Explore the vast range of titles available.

PurposeThis study examines the effectiveness of passive value capture mechanisms as an effective form of mechanisms in funding infrastructure from an Australian perspective. The lukewarm response of active value capture mechanisms such as betterment levies in Australia is also discussed.Design/methodology/approachA case study of the Sydney Metro City and Southwest (SMCSW) project in Sydney is used to illustrate passive value capture mechanisms.FindingsUnlike many developed countries, passive value capture mechanisms have been adopted in Australia. This approach is an effective form of value capture mechanisms to capture the value uplift to offset the total development cost of the SMCSW project. However, this approach is highly sensitive to property transaction activities that could be affected by the general economic conditions and unprecedented events such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, there is a widespread discussion of the efficiency of land tax in New South Wales (NSW) in capturing all properties subject to the value uplift. Consequently, a shift towards a broad-based land tax is recommended in which it would provide a more efficient way of infrastructure funding.Practical implicationsPolicymakers should consider a broad-based land tax for residential and commercial properties in order to improve the efficiency of passive value capture mechanisms. This also highlights property valuers should play a greater role in the development of broad-based land tax system.Originality/valuePrevious studies have extensively demonstrated property value impacts of transit investments; very little research assesses the growth of value capture funding mechanisms, particularly passive value capture mechanisms. Specifically, this paper is the first paper to assess the effectiveness of passive value capture mechanisms.

Research Summary: This paper extends the relational view to offer a dynamic perspective on the factors that drive value creation and value capture over the alliance life cycle. We argue that access to complementary resources provides an initial rationale for forming alliances, but benefits from complementarity can attenuate over time. Indeed, viewed dynamically, factors that often lead to higher value creation—informal trust, repeated ties, customized assets—may also lead to diminished alliance performance. We highlight interdependence between the complementary resources of partners as the critical factor determining the pattern of alliance value creation, notably how quickly alliances generate value and how quickly they are likely to dissolve. We identify factors, both internal and external to the alliance, that trigger diminished value creation and increased competition for value capture among partners. Managerial Summary: The “relational view” perspective has shown that firms create value in alliances when they identify partners with complementary resources, when they build high levels of informal trust and they share knowledge and make investments that are customized to the partner. The level of resource interdependence in alliances determines how quickly alliances can reach their potential in value creation and how quickly they are likely to dissolve. Viewed dynamically, factors that often lead to higher value creation—like informal trust, repeated ties, customized assets—may also lead to diminished alliance performance. Finally, a number of factors both internal to and external to an alliance may trigger competition between the partners within an alliance to capture the value created by the alliance and also diminish the value created within the alliance.

Research summary: This article studies strategic interactions between firms that form alliances to exploit synergistic benefits. Firms cooperate to create value, but they can also compete to capture value. Fundamental questions rarely addressed by strategy scholars relate to how the configuration of control over resources influences firms' strategies, the potential for termination, and the emergence of cooperation and trust. The formal results reveal crucial aspects of the interorganizational rent-generating process and yield testable implications. With greater synergistic benefits, firms invest more, but they also compete more intensively to capture more value. With symmetric control, more value gets created, which limits the potential for termination, but also exacerbates the competition for value; from a relational perspective, this form of control augments the calculative rationale of cooperation and trust. Managerial summary: When forming an alliance to exploit synergies, firms engage in a complicated strategic interaction that is part cooperation and part competition. What happens when partner firms cooperate and invest to create value while competing and using costly adversarial tactics to capture value? The analysis reveals that with greater synergistic benefits, firms invest more in value creation, but the fear of opportunism pushes them to waste more resources on value capture tactics. The balance between value creation and value capture, and the possibility that the alliance is terminated depend on the configuration of control over resources. The analysis further reveals under what conditions there can be trust between the partners, such that they focus on value creation and avoid wasting resources in the competition for value.

Platform sponsors typically have both incentive and opportunity to manage the overall value of their ecosystems. Through selective promotion, a platform sponsor can reward successful complements, bring attention to underappreciated complements, and influence the consumer’s perception of the ecosystem’s depth and breadth. It can use promotion to induce and reward loyalty of powerful complement producers, and it can time such promotion to both boost sales during slow periods and reduce competitive interactions between complements. We develop arguments about whether and when a platform sponsor will selectively promote individual complements and test these arguments on data from the console video game industry in the United Kingdom. We find that platform sponsors do not simply promote “best in class” complements; they strategically invest in complements in ways that address complex trade-offs in ecosystem value. Our arguments and results build significant new theory that helps us understand how a platform sponsor orchestrates value creation in the overall ecosystem.

Purpose This conceptual paper aims to contribute to a better understanding of value creation and value capture with smart resources in the Internet of Things (IoT)-driven business models against the backdrop of an increasingly networked and connectivity-based environment. More specifically, the authors screen strategic management theories and adapt them to the specificities of new types of smart resources by focusing on a conceptual analysis of isolating mechanisms that enable value creation and value capture based upon different types of smart resources. Design/methodology/approach By adapting the state of the art of the contemporary resource-based discussion (resource-based view, dynamic capabilities view, relational view, resource-based view for a networked environment) to the context of IoT-driven business models, the paper typifies valuable intra- and inter-organisational resource types. In the next step, a discursive discussion on the evolution of isolating mechanisms, which are assumed to enable the translation of value creation into value appropriation, adapts the resource-based view for a networked environment to the context of IoT-driven business models. Findings The authors find that connectivity shapes both opportunities and challenges for firms, e.g. focal firms, in such business models, but it is notably social techniques that help to generate connectivity and transform inter-organisational ties into effective isolating mechanisms. Originality/value This paper lays a foundation for a theoretically underpinned understanding of how IoT can be exploited through designing economically sustainable business models. In this paper, research propositions are established as a point of departure for future research that applies strategic management theories to better understand business models that work with the digitisation and connectivity of resources on different levels.

