Visualization of Interfirm Relations in a Converging Mobile Ecosystem

Abstract

The mobile ecosystem is characterized by a large and complex network of companies interacting with each other, directly and indirectly, to provide a broad array of mobile products and services to end-customers. With the convergence of enabling technologies, the complexity of the mobile ecosystem is increasing multifold as new actors are emerging, new relations are formed, and the traditional distribution of power is shifted. Drawing on theories of network science, complex systems, interfirm relationships, and the creative art and science of visualization, this paper identifies key players and maps the complex structure and dynamics of nearly 7000 global companies and over 18,000 relationships in the converging mobile ecosystem. Our approach enables decision makers to (i) visually explore the complexity of interfirm relations in the mobile ecosystem, (ii) discover the relation between current and emerging segments, (iii) determine the impact of convergence on ecosystem structure, (iv) understand a firm's competitive position, and (v) identify interfirm relation patterns that may influence their choice of innovation strategy or business models.

Orchestrating Innovation Ecosystems: A Qualitative Analysis of Ecosystem Positioning Strategies

“…The innovation ecosystem approach has emphasized fostering the creation of growth, interaction, and innovative startups around so-called knowledge hubs (Engel & Del-Palacio, 2011). Thus, a defining characteristic of innovation ecosystems is their ability to adapt and evolve (Basole, 2009). …”

Who Inhabits a Business Ecosystem? The Technospecies as a Unifying Concept

“…Michael L. Weber and Michael J. Hine teract (Hurley, 2009) and create value (Basole, 2009). It is thus important to understand and chart these interrelationships as each firm engages in an ongoing exchange with its environment, including other ecosystem inhabitants (Marin et al, 2008).…”

“…In order to interact and engage effectively, a firm must be able to identify the members of the ecosystem(s) with which it interacts. Where a firm is situated in the ecosystem and the connections within that ecosystem are of primary concern to each business ecosystem inhabitant (Chesbrough, 2006;Moller & Rajala, 2007;Basole, 2009) and hence are of practical relevance to the managers of those firms.…”

“…However, ecosystem boundaries often transcend a single industry (Makinen & Dedehayir, 2012). Examples of boundary spanning ecosystems are: the mobile phone ecosystem (Basole, 2009), the Internet ecosystem (Zacharakis et al, 2003, Nehf, 2007, Javalgi et al 2005, the microprocessor ecosystem , the biopharmaceutical ecosystem (Garnsey & Leong, 2008), Amazon's web service ecosystem (Isckia, 2009), Google's ecosystem (Iyer & Davenport, 2008), Cisco's business ecosystem (Li, 2009), and the rental car ecosystem (Pierce, 2009). Taking the mobile phone ecosystem as an example, current superphone products by Samsung, Sony, Apple, etc.…”

“…Although research has made important contributions toward the understanding of business connections and structures (Hakansson & Ford, 2002;Iansiti & Levien, 2004a, 2004bKambil, 2008;Henneberg et al, 2010), a holistic understanding of business ecosystems is absent (Corallo & Protopapa, 2007;Li, 2009;Satsangi, 2012). Business ecosystems have been conceptualized as platforms (Muegge, 2013), multi-sided platforms (Iyer & Davenport, 2008;Bailetti & Bot, 2013), communities (Carbone, 2009;Muegge, 2011), networks (Iansiti & Levien, 2004b;Corallo & Protopapa, 2007;Basole, 2009), value blueprints (Adner, 2012), and institutions and resource flows (Hearn & Pace, 2006;Muegge, 2011Muegge, , 2013; these models are often viewed separately and studied independently even though a holistic view is required. Firms, government and regulatory agencies, non-governmental organizations, and open source platforms, among others, all inCurrently, many terms are used to describe business ecosystems and their inhabitants.…”