=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2239/article_1
|storemode=property
|title=Continuous Business Model Planning with the Value Management Platform
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2239/article_1.pdf
|volume=Vol-2239
|authors=Geert Poels,Ben Roelens,Henk de Man,Theodoor van Donge
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/vmbo/PoelsRMD18
}}
==Continuous Business Model Planning with the Value Management Platform==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2239/article_1.pdf
Continuous Business Model Planning with the Value
Management Platform
Geert Poels1[0000-0001-9247-6150], Ben Roelens1[0000-0002-2443-8678], Henk de Man2, and Theo-
door van Donge2
1
Department of Business Informatics and Operations Management, Faculty of Economics and
Business Administration, Ghent University, Tweekerkenstraat 2, 9000 Gent, Belgium
geert.poels@UGent.be, ben.roelens@UGent.be
2
VDMbee, Schietboom 2, 3905TD Veenendaal, The Netherlands
hdman@vdmbee.com, tvdonge@vdmbee.com
Abstract. The Value Delivery Modeling Language (VDML) is a standardized
language for developing conceptual models that are used for the analysis and
design of value creation and value capture in enterprise operations. Although the
VDML 1.0 specification was published by the Object Management Group
(OMG) in October 2015, as of yet, little is known about applications and experi-
ences of value modeling with VDML. We report in this paper on the industrial
practice of applying VDML for continuous business model planning using the
Value Management Platform (VMP) tool of the Dutch company VDMbee. Nei-
ther the VMP user guide nor the VDML specification prescribe how to perform
value modeling using the tool/language. With this paper, we add to the procedural
knowledge of value modeling by analyzing the method applied in a continuous
business model planning case-study of a low-cost carrier. We focus particularly
on how the VMP was used in this case-study for supporting managerial decision
making and strategy exploration regarding the company’s future growth on both
the existing business model and innovation-driven business transformation. By
identifying, extracting, and making explicit the method of continuous business
model planning using the VMP, we contribute to a better understanding of the
practice of value modeling with VDML.
Keywords: Conceptual Modeling, Enterprise Modeling, Value Modeling, Busi-
ness Ontology, VDML, Business Model Planning, Business Innovation, Busi-
ness Transformation, Strategy Exploration, Managerial Decision Making
1 Introduction
A value model is a type of enterprise model that shows how value is delivered in a
network of actors (e.g., a supply chain, a consumer market, a smart grid, a healthcare
system). As such, value modeling can be used for strategic analysis and the (re)design
of value networks. Since the early 2000’s, different modeling approaches have been
proposed with specific emphasis on value-related aspects (e.g., exchange, impact and
2
value creation analyses [1], e-service design [2]). The Value Delivery Modeling Lan-
guage (VDML) [3], which integrates many concepts of other value modeling as well as
business modeling approaches, has been adopted as a standard business modeling spec-
ification by the Object Management Group (OMG) [4]. Tool support for VDML is of-
fered by the Dutch company VDMbee [5]. Their Value Management Platform (VMP)
provides a user-friendly tool for working with VDML using different kinds of business
canvas/map templates and storytelling/mapping techniques for model building. The
transparent creation of VDML meta-model instantiations via the tool’s highly visual
interfaces instead of directly working with the language, targets value management pro-
fessionals with a business-oriented profile rather than a technology-oriented profile.
The approach to value modeling adopted in the VMP is called continuous business
model planning (CBMP) [6], to stress that it is an approach that uses a business model
framework to connect strategy and operations, in a spirit of ‘continuous improvement’
by steering the business on values. The VMP is thus used as a dashboard for planning
and monitoring strategic change and as a decision support system for exploring, evalu-
ating and deciding on strategic plans.
A complete enterprise modeling approach entails more than the definition of a meta-
model, a notation, and the development of modeling, analysis, and design tools. A mod-
eling method also consists of a modeling procedure which guides the creation and anal-
ysis of models [7]. Currently, there is no research on how to apply VDML as related
research focuses on ontological analysis of the conceptualization of value [8-11],
VDML extensions and analysis techniques for applications like business model analy-
sis [12,13], compliance engineering [14] and reputation systems design [15], and inte-
gration of VDML into enterprise architecture modeling approaches (e.g., ArchiMate
[16,17]).1 Regarding CBMP with the VMP, a brief overview of its stages can be found
in the literature [14]. A more up-to-date overview can be found in [6], which is a
VDMbee blog post that is deliberately high-level and introductory. Apart from largely
anecdotic evidence of (showcase) VDML applications (e.g., case-studies reports [5],
master thesis projects [18-20]), knowledge on the practice of value modeling with
VDML is largely tacit. For CBMP, this knowledge is embedded in the VMP code and
in its documentation, video tutorials and other training materials, not forgetting the tacit
knowledge ‘embodied’ by the tool developers themselves.
