Journal of Business Strategy

Business model innovation: coffee triumphs for Nespresso

Kurt Matzler, Franz Bailom, Stephan Friedrich von den Eichen, Thomas Kohler,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Kurt Matzler, Franz Bailom, Stephan Friedrich von den Eichen, Thomas Kohler, (2013) "Business model innovation: coffee triumphs for
Nespresso", Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 34 Issue: 2, pp.30-37, https://doi.org/10.1108/02756661311310431
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/02756661311310431
Downloaded on: 27 September 2017, At: 09:47 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 19 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 71794 times since 2013*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2003),"The ultimate competitive advantage of continuing business model innovation", Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 24 Iss 5 pp. 15-21
Downloaded by ABE, Miss Claire Siegel At 09:47 27 September 2017 (PT)

<a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/02756660310504924">https://doi.org/10.1108/02756660310504924</a>
(2015),"How professional identity shapes youth healthcare", Journal of Health Organization and Management, Vol. 29 Iss 3 pp. 317-342 <a
href="https://doi.org/10.1108/JHOM-06-2012-0096">https://doi.org/10.1108/JHOM-06-2012-0096</a>

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:616458 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about
how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/
authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than
290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional
customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and
also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 Business model innovation: coffee
triumphs for Nespresso
Kurt Matzler, Franz Bailom, Stephan Friedrich von den Eichen and Thomas Kohler

Kurt Matzler is Professor at

the University of Innsbruck,
Introduction
Innsbruck, Austria. Franz According to Michal Porter, strategy is about being different. Over the long run only
Bailom is based at IMP,
Downloaded by ABE, Miss Claire Siegel At 09:47 27 September 2017 (PT)

companies that succeed in building a sustained competitive advantage will be successful

Innsbruck, Austria. Stephan (Porter, 1996). Therefore, a company’s value creation process needs to be distinct from its
Friedrich von den Eichen is competitors. It needs to be both more effective and more efficient. Product innovation no
based at IMP, Munich, longer offers sufficient competitive advantage in differentiating successful companies
Germany. Thomas Kohler is
(McGrath, 2011). Competitors are quickly able to copy innovations, product life cycles are
Assistant Professor of
becoming shorter and competitors from low wage countries have considerable cost and
Marketing at Hawaii Pacific
price advantages. At the same time, Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs),
University, Honolulu,
Hawaii, USA.
offer unprecedented opportunities to rearrange value creation activities in new and different
ways. Hence, companies consider business model innovation as an opportunity to build
sustainable competitive advantage (Teece, 2010). The IBM CEO study from 2009
highlighted that 70 percent of CEOs regard business model innovation as a strategic
priority and 98 percent are working on changing their existing business models. A joint study
by Business Week and the Boston Consulting Group concludes that business model
innovators have higher and more sustained returns than product or process innovators
(Lindgardt et al., 2009). Amazon, Southwest Airlines, Apple, Nespresso and ING-DiBa are
companies that redefined customer value, found new ways to structure their value creation
processes and captured that value with great returns. This paper examines the concept of
business model innovation and discusses the design of the key elements. Using the
Nespresso case as an example, we demonstrate how business model innovation can be
implemented successfully. Based on a unique positioning strategy, successful business
model innovators align their product and services logic, added value logic, sales and
marketing logic and revenue logic to create a system that delivers great returns. The secret
of a successful business model lies in its coherence, its uniqueness and the fact that it is
difficult to imitate.

Business model innovation: value creation and value capture

A business model defines the way a company generates value (value creation) and how it
captures some of this value as profit (value capture) (Teece, 2010). In this sense, a business
model represents the ‘‘business logic’’ (Casadesus-Masanell and Ricart, 2010) or in Peter
Drucker’s words the ‘‘theory of the business’’ (Drucker, 1994). Value creation expresses the
benefits the company creates for its customers. The customer value corresponds with the
customer’s willingness to pay for a product or service. Customer value added results if the
product’s perceived value exceeds its price. If the product’s cost is below its price, the
company generates a profit (value capture). Figure 1 illustrates these relationships (Bowman
and Ambrosini, 2000).

