Business model innovation is considered key for organizations to achieve sustainability. However, there are many problems involving the operationalization of business model innovation. We used a design science methodology to develop an artifact to assist business model innovation efforts. The artifact uses performance measurement indicators of the company's business model, which are powered by Big Data analytics to endow customer-driven business model innovation. Then, we applied the artifact in a critical case study. The selected company is a fashion ecommerce that proposes a vegan and sustainable value using recycled plastic bottle yarn as raw material, and ensures that no material with animal origin is used. Our findings show that the artifact successfully assists a proactive and continuous effort towards business model innovation. Although based on technical concepts, the artifact is accessible to the context of small businesses, which helps to democratize the practices of business model innovation and Big Data analytics beyond large organizations. We contribute to the business model innovation literature by connecting it to performance management and Big Data and providing paths for its operationalization. Consequently, in practice, the proposed artifact can assist managers dealing with business model as a dynamic element towards a sustainable company.Sustainability 2020, 12, 277 2 of 29 to frequent unsuccessful results about the underlying business logic and, therefore, perpetuating failures that slow down the process of knowledge creation and, thus, undermining possibilities for growth. In this regard, there is a gap between what has been studied in academia and what can be potentially useful for managers willing to innovate their BM [8,9].Thus, BM innovation, validation, and experimentation processes need to be structured and implemented. This is relevant in several industries as the greater frequency of disruption and dislocation are shortening business model life cycles and the sustainability of any specific business model is unclear [10,11]. In a scenario of constant change and need for a better structured management process for BMI, it is important to consider alternatives for testing and experimenting with new alternatives of BM. However, it is not clear in the BMI literature how to do this in the face of the recognized complexity of this process [12,13].Christensen, Bartman, and van Bever [14] argue that there is the need for a systematic mechanism to evaluate the relationship between opportunities and BM. Besides, it is necessary to consider that innovation in BM cannot be generated randomly through guesswork. Nonetheless, Laudien and Daxböck [15] show that, in many cases, innovations in BM are not deliberate strategic options but rather a result of an emergent process, often unplanned. Strategic options, however, are usually related to a company's performance management which means the measurement of a set of indicators on various perspectives of the company [16,17]. In this sense, it seems natura...

Purpose\ud \ud – The purpose of this paper is to identify and discuss the reasons why business models fail, while also identifying the features necessary to develop a method that enables the evaluation of the implementation process of the business model, and is able to help in its development. \ud \ud \ud \ud \ud Design/methodology/approach\ud \ud – The proposed method (roadmap for implementation of business models – RIBM) is composed of nine steps, and seven initials conditions (limitations). Such conditions reduce its complexity (e.g. performance management system is defined in the company). \ud \ud \ud \ud \ud Findings\ud \ud – Some reasons why business models fail (alignment between value proposition and customer segment (value proposition); business model financial viability (costs and revenue); environmental constraints not fully integrated with the design of the business model (environment); business model execution (management), etc.) and made some considerations about the implementation of business models. \ud \ud \ud \ud \ud Research limitations/implications\ud \ud – This work was developed in a small business (with a small team and the external member). The business complexity level and number of processes involved are much smaller when compared with a mid-size or large company. Another factor that contributed to mitigating the problem is that the enterprise had a well-structured report once the owners had made annual analysis and discussed how to improve and expand the business. \ud \ud \ud \ud \ud Practical implications\ud \ud – In this application, RIBM showed a potential tool to minimize flaws in implementation processes of business models. \ud \ud \ud \ud \ud Originality/value\ud \ud – The business model concept is relatively new in the literature. And because of its strategic importance has been the target of all major schools in the area. This work, in particular, deals with the question-related failures that occur in the process of implementing business models

The digital era is reshaping the competitive landscape, creating a more turbulent environment where digital technologies play a significant role in enabling innovative business models. Companies need to promote business model innovations, readapting their business models, and create new digital business models to thrive in this scenario. The literature emphasizes that dynamic capabilities are the main antecedent to business model innovation. However, the dynamic capabilities construct is poorly operationalized, lacking proper measurements that effectively translate them to practice, remaining a black box. This paper aims to further understand, operationalize and measure the distinctive dimensions of dynamic capabilities for business model innovation. To this end, we follow the design science research methodology, building a tool for dynamic capabilities evaluation through a systematic literature review. We then evaluate the tool based on a three-year, in-depth case study of a software company. Our findings show that the current business model has a central role in shaping dynamic capabilities for business model innovation. The proposed measures encompass activities and practices and business model structure, highlighting the relevance of the co-evolution between business model and dynamic capabilities. Thus, we propose creating what we call a "business model innovation engine" as a function that reshapes the business model to incorporate dynamic capabilities as part of the value creation architecture. We contribute to theory by better translating dynamic capabilities for business model innovation to observable (and measurable) organizational phenomena, linking it to the extant strategic management literature, and elucidating how to measure and guide the build-up of such capabilities. We also add to practice by developing a practical tool for management to use as a means to evaluate their current dynamic capabilities state, therefore guiding for informed strategic action.INDEX TERMS Business model innovation, design science research, digital economy, dynamic capabilities, innovation management.

Highlights: Proposal to integrate the Business Model Innovation (BMI) influencing factors in a single framework. Twelve BMI influencing factors found through an integrative literature review. Factors grouped through an affinity diagram to design the framework architecture, containing four categories. The study highlights the importance for companies to consider the interrelationship between the influence factors to be successful in their BMI initiatives. Goal: This paper aims to provide an integrated framework that comprises influence factors for business model innovation, and describe them by exploring the linkages between different factors. Design / Methodology / Approach: an integrative literature review was conducted using PRISMA work flow to manage this kind of methodology. Results: This work finds 12 main potential influence factors for business model innovation. All factors have been grouped into four different categories, using the affinity diagram approach. Limitations of the investigation: Business model innovation is a recent research topic, and not all its influence factors are agreed upon. Despite the importance of grouping, those already described in a single framework, there may be other relevant factors not mapped. Originality / Value: Despite the existence of bibliographic material on specific influencing factors, there is, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, no study that integrates all the explored factors. This work contributes to literature by integrating the diverse factors into a single framework. Practical implications: It contributes to practice, enticing managers to reflect on their own environment, and on the possible paths to follow for succeeding with its business model innovations efforts.

Business model innovation (BMI) and organizational ambidexterity have been pointed out as mechanisms for companies achieving sustainability. However, especially considering small and medium enterprises (SMEs), there is a lack of studies demonstrating how to combine these mechanisms. Tackling such a gap, this study seeks to understand how SMEs can ambidextrously manage BMI. Our aim is to provide a practical artifact, accessible to SMEs, to operationalize BMI through organizational ambidexterity. To this end, we conducted our study under the design science research to, first, build an artifact for operationalizing contextual ambidexterity for business model innovation. Then, we used an in-depth case study with a vegan fashion small e-commerce to evaluate the practical outcomes of the artifact. Our findings show that the company improves its business model while, at the same time, designs a new business model and monetizes it. Thus, our approach was able to take the first steps in the direction of operationalizing contextual ambidexterity for business model innovation in small and medium enterprises, democratizing the concept. We contribute to theory by connecting different literature strands and to practice by creating an artifact to assist management.Sustainability 2020, 12, 2337 2 of 34 pressure from economic, social and environmental demands, entailed by the transition to sustainable development (SD) [14]. Incorporating environmental and social aspects into businesses represent additional challenges for BMI processes. It requires cross-functional and systems thinking, as well as radical changes in business processes, products, and organizational forms [15]. As a result, most BMIs for sustainability are developed ad-hoc and are neither systematic nor systemic [16].Thus, there is a need to exploit established BMs and, at the same time, a need to search for new BMs that adapt to the needs and demands that are constantly changing, in order to become a sustainable organization, that is, an organization that can achieve (enduring) success while performing well in economic, social and environmental aspects. This managerial capability to exploit and explore refers to organizational ambidexterity [17,18]. Organizational ambidexterity has also been often highlighted as a mechanism to attain sustainability [19,20]. However, this is another concept that is difficult to implement [21]. Again, in the context of SMEs, it becomes an even more difficult task [12], even though, as suggested by recent studies, SMEs could benefit from being ambidextrous and should take action in this direction [22].It is observed that, although BMI and ambidexterity are important mechanisms for achieving sustainability, the connection between both concepts has received limited attention in the literature [23]. This gap is even larger from the perspective of SMEs, as BMI literature mostly focuses on large companies, often neglecting SMEs [7,24]. Laudien and Daxböck [4] argue that BMI research should go beyond the focus on large, established compani...