The goal of this paper is to make this tacit knowledge explicit. We intend to contrib-
ute procedural knowledge (i.e., how to?) of CBMP by making the method underlying
the use of the VMP explicit. Via the specific value modeling approach chosen, we also
intend to better the understanding of the practice of value modeling. We believe that by
demonstrating the VMP-supported approach as a for managers transparent practice of
VDML that guides and supports their strategic planning processes regarding continuous
1
A systematic search on Google Scholar on December 18, 2017 returned 589 hits for the search
string “continuous business model planning” OR “VDML” OR “value delivery modeling lan-
guage” OR “value delivery modelling language” OR “value delivery metamodel” OR “value
delivery meta-model”. These hits revealed 108 unique documents in English which referred
to VDML as acronym for value delivery modeling language (or value delivery meta-model as
it was first coined by the OMG) and one document that mentioned CBMP using the VMP.
3
innovation and transformation, we help increasing the maturity of value modeling prac-
tice and boosting the adoption of VDML. Making the method explicit will also facilitate
further research on the use of VDML.
To identify and extract the method underlying the use of VMP for CBMP, we follow
the Design Science Research Method for Information Systems Research [21]. In par-
ticular, we conducted client/context-initiated design-based research. According to [21,
p. 56] “a client/context-initiated solution may be based on observing a practical solution
that worked; it starts with activity 4 [Demonstration: find suitable context & use artifact
to solve problem], resulting in a D[esign]S[cience] solution if researchers work back-
ward to apply rigor to the process retroactively”. In our case, the client is VDMbee that
asked us for help to make tacit knowledge about the CBMP method explicit. The con-
text is the application of the approach to the CBMP process of a low-cost carrier (LCC).
This LCC case-study was developed by the VDMbee Academy to be used for training
value management professionals in the use of the VMP.
VDMbee provided us access to the case-study documentation and data (i.e., business
model packages stored in the VMP) and the two VDMbee value architects who were
involved in the development of the case-study, joined the research team. The participa-
tion of the value architects greatly helped us to reconstruct the development process,
while ensuring the correct interpretation of the case-study materials. So, our main re-
search activity was to reverse engineer the demonstration of VMP-based value model-
ing in the LCC context, to find out the activities performed and techniques applied, and
to add some rigor to the CBMP method’s design rationale by grounding design deci-
sions in the Information Systems and Strategic Management knowledge base [22]. We
decided that the evaluation of this method is outside the research scope of this paper.
We also emphasize that this is only a first iteration of adding rigor as we report on an
industrial practice, focusing on describing the method underlying the use of the VMP
as observed from a particular instantiation (i.e., the LCC case-study). Consequently, the
maturity level of the knowledge contribution of our research is still low, being of the
type ‘situated implementation of artifact’ [23]. Further research is required to raise the
level of knowledge of CBMP to that of a design theory.
The paper is structured as follows. The second section of the paper introduces the
LCC case-study. The third section analyses how the VMP was used in the case-study
to identify and extract the underlying CBMP method. The fourth section discusses the
most distinctive features of the method, the limitations of the research, and the next
steps in developing the VMP and in conducting research on CBMP. The final section
concludes by outlining our contribution and its implications for practice and research.
2 Case-study
The LCC studied differentiates itself most clearly from a full-service carrier through
the adoption of the ‘no-frills’ business model pattern [24]. Passengers can buy cheap
tickets to be transported from point A to point B, but basically any other service (e.g.,
hold luggage, carry-on luggage, food and beverages, seat allocation) must be bought as
add-ons at a premium price. The ancillary revenues generated by the add-ons combined
4
with a cost-cutting focus (e.g., minimal turnaround time, minimal fuel carriage and
consumption, maximal aircraft utilization, low wages) allow keeping ticket prices low.
Apart from low costs, other key values of the LCC under study are environmental sus-
tainability (i.e., consuming less fuel per passenger kilometer than competitors do) and
passenger satisfaction, which is determined by ticket prices, promptness (i.e., flights in
time) and the variety of destinations within the European Union that are served.
Despite the success of the current business model, the LCC’s management team re-
alizes that further strategic thinking and action is required to cope with emerging chal-
lenges and threats, including a worsening reputation (in terms of lack of customer ser-
vice quality and bad treatment of personnel), projected market (share) growth (neces-
sitating investments in hundreds of new aircrafts), increased competition by so-called
ultra-low-cost carriers, and the Brexit (potentially resulting in a reversing of deregula-
tion and liberalization for flights to and from the UK).
