Purpose Despite the common understanding that business model (BM) innovation is of vital importance for securing competitive positioning in the market place, managers still seem to lack appropriate frameworks and tools which can support them in renewing and rejuvenating their company’s existing BM. The purpose of this paper is to develop a structural and comprehensive toolbox of available BM configurations, from which companies can choose, to innovate their BM upon, and to design an appropriate BM innovation framework which can facilitate them in re-designing, selecting, and implementing new BM configuration possibilities. Design/methodology/approach A structured literature review is conducted to identify all the relevant BM configurations. Then, a value driver analysis is performed to group these BM configurations into appropriate categories. Finally, an ontological classification scheme and a structural and workable process, i.e. a BM innovation framework, are inductively developed. Findings The paper systematically develops a list of 71 BM configurations and groups them into an ontological classification scheme according to five groups: Value Proposition, Value Segment, Value Configuration, Value Network, and Value Capture. The paper illustrates how the BM innovation framework, enabled by this ontological classification scheme, provides a platform for identifying BM innovation routes for companies, allowing managers to envisage radical, disruptive, and new-to-the-world BM configuration ideas, or apply existing configurations from other industrial settings in what may be deemed new-to-the-industry innovation. Originality/value The paper enriches the amount of potential BM configurations available for managers to choose from when innovating their BMs, and extends the analysis to five core BM configuration categories. Moreover, the BM innovation framework suggested highlights the strong relationships among the value drivers, thus presenting the opportunity for managers to assess potential conflicts or synergies between various value drivers, and to align the BM management process as a whole.

Purpose-The purpose of this paper is to investigate the measurement and the management of the dynamic aspects of intellectual capital through the use of causal mapping. Design/methodology/approach-The paper details the methods utilized in a single in-depth case study of a network-based business model. Findings-The paper illustrates how causal mapping can be used to understand how intellectual capital really works in the specific business context in which it is deployed. Moreover, exploiting the causal map as a platform for extracting a set of indicators can provide information on the length of the lag and the persistence of the effects of managerial actions. In addition, it can signal when and how to refine and update the causal map. The combination of these factors can potentially support the dynamic measurement and management of intellectual capital. Research limitations/implications-The paper presented has two main limitations. First, the use of a single case study to provide in-depth and rich data limits the generalizability of the observations. Second, the proposed approach has not been implemented in practice. Future research opportunities include interventionist-type case studies that put the causal mapping approach into practice. Practical implications-The paper highlights the need to build causal maps to enhance the measurement and management of intellectual capital, which is dynamic in nature. As a consequence, this tool can be useful for monitoring the intangibles of companies and networks and to better understand the contribution their intellectual capital makes to the value creation process. Originality/value-The paper openly questions the measurement of the fluid and dynamic aspects of intellectual capital. It proposes a tool for governing these aspects and it suggests that even the existing intellectual capital measurement systems can improve their usefulness by including these dimensions. So, a shift in intellectual capital measurement is prescribed.

Purpose – Although several frameworks for measuring and reporting Intellectual Capital (IC) have been developed over the past two decades, their actual use in practice is still limited. The purpose of this paper is to answer the call to analyze IC practices from a critical and performative perspective by investigating how and why IC indicators may end up not being used, thus shedding light on the barriers to their use. Design/methodology/approach – The paper presents a single in-depth case study and focusses attention on the fragility of the IC indicators as well on the interactions that occur among subjects while transmitting IC indicators. Findings – The case analysis shows how the different perspectives and expectations that are at stake when subjects engage with IC indicators can play a central role in hindering or enabling their use in practice. Expecting IC indicators to be able to accurately represent and to objectively signal the size and the growth/decline of IC, i.e. to be complete and isomorphic measures, can act as a barrier to their use. The case also shows that scores play a role in hindering the use of the IC indicators; the subjects disputed the scores when they did not confirm their perception of reality, and the lack of completeness and isomorphism of the IC indicators, i.e. their fragility, was the reason put forward to justify the subjects’ refusal to accept the scores and thus, to use these measures. Research limitations/implications – Although the use of a single case study provides in-depth and rich data, it also limits the generalizability of the observations to other companies. Moreover, the findings obtained may be influenced by the specific IC framework and indicators adopted. Originality/value – Differently from most previous IC research, this paper focusses attention on the transmission of indicators and ultimately, on their “fate,” and it contributes to the understanding of how and why IC indicators may be produced but not used, thus hindering the diffusion of IC frameworks in practice.

PurposeThis paper is concerned with identifying the role(s) of the individual employee(s) in the value creation process of three network‐based business models that are analyzed through case studies. The paper aims to focus on how the relationships between the network‐partners internally and also outside the network affect value creation.Design/methodology/approachThe study conducted is a case study of three network‐based business models applying a semi‐structured interview approach as the primary source of data.FindingsThe study shows that, together with the terms “integrating” and “enabling” which the traditional literature tends to use, expressions like “building” and “aligning” can be added in order to describe the role of human resources in the value creation process of the network‐based business models. Human resources are found to be important for aligning the value proposition of the network as a whole to the customers' needs and expectations.Research limitations/implicationsThe generalizability of the results are restricted by the fact that the network‐based businesses studied have a different set of stakeholder tensions than more traditionally organized.Practical implicationsThis paper demonstrates the advantages of network‐based value configurations and indicates how performance measures may be directly derived from value creation maps.Originality/valueThis paper contributes to understanding advantages and drawbacks of network‐based companies and how such types of organization challenge the people within and outside of them.

No abstract