Journal of Management Information Systems

Volume 39 Number 3 2022 pp. 824-833

Special Section: Reevaluating Markets for Information

Kauffman, Robert J, Weber, Thomas A, and ,

Robert J. Kauffman ([email protected]; corresponding author) holds the Endowed Chair in Digitalization at the Copenhagen Business School and is Emeritus Professor of Information Systems at Singapore Management University (SMU). His graduate degrees are from Cornell University (M.A.) and Carnegie Mellon University (M.S. in Systems Science, and Ph.D. in Industrial Administration). Dr. Kauffman’s research has focused on technology and strategy, the economics of IT, financial services and technology, managerial decision-making, sustainability economics, and e-commerce. He previously served in the as Associate Dean (Faculty) and Associate Dean (Research), and Chair of the IS and Management Area at SMU’s School of Information Systems. He was also the W.P. Carey Chair in IS at Arizona State University, and Professor and Director of the MIS Research Center at the Carlson School of Management of the University of Minnesota. He was also a researcher and faculty member at the Economics Department of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, the Simon Graduate School of Management at the University of Rochester, the School of Economics and Management at Tsinghua University, and the Tuck School at Dartmouth College. His work has appeared in Organization Science, Management Science, Review of Economics and Statistics, Information Systems Research, Journal of Management Information Systems, and MIS Quarterly, among many others. He has won multiple awards for his field research contribution and research from professional associations for IS, Engineering Management, and Management Science.

Thomas A. Weber ([email protected]) is Professor of Operations, Economics and Strategy at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne. He holds Master’s degrees in Technology and Policy, and Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from MIT, and a Ph.D. in Applied Economics and Managerial Science from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Weber’s research interests include dynamic systems, optimization, the economics of information and uncertainty, the design of contracts, and strategy. Previously, he was a senior consultant with the Boston Consulting Group, as well as a member of the faculty in the Department of Management Science and Engineering at Stanford University, and a visiting faculty in Economics at Cambridge University and in Mathematics at Moscow State University. He has published over 100 scholarly papers, in such journals such as American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, Economics Letters, Economic Theory, Information Systems Research, Journal of Management Information Systems, Journal of Mathematical Economics, Management Science, Operations Research, and many others. He is the author of Optimal Control Theory with Applications in Economics (MIT Press, 2011).

Guest Editors’ Introduction

As the use of information as a productive and tradeable asset becomes more pervasive, its—often unintended—side-effects start showing. This prompts us to systematically recognize these effects and, once identified, to think about how to use them to our advantage or else mitigate them as much as may be economically and/or socially desirable. In this Special Section, we have assembled three research papers, which take a look at different interesting instances of this question, namely in the context of regulating peer-to-peer sharing markets, the substitution of knowledge workers (or their skills) by artificial intelligence (AI), and the difficulties in appropriating rents from information goods that can be pirated by its very consumers.

The deep infusion of information-based innovation into the manufacturing and service sectors of global economies and their electronic markets has continued apace over the past decade, resulting in effects that are both natural and expected. They include: information technology (IT)-induced price adjustments in computer retail [44]; manufacturing productivity and output quality gains [42]; new forms of business-network business-value co-creation [33]; a persistent global disaggregation of information-intensive services [3]; long-anticipated shifts in the boundaries of large and small firms [26]; and flexible, digital supply-chain sourcing in an increasingly borderless world of production and operations management [22]. In addition, we have witnessed changes in inter-firm collaboration via outsourced intermediate production [25] as well as how manufacturing plants [7] have leveraged process outsourcing to enhance their performance compared to their competitors.

Regarding unintended side-effects of the proliferation of information, a major emphasis in recent research has been on fake news, its externalities, and how to mitigate them [17, 35]. Researchers have also recognized that, given the extraordinary extent of fake news on the Internet, some “people believe what they want to believe [even] when it makes no sense at all” [41, p. 143]. The research has grown to encompass many different issues: the groundswell emergence of fake news on IT platforms; how it often spreads faster than real news; its dark-side effects in retail markets; how it can negatively shape consumer opinions about products and citizen views about political elections, and influence the debates on freedom of speech, gender, and racial equity; the selection of government agency, ministry, and judicial appointees; and social perspectives on resource sustainability in the wake of climate change. (See European Parliament [18] for an example.)

