The Use of Business Model Canvas in The Design and Classification of Product-Service Systems Design Methods

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/359722214
The Use of Business Model Canvas in the Design and Classiﬁcation of Product-
Service Systems Design Methods
Article in Sustainability · April 2022

DOI: 10.3390/su14074283
CITATIONS READS
7 3,109
4 authors:
Mariusz Salwin Ilona Jacyna-Gołda

Warsaw University of Technology Warsaw University of Technology
29 PUBLICATIONS 141 CITATIONS 75 PUBLICATIONS 782 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Andrzej Kraslawski Aneta Waszkiewicz

Lappeenranta – Lahti University of Technology LUT SGH Warsaw School of Economics
300 PUBLICATIONS 5,040 CITATIONS 10 PUBLICATIONS 31 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Mariusz Salwin on 06 April 2022.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

sustainability
Article
The Use of Business Model Canvas in the Design and
Classification of Product-Service Systems Design Methods
Mariusz Salwin 1, * , Ilona Jacyna-Gołda 1 , Andrzej Kraslawski 2 and Aneta Ewa Waszkiewicz 3
1 The Institute of Organization of Production Systems, Faculty of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering,
Warsaw University of Technology, 85 Narbutta Street, 02-524 Warsaw, Poland; ilona.golda@pw.edu.pl
2 Industrial Engineering and Management, School of Engineering Science, Lappeenranta University of
Technology, P.O. Box 20, FI-53581 Lappeenranta, Finland; andrzej.kraslawski@lut.fi
3 Department of International Finance, SGH Warsaw School of Economics, 02-554 Warsaw, Poland;
awaszkie@sgh.waw.pl
* Correspondence: mariusz.salwin@onet.pl
Abstract: The implementation of Product-Service Systems (PSS) calls for the modification of existing
business models. The goal of the paper is to work out an analysis and a classification of PSS design
methods used in the development of new business models. Using a systematic review method,
we identified 60 PSS design methods. Following the examination of the major business model
templates, we selected the Business Canvas Model for further studies. Then, coding rules were
adopted to specify what elements of the Business Model Canvas impacts individual PSS design
methods and an analysis was performed. In the final stage, methods were broken down by Business
Model Canvas domains. Various PSS design methods presented in the literature address different
areas of Business Model Canvas. The available PPS methods can be classified into three main
groups: Group 1—including infrastructure and offering; Group 2—including infrastructure, offering

and customers; and Group 3—including infrastructure, offering, customers and finance. Very few
Citation: Salwin, M.; Jacyna-Gołda, I.; methods consider areas such as Key Partners, Customer Segments, Cost Structure and Revenue
Kraslawski, A.; Waszkiewicz, A.E. Streams. Nevertheless, there is no PPS design method that would address all of Business Model
The Use of Business Model Canvas in Canvas building blocks. The paper discusses PSS design in business model context. Classification of
the Design and Classification of PSS design methods was proposed together with new possibilities to develop business models based
Product-Service Systems Design on this classification. The proposed approach illustrates the combination of PSS design methods
Methods. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4283.
applied in food processing and agricultural machines industry.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074283
Academic Editor: JinHyo Joseph Keywords: Product-Service System; Business Model Canvas; business model; Product-Service System
Yun design; classification of Product-Service System design methods
Received: 10 February 2022

Accepted: 28 March 2022
Published: 4 April 2022
1. Introduction
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
Nowadays, the market experiences fierce global competition, saturation, and com-
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
moditization of the main product markets [1–4], which negatively impacts the sales of
published maps and institutional affil-
products and business profits [5–7]. In addition, customer needs change very quickly while
iations.
their expectations become increasingly more complex and difficult to be met by products
alone [5–8]. More and more often, customers are interested in product availability, the
possibilities it offers and the effects that it produces rather than in the product itself, its
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. purchase or just having it [9–12]. These factors make companies look for new ways of
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. doing business [13,14]. They are also key driving forces behind the development of PSS
This article is an open access article business models [15,16]. Seen from this angle, the PSS concept is an alternative for manu-
distributed under the terms and facturing companies wishing to introduce innovations, achieve competitive advantages
conditions of the Creative Commons and improve financial performance as, in addition to selling goods, it includes auxiliary
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// services designed to meet customer needs [13,17]. The concept shows how business models
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ have evolved from their traditional form into PSS-based models [17].
4.0/).
Sustainability 2022, 14, 4283. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074283 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2022, 14, 4283 2 of 23
An innovative concept, such as the PSS, is receiving increasingly more interest from
researchers and practitioners. Benefits triggered by PSS are obvious, and the major ones
include better financial performance and environmental benefits [6,17,18]. In literature,
the PSS has been investigated from different perspectives, e.g., benefits (Baines et al.,
2007), sustainable development aspects [6,19], barriers to its implementation [20,21], PSS
modularization [22,23] and PSS design [24–26]. PSS design is a new huge challenge to
manufacturing companies [27,28]. In this approach, we can see how the perception of
products and technologies evolves, often leading to new ways of using them in different
stages of their lifecycle. It links with the reorganization of company structure and founding
it on new values [29,30]. As a result, the business model of an enterprise is adapted to fully
exploit PSS-linked benefits [31].
Relationships between the business model of a company and PSS design have not been
widely discussed in the literature [32]. A business model can be defined as a simplified
way of explaining how companies create value [33]. This is why they should participate
and understand PSS design. In order to take full advantage of companies’ involvement
in PSS development, we must examine the available design methods for business models.
We are still missing comprehensive analytical assessments of individual design methods
which would consider specific elements of the business model. Such analysis would greatly
facilitate the replacement of a traditional business model with a PSS-based model and
contribute to generating new PSS development paths.
To be able to fully use business models in PSS design we investigated literature
and developed a classification of PSS design methods based on Business Model Canvas
components and proposed combining them to generate new methods for new industries.
The classification represents a different, unprecedented approach to PSS design methods,
which incorporates the impact of PSS design on a company. Such an approach was not
considered before and is a pioneer effort.
The paper is structured as follows: Its first section is an introduction, followed by a
discussion of the research methodology. The third section presents the classification of PSS
design methods based on the Business Model Canvas. The next section proposes universal
PSS design stages. The fifth section of the paper considers how the proposed classification
and universal stages can be used to develop new PSSs, and a case study is presented. The
last section of the paper is a discussion.
2. Research Methodology
2.1. Research Aim
The goal of the paper is to examine and classify PSS design methods based on the
Business Model Canvas and its adaptation to design new PSS for new industries.
The following research questions have been formulated in the paper:
1. Do PSS design methods available in literature impact all elements of Business Model
Canvas?
2. Can we create new PSS models by combining methods already available in literature?
3. How can we create new PSS models for new industries based on the proposed
classification?
The classification will also make suggestions as to how the existing methods should
be supplemented, if the need arises, by three universal design stages. By investigating the
effect of PSS design methods on the business model of a company, we hope to facilitate
the development of comprehensive methods that would impact the whole of the Business
Model Canvas in new industries.
On top of that, the paper offers other, unprecedented and innovative approaches to
the analysis of the proposed PSS design methods.
2.2. Systematic Review

This paper uses a systematic review [34–36] to examine papers devoted to PSS design
published over the period 2001–2021. The method was selected because it differs from tra-
ditional literature reviews by offering a scientific and transparent process which minimizes
prejudice by conducting an exhaustive literature search [37].
The review took the form of structured keyword searches using terms such as “Product-
Service Systems design” or its synonyms. We searched titles and keywords for the above
terms to make a list of papers which directly address methods of PSS design. The following
databases were used in literature sources: ProQues, Springler Link, Science Direct, Taylor &
Francis Online, EBSCOhost, Scopus, Emerald, Insight, Web of Science, Ingenta, Wilma, IEEE
Xplore Digital Library and Google Scholar. These bases include mainly scientific journals
related to the subject in question and are excellent tools in searching for digital sources.
We managed to collect 400 works published in English (papers, chapters in books,
conference materials and reports). A comprehensive analysis of texts helped in narrowing
the selection down to 64 items, including research papers, conference papers, chapters in
monographs and books, in which we found 60 PSS design methods.
2.3. Selection of Business Model Canvas

The next step in the research method consisted of the selection of Business Model
Canvas. Implementation of PSS triggers business restructuring and proposing a new offer
that combines products with ancillary services, which is indicative of the emergence of
business models. In the context of PSS design, a business model specifies how a company
works before and after PSS has been developed. By superimposing the Business Model
Canvas on a given PSS design method, we can say which areas in a company are influenced
by available methods, identify their strengths and weaknesses and elements that need to
be optimized. The use of a business model helps in transparent classification of available
design methods.
To find the best Business Model Canvas to be used for analyzing PSS design meth-
ods we started with detailed literature searches in scientific databases to identify busi-
ness modelling methods. Our searches in this case were centered around the following
keywords: business model, value proposition, enterprise architectures, value modeling,
innovation and value chain. From among the works which we had read, in total, nine
different business modelling methods were selected for the analysis.
Weill and Vitale’s approach is strongly linked with electronic services. It recognizes
a business model at the level of networks incorporating e-business model schemes and
the role of information technologies. In addition, the model addresses critical success
factors for atomic e-business models [38]. Chesbrough seeks to ensure a framework which
sequences available business models starting from the very basic (and little valuable) ones
to much more advanced (and very valuable) ones. This approach is bound with technology-
based innovation and target mature firms deeply rooted in the market. In addition, the
approach includes a competitive strategy [39]. E3-value is an ontology of e-business model
focused around the primary concept of economic value and demonstrates how economic
value is generated, interpreted and exchanged in a multi-party (extended) network of
companies and customers. E3-value specifies the components of an e-business model;
in particular, it defines, derives and examines relationships between many companies,
e-business scenarios and operational requirements at both qualitative and quantitative
levels [40]. An entrepreneur’s business model is a framework of a business model which
can be used independently of the type of a venture. It includes a strategic component while
its unique element makes references to personal/investor factors of an entrepreneur. The
authors look at a business model from the point of view of entrepreneurship and deal with
areas such as strategy of ventures, architecture and economy [41]. Ballon’s approach is used
to develop a business model for services, products and ICT systems. It is consistent with a
multi-parameter approach applied to identify four levels at which business models operate
and three critical design parameters at each level. They concern not just one company but a
network of stakeholders engaged in manufacturing and delivering a particular product,
service or system. Its intention is to go beyond a narrow scope observed in many traditional
business models [42]. The STOF model is positioned as an approach to service innovation.
The approach focuses on business models for services. It offers an understanding of critical
design issues and success factors, which are relevant in a real sustainable business model.
The STOF model views the definition of service in customer value proposition categories
as a starting point for any business model. Service definition is a reference point for other
areas. Technology is seen as central, as it is an important factor in increasing customer
value from her/his perspective [43]. The Four-Box business model ensures a structure
that helps in revealing and categorizing all company domains. It positions business rules,
behavioral norms and success metrics among core processes and perceives them as links for
business model areas which maintain the model in equilibrium. Thanks to it, the customer
value proposition can be delivered in a repeatable and foreseeable manner, meeting the
profit formula at the same time [44]. Business Model Canvas can be used to develop new
or document the existing business models. By using it, the authors describe a business
model to explain how an organization creates, delivers and presents value [45]. Business
model roadmapping was developed based on subject-matter literature on business models
and technology roadmapping. The advantages of such an approach consist of not only
specifying an action plan and proposing changes to a business model but also in identifying
and discussing compromises between strategic business model issues and operational
activities. Business model roadmapping may help in identifying overlapping paths and
points of no return [46].
After having examined business model frameworks (Table 1), we used the Business
Model Canvas to classify the impact of PSS design on the business model of a company.
Preliminary analyses have shown that this is the most adequate framework because:
• It is a popular tool which helps practitioners in designing business models [47]. This
practical tool rests on a detailed conceptual model which takes account of elements
that describe company value, value proposition (offer), infrastructure, customers
and finance [45].
• Business Model Generation, the book which discusses Business Model Canvas and
has published more than 100,000 copies, features in many rankings of best-selling
business books. In addition to its 2 principal authors, 470 practitioners were engaged in
writing it [48].
• A total of 9291 Google Scholar citations and 3309 Research Gate citations confirm that
Business Model Canvas is the most frequently quoted business model framework in
the literature.
• The model is also used by many companies and startups.
• It is an intuitive model, easy to be discussed and simple in construction.
• It is a highly flexible approach, which allows using it to describe business models in
different industries.
• It is used as a design tool for innovation.
• The model shows how an organization creates, delivers and recognizes customer value.
• It specifies the elements of a business model; in particular, it defines, identifies and
analyses relationships between diverse domains of a company.
• Its next advantage consists of the central location of value proposition. In this approach,
an organization’s efforts focus on giving the customer what he really wants or needs,
which is closely linked with the PSS and is crucial for it.
• Current and future performance of a company can be easily compared.
• It can be used by a team (employees and/or advisors) to understand the relationships
and come to an agreement.
• It provides a useful background for strategic adaptation of the main PSS elements and
for allocating them to concrete domains of company operations to which they belong.
• Canvas ensures a coherent approach and a common language for all PSS design
methods. It explains relationships and impact on individual business domains within
a company and thus helps in structuring and classifying them.
• So far, the Business Model Canvas has not been applied in such analyses in PSS design.
Table 1. Business module analysis.

