Introduction and Conceptual Overview
It is well established that the gross domestic product (GDP) at real prices is not the right measure of economic growth. The welfare component is measured by consumer and producer surplus, together, with the advent of digital information, more interesting and innovative measures of user-driven satisfaction can be derived (Coyle, 2017).
Digital platforms as an aggregate resource in improving the overall performance of the economy are not appraised fully in the form of a national indicator since GDP considers factor costs at market prices (considering complete markets), which is not realistic (Simon, 1991). Similarly, the component of the digital economy in the overall welfare cannot be measured with the assumption of symmetric information and complete market assumptions.
Hence, the underlying philosophy of dynamic pricing for digital platforms is a reasonable preposition since prices are driven by idiosyncratic and time-inconsistent factors. The present work is going to discuss the literature attempting to understand and analyze the possibility of providing a comprehensive conceptual digital platform pricing framework for its sustainability and growth.
Brenner (2018) explained how digital imperatives, the digital ecosystems where the customer-centric approach of providing single window solutions and products, is the need of time. This according to the author is achieved by integrating theoretical postulates from contingency theory, transaction cost theory, resource-based approach, and shared-value logic. Another important view is that often balance sheet assets need to include data and customers as they bring value and revenue to businesses in the digital age.
Chicago Gazzola, Colombo, Pezzetti, and Nicolescu (2017) described the three hypotheses about the competition and consumer skills enhancement, about his/her skills about sustainability product laws, and later improving his/her engagement with the product/service. However, the responses collected were not dynamically acknowledged and no phenomenological study was conducted to support the seven hypotheses mentioned in the article.
Theoretical Constructs
DA Pricing and Static Versus Dynamic Pricing Framework
The article demonstrates the digital platform theory where firms use digital technology infrastructure for matchmaking, that is, complex resource allocation to match demand and supply between the economic actors in the system. The article empirically explains the principles of the digital platforms pricing process as predetermined pricing where the products are usually static, versus, dynamic pricing, where the prices are decided in real-time based on demand and supply matching among the economic actors as stated above. Digital platforms provide extensive direct and indirect or crossover network effects and thus help organizations reduce their marginal costs substantially. The article uses four theoretical principles of digital platform theory namely relationship building, governing transactions, motivating innovation, and curating matches using the case study.
Hence, theoretically, the digital platform can command high prices (both through licensing and through dynamic pricing) only when they ensure a highly positive coupling in the relationships among actors, providing freedom for generative exploration, curating matching through the sophistication of algorithmic architecture, have orchestration symbolizing proper incentives for ecosystem players in the digital space.
The Methodology used in this Study
Before delving further into the subject, an important point on the choice of unique methodology needs to be highlighted.
The methodology chosen in this essay does not either proliferate to pure quantitative or pure “explications,” it is the middle path in which the author’s amalgamated “diverse viewpoints” expressed in the earlier empirical studies on DA, digital economics, and its sustainability issues.
To give more scientific parlance, one can imagine this study resembling “asymmetric discourse studies” although unlike the use of “language” and its phenomenological justifications, the author limits his understanding to developing a simple yet meaningful time-invariant conceptual model of digital asset (DA) sustainability. The model is thus a manifestation of one of the dimensions in which the author has tried to summarize his views after “converging” diverse literature about the complexity of DA sustainability.
The Terminologies used in the Study
-
Digital asset: In this essay, a DA essentially means a long-term content (usually more than 12 calendar months from the date of creation and its commercial launch). The essay specifically excludes bitcoins or cryptocurrencies as they are purposefully used for short-term speculative trading.
-
Complex digital asset: The complex DA essentially means digital content that has a significant investment and a comparatively “complex” front-end and back-end development process involved.
-
Static digital asset: Static DA essentially means that digital content or digital platform on which essentially one-time investment was desired for its long-term sustainability and only a static or reasonable lower maintenance cost is targeted for its upkeep.
-
Dynamic digital asset: In this essay, dynamic digital asset refers to any digital content on a digital platform that has time-variant requirements of price changes due to R&D and innovation required to ramp up the features for users.
-
Digital consumption: Essentially specifies any form of digital content consumption.
-
Sustainability of digital asset: This is unlike bitcoin prices that have unlimited or undefined periods, unless trading ceases and such bitcoin traders delist them from terminals. The sustainability of digital content (as used as a DA in this essay) is concerning the content that is curated with a purpose in which the digital platform creator is essentially looking for a dynamic pricing process that matches with customers and reduces completion significantly.
-
DA sustainability: To improve the longevity or sustainability of a digital asset, using the strategies (1–4) described later, sustainability can be achieved by a “hybrid” combination.
Asymmetric Literature Review
Developing and sustaining a DA strategically never remains in control of a single entity. The platform developers, the advertisers, and other technology or digital entrepreneurs and consumers share the space of deciding the sustainability or useful life of the digital asset.
For DA, the pricing process is cumbersome since it is important to justify how the price translates into the optimal distribution of margin. Essentially, this seems a complex discussion since for an end consumer, the entire approach is application usability, its usage, comfort, and leisure appeal, and so on. For an end-consumer defining a technical viewpoint is not possible. And thus, who brought the maximum user experience in terms of revenues or margins becomes a never ending challenge. Thus, pricing a DA at the optimal time of its life becomes a tedious task.
Morton et al. (2019) had explicitly described a concept of tipping in the digital platform markets. Tipping means that digital platforms essentially are highly concentrated markets with the ability to provide “complements” (in the form of innovative apps). These complements attract and retain customers thereby increasing the economies of scale and scope for digital players.
Goldfarb and Tucker (2019) described an intriguing situation where digital consumption of a leisure product could sustain a longer life cycle even without technological breakthroughs. So, under such circumstances pricing issues dominate in terms of context and appearance which become core aspects of brand consciousness. Now, scaling up such brand-loyal DA or product is not advisable unlike what happens in the case of the physical goods industry. You can see this in the example that consumers who visit online grocery stores would not like to see the same format in their mobile or web app and a creative appearance like a banking site.
