Rethinking dominant theories used in information systems field in the digital platform era

Selecting an appropriate theory has always remained a critical task for the digital policy researchers. The literature seems to miss providing theoretical accounts of policy view of the digital platforms governance and offering tools for measuring the effectiveness of policies. To this end, this paper aims to provide a critical review and comparison of dominant information systems (IS) theories used. It highlights the weaknesses of these theories to explain technology features and actor- technology interactions with the rising trend of digital platforms. The main argument of this research is that the policymakers will not have adequate tools for policymaking of digital platforms by following the assumptions of theories used dominantly in the IS field.

This paper analyzes the assumptions of dominant IS theories and their applications in the digital policy literature. Then, it shows to what extent these theories are incapable of conceptualizing features of technology and actors’ role in policymaking and governance of digital platforms.

This paper identifies three aspects of digital platforms, including layered architecture, multisided (“side” means “participants”) and user interaction based, that dominant IS theories have shortcomings in explaining them.

The findings of this research can help authorities to take a more realistic view in defining digital platform policy objectives and applying more appropriate tools in policy implementation.

Discussing insights into the shortcomings of theories helps to define the theoretical requirements for studying policymaking and governance of digital platforms. It also suggests opportunities and recommendations for future studies.