To cope with these challenges and threats, and to realize the CEO’s ambition to
grow, several ideas for business model innovation are actively being pursued, including
operating long-haul flights (e.g., inter-Atlantic flights), setting up short-haul operations
in the Middle-East, and offering connecting flights (i.e., feeder lines) for long-haul air-
lines. Also, several alternatives of the current business model are being explored, to
find the best basis for future growth (e.g. lowering of fares, leasing of planes).
Fig. 1. VMP screenshot showing a comparison of four calculated plan values in the next year
for alternative implementations of the current business model, based on market prognoses2.
To structure this strategic thinking and turn it into a systematic strategic planning pro-
cess, the VMP was used. Using the VMP, business model innovation is moved from
2
Market size increases from 2200 million tickets in year 0 to 2250 million tickets in year 1 and
market share increases from 5% in year 0 to 5.5% (unchanged policy) or 10% (low fares, low
fares & partial lease) in year 1.
5
ideation to prototyping, allowing managers to take informed decisions on the adoption
and implementation of new/modified business models and on the phasing of the busi-
ness transformation. The VMP informs managerial decision-making by means of prog-
noses and analyses of scenarios regarding the value impact of the continuation of cur-
rent business models and/or business model innovation. For instance, a value manage-
ment dashboard can be created to show the trade-offs in and/or evolution of ‘plan val-
ues’ (see Fig. 1 for an example). The method underlying the application of the VMP is
demonstrated and analyzed in the next section.
3 Continuous Business Model Planning Method
In this section, a first subsection presents the analysis of the CBMP process performed
for the LCC under study. The analysis looks into what activities were performed, for
which purpose, in what order, and how they were organized as to who is involved and
where they took place. The second subsection then looks specifically into the question
with what means the activities were performed. The different techniques incorporated
in the VMP are demonstrated on the LCC case and are mapped onto applicable con-
structs and diagrams of VDML.
3.1 Analysis of the Continuous Business Model Planning Process
In CBMP, the business model is considered as the unit of strategic planning. In line
with OMG’s Business Motivation Model (BMM) [25], strategy is seen as a description
of a course of action to reach goals, which express the enterprise’s aspirations (i.e., its
vision). In other words, the BMM defines a strategy as a component of the plan for the
realization of the mission that makes the vision operative. A strategy guides efforts
towards the achievement of objectives that quantify the enterprise goals. As CBMP is
meant to steer the business on values, the objectives defined are those pertaining to
value delivery. In this context, the VDML definition of value as a measurable factor of
benefit, of interest to a recipient [4] is adopted.
Value objectives can be defined and managed per phase in the plan for the mission.
For each phase, alternatives can be defined to explore different approaches for achiev-
ing the phase’s value objectives.3 Strategies are incorporated into the plan as business
models for phases/alternatives that define how the business operates in each phase (i.e.,
business model evolution) and alternative (i.e., business model variation). The mission
is thus decomposed in a set of interacting business models, together covering all busi-
ness activities, both customer-facing and internal. It is important to understand that a
business model is not merely the formulation of a product-market strategy (e.g., product
differentiation, cost leadership), but rather the blueprint of a value proposition and ac-
tivity system used to deliver value to customers [26]. The CBMP thus focuses on ra-
tionalizing strategy in terms of customer and partner relationships, business activities
3
A phase alternative in the VMP thus matches with a VDML scenario within a VDML value
delivery model.
6
and required competencies, and assessing the impact of strategy implementation on the
achievement of the value objectives in the future [6].
In the case-study, the VMP was used to define a phased plan for the LCC’s mission,
distinguishing the current model (year 0), growth (year 1), and growth (year 2) (see Fig.
2). The growth phases take into account both market growth (in terms of prognoses of
tickets sold) and the projected growth of LCC’s business. For the growth (year 1) phase,
three alternatives were defined: unchanged policy, lower fares, and lower fares & par-
tial lease. The first alternative concerns a slight increase in market size and market
share, without change of operating model. The second alternative explores a significant
increase in market share as a result of dramatic lowering of ticket prices, but also ne-
cessitating a significant increase in fleet size. The third alternative builds on the second
one, but reflects also a change in LCC’s policy of fleet ownership by considering leas-
ing planes instead of buying them.
Fig. 2. VMP screenshot showing three phases in the plan for the mission.
When looking into the activities performed, Fig. 3 shows that in the LCC case-study,
the VMP was used in three different stages. These stages (i.e., Discover, Prototype and
Adopt) provide a high-level structuring of the CBMP process.
Fig. 3. High-level overview of continuous business model planning (taken from [6]).
