Compliance Strategies in Emerging Digital Markets: A Comparative Qualitative Analysis of Platform Regulatory Strategies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37241/jatss.2026.161Keywords:
digital platforms, regulatory compliance, non-market strategy, platform architecture, emerging marketsAbstract
Introduction: As rapid platform innovation collides with legal frameworks, digital market regulation in emerging economies creates strategic tension. Accordingly, for digital platforms, this endeavor explores the way in which country of origin influences regulatory response, architecture conditions regulatory exposure, and how these two attributes interact within a single institutional environment.
Method: Through exploratory qualitative multi-case design, the study compares the compliance strategies of Trendyol, a foreign-backed hybrid platform and Sahibinden.com, a domestic broker operating without foreign investment. Each firm’s regulatory trajectory is analyzed and reconstructed using the documentary record of the Turkish Competition Authority.
Results or Findings: The results indicate that although the regime drives both firms toward eventual accommodation, their responses differ. Firm origin shapes the range of non-market tools available, with Trendyol drawing on a broader set of statutory mechanisms than Sahibinden.com. Platform architecture shapes where compliance cost is absorbed. Trendyol shifts its concessions into peripheral activity through structural separation, whereas Sahibinden.com internalizes them within its core data asset.
Discussion or Conclusion: This article develops a model of segmented compliance in which regulatory adaptation is distributed across distinct layers of platform organization. The model shows that the regulatory regime fixes the outer bounds of response, firm origin shapes the depth of the repertoire deployed within those bounds, and platform architecture determines the organizational location at which compliance costs are absorbed. The model contributes to the institution-based view, non-market strategy, and research on multi-sided markets.
Downloads
References
Aguinis, H., & Solarino, A. M. (2019). Transparency and replicability in qualitative research: The case of interviews with elite informants. Strategic Management Journal, 40(8), 1291–1315. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3015
Baron, D. P. (1995). Integrated strategy: Market and nonmarket components. California Management Review, 37(2), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165788
Boddewyn, J. J., & Brewer, T. L. (1994). International-business political behavior: New theoretical directions. Academy of Management Review, 19(1), 119–143. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1994.9410122010
Buyukbalci, P., & Dulger, M. (2023). Dynamic and ambidextrous: International expansion of digital economy ventures from an emerging market. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 15(6), 1459–1489. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-08-2021-0339
Cantwell, J., Dunning, J. H., & Lundan, S. M. (2010). An evolutionary approach to understanding international business activity: The co-evolution of MNEs and the institutional environment. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(4), 567–586. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2009.95
Cennamo, C., & Santaló, J. (2013). Platform competition: Strategic trade-offs in platform markets. Strategic Management Journal, 34(11), 1331–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2066
Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. (2004). Identity ambiguity and change in the wake of a corporate spin-off. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(2), 173–208. https://doi.org/10.2307/4131471
Crémer, J., de Montjoye, Y.-A., & Schweitzer, H. (2019). Competition policy for the digital era. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2763/407537
Cusumano, M. A., Gawer, A., & Yoffie, D. B. (2021). Can self-regulation save digital platforms?. Industrial and Corporate Change, 30(5), 1259–1285. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtab052
Çekin, M. S. (2024). Das Gesetz zur Änderung des Gesetzes über die Regulierung des elektronischen Geschäftsverkehrs: Neue Regeln für (neue) Akteure im elektronischen Geschäftsverkehr in der Türkei. Annales de la Faculté de Droit d’Istanbul, (74), 41–60. https://doi.org/10.26650/annales.2024.74.0003
Di Maggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
Doh, J. P., Lawton, T. C., & Rajwani, T. (2012). Advancing nonmarket strategy research: Institutional perspectives in a changing world. Academy of Management Perspectives, 26(3), 22–39. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2012.0041
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308385
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24160888
Eisenmann, T., Parker, G., & Van Alstyne, M. W. (2006). Strategies for two-sided markets. Harvard Business Review, 84(10), 92–101.
Eskhita, R., Arbia, H., & Manda, V. K. (2025). The extraterritorial impact of the Digital Markets Act (DMA): A case study on Gulf-based e-commerce platforms. In E. Alaverdov & G. Abuseridze (Eds.), Globalization, global security, and new international realities for modern democracies (pp. 269–298). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3373-1355-9.ch012
Evans, D. S. (2003). Some empirical aspects of multi-sided platform industries. Review of Network Economics, 2(3), 191–209. https://doi.org/10.2202/1446-9022.1026
Evans, D. S., & Schmalensee, R. (2016). Matchmakers: The new economics of multisided platforms. Harvard Business Review Press.
García Canal, E., & Guillén, M. F. (2026). The international expansion of digital platforms: A dynamic setting for challenging and advancing theories of the multinational enterprise. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 29(1), 62–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/23409444251382952
Gawer, A. (2021). Digital platforms’ boundaries: The interplay of firm scope, platform sides, and digital interfaces. Long Range Planning, 54(5), Article 102045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2020.102045
Gibbert, M., & Ruigrok, W. (2010). The “what” and “how” of case study rigor: Three strategies based on published work. Organizational Research Methods, 13(4), 710–737. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428109351319
Gilbert, D. U., Schrage, S., & Behnam, M. (2024). Advancing the moral legitimacy of digital platforms as gatekeepers: A critical analysis from a political corporate social responsibility perspective. Journal of Business Economics, 94(7-8), 1115–1145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-024-01200-z
Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112452151
Gioia, D., Corley, K., Eisenhardt, K., Feldman, M., Langley, A., Lê, J., Golden-Biddle, K., Locke, K., Mees-Buss, J., Piekkari, R., Ravasi, D., Rerup, C., Schmid, T., Silverman, D., & Welch, C. (2022). A curated debate: On using “templates” in qualitative research. Journal of Management Inquiry, 31(3), 231–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/10564926221098955
Gong, H., & Hassink, R. (2019). Co-evolution in contemporary economic geography: Towards a theoretical framework. Regional Studies, 53(9), 1344–1355. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2018.1494824
Hagiu, A. (2007). Merchant or two-sided platform? Review of Network Economics, 6(2), 115–133. https://doi.org/10.2202/1446-9022.1113
Hagiu, A., & Wright, J. (2015). Marketplace or reseller? Management Science, 61(1), 184–203. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.2042
Han, Z., Wood, S., Coe, N. M., & Alexander, A. (2024). Conceptualising the co-evolution of China’s industrial and institutional environment for cross-border e-commerce. Geoforum, 153, Article 104034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2024.104034
Henisz, W. J. (2003). The power of the Buckley and Casson thesis: The ability to manage institutional idiosyncrasies. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(2), 173–184. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400015
Hillman, A. J., & Hitt, M. A. (1999). Corporate political strategy formulation: A model of approach, participation, and strategy decisions. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 825–842. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1999.2553256
Hoskisson, R. E., Eden, L., Lau, C. M., & Wright, M. (2000). Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 249–267. https://doi.org/10.5465/1556394
Jacobides, M. G., & Lianos, I. (2021). Ecosystems and competition law in theory and practice. Industrial and Corporate Change, 30(5), 1199–1229. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtab061
Kara, B. C., Şahin, A., & Dirsehan, T. (2026). Version 2-BibexPy: Harmonizing the bibliometric symphony of Scopus and Web of Science. SoftwareX, 35, Article 102944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.softx.2026.102944
Katz, M. L., & Shapiro, C. (1994). Systems competition and network effects. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(2), 93–115. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.8.2.93
Khan, H., Stylianou, K., Khan, Z., & Wood, G. (2026). Strategic responses of platform multinational enterprises: Rethinking competition policy through a comparative institutional perspective. Long Range Planning, 59(3), Article 102636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2026.102636
Khan, L. M. (2017). Amazon’s antitrust paradox. Yale Law Journal, 126(1), 710–805. https://www.yalelawjournal.org/note/amazons-antitrust-paradox
Khan, Z., Zeng, J., Knight, G., Rajwani, T., & Pattnaik, C. (2023). Non-market strategies and disruptive innovation in the platform economy. Journal of International Management, 29(5), Article 101047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2023.101047
Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. G. (2010). Winning in emerging markets: A road map for strategy and execution. Harvard Business Press.
Kocabaş, K., & Malinauskaite, J. (2025). Turkey’s recent e-commerce amendments: A critical comparison with the EU Digital Markets Act. Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies, 18(32), 79–100. https://doi.org/10.7172/1689-9024.yars.2025.18.32.5
Koo, W. W. (2024). Hybrid governance of platform entrepreneurs. Research Policy, 53(2), Article 104916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2023.104916
Kornelakis, A., & Hublart, P. (2022). Digital markets, competition regimes and models of capitalism: A comparative institutional analysis of European and US responses to Google. Competition & Change, 26(3-4), 334–356. https://doi.org/10.1177/10245294211011295
Kostova, T., & Zaheer, S. (1999). Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: The case of the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 24(1), 64–81. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1999.1580441
Köhler, T., Smith, A., & Bhakoo, V. (2022). Templates in qualitative research methods: Origins, limitations, and new directions. Organizational Research Methods, 25(2), 183–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/10944281211060710
Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1999.2553248
Lee, K. J., & Saha, D. (2025). A critical evaluation of ex-ante regulation and ex-post antitrust in digital platform markets: Special lens in India and South Korea. Journal of Competition Law & Economics, 21(4), 504–533. https://doi.org/10.1093/joclec/nhaf013
Lewin, A. Y., Long, C. P., & Carroll, T. N. (1999). The coevolution of new organizational forms. Organization Science, 10(5), 535–550. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.5.535
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publishing.
