Acta Informatica Pragensia X:X | DOI: 10.18267/j.aip.307115

Exploring Design Principles for SME Complementor-Suitable Digital Platforms

Lukas Rudolf Germut Fitz ORCID...1, Jochen Scheeg2
1 Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus – Senftenberg, Cottbus, Germany
2 Brandenburg University of Applied Sciences, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany

Background: Some of the world’s most valuable platform businesses rely on products and services provided by small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Though, the modern digital platform economy is increasingly shaped by uncertainties and power asymmetries benefitting dominant platform owners and threatening smaller players participating as complementors in those ecosystems. Negative consequences include lock-in effects and platform dependency, exploitative participation terms and eroded entrepreneurial autonomy on the SMEs’ side, which altogether harm the digital platforms’ long-term viability, too. Addressing these issues, this paper investigates design principles for digital platforms taking SME complementors’ needs into account.

Objective: This study investigates design principles for digital platforms that enhance suitability for SMEs as complementors, focusing on stakeholder-centric platform design approaches that better accommodate SME-specific needs and requirements. In this, this study aims to address current negative developments concerning imbalanced power dynamics and uncertainties emerging from platform owner-SME-partnerships in dominant digital platform ecosystems.

Methods: A qualitative reflective meta-analysis approach was employed, combining explorative expert interviews with SME specialists and a thematic literature review of SME platform design research. The methodology synthesized findings to identify meta-requirements and derive design principles through interpretive analysis.

Results: Eleven meta-requirements were identified and synthesized into four design principles: the principle of SME empowerment, the principle of open boundaries, the principle of transparent and fair participation terms, and the principle of reflection of individuality. In combination, these principles aim to inform future digital platform design that takes SME complementor needs into account.

Conclusion: The conceptual proposal of four design principles guides researchers and practitioners in creating SME-suitable digital platforms with stakeholder-centric design approaches. The principles enable digital platform models that accommodate diverse SME requirements, enhance participation experiences, and foster collaborative ecosystems tailored to SME characteristics and their operational contexts.

Keywords: Digital platforms; Digital economy; Small and medium-sized enterprise; Design principles; Information system design; Business model design; Reflective meta-analysis; Digital business model.

Received: November 27, 2025; Revised: January 28, 2026; Accepted: February 12, 2026; Prepublished online: March 6, 2026 

Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Alismail, S., Zhang, H., & Chatterjee, S. (2017). A Framework for Identifying Design Science Research Objectives for Building and Evaluating IT Artifacts. In A. Maedche, J. vom Brocke, & A. Hevner, Designing the Digital Transformation. DESRIST 2017. (pp. 218-230). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59144-5_13 Go to original source...
    2. Asadullah, A., Faik, I., & Kankanhalli, A. (2020). Can digital platforms help SMEs develop organizational capabilities? A qualitative field study. In Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Information Systems. AIS.
    3. Asadullah, A., Faik, I., & Lim, S.-Y. (2023). The dark side of digital platforms: understanding small and medium enterprises' dependence on third-party platforms. In Proceedings of the 31st European Conference on Information Systems. AIS.
    4. Balk, A. (2024). Cooperative opportunities for strengthening SMEs in dealing with online platforms. Journal of Co-operative Organization and Management, 12(2), 100245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcom.2024.100245 Go to original source...
    5. Baskerville, R. (2008). What design science is not. European Journal of Information Systems, 17(5), 441-443. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2008.45 Go to original source...
    6. Beck, J., & Stolterman, E. (2016). Examining the types of knowledge claims made in design research. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 2(3), 199-214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2017.02.001 Go to original source...
    7. Bhargava, H. K., Wang, K., & Zhang, X. (2022). Fending Off Critics of Platform Power with Differential Revenue Sharing: Doing Well by Doing Good?. Management Science, 68(11), 8249-8260. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4545 Go to original source...
    8. Bogner, A. (2009). Interviewing experts. Palgrave Macmillan. Go to original source...
    9. Böhmer, M., Kuehnel, S., Kendziorra, J., & Damarowsky, J. (2024). Helping Early-Career IS Scholars Get a Head Start in Design Science Research-A Proposed Framework for Conceptualizing Design Principles from Literature and Theory. In Proceedings of the Australasian Conference on Information Systems 2024, 164. AIS.
