Skip to main content

Wertschöpfungspotenziale und strategische Implikationen einer Öffnung von Informationsressourcen – Phänomenologie und ein Bezugsrahmen

Value creation potential and strategic implications of opening-up information resources—phenomenology and a framework

Zusammenfassung

In den letzten Jahren gelingt es Unternehmen zunehmend, durch Öffnung ihrer Informationsressourcen das Wertschöpfungspotenzial externer Ressourcen besser zu nutzen. Sie erhöhen damit den Wert eigener Ressourcen zum Teil erheblich. Derartige Phänomene lassen sich jedoch nicht mit den herkömmlichen ressourcenorientierten Ansätzen erklären. Unser Aufsatz leistet einen Beitrag zur Strukturierung und zum besseren Verständnis dieser Problematik. Hierzu entwickeln wir einen Bezugsrahmen, der Öffnungsphänomene anhand der Dimensionen (1) „Zugriff“ und (2) „Kontrolle“ differenziert. Der Bezugsrahmen motiviert eine erweiterte Sicht des betriebswirtschaftlichen Managements von Informationsressourcen. Diese Sicht wird als „Management unternehmensübergreifender Informationssphären“ konzeptualisiert und verweist auf weiteren Forschungsbedarf im Bereich der überbetrieblichen Wertschöpfung.

Abstract

For some years, companies have successfully harnessed the value-creation potential of external resources by opening up their information resources, thus increasing considerably the value of their own resources. Corresponding phenomena, however, cannot be explained by common resource-based approaches. By providing a structure, our article contributes to a deeper understanding of this issue. We develop a framework, grounded in the Resource-Based View, that differentiates phenomena of opening up information resources between two dimensions: (1) access and (2) control. Our analysis motivates an extended view of information resources management that also accounts for enterprise-external resources. We conceptualize this view as the “management of information spheres,” highlighting the need for further research in the field of value creation related to external resources.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2

Notes

  1. Zur Nutzung externer Ressourcen müssen Unternehmen über eine Absorptionskapazität verfügen oder diese aufbauen. Vgl. hierzu Cohen u. Levinthal 1990 und Zahra u. George 2002.

  2. Anzumerken ist, dass ein breites Spektrum unterschiedlicher Lizenzen für Open Source Software existiert. Sie unterscheiden sich insbesondere dahingehend, inwieweit ein veränderter Quellcode kommerzialisiert werden darf, ohne dass diese Änderung veröffentlicht wird (De Laat 2005, S. 1517–1522). Die verschiedenen Lizenzen haben jedoch gemein, dass ein einmal veröffentlichter Quelltext nicht mehr dem allgemeinen Zugriff entzogen werden kann.

  3. Spezifität wird vorliegend als eine Bindung von Ressourcen untereinander, nicht als eine Bindung einer Ressource zu einem Unternehmen verstanden (ähnlich: Lippman u. Rumelt 2003, S. 1070).

  4. Im Fall von IR mit den Ausprägungen „gemeinsame Kontrolle“ und „allgemeiner Zugriff“ teilt sich ein Unternehmen die Kontrolle über diese Ressource mit einem weiteren oder mehreren Akteuren. Im Extremfall, bei dem die Kontrolle auf die Allgemeinheit übertragen ist, teilen diese IR Eigenschaften öffentlicher Güter. Dies gilt beispielsweise für OSS.

  5. Weitere Untersuchungen zur Collective Invention bieten Fauchart (2003) und Lamoreaux u. Sokoloff (2000).

  6. Da das Vertrauen zu einer wichtigen Voraussetzung für diese Strategie wird, bauen Unternehmen bewusst ein positives Image auf. So vereinnahmt z. B. das Unternehmen Google die Phrase „Don’t be evil“, um Vertrauen bei Kunden und externen Wertschöpfungspartnern zu schaffen. Vgl. Google Code of Conduct, abgerufen am 23.03.2010 von http://investor.google.com/conduct.html.

