Platform Strategiarchy as a Tool for Reducing Information Asymmetry, Taking into Account the Scale, Cardinality and Order of the Strategy
The purpose of study is to substantiate the conceptual foundations of reducing information asymmetry using platform strategiarchy taking into account scale, cardinality and order of the strategy. The scientific novelty obtained as a result of the research lies in the description of new scientific c...
Збережено в:
| Дата: | 2023 |
|---|---|
| Автор: | |
| Формат: | Стаття |
| Мова: | English |
| Опубліковано: |
Інститут економіки промисловості НАН України
2023
|
| Назва видання: | Економічний вісник Донбасу |
| Теми: | |
| Онлайн доступ: | http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/197740 |
| Теги: |
Додати тег
Немає тегів, Будьте першим, хто поставить тег для цього запису!
|
| Назва журналу: | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| Цитувати: | Platform Strategiarchy as a Tool for Reducing Information Asymmetry, Taking into Account the Scale, Cardinality and Order of the Strategy / O. Vyshnevskyi // Економічний вісник Донбасу. — 2023. — № 4 (74). — С. 59-66. — Бібліогр.: 12 назв. — англ. |
Репозитарії
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine| id |
irk-123456789-197740 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
irk-123456789-1977402024-07-06T13:56:02Z Platform Strategiarchy as a Tool for Reducing Information Asymmetry, Taking into Account the Scale, Cardinality and Order of the Strategy Vyshnevskyi, O. Digital Economy and Information Technologies The purpose of study is to substantiate the conceptual foundations of reducing information asymmetry using platform strategiarchy taking into account scale, cardinality and order of the strategy. The scientific novelty obtained as a result of the research lies in the description of new scientific concepts: strategiarchy, platform strategiarchy, information asymmetry, scale of strategy, cardinality of strategy, order of strategy scale. The introduction of which allows us to form a scientific and theoretical basis for the further institutionalization of strategizing, which creates conditions for reducing information asymmetry in the process of developing the digital economy. In a broad sense, strategiarchy is a model of social structure aimed at increasing subjectivity in society and minimizing information asymmetry through the institutionalization of strategizing. Key characteristics of strategiarchy: 1. Every capable individual and legal entity has a public strategy. 2. Every capable individual and legal entity has the ability and opportunity to evaluate any strategy (of the other capable individual and legal entity). In a narrow sense, strategiarchy is a system for coordinating strategies at various levels of governance and management. In other words, strategiarchy is the result of ascent from the abstract (general theory of strategizing) to the concrete (digital platform for strategy consolidation). The implementation of strategiarchy using a digital platform is called platform strategiarchy. The introduction of the concepts “scale of strategy”, “cardinality of strategy”, “order of strategy scale” allows you to organize and compare strategies, including on the appropriate digital platform. The scale of strategy is equal to the product of influence and resource of the subject of strategy implementation. The quantitative assessment of the "resource" is determined by the number of employees of the organization. "Impact" is quantified through the number of customers or stakeholders. The cardinality of a strategy is defined as the square root of the scale of the strategy. The order of strategy cardinality is determined by the order of the number characterizing the cardinality of the strategy, i.e. the decimal logarithm of the power. The calculation of these characteristics is demonstrated on specific examples (United Nations, USA, Facebook, Kiev, Ilon Musk, Felix Arvid Ulf Kjellberg, Robinson Crusoe). As a result, placing strategies on digital platforms allows to reduce information asymmetry in various communications between companies, government and individuals. Метою дослідження є обґрунтування концептуальних основ зменшення інформаційної асиметрії за допомогою платформної стратегіархії з урахуванням масштабу, потужності та порядку стратегії. Наукова новизна дослідження полягає в описі нових понять: стратегіархія, платформна стратегіархія, загальні характеристики стратегії (масштаб, потужність і порядок стратегії). Використання цих понять дозволяє сформувати теоретичну основу для подальшої інституціоналізації стратегування, яке створює умови для зменшення інформаційної асиметрії у умовах розвитку цифрової економіки. У широкому сенсі стратегархія – це модель соціального устрою, спрямована на підвищення суб’єктності в суспільстві та мінімізацію інформаційної асиметрії через інституціоналізацію стратегування. Основні характеристики стратегархії: (1) кожна дієздатна фізична та юридична особа має публічну стратегію; (2) кожна дієздатна фізична та юридична особа має здатність і можливість оцінити будь-яку стратегію (іншої дієздатної фізичної або юридичної особа). У вузькому розумінні стратегархії – це система координації стратегій на різних рівнях управління. Одночасно, стратегархії являє собою результат сходження від абстрактного (загальна теорія стратегування) до конкретного (цифрова платформа для консолідації стратегій). Імплементація стратегіархії на цифровій блокчейн платформі називається платформною стратегіархією. Введення понять масштаб, потужність та порядок стратегії дозволяє упорядкувати та співставляти стратегії в тому числі на відповідній цифровій платформі. Масштаб стратегії дорівнює добутку впливу та ресурсу суб’єкту реалізації стратегії. Кількісна оцінка «ресурсу» визначається через чисельність працівників організації. Кількісна оцінка «впливу» визначається через кількість клієнтів або зацікавлених сторін. Потужність стратегії визначається як квадратний корінь масштабу стратегії. Порядок потужності стратегії визначається порядком числа, що характеризує потужність стратегії тобто десятковий логарифм потужності. На конкретних прикладах (ООН, США, Facebook, місто Київ, Ілон Маск, Фелікс Арвід Ульф Чельберг, Робінзон Крузо) продемонстровано розрахунок цих характеристик. У підсумку розміщення стратегій на цифрових платформах дозволяє знизити асиметрію інформації при різними комунікації між компаніями, урядом та індивідами. 2023 Article Platform Strategiarchy as a Tool for Reducing Information Asymmetry, Taking into Account the Scale, Cardinality and Order of the Strategy / O. Vyshnevskyi // Економічний вісник Донбасу. — 2023. — № 4 (74). — С. 59-66. — Бібліогр.: 12 назв. — англ. 1817-3772 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12958/1817-3772-2023-4(74)-59-66 http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/197740 338.2:004 en Економічний вісник Донбасу Інститут економіки промисловості НАН України |
| institution |
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| collection |
DSpace DC |
| language |
English |
| topic |
Digital Economy and Information Technologies Digital Economy and Information Technologies |
| spellingShingle |
Digital Economy and Information Technologies Digital Economy and Information Technologies Vyshnevskyi, O. Platform Strategiarchy as a Tool for Reducing Information Asymmetry, Taking into Account the Scale, Cardinality and Order of the Strategy Економічний вісник Донбасу |
| description |
The purpose of study is to substantiate the conceptual foundations of reducing information asymmetry using platform strategiarchy taking into account scale, cardinality and order of the strategy.
