Digital Infrastructure: A Service-dominant Logic Perspective

Owing to the rapid and unrelenting digitalization of business ecosystems, digital infra-structure—as a new information technology artifact to conceptualize and realize inter-connected information system collectives—has drawn considerable attention in infor-mation systems research. Building on the extant body of knowledge, this study synthe-sizes and integrates existing discourses into a theoretical framework to contribute to the conceptualization of and to prospective theorizations on digital infrastructure. This the-oretical framework follows distinctive assumptions of service-dominant logic to business ecosystems and accounts for socio-technical complexity of digital infrastructure to even-tually derive six theoretical foundations of digital infrastructure. While three foundations (i.e., structural integrity, structural elasticity, and ambidexterity) reflect fundamental bases of digital infrastructure, the other three foundations (i.e., connectivity, generativ-ity, and modularity) reflect underlying mechanisms that cause and shape digital infra-structure’s fundamental bases. These insights represent an overall study’s first step whose next steps and the expected outcomes are also discussed.

[1]  Kent D. Miller,et al.  Organizational learning with forgetting: Reconsidering the exploration–exploitation tradeoff , 2016 .

[2]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Digital product innovation within four classes of innovation networks , 2016, Inf. Syst. J..

[3]  Peter Weill,et al.  Revisiting complexity in the digital age , 2015, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[4]  Robert F. Lusch,et al.  Service Innovation: A Service-Dominant Logic Perspective , 2015, MIS Q..

[5]  Stephen L. Vargo,et al.  Service Innovation in the Digital Age: Key Contributions and Future Directions , 2015, MIS Q..

[6]  Dovev Lavie,et al.  Ambidexterity Under Scrutiny: Exploration and Exploitation Via Internal Organization, Alliances, and Acquisitions , 2014 .

[7]  D. Dalli,et al.  Theory of value co-creation: a systematic literature review , 2014 .

[8]  M. Akaka,et al.  Technology as an operant resource in service (eco)systems , 2014, Inf. Syst. E Bus. Manag..

[9]  A. Tiwana Platform Ecosystems: Aligning Architecture, Governance, and Strategy , 2013 .

[10]  Bendik Bygstad,et al.  The Generative Mechanisms of Digital Infrastructure Evolution , 2013, MIS Q..

[11]  A. Bharadwaj,et al.  Visions and Voices on Emerging Challenges in Digital Business Strategy , 2013, MIS Q..

[12]  A. Bharadwaj,et al.  Digital Business Strategy: Toward a Next Generation of Insights , 2013, MIS Q..

[13]  Stephen L. Vargo,et al.  Value cocreation and service systems (Re)formation: A service ecosystems view , 2012 .

[14]  Varun Grover,et al.  Cocreating IT Value: New Capabilities and Metrics for Multifirm Environments , 2012, MIS Q..

[15]  Tina Blegind Jensen,et al.  Building nation-wide information infrastructures in healthcare through modular implementation strategies , 2011, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[16]  Peng Huang,et al.  Co-Creation of Value in a Platform Ecosystem: The Case of Enterprise Software , 2011, MIS Q..

[17]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Research Commentary - Digital Infrastructures: The Missing IS Research Agenda , 2010, Inf. Syst. Res..

[18]  Paul A. Pavlou,et al.  Research Commentary - Seeking the Configurations of Digital Ecodynamics: It Takes Three to Tango , 2010, Inf. Syst. Res..

[19]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  Computing in Everyday Life: A Call for Research on Experiential Computing , 2010, MIS Q..

[20]  Moshe Farjoun Beyond Dualism: Stability and Change As a Duality , 2010 .

[21]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Design theory for dynamic complexity in information infrastructures: the case of building internet , 2010, J. Inf. Technol..

[22]  Paul A. Pavlou,et al.  The 'Third Hand': IT-Enabled Competitive Advantage in Turbulence Through Improvisational Capabilities , 2009, Inf. Syst. Res..

[23]  Stephen L. Vargo,et al.  Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution , 2008 .

[24]  Kevin J. Boudreau,et al.  Does Opening a Platform Stimulate Innovation? The Effect on Systemic and Modular Innovations , 2007 .

[25]  O. Hanseth,et al.  Developing Health Information Systems in Developing Countries: The Flexible Standards Strategy , 2007, MIS Q..

[26]  M. Tushman,et al.  Ambidexterity as a Dynamic Capability: Resolving the Innovator's Dilemma , 2007 .

[27]  Bill McKelvey,et al.  Using Complexity Science to effect a paradigm shift in Information Systems for the 21st century , 2006, J. Inf. Technol..

[28]  Hind Benbya,et al.  Using coevolutionary and complexity theories to improve IS alignment: a multi-level approach , 2006, J. Inf. Technol..

[29]  Geoff Walsham,et al.  Doing interpretive research , 2006, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[30]  Omar El Sawy,et al.  Absorptive Capacity Configurations in Supply Chains: Gearing for Partner-Enabled Market Knowledge Creation , 2005, MIS Q..

[31]  Stephen L. Vargo,et al.  Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing , 2004 .

[32]  Varun Grover,et al.  Shaping Agility through Digital Options: Reconceptualizing the Role of Information Technology in Contemporary Firms , 2003, MIS Q..

[33]  Richard T. Watson,et al.  Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review , 2002, MIS Q..

[34]  Amany R. Elbanna,et al.  From Control to Drift: The Dynamics of Corporate Information Infrastructures , 2001 .

[35]  Robert W. Zmud,et al.  Research Commentary: The Organizing Logic for an Enterprise's IT Activities in the Digital Era - A Prognosis of Practice and a Call for Research , 2000, Inf. Syst. Res..

[36]  P. Weill,et al.  The Implications of Information Technology Infrastructure for Business Process Redesign , 1999, MIS Q..

[37]  Gianni Lorenzoni,et al.  The leveraging of interfirm relationships as a distinctive organizational capability: a longitudinal study , 1999 .

[38]  O. Hanseth,et al.  Developing Information Infrastructure: The Tension Between Standardization and Flexibility , 1996 .

[39]  Karen Ruhleder,et al.  Steps Toward an Ecology of Infrastructure: Design and Access for Large Information Spaces , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[40]  R. Larsson Case Survey Methodology: Quantitative Analysis of Patterns Across Case Studies , 1993 .

[41]  Allen S. Lee Integrating Positivist and Interpretive Approaches to Organizational Research , 1991 .

[42]  K. Weick Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems , 1976, Gestión y Estrategia.

[43]  Stephen L. Vargo,et al.  Institutions and axioms: an extension and update of service-dominant logic , 2016 .

[44]  Ann Majchrzak,et al.  Towards an Information Systems Perspective and Research Agenda on Crowdsourcing for Innovation , 2013, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[45]  Eric Monteiro,et al.  Configurable Politics and Asymmetric Integration: Health e-Infrastructures in India , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[46]  Knut H. Rolland,et al.  Ecologies of e-Infrastructures , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[47]  David B. Yoffie,et al.  Competing in the Age of Digital Convergence , 1997 .