DA generate enormous data, and due to compatible analytics data software, today it is far easier for economists studying DA to examine the end-user experience and other key participants in sustaining and nurturing the DA. Data science empowers economists to assimilate and classify the digital stakes of each participant in the user-experience journey. This also to an extent solves the mystery of shared responsibility of the continuity of DA. However, needless to say, the authenticity of such data and noise factors are to be calibrated to make it more decision-oriented.
Of far-reaching importance for an economist while studying the longevity of a DA is examining the choice of lower cost of distribution vis-à-vis the investment in the creative content and the up-gradation of cutting-edge technology. How to balance the sustainability of such DA for such choice sets requires a sophisticated optimal mechanism that needs to be dynamically studied under different scales of market penetration. Certainly, as traditional market context goes, highly creative content incurs considerable research costs (may not be development costs) and thus a premium price should be commended due to the market principle. Whether such phenomena work in DA, is extremely doubtful.
The source of conflict further mounts when the stakeholders in the DA sustainability journey are geographically differentiated. Several studies concluded that despite the ease of hiring and offering work with lower costs to global workers, the real choice depends solely on skill-differentials and the trust factors lying with the employers. What matters additionally is that while selecting the candidates or stakeholders when deciding to extend the sustainability of a DA, an understanding stakeholder and the principal-agent relationship resonating the same ideas or work on the same principle are extremely important which, at times, are not governed by traditional supply and demand mechanisms.
Are the stakeholders truly understanding the softer issues of usability status of consumers of digital content across the globe more clearly and visibly? Such disproportionate knowledge or information asymmetry can lead to biased decisions that permeate through adverse selection. This can either happen at the end-user level or perhaps also at the producer level. Since any markets where both buyers and sellers are ill-informed can never lead to market corrections in the short term, to that extent, it is usually seen that digital consumers have some sort of “stickiness” toward a particular digital platform.
Now let us dig a little deeper and take up the aspect of sustainable yet complex digital platform pricing into consideration. Aartsen, Peeters, Wagers, and Williams-Jones (2018) forwarded their empirical work explaining “Drug-discovery platforms” (these can be considered as highly complex digital platforms) which are backed by funding to support proof-of-concept. But as observed the sustainable economic protection about such assets cannot be guaranteed due to limited funding. Problems come up when the partners in the making of DA do not always have economic motives per se. In the case of drug discovery platforms sustaining beyond the initial funding period requires a continuous sponsorship, demanding accelerators who may be in the form of impact organizations (non-profits) that can constantly strive to expand the user base and possibly assist in sustaining the sustainability of such assets. But this is a formidable task, since, unlike static DA, drug discovery platforms are complex digital products and therefore constant funding is usually marred with a concept called “foundation fatigue.” To overcome such “foundation fatigue” the agency in terms of nonprofits must constantly engage a wider market spectrum.
It is evident that, unlike natural resources that have the risk of depletion due to over- consumption, in the case of DA, over-consumption is the only savior for its survival and growth (Stuermer, Abu-Tayeh, & Myrach, 2017). Hence, a wider user network can only bring in the economic aspect of monetization. This defines higher marginal returns to scale and almost zero distribution costs to the digital platform sellers.
Stuermer, Abu-Tayeh, and Myrach (2017) justified that although traditional definitions of knowledge or DA or artifacts only act as supporting elements, it is rather ill-defined since knowledge or DA must be preserved, nurtured, and has to be made sustainable. The digital knowledge, ecosystem, and its management depends upon the interactive networks or communities, as against knowledge preserved tacitly in the brain which is of no use (Nonaka and von Krog, 2009).
Further, to stretch this dimension of indestructibility associated with digital knowledge resources (assets) the concept “cap and floor” as a wider distinction of natural and digital resource consumption makes an interesting point. Important conditions for the sustainability of DA include transmutability for their usage under various contexts.
Jain and Vazirani (2010) explained whether the fundamental two theorems of welfare economics can be applied to both conventional and digital goods. The discussion on partial Pareto-optimal theorem (leaving the production and allocation of digital goods fixed), and the second theorem of welfare economics in terms of categorization of semantically substitute digital goods in terms of cardinal and ordinal parts is far more difficult in conventional goods (for instance, perishable goods); but in the case of digital goods, there is no such condition. Hence as per the author, the traditional fundamental theorem of welfare economics can be made applicable in the mixed economy (where an optimal combination of conventional and digital goods coexists) to reach equilibrium.
While natural resources are seldom created their depletion due to over-consumption needs to be closely monitored (a cap is a strategy required for environmental sustainability) and the floor essentially denotes investments incurred in creating, preserving, and improving digital resources. Sustainability of DA thus is a question of mainly “floors” and not “caps.”
Graham (2019), in his well-written text titled Digital Economics at Global Margin, explained supporting reasons which add a useful dimension to the aspect of DA and their sustainability from a sociological point of view. He commented on several examples where the communities who previously have been vulnerable for such ICT or technological infrastructure have seen the possibility of using them by removing political resistances. Such support also came from the initiative of local authorities but what is surprising is that such ICT resources eventually had not eradicated the problem of economic dependence as it was previously conceived by many policy makers. The problem lies in not establishing the right connection between existing skill levels which may be required to make the best use of such resources. Nevertheless, ICT and digital disruptions at the grassroots have brought some inclusiveness at least in terms of removing the information asymmetries. As in certain developing economies, marginal farmers are now able to get the right price for their produce through mobile connectivity at the village level. These measures of bringing DA to the larger strata of society to harness their effective use are certainly a laudable extension of the idea of improving sustainability from a social perspective. For such DA’s sustainability at the grassroots level again local machinery in the form of nonprofits or public-private support cannot be undermined.
