CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,600Digital Platforms and EconomicsBusiness Strategy and InnovationInnovation and Knowledge Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ecosystem as Structure: An Actionable Construct for Strategy

Open access
Adner, Ron·2017·Journal of Management
DOI 10.1177/0149206316678451
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Over the past 20 years, the term “ecosystem” has become pervasive in discussions of strategy, both scholarly and applied. Its rise has mirrored an increasing interest and concern among both researchers and managers with interdependence across organizations and activities. This article presents a structuralist approach to conceptualizing the ecosystem construct. It presents a clear definition of the ecosystem construct, a grammar for characterizing ecosystem structure, and a characterization of the distinctive aspects of ecosystem strategy. This approach offers an explicit examination of the relationship among ecosystems and a host of alternative constructs (business models, platforms, coopetition, multisided markets, networks, technology systems, supply chains, value networks) that helps characterize where the ecosystem construct adds, and does not add, insight for the strategy literature.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0149206316678451

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Adner R., 2000, Mastering strategy: The complete MBA companion in strategy
  2. Adner R., 2006, Harvard Business Review, 84, 98
  3. Adner R., 2013, The wide lens: What successful innovators see that others miss
  4. Adner R., 2016, Harvard Business Review, 94, 60
  5. Brandenburger A. M., 1996, Co-opetition
  6. 10.2307/259056 · DOI
  7. Milgrom P., 1990, American Economic Review, 80, 511
  8. Parker G. G., 2016, Platform revolution

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 2,600

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Adner, R.
Affiliations
Dartmouth College (US)
Corresponding author
Adner, Ron
ORCID
Adner, Ron
Venue
Journal of Management
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2016-11-24
Volume
43
Issue
1
Pages
39-58
ISSN
  • 0149-2063 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-1211
DOI
10.1177/0149206316678451
OpenAlex
W2551675031
Cited by
2,600
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 557 · 2025: 407 · 2024: 341 · 2023: 258 · 2022: 270 · 2021: 306 · 2020: 215 · 2019: 140 · 2018: 73 · 2017: 32
FWCI
195.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Journal of Management (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Digital Platforms and Economics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Business Strategy and Innovation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
Keywords
ecosystem strategy, ecosystem structure, structuralist approach, business models, platforms, coopetition, multi-sided markets, value networks, supply chain, technical systems, networks

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review