Platform Thinking: Towards a Cross-Sectoral Socio-Technical Paradigm
Submission deadline: 15 October 2026
This Special Issue investigates how platform thinking is evolving from a digital business model into a broader socio-technical paradigm. It shifts attention from platforms as purely technological infrastructures to platforms as organizing logics that reshape collaboration, governance, and value creation across diverse domains. By connecting insights from innovation management, organizational theory, and socio-technical systems, this issue aims to uncover how platform principles operate in hybrid, civic, industrial, and public sector settings. Contributions will advance theory and provide practical guidance for scholars, policymakers, and practitioners addressing the systemic transformations driven by platformization.

Guest editors:

Daniel Trabucchi - School of Management Politecnico di Milano, daniel.trabucchi@polimi.it
Luca Mora - Edinburgh Napier Universirty & Tallinn University of Technology, l.mora@napier.ac.uk
Tommaso Buganza - School of Management Politecnico di Milano, tommaso.buganza@polimi.it
Paavo Ritala - LUT University, paavo.ritala@lut.fi
Wim Vanhaverbeke - University of Antwerp, wim.vanhaverbeke@uantwerpen.be
Special issue information:

Scope and rationale

In recent years, platform-based firms have risen to prominence, reshaping the global economic landscape and becoming some of the most influential and valuable organizations worldwide (Kenney et al., 2021). These firms, relying on different value architectures, leverage digital infrastructures to connect distinct user groups, enabling exchanges and interactions that generate value through various mechanisms such as facilitating peer-to-peer transactions, enabling crowdsourced content creation, offering subscription-based access to curated services, supporting data-driven personalization, or fostering co-innovation through open ecosystems (Gaver and Cusumano, 2014; Trabucchi & Buganza, 2022). Their impact spans nearly every industry, from transport and commerce to healthcare and education (Tauscher & Laudine, 2018; Özalp et al., 2022), illustrating the versatility and reach of platform models (Kenney et al., 2021). Prominent cases include social networking sites like Facebook (Thomas et al., 2022) and YouTube (Gastaldi et al., 2024), and large-scale marketplaces such as Amazon (Ritala et al., 2014), all of which process a massive number of transactions, content items, and interactions globally (Kenney et al., 2021).

As digital transformation continues to influence organizational strategies, platform models are emerging as key enablers of new forms of value creation, distribution, and appropriation (Gawer and Cusumano, 2014). These architectures offer operational advantages, including high scalability, efficiency in resource allocation, and significant reductions in transaction costs (Evans, 2016). They also support broader participation by reducing entry barriers, fostering inclusivity, and opening new avenues for innovation (Amit and Han, 2017; Trabucchi and Buganza, 2022).

Network effects are another defining characteristic of successful platforms (Katz and Shapiro, 1985; Karhu et al., 2024). For instance, Airbnb’s growth trajectory was initially constrained by a lack of users on both the supply and demand sides. However, as more hosts and guests joined, the platform became increasingly attractive to both groups, leading to exponential growth and continuous platform evolution by exploiting idle assets via a novel platform market structure (Trabucchi et al., 2020; Kashanizadeh et al., 2024). Today, Airbnb connects a global community of over 1.5 billion users, facilitating short-term stays across more than 200 countries and regions through a network of over 5 million hosts[1]. This platform company is a dominant force in the travel and hospitality sector. Ride-hailing service Uber demonstrates another aspect of platform efficiency: by relying on independent drivers rather than owning a vehicle fleet, the company minimizes fixed costs and capital investment. As usage expands, Uber’s operational costs are distributed over a larger number of transactions, exemplifying economies of scale (Urbinati et al, 2015; Trabucchi et al., 2020).

While much of the early scholarship on platforms has concentrated on their digital underpinnings – examining how software infrastructures, algorithms, and data flows enable two-sided markets and ecosystem coordination (Gawer and Cusumano, 2014; Parker and Van Alstyne, 2005) – a growing strand of research is now pushing beyond these foundations. This emerging literature introduces platform thinking as a broader socio-technical logic that informs how platform-based principles such as modularity, generativity, orchestration, and multi-sided value creation, can be applied to transform organizational structures, governance mechanisms, and institutional arrangements (Jacobides et al., 2018; Thomas & Tee, 2022; Trabucchi & Buganza, 2022).

