The equivalence of incentive schemes in content platforms: an equilibrium analysis

Purpose For most platforms, a key challenge is to design appropriate incentive mechanisms that effectively motivate relevant participants in an open environment. In this paper, the authors aim to focus on a three-sided content platform involving creators, users and advertisers and investigate the strategic design of such mechanisms. Specifically, this study analyzes and compares three common incentive schemes: content-volume-based, view-volume-based and a hybrid of the previous two. Design/methodology/approach Using a game-theoretic model that captures the interactions among all parties, this study derives closed-form equilibrium solutions for the platform’s optimal incentive fees and advertising prices, as well as for creators’ content-production levels and payoffs. Findings The analysis reveals a striking equivalence among the three schemes: despite their structural differences, they yield identical equilibrium outcomes in content production, user engagement, advertising metrics and platform profit. Moreover, the optimal hybrid incentive fees are simply a convex combination of optimal incentive fees under the two pure schemes, giving managers budgetary flexibility without affecting performance. Originality/value This study contributes to the literature on multisided platforms by demonstrating the strategic substitutability of common incentive structures and by providing a unified framework for understanding platform design when advertising levels and creator competition are endogenous.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Modelling in Management
Published
2026-04-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1108/jm2-11-2025-0646
Primary Topic
Digital Platforms and Economics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The equivalence of incentive schemes in content platforms: an equilibrium analysis

Q. B. Gou, Xi Zhang, Junkai Hu, Yujia Liu
Journal of Modelling in Management
Digital Platforms and Economics
article

The equivalence of incentive schemes in content platforms: an equilibrium analysis

Q. B. Gou, Xi Zhang, Junkai Hu, Yujia Liu
article en

Abstract

Purpose For most platforms, a key challenge is to design appropriate incentive mechanisms that effectively motivate relevant participants in an open environment. In this paper, the authors aim to focus on a three-sided content platform involving creators, users and advertisers and investigate the strategic design of such mechanisms. Specifically, this study analyzes and compares three common incentive schemes: content-volume-based, view-volume-based and a hybrid of the previous two. Design/methodology/approach Using a game-theoretic model that captures the interactions among all parties, this study derives closed-form equilibrium solutions for the platform’s optimal incentive fees and advertising prices, as well as for creators’ content-production levels and payoffs. Findings The analysis reveals a striking equivalence among the three schemes: despite their structural differences, they yield identical equilibrium outcomes in content production, user engagement, advertising metrics and platform profit. Moreover, the optimal hybrid incentive fees are simply a convex combination of optimal incentive fees under the two pure schemes, giving managers budgetary flexibility without affecting performance. Originality/value This study contributes to the literature on multisided platforms by demonstrating the strategic substitutability of common incentive structures and by providing a unified framework for understanding platform design when advertising levels and creator competition are endogenous.

Journal of Modelling in Management
University of Science and Technology of China (CN), Hefei University of Technology (CN)
National Natural Science Foundation of China
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Digital Platforms and Economics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.