Comparison of Two Value-Modeling Methods: e³ value and SEAM

Abstract

In the last few decades, several value-modeling methods have emerged in requirements engineering for IS research. We compare two value-modeling methods, e 3 value and SEAM. We illustrate their use with an example of the exchange of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) on music. In the process, we propose a comparison framework. The results of our study show that e 3 value and SEAM are similar valuemodeling techniques: both model services in networked systems and focus on value exchanges. They differ, however, in the way value is conceptualized: the market viability of the service system in e 3 value versus the subjective value and lack of market profitability analysis in SEAM. e 3 value shows how value flows from one actor to another, whereas SEAM shows the relative importance of different value propositions and how they are constructed by the service network. These results can be used by modelers to select a value-modeling method for their purposes by proposing explicit selection criteria. The comparison framework, which is in its early stages of development, can be used to compare other modeling methods.

Identification of barriers and investment determinants for hydrogen infrastructure: Development of new business models

“…The methodology has been successfully applied in several R&D projects both in the energy domain, such as BUSMOD [10], EcoGrid EU and SmartNet [11] and other areas [12]. Several recent publications make comparative evaluation of e3value with similar methodologies (see [13] and [14]) and acknowledge its functionality. The approach is unique because it focuses on the concept of economic value as a central modelling construct.…”