Platform Synergy: Architectural Origins and Competitive Consequences

References

• Agarwal R, Tiwana A (2015) Evolvable systems: Through the looking glass of IS. Inform. Systems Res. 26(3):473–479.Link, Google Scholar
• Baldwin C (2008) Where do transactions come from? Modularity, transactions, and the boundaries of firms. Indust. Corporate Change 17(1):155–195.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baldwin C, Clark K (2000) Design Rules: The Power of Modularity (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barnett W (2008) The Red Queen Among Organizations: How Competitiveness Evolves (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bresnahan T, Greenstein S (2014) Mobile computing: The next platform rivalry. Amer. Econom. Rev. 104(5):475–480.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brusoni S, Prencipe A (2006) Making design rules: A multidomain perspective. Organ. Sci. 17(2):179–189.Link, Google Scholar
• Canalys (2015) Top 25 U.S. developers account for half of app revenue. http://www.canalys.com/newsroom/top-25-us-developers-account-half-app-revenue#.Google Scholar
• Cennamo C, Santalo J (2013) Platform competition: Strategic tradeoffs in platform markets. Strategic Management J. 34(11):1331–1350.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clark K (1985) The interaction of design hierarchies and market concepts in technological evolution. Res. Policy 14(5):235–251.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Colfer L, Baldwin C (2016) The mirroring hypothesis: Theory, evidence, and exceptions. Indust. Corporate Change 25(5):709–738.Crossref, Google Scholar
• D’Aveni R, Dagnino G, Smith K (2010) The age of temporary advantage. Strategic Management J. 31(13):1371–1385.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Doraszelski U (2003) An R&D race with knowledge accumulation. RAND J. Econom. 34(1):20–42.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Economist, The (2014) Platforms: Something to stand on. (Jan 18), http://economist.com/news/special-report/21593583-proliferating-digital-platforms-will-be-heart-tomorrows-economy-and-even.Google Scholar
• Ethiraj S, Levinthal D (2004) Modularity and innovation in complex systems. Management Sci. 50(2):159–173.Link, Google Scholar
• Frenken K, Mendritzki S (2012) Optimal modularity: A demonstration of the evolutionary advantage of modular architectures. J. Evolutionary Econom. 22(5):935–956.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garen J (1984) The returns to schooling: A selectivity bias approach with a continuous choice variable. Econometrica 52(5):1199–1218.Crossref, Google Scholar
• High Scalability (2015) Developing products in the style of Etsy. (June 1), http://highscalability.com/blog/2015/6/1/developing-products-in-the-style-of-etsy.html.Google Scholar
• Huang P, Ceccagnoli M, Forman C, Wu D (2013) Appropriability mechanisms and the platform partnership decision: Evidence from enterprise software. Management Sci. 59(1):102–121.Link, Google Scholar
• Lerner J (1997) An empirical exploration of a technology race. RAND J. Econom. 28(2):228–247.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lin M, Li S, Whinston A (2011) Innovation and price competition in a two-sided market. J. Management Inform. Systems 28(2):171–202.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lindberg A, Berente N, Gaskin J, Lyytinen K (2016) Coordinating interdependencies in online communities: A study of an open source software project. Inform. Systems Res. 27(4):751–772.Link, Google Scholar
• McIntyre D, Srinivasan A (2017) Networks, platforms, and strategy: Emerging views and next steps. Strategic Management J. 38(1):141–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McNish J, Silcoff S (2016) Losing the Signal: The Untold Story Behind the Extraordinary Rise and Spectacular Fall of BlackBerry (Flatiron Books, New York).Google Scholar
• Metz C (2015) Google is 2 billion lines of code—And it’s all in one place. Wired, http://wired.com/2015/2009/google-2012-billion-lines-codeand-one-place.Google Scholar
• Mihm J, Loch C, Wilkinson D, Huberman B (2010) Hierarchical structure and search in complex organizations. Management Sci. 56(5):831–848.Link, Google Scholar
• Monteverde K (1995) Technical dialog as an incentive for vertical integration in the semiconductor industry. Management Sci. 41(10):1624–1638.Link, Google Scholar
• Page-Jones M (1988) Practical Guide to Structured Systems Design (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Parnas D (1972) On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules. Comm. ACM 15(9):1053–1058.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sanchez R, Mahoney J (1996) Modularity, flexibility, and knowledge management in product organization and design. Strategic Management J. 17(1):63–76.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sarker S, Sarker S, Sahaym A, Bjorn-Andersen N (2012) Exploring value cocreation in relationships between an ERP vendor and its partners: A revelatory case study. MIS Quart. 36(1):317–338.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schilling M (2000) Toward a general modular systems theory and its application to interfirm product modularity. Acad. Management Rev. 25(2):312–334.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon H (1962) The architecture of complexity. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc. 106(6):467–482.Google Scholar
• Simon H (2002) Near decomposability and the speed of evolution. Indust. Corporate Change 11(3):587–599.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon H (2005) Modularity: Understanding the development and evolution of natural complex systems. Callebaut W, Rasskin-Gutman D, eds. The Structure of Complexity in an Evolving World: The Role of Near Decomposability (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), ix–xiii.Google Scholar
• Sirmon D, Hitt M, Ireland R (2007) Managing firm resources in dynamic environments to create value: Looking inside the black box. Acad. Management Rev. 32(1):273–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith C (1981) A Search for Structure (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Subramanyam R, Ramasubbu N, Krishnan M (2012) In search of efficient flexibility: Effects of software component granularity on development effort, defects, and customization effort. Inform. Systems Res. 23(3):787–803.Link, Google Scholar
• Tiwana A (2015) Evolutionary competition in platform ecosystems. Inform. Systems Res. 26(2):266–281.Link, Google Scholar
• Ulrich K (1995) The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm. Res. Policy 24(3):419–440.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wareham J, Fox P, Giner J (2014) Technology ecosystem governance. Organ. Sci. 25(4):1195–1215.Link, Google Scholar