Toward a Knowledge-Based View of a Business Model

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to conceptualize the business model (BM) from a knowledge-based view (KBV), to interpret its nature and knowledge structure and to investigate the relationship between its imitability and the erosion of firm’s competitive advantage. Design/methodology/approach Based on a systematic literature review, this study builds an integrated framework to explicate the nature and structure of the BM from a KBV. Moreover, on the analysis of two contrasting cases, the argument concerning the relationship between BM imitability and its strategic value is proposed, analyzed and supported. Findings The main finding of this study is that a BM can be viewed as a structured knowledge cluster that contains explicit and implicit parts. Its imitation is a dynamic process of knowledge diffusion across firm boundaries. Ceteris paribus, with a lower proportion of implicit knowledge, a BM is more likely to be imitated and the adopter’s competitive advantage is more likely to be eroded, and vice versa. Practical implications The proposed framework could provide managers with a deeper understanding of the nature and structure of the BM and help potential adopters develop a successful entry strategy by avoiding BMs that seem profitable but are incapable of maintaining competitive advantage. Originality/value As a complement to previous studies, the research conceptualizes the BM as a “structured knowledge cluster” to explicate its nature and knowledge structure from a KBV. The implicit part of the BM is explored, and its importance for the adopter’s competitive advantage is discussed and verified.

Aim: In the era of mobile internet, live marketing has become a new business model for network marketing, and is a product of the interactive integration of new technology and marketing activities in the new era.Method: Based on the business model theory, combining the value creation process, using live streaming platforms such as Taobao, Tiktok, Jingdong and Amazon as examples, and adopting a qualitative analysis method, the business model elements and innovation paths of live marketing are analyzed.Findings: The research found that: (1) The live marketing model has new integrated features and new values. The combination of technical system integration and marketing activities is a hotbed for live marketing;(2) Based on the anchors influence and audiences attractiveness as the classification criteria, live broadcast sellers can be divided into super sellers, famous sellers, ordinary sellers and low-level sellers. It is a new classification proposed for the first time, which provides important evaluation contributions for understanding and distinguishing the different categories of live broadcast sellers; (3) Based on the business model canvas, this article finds that the business model innovation of live marketing illustrates the nine elements logical relationship of the business model, value proposition is the key-hub linking other elements. The business model innovation of live marketing also follows the basic laws of value creation, that is, from value proposition to value creation to value transmission, and finally to value acquisition;(4) The business model innovation path of live marketing is also the path of value rebuilding, which increasing value is the essence of the sustainable development of business model innovation.Implications/Novel Contribution: Therefore, these new findings can help non-live broadcast marketers transform their marketing concepts and methods, and improve their sales capabilities. The analysis of the business model innovation and value creation of live marketing reveals the essence of live marketing, and the mechanism of value co-creation between sellers and customers, which this research also creatively proposes its innovation model and value creation process from the perspective of the relationship between business model and value creation. Finally, the article is not in-depth study of its relationship business model innovation and value creation from the perspective of explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge.

The article is dedicated to exploring various strategies and approaches to business model development, emphasizing its role in enhancing organizational adaptability, competitiveness, and long-term sustainability. The study highlights the importance of business model development, innovation, and improvement in achieving sustainable success for organizations in dynamic market conditions. It identifies key factors that drive the need for continuous innovation of business models, including the impact of the external environment, influenced by rapid technological innovations, changing consumer preferences, economic volatility, and increasing competition. The article characterizes the main approaches to business model innovation depending on the enterprise's strategic focus (counteracting downturns or negative industry changes or striving for breakthrough growth) and the direction of transformation (transforming the core business activity or extending beyond it). Based on these approaches, enterprises are divided into reinventors, mavericks, adapters, and adventurers. We examine the forms of business model innovation: startups, transformation, diversification, and acquisitions, each involving different degrees of change to the business model. Criteria for classifying a business model innovation as sustainable or contributing to sustainable development are outlined. Popular strategies for business model innovation are summarized: integration, replacement, expansion, separation, exclusion, optimization, and relocation. For each strategy, opportunities and challenges are identified. Typical directions for business model development through these strategies are outlined. Internal and external factors to be considered in the analysis preceding business model innovation are defined. The article emphasizes that sustainable business models integrate technological, social, and environmental factors to ensure long-term success. Innovations toward sustainable development are key to achieving economic success and a positive societal impact.

Business model innovation（BMI）is becoming the important carrier of corporate transformation and upgrading, and its theme design as the value source of corporate sustainable competitive advantage has attracted much attention in recent years. Being embedded in a particular social situation and institution environment, BMI theme design is a product of contextualization. However, most researchers don’t have sufficient understanding for start-ups’ BMI institutional context. BMI under China’s transitional economy is much different from that one under western situation, China has become ‘a legitimate and viable context for management and organization reasearch’. Widespread ‘institution vacuum’ and ‘institution defect’ in transitional context have sharpened antecedents of business model design, have triggered a responsive motivation and creative challenge, and have provided theme design space with pioneering BMI and perfecting BMI. Therefore, it is very necessary to design the theme of BMI in China’s context and incorporate its operation to make measurement more meaningful and effective. In conformity with the research logic of theme business model design, based on China’s unique context, and focusing on how China’s start-ups change trading institution through BMI, this paper firstly excavates the trading and the institution attributes of business model, analyzes the influence of China’s transitional context on start-ups’ BMI, and refines out the theme design connotation of pioneering and perfecting BMI. Then, according to the development logic of measurement scale, by the use of combined approach, this paper initializes the scale of pioneering and perfecting BMI. Finally, by virtue of two sets of independent sample data respectively, we conduct EFA and CFA quantitative research to purify and validate the scale. Empirical analysis results show that BMI in transitional context is composed of 2 theme dimensions and 16 items, thus confirming our pioneering and perfecting BMI theoretic framework and developing a corresponding scale with a favorable reliability and validity, which is better to explain start-ups’ BMI behavior in the context of China’s transitional economy. The pioneering and perfecting BMI theme design which respectively acts on ‘institution vacuum’ and ‘institution defects’, frames not only the design elements of business model, but also conveys organization meaning, beliefs and values. This paper makes up for the lack of BMI contextualization in the answer of how China’s start-ups actively change incumbent institution, brings out the operative definition of pioneering and perfecting theme design, and makes theoretical contribution to the literature of BMI and corporate strategy. Moreover, the flexible use of pioneering and perfecting BMI, the equal attention to transaction innovation and organizational legitimacy, and the diagnostic tool function of theme scale all provide practical implications for start-ups’ business model innovative catching-up.

The term business model innovation refers to the introduction of innovations that differ from state-of-the-art business models in the same field. Current research indicates that business model innovations are more resilient (e.g. to imitation) overall and more successful in the long term compared to traditional types of innovation (e.g. product innovations). Working on business model innovation, therefore, can provide valuable insights, particularly for start-ups looking to grow and scale up under conditions of extreme uncertainty. Business model innovation involves the innovation of two of four core elements of a business model: customer, value proposition, value chain and revenue mechanism. A business model can be described using these four elements in a sophisticated and comprehensive manner. Moreover, these elements help us to determine whether a business model innovation exists. However, do start-ups really use the advantages of business model innovation and to what extent? This research paper addresses this issue and examines the role business model innovation plays for start-ups as well as how it has been implemented. To gain these insights, we examine the business plans of 24 finalists of a Swiss innovation competition in 2021 in a multi-stage process. We systematically reviewed and analysed business plans individually using pre-defined innovation criteria for each of these four elements of a business model. The individual analysis allows a robust assessment to be able to make a comprehensible classification. On reviewing the results, we were surprised by how many of the analysed start-ups are pursuing business model innovations, and that they often innovate more than two elements of their business models. According to our findings, start-ups nowadays deal with business model innovation more often than they did in previous research studies. We can also show that business model innovations are often more complex than they were in the past.

Collective processes of organizational knowledge creation remain poorly explored. Yet efficient knowledge management has to focus on those processes as far as it aims at dealing with sustaining knowledge development and knowledge sharing rather than solely its memorization. In this paper, we present a comparative analysis of two processes of knowledge creation within a business intelligence unit. This analysis leads to a five stages model that can be used either as a descriptive or prescriptive tool for knowledge management.

