平台与互补商协同创新的制度逻辑及其作用机制

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 平台与互补商的协同专业化对于创新生态系统的构建具有重要作用。然而，平台企业与互补商可能各自具有冲突的或互补的制度逻辑，它们彼此要实现协同创新的目标，就必然在达成协作共识的过程中形成主导型制度逻辑，进而规范双方的创新活动与行为。但是，这种主导型制度逻辑如何产生？它们的作用机制是什么？过去的研究还很少涉及这类问题。本文通过OPPO的案例研究，结果表明：（1）平台与一般互补商合作时，平台的谈判能力相对较强，平台的制度逻辑占据主导地位|（2）平台对瓶颈互补商具有较强的依赖时，互补商拥有较强的谈判能力，平台在两者的合作中会选择妥协，此时互补商的制度逻辑占主导地位|（3）平台与瓶颈互补商的关系是双向依赖时，两方合作形成的制度逻辑是混合逻辑|（4）面对强大的外部制度压力时，平台与互补商的合作会形成或遵循新的制度逻辑。

关键词: 平台, 创新生态系统, 互补商, 制度逻辑

Abstract: The co-specialization of platforms and complementors plays an important role in the construction of the innovation ecosystem. However, platform enterprises and complementors may have conflicting or complementary institutional logic respectively. If they want to achieve the goal of collaborative innovation, they will inevitably form a dominant institutional logic in the process of reaching a collaborative consensus, and then regulate the innovation activities and behaviors of both parties. But how does this dominant institutional logic emerge? What are their mechanisms? Past studies have rarely referred to such issues. Through the case study of OPPO, the results show that:(1) when the platform cooperates with general component suppliers, the bargain power of platform is stronger, and the institutional logic of platform occupies a dominant position; (2) when the platform is dependent much on the bottleneck component supplier, the bargaining power of complementor is stronger, and the platform has to compromise in the cooperation between the two parties. At this time, the institutional logic of complementor dominates; (3) when the relationship between the platform and the bottleneck component supplier is bidirectional dependence, the institutional logic formed by the two parties' cooperation is hybrid logic; (4) in the face of strong external institutional pressure, the cooperation between the platform and complementors will form or follow the new institutional logic.

Key words: platform, innovation ecosystem, complementor, institutional logic

唐方成, 王冉冉. 平台与互补商协同创新的制度逻辑及其作用机制[J]. 管理评论, 2021, 33(11): 249-258.

Tang Fangcheng, Wang Ranran. Institutional Logic and Mechanism of Collaborative Innovation between Platform and Complementor[J]. Management Review, 2021, 33(11): 249-258.