This shift signals a conceptual expansion (Kuan and Thornton, 2022; Perez Mengual et al., 2023; Wijngaarden, 2023; Karhu et al., 2024): from platforms as digital tools to platforms as organizing logics. This broader view reveals that the platform model is not confined to tech companies or digital-native firms. It is increasingly visible in diverse organizational contexts – for example, science parks (e.g., Cirella and Yström, 2018), civic infrastructures (e.g., Logue and Grimes, 2022), cooperative systems (e.g., Scholz, 2016), physical asset-heavy industrial companies (e.g., Springer et al., 2025), and public sector organizations (e.g., Cordella and Paletti, 2019) – where digital infrastructure may be partial, peripheral, or even absent. In these settings, platform thinking guides how actors coordinate, interact, and co-create value, often relying on human facilitation and shared governance mechanisms, and even physical proximity, rather than (only) automated matchmaking.

However, despite these developments, academic discourse remains heavily centered on iconic digital cases (e.g. Uber, Airbnb, and Amazon) and grounded observations mainly related to technical architectures and algorithmic coordination (Möhlmann et al., 2021; Brons et al., 2022). Relatedly, the literature has mainly focused on highly scalable platforms in business-to-customer (B2C) markets, leaving other types of platform markets unaddressed. As a result, two key dimensions of platform evolution remain underexplored.

First, there is limited theorization of how platform thinking is being applied by organizations outside the tech sector, including public institutions (e.g., collaborative platforms and local governments using participatory platforms for urban planning) (e.g., Cordella and Paletti, 2019), civic initiatives (e.g., community-run digital commons or platform cooperatives) (e.g., Scholz, 2016)), physical innovation spaces (e.g., science parks, fab-labs, and accelerators) (e.g., Cirella and Ystrom, 2018), and traditional firms adopting internal platform models to enhance modularity and cross-functional coordination. These settings demonstrate that platform logic is diffusing beyond its digital-native roots, but the mechanisms and implications of this diffusion remain poorly understood (e.g., Gawer, 2021). What is still missing is a cohesive theoretical understanding to explain the common mechanisms, emerging tensions, and governance challenges that arise when platform logics are applied in settings where digital infrastructure plays a partial or supporting role, rather than being the primary driver.

Second, there is a pressing need to move beyond infrastructure-centric analyses that narrowly focus on the technological components of platforms and instead examine the broader socio-technical transformations these models are enabling (e.g., Kretschmer et al., 2022). Platform thinking is reorganizing digital interactions while also contributing to reshaping how collective participation is structured across domains (Amit and Han, 2017), redefining the roles of users, producers, intermediaries, and institutions (Kretschmer et al., 2022). It introduces new modes of orchestration – where coordination may occur through algorithms, interfaces, or human facilitation (e.g., Möhlmann et al., 2021; Brons et al., 2022) – and challenges existing governance logics by distributing authority across multi-actor systems (e.g., Pereira et al., 2019). Platforms and platform ecosystems increasingly mediate how innovation unfolds: not solely as technological advancement, but as a process of institutional negotiation, discourse, trust-building, and rule-setting among diverse stakeholders (Ert et al, 2016; Thomas & Ritala, 2022; Kashanizadeh et al., 2024). These shifts have deep implications for how we conceptualize power, inclusion, accountability, and value creation in contemporary socio-economic systems (Amit and Han, 2017).

This Special Issue seeks to address these gaps by rethinking platforms as configurable socio-technical systems, rather than software architectures or digital marketplaces. We invite contributions that examine how platform thinking operates as an organizing logic, shaping organizational designs, collaboration, coordination, governance mechanisms, regulatory frameworks, and value creation processes in diverse settings, including public, private, and hybrid domains. In line with the mission of Technological Forecasting and Social Change (TFSC), we are particularly interested in studies that reveal how platform logics both influence and are influenced by technological trajectories, institutional conditions, and broader socio-economic transformations.

