Abstract
The dynamics of network effects present challenges for platforms’ management strategies across development stages, which have been overlooked in existing literature. Using data from a Chinese prominent freight exchange platform, this paper explores the evolution of direct network effects and offers an explanation for the inconsistent findings in existing literature. We find that direct network effects are positive initially but gradually lose significance and eventually turn negative as the market thickens. We consistently observe asymmetry in direct network effects, initially favoring carriers but shifting to shippers over time. Additionally, shippers experience earlier changes in direct network effects compared to carriers. We attribute the changes over time to the diverse perceptions of platform value resulting from an increased number of peers, as different forces dominate under different market thickness conditions. Our study contributes to the debate on direct network effects, providing insights into their variability based on market thickness.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
A website about a new carrier looking for chat groups on the Internet: https://www.zhihu.com/question/323588154
References
Ackerberg, D. A. (2006). Quantifying equilibrium network externalities in the ACH banking industry. RAND Journal of Economics, 37(3), 738–761. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2006.tb00040.x
Anderson, E. G., Parker, G. G., & Tan, B. (2014). Platform performance investment in the presence of network externalities. Information Systems Research, 25(1), 152–172. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2013.0505
Asvanund, A., Clay, K., Krishnan, R., & Smith, M. D. (2004). An empirical analysis of network externalities in peer-to-peer music-sharing networks. Information Systems Research, 15(2), 155–174. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1040.0020
Bernstein, F., DeCroix, G. A., & Keskin, N. B. (2020). Competition between two-sided platforms under demand and supply congestion effects. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 23(5), 1043–1061. https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2020.0866
Bimpikis, K., Elmaghraby, W. J., Moon, K., & Zhang, W. (2020). Managing market thickness in online business-to-business markets. Management Science, 66(12), 5783–5822. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3497
Chakravarty, S., Dogan, K., & Tomlinson, N. (2006). A hedonic study of network effects in the market for word processing software. Decision Support Systems, 41(4), 747–763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2004.10.010
Chao, Y., & Derdenger, T. (2013). Mixed bundling in two-sided markets in the presence of installed base effects. Management Science, 59(8), 1904–1926. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1120.1688
Chen, X., Zhou, D., Zhan, Z., & Lu, R. (2023). When do you enter? entrepreneurial firms’ entry timing and product performance in the digital platform market. Sustainability, 15(6), 5313. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15065313
Chen, Y., & Xie, J. (2007). Cross-market network effect with asymmetric customer loyalty: Implications for competitive advantage. Marketing Science, 26(1), 52–66. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1060.0238
Chou, C.-H., Wang, Y.-S., & Tang, T.-I. (2015). Exploring the determinants of knowledge adoption in virtual communities: A social influence perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 35(3), 364–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.02.001
Chu, J., & Manchanda, P. (2016). Quantifying cross and direct network effects in online consumer-to-consumer platforms. Marketing Science, 35(6), 870–893. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2016.0976
Fuentelsaz, L., Maicas, J. P., & Polo, Y. (2012). Switching costs, network effects, and competition in the European mobile telecommunications industry. Information Systems Research, 23(1), 93–108. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0303
Gan, L., & Li, Q. (2016). Efficiency of thin and thick markets. Journal of Econometrics, 192(1), 40–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2015.10.012
Gan, L., Wang, P., & Zhang, Q. (2018). Market thickness and the impact of unemployment on housing market outcomes. Journal of Monetary Economics, 98, 27–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2018.04.007
Halaburda, H., & Felix, O.-G. (2014). The limits of scale: Companies that get big fast are often left behind. here’s why. Harvard Business Review Digital Article, 92(4), 95–99.
