Table 3 Changes in business model design... | Emerald Publishing

Table 3

Changes in business model design and strategic influences

	Strategic influences on BM design	Value creation	Value proposition and delivery	Value capture
OEM	• OEMs demonstrated the technological feasibility of xEVs early on. However, they consider the timing of when to scale up the technology and charging infrastructure as critical factors • OEMs are attempting to shorten vehicle development times to increase developmental flexibility	• They are attempting to maintain their current vehicle capabilities while adding additional ones for xEVs (e.g. capabilities for electric/electrified drivetrains) • OEMs rely on partners for new offers (e.g. electric charging solutions) to complement their own • Increased flexibility in the development processes will require more flexibility from suppliers	• Need for OEMs to provide holistic solutions for xEVs. Therefore, the attractivity of xEV technologies needs to be increased (e.g. through higher driving ranges) • Simultaneously, OEMs are beginning to offer complementing solutions (e.g. charging infrastructure, electrical energy, additional leasing of non-xEVs in specific circumstances) to satisfy customer requirements	• Currently, xEVs are primarily leased to business customers (e.g. operators of vehicle fleets) • Sales of high-end non-xEVs still drive OEM earnings • In order to avoid fees for not adhering to regulations (e.g. on emissions), they need to sell xEVs with low local emissions • Technology development (e.g. batteries) is expected to bring xEV costs down
ETP	• Describe the unclear role of multiple, potentially competing technologies leading to high uncertainty of investments • Profits from petrol-based technologies are required to finance an extensive portfolio of technologies required for xEVs	• The focus of R&D activities was initially on establishing the desired technological properties (e.g. efficiency, durability) and shifting toward integrating technologies into the customers' vehicle system • Training current employees as well as hiring employees skilled in new technologies • Acquire companies to expand their competencies • Participate in funded research projects with other actors (e.g. research institutions, start-ups) to increase capabilities • Coordinate an extensive network of suppliers and new partners	• Use prototypes to demonstrate and communicate its capabilities to customers • Support customers in (1) identifying and (2) developing new technologies as well as (3) industrializing related products and (to some degree) (4) increasing the customers' competencies concerning new technologies • Add value for customers by relaying information and requirements between actors in the ecosystem • Especially for xEVs, shortening development cycles (time to market) and more agile approaches (especially concerning new ecosystem actors) are required	• Revenues are generated through (1) engineering projects or (2) engineering services • Customers are increasingly demanding a higher degree of flexibility in their payment solutions • The profitability of technological areas is a criterion that should be used to revise the company’s technological approaches
SUP(e)	• Establish independent organizational units for xEV technologies due to high risks and currently low-profit margins • Aim for modularization of components to be used on xEVs and petrol-based vehicles	• M&A activities to extend competencies for xEVs • Tier 1 suppliers relay flexibility requirements to their suppliers further upstream • Acquire new technology components while increasing their capabilities in selected areas (e.g. electric motors) • New technologies for xEVs reduce the value-added share • Training and recruiting employees toward xEV technologies is challenging • They integrate technologies into vehicle systems and ensure the overall system properties during development • Describe increasing cooperation with RIs, ETPs and many partners	• The archetypical business model of developing and selling products to customers (primarily OEMs) did not change in the case of xEVs • Sharing risks when developing technologies and subsequent products for xEVs provided additional value to their customers • They emphasized the need to deliver their products to customers worldwide with customer-specific solutions	• In Tier 1 suppliers, profits are achieved by direct product sales • Development capabilities were used to justify the sale prices and improve cost efficiency in development efforts • Furthermore, revenues from after-sales business (e.g. product maintenance) were predicted as lower with xEV technologies
