Conference PaperPDF Available

Mobility as a Service business and operator models


Abstract and Figures

Mobility as a Service (MaaS) is an emerging concept, which offers a new holistic perspective on how to organise and implement mobility service concepts in the future. The MaaS concept strongly relies on the ongoing digitalisation development, which is currently and rapidly changing the traditional transport system and the roles of key stakeholders. However, the path to that future is not clear, since factors like laws, regulations, regional differences, market size, current market shares, active stakeholders and key actors in the market significantly affect the development of potential Maas business models. The purpose of this paper is to present and analyse some of the existing MaaS business models addressed in the MaaSiFiE project, in which business model cases have been analysed and a state-of-the-art survey has been conducted, including a stakeholder questionnaire gathering different views of MaaS as input for developing a European roadmap for MaaS deployment.
Content may be subject to copyright.
12th ITS European Congress, Strasbourg, France, 2017
Mobility as a Service business and operator models
Jenni Eckhardt1*, Aki Aapaoja1, Lasse Nykänen1, Jana Sochor2
1. VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Ltd, Finland,
P.O. Box 1000, FI-02044 VTT, Finland, +358 40 7505615,
2. Chalmers University of Technology, Division of Design & Human Factors
SE-412 96 Gothenburg, Sweden, tel +46 31 772 1477,
Mobility as a Service (MaaS) is an emerging concept, which offers a new holistic perspective on how
to organize and implement mobility service concepts in the future. The MaaS concept strongly relies
on the ongoing digitalization development, which is currently and rapidly changing the traditional
transport system and the roles of key stakeholders. However, the path to that future is not clear, since
factors like laws, regulations, regional differences, market size, current market shares, active
stakeholders and key actors in the market significantly affect the development of potential Maas
business models. The purpose of this paper is to present and analyze some of the existing MaaS
business and operator models addressed in the MaaSiFiE project, in which business model cases have
been analyzed and a state-of-the-art survey has been conducted, including a stakeholder questionnaire
gathering different views of MaaS as input for developing a European roadmap for MaaS deployment.
Mobility as a Service, MaaS, business models, mobility, transport, services
Current megatrends, such as urbanization, climate change, globalization, digitalization and
demographic shifts are constantly affecting the movement of people and goods some changes
happen faster and some slower. However, most of these megatrends are causing pressure to intensify
and decarbonize the current transport system. For example, when housing is concentrated in urban
areas and the current transport system is strongly based on the usage of private cars, it is difficult to
reduce congestions and emissions with traditional transport solutions. However, digitalization can be
seen as an exception to other megatrends, because at the moment the common understanding is that
digitalization will mostly result in positive impacts in the transport sector by offering new kinds of
solutions. In general digitalization and IT-related services are seen to provide new solutions and
improvements to connectivity, transparency, situational awareness and effectiveness of the transport
system. (1)
Mobility as a service (MaaS) is an emerging mobility concept that heavily relies on digitalization and
an end-user oriented approach. The great vision in the MaaS concept is to connect all available
transport and mobility services together in a one-stop-shop package and hence offer an agile,
Mobility-as-a-service business and operator models
sustainable and effective competitor to private cars, which can be tailored according to the needs of
end users. Since the MaaS concept is holistic and still emerging, it can be defined and approached
from many different points of view, but the definition adopted in this paper is the same definition
within the MaaSiFiE project, namely: “Multimodal and sustainable mobility services addressing
customers' transport needs by integrating planning and payment on a one-stop-shop principle” (2).
This paper presents and analyzes existing business models of MaaS operators, which have been
identified in the ongoing international research project titled Mobility as a Service for Linking Europe
(MaaSiFiE). The paper consists of seven sections, where the first two present a general background
and connect the paper’s context to the theoretical background. Sections 3 and 4 describe the
methodology employed and the MaaS cases analyzed in the MaaSiFiE project are presented in the
fifth section. Section 6 consists of the main findings and Section 7 summarizes the paper.
Building a competitive advantage through a business model
Every successful company has a sound business model (3; 4). Various definitions of a business model
exist, for instance a business model explains how enterprises work (4). A successful business model
answers fundamental questions such as “Who are the customers and what do they value?”, “How is
money generated in this business?”, and “How can the value be delivered to customers at an
appropriate cost?” Business models force managers to thoroughly think about their business and assess
how well all the elements of a system fit together as a whole (4).
Some researchers have defined business models more formally. Most of them relate to the company’s
logic for creating and capturing value, which are the most fundamental functions that all organizations
must perform to survive and stay competitive (5). Osterwalder and Pigneur (6) state that: “a business
model describes the rationale of how an organization creates, delivers, and captures value”. Business
model innovation is the only way to avoid competition even temporarily. Additionally, a business
model itself can provide a competitive advantage if the model is sufficiently differentiated to meet
particular customer needs and is hard to replicate (7). An appropriate business model is also required
for commercialization of new ideas and technologies, otherwise they have no objective value and their
economic value will remain latent (8).
A business model is usually described as containing three elements that give an explanation of how
value is created: value proposition and offering, value creation system, and revenue model (i.e., value
capturing) (9). A business model is built on customer value since the ultimate purpose for a buyer and
seller engaging in a relationship is to work together in a way that creates value for them. Sometimes
value is just defined monetarily, although nowadays a broader definition is often utilized that also
includes non-monetary revenues, such as competitive advantage, competence, customer experience,
market position and social rewards.
Mobility-as-a-service business and operator models
Successful companies find a way to create customer value (4), but only some companies have been
able to define and measure created customer value (e.g. 10). To make customers focus more on total
costs (i.e., life-cycle) rather than only on acquisition price, a supplier must have a clear understanding
of what is of value to their customers. The offering covers the output of the value creation system
including both products and services. Companies strive to solve customers’ problems and satisfy their
needs with the offering and hence the primary objective of any offering is to provide value to a
particular customer segment (7). The last part of the business, value capturing, is commonly forgotten
(6). Unfortunately, this means that companies also fail to capture revenues relative to the value they
create. Value capturing measures a company’s ability to translate its value proposition into revenue
streams (11). Usually, companies do not have just a single revenue stream because they may have
different pricing models for different services or products. Therefore, their revenue models should be
in line with the markets in which they compete.
Background and methodology
In this paper, the findings and analyzes are mainly based on qualitative data. Data has been gathered
via a literature review and expert interviews, which were conducted within the MaaSiFiE project
during the spring of 2016. MaaSiFiE (Mobility as a Service for Linking Europe) is a two-year project
financed by the CEDR (Conference of European Directors of Roads) Transnational Road Research
Programme (12). The goal of the project is to analyze the state-of-the-art and future trends of Mobility
as a Service concepts including multimodal traveler information services, ticketing/payment systems
and multimodal or sharing concepts. The MaaSiFiE project also develops business and operator
models, as well as analyes potential impacts, technological requirements and interoperability issues,
legal enablers and challenges. The main expected results of the MaaSiFiE project are a medium-term
European Roadmap 2025 and recommendations for the implementation of MaaS. The roadmap
includes roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders, and especially national road
administrations. Thus, the understanding of different existing and emerging business models is seen to
be crucial to the MaaSiFiE project and all the MaaS stakeholders.
During the project, a literature review helped identify existing MaaS pilots and operators and form a
general understanding of the business and operation models by which MaaS service providers are
operating. Also, the literature review was used to connect MaaS business models to the general
theoretical background of business models. Since the MaaS concept is still emerging, the availability
of MaaS-related scientific papers is still very limited and thus the main focus of the literature review
was on the websites of the MaaS operators and pilots.
Expert interviews (Table 1) were used to form a more enhanced and profound understanding of the
business and operation models of the identified MaaS business model cases. The expert interviews
were a necessary part of the data collection, since the public websites of the operators are mainly
directed to the exact target audience, i.e., end users, and thus operation and business models are
Mobility-as-a-service business and operator models
explained only generally on websites. Analyzed MaaS business model cases are listed and explained
below in the next section.
Since informal discussion and flexibility were seen as being essential to this research, the interview
questions were kept relatively broad and loosely defined. The primary object of the interviews was to
form a solid understanding of both current and expected potential business models, transport service
providers and service descriptions, and combinations/packages in different regional areas. Because
MaaS touches various societal levels and hence multiple stakeholders, the interviews were conducted
both with public organizations (e.g., public and road authorities) and private organizations (e.g.,
service and product providers) in order to reveal roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders.
Table 1 Interviewed organizations
ASFINAG, Austria
VR, Finland
SNCF, France
E-Mobility, Austria
Victoria Swedish
ICT, Sweden
Finnish Taxi, Finland
Gothenburg University,
Sunfleet carsharing, Sweden
DLR, Germany
Tuup, Finland
Tieto, Finland
Trivector, Sweden
Ubigo Innovation,
MaaS Global, Finland
Forum Virium Helsinki,
Finnish Transport Agency,
Telia Company,
Region of Västra
Götaland, Sweden
Ministry of Transport and
Communications, Finland
Finnish Transport Safety
Agency, Finland
Sito, Finland
Siemens, Finland
Samtrafiken, Sweden
ÖBB, Austria
Västtrafik public
transport, Sweden
ÅF Consulting,
Trafikkontoret, Gothenburg,
Vinnova, Swedish
innovation agency, Sweden
Mobisoft, Finland
PayiQ, Finland
MaaS business model cases
The MaaS business model cases analyzed in this paper are: MaaS Global Whim; Tuup; Telia
Company Finland Ylläs Around and Sonera Reissu; Helsinki Region Transport (HRT) Kutsuplus;
Sito Kätevä Seinäjoki; SNCF iDVROOM, iDCAB, iDAVIS, iDPASS; UbiGo; and
SMILE/Beam-Beta. Each of these cases is described in more detail below.
MaaS Global (Finland)
Maas Global is a privately owned mobility service provider, which was established in 2015 by a group
of Finnish national and international transport and mobility service providers. At the end of 2016 Maas
Global launched its Whim application. Through the Whim application Maas Global offers three kinds
of mobility packages on a monthly basis based on user mobility demand and also a travel package on a
pay-as-you-go basis. (13)
Whim includes travel planning, routing and ticketing for mobility services like taxis, rental cars, and
public transport, and hopes to add bikesharing. The application uses travel history data and
Mobility-as-a-service business and operator models
synchronizes mobility needs with the user’s calendar. For the end users, the use of application is free
but the user pays for the mobility services via their package’s mobility points, which can also be
earned by using the application based on sustainable and smart mobility choices. All the fees and
pricings used in the service are based on the bilateral agreements between MaaS Global and transport
service providers. (13)
Tuup (Finland)
Tuup is a Finnish service providing access for users to all the transportation options through one
mobile application. The Tuup service is marketed for end users, cities and municipalities and for
enterprises that want to enhance the cost-effectiveness of work-related trips and to ensure that
employees use sustainable transport solutions. Tuup offers users information on the prices, routes and
timetables of all kinds of transportation, be it public transportation, taxis, rental cars, bicycles or a
combination of these. The Turku Region Traffic, also known as Föli, was the first mobility service
offering ticket purchase via Tuup. (14). Tuup has also launched Kyyti taxi-pooling service in Oulu,
Northern Finland. Kyyti offers dynamically priced taxi rides and it is a first-/last-mile solution.
The Tuup mobile application has been available since April 2016 and currently the service includes the
following features: a comprehensive route planner and daily travel plan optimized according to the
user’s travel history data, and integrated searching, paying and use of mobility services. The service
presents general statistics and some key societal effects about the mobility choices, and also provides
information and reminders about upcoming trips, deviations, pick-up locations and the general
real-time traffic situation. During 2017, Tuup Ltd. and Vinka Ltd together with the Sohjoa project are
planning to start a demand-responsive automated robot bus service in the city of Tampere.
Telia Company Finland: Ylläs Around (Finland)
Telia Company’s Ylläs Around public-private-partnership (PPP) service is a MaaS pilot in the Ylläs
ski resort area in Northern Finland that started in spring 2016. The service is a part of the Aurora
Snowbox test ecosystem and is operated by Telia Company in cooperation with other main
stakeholders: local transport operators, local municipality Kolari, Ylläs Travel Association and the
Finnish Transport Agency. (15)
The main idea in the Ylläs Around pilot is to offer one-stop-shop transport services in the Ylläs ski
resort area and between the Ylläs area and the main local transport hubs, Kittilä airport and Kolari
railway station. The Ylläs Around pilot includes multimodal transport services, which are all available
for end users through a mobile application. The application also includes payment and ticketing
features. All the fees and prices are based on bilateral agreements between the MaaS operator and
transport service providers, such as fixed taxi prices and minor commission fees on re-sold bus trips.
Mobility-as-a-service business and operator models
Telia Company Finland: Sonera Reissu (Finland)
Sonera Reissu offered (pilot was executed in 2016) transport services in the city of Hämeenlinna for
rail/bus and (shared) taxi. The idea in the Reissu service was that end users can pay for their trip on a
one-stop-shop basis via a mobile application. The Reissu application used mobile payment and
ticketing and it combined both taxi and train/bus trips on the same ticket, but it preserved separate
ticket IDs according to the service providers’ ticketing systems. Sonera Reissu used fixed prices with
taxi companies and takes a minor commission fee on re-sold train tickets. (16)
HRT Kutsuplus (Finland)
HRT (Helsinki Regional Transport) Kutsuplus service was one of the first large-scale pilots which
aimed to reinvent carpooling for the algorithm age. The public transport operation started in 2013 and
lasted until the end of 2015 (eventually the number of vehicles reached 15). The main idea in the pilot
project was to tempt motorists to switch to public transport by offering a service combining traditional
taxi and city bus services into one, on-demand minibus service. (17)
Kutsuplus used an algorithm to optimize and route scheduled and spontaneous trips heading roughly in
the same direction. The Kutsuplus service was available only during the day in the Helsinki
metropolitan area, where it offered the option to travel in the city area cheaper than with a traditional
taxi service but much more flexibly than with the normal public transport bus service that only has
fixed routes. To get a ride required one to log into a website and fill in the origin and destination, and
finally walking to the closest bus stop to wait for the pick-up. The price depended on trip distance, a
number of passengers, and how soon until pick-up time. In particular, Kutsuplus offered a good option
for transverse traveling against main public bus lines to and from the Helsinki city center. (17)
Sito (Finland)
Sito Ltd. is coordinating a MaaS pilot named Kätevä Seinäjoki in the municipality of Seinäjoki, which
started in November 2016. N.B. the Finnish word “Kätevä” means handy or useful in English. The
pilot is funded by Tekes, the Finnish Innovation Agency. Kätevä integrates traditional bus and taxi
services and hence offers more agile and useful travel chains via a mobile application. The pilot
includes a test group of 20 travelers and the following services: taxi, shared taxi, demand-responsive
and traditional route- and schedule-based public transport, city bikes and walking. The service offers
three different priced monthly packages. The test group will be enlarged and more services will be
added in the future. The Kätevä application is available for IOS and Android. (22)
SNCF (France)
SNCF is France's national, state-owned railway company, which has created several new
multimodal services and service combinations. The aim of the development is to tempt more train use
via improved customer relations and integrated services, and the results have been positive. The idea is
to be able to provide door-to-door services that can also be integrated with international services. To
Mobility-as-a-service business and operator models
this end, SNCF has initiated several mobility initiatives:
iDVROOM is a car pooling service. Regular users have a guaranteed return journey by taxi if
the driver unexpectedly cannot bring one back. iDVROOM users also have a free automatic toll
badge, no management costs, and a monthly downloadable invoice. (18)
iDCAB is a taxi or car-with-a-driver service with fixed price and advance payment. The
reservation can be done on the website iDCAB or using the iDPASS application. (19)
iDAVIS service enables simultaneous booking of rental car and train ticket, and offers reduced
prices depending on if the user has a discount or loyalty card. The service is available at over
170 railway stations in France and over 90 stations in Europe. (20)
iDPASS is a mobile application for door-to-door transportation planning for the first and last
mile. The services included via application are: Wattmobile, a self-service electric vehicle rental
service; Zipcar, a self-service car rental/sharing service; bikesharing, where the application
shows the locations of self-service bicycle stations and the number of available bicycles;
Parking feature, where the application visualizes the parking places available nearby and
general information on how to get there. (21)
UbiGo (Sweden)
In Gothenburg, Sweden, the Go:Smart project ran a six-month Field Operational Test (FOT) of the
UbiGo service from November 2013 through April 2014, involving around 200 participants from
private, urban households. The goal was to test the business concept and the service looked to lessen
or eliminate the need to own a (second) private car. Although the end-users were highly satisfied and
used the service to test new and more sustainable travel behaviors, the service was discontinued after
the pilot ended, mainly due to difficulties in finding a cooperative model that worked for both the
region/PT-provider and UbiGo as an emerging private, commercial service (24-25).
UbiGo operated on a reseller basis, based on bilateral agreements with transport service providers. Its
features and services included; access to public transport, bike sharing, car sharing, taxi and rental
cars; a personalized, monthly household subscription (and single invoice); a customer service phone
line open 24 hours per day; subscription access via a smartphones, in which users could activate
tickets/trips, make/check bookings, etc.; a smartcard, used for instance to check out a bicycle from the
bikesharing service or unlock a booked car, but also charged with extra credit for the public transport
system in case there was any problem using the UbiGo service.
BeamBeta/WienMobil-Lab (initiated by the SMILE project)
The SMILE project, which ended in 2015, provided an integrated mobility platform based on the
multimodal traveler information platform VAO (Verkehrsauskunft Österreich), which was initiated
through public transport associations and public financed projects. As a follow-up to SMILE,
Beam-Beta is in development. Mainly public/or partly public-owned organizations are involved in the
SMILE and Beam-Beta pilot activities.
Mobility-as-a-service business and operator models
The central part of both pilots is providing integrated multimodal information services together with
ticketing/payment and shared-mobility features, such as real-time routing based on dynamic
timetables, LoS and traffic events information (including road, public transport, trains, cycling,
walking and intermodal transfer points, known as P+R stations). Both pilots provide all different
services over one common interface and offer a one-stop-shop principle to travelers. The SMILE FOT
was conducted with 1000 external users having tested SMILE over several months with positive
effects on transport mode usage (based on questionnaire results), e.g. 26 % of respondents answered
that they have changed their habits towards less use of private cars.
MaaS business and operator models
The MaaS concept is strongly built upon digitalization and further on a platform approach. For the
transport sector this is a new way of thinking and it may need time to gain acceptance from end users
as well. However, it also requires integrated agile solutions which not only require a more
comprehensive understanding of available solutions and customers’ needs, but also exploitation of new
value capturing models. MaaS operators are operating in the interface between customers and service
providers and thus it is essential to understand the needs of both and to enable the development of
agile, integrated solutions by providing a working middleware environment or B2C interface with
various fit-for-purpose payment methods.
According to the MaaS operator business model analysis, all MaaS business models have in common a
wide range of key partners and customers as well as revenue streams. Thus this also illustrates the
business potential of MaaS. A wide range of engaged stakeholders enables but also requires the
extensive development and provision of interoperable and integrated services, where some actors
attract more customers than others. Based on the case analysis, various business models with different
approaches exist when the MaaS operator can be either a private or a public entity. Figure 1 describes
two operator models reseller and integrator that are managed by commercial and private MaaS
operators. In the reseller model, multiple services from various transport service providers (TSPs) are
combined and offered to end users via one interface. The integrator model includes both traditional
transport services and some extra services/features from a mobile service provider (MSP), which could
provide key enabling technologies and services such as mobile ticketing and payment.
Figure 1 - Commercial MaaS operator models (24).
Mobility-as-a-service business and operator models
The public transport service operator (Figure 2) is a typical and traditionally very essential actor in the
transport sector. As a MaaS operator, the public transport operator aims to enrich its services by
integrating other transport-related services into its normal service portfolio. These additional services
could include taxis, carpooling, city bikes and some comprehensive digital services, e.g. mobile
ticketing and payment, and multimodal planner and (re)routing, which are provided by the MSP.
Figure 2 - Public transport operator as MaaS operator and PPP MaaS operator models (24).
Figure 2 also illustrates the public-private partnership (PPP) MaaS operator model, which in this case
is mainly based on the Kätevä Seinäjoki/Sito case in Finland. As described above, in Kätevä Seinäjoki,
the MaaS pilot is a collaboration in which Sito Ltd. (a consulting and planning company), the
municipality of Seinäjoki, and local transport operators are cooperating and offering a new kind of
Mobility as a Service in the Seinäjoki area.
Unlike other MaaS operator business models, the PPP MaaS operator business model also includes
local logistics service providers (LSP) in the MaaS service together with TSPs and MSPs. In addition
to these services, Kätevä Seinäjoki also aims to intensify statutory social service transportation (SST),
i.e. trips for disabled and elderly persons, etc., by connecting the organizations responsible for these
trips to the MaaS service. According to the initial results and findings, the PPP MaaS business model
could be especially suitable in rural or sparsely populated areas, where overall transport volumes are
low but travel distances are relatively long. In this kind of environment, efficiency is a key enabler and
thus combining logistics services as well as school and statutory social service transportation with
MaaS is seen to be an efficient solution for future development. N.B. while all operator models can
include logistics services and other additional services, the PPP model usually integrates logistics
services from the beginning due to available transport capacity and long distances.
Regardless of the MaaS operator model, stakeholders and service agreements between the MaaS
operator and transport operators vary. It is also important to point out that one MaaS service can
include different service agreements. The recognized service agreement types are re-sold services and
negotiated services, which are presented in Figure 3. Re-sold services can be based on list fares, like
between Telia Company and VR (Finnish Railways) in Sonera Reissu, or on a fixed reduction
percentage, like in SNCF iDAVIS. In general, negotiated services are based on bilateral agreements:
see for example the cases Telia Company and taxis in Sonera Reissu, and SNCF Pack mobilité.
Mobility-as-a-service business and operator models
Figure 3 - MaaS service agreement types (24).
Analysis of MaaS business and operator models
At the top level, three different MaaS operator model categories exist: commercial, public and PPP.
Furthermore, commercial MaaS operator models can be broken down into two types: reseller and
integrator. A reseller supplies transport services of different transport modes (e.g. a travel agency). An
integrator, in addition, combines the services of several modes with digital services, e.g. an application
for mobile ticketing, travel planning etc. For some integrators, MaaS is the main business and for
some MaaS is a complement to their service offering. Municipality/city-owned and state-owned public
transport operators can act as MaaS operators by integrating additional transport services and digital
services with their existing public transport. In the Public-Private-Partnership (PPP), the public actor
may integrate different types of actors and services in the system, which will rationalize the services
the public actor is responsible for, e.g. legislated special transport services and freight/delivery. Figure
4 illustrates the three recognized operator model categories.
Figure 4 - MaaS operator models (24).
Although some MaaS services and pilots already exist there is not yet much evidence on the suitability
and success of different MaaS business models, and there are hardly any full-scale international MaaS
(related) services providing common ticketing and multimodal traveler information at least on a
cross-border level. Business models will surely develop further and the less successful will disappear.
Despite the relatively early stage of the MaaS concept, we can recognize various revenue models for
MaaS operators. The reseller business model is often based on commissions and requires high
efficiency, and the margin is probably low. The concept does not give much additional monetary value,
but it integrates different modes of transport on a one-stop principle. In the integrator model MaaS can
be the main business, which would require large volumes as the revenue model would probably be
based on commissions on re-sold services. Additional services combined with transport services would
likely be required to increase volumes. Also advertisement/marketing of other services and products
could be used for additional incomes.
An integrator may offer MaaS services as a complementing business. In this case, the aim would be to
Service agreements
Negotiated services
Re-sold services
reduction %
List fares Fares depend on
bilateral agreements
Mobility-as-a-service business and operator models
support and increase the sale of the primary business. For example, if additional service providers (e.g.
accommodation, entertainment) act as MaaS operators, transport services can be considered as
additional services from their point of view. This could also improve the image of the company
offering MaaS services. Customers might be willing to pay a higher price for a trip sold by a MaaS
operator, if the operator could guarantee a connection in case of delay in a multimodal travel chain.
When a public transport operator acts as a MaaS operator, the main aim is probably to increase sales
and the average vehicle occupancy by offering a variety of first-/last-mile services, more
comprehensive services and additional services. Public transport operators should also pursue the
reduction of emissions in accordance with the political guidelines of the municipalities, region or state
(nation). The PPP model does not necessarily aim at profits, but it can result in cost savings for the
public sector via increased efficiency and more comprehensive services for, in particular, vulnerable
social groups or rural areas.
The value creation can be described with three key elements of a business model: value proposition
and offering, value creation system, and revenue model. In this paper, MaaS business and operator
models are described and analyzed through existing MaaS services and pilots. Four different types of
models were identified; two commercial models reseller and integrator; the public transport operator
as MaaS operator model; and the PPP MaaS operator model. For all of these models, a wide range of
key partners and customers in addition to revenue streams, i.e. multidimensionality, are connecting
features and also vital parts of the business model.
Based on the findings, it could be concluded that the public transport operator-based model is likely to
be more successful in and between cities and suburban areas since these areas are already relatively
well covered with public transport. The PPP model can potentially bring remarkable cost savings for
the public sector, thus it could be more viable especially in rural areas and together with other
subsidized transport. The reseller model might lose its share as new, more comprehensive services
with mobile applications arise, hence it may face challenges in the future. The integrator model might
offer the most variety in terms of implementation and is thus the most unpredictable model due to the
uncertain development of several factors, such as service combinations, mobile services, one-stop
principle and user acceptance, that will affect the integrator business model. Since the integrator model
is purely commercial, novel and there are only few ongoing pilots or services, many uncertainties
currently exist and hence the model could very well disappear in the future, or become a huge success,
or something between.
Mobility-as-a-service business and operator models
1. Pöllänen, M., Mäkelä, T., Nykänen, L., Liimatainen, H., & Mäntynen, J. (2015). Liikenteen
markkinat Suomessa. Trafi Research Reports 16/2015. Available at:
markkinat_raportti_2015-12-10.pdf, (only in Finnish).
2. König, D., Eckhardt, J., Aapaoja, A., Sochor, J. & Karlsson, M. (2016). Deliverable 3: Business
and operator models for MaaS. MAASiFiE project funded by CEDR. Available at:
3. Johnson, M., Christensen, C., Kagermann, H. (2008). Reinventing your business model. Harvard
Business Review 86(12), 5159.
4. Magretta, J. (2002). Why business model matter. Harvard Business Review 80(5), 8692.
5. Shafer, S., Smith, J., Linder, J., 2005. The power of business models. Business Horizons 48(3),
6. Osterwalder, A. and Pigneur, Y. (2013). Business Model Generation. NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
7. Teece, D. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Planning
43(23), 172194.
8. Chesbrough, H. (2010). Business model innovation: opportunities and barriers. Long Range
Planning 43(23), 354363.
9. Pekuri, A. (2015). The role of business models in construction business management. Doctoral
Dissertation. University of Oulu, Finland, June 2015.
10. Anderson, J.C., Narus, J.A. (1998). Business marketing: understand what customers value.
Harvard Business Review 76(6), 515.
11. Osterwalder, A. (2004). The Business Model Ontology A Proposition in design Science
Approach. PhD thesis, Department of Business and Economics, University of Lausanne,
12. MaaSiFiE project (2016). Available at:, visited on 2017-01-09.
13. Maas Global (2017). Available at:, visited on 2017-01-11.
14. Tuup (2017). Available at:, visited on 2017-01-11.
15. Telia Company Finland (2017). Ylläs Around.
Available at:, visited on 2017-01-12.
16. Telia Company Finland (2017). Sonera Reissu.
Available at., visited on 2017-01-12.
17. HSL (2016). Kutsuplus - final report. Available at:
18. SNCF (2017). Available at:, visited on 2017-01-13.
19. SNCF (2017). Available at:, visited on 2017-01-13.
20. SNCF (2017). Available at:, visited on 2017-01-13.
21. SNCF (2017). Available at:, visited on 2017-01-13.
22. Kätevä Seinäjoki (2017). Available at:, visited on 2017-01-13.
23. Eckhardt, J. & Aapaoja, A. (2016). In: König, D., Eckhardt, J., Aapaoja, A., Sochor, J. & Karlsson,
M. (2016). Deliverable 3: Business and operator models for MaaS.
24. Sochor, J., Strömberg, H., and Karlsson, I.C.M. (2015). ”An Innovative Mobility Service to
Facilitate Changes in Travel Behavior and Mode Choice”. Proceedings of the 22nd World
Congress on Intelligent Transportation Systems (Bordeaux, October 5-9, 2015).
25. Sochor, J., Strömberg, H., and Karlsson, I.C.M. (2015). ”Implementing Mobility as a Service:
Challenges in Integrating User, Commercial, and Societal Perspectives”. In Transportation
Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2536, Vol. 4, pp. 1-9,
Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C.
... For example, Kamargianni and Matyas (M actors and roles that compose the MaaS business ecosystem. Following a similar approach, Jittrapirom was the subject of the research works presented by Aapaoja et al. (Aapaoja, Eckhardt, & Nykänen, 2017) and Eckhardt et al. (Eckhardt, Aapaoja, Nykänen, & Sochor, 2017). Additionally, Ebrahimi et al. (Ebrahimi, -which MaaS business models can generate sustainable value for the several stakeholders. ...
... For example, Kamargianni and Matyas (M actors and roles that compose the MaaS business ecosystem. Following a similar approach, Jittrapirom was the subject of the research works presented by Aapaoja et al. (Aapaoja, Eckhardt, & Nykänen, 2017) and Eckhardt et al. (Eckhardt, Aapaoja, Nykänen, & Sochor, 2017). Additionally, Ebrahimi et al. (Ebrahimi, -which MaaS business models can generate sustainable value for the several stakeholders. ...
... was supported by the European Union's Research and Innovation Collaborative Project "MyCor-723384.Aapaoja, A.,Eckhardt, J., & Nykänen, L. (2017). Business models for MaaS. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Over the recent years, the vast variety of widely accessible cloud computing services along with the need to combine transportation services either from public or private providers, have led to the rise of the Mobility as a Service (MaaS) concept. The main feature of MaaS is that it gives users access to a set of heterogeneous transportation services from a single access point (i.e., an app). The ever-increasing adoption of MaaS by service providers introduces a variety of new business models and technologies that can successfully support the design and deployment of MaaS services. However, the outcome of this process depends on the definition of a data model for the transportation services, and its proper implementation that will ensure a seamless service provision within the MaaS platform. Towards this direction, this paper presents a definition of the transportation service data model suitable for a MaaS platform, as well as two different implementation approaches. In particular, a custom-design approach and an ontology-based approach are presented and compared with each other based on a set of key performance indicators (KPIs) such as code complexity, code maintainability, and performance. The two approaches were quantitatively compared using both artificially generated and real data derived from a real-world MaaS platform, namely the one developed in the context of the H2020 European research project MyCorridor. The preliminary results present the advantages and disadvantages of the two approaches for the implementation of the defined transportation service data model in the context of a real-world MaaS platform.
... Two collaboration-related issues have been contested to a higher degree than others: what types of actors should front MaaS services and take responsibility for user relations (cf. Eckhardt et al., 2017;Holmberg et al., 2016); and what types of business models are viable (cf. Sarasini et al., 2017)? ...
... Numerous analogous and overlapping models for how the MaaS value chain can be organized have also been presented in strategy documents, consultancy reports, and conference papers (e.g. Arthur D. Little, 2014;Eckhardt et al., 2017;Holmberg et al., 2016;Kerttu et al., 2017;KPMG, 2017;Region Stockholm, 2016;Siemens, 2017;UITP, 2019). In addition to illustrating the different types of public sector involvement, these models recognize that MaaS value chains can be more or less open, and that the decisionmaking can be either centralized or decentralized (cf. ...
Full-text available
... Each level integrates the preceding levels, such that level 4 integrates information (level 1), booking and payment (level 2), and the service offer (level 3). Eckhardt, Aapaoja, Nykänen, and Sochor (2017) propose three operator model categories for MaaS to realise this integration: commercial, public, and the combination, i.e. public-private partnerships. A commercial operator is either a reseller or an integrator. ...
Full-text available
Although Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) is a very prominent model for future passenger transport, ideas on how to offer it are still scarce. As MaaS platforms are currently mostly offered as field trials, they are highly use-case specific. One of the main reasons for seeing only few examples of ‘real’ MaaS as a commercial offer is the shortage of business models that could be applied when providing the service. To better understand potential business model configurations for MaaS, we propose a new conceptual framework to develop MaaS business models. We do so by integrating the Business Model Canvas with a morphological approach to compose all relevant factors in one framework. To populate the framework, we draw on a systematic literature review. We use this to generate morphological boxes for each of the nine building blocks of the Business Model Canvas. The framework helps to understand the features of MaaS and how to provide them from an operator's point of view. By discussing interdependencies of different configurations, we also provide a starting point to evaluate MaaS in a structured way and thereby generate implications for managerial practice, also for generating viable MaaS business models.
... For this reason, BMs for MaaS have a wide range of key partners, customers and revenue streams, requiring an extensive development and provision of interoperable and integrated services. In the reseller BM, one interface combines multiple services from various transport service providers whereas in the integrator BM both traditional and additional transport services are offered via a mobile service provider, which grants mobile ticketing and a payment interface [13]. Consequently, the end-to-end customer experience is enhanced, and a customized mobility package based on data analysis can be suggested [6]. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
The use of autonomous vehicles (AVs) is likely to remodel urban mobility. The business model (BM) of shared mobility services is impacted by adopting this new technology. In order to forecast the changes caused by the implementation of AVs, a BM for mobility services based on shared autonomous vehicles (SAVs) using the Lean Canvas approach has been developed. The key findings are: the proposed service can replace all existing shared mobility services; AVs provide a high level of temporal and spatial flexibility; and a strong cooperation is to be established between service providers, vehicle operator, and vehicle owners. Our results support the establishment of future SAV-based services. Also, it increases awareness of all stakeholders about how transformations in shared mobility affect the interaction between them, implying policy measures.
... However, recent studies find little difference in preferences for car ownership between Millennials and previous generations after accounting for their different socioeconomic circumstances [33][34][35][36] . New on-demand travel options such as ride-hailing and mobility-as-a-service apps (also known as MaaS apps, digital platforms that allow people to seamlessly plan, book and pay for multiple mobility services) have also garnered attention Articles NATUre SUSTAINABIlITY as potential alternatives to the privately owned cars in US cities [37][38][39][40] . While some studies have found that ride-hailing services do have a significant impact on reducing car ownership at various scales [41][42][43][44][45] , more-recent longitudinal analyses have found that the introduction of ride-hailing services has had little effect on vehicle ownership across the United States, except in cities with the most-robust transit systems 46 . ...
Full-text available
It is widely accepted that consumers underestimate the full cost of car ownership and that correcting this bias could meaningfully accelerate the adoption of shared mobility. Yet this argument fails to consider how much benefit consumers enjoy from owning their own vehicle. Here we estimate the value of private car ownership and use in four US metro areas—Chicago, Illinois; Dallas, Texas; Seattle, Washington; and Washington DC—using online discrete choice experiments. We find that, on average, people would need to be paid $11,197 to give up access to their privately owned vehicle for one year, which is at least as much as estimates of the average total private cost of vehicle ownership (~$9,000). Critically, we find that more than half of this value is non-use value—such as the option to travel whenever or wherever needed at a moment’s notice and the status that comes from owning one’s own vehicle—beyond the use value of getting from A to B. Further, this non-use value was found to be much higher during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings reframe the conversation around the transition away from private vehicle dependence, emphasizing the need to provide value and convenience if alternative mobility solutions are to be widely adopted. A choice experiment shows that perceived benefits of vehicle ownership, including non-use values such as schedule flexibility and status in addition to the transport value, are on average larger than their private costs.
... Most of these authors define MaaS as the "Combination" or "Connection" of different transport modes or providers (public, private, shared, etc) through a unified gateway or based on one-stop-shop principle (Veerapanane, Taylor, & Kaparias, 2018;Eckardt, Aapaoja, & Sochor, 2017;EPOMM, 2017;Transport Systems Catapult, 2016). Most of them refer that this single interface allows the management of all stages of the trip (König et al., 2017;EPOMM, 2017;Veerapanane, Taylor, & Kaparias, 2018), although varying in the extent of the available functions. ...
Full-text available
World population forecasted growth, ageing population, rising urbanization and congestion levels carry several challenges inside urban mobility systems. The digitalization megatrend is reshaping lives worldwide while at the same time “Usership” is thriving along collaborative consumption. “Mobility-as-a-Service” (“MaaS”) emerges as a potential mobility disruption, in this new mobility ecosystem. Inspired in Finland's “MaaS” ecosystem, this paper aims to propose a “Mobility as a Service Public Policy Framework” with a two-stage approach. First structuring the “MaaS” concept, looking for the core features, its relations, that leads to its reconceptualization and a topology proposal. Secondly, a public policy framework is proposed, considering the policy instruments, indicative group of stakeholders responsible and the different urban mobility management decision levels. The authors argue that is fundamental to understand the nature of decisions which are intimately connected with the Urban Mobility system, to design and implement a coherent and effective policy framework, where the policy tools chosen to materialize policy decisions regarding “MaaS” should first consider the identification of the founding pillars of the “MaaS” concept, guiding the process of policy design accordingly. If “MaaS” is considered a Mobility Management tool, it can constitute an opportunity to redefine public transport and its financing.
... Enterprise mobility can be defined as the degree to which an organization's operations and information needs, typically employee activity, are supported in a geo-graphically and sustainable independent way [27]. Enterprise mobility, when focused on how the elements of a system fit together [28], including the large amounts of data that an enterprise system handles [29], may contribute to humanistic goals, such as emphasizing individual human values or helping employees find a better balance between work and their personal life [9]. ...
... This perspective is focused on the access to mobility services through specific actions (e.g. "purchasing ability", "means of access"); ii) "MaaS" is what happens when some conditions exist (no direct action needed for "MaaS" to exist) (Eckardt, Aapaoja, & Sochor, 2017;Leviäkangas, 2016;Sprei, 2018). This perspective bases the existence of "MaaS" in conditions, that can be understood as the necessary relations between systems (transport, information, payment, data infrastructure, etc) and stakeholders (public and private transport providers, authorities, etc); iii) "MaaS" understood as a Mobility Distribution Model (a model that enables a set of conditions that allow afterwards the occurrence of specific actions within the mobility system) (Matyas & Kamargianni, 2017b). ...
World population forecasted growth, ageing population, rising urbanization and congestion levels carry several challenges inside urban mobility systems. The digitalization megatrend is reshaping lives worldwide while at the same time “Usership” is thriving along collaborative consumption. “Mobility-as-a-Service” (“MaaS”) emerges as a potential mobility disruption, in this new mobility ecosystem. Inspired in Finland's “MaaS” ecosystem, this paper aims to propose a “Mobility as a Service Public Policy Framework” with a two-stage approach. First structuring the “MaaS” concept, looking for the core features, its relations, that leads to its reconceptualization and a topology proposal. Secondly, a public policy framework is proposed, considering the policy instruments, indicative group of stakeholders responsible and the different urban mobility management decision levels. The authors argue that is fundamental to understand the nature of decisions which are intimately connected with the Urban Mobility system, to design and implement a coherent and effective policy framework, where the policy tools chosen to materialize policy decisions regarding “MaaS” should first consider the identification of the founding pillars of the “MaaS” concept, guiding the process of policy design accordingly. If “MaaS” is considered a Mobility Management tool, it can constitute an opportunity to redefine public transport and its financing.
Full-text available
This paper discusses demand and willingness to pay for mobility as a service (MaaS) plans. Given the rising popularity of the MaaS concept, research exploring preferences and demand for such services is valuable to researchers and policy makers as well as other involved stakeholders and mobility operators. This research investigates individual preferences for MaaS utilizing data collected via questionnaire surveys from Greater Manchester, United Kingdom. The surveys collected socio-demographic data and data in relation to individuals’ attitudes and typical mode use patterns, while stated preference data were also obtained by designing menu-based stated preference experiments where the respondents were able to create their ideal MaaS plan. A hybrid choice model is developed to explore user choices toward MaaS, while distributed willingness to pay values are estimated. A latent variable that captures the latent predisposition of people toward using multiple modes of transport is constructed. The results indicate that individuals who are more prone to using multimodal mobility options are willing to pay more for being offered both traditional and emerging mobility services as part of a monthly MaaS plan. Considering that the implementation of MaaS is still at an immature phase, while research efforts in relation to the demand for MaaS are limited, the results of this paper provide significant insights into individuals’ preferences toward MaaS and the heterogeneity between different user segments, and could be exploited to formulate valuable plans and contribute to the successful implementation of MaaS.
Technical Report
Full-text available
Executive summary The transnational research programme “Call 2014: Mobility and ITS” was launched by the Conference of European Directors of Roads (CEDR). Funded within that program, Mobility as a Service for Linking Europe (MAASiFiE) is a two-year project that investigates the prerequisites for organizing user-oriented and ecological mobility services in order to provide consumers with flexible, efficient and user-friendly services covering multiple modes of transport on a one-stop-shop principle. Megatrends like changing demographics in terms of population growth, ageing of population, new population requirements of millennials, and ICT technology transformation, play a major role enabling the evolvement of new mobility services. Mobility service concepts are changing in the direction of combining and implementing new business models, enabling the development of innovative services and products in mobility markets. With this respect, Deliverable 3 as part of Work Package (WP) 3 of the MAASiFiE project concentrates on the identification of new business and operator models providing an insight into the new transport paradigm of Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS). Based on a state-of- the-art survey covering interviews with experts, an online questionnaire, case examples of MaaS services and a literature review, a more thorough understanding of how transport- related stakeholders perceive and interact with the topic of MaaS is gained. Thus, an elaboration of responsibilities/roles, business models, related value chains and operator models in the context of MaaS is enabled and results are provided in this document. As a common point of reference, the consortium has agreed upon the following definition of MaaS: Multimodal and sustainable mobility services addressing customers' transport needs by integrating planning and payment on a one-stop-shop principle. Mobility services are expected to increase the use of public transport and ride sharing and to provide the means for rationalising passenger transport and wherever possible freight transport as well as identified by the state-of-the-art survey within Deliverable 3. In addition, available freight transport and logistic operations are analysed wherever similar characteristics to MaaS-related passenger applications are identified. Overall, the state-of- the-art survey results focusing on international MaaS concepts have shown that there currently exist various smaller MaaS-pilots covering different geographical service areas, including for instance city, rural and/or regional areas. Very few larger MaaS services have been established with a wider geographical coverage, including national and international service coverage. Based on different MaaS service areas, different aims and requirements for implementing MaaS concepts arise. While for instance, urban areas focus largely on the reduction of private car usage, congestion and transport-related emissions, rural areas aim at promoting higher efficiency and utilization rates by emphasizing demand driven transport services. National and international MaaS services focus rather on providing combined all-in- one packages including for instance long-haul transport, accommodation, event and booking services. Identified value chains of MaaS services illustrate changes of roles and responsibilities in the organisation of transport of people and goods. In this respect, changes in value networks and related organisational requirements are derived and applied to show different combinations of MaaS services. Basically four MaaS operator models were identified: Reseller, Integrator, Public transport operator and PPP models. Based on service combination characteristics, it could be concluded that the commercial Reseller model may best fit travel agencies and therefore national and international traveling. The Public transport (PT) operator model could be mainly used in cities, where comprehensive PT already exists. The PPP model may be preferred for rural areas, as public actors have an interest in increasing efficiency of subsidized transportation. The commercial Integrator model would probably fit well in both urban and suburban areas and national/international MaaS; thus it could be considered the most versatile and flexible model. However, as MaaS is continuously developing, and can be implemented in various ways, the presented models and categorizations should be read and interpreted as a current understanding of an emerging phenomenon.
Full-text available
Although the need for change was recognized a couple of decades ago, the construction industry is still struggling with its productivity development and customer satisfaction. Usually, construction improvement initiatives focus on developing practices related to project management and delivery processes. However, this study views the general underperformance of the industry from the perspective of how the construction business is managed and conceptualized in practice. The objective of this thesis is to understand the role of business models in construction business management. This objective is pursued by addressing specific research questions in four individual publications, two of which contribute to the research objective from a more conceptual and two from a more empirical viewpoint. The exploratory study follows the qualitative research tradition and exploits the case study approach. The primary method for data collection has been interviews. This study demonstrates the applicability of the business model concept to the analysis and development of the construction business. However, its use requires a comprehensive understanding of the concept and proper alignment of its elements in practice. The results of this study indicate that the current business models of construction companies are too similar to enable value-based competition. Indeed, the conventional business models neglect the customer perspective and thus revolve around internal efficiency rather than customer value creation. Consequently, construction businesses are usually managed on a project-by-project basis without the governing effect of specific customer-oriented business models and a clear long-term vision or business purpose that would go beyond the objectives of growing and surviving. A better understanding of business models provides a starting point for managers to reform the construction business and the whole industry. Explicitly defined business models provide a foundation for consistent management practice and process development. New possibilities for customer value creation can be exploited as the limitations of the current thinking are overcome and business models are approached from the viewpoints of the customer and value creation.
Why is it so difficult for established companies to pull off the new growth that business model innovation can bring? Here's why: They don't understand their current business model well enough to know if it would suit a new opportunity or hinder it, and they don't know how to build a new model when they need it. Drawing on their vast knowledge of disruptive innovation and experience in helping established companies capture game-changing opportunities, consultant Johnson, Harvard Business School professor Christensen, and SAP co-CEO Kagermann set out the tools that executives need to do both. Successful companies already operate according to a business model that can be broken down into four elements: a customer value proposition that fulfills an important job for the customer in a better way than competitors' offerings do; a profit formula that lays out how the company makes money delivering the value proposition; and the key resources and key processes needed to deliver that proposition. Game-changing opportunities deliver radically new customer value propositions: They fulfill a job to be done in a dramatically better way (as P&G did with its Swiffer mops), solve a problem that's never been solved before (as Apple did with its iPod and iTunes electronic entertainment delivery system), or serve an entirely unaddressed customer base (as Tata Motors is doing with its Nano - the $2,500 car aimed at Indian families who use scooters to get around). Capitalizing on such opportunities doesn't always require a new business model: P&G, for instance, didn't need a new one to lever-age its product innovation strengths to develop the Swiffer. A new model is often needed, however, to leverage a new technology (as in Apple's case); is generally required when the opportunity addresses an entirely new group of customers (as with the Nano); and is surely in order when an established company needs to fend off a successful disruptor (as the Nano's competitors may now need to do).
This paper presents insights from a six-month field operational test (FOT) in Gothenburg, Sweden, during which 195 participants tested the UbiGo mobility service for everyday travel. The service integrates both public and private solutions into a new type of “collective transport”, thereby contributing to Swedish societal goals of a reduction of private car use and ownership. A triangulation approach to data sources and collection methods has been adopted in order to identify matches and mismatches between the expectations and experiences of three stakeholder groups: users (FOT participants/customers), commercial actors (the mobility broker and service providers), and society. Identified matches include the “transportation smorgasbord” concept, reducing private car ownership, and increased pre-trip planning. Identified mismatches relate to the greater than expected reduction in car use; the respective business models of the mobility broker and service providers; back office administration; and the smartphone platform. Gaps include the infeasibility of some trips and the need for more carsharing sites. All in all, the FOT was successful with 93% of participants satisfied with their travel and 97% wanting to continue using UbiGo. However, the mismatches and gaps need to be resolved or at least deliberated upon in order to create a commercially viable mobility service. Based on the experience gained, the authors conclude that truly “collective transport” must involve close cooperation between public and private actors, and the consideration of at least these three, sometimes conflicting, stakeholders’ perspectives in order to create integrated solutions. Furthermore, new business models are needed to address the challenges associated with future, integrated, urban mobility solutions.
Conference Paper
The aim of this paper is to present and discuss changes in users’ travel behavior and mode choice during in the six-month Field Operational Test (FOT) of the UbiGo transport broker service in Gothenburg, Sweden. Four user groups are analyzed – car “shedders”, car “keepers”, already carsharing, and car “accessors” – based on data collected via questionnaires, interviews, and travel diaries. Findings suggest that although some groups sought or achieved change more than others, each group’s mode choice shifted in a more sustainable direction, and these changes were perceived positively and with high satisfaction with the service. Despite the user groups’ differing motivations, behaviors, and experiences, the FOT results illustrate that a holistic approach to mobility, in this case a personalized “transportation smorgasbord” package of integrated services, can offer “something to everyone” and promote broader change.
Over the past few years, “business models” have surged into the management vocabulary. But, while it has become quite fashionable to discuss business models, there is still much confusion about what business models are and how they can be used. In fact, business models can serve a positive and powerful role in corporate management. While other authors have recently offered definitions of “business model,” none appear to be generally accepted. This lack of consensus may in part be attributed to interest in the concept from a wide range of disciplines, all of which have found a connection to the term. To help managers better understand business models, this paper reviews the extant literature and identifies and classifies the components of business models cited therein. Components were classified into four primary categories: strategic choices, the value network, creating value, and capturing value. To address the absence of a generally accepted definition of a business model, a new definition that integrates and synthesizes the earlier work is offered. Based on the proposed definition, business models are then contrasted with strategy. Four problems associated with business models are also discussed.
Companies commercialize new ideas and technologies through their business models. While companies may have extensive investments and processes for exploring new ideas and technologies, they often have little if any ability to innovate the business models through which these inputs will pass. This matters - the same idea or technology taken to market through two different business models will yield two different economic outcomes. So it makes good business sense for companies to develop the capability to innovate their business models.This paper explores the barriers to business model innovation, which previous academic research has identified as including conflicts with existing assets and business models, as well as cognition in understanding these barriers. Processes of experimentation and effectuation, and the successful leadership of organizational change must be brought to bear in order to overcome these barriers. Some examples of business model innovation are provided to underline its importance, in hopes of inspiring managers and academics to take these challenges on.
Whenever a business enterprise is established, it either explicitly or implicitly employs a particular business model that describes the design or architecture of the value creation, delivery, and capture mechanisms it employs. The essence of a business model is in defining the manner by which the enterprise delivers value to customers, entices customers to pay for value, and converts those payments to profit. It thus reflects management's hypothesis about what customers want, how they want it, and how the enterprise can organize to best meet those needs, get paid for doing so, and make a profit. The purpose of this article is to understand the significance of business models and explore their connections with business strategy, innovation management, and economic theory.
A small but growing number of suppliers in business markets draw on their knowledge of what customers value, and would value, to gain marketplace advantages over their less knowledgeable competitors. These suppliers have developed what the authors call customer value models, which are data-driven representations of the worth, in monetary terms, of what the supplier is doing or could do for its customers. To create customer value models, the authors draw on the experiences of suppliers that have built and used such models successfully. First, the authors suggest having a shared understanding of what exactly value is in business markets. Next, the authors provide tips on how to get started. They suggest generating a comprehensive list of value elements, gathering data, validating the model and understanding variance in the estimates, and creating value-based sales tools. In terms of putting an understanding of value to use, the authors suggest managing market offerings, guiding the development of new or improved products and services, gaining customers, and sustaining customer relationships. INSETS: Using Customer Focus Groups to Assess Value; How BT Products Uses Value Models as Sales Tools; The Information BT Products Gathers to Build Customer Value..; Understanding Value: How W.W. Grainger and Its Customers Benefit.
The goal of this dissertation is to find and provide the basis for a managerial tool that allows a firm to easily express its business logic. The methodological basis for this work is design science, where the researcher builds an artifact to solve a specific problem. In this case the aim is to provide an ontology that makes it possible to explicit a firm's business model. In other words, the proposed artifact helps a firm to formally describe its value proposition, its customers, the relationship with them, the necessary intra- and inter-firm infrastructure and its profit model. Such an ontology is relevant because until now there is no model that expresses a company's global business logic from a pure business point of view. Previous models essentially take an organizational or process perspective or cover only parts of a firm's business logic. The four main pillars of the ontology, which are inspired by management science and enterprise- and processmodeling, are product, customer interface, infrastructure and finance. The ontology is validated by case studies, a panel of experts and managers. The dissertation also provides a software prototype to capture a company's business model in an information system. The last part of the thesis consists of a demonstration of the value of the ontology in business strategy and Information Systems (IS) alignment.