Description
Examines business models for emerging technology-based services. Although the concept of business model is an essential term in business and the existing literature offers various definitions of it, there is still much confusion around the term.
Examining business models for emerging technology-based services – a
network perspective
Teea Palo
Department of Marketing, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of
Oulu, P.O. Box 4600, 90014 University of Oulu, Finland
[email protected]
Abstract
The paper examines business models for emerging technology-based services. Although the
concept of business model is an essential term in business and the existing literature offers
various definitions of it, there is still much confusion around the term. Hence, the aim is to
develop some common ground for defining and developing business models by identifying
some general elements of a business model in the field of technology-based services. As
single companies often cannot govern all the relevant resources and activities needed in
producing and commercializing such services, a network of actors is needed. Thus, the
concept also needs to be further developed from a network perspective. As a result, the paper
presents a framework describing the elements of a net business model that need to be
considered in a business model in order to describe the production and commercialization of
technology-based services in business nets. The research project is in progress, and the
framework will be further developed in the future based on existing theory, as well as
according to further empirical study.
Keywords: Business model, strategic business net, technology-based service, Delphi method
Work-in-progress paper submitted to the 25th IMP Conference
Euromed Management, Marseilles, September 3-5, 2009
Examining business models for emerging technology-based services – a
network perspective
Abstract
The paper examines business models for emerging technology-based services. Although the
concept of business model is an essential term in business and the existing literature offers
various definitions of it, there is still much confusion around the term. Hence, the aim is to
develop some common ground for defining and developing business models by identifying
some general elements of a business model in the field of technology-based services. As
single companies often cannot govern all the relevant resources and activities needed in
producing and commercializing such services, a network of actors is needed. Thus, the
concept also needs to be further developed from a network perspective. As a result, the paper
presents a framework describing the elements of a net business model that need to be
considered in a business model in order to describe the production and commercialization of
technology-based services in business nets. The research project is in progress, and the
framework will be further developed in the future based on existing theory, as well as
according to further empirical study.
Keywords: Business model, strategic business net, technology-based service, Delphi method
Introduction
Emerging technologies across different fields have multiple effects on business, firms,
markets and marketing (Srinivasan, 2008). Radical technological developments can be
characterized by nonlinear and unpredictable change, which bring many challenges to firms
commercializing breakthrough innovations while there is no clear market structure with
identifiable actors (Möller & Svahn, 2009). As new technology is changing the business
environment, there is a need to find new innovative business models. Technology is taken to
the markets by firms through a venture shaped by a specific business model, and in many
cases managers need to expand their perspectives and find the right business models in order
to capture value from that specific technology (Chesbrough & Rosenbloom, 2002).
Although the concept of business model is increasingly discussed both in the academia and
everyday language, there is still confusion around the concept in terms of how it can be
defined and used. Various definitions of the concept exist, but none appears to be generally
accepted. This may be due to the fact that the concept draws from as well as integrates a
range of disciplines (Chesbrough & Rosenbloom, 2002; Shafer, Smith & Linder, 2005).
However, before managers can apply the concept properly, they need a simple working
definition of the concept that clears up the fuzziness around the term (Magretta, 2002).
Hence, this study focuses on developing some common ground for defining and developing
business models. The paper acknowledges that the concept is in many cases context-specific,
and hence examines it in the specific field of emerging technology-based services. More
specifically the focus is on ubiquitous services which commonly combine the advances of
information and networking technologies (Shin & Lee, 2005) as well as mobile and pervasive
computing (Lyytinen & Yoo, 2002).
Furthermore, this study examines the concept of business model more specifically from a
network perspective, as there are often various actors involved in developing services and
hence, a complexity of relationships internal as well as external to the organization occurs
(e.g. Morgan, Deeter-Schmelz & Moberg, 2007; Syson & Perks, 2004). This is the case
especially in the emergence of new technology and technology-based services, where a
diversity of activities and resources are needed from various actors (see e.g. Komulainen,
Mainela, Sinisalo, Tähtinen & Ulkuniemi, 2006; Lundgren, 1995; Möller & Svahn, 2009).
This study suggests that these multiple actors form emerging business nets with radical
changes in their value systems or completely new value activities, which aim at creating new
technology (Möller & Rajala, 2007; Möller, Rajala & Svahn, 2005), and hence are relevant in
examining the business model concept.
For the abovementioned reasons, the aim of this paper is to 1) identify some general elements
of a business model in the field of technology-based services and 2) develop the concept
further from a network and especially from strategic net perspective. In pursuing these goals,
the paper builds on research on business models (e.g. Hedman & Kalling, 2003; Timmers,
1998) especially from a network perspective (e.g. Helander & Rissanen, 2005; Komulainen et
al., 2006), and the strategic or value net approach (e.g. Möller & Rajala, 2007; Möller, Rajala
& Svahn, 2005; Parolini, 1999).
The empirical part of the paper presents a qualitative study that employs the Delphi method.
This specific method was chosen as the concept of business model is very fragmentary and
the aim is to elaborate the concept in a highly dynamic environment. The study included two
online questionnaire rounds among experts from firms and non-business actors with open-
ended questions. As a result, the paper presents a conceptual framework for developing
business models for emerging technology-based services in a networked business field. It
includes the elements that need to be considered in a business model in order to describe the
production and commercialization of technology-based services in business nets. Along with
this, some general guidelines and characteristics of business models in this specific field of
business are discussed.
The paper is organised in the following way. First, the theoretical premises of the study are
discussed: the concept of business model as well as the nature of strategic business nets. After
this, the methodological choices employed in the study are elaborated. Then, the analysis of
the data obtained through the Delphi-study will be discussed in two phases, after both
questionnaire rounds. Finally, based on the analysis and the theoretical premises, a
framework for identifying the elements of a business model will be presented as results and
some conclusion will be drawn.
Theoretical base
The concept of business model
The term business model became a great buzzword in the era of the internet boom and dot-
com companies (Magretta, 2002; Shafer, Smith & Linder, 2005). Previous literature offers
various definitions of the concept; many emphasize strongly the e- prefix (e.g. Timmers,
1998; Weill & Witale, 2001), while others are not restricted to certain businesses such as the
online world (Shafer, Smith & Linder, 2005). In the following table, some definitions of the
concept are presented with an emphasis on different aspects, elements, and manners of
representation.
Table 1. Definitions of business models
Authors Definition Central elements and
characteristics
Amit & Zott,
2001
Business model represents an important locus of innovation
and a crucial source of value creation for the firm and its
suppliers, partners and customers. Each business model is
centered on a particular firm.
Value creation, actors,
single firm’s perspective.
Chesbrough &
Rosenbloom,
2002
Companies must find the right business model in order to
create value from new technology. Business model provides a
framework which considers the technological characteristics
and potentials as inputs and converts them through customers
and markets into economic outputs.
Technology, value,
normative representation,
context-specific.
Hedman &
Kalling, 2003
The concept of business model generally describes the key
components of a given business: 1) customers, 2) competitors,
3) offering, 4) activities and organisation, 5) resources, 6)
supply of factor and production inputs and 7) a longitudinal
process component to cover the dynamics of the business
model as well as the cognitive and cultural constraints that
management has to take into account.
Actors, offering, flows of
resources, central firm,
dynamics, general
representation.
Helander &
Rissanen, 2005
Business models of the companies must be linked to the
business models of the other companies involved in the
network.
Network,
interconnectedness of
business models.
Komulainen et
al., 2006
There can be identified three core elements of a network
business model; the product/service, the business actors and
their roles, and value-creating exchanges among the actors.
Product/service, business
actors and their roles,
value-creating exchanges,
network perspective.
Shafer, Smith &
Linder, 2005
Business model is defined “as a representation of a firm’s
underlying core logic and strategic choices for creating and
capturing value within a value network”.
Central firm, value
creation and capture,
value network.
Weill & Vitale,
2001
Business model represents the roles and relations among the
firm’s customers, allies and suppliers identifying the major
flows of product, information and money and the major
benefits for the actors.
Actors and roles, value
exchanges (flows),
relations, relationship
perspective.
The list is not by all means exhaustive but demonstrates the different elements and
perspectives build into the concept of business model. It is not in the interests of this paper to
give a review of the wide range of definitions of business models and their components (see
e.g. Hedman & Kalling, 2003; Shafer, Smith & Linder, 2005) but instead, the current study
emphasizes the key component or perspective of business models, which has been identified
frequently in the existing literature: business networks.