Dolgin (2008) had provided an excellent context in his work in Economics of Symbolic Exchange where he described how the music industry over the years had been severely impacted by the advent of internet-based distribution innovations. He quoted the Compact diskettes industry stiff competition from internet-based music distributors who disrupted the music distribution markets. However, such massive exploitation from such disruptors in this industry was not completely free from several challenges. Firstly, even though such online distributors had scaled up their distribution and managed to expand this market by giving free-of-cost music platforms to consumers, the content delivered needed to be completely improved and curated which requires engaging creative talent which at times are not economically cheaper. Such disruptors who entered the distribution markets, selling at a much cheaper price than their physical counterparts, also face the illegitimate logic of piracy and copyrights invasions. Not only this, but even legal machinery imposes stricter restrictions for end-users who fail to adhere to piracy acts laid down by the state. Well, how far such policies work to protect some sections of industry and not others, is again a debatable issue. How far such legal structure can stop these digital disruptions where consumers are charmed by free-content, is again contravening the process of a free-will approach of entrepreneurial spirit. These are tough questions under the banner of economist lenses and promising solutions are not imaginable in the short term. In the same book, a concept of uniform prices was also depicted, but as the author analyzed correctly, making the price as a unit of control is against the market forces, such measures from an economic point of view will only increase mispricing and asymmetries in the long run. Any effort to reduce the differentiation will severely dampen the growth of creative platforms in the future. The prices of such DA must be decided based on the principle of end-user experience and the size of the segment being served.
Pricing Strategies for DA – A Literature Survey
Academic literature on DA pricing is very scarce. Bertani, Ponta, Raberto, Teglio, and Cincotti (2021) in their recent paper discussed that the DA landscape is prone to complexity. The authors coined the term intangible or “DA developer” as an agent in the existing macroeconomic heterogeneous agent model framework. The paper used the production function where the knowledge component of the labor force accelerates the process of total productivity. For DA pricing dynamics, the paper used the mix of collusive and competitive pricing strategies, where according to the author, only in the competitive pricing model, a variation in the mark-up was exhibited. This concept closely resembles the idea used in my research of hybrid pricing since depending upon the type of product, and its state (static or dynamic), and time spent in the market, the pricing dynamics need to be altered for sustainability of DA.
Concerning pricing of cloud computing Laatikainen, Ojala, and Mazhelis (2013) depicted an interesting SBIFT model (Scope, Base, Influence, Formula, Temporal Rights). There has been discussion on hybrid pricing in the context of a combination of elements of penetration and skimming pricing concepts. (I used reasonable pricing and competitive pricing in the same sense.) The authors also in the same article reported on free or follow-the-free pricing approaches. The study also explained that almost 90 percent of PaaS cloud products command a free trial version strategy. In a similar vein of research work, the service renting model was explained as a pricing strategy by Ojala (2016) and several others.
Abrams, Cruse, Kunze, and Mundrane (2012) used the concept of total cost preservation (TCP) which closely resembles the idea of identifying the key components in preserving the digital asset. This paper talked about static DA and suggested a hybrid pricing model. Hybrid pricing under this model depends upon what components are predictable in the future and what are not. What it means is that paid-up costs constitute a one-time component. But certain fixed components, like future inflation rates, rate of investment, can be made flexible. For this, the author proposed the use of stochastic modes like Monte-Carlo simulation in calibrating the optimal pricing process for the long-term preservation of static DA. Keiser, Nielsen, and Thirifays (2011) also talked in similar lines in terms of static. Warren (2010) used a similar example of a hybrid model of the university where the physical and digital access of books was utilized dynamically by the students.
Harmaala (2016) explained that in the age of digital consumption, the end-user acts as a collaborator in the production, maintenance, and development of DA. There are networks of collaborators who can have a blurred distinction of consumer and producer. DA (platforms) have reduced the scope for implementing old pricing and revenue models and there is the scope of extending the sustainability by the concept of distributed power law. The platforms can sustain profitability in the long-term tailed curve. There will be a core interaction through participants which include producers and consumers both assisting in the scalability of the DA. The core interactions or collaborative approach also helps in rationalizing the pricing since now the value of digital products resonates more closely with the dynamic user experience. Under the phase of such dynamic user experience, the DA cannot command a static price mechanism, they must reconfigure their pricing strategies involving elements of homogenous mass market (reasonable price) and heterogenous or dynamic component of the DA (competitive price). The dynamic interplay of the pricing method will only ensure a smooth trajectory of long-tailed profitability (Ciccone, 2017). Ciccone (2017) in their work also questioned that there must be an extent toward restricting DA exclusion. Such regulatory exclusions will disturb the economic justification of hybrid pricing utilized under the collaborative model. In the expansionary phase with a complex digital product, a free-pricing approach can be justified only when the two-sided network externalities are available.
Lightcap, Peeo, and Fullenkamp (2012) explained that oligopolistic pricing models by traditional advertisers have been replaced by click-through models. Thanks to DA, the media consumption through the internet is less differentiated since all the available digital content is now accessible through a single app or digital platform.
Few empirical ideas on hybrid pricing were found in electricity markets. Chase (2014) explained demand response (DR) model in terms of the smart grid framework where the hybrid pricing model incentivizes the customer through the DR channel promoting the efficient use of electricity (demand side electricity management). The Chase (2014) paper explained three prevalent forms of electricity pricing namely time of use (TOU), critical-peak (CP), and customer-baseline load (CBL) pricing methods in US markets for both residential and industrial consumer segments.
Sustainable Pricing Strategies for Digital Assets (Spsda) Matrix for Improving the Digital Assets
Before proposing the four strategies for sustainability of DA/platforms, it is important to understand the process of auction, under which the winners curse can be significantly reduced when the product and service characteristics and features are explicitly told to the bidder (Janssen, 2020). Hence, the asymmetries for a particular product/service are reduced, the pricing of that product/service provides more consumer surplus and thus generates a welfare perspective.