Literatur

  • Achtenhagen L, Müller-Lietzkow J, Knyphausen-Aufseß D (2003) Das Open Source-Dilemma: Open Source-Software zwischen freier Verfügbarkeit und Kommerzialisierung. Schmalenbachs Z Betriebswirtschaftliche Forsch 55:455–481

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahuja G (2000) The duality of collaboration: inducements and opportunities in the formation of interfirm linkages. Strateg Manag J 21(3):317–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen RC (1983) Collective invention. J Econ Behav Organ 4(1):1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amit R, Schoemaker PJH (1993) Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strateg Manag J 14(1):33–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apple (1999) Mac OS X server embraces open source with launch of Darwin. Pressemitteilung vom 18.03.1999. http://www.apple.com/ca/press/1999/03/darwin.html. Zugegriffen: 1. Juni 2009

  • Apple (2003) Apple public source license version 2.0 vom 06.08.2003. http://www.opensource.apple.com/license/apsl/. Zugegriffen: 01. Juni 2009

  • Aral S, Weill P (2007) IT assets, organizational capabilities, and firm performance: How resource allocations and organizational differences explain performance variation. Organ Sci 18(5):763–780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arrow KJ (1962) Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In: Nelson RR (Hrsg) The rate and direction of inventive activity: economic and social factors. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, S 609–626

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin CY, Clark KB (1997) Managing in an age of modularity. Harvard Bus Rev 75(5):84–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney JB (1986) Strategic factor markets: expectations, luck, and business strategy. Manage Sci 32(10):1231–1241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney J (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Manage 17(3):99–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benkler Y (2006) The wealth of networks. How social production transforms markets and freedom. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT

    Google Scholar 

  • Bessen J (2002) What good is free software. In: Hahn RW (Hrsg) Government policy toward open source software. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC, S 12–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Birchall D, Tovstiga G (2005) Capabilities for strategic advantage. Leading through technological innovation. Palgrave, Basingstoke

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonaccorsi A, Giannangeli S, Rossi C (2006) Entry strategy under competitive standards: hybrid business models in the open source software industry. Manage Sci 52(7):1085–1098

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bongartz U (1998) Unternehmensspezifische Ressourcen und strategische Gruppen im US-Luftverkehrsmarkt. Z Betriebswirtschaft 68(4):381–407

    Google Scholar 

  • Borowicz F, Scherm E (2001) Standardisierungsstrategien: Eine erweiterte Betrachtung des Wettbewerbs auf Netzeffektmärkten. Z Betriebswirtschaftliche Forsch 53(4):391–416

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouncken RB (2000) Dem Kern des Erfolges auf der Spur? State of the Art zur Identifikation von Kernkompetenzen. Z Betriebswirtschaft 70(7–8):865–885

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockhoff K (1995) Zur Theorie des externen Erwerbs neuen technologischen Wissens. Z Betriebswirtschaft, Ergänzungsheft 1995(1):27–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Brügge B et al (2004) Open-Source-Software. Eine ökonomische und technische Analyse. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough HW (2003/2008) Open innovation. The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough HW, Appleyard MM (2007) Open innovation and strategy. Calif Manage Rev 50(1):67–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Church J, Gandal N (1992) Network effects, software provision and standardization. J Econ Behav Organ 401(1):85–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1990) Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Adm Sci Q 35(1):128–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cusumano MA, Gawer A (2002) The elements of platform leadership. MIT Sloan Manage Rev 43(3):51–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahan E, Hauser JR (2002) The virtual customer. J Prod Innov Manage 19(5):332–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlander L (2005) Appropriation and appropriability in open source software. Int J Innov Manage 9(3):259–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlander L, Magnusson MG (2005) Relationships between open source software companies and communities: observations from Nordic firms. Res Pol 34(4):481–493

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis S (1987) Future perfect. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • De Laat PB (2005) Copyright or copyleft? An analysis of property regimes for software development. Res Pol 34(10):1511–1532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dibbern J, Güttler W, Heinzl A (2001) Die Theorie der Unternehmung als Erklärungsansatz für das selektive Outsourcing der Informationsverarbeitung. Entwicklung eines theoretischen Bezugsrahmens. Z Betriebswirtschaft 71(6):675–700

    Google Scholar 

  • Dierickx I, Cool K (1989) Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Manage Sci 35(12):1504–1513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietl H (1995) Institutionelle Koordination spezialisierungsbedingter wirtschaftlicher Abhängigkeit. Z Betriebswirtschaft 65(6):569–585