The scientific novelty obtained as a result of the research lies in the description of new scientific concepts: strategiarchy, platform strategiarchy, information asymmetry, scale of strategy, cardinality of strategy, order of strategy scale. The introduction of which allows us to form a scientific and theoretical basis for the further institutionalization of strategizing, which creates conditions for reducing information asymmetry in the process of developing the digital economy.
In a broad sense, strategiarchy is a model of social structure aimed at increasing subjectivity in society and minimizing information asymmetry through the institutionalization of strategizing.
Key characteristics of strategiarchy:
1. Every capable individual and legal entity has a public strategy.
2. Every capable individual and legal entity has the ability and opportunity to evaluate any strategy (of the other capable individual and legal entity).
In a narrow sense, strategiarchy is a system for coordinating strategies at various levels of governance and management. In other words, strategiarchy is the result of ascent from the abstract (general theory of strategizing) to the concrete (digital platform for strategy consolidation).
The implementation of strategiarchy using a digital platform is called platform strategiarchy. The introduction of the concepts “scale of strategy”, “cardinality of strategy”, “order of strategy scale” allows you to organize and compare strategies, including on the appropriate digital platform.
The scale of strategy is equal to the product of influence and resource of the subject of strategy implementation. The quantitative assessment of the "resource" is determined by the number of employees of the organization. "Impact" is quantified through the number of customers or stakeholders. The cardinality of a strategy is defined as the square root of the scale of the strategy. The order of strategy cardinality is determined by the order of the number characterizing the cardinality of the strategy, i.e. the decimal logarithm of the power. The calculation of these characteristics is demonstrated on specific examples (United Nations, USA, Facebook, Kiev, Ilon Musk, Felix Arvid Ulf Kjellberg, Robinson Crusoe).
As a result, placing strategies on digital platforms allows to reduce information asymmetry in various communications between companies, government and individuals. |
| format |
Article |
| author |
Vyshnevskyi, O. |
| author_facet |
Vyshnevskyi, O. |
| author_sort |
Vyshnevskyi, O. |
| title |
Platform Strategiarchy as a Tool for Reducing Information Asymmetry, Taking into Account the Scale, Cardinality and Order of the Strategy |
| title_short |
Platform Strategiarchy as a Tool for Reducing Information Asymmetry, Taking into Account the Scale, Cardinality and Order of the Strategy |
| title_full |
Platform Strategiarchy as a Tool for Reducing Information Asymmetry, Taking into Account the Scale, Cardinality and Order of the Strategy |
| title_fullStr |
Platform Strategiarchy as a Tool for Reducing Information Asymmetry, Taking into Account the Scale, Cardinality and Order of the Strategy |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Platform Strategiarchy as a Tool for Reducing Information Asymmetry, Taking into Account the Scale, Cardinality and Order of the Strategy |
| title_sort |
platform strategiarchy as a tool for reducing information asymmetry, taking into account the scale, cardinality and order of the strategy |
| publisher |
Інститут економіки промисловості НАН України |
| publishDate |
2023 |
| topic_facet |
Digital Economy and Information Technologies |
| url |
http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/197740 |
| citation_txt |
Platform Strategiarchy as a Tool for Reducing Information Asymmetry, Taking into Account the Scale, Cardinality and Order of the Strategy / O. Vyshnevskyi // Економічний вісник Донбасу. — 2023. — № 4 (74). — С. 59-66. — Бібліогр.: 12 назв. — англ. |
| series |
Економічний вісник Донбасу |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT vyshnevskyio platformstrategiarchyasatoolforreducinginformationasymmetrytakingintoaccountthescalecardinalityandorderofthestrategy |
| first_indexed |
2025-07-17T02:44:13Z |
| last_indexed |
2025-07-17T02:44:13Z |
| _version_ |
1837860393035235328 |
| fulltext |
O. Vyshnevskyi
59
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4(74), 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12958/1817-3772-2023-4(74)-59-66
UDC 338.2:004
O. Vyshnevskyi,
DrHab (Economics), Senior Researcher,
ORCID 0000-0002-2375-6033,
e-mail: vishnevskiy_O@nas.gov.ua,
Institute of Industrial Economics of the NAS of Ukraine, Kyiv
PLATFORM STRATEGIARCHY AS A TOOL FOR REDUCING INFORMATION
ASYMMETRY, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE SCALE, CARDINALITY
AND ORDER OF THE STRATEGY
Formulation of the problem
Information asymmetry is one of the key problems
of modern economic theory and practice. Fourth
industrial revolution does not solve this problem, but at
the same time creates some opportunities to decrease it.
The volume of information is constantly increasing at an
accelerating rate. The possibilities for organizing this
information without the use of artificial intelligence
technologies for people and companies are exhausted.
Under these conditions, some people and compa-
nies cannot assess the intentions of others. As a result,
activity is directed not at the coordinated construction of
the desired future for all, but at the construction of one’s
own future through the futurocide of someone else’s.
For example, through deprivation of the last necessary
development resources.
However, there is an opportunity to understand it
much more broadly and deeply. The development of the
platform economy creates both opportunities to
overcome information asymmetry and its aggravation.
This determines the relevance of studying this problem.
Literature review
Problems associated with information asymmetry
attract close attention of the scientific community
around the world. For instance, over the past 10 years,
the Scopus scientometric database alone contains more
than three thousand publications related to this topic
(Fig. 1) only in the three fields (Business, Management
and Accounting – 2 183; Economics, Econometrics and
Finance – 2 040; Social Sciences – 731).
Fig. 1. Number of articles related to the study of information asymmetry in the Scopus database
Scientific description of information asymmetry
was done more the 50 years ago. “The foundations for
this theory were established in the 1970s by three
researchers: George Akerlof, Michael Spence and
Joseph Stiglitz. They received the Bank of Sweden Prize
in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel,
2001, for their analyses of markets with asymmetric
information” [1]. However, earlier (more than 200 year
earlier) Emanuil Kant wrote “All actions relating to the
rights of other men are wrong, if the maxims from which
they follow are inconsistent with publicity.” [2, p. 185].
In fact, he emphasizes that there is an unacceptable
asymmetry of information in actions regarding other
people if these actions cannot be public.
Now, in the age of the Fourth Industrial
Revolution, we can see strong attention to asymmetric
information in conditions of digitalization [3-7].
Mutascu and Sokic studied the asymmetric
information in online social network. They came to the
conclusions, that “many posted information wrongly
passes the validation control, being profoundly altered
from a qualitative point of view in reality. This suggests
that the posted information without serious filters during
the reading stage is a serious source of asymmetry” [3,
Digital Economy and Information Technologies
O. Vyshnevskyi
60
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4(74), 2023
p. 14]. This indicates that digital platforms (for example,
online social networks) create conditions for increasing
information asymmetry. Which they try to reduce
through improving the quality of user education or
censorship.
Dong Quang Dang and others investigate
information asymmetry on stock market. “Our findings
confirm the two proposed hypotheses and are consistent
with previous findings that earnings manipulations
through accrual bases can distort the market and
exacerbate the problem of information asymmetry.
There are differences in outside investor’s abilities to
process and analyse earnings-related information. So,
low quality of earnings can divide investors into the
informed and uninformed and exacerbate the
information asymmetry in the stock market” [4, p. 15].
Position, that “information asymmetry has a positive
effect on earnings management”, is supported by
scientists from Indonesia [5, p. 84].
Some researchers show relationship between
signaling theory and asymmetric information. They
prove, that “signaling theory best explains the
relationship between quality financial information and
asymmetric information and thus, engaging in quality
financial information can substantially reduce
asymmetric information in capital markets and other
economic dealings involving corporate firms and
financial statements users” [6, p. 26]. As result
“information asymmetry influences investors’ decisions
greatly, causing fluctuations in the value of these
companies in the financial market” [7, p. 15].
At the same time number of articles related to the
study “strategy” in the Scopus database (1993-2023) is
2 486 322. But none of them is linked to “information
asymmetry”.
The potential for reducing information asymmetry
through the use of the general theory of strategizing [8]
remains outside the focus of the scientific community.
The practical implementation of the general theory of
strategizing using a digital strategizing platform [9]
forms the platform strategiarchy, a description of which
will be presented below.
Consequently, the problem of reducing
information asymmetry in various areas, both at the
corporate and individual levels, remains unresolved.
Purpose of research
Based on the review of the literature and unsolved
research problem, the purpose of study is to substantiate
the conceptual foundations of reducing information
asymmetry using platform strategiarchy taking into
account scale, cardinality and order of the strategy.
Presentation of main results
The structure of the study assumes the following
logic. At the first stage, it is described what strategiarchy
means. At the second stage, the role of strategiarchy as
a tool for reducing information asymmetry is
substantiated. The third step describes a digital platform
enabling strategiarchy (platform strategiarchy). The
fourth step proposes a metric to compare different
strategies based on scale, cardinality and cardinality
order of the strategy, which is going to be used as filter
on digital platform.
Definition of strategiarchy
Previous studies [8] have shown that strategy is a
necessary and sufficient condition of subjectness. An
object (for example, a hired worker) becomes a subject
(master) as soon as it realizes (formalizes) its strategy.
When a subject (for example, a capitalist) loses the
ability to form and implement a strategy, he transformes
in an object. For example, in the case of relations
between owners and top managers, the strategy is
created not so much in the interests of the owner as in
the interests of top management. This is especially
noticeable in relation to minority shareholders, who,
being co-owners, are mostly removed from the
management of the company. The actions of objects are
always reactive, and the actions of subjects are always
proactive. The presence of a strategy guarantees the
presence of reflected goals in an individual [8, p. 122].
Strategy is a mutually agreed upon mission, vision,
values, goals, plans and risks. The presence of a strategy
provides not only an understanding of the direction in
which an individual or organization plans to move, but
also the space of this movement, including the rules
(laws, patterns) operating in this space. This structure
has universal character and it is relevant for different
level from individual to state or multinational
companies. So that we can see basis for implementation
of fractal logic, when the structure characteristic of a
lower level is reproduced at a higher level [9, p. 171].
There exist only two options: (1) person or
organization has own mission (key element of the
strategy) or (2) person or organization does not have
own mission therefore stays in position "submission" (in
relation to person or organization who has mission).
In a broad sense, strategiarchy is a model of social
structure aimed at increasing subjectivity in society and
minimizing information asymmetry through the
institutionalization of strategizing.
Key characteristics of strategiarchy:
1. Every capable individual and legal entity has a
public strategy.
2. Every capable individual and legal entity has the
ability and opportunity to evaluate any strategy (of the
other capable individual and legal entity).
In a narrow sense, strategiarchy is a system for
coordinating strategies at various levels of governance
and management. In other words, strategiarchy is the
result of ascent from the abstract (general theory of
strategizing) to the concrete (digital platform for
strategy consolidation [10]).
As will be shown below, the system of
coordinating public strategies leads to a reduction in
information asymmetry.
Elements of the logic described in the concept of
strategiarchy has already been implemented on the stock
O. Vyshnevskyi
61
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4(74), 2023
exchange (during listing, when companies indicate the
priorities of their activities), in state and municipal
administration (when forming strategies and monitoring
their implementation), in TNCs (when coordinating the
general strategies of parent and subsidiary companies).
These examples provide reasonable assurance that it can
be deployed at other levels as well.
Role of strategiarchy as a tool for reducing
information asymmetry
Information asymmetry is a natural characteristic
of any communication. The origins of asymmetry are
explained by people having different goals and images
of the future. Party A always knows more about its
future actions than party B and vice versa. However, it
is possible to significantly reduce the unpredictability of
other Party’s actions.
There are two main causes of asymmetry –
(1) hidden properties and (2) hidden actions. The
asymmetry caused by hidden actions relates primarily to
the secrecy of strategic aspirations. Asymmetry may
also relate to the properties of the product, which is
generally described in the organization’s mission.
The way to overcome information asymmetry
caused by hidden actions is signaling [11-12]. For
example, in what has become a classic paper, Michael
Spence showed that having completed academic degree
is a powerful signal from applicants to employer that
typically leads to higher earn compared to applicants
who have the same number of education years but no
official diploma [11].
A public strategy gives signals about its planned
actions for all stakeholders. Consequently, strategiarchy
is a signaling way of overcoming total information
asymmetry.
Digital platform for implementation of
strategiarchy
The digital era creates opportunities to bring the
concept of "strategiarchy" to life through the use of
digital platform capabilities. As it has been shown in
work “Digital platformization of the process of
strategizing the development of the national economy”
[9, p. 347-348] such digital platform must use
blockchain technology.
The development of decentralized digital platforms
based on blockchain technology allows the use of
strategic management at the individual and collective
levels in all aspects of its manifestation. The digital
blockchain platform combines authenticity, privacy and
publicity. Therefore, not only national or regional
(local) strategies, but even individual strategies can be
publicly posted, made visible only in necessary cases or
to some extent, but without the possibility of being
destroyed or deleted from the data storage.
Thus, the presence of a digital blockchain platform
containing the strategies of all collective (bodies of state
power, local self-government, state enterprises, political
parties, public organizations, etc.) and individual
(officials, civil servants, politicians, heads of structural
divisions of state enterprises ) users allows you to
compare the goals, values, etc., declared in the strategy
with the real activity of individuals and organizations,
which is recorded through an indestructible digital
profile and the digital footprint they leave. When
comparing digital footprints and strategic goals with
each other, an opportunity is created for:
– formation of a general and universal culture of
strategizing;
– aggregation of goals from individual to higher
levels;
– increasing the level of trust between
counterparties and, as a result, reducing transaction
costs;
– the transition to a digital society with dominant
subjectivity;
– transformation of the economic model of
management.
Consequently, the implementation of strategiarchy
using a digital platform is called platform strategiarchy.
Of the currently existing international
organizations, the UN has the most suitable
organizational, economic and political capabilities.
Digital platform of strategizing, that would operate in
the UN, will henceforth be called multinational digital
platform of strategizing (MDPS). And the basic strategy
for placement on this platform could be the “Sustainable
Development Goals” to create opportunities for further
coordination of the strategies of other collective and
individual entities. This would be an interesting
example of top-down movement.
However, there are no restrictions for the
simultaneous coordination of strategies at the lower
level of a large community or small enterprise.
General features of strategy: scale, cardinality
and cardinality order
Main feature of each platform working with big
data is filter. In the target state MDPS would contain
more than one billion of members (individuals and legal
entities) and their strategies. And every user of MDPS
would face with a problem of how to prioritize existing
strategies, compare your strategy and strategies of
others.
As tools for solving this problem, you can use scale
of strategy and cardinality of strategy, which will be
discussed below.
The scale of a strategy reflects the location of the
strategy in the resource- impact coordinate system. The
quantitative assessment of the “resource” is determined
through the number of employees of the organization.
The quantitative assessment of the “impact” is deter-
mined through the number of clients or stakeholders.
Based on the characteristics of the strategy scale, it
is proposed to evaluate the integral indicator
“cardinality of strategy”, defined as the square root of
the product of the strategy resource and the impact of
the strategy. Cardinality order is determined by the order
of the number characterizing the cardinality of strategy.
O. Vyshnevskyi
62
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4(74), 2023
We will now formalize the above definitions.
Let
A – individual or organization (group
of individuals);
St(A) – strategy A;
R(St(A)) – resource strategy A;
r – order of R(St(A));
I(St(A)) – impact strategy A;
i – order of I(St(A));
Sc(St(A)) – scale of strategy A;
N(St(A)) – cardinality of strategy A;
v – cardinality (strategy A) order.
Then
R(St(A)) = 10^r (1)
I(St(A)) = 10^i (2)
Sc(St(A)) = R(St(A)) * I(St(A)) = 10 ^ (r+i) (3)
N(St(A)) = (Sc(St(A))) ^ (1/2) = 10 ^ ((r+i)/2) (4)
v = (r+i)/2. (5)
As we can see unit of measurement for Sc(St(A))
is people squared, that suggests the advisability of
introducing a category representing its square root. This
category is cardinality of strategy (N(St(A)).
The cardinality order is calculated as the arithmetic
mean between the resource order and the impact order
or decimal logarithm of cardinality of strategy.
To deepen understanding of these concepts, it is
necessary to consider specific examples. To do this, let
us take various individuals and organizations: 1) United
Nations, 2) USA, 3) Facebook, 4) Kiev, 5) Ilon Musk,
6) Felix Arvid Ulf Kjellberg, 7) Robinson Crusoe.
In cases where there is no formalized strategy or
group of strategic documents, it is assumed that the
current assessment of impact and resources corresponds
with the target.
1) United Nations is the most powerful
intergovernmental organization, which tries to speak on
behalf of whole human race and have influence on all
world. Wherein, United Nations Secretariat staff is over
36 000 people1. So that, using formulas (1) – (5), if
R(St(UN) – direct current resource of United Nations
and I(St(UN)) – influence of United Nations strategy
whole human population:
R(St(UN)) = 36 000 = 3.6*10^4 ≈ 10 ^ 4.56
r(St(UN)) = 4.56
I(St(UN)) = 8 * 10 ^ 9 ≈ 10 ^ 9.9
i(St(UN)) = 9.9
Sc(St(UN)) = R(St(UN)) * I(St(UN)) = 10 ^ 15,46
N(St(UN)) = (Sc(St(UN))) ^ (1/2) = 10 ^ 7.23
1 United Nations (2023). Report of the Secretary-General on the Work of the Organization (A/78/1, seventy-eighth session).
URL: https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/sg_annual_report_2023_en_0.pdf (p. 15).
2 URL: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Biden-Harris-Administrations-National-Security-Strategy-
10.2022.pdf.
3 URL: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/National-Cybersecurity-Strategy-2023.pdf.
4 By the end of 2023, Facebook reported 67,317 employees. URL: https://fourweekmba.com/facebook-employees-
number/#:~:text=By%20September%202022%2C%20Facebook's%20(Meta,bringing%20the%20headcount%20to%2075%2C964.
5 Number of monthly active Facebook users worldwide as of 3rd quarter 2023(in millions). URL:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/264810/number-of-monthly-active-facebook-users-worldwide/.
6 URL: https://kievvlast.com.ua/mind/kilkist-chinovnikiv-u-kiivradi-kmda-ta-rda-bezperervno-roste-navishho.
v(St(UN)) = 7.23
2) For USA as country, resource R(St(US))=R(US)
equals population (about 330 million) and impact
(I(US)) – global world (8 billion). In this case,
evaluation of resource has extremely broad character. In
reality US “strategy” includes corpus of strategic
documents such as National security strategy (October
2022 2) or National Cybersecurity Strategy (March
20233) and so on. This situation is typical for any
government entities.
We count all population. So that
R(St(US)) = 300 * 10 ^ 6 ≈ 10 ^ 8.48
r(St(US)) = 8.48
I(St(US)) = 8 * 10 ^ 9 ≈ 10 ^ 9.9
i(St(US)) = 9.9
Sc(St(US)) = R(St(US)) * I(St(US)) = 10 ^ 18.38
N(St(US)) = (Sc(St(US))) ^ (1/2) = 10 ^ 9.19
v(St(US)) = 9.19
3) For company Meta (Facebook), resource
(R(FB))4 is calculated based on the number of
employees and impact (I(FB)) – as a number of
Facebook users (3,05 users5 . So that
R(St(FB)) ≈ 67 * 10 ^ 3 ≈ 10 ^ 4.83
r(St(FB)) = 4.83
I(St(FB)) = 3.05 * 10 ^ 9 ≈ 10 ^ 9.48
i(St(FB)) = 9.48
Sc(St(FB)) = R(St(FB)) * I(St(FB)) = 10 ^ 14.31
N(St(FB)) = (Sc(St(FB))) ^ (1/2) = 10 ^ 7.15
v(St(FB)) = 7.15
For city Kiev, resource (R(K)) is calculated based
on the number of employees at administrations (city +
districts, as of 2019 about 4 0006) and impact (I(K)) – as
a number of citizens in Kiev about 3 million people. Of
course, this approach to estimate resource is very
conservative, by its low limit. In any case, as example,
we have:
R(St(K)) ≈ 4 * 10 ^ 3 ≈ 10 ^ 3.6
r(St(K)) = 3.6
I(St(K)) = 3 * 10 ^ 6 ≈ 10 ^ 6.48
i(St(K)) = 6.48
Sc(St(K)) = R(St(K)) * I(St(K)) = 10 ^ 10.08
N(St(K)) = (Sc(St(K))) ^ (1/2) = 10 ^ 5.04
v(St(K)) = 5.04
Next group of samples shows scale and cardinality
of strategies on individual level.
O. Vyshnevskyi
63
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4(74), 2023
5) Ilon Mask strategy must be coherent with
companies’ strategies, which he owns or manages (main
actives are SpaceX: 13 000 employees1 and 1.3 million
customers in the US2; Tesla: 127,855 employees
worldwide3 and 1.8 million delivered vehicles4,
Twitter/X: 1300 employees5 and 550 million users6). So
that resource is about 133 155 (13 000 + 127,855 +
+ 1300) and impact is 553.1 million (1.3 + 1.8 + 550).
R(St(IM)) ≈ 133 155 ≈ 10 ^ 5.12
r(St(IM)) = 5.12
I(St(IM)) ≈ 553.1 * 10 ^ 6 ≈ 10 ^ 8.74
i(St(IM)) = 8.74
Sc(St(IM)) = R(St(IM)) * I(St(IM)) = 10 ^ 13.86
N(St(IM)) = (Sc(St(IM))) ^ (1/2) = 10 ^ 6.93
v(St(IM)) = 6.93
6) Felix Arvid Ulf Kjellberg doesn’t have clear
public strategy, but we have some information for
interpretation and understanding of his strategy.