Research summary: This article provides the first review of a growing line of scholarly work in strategy that we refer to as \"value capture theory.\" The common thread in this work is its use of cooperative game theory as a general, mathematical foundation upon which to build a deep understanding of firm performance in market settings. Our review: (1) describes the primary elements of the theory; (2) highlights important blindspots that it resolves with respect to existing theoretical approaches; (3) calls attention to several of its novel insights; and (4) summarizes a myriad of applications and empirical studies that have appeared in recent years using value capture theory. Managerial summary: Traditionally, theoretical claims in strategic management have been supported by informal, qualitative reasoning. Recently, however, a new line of theoretical work based upon mathematical methods, known as \"value capture theory,\" has been gaining in popularity. This article reviews the recent advances in this line with a particular emphasis upon a number of its important insights, several of which challenge longstanding propositions from the traditional line. For managers, the formal nature of value capture theory is well-aligned with aata-ariven analyses of strategic situations.

Digitalization is revolutionizing the way business is conducted within industrial value chains through the use of Internet of Things (IoT) technologies, intensive data exchange and predictive analytics. However, technological application on its own is not enough; profiting from digitalization requires business model innovation such as making the transition to advanced service business models. Yet, many research gaps remain in analyzing how industrial companies can leverage digitalization to transform their business models to achieve sustainability benefits. Specifically, challenges related to value creation, value delivery, and value capture components of business model innovation need further understanding as well as how alignment of these components drive sustainable industry initiatives. Thus, this special issue editorial attempts to take stock of the emerging research field through a literature review and providing a synthesis of special issue contributions. In doing so, we contribute by developing a framework that communicates and sets the direction for future research by linking digitalization, business model innovation, and sustainability in industrial settings.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate the managerial practices that companies can implement in order to design a circular economy business model and how companies can create and capture value from a circular economy business model.Design/methodology/approachThe paper adopts a single case study methodology with semi-structured interviews and company, supplier, and manufacturing site visits, conducted in a small-to-medium-size Italian company operating in the office supply industry.FindingsThe theoretical setting maps a set of managerial practices for a circular economy business model and sets the research gaps and questions in a research framework designed along three main dimensions: value network, customer value proposition and interface, and managerial commitment. Then, through an empirical analysis, the findings reveal that the proposed dimensions are interdependent and reinforce each other. Moreover, the managerial commitment as moderating factor between the value network and the customer value proposition and interface dimensions is identified as essential for reaching the intended goals of circular economy business models.Research limitations/implicationsThis study maximizes the depth of the phenomenon under investigation by leveraging a single case study methodology, which ideally helps in a theory-testing approach as in the present case. Future research opportunities could be found in qualitative and quantitative studies to increase the generalizability of the findings of this paper.Practical implicationsThe paper presents a set of relevant managerial practices for circular economy business models that can be used by managers who have the will to embrace in practice circular economy principles to support the design, change, or upgrade of the business model of companies within which they operate.Originality/valueAn interdisciplinary approach that integrates the research streams of circular economy, social psychology, organizational behavior, and business model design has been pursued to test the theoretical setting and the research framework for circular economy business models in a real-world context.

The rise of AI technologies is generating novel opportunities for companies to create additional value for their customers by applying a proactive approach, managing uncertainty, and thus improving cost efficiency and increasing revenue. However, AI technology capabilities are not enough—companies need to understand how the technology can be commercialized through appropriate AI business model innovation. When emerging technologies are introduced, business-model concepts often need to be significantly altered. This is necessary to fully capitalize on disruptive technologies because it is just as important to innovate the business model as it is to build advanced technology solutions. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explain how AI providers align value-creation and value-capture dimensions in order to develop commercially viable AI business models. To fulfill our stated purpose, this study has adopted an inductive and exploratory single case-study approach centered on a market-leading provider of AI-related services. The findings are consolidated into a process framework that explicitly illustrates the key activities that companies need to perform concerning value creation and value capture for AI business model innovation and commercialization. The framework explains that AI providers need to follow three phases—namely, identifying prerequisites for AI value creation, matching value capture mechanisms, and developing AI business model offer. We also find that AI providers need to test and develop multiple AI business models and operate them simultaneously to ensure commercial success.

PurposeIn the last decades, business and management scholars have given great attention to intellectual capital (IC), which could seem a mature topic, having arrived at its third wave of studies. However, its intersections with the business model (BM) remain an under-investigated topic, and the authors wanted to investigate two research questions (RQs): how the literature addressing IC and BM has evolved so far in the business and management domains? What are possible future research trends of business and management studies regarding IC and BM?Design/methodology/approachThis study answers these questions through a systematic literature review (SLR) of 74 peer-reviewed articles in the area of business and management. First, a bibliometric analysis was conducted to evaluate what is the current trend of such publications and what are the most relevant articles, authors, countries and journals. Then, a content analysis was performed to aggregate and systematize the results and identify future lines of research.FindingsResults show that most of the studies conducted to date are focused on the aspects of value creation and value capture, with a primary focus on investigating the relationship between IC and firms' performances (e.g. economic, financial and organizational).Originality/valueThe relationship between IC and BM has been quite neglected by the literature, or at least it leaves room for further research lines. For example, little is known about how firms use the various IC assets to leverage new forms of value proposition, new target markets or new sources of revenues. This is one of the first papers systematizing the current body of knowledge on this topic and drawing future lines of research.