Evaluation of LMSN configuration types
| Business model | Alpha | Bravo | Charlie | Delta | Echo | Foxtrot | Golf | |
| Competitive strategy | Lean competitiveness | Cost leadership | Broad market differentiation | Broad market differentiation | Niche differentiation | Cost leadership | Lean competitiveness | |
| Product variety | Low | Low | High | High | High | Low | Low | |
| Delivery responsiveness | Slow | Hybrid | Slow | Hybrid | Fast | Fast | Slow | |
| Configuration dimension | Variable | Alpha | Bravo | Charlie | Delta | Echo | Foxtrot | Golf |
| Network structurea | Centralization | 5 | 2 | 4.5 | 4 | 1 | 1.5 | 5 |
| Vertical integration | 5 | 5 | 2.5 | 3.5 | 2 | 4.5 | 3.5 | |
| Horizontal integration | 1 | 1 | 4 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 1.5 | 3.5 | |
| Geographic dispersion | 3 | 5 | 4.5 | 5 | 1 | 4.5 | 4.5 | |
| Network flowa | Flow integration | 5 | 4 | 3.5 | 3 | 2 | 4.5 | 3 |
| Flow coordination | 1.5 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 4.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | |
| Relationship governancea | Interdependence | 2 | 2.75 | 3.75 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4.5 |
| Governance mechanismc | Hierarchy and relational contract | Hierarchy | Hierarchy and market | Hierarchy and market | Relational contract and market | Hierarchy, relational contract and market | Hierarchy, relational contract and market | |
| Strengtd of networked governance structure | 1 | 1 | 4.5 | 4 | 4.5 | 3 | 4 | |
| Service architecturea | Service uniquenessd | 5 | 3 | 2.5 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 4.5 |
| Service modularity | 1 | 3 | 4 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | |
| Consumer survey | Satisfaction (100) | 75.7 | 77.3 | 76.9 | 83.1 | 82.1 | 77.7 | 74.0 |
| Convenience (100) | 73.8 | 74.4 | 76.3 | 79.3 | 78.7 | 75.5 | 71.9 | |
| Reliabilityb | 0.96 | 0.90 | 0.86 | 0.93 | 0.89 | 0.84 | 0.92 | |
| Business model | Alpha | Bravo | Charlie | Delta | Echo | Foxtrot | Golf | |
| Competitive strategy | Lean competitiveness | Cost leadership | Broad market differentiation | Broad market differentiation | Niche differentiation | Cost leadership | Lean competitiveness | |
| Product variety | Low | Low | High | High | High | Low | Low | |
| Delivery responsiveness | Slow | Hybrid | Slow | Hybrid | Fast | Fast | Slow | |
| Configuration dimension | Variable | Alpha | Bravo | Charlie | Delta | Echo | Foxtrot | Golf |
| Network structurea | Centralization | 5 | 2 | 4.5 | 4 | 1 | 1.5 | 5 |
| Vertical integration | 5 | 5 | 2.5 | 3.5 | 2 | 4.5 | 3.5 | |
| Horizontal integration | 1 | 1 | 4 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 1.5 | 3.5 | |
| Geographic dispersion | 3 | 5 | 4.5 | 5 | 1 | 4.5 | 4.5 | |
| Network flowa | Flow integration | 5 | 4 | 3.5 | 3 | 2 | 4.5 | 3 |
| Flow coordination | 1.5 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 4.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | |
| Relationship governancea | Interdependence | 2 | 2.75 | 3.75 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4.5 |
| Governance mechanismc | Hierarchy and relational contract | Hierarchy | Hierarchy and market | Hierarchy and market | Relational contract and market | Hierarchy, relational contract and market | Hierarchy, relational contract and market | |
| Strengtd of networked governance structure | 1 | 1 | 4.5 | 4 | 4.5 | 3 | 4 | |
| Service architecturea | Service uniquenessd | 5 | 3 | 2.5 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 4.5 |
| Service modularity | 1 | 3 | 4 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | |
| Consumer survey | Satisfaction (100) | 75.7 | 77.3 | 76.9 | 83.1 | 82.1 | 77.7 | 74.0 |
| Convenience (100) | 73.8 | 74.4 | 76.3 | 79.3 | 78.7 | 75.5 | 71.9 | |
| Reliabilityb | 0.96 | 0.90 | 0.86 | 0.93 | 0.89 | 0.84 | 0.92 | |
Notes: aBased on a Likert scale 1 to 5: low (1), low-moderate (2), moderate (3), moderate-high (4), and high (5); breliability is calculated using ICC(3,K) following review for major disagreement (Shrout and Fleiss, 1979); cbased on a categorical scale indicating tde governance mechanism type: hierarchy, market, and relational contract; dbased on proportion of unique to standard modules
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.