Discover Stage. The purpose of the Discover stage is the discovery of the As-Is and
To-Be business models to be further elaborated in the Prototype stage. The discovery
of business models to be described, analyzed, experimented, innovated and evaluated
7
across the defined phases and alternatives is done in a collaborative workshop involving
the stakeholders in the CBMP initiative. These stakeholders include a value manage-
ment analyst (that facilitates the workshop) and one or more participants of the end-
user organization that are responsible for strategic planning (possibly with strategic de-
cision-making authority) and possibly participants that are subject matter experts in the
end-user organization or from other organizations in the ecosystem of the end-user or-
ganization.
The workshop is organized in four sessions, each with their own objectives (see Fig.
4). In the first session, the business ecosystem is sketched and key participants, from
whose perspective business models will be discovered, are identified. In the second
session, the business models of these key participants are described and related to each
other, consistent with the ecosystem. In the third session, the values to steer on are
decided upon and other values, which influence them or are influenced by them, are
identified by relating them through cause-and-effect relations. In the fourth session, the
plan for the mission is outlined or, if already available in case of a continued engage-
ment in the CBMP, further extended with one or more additional phases. The values to
steer on are defined as plan values, i.e., values that are the basis for management and
measurement of plan progress and the success of plan outcomes, while the other values
are related to the business models into which the plan is decomposed. Phases in the plan
are defined to add phase-specific objectives for the plan values. Furthermore, phase
alternatives can be used to describe scenarios that analyze risks, assumptions, and stra-
tegic choices.
The techniques employed during these sessions and their demonstration on the LCC
case are presented in the next subsection.
Fig. 4. Organization of the continuous business model planning engagement (taken from [6])
In the case-study, four interrelated business models owned by the LCC under study
were discovered (see Fig. 5):4
• Business plus: Offering cheap tickets to business passengers;
• Economy: Offering cheap tickets to economy passengers;
• Flights: Internal business model for offering of the fleet and flights to the LCC Travel
business unit by the LCC Operations business unit;
4
The LCC owns many other business models, but for the sake of simplicity we limit the demon-
stration of the CBMP to the four models listed.
8
• Shops: In-flight offering of customers to duty free companies.
Fig. 5. VMP screenshot showing four business models owned by the LCC under study.
Prototype Stage. The purpose of this stage is to develop a multi-perspective business
model ecosystem by further elaborating the interrelated business models from the Dis-
cover stage, for each of the phases and alternatives in the plan. This allows comparing
plan values and business model values across phases and alternatives to gauge the ef-
fectiveness of the business ecosystem design and business model innovation, and to
decide upon the most appropriate course of action.
The business model concept embraced by CBMP is inspired by Lindgren’s Business
Model Cube [27]. CBMP’s business model cube concept provides a ‘canonical’ form
of business model representation that is adequate for an unambiguous description of
business models that live in an ecosystem of interacting business models. Using this
representation, all ecosystem business models can be balanced in terms of customer and
partner relationships and exchanges of value between all participants in all directions,
following a universal concept of value that is adequate for simulation and calculation.
The conceptualization of a business model as a cube implies that there are six faces:
─ Value propositions offered and received, including my propositions (i.e., results of
the business model as captured by the owning enterprise, also known as ‘the busi-
ness’);
─ Customers as business ecosystem participants that are served by the business – this
determines the main purpose of the business model;
─ Partners as business ecosystem participants that are involved in the business model
to help creating the values to be delivered to the customers;
─ Activities as work performed by participants in a role (i.e., partner roles, customer
roles, roles of the business) and part of value streams5 that pursue value propositions;
─ Competencies as capabilities and resources that the business has and applies in order
to perform the work represented by activities;6
─ Values as benefits or interests to customers and partners (in value propositions of-
fered), as captured by the business (in my propositions), as qualifying customer re-
wards or partner offerings (in value propositions received), and as internal (created
by activities).
5
Currently, VDML value streams have no direct representation in the VMP, but based on the
information provided by the tool, value stream maps can be constructed that are consistent
with VDML activity network diagrams.
6
In VMP’s business model framework, the competencies of customers and partners, if needed
to model, can be described in the business models owned by them.
9
For all these business model components, the VMP uses definitions that can be traced
back to the VDML meta-model. Value proposition, value (in a value proposition), ac-
tivity, capability and resource are VDML constructs. Customers, partners and the busi-
ness itself are VDML participants in VDML business networks, while ‘the business’,
‘customer’ and ‘partner’ are business model cube manifestations of generic VDML
roles. An activity value is a VDML value add (representing a value contribution of the
activity). Competency is a generalization of VDML capability and VDML resource.
The invisible seventh dimension of Lindgren’s Business Model Cube (i.e., the interior
of the cube) that refers to the ‘wiring’ (i.e., relationships) of the business model com-
ponents on the visible faces [27], is formalized in the VMP through the relationships
between constructs in the VDML meta-model. Fig. 6 shows a VMP screenshot of the
business model cube visualization of the LCC’s ‘shops’ business model.