Interorganizational networks represent a key element in business models (Westerlund, Rajala
& Leminen, 2008). It can also be seen from table 1, that actors and their roles as well as
networks are emphasized in various definitions. Timmers (1998) includes in his definition of
a business model a description of the various business actors and their roles. Shafer, Smith
and Linder (2005) emphasize the value network and the role that the firm chooses to play in
the network as important elements of the business model. Chesbrough and Rosenbloom
(2002) also suggest that one of the functions of a business model is to describe the position
that firm has within the value network. Westerlund, Rajala and Leminen (2008) propose that
the business model of a firm describes the way the company creates revenue by specifying
the relationships with other actors as well as the firm’s position in the value creating network.
Helander and Rissanen (2005) talk about open source software business models and
recognise that the value created in open source projects generally cannot be owned by a
single company but value is created for the network. Thus business models must be linked
between the companies involved in the network and may also include some other components
outside the network (Helander & Rissanen, 2005).
Although the network of actors and their roles have been identified as important elements of
a business model, they are still generally explored from a single firm’s perspective (e.g. Amit
& Zott, 2001). However, single companies most often cannot master all the necessary
resources and competencies to develop and produce new technology by themselves. Instead,
there are more actors involved. Thus the underlying business models are not limited to one
core actor but instead they have to be attractive to multiple actors (Bouwman & Fielt, 2008;
Komulainen et al., 2006). This study adopts the viewpoint of Komulainen et al. (2006), who
examine the concept of business model from a network perspective (see Table 1). The
network perspective, or more specifically the strategic net approach, will be elaborated in the
following.
Strategic business nets
As already noticed, in the emergence of new technology-based services, an individual
company cannot master all the necessary resources and competencies but a diversity of
activities are needed from various actors (see e.g. Komulainen et al., 2006; Lundgren, 1995;
Möller & Svahn, 2009). E.g. Kallio (2004) has identified various roles in wireless business
such as the application provider, content provider, infrastructure provider, operator, service
provider and the end user. The multiple actors involved in the development, production and
commercialization of the services form strategic business nets, as it is not usually reasonable
to try to create value for the customer through the firm itself with limited competencies if it is
possible to ally with other firms that can complement the existing competencies (Helander,
2004).
Strategic business nets are distinguished from more general “networks of firms” and they can
be defined as intentionally formed networks that contain a finite set of parties, at least three
(Möller, Rajala & Svahn, 2005). J arillo (1988) conceptualizes strategic networks as a mode
of organization which is a long-term and purposeful arrangement to gain or sustain
competitive advantage by outsourcing activities and focusing on the key ones in which the
firm has comparative advantage. Furthermore, a hub firm is seen as essential in setting up the
network and taking a pro-active role in it. Strategic networks are composed of enduring
interorganizational ties that are strategically significant for the firms involved in them as such
networks can provide companies the access to information, resources, markets and
technologies, and allow firms to achieve strategic objectives such risk sharing (Gulati, Nohria
& Zaheer, 2000). Möller, Rajala and Svahn (2005) highlight the centrality of the value system
and its level of determination in understanding strategic nets. Value creating systems can be
defined as sets of activities that create value and that are connected to each other by flows of
information, material, money and influence relationships (Parolini, 1999). It is important to
decide which parts of a value chain or a system of a given product are emphasized in a firm
and which are farmed out: a critical component of a strategic network is the opportunity for
joint value creation between the organisations (J arillo, 1988).
Möller, Rajala and Svahn (2005) identify three factors that explain the nature of strategic nets
and their management: 1) the level of determination of the value activities and the actors
forming the net, 2) the goal of the net or its hub firm in terms of the desired outcomes that are
pursued through the net, and 3) the structure of the net which can be described through the
vertical and horizontal dimensions and through the numbers and different types of actors.
Hence,
systems
concept
distingu
which i
achieve
are mo
technol
transfor
explore
In figur
nets are
element
intercon
thus are
as actor
model,
Figure 1
Method
This stu
utilizing
group
The
of b
m
there are di
s which are
ts (Möller,
uish applica
include rad
e commercia
stly driven
ogy provide
rmed into v
ed from a str
re 1, the var
e shown. It i
t of busin
nnected. Th
e overlappin
rs and roles
one also ne
. A theoretica
dology
udy has cho
g experts’ o
of individ
elements
business
model
ifferent type
e created in
Rajala &
ation nets a
dical and di
ally viable b
n by a hub
ers, as well
viable busin
rategic net p
rious and so
is evident fr
ness mode
he various e
ng. The elem
, dynamics,
eeds to descr
al framework
osen to app
opinions in
duals to de
es of nets as
order to co
Svahn, 20
as a specific
iscontinuou
business ap
firm and
l as pilot cu
ness nets, an
perspective.
omewhat ov
from the the
els, and th
elements ide
ments under
, relations a
ribe the bus
k of the eleme
ply a qualita
a structured
eal with a
Business n
Product/
service
Value creat
Flows of
informatio
resources
benefits et
Technolog
Central fir
s well. The
ommercialis
005). More
c net catego
us change. A
pplications o
involve a w
ustomers. H
nd hence th
.
verlapping e
eoretical dis
hus the tw
entified in th
r business n
and the valu
siness net in
ents of a busi
ative Delph
d communic
a complex
nets
/
tion
f
on,
s,
tc.
gy
rm
focus of th
se new tech
specificall
ory in the a
Application
out of the e
web of com
However, su
he concept o
elements of
cussion tha
wo theore
he figure ar
nets are esse
ue system. H
nvolved.
iness model
hi method. T
cation proce
problem
Struct
Actor
Roles/pos
Relations
Dynam
Value sy
is study lies
nologies, pr
ly, Möller
area of emer
n nets are f
evolving tec
mponent, s
uch applicati
of business
f business m
at business n
etical prem
re connecte
ential in bus
Hence, in de
The method
ess, which e
(Linstone
ure
rs
sitions
s, ties
mics
ystem
s in emergin
roducts or b
and Rajala
rging busin
formed in o
chnology. Su
oftware, an
ion nets ne
model nee
models and b
nets are an e
mises are
d to each o
siness mode
escribing a b
d is concern
effectively a
& Turoff,
Hub fir
Access
informa
etc.
Level
determin
Value act
ng value
business
a (2007)
ness nets
order to
uch nets
nd other
ed to be
ds to be
business
essential
strongly
ther and
els, such
business
ned with
allows a
1975).
rm?
s to
ation
.
of
nation
tivities
Traditionally, the Delphi method has been used to achieve consensus around situations where
there is contradictory or insufficient amount of information (Hasson, Keeney & McKenna,
2000). Other major variation of the method is policy Delphi (e.g. Turoff, 1975) where
opposing views are debated on a complex issue (Loo, 2002). The Delphi method was chosen
for this study as the concept of business model is very fragmentary and the aim is to develop
the concept further in a highly dynamic environment. The aim was not to achieve consensus
among the experts, but to increase the understanding of the concept of business model by
gaining different perceptions and opinions of it. The current study is a preliminary study of
the research project, in order to gain some pre-understanding of the phenomenon and lay
some ground for further research.
The Delphi method is a research process that involves various phases. For example Linstone
and Turoff (1975) identify four main phases of the Delphi research process; 1) exploration of
the subject wherein individuals contribute additional information, 2) process of reaching an
understanding of how the group views the issue, 3) in case of strong disagreement among the
group, an exploration of the underlying reasons for the differences, and 4) final analysis and
evaluation. The data gained from the process represents basically the subjective beliefs and
judgements of the experts (Bell, 1997, 264). Although the Delphi process tends to minimize
the feelings and information communicated through face-to-face communication, the process
provides the individuals a great degree of individuality and freedom from restrictions on their
expressions (Linstone & Turoff, 1975). This preliminary study did not include expert
interviews or other face-to-face meetings but the questionnaires were the primary mode of
data collection. This may have had an effect on the richness of the data. However, the experts
had the chance to answer to the questions anonymously and by writing which provided them
the opportunity answer to the questions freely.