We encourage submissions that engage with, but are not limited to, the following themes:

The emergence and operation of platform-like models in non-digital or hybrid contexts (e.g., innovation districts, science parks, cooperative marketplaces, traditional asset-heavy industrial settings, accelerators, and fab-labs).
The role of platform logic in civic and urban innovation (e.g., participatory urban platforms, GovTech initiatives, federated digital twins, and platform cooperatives).
The internal adoption of platform logics within organizations, including initiatives to enhance modularity in processes and systems, fostering of cross-functional collaboration, improving of knowledge sharing, enabling interoperability between business units, and integrating internal and external innovation efforts.
The transformation of governance in complex systems through platform mechanisms (e.g., orchestration, data-based coordination, API ecosystems, and hybrid human–algorithmic regulation).
The frictions, trade-offs, and governance challenges in adapting platform models to public, decentralized, or mission-oriented systems (e.g., scalability vs. inclusion, openness vs. control, efficiency vs. equity).
By broadening the analytical lens from digital platforms to platform thinking, this Special Issue aims to:

Uncover underexplored manifestations of platformization and analyze their strategic relevance, institutional dynamics, and broader societal consequences
Advance theoretical understanding of platforms as socio-technical arrangements, integrating both technological and institutional dimensions.
Foster cross-disciplinary dialogue, connecting innovation research with urban studies, information systems, organization studies, strategy, public administration, governance, and other fields where platform logics are evolving, ensuring that insights from diverse domains interconnect to inform and enrich platform scholarship.
Ultimately, our goal is to position platform thinking as a foundational paradigm for studying technological and organizational change together. This goal is aligned with TFSC’s commitment to exploring emerging futures and socio-technical transitions and evaluating their systemic impacts.

Contribution and Alignment

Research on platforms has developed considerably over the past two decades, evolving from its early roots in economics and management into adjacent fields such as innovation studies, information systems, and organizational theory. The foundational literature largely conceptualized platforms as digital intermediaries that enable transactions between user groups, underpinned by software and technological infrastructures, algorithmic matchmaking mechanisms, and cross-side network effects (Evans & Schmalensee, 2016; Rochet & Tirole, 2003; Eisenmann et al., 2006). This work generated enduring insights into how platforms create and capture value, producing influential studies on platform strategy and multi-sided markets (Gawer & Cusumano, 2014; McIntyre et al., 2021; Jacobides et al., 2024), and examining their implications for both digital-native firms and established organizations (Karhu et al., 2024; Springer et al., 2025).

Typologies of platforms: transaction, orthogonal, and innovation

As platform research has matured, scholars have increasingly moved beyond a “one-size-fits-all” view, distinguishing between platform types based on their core value creation logics. A widely used classification identifies three primary archetypes, each with distinct mechanisms of value creation, orchestration, and governance (Cusumano et al., 2019; Trabucchi & Buganza, 2023): transactional, orthogonal, and innovation platforms.

Transactional platforms (or transaction platforms) are the most commonly known and studied type. Rooted in the economics of two-sided markets (Evans & Schmalensee, 2016; Cennamo, 2021), these platforms facilitate direct exchanges between two interdependent user groups, such as buyers and sellers or drivers and passengers. Their value emerges through cross-side network effects, meaning that as one side grows, the other side finds the platform more attractive (Rochet & Tirole, 2003; Parker and Van Alstyne, 2005). Classic examples include Airbnb, Uber, and Visa. These platforms are designed to optimize matchmaking and reduce transaction costs, and they are often scalable due to their low marginal costs and data-driven efficiencies. Among established firms, transactional platforms remain the most accessible entry point into the platform economy, especially when extending existing value chains or repurposing idle assets (Trabucchi et al., 2020).

