Managing External Innovation: The Case of Platform Extensions
Managing External Innovation: The Case of Platform Extensions Managing External Innovation: The Case of Platform Extensions
complexity of the platforms, and to hide low-level aspects of the platform from extension developers. Prügl & Schreier (2006) distinguish between low-end and high-end toolkits; depending on the scope describing the design possibilities users can explore using the toolkit. They found that in addition to the toolkits offered by the platform owner, which tend to be more basic, users have created more advanced toolkits to meet the needs of specific user groups. Providing toolkits is not restricted to platform owners, as users develop toolkits that serve the users’ needs in the process of developing elements for the platform. An example is the K Desktop Environment (KDE) that was developed by Matthias Ettrich (Spinellis & Gousios, 2009a). Software sandboxes The software sandboxes are another form of user toolkits that can be provided for innovation. Traditionally sandboxes defined as a controlled environment that provides at least a minimal functionality needed to accurately test the developed software (Venugopalan, 2005). Sandboxes provide an isolated environment for untested code changes and an experimentation space away from the original code-base repository. There is no uniform definition of what a sandbox comprises. A testing server, a mirrored production environment (working directory), and a development server are different formations of sandboxes that exist today. In the context of web application development, a sandbox is a staging or development server that is logically separated from the production server. There is even a more 23
specialized notion of sandbox in the sense of an environment for executing non-trusted applications (such as applets). A sandbox can also include the capability to test multiple platform configurations where the module being tested is combined with other modules and the opportunity to simulate environmental conditions to exert the module (for example, if deployment of the module requires the presence of special hardware, or should be tested with multiple users) (Bosch & Bosch-Sijtsema, 2009). 2.3 Lessons learned The lessons learned from the literature are: • The research regarding the development of platform extensions is still in its early stages, so there is not much literature on the strategies and frameworks used to manage the platform extension development process. • Open innovation leads to porous boundaries between firms and their surrounding environment, which facilitates information flow with external parties, but also results in a loss of direct control over the quality of product features. • Elements of the architecture of participation such as technical design, development process and intellectual property are important enablers for leveraging innovation and controlling quality in the platform network. • There are different models to open up the innovation process and collaboration governance but there are no frameworks to control the quality of the outcome. 24
- Page 1: MANAGING EXTERNAL INNOVATION: THE C
- Page 4 and 5: ABSTRACT In recent years, high-tech
- Page 6 and 7: TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION...
- Page 8 and 9: 4.9 StarOffice.....................
- Page 10 and 11: Figure 22. IBM HTTP Server communit
- Page 12 and 13: Table 20. Collaboration modes for M
- Page 14 and 15: 1 INTRODUCTION Iyer (2006) describe
- Page 16 and 17: 2. How do platform owners encourage
- Page 18 and 19: 1.4 Contributions This research con
- Page 20 and 21: 2.1 Open innovation strategies and
- Page 22 and 23: architecture, production process an
- Page 24 and 25: Innovation Mall Elite Circle Innova
- Page 26 and 27: platform and extends its functional
- Page 28 and 29: Therefore, the platform architectur
- Page 30 and 31: In a modular architecture, the modu
- Page 32 and 33: The distinction between external an
- Page 34 and 35: platform, information, and service
- Page 38 and 39: • Contribution of external partie
- Page 40 and 41: 3 RESEARCH METHOD This chapter desc
- Page 42 and 43: 3.3 Method The research around regu
- Page 44 and 45: 1. What are the models used by soft
- Page 46 and 47: literature: i) regulatory tools, ii
- Page 48 and 49: four projects was chosen using theo
- Page 50 and 51: No. Section Description Data source
- Page 52 and 53: Information was drawn from the plat
- Page 54 and 55: 3.3.7 Identify strategies adopted b
- Page 56 and 57: 4 WRITE UPS FOR PLATFORMS IN THE SA
- Page 58 and 59: plug-in plugs and declares its depe
- Page 60 and 61: Table 9. Collaboration modes for Ec
- Page 62 and 63: selection of these new opportunitie
- Page 64 and 65: products are based on Java technolo
- Page 66 and 67: Table 10. Collaboration modes for I
- Page 68 and 69: of that is adapting Firefox for use
- Page 70 and 71: While not very prominent, there are
- Page 72 and 73: as Extension Developer). There are
- Page 74 and 75: Extension module Core module Spring
- Page 76 and 77: Community structure Figure 15 shows
- Page 78 and 79: The first stage is the extension pr
- Page 80 and 81: The SpringSource.com offers a partn
- Page 82 and 83: modules: set of core modules 4 that
- Page 84 and 85: Table 14. Collaboration mode for th
specialized notion <strong>of</strong> sandbox in the sense <strong>of</strong> an environment for executing non-trusted<br />
applications (such as applets).<br />
A sandbox can also include the capability to test multiple platform configurations where<br />
the module being tested is combined with other modules and the opportunity to simulate<br />
environmental conditions to exert the module (for example, if deployment <strong>of</strong> the module<br />
requires the presence <strong>of</strong> special hardware, or should be tested with multiple users) (Bosch<br />
& Bosch-Sijtsema, 2009).<br />
2.3 Lessons learned<br />
<strong>The</strong> lessons learned from the literature are:<br />
• <strong>The</strong> research regarding the development <strong>of</strong> platform extensions is still in its early<br />
stages, so there is not much literature on the strategies and frameworks used to<br />
manage the platform extension development process.<br />
• Open innovation leads to porous boundaries between firms and their surrounding<br />
environment, which facilitates information flow with external parties, but also<br />
results in a loss <strong>of</strong> direct control over the quality <strong>of</strong> product features.<br />
• Elements <strong>of</strong> the architecture <strong>of</strong> participation such as technical design,<br />
development process and intellectual property are important enablers for<br />
leveraging innovation and controlling quality in the platform network.<br />
• <strong>The</strong>re are different models to open up the innovation process and collaboration<br />
governance but there are no frameworks to control the quality <strong>of</strong> the outcome.<br />
24