This study has followed the general steps of the research process by starting with defining the
research problem. The two online questionnaire rounds consisted mainly of open-ended
questions. The first questionnaire round involved two expert panels, Panel 1 with
representatives of firms and non-business actors in technology-based business field, and
Panel 2 with firm representatives from various other business fields (see Table 2). The
questionnaire revolved around general business models and their usage in practice. It
consisted of two parts: firstly seven different definitions offered by the existing literature
were presented and the experts were asked to comment on them freely. These definitions can
be found in the theoretical part of the paper (Table 1). The alternative definitions were chosen
based on their emphasis on perspective (single/central firm, relationship, or network), manner
of representation (normative, general, or context-specific) and alternative elements of
business models. Secondly, three open-ended questions were presented concerning these
definitions, elements of business models, and their usage in business field. After conducting
the first round, the data was analysed.
The preliminary results of the first round were presented to the experts on the second
questionnaire round, which had been formed based on the data. The second questionnaire was
sent solely to Panel 1, representatives of firms and non-business actors in technology-based
business field, as the focus was more narrowed down to technology-based services. The
questionnaire presented a framework describing the elements of a business model which had
been identified based on the data gained from the first round (product/service, actors and their
roles, value exchanges, value net, business logic and strategic issues, and the environment).
The experts were asked to comment on that, as well as to comment a few statements
regarding the nature and development of business models in the field of technology-based
services, which had also been formed based on the data from the first round. Finally, the
experts also had an opportunity to answer freely to an open-ended question about business
models in general. After the second round, the data was analysed and reported. The numbers
of the members and the respondents of both panels can be seen in table 2. In the first round,
altogether 13 of 37 experts responded to the questionnaire and in the second round 10 of 20
experts responded.
Table 2. Expert panels
Panel 1 (members/respondents) Panel 2 (members/respondents)
1
st
questionnaire round 20 / 7 17 / 6
2
nd
questionnaire round 20 / 10 - / -
Data analysis was done in two main phases. Firstly, after the first questionnaire round, the
data was analysed in order to present the results to the experts in the second questionnaire.
Secondly, the data obtained from the second questionnaire round was analysed and the results
obtained from the first questionnaire were modified based on the analysis.
In both stages of the analysis, the answers were codified with the QSR NVivo 8-program.
This was done in two main phases after both questionnaire rounds. The analysis was started
first by reading the data several times and then by codifying it into various themes. The
themes were codified under free nodes in NVivo, and they included elements of business
models identified in the theoretical base as well as some other elements and characteristics
arisen from the data. Secondly, these various themes were combined into wider categories by
using tree nodes in NVivo. As part of the analysis, the themes were written out and also
illustrated figuratively after both questionnaire rounds. The actual data analysis done with
NVivo is described in more detail in the following chapter.
Analysis of the Delphi-study
First questionnaire round
After reading the answers the first few times, several themes around the elements of business
models were found. These elements mainly represent the factors that business models need to
cover and describe. Altogether six basic elements of business models were recognized: actors
and their roles, services and products, value net, value exchanges, business logic and strategic
issues, and the environment. The actors represent different business actors such as suppliers,
partners and other network players as well as customers and competitors. Business model
should also describe their roles in the network. The service or product is in a central place in a
business model, and it includes e.g. innovations and technology aspects. The value net
naturally includes the actors of the net, but as an essential factor in the analysis of the net was
seen the level of cooperation as well as the changes in the net. Value exchanges refer to the
value creation logic of the net, such as the flows of competencies, resources and benefits
between the actors. It was also emphasized in the data, that the business model needs to
describe both the business logic and strategic choices, that is, both the operational level and
strategic decisions and their implementation. Finally, the environment was seen as a very
central element of business models, as the changes in the environment, such as the market,
culture, regulations and legislation, and technology have to be taken into account in
developing and adjusting the business model.
In addition, there were also other interesting findings concerning the fundamental
characteristics of business models that affect the development and implementation of them.
Based on the data it was evident that it is quite difficult to develop a single general definition
of the concept of business model, as it becomes too vague. One definition cannot cover
everything and moreover, in trying to do so, the uniqueness of business models suffers as the
business models need to cover fundamental and practical actions and choices in the
company’s everyday business. Still, on the other hand it was seen that companies operating in
a basically same process can have the same model of planning and controlling instead of
individual models.
Thus it was seen that a business model is more of a framework instead of developing a single
business model. A framework gives space for realigning the process. Therefore, an ongoing
strategic process is needed besides the business model. This was closely related to another
essential characteristic of business models strongly emphasized in the data, namely dynamics.
Business model changes over time as there are many dynamic factors in the surrounding
environment, which affect the development of business models; relationships, knowledge,
flexibility, time resources, and networking as well as new technology. Another confrontation
could be found between long term vs. short term planning, which should be both covered in a
business model. Furthermore, the development of business models was also seen different in
small vs. large companies: small businesses may not have that complete models as in big,
multinational companies the models are defined at the top.
The network perspective on business models was present in the panellists’ answers. The
respondents found it possible to create business models for multiple actors, moreover, most of
them saw that business models need to be linked at least to some extent as no one can do
business on their own. Business models could be established to multiple players with
different roles, and each player specifies their own models later in more detail. This is
naturally dependent on the level of cooperation between the actors, and it was also noticed
that business models cannot always be linked in case of a low level of cooperation.
Second questionnaire round
The second questionnaire round elaborated the elements as well as the nature and
development of business models. Basically, the elements identified in the first round proved
to be essential in a business model based on the data. Only some elaborations on the roles of
the elements and the nature of business models were found. Also the role of the presented
framework was discussed in the data. What does it aim to describe; a concrete value chain or
a description of strategic decision-making? Furthermore, the interrelationships and priority
between the different elements raised questions among the respondents.
The role of a single company vs. value net in the business model was further deliberated. It
was seen that some of the elements refer to the business model of a single company and
others to the business model of the value net. A separation of the business models of single
companies and that of the value nets is needed. That is, could the business models of single
companies be embedded in the business model of the value net? Furthermore, the level of
cooperation was emphasized in the data in terms of developing business models for the value
net. On one hand, it was seen that this can be impossible e.g. in the case of networks that
exist only a short period of time. Then on the other hand, most experts agreed that it is more
often necessary to develop business models for a net of actors. However, it is central that the
business model is developed for the service itself that the different actors in the net are
producing. Thus, the role of the service is central in the business model. Furthermore, the role
of the customer was seen as important in a business model and in the field of technology-
based services in general. The business model and the value net need to be based on the needs
and benefits, which have been found in practice. Also money and revenue flows were
mentioned as an important element in addition to those identified in the first round, and those
flows should be described in a business model.
The discussion around defining the concept of business model continued in the second
questionnaire round. It was clear that there cannot be a general and universal definition of
business model at operational level. However, it is possible to define the elements of a
business model, and specify the content of the elements in each case. Furthermore, businesses
are different in different fields, and thus it might be preferable to develop more context-
specific definitions or frameworks. Also the dynamic nature of business models was strongly
emphasized in the answers. The environment has many effects on business models.
Especially the role of technology was emphasized, such as new technological development,
as well as the usage of old or existing technology, which can be employed in a new
technology innovation.
Results
Based on the analysis of the data, and drawing on existing theoretical discussion in the fields
of business models and strategic business nets, the paper presents a conceptual framework for
developing business models for emerging technology-based services in a networked business
field. The framework will be further developed based on existing theory, as well as according
to further empirical study. The current framework is presented in figure 2.
Figure 2. A framework of the elements of a net business model
The framework represents the elements that need to be considered in a business model in
order to describe the production and commercialization of technology-based services in
business nets. The key elements of a business model are presented inside the dash lined
rectangle: the service, the customer(s), the actors and their roles below (ellipses), as well as
Short term
and long
term
changes
Customer
needs and
involvement
Adjustments according to the
changes in environment
Adjustments
according to
the past
Technology
requirements
Value
exchanges
The service
Customer(s)
the value exchanges (arrows) between the actors, the service, and the customer. Hence, the
business model describes the business net in commercializing the service, and thus the term
of net business model is used. The service is the central element of the net business model, as
it defines the necessary technology requirements and hence also the necessary competencies
and resources needed from different actors. Thus every actor has a certain role in the net
business model. The service placed in the middle of the framework can also represent the hub
company of the net.
The customer is an essential element of the net business model, as it pays for the service and
hence, the customer needs have to be taken into account in developing and commercializing
the service. Thus, the customer is involved in the net as well. The arrows between the actors,
the service, and the customer represent the value exchanges, such as flows of money, other
benefits, resources and activities.
