Multi‐mode standardization under extreme time‐pressure – the case of COVID‐19 contact‐tracing apps

Abstract

The present study investigates the standardization process of contact tracing apps during the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the epidemiological urgency, and differing from classical examples in the literature, this process is characterized by a compressed timeframe. In this setting, we investigate the role of different standard-setting modes and their interaction through the lens of multi-mode standardization. We find that the processes of standard setting through market competition or inclusive multi-stakeholder committees proved time-consuming and inefficient in addressing the immediate needs during this major global health crisis. Multi-mode standardization between committees, market players, and governments equally proved unable to coordinate a standard. Ultimately, a so far neglected actor, namely platform owners, proved to be pivotal in coordinating a widely-adopted standard. Our research extends multi-mode standardization with platform owners as a further standardization actor of proliferating importance given the increasing pervasiveness of platforms in numerous contexts. The present article provides implications for the interplay between different modes of standard setting in general, and the setting of technological standards in crises in particular.

Governing digital crisis responses: platform standards and the dilemma of COVID-19 contact tracing

“…Our results support their findings by showing that platform owners can coerce third-party complementors into using boundary resources that they might not have adopted without the powerful influence of the platform owners. Thus, in line with the findings of Marhold and Fell (2021), we support the notion of platform owners adopting a quasi-governmental role within their ecosystem. We add to this stream of literature by demonstrating that both innovation and transaction platforms jointly support this coercion power.…”

“…Ultimately, the dependence in terms of decisions around governmental DCT apps grants Google and Apple increased influence in public health sectors of sovereign states (Sharon 2020). Hence, when health authorities accept the public-private partnership, the platform owners' quasi-governmental role becomes essentially legitimized (Leclercq-Vandelannoitte and Aroles 2020; Marhold and Fell 2021). Further, decentralized approaches such as the GAEN protocol are intended to address the risk of potential state surveillance (Fraunhofer AISEC 2020).…”

“…While the standardization of DCT (e.g., Marhold and Fell 2021) and especially the involvement of Google and Apple naturally attracted the attention of researchers from various disciplines (e.g., Michael and Abbas 2020;Sharon 2020;Storeng and de Bengy 2021;Lanzing et al 2022), an extensive investigation based on both the standards and the platform literature addressing the above-mentioned questions and issues remains absent. However, we argue that because DCT apps rely on both software platforms and IT standards to enable their effective development and the exploitation of network effects, the case provides an avenue to advance the recent research stream that combines the aforementioned bodies of literature (e.g., Hein et al 2019;Tessmann and Elbert 2022).…”

R&D management at a time of crisis: what are we learning from the initial response to the COVID‐19 pandemic?

“…We found evidence that players in all categories were willing to share what they knew and owned to support the development of innovation to counteract the pandemic, even in conjunction with direct competitors (e.g. Marhold, 2021). One of the practices adopted by those owning IP has been to offer it freely to those who could employ it for fighting the pandemic: Antonelli et al (2021) studied the Open COVID Pledge, subscribed by companies who pledged '[..] to make [their] intellectual property available free of charge for use in ending the COVID-19 pandemic and minimizing the impact of the disease' 1 .…”

“…Bergami et al, 2021;von Behr et al, 2021) and small (Battaglia et al, 2021;Clauss et al, 2021) companies. Even very large 'arch-competitor' companies such as Apple and Google joined forces in the name of a societal value logic: developing the standard for bluetooth technology that enabled contact tracing across the world (Marhold, 2021). Furthermore, companies participated in different initiatives to share their knowledge and pledged to license IP for free to those who were going to use them to fight the pandemic (Antonelli et al, 2021).…”