Business models as scientific models: The question of perspective?

IF 1.5 Q3 MANAGEMENT

Human systems management Pub Date : 2022-07-06 DOI:10.3233/hsm-220036

Anita Trnavcevic, Roberto Biloslavo, Tine Bertoncel, Carlo Bagnoli, A. Janeš, B. McKenna, Çağri Bulut

{"title":"Business models as scientific models: The question of perspective?","authors":"Anita Trnavcevic, Roberto Biloslavo, Tine Bertoncel, Carlo Bagnoli, A. Janeš, B. McKenna, Çağri Bulut","doi":"10.3233/hsm-220036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND: In the last 15 years, theoretical discussions, and empirical research on the domain of business models have grown significantly. Different authors understand and focus on either constituencies of business models or narratives. The question remains what the predictive value of business model is. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this interdisciplinary conceptual paper is to investigate and discuss business models as scientific models. METHODS: This article is conceptual, although previous studies on business models enrich this discussion. RESULTS: A narrative perspective on business models shows that they also have a predictive value that is expressed through language not in numbers, maps, and diagrams. The process of reflexivity that is contextualised and bounded in the form of a narrative lies at the centre of designing and changing the business model. The article provides substantial discussion on business models as scientific models, and their predictive power. These concepts have not been deeply discussed yet. CONCLUSIONS: An argument is provided to support the proposition that business models can be considered as scientific models that is, however, embedded in specific organizational, cultural, and technological contexts. Future research needs to be directed towards the empirical analysis of narratives in companies.","PeriodicalId":13113,"journal":{"name":"Human systems management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human systems management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/hsm-220036","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the last 15 years, theoretical discussions, and empirical research on the domain of business models have grown significantly. Different authors understand and focus on either constituencies of business models or narratives. The question remains what the predictive value of business model is. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this interdisciplinary conceptual paper is to investigate and discuss business models as scientific models. METHODS: This article is conceptual, although previous studies on business models enrich this discussion. RESULTS: A narrative perspective on business models shows that they also have a predictive value that is expressed through language not in numbers, maps, and diagrams. The process of reflexivity that is contextualised and bounded in the form of a narrative lies at the centre of designing and changing the business model. The article provides substantial discussion on business models as scientific models, and their predictive power. These concepts have not been deeply discussed yet. CONCLUSIONS: An argument is provided to support the proposition that business models can be considered as scientific models that is, however, embedded in specific organizational, cultural, and technological contexts. Future research needs to be directed towards the empirical analysis of narratives in companies.

查看原文本刊更多论文

商业模式作为科学模式：视角问题？

背景：在过去的15年里，关于商业模式领域的理论讨论和实证研究显著增长。不同的作者理解并关注商业模式或叙事的支持者。问题仍然是商业模式的预测价值是什么。目的：这篇跨学科概念论文的目的是将商业模式作为科学模型进行研究和讨论。方法：这篇文章是概念性的，尽管之前对商业模式的研究丰富了这一讨论。结果：商业模式的叙述视角表明，它们也具有预测价值，通过语言而不是数字、地图和图表来表达。以叙事的形式被情境化和限制的自反性过程是设计和改变商业模式的核心。这篇文章对商业模型作为科学模型及其预测能力进行了实质性的讨论。这些概念尚未得到深入讨论。结论：提供了一个论点来支持这样一个命题，即商业模式可以被视为科学模式，然而，它嵌入了特定的组织、文化和技术背景中。未来的研究需要针对公司叙事的实证分析。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Human systems management MANAGEMENT-

CiteScore

3.50

自引率

30.40%

发文量

期刊介绍： Human Systems Management (HSM) is an interdisciplinary, international, refereed journal, offering applicable, scientific insight into reinventing business, civil-society and government organizations, through the sustainable development of high-technology processes and structures. Adhering to the highest civic, ethical and moral ideals, the journal promotes the emerging anthropocentric-sociocentric paradigm of societal human systems, rather than the pervasively mechanistic and organismic or medieval corporatism views of humankind’s recent past. Intentionality and scope Their management autonomy, capability, culture, mastery, processes, purposefulness, skills, structure and technology often determine which human organizations truly are societal systems, while others are not. HSM seeks to help transform human organizations into true societal systems, free of bureaucratic ills, along two essential, inseparable, yet complementary aspects of modern management: a) the management of societal human systems: the mastery, science and technology of management, including self management, striving for strategic, business and functional effectiveness, efficiency and productivity, through high quality and high technology, i.e., the capabilities and competences that only truly societal human systems create and use, and b) the societal human systems management: the enabling of human beings to form creative teams, communities and societies through autonomy, mastery and purposefulness, on both a personal and a collegial level, while catalyzing people’s creative, inventive and innovative potential, as people participate in corporate-, business- and functional-level decisions. Appreciably large is the gulf between the innovative ideas that world-class societal human systems create and use, and what some conventional business journals offer. The latter often pertain to already refuted practices, while outmoded business-school curricula reinforce this problematic situation.