McIntyre, D., Srinivasan, A., Afuah, A., Gawer, A., & Kretschmer, T. (2021). Multisided platforms as new organizational forms. Academy of Management Perspectives, 35(4), 566–583. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2018.0018
Mees Buss, J., Welch, C., & Piekkari, R. (2022). From templates to heuristics: How and why to move beyond the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 25(2), 405–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120967716
Mellahi, K., Frynas, J. G., Sun, P., & Siegel, D. (2016). A review of the nonmarket strategy literature: Toward a multi-theoretical integration. Journal of Management, 42(1), 143–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315617241
Nambisan, S., Zahra, S. A., & Luo, Y. (2019). Global platforms and ecosystems: Implications for international business theories. Journal of International Business Studies, 50(9), 1464–1486. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-019-00262-4
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808678
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145–179. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1991.4279002
Parente, R. C., Geleilate, J. M. G., & Rong, K. (2018). The sharing economy globalization phenomenon: A research agenda. Journal of International Management, 24(1), 52–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2017.10.001
Peng, M. W., Sun, S. L., Pinkham, B., & Chen, H. (2009). The institution-based view as a third leg for a strategy tripod. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(3), 63–81. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2009.43479264
Peng, M. W., Wang, D. Y. L., & Jiang, Y. (2008). An institution-based view of international business strategy: A focus on emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(5), 920–936. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400377
Pettigrew, A. M. (1990). Longitudinal field research on change: Theory and practice. Organization Science, 1(3), 267–292. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1.3.267
Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Trade. (2026, May). E-commerce outlook in Türkiye report 2025. https://ticaret.gov.tr/data/6a104abe269de1b0e034a48c/T%C3%BCrkiye%27de%20E-Ticaretin%20G%C3%B6r%C3%BCn%C3%BCm%C3%BC%20Raporu%202025%20%C4%B0ngilizce%20Versiyonu.pdf
Reuters. (2021, April 20). China’s Alibaba invests $350 mln in capital increase to Turkey’s Trendyol-trade registry. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/chinas-alibaba-invests-350-mln-capital-increase-turkeys-trendyol-trade-registry-2021-04-20/
Ridder, H.-G. (2016). Case study research: Approaches, methods, contribution to theory. Rainer Hampp Verlag.
Ridder, H.-G. (2017). The theory contribution of case study research designs. Business Research, 10(2), 281–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-017-0045-z
Rochet, J.-C., & Tirole, J. (2003). Platform competition in two-sided markets. Journal of the European Economic Association, 1(4), 990–1029. https://doi.org/10.1162/154247603322493212
Rochet, J.-C., & Tirole, J. (2006). Two-sided markets: A progress report. The RAND Journal of Economics, 37(3), 645–667. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2006.tb00036.x Scopus
Sanlı, K. C. (2024). Turkey’s new e-commerce law: A draconian regulation of digital platforms. GRUR International, 73(5), 377–378. https://doi.org/10.1093/grurint/ikae016
Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities (4th ed.). Sage Publishing.
Seawright, J., & Gerring, J. (2008). Case selection techniques in case study research: A menu of qualitative and quantitative options. Political Research Quarterly, 61(2), 294–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912907313077
Stallkamp, M., & Schotter, A. P. J. (2021). Platforms without borders? The international strategies of digital platform firms. Global Strategy Journal, 11(1), 58–80. https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1336
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331
Sun, P., Doh, J. P., Rajwani, T., & Siegel, D. (2021). Navigating cross-border institutional complexity: A review and assessment of multinational nonmarket strategy research. Journal of International Business Studies, 52(9), 1818–1853. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-021-00438-x
Sun, Y., Pinkse, J., & Bleda, M. (2025). Social media platforms’ use of nonmarket strategy to manage politically contentious issues in host countries: The case of TikTok in the US market. Journal of International Management, 31(6), Article 101293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2025.101293
Tiwana, A., Konsynski, B., & Bush, A. A. (2010). Platform evolution: Coevolution of platform architecture, governance, and environmental dynamics. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 675–687. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0323
Turkish Trade Registry Gazette (2026, June 22). Sahibinden Bilgi Teknolojileri Pazarlama ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi (Issue 11606, p. 365) https://www.ticaretsicil.gov.tr/tmp_gazete/40c1c82c-6e14-11f1-b7e5-8df373f5970.pdf
Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Hoskisson, R. E., & Peng, M. W. (2005). Strategy research in emerging economies: Challenging the conventional wisdom. Journal of Management Studies, 42(1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2005.00487.x
Yates, L. (2023). How platform businesses mobilize their users and allies: Corporate grassroots lobbying and the Airbnb “movement” for deregulation. Socio-Economic Review, 21(4), 1917–1943. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwad028
Yeşilbağ, M. (2022). New geographies of platform capitalism: The case of digital monopolization in Turkey. Big Data & Society, 9(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517221124585
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Sage Publishing.
Zaheer, S. (1995). Overcoming the liability of foreignness. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 341–363. https://doi.org/10.5465/256683
Zhan, N., Lu, Q., & Tian, H. (2026). Crossing the regulatory rubicon: The Brussels Effect of the EU’s twin digital regulations on China’s platform governance. Computer Law & Security Review, 61, Article 106314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2026.106314
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
