A dynamic business model for Turkish techno parks: looking through the lenses of service perspective and stakeholder theory

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the business model of techno parks (TPs) in Turkey and shed light on the value co-creation in TPs in the light of the service perspective and stakeholder theory. Design/methodology/approach In this conceptual paper, a generic business model canvas for Turkish TPs has been elicited based on an in-depth review of the literature. Then, the functioning of the model and the nature of value co-creation have been viewed through the lenses of service perspective and stakeholder theory, and then the relationships and flows between the components of the business model have been visualized with a dynamic model. Findings The institutional environment leads Turkish TPs to have similar business models with functional differences. The value is co-created by stakeholders in TPs and value co-creation depends on the skills, competencies and cooperative efforts of all actors involved in the functioning of the business model. Practical implications This paper provides insight for TP management companies to improve their business models, for policymakers to refine institutional framework to enable effective functioning of TPs and for stakeholders to understand their role in value co-creation. Originality/value This paper provides a dynamic framework and a model for understanding business models of TPs and the value co-creation process, which is an understudied area, especially in a developing country context. It also extends the business model and value co-creation literature in the context of TPs by integrating multiple theoretical perspectives.

Collaborative Value Co-creation from a Stakeholder Perspective: A Literature Review

“…The functional value dimension includes offerings’ overall performance, such as better service (lead time reduction, inventory management and increased flexibilities), mitigating complex problems and innovative solutions (Leone et al, 2021; Polat, 2022; Schiavone et al, 2021). Ramaswamy and Ozcan (2016) argued that stakeholders mostly consider functional, emotional and self-expressive benefits as expected values of collaboration.…”

Unicanvas: Exploring a tool for strategic management

“…Some theoretical implications can be derived from our proposal. First, Unicanvas, specifically the identification of the beneficiaries’ segment, could enrich the focus of the Stakeholders Theory by better identifying beneficiaries through the process of mutual value exchange beyond the process of resource transaction ( Falqueto et al , 2020 ; Freudenreich et al , 2020 ; Polat, 2022 ). Second, blocks of key partners, resources, and activities could be underpinned by the Resource-based View.…”

“… Jongbloed and Kottmann (2022) have applied to BMC for universities, but only for value proposition analysis. Trevisan et al (2022) used BMC for HEI eco-innovative strategies, Polat (2022) applied BMC in techno parks analysis. Finally, Mulyana et al (2018) and Dahlan et al (2020) have combined in the university context BMC with other strategic tools such as SWAT, Environmental Map, and Value Proposition Design Canvas.…”

“…In the context of HEIs, despite being a tool that is taught for entrepreneurship courses in the leading universities ( Türko, 2016 ), BMC has been timidly used, but either in a partial way or to achieve some specific strategic objectives ( Dahlan et al , 2020 ; Gaus & Raith, 2013 ; Gomes et al , 2020 ; Hadăr et al , 2016 ; Jongbloed & Kottmann, 2022 ; MacBryde & Franco-Santos, 2016 ; Mulyana et al , 2018 ; Polat, 2022 ; Rytkonën & Nenonen, 2014 ; Trevisan et al , 2022 ; Trunina et al , 2021 ).…”

Finding the key to the black box of board diversity and firm performance: A mediating effect analysis of technological innovation

“…At the same time, in the process of maximizing firm performance, the joint participation of internal and external stakeholders was required ( Freeman et al, 2020 ). Companies should enhance the broad participation of the board of directors, attract non-shareholders such as employees, creditors and community representatives, and ensure their voice and voting rights ( Polat, 2021 ). The theoretical support of the stakeholder theory for this paper was to promote more stakeholders into the board of directors, thereby increasing the diversity of the board.…”