The digital platform: a research agenda
As digital platforms are transforming almost every industry today, they are slowly finding their way into the mainstream information systems (ISs) literature. Digital platforms are a challenging research object because of their distributed nature and intertwinement with institutions, markets and technologies. New research challenges arise as a result of the exponentially growing scale of platform innovation, the increasing complexity of platform architectures and the spread of digital platforms to many different industries. This paper develops a research agenda for digital platforms research in IS. We recommend researchers seek to (1) advance conceptual clarity by providing clear definitions that specify the unit of analysis, degree of digitality and the sociotechnical nature of digital platforms; (2) define the proper scoping of digital platform concepts by studying platforms on different architectural levels and in different industry settings; and (3) advance methodological rigour by employing embedded case studies, longitudinal studies, design research, data-driven modelling and visualisation techniques. Considering current developments in the business domain, we suggest six questions for further research: (1) Are platforms here to stay? (2) How should platforms be designed? (3) How do digital platforms transform industries? (4) How can data-driven approaches inform digital platforms research? (5) How should researchers develop theory for digital platforms? and (6) How do digital platforms affect everyday life?
Keywordsdigital platforms digital infrastructures digital ecosystems digital innovation research agenda
The authors wish to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments. We also greatly appreciate the significant encouragement and help from the Editors-in-Chief in developing this paper and for providing excellent feedback and advice. The research was in part supported by a number of research grants. The first author’s work was supported by The European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program under Grant Agreement No 645791. The second author’s work was supported by the following research grants: The Flexible Networks (EPSRC Grant: EP/G066434/1); User Interactions for Breakthrough Services (EPSRC Grant: EP/G066426/1); The Telenor Research and Future Studies Value Networks Programme; and The Huawei HUDIP project supported under the Synergetic Innovation Network, Theory and Practice (HIRPO20161301) Programme. The third author's work was in part supported by the Tennenbaum Institute for Enterprise Transformation.
- @Scale (2015). Why Google Stores Billions of Lines of Code in a Single Repository. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W71BTkUbdqE&feature=youtu.be.
- Alaimo, C. (2014). Computational Consumption: Social Media and the Construction of Digital Consumers. London School of Economics. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cristina_Alaimo/publication/266701936_Computational_consumption_social_media_and_the_construction_of_digital_consumers/links/5437dbf30cf2027cbb20502d.pdf.
- Alaimo, C. and Kallinikos, J. (2016). Encoding the Everyday: Social Data and Its Media Apparatus, In: S.R. Cassidy, H.R. Ekbia, and M. Mattoli (eds). Big Data is not a Monolith: Policies, Practices, and Problems, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Baldwin, C.Y., and Clark, K.B. (2000). Design Rules, Vol. 1: The Power of Modularity, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Baldwin, C.Y., and Woodard, C.J. (2009). The Architecture of Platforms: A Unified View, In A. Gawer (Ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation (pp. 19–44). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
- Basole, R.C., Russell, M.G., Huhtamäki, J., Rubens, N., Still, K., and Park, H. (2015). Understanding Business Ecosystem Dynamics: A Data-Driven Approach, ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (TMIS) 6(2): 6.Google Scholar
- Bennett, S.C. (2012). Right to be Forgotten: Reconciling EU and US Perspectives, Berkeley Journal of International Law, 30: 161.Google Scholar
- Boudreau, K.J., and Hagiu, A. (2009). Platform Rules: Multi-sided Platforms as Regulators, In A. Gawer (Ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation (pp. 163–191), Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
- Brynjolfsson, E., and McAfee, A. (2011). Race Against The Machine, Lexington: Digital Frontier Press.Google Scholar
- Brynjolfsson, E., and McAfee, A. (2014). The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies, New York City: WW Norton & Company.Google Scholar
- Ciborra, C.U., Braa, K., Cordella, A., Dahlbom, B., Failla, A., Hanseth, O., et al. (Eds.). (2001). From Control to Drift. The Dynamics of Corporate Information Infrastructures, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Eisenman, T., Parker, G., and Van Aystyne, M.W. (2006). Strategies for Two-Sided Markets, Harvard Business Review 84(10): 92–101.Google Scholar
- Evans, D.S. and Schmalensee, R. (2013): The Antitrust Analysis of Multi-sided Platform Businesses. Paper No. 623. The Law School, The University of Chicago. http://www.law.uchicago.edu/Lawecon/index.html.
