Concluding Remarks

  • Jan F. TeschEmail author
Part of the Progress in IS book series (PROIS)


This chapter summarizes limitations and avenues on future research on IoT business model innovation.


Business model innovation Internet of things IoT Digitalization 


  1. Abdelkafi, N., Makhotin, S., & Posselt, T. (2013). Business model innovations for electric mobility—What can be learned from existing business model patterns? International Journal of Innovation Management, 17(1), 1–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ali, A. (2015). An MCDM approach towards M-payment business models evaluation. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 7(2), 273–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amshoff, B., Dülme, C., Echterfeld, J., & Gausemeier, J. (2015). Business model patterns for disruptive technologies. International Journal of Innovation Management, 1–22.Google Scholar
  4. de Reuver, M., Bouwman, H., & Haaker, T. (2013). Business model roadmapping: A practical approach to come from an existing to a desired business model. International Journal of Innovation Management, 17(01), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Desyllas, P., & Sako, M. (2013). Profiting from business model innovation: Evidence from pay-as-you-drive auto insurance. Research Policy, 42(1), 101–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gassmann, O., Frankenberger, K., & Csik, M. (2014). The business model navigator: 55 models that will revolutionise your business. Harlow, UK: Pearson.Google Scholar
  7. Gregor, S., & Hevner, A. (2013). Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 37(2), 337–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Haaker, T., Bouwman, H., Janssen, W., & de Reuver, M. (2017). Business model stress testing: A practical approach to test the robustness of a business model. Futures, 89, 14–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 28(1), 75–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Iivari, J., & Venable, J. R. (2009). Action research and design science research—Seemingly similar but decisively dissimilar. In ECIS 2009 Proceedings, No. Paper 73.Google Scholar
  11. Nickerson, R. C., Varshney, U., & Muntermann, J. (2013). A method for taxonomy development and its application in information systems. European Journal of Information Systems, 22(3), 336–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2013). Designing business models and similar strategic objects: The contribution of IS. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 14(5), 237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Schneider, S., & Spieth, P. (2013). Business model innovation. Towards an integrated future research agenda. International Journal of Innovation Management, 17(01), 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sein, M. K., Henfridsson, O., Purao, S., Rossi, M., & Lindgren, R. (2011). Action design research. MIS Quarterly, 35(1), 37–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Tesch, J.F. (2016). Discovering the role of scenario planning as an evaluation methodology for business models in the era of the internet of things (IoT). In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Vol. 24, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
  16. Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 26(2), 13–23.Google Scholar
  17. Wynn, D., Jr., & Williams, C. K. (2012). Principles for conducting critical realist case study research in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 36(3), 787–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Yin, R. K. (1989). Research design issues in using the case study method to study management information systems. The Information Systems Research Challenge: Qualitative Research Methods, 1, 1–6.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of GöttingenGöttingenGermany

Personalised recommendations