Fig. 6. VMP screenshot showing the ‘shops’ business model cube visualization.
In the case-study, prototyping the discovered business models for all phases and alter-
natives of the plan involved four steps:
1. Value network design: Designing participant networks by defining participants, their
roles, value propositions exchanged (i.e., offered and received) and their values –
pertaining to value propositions, customers, partners and values faces of the business
model cubes;
2. Value stream design: Designing value streams by defining activities that pursue
value propositions, the participant roles that perform those activities, the values they
10
create, and the values of value propositions and my propositions they contribute to
– pertaining to activities and value faces of the business model cubes;
3. Competency design: Identifying the capabilities and resources that are needed to per-
form the work represented by the activities – pertaining to the competencies face of
the business model cubes;
4. Value impact design & measurement: Designing the value aggregation structure by
entering value measurements7 and value formulas that relate business model values
(i.e., activity values, value proposition values and my proposition values) and plan
values, within and if relevant across plan phases – pertaining to value propositions,
activities, and values faces of the business model cubes and to plan values.
As shown in Fig. 4, the Prototype stage is performed using an agile approach in two or
three weekly sprints. The prototyping is done by the value management analyst, based
on the input received during the Discover stage. At the end of each sprint, feedback is
obtained from the stakeholders of the involved organizations. This cycle continues until
these stakeholders are satisfied with the results and are able to make decisions in the
Adopt stage.
Adopt Stage. The purpose of this stage is to present the prototyping results to strategic
decision-makers, allowing them to decide on adoption and initiation of the required
changes. Value management professionals support the decision-making process by us-
ing the built-in dashboard, reporting, and what-if scenario analysis techniques of the
VMP (see next subsection).
3.2 Techniques of Continuous Business Model Planning
The techniques used in the CBMP activities are demonstrated for the LCC case-study
in the order of the process stages presented in the previous subsection.
Discover Stage. The sketching of the business ecosystem and the identification of key
participants is supported by the VMP through the business ecosystem map (see Fig. 7).
This model is essentially the same as the VDML value proposition exchange diagram,
though there is an option to include VDML participants (i.e., enterprises (i.e., VDML
organization units), market segments (i.e., VDML communities) or individuals (i.e.,
VDML actors) or VDML business models instead of VDML roles. Fig. 7 illustrates the
former option, where participants and exchanged value propositions are given pictorial
representations. The business ecosystem map provides a more abstract view of the
VDML role collaboration diagram, which shows the flows of tangible and intangible
deliverables between participant roles, based on Allee’s Value Network concept [1].
7
Value measurement in the VMP is fully consistent with the OMG’s Structured Metrics Meta-
model (SMM) [28].
11
Fig. 7. VMP screenshot showing the LCC business ecosystem map
In the LCC case-study, six participants were identified, from whom the LCC Travel
and LCC Operations business units are key participants. These participants exchange
sixteen value propositions in the ecosystem, based on which the four business models
of Fig. 5 were discovered.8
The VMP supports the description of the key participants’ business models through
business canvasing techniques. Although different types of business canvases are sup-
ported, in the LCC case-study only use was made of the widely known business model
canvas [29], which is based on Osterwalder’s Business Model Ontology [30]. Although,
there is no VDML diagram equivalent to the business model canvas, the VMP also
supports a business model canvas variant called business model innovation canvas. This
variant has the six faces of the business model cube as components, which allows direct
traceability to the corresponding VDML constructs.
Fig. 8 shows as an example the business model canvas for the ‘flights’ business
model, which is owned by the LCC Operations business unit. Based on the business
ecosystem map, which resulted from the first workshop session (see Fig. 7), the value
management analyst had pre-filled LCC travel as the customer, airports and oil compa-
nies as partners, and fleet and flights as value propositions offered to the customer. In
the second workshop session, workshop participants used the canvas to systematically
think about key activities and resources required to pursue the value propositions, their
costs, and the revenue streams that will be generated.
8
The business ecosystem map also allowed discovering two further business models not owned
by key participants: ‘LCC hosting’ owned by airports and ‘LCC customers’ owned by duty
free companies. These business models were not further elaborated in the case-study.
12
Fig. 8. VMP screenshot showing the LCC operation’s ‘flights’ business model canvas.
To support the identification of plan values and business model values and how values
influence each other, strategy maps are used as a storyboard for cause-and-effect value
creation. This technique is based on the homonymous technique presented by Kaplan
and Norton [31].
An example strategy map, from the case-study, is shown in Fig. 9. It shows how
competencies and activities influence values for the LCC (e.g., low overhead, low
maintenance costs, low aircraft acquisition costs) and for its customers (e.g., high
promptness).
