IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/iepoli/v48y2019icp1-14.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Openness as a business strategy: Historical perspectives on openness in computing and mobile phones

Author

Listed:
  • Garcia-Swartz, Daniel D.
  • Campbell-Kelly, Martin

Abstract

In this paper we pose a simple question: For firms that own or sponsor a computer or smartphone standard, is it better to make the standard open or closed? In other words, has openness paid as a business strategy? We explore the issue by examining the history of operating systems in computing and mobile phones, and rely on four different notions of openness: open systems, open innovation, open-source software, and open governance. We conclude that the truly successful operating systems have been those whose owner or sponsor has managed to combine some degree of openness with some measure of control.11We have received extremely helpful comments from an anonymous reviewer and the editor of the journal, Dr. Ulrich Kaiser. The views expressed in this article are the views and opinions of the authors, and do not reflect or represent the views of Charles River Associates, Warwick University, or any of the organizations with which the authors are affiliated.

Suggested Citation

  • Garcia-Swartz, Daniel D. & Campbell-Kelly, Martin, 2019. "Openness as a business strategy: Historical perspectives on openness in computing and mobile phones," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 1-14.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:iepoli:v:48:y:2019:i:c:p:1-14
    DOI: 10.1016/j.infoecopol.2019.07.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167624518301331
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.infoecopol.2019.07.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kevin J. Boudreau & Andrei Hagiu, 2009. "Platform Rules: Multi-Sided Platforms as Regulators," Chapters, in: Annabelle Gawer (ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Timothy F. Bresnahan & Shane Greenstein, 1999. "Technological Competition and the Structure of the Computer Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 1-40, March.
    3. West, Joel, 2003. "How open is open enough?: Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1259-1285, July.
    4. Kevin Boudreau, 2010. "Open Platform Strategies and Innovation: Granting Access vs. Devolving Control," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(10), pages 1849-1872, October.
    5. Joseph Farrell & Nancy T. Gallini, 1988. "Second-Sourcing as a Commitment: Monopoly Incentives to Attract Competition," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 103(4), pages 673-694.
    6. Campbell-Kelly, Martin & Garcia-Swartz, Daniel D., 2009. "Pragmatism, not ideology: Historical perspectives on IBM's adoption of open-source software," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 229-244, August.
    7. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Martin Campbell-Kelly & Marina Danilevsky & Daniel Garcia-Swartz & Shane Pederson, 2010. "Clustering in the Creative Industries: Insights from the Origins of Computer Software," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 309-329.
    9. West, Joel & Mace, Michael, 0. "Browsing as the killer app: Explaining the rapid success of Apple's iPhone," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5-6), pages 270-286, June.
    10. Melissa A. Schilling, 2009. "Protecting or Diffusing a Technology Platform: Tradeoffs in Appropriability, Network Externalities, and Architectural Control," Chapters, in: Annabelle Gawer (ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Henkel, Joachim & Schöberl, Simone & Alexy, Oliver, 2014. "The emergence of openness: How and why firms adopt selective revealing in open innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 879-890.
    12. Campbell-Kelly, Martin & Garcia-Swartz, Daniel & Lam, Richard & Yang, Yilei, 2015. "Economic and business perspectives on smartphones as multi-sided platforms," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 717-734.
    13. Oliver Alexy & Joel West & Helge Klapper & Markus Reitzig, 2018. "Surrendering control to gain advantage: Reconciling openness and the resource‐based view of the firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1704-1727, June.
    14. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon J., 2014. "The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 867-878.
    15. Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy, 1993. "Changing competitive dynamics in network industries: An exploration of sun microsystems' open systems strategy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 351-369, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Oliver Alexy & Joel West & Helge Klapper & Markus Reitzig, 2018. "Surrendering control to gain advantage: Reconciling openness and the resource‐based view of the firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1704-1727, June.
    2. Kevin Boudreau, 2010. "Open Platform Strategies and Innovation: Granting Access vs. Devolving Control," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(10), pages 1849-1872, October.
    3. Boudreau, Kevin J. & Lakhani, Karim R., 2015. "“Open” disclosure of innovations, incentives and follow-on reuse: Theory on processes of cumulative innovation and a field experiment in computational biology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 4-19.
    4. Torres de Oliveira, Rui & Verreynne, Martie-Louise & Steen, John & Indulska, Marta, 2021. "Creating value by giving away: A typology of different innovation revealing strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 137-150.
    5. West, Joel & Kuk, George, 2016. "The complementarity of openness: How MakerBot leveraged Thingiverse in 3D printing," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 169-181.
    6. Cenamor, Javier & Frishammar, Johan, 2021. "Openness in platform ecosystems: Innovation strategies for complementary products," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    7. Miric, Milan & Boudreau, Kevin J. & Jeppesen, Lars Bo, 2019. "Protecting their digital assets: The use of formal & informal appropriability strategies by App developers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    8. Kuan, Jennifer & West, Joel, 2023. "Interfaces, modularity and ecosystem emergence: How DARPA modularized the semiconductor ecosystem," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(8).
    9. Veer, Theresa & Yang, Philip & Riepe, Jan, 2022. "Ventures' conscious knowledge transfer to close partners, and beyond: A framework of performance, complementarity, knowledge disclosure, and knowledge broadcasting," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 37(3).
    10. Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia & Yang, Jialei, 2022. "Distinguishing between appropriability and appropriation: A systematic review and a renewed conceptual framing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    11. Justus Baron & Cher Li & Shukhrat Nasirov, 2019. "Why do R&D-intensive firms participate in standards organizations? The role of patents and product-market position," Discussion Papers 2019-16, University of Nottingham, GEP.
    12. Crass, Dirk & Valero, Francisco Garcia & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2019. "Protecting Innovation Through Patents and Trade Secrets: Evidence for Firms with a Single Innovation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 26(1), pages 117-156.
    13. Jinhyo Joseph Yun & Xiaofei Zhao & KyungBae Park & Lei Shi, 2020. "Sustainability Condition of Open Innovation: Dynamic Growth of Alibaba from SME to Large Enterprise," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-24, May.
    14. Arora, Ashish & Athreye, Suma & Huang, Can, 2016. "The paradox of openness revisited: Collaborative innovation and patenting by UK innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1352-1361.
    15. Jabbour, Chady & Rey-Valette, Hélène & Maurel, Pierre & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2019. "Spatial data infrastructure management: A two-sided market approach for strategic reflections," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 69-82.
    16. Lei Huang & Yandong Zhao & Liang Mei & Peiyi Wu & Zhihua Zhao & Yijun Mao, 2019. "Structural Holes in the Multi-Sided Market: A Market Allocation Structure Analysis of China’s Car-Hailing Platform in the Context of Open Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-20, October.
    17. Siobhan O'Mahony & Rebecca Karp, 2022. "From proprietary to collective governance: How do platform participation strategies evolve?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 530-562, March.
    18. Langlois, Jonathan & BenMahmoud-Jouini, Sihem & Servajean-Hilst, Romaric, 2023. "Practicing secrecy in open innovation – The case of a military firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    19. Xue Ding & Zhong Yang, 2022. "Knowledge mapping of platform research: a visual analysis using VOSviewer and CiteSpace," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 787-809, September.
    20. Martie-Louise Verreynne & Rui Torres de Oliveira & John Steen & Marta Indulska & Jerad A. Ford, 2020. "What motivates ‘free’ revealing? Measuring outbound non-pecuniary openness, innovation types and expectations of future profit growth," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 271-301, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:iepoli:v:48:y:2019:i:c:p:1-14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505549 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.