复旦大学：《电子商务》课程资源_教学案例：The Business Model-Recent Developments and Future Research-JOM2011.pdf

The Business Model: Recent Developments and Future Research Christoph Zott IESE Business School Raphael Amit University of Pennsylvania Lorenzo Massa IESE Business School 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 subjectmatter 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. Keywords: innovation; business model; value creation; value capture; strategy In recent years, the business model has been the focus of substantial attention from both academics and practitioners. Since 1995, there have been at least 1,177 articles published in Acknowledgments: We gratefully acknowledge the very helpful comments and suggestions of the editor and of two anonymous reviewers on earlier drafts of this article. 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. Corresponding author: Christoph Zott, IESE Business School, Av. Pearson 21, 08034 Barcelona, Spain Email: czott@iese.edu Journal of Management Vol. 37 No. 4, July 2011 1019-1042 DOI: 10.1177/0149206311406265 © The Author(s) 2011 Reprints and permission: http://www. sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav 1019 Downloaded from jom.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on March 13, 2012

1020 Journal of Management/ July 2011 peer-reviewed academic journals in which the notion of a business model is addressed. The business model also has been the subject of a growing number of practitioner-oriented studies. While there has been an explosion in the number of articles published, and an abundance of conference sessions and panels on the subject of business models, it appears that researchers (and practitioners) have yet to develop a common and widely accepted language that would allow researchers who examine the business model construct through different lenses to draw effectively on the work of others. In this comprehensive review of the academic literature, we have attempted to explore the origin of the business model concept and to examine it through multiple disciplinary and subject-matter lenses. This broad and multifaceted review revealed several insights, including the following Despite the overall surge in the literature on business models, scholars do not agree on what a business model is. We observe that researchers frequently adopt idiosyncratic definitions that fit the purposes of their studies but that are difficult to reconcile with each other. As a result, cumu- The literature is developing largely in silos, according to the phenomena of interest to the respec- tive researchers. The main interest areas identified are(1)e-business and the use of information technology in organizations; (2)strategic issues, such as value creation, competitive advantage, and firm performance; and (3)innovation and technology management. Despite conceptual differences among researchers in different silos (and within the same silo), there are some emerging themes. Notably, (1)there is widespread acknowledgement--implicit and explicit-that the business model is a new unit of analysis that is distinct from the product firm, industry, or network; it is centered on a focal firm, but its boundaries are wider than those the firm;(2) business models emphasize a system-level, holistic approach to explaining how firms"do business";(3)the activities of a focal firm and its partners play an important role in the various conceptualizations of business models that have been proposed; and (4)business serve as important catalysts for a more unified study of business models erging themes could models seek to explain both value creation and value capture. These hensive and up-to-date literature review on business models, as well as to document carefull the discrepancies and dissonances in that literature, and second, to structure the literature along its main fault lines and begin to bridge the seemingly wide gaps between the various pproaches. This should facilitate future cumulative research on the topic The review is structured as follows: We begin by briefly reviewing the emergence of the business model concept. Next, we proceed to the Method section, where we discuss the way this review has been carried out. We then review the business model literature by examinin it through multiple lenses Method To conduct this study, we followed a multistep process. First, we searched for articles pub- lished in leading academic and practitioner-oriented management journals during the period January 1975 to December 2009. Our initial list of academic journals included the Academy of Management Journal(AM), Academy of Management Review(AMR), Administrative Science Downloadedfromjom.sagepub.comaFudaNUnivLibonMarch13,2012