There also are Sector-related social-media communication anomalies that have resulted in biased information sharing. For example, there are now information-communication phenomena in financial markets that provide a new basis for irrational exuberance [49] and the paradox of rational irrationality [4, 12]—as well as irrational rationality [36]. An example is the GameStop stock meme on Reddit and the social-media-influenced stock price run-ups and short squeeze in January and February 2022 [45]. Such instances—increasingly observed—are changing the way we view the occasionally false wisdom of crowds, at least in the investment services and financial market context [14]. The conclusion many have drawn is that the abundance of information available today undoubtedly is a powerful force, both positive and negative in its effects, influencing consumer and producer decision-making and the behavioral patterns they exhibit [48]. Simultaneously though, it has affected the theory-based logic of firm-level strategy formulation and our assumptions about what constitutes individual identity, social civility, and collective action [15].

This Special Section of the Journal of Management Information Systems showcases new empirical and theoretical research that informs the thinking and approaches, by academic researchers, industry professionals, and policy makers, toward peer-to-peer markets, machine intelligence, and the difficulties of capturing the value of goods that are entirely based on information. It also considers how to best channel their beneficial effects to create and appropriate value for the firm in services [31] and elsewhere when sector templates define the division of labor, asset complementarities, and factor mobility all support co-specialized production [30]. The research articles we developed for publication demonstrate why Economics and Social Science research on technology impacts is vibrant, insightful, and can even be counterintuitive in its contributions to the information systems (IS) literature. This is true for those of us who are involved in crafting their scientific underpinnings and balancing the rigor of the inquiry with the relevance of what can be learned. Emerging from the new digital ecosystems of technological innovation is the impetus for strategy and technology observers to determine its effects with existing theories, while they seek to move the theoretical foundations of the IS discipline to higher and less explored ground. The articles are intended to offer insights to academics and advice to practitioners in several affected sectors. The empirical findings and theoretical perspectives that the authors present also deliver outcomes that will inform future decisions on sustainably generating rents and welfare from informational assets related to the peer-to-peer sharing economy, the substitution of knowledge workers by AI, and the selling of information goods in the presence of piracy.



For additional details, see von Briel and Dolnicar [56].

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).


[1]Acemoglu, D.; and Restrepo, P. The wrong kind of AI? Artificial intelligence and the future of labour demand. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy, and Society, 13, 1 (March 2020), 25–35.

[2]Aghion, P.; Akcigit; and Howitt, P. Lessons from Schumpeterian growth theory. American Economic Review, 105, 5 (May 2015), 94–99.

[3]Apte, U.M.; and Mason, R.O. Global disaggregation of information-intensive services. Management Science, 41, 7 (July 1995), 1250–1262.

[4]Ariely, D. Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions. New York: Harper-Collins, 2016.

[5]Bakos, J.Y.; and Brynjolfsson, E. Bundling information goods: Pricing, profits, and efficiency. Management Science, 45, 12 (December 1999), 1613–1630.

[6]Bakos, J.Y.; and Brynjolfsson, E. Bundling and competition on the internet. Marketing Science, 19, 1 (Winter 2000), 63–82.

[7]Bardhan, I.; Whitaker, J.; and Mithas, S. Information technology, production process outsourcing, and manufacturing plant performance. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23, 2 (Fall 2006), 13–40.

[8]Barron, K.; Kung, E.; and Proserpio, D. The effect of home-sharing on house prices and rents: Evidence from Airbnb. Marketing Science, 40, 1 (January 2021), 23–47.

[9]Bhargava, H. Mixed bundling of two independently valued goods. Management Science, 59, 9 (September 2013), 2170–2185.

[10]Bockstedt, J.C.; and Goh, K.H. Customized bundling and consumption variety of digital information goods. Journal of Management Information Systems, 31, 2 (Fall 2014), 105–132.

[11]Braverman, H. Labor and Monopoly Capital: The Degradation of Work in the Twentieth Century. New York: NYU Press, 1998.

[12]Caplan, B. Rational irrationality: A framework for the neoclassical-behavioral debate. Eastern Economic Review, 26, 2 (2000), 191–211.

[13]Chang, R.M; Kauffman, R.J; and Kwon, Y. Understanding the paradigm shift to computational social science in the presence of big data. Decision Support Systems, 63 (July 2014), 67–80.

[14]Chen, H.; De, P.; Hu, J.; and B.H. Hwang. Wisdom of crowds: The value of stock opinions transmitted through social media. Review of Financial Studies, 27, 5 (2014), 1367–1403.

[15]Clemons, E.K.; Dewan, R.M.; Kauffman, R.J.; and Weber, T.A. Understanding the information-based transformation of strategy and society. Journal of Management Information Systems, 34, 2 (Fall 2017), 425–456.

[16]Cui, Y.; and Davis, A.M. Tax-induced inequalities in the sharing economy. Management Science (2022, in press).

[17]Dennis, A.R.; Galletta, D.F.; and Webster, J. Fake news on the Internet. Journal of Management Information Systems, 38, 4 (Spring 2021), 893–897.

[18]European Parliament. The fight against disinformation and the right to freedom of expression. PE695.445, Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, Directorate-General for Internal Policies, July 2021.

[19]Filippas, A.; Horton, J.J.; and Zeckhauser, R.J. Owning, using, and renting: Some simple economics of the sharing economy. Management Science, 66, 9 (September 2020), 4152–4172.

[20]Frank, M.R.; Autor, D.; Bessen, J.E.; Brynjolfsson, E.; Cebrian, M.; Deming, D.J.; Feldman, M.; Groha, M.; Lobo, J.; Moro, E.; Wang, D.; Youn, H.; and Rahwan, I. Toward understanding the impact of AI on labor. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116, 14 (March 2019), 6531–6539.

[21]Frey, C.B.; and Osborne, M.A. The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114 (January 2017), 254–280.

[22]Fung, V.K.; Fung, W.K.; and Wind, Y. Competing in a Flat World: Building Enterprises for a Borderless World. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Publishing, 2008.

[23]Gandal, N.; Markovich, S.; and Riordan, M.H. Ain’t it “suite?” Bundling in the PC office software market. Strategic Management Journal, 39, 8 (August 2018), 2120–2151.

[24]Gomber, P.; Kauffman, R.J.; Parker, C.; and Weber, B.W. On the Fintech Revolution: Interpreting the forces of innovation, disruption, and transformation in financial services. Journal of Management Information Systems, 35, 1 (Summer 2018), 220–265.

[25]Han, K.; Kauffman, R.J.; and Nault, B.R. Returns to information technology outsourcing. Information Systems Research, 22, 4 (December 2011), 824–840.

[26]Hitt, L.M. Information technology and firm boundaries: Evidence from panel data. Information Systems Research, 10, 2 (June 1999), 134–148.

[27]Hoang, A.P.; and Kauffman, R.J. Content sampling, household informedness, and the consumption of digital information goods. Journal of Management Information Systems, 35, 2, (Fall 2018), 575–609.

[28]Hong, S.J.; Bauer, J.M.; Lee, K.; and Granados, N.F. Drivers of supplier participation in ride-hailing platforms. Journal of Management Information Systems, 37, 3 (Winter 2020), 602–630.

[29]Imbens, G.; and Rubin, D.B. Causal Inference in Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.

[30]Jacobides, M.G.; Knudsen, T.; and Augier, M. Benefiting from innovation: Value creation, value appropriation and the role of industry architectures. Research Policy, 35, 8 (October 2006), 1200–1221.

[31]Kathuria A.; Mann, A.; Khuntia, J.; Saldanha T.; and Kauffman, R.J. Understanding the strategic value appropriation path for cloud computing. Journal of Management Information Systems, 35, 3 (Winter 2018), 740–775.

[32]Kauffman, R.J.; Kim, K.; Lee, S.Y.; Hoang, A.P.; and Ren, J. Combining machine-based and econometrics methods for policy analytics insights. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 25 (2017), 115–140.

[33]Kauffman, R.J.; Li, T.; and van Heck, E. Business network-based value creation in electronic commerce. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 15, 1 (Fall 2010), 111–142.

[34]Kauffman, R.J.; and Naldi, M. Research directions for sharing economy issues. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 43 (2020), Art. 100973.

