As digital platforms are transforming almost every industry today, they are slowly finding their way into the mainstream information systems (ISs) literature. Digital platforms are a challenging research object because of their distributed nature and intertwinement with institutions, markets and technologies. New research challenges arise as a result of the exponentially growing scale of platform innovation, the increasing complexity of platform architectures and the spread of digital platforms to many different industries. This paper develops a research agenda for digital platforms research in IS. We recommend researchers seek to (1) advance conceptual clarity by providing clear definitions that specify the unit of analysis, degree of digitality and the sociotechnical nature of digital platforms; (2) define the proper scoping of digital platform concepts by studying platforms on different architectural levels and in different industry settings; and (3) advance methodological rigour by employing embedded case studies, longitudinal studies, design research, data-driven modelling and visualisation techniques. Considering current developments in the business domain, we suggest six questions for further research: (1) Are platforms here to stay? (2) How should platforms be designed? (3) How do digital platforms transform industries? (4) How can data-driven approaches inform digital platforms research? (5) How should researchers develop theory for digital platforms? and (6) How do digital platforms affect everyday life?
AlaimoC., and KallinikosJ. (2016). Encoding the Everyday: Social Data and Its Media Apparatus, In: S.R. Cassidy, H.R. Ekbia, and M. Mattoli (eds). Big Data is not a Monolith: Policies, Practices, and Problems, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
4.
ArthurW.B. (1989). Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-in by Historical Events, The Economic Journal, 89: 116–131.
5.
ArthurW.B. (1990). Positive Feedbacks in the Economy, Scientific American262 (2): 92–99.
6.
BaldwinC.Y., and ClarkK.B. (2000). Design Rules, Vol. 1: The Power of Modularity, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7.
BaldwinC.Y., and WoodardC.J. (2009). The Architecture of Platforms: A Unified View, In GawerA. (ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation (pp. 19–44). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
8.
BasoleR.C. (2009). Visualization of Interfirm Relations in a Converging Mobile Ecosystem, Journal of Information Technology24 (2): 144–159.
9.
BasoleR.C. (2014). Visual Business Ecosystem Intelligence: Lessons from the Field, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 5: 26–34.
10.
BasoleR.C., and BellamyM.A. (2014). Visual Analysis of Supply Network Risks: Insights from the Electronics Industry, Decision Support Systems, 67: 109–120.
11.
BasoleR.C., and KarlaJ. (2011). On the Evolution of Mobile Platform Ecosystem Structure and Strategy, Business & Information Systems Engineering, 3 (5): 313–322.
12.
BasoleR.C., ParkH., and BarnettB.C. (2014). Coopetition and Convergence in the ICT Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy39: 537–552.
13.
BasoleR.C., RussellM.G., HuhtamäkiJ., RubensN., StillK., and ParkH. (2015). Understanding Business Ecosystem Dynamics: A Data-Driven Approach, ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (TMIS)6 (2): 6.
14.
BenlianA., HilkertD., and HessT. (2015). How Open is This Platform? The Meaning and Measurement of Platform Openness from the Complementors’ Perspective, Journal of Information Technology, 30 (3): 209–228.
15.
BennettS.C. (2012). Right to be Forgotten: Reconciling EU and US Perspectives, Berkeley Journal of International Law, 30: 161.
16.
BoudreauK.J. (2012). Let a Thousand Flowers Bloom? An Early Look at Large Numbers of Software App Developers and Patterns of Innovation, Organization Science23 (5): 1409–1427.
17.
BoudreauK.J., and HagiuA. (2009). Platform Rules: Multi-sided Platforms as Regulators, In GawerA. (ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation (pp. 163–191), Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
18.
BrynjolfssonE., and McAfeeA. (2011). Race Against The Machine, Lexington: Digital Frontier Press.
19.
BrynjolfssonE., and McAfeeA. (2014). The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies, New York City: WW Norton & Company.
20.