I propose the following four important DA pricing strategies under the SPSDA Matrix approach:
Strategy A
A more complex and dynamic DA for mass consumption requires initial funding but can sustain on its own at a reasonable price. The differentiation strategy may not be required since it is expected that such digital assets may not require reinvestment in terms of constant innovation after some point of time in the future.
Strategy B
A more static DA for mass consumption requires initial funding and can survive or sustain by increasing the user base by reducing the price over the period.
Strategy C
A more complex and dynamic DA for a particular consumer segment requires initial funding beyond which there are two possibilities, either take this product to the masses with a reasonable price, or insure bringing an element of innovation and disrupt the same consumer segment by charging competitive prices.
Strategy D
A static DA for a particular consumer segment, again with initial funding over some time may see a limitation its terms of saturation and early maturity of the market, and to sustain, it has to be freely distributed to the mass market with the active support of backbone organizations for its sustainability and growth.
Let us observe the above strategies for better comparison (see Table 17.1).
Table 17.1:SPSDA Matrix – Sustainability-oriented pricing strategies for digital assets.
| Complex and dynamic DA for Mass market (Strategy A) | complex and dynamic DA for the limited end-user market (Strategy C) |
| After Initial Funding | After Initial Funding |
| (Sustain it by charging “reasonable price<<competitive price”) | (Sustain it by either charging “reasonable price” for mass markets or, charge “competitive prices>>reasonable prices” after making major innovative disruption for same consumer segment) |
| Static DA for the mass market (Strategy B) | Static DA for the limited end-user market (Strategy D) |
| After Initial Funding | After Initial Funding |
| (Sustain it by reducing the price over sometime) | (Sustain it by “freely” distributing into the mass market, backbone agency support) |
Explanation of the SPSDA Matrix
The pricing dynamics in the case of static or dynamic DA acts as “hybrid” in nature.
We observe that any “new product” at the initial stages, because of its limited existence, tends to resemble the characteristics of a closed or opaque market with information asymmetries. We can substitute the art market concept for such DA. But, as DA penetrates wider segments, or starts maturing, it follows the rules of pure markets in the true economic sense. Although, in my SPSDA matrix, for a digital asset, the journey is not always from class “to mass markets.”
Sometimes, it must be sustained at a certain market segment, where the logic of pure-market where arbitrage-free transaction prevails does not exist. This, however, requires extensive funding of the R&D capital.
Hence, my proposed “hybrid” pricing model best explains this phenomenon, where sustaining in the same market does not necessarily fit the rules of either market, that is, a DA may still retain its information asymmetries despite spending reasonable time in the consumption space, and to the contrary may sometimes, as the matrix explains, behave in the conventional way of entering into the expansionary phase with reasonable price moderation due to substantial reduction in the information asymmetry.
The economist will understand reasonable price as “minimum” optimal price, which may be required for upkeep, wider distribution, and maintenance of DA, which is different from competitive prices (which are external or market-driven). Here in the case of competitive prices, after initial funding, a reinvestment in DA innovation is required at various stages of extended sustainability. In the case of static DA for mass market, price reduction over some time will ensure its sustainability. However, for a complex and dynamic DA, it is important to charge the reasonable price over the entire life of the DA. Now, it is important to understand that the reasonable price in the case of a mass market for a complex and dynamic DA will be definitely higher in comparison to the reasonable price of a static product for the mass market.
For the class (limited user-segment market), as mentioned in the above SPSDA matrix, for a static DA, after the saturation stage, such DA needs to be set free since, without any innovation, such static products only need to be used for reducing the digital inequalities in the communities.
For complex and dynamic products for the class market, after the initial funding, and churning the premium elements out of such limited end-user segments in the first phase of consumption, either ensure to reduce the price to the reasonable rates for mass markets, or reinvest in the second wave of disruption in the same DA and same end-user segment by charging the competitive or premium prices.
Hence, depending upon the characteristics of the market, type (mass or class market segment) of the product, length of time of the product use (short term or long term), and sustainability objective in place, a suitable DA pricing portfolio can be developed by the stakeholders.
Conclusion and Future Scope
Understanding the pricing of DA or platforms demands a nontraditional economic pricing approach. The digital-asset mix will have DA for serving different time-dependent or event-dependent markets. The pricing process therefore also needs to be dynamically optimized. As understood through extant literature, the stakeholders in the space of DA or infrastructure do not work in silos, they work collaboratively in a two-way network space.
The prices are decided by the consumer liking in the value network and to ensure the sustainability of such assets, pricing requires gauging the real needs of digital consumers, and his or her constant engagement in the life cycle of asset curation and sustainability.
As understood through the proposed framework for the DA portfolio pricing model (SPSDA matrix), no single-point strategy can lead to optimal results. It is a path-dependent optimal matrix, since, as any digital platform (asset) matures, the pricing process has to accommodate the user experience and calibrate the monetizing threshold to generate smooth transitions resisting the market forces. The hybrid pricing model of the type explained in the previous paragraphs serves the purpose of redistributing optimal economic incentives to various stakeholders in the DA journey.
In the end, after reading a few pages of Mokyr, Vickers, and Ziebarth (2015), it can be safely argued that economists should foresee whether digital technology anxiety is one way economic instinct fulfills the need of consumer, society, government, and human institutions in the coming time, or dehumanizes them, making the entire workforce vulnerable to this man-made economic order.
The pandemic will surely put this expression to its real test.