Authors Weill and Vitale Chesbrough Akkermans and Gordijn Morris et al. Ballon Bouwman et al. Johnson Osterwalder et al. De Reuver et al.
Technology/market Entrepreneur’s business The Four-Box Business Business model

Name Business Model Schematics e3—value methodology The Ballon approach The STOF model Business Model Canvas
mediation model Model roadmapping
Source [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46]
Citations—Research Gate 1515 4978 1036 2786 251 425 730 9291 131
Citations—Google Scholar 500 1746 624 1416 152 223 3309 79
E-business/General E-business General E-business General General E-business General General General
Electronic services, especially
E-commerce (dedicated and ICT services, products in the field of mobile Companies entering the It can be used without
Application Electronic services Open innovation General General
used in e-commerce) and systems telephony, ICT, media, ‘white space’ any restrictions
energy
4 levels, 3 control parameters 9 blocks broken down into
Number of constituents 8 6 8 3 levels and 6 questions 4 4 2 layers and 4 stages
at each level 4 pillars
A Value Network
Foundation level (For the Parameters
foundation level, a A1 Combination of Assets
well-formulated business A2 Vertical Integration Two layers: the business
model must address six A3 Customer Ownership model layer, which defines
key questions: B Functional the required changes in the
1 How do we create Architecture business model, and the
value? Parameters Customer Value Proposition Infrastructure (Key Activities, activities layer, which defines
2 Who do we create value B1 Modularity (Job-to-be-done, Offering), Key, Resources, Partner the actual activities to be
Strategic objectives, value B2 Distribution of
Value proposition, target Actors, market segments, for? Profit Formula (Revenue Network), Offering (Value executed. The process of
proposition, revenue sources,
markets, internal value chain value offering, value activity, 3 What is our source of Intelligence Model, Cost Structure, Target Propositions), Customers business model
success factors, channels, Service, Technology,
Constituents structure, cost structure and stakeholder network, value competence? B3 Interoperability Unit Margin, Resource (Customer Segments, roadmapping involves four
core competencies, customer C Financial Model Organization, Finance
profit model, value network, interfaces, value ports, 4 How do we Velocity), Key Resources, Key Channels, Customer core steps: identify the
segments and
competitive strategy value exchanges competitively position Parameters Processes (Processes, Relationships), Finances desired change in the
IT infrastructure C1 Cost (Sharing) Model
ourselves? Business Rules and (Cost Structure, business model, analyze how
5 How do we make C2 Revenue Model Success Metrics). Revenue Streams) these desired changes impact
money? C3 Revenue Sharing other business model
6 What are our time, Model domains, the translation in
scope and size D Value Proposition executable actions and
ambitions?); Proprietary Parameters back-casting transition paths
level, Rules level D1 Positioning
D2 User Involvement
D3 Intended Value
Focus on value proposition X X X X Considering customer value X Value placed at the core Requirement specification
Clear delineation of the
Presentation (visualization) Plan that describes
Multi-aspect, scope of a proposed business Each domain must be
and a comprehensive review X X X X X intermediary steps and
network-centric approach model. Multi-parameter described in great detail
of business model design critical decisions
approach
Analysis of differences
between the present and X X
future business model
Focuses on the internal
business model of a single More difficult to be applied
Network business model X X X X company rather than on a in networks for multi-
partnership network, yet it level reasons
considers network elements
Easy to modify X X
Table 1. Cont.
Authors Weill and Vitale Chesbrough Akkermans and Gordijn Morris et al. Ballon Bouwman et al. Johnson Osterwalder et al. De Reuver et al.
Transparency X X X
Takes account of IT role X X X X
Identification of
X X X X X
key weaknesses
Identification of
X X X X
key resources
Identification of key
X X X X
success factors
Informs how enterprises
Explains how economic Measures business model
Economic aspect X X X X generate profit and
value is created profitability
operational expenditure
Linked with Design and
Innovation Service innovation X
technology-based innovation innovation oriented
Links strategic level which
Defines e-business strategies attracts most of model
Strategic/operational/ and operational Includes a strategic element Links business strategy and thinking with the operational
Include competitive strategy
tactic level requirements at qualitative (component 4) business processes and tactic levels necessary for
and quantitative levels translating a business model
into practical planning
Distinguishes processes and
resources as separate
Contains a unique element
elements but claims that they Most often used in
Strongly stresses the that covers Focused mainly on the
Practical tool derived from should be considered practice—has been used and
Additional information Survey research 35 case studies evaluation of profitability personal/investor factors of classification of business Defining timeline horizon
research studies together as a adapted to concrete business
and ventures an entrepreneur models in taxonomy schemes
process–resource couple scenarios and applications
(component 6)
since there is some synergy
between them
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 26
Sustainability 2022, 14, 4283 The above presented arguments suggest that Business Model Canvas provides 7 ofthe
23
best framework for a business model that can be used in PSS design. The model may help
in exploring available methods and generating new PSSs. It can offer support to compa-
nies The
whichabove
so farpresented
have notarguments
used PSS in suggest that Business
developing Model Canvas
and implementing provides
business models.the
best framework
Business Model for a business
Canvas showsmodel that can
how these be used
activities in PSSindividual
impact design. The model may
domains help
of a com-
in exploring
pany available
and eliminate ormethods and generating
reduce emerging newan
risk. Such PSSs. It can offer
approach allowssupport to companies
unveiling and clas-
which
sifying all of the issues one must face before available PSS design methods can beBusiness
so far have not used PSS in developing and implementing business models. used in
Model Canvas
a company. Thisshows
is whyhow
wethese activities
decided impact
to apply individual
the Business domains
Model Canvasof ato
company
proposeand the
eliminate or reduce
classification of PSS emerging risk. Such an approach allows unveiling and classifying all
design methods.
of the issues one must face before available PSS design methods can be used in a company.
This is whyRules
2.4. Coding we decided to apply the Business Model Canvas to propose the classification
of PSS design methods.
After the available design methods have been examined and a business model frame-
work has been
2.4. Coding Rulesselected, we encoded the available methods according to the following
criteria:
After the available design methods have been examined and a business model framework
• been
has Criterion No.we
selected, 1—coding is based
encoded the on the
available Business
methods ModeltoCanvas
according and stages
the following of PSS
criteria:
design for methods available in literature. Our classification distinguishes between
• Criterion No. 1—coding is based on the Business Model Canvas and stages of PSS
the presence
design or absence
for methods of a given
available design stage
in literature. that takes account
Our classification of or relates
distinguishes betweento a
given
the building
presence orblock in the
absence of aCanvas model. stage that takes account of or relates to a
given design
• Criterion No. 2—coding is based
given building block in the Canvas model.on the number of Business Model Canvas domains,
• which consider design methods broken
Criterion No. 2—coding is based on the number down into three main
of Business groups:
Model Canvas domains,
which
o consider design methods
Infrastructure + offering; broken down into three main groups:
o Infrastructure
# Infrastructure++offering;
offering + customers;
#
o Infrastructure
Infrastructure++offering
offering++customers;
customers + finance.
• # Infrastructure + offering + customers + finance.
Criterion No. 3—the third criterion distinguishes between available PSS design meth-
• Criterion No. 3—the
ods validated thirdand
in practice criterion distinguishes
proposals between available
made by researchers. PSS design
In addition, meth-
we consid-
ods validated in practice and proposals made
ered the industry to which they are addressed. by researchers. In addition, we consid-
ered the industry to which they are addressed.
3. Canvas Classification
3. Canvas Classification
In order to classify the impact of PSS design methods on the business model of a
In order
company, we to classify
have the impact
deployed of PSSModel
the Business design methods
Canvas as a on the
tool. It business
is a visualmodel of a
chart with
company, we have deployed the Business Model Canvas as a tool. It is a visual chart with
elements describing company value, value proposition (offering), infrastructure, custom-
elements describing company value, value proposition (offering), infrastructure, customers
ers and finances (Figure 1) [45].
and finances (Figure 1) [45].
Figure 1.
Figure 1. Elements of Canvas Business
Business Model
Model [45].
[45].
PSS design
design often implies the change
change ofof aa business
business model.
model. It calls for a number of
internal and external
internal and externalanalyses
analysesand
andinvolves
involvesa ahuge
huge challenge
challenge to to entrepreneurs.
entrepreneurs. When
When an-
analyzing
alyzing thethe
PSSPSS design
design methods
methods in the
in the context
context of the
of the Business
Business Model
Model Canvas.
Canvas. we
we may
may realize that each method described in literature impacts three areas of a business
model (Figure 1).
realize that each method described in literature impacts three areas of a business model (Fig-
ure 1).
3.1. Group 1—IO (Infrastructure + Offering)

