in a higher innovation rate and speed.
The last two findings identified two relevant aspects for value appropriation within performance-oriented systems. Finding five emphasized the role of the integrating module, whereas finding six accentuated the change towards a user-oriented innovation behavior. As previously described, the technical interconnection of the components within the integrating module allows objective monitoring and therefore information on the provided system performance. The novel innovation behavior is gathering information about the subjective user-demand, i.e. the requested performance through the user-interface of the integrating module. Both aspects incorporate the aggregation of hidden information within the firm which is neither accessible by the system suppliers nor the competitors. The hidden information comprises valuable knowledge regarding the resolution of the identified bottleneck on an operational level. Hence, the integrating module establishes an information filter as a measure to secure the advantage of the previously created value, i.e. the integration of the industry bottleneck within the realm of the firm. The following section describes the implications of this filter on the development of the upward interface, i.e. the connection of complements to the integrating module, in greater detail.
To recapitulate, performance-oriented systems are providing the performance of a variety of resources. The system offerings comprise a high elasticity of resource deployment as the key advantage for the user. This means on the downside, that the implementing firm has to deploy the necessary resources for system composition and operation. The informants of the examined case examples accentuate that especially the deployment of financial resources becomes a major problem for the providing firm with increasing system size. Thus, the managers of mature performance-oriented systems are forced to refocus and adapt the structure of their offering. This process is illustrated by 'Mobility 9': "I believe you need to have very good service. [...] So what we do is we are constantly giving up the product part in order to provide that service. And I believe, strategic move is actually, constantly to give up the product and outsource it and focus on service, service, you know, good service. So, your interface with the client should be very good." First, this quote underscores the role of the user-interface, which was discussed in the previous section. Second, the informant argues for outsourcing the physical complements, i.e. the product components of the system. Albeit this quote is clear about the minor relevance of product components in rising systems, the question remains why the examined system initially integrated these resources within their firm boundary at all. The answer is given by 'Mobility 7': "We were just too small. We were solving our own problem. So we were not having this collaboration with other companies. The strategy to collaborate with other companies was a development strategy and a growth strategy. But the point is actually to use their customers to be your customers as well. That is the idea. Since they are close to their customers, you are getting close to those target groups as well." And further "You know, usually for those kind of systems, you have to start up, you have to figure out a startup setting. Then you have to find out your partners, as we were just talking about, those distributional partners to somehow amplify your system, to scale up your system. In the beginning, these partners, they probably ask you for exclusive partnerships, [...] and then in a third phase you have to overcome those exclusive partnerships." ('Mobility 7') First, this quote illustrates that the providing firm initially has to compose and operate the system on its own. The firm needs to validate the capability of the system to resolve the bottleneck. The possibility to outsource physical complements through partnerships with suppliers correlates with the system size and therefore is relevant for comparatively mature systems only. Second, the manager describes the pursuit to source one single complement not from one supplier but several. This indicates that the providing firms strive to decentralize their sourcing.
Third, the informant describes an advantage of outsourcing besides an increase of
financial elasticity for the firm: the integration of new, related user groups within the system. The system evolution towards outsourcing the product components is also supported by informants from other industries. Exemplary, 'Chemical 4' asserts that: "At the beginning, many things were separated like in pieces. Then we came into a situation where everybody is now cooperating with us, like chemical producers, like recyclers, like waste management people, like customers, everybody is cooperating to keep this will arising."
Depiction 21: Location of System Resources
Depiction 21 incorporates an excerpt from the code relations browser, a visual tool of MaxQDA to reveal relations between different codes. The illustration provides an overview of the generic system resources, e.g. product component, service module or integrating platform, and their location with regards to the firm boundary, e.g. internal or external resource. The bubble diameter equals the number of quotes within all interviews. The results support the portrayed evolution towards a constant outsourcing of the product components. The service modules comprise a divergent pattern. Directly platform-related services are kept internal, whereas platform-independent services are often outsourced as well. As already discussed, the vast majority of case examples keep the integrating module internal due to its importance. The depicted results are aggregated from all examined cases. Albeit the evolution to continuously outsource
product components is especially relevant for the capital intensive systems in the mobility, chemical and energy industry, it can also be observed in the ICT industry to a certain extent. In the latter case, the higher elasticity for the firm in terms of time and know-how are rated as relevant as the financial advantages. The results further indicate that the central supplier for the systems that were developed by incumbents is the parental firm. Depiction 22 integrates the recent insights on the adaption of the firm boundary with growing systems size.
To summarize, the responsibility of the product resources is more and more relocated outside the firm boundary to ensure the flexibility of rising systems. The need for a significant resource deployment is shifted towards the suppliers. The providing firm's emphasis resides on the integrating module and its related interfaces. The further system evolution is characterized by decentralization on the upward side, i.e. several suppliers for one component, as well as on the downward side of the integrating module through the further integration of related user groups. This leads to the seventh finding:
Finding 7: Product resources are constantly outsourced by the firm with