Purpose: Despite the vast array of literature on integrated reporting, there is scant empirical evidence on the value relevance of the specific content elements of integrated reports. This paper investigates whether a specific content element of integrated reports, namely, business model disclosure quality influences the share price of South African listed companies. Business model disclosure was selected because it is integral to all stakeholders in understanding companies’ value creation processes to make informed decisions. Design/Methodology/Approach: The value relevance was tested using the Ohlson (1995) Model through the application of panel data. A new proxy was used for the “other information” variable in the Ohlson (1995) Model for business model disclosure. Two scenarios were evaluated: one sample included profit-making and loss-making companies (350 observations) and another sample of profit-making companies (260 observations) for five years from 2016 to 2020. Findings: The results for both scenarios indicated that the quality of business model disclosure had no effect on the share price of South African listed companies. Originality/Value: The paper makes four contributions to the existing literature. Firstly, analysing the value relevance of one specific component of integrated reports, namely, business model disclosure. Secondly, using a new a proxy for business model disclosure to incorporate into the Ohlson (1995) Model. Thirdly, the paper provides empirical evidence on the value relevance of one of the critical elements of integrated reports of companies that have a mandatory requirement to publish integrated reports. Fourthly, two samples were analyzed: one sample of profit-making and loss-making companies and another sample of profit-making companies.

In this interview-based article, Professor Christian Nielsen summons two of the latest decades’ biggest management thinkers, the two inventors of the Business Model Canvas, Alex Osterwalder and Yves Pigneur, for a conversation about the current challenges for companies in doing business model innovation. According to Alex and Yves, companies face two major challenges. First, companies have inadequate governance structures for allowing innovators to do decent work, and second, the old guard knows jack shit about innovation. Unfortunately, it is precisely the old guard sitting with the management reigns at this time. Our conversation identifies three enablers to help overcome these challenges. First, the enabler is about ensuring leadership commitment and allocating management time to innovation. The second enabler is the ability to kill ideas. This is important, because every company needs to focus its innovation efforts, besides ensuring that budgets and resources are channeled in the most fruitful directions. The third enabler is building an innovation culture that coexists with an exploitation culture and where innovators can thrive. In successful companies, innovators are not pirates; they are highly esteemed contributors to corporate success. Finally, we get a sneak peek at their current work focus.

Business modeling tools are crucial for designing and implementing successful business models. However, there exist instances—which we refer to as the design of ecosystemic business models—in which developing a business model requires simultaneous consideration of both one’s own business model and that of ecosystem partners. In these instances, standard business modeling tools focusing on representing business models in isolation may be inadequate. Based on a real-world example of a business ecosystem from the maritime logistics industry, we highlight five significant design challenges for ecosystemic business models. We then reflect on and discuss the extended role of the business model as an instrument for inter-organizational alignment, and draw out three implications for business modeling tools. The objective of this paper is to deduce implications and functional design requirements for business modeling tools from a conceptual perspective.

The purpose of this study is to shed light on patterns of change in incumbent firms and, in doing so, identify different types of approaches to business model reconfiguration (BMR). Drawing on data spanning a 10-year period in the empirical context of mature, low-tech firms in the Swedish wood manufacturing industry, this paper develops a typology of BMR approaches, namely Incremental, Modular, Integrated and Transformational BMR. The paper illustrates the nature of these types and offers several insights into the meaning and significance of each for our understanding of BMR and the design of business models in general.


 
 
 
 Ecosystems have become one of the “hottest” topics in industry practice and academia and are becoming increasingly important for companies to grasp in their business model innovation activities. However, research and practice are developing along different lines. Hence, this paper aims to bridge the gap between theory and practice and clarify which critical topics in the field of ecosystem management will be crucial for business model innovation in the future. This leads to four key areas that need attention: 1) Organisational change and firm culture as the most significant barriers for ecosystems and, thereby, business model innovation, 2) Portfolio strategies and performance evaluation for ecosystem-based business model innovation, 3) New investment approaches to deal with start-ups that are ecosystem orchestrators 4) Hands-on approaches for the different roles and tasks in an ecosystem. This makes ecosystem thinking an integral part of business model innovation thinking.
 
 
 

Purpose: Develop a method for an extended “fore-and-aft” use of business models. The method will turn them also into potent business history tools, in addition to being valuable forward planning instruments. Approach: Business models can be used to understand organizations by studying them as “snapshots” at any given time or accounting for their evolution by comparing their past successive forms on a temporal axis. The paper proposes a method of evolutionary analysis, which, by following a historical institutionalism approach, identifies “critical junctures”, organizational change and business model revisions. The evolution of organisations can be deciphered by comparing the business models at these “critical junctures”. Findings: The method has been tested in two international financial institutions. Value: There is no similar approach and use of business models. The method can serve scholarly purposes and business applications.

The Business Model Conference 2021, held at Aalborg University’s Copenhagen campus in early October, provided the members of the academic community with a great opportunity to discuss the latest research, innovative teaching methods, and best practices in business models research. Following the cancellation of the Business Model Conference 2020 due to the COVID-19 crisis, the 2021 edition represented a new beginning and restored the familiar sense of community feeling experienced before the pandemic.

Purpose: This paper offers a literature review and explains the terminology for platform ecosystem business models. It also suggests a practical tool, the Platform Canvas, to support the implementation activities. Design/Methodology/Approach: A literature review was conducted in fall 2016 that resulted in the tentative canvas approach, which was evaluated in seven real company cases. Findings: The study identified the eight most important characteristics for a business model design of a platform ecosystem. To support the development and improvement of successful business models in a platform ecosystem, the Platform Canvas tool was created. Originality/Value: The unique result is a practical tool, the Platform Canvas that facilitates business model creation in platform ecosystems.