Sustainability 2022, 14, 4283 The first group is referred to as IO. Methods included in this group impact three 8 of 23
building blocks of the business model pursued by a company that wants to apply them.
These are: Key Activities, Value Proposition and Key resources (Figure 2).
The IO group covers only a fraction of the Business Model Canvas and includes the
3.1. Group 1—IO (Infrastructure + Offering)
least comprehensive methods. Their application in the business practice may involve a lot
The
of risk to afirst group Before
company. is referred
usingtothem
as IO. Methods included
in industrial in this
practice, the group
methods impact
should bethree
fine-
building blocks of the business model pursued by a company
tuned to clearly consider all areas of the Business Model Canvas. that wants to apply them.
These are: Key Activities, Value Proposition and Key resources (Figure 2).
Elements
2. Elements
Figure 2. of of Business
Business Model
Model Canvas
Canvas considered
considered in theinPSS
thedesign
PSS design methods
methods from
from Group
1—IO.
Group 1—IO.
The IO
This group
group covers eight
includes only aPSS
fraction
designof methods
the Business Model
(Table Canvas
2). Seven of and
themincludes
have beenthe
least comprehensive
validated methods.
in practice, and one is aTheir application
researchers’ in theFour
proposal. business
of thepractice
methods may involve
in this groupa
lot of
are notrisk to a company.
dedicated Before using
to any specific themThe
industry. in industrial
remainingpractice,
four havethe methods
been should
developed be
with
fine-tuned to clearly consider all areas
specific sectors and industries in mind. of the Business Model Canvas.
This group includes eight PSS design methods (Table 2). Seven of them have been
validated in practice,
Table 2. Elements and oneModel
of Business is a researchers’ proposal.
Canvas considered Four
in PSS of themethods
design methods in this
from Groupgroup
1—
are not dedicated to any specific industry. The remaining four have been developed with
IOC.
specific sectors and industries in mind.
Activities Relationships
Researchers’ Proposal
Validated in Practice
Customer Segments
Value Proposition
Revenue Streams
Table 2. Elements of Business Model Canvas considered in PSS design methods from Group 1—IOC.
Cost Structure
Key Activities
Key resources
SourceKey Partners
Channels
Source
The Authors of
Customer Relationships
No. Target Industry

Customer Segments
the Method
Value Proposition
Revenue Streams
KeyCustomer
Cost Structure
Key resources
Key Partners
Channels
The Authors of
No. Target Industry
the Method
Intersectoral approach, food processing, metal, plastics indus-

1. Engelhardt et al. [49] + + + + try, construction, furniture, repair networks, environmental
consultants
Intersectoral approach, food processing,
2. 1. James et al. et al. [50] + + metal,
and plastics industry, construction,
Engelhardt [49] + ++ ++ + Electronics IT sector
furniture, repair networks,
3. Abdalla [51] + + + + No indications—potentially
environmentalanyconsultants
2. WeberJames
and Deu-
et al. [50] + + + + Electronics and IT sector
4. 3. Abdalla [52] [51] + + + ++ + + +No indications—potentially any
No indications—potentially any
bel
Weber and
5. 4. Van Halen et al. [53]
Deubel
[52] + + + ++ ++ + No indications—potentially
No indications—potentially any any
5. Tukker andet al.
Van Halen [53] + + + + No indications—potentially any
6. Tukker and [54] + + + + No indications—potentially any
6. Tischner [54] + + + + No indications—potentially any
Tischner
7. 7. Barquet et al.
Barquet et al. [55] [55] + + + ++ ++ + Bike sharing system
Bike sharing system
8. 8. MutoMuto et al. [56]
et al. [56] + + + ++ ++ + spare parts—production
Car Car spare parts—production
support support
3.2. Group 2—IOC (Infrastructure + Offering + Customers)

The second proposed group is the one designated with the IOC (Infrastructure +
offering + customers) acronym (Figure 3). Methods within this group represent a wider
spectrum of impact on the business model of a company because they also highlight areas
connected with customers (Customer Relationships, Channels, Customer Segments). The
33 methods allocated to this group cover in total 7 elements of the business model (Table 3).
3.2. Group 2—IOC (Infrastructure + Offering + Customers)
The second proposed group is the one designated with the IOC (Infrastructure + of-
fering + customers) acronym (Figure 3). Methods within this group represent a wider
Sustainability 2022, 14, 4283
spectrum of impact on the business model of a company because they also highlight areas9 of 23
connected with customers (Customer Relationships, Channels, Customer Segments). The
33 methods allocated to this group cover in total 7 elements of the business model (Table
3). Yet, when singled out and considered separately, none of them covers all of these seven
Yet, when singled out and considered separately, none of them covers all of these seven
elements.
elements.
Figure 3. Elements
Elements of
ofCanvas
CanvasBusiness
BusinessModel
Modelconsidered in in
considered PSSPSS
design methods
design fromfrom
methods Group 2—IOC.
Group 2—
IOC.
This group consists of 33 PSS design methods. Seventeen out of them have been vali-
datedThis
in practice, while the
group consists validation
of 33 of one
PSS design method
methods. is still pending.
Seventeen Fifteen
out of them methods
have are
been val-
researchers’ proposals. Eight methods in this group are not intended for a concrete industry.
idated in practice, while the validation of one method is still pending. Fifteen methods are
researchers’ proposals. Eight methods in this group are not intended for a concrete indus-
Table 3. Elements of Business Model Canvas considered in PSS design methods from Group 2—IOC.
try.
Table 3. Elements of Business Model Canvas considered in PSS design methods from Group 2—
Customer Segments
Value Proposition
Revenue Streams
Key Resources
Cost Structure
Key Activities
IOC.
Key Partners
Channels
Source
No. The Authors of the Method Target Industry

Customer Segments
Value Proposition
Revenue Streams
Key Resources
Cost Structure
Key Activities
Key Partners
Channels
Source
The Authors of
No. Target Industry
Urban telecenter—service offering
1. the Method
Morelli
[57,
+ + + + + + +
office space and related premises for
58]
short-term rental (from 1 h on)
Issues concerning food, accommodation
2. Green and Vergragt [59] + + + + + + (heating, cooling, house lightening) and
clothing
3. Tukker and Van Halen [60] + + + + + + + No indications—potentially any
Urban telecenter—service Practically
offering office space and
any industry, related
authors
1. Morelli [57,58] + [61,+ + + + + + mention, inter(from
alia, aircraft,
4. Alonso-Rasgado et al. + + + + + + premises +for short-term rental 1 h on)food
62] processing, machine, tools and
Green and Ver- Issues concerning food, accommodation (heating, cooling,
medical industry
2. [59] + + + + + +
5. gragt and Tischner
Tukker [54] + + + + + + house lightening) and clothing
No indications—potentially any
Manzini
Tukker and Van et al. [63,
+ + + + + +
3.6. Evans et al. [60] + 64] + + + + + ++ + Foodany
No indications—potentially
Halen Shipbuilding (valves, tank gauging
7. Matzen and McAloone [65] + + + + + Practically
+ any industry,systems,
authorsconfiguration
mention, inter alia,for
services air-
Alonso-Rasgado et
4. [61,62] + + + + + + + craft, food processing, machine,Danish shipyards)
tools and medical indus-
8.
al.
Aurich et al. [66] + + + + +
Heavy-duty machinery for road
try construction
9. Tukker and
Morelli [67] + + + + + No indications—potentially any
5. [54] + + + + + + No indications—potentially
Micro-productionany
in the field of
10. Tischner
Welp et al. [68] + + + + +
electroerosion machining
11. Manzini
Komoto et al.Tomiyama
and
6. [63,64] + [69]+ + ++ + + + ++ + ++ IT hardware + Food
12. Evansand
Rexfelt et al.
Hiort af Ornäs [70] + + + + + No indications—potentially any
Power industry—electricity
Matzen and Shipbuilding (valves, tank gauging systems, configuration
13.
7. Maussang et al. [65] [71]+ + ++ + + ++ + ++ + transmission in hyperconductive cables,
McAloone services for Danish shipyards)
helium-based cooling devices
14. Shimomura et al. [72] + + + + + Lifts
15. Tan et al. [73] + + + + + + Aircraft industry
16. Kimita et al. [74] + + + + + Services on domestic flights
17. Wood and Tasker [75] + + + + + Aircraft
Laser systems used in industrial cutting
18. Vasantha et al. [76] + + + + + +
operations
19. Geum and Park [77] + + + + + Automotive, water purifiers
20. Marques et al. [78] + + + + + + Automotive
8. Aurich et al. [66] + + + + + Heavy-duty machinery for road construction
9. Morelli [67] + + + + + No indications—potentially any
10. Welp et al. [68] + + + + + Micro-production in the field of electroerosion machining
Komoto and Tomi-
11. [69] + + + + + + IT hardware
yama
Sustainability
Rexfelt2022, 14, 4283
and Hiort 10 of 23
12. [70] + + + + + No indications—potentially any
af Ornäs
Power industry—electricity transmission in hyperconduc-
13. Maussang et al. [71] + + + + + +
tive cables, helium-based cooling devices
Table 3. Cont.
14. Shimomura et al. [72] + + + + + Lifts
15. Tan et al. [73] + + + + + + Aircraft industry
Customer Segments
16. Kimita et al. [74] + + + + + Services on domestic flights
Value Proposition
Revenue Streams
Key Resources
Cost Structure
Key Activities
Key Partners
17. Wood and Tasker [75] + + + + + Aircraft
Channels
Source
18. Vasantha et al. [76] + + + + + + Laser systems used in industrial cutting operations
No. The Authors of the Method Target Industry
19. Geum and Park [77] + + + + + Automotive, water purifiers
20. Marques et al. [78] + + + + + + Automotive
21. Pezzotta et al. [79] + + + + + No indication—potentially any
22. Pezzotta et al. [80] + + + + + + Automotive (garage for trucks)
21.
23. KimPezzotta
et al. et al. [81] [79]+ + ++ + + ++ + + Mobile devices,+telecommunication,
No indication—potentially any
education (English)
22. Pezzotta et al. [80] + + + + + + Automotive (garage for trucks)
24. Moser et al. [82] + + + + + Automotive—Service Mobil
Mobile devices, telecommunication,
23.
25. Tran andKim Parket al.
[83] [81]
+ + ++ +
+ + +
++ +
Office furniture
education (English)
24.
26. Ziout andMoser
Azab et al. [84] [82]+ + ++ + + ++ + + + Automotive—Service
Agricultural machinery Mobil
25. Tran and Park [83] + + + + + Office furniture
27.
26. Chiu et al.
Ziout and Azab [85] [84]+ + + + + ++ + + + + ElectronicsAgricultural
(digital) machinery
27. Trevisan and
ChiuBris-
et al. [85] + + + + + Electronics (digital)
28.
28. Trevisan [86] [86]+ + + + + + Pneumatic energy supplies
saud and Brissaud + + + + Pneumatic energy supplies
29. Sassanelli et al. [87] + + + + + + No indication—potentially any
29.
30. Sassanelli et al.et al. [87]
Scherer [88]+ ++ ++ + + ++ + + + No+indication—potentially any
No indication—potentially any
30. Scherer et al. [88] + + + + + + + No indication—potentially any services for
Cleaning robot—cleaning
31. Andriankaja et al. [89] + + + + + + Cleaning +robot—cleaningmeat processing industry—Clean
services for meat processing in-
Robot, autonomous industrial
31. Andriankaja et al. [89] + + + + + + + dustry—Clean Robot, autonomous industrial
cleaning cleaning ser-
services
CNC machine tools (fast
vices
32. Adrodegari et al. [90] + + + + +
milling machines)
32. Adrodegari et al. [90] + + + + + CNC machine toolsNo (fast milling machines)
indication—potentially any,
33.
33. IdrissiIdrissi
et al. et al. [91] [91]+ + ++ + + + + + +
No indication—potentially any, universal method
universal method
3.3.
3.3. Group
Group 3—IOCF
3—IOCF (Infrastructure
(Infrastructure ++ Offering
Offering ++Customers
Customers ++Finance)
Finance)
The
The third group we propose is IOCF (Infrastructure + offering ++ customers
third group we propose is IOCF (Infrastructure + offering customers ++ finance)
finance)
(Figure 4). Methods assigned to this group impact each of the four
(Figure 4). Methods assigned to this group impact each of the four main building main building blocks
blocks of
of the business model. IOCF considers methods, which cover areas such
the business model. IOCF considers methods, which cover areas such as Cost structure as Cost structure
and
and Revenue
Revenue streams.
streams. Altogether,
Altogether, the the 19
19 methods
methods in in this
this group
group cover
cover 99 elements
elements of of the
the
business
business model
model (Table
(Table 4).
4). However,
However, none none of
of these
these methods
methods taken
taken separately
separately covers
covers allall of
of
the nine elements. Methods from this group outline the major financial effects
the nine elements. Methods from this group outline the major financial effects of putting of putting
the PSS
PSS solution
solutionininplace
placeand
and ways,
ways, in in which
which a company
a company generates
generates revenue
revenue from from PSS-
PSS-based
based operations.
operations. These These areas
areas are are missing
missing in eachinmethod
each method
includedincluded in Groups
in Groups 1 and 2.1 and 2.
Figure 4. Elements
Elementsof
ofCanvas
CanvasBusiness
Business Model
Model considered
considered in PSS
in PSS design
design methods
methods from Group
from Group 3—
3—IOCF.
IOCF.
The third group consists of 19 PSS design methods. Out of the total pool, 9 methods
have been validated in practice. A further 10 methods are researchers’ proposals. Each
method within this group is industry-specific.
Table 4. Elements of Business Model Canvas considered in PSS design methods from Group 2—IOCF.
Customer Segments
Value Proposition
Revenue Streams
Key Resources
Cost Structure
Key Activities
Key Partners
Channels
Source
The Authors of
No. Target Industry
the Method
Cars (mobility), home appliances, office