References
Aartsen, W., Peeters, P., Wagers, S., & Williams-Jones, B. (2018). Getting Digital Assets from Public-Private Partnership Research Projects through “The Valley of Death,” and Making Them Sustainable. Frontiers in Medicine, 5: 65. →
Abrams, S., Cruse, P., Kunze, J., & Mundrane, M. (2012). The Total Cost of Preservation (TCP): Cost Modeling for Sustainable Services. UC Curation Center, California Digital Library. →
Bertani, F., Ponta, L., Raberto, M., Teglio, A., & Cincotti, S. (2021). The Complexity of the Intangible Digital Economy: An Agent-Based Model. Journal of Business Research, 129:527–540. →
Brenner, B. (2018). Transformative Sustainable Business Models in the Light of the Digital Imperative – A Global Business Economics Perspective. Sustainability, 10(12): 4428. →
Chase, J. S. (2014). Demand Response for Computing Centers. The Green Computing Book: Tackling Energy Efficiency at Large Scale, 12: 267. a, b
Ciccone, E. (2017). Platform Ecosystem: An Analysis of the Business Model Evolution through Blockbuster and Netflix Case Studies. Tesi di Laurea in Corporate strategies, LUISS Guido Carli, relatore Federica Brunetta, 127. a, b
Coyle, D. (2017). The Future of the National Accounts: Statistics and the Democratic Conversation. Review of Income and Wealth, 63: S223–S237. →
Dolgin, A. (2008). The Economics of Symbolic Exchange. Springer Science & Business Media, USA. →
Gazzola, P., Colombo, G., Pezzetti, R., & Nicolescu, L. (2017). Consumer empowerment in the Digital Economy: Availing Sustainable Purchasing Decisions. Sustainability, 9(5): 693. →
Goldfarb, A., & Tucker, C. (2019). Digital Economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 57(1): 3–43. →
Graham, M. (2019). Digital Economies at Global Margins (Vol. 1). The MIT Press, Massachusetts, USA →
Harmaala, M. M. (2016). Collaborative Brands–Digital Value Creation in the Collaborative Economy. In Strategica. Opportunities and Risks in the Contemporary Business Environment. International Academic Conference, Bucharest, October 20–21,2016. SNSPA Faculty of Management. →
Jain, K., & Vazirani, V. V. (2010). Equilibrium Pricing of Semantically Substitutable Digital Goods. arXiv preprint arXiv:1007.4586. →
Janssen, M. C. (2020). Reflections on the 2020 Nobel Memorial Prize Awarded to Paul Milgrom and Robert Wilson. Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics, 13(2): 177–184. →
Kejser, U. B., Nielsen, A. B., & Thirifays, A. (2011). Cost Model for Digital Preservation: Cost of Digital Migration. Proceedings of the iPRES2011 Conference, 166. →
Laatikainen, G., Ojala, A., & Mazhelis, O. (2013, June). Cloud Services Pricing Models. In International Conference of Software Business (117–129). Springer, Berlin: Heidelberg. →
Lightcap, B. C., Peek, W. A., & Fullenkamp, R. (2012). The Effects of Digital Media on Advertising Markets. Durham, NC: Duke University.
Morton, F., Bouvier, P., Ezrachi, A., Jullien, B., Katz, R., Kimmelman, G., … & Morgenstern, J. (2019). Committee for the study of digital platforms: Market structure and antitrust subcommittee report. Chicago: Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State, University of Chicago Booth School of Business. →
Mokyr, J., Vickers, C., & Ziebarth, N. L. (2015). The History of Technological Anxiety and the Future of Economic Growth: Is This Time Different? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(3): 31–50. →
Nonaka, I., & von Krogh, G. (2009). Tacit Knowledge and Knowledge Conversion: Controversy and Advancement in Organizational Knowledge Creation Theory. Organization Science, 20(3), 635–652. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25614679 →
Ojala, A. (2016). Adjusting Software Revenue and Pricing Strategies in the Era of Cloud Computing. Journal of Systems and Software, 122: 40–51. →
Simon, H, A. (1991). Organizations and Markets. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5: 25–44. →
Stuermer, M., Abu-Tayeh, G., & Myrach, T. (2017). Digital Sustainability: Basic Conditions for Sustainable Digital Artifacts and their Ecosystems. Sustainability Science, 12(2): 247–262. a, b
Warren, J. W. (2010). The Progression of Digital Publishing: Innovation and the Evolution of E-books. International Journal of the Book, 7(4): 46. →
List of Contributors
Dr. Rhodora Abadia is the program facilitator at the University of South Australia. She manages the online delivery of the IT, Data Analytics, Engineering, and Construction Management degrees. She has received several major research grants for undertaking research projects in the areas of artificial intelligence (e.g., machine learning, multi-agent systems, case-based reasoning) applied in education; multimedia and human-computer interaction; user experience and usability; online learning; data analytics; and virtual reality. Dr. Abadia has published in such journals as Artificial Intelligence in Education; Journal of Research in Science, Computing and Engineering; Intelligent Tutoring Systems: Computers and Education Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Pacific Rim International Conference on Artificial Intelligence; and International Conference on Computers in Education, and has been invited to present in conferences in Asia, Australia, Europe, and North America. She currently has several research projects that focus on the application of adaptive learning, data analytics, and virtual reality in online education.
Kriti Aggarwal is an undergraduate scholar pursuing a BE in computer science and engineering at Chandigarh College of Engineering and Technology (Degree Wing), Chandigarh, India. She is a research enthusiast and has published papers in leading conferences, book chapters, and journals. Kriti has experience in organizing, managing, and working with large teams and events. Kriti has been a part of national level government seminars and programs as an organizer and host.
Ashfaq Ahmad obtained an MBA from the University of Asia Pacific, Bangladesh. He has over six years of experience as a business consultant and has worked for many national and multinational companies. In addition, he worked as a part-time academic for a few universities in Bangladesh. His research has been published in many international journals such as Tourism Recreation Research and Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, among others. Ashfaq Ahmad is a qualitative researcher who focuses on the interpretive paradigm of research. He is currently working as a research associate at the University of Asia Pacific (Bangladesh). His areas of interest include marketing and entrepreneurship.
