Platform selection for complex systems: Building automation systems

Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 415-438

  van de Kaa, Geerten ^a   de Vries, Henk Jan ^a,b   Rezaei, Jafar ^a  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^b ERASMUS UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Automation system; Building; Complex system; Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP); Multi criteria decision making (MCDM); Platform

Indexed keywords

ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS; BUILDINGS; COMPLEX NETWORKS; DECISION MAKING; ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING; INTELLIGENT BUILDINGS; LARGE SCALE SYSTEMS; SYSTEMS ENGINEERING; TELECOMMUNICATION INDUSTRY;

AUTOMATION SYSTEMS; BUILDING AUTOMATION SYSTEMS; FUZZY - MULTI CRITERIA DECISION MAKING; FUZZY ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY; MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION MAKING; PLATFORM; TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY;

AUTOMATION;

EID: 84925494130     PISSN: 10043756     EISSN: 18619576     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11518-014-5258-5     Document Type: Article

References (106)

1. Arthur, W.B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. The Economic Journal, 99(394): 116–131.
2. Axelrod, R., Mitchell, W., Thomas, R.E., Bennett, D.S., & Bruderer, E. (1995). Coalition formation in standard-Setting alliances. Management Science, 41(9): 1493–1508.
3. Badri, M.A. (2001). A combined AHP-GP model for quality control systems. International Journal of Production Economics, 72(1): 27–40.
4. Baker, S., Green, H., Einhorn, B., and Moon, I. (2004). Big Bang! Business Week, 3888: 68–76.
5. Baldwin, C.Y., & Clark, K.B. (1997). Managing in an age of modularity. Harvard Business Review, september: 84–93.
6. Belton, V., & Stewart, T.J. (2003). Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: an Integrated Approach. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA.
7. Besen, S.M., & Farrell, J. (1994). Choosing how to compete: strategies and tactics in standardization. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(2): 117–131.
8. Blind, K. (2004). The Economics of Standards, Theory, Evidence, Policy. Edwar Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
9. Boudreau, K.J. (2012). Let a thousand flowers bloom? An early look at large numbers of software app developers and patterns of innovation. Organization Science, 23(5): 1409–1427.
10. Bozdağ, C.E., Kahraman, C., & Ruan, D. (2003). Fuzzy group decision making for selection among computer integrated manufacturing systems. Computers in Industry, 51(1): 13–29.
11. Buckley, J.J. (1985). Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 17(3): 233–247.
12. Çakır, O. (2008). On the order of the preference intensities in fuzzy AHP. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 54(4): 993–1005.
13. Chan, F.T., Kumar, N., Tiwari, M.K., Lau, H.C.W., & Choy, K.L. (2008). Global supplier selection: a fuzzy-AHP approach. International Journal of Production Research, 46(14): 3825–3857.
14. Chang, D.Y. (1996). Application of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 95(3): 649–655.
15. Clark, K.B. (1985). The interaction of design hierarchies and market concepts in technological evolution. Research Policy, 14(5): 235–251.
16. Cusumano, M.A. (2011). Technology strategy and management: platform wars come to social media. Communications of the ACM, 54(4): 31–33.
17. Dağdeviren, M., & Yüksel, İ. (2008). Developing a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP) model for behavior-based safety management. Information Sciences, 178(6): 1717–1733.
18. David, P.A. (1985). Clio and the economics of QWERTY. American Economic Review, 75(2): 332–337.
19. David, P.A., & Greenstein, S. (1990). The economics of compatibility standards: an introduction to recent research. Economics of Innovation & New Technologies, 1(1,2): 3–41.
20. De Vries, H.J. (1999). Standardization, a business approach to the role of national standardization organizations. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston / Dordrecht / London.
21. De Vries, H.J., & Hendrikse, G.W.J. (2001). The dutch banking chipcard game — understanding a battle between two standards. International Studies of Management and Organization, 31(1): 106–125.
