---
id: "question-hostile-ecosystems"
type: "open-question"
source_timestamps: ["§ Strategies for Pursuing Ecosystem Synergies"]
tags: ["integration-risk", "competition"]
related: ["concept-ecosystem-clusters", "framework-strategies-pursuing-synergies"]
resolution_path: "Case studies analyzing failed ecosystem integrations to identify anti-patterns in complementor relations during M&A."
source_url: "https://hbr.org/2026/06/when-evaluating-an-ma-opportunity-consider-the-broader-digital-ecosystem"
source_title: "When Evaluating an M&A Opportunity, Consider the Broader Digital Ecosystem"
sources: ["ecosystem"]
sourceVaultSlug: "hbr-seg-ecosystem"
originDay: 11
articleStem: "hbr-cl-80-ma-digital-ecosystem"
sourceUrl: "https://hbr.org/2026/06/when-evaluating-an-ma-opportunity-consider-the-broader-digital-ecosystem"
sourceTitle: "When Evaluating an M&A Opportunity, Consider the Broader Digital Ecosystem"
---
# What Happens When Combining Ecosystems With Conflicting Standards or Hostile Complementors?

**Open question.** The framework assumes that combining ecosystems (especially within [[concept-ecosystem-clusters]]) will beneficially reshape relationships and encourage complementors to build. It leaves open how to handle M&A where:
- the target's [[concept-complementors]] view the acquirer as a **competitor**, or
- the two ecosystems rely on fundamentally **conflicting open-source vs. closed-source** philosophies.

**Possible resolution path:** Case studies analyzing failed ecosystem integrations to identify anti-patterns in complementor relations during M&A.

**Enrichment note:** Related governance risks compound this gap — 'reach for the center' strategies (heuristic #3 of [[framework-strategies-pursuing-synergies]]) can trigger regulator scrutiny, partner distrust, or envelopment responses from rivals, and a richer ecosystem can increase complexity and cannibalization. These governance, antitrust, and coordination risks are only lightly treated in the source (see [[contrarian-ma-value-source]]).