I(St(PDP)) = I(PDP) and equals to subscribers number
in the YouTube (111 million7). Of course, this most
popular YouTube blogger has accounts in other social
networks such as Instagram, TikTok, Twitch. But
YouTube is the most popular of them. As a result:
R(St(PDP)) = 1= 10 ^ 0
r(St(PDP)) = 0
I(St(PDP)) = 111 * 10 ^ 6 ≈ 10 ^ 8.45
i(St(PDP)) = 8.45
Sc(St(PDP)) = R(St(PDP)) * I(St(PDP)) = 10 ^ 8.45
N(St(K)) = (Sc(St(K))) ^ (1/2) = 10 ^ 4.23
v(St(K)) = 4.23
7) The final example is Robinson Crusoe, who
personifies the one-man economy. In case of Robinson
Crusoe we can see next characteristics of strategy:
R(St(RS)) = 1= 10 ^ 0
r(St(RS)) = 0
I(St(RS)) = 1= 10 ^ 0
i(St(RS)) = 0
Sc(St(RS)) = R(St(RS)) * I(St(RS)) = 10 ^ 0
N(St(RS)) = (Sc(St(RS))) ^ (1/2) = 10 ^ 0
v(St(RS)) = 0
Robinson Crusoe has shown minimum order
cardinality (v=0). Maximum order cardinality is
achieved if R=I=8*10^9 (r=I ≈ 9.9) and v=9.9, which
corresponds to the situation of full involvement of the
entire population of the Earth as both a resource and a
stakeholder.
1 URL: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txsd.1934705/gov.uscourts.txsd.1934705.1.0.pdf (p. 4).
2 URL: https://www.pcmag.com/news/spacex-starlink-now-has-13-million-customers-in-the-us.
3 URL: https://ir.tesla.com/_flysystem/s3/sec/000095017023001409/tsla-20221231-gen.pdf.
4 URL: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/02/tesla-tsla-q4-2023-vehicle-delivery-and-production-numbers.html.
5 URL: https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/20/twitter-is-down-to-fewer-than-550-full-time-engineers.html.
6 URL: https://www.cnbc.com/2023/09/18/musk-says-twitter-now-x-is-moving-to-monthly-subscriptions.html.
7 PewDiePie (2023). URL: https://www.youtube.com/@PewDiePie.
Aggregation of the results obtained above is
presented in Fig. 2. This figure shows the map of scale
of strategies.
By comparing the order of the strategies
considered as examples, we can build a series according
to their significance:
v(St(RS)) = 0 < v(St(PDP)) = 4.23 < v(St(K)) =
= 5.04 < v(St(IM)) = 6.93 < < v(St(FB)) =
= 7.15 < v(St(UN)) = 7.23 < v(St(US)) = 9.19.
By transferring this information to the MDPS, or a
group of platforms that is collectively equivalent to the
MDPS, strategies can be compared and prioritized to
determine the most important strategies.
Also, MDPS allows you to form a one-to-one
match between each strategy and the individuals and
companies that act as resources or stakeholders. As a
result, individuals receive an information about what
focus of attention they are in. Consequently,
digitalization and coordination of strategies makes it
possible for the subject of strategy implementation to
wisely choose the focus of his attention on the strategies
of other actors when forming and implementing his own
strategy.
Discussions
The proposed indicators for assessing resources
and impact are not exhaustive. As measure of resources,
we can use other parameters than a number of people.
For instance, gross revenue for commercial companies,
budget for countries or cities. As measure of impact, we
can use other parameters than a number of clients. For
instance, contractors and suppliers can also be
considered as people influenced by the company.
Conclusions
1. The problem of information asymmetry in the
context of digitalization of economy is influenced by
two multidirectional factors. On the one hand, an
increase in the volume of information leads to an
increase in asymmetry, and on the other, digital
technologies create conditions for its reduction. One of
the possible tools for reducing information asymmetry
is a model of society called strategairchy.
2. Ultimately, strategiarchy presupposes the
presence of public strategies among all individuals and
legal entities. However, the presence of such strategies
without the possibility of systematizing and comparing
them creates little added value for society. A partial
solution to this problem can be obtained by introducing
the concepts scale, cardinality and order of strategy
cardinality.
O. Vyshnevskyi
64
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4(74), 2023
Fig. 2. Scale of strategy (examples)
3. The scale of the strategy is equal to the product
of influence and resource of the subject of strategy
implementation. The quantitative assessment of the
"resource" is determined by the number of employees of
the organization. "Impact" is quantified through the
number of customers or stakeholders. The cardinality of
a strategy is defined as the square root of the scale of the
strategy. The order of strategy cardinality is determined
by the order of the number characterizing the cardinality
of the strategy, i.e. the decimal logarithm of the power.
4. Order of strategy impact allows to classify the
strategies. If I(St(A)) –strategy impact of company A,
i – order of I(St(A)), i(St(A))t=0 – order of the impact on
the start of the strategy, k – strategy implementation
period, that is systematized in Table.
Table
Name and description of the strategy depending on the order of its impact
Changing the order of strategy impact Name and description of the strategy
(і(St(A))t=0 - і(St(A))t=k) ≤ -1 Exit/retreat strategy: (1) termination of current activities;
(2) failure to meet the needs of existing customers
-1 < (і(St(A))t=0 - і(St(A))t=k) < 0 Survival strategy: (1) reduction in the number of clients;
(2) maintaining hopes of returning to previous positions
(і(St(A))t=0 - і(St(A))t=k) = 0 Position retention strategy: (1) maintaining the current
number of clients
1 > (і(St(A))t=0 - і(St(A))t=k) > 0 Development strategy: (1) increase in the number of clients
(і(St(A))t=0 - і(St(A))t=k) ≥ 1 Accelerated development strategy: (1) а sharp increase in the
number of clients; (2) very risky for realization
5. Based on the proposed definition of the scale and
power of strategy, the power of humanity’s potential
strategy is approximately 10^10 (8*10^9).
Consequently, increasing the scale, power and order of
the strategy of "humanity as a whole" presupposes a
constant increase in population. This is in conflict with
the environmental capacity of the planet. Resolution of
this contradiction is possible through human’s
exploration of space.
Based on this, space exploration can be considered
a tool for increasing subjectivity in society based on the
construction of a strategariarchy.
