How platform leaders win

Abstract

Purpose To study successful strategies in platform industries, which are IT products that enable (a network of) users to communicate with each other, and that, consequently, exhibit network effects. Design/methodology/approach The authors studied 15 platform industries, including their first‐mover, early entrants and current leaders. Also studied were historical documents, for example to find the time of market entry. Findings Unlike traditional products (e.g. consumer products), platforms evolve over time by technically integrating separate platforms (“embrace and extend”). Two key patterns were found among platform leaders: follower advantage and staircase strategies. While follower advantage is also prevalent in traditional industries, staircase strategies are not. Complementary resources (i.e. resources the firm possesses outside of the product in question, for example R&D skills or customer relations) did not explain why the current leaders won. Research limitations/implications First‐mover advantage was largely illusionary and follower advantage prevalent. Some leaders of platform industries entered the industry early and some entered late, but it is not clear why a particular entry timing was successful in one platform industry but not in another. The authors cannot (yet) predict how a platform industry evolves, particularly in the presence of network effects. Practice implications To become the leader in a platform industry, do not become the first mover, but enter some time afterwards, and manage the “embrace and extend” platform evolution using staircase strategies. Originality/ value This study analyzed a sample of 15 platform industries, i.e. more than a few case studies.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 28 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.