1. Brezet et al. [92] + + + + + + +
furniture
Transportation—short-distance
2. Luiten et al. [93] + + + + + + + +
individual mobility (Mitka vehicle)
Electronic car components; PCs and
Maxwell and
3. [94] + + + + + + other participating in Environmentally
van der Vorst
Superior Product program—Ireland
Home appliances, radio and
4. Halme et al. [95] + + + + + +
TV equipment
5. Lindahl et al. [96] + + + + + + + Manufacturing
[97,
6. Uchihira et al. + + + + + Video cameras (product-based services)
98]
Micro-energy systems (small
decentralized energy conversion units
7. Müller et al. [24] + + + + + + that supply households or small
companies; crucial in low income
regions where infrastructure is poor)
Cranes, compactors, washing machines
8. Sundin et al. [99] + + + + + +
and refrigerators
9. van de Kar [100] + + + + + + + + Mobile services (mobile phones), ICT
Clothing, containers for
10. Lee et al. [101] + + + + + + + + +
recycled clothing
Umbrellas (umbrella rental service at
11. Kim et al. [102] + + + + + + +
underground stations)
Electronics (facility maintenance service
12. Akasaka et al. [103] + + + + + + +
for an electronic substation)
Dimache and
13. [104] + + + + + + + Cooling devices
Roche
Industrial and engineering training
courses (educational materials).
14. Tran and Park [105] + + + + + + +
Product and service design (sanitation
services, toilets in Ghana)
15. Vezzoli et al. [106] + + + + + + Automotive
Medini and
16. [107] + + + + + + + Steel sludge
Boucher
Blocks of flats/condominiums for
elderly people combined with services
17. Muto et al. [108] + + + + + + +
(home appliances manufacturers,
construction and ICT service suppliers)
18. Campos et al. [109] + + + + + + Manufacture machinery
Clothing and washing machines
19. Chiu et al. [110] + + + + + + +
(laundry units)
4. Universal Product-Service System Design Stage

The classification demonstrates that design methods available in literature take very
little account of Key Partners, Customer Segments, Cost Structure, and Revenue Streams
(Figure 5). Having examined the PSS development models, we would like to propose three
completely new, universal stages which help in developing new, interdisciplinary business
models based on PSS.
Sustainability
Sustainability 14, x 14,
2022, 2022, FOR 4283
PEER REVIEW 12 of 23
14 of 26
70
60
60 60 60
50
Number of methods
40
43
30
29
20
10 15
3 4 9
0
Key Partners Key Value Customer Customer Key resources Channels Cost Revenue
Activities Proposition Relationships Segments structure streams
Nine business model building blocks
Figure 5. 5.
Figure Impact
Impactofofdesign
designmethods onareas
methods on areasofofBusiness
Business Model
Model Canvas.
Canvas.
4.1.4.1.
KeyKey PartnersStage
Partners Stage
The
The firststage
first stageconcerning
concerning Key
KeyPartners should
Partners be the
should be initial one creating
the initial opportunities
one creating opportuni-
to diagnose and select key partners critical for PSS development. In most cases, we can
ties to diagnose and select key partners critical for PSS development. In most cases, we
think of banks, suppliers of machinery and materials for production, IT system providers
canorthink of banks, suppliers of machinery and materials for production, IT system pro-
universities. These are just examples that are worth considering. On top of that, at this
viders orwe
stage, universities.
should find These are
answers to just examplesquestions:
the following that are worth considering. On top of that,
at this
• stage, we should find answers to the following questions:
What partnerships are critical for a new PSS?
• • What
Whopartnerships
are our criticalare criticalin
suppliers for a new
a new PSS?
PSS?
• • Which
Who are of ourcritical
our suppliers and partners
suppliers receive
in a new PSS?our critical resources in a new PSS?
• • Which of our suppliers and partners receivea our
What kind of partnership meets our needs in newcritical
PSS? resources in a new PSS?
• • What supply chain is the best for a new PSS?
What kind of partnership meets our needs in a new PSS?
• Thissupply
What stage introduces
chain is theorder in the
best for design
a new method
PSS? and introduces partners crucial for
the development of a new PSS.
This stage introduces order in the design method and introduces partners crucial for
the4.2.
development of a new PSS.
Customer Segmentation Stage
The second stage is about Customer Segmentation. In this stage, potential customers
4.2.ofCustomer Segmentation
the PSS solution Stagedown into groups based on their needs and expectations.
are broken
This
Theis second
the stage when
stage is the
about coreCustomer
of the PSSSegmentation.
solution is developed with the
In this stage, productcustomers
potential and
services that accompany it; the solution will be further divided and addressed to different
of the PSS solution are broken down into groups based on their needs and expectations.
customer groups. The stage helps in visualizing and configuring all of possible PSS
This is the stage when the core of the PSS solution is developed with the product and
targeting concrete market segments. In this stage, the company must provide answers to
services that accompany
the following questions: it; the solution will be further divided and addressed to different
customer groups. The stage helps in visualizing and configuring all of possible PSS tar-
• Who are our customers?
geting
• concrete market
What is the segments.
development In this
potential ofstage, the company must provide answers to the
our customers?
following
• questions:
Which customers, or potential customers, of a new PSS are worth receiving most of
• ourare
Who timeour
andcustomers?
attention?
• • Why do customers come to
What is the development use a new
potential ofPSS?
our customers?
• So far, very few methods offered such
Which customers, or potential customers, possibilities
of a new and
PSScustomers
are worthwho decided most
receiving to of
useour
a PSS solution have
time and attention?different preferences. For instance, let us take a PSS solution for
• a vacuum
Why docleaner. Methods available in literature help develop a general PSS solution
customers come to use a new PSS?
for a vacuum cleaner, yet we cannot divide it to target diverse market segments, such as,
Sohouseholds,
e.g., far, very few methods
interior designoffered such
companies or possibilities and customers
cleaning companies. The stage who decided to
is intended
usetoaassist
PSS solution
in diagnosing the customer segments and needs within each segment. We need for a
have different preferences. For instance, let us take a PSS solution
vacuum cleaner. Methods available in literature help develop a general PSS solution for a
vacuum cleaner, yet we cannot divide it to target diverse market segments, such as, e.g.,
households, interior design companies or cleaning companies. The stage is intended to
assist in diagnosing the customer segments and needs within each segment. We need this
this stage because, e.g., households have different needs than interior design companies,
which, in turn, have different needs than the cleaning companies.
4.3. Financial Analysis

The third stage is devoted to building up a financial model that would take account of
costs involved in the development of a PSS solution for a company and estimate revenue
streams. This stage may also include valuation of services dedicated to the product within
the framework of a PSS model. It is an excellent tool that allows presenting concrete data on
future financial results and comparing them with incurred costs. If we add on appropriate
variables, for instance, remuneration rates, cost of services or subscription fees, service
valuation levels, assumptions about possible failures, maintenance or demurrage periods,
we will be able to develop and prepare for PSS design. In this stage, we need to answer the
following questions:
• What will companies be making money on in a new PSS?
• What are the costs of a new PSS?
• How can we value services added to the product in a new PSS?
This stage will help in evaluating the profitability of PSS-based solutions and in
proposing different price combinations.
The proposed universal stages of PSS design may be applied mainly in methods
from Group 3, which have only minor shortcomings regarding elements of the Business
Model Canvas. By adding one of the above-mentioned stages, we will make these methods
complete are ready to use.
5. How Can the Proposed Classification Be Used in Developing a New Business Model
The combination of different methods may lead to the development of new, sophisti-
cated and innovative solutions addressed to areas that were not considered before.
In order to show how a new interdisciplinary model is built based on the proposed
classification, we used the HICS method [63,64] and the method developed by [84] and
added the universal stage devoted to financial analysis (Table 5). These methods have been
selected for the following reasons:
• In the available literature, there are no PSS design methods that would target animal
feed industry;
• Taken together, they strongly focus on the upper part of the Business Model Canvas
(Infrastructure + offering + customers), and to supplement them, we only need to use
the universal stage of financial analysis;
• The authors of the method targeting agriculture machinery observe, however, that
agriculture is a gigantic sector of huge potential [84];
• The main goal of agriculture is to provide food by cultivating the soil, growing crops
and raising livestock [111];
• HICS method is intended to develop industrialized and sustainable solutions for food
and diverse groups of people [63,64];
• Being one of the main branches of agriculture, raising livestock needs appropriate diet
and adequate care for animals;
• These two methods have been selected because we wanted to provide individual
feeding solutions to target groups of livestock breeders wishing to increase their
production and ensure the best healthy environment for animals. Target groups
include farmers breeding dairy and beef cattle, chicken, goats, etc.;
• The combination of the two methods allows for exploiting validated design elements
from the two industries in a new approach to PSS development in animal feed;
• This combination may help in reducing waste of feed and agricultural products
intended for animals.
Table 5. A combination of PSS design methods and universal PSS design phases taking into account
all elements of the Business Model Canvas.
Customer Segments
Value Proposition
Revenue Streams
Key Resources
Cost Structure
Key Activities
Key Partners
Channels
Source
The Authors of the
Group Target Industry
Method
Manzini et al.
Group 2—IOC [63,64] + + + + + + + Food
Evans et al.
Group 2—IOC Ziout and Azab [84] + + + + + Agricultural machinery
Universal PSS Financial
+ + Universal stage
design stage analysis—universal stage
New PSS design method + + + + + + + + + Feed for agricultural animals
These methods may be combined in the following way:

1. Data collection [84];
2. Contextual application/analysis (HICS) [63,64] and PESTEL analysis [84];
3. Partnership network (HICS) [63,64];
4. Solution development/design (HICS) [63,64];
5. Financial analysis (universal stage);
6. Decision making [84].
By combining two incomplete methods and supplementing them with the finan-
cial analysis stage, we have arrived at a new and complete PSS design method for a
new industry.
In order to check how our proposal works, we conducted a case study on a farm. Our
proposal targets feeding farm animals (Figure 6). This is a totally new area for which no
PSS solution has been developed so far; this new area emerged as a combination of the two
sectors targeted by the two above-mentioned methods. The development of such a method
is extremely important from the point of view of both feed manufacturers and breeders.
Feed manufacturer supplies the feed to his customer, in our case, a farmer who breeds
animals. We need to start by discussing some aspects, possible additional services and
selling services rather than feed. Manufacturer collects a specific fee for results achieved by
the farmer. In the analyzed case, for this fee, the manufacturer guarantees the provision of a
number of services connected with timely supplies of feed, storing it at customer’s premises,
making suggestions about appropriate diet that could produce the best results, veterinary
care, as well as all sorts of advice and consultancy in the field of feeding farm animals. We
need to stress here that ownership is not transferred to the user but continues to rest with
the feed manufacturer. Every farmer wants, above all, to achieve the best possible results
in breeding farm animals and cares for keeping his animals in the best shape while he is
not interested in owning feed or taking care of a number of issues connected with it.
We need to focus on what is important to a breeder, that is, mainly on effects produced
by the feed and services connected with it. In a PSS model, a feed manufacturer may supply
a number of services, starting from the supply of feed and its storing at farmer’s premises
up to a professional diet in line with effects expected by the breeder and veterinary care
services. Such a solution can be valued based on how farmer’s animals perform when it
comes to, e.g., milk production, weight, etc.
dustry.
In order to check how our proposal works, we conducted a case study on a farm. Our
proposal targets feeding farm animals (Figure 6). This is a totally new area for which no
PSS solution has been developed so far; this new area emerged as a combination of the
Sustainability 2022, 14, 4283
two sectors targeted by the two above-mentioned methods. The development of 15 such
of 23
a
method is extremely important from the point of view of both feed manufacturers and
breeders.
Figure6.6.PSS
Figure PSSproposal
proposalfor
forfeeding
feedingfarm
farmanimals.
animals.
6. Discussion
6.1. Discussion: The Value of Business Model
The paper provides a review of the existing PSS design methods paying special
attention to their impact on the Business Model Canvas. The review covered 60 PSS design
methods which we managed to identify. Next, we examined these methods in an innovative
and unprecedented manner. The authors’ specified design stages of the available methods
which consider and impact individual domains of the business model. Furthermore,
methods were broken down into three groups. After the authors have classified and
identified business model domains that are little influenced by the available methods, three
universal PSS design stages have been proposed.
The paper proposes a completely new classification of PSS design methods. Based on
the Business Model Canvas the following three main groups of PSS design methods have
been identified:
• Group 1—IO (Infrastructure + offering);
• Group 2—IOC (Infrastructure + offering + customers);
• Group 3—IOCF (Infrastructure + offering+customers + finance).
Having reviewed the potential Business Model Canvas domains, three out of them
have been unambiguously found to fit each method. It means that by using these domains,
we can split the methods into three separate sets.
The proposed classification has four main advantages. They include support to
managers in identifying the domains in a company that are crucial for PSS; support to
designers in generating new solutions for new industries; dialogue between PSS design
and a company business model; and clear presentation of methods from the least to the
most comprehensive.
Most, as many as 42 (groups 1 and 2), of the explored methods cover only fractions
of the Business Model Canvas, not its entirety, which is why their repeatable use may
be unattainable due to concrete instructions targeting companies which would like to
use them. Using methods allocated to this groups may be risky. It is a very imprecise
presentation of activities that a company should carry out when developing a new PSS.
Further stages of presented methods do not specify who is responsible for performing
individual activities and which activities should be carried out by the company. Only
general slogans are presented.
The methods included in group 3 draw attention to the major financial consequences
of acting within the PSS framework and the way a company can generate revenue from
PSS-based activities. Such information was missing in each method from groups 1 and 2.
The third group covers all of Business Model Canvas building blocks, however, methods
allocated to this group, although being the most comprehensive, do not consider all business
model elements and thus have some limitations.
The paper identifies the main gap in PSS design which confirms that none of the avail-
able methods that has been singled out and separated as an individual and independent
method covers all of nine elements of the Business Model Canvas.
Business Model Canvas-based analysis of PSS design methods is important for compa-
nies, which have shifted or want to shift from offering products to offering a combination
of products and services. Such classification helps companies in their searches for a design
method; it reveals their limitations and defines business model domains which a particular
method influences. In addition, it can assist companies which have already worked out a
PSS to implement required changes or improve their current performance. Considering the
available methods and possibilities of combining them, attention has been drawn to the
need to propose universal design stages. These stages offer bigger flexibility in creating
new PSS and help in estimating financial performance and improve relationships with
customers and business partners. These elements have a valid business potential so far
little acknowledged in PSS design.
The most unique aspects of the paper include the analysis of PSS design approaches
and their classification from the point of view of the impact on Business Model Canvas.
This is how we reflect the impact of PSS design on a company. Universal design stages and
the proposal to combine the methods are also innovative. Classification highlights relevant
research issues in PSS design and provides a complete overview of methods available in
literature viewed from another, previously missing perspective.
How the proposed classification is used is another aspect of value added. The combi-
nation of methods based on the Business Model Canvas has not been tried before either in
literature or in practice, and it is a new approach to the development of design methods
based on known and available approaches. The concept is very intuitive and focused on
market and customer needs. If necessary, it allows generating a number of methods for
many industries.
In addition, using the classification, the authors have identified only a handful of meth-
ods that take account of Key Partners, Customer Segments, Cost Structure and Revenue
Streams. Looking at the classification, its main limitation in PSS design may derive from a
small number of methods that take account of the above-listed domains. With the above
shortage in mind, we have proposed universal stages which can be used in PSS design
in available methods, as well as in methods generated from the classification. There is a
clear need to put in place universal design stages focused on these domains and economic
analysis of PSS due to limited combination possibilities stemming from very limited con-
sideration given to these domains in available methods. By exclusively using methods
included in the classification to generate new methods, we would continuously exploit
methods that consider these domains. It restricts flexibility and possibilities of generating
PSS for new industries. The restriction can be eliminated by proposing universal design
stages which fill in elements of the Business Model Canvas ignored in the combination
of methods.
Irrespective of the method or industry, classification facilitates decision making in
the design stage. Moreover, the classification clearly demonstrates which domains of the
company are engaged in the creation of a new PSS.
The innovative nature of classification is expected to expand PSS design possibilities
by supporting the integration of product, service and business model components from
early design stages. The need to integrate the above constituents is expected to take
account of all PSS functions, the perspective of its full life cycle and better coordination of
company operations.
The classification expands our view of PSS design, which has so far focused prelimi-
narily on the integration of product design and services linked with the products. Design
methods approached in the context of the Business Model Canvas enable recording the
impact and organizational changes in different domains of company operations and vi-
sualizing processes taking place after the business switches to PSS. Effective integration
of these areas unleashes a much bigger potential for developing new PSS. The proposed
classification sends a clear message to present and future authors of methods who should
take care of the entire business model of a company when generating new approaches.
The perspective of combining the existing methods from individual groups offers an
opportunity to create new methods for new industries, which will cover all of the company
business model using universal design stages. Such approach helps in finding out where
the company obtains its money from, what it sells, to whom and how as well as when it
decides its performance is successful. In addition, various types of information omitted in
individual methods will be brought together and used to generate better solutions.
6.2. Discussion: Open Business Model with Open Innovation Dynamics

According to Open Innovation, enterprises should not rely only on the results of
their research and development works but also use external sources of innovation through
cooperation with other entities [112–114]. Enterprises using Open Innovation acquire the
necessary knowledge and innovations as part of the built network of contacts (specialized
research institutions, suppliers, users, customers and competitors) [115,116]. They should
also share their inventions, which they do not use, to other entities based on selling licenses,
creating consortia or spin-off companies. It is a deliberate flow of knowledge, ideas and
technologies that accelerate innovation [112,117].
Open Innovation seems to be a natural direction of changes in the evolution of busi-
ness models [112,113,115]. It allows for the creation of suitable places for research and
development activities and those that attach importance to cooperation and joint value
creation [118,119]. The company’s business model determines which external information
to use and what internal information to disclose to other entities [120,121]. The use of open
innovations in the business model is the company’s openness to knowledge and solutions
in its environment to maximize profits for all cooperating entities [114,122,123].
In designing business models, PSS Open Innovation supports exchanging information
and collaboration within a team, which any company can adopt to manage the PSS design
process. In this context, the use of Open Innovation includes [124–126]:
• Extending the functionality of the product while increasing its value for all parties involved;
• Generating new ideas and consulting for the best—this guarantees enterprises access
to a large number of innovative ideas generated by employees while ensuring a deeper
and more complete understanding of the needs of colleagues and customers;
• Interaction with the client—client involvement and the use of data and information
from the client by the company’s employees in the development of new solutions;
• Joint development of new solutions—consists of the cooperation of various enterprises
on new solutions, which means that it is developed as quickly as possible while
reducing costs.
The business model describes several value-generating mechanisms essential for a
company to profit [127,128]. For the business model to be effective and profitable, its
dynamics are crucial. This is especially true for the PSS business models [54,115]. Business
Model Dynamics enable the automation of business models and is one of the supporting
business models [129,130]. This allows for automatically updating, defining and redefining
business processes in the enterprise, which enables continuous updating of the business
model that adapts to changes in the enterprise’s environment [131–133].
Business Model Dynamics seems to be particularly important from the point of view
of PSS business models. The changing needs and requirements of customers require
enterprises to develop new solutions. New solutions are related to introducing changes in
the enterprise’s business model. In this context, Business Model Dynamics allows you to
improve your value proposition by delivering better product-related services, analyzing