    Google Scholar 

  • Duschek S (2004) Inter-firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Manage Revue 15(1):53–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyer JH, Singh H (1998) The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Acad Manag Rev 23(4):660–679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt K, Martin JA (2000) Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strateg Manag J 21(10/11):1105–1121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt KM, Schoonhoven CB (1996) Resource-based view of strategic alliance formation: strategic and social effects in entrepreneurial firms. Organ Sci 7(2):136–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enkel E, Gassmann O, Chesbrough H (2009) Open R & D and open innovation: exploring the phenomenon. R & D Manag 39(2):311–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Facebook (2008) Facebook developers wiki – storable information. http://wiki.developers.facebook.com/index.php/Storable_Information. Zugegriffen: 1. Juni 2009

  • Farrell J, Gallini NT (1988) Second-sourcing as a commitment: monopoly incentives to attract competition. Quart J Econ 103(4):673–694

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrell J, Saloner G (1985) Standardization, compatibility, and innovation. RAND J Econ 16(1):70–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fauchart E (2003) On knowledge sharing patterns among rival firms: the case of knowledge on safety. DRUID summer conference 2003 on creating, sharing and transfering knowledge. Copenhagen. http://userinnovation.mit.edu/papers/safety3.pdf. Zugegriffen: 10. Apr. 2009

  • Foray D (2004) Economics of knowledge. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford D, Ryan C (1981) Taking technology to market. Harvard Bus Rev 59(2):117–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Fosfuri A, Giarratana MS, Luzzi A (2008) The penguin has entered the building: the commercialization of open source software products. Organ Sci 19(2):292–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foss K, Foss N (2001) Assets, attributes and ownership. Int J Econ Bus 8(1):19–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foss K, Foss NJ (2005) Resources and transaction costs: How property rights economics furthers the resource-based view. Strateg Manag J 26(6):541–553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foss NJ, Knudsen T (2003) The resource-based tangle: towards a sustainable explanation of competitive advantage. Manag Decis Econ 24(4):291–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franck E (2006) Beiträge der Neuen Institutionenökonomik zum Inovationsmanagement – Von der Ausgestaltung der Intellectual Property Rights zur Aneignung von Innovationserträgen. Schmalenbachs Z Betriebswirtschaftliche Forsch, Sonderheft 54:58–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Franz A (2003) Management von Business Webs. Das Beispiel von Technologieplattformen für mobile Dienste. Deutscher Universitätsverlag, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Free Software Foundation (2002) GNU free documentation license version 1.2, November 2002. http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html

  • Free Software Foundation (2007) GNU general public license version 3, 29 June 2007. http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html. Zugegriffen: 14. Apr. 2008

  • Funk JL (2003) Standards, dominant designs and preferential acquisition of complementary assets through slight information advantages. Res Pol 32(8):1325–1341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaitanides M (1997) Integrierte Belieferung – Eine ressourcenorientierte Erklärung der Entstehung von Systemlieferanten in der Automobilzulieferindustrie. Z Betriebswirtschaft 67(7):737–757

    Google Scholar 

  • Galende J, Fuente JM de la (2003) Internal factors determining a firm’s innovative behaviour. Res Pol 32(5):715–736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gawer A, Cusumano MA (2002) Platform leadership. How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco drive industry innovation. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Gawer A, Henderson R (2007) Platform owner entry and innovation in complementary markets: evidence from Intel. J Econ Manag Strateg 16(1):1–34

    Google Scholar 

  • George C, Chandak N (2006) Issues and challenges in securing interoperability of DRM systems in the digital music market. Intern Rev Law, Comput Technol 20(3):271–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghemawat P (1986) Sustainable advantage. Harvard Bus Rev 64(5):53–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Giles J (2005) Internet encyclopaedias go head to head. Nature 438(7070):900–901

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant RM (1991) The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: implications for strategy formulation. Calif Manage Rev 33(3):114–135

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant RM (1996) Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strateg Manag J 17(winter special issue):109–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman SJ, Hart OD (1986) The costs and benefits of ownership: a theory of vertical and lateral integration. J Polit Economy 98(6):1119–1158