However, the net business model cannot exist in isolation or be a static model of the business
net, but it needs to be developed and constantly adjusted according to the environment.
Hence, the boarders of the rectangle are illustrated with dash lines. Changes both in short and
long term need to be taken into account in developing the net business model. The model also
has to be adjusted according to these changes on a continuous basis. Furthermore, in addition
to future-oriented changes in the environment, also factors in the past can have effects in the
development and adjustment of the net business model, e.g. in the form of old or existing
technology which can become useful along with new technology in a service innovation.
Conclusions
Overall, the presented framework identifies a set of generic elements that need to be
described in a net business model and hence assist the development of such business models
in practice. However, the aim was not to develop a universal framework for defining business
models in all fields, but the content within the defined elements varies in each case. Yet, after
the identification of such elements, the framework can be used to develop net business
models and their scenarios in the future. Furthermore, it creates common ground for defining
the concept of business model in the field of novel technology-based services from a network
perspective.
Many of the elements in the framework can be identified in the theoretical base, such as the
actors and their roles, the service, and the value exchanges (e.g. Komulainen et al., 2006).
Also dynamics, or more specifically radical and discontinuous change (Möller & Rajala,
2007), has also been identified as characteristic to emerging business nets. This study further
elaborates dynamics as central in business models, and distinguishes between long term and
short term changes, as well as the past. The role of the customer was strongly emphasized in
the data, and seen as important especially in this specific field as the customer needs should
be taken into account when developing new technology and services. A crucial element
already identified in the theoretical base (e.g. Westerlund, Rajala & Leminen, 2008) and
further emphasized as a result of the study, are business nets. The current study suggests that
business models need to be viewed from a net perspective instead of single companies.
Hence, the service is a central element of the net business model as it defines the necessary
activities and competencies needed by the actors. In addition to identifying the elements of a
net business model based on the theoretical discussion and the Delphi study, the framework
also describes the roles and relations of the elements to each other instead of just listing them.
However, this needs further examination in the future.
The elements identified in the framework are quite abstract in nature, and many of them can
be central in business models in general, also in fields other than emerging technology-based
services. The framework could be applied particularly in other emerging business fields with
new innovations and rapid change. However, the current framework emphasizes services in
the field of new technology because of the networked nature of this specific environment.
Single companies rarely master all the necessary competencies needed in the production and
commercialization of a new technology-based service, and hence there is a need to develop
business models for such services in a net of companies. Furthermore, such business
environment is also rather dynamic in nature, including rapid changes and emerging business
opportunities. Overall, the generalizability of such a framework is a matter of the abstraction
level; in pursuing to cover everything in detail, it becomes too specific, as when trying to
generalize over different fields, it becomes too vague. This is a dilemma that was strongly
emphasized among the experts in the Delphi study, and also needs further attention.
However, the research project is still in progress. The suggested framework is thus
preliminary, and it needs to be further developed on the basis of existing theoretical
discussion in the fields of business models and strategic business nets. The aim is also to
continue the research with further empirical study including expert interviews, and develop
the framework accordingly. After completing the framework, it will be used in developing
future net business model scenarios for technology-based services in the specific field of
ubiquitous computing. In addition to this continuing research process, the framework could
also be elaborated in other contexts besides emerging technology-based services. Also the
role of business nets in producing and commercializing products and services in general
could be examined more carefully.
Acknowledgements
This study is part of UbiLife research project funded by the Technology Agency of Finland,
TEKES.
References
Amit, R. & Zott, C. (2001) “Value creation in e-business”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol
22, pp. 493-520.
Bell, W. (1997), Foundations of Futures Studies, Human Science for a New Era. Volume 1,
History, Purposes, and Knowledge. Transaction Publishers, USA.
Bouwman, H. & Fielt, E. (2008) “Service innovation and business models”, in Bouwman, H., De
Vos, H. & Haaker, T. (eds.), Mobile Service Innovation and Business Models, Springer,
Berlin, pp. 9-30.
Chesbrough, H. & Rosenbloom R. (2002) “The role of the business model in capturing value
from innovation: evidence from Xerox Corporation’s technology spin-off companies”,
Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol 11 No 3, pp. 529-555.
Gulati, R., Nohria, N. & Zaheer, A. (2000) “Strategic networks”, Strategic Management
Journal, Vol 21, pp. 203-215.
Hasson, F., Keeney, S. & McKenna, H. (2000) “Research quidelines for the Delphi survey
technique”, Journal of Advanced Nursing, Vol 32 No 4, pp. 1008-1015.
Hedman, J . & Kalling, T. (2003) “The business model concept: theoretical underpinnings and
empirical illustrations”, European Journal of Information Systems, Vol 12, pp. 49-59.
Helander, N. (2004), Value-Creating Networks: An Analysis of the Software Component
Business, Ph.D. Thesis. Acta Universitatis Ouluensis, Oeconomica G 16, Oulu.
Helander, N. & Rissanen, T. (2005) “Value-creating networks approach to open source software
business models”, Frontiers of E-Business Research 2005, pp. 840-854.
J arillo, J . C. (1988) “On strategic networks”, Strategic Management J ournal, Vol 9, pp- 31-41.
Kallio, P. (2004), Emergence of Wireless Services, Business Actors and Their Roles in
Networked Component-Based Development, Doctoral dissertation, University of Oulu,
VTT Publications 534, Oulu.
Komulainen, H., Mainela, T., Sinisalo, J ., Tähtinen J . & Ulkuniemi P. (2006) “Business model
scenarios in mobile advertising”, International Journal of Internet Marketing and
Advertising, Vol 3 No 3, pp. 254-270.
Linstone, H. & Turoff, M. (1975), The Delphi Method - Techniques and Applications,
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., Massachusetts.
Loo, R. (2002) “The Delphi method: a powerful tool for strategic management”, Policing: An
International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, Vol 25 No 4, pp. 762-769.
Lundgren, A. (1995), Technological Innovation and Network Evolution, Routledge, London.
Lyytinen, K. & Yoo, Y. (2002) “Issues and challenges in ubiquitous computing”,
Communications of the ACM, Vol 45 No 12, pp. 62-65.
Magretta, J . (2002) “Why business models matter”, Harvard Business Review, May 2002.
Morgan, F., Deeter-Schmelz, D. and Moberg, C.R. (2007), “Branding implications of partner
firm-focal firm relationships in business-to-business service networks”, Journal of
Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol 22 No 6, pp. 372-382.
Möller, K. & Rajala, A. (2007) “Rise of strategic nets – New modes of value creation”,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol 36, pp. 895-908.
Möller, K., Rajala, A. & Svahn, S. (2005) “Strategic business nets – their type and management”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol 58, pp. 1274-1284.
Möller K. & Svahn, S. (2009) “How to influence the birth of new business fields – Network
perspective”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol 38, pp. 450-458.
Parolini, C. (1999), The Value Net. A Tool for Competitive Strategy, J ohn Wiley & Sons Ltd,
Great Britain.
Shafer, S., Smith, H. & Linder, J . (2005) “The power of business models”, Business Horizons,
Vol 48, pp. 199-207.
Shin, B. & Lee, H.G. (2005) “Ubiquitous computing-driven business models: A case of SK
Telecom’s financial services”, Electronic Markets, Vol 15 No 1, pp. 4-12.
Srinivasan, R. (2008) “Sources, characteristics and effects of emerging technologies: Research
opportunities in innovation”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol 37, pp. 633-640.
Syson, F. & Perks, H. (2004) “New service development: a network perspective”, Journal of
Services Marketing, Vol 18 No 4, pp. 255-266.
Timmers, P. (1998) “Business models for electronic markets”, Electronic Markets, Vol 8 No2,
pp. 3-8.
Turoff, M. (1975) “The policy Delphi”, in Linstone, H. & Turoff, M. (eds.), The Delphi Method
- Techniques and Applications, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.,
Massachusetts, pp. 84-101.
Weill, P. & Vitale, M. (2001), Place to Space: Migrating to E-Business Models, Harvard
Business School Press, Boston.
Westerlund, M., Rajala, R. & Leminen, S. (2008) ”SME business models in global competition: a
net work perspective”, International Journal of Globalisation and Small Business, Vol 2
No 3, pp. 342-358.
doc_212532139.pdf
Examines business models for emerging technology-based services. Although the concept of business model is an essential term in business and the existing literature offers various definitions of it, there is still much confusion around the term.
