Possibilities of Applying the Configurational Approach to Business Model Research

• Autorzy: Anna Kwiotkowska
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The issue of business models is a current and more and more deeply analysed field of scientific research. However, despite the requirements of a solid and comprehensive research approach, capable of capturing the multidimensionality of business models, there is a continuous dissatisfaction with the conducted empirical research in this area. The aim of the article is to present the possibility of using the configurational approach and fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fs/QCA) to business models research, which enables to conduct comprehensive, integrated analyses. The research was conducted on the basis of a group of 53 enterprises classified in the high-tech sector. The research provided an insight into the key and auxiliary elements of the selected business models, and the methods of their mutual interaction in the context of the configuration of these elements were monitored, at the same time providing insight into the equifinality of the configuration. The results may form the basis for a deeper discussion on the definition of business models and their core components. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Business models

PL

Modele biznesowe

• Czasopismo: Organizacja i Zarządzanie : kwartalnik naukowy
• Rocznik: 2019
• Numer: nr 2 (46)
• Strony: 75--86

Twórcy

autor

Anna Kwiotkowska

• Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice

Bibliografia

• Amit, R., and Zott, C. (2010). Business Model Design: an Activity System Perspective. Long Range Planning, 43(2-3), 216-226 (Special Issue on Business Models). doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.004.
• Antoncic, B., and Hisrich, R.D. (2003). Privatization, corporate entrepreneurship and performance: Testing a normative model. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 8(3), 197-218.
• Birkinshaw, J., Ansari, S. (2015). Understanding management models: going beyond "what" and "why" to "how" work gets done in organizations. In: N.J. Foss, T. Saebi (Eds.), Business Model Innovation: the Organizational Dimension (pp. 85-103). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Bratnicki, M. (2009). Prolegomena do przedsiębiorczego rozwoju organizacji. Próba teoretycznego ustawienia konfiguracji. In: J. Pyka (Ed.), Nowoczesność przemysłu i usług. Kreatywność i innowacyjność w unowocześnianiu przemysłu i usług (pp. 17-25). Katowice: Wyd. TNOiK Oddział w Katowicach.
• Camuffo, A., Furlan, A., and Grandinetti, R. (2007). How do Subcontractors evolve? International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 27(1), 69-89. doi: 10.1108/01443570710714547.
• Casadesus-Masanell, R., and Ricart, J.R. (2010). From strategy to business models and onto tactics. Long Range Planning, 43(2-3), 195-215 (Special Issue on Business Models). doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2010.01.004.
• Chandler, G.N., and Hanks, S.H. (1993). Measuring the performance of emerging businesses: a validation study. Journal of Business Venturing, 8(5), 391-409. doi: 10.1016/0883-9026(93)90021-V.
• Chesbrough, H.W. (2007). Why companies should have open business models. MIT Sloan Management Review, 48(2), 22-28.
• Dentchev, N., Rauter, R., Jóhannsdóttir, L., Snihur, Y., Rosano, M., Baumgartner, R., Nyberg, T., Xingfu, T., van Hoof, B., Jonker, J. (2018). Embracing the variety of sustainable business models: A prolific field of research and a future research agenda. Journal of Cleaner Production, 194, 695-703. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.156.
• Fiss, P.C. (2007). A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1180-1198. doi: 10.5465/amr.2007.26586092.
• Fiss, P.C. (2011). Building better causal theories: a fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 393-420. doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.60263120.
• Foss, N.J., Saebi, T. (2016). Fifteen years of research on business model innovation: how far have we come, and where should we go? Journal of Management, 43(1), 200-227. doi: 10.1177/0149206316675927.
• Foss, N.J., Saebi, T. (2018). Business models and business model innovation: Between wicked and paradigmatic problems. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 9-21. doi: 10.1016/ j.lrp.2017.07.006.
• Heirman, A., and Clarysse, B. (2004). How and why do research-based start-ups differ at founding? A resource-based configurational perspective. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29, 3-4, 247-268. doi: 10.1023/B:JOTT.0000034122.88495.
• Johnson, M.W., Christensen, C.M., and Kagermann, H. (2008). Reinventing your business model. Harvard Business Review, 87(12), 52-60.
• Katz, D., and Kahn, R.L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley.
• Ketchen, D.J., Thomas, J.B. and Snow, C.C. (1993). Organizational configurations and performance: A comparison of theoretical approaches. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1278-1313. doi: 10.2307/256812.
• Malone, T.W., Weill, P., Lai, R.K., D'Urso, V.T., Herman, G., Apel, T.G., and Woerner, S.L. (2006). Do some business models perform better than others? SSRN Electronic Journal, MIT Sloan Working Paper 4615-06. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.920667.
• Markides, C., and Charitou, C.D. (2004). Competing with dual business models: A contingency approach. The Academy of Management Executive, 18(3), 22-36.
• Meyer, A.D., Tsui, A.S., and Hinings, C.R. (1993). Configurational approaches to organizational analysis. The Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1175-1195. doi: 10.2307/256809.
• Olofsson, S., Hoveskog, M., Halila, F. (2018). Journey and impact of business model innovation: the case of a social enterprise in the Scandinavian electricity retail market. Journal of Cleaner Production, 175, 70-81. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.081.
• Ragin, C.C. (2000). Fuzzy-set social science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Ragin, C.C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Ragin, C.C., and Davey, S. (2009). Fs/QCA, version 2.5 [computer program]. Tucson, AZ: Department of Sociology, University of Arizona.
• Ragin, C.C., and Fiss, P. (2008). Net effects analysis versus configurational analysis: An empirical demonstration. In: C.C. Ragin (Ed.), Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond (pp. 190-212). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Schaltegger, S., Hansen, E.G., Lüdeke-Freund, F. (2015). Business models for sustainability: origins, present research, and future avenues. Organization & Environment, 29(1), 3-10. doi: 10.1177/1086026615599806.
• Schweizer, L. (2005). Concept and evolution of Business Models. Journal of General Management, 31(2), 37-56. doi: 10.1177/030630700503100203.
• Shafer, S.M., Smith, J.H., and Linder, J.C. (2005). The power of business models. Business Horizons, 48(3), 199-207. doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2004.10.014.
• Teece, J.D. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40-49. doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2017.06.007.
• Timmers, P. (1998). Business models for electronic markets. Electronic Markets, 8(2), 3-8. doi: 10.1080/10196789800000016.
• Wirtz, B.W., Pistoia, A., Ullrrich, S., Gottel, V. (2016). Business models: origin, development and future research perspectives. Long Range Planning, 49(1), 36-54. doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2015.04.001.
• Zott, C., Amit, R., and Massa, L. (2011). The business model: recent developments and future research. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1019-1042. doi: 10.1177/ 0149206311406265.
• Zott, C., and Amit, R. (2007). Business model design and the performance of entrepreneurial firms. Organization Science, 18(2), 181-199. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1060.0232.
• Zott, C., and Amit, R. (2008). The fit between product market strategy and business model: implications for firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29(1), 1-26. doi: 10.1002/smj.642.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.29119/1899-6116.2019.46.6