6. The scientific novelty obtained as a result of the
research lies in the description of new scientific
concepts: strategiarchy, scale, cardinality and order of
strategy. The introduction of which allows us to form a
scientific and theoretical basis for the further
institutionalization of strategizing, which in turn creates
O. Vyshnevskyi
65
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4(74), 2023
conditions for reducing information asymmetry when
moving from the abstract-theoretical to the concrete-
applied level.
Directions for further research.
Based on the findings, promising directions for
further research are the formation and updating of
strategies, taking into account their intersections in
resources and clients.
Literature
1. George A. Akerlof, A. Michael Spence, Joseph E. Stiglitz: Information for the Public, Markets with Asymmetric Information.
Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2001-1. Nobel Prize Committee. The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory
of Alfred Nobel, 2001. URL: https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2001/popular-information/ (дата звернення:
01.11.2023).
2. Kant I. Perpetual Peace. A Philosophical Essay. 2016 [EBook #50922]. URL: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/50922/50922-
h/50922-h.htm#Page_185 (дата звернення: 01.11.2023).
3. Mutascu M., Sokic A. Do online social networks affect information asymmetry? Online Journal of Applied Knowledge
Management. 2023. Vol. 11(2) Р. 1-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36965/OJAKM.2023.11(2)1-24.
4. Dang D., Korkos I., Wu W. The effects of earnings management on information asymmetry and stock price synchronicity.
Cogent Economics & Finance. 2023. Vol. 11 (2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2023.2290359.
5. Wijaya J., Herwiyanti E. A study of information asymmetry in financial research. The Indonesian Accounting Review. 2023.
Vol. 13, No. 1, January - June. P. 79 – 89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14414/tiar.v13i1.2935.
6. Ayagi S. R., & Salisu, M. Financial Reporting Quality and Information Asymmetry: A Review of Empirical Literature.
FUDMA Journal of Accounting and Finance Research [FUJAFR]. 2023. №1 (3). P. 19–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33003/fujafr-
2023.v1i3.51.19-29.
7. Cescon J., Rosa da Silva J., Lima N., Ferreira J. Continuity risks: information asymmetry between the management report and
the independent auditor. Revista Catarinense da Ciência Contábil. 2022. Vol. 21. № 1-20, e3326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16930/2237-
7662202233262.
8. Вишневський О. С. Загальна теорія стратегування: від парадигми до практики використання: монографія / НАН
України, Ін-т економіки промсті. Київ, 2018. 156 с. URL: https://iie.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/mono_Vishnevskiy_
ukr_2018.pdf (дата звернення: 01.11.2023).
9. Вишневський О. С. Цифрова платформізація процесу стратегування розвитку національної економіки: монографія.
Київ: ІЕП НАН України, 2021. 449 с. URL: https://iie.org.ua/monografiyi/cifrovaplatformizacija-procesu-strateguvannja-rozvitku-
nacionalnoi-ekonomiki/ (дата звернення: 01.11.2023).
10. Вишневський О. С. Цифрова платформізація стратегічного управління економікою України. Економіка
промисловості. 2021. № 3. С. 5-24. DOI: http://doi.org/10.15407/econindustry.2021.03.005.
11. Spence M. Job Market Signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. Vol. 87. Issue 3. August 1973. P. 355–374. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2307/1882010.
12. Ackerlof G. The market for “lemons”: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics.
1970. Vol. 84. P. 488–500. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1879431.
References
1. George A. Akerlof, A. Michael Spence, Joseph E. Stiglitz: Information for the Public, Markets with Asymmetric Information.
Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2001-1. The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel. (2001).
Committee Nobel Prize. Retrieved from https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2001/popular-information/.
2. Kant, I. (2021). Perpetual Peace. A Philosophical Essay. [EBook #50922]. Retrieved from:
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/50922/50922-h/50922-h.htm#Page_185.
3. Mutascu, M., Sokic, A. (2023). Do online social networks affect information asymmetry? Online Journal of Applied
Knowledge Management. 11(2):1-24. DOI: DOI: https://doi.org/10.36965/OJAKM.2023.11(2)1-24.
4. Dang, D., Korkos, I., Wu, W. (2023). The effects of earnings management on information asymmetry and stock price
synchronicity. Cogent Economics & Finance, 11 (2). DOI: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2023.2290359.
5. Wijaya, J., Herwiyanti, E. (2023). A study of information asymmetry in financial research. The Indonesian Accounting Review,
Vol. 13, No. 1, January - June, рр. 79 – 89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14414/tiar.v13i1.2935.
6. Ayagi, S. R., Salisu, M. (2023). Financial Reporting Quality and Information Asymmetry: A Review of Empirical
Literature. FUDMA Journal of Accounting and Finance Research [FUJAFR], 1(3), рр. 19–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33003/fujafr-
2023.v1i3.51.19-29.
7. Cescon, J., Rosa da Silva, J., Lima, N., Ferreira, J. (2022). Continuity risks: information asymmetry between the management
report and the independent auditor. Revista Catarinense da Ciência Contábil, Vol. 21, no. 1-20, e3326. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.16930/2237-7662202233262.
8. Vyshnevskyi, O. S. (2018). Zahalna teoriia stratehuvannia: vid paradyhmy do praktyky vykorystannia [The general theory of
strategizing: from paradigm to practical use]. Kyiv, IIE of NAS of Ukraine. 156 p. Retrieved from: https://iie.org.ua/wp-
content/uploads/2019/01/mono_Vishnevskiy_ukr_2018.pdf [in Ukrainian].
9. Vyshnevskyi, O. S. (2021). Tsyfrova platformizatsiia protsesu stratehuvannia rozvytku natsionalnoi ekonomiky [Digital
platformization of the process of strategizing the development of the national economy]. Kyiv, IIE of NAS of Ukraine. 449 p. Retrieved
from: https://iie.org.ua/monografiyi/cifrovaplatformizacija-procesu-strateguvannja-rozvitku-nacionalnoi-ekonomiki/ [in Ukrainian].