Examining business models for emerging technology-based services – a
network perspective
Teea Palo
Department of Marketing, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of
Oulu, P.O. Box 4600, 90014 University of Oulu, Finland
[email protected]
Abstract
The paper examines business models for emerging technology-based services. Although the
concept of business model is an essential term in business and the existing literature offers
various definitions of it, there is still much confusion around the term. Hence, the aim is to
develop some common ground for defining and developing business models by identifying
some general elements of a business model in the field of technology-based services. As
single companies often cannot govern all the relevant resources and activities needed in
producing and commercializing such services, a network of actors is needed. Thus, the
concept also needs to be further developed from a network perspective. As a result, the paper
presents a framework describing the elements of a net business model that need to be
considered in a business model in order to describe the production and commercialization of
technology-based services in business nets. The research project is in progress, and the
framework will be further developed in the future based on existing theory, as well as
according to further empirical study.
Keywords: Business model, strategic business net, technology-based service, Delphi method
Work-in-progress paper submitted to the 25th IMP Conference
Euromed Management, Marseilles, September 3-5, 2009
Examining business models for emerging technology-based services – a
network perspective
Abstract
The paper examines business models for emerging technology-based services. Although the
concept of business model is an essential term in business and the existing literature offers
various definitions of it, there is still much confusion around the term. Hence, the aim is to
develop some common ground for defining and developing business models by identifying
some general elements of a business model in the field of technology-based services. As
single companies often cannot govern all the relevant resources and activities needed in
producing and commercializing such services, a network of actors is needed. Thus, the
concept also needs to be further developed from a network perspective. As a result, the paper
presents a framework describing the elements of a net business model that need to be
considered in a business model in order to describe the production and commercialization of
technology-based services in business nets. The research project is in progress, and the
framework will be further developed in the future based on existing theory, as well as
according to further empirical study.
Keywords: Business model, strategic business net, technology-based service, Delphi method
Introduction
Emerging technologies across different fields have multiple effects on business, firms,
markets and marketing (Srinivasan, 2008). Radical technological developments can be
characterized by nonlinear and unpredictable change, which bring many challenges to firms
commercializing breakthrough innovations while there is no clear market structure with
identifiable actors (Möller & Svahn, 2009). As new technology is changing the business
environment, there is a need to find new innovative business models. Technology is taken to
the markets by firms through a venture shaped by a specific business model, and in many
cases managers need to expand their perspectives and find the right business models in order
to capture value from that specific technology (Chesbrough & Rosenbloom, 2002).
Although the concept of business model is increasingly discussed both in the academia and
everyday language, there is still confusion around the concept in terms of how it can be
defined and used. Various definitions of the concept exist, but none appears to be generally
accepted. This may be due to the fact that the concept draws from as well as integrates a
range of disciplines (Chesbrough & Rosenbloom, 2002; Shafer, Smith & Linder, 2005).
However, before managers can apply the concept properly, they need a simple working
definition of the concept that clears up the fuzziness around the term (Magretta, 2002).
Hence, this study focuses on developing some common ground for defining and developing
business models. The paper acknowledges that the concept is in many cases context-specific,
and hence examines it in the specific field of emerging technology-based services. More
specifically the focus is on ubiquitous services which commonly combine the advances of
information and networking technologies (Shin & Lee, 2005) as well as mobile and pervasive
computing (Lyytinen & Yoo, 2002).
Furthermore, this study examines the concept of business model more specifically from a
network perspective, as there are often various actors involved in developing services and
hence, a complexity of relationships internal as well as external to the organization occurs
(e.g. Morgan, Deeter-Schmelz & Moberg, 2007; Syson & Perks, 2004). This is the case
especially in the emergence of new technology and technology-based services, where a
diversity of activities and resources are needed from various actors (see e.g. Komulainen,
Mainela, Sinisalo, Tähtinen & Ulkuniemi, 2006; Lundgren, 1995; Möller & Svahn, 2009).
This study suggests that these multiple actors form emerging business nets with radical
changes in their value systems or completely new value activities, which aim at creating new
technology (Möller & Rajala, 2007; Möller, Rajala & Svahn, 2005), and hence are relevant in
examining the business model concept.
For the abovementioned reasons, the aim of this paper is to 1) identify some general elements
of a business model in the field of technology-based services and 2) develop the concept
further from a network and especially from strategic net perspective. In pursuing these goals,
the paper builds on research on business models (e.g. Hedman & Kalling, 2003; Timmers,
1998) especially from a network perspective (e.g. Helander & Rissanen, 2005; Komulainen et
al., 2006), and the strategic or value net approach (e.g. Möller & Rajala, 2007; Möller, Rajala
& Svahn, 2005; Parolini, 1999).
The empirical part of the paper presents a qualitative study that employs the Delphi method.
This specific method was chosen as the concept of business model is very fragmentary and
the aim is to elaborate the concept in a highly dynamic environment. The study included two
online questionnaire rounds among experts from firms and non-business actors with open-
ended questions. As a result, the paper presents a conceptual framework for developing
business models for emerging technology-based services in a networked business field. It
includes the elements that need to be considered in a business model in order to describe the
production and commercialization of technology-based services in business nets. Along with
this, some general guidelines and characteristics of business models in this specific field of
business are discussed.
The paper is organised in the following way. First, the theoretical premises of the study are
discussed: the concept of business model as well as the nature of strategic business nets. After
this, the methodological choices employed in the study are elaborated. Then, the analysis of
the data obtained through the Delphi-study will be discussed in two phases, after both
questionnaire rounds. Finally, based on the analysis and the theoretical premises, a
framework for identifying the elements of a business model will be presented as results and
some conclusion will be drawn.
Theoretical base
The concept of business model
The term business model became a great buzzword in the era of the internet boom and dot-
com companies (Magretta, 2002; Shafer, Smith & Linder, 2005). Previous literature offers
various definitions of the concept; many emphasize strongly the e- prefix (e.g. Timmers,
1998; Weill & Witale, 2001), while others are not restricted to certain businesses such as the
online world (Shafer, Smith & Linder, 2005). In the following table, some definitions of the
concept are presented with an emphasis on different aspects, elements, and manners of
representation.
Table 1. Definitions of business models
Authors Definition Central elements and
characteristics
Amit & Zott,
2001
Business model represents an important locus of innovation
and a crucial source of value creation for the firm and its
suppliers, partners and customers. Each business model is
centered on a particular firm.
Value creation, actors,
single firm’s perspective.
Chesbrough &
Rosenbloom,
2002
Companies must find the right business model in order to
create value from new technology. Business model provides a
framework which considers the technological characteristics
and potentials as inputs and converts them through customers
and markets into economic outputs.
Technology, value,
normative representation,
context-specific.
Hedman &
Kalling, 2003
The concept of business model generally describes the key
components of a given business: 1) customers, 2) competitors,
3) offering, 4) activities and organisation, 5) resources, 6)
supply of factor and production inputs and 7) a longitudinal
process component to cover the dynamics of the business
model as well as the cognitive and cultural constraints that
management has to take into account.
Actors, offering, flows of
resources, central firm,
dynamics, general
representation.
Helander &
Rissanen, 2005
Business models of the companies must be linked to the
business models of the other companies involved in the
network.
Network,
interconnectedness of
business models.
Komulainen et
al., 2006
There can be identified three core elements of a network
business model; the product/service, the business actors and
their roles, and value-creating exchanges among the actors.
Product/service, business
actors and their roles,
value-creating exchanges,
network perspective.
Shafer, Smith &
Linder, 2005
Business model is defined “as a representation of a firm’s
underlying core logic and strategic choices for creating and
capturing value within a value network”.
Central firm, value
creation and capture,
value network.
Weill & Vitale,
2001
Business model represents the roles and relations among the
firm’s customers, allies and suppliers identifying the major
flows of product, information and money and the major
benefits for the actors.
Actors and roles, value
exchanges (flows),
relations, relationship
perspective.
The list is not by all means exhaustive but demonstrates the different elements and
perspectives build into the concept of business model. It is not in the interests of this paper to
give a review of the wide range of definitions of business models and their components (see
e.g. Hedman & Kalling, 2003; Shafer, Smith & Linder, 2005) but instead, the current study
emphasizes the key component or perspective of business models, which has been identified
frequently in the existing literature: business networks.