    10. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2020). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328-352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238 Go to original source...
    11. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. SAGE Publications.
    12. Brendel, A. B., Lembcke, T. B., & Kolbe, L. M. (2022). Towards an integrative view on design science research genres, strategies, and pivotal concepts in information systems research. ACM SIGMIS Database, 53(4), 9-23. https://doi.org/10.1145/3571823.3571826 Go to original source...
    13. Budde, L., Hänggi, R., Laglia, L., & Friedli, T. (2024). Leading the transition to multi-sided platforms (MSPs) in a B2B context - The case of a recycling SME. Industrial Marketing Management, 116, 106-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2023.12.002 Go to original source...
    14. Candelo, E., Casalegno, C. G., & Civera, C. (2022). Digital transformation or analogic relationships? A dilemma for small retailer entrepreneurs and its resolution. Journal of Strategy and Management, 15(3), 397-415. https://doi.org/10.1108/jsma-02-2021-0056 Go to original source...
    15. Chandra Kruse, L. (2025). Design Principles Unveiled: Capturing Innovation Insights for Future Design Breakthroughs. CERN IdeaSquare Journal of Experimental Innovation, 9(1), 5-8. https://doi.org/10.23726/cij.2025.1582 Go to original source...
    16. Costa, E., Soares, A. L., & de Sousa, J. P. (2020). Industrial business associations improving the internationalisation of SMEs with digital platforms: A design science research approach. International Journal of Information Management, 53, Article 102070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102070 Go to original source...
    17. Cronholm, S., Göbel, H., & Cao, L. (2023). Abductive design science research: The interplay between deduction and induction. In Proceedings of the Australasian Conference on Information Systems 2023. AIS.
    18. Culkin, N., & Smith, D. (2000). An emotional business: a guide to understanding the motivations of small business decision takers. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 3(3), 145-157. https://doi.org/10.1108/13522750010333898 Go to original source...
    19. Cusumano, M. A., Gawer, A., & Yoffie, D. B. (2019). The business of platforms: Strategy in the age of digital competition, innovation, and power. Harper Business.
    20. Cutolo, D., & Grimaldi, R. (2023). I wasn't expecting that: How engaging with digital platforms can turn leisure passion into entrepreneurial aspirations. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 20, e00404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbvi.2023.e00404 Go to original source...
    21. Cutolo, D., & Kenney, M. (2021). Platform-Dependent Entrepreneurs: Power Asymmetries, Risks, and Strategies in the Platform Economy. Academy of Management Perspectives, 35(4), 584-605. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2019.0103 Go to original source...
    22. de Reuver, M., Sørensen, C., & Basole, R. C. (2018). The digital platform: A research agenda. Journal of Information Technology, 33(2), 124-135. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41265-016-0033-3 Go to original source...
    23. de Reuver, M., Van Wynsberghe, A., Janssen, M., & Van de Poel, I. (2020). Digital platforms and responsible innovation: expanding value sensitive design to overcome ontological uncertainty. Ethics and Information Technology, 22(3), 257-267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-020-09537-z Go to original source...
    24. Deilen, M., & Wiesche, M. (2021). The Role of Complementors in Platform Ecosystems. In F. Ahlemann, R. Schütte, & S. Stieglitz (eds) Innovation Through Information Systems. WI 2021. (pp. 473-488). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86800-0_33 Go to original source...
    25. Dellermann, D., Jud, C., & Popp, K. M. (2016). Why don´t they join? Analyzing the Nature and Consequences of Complementors´ Costs in Platform Ecosystems. In Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Information Systems. AIS.
    26. Drechsler, A., Hönigsberg, S., & Watkowski, L. (2022). What's In an SME? Considerations for Scoping Research on Small And Medium Enterprises and Other Organisations in the is Discipline. In Proceedings of the 30th European Conference on Information Systems. AIS.
    27. Drewel, M., Özcan, L., Gausemeier, J., & Dumitrescu, R. (2021). Platform Patterns-Using Proven Principles to Develop Digital Platforms. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 12(2), 519-543. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00772-3 Go to original source...
