Lean Startup Experience -elCurator - deux ans de lean startup
Lean Startup as a Tool for Digital Business Model ...
Transcript of Lean Startup as a Tool for Digital Business Model ...
Lean Startup as a Tool for Digital
Business Model Innovation: Enablers and
Barriers for Established Companies
MASTER THESIS
THESIS WITHIN: Business Administration
NUMBER OF CREDITS: 30 credits PROGRAMME OF STUDY: Digital Business AUTHOR: Maja Beisheim and Charline Langner JÖNKÖPING May 2021
i
Master Thesis in Business Administration
Title: Lean Startup as a Tool for Digital Business Model Innovation: Enablers and
Barriers for Established Companies
Authors: Maja Beisheim and Charline Langner
Tutor: Henry Nelson Lopez Vega
Date: 2021-05-24
Key terms: Lean Startup, Digital Business Model Innovation, Business Models, Business
Experimentation, Established Companies, Agile Methods.
Abstract
Background: The rapidly changing world of digital technologies forces many companies to
undertake a digital shift by transforming existing business models into digital business models
to achieve sustainable value creation and value capture. Especially, for established companies,
that have been successful leaders before the dot-com bubble (1995-2000) and whose business
models have been threatened by the emergence of digital technologies, there is a need for a
digital shift. We refer to this digitization of business models as digital business model
innovation. However, often adoption and implementation of digital technologies require
tremendous changes and thus, can be challenging for established companies. Therefore, agile
methods and business experimentation have become important strategic elements and are used
to generate and test novel business models in a fast manner. We introduce lean startup as an
agile method for digital business model innovation, which has proven to be successful in digital
entrepreneurship. Thus, it requires further empirical investigation on how to use lean startup in
established companies for successful digital business model innovation.
Purpose: The purpose of our study is to identify enablers and barriers of lean startup as a tool
for digital BMI in established companies. Thus, we propose a framework showing how
established companies can be successful in digital business model innovation by using lean
startup.
Method: We conducted an exploratory, qualitative research based on grounded theory
following an abductive approach. Using a non-probability, purposive sampling strategy, we
gathered our empirical data through ten semi-structured interviews with experts in lean startup
and digital business model innovation, working in or with established companies, shifting their
business model towards a digital business model. By using grounded analysis, we gained an in-
depth understanding of how lean startup is used in practice as well as occurring barriers and
enablers for established companies.
Conclusion: We emphasize that successful use of lean startup for digital business model
innovation is based on an effective (1) lean startup management, appropriate (2) organizational
structures, fitting (3) culture, and dedicated (4) corporate governance, which all require and are
based on solid (5) methodical competence of the entire organization. Furthermore, (6) external
influences such as market conditions, role of competition, or governance rules indirectly affect
using lean startup as a tool for digital business model innovation.
ii
Table of content
List of Figures ................................................................................................................. iv
List of Tables ................................................................................................................... iv
List of Abbreviations ...................................................................................................... iv
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Background ................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Problem discussion ...................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Research question and research purpose ..................................................................... 3
1.4 Outline of the paper ..................................................................................................... 4
2. Literature Review ........................................................................................................ 5
2.1 Business Model Innovation ......................................................................................... 5
2.1.1 Business Models ........................................................................................ 5
2.1.2 The digital shift – Business Models and Digital Technologies ................. 6
2.1.3 Digital Business Model Innovation ............................................................ 8
2.2 Lean Startup as a Tool for Digital Business Model Innovation .................................. 9
2.2.1 Business Experimentation and Lean Startup............................................ 10
2.2.2 Lean Startup ............................................................................................. 10
2.2.3 Digital Business Model Innovation with Lean Startup in Established
Companies ............................................................................................... 15
3. Methodology .............................................................................................................. 17
3.1 Research Philosophy ................................................................................................. 17
3.2 Research Approach ................................................................................................... 18
3.3 Research Design ........................................................................................................ 19
3.3.1 Data Collection......................................................................................... 19
3.3.2 Sampling Strategy .................................................................................... 21
3.3.3 Interview Design ...................................................................................... 22
3.4 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................ 24
3.5 Research Ethics and Quality Insurance ..................................................................... 27
4. Empirical Findings .................................................................................................... 31
4.1 Lean Startup Management ........................................................................................ 34
4.1.1 Agility ...................................................................................................... 34
4.1.2 Digital Tools ............................................................................................ 35
4.1.3 Handling of Hypotheses ........................................................................... 35
4.1.4 Handling of Minimum Viable Product .................................................... 36
4.1.5 Customer Involvement ............................................................................. 37
4.2 Organizational Structures .......................................................................................... 38
4.3 Culture ....................................................................................................................... 40
4.3.1 Corporate Culture ..................................................................................... 40
4.3.2 Mindset ..................................................................................................... 41
4.3.3 Personal Culture ....................................................................................... 42
4.3.4 Motivation ................................................................................................ 42
4.4 Corporate Governance ............................................................................................... 43
4.4.1 Management ............................................................................................. 43
4.4.2 Leadership ................................................................................................ 44
4.5 Methodical Competence ............................................................................................ 46
4.5.1 Knowledge ............................................................................................... 46
4.5.2 Training and Education ............................................................................ 46
iii
4.5.3 Teaming.................................................................................................... 47
4.6 External Influences .................................................................................................... 48
5. Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 50
5.1 Framework of Enablers and Barriers for Lean Startup ............................................. 50
5.2 Digital Business Model Innovation with Lean Startup in Established Companies ... 52
5.2.1 External Influences................................................................................... 52
5.2.2 Methodical competence ........................................................................... 53
5.2.3 Organizational Structures, Culture, and Corporate Governance .............. 54
5.2.4 Lean Startup Management ....................................................................... 56
6. Conclusion & Discussion .......................................................................................... 58
6.1 Summary ................................................................................................................... 58
6.2 Theoretical Implications ............................................................................................ 59
6.3 Managerial Implications ............................................................................................ 60
6.4 Limitations and Future Research ............................................................................... 62
Reference list .................................................................................................................. 64
Appendices ...................................................................................................................... v
iv
List of Figures
Figure 1: Lean startup hypothesis process (Eisenmann et al., 2012). ............................. 12
Figure 2: Build-Measure-Learn loop (Ries, 2011). ......................................................... 13
Figure 3: Final coding tree with example codes. ............................................................ 26
Figure 4: Enablers and barriers for using lean startup as a tool for digital BMI. ............ 50
List of Tables
Table 1: Overview of Interview Partners. ....................................................................... 20
Table 2: Overview of categories and sub-categories with example codes and quotes. .. 33
List of Abbreviations
BM Business Model
BMI Business Model Innovation
MVP Minimal Viable Product
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
1
1. Introduction
___________________________________________________________________________
This thesis examines lean startup as a tool for digital business model innovation in established
companies. The purpose of this part is to familiarize the reader with the research field by
introducing and bridging the main topics of business models and business model innovation
with digital technologies and lean startup. Further, it discusses the problem statement and
identifies research gaps, leading to the purpose and research question of this study. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.1 Background
Every company explicitly or implicitly operates with a business model (BM), predicting what
customers want and need (Teece, 2010), describing how companies create and deliver value,
identifying customers and how companies engage with them (Amit & Zott, 2012a; Baden-
Fuller & Haefliger, 2013; Teece, 2010). To achieve sustainable value creation and value capture
as well as customer satisfaction, companies are required to continuously question and rethink
their BM to stay competitive (Achtenhagen et al., 2013; Amit & Zott, 2012b). Especially, digital
technologies have revolutionized how industries operate and how value is created and captured
in businesses (Dal Mas et al., 2020). This led to a transformation of business structures and
activities and requires companies to make organizational-wide changes (Brynjolfsson & Hitt,
2000).
The rapidly changing world of digital technologies empowers the digitization of products and
processes and forces many companies to follow that digital shift to keep up with the competition
and to fulfill customer and market needs (Chanias et al., 2019). Over the past years, new
technologies changed the nature of products and services, customer relationship management,
organizational structures, business operations, and even whole BMs (Bharadwaj et al., 2013;
Chanias et al., 2019; Correani et al., 2020; Rachinger et al., 2019; Westerman & Bonnet, 2015).
Thus, there is a need for companies to reinvent themselves to successfully adopt digital
technologies. However, besides opportunities such as increased flexibility, reactivity, and
product individualization, the digital shift also presents challenges such as the complexity of
using and implementing technology or changing customer behavior and preferences, as well as
legal requirements (Rachinger et al., 2019). For this study, we focus on a digital shift in the
context of business model innovation (BMI), caused by the adaptation and implementation of
digital technologies. Often, existing BMs are successful for a certain time period but need to be
adapted to new market conditions, forced by digital technologies, and if not, they risk failing
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
2
(Achtenhagen et al., 2013). Therefore, BMI can be a powerful tool as it provides potential for
new products and services, and new markets (Amit & Zott, 2012b). In this context, digital
technologies are a facilitator of BMI which can either force BMs to change completely, by
replacing old ones, or they can advance value creation and delivery by extending existing BMs
(Baden-Fuller & Haefliger, 2013). Thus, adapting digital technologies shifts existing BMs
towards digital BMs. Therefore, we define digitization of BMs as digital BMI.
Especially established companies whose BMs have been threatened by the emergence of digital
technologies (Chanias et al., 2019), require a digital shift (Ross et al., 2016; Sebastian et al.,
2017). These companies have often been established leaders before the dotcom bubble (1995-
2000) and thus, experienced rather low competition and steady success. Mainly, these
established companies belong to traditional industries, such as finance, retail or automotive.
Often, their original BM does not include digital components and hence, is not prepared for
today’s competition (Ross et al., 2016). A good example of an established company, shifting
its BMs by adapting digital technologies, is Philips Lightning, as it moved from selling light
bulbs, electricity, and installations to selling lights as a service on a pay-per-use basis (Tekic &
Koroteev, 2019). In comparison to so-called born-digital companies which started in the digital
era such as Google, Amazon, or Facebook, established companies need to make tremendous
changes when adopting and implementing digital technologies (Ross et al., 2016). In most
cases, their processes, organizational structures, or BMs are not designed for adapting novel
digital technologies (Chanias et al., 2019). The challenge for these established companies is to
reinvent their BMs and to adopt digital technologies as well as to make strategic changes, while
simultaneously taking advantage of their well-established business and maintaining their
customer relationships (Sebastian et al., 2017). Many traditional companies are too slow and
cautious in transforming processes (Westerman & Bonnet, 2015). Also, established companies
often perceive digitization as a challenge rather than an opportunity for change.
Therefore, agile methods and business experimentation have become important strategic
elements. They are used to generate and test novel BMs in a fast manner (Bocken & Snihur,
2020). One of these agile methods within the context of business experimentation is lean startup
(Ries, 2011). This method is a customer-centric approach aiming to identify the preferences
and needs of customers through feedback loops and step-by-step adjustments of products and
services. Lean startup has mainly been investigated for BMI within digital entrepreneurship
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
3
(Ghezzi, 2020; Ghezzi & Cavallo, 2020). Also, it has proven to be an agile, innovative, and
successful method to facilitate change processes (Balocco et al., 2019). Yet, research has not
examined how lean startup can be successfully used as a tool for digital BMI in established
companies.
1.2 Problem discussion
In comparison to the dynamic environment of startups, established companies need to undertake
tremendous changes to shift from a traditional business to the digital economy (Ross et al.,
2016). Still, many of these large enterprises are in an early stage of adopting and implementing
digital technologies (Sebastian et al., 2017). Often, established companies lack organizational
structures and capabilities to make fast decisions and hence, have difficulties transforming
(Ross et al., 2016). Over the past years, the agile approach of business experimentation became
an emerging topic in BMI (Bocken & Snihur, 2020). However, this approach is mainly used in
startups and entrepreneurial contexts, given the dynamic and fast-changing environment. In line
with these business experimentations, agile methods are gaining more and more interest not
only for startups but also for established leaders. However, established companies seem to
struggle with adapting to the new, agile, and experimental work environment and fail to
implement methods like lean startup (Bocken & Snihur, 2020). Still, academic understanding
of lean startup is only emerging (Bocken & Snihur, 2020). Thus, it needs further investigation
to enrich current theory and discover enabling and hindering factors for applying lean startup
in established companies. As lean startup has proven to be a successful tool for BMI in (digital)
startups, we aim to identify success factors for established companies.
1.3 Research question and research purpose
The purpose of our study is to identify enablers and barriers of lean startup as a tool for digital
BMI in established companies. By doing so, we aim to propose a framework showing how
established companies can be successful in digital BMI using lean startup. Thus, the research
question which shall be explored is:
What are enablers and barriers of lean startup as a tool for digital business model
innovation?
To answer our research question and to build our framework, we conducted semi-structured
interviews with experts in lean startup and digital BMI, working in or with established
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
4
companies that are shifting towards a digital BM. By doing so, we gained an in-depth
understanding of occurring barriers and enablers for lean startup in established companies given
our diverse interview partners. We identified internal and external factors facilitating and
hindering lean startup in established companies. Also, we outline necessary organizational
changes required to succeed in digital BMI with lean startup. Our study contributes to current
theory of agile methods and lean startup, BM, and BMI. Thus, we combine lean startup and
BMI, specifically digital BMI, by investigating lean startup as a tool for digital BMI and
extending it to established companies. Further, we provide practical implications on how such
companies can use lean startup or what to consider when already working with the approach.
1.4 Outline of the paper
The thesis is structured as followed. In chapter 2, the study’s theoretical background is outlined.
Namely our main research fields BMs, BMI, and lean startup as well as their connections
regarding the research purpose. Also, we show how digital technologies influence these areas.
In chapter 3 we describe the methodology and research design. We will provide an overview of
our sampling, data collection, analysis process, and illustrate how our empirical research met
quality criteria and ethical principles. In chapter 4 we present our empirical findings, by
outlining enablers and barriers for established companies when using lean startup as a tool for
digital BMI. Our findings are then analyzed in chapter 5. Highlighting main factors hampering
and facilitating lean startup in established companies and discuss those in the context of existing
theory to answer our research question and to propose our framework. Finally, we will conclude
our study in chapter 6 by showing findings, highlighting enablers and barriers when working
with lean startup in digital BMI, giving theoretical and practical implications, discussing
limitations to our work, and proposing further research.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
5
2. Literature Review
___________________________________________________________________________
This section examines the current state of literature regarding the phenomena under study.
The literature collection process is described along with a literature review of relevant topics,
including business models, business model innovation, and lean startup. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
This study links different fields of research, specifically BM, digital BMI, and lean startup
approaches. The research question emerged from combining these research areas. To gather
relevant scientific articles and findings within these fields and to answer the research question
appropriately, different scientific databases, such as Web of Science and Primo, were used.
Further, to assure that only relevant and contemporary literature is used, we filtered our search
for the newest publications as well as most cited publications. Specifically, relevant academic
articles, used for this research, were collected by combining different search terms, like
“Business Model Transformation”, “Business Model Innovation”, “Digital Business Model
Innovation”, “Business Experimentation, “Lean Startup Approach” and “Established
Companies”. We also used relevant articles to identify further appropriate academic sources for
our study to assure high quality of research. More specifically, to get a deeper understanding of
specific theories and themes, we used backward citation searching. The purpose of the literature
review is to give an overview of relevant theories, definitions, and findings of our research
frame. Moreover, it serves as a fundamental grounding for the empirical part of our study.
2.1 Business Model Innovation
In this chapter, we are outlining the terminology of BMs and digital shift of BMs to address the
topic of BMI and further introduce the term digital BMI.
2.1.1 Business Models
The topic of BMs has gained much popularity in the research area of strategic business and
business innovation. Before the introduction of the BM concept, scholars used organizational
design or business strategy to describe aims and purpose of a company (Keen & Qureshi, 2006).
However, nowadays there is a need to distinguish between business strategy and BM, as
business strategy rather defines how a company is making business. Opposing to that, BM
answers the question of what a company is doing (Keen & Qureshi, 2006). Still, these two
concepts are closely linked as strategic analysis of companies is an inevitable element for BM
design (Keen & Qureshi, 2006; Teece, 2010). Every firm is grounded in a BM, even if the
company itself does not express it directly (Chesbrough, 2007; Foss & Saebi, 2018; Teece,
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
6
2010). Many academics contributed to defining the term BM, however, there is still no mutually
used definition (Foss & Saebi, 2018). Nevertheless, most scholars have agreed that BMs
function to create, deliver, and capture value (Chesbrough, 2007; Foss & Saebi, 2018;
Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010; Teece, 2010).
BMs are seen as a way to create value for customers and how the business turns market
opportunities into profit through different actors, activities, and collaborations (Rajala &
Westerlund, 2005; Zott & Amit, 2007). Afuah (2004) describes BMs as a set of activities a
company performs, how it performs those and when it performs them. They represent all
elements of a company’s business activities, their relationship, and interaction (Rachinger et
al., 2019). Correspondingly, BMs define the building blocks of value chain, creating value by
defining a set of activities from raw materials through to final consumers. BMs also outline
structures of revenues, costs, and profits of a company when delivering value (Teece, 2010).
Osterwalder and Pigneur (2010) created a tool, named Business Model Canvas, which visually
illustrates nine building blocks of any BM. Namely user segment, value proposition, channels,
user relationships, revenue streams, key resources, key activities, key partners, and cost
structure. Because of the more customer-driven world, companies are obliged to rethink their
business strategy and to complement revenues with a suitable BM to respond to the two main
dimensions of BMs, specifically value creation and value capturing (Amit & Zott, 2012b;
Baden-Fuller & Haefliger, 2013). Value creation describes the identification of customers and
their engagement with a company, whereas value capturing marks how novel value is delivered
to customers and how money is made with it (Baden-Fuller & Haefliger, 2013).
2.1.2 The digital shift – Business Models and Digital Technologies
Digital technologies are directly linked to the development and transformation of BMs as they
change how firms produce and deliver value (Keen & Qureshi, 2006; Vaska et al., 2020). They
create value in a new way for businesses, optimize customer experience, and build new
capabilities which support overall business activities (Dörner & Edelman, 2015). Thus, they
make it necessary for companies to undertake a digital shift. In our study, we define digital shift
as the transformation of a company’s existing BM towards a digital BM by adopting digital
technologies. By doing so, digital technologies influence business activities by advancing BMs
or even making former successful BMs now obsolete (Kiel et al., 2017; Tongur & Engwall,
2014). Baden-Fuller and Haefliger (2013) reflect on the correlation of digital technologies and
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
7
BMs, indicating to which extent and when digital technologies require changes in BMs to gain
a competitive advantage. The authors claim that digital technologies and BMs interact
constantly in a two-sided way (Baden-Fuller & Haefliger, 2013). Hence, the choice of a specific
BM can determine how digital technology can be made profitable, but also digital technologies
can influence the possibilities of BMs. Consequently, focus on customer engagement as well
as value creation is increasing. To capture this novel creation of value, digital technology needs
to be intertwined with the right BM (Baden-Fuller & Haefliger, 2013; Teece, 2010).
