نوآوری مدل کسب و کار پایدار
ترجمه نشده

نوآوری مدل کسب و کار پایدار

عنوان فارسی مقاله: نوآوری مدل کسب و کار پایدار: یک بررسی
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله: Sustainable business model innovation: A review
مجله/کنفرانس: مجله تولید پاک - Journal of Cleaner Production
رشته های تحصیلی مرتبط: مدیریت
گرایش های تحصیلی مرتبط: مدیریت کسب و کار، مدیریت عملکرد، سیاست های تحقیق و توسعه
کلمات کلیدی فارسی: نوآوری مدل کسب و کار، مدل کسب و کار پایدار، چالش ها، بررسی، موانع، مدل کسب و کار دورانی
کلمات کلیدی انگلیسی: Business model innovation، Sustainable business model، Challenges، Review، Barriers، Circular business model
نوع نگارش مقاله: مقاله مروری (Review Article)
نمایه: Scopus - Master Journals List - JCR
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.240
دانشگاه: University of Cambridge, The Old Schools, Trinity Lane, Cambridge, CB2 1TN, UK
صفحات مقاله انگلیسی: 16
ناشر: الزویر - Elsevier
نوع ارائه مقاله: ژورنال
نوع مقاله: ISI
سال انتشار مقاله: 2018
ایمپکت فاکتور: 7/096 در سال 2018
شاخص H_index: 150 در سال 2019
شاخص SJR: 1/620 در سال 2018
شناسه ISSN: 0959-6526
شاخص Quartile (چارک): Q1 در سال 2018
فرمت مقاله انگلیسی: PDF
وضعیت ترجمه: ترجمه نشده است
قیمت مقاله انگلیسی: رایگان
آیا این مقاله بیس است: بله
کد محصول: E11340
فهرست مطالب (انگلیسی)

Abstract

1- Introduction

2- Method

3- Underlying concepts

4- Research gap

5- Research questions

6- Discussion and conclusions

Reference

بخشی از مقاله (انگلیسی)

Abstract

The capability to rapidly and successfully move into new business models is an important source of sustainable competitive advantage and a key leverage to improve the sustainability performance of organisations. However, research suggests that many business model innovations fail. Despite the importance of the topic, the reasons for failure are relatively unexplored, and there is no comprehensive review of the sustainable business model innovation literature. This research provides a review of the literature, using a systematic database search and cross-reference snowballing. Its key contributions are: (1) a review of the key underlying concepts, discussing their similarities and differences and offer new definitions where there is an identified need; (2) we identify a research gap; and (3) we deduct research questions to address the gap.

Introduction

Sustainability issues, like growing inequality (Piketty and Saez, 2014) and the deterioration of our natural livelihood (Rockstrom, € Steffen, and Noone, 2009) make the transformation to a more sustainable economic system increasingly desirable. To realise this transition, private business is a pivotal stakeholder commanding the most resources and capabilities (Porter and Kramer, 2011). However, technological advances towards sustainability are increasingly incremental, and many companies find it difficult to meet their sustainability targets. Therefore, innovation on the business model level is required to align incentives and revenue mechanisms to leverage sustainable solutions (Rashid et al., 2013). Business model innovations are suspected to yield higher returns than product or process innovations (Chesbrough, 2007; Lindgardt et al., 2009), and sustainable business models might have the additional benefit of higher risk mitigation and resilience (Choi and Wang, 2009) and yield additional diversification and value cocreation opportunities (Nidumolu et al., 2009; Porter and Kramer, 2011; Tukker and Tischner, 2006). To realise these advantages organisations become increasingly interested in implementing sustainable solutions (Evans et al., 2009). However, many business model innovations fail (Patel, 2015). This has serious economic implications for companies (Chesbrough, 2007) and leads to considerable delays in the adoption of sustainable solutions (Geissdoerfer et al., 2017a, b). Despite the importance of these issues, the reasons for failure remain relatively unexplored. To explore this issue, we conducted a comprehensive review of the sustainable business model innovation literature. We identified various definitions of the key underlying concepts, which we interpreted and synthesised into working definitions. We identified essential research gaps and formulated research questions based on our analysis and thinking. We propose that these and similar questions are addressed by the development of research agendas based on the gap and the proposed working definitions.