Abstract
The purpose of this study is to investigate the critical success factors of platform leadership in the Web 2.0 based service business environment. Because of the lack of theoretical foundation for this topic, we adopted relevant theory and case study analyses. Representative Web 2.0 firms which have developed platform leadership were chosen and analyzed on the basis of previous research on platform strategy through spider web analysis. This study shows that Web 2.0 firms such as Google, Flickr, and Salesforce.com differ in their competitive capabilities for platform leadership. The result of this research suggests that platform leadership in the Web 2.0 era depends on five interdependent dimensions: innovation ability, connectivity, complementarities, efficiency, and network effects.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alexander B (2006) Web 2.0: a new wave of innovation for teaching and learning? Educause Rev 41(2):33–44
Amit R, Schoemaker PJH (1993) Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strateg Manag J 14(1):33–46
Amit R, Zott C (2001) Value creation in e-business. Strateg Manag J 22(6):493–520
An M, Noh Y (2009) Airline customer satisfaction and loyalty: impact of in-flight service quality. Serv Bus 3(3):293–307
Anderson C (2004) The long tail: why the future of business is selling less of More. Hyperion, New york
Arthur WB (1996) Increasing returns and the new world of business. Harvard Bus Rev 74(4):100–109
Best D (2006) Web 2.0 Next big thing or next big internet bubble? Lecture Web Information Systems. Technische Universiteit, Eindhoven
Bonabeau E (2009) Decisions 2.0: the power of collective intelligence. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 50:45–52
Brynjolfsson E, Kemerer CF (1996) Network externalities in microcomputer software: an econometric analysis of the spreadsheet market. Manag Sci 42(12):1627–1647
Chesbrough HW, Appleyard M (2007) Open innovation and strategy. California Manag Rev 50(1):57–76
Constantinides E, Fountain SJ (2008) Web 2.0: conceptual foundations and marketing issues. J Direct Data Digit Mark Pract 9:231–244
Cusumano MA, Gawer A (2002) The elements of platform leadership. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 43(3):51–58
Dranove D, Gandal N (2003) The DVD-vs.-DIVX standard war: empirical evidence of network effects and preannouncement effects. J Econ Manag Strategy 12(3):363–386
Economides N, Salop SC (1992) Competition and integration among complements, and network market structure. J Ind Econ 40(1):105–123
Eisenmann T, Parker G, Alstyne MWV (2006) Strategies for two-sided markets. Harvard Bus Rev 84(10):92–101
Evans PB, Wurster TS (1999) Blown to Bits: How the new economics of information transforms strategy. Harvard Business School Press, Boston
Gandal N (1995) Competing compatibility standards and the network. Rev Econ Stat 77(4):599
Gawer A, Cusumano MA (2008) How companies become platform leaders. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 49(2):28–35
Greenmeier L, Gaudin S (2007) Amid the rush to Web 2.0, Some words of warning. Obtained through the Internet: http://www.informationweek.com/. accessed 26/3/2009
Gruber T (2007) Collective knowledge systems: where the social web meets the sementic web. Web Sementics Sci Serv Agents World Wide Web 6(1):4–13
Hagel J, Brown JS, Davison L (2008) Shaping strategy in a world of constant disruption. Harvard Bus Rev 86(10):80–89
Hoegg R, Martignoni R, Meckel M, Stanoevska-Slabeva K (2006) Overview of business models for Web 2.0 communities. In: Proceedings of GeNeMe, Dresden
Iansiti M, Levien R (2004) Strategy as ecology. Harvard Bus Rev 82(3):132–133
Katz ML, Shapiro C (1985) Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. Am Econ Rev 75(3):424–440
Kim WC, Mauborgne R (2005) Blue ocean strategy: from theory to practice. Calif Manag Rev 47(3):105–121
Lee S, Ribeiro D, Olson D, Roig S (2007) The importance of the activities of service business in the economy: welcome to the Service Business. Serv Bus 1(1):1–5
Lee SH, DeWester D, Park SR (2008) Web 2.0 and opportunities for small businesses. Serv Bus 2(4):335–345
McAfee AP (2006) Enterprise 2.0: the dawn of emergent collaboration. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 47(3):21–28
Metcalfe B (1995) Metcalfe’s law: a network becomes more valuable as it reaches more users. InfoWorld 17:53
Meyer MH, Mugge PC (2001) Make platform innovation drive enterprise growth. Res Technol Manag 44(1):25–39
Nalebuff BJ, Brandenburger AM (1997) Co-opetition: competitive and cooperative business strategies for the digital economy. Strategy Leadersh 25(6):28–35
O’Reilly T (2004) Web-user satisfaction on the upswing. Obtained through the Internet: http://www.pcworld.com/. accessed 26/3/2009]
O’Reilly T (2005) What is Web 2.0. O’Reilly Network. Obtained through the Internet: http://www.oreillynet.com/. accessed 23/2/2009
O’Reilly T (2006) Web 2.0 Compact definition: trying again. Obtained through the Internet: http://radar.oreilly.com/. accessed 11/1/2009
Rochet JC, Tirole J (2003) Platform competition in two-sided markets. J Eur Econ Assoc 1(4):990–1029
Schumpeter JA (1934) The theory of economic development: an inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest and the business cycle. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Schumpeter JA (1939) Business cycles: a theoretical and statistical analysis of the capitalist process. McGraw-Hill, New York
Shen A (2008) Web 2.0: a strategy guide. O’Reilly Media, Inc, Sebastopol, California
Wilson J (2006) 3G to Web 2.0? Can mobile telephony become an architecture of participation? Int J Res New Media Technol 12(2):229–242
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lee, S.M., Kim, T., Noh, Y. et al. Success factors of platform leadership in web 2.0 service business. Serv Bus 4, 89–103 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-010-0093-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-010-0093-3