Conference PaperPDF Available

Coworking-spaces in Asia: A Business Model Design Perspective

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Coworking-spaces are a recent phenomenon that spreads around the world. Coworking-spaces particularly rise and increase in importance in Asian countries because of the cultural (i.e. collectivism, high-context communication) and institutional contexts (i.e. mega-cities, digitalization, sharing economy) in Asia. Despite the various advantages of coworking-spaces, very limited understanding exists how coworking-space providers can design their business models for the differing user demands and their business models. To close this gap, we take a business model design perspective. We emphasize that coworking-space providers can use four layers of value creation and several value capture approaches to configure their business models along a continuum from rather basic efficiency-centered to novelty-centered full-service business models.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Coworking-spaces in Asia: A business model design perspective
Bouncken, Ricarda B., University of Bayreuth, Germany
Clauss, Thomas, University of Marburg, Germany
Reuschl, Andreas J., University of Bayreuth, Germany
Abstract
Coworking-spaces are a recent phenomenon that spreads around the world. Coworking-spaces particularly rise
and increase in importance in Asian countries because of the cultural (i.e. collectivism, high-context
communication) and institutional contexts (i.e. mega-cities, digitalization, sharing economy) in Asia. Despite the
various advantages of coworking-spaces, very limited understanding exists how coworking-space providers can
design their business models for the differing user demands and their business models. To close this gap, we take
a business model design perspective. We emphasize that coworking-space providers can use four layers of value
creation and several value capture approaches to configure their business models along a continuum from rather
basic efficiency-centered to novelty-centered full-service business models.
Introduction
Building upon the global trends of digitalization and sharing economy, coworking-spaces open around the world
and build a new avenue for business development and innovation for both independent entrepreneurs and
incumbent firms. The first ideas about coworking-spaces developed around 2007 in Silicon Valley and led to a
rise of coworking-spaces ever since (Jackson, 2013). Reports describe that coworking-spaces mushroom in the US
(Jackson, 2013), in several countries of Europe (Foertsch, 2014 ; Schmidt, Brinkhoff, & Brinks, 2013), and in Asia
(Pearce-Neudorf, 2014). Despite its advantages and the rise of coworking-spaces, only very few researchers and
mostly only non-management scholars looked at this new phenomenon (Capdevila 2013; Gandini 2015; Moriset
2014; Pohler 2012; Spinuzzi 2012) overlooking the diverse opportunities for business model development. We
assume that coworking-spaces and their business models will specifically rise and increase in importance in Asian
countries because of the cultural (collectivism, high-context communication) and institutional contexts (Mega-
Cities, strong digitalization) in Asia. Hence, the aim of our research is to deliver a first understanding about the
forms of business model development of and in coworking-spaces while explaining its specific importance and
configurations for Asia.
Coworking-spaces offer their users ‘coworkers’ (mostly self-employed, freelancer, or micro-enterprises) access to
office infrastructure at self-regulated working hours and the potential to interact with other coworkers in the office
and the social space. Coworkers gain an environment for resource sharing (desks, wi-fi connection, conference
rooms, kitchen, office supplies), and community (daily routines, sense of community, social environment)
(Capdevila, 2013; Gandini, 2015; Garrett, Spreitzer, & Bacevice, 2014). Coworking-users have the opportunity to
interact with others, receive feedback, build partnerships, create trust in relationships through co-presence, and to
collaborate with others, and from these interactions improve several aspects of the business model and its
performance. Coworking-space users can form relationships with other ‘coworkers’ who work in the same location
and enjoy the social activities and social interactions as within hierarchical organizations (e.g. joint coffee breaks,
joint lunch, or after work activities) thus reducing the isolation of digital work. Coworking-spaces allow loosely
coupled practices that contribute to the development of a community in the coworking-space (Garrett et al., 2014)
and which specifically provide a social context for individuals from collectivist-Asian cultures.
The varied coworking-spaces around the world take different forms, offer diverse physical environments (common
offices, single offices, conference rooms, 3D printers, conferences facilities, even labs etc.) to diverse target
groups. Self-employed persons, freelancers, and microbusinesses, but also incumbent firms access the coworking-
space’s infrastructure and the social interaction that additionally provides inspiration and other contacts to
entrepreneurs for business development and innovation (Spinuzzi, 2012). Coworking-spaces provide office space
typically in good locations that are overly expensive in cities, specifically the mega-cities of the world as in Asia.
Coworking-spaces reduce the isolation of digital and creative workers that often work in home-offices and who
particularly in Asian countries require intense personal social interaction and context-rich direct communication
for their social well-being and their business development. Coworking-spaces specifically nurture the desire of
digital or creative coworkers from collective cultures that otherwise suffer from a lack of social exchange which
might damage their creative potential for business model development and innovation. Coworking-spaces allow
to work besides or with others, exchanging ideas and contacts – thus improving the freelancer’s or entrepreneur’s
business models through inspiration and feed-back (Kwiatkowski & Buczynski, 2011), specifically in Asian
cultures where individuals need rich direct and high-context communication about both work-topics and non-work
topics. Coworking-spaces allow the pursuit of cultural/social projects but primarily of their users’ business models.
