European Management Journal (2009) 27, 442– 455

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/emj

Service-based business concepts: A typology

for business-to-business markets
Gunter Lay, Marcus Schroeter *, Sabine Biege

Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research, Breslauer Str. 48, 76139 Karlsruhe, Germany

KEYWORDS Summary Manufacturing industries are increasingly applying alternative business con-
Service-based business cepts, transforming traditional buyer–supplier relationships into new exchange models
concepts; of deliveries and payments. In scientific debates on this phenomenon, however, there
Equipment supply exist neither consistent terms nor standardised characteristics. This article aims to pro-
industry; vide a set of parameters that relate the broad variety of scientific papers in this field
Business-to-business of research to a common framework. By applying this framework to multiple case studies,
services; a preliminary typology of new business concepts emerges. These findings have implica-
Case study approach; tions for managerial decisions on adopting new business concepts. Our work also suggests
Typology future research directions.
ª 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction
The shift of manufacturing companies from product-focused
to service-focused operations—also called ‘‘servicizing’’
(Rothenberg, 2007) and ‘‘tertiarisation’’ (Leo and Philippe,
2001) has been of interest to researchers for at least a dec-
ade. Several classification schemes have been developed to
distinguish between different types of product-related ser-
vices (Lalonde and Zinszer, 1976; Frambach et al., 1997;
Boyt and Harvey, 1997; Mathieu, 2001; Gebauer and Pütz,
2007). These classification approaches describe product-re-
lated services including low-end, or traditional services, and
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +49 (0)721 68 09338; fax: +49 (0)721
689152.
E-mail addresses: gunter.lay@isi.fraunhofer.de (G. Lay),
marcus.schroeter@isi.fraunhofer.de (M. Schroeter), sabine.biege@
isi.fraunhofer.de (S. Biege).
high-end, or advanced services. Gebauer and Pütz (2007)
used ‘‘customer support services’’ as a synonym for
advanced services. Some authors characterise these second
kinds of services as ‘‘high-value integrated solutions’’
(Davies et al., 2007) and associate increasing importance
with this approach to combining products and services.
First, the marketing literature has noted a tendency to-
wards advanced services. Manufacturers change the focus
of their business-to-business concepts from selling products
to providing solutions (Grönroos, 2000). New business con-
cepts, such as high-end types of product-related services,
can also be found in literature that deals with the sustain-
ability aspect of industrial production. Literature describing
sustainable business concepts (see, e.g., Rothenberg, 2007;
Tukker, 2004; Mont, 2002; Goedkoop et al., 1999) contains
various advanced services elements. The factors that we
consider important for the design of sustainable business