1020 Journal of Management / July 2011 peer-reviewed academic journals in which the notion of a business model is addressed. The business model also has been the subject of a growing number of practitioner-oriented studies. While there has been an explosion in the number of articles published, and an abundance of conference sessions and panels on the subject of business models, it appears that researchers (and practitioners) have yet to develop a common and widely accepted language that would allow researchers who examine the business model construct through different lenses to draw effectively on the work of others. In this comprehensive review of the academic literature, we have attempted to explore the origin of the business model concept and to examine it through multiple disciplinary and subject-matter lenses. This broad and multifaceted review revealed several insights, including the following: • Despite the overall surge in the literature on business models, scholars do not agree on what a business model is. We observe that researchers frequently adopt idiosyncratic definitions that fit the purposes of their studies but that are difficult to reconcile with each other. As a result, cumulative progress is hampered. • The literature is developing largely in silos, according to the phenomena of interest to the respective researchers. The main interest areas identified are (1) e-business and the use of information technology in organizations; (2) strategic issues, such as value creation, competitive advantage, and firm performance; and (3) innovation and technology management. • Despite conceptual differences among researchers in different silos (and within the same silo), there are some emerging themes. Notably, (1) there is widespread acknowledgement—implicit and explicit—that the business model is a new unit of analysis that is distinct from the product, firm, industry, or network; it is centered on a focal firm, but its boundaries are wider than those of the firm; (2) business models emphasize a system-level, holistic approach to explaining how firms “do business”; (3) the activities of a focal firm and its partners play an important role in the various conceptualizations of business models that have been proposed; and (4) business models seek to explain both value creation and value capture. These emerging themes could serve as important catalysts for a more unified study of business models. Our intended contributions in this article are twofold: first, to provide the most comprehensive and up-to-date literature review on business models, as well as to document carefully the discrepancies and dissonances in that literature, and second, to structure the literature along its main fault lines and begin to bridge the seemingly wide gaps between the various approaches. This should facilitate future cumulative research on the topic. The review is structured as follows: We begin by briefly reviewing the emergence of the business model concept. Next, we proceed to the Method section, where we discuss the way this review has been carried out. We then review the business model literature by examining it through multiple lenses. Method To conduct this study, we followed a multistep process. First, we searched for articles published in leading academic and practitioner-oriented management journals during the period January 1975 to December 2009. Our initial list of academic journals included the Academy of Management Journal (AMJ), Academy of Management Review (AMR), Administrative Science Downloaded from jom.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on March 13, 2012

Zott et al. The Business Model 1021 Quarterly (as), Journal of Management (OM), Journal of Management Studies (JMS) Management Science (MS), MIS Quarterly, Organization Science (OS), and Strategic Management Journal (SM). To these we added three of the leading practitioner-oriented journals, namely, the California Management Review(CMR), Harvard Business Review(HBR), and MIT Sloan Management Review(MSM). Focusing on articles that contain the term business model in the title or keywords, our initial search revealed 70 articles on business models of which 10 had been published in academic journals and 60 had appeared in CMR, HBR, and MSM his relatively small set of articles(especially those published in academic outlets) led us to extend our search, using the EBSCO Business Source Complete database as a starting point(see Certo, Holcomb, Holmes, 2009: Laplume, Sonpar, Litz, 2008 ). This database ncludes more than 1,300 business journals and represents one of the most complete sources on business studies. We searched the database for academic articles published from January 1975 to December 2009 containing the term business model in the title, abstract, or keywords As a result of this process, we obtained 1, 202 articles, which we added to our initial sample of 70 articles. As 19 of the newly added articles were already present in the initial sample, our overall sample contained 1, 253 articles An initial cursory analysis of these articles, performed by reading article titles, journal names, abstracts, and introductions, revealed that not all the articles identified by our search would be useful for the purpose of writing this review. Many of these articles were case studies, summaries of articles published elsewhere, or studies in which the business model is not really the subject of the analysis To identify relevant articles, we adopted the following three additional criteria for our iterature review on business models. first to be included in our review an article must deal with the business model concept in a nontrivial and nonmarginal way. Second, an article also must refer to the business model as a concept related to business firms(as opposed to, e.g economic cycles). Finally, the journal in which the article appeared must be ranked in the ISI Web of Knowledge. As a result, we eliminated 1, 120 articles that did not fit these criteria, which left us with a sample of 133 articles Through reading these 133 articles in depth, we became aware of further works on bus ness models(in particular, books)that appeared relevant and that we therefore decided to include in our review. We also found working papers that our database research had failed to reveal, some of which were subsequently published and are included in the reference section, which lists their updated publication status. Moreover, our careful reading of these articles also allowed us to exclude studies in which the business model was treated in a rather arginal or trivial way. Our final sample, therefore, included 103 publications Moreover, as we highlight below in the Discussion section, our analysis of these publica- ions suggested some common themes, such as(1)the business model as a new unit of analysis, (2)a holistic perspective on how firms do business, (3)an emphasis on activities, and(4)an acknowledgement of the importance of value creation. These themes led us to review adjacent literatures that might be relevant for the study of business models but do not directly refer to the concept--namely, the literatures on new organizational forms, ecosys- tems, activity systems, and value chains and value networks. Drawing on these literatures could help put future research on business models on a more solid conceptual footing. Given the space and scope considerations for this article, however, we present our brief reviews of these adjacent literatures in an appendix that is available upon request from the authors Downloadedfromjom.sagepub.comaFudaNUnivLibonMarch13,2012

Zott et al. / The Business Model 1021 Quarterly (ASQ), Journal of Management (JOM), Journal of Management Studies (JMS), Management Science (MS), MIS Quarterly, Organization Science (OS), and Strategic Management Journal (SMJ). To these we added three of the leading practitioner-oriented journals, namely, the California Management Review (CMR), Harvard Business Review (HBR), and MIT Sloan Management Review (MSM). Focusing on articles that contain the term business model in the title or keywords, our initial search revealed 70 articles on business models of which 10 had been published in academic journals and 60 had appeared in CMR, HBR, and MSM. This relatively small set of articles (especially those published in academic outlets) led us to extend our search, using the EBSCO Business Source Complete database as a starting point (see Certo, Holcomb, & Holmes, 2009; Laplume, Sonpar, & Litz, 2008). This database includes more than 1,300 business journals and represents one of the most complete sources on business studies. We searched the database for academic articles published from January 1975 to December 2009 containing the term business model in the title, abstract, or keywords. As a result of this process, we obtained 1,202 articles, which we added to our initial sample of 70 articles. As 19 of the newly added articles were already present in the initial sample, our overall sample contained 1,253 articles. An initial cursory analysis of these articles, performed by reading article titles, journal names, abstracts, and introductions, revealed that not all the articles identified by our search would be useful for the purpose of writing this review. Many of these articles were case studies, summaries of articles published elsewhere, or studies in which the business model is not really the subject of the analysis. To identify relevant articles, we adopted the following three additional criteria for our literature review on business models. First, to be included in our review, an article must deal with the business model concept in a nontrivial and nonmarginal way. Second, an article also must refer to the business model as a concept related to business firms (as opposed to, e.g., economic cycles). Finally, the journal in which the article appeared must be ranked in the ISI Web of Knowledge. As a result, we eliminated 1,120 articles that did not fit these criteria, which left us with a sample of 133 articles. Through reading these 133 articles in depth, we became aware of further works on business models (in particular, books) that appeared relevant and that we therefore decided to include in our review. We also found working papers that our database research had failed to reveal, some of which were subsequently published and are included in the Reference section, which lists their updated publication status. Moreover, our careful reading of these articles also allowed us to exclude studies in which the business model was treated in a rather marginal or trivial way. Our final sample, therefore, included 103 publications. Moreover, as we highlight below in the Discussion section, our analysis of these publications suggested some common themes, such as (1) the business model as a new unit of analysis, (2) a holistic perspective on how firms do business, (3) an emphasis on activities, and (4) an acknowledgement of the importance of value creation. These themes led us to review adjacent literatures that might be relevant for the study of business models but do not directly refer to the concept—namely, the literatures on new organizational forms, ecosystems, activity systems, and value chains and value networks. Drawing on these literatures could help put future research on business models on a more solid conceptual footing. Given the space and scope considerations for this article, however, we present our brief reviews of these adjacent literatures in an appendix that is available upon request from the authors. Downloaded from jom.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on March 13, 2012

Business model literature Emergence of the Business Model Concept and Definitions Emergence of the business model concept. Although business models have been integral to trading and economic behavior since pre-classical times (Teece, 2010), the business model concept became prevalent with the advent of the Internet in the mid-1990s, and it has been gathering momentum since then. From that time on, ideas revolving around the concept have resonated with scholars and business practitioners, as documented by the number of publications, including articles, books, and book chapters in the business press and scientific ournals. In a frame analysis of the use of the term business model in public talk, Ghaziani and Ventresca(2005) searched for the use of the term in general management articles from 1975 to 2000. Their search, conducted using the ABI/INFORM database, returned 1, 729 publications that contained the term business model. Of these, only 166 were published in the period 1975-1994; the remaining(1, 563) belonged to the period 1995-2000, revealing a dramatic increase in the incidence of the term We performed a similar search using the EBSCOhost database, distinguishing betweer academic and journalistic outlets and extending the analysis to 2009. We found that up to December 2009. the term business model had been included in 1.202 articles in academic journals. Nonacademic articles followed a similar trend. From 1975 to December 2009, the term had been mentioned in 8, 062 documents As Figure I suggests, interest in the concept virtually exploded in the 15-year period between 1995 and 2010, which is consistent with Ghaziani and Ventresca's(2005) findings. Figure 1 also indicates that academic research on business models seems to lag behind practice. Some scholars surmise that the emergence of the business model concept, and the exte Internet(e.g, Amit& Zott, 2001), rapid growth a y have been driven by the advent of the of-the-pyramid" issues(Prahalad Hart, 2002; Seelos Mair, 2007; Thompson MacMillan, 2010), and the expanding industries and organizations dependent on postindus trial technologies(Perkmann Spicer, 2010) Business model definitions. At a general level, the business model has been referred to a statement(Stewart Zhao, 2000), a description(Applegate, 2000; Weill Vitale, 2001) a representation(Morris, Schindehutte, Allen, 2005; Shafer, Smith, Linder, 2005),an architecture(Dubosson-Torbay, Osterwalder, Pigneur, 2002; Timmers, 1998), a concep- tual tool or model( George Bock, 2009; Osterwalder, 2004; Osterwalder, Pigneur, tucci, 2005), a structural template(Amit Zott, 2001), a method(Afuah tucci, 2001), a frame- work(Afuah, 2004), a pattern(Brousseau Penard, 2006), and a set(Seelos Mair, 2007) Surprisingly, however, the business model is often studied without an explicit definition of the concept Of the 103 business model publications reviewed, more than one third (37%)do not define the concept at all, taking its meaning more or less for granted. Fewer than half (44%)explicitly define or conceptualize the business model, for example, by enumerating its main components. The remaining publications(19%)refer to the work of other scholars in defining the concept. Moreover, existing definitions only partially overlap, giving rise to a multitude of possible interpretations Downloadedfromjom.sagepub.comaFudaNUnivLibonMarch13,2012

1022 Journal of Management / July 2011 Business Model Literature Emergence of the Business Model Concept and Definitions Emergence of the business model concept. Although business models have been integral to trading and economic behavior since pre-classical times (Teece, 2010), the business model concept became prevalent with the advent of the Internet in the mid-1990s, and it has been gathering momentum since then. From that time on, ideas revolving around the concept have resonated with scholars and business practitioners, as documented by the number of publications, including articles, books, and book chapters in the business press and scientific journals. In a frame analysis of the use of the term business model in public talk, Ghaziani and Ventresca (2005) searched for the use of the term in general management articles from 1975 to 2000. Their search, conducted using the ABI/INFORM database, returned 1,729 publications that contained the term business model. Of these, only 166 were published in the period 1975-1994; the remaining (1,563) belonged to the period 1995-2000, revealing a dramatic increase in the incidence of the term. We performed a similar search using the EBSCOhost database, distinguishing between academic and journalistic outlets and extending the analysis to 2009. We found that up to December 2009, the term business model had been included in 1,202 articles in academic journals. Nonacademic articles followed a similar trend. From 1975 to December 2009, the term had been mentioned in 8,062 documents. As Figure 1 suggests, interest in the concept virtually exploded in the 15-year period between 1995 and 2010, which is consistent with Ghaziani and Ventresca’s (2005) findings. Figure 1 also indicates that academic research on business models seems to lag behind practice. Some scholars surmise that the emergence of the business model concept, and the extensive use of the concept since the mid-1990s, may have been driven by the advent of the Internet (e.g., Amit & Zott, 2001), rapid growth in emerging markets and interest in “bottomof-the-pyramid” issues (Prahalad & Hart, 2002; Seelos & Mair, 2007; Thompson & MacMillan, 2010), and the expanding industries and organizations dependent on postindustrial technologies (Perkmann & Spicer, 2010). Business model definitions. At a general level, the business model has been referred to as a statement (Stewart & Zhao, 2000), a description (Applegate, 2000; Weill & Vitale, 2001), a representation (Morris, Schindehutte, & Allen, 2005; Shafer, Smith, & Linder, 2005), an architecture (Dubosson-Torbay, Osterwalder, & Pigneur, 2002; Timmers, 1998), a conceptual tool or model (George & Bock, 2009; Osterwalder, 2004; Osterwalder, Pigneur, & Tucci, 2005), a structural template (Amit & Zott, 2001), a method (Afuah & Tucci, 2001), a framework (Afuah, 2004), a pattern (Brousseau & Penard, 2006), and a set (Seelos & Mair, 2007). Surprisingly, however, the business model is often studied without an explicit definition of the concept. Of the 103 business model publications reviewed, more than one third (37%) do not define the concept at all, taking its meaning more or less for granted. Fewer than half (44%) explicitly define or conceptualize the business model, for example, by enumerating its main components. The remaining publications (19%) refer to the work of other scholars in defining the concept. Moreover, existing definitions only partially overlap, giving rise to a multitude of possible interpretations. Downloaded from jom.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on March 13, 2012