CiborraC.U., BraaK., CordellaA., DahlbomB., FaillaA., HansethO. (Eds.). (2001). From Control to Drift. The Dynamics of Corporate Information Infrastructures, New York: Oxford University Press.
21.
ClarkK.B. (1985). The Interaction of Design Hierarchies and Market Concepts in Technological Evolution, Research Policy14 (5): 235–251.
22.
DarkingM., WhitleyE.A., and DiniP. (2008). Governing Diversity in the Digital Ecosystem, Communications of the ACM, 51 (8): 137–140.
23.
de ReuverM., and OndrusJ. (2017). When Technological Superiority is not Enough: The Struggle to Impose the SIM Card as the NFC Secure Element for mobile payment platforms. Telecommunications Policy. doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2017.01.004.
24.
de ReuverM., BouwmanH., and HaakerT. (2013). Business Model Roadmapping: A Practical Approach to Come from An Existing to a Desired Business Model, International Journal of Innovation Management17 (01): 1340006-1–1340006-18.
25.
de ReuverM., VerschuurE., NikayinF., CerpaN., and BouwmanH. (2015). Collective Action for Mobile Payment Platforms: A Case Study on Collaboration Issues Between Banks and Telecom Operators, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications14 (5): 331–344.
26.
DewN., and ReadS. (2007). The More We Get Together: Coordinating Network Externality Product Introduction in the RFID Industry, Technovation27 (10): 569–581.
27.
EatonB.D., Elaluf-CalderwoodS., SørensenC., and YooY. (2015). Distributed Tuning of Boundary Resources: The Case of Apple's iOS Service System, MIS Quarterly: Special Issue on Service Innovation in a Digital Age39 (1): 217–243.
28.
EisenmanT., ParkerG., and Van AystyneM.W. (2006). Strategies for Two-Sided Markets, Harvard Business Review84 (10): 92–101.
29.
EvansD.S. (2003). Some Empirical Aspects of Multi-Sided Platform Industries, Review of Network Economics2 (3): 191–209.
30.
EvansP.C., and BasoleR.C. (2016). Revealing the API Ecosystem and Enterprise Strategy using Visual Analytics, Communications of the ACM59 (2): 23–25.
31.
EvansD.S., and SchmalenseeR. (2013): The Antitrust Analysis of Multi-sided Platform Businesses. Paper No. 623. The Law School, The University of Chicago. http://www.law.uchicago.edu/Lawecon/index.html.
32.
EvansD. S., and SchmalenseeR. (2016). The Matchmakers: The New Economics of Multisided Platforms, Boston: Harvard Business Review Press.
33.
GawerA. (2014). Bridging Differing Perspectives on Technological Platforms: Toward an Integrative Framework, Research Policy43 (7): 1239–1249.
34.
GawerA., and CusumanoM.A. (2002). Platform Leadership: How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco Drive Industry Innovation, Brighton: Harvard Business School Press.
35.
GermonprezM., and HovorkaD.S. (2013). Member Engagement Within Digitally Enabled Social Network Communities: New Methodological Considerations, Information Systems Journal23 (6): 525–549.
36.
GermonprezM., HovorkaD., and GalU. (2011). Secondary Design: A Case of Behavioral Design Science Research, Journal of the Association for Information Systems12 (10): 662–683.
37.
GhazawnehA., and HenfridssonO. (2013). Balancing Platform Control and External Contribution in Third-Party Development: The Boundary Resources Model, Information Systems Journal23 (2): 173–192.
38.
GhazawnehA., and HenfridssonO. (2015). A Paradigmatic Analysis of Digital Application Marketplaces, Journal of Information Technology30 (3): 198–208.
39.
GroverV., and LyytinenK. (2015). New State of Play in Information Systems Research: The Push to the Edges, MIS Quarterly39 (2): 271–296.
40.
HansethO., and LyytinenK. (2010). Design Theory for Dynamic Complexity in Information Infrastructures: The Case of Building Internet, Journal of Information Technology25 (1): 1–19.
41.