    28. Eikebrokk, T. R., & Olsen, D. H. (2007). An empirical investigation of competency factors affecting e-business success in European SMEs. Information & Management, 44(4), 364-383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2007.02.004 Go to original source...
    29. Eisape, D. (2019). The Platform Business Model Canvas a Proposition in a Design Science Approach. American Journal of Management Science and Engineering, 4(6), 91-107. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajmse.20190406.12 Go to original source...
    30. Eisenmann, T., Parker, G., & van Alstyne, M.W. (2006). Strategies for two-sided markets. Harvard Business Review, 84(10), 92-101.
    31. Fitz, L.R.G., & Scheeg, J. (2025a), Coping Practices of Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises Facing Power Asymmetry in Digital Platform Business. Strategic Change, (in press). https://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.2657 Go to original source...
    32. Fitz, L.R.G., & Scheeg, J. (2025b). Alternative digital platforms: comparative analysis through the lens of Corporate Aikido. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 23, 845-866. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-025-00703-8 Go to original source...
    33. Franco, M., & Matos, P. G. (2015). Leadership styles in SMEs: a mixed-method approach. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(2), 425-451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-013-0283-2 Go to original source...
    34. Franco, M., & Prata, M. (2019). Influence of the individual characteristics and personality traits of the founder on the performance of family SMEs. European Journal of International Management, 13(1), 41-68. https://doi.org/10.1504/ejim.2019.096498 Go to original source...
    35. Gawer, A. (2021). Digital platforms' boundaries: The interplay of firm scope, platform sides, and digital interfaces. Long Range Planning, 54(5), 102045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2020.102045 Go to original source...
    36. Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. A. (2015). Business Platforms. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 37-42). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.73012-1 Go to original source...
    37. Goldkuhl, G. (2012). Pragmatism vs interpretivism in qualitative information systems research. European Journal of Information Systems, 21(2), 135-146. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2011.54 Go to original source...
    38. Grant, J., & Wunder, T. (2021). Strategic transformation to sustilience: Learning from COVID-19. Journal of Strategy and Management, 14(3), 331-351. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA-07-2021-0151 Go to original source...
    39. Gregor, S., Chandra Kruse, L., & Seidel, S. (2020). Research perspectives: the anatomy of a design principle. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(6), 2. Go to original source...
    40. Gregor, S., & Hevner, A. R. (2014). The Knowledge Innovation Matrix (KIM): A Clarifying Lens for Innovation. Informing Science, 17, 217-239. https://doi.org/10.28945/2046 Go to original source...
    41. Guo, Y., Chen, Y., Usai, A., Wu, L., & Qin, W. (2023). Knowledge integration for resilience among multinational SMEs amid the COVID-19: from the view of global digital platforms. Journal of Knowledge Management, 27(1), 84-104. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-02-2022-0138 Go to original source...
    42. Harracá, M., Castelló, I., & Gawer, A. (2023). How Digital Platforms Organize Immaturity: A Sociosymbolic Framework of Platform Power. Business Ethics Quarterly, 33(3), 440-472. https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2022.40 Go to original source...
    43. Heikkilä, M., Bouwman, H., & Heikkilä, J. (2017). From strategic goals to business model innovation paths: an exploratory study. Journal of small business and enterprise development, 25(1), 107-128. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-03-2017-0097 Go to original source...
    44. Heimburg, V., & Wiesche, M. (2022). Relations Between Actors in Digital Platform Ecosystems: A Literature Review. In Proceedings of the 30th European Conference on Information Systems. AIS.
    45. Hevner, A., & Gregor, S. (2022). Envisioning entrepreneurship and digital innovation through a design science research lens: A matrix approach. Information & Management, 59(3), 103350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2020.103350 Go to original source...
    46. Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in Information Systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75-105. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148625 Go to original source...
    47. Hönigsberg, S. (2020). A Platform for Value Co-creation in SME Networks. In S. Hofmann, O. Müller, & M. Rossi (Eds.), Designing for Digital Transformation. Co-Creating Services with Citizens and Industry. DESRIST 2020. (pp. 285-296). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64823-7_26 Go to original source...
