Search results

Business Model Innovation is increasingly created by an ecosystem of related companies. This paper aims to investigate the transition of a manufacturing ecosystem toward electric vehicles from a business model perspective.

The authors investigate an automotive manufacturing ecosystem that is in transition toward electric and electrified vehicles, conducting semi-structured interviews with 46 informants from 27 ecosystem members.

The results reveal that the actions of several ecosystem members are driven by regulations relating to emissions. Novel requirements regarding components and complementary offers necessitate the entry of actors from other industries and the formation of new ecosystem members. While the newly emerged ecosystem has roots in an established ecosystem, it relies on new value offers. Further, the findings highlight the importance of ecosystem governance, while the necessary degree of change in the members' business models depends on their roles and positions in the ecosystem. Therefore, upstream suppliers of components must perform business model adaptation, whereas downstream providers must perform more complex business model innovation.

The paper is among the first to investigate an entire manufacturing ecosystem and analyze its transition toward electric vehicles and the implications for business model innovation.

Today’s automotive leadership faces harsh competitive truths. Six forces will have transformed the automotive world by 2008: (1) an imperative to create value for consumers and shareholders, faster; (2) further consolidation and scale (yet scale alone is not guarantee of success); (3) a greater need for production and process agility, to embrace technological breakthroughs in vehicle engineering; (4) the advent of new disruptive technology in vehicles, and in supply chains; (5) accelerated innovation of products and services; innovation is the differentiator; and (6) Increasing customer expectation of both choice and value. Success in the future will depend on adopting a model that is based on collaborative relationships with suppliers and others. Companies that can assemble the best supply communities and accelerate consumer‐centric innovation faster than their competitor’s network will be the winners. Collaborative product commerce (CPC) provides the framework under which multiple‐company collaborative communities can flourish and deliver long term sustainable value. The transition to a collaborative model requires strategic leadership. The formation of new communities will not happen as a natural evolution from the lower forms of collaboration that currently exist. The benefits of CPC include: shorter cycle times, cost reductions, development of consumer‐centric offerings. Six key steps to CPC are: (1) make collaboration the centerpiece of strategy: obtain a community of partners that excel in customer responsiveness, speed to market, and innovation; (2) anticipate the upcoming disruptive forces and create a collaborative response with key community partners rather than in isolation; (3) work with community partners to identify essential areas where collaboration can create a superior business model; (5) begin working with partners first on enhancing product development; (5) focus on core competencies and eliminate redundant processes; and (6) share value within the community. The mastery of collaboration will prove a defining and indispensable strategy for the automotive leaders that will emerge early in the second automotive century.

This research attempts to empirically expand the Aaker's consumer based brand equity model in hybrid business firms by incorporating after sales service as a new dimension. Exploring and understanding the drivers of consumer based brand equity in a hybrid business context will help in building industry specific competitive barriers and generating brand wealth.

The data were collected from Pakistani adults using a structured questionnaire based on established scales. Convenience sampling was used to gather data from 205 respondents across the major cities of Pakistan. To test the proposed research model the data were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis.

The results support the proposed five‐factor model of consumer based brand equity for the automotive industry. The results support the notion that after sales service is related but is a separate dimension of consumer based brand equity in the automotive sector.

This proposed CBBE model was tested in the automotive sector of Pakistan. However, the automotive industry is special in the sense that it builds brands at dual level. This study only investigates consumer based brand equity at marque level. Future studies can expand on this work by investigating consumer based brand equity both at marque and model levels.

The establishment of after sale services as a separate but independent dimension of consumer based brand equity for the hybrid business organizations provides a fresh reminder regarding the possibilities of new sources for building brand equity. Managers can focus on delivering excellent after sale services to build and enhance the equity of their brands in hybrid business organizations.

This study expands Aaker's brand equity model by empirically establishing after sales service as a fifth dimension for the firms operating on hybrid business model.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a holistic approach to the assessment of dynamic capabilities (DCs). Holistic refers to incorporating all DCs of an organisation relevant for determining and executing the firm's strategy.

A two-phase study was conducted. First, secondary sources, such as media, industry and annual reports, are being used to initially assess CASE (connected, autonomous, shared and electric) and implications for incumbent car manufacturers in a structured way. Second, semi-structured interviews with automotive managers and further automotive stakeholders offer in-depth insights into CASE, as well as incumbents' strategies and the underlying rationale.