HansethO., MonteiroE., and HaltingM. (1996). Developing Information Infrastructure: The Tension Between Standardisation and Flexibility, Science, Technologies, and Human Values21 (4): 407–426.
42.
HendersonR.M., and ClarkK.B. (1990). Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of Established Firms, Administrative Science Quarterly35: 9–30.
43.
HenfridssonO., and BygstadB. (2013). The Generative Mechanisms of Digital Infrastructure Evolution, MIS Quarterly37 (3): 907–931.
44.
HenfridssonO., MathiassenL., and SvahnF. (2014). Managing Technological Change in the Digital Age: The Role of Architectural Frames, Journal of Information Technology29: 27–43.
45.
IansitiM., and LevienR. (2004a). The Keystone Advantage: What the New Dynamics of Business Ecosystems Mean for Strategy, Innovation, and Sustainability, Brighton: Harvard Business Press.
46.
IansitiM., and LevienR. (2004b). Strategy as Ecology, Harvard Business Review82 (3): 68–81.
47.
KallinikosJ., AaltonenA., and MartonA. (2013). The Ambivalent Ontology of Digital Artifacts, MIS Quarterly37 (2): 357–370.
48.
KaplanR.A., and NadlerM.L. (2015). Airbnb: A Case Study in Occupancy Regulation and Taxation, The University of Chicago Law Review, 82: 103.
49.
KarhuK., TangT., and HämäläinenM. (2014). Analyzing Competitive and Collaborative Differences Among Mobile Ecosystems Using Abstracted Strategy Networks, Telematics and Informatics31 (2): 319–333.
50.
KatzM.L., and ShapiroC. (1985). Network Externalities, Companition and Compatibility, American Economic Review75: 424–440.
51.
KieslingL.L. (2016). Implications of Smart Grid Innovation for Organizational Models in Electricity Distribution, In LiuC.-C. (ed.), Wiley Handbook of Smart Grid Development, Hoboken: Wiley.
52.
LeonardiP.M., NardiB.A., and KallinikosJ. (Eds.). (2012). Materiality and Organizing, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
53.
MainelliM., and SmithM. (2015). Sharing Ledgers for Sharing Economies: An Exploration of Mutual Distributed Ledgers (Aka Blockchain Technology), The Journal of Financial Perspectives3 (3): 38–69.
54.
MaloneT.W., LaubacherR.J., and JohnsT. (2011). The Age of Hyperspecialization, Harvard Business Review89 (7/8): 56–65.
55.
MooreJ.C., RaoH.R., WhinstonA., NamK., and RaghuT.S. (1997). Information Acquisition Policies for Resource Allocation Among Multiple Agents, Information Systems Research8 (2): 151–170.
NikayinF., and De ReuverM. (2013). Opening up the Smart Home: A Classification of Smart Living Service Platforms, International Journal of E-Services and Mobile Applications (IJESMA)5 (2): 37–53.
58.
OndrusJ., GannamaneniA., and LyytinenK. (2015). The Impact of Openness on the Market Potential of Multi-sided Platforms: A Case Study of Mobile Payment Platforms, Journal of Information Technology30 (3): 260–275.
59.
ParkerG.G., and Van AlstyneM.W. (2005). Two-Sided Network Effects: A Theory of Information Product Design, Management Science51 (10): 1494–1504.
60.
ParkerG.G., Van AlstyneM.W., and ChoudaryS.P. (2016). Platform Revolution: How Networked Markets are Transforming the Economy and How to Make Them Work for You, New York: WW Norton & Co.
PonB., SeppäläT., and KenneyM. (2014). Android and the Demise of Operating System-Based Power: Firm Strategy and Platform Control in the Post-PC World, Telecommunications Policy38: 979–991.
RochetJ.-C., and TiroleJ. (2003). Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets, Journal of the European Economic Association1 (4): 990–1029.
65.
RochetJ.-C., and TiroleJ. (2006). Two-Sided Markets: A Progress Report, The Rand Journal of Economics37 (3): 645–667.
66.
