Three interwoven
trends that we argue drive the development of new business models and that
drive the need for sustainable business model innovations: (1) the
sustainability problem, (2) digitalization and the technological opportunity
space and (3) changing consumer preferences and lifestyles
Briefly put,
RESTART is an acronym of seven letters that correspond with seven features of
more sustainable business models. They can meaningfully be categorized into
three groups of features (“RE”, “STA” and “RT”, respectively), and the
framework was designed with these three in mind.
The first
category, “RE”—redesign and experimentation—relates to the development that
companies are increasingly faced with the need to redesign their business
models which in turn necessitates controlled experimentation
The second
category, “STA”—service-logic, the circular economy and alliances—reflects
three central developments in contemporary business modeling for
sustainability: the emphasis on services rather than products (or functionality
rather than ownership; on circular business models rather than linear ones and
on alliances and collaboration rather than single companies competing in
isolation
The third
category, “RT”—results and three-dimensionality—relates to the governance and
control challenges associated with implementing a sustainable business model,
which are crucial for its success
REDESIGN rather
than standstill
EXPERIMENTATION
rather than turnaround
SERVICE-LOGIC
rather than product-logic
THE CIRCULAR
rather than the linear economy
ALLIANCES rather
than solo-runs
RESULTS rather
than indulgences
THREE-DIMENSIONALITY
rather than one-dimensionality
Specifically, we
suggest the following propositions about the business models of the future:
…they will
require frequent REDESIGN,
…which
necessitates controlled EXPERIMENTATION.
…and be
characterized by SERVICE-LOGIC
…based on ideas
from THE CIRCULAR economy.
…which will make
ALLIANCES even more important,
…in order to
achieve the right RESULTS
…in a world
where the scorecard is THREE-DIMENSIONAL.
More and more
companies are trying to make the world more sustainable. But not only that:
they are trying to make money while doing so. If companies embrace these
opportunities and take on this responsibility, we might be able to achieve the
so-called green growth: economic growth while reducing the use of resources and
thus the emissions that contribute to a worsening climate. When customers,
employees, investors and other stakeholders place greater demands on social and
environmental performance, openness and transparency, and expect that products
and services are made more sustainable, it becomes less attractive to be the
company that cannot live up to those expectations
More and more
research shows that sustainability and profitability are possible to align and
that improving sustainability performance can even lead to certain types of
competitive advantage that are unavailable to businesses that are not
sustainable. There is a need for both companies that take responsibility for
reducing their negative influence on society and the environment and companies
that manage to find profitable ways to exploit the business opportunities that
arise because of those problems. Fortunately, we see that both things are
happening—although perhaps not quickly enough.
On the one hand,
there are companies that take responsibility for their culpability in
contributing to the problem and consequently take measures to reduce their
negative impact on society and the environment. On the other hand, there are
companies that see potential for solving the problem and consequently build
business models that enable them to offer profitable products and services that
address the footprint made by others.
sustainable
business is about creating a harmonious and sustainable interaction between
economy, society and the environment in which economic activity strengthens the
social and environmental systems they exist within, rather than breaking them
down. Recent research in fact suggests that companies that succeed in
integrating sustainability into their overall strategies and business models
are more profitable in the long term.
The difference
is greater for companies that are relatively more exposed to end consumers
Business to customer (B2C) than for those who mostly sell to other companies
Business to business (B2B). The difference is also greater for companies that
compete on brand and reputation, and for companies that are more dependent on
using large amounts of natural resources.
Every year, the
Global Footprint Network (GFN) announces Earth Overshoot Day (see, e.g., Global
Footprint Network 2011). It is the day of the year when we have used all the
resources we have available that year if we were to manage our resources
sustainably. In 2017, the day fell on 2 August—six days earlier than in 2016,
when it was 8 August. Hence, we are moving in the wrong direction with quite
some speed. We use a full year’s worth of the earth’s resources during the
first eight months of the year, and for the remainder of the year, we borrow
all the resources we consume from future generations.
Currently, the
Earth’s population is annually using more than 50 percent of its resources
and producing more waste, including CO2, than the planet can handle. There are
of course huge differences between countries: while it takes just less than
four “Italies” to meet Italy’s needs, we need more than 12 “Saudi Arabias” to
support Saudi Arabia.
The Stockholm
Resilience Center (SRC) has developed a framework that covers nine planetary
boundaries that are under pressure (e.g., Rockström et al. 2009). Each year,
the center publishes reports in which they attempt to measure the progress in
these nine areas. The nine areas together capture the planet’s carrying
capacity: Stratospheric ozone depletion, Loss of biosphere integrity, Chemical
pollution and the release of novel entities, Climate change, Ocean
acidification, Freshwater consumption and the global hydrological cycle, Land
system change Nitrogen and phosphorus flows to the biosphere and oceans
Atmospheric aerosol loading. One may in fact solve environmental problems by
solving social problems and vice versa. The social boundaries are perhaps less
tangible than are the planetary boundaries.
