The Sky is the Limit: Evaluating Business Models from an Integral and Non-Reductionist View of Reality

IF 1 Q4 MANAGEMENT Philosophy of Management Pub Date : 2024-02-05 DOI:10.1007/s40926-023-00246-3
Guilherme Coelho da Rocha de Castro, Humberto Elias Garcia Lopes
{"title":"The Sky is the Limit: Evaluating Business Models from an Integral and Non-Reductionist View of Reality","authors":"Guilherme Coelho da Rocha de Castro, Humberto Elias Garcia Lopes","doi":"10.1007/s40926-023-00246-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper presents an ontological perspective that enables evaluating the effectiveness of business models from an integrative worldview. Different groups’ fragmented and reductionist views on this topic create a dichotomy that makes it difficult to compare and analyze them in practice. Such groups use different values for some components, which may result in neglecting others and their interrelationship. This study discusses a functional characteristic of business models that academia still needs to address. It explores new frontiers in the field, such as business models for networks, sustainability, and their practical evaluation. To achieve an integrative ontology and avoid focusing on specific constructs or systems at the expense of others, we draw upon the theory of worldviews from Wilhelm Dilthey, reformational philosophy, and Herman Dooyeweerd’s theory of modal aspects. Society should move beyond dualistic thinking and embrace practical and applicable solutions. To help companies develop effective models, we introduce a new business model framework based on an integrative worldview that enables comparisons and evaluations of companies in practice. Creating competitive advantages and value appropriations synergizes with essential aspects of reformational philosophy. Analyzing and interrelating such elements are fundamental to understanding the real applied value of business models.</p>","PeriodicalId":54136,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy of Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40926-023-00246-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper presents an ontological perspective that enables evaluating the effectiveness of business models from an integrative worldview. Different groups’ fragmented and reductionist views on this topic create a dichotomy that makes it difficult to compare and analyze them in practice. Such groups use different values for some components, which may result in neglecting others and their interrelationship. This study discusses a functional characteristic of business models that academia still needs to address. It explores new frontiers in the field, such as business models for networks, sustainability, and their practical evaluation. To achieve an integrative ontology and avoid focusing on specific constructs or systems at the expense of others, we draw upon the theory of worldviews from Wilhelm Dilthey, reformational philosophy, and Herman Dooyeweerd’s theory of modal aspects. Society should move beyond dualistic thinking and embrace practical and applicable solutions. To help companies develop effective models, we introduce a new business model framework based on an integrative worldview that enables comparisons and evaluations of companies in practice. Creating competitive advantages and value appropriations synergizes with essential aspects of reformational philosophy. Analyzing and interrelating such elements are fundamental to understanding the real applied value of business models.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
天空才是极限:从整体和非还原论的现实视角评估商业模式
本文提出了一种本体论视角,有助于从综合世界观的角度评估商业模式的有效性。不同群体对这一主题的割裂和还原论观点造成了二分法,使得在实践中很难对其进行比较和分析。这些团体对某些组成部分采用不同的价值观,这可能会导致忽视其他组成部分及其相互关系。本研究讨论了学术界仍需解决的商业模式的功能特征。它探索了该领域的新前沿,如网络商业模式、可持续性及其实际评估。为了实现综合本体论,避免只关注特定的构造或系统而忽略其他构造或系统,我们借鉴了威廉-狄尔泰(Wilhelm Dilthey)的世界观理论、改革哲学以及赫尔曼-杜伊维尔德(Herman Dooyeweerd)的模式方面理论。社会应超越二元对立思维,接受切实可行的解决方案。为了帮助企业开发有效的模式,我们在综合世界观的基础上引入了一个新的商业模式框架,以便在实践中对企业进行比较和评估。创造竞争优势和价值分配与改革哲学的重要方面相辅相成。对这些要素进行分析并将其相互联系起来,是理解商业模式真正应用价值的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
25.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: Philosophy of Management addresses all aspects of the philosophical foundations of management in theory and practice, including business ethics, ontology, epistemology, aesthetics and politics.  The application of philosophical disciplines to issues facing managers are increasingly recognized to include organizational purpose, performance measurement, the status of ethics, employee privacy, and limitations on the right to manage. Philosophy of Management is an independent, refereed forum that focuses on these central philosophical issues of management in theory and practice. The journal is open to contributions from all philosophical schools and traditions.  Since 2001 the journal has published three issues per year, each focused on a particular topic. Published contributors include René ten Bos, Ghislain Deslandes, Juan Fontrodona, Michelle Greenwood, Jeremy Moon, Geoff Moore, Duncan Pritchard, and Duane Windsor. This journal follows a double-blind reviewing procedure.
期刊最新文献
How do you find the Crack? A Report on a ‘Philosophical Methods’ Workshop Freedom in Business: Elizabeth Anderson, Adam Smith, and the Effects of Dominance in Business Organizational Resilience through the Philosophical Lens of Aristotelian and Heraclitean Philosophy Technological Evolution and Cooperative Identity: A Genealogical Analysis using Simondon's Cybernetic Process Philosophy “You Can’t Say That”: A Normative Account of Speech Rights and Limits in Organizations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1