数字平台的蓬勃发展为数字创业者提供了多元化的平台选择,越来越多的创业者通过“多栖布局”在不同平台寻求快速成长。然而,何种多栖战略能有效驱动目标平台的高绩效表现,这一核心问题尚未得到系统性解答。本文聚焦移动应用领域,以194个在Android与iOS 平台实施多栖战略的游戏类App为研究样本,基于多栖方向将其划分为Android目标平台组与iOS目标平台组,运用模糊集定性比较分析方法(fsQCA),从原平台产品绩效、多栖产品规模、多栖布局速度、多栖经验积累以及模块应用能力五个维度构建组合情境,深入挖掘数字创业者在目标平台实现高下载量的关键路径。研究发现呈现显著的平台差异化特征:在Android目标平台,存在三条高绩效实现路径,分别为用户体验型经验驱动路径、网络效应型经验驱动路径和模块应用型经验驱动路径,体现出该平台对多元能力组合的兼容特性;而iOS目标平台仅识别出一条高绩效路径——网络效应叠加用户体验型经验驱动的协同路径,凸显该生态系统对核心竞争优势整合的更高要求。值得关注的是,本文同时发现两条导致iOS平台非高绩效的多栖路径,其共性特征表现为创业者在多栖经验储备、跨平台网络效应利用及用户体验构建上存在显著不足,叠加原平台产品绩效欠佳,最终导致目标平台下载量受限。本文的创新点在于:通过组态视角揭示多栖战略绩效的复杂因果关系,不仅拓展了数字平台创业者多栖战略绩效前因的理论框架,更通过差异化路径识别,为创业者跨平台布局提供了精细化的实践指引——建议根据目标平台特性构建针对性的能力组合,尤其注重核心优势的迁移转化与生态适配,避免陷入资源错配的战略陷阱。
数字创业者多栖战略实现高绩效的路径效应——基于移动应用平台游戏类应用的定性比较分析
摘要
参考文献
1 杜运周, 贾良定. 组态视角与定性比较分析(QCA): 管理学研究的一条新道路[J]. 管理世界, 2017, (6): 155-167. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-5502.2017.06.011
2 杜运周, 刘秋辰, 陈凯薇, 等. 营商环境生态、全要素生产率与城市高质量发展的多元模式——基于复杂系统观的组态分析[J]. 管理世界, 2022, 38(9): 127-144. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-5502.2022.09.010
3 王璁, 王凤彬. 大型国有企业集团总部对成员单位控制体系的构型研究——基于102家中央企业的定性比较分析[J]. 南开管理评论, 2018, 21(6): 185-197. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-3448.2018.06.017
4 王节祥, 陈威如, 江诗松, 等. 平台生态系统中的参与者战略: 互补与依赖关系的解耦[J]. 管理世界, 2021, 37(2): 126-147. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-5502.2021.02.011
5 王节祥, 刘双, 瞿庆云. 数字平台生态系统中的创业企业成长研究: 现状、框架与展望[J]. 研究与发展管理, 2023, 35(1): 72-88.
6 谢运博, 陈宏民. 多归属、互联网平台型企业合并与社会总福利[J]. 管理评论, 2018, 30(8): 115-125.
7 张明, 杜运周. 组织与管理研究中QCA方法的应用: 定位、策略和方向[J]. 管理学报, 2019, 16(9): 1312-1323. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-884x.2019.09.005
8 Bresnahan T, Orsini J, Yin P L. Demand heterogeneity, inframarginal multihoming, and platform market stability: Mobile apps[R]. Stanford University Working Paper, 2015.