The office and social environment of coworking-spaces generally allows finding mates, new ideas, enjoying the
community, and finding new contacts for start-ups, improving creativity and entrepreneurship in all cultural
contexts. Additionally, coworking-users might take advantage from the involvement in projects from incumbent
firms. When incumbent firms rent office or conference space, they can source need ideas from the users in the
coworking-spaces and implement open innovation projects or recruit personnel. Coworkers might earn money
from inclusion in the incumbents’ projects or might learn from the incumbent firm’s project stimulating their own
business model or start-up. Coworking-spaces additionally can provide a variety vocational training, coaching,
and the access to business angels and investors accelerating start-ups that bring education for entrepreneurs.
Despite the many practical advantages of coworking-spaces for their users in general and particularly in an Asian
context, relatively little is known about the requirements and opportunities for a configuration and design of
coworking business model from the perspective of the provider and the user. As coworking-spaces take different
business models and allow diverse business models of their individual and their institutional users, we aim to
clarify and structure the concept of coworking-spaces from a business model perspective. This piece of conceptual
work will explain the different business model components of coworking providers and coworking users and
develop a first configuration of business model design dimensions in and of coworking-spaces, explaining its
relevance in the Asian context. It contributes to business model research explicating a new and strongly increasing
area for business model design and innovation in today’s digitalized and sharing economy for both start-ups and
incumbent firms.
Business models of coworking-space-providers
Coworking space providers
Different institutions following specific targets and business models provide coworking-spaces. We define the
term commercial coworking-space provider for firms that run coworking-spaces as their (core) business model
aiming for value capture through fees for their infrastructure, space and other services. For (incumbent) firms that
offer a coworking-space to their employees we use the term corporate coworking-space provider. Corporate
coworking providers might also rent out office space for externals for a fee as commercial coworking-space
providers but often aim to capture value through greater creativity and innovativeness of their employees or
internal units through the inspirational advantages and knowledge flows in the cowork. Especially IT-companies
(e.g. Google or Apple) aim on value creation and capture in coworking-spaces to foster creative and open social
interaction exclusive for their temporary and permanent employees. Public coworking-spaces instead are open to
everyone. They might be run by commercial, corporate, or non-profit coworking-space providers, e.g.
governmental institutions or universities. First prominent examples of university coworking spaces are the
Blackstone Launchpad by a group of mainly US-based universities (e.g. Cornell University, UCLA, New York
University), the i-Lab in Allson by the Harvard University, the day-office in Ashburn by the Lakeview University,
the start-up Sauna in Helsinki by the Aalto University, or the coworking-space by the Technical University of
Berlin.
Efficiency vs. novelty-centered business models
Business models in general are structural templates of how firms run and develop their business on holistic and
system-levels (Spieth, Schneckenberg, & Ricart, 2014; Christoph Zott & Amit, 2013; C. Zott, Amit, & Massa,
2011). Researchers identified different design themes that detail the systems dominant value creation drivers
(Christoph Zott & Amit, 2010). In line with previous findings, business models are either novelty-centered or
efficiency-centered in nature (Christoph Zott & Amit, 2007, 2008). Whereas efficiency-centered business models
aim for greater efficiency through reducing transaction costs by limiting the scope of provided contents, definition
of clear and ridged structures and governance mechanisms, novelty-centered business models aim for adopt new
contents linking activities and actors in new ways and keeping governance emerging and flexible (Christoph Zott
& Amit, 2010). In line with this, efficiency-centered business models are primarily compatible with cost-leadership
market strategies and novelty-centered business models allow for a greater differentiation (Christoph Zott & Amit,
2008).
Applying the business model perspective to the phenomenon of coworking-spaces, at the core, coworking-spaces
build a class of new business models providing a novelty centered activity systems that adopts new activities
(content: e.g. space, infrastructure, services) and/or links the activities (structure of renting out resources and
providing services), and/or govern these activities in a new way (e.g. service packages, linkages to incumbent
firms). However, this new concept of coworking-spaces business models ranges from more efficiency-centered
concepts to novelty-centered designs. In particular when adopting a cost-leadership strategy or addressing less
wealthy coworkers that cannot effort an alternative working space, coworking-space provider can focus on
efficiency, reducing costs into their physical resources and by reducing transaction costs by running their business
model. For example coworking spaces use old empty factory facilities and reduce their offers to a very limited
content (i.e. used machines, energy, and space). Other coworking-space providers develop novelty-centered
business models which raise users’ willingness to pay. By providing fancy interior, top of the line equipment,
additional services as well as innovative offers, coworking-space providers can differentiate their business model
and address a clientele that could use or does use other office space but particularly seeks the additional gains
provided by the coworking conditions.
Four core layers of value creation of coworking-space providers
Corporate coworking-spaces typically do not charge fees to their employees and use their internal coworking
spaces for value creation and capture from greater innovation. For example, besides the coworking-concept in
Silicon Valley, the Google Campus in London offers about 500 workshops mostly focused on IT qualification,
some for free, some for a fee. Coworkers organize most of the courses themselves. Thus, the coworking-spaces
function as creativity and innovation hub and as a new form for HR-development. Similar conditions apply to
public coworking-spaces.
Commercial coworking-spaces instead require a business model for creating and capturing value from their
customers (Amit & Zott, 2015). Regarding value creation, four layers can be identified: The basic layer of the
business model of coworking-spaces is the offering of office space which includes business infrastructures (e.g.
desks, printer, and wifi) and the social space that includes a lounge or cafeteria space at least. Coworking-spaces
can provide physical space and infrastructure, e.g. the access to creativity rooms, 3D printers, labs, machine
workshops as well as leisure and sport facilities as an extended or modified business model-layer. In a second
layer, coworking-spaces utilize their position and resources to offer additional physical offerings that are
compatible with the basic value creation layer but not in the core of the coworking portfolio. For example, some
providers provide co-living spaces available or act as brokers to housing. As a third layer, coworking-spaces may
offer diverse services of vocational training, team coaching, start-up-coaching (e.g. business plan training) and
Barcamps for which they charge additional fees or which are included in higher rents. In a fourth layer, coworking
spaces might provide or brokerage of contacts to investors, experts, vacant positions or offers, projects of
incumbent firms. In this case, coworking-space providers act as platform providers that link multisided markets
(Hagiu & Wright, 2015).
Together, the various degrees of diversification of value creation show design parameters, which coworking-space
providers can use to configure business models along a continuum from lean efficiency-centered to differentiated
novelty-centered systems. A focus on the core basic layer provides the opportunity to significantly reduce the
costs. On the other hand, we see a potential to significantly diversify the portfolio of coworking-space providers
and to position themselves as full-service providers.
Examples from Asia illustrate the different configurations of business models for coworking-spaces. Located in
Bali, ‘Hubud’ offers a basic coworking-space comprising layers one and two. Coworkers can use the available
desks, internet connection, and e.g. networking events. ‘Hubba’ in Bangkok emphasizes the provision of services
as constituent part of the business model and offers events to network with other coworkers and venture capital
investors, too. The ‘TechTemple’ located in Beijing and the ‘Impact Hub’ located in Singapore exhibit a more
professional approach towards coworking. Besides the offer of working space (desks, offices, meeting-rooms),
and basic services (networking events), both coworking-space providers offer a variety of services for
entrepreneurs, e.g. individualized coaching and mentoring, business related training and consulting, marketing
support, and e.g. incorporation services. As displayed in table 1, the ‘TechTemple” as well as the ‘Impact Hub’
added a third layer to their business models. Instead of only organizing networking events, the coworking-space
providers add the contact initiation with venture capital investors and business angels as third layer to their business
models. Renting out co-living-space just evolves as an additional layer for the business models of coworking-
spaces. ‘Angkorhub’ in Cambodia offers a complete package for (digital) business nomads who strive for
independent and flexible working in Asia. Angkorhub picks coworkers up at the airport, equips them with local
SIM-cards, and provides a coworking-space with private accommodation.
Table 1: Business model layers for coworking-spaces in Asia
Coworking-Space Hubud
(http://www.hubud.
org)
Hubba
(http://hubbathailand.
com)
TechTemple –
Startup Zen
(http://techtemple.cn)
Impact Hub
(
http://singapore.impacthub.
net)
Angkorhub
(https://angkorhub.com/)
Location Bali, Indonesia Bangkok, Thailand Beijing, PR China Singapore, Singapore Siem Reap Town,
Cambodia
Description Coworking-
space foc used on
work-life
balance
Coworking-space
with foc us on
entrepreneurs.
Coworking-space
with foc us on startup
incubation.
Holistic cowor king for
startups and
entrepreneurs, part of a
global network.
Coworking- and co-
living-space
Pricing Pricing model
for hourly, daily,
unlimited or
event acc ess.
Monthly pricing
model for one day,
5 days, or
unlimited acc ess.
Flexible pricing for
individuals and
teams.
Flexible pricing for
access to selected offers
(e.g., dedicated desk).
Pricing daily, weekly,
and monthly.
Busine ss model
Layer I
Off ice space (e.g.
desks, internet),
technical space
(machines, tools),
and social space
(cafe)
Garden, internet,
open desks,
meeting-rooms,
organic kitchen.
Garden, desks,
meeting rooms,
offices, dining
area, and a café,
fixed telephone
number.
1,800 square meters
office space for 300
cow orkers including
desks, meeting
rooms, offices,
dining area, and a
café.
Desks, meeting rooms,
offices, dining area, and
a café, fixed telephone
number.
Garden, internet, open
desks, meeting-
rooms, café.
Layer II
Extended offering
portfolio (housing,
co-living models)
Private rooms ,
breakfast and lunch,
24 hours access to
coworking-space.
Layer III
Service provision
(vocational training,
start-up coaching)
Networking
events.
Business
consulting,
networking events
including venture
capital investors,
partner matc hing.
Individualized
coaching for
cow orkers and start-
up teams.
Staff members for
assistance, mentoring,
coaching, consultancy
with experts, marketing
support, incorporation
services.
Airport service, SIM-
Cards for Cambodian
network, networking-
events, workshops.
Layer IV
Platf orm business
(contacts to
investors, experts,
incumbent firms)
Regular events
including venture
capital investors and
business angels.
Networking events,
fundraising, global
network, stable venture
capital partners.
As value capture component of the business model, coworking spaces can use and combine different revenue with
the value creation layers above. Today, the majority of commercial coworking-spaces rely on some kind of
subscription based model (Gassmann, Frankenberger, & Csik, 2014). Via hourly payment or via a membership-
model providers offer flexible memberships to their individual or institutional users which covers alternative
models of days, hours, weeks (Capdevila 2013; Gandini 2015; Garrett et al. 2014; Moriset 2014; Spinuzzi 2012).
By payment of the fee, users get access to the office and social space. Users might pay add-ons for accessing single
offices, group and creativity facilities, the use of other technical equipment. Further, some training, coaching,
access too in-house conference might be completely, partially, or not included in the membership. Users thus might
individually pay for additional services or pay for service packages. Additionally, commercial coworking-space
providers can capture value from the fees of training, coaching, Barcamps, recruiting services, conference
organizations etc. The access to more sophisticated or a wider range of services might allow the coworking-space
provider to charge a higher membership fee. Higher membership fees can also come from their configuration of
resources and activities: a good location, a specific interior, a specific menu, service (here: e.g. IT support), and
from the image, spirit, and community in the coworking-space. As the utility of coworking-spaces depends on
network effects and thus a certain number of users, providers can offer freemium models (Gassmann et al., 2014)
in which basic users can use the co-working space for free but additional services or more comprehensive packages
are offered for a comparably high premium rate. Thus, coworking-spaces can develop diverse membership models
covering their different value creation layers and then including or excluding the access to infrastructure and
services in a specific service package. Additionally coworking-space providers earn from selling complementary
goods such as food and drinks in the social space and charge a relatively high price for it (comparable to cinemas
or hotels). They can host projects of bigger incumbent firms that extend their office space or aim to source new
ideas and talents from the coworking-space. Incumbent firms can rent conference space or give presentations in
coworking-spaces to recruit talents or ideas. The individual user of the services then might not always be the one
paying for it. For example, coworking-spaces might charge incumbent firms that rent office space and/or
conference venues and that might integrate coworkers into their projects. Especially, when commercial coworking-
spaces aim for specific industries, technologies or focus on entrepreneurs, incubation, and start-up acceleration
they might take business models as or similar to technology incubators or investors. Incubation programs and
governments might pay the coworking-space. These accelerator coworking-spaces might have stakes and
investments of governmental institutions which promote entrepreneurship in a city or a region. Coworking-spaces
with a focus on start-ups might also offer complete packages for venture development and request shares of the
start-up. Lastly, coworking-space providers can capture value from cross-subvention via third parties. They could
collaborate with equipment providers that might install their hard and software for advertising purposes.
Furthermore, some part of the remaining office space can be rented to third-parties that offer their products or
services to the coworkers.
In combination of the four layers of coworking-space value creation and the different opportunities for capturing
value, multiple configurations of business models can be designed for the local demand in Asian cities.
Business models of coworking-users
Efficiency focus
Coworking-spaces allow physical proximity, probably associated with cognitive proximity coming with intense
face-to-face interaction that facilitates the creation and nurturing of trustful relationships (Capdevila, 2013). Trust-
based relationships always reduce transaction costs related to the search, validation and transfer of information
and new knowledge in every cultural background, but specifically in Asian cultures. Beyond this coworking-spaces
are a place where individuals (freelancer/self-employed) can better execute their business model because they have
better office-facilities than at home, can structure their private and business life easier than in a home-office, can
comfort their life because of more and easy social contacts, take advantage from the community and their
identification with it, and finally increase their business directly by getting access to business opportunities and
ideas for improvement. Thus, coworking-spaces can improve freelancers and self-employed individuals’ operative
and efficiency orientated business models. Similarly, coworking-spaces can help to increase the efficiency of
micro-businesses. The coworking-space helps to reduce production costs by the sharing of the infrastructure and
helps to reduce transaction costs of finding an office, adapting its size to the company growth or decline, finding
some additional manpower, especially when needed temporarily. Also incumbent firms that (temporarily) need
more office space will find the desks, offices, and conference venue of coworking-spaces as a flexible form of
rent. Incumbent firms might get in contact with personnel and freelancers to adapt to capacity changes and to
recruiting demands.
Novelty focus
Coworking-spaces offer independent entrepreneurs and company entrepreneurs the possibility to get in touch with
creative individuals, experts, entrepreneurs, and start-ups. Fabbri and Charue-Duboc (2014) highlight in a case-
study that coworking-spaces drive entrepreneurship through numerous and varied interactions among coworkers,,
the arrangement of the spaces, the ambiance, the events, but above all the personal interactions as the fruit of a
proactive effort. Through personal interaction in the office and social space of the cowork entrepreneurs get new
ideas for the development or innovation of their business model. Independent entrepreneurs and company
entrepreneurs might not only insource ideas but also find mates for their start-ups or innovation projects using the
different layers of the coworking-spaces business model. Personal contacts might improve the development of a
business plan and allow access to investors. Especially as coworking-spaces can provide direct contacts or linkages
to firms, institutes etc. that aim to insource innovation, creativity and new business ideas the coworking-users get
access to institutional partners that can improve their business models or involve them in their innovation projects
or novel business models
Conclusion
Coworking-spaces have many advantages of for individuals, freelancers, entrepreneurs, start-ups, incumbent firms,
and even investors especially in the Asian context where individuals are very open to the new trends of
digitalization and sharing economy and further where rents are very high in the strongly growing mega-cities and
where individuals strongly base their well-being and business upon intensive context-rich direct communication.
The diverse institutions of coworking-providers might follow a range of different efficiency and novelty orientated
business models which provide numerous opportunities for business model development of their individual and
institutional users, also following both efficiency and novelty focused business models. We assume that in the
future coworking-spaces all around the world, but especially in Asia will increasingly take the role as a hub for
independent and corporate entrepreneurs improving or inventing business models in an inspiring innovative social
climate. Entrepreneurs and companies will need to understand how they can best develop new strategies and
practices for using coworking-spaces.
References
Amit, R., & Zott, C. (2015). Crafting business architecture: The antecedents of business model design. Strategic
Entrepreneurship Journal, 9(4), 331-350.
Capdevila, I. (2013). Knowledge dynamics in localized communities: Coworking spaces as microclusters.
Available at SSRN 2414121.
Fabbri, J., & Charue-Duboc, F. (2014). Exploring the everyday life of entrepreneurs in a coworking space. Paper
presented at the XXIIIème conférence annuelle de l'AIMS - 26 au 28 Mai 2014 - Rennes, Rennes.
Foertsch, C. (Producer). (2014 01.12.2014). Deskmag Survey 2014 - Presentation at CoworkingEU 2014 in
Lisbon. [Video - Conference Presentation] Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hutCeXQ9Z6Y
Gandini, A. (2015). The rise of coworking spaces: A literature review. ephemera: theory & politics in organization,
15(1), 193-205.
Garrett, L. E., Spreitzer, G. M., & Bacevice, P. (2014). Co-constructing a Sense of Community at Work: The
Emergence of Community in Coworking Spaces. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2014(1).
Gassmann, O., Frankenberger, K., & Csik, M. (2014). The business model navigator: 55 models that will
revolutionise your business: Financial Times.
Hagiu, A., & Wright, J. (2015). Multi-sided platforms. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 43, 162-
174.
Jackson, K. (2013). Making Space for Others. Retrieved 29 April 2016, from
http://www.makingspaceforothers.com/
Kwiatkowski, A., & Buczynski, B. (2011). Coworking: How Freelancers Escape the Coffee Shop Office and Tales
of Community from Independents Around the World: Fort Collins, Cohere Coworking.
Pearce-Neudorf, J. (2014). Collaborative Innovation: A shared discourse within Phnom Penh’s co-working
community? (1-year master student thesis), Malmö University, Malmö. Retrieved from
http://hdl.handle.net/2043/17537
Schmidt, S., Brinkhoff, S., & Brinks, V. L. (2013). Berlin – a survey: Spaces and Events as Interfaces for
Innovation and Creativity. Berlin: Berlin Government – Senate Department for Economics, Technology
and Research Projekt Zukunft Office.
Spieth, P., Schneckenberg, D., & Ricart, J. E. (2014). Business model innovation state of the art and future
challenges for the field. R&D Management, 44(3), 237-247.
Spinuzzi, C. (2012). Working Alone Together: Coworking as Emergent Collaborative Activity. Journal of
Business and Technical Communication, 26(4), 399-441.
Zott, C., & Amit, R. (2007). Business model design and the performance of entrepreneurial firms. Organization
Science, 18(2), 181-199.
Zott, C., & Amit, R. (2008). The fit between product market strategy and business model: implications for firm
performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29(1), 1-26.
Zott, C., & Amit, R. (2010). Business model design: an activity system perspective. Long Range Planning, 43(2),
216-226.
Zott, C., & Amit, R. (2013). The business model: A theoretically anchored robust construct for strategic analysis.
Strategic Organization, 11(4), 403-411.
Zott, C., Amit, R., & Massa, L. (2011). The Business Model: Recent Developments and Future Research. Journal
of Management, 37(4), 1019-1042.
... Other social attributes of coworking spaces come from the wide range of services and activities, and the considerable acceptance of coworking-space itself as an "innovation hub" Bouncken, Aslam, and Qiu 2020;. Drawing on the literature on coworking-spaces (e.g.,Bouncken, Qiu, and Clauss 2020;Bouncken, Clauss, and Reuschl 2016; and ecosystems (e.g.,Chandler et al. 2018;, we define coworking ecosystems as systems that consists of diverse actors connected by physical, social and institutional attributes of coworking-spaces, which work within one coworking venue but also become connected via first and second order linkages of coworking users. The members of the coworking ecosystems are not only connected by at least temporary coworking-space use, but also by shared values, interacting under shared institutional logics while co-evolving and collectively changing the existing institutions to achieve resource integration and value cocreation.The fast rise of coworking-spaces in Silicon Valley and in urban centers around the world shows how fast institutionalization can happen. ...
... Bouncken, Clauss, and Reuschl 2016;. Thus, an inductive approach following the Grounded Theory is well suited for investigating CWE and how institutions facilitate innovation and legitimation therein(Gioia, Corley, and Hamilton 2013;Strauss and Corbin 1990;Cassell and Symon 2004;Langley and Abdallah 2011). ...
... , we contribute to research on coworking-spaces(Bouncken, Clauss, and Reuschl 2016;, extending it towards our concept of coworking-ecosystems. While we inform about the connection of different levels for understanding the institutional development in this ecosystem, further research on coercive and normative forces is essential. ...
Thesis
Contemporary workplaces are undergoing enormous changes, including visible and invisible forms of transformation. The visible working environments of modern workplaces incorporate more playful interior design and open-plan office layouts and remove physical boundaries between organizations to accommodate the new workforce and working culture. This trend is especially manifested and fueled by the growing number of the workforce embracing coworking-spaces. A more invisible transformation in the workplace points to the ubiquitous adoption of digital technologies. Digital transformation induces the emergence of the digital workforce, redefines the workplace to be more flexible and connected, and modifies the ways and processes in which work is done. Both forms of transformation are interwoven with the concept of sharing, which creates platforms to share resources and promote connectivity. The extant literature on workplaces investigates the phenomena, discusses the ongoing changes, and presents the advantages of embracing these changes. However, the lack of an overview on the impacts and the mechanisms of the workplace evolution might blur the directions of future research and cloud organizations’ strategic decisions concerning workspace design, technology upgrades and talent acquisition. This thesis aims to shed light on the overall changes in today’s workplace and the underlying mechanisms by analyzing the impacts of the sharing economy, spatial settings, and digital transformation. The three parts in this thesis address each of the three mentioned topics, respectively. Part one includes two published research articles and examines how the sharing economy and the induced platforms modify value configurations in organizations, including the operating environment and guiding framework of workplaces. Part two digs into the workplace transformation concerning spatial settings, especially applying coworking-spaces as the research context. Three papers in part two employ distinct theoretical lenses to unravel the structures, processes, and mechanisms of coworking-spaces. Part three seeks to provide a comprehensive and systematic overview of organizational changes from digital transformation through a systematic review of empirical studies on this topic. By doing so, this thesis contributes to the extant literature on contemporary workplaces by developing a more integrated view, incorporating the general sharing concept, changes in spatial settings, and digital transformation. The findings develop an understanding of changing modern workplaces and provide references for organizations to harness the opportunities.
... Coworking spaces may have significant differences in their business models, for example, for-profit or non-profit, public, or private, and international (chain/franchise) or local, yet they all have three common production features that form the foundation of value delivery to customers. These are space (with facilities), extended services and community (Bouncken, Clauss, & Reuschl, 2016;Fuzi, 2015;Zhai, 2017). ...
... Extended services include basic services (refreshments -this may include in the membership fee), business services (workshops/events space renting and services, telephone services, etc.), corporate services (e.g. HR services, accounting, consulting services, IT services), personal services (food delivery, co-living) (Bouncken et al., 2016;Kojo & Nenonen, 2016;Zhai, 2017). ...
Article
Full-text available
In recent years, coworking spaces have not only rapidly increased in cosmopolitan cities, they have been also emerged in rural areas. At the same time, the research interest in coworking spaces privileges cities and urban centres. That means existing research leaves the phenomenon coworking spaces in rural areas largely unexplored. Moreover, in the current scholarship discourse, there is little known about how business models of coworking spaces in rural areas work, given their location disadvantages. Therefore, to fill in this gap in the literature, this current paper adopts a mixed method approach to investigate the similarities and differences of business models in rural and urban areas, with a special focus on value creation, the roles of community hosts, and the evolution of business models. Drawing upon a case study of coworking spaces in Switzerland, our findings highlight that coworking spaces in rural areas adopt different positioning strategy and revenue generation to exploit the advantages of their location.
... Coworking and coworking spaces emerged as a phenomenon of the sharing economy (Blagoev, Costas, & K€ arreman, 2019;Bouncken, Clauss, & Reuschl, 2016) and are especially encouraged by technology. As a trend that is about to change the way we work, coworking is a significant area of interest in organization science and entrepreneurship. ...
Article
Full-text available
Coworking and its merits and benefits have been under heavy scholarly investigation. Also in practice, the phenomenon with its characteristics and manifestations becomes increasingly relevant on many levels and for many different types of people and organizations. But why is that so, and how are the research activities distributed between researchers, countries, and journals? To answer these questions, we first analyzed existing literature and extracted the focal points of the respective approaches. We conducted a cluster analysis on the existing literature by analyzing data from the Web of Science. With these clusters, we show the development of the research stream and how the studies are connected. The findings point towards the relevance of coworking spaces for innovative behavior and knowledge exchange, making them a place for work and social exchange and a tool for pursuing daily work, innovative ideas, knowledge creation, and interaction. With these findings, we contribute to the understanding of this research stream as a whole and provide a deeper understanding of the available studies and how they are connected. This allows researchers to understand where the interest came from, where it is going and how they can contribute to the topic. Our study indicates that scholars should take a broad approach towards the phenomenon coworking. It set food in many different research areas and all of them are important for a holistic understanding, showing potential for interesting studies. On a practical note, the factors that coworking influences need to be rethought throughout the whole work environment.
... Also the design style of co-living structures support community engagement (Ataman & Dino, 2019 ) and they are often managed and operated by external entities who supervise the property (Fix & Lesniak, 2017). These co-living facilities are located both in rural and urban areas and support residents with common work places (Bouncken, Clauss & Reuschl, 2016). ...
... A report shows that co-working spaces are mushrooming in Asia and currently take up 1% to 5% of total office stock and are foreseen to increase between 20% to 30% by 2030 (Bouncken, Clauß, & Reuschl, 2016;Kay, 2016). Co-working spaces particularly have risen and increased in Asian countries because of the culture such as collectivism, highcontext communication, and institutional contexts in Asia. ...
Research
Full-text available
Modern lifestyles do influence Malaysian occupants to work long hours in a day in order to cope with large workloads and to meet a deadline. Majority of the occupants are overstressed, faced with negative emotions that lead to an unhealthy lifestyle. Studies show that nature is able to enhance human well-being by reconnecting human with natural elements in a built environment, which is known as biophilic design. Therefore, this study aims to create a biophilic design guideline to enhance occupants' well-being in heritage adaptive reuse indoor co-working space. This study is conducted in the Heritage World Site (WHS) in George Town, Penang. Mixed method research design was used to collect data from the site. Both qualitative and quantitative data were analysed using the triangulation method to validate the overall data and research by cross verifying the information from multiple methods to gather the data. The results proved that the existing biophilic design patterns do enhance co-workers' emotional well-being significantly and it can be used as design guideline. In addition, this study also investigated different ways of biophilic design patterns application which can affect the quality of biophilic experiences.
... Силата на платформите е именно в осигуряване възможността на разнообразни участници да предлагат, купуват или разменят продукти и услуги в подходяща среда, с минимизирани разходи за дистрибуция и комуникация. 4 Платформите стартират развитието си в контекста на линейната верига на стойността и все повече усложняват бизнес моделите, като премахват посредници и усилват икономиите от мащаба от страна на търсенето. Ключът за успеха на платформите е в способността им да създават стойност. ...
Article
Full-text available
Start-ups ecosystem is growing fast worldwide& for that requirement of office space is also increasing. There are many dimensions of start-up ecosystem and co-working space is one of them. Co-working space is a shared space provide suitable business environment for networking, business relationship with other tenantsand other facilities also. Co-working space provide a diversity which creates an ecosystem of new ideas & innovation. The present study aims to analyse the perception of start-ups from incubators, providingco-working space user Rajasthan as this area is not explored in detail literature. The sample size of study is 72start-ups from Rajasthan availing co-working space service from different incubators. The study concludes that the respondents believe that the co-working facilities provided by the incubators are below market rate and are affordable. The results also reveal that the start-ups believe that they are provided 24 hours co-working space with necessary office equipment.
Experiment Findings
Full-text available
A kutatás célja a gazdaság digitalizációjához kötődő új munkavégzési formák tereinek vizsgálata a vidéki Magyarországon, kiemelten kezelve a közösségi irodák szerepét.
Chapter
Portable computers and wireless internet have transformed white-collar work and made the digital nomad lifestyle possible, which is to work online from almost anywhere on the planet. This research examines the requirements nomadic online freelancers and location-independent small business owners (digital nomads) have in terms of amenities and community in a coworking space, but also how they are willing to pay for these services. Coworking spaces (shared offices) provide a workspace outside the home as well as networking opportunities with other digital nomads. This study builds on Lucia Parrino’s (2015) study on proximity and collaboration in coworking spaces in Milan. The case study is based on interviews with 19 digital nomads and three coworking space employees who lived and worked in Chiang Mai, Thailand, in 2019. The focus lies on the digital nomad experience; the coworking space employees were interviewed to gain an additional perspective on the digital nomad lifestyle. The results demonstrate that there are three distinct groups of digital nomads in terms of workspace usage who nevertheless share a number of expectations as to must-have features of a coworking space. These include ergonomic furniture and a quiet atmosphere, community and networking activities, and the desire for a balance between work and play. Participants also discussed the need to constantly seek out new workspaces as well as alternative payment options in terms of workspace usage, for example via food purchases or room rates. While the fieldwork was conducted before the COVID-19 pandemic, the findings are also relevant for the post-COVID-19 era that has drawn many remote workers out of the capital cities and into regional towns. As such, this research could help businesses attract a wider range of clients to their coworking spaces.
Article
Full-text available
The literature on knowledge creation in economic geography has often focused on the territorial or organizational level, without considering the multi-scalar aspect of innovation and knowledge dynamic. This article contributes to fill this gap by analyzing the knowledge dynamics that take place in localized emerging communities in Coworking Spaces (CWS) as well as their impact at the local and global levels. CWS are theorized as microclusters as they present similar knowledge dynamics as the ones identified in industrial clusters but at a lower scale. As an illustration, the article presents the case of the CWS in Barcelona. The implications for policy makers are analyzed in view of the potential contributions of these microclusters to the local dynamics of knowledge creation and transfer.
Article
Full-text available
Business model innovation is receiving increased attention in corporate practice and research alike. We propose in this article a role-based approach to categorize the literature and argue that the respective roles of explaining the business, running the business, and developing the business can serve as three interrelated perspectives to present an overview of the current business model innovation field and to accommodate the selected contributions of this special issue. We refer to contributions from entrepreneurship, innovation and technology management, and corporate strategy to explicate the three elaborated perspectives and to summarize the main contents of the special issue articles. We conclude by reflecting on main theoretical challenges for studies on business model innovation which stem from the uncertain boundaries of the phenomenon, and we propose some theoretical stances and analytic levels to develop future avenues for research.
Article
Full-text available
Mobile professionals can choose to work in offices, executive suites, home offices, or other spaces. But some have instead chosen to work at coworking spaces: open-plan office environments in which they work alongside other unaffiliated professionals for a fee of approximately $250 a month. But what service are they actually purchasing with that monthly fee? How do they describe that service? From an activity theory perspective, what are its object, outcome, and actors? This article reports on a 20-month study that answers such questions.
Article
Full-text available
We focus on the design of an organization's set of boundary-spanning transactions - business model design - and ask how business model design affects the performance of entrepreneurial firms. By extending and integrating theoretical perspectives that inform the study of boundary-spanning organization design, we propose hypotheses about the impact of efficiency-centered and novelty-centered business model design on the performance of entrepreneurial firms. Tb test these hypotheses, we developed and analyzed a unique data set of 190 entrepreneurial firms that were publicly listed on U.S. and European stock exchanges. The empirical results show that novelty-centered business model design matters to the performance of entrepreneurial firms. Our analysis also shows that this positive relationship is remarkably stable across time, even under varying environmental regimes. Additionally, we find indications of potential diseconomies of scope in design; that is, entrepreneurs' attempts to incorporate both efficiency- and novelty-centered design elements into their business models may be counterproductive.
Article
The nature of work has become increasingly flexible and autonomous, leading many workers to feel isolated and socially adrift as they are increasingly working virtually or remotely. To address this challenge, independent workers are beginning to work in coworking spaces – shared spaces where independent workers do their work alone but together with the express purpose of creating a feeling of community. In this study, we draw on ethnographic observation and interviews to analyze how members of one coworking space work together to co- construct a sense of community through their day-to-day practices in the space. We introduce a performativity lens to research on community in the workplace and develop a conceptualization of community as a co-constructed accomplishment through engagement in a set of community- oriented practices. We identify three pathways to creating a sense of community: espousing, learning, and enacting. Each pathway represents a different form of community work that members can choose to engage in to achieve a desired level of community. The rapidly growing coworking movement offers insights, as uncovered in this study, on how to integrate an authentic sense of community into the world of work.
Article
Anchored in the broad design literature, we derive four antecedents of business model design: goals, templates, stakeholder activities, and environmental constraints. These business model design antecedents are illustrated using interview data from nine new ventures in the peer-to-peer lending space. We proceed with the theoretical development to link the design antecedents to the design themes of business models and conclude with implications for business model research and entrepreneurial leaders. Copyright © 2015 Strategic Management Society.
Article
Anchored in our research on business models, we delineate in this article a future research agenda. We establish that the theoretical and empirical advancements in business model research provide solid conceptual and empirical foundations on which scholars can build in order to explore a range of important, yet unanswered research questions. We draw inspiration on the direction of the business model research agenda by briefly reviewing several distinct bodies of literature adjacent to the business model literature including new organizational forms, ecosystems, activity systems, and value chain. In doing so, we also distinguish the business model concept from seemingly similar concepts that have been proposed by researchers.
Article
We study the economic tradeoffs that drive organizations to position themselves closer to or further away from a multi-sided platform (MSP) business model, relative to three traditional alternatives: vertically integrated firms, resellers or input suppliers. These tradeoffs lead to a comprehensive discussion of the defining features of MSPs. The formal model we develop focuses on the MSP versus vertical integration choice, which we interpret in the context of professional services. A key tradeoff emerges between the need to coordinate decisions that generate spillovers across professionals (best achieved by a vertical integrated firm) and the need to both motivate unobservable effort by professionals and ensure professionals adapt their decisions to their private information (best achieved by a MSP). We show how this baseline tradeoff is impacted by the nature of contracts available to the vertically integrated firm and the MSP, and by the possibility of professionals holding pessimistic expectations when deciding whether or not to join the vertically integrated firm or MSP.
Article
The paper provides a broad and multifaceted review of the received literature on business models in which we examine the business model concept through multiple subject-matter lenses. The review reveals that scholars do not agree on what a business model is, and that the literature is developing largely in silos, according to the phenomena of interest to the respective researchers. However, we also found emerging common themes among scholars of business models. Specifically, 1) the business model is emerging as a new unit of analysis; 2) business models emphasize a system-level, holistic approach towards explaining how firms “do business”; 3) firm activities play an important role in the various conceptualizations of business models that have been proposed; and 4) business models seek to explain how value is created, not just how it is captured. These emerging themes could serve as catalysts towards a more unified study of business models.
Article
We examine the fit between a firm's product market strategy and its business model. We develop a formal model in order to analyze the contingent effects of product market strategy and business model choices on firm performance. We investigate a unique, manually collected dataset, and find that novelty-centered business models—coupled with product market strategies that emphasize differentiation, cost leadership, or early market entry—can enhance firm performance. Our data suggest that business model and product market strategy are complements, not substitutes. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.