Extended Generativity Theory on Digital Platforms

The assumption that generativity engenders unbounded growth has acquired an almost taken-for-granted position in information systems and management literature. Against this premise, we examine the relationship between generativity and user base growth in the context of a digital platform. To do this, we synthesize the literature on generativity into two views, social interaction (expansion of ecosystem boundaries) and product view (expansion of product boundaries), that jointly and individually relate to user base growth. Both views help us explain how opening a platform relates to the emergence and resolution of conflicting expectations in a platform ecosystem that result in new functions and expanded use. We adopt a panel vector autoregressive approach combining data from six large transaction platforms that engaged with open-source developer communities. We found that the dominant narrative of generativity engendering growth, although generally supported by our analysis, obscures the fact that the inverse is also true; that is, growth can lead to expansion of product boundaries (inverse generativity) and that generativity can be bounded; that is, growth can stabilize ecosystem boundaries (bounded generativity). Against this background, we propose an extended generativity theory that presents generativity and growth in an integrative view and raises awareness about the limitations of the “unbounded growth” claim. We conclude that there is value in separating the two views of generativity conceptually and analytically, along with their relationship to user base growth, and we call for research on the pathways through which generativity produces growth.

History: Ola Henfridsson, Senior Editor; Robert Wayne Gregory, Associate Editor.

Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2023.1209 .

Digital “x”—Charting a Path for Digital-Themed Research

We live in a time when digital technologies reshape most aspects of business and social life. This challenges received assumptions about modes of operation in organizations. As a result, scholars and practitioners increasingly use the label “digital” to signify that something has changed to the extent that a plethora of long-established management concepts are expressed in a new formulaic form of “digital x,” and x can stand for innovation, strategy, transformation, infrastructure, etc. In the information systems discipline and beyond, “digital” has emerged as an oft-used conceptual label to characterize age-long phenomena hitherto described by the IT (or x) label. There is a sense among academic and practitioner communities that digital and IT are not mere synonyms, but beyond the hype, something fundamentally different is being signaled when the “digital” label is invoked. This paper traces the intellectual roots and foundations of the growing use of “digital” as a conceptual label, identifies when the label use is warranted as well as outlines implications that the moniker holds for future scholarship, policy, and practice. In particular, the paper offers actionable guidance that enables more reflective use of the term “digital” as we move forward.

On digital theorizing, clickbait research, and the cumulative tradition

The pursuit of novel and indigenous digital theories is a thought-provoking call by Grover and Lyytinen. Such a piece is direly needed, and we hope it will spark a reinvigoration of the field. However, despite its many merits and our alignment with its message, we have two comments or caveats for readers of their piece. These are—a) a need to re-emphasize the value of attending to the cumulative tradition in our pursuit of digital theorizing, and relatedly b) an unreflective reading of the paper may risk mobilizing IS scholarship towards clickbait research. We further highlight three anchors that future scholarship can consider in attending to these issues a) problematization anchor, b) implications anchor, and c) boundary-spanning anchor. With these points, we add more volume to amplify the message of G&L and offer suggestions for pursuing innovative digital theories that go beyond ephemeral theorizing.

Digital Agility: Conceptualizing Agility for the Digital Era

It goes without saying that digital technologies have been forming an increasingly crucial component of companies’ value offerings in recent times. In many industries, this trend has led to converging markets, where traditional firms compete and collaborate with software firms and digital startups. One central competitive factor in these markets is the ability to capitalize on digital options faster than the competition. Prior research on agility in this context has advanced our knowledge on managerial and employee behaviors, as well as structures supporting such behaviors, to enable agility both in traditional and software firms. The challenge for firms in digitally converging markets is that agility now requires a combination of organizational and IS development agility—perceiving these concepts as separate entities is no longer appropriate or instructive. Building on prior work on agile behaviors and structures, and published cases on digital firms, we develop an integrative conception of digital agility in line with the realities of the digital era.