IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/bushor/v60y2017i6p807-817.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Digital maker-entrepreneurs in open design: What activities make up their business model?

Author

Listed:
  • Troxler, Peter
  • Wolf, Patricia

Abstract

The business models of digital maker-entrepreneurs in open design are inextricably linked to the broader open design community. Digital makers share designs on online platforms such as Thingiverse and use digital manufacturing technology such as 3-D printing as a generative mechanism for their entrepreneurial activities. There is a general understanding of how sharing works in that community and the basic design parameters that determine the business models of these digital maker-entrepreneurs, which are based on a portfolio of activities. This study is based on in-depth interviews with 11 digital maker-entrepreneurs from the open design community. We investigate the activities that constitute their business models using activity theory as a lens with which better to understand them. This study provides a perspective on the complexity of the relationships in which these activities are embedded and analyzes the activities related to the production, distribution, and consumption of value. Finally, we examine the exchanges between digital maker-entrepreneurs in the community, shedding light on how digital maker-entrepreneurs share and exchange goods, services, and knowledge as peers.

Suggested Citation

  • Troxler, Peter & Wolf, Patricia, 2017. "Digital maker-entrepreneurs in open design: What activities make up their business model?," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 60(6), pages 807-817.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:bushor:v:60:y:2017:i:6:p:807-817
    DOI: 10.1016/j.bushor.2017.07.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0007681317301040
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.bushor.2017.07.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frank Blackler, 1993. "Knowledge And The Theory Of Organizations: Organizations As Activity Systems And The Reframing Of Management," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(6), pages 863-884, November.
    2. Dale Dougherty, 2012. "The Maker Movement," Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, MIT Press, vol. 7(3), pages 11-14, July.
    3. Ng, Thiam Hee & Yarcia, Damaris Lee, 2014. "Has Regional Integration Led to Greater Risk-Sharing in Asia?," Working Papers on Regional Economic Integration 135, Asian Development Bank.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hanna Saari & Maria Åkerman & Barbara Kieslinger & Jouko Myllyoja & Regina Sipos, 2021. "How Open Is the Maker Movement? Integrative Literature Review of the Openness Practices in the Global Maker Movement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-20, December.
    2. Jérémy Bonvoisin & Robert Mies & Jean-François Boujut, 2021. "Seven observations and research questions about Open Design and Open Source Hardware," Post-Print hal-03395460, HAL.
    3. Elia, Gianluca & Margherita, Alessandro & Passiante, Giuseppina, 2020. "Digital entrepreneurship ecosystem: How digital technologies and collective intelligence are reshaping the entrepreneurial process," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    4. Umair Baig & Batool Muhammad Hussain & Ieva Meidute-Kavaliauskiene & Sigitas Davidavicius, 2022. "Digital Entrepreneurship: Future Research Directions and Opportunities for New Business Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-16, April.
    5. Miao, Yumeng & Du, Rong & Ou, Carol, 2022. "Guanxi circles and light entrepreneurship in social commerce : The roles of mass entrepreneurship climate and technology affordances," Other publications TiSEM f19a203f-abb6-4835-9c34-2, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Tara Vinodrai & Brenton Nader & Christian Zavarella, 2021. "Manufacturing space for inclusive innovation? A study of makerspaces in southern Ontario," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 36(3), pages 205-223, May.
    7. Wolf, Patricia & Klotz, Ute & Gaudenz, Urs, 2020. "Mitbestimmung von Mitarbeitenden aus DIY-Communities," Study / edition der Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, Düsseldorf, volume 127, number 438.
    8. Vladimiras Dolgopolovas & Valentina Dagiene, 2021. "On the Future of Computational Thinking Education: Moving beyond the Digital Agenda, a Discourse Analysis Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-21, December.
    9. Erickson, Kristofer, 2018. "Can creative firms thrive without copyright? Value generation and capture from private-collective innovation," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 61(5), pages 699-709.
    10. Rayna, Thierry & Striukova, Ludmila, 2021. "Assessing the effect of 3D printing technologies on entrepreneurship: An exploratory study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    11. Tabarés, Raúl & Kuittinen, Hanna, 2020. "A tale of two innovation cultures: Bridging the gap between makers and manufacturers," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    12. María Jesús Ávila-Gutiérrez & Alejandro Martín-Gómez & Francisco Aguayo-González & Juan Ramón Lama-Ruiz, 2020. "Eco-Holonic 4.0 Circular Business Model to Conceptualize Sustainable Value Chain towards Digital Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-32, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vladimiras Dolgopolovas & Valentina Dagiene, 2022. "On Semiotics Perspectives of Computational Thinking: Unravelling the “Pamphlet” Approach, a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-22, February.
    2. Keijo Räsänen & Susan Meriläinen & Raimo Lovio, 1994. "Pioneering descriptions of corporate greening: Notes and doubts on the emerging discussion," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(4), pages 9-16.
    3. Greg Schrock & Marc Doussard & Laura Wolf-Powers & Stephen Marotta & Max Eisenburger, 2019. "Appetite for Growth: Challenges to Scale for Food and Beverage Makers in Three U.S. Cities," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 33(1), pages 39-50, February.
    4. Liubertė Irina, 2019. "On Social Knowledge and Its Empirical Investigation in Contemporary Organisations," Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, Sciendo, vol. 81(1), pages 21-37, June.
    5. Steve Marotta, 2021. "Making sense of ‘maker’: Work, identity, and affect in the maker movement," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 53(4), pages 638-654, June.
    6. Langley, David J. & Zirngiebl, Marthe & Sbeih, Janosch & Devoldere, Bart, 2017. "Trajectories to reconcile sharing and commercialization in the maker movement," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 60(6), pages 783-794.
    7. J. M. Pearce, 2016. "Return on investment for open source scientific hardware development," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 192-195.
    8. Torsten Ringberg & Markus Reihlen, 2008. "Towards a Socio‐Cognitive Approach to Knowledge Transfer," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(5), pages 912-935, July.
    9. Laurent Dupont & Alex Gabriel & Mauricio Camargo & Claudine Guidat, 2017. "Collaborative Innovation Projects Engaging open communities: a Case Study on Emerging Challenges," Post-Print hal-01582548, HAL.
    10. Yingqiu Wu & Zhonghong Ma, 2022. "The Power of Makerspaces: Heterotopia and Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, December.
    11. Stefania Fiorentino, 2019. "The Maker Faire of Rome as a window of observation on the new perspectives for local economic development and the new urban entrepreneurial ecosystems," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 34(4), pages 364-381, June.
    12. Welter, Friederike & May-Strobl, Eva & Wolter, Hans-Jürgen & Günterberg, Brigitte, 2014. "Mittelstand im Wandel," IfM-Materialien 232, Institut für Mittelstandsforschung (IfM) Bonn.
    13. Bernardo Batiz-Lazo & Jorge Gomes & Maria Mendes, 2002. "New Product Development & Management Of Knowledge In Portuguese Higher Education," Industrial Organization 0211019, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Macpherson, Allan & Holt, Robin, 2007. "Knowledge, learning and small firm growth: A systematic review of the evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 172-192, March.
    15. Hamalainen, Markko & Karjalainen, Jesse, 2017. "Social manufacturing: When the maker movement meets interfirm production networks," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 60(6), pages 795-805.
    16. Nancy Beauregard & Louise Lemyre & Jacques Barrette, 2015. "The Domains of Organizational Learning Practices: An Agency-Structure Perspective," Societies, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-21, October.
    17. Kolja Oswald & Xiaokang Zhao, 2021. "Collaborative Learning in Makerspaces: A Grounded Theory of the Role of Collaborative Learning in Makerspaces," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, June.
    18. Reihlen, Markus & Klaas, Thorsten, 1999. "Individualismus, Holismus und Systemismus: Erörterung metatheoretischer Sichtweisen in den Sozialwissenschaften," Working Paper Series 99, University of Cologne, Department of Business Policy and Logistics.
    19. Tabarés, Raúl & Kuittinen, Hanna, 2020. "A tale of two innovation cultures: Bridging the gap between makers and manufacturers," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    20. Paul Vallance, 2011. "Relational and Dialectical Spaces of Knowing: Knowledge, Practice, and Work in Economic Geography," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 43(5), pages 1098-1117, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:bushor:v:60:y:2017:i:6:p:807-817. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/bushor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.