This Whitepaper presents the essence of research into existing and emerging circular business models (CBMs). This results in the identification of seven basic types of CBM, divided into three groups that together form a classification. This Whitepaper consists of three parts.▪ The first part discusses the background and explains the circular economy (CE), the connection with sustainability, business models and an overview of circular business models.▪ In the second part, an overview is given of the developed classification of CBM, and each basic type is described based on its characteristics. This has resulted in seven knowledge maps. Finally, the last two, more future-oriented models are further explained and illustrated.▪ The third part looks back briefly at the reliability of the classification made and then at the aspects of change management in working on and with a CBM.
MULTIFILE
Purpose: To facilitate the design of viable business models by proposing a novel business model design framework for viability. Design: A design science research method is adopted to develop a business model design framework for viability. The business model design framework for viability is demonstrated by using it to design a business model for an energy enterprise. The aforementioned framework is validated in theory by using expert opinion. Findings: It is difficult to design viable business models because of the changing market conditions, and competing interests of stakeholders in a business ecosystem setting. Although the literature on business models provides guidance on designing viable business models, the languages (business model ontologies) used to design business models largely ignore such guidelines. Therefore, we propose a business model design framework for viability to overcome the identified shortcomings. The theoretical validation of the business model design framework for viability indicates that it is able to successfully bridge the identified shortcomings, and it is able to facilitate the design of viable business models. Moreover, the validation of the framework in practice is currently underway. Originality / value: Several business model ontologies are used to conceptualise and evaluate business models. However, their rote application will not lead to viable business models, because they largely ignore vital design elements, such as design principles, configuration techniques, business rules, design choices, and assumptions. Therefore, we propose and validate a novel business model design framework for viability that overcomes the aforementioned shortcomings.
DOCUMENT
The QuickScan CBM (Circular Business Model) offers an approach to develop a circular business model. It focuses primarily on the manufacturing industry, even though it can be used in other sectors. It consists of three parts: (1) an introduction with an explanation of backgrounds and central concepts, (2) knowledge maps of seven business models that together form a classification and (3) the actual QuickScan.An interactive application can be found at Business Model Lab. This last version is bilingual (Dutch and English). Regardless of the version, it can be used to develop a new CBM or adapt an existing business model based on a qualitative approach. The starting point is that better design and organisation of a CBM contributes to the transformation and transition towards a sustainable and circular economy.
MULTIFILE
To gain insights into what business model-building and model-changing aspects make physiotherapy primary healthcare organisations (PTPHOs) attain and sustain superior performance in a changing environment, according to their managers.
DOCUMENT
Organisations operate in an increasingly dynamic environment. Consequently, the business models span several organisations, dealing with multiple stakeholders and their competing interests. As a result, the enterprise information systems supporting this new market setting are highly distributed, and their components are owned and managed by different stakeholders. For successful businesses to exist it is crucial that their enterprise architectures are derived from and aligned with viable business models. Business model ontologies (BMOs) are effective tools for designing and evaluating business models. However, the viability perspective has been largely neglected. In this paper, current BMOs have been assessed on their capabilities to support the design and evaluation of viable business models. As such, a list of criteria is derived from literature to evaluate BMOs from a viability perspective. These criteria are subsequently applied to six well-established BMOs, to identify a BMO best suited for design and evaluation of viable business models. The analysis reveals that, although none of the BMOs satisfy all the criteria, e3-value is the most appropriate BMO for designing and evaluating business models from a viability perspective. Furthermore, the identified deficits provide clear areas for enhancing the assessed BMOs from a viability perspective.
DOCUMENT
The BMT provides the building blocks to develop a logic for a business model. In such a model the nature of value creation, how value creation is organized, and how transactions are taking shape are operationalized so that they meet the proposition. Practice shows that at present business models aimed at capturing multiple value creation can be divided into three major categories: (1) platform business models, (2) community-based (or collective) business models, and (3) circular business models. The three archetypes differ mainly in the way in which they create value, as well as the objective, the mechanism through which value creation takes place, and the infrastructural and technological requirements. When using the BMT, it is useful to consider at an early stage which business model archetype is dominant in the realization of the intended value proposition. Choosing a business model archetype might look straightforward, but it can be quite a tricky task.
LINK
This upper-level Open Access textbook aims to educate students and professionals on how to develop business models that have a positive impact on people, society, and the social and ecological environment. It explores a different view of how to organize value creation, from a focus on an almost exclusively monetary value creation to one that creates positive impact through multiple values.The book offers students and entrepreneurs a structured approach based through the Business Model Template (BMT). It consists of three stages and ten building blocks to facilitate the development of a business model. Users, be they students or practitioners, need to choose from one of the three offered business model archetypes, namely the platform, community, or circular business models. Each archetype offers a dedicated logic for vale creation. The book can be used to develop a business model from scratch (turning an idea into a working prototype) or to transform an existing business model into one of the three archetypes. Throughout the book extra sources, links to relevant online video clips, assignments and literature are offered to facilitate the development process.This book will be of interest to students studying the development of business models, sustainable management, innovation, and value creation. It will also be of interest executives, and professionals such as consultants or social entrepreneurs seeking further education.
LINK
Organisations are increasingly becoming interdependent in order to create and deliver superior value to their customers. The resulting business mod- els of such organisations are becoming increasingly complex and difficult to de- sign, because they have to deal with multiple stakeholders and their competing interests, and with dynamic and fast paced markets. Hence, in order to ensure the long-term survival of such firms, it is crucial that their business models are viable. Business model ontologies (BMOs) are effective tools for designing and evaluat- ing business models. However, the viability perspective has largely been ignored, and the current BMOs have not been evaluated on their capabilities to facilitate the design and evaluation of viable business models. In order to address this gap, current BMOs have been assessed from the viability perspective. To evaluate the BMOs, a list of 26 criteria is derived from the literature. This list of criteria is then applied to assess six well-established BMOs. The analysis reveals that none of the BMOs satisfies all the criteria. However, the e3-value satisfies most of the criteria, and it is most appropriate for designing and evaluating viable business models. Furthermore, the identified deficits clearly define the areas for enhancing the
DOCUMENT
In order to achieve more impact and efficiency on the route towards a circular economy, new business models are introduced in the value chain of construction. It is suggested that lease and performance contracts will stimulate producers to improve quality and lifetime of building products, thereby ameliorating use and reuse of products and their materials. This, since these companies know the origin and composition of the materials, and the history of use and service of the products. The advantages seem to be obvious: the user only pays for use and performance of the product e.g. light, energy, vertical transport or protection against water and wind. The producers remain the owners of products and resources, and have the possibility to reuse and recycle materials and products in an efficient manner. This requires that they provide service during the lifetime of the products, and have the obligation to take care of the perfor- mance of their products over a certain period of time.In the Netherlands these circular business models (CBMs) are already implemented at a small scale. The introduction of these models raises some fundamental questions however, which, ideally, need to be addressed before such models are implemented at a larger scale. The aim of this paper is on the one hand to describe some of these business models, and on the other hand to reflect on some fundamental questions that can be raised in relation to a shift of ownership of materials. What may be the consequences of this shift of ownership? What are the risks of agglomeration of building materials by larger companies? Among other things such a shift could potentially influence the diversity and flexibility of choice available for tenants and building owners. It may also limit future possibilities of SME’s in the supply chain of construction. Are there ways to minimize some of these risks if we decide to implement these business models at a large scale?
DOCUMENT