Redesign Rather than Standstill
A common
denominator of business models is that they reflect how companies create,
deliver and capture value from business opportunities
1. Value creation: How the company
helps customers to solve a problem or perform a job-to-be-done at a given price
(often referred to as the value proposition).
2. Value delivery: The key resources,
activities and partners that are needed for the company to carry out what the
value proposition requires.
3. Value capture: How the company makes
money by means of a given revenue model and a given cost structure.
Successful value
propositions have a coherence between what the company offers and what job the
customers would like done. Different customers have different needs. Therefore,
they really have different jobs they want done. It is important to remember
that the costs of the customer are not just a matter of money. It is also about
time and effort costs. New or existing companies can identify problems that are
not at present resolved in a satisfactory manner.
Value delivery
refers to the configuration of the most important resources, activities and
partners that are needed in order to deliver and be paid for the value
proposition. Simply put, resources are anything the company has, while
activities comprise everything the company does. Financial or intellectual—are
the inputs required to deliver on what the value proposition promises the
customer. It is, however, not enough to possess such resources—the company must
use them to perform activities that enable them to deliver value over time. Value
delivery thus reflects the strategic and organizational conditions that must be
in place for the company being able to create, deliver and capture value over
time. In order to deliver value, they need suppliers and partners, whether to
provide resources the company itself does not possess or to perform activities
it cannot carry out on its own. In this way, partners can unlock new modes of
value delivery for the company.
Innovation is not
just about new products and services—it also relates to innovation of business
models. In other words, changes in the way companies create, deliver and
capture value. This means that innovation can occur in connection with all
three components of the business model:
First, it may be
an innovative value proposition offering new types of value. Second, it may be
linked to value delivery, for example, with regard to the innovative use of
resources or design of value-adding activities alone or in collaboration with
others. Third, it can be linked to value capture, for instance, in the form of
innovative payment models or novel revenue streams.
Incremental
changes take place gradually, while radical changes entail an abrupt break from
existing solutions.
A much-discussed
type of radical innovations are the so-called disruptive innovations. This
refers to new products or services that deviate radically from existing
offerings, typically by being simpler and less expensive
Experimentation Rather than Turnaround
Redesigning a
business model is not done overnight, and it is wise not to risk everything on
one endeavor. To succeed with business model innovations, companies need to
conduct controlled experiments on their business models, in order to uncover
what works and why. In that way, they can increase the likelihood that the
business model will be successful when it is finally implemented in the entire
market.
Experimentation
under controlled conditions can provide insight into what works and what does
not, and it can reduce the risk of innovation. In innovation circles, it has
become a mantra that entrepreneurs should “fail fast”.
If you fail
quickly, be sure to fail in a controlled manner. An important type of business
model experimentation thus relates to conducting controlled trials that make it
possible to assess the impact of planned changes. Most innovations are actually
incremental, and not all sustainable business models need to be radical
deviations from existing business models. We need various players in the market
to experiment together to create this movement—thus creating an ecosystem for
innovation. Creating sustainable and profitable business models necessitates
experimentation with different customers in different markets and with various
ways of delivering and capturing value.
Service-Logic Rather than Product-Logic
Companies
conduct services for their customers, whether they do so by means of physical
products or not. Sustainable business can be furthered by companies embracing a
service-logic across all types of products. This implies thinking in terms of
access over ownership, whether we are talking about sharing services, streaming
services or leasing-like payment models. By building business models based on
service-logic, companies can contribute to improved capacity utilization and
less resource waste.
Filippa K’s
sharing-economic model for the rental of fashion wear that customers would
otherwise have had to purchase. the energy, resources and waste resulting from
the production of even more similar objects could have been avoided if we
had utilized the objects that already exist more efficiently. This is the point
of departure for the sharing economy , which has taken the world by storm in
recent years
The new app Tise
facilitates the reuse of fashion clothing;
The Circular Rather than the Linear Economy
To become more
sustainable, companies need to go from traditional, linear business models
based on “take, make and dispose” to circular business models based on reuse,
resource efficiency, the sharing economy and closed loops. This can counteract
resource depletion, reduce pollution and be a source of cost reductions, new
revenue streams and better risk management for companies.
The
circular-economic paradigm suggests that there are at least three necessary
responses to the problem. First, we need to use resources in a way and to an
extent that does not exhaust resource stocks. Second, companies must design
products, services and processes in ways that lead to less use of scarce
resources and facilitate the reuse thereof. Third, all products and materials must be
maintained at as high a quality level as possible, so that they can actually be
reused.