S. Balamurugan obtained his BE from the College of Engineering, Anna University, Guindy, Chennai; PGDM from the Indian Institute of Management IIM- Bangalore; MBA from Indira Gandhi National Open University, New Delhi; and an FRPM from the Indian Institute of Management and Technology, Hisar, Haryana. He was also a student at the Indian Institute of Technology IIT – Kharagpur. He has submitted many technical papers at national and international seminars, and published papers in ABDC, Scopus, and UGC journals. Dr. Balamurugan is a Fellow at the Institution of Engineers (FIE) and the Institution of Valuers (FIV).
Manish Mohan Baral is Assistant Professor in the Department of Operations, GITAM (deemed to be university), Visakhapatnam, India. He is an engineering graduate from KIIT University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India, MBA in International Business from GITAM University, Visakhapatnam and pursued his PhD in Management from Birla Institute of Technology Mesra, Ranchi, India. Manish has published in reputable journals and high indexed book chapters. He has presented 12 papers in various conferences and has also received three best paper and “best paper presented” awards. Manish’s research areas include information technology, cloud computing, supply chain management, artificial intelligence, operations research, and quality management. His expertise is in statistical techniques like SEM and MCDM techniques like TOPSIS, Fuzzy TOPSIS, etc.
Valeria Meléndez Cervantes is Professor of Business Intelligence at Universidad Popular Autónoma del Estado de Puebla, Mexico.
Claudia Malcón Cervera is Professor of Business Intelligence at Universidad Popular Autónoma del Estado de Puebla, Mexoco.
Ranga Chimhundu is a senior lecturer in marketing and academic team leader (marketing) at the University of Southern Queensland in Australia. His research interests are in FMCG marketing, brand and product management, grocery retailing, marketing strategy and digital marketing, and he supervises PhD and DBA candidates in marketing. Ranga is a chartered marketer (Chartered Institute of Marketing, UK) and a member of the Chartered Institute of Marketing, Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy, Australian Marketing Institute, and the European Marketing Academy.
Venkataiah Chittipaka is an associate professor in the area of operations, quality, and project management in India. He is an engineering graduate and earned his MBA from National Institute of Technology, Warangal, India and obtained his doctorate from the Department of Business Management, Osmania University and qualified in UGC-NET conducted by University Grants Commission, New Delhi, India. He is a certified ZED Master Trainer from Quality Council of India and National Monitoring & Implementation Unit (NMIU) for the Zero Defect and Zero Effect (ZED) scheme of Ministry of Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprise (MSME). He also received the “Best Professor in Project Management” Award from Business School Affaire & Dewang Mehta National Education Awards. Venkataiah is a life member in National HRD Network (NHRD), International Association of Academicians & Researchers (INAAR), and editorial member in International Centre of Economics, Humanities and Management (ICEHM). Venkataiah’s areas of interest include operations, quality, marketing research, logistics, supply chain management, and project management.
Dr. R. Dhaya has 16 years of experience in teaching and research in computer science and engineering. She has published more than 80 research papers in peer-reviewed international journals. She was the recipient of the IEI young women engineers award. R. Dhaya’s areas of interest include wireless sensor networks, embedded systems, and machine learning, communication systems.
Oliver Moisés Cervantes Flores is Professor of Business Intelligence at Universidad Popular Autónoma del Estado de Puebla, Mexico.
Dr. Gulshan Goyal is currently employed as Assistant Professor in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at Chandigarh College of Engineering and Technology (Degree Wing), Chandigarh, India. He holds a B.Tech, M.Tech and PhD in the field of Computer Science and Engineering. He has 19 years of teaching experience at undergraduate, postgraduate and PhD levels. He has worked at DVIET, Karnal, SDDIET, Barwala (Panchkula) and Chandigarh University. He was selected for his present position by UPSC New Delhi in 2016. He has published research papers in various conferences and journals of repute. He has published three books, as well as organized and participated in various faculty development programs. His research areas include digital image processing, big data, theoretical computer science, discrete and statistical structures, algorithm design and machine learning.
Alock Gupta is Assistant Professor in CSE DEPTT at Vaish College of Engineering, Rohtak, India. He has 10 years of teaching experience at the graduate and post graduate level. He has published papers in reputed journals as well as presented papers in national and international conferences. He is well versed in network administration and administrative work.
Rumman Hassan is a lecturer in marketing at the University of Southern Queensland in Australia. His research interests are in FMCG marketing, consumer behavior, green/eco-friendly marketing, services marketing and digital marketing, and he supervises PhD and DBA candidates in marketing. Rumman is a member of the Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy and the Australian Marketing Institute, and is a Certified Practicing Marketer (CPM).
Bhaswati Jana is a doctoral scholar at GD Goenka University, Gurgaon, India. She is also CHRO at Radiant Institute of Skill Development. She graduated from Calcutta University, has an MBA in HR from IK Gujral Punjab Technical University and received her diploma in French Language from Alliance Française. Bhaswati is currently pursuing her PhD from GD Goenka University, Gurgaon. She has received the Faculty Excellence Award from Woxsen University for giving stellar performances and the Gold Certificate in Communication and Business Negotiation from IIT Kharagpur. She has worked for reputable organizations like Chandigarh University, ICFAI University, and Woxsen University and is currently a member of SHRM USA. Bhaswati has 25 years of working experience and expertise in teaching HR analytics, French language, soft skills, and communication and all HR-related subjects. Bhaswati’s areas of interest in research are HR analytics, IT, and digital marketing.
Dr. B. J. D. Kalyani is Associate Professor and Head of Computer Science and Engineering at the Institute of Aeronautical Engineering. She was awarded a doctorate from Acharya Nagarjuna University, Guntur, in cloud computing. Dr. Kalyani has six years of industry experience and 12 years of teaching experience. She has guided eight postgraduate and 20 undergraduate projects. She has published 15 papers in various national/international conferences and journals. She is associated with several committees such as R & D, Discipline, Anti Ragging, and Hospitality. She has acted as Convener for R&D and was actively involved in organizing ICRTEMMS-2018 as registration committee Convener. Dr. Kalyani’s areas of interest include cloud computing, data analytics, business intelligence, software engineering, and database management systems.
Dr. Prof. Kanthavel has 22 years of experience in teaching and research in the field of information and communication engineering. He has of more than 100 research articles in peer-reviewed international journals. Prof. Kanthavel’s areas of interests include computer networking, machine learning and AI, cooperative communication, computing, and mobile networks.
Komal Kapoor is a research-oriented academician, enthusiastic educator, and avid reader with over 18 years of teaching experience, research, and student development with key focus on quality input and stimulating learning environment. Her key areas of teaching and learning are marketing strategy, brand management, strategic management, ethics and CSR, entrepreneurship development, advertising and marketing services leading to a multi-disciplinary approach to developing students and content alike. Pursuing her PhD around consumer behavior toward luxury brands, she has published many research papers and book chapters. With the adoption of innovative pedagogical tools, Komal focuses on the holistic development of her students.
Harmanpreet Kaur is Assistant Professor in CBS, Chandigrah University, Punjab, India. She is a research oriented academician and has published papers in peer-reviewed and indexed journals. She has also participated in many national and international conferences. In addition, she is well versed in initiating and implementing student engagement activities for effective development of students.
Tanvi Kaushik is B. Tech final year student at Vaish College of Engineering, Rohtak, India. She is passionate about research work. Her areas of interest include big data, machine learning, blockchain technology and the Internet of Things. She has also participated in national and international conferences.
Bui Huy Khoi is at the Industrial University of Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Bui has published many research papers and chapters in peer reviewed journals and books. Bui has also participated in many conferences and has made significant contributions in academics and research.
Dr. Ram Krishan is currently Assistant Professor and Head in the Department of Computer Science, Mata Sundri University Girls College, Mansa, Punjab (A Constituent College of Punjabi University, Patiala), India. Dr. Krishan obtained his PhD in computer science and engineering from Guru Kashi University, Talwandi Sabo, India in 2017 and MTech in computer engineering from Punjabi University, Patiala, India in 2009. He has more than 15 years of teaching experience at various colleges. Dr. Krishan has authored two academic books and published more than 35 research papers in various international/national journals, conference proceedings, and book chapters. He has also edited three research books in the field of wireless communication and computing. His research areas include wireless communication, cloud computing, and antenna design.
Dr. Rohit Malhotra (PhD, MBA) is currently a subject matter expert at the Faculty of Economics and Finance with NMIMS, Mumbai. He has published in reputable journals included on ABDC, Sage, Scopus, and Repec listed rankings. Dr. Malhotra has presented several papers at international conferences and received Best Paper Awards including at the AIB 2020 MIT-IIMV International Conference. His research interests include financial econometrics, accounting anthropology, empirical asset pricing, risk management, and portfolio analytics.
Dr. Reena Malik is currently Assistant Professor in Chitkara Business School, Chitkara University, Punjab, India. She has a PhD in management and post graduate degree in management and commerce. She has qualified the UGC/NTA NET in both commerce and management. She has published more than 20 papers in reputed national and international journals and has presented papers in various government sponsored seminars and conferences. She has two books to her credit. Having a teaching experience of more than eight years she is actively working in the research areas of marketing and finance.
José Gerardo de la Vega Meneses is Professor of Accounting and Finance at Universidad Popular Autónoma del Estado de Puebla, Mexico.
Vipin Mittal is Assistant Professor in the MBA department at Vaish College of Engineering, Rohtak, India. He has published papers in peer-reviewed journals as well as participated in many conferences at national and international levels. His areas of interest include strategic management, entrepreneurship, big data and ecommerce. He is passionate about academic and research initiatives.
Subhodeep Mukherjee is a PhD student at the GITAM (deemed to be university), Visakhapatnam, India. He obtained his master’s degree from the Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, Ranchi, India. His main research interests include food supply chain management, cloud computing, and blockchain technologies. He has published in reputable journals and high indexed book chapters. Dr. Mukherjee has also presented more than nine papers in various conferences and also received two best paper and best paper presented awards. Dr. Mukherjee’s main research interests include food supply chain management, cloud computing, and blockchain technologies. His expertise is in statistical techniques like SEM, etc.
Seprianti Eka Putri holds a Faculty, Economics and Business position at Universitas Bengkulu, Indonesia. He is a research oriented academician, proactive researcher and keen on implementing student engagement programs. He has published papers in reputed journals as well as participated in many conferences. Seprianti adopts innovative pedagogical tools to focus on the holistic development of students.
Fazla Rabby is a doctoral research candidate at the University of Southern Queensland in Australia. In 2000 he received his BS from the University of Madras in India and in 2003, his MIS from Central Queensland University in Australia. He worked in a number of organizations in top management positions in Australia from 2004 to 2021. Fazla has also held formal teaching positions at universities and private colleges. In 2012, he was appointed Chief Executive Officer (CEO) in one of the reputed marketing companies in Australia. Fazla has a keen interest in digital marketing and consumer behavior, as well as augmented and virtual reality in marketing.
Dr. M. Palanivelrajan is Assistant Professor in the Department of Management Studies, Madurai Kamaraj University, Madurai. He has a master’s degree in MS (Information Technology & Management) and holds a doctorate in business administration. In addition to seven years of academic experience, he has been actively engaged in guiding research scholars of MPhil and PhD degrees. He has also presented papers at national and international seminars and conferences, and is a member of various academic bodies and management associations. Dr. Rajan’s areas of specialization are marketing and entrepreneurship.