and improving the value chain and establishing a revenue and cost structure. In this way,
it contributes to the introduction of innovation in companies’ business models using PSS.
Both Open Innovation and Business Model Dynamics will increasingly affect the
development of PSS business models, the configuration of which will be original, innovative
and pioneering. They will help companies develop new solutions and update the value
chain architecture. As a result, they will enable them to face the challenges companies face
in a changing market.
7. Conclusions
This study aims to highlight the role of PSS design methods and their impact on the
business model. The article proposed an innovative way to classify PSS design methods,
emphasizing their impact on the Canvas Business Model and presenting the gaps they
have and how to fill them. The analysis through the prism of Canvas Business Model is
carried out in order to cover the entire scope of the company’s activities. The conducted
research indicates that the existing PSS design process presented in the literature does not
fully reflect the industrial PSS design practice.
The aim of the paper was to answer the following three research questions:
1. Do PSS design methods available in literature impact all elements of Business Model Canvas?
A literature review indicates that none of the PSS design methods affects all elements
of the Canvas Bisness Model. Group 3—IOCF is the most complete group. Incomplete
methods containing fragments of the Canvas Bisness Model have been classified in the
other two groups.
2. Can we create new PSS models by combining methods already available in literature?
Combining PSS design methods has not been discussed in the literature so far. Such
activities are possible by comparing the appropriate stages of specific design methods based
on the Canvas Business Model. This turns out to be a new approach to the development of
design methods based on known and available approaches. This concept is very intuitive
and oriented towards the needs of the market and the customer. It allows you to generate
many methods for many industries depending on whether there is such a need.
3. How can we create new PSS models for new industries based on the proposed classification?
The developed classification allows for flexible selection and combination of various
methods in various ways, ranging from combining methods, through interweaving or
crossing their stages, to their extension and supplementation. In some cases, combining
the methods may turn out to be insufficient because, even after combining the methods,
it may turn out that the newly created method does not contain all areas of the Canvas
Bisness Model. It is necessary to extend it with additional steps or modules that will take
into account these areas to create new solutions for the industry on the basis of several
available methods.
The work also has some limitations. The first is the completeness of the study. It is
likely that selecting a different combination of keywords and searching more databases
would find more PSS design methods. Another limitation of this work is a single farm case
study on feeding farm animals.
Further works will focus on developing a PSS design method based on the Business
Model Canvas. That will help in creating a comprehensive approach to PSS design, which
covers all of a company and its resources. The method should have theoretical and practical
implications. In particular, it could be used as a support tool for designers, managers and
marketing professionals. The method should consider customer needs and expectations
and be used in different industries in companies of different sizes.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.S. and A.K.; methodology, M.S. and A.K.; formal
analysis, M.S.; investigation, M.S. and I.J.-G.; resources, M.S.; data curation, M.S.; writing—original
draft preparation, M.S.; writing—review and editing, M.S.; visualization, M.S.; supervision, A.K.,
I.J.-G. and A.E.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: Acknowledgments to Ilona Jacyna-Gołda for financial support for publication.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: Acknowledgments to Ilona Jacyna-Gołda, Andrzej Kraslawski and Aneta Ewa
Waszkiewicz for help with the research.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Gebauer, H. Identifying Service Strategies in Product Manufacturing Companies by Exploring Environment–Strategy Configura-
tions. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2008, 37, 278–291. [CrossRef]
2. Matthyssens, P.; Vandenbempt, K. Moving from Basic Offerings to Value-Added Solutions: Strategies, Barriers and Alignment.
Ind. Mark. Manag. 2008, 37, 316–328. [CrossRef]
3. Vandermerwe, S.; Rada, J. Servitization of Business: Adding Value by Adding Services. Eur. Manag. J. 1988, 6, 314–324. [CrossRef]
4. Salwin, M. Design of Product-Service Systems in Printing Industry. Ph.D. Thesis, Lappeenranta-Lahti University of Technology
LUT, Lappeenranta, Finland, 2021.
5. Manzini, E.; Vezzoli, C. A Strategic Design Approach to Develop Sustainable Product Service Systems: Examples Taken from the
‘Environmentally Friendly Innovation’ Italian Prize. J. Clean. Prod. 2003, 11, 851–857. [CrossRef]
6. Tukker, A. Product Services for a Resource-Efficient and Circular Economy—A Review. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 97, 76–91. [CrossRef]
7. Sholihah, M.; Maezono, T.; Mitake, Y.; Shimomura, Y. PSS Strategic Alignment: Linking Service Transition Strategy with PSS
Business Model. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6245. [CrossRef]
8. Mathieu, V. Service Strategies within the Manufacturing Sector: Benefits, Costs and Partnership. Int. J. Serv. Ind. Manag. 2001, 12,
451–475. [CrossRef]
9. Mont, O.K. Clarifying the Concept of Product–Service System. J. Clean. Prod. 2002, 10, 237–245. [CrossRef]
10. Sawhney, M.; Balasubramanian, S.; Krishnan, V.V. Creating Growth with Services: In a World of Commoditized Products,
Companies Are Turning to Service Offerings for Growth. The Key to Success Involves Redefining Markets in Terms of Customer
Activities and Outcomes, Not Products and Services. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 2004, 45, 34–44.
11. Stahel, W.R. The Performance Economy: Business Models for the Functional Service Economy. In Handbook of Performability
Engineering; Misra, K.B., Ed.; Springer: London, UK, 2008; pp. 127–138, ISBN 978-1-84800-130-5.
12. Muñoz López, N.; Santolaya Sáenz, J.L.; Biedermann, A.; Serrano Tierz, A. Sustainability Assessment of Product–Service Systems
Using Flows between Systems Approach. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3415. [CrossRef]
13. Tischner, U.; Verkuijl, M. Suspronet Report: First Draft Report Of Pss Review; TNO-STB: Delft, The Netherlands, 2002.
14. Salwin, M.; Kraslawski, A.; Lipiak, J.; Goł˛ebiewski, D.; Andrzejewski, M. Product-Service System Business Model for Printing
Houses. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 274, 122939. [CrossRef]
15. Visnjic, I.; Jovanovic, M.; Neely, A.; Engwall, M. What Brings the Value to Outcome-Based Contract Providers? Value Drivers in
Outcome Business Models. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2017, 192, 169–181. [CrossRef]
16. Salwin, M.; Santarek, K.; Kraslawski, A.; Lipiak, J. Product-Service System: A New Opportunity for the Printing Industry. In
Advanced Manufacturing Processes II; Tonkonogyi, V., Ivanov, V., Trojanowska, J., Oborskyi, G., Grabchenko, A., Pavlenko, I., Edl,
M., Kuric, I., Dasic, P., Eds.; Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland,
2021; pp. 83–95, ISBN 978-3-030-68013-8.
17. Goedkoop, M.; van Haler, C.; te Riele, H.; Rommers, P. Product Service-Systems, Ecological and Economic Basics; Report for Dutch
Ministries of Environment (VROM) and Economic Affairs (EZ): Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1999.
18. Omann, I. Product Service Systems and Their Impacts on Sustainable Development: A Multi-Critera Evaluation for Austrian
Companies. Frontiers 2003, 2, 1–34.
19. Tukker, A. Eight Types of Product–Service System: Eight Ways to Sustainability? Experiences from SusProNet. Bus. Strat. Env.
2004, 13, 246–260. [CrossRef]
20. Baines, T.S.; Lightfoot, H.W.; Evans, S.; Neely, A.; Greenough, R.; Peppard, J.; Roy, R.; Shehab, E.; Braganza, A.; Tiwari, A.; et al.
State-of-the-Art in Product-Service Systems. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part. B J. Eng. Manuf. 2007, 221, 1543–1552. [CrossRef]
21. Vladimirova, D.K. Transformation of Traditional Manufacturers towards Servitized Organisations. Ph.D. Thesis, Cranfield
University, Cranfield, UK, 2012.
22. Fargnoli, M.; Haber, N.; Sakao, T. PSS Modularisation: A Customer-Driven Integrated Approach. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2018, 1–17.
[CrossRef]
23. Li, H.; Ji, Y.; Li, Q.; Yang, M.; Evens, S. A Methodology for Module Portfolio Planning within the Service Solution Layer of a
Product–Service System. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2018, 94, 3287–3308. [CrossRef]
24. Müller, P.; Kebir, N.; Stark, R.; Blessing, L. PSS Layer Method—Application to Microenergy Systems. In Introduction to
Product/Service-System Design; Sakao, T., Lindahl, M., Eds.; Springer: London, UK, 2009; ISBN 978-1-84882-908-4.
25. Sakao, T.; Mizuyama, H. Understanding of a Product/Service System Design: A Holistic Approach to Support Design for
Remanufacturing. J. Reman 2014, 4, 1. [CrossRef]
26. Song, W.; Sakao, T. A Customization-Oriented Framework for Design of Sustainable Product/Service System. J. Clean. Prod. 2017,
140, 1672–1685. [CrossRef]
27. Salwin, M.; Gladysz, B.; Santarek, K. Technical Product-Service Systems—A Business Opportunity for Machine Industry. In
Advances in Manufacturing; Hamrol, A., Ciszak, O., Legutko, S., Jurczyk, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham,
Switzerland, 2018; pp. 269–278, ISBN 978-3-319-68618-9.
28. Salwin, M.; Kraslawski, A.; Lipiak, J. State-of-the-Art in Product-Service System Design. In The 10th International Conference on
Engineering, Project, and Production Management; Panuwatwanich, K., Ko, C.-H., Eds.; Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering;
Springer: Singapore, 2020; pp. 645–658, ISBN 9789811519093.
29. Baines, T.S.; Lightfoot, H.; Benedettini, O.; Whitney, D.; Kay, J.M. The Adoption of Servitization Strategies by UK-Based
Manufacturers. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part. B J. Eng. Manuf. 2010, 224, 815–829. [CrossRef]
30. Bech, N.M.; Birkved, M.; Charnley, F.; Laumann Kjaer, L.; Pigosso, D.C.A.; Hauschild, M.Z.; McAloone, T.C.; Moreno, M.
Evaluating the Environmental Performance of a Product/Service-System Business Model for Merino Wool Next-to-Skin Garments:
The Case of Armadillo Merino® . Sustainability 2019, 11, 5854. [CrossRef]
31. Kuo, T.C.; Ma, H.-Y.; Huang, S.H.; Hu, A.H.; Huang, C.S. Barrier Analysis for Product Service System Using Interpretive Structural
Model. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2010, 49, 407–417. [CrossRef]
32. Palo, T.; Tähtinen, J. A Network Perspective on Business Models for Emerging Technology-based Services. J. Bus. Indus Mark.
2011, 26, 377–388. [CrossRef]
33. Aurich, J.C.; Mannweiler, C.; Schweitzer, E. How to Design and Offer Services Successfully. CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol. 2010, 2,
34. Collins, J.A.; Fauser, B.C.J.M. Balancing the Strengths of Systematic and Narrative Reviews. Hum. Reprod. Update 2005, 11,
35. Macpherson, A.; Holt, R. Knowledge, Learning and Small Firm Growth: A Systematic Review of the Evidence. Res. Policy 2007,
36, 172–192. [CrossRef]
36. Pittaway, L.; Robertson, M.; Munir, K.; Denyer, D.; Neely, A. Networking and Innovation: A Systematic Review of the Evidence:
Networking and Innovation: A Systematic Review of the Evidence. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2004, 5–6, 137–168. [CrossRef]
37. Annarelli, A.; Battistella, C.; Nonino, F. Product Service System: A Conceptual Framework from a Systematic Review. J. Clean.
Prod. 2016, 139, 1011–1032. [CrossRef]
38. Weill, P.; Vitale, M.R. Place to Space: Migrating to Ebusiness Models; Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2001;
ISBN 978-1-57851-245-4.
39. Chesbrough, H. The Role of the Business Model in Capturing Value from Innovation: Evidence from Xerox Corporation’s
Technology Spin-off Companies. Ind. Corp. Chang. 2002, 11, 529–555. [CrossRef]
40. Akkermans, J.M.; Gordijn, J. Value-Based Requirements Engineering: Exploring Innovative e-Commerce Ideas. Requir. Eng. 2003,
8, 114–134. [CrossRef]
41. Morris, M.; Schindehutte, M.; Allen, J. The Entrepreneur’s Business Model: Toward a Unified Perspective. J. Bus. Res. 2005, 58,
42. Ballon, P. Business Modelling Revisited: The Configuration of Control and Value. In Proceedings of the 20th Bled eConference
eMergence: Merging and Emerging Technologies, Processes, and Institutions, Bled, Slovenia, 4–6 June 2007; Volume 9, pp. 6–19.
[CrossRef]
43. Bouwman, H.; De Vos, H.; Haaker, T. Mobile Service Innovation and Business Models; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2008;
ISBN 978-3-540-79237-6.
44. Johnson, M.W. Seizing the White Space: Business Model. Innovation for Growth and Renewal; Harvard Business Press: Boston, MA,
USA, 2010; ISBN 978-1-4221-2481-9.
45. Osterwalder, A.; Pigneur, Y.; Clark, T. Business Model. Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers; Wiley:
Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2010; ISBN 978-0-470-87641-1.
46. De Reuver, M.; Bouwman, H.; Haaker, T. Business Model Roadmapping: A Practical Approach to Come from an Existing to a
Desired Business Model. Int. J. Innov. Mgt. 2013, 17, 1340006. [CrossRef]
47. Osterwalder, A.; Pigneur, Y. An E-Business Model Ontology for Modeling e-Business. In Proceedings of the BLED 2002
Proceedings, Bled, Slovenia, 17 June 2002; pp. 75–91.
48. Fielt, E. Business Service Management, Volume 3—Understanding Business Models; Smart Services CRC Pty Ltd.: Sydney, Australia,
2011; Volume 3.
49. Engelhardt, G.; Hammerl, B.; Hinterberger, F.; Manstein, C.; Schnitzer, H.; Vorbach, S.; Jasch, C. Sustainable Products and Services:
Guide for the Development of Sustainable Business; Joanneum Research: Graz, Austria, 2003.
50. James, P.; Slob, A.; Nijhuis, L. Enviromental and Social Well Being in the New Economy: Sustainable Services—An. Innovation Workbook;
Univerisity of Bradford: Bradford, UK, 2001.
51. Abdalla, A. Concept Development and Realization of an Innovation Studio. Master’s Thesis, University of Applied Sciences
Soest, South Westphalia, Germany, Bolton Institute, Bolton, UK, 2003.
52. Weber, C.; Deubel, T. New Theory-Based Concepts for PDM and PLM. In Proceedings of the International Conference on
Engineering Design Iced 03, Stockholm, Sweden, 19–21 August 2003. [CrossRef]
53. Van Halen, C.; Vezzoli, C.; Wimmer, R. Methodology for Product Service System Innovation: How to Develop Clean, Clever and
Competitive Strategies in Companies; Koninklijke Van Gorcum: Assen, The Netherlands, 2005; ISBN 978-90-232-4143-0.
54. Tukker, A.; Tischner, U. New Business for Old Europe: Product-Service Development, Competitiveness and Sustainability; Greenleaf:
Sheffield, UK, 2006; ISBN 978-1-874719-92-2.
55. Barquet, A.P.B.; Steingrímsson, J.G.; Seliger, G.; Rozenfeld, H. Method to Create Proposals for PSS Business Models. Procedia CIRP
2015, 30, 13–17. [CrossRef]
56. Muto, K.; Kimita, K.; Shimomura, Y. A Guideline for Product-Service-Systems Design Process. Procedia CIRP 2015, 30, 60–65.
[CrossRef]
57. Morelli, N. Designing Product/Service Systems: A Methodological Exploration. Des. Issues 2002, 18, 3–17. [CrossRef]
58. Morelli, N. Product-Service Systems, a Perspective Shift for Designers: A Case Study: The Design of a Telecentre. Des. Stud. 2003,
24, 73–99. [CrossRef]
59. Green, K.; Vergragt, P. Towards Sustainable Households: A Methodology for Developing Sustainable Technological and Social
Innovations. Futures 2002, 34, 381–400. [CrossRef]
60. Tukker, A.; Van Halen, C. Innovation Scan Product Service Combinations: Madual; Delft: Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2003.
61. Alonso-Rasgado, T.; Thompson, G.; Elfström, B.-O. The Design of Functional (Total Care) Products. J. Eng. Des. 2004, 15, 515–540.
[CrossRef]
62. Alonso-Rasgado, T.; Thompson, G. A Rapid Design Process for Total Care Product Creation. J. Eng. Des. 2006, 17, 509–531.
[CrossRef]
63. Manzini, E.; Collina, L.; Evans, S. Solution Oriented Partnership, How to Design Industrialised Sustainable Solutions; Cranfield
University: Bredford, UK, 2004; ISBN 978-1-86194-106-0.
64. Evans, S.; Partidário, P.J.; Lambert, J. Industrialization as a Key Element of Sustainable Product-Service Solutions. Int. J. Prod. Res.
2007, 45, 4225–4246. [CrossRef]
65. Matzen, D.; McAloone, T.C. A Tool for Conceptualising in PSS Development. In Proceedings of the Design for X: Beiträge zum 17.
Symposium; Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Lehrstuhl für Konstruktionstechnik: Neukirchen, Germany,
2006; Volume 1, pp. 131–140.
66. Aurich, J.C.; Fuchs, C.; Wagenknecht, C. Life Cycle Oriented Design of Technical Product-Service Systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2006, 14,
1480–1494. [CrossRef]
67. Morelli, N. Developing New Product Service Systems (PSS): Methodologies and Operational Tools. J. Clean. Prod. 2006, 14,
1495–1501. [CrossRef]
68. Welp, E.G.; Meier, H.; Sadek, T.; Sadek, K. modelling approach for the integrated development of industrial product-service
systems. In Manufacturing Systems and Technologies for the New Frontier; Mitsuishi, M., Ueda, K., Kimura, F., Eds.; Springer: London,
UK, 2008; pp. 525–530. ISBN 978-1-84800-266-1.
69. Komoto, H.; Tomiyama, T. Integration of a Service CAD and a Life Cycle Simulator. CIRP Ann. 2008, 57, 9–12. [CrossRef]
70. Rexfelt, O.; Hiort af Ornäs, V. Consumer Acceptance of Product-service Systems: Designing for Relative Advantages and
Uncertainty Reductions. J. Manuf. Tech. Manag. 2009, 20, 674–699. [CrossRef]
71. Maussang, N.; Zwolinski, P.; Brissaud, D. Product-Service System Design Methodology: From the PSS Architecture Design to the
Products Specifications. J. Eng. Des. 2009, 20, 349–366. [CrossRef]
72. Shimomura, Y.; Hara, T.; Arai, T. A Unified Representation Scheme for Effective PSS Development. CIRP Ann. 2009, 58, 379–382.
[CrossRef]
73. Tan, A.R.; McAloone, T.C.; Hagelskjær, L.E. Reflections on Product/Service-System (PSS) Conceptualisation in a Course Setting.
Int. J. Des. Eng. 2009.
74. Kimita, K.; Shimomura, Y.; Arai, T. A Customer Value Model for Sustainable Service Design. CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol. 2009, 1,
75. Wood, L.A.; Tasker, P.H. Service Thinking in Design of Complex Sustainment Solutions. In Complex Engineering Service Systems;
Ng, I., Parry, G., Wild, P., McFarlane, D., Tasker, P., Eds.; Springer: London, UK, 2011; pp. 397–416. ISBN 978-0-85729-188-2.
76. Vasantha, G.V.A.; Hussain, R.; Roy, R.; Tiwari, A.; Evans, S. A Framework for Designing Product-Service Systems; Technical University
of Denmark: Lyngby/Copenhagen, Denmark, 2011.
77. Geum, Y.; Park, Y. Designing the Sustainable Product-Service Integration: A Product-Service Blueprint Approach. J. Clean. Prod.
2011, 19, 1601–1614. [CrossRef]
78. Marques, P.; Cunha, P.F.; Valente, F.; Leitão, A. A Methodology for Product-Service Systems Development. Procedia CIRP 2013, 7,
79. Pezzotta, G.; Pinto, R.; Pirola, F.; Ouertani, M.-Z. Balancing Product-Service Provider’s Performance and Customer’s Value: The
SErvice Engineering Methodology (SEEM). Procedia CIRP 2014, 16, 50–55. [CrossRef]
80. Pezzotta, G.; Pirola, F.; Pinto, R.; Akasaka, F.; Shimomura, Y. A Service Engineering Framework to Design and Assess an
Integrated Product-Service. Mechatronics 2015, 31, 169–179. [CrossRef]
81. Kim, S.; Son, C.; Yoon, B.; Park, Y. Development of an Innovation Model Based on a Service-Oriented Product Service System
(PSS). Sustainability 2015, 7, 14427–14449. [CrossRef]
82. Moser, U.; Maisenbacher, S.; Kasperek, D.; Maurer, M. Definition of an Approach for the Development of Product-Service Systems.
Procedia CIRP 2015, 30, 18–23. [CrossRef]
83. Tran, T.; Park, J.Y. Development of a Strategic Prototyping Framework for Product Service Systems Using Co-Creation Approach.
Procedia CIRP 2015, 30, 1–6. [CrossRef]
84. Ziout, A.; Azab, A. Industrial Product Service System: A Case Study from the Agriculture Sector. Procedia CIRP 2015, 33, 64–69.
[CrossRef]
85. Chiu, M.C.; Kuo, M.Y.; Kuo, T.C. A Systematic Methodology to Develop Business Model of a Product-Service System. Int. J. Ind.
Eng. Theory Appl. Pract. 2015, 22, 369–381.
86. Trevisan, L.; Brissaud, D. Engineering Models to Support Product–Service System Integrated Design. CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol.
2016, 15, 3–18. [CrossRef]
87. Sassanelli, C.; Pezzotta, G.; Pirola, F.; Terzi, S.; Rossi, M. Design for Product Service Supportability (DfPSS) Approach: A State of
the Art to Foster Product Service System (PSS) Design. Procedia CIRP 2016, 47, 192–197. [CrossRef]
88. Scherer, J.O.; Kloeckner, A.P.; Ribeiro, J.L.D.; Pezzotta, G.; Pirola, F. Product-Service System (PSS) Design: Using Design Thinking
