Using these two indexes as dummy variables, interoperability), and finally, one that was leading in we grouped all global 4,053 as well as 1,292 terms of both ecosystem expansion and integration respondents in Growth Markets into three groups. across these ecosystems (companies with high The first group, which had not improved Diversity interoperability). We then investigated how being in over the last two years, regardless of their each group correlates to measures of performance. Interoperability score, was named companies with low/no interoperability. The second group, Calculation of the which had improved Diversity but not improved its performance difference Interoperability was called companies with medium interoperability. The remaining respondents, Using the definitions above, we compared the who had improved both their Diversity and difference in performance between these three Interoperability were named high interoperability. groups—with metrics such as cost savings, revenue In Growth Markets, each group had roughly a growth, employee productivity, and how successful third of the respondents (~33%, or ~430). In other they have been at achieving business goals such words, we identified three equal sized groups as reinventing customer experience and achieving of companies, one of which was in ecosystem efficiency in supply chain operations. stasis (companies with low/no interoperability), one that was expanding ecosystems but not improving integration (companies with medium