Tobias Goldbach

Control Mechanisms on Software Platforms

Software platforms, like the Apple App Store or Google Play, depend heavily on external app-developers who regularly develop and update apps for the platform. As part of platform governance, control theory can be invoked in order to describe and analyze the coordination between a platform vendor and app-developers. In this article we describe and categorize existing control mechanisms on software platforms and point out that Apple and Google largely exercise informal control (i.e., self- and clan control) and less formal control (i.e., input, process and output control). Additionally, in a lab experiment, we found evidence that self-control has more positive effects on the quality of developed apps and on developers’ loyalty to the platform compared to formal control. The article demonstrates and suggests that platform vendors should increasingly focus on implementing informal control mechanisms.

Informal Control and Intrinsic Motivation on Software Platforms

Software ecosystem platforms such as Google’s Play Store or Apple’s App Store rely heavily on highly motivated third-party developers who are eager to invest their time and effort into developing and updating apps for platforms. Platform owners are challenged to find a balance between developers’ need for autonomy and a platform’s integrity. Despite the widely acknowledged importance of informal control modes in such contexts, limited empirical work exists on how and why clan and self-control affect developers’ behaviors and performance outcomes on software platforms. Drawing on control theory and motivation literature, we conducted an online survey with 230 Android developers to examine how developers’ intrinsic motivation mediates the effects of informal control modes on developer performance. Our findings show that while intrinsic motivation plays an important role in mediating both informal control modes’ effects, clan control exhibits predominantly stronger downstream effects than self-control. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Social Capital and Clan Control on Software Platforms

Although platform operators such as Google or Apple are facing a trade-off between retaining and relinquishing control to manage a myriad of third-party developers and development projects, little is known about how clan control—a particularly relevant informal control mode in decentralized multi-project software development—can be facilitated on software platforms and how it affects developer performance. Drawing on control literature and social capital theory, we conducted an online survey with 218 app developers of Google’s Android platform in which we examined how social capital facilitates the exercise of clan control to enhance crucial developer performance outcomes. Our study not only shows that all three dimensions of social capital (i.e., structural, cognitive and relational social capital) are critical levers for exercising clan control on software platforms, but also that clan control leads to higher development performance and app ratings on the platform. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Formal vs. Self-Control on Software Platforms

Although control modes have been extensively studied in IS research, minimal research attention has been directed towards understanding how different control mechanisms operate in software-based platforms. Drawing on self-determination theory and IS control literature, we conducted a laboratory experiment with 138 participants in which we examined how well third-party developers contribute to a mobile app development platform in terms of output quality and whether they are willing to stick with this platform under formal (i.e., output and process) and informal (i.e., self-) control. We demonstrate that self-control has consistently stronger effects on application quality and platform stickiness than formal control modes. We also shed light on perceived autonomy as explanatory mechanism through which the control modes’ effects are mediated. Taken together, our study highlights the theoretically important finding that self-determination among third-party developers is a stronger driving force than typical hierarchical control mechanisms. Implications for research and practice are discussed.