    48. Hönigsberg, S., Dias, M., & Dinter, B. (2021). Design Principles for Digital Transformation in Traditional SMEs - An Antipodean Comparison. In L. Chandra Kruse, S. Seidel, & G. I. Hausvik (Eds.), The Next Wave of Sociotechnical Design. DESRIST 2021. (pp. 375-386). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82405-1_36 Go to original source...
    49. Josefy, M., Kuban, S., Ireland, R. D., & Hitt, M. A. (2015). All things great and small: Organizational size, boundaries of the firm, and a changing environment. Academy of Management Annals, 9(1), 715-802. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2015.1027086 Go to original source...
    50. Kim, J., Yeom, J., & Woo, H. G. (2025). How agency alliances with complementors moderate quality assurance, product originality, and success in platform ecosystems. Digital Business, 5(1), 100118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.digbus.2025.100118 Go to original source...
    51. Kude, T., & Huber, T. L. (2025). Responding to platform owner moves: A 14-year qualitative study of four enterprise software complementors. Information Systems Journal, 35(1), 209-246. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12527 Go to original source...
    52. Ladd, T., Barlow, R., Giannini, B., & Pflaum, A. (2024). Decentralized Autonomous Organizations as a Threat to Centralized Platforms: Applying and Expanding Theories of Platform Competition and Disintermediation. In Proceedings of the 57th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. AIS. Go to original source...
    53. Lan, S., Liu, K., & Dong, Y. (2019). Dancing with wolves: how value creation and value capture dynamics affect complementor participation in industry platforms. Industry and Innovation, 26(8), 943-963. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2019.1598339 Go to original source...
    54. Larsen, K., Lukyanenko, R., Mueller, R. M., Storey, V., Parsons, J., VanderMeer, D., & Hovorka, D. (2025). Validity in Design Science. MIS Quarterly, 49(4), 1267-1294. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2024/18064 Go to original source...
    55. Legenvre, H., Hameri, A. P., & Golini, R. (2022). Ecosystems and supply chains: How do they differ and relate. Digital Business, 2(2), 100029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.digbus.2022.100029 Go to original source...
    56. Liu, Z., Sampaio, P., Pishchulov, G., Mehandjiev, N., Cisneros-Cabrera, S., Schirrmann, A., Jiru, F., & Bnouhanna, N. (2022). The architectural design and implementation of a digital platform for Industry 4.0 SME collaboration. Computers in Industry, 138, Article 103623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2022.103623 Go to original source...
    57. Mandviwalla, M., & Flanagan, R. (2021). Small business digital transformation in the context of the pandemic. European Journal of Information Systems, 30(4), 359-375. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2021.1891004 Go to original source...
    58. Marzi, G., Marrucci, A., Vianelli, D., & Ciappei, C. (2023). B2B digital platform adoption by SMEs and large firms: Pathways and pitfalls. Industrial Marketing Management, 114, 80-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2023.08.002 Go to original source...
    59. Micallef, M., Keränen, J., & Kokshagina, O. (2023). The (un)intended consequences of multi-sided platform adoption for different actors in business networks. Industrial Marketing Management, 115, 214-227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2023.09.018 Go to original source...
    60. Möller, F., Guggenberger, T.M., Otto, B. (2020). Towards a Method for Design Principle Development in Information Systems. In S. Hofmann, O. Müller, M. Rossi (eds) Designing for Digital Transformation. Co-Creating Services with Citizens and Industry. DESRIST 2020. (, pp. 208-220). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64823-7_20 Go to original source...
    61. Nambisan, S., Siegel, D., & Kenney, M. (2018). On open innovation, platforms, and entrepreneurship. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(3), 354-368. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1300 Go to original source...
    62. Neff, A., Keller, A., Hiller, S., Reusch, S., & Rygl, D. (2023). Digital Platform Entry Barriers for Family-run SMEs. In Proceedings of the 29th Americas Conference on Information Systems. AIS.
    63. OECD. (2021). The Digital Transformation of SMEs, OECD Studies on SMEs and Entrepreneurship. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1787/bdb9256a-en Go to original source...