SUP(f)	• Suppliers relying on a focused area of technologies (SUP Epsilon, SUP Zeta) stated they avoided manufacturing high volumes of their products independently- - driver for establishing manufacturing partnerships	• Bring technology to the market largely in-house • Alternatively, both companies took on the role of a technological enabler	• The energy sector and the automotive sector converge their value proposition. OEMs and energy suppliers are beginning to offer their customers integrated energy solutions (including xEV charging) • Rely on specialized ecosystem actors for these solutions, often forming co-creation partnerships	• Focused suppliers generate revenues by licensing their technologies, conducting development projects with customers and obtaining research grants
RET	• Technological and financial feasibility • In addition to OEMs, they depend on energy providers	• Collaborate with subsidies of the affiliated OEMs that provide charging solutions • Cooperate with start-ups to reduce dependence	• Offer charging infrastructure and equipment	• Yet unclear, not profitable so far
FO	• xEVs as a means to satisfy the requirements of customers, shareholders, and stake-holders regarding ecological sustainability • Integrating xEVs into vehicle fleets requires commitment from upper management. However, initial investments (e.g. vehicle costs, rapid devaluation of vehicles, infrastructure) and the reliability of xEVs are still concerns	• They are establishing their own proprietary charging infrastructure to include a substantial percentage of xEVs in their fleets. A supporting factor for this is the predictability of driving distances and routes • The shift toward xEVs was made gradually to gain experience with the new technology. Activities outside the companies' areas of expertise are handled by ecosystem partners (e.g. xEV maintenance)	• Use xEVs to provide more sustainable mobility solutions for their company operations • Through resilient and readily available proprietary charging infrastructure and customized solutions for booking and billing charging operations, the ease of use of xEVs is ensured	• Handling electric charging purely through charging infrastructure providers was considered too expensive compared to having proprietary charging infrastructure • Although not yet comparable to other vehicles (e.g. due to initial investments for xEVs and infrastructure), the total costs of ownership for xEVs are becoming attractive. However, operating xEVs is only considered financially viable in the long run
EC(e)	• Shifting too far away from their core competencies and competing with OEMs is unattractive • Although the market for xEVs is seen as promising, ECs see the need to offer reliable technological solutions that can recoup investments	• Proactively install electric charging infrastructure • Energy companies collaborate to increase overall coverage of charging infrastructure • The number of suppliers for xEV technologies in the ecosystem has increased	• Offer public infrastructure and solutions for electric charging to B2B (e.g. closed off company-infrastructure) and B2C customers (e.g. domestic charging solutions) • ECs see potential in offering “complete” solutions to bind customers to the company	• Efficient monitoring, booking, and billing of infrastructure require digital solutions. Current energy prices are seen as potentially too low for large-scale xEV charging. However, providing energy for xEV charging is perceived as an attractive business • Cost efficiency could be improved by integrating xEVs in the energy grid and managing charging loads
EC(p)	• No significant changes	• Partly build up new competencies but predominately rely on suppliers for technological solutions	• No significant changes	• No significant changes
INF	• They experience significant influence from their shareholders (primarily companies from the energy and technology sectors). Try flexibly addressing customer requirements by providing financially feasible and technologically robust solutions with its ecosystem partners • See the need for higher volumes of xEVs to ensure the viability of xEV technologies	• Perform funded research projects with multiple partners and rely on its partner network for innovations • The overall aim is to quickly establish a minimum viable product that can be tested with customers • Act as coordinator for several suppliers to offer customers charging solutions	• Offer (semi-) public charging solutions to B2C customers that customers of other charging companies can also access for a fee • Establish and operate electric charging infrastructure for B2B customers and municipalities • They also provide “white label” products to ECs and support customers with digital solutions and processes	• They are generating revenues through “basic fees,” fees for electric charging, and through cooperation with OEMs • Aim to mitigate investments in the energy grid using “intelligent” solutions (e.g. flattening load curves)

	Strategic influences on BM design	Value creation	Value proposition and delivery	Value capture
OEM	• OEMs demonstrated the technological feasibility of xEVs early on. However, they consider the timing of when to scale up the technology and charging infrastructure as critical factors • OEMs are attempting to shorten vehicle development times to increase developmental flexibility	• They are attempting to maintain their current vehicle capabilities while adding additional ones for xEVs (e.g. capabilities for electric/electrified drivetrains) • OEMs rely on partners for new offers (e.g. electric charging solutions) to complement their own • Increased flexibility in the development processes will require more flexibility from suppliers	• Need for OEMs to provide holistic solutions for xEVs. Therefore, the attractivity of xEV technologies needs to be increased (e.g. through higher driving ranges) • Simultaneously, OEMs are beginning to offer complementing solutions (e.g. charging infrastructure, electrical energy, additional leasing of non-xEVs in specific circumstances) to satisfy customer requirements	• Currently, xEVs are primarily leased to business customers (e.g. operators of vehicle fleets) • Sales of high-end non-xEVs still drive OEM earnings • In order to avoid fees for not adhering to regulations (e.g. on emissions), they need to sell xEVs with low local emissions • Technology development (e.g. batteries) is expected to bring xEV costs down
ETP	• Describe the unclear role of multiple, potentially competing technologies leading to high uncertainty of investments • Profits from petrol-based technologies are required to finance an extensive portfolio of technologies required for xEVs	• The focus of R&D activities was initially on establishing the desired technological properties (e.g. efficiency, durability) and shifting toward integrating technologies into the customers' vehicle system • Training current employees as well as hiring employees skilled in new technologies • Acquire companies to expand their competencies • Participate in funded research projects with other actors (e.g. research institutions, start-ups) to increase capabilities • Coordinate an extensive network of suppliers and new partners	• Use prototypes to demonstrate and communicate its capabilities to customers • Support customers in (1) identifying and (2) developing new technologies as well as (3) industrializing related products and (to some degree) (4) increasing the customers' competencies concerning new technologies • Add value for customers by relaying information and requirements between actors in the ecosystem • Especially for xEVs, shortening development cycles (time to market) and more agile approaches (especially concerning new ecosystem actors) are required	• Revenues are generated through (1) engineering projects or (2) engineering services • Customers are increasingly demanding a higher degree of flexibility in their payment solutions • The profitability of technological areas is a criterion that should be used to revise the company’s technological approaches
SUP(e)	• Establish independent organizational units for xEV technologies due to high risks and currently low-profit margins • Aim for modularization of components to be used on xEVs and petrol-based vehicles	• M&A activities to extend competencies for xEVs • Tier 1 suppliers relay flexibility requirements to their suppliers further upstream • Acquire new technology components while increasing their capabilities in selected areas (e.g. electric motors) • New technologies for xEVs reduce the value-added share • Training and recruiting employees toward xEV technologies is challenging • They integrate technologies into vehicle systems and ensure the overall system properties during development • Describe increasing cooperation with RIs, ETPs and many partners	• The archetypical business model of developing and selling products to customers (primarily OEMs) did not change in the case of xEVs • Sharing risks when developing technologies and subsequent products for xEVs provided additional value to their customers • They emphasized the need to deliver their products to customers worldwide with customer-specific solutions	• In Tier 1 suppliers, profits are achieved by direct product sales • Development capabilities were used to justify the sale prices and improve cost efficiency in development efforts • Furthermore, revenues from after-sales business (e.g. product maintenance) were predicted as lower with xEV technologies
SUP(f)	• Suppliers relying on a focused area of technologies (SUP Epsilon, SUP Zeta) stated they avoided manufacturing high volumes of their products independently- - driver for establishing manufacturing partnerships	• Bring technology to the market largely in-house • Alternatively, both companies took on the role of a technological enabler	• The energy sector and the automotive sector converge their value proposition. OEMs and energy suppliers are beginning to offer their customers integrated energy solutions (including xEV charging) • Rely on specialized ecosystem actors for these solutions, often forming co-creation partnerships	• Focused suppliers generate revenues by licensing their technologies, conducting development projects with customers and obtaining research grants
RET	• Technological and financial feasibility • In addition to OEMs, they depend on energy providers	• Collaborate with subsidies of the affiliated OEMs that provide charging solutions • Cooperate with start-ups to reduce dependence	• Offer charging infrastructure and equipment	• Yet unclear, not profitable so far
FO	• xEVs as a means to satisfy the requirements of customers, shareholders, and stake-holders regarding ecological sustainability • Integrating xEVs into vehicle fleets requires commitment from upper management. However, initial investments (e.g. vehicle costs, rapid devaluation of vehicles, infrastructure) and the reliability of xEVs are still concerns	• They are establishing their own proprietary charging infrastructure to include a substantial percentage of xEVs in their fleets. A supporting factor for this is the predictability of driving distances and routes • The shift toward xEVs was made gradually to gain experience with the new technology. Activities outside the companies' areas of expertise are handled by ecosystem partners (e.g. xEV maintenance)	• Use xEVs to provide more sustainable mobility solutions for their company operations • Through resilient and readily available proprietary charging infrastructure and customized solutions for booking and billing charging operations, the ease of use of xEVs is ensured	• Handling electric charging purely through charging infrastructure providers was considered too expensive compared to having proprietary charging infrastructure • Although not yet comparable to other vehicles (e.g. due to initial investments for xEVs and infrastructure), the total costs of ownership for xEVs are becoming attractive. However, operating xEVs is only considered financially viable in the long run
EC(e)	• Shifting too far away from their core competencies and competing with OEMs is unattractive • Although the market for xEVs is seen as promising, ECs see the need to offer reliable technological solutions that can recoup investments	• Proactively install electric charging infrastructure • Energy companies collaborate to increase overall coverage of charging infrastructure • The number of suppliers for xEV technologies in the ecosystem has increased	• Offer public infrastructure and solutions for electric charging to B2B (e.g. closed off company-infrastructure) and B2C customers (e.g. domestic charging solutions) • ECs see potential in offering “complete” solutions to bind customers to the company	• Efficient monitoring, booking, and billing of infrastructure require digital solutions. Current energy prices are seen as potentially too low for large-scale xEV charging. However, providing energy for xEV charging is perceived as an attractive business • Cost efficiency could be improved by integrating xEVs in the energy grid and managing charging loads
EC(p)	• No significant changes	• Partly build up new competencies but predominately rely on suppliers for technological solutions	• No significant changes	• No significant changes
INF	• They experience significant influence from their shareholders (primarily companies from the energy and technology sectors). Try flexibly addressing customer requirements by providing financially feasible and technologically robust solutions with its ecosystem partners • See the need for higher volumes of xEVs to ensure the viability of xEV technologies	• Perform funded research projects with multiple partners and rely on its partner network for innovations • The overall aim is to quickly establish a minimum viable product that can be tested with customers • Act as coordinator for several suppliers to offer customers charging solutions	• Offer (semi-) public charging solutions to B2C customers that customers of other charging companies can also access for a fee • Establish and operate electric charging infrastructure for B2B customers and municipalities • They also provide “white label” products to ECs and support customers with digital solutions and processes	• They are generating revenues through “basic fees,” fees for electric charging, and through cooperation with OEMs • Aim to mitigate investments in the energy grid using “intelligent” solutions (e.g. flattening load curves)

Source(s): Own elaboration