Digital ecosystem models in business: challenges of management theory and practice

Purpose: this article is aimed at identifying the economic effects arising out of the integration of companies within the framework of the digital business ecosystem.
Methods: the article is based on the concept of the evolution of organizational systems in the context of the ecosystem approach, as well as on the provisions of the economic theory of network effects. The main methods of scientific research are represented by the structural- logical, bibliographic, computational-constructive and graphic method.
Results: the review of current publications related to the issue being considered showed that in the era of the Internet and digital technologies, the main factor of economic benefit is the network effect or the demand scale effect, as well as the fact that a new source of competitive advantage and market dominance pertains to the ecosystem of users. It is revealed that the strategy of unification within the framework of digital business ecosystem allows companies to provide additional value for customers and meet the utmost number of their needs. Due to the analysis presented in this research, other economic effects, as well as the risks of integration strategies with the digital business ecosystem based on the example of the market of mobile applications designed to pay for fuel in Russia have been identified.
Сonclusions and Relevance: currently, companies are increasingly adopting an ecosystem-oriented format of work when creating their business models, which allows them to scale their business at low cost and minimal investments, enter new markets, increase the customer's lifecycle and gain additional profit. Digital technologies bring the participants of business ecosystems to a new level of interaction thus leading to the reduction of barriers which prevent the synergetic effects from partner integration. The empirical analysis in the study also exposed potential risks of cooperation with the digital business ecosystem, as well as an alternative way of the organization's development strategy, which allows creating its own digital ecosystem in the future. The results have been tested in the process of improving the integration strategies of the company "Benzuber" and despite the fact that the analysis has a number of limitations, the findings might have practical implications for optimizing the development strategies of other companies.

1. Dyatlov S.A. Theoretical Approaches to Assessment Network Effects. Modern management technologies. 2017; 4(76):2–8 (In Russ.)

2. Varian H.R. Intermediate Microeconomics: A Modern Approach: Ninth International Student Edition. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. 2014. 832 р. URL: https://www.academia.edu/38113085/Intermediate_Microeconomics_A_Modern_Approach_Ninth_Edition (In Eng.)

3. Hagiu A., Yoffie D.B. Network Effects. In: The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Strategic Management / Augier M., Teece D.J. (eds). London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. P. 1104–1108. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-00772-8_552 (In Eng.)

4. Katz M., Shapiro C. Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. American Economic Review. 1985; 75(3):424–440. URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1814809 (In Eng.)

5. Shapiro С., Varian H.R. Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy. The Journal of Economic Education. 1999; 30(2):189–190. https://doi.org/10.2307/1183273 (In Eng.)

6. Balatsky E.V. Global Challenges of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Terra Economicus. 2019; 17(2):6–22. https:// doi.org/10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-2-6-22 (In Russ.)

7. Parker J., van Alstyne M., Choudhary S. Platform Revolution. How network markets change the economy and how to make them work for you. W.W. Norton & Company, 2016. 352 p. URL: https://wwnorton.com/books/Platform-Revolution (In Eng.)

8. Briscoe B., Odlyzko A., Tilly В. Metcalfe's law is wrong – communications networks increase in value as they add members-but by how much? IEEE Spectrum. 2006. 43(7):34–35. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSPEC.2006.1653003 (In Eng.)

9. Nureyev R.M., Surkhaev I.D. Digitalization of the Economy: the New Role of Social Media. Journal of Institutional Studies. 2021; 13(2):6–26. https://doi.org/10.17835/2076-6297.2021.13.2.006-026 (In Russ.)

10. Dementiev V.E. Kondratiev cycles and post-industrial economy. Economics of Contemporary Russia. 2014; 4(67):7–19 (In Russ.)

11. Shastitko A.E., Parshina E.N. Two-sided markets: the subject matter specification. Journal of Modern Competition. 2016; 10(1):5–18 (In Russ.)

12. Antipina O. Platforms as Multi-Sided Markets of the Digital Age. World Eсonomy and International Relations. 2020; 64(3):12–19. https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2020-64-3-12-19 (In Russ.)

13. Rochet J.-C., Tirole J. Platform Competition in Two-sided Markets. Journal of the European Economic Association. 2003; 1(4):990–1029. https://doi.org/10.1162/154247603322493212 (In Eng.)

14. Rochet J.-C., Tirole J. Two-sided markets: An overview. The RAND Journal of Economics. 2006. 37(3):645–667. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2006.tb00036.x (In Eng.)

15. Kozyrev A.N. Network Effects and Digital Platforms in Economics and Mathematical Models. Digital Economy. 2021; 3(15):5–33. https://doi.org/10.34706/DE-2021-03-01 (In Russ.)