    64. Papadimitropoulos, V., & Malamidis, H. (2024). The Transformative Potential of Platform Cooperativism: The Case of CoopCycle. TripleC, 22(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v22i1.1418 Go to original source...
    65. Paré, G., Trudel, M.-C., Jaana, M., & Kitsiou, S. (2015). Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews. Information & Management, 52(2), 183-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2014.08.008 Go to original source...
    66. Parker, G. G., van Alstyne, M. W., & Choudary, S. P. (2016). Platform Revolution: How Networked Markets Are Transforming the Economy - and How to Make Them Work for You. W. W. Norton Company.
    67. Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., & Niehaves, B. (2018). Design science research genres: introduction to the special issue on exemplars and criteria for applicable design science research. European Journal of Information Systems, 27(2), 129-139. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2018.1458066 Go to original source...
    68. Pussinen, P., Wallin, A., & Hemilä, J. (2023). The hope of exponential growth - Systems mapping perspective on birth of platform business. Digital Business, 3(2), Article 100060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.digbus.2023.100060 Go to original source...
    69. Rahman, H. A., Karunakaran, A., & Cameron, L. D. (2024). Taming platform power: Taking accountability into account in the management of platforms. Academy of Management Annals, 18(1), 251-294. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2022.0090 Go to original source...
    70. Randhawa, K., Wilden, R., & Gudergan, S. (2021). How to innovate toward an ambidextrous business model? The role of dynamic capabilities and market orientation. Journal of Business Research, 130, 618-634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.046 Go to original source...
    71. Ricart, J. E., Snihur, Y., Carrasco-Farré, C., & Berrone, P. (2020). Grassroots Resistance to Digital Platforms and Relational Business Model Design to Overcome It: A Conceptual Framework. Strategy Science, 5(3), 271-291. https://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2020.0104 Go to original source...
    72. Sagala, G. H., & Õri, D. (2024). Exploring digital transformation strategy to achieve SMEs resilience and antifragility: a systematic literature review. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 37(3), 495-524. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2024.2392080 Go to original source...
    73. Schoormann, T., Hansen, M. R., & Möller, F. (2025). Advancing Design Knowledge Reuse: A Framework for Circular Design Principles. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 56(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.05618 Go to original source...
    74. Schoormann, T., Möller, F., Chandra Kruse, L., & Otto, B. (2024). BAUSTEIN-A design tool for configuring and representing design research. Information Systems Journal, 34(6), 1871-1901. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12516 Go to original source...
    75. Schoormann, T., Möller, F., Di Maria, M., & Große, N. (2023). Guiding Design Principle Projects: A Canvas for Young Design Science Researchers. Journal of Information Systems Education, 34(3), 307-325.
    76. SCImago. (n.d.). SCImago Journal & Country Rank [Website]. http://www.scimagojr.com
    77. Seckler, C., Mauer, R., & vom Brocke, J. (2021). Design science in entrepreneurship: Conceptual foundations and guiding principles. Journal of Business Venturing Design, 1(1), 100004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbvd.2022.100004 Go to original source...
    78. Seppänen, S., Ukko, J., & Saunila, M. (2025). Understanding determinants of digital transformation and digitizing management functions in incumbent SMEs. Digital Business, 5(1),100106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.digbus.2025.100106 Go to original source...
    79. Sharafizad, J., Redmond, J., Standing, C., & Fulford, R. (2025). A framework for understanding the influence of the lifeworld concept on small business utilisation of LinkedIn. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 37(6), 947-978. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2025.2481158 Go to original source...
    80. Spithoven, A., Vanhaverbeke, W., & Roijakkers, N. (2013). Open innovation practices in SMEs and large enterprises. Small Business Economics, 41(3), 537-562. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-012-9453-9 Go to original source...
    81. Statista. (2022). Estimated number of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) worldwide from 2000 to 2021 (in millions). Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1261592/global-smes/
    82. Staub, N., Haki, K., & Aier, S. (2022). Opportunity or threat: a complementors' perspective on platform owner's acquisitions. In Proceedings of the 30th European Conference on Information Systems. AIS.
