Value Creation in the Internet of Things: Mapping Business Models and Ecosystem Roles

Ikävalko, Heini; Turkama, Petra; Smedlund, Anssi

doi:10.22215/timreview/1142

Cited by 37 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Ecosystem business models and collective approaches towards characterizing roles and strategies for all actors are crucial (Borgh et al, 2012;Ikävalko et al, 2018;Papert & Pflaum, 2017). Despite the criticality of orchestrating roles of keystones, a collective approach towards ecosystem orchestration with more flexible and extensible business models (Rong, Patton, & Chen, 2018) is essential for improving EVCC (Valkokari, Seppanen, Mantyla, & Jylha-Ollila, 2017), because ecosystems' constructs and interdependencies cannot be predicted ahead of time (Dattee, Alexy, & Autio, 2018).…”

Section: Effective Strategic and Operational Practices For Evccmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecosystem Value Creation and Capture: A Systematic Review of Literature and Potential Research Opportunities

Khademi¹

2020

TIM Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Effective Strategic and Operational Practices For Evccmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecosystem Value Creation and Capture: A Systematic Review of Literature and Potential Research Opportunities

Khademi¹

2020

TIM Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Finally, it is also worth mentioning that the trend of transforming firm-centric activities toward network-centric activities was seen as a change to service-dominant logic (Turber et al, 2014). In line with such logic and service cocreation activities, Ikävalko et al (2018) argue that a networkoriented view of a BM can make sense of the roles of each of the actors for the service development, as well as helping to understand their firm-level BM options.…”

Section: Joint Value Propositionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Moreover, the debate is still open in respect to what a BM is, what it does, relates to, includes, and so on. Some of the authors in our "final database" offer questions as dimensions to represent the BM (Ikävalko et al, 2018;Turber et al, 2014), which we use as cues to understand how researchers refer to the concept of BM in a network context. Specifically, the four questions we use for that purpose arewho, what, how and why.…”

Section: Defining a Network-oriented View Of A Business Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, in a networked and digital world, the development of services is not so straightforward if using a single-firm BM perspective . Therefore, alternative views, grounded in different theoretical foundations of firm interconnectedness, have been proposed as a more appropriate BM perspective for developing joint service offers and understanding business opportunities in networks (Ghanbari et al, 2017;Ikävalko et al, 2018;Jekov et al, 2017). The development of BMs according to Bankvall et al (2017) may start either from the firm-level BM and move from there to the dyadic, and then, the network-level BM; or vice versa, may start by designing the network-level BM and then discuss dyad and then each of the BMs of the participating actors individually.…”

Section: The State-of-the-art Research On Business Models At a Networmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Interconnected business models: present debates and future agenda

Jocevski

Arvidsson

Ghezzi

2020

JBIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study is to provide a review of the emergent literature to advance the current understanding of the business model (BM) concept in a context in which more than one actor is actively involved in the development and delivery of a joint offer based on information and communication technologies. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses a systematic literature review approach. The review is based on 25 systematically selected publications published from 2000 to 2018 and retrieved from bibliographic databases and through a process of snowballing. Findings The authors found several alternative conceptualizations of a BM at a network level, which highlighted different elements as core components. Based on this, authors’ findings suggest the literature has a fragmented view of what the BM concept entails at a network level, and of which actors are relevant. Conversely, there is a consensus that a single-firm view is inadequate for describing and studying joint value architectures because of its inability to consider all involved actors and their activities and resources. Therefore, a network-oriented view, as a relational aggregator, is seen as a possible way forward. Originality/value The study contributes to the current understanding of a BM concept at a network level and suggests three viewpoints from which to interpret value architectures at different levels of analysis: single-firm view, dyadic-level view and network-oriented view. Furthermore, the authors highlight several gaps to be studied and provide avenues for future research opportunities for scholars.

show abstract

“…Os modelos de negócio são apontados como um dos desafios mais significativos no que se refere à adoção das tecnologias IoT (MOHAMMADZADEH et al, 2018). Com o uso da IoT, verifica-se uma mudança voltada a uma perspectiva de ecossistema, tornando ineficiente a abordagem tradicional dos modelos de negócio, que apresentam uma perspectiva restrita ao nível de empresa (IKÄVALKO et al, 2018). Por apresentar uma infinidade de possibilidades de conexões, é preciso a adequação dos modelos de negócio para atender à complexidade trazida pela IoT (IKÄVALKO et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified