Skip to main content

Digital Platform Design at the Edge of Complexity: The Value of Design Thinking to Balance Between Configuration and Customization

  • 585 Accesses

Part of the Progress in IS book series (PROIS)

Abstract

Even though human-centered approaches such as Design Thinking have become a widespread strategy to gain competitive advantages, it remains unclear what it means for digital platform design. The very core of digital platforms lies in the systematic reuse of modules to reduce complexity and increase variety through configuration. Design Thinking, in turn, yields a variety of prototypes grounded in a deep understanding of the problem space. While the risk of the former lies in solution-fixation, the risk of the latter is that individual desirable solutions inhibit the transition toward actual implementation. Both perspectives are triangulated and the value of Design Thinking as a mindset, process, and toolset for Digital Platform Design is discussed. This contribution highlights the sweet spot where a wide range of problems (user needs) are addressed by a variety of platform configurations.

Keywords

  • Digital platforms
  • InsurTech
  • Human-centered design
  • Design thinking

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-90594-1_12
  • Chapter length: 10 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-90594-1
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Hardcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  • Baldwin CY, Clark KB (2000) Design rules: the power of modularity. MIT Press

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bask A, Lipponen M, Rajahonka M, Tinnilä M (2010) The concept of modularity: diffusion from manufacturing to service production. Int J Manuf Technol Manag 21(3):355–375

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Boudreau KJ, Hagiu A (2009) Platform rules: multi-sided platforms as regulators. Platf Mark Innov 1:163–191

    Google Scholar 

  • Brax SA, Bask A, Hsuan J, Voss C (2017) Service modularity and architecture – an overview and research agenda. Int J Oper Prod Manag 37(6):686–702

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner W, Uebernickel F, Abrell T (2016) Design Thinking as mindset, process, and toolbox. In: Brenner W, Uebernickel F (eds) Design Thinking for innovation: research and practice. Springer, Cham, pp 3–21

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Brown T (2009) Change by design: how design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. Harper Business, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Caillaud B, Jullien B (2003) Chicken & egg: competition among intermediation service providers. Rand J Econ 34(2):309–328

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Constantinides P, Henfridsson O, Parker GG (2018) Introduction—platforms and infrastructures in the digital age. Inf Syst Res 29(2):381–400

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper A, Reimann R, Cronin D (2007) About face 3: the essentials of interaction design. John Wiley & Sons

    Google Scholar 

  • Cusumano MA, Gawer A, Yoffie DB (2019) The business of platforms: strategy in the age of digital competition, innovation, and power. Harper Business, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • De Weck OL, Roos D, Magee CL (2011) Engineering systems: meeting human needs in a complex technological world. MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Design Council (2015) What is the framework for innovation? Design council’s evolved double diamond. Design Council. https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/news-opinion/what-framework-innovation-design-councils-evolved-double-diamond. Accessed 7 Feb 2021

  • Dolata M, Schwabe G (2016) Design thinking in IS research projects. In: Brenner W, Uebernickel F (eds) Design thinking for innovation. Springer, Cham, pp 67–83

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Evans PC, Gawer A (2016) The rise of the platform enterprise: a global survey. The Center for Global Enterprise. http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/811201/

  • Gawer A (2014) Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: toward an integrative framework. Res Policy 43(7):1239–1249

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Germonprez M, Hovorka D, Collopy F (2007) A theory of tailorable technology design. J Assoc Inf Syst 8(6):315–367

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanington B, Martin B (2012) Universal methods of design: 100 ways to research complex problems, develop innovative ideas, and design effective solutions. Rockport Publishers, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Hehn J, Uebernickel F, Herterich M (2018a) Design thinking methods for service innovation—a Delphi study. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, Yokohama

    Google Scholar 

  • Hehn J, Uebernickel F, Stoeckli E, Brenner W (2018b) Designing human-centric information systems: towards an understanding of challenges in specifying requirements within design thinking projects. MKWI proceedings 2018

    Google Scholar 

  • Hehn J, Mendez D, Uebernickel F, Brenner W, Broy M (2020) On integrating design thinking for human-centered requirements engineering. IEEE Softw 37(2):25–31

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hein A, Weking J, Schreieck M, Wiesche M, Böhm M, Krcmar H (2019) Value co-creation practices in business-to-business platform ecosystems. Electron Mark 29(3):503–518

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hein A, Schreieck M, Riasanow T, Setzke DS, Wiesche M, Böhm M, Krcmar H (2020) Digital platform ecosystems. Electron Mark 30(1):87–98

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • IDEO (2015). Field guide to human-centered design. IDEO.org. https://www.designkit.org/resources/1. Accessed 6 Feb 2021

  • Jones M, Samalionis F (2008) From small ideas to radical service innovation. Des Manag Rev 19(1):20

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Linsey JS, Markman AB, Wood KL (2012) Design by analogy: a study of the wordtree method for problem re-representation. J Mech Des 134(4):041009

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ Sci 2(1):71–87

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Meinel C, Leifer L (eds) (2019) Design thinking research: looking further: design thinking beyond solution-fixation. Understanding innovation. Springer, Cham

    Google Scholar 

  • Moon SK, Shu J, Simpson TW, Kumara SRT (2010) A module-based service model for mass customization: service family design. IIE Trans 43(3):153–163

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Porter ME (1996) What is strategy. Harv Bus Rev 74(6):61–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter ME (2012) What is strategy: issues for the world bank. Harvard Business School. https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/2012-0802—World_Bank_Strategy_c2726162-7d36-400b-938c-a87119f5ccac.pdf. Accessed 26 Jan 2021

  • Rae J (2015) Design value index. Des Manag Rev 26(1):4–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouse WB (2007) People and organizations: explorations of human-centered design. Wiley

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard B, Sarrazin H, Kouyoumjian G, Dore F (2018) The business value of design. McKinsey Quarterly

    Google Scholar 

  • Staehelin D, Dolata M, Schwabe G (2021) Managing tensions in research consortia with design thinking artifacts. In: Hehn J, Mendez D, Brenner W, Broy M (eds) Design thinking for software engineering - creating human-oriented software intensive products and services. Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoeckli E, Dremel C, Uebernickel F (2018) Exploring characteristics and transformational capabilities of InsurTech innovations to understand insurance value creation in a digital world. Electron Mark 28(3):287–305

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Sun W, Zhang X, Guo CJ, Sun P, Su H (2008) Software as a service: configuration and customization perspectives. In: 2008 IEEE Congress on Services Part II (services-2 2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuckman BW (1965) Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychol Bull 63(6):384–399

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Uebernickel F, Brenner W, Naef T, Pukall B, Schindlholzer B (2015) Design thinking: Das Handbuch. Frankfurter Allgemeine Buch

    Google Scholar 

  • Viana DD, Tommelein ID, Formoso CT (2017) Using modularity to reduce complexity of industrialized building systems for mass customization. Energies 10(10):1622

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Yoo Y, Henfridsson O, Lyytinen K (2010) Research commentary—the new organizing logic of digital innovation: an agenda for information systems research. Inf Syst Res 21(4):724–735

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Yoo Y, Boland RJ, Lyytinen K, Majchrzak A (2012) Organizing for innovation in the digitized world. Organ Sci 23(5):1398–1408

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Stoeckli, E. (2022). Digital Platform Design at the Edge of Complexity: The Value of Design Thinking to Balance Between Configuration and Customization. In: Hehn, J., Mendez, D., Brenner, W., Broy, M. (eds) Design Thinking for Software Engineering. Progress in IS. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90594-1_12

Download citation