IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i20p5813-d278351.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Structural Holes in the Multi-Sided Market: A Market Allocation Structure Analysis of China’s Car-Hailing Platform in the Context of Open Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Lei Huang

    (Institute of Science, Technology and Society, Chinese Academy of Science and Technology for Development, Beijing 100038, China
    College of Economic and Social Development, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, China)

  • Yandong Zhao

    (Institute of Science, Technology and Society, Chinese Academy of Science and Technology for Development, Beijing 100038, China
    Center for Studies of Sociological Theory & Method, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China)

  • Liang Mei

    (National School of Development, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
    Research Center for Future Education Management, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China)

  • Peiyi Wu

    (School of Public Policy and Management, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
    Department of Public Policy, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China)

  • Zhihua Zhao

    (IP & Law Department, National Center for Science & Technology Evaluation, Beijing 100081, China)

  • Yijun Mao

    (Department of Research Management, Chinese Academy of Science and Technology for Development, Beijing 100038, China)

Abstract

Car-hailing platform governance is an emerging topic of research and practice. The governance of the data-driven platform economy is challenging the research paradigm of competition regulation in the context of open innovation. This research is trying to reveal the market allocation structure of China’s online car-hailing industry from the perspective of personal data allocation by the study of Application Programming Interface (API) of sample platforms. On the basis of the networked nature of personal data allocation via APIs, this research constructs a mathematical model of the edge weight of data resource connections between platforms. Furthermore, this research optimises the structural hole analysis of complex networks to discuss the state of personal data resource allocation in China’s car-hailing industry. Results reveal that there are obvious structural holes within the sample network. When compared with related indicators, we found that accessing personal data resources is an essential component of the sample network competition capability and sustainable innovation. Social media platforms and online payment platforms more greatly impact car-hailing platform competition than other types of platforms within the multi-sided market context. This research offers a research perspective of personal data allocation for further study of competition, regulation and sustainable innovation of data-driven platform economies.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:20:p:5813-:d:278351
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/20/5813/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/20/5813/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ranjay Gulati, 1999. "Network location and learning: the influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(5), pages 397-420, May.
    2. Nicholas Economides & Evangelos Katsamakas, 2006. "Two-Sided Competition of Proprietary vs. Open Source Technology Platforms and the Implications for the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1057-1071, July.
    3. E. Glen Weyl, 2010. "A Price Theory of Multi-sided Platforms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1642-1672, September.
    4. repec:cup:cbooks:9780511771576 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. 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.
    6. Jean‐Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2006. "Two‐sided markets: a progress report," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 645-667, September.
    7. 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.
    8. Edward Iacobucci & Francesco Ducci, 2019. "The Google search case in Europe: tying and the single monopoly profit theorem in two-sided markets," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 15-42, February.
    9. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    10. Geoffrey G. Parker & Marshall W. Van Alstyne, 2005. "Two-Sided Network Effects: A Theory of Information Product Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(10), pages 1494-1504, October.
    11. Hosseinalifam, M. & Marcotte, P. & Savard, G., 2016. "A new bid price approach to dynamic resource allocation in network revenue management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 255(1), pages 142-150.
    12. Graef, Inge & Wahyuningtyas, Sih Yuliana & Valcke, Peggy, 2015. "Assessing data access issues in online platforms," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 375-387.
    13. Rahul Basole & Jürgen Karla, 2011. "On the Evolution of Mobile Platform Ecosystem Structure and Strategy," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 3(5), pages 313-322, October.
    14. Kevin Boudreau, 2010. "Open Platform Strategies and Innovation: Granting Access vs. Devolving Control," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(10), pages 1849-1872, October.
    15. Hagiu, Andrei & Wright, Julian, 2015. "Multi-sided platforms," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 162-174.
    16. Farrell, Joseph & Weiser, Philip J., 2003. "Modularity, Vertical Integration, and Open Access Policies: Towards a Convergence of Antitrust and Regulation in the Internet Age," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt4dh7q2dd, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    17. Veronica Scuotto & Manlio Del Giudice & Elias G. Carayannis, 2017. "The effect of social networking sites and absorptive capacity on SMES’ innovation performance," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 409-424, April.
    18. JinHyo Joseph Yun & EuiSeob Jeong & JinSeu Park, 2016. "Network Analysis of Open Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-21, July.
    19. Gordon Walker & Bruce Kogut & Weijian Shan, 1997. "Social Capital, Structural Holes and the Formation of an Industry Network," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(2), pages 109-125, April.
    20. Benlian, Alexander & Hilkert, Daniel & Hess, Thomas, 2015. "How open is this platform? The meaning and measurement of platform openness from the complementors’ perspective," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 65705, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    21. Benlian, Alexander & Hilkert, Daniel & Hess, Thomas, 2015. "How open is this platform? The meaning and measurement of platform openness from the complementors’ perspective .- (forthcoming)," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 65692, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    22. David S. Evans & Richard Schmalensee, 2013. "The Antitrust Analysis of Multi-Sided Platform Businesses," NBER Working Papers 18783, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    23. van den Broek, Tijs & van Veenstra, Anne Fleur, 2018. "Governance of big data collaborations: How to balance regulatory compliance and disruptive innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 330-338.
    24. Andrea Fumagalli & Stefano Lucarelli & Elena Musolino & Giulia Rocchi, 2018. "Digital Labour in the Platform Economy: The Case of Facebook," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-16, May.
    25. Bental, Benjamin & Spiegel, Menahem, 1995. "Network Competition, Product Quality, and Market Coverage in the Presence of Network Externalities," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 197-208, June.
    26. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1994. "Systems Competition and Network Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 93-115, Spring.
    27. JinHyo Joseph Yun & DongKyu Won & KyungBae Park, 2018. "Entrepreneurial cyclical dynamics of open innovation," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 28(5), pages 1151-1174, December.
    28. Benlian, Alexander & Hilkert, Daniel & Hess, Thomas, 2015. "How open is this platform? The meaning and measurement of platform openness from the complementors’ perspective," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 75001, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    29. Easley,David & Kleinberg,Jon, 2010. "Networks, Crowds, and Markets," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521195331, January.
    30. Nestor Duch-Brown & Bertin Martens & Frank Mueller-Langer, 2017. "The economics of ownership, access and trade in digital data," JRC Working Papers on Digital Economy 2017-01, Joint Research Centre.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Belezas, Fernando & Daniel, Ana Dias, 2023. "Innovation in the sharing economy: A systematic literature review and research framework," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    2. JinHyo Joseph Yun & Xiaofei Zhao & KwangHo Jung & Tan Yigitcanlar, 2020. "The Culture for Open Innovation Dynamics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-21, June.
    3. Mohammadbashir Sedighi & Hamideh Parsaeiyan & Yashar Araghi, 2021. "An Empirical Study of Intention to Continue Using of Digital Ride-hailing Platforms," The Review of Socionetwork Strategies, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 489-515, November.
    4. Jee Hoon Lee & Jacob Wood & Jungsuk Kim, 2021. "Tracing the Trends in Sustainability and Social Media Research Using Topic Modeling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, January.

