We explore the theoretical foundations of value creation in e‐business by examining how 59 American and European e‐businesses that have recently become publicly traded corporations create value. We observe that in e‐business new value can be created by the ways in which transactions are enabled. Grounded in the rich data obtained from case study analyses and in the received theory in entrepreneurship and strategic management, we develop a model of the sources of value creation. The model suggests that the value creation potential of e‐businesses hinges on four interdependent dimensions, namely: efficiency, complementarities, lock‐in, and novelty. Our findings suggest that no single entrepreneurship or strategic management theory can fully explain the value creation potential of e‐business. Rather, an integration of the received theoretical perspectives on value creation is needed. To enable such an integration, we offer the business model construct as a unit of analysis for future research on value creation in e‐business. A business model depicts the design of transaction content, structure, and governance so as to create value through the exploitation of business opportunities. We propose that a firm's business model is an important locus of innovation and a crucial source of value creation for the firm and its suppliers, partners, and customers. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This article provides a broad and multifaceted review of the received literature on business models in which the authors examine the business model concept through multiple subject-matter lenses. The review reveals that scholars do not agree on what a business model is and that the literature is developing largely in silos, according to the phenomena of interest of the respective researchers. However, the authors also found emerging common themes among scholars of business models. Specifically, (1) the business model is emerging as a new unit of analysis; (2) business models emphasize a system-level, holistic approach to explaining how firms "do business"; (3) firm activities play an important role in the various conceptualizations of business models that have been proposed; and (4) business models seek to explain how value is created, not just how it is captured. These emerging themes could serve as catalysts for a more unified study of business models. Disciplines Business Administration, Management, and OperationsThis journal article is available at ScholarlyCommons: http://repository.upenn.edu/mgmt_papers/74Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1674384 The authors gratefully acknowledge the very helpful comments and suggestions of the Editor and of two anonymous reviewers on earlier drafts of this paper. Chris Zott and Lorenzo Massa acknowledge the support of IESE in sponsoring this research. Raffi Amit is grateful to the Wharton eBusiness Initiative and to the Robert B. Goergen Chair for financial support of this research.Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1674384Business Model/2 THE BUSINESS MODEL: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND FUTURE RESEARCH AbstractThe paper provides a broad and multifaceted review of the received literature on business models in which we examine the business model concept through multiple subject-matter lenses. The review reveals that scholars do not agree on what a business model is, and that the literature is developing largely in silos, according to the phenomena of interest to the respective researchers. However, we also found emerging common themes among scholars of business models. Specifically, 1) the business model is emerging as a new unit of analysis; 2) business models emphasize a system-level, holistic approach towards explaining how firms "do business"; 3) firm activities play an important role in the various conceptualizations of business models that have been proposed; and 4) business models seek to explain how value is created, not just how it is captured. These emerging themes could serve as catalysts towards a more unified study of business models.

No abstract

This article provides a broad and multifaceted review of the received literature on business models in which the authors examine the business model concept through multiple subject-matter lenses. The review reveals that scholars do not agree on what a business model is and that the literature is developing largely in silos, according to the phenomena of interest of the respective researchers. However, the authors also found emerging common themes among scholars of business models. Specifically, (1) the business model is emerging as a new unit of analysis; (2) business models emphasize a system-level, holistic approach to explaining how firms "do business"; (3) firm activities play an important role in the various conceptualizations of business models that have been proposed; and (4) business models seek to explain how value is created, not just how it is captured. These emerging themes could serve as catalysts for a more unified study of business models. Disciplines Business Administration, Management, and OperationsThis journal article is available at ScholarlyCommons: http://repository.upenn.edu/mgmt_papers/74Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1674384 The authors gratefully acknowledge the very helpful comments and suggestions of the Editor and of two anonymous reviewers on earlier drafts of this paper. Chris Zott and Lorenzo Massa acknowledge the support of IESE in sponsoring this research. Raffi Amit is grateful to the Wharton eBusiness Initiative and to the Robert B. Goergen Chair for financial support of this research.Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1674384Business Model/2 THE BUSINESS MODEL: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND FUTURE RESEARCH AbstractThe paper provides a broad and multifaceted review of the received literature on business models in which we examine the business model concept through multiple subject-matter lenses. The review reveals that scholars do not agree on what a business model is, and that the literature is developing largely in silos, according to the phenomena of interest to the respective researchers. However, we also found emerging common themes among scholars of business models. Specifically, 1) the business model is emerging as a new unit of analysis; 2) business models emphasize a system-level, holistic approach towards explaining how firms "do business"; 3) firm activities play an important role in the various conceptualizations of business models that have been proposed; and 4) business models seek to explain how value is created, not just how it is captured. These emerging themes could serve as catalysts towards a more unified study of business models.