Sudhir Rana believes in driving and motivating academics and research in such a way that it can be best utilized in an enthusiastic and dynamic environment to foster versatile personalities. He is a faculty of marketing and strategy at the College of Healthcare Management & Economics at Gulf Medical University, UAE. He holds a PhD degree with the Ministry of Human Resource Development Scholarship from the Government of India and post-doctorate from Putra Business School (AACSB Accredited), University of Putra, Malaysia. Sudhir has set high standards in academics and research. He has been associated with the Fortune Institute of International Business, India and Maastricht School of Management, Kuwait. Sudhir has delivered more than 150 workshop sessions, keynote speeches, and webinars. His research area is consumer behavior and emerging markets. Sudhir’s work has been published in the Journal of Business Research, International Journal of Emerging Markets, and Journal of Promotion Management, among other reputed journals. He is a well-known scholar and editor in the field. He was involved with the progression of the journal FIIB Business Review, which is one of the most preferred journals from Sage Publishing. He launched as well as chaired the doctorate program at Fortune Institute of International Business, India.
Tareq Rasul is Senior Lecturer at the Australian Institute of Business (AIB), Australia. He holds a doctorate in marketing from the University of South Australia, Australia and an MBA from the University of East London, United Kingdom. His area of research is multidisciplinary and encompasses Digital Marketing, Customer Engagement, Entrepreneurship and Tourism. He is comfortable with both qualitative and quantitative research. To date, he has published 50 (+) peer-reviewed journal articles, conference papers and book chapters. His research has been published in high-ranked journals such as Australasian Journal of Information Systems, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Journal of Business Research, Journal of Islamic Marketing, Journal of Knowledge Management, Journal of Strategic Marketing, and Tourism Recreation Research, among others.
Namrata Sandhu, PhD, has 16 years of experience in research, consulting, and teaching graduate management courses. She has authored/edited three books and published over 60 research articles in journals of academic repute such as Development Policy Review, Development, Journal of Financial Crime, Global Business Review, Journal of Human Values, International Journal of Business and Globalization, Paradigm, Business Perspectives and Research, Indian Journal of Women and Social Change, FIIB Business Review, etc. Dr. Sandhu has worked as a consultant with the United Nations Development Program and Metamorph Consultants, Mumbai. Dr. Sandhu’s areas of interest include ethics, finance, and gender studies.
M. Selvalakshmi has approximately 20 years of experience teaching business communication, marketing, and strategy. She has published in several research publications on subjects ranging from customer service to student skills, and inclusive growth. Her latest publication was in the International Journal of Innovation Science on Pedagogy Innovation in January 2021.M. Selvalakshmi published the cases in Ivey Publishing and in the Case Centre. She has also been actively involved on consulting assignments with several MSMEs. She has rendered yeoman service to the Thiagarajar School of Management in numerous administrative roles and became principal in 2015. As a corporate trainer, she has helped executives from numerous top companies in India to achieve their true potential, including Airtel India Ltd., Ramco Cements, TVS Tyres, Honeywell Technology Solutions, SPIC, Hi Tech Arai, etc.
Dilpreet Singh, PhD (Strategy), MBA (Marketing), has over 15 years of academic and industry experience. He is an accomplished teacher, researcher, consultant, and trainer with expertise in strategy and sales. He has presented research articles in various conferences, in addition to publishing them in journals of repute. Dr. Singh is the author of the following books: Bank Marketing Strategies – An Indian Perspective and Contemporary Issues in Business published by renowned international publishers. He received the Best Research Paper Award at the IMRA-IIMB International Conference, 2015, Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore. Dr. Singh is also an avid trainer and consultant and has imparted training/consultancy to various organizations including Reliance Communications, Hero Cycles, Subhiksha Trading Services, Punjab State Cooperative Development Bank, Punjab Agriculture Department, etc. Dr. Singh is currently Assistant Dean, BBA Programs with Chitkara Business School, Chitkara University, Punjab, India.
Dr. Sonal Trivedi has more than 10 years of teaching experience. She is the author of two books, chapters in edited books, and has published many research papers in national and international journals of repute. She has participated in many conferences and proactive academic initiatives.
About the Editors
Dr. Amandeep Singh has obtained his BIT, MBA, and PhD and is also UGC-NET qualified. He has served as dean/principal in various reputable universities and colleges. Dr. Singh is currently working as a professor at Chandigarh University, Punjab, India. Dr. Singh has more than 15 years of teaching experience, and was named “Best Teacher” in 2008. He is also part of the board of studies of various B-Schools and leading universities in Northern India. He has published 28 research papers in various journals and conferences indexed in Scopus, Web of Science, and ICI. In addition, he has authored three books with renowned publishers like Wiley and IGI Global. Dr. Singh is on the editorial board for three international journals, and has also chaired many national and international conferences. His main area of research is marketing with a special focus on digital marketing.
Dr. Rohit Bansal is Assistant Professor in the Department of Management Studies at Vaish College of Engineering, Rohtak, India. He obtained his PhD in management from Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, India. With 13 years of experience, Dr. Bansal has achieved career growth through robust and proactive academic initiatives. He has presented papers at 30 conferences and seminars, and has acted as session chair in many conferences. Dr. Bansal also served as a member of the advisory committee at many international conferences, in addition to being a member of the editorial advisory board for 110 national and international peer-reviewed journals. He is the managing editor of International Journal of Management Reviews and International Journal of Techno-Management Research. He has authored and edited eight books, as well as published 95 research papers in reputable national and international journals including chapters in edited books. He has reviewed more than 700 articles for international peer-reviewed journals. Dr. Bansal’s areas of interest include marketing management, human resource management, organizational behavior, and digital marketing.
Dr. Sandhir Sharma has a PhD in strategic management with nearly 20 years of experience in higher education and five years in the telecom industry. With more than 43 published research papers in various journals and conferences at national and international levels, Dr. Sharma has developed his core expertise in the area of strategy formulation. His research has been widely published in various newspapers. Currently, he is serving as Dean at Chitkara Business School and is visiting faculty at Binus University, Indonesia, and University of Applied Sciences, Osnabruck, Germany.