Content uploaded by Francesca Dal Mas
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Francesca Dal Mas on Jan 21, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
DOI: 10.4018/IJESMA.2019070103
Volume 11 • Issue 3 • July-September 2019
Copyright © 2019, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
34
Carlo Bagnoli, Università Ca’ Foscari, Venice, Italy
Francesca Dal Mas, Università degli Studi di Roma La Sapienza, Rome, Italy
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6477-4177
Maurizio Massaro, Università Ca’ Foscari, Venice, Italy
The objective of this article is to analyze the impact of Industry 4.0 on business models considering
technological change as a driver of strategic innovation. The research aims to provide the key to
interpreting a process of innovation that, starting from the technological transformation, translates it
into a broader change of business models. A structured literature review has been developed analyzing
144 sources divided into scientific papers, reports from consultancy firms and institutional reports.
This method identified the importance given by the literature to the technologies and their impact on
the building blocks of the business model. The research has led to the identification of 12 business
models that can represent a framework to interpret the Industry 4.0 phenomenon strategically. A
questionnaire analysis of a sample of 111 companies based in Italy allowed us to compare the results
of theoretical research with the perceptions of Italian entrepreneurs.
Building Blocks, Business Models, Industry 4.0, Innovation, Italian Entrepreneurs, Strategy, Structured Literature
Review, Technological Change
The concepts of “Innovation” and “Strategy” have become the fundamental themes of two rich areas
of study in the nineties (Schlegelmilch et al., 2003). The literature focused on strategy defines the
way to compete within a specific market sector and outlines the field of action of the organization
through the choices needed to achieve a long-term or overall aim. On the other hand, the literature on
innovation has focused its attention on the level of product and process innovation (Schlegelmilch et
al., 2003). Therefore, while the literature on strategy focuses on the overall aims of the organization,
the concept of innovation, until the mid-nineties, was never used at the enterprise level. The different
focus of innovation and strategy are stimulating, especially considering the intrinsic nature of the
term innovation. Indeed, innovation represents the ability to think and to practice new or better ways
of doing things, and thus represents an exceptional mechanism, capable of unleashing the creative
spirit. Innovation can be the trigger for opening the mind to possibilities that were previously
unknown, leading to progress in areas essential for human development. Therefore, innovation leads
to very demanding challenges but also extraordinary opportunities for companies pushing traditional
approaches focused on product and process under a great pressure to expand their horizons (Porter,
1996). Because of the need to create a more comprehensive approach on innovation, from the nineties,
Volume 11 • Issue 3 • July-September 2019
35
the concepts of innovation and strategy have started to become more linked, thanks to the introduction
of the concept of strategic innovation (Schlegelmilch et al., 2003). Strategic innovation consists in the
development of a new concept (and therefore a model) of business, namely: new products or services,
presented or combined in a new way, to create a radically new experience for clients, involving them
also at an emotional level. Strategic innovation can also arise from the reconfiguration of the sector’s
value chain to change the rules of the game - exploiting, for example, the possibilities offered by
new technologies to reach the final customer directly to enhance the distinctive competencies of the
company (Buaron, 1981).
From that point on the literature agreed that strategic innovation goes beyond the simple adjustment
of the current business strategy. Indeed, strategic innovation requires extensive changes both at the
level of the structure and at the level of business processes. Therefore, it becomes necessary especially
for companies anchored to “traditional” business models (BM) that are resistant to strategic change
(Spender, 1989). The phenomenon of the new industrial revolution (Industry 4.0) has contributed to
enhancing the complexity of the topic.
Given the new technological challenges and the impact on innovation provided by Industry
4.0, this study employs a structured literature review (SLR) approach according to Massaro et al.
(2018) to understand how Industry 4.0 is changing companies’ BM providing new opportunities and
challenges. The analysis refers to 144 selected documents such as journal papers, books, reports, to
understand the impact of Industry 4.0’s technologies on BM. A questionnaire analysis of a sample of
111 companies based in Italy has been carried on to double check the results of theoretical research
with the perceptions of Italian entrepreneurs.
