Our study elucidates collaborative value creation and private value capture in collaborative networks in a context of sustainability. Collaborative networks that focus on innovative solutions for grand societal challenges are characterized by a multiplicity and diversity of actors that increase the complexity and coordination costs of collective action. These types of inter-organizational arrangements have underlying tensions as partners cooperate to create collaborative value and compete to capture or appropriate value on a private or organizational level, resulting in potential and actual value flows that are highly diffuse and uncertain among actors. We also observe that network participants capture value differentially, often citing the pro-social (e.g. community, belonging, importance) and extrinsic benefits of learning and reputation as valuable, but found it difficult to appropriate economic or social benefits from that value. Differential and asymmetric value appropriation among participants threatens continued network engagement and the potential collective value creation of collaborative networks. Our data indicates that networked value creation and capture requires maintaining resource complementarity and interdependency among network participants as the network evolves. We develop a framework to assess the relational value of collaborative networks and contribute to literature by unpacking the complexities of networked value creation and private value capture in collaborative networks for sustainability.
DOCUMENT
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to find determinants about risk resilience and develop a new risk resilience approach for (agricultural) enterprises. This approach creates the ability to respond resiliently to major environmental challenges and changes in the short term and adjust the management of the organization, and to learn and transform to adapt to the new environment in the long term while creating multiple value creation. Design/methodology: The authors present a new risk resilience approach for multiple value creation of (agricultural) enterprises, which consists of a main process starting with strategy design, followed by an environmental analysis, stakeholder collaboration, implement ESG goals, defining risk expose & response options, and report, learn & evaluate. In each step the organizational perspective, as well as the value chain/area perspective is considered and aligned. The authors have used focus groups and analysed literature from and outside the field of finance and accounting, to design this new approach. Findings: Researchers propose a new risk resilience approach for (agricultural) enterprises, based on a narrative about transforming to multiple value creation, founded determinants of risk resilience, competitive advantage and agricultural resilience. Originality and value: This study contributes by conceptualizing risk resilience for (agricultural) enterprises, by looking through a lens of multiple value creation in a dynamic context and based on insights from different fields, actual ESG knowledge, and determinants for risk resilience, competitive advantage and agricultural resilience.
DOCUMENT
We are currently in a transition moving from a linear economy grounded on economic value maximization based on material transformation to a circular economy. Core of this transition is organising value preservation from various yet interlinked perspectives. The underlying fundamental shift is to move away from mere financial value maximization towards multiple value creation (WCED, 1987; Jonker, 2014; Raworth, 2017). This implies moving from mere economic value creation, to simultaneously and in a balanced way creating ecological and social value. A parallel development supporting this transition can be observed in accounting & control. Elkington (1994) introduced the triple bottom line (TBL) concept, referring to the economic, ecological and social impact of companies. The TBL should be seen more as a conceptual way of thinking, rather than a practical innovative accounting tool to monitor and control sustainable value (Rambaud & Richard, 2015). However, it has inspired accounting & control practitioners to develop accounting tools that not only aim at economic value (‘single capital’ accounting) but also at multiple forms of capital (‘multi capital’ accounting or integrated reporting). This has led to a variety of integrated reporting platforms such as Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), International Integrated Reporting Framework (IIRC), Dow Jones Sustainable Indexes (DJSI), True Costing, Reporting 3.0, etc. These integrated reporting platforms and corresponding accounting concepts, can be seen as a fundament for management control systems focussing on multiple value creation. This leads to the following research question: How are management control systems designed in practice to drive multiple value creation?
MULTIFILE
This article examines internal organizational factors and external antecedents of sus-tainable value creation by small medium enterprises (SMEs) and constructs a frame-work that integrates, at both levels, the theories of psychological distance andconstrual level from the field of psychology. This research provides an explanation asto why sustainable value creation remains a complex issue, and why many SMEs'engage with sustainable value creation to varying degrees. This paper particularlyhighlights how owner/managers of SME may construe different dimensions of psy-chological distance and apply their understanding to their response to different ante-cedents of sustainable value creation. Finally, by adopting the psychological distanceperspective, this paper highlights the conditions under which internal and externalorganizational and factors can affect SMEs' propensity to create sustainable value. Itfurther concludes by highlighting areas for further research
LINK
High-tech horticulture production methods (such as vertical farming, hydroponics and other related technology possibilities), combined with evolving market side possibilities (consumer’s willingness to pay for variety, food safety and security), are opening new ways to create and deliver value. In this paper we present four emerging business models and attempt to understand the conditions under which each business model is able to create positive market value and sustained business advantage. The first of these four models is the case of a vertically integrated production to retail operation. The second model is the case of a production model with assured retail/distribution side commitment. The third model deals with a marketing/branding driven production model with differentiated market positioning. Finally, the forth is a production model with direct delivery to the end-consumer based upon the leveraging of wide spread digital technology in the consumer market. To demonstrate these four business models, we analyze practical case studies and analyze their market approach and impact. Using this analysis, we create a framework that enables entrepreneurs and businesses to adopt a business model that matches their capabilities with market opportunities.
