Regulating how digital platforms use algorithms to determine and control content displayed to their users has become a controversial topic and an important societal challenge. Despite the acknowledgement of institutional tussles around regulation of algorithmic control, we lack research on how the development of regulation takes place. This research examines the process of institutional work by actors to develop regulation. We study two cases of algorithmic control regulation in Australia: one involving algorithmic control for content display, the other for moderation. We build on data from a longitudinal discourse analysis of 410 media articles and 447 policy and industry documents. We have found that the institutional work of regulators and digital platforms is critical to creating a new institutional arrangement, while third parties (media, academia, etc.) play a supporting or mediating role. We develop a process model of institutional work for regulation of algorithmic control. This model captures the institutional tussles between the main stakeholders as they express their perspective on legitimate forms of algorithmic control, and shape the process and outcome of regulation. Building on our model, we discuss the dynamics of regulation development in light of the constellations of actors and their power positions in the process. We further consider the outcome of regulation and highlight future research questions that build on our findings.

Sustainability research has increasingly emphasized the importance of value networks in the design and development of sustainable business models (SBM). This is because SBMs must incorporate economic, environmental and social goals to achieve their desired impacts, hence designing such models requires firms to develop an understanding of value creation from the perspective of all key stakeholders in their networks in order to co-create economic, social and ecological value. To advance our understanding of how value network activities shape SBM development, we conducted a longitudinal case study of RECUP, a born sustainable startup with a circular economy business model that has developed and worked with a broad value network to achieve a major reduction in waste from linear consumption. We identify three sets of value network activities that supported the continuous development of the firm’s value proposition and contributed to mutual value creation among stakeholders from business, politics and society: B2B-partnering, political agenda-setting and mobilizing end-consumers. Our contributions to research on SBM innovation and design include demonstrating how value network activities initially emerge through experimentation and consolidate over time through iterative learning processes. Such learning and adaption through dynamic value network activities is especially important, we argue, when value-creating factors are not sufficiently known in advance by startups and/or their stakeholders.

PurposeA large part of maritime container supply chain costs is generated by carriers in port hinterland logistics. Carriers which operate in the hinterland are under pressure to reduce costs and increase profitability, and they face challenges of fierce price competition. This study aims to explore how collaboration is perceived and implemented by carriers in truck container logistics in the port hinterland as a way to tackle these issues.Design/methodology/approachThis study adopts a qualitative multiple case study approach. Qualitative interviews with carriers in the port hinterland of Hamburg, Germany, were conducted and analyzed using grounded theory.FindingsThe study reveals two collaboration types in the hinterland, based on the different carriers' interpretation of market conditions as changeable or as given, driving their collaboration mindsets and strategic actions: The developer, who has a proactive collaboration mindset and practices strategic maneuvers toward changing poor market conditions through collaboration, and the adapter, who has a defensive collaboration mindset and perceives market conditions as given and constraining collaboration.Research limitations/implicationsThe qualitative results will help researchers better understand how collaboration practices depend on the carriers' subjective interpretations and perceptions of the market.Practical implicationsBased on the findings, managers of carriers gain an understanding of the different types of actors in their market and the relevance of acknowledging these types. Consequently, they can design appropriate strategic measures toward collaboration.Originality/valueThe findings for the first time provide exploratory insights of carriers' mindsets.

No abstract