PAGE 30 j JOURNAL OF BUSINESS STRATEGY j VOL. 34 NO. 2 2013, pp. 30-37, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 0275-6668 DOI 10.1108/02756661311310431
 Figure 1 Value creation and value capture: the relationship among willingness to pay,
customer value added, income and expenses

Willingness
to pay Customer
Value
Customer Customer Added Customer
Value Customer Value Value
Added Value Added Added
Added
Price
Customer
Value
Profit Profit Profit
Profit Added

Cost Profit

Profit

Profit Profit Profit

Cost
Profit
Profit
Downloaded by ABE, Miss Claire Siegel At 09:47 27 September 2017 (PT)

A B C

Business model innovation results when a company increases customer value and
simultaneously creates a new value creation and revenue model that allows the company to
capture some of the value created in a new way.
Figure 1 schematically illustrates three types of business model innovation. In the first case
(A) the company does not add value to a product or service, but rather the increase of
customer-added value results from a new value creation system that allows the company to
reduce product costs and prices. Additional value is created for both the customer and the
company. The second case (B) shows that an innovation leads to higher willingness to pay
because of higher value to the customer. A higher price and a new value creation
architecture allow for a higher monetization. In the third case (C) the customer’s benefit is
reduced by, for example, offering a stripped down version of a product. However, if the price
reduction is comparably higher than the benefit reduction, the value for the customer
increases. A new value chain architecture allows cost reductions and consequently the profit
for the company increases.
Hence, value creation and value capture are two key tasks set forth by a business model
(Pitelis, 2009). As corporate practice demonstrates, the development of a sustainable and
profitable business model is extremely challenging. The problem is illuminated in Figure 2.
Companies in the upper left corner are creating added value for customers but are not able
to turn a portion of it into profit. The total added value goes to the customer. This usually
results from a poor revenue logic or from an incoherent value creation architecture. A poor
revenue logic is the weak spot in the case of Skype. The added value for customers is
immense. With more than 660 million customers worldwide but only about eight million
paying premium customers, Skype has yet to find a sustainable revenue logic that allows it to
reap any financial benefits. An example for incoherent value creation architecture is Air
Berlin. In recent years, the airline showed high growth rates, which indicates that customer
value was added. The value is high while prices are low. However, for years the airline
operated in the red. Their value creation architecture made it difficult to generate profit at
these prices. The hybrid business model between a full-service airline and a low-cost airline
lacks coherence.
Companies in the upper right corner have a sustainable, profitable business model. Apple
and Nespresso are convincing examples. This research project will take a close look at the
business model of Nespresso.

j j
VOL. 34 NO. 2 2013 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS STRATEGY PAGE 31
 Figure 2 Value creation and value capture: which business models work

High
HIGH CUSTOMER VALUE WITHOUT
A FUNCTIONING REVENUE LOGIC PROFITABLE BUINESS MODEL

VALUE CREATION
Low NO PROSPECT FOR SUCCESS UNSUSTAINABLE REVENUE LOGIC

Low VALUE CAPTURE High

Downloaded by ABE, Miss Claire Siegel At 09:47 27 September 2017 (PT)

Companies with low or no added value for customers, but high profits are not in a
sustainable position. They are vulnerable to attacks from rivals with new business models.
Finally, companies, which neither create enough value for customers nor develop a
functioning value creation system and revenue model, are doomed for failure.

Components of a business model

Apple, with the iPod, iPhone and iPad, Southwest Airlines, Ryan Air, Nespresso, Facebook,
Google, Starbucks, Zara, Enterprise Car Rental, and direct banks such as ING DiBa are
examples of successful business model innovations in recent years (Bailom et al., 2010;
Johnson, 2010; Markides, 2008, 2010). They all transformed or are currently transforming
their industry. What makes these business model innovations so unique and sustained? The
answer to the following questions provides the core of their business models:
1. How do we create value for customers? (Value creation.)
2. How can we monetize this value – in other words, how can we convert the added value
into profit? (Value capture.)
The answers to these two questions are the essence of a business model. As the ‘‘theory of
the business’’, it describes its internal logic and strategy. An effective business model
innovation will always embrace these two aspects. In order to turn this ‘‘theory of the
business’’ into a successful value-creation system, we suggest enriching these two core
questions with two additional questions:
1. How does our value creation system work: how do we organize value delivery and how
can we build sustainable cost advantages?
2. How does our marketing and distribution logic function: how do we attract and retain
customers?
The starting point, for the design of these four components of the business model, is the
company’s positioning in the market with the aim of sustainable differentiation. This refers to
the customer needs a company is trying to fulfill with the aim to create and maintain a
‘‘monopoly’’ position in customers’ minds. Market conditions and core competencies
provide the framework. These considerations are depicted in the schematic business model
in Figure 3.