参考文献

[1] Li S., Ragu-Nathan B., Ragu-Nathan T. S., et al. The Impact of Supply Chain Management Practices on Competitive Advantage and Organizational Performance[J]. Omega, 2006,34(2):107-124
[2] Adner R. Match Your Innovation Strategy to Your Innovation Ecosystem[J]. Harvard Business Review, 2006,84(4):98-107
[3] Chesbrough H. W. Open Innovation:The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology[M]. Brighton:Harvard Business Press, 2003
[4] Huang P., Ceccagnoli M., Forman C., et al. Appropriability Mechanisms and the Platform Partnership Decision:Evidence from Enterprise Software[J]. Management Science, 2013,59(1):102-121
[5] Tiwana A., Konsynski B., Bush A. A. Research Commentary-Platform Evolution:Coevolution of Platform Architecture, Governance, and Environmental Dynamics[J]. Information Systems Research, 2010,21(4):675-687
[6] 戚聿东,李颖.新经济与规制改革[J].中国工业经济, 2018,(3):5-23
[7] 刘振,崔连广,杨俊,等.制度逻辑、合法性机制与社会企业成长[J].管理学报, 2015,12(4):565-575
[8] Iansiti M., Levien R. The Keystone Advantage:What the New Dynamics of Business Ecosystems Mean for Strategy, Innovation, and Sustainability[M]. Brighton:Harvard Business Press, 2004
[9] Zahra S. A., Nambisan S. Entrepreneurship in Global Innovation Ecosystems[J]. AMS Review, 2011,1(1):4-17
[10] 张利飞.高科技企业创新生态系统运行机制研究[J].中国科技论坛, 2009,(4):57-61
[11] 吴金希.创新生态体系的内涵、特征及其政策含义[J].科学学研究, 2014,32(1):44-51
[12] Kapoor R., Lee J. M. Coordinating and Competing in Ecosystems:How Organizational Forms Shape New Technology Investments[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2013,34(3):274-296
[13] Nambisan S., Baron R. A. Entrepreneurship in Innovation Ecosystems:Entrepreneurs'Self-Regulatory Processes and Their Implications for New Venture Success[J]. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 2013,37(5):1071-1097
[14] Adner R., Kapoor R. Value Creation in Innovation Ecosystems:How the Structure of Technological Interdependence Affects Firm Performance in New Technology Generations[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2010,31(3):306-333
[15] Pagani M. Digital Business Strategy and Value Creation:Framing the Dynamic Cycle of Control Points[J]. Mis Quarterly, 2013,37(2):617-632
[16] Baldwin C. Y. Bottlenecks, Modules and Dynamic Architectural Capabilities[R]. Harvard Business School Finance Working Paper, 2015
[17] Kapoor R. Ecosystems:Broadening the Locus of Value Creation[J]. Journal of Organization Design, 2018,7(1):1-16
[18] Adner R., Kapoor R. Innovation Ecosystems and the Pace of Substitution:Re-Examining Technology S-Curves[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2016,37(4):625-648
[19] Kapoor R., Furr N. R. Complementarities and Competition:Unpacking the Drivers of Entrants'Technology Choices in the Solar Photovoltaic Industry[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2015,36(3):416-436
[20] Ekman P., Raggio R. D., Thompson S. M. Service Network Value Co-Creation:Defining the Roles of the Generic Actor[J]. Industrial Marketing Management, 2016,56:51-62
[21] Bloom P. N., Dees G. Cultivate Your Ecosystem[J]. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 2008,6(1):47-53
[22] Estrin J. Closing the Innovation Gap:Reigniting the Spark of Creativity in a Global Economy[M]. New York:McGraw Hill Professional, 2008
[23] Parker G., Van Alstyne M. Innovation, Openness, and Platform Control[J]. Management Science, 2017,64(7):3015-3032
[24] Alford R. R., Friedland R. Bringing Society Back in:Symbols, Practices, and Institutional Contradictions[J]. The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, 1991,3:232-263
[25] Thornton P. H. Markets from Culture:Institutional Logics and Organizational Decisions in Higher Education Publishing[M]. Redwood City:Stanford University Press, 2004
[26] Thornton P. H., Ocasio W., Lounsbury M. The Institutional Logics Perspective:A New Approach to Culture, Structure, and Process[M]. New York:Oxford University Press, 2012
[27] 缑倩雯,蔡宁.制度复杂性与企业环境战略选择:基于制度逻辑视角的解读[J].经济社会体制比较, 2015,1:125-138
[28] Reay T., Hinings C. R. Managing the Rivalry of Competing Institutional Logics[J]. Organization Studies, 2009,30(6):629-652
[29] Purdy J. M., Gray B. Conflicting Logics, Mechanisms of Diffusion, and Multilevel Dynamics in Emerging Institutional Fields[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2009,52(2):355-380
[30] Gubbi S. R., Aulakh P. S., Ray S. International Search Behavior of Business Group Affiliated Firms:Scope of Institutional Changes and Intragroup Heterogeneity[J]. Organization Science, 2015,26(5):1485-1501
[31] 李宏贵,谢蕊,陈忠卫.多重制度逻辑下企业创新合法化战略行为——基于阿里巴巴案例分析[J].经济与管理研究, 2017,38(7):133-144
[32] Besharov M. L., Smith W. K. Multiple Institutional Logics in Organizations:Explaining Their Varied Nature and Implications[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2014,39(3):364-381
[33] Pache A. C., Santos F. M. Inside the Hybrid Organization:An Organizational Level View of Responses to Conflicting Institutional Demands[J]. Ssrn Electronic Journal, 2010,56:972-1001
[34] Oliver C. Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1991,16(1):145-179
[35] Berente N., Yoo Y. Institutional Contradictions and Loose Coupling:Postimplementation of NASA's Enterprise Information System[J]. Information Systems Research, 2012,23(2):376-396
[36] Hannah D. P., Eisenhardt K. M. How Firms Navigate Cooperation and Competition in Nascent Ecosystems[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2018,39(12):3163-3192
[37] Bruton G. D., Peng M. W., Ahlstrom D., et al. State-Owned Enterprises Around the World as Hybrid Organizations[J]. Academy of Management Perspectives, 2015,29(1):92-114
[38] Gümüsay A. A., Smets M., Morris T.'God at Work':Engaging Central and Incompatible Institutional Logics through Elastic Hybridity[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2020,63(1):124-154
[39] Emerson R. M. Power-Dependence Relations[J]. American Sociological Review, 1962,27(1):31-41