Innovations need to satisfy interoperability criteria more and more, which is the “ability of information and communication technology (ICT) systems as well as, of the business processes they support in order to exchange data and enable the sharing of information and knowledge” (IDABC). New products and services have to be offered in cooperation with other components or as part of complex technical systems to individual customers and organizations or institutions that are themselves involved in a large number of technical and organizational environments. In addition to novel challenges in the supply side and the buy side, especially the information and communication technologies, markets have also changed. These markets have been particularly transformed by globalization because a growing number of various actors participate as consumers, suppliers and intermediaries in the trade of goods and services. These conditions require interoperability of one’s own innovative products and services with those of customers and existing infrastructures for a successful introduction into the market. Their importance is increased further by the new “open innovation” paradigm, which requires cooperation throughout research and development phases to integrate other technology suppliers as well as customers.
Interoperability has implications for competition policy because interoperable systems imply low barriers to market entry for innovative suppliers, as well as for innovative products and services. Competitive pressure for established companies increases, pushing innovative reactions in return. If one or several companies succeed in sealing off complex systems through limiting interoperability, monopoly or oligopoly-like structures can evolve, which are characterized by inhibited innovation. The challenges in establishing a framework for securing a framework of interoperability lie in the equality of all business models, neither favoring one model nor putting it at a disadvantage. After all, innovations are also driven by companies that finance their investments in innovation through the thereby created intellectual property rights.
Finally, the various strategies and instruments for securing interoperability have to be assessed regarding their impact on innovation enhancement. Apart from companies publicizing their own interfaces and open source codes, standardization constitutes an important and efficient instrument in transparent processes. A balance has to be kept between the interests of companies actively participating in standardization processes by publicizing technical knowledge and corresponding intellectual property rights, and the organizations which use these standards. Monopolization of standards by individual companies using restrictive licensing practices and disincentives for innovative companies that introduce their knowledge in standardization processes are to be avoided. Standardization should be promoted by innovative companies, while at the same time the interests of users have to be recognized and integrated. Because the government is an important user of information and communication technology and products established thereon, representatives of corresponding institutions should actively participate in standardization processes and – if possible – abstain from regulatory intervention.
Originally published as a part of “Schriftenreihe Politik”, page 23-24, avaliable from BITKOM at this page (in german)