j j
PAGE 32 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS STRATEGY VOL. 34 NO. 2 2013
 Figure 3 Components of a business model

Value
Product and
creation
service logic
logic

Positioning

Marketing
Profit
and sales
formula
logic

Components of the innovative business model

The starting point of business model innovation is a differentiated and innovative positioning
on the market, ‘‘an organized system for finding a window in the mind’’ (Ries and Trout, 1981)
Downloaded by ABE, Miss Claire Siegel At 09:47 27 September 2017 (PT)

of the customer. The idea of positioning focuses on the rational or emotional benefits that a
buyer will receive by using the product or service. It must be unique and sustainable. Very
few companies succeed in positioning themselves sustainably and distinctively. As Ries and
Trout outline, companies with a lack of differentiation become interchangeable and mere
substitutes. Substitutes are only a small step away from being a commodity, which may
intertwine them in irrevocably ruinous price competition. We can summarize the role of the
positioning in a business model as follows: Without effective differentiation, there is no
positioning. Without positioning, there is no uniqueness. Uniqueness ultimately drives the
odds of a business model innovation.
The product and service logic presents the second component of business model
innovation. Product and service innovations must be aligned with positioning. These
innovations ultimately serve as tools to realize the positioning of the company in the market.
Products and services only offer added value if they create a unique product benefit and if
the price of the products is below the benefit. Economists label this the consumer surplus.
The value creation logic refers to how the company shapes its activities and processes, to
market the product or service. The company needs to consider what its ‘‘core’’ and
‘‘non-core’’ elements are to make a decision on which to source internally and which ones to
outsource. The key question is about core competencies and the value creation that can be
achieved along the process. The added value logic must be tailored to the positioning, the
product and service logic and the revenue logic. A case in point is Apple. Production is
outsourced to China while software expertise remains in house: ‘‘One of our biggest insights
(years ago) was that we did not want to get into any business where we did not own or control
the primary technology because you’ll get your head handed to you’’ (Steve Jobs).
Companies must decide and depict in their business models which role they will play in the
value creation. Today, we are witnessing competition no longer confined within industry
boundaries, but rather a competition of value creation architectures across industry
boundaries. The competition of the future will be less about competition between companies
and more about competition between networks of firms.
The sales and marketing logic defines how to attract and retain customers. It needs to be in
sync with the other components of the business model, especially the positioning and
revenue logic.
The profit formula builds the core of the business model, consisting of the revenue and cost
model, and defines how the company earns its money. Discount stores, for example, build
their business models around high volumes. Christensen and Tedlow (2000) describe how in
the early 1960s discount stores made money through a completely different business model

j j
VOL. 34 NO. 2 2013 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS STRATEGY PAGE 33
 and competed successfully with department stores. The business model was based on a
low-cost, high turnover model that enabled them to achieve five inventory turns a year with
gross margins of between 20 and 25 percent. They concentrated on simple products that
could sell themselves, such as branded hard goods in the form of hardware, kitchen
utensils, books or packaged personal care products.
The main drivers of the revenue model are also economies of scale or economies of scope,
customer lifetime value concept, cross selling, cross-subsidizing model (premium
customers ‘‘subsidize’’ non-paying customers in a freemium model such as LinkedIn),
third party revenue model (eg Google’s pay- per-click advertisements), or razor-blade
models. Especially the latter has gained enormous popularity, named after its inventor King
Gillette (Anderson, 2008). After the invention of his disposable blade King Gillette sold just
51 razors and 168 blades in 1903. Bitterly disappointed, he then changed his revenue logic:
he sold razors for petty cash to the army, gave away razors as extras with Wrigley’s chewing
gum, coffee, tea, spices, and marshmallows and earned money from the resulting blade
sales. The result was one of the most successful business models. This revenue logic
provided the basis for many industries: cellphones, inkjet printers, coffee machines and
even Apple is using this logic. Apple, however, turned it around: Expensive iPhones and
iPads provide access to inexpensive music and free apps.
In the following section, we present one of the most successful business model innovations
Downloaded by ABE, Miss Claire Siegel At 09:47 27 September 2017 (PT)

in recent years. The presented framework portrays the successful business model of
Nespresso. Nespresso took new directions for all five components of the business model
(see Table I). Their success is based on a unique, innovative and coherent business model.