    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. Jingtao Yi & Jinqiu He & Lihong Yang, 2019. "Platform heterogeneity, platform governance and complementors’ product performance: an empirical study of the mobile application industry," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-20, December.
    2. de Reuver, Mark & Sørensen, Carsten & Basole, Rahul C., 2018. "The digital platform: a research agenda," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 80669, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Veile, Johannes W. & Schmidt, Marie-Christin & Voigt, Kai-Ingo, 2022. "Toward a new era of cooperation: How industrial digital platforms transform business models in Industry 4.0," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 387-405.
    4. Christian Bartelheimer, Philipp zur Heiden, Hedda Lüttenberg, Daniel Beverungen, 2021. "Systematizing the Lexicon of Platforms in Information Systems: A Data-Driven Study," Working Papers Dissertations 79, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    5. Elizabeth J. Altman & Mary Tripsas, 2013. "Product to Platform Transitions: Organizational Identity Implications," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-045, Harvard Business School, revised Sep 2014.
    6. Key Pousttchi & Alexander Gleiss, 2019. "Surrounded by middlemen - how multi-sided platforms change the insurance industry," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(4), pages 609-629, December.
    7. Jan Frederic Nerbel & Markus Kreutzer, 2023. "Digital platform ecosystems in flux: From proprietary digital platforms to wide-spanning ecosystems," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-20, December.
    8. Burcu Tan & Edward G. Anderson, Jr. & Geoffrey G. Parker, 2020. "Platform Pricing and Investment to Drive Third-Party Value Creation in Two-Sided Networks," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 217-239, March.
    9. Xing Wan & Javier Cenamor & Geoffrey Parker & Marshall Van Alstyne, 2017. "Unraveling Platform Strategies: A Review from an Organizational Ambidexterity Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    10. Fabian Schueler & Dimitri Petrik, 2022. "Objectives of platform research: A co-citation and systematic literature review analysis," Papers 2202.08822, arXiv.org.
    11. Mosterd, Lars & Sobota, Vladimir C.M. & van de Kaa, Geerten & Ding, Aaron Yi & de Reuver, Mark, 2021. "Context dependent trade-offs around platform-to-platform openness: The case of the Internet of Things," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    12. Andreas Hein & Maximilian Schreieck & Manuel Wiesche & Markus Böhm & Helmut Krcmar, 2019. "The emergence of native multi-sided platforms and their influence on incumbents," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(4), pages 631-647, December.
    13. He Huang, 2019. "How Does Information Transmission Influence the Value Creation Capability of a Digital Ecosystem? An Empirical Study of the Crypto-Digital Ecosystem Ethereum," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-16, September.
    14. Christian Bartelheimer & Philipp Heiden & Hedda Lüttenberg & Daniel Beverungen, 2022. "Systematizing the lexicon of platforms in information systems: a data-driven study," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(1), pages 375-396, March.
    15. Rodolphe Durand & Robert M. Grant & Tammy L. Madsen & David P. McIntyre & Arati Srinivasan, 2017. "Networks, platforms, and strategy: Emerging views and next steps," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 141-160, January.
    16. Steffen, Nico & Wiewiorra, Lukas & Kroon, Peter, 2021. "Wettbewerb und Regulierung in der Plattform- und Datenökonomie," WIK Discussion Papers 481, WIK Wissenschaftliches Institut für Infrastruktur und Kommunikationsdienste GmbH.
    17. Sebastian Spaeth & Sven Niederhöfer, 2022. "Compatibility promotion between platforms: The role of open technology standards and giant platforms," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(4), pages 1891-1915, December.
    18. Narayanan, V.K. & Chen, Tianxu, 2012. "Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1375-1406.
    19. Basaure, Arturo & Vesselkov, Alexandr & Töyli, Juuso, 2020. "Internet of things (IoT) platform competition: Consumer switching versus provider multihoming," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 90.
    20. Cenamor, Javier, 2021. "Complementor competitive advantage: A framework for strategic decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 335-343.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:20:p:5813-:d:278351. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.