22. Dranove, D., & Gandal, N. (2003). The DVD versus DIVX standard war: empirical evidence of network effects and preannouncement effects. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 12(3): 363–386.
23. Duysters, G.M., & Hagedoorn, J. (1998). Technological convergence in the IT industry: the role of strategic technology alliances and technological competencies. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 5(3): 355–368.
24. Farrell, J., & Saloner, G. (1985). Standardization, compatibility, and innovation. The Rand Journal of Economics, 16(1): 70–83.
25. Farrell, J., & Saloner, G. (1986). Installed base and compatibility: innovation, product preannouncements, and predation. American Economic Review, 76(5): 940–955.
26. Farrell, J., & Saloner, G. (1988). Coordination through committees and markets. The Rand Journal of Economics, 19(2): 235–252.
27. Frenzel, L.E. (2009). A dizzying mix of standards. Electronic Design, December: 7.
28. Gallagher, S.R. (2007). The complementary role of dominant designs and industry standards. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 54(2): 371–388.
29. Gallagher, S.R., & Park, S.H. (2002). Innovation and competition in standard-based industries: a historical analysis of the U.S. home video game market. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 49(1): 67–82.
30. Garud, R., Jain, S., & Kumaraswamy, A. (2002). Institutional entrepreneurship in the sponsorship of common technological standards: the case of Sun Microsystems and Java. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1): 196–214.
31. Garud, R., & Kumaraswamy, A. (1993). Changing competitive dynamics in network industries: an exploration of Sun microsystems’ open systems strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 14(5): 351–369.
32. Gawer, A., (2009a). Platform dynamics and strategies: from products to services. In A. Gawer (Ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation, pp. 45–76. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar
33. Gawer, A. (2009b). Platforms, markets and innovation. Edwar Elgar Publishing, Celtenham, UK.
34. Gawer, A. (2014). Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: toward an integrative framework. Research Policy, 43(7): 1239–1249
35. Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. (2002). Platform leadership: how Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco drive industry innovation. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
36. Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M.A. (2013). Industry platforms and ecosystem innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(3): 417–433.
37. Gomes-Casseras, B. (1994). Group versus group: how alliance networks compete. Harvard Business Review, 72(4): 62–74.
38. Halman, J.I.M., Hofer, A.P., & Van Vuuren, W. (2003). Platform-driven development of product families: linking theory with practice. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 20 149–162.
39. Hornby, A.S. (2000). Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary of current english. Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York.
40. Katz, M.L., & Shapiro, C. (1985). Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. American Economic Review, 75(3): 424–440.
41. Keil, T. (2002). De-facto standardization through alliances — lessons from Bluetooth. Telecommunications Policy, 26(3–4): 205–213.
42. Kotha, S. (1995). Mass customization: implementing the emerging paradigm for competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 16(S1): 21–42.
43. Krishnan, V., & Gupta, S. (2001). Appropriateness and impact of platform-based product development. Management Science, 47(1): 52–68.
44. Kuo, R.J., Chi, S.C., & Kao, S.S. (2002). A decision support system for selecting convenience store location through integration of fuzzy AHP and artificial neural network. Computers in Industry, 47(2): 199–214.
45. Langlois, R.N., & Robertson, P.L. (1992). Networks and innovation in a modular system: lessons from the microcomputer and stereo component industries. Research Policy, 21(4): 297–313.
46. Lee, J., Lee, J., & Lee, H. (2003). Exploration and exploitation in the presence of network externalities. Management Science, 49(4): 553–570.
47. Lee, J., O’Neal, D.E., Pruett, M.W., & Thoams, H. (1995). Planning for dominance: a strategic perspective on the emergence of a dominant design. R&D Management, 25(1): 3–15.
48. Lehr, W. (1992). Standardization: understanding the process. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43(8): 550–555.
