Short instruction
Considering that there is no general agreement about the classification of standards – there are several ways in which standards can be classified. One of the most consistent classifications of the standards is provided by Prof. De Vries. A systematic classification may be beneficial for SDOs, as they could describe standardisation projects, develop criteria to determine if standards are within their scope, and enhance the identification of standards (De Vries, 1999).
The ILOs examples
K6.1., K7.1.
Recommended Teaching Case studies/Serious games/Оther
1. Case Study
Case Study: Michelin Awards: Do the stars still matter?
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/features/michelin-awards-do-the-stars-still-matter-9137115.html
Good practice
Educators teaching the classification of standards usually classify standards as formal vs. informal standards thus explaining the differences between standards developed within formal organizations for standardisation (also known as de jure standards) and standards developed within informal organizations for standardisation (also known as de facto standards). Educators also address one of the most commonly used classifications of standards thus classifying standards as product, service, process, and management system standards (MSSs) (Stroyan & Brown, 2012). Other classifications are addressed if considering the economic effects of standards (e.g., according to the economic problems they resolve, standards may be classified as compatibility standards, minimum quality/safety standards, variety-reducing and information and measurement standards (David, 1987).
Recommended sources
If you are new to the topic, the basics can be found at:
- https://hsbooster.eu/training-academy/classifications-standards
- Abdelkafi, N., Bekkers, R., Bolla, R., Rodriguez-Ascaso, A., & Wetterwald, M. (2021). Understanding ICT Standardisation: Principles and Practice, ETSI 2021, URL: https://www.etsi.org/images/files/Education/Textbook_Understanding_ICT_
Standardisation.pdf, 2nd Edition, Chapters 3 and Chapter 5.
Other sources relevant to the topic:
- David, P. (1987). Some new standards for the economics of standardisation in the information age. In M. Waterson, P. Dasgupta, & P. Stoneman (Eds.), Economic Policy and Technological Performance. (Vol. 98, Issue 392). https://doi.org/10.2307/2233926, pp. 857.
- David, P., & Greenstein, S. (1990). The economics of compatibility standards: An introduction to recent research. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 1(1–2). https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599000000002, pp. 3-41.
- De Vries, H. J. (2006). IT Standards Typology. In K. Jakobs (Ed.), Advanced Topics in Information Technology Standards and Standardisation Research. Idea Group Publishing, p. 4.
- Egyedi, T.M., Ortt, J.R. (2017). Towards a functional classification of standards for innovation research. In R. Hawkins, K. Blind, R. Page (Eds.) Handbook of Innovation and Standards. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar
- Folmer, E., & Verhoosel, J. (2011). State of the Art on Semantic IS Standardisation, Interoperability & Quality.
- Hesser, W. (2010). Standardisation within a Company: Strategic Perspective. In W. Hesser, A. Feilzer, & H. de Vrfies (Eds.), Standardisation in Companies and Markets (3rd ed.). Druckerei Helmut Schmidt University, pp. 569.
- Pham, T. H. (2006). Economic Aspects of Standardisation. In W. Hesser, Feilzer, & H. De Vries (Eds.), Standardisation in Companies and Markets. Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg, pp. 77-123.
- Spivak, S., & Brenner, C. (2001). Standardisation Essentials: Principles and Practice. CRC Press.
- Stroyan, J., & Brown, N. (2012). Using Standards to Support Growth, Competitiveness and Innovation. In Guidebook Series: How to Support SME Policy from Structural Funds. (October).
Other sources on de jure standards:
- Backhouse, J., Hsu, C. W., & Silva, L. (2006). Circuits of power in creating de jure standards: Shaping an international information systems security standard. MIS Quarterly, 413-438.
- Bartleson, K. (2012). What’s The Difference Between De Jure and De Facto Standards? Electronic Design, 14.
- Tamura, S. (2015). Who participates in de jure standard setting in Japan: The analysis of participation costs and benefits. Innovation, 17(3), 400-415.
- Tamura, S. (2018). The dynamics and determinants of de jure standards: Evidence from the electronic and electrical engineering industries. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 56, 1-12.
Other sources on de facto standards:
- Belleflamme, P. (2002). Coordination on formal vs. de facto standards: A dynamic approach. European Journal of political economy, 18(1), 153-176.
- Den Uijl, S. (2015). The emergence of de-facto standards (No. EPS-2014-328-LIS).
- Memarian, K., Matthiesen, J., Lingard, J., Nienhuis, K., Chisnall, D., Watson, R. N., & Sewell, P. (2016). Into the depths of C: elaborating the de facto standards. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 51(6), 1-15.
- Cargill, C. F. (2011). Why standardisation efforts fail. Journal of Electronic Publishing, 14(1).
- Egyedi, T. M., & Sherif, M. H. (2008, May). Standards’ dynamics through an innovation lens: Next-generation Ethernet networks. In 2008 First ITU-T Kaleidoscope Academic Conference-Innovations in NGN: Future Network and Services (pp. 127-134). IEEE.
- Umapathy, K., Purao, S., & Bagby, J. (2012). Empirical analysis of anticipatory standardisation processes: a case study. Information Systems and E-Business Management, 10.
Other sources on the concurrent standardisation:
- Grote, G., Weichbrodt, J. C., Günter, H., Zala-Mezö, E., & Künzle, B. (2009). Coordination in high-risk organizations: the need for flexible routines. Cognition, technology & work, 11, 17-27.
- Güthert, K. Concurrent standardisation as a necessity: The genesis of the new official orthographic guidelines. In Språknormering-i tide og utideti (pp. 15-32). Novus AS.
- Kim, H. J., Park, K. S., Chin, B. M., & Park, C. H. (1999). Virtual standards development environments for concurrent standardisation process. ETRI Journal, Vol. 21(1), pp. 55-71.
- Laakso, M., & Kiviniemi, A. O. (2012). The IFC standard: A review of history, development, and standardisation, Information Technology. ITcon, Vol 17(9).
Other sources on the ex-ante standardisation:
- Brander, J. A. (1995). Strategic trade policy. Handbook of international economics, 3, 1395-1455.
- Choi, J. P. (1994). Standardisation and Experimentation: Ex Ante versus Ex Post Standardisation.
- Contreras, J. L. (2011). An empirical study of the effects of ex-ante licensing disclosure policies on the development of voluntary technical standards. National Institute of Standards and Technology, No. GCR, 11-934.
- Contreras, J. L. (2013). Technical Standards and „ex-ante“ Disclosure: Results and Analysis of an Empirical Study. Jurimetrics, Vol. x, pp. 63-211.
- Galvin, P., & Rice, J. (2008). A Case Study of Knowledge Protection and Diffusion for Innovation: Managing Knowledge in the Mobile Telephone Industry. International Journal of Technology Management, 42(4), 426-438.
- Geradin, D. (2006). Standardisation and technological innovation: Some reflections on ex-ante licensing, FRAND, and the proper means to reward innovators. World Competition, 29(4).
- Geradin, D., & Layne-Farrar, A. (2007). The logic and limits of ex-ante competition in a standard-setting environment. Competition Policy International, 3(1).
Other sources on the ex-post standardisation:
- Argentesi, E., Buccirossi, P., Calvano, E., Duso, T., Marrazzo, A., & Nava, S. (2021). Merger policy in digital markets: an ex-post assessment. Journal of Competition Law & Economics, 17(1), 95-140.
- Choi, J. P. (1994). Standardisation and Experimentation: Ex Ante versus Ex Post Standardisation.
Church, J., & Gandal, N. (2012). Direct and indirect network effects are equivalent: A comment on “Direct and Indirect Network Effects: Are They Equivalent”. International Journal of Industrial Organization (IJIO), Vol. 30(6), pp. 708-712.
Other sources on the voluntary consensus-based standardisation:
- Egyedi, T. M. (2001). Beyond Consortia, Beyond Standardisation. New Case Material and Policy Threads. Final Report for the European Commission. Delft. The Netherlands.
- Marpet, M. I. (1998). An ethical issue in voluntary-consensus standards development: A decision-science view. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 1701-1716.
- Murphy, C., & Yates, J. (2013). The International Organization for Standardisation: Global Governance through Voluntary Consensus. Business Regulation and Non-State Actors: Whose Standards Whose Development, 81–94. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203126929-15.
- Spencer, C., & Temple, P. (2016). Standards, learning, and growth in Britain, 1901–2009. The Economic History Review, 69(2), 627-652.
- Van Elk, K., & van der Horst, R. (2009). Access to Standardisation. Study for the European Commission Enterprise and Industry Directorate-General, Final Report, Zoetermeer [10.03. 2009].