- Evans, D. S. and Schmalensee, R. (2016). The Matchmakers: The New Economics of Multisided Platforms, Boston: Harvard Business Review Press.Google Scholar
- Gawer, A., and Cusumano, M.A. (2002). Platform Leadership: How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco Drive Industry Innovation, Brighton: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
- Iansiti, M., and Levien, R. (2004a). The Keystone Advantage: What the New Dynamics of Business Ecosystems Mean for Strategy, Innovation, and Sustainability, Brighton: Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
- Iansiti, M., and Levien, R. (2004b). Strategy as Ecology, Harvard Business Review 82(3): 68–81.Google Scholar
- Kaplan, R.A., and Nadler, M.L. (2015). Airbnb: A Case Study in Occupancy Regulation and Taxation, The University of Chicago Law Review, 82: 103.Google Scholar
- Katz, M.L., and Shapiro, C. (1985). Network Externalities, Companition and Compatibility, American Economic Review 75: 424–440.Google Scholar
- Kiesling, L.L. (2016). Implications of Smart Grid Innovation for Organizational Models in Electricity Distribution, In C.-C. Liu (Ed.), Wiley Handbook of Smart Grid Development, Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Leonardi, P.M., Nardi, B.A., and Kallinikos, J. (Eds.). (2012). Materiality and Organizing, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Mainelli, M., and Smith, M. (2015). Sharing Ledgers for Sharing Economies: An Exploration of Mutual Distributed Ledgers (Aka Blockchain Technology), The Journal of Financial Perspectives 3(3): 38–69.Google Scholar
- Malone, T.W., Laubacher, R.J., and Johns, T. (2011). The Age of Hyperspecialization, Harvard Business Review 89(7/8): 56–65.Google Scholar
- Morozov, E. (2016). Cheap Cab Ride? You Must Have Missed Uber’s True Cost. The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/31/cheap-cab-ride-uber-true-cost-google-wealth-taxation.
- Parker, G.G., Van Alstyne, M.W., and Choudary, S.P. (2016). Platform Revolution: How Networked Markets are Transforming the Economy and How to Make Them Work for You, New York: WW Norton & Co.Google Scholar
- Pon, B. (2016). Winners & Losers in the Global App Economy, Surrey, UK: Caribou Digital. http://cariboudigital.net/winners-losers-in-the-global-app-economy/.
- Shapiro, C., and Varian, H.R. (1998). Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
- Sørensen, C. and Pillans, G. (2012). The Future of Work. The Corporate Research Forum. http://www.crforum.co.uk.
- Susskind, R.E., and Susskind, D. (2015). The Future of the Professions: How Technology Will Transform the Work of Human Experts, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Svahn, F. and Henfridsson, O. (2012). The Dual Regimes of Digital Innovation Management, In: HICSS 45, Maui, Hawai’i, IEEE, pp. 3347–3356.Google Scholar
- Svahn, F., Lindgren, R. and Mathiassen, L. (2015). Applying Options Thinking to Shape Generativity in Digital Innovation: An Action Research into Connected Cars, In: 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS 49), IEEE, pp. 4141–4150.Google Scholar
- Tilson, D., Sørensen, C. and Lyytinen, K. (2011). The Paradoxes of Change and Control in Digital Infrastructures: The Mobile Operating Systems Case, In: The 10th International Conference on Mobile Business, Como, Italy.Google Scholar
- Tilson, D., Sørensen, C. and Lyytinen, K. (2012). Change and Control Paradoxes in Mobile Infrastructure Innovation: The Android and iOS Mobile Operating Systems Cases, In: 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS 45), Maui, HI.Google Scholar
- Tiwana, A. (2014). Platform Ecosystems: Aligning Architecture, Governance, and Strategy, Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
- Tracy, A. (2015): Apple Says iOS 9 Adoption Rate Is The Fastest Ever, Running On 50% of Devices. http://www.forbes.com/sites/abigailtracy/2015/09/21/apple-says-ios-9-adoption-rate-is-the-fastest-ever/-53d242bf2727.
- Turkle, C. (2011). Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- Um, S., Yoo, Y. and Wattal, S. (2015). The Evolution of Digital Ecosystems: A Case of WordPress from 2004 to 2014, In: T. Carte, A. Heinzl, and C. Urquhart (eds.) Thirty Sixth International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 36), Fort Worth.Google Scholar
- West, J., and Wood, D. (2013). Evolving an Open Ecosystem: The Rise and Fall of the Symbian Platform, Advances in Strategic Management, 30: 27–67.Google Scholar
- Wikipedia. (2015). Right to be Forgotten, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_be_forgotten.
- Yoo, Y. (2013). The Table Has Turned: How Can IS Field Contribute to the Technology and Innovation Management? Journal of the AIS 14: 227–236.Google Scholar
- Zittrain, J. (2006). The Generative Internet, Harvard Law Review 119: 1974–2040.Google Scholar