Less power for the tech giants? The potential of decentralised platforms

Digital platforms such as Amazon, Apple and Google are increasingly coming under criticism due to their market power. Can decentralised platforms be a realistic alternative to these tech giants – or will they remain a niche phenomenon?
 
Tim Meyer: That is precisely what we are attempting to find out with this research project. Unlike platforms such as Amazon, Apple or Google, control over decentralised platforms does not lie with a single company, but with several stakeholders who share this power. At first glance, this sounds like an interesting alternative. In practice, however, challenges arise. It has become apparent that the design and coordination of decentralised platforms are more difficult, and that even here some stakeholders assume a dominant position. In our project, we therefore try to determine to what extent decentralised platforms can actually be designed in such a way that they offer added value to users and product providers on these platforms.
 
Your project "Decentralisation and Platform Governance" examines so-called “Decentralised Autonomous Organisations” (DAOs). What characterises their decision-making processes, and what insights do you expect to gain regarding the advantages and disadvantages of this form of governance?
 
TM: Decentralised platforms are generally based on so-called "Decentralised Autonomous Organisations", or DAOs for short. The basic idea behind DAOs is that decisions – for example, regarding the design of a decentralised platform – are taken collectively by a community of individuals. In practice, this usually done through voting systems, in which each member of the DAO can express their approval or rejection of a particular decision. The disadvantage of this form of governance is that decisions often take longer to reach, making it more difficult to control the platform. As the decisions to be made are also generally very complex, many participants delegate their voting rights to a small number of experts within the DAO, which in turn leads to a concentration of control that actually contradicts the fundamental idea of decentralisation.
 
Your study focuses on crypto exchanges. Which insights from this area can also be applied to other digital platforms or sectors?
 
TM: The interesting thing about crypto exchanges is that there are two types of platforms co-existing in parallel: traditional digital platforms, where a single company has full control, and decentralised platforms, where power is distributed amongst multiple stakeholders. Both types of crypto exchanges offer users the same service – namely, trading in cryptocurrencies – even though they differ fundamentally in their structure. This allows for a direct comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of both models, as well as the corresponding behaviour of users. Much like many other platforms, crypto exchanges ultimately facilitate transactions between buyers and sellers, meaning that some insights could be applied to other areas.
 
There is currently intense debate about the risks of artificial intelligence and the power of large technology companies. What role can decentralisation play in making digital markets more transparent, fairer and more trustworthy?
 
TM: Whether it is artificial intelligence or decentralised platforms and the underlying blockchain technology, the question ultimately boils down to how novel algorithms will transform companies and business models. However, the effects of these two technologies are very different. With AI, we are seeing – at least for now – an increasing concentration of power amongst companies that control the algorithms. The idea behind decentralised platforms and the underlying blockchain technology, on the other hand, is to distribute control amongst multiple actors. In principle, therefore, this could create an interesting counterbalance. We are investigating whether this works in practice as part of our project.
 
In your view, what would be the most significant achievement of your research project? What specific insights could companies, regulatory authorities or society gain from it?
 
TM: The ultimate goal of the research project is to understand whether decentralised platforms can actually be successful in the long run in practice. Although traditional digital platforms are often the subject of criticism, it remains unclear in which areas decentralised platforms truly offer added value. Digital platforms are often highly efficient in the design of their processes and can react quickly to new developments. This offers advantages from which users can ultimately benefit too. Through this research project, we aim to identify the areas in which decentralised platforms can offer genuine, added value, and thereby understand which principles might also be applicable to traditional digital platforms.
 
Looking back at the platform economy in ten years’ time: Do you think that decentralisation will then be the exception or an integral part of digital markets – and why?
 
TM: I think that decentralised platforms will certainly play an important role in some areas. This applies in particular to areas where the products traded on the platform are digital and where ensuring trust between transaction partners plays a key role. Some experts also believe that they could play a key role in the exchange of services between AI agents. Further developments in the field of decentralised platforms will therefore certainly remain fascinating.

Prof. Tim Meyer is an assistant professor of Strategic Management at the University of St.Gallen. His research focuses, amongst other things, on how digital platforms and ecosystems influence the performance and competitive relationships of companies. As part of the SNSF-funded project “Decentralisation and Platform Governance” (start: 1 October 2026, duration: 2 years), he is investigating whether decentralised platforms represent a viable alternative to the major platform companies.