ABSTRACT This study contributes to information systems (IS) scholarship by extending platform governance theory to regulatory contexts, explaining how regulatory forces co‐evolve with technological architectures to shape openness and control. This research examines the evolution of platform governance in the context of open banking, where regulatory mandates compel incumbent banks to open their infrastructures to third‐party access, by drawing on digital platform governance theory and a seven‐year interpretive study. Open banking provides a unique empirical setting in which platform orchestration is co‐constructed by banks, regulators, and emerging fintechs. The research identifies three phases of platform governance evolution: regulatory interpretation and codification, marked by technical prescription and restrictive due diligence; strategic platform expansion, characterised by curated innovation co‐design and tiered platform access; and platform ecosystem orchestration, with distributed governance and adaptive gateways. The study theorises the antecedents, governance mechanisms, outcomes, and enablers and inhibitors shaping the three phases and the transitions between them. The study offers theoretical and practical insights for managing platform governance evolution, in policy‐driven digital platform environments where platformization is not voluntary.

ABSTRACTTo remain competitive, many organisations are undertaking agile transformations in pursuit of agility. Information technology (IT) plays a pivotal role in supporting organisational agility; thus, it is essential that organisations select the right IT projects in a timely manner to deliver. In practice, though, organisations have struggled with effective decision‐making in the IT planning process, especially in competitive environments where there is a need for agile decisions. To guide organisations on how they can transform their IT project selection (ITPS) process to become more agile, we examine two large and well‐established Australian organisations and their digital‐only subsidiaries launched as agile organisations in start‐up style. We explain how the parent companies conduct ITPS and contrast this with the digital‐only subsidiaries, highlighting the strengths and challenges each approach presents for agility. We provide an ITPS agility framework that identifies five dimensions that can enable or inhibit agility. These are: ITPS funding approach, number of ITPS decision‐makers, granularity of ITPS work‐packages, frequency of ITPS process and duration of ITPS process. Our findings indicate that the traditional approach that the parent organisations have taken with these ITPS dimensions has inhibited agility, whereas the ITPS dimensions have been configured to enable agility in their digital‐only subsidiaries. We recommend that those responsible for agile transformations of ITPS within their organisations fund teams instead of projects, delegate ITPS decision‐making authority, make faster and more frequent ITPS decisions about work‐packages that are smaller in scope, and use agility in the right places, as ITPS does not always need to be agile.

ABSTRACTThe widespread applications of generative AI (GenAI) have sparked significant interest, with many organisations eager to leverage its transformative potential. Rather than focusing on individual organisations, this study examines GenAI integration within enterprise platforms, which are extensively adopted by many organisations and thus amplify both the benefits and risks of GenAI. We offer targeted recommendations for enterprise platform owners and their complementors, addressing challenges they face when integrating GenAI into these platforms. Drawing on a case study of Salesforce's experience, we recommend actions in three foundational areas – platform capability, architecture and governance – ensuring that our guidance is broadly applicable across enterprise platforms. In platform capability, we advise developing a unified GenAI stack built on existing platform services, offering generic and industry‐specific GenAI use cases to accelerate customer adoption and providing tools for customisation and creation of new use cases to enhance GenAI's transformational impact. For platform architecture, we recommend adding new layers for accommodating diverse GenAI foundation models and creating a trusted environment for secure data access, privacy and content monitoring. We also recommend implementing a prompt architecture to improve content relevance and accuracy. In platform governance, we recommend establishing new mechanisms to mitigate GenAI risks. Partnerships with GenAI providers and proactive investments in GenAI are essential to retain critical GenAI technologies. Personalised consultancy and training along with joint design and implementation with platform customers are also recommended. These combined actions, pursued in parallel across capability, architecture and governance, form a sustainable roadmap for GenAI integration in enterprise platforms.

ABSTRACTThis study examines how external pressures drive a platform leader to fight counterfeiting over time. Acknowledging the tension between the illegality and legitimacy of counterfeiting, we find that the fighting effort involves an enduring balance between the two poles of the tension until counterfeits have been sharply reduced. We demonstrate how the management of the tension entails an interactive process in which a platform leader decouples counterfeit fighting actions to pursue legitimacy. We suggest that pressures from external forces predict a process of decoupling and legitimation through which the platform leader promotes ecosystem acceptance and builds a shared understanding of ecosystem purposes, and the endeavours to balance platform quality and activity prompt the platform leader to pursue legitimation which demonstrates the viability of an ecosystem. We show that these processes are accompanied by activating and stabilising the tension, which predicts varied strength and scope of measures and the reduction of counterfeits over time.