Halaburda, H., Jan Piskorski, M., & Yıldırım, P. (2018). Competing by restricting choice: The case of matching platforms. Management Science, 64(8), 3574–3594. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2017.2797
Haviv, A., Huang, Y., & Li, N. (2020). Intertemporal demand spillover effects on video game platforms. Management Science, 66(10), 4788–4807. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3414
Hinz, O., Otter, T., & Skiera, B. (2020). Estimating network effects in two-sided markets. Journal of Management Information Systems, 37(1), 12–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2019.1705509
Koh, T. K., & Fichman, M. (2014). Multihoming users’ preferences for two-sided exchange networks. MIS Quarterly, 38(4), 977–996. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2014/38.4.02
Li, C.-Y., & Fang, Y.-H. (2022). The more we get together, the more we can save? A transaction cost perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 62, 102434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102434
Li, H., Shen, Q., & Bart, Y. (2018). Local market characteristics and online-to-offline commerce: An empirical analysis of Groupon. Management Science, 64(4), 1860–1878. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2666
Li, H., Shen, Q., & Bart, Y. (2020). Dynamic resource allocation on multi-category two-sided platforms. Management Science, 67(2), 984–1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2020.3586
Li, J., & Netessine, S. (2019). Higher market thickness reduces matching rate in online platforms: Evidence from a quasiexperiment. Management Science, 66(1), 271–289. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3223
Li, S., Liu, Y., & Bandyopadhyay, S. (2010). Network effects in online two-sided market platforms: A research note. Decision Support Systems, 49(2), 245–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2010.02.004
Lu, J. W., & Beamish, P. W. (2004). International diversification and firm performance: The s-curve hypothesis. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 598–609. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159604
McLaren, J. (2003). Trade and market thickness: Effects on organizations. Journal of the European Economic Association, 1(2–3), 328–336. https://doi.org/10.1162/154247603322390964
Miller, J., Nie, Y. (Marco), & Liu, X. (2020). Hyperpath truck routing in an online freight exchange platform. Transportation Science, 54(6), 1676–1696. https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.2020.0989
Mullick, S., Raassens, N., Haans, H., & Nijssen, E. J. (2021). Reducing food waste through digital platforms: A quantification of cross-side network effects. Industrial Marketing Management, 93, 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.09.021
Muzellec, L., Ronteau, S., & Lambkin, M. (2015). Two-sided Internet platforms: A business model lifecycle perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 45, 139–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.02.012
Niculescu, M. F., Wu, D. J., & Xu, L. (2018). Strategic intellectual property sharing: Competition on an open technology platform under network effects. Information Systems Research, 29(2), 498–519. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2017.0756
Pontiggia, A., & Virili, F. (2010). Network effects in technology acceptance: Laboratory experimental evidence. International Journal of Information Management, 30(1), 68–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2009.07.001
Rochet, J.-C., & Tirole, J. (2003). Platform competition in two-sided markets. Journal of the European Economic Association, 1(4), 990–1029. https://doi.org/10.1162/154247603322493212
Scott, A., Parker, C., & Craighead, C. W. (2017). Service refusals in supply chains: Drivers and deterrents of freight rejection. Transportation Science, 51(4), 086–1101. https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.2016.0677
Song, Jaeki, Baker, Jeff, Wang, Ying, Choi, Hyoung Yong, & Bhattacherjee, Anol. (2018). Platform adoption by mobile application developers: A multimethodological approach. Decision Support Systems, 107, 26–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2017.12.013
Sterman, J. D., Henderson, R., Beinhocker, E. D., & Newman, L. I. (2007). Getting big too fast: Strategic dynamics with increasing returns and bounded rationality. Management Science, 53(4), 683–696. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0673
Sun, B., Xie, J., & Cao, H. H. (2004). Product strategy for innovators in markets with network effects. Marketing Science, 23(2), 243–254. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1040.0058
Taylor, T. A. (2018). On-demand service platforms. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 20(4), 704–720. https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2017.0678
Tsai, J.-M., Hung, S.-W., & Lin, G.-T. (2022). Continued usage of smart wearable devices (SWDs): Cross-level analysis of gamification and network externality. Electronic Markets, 32(3), 1661–1676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00575-7
Tucker, C., & Zhang, J. (2010). Growing two-sided networks by advertising the user base: A field experiment. Marketing Science, 29(5), 805–814. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1100.0560
Voigt, S., & Hinz, O. (2015). Network effects in two-sided markets: Why a 50/50 user split is not necessarily revenue optimal. Business Research, 8(1), 139–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-015-0018-z
Wallbach, S., Coleman, K., Elbert, R., & Benlian, A. (2019). Multi-sided platform diffusion in competitive B2B networks: Inhibiting factors and their impact on network effects. Electronic Markets, 29(4), 693–710. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-019-00382-7
Wang, R., & Wang, Z. (2017). Consumer choice models with endogenous network effects. Management Science, 63(11), 3944–3960. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2520
Ward, M. R. (2022). Network engagement from learning friends’ preferences: Evidence from a video gaming social network. Electronic Markets, 32(3), 1239–1255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00583-7
Wu, C.-H., & Chamnisampan, N. (2021). Platform entry and homing as competitive strategies under cross-sided network effects. Decision Support Systems, 140, 113428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2020.113428
Zellner, A. (1962). An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests for aggregation bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 57(298), 348–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1962.10480664
Zhu, F., & Iansiti, M. (2019). Why some platforms thrive and others don’t. Harvard Business Review, 97(1), 118–125.
Funding
This research was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant numbers 72171108 and 71871112).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Responsible Editor: Ricardo Büttner
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Lyu, X., Xiao, T. & Li, J. Evolution of direct network effects: A perspective of market thickness of an online freight platform. Electron Markets 34, 7 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-024-00691-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-024-00691-6