As everyday objects get connected, brace yourself for network effects, says one economist.
Product companies compete
by building ever bigger factories to turn out ever cheaper widgets. But a very
different sort of economics comes into play when those widgets start to
communicate. It’s called the network effect—when each new user of a product makes
its value higher. Think of the telephone a century ago. The greater the number
of people who used Bell’s invention, the more valuable it became to all of
them. The telephone became a platform for countless new businesses its inventor
never imagined.
Now that more objects are
getting wired up into networks—street lights, wind turbines, automobiles—there
are opportunities for new platforms to emerge. That’s why some companies are
seeking the advice of Marshall Van Alstyne, a business professor at Boston University
who has studied the economics of e-mail spam and social networks.
These days, Van Alstyne
studies “platform economics,” or why companies such as Uber, Apple, and Amazon
are so successful—and what traditional product makers can do to emulate them. MIT Technology Review’s senior editor for business,
Antonio Regalado, visited Van Alstyne at his office in Boston.
How can I tell
if a business is a platform?
If you produce the value,
then you are a classic product company. But there are new systems where value
is being created outside the firm, and that’s a platform business. Apple gets
30 percent of the cut from other people’s innovations in its app store. I define
a platform as a published standard that lets others connect to it, together
with a governance model, which is the rules of who gets what. Business
platforms are often engaged in consummating a match. It’s a match between
riders and drivers with Uber. It’s between travelers and spare capacity of
guest rooms in Airbnb.
Is connecting
ordinary objects, like toasters, to the Internet going to trigger new
platforms?
Absolutely, yes. But you
can’t stop at the connectivity. The technologist’s mistake is often to stop
simply at the standards, the connections. You also have to add the reasons for
other people to add value. That often means allowing recombination of features
in ways that you, the original designer, just cannot anticipate. People have
combined the functions of the iPhone into hundreds of thousands of apps that
Apple never even conceived of. That is also what the Internet of things enables
if you design it in the right way.
“Most companies compete by adding new features to
products. They haven’t been in the business of thinking of how to add new
communities or network effects.”
—Marshall Van Alstyne
—Marshall Van Alstyne
What’s an
example of this happening?
Philips Lighting just
called me. They are adding a series of APIs to their LED lights so anyone can
create millions of colors, create romantic mood apps or the colors of a sunset
from one of your favorite trips. You can change the lights in your study in
conjunction with the stock market conditions. That is the Internet of things,
and they’re opening it to anyone (see “TheLight Bulb Gets a Digital Makeover”).
Do product
companies have a difficult time making this kind of transition?
They have a really
difficult time with the mental models. It’s fascinating. Most companies compete
by adding new features to products. They haven’t been in the business of
thinking of how to add new communities or network effects. One of the points I
make is that platform business models are like playing 3-D chess.
You estimate
that half the top 20 companies in the world, like Google, own platforms. Why are they winning?
There is a strong argument
that platforms beat products every time. Think of how the iPhone is absorbing
the features of the voice recorder, the calculator, and game consoles. The
reason for this is that as a stand-alone product, you’re going to have a
certain pace of innovation. But if you have opened your product so that third
parties can add value, and you have designed the rules of the ecosystem such
that they want to, your innovation curve is going to be faster.
To me this means there are
huge opportunities to take away business from existing players in all different
kinds of goods. Or for existing players to expand their markets if they are
paying attention.
What are some
of the next areas for platforms?
It’s where you see
connectivity is coming in. Cities, health care, education, electricity grids.
What are the
biggest challenges?
In many cases, the
governance models have not been established. For instance, population density
can be determined by mobile-phone distribution. A telecom company owns that
data. How do you motivate them to share it? All these sensors are capturing
data, but how do you divide the value? Those are the rules that need to be
worked out, and that’s the missing piece of most of these discussions about the
Internet of things. You have to build economic incentives around it, not simply
connectivity.
No comments:
Post a Comment