Nespresso’s business model

Nespresso is one of the most successful business model innovations in recent years. Since
2000, Nespresso has grown by 30 percent per year and it is Nestlé’s fastest growing
business unit. In 2009 sales amounted to CHF 2.77 billion and worldwide every minute
consumers drink more than 10,000 cups of Nespresso (Nestlé-Nespresso, 2010).

The positioning
The basic idea of the Nespresso concept is customization. The CEO of Nestlé Coffee
Specialties Willem Pronk explained more than a decade ago:
Individualization is a driving force in today’s markets – in everything from the telephone to beer to
tea to personal computers. The Nespresso system is an innovative concept that offers consumers
individual portions of freshly-ground coffee in a range of tastes that result in an exceptional cup of

Table I Core questions of a business model

Component Questions

Positioning 1. Which basic customer need are we trying to fulfill?

2. How can we establish and retain a unique position in our customers’
minds?
Product and service logic 3. Which products and product features are necessary to become
indispensable and strengthen our positioning?
4. What is the unique product benefit we offer our customers?
Added value logic 5. How we design our value creation processes to effectively and
efficiently bring our offers to the market?
6. What are our core competencies and core processes on which we
focus and which allow us to create value?
Sales and marketing logic 7. How do we attract customers?
8. How do we retain customers?
Profit formula 9. Based on which economic rational are we making profits?

j j
PAGE 34 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS STRATEGY VOL. 34 NO. 2 2013
 ‘‘ A business model defines the way a company generates value
(value creation) and how it captures some of this value as
profit (value capture) ’’

espresso every time. We’re convinced of the power of the idea and the technology behind it, and
we’re aiming to grow this business eightfold to £ 1 billion in the next decade (Kashani, 2000).

Indeed, this idea has led to sustained differentiation on the market: Consumers were given
the opportunity to prepare their espressos according to their individual preferences with
exquisite crema, aroma and full-bodied taste. A unique positioning resulted from the
confluence of a broad variety of choices and an individual coffee experience coupled with
convenience.

The product and service logic

Their unique capsule system is perfectly in line with their positioning. Sixteen different tastes
are available in individually vacuum-packed capsules that retain the flavor and freshness.
Downloaded by ABE, Miss Claire Siegel At 09:47 27 September 2017 (PT)

While most consumers typically had only one type of coffee in a 250 g or 500 g pack at home,
Nespresso now permits indulging in a broad range of tastes unique to each individual coffee
experience. The hermetically sealed capsules protect the coffee against air, light and
moisture and the flavor, freshness and taste are preserved. However, the quality of espresso
not only depends on the quality of the coffee, but also to a great extent on the espresso
machine. Water temperature (ideally held constant at 86-91 degrees Celsius) and water
pressure are crucial for the taste. Therefore, Nespresso developed its own coffee machine
with electronic water temperature control and a patented extraction and brewing system
including a 19-bar high-pressure pump (Nestlé-Nespresso, 2010). Exclusive and
personalized customer service 24/7 ensures individual attention for each customer. Thus,
the product and service logic is perfectly aligned with the positioning.

The value creation logic

Nestlé’s core competencies are the production and marketing of food, not the manufacturing
of household appliances. Therefore, Nestlé decided to develop the Nespresso system in
collaboration with an external design partner and several machine specialists
(Nestlé-Nespresso, 2010). A total of 1,700 patent applications were filed. The
manufacturing and distribution of the coffee machines is conducted through established
manufacturers under a licensing agreement with Nestlé. Nestlé does not earn money
through the coffee machines (Kashani, 2000). Instead, Nespresso value chain architecture
focuses on advancing the Nespresso system, the coffee production and its marketing.
Especially the coffee production is built on Nespresso’s key core competencies. If follows
the principles of the shared value concept (Porter and Kramer, 2011). In 2003, Nespresso
introduced the AAA Sustainable Quality Program, which ensures quality and sustainability in
the value creation through generating shared value. By 2013, Nespresso wants to obtain 80
percent of the total coffee from coffee farmers who operate based on the Rainforest Alliance
Certificate (Nestlé-Nespresso, 2010).

The sales and marketing logic

To market and sell the product, Nespresso also went in uncharted directions. Previously food
retail distribution was almost the only way to distribute products. Nespresso is based on an
entirely new concept: the Internet Sales (Nespresso club), exclusive retail boutiques and
flagship stores. This provides them with direct customer contact (about 70 percent of the
world’s 4,500 employees are in direct contact with customers), direct service, an exclusive
brand image and ultimately higher margins. Customer acquisition occurs in a number of
ways:

j j
VOL. 34 NO. 2 2013 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS STRATEGY PAGE 35
 B through the distributor of the coffee machines;
B via exclusive, since 2006, advertising (‘‘Nespresso. What else?’’ with George Clooney);
and
B the Nespresso Club with more than seven million members, of which more than 50
percent of new Nespresso Club members are referrals from existing members
(Nestlé-Nespresso, 2010).

The profit formula

Nespresso’s revenue logic is built on the razor-blade model. High quality coffee machines in
elegant design are sold for an economic price through licensing partners. Nespresso does
not profit from the coffee machines. Instead they earn money primarily through Nespresso
capsule sales. The Nespresso capsule gross margins are estimated to be around 85
percent, compared with 40 percent to 50 percent for regular drip-coffee brands (Levine,
2011). The second component of the revenue logic is the cross-selling of coffee
accessories.

What are the secrets of Nespresso’s success?

Downloaded by ABE, Miss Claire Siegel At 09:47 27 September 2017 (PT)

First, Nespresso created a unique, difficult to imitate and internally consistent business
model. Second, the business model builds on a unique, sustainable positioning that
meets long-term trends in the market (convenience, espresso culture, digitalization in the
distribution system). Third, the product (coffee and espresso machine) is perfectly
aligned with the positioning and supports it in unique way. Fourth, Nespresso has a very
clear answer to the question: What is core and what is non-core. If focusses on its core
competences and outsources other activities or cooperates with partners. Fifth, the
marketing and distribution logic is perfectly aligned with the positioning and the product
logic. Finally, Nespresso has a very clear value creation and value capture system. It
creates unique value for its customers and has a clearly defined and well-functioning
profit formula.
Nespresso’s unique positioning and innovative product are important to H- important, but
not enough. The idea to sell coffee in capsules has now been copied many times but what is
hard to copy is the entire system – the business model. This non-duplicable business model
provides the foundation for sustained success.

Conclusion
Product innovations no longer provide sufficient opportunities for differentiation. Ever shorter
life cycles, shorter periods of imitation and increasing competition from low wage countries
require new and sustained competitive advantages. Unique, non-duplicable business
models are at the root of today’s new business opportunities. A company’s task is to find new
ways to generate added value for customers and to monetize a portion of this surplus value.
A business model innovation comprises five components:
1. innovative, unique positioning;
Keywords: 2. a consistent product and service logic;
Value creation,
Value capture, 3. an appropriate value creation architecture;
Business model innovation, 4. an effective sales and marketing logic; and
Case studies,
5. a profit formula that works.
Components of a business
model, Using the example of one of the most successful business model innovations in recent years
Value analysis, – the Nespresso system – we have exemplified concept of business model innovation.
Innovation, Uniqueness, difficult imitation and especially the individual component’s consistency drive
Corporate strategy its success.

j j
PAGE 36 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS STRATEGY VOL. 34 NO. 2 2013
 ‘‘ As corporate practice demonstrates, the development of a
sustainable and profitable business model is extremely
challenging. ’’

References
Anderson, C. (2008), ‘‘Why $ 0.00 is the future of business’’, Wired Magazine, March, pp. 140-94.
Bailom, F., von den Eichen, F. and Anschober, S.A.M. (2010), ‘‘Die Dimensionen der Geschäftslogik sind
systemisch zu betrachten! Komplex?’’, IMP Perspectives, No. 2, pp. 35-51.
Bowman, C. and Ambrosini, V. (2000), ‘‘Value creation versus value capture: towards a coherent
definition of value in strategy’’, British Journal of Management, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 1-15.
Casadesus-Masanell, R. and Ricart, J.E. (2010), ‘‘From strategy to business models and onto tactics’’,
Long Range Planning, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 195-215.
Christensen, C.M. and Tedlow, R. (2000), ‘‘Patterns of disruption in retailing’’, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 78 No. 1, pp. 42-5.
Downloaded by ABE, Miss Claire Siegel At 09:47 27 September 2017 (PT)

Drucker, P. (1994), ‘‘The theory of the business’’, Harvard Business Review, September-October,
pp. 95-104.