Integrating digital technologies into BMs reshapes and improves customer value propositions
and leads to greater customer interaction and collaboration (Berman, 2012). Thus, it brings
opportunities across the entire organization. As a result, digital technologies increase the speed
of change and lead to transformations across industries (Bharadwaj et al., 2013).
Implementation of digital technologies is completely reshaping traditional business strategies
as business practices can now be carried out across boundaries of time, distance, and function
(Banker et al., 2006; Ettlie & Pavlou, 2006; Kohli & Grover, 2008; Rai et al., 2012;
Sambamurthy et al., 2003; Straub & Watson, 2001; Subramaniam & Venkatraman, 2001;
Tanriverdi & Venkatraman, 2005; Wheeler, 2002). In this context, digital technologies are seen
as an influence on three dimensions: (1) externally, meaning to digitally enhance customer
experience, (2) internally, meaning to influence business operations, decision-making, and
internal structures and (3) holistically, stating that all business segments are being affected,
which leads to completely new BMs (Hess et al., 2016, 2020; Kaufman & Horton, 2015;
Schuchmann & Seufert, 2015). Hence, digital technologies can change individual business
elements within a BM, the complete BM, adding on different components of value chains, or
the recombination of networks of different actors within a BM (Schallmo & Williams, 2018).
To what extent a BM will be changed depends on the degree of implemented digital
technologies.
It is argued that digital technologies bring new opportunities for the conceptualization of BMs
as well as novel forms for organizations to create and capture value (Vaska et al., 2020).
Opposing to that, drastic changes resulting from the emergence of novel digital technologies
(e.g. mobile technologies, cloud computing, big data, etc.) make it extremely hard for
established companies to stay ahead of competitors that are born-digital and familiar in handling
novel digital technologies. According to Piccini et al. (2015), traditional structures of whole
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
8
industries are being transformed with the introduction of novel digital technologies, which
contains many challenges concerning BMI. However, the new digital environment forces all
companies to adapt to these changes brought by digital technologies to stay competitive
(Subramanian et al., 2011). Especially for established companies, this can be a challenging task.
2.1.3 Digital Business Model Innovation
BMs are capturing how value is created and delivered (Chesbrough, 2007; Foss & Saebi, 2018;
Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010; Teece, 2010) and digital technologies in this context are a great
source of innovation and an enabler for advancing and developing BMs (Rachinger et al., 2019).
However, the highly competitive and rapidly changing business environment today implicates
that BMs became a significant factor for competitive advantage (Berends et al., 2016) and are
also an important source of innovation (Rachinger et al., 2019). Therefore, it is beneficial for
companies to change their process of value creation and capturing (Berends et al., 2016) and to
develop appropriate capabilities to innovate their BMs (Chesbrough, 2010). Berends et al.
(2016) describe BMI as a “multi-step, multi-mechanism learning process” (p. 200), meaning
that it is rather a loose trail-and-error-process of making changes and adjustments, and learning
from these to develop new BMs. However, BMI does not only result in completely novel BMs
and can also be the outcome of innovating existing ones (Rachinger et al., 2019).
Often, novelty and efficiency are key aspects named in BMI (Amit & Zott, 2012b). However,
in large enterprises, this expectation can conflict with traditional setup and structures as
managers see existing business threaten and are therefore less willing to experiment
(Chesbrough, 2010). There is a conflict between existing and new business (Berends et al.,
2016; Christensen, 2003) that makes BMI challenging for established companies, also referred
to as ambidexterity of exploitation and exploration (O'Reilly & Tushman, 2004). The term
ambidextrous organization describes companies that maintain and protect their established
business while giving space for new, disruptive innovation beyond their existing products and
services (O'Reilly & Tushman, 2004). In this context, existing structures can both facilitate or
hamper BMI, as resources might be useful for innovation processes, but existing structures
could also lead to inertia as opportunities might not be perceived as such (Berends et al., 2016).
Thus, it is challenging to balance between exploiting existing businesses while exploring
potentials for innovation growth (O'Reilly & Tushman, 2004). Hence, established companies
need to identify what made them successful in the past and predict what can work in the future,
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
9
to make appropriate changes regarding their BM. The difficulty is to understand the complexity
of BMs and to make right assumptions about different elements of a BM and their interactions
(Berends et al., 2016). Also, it is hard to predict whether or not a BM will be successful (Berends
et al., 2016). Generally, it is key to identify and understand barriers of BMI within the
organizational context and to make necessary changes in leadership, culture, and organizational
structures accordingly (Berends et al., 2016; Chesbrough, 2010). Therefore, it is important for
established companies to learn through experimentation (Chesbrough, 2010) and to build an
effective learning process to be innovative and to create novel BMs (Berends et al., 2016). Also,
it is necessary to understand, that experiments can and will fail and that it requires an open
culture allowing such failures to learn from them (Berends et al., 2016; Chesbrough, 2010).
According to Chesbrough (2010), it requires internal leaders to drive experimental change in
BMI to create new and better value propositions. Coming back to the phenomenon of
ambidexterity, it is crucial to drive cultural change while maintaining existing businesses and
to find a solution how both can coexist and later be combined within a company (Chesbrough,
2010).
As we argue that established companies need to undertake a digital shift of existing BMs by
adopting digital technologies, we define digitization of BMs as digital BMI. In this context, the
influential character of digital technologies on BM has three different dimensions: (1) Digital
technologies can lead to optimization of existing BMs, meaning cost efficiency by using digital
technologies for instance. In this context, optimization refers to digitization of products and
services. (2) Digital technologies can transform current BMs, meaning an extension of existing
BMs or changing individual elements by adopting digital technologies. Thus, they digitize
processes and decision-making. And (3) digital technologies can empower the development of
novel BMs, that either replaces or accomplishes existing ones by completely changing value
propositions (Berman, 2012; Matzler et al., 2016; Rachinger et al., 2019). Therefore, we define
the three dimensions of digital BMI as (1) optimization, (2) transformation, and (3) novel BM
creation, meaning that established companies are to some extent adapting and implementing
digital technologies in their BMs.
2.2 Lean Startup as a Tool for Digital Business Model Innovation
In the field of digital entrepreneurship, lean startup has already been used as a tool to validate
and innovate BMs (Ghezzi, 2020) and is a scientific approach for a fast go-to-market strategy
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
10
(Tohanean & Weiss, 2019). In the following, we introduce lean startup as an agile method for
digital BMI and further bring it into the context of established companies.
2.2.1 Business Experimentation and Lean Startup
Lean startup can be used to advance innovation processes by bringing lean thinking into
organizations (Balocco et al., 2019) and to continuously reinvent BMs. Such a task requires
experimentation and customer involvement (Xu & Koivumäki, 2019), which are essential
aspects covered in lean startup. Business experimentation is a new, emerging field in BMI, and
it is argued that experimental learning significantly influences innovation processes (Berends
et al., 2016; Weissbrod & Bocken, 2017). Meaning, that organizations that constantly
experiment with innovative ideas and concepts are more likely to be successful with the intent
(Chang et al., 2012). Build-measure-learn cycles (Ries, 2011) enable every size of company to
think and operate like a startup and convert ideas into feasible products and services. By using
this approach, it is less about following a clear plan and rather doing a trial-and-error experiment
(Xu & Koivumäki, 2019). Research revealed that business experimentation not only enables
learning and innovation but also reduces uncertainty, can help to interact and communicate with
customers and other stakeholders, and also helps to overcome organizational inertia (Bocken &
Snihur, 2020). Thus, BMI needs to be seen as an ongoing process that requires appropriate
mechanisms (Tohanean & Weiss, 2019).
2.2.2 Lean Startup
In 1997, the term lean philosophy was introduced by Womack & Jones (1997) initiated with
novel development to put high emphasis on customers’ interest. Novel customer value at that
time changed production systems and business activities in the entire construction industry.
Inspired by the Toyota Production System, where it is all about reducing waste in industrial
processes, the authors introduce „five principles of lean”, namely (1) create value for customers,
(2) identify value streams, (3) create flow, (4) produce only what is pulled by customers, and
(5) pursue perfection by continuously identifying and eliminating waste (Womack & Jones,
1997). Those principles demonstrate a high focus on customer value that is implied by the lean
philosophy (Ghezzi & Cavallo, 2020). It also shows a customer or user-centric approach.
Ries (2011) and Blank (2013) firstly transferred lean philosophy from the manufacturing
industry to the entrepreneurial world. The idea of lean startup evolved when Eric Ries was
confronted with the failure of his products getting traction (Leoveanu, 2018). As an engineer,
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
11
he figured that the problem had to do with technical problems of the products. However, it
turned out that he just spent a lot of time building things nobody was interested in (Ries, 2011).
With this experience, he was not alone, as 75% of startups failed in the initial startup phase due
to traditional approaches (Blank, 2013). The commonly known manner to create a BM was to
build a business plan with a five-year prospect, which was pitched to investors. If the pitch was
successful, the business plan would be realized and brought to market. Only then would
entrepreneurs get feedback from customers about products or services. This means,
entrepreneurs would find out if the initial business idea was a hit or miss, only after a product
was already available on the market when lots of time and money was already spent (Blank,
2013). So, there was a need to change this process, making the creation of novel BMs less risky.
As a solution, different lean startup approaches have been introduced (Ghezzi & Cavallo, 2020),
such as lean startup (Ries, 2011) and customer development methods (Blank, 2013). Ries
(2011) and Blank (2013) define lean startup approaches as a startups’ way of identifying all
preferred features of a business idea, activities, and processes of customers and which are non-
relevant, or even not wanted. To reduce uncertainty about a business’s viability, startups need
to iterate their business ideas as quickly as possible applying the method of learning-by-doing
(Gans et al., 2019; Ott et al., 2017). Getting the right business idea quickly to market has a
positive impact on its success in the long run (McDonald & Gao, 2019; Zott & Amit, 2007).
Therefore, lean startup is a useful tool helping to iterate business ideas quickly, up to the point
where entrepreneurs are able to formulate a sound BM and make early assumptions about its
feasibility (Blank, 2013; Ries, 2011). The method contains two main features. Firstly,
formulation of hypotheses in nine areas of a business idea (called Business Model Canvas) and
secondly, the approach of getting-out-of-the-building, meaning that each hypothesis will be
tested by interviewing customers and other stakeholders (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010; Ries,
2011). The Business Model Canvas is used to visually illustrate the complete extent of a
business, its goods, services, parties involved, and how ownership of goods/services will be
exchanged. Each of the nine building blocks withholds assumptions about the business idea and
is being used as hypotheses to test BMs (Leatherbee & Katila, 2020). The goal is to test all
hypotheses with potential customers to build a strong BM with (dis)confirmed hypotheses
(Leatherbee & Katila, 2020). The canvas supports lean startup as it causes entrepreneurs to ask
the right questions, such as: Who are the customers?, What are you building for them?, What
is the value proposition?, What are the right channels to reach your customers?, How do you
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
12
keep existing customers and how do you get new ones?, What are your pricing tactics?, What
is your revenue model?, What resources do you need and which partners do you need? (Blank
& Euchner, 2018). Traditionally when building a BM with the canvas, building blocks were
filled in as facts, without testing them. With lean startup, the fields are being filled with
hypotheses that are being tested out-of-the-building with potential customers (Blank &
Euchner, 2018). The method makes initiation of a new BM less risky, as it uses experimentation
instead of planning, valuable customer feedback instead of making assumptions, and intuition
and an iterative design process instead of traditional time-consuming and costly perfectionistic
design upfront (Blank, 2013). Lean startup, therefore, reduces uncertainty about a business
idea’s viability and helps to indicate if there is an actual customer need as well as to quickly
decide whether to stick with a BM (persevere), to change/adapt it (pivot), or not proceed with
the idea (perish) (figure 1).
Figure 1: Lean startup hypothesis process (Eisenmann et al., 2012).
Lean startup makes use of a hypothesis-driven attempt, in which innovators and entrepreneurs
formulate their business intent into measurable hypotheses. These hypotheses are incorporated
into a lean startup Business Model Canvas and can furtherly be combined with formulation of
user stories as well as use cases and first estimate business cases. In a following step, these
hypotheses are being tested with potential customers. If an entrepreneur decides to persevere
with a BM, it will then be translated into a minimum viable product (MVP). Eisenmann et al.
(2012) define a MVP as the smallest set of activities needed to disprove a hypothesis. Ries
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
13
(2011) describes it as a product that combines just a few features which makes it possible for
early adopters to give useful feedback for further product development. Early adopters are
involved in hypotheses testing through experiments with a MVP, where they give feedback
while using it. This process is highly valuable for the development, as a product is based on
customer needs, opposed to the approach of basing evaluations on secondary data or desk
research or even pure assumptions (Ghezzi & Cavallo, 2020). Based on experiments’ results
with early adopters and lead users, hypotheses can be proven right or wrong. Continuous testing
and improving are referred to as build-measure-learn loops (Ries, 2011). In these loops (figure
2) a MVP is built (Build), then customer feedback is given and evaluated (Measure) and from
those insights, learnings are being generated (Learn).
Figure 2: Build-Measure-Learn loop (Ries, 2011).
MVPs, as well as BMs, will be adapted according to customers’ preferences (Ries, 2011). Thus,
a MVP is used to validate or invalidate assumptions (Blank & Euchner, 2018). This process is
repeated until all hypotheses are validated through MVP testing. According to Eisenmann et al.
(2012), at that point, a product or service achieves its approved product-market-fit. In addition,
this process helps not only to validate hypotheses but also to improve products as such. Nobel
(2011) additionally highlights the emphasis on speeding up the process, as with lean startup
companies do not need to spend several months perfecting a full-featured product but rather
launch a quickly developed MVP. Therefore, build-measure-learn cycles shall be executed
quickly to fail early and to succeed sooner (Brown & Katz, 2019; Ries, 2011). In turn, MVPs
help companies to quickly market products that are highly relevant for their customers and have
a proven product-market fit.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
14
Many startups have succeeded with lean startup (Leatherbee & Katila, 2020), such as Dropbox
and Zappos, however, it still has some limitations. Ladd (2016) argues that despite its well-
deserved popularity, the method requires strict tailoring and needs to be used with care. It is
crucial to generate unique and testable hypotheses, which can be challenging as lean startup
does not per se guides through the process (Bocken & Snihur, 2020). Literature states that
continuous testing of multiple hypotheses decelerates the process and leads to disheartened and
impatient founders (Ladd, 2016). Moreover, it is argued that the customer-centric approach
presents some pitfalls, as it is difficult to capture non-biased and valuable customer feedback
to confirm hypotheses (Felin et al., 2019; Ng, 2014; Nirwan & Dhewanto, 2015). Also, heavy
reliance on customer feedback is harshly criticized, as customers might not necessarily have
better knowledge of a business idea or product (Felin et al., 2019). The customer-centric
approach also leads to focus on what customers want today and fails to predict what will occur
in the future (Mollick, 2019). Additionally, novel business ideas are always harder to
understand for customers and tend to be initially disliked by them (Christensen et al., 2013). It
is even argued that regulatory and administrative barriers hinder the process of obtaining
customer feedback and as a result slow down the whole BMI process (Nirwan & Dhewanto,
2015). Therefore, it is questionable if lean startup helps to generate radical BMs and hence, is
rather a tool for incremental change (Felin et al., 2019; Mollick, 2019). Another critical aspect
is handling MVPs, as established companies often hesitate to create a perceived inferior
product, that might fail to satisfy existing customers’ needs (Nirwan & Dhewanto, 2015).
Opposingly, according to Zuzul and Tripsas (2020) entrepreneurs that strongly rely on their
original business idea might be less successful than entrepreneurs that continuously update their
BM, which is a favorable aspect supporting lean startup. Also, it is argued that a BM idea can
be both radical and incremental when applying lean startup, as it is not a tool to generate novel
business ideas but rather to test if an idea is solid (Bocken & Snihur, 2020). Despite the
skepticism (Felin et al., 2019; Ladd, 2016; Nirwan & Dhewanto, 2015), lean startup has been
adopted around the world as a popular solution to avoid business failure (Nirwan & Dhewanto,
2015) and is a successful tool for BMI (Leatherbee & Katila, 2020). Opposing to its popularity
in the business context, lean startup has not been thoroughly investigated in empirical research
(Leatherbee & Katila, 2020). Hence, it is necessary to fill this research gap and to examine how
established companies can successfully use lean startup as a tool for digital BMI.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
15
2.2.3 Digital Business Model Innovation with Lean Startup in Established Companies
As startups offer new products and BMs at a high speed, they put traditional actors and
especially established companies under high pressure (Edison et al., 2018). Startups are
constantly in close collaboration with potential customers, indicating gaps in existing market
offers to find new, scalable BMs. This means, for established companies in order to compete
with these disruptive players, they need to find new ways of creating and capturing value (Rejeb
et al., 2008). Therefore, a high focus for established companies is put to innovate and act like
startups to regain leading positions as well as to compete with startups. They realize that startups
are no longer ankle-biters, but serious competitors that can take over their business or even to
disrupt entire markets and that there is a need to rethink their BMs (Blank & Euchner, 2018).
Thus, established companies start adapting startup techniques to compete with startups, but
oftentimes fail to implement tools as an end-to-end solution for growth. Rather they use it for
experimentation but are not capable to bring new BMs to scale and market (Blank & Euchner,
2018). Especially for established companies, digital BMI can be a huge challenge as they might
not be used to the fast-paced digital environment. Therefore, business experimentation is
needed to react faster to new market conditions by continuously creating and testing hypotheses
about novel or changed BMs (Bocken & Snihur, 2020).
Especially, because established companies rely on and aim to fulfill existing customer needs
while simultaneously gaining new customers, the customer-centric approach of lean startup can
help them to do both. In this way, they centralize all their efforts to their main and necessary
business operations, focusing on what customers want and need (Ries, 2011). Through low-
cost experimentations with MVPs, new ideas can be tested easily and fast with customers, and
thus implement a startup mentality in large enterprises (Bocken & Snihur, 2020) without
making huge investments or long-time planning (Mansoori, 2017; Ries, 2011). Moreover,
continuity is a major advantage of lean startup as a tool for BMI. As pointed out before, it is
important for any company to continuously rethink its BM to stay competitive. With feedback
loops, as an essential part of lean startup, established companies can constantly challenge and
reinvent their business. In this context, it is important to truly understand customer needs and
work closely together with them to generate learnings from customers rather than selling them
something (Mansoori, 2017; Xu & Koivumäki, 2019). Ghezzi (2020) outlines the importance
of simple heuristics instead of abstract guidelines to successfully apply lean startup and make
use of existing resources. Further, lean startup requires agility on every level in terms of culture
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
16
and organizational structure (Ghezzi & Cavallo, 2020) as BMI or change in general, especially
grounded in digital technologies, forces companies to adapt in the way they think and act. Such
agile structures can be found in (digital) startups (Ghezzi & Cavallo, 2020) and thus needs
further investigation in established companies that are facing a digital shift. Xu and Koivumäki
(2019) explain challenges of lean startup with an enormous change from existing procedures to
agile methods. Before, companies predicted what customers want. Now, by including them in
the process it shifts to customers telling companies what they want, thus altering the competitive
landscape and forcing companies to be primarily fast and agile. Therefore, organizational
structures and operational processes need to allow the inclusion of customers as external
sources (Mansoori, 2017). However, once an innovative idea is generated, the lean startup
process can yield novel and innovative BMs (Bocken & Snihur, 2020) and the lean perspective
can help to shift learnings from a small task to an organization-wide implementation in a step-
by-step process (Balocco et al., 2019).
According to Ries (2011), the core idea and activities of lean startup offer many benefits for
established companies, which is why lean startup has gained interest from companies, such as
General Electrics, 3M and W.L. Gore, etc. (Edison et al., 2018). According to a study by the
Harvard Business Review on 170 corporate executives, 82% of them are using elements of lean
startup in their business context (Kirsner, 2016). Still, many large companies struggle with lean
startup. One critical aspect is that they fail to connect innovation teams with operational groups
(Blank & Euchner, 2018). Another problematic factor is that oftentimes established companies
have managers with a rather traditional leading styles that fail to understand the needs to apply
lean startup thinking within a company (Blank & Euchner, 2018). Also, employees of large
organizations are motivated for different reasons as startup employees, who are rather
motivated by passion and drive to make a difference (Blank & Euchner, 2018). Nevertheless,
lean startup is nowadays one of the most common and trusted innovation methods not only by
startups and entrepreneurs but also for corporations and policymakers (Leatherbee & Katila,
2020).
However, scientific and empirical insights about using lean startup in established companies
are still rare. Hence, there is an urgent need to understand how to successfully use lean startup
in those companies (Edison et al., 2018). Thus, we aim to identify enablers and barriers
influencing usage of lean startup as a tool for digital BMI in established companies.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
17
3. Methodology
___________________________________________________________________________
This chapter provides an overview of our research environment outlining the research’s
underlying philosophy, our research approach, and design, as well as data analysis including
quality insurance and ethical considerations. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3.1 Research Philosophy
Research philosophy consists of the ontological and epistemological view of a study. Ontology
describes basic assumptions researchers hold about the nature of reality and existence, basically
how we see the world (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). For this study, we ground our assumptions
on relativism. Relativism defines reality as a subjective product of how individuals see the
world, as reality depends on individual perspectives, and truth is created subjectively by
individuals (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). This perspective suits our study best as we generate
our data from interviews with diverse experts, with different knowledge, experience, and
expertise in lean startup for digital BMI and each one perceives reality differently. Furthermore,
we generate our knowledge through our observations and gathered data from interviews and
hence, build a multi-sided truth of the investigated topic. In relativism, scientific laws are not
predefined but created by people (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Hence, we explore
heterogeneity of opinions on our research themes digital BMI and lean startup, as we also
include different standpoints and perspectives, due to the different roles of the respondents.
Epistemology describes how knowledge is generated in terms of how researchers enquire the
physical and social world, or simply how we know what we know and how we investigate the
world (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Based on our relativistic ontological viewpoint, our study’s
underlying epistemology is social constructionism. Social constructionism aligns with the
perspective that reality and knowledge are created by people and it is important to acknowledge
individual perspectives (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). We base our findings and emerging
knowledge on our interviewees’ experience and therefore, need to see reality in different ways
even though we aim to develop a common understanding by identifying certain patterns and
similarities. From a social constructionism position, we as researchers are reflective observers.
Thus, we take active part in the research by interacting with interview partners, interpreting our
findings, developing deeper understanding of the topic, as well as explaining and generalizing
the research phenomenon and its outcome. By doing so, we gather rich data about lean startup
as a tool for digital BMI in established companies and construct an understanding of the
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
18
research fields lean startup and digital BMI to later generalize our knowledge through
theoretical implications.
3.2 Research Approach
Based on our research philosophy we conducted an exploratory, qualitative research.
Coherently with our ontology and epistemology, we choose grounded theory as the underlying
methodology, following an abductive approach. Thus, we aim to collect and analyze data by
identifying common patterns to extend existing theory and eventually generating new ones
(Saunders et al., 2012). In comparison to deductive or inductive research, the abductive
approach allows us to explain, develop, and change the theoretical framework at any time in
the research process (Saunders et al., 2012). It is a mixed approach of inductive and deductive
that aims to derive novel insights from gathered data to contribute to existing theory and thus
emphasizes researchers to acquire a deep understanding of the topic beforehand (Timmermans
& Tavory, 2012). As we investigate lean startup as a tool for digital BMI, we intend to
contribute to and extend current theory about lean startup and BMI. Thus, we combine fields
of lean startup and BMI, extending BMI in the digital context and investigate both in a new
context within established companies.
Therefore, we choose grounded theory by Charmaz (2000) as it aligns best with our relativism
and social constructionism viewpoint, as well as the abductive approach. As we aim to identify
enablers and barriers of using lean startup for digital BMI in established companies, we consider
different perspectives of our interviewees due to different roles within or without company
boundaries, years of experience, and expertise of each respondent. We used literature to get
familiar with lean startup and digital BMI to design our theoretical framework by combining
these fields and putting them in the context of established companies. However, we did not use
any pre-assumptions regarding our research purpose when conducting the research and
analyzing the data. In general, grounded theory examines a research problem without making
prior assumptions where theory emerges from data by continuously comparing it with each
other to identify common patterns (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). However, Charmaz’s (2000)
approach allows and recommends prior familiarization with literature to get a pre-
understanding of the topic and thus to better examine data later in the research process.
Compared to other approaches of grounded theory, the main difference in Charmaz’s (2000)
approach is that results should emerge from the interaction between research subject and
researcher. Therefore, we understand our role as reflective observers and co-creators of
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
19
meaning by interacting with our interview partners. Rahmani and Leifels (2018) show how an
abductive approach can be used with grounded theory arguing that even though the literature
review is influencing the research question, there is no need to direct data collection and
analysis towards any pre-defined theories. Similar to our study, we developed our research
question based on the identified gap in literature but not used existing concepts to analyze our
data, rather we aimed for “surprising facts” emerging from data (Saunders et al., 2012).
3.3 Research Design
3.3.1 Data Collection
The collected qualitative data consist of primary data, which is conducted through semi-
structured interviews with diverse experts of lean startup usage for digital BMI. Aligning with
our study’s purpose, to understand enablers and barriers of lean startup for established
companies, we collected data from ten in-depth, semi-structured interviews. The interviewees
are all experts in lean startup as a tool for digital BMI in established companies, as they all have
been or are working in/with established companies using lean startup. A detailed description of
our experts, their roles, and experience with lean startup as a tool for digital BMI in established
companies, is shown in table 1.
We used in-depth, semi-structured interviews, as we want to explore deeper meanings, patterns,
and relations of different fields concerning the usage of lean startup for digital BMI in
established companies. As most of the experts work in different industries with different roles
and perspectives (table 1), we thrive to cover as many aspects as possible for using lean startup
in different established companies. Therefore, semi-structured interviews appear as the most
appropriate method. Moreover, we wanted to be flexible with questions throughout the
interviews, to make sure to react and cover areas that we initially did not think about. Thus,
semi-structured interviews allow to make answers comparable but still give space to
spontaneously react to responses and to ask follow-up questions (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018).
We did not conduct completely structured interviews, as they tempt us to make assumptions
before having the interviews as well as to leave out important insights, which we do not cover
with our planned interview questions. Also, as we aim to explore which enablers and barriers
established companies face when working with lean startup, we refrain from working with
unstructured interviews. Without giving any guidelines and setting a frame, we would not
collect useful and appropriate data on our intended research, which is why we choose to have a
semi-structure (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018).
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
20
Table 1: Overview of Interview Partners.
Interviewee Job Description Industry External/
Internal
Perspective
Date Length Background & Experience with Lean
Startup
Respondent 1 Project &
Innovation
Manager &
Product Owner
New Business
Logistics Internal
perspective
30.03.21 58 min Uses Lean Startup method for the last six
months for an internal intend to create novel
digital business models within the boundaries
of an established company.
Respondent 2 Management
Consultant, Agile
Coach & SAFe
5.0 SPC
Consulting External
perspective
01.04.21 65 min Works as an external coach for established
companies that are using the lean startup
method for digital business model innovation.
Respondent 3 PhD. Advisor and
Lecturer on
Business Model
Innovation and
Customer Value
Creation
Consulting/
Education
External
perspective
02.04.21 70 min Acts as an external coach for business model
innovation for 13 years. Teaches business
model innovation with lean startup for the last
six years.
Respondent 4 Agile Coach and
Digital Consultant
for digital
Transformation
and New Work
Consulting External
perspective
06.04.21 62 min Acts as a digital coach for the last nine years,
mainly for established companies that are in the
process of digital transformation. Has had one
big project for two years where he consulted an
established firm in the process of digital
transformation with the help of the lean startup
method.
Respondent 5 Innovation Lead Production
(B2B)
Internal
perspective
06.04.21 66 min Acts as lean startup ambassador for three years.
Was commissioned by management of an
established firm to work as an innovation lead
with lean startup in order to create novel digital
business models and to digitally transform the
traditional and existing business models of the
established company for the last two years.
Respondent 6 Innovation
Manager
Consulting External
perspective
08.04.21 63 min Acted as an external coach for one year for
established companies that practice (digital)
business model innovation and used lean
startup method in this context.
Respondent 7 Innovation and
Technology
Consultant
Consulting External
perspective
08.04.21 58 min Works as an external consultant for different
traditional companies that are in the process of
digital transformation and supports them with
digital business model innovation with lean
startup method.
Respondent 8 PhD.
Organizational
Development
Consultant
Corporate
Incubation
Automotive
Industry
(Innovation
Lab)
Internal
perspective
(Corporate
incubation)
16.04.21 61 min Set up and worked for almost four years as a
business accelerator for the corporate
organizational development in form of an
innovation lab of a big corporate automotive
group. There, different initiatives for digital
business model innovation were practiced with
the lean startup method.
Respondent 9 Organizational
Development
Consultant
Corporate
Incubation
Automotive
Industry
(Innovation
Lab)
Internal
perspective
(Corporate
incubation)
21.04.21 56 min Colleague of Respondent 8. Worked for three
years at the innovation lab of a big corporate
automotive group. Different initiatives for
digital business model innovation were
practiced with the lean startup method.
Respondent 10 Founder of
Innovation Hub;
Agile Coach
Innovation
Innovation
Hub
External
perspective
23.04.21 59 min Background in a digital factory incubation lab
of a big automotive group. Founder of an
innovation hub where organizations are
supported to master innovation in a digital
world since one and a half years. Works with
different agile methods, inter alia Lean Startup,
to develop digital business models, products
and services for and with established medium-
sized enterprises.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
21
3.3.2 Sampling Strategy
As a sampling method, we used non-probability sampling with purposive sampling, as we aim
to identify reasonable specimens of the researched phenomenon (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018).
As our research purpose is to understand enablers and barriers of lean startup for established
companies, we need experts that are familiar with the research topic, that have broad experience
and knowledge within this field. Meaning, that only a small collection of individuals has the
required expertise, in working with lean startup as a tool for digital BMI, which we can choose
from. With probability sampling methods the data sample could be biased, as not everybody
has expertise and experience working with lean startup for digital BMI in established
companies.
To get in contact with potential interviewees, we first did online research on professionals
working with lean startup for digital BMI in established companies. Therefore, we searched for
the keywords “Lean Startup” and “Business Model Innovation with Lean Startup” on Google
and LinkedIn. From there we identified several persons that appear to be experts in using lean
startup for digital BMI. To detect if a person was specifically suitable for our study, prior we
set different criteria for selecting our interviewees. First, the person needed to have knowledge
and a deep understanding of lean startup. To ensure this criterion, we checked their working
experience with lean startup, and we only contacted individuals if they directly stated that they
are/have been working with lean startup. All our experts explicitly mentioned in their online
communication, either on their LinkedIn profile or on the respective company website, that they
have been/are working with lean startup. Some experts are moreover acting as lean startup
ambassadors or are teaching lean startup. This is how we made certain that they have deep
understanding and knowledge within the field of interest. Another criterion which we set, was
that the experts understand lean startup as a tool for BMI, and not only as an agile working
method as such. To ensure this criterion, we asked the experts how they work with lean startup.
We only set an interview, if the individuals stated that they use it as a tool for BMI. Furthermore,
we made sure that the experts use lean startup for BMI in companies that are facing a digital
shift, meaning that the experts have experience with using lean startup for digital BMI. This
leads to another criterion that we set priory. As lean startup is commonly known as a method
for startups, we needed to make sure that the experts work with established companies and not
for/with growing companies and startups. To ensure this we asked the experts directly for/with
which types of company(ies) they use lean startup. Again, we only scheduled interviews with
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
22
experts that explicitly mentioned that they use lean startup in/with established companies. Also,
it was interesting for us, to understand if a person acts as an external coach or consultant, uses
lean startup within company boundaries, or in-between both positions, e.g. in a corporate
incubation position. This way, we made certain that we cover different perspectives of using
lean startup to get a holistic understanding. Only if a person corresponded to all above-named
criteria and was indicated to be suitable for our research intend, we scheduled an appointment
for an expert interview.
To avoid sampling bias, we aim to make data collection as representative, yet still comparable,
as possible (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). For this, we chose diverse interviewees, that all work
with lean startup for digital BMI in established companies, but in different positions and
perspectives (table 1). Meaning, that we interviewed experts that function as external
consultants as well as employees working with lean startup as a tool for digital BMI and people
that function as innovation leaders, supervising usage of lean startup for digital BMI. Also,
some of the experts act as corporate incubators, for instance in corporate innovation labs,
meaning they work independently in parallel to the core business of established companies to
innovate existing BMs. Thus, we have different perspectives (internal and external) on using
lean startup as a tool for digital BMI. This helps us to critically reflect on empirical findings.
Additionally, all interviewees have different years of experience within the field. Moreover, all
experts work in different markets, reaching from the automotive industry, finance, to production
and manufacturing. Still, all respondents work for/with established companies in Germany that
were founded before the dotcom bubble (1995-2000) and are now facing a digital shift of their
existing BMs.
3.3.3 Interview Design
We conducted ten semi-structured interviews between 30th of March and 23rd of April 2021
using an interview guide (appendix 1) containing a set of pre-defined questions. The interviews
lasted on average one hour and thus, we gathered more than ten hours of interview recordings
(table 1). We did not specify an explicit number of interviews that we planned to conduct, as
we aimed for knowledge saturation. This was achieved with the 9th interview and confirmed
with the 10th, as no new data derived.
The interview guide was developed with different fields of our research purpose and key
findings from the literature review. Also, the interview guideline was tested with one expert
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
23
before the planned interviews to detect unsuitable topics and to see if the interview guideline
works in practice. This expert was a suitable choice to test the interview questions, as the expert
has been recently using lean startup for digital BMI in an established company. There the expert
started several projects, applying lean startup, to create novel, digital BMs. The company was
founded in 1885, is very conservative, and is slowly proceeding in the digital transformation
process, which makes it fit perfectly to our criteria. Also, the expert has theoretical knowledge
from his academic background. From the feedback of the test respondent, we learned that some
questions were still too narrow and needed to be rephrased to not bias the interview outcome.
Also, it was a helpful trial on how to lead respondents through the interview guide.
The interview guide covers two main topics: First, general understanding of the topic and how
the respective companies use lean startup and secondly, the experts’ experience with lean
startup as a tool for digital BMI in established companies. During the interviews, we asked our
experts four open questions about their experience with lean startup as a tool for digital BMI,
two questions about positive aspects as well as three questions concerning which barriers and
difficulties they experienced and how they dealt with them. Also, we asked six questions about
advantages and drawbacks of lean startup as a tool for digital BMI in established companies.
As we used a semi-structured interview guide, during the actual interviews we adapted some
additional open questions (see optional questions in appendix 1), which came up spontaneously
as a reaction to the respondents’ experiences. Accordingly, we added some questions
concerning the experience with handling digital BMI in general and the potential for
improvement.
All interviews were conducted digitally, using online video platforms, namely Zoom and
Microsoft Teams, as those were our respondents’ preferred platforms. This approach was most
suitable, as the respondents were all spread around different locations in Germany. All
interviews were conducted in German, transcribed with the software trint.com, and then
manually checked for errors. We choose to conduct interviews in German as our participants
felt more comfortable with using their mother tongue and we expected to get a more detailed
description of their thoughts and opinions about their experience of using lean startup for digital
BMI in established companies.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
24
3.4 Data Analysis
Aligned with our methodology, we use the open approach of grounded analysis to analyze our
gathered data. Grounded analysis is a holistic approach in qualitative research, often used in
combination with grounded theory methodology, aiming to develop a theory based on given
data (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). We see this technique as suitable for our study as it gives us
the possibility to not only confirm existing theory on lean startup and digital BMI but also to
discover new findings to get deeper understanding of the research phenomena. As we are using
an abductive approach and aim to identify enablers and barriers of lean startup as a tool for
digital BMI, grounded analysis offers us to explore novel insights about the research topic,
beyond the usage in digital startups, in the context of established companies. Therefore, we
intend to compare different perspectives of our research participants and their experience of
using lean startup in established companies to derive new knowledge. Thus, we aim to
contribute and extend existing literature about lean startup and digital BMI from using it in
startups to the use in established companies. Through constant comparison of the data,
following the seven steps of grounded analysis, we identified common patterns in form of codes
and categories and built a holistic understanding and theory of the studied phenomenon. The
seven steps are (1) Familiarization, (2) Reflection, (3) Open or initial coding, (4)
Conceptualization, (5) Focused re-coding, (6) Linking, and (7) Re-evaluation (Easterby-Smith
et al., 2018).
Following these principles, we first familiarized ourselves with the data by listening again to
interview recordings and going through interview transcripts. We already started with
familiarization in the data collection process by writing notes during the interviews, listening
to our recordings, and reading interview transcripts several times. We made initial comments
and frequently discussed our impressions and thoughts after each interview. Whenever we
identified interesting new topics related to lean startup as a tool for digital BMI, we adjusted
our interview guide for the next interviews. These adjustments are illustrated in our interview
guide (appendix 1) as optional questions emerging from the interviews. After conducting all
interviews, we reflected on the data in the context of our study asking what enablers and barriers
occur when using lean startup for digital BMI in established companies. Afterward, we went
through our interview transcripts for initial coding once more, by summarizing the most
important quotes from our interviewees in codes. For the first coding, we worked together
taking the first data set (Respondent 1) to identify and discuss a first set of codes that seemed
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
25
to be important, before we continued individually for the further coding process. The coding
has been conducted using ATLAS.ti, which allowed us to follow each other’s coding process.
Even though we worked independently to increase the quality of our analysis and decrease bias,
we constantly updated each other about the process and findings. We used the initial codes as
guidance and added new codes throughout the process, which we then discussed to share the
same understanding of the data. After the individual coding, we came together to debate about
all emerged codes, their importance, characteristics, and uniqueness. We identified 176 codes
in our initial coding, which we grouped into 18 initial categories by comparing codes,
identifying similarities, and patterns of the data regarding lean startup for digital BMI in
established companies. Based on that, we went through our transcripts again to recode the data
in a more focused manner, renaming, restructuring, and finalizing our codes. That way, we
deepened our analysis and worked even closer with the data focusing on the most important
facts in the context of our research question. We ended up with 79 codes, structured into 16
pre-categories. Further, we conceptualized our findings into six main categories, namely (1)
lean startup management, (2) organizational structures, (3) culture, (4) corporate governance,
(5) methodical competence, and (6) external influences. Thus, we are now referring to the initial
16 pre-defined categories as sub-categories that helped us to group our final categories. From
the 16 pre-categories, we transferred two (organizational structures and external influences)
directly into main categories, as they could not be combined with any other sub-category. Thus,
the final coding shows 79 codes, 14 sub-categories, and 6 categories (appendix 3). Following
the principles of grounded analysis, we discussed interrelations of our categories by identifying
linkages that have been transferred in a framework showing enablers and barriers for using lean
startup as a tool for digital BMI in established companies. As the last step, we re-evaluated our
analysis process by going through our data, codes, and categories again to confirm our findings
and to answer our research question. Figure 3 shows our final coding tree displaying example
codes for each sub-category/category. Further, we will provide example quotes for these codes
later in our empirical data (chapter 4, table 2).
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
26
Figure 3: Final coding tree with example codes.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
27
3.5 Research Ethics and Quality Insurance
Ethical considerations are important to respect in research and to ensure that no harm occurs
(Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). We ensure ethical correct research by following the key principles
by Bell and Bryman (2007). In the following we are outlining how we applied these principles
throughout our research, and further highlight how we ensure quality of our study:
(1) Harm to participants – We ensure physical and psychological well-being of our participants
to avoid any harm, by creating a safe and comfortable research environment. As we selected
respondents via online research without having any personal connection to them, we offered to
have a prior phone call, where we presented ourselves, and our study’s intent as well as
boundary conditions of the interview. This was important to gain trust and to create a safe and
comfortable environment for all respondents. Moreover, we did not ask any inappropriate
questions about potentially sensitive topics, such as too personal data, company details, or
financial aspects, and all participants were able to refuse to answer at any time. This is
especially important for our study, as some respondents act as external coaches that underlie
strict corporate non-disclosure agreements. This way, we avoid that respondents felt
uncomfortable as well as incorrect, biased answers (Saunders et al., 2012).
(2) Dignity – We respected our research participants’ dignity regarding all answers and opinions
without influencing or guiding them towards a certain direction. We ensure that by the design
of our interview guide with only asking open and non-judgmental questions. This was
especially important regarding our research topic, as we investigate lean startup as a tool for
digital BMI in established companies from multiple perspectives by including internal
perspectives of employees as well as external perspectives of consultants. Before we conducted
the interviews, a test interview was set up (see chapter 3.3.3) to ensure that all questions are
asked appropriately. With open questions, we intended to not personally bias respondents as
well as to motivate them to elaborate on further details to uncovered parts within the interview
guide. Thus, we added optional questions to the interview guide (appendix 1) throughout the
interview process whenever respondents highlighted new insights on lean startup for digital
BMI that has not been covered by leading questions before.
(3) Informed consent – We ensured fully informed consent of our research participants by
sending out a GDPR consent form (appendix 2) before the interviews. By doing so, an e-mail
was sent to all respondents where we asked for their willingness to participate in our research
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
28
and informed them about their rights concerning privacy, anonymity, and confidentiality
according to GDPR. In addition to the written agreement, we asked again for their verbal
consent for participation as well as the recording of the interview at the beginning of each
interview. Only after the verbal consent, we started recording the interview as well as taking
notes.
(4) Privacy – To protect our research participants’ privacy we do not process any personal- or
company-related data that could be linked to any interview partners. As many respondents are
consultants working with lean startup in various companies, it is important for us to also protect
and respect privacy of our research participants’ customers. Coherently, all information is only
processed according to GDPR which all participants have been informed of before the
interview. Thus, we are not processing information related to our interview partners to any third
party.
(5) Confidentiality – All recordings and interview transcripts are securely stored and only
accessible by the two of us for the purpose of this study. Thus, we ensure confidentiality of our
research data and do not hand any confidential information to third parties. All data will be
deleted when it is not needed anymore for this study.
(6) Anonymity – We protect the anonymity of our research participant, their employers, and
business partners. Thus, we are not stating any names within this study and refer to the
interviewees as “Respondent X”. Further, all confidential information in our interview
transcripts has been blacked to ensure that no personal- or company-related data is being
processed. Again, this is specifically relevant for our study as some research participants
function as external consultants for well-known established companies, where they are
underlying strict corporate non-disclosure agreements.
(7) Deception – To avoid any deception about the nature or aim of the research we transparently
outline the research procedure by illustrating the purpose of our research and all decisions that
have been taking accordingly. Thus, we also aim to increase dependability of our study,
meaning the results of our study are not influenced by the chosen method and a stepwise
replication of the study is possible (Guba, 1981). Even though qualitative research is difficult
to replicate, we argue that we give a transparent and systematic overview of the study procedure
in terms of data collection and data analysis which is comprehensible by the audience.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
29
Additionally, we achieved data saturation with our ten interviews as no new insights about lean
startup as a tool for digital BMI in established companies emerged after the 9th interview, and
interview 10 rather confirmed and deepened the already gained knowledge about the topic.
Thus, we do not expect additional interview partners to reveal new insights about lean startup
and digital BMI in the context of established companies. Further, as we used grounded analysis,
we let knowledge about enablers and barriers only emerge from data. We only used existing
literature to familiarize with the topics of lean startup and digital BMI to better understand the
studied phenomenon when analyzing the data, but not taking pre-assumptions into account.
Additionally, the research has been conducted by the two of us, first analyzing the data together
to get a common understanding, then continuing independently, and later re-evaluated by
comparing our results and cross-checking the data together.
(8) Affiliation – In the case of our research, no affiliation applies as we chose the topic ourselves.
Thus, the research purpose has not been assigned to us. Furthermore, there is no conflict of
interest as we did not receive any funding. The only affiliation of our study is the connection to
Jönköping University, which has been stated in our GDPR consent form. However, we do not
expect any influence or bias by mentioning Jönköping University, as we did not acknowledge
any negative affiliations of our interview partners with Jönköping University.
(9) Honesty and transparency – We ensure honest and transparent communication about our
study throughout the whole research process. This applies first in terms of our research
participants regarding the processed data, as we clearly stated the study’s intent as well as how
we are using their data. Thus, we created a trustful connection with our research participants.
Furthermore, we aim to create trust for all researchers and managers interesting in our research,
by fully outlining our research process and decisions taken within this study. Therefore, we
ensure credibility of our data by displaying and interpreting our results according to the
participants’ perspectives (Guba, 1981). Even though interviews per se are a limitation to
research, as interview partners cannot give full access to information, we compared multiple
perspectives to identify common patterns and similarities. By including employees, innovation
incubators as well as consultants using lean startup as a tool for digital BMI, we combine
internal and external perspectives about our studied phenomenon in the context of established
companies. Hence, we identified similarities and differences of perspectives and thus avoid bias
(Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Further, credibility is ensured by using triangulation while
analyzing the data as we worked independently and controlled each other to decrease
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
30
subjectivity of our findings. Therefore, we met during the analysis process to first initially code,
to group our codes, to re-code the transcripts, to conceptualize our findings, and identify
linkages between categories, and finally to re-evaluate our results.
(10) Reciprocity – With our research, we aim for mutual benefit for us as researchers, for other
researchers with our contribution to existing theory, for managers/companies working with or
aiming to work with lean startup as a tool for digital BMI, but also for our research participants.
As we highly depended on our interviewees’ experience and their insights regarding lean startup
and digital BMI, we want to acknowledge this by sharing our results with them in return. Even
though transferability of qualitative research is difficult given its unique research environment,
taking all limitations such as sampling, interview partners, industries, context, etc. into account
(Guba, 1981) we aim for internal generalizability as we can only explain and generalize our
findings within the given research setting (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Thus, we can only argue
that our findings apply to the specific setup of our research. This might implicate a lack of
transferability of our research. However, we argue that with our sampling of diverse interview
partners from different industries, roles, and different experiences, we already gained a holistic
view and detailed insights about the use of lean startup as a tool for digital BMI in established
companies which can be, to some extent, generalized. Hence, such theoretical purposive
sampling increases transferability of our study (Guba, 1981) and thus is valuable for
researchers, managers/companies, and our research participants.
(11) Misrepresentation - To protect integrity of our research and to avoid any misleading or
false reporting, we ensure accuracy and transparency of both our research procedure and our
research findings. Further, we avoid bias in our study, as we conducted the research as a pair
and controlled each other throughout the process according to the outlined principles. This also
aligns with the criteria of confirmability, as the research is not influenced by researchers
themselves (Guba, 1981). Even though we let data occur from interactions with our interview
partners according to Charmaz (2000), we are reflective observers and therefore objective
within the research environment. Thus, results are based on our research participants’
experience and not guided or manipulated by us as researchers. Even though bias can emerge
from individual perspectives of interviewees in semi-structured interviews (Saunders et al.,
2012), we ensured confirmability of our findings by comparing similarities and differences of
the interviewees’ answers to get a holistic understanding of enablers and barriers of lean startup
as a tool for digital BMI. Also, as mentioned, we used triangulation to minimize subjectivity
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
31
and worked individually as well as together to analyze and compare our findings to check
reliability of our work.
4. Empirical Findings
___________________________________________________________________________
This chapter outlines main findings of our research by presenting and examining the collected
data. The chapter is structured according to our six categories (4.1 – 4.6) identified in our data
analysis showing enablers and barriers of lean startup as a tool for digital business model
innovation in established companies for each category. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
While analyzing our empirical data we identified six categories, namely (1) lean startup
management, (2) organizational structures, (3) culture, (4) corporate governance, (5)
methodical competence, and (6) external influences, that help us to answer our research
question:
What are enablers and barriers of lean startup as a tool for digital business model
innovation?
Therefore, we are first examining lean startup management in terms of agility, its connection to
digital tools, handling of hypotheses and MVPs, and customer involvement. We are then
outlining enablers and barriers in terms of organizational structures, culture, corporate
governance, and methodical competence. Finally, we are presenting external factors that
indirectly affect the use of lean startup as a tool for digital BMI in established companies. Table
2 gives insights into each category by outlining representative quotes from our interviewees.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
32
Categories Sub-Categories Example Codes Example Quotes
Lean Startup
Management
Agility
Digital Tools
Handling of Hypotheses
Handling of MVP
Customer Involvement
Generating learnings
Resource-efficiency
Open-ended process
Importance of digital tools
Facilitator
Scaling potential
Creating hypotheses
Testing hypotheses
Validating hypotheses
Quality of MVP
Identifying core element
Forms of MVP
Customer centricity
Customer feedback
Customer distance
“It is important to consider that you can fail, but you work fast, and you also learn fast. There is always something
that you take out of the process.”
“For us it also means to work resource-efficient, money and time wise.”
“Your starting point is not a solution it is a problem you want to solve and then you look what could be the right
solution to solve it.”
“Digital tools play a huge role as they make you faster.”
“(…) they facilitate the process.”
“Digital tools offer you scaling potentials.”
“Hypotheses are always somehow created with the customer.”
“Lean startup is not about generating ideas, but to test if an idea works for the user or not.”
“I think it is important that you validate the right hypotheses. That you validate the hypotheses you can validate.”
“Companies are afraid of ‘delivering qualitative crap’, simply because it’s not being perceived as this MVP, it’s
being perceived as a product that someone is releasing.”
“It is important to identify and narrow down to the core element.”
“Something physical can be beneficial at some point. But digital MVPs can be adjusted easily and faster.”
“You really need to engage with the customer and have in mind that it is not about a function or solution, it is
about an underlying need.”
“You get the BM smashed very early and very crudely from a different perspective.”
“In big companies it is often the case that employees do not know who the customers are neither what they want.
They are too far away from the customers.”
Organizational
Structures
Existing organizational structures
Changing procedures
Flat hierarchies
“It is difficult to implement lean startup in established processes as those are always prior to new processes and
ideas.”
“The good thing with lean startup is that you can also transform internal processes once the method is
internalized.”
“Successfully working with lean startup requires flat hierarchies and a dynamic environment.”
Culture Corporate Culture
Mindset
Cultural change
Error culture
Openness
“Doer” mentality
Persistence
Willingness to experiment
“If lean startup is well received, if it is accepted, if that commitment is there, I think it can be very beneficial for
cultural change.”
“(…) a healthy error culture. So being willing to say I learn from what I do, saying that the process is the way.”
“A traditional company needs to be open to new opportunities.”
“As a prerequisite, a traditional company needs a doer mentality, or at least from the people or team that has to
deal with it.”
“That you have to be patient and that you have to be open-minded (…). That also has a lot to do with persistence.”
“Willingness to experiment and to open up towards the customer (…).”
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
33
Personal Culture
Motivation
Courage
Fear
Small degree of arrogance
Employees driving change
Intrinsic motivation
Volunteers
“Sometimes the courage to go that way is missing.”
“Often it is the fear of being replaced and not to be needed anymore.”
“And with that comes a very, very small degree of arrogance.”
“(…) they actually realize, even though it may be a small thing, but they realize ok what I’m doing is having an
impact in some way.”
“And that’s where intrinsic motivation is necessary.”
“So volunteering is also important, that people are not forced to do it, but that they are willing to do it.”
Corporate
Governance
Management
Leadership
Commitment
Lack of foresight
Loose of power
Freedom and independence
Open and transparent communication
Creating save environment
“And there must also be a commitment from the company and the management to be successful in the long term.”
“(…) most companies simply lack the foresight for lean startup.”
“Because all agile methods come with a certain loss of power for the manager level.”
“(…) but there simply has to be an atmosphere where everyone feels free and actually is free and also has the
time.”
“You need to be as open and transparent as possible in the process.”
“So, you somehow need to provide a protected space.”
Methodical
Competence
Knowledge
Training/Education
Teaming
Knowledge transfer
Practical experience
Theoretical knowledge
Multiplicators
External coaches
Education of employees
Mixed teams
Diverse capacities and expertise
Interdisciplinarity
“You need to provide training and knowledge to employees and guide them in the process.”
“Above all, I think it’s important to know how to put it into practice.”
“And you read about it in many places.”
“(…) and you need multiplicators.”
“I think you need coaches; I mean you need people who can teach you how to do that.”
“(…) and then train, classically, first show, teach, and explain.”
“I think you benefit a lot from having a mixed team with some experienced people who know the established
processes, but also people who are completely new and fresh to the problem.”
“With different skills, which means you also need a doer mentality, on the one hand, within the team, but you also
need doing abilities.”
“That really means interdisciplinarity is important.”
External
Influences
Role of competition
Role of governance rules
Changing market conditions
“It is hard for large companies to compete with startups, as they are faster and more agile. (…) They think they
could copy startup ideas fast, but they can’t.”
“(…) but it also required a certain governance framework as to how innovation is systematically anchored in a
company.”
“I think that it’s also a kind of prerequisite for anything to happen on the outside that puts the company in turmoil
or puts pressure on it to change.”
Table 2: Overview of categories and sub-categories with example codes and quotes.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
34
4.1 Lean Startup Management
The fast implementation of and experimentation with ideas are highlighted by the respondents
as major advantages of using lean startup for digital BMI. Looking at the core of lean startup,
we identified agility, digital tools, handling of hypotheses and MVPs, as well as customer
involvement as essential factors for successful usage of lean startup for digital BMI in
established companies.
4.1.1 Agility
Agility refers to the intuitive, iterative, open-ended, explorative, and resource-efficient nature
of lean startup. Furthermore, generation of learnings, risk management, discarding ideas, and
the combination with other methods are named by the respondents regarding agility of lean
startup.
Most respondents notice how companies and employees are often surprised by “what is
possible in a very short time” (Respondent 8) when using lean startup for digital BMI, as they
are not used to auch agile way of working. Respondent 9 even calls it “structured chaos”
enabling established companies to think out of the box and be innovative. According to the
respondents, lean startup is often used in cases where there is no or little time and money
(Respondents 1;2;5;6;8;10). They describe it as a very resource-efficient method to minimize
risk when developing new BMs. Further, the respondents highlight the importance of learning
processes from lean startup as “experiments can never turn out negative as they always gather
results” (Respondent 2). It is the experimental character that is core of lean startup.
Accordingly, Respondent 7 explains that lean startup is about “starting with a problem rather
than a solution, and then looking which solution fits the problem best”. However, Respondent
8 argues that such open-ended process can raise uncertainty for established companies as they
do not know where the process leads them. In addition to that, expectations can also be a
problem as often “people perceive it as not really finished” (Respondent 6). Further, the
respondents explain that build-measure-learn iterations can be challenging and that it is difficult
to define an appropriate time to stop iterations (Respondent 5). Another important aspect of
agility in the lean startup process is discarding ideas, which can be a huge challenge
(Respondents 5;6;10). The respondents argue that individuals can be too convinced by own
ideas and not putting customers’ pain in focus anymore. Thus, it can hinder usage of lean startup
for digital BMI. Moreover, lean startup is not a stand-alone method as the respondents point
out that it is often combined with other methods, such as Design Thinking. Respondent 1
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
35
mentions “lean startup is not about generating ideas but to test if an idea works for the users.”
Hence, Design Thinking seems to be a potential pre-step before starting with lean startup.
4.1.2 Digital Tools
Our empirical findings highlight a general importance of digital tools within the lean startup
process and further, the respondents argue that these are a crucial facilitator and offer scaling
potential.
The respondents see digital tools as facilitators and enablers of lean startup, as they are not only
making BMI but also the lean startup process itself faster and easier. Even though Respondent
1 states that lean startup can be used without digital tools, advantages prevail. Especially, in
terms of prototyping, building MVPs, and collecting customer feedback they play an important
role. As Respondent 2 puts it, being fast is most important in lean startup and digital tools
contribute to this matter. This also goes along with saving time. Hence, digital tools facilitate a
resource-efficient way of working (Respondent 6). Especially, for established companies they
offer new, diverse possibilities to interact on large scale, internally as well as externally
(Respondent 10). Respondent 7 adds “digital tools are important, as they facilitate user
feedback and input”. Hence, they are facilitating testing and validating of hypotheses and
enable experimentation (Respondent 10). Therefore, digital tools enable lean startup for digital
BMI, as they facilitate the lean startup process, by making it faster, more efficient, and easier
to work internally as well as collaborate with customers.
4.1.3 Handling of Hypotheses
Hypotheses are an important element of lean startup. Our research revealed that right handling
of hypotheses in terms of creating, testing, and validating hypotheses is essential to successfully
work with lean startup as a tool for digital BMI.
Handling hypotheses to make formulations for each BM component is a difficult task for
established companies (Respondents 1;4;5;7). On one hand, the respondents argue that
formulation of hypotheses per se is hard and time-consuming and needs guidance, either from
consultants/coaches or colleagues and management. On the other hand, it is hard to fill in BM
components with pure assumptions (Respondents 1&4). The respondents commonly agree that
it is difficult to create right hypotheses but that this is crucial for testing. Often it helps when
hypotheses are already created together with customers (Respondent 7). A major challenge is
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
36
to listen to customer feedback and to not manipulate data to get preferred outcomes (Respondent
5). According to Respondent 4, it all “begins with formulation of a good hypothesis. And
generating good hypotheses requires good observation skills and a certain accuracy for
details.” Once hypotheses are created, validation through MVPs helps getting quick feedback
from customers to edge hypotheses and to set the right focus (Respondent 7). Thus, handling
hypotheses can be an enabler or barrier of lean startup for digital BMI, and it is important to
create good hypotheses that can be tested and validated to facilitate the lean startup process and
to make right assumptions about BMs.
4.1.4 Handling of Minimum Viable Product
Another main element of the lean startup process is the MVP. Similar to hypotheses, also
handling MVPs right is crucial to successfully work with lean startup for digital BMI. In this
context, role of MVPs, building MVPs, as well as forms and quality of MVPs have been
identified as enabling and hindering factors of lean startup. Furthermore, the respondents
highlight the importance of identifying an MVP’s core element(s).
As mentioned before, the respondents agree that lean startup is used as a tool for digital BMI
with comparatively low initial costs when building an MVP and, thus, requires to work with
only little resources. Therefore, it is important to identify the core element of a MVP and reduce
it to the actual minimum (Respondent 6). According to Respondent 1, it is a useful tool with
which companies can quickly indicate if a BM is feasible or not. The respondents summarize it
as a fast way of testing and validating hypotheses with low expenses to get fast feedback. Thus,
it offers a short time to market (Respondent 10). Still, handling of MVPs is difficult for
established companies as they associate building an MVP with building a product of minor
quality (Respondent 1). Respondent 10 explains that with a “missing courage of delivering
‘unfinished’ products” and Respondent 6 therefore suggests publishing MVPs under a different
name than the corporate brand. According to Respondent 8, employees can be overwhelmed in
the beginning as they do not know where to start and what to build. Therefore, the respondents
argue that it is easier to build an MVP starting with a “click and feel dummy” (Respondent 6)
to make it look real for customers (Respondent 10). In this context, the respondents also
highlight the importance of digital tools as they make the development process and collection
of customer feedback faster and MVPs easily adjustable. Hence, the respondents argue that
testing without digital tools is almost impossible nowadays. The right handling of MVPs
becomes crucial for the lean startup process as without a suitable MVP, hypotheses about a BM
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
37
cannot be validated correctly and, thus, hinder usage of lean startup for digital BMI. In turn, a
good MVP facilitates validation of hypotheses and offers established companies a short time to
market for their digital BMs.
4.1.5 Customer Involvement
As mentioned before, lean startup is a customer-centric approach and thus, involvement of
customers becomes important for successfully working with lean startup in established
companies. Therefore, we identify customer centricity, distance, and feedback as enablers and
barriers of lean startup for digital BMI.
Customer-centricity is a major part of lean startup to identify customer pain, to create
hypotheses, and to test hypotheses with MVPs. The respondents highlight the importance of
early customer engagement and multiple involvements throughout the process. To get high-
quality feedback, it is important to identify suitable group(s) of customers (Respondent 8) and
to have a good MVP that helps to validate hypotheses (Respondent 4). Customer involvement
then eases to evaluate BMs from a different perspective, as it gives “completely new impulses,
new ideas, or draws your attention to problems that you wouldn’t have seen yourself”
(Respondent 8). By engaging with customers, companies can discover underlying needs instead
of delivering features and functions (Respondent 4). Primary goal should be to satisfy those
needs (Respondent 5). In established companies, customer distance can also be a challenge. As
pointed out by the respondents, the bigger a company is the farther away are employees from
customers, meaning they do not know who the customers are neither what they want.
Respondent 4 even adds that “in some companies it is forbidden for employees […] to talk to
the customer”. Furthermore, some companies are afraid of customer contact and potentially
negative feedback emerging from it (Respondent 8). Nevertheless, lean startup helps to
understand customers better, to indicate their needs (Respondent 2) and supports companies to
build a future customer base for novel digital BMs (Respondent 1). Therefore, it is important
to listen to customers, to identify and include suitable groups of customers, and to close the gap
between companies/employees and their customers. Thus, customer involvement can be a huge
enabler when using lean startup for digital BMI.
In terms of lean startup management, resource efficiency enables usage of lean startup, as
companies tend to use the tool based on this characteristic. However, the open-ended process
can impede the lean startup process, as individuals are unfamiliar with this novel way of
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
38
working and might be overwhelmed. Therefore, it forms a barrier. Same accounts for handling
of MVPs and hypotheses, as established companies are not used to work with these techniques
and might refuse to release a product of minor quality. Opposingly, customer centricity forms
an enabler for lean startup and digital BMI, as established companies can overcome customer
distance with it. In all this, digital tools play a facilitating role, enabling usage of lean startup
for digital BMI in established companies.
4.2 Organizational Structures
Organizational structures form a crucial element when using lean startup for digital BMI. In
this context, existing organizational structures, changing these structures and procedures, flat
hierarchies, and separation of lean startup projects emerged as enablers and barriers for lean
startup as a tool for digital BMI in established companies.
The respondents commonly agree that it is impossible to implement lean startup without
changing organizational structures. Existing organizational structures are pointed out to be both
enabling and hindering in this context (Respondent 10). On one hand, lean startup can benefit
from resources of a company (Respondent 2) and existing structures such as “distribution
channels, customer networks, technologies, etc.” (Respondent 8). On the other hand,
established processes, stiff structures, high bureaucracy, and long ways of communication are
named by the respondents to inhibit the usage of lean startup for digital BMI. Even though the
respondents say that existing structures could facilitate the usage of lean startup, some perceive
it generally more as a barrier in established companies. Established companies often developed
specific business processes over the years, and thus get stuck in their routines. When
implementing lean startup to become faster and more agile, Respondent 2 mentions that
companies struggle to change organizational structures accordingly. As per Respondent 4,
“every company that is fundamentally hierarchical organized should be reorganized and
restructured from scratch.” Without undertaking changes in organizational structures, “old and
new way of working will automatically clash” (Respondent 2). However, established companies
have difficulties breaking up existing structures and hierarchies. The bigger a company, the
more complex its structures and the harder it is to change, and in turn the smaller a company
the faster lean startup can be adopted (Respondent 6). Respondent 8 further highlights, that
existing structures and procedures will most likely be prioritized over new, agile projects.
Therefore, the role of existing structures becomes more important the closer it is to a company’s
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
39
core business (Respondent 8) and builds a barrier for using lean startup as a tool for digital BMI
in established companies.
According to Respondent 7, established companies “are now encountering more and more
difficulties and are simply realizing that they have to develop new things in a much shorter time
and be flexible and creative in their way of working and thinking.” Thus, using lean startup for
digital BMI does also require changes in procedures, but it could take a few years for established
companies (Respondent 6). Moreover, it requires organizational change on a large scale to have
an impact on companies, as otherwise it is most likely that they return to old routines
(Respondent 9). However, as a minimum, existing organizational structures, especially very
hierarchical ones, need to be removed for team(s) directly working with lean startup to be
flexible (Respondent 7). This also implies a separation of lean startup projects from companies’
core businesses. When asking the respondents if and how lean startup projects/teams need to
be separated from the core business, we received controversial answers. On one hand, a
separation can reduce potential conflicts (Respondent 1) and on the other hand, it can convey a
certain statement towards the rest of the organization and thus, can be perceived negatively
(Respondent 4). Therefore, the respondents argue that it is important to openly communicate
the aim, how it will impact the entire organization and that it has no danger to existing business
(Respondent 1&3). When separated from core businesses, lean startup empowers to work more
flexibly and creatively and to think outside the box (Respondent 5), but there is also risk of
losing connection to the core business (Respondent 3). According to Respondent 7, separation
of lean startup projects can be especially helpful in the beginning of innovation processes as
these teams dependent less on the core business and therefore, are more likely to take risks and
experiment. Even though a physical separation of lean startup projects can be helpful to be more
disruptive outside existing structures (Respondent 9), it is important to find a way to establish
lean startup in daily business to “do the everyday work while experimenting with new and
radical things” (Respondent 10). Therefore, it is key to create independence for new, lean
projects while simultaneously being connected to core business (Respondent 10). “That is the
keyword of ambidexterity”, Respondent 8 states, “to adopt a two-pronged strategy to let the
new and existing one co-exist, to communicate and let them facilitate each other.” Therefore,
it requires open and transparent communication. Furthermore, flat hierarchies are a main
requirement for using lean startup in digital BMI (Respondents 6&9), along with restructuring
of people and responsibilities (Respondent 6), and interdisciplinarity of teams (Respondent 7).
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
40
In terms of organizational structures, hierarchical levels, long ways of communication as well
as high bureaucracy slow down the lean startup process. In addition, when existing structures
and procedures are prioritized over new agile projects, they form barriers for the successful
usage of lean startup for digital BMI in established companies. In contrast, existing resources
of established companies can be an enabler for lean startup. By adapting a two-sided strategy
and implementing flat hierarchies, established companies can foster an agile environment for
lean startup while maintaining existing businesses.
4.3 Culture
We also discover culture playing a huge role when using lean startup in established companies.
More specifically, corporate culture, corporate and personal mindset, personal culture of
individuals within the company, as well as their motivation are influential factors hampering or
facilitating usage of lean startup for digital BMI.
4.3.1 Corporate Culture
Several respondents agree that corporate culture has a high influence on using lean startup in
established companies (Respondent 1;2;3;4;8;9) in terms of being open to make mistakes, to
culturally change, and to drive agility.
Respondent 1 explains that existing culture is crucial to successfully use lean startup for digital
BMI. One often-named factor for successful integration of lean startup is to have an open error
culture within established companies (Respondent 1;2;4;7;8;10). Some respondents (1;2;4)
explain that established companies try to avoid failure and risk and are taught to an error-free
execution of their work. Individuals within organizations are therefore too afraid to make
mistakes and to experiment: “I don’t want to do a mistake, cause I’m afraid of being punished
for it” (Respondent 1). Thus, several respondents see an urgent need for an open error culture
in established firms, as without “there will be no culture of trying, experimenting, and
learning” (Respondent 2). Hence, it is important to create awareness that systematic learning
processes are more valuable for digital BMI than a zero-error attitude (Respondent 4). Also, it
is crucial to build psychological safety, where it is deliberately chosen and supported to make
mistakes, to fail fast, and to learn quickly (Respondent 8). However, in established companies
this is a difficult undertaking, as existing values and ways of working are already established
and internalized for a long time (Respondent 4). Moreover, it is hard for established companies
to differentiate in which business area to apply a zero-error culture and where they allow to test
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
41
and experiment with novel approaches, as well as to manage this separation (Respondent 10).
Also, openness towards agile methods of established companies is mentioned by some
respondents (1&8). Respondent 1 explains that this is crucial because, without openness to
innovate, to give room for experimentation and try novel solutions, established companies
cannot work with lean startup for digital BMI in first place. To use lean startup successfully in
established companies, several respondents (1;4;5;6;7;8;9) argue that it needs a cultural change.
On one hand, some respondents argue that working with lean startup automatically brings
cultural change in established companies (Respondents 4;5;6;8). On the other hand, there can
be a strong resistance towards cultural change, as many established companies are too rigid and
do not want to change their ways of working (Respondents 7&8). Respondent 9 even states that
working with lean startup has only little effect on cultural change, because established corporate
culture is just too strong. Hence, first culture and mindset of the people need to change to a
more agile culture, to successfully work with lean startup for digital BMI (Respondent 9).
4.3.2 Mindset
Also, corporate and personal mindset about being willing to change traditional mindset, to
experiment, and to learn new things, being persistent, as well as a “doer” mentality, are essential
when working with lean startup for digital BMI.
Most respondents (1;2;3;4;5;7;9) argue that individuals in established companies are oftentimes
trapped in traditional mindsets, which have been built up for a long time. Therefore, they are
less willing to change existing ways of business activities (Respondent 7) and are caught in
their traditional thinking and role, as individuals need to deliver results in the corporate
environment to secure their jobs (Respondent 4). Respondent 9 adds that it is always a challenge
for people working in established companies to get away from efficiency mindset and to stop
thinking about generating money. Thus, several respondents request a change of mindset in
established companies to work with lean startup and to survive in the novel, fast-paced, digital
environment (Respondent 3;4;6;7;8). Hence, established companies need an agile mentality, as
several respondents (1;2;7;8;10) express it as a “doer mentality”. In addition, individuals need
to overcome their skepticism for lean startup. Some respondents experience that unfamiliar
tools, such as lean startup, are hard to be accepted by individuals within established companies,
as they feel “uncomfortable with the unknown” (Respondent 2). Thus, willingness to learn,
experiment and change established ways of working is essential for successful use of lean
startup for digital BMI (Respondent 1;7;8;9).
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
42
4.3.3 Personal Culture
Further personal culture in terms of courage and being able to overcome fear and arrogance are
important when using lean startup in established companies.
Respondent 1 argues that individuals need to be brave, try out new things without planning too
long and just start acting. Yet, Respondents 4 and 7 doubt that individuals in established
companies can overcome their fear, as “they don't have guts to go down that path” (Respondent
4). Respondent 7 sees one of the main problems in people who have strong ambitions for a
career, as they are not interested to change the known and want to stay in their established
position. By using lean startup and innovating existing BMs to digital BMs, they fear to lose
their positioning within the company (Respondent 7). Respondent 3 adds that oftentimes the
own ego stands in the way, disturbing digital BMI processes. Hence, Respondent 1 argues that
for successful usage of lean startup for digital BMI, people need to overcome their arrogance
and start to accept that they do not have ultimate knowledge about customer needs. In turn, a
small degree of arrogance facilitates the lean startup process.
4.3.4 Motivation
Another crucial factor of culture is motivation of individuals within established companies to
work with lean startup. Thus, volunteers and intrinsic motivation are playing a big part for
successfully using lean startup for digital BMI, as well as employees need to be willing and
able to drive change.
In relation to this, several respondents argue that motivation to work with lean startup for digital
BMI needs to come intrinsically (Respondent 1;8;9) and should not be enforced by the
management (Respondent 2). Thus, it requires volunteers that are willing to work and
experiment with lean startup and that are enthusiastic about such tools (Respondents 2;6;9)
which will in turn lead to more creativity in the iterative process (Respondent 1). To foster
motivation, employees need to experience that they can be effective themselves and induce
something within the company and that “they are not just a small part of a big gear”
(Respondent 2).
In terms of culture, traditional mindset of individuals and corporate hinders cultural change
towards more agility and thus, needs to be overcome. Established positioning and
accompanying high degree of arrogance also form a barrier when using lean startup for digital
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
43
BMI. In addition, missing persistence hinders long-term success of lean startup. Opposingly,
high willingness to change, experiment, and learn as well as an error culture encourages
business experimentation which is beneficial for lean startup as a tool for digital BMI. Also, a
doer-mentality and intrinsic motivation of employees is building an enabling factor for using
lean startup.
4.4 Corporate Governance
Another influential factor emerging from our empirical findings, either enabling or inhibiting
the usage of lean startup for digital BMI, is corporate governance. In this context, we distinguish
between management and its role in the lean startup process, as well as their leadership style.
4.4.1 Management
Most respondents (2;4;6;7;9;10) agree that the role of the management is highly important for
successfully working with lean startup in established companies to operate with digital BMI.
Specifically, attitude and commitment towards lean startup and digital BMI, their lack of vision,
foresight, and education as well as fear to lose power.
According to the respondents, management can influence lean startup processes either
positively or negatively. Therefore, respondents argue that it is important to have management’s
commitment and support during the process, as managers are decision-makers who are
responsible for everything, including usage of lean startup (Respondent 6). So, to have
management on board is crucial “for legitimacy” to work with lean startup as it is “often
diametrically opposed to other ways of working in organizations and thus somehow also stands
out” (Respondent 10). In this context, it is argued that it requires the management to drive
change in companies as “a bottom-up approach […] leads to limits” at some point “if the upper
level is not on board” (Respondent 2). Respondent 7 argues that managers also have to set an
example to create the right atmosphere for all individuals to adopt to the new, agile ways of
working. Respondent 4 even sees the management as “bottleneck”, impeding the successful
usage of lean startup for digital BMI. Opposingly, the role of management is perceived by other
respondents as being less important when using lean startup for digital BMI, as they focus more
on process’ outcome and how it moves the business forward instead of the method itself
(Respondents 2;6;9). Further, the importance of the general attitude by management towards
lean startup for digital BMI occurred from our findings. Some respondents (1;5;8) state that the
management has a positive attitude towards using lean startup, as they know that existing
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
44
structures and ways of working are no longer suitable and too slow to keep up in innovation
processes. Thus, they facilitate and support working with lean startup. Others experienced
managers having mixed feelings and concerns about working with lean startup (Respondent 2).