10. Vyshnevskyi, O. S. (2021). Tsyfrova platformizatsiia stratehichnoho upravlinnia ekonomikoiu Ukrainy [Digital
platformization of strategic management of Ukrainian economy]. Econ. promisl., 3, рр. 5-24. DOI:
http://doi.org/10.15407/econindustry.2021.03.005 [in Ukrainian].
11. Spence, M. (1973). Job Market Signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 87, Issue 3, рр. 355–374. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2307/1882010.
12. Ackerlof, G. A. (1970). The market for “lemons”: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of
Economics, 84, рр.488–500. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1879431.
O. Vyshnevskyi
66
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4(74), 2023
Вишневський О. С. Платформна стратегіархія як інструмент зменшення інформаційної асиметрії з урахуванням
масштабу, потужності та порядку стратегії
Метою дослідження є обґрунтування концептуальних основ зменшення інформаційної асиметрії за допомогою
платформної стратегіархії з урахуванням масштабу, потужності та порядку стратегії.
Наукова новизна дослідження полягає в описі нових понять: стратегіархія, платформна стратегіархія, загальні
характеристики стратегії (масштаб, потужність і порядок стратегії). Використання цих понять дозволяє сформувати
теоретичну основу для подальшої інституціоналізації стратегування, яке створює умови для зменшення інформаційної
асиметрії у умовах розвитку цифрової економіки.
У широкому сенсі стратегархія – це модель соціального устрою, спрямована на підвищення суб’єктності в суспільстві
та мінімізацію інформаційної асиметрії через інституціоналізацію стратегування.
Основні характеристики стратегархії: (1) кожна дієздатна фізична та юридична особа має публічну стратегію; (2) кожна
дієздатна фізична та юридична особа має здатність і можливість оцінити будь-яку стратегію (іншої дієздатної фізичної або
юридичної особа).
У вузькому розумінні стратегархії – це система координації стратегій на різних рівнях управління. Одночасно,
стратегархії являє собою результат сходження від абстрактного (загальна теорія стратегування) до конкретного (цифрова
платформа для консолідації стратегій).
Імплементація стратегіархії на цифровій блокчейн платформі називається платформною стратегіархією. Введення
понять масштаб, потужність та порядок стратегії дозволяє упорядкувати та співставляти стратегії в тому числі на відповідній
цифровій платформі.
Масштаб стратегії дорівнює добутку впливу та ресурсу суб’єкту реалізації стратегії. Кількісна оцінка «ресурсу»
визначається через чисельність працівників організації. Кількісна оцінка «впливу» визначається через кількість клієнтів або
зацікавлених сторін. Потужність стратегії визначається як квадратний корінь масштабу стратегії. Порядок потужності
стратегії визначається порядком числа, що характеризує потужність стратегії тобто десятковий логарифм потужності. На
конкретних прикладах (ООН, США, Facebook, місто Київ, Ілон Маск, Фелікс Арвід Ульф Чельберг, Робінзон Крузо)
продемонстровано розрахунок цих характеристик.
У підсумку розміщення стратегій на цифрових платформах дозволяє знизити асиметрію інформації при різними
комунікації між компаніями, урядом та індивідами.
Ключові слова: стратегіархія, платформна стратегіархія, інформаційна асиметрія, масштаб стратегії, потужність
стратегії, порядок потужності стратегії, цифрова платформа, цифрова економіка.
Vyshnevskyi О. Platform Strategiarchy as a Tool for Reducing Information Asymmetry, Taking into Account the Scale,
Cardinality and Order of the Strategy
The purpose of study is to substantiate the conceptual foundations of reducing information asymmetry using platform
strategiarchy taking into account scale, cardinality and order of the strategy.
The scientific novelty obtained as a result of the research lies in the description of new scientific concepts: strategiarchy, platform
strategiarchy, information asymmetry, scale of strategy, cardinality of strategy, order of strategy scale. The introduction of which
allows us to form a scientific and theoretical basis for the further institutionalization of strategizing, which creates conditions for
reducing information asymmetry in the process of developing the digital economy.
In a broad sense, strategiarchy is a model of social structure aimed at increasing subjectivity in society and minimizing
information asymmetry through the institutionalization of strategizing.
Key characteristics of strategiarchy:
1. Every capable individual and legal entity has a public strategy.
2. Every capable individual and legal entity has the ability and opportunity to evaluate any strategy (of the other capable individual
and legal entity).
In a narrow sense, strategiarchy is a system for coordinating strategies at various levels of governance and management. In other
words, strategiarchy is the result of ascent from the abstract (general theory of strategizing) to the concrete (digital platform for strategy
consolidation).
The implementation of strategiarchy using a digital platform is called platform strategiarchy. The introduction of the concepts
“scale of strategy”, “cardinality of strategy”, “order of strategy scale” allows you to organize and compare strategies, including on the
appropriate digital platform.
The scale of strategy is equal to the product of influence and resource of the subject of strategy implementation. The quantitative
assessment of the "resource" is determined by the number of employees of the organization. "Impact" is quantified through the number
of customers or stakeholders. The cardinality of a strategy is defined as the square root of the scale of the strategy. The order of strategy
cardinality is determined by the order of the number characterizing the cardinality of the strategy, i.e. the decimal logarithm of the
power. The calculation of these characteristics is demonstrated on specific examples (United Nations, USA, Facebook, Kiev, Ilon
Musk, Felix Arvid Ulf Kjellberg, Robinson Crusoe).
As a result, placing strategies on digital platforms allows to reduce information asymmetry in various communications between
companies, government and individuals.
Keywords: strategiarchy, platform strategiarchy, information asymmetry, scale of strategy, cardinality of strategy, order of
strategy scale, digital platform, digital economy.
Received by the editors 15.11.2023
|