Fig. 9. One of the strategy maps used in the LCC case-study.
Finally, the last workshop session is supported through the VMP’s functionality to
model phases and alternatives (see Fig. 2) and to enter plan values (which can for large
part be derived from the strategy maps and business canvases).
13
Fig. 10. VMP screenshot showing the filled story-telling form for the ‘flights’ value proposition
in the ‘flights’ business model.
Prototype Stage. The VMP provides business-friendly interfaces that employ story-
telling as a technique to fill the business model cubes throughout the activities of value
network design, value stream design, competencies design, and value impact design.
Fig. 10 (on the previous page) shows an example of a story-telling form for the ‘flights’
value proposition in the ‘flights’ business model cube, asking for who (and in what
role) offers this value proposition to whom (and in what role), delivering what values.
Table 1. Construct mappings supported by the VMP
BM canvas BM cube Business ecosystem VDML
map
Key partners Partners Enterprises, market seg- Participant
ments, individuals (partner role)
Key activities Activities Activities
Key resources Competencies Resources
9
Value propositions Value propositions Value propositions Value propositions
Customer segments Customers Enterprises, market seg- Participants
ments, individuals (customer role)
Cost structures Values10 Value Elements
Revenue streams Values10 Value Elements
The analysis of the LCC case-study taught us that in reality much of the data in the
business model cubes was already filled by the value management analyst in between
and after the Discovery stage workshop sessions. Based on the business ecosystem map
9
Limited to value propositions offered to customers. The business model canvas does not allow
including other value propositions (e.g., those received from customers and those offered to
and received from partners).
10
Also plan values (i.e., not part of a particular business model in the mission plan).
14
(see Fig. 7), the analyst created business models, identified participant networks (see
the different colors of the value proposition provide and receive arrows in Fig. 7), and
filled in customers, partners and value propositions in the business model cubes. Based
on the business model canvases (see Fig. 8), the analyst then started to fill the remaining
gaps in the cubes.
To facilitate this process, the VMP includes a mapping wizard, which provides the
user an interactive mapping functionality back and forth between business ecosystem
map elements and business model cube elements and between the slips on a business
canvas (shown as post-it notes in Fig. 8) and business model cube elements (see Table
1 for a mapping that holds for the business model canvas)11. Using this mapping func-
tionality, the structured models used in the Prototype stage can largely be generated
from the graphical models used in the Discover stage. Vice-versa, a large amount of the
data in the business model cubes can be visually represented in the business ecosystem
map and business canvases. The mapping thus affords a great deal of flexibility in
CBMP process, providing two-way traceability and allowing to move back and forth
between Discover and Prototype stages, and choosing between top-down, bottom-up or
hybrid approaches to strategic planning.
Finally, the competencies, activities and values in the strategy map and the infor-
mation on plan phases and alternatives were used by the analyst in the Prototyping
sprints to further elaborate the business model cubes (e.g., entering value formulas and
other measurement-related detail to complete their value aggregation structures).
Adopt Stage. The VMP offers ‘dashboarding’ functionality for comparing values
across plan phases and alternatives. First, a report, as another type of model in the VMP,
can be created to tell the story of the plan. The reporting functionality comes with an
embedded rich text editor and supports the direct incorporation of Discover stage dia-
grams such as business ecosystem maps and business canvases. Second, interactive
dashboards can be generated from the information in the mission plan presenting com-
parisons of values using tables and various types of charts (see Fig. 1 for an example of
a bar chart). Dashboards can be extended with the creation of scenarios for what-if
analyses and simulation, by entering different sets of measurements for selected input
values. Scenario results can then be presented in the dashboard, for comparison reasons,
as well. It is also possible to promote a ‘best’ scenario to update the plan. Value meas-
urements can be imported from csv-files and exported as csv-files or as xlsx-files (for
further analysis in Excel). Using the import functionality, actual values can also be
compared with values in the plan, typically based on a time line view in the dashboards.
This functionality is essential for monitoring plan implementation, as part of the ‘con-
tinuous’ strategic planning process of the CBMP method.
11
For other types of business canvas supported by the VMP, other mappings exist. The mapping
from the business model innovation canvas to the business model cubes is the most straight-
forward.
15
4 Discussion
The analysis of the LCC case-study taught us that the approach to value modeling with
VDML using the VMP has some distinctive features, which might not be shared with
other value modeling approaches and applications. Probably the most distinctive fea-
ture is that CBMP is highly business-oriented in the sense that value models are con-
structed through a transparent use of VDML. Value management professionals and
other strategic planning stakeholders are offered business-friendly interfaces (e.g., busi-
ness canvases, business ecosystem maps, strategy maps, business model cubes, inter-
active dashboards), without ever having to work directly with VDML. In other words,
no VDML knowledge is required to use the method. Nevertheless, all business model
packages stored in the VMP are valid VDML value delivery models.12 Hence, all VMP
model contents are instantiations of the VDML and SMM meta-models.
