Value Creation in IT Service Platforms through Two-Sided Network Effects

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7714)


IT service businesses can achieve economies of scale and scope faster than in traditional product businesses. In particular, as IT service platforms will become the founding infrastructure of our economies, the analysis and understanding of the value that a service platform can generate is of great importance. IT service platforms provide all involved market participants with different values. For this paper, we consider application service users, service developers and service platform providers as market participants and analyze the interrelationship between the value creations of these market participants. The basis for the description of the values and their interrelationship is the identification of parameters. Based on these parameters, a simulation model has been developed. It helps inferring the relative impact of these parameters on the evolution of the IT service platform stakeholder values. The results imply that there is a two-sided network effect. All stakeholders of a service platform mainly benefit from a growing installed base of application users. The benefit of a large service variety, however, mainly benefits the service platform provider. Therefore, we can state that a large fraction of the value from two-sided network effects goes to the platform provider.


IT service platform value creation system dynamics two-sided network effect business modeling IT business SaaS cloud computing 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Demirkan, H., et al.: Service-oriented technology and management: perspectives on research and practice for the coming decade. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 7, 356–376 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Katz, M.L., Shapiro, C.: Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. The American Economic Review 75(3), 424–440 (1985)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Liebowitz, S.J., Margolis, S.E.: Network externality: An uncommon tragedy. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 8(2), 133–150 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Farrell, J., Saloner, G.: Standardization, compatibility, and innovation. Rand Journal 16, 70–83 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Farrell, J., Saloner, G.: Installed base and compatibility: Innovation, product preannouncements, and predation. The American Economic Review, 940–955 (1986)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Farrell, J., Saloner, G.: Coordination through committees and markets. The RAND Journal of Economics, 235–252 (1988)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Farrell, J., Saloner, G.: Converters, compatibility, and the control of interfaces. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 9–35 (1992)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Clements, M.T.: Direct and indirect network effects: are they equivalent? International Journal of Industrial Organization 22(5), 633–645 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Economides, N., Flyer, F.: Compatibility and Market Structure for Network Goods. Stern School of Business. Department of Economics Working Paper Series (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Katz, M.L., Shapiro, C.: Technology adoption in the presence of network externalities. Journal of Political Economy 94, 822–841 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Basole, R.C., Karla, J.: Value transformation in the mobile service ecosystem: A Study of App Store Emergence and Growth. Service Science 4(1), 24–41 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bieberstein, N., Bose, S., Fiammante, M., Jones, K., Shah, R.: Service-oriented architecture(SOA) compass: business value, planning, and enterprise roadmap. FT Press, Upper Saddle River (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Amit, R., Zott, C.: Value creation in e-business. Strategic Management Journal 22, 493–520 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee, S., Kim, T., Noh, Y., Lee, B.: Success factors of platform leadership in web 2.0 service business. Service Business 4(2), 89–103 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Smedlund, A.: Value co-creation in service platform business models. Service Science 4(1), 79–88 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Iansiti, M., Levien, R.: Strategy as ecology. Harvard Business Review 82(3), 68–81 (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gawer, A., Cusumano, M.A.: How companies become platform leaders. MIT Sloan Management Review 49(2), 28–35 (2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Agarwala, S., Yuan, C., Milojicic, D., Schwan, K.: QoS and utility aware monitoring in Enterprise Systems, pp. 124–133. IEEE (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Evans, D.S.: Some Empirical aspects of multi-sided platform industries. SSRN Electronic Journal (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Katz, M.L., Shapiro, C.: Product introduction with network externalities. Journal of Industrial Economics 40(1), 55–84 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Katz, M.L., Shapiro, C.: Systems competition and network effects. Journal of Economic Perspectives 8(2), 93–115 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Eisenmann, T., Parker, G., VanAlstyne, M.W.: Strategies for two-sided markets. Harvard Business Review 84(10), 92 (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhu, F., Iansiti, M.: Entry into platform-based markets. Strategic Management Journal 33, 88–106 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nalebuff, B.J., Brandenburger, A.M.: Co-opetition: competitive and cooperative business strategies for the digital economy. Strategy & Leadership 25, 28–35 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gebregiorgis, S.A., Altmann, J.: IT service platforms: Their value creation model and the impact of their level of openness on their adoption. In: Annual SRII Global Conference, SRII 2012, San Jose, California, USA (2012)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kim, K., Altmann, J., Hwang, J.: An analysis of the openness of the Web2.0 service network using two sets of indices for measuring the impact of service ownership. In: Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science, HICSS44, Koloa, Hawaii, USA (2011)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kim, K., Altmann, J., Hwang, J.: Measuring and analyzing the openness of the Web2.0 service network for improving the innovation capacity of the Web2.0 system through collective intelligence. In: Symposium on Collective Intelligence, COLLIN 2010. Springer Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing, Hagen, Germany (2010)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Altmann, J., Ion, M., Bany Mohammed, A.A.: Taxonomy of Grid Business Models. In: Veit, D.J., Altmann, J. (eds.) GECON 2007. LNCS, vol. 4685, pp. 29–43. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Apple iTunes (2012),
  30. 30.
    Apple Development Kits (2012),
  31. 31.
  32. 32.
    Google Apps Marketplace (2012),

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Technology Management, Economics, and Policy Program (TEMEP), College of EngineeringSeoul National UniversitySeoulSouth-Korea

Personalised recommendations