Platform-based Innovation Management: Directing External Innovational Efforts in Platform Ecosystems

Scholten, Simone; Scholten, Ulrich

doi:10.1007/s13132-011-0072-5

Cited by 49 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As such, these complementary firms apply to several distinct types of control mechanisms along with their external innovation process, including the following: (a) market regulative control, (b) co-regulative control, (c) restrictive control, (d) sanction control, (e) motivational control and (f) informative control (Scholten & Scholten, 2012). These control mechanisms can be applied at dedicated phases of the platform-based innovation process to steer external complementary innovation efforts on top of the platform.…”

Section: Research Scope and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Growth of a platform business model as an entrepreneurial ecosystem and its effects on regional development

Yun

Won

Park

et al. 2017

European Planning Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Research Scope and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Growth of a platform business model as an entrepreneurial ecosystem and its effects on regional development

Yun

Won

Park

et al. 2017

European Planning Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Focal firms create value by accumulating more suppliers and customers, rather than through agency work (Armstrong 2006). Moreover, the value is co-created with various stakeholders, including complementary providers and customers (Scholten and Scholten 2012;Pera et al 2016).…”

Section: Focal Firm Platform: Network Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This indicates a two-sided market to explain the network effect in platform-based business competition: the focal firm will earn more benefits if its platform is home to more users, from both supply and demand sides (Katz and Shapiro 1994;Parker and Van Alstyne 2005;Tirole 2003, 2006;Shankar and Bayus 2003). For instance, in the ICT (Information Communications Technology) industry the more complementors join the ecosystem to supply complementarities, the more valuable the platform becomes to consumers due to a greater variety of choice (Scholten and Scholten 2012). Hence, the network effect between supply and demand sides is key to sustaining the platform business (Armstrong 2006;Li and Pénard 2014;Rochet and Tirole 2003).…”

Section: Focal Firm Platform: Network Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Business ecosystem research agenda: more dynamic, more embedded, and more internationalized

Rong

Lin

et al. 2018

Asian Bus Manage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We explore the emerging body of research focusing on business ecosystems (BEs). The study of inter-organizational relationships has evolved from a focus at the level of firm, to the supply chain, the platform, and now towards the BE. The co-evolution of inter-related organizations is an essential element of BE research, rather than static structure. The success of leading internet companies in Asia, such

show abstract

“…Leading platform owners have strongly focused on attracting and tying external complementary firms to their platforms (Jeon, Kim, & Koh, 2015). As such, these complementary firms relate to several distinct types of control mechanism along with their external innovation process, including the following: (a) market regulative control, (b) co-regulative control, (c) restrictive control, (d) sanction control, (e) motivational control and (f) informative control (Scholten & Scholten, 2012). The control 'mantra' tells us that this is not a fully open innovation model but still retains lots of closure as in 'closed innovation' quasi-models.…”

Section: Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Platformsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution and variety in complex geographies and enterprise policies

Yun

Cooke

Park

2017

European Planning Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This Special Issue showcases eight articles on the emergent idea of "entrepreneurial ecosystems". As a subject it has begun to attract early attention because it professes to realise the fundamentally social processes of entrepreneurial practice as against the cartoonlike figure of the heroic entrepreneur much-beloved of those in entrepreneurial studies and policies of a more individualistic persuasion. Furthermore, it aims to assist development of coherence in the field of study occasioned by the great variety of forms and labels given to small and micro-businesses consequent on the erosion in scale and scope of many traditional large enterprises. A further introductory point to be made is that many of the articles on display originate in South Korea where the attenuation of large corporate actors, stagnating national growth rates and government support for entrepreneurship have been one response to the crisis. Hanjin is merely one of the recent casualties of the faltering of globalisation for the South Korean corporate sector, beneficiary of major port-related innovation investment in the past as the South Korea -China comparison paper reveals. Other papers anatomise "platform ecosystems" in ICT applications, green urban policies, clusters, creative industry and regional development. All of these impinge upon government support for entrepreneurial efforts to grow a more social economy and, indeed, economic sociology and geography of regional and national growth.

show abstract

Platform-based Innovation Management: Directing External Innovational Efforts in Platform Ecosystems

Cited by 49 publications

References 22 publications

Growth of a platform business model as an entrepreneurial ecosystem and its effects on regional development

Growth of a platform business model as an entrepreneurial ecosystem and its effects on regional development

Business ecosystem research agenda: more dynamic, more embedded, and more internationalized

Evolution and variety in complex geographies and enterprise policies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About