Another distinctive feature is that value modeling is used for strategic planning. Spe-
cifically, CBMP regards the business model as the unit for strategic planning, employ-
ing a business model framework that is multi-perspective (resulting in an ecosystem of
interrelated business models), considers structured relationships in terms of value prop-
osition exchanges between all ecosystem participants (and not just customer value
propositions and customer relationships), uses a uniform, unambiguous concept of
value (for all participants), and is highly dynamic (allows for a continuous process of
strategic planning). Based on the review of strategic planning theories and models in
[32], we can characterize the CBMP approach to strategic planning as assuming a goal-
based strategic model (i.e., setting value objectives aligned with mission and vision,
and phased over time) and to some extent also a scenario planning model (i.e., explor-
ing different alternatives per phase in the strategic plan to cope with external forces).
The goal-based model is the most adopted model of strategic planning [32], which pro-
vides some justification to the design rationale of the CBMP method.
Of course, more research is needed on the design of the CBMP method. Our current
client/context-initiated design-based research is not without limitations. First, the
method as presented in this paper was the result of the analysis of a single case-study.
Furthermore, this case did not result from a real-life application of the CBMP, but was
developed for training value management professionals in the use of the VMP. To mit-
igate the threat that our analysis is not valid or generalizable, the two value architects
from VDMbee who developed the case-study, were involved in the research and helped
the researchers to interpret the case-study data. These value management experts have
applied CBMP using the VMP in numerous real-life projects and used this experience
to develop the case-study, which is not fictional but based on real data about Ryanair
that is publicly available on the Internet. Nevertheless, we acknowledge that to raise
the level of knowledge of CBMP to that of a design theory, we need to investigate more
in-depth its theoretical underpinning and also evaluate the method.
12
Allowing entire plans (with all data) to be imported and exported to facilitate collaboration,
but also ‘downstream development’ using a model-driven approach (e.g., derive business pro-
cess skeletons, software skeletons).
16
Further plans for developing the CBMP method as supported by the VMP tool in-
clude (but are not limited to) providing explicit visualization of value streams and com-
petencies (e.g., value stream maps based on VDML activity network diagrams), incor-
porating and visualizing libraries13 (e.g., VDML role libraries, VDML capability library
diagrams, VDML capability heatmaps), and automated monitoring of strategy plan im-
plementation. In the near future, VDMbee also intends to add views for showing dif-
ferences between As-Is and To-Be in a user-friendly way, such that specific differences
between previous and next phases can be framed into requirements for projects to im-
plement the plan. To support this development, we plan to conduct research on the
integration of CBMP with methods of capability-based planning, portfolio manage-
ment, enterprise architecture management, business process management, and change
management. Given the raising importance of capability-based enterprise modeling in
the field, we also plan to investigate the integration of CBMP’s multi-perspective busi-
ness model ecosystem with the service ecosystem view for strategic sourcing of capa-
bilities developed in [33].
5 Conclusion
This paper presents an account of the industrial practice of value modeling with VDML
by means of the specific approach taken by value management analysts when using the
Value Management Platform (VMP) tool of the company VDMbee. The contribution
of this paper is to make the tacit knowledge of this approach, called continuous business
model planning (CBMP) and currently only described at an introductory level [6], ex-
plicit by identifying and extracting the method underlying the use of the VMP for
CBMP. By analyzing the CBMP case-study of a low-cost carrier, we were able to de-
scribe a ‘situated implementation’ of the CBMP method artifact, in terms of purpose,
process, activities, organization, participants, models, and techniques used.
Our research addresses the knowledge gap of ‘how’ to apply VDML as currently
only anecdotic evidence is publicly available. We hope this paper helps furthering the
understanding of value modeling with VDML of both value management professionals
and value modeling researchers. By presenting the specific tool-supported method of
CBMP, we intend to increase the maturity level of value modeling and raise the interest
of practitioners and researchers in further exploring and researching this method.
References
1. Allee, V.: Value network analysis and value conversion of tangible and intangible assets.
Journal of intellectual capital 9, 5-24 (2008).
2. Gordijn, J., Yu, E., van der Raadt, B.: E-service design using i* and e3value modeling. IEEE
software 23, 26-33 (2006).
3. Cummins, F. A.: Building the Agile Enterprise: With Capabilities, Collaborations and
Values. Morgan Kaufmann (2016).
13
The VMP already allows for the creation, import and export of vocabulary libraries such that
users can label model elements with terms that are common to their community.