The design of
such business models can be done on at least five different levels. As we see
from the circles in the figure, companies can rent out their products, which,
for example, MUD Jeans and Filippa K do with clothes. They can also offer
repair services; they can reuse either parts of or all of the products and
resell them; they can refurbish and renew products and they can upcycle
resources and materials and thus reuse them instead of extracting new, virgin
resources.
currently
plastics from the oceans are used to make everything from carpets to shoes.
This is also the concept of the Spanish clothing brand Ecoalf, which produces a
full range of fashion apparel and bags made from old fishing nets and plastic
bottles. Using 235 grams of fishnets, Ecoalf makes one meter of yarn,
which in turn is used to produce winter jackets and other products. Ecoalf is
not capable on its own to conduct the entire process leading up to this.
Therefore, the company has established 18 joint ventures with other companies
in order to collect waste, develop yarn and design and distribute its products.
Ecoalf and its partners have thus developed a business model that enables the
collection of waste and the production of new materials, and thereby novel and innovative
ways of designing, producing, distributing and selling fashion clothes. By
using circular-economic thinking, Ecoalf and its allies turned the plastic
problem into an opportunity. There are numerous business opportunities in the
circular economy, and innovative companies can create value by recovering
resources that have gone astray and putting them back into productive use.
circular
business models build on at least three strategies. First, closing the loop,
that is, ensuring a flow of resources from post-use to production of new
products. Second, narrowing the loop, that is, ensuring resource efficiency and
the use of fewer resources per produced unit. Third, slowing the loop, that is,
ensuring longer product lives by designing for longevity.
Big companies
are making their own systems in which they design long-lasting products and
make money on additional services such as repair, upgrades and refurbishing. Some
of these companies are now starting to rent rather than sell products, which
implies that they regain access to the products after customers are done with
them. Big companies such as Apple, Renault and H&M, for instance, operate
in this way. Ecoalf collects plastic waste, such as fishing nets, and uses it
as an input factor in their products. In this way, the company also creates
jobs for poor people in areas with a large surplus of plastic waste.
Alliances Rather than Solo-runs
To assess the
sustainability efforts of companies properly, we must look at entire ecosystems
of companies and their collaborative efforts for doing business more
sustainably. Arguably, developing such collaborative willingness and competence
will be important in trying to design more sustainable business models. Companies
that manage to build appropriate value-adding alliances can thereby improve
their value capture by getting a slightly smaller piece of a much larger cake. Seeing
the company as a coalition of stakeholders involves understanding it as an
organism that depends on the support of key stakeholders contributing to its
activities and to achieving its objectives.
Results Rather than Indulgences
The important
thing is to solve the problems we face—not who does it or what looks good. In
order to address the important issues properly, prioritization is key. Simply
put, achieving profitability involves increasing revenues, reducing costs or
both. By extension, this applies to the relationship between sustainability and
profitability. For sustainability efforts to pay off, they must affect the
company’s bottom line by influencing revenues and costs directly and/or
indirectly. We show various effects of this type. We distinguish between
efforts influencing the upside positively and efforts that reduce the downside.
Furthermore, we distinguish between efforts that have a direct influence and
those that have an indirect influence on the company’s performance.
These four
effects—higher revenues, lower costs, increased access to intellectual
resources and reduced risk—may perhaps not belong in distinct categories. By
differentiating between upside and downside effects, and between direct and
indirect effects, it becomes easier for decision makers to see how investments
in sustainability may also have effects beyond direct influence in the short
term. To assess materiality involves identifying salient social and
environmental issues that the company faces and prioritizing them with regard
to their importance from economic, social and environmental standpoints. Generally,
companies must take great care in addressing material sustainability issues,
while they may place less emphasis on those that are less material
The first
question is which efforts should be undertaken. The second question is how to
know whether the resources allocated to sustainability efforts lead toward
attaining the goals set by the company and if stakeholders appreciate the
efforts.
First, a company
can offer new or improved types of value to its customers, which may lead
customers to prefer its products or services. Second, the company can attract
resources that would otherwise not have been available to it, such as
employees, investors or partners who are attracted by the company’s
sustainability profile. Third, the company’s sustainability efforts can render
it able to perform value-adding activities that it could otherwise not have
carried out, which can be a consequence of attracting new and valuable
resources or partners. Fourth, the company can take advantage of opportunities
in product markets that otherwise would have been inaccessible, for example, by
attaining a position in the market or a reputation that makes the company more
competitive. the conclusions depend highly on what is measured and what time
horizon is assumed.