The paper is novel since it starts from a literature review of recent and various sources to verify
the impact of new technologies on BM. The results allow identifying which BM seem to be the more
successful, and which technologies seem to have the power to influence the current BM. The results
of the survey allow verifying what appears to be the state of the art for Italian entrepreneurs.
The paper is structured as follow. The first paragraph explains the literature review, and it is
followed by the research methodology. Results and conclusions end the paper.
BMs represent the underlying logic of how the company is doing business, creates value for
stakeholders and captures a share of value for itself (Biloslavo et al., 2018; Bagnoli et al., 2018 (a);
Bagnoli et al., 2018 (b); Nielsen et al., 2018; Nielsen et al., 2019). The business model “Canvas” is
a strategic tool that uses visual language to create and develop innovative BM. It represents the way
in which a company generates, distributes, and captures value. The value offered is the reason for
customers to choose a company rather than a different one by solving a customer issue or meeting
their needs. Each value consists of a selected set of products or services that fits the requirements
of a specific customer segment. Some value propositions can be innovative and represent a new or
disruptive offer, others may be similar to the ones existing on the market, but with additional features
and attributes.
The framework adopted in our study is the one by Biloslavo et al. (2018), which consists of a
reworking of the famous model of Osterwalder and Pigneur. The model starts from a triangular figure
that can be “open,” thus configuring a direct and straightforward visual reference scheme, suitable
for a lean but complete representation of all the eight elements of the business model: suppliers,
resources, internal processes, external processes, products, customers, society, and value proposition.
Volume 11 • Issue 3 • July-September 2019
36
The growing attention on the role BM canvas follows the development of the literature on innovation.
Scholars distinguish three different sources of strategic innovation: Technology Push, Market Pull, and
design-driven (Verganti, 2011). These three different types of change start from different assumptions
and therefore lead to equally mixed results.
The technology push innovation derives from the exploration of new technological possibilities
by the organization. Typically, they lead to radical innovations in technical and technological terms
and changes in consumer needs. According to Schumpeter, the company imposes “change,” and the
consumer is instrumental to the fact that the activity of the producer is successful (Schumpeter, 1971).
The company, therefore, moves independently, and the introduction of innovation does not take place
according to the needs of consumers. In this way, the firm “educates” its consumer, to push him/
her to let the new products be included among his/her preferences. Strategic innovation, however,
cannot derive only from a technology push innovation. Change cannot focus only on the increase in
technical or technological characteristics, without considering the needs of the client (Verganti, 2008).
Market pull innovation, on the other hand, originates from an understanding of the needs of
customers or end users, or direct requests from the market. It usually starts with the analysis of the
clients/users’ needs, and with the following search for technologies that can satisfy them in a better
way. These innovations are purely incremental because the market and the customers are rarely able
to express needs that go beyond their usual consumption experience (Verganti, 2008).
Design-driven innovation is not a technological innovation, nor it does derive from the needs
expressed by the market, but it is an innovation of meaning. This type of change arises from the
exploration and understanding of existing and future trends in socio-cultural models and offers new
visions, new concepts and radically new senses to existing products or services and therefore acts on
potential needs or emotional and symbolic aspects. These are, therefore, innovations pushed by the
vision of the company regarding the possible changes in meanings and languages that could emerge
in the future (Verganti, 2008) and not from current customer needs.
Design-driven innovations can be both radical and incremental. They can bring about a change
in language, which in turn determines the message transmitted to the client and therefore the meaning
of the products or services offered, only partially or different from that existing in the current socio-
cultural models. According to Biloslavo et al. (2018), design-driven innovations are the only way for
companies already present in the market to renew their position of success. At the same time, they
Figure 1. Our framework (Source: Biloslavo et al., 2018)
Volume 11 • Issue 3 • July-September 2019
37
represent a way for new entrants to overcome the significant disadvantages compared to companies
already present in the market.
Interestingly, the development of the innovation called “Industry 4.0” is providing new sources of
innovations that draw on all these characteristics, presenting new challenges for changing companies’
BM. Indeed, Industry 4.0 leads to a digital transformation, which takes the form of interconnected
systems able to interact with each other and to collect and analyze data to adapt to changes. It disrupts
the value chain, and for this reason, companies must not limit themselves to a technological analysis
of transformation but are forced to rethink their BM, their way of working to create value for their
customers.
This paper employs an SLR (Massaro, Dumay, et al., 2016). Conducting an SLR “can help experienced
scholars develop new and interesting research paths by accessing and analyzing a considerable
volume of scholarly work” (Massaro, Dumay, et al., 2016). Additionally, Massaro et al. (2016) state
that an SLR can “contribute to developing research paths and questions by providing a foundation”
for future investigation. Interestingly, SLRs seem to provide an alternative to more ‘traditional’
literature reviews, to reach more “defensible” and “replicable” results. This approach has already
been used to investigate interdisciplinary fields of accounting, auditing and accountability (Guthrie
and Parker, 2011), Knowledge Management in the Public Sector (Massaro et al., 2015), Knowledge
Management in Small and Medium Enterprises (Massaro, Handley, et al., 2016), organizational
knowledge protection (Manhart and Thalmann, 2015), human capital accounting (Guthrie et al.,
2012; Guthrie and Murthy, 2009), the use of content analysis (Dumay and Cai, 2014), Integrated
Reporting (Bernardi et al., 2014; Dumay et al., 2016) and Intellectual Capital (IC) (Dumay, 2014).
Figure 1 depicts the model described by Massaro et al. (2013).
Following Massaro et al. (2016) approach, first, we developed a Research Protocol describing
the steps shaping an SLR (Figure 2). A total number of 140 documents divided into journal articles,
consulting reports, institutional reports and other sources have been searched using keyword searches
in databases such as Scopus, Ebsco, Google Scholar and professional or institutional websites focused
on the topic of Industry 4.0 (e.g. a specific section of the Economic Ministry of Italy). More than
18,770 references have been coded in 162 nodes using an open coding approach (Miles et al., 2013).
The inquiry was developed around two main research questions:
RQ1: How does Industry 4.0 affect existing BM?
RQ2: How could Industry 4.0 lead to the development of new BMs?
Considering that we employed an open coding approach, they could not apply validity measures
such as the Krippendorff’s alpha. To ensure validity, results were discussed by whole the research
team to ensure consistency of the coding approach. Additionally, word searches were employed to
ensure that relevant nodes were not missed or underestimated. The following sections describe the
findings of the research.
This section depicts the results of the SLR focusing on the first research question: how does Industry 4.0
affect existing BM? To answer the first research question we analyzed current definitions provided by
the authors. According to (Schumacher et al., 2016, p. 162) “Industry 4.0 refers to recent technological
advances where the internet and supporting technologies (e.g., embedded systems) serve as a backbone
Volume 11 • Issue 3 • July-September 2019
38
to integrate physical objects, human actors, intelligent machines, production lines and processes across
organizational boundaries to form a new kind of intelligent, networked and agile value chain.” Main
technologies considered within the concept of Industry 4.0 are depicted in Figure 3.
To better focus the research, we analyzed how these technologies are described regarding their
impact on the company’s BM. Results of this analysis are depicted in the following Figure 4.
The figure shows the synthesis of the nine heatmaps referring to each enabling technology.
The intensity of the color of each building block in the heatmaps is associated with the importance
recognized by the literature to the change due to the development of the technology.
The literature focuses its attention on the internal part of the company and, in particular, on
internal processes and resources, interpreting Industry 4.0 as a tool to improve productivity and
efficiency of the methods. However, we could find a keen interest in the literature towards customers
Figure 2. SLR methodology (Source: Massaro et al., 2016)
Volume 11 • Issue 3 • July-September 2019
39
and their increasingly central and collaborative role in the value chain and also on products, which
are now more innovative and full of smart functionality. There is an openness towards elements of
the business model addressed to the outside, such as customers, products, external processes of the
company and society. On the other hand, literature seems to neglect the impact of technologies on the
value proposition, adopting a more operative perspective. The following tables (Table 1a and Table
1b) provide more details describing how each technology can affect each building block shaping the
company’s BM.
Figure 3. Industry 4.0 technologies (Source: Bagnoli et al., 2018a)
Figure 4. Industry 4.0 technologies heatmap according to the literature (Source: Our elaboration)
Volume 11 • Issue 3 • July-September 2019
40
Findings of the SLR show that Industry 4.0 allows the development of new BM starting a strategic
innovation that creates new market spaces through a unique value proposition. Findings allowed
us to identify twelve new BM characterized by innovative value propositions, thanks to the new
technological opportunities provided by the Industry 4.0. Finally, we were able to group the 12 new
business models into four categories, namely: Mass customization BM, data & analytics BM, as a
service BM and platform BM. Each group is described in the following subsections.
Table 1. Results of the literature review on the impact of industry 4.0 on company’s BM
Volume 11 • Issue 3 • July-September 2019
41
4.2.1. Mass Customization BMs
In the category “Mass Customization” we can identify specific BMs that work on the value discipline
of Operational Excellence (Treacy and Wiersema, 1993). Technology provided by the Industry 4.0
allows transforming traditional paradoxes such as “man vs. machine,” “profit vs. sustainability,”
“craft production vs. industrial production” and “knowledge exploration vs. knowledge exploitation.”
Value production plays a central role for Industry 4.0, as it involves integrating the product
with all the actors in the value chain, as it acts as an interconnection tool. This connection lays the
foundation for cyber-physical systems, intelligent networks of machines, ICT systems, products,
and people. In this context, the production of value is automated and dematerialized and makes it
possible to combine large-scale production with customization, thus moving to a more dynamic and
on-demand approach, increasing at the same time efficiency and productivity.
Therefore, BM is set up for the production of high-tech goods that use increasingly sophisticated
materials and can adapt dynamically to changing market conditions. This adaptation is also favored by
the proximity to the customers, which allows to fully understand the clients’ needs by establishing a
proximity relationship both in a physical and virtual sense. The products are so unique and customized,
being designed directly to the requests of the final consumer. The following table depicts main impacts
of Industry 4.0 on the BM of Mass Customization. The color in Table 2 describes the magnitude of
the effect.
4.2.2. Servitization BM
Services are taking an increasingly central position, allowing the creation of valuable proposals
based on the combination of services and products, integrated through technologies. The digital
transformation is offering the possibility of creating BMs based on the provision of services, and
increasingly customer-oriented. The services allow to combine the virtual world with the physical
one, and to set up new profit models such as performance-based contracts, product-as-a-service,
pay-per-use, subscription-based and machine-as-a contracts -service.
The new BM of the “servitization” category try to identify the “why” behind the need to purchase
and to respond to this by transforming products into services. In fact, the logic of these models lies
in the fact that the value is not represented only by the product itself, but by what is made possible
through its use. The service thus becomes the very foundation of the exchange and provide the base
Table 2. Mass customization BM and the impacts of industry 4.0 on the BM building blocks
Volume 11 • Issue 3 • July-September 2019
42
of the value discipline of product/service leadership (Treacy and Wiersema, 1993). The following
Table 3 depicts main impacts of Industry 4.0 on the BM of Servitization. The color in the table
describes the magnitude of the effect.
4.2.3. Data-Driven BM
The exploitation of the value generated by the data obtained and the recognition of the centrality of
the client lead to the development of new BM based on big data & analytics technologies. The data
represent the core driver of innovation and competition, as they are necessary to achieve leadership
positions in the creation of value.
These BM allow the development of innovative methods for the collection and use of data, and
to benefit from the value embedded in information. The data make it possible to increase product
functionality but can also be exploited as a product to obtain incremental revenues. The information
collected is used by companies for production and commercial purposes, and this requires attention to
the legal profiles of their use in the private sphere, but also about the price policies. Therefore, Data-
driven BM allow the development of a new perspective on the customer intimacy value discipline
is reducing barriers to reach customers and customize products (Treacy and Wiersema, 1993). The
following Table 4 depicts main impacts of Industry 4.0 on the Data-driven BM. The color in the table
describes the magnitude of the effect.
Table 3. Servitization BM and the impacts of industry 4.0 on the BM building blocks
Table 4. Data-driven BM and the impacts of industry 4.0 on the BM building blocks
Volume 11 • Issue 3 • July-September 2019
43
4.2.4. Platform BM
The distribution of value is undergoing significant changes thanks to technologies that reduce the
distance between the company and the customer through a deeper understanding of the latter’s needs.
The proximity to the customer is a crucial feature of the distribution BM. It requires the
development of platforms, which support the interoperability between various actors of the value
chain, based on the shared representation and updated in real time, configured on the specific needs
of the user. These platforms make it possible to co-create value among networks, to share experiences
and meanings, because they facilitate the exchange of data and services among the actors of the
ecosystem. The following Table 5 depicts main impacts of Industry 4.0 on the Data-driven BM. The
color in the table describes the magnitude of the effect.
4.2.5. Evidence From the Field
To better understand the entrepreneurs’ vision of the opportunities, risks and practical feasibility of
Industry 4.0, an exploratory survey was carried out in collaboration with KPMG. The questionnaire
was managed by KPMG in May 2017, and its results were presented at the event “Biennale
Innovazione” organized by the Ca ‘Foscari University of Venice in June 2017. The representatives
of 111 companies belonging to different sectors were involved. The sample involved companies from
all over Italy. However, the most significant part is represented by organizations from the North of
the country, in particular from Veneto, Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Trentino-Alto Adige, Lombardy, and
Emilia-Romagna. The sectors involved included iron and steel, engineering, pharmaceuticals, textiles,
automation, food, and beverages. Both companies operating in the B2B industry, as well as B2C,
were considered. The survey was also extended to technology providers with the aim of studying a
different point of view. The questions were oriented towards understanding the opportunities and
benefits that the technologies could offer.
The questionnaire consisted of 24 multiple-choice questions which themes can be traced to two
different main sections. The first section included issues related to a broader context, that allowed
to understand the more general view of companies on the impacts of Industry 4.0 both regarding
opportunities, as well as the obstacles that can block the implementation. The section was further
divided into two parts: the country system and the industrial system that allowed to draw a complete
picture of the impact of Industry 4.0 in the external context, as perceived by the companies. In
particular, the first section, entitled “The external context: the country system and the industrial
sector”, recorded the opportunities and benefits that companies expected from investments in Industry
4.0 about the dynamics of their sectoral and government policies. Besides, it sought to understand the
main obstacles to the development of industry 4.0 by companies and their perception of the political
and competitive aspects of their sector.
Table 5. Platform BM and the impacts of industry 4.0 on the BM building blocks
Volume 11 • Issue 3 • July-September 2019
44
The second section specified the vision on the impact in the internal context, the organizational
one, that an investment in Industry 4.0 can have on the strategic choices of the companies. Specifically,
in the second section, “Internal context: technological feasibility and strategic opportunities,” the
questions were about the changes that companies are observing on their business model and what
human and intellectual resources and technologies are necessary to implement innovative strategies
and actions.
In this sense, we aim to compare the vision on the phenomenon of Industry 4.0 and Italian
business, evaluating the Italian manufacturing point of view compared to the international one given
by the literature. The results of the questionnaire showed that the Italian companies seem not to be
yet fully aware of the phenomenon and are primarily behind the application of the technologies and
skills necessary to use them.
The business models developed in our research can be used by companies. An example can be
the attention to the personalization of products as an emerging trend, as shown by the study. The use
of technologies allows improving the quality of production processes and outputs without a spending
much money, allowing companies to invest in the personalization of products and, therefore, in a new
experience for the consumer. This is made possible by additive manufacturing technologies and by
the use of robots that allow refining the product and, therefore, guarantee the highest quality to the
mass market (mass customization) at reduced costs, thus conquering new markets.
The challenge of the Industry 4.0 can be grasped by the Italian companies trying to find an
original synthesis between the humanistic culture that is at the base of the success of the “Made in
Italy” and the technical culture that the new technologies in some ways impose. Paradoxically, the
fourth industrial revolution will bring back to life craftsmanship, linked to the ability to experiment
with innovative solutions without losing sight of their cultural significance. Main results are depicted
in the following Table 6.
Our research develops a Structured Literature Review to answer two main research questions related
to the definition of Industry 4.0 and its role to promote the development of new Business Models.
Results show that Industry 4.0 is a complex topic shaped mainly from nine different technologies.
Each technology has specific impacts on a company’s BM. Interestingly, while most of the impacts of
Industry 4.0 focus on the production building blocks of the BM, there are significant and interesting
effects also on other dimensions such as customers, external processes, and society. A questionnaire
was then conducted among 111 Italian companies from a variety of industrial sectors to double check
the status of Industry 4.0 in Italy. Results clearly show that Italian companies seem not to be yet fully
aware of the phenomenon and are behind the application of the technologies and the necessary skills.
The paper is novel compared to previous studies since it tries to understand and map the literature
to detect new successful BM, starting from the phenomenon of Industry 4.0.
Our findings show that when more technologies are combined they allow the development of
new BM. New ways of developing relationships with customers, suppliers and other stakeholders are
pushing new approaches to deal with the relational capital and the knowledge management processes.
Additionally, new knowledge-based products can be developed thanks to Industry 4.0, and new
approaches can be defined to deal with the whole society more sustainably. Results depict four main
typologies of BM named: mass customization BM, Servitization BM, Data-driven BM, Platform BM
and show how each BM uses innovations provided by the Industry 4.0 to review traditional building
blocks. These new BM could be successfully implemented by firms and organizations.
The paper has several limitations. The survey was conducted only in Italy, and it reflects the
situation and feelings of Italian entrepreneurs. Further researches could start from the results of this
literature review providing concrete cases of companies that used the opportunities provided by the
Volume 11 • Issue 3 • July-September 2019
45
Industry 4.0 to develop new Business Models. In addition, the analysis of the questionnaire should
be enlarged to other countries or contexts to better verify the results.
Table 6. Industry 4.0 challenges as seen by entrepreneurs
The external context:
the country system and
the industrial sector
Industry 4.0 as an opportunity to change The majority of firms thinks that Industry 4.0. represent an
opportunity to change and enhance the Italian manufacturing
industry
Factors that foster the possibility to invest in
Industry 4.0
The majority of firms thinks that human resources are the key
enablers of Industry 4.0
Obstacles or threats that limit the possibility to
invest in Industry 4.0
The majority of firms thinks that organizational culture is the
major obstacle
Ability of the “Made in Italy” industry to fully
embrace Industry 4.0 technologies
The majority of firms thinks that Italy will face several
difficulties in embracing Industry 4.0 technologies
Most effective industrial policies to enhance
Industry 4.0
The majority of firms thinks that infrastructural investments are
more effective than fiscal benefits
Ability of Industry 4.0 to renew the current
production models
The majority of firms agrees that Industry 4.0 can help to renew
the current production models
Competitive benefits from Industry 4.0 The majority of firms thinks that data from Industry 4.0
technologies can help fostering competitive advantage
Occupational repercussions from Industry 4.0 The majority of firms thinks that Industry 4.0 will not decrease
the number of employees, however, several of them will change
their role
Ability of Italian competitors to activate Industry
4.0 investments
The majority of firms thinks that their Italian competitors have
not yet invested in Industry 4.0 technologies
Ability of European competitors to activate Industry
4.0 investments
The majority of firms thinks that their European competitors
have not yet invested in Industry 4.0 technologies
Ability of Extra-European competitors to activate
Industry 4.0 investments
The majority of firms thinks that their extra European
competitors have not yet invested in Industry 4.0 technologies
Ability of the firm compared to its competitors The majority of firms are not yet able to define their positioning
compared to their competitors
The internal context:
technological
feasibility and strategic
opportunities
Path to integrate Industry 4.0 with existing
technologies/operations
The majority of firms still needs to allocate a budget for this
purpose
Internal agents to enhance Industry 4.0 The majority of fir ms will rely on their CEOs
External agents to enhance Industry 4.0 The majority of firms will rely on consultancy firms more than
technology providers and universities
Impact on BMs The majority of firms thinks that resources and products will the
most affected building blocks
Expected general benefits from Industry 4.0 The majority of firms thinks that Industry 4.0 will allow them to
better react to changes
Presence of enough internal skills to use Industry
4.0 tools properly
The majority of firms thinks that internal skills should be
improved to use Industry 4.0 tools properly
Skills to be enhanced The majority of firms thinks that organizational skills are the
ones to be improved
Ways of reducing skills gaps The majority of firms is likely to use external sources, however
internal classes/training are considered as well
Areas of investments from Industry 4.0 The major ity of firms is likely to invest more in Data Analytics
Expected internal benefits from Industry 4.0 The majority of firms expect innovation in managing their
industrial processes
Presence of a specific budget devoted on Industry
4.0
The majority of firms has not defined a budget yet
Future investments on Industry 4.0 The majority of firms will invest between 5 and 10% of their
budget
Source: KPMG/Ca’ Foscari
Volume 11 • Issue 3 • July-September 2019
46
Bagnoli, C., Bravin, A., Massaro, M., & Vignotto, A. (2018), Business Model 4.0. I modelli di business vincenti
per le imprese italiane nella quarta rivoluzione industriale. Venezia: Edizioni Ca‘ Foscari.
Bagnoli, C., Garlatti, A., Massaro, M., Dal Mas, F., & Paschetto, M. (2018), Winning Business Models for
the 4th Industrial Revolution. In Proceedings of the International Conference Theory and Applications in the
Knowledge Economy (pp. 60-75).
Biloslavo, R., Bagnoli, C., & Edgar, D. (2018). An eco-critical perspective on business models: The value triangle
as an approach to closing the sustainability gap. Journal of Cleaner Production, 174, 746–762. doi:10.1016/j.
jclepro.2017.10.281
Buaron, R. (1981), New-game strategies, The McKinsey Quarterly, Spring(1), 24–41.
Dumay, J. (2014). 15 years of the Journal of Intellectual Capital and counting: A manifesto for transformational
IC research. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 15(1), 2–37. doi:10.1108/JIC-09-2013-0098
Dumay, J., Bernardi, C., Guthrie, J., & Demartini, P. (2016). Integrated reporting: A structured literature review.
Accounting Forum, 40(3), 166–185. doi:10.1016/j.accfor.2016.06.001
Dumay, J., & Cai, L. (2014). A review and critique of content analysis as a methodology for inquiring into IC
disclosure. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 15(2), 264–290. doi:10.1108/JIC-01-2014-0010
Guthrie, J., & Murthy, V. (2009). Past, present and possible future developments in human capital accounting.
Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting, 13(2), 125–142. doi:10.1108/14013380910968647
Guthrie, J., & Parker, L. D. (2011). Reflections and projections 25 years of interdisciplinary perspectives on
accounting, auditing and accountability research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 25(1), 6–26.
doi:10.1108/09513571211196829
Guthrie, J., Ricceri, F., & Dumay, J. (2012). Reflections and projections: A decade of Intellectual Capital
Accounting Research. The British Accounting Review, 44(2), 68–82. doi:10.1016/j.bar.2012.03.004
Manhart, M., & Thalmann, S. (2015). Protecting organizational knowledge: A structured literature review.
Journal of Knowledge Management, 19(2), 190–211. doi:10.1108/JKM-05-2014-0198
Massaro, M., Dumay, J., & Garlatti, A. (2015). Public sector knowledge management: A structured literature
review. Journal of Knowledge Management, 19(3), 530–558. doi:10.1108/JKM-11-2014-0466
Massaro, M., Dumay, J. C., & Guthrie, J. (2016). On the shoulders of giants: Undertaking a structured literature
review in accounting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 29(5), 767–901. doi:10.1108/AAAJ-01-
2015-1939
Massaro, M., Handley, K., Bagnoli, C., & Dumay, J. (2016). Knowledge Management in Small and Medium
Enterprises. A structured literature review. Journal of Knowledge Management, 20(2), 258–291. doi:10.1108/
JKM-08-2015-0320
Miles, M. B. Huberman, A. M. & Saldana, J. (2013). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
Nielsen, C., Lund, M., Montemari, M., Paolone, F., Massaro, M., & Dumay, J. (2019). Business Models. A
research overview. London: Routledge.
Nielsen, C., Lund, M., Thomsen, P., Brøndum, K., Sort, J., Byrge C., … Dumay, J. (2018), Depicting A
Performative Research Agenda: The 4th Stage Of Business Model Research. Journal of Business Models, 6(2),
59–64.
Porter, M. E. (1996). What is Strategy? Harvard Business Review, 74(6), 61–78. PMID:10158474
Schlegelmilch, B. B., Diamantopoulos, A., & Kreuz, P. (2003). Strategic innovation: The construct, its drivers
and its strategic outcomes. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 11(2), 117–132. doi:10.1080/0965254032000102948
Schumacher, A., Erol, S., & Sihn, W. (2016). A Maturity Model for Assessing Industry 4.0 Readiness and Maturity
of Manufacturing Enterprises. Procedia CIRP, 52, 161–166. doi:10.1016/j.procir.2016.07.040
Volume 11 • Issue 3 • July-September 2019
47
Carlo Bagnoli is Full Professor of Strategy Innovation at the Department of Management, Ca’ Foscari University of
Venice. He received a Ph.D. in Business Economics at Ca’ Foscari University of Venice. He was visiting research
fellow at the University of Florida. He is Scientific Director of Strategy Innovation Srl that is a Ca’ Foscari University
Spin-off. His research interests include knowledge management, competitive strategy, business model innovation.
Carlo’s research work has been published in various outlets, including the Journal of Business Economics and
Management, Industrial Management & Data System, the Journal of Management and Governance and the
Journal of Intellectual Capital.
Francesca Dal Mas has a master’s degree in business administration from Udine University and a law degree
from Bologna University, Italy. She got her Ph.D. in Managerial and Actuarial Sciences from the Universities of
Udine and Trieste, and she is now Honorary Fellow at the University of Rome La Sapienza. She was founder and
CEO of three small companies and she has served as marketing manager and deputy project manager at a small
international pharmaceutical company. She also teaches finance, law, strategy and accounting at post graduate
and undergraduate courses organized by public bodies and private business schools.
Maurizio Massaro, Ph.D., is an associate professor at Ca’ Foscari University of Venice and was lecturer at Udine
University since 2008. Before joining academia, he was founder and CEO of multiple consultancy firms. He
has been a visiting Professor at Florida Gulf Coast University and Leicester University. His research interests
include knowledge management, intellectual capital, and research methods. In 2016 won the Emerald Literati
Award for Excellence as Highly Commended paper in the Journal of Knowledge Management. His last book
“Sustainable Development in the Developing World” got the endorsement of US ambassador Andrew Young who
wrote the “to the reader” section. Maurizio main references are: Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.co.uk/
citations?user=3kMvyyYAAAAJ
Schumpeter, J. (1971). Teoria dello sviluppo economico. Firenze: Sansoni Editore.
Spender, J. C. (1989). Industry Recipes: The Nature and Sources of Managerial Judgement. Oxford: Blackwell.
Treacy, M., & Wiersema, F. (1993). Customer Intimacy and Other Value Disciplines Customer Intimacy and
Other Value Disciplines. Harvard Business Review, 71(9301), 84–93.
Verganti, R. (2008). Design, meanings and radical innovation: A meta-model and a research agenda. Journal of
Product Innovation Management, 25(5), 436–456. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2008.00313.x
Verganti, R. (2011). Innovazione di prodotto e sviluppo delle imprese. In Methodologies and Technologis for
Networked Enterprises. New York: Springer.
