Platform Architecture and Quality Trade-offs of Multihoming Complements
Abstract
Multihoming, the decision to design a complement to operate on multiple platforms, is becoming increasingly common in many platform markets. Perceived wisdom suggests that multihoming is beneficial for complement providers as they expand their market reach, but it reduces differentiation among competing platforms as the same complements become available on different platforms. We argue that complement providers face trade-offs when designing their products for multiple platform architectures—they must decide how far to specialize the complement to each platform’s technological specifications. Because of these trade-offs, multihoming complements can have different quality performance across platforms. In a study of the U.S. video game industry, we find that multihoming games have lower-quality performance on a technologically more complex console than on a less complex one. Also, games designed for and released on a focal platform have lower-quality performance on platforms they are subsequently multihomed to. However, games that are released on the complex platform with a delay suffer a smaller drop in quality on complex platforms. This has important implications for platform competition, and for managers considering expanding their reach through multihoming. The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2018.0779 .
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Multihoming carries important costs for complementors which tend to increase with the technological distance between platforms and different versions of platform architecture.
“multihoming carries important costs for the complementors (Armstrong and Wright 2007) which tend to increase with the technological distance between platforms and different versions of platform architecture”
From Smart Timing for Smart Products? Complementor Multihoming in Nascent Platform Markets (2026) · cites this paper as Cennamo et al. 2018
Section 2, “Multihoming: The Benefits and Implications” (page not available), says differences in platform architecture can increase multihoming costs. Section 3.2, “Complex vs. Simple Platform Technology,” links differences in platform complexity to greater resource-allocation and integration tradeoffs for complementors. These passages support the claim about technological differences between platforms, but do not establish that costs increase across different versions of a platform architecture. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredMost studies in the platform literature have centered around complementors' market entry strategies and have mainly examined single-platform settings.
“Most studies in this field have centered around complementors' market entry strategies (Ceccagnoli et al. 2012;Cennamo et al. 2018;Corts and Lederman 2009;Huang et al. 2013;Kapoor and Agarwal 2017), and they have mainly examined single-platform settings (Ceccagnoli et al. 2012;Kapoor and Agarwal 2017).”
From Smart Timing for Smart Products? Complementor Multihoming in Nascent Platform Markets (2026) · cites this paper as Cennamo et al. 2018
The Introduction says the literature generally treats complementors’ multihoming choice as a trade-off between market size and costs, which supports a focus on platform participation decisions. But this paper’s stated question concerns the quality of complements developed for multiple platforms, rather than market entry strategies. The citing sentence attributes the separate single-platform claim to other sources, not to Cennamo et al. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredResearch on complementor multihoming has largely been conducted in mature platform contexts where platform dynamics have been reduced to interactions between two dominant platforms, leading to a one-off multihoming decision with only one multihoming option.
“research on complementor multihoming has largely been conducted in mature platform contexts where platform dynamics have been reduced to the interactions between two dominant platforms; consequently, complementors face a one-off multihoming decision with only one multihoming option”
From Smart Timing for Smart Products? Complementor Multihoming in Nascent Platform Markets (2026) · cites this paper as Cennamo et al. 2018
The Introduction (page unavailable) says existing multihoming research largely neglects technological dynamics, and §3 describes a common assumption that complementors decide whether to multihome without further platform-specific investment. The copy does not say that research was largely conducted in mature markets with two dominant platforms, or that complementors consequently faced a one-off decision with only one multihoming option. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe paper's findings contradict prior research that emphasized negative effects of multihoming on complement quality.
“Our findings contradict prior research that emphasized the negative effects of multihoming on complement quality (Cennamo et al., 2018;Kang et al., 2019).”
From What role do data network effects play for multihoming complements? An empirical analysis of platform complementors’ strategies for consumer value creation (2025) · cites this paper as Cennamo et al., 2018
The Introduction and Discussion and Conclusion report lower quality for multihomed games on more complex consoles and for games released with a delay. But the Estimation Approach says the study compares the same multihomed game across platforms, not multihomed games with singlehomed games. The source therefore supports conditional quality trade-offs, not a general negative effect of multihoming on complement quality. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredHoming costs usually arise from the adaptation, coordination, and communication requirements associated with joining a new platform.
“Nevertheless, research suggests that homing costs usually arise from the adaptation, coordination, and communication requirements (Kogut and Zander 1992) associated with joining a new platform (Cennamo et al. 2018;Kapoor and Lee 2013).”
From Smart Timing for Smart Products? Complementor Multihoming in Nascent Platform Markets (2026) · cites this paper as Cennamo et al. 2018
Due to the costs of innovation in complex digital platforms, complements perceived as high quality in one platform are not necessarily candidates for a multihoming strategy.
“However, due to the costs of innovation in complex digital platforms (Cennamo et al., 2018), complements perceived as high quality in one platform are not necessarily candidates for a multihoming strategy.”
From What role do data network effects play for multihoming complements? An empirical analysis of platform complementors’ strategies for consumer value creation (2025) · cites this paper as Cennamo et al., 2018
In the context of multihoming, research suggests the specialization of complements toward a particular platform ecosystem potentially has a positive effect on complement quality.
“In the context of multihoming, research suggests the specialization of complements toward a particular platform ecosystem potentially has a positive effect on complement quality (Cennamo et al., 2018;Kapoor & Agarwal, 2017).”
From What role do data network effects play for multihoming complements? An empirical analysis of platform complementors’ strategies for consumer value creation (2025) · cites this paper as Cennamo et al., 2018
The monetization of complementors' products might affect consumer satisfaction.
“Complementors aim for high-quality outputs to meet users' expectations; however, the monetization of their products might affect consumer satisfaction (Cennamo et al., 2018;Clough & Wu, 2022).”
From What role do data network effects play for multihoming complements? An empirical analysis of platform complementors’ strategies for consumer value creation (2025) · cites this paper as Cennamo et al., 2018
Section 3.1 says users assess complements’ quality, while the Introduction discusses the revenue incentive to develop for multiple platforms. Neither passage links product monetization to consumer satisfaction. Searches for monetization, pricing, and satisfaction found no passage making that connection. (LLM, conf=0.75)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets
Rochet, J.-C., & Tirole, J. (2003) · Journal of the European Economic Association · doi:10.1162/154247603322493212 · Cited by 5,642 · see citing works
Towards a theory of ecosystems
Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2904 · Cited by 3,724 · see citing works
Self-citationBridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework
Gawer, A. (2014) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2014.03.006 · Cited by 1,869 · cited 5× · see citing works
“2 A platform’s technological architecture shapes its core functionalities (Baldwin and Woodard 2009, Gawer 2014), which can affect both competitive performance (Gawer and Cusumano 2002, Zhu and Iansiti 2012) and incentives of independent firms to develop complements (Anderson et al. 2014, Tiwana et…”
BackgroundInfluentialChicken & Egg: Competition among Intermediation Service Providers
Caillaud, B., & Jullien, B. (2003) · The RAND Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/1593720 · Cited by 1,799 · see citing works
Tiwana, A., Konsynski, B., & Bush, A. A. (2010) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1100.0323 · Cited by 1,514 · see citing works
Networks, platforms, and strategy: Emerging views and next steps
McIntyre, D. P., & Srinivasan, A. (2017) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2596 · Cited by 1,109 · see citing works
Incentives and Problem Uncertainty in Innovation Contests: An Empirical Analysis
Boudreau, K. J., Lacetera, N., & Lakhani, K. R. (2011) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1110.1322 · Cited by 830 · see citing works
Platform competition: Strategic trade‐offs in platform markets
Cennamo, C., & Santalo, J. (2013) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2066 · Cited by 780 · see citing works
Self-citationTwo-sided Markets, Competitive Bottlenecks and Exclusive Contracts
Armstrong, M., & Wright, J. (2007) · Economic Theory · doi:10.1007/s00199-006-0114-6 · Cited by 690 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Early theoretical studies (Armstrong 2006; Armstrong and Wright 2007; Caillaud and Jullien 2003; Rochet and Tirole 2003) focus on which side multihomes and who takes most of the surplus.”
BackgroundPlatform Performance Investment in the Presence of Network Externalities
Anderson, E. G., Parker, G. G., & Tan, B. (2014) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2013.0505 · Cited by 326 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 35
- Ambrus A, Calvano E, Reisinger M (2016) Either or both competition: A two-sided theory of advertising with overlapping viewerships. Amer. Econom. J.: Microeconomics 8(3):189 -222.
- Armstrong, M. 2006. Competition in two-sided markets. RAND J. Econom . 37 (3): 668 -91.
- Athey, S., Calvano, E., and Gans, J. S. (2016). The impact of consumer multi-homing on advertising markets and media competition. Management Sci. , ePub ahead of print December 16, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2675. · DOI
- Baldwin C, Clark K (2000) Design Rules: The Power of Modularity . (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
- Binken JLG, Stremersch S (2009) The effect of superstar software on hardware sales in system markets. J. Marketing. 73(2):88-104.
- Cennamo C (2016) Building the value of next-generation platforms: The paradox of diminishing returns. J. Manag. ePub ahead of print July 15, 2016, doi: 10.1177/0149206316658350. · DOI · Paper page
- Cennamo C, Santalo J (2013) Platform competition: Strategic tradeoffs in platform markets. Strategic Management J. 34(11):1331-1350.
- Claussen J, Kretschmer T, Mayrhofer P (2013) The effects of rewarding user engagement: The case of Facebook apps. Inform. Systems Res. 24(1):186-200.
- Claussen J, Essling C, Kretschmer T (2015a) When less can be more -Setting technology levels in complementary goods markets. Res. Policy 44(2):328 -339.
- Claussen J, Kretschmer T, Stieglitz N (2015b) Vertical scope, turbulence, and the benefits of commitment and flexibility. Management Sci. 61(4):915-929.
- Clements M, Ohashi H (2005) Indirect network effects and the product cycle: Video games in the U.S., 1994 -2002. J. Indust. Econom. 53(4):515 -542.
- Eisenmann T, Parker G, Van Alstyne M (2011) Platform envelopment. Strategic Management J . 32(12):1270 -1285.
- Gawer A, Cusumano M (2002) Platform Leadership: How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco Drive Industry Innovation (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).
- Gawer, A., Henderson, R. (2007) Platform owner entry and innovation in complementary markets: Evidence from Intel. J. Econ. Manag. Strategy 16 (1), 1 -34.
- Gimeno J (1999) Reciprocal threats in multimarket rivalry: staking out 'spheres of influence' in the U.S. airline industry. Strategic Management J. 20(2): 101 -128.
- Jacobides, MG, Knudsen T, Augier M (2006) Benefiting from innovation: Value creation, value appropriation and the role of industry architectures. Res. Policy 35(6): 1200 -1221.
- Jeitschko TD, Tremblay MJ (2017) Platform competition with endogenous homing. Working paper. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2441190 · DOI
- Kapoor R, Agarwal S (2017) Sustaining superior performance in business ecosystems: Evidence from application software developers in the iOS and Android smartphone ecosystems. Org. Sci. 28(3): 531-551.
- Klompmaker JE, Hughes DG, Haley RI (1976) Test marketing in new product development. Harvard Bus. Rev. 54(3):128-138.
- Kretschmer T, Claussen J (2016) Generational transitions in platform markets -The role of backward compatibility. Strategy Sci. 1(2):90-104.
- Kretschmer T, Reitzig M (2013) How Much to Integrate? Firms' Profit-Maximizing R&D Allocations in Emerging Standard Settings. Academy of Management Proceedings
- Landsman V, Stremersch S (2011) Multihoming in two-sided markets: An empirical inquiry in the video game console industry. J. Marketing 75(6):39 -54.
- Lee RS (2013) Vertical integration and exclusivity in platform and two-sided markets. Am. Econ. Rev. 103(7):2960-3000.
- Parker G, Van Alstyne M (2005) Two-sided network effects: A theory of information product design. Management Sci. 51(10):1494 -1504.
- Pettus, S. 2013. Service Games: The Rise and Fall of SEGA: Enhanced Edition. Printed by CreateSpace Independent Publishing.
- Rochet JC, Tirole J (2006) Two-sided markets: A progress report. RAND J. Econom. 37(3):645 -667.
- Rysman, M (2007) An empirical analysis of payment card usage. J. Ind. Econ. 55(1): 1-36.
- Schilling M (2000) Toward a general modular systems theory and its application to interfirm product modularity. Acad. Management Rev. 25(2):312 -334.
- Seamans, R, Zhu F (2014) Responses to entry in multi-sided markets: The impact of Craigslist on local newspapers. Management Sci. 60(2): 476-493.
- Sorenson O, Rivkin JW, Fleming L (2006) Complexity, networks and knowledge flow. Res. Policy 35(7):994 -1017.
- Tiwana A (2015) Evolutionary competition in platform ecosystems. Inform. Systems Res. 26(2):266 -281.
- Wareham J, Fox P, Giner J (2014) Technology ecosystem governance. Organ. Sci. 25(4):1195 -1215.
- Yoo Y, Henfridsson O, Lyytinen K (2010) The new organizing logic of digital innovation: An agenda for information systems research. Inform. Systems Res. 21(4):724 -735.
- Zhu F, Iansiti M (2012) Entry into platform-based markets. Strategic Management J. 33(1):88 -106.