What do the drivers of sustainability
efforts imply for how to design the efforts? To answer this
question, it may be useful to distinguish between “push” and “pull” factors for
companies’ investments in sustainability efforts. These factors, respectively,
reflect the negative aspects of the current business model, which “push” the
company toward more sustainable solutions, and the positive aspects of an
alternative, more sustainable business model, which are attractive enough to
“pull” the company toward change.
Three-Dimensionality Rather than
One-Dimensionality
The bottom line
is becoming three-dimensional. To achieve such results, the entire organization
must be designed in a way that renders the company able to become sustainable
and profitable. This requires setting the right objectives socially,
environmentally and financially; it requires measuring and monitoring the right
things and communicating them to those who need the information.
Research on
companies that manage to combine sustainability and profitability suggests that
commitment and anchoring of sustainability efforts at the highest level of the
organization are critical to the success of mobilizing and motivating employees
to comply with the sustainability vision. To succeed with truly
three-dimensional performance, leadership and organizational design must
facilitate it. A key challenge for managers is directing employees’ attention
toward performance along all three dimensions on which the company is measured.
The company must moreover be designed in a way that enables employees to act in
accordance with those goals.
four
organizational characteristics that are particularly important for promoting
simultaneous goal attainment along all three performance dimensions.
1. Assignment of
authority and accountability within the organization and placement of suitable
competence in the right places in the organization
2. Contact with
stakeholders inside and outside the organization
3. Development
and monitoring of control systems and performance indicators
4. Development
of appropriate incentive structures
Being in touch
with stakeholders in this way has an accountability side (“who are affected by
the company’s activities, and what does that mean for the company?”) and an
opportunity side (“who is able to influence the company’s activities, and what
does that imply for the company?”).
Better Dashboard, Better Management
Walk It Like You Talk It
Using incentives
to promote sustainability can be very powerful, and research shows that
companies performing particularly well with regard to sustainability typically
have corresponding financial incentives for managers who are responsible for
such outcomes. the company measured these KPIs and tied a significant part of
executives’ performance-based pay to the attainment of the
sustainability-related goals.
RESTART Before It is Too Late
A Process Model
for Sustainable Business Model Innovation
three major trends
drive this need for continuous business model innovation: first, the
comprehensive sustainability problem, which is both a threat and an opportunity
for companies; second, the technological opportunity space related to
digitalization and the fourth industrial revolution, which renders old business
models obsolete and opens up for completely novel business models, and third,
ongoing changes in consumer preferences, lifestyles and consumption patterns
that make new types of value creation both possible and necessary
We conceive of
The Business Model RESTARTer as a reiterative process model in which we divide
the sustainable business model innovation process into four phases
1. Recognize your business model—understanding
the status quo and identifying the need for change
2. Rethink your business model—identifying
opportunities, threats and possibilities for an improved business model
3. Reinvent your business model—hypothesizing,
testing and deciding on a new business model
4. Reorganize your business model—implementing
the new business model
These two first
phases, recognize and rethink, can be understood as a problem formulation,
while the purpose of the two next phases, reinvent and reorganize, is to
develop and test new solutions and to integrate them in a new business model.
(1) Recognize your business model
Who are your target customers, what
problems do they have, what products and services do you offer them and what is
your value proposition to these customers?
How do you deliver value, that is, what are the key resources, activities and partners that allow you to deliver on your value proposition reliably over time?
How do you deliver value, that is, what are the key resources, activities and partners that allow you to deliver on your value proposition reliably over time?
How do you capture value, that is,
what are your most important sources for revenue and cost?
What are your current ambitions? And
what scope and time horizon do you have for growth?
What are the main negative and
positive externalities of your business model?
(2) Rethink your business model
Which jobs do customers really want
to have done?
Which technological and societal
trends and drivers influence your business model?
Who are the main players in your industry?
Who are the main players in your industry?
How can elements from the RESTART
framework be an inspiration for sustainable business model innovation?
Is there a platform for change and a
culture for a RESTART in your organization? If not: What are the main obstacles
and how can you overcome them?
(3) Reinvent your business model
What are your new ambitions? And what
time horizons and scope for growth do you have now?
Who should your customers be?
What should your new value proposition(s)
be, and how can value be delivered and captured in new ways?
What needs to be true for the new
business model(s) to go to market?
How can you test and experiment with
new business models?
(4) Reorganize your business model
Is there a strong relationship
between the new ways of creating, delivering and capturing value in your
business model?
Are you organized to leverage your
resources and facilitate value-creating activities?
Are you counting, incentivizing and
communicating the things that really matter?
How are you preparing your business
for a new RESTART?
Starting the RESTART
Sustainability
efforts are not a one-size-fits-all phenomenon, and the heterogeneity in which
sustainability issues are most important and which efforts are best suited to
address them is crucial to corporate sustainability efforts in practice.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder