IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i10p5647-d556963.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainable Business Model Innovations in the Value Uncaptured Manufacturing Industry: Fitting Gains—Gain Creators

Author

Listed:
  • Burhan

    (Industrial and System Engineering, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya 60111, Indonesia
    Department of Agricultural Industrial Technology, Universitas Trunojoyo Madura, Bangkalan 69162, Indonesia)

  • Udisubakti Ciptomulyono

    (Industrial and System Engineering, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya 60111, Indonesia)

  • Moses Laksono Singgih

    (Industrial and System Engineering, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya 60111, Indonesia)

  • Imam Baihaqi

    (Department of Business Management, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya 60111, Indonesia)

Abstract

Increased manufacturing activity has an impact on environmental quality degradation. Waste generated from manufacturing activities is one of the causes. Previous studies have referred to this waste as value uncaptured. Minimizing value uncaptured is a solution to improve environmental quality. This study aims to reduce value uncaptured by converting it into value captured. This process requires a value proposition design approach because of its advantages. One of the advantages of this approach is that it can improve existing or future products/services. To do so, this research uses a case study of a furniture company. To implement a converting process, a sustainable business model is proposed to solve this problem. This business model combines several methods: value proposition design, house of value and the product sustainability index matrix. Recently, the existing value proposition problem-solving has been using the value proposition design method. This research proposed implementing a house of value to replace the fitting process. The questionnaire is developed to obtain various value uncaptured in the company. To the weight of the value uncaptured, this research utilized the pairwise comparison method. Then, the weights could represent the importance of jobs. Based on the highest weight of these jobs, the alternative gains would be selected. To provide the weight of the gain creators and value captured, the house of value method is developed. Referring to three pillars of sustainability, the value captured should be considered. This research proposed implementing a product sustainability index which in turn produces eco-friendly products. This study produces “eco-friendly products” as sustainability value captured. The sustainability business model could be an alternative policy to minimize the existence of value uncaptured.

Suggested Citation

  • Burhan & Udisubakti Ciptomulyono & Moses Laksono Singgih & Imam Baihaqi, 2021. "Sustainable Business Model Innovations in the Value Uncaptured Manufacturing Industry: Fitting Gains—Gain Creators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-23, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:10:p:5647-:d:556963
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/10/5647/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/10/5647/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Farida Pulansari & Suparno & Sri Gunani Partiwi, 2018. "A development of a framework for evaluation of reverse logistics maturity level," International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 29(2), pages 151-172.
    2. Parenreng, Syarifuddin Mabe & Pujawan, Nyoman & Karningsih, Putu Dana & Engelseth, Per, 2016. "Mitigating Risk in the Tuna Supply through Traceability System Development," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 19(1), pages 1-24, February.
    3. Jeffrey H. Dyer & Harbir Singh & William S. Hesterly, 2018. "The relational view revisited: A dynamic perspective on value creation and value capture," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(12), pages 3140-3162, December.
    4. Parama Kartika Dewa & I. Nyoman Pujawan & Iwan Vanany, 2017. "Human errors in warehouse operations: an improvement model," International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 27(3), pages 298-317.
    5. Toivonen, Ritva Marketta, 2012. "Product quality and value from consumer perspective—An application to wooden products," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 157-173.
    6. Mateusz Lewandowski, 2016. "Designing the Business Models for Circular Economy—Towards the Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-28, January.
    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. Vinicius Minatogawa & Matheus Franco & Izabela Simon Rampasso & Maria Holgado & Diego Garrido & Hernan Pinto & Ruy Quadros, 2022. "Towards Systematic Sustainable Business Model Innovation: What Can We Learn from Business Model Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-35, March.
    2. Sylwia Lorenc & Tomasz Leśniak & Arkadiusz Kustra & Maria Sierpińska, 2023. "Evolution of Business Models of Mining and Energy Sector Companies according to Current Market Trends," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-21, July.

    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. Julia Köhler & Sönnich Dahl Sönnichsen & Philip Beske‐Jansen, 2022. "Towards a collaboration framework for circular economy: The role of dynamic capabilities and open innovation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(6), pages 2700-2713, September.
    2. Pina Puntillo, 2023. "Circular economy business models: Towards achieving sustainable development goals in the waste management sector—Empirical evidence and theoretical implications," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(2), pages 941-954, March.
    3. Mechthild Donner & Anne Verniquet & Jan Broeze & Katrin Kayser & Hugo de Vries, 2021. "Critical success and risk factors for circular business models valorising agricultural waste and by-products," Post-Print hal-03004851, HAL.
    4. Van Wijk, Raymond & Nadolska, Anna, 2020. "Making more of alliance portfolios: The role of alliance portfolio coordination," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 388-399.
    5. Aleksey I. Shinkevich & Alsu R. Akhmetshina & Ruslan R. Khalilov, 2022. "Development of a Methodology for Forecasting the Sustainable Development of Industry in Russia Based on the Tools of Factor and Discriminant Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-16, March.
    6. Jacopo Zotti & Andrea Bigano, 2019. "Write circular economy, read economy’s circularity. How to avoid going in circles," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 36(2), pages 629-652, July.
    7. David E. Cantor & Tingting Yan & Mark Pagell & Wendy L. Tate, 2022. "From the editors: Introduction to the emerging discourse incubator on the topic of leveraging multiple types of resources within the supply network for competitive advantage," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 58(2), pages 3-7, April.
    8. Wiebke Reim & David Sjödin & Vinit Parida, 2021. "Circular business model implementation: A capability development case study from the manufacturing industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(6), pages 2745-2757, September.
    9. Julian Lauten-Weiss & Stephan Ramesohl, 2021. "The Circular Business Framework for Building, Developing and Steering Businesses in the Circular Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-14, January.
    10. Maurizio Massaro & Francesca Dal Mas & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour & Carlo Bagnoli, 2020. "Crypto‐economy and new sustainable business models: Reflections and projections using a case study analysis," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(5), pages 2150-2160, September.
    11. Claudia Aparecida De Mattos & Thiago Lourenço Meira De Albuquerque, 2018. "Enabling Factors and Strategies for the Transition Toward a Circular Economy (CE)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, December.
    12. María E. Aguilar-Fernández & José Ramon Otegi-Olaso, 2018. "Firm Size and the Business Model for Sustainable Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-27, December.
    13. Maria Rosa De Giacomo & Raimund Bleischwitz, 2020. "Business models for environmental sustainability: Contemporary shortcomings and some perspectives," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3352-3369, December.
    14. Rachel Greer & Timo Wirth & Derk Loorbach, 2023. "The Circular Decision-Making Tree: an Operational Framework," Circular Economy and Sustainability,, Springer.
    15. Maniyassouwe Amana & Pingfeng Liu & Mona Alariqi, 2022. "Value Creation and Capture with Big Data in Smart Phones Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-22, November.
    16. Nadia Preghenella & Cinzia Battistella, 2021. "Exploring business models for sustainability: A bibliographic investigation of the literature and future research directions," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(5), pages 2505-2522, July.
    17. Shimei Jiang & Yimei Hu & Ziyuan Wang, 2019. "Core Firm Based View on the Mechanism of Constructing an Enterprise Innovation Ecosystem: A Case Study of Haier Group," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-26, June.
    18. Yli-Renko, Helena & Denoo, Lien & Janakiraman, Ramkumar, 2020. "A knowledge-based view of managing dependence on a key customer: Survival and growth outcomes for young firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(6).
    19. Steffen Runge & Christian Schwens & Matthias Schulz, 2022. "The invention performance implications of coopetition: How technological, geographical, and product market overlaps shape learning and competitive tension in R&D alliances," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 266-294, February.
    20. Shen, Huijun & Coreynen, Wim & Huang, Can, 2022. "Exclusive licensing of university technology: The effects of university prestige, technology transfer offices, and academy-industry collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:10:p:5647-:d:556963. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.