You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
  • Article
  • Open Access

8 December 2022

Business Model Innovation Paths of Manufacturing Oriented towards Green Development in Digital Economy

and
School of Management, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.

Abstract

China’s manufacturing industry has been confronted with the issue of extensive development with high input, high consumption, and high emissions for a long time, and its green development is the key to reaching carbon neutrality in China. Under the digital economy, business model innovation is the fundamental means of the green development of manufacturing enterprises. Four representative listed companies in China’s manufacturing were selected as typical cases for the case study. Through open, axial, and selective coding that is based on proceduralized grounded theory, this study profoundly explores business model innovation paths of the manufacturing industry oriented towards green development in the digital economy following the research logic of “green development orientation–business model innovation process–business model innovation result”. Moreover, this study further compares the differences among paths and discusses each path’s effectiveness and applicable conditions. Results show that: (1) Four green business model innovation paths are revealed based on the four green development orientations: efficiency-oriented path, value-oriented path, user-oriented path, and ecology-oriented path. (2) Different enterprises pursue distinct business model innovation paths. The scientific premise for enterprises to opt for the optimal innovation path is the matching of upgrading demands, existing conditions, and path characteristics. Ultimately, the following policy implications are offered: First, promote the green innovation of business models in the manufacturing industry. Second, consider enterprises’ heterogeneity and implement differentiated support policies. This study can serve as theoretical support and decision-making reference for business model innovation and green development in manufacturing enterprises.

1. Introduction

As a major carbon emitter, China is facing the dual pressure of low-carbon transition and an economic downturn brought on by the COVID-19 epidemic. Therefore, achieving green development—namely, innovation and development patterns that scientifically balance the ecological environment and economic growth—becomes a significant topic during the crisis [1,2]. As the “ballast stone” of China’s economy, the extensive development mode of the manufacturing industry has brought great pressure on the ecological environment. Therefore, the green development of the manufacturing industry has become the strategic focus of China’s continuous promotion [3,4]. As emphasized in the “14th Five-Year Plan for Industrial Green Development”, the next five years will be a critical period for implementing the strategy of manufacturing power and a crucial stage for the realization of green manufacturing. Hence, Chinese manufacturing enterprises need to accelerate their green transformation and improve their green innovation capability to drive green development [5,6]. However, from the perspective of industrial carbon emissions in 2021 provinces (as shown in Figure 1), the development form is still very severe. Faced with the requirements of green development, must manufacturing enterprises sacrifice their financial profits to fulfill their environmental obligations? Is there a win-win way to achieve both profit growth and green development? This issue remains to be explored. This paper studies business model innovation in manufacturing to integrate the environmental requirements in business activities fundamentally, and innovation practices seem necessary [7,8].
Figure 1. The industrial carbon emissions in the year 2021.
In recent years, China has gradually become an important leader and driver of the global digital economy [9]. Under the background of economic digital development and transformation, the integration of new-generation information technology and the manufacturing industry is able to empower all-around green business model innovation, including the improvement of value creation processes, the increase in the efficiency of value delivery, the expansion of value capture channels [10,11], and the promotion of the development of manufacturing industry to the direction of high-end, intelligent, green, and service [12]. This creates new opportunities for the green development of China’s manufacturing industry. However, the majority of studies on digital business model innovation in Chinese manufacturing enterprises have focused on maximizing corporate profits or performance [13]. Few studies have considered the value of digital business model innovation to the environment from the perspective of green development. Therefore, in the digital economy, integrating digital business model innovation with the green development of the manufacturing industry is a timely and important but not yet sufficiently explored research topic.
In general, existing studies on business model innovation in the academic circle have focused on the following. (1) they explore the influencing factors or driving forces of business model innovation based on the internal and external aspects of enterprises [14,15,16]. For example, Sorescu proposed that big data is able to drive and empower business model innovation to become a source of competitive advantage [17]. Yu et al. conducted multiple regression analyses on the data of 145 Chinese manufacturing enterprises to explore the impact of organizational search on business model innovation [18]. (2) they explore the types of business model innovation based on different dimensions [19,20,21,22]. For example, Sun et al. selected three representative enterprises for their case studies and classified sharing economy business models into nine basic types based on two dimensions, namely, thematic type and manifestation [23]. Duparc et al. obtained seven types of open-source business model innovation through a structured review of the literature and cluster analysis of 120 case data [24]. (3) they explored the performance impact and evaluation of business model innovation [25,26,27,28]. For example, Guo et al. explored the contribution of the three elements of business model innovation of the enterprise to the performance of digital innovation from a demand-side perspective [29]. Bockin introduced business model lifecycle assessment, which refers to a quantitative method for evaluating and comparing the environmental performance of the business model [30].
The aforementioned research perspective has formed diverse valuable research results. However, three deficiencies remain. First, existing studies pay more attention to the influencing factors and evaluation of business model innovation [31,32,33], while few researches discuss the evolution and development of the enterprise business model from the perspective of process, especially the induction and summary of the innovation path of the enterprise business model. Second, the present research lacks grounded case studies on the innovation practices of China’s successful manufacturing enterprises in the context of the digital economy and green development [34,35], and few studies can provide practical direction for enterprise digital and green business model innovation. Third, existing research on the innovation of the manufacturing business model is mostly a single case study [36,37,38] that lacks comparative research among different enterprises. However, as China’s manufacturing industry has large volumes and diverse categories, it is necessary to use multi-case studies on this basis to improve the research’s universality and explore differentiated business model innovation models and paths of manufacturing.
Based on the above analysis, this study takes a number of typical Chinese manufacturing enterprises as the research object and selects the green development pioneers who embedded digital technology into their business model for green business model innovation as samples. This study systematically analyzes business model innovation paths of manufacturing oriented towards green development of manufacturing under a digital economy through multi-case research and three-level coding and additionally performs a comparative study on the paths. This paper aims to fill the existing research gaps, enrich the business model innovation and green development theory, and serve as practical guidance and theoretical reference for manufacturing enterprises and the government.
This study is organized as follows. Section 2 provides a detailed review of the literature and research framework. Section 3 details the research design of this paper, including the research methods, study case selection, data collection, and data coding process. Section 4 presents the result analysis, which introduces the four paths revealed by coding in detail, constructs their conceptual models, and puts forward four propositions. Section 5 involves a discussion that compares the four paths, discussing the heterogeneity among paths and also pointing out the efficiency and the applicable condition of each path. Section 6 discusses the main conclusion. Section 7 discusses theoretical contribution, management implications, and policy implications. Section 8 describes the limitations and prospects of this study.

2. Literature Review and Research Framework

2.1. Literature Review

With regard to the so-called enterprise business model, scholars have conducted research in light of value chains, enterprise systems, organizational management, and the science of strategy [39,40,41,42], which have essentially identified the business model as an architecture of activities that create, deliver and capture value in an enterprise [43]. Business model innovation is a process of organizational transformation in which organizations seek to create, deliver, and acquire value for stakeholders through new value propositions [44]. It is a new method and logic for enterprises to explore value creation, as well as a crucial strategy for enterprises to develop competitive advantages [45].
The digital economy is the increasing application and integration of digital technology in the whole economy and society [46]. Digital technology provides a new perspective and way for enterprises to discover and create value and becomes the entry point of business model innovation for today’s enterprises [47,48]. Existing studies have pointed out that business model innovation in the digital economy depends on the fundamental components of digital transformation, including the design of digital products or services and digital platforms, which stand for the results of the combination of digital technology elements [49]. On the one hand, digital products or services are supported by digital technology and are products or specific service solutions with perceptual interaction and iteration functions [50,51]. On the other hand, a digital platform is a major form in which digital technology plays a role in the transformation of enterprise business form [52,53]. Due to the characteristics of emerging technologies in the digital economy, the research on business model innovation in the context of China mainly focuses on the Internet and e-commerce [54,55]. For example, based on the perspective of strategy and resources, Wang Bingcheng took Internet service enterprises as research samples, built the driving mechanism model of business model innovation of Internet service enterprises, and revealed three modes to achieve business model innovation [56]. The current exploration of manufacturing is relatively small. As a supporting industry of China’s national economy, the manufacturing industry has not been fundamentally changed in the situation of being large but not strong, complete but not excellent [57].
Business model innovation is an important “window of opportunity” for our manufacturing industry transformation and upgrading [58]. Under the digital economy, manufacturing business model innovation should pay attention to not only economic value but also environmental value [59,60]. With the increasing importance of green development, scholars have been widely concerned about how to achieve green development [61,62,63]. Recent studies have found that business model innovation can promote sustainable development and mitigate the associated negative environmental externalities [63,64,65]. For example, the leasing and sharing model can encourage enterprises to design products around durability and improved quality, make remanufacturing feasible, and reduce the total production of products and the demand for resources [66]. There is also the product service model, which provides value-added services for the product life cycle, separates value creation from material and energy consumption, and significantly reduces the impact on the environment compared with a pure product system [67]. In addition, some scholars point out that different upgrading pressures faced by enterprises will promote the formation of different green development orientations and then affect various types of performance with differentiated innovation paths [68,69].
To sum up, although digit and green have become two important directions of manufacturing enterprises’ business model innovation, academic research is still lacking. In essence, the premise of green development is sustainable economic development. We must innovate the business model, balance the relationship between green development and enterprise profit, and unify ecology and marketization in order to realize green development truly. Most of the existing research only explores the business model innovation of Chinese manufacturing enterprises from the perspective of higher competitive advantages and enterprise performance, ignoring the combination of China’s current green development situation. It is necessary to extend the connotation of green development in business model innovation, seek a business model innovation path that takes into account enterprises’ profit growth and green development, and guide the green transformation of manufacturing enterprises. These are the core issues to be solved in this study.

2.2. Research Framework

Through the above review of the literature, this study intends to consider that the business model innovation process oriented towards green development in the digital economy is as follows: On the basis of the green development orientation that corresponds to the upgrading pressure, manufacturing enterprises utilize digital technology and digital platforms to innovate the logic of original value creation and to achieve green business model innovation finally. Based on this process, to further explore the specific green business model innovation paths of manufacturing, whether differences exist between these paths, and what application conditions are required for each path, this paper constructs an analytical framework based on the basic logic of “green development orientation–business model innovation process–business model innovation result” (as shown in Figure 2). This paper uses the case study method to analyze the green development orientations, business model innovation process, and business model innovation results of a number of typical Chinese manufacturing enterprises systematically and examines and compares their green business model innovation paths. This work aims to make up for the shortcomings of existing research and achieve the effective expansion of theory.
Figure 2. Research framework.

3. Research Design

3.1. Research Method

This paper uses grounded theory to conduct the exploratory multi-case study, primarily for the following reasons. (1) The purpose of this study is to analyze the business model path for green development under the digital economy, which belongs to the “how—question”. Exploratory case analysis lies in the “discovery logic” rather than the “verification logic” [70], which can clearly explain the “how-to problem” and is very consistent with the research theme. (2) the business model innovation is dynamic and complex. The grounded case study can repeatedly focus and comparison based on textual data to further study the business model innovation experience of sample enterprises so as to reveal the business model innovation path and unleash the advantages of theoretical construction based on “Phenomenon Driven” [71] (3) Compared with the limitations of single case studies, multi-case studies can help identify and compare the similarities and differences among different types of business model innovation, which improve the external validity of the research, enhance the persuasiveness and universality of the conclusion and are more in line with the replication logic of the case study. (4) Procedural grounded theory provides strict criteria, steps, and procedures for qualitative analysis, and its rigorous techniques and methods enable the research to carry out process tracing and repeated testing, making up for the defects of general qualitative methods that the process cannot be traced and the conclusion is difficult to test. It includes open coding, spindle coding, selective coding, and theoretical saturation test. This highly systematic data selection and analysis procedure will be strictly followed in this paper to improve the accuracy, rigor, and verifiability of research findings.

3.2. Research Case Selection

The sample selection for the case study is based on the following considerations. (1) Universality and heterogeneity of cases. The issue of the business model innovation path for enterprises requires cases with widespread or variable consumer types, production characteristics, and establishment periods. (2) Availability and adequacy of data. The annual reports and other public information of four companies listed as case companies are available. Their development model has also captured widespread attention from the media and research institutions, and a large amount of news, the literature, and additional relevant information has been published. (3) Representativeness and typicality. All four companies exhibit strong industry representation and leadership. Hence, they are robust benchmarks in their fields. Moreover, the case companies have a good demonstration role in the green development of China’s manufacturing industry. All four companies fully implement the national green and low-carbon development strategy, adhere to green innovation to help the development of companies, and achieve the coordinated development of economic and environmental benefits. (4) The principle of the matching between the case object and the research questions. Samples were selected to fit the themes of the “digital economy and green development” and “business model innovation.” The case enterprise started the digital transformation earlier, and on this basis, it has successfully implemented the green business model innovation to achieve green development and thus has rich experience in innovation and development. In summary, the case enterprise information is as Table 1.
Table 1. Information on case companies.
In order to improve the reliability of the research, according to the idea of continuous analysis of grounded theory, the case enterprises are divided into a modeling group and a testing group. In accordance with the principles of the availability of information, the typicality and heterogeneity of the selected cases, and the matching of the research problems, five cases of Changan Automobile Group, Shenyang Machine Tool, Xi’an Shaangu Power, Qingdao Red Collar Group and Haier Group were selected to test the saturation of the theoretical model.

3.3. Data Collection

As a representative enterprise in its field, the growth and innovation mode of Xiaomi Corporation, Goldwind Company, Qumei Group, and Baosteel Group have captured widespread attention in the industry and academia, thereby making various publicly available interviews, surveys, books, reports, and other materials abundant to cover research needs sufficiently. The specific sources of the case materials in this paper as Table 2. Multi-channel information sources help avoid homologous bias and enhance the “construct validity” of the case study. In order to ensure the authenticity and reliability of the case data, the data acquisition process conforms to the “triangulation verification” principle. Finally, the case document library is constructed according to the collected data to provide the basis for coding analysis so as to improve the reliability of the case study.
Table 2. Specific sources of case information.

3.4. Data Coding

In this study, data coding is carried out according to programmed grounded theory. In order to avoid the influence of the coders’ individual subjectivity, reduce the errors in the case study and improve the sensitivity of the theory, this study formed a coding team to complete the coding process, and the members adopted the form of “back-to-back” independent coding analysis, comparison and discussion until a consensus was reached. The coding process is as follows, open coding, spindle coding, selective coding, and theoretical saturation testing.

3.4.1. Open Coding

Open coding involves repeatedly refining the original material, extracting information regarding the research object, and conceptualizing and classifying it. This paper focuses on the “Business model innovation of manufacturing enterprises orientated to green development under the digital economy” to conduct open coding. First, the words and sentences related to this content in the material are marked and preliminarily simplified into concepts. This step is followed by “categorization,” in which concepts that seem related to the same phenomenon are grouped into subcategories. The final four cases resulted in 61 subcategories (as shown in Table 3).
Table 3. Open coding results.

3.4.2. Axial Coding

Axial coding, which is based on open coding, seeks the organic connection between concepts. Its primary task is to find and establish various associations between conceptual categories. Based on the research framework of this paper, second-level coding summarizes and deduces the concepts of green development orientation and business model innovation behavior involved in first-level coding further. For example, the five pairs of “Introduction of automated equipment,” “standardization of operation process,” “basic data collection,” “data integration,” and “production automation” in the first-level coding can be integrated into an axis: The enterprise introduces automated equipment, accesses the Internet for the basic data collection on production equipment, and automates the production process by integrating data through standardized operational processes to form automated production lines for systematic and continuous production. Therefore, these five subcategories can be incorporated into the main category of “production process automation.” Through axial coding, 17 main categories are extracted (as shown in Table 4).
Table 4. Axial coding results.

3.4.3. Selective Coding

Selective coding is a three-level coding in proceduralized grounded theory, which determines the core category after a systematic analysis of the concept categories found. Subsequently, the core category and other categories are systematically integrated to form a “storyline.” Further, through the interaction between materials and emerging theories, the categories and their relationships are continuously improved to construct a theoretical model(as shown in Figure 3). This paper takes the green development orientation as the core category and forms a storyline through the matching of green development orientation and business model innovation behavior, as well as the matching between innovation behavior, to construct the path model. Three-level coding results were obtained on the basis of the analysis and comparison of case data, concepts, and categories. Through selective coding, four paths are extracted (as shown in Table 5).
Figure 3. Research framework.
Table 5. Selective coding results.

3.4.4. Theoretical Saturation Test

The grounded theory method requires researchers to constantly collect and analyze data and constantly supplement and improve emerging concepts and categories. When the newly collected data fails to produce new categories and relations, it indicates that the theory has reached saturation. In order to test whether theoretical saturation has been achieved, this study grounded the cases of Changan Automobile, Shenyang Machine Tool, Shaan-Gu Power, Qingdao Red Collar, and Haier in the test group according to the same method. The encoding results are shown in Table 6. Although some new concepts have been separated out in this coding, these new concepts can be included in the categories of the above analysis, and no new categories and structural relations have been found. It shows that the coding results of this study have good theoretical saturation and validity.
Table 6. Theoretical saturation test results.

4. Case Analysis

This paper uses grounded theory and multi-case study methods to systematically analyze the green development orientation and business model innovation behavior in different case situations and then construct the efficiency-oriented path, value-oriented path, user-oriented path, and ecology-oriented path. The four green business model innovation paths are discussed in detail, from the green development orientation, business model innovation process, and the business model innovation result.

4.1. Efficiency-Oriented Path: From Production Process Automation to Intelligent Transformation

Enterprises are under pressure to upgrade their efficiency, accordingly taking efficiency improvement (i.e., producing high-quality products, saving energy, improving efficiency, and reducing production costs) as the green development orientation. Based on this orientation, the efficiency-oriented path is meant for enterprises to achieve intelligent transformation through the gradual automation and digitization of the production process to resolve efficiency issues and enhance product quality. Efficiency-oriented enterprises implement automation equipment, accelerate digital construction, and connect diverse plant equipment to the Internet for data collection. These measures make the advantages of automated manufacturing superimposed with networking and digitization, give full play to the role of digital technology in controlling and enabling industrial development, and implement the automation of the production process. Furthermore, enterprises transform into intelligence, reconfigure critical resources, and optimize specific processes. Based on the data self-service platform to achieve intelligent analysis and application of production data, such as state perception, intelligent decision-making, advanced warning, and intelligent visualization. This path ultimately achieves an upgrade in the efficiency of the whole industrial chain under upgrading technology levels [72], reduces pollution emissions, improves quality and efficiency, and maximizes energy and resource utilization (as shown in Figure 4).
Figure 4. Conceptual model of the efficiency-oriented path.
This path has two key nodes. (1) Automation of production processes. Enterprises effectively integrate production lines, processes, and procedures and use automation technologies and artificial intelligence to establish an automated production line group that runs through the whole process from raw materials into the factory to finished products. To optimize its production process, the Baosteel Group executes the “machine substitution” strategy and introduces new technologies, such as industrial robots, unmanned cranes, and artificial intelligence. On the one hand, it has developed a unified standard for operation mode, operation process, and information processing to achieve the acquisition of product lifecycle data. On the other hand, it unifies data structure so that the upper and lower process data in the workshop can flow and cooperate and thus implement the full automation of the production process gradually. Based on this, the automation level of the Baosteel Group has reached a new height and is close to the advanced international level, making the production process more safe and efficient and realizing the improvement of the production line quality index, cost index, and energy consumption index. This indicates that manufacturing enterprises should carry out the automatic transformation on the basis of the standardization and standardization of their production process so as to improve the working efficiency and solve the problem of industrial manufacturing safety production.
(2) Intelligent transformation. Together, intelligent machines and human experts form a human–machine integrated intelligent system, which will drive manufacturing development to a new level. During the product process, the system will carry on independent analysis, reasoning, and decision-making for the simulation of the process. It continuously improves its own intelligence through data accumulation, thereby providing strong support for energy conservation and environmental protection, product quality improvement, cost control, and efficiency enhancement. Intelligence is the direction of development for manufacturing automation, which updates the concept of manufacturing automation and extends it to flexibility, intelligence, and a high degree of integration. The Baosteel Group is currently in this process, and the main action strategy is to establish a human–machine integrated intelligent system and implement intelligent analysis and application of data continuously. As an example, the development of an energy efficiency diagnostic model for steel furnaces, the online, real-time monitoring of pollution factors, and the comparison of energy consumption and pollutant emissions with standard lines for early warning in order to maximize energy efficiency and minimize pollutant emissions. In addition, a higher level of intelligence is also available in the form of virtual reality platforms. This application simulates the performance of products, equipment, and plants in real-life situations, thereby enabling enterprises to inspect in a virtual environment before proceeding into production and then optimizing the entire process in parallel based on the test results to reduce resource waste and environmental pollution. This manifests that enterprises should take digital transformation as the starting point to complete the construction of a series of platforms and systems, such as an integrated control platform, AR/VR system, integrated decision IOC and intelligent diagnosis to strengthen their ability to intelligent data analysis, and build visual, transparent, and intelligent manufacturing.
Based on the above analysis and discussion, combined with coding materials, this paper proposes Proposition 1:
Proposition 1. 
Based on efficiency orientation, production process automation and intelligent manufacturing represent an important green business model innovation trend. Manufacturing enterprises digitalize and automate the production process by introducing digital technology and implementing autonomous control and dynamic production to optimize production and reduce consumption and emissions. Then, they further analyze and apply the production data intelligently to achieve intelligent transformation, improving the accuracy of decision-making to save energy, reduce emissions and enhance the quality of products. Such innovation increases the efficiency of resource utilization in the production process and reduces environmental pollution so as to promote the green development of manufacturing.

4.2. Value-Oriented Path: From Core Competence Shaping to Servitization Transformation

Enterprises are under pressure to upgrade their value proposition, accordingly taking value enhancement (i.e., expanding sustainable value business, enhancing value proposition, creating higher value space for customers) as the green development orientation. Based on this orientation, the value-oriented path is meant for enterprises to transform from merely supplying products to supplying additional services for products, which eventually provide total solution services to achieve servitization transformation. Value-oriented enterprises primarily reinforce digital technology research and development and patent construction to shape the unique core capabilities (technological innovation) constantly. With their core capabilities, they further explore high-value-added markets (market innovation) and provide additional services for products. Lastly, enterprises are capable of developing resource service platforms to rapidly supply digital services [73], such as intelligent operation services and total solution services, so as to achieve the servitization transformation from product manufacturer to the solution service provider (technology-market innovation). This path ultimately shapes the advantages of sustainable development of enterprises, eliminates product resource limitation through servitization, and leads the healthy industry competition driven by technology and service innovation (as shown in Figure 5).
Figure 5. Conceptual model of the value-oriented path.
This path has three key nodes. (1) Core competence shaping. Enterprises continue to develop critical core technologies to shape a unique competitive advantage. With a focus on technological innovation, enterprises shape the ability to increase value for customers, thereby laying the foundation for subsequent servitization. For instance, the Goldwind Company continued to invest in scientific research over the years and insisted on independent research and development and innovation of wind power technology, which laid a leading edge for its long-term sustainable development. As the technology continues to break through, the technology level and products of Goldwind Company have also taken a leading position in the world. Digital technology runs through their industrial chain and has intelligent operation and management capabilities for labor scheduling, cost and risk control, energy efficiency prediction, asset management, and economical operation, forming the core advantages and competitiveness of the enterprise. This indicates that the premise of enterprise servitization is to develop distinctive core competence of delivering irreplaceable services.
(2) Additional services for products. To change the homogenization of market products and the continuous decline of core business profits, enterprises desire to expand various payment services while selling products and achieve the service of core technology. Accordingly, enterprises adopt sustainable considerations to address customer needs, broaden their business scope, and provide professional services supported by core technologies. For example, the Goldwind Company provides maintenance, wind turbine design, old equipment technology system upgrade, and other services. At this time, the service model of Goldwind Company mainly provides product-centric services to increase the added value of products and accumulate technical service experience and related markets.
(3) Servitization transformation, from manufacturer to servitization provider. The development of servitization in manufacturing aims to generate value-added and create sustainable value. Providing total solutions meet this demand. As a result, manufacturing enterprises further improve the degree of service, that is, from providing additional services for products to providing integrated to meet the value of customers at a high level of the total solution services. In the course of its development, the Goldwind Company has invariably insisted on becoming the “leader” of integrated wind power solutions that strives to create greater value for users in all aspects of wind power development and operation. Therefore, Goldwind deepens the intelligent and digital operation and maintenance into the whole value chain of operation and maintenance services, providing customers with comprehensive digital and high-level solution services instead of homogenized and replaceable services. For instance, the Goldwind Company created the online Smart Operation System- SOAM™, which integrates unified IT tools with advanced applications, such as centralized power prediction, intelligent fault diagnosis, and health status warning, and provides customers with professional and convenient integrated energy optimization solutions. With the servitization transformation, Goldwind’s main business has shifted to providing functions rather than ownership, identifying business areas with long-term value, and helping other related enterprises to optimize their energy operations and achieve energy saving and emission reduction. This proves that servitization transformation can lead to the green development of the entire upstream and downstream industry chain, co-establish a high-quality ecosystem, and mitigate social and environmental risks.
Based on the above analysis and discussion, combined with coding materials, this paper proposes Proposition 2:
Proposition 2. 
Based on value orientation, providing total solutions and developing platform-based digital services represent a significant green business model innovation trend. Manufacturing enterprises independently R&D critical core technologies to expand their service businesses with unique competence. Afterward, through the digital platform, they integrate various resources to form a resource service platform, provide integrated digital solutions, help customers expand their value space, and achieve service transformation. Such innovation enhances the value proposition of enterprises by identifying the business areas with long-term value and leads the entire industry to create a higher level of sustainable value so as to promote the green development of the manufacturing industry.

4.3. User-Oriented Path: From Personalized Customization to Scenario Innovation

Enterprises are under pressure to upgrade their user relationships, accordingly taking user relationship enhancement (i.e., increasing the viscosity of users, meeting diversified market demands, forming a differentiation brand) as the green development orientation. Based on this orientation, the user-oriented path is meant for enterprises to entitle users to participate in the manufacturing, implement personalized customization based on agile manufacturing, emphasize experiential user consumption, and shape a differentiated brand image with scenario-based innovation. On the one hand, user-oriented enterprises’ manufacturing and delivery must acquire and satisfy the preferences of consumers; on the other hand, they must produce economically and sustainably to achieve rapid integration and timely response of resources. With the support of digital technology, the enterprise online, through the construction of a user touchpoint platform, gains a comprehensive insight into consumer demands, generates user participation and design, and uses big data analysis to capture personalized market demands and achieve an accurate allocation of resources. Moreover, enterprises offline implement scenario innovation, embed multi-scenario elements to promote experiential consumption, and further strengthen the interaction between enterprise and consumers online and offline to shape a brand concept that is in tune with the spirit of the audience. This path ultimately shortens the distance between enterprises and consumers, improves the relationship between enterprises and consumers, and achieves accurate resource allocation to prevent resource mismatch and resource backlog [74,75] (As shown in Figure 6).
Figure 6. Conceptual model of the user-oriented path.
This path has three significant nodes: (1) To achieve customized production. Consumers have tended to pursue personalized spiritual satisfaction in recent years. At the same time, digital technology reduces conversion expenses and substantially affects the stability and sustainability of client resources. Therefore, enterprises should implement a user-centered pattern to develop their sustainable competitive advantage and reduce waste triggered by the misallocation of resources. For example, using the “DESIGN IN” model through the user design platform or brand interactive community on the demand side, consumers can participate in the product design process, alleviating market information asymmetry and reducing communication costs. This model meets users’ individual needs, facilitates word-of-mouth communication, and contributes to the development of corporate brands. It is worth noting that personalized customization necessitates that manufacturing enterprises increase their market adaptability to shorten the product development cycle and eliminate inventory. Consequently, flexible manufacturing has become an inevitable choice for manufacturing enterprises to improve the dynamic adaptation between product supply and demand. For instance, Qumei Group has improved its manufacturing level on the supply side through digital management and modular production, increased the flexible delivery capacity of personalized consumption trends, and captured the forward-looking market. In short, the original homogeneous product competition is not conducive to economic growth and results in a waste of resources, so enterprises should use digital technology to shorten the product manufacturing cycle and enhance the rapid response capability of manufacturing so that personalized and flexible production becomes an essential strategy at the enterprise production level.
(2) Scenario innovation. Offline scenario innovation is reflected in three touchpoints: digital touchpoint (digital display forms and carriers), physical touchpoint (traditional single scenario to multi-scene synthesis), and interpersonal touchpoint (add experience-centered interaction with consumers). Using “You + Living Hall” of Qumei Group as an example, the experiential consumption of leisure, entertainment, and shopping is realized through the home scenario layout, and it further accomplishes the visceral interaction between consumers. It also incorporates digital technologies such as virtual reality and artificial intelligence, enabling consumers to perceive information online while enhancing the consumer experience and promoting business sustainability. This implies that guided by data and taking experience as the starting point, Qumei Group has added more products and consumption scenarios around users’ needs, gradually connecting the links of users’ lives with each Qumei scenario and establishing a strong connection. In conclusion, in the current era of green development, the products and services produced must have not only economic value but also spiritual cores, such as experience and emotional value. As a result, enterprises should adapt to the live scene, integrate scientific and technological elements, and highlight the comprehensive experience of consumers through cross-border industrial integration, so as to actualize the value resonance with consumers.
(3) Combining offline and online innovation. The traditional storefront model is being replaced by online and offline commerce integration. The advantages of online commerce integration include commercial flow, information flow, and capital flow, which can reduce intermediate links and provide enterprises with timely access to data and information to optimize the allocation of resources. Offline commerce integration has advantages in logistics, service, and experience, and the arrangement of offline scenarios is crucial for stimulating consumer demand, increasing user experience, and fostering consumer loyalty. By combining the benefits of online business flow, information flow, and capital flow with the benefits of offline logistics, service, and experience, the advantages can be amplified geometrically, bringing greater benefits to the economy, society, and the environment.
Based on the above analysis and discussion, combined with coding materials, this paper proposes Proposition 3:
Proposition 3. 
Based on user orientation, product customization and experience-centered scenario innovation represent a significant green business model innovation trend. Manufacturing enterprises leverage digital platforms to engage users in manufacturing, utilize big data to excavate the user’s expectations, and enhance manufacturing responsiveness, so as to meet the individualized needs of users. Then, they develop experiential consumption through scenario innovations such as cross-border integration and digitalization of shops, and finally, achieve integrated development online and offline. Such innovation ameliorates the market situation of a large number of homogenized products, increases the viscosity of users, and achieves accurate allocation of resources to reduce resource wastes so as to promote the green development of manufacturing.

4.4. Ecology-Oriented Path: From Product Intelligence to Smart Connected Product Systems Construction

Enterprises are under pressure to expand their boundaries, accordingly taking ecological synergy (i.e., expanding the boundary of the enterprise, forming a business ecosystem, and achieving openness and cooperation) as the green development orientation. Based on this orientation, the ecology-oriented path is meant for enterprises to produce smart connected products, achieve cross-departmental collaboration by constructing a business ecosystem to enrich enterprise product categories, and finally establish smart connected product systems by ecological platforms. Ecology-oriented enterprises develop information resources sharing platforms and construct a business ecosystem comprised of associated industries and accessory product suppliers in a nested, value-added manner to diversify their product offerings, increase their control over pivotal resources, and expand their boundaries. Afterward, through large-scale and highly integrated connections between intelligent products, the product and business scope of enterprises is extended to a set of associated smart and connected scenario products and services. Furthermore, through multi-scenario linkage, the intelligent connection of all things is realized. This path ultimately achieves resource connection and sharing with external stakeholders, interconnects previously isolated resources to perform well together as a system, and generates considerably better resource value and functionality [76] (As shown in Figure 7).
Figure 7. Conceptual model of the ecology-oriented path.
This path has two significant nodes: (1) Product intelligence. Enterprises enhance the digital and intelligent levels of their products to make them more user-friendly and expand their functionality and value. By embedding different IT technologies (e.g., software), physical products transform into intelligent products that comprise hardware, sensors, and communication components. Intelligent products enable identifying user behavior and generating user behavior data and utilize intelligent computing capabilities (e.g., edge computing) to record, calculate, and even think autonomously. For instance, the acceleration sensor in the bracelet of Xiaomi Corporation counts steps by measuring the amount of change in direction and acceleration. Then, the smart module in the bracelet processes the data through intelligent computing capabilities to match the exercise types of users and supply a more scientific exercise program for the user. This predicts that product intelligence is a development trend for the transformation and upgrading of traditional manufacturing industries, such as mobile phones, wearable devices, and home appliances. Through the development of digital technologies such as the Internet of Things (IoT), enterprises can optimize the original functions of products, strengthen the connection between products and users to improve the added value of products, and increase their market control.
(2) Construction of the smart connected product systems by the ecological platform. In the process of smart product development, enterprises use a unified IoT smart chip to promote the generation of standardized data to determine the interactive linkage of products so as to create a systematic product ecological environment for users. For instance, Xiaomi Corporation has launched a smart home system: based on PM2.5, PM10, CO2, temperature, and humidity detected by the air detector, and the system creates a comfortable indoor environment by linking air conditioners, air purifiers, and humidifiers to form a new systematic function. This indicates that the smart-connected components of smart-connected products not only optimize the product functions but also integrate individual, discrete products into customized, integrated system solutions to meet the broader potential needs of users. The smart connected product is no longer an entity with a single function but a platform bearing multiple functional modules, which constantly reshapes the internal product boundary and expands the enterprise boundary through product interactive connection.
However, due to the diversification of consumer demands, the resources of an individual enterprise often fail to meet the construction of smart connected product systems through manufacturing or purchasing. Enterprises usually pursue a business ecosystem of cross-sectoral collaboration to share resources, knowledge, wealth, and value creation and achieve the synergy of ecosystem resources. For instance, the Xiaomi Corporation has launched the Xiaomi Eco Cloud, which enables data interaction and sharing among different products. Other enterprises can access their clouds to the Xiaomi loT platform through the Eco Cloud and incorporate it into the “Mi Home App” to achieve unified control so that their resources and external resources can implement synergetic development. This approach consolidates information from different products and enterprises across organizational boundaries to further increase the value of data reuse and amplify the role of resources. In addition, data sharing based on a cloud platform will not significantly increase the cost of organization operation, which can effectively avoid the internal production cost of organizations will continue to increase with the expansion of borders. This reveals that enterprises are able to take advantage of the general ecological platform as the data path points to achieve product links and data sharing. By constructing cross-industry and cross-field hyperlinks, the integrated communication and collaborative utilization of multi-source heterogeneous information flow are able to be actualized so as to establish a large-scale, cross-boundary, hyperlink, and highly integrated production system.
Based on the above analysis and discussion, combined with coding materials, this paper proposes Proposition 4:
Proposition 4. 
Based on ecology orientation, Providing smart connected products and building business ecosystems represents a significant green business model innovation trend. Manufacturing enterprises use digital technologies, such as the IoT, to generate the intelligence and interconnection of products and improve their added value. Afterward, by building a generally shared platform to achieve a business ecosystem across the organizational boundaries of multiple stakeholders, they gradually construct smart connected product systems to form intelligent life scenario products, such as smart homes. Such innovation optimizes product attributes and creates a business ecosystem to generate large-scale, cross-border collaborative innovation and data sharing, making the resource create higher value and function so as to promote the green development of the manufacturing industry.

5. Comparison of Four Business Model Innovation Paths

The so-called business model innovation path is a general term for the direction, starting point, focus, process, and methodological means to achieve business model innovation. The coding process and the explanatory argumentation of typical cases take the basic elements of the business model innovation path as the main line of research and analysis and the focus of the investigation. Therefore, the four business model innovation paths in the previous section are compared comprehensively around the essential elements of the paths, such as the starting point, the direction and focus, the innovation process, effectiveness, innovation risk, and applicable condition (as Table 7).
Table 7. Comparison of business model innovation paths.
The comparison between the paths and the case studies of the four manufacturing enterprises indicates that differentiated optimal innovation paths exist for various enterprises. First, around the critical aspects of innovation, such as production processes, technology development, market response, and product development, enterprises select their innovation starting point based on upgrading needs. Second, innovation focus and innovation process differ significantly between paths, thereby further resulting in varying effectiveness and applicable condition. Therefore, enterprises should combine their existing resources and capabilities to achieve an optimal match with differentiated innovation paths in accordance with the upgrading pressures they face.

6. Conclusions

This paper has performed an exploratory study by means of a multi-case study method and the encoding technique of proceduralized grounded theory. The main research findings are presented as follows.
(1) Based on the green development orientation, the four green business model innovation paths, including the efficiency-oriented path, value-oriented path, user-oriented path, and ecology-oriented path, are revealed. They utilized digital technology to change the content and logic of the original business model of enterprises, implement tangible value appreciation or intangible value development, and create economic and environmentally sustainable value. Specifically, the efficiency-oriented path leans toward efficiency improvement, which maximizes the efficiency of energy and resource utilization and minimizes pollutant emissions in the production process by transforming the production process from automation to intelligence and reducing production costs. The value-oriented path leans toward value enhancement, which enables enterprises to reposition themselves in the industry or value network with servitization transformation, develop digital services to break away from the contradiction between business growth and resource overload, and lead the sustainable development of the industry. The user-oriented path leans toward the user relationship deepening, which creates a locked-in user effect with personalized customization and scenario-based innovation to eliminate homogeneous competition in the industry, thereby increasing the viscosity of users and achieving precise resource allocation to prevent resource mismatch and waste. The ecology-oriented path leans toward ecological synergy, which constructs smart connected product systems with a business ecosystem of cross-department collaboration through a digital platform, and expands enterprise boundaries, thereby maximizing the resource portfolio value.
(2) With regard to the basic elements of the paths, such as the starting point, the direction and focus, the innovation process, effectiveness, innovation risk, and applicable condition, this paper compares the four green business model innovation paths comprehensively, identifies the differences among the four paths, and discusses the effectiveness and applicable condition of each path. Further analysis demonstrates that the business model innovation path has differentiated characteristics, and the optimal business model innovation path of an enterprise is determined by the matching relationship among innovation path characteristics. Their business model upgrade demands and their existing conditions.

7. Contributions of the Study

7.1. Theoretical Contributions

The research in this paper has enabled a richer research perspective on the fundamental path and path selection of business model innovation oriented towards green development in traditional manufacturing enterprises, whose theoretical insights are mainly embodied in three aspects.
(1)
In this study, the multi-case study method has reinforced the universality of the research findings, which in turn has compensated for the inadequacy of the fact that most of the existing studies on the business model innovation path of manufacturing are single case studies. The four core categories of efficiency orientation, value orientation, user orientation, and ecological orientation are derived to illustrate the differentiated green development orientation of manufacturing under the background of the digital economy and green development. Furthermore, the four green business model innovation paths are presented and compared in this foundation, which extends the relevant theories on the types and choices of green business model innovation paths. Moreover, it compensates for the inadequacies of the current relevant research, such as a single perspective and vague definition of paths.
(2)
The relationship between the digital economy and green development has been deepened. This study combines the digital economy and green development and integrates their synergistic relationship into the business model, which is a further improvement of the relationship between the digital economy and green development discussed in the existing literature. Existing studies have shown that there is a two-way relationship between the digital economy and green development, but most of them are macro-oriented and lack consideration of the relationship between the two from the perspective of the business model. Through the case study, this paper finds that the business model innovation process under the guidance of green development of enterprises cannot be separated from digital technology, and the business model innovation under the digital economy can promote the sustainable development of the economy and reduce the related negative environmental externalities.
(3)
This paper expands the theory of business model innovation. On the one hand, it enriches the connotation of business model innovation theory. Most of the existing research on business model innovation focuses on economic influence. This paper takes into account the challenges brought by environmental change and resource scarcity, emphasizes the important position of green development orientation in the process of business model innovation, and seeks business model innovation paths that take into account both Economic benefit and environmental efficiency. On the other hand, it expands the application situation of business model innovation theory. Based on the “China story” under the background of the digital economy and green development, this study takes a number of Chinese local manufacturing enterprises as typical cases to reveal the common experience of manufacturing enterprises’ business model innovation and provides specific path suggestions for Chinese manufacturing enterprises in the critical period of transformation how to achieve business model innovation.

7.2. Management Implications

Manufacturing enterprises need to choose an appropriate green business model innovation path based on their actual situation. This paper puts forward the following management implications for manufacturing enterprises to implement business model innovation.
(1) Enterprises with large-scale automation capabilities, comparatively mature and stable markets, and the desire to reduce costs and increase efficiency can opt for the efficiency-oriented path. Enterprises can use digital simulation, virtual reality, and other technologies to digitize difficult-to-materialize technologies and processes, automate production, and enable intelligent data analysis and application. In the innovation process, enterprises should pour attention to top-to-bottom strategic planning and introduce appropriate technologies based on their own development needs to avoid misunderstanding efficiency and only pursue advanced technology.
(2) Enterprises with core technology research and development capabilities, high technical barriers in the industry, and the desire to realize the upgrading of the industry value chain positioning can opt for the value-oriented path. Enterprises can develop digital services through digital technology and form a digital service platform to realize business value-added. In the innovation process, enterprises should focus on core technology development and service expansion and provide diversified, differentiated, and personalized integrated services for users. This approach avoids the frustration of transformation that resulted from the severe homogenization of industry products and services.
(3) Enterprises with products relevant to the daily lives of the general public and the desire to lock in consumer resources can opt for the user-oriented path. Enterprises can achieve close interaction with the demand side through digital platforms to realize user value co-creation so that users’ individual needs and emotional needs can be fully expressed. In the innovation process, enterprises should prioritize in-depth interaction with users, comprehend user needs through big data analysis, and organize production with a user-centric focus. Simultaneously, they should develop a flexible supply chain, alter their business processes, and enhance their adaptability to adjust to the complex environment of internal and external changes.
(4) Enterprises with core products with the foundation of embedded intelligent modules and the desire to extend product boundaries further can opt for the ecology-oriented path. Enterprises can produce intelligent products and form a business ecosystem through digital interconnection, gradually building a system of intelligent, interconnected products. In the process of innovation, enterprises should focus on the cohesion of smart product modules and inspire data sharing between products. At the same time, in the process of ecosystem construction, enterprises should consider products comprehensively to avoid the problems of product positioning and product management by excessively concentrated or scattered investment in the ecological chain.

7.3. Policy Implications

Based on the case analysis and findings, this paper puts forward the following suggestions on how to promote the green development of the manufacturing industry.
(1)
Actively guide the manufacturing industry to implement innovative green business models. The government encourages enterprises to use market-based methods to achieve relevant green business model innovations, gives full play to the incentive role of fiscal policies, and reasonably amplifies the signaling role of government subsidies. For example, the government can provide substantial rewards and honorary support to enterprises that carry out green business model innovations, adjusts the ratio of ex-post to ex-ante subsidies, and explores diverse forms of subsidies and recognition.
(2)
Give full consideration to the heterogeneity of enterprises and implement differentiated support policies. The competent authorities should implement differentiated innovation support policies according to the technical level of the industry, the attributes of the industry’s production, the attributes of the industry’s market, and the product types of the enterprise. For example, the steel industry can promote its automation and intelligent development, the consumer goods manufacturing industry can promote its personalized customization, and the high-end equipment manufacturing industry can promote its service-oriented transformation. By conducting pilot evaluations in specific industries, local conditions can be adapted.

8. Limitations and Prospects

First, the qualitative research method itself has some limitations. For example, there may be some inevitable subjectivity in the coding process, which needs to be empirically tested by large samples. Second, green development and technological innovation in the case show an interactive driving phenomenon. Hence, future studies may investigate the interaction mechanism between technological innovation and green development. Finally, digital change and green development concepts will continue to affect the path of business model innovation, thereby necessitating the tracking of new cases and practices in the future.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.Z.; methodology, X.H. and J.Z.; validation, X.H.; formal analysis, J.Z.; investigation, J.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, J.Z.; writing—review and editing, X.H.; supervision, X.H.; project administration, X.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China (Grant No. 2022VI01-07), General Project of Hubei Social Science Funds of China (Grant No. 2021198), National Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program for College Students (Grant No. S202210497111) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 72202166).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets used or analyzed in this are accessible from the corresponding author on demand.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Zhu, J.H.; Wang, S.S. Evaluation and Influencing Factor Analysis of Sustainable Green Transformation Efficiency of Resource-Based Cities in Western China in the Post-COVID-19 Era. Front. Public Health 2022, 10, 832904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Yao, S. Fuzzy-based Multi-criteria Decision Analysis of Environmental Regulation and Green Economic Efficiency in a Post-COVID-19 Scenario: The Case of China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 28, 30675–30701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Wang, C.; Chen, P.; Hao, Y.; Dagestani, A.A. Tax incentives and green innovation- The mediating role of financing constraints and the moderating role of subsidies. Front. Environ.Sci. 2022, 10, 1067534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Jin, W.; Ding, W.; Yang, J. Impact of financial incentives on green manufacturing: Loan guarantee vs. interest subsidy. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2022, 300, 1067–1080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Sarkar, A.; Qian, L.; Peau, A.K. Overview of green business practices within the Bangladeshi RMG Industry: Competitiveness and Sustainable Development Perspective. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 27, 22888–22901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Hu, D.; Qiu, L.; She, M. Sustaining the sustainable development: How do firms turn government green subsidies into financial performance through green innovation? Bus. Strategy Environ. 2021, 30, 2271–2292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Quintás, M.A.; Martínez-Senra, A.I.; Sartal, A. The role of SMEs’ Green Business Models in the transition to a Low-carbon Economy: Differences in their Design and Degree of Adoption Stemming from Business Size. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Rajala, R.; Westerlund, M.; Lampikoski, T. Environmental Sustainability in Industrial Manufacturing: Re-examining the Greening of Interface’s Business model. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 115, 52–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Ma, C.; Mao, J.Y.; An, X.P. The driving forces behind the phenomenal rise of the digital economy in China. Manag. Organ. Rev. 2022, 18, 803–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Gregori, P.; Holzmann, P. Digital Sustainable Entrepreneurship: A Business Model Perspective on Embedding Digital Technologies for Social and Environmental Value Creation. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 272, 122817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Feng, H.; Wang, F.; Song, G.; Liu, L. Digital Transformation on Enterprise Green Innovation: Effect and Transmission Mechanism. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 19, 10614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Fu, Q. How Does Digital Technology Affect Manufacturing Upgrading? Theory and Evidence from China. PLoS ONE 2020, 17, 0267299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Xia, Q.H.; Fang, Q. Research on the path of manufacturing transformation and business model innovation -- Based on the double case analysis of Gree and Midea. Stud. Pract. 2017, 4, 31–41. [Google Scholar]
  14. Bashir, M.; Verma, R. Internal Factors & Consequences of Business Model Innovation. Manag. Decis. 2019, 57, 262–290. [Google Scholar]
  15. Bocken, N.M.P.; Geradts, T.H.J. Barriers and Drivers to Sustainable Business Model Innovation: Organization Design and Dynamic Capabilities. Long Range Plan. 2020, 53, 101950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ciampi, F.; Demi, S.; Magrini, A.; Marzi, G.; Papa, A. Exploring the Impact of Big Data Analytics Capabilities on Business Model Innovation: The Mediating Role of Entrepreneurial Orientation. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 123, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Sorescu, A. Data-driven Business Model Innovation. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2017, 34, 691–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Yu, B.; Hao, S.; Wang, Y. Organizational Search and Business Model Innovation: The Moderating Role of Knowledge Inertia. J. Knowl. Manag. 2020, 24, 1705–1718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Passlick, J.; Dreyer, S.; Olivotti, D. Predictive Maintenance as an Internet of Things Enabled Business Model: A Taxonomy. Electron. Mark. 2021, 31, 67–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Andreassen, T.W.; Lervik–Olsen, L.; Snyder, H. Business Model Innovation and Value-creation: The Triadic Way. J. Serv. Manag. 2018, 29, 883–906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Möller, F.; Stachon, M.; Azkan, C. Designing Business Model Taxonomies–Synthesis and Guidance from Information Systems Research. Electron. Mark. 2022, 32, 701–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Lennart, S.A.; Peter, S. Disruption by Design? Classification Framework for the Archetypes of Disruptive Business Models. RD Manag. 2022, 52, 893–929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Sun, K.; Wang, Z.F.; Yu, Z.H. Classification and Theoretical Model of Sharing Economy Business Model: Based on Three Typical Case Study. Manag. Rev. 2019, 31, 97–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Estelle, D.; Frederik, M.; Ilka, J.; Maleen, S.; Sükran, A.; Boris, O. Archetypes of Open-source Business Models. Electron. Mark. 2022, 32, 727–745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zhang, X.; Meng, Q.; Le, Y. How Do New Ventures Implementing Green Innovation Strategy Achieve Performance Growth? Sustainability 2022, 14, 2299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Li, L.; Msaad, H.; Sun, H.; Tan, M.X.; Lu, Y.; Lau, A. Green Innovation and Business Sustainability: New Evidence from Energy Intensive Industry in China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Palmié, M.; Miehé, L.; Oghazi, P. The Evolution of the Digital Service Ecosystem and Digital Business Model Innovation in Retail: The Emergence of Meta-ecosystems and the Value of Physical Interactions. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2022, 177, 121496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Ma, Y.; Yin, Q.; Pan, Y. Green product innovation and firm performance: Assessing the moderating effect of novelty-centered and efficiency-centered business model design. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Guo, H.; Guo, A.; Ma, H. Inside the black box: How Business Model Innovation Contributes to Digital Start-up Performance. J. Innov. Knowl. 2022, 7, 100188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Bhatnagar, R.; Keskin, D.; Kirkels, A. Design principles for Sustainability Assessments in the Business Model Innovation Process. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 377, 134313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Chu, Y.; Chi, M.; Wang, W.; Luo, B. The Impact of Information Technology Capabilities of Manufacturing Enterprises on Innovation Performance: Evidences from SEM and fsQCA. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kiel, D.; Arnold, C.; Voigt, K. The Influence of the Industrial Internet of Things on Business Models of Established Manufacturing Companies- A Business Level Perspective. Technovation 2017, 68, 4–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Matarazzo, M.; Penco, L.; Profumo, G.; Quaglia, R. Digital Transformation and Customer Value Creation in Made in Italy SMEs: A Dynamic Capabilities Perspective. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 123, 642–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Enkel, E.; Bogers, M.; Chesbrough, H. Exploring Open Innovation in the Digital Age: A Maturity Model and Future Research Directions. RD Manag. 2020, 50, 161–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Brenner, B. Transformative Sustainable Business Models in the Light of the Digital Imperative—A Global Business Economics Perspective. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Wen, L.; Hui, X.; Sihui, L.; Lei, M. Research on Business Model Innovation Path of Manufacturing Enterprises Based on Simulation—A Case study of Haier’s Servitization Transformation. Manag. Case Stud. Rev. 2021, 14, 622–639. [Google Scholar]
  37. Tian, Q.; Zhang, S.; Yu, H.; Cao, G. Exploring the Factors Influencing Business Model Innovation Using Grounded Theory: The Case of a Chinese High-End Equipment Manufacturer. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Chen, Y.H.; Zhang, Z.G.; Huang, L. Mechanism and Path of Digital Enabling Business Model Innovation of Manufacturing Enterprises. J. Manag. 2021, 18, 731–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Freudenreich, B.; Lüdeke-Freund, F.; Schaltegger, S. A Stakeholder Theory Perspective on Business Models: Value Creation for Sustainability. J. Bus. Ethics 2020, 166, 3–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Müller, J.M.; Buliga, O.; Voigt, K. The Role of Absorptive Capacity and Innovation Strategy in the Design of Industry 4.0 Business Models-A Comparison between SMEs and Large Enterprises. Eur. Manag. J. 2020, 39, 333–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Di Vaio, A.; Palladino, R.; Hassan, R. Artificial intelligence and business models in the sustainable development goals perspective: A systematic literature review. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 121, 283–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Teece, D.J. Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Plan. 2018, 51, 40–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Foss, N.J.; Saebi, T. Business Models and Business Model Innovation: Between Wicked and Paradigmatic Problems. Long Range Plan. 2017, 51, 9–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Ghezzi, A.; Cavallo, A. Agile business model innovation in digital entrepreneurship: Lean startup approaches. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 110, 519–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Clauss, T. Measuring business model innovation: Conceptualization, scale development, and proof of performance. Rd Manag. 2017, 47, 385–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Chen, X.; Li, Y.; Song, L.; Wang, Y. Digital Economy Theoretical System and Research Prospects. Manag. World 2022, 38, 208–224. [Google Scholar]
  47. Caputo, A.; Pizzi, S.; Pellegrini, M.M. Digitalization and business models: Where are we going? A science map of the field. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 123, 489–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Ritter, T.; Pedersen, C.L. Digitization capability and the digitalization of business models in business-to-business firms: Past, present, and future. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2020, 86, 180–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Vaska, S.; Massaro, M.; Bagarotto, E.M. The digital transformation of business model innovation: A structured literature review. Front. Psychol. 2021, 35, 539363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Niu, X.J.; Qin, S.F. Integrating Crowd-/Service-sourcing into Digital Twin for Advanced Manufacturing Service Innovation. Adv. Eng. Inform. 2021, 50, 101422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Langley, D.J.; van Doorn, J. The Internet of Everything: Smart things and their impact on business models. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 122, 853–863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Xie, X.M.; Han, Y.H.; Alistair, A.; Ribeiro-Navarrete, S. Digital Platforms and SMEs’ Business Model Innovation: Exploring the Mediating Mechanisms of Capability Reconfiguration. Int. J. Inform. Manag. 2022, 65, 102513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. De Reuver, M.; Sørensen, C.; Basole, R.C. The Digital Platform: A Research Agenda. J. Inf. Technol. 2018, 33, 124–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Lin, P.; Zhang, X.; Yan, S. Dynamic capabilities and business model innovation of platform enterprise: A case study of DiDi taxi. Sci. Program. 2020, 2020, 8841368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Li, W. Research on the driving mechanism of business model innovation of Internet financial enterprises. Sci. Res. Manag. 2020, 41, 130–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Wang, B.C.; Zhang, Q. Research on the configuration of business model innovation of Internet Service Enterprises: Based on strategy and resource perspective. Manag. J. 2022, 35, 119–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Tian, H.; Li, Y.; Zhang, Y. Digital and intelligent empowerment: Can Big Data Capability Drive Green Process Innovation of Manufacturing Enterprises? J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 377, 134261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Zhou, R.; Tang, D.; Da, D.; Chen, W.; Kong, L.; Boamah, V. Research on China’s Manufacturing Industry Moving towards the Middle and High-End of the GVC Driven by Digital Economy. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Huang, W.; Chau, K.Y.; Kit, I.Y.; Nureen, N.; Irfan, M.; Dilanchiev, A. Relating Sustainable Business Development Practices and Information Management in Promoting Digital Green Innovation: Evidence From China. Front. Psychol. 2020, 13, 930138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Méndez–León, E.; Reyes–Carrillo, T.; Díaz–Pichardo, R. Towards a Holistic Framework for Sustainable Value Analysis in Business Models: A Tool for Sustainable Development. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2022, 31, 15–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Chen, W.Q.; Hauschild, M.Z.; Huang, B.J.; Kara, S. Life Cycle Engineering and Sustainable Manufacturing for Net-zero Targets and Environmental. Sustainability 2022, 186, 106480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Wei, Z.; Sun, L. How to leverage manufacturing digitalization for green process innovation: An information processing perspective. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2021, 121, 1026–1044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Roh, T.; Noh, J.; Oh, Y.; Park, K.S. Structural Relationships of a Firm’s Green Strategies for Environmental Performance: The Roles of Green Supply Chain Management and Green Marketing Innovation. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 356, 131877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Han, J.; Heshmati, A.; Rashidghalam, M. Circular Economy Business Models with a Focus on Servitization. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Zhu, X.; Liu, K.A. Systematic Review and Future Directions of the Sharing Economy: Business Models, Operational Insights and Environment-based Utilities. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 290, 125209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Laukkanen, M.; Tura, N. The potential of Sharing Economy Business Models for Sustainable Value Creation. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 253, 120004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Batlles–dela Fuente, A.; Belmonte–Ureña, L.J.; Plaza–Úbeda, J.A. Sustainable Business Model in the Product-Service System: Analysis of Global Research and Associated EU Legislation. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 10123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Ardito, L.; Dangelico, R.M. Firm Environmental Performance Under Scrutiny: The Role of Strategic and Organizational Orientations. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2018, 25, 426–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Qiu, L.; Hu, D.; Wang, Y. How do Firms Achieve Sustainability Through Green Innovation under External Pressures of Environmental Regulation and Market Turbulence? Bus. Strategy Environ. 2020, 29, 2695–2714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Petri, Y. Case study research in the social sciences. Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. 2019, 10, 30–35. [Google Scholar]
  71. Tasci, A.D.; Wei, W.; Milman, A. Uses and misuses of the case study method. Ann. Tour. Res. 2020, 82, 102815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Amjad, M.S.; Rafique, M.Z.; Khan, M.A. Leveraging Optimized and Cleaner Production Through Industry 4.0. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2021, 26, 859–871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Fernando, Y.; Jabbour, C.J.C.; Wah, W.X. Pursuing Green Growth in Technology Firms Through the Connections Between Environmental Innovation and Sustainable Business Performance: Does Service Capability Matter? Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 141, 8–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Viciunaite, V.; Alfnes, F. Informing Sustainable Business Models with a Consumer Preference Perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 242, 118417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Baldassarre, B.; Calabretta, G.; Bocken, N.M.P. Bridging Sustainable Business Model Innovation and User-oriented Innovation: A Process for Sustainable Value Proposition Design. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 147, 175–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Zheng, P.; Lin, T.J.; Chen, C.H. A Systematic Design Approach for Service Innovation of Smart Product-service Systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 201, 657–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.