CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 59Digital Platforms and EconomicsInformation Systems Theories and ImplementationOpen Source Software Innovations

Optimizing and Satisficing: The Interplay Between Platform Architecture and Producers’ Design Strategies for Platform Performance1

Brunswicker, Sabine, Almirall, Esteve, Majchrzak, Ann·2019·MIS Quarterly
DOI 10.25300/misq/2019/13561
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Two-sided platforms are gaining increasing attention in practice and as the subject of IS and management research. We explore an assumption of research and practice: that a platform’s architecture needs to be decoupled so that producers can easily mix and match the platform’s design elements (APIs, code libraries, process models, etc.) into apps that perform well competitively, and insulate the platform from skewed out-comes and low market performance. However, in practice, complete decoupling is not just difficult but almost impossible. Based on more than two million runs of an exploratory NK model in which producers use a platform’s design space for the creation of apps, we generate several surprising insights. First, we show that tighter coupling may not necessarily be harmful depending on the producers’ design strategies and the amount of constraints placed on design elements. Second, we observe that if moderate to tightly coupled platforms with optimizing producers focused exclusively on being competitive, platform performance is lower compared to platforms with satisficing producers who put a lower priority of being competitive because of other interests. This is surprising since optimizers are better suited to cope with the inherent uncertainty of coupling. Finally, moderately coupled platforms can outperform platforms with loose coupling when constraints nudge producers into distant design moves while also isolating them from downside uncertainty. These three findings offer implications for multiple streams of literature on platform architectures.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.25300/misq/2019/13561

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 79 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Brunswicker, S., Almirall, E., & Majchrzak, A.
Affiliations
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
  • Esade (ES)
  • University of Southern California (US)
ORCID
Venue
MIS Quarterly
Publisher
MIS Quarterly
Published
2019-12-01
Volume
43
Issue
4
Pages
1249-1277
ISSN
  • 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
  • 2162-9730
DOI
10.25300/misq/2019/13561
OpenAlex
W2989962166
Cited by
59
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2014: 1
FWCI
9.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • MIS Quarterly (publishedVersion)
  • Journal of the Association for Information Systems (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Digital Platforms and Economics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Open Source Software Innovations
Keywords
two-sided markets, platform architecture, coupling, decoupling, NK model, satisficing, optimizing behavior, platform performance, design space, uncertainty, competitive performance, app development

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