9 Ceccagnoli M, Forman C, Huang P, et al. Cocreation of value in a platform ecosystem! The case of enterprise software[J]. MIS Quarterly, 2012, 36(1): 263-290. DOI:10.2307/41410417
10 Cennamo C, Ozalp H, Kretschmer T. Platform architecture and quality trade-offs of multihoming complements[J]. Information Systems Research, 2018, 29(2): 461-478. DOI:10.1287/isre.2018.0779
11 Chatterjee J. Strategy, human capital investments, business-domain capabilities, and performance: A study in the global software services industry[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2017, 38(3): 588-608. DOI:10.1002/smj.2505
12 Chen L, Tong T W, Tang S Q, et al. Governance and design of digital platforms: A review and future research directions on a meta-organization[J]. Journal of Management, 2022, a,48(1): 147-184.
13 Chen L, Yi J T, Li S L, et al. Platform governance design in platform ecosystems: Implications for complementors’ multihoming decision[J]. Journal of Management, 2022, b,48(3): 630-656.
14 Corts K S, Lederman M. Software exclusivity and the scope of indirect network effects in the U. S. home video game market[J]. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 2009, 27(2): 121-136. DOI:10.1016/j.ijindorg.2008.08.002
15 Davis S J, MacCrisken J, Murphy K M. Economic perspectives on software design: PC operating systems and platforms[R]. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 8411, 2001.
16 Dibia V, Wagner C. Success within app distribution platforms: The contribution of app diversity and app cohesivity[A]. 2015 48th Hawaii international conference on system sciences[C]. Kauai: IEEE, 2015.
17 Eaton B, Elaluf-Calderwood S, Sørensen C, et al. Distributed tuning of boundary resources: The case of Apple’s IOS service system[J]. MIS Quarterly, 2015, 39(1): 217-243. DOI:10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.1.10
18 Fiss P C. Building better causal theories: A fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2011, 54(2): 393-420. DOI:10.5465/amj.2011.60263120
19 Ghose A, Han S P. Estimating demand for mobile applications in the new economy[J]. Management Science, 2014, 60(6): 1470-1488. DOI:10.1287/mnsc.2014.1945
20 Gu Z J, Bapna R, Chan J, et al. Measuring the impact of crowdsourcing features on mobile App user engagement and retention: A randomized field experiment[J]. Management Science, 2022, 68(2): 1297-1329. DOI:10.1287/mnsc.2020.3943
21 Hagiu A, Wright J. Multi-sided platforms[J]. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 2015, 43: 162-174. DOI:10.1016/j.ijindorg.2015.03.003
22 Hagiu A, Yoffie D B. What’s your Google strategy[J]. Harvard Business Review, 2009, 87(4): 74-81.
23 Hyrynsalmi S, Suominen A, Mäntymäki M. The influence of developer multi-homing on competition between software ecosystems[J]. Journal of Systems and Software, 2016, 111: 119-127. DOI:10.1016/j.jss.2015.08.053
24 Jacobides M G, Cennamo C, Gawer A. Towards a theory of ecosystems[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2018, 39(8): 2255-2276. DOI:10.1002/smj.2904
25 Kapoor R, Agarwal S. Sustaining superior performance in business ecosystems: Evidence from application software developers in the IOS and Android smartphone ecosystems[J]. Organization Science, 2017, 28(3): 531-551. DOI:10.1287/orsc.2017.1122
26 Karhu K, Gustafsson R, Lyytinen K. Exploiting and defending open digital platforms with boundary resources: Android’s five platform forks[J]. Information Systems Research, 2018, 29(2): 479-497. DOI:10.1287/isre.2018.0786
27 Landsman V, Stremersch S. Multihoming in two-sided markets: An empirical inquiry in the video game console industry[J]. Journal of Marketing, 2011, 75(6): 39-54. DOI:10.1509/jm.09.0199
28 Li H, Zhu F. Information transparency, multihoming, and platform competition: A natural experiment in the daily deals market[J]. Management Science, 2021, 67(7): 4384-4407. DOI:10.1287/mnsc.2020.3718
29 Nambisan S. Digital entrepreneurship: Toward a digital technology perspective of entrepreneurship[J]. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 2017, 41(6): 1029-1055. DOI:10.1111/etap.12254
30 Park K F, Seamans R, Zhu F. Homing and platform responses to entry: Historical evidence from the U. S. newspaper industry[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2021, 42(4): 684-709. DOI:10.1002/smj.3241
31 Parker G, Van Alstyne M, Jiang X Y. Platform ecosystems: How developers invert the firm[J]. MIS Quarterly, 2017, 41(1): 255-266. DOI:10.25300/MISQ/2017/41.1.13
32 Picoto W N, Duarte R, Pinto I. Uncovering top-ranking factors for mobile apps through a multimethod approach[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2019, 101: 668-674. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.038
33 Polidoro F, Yang W. Porting learning from interdependencies back home: Performance implications of multihoming for complementors in platform ecosystems[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2024, 45(9): 1791-1821. DOI:10.1002/smj.3601
34 Ragin C C. Set relations in social research: Evaluating their consistency and coverage[J]. Political Analysis, 2006, 14(3): 291-310. DOI:10.1093/pan/mpj019
35 Sällberg H, Wang S J. Numminen E. The combinatory role of online ratings and reviews in mobile app downloads: An empirical investigation of gaming and productivity apps from their initial app store launch[J]. Journal of Marketing Analytics, 2023, 11(3): 426-442. DOI:10.1057/s41270-022-00171-w
36 Schilling M A. Toward a general modular systems theory and its application to interfirm product modularity[J]. The Academy of Management Review, 2000, 25(2): 312. DOI:10.2307/259016
37 Tafesse W, Shen K N. Driving user adoption of mobile apps through platform multihoming: The effects of multihoming delay and multihoming customization[J]. International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 2024, 4(2): 100263. DOI:10.1016/j.jjimei.2024.100263
38 Tavalaei M M, Cennamo C. In search of complementarities within and across platform ecosystems: Complementors’ relative standing and performance in mobile apps ecosystems[J]. Long Range Planning, 2021, 54(5): 101994. DOI:10.1016/j.lrp.2020.101994
39 Tian Y, Nagappan M, Lo D. et al. What are the characteristics of high-rated apps? A case study on free android applications[A]. IEEE international conference on software maintenance and evolution[C]. Bremen: IEEE, 2015.
40 Tiwana A. Systems development ambidexterity: Explaining the complementary and substitutive roles of formal and informal controls[J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2010, 27(2): 87-126. DOI:10.2753/MIS0742-1222270203
41 Tiwana A. Platform ecosystems: Aligning architecture, governance, and strategy[M]. Amsterdam: MK, 2014.
42 Tiwana A. Evolutionary competition in platform ecosystems[J]. Information Systems Research, 2015, 26(2): 266-281. DOI:10.1287/isre.2015.0573
43 Venkataraman V, Ceccagnoli M, Forman C. Multihoming within platform ecosystems: The strategic role of human capital[R]. Georgia Tech Scheller College of Business Research Paper No. 18-8, 2018.
44 Ye H, Kankanhalli A. User service innovation on mobile phone platforms: Investigating impacts of lead userness, toolkit support, and design autonomy[J]. MIS Quarterly, 2018, 42(1): 165-187. DOI:10.25300/MISQ/2018/12361
45 Yoo Y, Henfridsson O, Lyytinen K. Research commentary—the new organizing logic of digital innovation: An agenda for information systems research[J]. Information Systems Research, 2010, 21(4): 724-735. DOI:10.1287/isre.1100.0322
46 Zhang Y C, Li J J, Tong T W. Platform governance matters: How platform gatekeeping affects knowledge sharing among complementors[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2022, 43(3): 599-626. DOI:10.1002/smj.3191
引用本文
吴畏, 韩炜. 数字创业者多栖战略实现高绩效的路径效应——基于移动应用平台游戏类应用的定性比较分析[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2025, 47(5): 50-65.
导出参考文献,格式为: