Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043604 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Article
New Business Models in the Energy Sector in the Context of
Revolutionary Transformations
Lazar Gitelman and Mikhail Kozhevnikov *
Department of Energy and Industrial Management System, Ural Federal University,
620002 Ekaterinburg, Russia
* Correspondence: m.v.kozhevnikov@urfu.ru
Abstract: The relevance of the problem of improving business models in the energy industry has
become especially acute in recent years due to the energy transition, the emergence of new energy
production and consumption technologies, and the increase in environmental requirements for en-
ergy companies’ performance. The purpose of the study is to form recommendations for creating
business models in energy companies that meet modern realities and ensure the sustainable devel-
opment of the energy business in an environment that is characterized by increased uncertainty and
aggressive competition. Based on the analysis of scientific publications and the systematization of
industry cases, it is proved that business models in the energy sector are likely to transform in the
following three aspects: implementation of green technologies as a response to the public demand
for clean energy; spatial organization of production based on platforms and digital tools; and active
implementation of customized knowledge-intensive services. This article discusses the develop-
ment of the social investment concept, the key factors affecting its implementation in the energy
sector and related industries, and its risks and limitations in the times of energy crises. It is justified
that new business models require changes in energy market infrastructure and strategic manage-
ment principles. In this regard, the authors developed recommendations for the adaptation of the
wholesale and retail electricity and power market to the structural, technological, and economic
transformations in the energy production and consumption areas. The main advantages, barriers,
and ideas for the effective implementation of innovative business models in energy companies are
verified through an expert survey.
Keywords: business model; energy transition; diversification; smart contract; platform; demand
management; energy as a service; virtual power plants; knowledge-intensive service
1. Introduction
1.1. Genesis of the Business Model Concept
A business model is a client-centered concept: it is generally used to describe a com-
pany’s prompt and precise response to any change in customers’ needs; companies’ ef-
forts to foster enduring relationships with their customers, not only in the process of prod-
uct design and manufacturing but also by providing after-sales services, e.g., support at
the later stages of the product’s (or project’s) lifecycle. In fact, a business model is one of
the key competencies which helps a company distinguish itself from the rivalling firms,
create innovations, and quickly bring them to markets, as well as determine the strategic
priorities and relationships between business processes.
In economics, the concept of a business model came to the fore in the 1980s and 1990s
[1–4]. Initially, business models were mostly used in such spheres as the services sector,
IT industry, media business, automotive industry, and electronics, that is, the spheres
with a large number of products with various modifications intended for the mass market
Citation: Gitelman, L.; Kozhevnikov,
M. New Business Models in the
Energy Sector in the Context of
Revolutionary Transformations.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043604
Academic Editor: Paolo Rosa
Received: 15 December 2022
Revised: 26 January 2023
Accepted: 12 February 2023
Published: 15 February 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license
(https://creativecommons.org/license
s/by/4.0/).
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 2 of 22
[3]. At this time, the most fundamental studies in the field of business models were pub-
lished. Among them are the publications of D.F. Abell [5,6], P. Vervest [7,8], G. Hamel [9],
H. Chesbrough [10,11], A. Osterwalder and Y. Pigneur [12–14], A. Slywotzky [15], and C.
Zott and R. Amit [1,16]. In the classical interpretation of these authors, the business model,
as a rule, was considered as the process of creating and delivering values to the client with
effective costs, that is, essentially answering the question of how the company earns
money. Thus, the financial, economic, and marketing components were the basis of the
business model concept.
Among recent studies, the most prominent works include the monographs by T.
Clark and B. Hazen [17], C. Linz, G. Müller-Stewens, and A. Zimmermann [18]. The ty-
pology proposed by the latest authors integrates both traditional and advanced ideas
about the concept (for example, platform or project business models) and includes four
types, which can be used by companies when developing the customized products and
services (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Modern typology of business models (based on [18]).
Platform business models today are of increased interest, which is due to the spread
of platform markets (mainly in the high-tech segment of the tertiary sector of the econ-
omy) [19,20]. It is noted that the main advantage of such a business model is to reduce the
role of the institution of traditional mediation and, accordingly, transactional, operating
rooms, temporary, and other costs for all subjects of economic interaction—the manufac-
turer of the service, its consumers, and the owner of the platform [21,22]. In addition, the
“everything-as-a-service” approach and convenient forms of payment (pay-as-you-go)
used as part of platform business models contribute to the expansion of the assortment
and the quality of the products and services provided to consumers [23,24].
In modern notations, the business model is also considered as an integral component
of technological entrepreneurship [25], strategic (proactive) management [26], and crisis
management [27]. Specialized areas of business modeling are developing, for example,
business continuity management (BCM)—a systematic intelligent process of identifying
potential threats, analyzing their impact on business, and developing proactive solutions
to effectively respond to crisis situations in order to protect the interests of stakeholders,
reputation, and the most significant business areas of the company [28–30]. Therefore, it
can be stated that the boundaries of the business model concept are becoming wider, and
today, the business model is perceived not only as a marketing tool that increases the
competitiveness of the company but also as an integral element of the strategy, based on
the use of advanced IT-tools and scientific and technical achievements.
1.2. Factors Determining the Spread of Business Models in the Electric Power Industry
In the electric power industry, which is one of the most complex infrastructural sec-
tors and which is the object of the current study, the topic of business models has started
to gain ground only comparatively recently [31]. The liberalization of energy markets and
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 3 of 22
intensifying competition between energy companies, renewable energy development, and
cascading innovation in the energy sector have been conducive to the transition from the
single-product model (supply of electricity and/or heat) to the model based on a diversi-
fied portfolio of various energy services [32,33]. The latter, in turn, requires an adjustment
of business modeling tools to the to the unique technological specifics of the industry, as
well as its social function—ensuring reliable and sufficient energy production for all eco-
nomic entities. However, in the opinion of a number of experts [31,34], the problems of
business modeling in such a complex industry as the electric power industry have not yet
found proper lighting in the literature. There is a serious deficiency of both theoretical and
practical knowledge in this field. For example, it is critical to include technological fea-
tures of energy production to the business model structure and to analyze their impact on
the financial results of energy companies. These issues are often ignored by researchers,
and therefore it is an important motive for writing and the subject of theoretical discourse
of this article.
An Important role in the transformation of business models is played by the unfold-
ing energy crisis, which makes the energy transition more complicated (in this article, the
energy transition is understood as a set of profound technical and economic transfor-
mations in energy production, supply, and consumption aimed at minimizing the envi-
ronmental impact of the energy industry [35–38]).
The transformations in the business models of energy companies are determined by
the general logic of the energy transition and, in particular, by the number of factors. These
factors include far-reaching revisions of the eco- and energy efficiency requirements for
manufacturing processes; the development of ‘green’ energy technologies—the main goal
of the energy transition [36,37]; advancements in smart energy infrastructure through the
extensive use of smart grids, small-scale renewable energy systems, microgrids, cutting-
edge diagnostics, and repair tools for energy equipment [39–41]; a new stage in electrifi-
cation, encompassing smart cities, homes, industrial production, transport, and commer-
cial and utilities sectors [42,43]; and the transition from the product-based business logic
(energy is sold as a product) to the service-based logic, which means that energy compa-
nies not only supply electricity and heat but also offer a whole range of services for energy
efficiency/energy consumption management [44–46]. The latter to a certain extent leads to
the emergence of active energy consumers or prosumers, who become rightful partici-
pants in the bilateral relationships on the energy market [47,48].
One more factor that should be added to this list is the integral feature of energy
supply—its stability, which is gaining a particular social significance in the period of the
global energy crisis. This characteristic corresponds to the demand for energy and capac-
ity in terms of their amount, parameters, time, and place; continuity of energy supply;
affordable prices for all consumers, i.e., prices reflect the actual costs of services; and en-
vironmental friendliness and safety in all elements of the energy supply process.
As a result of the above-described changes, the line between energy producers and
consumers is getting increasingly blurred. Energy services are now becoming more per-
sonalized, corresponding to individual consumption models. Energy users are now of-
fered more and more new services provided by companies from different spheres—infor-
mation and telecommunications (Google and Apple), automotive industry (General Mo-
tors, Tesla, and Volkswagen), software and digital solutions (SAP and Siemens), electron-
ics (Samsung and Philips), and e-commerce platforms (Amazon) (Table 1).
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 4 of 22
Table 1. Examples of tech companies entering the energy sector (developed by the authors on the
basis of systematization of the data given in [49–52]).
Sector of
Economy
Main Strategic
Focus Examples of Integrated Solutions Examples of
Companies
Original
equipment
manufacturers
All the services
where devices
play the key
role
• Smart home
• Energy supply management sys-
tems based on preinstalled soft-
ware
• Closed protocol systems
Schneider Electric,
Google, Siemens,
Semtech, and Gen-
eral Electric
Information
and communi-
cation technol-
ogies
Comprehensive
solutions of
data collection
and processing
• Maintenance of energy generat-
ing assets and optimization of
energy consumption with the
help of software
• Event data management and
data accumulation
• Consumer data, personalization,
and analytics
Oracle, Accenture,
IBM, and Cisco
Car industry
Rebuilding op-
erating models
and entering
new markets
• Industrial solar panels
• Wind generators and solar cells
for EV charging
• Use their own RES plants to re-
duce CO2 emissions
Seat, Honda,
Volkswagen, and
General Motors
As these companies are competing successfully with traditional participants in the
energy market, the latter are forced to innovate to stay afloat. Thus, the nature of market
relations in such a very conservative industry as electric power is fundamentally chang-
ing. Some energy companies have begun to use the elements of multiservice and platform
business models, however, these attempts naturally face barriers caused by the unwilling-
ness of energy market infrastructure, individual consumers, and utilities’ management.
The identification of the necessary conditions and restrictions arising from the introduc-
tion of such business models in energy enterprises is another important subject for theo-
retical analysis.
1.3. The Purpose and the Scope of the Study
In light of the identified trends and modern challenges facing the energy industry,
the purpose of this study is to form recommendations for creating business models in
energy companies that meet new realities and ensure the sustainable development of the
energy business in an environment that is characterized by increased uncertainty and ag-
gressive competition.
It is important to emphasize that the authors do not set the goal of creating a template
of a business model that is universal for any energy company. The main idea of the article
is to demonstrate how unique technological features of the electric power industry and
changes in market relations that occur under the influence of numerous factors listed
above should be taken into account when creating new business models, which barriers
can occur during their implementation, and what practical decisions should be made in
order to soften potential risks. This is the main increase in theoretical knowledge in the
field of the problem of business modeling, which generally corresponds to ideas about the
role of theory in science, including economics and management [53,54].
To achieve the purpose, the following tasks are set: identifying key features of busi-
ness models in the energy sector; systematizing the directions of their transformation and
determining their most promising configurations in the context of new realities, including
crisis phenomena in the economy and energy transition; identification of the necessary
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 5 of 22
transformations in energy market infrastructure; and determining the conditions, barriers,
and decisions for the practical implementation of business models in electric power utili-
ties.
The author’s position regarding the definition of a business model is expressed in the
fact that this concept characterizes organizational forms of attracting investments to up-
date production at the most modern scientific and technical level and promoting products
(services) in the market that ensure steady growth in financial results. In this regard, the
article attempted to justify that the radical changes taking place in the industry against the
background of energy transition and structural shifts in the economy open up new oppor-
tunities for the energy business, allowing it to create diversified portfolios of services with
increased value for consumers.
Our analysis revealed that energy business models are increasingly using platform
elements while expanding the range of products offered by the utilities, primarily due to
the service component, which emphasizes customization and environmental performance
(to confirm this thesis, the authors separately studied the penetration of the ‘environmen-
tal–social–governance’ (ESG) concept into the industry). Thus, despite the unique tech-
nical and economic features of the energy sector, which leave a peculiar imprint on the
functioning of energy companies, it can be argued that the principles of forming business
models in the energy and other industries are converging. We believe that the implemen-
tation of the proposed recommendations in practice will contribute to the sustainable de-
velopment of the electric power industry in the interests of various actors—energy com-
panies and consumers, as well as regulatory authorities that form the “rules of the game”
in specific energy markets.
2. Data and Method
Methodologically, the study relies on the methods of systems analysis, logical struc-
ture analysis, content analysis, conceptual design methods, visualization methods, and
interview methods. To identify the priority areas in business development, we surveyed
74 experts—top and line managers from the energy industry, energy services sphere, and
IT and telecommunications companies (see Table 2). The main criteria for the selection of
experts were their interest in the issue (willingness to take part in achieving the objectives
set), their competence (length of working experience, position, experience in participating
in innovative projects, and level of education), their general scope of knowledge, views,
and creative abilities. The survey focused on identifying the attitude of the companies’
leaders to business modeling as a tool for ensuring the strategic sustainability of the mod-
ern energy business, as well as the main advantages and barriers that arise when imple-
menting business models in energy companies.
Table 2. Sample breakup by sector.
Sector Business Sphere Number of Experts
Electric power indus-
try
Energy generation 8
Energy transmission and distribution 12
Power supply and trading 9
Energy services
Energy efficiency services 8
Engineering 7
Maintenance and repair 8
Installation and commissioning services 6
IT Software solutions 6
Telecommunications Telecom operator 10
Total 74
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 6 of 22
The study relies on the data from academic publications; expert analytical reports of
the International Energy Agency, UN Energy Commission for Europe, International Re-
newable Energy Agency (IRENA), and the consulting companies PwC, Accenture, and
Deloitte (more than 15 reports issued in the 2017–2022 period in total); statistical data pro-
vided by online databases Lazard and Enerdata; an the official websites of energy compa-
nies. About 80 scientific publications were analyzed, including classic studies that laid the
foundations of business modeling [1,5–16], as well as industry-specific studies that consider
the business model through the prism of the technical and economic features of the energy
industry. The search for publications was mainly carried out in the ScienceDirect, SCOPUS,
and MDPI databases.
3. Results
3.1. Vectors of Transformation of Energy Companies’ Business Models
The analysis of scientific publications and practical industrial cases allows to identify
three main areas in which the business models of energy companies are developing.
3.1.1. Transition from ‘Linear’ to ‘Spatial’ Models of Production Organization through
Platform- and Network-Based Solutions and Digital Tools
According to the traditional idea of business models in the energy sector, an energy
company performs all types of activity within the sectoral value chain in three dimensions
(Figure 2). Electricity (the main product) is transmitted only in one direction: from the
source to ‘passive’ consumers, who pay for it according to the tariffs. In the classical
model, energy companies’ margin growth can be achieved only by cutting the costs of
energy production or through economies of scale. The latter, in turn, can be achieved
through vertical and/or horizontal integration.
Figure 2. Classical business model of a large energy company.
For a long time, energy companies have used the vertical integration of operations in
the sphere of energy generation, natural gas production, energy transportation and
wholesale trading, and the supply of energy and services to end users in order to optimize
their businesses and manage their risks. The horizontal integration of production pro-
cesses in the energy sector and in the gas industry creates synergy and increases growth
potential through the convergence of the two sectors, especially the growing importance
of natural gas in energy generation and further development of dual-fuel products for end
users. The business model shown in Figure 2 is underpinned by the classical concept of
the linear value chain: generation–transmission–distribution–trading–consumption. This
concept, however, had grown obsolete by the early 2010s.
A good example of a company that was able to proactively meet these challenges is
the German-based company E.ON. In 2014, E.ON split into two companies, one of which
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 7 of 22
focused on energy business centered around renewables, intelligent systems, and the In-
ternet of Energy (IoE), while the other, called Uniper, concentrated on conventional en-
ergy [55,56].
In today’s world, energy companies seek to make their business models more net-
work-based. An illustrative example is the business model of the Switzerland-based en-
ergy company EGL, which has three major areas of activity: energy trading, management
of its own asset base, and gas supply (Figure 3). EGL uses its own productive capacities
to supply fuel for high-efficiency electric power generation, which, through the system of
asset management, is closely tied to trading operations. Along with supplying gas to its
own power stations, EGL also supplies gas to other consumers via long- and short-term
contracts. Moreover, this energy company is a European center of competencies in the
sphere of market analysis.
Figure 3. EGL business model.
Thus, the EGL business model is based on close ties between the system of gas sup-
ply, power generation (gas-based cogeneration plants), transport infrastructure, energy
trading platforms (energy exchanges), and additional financial tools. The key competence
distinguishing EGL from its competitors is the network form of organization. Through its
expertise in trading, presence in all European countries, and marketing know-how, EGL
has managed to significantly broaden its product portfolio and expand into a variety of
markets.
The business models of E.ON and EGL can be classified as gentailer models (‘gen-
tailer’ is a term coined by combining the words generation and retailer). Gentailer com-
panies are involved both in power generation and retail, in other words, they own both
ends of the supply chain. A gentailer company usually pays network tariffs to the opera-
tors but also buys and sells energy on the spot market to bridge the gap between supply
and demand at a certain moment of time [49,57]. This term became popular in the 2010s
in the practice of American and Australian energy companies, subsequently spreading to
other countries with developed liberalized energy markets [49,58,59].
E.ON and EGL are justifiably considered the world’s innovation leaders in the energy
industry. Their service portfolio, however, is typical of vertically integrated energy com-
panies, while their forms of interaction with clients are not very diverse. The energy tran-
sition, together with the ongoing digitalization and energy decentralization, as well as
changes in the economic relationships between energy producers and consumers, result
in the emergence of completely new business models with a focus on environmental sus-
tainability, personified approach, and flexibility [31,49,60–62]. These, for example, include
the Grid Developer model—a company that buys, develops, builds, owns, and serves
power transmission lines connecting decentralized generators with the operators of local
distribution systems. Another model is called Network Manager—an operator of energy
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 8 of 22
distribution devices that provides access to its networks to industrial enterprises and tel-
ecommunications companies. The testing of these business models is still fragmented and
occurs mainly in regions with a high concentration of distributed generation plants.
Another striking example is the conceptual business model of a virtual power plant
(VPP) operator (Figure 4). Particularly noteworthy about this model is the dramatic in-
crease in reciprocally directed flows of energy transactions, data, and tangible products
(primarily equipment) between the VPP and multiple participants of energy supply, in-
cluding those that are not directly connected to the energy industry.
Figure 4. Business model of a VPP operator (developed by the authors on the basis of [34,63–65]).
Companies with business models of this kind make a special focus on the optimiza-
tion of the sources of energy in terms of their cost, reliability of supply, and appeal to
customers [34,63]. A VPP operator can also perform the functions of demand management
and control various power receivers of commercial consumers and households to elimi-
nate imbalances within the system. This can be done via a wholesale market or through
direct agreements with owners/operators of power grids.
Let us consider, for example, the case of the British company LimeJump [66], which
has entered the UK grid balancing market via its VPP (the purpose of the balancing market
is to balance electricity supply and demand in real time). LimeJump is an energy tech
platform, acting as an aggregator of renewable generators, energy storage units, and de-
mand management resources connected via software involving big data analytics and ma-
chine learning technologies. For this company to operate, a complex set of legal founda-
tions and mechanisms is needed so that units of different types and sizes can work to-
gether as one large power station.
Another example is the project realized by the American company New Brunswick
Power [67], involving 1400 households and 30 companies. To balance the load on the wind
farm, the energy company installed a control system that detects and uses large amounts
of flexible loads of consumers (by regulating the air temperature, capacity of hot water
boilers, and other equipment that can store energy and is suitable for interval operation).
According to New Brunswick Power, a VPP can provide an extra regulatory resource of
17 MW and thus help mitigate the daily grid load during morning peak periods.
Based on formal criteria, the following VPP-related models can be identified. First,
this is the traditional model/model of a power supply company: a company operating on
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 9 of 22
the energy market creates a network that controls various distributed generation units
and flexible capacity units of its consumers. The second model is client-oriented: consum-
ers install a VPP to meet their energy needs. In this case a VPP is used to manage the
consumers’ own energy consumption, for example, large supermarkets such as the Amer-
ican chain Wal-Mart use VPPs to control and regulate energy consumption by different
objects in their stores nationwide: refrigeration systems, air conditioners, lighting, and
systems of ventilation and heating. Finally, there is the aggregator model, when an inde-
pendent organization (aggregator) is established on the market to serve as a VPP operator.
An aggregator connects consumers to its VPP and pays the participants for taking part in
the so-called energy demand management programs. The amount of payments de-pends
on the conditions in a particular market. Thus, a VPP can be used for commercial (whole-
sale of energy) or technical purposes (system services—load frequency control and power
quality maintenance) or combine these two functions.
The most attractive for VPP operators are the markets with a wide network of dis-
tributed generation sources and where consumers have a legal right to choose their energy
suppliers, as well as insular energy systems and remote (isolated) energy systems.
In the business model shown in Figure 4, an important role is played by knowledge-
intensive services based on metering, financial accounting, and information security [46].
For instance, energy companies may use customer analytics tools to tailor their marketing
offers (e.g., new solutions in the sphere of energy efficiency) and newsletters (changes in
the legislation and tariffs) for particular segments and groups. The collected data can also
be analyzed and decoded for plan-fact analysis of services by categories, for benchmark-
ing of the portfolio of performance contracts, and for expenditure forecasting. Moreover,
energy companies may use blockchain technologies for concluding smart contracts. This
way, they can significantly reduce their administration and cybersecurity transaction
costs [68,69].
Blockchain and smart contracts underlie the model of peer-to-peer (P2P) trading,
which emerged as a result of the fast development of the sharing economy. For the energy
industry, P2P trading holds a lot of practical value because it enables companies to inte-
grate intermittent small-scale generation into a system while keeping the intermediate
costs low. In the energy sector, P2P trading refers to the buying and selling of energy be-
tween two or more parties connected to the network via a secure digital platform. The
first recorded peer-to-peer energy trade occurred in New York in 2016, when a resident
with solar panels sold a few kilowatt hours to his neighbor via the Ethereum blockchain.
Experts believe [70,71] that P2P is an effective option for businesses because, in this
business model, it is possible to use different profiles of generation and demand from
different clients. The drawbacks of this business model are mostly connected to the nor-
mative and administrative difficulties impeding the mass spreading of P2P technologies.
3.1.2. The Rise of the Corporate Green Agenda as a Reaction to Public Demand
This trend in the development of business models seems natural in light of the ongo-
ing energy transition, but what is interesting is the details of how this model is imple-
mented by the companies engaging in the risk-fraught renewables business and how they
make this business profitable and scalable. The theoretical aspects of creating such busi-
ness models are considered in sufficient detail, for example, in [72–74]. In this article, we
decided to focus on a number of specific industrial examples in order to make appropriate
practical generalizations.
NextEra Energy (Juno Beach, FI, USA) is the world’s largest generator of wind and
solar energy [75]. It is an electric utility holding company, the owner of two subsidiaries—
Florida Power & Light (FPL) and Gulf Power—and a number of startups investing in re-
newable energy assets. Moreover, NextEra is the world’s leader in the field of battery stor-
age energy. In 2019, NextEra owned a 15.1-gigawatt wind farm and a 2.5-gigawatt solar
farm and also launched new RES projects with a combined capacity of 11 GW. The com-
pany’s business model is based on selling electricity to end users as part of a long-term
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 10 of 22
fixed-price Power Purchase Agreement (PPA). Fixed-price PPAs ensure a stable cash flow,
providing funds that can be reinvested into R&D for further growth.
A similar business model is implemented by Brookfield Renewable Partners (To-
ronto, ON, Canada), a company which owns a variety of hydropower, wind, solar, and
storage facilities [76]. Fixed-price contracts help to dampen the risks of uncertainty asso-
ciated with the energy tariffs in the regions of the company’s presence (especially in the
countries with unstable geopolitical situation such as Colombia and Brazil).
One more company using fixed-price contracts is Ormat Technologies (Reno, NV,
USA). The company [77] manages the portfolio of geothermal power plants in the USA,
Central America, Asia, and Africa. It also designs, manufactures, and sells power equip-
ment and other products to third-party geothermal operators. What distinguishes Ormat
Technologies’ business model is the concentration of competencies in a quite peculiar
niche—geothermal energy. It took the company only several decades to become a global
leader in this segment of RES and, by using its subsidiaries, organize the production of
unique power equipment. The annual revenue of Ormat Technologies is now USD 700
million, 60% of which come from electricity sales and 40%, from sales of equipment and
related services.
First Solar (Tempe, AZ, USA) specializes in manufacturing thin-filmed solar panels
based on cadmium telluride (CdTe) in a semiconductor layer, instead of crystalline cad-
mium as in most other panels [78]. First Solar panels have a larger size and are more ex-
pensive, but due to their higher efficiency, the productions costs of 1 kilowatt-hour are
lower in comparison with rivalling products. The key factor behind First Solar’s success
in the field of solar generation is that it is has managed to achieve the best financial balance
in the sector: at the end of 2019, the company’s net cash on the balance sheet was USD 2.1
billion against the liabilities of USD 600 million, which gives First Solar enough resources
to continue investing in R&D and testing various technical and structural solutions.
SolarEdge Technologies (Herzliya, Israel) specializes in unique technologies for the op-
timization of renewable energy consumption. This company [79] has developed smart in-
verter solutions to improve the process of conversion of DC power from solar panels to
AC power used by the power grid. This solution enables solar cells to maximize their
electricity output while simultaneously cutting the costs of electricity production. So-
larEdge Technologies also invests in such segments as battery storage systems and electric
vehicle charging, which in the future will maximize its opportunities for cross-selling
parts to adjacent markets. The company is planning to make its business model more bal-
anced and diversified and expand beyond the niche (selling unique solutions in a local
market segment) to address more of its customers’ needs in various markets.
These examples show that companies operating in the sphere of green energy tech-
nologies rely primarily on the following three components in their business models. The
first component is the technical know-how, which, on the one hand, gives the company a
competitive advantage over its competitors and, on the other hand, increases its value in
the eyes of customers by improving the sustainability and efficiency of energy consump-
tion. The second component is the company’s efforts to maintain steady growth by im-
proving customer outreach and expanding into related markets and sectors [72]. Addi-
tionally, last but not least, continuous investment in the development of the company’s
own competencies makes it more competitive in the energy market.
3.1.3. Servitization: Companies Increase Their Revenue and Profits Not by Selling the
Main Product—Electricity and Heat—But by Improving Their Sales of Services
An example of an energy company placing a bet on services is the Austrian enterprise
EVN AG, which divided its business model into two key segments—energy business and
environmental services based on the use of green tech solutions (Figure 5). For an energy
company such as EVN AG, the development of ancillary services not only helps expand
its offering but also shows that it is keeping up with the modern agenda and embracing
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 11 of 22
ESG, thus making it more attractive to investors. EVN AG has managed to boost its com-
petitive edge by offering its clients comprehensive solutions in the sphere of water supply
and disposal, as well as waste utilization.
Figure 5. Service-oriented ESG business model.
A separate actively developing segment of service business models is Energy-as-a-
Service, or EaaS. It means that a company sells a package of services that are really im-
portant to consumers and uses energy carriers only as a material foundation for these
services (microenvironment control, system of integrated control over the household util-
ities infrastructure, and energy storage control) [80,81]. EaaS contracts are now becoming
more and more popular: by 2026, the EaaS market size is expected to reach USD 220 billion
[60].
The EaaS business model fits into the ‘partner of partners’ category [82,83], meaning
that the company on a compulsory basis offers consumers ancillary services, increasing
consumers’ ‘energy’ comfort (e.g., change in batteries in energy storage systems at the end
of their useful life, automation and programming of household appliances, control over
the return of excess energy to the grid, etc.). Such services may be provided by the com-
pany itself or by its partners—other suppliers of goods and services with a good reputa-
tion in the market, for example, ABB, Siemens, GE, Tesla, and Solar City. Therefore, the
success of this business model largely depends on investment in data analytics, which is
necessary to estimate demand elasticity and identify partners with the most suitable com-
plementary technologies, products, and services, thus increasing the value of a hybrid
offer.
Not surprisingly, the EaaS business model is now used not only by energy companies
but also by manufacturers of energy equipment and parts. Recently, Schneider Electric
shifted its focus to smart power supply systems based on integrated solutions, including
smart connected devices, edge control, applications, analytics, and services. In the early
2010s, the company started testing IoT technologies and developed a first-generation IoT-
enabled platform, EcoStruxure, designed to digitalize and simplify electrical distribution
and power management. The results of the transformation were impressive: in 2016, the
company’s revenue was EUR 24.7 billion, out of which 44% came from IoT solutions alone
[84].
In general, it can be stated that the service business model that integrates platform
tools and the latest information and communication technologies is considered by energy
companies in the context of the ongoing technological transformations and the energy
transition as the most promising. It allows for a reversal in the logic of doing business: to
move from the ‘single-product’ model, which involves maximizing sales of the main
goods (electricity and heat), to the implementation of packages of knowledge-intensive
services aimed at optimizing energy consumption processes and growth of the consum-
ers’ energy comfort.
3.2. ESG as a New Framework for Energy Business Development
One of the rapidly developing trends in the energy industry is the growing im-
portance of ESG compliance for energy companies. Its three pillars include environmental
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 12 of 22
responsibility (waste and pollution control, waste management, and carbon footprint re-
duction), social responsibility (good working conditions and equal job opportunities, as
well as ethical responsibility towards personnel, suppliers, clients, partners, and consum-
ers), and governance (the high quality of corporate management, transparency, fair pay,
responsibility towards stakeholders, and compliance of the management standards with
modern social values) [85–87].
Energy companies are among the world’s leaders in ESG compliance. On the one
hand, this can be explained by purely economic factors (more efficient resource use im-
proves companies’ financial performance); on the other hand, compliance with ESG prin-
ciples is important for investors: almost 100% of strategic investors are monitoring ESG-
rankings of companies. In 2021, Schneider Electric (France, Rueil-Malmaison), which has
the largest energy division, transnational company Ørsted A/S (Denmark, Fredericia), and
oil company Neste Oyj (Finland, Espoo) were in the top five of the ESG corporations, ac-
cording to Corporate Knights [88].
It should be noted that ESG rankings are justly criticized for evaluating not the actual
performance of the companies in the sphere of social responsibility, environmental pro-
tection, corporate management, etc., but the documents describing these initiatives—strat-
egies, reports, declarations of intent, regulations, roadmaps, KPIs, and so on. In other
words, in practice, it is quite difficult to verify whether corporate investment will really
be directed to projects with high eco-economic efficiency. As a result, ESG may turn into
a window-dressing gesture meant for investors rather than something meaningful and
effective.
The direct impact of energy companies’ sustainable development programs on their
attractiveness for investors is reflected in green bond issuance. Russian banks have re-
cently begun to issue ESG-linked loans, which is also a positive sign. Companies that com-
mit to the ESG agenda may enjoy easier access to finance and global value chains, which
is particularly important in the sanctions period. There has been a shift in the paradigm
of behavior, demonstrated by young investors and executives in the energy sector: in ad-
dition to financial indicators, many of them have started paying attention to the ‘green’
aspects in companies’ performance. At this point, however, it is crystal clear that, in addi-
tion to being more expensive than traditional energy sources, RES cannot fully meet our
energy needs.
Digitalization is one of the factors contributing to the achievement of ESG goals in
the energy sector. There is research evidence [87,89,90] that most of the digital solutions
implemented by energy companies are intended to optimize consumption, to balance the
load peaks, and to conserve energy, which helps save natural resources and reduce GHG
emissions (see Table 3). Other solutions are aimed at ensuring workplace safety in power
plants and promoting distance learning systems and virtual/augmented reality systems
for personnel training, which has a positive impact on corporate social responsibility and
the quality of corporate governance. There is a separate group of factors related to digi-
talization: for example, remote monitoring systems installed at energy facilities contribute
to the development of ‘manless’ technologies, which improve workplace safety and allow
companies to move to condition-based maintenance, thus promoting resource-conserving
consumption [91,92].
In all likelihood, despite the ongoing economic and energy crisis, ESG principles will
be playing an increasingly important role in the development of the energy business. This
means that more and more energy companies and actors in related markets will be re-
orienting their business models towards the green agenda, creating new eco- and energy-
efficient services for end users and implementing low-carbon technologies for energy gen-
eration. Companies with high ESG ratings can also count on extra financial and regulatory
support from national governments: such plans have already been announced by the
American and British governments [93,94].
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 13 of 22
Table 3. Examples of ESG factors and the corresponding digital solutions.
ESG Factor Digital Solutions Outcomes
Technology
Smart EV charging infrastructure
Creation of EV charging infrastructure for private
and public transport, implementation of platform so-
lutions for EV charging infrastructure control, and
testing of new technologies (e.g., smart charging,
V2G, energy storage systems, and integration in
smart grids).
Cutting CO2 emissions by stimulating the devel-
opment of electric transport, including public
transport. Optimization of resource use with the
help of V2G technology.
Demand response management
Creation of mechanisms for adjusting energy con-
sumption in relation to the normal load profile
through prices or incentive payments.
CO2 emissions reduction and resource conserva-
tion.
Demand response systems to reduce consump-
tion in peak times, thus cutting СО2 emissions.
Digital technologies for remote load control and for
remote control of power plants’ equipment
Creation of a technology to regulate the energy sys-
tem’s operation through automatic remote load con-
trol from the System Operator’s dispatch centers.
Optimization of consumption and resource con-
servation.
Solving the problem of intermittency in renewa-
ble energy with the help of balancing mecha-
nisms.
Economy and
management
Systems of predictive analytics for improved repair
and maintenance planning
Automated data system to control technical mainte-
nance and repair, and modernization and revamping
of equipment; integration with related business pro-
cesses.
Optimization of equipment cost management.
Building end-to-end processes of maintenance,
repair, and modernization. Business process
standardization. Enhanced quality of planning.
Resource conservation. Accident risk reduction.
Common Information Model (CIM)
Creation of a unified digital model of the country’s
(or region’s) energy system by logically connecting
the data models of dispatch centers and power facili-
ties.
Higher data quality, reduction in data heteroge-
neity and asynchronicity of data updates. Shorter
commissioning time. Improvement of data acces-
sibility.
Implementation of intelligent systems for power
equipment monitoring.
Platform for automated control (monitoring) of high-
voltage equipment in substations.
Transition to condition-based maintenance—sav-
ings in maintenance costs. Improvement of data
accessibility. Accident risk reduction.
3.3. Adaptation of the Energy and Capacity Markets
The energy revolution alters not only the way energy companies organize their busi-
ness but also the behavior of players in related spheres seeking to expand their offerings
for end users through the application of innovative solutions. All of the above naturally
entails transformations in the energy markets’ architecture. As our analysis shows, this
aspect still remains largely underexplored, both in the research literature and in practice.
It is, therefore, important to place a special focus on several aspects of the model of the
wholesale market of energy and capacity shared by different countries.
Wholesale energy spot market. The structural and technological transformations in-
herent in the energy transition will make the wholesale spot market obsolete for a number
of reasons:
1. As products are becoming more technologically diversified, power facilities are ac-
quiring a range of new functions: environmental, technical, and economic, which
makes them noninterchangeable and incomparable in a wide range of parameters.
Thus, they can no longer be considered as rivals (including the level of their variable
costs).
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 14 of 22
The actual competition between generating facilities is possible only for power plants
using identical kinds of fuel of identical types and sizes. The technological progress
increasingly narrows the range of generating facilities, and competition moves from
the sphere of power generation to the sphere of investment and engineering;
2. Given the large discrepancies in fuel prices (natural gas–low-grade coal) and the en-
ergy efficiency of power plants, the method of marginal-cost pricing is becoming in-
effective because, in this case, the closing price of electricity (its fuel component) will
go far beyond the average value. In the case of radical structural shifts, this will trig-
ger extra growth in the production costs in the energy systems, including both vari-
able and fixed expenses;
3. The equilibrium (marginal) price of the spot market covers only the variable costs of
manufacturers. Recovery of the fixed costs of equipment maintenance is becoming
more complicated and requires manufacturing companies either to obtain an addi-
tional margin on the spot market or to participate in competitive capacity trading on
a specialized market. The problem of covering the capacity-related expenses is made
more serious by the implementation of new capital-intensive technologies.
All of the above points to the key role played by free bilateral contracts on the whole-
sale market of energy and capacity signed in different time periods and using different
implementation mechanisms. Regulated tariffs determine the upper limits of negotiated
prices.
Wholesale capacity market. Long-term regulation of the capacity market may be used
to ensure that generating companies will participate in state investment programs, as they
will be obligated to conclude capacity delivery contracts with the national government of
the given country. Such contracts include the mechanism of guaranteed investment based
on the price of a capacity unit set by the regulator. This price is calculated by using a
certain payback period, the recovery period of capital expenditure, and the economically
justified return on investment.
Retail markets of energy and capacity. A retail energy market functions within the
limits of regional power supply systems. The market’s transport infrastructure consists of
power distribution networks. In retail markets, independent energy producers (owners of
small-scale generators) sell energy and capacity through contracts to individual users and
to local utilities companies (guaranteed supplier) at regulated tariffs. The mechanism of
competition in such a market is activated when the potential amount of total energy gen-
erated by independent energy producers exceeds the total energy demand covered by
small-scale (distributed) generation. In this case, independent producers can sell energy
to the guaranteed supplier at the competitive prices that they set for the market operator.
The latter distributes the load among the generators by applying the least-cost criterion
(the fuel component of costs). The quoted price should not exceed the rate of the regulated
tariff (in the part of the tariff related to electricity charges) set for a specific producer.
Through load distribution in the planned dispatch schedule, a unified weighted-av-
erage market price is set. This price is more favorable for consumers in comparison with
the marginal price used in the wholesale spot market.
4. Discussion
The concept of a business model, which initially evolved in highly competitive mar-
kets and segments, is now gaining popularity in the energy industry. This trend is sup-
ported by empirical evidence and is reflected in the growing body of research on this
topic. The survey we conducted as part of this study also confirms this conclusion. Over
60% of our respondents said that their companies are actively developing their own busi-
ness models to become more competitive (Figure 6).
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 15 of 22
Figure 6. Implementation of business models in Russian energy companies (experts survey results).
On the one hand, experts note very typical advantages that appear in energy compa-
nies through the use of modern business models: for example, an integrated approach to
customer service, as well as personalization of services (‘smart home’, individual tariffs
for electricity and heat tariffs, and energy consumption forecasting). However, some other
areas that are unique to the electric power industry are much more important in their
opinion. In the field of asset life cycle management, advanced technological solutions help
establish the optimal levels of remote control and preventative maintenance, thus extend-
ing the useful life of assets and the overall efficiency of the energy infrastructure and op-
timizing power grids’ operation through real-time load balancing and IoE technologies.
Such innovative elements of business models contribute to reducing operating costs
of energy companies and increasing the reliability of energy supply. Thus, taking into
account the technological specificity of a particular industry in the design of business
models is a significant factor; moreover, as approved in [1,95], it is the technological com-
ponent that ultimately determines the viability of the business model. In this regard, it is
difficult to agree with the authors stating that the content of the business model is univer-
sal for any market activity [96,97].
Changes in the technological architecture and the emergence of new market players,
increasing the intensity of competition, lead to the fact that business models are imple-
mented not only in energy companies operating in a market paradigm (power generation,
retail, and service companies) but also in utilities, which are often natural monopolies and
are, therefore, subject to rigid control from the regulator. For example, the large Russian
regional electric grid company Bashkirenergo is now building a more diversified business
model and transitioning to a partner-led model of customer service, involving a guaran-
teed supplier—a regional energy supply company. This model involves sharing the task
of installing energy meters in homes: communal and individual metering devices are in-
stalled by the grid company, while the guaranteed supplier uses meter readings to track
electricity consumption. It also implies sharing the task of meter data collection: the guar-
anteed supplier organizes metering data collection from households, for example, via
email or text messages, and then sends the data to the grid company. The grid company,
in turn, also collects the metering data in its offices and passes this information to the
guaranteed supplier. The grid company is responsible for taking control readings, and it
provides access to these data to the guaranteed supplier. Thus, the synchronization of
documentation forms and computational models starts: for more convenient data im-
port/export to/from data management systems, the guaranteed supplier and grid com-
pany adopt unified forms of aggregated data reporting and formulae for calculating the
volume of energy services for the cases not regulated by the law.
In general, the development of the business models of energy companies, according
to a number of experts [49,60], occurs as a response to radical changes in the chain of
creating energy value. The authors tend to agree with this position. However, it should be
noted that in this regard it would be more accurate to describe value chains as ‘networks’
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 16 of 22
rather than ‘chains’, since today’s energy companies, consumers, and suppliers of equip-
ment, service solutions, and software are embedded into a hyperconnected ecosystem
(Figure 7). All of these actors will have to overcome the habit of considering each element
of the value network in isolation and instead adopt a more comprehensive vision of the
new power systems and their elements.
Figure 7. Hyperconnected architecture of the future energy industry (developed by the authors on
the basis of the data given in [49]).
The key problems of implementing business models in the energy sector are as fol-
lows:
• State regulators and energy infrastructure companies tend to see increased competi-
tion in the energy sector as undesirable. The sector in general is ‘over-regulated’,
which impedes business diversification (implementation of an innovative business
model inevitably leads to diversification) [72].
• Regional power systems are technically not ready for a massive increase in the num-
ber of active users connected to the grid. Other problems include the spreading of
bidirectional and multidirectional energy flows and capacity flows and challenges
associated with the certification of new technologies [31].
• Some energy market players, primarily large private and state-owned companies,
lack economic motivation to improve their performance by offering new services.
Instead, they prefer to increase generation of electricity and heat, their main product.
Moreover, their management may lack awareness of the benefits of green energy and
ESG [98].
• Obsolete technologies and systems of corporate governance block the process of in-
novation in companies; there is a shortage of qualified specialists capable of generat-
ing new ideas and putting them into practice [99].
• Cybersecurity and data protection are considered a priority in the transition to digi-
talization of operations, business processes, and communication with clients [100].
Therefore, the following practical guidelines can be recommended for those energy
businesses that are standing at the beginning of this road. These principles have been suc-
cessfully tested by energy companies from different parts of the energy sector (generation,
transmission, and supply). First, it is necessary to evaluate the readiness of the market
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 17 of 22
(consumers and regulator), its pricing mechanisms, and the availability of the technolog-
ical infrastructure for new energy services. Second, since innovation lies at the heart of
any business model, corporate managers have to evaluate the amount of available intel-
lectual, technological, organizational, and investment resources. This also makes the ques-
tion of building ‘smart partnerships’ with universities and suppliers of knowledge-inten-
sive solutions more relevant for the business. Such issues are discussed in detail in other
studies of the authors of this article [101,102]. Third, it is recommended to create an inte-
gral automated management system connecting all the business processes and elements
of the value chain (resource planning, document flow, utility connection, budgeting and
finance, investment program, tariff calculation, and environmental and cyber security)
into a single cycle. It should be noted that these management systems not only can im-
prove the company’s performance but also make the business more flexible and respon-
sive to change, which is an essential task in times of crisis and uncertainty.
5. Conclusions
The energy sector is on the threshold of one of the most significant technological
transformations. In the future, energy companies’ business models will be focused on in-
novation, especially in the sphere of decentralized energy generation (provided that its
costs will continue to decline—a trend that is particularly relevant in crisis periods). Wide-
scale automation and advanced analytics will provide a new foundation for value chain
management. Thus, energy enterprises will be able to benefit from the optimization of
corporate governance processes, cost cutting, increased transaction security, and innova-
tion in end user services.
This study demonstrates the main vectors for the development of business models in
the electric power industry—a complex and conservative sector which has been for a long
time oriented towards the maximization of profit by selling a single product: electricity
and heat. The innovation cascade brings a major change to consumers’ attitudes to energy
as a service with unique characteristics. Similarly, business models are also undergoing
radical transformations. The three most popular types of business models include the fol-
lowing: ‘spatial’ models of production organization based on platform network and digi-
tal tools; introducing eco-friendly products to stimulate sustainable consumption; and of-
fering services to ensure ‘energy comfort’ and manageability of the energy supply process.
Identification of the characteristics of these types of business models and determination
of the basic conditions for their implementation in energy companies can be considered
as a theoretical result of the current study.
ESG provides a new conceptual framework for energy companies, resulting in new
business operations requirements and parameters of services. The use of ESG principles
in the energy business in conjunction with digital solutions has significant social implica-
tions: this not only leads to the deep customization of services for consumers and an in-
crease in the environmental efficiency of energy production but also generally contributes
to the formation of an energy culture of consumers, as well as awareness of the value of
energy as a key resource for the economy, which in turn lays the foundation for the sus-
tainable development of regions in the long-term perspective.
Our analysis of research literature and expert survey results show that the key factor
in the development of new business models should become the changes in the architecture
of the energy market’s retail sector, deregulation of the economic relationships between
the actors in the market, and the creation of simplified interfaces for easier technological
and information exchange between distributed energy systems and the country’s (or re-
gion’s) energy system. All of the above should lead to the appearance of a new class of
market actors—active consumers and prosumers, operators of microenergy systems, and
aggregators of distributed energy resources, creating the demand for high-tech equipment
and services. In this regard, we have given recommendations for adapting the configura-
tion and rules of the wholesale and retail energy and capacity markets, which is an im-
portant practical result of the article.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 18 of 22
The variety of business model templates presented in the scientific literature and
practical cases does not allow to analyze the possibilities of their use in the energy sector
within the framework of just one article. Nevertheless, we tried to highlight the most rel-
evant types of business models for the modern electric power industry, demonstrate their
possible configurations, and justify the conditions for their successful implementation in
specific companies.
Another limitation could be found in the engagement of mainly Russian experts in
the surveys. However, it should be noted that the respondents’ professional and academic
background, their experience of participation in energy innovation projects, and a broad
scope of general knowledge were the key selection criteria employed by the authors. This
is why the majority of the surveyed experts are top managers of large companies. In order
to increase the reliability of the conclusions, a large number of practical cases and many
authoritative opinions of specialists from different countries were analyzed within the
framework of the study.
The issue of business modeling remains very promising for further investigations by
the authors. A broad horizon opens up as part of the study of the concepts of BCM, pro-
active management, and strategic intelligence of the organization in relation to the unique
specifics of the electric power industry and energy markets. A special series of research
can be devoted to the use of platform business models and the analysis of the transactional
effects in energy companies of various sectors (generation, electric distribution complex,
energy supply, and energy trading). This also opens avenues for research on the scenarios
of business models’ transformation amid the increasing energy and economic crisis, dis-
rupted logistics chains, and investment shortages. The latter factors may change the
course of the energy transition, leading companies to choose familiar tools and solutions
over more progressive and intelligent ones.
Author Contributions: All authors contributed equally to the present work. Conceptualization, L.G.
and M.K.; methodology, L.G.; investigation, L.G. and M.K.; writing—original draft preparation,
L.G. and M.K.; writing—review and editing, M.K.; visualization, M.K.; supervision, L.G. All authors
have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: The research funding from the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian
Federation (Ural Federal University Program of Development as part of Priority-2030 Program) is
gratefully acknowledged.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Zott, C.; Amit, R.; Massa, L. The business model: Theoretical roots, recent developments and future research. J. Manag. 2011, 37,
1019–1042.
2. Nielsen, C.; Lund, M. A Brief History of the Business Model Concept; Nielsen, C., Lund, M., Eds.; The Basics of Business Models;
Ventus: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2014; pp. 21–27.
3. Rodet-Kroichvili, N.; Cabaret, K.; Picard, F. New Insights into Innovation: The Business Model Approach and Chesbrough’s
Seminal Contribution to Open Innovation. J. Innov. Econ. Manag. 2014, 15, 79–99. https://doi.org/10.3917/jie.015.0079.
4. Lindgren, P.; Rasmussen, O.H. The Business Model Cube. J. Multi Bus. Model Innov. Technol. 2013, 1, 135–180.
5. Abell, D.F. Defining the Business: The Starting Point of Strategic Planning; Prentice-Hall, Inc.: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 1980.
6. Abell, D. Managing with Dual Strategies; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1993; p. 292.
7. Vervest, P.; Heck, E.; Pau, L.-F. Smart Business Networks; Springer Berlin: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2005; p. 442.
8. Vervest, P.; van Heck, E.; Preiss, K.; Pau, L. Introduction to Smart Business Networks. J. Inf. Technol. 2004, 19, 225–227.
https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jit.2000031.
9. Hamel, G. Leading the Revolution: How to Thrive in Turbulent Times by Making Innovation a Way of Life; Harvard Business School
Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2000.
10. Chesbrough, H. Business Model Innovation: Opportunities and Barriers. Long Range Plan. 2010, 43, 354–363.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 19 of 22
11. Chesbrough, H.; Rosenbloom, R.S. The Role of the Business Model in Capturing Value from Innovation: Evidence from Xerox
Corporation’s Technology Spin-off Companies. Ind. Corp. Chang. 2002, 11, 529–555.
12. Osterwalder, A.; Pigneur, Y.; Clark, T. Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers;
Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2010; p. 288.
13. Osterwalder, A.; Pigneur, Y.; Bernarda, G.; Smith, A.; Papadakos, T. Value Proposition Design: How to Create Products and Services
Customers Want; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2014; p. 320.
14. Osterwalder, A.; Pigneur, Y.; Smith, A. The Invincible Company: How to Constantly Reinvent Your Organization with Inspiration from
the World's Best Business Models; John Wiley & Sons Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2020; p. 400.
15. Slywotzky, A.J. Value Migration: How to Think Several Moves Ahead of the Competition; Harvard Business School Press: Boston,
MA, USA, 1996; p. 240.
16. Zott, C.; Amit, R. Exploring the fit between business strategy and business model: Implications for firm performance. Strateg.
Manag. J. 2008, 29, 1–26.
17. Clark, T.; Hazen, B. Business Models for Teams: See How Your Organization Really Works and How Each Person Fits; Portfolio: New
York, NY, USA, 2017; p. 272.
18. Linz, C.; Müller-Stewens, G.; Zimmermann, A. Radical Business Model Transformation: How Leading Organizations Have Success-
fully Adapted to Disruption; Kogan-Page: London, UK, 2020; p. 368.
19. Parker, G.; Van Alstyne, M. Innovation, Openness, and Platform Control. Manag. Sci. 2018, 64, 3015–3032.
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2017.2757.
20. Periyasami, S.; Periyasamy, A.P. Metaverse as Future Promising Platform Business Model: Case Study on Fashion Value Chain.
Businesses 2022, 2, 527–545. https://doi.org/10.3390/businesses2040033.
21. The Sharing Economy; PwC. 2015. Available online: https://www.pwc.com/us/en/industry/entertainment-media/publica-
tions/consumer-intelligence-series/assets/pwc-cis-sharing-economy.pdf (accessed on 23 January 2023).
22. Romero, M.C.; Lara, P.; Villalobos, J. Evolution of the Business Model: Arriving at Open Business Model Dynamics. J. Open
Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021, 7, 86. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7010086.
23. Kim, J.; Min, J. Supplier, Tailor, and Facilitator: Typology of Platform Business Models. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex.
2019, 5, 57. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc5030057.
24. McCabe, M.J.; Snyder, C.M.; Fagin, A. Open Access versus Traditional Journal Pricing: Using a Simple “Platform Market” Model
to Understand Which Will Win (and Which Should). J. Acad. Librariansh. 2013, 39, 11–19.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2012.11.035.
25. Wang, R.; Chebo, A.K. The Dynamics of Business Model Innovation for Technology Entrepreneurship: A Systematic Review
and Future Avenue. SAGE Open 2021, 11, 21582440211029917. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211029917.
26. Brege, H.; Kindström, D. Exploring proactive market strategies. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2020, 84, 75–88.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.05.005.
27. Beqiri, G. Innovative Business Models and Crisis Management. Procedia Econ. Financ. 2014, 9, 361–368.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-567100037-9.
28. Sawalha, I.H. Views on business continuity and disaster recovery. Int. J. Emerg. Serv. 2021, 10, 351–365.
29. Niemimaa, M.; Järveläinen, J.; Heikkilä, M.; Heikkilä, J. Business continuity of business models: Evaluating the resilience of
business models for contingencies. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2019, 49, 208–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.04.010.
30. Gitelman, L.D.; Kozhevnikov, M.V.; Chebotareva, G.S. Strategic Intelligence of an Organization Amid Uncertainty. Int. J. Energy
Prod. Manag. 2021, 6, 294–305. https://doi.org/10.2495/EQ-V6-N3-294-305.
31. Brzóska, J.; Knop, L.; Odlanicka-Poczobutt, M.; Zuzek, D.K. Antecedents of Creating Business Models in the Field of Renewable
Energy Based on the Concept of the New Age of Innovation. Energies 2022, 15, 5511. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15155511.
32. Kallio, L.; Heiskanen, E.; Apajalahti, E.-L.; Matschoss, K. Farm power: How a new business model impacts the energy transition
in Finland. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2020, 65, 101484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101484.
33. Hamwi, M.; Lizarralde, I. Energy Entrepreneurship Business Models Innovation: Insights from European Emerging Firms.
Available online: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01961930/document (accessed on 5 January 2023).
34. Giehl, J.; Göcke, H.; Grosse, B.; Kochems, J.; Müller-Kirchenbauer, J. Survey and Classification of Business Models for the Energy
Transformation. Energies 2020, 13, 2981. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13112981.
35. Theme Report on Energy Transition. Towards the Achievement of SDG 7 and Net-Zero Emissions; United Nations. 2021. Available
online: https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/2021-twg_2-062321.pdf (accessed on 13 December 2022).
36. Perspectives for the Energy Transition. Investment Needs for a Low-Carbon Energy System; OECD/IEA, IRENA: 2017. Available online:
https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2017/Mar/Perspectives_for_the_Energy_Transition_2017.pdf
(accessed on 13 December 2022).
37. Global Energy Transformation. A Roadmap to 2050; IEA Publications, IRENA Publications; 2017. Available online:
https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2018/Apr/IRENA_Report_GET_2018.pdf (accessed on 13 De-
cember 2022).
38. Henderson, J.; Sen, A. The Energy Transition: Key Challenges for Incumbent and New Players in the Global Energy System; Oxford
Institute for Energy Studies: 2021. Available online: https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/En-
ergy-Transition-Key-challenges-for-incumbent-players-in-the-global-energy-system-ET01.pdf (accessed on 13 December 2022).
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 20 of 22
39. Gitelman, L.D.; Kozhevnikov, M.V.; Adam, L.A. Sustainable energy for smart city. Int. J. Energy Prod. Manag. 2019, 4, 273–286.
https://doi.org/10.2495/EQ-V4-N4-343-353.
40. Gitelman, L.D.; Kozhevnikov, M.V. Adoption of technology platforms in the electric power industry: New opportunities. WIT
Trans. Ecol. Environ. 2022, 255, 23–34. https://doi.org/10.2495/EPM220031.
41. Gitelman, L.D.; Kozhevnikov, M.V.; Kaplin, D.D. Asset management in grid companies using integrated diagnostic devices.
Int. J. Energy Prod. Manag. 2019, 3, 230–243. https://doi.org/10.2495/EQ-V4-N3-230-243.
42. Gitelman, L.D.; Kozhevnikov, M.V. Electrification in Industrial Revolution 4.0. Int. J. Energy Prod. Manag. 2020, 5, 367–379.
https://doi.org/10.2495/EQ-V5-N4-367-379.
43. Martins, F.; Moura, P.; de Almeida, A.T. The Role of Electrification in the Decarbonization of the Energy Sector in Portugal.
Energies 2022, 15, 1759. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15051759.
44. Singh, M.; Jiao, J.; Klobasa, M.; Frietsch, R. Servitization of Energy Sector: Emerging Service Business Models and Startup’s
Participation. Energies 2022, 15, 2705. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15072705.
45. Mourik, R.; Bouwknegt, R. Energy Service Business Models and Entrepreneurial Skills: Identifying Models and Patterns. Pro-
ceedings 2020, 65, 26. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2020065026.
46. Kozhevnikov, M.V. A transition to knowledge-intensive service activities in power industry: A theoretical framework. WIT
Trans. Ecol. Environ. 2019, 222, 13–25. https://doi.org/10.2495/EQ180021.
47. Xia-Bauer, C.; Vondung, F.; Thomas, S.; Moser, R. Business Model Innovations for Renewable Energy Prosumer Development
in Germany. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7545. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137545.
48. Santa, A.-M.I. Prosumers—A New Mindset for Citizens in Smart Cities. Smart Cities 2022, 5, 1409–1420.
https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities5040072.
49. The Road Ahead. Gaining Momentum from Energy Transformation; PwC: 2014. Available online: https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/util-
ities/publications/assets/pwc-the-road-ahead.pdf (accessed on 13 December 2022).
50. World Energy Investment 2021; IEA: 2021. Available online: https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/5e6b3821-bb8f-4df4-a88b-
e891cd8251e3/WorldEnergyInvestment2021.pdf (accessed on 13 December 2022).
51. Pakulska, T.; Poniatowska-Jaksch, M. Digitalization in the Renewable Energy Sector—New Market Players. Energies 2022, 15,
4714. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15134714.
52. Platform Economy: Technology-Driven Business Model Innovation from the Outside in; Accenture: 2017. Available online:
https://www.giz.de/expertise/downloads/Accenture_Platform-Economy-Technology-Vision-2016.pdf (accessed on 13 Decem-
ber 2022).
53. Whetten, D.A. What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution? Acad. Manag. Rev. 1989, 14, 490–495.
54. Suddaby, R. Editor’s comments: Why theory? Acad. Manag. Rev. 2014, 39, 407–411.
55. Asset-vs. Service-Based Business Models—Where Lies The Future For Utilities? Available online: https://www.ener-
quire.com/blog/the-future-business-model-of-utilities-like-eon-innogy-services-vs-assets (accessed on 13 December 2022).
56. New Corporate Strategy: E.ON to Focus on Renewables, Distribution Networks, and Customer Solutions and to Spin off the
Majority of a New, Publicly Listed Company Specializing in Power Generation, Global Energy Trading, and Exploration and
Production. Available online: https://www.eon.com/en/about-us/media/press-release/2014/new-corporate-strategy.html (ac-
cessed on 13 December 2022).
57. Electricity Network Transformation Roadmap. Insights from Global Jurisdictions, New Market Actors & Evolving Business Models; Ac-
centure: 2016. Available online: https://www.energynetworks.com.au/resources/reports/insights-from-global-jurisdictions-
new-market-actors-evolving-business-models/ (accessed on 13 December 2022).
58. Three Possible Business Models for Distributed Storage. Available online: https://wattclarity.com.au/articles/2014/03/three-pos-
sible-business-models-for-distributed-storage/ (accessed on 5 January 2023).
59. Palmié, M.; Boehm, J.; Friedrich, J.; Parida, V.; Wincent, J.; Kahlert, J.; Gassmann, O.; Sjödin, D. Startups versus incumbents in
‘green’ industry transformations: A comparative study of business model archetypes in the electrical power sector. Ind. Mark.
Manag. 2021, 96, 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2021.04.003.
60. Energy-as-a-Service. The Lights Are on. Is Anyone Home?; Deloitte: 2019. Available online: https://www2.deloitte.com/con-
tent/dam/Deloitte/uk/Documents/energy-resources/deloitte-uk-energy-as-a-service-report-2019.pdf (accessed on 13 December
2022).
61. The Potential of Digital Business Models in the New Energy Economy; IEA: 2022. Available online: https://www.iea.org/articles/the-
potential-of-digital-business-models-in-the-new-energy-economy (accessed on 13 December 2022).
62. Cleary, K.; Palmer, K. Energy-as-a-Service: A Business Model for Expanding Deployment of Low-Carbon Technologies. Re-
sources for the Future. 2019. Available online: https://media.rff.org/documents/IB_19-09_EaaS.pdf (accessed on 13 December
2022).
63. A Brief Review of Energy Storage Business Models. Available online: https://leylinecapital.com/news/a-brief-review-of-energy-
storage-business-models (accessed on 13 December 2022).
64. Xia-Bauer, C.; Große-Kreul, F.; Thomas, S. Business Models of Virtual Power Plants (VPPs) in Germany. Available online:
https://www.energypartnership.cn/fileadmin/user_upload/china/media_elements/publications/Business_Models_of_Vir-
tual_Power_Plants__VPPs__in_Germany-EN.pdf (accessed on 5 January 2023).
65. Roozbehani, M.M.; Heydarian-Forushani, E.; Hasanzadeh, S.; Elghali, S.B. Virtual Power Plant Operational Strategies: Models,
Markets, Optimization, Challenges, and Opportunities. Sustainability 2022, 14, 12486. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912486.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 21 of 22
66. LineJump Official Website. Available online: https://www.limejump.com (accessed on 13 December 2022).
67. New Brunswick Power Official Website. Available online: https://www.nbpower.com (accessed on 13 December 2022).
68. Khatoon, A.; Verma, P.; Southernwood, J.; Massey, B.; Corcoran, P. Blockchain in Energy Efficiency: Potential Applications and
Benefits. Energies 2019, 12, 3317. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12173317.
69. Kirli, D.; Couraud, B.; Robu, V.; Salgado-Bravo, M.; Norbu, S.; Andoni, M.; Antonopoulos, I.; Negrete-Pincetic, M.; Flynn, D.;
Kiprakis, A. Smart contracts in energy systems: A systematic review of fundamental approaches and implementations. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 158, 112013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.112013.
70. Junlakarn, S.; Kokchang, P.; Audomvongseree, K. Drivers and Challenges of Peer-to-Peer Energy Trading Development in Thai-
land. Energies 2022, 15, 1229. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15031229.
71. Soto, E.A.; Bosman, L.B.; Wollega, E.; Leon-Salas, W.D. Peer-to-peer energy trading: A review of the literature. Appl. Energy
2021, 283, 116268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.116268.
72. Gabriel, C.-A.; Kirkwood, J. Business models for model businesses: Lessons from renewable energy entrepreneurs in developing
countries. Energy Policy 2016, 95, 336–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.05.006.
73. Kindström, D.; Ottosson, M. Local and regional energy companies offering energy services: Key activities and implications for
the business model. Appl. Energy 2016, 171, 491–500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.03.092.
74. Trapp, C.T.C.; Kanbach, D.K. Green entrepreneurship and business models: Deriving green technology business model arche-
types. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 297, 126694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126694.
75. NextEra Energy Official Website. Available online: https://www.nexteraenergy.com (accessed on 13 December 2022).
76. Brookfield Renewable Partners Official Website. Available online: https://bep.brookfield.com (accessed on 13 December 2022).
77. Ormat Technologies Official Website. Available online: https://www.ormat.com/en/home/a/main/ (accessed on 13 December
2022).
78. First Solar Official Website. Available online: https://www.firstsolar.com (accessed on 13 December 2022).
79. SolarEdge Technologies Official Website. Available online: https://www.solaredge.com (accessed on 13 December 2022).
80. Wedekind, S. Energy as a Service: A Strategic Challenge and Key Opportunity for ESCOs. Available online: https://energycen-
tral.com/o/Guidehouse/energy-service-strategic-challenge-and-key-opportunity-escos (accessed on 13 December 2022).
81. Wedekind, S. Energy Service Companies Face Increasing Pressure from Energy as a Service. Available online:
https://guidehouseinsights.com/news-and-views/energy-service-companies-face-increasing-pressure-from-energy-as-a-ser-
vice (accessed on 13 December 2022).
82. Järvi, K.; Sainio, L.-M.; Ritala, P.; Pellinen, A. Building a framework for a partnership business model. Int. J. Manag. Concepts
Philos. 2010, 4, 100–117.
83. Chaurey, A.; Krithika, P.R.; Palit, D.; Rakesh, D.; Sovacool, B.K. New partnerships and business models for facilitating energy
access. Energy Policy 2012, 47, 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.03.031.
84. Weill, P.; Woerner, S. What's Your Digital Business Model? Six Questions to Help You Build the Next-Generation Enterprise; Harvard
Business Review Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2018; p. 256.
85. The 17 Goals. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/goals (accessed on 10 November 2022).
86. The Rising Need for ESG in The Energy Industry. Available online: https://ifsolutions.com/the-rising-need-for-esg-in-the-en-
ergy-industry/ (accessed on 13 December 2022).
87. Nitlarp, T.; Kiattisin, S. The Impact Factors of Industry 4.0 on ESG in the Energy Sector. Sustainability 2022, 14, 9198.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159198.
88. 2021 Global 100 Ranking. Available online: https://www.corporateknights.com/rankings/global-100-rankings/2021-global-100-
rankings/2021-global-100-ranking/ (accessed on 13 December 2022).
89. Assessing ESG Factors in the Energy Sector: A Handbook. Available online: https://www.dlapiper.com/en/us/insights/publica-
tions/2020/10/assessing-esg-factors-in-the-energy-sector/ (accessed on 13 December 2022).
90. Puttachai, W.; Phadkantha, R.; Yamaka, W. The threshold effects of ESG performance on the energy transitions: A country-level
data. Energy Rep. 2022, 8, 234–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.10.187.
91. Cozzi, L.; Goodson, T. Empowering Electricity Consumers to Lower Their Carbon Foot-Print; International Energy Agency, 2020:
Available online: https://www.iea.org/commentaries/empowering-electricity-consumers-to-lower-their-carbon-footprint (ac-
cessed on 13 December 2022).
92. Smart Meter Benefits. Role of Smart Meters in Responding to Climate Change. Delta-EE Viewpoint. Available online:
https://www.smartenergygb.org/media/i0pjpsqm/smart-meter-benefits-climate-change.pdf (accessed on 13 December 2022).
93. Reilly, T., Mahween, S. ESG in the Energy Sector. Available online: https://www.insideenergyandenviron-
ment.com/2021/04/esg-in-the-energy-sector/ (accessed on 13 December 2022).
94. ESG: Transforming Energy’s Risk Landscape. Energy Market Review 2020. Willis Tow-Ers Watson Analytical Report. 2020.
Available online: https://www.wtwco.com/assets/image/Energy-Market-Review-v10.pdf (accessed on 13 December 2022).
95. Grabowska, S.; Saniuk, S. Business Models in the Industry 4.0 Environment—Results of Web of Science Bibliometric Analysis.
J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 19. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8010019.
96. Jensen, A.B. Do we need one business model definition? J. Bus. Model. 2013, 1, 61–84.
97. Magretta, J. Why business models matter. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2002, 80, 86–92.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3604 22 of 22
98. Bürer, M.J.; de Lapparent, M.; Capezzali, M.; Carpita, M. Governance Drivers and Barriers for Business Model Transformation in the
Energy Sector; Hettich, P., Kachi, A., Eds.; Swiss Energy Governance; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 195–243.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80787-0_10.
99. Gitelman, L.D.; Kozhevnikov, M.V. A Science and Education Platform for Intellectual Support of Breakthrough Teams in the
Energy Sector. Int. J. Energy Prod. Manag. 2022, 7, 388–400. https://doi.org/10.2495/EQ-V7-N4-388-400.
100. Troup, E.G. Growing Role of Platforms in Cybersecurity. Cyber Def. Rev. 2017, 2, 61–70.
101. Gitelman, L.; Kozhevnikov, M. New leaders for technological breakthroughs in the energy industry. WIT Trans. Ecol. Environ.
2017, 224, 499–511. https://doi.org/10.2495/ESUS170461.
102. Gitelman, L.; Kozhevnikov, M.; Ryzhuk, O. Advance Management Education for Power-Engineering and Industry of the Fu-
ture. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5930. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11215930.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual au-
thor(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.