DOCUMENT
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to find determinants about risk resilience and develop a new risk resilience approach for (agricultural) enterprises. This approach creates the ability to respond resiliently to major environmental challenges and changes in the short term and adjust the management of the organization, and to learn and transform to adapt to the new environment in the long term while creating multiple value creation. Design/methodology: The authors present a new risk resilience approach for multiple value creation of (agricultural) enterprises, which consists of a main process starting with strategy design, followed by an environmental analysis, stakeholder collaboration, implement ESG goals, defining risk expose & response options, and report, learn & evaluate. In each step the organizational perspective, as well as the value chain/area perspective is considered and aligned. The authors have used focus groups and analysed literature from and outside the field of finance and accounting, to design this new approach. Findings: Researchers propose a new risk resilience approach for (agricultural) enterprises, based on a narrative about transforming to multiple value creation, founded determinants of risk resilience, competitive advantage and agricultural resilience. Originality and value: This study contributes by conceptualizing risk resilience for (agricultural) enterprises, by looking through a lens of multiple value creation in a dynamic context and based on insights from different fields, actual ESG knowledge, and determinants for risk resilience, competitive advantage and agricultural resilience.
DOCUMENT
The aim of this study is to understand how governance mechanisms in cross-sector collaborations (CSCs) for sustainability affect value creation and capture and subsequently the survival of this organizational form. Drawing on a longitudinal, participatory, single-case study of collaborative action in the textile industry, we identify three governance mechanisms—safeguarding, bundling and connecting—that coevolve with the rising and waning of collaborative tensions and the shifting levels of action in the CSC we studied. These mechanisms aided value creation and helped facilitate private value capture. We integrate these insights into a process model that visualizes the interplay between governance mechanisms of tensions and systems of value creation and capture in CSCs for sustainability. Our study contributes to the cross-sector collaboration literature by providing a dynamic and nuanced understanding of how governance mechanisms influence outcomes in CSCs for sustainability. We also add to the business model for sustainability literature by theorizing the value creation and capture system of collaborative rather than individual organizations. Our findings have important implications for policymakers who fund collaborative organizations and practitioners who manage or participate in them.
DOCUMENT
Coopetition (simultaneous competition and collaboration between firms) is an important driver for innovation, as competing organizations benefit from pooling resources and ideas for new products, processes and achieving benefits such as collective reputation. However, a key issue facing such relationships is the notion of value creation and capture–how does value get created and distributed amongst competing partners. This issue becomes increasingly salient when the coopetition includes multiple actors and common pool resources such as land and water. In this symposium, we bring together scholars who are investigating coopetition between different actors such as direct competitors, actors from the same industry, and organizations sharing similar collective goals such as sustainable manufacturing. In showcasing this diversity of context we shed light on the notion of value creation and capture in coopetitive relationships.
MULTIFILE
This paper investigates how management accounting and control systems (operationalized by using Simons’ (1995a) levers of control framework) can be used as devices to support public value creation and as such it contributes to the literature on public value accounting. Using a mixed methods case study approach, including documentary analysis and semi-structured interviews, we found diverging uses of control systems in the Dutch university of applied sciences we investigated. While belief and interactive control systems are used intensively for strategy change and implementation, diagnostic controls were used mainly at the decentral level and seen as devices to make sure that operational and financial boundaries were not crossed. Therefore, belief and interactive control systems lay the foundation for the implementation of a new strategy, in which concepts of public value play a large role, using diagnostic controls to constrain actions at the operational level. We also found that whereas the institution wanted to have interaction with the external stakeholders, in daily practice this takes place only at the phase of strategy formulation, but not in the phase of intermediate strategy evaluation.
MULTIFILE
