Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 332

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Industry-Wide Information Systems Standardization as Collective Action: The Case of the U.S. Residential Mortgage Industry1

Markus, M. Lynne, Steinfield, Charles W., Wigand, Rolf T., Minton, Gabe·2006·MIS Quarterly

Abstract

Vertical information systems (VIS) standards are technical specifications designed to promote coordination among the organizations within (or across) vertical industry sectors. Examples include the bar code, electronic data interchange (EDI) standards, and RosettaNet business process standards in the electronics industry. This contribution examines VIS standardization through the lens of collective action theory, applied in the literature to information technology product standardization, but not yet to VIS standardization, which is led by heterogeneous groups of user organizations rather than by IT vendors. Through an intensive case analysis of VIS standardization in the U.S. residential mortgage industry, VIS standardization success is shown to be as problematic as IT product standardization success, but for different reasons. VIS standardization involves two linked collective action dilemmas—standards development and standards diffusion— with different characteristics, such that a solution to the first may fail to resolve the second. Whereas prior theoretical and empirical research shows that IT product standardization efforts tend to splinter into rival factions that compete through standards wars in the marketplace, successful VIS standards consortia must encompass heterogeneous groups of user organizations and IT vendors without fragmenting. Some tactics successfully used to solve the collective action dilemma of VIS standardization (e.g., governance mechanisms and policies about intellectual property protection) are also used by IT product standardization efforts, but some are different, and successful VIS standardization requires a package of solutions tailored to fit and jointly resolve the specific dilemmas of particular VIS standards initiatives.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/25148768

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 332

Metadata

Authors
Markus, M. L., Steinfield, C. W., Wigand, R. T., & Minton, G.
Venue
MIS Quarterly
Publisher
MIS Quarterly
Published
2006-08-01
Volume
30
Issue
Special Issue
Pages
439-465
ISSN
  • 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
  • 2162-9730
OpenAlex
W252959711
Cited by
332
References
1
FWCI
65.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Industry-Wide Information Systems Standardization as Collective Action: The Case of the U.S. Residential Mortgage Industry1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/25148768
The paper
Markus, M. L., Steinfield, C. W., Wigand, R. T., & Minton, G. (2006). Industry-Wide Information Systems Standardization as Collective Action: The Case of the U.S. Residential Mortgage Industry1. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148768

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.