OM Forum—Innovative Online Platforms: Research Opportunities

Chen, Ying‐Ju; Dai, Tinglong; Korpeoglu, C. Gizem; Körpeoğlu, Ersin; Şahin, Özge; Tang, Christopher S.; Xiao, Shihong

doi:10.1287/msom.2018.0757

Cited by 168 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been estimated that 30% of global economic activity could be mediated by digital platforms by 2025 (Schenker 2019), leading to the emergence of platform businesses that “provide a governance structure and a set of standards and protocols that facilitate interactions at scale so that network effects can be unleashed” (Hemans 2020). Several platform classifications have been put forward, including those based on the activities of the platform, such as resource sharing, matching, crowdsourcing, reviews, crowdfunding, development, and communications (Chen et al 2020; Field et al 2018; Wirtz et al 2019), or those based on purposes, such as aggregation platforms (e.g., Airbnb), social platforms (e.g., Twitter), mobilization platforms (e.g., Linux), and learning platforms (e.g., ccMixter) (Hemans 2020). Here, we discuss two key platform types—exchange-based and market-based (Eckhardt et al 2019)—to generate potential research questions.…”

Section: Service Research Prioritiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Service Research Priorities: Designing Sustainable Service Ecosystems

Fotheringham

Subramony

et al. 2021

Journal of Service Research

108

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article utilizes input from service scholars, practitioners, reviews of published literature, and influential policy documents to identify service research priorities that push the boundaries of extant research. In a companion piece, we focused on four service research priorities related to managing and delivering service in turbulent times. Further, we identified a set of stakeholder-wants from the literature and included research questions that tie key stakeholder-wants to each of the three priorities in this article and the four priorities in the companion article. Here, we highlight the critical importance of scholarship and practice related to the design of sustainable service ecosystems and discuss three key service research priorities: large-scale and complex service ecosystems for transformative impact (SRP5), platform ecosystems and marketplaces (SRP6), and services for disadvantaged consumers and communities (SRP7). We call for an engaged service scholarship that considers the interrelationships among consumers, organizations, employees, platforms, and societal institutions and pursues transformative goals.

show abstract

Section: Service Research Prioritiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Service Research Priorities: Designing Sustainable Service Ecosystems

Fotheringham

Subramony

et al. 2021

Journal of Service Research

108

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To induce more backer contributions, platforms strive to improve information disclosure through various website policies and designs (Chen et al. 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building the Momentum: Information Disclosure and Herding in Online Crowdfunding

Xiao

Che

2021

Production and Operations Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In online crowdfunding markets, backers face high uncertainty about the quality of a campaign. To mitigate such uncertainty, crowdfunding platforms often allow campaign creators to post communicative messages—that is, campaign updates and creator comments—to dynamically disclose further information about the campaigns. In addition, previous funding transactions of ongoing campaigns are made publicly available, giving rise to herding among backers. In this research, we aim to understand how communicative messages and herding interactively shape the behavior of backers contributing to crowdfunding campaigns. Our results show that the frequency of communicative messages has a positive effect on backer contributions; however, it attenuates successors' herding momentum toward predecessors, perhaps because the information disclosed in those messages lowers the informational value of previous funding transactions. To investigate the role of message contents, we extract topics addressed in update and comment messages using a Latent Dirichlet allocation model. The results reveal that distinct messages have different impacts on backers' contribution and herding behavior, and such discrepancies are found to be topic specific. This study not only contributes to operations management literature on crowdfunding but also offers implications for campaign creators and platform managers.

show abstract

“…Most broadly, our work speaks directly to recent calls in the OM literature for an improved understanding of mechanism design with an eye toward i) mitigating information asymmetry, and ii) improving matching efficiency (Chen et al 2020, Hu 2020. Our work provides a novel consideration of the value of an ex-post mechanism for fostering positive transaction outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…Moreover, the cost born by the platform to operate this service is relatively small; Modria.com, a major provider of online dispute resolution systems to eCommerce sites, reportedly resolves 90% of all disputes filed without human involvement. 1 Chen et al (2020) highlight a need to better understand how platform intermediaries can effectively reduce search frictions and uncertainty for buyers and service providers. Similarly, Hu (2020) points to open research questions related to the understanding of platform mechanisms for managing information asymmetry between buyers and sellers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When Does Dispute Resolution Substitute for a Reputation System? Empirical Evidence from a Service Procurement Platform

Burtch

Hong

Kumar³

2021

Production and Operations Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

W e consider the role of online dispute resolution (ex-post guarantees of supplier quality) when introduced in the presence of an online reputation system (an ex-ante informational mechanism), in the context of online service procurement platforms. We argue that dispute resolution will reduce buyers' reliance on reputation systems in their hiring decisions to varying extents, depending on the nature of the work required. We assess these predictions using proprietary data capturing projects, service providers, bids, and hiring decisions around a natural experiment: the introduction of a new dispute resolution system at a major online service procurement platform. We provide evidence consistent with our expectations; introducing a dispute resolution system led buyers to reduce their consideration of service provider rating volumes in hiring decisions, particularly for projects where service provider performance could be evaluated objectively by a third party (e.g., data entry, as opposed to more subjective, creative work, like logo design). We also report a variety of additional analyses, which demonstrate the robustness of our findings to alternative measures, dynamics of the effects depending on buyers' experience with the dispute process, and the impact of the dispute service on buyers' propensity to enter ratings of service providers. These findings provide empirical evidence that dispute resolution can be an effective, alternative means of mitigating supplier quality risks in online service procurement markets in place of ex-ante signals of provider quality. However, this is particularly true in settings where the output of work contracted can be objectively evaluated by a third party.

show abstract

OM Forum—Innovative Online Platforms: Research Opportunities

Cited by 168 publications

References 70 publications

Service Research Priorities: Designing Sustainable Service Ecosystems

Service Research Priorities: Designing Sustainable Service Ecosystems

Building the Momentum: Information Disclosure and Herding in Online Crowdfunding

When Does Dispute Resolution Substitute for a Reputation System? Empirical Evidence from a Service Procurement Platform

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About