17
4. Object Management Group: Value Delivery Metamodel, version 1.0. OMG (2015).
5. VDMbee Homepage, http://www.vdmbee.com, last accessed 2017/12/18.
6. de Man, H.: Continuous Business Model Planning with VDMbee,
https://vdmbee.com/2017/12/, last accessed 2017/12/18.
7. Frank, U.: Multi-perspective enterprise modeling: foundational concepts, prospects and
future research challenges. Software and Systems Modeling 13, 941-962 (2014).
8. Blums, I., Weigand, H.: Towards a Reference ontology of complex economic exchanges for
Accounting Information Systems. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on
Enterprise Distributed Object Computing (EDOC), pp. 1-10. IEEE (2016).
9. Gailly, F., Roelens, B., Guizzardi, G.: The design of a core value ontology using ontology
patterns. In: Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling
(ER), pp. 183-193. Springer (2016).
10. Guarino, N., Andersson, B., Johannesson, P., Livieri, B.: Towards an Ontology of Value
Ascription. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conferenece on Formal Ontology in
Information Systems (FOIS), pp. 331. IOS Press (2016).
11. Sales, T. P., Guarino, N., Guizzardi, G., Mylopoulos, J.: An Ontological Analysis of Value
Propositions. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Enterprise Distributed
Object Computing (EDOC), pp. 184-193. IEEE (2017).
12. Roelens, B., Poels, G.: The Development and Experimental Evaluation of a Focused
Business Model Representation. Business & Information Systems Engineering 57, 61-71
(2015).
13. Metzger, J., Kraemer, N., Terzidis. O.: A Systematic Approach to Business Modeling Based
on the Value Delivery Modeling Language. In: Complexity in Entrepreneurship, Innovation
and Technology Research, pp. 245-266. Springer (2016).
14. Kiriinya, R. K. M.: Designing Compliance Patterns: Integrating Value Modeling, Legal
Interpretation and Argument Schemes for Legal Risk Management. PhD dissertation,
University of Luxembourg. Luxembourg (2017).
15. Bettini, L., Capecchi. S.: VDML4RS: a tool for reputation systems modeling and design. In:
Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Social Software Engineering, pp. 8-14.
ACM (2016).
16. Ding, H.: Integrating value modeling into ArchiMate. Thesis, University of Twente.
Enschede (2016).
17. Lankhorst, M., Aldea M.A., Niehof, J.: Combining ArchiMate with Other Standards and
Approaches. In: Enterprise Architecture at Work, pp. 123-140. Springer (2017).
18. Eylenbosch, S.: Een nieuwe standaard voor business modeling: Het modelleren van value
delivery. Thesis, Ghent University. Gent (2013).
19. De Langhe, D.: The congruence between VDML and DAMIAN: A case study: In vehicle
signage. Thesis, Ghent University. Gent (2017).
20. Devocht, B.: Analyse van de impact van veranderingen op de telecomsector aan de hand van
dynamische waardenetwerken. Thesis, Ghent University. Gent (2017).
21. Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M.A., Chatterjee, S.: A Design Science Research
Methodology for Information Systems Research. Journal of Management Information Sys-
tems 24(3), 45–77 (2008).
22. Hevner, A. R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in Information Systems
research. MIS Quarterly 28 (1), 75-105 (2004).
23. Gregor, S., Hevner, A.R.,: Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum
impact. MIS Quarterly 37(2), 337-355 (2013).
24. Casadesus-Masanell, R., Ricart, J.E.: From Strategy to Business Models and onto Tactics.
Long Range Planning 43, 195-215 (2010).
18
25. Object Management Group: Business Motivation Model, version 1.3. OMG (2015).
26. Zott, C., Amit, R., Massa, L.: The Business Model: Recent Developments and Future Re-
search. Journal of Management 37(4), 1019-1042 (2011).
27. Lindgren, P., Rasmussen, O.H.: The Business Model Cube. Journal of Multi Business Model
Innovation and Technology 1(3), 135-182 (2013).
28. Object Management Group: Structured Metrics Meta-model, version 1.1.1. OMG (2016).
29. Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y.: Business model generation: A handbook for visionaries, game
changers, and challengers. John Wiley & Sons (2010).
30. Osterwalder, A.: The business model ontology: A proposition in a design science approach.
PhD dissertation, University of Lausanne. Lausanne (2004).
31. Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P.: Strategy maps: Converting intangible assets into tangible out-
comes. Harvard Business Press (2004).
32. Azevedo, C.: Incorporating Enterprise Strategic Plans into Enterprise Architecture. PhD dis-
sertation, University of Twente and Federal University of Espírito Santo. Enschede (2017).
33. Rafati, L, Poels, G.: Value-Driven Strategic Sourcing Based on Service-Dominant Logic.
Service Science 9(4), 275-287 (2017).