Escaping the Red Queen Effect in Competitive Strategy:: Sense-testing Business Models

International University, Bremen and Harvard Business School; University of Stellenbosch; University of Stellenbosch; University of St. Gallen
European Management Journal 02/2005; DOI:10.1016/j.emj.2004.12.008
Source: OAI

ABSTRACT Most business models are based on traditional ways of strategy formulation and implementation, leading to incremental and not disruptive change in the nature of business and industry practices. The ‘red queen effect’ refers to the red queen’s advice in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass in which she says, in order to stay in a (competitive) place you have to run very hard, whereas to get anywhere you have to run even harder. In today’s knowledge and mobile environments we know that businesses cannot survive by just running harder, but rather by running differently and ‘smarter’ than competitors. The article suggests a sense-testing tool for managers to enable disruptive innovation of business models through corporate examples and case study evidence.

0 0
  • Source
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Usage of software platforms alongside the business transformation potential of information and communication technology enables cooperation between different companies in both open and networked environments. This is possible when multiple actors cooperate in the delivery of services; each one contributes its own resources, and there is an underlying attractive business model for all of the players involved. This research paper investigates the definition process of a cooperative business model, which involves partners from different countries with different levels of technology, different markets, and different statutory regulations. The aim of this paper is to contribute to both theory and practice by introducing an approach for a cooperative business model definition that can be used in instances where there are conflicting requirements of partners who are willing to cooperate. In the case which is analyzed in this paper, the premature identification of the exploitation alternative scenarios among partners, the adoption of a perspective based on customers’ needs by the means of the business episode concept, and the usage of the business model ontology for the description of the structure of the cooperative business model, have helped the different partners to successfully converge to a common and agreed solution.
    International Journal of Electronic Commerce Studies. 01/2012; 3(2):229-249.
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: New technology-based firms, particularly those that develop their business around a new technological platform, are likely to be impacted by globalization, in terms of both pace of innovation and pressure of competition. For these firms, strategic decisions and growth processes are characterized by a deep inter-relationship amongst the processes of internationalization, innovation and entrepreneurship; processes which have tended to be examined independently in distinct bodies of literature. In practice strategic decisions concern each of these processes and address issues such as organizational boundaries, location of the operational activities, what activities to focus on and selection of value partners. The business model by which firms operate needs also to accommodate the spatial dimensions indicated by globalization; and the emergence of global technology markets. Little is known to date about the extent to which business models accommodate or are adapted to internationalization, innovation and entrepreneurship. This paper presents a review of the business model literature from which a generic business model framework is derived, identifying and introducing the main elements of these processes as the firms’ focus, modus and locus. This contribution makes a clear distinction between the business model and the strategy concepts and highlights the relevance of location decisions—not considered by extant business model literature to date. While our discussion draws on the high technology new venture as our primary example, we believe our business model conceptualization has general applicability. KeywordsBusiness model-Entrepreneurship-Internationalization-Innovation-Technology-based firms
    Journal of Management and Governance 01/2012; 14(3):1-32.
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose – In the stream of works showing the semantic dimension as a core concept of the product innovation (e.g. design driven innovation), the paper aims to present a new business modeling approach driven by design and meanings. Similarly to the concept that the product is not represented only by form and function but also by meaning, the entire business model of a company does not transmit economic and technological value only, but tells a lot of the company from a semantic point of view. The work seeks to point out that companies can focus on the management of meanings to “make sense” of their entire business model moulded in building blocks, and realize what the authors called meaning strategy. Design/methodology/approach – After a detailed overview of the theoretical background grounded in the strategy literature and design one, to support the authors' perspective, an in-depth study of meaning strategy performed by illycaffè is presented. Findings – The value of the work lies in underlining that the design driven (product) innovation's application can be extended further than only describing successful (product) strategies of design-intensive manufactures and in the suggestions on how to implement a meaning strategy, creating new meanings not only in the products, but also in the building blocks of a company's business model. Originality/value – The meaning strategy content and action-oriented framework proposed and the matrix business model meanings versus building blocks can become tools to communicate the company strategy's pivotal elements and its evolution and they can drive strategists in developing and managing new/existing meanings and building blocks.
    Management Decision 04/2012; 50(4):718-743. · 1.30 Impact Factor

Full-text (4 Sources)

Available from
Dec 3, 2013