Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Kooperative Geschäftsmodellentwicklung für systemische Nachhaltigkeitsinnovationen: Eine Fallstudie im deutschen Smart Energy-Markt

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Kompendium Geschäftsmodell-Innovation

Zusammenfassung

Nachhaltigkeitsinnovationen zeichnen sich häufig durch einen systemischen Charakter aus, so dass deren Entwicklung ein koordiniertes Vorgehen mehrerer Akteure erfordert. Um gemeinsam Chancen für systemische Nachhaltigkeitsinnovationen zu erkennen, sie zu planen und umzusetzen, werden neue kooperative Methoden und Ansätze benötigt.

Insbesondere für die Entwicklung der Energiewirtschaft hin zu einer nachhaltigen Energieversorgung sind systemische Innovationen von großer Bedeutung. Die Integration eines schnell wachsenden Anteils erneuerbarer Energien und dezentraler Erzeugungsanlagen stellt Energieversorgungsunternehmen (EVU) vor Herausforderungen, die sie nicht alleine lösen können. Moderne Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologien (IKT) werden zur effizienten Steuerung verteilter Erzeugungsanlagen und Verbraucher und zur Koordinierung zahlreicher Marktakteure benötigt. Die Entwicklung intelligenter Energiesysteme („Smart Energy“) eröffnet aber auch Chancen für die Erweiterung der Geschäftstätigkeit von EVU. Hierzu werden neue Geschäftsmodelle benötigt.

In diesem Beitrag stellen wir unseren Ansatz der kooperativen Geschäftsmodellentwicklung (KGE) vor. Wir wenden die KGE in einer Fallstudie an, bei der acht Unternehmen kooperiert haben, um neue Geschäftsmodelle für die Energiewirtschaft zu entwickeln. Nach der Darstellung unseres Ansatzes diskutieren wir seine Stärken und Limitationen und vergleichen ihn mit zwei alternativen Methoden der Strategie- und Innovationsplanung, der Szenariotechnik und dem Roadmapping.

Es zeigt sich, dass die KGE gut geeignet ist um 1. potentiellen wirtschaftlichen und gesellschaftlichen Nutzen zu identifizieren, 2. kooperative Wertschöpfungsarchitekturen zu entwickeln, 3. in komplexen und unsicheren Märkten zu planen und 4. die Umsetzung neuer Geschäftsmodelle vorzubereiten.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Dieser Abschnitt ist ein aktualisierter Auszug aus dem Artikel Knab und Konnertz (2011).

Literatur

  • Afuah AN, Bahram N (1995) The hypercube of innovation. Research Policy 24:51–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amit R, Zott C (2012) Creating value through business model innovation. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 53(3):41–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayuso S, Rodriguez MA, Garcia-Castro R, Arino MA (2011) Does stakeholder engagement promote sustainable innovation orientation? Ind Manag Data Syst 111(9):1399–1417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baden-Fuller C, Morgan MS (2010) Business models as models. Long Range Plann 43(2–3):156–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • B.A.U.M. Consult GmbH (2012) Smart Energy made in Germany: Zwischenergebnisse der E-Energy-Modellprojekte auf dem Weg zum Internet der Energie. B.A.U.M. Consult GmbH, München/Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg P, Pihlajamaa J, Poskela J, Smedlund A (2006) Benchmarking of quality and maturity of innovation activities in a networked environment. Int J Technol Manag 33(2–3):255–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boons F, Lüdeke-Freund F (2013) Business models for sustainable innovation: state-of-the-art and steps towards a research agenda. J Clean Prod 45:9–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boons F, Roome N (2005) Sustainable enterprise in clusters of innovation: new directions in corporate sustainability research and practice. In: Sharma S, Aragon-Correa AJ (Hrsg) Corporate environmental strategy and competitive advantage. Edward Elgar Academic Publishing, Cheltenham

    Google Scholar 

  • Boons F, Montalvo C, Quist J, Wagner M (2013) Sustainable innovation, business models and economic performance: an overview. J Clean Prod 45:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouffard F, Kirschen DS (2008) Centralised and distributed electricity systems. Energy Policy 36(12):4504–4508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie (BMWi) (2013) Energiedaten/Erneuerbare Energien. http://www.bmwi.de/DE/Themen/Energie/Energiedaten-und-analysen/Energiedaten/energietraeger.html. Zugegriffen: 15. Nov. 2013

  • Cairns G, Wright G, Van der Heijden K, Bradfield R, Burt G (2006) Enhancing foresight between multiple agencies: issues in the use of scenario thinking to overcome fragmentation. Futures 38(8):1010–1025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casadesus-Masanell R, Ricart JE (2010) From strategy to business models and onto tactics. Long Range Plann 43(2–3):195–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chermack TJ, van der Merwe L, Lynham SA (2007) Exploring the relationship between scenario planning and perceptions of strategic conversation quality. Technol Forecast Soc 74(3):379–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough HW (2003) The era of open innovation. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 44(3):35–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough H (2010) Business model innovation: opportunities and barriers. Long Range Plann 43(2–3):354–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough H, Rosenbloom RS (2002) The role of the business model in capturing value from innovation: evidence from Xerox Corporation’s technology spin-off companies. Ind Corp Change 11(3):529–555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiou CH (2011) Dynamic capabilities, collaborative network and business model: an empirical analysis of Taiwan HTC Corporation. Afr J Bus Manag 5(2):294–305

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahan NM, Doh JP, Oetzel J, Yaziji M (2010) Corporate-NGO collaboration: co-creating new business models for developing markets. Long Range Plann 43(2–3):326–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Boer Y, van Bergen B (2012) Expect the unexpected: building business value in a changing world. KPMG International, Zug

    Google Scholar 

  • De Laat PB (1999) Systemic innovation and the virtues of going virtual: the case of the digital video disc. Technol Anal Strateg Manag 11(2):159–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deloitte (2012) Smart Grid vs. Smart Market. Wie funktioniert die deutsche Energiewende. Deloitte & Touche GmbH Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Demil B, Lecocq X (2010) Business model evolution: in search of dynamic consistency. Long Range Plann 43(2–3):227–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dodgson M, Gann D, Salter A (2006) The role of technology in the shift towards open innovation: the case of Procter & Gamble. R & D Manag 36(3):333–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dormann, J, Holliday, C (2002) Innovation, technology, sustainability, and society. World Business Council for Sustainability (WBCSD). Hertfordshire, Stevenage

    Google Scholar 

  • Doz YL, Kosonen M (2010) Embedding strategic agility: a leadership agenda for accelerating business model renewal. Long Range Plann 43(2–3):370–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubosson-Torbay M, Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y (2002) E-business model design, classification, and measurements. Thunderbird Int Bus Rev 44(1):5–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2011) A roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050. European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Franz et al (2006) Potenziale der Informations- und Kommunikations-Technologien zur Optimierung der Energieversorgung und des Energieverbrauchs (eEnergy). Bericht von wik-Consult, Fraunhofer ISI und Fraunhofer ISE, Bad Honnef

    Google Scholar 

  • Garces-Ayerbe C, Rivera-Torres P, Murillo-Luna JL (2012) Stakeholder pressure and environmental proactivity Moderating effect of competitive advantage expectations. Manage Decis 50(1–2):189–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Govindarajan V, Trimble C (2011) The CEO’s role in business model reinvention. Harvard Bus Rev 89(1–2):108–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenveld P (2007) Roadmapping integrates business and technology. Res Technol Manag 50(6):49–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacklin F, Wallnöfer M (2012) The business model in practice of strategic decision making: insights from a case study. Manage Decis 50(2):166–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall KJ, Vredenburg H (2003) The challenges of innovating for sustainable development. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 45(1):61–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanninen S (2007) The perfect technology syndrome: sources, consequences and solutions. Int J Technol Manag 39(1):20–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen EG, Grosse-Dunker F, Reichwald F (2009) Sustainability innovation cube: a framework to evaluate sustainability-oriented innovations. Int J Innov Manag 13(4):683–713

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen EG, Große-Dunker F (2013) Sustainability-oriented innovation. In: Idowu SO, Capaldi N, Das Gupta A, Zu L (Hrsg) Encyclopedia of corporate social responsibility. Springer, Heidelberg, S 2407–2417

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart SL (1995) A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Acad Manag Rev 20(4):986–1014

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart SL, Dowell, G (2011) A natural-resource-based view of the firm: fifteen years after. J Manag 37(5):1464–1479

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart SL, Milstein MB (2003) Creating sustainable value. Acad Manag Exec 17(2):56–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heger T, Rohrbeck R (2012) Strategic foresight for collaborative exploration of new business fields. Technol Forecast Soc Change 79(5):819–831

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellström T (2007) Dimensions of environmentally sustainable innovation: the structure of eco-innovation concepts. Sustain Dev 15(3):148–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hines F, Marin O (2004) Building innovations for sustainability: 11th international conference of the greening of industry network. Bus Strat Environ 13(4): 201–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoegl M, Gemuenden HG (2001) Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects: a theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organ Sci 12(4):435–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes S, Smart P (2009) Exploring open innovation practice in firm-nonprofit engagements: a corporate social responsibility perspective. R & D Manag 39(4):394–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Itami H, Nishino K (2010) Killing two birds with one stone: profit for now and learning for the future. Long Range Plann 43(2–3):364–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson MW, Suskewicz J (2009) How to jump-start the clean tech economy. Harvard Bus Rev 87(11):52–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson MW, Christensen CM, Kagermann H (2008) Reinventing your business model. Harvard Bus Rev 2008:50–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanter RM (2011) How great companies think differently. Harvard Bus Rev 89(11):66–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Knab S, Konnertz L (2011) Smart Energy – Branchenübergreifende Exploration eines entstehenden Marktes. et – Energiewirtschaftliche Tagesfragen 61(5):8–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Knab S, Strunz K, Lehmann H (2010) Smart grid: the central nervous system for power supply. New paradigms, new challenges, new services. In TU Berlin (Hrsg) Schriftenreihe Innovationszentrum Energie Nr 2. Universitätsverlag der TU Berlin, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Koen PA, Bertels HMJ, Elsum IR (2011) The three faces of business model innovation: Challenges for established firms. Res Technol Manag 54(3):52–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laszlo A, Laszlo KC, Dunsk H (2010) Redefining success: designing systemic sustainable strategies. Syst Res Behav Sci 27(1):3–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Lei DT (2000) Industry evolution and competence development: the imperatives of technological convergence. Int J Technol Manag 19(7–8):699–738

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenthaler E (2005) The choice of technology intelligence methods in multinationals: towards a contingency approach. Int J Technol Manag 32(3–4):388–407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorenz M-L, Menkens C, Konrad N (2009) E-Energy. Trend Report 2009/2010. Center for Digital Technology and Management, München

    Google Scholar 

  • McDowall W, Eames M (2006) Forecasts, scenarios, visions, backcasts and roadmaps to the hydrogen economy: a review of the hydrogen futures literature. Energ Policy 34(11):1236–1250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGrath RG (2010) Business models: a discovery driven approach. Long Range Plann 43(2–3):247–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles RE, Miles G, Snow CC (2006) Collaborative entrepreneurship: a business model for continuous innovation. Organ Dyn 35(1):1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MIT Sloan Management Review, The Boston Consulting Group (2012) Sustainability nears a tipping point. MIT Sloan Manag Rev. Winter 53(2):69–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterwalder A (2004) The business model ontology – a proposition in a design science approach. Dissertation, HEC Lausanne

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y (2010) Business model generation: a handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  • Paucar-Caceres A, Espinosa A (2011) Management science methodologies in environmental management and sustainability: discourses and applications. J Oper Res Soc 62(9):1601–1620

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrick IJ, Echols AE (2004) Technology roadmapping in review: a tool for making sustainable new product development decisions. Technol Forecast Soc Change 71(1–2):81–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phaal R, Farrukh CJP, Probert DR (2004a) Collaborative technology roadmapping: network development and research prioritisation. Int J Technol Intell Plann 1(1):39–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Phaal R, Farrukh CJP, Probert DR (2004b) A framework for supporting the management of technological knowledge. Int J Technol Manag 27(1):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phaal R, Farrukh CJP, Probert DR (2004c) Technology roadmapping – a planning framework for evolution and revolution. Technol Forecast Soc Change 71(1–2):5–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinkse J, Kolk A (2010) Challenges and trade-offs in corporate innovation for climate change. Bus Strat Environ 19(4):261–272

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter ME, Kramer MR (2011) The big idea: creating shared value. Harvard Bus Rev 89(1–2):62–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC) (2008) Smart Metering: Umsetzungsstand und strategische Implikationen für die Energiewirtschaft. PricewaterhouseCoopers, Düsseldorf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Probert D, Farrukh C, Gregory M, Robinson N (1999) Linking technology to business planning: theory and practice. Int J Technol Manag 18(1–2):11–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice MP, Leifer R, O’Connor GC (2002) Commercializing discontinuous innovations: bridging the gap from discontinuous innovation project to operations. IEEE T Eng Manag 49(4): 330–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson J (2008) The business model: an integrative framework for strategy execution. Strat Change 17(5–6):133–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richter M (2013) Business model innovation for sustainable energy: German utilities and renewable energy. Energ Policy 62:1226–1237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ringland G (2010) The role of scenarios in strategic foresight. Technol Forecast Soc Change 77(9):1493–1498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohrbeck R, Kallehave P (2012) The role of corporate foresight in promoting sustainability, UN Global Compact International Yearbook. United Nations, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohrbeck R, Döhler M, Arnold H (2009a) Creating growth with externalization of R & D results – the spin-along approach. Global Bus Organ Excellence 28(4):44–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohrbeck R, Hölzle K, Gemünden HG (2009b) Opening up for competitive advantage – how Deutsche Telekom creates an open innovation ecosystem. R & D Manag 39(4):420–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohrbeck R, Konnertz L, Knab S (2013) Collaborative business modeling for systemic and sustainability innovations. International Journal of Technology Management 63(1/2):4–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruff F (2006) Corporate foresight: integrating the future business environment into innovation and strategy. Int J Technol Manag 34(3–4):278–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruohomaa S, Kutvonen L (2010) Trust and distrust in adaptive inter-enterprise collaboration management. J Theor Appl Elect Com Res 5(2):118–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger S, Beckmann M, Hansen EG (2013) Transdisciplinarity in corporate sustainability: mapping the field. Bus Strat Environ 22(4):219–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siggelkow N (2002) Evolution toward fit. Admin Sci Quart 47(1):125–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith WK, Binns A, Tushman ML (2010) Complex business models: managing strategic paradoxes simultaneously. Long Range Plann 43(2–3):448–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sosna M, Trevinyo-RodrÌguez RN, Velamuri SR (2010) Business model innovation through trial-and-error learning: the naturhouse case. Long Range Plann 43(2–3):383–407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storbacka K, Nenonen S (2011) Scripting markets: from value propositions to market propositions. Ind Mark Manag 40(2):255–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece DJ (2010) Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Plann 43(2–3):172–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Economist (2013) How to lose half a trillion euros. From the print edition: Oct 12th 2013. http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21587782-europes-electricity-providers-face-existential-threat-how-lose-half-trillion-euros. Zugegriffen: 15. Nov. 2013

  • Thom N, Rohrbeck R, Dunaj M (2010) Innovation instruments for translating future insights into managerial actions. Paper presented at the ISPIM Conference 2010. Bilbao

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson JD, MacMillan IC (2010) Business models: creating new markets and societal wealth. Long Range Plann 43(2–3):291–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Timmers P (1998) Business models for electronic markets. Electron Mark 8(2):3–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulhøi JP (2008) Supporting the development of environmentally sustainable technologies and products: The role of innovation, informal cooperation and governmental agency. Int J Environ Pollut 32(1):121–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulhøi JP, Madsen H (2009) Recapturing the corporate environmental management research agenda. Bus Strat Environ 18(2):79–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Secretary-General’s high-level panel on global sustainability (2012) Resilient people, resilient planet: a future worth choosing. Overview. United Nations, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • van Dinther C, Weidlich A, Block C (2006) Energiemärkte der Zukunft. Universität Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe

    Google Scholar 

  • Visser MP, Chermack TJ (2009) Perceptions of the relationship between scenario planning and firm performance: a qualitative study. Futures 41(9):581–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells R, Phaal R, Farrukh C, Probert D (2004) Technology roadmapping for a service organization. Res Technol Manag 47(2):46–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Yaziji M (2004) Turning gadflies into allies. Harvard Bus Rev 2004:110–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Yunus M, Moingeon B, Lehmann-Ortega L (2010) Building social business models: lessons from the Grameen experience. Long Range Plann 43(2–3):308–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zott C, Amit R (2010) Business model design: an activity system perspective. Long Range Plann 43(2–3):216–226

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Professur für BWL, insb. Unternehmensethik, Fachbereich Sozialökonomie, Universität Hamburg, Von-Melle-Park 9, 20146, Hamburg, Deutschland

    Sebastian Knab

  2. Department of Business Administration, Aarhus University, Bartholins Allé 10, 8000, Aarhus, Denmark

    Prof. Dr. René Rohrbeck

  3. Birkenstraße 19, 10559, Berlin, Deutschland

    Lars Konnertz

Authors
  1. Sebastian Knab
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Prof. Dr. René Rohrbeck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lars Konnertz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sebastian Knab .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany

    Daniel R.A. Schallmo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Knab, S., Rohrbeck, R., Konnertz, L. (2014). Kooperative Geschäftsmodellentwicklung für systemische Nachhaltigkeitsinnovationen: Eine Fallstudie im deutschen Smart Energy-Markt. In: Schallmo, D. (eds) Kompendium Geschäftsmodell-Innovation. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-04459-6_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-04459-6_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-04458-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-04459-6

  • eBook Packages: Business and Economics (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation