Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

SMEs’ online channel expansion: value creating activities

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Electronic Markets Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

SMEs are faced with new business opportunities through online channels, i.e., electronic commerce and mobile commerce. The model by which they create and capture value is challenged, making the adoption of a business model that fits the organisation a crucial strategic decision. The purpose of this paper is to study value creating activities taken by SMEs when making a transition to an online multichannel context. Sixteen SMEs in Sweden are studied using a qualitative research approach and through the lens of an e-transit business model configuration. The results show that SMEs are required to take various value creating activities denoted as primary and secondary transition activities and that there is a discrepancy between actions taken and their perceived degree of importance. One main conclusion is that the combination of value creating activities an SME should focus on during different stages of an online channel expansion differ depending on the type of transition (e.g., from physical store to electronic commerce or from electronic commerce to mobile commerce) and will change over time.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abebe, M. (2014). Electronic commerce adoption, entrepreneurial orientation and small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) performance. Journal of Small Business Management, 21(1), 100–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abed, S. S., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Williams, M. D. (2015). Social media as a bridge to E-Commerce adoption in SMEs: a systematic literature review. The Marketing Review, 15(1), 39–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Somali, S. A., Gholami, R., & Clegg, B. (2015). A stage-oriented model (SOM) for e-commerce adoption: a study of Saudi Arabian organisations. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 26(1), 2–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amit, R., & Zott, C. (2012). Creating value through business model innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 53(3), 41–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avery, J., Steenburgh, T. J., Deighton, J., & Caravella, M. (2012). Adding Bricks to Clicks: Predicting the Patterns of Cross-Channel Elasticities over Time. Journal of Marketing, 76(3), 96–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouwman, H., De Vos, H. & Haaker, T. (2008). Mobile service innovation and business models. Springer Science & Business Media

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brynjolfsson, E., & Smith, M. (2000). Frictionless commerce? A comparison of Internet and conventional retailers. Management Science, 46(4), 563–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee, S. (2013). Simple rules for designing business models. California Management Review, 55(2), 97–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, J. E., Pan, S. L., & Ouyang, T. H. (2014). Routine reconfiguration in traditional companies’ e-commerce strategy implementation: A trajectory perspective. Information & Management, 51(2), 270–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research design, choosing among five traditions (2 ed.). Thousand oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Reuver, M., Nikou, S., & Bouwman, H. (2015). The interplay of costs, trust and loyalty in a service industry in transition: The moderating effect of smartphone adoption. Telematics and Informatics, 32(4), 694–700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ecommerce-Europe (2014). European B2C E-commerce Report 2014. Retrieved 29.5.2016, from http://www.ecommerce-europe.eu/

  • El Sawy, O. A., & Pereira, F. (2013). Business modelling in the dynamic digital space, an ecosystem approach. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2014b). SME Performance Review. Enterprise and Industry. Retrieved 29.5.2016, from http://ec.europa.eu/growth/smes/business-friendly-environment/performance-review/index_en.htm

  • EuropeanCommission (2014a). Facts and figures: SME definition. Enterprise and Industry. Retrieved 29.5.2016, from http://ec.europa.eu/growth/smes/business-friendly-environment/sme-definition/index_en.htm

  • Fillis, I., Johannson, U., & Wagner, B. (2004). Factors impacting on e-business adoption and development in the smaller firm. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 10(3), 178–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghobadian, A., & Gallear, D. (1997). TQM and organization size. International Journal of Operations & production management, 17(2), 121–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghobakhloo, M., Arias-Aranda, D., & Benitez-Amado, J. (2011). Adoption of e-commerce applications in SMEs. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 111(8), 1238–1269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghose, A., Smith, M., & Telang, R. (2006). Internet exchanges for used books: An empirical analysis of product cannibalization and welfare implications. Information. Systems Research, 17(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grandon, E. E., & Pearson, J. M. (2004). Electronic commerce adoption: an empirical study of small and medium US businesses. Information & management, 42(1), 197–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunzel, F. & Holm, A. B. (2013). One size does not fit all: understanding the front-end and back-end of business model innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management, 17(1), 1340002–1340001–1340002-1340034

  • Ifinedo, P. (2011). Internet/e-business technologies acceptance in Canada’s SMEs: an exploratory investigation. Internet. Research, 21(3), 255–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamali, S. K., Samadi, B., & Gharleghi, B. (2015). Factors Influencing Electronic Commerce Adoption: A Case Study of Iranian Family SMEs. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 6(2), p207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ja-Shen, C., & Ching, R. K. H. (2002). A proposed framework for transitioning to an e-business model. Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce, 3(4), 375–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeansson, J., Nikou, S., Gustavsson, R., Lundqvist, S., Marcusson, L., Sell, A., & Walden, P. (2015). Understanding Online Channel Expansion in an SME Context: A Business Model Perspective. In Proceedings of the 28th Bled eConference, #eWellBeing (pp. 322–337). Slovenia: Bled.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, D., Wade, M., & McClean, R. (2007). Does e-Business matter to SMEs? A comparison of the financial impacts of internet business solutions on European and North American SMEs. Journal of Small Business Management, 45(3), 354–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kabanda, S., & Brown, I. (2015). E-Commerce Enablers and Barriers in Tanzanian Small and Medium Enterprises. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 67(7), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karjaluoto, H., & Huhtamäki, M. (2010). The Role of Electronic Channels in Micro-Sized Brick-and-Mortar Firms. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 23(1), 17–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirner, K. G. & Lindemann, U. (2013). Assessing the Performance of Product Development Processes in a Multi-Project Environment in SME. In ICoRD’13, (pp. 797–808). Springer India.

  • Krafft, M., & Mantrala, M. K. (2006). Retailing in the twenty-first Century, Current and Future Trends. Berlin ʺ Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurnia, S., Choudrie, J., Mahbubur, R. M., & Alzougool, B. (2015). E-commerce technology adoption: A Malaysian grocery SME retail sector study. Journal of Business Research, 68(9), 1906–1918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, X., Troutt, M., Brandyberry, A., & Wang, T. (2011). Decision factors for the adoption and continued use of online direct sales channels among SMEs. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 12(1), 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mack, N., Woodsong, C., MacQueen, K.M., Guest, G. & Namey, E. (2005). Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector’s Field Guide. FLI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magretta, J. (2002). Why business models matter. Harvard Business Review, 80(5), 86–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, R. G. (2010). Business models: a discovery driven approach. Long range planning, 43(2), 247–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merriam, B. S. (2009). Qualitative Research, a guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, John Wiley & Sons, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook (2 ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage publications, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moingeon, B., & Lehmann-Ortega, L. (2010). Creation and Implementation of a New Business Model: a Disarming Case Study. Management, 13(4), 266–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mustaffa, S., & Beaumont, N. (2004). The effect of electronic commerce on small Australian enterprises. Technovation, 24(2), 85–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osterwalder, A. (2004). The Business Model Ontology: A proposition in a design science approach. PhD thesis. Universit de Lausanne.

  • Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business model generation. New Jersey, U.S.: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2013). Business model generation: a handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y., & Tucci, C. (2005). Clarifying business models: origins, present, and future of the concept. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 16(1), 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (3 Ed.). Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California

  • San Martín, S., & Jiménez, N. H. (2011). Online buying perceptions in Spain: can gender make a difference? Electronic Markets, 21(4), 267–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, S., & Spieth, P. (2013). Business model innovation: towards an integrated future research agenda. International Journal of Innovation Management, 17(1), 1340001–1340034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senarathna, I., Warren, M., Yeoh, W., & Salzman, S. (2014). The influence of organisation culture on E-commerce adoption. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 114(7), 1007–1021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stockdale, R., & Standing, C. (2004). Benefits and barriers of electronic marketplace participation: an SME perspective. The Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 17(4), 301–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, J. S., & Sullivan, U. Y. (2005). Managing Marketing Communications with Multichannel Customers. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 239–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Timmers, P. (2008). Business models for electronic markets. Electronic markets, 8(2), 3–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiwari, R., Buse, S., & Herstatt, C. (2006). From electronic to mobile commerce, Opportunities through technology convergence for business services. Tech Monitor, 23(5), 38–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turban, E., King, D., Viehland, D., & Lee, J. (2006). Electronic Commerce, a managerial perspective 2006. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.

  • United States International Trade Commission (2010). Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Overview of Participation in U.S. Exports. Publication 4125, January 2010. Retrieved 29.5.2016, https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4125.pdf.

  • Valos, M. J. (2009). Structure, people and process challenges of multichannel marketing: Insights from marketers. Journal of Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management, 16(3), 197–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vlachos, I. (2011). SMEs E-Business Behaviour: A Demographics and Strategic Analysis. Journal of Enterprise Resource Planning Studies, 2011(2011), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, G., Schramm-Klein, H., & Steinmann, S. (2013). Effects of cross-channel synergies and complementarity in a multichannel e-commerce system – an investigation of the interrelation of e-commerce, m-commerce and IETV-commerce. International Review of Retail, Distribution & Consumer Research, 23(5), 571–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weill, P., & Vitale, M. (2001). Place to Space, migrating to e-business models. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, H., Daniel, E., & Davies, I. (2008). The diffusion of e-commerce in UK SMEs. Journal of Marketing Management, 24(5–6), 489–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, K. Y., & Aspinwall, E. (2004). Characterizing knowledge management in the small business environment. Journal of knowledge management, 8(3), 44–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wymer, S. A., & Regan, E. A. (2005). Factors influencing e-commerce adoption and use by small and medium businesses. Electronic Markets, 15(4), 438–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zach, O., Munkvold, B. E., & Olsen, D. H. (2014). ERP system implementation in SMEs: exploring the influences of the SME context. Enterprise Information Systems, 8(2), 309–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Farris, P. W., Irvin, J. W., Kushwaha, T., Steenburgh, T. J., & Weitz, B. A. (2010). Crafting Integrated Multichannel Retailing Strategies. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 24(2), 168–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zott, C., & Amit, R. (2010). Business model design: an activity system perspective. Long range planning, 43(2), 216–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zott, C., & Amit, R. (2013). The business model: A theoretically anchored robust construct for strategic analysis. Strategic Organization, 11(4), 403–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zott, C., Amit, R., & Massa, L. (2011). The Business Model: Recent Developments and Future Research. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1019–1042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support from the Wallenberg Foundation. The authors also appreciate the excellent comments received during the presentation of an  earlier version of the manuscript in the 28th Bled eConference.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business and Economics, Linnaeus University, 391 82, Kalmar, Sweden

    John Jeansson, Siw Lundqvist & Leif Marcusson

  2. Faculty of Social Sciences, Business and Economics Organization, Åbo Akademi University, Gezeliusgatan 2 A, 20500, Turku, Finland

    Shahrokh Nikou, Anna Sell & Pirkko Walden

Authors
  1. John Jeansson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shahrokh Nikou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Siw Lundqvist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Leif Marcusson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Anna Sell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Pirkko Walden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shahrokh Nikou.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Hans-Dieter Zimmermann

Appendix: Interview guide

Appendix: Interview guide

Let’s talk about how you worked with the products, services and added value that were to be offered through the new initiative.

BQ1: What value proposition motivated your initiative?

(What was your value proposition before the initiative and what is your value proposition after the initiative?)

BQ2: Have your products/services changed due to the initiative?

  1. a)

    If yes, in what way?

BQ3: Are all products/services offered in all existing channels? (synergy between channels / separation between channels).

  1. a)

    If no, why not?

BQ4: Do you have different prices for your products in different channels?

(Dynamic pricing, different pricing online/offline, special offers...)

Let’s talk about how you worked with how to connect and understand customers that are to use the new initiative.

BQ5: Are your customer groups the same or different than before the initiative?

  1. a)

    In market characteristics?

  2. b)

    In size of segment?

  3. c)

    In location?

  4. d)

    Was this change expected?

BQ6: Has your knowledge of the customers changed?

  1. a)

    If so, how?

(Do you know more/less/the same, what/how do you know).

BQ7: How did you collect customer data before and how do you do it now?

BQ8: Does the company own and have access to the customer data?

(Ownership of customer data)

BQ9: How do you keep your customer data secure?

BQ10: How have you promoted the initiative to your customers?

BQ11: How is the distribution between one-time customers and existing customers after the transition?

Let’s talk about how you worked with your channels due to the new initiative.

Related to channels

BQ12: What new channels (where you can interact with your customers) have the initiative generated?

BQ13: To what degree have your customers adopted the new channel?

BQ14: Has the new channels been integrated with existing ones?

  1. a)

    If yes, how?

  2. b)

    If no, why not?

(Channel integration?)

BQ15: What information does the new channels provide?

(To and from customers)

  1. a)

    How is the information captured?

Related to interaction

BQ16: How were you interacting with your customers before the initiative, and how are you interacting with your customers now?

  1. a)

    How would you describe the benefits of these interactions?

  2. b)

    How would you describe the costs of these interactions?

Let’s talk about how you worked with process change in order to establish the new initiative. Activity that converts material and/or information towards that which is required by the customer.

BQ17: What kind of activities does the organization perform to add value to products or services?

  1. a)

    How has this changed from before the initiative?

BQ18: What kind of activities does the organization perform after the products or services have been sold?

  1. a)

    How has this changed from before the initiative?

BQ19: What kind of activities does the organization perform to maintain the security and customer privacy?

  1. a)

    How has this changed from before the initiative?

Let’s talk about how you worked with finding a sustainable revenue model in order to secure financial transactions in the new initiative.

BQ20: Have your payment solutions changed due to the initiative?

  1. a)

    If yes, in what way?

  2. b)

    Why?

BQ21: How did you work with a) trust and b) security regarding payments before and after the initiative?

(Include definitions for trust and security)

BQ22: Have there been changes to any of the following revenue models due to the initiative:

(Mark the alternatives)

  1. a)

    If yes, why and in what way?

BQ23: Were there payment options you considered but did not choose?

  1. a)

    If so, why?

BQ24: How is the distribution between payment methods?

Changes in cost structure

BQ25: Do you have new fixed and/or variable costs due to the transition?

  1. a.

    Which ones?

BQ26: Have you been able to eliminate some fixed or variable costs due to the transition?

  1. a.

    Which ones?

BQ27: Have there been changes in your product margins due to the transition? Please describe.

Let’s talk about how you worked with your network of partners in order to establish the new initiative.

BQ28: With what companies are you collaborating or partnering in this initiative? (Network structure).

BQ29: Have your partnerships changed because of the transition?

  1. a)

    If so, how?

BQ30: Have you encountered any difficulties during the partnerships?

  1. a)

    How did it resolve?

(Conflict of interest)

Related to companies acting on a B2B platform

  1. a)

    BQ31: Who owns the platform?

BQ32: Who utilizes the platform and who will benefit from it?

(Platform/Ecosystem).

BQ33: How is the cooperation coordinated and how did it influence your decision for partnership? (How are activities coordinated between different partners?) (Platform leadership).

Let’s talk about how you handled information generated through the new initiative.

BQ34: What is regarded as key/critical information?

BQ35: How has access to information changed?

BQ36: How has the initiative affected your ability to capture and share information? (how is data used to create value)

BQ37: What of the following activities do you or your company partake?

Social media dimension (customer): listening, reacting, talking,

Business intelligence dimension (product/market/costs):

Transaction dimension (business partners):

Let’s talk about how you worked with your resources in order to establish the new initiative.

BQ38: Has the new initiative required human resources/competences that were not present within the company?

  1. a.

    If yes, which ones?

  2. b.

    How did you acquire the needed/missing resources/competences?

BQ39: In what way has your IT-infrastructure changed as a result of the initiative?

(E.g. new servers, new software, outsourcing of infrastructure....)

BQ40: How have you financed the new initiative (own capital, loan, external investors)?

BQ41: Did you take your brand into consideration when you took your initiative?

  1. a)

    If yes, in what way?

  2. b)

    If no, why not?

  3. c)

    Have you asked your customers about how they view your brand?

Please indicate to what degree you find the following statements to be of importance

 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

In the transition, what we offer our customers in terms of products, services and added value changed

       

In the transition, our company’s customer relationships changed

       

In the transition, the way we interact with our customers has changed

       

In the transition, based on our customer preferences, our value-adding activities have changed

       

In the transition, our revenue model and cost structure changed

       

In the transition, our company’s partnerships changed

       

In the transition, the way we manage information changed

       

In the transition, the resources we have in our company changed

       
  1. Strongly disagree (1) – Disagree (2) Slightly disagree (3) – Neither agree nor disagree (4) – Slightly agree (5) – Agree (6) – Strongly agree (7)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jeansson, J., Nikou, S., Lundqvist, S. et al. SMEs’ online channel expansion: value creating activities. Electron Markets 27, 49–66 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-016-0234-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-016-0234-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation