Paper Number
ECIS2026-2291
Paper Type
CRP
Abstract
Public education authorities face a fundamental tension when governing digital education platforms, as they must simultaneously enable pedagogical innovation while constraining operations within regulatory boundaries. Drawing on platform governance literature and by analyzing three cases through interviews and secondary data, this study reveals how authorities mitigate this regulator-enabler tension through six interdependent mechanisms organized across three governance checkpoints. Technical mechanisms like a centralized core infrastructure, standardized interoperability layers, and cross-border collaboration establish stable and compliant foundations that absorb regulatory complexity. Pedagogical mechanisms like competence diagnosis, mandatory professional development, and deliberate pedagogical design build sustainable capacity for educational transformation. Rather than eliminating tension, these mechanisms transform it, as each checkpoint shifts governance from managing binary constraints toward collaborative standardization that enables an outward-looking ecosystem development. The findings extend platform governance theory by demonstrating that effective governance in highly regulated sectors requires mechanisms which serve dual enabling-constraining functions simultaneously.
Recommended Citation
Badmann, Stefanie, "Regulator Versus Enabler: The Role Of Public Education Authorities In Governing Digital Education Platforms" (2026). ECIS 2026 Proceedings. 9.
https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2026/platforms/platforms/9
Regulator Versus Enabler: The Role Of Public Education Authorities In Governing Digital Education Platforms
Public education authorities face a fundamental tension when governing digital education platforms, as they must simultaneously enable pedagogical innovation while constraining operations within regulatory boundaries. Drawing on platform governance literature and by analyzing three cases through interviews and secondary data, this study reveals how authorities mitigate this regulator-enabler tension through six interdependent mechanisms organized across three governance checkpoints. Technical mechanisms like a centralized core infrastructure, standardized interoperability layers, and cross-border collaboration establish stable and compliant foundations that absorb regulatory complexity. Pedagogical mechanisms like competence diagnosis, mandatory professional development, and deliberate pedagogical design build sustainable capacity for educational transformation. Rather than eliminating tension, these mechanisms transform it, as each checkpoint shifts governance from managing binary constraints toward collaborative standardization that enables an outward-looking ecosystem development. The findings extend platform governance theory by demonstrating that effective governance in highly regulated sectors requires mechanisms which serve dual enabling-constraining functions simultaneously.
When commenting on articles, please be friendly, welcoming, respectful and abide by the AIS eLibrary Discussion Thread Code of Conduct posted here.