رویکرد سیستماتیک برای توسعه یک مدل کسب و کار جدید با استفاده از تجزیه و تحلیل مورفولوژیک و رویکرد فازی یکپارچه
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی|
|7865||2013||15 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید|
نسخه انگلیسی مقاله همین الان قابل دانلود است.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله بر اساس تعداد کلمات مقاله انگلیسی محاسبه می شود.
این مقاله تقریباً شامل 9790 کلمه می باشد.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله توسط مترجمان با تجربه، طبق جدول زیر محاسبه می شود:
- تولید محتوا با مقالات ISI برای سایت یا وبلاگ شما
- تولید محتوا با مقالات ISI برای کتاب شما
- تولید محتوا با مقالات ISI برای نشریه یا رسانه شما
پیشنهاد می کنیم کیفیت محتوای سایت خود را با استفاده از منابع علمی، افزایش دهید.
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Expert Systems with Applications, Volume 40, Issue 11, 1 September 2013, Pages 4463–4477
Despite the growing importance of developing a novel business model, most previous studies on business model remain conceptual and theoretical. A paucity of empirical studies has hindered the use of the business model concept in practical purposes. Hence, this study proposes a systematic approach to new business model development (NBMD) that helps business practitioners to develop, evaluate and select the best business model to meet the business objectives. The proposed approach comprises two stages: identification of business model alternatives and business model evaluation and selection. During the first stage, a set of business model alternatives are derived by exploring all the possible combinations of a morphological matrix, and in the second stage, we conduct an evaluation and selection of a suitable business model. Morphological analysis (MA) has been employed for the derivation and aggregation of business model alternatives, and decision-making approach that integrates fuzzy extent analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) and fuzzy technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) methods is used as an evaluation and selection tool. Finally, to illustrate the applicability of proposed approach, a case study on the development of a business model for a Telco has been presented.
The economic value of products and services remains latent until it is commercialized using a solid business model. To capture value and maximize profit from products and services, managers should expand their perspectives to develop novel business models. Products and services will generate lesser value with a traditional business model than with a novel business model (Chesbrough, 2010). Theoretically, a business model encompasses the business logic of the firm, the manner in which it operates, and how it creates value for its stakeholders (Casadesus-Masanell & Ricart, 2010). Accordingly, new business model development (NBMD) can be considered a process for determining an innovative way for conducting business to meet the customer needs and firm’s strategic objectives. Since there is an increasing consensus that a novel business model is the key to business success (Zott, Amit, & Massa, 2011), firms are endeavoring to invent novel business models to confront challenging and competitive market environments (Chesbrough, 2010). NBMD is based on products and service concepts, which are invented through new product development (NPD) and new service development (NSD); NPD is for developing new tangible products, whereas NSD is for developing new intangible service products for the firm (Johne & Storey, 1998). However, although NPD and NSD have been studied empirically and numerous systematic supporting methodologies, models, and tools such as quality function deployment (QFD) (Einspruch, 1996), service platform (Meyera & DeToreb, 2001), and theory of inventive problem solving (TRIZ) have been developed for them, thus far, the supporting methodology for NBMD has not been adequately researched. Although many studies have been conducted on business model (Gordijn and Akkermans, 2001, Mahadevan, 2000, Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2005, Pateli and Giaglis, 2003, Shafer et al., 2005 and Timmers, 1998), studies related to NBMD and evaluating business model are still in its infancy (Osterwalder, 2004 and Zott and Amit, 2010). Therefore, most business practitioners in the field face difficulties in developing, evaluating and selecting their business models (Linder & Cantrell, 2000). The creation and development of a novel business model is recognized as a subjective and challenging task requiring experiential knowledge and creative thinking, which is only possible by adopting unstructured means such as intuitive thinking. Although potential sources of novel business models are ubiquitous, developing novel business models that are successful involve aggregating unusual ideas and combining them with resources to develop unique ways for creating and delivering value to the customers. For this, firms need to conduct an iterative process of planning, designing, testing, and re-testing alternative business model variants until it finds the one that best suits its business objectives (Sosna, Trevinyo-Rodrı´guez, & Velamuri, 2010). Consequently, adopting a specialized systematic approach for deriving innovative ideas from experts and aggregating them into a combined set of business model is essential. Having realized the significance of a business model, academic scholars and practitioners in the field have conducted various studies on the subject (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2005). However, most of these studies have focused only on business model concepts. Therefore, this study aims to propose a systematic approach that supports the NBMD process. The proposed methodology will not only enable managers to seek innovative ideas from various experts but also combine them into a set of alternative business models. Moreover, the proposed methodology will include an evaluation model comprising a set of evaluation criteria to analyze and select the business model that best fits the firm’s business objectives. In order to achieve its objectives, this study proceeds with the following two stages. The first stage involves the identification of business model alternatives using morphological analysis (MA). MA is a non-quantified modeling method for structuring and analyzing technological, organizational, and social problem complexes. This method is appropriate for complex cases where expertise on several areas is required (Eriksson & Ritchey, 2002) and is currently considered one of the most extensively used methods for concept generation (Lee, Song, & Park, 2009). Therefore, MA can contribute to improving the process of NBMD by utilizing ideas from various experts. Although MA is effective for modeling a complex problem and exploring alternatives, its weakness lies in evaluating and selecting the most satisfactory alternatives (Lee et al., 2009). It is necessary to support MA with other processes such as utility theory, analytic hierarchy process (AHP), graphical tools such as matrices, QFD (Kim et al., 2008, Yoon, 2008 and Yoon and Park, 2005) and fuzzy logic (Yan, Chen, & Shieh, 2006). In response, in the second stage, an integrated fuzzy extent analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) and fuzzy technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) approach is used for evaluating and selecting the business model. FAHP is applied to calculate criteria priority weights and fuzzy TOPSIS is used to select a business model alternative. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 provides a literature review of the business model concept and explains the underlying methodologies used in this study. Section 3 illustrates and explains the proposed approaches for NBMD. Section 4 provides the experimental results of the case study. Finally, Section 5 presents the conclusion of the paper and suggests several directions for further research.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
We proposed a new systematic approach to NBMD, which consisted of two stages: identification of business model alternatives and business model evaluation and selection. At the first stage, a set of business model alternatives were derived and in the second stage, the derived business model alternatives were evaluated and selected. Morphological analysis (MA) was employed for the derivation and aggregation of business models and the FAHP and fuzzy TOPSIS approach were applied for calculation of priority weights for criteria and evaluation and selection of the best business model alternative, respectively. Finally, a Telco’s NBMD case was illustrated to help understand the proposed approach. The main contributions of this study can be summarized as follows. First, an optimized business model can be systematically identified and evaluated to meet a firm’s strategic objectives. Second, unlike the previous conceptual approaches, the approach in this study is practical, can be readily employed in reality, and can provide meaningful results in NBMD. Finally, since this study is, to the best of our knowledge, one of the first attempts to develop a systematic approach to NBDM, it can function as the foundation for future business model application research. Since this study was the first attempt in NBMD, it has some limitations that necessitate further research. First, the identification of the conditions for each dimension was based on the experiential knowledge of experts and was not completely structured. This limitation can be overcome by considering data analysis of patent, mega-trend, voice of customer (VOC), etc., by using various techniques such as data mining, text mining, and patent analysis. Second, the evaluation and selection process was conducted using internal perspectives alone; however, it is also necessary to consider external perspectives such as those of potential customers. Therefore, developing a framework that captures both internal and external perspectives is required. Finally, this study used a general form of MA, which only provides a simple framework for developing a morphological matrix. By developing an MA-based business model development system with NBMD-oriented functions such as simple profit forecasting, feasibility test, etc., the process of NBMD could be conducted more efficiently and effectively.