Purpose The aim of this paper is to review and synthesise the recent advancements in the business model literature and explore how firms approach business model innovation. Design/methodology/approach A systematic review of business model innovation literature was carried out by analysing 219 papers published between 2010 and 2016. Findings Evidence reviewed suggests that rather than taking either an evolutionary process of continuous revision, adaptation and fine-tuning of the existing business model or a revolutionary process of replacing the existing business model, firms can explore alternative business models through experimentation, open and disruptive innovations. It was also found that changing business models encompasses modifying a single element, altering multiple elements simultaneously and/or changing the interactions between elements in four areas of innovation: value proposition, operational value, human capital and financial value. Research limitations/implications Although this review highlights the different avenues to business model innovation, the mechanisms by which firms can change their business models and the external factors associated with such change remain unexplored. Practical implications The business model innovation framework can be used by practitioners as a “navigation map” to determine where and how to change their existing business models. Originality/value Because conflicting approaches exist in the literature on how firms change their business models, the review synthesises these approaches and provides a clear guidance as to the ways through which business model innovation can be undertaken.

Business models are a cornerstone of innovation for both startups and established firms. The term exists as part of the management lexicon, as media and scholars devote significant attention to it, especially with Internet-based and tech businesses exploiting innovative new models. This review aims to address the question concerning the current knowledge regarding the concepts of the business model and business model innovation. Starting with the business model, the paper examines the diversity of definitions that scholars offer, particularly related to its scope (e.g., firm, network) and conceptualization (e.g., activities, value). The narrative delves into a systematic review and components of the business model. It segues to examining links with the lean startup and associated canvases that encompass components to define value creation, delivery, and capture. This section closes by highlighting the diverse multitude of business models, including fifty-five common patterns, and finally, considers the assessment of the construct, most notably Teece's seven questions. The business model innovation section delves into its diverse characterizations by scholars, leading to the identification of common themes- value, process, novel, change, activities, core elements, model, and discovery. The section discusses two relevant systematic reviews that highlight gaps for further exploration. It then dives into multiple approaches, such as business model development, reconfiguration, discovery-driven planning, customer discovery, parallel play, and reinventing-the-wheel. This discussion closes by examining the role of business model innovation in the organizational learning process, particularly that of experimentation. Finally, it addresses evaluation, featuring Amit and Zott's six questions. Themes to draw for the business model involve that it (1) is essential to define a path to innovation and successful commercialization; (2) embodies the creation, delivery, capture, and apportionment of value; and (3) encompasses exploration and exploitation functions. For business model innovation, a notable extraction is that it involves a critical organizational learning process fashioning a model that offers novelty and value to the firm and its ecosystem of customers, investors, and partners.

Ever since the branching of the sustainable and circular literature on business models of the late 2000s and early 2010´s, academia´s, businesses and societies have been experimenting with how to measure green business models. Green Business Model design—creating, capturing, delivering, receiving and consuming TO BE Business Models, Business Model Reconfiguration—focusing on changing AS IS Business Models into becoming or being green and Green Business Model Development—focusing on the tactical parameters of Green Business Models are 3 very different areas of measuring green related to business models and business model innovation. Several tools and actions can in these cases be taken into consideration, when measuring Green Business Models and Green Business Model Innovation. However, it seems as if there is a gap in literature and practice on how to really measure these Green BM Parameters. More specifically—How to measure green related to business models and How to measure green related to business model innovation. None seems yet to be able to measure green business models in real time and none seems to offer green business model measurement on all Green Business Model Parameters in symbiosis with monetary business model parameters. One of the reasons is that there is no clear definitions of green business model parameters although numerous green certificates exist, and several consultancies capitalise heavily on the billion dollar green business model certificate ecosystem for measuring and validating transformation of “AS IS” and “TO BE” business model ecosystems, businesses and their related business models into green. Most definitions and certificates also seem to be pure static and adapted as copies of former iso measurement standards. Very few offer and use advanced technologies to measure the green business model parameters in real-time. Further there is a lack of advanced measurement technologies that are able to measure on all green business model parameters within internet time together with monetary business model parameters. The paper presents some preliminary work on green business model measuring based on data from 240 SME businesses and reports on some preliminary work on a Green Business Model Dashboard in the EU Interreg, Kask GREENBIZZ project aimed at measuring—How green a business and its related business models really are?—and in real time.