[35]Kim, A.; Moravec, P.L.; and Dennis, A.R. Combating fake news on social media with source ratings: The effects of user and expert reputation ratings. Journal of Management Information Systems, 36, 3 (Winter 2019), 931–968.

[36]Kim, K; Lee, S.Y.; and Kauffman, R.J. Collective behavior and social sentiment: Retail investors, irrationality, and the GameStop short squeeze. Working paper, Copenhagen Business School, Frederiksberg, Denmark, 2022.

[37]Koty, A.C. Artificial intelligence in China: Shenzhen releases first local regulations. (July 29, 2021). Available at: (accessed on June 13, 2022).

[38]Lee, K.F. How to prepare for AI job displacement? (October 25, 2018). Available at: (accessed on June 13, 2022).

[39]Marchi, G.D.; Lucertini, G.; and Tsoukiàs, A. From evidence-based policymaking to policy analytics. Annals of Operations Research, 236, 1 (January 2016), 15–38.

[40]McCarthy, N. Pirated video gets viewed over 200 billion times a year. Forbes (June 26, 2019).

[41]Moravec, P.L.; Minas, R.L.; and Dennis, A.R. Fake news on social media: People believe what they want to believe when it makes no sense at all. MIS Quarterly, 43, 4 (December 2019), 143–160.

[42]Mukhopadhyay, T.; Rajiv, S.; and Srinivasan, K. Information technology impact on process output and quality. Management Science, 43, 12 (December 2003), 1645–1659.

[43]Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The economic impact of counterfeiting and piracy. Paris: OECD, 2007.

[44]Oh, W.; and Lucas, H.C., Jr. Information technology and pricing decisions: Price adjustments in online computer markets. MIS Quarterly, 30, 3 (September 2006), 755–775.

[45]Pedersen, L.H. Game on: Social networks and markets. ASSA 2022 Virtual Annual Meeting, January 7-9, 2022.

[46]Schmalensee, R. Commodity bundling by single-product monopolies. Journal of Law and Economics, 25, 1 (April 1982), 67–71.

[47]Schumpeter, J. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. New York: Harper, 1942.

[48]Shapiro, C.; and Varian, H.R. Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press, 1998.

[49]Shiller, R.J. Irrational Exuberance, 3rd ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016.

[50]Spulber, D.F. The intermediation theory of the firm: Integrating economic and management approaches to strategy. Managerial Decision and Economics, 24, 4 (June-July 2003), 253–266.

[51]Stahl, A. How AI will impact the future of work and life. Forbes (March 10, 2021). Available at (accessed on July 26, 2022).

[52]Stremersch, S.; and Tellis, G.J. Strategic bundling of products and prices: A new synthesis for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 66, 1 (January 2002), 55–72.

[53]Szczepański, M. Economic impacts of artificial intelligence. EPRS-PE-637.967, European Parliamentary Economic Service, Strasbourg, France, Brussels, Belgium, Luxembourg, July 2019.

[54]Thatcher, M.E.; and Clemons, E.K. Managing the Costs of informational privacy: Pure bundling as a strategy in the individual health insurance market. Journal of Management Information Systems, 17, 2, 2000 (Fall 2000), 29–57.

[55]Thomas, M. Will a robot take your job? AI’s impact on the future of jobs. (January 25, 2022). (accessed June 13, 2022).

[56]von Briel, D.; and Dolnicar, S. The evolution of Airbnb regulation: An international longitudinal investigation 2008-2020. Annals of Tourism Research, 87 (March 2021), Art. 102983.

[57]Weber, T.A. Product pricing in a peer-to-peer economy. Journal of Management Information Systems, 33, 2 (Fall 2016), 573–596.

[58]Weber, T.A. How to market smart products: Design and pricing for sharing markets. Journal of Management Information Systems, 37, 3 (Winter 2020), 631–667.

[59]Wessel, M.; Gleasure, R.; and Kauffman, R.J. Journal of Management Information Systems, 38, 3 (Fall 2021), 612–646.

[60]West, D.M. Will robots and AI take your job? The economic and political consequences of automation. TechTank, Brookings Institution, Washington DC, April 18, 2018.