0263-2373/$ - see front matter ª 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.emj.2009.04.002
Service-based business concepts: A typology for business-to-business markets
concepts overlap to some extent with the parameters com-
monly found in the marketing literature. A third strand of re-
search addresses sector-specific developments in the
chemical industry and energy-consuming sectors (Stoughton
and Votta, 2003; Mont et al., 2006). Some recently published
research results describe business concepts established by
chemical product manufacturers. These manufacturers man-
age chemicals for their clients instead of merely selling
them. Similarly, business concepts introduced by energy-
consuming equipment manufacturers also extend to con-
tracting concepts. Considering these different developments
and rationales, we see a common trend in manufacturing
industries towards new business concepts in business-to-
business markets. The effect is that manufacturing industry
players become service providers. Due to this shift, manu-
facturing companies need to change their strategies and
build new business concepts (Neu and Brown, 2005).
To the best of our knowledge, a viable and basic ap-
proach to generate and structure these new concepts has
not been documented to date. A diversified bibliography
has not yet been consolidated, nor has the literature pre-
sented an instrument to differentiate the multiplicity of
methods that describe new business concepts in a well-
defined and comprehensive way. Thus, to address this re-
search gap, we designed a framework based on a review
of pertinent literature that may help to distinguish new
business concepts based on their characteristic features.
On the basis of this framework, we developed a typology
of new service-based business concepts by interpreting 17
case studies that we conducted in different industrial sec-
tors. This typology provides a classification scheme that
decision makers can use to develop meaningful strategies
for implementing service-based business concepts. Based
on property rights theory, we deduce the economic effects
resulting from these concepts. To conclude, we discuss
managerial implications, limitations of our research ap-
proach and directions for future investigations.
Review of literature on new business concepts
In the following section, we analyse relevant literature in
order to identify the characteristics of new business con-
cepts. Our analysis focuses on the question of whether there
are similarities in these innovative business concepts that
may help to distinguish between these and more traditional
ways of doing business.
Marketing literature on new business concepts for
advanced services
In one strand of marketing literature, new business concepts
are characterised as offering ‘‘full service contracts’’
(Stremersch et al., 2001; Kumar and Kumar, 2004). Full ser-
vice contracts are defined as ‘‘. . . a comprehensive bundle
of products and/or services, that fully satisfies the needs
and wants of a customer related to a specific event or prob-
lem’’ (Stremersch et al., 2001, p. 2). The responsibility of
the equipment provider for all maintenance activities and
a new payment model (Kumar and Kumar, 2004) are the
key characteristics of a full-service contract. Instead of
charging the customer for a number of hours of mechanical
443
engineering work for a fixed unit price per hour, the new pay-
ment model focuses on the success of maintenance activities
in the context of contract remuneration (Stremersch et al.,
2001).
‘‘Performance-based contracting’’ and ‘‘performance-
based logistics’’ are labels used to characterise new business
concepts in another strand of the marketing literature
(Kim et al., 2007, Aberdeen Group, 2007). Based on studies
conducted in industries like military and aerospace, these
authors uncovered business concepts that aimed to ensure
the availability of a product. One of the main characteristics
of these business concepts is that compensation for the
equipment is paid based on the actual availability of the
product to the customer (Kim et al., 2007). In addition to
the parameters ‘‘responsibility for maintenance’’ and ‘‘pay-
ment model,’’ used to characterise the full-service contracts
mentioned above, the authors dealing with the concept of
‘‘performance-based contracting’’ introduced ‘‘ownership
of the equipment’’ and ‘‘ownership of spare parts’’ to fully
represent this concept.
‘‘High-value integrated solutions’’ is an expression used
by Davies et al. (2007) and Windahl (2007) to describe a con-
cept of advanced services for high-cost capital goods, e.g.,
aircraft engines. In comparison to the concepts of ‘‘full ser-
vice contracts’’ and ‘‘performance based contracting,’’ the
provider of high-value integrated solutions is responsible
not only for maintenance tasks, but also for the operational
personnel and the financing of the system during its life
cycle (Davies et al., 2007). The owner of the system can
be either the customer or the service provider. In a business
model for high-value integrated solutions in which the ser-
vice provider is the owner of the system, the customer
‘‘pays according to level of usage or in relation to obtained
cost savings’’ (Windahl, 2007, p. 5). Thus, the design param-
eters used by the authors to present their concept are
‘‘responsibility for maintenance,’’ ‘‘responsibility for oper-
ations,’’ ‘‘financing the system’’ and ‘‘payment.’’
Markeset and Kumar (2005) introduced the concept of
the ‘‘functional product.’’ The value proposition of this
business concept is the ‘‘. . . process of continuously deliver-
ing the function according to some agreed upon perfor-
mance criteria . . .’’ (Markeset and Kumar, 2005, p. 61).
This concept is characterised by the following parameters.
The manufacturer of the capital good retains the ownership
of the physical product that is used to deliver the desired
service for the customer. The manufacturer is also respon-
sible for operations and maintenance (Alonso-Rasgado
et al., 2004; Kumar and Kumar, 2004; Markeset and Kumar
2003). The core of this concept is that ‘‘. . . the customer
buys the performance, not the product and the related ser-
vices’’ (Markeset and Kumar, 2005, p. 64). As a result, the
authors use the parameters ‘‘responsibility for mainte-
nance,’’ ‘‘responsibility for operations’’ and ‘‘payment’’
to map their concept of the ‘‘functional product.’’
The concept of ‘‘functional sales’’ (Ölundh and Ritzen,
2001; Sundin et al., 2005; Sundin and Bras, 2005) is similar
to the aforementioned ‘‘functional product.’’ The focus of
functional sales is in ‘‘. . . reference to the customer value,
to optimise the functional solution from a life-cycle per-
spective’’ (Sundin et al., 2005, p. 1). The main idea behind
the functional sales concept is the freedom of the service
provider to decide how to deliver the function purchased
444
by the customer (Sundin and Bras, 2005). Nevertheless, the
ownership of the physical product is not obvious in a ‘‘func-
tional sales’’ transaction. It can either be passed to the cus-
tomer or remain with the manufacturer (Ölundh and Ritzen,
2001).
Oliva and Kallenberg (2003) characterise equipment sup-
plier services that are relationship-based and focused on
end-user processes with the term ‘‘operational services.’’
This type of product-related service is considered one of
the most demanding new business concepts. Operational
services are ‘‘managing maintenance functions’’ and ‘‘man-
aging operations’’ (Oliva and Kallenberg, 2003, p. 168).
Characteristic attributes of the ‘‘managing maintenance
functions’’ service include the manufacturerÕs provision of
all services for a fixed price over an agreed period, instead
of charging the customer for every single service. One
example of such a service is a maintenance contract where
the service provider is paid for operational availability
(Oliva and Kallenberg, 2003). ‘‘Managing operations’’ is a
service where the producer integrates the customerÕs main-
tenance or operating organisation and takes over the oper-
ating risks of the customer (Oliva and Kallenberg, 2003,
p. 168). Oliva and Kallenberg (2003) use the parameters
‘‘responsibility for maintenance,’’ ‘‘responsibility for oper-
ations’’ and ‘‘payment’’ to describe the concepts ‘‘manag-
ing maintenance functions’’ and ‘‘managing operations.’’
The chosen parameters match those of Markeset and Kumar
(2005) in their ‘‘functional product’’ concept description.
Toffel (2002) introduced the term ‘‘selling functional-
ity’’ to describe a new business concept for advanced ser-
vices. The realisation of this concept changes ‘‘. . . the
nature of the relationship between manufacturer and cus-
tomers by aligning their incentives to reduce the total cost
of product functionality over its entire life span, which has
the potential to influence product design’’ (Toffel, 2002, p.
2). The author reconceived this business concept from a
transaction cost economics perspective. He defines the
business model of servicising as follows. The customer buys
the functionality of the product instead of buying the prod-
uct. As a result, the producer retains the ownership. The
producer is also responsible for maintaining the product
and the operational location is not fixed. The equipment
can be located either at the manufacturerÕs site or at the
customerÕs location. There are also two options with regard
to product operation. It is possible that either the manufac-
turer or the customer may use the product to achieve the
desired result. Consequently, Toffel (2002) considers the
parameters ‘‘ownership,’’ ‘‘payment,’’ ‘‘location,’’ ‘‘res-
ponsibility for maintenance,’’ ‘‘responsibility for opera-
tion’’ and ‘‘take-back, recovery and disposal’’ as important
for shaping the business concept of servicising.
Literature on sustainability in the context of new
business concepts
Just as with the marketing literature, research focusing on
sustainability often deals with the phenomenon of ‘‘new
business concepts.’’ Within this research arena, innovative
business relations between equipment suppliers and their
customers are discussed predominantly with the terms
‘‘product-service systems’’ ( Tukker, 2004; Mont, 2002;
G. Lay et al.
Goedkoop et al., 1999), ‘‘eco-efficient producer services’’
(Bartolomeo et al., 2003) and ‘‘sustainable product-service
systems’’ (Roy, 2000).
In the literature, product-service systems are classified
into three sub-categories: product-oriented services, use-
oriented services and result-oriented services ( Williams,
2005; Tukker, 2004). While product-oriented services are
comprised of traditional services like maintenance, financ-
ing, and consultancy services, use-oriented services and re-
sult-oriented services are more advanced and, as such,
require new business concepts.
Use-oriented services, such as shared utilisation services,
are characterised by equipment producers who aim to in-
crease the capacity utilisation of products. Literature dif-
ferentiates among three options for use oriented services
with regard to the productsÕ accessibility to the customer
(Tukker, 2004; Roy, 2000):
• If customers lease the product, the equipment supplier
becomes a service provider by retaining the ownership
and assuming responsibility for maintenance. The cus-
tomers pay a regular fee for unlimited individual access
to the product instead of investing in the equipment.
• If customers rent the product, the responsibilities and
contractual regulations are similar to the concept men-
tioned above, except for one major difference: the user
does not have unlimited individual access. This concept
implies that the equipment is used sequentially by differ-
ent users.
• If customers choose the concept of ‘‘product pooling,’’
one crucial difference emerges: the equipment is used
simultaneously by several users instead of a sequential
mode of use.
Result-oriented services imply that customers buy a
result instead of a product, or the use of a product. In the
literature, three different modes of result-oriented services
are distinguished:
• Tukker (2004) assigns outsourcing to result-oriented ser-
vices because ‘‘most of the outsourcing contracts include
performance indicators to control the quality of the out-
sourced service’’ (Tukker, 2004, p. 249). The service pro-
vider usually assumes responsibility for operation and
maintenance.
• In ‘‘pay per service unit-concepts,’’ the physical product
is still the basis for the product-service system. The own-
ership of the product is assumed by the service provider
and the user buys an output of product that is consistent
with the level of use. The service provider not only cov-
ers the obligation to supply the consumables of the cap-
ital product, to repair and maintain the product, but also
to replace it when needed (Tukker, 2004).
• The ‘‘functional result concept’’ relies mainly on an
agreement between the service provider and user on a
final result without specifying how the result is achieved
(Tukker, 2004). Consequently, the service provider owns
all the physical equipment necessary to deliver the
promised result. Moreover, the provider is responsible
for operating, maintaining, retrieving and recycling the
capital equipment (Roy, 2000).
Service-based business concepts: A typology for business-to-business markets
Looking at the overall concept of ‘‘product-service sys-
tems’’ including all its sub-categories, the key defining
parameters include ‘‘ownership of the equipment,’’ ‘‘pay-
ment model,’’ ‘‘responsibility for operations,’’ ‘‘responsi-
bility for maintenance,’’ ‘‘responsibility for supply of
consumables’’ and ‘‘responsibility for retrieval, recycling
and replacement of the equipment.’’
Additionally, Roy (2000) and Stahel (1997) note product-
life extension services. With this kind of service, providers
intend to ‘‘. . . increase the useful life of products or mate-
rials through maintenance, repair, reuse and recycling.’’
(Roy, 2000, p. 296). The tasks of the service provider include
the proper supply of the physical products, maintenance,
upgrades in case of technological innovations or changing
customer requirements and the efficient retrieval of the
products (Roy, 2000; Bartolomeo et al., 2003; Mont, 2002).
Literature on sector-specific trends in the context
of new business concepts
In addition to the sustainability-oriented and marketing-ori-
ented literature, new business concepts are also mentioned
in scientific papers that consider sector-specific trends,
especially in the chemical industry and energy-consuming
sectors.
As far as the chemical industry is concerned, several
authors describe a business concept called ‘‘chemical man-
agement service’’ (Reiskin et al., 1999; Stoughton and
Votta, 2003; Mont et al., 2006; Eder and Delgado, 2006).
This concept is defined as ‘‘a business model in which a cus-
tomer engages with a service provider in a strategic, long-
term contract to supply and manage the customerÕs
chemical and related services’’ (Stoughton and Votta,
2003). The revenue of the provider depends on ‘‘. . . how
well the function of the chemical is delivered . . .’’
(Mont et al., 2006, p. 282). Chemical service providers are
responsible for supply and management of the chemicals.
Hence, providers have an incentive to reduce the volume
of chemicals that is necessary to provide sufficient utility
for the customer. The lower the amount of chemicals
needed, the higher the profit for the chemical service pro-
vider (Reiskin et al., 1999). Eder and Delgado (2006) divide
business models for chemical management services into two
subgroups with respect to ownership of the chemicals and
liability. Within the first group, Eder and Delgado (2006)
classify business models in which the chemical supplier still
sells the chemicals to the customer. In contrast to the tra-
ditional business model, this kind of business concept is
comprised of services such as inventory management, appli-
cation advice, recycling and waste treatment (Eder and Del-
gado, 2006). If the chemical supplier additionally assumes
liability and retains ownership of the chemicals, the sup-
plier is also responsible for the application and the manage-
ment (inventory, storage, recycling and waste treatment) of
the chemicals. The supplier receives payments for the per-
formance of the chemical service, e.g., number of painted
cars (Eder and Delgado, 2006).
In summarising the literature pertaining to chemical
management services, several characteristics of this busi-
ness concept are notable: ownership of chemicals after
delivery to the customer, responsibility for the application
445
of chemicals, inventory management, application advice,
payment model and responsibility for recycling and waste
management.
A second relevant sector-specific trend is reported in the
literature that analyses the innovative business concepts of
energy providers. The most common terms describing pro-
cesses of servicising in this industry are ‘‘energy service
contracting’’ (Sorrell, 2007; Helle, 1997) and ‘‘performance
contracting for energy services’’ (OECD, 2004). Energy ser-
vice contracting is defined as ‘‘the outsourcing of one or
more energy-related services to a third party’’ ( Sorrell,
2007, p. 507). Energy service contracts frequently contain
regulations regarding the installation of new energy-con-
suming equipment, the financing of this equipment, the
ownership of the equipment during use, the energy streams,
the activities necessary to supply energy, the performance
level and the payment model ( Sorrell, 2007). Therefore,
these parameters distinguish the traditional business rela-
tions between energy providers and their customers from
the innovative ones.
Summary of literature review
Table 1 shows a summary of the characteristics that appear
in the management literature to describe new modes of
doing business. It is clear that each concept presented in
the literature has been characterised as following a differ-
ent structure. To date, a homogeneous set of parameters
has not been applied. Hence, it remains unclear if business
concepts mentioned in the literature vary, or if they are
similar but have not yet been comprehensively character-
ised. Conversely, Table 1 clearly shows that a comprehen-
sive picture of new business concepts can be drawn with
information about a few basic parameters. We develop a
descriptive framework for these business concepts in the
following section.
Framework for the description of new business
concepts
With the development of a framework for the description
of new business concepts, we intend to accomplish three
main objectives: (1) to provide a structure that cogently
combines the diverse array of reports and papers that deal
with new business concepts from a variety of different per-
spectives, (2) to make the concepts comparable and trans-
parent and (3) to contribute to a framework for addressing
these types of business transactions from a managerial
point of view. To achieve these objectives, the framework
must include descriptive parameters of new business con-
cepts, as well as lists of corresponding specifications for
each parameter. These specifications should characterise
the optional features of the parameters comprehensively.
A Morphological Box (Zwicky and Wilson, 1967) seemed to
be the most effective instrument to graphically represent
such a framework.
Based on the parameters identified in our literature re-
view (cf. Table 1) and building on our experiences with pilot
applications of framework ideas as presented by Urbani and
Pasek (2002) and Lay et al. (2003), it seems appropriate to
compose the framework for the description of new business
 446
Table 1 New business concepts.
Parameters New business
introduced to describe concepts
new business concepts Full service Performance-based Integrated Functional Functional Servicisingf Product Product-life Chemical Energy service
contractsa contractingb solutionsc productd salese service extension management contractingj
systemsg servicesh servicesi
Ownership Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Financing Yes Yes
Production personnel Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Maintenance Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes yes Yes Yes Yes
personnel
Payment Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Number of customers Yes
Location of operation Yes
Retrieval, recycling Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
a
Stremersch et al., 2001; Kumar and Kumar, 2004.
b
Aberdeen Group, 2007.
c
Windahl, 2007; Davies et al., 2007.
d
Kumar and Kumar, 2004; Markeset and Kumar, 2005.
e
Ölundh and Ritzen, 2001; Sundin et al., 2005; Sundin and Bras, 2005.
f
Toffel, 2002.
g
Tukker, 2004; Williams, 2005.
h
Stahel, 1997; Roy, 2000.
i
Stoughton and Votta, 2003; Mont et al., 2006; Reiskin et al., 1999.
j
Sorrell, 2007; OECD, 2004.

G. Lay et al.
Service-based business concepts: A typology for business-to-business markets 447

concepts using the following parameters: ‘‘ownership dur-
ing phase of use,’’ ‘‘ownership after phase of use,’’
‘‘responsibility for production personnel,’’ ‘‘responsibility
for maintenance personnel,’’ ‘‘payment model,’’ ‘‘number
of customers’’ and ‘‘location of operation.’’
The parameter ‘‘ownership during the phase of use’’ de-
fines which party has the property rights to the machinery or
other equipment during the term of the contract. The man-
ufacturer can either remain in the possession of the equip-
ment or sell it to the customer upon completion. There also
exist a range of other options between these two extremes.
The machinery can either be sold to a bank that leases the
equipment back to the equipment supplier or to the cus-
tomer. The customer has the option to form a joint venture
with a bank or any third party to buy the machinery. This list
of optional features includes financing aspects that have not
been represented in a separate parameter to date.
‘‘Ownership after phase of use’’ describes who has the
right of disposition after the contract expires. Two reason-
able options are commonly adopted. After the phase of
operating the machinery, depending on which party previ-
ously assumed ownership, the equipment can either remain
the property of the equipment supplier or can be sold back
to the supplier for upgrading or recycling. The machinery
property rights can also stay in the possession of the
customer or be retained after a joint venture is terminated
or a contract with a leasing bank and/or the equipment sup-
plier expires. As listed above, responsibility for retrieval,
recycling and replacement of the equipment is a criterion
specified in the bibliography. In our opinion, this parameter
can be subsumed under ‘‘ownership after phase of use’’ as
the party with the property rights to the equipment is
responsible for recycling.
The ‘‘operating personnel’’ characteristic describes the
allocation of the workforce in a business concept. The pro-
duction process necessarily includes manufacturing as well
as maintenance activities. The responsibilities for these
two areas can either be assumed by one party or by differ-
ent participants. Equipment producers as well as customers
can hire the necessary personnel. In the case of a joint ven-
ture, the staff can be hired by one of the two aforemen-
tioned parties or by the joint venture entities.
With respect to the ‘‘location of operation,’’ there exist
three options. Besides the equipment producerÕs and the cus-
tomerÕs establishments, a third alternative can be thought of:
allocating the equipment using a so-called supply park, in
which suppliers establish their plants ‘‘fence-to-fence’’ be-
side the facilities of their customer.
This last parameter is strongly connected to the ‘‘exclu-
sivity of use of the machinery’’ (Lay et al., 2003). In cases

Characteristic Features Options

during phase Equipment Operating joint

Leasing bank Customer
of use producer venture
Ownership
after phase of Equipment Operating joint
Leasing bank Customer
use producer venture
Equipment Operating
Manufacturing Customer
producer joint venture
Personnel
Equipment Operating
Maintenance Customer
producer joint venture
Equipment producer's Establishment "fence to Customer's
Location of operation
establishment fence" to the customer establishment
Single / multiple In parallel operation for multiple
Operation for a single customer
customer operation customers

pay per pay for fixed pay for

Payment model
unit availability rate equipment

Figure 1 Morphological Box as a framework to describe new business concepts.

