Research on the Construction of Enterprise Ecological Strategy in the Context of Platform Economy

Zhengxuan Li

doi:10.54097/rgmffh23

Authors

Zhengxuan Li Surrey International Institute, Dongbei University of Finance and Economics, 116025, China

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54097/rgmffh23

Keywords:

Platform Economy, Enterprise Ecological Strategy, Openness and Control, Dynamic Balance, Core Contradiction.

Abstract

Against the backdrop of in-depth digital economic transformation, platform economy has become a core engine reshaping the global industrial pattern and driving high-quality economic development, while the construction of ecological strategy is a key grasp for platform enterprises to break through the bottleneck of single business and build long-term competitive advantages. Taking the "dynamic balance between openness and control" in the construction of platform ecological strategy as the core entry point, this paper accurately defines the core connotation and dimensional characteristics of openness and control in platform ecology, and constructs a special "Dimension-Mechanism-Performance" analytical framework based on core theories such as two-sided market theory and ecosystem theory. By selecting typical multi-track platform enterprises at home and abroad, including Tencent Video, iQiyi, TikTok, and SHEIN, this paper deeply analyzes the typical manifestations and underlying causes of the imbalance between openness and control. Combined with the background of regulated development of platform economy and case practice experience, it proposes phased and multi-dimensional paths to achieve dynamic balance. The research conclusions not only accurately solve the core governance dilemma of platform enterprises of "chaos with excessive openness and rigidity with excessive control", but also provide operable practical guidance for platform enterprises to optimize ecological strategic layout and improve ecological governance efficiency. Meanwhile, it enriches the special research results in the interdisciplinary field of platform economy and enterprise ecological governance, and provides theoretical support for the standardized and high-quality development of platform economy.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Teece D J. Dynamic capabilities and (digital) platform lifecycles[M]//Entrepreneurship, innovation, and platforms. Emerald Publishing Limited, 2017, 37: 211 - 225.

[2] Cheng L, Xu M, Chang C Y. Exploring network content ecosystem evaluation model based on Chinese judicial discourse of digital platform [J]. International Journal of Legal Discourse, 2023, 8 (2): 199 - 224.

[3] Schmeiss J, Hoelzle K, Tech R P G. Designing governance mechanisms in platform ecosystems: Addressing the paradox of openness through blockchain technology [J]. California Management Review, 2019, 62 (1): 121 - 143.

[4] Eisenhardt K M. Building theories from case study research [J]. Academy of management review, 1989, 14 (4): 532 - 550.

[5] K Robert, Y. (2018). Case study research and applications design and methods. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data.

[6] Eisenmann T R, Parker G, Van Alstyne M. Opening platforms: How, when and why [J]. Platforms, markets and innovation, 2009, 6: 131 - 162.

[7] Tiwana A. Platform ecosystems: Aligning architecture, governance, and strategy [M]. Newnes, 2013.

[8] Jacobides M G, Cennamo C, Gawer A. Towards a theory of ecosystems [J]. Strategic management journal, 2018, 39 (8): 2255 - 2276.

[9] Costabile C. Digital platform ecosystem governance of private companies: Building blocks and a research agenda based on a multidisciplinary, systematic literature review [J]. Data and Information Management, 2024, 8 (1): 100053.

[10] Tonin A C, Behm A J B, Pinheiro A B. Unlocking value: the moderating role of stakeholder engagement in the relationship between ESG performance and market value [J]. Sustainable Finance Review, 2025: 1 - 15.

[11] Degen K, Gleiss A. Time to break up? The case for tailor-made digital platform regulation based on platform-governance standard types [J]. Electronic Markets, 2025, 35 (1): 5.

[12] Cutolo D, Kenney M. Platform-dependent entrepreneurs: Power asymmetries, risks, and strategies in the platform economy [J]. Academy of management perspectives, 2021, 35 (4): 584 - 605.

[13] Kretschmer T, Leinonen A, Schilling M, et al. Platform ecosystems as meta‐organizations: Implications for platform strategies [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2022, 43 (3): 405 - 424.

[14] Tschang F T. Platform-dependent entrepreneurs: Participants in an expanding universe of platforms? [J]. Academy of Management Perspectives, 2021, 35 (4): 696 - 701.

[15] Kano L, Tsang E W K, Yeung H W. Global value chains: A review of the multi-disciplinary literature[J]. Journal of international business studies, 2020, 51 (4): 577 - 622.

[16] Kretschmer, T., Leiponen, A., Schilling, M., & Vasudeva, G. (2022). Platform ecosystems as meta‐organizations: Implications for platform strategies. Strategic Management Journal, 43 (3), 405 - 424.

[17] Duffy B E, Meisner C. Platform governance at the margins: Social media creators’ experiences with algorithmic (in) visibility [J]. Media, Culture & Society, 2023, 45 (2): 285 - 304.

[18] Han Y, Xie L. Sustainable Governance of Digital Platform Ecosystem: A Life Cycle Perspective Through Multiple Governance Parties [J]. Sustainability, 2025, 17(8): 3628.

[19] Valdez-De-Leon O. How to develop a digital ecosystem: A practical framework [J]. Technology Innovation Management Review, 2019, 9 (8).