Abstract
Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc. are some of the prominent large-scale digital service providers that are having tremendous impact on societies, corporations and individuals. However, despite the rapid uptake and their obvious influence on the behavior of individuals and the business models and networks of organizations, we still lack a deeper, theory-guided understanding of the related phenomenon. We use Teece’s notion of complementary assets and extend it towards ‘digital complementary assets’ (DCA) in an attempt to provide such a theory-guided understanding of these digital services. Building on Teece’s theory, we make three contributions. First, we offer a new conceptualization of digital complementary assets in the form of digital public goods and digital public assets. Second, we differentiate three models for how organizations can engage with such digital complementary assets. Third, user-base is found to be a critical factor when considering appropriability.
Recommended Citation
Rosemann, Michael; Anderson, Magnus; and Lind, Mikael, "Digital Complementary Assets" (2011). ICIS 2011 Proceedings. 4.
https://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2011/proceedings/onlinecommunity/4
Digital Complementary Assets
Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc. are some of the prominent large-scale digital service providers that are having tremendous impact on societies, corporations and individuals. However, despite the rapid uptake and their obvious influence on the behavior of individuals and the business models and networks of organizations, we still lack a deeper, theory-guided understanding of the related phenomenon. We use Teece’s notion of complementary assets and extend it towards ‘digital complementary assets’ (DCA) in an attempt to provide such a theory-guided understanding of these digital services. Building on Teece’s theory, we make three contributions. First, we offer a new conceptualization of digital complementary assets in the form of digital public goods and digital public assets. Second, we differentiate three models for how organizations can engage with such digital complementary assets. Third, user-base is found to be a critical factor when considering appropriability.