Orthogonal platforms, also known as non-transactional platforms (Filistrucchi et al., 2014), differ in that the participating user groups do not interact directly. Instead, value is created asymmetrically, often by monetizing one group’s attention or data to benefit another group. For example, Google Search connects users seeking information with advertisers, but the two sides never transact directly. The same holds for Strava, which repurposes user-generated fitness data to provide insights to municipalities (Trabucchi et al., 2017). These platforms often integrate a linear service logic, delivering direct value to one group – with a platform model built on indirect monetization. They are particularly relevant in industries with strong data capabilities, such as retail, advertising, and smart mobility, and present a promising yet less explored domain in platform research, especially regarding governance and ethical concerns (Trabucchi & Buganza, 2023).

Innovation platforms are ecosystem-enabling infrastructures that support the creation of complementary innovations by third parties (Cennamo, 2021). These platforms function more as technological foundations rather than marketplaces, and they derive value from enabling external developers to build new services or products (Gawer & Cusumano, 2014). Examples include Apple iOS, Google Android, and Microsoft Azure. Innovation platforms rely on developer ecosystems, modular architecture, and openness to external contributions. They are more complex to manage, often requiring advanced capabilities in API design as well as partner integration and strategic openness (Jacobides et al., 2024). Despite their complexity, they are seen as high-leverage vehicles for ecosystem orchestration and long-term innovation.

The distinctions among these archetypes are more than taxonomical – they shape the mechanisms through which platform thinking can be applied across industries, sectors, and organizational types (e.g., from enabling any kind of marketplace dynamics, to enforce open innovation through APIs and a technological base, to the enablement of indirect network effects on the basis of data exploitation). For this Special Issue, we encourage submissions to clearly position their work within (or across) these and other established categories, while also considering how these logics translate into non-digital, hybrid, and cross-sector contexts where the technical layer is only a part of a broader socio-technical system.

An emerging new perspective

A growing strand of scholarship is challenging the dominant digital-centric framing of platform research. Building on but also extending foundational work, recent studies introduce platform thinking as the application of platform-based principles such as modularity, orchestration, and multi-sided value creation in contexts that go well beyond digital-native business models (Trabucchi & Buganza, 2022). These contexts include science parks, coworking spaces, urban commons, cooperative marketplaces, and public service innovation (Perez Mengual et al., 2023; Schiuma & Santarsiero, 2023).

In these settings, platform logics unfold through spatial proximity, where physical co-location fosters repeated encounters and nurtures trust-building and knowledge exchange; through human-mediated coordination, where dedicated actors or institutions play the role of orchestrators and matchmakers; and through local network effects, where the value of participation increases as more actors within a specific geographic or institutional context become involved. In such cases, digital tools may still be present, but they often have a supporting role, complementing rather than replacing the social and spatial dynamics that underpin coordination and value creation (Franzò et al., 2023; Rohn et al., 2021).

Elements of a broader socio-technical turn in platform research have already started to surface. Recent contributions have examined platform-enabled value emergence and co-creation (Peng et al., 2023), analyzed algorithmic governance in gig platforms (Zhu et al., 2024), investigated ecosystem transitions in platform business models (Gomes et al., 2023), mapped virtuous platform cycles (Rodrigo et al., 2025), explored the role of platforms in industry disruption (Trabucchi et al., 2019), reviewed the field of industrial digital platforms (Madanaguli et al., 2023), and studied innovation diffusion in two-sided models (Wang & Lai, 2020). Collectively, these studies indicate an emerging interest in the institutional, governance, and systemic dimensions of platformization, yet they remain primarily grounded in digital infrastructures and their relationship with corporate-level strategies and market-based logics (e.g., Cennamo, 2021; Gawer, 2021, Jacobides et al., 2024).

