Understanding the Augmented and Virtual Reality Business Ecosystem: An e3-value Approach

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 391)


In recent years, augmented and virtual reality have increasingly gained attention. To date, a multitude of solutions has been developed and implemented both in research and in practice. As a result, these technologies create new business opportunities. Particularly in Germany, a variety of startups tried to enter the market. By analyzing 141 tech startups, this paper visualizes the 25 generic roles and value streams within the augmented and virtual reality business ecosystem using the e3-value method. Furthermore, we evaluate the model with semi-structured interviews to verify validity. Practitioners can use the model to identify competitors or collaboration opportunities. Theoretically, our research contributes to the body of knowledge by systematically depicting the services related to augmented and virtual reality. Finally, we provide directions for future research.


Generic value network e3-value method Augmented reality Virtual reality Business ecosystem 



The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive feedback. This research is funded by the “Graduiertenkolleg va-eva: Vertrauen und Akzeptanz in erweiterten und virtuellen Arbeitswelten” at the University of Osnabrück (


  1. 1.
    Chesbrough, H.: Business model innovation: opportunities and barriers. Long Range Plann. 43, 354–363 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bezegová, E., Ledgard, A., Molemaker, R.-J., Oberč, B.P., Vigkos, A.: Virtual Reality and its Potential for Europe. Ecorys, London (2018)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Liu, S.: Forecast augmented (AR) and virtual reality (VR) market size worldwide from 2016 to 2023 (in billion U.S. dollars). Accessed 20 Feb 2020
  4. 4.
    Milgram, P., Takemura, H., Utsumi, A., Kishino, F.: Mixed Reality (MR) Reality-Virtuality (RV) Continuum. In: SPIE, vol. 2351, pp. 282–292 (1994). Telemanipulator Telepresence Technol.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Martín-Gutiérrez, J., Mora, C.E., Añorbe-Díaz, B., González-Marrero, A.: Virtual technologies trends in education. EURASIA J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 13, 469–486 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rauschnabel, P.A., Ro, Y.K.: Augmented reality smart glasses: an investigation of technology M acceptance drivers. Int. J. Technol. Mark. 11, 123–148 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Niemöller, C., Metzger, D., Thomas, O.: Design and evaluation of a smart-glasses-based service support system. In: Proceedings of the 13th Internationale Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik, pp. 106–120 (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Metzger, D., Niemöller, C., Wingert, B., Schultze, T., Bues, M., Thomas, O.: How machines are serviced – design of a virtual reality-based training system for technical customer services. In: Proceedings of the 13th Internationale Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik, pp. 604–618 (2017)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Moore, J.F.: Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition. Harv. Bus. Rev. 71, 75–86 (1993)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Riasanow, T., Jäntgen, L., Hermes, S., Böhm, M., Krcmar, H.: Core, intertwined, and ecosystem-specific clusters in platform ecosystems: analyzing similarities in the digital transformation of the automotive, blockchain, financial, insurance and IIoT industry. Electron. Mark. (2020).
  11. 11.
    Bundesregierung, D.: Hightech-Strategie 2025. Accessed 20 Feb 2020
  12. 12.
    Mühlhans, T.: Virtual Reality/Augmented Reality - Bestandsaufnahme und Best Practices (2018)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Capgemini Research Institute: Augmented and Virtual Reality in Operations (2018)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    European Comission: Augmented and Virtual Reality. Accessed 20 Feb 2020
  15. 15.
    Walsh, K.R., Pawlowski, S.D.: Virtual reality: a technology in need of is research. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 8, 297–313 (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Harborth, D.: Augmented reality in information systems research: a systematic literature review. In: Twenty-Third Americas Conference on Information Systems, Boston, pp. 1–10 (2017)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jimenez, R.J.P., Becerril, E.M., Nor, R.M., Smagas, K., Valari, E., Stylianidis, E.: Market potential for a location based and augmented reality system for utilities management. In: 2016 22nd International Conference on Virtual System & Multimedia (VSMM), pp. 1–4 (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mütterlein, J., Hess, T.: Exploring the impacts of virtual reality on business models: the case of the media industry. In: ECIS Proceedings 2017, pp. 3213–3222 (2017)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cranmer, E., Jung, T.: Augmented reality (AR): business models in urban cultural heritage tourist destinations. In: 12th APacCHRIE Conference (2014)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Riasanow, T., Galic, G., Böhm, M.: Digital transformation in the automotive industry: towards a generic value network. In: 2017 Proceedings of 25th European Conference on Information and Systems, ECIS 2017, pp. 3191–3201 (2017)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gordijn, J., Akkermans, J.M.: Value-based requirements engineering: exploring innovative e-commerce ideas. Requir. Eng. 8, 114–134 (2003). Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MIS Q. 28, 75–105 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    March, S.T., Smith, G.F.: Design and natural science research on information technology. Decis. Support Syst. 15, 251–266 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    vom Brocke, J., Simons, A., Niehaves, B., Riemer, K., Plattfaut, R., Cleven, A.: Reconstructing the giant: on the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process. In: 17th European Conference on Information and Systems, ECIS 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    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. 11, 529–555 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tian, C.H., Ray, B.K., Lee, J., Cao, R., Ding, W.: BEAM: a framework for business ecosystem analysis and modeling. IBM Syst. J. 47, 101–114 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ignat, V.: Digitalization and the global technology trends. In: IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 227 (2017)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ibarra, D., Ganzarain, J., Igartua, J.I.: Business model innovation through Industry 4.0: a review. Procedia Manuf. 22, 4–10 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gordijn, J., Akkermans, H.: Designing and evaluating e-business models. IEEE Intell. Syst. 16, 11–17 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Veit, D., Clemons, E., Benlian, A., Buxmann, P., Hess, T., Kundisch, D., Leimeister, J.M., Loos, P., Spann, M.: Business models: an information systems research agenda. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 6, 45–53 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    van den Hoven, J.: ICT and value sensitive design. In: Goujon, P., Lavelle, S., Duquenoy, P., Kimppa, K., Laurent, V. (eds.) The Information Society: Innovation, Legitimacy, Ethics and Democracy In honor of Professor Jacques Berleur s.j. IIFIP, vol. 233, pp. 67–72. Springer, Boston (2007). Scholar
  32. 32.
    Böhm, M., Koleva, G., Leimeister, S., Riedl, C., Krcmar, H.: Towards a generic value network for cloud computing. In: Altmann, J., Rana, Omer F. (eds.) GECON 2010. LNCS, vol. 6296, pp. 129–140. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). Scholar
  33. 33.
    Riasanow, T., Flötgen, R.J., Setzke, D.S., Böhm, M., Krcmar, H.: The generic ecosystem and innovation patterns of the digital transformation in the financial industry. In: PACIS (2018)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Greineder, M., Riasanow, T., Böhm, M., Krcmar, H.: The generic InsurTech ecosystem and its strategic implications for the digital transformation of insurance industry. In: 40th GI EMISA (2019)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Perotti, V., Yu, Y.: Startup Tribes: Social Network Ties that Support Success in New Firms (2015)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Marra, A., Antonelli, P., Dell’Anna, L., Pozzi, C.: A network analysis using metadata to investigate innovation in clean-tech - implications for energy policy. Energy Policy 86, 17–26 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    KPMG: Neue Dimensionen der Realität - The New Media Consortium (2016)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mayring, P.: Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. In: Handbuch qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie, pp. 601–613. Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M.A., Chatterjee, S.: A design science research methodology for information systems research. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 24, 45–77 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D.K., Mead, M.: The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst. 11, 369–386 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Gläser, J., Laudel, G.: Experteninterviews und qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Venable, J., Pries-Heje, J., Baskerville, R.: A comprehensive framework for evaluation in design science research. In: Peffers, K., Rothenberger, M., Kuechler, B. (eds.) DESRIST 2012. LNCS, vol. 7286, pp. 423–438. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). Scholar
  43. 43.
    Richardson, C., Rymer, J.R.: New Development Platforms Emerge For Customer-Facing Applications (2014)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Crunchbase: Ubimax on Crunchbase Accessed 08 May 2020
  45. 45.
    Ubimax: Ubimax. Accessed 08 May 2020

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Accounting and Information SystemsOsnabrück UniversityOsnabrückGermany
  2. 2.Information Management and Information SystemsOsnabrück UniversityOsnabrückGermany
  3. 3.Smart Enterprise EngineeringGerman Research Center for Artificial IntelligenceOsnabrückGermany

Personalised recommendations