Characteristic Features Options

during phase Equipment Operating joint

Leasing bank Customer
of use producer venture
Ownership
after phase of Equipment Operating joint
Leasing bank Customer
use producer venture
Equipment Operating
Manufacturing Customer
producer joint venture
Personnel
Equipment Operating
Maintenance Customer
producer joint venture
Equipment producer's Establishment "fence to Customer's
Location of operation
establishment fence" to the customer establishment

Single / multiple In parallel operation for multiple

Operation for a single customer
customer operation customers

pay per pay for fixed pay for

Payment model
unit availability rate equipment

Figure 2 New business concept Type I, focused on payment and ownership.

448 G. Lay et al.

where the production system does not operate in the cus-
tomerÕs plant, a choice can be made between single-cus-
tomer operations, where the demand of just one customer
is met with the production machine, and multi-customer
operations, where several customers are served by the out-
put of a single production facility.
As a final parameter to describe business concepts, we
consider the ‘‘payment model.’’ In a traditional purchase
framework, a payment is made for the utilities. Further-
more, it is possible to pay for the actual time the machin-
ery is available for production (pay on availability) or to
pay for the units produced on the machinery (pay per
unit). A fixed rate is also possible, which is paid per time
unit.
In combining these parameters and optional features,
the Morphological Box depicted in Figure 1 emerges. In this
common framework, each of the ‘‘paths’’ through the Mor-
phological Box from top to bottom represents a possible
business concept.
The ‘‘traditional’’ business concepts can be found on the
right side of the Morphological Box. Here, the equipment
producer sells the machinery to his customer who operates
it on his companyÕs site. The customer only pays for the
equipment since the customerÕs employees are responsible
for manufacturing operations as well as for maintaining
the machine. The number of units manufactured meets
the needs of only one customer, the owner of the
machinery.
The concept of outsourcing entire business processes
from customers to equipment suppliers is represented by a
path on the far left of the Morphological Box. Given this
path, the equipment producer retains ownership of the
equipment and employs operations and maintenance per-
sonnel. The equipment is installed in the customerÕs produc-
tion plant and parts are produced on this equipment for
multiple customers, who pay on a per-part basis.
Case studies: methodology and results
To gain a better perspective on how these new business con-
cepts work in practice, an interview-driven case study ap-
proach seemed to be an appropriate research strategy.
Compared to traditional questionnaires, the case study
method is more qualitative because it allows for a gathering
of open suggestions and useful inputs. These open-ended re-
sponses are needed in this phase of research, which deals
with less structured topics. Hence, we employed a multi-
case research design ( Eisenhardt, 1989; Miles and Huber-
man, 1994; Perry, 1998). This methodological approach
guarantees a high standard of validity and reliability of re-
sults ( Yin, 1994). The study was well-suited for case re-
search because new business concepts in equipment-
producing companies are still a new phenomenon, which
has not been sufficiently explored by academic researchers.
The cases were not sampled randomly; they were based
on information about the activities of equipment-producing
companies in the field of advanced product-related services
and new ways of organising business. Hence, we selected
only companies that we knew to be active in the field of
new business concepts because only this group of enter-
prises guaranteed the applicability of our proposed
framework.
The case study research was based on a guided interview.
This instrument was designed to elicit information in a
loosely structured way around three primary topics: (1) cor-
porate profile data and the history of the development of
new business concepts, (2) the description of one or more
of the new business concepts realised using the descriptive
framework and (3) objectives for and experiences with new
business concepts. The interview guide consisted of two
types of questions: unstructured, which allowed intervie-
wees to report on their experiences, and structured, which
ensured that our initial objectives were addressed if they

Table 2 Case studies and company characteristics.

Case Case study company (supplier of Products of case study companies Customer
business concept)
By sector By size
A Mechanical engineering Large Water treatment equipment Local authorities
B Chemical industry Large Paint mixing system Steel producing industry
C Mechanical engineering Large Air separation plant Process industry
D Machine tool industry SME Lathes Automotive, engineering
E Machine tool industry Large Gear hobbing machines Automotive
F Machine tool industry Large Lathes Automotive, engineering
G Mechanical engineering SME Laser equipment Automotive
H Mechanical engineering SME Packaging machines Food, health
I Mechanical engineering SME Automation modules Automotive, aerospace
J Automotive Large Parts for cars and trucks Automotive
K Industrial services Large Oil and gas plants Process industry,
L Industrial services Large Steel tubes, engineering, health Health, process industry
M Mechanical engineering Large Packaging machines Food, health
N Chemical/plastic Large Plastic production line Various sectors
O Machine tool industry SME EDM machines Mould and die, automotive
P Mould making SME Turn-key systems Packaging sector
Q Machine tool industry Large Milling and grinding machines Aerospace
Service-based business concepts: A typology for business-to-business markets 449

did not arise during the unstructured part of the interview
(Perry, 1998). This interview guideline was tested for prac-
ticality before use.
Case study questions from our interview guide were as-
signed to those staff members who were most familiar with
a given topic. Furthermore, relevant company documenta-
tion was provided in some cases – this was analysed and
served as a second source of evidence.
Case study interviews were conducted between Novem-
ber 2005 and May 2006. They lasted from 2 to 4 h. We did
not record the interviews due to the sensitivity of the inter-
view content. Because new business concepts in all the
companies were of strategic and competitive importance,
company representatives insisted on strict interview confi-
dentiality. To cope with the problem of having no access
to transcriptions, each case study interview was conducted
by two researchers. This gave us the opportunity for exten-
sive note-taking. Based on the notes from our interviews,
company documentation and additional sources (if avail-
able), each case was documented in an exhaustive case re-
port. Individual case reports were reviewed by case
participants to strengthen construct validity ( Eisenhardt,
1989; Yin, 1994). Afterwards, the reports were sent back
to the case study companies for feedback and revision.
Overall, we conducted 17 case studies across four European
countries. Table 2 characterises case study companies by
sector, size, products and industries.
After completing the case reports, a cross-case analysis
was conducted to synthesise findings from all cases primar-
ily using a pattern-matching approach (Yin, 1994). Certain
key results from the case studies are summarised in Table 3.
The data indicate that the ownership of equipment in the
cases analysed predominantly remains with the equipment
producers. In 10 of 17 cases, equipment manufacturers rea-
lised new business concepts in which they did not sell their
products but instead continued to use them. Three cases
were characterised by the involvement of a leasing bank
and by a joint venture, which invested in the equipment
and became the owner.
‘‘Manufacturing personnel’’ in new business concepts
were found to be employed equally by equipment producers
and by customer companies. In two cases, joint ventures
had been established to employ manufacturing staff. In con-
trast, maintenance personnel seemed to be employed
mainly by the equipment producers. Hence, new business
concepts might induce a shift of maintenance staff from
the payrolls of equipment users to equipment producers.
This could indicate that new business concepts may focus
on reducing downtimes associated with high-technology
equipment by shifting responsibility to the equipment pro-
ducerÕs highly qualified staff. Such employees would be
familiar with the peculiarities of the equipment.
Furthermore, our results indicate that it is still customary
to realise new business concepts predominantly by installing
equipment in customer plants. New ownership modes or new
responsibilities for employing personnel only led to a reloca-
tion of equipment to the equipment producerÕs site or to
investments in production facilities that were, in four cases,
‘‘fence-to-fence’’ with customersÕ sites.
Payment specifications for new business concepts are
frequently characterised by a hybrid model. Fixed rates
are combined with pay-per-part remuneration or with avail-
ability-based rates. Overall, the modification of payment
models in new business concepts contributes to a shift of
risk from the customers to the producers of manufacturing
equipment. While traditional business concepts can be

Table 3 Case study category results.

Features of new business concepts Selected option Frequency
Ownership Equipment producer 10
Leasing bank 3
Operating joint venture 2
Customer 2

Employer of manufacturing personnel Equipment producer 8

Operating joint venture 1
Customer 8

Employer of maintenance personnel Equipment producer 12

Operating joint venture 2
Customer 3

Location of operation Equipment producerÕs establishment 3

Establishment ‘‘fence-to-fence’’ with the customer 1
CustomerÕs establishment 13

Single/multiple customer operation Parallel operation for multiple customers 3

Operation for a single customer 14

Payment modela Pay per unit 10

Pay for availability 2
Fixed rates 8
Pay for equipment 3
a
Multiple answers given.
450
characterised by a transfer of risks from the equipment pro-
ducers to their customers after investment and production
startup, new business concepts at least partially spread
the risks between customers and equipment producers dur-
ing the entire equipment life-cycle.
Typology
Our case study findings indicate that in practice there exists
a large variety of highly individualised business concepts,
which at first glance differ significantly from one another.
Nevertheless, when describing the business concepts within
the framework introduced above, similarities and differ-
ences become visible. Assuming that the seven characteris-
tic features of service-based business concepts are of equal
relevance, we compared the possible paths through the
Morphological Box and grouped them, allowing a maximum
deviation of two characteristic features per group. The
graphical representation of the business concepts in the
Morphological Box turned out to be especially beneficial
for this comparison, which resulted in five groups of two
to six cases, from which we derived generic types of busi-
ness concepts.
In the following section, we use the morphological
framework concept to present this typology and to illustrate
each type by examining an exemplary case.
As a first type of new business concept, we identified a
model that focuses on new arrangements of ownership,
financing and payment procedures for production equip-
ment. This category is similar to the traditional business
model in terms of responsibility for personnel matters and
the operating location. Nevertheless, in contrast to the tra-
ditional model, suppliers offer their customers the right to
use the equipment without having to purchase it. The remu-
neration is based on the use of the machinery on a ‘‘produc-
tion-based payments’’ or ‘‘pay per use’’ basis depending on
the relevant contract clauses. After the contract period, the
customer has the option to buy the equipment or to give it
back to the supplier.
This type of business concept can be regarded as an evo-
lution of renting. The advancement is based on the modifi-
cation of the payment model. Instead of a predetermined
fixed rent per month, the customers pay for the number
of products manufactured using the equipment. As a result,
Characteristic Features
during phase Equipment
Leasing bank
of use producer
Ownership
after phase of Equipment
Leasing bank
use producer
Equipment
Manufacturing
producer
Personnel
Equipment
Maintenance
producer
Equipment producer's
Location of operation
establishment
Single / multiple In parallel operation for multiple
customer operation customers
pay per
Payment model
unit
Figure 3 New business concept Type II, operational focus.
G. Lay et al.
equipment producers cover a part of the customersÕ market
risk. If the customers do not buy the equipment at the end
of the contract duration, the supplier has to take it back.
Since the equipment is usually not at the end of its useful
life at that time, suppliers are particularly interested in tak-
ing back the equipment, provided that it is in good condition
and can be reused by other customers. Therefore, suppliers
often integrate a full or partial maintenance service into
this business concept to prevent ‘‘wear and tear.’’
Figure 2 illustrates the type of new business concept de-
scribed above. It is represented by case studies H, M and P.
Case study P illustrates this type more in detail:
Company P is a small enterprise specialising in produc-
tion moulds for small and medium parts—mainly caps, clo-
sures, and small technical parts. Furthermore, moulds for
pre-forms and injection-blowing are also produced. The cus-
tomers of P are mainly companies from the packaging sector
working for cosmetics producers, the perfume industry, the
pharmaceutical industry, the food industry, etc. Company P
decided some time ago to additionally offer moulds in a new
business concept to increase its market share. Customers
are expected to gain benefits from this business concept be-
cause they have the opportunity to access moulds without
buying them. According to this concept, the equipmentÕs
operating personnel are trained by the supplier but are still
employed by the customer. The payment model is also inno-
vative. The equipment producer is paid based on the num-
ber of parts produced with the moulds.
A second type of new business concept does not focus on
financing, but rather on the operational aspects of produc-
tion equipment. One of the characteristic features of this
concept is the mode of employment. Operations and main-
tenance personnel are not employed by the customer—they
are employed by the equipment producers instead. In addi-
tion, the personnel costs are paid by the customer through a
combination of fixed and performance-based rates. The cus-
tomer buys the equipment from the producer or leases it
from a leasing bank. The equipment is then installed at
the customerÕs plant and is used solely to meet a single cus-
tomerÕs need. We mainly found this concept being adopted
by customer companies that do not have qualified staff
available and consequently are not able to exploit the ben-
eficial features of advanced equipment technology. Equip-
ment suppliers can compensate for this deficit by
Options
Operating joint
Customer
venture
Operating joint
Customer
venture
Operating
Customer
joint venture
Operating
Customer
joint venture
Establishment "fence to Customer's
fence" to the customer establishment
Operation for a single customer
pay for fixed pay for
availability rate equipment
Service-based business concepts: A typology for business-to-business markets 451

deploying their own highly-skilled personnel to customersÕ
facilities to assume operational tasks either temporarily or
long-term.
Figure 3 illustrates this concept. This type of new busi-
ness concept is represented by case studies A, D, E, F, I
and O. Company I is a medium-sized enterprise that pro-
duces complex and highly customised high-priced machines,
e.g., automation modules. The company operates in a
highly competitive market. During the last few years it has
acquired new customers and has moved from small enter-
prises to larger companies. In order to stay competitive, it
has enhanced its offerings by adding new advanced services,
including a ‘‘full operation concept.’’ A leasing company
buys the machine and leases it to the customer. Company
I is responsible for maintenance and is partly responsible
for assisting the customerÕs manufacturing personnel. This
service is offered by company I because the customer em-
ploys personnel who are inexperienced with its new high-
tech machine. In the case of high technology installations,
the customerÕs personnel is directly supported by the per-
sonnel of company I for some months, while, if the machine
is very complex, this period can be extended. If a customer
owns or leases several machines produced by company I,
this company has its own staff who work permanently at
the customerÕs premises and assume responsibility for the
entire production system.
A third type of new business concept is, to a certain ex-
tent, a combination of the first and second types described
above, with a focus on both the financing and operational
aspects. The supplier retains equipment ownership, oper-
ates this equipment at the customerÕs plant exclusively for
this customer, and employs maintenance personnel and in
some cases operating personnel as well. The supplier is paid
either per use or per part.
Figure 4 summarises this type graphically using the mor-
phological framework. In the case studies this type is repre-
sented by the cases B and C.
Company C is a producer of air separation plants for the
process industry and offers a Type III business concept: it
owns and operates plants on its customersÕ sites to deliver
gases. Avoiding plant investments and the outsourcing of
non-core business processes are the main reasons for cus-
tomers to demand this business concept. Company C also
profits from this business concept since it allows the com-
pany to provide a number of additional customers located
near the plant with gases that are not demanded by the
main customer via pipeline, tank lorry or gas bottle.
The fourth type of new business concept turns the equip-
ment supplier even more into a part supplier and conse-
quently resembles the third type of business concept. The
difference lies mainly in the location of the production
equipment. The equipment producer installs the production

Characteristic Features Options

during phase Equipment Operating joint

Leasing bank Customer
of use producer venture
Ownership
after phase of Equipment Operating joint
Leasing bank Customer
use producer venture
Equipment Operating
Manufacturing Customer
producer joint venture
Personnel
Equipment Operating
Maintenance Customer
producer joint venture
Equipment producer's Establishment "fence to Customer's
Location of operation
establishment fence" to the customer establishment
Single / multiple In parallel operation for multiple
Operation for a single customer
customer operation customers

pay per pay for fixed pay for

Payment model
unit availability rate equipment

Figure 4 New business concept Type III, finance/operational focus at customer site.

Characteristic Features Options

during phase Equipment Operating joint

Leasing bank Customer
of use producer venture
Ownership
after phase of Equipment Operating joint
Leasing bank Customer
use producer venture
Equipment Operating
Manufacturing Customer
producer joint venture
Personnel
Equipment Operating
Maintenance Customer
producer joint venture
Equipment producer's Establishment "fence Customer's
Location of operation
establishment to fence" to customer establishment

Single / multiple In parallel operation for multiple

Operation for a single customer
customer operation customers

pay per pay for fixed pay for

Payment model
unit availability rate equipment

Figure 5 New business concept Type IV, finance/operational focus at supplier site.
452
machinery on its own shop floors or ‘‘fence-to-fence’’ with
the customerÕs facilities in a supplier park and produces
parts with this equipment according to incoming customer
orders. Thus, the supplier is able to meet specific customer
requirements such as transient demand increases, or to of-
fer additional production capacity in case of machine break-
downs, etc. The equipment producer retains equipment
ownership, operates and maintains the equipment with its
own personnel and is paid on a per part basis. Usually, the
same machinery orders are processed simultaneously or in
sequence for several customers. Figure 5 depicts this type
of new business concept.
In the case studies, this concept is represented by cases
G, N, J and Q. Company Q is an SME that produces machine
systems (milling and grinding) for precision mechanical
components. The products are huge, complex systems that
are sold at a high price. Since 1999, company Q has been
offering additional innovative services. Its very successful
business model focuses on producing products on its inter-
nally-produced equipment for their customers, and manag-
ing machine operation, personnel, and maintenance using
its own resources at the supplier site. Company Q is paid
according to the number of produced parts. To reduce risk,
all customers have to accept delivery of contractually-fixed
minimum and maximum quantities of the product. After a
predetermined period of pay-per-part production, in which
customers can acquire experience with the process and test
the market potential, customers have the option of either
buying the machines, continuing on a pay-per-part-basis,
renegotiating the conditions or closing the contract.
Company J is a multinational supplier of machines and
components for all the major automotive firms. Since
1999, the company successfully implemented five business
concepts of the type described above. In the case of com-
pany J, the supplier retains plant ownership and all equip-
ment located in supplier parks. The supplier is solely
responsible for the operation and management of the ma-
chines. Personnel are employed for both manufacturing
and maintenance activities, and the supplier is free to
determine the organisational structures and management
methods inside the plant. Company J is paid for the number
of supplied parts, and the price of a part is predefined in the
contract between J and its customer. As a result, company J
fully assumes all market risk associated with the customersÕ
products. To limit this risk, company J usually develops and
•Merkmale Features
Characteristic
during phase Equipment
Leasing bank
of use producer
Ownership
after phase of Equipment
Leasing bank
use producer
Equipment
Manufacturing
producer
Personnel
Equipment
Maintenance
producer
Equipment producer's
Location of operation
establishment
Single / multiple In parallel operation for multiple
customer operation customers
pay per
Payment model
unit
Figure 6 New business concept Type V, involving a joint venture.
G. Lay et al.
uses standardised and modularised machines for this busi-
ness concept with the aim of reusing them in case of failure.
In addition, this procedure makes it possible for company J
to add or remove machines with respect to the market suc-
cess of different car models.
A last type of new business concept revealed through our
case study reports is characterised by the involvement of a
third party – an entity other than the equipment producer
and customer. An operating joint venture or a contractor as-
sumes the risk associated with owning production equip-
ment by investing in and operating the equipment for the
customer. Besides the equipment supplier, the customer
can be involved in this joint venture as a partner. Figure 6
graphically describes this type.
This type of new business concept has been encountered
in case studies K and L. Case L deals with steel-making facil-
ities. The offer of company L is composed of infrastructure
building, industrial plant design and assembly, energy and
power solutions, and selected public services. All projects
of company L are characterised by the involvement of multi-
ple entities: sponsors, which have a special interest in the
plantÕs success; banks, which finance the projects and as-
sume a degree of ‘‘financial exposure’’ from the beginning
of the project up to the final operation of the plant; organ-
isations, such as companies that manage the maintenance
activities and other specialised suppliers like those who con-
duct civil, electrical, or underwater work. During the usage
period, the owner of the plant is the project company that
has been created among all the involved partners. After
use, the customer becomes the owner.
The typology of service-based business
concepts from a property-rights theory
perspective
Exploring this typology, the question arises as to why man-
ufacturers and their customers would abandon a traditional
business concept for the sake of the new business models
described above. Type II is focused on operating activities
carried out by supplier personnel and, as a result, its win-
win-potential is based on the suppliersÕ expertise in running
their equipment, which can lead to economies of scale and
a reduction of lead times. The remaining five service-based
business concepts described above exhibit one common
Options
Operating joint
Customer
venture
Operating joint
Customer
venture
Operating
Customer
joint venture
Operating
Customer
joint venture
Establishment "fence to Customer's
fence" to the customer establishment
Operation for a single customer
pay for fixed pay for
availability rate equipment
Service-based business concepts: A typology for business-to-business markets
characteristic. The ownership of the equipment is not trans-
ferred to the customer, but remains with the equipment
supplier or is shared with the customer under the terms of
a joint venture. The benefits generated by business con-
cepts of Types I, III, IV and V can be explained by the prin-
ciples of property rights theory.
According to Furubotn and Richter, ‘‘the right of owner-
ship in an asset is understood to consist of the right to use it,
to change its form and substance and to transfer all rights in
the asset, or some rights, as desired’’ (Furubotn and
Richter, 1998, p. 72). Under a traditional business concept,
these property rights are wholly transferred to the customer
at the point of sale; the service-based business concepts
elucidated above are characterised by a novel allocation
of property rights. This shift in ownership structure can con-
tribute to economies of scale, reducing information asym-
metries and modifying the incentives of both suppliers and
customers (Morey and Pacheco, 2003).
In renting models, like in the Type I business concept, the
right to use the equipment is detached from its ownership.
From a customer perspective, fixed costs become variable
and the true costs of single usage or time periods of use be-
come evident (Hockerts, 2008). From a supplier perspective,
there is no sense in optimising a product for sale or concen-
trating on the equipment price when the manufacturer is
paid per part produced with the machinery. Furthermore,
because the supplier has an interest in taking back the
equipment after the contract expires, the lifespan of the
machinery needs to be extended.
Under the traditional business concept, customers have
an information deficit concerning equipment features. To
balance these information asymmetries and avoid being af-
fected by the opportunistic behaviour of suppliers, consid-
erable financial resources (i.e., transaction costs) need to
be employed (Morey and Pacheco, 2003).
The goods manufacturer has full knowledge of their prod-
ucts and capabilities. If the property rights of the equip-
ment are not transferred to the customer but are instead
retained by the supplier, the client does not have to take
into consideration the effort required to balance the infor-
mation asymmetries associated with the supplierÕs more
complete knowledge of the equipment. Any information
asymmetries regarding service quality become irrelevant
since only those parts that fulfil the quality requirements
are paid.
The manufacturer, responsible for running the machinery
in the Types III, IV and V business concepts, can use knowl-
edge of the machinery to achieve economies of scale. Fur-
thermore, the supplier profits from high efficiency and a
long usable life for the equipment. Due to the change in
payment models, the manufacturer has a new incentive: in-
stead of concentrating on the equipment price at the point
of sale, the focus is on maximising the equipmentÕs effi-
ciency since in the new business concept the produced parts
are sold to the customers. Therefore, the incentives of cus-
tomers and suppliers are aligned because no party focuses
on the price of the equipment (Morey and Pacheco, 2003).
Since property rights involve duties (Hockerts, 2008), the
advantages and shortcomings arising from the new business
concepts for both suppliers and customers need to be
weighed before any decision in favour of a new business
concept can be finalised.
453
Managerial implications and future research
needs
This article has provided a framework to classify new ser-
vice-based business concepts for manufacturing companies
that operate in business-to-business markets. The intention
behind the framework is to give decision makers in manu-
facturing companies a tool to structure and design new ser-
vice-based business concepts.
The framework was applied to 17 case studies and a
wide variety of new service-based business concepts was
identified, from which five generic types of new service-
based business concepts could be derived. All of the con-
cepts that we analysed led to new opportunities but also
to higher risks for the manufacturing companies as com-
pared with the way in which they previously conducted
business. The traditional business concept focused on sell-
ing manufactured goods in business-to-business markets. By
contrast, a main feature of the new service-based business
concepts is the integration of additional tasks and conse-
quently, additional risks during the use of the product by
the manufacturing company.
This typology shows that suppliers of manufactured
goods have to analyse carefully whether they can perform
operational tasks more efficiently than their customers.
Furthermore, they have to investigate whether they have
more favourable financing conditions for equipment
investments, or if they can achieve higher utilisation
rates by running the equipment in their own establish-
ments and meeting the demands of multiple clients. As
win-win situations for suppliers and customers must nec-
essarily be founded on comparative advantages, new ser-
vice-based business concepts that focus on this
superiority create added value and offer the possibility
not only of taking on additional risks, but also of making
further profits.
Our Morphological Box and the associated typology can
help manufacturing companies that have minimal experi-
ence with new service-based business concepts to design
their own concepts that match their business conditions.
By working with the Morphological Box, managers are able
to see all possible options for characteristic features of a
potential new business concept. The typology provides them
with ready-made solutions that they can transfer to their
own company and adapt to their customerś and their own
business needs.
Since the research field of new service-based business
concepts for manufacturing companies has not been ex-
plored exhaustively, there is still a need for further analysis.
The managerial implications in particular demand further
in-depth research. The exploratory strategy applied in this
paper seemed adequate to compile existing literature, iden-
tify structural guidelines, clarify expressions and develop a
typology. The next steps must delve into more detail while
also offering representative empirical data. Guidelines for
managerial advice in the field of new business concepts
need to be substantiated in both directions.
In-depth analysis is necessary to investigate the factors
that influence the success of new service-based business
concepts. By comparing conceptual designs, peculiarities
of market situations, company data from business partners
and performance features of failures and success stories,
454
some general guidelines may be gleaned that could help
decision makers convert these new concepts into valuable
strategic options.
Representative empirical data regarding new business
concepts can help identify emerging markets for these kinds
of business operations. Demand-side and supply-side should
be covered simultaneously. A significant gap between sup-
ply and demand offers valuable ideas as to how one may tar-
get new offerings.
Furthermore, this paper attempted to explain the bene-
fits of service-based business concepts for manufacturing
companies, represented in our typology using the principles
of property rights theory. We demonstrated that the novel
allocation of property rights in service-based business con-
cepts serves as a basis for the generation of win-win situa-
tions. Nevertheless, further research is needed to connect
business concepts found in practice with the principles of
the new institutional economics to explain their existence,
give these reasons to decision makers and to highlight room
for improvement.
Finally, our results go along with the ideas and findings of
the currently much-discussed principles of the service-dom-
inant logic and its implication of value co-creation (Vargo
et al., 2008; Vargo and Lusch, 2004). It seems that we have
moved into an era which is dominated by services. Thus, it
would be of great value to contextualise our research ap-
proach with the propositions of this new marketing
paradigm.
References
Aberdeen Group (2007) Managing risk and reward in the perfor-
mance-driven service chain – Benchmarking the viability of
performance-based service agreements. http://www.clock-
work-solutions.com/pdfs/Analyst-reports/bench-
mark_report.pdf (Download 9/11 2007).
Alonso-Rasgado, T., Thompson, G. and Elfström, B.-O. (2004) The
design of functional (total care) products. Journal of Engineer-
ing Design 15(6), 515–540.
Bartolomeo, M., dal Maso, D., de Jong, P., Eder, P., Groenewegen,
P., Hopkinson, P., James, P., Nijhuis, L., Örninge, M., Scholl, G.,
Slob, A. and Zaring, O. (2003) Eco-efficient producer services –
what are they, how do they benefit customers and the environ-
ment and how likely are they to develop and extensively utilised?
Journal of Cleaner Production 11, 829–837.
Boyt, T. and Harvey, M. (1997) Classification of industrial services –
A model with strategic implications. Industrial Marketing Man-
agement 26, 291–300.
Davies, A., Brady, T. and Hobday, M. (2007) Organizing for
solutions: Systems seller vs systems integrator. Industrial Mar-
keting Management 36(2), 183–193.
Eder, P. and Delgado, L. (2006) Chemical product services in the
European Union. Technical report series, IPTS, EUR 22213 EN.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) Building Theories from case study research.
Academy of Management Review, 14(October), 532–550.
Furubotn, E. G. and Richter, R. (1998) Institutions and economic
theory: The contribution of the new institutional economics.
University of Michigan Press.
Frambach, R. T., Wels-Lips, I. and Gündlach, A. (1997) Proactive
product service strategies – an application in the European
health market. Industrial Marketing Management 26, 341–352.
Gebauer, H. and Pütz, F. (2007) The impact of service offerings on
service-related performance outcomes. International Journal of
Services Technology and Management 8(2/3), 123–138.
G. Lay et al.
Goedkoop, M.J., van Halen, C.J.G., te Riele, H.R.M. and Rommens,
P.J.M. (1999) Product service systems, ecological and economic
basics. The Report No. 1999/36 submitted to Ministerje van
Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer, 1999;
22–25.
Grönroos, C. (2000) Service management and marketing – A
customer relationship management approach, Chichester.
Helle, C. (1997) On energy efficiency-related product strategies –
illustrated and analysed using contracting approaches in Ger-
many as an example. Utilities Policy 6(1), 75–85.
Hockerts, K. (2008) Property rights as a predictor for the eco-
efficiency of product-service systems. Working Paper No. 02-
2008, CBS Center for Corporate Social Responsibility,
Frederiksberg.
Kim, S. H., Howard, M. A. and Netessine, S. (2007) Performance
contracting in after-sales service supply chains. Management
Science 53(12), 1843–1858.
Kumar, R. and Kumar, U. (2004) A conceptual framework for the
development of a service delivery strategy for industrial systems
and products. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing
19(5), 310–319.
Lalonde, B. and Zinszer, P. H. (1976) Customer service: Meanings
and measurement. National Council of Physical Distribution
Management, Chicago.
Lay, G., Meier, H., Schramm, J. and Werding, A. (2003) Betreiben
statt Verkaufen – Stand und Perspektiven neuer Geschäftsmo-
delle für den Maschinen- und Anlagenbau. Industriemanagement
(4), 9–14.
Leo, P.-Y. and Philippe, J. (2001) Offer of services by goods
exporters: Strategic and marketing dimensions. The Service
Industries Journal 21, 91–116.
Markeset, T. and Kumar, U. (2005) Product support strategy:
Conventional versus functional products. Journal of Quality in
Maintenance Engineering 11(1), 53–67.
Mathieu, V. (2001) Product services: From a service supporting the
product to a service supporting the client. Journal of Business
and Industrial Marketing 16(1), 39–53.
Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M. (1994) Qualitative data analysis.
Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Mont, O. (2002) Clarifying the concept of product-service system.
Journal of Cleaner Production 10(3), 237–245.
Mont, O., Singhal, P. and Fadeeva, Z. (2006) Chemical management
services in Sweden and Europe: Lessons for the future. Journal
of Industrial Ecology 10(1–2), 279–292.
Morey, E. and Pacheco, D. (2003) Product-service systems: Explor-
ing the potential for economic and environmental efficiency.
Working paper, ECON 4545, University of Colorado.
Neu, W. A. and Brown, S. W. (2005) Forming successful business-to-
business services in goods-dominant firms. Journal of Service
Research 8(3), 3–17.
OECD (2004) Waste contract design and management for enhanced
waste minimisation – A synthesis report,’’ ENV/EPOC/
WGWPR(2004)3/FINAL.
Ölundh, G. and Ritzen, S. (2001) Functional sales as a further
approach to environmental product development – A case
study. ecodesign, 619–624, 2nd International symposium on
environmentally conscious design and inverse manufacturing
(EcoDesignÕ01).
Oliva, R. and Kallenberg, R. (2003) Anaging the transition from
products to services. International Journal of Service Industry
Management 14(2), 160–172.
Perry, C. (1998) Processes of a case study methodology for
postgraduate research in marketing. European Journal of Mar-
keting 32(9/10), 785–802.
Reiskin, E. D., White, A. L., Johnson, J. K. and Votta, T. J. (1999)
Servicizing the chemical supply chain. Journal of Industrial
Ecology 3(2–3), 19–31.
Service-based business concepts: A typology for business-to-business markets 455

Rothenberg, S. (2007) Sustainability through servicizing. MIT Sloan Yin, R. K. (1994) Case study research: Design and methods. Sage,
Management Review 48(2), 82–91. Thousand Oaks, CA.
Roy, R. (2000) Sustainable product-service systems. Futures 32(3– Zwicky, F. and Wilson, A. (1967) New methods of thought and
4), 289–299. procedure: Contributions to the symposium on methodologies.
Sorrell, S. (2007) The economics of energy service contracts. Energy Springer, Berlin.
Policy 35, 507–521.
Stahel, W. R. (1997) The service economy: ÔWealth without
GUNTER LAY was born in 1951, received his
resource consumptionÕ? Philosophical Transactions: Mathe-
Diploma in Management from the University
matical, Physical and Engineering Sciences (Series A)
of Mannheim and his PhD from the Ges-
355(1728), 1309–1319.
amthochschule Kassel. After working for
Stoughton, M. and Votta, T. (2003) Implementing service-based
two years as research assistant for Professor
chemical procurement: Lessons and results. Journal of Cleaner
Gaugler (University oft Mannheim) he joined
Production, 11(8 SPEC.), 839–849.
the Fraunhofer-Institute ISI, where he star-
Stremersch, S., Wuyts, S. and Frambach, R. T. (2001) The
ted to establish a research group dealing
purchasing of full-service contracts: An exploratory study within
with innovations in manufacturing. In the
the industrial maintenance market. Industrial Marketing Man-
last years his scientific work was focussed on
agement 30(1), 1–12.
product-service-systems.
Sundin, E. and Bras, B. (2005) Making functional sales environmen-
tally and economically beneficial through product remanufac-
turing. Journal of Cleaner Production 13, 913–925.
MARCUS SCHROETER was born in 1972.
Sundin, E., Lindahl, M., Sakao, T., Shimomura, Y. and Björkman, M
Studied business studies & economics at the
(2005) New engineering design for functional sales business.
University of Bremen with special focus on
Proceedings of international conference on engineering design
‘‘Production and Logistics’’, ‘‘Environmen-
(ICED- 05), Melbourne, August 15–18.
tal Management’’ and ‘‘Structural Policy’’.
Toffel, M.W. (2002) Contracting for servicizing. Harvard Business
He received his PhD from the Technical
School Technology & Operations Mgt. Unit Research Paper, No.
University of Braunschweig for research on
08-063.
the strategic management of closed-loop
Tukker, A. (2004) Eight types of product-service system: Eight ways
supply chains. Since 2005 he has been
to sustainability? Experiences from Suspronet. Business Strategy
employed as a researcher at the Fraunhofer
and the Environment 13(4), 246–260.
Institute for Systems and Innovation Research. The focus of his
Urbani A. and Pasek, Z. (2002) Description and analysis of a possible
research is the design and the assessment of sustainable business
supply chain evolution based on a service pattern. Proceedings
concepts.
of MIM, September 9–11, USA.
Vargo, S. L., Maglio, P. P. and Akaka, M. A. (2008) On value and
value co-creation: A service systems and service logic perspec-
SABINE BIEGE was born in 1980. Studied
tive. European Management Journal 26, 145–152.
industrial engineering and management with
Vargo, S. L. and Lusch, R. F. (2004) Evolving to a new dominant logic
special focus on quality management and
for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(January), 1–17.
industrial management at the University of
Williams, A. (2005) The strategic management of product
Erlangen-Nuernberg. Since December 2006
service systems. The centre for business relationships,
she has been employed as a researcher at
accountability, sustainability and society (BRASS), Working
the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and
paper series, (28).
Innovation Research in Karlsruhe. Her
Windahl, C. (2007) Integrated solutions in the capital goods sector
research mainly focuses on monitoring
– Exploring innovation, service and network perspectives.
innovative manufacturing technologies as
Linköping Studies in Science and Technology, Dissertation No.
well as on designing and evaluating sustainable business concepts.
1098.