Johnson, M.W. (2010), Seizing the White Space: Business Model Innovation for Growth and Renewal,
Harvard Business Press, Boston, MA.
Kashani, K. (2000), Innovation and Renovation: The Nespresso Story, IMD, Lausanne, IMD case study.
Levine, J. (2011), ‘‘Pod of gold’’, Time Magazine, March 11.
Lindgardt, Z., Reeves, M., Stalk, G. and Deimler, M.S. (2009), Business Model Innovation. When the
Game Gets Tough, Change the Game, The Boston Consulting Group, Boston, MA.
McGrath, R.G. (2011), ‘‘When your business model is in trouble’’, Harvard Business Review,
January-February, pp. 96-8.
Markides, C.C. (2008), Game-changing Strategies, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Markides, C.C. (2010), ‘‘Creativity is not enough’’, IMP Perspectives, No. 2, pp. 73-81.
Nestlé-Nespresso (2010), Leidenschaftliches Streben nach Höchstleistungen, Nestlé-Nespresso,
Lausanne.
Pitelis, C.N. (2009), ‘‘The co-evolution of organizational value capture, value creation and sustainable
advantage’’, Organization Studies, Vol. 30 No. 10, pp. 1115-39.
Porter, M. (1996), ‘‘What is strategy?’’, Harvard Business Review, November-December, pp. 61-78.
Porter, M.E. and Kramer, M.R. (2011), ‘‘Creating shared value’’, Harvard Business Review,
January-February, pp. 62-77.
Ries, A. and Trout, J. (1981), Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, McGraw Hill, New York, NY.
Teece, D.J. (2010), ‘‘Business models, business strategy and innovation’’, Long Range Planning, Vol. 43
Nos 2-3, pp. 172-94.

Corresponding author
Kurt Matzler can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

j j
VOL. 34 NO. 2 2013 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS STRATEGY PAGE 37
 This article has been cited by:

1. Natalia Vila-Lopez, Ines Kuster-Boluda. 2017. Excellent products or servitisation? Analysing retailers’ preference before and
after a loyalty programme. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 28:11-12, 1378-1392. [Crossref]
2. Le Floc’hGaël, Gaël Le Floc’h, ScaringellaLaurent, Laurent Scaringella. 2017. Another failed M&A: misaligned business
models as culprit. Journal of Business Strategy 38:5, 18-26. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. Edurne A. Inigo, Laura Albareda, Paavo Ritala. 2017. Business model innovation for sustainability: exploring evolutionary
and radical approaches through dynamic capabilities. Industry and Innovation 24:5, 515-542. [Crossref]
4. Thomas Clauss. 2017. Measuring business model innovation: conceptualization, scale development, and proof of performance.
R&D Management 47:3, 385-403. [Crossref]
5. Maura McAdam, Kristel Miller, Rodney McAdam. 2017. University business models in disequilibrium - engaging industry
and end users within university technology transfer processes. R&D Management 47:3, 458-472. [Crossref]
6. MARTIN TRAPP, KAI-INGO VOIGT, ALEXANDER BREM. 2017. BUSINESS MODELS FOR CORPORATE
INNOVATION MANAGEMENT: INTRODUCTION OF A BUSINESS MODEL INNOVATION TOOL FOR
ESTABLISHED FIRMS. International Journal of Innovation Management 53, 1850007. [Crossref]
7. WinterhalterStephan, Stephan Winterhalter, WeiblenTobias, Tobias Weiblen, WechtChristoph H., Christoph H. Wecht,
Downloaded by ABE, Miss Claire Siegel At 09:47 27 September 2017 (PT)