This Special Issue aims to build on these foundations while extending the lens to non-digital, hybrid, and cross-sector settings where platform thinking serves as an organizing logic beyond its traditional technological core. It aims to reposition platform research within a broader socio-technical and institutional frame. We call for contributions showing how platform thinking has evolved into an organizing paradigm that reaches far beyond digital-native firms. It is now evident in civic platforms, federated data infrastructures, cooperative models, science parks, and local ecosystems, where it shapes the ways actors connect, interact, and work together toward shared objectives. In these diverse environments, platform thinking has been applied to set the terms for collaboration, define the flows of knowledge and resources, and influence how collective efforts are initiated, sustained, and expanded across public, private, and hybrid domains.

Concrete examples can help make this shift visible. The rise of platform cooperatives, for instance, demonstrates how platform thinking can be repurposed for democratic ownership and collective governance, as in the case of Fairbnb.coop, a cooperative alternative to Airbnb where hosts and communities collectively manage and appropriate value. Similarly, the emergence of cross-sector initiatives such as Gaia-X illustrates how platform logics can underpin federated and mission-driven infrastructures; in this case, a Europe-wide effort to establish secure and interoperable data ecosystems that enable coordination across industries and nations. These cases show how platform thinking can be mobilized in settings where digital tools are only part of the picture.

Our agenda builds on and extends these recent trends in platform research, which can be summarized as follow:

A shift in ontology: From platforms as technical enablers to platforms as socio-technical arrangements that integrate technological, organizational, and institutional dimensions (e.g., Kretschmer et al., 2022).
A shift in coordination mechanisms: From algorithmic matchmaking to human-mediated coordination, where trust, facilitation, and shared governance play a central role (e.g., Möhlmann et al., 2021; Brons et al., 2022).
A shift in purpose and values: From a focus on scalable efficiency to inclusive, mission-driven governance that balances growth with equity and societal goals (Scholz, 2016; Gulati, 2022; Ritala, 2024).
A shift in sectoral reach: From sector-specific models to the cross-sector diffusion of platform logics across public institutions, civic initiatives, and hybrid ecosystems (Kenney et al., 2021).
A shift in infrastructure dependence: From digital infrastructure dependence to hybrid and non-digital configurations in which platform principles operate effectively even when technology plays a partial or supporting role (Cirella and Ystrom, 2018; Kuan et al., 2022).
By inviting interdisciplinary perspectives – from innovation management, public administration, and urban studies to governance, sociology, and beyond – this Special Issue seeks to advance TFSC’s mission of exploring the technological, institutional, and societal dynamics of change underpinning platform thinking. We call on scholars to move beyond “platforms as we know them” to investigate how platform logics are evolving, diffusing, and mutating across sectors, and how these transformations interact with wider processes of socio-technical and institutional change.

Topics of Interest

This Special Issue welcomes a broad range of theoretical, empirical, and methodological contributions that advance the understanding of platform thinking as a socio-technical paradigm operating across sectors, institutional settings, and degrees of digital intensity. We particularly seek studies that move beyond iconic digital-native cases to investigate how platform logics manifest in hybrid, non-digital, and unconventional contexts: for example, civic platforms, public sector organizations, federated data infrastructures, cooperative marketplaces, and physical platform spaces such as coworking hubs and science parks.

We encourage submissions that balance two complementary perspectives:

· Theoretical contributions that reinterpret and extend established definitions and theoretical understandings of platforms in light of organizational theory, institutional logics, socio-technical systems, and innovation governance. This may include the development of new conceptual typologies, integrative frameworks, or novel constructs that illuminate how platform principles are adapted and reconfigured in diverse settings.

· Practical contributions that generate actionable insights from rigorous research methods, such as in-depth case studies, longitudinal analyses, surveys, ethnographies, design science research, and action research. Empirical work should aim to capture the governance challenges and societal implications of platform thinking in real-world contexts.

Consistent with TFSC’s editorial mission, we are especially interested in contributions that:

· Bridge disciplinary boundaries by integrating perspectives from innovation management, public administration, urban studies, governance, sociology, and any other related fields.

· Engage with societal-level transformations, examining how platformization processes interact with technological change, institutional evolution, and socio-economic transitions.

· Advance methodological approaches for studying complex, multi-actor, and cross-sector platform configurations, including hybrid arrangements where digital tools play a supporting rather than central role.

The questions below are illustrative rather than exhaustive and are intended to spark contributions that connect to the Special Issue’s scope and agenda.

Platform thinking in physical and hybrid contexts

· How is platform thinking adapted in environments such as coworking spaces, science parks, or innovation districts where interactions are not primarily mediated by digital infrastructures?

· Under what conditions can platform thinking generate matchmaking and trust-building without relying on fully digital architectures?

· How do spatial proximity and place-based identity influence the way platform thinking organizes collaboration and resource sharing?

· What spatial or organizational configurations – fixed, distributed, or temporary – best support platform thinking in multi-actor settings?

· How are physical assets, equipment, and spaces both facilitating and constraining platform-based models?

Civic, cooperative, and federated platforms

· How does platform thinking shape governance and orchestration in civic, cooperative, and federated platforms that span multiple institutions or jurisdictions?

· What challenges and trade-offs arise when platform thinking is applied in nonprofit or community-led contexts?

· How do these platforms manage tensions between openness and operational efficiency?

· Which design principles and governance models enable platform thinking to sustain engagement in cooperative and federated ecosystems over time?

Human-centered orchestration

· How does platform thinking operate when orchestration is primarily human-led, and what skills, roles, and practices are essential for building trust and fostering engagement?

· Can human-mediated orchestration within platform thinking be scaled or institutionalized without losing its relational strengths?

· How do hybrid orchestration models blending human facilitation with digital tools extend the reach and adaptability of platform thinking?

Alternative pathways to network effects

· How does platform thinking generate network effects in localized, small-scale, or non-digital ecosystems?

· When scale is limited, how does platform thinking substitute volume with interaction quality, relational density, or diversity of actors?

· Which organizational, spatial, or institutional levers best stimulate virtuous cycles in hybrid or non-digital applications of platform thinking?

Platform thinking in the public sector

· How can platform thinking be embedded in the design, delivery, and governance of public services?

· How does platform thinking enable hybrid configurations (such as public–private partnerships or university-led consortia) to balance market, mission, and community logics?

· What governance tensions arise when platform thinking spans public, private, and third-sector domains, and how are they resolved?

· Can public platforms applying platform thinking achieve modularity and scalability without simply replicating commercial models?

· How does platform thinking enable collaborative governance across multiple agencies and government levels?

· What institutional arrangements and incentive structures sustain collaboration in public sector initiatives leveraging platform thinking?

· How does platform thinking reshape relationships between government, private actors, and civil society in co-producing public value?

· Which policy and regulatory frameworks frameworks best support the long-term viability of platform thinking in the public sector?

Urban platforms and smart city development

· How is platform thinking shaping the design and governance of urban platforms, such as urban operating systems, intelligent mobility systems, or digital twins?

· How does platform thinking enable interoperability and data sharing among diverse urban stakeholders?

· In what ways can urban platforms using platform thinking reconcile centralized control with citizen-driven innovation?

· What institutional arrangements ensure that platform thinking in urban settings advances efficiency without compromising social inclusion?

· How does platform thinking interact with physical infrastructure to support place-based innovation?

We encourage both early-career and senior scholars to contribute. Submissions may focus on local, national, or global contexts, and may draw from diverse geographies. All papers should clearly articulate their contribution to platform theory and to the broader understanding of socio-technical change.

Manuscript submission information:

All manuscripts should be original and not under review elsewhere. Submissions will be peer-reviewed following Technological Forecasting and Social Change’s standard policies.

Submit via Editorial Manager® by selecting the article type: “VSI: Platform Thinking”

Author guidelines: Guide for authors - Technological Forecasting and Social Change - ISSN 0040-1625 | ScienceDirect.com by Elsevier

Important Dates:

· Special issue opens for submission: January 15, 2026

· Submission window: 9 months

· [OPTIONAL] Special track for pre-submission feedback at the International Conference Symplatform (Abstracts by April 1st, see symplatform.com) organized by Politecnico di Milano

· Submission deadline: October 15, 2026