In some cases, the attitude towards lean startup can even differ among management and
employees, which makes it then challenging to drive companywide change. Although some
board members of established companies see lean startup and digital BMI as a strategic tool to
make their business viable in the future, some others are lacking necessary vision and foresight
(Respondent 4). Often skeptical managers lack knowledge about lean startup, are overwhelmed
by unfamiliar activities, or have a general aversion towards new methods. Therefore, it is
important to make them familiar with the method, as managers will be more likely to accept it
when they see that it actually works (Respondent 2). Another critical aspect in established
companies is that managers generally like to plan things ahead to avoid uncertainty and decrease
risk, as they are responsible for resource planning, and need to approve procedures (Respondent
1). According to Respondent 1, the management is most “afraid of losing control and that it is
not working.” However, there will always be a loss of control for managers to a certain extent
when using lean startup, as “decision-making authority is transferred to people who use it”
(Respondent 5). Therefore, managers need to change their way of thinking by “not asking how
[they] can make [their] employees do that, but rather how [they] can facilitate them in what
they are doing” (Respondent 2). In general, without commitment and dedication of the
management, lean startup projects are more limited and most likely to fail (Respondents
1;2;4;5;7;8;10).
4.4.2 Leadership
The second part of corporate governance refers to leadership style of the management in
established companies that fosters or impedes usage of lean startup for digital BMI. In this area
we discover that creating a safe environment, freedom and independence, open and transparent
communication, setting the right boundary conditions, giving guidance, motivation of
employees, equality, and trust are influencing factors.
Freedom and independence are two of the most important factors enabling to innovate digital
BMs with lean startup (Respondents 1;2;3;4;5;7;10). Freedom is important not only in creating
a setting where employees are given more power, and autonomy, but also to think freely aside
from their operational tasks and to get the necessary time besides their core activities
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
45
(Respondent 2;5;7;9). All respondents agree that one of the main strengths of lean startup as a
tool for digital BMI is that innovation processes can be realized in a fast manner with little
resources, and it helps to experiment and get feedback at an early stage. Therefore, people that
work with the method need to have power to decide quickly, otherwise it slows down innovation
processes. Further, it requires managers to trust employees, which is often missing in
established companies (Respondent 2). Thus, open and transparent communication facilitates
usage of lean startup in established companies and can also be beneficial to build trust
(Respondent 1). Nevertheless, employees still need guidance and boundary conditions,
according to the respondents. Respondent 9 believes that individuals cannot be left completely
alone in build-measure-learn processes and always need someone who is familiar with lean
startup and who supports the innovation intend. In relation to that, a frame needs to be set, in
terms of boundary conditions, such as goals, timings, and number of people working on the
project (Respondents 2;5;7;9). Lean startup gives leaders in established companies the chance
to hand over responsibilities to employees, which then leads to a higher level of motivation to
be able to shape and change organizations (Respondent 10). In this context, it is also important
that leaders understand their role as “coach, facilitator, and supporter” (Respondent 1) and
further need to communicate that they are an equal part of the team (Respondent 7). This is
important because the management has direct impact on employees. Thus, leaders support
employees in becoming more independent and to have courage to think and act freely to
experiment with lean startup. If employees feel trusted by managers, they will be motivated,
more confident, and get the possibility to change something within established companies.
All in all, managers need to overcome their high focus on only financial outputs, which form a
barrier for lean startup. Also, a lacking vision and foresight for the future are hindering usage
of lean startup for digital BMI as well as fear of losing control and power. Our findings reveal
that full commitment of the management is necessary to successfully work with lean startup for
digital BMI. Thus, managers need to provide a safe environment, guidance, as well as freedom
and independence for all individuals within the organization, to experiment, to take their own
decisions, and to motivate them, which will then fasten up innovation processes of digital BMs
with lean startup.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
46
4.5 Methodical Competence
We further identify methodical competence as an influential factor, referring to knowledge,
training and education, as well as teaming, which can both be enabling or hindering usage of
lean startup for digital BMI.
4.5.1 Knowledge
Knowledge in terms of theoretical and practical experience about lean startup, as well as
knowledge transfer, is important to overcome uncertainty and thus are crucial aspects for
successfully working with lean startup for digital BMI.
Respondent 1 argues that “it is important that individuals have knowledge and expertise not
only from books but also from practical experience with lean startup”. Still, in established
companies, there is a lack of knowledge about lean startup as a tool for digital BMI. One reason
is that the method is not practiced in established companies because there is still a big
uncertainty about handling lean startup and its processes right (Respondent 7). This is a
problem, as without experience, deep knowledge and understanding of lean startup, the intent
for digital BMI with lean startup is most likely to fail (Respondent 1). Lack of knowledge
oftentimes ends up in frustration, as Respondent 8 states. To prevent this and to make lean
startup successful, it is essential to provide training and knowledge to employees and
management (Respondent 5). Primarily, it is essential to transfer knowledge about lean startup
to companies. There is a need for gaining deep theoretical knowledge (Respondent 1;5;8) as
well as practical experience and continuous contact with lean startup, as otherwise, lean startup
will not be successful in the long run (Respondents 1;4;7;8;10).
4.5.2 Training and Education
An important aspect linked to gaining knowledge is training and educating employees and
management, which is crucial for the successful use of lean startup. Further, we also refer to
external coaches and multiplicators in this section.
To prevent frustration caused by a lack of knowledge and to use lean startup successfully, it is
essential to provide training and education to employees and management (Respondent 5). This
can be done in workshops and by talking with different departments to explore lean startup and
to gain first understanding of the method (Respondents 5&8). However, transfer of knowledge
serves as a starting point but does not necessarily help to establish usage of lean startup
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
47
(Respondent 4). Thus, it requires to deepen knowledge by educating with different approaches,
such as showing and explaining the method as well as to experience lean startup either in a role
play, in an experiment (Respondent 2), or via different workshops and events, like a method
marathon (Respondent 8). Respondent 1 also adds that established firms should determine
multiplicators of lean startup within firms. These multiplicators serve as lean startup experts
and have the task to spread knowledge across the company and to continuously educate all
employees. Also, persisting education of all individuals within a company has potential to
dismount level of frustration (Respondent 8), as well as uncertainty in handling the method
(Respondent 7). Another common approach mentioned by many respondents is to make use of
external coaches and experts, as they help established companies to experience lean startup
(Respondent 7) and to teach them how to work with the method (Respondent 1&2).
4.5.3 Teaming
Another important aspect mentioned by our respondents is teaming and collaboration of
individuals when using lean startup for digital BMI. The respondents elaborate on the
importance of having small, mixed teams with diverse capabilities and expertise as well as
interdisciplinarity for successfully using lean startup for digital BMI.
Respondent 7 explains that the advantage of mixed teams is that different strengths, different
foci, and inputs are combined. This facilitates the lean startup process for digital BMI as
different viewpoints and dimensions, for instance from marketing, production and sales
perspective are implied. Therefore, to design new BMs some respondents argue that it is
beneficial to have a mixed team of specialists, some that are familiar with established processes,
some that are new and fresh to the topic, as well as specialists of lean startup (Respondent 5&8).
Respondent 8 also recommends mixing teams among generations. Different standpoints of
individuals that are used to traditional values and ways of working, in combination with
generations of freshmen that have not yet internalized traditional company values facilitate
digital BMI with lean startup. Respondent 9 highlights that it is also important to consider
interdisciplinarity on different hierarchical levels, meaning to include managers, trainees,
administrative staff, mechanics, and their foremen. However, teams should not be too big
(Respondent 10). Respondent 10 argues that ideally, a team consists of “maximum five to seven
people”. Small, interdisciplinary teams also help to quickly undergo innovation processes with
lean startup, because otherwise there is a danger to get stuck in the process (Respondent 7).
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
48
Establishing methodical competence throughout the entire organization is necessary as these
build a solid foundation for successful usage of lean startup for digital BMI in established
companies. Hence, established companies need to provide opportunities for their employees to
familiarize themselves with lean startup, both on a theoretical and practical level. Further, lack
of knowledge needs to be overcome by employees and management. From our empirical data,
it becomes apparent that involvement of external coaches and experts of lean startup is
beneficial to overcome lack of knowledge. In this way, the whole organization builds
methodical competence in handling lean startup, which reduces uncertainties, and also fosters
innovation of digital BMs.
4.6 External Influences
In addition to these internal factors, our interviewees elaborate on several external factors that
form opportunities and threats for established companies when using lean startup for digital
BMI. Main factors mentioned by the respondents are changing market conditions, changing
customer behavior, role of competition as well as governance rules.
As for general change of market conditions, Respondent 9 believes that a change in markets
and industries builds a prerequisite to use lean startup for digital BMI. Thus, changing market
conditions cause established companies to change their ways of doing business and triggers a
feeling of restlessness and pressure to react to changing environments quickly. Additionally,
digitalization is named as an important component of why established companies turn to agile
tools, such as lean startup, to innovate BMs, as digital technologies offer new possibilities for
digital BMs. Along with changing market conditions, several respondents (3;7;9) see changing
customer behavior as a vast opportunity for using lean startup in established companies. Thus,
customers have become very picky, because markets offer many diverse options for them to
choose from (Respondent 7). Hence, the challenge for established companies is to predict what
customers need and want (Respondent 2). Therefore, lean startup, with its customer-centric
approach, is a big opportunity to overcome this issue, as respondent 2 adds. Further, role of
competition externally influences a company, as it is hard for established companies to compete
with startups in the digital environment (Respondents 5&7). Often startups operate in a faster,
more agile manner given their organizational structures and have much more power, in terms
of motivation and passion (Respondent 5). Therefore, established companies are using lean
startup for digital BMI to secure a “fighter positioning” (Respondent 7), as with help of such
agile tools they can rapidly change and adapt their BMs by adopting digital technologies, to
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
49
compete with digital startups. Moreover, legal governance rules are hindering established
companies from using lean startup for digital BMI. Several respondents (4;6;7) point out that
for established firms to innovate with agile tools, such as lean startup, there is a need for
“breaking up legal guidelines” (Respondent 6), as with existing governance rules established
firms face many difficulties that inhibit digital BMI processes. As many new digital
technologies enter the market, uncertainties and unresolved responsibilities remain when it
comes to handling private data for instance (Respondent 7). Respondent 4 demands a “certain
governance framework as to how innovation is systematically anchored in a company”, as there
is still no established framework, which in result overwhelms established companies in
innovation processes.
The named external influences are indirectly affecting the use of lean startup for digital BMI.
However, established companies need to be aware of such influential factors to overcome
obstacles and to successfully use lean startup for digital BMI and thus, react fast to changing
market conditions and changing customer behavior.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
50
5. Analysis
___________________________________________________________________________
In this part we show linkages between outlined categories and answer our research question
by introducing our framework of enabler and barriers of lean startup for digital business model
innovation. Further, we discuss our framework in theoretical context. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
5.1 Framework of Enablers and Barriers for Lean Startup
Figure 4: Enablers and barriers for using lean startup as a tool for digital BMI.
We argue that digital BMI is an important task for established companies to reinvent their
business, to master digital shift from a purely analog to a digital BM and to stay competitive in
the novel digital environment. We introduce lean startup as an effective method to digitally
transform existing BMs or to innovate new digital BMs in established companies. Emerging
from our empirical findings, we emphasize that successful use of lean startup for digital BMI
is based on effective (1) lean startup management, appropriate (2) organizational structures,
fitting (3) culture, and dedicated (4) corporate governance, which all require solid (5)
methodical competence on all levels of the organization. Furthermore, (6) external influences
such as market conditions, role of competition, or governance rules indirectly affect usage of
lean startup as a tool for digital BMI.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
51
We introduce our framework (figure 4) displaying how different fields within organizations
contain enabling or hindering factors for using lean startup for digital BMI. It also highlights
interrelations between different influential areas. Methodical competence forms the foundation
for successful usage of lean startup for digital BMI. It is prerequisite for management (e.g.
corporate governance) and all other individuals within the organization (e.g. culture) to
overcome uncertainties and lack of knowledge regarding usage of lean startup. Furthermore, to
create awareness and knowledge of how existing organizational processes, structures,
procedures, units, etc. (organizational structures) organizations can hire external coaches or
determine internal experts or multiplicators of lean startup (methodical competence). If
methodical competence is adopted throughout all areas of the organization, a foundation is built
for the frameworks’ next level – corporate governance, culture, and organizational structure.
Same as methodical competence, these areas each withhold enablers and barriers for usage of
lean startup as a tool for digital BMI in established companies, as stated in the empirical
findings. It is important to overcome the hindering aspects in each area and parallelly focus on
adapting enabling factors. However, the areas are also interrelated, meaning that they influence
each other. Therefore, it is crucial to understand that strategic changes taken in one area can
have a direct influence on the other two areas. For instance, to change hierarchical structures
(organizational structure), it is crucial that management (corporate governance) as well as
employees (culture) are open to proposed changes and can function and work within flat
hierarchical structures. Furthermore, an open error culture (culture) is impossible to implement
if management (corporate governance) does not provide a safe space to experiment and trust
employees and if organizational structures do not grant room for such activities in general.
Nevertheless, if organizational structures, culture, and corporate governance are overcoming
the identified barriers and implement respective enablers, they have a highly positive influence
on the usage of lean startup as a tool for digital BMI in established companies. Meaning they
make way for the frameworks’ next level – lean startup management. Thus, if established
companies have solid methodical competence, appropriate culture, organizational structure,
and dedicated corporate governance they facilitate lean startup management, such as handling
of MVPs, hypotheses, etc. This then results in successful usage of lean startup, which in the end
has a positive influence on digital BMI in established firms.
To sum up, our research examines that successful digital BMI in established companies with
lean startup depends on various influencing factors in six different areas. Moreover, it is
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
52
important to consider interrelations between different areas of the framework, as strategic
actions might affect different fields of the framework. However, if all factors and areas of the
framework are considered, established companies are capable to successfully use lean startup
as a tool for digital BMI.
5.2 Digital Business Model Innovation with Lean Startup in Established Companies
5.2.1 External Influences
External influences, such as changing market conditions, changing customer behavior,
governance rules as well as role of competition, all originating from the development of digital
technologies, force especially established companies to rethink existing BMs as well as how
they engage with customers. Consequently, general change in markets and industries, and
digitalization as such, trigger a need to quickly adapt to changing environment by using agile
tools, such as lean startup. Following that digital shift to keep up with competition and to fulfill
novel customer and market needs can be a challenging task, especially for established
companies, as they must compete against digital native companies who are familiar in handling
digital technologies (Subramanian et al., 2011). Thus, development and introduction of digital
technologies results in an increasingly competitive landscape for established companies and is
threatening their established BMs (Ghezzi, 2020; Ghezzi & Cavallo, 2020). It also implicates
that a BM itself becomes an indicator for competitive advantage (Berends et al., 2016). This
leads established companies to change existing ways of value creation and capturing and
innovate their BM (Chesbrough, 2010) to compete with other disruptive players (Rejeb et al.,
2008). Thus, we argue that changing market conditions, triggered by novel digital technologies,
as well as role of competition, are enabling the usage of lean startup as an effective tool for
digital BMI in established companies. Nevertheless, these changing market conditions also
bring up challenges for established companies in terms of legal governance frameworks. These
outline that there is a need to break up existing, legal governance guidelines, as they impede
innovation processes with agile tools, such as lean startup. This aligns with Nirwan and
Dhewanto (2015), who found that existing regulatory and administrative regulations hinder
BMI processes with lean startup. However, legal governance frameworks on how to manage
innovation in established companies are difficult to directly influence for established
companies. Meaning, even if companies utilize all identified external influences of our
framework, they will not overcome the barrier of legal corporate governance regulation on their
own. Thus, legal governance can present an insurmountable barrier for using lean startup as
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
53
tool for digital BMI in established companies. Therefore, it can be a limitation to our
framework. Nevertheless, we argue that with digitalization as such corporate governance
guidelines are forced to be adapted in novel digital market environment and innovations. Hence,
the pressure, created by developments in the market, will break up existing legal governance
frameworks automatically.
5.2.2 Methodical competence
Using lean startup for digital BMI implies a shift in the way established companies work
(organizational structures), think (culture), and act (corporate governance), to make them
capable of responding to changing market conditions faster and more agile (lean startup
management). From our empirical data, we understand implementation of solid methodical
competence throughout the entire organization as prerequisite. It becomes evident, that training
and educating all individuals (including management) within established companies is
essential, to build strong methodical competence of lean startup. Deep knowledge and
understanding how to use lean startup prevent established companies from frustration and
uncertainty, of which both are known to hinder innovation processes (Bocken & Snihur, 2020).
Thus, it also accounts for successfully using lean startup for digital BMI. As stated by our
empirical data, without expertise and knowledge of lean startup, the intention of digital BMI
tends to fail. Therefore, it is inevitable for established firms using lean startup for digital BMI
to change existing structures (organizational structures) in terms of education of novel, agile
methods such as lean startup. This also highlights how methodical competence is directly
influencing the framework’s next level – culture, corporate governance, and organizational
structures.
Based on the respondents’ opinions, not only theoretical knowledge, but most importantly
learnings generated by experimenting with and experiencing the method play a big role in
success of digital BMI with lean startup. This extends existing literature by Chesbrough (2010)
who argues that established companies learn through experimentation, and Berends et al. (2016)
stating that this builds an effective learning process to be innovative and to create novel BMs.
It further aligns with Bocken and Snihur (2020) who argue business experimentation not only
enables learning and innovation but also reduces uncertainty and helps to overcome
organizational inertia (organizational structures). To transfer this to lean startup as tool for
digital BMI, enabling knowledge flow about the method as well as creating room for individuals
to experiment with lean startup will help to reduce uncertainty and positively influence
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
54
innovation processes. In the long run, this means that if methodical competence of all
individuals within established companies is strengthened, a solid foundation is formed for the
other areas (organizational structures, culture, and corporate governance) and thus enable
digital BMI with lean startup.
5.2.3 Organizational Structures, Culture, and Corporate Governance
Based on our empirical findings, organizational structures, culture, and corporate governance
play a vast influential role when using lean startup for digital BMI in established companies.
These three areas are highly interrelated and influence each other, as demonstrated in our
framework (figure 4). Therefore, it is important to understand them holistically and how they
affect each other.
As Berends et al. (2016) and Chesbrough (2010) argue, it is crucial to understand barriers of
BMI within the organizational context and to make necessary changes in leadership, culture,
and organizational structures. Hence, with our framework, we extent literature, exploring what
specific barriers of BMI occur within organizational areas in the context of digital BMI with
lean startup that requires established companies to align organizational structures, culture, and
corporate governance accordingly. It emerges that using lean startup in existing organizational
structures is challenging and will influence the entire organization. This is demonstrated in our
framework, as it is directly connected to culture and corporate governance and builds a ground
for lean startup management. Correspondingly, Xu and Koivumäki (2019) claim the biggest
challenge is formed by changing from existing to a more agile structure within a company.