16. Styrin E.M., Dmitrieva N.E., Sinyatullina L.H. Government digital platform: from concept to implementation. Public Administration Issues. 2019; (4):31–34 (In Russ.)

17. Popov E.V., Simonova V.L., Grishina V.V. A typology of digital platforms of interfirm interaction. Economic Analysis: Theory and Practice. 2020; (19):1231–1248. https://doi.org/10.24891/ea.19.7.1231 (In Eng.)

18. Moore J.F. The Death of Competition: Leadership and Strategy in the Age of Business Ecosystems. N.Y.: Harper Business, 1997. 134 р. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/31744644_The_Death_of_Competition_Leadership_and_Strategy_in_the_Age_of_Business_Ecosystems_JF_Moore (In Eng.)

19. Kleiner G.B. Socio-economic ecosystems in the light of the System Paradigm. In: System Analysis in Economics – 2018. Proceedings of the V International Scientific and Practical Conference-Biennale / ed. G.B. Kleiner, S.E. Shchepetova. Moscow: Prometheus, 2018. Р. 4–14. https://doi.org/10.33278/SAE-2018.rus.005-014 (In Russ.)

20. Popov E.V., Dolzhenko R.A., Simonova V.L. Theory of Ecosystem Analysis. Management issues. 2021; 6(73):20– 36. https://doi.org/10.22394/2304-3369-2021-6-20-36 (In Russ.)

21. D’Oliveira, J.L.P., Guedes L.G. de R., Pasqualetto A. Business Cooperation Networks: Ecosystem Interaction in Small and Medium-sized Companies. IJEEEE. 2017; 7(1):59–69. https://doi.org/10.17706/ijeeee.2017.7.1.59-69 (In Eng.)

22. Dementiev V.E., Evsukov S.G., Ustyuzhanina E.V. Hybrid Forms of Business Organization: The Interfirm Cooperation Perspective. Russian Journal of Management. 2017; 15(1):89–122. https://doi.org/10.21638/11701 (In Russ.)

23. Kartashev V.V. System of systems. Essays on general theory and methodology. Moscow: Progress-Akademiya, 1995. 415 p. (In Russ.)

24. Gawer A., Cusumano M.A. Industry Platforms and Ecosystem Innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2014; 31(3):417–433. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12105 (In Eng.)

25. Tikhonova A.D. On the Development of Innovative Ecosystems in the Modern Economy. Russian Journal of Innovation Economics. 2019; 9(4):1383–1392. https://doi.org/10.18334/vinec.9.4.41449 (In Russ.)

26. Filimonov O.I., Kasyanenko T.G., Kukhta M.V. Ecosystem as a new organizational and economic form of virtual business. Actual research. 2021; 48-2(75):31–41 (In Russ.)

27. Constantinides P., Henfridsson O., Parker G.G. Introduction-Platforms and Infrastructures in the Digital Age. Information Systems Research. 2018; 29(2):381–400. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2018.0794 (In Eng.)

28. Nambisan S., Wright M., Feldman M. The digital transformation of innovation and entrepreneurship: Progress, challenges and key themes. Research Policy. 2019; 48(8):103773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.03.018 (In Eng.)

29. Hein A., Schreieck M., Wiesche M., Böhm M., Krcmar H. The emergence of native multi-sided platforms and their influence on incumbents. Electronic Markets. 2019; (29):631–637. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-019-00350-1 (In Eng.)

30. Porokhovskiy A.A. Digitalization and productivity. USA & Canada: Economics – Politics – Culture. 2019; (8):5–24. https://doi.org/10.31857/S032120680005964-4 (In Russ.)

31. Karapaev O.V., Nureev R.M. Economy Digitalization and Labour Productivity. Journal of Economic Regulation. 2019; 10(3):76–91. https://doi.org/10.17835/2078-5429.2019.10.3.076-091 (In Russ.)

32. Metlyakhin A.I., Nikitina N.A., Yrygina L.V., Orlova E.O. Analysis of the Impact of Economy Digitalization on Labor Productivity in Russia. St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University Journal. Economics. 2020; 13(2):7–17. https://doi.org/10.18721/JE.13201 (In Eng.)

33. Karpinskaya V.A. Ecosystem as a unit of economic analysis. System Problems of the Domestic Mesoeconomics, Microeconomics, and Economics of Enterprises / ed. G.B. Kleiner. Moscow: CEMI RAS, 2018. P. 125–141. https://doi.org/10.33276/978-5-8211-0769-5-125-141 (In Russ.)

34. Jullien B., Caillaud B. Chicken & Egg: Competition Among Intermediation Service Providers. The RAND Journal of Economics. 2003; 34(2):309–328. https://doi.org/10.2307/1593720 (In Eng.)