49. Leiponen, A.E. (2008). Competing through cooperation: the organization of standard setting in wireless telecommunications. Management Science, 54(11): 1904–1919.
50. Lieberman, M.B., & Montgomery, D.B. (1988). First Mover advantages. Strategic Management Journal, 9 (Special Issue: Strategy Content Research): 41–58.
51. Lieberman, M.B., & Montgomery, D.B. (1998). First-Mover (Dis)Advantages: Retrospective and link with the resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 19(12): 1111–1125.
52. Lint, O., & Pennings, E. (2003). The recently chosen digital video standard: playing the game within the game. Technovation, 23(4): 297–306.
53. Meyer, M.H., & Utterback, J.M. (1993). The product family and the dynamics of core capability. Sloan Management Review, 34(3): 29–47.
54. Mikhailov, L. (2003). Deriving priorities from fuzzy pairwise comparison judgements. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 134(3): 365–385.
55. Mitchell, W., & Singh, K. (1996). Survival of businesses using collaborative relationships to commercialize complex goods. Strategic Management Journal, 17(3): 169–195.
56. Mitra, K. (2010). Validating AHP, fuzzy alpha cut and fuzzy preference programming method using clustering technique. Opsearch, 47(1): 5–15.
57. Pelkmans, J. (2001). The GSM standard: explaining a success story. Journal of European Public Policy, 8(3): 432–354.
58. Rezaei, J., & Ortt, R. (2013). Multi-criteria supplier segmentation using a fuzzy preference relations based AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 225(1): 75–84.
59. Rezaei, J., Ortt, R., & Scholten, V. (2013). An improved fuzzy preference programming to evaluate entrepreneurship orientation. Applied Soft Computing, 13(5): 2749–2758.
60. Robertson, D., & Ulrich, K. (1998). Planning for product platforms. Sloan Management Review, 39(4): 19–31.
61. Rochet, J.C., & Tirole, J. (2003). Platform competition in two-sided markets. Journal of the European Economic Association, 1(4): 990–1029.
62. Rose, B. (2001). Home networks: a standards perspective. IEEE Communications Magazine, 39(12): 78–85.
63. Saaty, T.L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. McGraw-Hill, New York.
64. Saaty, T.L. (1990). How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1): 9–26.
65. Saaty, T.L. (2005). Making and validating complex decisions with the AHP/ANP. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, 14(1): 1–36.
66. Saaty, T.L., & Khouja, M.W. (1976). A measure of world influence. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 2(1): 31–48.
67. Samvedi, A., Jain, V., & Chan, F.T. (2013). Quantifying risks in a supply chain through integration of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS. International Journal of Production Research, 51(8): 2433–2442.
68. Sawhney, M.S. (1998). Leveraged high-variety strategies: from portfolio thinking to platform thinking. Academy of Marketing Science Journal, 26(1): 54–61.
69. Schilling, M.A. (1998). Technological lockout: an integrative model of the economic and strategic factors driving technology success and failure. Academy of Management Review, 23(2): 267–284.
70. Schilling, M.A. (1999). Winning the standards race: building installed base and the availability of complementary goods. European Management Journal, 17(3): 265–274.
71. Schilling, M.A. (2000). Toward a general modular systems thoery and its application to interfirm product modularity. Academy of Management Review, 25(2): 312–334.
72. Schilling, M.A. (2002). Technology success and failure in winner-take-all markets: the impact of learning orientation, timing, and network externalities. Academy of Management Journal, 45(2): 387–398.
73. Schilling, M.A. (2013). Strategic Management of Technological Innovation. McGraw-Hill, New York, USA.
74. Schmidt, S.K., & Werle, R. (1998). Co-ordinating technology. studies in the international standardization of telecommunications. MIT Press, Cambridge.
75. Schumpeter, J.A. (1934). The theory of economic development: an inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
76. Shapiro, C., & Varian, H.R. (1999a). The art of standards wars. California Management Review, 41(2): 8–32.
77. Shapiro, C., & Varian, H.R. (1999b). Information rules, a strategic guide to the network economy. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.
78. Shim, J.P. (1989). Bibliographical research on the analytic hierarchy process. Socio-economic Planning Sciences, 23(3): 161–167.
79. Simon, H.A. (1962). The architecture of complexity. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 106(6): 467–482.
80. Singh, S.P., & Singh, V.K. (2011). Three-level AHP-based heuristic approach for a multi-objective facility layout problem. International Journal of Production Research, 49(4): 1105–1125.
81. Soh, P.-H., & Roberts, E.B. (2003). Networks of innovators: a longitudinal perspective. Research Policy, 32(9): 1569–1588.
82. Steward, T.J. (1992). A critical survey on the status of multiple criteria decision-making theory and practice. Omega, 20(5–6): 569–586.
83. Suarez, F.F. (2004). Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework. Research Policy, 33(2): 271–286.
84. Suarez, F.F., & Utterback, J.M. (1995). Dominant designs and the survival of firms. Strategic Management Journal, 16(6): 415–430.
85. Teece, D.J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing, and public policy. Research Policy, 15(6): 285–305.
86. Tilson, D., Lyytinen, K., & Sørensen, C. (2010). Digital infrastructures: the missing IS research agenda. Information Systems Research, 21(5): 748–759.
87. Tiwana, A., Konsynsky, B., & Bush, A.A. (2010). Platform evolution: coevolution of platform architecture, governance, and environmental dynamics. Information Systems Research, 21(4): 675–687.
88. Vaidya, O.S., & Kumar, S. (2006). Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 169(1): 1–29.
89. Van de Kaa, G., & De Vries, H.J. (2014). Factors for winning format battles: A comparative case study. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, forthcoming
90. Van de Kaa, G., Den Hartog, F., & De Vries, H.J. (2009). Mapping standards for home networking. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 31 1175–1181.
91. Van de Kaa, G., Greeven, M., & van Puijenbroek, G. (2013). Standards battles in China: opening up the black-box of the Chinese government. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 25(5): 567–581.
92. Van de Kaa, G., Rezaei, J., Kamp, L., & De Winter, A. (2014). Photovoltaic technology selection: a fuzzy MCDM approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 32 662–670.
93. Van de Kaa, G., Van den Ende, J., De Vries, H.J., & Van Heck, E. (2011). Factors for winning interface format battles: a review and synthesis of the literature. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 78(8): 1397–1411.
94. Van de Kaa, G., Van Heck, H.W.G.M., De Vries, H.J., Van den Ende, J.C.M., & Rezaei, J. (2014). Supporting decision-making in technology standards battles based on a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 61(2): 336–348.
95. van Laarhoven, P.J.M., & Pedrycz, W. (1983). A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory. Fuzzy Set Syst., 11(2): 229–241.
96. Varajão, J., & Cruz-Cunha, M.M. (2013). Using AHP and the IPMA competence baseline in the project managers selection process. International Journal of Production Research, 51(11): 1–13.
97. Vargas, L.G. (1990). An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1): 2–6.
98. Wacks, K. (2002). Home systems standards: achievements and challenges. IEEE Communications Magazine, 40(4): 152–159.
99. Wang, Y.M., & Chin, K.S. (2011). Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: a logarithmic fuzzy preference programming methodology. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 52(4): 541–553.
100. Wang, Y.M., Luo, Y., & Hua, Z. (2008). On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 186(2): 735–747.
101. Webster, E.o.M. (2000). Webster’s third new international dictionary Merriam-Webster, Inc., Springfield, Massachusetts.
102. Whitaker, R. (2007). Validation examples of the analytic hierarchy process and analytic network process. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 46(7): 840–859.
103. Willard, G.E., & Cooper, A.C. (1985). Survivors of industry shake-outs: the case of the U.S. color television set industry. Strategic Management Journal, 6(4): 299–318.
104. Yoo, Y., Boland, R.J., Lyytinen, K., & Majchrzak, A. (2012). Organizing for innovation in the digitized world. Organization Science, 23(5): 1398–1408.
105. Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O., & Lyytinen, K. (2010). The new organizing logic of digital innovation: an agenda for information systems research. Information Systems Research, 21(4): 724–735.
106. Zadeh, L.A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3): 338–353.