    Google Scholar 

  • Guth RA, Vara V, Delaney KJ (2007) Microsoft bets on facebook stake and web ad boom. Wall St J vom 25.10.2007, S B1

  • Hamel G, Doz YL, Prahalad CK (1989) Collaborate with your competitors – and win. Harvard Bus Rev 67(1):133–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Harhoff D, Henkel J, Hippel E von (2003) Profiting from voluntary information spillovers: How users benefit by freely revealing their innovations. Res Pol 32(10):1753–1769

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart O (1995) Firms, contracts, and financial structure. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hart OD, Moore J (1990) Property rights and the nature of the firm. J Polit Economy 98(6):1119–1158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helfat CE, Peteraf MA (2009) Understanding dynamic capabilities: progress along a developmental path. Strat Organ 7(1):91–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helfat CE, Raubitschek RS (2000) Product sequencing: co-evolution of knowledge, capabilities and products. Strateg Manag J 21(10/11):961–979

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller MA, Eisenberg RS (1998) Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science 280(5364):698–701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson R, Clark KB (1990) Architectural innovation: the reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Adm Sci Q 35(1):9–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henkel J (2006) Selective revealing in open innovation processes: the case of embedded Linux. Res Pol 35(7):953–969

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henkel J (2007) Offene Innovationsprozesse. Die kommerzielle Entwicklung von Open-Source-Software. Innovation und Entrepreneurship. Deutscher Universitätsverlag, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Hippel E von (1994) ‚Sticky information‘ and the locus of problem solving: implications for innovation. Manage Sci 40(4):429–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hippel E von (1988/1994) The sources of innovation. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hippel E von (2005) Democratizing innovation. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Hippel E von, Krogh G von (2006) Free revealing and the private-collective model for innovation incentives. R & D Manag 36(3):295–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann L (2009) Crowd conrol. Commun ACM 52(3):16–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howe J (2006) The rise of crowdsourcing. WIRED Mag 6:176–183

    Google Scholar 

  • Iansiti M, Clark KB (1994) Integration and dynamic capability: evidence from product development in automobiles and mainframe computers. Ind Corp Change 3(3):557–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iansiti M, Levien R (2004) Strategy as ecology. Harvard Bus Rev 82(3):68–78

    Google Scholar 

  • IBM (2005) IBM statement of non-assertion of named patents against OSS. http://www.ibm.com/ibm/licensing/patents/pledgedpatents.pdf. Zugegriffen: 20. Apr. 2008

  • Inkpen AC (2000) A note on the dynamics of learning alliances: competition, cooperation, and relative scope. Strateg Manag J 21(7):775–779

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kale P, Singh H (2000) Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: building relational capital. Strateg Manag J 21(3):217–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz ML, Shapiro C (1985) Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. Amer Econ Rev 75(3):424–440

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz ML, Shapiro C (1992) Product introduction with network externalities. J Ind Econ 40(1):55–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz ML, Shapiro C (1994) Systems competition and network effects. J Econ Perspect 8(2):93–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Khanna T, Gulati R, Nohria N (1998) The dynamics of learning alliances: competition, cooperation, and relative scope. Strateg Manag J 19(3):193–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim J, Mahoney JT (2005) Property rights theory, transaction costs theory, and agency theory: an organizational economics approach to strategic management. Manag Decis Econ 26(4):223–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut B, Zander U (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and replication of technologies. Organ Sci 3(3):383–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krogh G von, Hippel E von (2006) The promise of research on open source software. Manage Sci 52(7):975–983

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kubicek H (1977) Heuristische Bezugsrahmen und heuristisch angelegte Forschungsdesigns als Elemente einer Konstruktionsstrategie empirischer Forschung. In: Köhler R (Hrsg) Empirische und handlungstheoretische forschungskonzeptionen in der Betriebswirtschaftslehre. Poeschel, Stuttgart, S 3–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamoreaux NR, Sokoloff KL (2000) The geography of invention in the American glass industry, 1870–1925. J Econ Hist 60(3):700–729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavie D (2007) Alliance portfolios and firm performance: a study of value creation and appropriation in the U.S. software industry. Strateg Manag J 28(12):1187–1212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leimeister JM, Huber M, Bretschneider U, Krcmar H (2009) Leveraging crowdsourcing: activation-supporting compontents for IT-based ideas competition. J Manag Inf Syst 26(1):192–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Lessig L (2002) The architecture of innovation. Duke Law J 51(6):1783–1801

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin RC, Klevorick AK, Nelson RR, Winter SG (1987) Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings Pap Econ Act 1987(3):783–831

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitan KB (1982) Information resources as ‚Goods‘ in the life cycle of information production. J Am Soc Inf Sci 33(1):44–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li T, Calantone RJ (1998) The impact of market knowledge competence on new product advantage: conceptualization and empirical examination. J Mark 62(4):13–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenthaler U (2007) Open for innovation: understanding the determinants of external technology commercialization. Z Betriebswirtschaft, Special Issue 2007(4):21–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenthaler U, Ernst H (2007) Developing reputation to overcome the imperfections in the markets for knowledge. Res Pol 36(1):37–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liebeskind JP (1996) Knowledge, strategy, and the theory of the firm. Strateg Manag J, Special Issue 17:93–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippman SA, Rumelt RP (2003) A bargaining perspective on resource advantage. Strateg Manag J 24(11):1069–1086

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markides C, Oyon D (2000) Changing the strategy at nespresso: an interview with former CEO Jean-Paul Gaillard. Eur Manag J 18(3):296–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meckl R, Kubitschek C (2000) Organisation von Unternehmensnetzwerken – Eine verfügungsrechtstheoretische Analyse. Z Betriebswirtschaft 70(3):289–307

    Google Scholar 

  • Mockus A, Fielding R, Herbsleb JD (2002) Two case studies of open source software development: Apache and Mozilla. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol 11(3):309–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moran P, Ghoshal S (1999) Markets, firms, and the process of economic development. Acad Manag Rev 24(3):390–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka I, Takeuchi H (1995) The knowledge creating company. How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Nooteboom B (2000) Learning by interaction: absorptive capacity, cognitive distance and governance. Journal of Management und Gov 4(1/2):69–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nuvolari A (2004) Collective invention during the British Industrial Revolution: the case of the Cornish pumping engine. Cambridge J Econ 28(3):347–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osterloh M, Rota S (2007) Open source software development – just another case of collective invention? Res Pol 36(2):157–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pénin J (2007) Open knowledge disclosure: an overview of the evidence and economic motivations. J Econ Surveys 21(2):326–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penrose ET (1959/2009) The theory of the growth of the firm, 4. Aufl. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Peteraf MA (1993) The cornerstones of competitive advantage: a resource-based view. Strateg Manag J 14(3):179–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peteraf MA, Barney JB (2003) Unraveling the resource-based tangle. Manag Decis Econ 24(4):309–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer J, Salancik GR (2003) The external control of organizations. A resource dependence perspective. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Picot A (1991) Ein neuer Ansatz zur Gestaltung der Leistungstiefe. Schmalenbachs Z Betriebswirtschaftliche Forsch 43(4):336–357

    Google Scholar 

  • Piller FT (1998) Kundenindividuelle Massenproduktion. Hanser, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Piller FT, Walcher D (2006) Toolkits for idea competitions: a novel method to integrate users in new product development. R & D Manag 36(3):307–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pine JB II (1992/1998) Mass customization. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Pisano GP (1990) The R & D boundaries of the firm: an empirical analysis. Adm Sci Q 35(1):153–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi M (1958/2004) Personal knowledge. Towards a post-critical philosophy, 16. Aufl. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter ME (1991) Towards a dynamic theory of strategy. Strateg Manag J 12(8):95–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Priem RL, Butler JE (2001) Is the resource-based „view“ a useful perspective for strategic management research? Acad Manag Rev 26(1):22–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramírez R (1999) Value co-production: intellectual origins and implications for practice and research. Strateg Manag J 20(1):49–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasche C, Wolfrum B (1994) Ressourcenorientierte Unternehmensführung. Betriebswirtschaft 54(4):501–517