We focus on the design of an organization's set of boundary-spanning transactions-business model design-and ask how business model design affects the performance of entrepreneurial firms. By extending and integrating theoretical perspectives that inform the study of boundary-spanning organization design, we propose hypotheses about the impact of efficiency-centered and novelty-centered business model design on the performance of entrepreneurial firms. To test these hypotheses, we developed and analyzed a unique data set of 190 entrepreneurial firms that were publicly listed on U.S. and European stock exchanges. The empirical results show that novelty-centered business model design matters to the performance of entrepreneurial firms. Our analysis also shows that this positive relationship is remarkably stable across time, even under varying environmental regimes. Additionally, we find indications of potential diseconomies of scope in design; that is, entrepreneurs' attempts to incorporate both efficiency-and novelty-centered design elements into their business models may be counterproductive. Business Model Design and the Performance of Entrepreneurial Firms AbstractWe focus on a particular organization design issue -namely, the design of an organization's set of boundary-spanning transactions-which we refer to as business model design, and ask how business model design affects the performance of entrepreneurial firms. Specifically, by extending and integrating theoretical perespectives that inform the study of boundary-spanning organization design, we propose hypotheses about the impact of efficiency-centered and novelty-centered business model design on the performance of entrepreneurial firms. To test these hypotheses, we developed and analyzed a unique data set of 190 entrepreneurial fmns that were publicly listed on U.S. and European stock exchanges. The empirical results show that novelty-centered business model design matters to the performance of entrepreneurial firms. Our analysis also shows that this positive relationship is remarkably stable across time, even under varying environmental regimes. As well, we find indications of potential diseconomies of scope in design; that is, entrepreneurs' attempts to incorporate both efficiency-and novelty-centered design elements into their business models may be counterproductive.Keywords: Organization design, new organizational form s, business model, design themes, organization performance, environmental munificence. 2 Business Model Design and the Performance of Entrepreneurial FirmsAn organization is a goal-directed social entity that consists of deliberately structured and coordinated activity systems; it can be conceived of as an open system that interacts with its environment (Thompson 1967). Its subsystems can be classified either "internal" or "boundary- In this paper we identify two critical dimensions of business model design, which we denote as "efficiency-centered" and "novelty-centered" design themes. Anchoring our reasoning in the transac...

Results of a two-year inductive field study of British ventures show that entrepreneurs are more likely to acquire resources for new ventures if they perform symbolic actions—actions in which the actor displays or tries to draw other people's attention to the meaning of an object or action that goes beyond the object's or action's intrinsic content or functional use. We identify four symbolic action categories that facilitate resource acquisition: conveying the entrepreneur's personal credibility, professional organizing, organizational achievement, and the quality of stakeholder relationships. Our data show that entrepreneurs who perform a variety of symbolic actions from these categories skillfully and frequently obtain more resources than those who do not. Our data also suggest three factors—structural similarity, intrinsic quality, and uncertainty—that moderate the relationship between symbolic management and resource acquisition. We theorize how the various symbolic action categories shape different forms of legitimacy that help entrepreneurs acquire resources.

This paper explores how the dynamic capabilities of firms may be linked to differential firm performance within an industry. A formal model is presented in which dynamic capabilities are treated as a set of routines guiding the evolution of a firm's resource configuration. The model centers on the endogenous choice firms make between resource deployment through imitation and experimentation in order to generate alternative resource configurations. Three performance-relevant attributes of dynamic capabilities are proposed: timing, cost, and learning of resource deployment. Theoretical propositions are developed that suggest how these attributes contribute to the emergence of differential intraindustry firm performance. Simulation analysis offers insights into the trajectories of evolutionary change engendered by dynamic capability, and serves to refine the theoretical propositions. It is found that timing, cost, and learning effects foster the emergence of robust performance differences among firms with strikingly similar dynamic capabilities. Moreover, the results show that even small initial differences among firms can generate significant intraindustry differential firm performance, especially when the effects of timing, cost and learning are combined. corporate-parent effects, and market share effects, Schmalensee (1985) demonstrates the importance of industry effects on firm performance. Extending Schmalensee's approach, Rumelt (1991), McGahan andPorter (1997a), andMcGahan (1999) show that business effects were approximately twice as important for performance as industry effects. These results have stimulated interest in the slightly refined question: 'Why do firms in the same industry perform differently?' This question is the focus of the present study.A dominant framework in the strategy literature to address this question has been the resourcebased view (RBV) of the firm. According to RBV, firms in the same industry perform differently because, even in equilibrium, firms differ in

No abstract