Interorganizational networks represent a key element in business models (Westerlund, Rajala
& Leminen, 2008). It can also be seen from table 1, that actors and their roles as well as
networks are emphasized in various definitions. Timmers (1998) includes in his definition of
a business model a description of the various business actors and their roles. Shafer, Smith
and Linder (2005) emphasize the value network and the role that the firm chooses to play in
the network as important elements of the business model. Chesbrough and Rosenbloom
(2002) also suggest that one of the functions of a business model is to describe the position
that firm has within the value network. Westerlund, Rajala and Leminen (2008) propose that
the business model of a firm describes the way the company creates revenue by specifying
the relationships with other actors as well as the firm’s position in the value creating network.
Helander and Rissanen (2005) talk about open source software business models and
recognise that the value created in open source projects generally cannot be owned by a
single company but value is created for the network. Thus business models must be linked
between the companies involved in the network and may also include some other components
outside the network (Helander & Rissanen, 2005).
Although the network of actors and their roles have been identified as important elements of
a business model, they are still generally explored from a single firm’s perspective (e.g. Amit
& Zott, 2001). However, single companies most often cannot master all the necessary
resources and competencies to develop and produce new technology by themselves. Instead,
there are more actors involved. Thus the underlying business models are not limited to one
core actor but instead they have to be attractive to multiple actors (Bouwman & Fielt, 2008;
Komulainen et al., 2006). This study adopts the viewpoint of Komulainen et al. (2006), who
examine the concept of business model from a network perspective (see Table 1). The
network perspective, or more specifically the strategic net approach, will be elaborated in the
following.
Strategic business nets
As already noticed, in the emergence of new technology-based services, an individual
company cannot master all the necessary resources and competencies but a diversity of
activities are needed from various actors (see e.g. Komulainen et al., 2006; Lundgren, 1995;
Möller & Svahn, 2009). E.g. Kallio (2004) has identified various roles in wireless business
such as the application provider, content provider, infrastructure provider, operator, service
provider and the end user. The multiple actors involved in the development, production and
commercialization of the services form strategic business nets, as it is not usually reasonable
to try to create value for the customer through the firm itself with limited competencies if it is
possible to ally with other firms that can complement the existing competencies (Helander,
2004).
Strategic business nets are distinguished from more general “networks of firms” and they can
be defined as intentionally formed networks that contain a finite set of parties, at least three
(Möller, Rajala & Svahn, 2005). J arillo (1988) conceptualizes strategic networks as a mode
of organization which is a long-term and purposeful arrangement to gain or sustain
competitive advantage by outsourcing activities and focusing on the key ones in which the
firm has comparative advantage. Furthermore, a hub firm is seen as essential in setting up the
network and taking a pro-active role in it. Strategic networks are composed of enduring
interorganizational ties that are strategically significant for the firms involved in them as such
networks can provide companies the access to information, resources, markets and
technologies, and allow firms to achieve strategic objectives such risk sharing (Gulati, Nohria
& Zaheer, 2000). Möller, Rajala and Svahn (2005) highlight the centrality of the value system
and its level of determination in understanding strategic nets. Value creating systems can be
defined as sets of activities that create value and that are connected to each other by flows of
information, material, money and influence relationships (Parolini, 1999). It is important to
decide which parts of a value chain or a system of a given product are emphasized in a firm
and which are farmed out: a critical component of a strategic network is the opportunity for
joint value creation between the organisations (J arillo, 1988).
Möller, Rajala and Svahn (2005) identify three factors that explain the nature of strategic nets
and their management: 1) the level of determination of the value activities and the actors
forming the net, 2) the goal of the net or its hub firm in terms of the desired outcomes that are
pursued through the net, and 3) the structure of the net which can be described through the
vertical and horizontal dimensions and through the numbers and different types of actors.
Hence,
systems
concept
distingu
which i
achieve
are mo
technol
transfor
explore
In figur
nets are
element
intercon
thus are
as actor
model,
Figure 1
Method
This stu
utilizing
group
The
of b
m
there are di
s which are
ts (Möller,
uish applica
include rad
e commercia
stly driven
ogy provide
rmed into v
ed from a str
re 1, the var
e shown. It i
t of busin
nnected. Th
e overlappin
rs and roles
one also ne
. A theoretica
dology
udy has cho
g experts’ o
of individ
elements
business
model
ifferent type
e created in
Rajala &
ation nets a
dical and di
ally viable b
n by a hub
ers, as well
viable busin
rategic net p
rious and so
is evident fr
ness mode
he various e
ng. The elem
, dynamics,
eeds to descr
al framework
osen to app
opinions in
duals to de
es of nets as
order to co
Svahn, 20
as a specific
iscontinuou
business ap
firm and
l as pilot cu
ness nets, an
perspective.
omewhat ov
from the the
els, and th
elements ide
ments under
, relations a
ribe the bus
k of the eleme
ply a qualita
a structured
eal with a
Business n
Product/
service
Value creat
Flows of
informatio
resources
benefits et
Technolog
Central fir
s well. The
ommercialis
005). More
c net catego
us change. A
pplications o
involve a w
ustomers. H
nd hence th
.
verlapping e
eoretical dis
hus the tw
entified in th
r business n
and the valu
siness net in
ents of a busi
ative Delph
d communic
a complex
nets
/
tion
f
on,
s,
tc.
gy
rm
focus of th
se new tech
specificall
ory in the a
Application
out of the e
web of com
However, su
he concept o
elements of
cussion tha
wo theore
he figure ar
nets are esse
ue system. H
nvolved.
iness model
hi method. T
cation proce
problem
Struct
Actor
Roles/pos
Relations
Dynam
Value sy
is study lies
nologies, pr
ly, Möller
area of emer
n nets are f
evolving tec
mponent, s
uch applicati
of business
f business m
at business n
etical prem
re connecte
ential in bus
Hence, in de
The method
ess, which e
(Linstone
ure
rs
sitions
s, ties
mics
ystem
s in emergin
roducts or b
and Rajala
rging busin
formed in o
chnology. Su
oftware, an
ion nets ne
model nee
models and b
nets are an e
mises are
d to each o
siness mode
escribing a b
d is concern
effectively a
& Turoff,
Hub fir
Access
informa
etc.
Level
determin
Value act
ng value
business
a (2007)
ness nets
order to
uch nets
nd other
ed to be
ds to be
business
essential
strongly
ther and
els, such
business
ned with
allows a
1975).
rm?
s to
ation
.
of
nation
tivities
Traditionally, the Delphi method has been used to achieve consensus around situations where
there is contradictory or insufficient amount of information (Hasson, Keeney & McKenna,
2000). Other major variation of the method is policy Delphi (e.g. Turoff, 1975) where
opposing views are debated on a complex issue (Loo, 2002). The Delphi method was chosen
for this study as the concept of business model is very fragmentary and the aim is to develop
the concept further in a highly dynamic environment. The aim was not to achieve consensus
among the experts, but to increase the understanding of the concept of business model by
gaining different perceptions and opinions of it. The current study is a preliminary study of
the research project, in order to gain some pre-understanding of the phenomenon and lay
some ground for further research.
The Delphi method is a research process that involves various phases. For example Linstone
and Turoff (1975) identify four main phases of the Delphi research process; 1) exploration of
the subject wherein individuals contribute additional information, 2) process of reaching an
understanding of how the group views the issue, 3) in case of strong disagreement among the
group, an exploration of the underlying reasons for the differences, and 4) final analysis and
evaluation. The data gained from the process represents basically the subjective beliefs and
judgements of the experts (Bell, 1997, 264). Although the Delphi process tends to minimize
the feelings and information communicated through face-to-face communication, the process
provides the individuals a great degree of individuality and freedom from restrictions on their
expressions (Linstone & Turoff, 1975). This preliminary study did not include expert
interviews or other face-to-face meetings but the questionnaires were the primary mode of
data collection. This may have had an effect on the richness of the data. However, the experts
had the chance to answer to the questions anonymously and by writing which provided them
the opportunity answer to the questions freely.
This study has followed the general steps of the research process by starting with defining the
research problem. The two online questionnaire rounds consisted mainly of open-ended
questions. The first questionnaire round involved two expert panels, Panel 1 with
representatives of firms and non-business actors in technology-based business field, and
Panel 2 with firm representatives from various other business fields (see Table 2). The
questionnaire revolved around general business models and their usage in practice. It
consisted of two parts: firstly seven different definitions offered by the existing literature
were presented and the experts were asked to comment on them freely. These definitions can
be found in the theoretical part of the paper (Table 1). The alternative definitions were chosen
based on their emphasis on perspective (single/central firm, relationship, or network), manner
of representation (normative, general, or context-specific) and alternative elements of
business models. Secondly, three open-ended questions were presented concerning these
definitions, elements of business models, and their usage in business field. After conducting
the first round, the data was analysed.
The preliminary results of the first round were presented to the experts on the second
questionnaire round, which had been formed based on the data. The second questionnaire was
sent solely to Panel 1, representatives of firms and non-business actors in technology-based
business field, as the focus was more narrowed down to technology-based services. The
questionnaire presented a framework describing the elements of a business model which had
been identified based on the data gained from the first round (product/service, actors and their
roles, value exchanges, value net, business logic and strategic issues, and the environment).
The experts were asked to comment on that, as well as to comment a few statements
regarding the nature and development of business models in the field of technology-based
services, which had also been formed based on the data from the first round. Finally, the
experts also had an opportunity to answer freely to an open-ended question about business
models in general. After the second round, the data was analysed and reported. The numbers
of the members and the respondents of both panels can be seen in table 2. In the first round,
altogether 13 of 37 experts responded to the questionnaire and in the second round 10 of 20
experts responded.
Table 2. Expert panels
Panel 1 (members/respondents) Panel 2 (members/respondents)
1
st
questionnaire round 20 / 7 17 / 6
2
nd
questionnaire round 20 / 10 - / -
Data analysis was done in two main phases. Firstly, after the first questionnaire round, the
data was analysed in order to present the results to the experts in the second questionnaire.
Secondly, the data obtained from the second questionnaire round was analysed and the results
obtained from the first questionnaire were modified based on the analysis.
In both stages of the analysis, the answers were codified with the QSR NVivo 8-program.
This was done in two main phases after both questionnaire rounds. The analysis was started
first by reading the data several times and then by codifying it into various themes. The
themes were codified under free nodes in NVivo, and they included elements of business
models identified in the theoretical base as well as some other elements and characteristics
arisen from the data. Secondly, these various themes were combined into wider categories by
using tree nodes in NVivo. As part of the analysis, the themes were written out and also
illustrated figuratively after both questionnaire rounds. The actual data analysis done with
NVivo is described in more detail in the following chapter.
Analysis of the Delphi-study
First questionnaire round
After reading the answers the first few times, several themes around the elements of business
models were found. These elements mainly represent the factors that business models need to
cover and describe. Altogether six basic elements of business models were recognized: actors
and their roles, services and products, value net, value exchanges, business logic and strategic
issues, and the environment. The actors represent different business actors such as suppliers,
partners and other network players as well as customers and competitors. Business model
should also describe their roles in the network. The service or product is in a central place in a
business model, and it includes e.g. innovations and technology aspects. The value net
naturally includes the actors of the net, but as an essential factor in the analysis of the net was
seen the level of cooperation as well as the changes in the net. Value exchanges refer to the
value creation logic of the net, such as the flows of competencies, resources and benefits
between the actors. It was also emphasized in the data, that the business model needs to
describe both the business logic and strategic choices, that is, both the operational level and
strategic decisions and their implementation. Finally, the environment was seen as a very
central element of business models, as the changes in the environment, such as the market,
culture, regulations and legislation, and technology have to be taken into account in
developing and adjusting the business model.
In addition, there were also other interesting findings concerning the fundamental
characteristics of business models that affect the development and implementation of them.
Based on the data it was evident that it is quite difficult to develop a single general definition
of the concept of business model, as it becomes too vague. One definition cannot cover
everything and moreover, in trying to do so, the uniqueness of business models suffers as the
business models need to cover fundamental and practical actions and choices in the
company’s everyday business. Still, on the other hand it was seen that companies operating in
a basically same process can have the same model of planning and controlling instead of
individual models.
Thus it was seen that a business model is more of a framework instead of developing a single
business model. A framework gives space for realigning the process. Therefore, an ongoing
strategic process is needed besides the business model. This was closely related to another
essential characteristic of business models strongly emphasized in the data, namely dynamics.
Business model changes over time as there are many dynamic factors in the surrounding
environment, which affect the development of business models; relationships, knowledge,
flexibility, time resources, and networking as well as new technology. Another confrontation
could be found between long term vs. short term planning, which should be both covered in a
business model. Furthermore, the development of business models was also seen different in
small vs. large companies: small businesses may not have that complete models as in big,
multinational companies the models are defined at the top.
The network perspective on business models was present in the panellists’ answers. The
respondents found it possible to create business models for multiple actors, moreover, most of
them saw that business models need to be linked at least to some extent as no one can do
business on their own. Business models could be established to multiple players with
different roles, and each player specifies their own models later in more detail. This is
naturally dependent on the level of cooperation between the actors, and it was also noticed
that business models cannot always be linked in case of a low level of cooperation.
Second questionnaire round
The second questionnaire round elaborated the elements as well as the nature and
development of business models. Basically, the elements identified in the first round proved
to be essential in a business model based on the data. Only some elaborations on the roles of
the elements and the nature of business models were found. Also the role of the presented
framework was discussed in the data. What does it aim to describe; a concrete value chain or
a description of strategic decision-making? Furthermore, the interrelationships and priority
between the different elements raised questions among the respondents.
The role of a single company vs. value net in the business model was further deliberated. It
was seen that some of the elements refer to the business model of a single company and
others to the business model of the value net. A separation of the business models of single
companies and that of the value nets is needed. That is, could the business models of single
companies be embedded in the business model of the value net? Furthermore, the level of
cooperation was emphasized in the data in terms of developing business models for the value
net. On one hand, it was seen that this can be impossible e.g. in the case of networks that
exist only a short period of time. Then on the other hand, most experts agreed that it is more
often necessary to develop business models for a net of actors. However, it is central that the
business model is developed for the service itself that the different actors in the net are
producing. Thus, the role of the service is central in the business model. Furthermore, the role
of the customer was seen as important in a business model and in the field of technology-
based services in general. The business model and the value net need to be based on the needs
and benefits, which have been found in practice. Also money and revenue flows were
mentioned as an important element in addition to those identified in the first round, and those
flows should be described in a business model.
The discussion around defining the concept of business model continued in the second
questionnaire round. It was clear that there cannot be a general and universal definition of
business model at operational level. However, it is possible to define the elements of a
business model, and specify the content of the elements in each case. Furthermore, businesses
are different in different fields, and thus it might be preferable to develop more context-
specific definitions or frameworks. Also the dynamic nature of business models was strongly
emphasized in the answers. The environment has many effects on business models.
Especially the role of technology was emphasized, such as new technological development,
as well as the usage of old or existing technology, which can be employed in a new
technology innovation.
Results
Based on the analysis of the data, and drawing on existing theoretical discussion in the fields
of business models and strategic business nets, the paper presents a conceptual framework for
developing business models for emerging technology-based services in a networked business
field. The framework will be further developed based on existing theory, as well as according
to further empirical study. The current framework is presented in figure 2.
Figure 2. A framework of the elements of a net business model
The framework represents the elements that need to be considered in a business model in
order to describe the production and commercialization of technology-based services in
business nets. The key elements of a business model are presented inside the dash lined
rectangle: the service, the customer(s), the actors and their roles below (ellipses), as well as
Short term
and long
term
changes
Customer
needs and
involvement
Adjustments according to the
changes in environment
Adjustments
according to
the past
Technology
requirements
Value
exchanges
The service
Customer(s)
the value exchanges (arrows) between the actors, the service, and the customer. Hence, the
business model describes the business net in commercializing the service, and thus the term
of net business model is used. The service is the central element of the net business model, as
it defines the necessary technology requirements and hence also the necessary competencies
and resources needed from different actors. Thus every actor has a certain role in the net
business model. The service placed in the middle of the framework can also represent the hub
company of the net.
The customer is an essential element of the net business model, as it pays for the service and
hence, the customer needs have to be taken into account in developing and commercializing
the service. Thus, the customer is involved in the net as well. The arrows between the actors,
the service, and the customer represent the value exchanges, such as flows of money, other
benefits, resources and activities.
However, the net business model cannot exist in isolation or be a static model of the business
net, but it needs to be developed and constantly adjusted according to the environment.
Hence, the boarders of the rectangle are illustrated with dash lines. Changes both in short and
long term need to be taken into account in developing the net business model. The model also
has to be adjusted according to these changes on a continuous basis. Furthermore, in addition
to future-oriented changes in the environment, also factors in the past can have effects in the
development and adjustment of the net business model, e.g. in the form of old or existing
technology which can become useful along with new technology in a service innovation.
Conclusions
Overall, the presented framework identifies a set of generic elements that need to be
described in a net business model and hence assist the development of such business models
in practice. However, the aim was not to develop a universal framework for defining business
models in all fields, but the content within the defined elements varies in each case. Yet, after
the identification of such elements, the framework can be used to develop net business
models and their scenarios in the future. Furthermore, it creates common ground for defining
the concept of business model in the field of novel technology-based services from a network
perspective.
Many of the elements in the framework can be identified in the theoretical base, such as the
actors and their roles, the service, and the value exchanges (e.g. Komulainen et al., 2006).
Also dynamics, or more specifically radical and discontinuous change (Möller & Rajala,
2007), has also been identified as characteristic to emerging business nets. This study further
elaborates dynamics as central in business models, and distinguishes between long term and
short term changes, as well as the past. The role of the customer was strongly emphasized in
the data, and seen as important especially in this specific field as the customer needs should
be taken into account when developing new technology and services. A crucial element
already identified in the theoretical base (e.g. Westerlund, Rajala & Leminen, 2008) and
further emphasized as a result of the study, are business nets. The current study suggests that
business models need to be viewed from a net perspective instead of single companies.
Hence, the service is a central element of the net business model as it defines the necessary
activities and competencies needed by the actors. In addition to identifying the elements of a
net business model based on the theoretical discussion and the Delphi study, the framework
also describes the roles and relations of the elements to each other instead of just listing them.
However, this needs further examination in the future.
The elements identified in the framework are quite abstract in nature, and many of them can
be central in business models in general, also in fields other than emerging technology-based
services. The framework could be applied particularly in other emerging business fields with
new innovations and rapid change. However, the current framework emphasizes services in
the field of new technology because of the networked nature of this specific environment.
Single companies rarely master all the necessary competencies needed in the production and
commercialization of a new technology-based service, and hence there is a need to develop
business models for such services in a net of companies. Furthermore, such business
environment is also rather dynamic in nature, including rapid changes and emerging business
opportunities. Overall, the generalizability of such a framework is a matter of the abstraction
level; in pursuing to cover everything in detail, it becomes too specific, as when trying to
generalize over different fields, it becomes too vague. This is a dilemma that was strongly
emphasized among the experts in the Delphi study, and also needs further attention.
However, the research project is still in progress. The suggested framework is thus
preliminary, and it needs to be further developed on the basis of existing theoretical
discussion in the fields of business models and strategic business nets. The aim is also to
continue the research with further empirical study including expert interviews, and develop
the framework accordingly. After completing the framework, it will be used in developing
future net business model scenarios for technology-based services in the specific field of
ubiquitous computing. In addition to this continuing research process, the framework could
also be elaborated in other contexts besides emerging technology-based services. Also the
role of business nets in producing and commercializing products and services in general
could be examined more carefully.
Acknowledgements
This study is part of UbiLife research project funded by the Technology Agency of Finland,
TEKES.
References
Amit, R. & Zott, C. (2001) “Value creation in e-business”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol
22, pp. 493-520.
Bell, W. (1997), Foundations of Futures Studies, Human Science for a New Era. Volume 1,
History, Purposes, and Knowledge. Transaction Publishers, USA.
Bouwman, H. & Fielt, E. (2008) “Service innovation and business models”, in Bouwman, H., De
Vos, H. & Haaker, T. (eds.), Mobile Service Innovation and Business Models, Springer,
Berlin, pp. 9-30.
Chesbrough, H. & Rosenbloom R. (2002) “The role of the business model in capturing value
from innovation: evidence from Xerox Corporation’s technology spin-off companies”,
Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol 11 No 3, pp. 529-555.
Gulati, R., Nohria, N. & Zaheer, A. (2000) “Strategic networks”, Strategic Management
Journal, Vol 21, pp. 203-215.
Hasson, F., Keeney, S. & McKenna, H. (2000) “Research quidelines for the Delphi survey
technique”, Journal of Advanced Nursing, Vol 32 No 4, pp. 1008-1015.
Hedman, J . & Kalling, T. (2003) “The business model concept: theoretical underpinnings and
empirical illustrations”, European Journal of Information Systems, Vol 12, pp. 49-59.
Helander, N. (2004), Value-Creating Networks: An Analysis of the Software Component
Business, Ph.D. Thesis. Acta Universitatis Ouluensis, Oeconomica G 16, Oulu.
Helander, N. & Rissanen, T. (2005) “Value-creating networks approach to open source software
business models”, Frontiers of E-Business Research 2005, pp. 840-854.
J arillo, J . C. (1988) “On strategic networks”, Strategic Management J ournal, Vol 9, pp- 31-41.
Kallio, P. (2004), Emergence of Wireless Services, Business Actors and Their Roles in
Networked Component-Based Development, Doctoral dissertation, University of Oulu,
VTT Publications 534, Oulu.
Komulainen, H., Mainela, T., Sinisalo, J ., Tähtinen J . & Ulkuniemi P. (2006) “Business model
scenarios in mobile advertising”, International Journal of Internet Marketing and
Advertising, Vol 3 No 3, pp. 254-270.
Linstone, H. & Turoff, M. (1975), The Delphi Method - Techniques and Applications,
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., Massachusetts.
Loo, R. (2002) “The Delphi method: a powerful tool for strategic management”, Policing: An
International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, Vol 25 No 4, pp. 762-769.
Lundgren, A. (1995), Technological Innovation and Network Evolution, Routledge, London.
Lyytinen, K. & Yoo, Y. (2002) “Issues and challenges in ubiquitous computing”,
Communications of the ACM, Vol 45 No 12, pp. 62-65.
Magretta, J . (2002) “Why business models matter”, Harvard Business Review, May 2002.
Morgan, F., Deeter-Schmelz, D. and Moberg, C.R. (2007), “Branding implications of partner
firm-focal firm relationships in business-to-business service networks”, Journal of
Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol 22 No 6, pp. 372-382.
Möller, K. & Rajala, A. (2007) “Rise of strategic nets – New modes of value creation”,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol 36, pp. 895-908.
Möller, K., Rajala, A. & Svahn, S. (2005) “Strategic business nets – their type and management”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol 58, pp. 1274-1284.
Möller K. & Svahn, S. (2009) “How to influence the birth of new business fields – Network
perspective”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol 38, pp. 450-458.
Parolini, C. (1999), The Value Net. A Tool for Competitive Strategy, J ohn Wiley & Sons Ltd,
Great Britain.
Shafer, S., Smith, H. & Linder, J . (2005) “The power of business models”, Business Horizons,
Vol 48, pp. 199-207.
Shin, B. & Lee, H.G. (2005) “Ubiquitous computing-driven business models: A case of SK
Telecom’s financial services”, Electronic Markets, Vol 15 No 1, pp. 4-12.
Srinivasan, R. (2008) “Sources, characteristics and effects of emerging technologies: Research
opportunities in innovation”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol 37, pp. 633-640.
Syson, F. & Perks, H. (2004) “New service development: a network perspective”, Journal of
Services Marketing, Vol 18 No 4, pp. 255-266.
Timmers, P. (1998) “Business models for electronic markets”, Electronic Markets, Vol 8 No2,
pp. 3-8.
Turoff, M. (1975) “The policy Delphi”, in Linstone, H. & Turoff, M. (eds.), The Delphi Method
- Techniques and Applications, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.,
Massachusetts, pp. 84-101.
Weill, P. & Vitale, M. (2001), Place to Space: Migrating to E-Business Models, Harvard
Business School Press, Boston.
Westerlund, M., Rajala, R. & Leminen, S. (2008) ”SME business models in global competition: a
net work perspective”, International Journal of Globalisation and Small Business, Vol 2
No 3, pp. 342-358.
doc_212532139.pdf