SanchezR.A., and MahoneyJ.T. (1996). Modularity, Flexibility and Knowledge Management in Product and Organization Design, Strategic Management Journal17: 63–76.
67.
SeinM.K., HenfridssonO., PuraoS., RossiM., and LindgrenR. (2011). Action Design Research, MIS Quarterly35 (1): 37–56.
68.
SelanderL., HenfridssonO., and SvahnF. (2013). Capability Search and Redeem Across Digital Ecosystems, Journal of Information Technology28 (3): 183–197.
69.
ShapiroC., and VarianH.R. (1998). Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
70.
SørensenC., and LandauJ. (2015). Academic Agility in Digital Innovation Research: The Case of Mobile ICT Publications within Information Systems 2000-2014, Journal of Strategic Information Systems24 (3): 158–170.
71.
SørensenC., and PillansG. (2012). The Future of Work.The Corporate Research Forum. http://www.crforum.co.uk.
72.
SpagnolettiP., RescaA., and LeeG. (2015). A Design Theory for Digital Platforms Supporting Online Communities: A Multiple Case Study, Journal of Information Technology30: 364–380.
73.
SusskindR.E., and SusskindD. (2015). The Future of the Professions: How Technology Will Transform the Work of Human Experts, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
74.
SvahnF., and HenfridssonO. (2012). The Dual Regimes of Digital Innovation Management, In: HICSS 45, Maui, Hawai'i, IEEE, pp. 3347–3356.
75.
SvahnF., LindgrenR., and MathiassenL. (2015). Applying Options Thinking to Shape Generativity in Digital Innovation: An Action Research into Connected Cars, In: 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS 49), IEEE, pp. 4141–4150.
76.
ThomasL., AutioE., and GannD. (2014). Architectural Leverage: Putting Platforms in Context, The Academy of Management Perspectives28 (2): 198–219.
77.
TilsonD., LyytinenK., and SørensenC. (2010). Digital Infrastructures: The Missing IS Research Agenda, Information Systems Research21 (5): 748–759.
78.
TilsonD., SørensenC., and LyytinenK. (2011). The Paradoxes of Change and Control in Digital Infrastructures: The Mobile Operating Systems Case, In: The 10th International Conference on Mobile Business, Como, Italy.
79.
TilsonD., SørensenC., and LyytinenK. (2012). Change and Control Paradoxes in Mobile Infrastructure Innovation: The Android and iOS Mobile Operating Systems Cases, In: 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS 45), Maui, HI.
80.
TiwanaA. (2014). Platform Ecosystems: Aligning Architecture, Governance, and Strategy, Morgan Kaufmann.
81.
TiwanaA., and KonsynskiB. (2010). Complementarities Between Organizational IT Architecture and Governance Structure, Information Systems Research21 (2): 288–304.
82.
TiwanaA., KonsynskyB., and BushA.A. (2010). Platform Evolution: Coevolution of Platform Architecture, Governance, and Environmental Dynamics, Information Systems Research21 (4): 675–687.
TurkleC. (2011). Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other, New York: Basic Books.
85.
UmS., YooY., and WattalS. (2015). The Evolution of Digital Ecosystems: A Case of WordPress from 2004 to 2014, In: T. Carte, A. Heinzl, and C. Urquhart (eds.)Thirty Sixth International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 36), Fort Worth.
86.
VarianH.R. (2010). Computer Mediated Transactions, The American Economic Review100 (2): 1–10.
YooY. (2013). The Table Has Turned: How Can IS Field Contribute to the Technology and Innovation Management?Journal of the AIS14: 227–236.
91.
YooY., HenfridssonO., and LyytinenK. (2010). The New Organizing Logic of Digital Innovation: An Agenda for Information Systems Research, Information Systems Research21 (4): 724–735.
92.
ZittrainJ. (2006). The Generative Internet, Harvard Law Review119: 1974–2040.
93.
ZuboffS. (2015). Big Other: Surveillance Capitalism and the Prospects of an Information Civilization, Journal of Information Technology30 (1): 75–89.