Organizations continually realise that fulfilling their sustainability objectives requires emerging innovations and innovation in the business model. Initially, most research revolved around product or method innovations with a new field of concern for the innovation in the business for its sustainability. A variety of new techniques & strategies have been designed to promote sustainability in the business models. While creating a large variety of business models, very few have been introduced successfully. Despite the topic's importance, research shows that many business model innovations fail. The causes of failure are largely unexplored and there is a lack of a comprehensive review of the literature on innovation in sustainable business models. The identified gaps in the areas of sustainable business model innovation that undermine bridging the design-implementation gaps are; the process of implementing business model innovation; its tools; and its challenges. The Cambridge Business Model innovation process (CBMIP) enables current and newly designed tools to be incorporated into the market modelling process, showing deficiencies.

PurposeThis paper aims to discuss hybrid organizations whose business models blur the boundary between for-profit and nonprofit worlds. With the aim of understanding how hybrid organizations have developed commercially viable business models to create positive social and environmental change, the authors contend that hybrids are altering long-held business norms and conceptions of the role of the corporation in society. Building on an analysis of the most updated literature on hybrid organizations and with the use of case study approach, the purpose of this paper is to derive managerial lessons that traditional businesses may apply to innovate their business models.Design/methodology/approachThis paper has a practical focus to help organizations to develop successful business strategies and design innovative business models. It applies emerging thinking on hybrid business models to provide new insights and ideas on the use of business models as tools for innovating and delivering value. To comply with this, first, the authors discuss the distinctive characteristics of hybrids and the hybrid business model through a concise but comprehensive review of all the literature on hybrid organization, which is still very recent. Second, we relied on a short case study that introduces information technology and digital innovation as the premises of the emergence of a new hybrid business model that adds additional elements to traditional business managers on how to learn from hybrid organizations’ avenues to innovate their business models.FindingsIn this paper, the authors aimed to shed light on the management of any organization or initiative that aims to embrace multiple and competing yet potentially synergistic goals, as is increasingly the case in modern corporations. Spotting hidden complementarities of antagonistic assets can be arduous, time-consuming, costly and risky, but businesses driven by innovation may want to keep a close eye on the expanding hybrid sector as a source of future entrepreneurial opportunities. To this regard, hybrid social ventures have the potential to shed light on ways to innovate traditional business models. The essence of studying hybrids is that firms may learn how to innovate their business models in ways that go beyond current conceptualizations, making their mission profitable, rather than making profit their only mission! The research design (literature analysis and case study) allowed the authors to disentangle different innovative business models that hybrids suggest highlight strengths and weaknesses of such business models, understand strategies and capabilities associated with hybrids and transpose all these lessons learned to traditional business managers who constantly struggle for innovation.Research limitations/implicationsThe main implication is that hybrid organizations may serve as incubators for new practices that can gain scale and impact by infusion into existing corporations. The authors can assist to a process of “hybridization” of incumbent firms, pushing the boundaries of corporate sustainability efforts toward strategies in which profit and social purpose share more equal footing.Practical implicationsFirms interested in benefiting from antagonistic assets that can have a dramatic impact on their business model innovation may want to consider some lessons: firms can attempt to build antagonistic assets into their mission, asking themselves what activities they can undertake with the potential to create (or erode) social, environmental and economic value and how these activities might be mediated by the context/environment in which they operate; they can partner with hybrids to benefit from them and absorb competencies from them, so to increase their likelihood to generate value-creating activities and to impact on wider range of stakeholders, including funders, partners, beneficiaries and communities; they can mimic hybrids on how to innovate their business model through the use of the “deliberate resource misfit” dynamic capability, mitigating negative impacts and trade-offs and maximizing positive value spillovers, both for the firms themselves and for the community.Social implicationsSharing know-how with hybrids opens up to ways to innovate business models, and hybrids are much more open to sharing lessons and encouraging others to copy their approaches in a genuine open innovation approach.Originality/valueThe main lesson businesses can take away from studying hybrids is that antagonistic assets – and not only profitable complementary ones, as the resource-based view would suggest – do not have to be a burden on profits. Hybrids ground their strategy first and foremost on their beneficiaries, thus dealing with a bundle of antagonistic assets. The primary objective of hybrids is thus to find imaginative ways of generating profits from their given resources rather than acquiring the resources that generate the highest profit. Profit is the ultimate goal of traditional businesses’ mission, but by making profit their only mission, firms risk missing out on the hidden opportunities latent in antagonistic assets. Learning from hybrids about how to align profits and societal impact may be a driver of long-term competitive advantage.