- Zhu F, Zhang M (2010) Impact of online consumer reviews on sales: The moderating role of product and consumer characteristics. J. Marketing 74(2):133 -148.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Towards a theory of ecosystems
Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2904 · Cited by 3,724 · see citing works
Self-citationIntroduction—Platforms and Infrastructures in the Digital Age
Constantinides, P., Henfridsson, O., & Parker, G. G. (2018) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2018.0794 · Cited by 943 · see citing works
Competing in Digital Markets: A Platform-Based Perspective
Cennamo, C. (2021) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2016.0048 · Cited by 487 · see citing works
Self-citationChen, L., Tong, T. W., Tang, S., & Han, N. (2022) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/01492063211045023 · Cited by 345 · see citing works
Liminal movement by digital platform‐based sharing economy ventures: The case of Uber Technologies
Garud, R., Kumaraswamy, A., Roberts, A., & Xu, L. (2022) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3148 · Cited by 274 · see citing works
Disruption in Platform‐Based Ecosystems
Ozalp, H., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/joms.12351 · Cited by 223 · see citing works
Self-citationJacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2024) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2023.104906 · Cited by 220 · see citing works
Self-citationPlatform governance matters: How platform gatekeeping affects knowledge sharing among complementors
Zhang, Y., Li, J., & Tong, T. W. (2022) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3191 · Cited by 214 · see citing works
Configurations of platform organizations: Implications for complementor engagement
Saadatmand, F., Lindgren, R., & Schultze, U. (2019) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2019.03.015 · Cited by 190 · see citing works
Chen, L., Yi, J., Li, S., & Tong, T. W. (2022) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206320988337 · Cited by 177 · see citing works
“Developers may use the first platform to test the market and later leverage the success by outbound multihoming (Cennamo et al., 2018).”
BackgroundComplementor competitive advantage: A framework for strategic decisions
Cenamor, J. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.016 · Cited by 116 · see citing works
Tavalaei, M. M., & Cennamo, C. (2021) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2020.101994 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Self-citationPlatform diffusion at temporary gatherings: Social coordination and ecosystem emergence
Fang, T. P., Wu, A., & Clough, D. R. (2021) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3230 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
Engert, M., Evers, J., Hein, A., & Krcmar, H. (2022) · Information Systems Frontiers · doi:10.1007/s10796-021-10236-3 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Hänninen, M., & Smedlund, A. (2021) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/joms.12701 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Positive, Negative, and Amplified Network Externalities in Platform Markets
Karhu, K., Heiskala, M., Ritala, P., & Thomas, L. D. W. (2024) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2023.0119 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Digital platform ecosystems in flux: From proprietary digital platforms to wide-spanning ecosystems
Nerbel, J. F., & Kreutzer, M. (2023) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-023-00625-8 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Ban Targeted Advertising? An Empirical Investigation of the Consequences for App Development
Kircher, T., & Foerderer, J. (2024) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2023.4726 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Mobilising new frontiers in digital transformation research: A problematization review
Ashrafi, A., Constantinides, P., Mehandjiev, N., & Thatcher, J. B. (2025) · Information Systems Journal · doi:10.1111/isj.12531 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Gastaldi, L., Appio, F. P., Trabucchi, D., Buganza, T., & Corso, M. (2024) · Information Systems Journal · doi:10.1111/isj.12491 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Platform Compatibility and Developer Multihoming: A Trade-off Perspective
Tian, J., Zhao, X., & Xue, L. (2022) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2022/16369 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Architectural Convergence and Platform Evolution: Empirical Test of Complementor Moves in Videogames
Srinivasan, A., & Venkatraman, V. N. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · doi:10.1109/tem.2018.2881560 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Smart Timing for Smart Products? Complementor Multihoming in Nascent Platform Markets
Aydin Ozden, S., Suarez, F. F., Libaers, D., & Bart, Y. (2026) · Journal of Product Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/jpim.70005 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Knorr, C., Erath, M., Saesen, J., Kindermann, B., & Strese, S. (2025) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-025-00817-4
“Complementors aim for high-quality outputs to meet users’ expectations; however, the monetization of their products might affect consumer satisfaction (Cennamo et al., 2018; Clough & Wu, 2022).”
Influential
- Authors
- Cennamo, C., Ozalp, H., & Kretschmer, T.
- Affiliations
- Bocconi University (IT)
- University of Leeds (GB)
- Centre for Economic Policy Research (GB)
- Venue
- Information Systems Research
- Published
- 2018-06
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 461-478
- ISSN
- 1047-7047 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5536
- OpenAlex
- W2784585839
- Cited by
- 273
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2026: 39 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 34.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Information Systems Research (publishedVersion)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
- Archivio istituzionale della Ricerca - Bocconi (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Digital Platforms and Economics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Games and Media
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Business Strategy and Innovation
- Keywords
- multihoming, platform architecture, platform competition, video games, console games, product specialization, technological complexity, quality trade-offs, platform markets, market reach
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