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichwald R, Piller F (2009) Interaktive Wertschöpfung. Open Innovation, Individualisierung und neue Formen der Arbeitsteilung, 2. Aufl. Gabler, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose CM (1998) The several futures of property: of cyberspace and folk tales, emission trades and ecosystems. Minnisota Law Rev 83(1):192–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumelt RP (1984) ‚Towards a strategic theory of the firm‘ in competitive strategic management. In: Lamb RB (Hrsg) Competitive strategic management. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson P (2006) IBM’s pragmatic embrace of open source. Commun ACM 49(10):21–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoder D, Madeja N, Vollmann C (2006) Explaining the success of NTT DoCoMo’s I-Mode – the concept of value scope management. In: Shaw MJ (Hrsg) E-commerce and the digital economy. Armonk, London, S 214–225

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter JA (1934/2008) The theory of economic development, 14. Aufl. Transaction, New Brunswick, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz A et al (2007) Understanding frameworks and reviews: a commentary to assist us in moving our field forward by analyzing our past. Data Base Adv Inf Syst 38(3):29–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Selznick P (1957/2007) Leadership in administration. A sociological interpretation. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro C, Varian H (1998) Information rules. A strategic guide to the network economy. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepard A (1987) Licensing to enhance demand for new technologies. RAND J Econ 18(3):360–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Specht G, Beckmann C, Amelingmeyer J (2002) F&E-Management. Kompetenz im Innovationsmanagement, 2. Aufl. Schäffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Spender J-C (1996) Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strateg Manag J, Special Issue 17:45–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Stallman R (1999) The GNU operating system and the free software movement. In: DiBona C (Hrsg) Open sources: voices from the open source revolution. O’Reilly, Beijing

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun Microsystems (2005) Sun grants global open source community access to more than 1,600 patents. http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/2005–01/sunflash.20050125.2.xml. Zugegriffen: 20. Apr. 2008

  • Tapscott D, Williams AD (2006) Wikinomics. How mass collaboration changes everything. Penguin, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece DJ (1986) Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Res Pol 15(6):285–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen A (1997) Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg Manag J 18(7):509–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomke S, Hippel E von (2002) Customers as innovators: a new way to create value. Harvard Bus Rev 80(4):74–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Ullrich F (2004) Verdünnte Verfügungsrechte. Konzeptualisierung und Operationalisierung der Dienstleistungsqualität auf der Grundlage der Property Rights Theorie. Deutscher Universitätsverlag, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Verona G (1999) A resource-based view of product development. Acad Manag Rev 24(1):132–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wade M, Hulland J (2004) Review: the resource based view and information systems research: review, extension and suggestions for future research. MIS Q 28(1):107–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfelt B (1984) A resource-based view of the firm. Strateg Manag J 5(2):171–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West J (2003) How open is open enough? Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies. Res Pol 32(7):1259–1285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West J, Gallagher S (2006) Challenges of open innovation: the paradox of firm investment in open-source software. R & D Manag 36(3):319–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler DA (2007) Why open source software/free software (OSS/FS, FLOSS, or FOSS)? Look at the numbers! – Working paper, version 16.4.2007. http://www.dwheeler.com/oss_fs_why.html. Zugegriffen: 10. Apr. 2008

  • Wiede T, Knüwer T (2009) Ein Russe zieht ins Silicon Valley. Handelsblatt 2009(101):13, (28.05.2009)

    Google Scholar 

  • Windrum P (2004) Leveraging technological externalities in complex technologies: Microsoft’s exploitation of standards in the browser wars. Res Pol 33(3):385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra SA, George G (2002) Absorptive capacity: a review, reconceptualization, and extension. Acad Manag Rev 27(2):185–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang MJ (2007) Assessing the performance impacts of information systems from the resource-based perspective: an empirical test of the indirect effect of IS. J Bus Strateg 24(2):141–164

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steffen Muhle.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Muhle, S., Schoder, D. & Fischbach, K. Wertschöpfungspotenziale und strategische Implikationen einer Öffnung von Informationsressourcen – Phänomenologie und ein Bezugsrahmen. Z Betriebswirtsch 80, 685–711 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-010-0370-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-010-0370-6

Schlüsselwörter

  • Unternehmensexterne Ressourcen
  • Öffnung
  • Informationssphären
  • Zugriff und Kontrolle auf Ressourcen
  • Resource-Based View

Keywords

  • External resources
  • Opening up
  • Information spheres
  • Access and control
  • Resource-Based View

JEL-Classification

  • M00
  • D8
  • L00