    83. Strohmann, T., Siemon, D., Elshan, E., & Gnewuch, U. (2023). Design principles in information systems research: trends in construction and formulation. In Proceedings of the 29th Americas Conference on Information Systems. AIS.
    84. Sun, R., & Gregor, S. (2023). Reconceptualizing platforms in information systems research through the lens of service-dominant logic. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 32(3), 101791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2023.101791 Go to original source...
    85. Thomas, M., Le Masson, P., Weil, B., & Legrand, J. (2021). The future of digital platforms: Conditions of platform overthrow. Creativity and Innovation Management, 30(1), 80-95. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12422 Go to original source...
    86. Tiwana, A. (2013). Platform ecosystems: Aligning architecture, governance, and strategy. Newnes.
    87. Tiwana, A. (2025). Exaptation in Platforms: A Theory of Origins, Mechanisms, and Consequences. Information Systems Research, 36(4), 4-10. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2022.0484 Go to original source...
    88. Tolani, A., Owoseni, A., & Twinomurinzi, H. (2020). Designing for Context Versus the Lock-in Effect of 'Free' Global Digital Platforms: A Case of SMEs from Nigeria. In S. Hofmann, O. Müller, & M. Rossi (Eds.), Designing for Digital Transformation. Co-Creating Services with Citizens and Industry. DESRIST 2020. (pp. 321-332). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64823-7_29 Go to original source...
    89. Tuukkanen, V., Wolgsjö, E., & Rusu, L. (2022). Cultural Values in Digital Transformation in a Small Company. Procedia Computer Science, 196, 3-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.11.066 Go to original source...
    90. VHB. (2024). VHB Publication Media Rating 2024 Area rating Wirtschaftsinformatik/Information Systems. https://vhbonline.org/en/professional-groups/business-information-systems-engineering-wi/vhb-rating-2024-wirtschaftsinformatik/information-systems
    91. vom Brocke, J., Winter, R., Hevner, A., & Maedche, A. (2020). Special issue editorial - Accumulation and evolution of design knowledge in design science research: a journey through time and space. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(3), 9. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00611 Go to original source...
    92. Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS quarterly, 26(2), xiii-xxiii. https://doi.org/10.2307/4132319 Go to original source...
    93. Welsh, J. A., White, J. F., & Dowell, P. (1982). A Small Business is not a Little Big Business. Harvard business review, 59(4), 18-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/026624268200100115 Go to original source...
    94. Wen, W., & Zhu, F. (2019). Threat of platform-owner entry and complementor responses: Evidence from the mobile app market. Strategic Management Journal, 40(9), 1336-1367. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3031 Go to original source...
    95. Wirtz, J., So, K. K. F., Mody, M. A., Liu, S. Q., & Chun, H. H. (2019). Platforms in the peer-to-peer sharing economy. Journal of Service Management, 30(4), 452-483. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-11-2018-0369 Go to original source...
    96. Wortmann, F., Jung, S., & Gassmann, O. (2023). The Platform Business Navigator. Pearson Education Limited.
    97. Wu, A., Song, D., & Liu, Y. (2022). Platform synergy and innovation speed of SMEs: The roles of organizational design and regional environment. Journal of Business Research, 149, 38-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.016 Go to original source...
    98. Yoon, Y. L., Yoon, Y., Nam, H., & Choi, J. (2021). Buyer-supplier matching in online B2B marketplace: An empirical study of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Industrial Marketing Management, 93, 90-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.12.010 Go to original source...
    99. Zhang, J., Zamani, E. D., Gerli, P., & Mora, L. (2025). Co-constructing cooperative value ecosystems: A critical realist perspective. Information Systems Journal, 35(2), 504-544. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12549 Go to original source...
    100. Zhu, F. (2019). Friends or foes? Examining platform owners' entry into complementors' spaces. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 28(1), 23-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/jems.12303 Go to original source...
    101. Zhu, F., & Liu, Q. (2018). Competing with complementors: An empirical look at Amazon.com. Strategic Management Journal, 39(10), 2618-2642. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1002/smj.2932 Go to original source...
    102. Zuboff, S. (2015). Big other: Surveillance Capitalism and the Prospects of an Information Civilization. Journal of Information Technology, 30(1), 75-89. https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2015.5 Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return