and Business Analytics to Improve PSS Design. Procedia CIRP 2016, 47, 341–346. [CrossRef]
89. Andriankaja, H.; Boucher, X.; Medini, K.; Vaillant, H. A Framework to Design Integrated Product-Service Systems Based on the
Extended Functional Analysis Approach. Procedia CIRP 2016, 47, 323–328. [CrossRef]
90. Adrodegari, F.; Pashou, T.; Saccani, N. Business Model Innovation: Process and Tools for Service Transformation of Industrial
Firms. Procedia CIRP 2017, 64, 103–108. [CrossRef]
91. Idrissi, N.A.; Boucher, X.; Medini, K. Generic Conceptual Model to Support PSS Design Processes. Procedia CIRP 2017, 64, 235–240.
[CrossRef]
92. Brezet, J.C.; Bijma, A.S.; Ehrenfeld, J.; Silvester, S. The Design of Eco-Efficient Services. Design for Sustainability Program; Delft
University of Technology: Delft, The Netherlands, 2001; pp. 1–46.
93. Luiten, H.; Knot, M.; van der Horst, T. Sustainable Product-Service-Systems: The Kathalys Method. In Proceedings of the
Proceedings Second International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing; IEEE Computer
Society: Tokyo, Japan, 2001; pp. 190–197.
94. Maxwell, D.; van der Vorst, R. Developing Sustainable Products and Services. J. Clean. Prod. 2003, 11, 883–895. [CrossRef]
95. Halme, M.; Jasch, C.; Scharp, M. Sustainable Homeservices? Toward Household Services That Enhance Ecological, Social and
Economic Sustainability. Ecol. Econ. 2004, 51, 125–138. [CrossRef]
96. Lindahl, M.; Sundin, E.; Öhrwall-Rönnbäck, A.; Öhlund-Sandström, G.; Östlin, J. Integrated Product and Service Engineering—
The IPSE Project. In Proceedings of the Changes to Sustainable Consumption: Workshop of the Sustainable Consumption
Reasearch Exchange (SCORE!), Copenhagen, Denmark, 20–21 April 2006; pp. 1–9.
97. Uchihira, N.; Kyoya, Y.; Kim, S.K.; Maeda, K.; Ozawa, M.; Ishii, K. Analysis and Design Methodology for Recognizing
Opportunities and Difficulties for Product-Based Services. J. Inf. Process. 2008, 16, 13–26. [CrossRef]
98. Uchihira, N.; Kyoya, Y.; Kim, S.K.; Maeda, K.; Ozawa, M.; Ishii, K. Analysis and Design Methodology for Recognizing
Opportunities and Difficulties for Product-Based Services. In Proceedings of the PICMET ’07—2007 Portland International
Conference on Management of Engineering & Technology, Portland, OR, USA, 5–9 August 2007; pp. 2755–2762.
99. Sundin, E.; Lindahl, M.; Ijomah, W. Product Design for Product/Service Systems: Design Experiences from Swedish Industry. J.
Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2009, 20, 723–753. [CrossRef]
100. van de Kar, E. Service System Design Approach, Vandekar Consulting. Available online: http://vandekar.nl/pdf/service_design.
pdf (accessed on 19 June 2018).
101. Lee, J.H.; Shin, D.I.; Hong, Y.S.; Kim, Y.S. Business Model Design Methodology for Innovative Product-Service Systems: A
Strategic and Structured Approach. In Proceedings of the 2011 Annual SRII Global Conference, San Jose, CA, USA, 29 March–2
April 2011; pp. 663–673.
102. Kim, Y.S.; Lee, S.W.; Kim, S.R.; Jeong, H.; Kim, J.H. A Product-Service Systems Design Method with Integration of Product
Elements and Service Elements Using Affordances. In Proceedings of the ServDes.2012 Conference Proceedings Co-Creating
Services, Espoo, Finland, 8–10 February 2012; Volume 67, pp. 111–119.
103. Akasaka, F.; Nemoto, Y.; Chiba, R.; Shimomura, Y. Development of PSS Design Support System: Knowledge-Based Design
Support and Qualitative Evaluation. Procedia CIRP 2012, 3, 239–244. [CrossRef]
104. Dimache, A.; Roche, T. A Decision Methodology to Support Servitisation of Manufacturing. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2013, 33,
1435–1457. [CrossRef]
105. Tran, T.A.; Park, J.Y. Development of Integrated Design Methodology for Various Types of Product—Service Systems. J. Comput.
Des. Eng. 2014, 1, 37–47. [CrossRef]
106. Vezzoli, C.; Kohtala, C.; Srinivasan, A.; Diehl, J.C. Product-Service System Design for Sustainability; Green Leaf: Sheffield, UK, 2014;
ISBN 978-1-906093-67-9.
107. Medini, K.; Boucher, X. Configuration of Product-Service Systems Value Networks—Evidence from an Innovative Sector for
Sludge Treatment. CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol. 2016, 12, 14–24. [CrossRef]
108. Muto, K.; Kimita, K.; Tanaka, H.; Numata, E.; Hosono, S.; Izukura, S.; Shimomura, Y. A Task Management Method for Product
Service Systems Design. Procedia CIRP 2016, 47, 537–542. [CrossRef]
109. Campos, A.R.; Correia, A.T.; Mourtzis, D.; Margarito, A.; Ntalaperas, D. Engineering Environment to Support Product-Service
Design Using Value Chain Data. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation
(ICE/ITMC), Madeira Island, Portugal, 27–29 June 2017; pp. 1465–1471.
110. Chiu, M.-C.; Chu, C.-Y.; Chen, C.-C. An Integrated Product Service System Modelling Methodology with a Case Study of Clothing
Industry. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2018, 56, 2388–2409. [CrossRef]
111. International Labour Conference; Internationales Arbeitsamt. Safety and Health in Agriculture: Sixth Item on the Agenda. 1;
Report/International Labour Conference; International Labour Office: Geneva, Switzerland, 1999; ISBN 978-92-2-111517-5.
112. Annarelli, A.; Battistella, C.; Nonino, F. Open Innovation Practices for Product Service System as a Business Model Innovation.
ISPIM Innov. Symp. 2017, 1–14.
113. Skrzypek, A.; Sagan, S. Otwarte Innowacje w Modelach Biznesowych. Ann. Univ. Mariae Curie-Skłodowska Sectio H Oecon. 2019,
52, 97. [CrossRef]
114. Jabłoński, M. Open Data Business Model: Innovative Aspects of Designing of Business. Studia I Pr. WNEiZ 2018, 52, 41–51.
[CrossRef]
115. Cook, M. Product Service System Innovation in the Smart City. Int. J. Entrep. Innov. 2018, 19, 46–55. [CrossRef]
116. Schutte, C.; Marais, S. The Development of Open Innovation Models to Assist the Innovation Process; University of Stellenbosch:
Stellenbosch, South Africa, 2010; ISBN 978-0-86970-667-1.
117. Onetti, A. Turning Open Innovation into Practice: Trends in European Corporates. J. Bus. Strategy 2021, 42, 51–58. [CrossRef]
118. Gay, B. Open Innovation, Networking, and Business Model Dynamics: The Two Sides. J. Innov. Entrep. 2014, 3, 2. [CrossRef]
119. Yun, J.J.; Yang, J.; Park, K. Open Innovation to Business Model: New Perspective to Connect between Technology and Market. Sci.
Technol. Soc. 2016, 21, 324–348. [CrossRef]
120. Wikhamn, B.R. Path Dependence as a Barrier for “soft” and “Open” Innovation. IJBIR 2011, 5, 714. [CrossRef]
121. Saebi, T.; Foss, N.J. Business Models for Open Innovation: Matching Heterogeneous Open Innovation Strategies with Business
Model Dimensions. Eur. Manag. J. 2015, 33, 201–213. [CrossRef]
122. Jablonski, A.; Jablonski, M. Digital Business Models: Perspectives on Monetisation; Routledge Studies in Innovation, Organizations
and Technology; Routledge: Abingdon, UK; Oxon: New York, NY, USA, 2021; ISBN 978-0-367-33865-7.
123. Shaikh, I.; Randhawa, K. Managing the Risks and Motivations of Technology Managers in Open Innovation: Bringing Stakeholder-
Centric Corporate Governance into Focus. Technovation 2022, 114, 102437. [CrossRef]
124. Velamuri, V.K.; Bansemir, B.; Neyer, A.-K.; Möslein, K.M. Product service systems as a driver for business model innovation:
Lessons learned from the manufacturing industry. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2013, 17, 1340004. [CrossRef]
125. Marilungo, E.; Coscia, E.; Quaglia, A.; Peruzzini, M.; Germani, M. Open Innovation for Ideating and Designing New Product
Service Systems. Procedia CIRP 2016, 47, 305–310. [CrossRef]
126. Lipiak, J.; Salwin, M. The Improvement of Sustainability with Reference to the Printing Industry—Case Study. In Advances in
Manufacturing II; Hamrol, A., Grabowska, M., Maletic, D., Woll, R., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland,
2019; pp. 254–266. ISBN 978-3-030-17268-8.
127. Globocnik, D.; Faullant, R.; Parastuty, Z. Bridging Strategic Planning and Business Model Management – A Formal Control
Framework to Manage Business Model Portfolios and Dynamics. Eur. Manag. J. 2020, 38, 231–243. [CrossRef]
128. Rong, K.; Patton, D.; Chen, W. Business Models Dynamics and Business Ecosystems in the Emerging 3D Printing Industry. Technol.
Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2018, 134, 234–245. [CrossRef]
129. Eskandari, Z.; Avazzadeh, Z.; Khoshsiar Ghaziani, R. Complex Dynamics of a Kaldor Model of Business Cycle with Discrete-Time.
Chaos Solitons Fractals 2022, 157, 111863. [CrossRef]
130. Vasquez-Delsolar, M.; Merino, A. Social Enterprises towards a Sustainable Business System: A Model of Institutional Dynamics.
Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2021, 40, 663–679. [CrossRef]
131. Peñarroya-Farell, M.; Miralles, F. Business Model Dynamics from Interaction with Open Innovation. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark.
Complex. 2021, 7, 81. [CrossRef]
132. Achtenhagen, L.; Melin, L.; Naldi, L. Dynamics of Business Models—Strategizing, Critical Capabilities and Activities for Sustained
Value Creation. Long Range Plan. 2013, 46, 427–442. [CrossRef]
133. Chesbrough, H. Business Model Innovation: Opportunities and Barriers. Long Range Plan. 2010, 43, 354–363. [CrossRef]
View publication stats

The Use of Business Model Canvas in The Design and Classification of Product-Service Systems Design Methods

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Use of Business Model Canvas in The Design and Classification of Product-Service Systems Design Methods

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Article in Sustainability · April 2022

Mariusz Salwin Ilona Jacyna-Gołda

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Andrzej Kraslawski Aneta Waszkiewicz

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Received: 10 February 2022

Sustainability 2022, 14, 4283. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074283 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

2.2. Systematic Review

2.3. Selection of Business Model Canvas

Table 1. Business module analysis.

Technology/market Entrepreneur’s business The Four-Box Business Business model

3.1. Group 1—IO (Infrastructure + Offering)

No. Target Industry

Intersectoral approach, food processing, metal, plastics indus-

3.2. Group 2—IOC (Infrastructure + Offering + Customers)

No. The Authors of the Method Target Industry

Cars (mobility), home appliances, office

4. Universal Product-Service System Design Stage

4.3. Financial Analysis

These methods may be combined in the following way:

6.2. Discussion: Open Business Model with Open Innovation Dynamics

improve your value proposition by delivering better product-related services, analyzing

View publication stats

You might also like