The proposed framework for assessing DCs offers a holistic approach and provides new angles of analysis. First, the time dimension is considered using scenarios since timing is vital in strategy and implementation. Second, capabilities are broken down into technological and non-technological, sharpening strategic decision-making of automakers. Third, the analysis considers external VUCA (volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity) as they interplay with internal DCs.

Further testing of the proposed DC assessment approach offers a promising opportunity for future research. This paper focuses on the automotive industry, but it is worth investigating the extent to which the approach can be used in other dynamic industries, such as finance or retail.

The approach proposed highlights the importance and nuances of considering external perspectives in the DC assessment and the relevance of non-technological capabilities in the automotive industry. Thereby, it contributes to the literature on capability assessments and the operationalisability of the DC lens.

Following the recent surge in research on carsharing, the paper synthesizes this growing literature to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current state of research and to identify directions for future work. Specifically, this study details implications for service theory and practice.

Systematic selection and analysis of 279 papers from the existing literature, published between 1996 and 2020.

The literature review identified four key themes: business models, drivers and barriers, customer behavior, and vehicle balancing.

For managers, the study illuminates the importance of collaboration among stakeholders within the automotive sector for purposes of widening their customer base and maximizing utilization and profits. For policy makers, their important role in supporting carsharing take-off is highlighted with emphasis on balancing support rendered to different mobility services to promote mutual success.

This is the first systematic multi-disciplinary literature review of carsharing. It integrates insights from transportation, environmental, and business studies, identifying gaps in the existing research and specifically suggesting implications for service research.

The purpose of this chapter is to highlight the key differences in the production processes of battery electric vehicles (BEV) and internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEV). This exploration not only includes the fundamental physical architectural differences between the types of vehicles but also their entirely different supporting supply chains and underpinning business logics. Many nuanced and less-discussed considerations such as geopolitics, supporting infrastructure, and background policy implications are also covered. This chapter stems from the collection and analysis of secondary peer-reviewed data that is supplemented by verified press publications. The automotive industry moves at an incredibly fast pace, and thus understanding the sociotechnical transition to BEVs requires the additional, timely context of press publications. The overall result of this chapter is a holistic overview of the BEV’s value chain, and more importantly some much needed context for readers to better appreciate the significant implications that are involved. Society is not merely substituting one ‘full fat’ product for a ‘low calorie’ version, but rather we are adopting a new technology that solves some of our problems but comes with challenges of its own. In the coming transition to BEVs, it will be impossible to switch technologies without reformulating various policies and reconsidering how we consume transportation as a commodity or a service. By presenting how society intends to evolve its predominant road propulsion system, this chapter seeks to explain the twists and turns ahead, and offer a glimpse of a more sustainable path forward.

The new digital era brings several opportunities and challenges that accelerate the need to implement digital solutions in organisations. This speed of change creates many questions, but unfortunately, references cases to answer them or general guidelines to succeed are still rare. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to present four cases that illustrate the procedure followed by companies to introduce digital elements in their operations (automotive industry supplier, toy industry, catering company and circuit trainings company). Each case offers inspiration and knowledge about the procedure to introduce digital elements and facilitates the proposal of a general procedure that aims to become guidance for practitioners.

The research implements comparative analysis in a multi-case design. It sensitises the concept of “digitalisation path” as a research instrument. Projects documentation and informal conversational interviews allow the researchers to describe each organisation and their digitalisation path. The interviewees review, enhance and approve the cases. Furthermore, the research compares the paths and summarises the findings into a digitalisation path model that explains the digitalisation of these organisations and it serves as a guide for other organisations.

The digitalisation paths evidence the necessity of business process management to develop digitalisation. Technology is not the goal, but the instrument and process excellence is the driver to introduce new technologies in the operations. Furthermore, the four organisations share a similar pattern and activities within their digitalisation paths.

The multi-case methodology lacks generalisation, but it provides detail over the digitalisation paths.

The paper presents a guideline for practitioners to introduce digital elements in the organisation.

The paper presents a practical perspective to introduce digitalisation in organisations, which is currently rare in literature.

The primary objective of this research is to explore whether total quality management (TQM) firms execute various quality management practices significantly differently from non‐TQM firms in the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) automotive supply chain. The study also aims to analyze differences between different tiers of this supply chain and to examine the relationship between the implementation of quality management systems and adoption of TQM.

