This page is referenced by:

• 1 2017-01-21T15:29:24-08:00 Section 3: Business Model Mapping / FINDINGS 12 List of findings from Business Model Mapping plain 2017-03-23T14:30:58-07:00

  Figure 27 - Business Model Mapping

  Mapping Visualization  *Total count of 8 companies

  An average count of each component shows an initial small investment for component nº1; a small customer base for component nº2; integration of the analysis of feedback received from clients for component nº3; low level of networkedness with no participation in international networks, showing affiliation to one or three business organizations hubs or networks locally for component nº4; high level of variation between companies, showing diversity of approaches to distribution and complexity channels, capabilities and revenue models for component nº5, nº6 and nº8; differentiation as the most frequently used strategy followed by customer care for component nº7, in terms of component nº 9 the average take is to invest money early in network activities considering this expenditure as part of their regular expenditure.

  Figure 28 - Average Business Model Mapping

  Average Mapping Visualization  *Total count of 8 companies

  
  According to the small sample of companies interviewed the approach take to develop the company is organic growth. Only two companies express their will to consider selling the company to a big organization and also, two companies are thinking to work collaboratively with other organizations to improve or explore new revenue models. There is some evidence to suggest that companies in the digital cluster need support in internationalization and scalability challenges and the inflow of exposure to users and new markets out of Hull City influence area.

  Startup Average Ratios Digital Economy Hull

  Duedil public data *Total count of 53 companies

  • Trade debtors: 25235

  • Net Assets: 35

  • Debt to Capital: 250%

  • Liquidity Ratio: 2

  53 companies public data on Duedil data set is used to indicate the average ratios of the startup digital economy industry.

   
• 1 2017-01-21T15:32:13-08:00 Section 3: Business Model Mapping / ANALYSIS 9 Methods and analysis SECTION 3 (Business model mapping ): Components analysis + Business model map + Network value analysis plain 2017-03-23T14:34:26-07:00

  Methods and analysis

  • Components analysis
  • Business model map
  • Network value analysis
  From a behavior analysis perspective, the process of data harvesting showed a generalized tendency of the companies towards feeling reluctant about data sharing both from Duedil and through personal emailing and survey inquiring. This particularity has made the business model analysis for the overall cluster an impossible endeavor to manage in the given time frame, even if it itself reveals to be a really insightful ethnographic observation on elements of their business culture.
  
  On the sample given by companies open to data sharing first I approached the component analysis after identifying them according to Osterwalder (2004) proposal adapted in combination with the three themes that help classify constituents of the business model according to Klang et at (2014:467)  and that are the following: (1) internal artefacts, which are primarily related to the internal sphere of the firm and do not directly influence its relationships with external stakeholders; (2) relational mechanisms, which influence the relationships between the firm and external stakeholders involved in its transactions; and (3) external stakeholders, which exist beyond the boundaries of the firm.
  As a result, 9 relevant components has been identified and represented in a series of maps (average figure 27 and individuals figure 28) according to Osterwalder’s range of levels for business model complexity analysis (see appendix Survey Design)
   
  • 1.Share capital - Initial Investment -  (1) internal artifacts
  • 2.The size of the customer base. (2) relational mechanisms
  • 3.Customer Integration - Feedback - (2) relational mechanisms
  • 4.Degree of networkedness - (3) external stakeholders
  • 5.Distribution Channel/Channel Complexity -(2) relational mechanisms
  • 6.Capabilities -  (1) internal artefacts
  • 7.Strategy - (2) relational mechanisms
  • 8.Revenue Model - (2) relational mechanisms
  • 9. Expenditure in network activities - (3) external stakeholders
  
  
  Business represented by interview participants acknowledge participation in at least one of the following networks: C4DI, The Enterprise Center and FEO, which aligns with a combination of theories linking connectivity to value creation and business model strategy. Several authors had already suggested that “value structure serves as the facilitator between the nature of the underlying opportunity and the enactment of that opportunity via resource and transactive elements” (Georges and Bock, 2011:90). The present research acknowledges the relevance of network value and will interrogate connections between value dynamics and business networks.