Moreover, Berends et al. (2016) argue that existing organizational structures even lead to inertia
and therefore could hinder usage of lean startup in established companies. However, opposing
to stated literature, from our empirical data we found that existing organizational structure can
also be beneficial to change from a traditional to an agile structure. For instance, existing
resources can be an important facilitator for lean startup. Also, experimenting within a working
and save system can make the process more open and innovative. Hence, the save environment
of a big company can decrease pressure of being successful with lean startup and experiments
can go wrong in first place to learn from them. Meaning that organizational structures can
enable lean startup for digital BMI.
However, our empirical data align with Christensen (2003) stating that established companies
that are afraid of change and are stuck in their traditional structures (organizational structures)
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
55
are less willing to experiment in terms of digital BMI. In this context, business experimentation
with agile methods, specifically lean startup, has become an important strategic element and is
used to generate and test novel BMs in a fast manner (Bocken & Snihur, 2020) which
significantly influences innovation processes of companies (Berends et al., 2016; Weissbrod &
Bocken, 2017). Regarding our study, business experimentation with lean startup is clearly
demonstrating, how not only methodical competence but also organizational structures,
culture, and corporate governance are interconnected and how they are forming barriers and
enablers to use lean startup for digital BMI in established companies. As business
experimentation with lean startup can help to overcome such organizational inertia (Bocken &
Snihur, 2020), it is important that existing organizational structures allow lean startup processes
and methods (Blank & Euchner, 2018). This means that for instance flat hierarchical structures
are needed as well as short ways of communication. Further, management (corporate
governance) need to have a positive attitude towards lean startup and needs to drive established
companies towards it. More specifically, the management is required to be committed to
achieve change with lean startup, needs to trust employees, should create a safe environment
for experimentation, and should be willing to delegate power. This then also requires a cultural
change of established companies to an open error culture (culture) for individuals to be able to
work with lean startup for digital BMI. In general, there needs to be more openness towards
novel solutions, a doer mentality within the company, strong intrinsic motivation as well as a
willingness to experiment. Hence, only if enabling aspects are implemented simultaneously in
all framework areas, a company will be able to successfully work with lean startup for digital
BMI. Yet, to simultaneously change corporate governance, culture, and organizational
structure of an established company is a highly challenging undertaking, as values, beliefs, and
certain ways of working have been existing for a long time and are difficult to change.
Moreover, companies that are in general facing changes due to the digital shift might be
overwhelmed by too many unknown methods and techniques. Therefore, the intent to change a
whole organization on different levels, is questionable and has to be considered as a limitation
to our framework. Nevertheless, if established companies aim to work with lean startup
successfully, the framework can still support them in planning consecutive strategic steps of
adapting enabling aspects in each area.
Ghezzi and Cavallo (2020) further argue that lean startup requires agility on every level in terms
of culture and organizational structures, as BMI, especially grounded in digital technologies,
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
56
always forces a company to adapt the way they think and act. However, this also forms many
difficulties for established companies as it clashes with existing culture and organizational
structures. An enabling factor is to separate lean startup projects/units from core business to
successfully work with lean startup for digital BMI in established companies. This
argumentation is also supported by O’Reilly and Tushman (2004), who point out that separation
of innovation units and allowing these units to be different in their processes, structures,
leadership style, and culture is key to success. Hence, we argue that ambidextrous structures
(O'Reilly & Tushman, 2004) can be beneficial for companies using lean startup for digital BMI.
They do not have to necessarily transform the entire organization but can establish new
structures, culture, and management style beside their traditional business. In BMI literature,
ambidexterity and separation of business units are established concepts. Our study validates
these concepts and extents it to digital BMI with lean startup. Still, implementing ambidextrous
structures is a long-lasting process that forces change throughout the entire organization.
However, we argue it is a necessary first step for established companies that are facing a digital
shift and most suitable solution to work successfully with lean startup as a tool for digital BMI.
This way, both existing business (analog) and innovation unit (digital) can coexist and later be
combined, to move forward in the digital shift.
To conclude, only if established companies overcome outlined barriers and implement
identified enabling factors of this study in organizational structures, culture, and corporate
governance, using lean startup as a tool for digital BMI will be successful. These areas, as well
as methodical competence, form ground for the framework’s next level – lean startup
management.
5.2.4 Lean Startup Management
Our framework (figure 4) demonstrates that for lean startup management to be successful,
methodical competence needs to be implemented throughout the entire organization, and
necessary adaptions in organizational structure, culture, and corporate governance need to be
made prior. This is crucial for lean startup management, as without these changes, using lean
startup techniques and characteristics, such as handling of digital tools, MVPs, and hypotheses
as well as customer involvement, are likely to fail. In other words, enabling factors of the areas
below lean startup management (namely methodical competence, organizational structures,
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
57
culture, and corporate governance) are pre-requisites for successful usage of lean startup tools
and techniques (lean startup management).
Established companies need to be prepared to work with lean startup as it forms a fast-paced
method for digital BMI. Moreover, it reduces distance between customers and established
companies, which otherwise can be a barrier for using lean startup in established companies.
The fast pace of lean startup and its build-measure-learn loops shall encourage established
companies to fail early in the process and not be afraid of failure as that is how they succeed
sooner (Brown & Katz, 2019; Ries, 2011). Therefore, it is inevitable for established companies
to have a fitting culture, an appropriate organizational structure, and dedicated management
(corporate governance) that support all techniques and tools of the lean startup process, such
as handling MVPs and hypotheses. Especially, regarding MVPs our empirical data show how
challenging it is for established companies as they hesitate to develop low quality or
“unfinished” products. Nirwan and Dhewanto (2015) describe it as fear of not satisfying
customer needs. But, as the lean startup process is highly customer-centric, derived empirical
data does not evaluate risk in customer satisfaction but rather in feedback quality as also
mentioned by Felin et al. (2019). According to Felin et al. (2019), it is hard to get valuable
customer feedback. Christensen et al. (2013) even argues that customers are not ideal to test
novel and radical BMs. Still, lean startup is about generating learnings from customers
(Mansoori, 2017; Xu & Koivumäki, 2019) and by involving them, established companies can
always learn something, in a positive (confirmation) or negative (rejection) way. Nevertheless,
it is crucial to identify and involve the right customers. Digital tools in this context are
facilitators, as they are enhancing customer engagement and involvement throughout the
process (Berman, 2012). From our empirical data, it emerges that lean startup is especially
useful in unknown markets and thus, emphasizes that customer involvement even helps
established companies to explore the novel digital environment, new customer needs, and
requirements. Therefore, we argue that effective lean startup management helps established
companies to master the digital shift with lean startup as a tool for digital BMI.
To conclude, using lean startup in established companies is difficult. However, if lean startup
management is done successfully, the user-centric, fast, and resource-efficient approach, as well
as iterations with customers, will lead to development and continuous improvement of digital
BMs. Nevertheless, it is necessary to not see lean startup as a generally successful tool for
digital BMI, as it has to be evaluated in the respective context. Therefore, it is important to
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
58
holistically understand the framework (figure 4) for lean startup management to successfully
use lean startup for digital BMI in established companies.
6. Conclusion & Discussion
___________________________________________________________________________
This section answers the research question and presents the main conclusions of our study. It
highlights our theoretical contributions, and practical implications. Further it outlines
limitations to the study and suggests future research. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
6.1 Summary
Established companies, that have been successful in their known business environment for a
long while, are now being challenged by changing market conditions triggered by digitalization
and development of digital technologies. Hence, there is a need for these companies to reinvent
their BMs by adding digital technologies and digitally shift their existing business. With our
work, we introduce lean startup as an effective tool to digitally reinvent BMs, as it is a fast-
paced and resource-friendly method. We identified enablers and barriers of lean startup as a
tool for digital BMI in established companies. Further, we proposed a framework showing how
established companies can be successful in digital BMI using lean startup. Hence, we
emphasize that successfully using lean startup for digital BMI is based on an effective (1) lean
startup management, appropriate (2) organizational structures, fitting (3) culture, and
dedicated (4) corporate governance, which all require solid (5) methodical competence on all
organizational levels. Furthermore, (6) external influences such as market conditions, role of
competition, or governance rules indirectly affect the usage of lean startup as a tool for digital
BMI. We argue that all areas withhold different aspects that can either be enablers or barriers
to use lean startup as a tool for digital BMI in established companies. Thus, we introduced a
framework (figure 4) showing how these elements can both facilitate or hinder using lean
startup for digital BMI as well as displaying connections between different influential factors.
Basic principle for established companies is to identify hindering aspects, adapt identified
enabling factors and hence overcome existing barriers.
Our study reveals that using lean startup for digital BMI implies a shift in the way established
companies work, think, and act, to respond to fast-changing market conditions and to stay
competitive in the digital market environment. Using lean startup is therefore especially
difficult for established companies since internal processes, corporate and personal culture as
well as management and leadership style have been existing in organizations for a long time.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
59
Moreover, these factors combined can lead to corporate inertia which lean startup helps to
overcome. With our study, we contribute showing what strategic actions need to be taken to
overcome inertia and to successfully work with lean startup as a tool for digital BMI. First,
companies need to implement methodical competence on all organizational levels. Then,
necessary adaptions on different levels of organizations, namely culture, organizational
structures, and corporate governance, need to be made. Our study highlights that these changes
in above-named areas are to be understood holistically, as these areas are all interrelated. Thus,
making strategic changes in one area can directly influence the others. Yet, simultaneously
changing established organizational structures, culture, and corporate governance is a long-
lasting and challenging task. Nevertheless, our framework gives guidance on how to
consecutively plan necessary steps for changes to positively influence a digital shift with lean
startup. To conclude, if all derived factors from our framework are considered, organizations
build a beneficial foundation for successfully using lean startup as a tool for digital BMI. This
will help established companies to digitally shift and regain their competitive position in the
novel digital market environment.
6.2 Theoretical Implications
As outlined in the problem discussion, there is a research gap about using lean startup for BMI
in established companies. With our study, we attempted to address this gap, enriching theory
of lean startup and BMI, as well as digital BMI, in established companies. In this part, we
illustrate our main theoretical implication and contributions to existing literature within these
three fields.
With our derived framework, we enrich current literature on BMI in established companies, as
the empirical data help to identify barriers and enablers of BMI using lean startup within
established companies. Scholars in this field argue that it is essential to identify and understand
barriers of BMI within organizations and to make necessary changes in leadership, culture, and
organizational structures accordingly (Berends et al., 2016; Chesbrough, 2010). With our
empirical data, we provide deep insights about specific aspects within established companies
that form inhibiting and enabling factors for BMI. Moreover, with our framework, we explore
areas within organizations that form barriers, and outline which strategic actions need to be
considered in order to overcome them. In addition, we demonstrated how all factors are
interrelated and how changes in one field might influence others. In this sense, we substantially
enriched existing literature of BMI in established companies.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
60
Further, we enrich existing theory on digital BMI. With our work, we provide novel insights
about how established companies can use lean startup to digitally transform their existing BMs.
However, as stated by literature on digital BMI, especially companies that have been establised
leaders in the non-digital world, face extrem difficulties when digitally transforming (Berends
et al., 2016; Christensen, 2003). Yet, we enrich existing literature, showing that lean startup is
already successfully used by many established companies in the context of a digital shift. Due
to our derived framework, we provide deeper understanding on how companies can quickly
undergo a digital shift by using lean startup.
Moreover, our research followed the request by Ghezzi (2020), Ghezzi and Cavallo (2020),
Leatherbee and Katila (2020), as well as Edision et al. (2018) to provide more detailed,
empirical evidence of using lean startup in established companies. As lean startup has mainly
been investigated as a tool for BMI in digital entrepreneurship (Ghezzi, 2020; Ghezzi &
Cavallo, 2020) there is still a need to examine how lean startup can be successfully used as a
tool for BMI in established companies. We fill this research gap by extending understanding of
how established companies can adapt agile structures to drive digital BMI to stay competitive
in the digital context. Current literature in this field states that established companies still
struggle with lean startup (Blank & Euchner, 2018; Bocken & Snihur, 2020; Xu & Koivumäki,
2019). With our empirical findings, we provide a deeper understanding for established
companies to master usage of lean startup for digital BMI, and hence enrich the research field
with novel insights.
6.3 Managerial Implications
In this section, we illustrate four practical implications for managers in established companies
involved in the fields of BMI, business experimentation as well as usage of agile tools, such as
lean startup for BMI. These implications are especially relevant for managers of established
companies that have enjoyed a strong and successful market position but are now facing fast-
changing market conditions triggered by the development of digital technologies and
digitalization.
To understand the topic holistically, we recommend managers to realize that lean startup needs
to be understood as an end-to-end solution for digital BMI and growth(Blank & Euchner, 2018),
which requires necessary adaptions on different levels of the organizations, namely culture,
organizational structures, and management. Therefore, successful digital BMI must overcome
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
61
identified barriers, such as high hierarchical structures, long ways of communication, traditional
mindsets, missing persistence, fear of change, and traditional leadership styles to work with
lean startup for a fast-paced innovation in digital BMI. At the same time, managers should try
to adapt and change considering enabling factors, such as using existing company resources,
implementing ambidextrous structures, flat hierarchies, high willingness to change, experiment
and learn, an open error culture, fostering a doer mentality, strong commitment from top level,
providing a safe environment and freedom for employees as well as open and transparent
communication. If managers consider all derived factors from our framework, organizations
build a beneficial foundation to successfully working with lean startup as a tool for digital BMI.
By using our framework managers have a comprised overview as a base for strategic activities
and decisions. Thus, managers can assess, decide on, and prioritize necessary actions to take
and areas to consider to diminishing barriers when using lean startup for digital BMI. Moreover,
it is crucial for managers to consider connections between different areas of the framework, as
strategic actions taken by management might be connected to different fields of the framework.
By focusing on activities deriving from our framework, managers can build a novel foundation
in established companies to drive digital BMI in a faster, more resource-efficient, and more
customer-centric manner, which in the long run helps to make their positioning viable as well
as to thrive in the novel, digital environment.
From our empirical data, we learned that especially management and leadership style in
established companies play a crucial role for using lean startup as a tool for digital BMI.
Therefore, it is beneficial that the management is fully dedicated to lean startup and its tools
and techniques. Hence, management teams need to lead by example. Imperative in this context
is the management’s openness to lean startup and to delegate power to employees. Moreover,
it is necessary to change from a rather traditional leadership style, where control is in focus, to
a more agile leadership style, where managers inspire and trust their employees.
Also, we highlight the importance of establishing methodical competence throughout the entire
organization. It builds a solid foundation for successful usage of lean startup in established
companies. Hence, managers need to provide opportunities for their employees to familiarize
themselves with the tool. This needs to happen on a theoretical level, but most importantly by
providing room and time for experimentation to gain practical experience with lean startup.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
62
However, lack of knowledge needs to be overcome by employees and management alike. From
our empirical data, it became apparent that involvement of external lean startup coaches and
experts are beneficial to close the knowledge gap. This way, the entire organization builds novel
methodical competence in handling new, agile solutions. It also reduces uncertainties,
facilitates handling of agile tools, such as lean startup, and also fosters innovation of digital
BMs. As a result, established companies can strengthen their competitive position in the still
unfamiliar digital environment and build a profitable future.
6.4 Limitations and Future Research
Although we answered our research question proven with empirical findings concerning the
usage of lean startup for digital BMI in the context of established firms, this study entails
limitations and thus calls for further research.
One limitation to our research relates to transferability (Guba, 1981) of our empirical findings
in another context. As we only examine individuals working with lean startup for digital BMI
in the German market, we cannot draw conclusions to other markets and environments.
Additionally, it remains unclear if our framework applies to a wider range of international
organizations within fast-changing markets. Hence, we suggest further research. Using a similar
research design in a different context and compare empirical findings with our derived
framework, could be beneficial to indicate similarities and differences.
To gain deeper insights into lean startup in established companies for digital BMI, we furtherly
recommend conducting case studies of diverse established companies using lean startup. Thus,
more primary data is generated which will help to sharpen the insider perspective of individuals
working with lean startup. We suggest conducting further research on the role of management,
because, as indicated from our empirical insights, they play a major role when using lean startup
in established firms.
It also became clear that lean startup is oftentimes used in combination with other agile tools,
such as design thinking. Thus, a limitation of this study is that lean startup is seen as a stand-
alone tool for digital BMI. Hence, we call for further research of using other agile tools and
combination of such tools for digital BMI in established companies. As we derived a framework
that applies to the usage of lean startup, it appears that same could account for general usage of
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
63
agile methods. Hence, it is necessary to explore our framework in comparison to other agile
tools to examine if it is also applicable in those areas.
In general, our framework shows some limitations. As outlined, it is questionable if established
companies that face a lot of uncertainty triggered by a fast-changing market environment and
development of digital technologies are able to internally change organizational structure,
culture, and corporate governance simultaneously. Moreover, because our framework explores
interrelations of many different areas, it might not only inhibit change in one organizational
area (e.g. organizational structure) but become an insurmountable obstacle in all areas. Thus,
the intent to use lean startup for digital BMI to digitally shift a company might not be successful.
Hence, further research is required on how established companies can simultaneously change
these areas without being overwhelmed by the whole process and pressure of the digital shift.
Furthermore, we recommend conducting a longitudinal study of established companies in the
digital transformation process, to better understand the development of digital BMI with lean
startup in established companies over time. As we see the usage of lean startup as a tool for
digital BMI as part of a digital shift of established companies, we argue that it is a long-lasting
process. This also implies that our empirical findings can change digital transformation
advances over time. Hence, we recommend to furtherly explore this phenomenon and to get a
deeper understanding how lean startup can be deployed sustainably as a tool for digital BMI in
established companies.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
64
Reference list
Achtenhagen, L., Melin, L., & Naldi, L. (2013). Dynamics of business models–strategizing,
critical capabilities and activities for sustained value creation. Long range planning,
46(6), 427-442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2013.04.002
Afuah, A. (2004). Business models: A strategic management approach. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Amit, R., & Zott, C. (2012). Creating value through business model innovation. MIT
Sloan Management Review. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/creating-value-through-
business-model-innovation/.
Baden-Fuller, C., & Haefliger, S. (2013). Business models and technological innovation. Long
range planning, 46(6), 419-426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2013.08.023
Balocco, R., Cavallo, A., Ghezzi, A., & Berbegal-Mirabent, J. (2019). Lean business models
change process in digital entrepreneurship. Business Process Management Journal.
https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-07-2018-0194
Banker, R. D., Bardhan, I. R., Chang, H., & Lin, S. (2006). Plant Information Systems,
Manufacturing Capabilities, and Plant Performance. MIS Quarterly, 30(2), 315-337.
https://doi.org/10.2307/25148733
Bell, E., & Bryman, A. (2007). The ethics of management research: an exploratory content
analysis. British journal of management, 18(1), 63-77. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
8551.2006.00487.x
Berends, H., Smits, A., Reymen, I., & Podoynitsyna, K. (2016). Learning while (re)
configuring: Business model innovation processes in established firms. Strategic
Organization, 14(3), 181-219. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127016632758
Berman, S. J. (2012). Digital transformation: opportunities to create new business models.
Strategy & Leadership. https://doi.org/10.1108/10878571211209314
Bharadwaj, A., El Sawy, O. A., Pavlou, P. A., & Venkatraman, N. (2013). Digital business
strategy: toward a next generation of insights. MIS quarterly, 471-482.
https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2013/37:2.3
Blank, S. (2013). Why the lean start-up changes everything. Harvard business review, 91(5),
63-72. https://hbr.org/2013/05/why-the-lean-start-up-changes-everything.
Blank, S., & Euchner, J. (2018). The genesis and future of Lean Startup: An interview with
Steve Blank. Research-Technology Management, 61(5), 15-21.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2018.1495963
Bocken, N., & Snihur, Y. (2020). Lean Startup and the business model: Experimenting for
novelty and impact. Long Range Planning, 53(4), 101953.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2019.101953
Brown, T., & Katz, B. (2019). Change by design: how design thinking transforms
organizations and inspires innovation (Vol. 20091). HarperBusiness New York, NY.
Brynjolfsson, E., & Hitt, L. M. (2000). Beyond Computation: Information Technology,
Organizational Transformation and Business Performance. Journal of Economic
Perspectives, 14(4), 23-48. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.14.4.23
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
65
Chang, Y.-C., Chang, H.-T., Chi, H.-R., Chen, M.-H., & Deng, L.-L. (2012). How do
established firms improve radical innovation performance? The organizational
capabilities view. Technovation, 32(7-8), 441-451.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2012.03.001
Chanias, S., Myers, M. D., & Hess, T. (2019). Digital transformation strategy making in pre-
digital organizations: The case of a financial services provider. The Journal of
Strategic Information Systems, 28(1), 17-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2018.11.003
Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. Handbook of
qualitative research, 2, 509-535.
Chesbrough, H. (2007). Business model innovation: It's not just about technology anymore.
Strategy & leadership, 35(6), 12-17. https://doi.org/10.1108/10878570710833714
Chesbrough, H. (2010). Business model innovation: opportunities and barriers. Long range
planning, 43(2-3), 354-363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.010
Christensen, C., Raynor, M. E., & McDonald, R. (2013). Disruptive innovation. Harvard
Business Review.
Christensen, C. M. (2003). The innovator's dilemma: The revolutionary book that will change
the way you do business. HarperBusiness Essentials New York, NY.
Correani, A., De Massis, A., Frattini, F., Petruzzelli, A. M., & Natalicchio, A. (2020).
Implementing a digital strategy: Learning from the experience of three digital
transformation projects. California Management Review, 62(4), 37-56.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125620934864
Dal Mas, F., Piccolo, D., Edvinsson, L., Skrap, M., & D’Auria, S. (2020). Strategy
Innovation, Intellectual Capital Management, and the Future of Healthcare: The Case
of Kiron by Nucleode. In Knowledge, People, and Digital Transformation (pp. 119-
131). Springer.
Dörner, K., & Edelman, D. (2015). What 'digital' really means.
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/technology-media-and-telecommunications/our-
insights/what-digital-really-means
Easterby-Smith, M., Jaspersen, L. J., Thorpe, R., & Valizade, D. (2018). Management and
business research (6th ed.). Sage.
Edison, H., Smørsgård, N. M., Wang, X., & Abrahamsson, P. (2018). Lean internal startups
for software product innovation in large companies: enablers and inhibitors. Journal of
Systems and Software, 135, 69-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2017.09.034
Eisenmann, T. R., Ries, E., & Dillard, S. (2012). Hypothesis-driven entrepreneurship: The
lean startup. Harvard Business School Entrepreneurial Management Case(812-095).
https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=41302.
Ettlie, J. E., & Pavlou, P. A. (2006). Technology-Based New Product Development
Partnerships*. Decision Sciences, 37(2), 117-147. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
5915.2006.00119.x
Felin, T., Gambardella, A., Stern, S., & Zenger, T. (2019). Lean startup and the business
model: Experimentation revisited. Forthcoming in Long Range Planning (Open
Access).
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
66
Foss, N. J., & Saebi, T. (2018). Business models and business model innovation: Between
wicked and paradigmatic problems. Long range planning, 51(1), 9-21.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2017.07.006
Gans, J. S., Stern, S., & Wu, J. (2019). Foundations of entrepreneurial strategy. Strategic
Management Journal, 40(5), 736-756. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3010
Ghezzi, A. (2020). How Entrepreneurs make sense of Lean Startup Approaches: Business
Models as cognitive lenses to generate fast and frugal Heuristics. Technological
Forecasting and Social Change, 161, 120324.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120324
Ghezzi, A., & Cavallo, A. (2020). Agile business model innovation in digital
entrepreneurship: Lean startup approaches. Journal of business research, 110, 519-
537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.06.013
Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Ectj,
29(2), 75-91. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766777
Hess, T., Matt, C., Benlian, A., & Wiesböck, F. (2016). Options for formulating a digital
transformation strategy. MIS Quarterly Executive, 15/2(131), 123-139.
https://doi.org/10.7892/boris.105447
Kaufman, I., & Horton, C. (2015). Digital transformation: leveraging digital technology with
core values to achieve sustainable business goals. The European Financial Review
(December–January), 63-67.
Keen, P., & Qureshi, S. (2006). Organizational Transformation through Business Models: A
Framework for Business Model Design. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences, 8, 206b-206b.
https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2006.376
Kiel, D., Arnold, C., & Voigt, K.-I. (2017). The influence of the Industrial Internet of Things
on business models of established manufacturing companies–A business level
perspective. Technovation, 68, 4-19.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2017.09.003
Kirsner, S. (2016). The barriers big companies face when they try to act like lean startups.
Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2016/08/the-barriers-big-companies-face-
when-they-try-to-act-like-lean-startups.
Kohli, R., & Grover, V. (2008). Business Value of IT: An Essay on Expanding Research
Directions to Keep up with the Times. Journal of the Association for Information
Systems, 9(1), 23-39. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00147
Ladd, T. (2016). The limits of the lean startup method. Harvard Business Review, 94(3).
https://hbr.org/2016/03/the-limits-of-the-lean-startup-method.
Leatherbee, M., & Katila, R. (2020). The lean startup method: Early‐stage teams and
hypothesis‐based probing of business ideas. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal,
14(4), 570-593. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1373
Leoveanu, V. M. (2018). The Advantages And Disadvantages Of Using The Lean Start Up
Method For Setting Up A Company In Romania. Manager Journal(28), 127-135.
Mansoori, Y. (2017). Enacting the lean startup methodology. International Journal of
Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-06-2016-0195
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
67
Matzler, K., Bailom, F., & von den Eichen, S. F. (2016). Digital Disruption: Wie Sie Ihr
Unternehmen auf das digitale Zeitalter vorbereiten. Vahlen.
McDonald, R., & Gao, C. (2019). Pivoting isn’t enough? Managing strategic reorientation in
new ventures. Organization Science, 30(6), 1289-1318.
https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2019.1287
Mollick, E. (2019). What the Lean Startup method gets right and wrong. Harvard Business
Review, 10, 1-4. https://hbr.org/2019/10/what-the-lean-startup-method-gets-right-and-
wrong.
Ng, G. (2014). Five Pitfalls of Running Lean Startup Experiments. In: Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/groupthink/2014/04/28/five-pitfalls-of-running-lean-
startup-experiments/?sh=18023d4b6296
Nirwan, M. D., & Dhewanto, W. (2015). Barriers in Implementing the Lean Startup
Methodology in Indonesia – Case Study of B2B Startup. Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 169, 23-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.282
Nobel, C. (2011). Teaching a ‘Lean Startup’Strategy. HBS Working Knowledge, 1-2.
https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/teaching-a-lean-startup-strategy.
O'Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2004). The ambidextrous organization. Harvard business
review, 82(4), 74-83. https://hbr.org/2004/04/the-ambidextrous-organization.
Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business model generation: a handbook for
visionaries, game changers, and challengers. John Wiley & Sons.
Ott, T. E., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Bingham, C. B. (2017). Strategy formation in entrepreneurial
settings: Past insights and future directions. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 11(3),
306-325. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1257
Piccinini, E., Hanelt, A., Gregory, R., & Kolbe, L. (2015). Transforming industrial business:
the impact of digital transformation on automotive organizations. ICIS.
Rachinger, M., Rauter, R., Müller, C., Vorraber, W., & Schirgi, E. (2019). Digitalization and
its influence on business model innovation. Journal of Manufacturing Technology
Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-01-2018-0020
Rahmani, F., & Leifels, K. (2018). Abductive grounded theory: a worked example of a study
in construction management. Construction management and economics, 36(10), 565-
583. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2018.1449954
Rai, A., Pavlou, P. A., Im, G., & Du, S. (2012). Interfirm IT Capability Profiles and
Communications for Cocreating Relational Value: Evidence from the Logistics
Industry. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 233-262. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410416
Rajala, R., & Westerlund, M. (2005). Business models: A new perspective on knowledge-
intensive services in the software industry. In 18th Bled eConference eIntegration in
Action - Conference Proceedings.
Rejeb, H. B., Morel-Guimarães, L., & Boly, V. (2008). Measuring innovation best practices:
Improvement of an innovation index integrating threshold and synergy effects.
Technovation, 28(12), 838-854. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2008.08.005
Ries, E. (2011). The lean startup: How today's entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to
create radically successful businesses. Crown Business.
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
68
Ross, J. W., Sebastian, I., Beath, C., Mocker, M., Moloney, K., & Fonstad, N. (2016).
Designing and executing digital strategies.
Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A., & Grover, V. (2003). Shaping Agility through Digital
Options: Reconceptualizing the Role of Information Technology in Contemporary
Firms. MIS Quarterly, 27(2), 237-263. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036530
Saunders, M. N. K., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2012). Research methods for business
students (6th ed.). Pearson Education.
Schallmo, D. R. A., & Williams, C. A. (2018). Digital Transformation Now: Guiding the
Successful Digitalization of Your Business Model. Springer International Publishing
AG.
Schuchmann, D., & Seufert, S. (2015). Corporate learning in times of digital transformation: a
conceptual framework and service portfolio for the learning function in banking
organisations. International Journal of Corporate Learning (iJAC), 8(1), 31-39.
https://doi.org/10.3991/ijac.v8i1.4440
Sebastian, I., Ross, J., Beath, C., Mocker, M., Moloney, K., & Fonstad, N. (2017). How big
old companies navigate digital transformation. MIS Q. Executive, 16.
Straub, D. W., & Watson, R. T. (2001). Research commentary: Transformational issues in
researching IS and net-enabled organizations. Information systems research, 12(4),
337-345. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.12.4.337.9706
Subramaniam, M., & Venkatraman, N. (2001). Determinants of transnational new product
development capability: testing the influence of transferring and deploying tacit
overseas knowledge. Strategic Management Journal, 22(4), 359-378.
https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.163
Subramanian, A. M., Chai, K.-H., & Mu, S. (2011). Capability reconfiguration of incumbent
firms: Nintendo in the video game industry. Technovation, 31(5-6), 228-239.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2011.01.003
Tanriverdi, H., & Venkatraman, N. (2005). Knowledge relatedness and the performance of
multibusiness firms. Strategic Management Journal, 26(2), 97-119.
https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.435
Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long range planning,
43(2-3), 172-194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.003
Tekic, Z., & Koroteev, D. (2019). From disruptively digital to proudly analog: A holistic
typology of digital transformation strategies. Business Horizons, 62(6), 683-693.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2019.07.002
Timmermans, S., & Tavory, I. (2012). Theory construction in qualitative research: From
grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological theory, 30(3), 167-186.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275112457914
Tohanean, D., & Weiss, P. (2019). Digital Entrepreneurship and green Business Model
Innovation: Lean Startup Approaches. Quality-Access to Success, 20.
Tongur, S., & Engwall, M. (2014). The business model dilemma of technology shifts.
Technovation, 34(9), 525-535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2014.02.006
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
69
Vaska, S., Massaro, M., Bagarotto, E. M., & Dal Mas, F. (2020). The digital transformation of
business model innovation: A structured literature review. Frontiers in Psychology,
11, 539363. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.539363
Weissbrod, I., & Bocken, N. M. P. (2017). Developing sustainable business experimentation
capability–A case study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 2663-2676.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.009
Westerman, G., & Bonnet, D. (2015). Revamping your business through digital
transformation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 56(3), 10.
https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/revamping-your-business-through-digital-
transformation/.
Wheeler, B. C. (2002). NEBIC: A Dynamic Capabilities Theory for Assessing Net-
Enablement. Information systems research, 13(2), 125-146.
https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.13.2.125.89
Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (1997). Lean thinking—banish waste and create wealth in your
corporation. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 48(11), 1148-1148.
https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600967
Xu, Y., & Koivumäki, T. (2019). Digital business model effectuation: An agile approach.
Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 307-314.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.10.021
Zott, C., & Amit, R. (2007). Business model design and the performance of entrepreneurial
firms. Organization science, 18(2), 181-199. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1060.0232
Zuzul, T., & Tripsas, M. (2020). Start-up inertia versus flexibility: The role of founder
identity in a nascent industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 65(2), 395-433.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839219843486
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
v
Appendices
Appendix 1: Interview Guideline
Themes Leading Questions Follow Up Questions Optional Questions
Part 1:
General
Questions
1. Brief introduction: Who are
you and what do you do for a
living, what is your main
focus?
2. (To what extent do you
work with lean startup and)
what do you understand by
the term lean startup?
3. How is lean startup applied
in established companies or
how do you apply it?
How does lean startup differ from
other methods of digital business
model innovation?
What does digital business
model innovation mean to
you?
With what type / size /
industry of company do you
apply lean startup?
Part 2:
Digital
business
model
innovation
4. For which type (s) of digital
business model innovation is
the lean startup method
particularly suitable in your
opinion? / How is lean
startup applied in the area of
digital business model
innovation?
How do you evaluate lean startup
as a tool for
BMI for established companies?
What role does lean startup
play in digital business model
innovation in established
companies?
How is the use of lean startup
related to digital business
model Innovation?
To what extent can and must
innovative lean startup units
be separated from the core
business?
Digital
Technologies
5. What role do digital
technologies play when it
comes to lean startup as a
tool for digital business
model innovation?
How do digital transformation
and application of Lean
Startup relate?
Success
Factors 6. What pre-
conditions should bring a
company in your opinion, to
work successfully with Lean
Startup?
How does the application of lean
startup in established companies
differ from the application in
growth companies / startups?
Positive
Aspects
7. How do you feel about the
cooperation with the
established companies and
lean startup?
What are positive experiences
that you have made in connection
with lean startup in existing
companies?
In your opinion, what are the
success factors in the
implementation of lean startup in
established companies?
Which factors favor the use of
lean startups in established
companies?
What works well in the use of
lean startup in established
companies?
Barriers 8. What are common problems
/ complications or risks that
Where do you see potential for
improvement in the application of
Where do obstacles / barriers
regularly occur in the
application /
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
vi
arise when using lean startup
with existing companies?
lean startups in established
companies?
Which factors hinder / complicate
the application of lean startup in
established companies?
implementation of lean
startup?
Handling of
Lean Startup
tools
9. How do employees /
management
perceive the customer-
centered approach or
the open-ended, experimental
approach of lean startup?
What role does top management
play in the successful
implementation of lean startup?
What are your experiences with
handling hypotheses? How are
“good” hypotheses generated?
How is customer feedback
incorporated?
How do employees perceive the
iterative build-measure-
learn loops?
What is the role of the
employees?
What are the benefits of
engaging customers?
What are the downsides to
engaging customers?
When and how do you decide
that the process is complete?
How are employees in
existing companies
introduced to the Lean
Startup method?
How is or can method
competence for the
application of lean startup in
companies be established?
Corporate
Culture
10. What influence do the
corporate culture aspects of
the established companies
have on the implementation
of lean startup?
To what extent does the use of
lean startup bring about a cultural
change in existing companies?
What role do the existing
organizational structures and
processes play in existing
companies for the successful
implementation of lean startup
methods?
To what extent does the
willingness of companies to
change play a role? / To what
extent is this important for
digital business model
innovation with lean startup?
Final
Question
11. What are the three most
important learnings about
lean startup application in
established companies for the
innovation of digital business
models that you would like to
advise us?
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
vii
Appendix 2: Consent Form
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
viii
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
ix
Appendix 3: Overview of all Codes, Sub-Categories, and Categories
Code Sub-Category Category
1 Combining methods
Agility
Lean Startup
Management
2 Discard ideas
3 Explorative approach
4 Generating learnings
5 Intuitive process
6 Iterative process
7 Risk management
8 Open-ended process
9 Resource-efficiency
10 Facilitator
Digital Tools 11 Importance of digital tools
12 Scaling potential
13 Customer centricity
Customer Involvement 14 Customer distance
15 Customer feedback
16 Creating hypotheses
Handling of Hypotheses 17 Testing hypotheses
18 Validating hypotheses
19 Building MVP
Handling of MVP
20 Identifying core element
21 Forms of MVP
22 Quality of MVP
23 Role of MVP
24 Separation of lean startup projects
Organizational Structures
25 Changing organizational structures
26 Changing procedure
27 Existing organizational structures
28 Flat hierarchies
29 Agile culture
Corporate Culture
Culture
30 Competitiveness
31 Cultural change
32 Error culture
33 Openness
34 Role of corporate culture
35 Seriousness
36 "Doer" mentality / just do it
Mindset
37 Attitude
38 Changing mindset
39 Persistence
40 Traditional mindset
41 Willingness to change
42 Willingness to experiment
43 Willingness to learn
44 Employees driving change Motivation
Jönköping International Business School, 2021 Maja Beisheim
Charline Langner
x
45 Intrinsic motivation
46 Volunteers
47 Courage
Personal culture 48 Fear
49 Small degree of arrogance
50 Providing boundary conditions
Leadership
Corporate Governance
51 Creating save environment
52 Equality
53 Freedom and independence
54 Guidance
55 Motivation of employees
56 Open and transparent communication
57 Trust
58 Attitude of management
Management
59 Influence of management
60 Lack of foresight
61 Loose of power
62 Success-oriented
63 Dedication/commitment
64 Knowledge transfer
Knowledge
Methodical Competence
65 Lack of knowledge
66 Practical experience/prior knowledge
67 Theoretical knowledge
68 Overcoming uncertainty
69 Diverse capacities and expertise
Teaming 70 Interdisciplinarity
71 Mixed teams
72 Education of employees
Training/education 73 Education of management
74 External coaches
75 Multiplicators
76 Changing customer behavior
External Influences 77 Changing market conditions
78 Role of competition
79 Role of governance rules