A total of 165 datasets collected from ASEAN automotive Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) and their tier 1 and 2 suppliers in five ASEAN countries were tested by using cross‐tabulation analysis and ANOVA with post hoc test.

The results show that firms that have successfully implemented the concept of work standardization or process‐approach through quality management systems (QMS) certification have tended to pursue TQM as the subsequent stage in their quality journey. In addition, the study found that all seven TQM practices – leadership; strategy and planning; customer focus; information and analysis; people management; process management; and supplier involvement – were significantly higher in TQM firms than in non‐TQM firms. Finally, the study found that tier 3 suppliers were less likely to implement TQM practices compared with higher tiers (1 and 2), except in supplier involvement.

The study presents an insight into TQM constructs evolution in the ASEAN region, which has gained increased prominence and world impact as a result of international outsourcing. It therefore addresses a significant gap in the literature about how quality management is deployed in this important region of the world.

This study is exploratory in nature and designed to address poorly documented issues in the literature. The dimensions of regional distribution or spatial organisation of Industry 4.0 (I4.0), including the potential role of clusters, have only recently been addressed, with most available studies focusing on advanced, mainly Western European countries. Although developing fast, the literature on I4.0 in other countries, such as the Central and Eastern European or post-transition economies like Poland, needs to pay more attention to the spatial distribution or geographical and organisational aspects. In response to the identified knowledge gap, this paper aims to identify the role of clusters in the transformation towards I4.0. This explains why clusters may matter for advancing the fourth digital transformation, how advanced in implementing I4.0 solutions are the residents of Polish clusters and how they perceive the advantages of cluster membership for such implementation. Finally, it seeks to formulate policy recommendations based on the evidence gathered.

The methodology used in this study combines quantitative analysis of secondary data from a cluster benchmarking survey with a case study approach. The benchmarking survey, conducted by the polish agency for enterprise development in 2021, gathered responses from 435 cluster members and 41 cluster managers, representing an estimated 57% of the current clusters in Poland. In addition to quantitative analysis, a case study approach was used, incorporating primary sources such as interview with cluster managers and surveys of cluster members, as well as secondary sources like company documents and information from cluster organisation websites. Statistical analysis involved assessing the relationship between technology implementation and the adoption of management systems, as well as exploring potential correlations between technology use and company characteristics such as revenue, export revenue share and number of employees using Pearson correlation coefficient.

In Poland, implementing I4.0 technologies by cluster companies is still modest. The cluster has influenced the use of I4.0 technologies in 23% of surveyed companies. Every second surveyed company declared a positive impact of a cluster on technological advancement. The use of I4.0 technologies is not correlated with the revenue of clustered companies. A rather bleak picture emerges from the results, revealing a need for more interest among cluster members in advancing I4.0 technologies. This may be due to a comfortable situation in which firms still enjoy alternative competitive advantages that do not force them to seek new advanced advantages brought about by I4.0. It also reflects the sober approach and awareness of associated high costs and necessary investments, which are paramount and prevent successful I4.0 implementation.

The limitations inherent in this study reflect the scarcity of the available data. This paper draws on the elementary survey administered centrally and is confined by the type of questions asked. The empirical section focuses on an important, though only one selected sector of the economy – the automotive industry. Nevertheless, the diagnosis of the Polish cluster’s role in advancing I4.0 should complement the existing literature.

The exploratory study concludes with policy recommendations and sets the stage for more detailed studies. Amidst the research’s limitations, this study pioneers a path for future comprehensive investigations, enabling a deeper understanding of Polish clusters’ maturity in I4.0 adoption. By comparing the authors’ analysis of the Polish Automotive Group (PGM) cluster with existing literature, the authors uncover a distinct disparity between the theoretical prominence of cluster catalysis and the current Polish reality. Future detailed dedicated enquiries will address these constraints and provide a more comprehensive map of Polish clusters’ I4.0 maturity.

This study identifies patterns of I4.0 implementation and diagnoses the role of clusters in the transformation towards I4.0. It investigates how advanced is the adoption of I4.0 solutions among the residents of Polish clusters and how they perceive the advantages of cluster membership for such transformation. Special attention was paid to the analysis of the automotive sector. Comparing the conclusions drawn from the analysis of the Polish PGM cluster in this case study to those from the literature on the subject, it becomes clear that the catalytic role of clusters in the implementation of I4.0 technologies by enterprises, as emphasised in the literature, is not yet fully reflected in the Polish reality.