Umeå University's logo

Is a business model (BM) always a BM? While there is an apparent consensus on the definition of BM as the specific way a particular organisation creates and captures value, there is simultaneously a prevalent and often implicit reference in the literature to BMs as generic ways of value creation and capture, i.e., to BMs (as) types (BMTs). However, scholars tend to conflate the two due to the use of the same label and the lack of a clear and coherent conceptualisation of BMTs, leading to faulty conclusions, hindering the accumulation of knowledge, and limiting the ability to pose novel questions. We address this issue through a systematic integrative literature review of 364 articles, focusing on the nature, origins, and roles of BMTs. We conceptualise BMTs, distinguish them from BMs, provide an integrative framework of the extant literature and establish essential avenues for future research. This review’s results offer a refined and extended understanding of BMTs, thereby advancing theory and enabling scholars to develop more rigorous and pertinent research. We also contribute to practice by providing actionable advice and a more refined vocabulary around BM(T)s.

Sustainable categories, such as “Circular business model”, represent what are seen as solutions to sustainable issues, thus guiding actors in determining what are “the right things to do”. When representing solutions that genuinely address these issues, these categories can support sustainable development. However, if misrepresenting the wrong phenomenon as solutions,they can cause harm. Thus, studying these categories emergence is crucial, which requires focusing on moral legitimacy since it is what determines if a category is sustainable. Despite its relevance, this topic has been overlooked. I address this limitation by focusing on discursive practices, and asking: how do actors discursively construct a category as morally legitimate? Based on a case study, I identify six discursive practices working through three mechanisms. I contribute to theory by providing an explanation of how categories can emerge as sustainable independently if the solution they represent are, identifying new practices and mechanisms, and substantiating previous work. I support practitioners by highlighting the need for critically assessing categories and providing a discursive toolbox.