Business models have the potential to deliver environmental sustainability in companies through innovative approaches to creating and delivering value. Business model innovation has been shown as a means to integrate circular economy principles into companies' operations. Several frameworks have been created to guide the transition from traditional to circular business models. However, there is a need for a framework that quantitatively evaluates business models to inform the transition based on their relative environmental performance in creating and delivering value. This study presents a new framework for evaluating the Environmental performance of Business Models (EBuM). The EBuM framework consists of sequential steps of life cycle assessment, participatory decision-making, and business model innovation. It enables organisations to integrate environmental considerations in their decisions and operations. The framework was applied to solar energy companies in Kenya. Life cycle assessments of the photovoltaic systems were conducted through the lens of business models of participating companies to provide insights into the hotspots of environmental impacts. Each company participated in two workshops to evaluate the potential of business model innovation in mitigating the environmental impacts of their activities. Findings showed that the environmental impacts of incumbent business models were generally higher than of their circular economy-oriented substitutes. Business model innovation could, for example, lower the climate change potential by 12 %–55 % and the metal depletion potential by 40 %–70 %. While the framework has been applied to solar energy companies, it can be applied to other business models in different sectors.

Despite increasing interest in business model innovation (BMI), there is only limited scholarship that examines how business model (BM) innovators present and explain their innovations to various stakeholders. As BMI often involves the creation of a new ecosystem, understanding how innovators can gain support of future ecosystem members is important. Based on a longitudinal case study of Salesforce, a pioneer in cloud computing, the authors show how the innovator’s skillful framing to different audiences fosters the emergence of an ecosystem around the new BM. The authors suggest that effective framing constitutes an important strategic process that enables BM innovators to shape new ecosystems due to the performative power of words.

Successful business model innovation requires managers to come up not only with new, but also with viable business models. To this end, it has been argued that business model consistency plays a vital role, as the internal fit of business model elements can generate reinforcing effects, thereby influencing performance and competitive advantage. Little research has been conducted to measure consistency and confirm these effects, especially within business model innovation. We tackle this issue by developing and testing a measurement of business model consistency, and investigate its relationship with business model innovation and its performance. We find evidence supporting the positive effect of consistency on innovation performance. We contribute to extant research by developing a concept and measurement for business model consistency based on contingency theory and empirically verifying it. Our findings underline that managers should pay close attention to the consistency of their business model designs during business model innovation.

This study explores antecedents to business model innovation and empirically tests theoretical findings. We relate firm characteristics to the propensity to innovate the business model. In order to test our hypotheses, we develop a quantitative model for business model innovation, utilizing the NK-model approach. We developed and analysed a unique dataset of incumbent Australian pension funds covering the years 2003-2010. This dataset allows us to specifically look at firm characteristics that can promote business model innovation. The empirical results indicate significant positive effects of experience with previous merger and acquisition transactions and heterogeneity of industry experience of the management board on the propensity of a firm to innovate its business model. These results indicate that firms incorporate inferences from highly disruptive experiences for subsequent decisions on business model innovation. Furthermore, the analysis underlines the fact that conflict arising from heterogeneity on the management board can counteract inertia within the firm and increase the propensity to innovate the business model. In contrast, dependence on an old business model has a significant negative influence on the propensity to innovate the business model. This is evidence that firms with a strong pull from existing assets embedded within an old business model struggle to break free and innovate their business model.