GassmannOliver, Oliver Gassmann. 2017. Business model innovation processes in large corporations: insights from BASF.
Journal of Business Strategy 38:2, 62-75. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
8. RumbleRyan, Ryan Rumble, MintoNiall Anthony, Niall Anthony Minto. 2017. How to use analogies for creative business
modelling. Journal of Business Strategy 38:2, 76-82. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
9. ParmentierGuy, Guy Parmentier, GandiaRomain, Romain Gandia. 2017. Redesigning the business model: from one-sided to
multi-sided. Journal of Business Strategy 38:2, 52-61. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
10. Douglas G. Carrie, Parizad Mulla, Andrew Patterson, Michelle Kilkolly-Proffit, Richard Brookes, Herbert Sima, Tom Agee.
2017. Adding value to first-year undergraduate marketing education: team-based learning as a strategic response to changing
modern educational environments. Journal of Strategic Marketing 25:2, 138-151. [Crossref]
11. Jonathan Morris. We Consumers—Tastes, Rituals, and Waves 457-491. [Crossref]
12. GERRIT REMANE, ANDRE HANELT, JAN F. TESCH, LUTZ M. KOLBE. 2017. THE BUSINESS MODEL
PATTERN DATABASE — A TOOL FOR SYSTEMATIC BUSINESS MODEL INNOVATION. International Journal
of Innovation Management 21:01, 1750004. [Crossref]
13. Sven Seidenstricker, Erwin Rauch, Cinzia Battistella. 2017. Business Model Engineering for Distributed Manufacturing
Systems. Procedia CIRP 62, 135-140. [Crossref]
14. Nicolai J. Foss, Tina Saebi. 2017. Fifteen Years of Research on Business Model Innovation. Journal of Management 43:1,
200-227. [Crossref]
15. YehShih-Shuo, Shih-Shuo Yeh, MaTao, Tao Ma, HuanTzung-Cheng, Tzung-Cheng Huan. 2016. Building social
entrepreneurship for the hotel industry by promoting environmental education. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management 28:6, 1204-1224. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
16. Marianne Hock, Thomas Clauss, Esther Schulz. 2016. The impact of organizational culture on a firm's capability to innovate
the business model. R&D Management 46:3, 433-450. [Crossref]
17. Stephan Winterhalter, Marco B. Zeschky, Oliver Gassmann. 2016. Managing dual business models in emerging markets: an
ambidexterity perspective. R&D Management 46:3, 464-479. [Crossref]
18. Alexander Brem, Maximilian Maier, Christine Wimschneider. 2016. Competitive advantage through innovation: the case of
Nespresso. European Journal of Innovation Management 19:1, 133-148. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
19. Frank-Walter Jaekel, Simon Schlosser, Boris Otto, Dobrila Petrovic, Ali Niknejad. Seamless Interrelation Between Business
Strategies and Tactical Planning 321-331. [Crossref]
20. Erwin Rauch, Sven Seidenstricker, Patrick Dallasega, Robert Hämmerl. 2016. Collaborative Cloud Manufacturing: Design of
Business Model Innovations Enabled by Cyberphysical Systems in Distributed Manufacturing Systems. Journal of Engineering
2016, 1-12. [Crossref]
21. Stephan Friedrich von den Eichen, Joerg Freiling, Kurt Matzler. 2015. Why business model innovations fail. Journal of Business
Strategy 36:6, 29-38. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
 22. Rozeia Mustafa. 2015. Business model innovation. Journal of Strategy and Management 8:4, 342-367. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
23. Florian Waldner, Marion K. Poetz, Christoph Grimpe, Markus Eurich. Antecedents and Consequences of Business Model
Innovation: The Role of Industry Structure 347-386. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
24. Alexey Bereznoy. 2015. Changing Competitive Landscape Through Business Model Innovation: the New Imperative for
Corporate Market Strategy. Journal of the Knowledge Economy . [Crossref]
25. Michael Blaschke, Maurus L. Wuetherich, Uwe V. Riss, Petros Papakostas. Business Model Management System Design:
Manifesto, Requirements, and Prototype 153-160. [Crossref]
26. Aleksei Bereznoi. 2015. Business Model Innovation in Corporate Competitive Strategy. Problems of Economic Transition 57:8,
14-33. [Crossref]
27. Laurent Bertrandias, Leila Elgaaied-Gambier. 2014. Others’ environmental concern as a social determinant of green buying.
Journal of Consumer Marketing 31:6/7, 417-429. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
28. Florian Mezger. 2014. Toward a capability-based conceptualization of business model innovation: insights from an explorative
study. R&D Management 44:5, 429-449. [Crossref]
29. Karolin Frankenberger, Tobias Weiblen, Oliver Gassmann. 2014. The antecedents of open business models: an exploratory
study of incumbent firms. R&D Management 44:2, 173-188. [Crossref]
Downloaded by ABE, Miss Claire Siegel At 09:47 27 September 2017 (PT)

30. Jonathan Morris. 2013. Why espresso? Explaining changes in European coffee preferences from a production of culture
perspective. European Review of History: Revue européenne d'histoire 20:5, 881-901. [Crossref]