This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and
innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and
innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
D2.1-Demonstrator baseline and market
characteristics report
Project acronym: ReCiPSS
Project full title:
Resource-efficient Circular Product-Service
Systems — ReCiPSS
Grant agreement
no.:
776577-2
Author/s:
Alena Klapalová, Radoslav Škapa, Cristina de Sousa
Gabriela Vaceková, Jana Švecová, Radmila Štangová
Reviewed:
Farazee, M. A. Asif, Conny Bakker, Nina Boorsma, Amir
Rashid, Malvina Roci, Niloufar Salehi, Sonja Van Dam
Approved:
Document
Reference:
D2.1
Demonstrator baseline and market characteristics report
Dissemination
Level:
PU
Version: Final version
Date: 22.07.2019
This is a draft document and subject to approval for final version. Therefore the
information contained herein may change.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 2 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
History of Changes
Version Date Modification reason Modified by
0.1 12.05.2019 Initial Draft Alena Klapalová
0.2 31.05.2019 Quality Check Conny Bakker
0.3 31.05.2019 Quality Check Nina Boorsma
0.4 03.06.2019 Quality Check Sonja Van Dam
0.5 10.06.2019 Quality Check Malvina Roci
0.6 11.06.2019 Quality Check Amir Rashid
0.7 13.06.2019 Quality Check Farazee M.A.Asif
0.8 18.6.2019 Quality Check Niloufar Salehi
0.9 27. 8. 2019 Quality Check Frances Kärsten and
Konstantinos
Georgopoulos
1.0 02.09.2019 Quality Check Birgit Kraenzl
1.1 02.09.2019 Quality Check Frances Kärsten
1.2 02.09.2019 Quality Check Peter Bartel
1.3 04.09.2019 Final reviewed deliverable Alena Klapalova
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 3 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Table of contents
Executive Summary.............................................................................................................8
1 Introduction................................................................................................................9
1.1 Document Scope......................................................................................................... 10
1.2 Methodology............................................................................................................... 10
2 Literature review – business models and business model innovation ..........................17
2.1 Business models.......................................................................................................... 17
2.2 Business models innovation and the transition to sustainable societies through
circular economy..................................................................................................................... 20
2.3 Business models innovation – systematic literature review ...................................... 21
3 State of the art review – circular business model........................................................27
3.1 Circular economy and circular business models - introduction.................................. 27
3.2 Specificities of the circular business models .............................................................. 31
4 Systematic literature review. Circular business models and innovative tools ...............54
4.1 Circular business models and innovative tools........................................................... 54
5 Environmental scanning and market analysis – Bosch.................................................68
5.1 In-depth interviews with trade levels......................................................................... 81
5.2 Internal environment.................................................................................................. 83
6 Environmental scanning and market analysis - Gorenje ..............................................85
6.1 External environment ................................................................................................. 85
6.2 The results of pilot surveys in Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Slovenia ... 101
6.3 Internal environment................................................................................................ 126
7 Current business models..........................................................................................128
7.1 Current business model - Bosch ............................................................................... 128
7.2 Current business model Gorenje.............................................................................. 132
8 Target circular business models ...............................................................................135
8.1 Circular business model Bosch ................................................................................. 135
8.2 Circular business model Gorenje.............................................................................. 143
8.3 Potential synergies between the models for both demonstrators .......................... 152
8.4 “Tools” suitable for the transition and adaptation of business models to be (more)
circular153
9 Conclusions .............................................................................................................155
References......................................................................................................................157
Appendix 1: References to the Gorenje environmental scanning and market analysis....... 176
Appendix 2: Bosch- in-depth interview protocol.................................................................. 181
Appendix 3: Questionnaires for the pilot survey in 4 markets for Gorenje ......................... 191
Appendix 4: Additional data from pilot survey for Gorenje ................................................. 233
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 4 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
List of figures
Figure 1: Visualisation of keywords for literature review (authors) ............................................11
Figure 2: Layers of the business environment (Johnson et al, 2008, p. 54) .................................13
Figure 3: Activity system design framework................................................................................15
Figure 4: Number of publications on Business Models in Scopus Indexed...................................17
Figure 5: Business model canvas..................................................................................................20
Figure 6: 10Rs (from the original 9Rs) framework.......................................................................32
Figure 7: Components, strategies and themes with circular business model,.............................33
Figure 8: Product-service continuum and three subcategories of PSS.........................................35
Figure 10: Basic characteristics of cloud manufacturing.............................................................46
Figure 11: Security issues in IoT ...................................................................................................47
Figure 12: (a) Trust concept in relation to dependability and social capital; (b) Three main
aspects of trust in the social IoT environment.............................................................................47
Figure 13: Environmental layer of the Triple Layer Business Model Canvas ...............................49
Figure 14: Sustainable business model canvas............................................................................49
Figure 15: Adapted sustainable business model canvas..............................................................50
Figure 16: C3 Business model canvas...........................................................................................51
Figure 17: Product-services systems and the O&P canvas...........................................................52
Figure 18: CBM canvas.................................................................................................................52
Figure 19: Framework for IoT business models ...........................................................................53
Figure 20: Distribution channels for parts forward delivery........................................................70
Figure 21: Aftermarket structure in Europe.................................................................................71
Figure 22: Groups of Actors in the Automotive Remanufacturing Marketing System ................72
Figure 23: Sources for cores.........................................................................................................74
Figure 24: Incentives for the core sourcing and returns ..............................................................76
Figure 25: 6 trends specific to automotive suppliers with a high potential for disruption..........77
Figure 26: Traditional versus strategic approach to reverse logistics .........................................80
Figure 27: Preferences of washing machines features and functions .........................................89
Figure 28: Total population in Denmark from 2007 to 2018, by age group (in millions) ............92
Figure 29: Forecast of the household composition in the Netherlands from 2016 to 2060, by
number of people in the household (in 1,000s) ...........................................................................97
Figure 30: What features do consumers consider most important in washing machines?.........99
Figure 31: The respondents' nationality and the age structure.................................................101
Figure 32: Education ..................................................................................................................102
Figure 33: Settlement structure.................................................................................................102
Figure 34: Living condition related to the settlement................................................................103
Figure 35: Income per person ....................................................................................................103
Figure 36: Structure of households ............................................................................................104
Figure 37: Technology adoption life cycle..................................................................................104
Figure 38: Eco-friend/fan/campaigner ......................................................................................105
Figure 39: Status of washing machine (in %).............................................................................105
Figure 40: Frequency of washing ...............................................................................................106
Figure 41: Experience with access-based consumption.............................................................107
Figure 42: Motivators for renting of washing machine .............................................................108
Figure 43: Motivators for pay per wash (in %) ..........................................................................109
Figure 44: Barriers to pay per wash (in %).................................................................................110
Figure 45: Motives for collaborative consumption (in %)..........................................................110
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 5 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 46: Features of an ideal washing machine .....................................................................113
Figure 47: Renting (in %)............................................................................................................114
Figure 48: PPW (in %).................................................................................................................114
Figure 49: PPW barriers (in %) ...................................................................................................115
Figure 50: Comparison of attributes priorities in four countries and for the whole sample......119
Figure 51: Frequencies of the most preferred profiles...............................................................120
Figure 52: Part-worth coefficients for the contract duration ....................................................121
Figure 53: Part-worth coefficients for washing machine condition...........................................122
Figure 54: Part-worth coefficients for price levels (pay per wash) ............................................122
Figure 55: Part-worth coefficients for the diverse option of payment scheme .........................123
Figure 56: Cluster structure description and predictors importance (squared eta
coefficients)................................................................................................................................124
Figure 57: Clusters comparison..................................................................................................125
Figure 58: Value proposition of remanufacturing at Automotive Aftermarket.........................129
Figure 59: Business model of remanufacturing at Automotive Aftermarket.............................130
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 6 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
List of tables
Table 1: Systematic literature review procedure .........................................................................22
Table 2: Dimensions and categories used for the coding process in the systematic literature
review...........................................................................................................................................22
Table 3: Some definitions of BMI .................................................................................................23
Table 4: Business model innovations to slow and close resource loops ......................................30
Table 5: Digital technologies functionalities for CE .....................................................................42
Table 6: SLR on tools for business models innovation - search queries for two databases.........56
Table 7: Frameworks, tools, models and methods for decision-making in CE.............................58
Table 8: SLR results - tools for the BMI for CE..............................................................................66
Table 9: Living conditions...........................................................................................................102
Table 10: Status of the washing machine in the cross-country comparison..............................106
Table 11: Renting - rank correlations between motivators and consumers factors..................108
Table 12: pay per wash - rank correlations between motivators and consumers factors.........109
Table 13: collaborative consumption - rank correlations between motivators and consumers
characteristics............................................................................................................................111
Table 14: perception related to experience with reman/refurbished products.........................112
Table 15: an overview of washing machine features assessed by consumers ..........................112
Table 16: Product attributes tested in CA..................................................................................116
Table 17: Initial and final sample for CA....................................................................................117
Table 18: The utility definition for CA ........................................................................................117
Table 19: Reversal in the initial model.......................................................................................118
Table 20: Final model fit ............................................................................................................118
Table 21: Attribute importance..................................................................................................118
Table 22: Part-worth coefficients...............................................................................................119
Table 23: Utilities of profiles (Score 1 – 11) and variability across respondents .......................120
Table 24: Components of Bosch circular business models.........................................................139
Table 25: Components of Gorenje circular business models......................................................147
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 7 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
List of abbreviations
Abbreviation Explanation
AAM Automotive aftermarket
BECE Backcasting and eco-design for the circular economy
BM Business model
BMI Business model innovation
BMC Business model canvas
BSC Balanced Scorecard
CE Circular economy
CBM Circular business model
CLSC Closed loop supply chain
CRM Customer Relationship Management
EoL End of Life
EoU End of Use
EMF Ellen McArthur Foundation
EU European Union
IaaS Infrastructure as a service
IAM Independent Aftermarket
IC Information and communication
ICT Information and Communications Technology
IT Information technology
IoT Internet of Thing
IS Information system(s)
LSP Logistics service provider
OE Original Equipment
OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer
OES Original Equipment Services
PaaS Platform as a service
PLC Product life cycle
PPW Pay per wash
PSS Product service system
TCO Total cost of ownership
SaaS Software as a service
SLR Systematic literature review
TL Trade level
UA User acceptance
UI User interaction
VP Value proposition
WP Work package
2PL Second Party Logistics Provider
3PL Third Party Logistics Provider
4PL Fourth Party Logistics Provider
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 8 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Executive Summary
The purpose of this deliverable is to define the current baseline and the target/improved circular
business models for two demonstrators (task 2.1) and to analyse both demonstrators´ markets
characteristics and their impact on the target circular business models (task 2.2).
The first demonstrator from the automotive aftermarket is Robert Bosch GmbH or Bosch group
(Bosch) as remanufacturing parts supplier and Circular Economy Solutions GmbH (C-ECO) which
provides reverse logistics services for remanufacturer in the automotive aftermarket upon the
brand of CoremanNet. The main project purpose regarding this demonstrator is to streamline
the reverse flows of cores for the remanufacturing business, to improve the information flow
related to the cores and to promote circularity of cores via CoremanNet. The second
demonstrator is Gorenje Gospodinjski Aparati D.D. (Gorenje) in the case of the white goods
industry. The aim of the project is to develop a new circular business model(s) for smart washing
machines, specifically for the pay per use business model for end-customer (businesses and
organizations) and final consumer enabling three product life cycles.
Deliverable first summarizes existing knowledge of business models, business models
innovation and circular business models as well as of the innovative tools that are invented and
proposed for the changes, adaptations and transitions of linear business models into the circular
ones. Systematic literature review of documented and reported knowledge relevant for both
demonstrators was performed in this step.
Second, environmental forces which create and influence the need for the changes and
improvements in the current value creation, value delivery and value capture toward circularity
are identified for both demonstrators.
Third, the deliverable identifies and proposes the potential and alternative circular business
models for both demonstrators. The review of the appropriate and applicable innovative tools
for the transition and improvement of the existing models are incorporated into this proposal.
Deliverable also provides the preliminary lists of challenges, opportunities, risks and barriers for
the alternative models. These factors should be taken into consideration for the detailed
development of the models that both demonstrators will pursue in practice during the
demonstration.
This document is the result of the initial systematic and state-of-the-art literature review and an
initial market analysis and circular business models proposal and provides the input for more indepth
analyses and more detailed CBM development within WP2 (Task 2.3 - Planning the
circular business implementation of the demonstrators), for the detailed plan of circular business
models demonstration within WP3 and WP4 and for the IT platforms development (WP5) as
well as for the deployment of solutions by both demonstrators in the form of real testing (WP6
and WP7) and evaluation of circular business models performance in the end of the
demonstration (WP2, task 2.4; WP3, task, 3.5; WP6, task 6.7 and WP7, task 7.5).
We thank to Mr. Frédéric Arnould from Surplus Autos S.A.R.L, Mr. Otto Bartel from RG GmbH,
Mr. Manuel Birreck from Bald Automobile GmbH, Mr. Jean-Michel Brach from La Concorde, Mr.
Pierre Chyrra from Partners Trading E.I.T., Mr. Stéphane Cozic from Autodistribution LOIR S.A.,
Mr. Thierry Durand from Bourgogne Recyclage, Mr. Gregory Edel from Edel International
Trading, Mr. Valentin Martin from Soulignon Auto Casse, Mr. Holger Orth from Ebbinghaus
Automobile GmbH and Mr. Régis Piton from Lebourgeois Le Havre, for their willingness to
participate in the in-depth interviews and for providing valuable information about the
Automotive aftermarket business.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 9 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
1 Introduction
The main objective of WP2 is the development of innovative business models supporting circular
manufacturing systems in the context of the two demonstrators. The deliverable D2.1
concentrates on defining the current baseline and the target new circular business model – in
case of the White goods demonstrator Gorenje - and the improved existing circular business
model – in the case of the demonstrator Bosch. The focus is on drawing a relatively
comprehensive picture about the current business approach of both demonstrators and based
on the summary of the existing knowledge of circular economy, circular business models and
the innovative tools the aim of this deliverable is to outline and justify proposals of suitable
circular business models with alternative solutions and suggest the suitable path for the
innovation process.
The questions to be answered in this report are as following:
1. What are the forces and factors that stand behind the circular economy and which may
bring companies to do their business in a circular way? What forces and what factors
might be the opportunities and challenges and what might be the threats and risks for
the white goods (washing machines) circular business and for the automotive
aftermarket and automotive remanufacturing circular business?
2. What is the purpose, the essence and the components and linkages between
components of business models as a system views on doing the sustainable and circular
business?
3. What specificities do the existing circular business models have in comparisons with
non-circular models and what are the reasons for these specificities (what factors
influence their structure and content)?
4. What are the most viable structure and content of the circular business models for both
demonstrators? Who are the customers in circular business models? Which other actors
play the role of customers in circular business? What are the needs, wants and the
characteristics of customers and stakeholders – as customers´ segments and what is the
“circular value” proposition for them that can satisfy these needs and wants? How can
the “circular value” be delivered to the relevant segments? What resources,
competencies and capabilities do companies need to be effective and efficient with the
circular business models? Who are the key partners for the “circular value creation”,
value delivery and value capture? What customers and other relevant stakeholders as
customers pay for in “circular value – what is the revenue structure? What specific costs
and what cost structure does exist with circular business models?
5. What are the innovation processes and the innovative tools, methods as well as
strategies, approaches, models, frameworks for the business models transition,
improvements or adaptations that can be used in for both demonstrators to make
needed steps towards circular economy?
To answer these questions, the following steps are taken:
1. A systematic literature review on circular business models and business models’
innovative tools towards circular economy is performed to build the knowledge base.
2. Pilot survey (Gorenje) of consumers from Austria, Denmark, Netherlands and Slovenia
(where the demonstration of the pay per wash system will be realized) and pilot in-
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 10 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
depth interviews with the automotive aftermarket players in France and Germany
(where the demonstration of the cloud platform as the tool for the streamlining the
reverse flows will be put in practice) are provided to obtain feedback on circular value
propositions for both demonstrators. The insight is used for the optimization of circular
product offerings, for specifying customer segments and their market readiness for
circular economy and business approaches.
3. External and internal environmental scanning of the markets and market analysis which
identifies factors for both demonstrators that might be relevant when modelling circular
business is executed. The purpose of market analysis is to evaluate the potential of all 6
markets for circular business models proposed in the project.
4. Current business models of both demonstrators covering problems, challenges,
barriers, gaps are described.
5. Building on the existing theoretical and empirical knowledge circular business models
are suggested for both demonstrators with the relevant alternatives that correspond
with the resources, competencies, capabilities of demonstrators and are in harmony
with the market trends. Appropriate innovative tools for the transition and
improvement accompanied these models. Models will serve as the frameworks for
further development within the work of WP2.3, WP3, WP4, WP5, for the
implementation by both demonstrators (WP6 and WP7) and for the evaluation of
results (WP2-WP8) during the following phases of the project.
1.1 Document Scope
This report characterizes the existing value proposal, value creation, value delivery and value
capture of the:
a) reverse logistics solution to enhance the needed supply of the cores from the endcustomer/consumer
to the remanufacturing facilities with the aim to satisfy the
demand for remanufactured spare parts and
b) the traditional linear washing machine business with only limited reverse logistics
processes with the rather limited circularity of products, spare parts, raw materials and
packaging.
Further, a literature review of the circular business solutions and circular economy potential for
the business model innovation is provided in the context of both demonstrators. Together with
the market analysis of the automotive aftermarket and reverse logistics in this market as well as
of the washing machine and laundering market, circular business models are proposed altering
to the existing and potential risks, barriers, challenges and opportunities. Relevant innovative
tools, methods, strategies, models, frameworks, approaches that help with the transition and
improvements are suggested as well.
1.2 Methodology
The character of the project requires multimethod research. A triangulation research design as
one of the multimethod research approaches is recommended by several authors especially in
business, management and entrepreneurship research (Bryman and Bell, 2003; Davidsson,
2003; Westhead and Wright, 2000). The main idea of the triangulation is in the enrichment and
supplementation of the pieces of findings from the individual approaches. Triangulation enables
to reach wider and deeper context and facilitates the interpretation of the relationships
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 11 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
between different phenomena and to answer distinct research questions related to the same
problem or theme or task (Bryman and Bell, 2003).
We applied all four forms of triangulation proposed by Denzin (1989):
1. Data triangulation, which entails gathering data at different times, from different sources, at
different spaces and different situations and from different persons or groups of people (in the
context of the project from different stakeholders);
2. Investigator triangulation, which means the use of more than one and different researchers
in one or from more fields to gather and interpret data;
3. Theoretical triangulation, which involves the use of multiple theoretical perspectives to the
same phenomenon for the process of interpreting data;
4. Methods triangulation, which refers to the use of several and different methods (and
techniques).
1.2.1 Literature review
A combination of a state-of-the-art review and systematic literature review (SLR) was applied for
this report.
a) The state-of-the-art review concentrates on more current issues and matters. This type of
review “may offer new perspectives on an issue or highlight an area in need of further
research” (Grant and Booth, 2009, p. 101). The state-of-the-art review was used for
understanding the contextual situation regarding the potential circular business models of
both demonstrators. This review relieved the themes we believe are connected to the
circular business models running. Figure 1 shows the main keywords that were applied to
the state-of-the-art review.
Figure 1: Visualisation of keywords for literature review (authors)
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 12 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
b) Systematic literature review is, according to Denyer and Tranfield (2009, p. 672), “a specific
methodology that locates existing studies, selects and evaluates contributions, analyses and
synthesizes data, and reports the evidence in such a way that allows reasonably clear
conclusions to be reached about what is and is not known”. SLR comprehensively identifies,
appraises, and synthesizes all relevant studies on some specific topic and helps to identify
gaps and diversity in current research (Petticrew and Roberts, 2006; Correia et al, 2017).
Essentially, SLR aims to synthesize knowledge of multiple original studies.
No unified process for SLR exists – authors differ in the number of steps and in detail content of
each step. For this report, based on Correia et al (2017) and Okoli and Schabram (2011) we
defined six phases: 1. Formulation of the purpose of the literature review; 2. Formulation of the
research questions; 3. Literature search; 4. Evaluation and screening of research; 5. Research
analysis and 5. Presentation of results.
There are two main purposes to do a systematic literature review in relation to the ReCiPSS
project and this deliverable:
1. to understand the substance of circular business models and their innovation and
2. to summarize and to evaluate the appropriate tools (methods, strategies, approaches,
models, frameworks…) that could be used for the transition (in the case of Gorenje) and
improvement (in case of Bosch) of business models to be (more) circular.
Based on the task 2.1 within WP2 which should be accomplished through SLR following research
questions were formulated:
RQ1: What specific features circular business models have in comparison to linear business
models?
RQ2: What are the main features of business model innovation in the current literature?
RQ3: What challenges exist within the process of innovation of business models towards
circular ones?
RQ4: What innovative tools for the business model change, transition, transformation,
adaptation, improvement to become (more) circular are appropriate for both demonstrators
within the project?
RQ5: Which synergies and cross-fertilization opportunities can exist across cases of both
demonstrators in their circular business models´ innovation processes?
The most often recommended databases – Web of Science and SCOPUS were used for the
search of the existing knowledge. For answering the RQ4 also cross-references, Proquest
database and review of the first 100 articles in Google Scholar was done to enlarge the scope of
potential sources of knowledge.
1.2.2 Environmental scanning and market analysis
Environmental scanning and market analyses enable to understand driving forces which urge
companies to make adaptations, changes and/or innovation of their way of doing business as
well as in the core of their business logic. Opportunities and threats, challenges, risks, barriers
should be detected and evaluated during these processes.
Some trends were found out also from the in-depth interviews with the automotive aftermarket
(AAM) companies (see chapter 2.2.4).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 13 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Environmental scanning and market analyses encompass all levels of the environment as can be
seen from Figure 2.
Figure 2: Layers of the business environment (Johnson et al, 2008, p. 54)
1.2.3 Current business models description
For the current business models description, a mix of several methods was used again. All of
them can be covered by the umbrella term “qualitative content analysis”. We analysed contents
of the transcripts from the on-site visits’ presentations, interviews and discussions with the
representatives of both demonstrators served as the key informants (Kumar et al, 1993). Expert
interviews were used for the exploration and orientation in the situation researched in the
project and for collection of context information helping to gain needed insight (Bogner and
Menz, 2002).
Content analysis from the first introductory co-creation workshops realized by TUD Delft during
the first on-site visits with both demonstrators was also incorporated into the description of
current business models. Finally, content analysis of webpages of demonstrators, their annual
reports, market reports, news, and online practitioners´ journals provided needed information
as well as existing articles from academic journals. Most information was collected and analysed
as part of the environmental scanning (see Chapter 6 and 7).
1.2.4 Pilot surveys, in-depth interviews and co-creation sessions
The most effective way for the needed information and data from the consumer markets, where
the demonstration of the pay per wash model should be realized (Austria, Denmark,
Netherlands and Slovenia), was to use pilot surveys (also recommended in the project proposal).
Online surveys with the use of the questionnaire were realized with the help of professional
market and marketing research agency Focus during the end of March and beginning of April
2019. The target sample size for every country was 150 responses (which is higher that
recommended for a pilot survey). The questionnaire in five languages versions is available in the
Appendix to this report.
The main purpose of the survey was to explore what is the laundering behaviour of consumers,
what experience and attitudes do they have with renting, leasing and pay per use models; what
is their perception and the attitudes to refurbished products and specially to washing machines.
Conjoint analysis (part of the questionnaire) aims to detect potential preferences of various pay
per wash options.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 14 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
The questionnaire design (topics and questions wording) was inspired by two sources: the
published conceptual and empirical research (Antikainen et al. 2015; Gullstrand Edbring, Lehner,
and Mont 2016; Lieder et al. 2018; Collins, Steg, and Koning 2007; Hsu 2014; Jiménez-Parra,
Rubio, and Vicente-Molina 2014; Mugge, Jockin, and Bocken 2017; Sweeney and Soutar 2001;
Wang and Hazen 2016; Subramanian and Subramanyam 2012) and by the co-creation session
conducted within the ReCiPSS project on 10/12/2018 with Slovenian consumers. Technically,
the questions were constructed as single and multiple choice, as 3-, 5- and 7-point scales, openended
questions and one ranking question for conjoint analysis. The missing data were not
substituted but were deleted, in particular analyses list- or case-wise.
For the automotive aftermarket in-depth interviews instead of the pilot survey was more
appropriate, first due to the higher probability to get informants and secondly, due to the more
explorative character of the research problem. Areas of interest and questions were prepared
with the very intensive cooperation with the C-ECO team and the involvement of TU Delft.
Recruitment of the informants was provided by the market research agency B-inside.
Recruitment and in-depth interviews (face to face and telephone) took place during April and
beginning of May 2019. From the databases with 120 companies in Germany and 120 companies
in France (divided into the three categories – IAM distributors, buying groups and garages) 11
interviews in Germany and 11 in France were realized and the results are used for the content
of this report.
The content analysis of surveys and interviews focused on behaviour and practices and reasons
for such behaviour and practices and for defining gains and pains, needs and wants, awareness,
attitudes and perceived risks of:
a) consumers with current laundering practices, with the pay per wash model and
refurbished washing machine; and
b) independent automotive aftermarket distributors and garages (workshops) with
current reverse logistics processes and information system as well as deposit
(surcharge) system for cores. With these actors also their awareness and perception of
trends and experience and attitudes to cloud-based information management of the
forward and reverse logistics processes were discussed.
Findings from the content analysis of the co-creation sessions with the consumers for the
Gorenje case which were organized by TU Delft in Netherlands and Slovenia in October and
November 2019 also represent the part of empirical research needed for the project.
The results of all content analyses and from the pilot surveys were used to develop circular
business models for both demonstrators and especially for formulating value propositions.
1.2.5 Circular business model development
Circular business models have been developed using a combination of the general methodology
of Wirtz (2011), “business model canvas” (BMC) approach and inspiring ideas from “The IoT
Business Model Builder” (Bilgeri et al, 2015).
Wirtz suggests going through 4 steps of business model design process – idea generation,
feasibility study, prototyping and decision making.
Wirtz´s methodology was combined with the Zott and Amitt (2009, p. 7) proposed Activity
system design framework (see Figure 3).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 15 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 3: Activity system design framework
As this deliverable is created in the very first phase of the whole project schedule, step 2 of
business model design process – feasibility study – covers only part of the first two substeps –
analysis of the existing markets and assessment of the potential. Complex outputs of the step 2
and 3 are dependent on the results of further work of WP2, WP3, WP4, decision making of WP6
and WP7 and work of WP5. Final step 4 - decision making will be the result of whole ReCiPSS
project.
In the idea generation phase, several creativity techniques were used to generate a multitude
of proposals for every strategic component of the potential circular business models for both
demonstrators. Knowledge from the literature review was combined with the outputs from
applying these techniques and based on the rough features of the models´ orientations and the
first rough concept have been determined and developed (Wirtz, 2011).
Brainstorming meetings were organized for every individual component of circular business
models with the purpose to generate as many ideas for the forms and contents of every
component as possible. Brainstorming was complemented with the synectics technique with the
aim to generate also unconventional business model ideas by employing personal, fantasy and
direct analogies (Wilson et al, 1973). Synectics was used in this initial work only in a nonsystematic
way for washing machine value proposition understanding. The results help to design
alternative circular business models/alternative components of business models probably not
feasible to deploy in the near future, but with some potential for the next decades (Wirtz, 2011).
For the feasibility analysis phase findings from the Environmental scanning (see Chapter 2.2.2)
and both literature reviews (on business models and their innovation and on circular business
models and innovative tools) were employed. Basic conditions as well as the trends of the
environment which shape and will shape the circular business models and their individual
components - especially customer and market component - were determined.
Components and the core logic (architecture) from the business model canvas (see also Chapter
3.1) and its variants and adaptations (proposed in the academic literature and practice for
sustainability-focused and circular business models) were used for the circular business models
development.
Framework provides insight by:
Giving business model design a language, concepts and tools
Highlighting business model design a key managerial/entrepreneurial task
Emphasizing system-level design over partial optimization
Design elements
Content What activities should be performed?
Structure How should they be linked and sequenced?
Governance Who should perform them, and Where?
Design themes
Novelty Adopt innovative content, structure or governance
Lock-In Build in elements to retain business model stakeholders, e.g. customers
Complementarities Bundle activities to generate more value
Efficiency Reorganize activities to reduce transaction costs
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 16 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
1.2.6 Document Structure
The document is divided into 9 parts (without the Introduction and Discussion and conclusions.
Chapter 2 contain the introduction and methodology to several researches and analyses realized
during the 1st
year of the project duration. Chapter 3 and Chapter 4 summarize the background
of literature on business models and a systematic literature review on business models
innovation. Chapter 5 presents results of a systematic literature review on circular business
models and innovative tools for the transition from the traditional linear or less developed
circular business models towards (more) circular ones. Findings from the environmental
scanning and market analyses as well as from the in-depth interviews and online surveys for
both demonstrators are provided. Chapter 8 describes current business models of Bosch and CECO´s
cores market and of Gorenje´s washing machine market. Chapter 9 brings proposals of
circular business models focusing mainly on the target approaches of both demonstrators
defined in the ReCiPSS project proposal and recaps risks, barriers, challenges and opportunities
connected to the proposed business models. The suitable tools (methods, strategies,
frameworks, model etc.) for the innovative steps toward circularity in business models are part
of this chapter.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 17 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
2 Literature review – business models and
business model innovation
This section summarises basic knowledge of the business models concept and the role and
process of business models innovation.
2.1 Business models
The business model (BM) concept appeared in the late 1960s but only gained momentum in the
1990s (Demil & Lecocq 2010) when it started to diffuse among management scholars, namely
in the areas of innovation and entrepreneurship studies. This upsurge is related to the
emergence of new opportunities and challenges for value creation and capture linked to the
digital transformation (e.g. e-commerce) (Wirtz et al. 2016). Figure 4 shows the growth of
academic publications using the concept (Scopus database, 10/11/2018. Search query: TITLEABS-KEY
("business model") AND (EXCLUDE (PUBYEAR, 2019).
Figure 4: Number of publications on Business Models in Scopus Indexed
Despite the proliferation of research on business models, there is still no agreement on what a
business model really is (Arend 2013; Casadeus-Masanell and Ricart 2010; DaSilva and Trkman
2014; Demil & Lecocq 2010; Morris et al. 2005; Osterwalder et al. 2005; Zott et al. 2011). The
conceptual diversity can be problematic since the concept is not always used in a coherent way
and sometimes is used as a synonym for terms like ‘business idea’ or ‘revenue model’ (Wirtz et
al 2016)
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 18 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This means that there are many definitions of business models. For instance, Seidel et al (2017,
p. 150) define business model “as a structured, simplified and intelligible representation of how
a company buys and sells goods or services and, in that process, earns money”. Demil and Lecocq
(2010, p. 227) define business model as the concept that “refers to the description of the
articulation between different BM components or ‘building blocks’ to produce a proposition that
can generate value for consumers and thus for the organization”.
Wirtz (2011, p. 13) sees a business model to be “the comprehensive description of
entrepreneurial activity in aggregated form”. Wirtz also adds some roles or purposes of business
models – more are introduced further in the text: “business models enable a manager to focus
on the essential aspects of his responsibility. Due to the reduction of complexity and the resulting
focus on relevant information, the quality of decision‐making can be enhanced, which allows for
more well‐founded strategic and operating decisions” (p. 16).
Margretta (2002, p. 89) states that “…a good business model answers Peter Ducker’s age-old
questions: Who is the customer? And what does the customer value? It also answers the
fundamental questions every manager must ask: How do we make money in this business? What
is the underlying economic logic that explains how we can deliver value to customers at an
appropriate cost? “
“A business model describes the design or architecture of the value creation, delivery and capture
mechanisms employed. The essence of a business model is that it crystallizes customer needs
and ability to pay, defines the manner by which the business enterprise responds to and delivers
value to customers, entices customers to pay for value, and converts those payments to profit
through the proper design and operation of the various elements of the value chain. Put
differently, a business model reflects management’s hypothesis about what customers want,
how they want it and what they will pay, and how an enterprise can organize to best meet
customer needs and get paid well for doing so.” (Teece, 2010, p. 191).
Amit and Zott (2001, p. 513) conclude that “A business model depicts the content, structure, and
governance of transactions designed so as to create value through the exploitation of business
opportunities.”
According to Osterwalder et al (2005, p. 17-18) a business model is a conceptual tool that
contains a set of elements and their relationships and allows expressing the business logic of a
specific firm. It is a description of the value a company offers to one or several segments of
customers and of the architecture of the firm and its network of partners for creating,
marketing, and delivering this value and relationship capital, to generate profitable and
sustainable revenue streams.
Business models have different functions and so they can be used for different purposes. Based
on Osterwalder (2004), Osterwalder et al (2005), Wirtz (2011) and Sarasini and Linder (2018, p.
15) we summarize them into the following categories:
 understanding and sharing – they can help to capture, visualize, understand,
communicate and share the business logic or the key mechanics of an existing business;
 to describe some company-level activities, focusing on the creation and distribution of
value;
 to link firm-level activities with market outcomes;
 analysing – they can help to analyse the business logic of a company, improve
measuring, tracking, observing, and comparing the business logic of a company with
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 19 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
other companies (or other business logic of the same company if different business
models are pursued). In that case business models can be used as a new unit of analysis.
 managing – they can help to design, plan processes to follow business logic, help to
manage modifying, changing or innovation and implementation of business models.
This can also improve the alignment of strategy, business organization and technology.
 prospects – they can serve as the basis for innovation routes, for improving the current
business structure and operations, for testing and also for stock (prepared for the
potential future use);
 patenting of business models – however, business models used to be very individual
solutions and patenting is not very frequent;
 to identify outsourcing opportunities – business models enable to define which
processes and activities should be internalized and which are possible and more
efficient to externalize.
The distinction between a strategy and a business model should be understood as business
models describe what and strategies help to answer how to achieve the “what”. Teece (2010, p.
179) states that a “business model is more generic than a business strategy”. He also adds that
to protect competitive advantage resulting from new business model design coupling strategy
and business model analysis is needed. Business models are seen to bridge the gap between
strategy (the positioning, objectives and goals of the company) and business processes
(involving the understanding and implementation of strategic information (Osterwalder and
Pigneur, 2002, p.77).
Business models should work on business level as a complex; however, they do not exist in a
vacuum. Particularly in bigger organization, several business models co-exist sometimes and
should be in harmony with others. Their success and sustainability is dependent both on action
programs or tactics (or operations) across the whole organization and on networks created by
relationships (Wirtz, 2011).
Teece (2010, p. 180) stresses that strategy analysis is an essential step in designing a
competitively sustainable business model. For a circular business model, some of his comments
are important. He alerts on the easiness of replicability of some “observable” characteristics
of business model, for instance, leasing vs owning. This is why figuring out and implementing
“isolating mechanisms” (e.g. patents, trade secrets, rapid scaling to secure large market share
and cost advantages) that can hinder or block imitations by competitors and disintermediation
by customer and suppliers. The last example of the isolating mechanism could be problematic
because of the low predictability of sustainable success of new model.
Summarizing the above-mentioned information, despite the conceptual diversity, there seems
to be a consensus on the fact that business models are related to the articulation between
different activities designed to produce value (and proposition of value to customers) and to
capture that value.
According to Demil and Lecocq (2010), two approaches to business models can be found in the
BM literature: a static and a dynamic one. The first approach deals with the description of the
way the company generates value, helping the managers to set a coherent system. The second
approach has a transformational nature, where the BM is understood as a tool to address
change and to promote innovation both at the level of the company and at the level of the BM
itself. The concept of BM innovation relates to this second approach.
In this study, to design the business models for the two demonstrators, we adopt the framework
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 20 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
developed by Osterwalder and Pigneur (2010). The authors introduce a framework to design
BM, which they call ‘canvas’ (see Figure 5, Osterwalder et al, 2014, p. 19), based on the nine
building blocks: customer segments, value propositions, channels, customers’ relationships,
revenue stream, key resources, key activities, key partnerships and cost structure. This
framework has been widely used by academics and practitioners both in management and in
sustainability/circular economy literature as a tool to design, redesign, innovate or develop a
new BM.
Figure 5: Business model canvas
2.2 Business models innovation and the transition to
sustainable societies through circular economy
In business model (BM) innovation the focus is on new BMs or on the transformation of existing
ones. BM innovation is considered an important source of firm’s competitive advantage (Spieth
et al. 2014). Recently, it is also pointed as a fundamental aspect in a transition to a more
sustainable society. The transformation in businesses, and therefore in BM, is considered as a
big challenge for companies, as there are many drivers and obstacles to the implementation of
a circular economy at the company and value chain and network level (R2π, 2018; Lewandowski
2016). This idea started in the practitioners´ arena (e.g. EMF & McKinsey 2012; EMF & McKinsey
2013; EMF, McKinsey & SUN 2015) but the evolution of the number of publications, shows that
sustainable/ circular BM are becoming a popular topic of research among academics. However,
in the CE literature, BMs are still insufficiently investigated (Antikainen & Valkokari 2016;
Blomsma & Brennan 2017; Lewandowski 2016; Lieder & Rashid 2016).
The following systematic literature review should give an overview of the main features of
business model innovation. These features represent the core of management thinking and
managerial processes in the attempt to make any changes or transition from the existing way of
doing business, and therefore the awareness of them can help open the space for new ideas
and activities.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 21 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
2.3 Business models innovation – systematic literature review
In terms of research, BMI is still in its infancy (Hossain 2017) and the literature on BMI lacks wellestablished
definitions, proper constructs, and a theoretical foundation (Bock et al., 2012). This
is intrinsically linked to lack of a clear concept of business model (Arend 2013; CasadeusMasanell
and Ricart 2010; DaSilva and Trkman 2014; Demil & Lecocq 2010; Morris et al. 2005;
Osterwalder et al. 2005; Zott et al. 2011).
This chapter presents a systematic literature review of the studies on BMI, with the aim of
mapping the extant research on the topic. The search was conducted in two bibliographic
databases – SCOPUS and Web of Science in the 1st
of March 2019. The table presents the
procedures adopted in the SLR.
Step Decision Comment / Result
Selection of the
database
SCOPUS
Web of Science
databases containing
journals that are generally
highly regarded by the
academic community;
a large number of sources,
providing broad coverage of
the academic literature
Keyword search
SCOPUS
Search query:
TITLE-ABS-KEY(“business model
innovation” OR (“business model”
AND innovation)
N = 1096
Keyword search
Web of Science
(all databases)
TOPIC ((“business model innovation”
OR (“business model” AND innovation)
N = 818
Inclusion criteria Document type = Article OR Article in
Press (including
Language = English
SCOPUS: N = 581
Web of Science: N = 439
Database
integration
Exclusion of duplicates (documents
that are in both databases)
N = 652
First scanning
through title,
abstract and
keyword reading
Exclude 134papers because they were
out of scope:
- did not meet the research criteria, as
containing the words “business
model” or “innovation” within the
title, abstract and keywords;
- BMI was not dealt in a fundamental
way (i.e. that mention the concept but
not use it)
- they are discussing entrepreneurial
universities or business education.
N = 518
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 22 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Access check 14 articles were excluded because full
text was not available
N = 504
Table 1: Systematic literature review procedure
The 504 articles were uploaded to Atlas.ti for thematic analysis. On Atlas.ti, through detailed
reading, the main body of each article and key information was coded. The coding procedure
was guided by the analytical dimensions and categories presented in Table 2. Additionally, each
study was classified in terms of its method and empirical context.
Table 2. Dimensions and categories used for the coding process in the systematic literature review
Dimension Categories Subcategories
Emergence of BMI
concept
BMI Definitions
BMI types
Drivers Technological
Competitive pressure
Sustainability pressure
Demands of stakeholders
Processes of BMI Barriers/facilitators
Capabilities
Leadership
Learning
Tools to manage the process
Innovative BM Scope
Degree of novelty/change
Context
Architecture
Component
Industry, market, company, the existing
business/incumbent, new venture)
Outcomes and
consequences
Industry level
Firm – financial performance
Firm – capabilities (e.g. strategic
flexibility)
Table 2: Dimensions and categories used for the coding process in the systematic literature review
1. The emergence of BMI concept
BMI literature lacks a construct clarity (Suddaby, 2010). The existence of multiple BMI
definitions (some examples are provided in Table 3) hampers the operationalization and
measurement of the empirical application of business model innovation processes and their
outcomes (Foss and Saebi, 2017).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 23 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Authors Definition Citations*
Markides
(2006:20)
“Business model innovation is the discovery of a
fundamentally different business model in an existing
business.”
100
Teece
(2010:173)
“Business model innovation can itself be a pathway to
competitive advantage if the model is sufficiently
differentiated and hard to replicate for incumbents and
new entrants alike.”
1838
Yunus et al.
(2010: 312)
“Business model innovation is about generating new
sources of profit by finding novel value proposition/value
constellation combinations.”
357
Amit and Zott
(2012: 36)
“BMI can consist of adding new activities, linking
activities in a new way or changing which party performs
an activity”.
251
Bucherer et al.
(2012:184)
“process that deliberately changes the core elements of a
firm and its business logic.”
90
CasadesusMasanell
and
Zhu
(2013: 464)
“search for new logic of the firm and new ways to create
and capture value for its stakeholders; it focuses primarily
on finding new ways to generate revenues and define
value propositions for customers, suppliers, and partners.”
163
*Number of citations in the SCOPUS or WoS database (1st
March 2019)
Table 3: Some definitions of BMI
It is possible to classify BMI according to its forms and types. Amit and Zott (2012) propose three
basic forms of BMI: (1) adding new activities to an existing business model, (2) organizing
activities in novel ways, and (3) changing some parties that perform the activities. Koen et al.
(2011) propose three types of BMI: technology, value network, and financial hurdle. Hwang and
Christensen (2008) categorize BMI into three broad categories: solution shops, value-adding
business processes, and facilitated user networks.
2. Drivers
New technologies are mentioned as the BMI drivers, by some scholars, since they facilitate the
emergence of new business models (Hossain, 2017) and create opportunities for firms to
consider new business models (Mezger, 2014).
Internet and digitalization have disrupted many previously successful, long-standing business
models (Holm et al., 2013) and led to new types of BM (Karimi and Walter, 2016). The reasons
for the relevance of ICT for BMI as a driver include the fact that these technologies change the
way companies, users, customers, and other stakeholders interact (Aagaard and Lindgren,
2015), the data gathering opportunities (Chandy et al, 2018; Trabucchi et al, 2018).
Some of the ICT technologies deserving the attention of scholars are cloud computing (Berman
et al., 2012; Gorrell, 2012; Khanagha et al, 2014), social media (Bouwman, Nikou et al 2018) and
big data (Bouwman, Nikou et al 2018; Cheah and Wang, 2017; Chandy et al, 2018; Trabucchi et
al, 2018).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 24 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Studies also stress the role of 3D printing technologies in promoting BMI, by enabling rapid
prototyping and improve the value proposition by better products and personalized
consumption experience (Flammini et al, 2017; Holzmannet et al, 2017; Jia et al, 2016; Rayna
and Striukova, 2016b).
But not all changes in the firms’ environment are technological. Market, sustainability and social
factors are also mentioned in the literature.
The fast change of market environments increases the obsolescence of existing BM and drives
the need for continuous BMI, to outperform the competition (Mitchell and Coles, 2003) and
achieve long-term success (Sosna et al., 2010). Scholars stress the role of competitive pressure
and hyper-competition (Krishnamoorthy and Damle, 2017; Michalski, 2003; Sosna et al 2010),
globalization (Ludviga, 2013; Taran et al, 2015) and increased customer expectations (Sorescu
et al, 2011).
Sustainability is increasingly considered as a BMI driver. Climate change, resource depletion and
energy transition have substantial impacts on existing BM (Gorissen et al., 2016). Moreover,
new BM is needed to promote sustainable development (Baldassarre et al 2017).
Some sustainability factors that are stressed as BMI drivers are: need to optimize material and
energy (Bocken et al., 2014); the need to change consumption patterns (Bocken, 2017); the need
to align with users’ desire for a lower environmental impact (Girontra and Netessine, 2013).
Finally, some studies also mention the role of social needs in stimulating BMI (Alegre and
Berbegal-Mirabent, 2016).
3. Process of BMI and resources and activities
Scholars stress the fact that BMI that involves steps, resources and activities. Sinfield et al.
(2011) propose that new BMI can be explored by conducting three sequential steps: creating a
template for the study of alternative answers to key BM questions, using that template to find
alternative approaches to value creation, and determining what will remain unchanged and
what needs to be changed in the business model.
Capabilities
In process of BMI the existence of needed capabilities as resources are central. Scholars stress
specifically the interlinking between dynamic capabilities and BMI (Li et al, 2008; Roaldsen,
2014; Schoemaker et al, 2018; Teece, 2018; Vicente et al, 2018; Wathan and Abi, 2017). Mezger
(2014) sees BMI as a distinct dynamic capability, related to the capacity to sense opportunities,
seize them through the development of valuable and inimitable BM and consequently
reconfigure the firms’ competencies and resources. Nair et al. (2013) argue that the firm’s
ability to understand, manage, and measure its core competencies is pivotal to BMI success.
Bucherer et al. (2012) argue that BMI is not a static system but rather a dynamic one, demanding
constant adjustments to react to both internal and external changes. Since BMI is a dynamic
process, the firm’s disposition and capability to modify its business model has a positive effect
on BMI success (Cucculelli et al., 2014; Cucculelli and Bettinelli, 2015). In this process, strategic
flexibility/agility becomes of utmost importance (Arbussa et al, 2017; Bock et al, 2012; Liao et
al, 2018; Schneide and Spieth, 2014).
Experimentation is also considered as an important capability in BMI since it allows to learn and
improve BMI activities and to create external and internal engagement (Bocken et al., 2018). Its
role has been especially stressed in the context of sustainable BMI (Bocken et al., 2018, 2019).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 25 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Also, in the context of sustainable BMI, Inigo et al (2017) study the role of several organisational
and managerial capabilities related to sensing, seizing and reconfiguring for BMI.
Bouncken et al, (2016) highlight the role of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and modularity as
triggers of BMI;
Leadership
The literature also shows that leadership plays a major role in BMI (Schoemaker et al, 2018).
Chesbrough (2010) claims that leadership of organizational change must be necessary to
overcome barriers (obstruction and confusion) that emerge in BMI. Guo et al. (2013)
demonstrate how the human and social capital of top managers can shape BMI. Liao et al (2018)
conclude that distributed leadership has a significant direct and indirect (by enhancing strategic
flexibility) influence on BMI.
Learning
Scholars also stress the importance of learning processes as a source of BMI (Andries and
Debackere, 2013; Eppler et al., 2011; Sosna et al., 2010;), often relating them to experimentation
and to trial and error processes.
It is claimed that the learning approaches used by firms in BMI change over time. Andries &
Debackere (2013) show that, under conditions of uncertainty, firms develop new business
models through commitment, incremental experimentation, or radical experimentation; firms
need to change their learning approach over time in order to successfully renew their business
model. Berends et al (2016) distinguish two patterns that can result in radical BMI: “drifting”
and “leaping”. The first starts with a focus on experiential learning and shifts later to cognitive
search, while the second starts with an emphasis on cognitive search and shifts later to
experiential learning.
4. Innovative BM
Scope
Some scholars consider that changing one of the BM components can be enough to achieve BMI
(Amit and Zott, 2012; Bock et al., 2012; Schneider and Spieth, 2013). Another way to
conceptualize BMI is through the change of multiple business model elements simultaneously
(Frankenberger et al., 2013; Sorescu et al., 2011; Wahyono, 2018). Other scholars go further and
consider BMI as an entirely novel combination of all BM components and their interactions
(Velamuri et al, 2013; Yanus et al, 2010).
This last view is related to the independence of the BM building blocks: changing one element
will not only impact other elements but also the interactions between these elements.
According to Zott and Amit (2010), innovative business models can be developed through linking
activities in a novel way that generates more value. However, the extant literature provides few
insights on how to change multiple BM components simultaneously (Wahyono, 2018) and on
the interdependences among components in the BMI process (Sorescu et al, 2011).
Most studies focus on value creation (Wahyono, 2018), namely on the value proposition, which
is seen as its core element. (Landau et al 2016). However, capturing value is also detrimental for
the BMI, namely through formal and informal protection strategies (Bonakdar et al 2017).
Degree of novelty/change
Related to the previous topic, some scholars contend that BMI can be framed as an evolutionary
process of incremental changes to some elements of the BM (Amit and Zott, 2012; Landau et
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 26 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
al., 2016; Velu, 2016). Others argue that BMI results from revolutionary processes that replace
the existing BM (Bock et al., 2012). Witell and Löfgren (2013) identify three degrees of BMI: (1)
change in the business model, (2) incremental BMI, and (3) radical BMI.
Some scholars stress the fact that companies can use more than one BM simultaneously, or
even engage in multiple BMI processes. Khanagha et al (2014) advocate that in the BMI process
companies have several strategic options related to the implementation of the new BM, ranging
from the incremental evolution and transformation to complete replacement of the existing
business model. If the company opts to manage the two BM (existing and new) at the same time
Markides (2013) points to the existence of three options: to create a separate business unit; to
integrate the two business models from the beginning, or to integrate the second business
model after a certain period. Flammini et al. (2017) conclude that, in a situation of co-existence
of BM, if a company needs to choose one of them it may prefer the most familiar one,
particularly if it faces high uncertainty.
Context
Some studies stress that market differences can affect BMI. They contend that BMI differs in
emerging markets when compared to developed countries. Examples of studies focusing on
emerging/low-income/base-of-the-pyramid markets include: Abraham (2012); Sánchez and
Ricart (2010); Yunus et al., 2010; Gebauer et al 2017a,b,c).
Another important factor that can affect BMI is the nature of the company, namely if It is an
incumbent or a new venture. Bohnsack et al. (2014) argue that incumbents and entrepreneurs
consider BMI in distinct ways, but over time, their business models ultimately converge. Kim and
Min (2015) explore how incumbent firms react to the emergence of a disruptive business model
by integrating the new business model into their existing one.
5. Outcomes and consequences
BMI is positively related to firm performance (Bouwman, Nikou et al 2018; Cucculelli and
Bettinelli, 2015; Giesen et al., 2010; Huang et al., 2013; Huang et al. 2012; Kastalli et al. 2013).
Financial value capture can be measured using several indicators, with return on equity being
commonly used (Bouncken and Fredrich, 2016).
Authors also stress that having a novel BMI is not enough for a firm to make profits. Value
capture issues are relevant: intellectual property protection and complementary assets
management may play a crucial role in a profitable BMI (Desyllas and Sako, 2013). Entry timing
can also play a role in the success of BMI (Park 2011)
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 27 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
3 State of the art review – circular business model
3.1 Circular economy and circular business models -
introduction
Just a few years ago, interest of practitioners, academics, politicians, and individuals has begun
to grow rapidly about what is hidden in, how can be the “what” captured in real and what is not
and why as regards the concept of circular economy (CE) (Homrich et al, 2018). Despite the fact
that the basic ideas of CE can be found in several schools of thoughts (Ghisellini et al, 2016) and
the idea behind a circular economy has existed for a long time (Murray et al, 2017), which can
be tracked even to the prehistoric era (Park and Chertow, 2014), only recently some forces push
more and more business to turn the attention and intensify the effort of being “less linear”
(Lieder and Rashid, 2016).
The prevailing perception of CE is to become a better alternative to the dominant economic
development model, so-called “take, make and dispose” (Ghisellini et al, 2016). It means that
the CE approach does not reject or does not keep down the strategy of a (economy, business…)
development, only the understanding of how sustainable development can be achieved and for
the gains and pains of which parties, has started to change. So, the space around the
sustainability continues to expand.
There are many conceptions of circular economy and no commonly agreed definition exists yet
(Kirchherr et al, 2017). European Commision, who is a big promoter and booster of circular
economy in practice, states that “In a circular economy the value of products and materials is
maintained for as long as possible; waste and resource use are minimized, and resources are
kept within the economy when a product has reached the end of its life, to be used again and
again to create further value” (EC, 2015, p. 1).
According to Geissdoerfer et al (2018a, p. 712) CE “is based on the idea of putting private
business into the service of the transition to a more sustainable system”. System view is also
stressed by Merli et al (2018) who are of the opinion that CE “proposes a circular system in which
the value of products, materials and resources is maintained in the economy as long as possible”
(p. 703). Camacho-Otero et al (2018, p. 1) state that a circular economy “aims at decoupling
value creation from waste generation and resource use by radically transforming production and
consumption systems”.
The circular economy is viewed as a “business´ business” and is predominantly concentrated on
ways how to operationalize implementation of sustainability issues at an environmental,
economic and social level (Merli et al, 2017). This is obvious from the definition of one of the
leading advocates and protagonists of the circular economy, Ellen McArthur Foundation (EMF,
2013, p. 14): “A circular economy is an industrial system that is restorative or regenerative by
intention and design….” It replaces the end-of-life concept of a product with one that
emphasizes reuse, repair, remanufacturing or recycling “through the superior design of
materials, products, systems and business models”.
However, CE is not only a “business business”. Such view is inherited for instance in the
comprehensive definition formulated by Kirchherr et al (2017, pp. 224-225): “A circular economy
describes an economic system that is based on business models which replace the ‘end-of-life’
concept with reducing, alternatively reusing, recycling and recovering materials in
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 28 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
production/distribution and consumption processes, thus operating at the micro level (products,
companies, consumers), meso level (eco-industrial parks) and macro level (city, region, nation
and beyond), with the aim to accomplish sustainable development, which implies creating
environmental quality, economic prosperity and social equity, to the benefit of current and future
generations.”
For the term “circle” also a “loop” is sometimes used as a synonym. Stahel (1994) states that
there are basically two kinds of loops that differ fundamentally with regard to their feasibility,
hence to understand this is extremely important for decision making which circular strategy to
follow. First is “reuse of products”, which “means an extension of the utilization period of goods,
through the design of long-life goods; the introduction of service loops to extend an existing
product's life, including reuse of the product itself, repair, reconditioning, and technical
upgrading; and a combination of these. The result of the reuse of goods is a slowdown of the
flow of materials from production to recycling” (p. 179). Second is recycling of materials, which
“means simply closing the loop between posture waste (supply) and production (resource
demand)” (p. 179).
Stahel (1993) explains the essence of five key principles of circular economy (which he labels
to be about stock optimization (stock as a wealth in the form of manufactured products, health,
education and skills) (p. 3). Those principles are:
1. The smaller the loop (activity-wise and geographically) the more profitable a resource
efficient it is – where activity-wise means: “don´t repair what is not broken, don't
remanufacture what can be repaired and don´t recycle what can be remanufactured);
Stahel in this point also criticises global recycling business;
2. Loops have no beginning and no end – which replaced the value-added concept of the
linear economy;
3. The speed of the circular flows is crucial: the efficiency of managing stock in the circular
economy increases with a decreasing flow speed; this principle is extremely important
for product design – quality of design itself and quality of material and component which
influence how many times product can be “circled” in one level of the recovery options
hierarchy (from resell to incineration);
4. Continued ownership is cost-efficient: reuse, repair and remanufacture without a
change of ownership save double transaction costs;
5. A circular economy needs a functioning market…..services are needed.
However, for instance, Daly (1977) argues that due to the entropy law for an economic system
it is impossible to be fully circular with products and energy turning back to raw materials
forever.
Lewandowski (2016, p. 5) summarizes other key principles of circular economy:
(1) Design out waste/Design for reuse
(2) Build resilience through diversity
(3) Rely on energy from renewable sources
(4) Think in systems
(5) Waste is food/Think in cascades/Share values (symbiosis)
Another key principle of a circular economy is to drive system-wide change (Webster, 2017 in
Wastling et al, 2018).
The Ellen McArthur Foundation (EMF, 2015) defines the following three principles (p. 22):
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 29 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
 Preserve and enhance natural capital by controlling finite stocks and balancing renewable
resource flows—for example, replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy or using the
maximum sustainable yield method to preserve fish stocks.
 Optimise resource yields by circulating products, components, and materials at the
highest utility at all times in both technical and biological cycles – for example, sharing
or looping products and extending product lifetimes.
 Foster system effectiveness by revealing and designing out negative externalities, such
as water, air, soil, and noise pollution; climate change; toxins; congestion; and negative
health effects related to resource use.
Based on these principles EMF proposed the ReSOLVE Framework containing six business
actions, which can be understood as a tool for generating circular strategies and growth
initiatives (pp. 22-23):
REgenerate - shift to renewable energy and materials; reclaim, retain, and regenerate the
health of ecosystems and return recovered biological resources to the biosphere;
Share - keep product loop speed low and maximise utilisation of products, by sharing
them among different users (peer-to-peer sharing of privately-owned products or public
sharing of a pool of products), by reusing them through their entire technical lifetime
(second hand), and by prolonging their lifetime through maintenance, repair, and design
for durability.
Optimise - increase performance/efficiency of a product; remove waste in production and
supply chain (from sourcing and logistics to production, use phase, end-of-use collection
etc.); leverage big data, automation, remote sensing and steering. All these actions are
implemented without changes to the actual product or technology.
Loop - keep components and materials in closed loops and prioritise inner loops. For finite
materials, it means remanufacturing products or components and recycling materials. For
renewable materials, it means anaerobic digestion and extracting biochemicals from
organic waste.
Virtualise - dematerialise resource use by delivering utility virtually: directly or indirectly.
Exchange - replace old with advanced non-renewable materials, apply new technologies
and choose new products/services.
Four distinct ways how to create value in circular business models are identified by EMF (2013)
in the conceptualization of different powers:
 Power of the inner circle
 Power of circling longer
 Power of cascaded use
 Power of pure circles
Hierarchy of “powers” reflects both the challenge for the companies to be overcome, the need
for new resources and reengineering, innovation in relationships and partners´ network as well
as the redesign of value creation, delivery and capture the logic and of course also the level or
extent of circularity.
Bocken et al (2016) based on Stahel (1994) distinguish three strategies towards the cycling of
resources:
(1) Slowing resource loops (design of long-life goods and product-life extension (i.e. through
maintenance, repair, share, reuse, upgrade, refurbishing and remanufacturing) In this strategy
following design options are included in: design for attachment and trust; design for reliability
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 30 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
and durability, design for product-life extension, design for ease of maintenance and repair,
design for upgradability and adaptability, design for standardization and compatibility and
design for dis- and reassembly.
(2) Closing resource loops through recycling. Within this strategy only three design options are
offered: design for a technological cycle, design for a biological cycle and design for dis- and
reassembly;
(3) Resource efficiency or narrowing resource flows through using fewer resources per
product and by reducing the amounts of materials and components in the manufacturing system this
strategy is considered by authors not to be applicable for circular economy. However, we
can argue that – from the resources list point of view to manufacture a tangible product –
companies can spend less time, effort and costs and spare them for other cycling processes.
This strategy could be used in combination with some of the above-mentioned ones.
Six business model strategies for the two above mentioned strategies (slowing and closing the
loops) were proposed by the authors - it means no full business model, only strategic directions
or the main characteristic feature of potential business models development. Core ideas
implemented in these business model strategies can serve as the springboard to think about the
architecture of the business model to create and deliver value and how to capture value
following the chosen strategic direction. Some examples of value, value creation, value delivery
and value capture within individual strategies and in several cases are also mentioned in the
article and can be used for CBM design and development for both demonstrators. Strategies
and their definition are in Table 4 ((Bocken et al, 2016, p. 313).
Strategies definition
Business model strategies for slowing loops
Access and performance model Providing the capability or services to satisfy user
needs without needing to own physical products
Extending product value Exploiting residual value of products – from the
manufacturing, to consumers, and then back to
manufacturing – or collection of products between
distinct business entities
Classic long-life model Business models focused on delivering long-product
life, supported by design for durability and repair for
instance
Encourage sufficiency Solutions that actively seek to reduce end-user
consumption through principles such as durability,
upgradability, service, warranties and reparability and
a non-consumerist approach to marketing and sales
Business model strategies for closing loops
Extending resource value Exploiting the residual value of resources: collection
and sourcing of otherwise “wasted” materials or
resources to turn these into new forms of value
Industrial Symbiosis A process-orientated solution, concerned with using
residual outputs from one process as feedstock for
another process, which benefits from geographical
proximity of businesses
Table 4: Business model innovations to slow and close resource loops
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 31 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Accenture (2014) develop five distinct approaches named as the circular business strategies:
1. Product life extension - by repairing, upgrading, remanufacturing or remarketing
products. Usually, the inner circles are involved, and the idea of circling longer is
followed in this strategy.
2. Resource recovery - is about capturing embedded value in products at the end of one
product lifecycle to feed into another via recycling and upcycling processes, often
provided as services or manufacturing processes by other players. Circling longer is
enabled by this strategy, and also cascade use and even the emergence of pure circles
can work here.
3. Product as a service – offers to buy service done by a product instead of buying the
product itself, usually through operational leasing or renting and/or pay-for-use
arrangements. Durability and upgradability are the main design characteristics for the
product in this model. The inner circle and circling longer are typical for this strategy.
4. Sharing platforms - are based on the collaboration among product users, and even
product owners, whether individuals or organizations. The main function of platforms
is to facilitate the sharing of overcapacity or underutilization, thus increasing
productivity and intensify the use of products. In this understanding the inner circle and
circling longer are reached, however in some form also cascade use may exist.
3.2 Specificities of the circular business models
As can be seen, circular economy brings many challenges to the traditional linear business
models and adding the focus on sustainability does not always help to solve the problems which
circular economy aims to cope with. This chapter thus gives some answers to the RQ1: What
specific features circular business models have in comparison to linear business models?
Similar to what happens to business models, the conceptualisation of Circular BM (CBM) is
lacking in the academic literature. In fact, few authors provide a clear CBM concept. Linder and
Williander (2017, p. 2) define a circular business model as “a business model in which the
conceptual logic for value creation is based on utilizing the economic value retained in
products after use in the production of new offerings.”
Thus, a circular business model implies a return flow to the producer from users, though there
can be intermediaries between the two parties. The term circular business model, therefore,
overlaps with the concept of closed-loop supply chains, and always involves some “recycling”
principles or strategies, as summarized into a framework by Kircherr et al (2017, p. 224) (see
Error! Reference source not found.Figure 6).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 32 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 6: 10Rs (from the original 9Rs) framework
Geissdoerfer et al (2018b) delineate circular business models as the subcategory of the
sustainable business model and characterise them as not only creating sustainable value,
employing proactive multi-stakeholder management, and having a long-term perspective, but
– except the above-mentioned closing, slowing, narrowing also intensifying and
dematerialising resource loops.
Geissdoerfer et al (2017) search for similarities and differences between sustainability and
circular economy. They also summarize warnings about negative impacts of CE: a) circular
systems will require specific costs; b) CE will have to cope with the technical impossibility to
really close the circle; c) recycling will be accompanied with growing demand on energy which
means that negative impact of this demand will be higher especially in the form of the emission
of greenhouse gasses than the overall environmental effect of acquiring the material from
conventional sources like mining.
Despite the lack of conceptualisation, as mentioned before, the topic of CBM has been attracting
the attention of scholars, since it has been realized that the shifting to a circular economy
demands the understanding of how companies can introduce circularity into their business
models (Lewandowski, 2016). As mentioned, this means a change in several building blocks of
the firms’ BM, namely value proposition, channels, resources and activities or changes in the
whole model as well as the development of a new one(s). In this point, Nuβholz (2017a) argues
that “the key difference of circular business model elements, compared to linear ones, appears
to be the embeddedness of a circular strategy in the offer, which can alter material flows.
Only scarce knowledge exists about circular business model components and corresponding
sub-components. Among the few, for instance, Mentink (2014) evaluates the specific character
of BMC for circular business. Ranta et al (2018, p. 996) summarized findings from the threecases
study where specific approaches within 3Rs strategies were found for the general
components (see Figure 7Error! Reference source not found.Error! Reference source not
found. with some examples within components and strategies). Knowledge of these specificities
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 33 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
enables to understand which changes of the components are in line with the shift towards
circularity.
Figure 7: Components, strategies and themes with circular business model,
The implementation of CE principles would affect all the building blocks of the BM framework,
since they change the logic behind value creation, delivery and capture. Some examples of BM
innovation, related to the implementation of CE, are:
- New value propositions, namely based on longer product life cycles, with designing for
more durable products (Hawken et al. 2000) and to support the end of life strategies
(Norden, 2015) and on higher customer service levels (Barquet et al. 2013; Bocken et al.
2016)
- New customer relationships need to be developed, namely that promote the shared use
of products among users (collaborative consumption) and reward customers (Bocken et
al. 2016)
- New revenue models, namely those not based in selling products, but instead in selling
services, leasing or accessing the products under pay per use mechanisms (Barquet et
al. 2013; Lacy & Rutqvist 2015)
- New key activities, related to closing production loops, like reverse logistics and
maintenance (Bocken et al. 2016). It is critical to develop closed-loop supply chains, a
combination of forward supply chains (from producer to consumer) and reverse supply
chains (from consumer to producer) enabling components and materials to enter again
the production process (Wells and Seitz 2005).
Probably four terms – beyond remanufacturing and recycling and other value recovery practices
(e. g. Verstrepen et al, 2007) - are the most often associated with CE and circular business
models and to a certain extent they reflect the content of the ReSOLVE framework: Product
Service Systems (PSS), Consumer (Customer) acceptance, Sharing (and collaborative economy)
and Internet-of-things (or industry 4.0) and so they reflect – more or less – the specific features
of circular business models. There are many interdependencies among the content of those
terms, however, they can exist in practice also independently. For instance, Kjaer et al (2018, p.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 34 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
666) argue that “PSS are often mentioned as a means to enable a transition from a linear to a
circular economy”. Providing services within PSS is more and more dependent on different
functionalities which industry 4.0 and IoT brings (Bressanelli et al, 2017). Use-oriented PSSs are
often related to sharing and collaboration business models (Annarelli et al, 2016).
3.2.1 Product service system (PSS)
Tukker (2004) defines PSS “as consisting of ‘tangible products and intangible services designed
and combined so that they jointly are capable of fulfilling specific customer needs (2004, p. 246)
and as “an integrated bundle of products and services which aims at creating customer utility
and generating value” (2015, p. 87). Several synonyms and/or alternations to the combination
of products and services in one bundle or package to the customers to the term exist: solution
development, functional product, functional sales, function-oriented business models, fullservice
contracts, performance-based contracting, integrated solutions, servicing or product-life
extension services (Tukker, 2004; Lay et al, 2009). Annarelli et al (2016) mention that PSS is by
some authors understood as the entire business model.
Baines et al (2007) add another view on Product-Service System: “PSS can be thought of as a
market proposition that extends the traditional functionality of a product by incorporating
additional services” (p. 1543).
How the bundle is created and how is related to circularity issues depends on many
circumstances, among all for instance on existing resources and capabilities, customer demand
and needs, position of a company in value chain and value network, tangible and intangible costs
and benefits for the provider(s), customers, environment and society and circularity feasibility.
Companies may choose some of the PSS from three options presented in Error! Reference
source not found. (developed by Tukker, 2004, p. 248)1
, complemented by Neely (2009 with
other two categories: “integration oriented Product-Service Systems” and “service-oriented
Product-Service Systems”2
or being inspired by the Morphological box developed by Lay et al
(2009, p. 447) which incorporates also differentiating parameters of the individual option
(ownership during use and at end of life; financing; maintenance personnel; payment; number
of customers; location of the operation; and retrieval and recycling when the final one is not
apparent in the box) – see FigureFigureError! Reference source not found.Figure.
1
Tukker defines these three options as: a) in product-oriented services the business model is still mainly
geared towards sales of products, but some extra services are added; b) in use-oriented services the
product stays in ownership with the provider, and is made available in a different forms, and even
sometimes shared by a number of users and c) in result-oriented services the client and provider in
principle agree on a result, with no special need to the pre-determination of product involved.
2
Neely explains these two options as (p. 11): “Integration oriented PSS result when firms seek to add
services by going downstream and vertically integrating. Service oriented PSS result when firms add
services to products, by integrating those services into the product”, p. 11
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 35 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 8: Product-service continuum and three subcategories of PSS
Figure 9: Morphological Box as a framework for PSS
According to Tukker (2015), the most important issue for companies regards to PSS is to be
aware of success factors in general and be aware of many risks and challenges associated with
PSS. He also presents some existing findings from literature: well-regarded brand reputations,
relevant service competencies, and strong buyer-seller relationships, shared innovativeness, an
ability to enhance utility and/or create transaction efficiencies, and effective marketing support.
Besides some ways how to evaluate PSS he also points to some risks or barriers of PSS, especially
for consumer markets and in result-oriented systems (the power of ownership, lesser care of
products from the consumer side and need for the most radical change of business model).
With circular economy, the use-oriented PSS is probably the most accepted approach. The useoriented
or access-based model contains different strategies (and business models) with the
core idea of the ownership of product being remained by the provider/seller, who makes the
product available to users, who do not pay for the possession but for its use. As the pay-back
period is much longer in comparison to the traditional sales of product, the products used to
be of a higher quality, more robust, less repair-dependent and designed for the long service
life and for the reuse of parts as much as possible after the end of the product's life (Tukker,
2015).
For setting this model up appropriately, there is a need to understand customer\consumer
preferences, consumers´ everyday lives and the role of material objects in their lives more
deeply. For that reason, researchers have started also engaging in consumers´ attitudes,
motivations and barriers in relation to access-based services (Antikainen et al., 2015). Even
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 36 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
though it is claimed, that consumers are generally interested in access-based services, attitude
differs based on the type of product. For example, toward renting or leasing home textiles, beds
or kitchen have consumer much more negative attitude in comparison with renting household
appliances or furniture (tables, chairs, etc.) (Edbring et al., 2016).
According to Raja et al. (2013), the key success factors for consumer satisfaction in accessbased
consumption are: the ease of use, guaranteed access, trust toward providers and
dynamics of the relationship between consumers and providers. By other authors, flexibility is
considered as a critical element for forming consumers’ attitude as well. The main reason of this
is that consumers may feel a sense of freedom by only having access to the products when they
need them (Catulli et al., 2013). Flexibility also relates to the type of contract under which are
products rented or leased. Although short-time renting was mentioned in many studies as more
preferred, for white goods which are used on a more permanent basis consumer prefer longterm
renting. That is because the responsibility remains on the side of the provider, who is
responsible for maintenance and reparation, when the product is broken or replaced, when the
product becomes out-dated. This may indicate that products with a fast innovation cycle are for
consumers more attractive to rent and not to buy (Edbring et al., 2016).
As another main reason to engage in the access-based model, the economic reasons and
benefits (Bardhi and Eckhardt, 2012) were mentioned. Renting may be seen as a more
favourable option because consumers can skip the direct investment.
To summarize the above-mentioned issues, it should be clearer now, that short-time contract
would be preferable by consumers than long-term. Another aspect, which plays an important
role is the setting of contracts in the appropriate form and provide right explanation to
consumers (Poppelaars et al., 2018). Another problem, which could occur is related to the
payment terms. Those should be properly set up and communicate toward the consumer. Some
consumers, who decided to join renting or leasing program, were unpleasantly surprised at the
end, that they have to pay extra money for repair, maintenance or even for insurance. This is
related to another obstacle toward access-based consumption. The consumer is often uncertain
about the rules in the event of the leased or rented product breaking or becoming damaged
(Catulli, 2012). Therefore, the provider should clearly communicate the rights and
responsibilities of the provider and adopter.
The content of offering and the price are very sensitive points for the contracts and extremely
important for the revenue for product owner/service provider. For the different schemes of
payment Leider and Sahin (2012, p. 6) argue that on B2C market consumers prefer choosing” a
flat rate contract (unlimited usage plans) over a pay-per-use option even if it leads to a lower
consumption value” probably due to “the risk aversion, demand over-estimation, and a distaste
for paying per consumption”.
3.2.2 Sharing (collaborative) economy (SE; CE)
Access-based consumption is connected to the concept of sharing and collaborative economy.
Both are the fast-growing phenomenons disrupting mainstream manufacturing industries. It is
not a new phenomenon at all – Cohen and Munoz (2016, p. 90) citing Price (1975) state that SE
is “the most universal form of human economic behavior and has been so for several hundred
thousand years”. Stranger and pseudo-sharing instead of family, friends and true-sharing
(without payment being required) are linked to the business models in CE (Ranjbari et al, 2018).
Sharing and collaborative consumption encompasses activities that involve customers and
consumers as both providers and “obtainers” of resources. But this is more typical for non-
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 37 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
business life. Both sharing and collaborative economy are forms of consumption which aims are
to recirculate the products and intensify the use of otherwise underutilised assets (CamachoOtero
et al, 2018). As Ranjbari et al (2018) summarize “through collaborating the consumption
of the resources by different consumers, material goods or less tangible assets are redistributed
and efficiently used, and this can release society from hyperconsumption, and leads to
environmental”… (and social and economic) …”benefits” (p. 8).
Frenken (2017) articulates three possible futures of the sharing economy: 1. monopolistic
super-platforms allowing for seamless services; 2. government regulation of platforms
through taxation and 3. platform cooperativism. In the last case, he introduces ideas about
cooperatives and their role as sharing economy platforms providers with examples of such
business in Germany.
3.2.2.1 Sharing, collaboration and value co-creation
Vasantha et al. (2012) define a product-service system as “an integrated product and service
offering that delivers value in use to the customer.” Vargo et al (2008) argue that in service
systems, value is not just delivered to the customer and put emphasis on his active role in the
value creation process. In their view, the firm is responsible for the value proposition and service
provision, but the value is only determined and derived through use. From this perspective,
producers and consumers are not on opposite sides. Co-creation is a collaborative process in
which value is created through interactions (Galvagno and Dalli, 2014). However, these
interactions are not limited to the firm and its customers. Vargo et al (2008) acknowledge the
importance of the network of stakeholders such as suppliers, employees, stockholders,
government agencies, etc.
From a cultural viewpoint, value is not created only materially but also symbolically (Galvagno
and Dalli, 2014). As Edvardsson et al (2011) suggest, the perception of value is influenced by the
degree of social consensus about such value. Value is therefore not static but relative, partly
dependant on the social context. In the context of a circular economy, this might have
important implications for consumer acceptance of PSS offerings as a society often supports
ownership (Rexfelt and Hiort af Ornäs, 2009).
Apart from the use phase, value co-creation can also be present in the design phase of service
offerings as well as products. Co-creation might be regarded as customers’ participation in
producing the offering for themselves (Kaasinen et al., 2013). This is also referred to as coproduction
(Fernandes and Remelhe, 2016). Another approach to co-creation is the engagement
of customers in the development of new products and services (Kaasinen et al., 2013).
Fernandes and Remelhe (2016) argue that while co-production is an integral part of the
transaction and thus not voluntary, users’ participation on development of new offerings, also
known as collaborative innovation, is relatively optional, voluntary and effortful. Companies
often struggle to identify customers’ requirements, which may be even more difficult when it
comes to services due to their intangible nature (Rexfelt and Hiort af Ornäs, 2009). Involving
users in design helps the company to better fit their needs (Kaissen et al., 2013).
Fernandes and Remelhe (2016) examined consumer motivations to engage in virtual
communities for collaborative innovation. They concluded that the most important motivators
were knowledge acquisition and intrinsic motivation, while the financial reward was viewed as
a less important factor. According to Gebauer et al (2013), collaborative innovation activities
create a sense of community among the participants and may help increase loyalty and
establish valuable relationships with customers. However, they argue that interactions
between companies and users might also initiate negative reactions. When the interactions
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 38 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
between service systems cause a decline in at least one of the system’s wellbeing, the process
is referred to as value co-destruction (Plé and Chumpitaz Cáceres, 2010). Value co-destruction
occurs when customers misbehave, fail to process information (Järvi, Kähkönen and Torvinen,
2018) or misuse the product (Plé and Chumpitaz Cáceres, 2010). In Business-to-business market,
value co-destruction is the result of the absence of trust among the actors, inadequate human
capital, poor coordination and power or dependence imbalance (Järvi et al, 2018).
In service encounters, interactions potentially occur among individual customers (Yoo et al,
2012) through sharing product information and experiences (Adjei et al, 2010). These customerto-customer
(C2C) interactions may be powerful marketing tools. Customers can contribute to
disseminating information through word of mouth, influence other customers’ perceptions,
acquire new customers Fernandes and Remelhe (2016), promote brand knowledge and service
satisfaction (Yoo et al, 2012). On the other hand, posting a negative review is seen as another
form of value co-destruction (Järvi et al, 2018).
3.2.3 Consumer (customer) acceptance
Consumer acceptance is considered to be one of the main reasons why the circular economy
solutions have not been widely adopted in the markets in spite of their potential
environmental benefits (Camacho-Otero et al, 2017). The issue of acceptance deals with various
areas which are in more details elaborated in the following text. They can be grouped into the
three broad and often interlinked categories – access-base (or use-oriented) PSS, “not-new”
products and Internet of Thing or smart products and digitalized services.
A significant change in peoples everyday lives required by the transition to PSS is giving up
ownership (Camacho-Otero et al., 2018). Consumers accumulate things to have the sense they
are building an estate and consuming material good to express their image, self-identity or social
position (Catulli et al., 2013). According to Thompson and Haytko (1997) thanks to owning of
some good can even make consumers feel they “stand out” at the top of the socioeconomic
ladder, and they even think they can help them to gain advantages in life and career. On the
other hand, this barrier might be lower for products that are used for their primary function in
comparison with the products which are associated with social status or some emotional value,
because consumer doesn´t buy them to express their personal style or their identity (Edbring et
al., 2016). In this context, literature pointed out that consumers behave less responsible for the
product, which they don´t own. It is because they don’t build strong attachments to them which
consequently leads to less care and increased wear of the product (Bocken et al., 2018). This
phenomenon was also confirmed by Bardhi and Eckhardt (2012), who proved that people don´t
develop a sense of ownership to the products in access-based consumption model, because of
the temporary nature of involvement which those products.
Contradict opinion is brought by Belk and Llamas (2012), who claim that consumers might feel
a sense of ownership also over the shared products. A good example could be aircraft or yachts,
which are very expensive and only a small group of consumers can afford to buy them. Thanks
to sharing of their use, sense of ownership might be created and consequently defines who they
are and what community they belong to (Catulli et al., 2013). This is to some extent in line with
the idea that the ownership is believed to provide a specific intangible added value (Cherry and
Pidgeon, 2018) .
Having conducted a series of workshops with the public in order to explore the concerns
regarding the pay-per-use concept, Cherry and Pidgeon (2018) concluded that willingness to
give up ownership differs according to product types and circumstances. The perceived
benefits of ownership were higher in case of more personal items connected to personal
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 39 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
identities such as clothes or furniture. On the other hand, the convenience of non-ownership
was appreciated for more functional products like appliances and tools. The results of the case
study conducted by Lieder et al. (2018) do not contradict the latter observation. When
comparing washing machine offers, consumers showed a preference for access rather than
ownership.
Schrader (1999) suggests that the acceptance of ownership substituting services is influenced
by various socio-demographic and socio-psychographic factors such as age, education,
apartment size, income, etc. He argues that younger consumers are less likely to consider
products like cars or washing machines as status-enhancing goods. Furthermore, a portion of
older people among innovators is usually smaller. Innovators, early adopters and
environmentally aware consumers have a generally higher educational background. The costs
of storing goods that are not used frequently arise with the smaller apartment size. Finally, the
influence of income and household size is believed to be ambivalent.
According to Ceschin et al (2010), a role of aesthetics in users acceptance of eco-efficient PSS
should be taken into account. It should be pointed out that instead of focusing on product
aesthetics alone, it is important to consider aesthetic of all the PSS elements – products,
services, communication and interactions which can be referred to as system aesthetic.
PSS can provide access to a certain product for the customers who could not afford to purchase
it. It is also believed to generate important cost savings for those who do not need to use the
product often enough or those who like to have the latest upgraded version. Moreover, PSS
reduces customers financial risk related to owning and maintaining the product (Lacy and
Rutqvist, 2015). However, consumers sometimes fail to recognize the potential economic
benefits of PSS solutions. In fact, PSS offerings are often considered more expensive than the
purchase of products due to lack of knowledge about lifecycle costs when users do not consider
the use, the maintenance, the repair and the disposal costs (Ceschin et al, 2010) . Sharing is also
influenced by the perceived risk of unfamiliar people – in particular, if regards sharing their
own products (Cheng and Chow, 2018).
Focusing on the transaction costs rather than on the net present value is also the reason for
non-acceptance of upgrading products to more durable ones instead of replacing them with
new ones (Planing, 2015). Concerns about the financial risks of a pay-per-use model were also
expressed by the participants of the above-mentioned workshop led by Cherry and Pidgeon
(2018). More specifically, they highlighted the risk of financial lock-in and fears of inability to
pay the service charges due to a sudden change of personal circumstances. For some
participants, insurance-based protection would help to overcome these concerns. Another
barrier to pay-per-use acceptance identified by the participants includes distrust in contracts
and business and a fear of losing freedom regarding the use of products.
Lack of PSS acceptance seems to concern B2B markets as well. Schenkl et al (2014) suggest that
identifying factors of acceptance of outsourcing helps to understand the market acceptance of
PSS since both these systems rely on the transfer of activities or the responsibility to a service
provider. Perceived benefits include cost savings, transparency about the total cost of
ownership (TCO), budget certainty, and lower need for investment or risk reduction
associated with changing fix costs into variable costs. Market acceptance can be hindered by
the perceived loss of control or service providers’ access to customers’ sensitive information.
In some cases, a shift to a circular economy requires giving up newness. (Camacho-Otero et
al., 2018). Having examined consumer acceptance of refurbished smartphones, van Weelden et
al (2016) discuss the level of perceived risk, which may represent a barrier to acceptance. More
specifically, the risks can be categorized as financial, performance and time risks. Perceived
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 40 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
risk-benefit balance is significantly influenced by warranty and service while a brand and a seller
can also serve as a form of warranty. In addition, a lack of knowledge about the refurbishment
process reduces the perceived value. Buyers with prior experience with refurbished products
showed a lower level of perceived risk. The authors further suggest that benefits customers link
with refurbishment are mainly financial and environmental benefits. However, environmental
benefits do not play a significant role in decision-making. Similar results were reported by Bittar
(2018) whose research showed that consumers environmental consciousness does not
influence their purchase decision in case of remanufactures laptops. These decisions were
mainly driven by brand and price. On the other hand, Wang and Hazen (2016) found that “green
knowledge” had a significant effect on perceived value of remanufactured products, although
still lower than cost and quality knowledge. Since quality seems to be a major determinant and
consumers do not have the possibility to verify it before purchase, the authors call for
a collaboration between government and remanufacturers to promote that remanufactured
products are as good as new. Government incentives have a potential to pull consumers
towards remanufactured products (Hazen et al, 2017). The environmental dimension of
remanufactured products could be communicated through eco-labels and green certification.
Wang et al. (2018) demonstrated that green certification has a positive impact on purchase
intention on remanufactured automotive parts via building trust.
For refurbishment or remanufacturing to work, the consumers should accept these products as
substitutes to new ones. Quality perception of the former as well as willingness to pay is
currently lower (Mugge et al, 2017). However, there might be product categories in which
consumers prefer used products over remanufactured ones such as products related to safety
e.g. child car seats. Indeed, consumers’ acceptance of refurbishment seems to vary for specific
product categories. As suggested by Mugge et al (2017) for hedonic products like watches or
vases, aesthetics is of high significance, and it is important that the product looks new. Products
serving a utilitarian purpose that are usually not visible to others are more likely to be accepted
refurbished even if they are visually damaged. The perceived risk seems to be lower when the
quality of a refurbished can be easily checked. In this respect, purchasing refurbished electronics
entails a higher level of risk than furniture. Another important factor is the level of involvement.
For the categories requiring a great financial investment, consumers need assurance on the
product quality such as warranty or more information about the refurbishment process. In the
case of low involvement products such as hangers, perceived financial benefits are not
significant, and it is advised to communicate the environmental benefits. Dynamic product
categories influenced by a fast-technological advancement face a risk of obsolescence; it is
therefore important to highlight their durability and functional quality. Categories perceived as
less suitable for refurbishment also include personalized products and hygienic products that
are in contact with users’ skin or food. Baxter et al (2017) use the term contaminated
interactions to designate the decline of object’s perceived value caused by its past use. These
interactions represent a barrier to circular flows.
Apart from giving up ownership and newness, consumers in the circular economy should
engage in returning goods (Camacho-Otero et al., 2018). Botelho et al. (2016) examined the
impact of incentive schemes for take-back of waste electrical and electronic equipment on
consumer acceptance in Portugal. From five proposed alternatives, exchange for money and
exchange for a new product were the most valued by the consumers, while the discount
coupons the least.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 41 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
3.2.4 Internet of Thing (IoT) and industry 4.0
3.2.4.1 IS/ICT
In many industries, technological development and associated costs decrease lead to higher
information content in product and processes (Porter and Heppelmann, 2015). It is the new
digital technologies that are the backbones of the “fourth industrial revolution” by enabling
serviced business models and transition towards Circular economy (partially as a consequence
of servitization). The role of ICT as a driver/enabler for CE is being already proposed by the Ellen
McArthur Foundation.
Up to date, any detailed analysis of the ICT in the CE-transition process has not been done
(Bressanelli et al., 2018), in other words, there has been limited knowledge of how to use these
technologies for the circular economy (Pagoropoulos et al, 2017).
The technical reason for ICT lies in the fact that ICT supplements the product with feedback
control, which can be used for evaluating of stakeholders` actions throughout (multiple) product
life (Pagoropoulos et al, 2017). The technology around CE consists of three task-layers:
- Data collection (based on radio frequency identification (RFID) and Iot/sensors)
- Data integration (relational databases and Product Lifecycle Management systems -
PLM)
- Data analysis (big data + machine learning)
The environmental benefits of ICT application are summarized by Li and Found (2017) as follows:
- Simplifying/replacing of mechanical components by software
- Upgrade of physical products via software through remote control
- Replacing the on-side service by remote one
- Transport elimination and reduction (e.g. thanks to 3D print, routes optimization)
- Supply chain synchronization
- Shared product database stimulates renting, sharing, refurbishing etc.
The above list is not exhaustive. E.g. Product Lifecycle Management systems besides its typical
function can be utilized for other purposes, in other situations too: PLM shares the product data
across various stakeholders in the value chain and through different life cycles (Pagoropoulos et
al, 2017). It can preserve product-related data that can be used in other lifecycles of product.
Bressanelli et al (2018b, p. 648) identified eight specific functionalities enabled by digital
technologies (See Table 5) and investigated how these functionalities affect three circular
economy value drivers (increasing resource efficiency, extending lifespan, and closing the
loop). Based on literature and a case study they developed a conceptual framework for utilizing
such technologies in transition to CE business models, specifically in value drivers` development
and support. For the purpose of the ReCiPSS project, the list of digital technology functionalities
is inspiring, despite the fact that the list is not fully comprehensive and should be expanded by
continuing literature reviews. Full conceptual Framework is not presented in this Deliverable, as
there might be some limitations on its applicability for the project.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 42 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
digital technology
functionality
description
Improving product design By collecting usage data through IoT and by analyzing them
through appropriate analytics, companies may improve the
design of their products to better respond to customers’
needs
Attracting target customers An elaboration of the information gathered from the
products installed base (through IoT) regarding how
customers are using products allows companies to improve
marketing activities, with the aim to attract new and
targeted customers.
Monitoring and tracking
products activity
Through IoT, companies monitor product condition, status,
location and usage. To enable product sharing between
multiple users, this information must be collected and
easily made available to each single user.
Providing technical support Information collected through IoT helps companies and
their field network to provide technical support and other
services such as spare parts management, repair, etc.
Providing preventive and
predictive maintenance
The analysis of Big Data collected through IoT by
appropriate analytics entails the provision of preventive
and predictive maintenance.
Optimizing product usage By analysing with appropriate analytics the Big Data
collected through IoT, companies may provide to their
customer's personalized advice with the aim to optimize
the usage phase, e.g. how the product should be used to
reduce energy consumption.
Upgrading the product When the product offered becomes smart, companies may
upgrade only its digital elements, e.g. the product
firmware, thus enhancing the feasibility of an upgrade
Enhancing renovation and
end-of-life activities
Through the IoT technology, companies can access realtime
product location and condition. This information may
be used for better execution of end-of-life collection,
refurbishment, remanufacturing, and recycling activities
Table 5: Digital technologies functionalities for CE
Lopes et Sousa Jabbour et al (2018) summarize core technologies of the Industry 4.0. These are:
cyber-physical systems, cloud manufacturing (computing), internet of thing and additive
manufacturing (mostly in the form of the 3D printing).
Antikainen et al (2018) exploratory qualitative study aims to detect what challenges and what
opportunities of the digitalisation in the CE transformation exists. They categorize knowledge
flows when digital tools are employed into circular business models into: knowledge of the
product location in real time; knowledge of product condition and knowledge of product
availability. Results from the workshop (empirical part of the paper) revealed several relevant
points for circular business model within ReCiPSS:
1. For Channel and Stakeholder – especially Customers´ relationships - social media is one
of the major enablers in consumer involvement and interactive relationships.
2. For Channel and Stakeholder relationships and for Key activities and key Resources marketing
is - due to digitalization - becoming more interactive and intelligent.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 43 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
3. For Key resources, Cost structure, Revenues and probably also for Key partners In the
context of business models - developing ideas into successful business models,
reframing and redefining business models, changing the mindset from productoriented
business towards service models, ensuring access to data and data
ownership, sharing data between competitors, integration of big data owned by
multiple actors, ensuring privacy and property rights, lack of needed data and
management of information flows belong to the biggest challenges.
4. For Key partners and Key resources - organising collaboration between different
partners, defining shared processes, finding suitable collaborators, combining
different areas of expertise and harmonizing diverse perspectives are also perceived
as very big challenges.
5. For Key resources mainly - ICT and sustainability-related competences and their
combination is the core issue and challenge as well
6. For circular business models functioning – networking and co-creation can be the most
proper solution for the alignment with challenges.
Rajala et al (2018, p. 21) explore “the ways in which the intelligence of goods influences closedloop
ecosystems”…” This “embedded intelligence” enabled by information software and
hardware transforms products into active nodes of new value-creating systems”. Authors
introduce the concept “material intelligence” (which “provides customers with personal and
contextual information about the materials they use to meet their business needs (p. 23)” –
for the ReCiPSS project we can ask if provision can also be realized for other stakeholders who
may need it). They further stress the role of digital platforms which help to foster collaboration
within circular (close-loop) ecosystems because these platforms can work as the intelligence
that will be holding together technologies like sensors, telematics, machine-to-machine (M2M),
and others to create new value. “Platforms create shared value and benefits for the participants
through network effects”. Rajala et al (2018) also alert that “monetizing platforms is difficult
because openness is what helps to grow the platform, but control is what helps the platform
owner to capture profits” (p. 30). Other examples are distributed ledger technologies which
enable to connect parties to jointly generate, maintain, and share any database on a fully
distributed basis. “A distributed ledger is a key infrastructure element for a P2P network3
in
which organizations can store, manage, and share information to form one data structure of any
good….The participating organizations store, manage and share information in a joint fashion
according to a tamper-resistant set of verifiable contract and business rules, backed up by hash
functions and cryptographic algorithms. “ (p. 28).
To summarise, the smart products (IoT) are reshaping the industry and changing the
relationships with customers that becomes continuous and open-ended (Porter and
Heppelmann, 2015). IoT opens an opportunity for value creation in the following aspects:
- Shorter product development cycles (including smaller software updates)
- New business models – cloud-based solutions, models built on the access to user data,…
- User data enable for better service offerings (better product utilisation, advice on
product usage,…)
- Tangible products become a part of the broader system (including sensors and software)
- Data analytics (Rymaszewska et al, 2017)
3
P2P (peer to peer) network is a group of the interconnected computers which acts as a node for
sharing the files and is seen as one of the key aspects of blockchain technology
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 44 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
3.2.4.2 Internet of Things and product and behaviour tracking and traceability
Technologies grouped under the umbrella IoT typically include the following: radio frequency
identification (RFID), wireless sensor networks (WSN), middleware, cloud computing, IoT
application software (Lee and Lee, 2015) including cognitive computing (Tseng et al, 2018).
The link between IoT and CE is straightforward: IoT has the potential to make some CE-related
processes viable. Specifically, the IoT platform helps to monitor and manage the products, which
are at the customers, out of direct control of the producer (Spring and Araujo, 2017). In return,
the reliable data about product usage and performance enable for a solid value proposition
resulting in improved customer satisfaction (Rymaszewska et al, 2017).
Besides learning about customers´ behaviour, the IoT also enables for the capturing of
(individual) products biographies (Spring and Araujo, 2017), which has far-reaching conclusions
for circularity.
Taylor, Reilly and Wren (2018) discussed the potential of IoT to support customer relationship
management, business intelligence and new product design. Smart devices are often
monitored or controlled from an application which may also serve as a communication channel.
Besides of marketing new products and services, the communication through this channel can
also cover customer support as for instance advising consumers on their product usage
optimization. Analysing the data from embedded sensors as well as consumer-entered data
further enables the manufacturer to identify usage patterns which can be useful for new product
design. The data can be combined with socio-economic data to perform customer
segmentation. Bressanelli et al. (2018b) examined digital technologies as an enabler of circular
economy. They point out that in addition to increasing resource efficiency by optimizing
product usage, monitoring product activity can prevent users from wrong behaviour in usage
and together with technical support and preventive and predictive maintenance helps to
increase the product´s lifespan. Information about product condition and location is useful to
organize collection activities better and contributes to closing the loop. Additionally, In the
case of smart products, companies can avert obsolescence by only upgrading digital
components of the products which do not generate any material waste (Bressanelli et al.,
2018a). Collecting the data at an individual customer level allows for personalized pricing
(Yerpude and Singhal, 2018) which is important for PSS.
Some users seem to be willing to exchange personal data for a certain level of convenience.
(Williams, Nurse and Creese, 2016). In-depth interviews with early-adopters Coskun, Kaner and
Bostan (2018) revealed that convenience, together with optimization, personalizing the home,
having a peace of mind and impressing others are perceived as major benefits of smart devices.
When asked to choose a single desired feature, most participants selected autonomy. This
feature was mainly preferred for washing machines and stoves. At the same time, control was
identified as a major concern. Although the participants wanted smart devices to take over their
chores such as housekeeping, they did not want them to intrude in pleasurable activities like
spending time with children or watching TV. Even if the participants preferred full automation
of household chore, they still wanted to be able to change the decisions taken by autonomous
appliances if needed. Falcone and Sapienza (2018) suggest that the level of autonomy users are
willing to grant the devices is proportional to the level of trust. They proposed a model for
users' acceptance of IoT systems focusing on users' interaction with those systems. By asking
for users’ feedback and modifying the work accordingly, the device can gradually gain their trust
through positive experiences.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 45 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
3.2.5 IoT and consumer/customer acceptance
Gao and Bai (2014) analyzed the factors influencing users' acceptance of IoT technologies based
on an extended technology acceptance model. Their findings suggest that the intention to
adopt IoT technologies is influenced by perceived usefulness, ease of use, behavioural control,
enjoyment and social influence while usefulness is viewed as the most important. However, the
authors acknowledge that the relative importance of these factors might depend on the type of
usage environment (e.g. hedonic vs utilitarian). Mani and Chouk (2018) focused on barriers
leading to consumer resistance to smart services. The results of their research indicate that a
major barrier to the acceptance of IoT services is their perceived complexity since consumers
may lack the necessary skills to understand these services and take advantage of them. Other
barriers include risks (e.g. fears about being hacked or theft of sensitive data), inertia and selfimage
congruence as some individuals perceive a gap between their image and the IoT
services they consider as luxuries and nonessentials. Technology anxiety and technological
dependence are believed to have an indirect impact on resistance through scepticism towards
IoT. Smart services rely on IoT devices able to perform activities autonomously. Interestingly,
one of the barriers identified in this study was the need for human interaction
Digital revolution has the potential to alter all aspects of the business, including supply chains.
The use of IoT in this area could make each individual item visible leading to a supply chain
where the location and characteristics of all things could be seen any time (Haddud et al., 2017).
Tu (2018) explored factors affecting firms adoption intention of IoT in their supply chain
management. Benefits identified by the interviewed managers included visibility of supply
chain, supply chain efficiency and product tagging benefits (e.g. the fact that data on RFID tags
can be over-written repeatedly).
Perceived benefits can be lowered by uncertainties about the trustworthiness of technology
such as reliability of the IoT system, integration of supply chain information and system
integration. Other important concerns were related to costs of organisational adjustment as
well as IoT systems equipment, hardware and software. The adoption intention towards IoT
technology was also found to be influenced by external forces represented by customers and
government.
Apart from the technological complexity and compatibility, costs, perceived effectiveness and
government support in line with the above-mentioned study, they found that RFID adoption is
further influenced by organisation size, trust between enterprises, management support and
competitive pressure. Haddud et al. (2017) examined potential benefits and challenges of the
adoption of IoT in organisational supply chain perceived by scholars focusing on individual
organisations as well as the entire supply chain.
3.2.5.1 Cloud computing
The clouds (or cloud computing) makes storage and reprocessing of such a large-scale data
affordable due to one of its elementary feature, which is the scalability – the clouds provide
reconfigurable resources such as computers, networks, servers, storage, applications, services,
software that the customers need not own, they can buy it (Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS),
Platform as a Service (PaaS) or Software as a Service (SaaS)) (Lee and Lee, 2015). In this way,
they could be an ideal platform for producers who need not invest too much in the necessary
ICT infrastructure.
Basic characteristics that help to distinguish between the cloud manufacturing options are
indicated in the following Figure (Labes, et al, 2013, p. 2).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 46 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 9: Basic characteristics of cloud manufacturing
3.2.5.2 Security, privacy and trust
As communication among IoT devices, other machines and humans is done through the
Internet; the IoT applications will amplify the security threats of the Internet. At the same time,
the traditional security and privacy solutions will be insufficient due to the scalability problem
caused by the high number of interconnected devices (Sicari et al, 2015) and by the
heterogeneity of the IoT networks (Li et al, 2015).
The Internet is not the only issue in IoT: In the IoT environment the devices are facing potential
attacks from internal sources (elements of the particular network) and external (from other
networks), so the security at all system levels is the most sensitive subject for IoT (Li et al, 2015).
The new need for IoT functionality in traditional companies could stimulate outsourcing
initiatives, which increases the risk of data abuse/leakage in third parties (Sicari et al, 2015).
Data leakage represents the major threats in the personalised service specifically. The privacy
together with security are two challenges for IoT, and the solution to privacy and security risks
will require the adoption of available Internet standards for the interoperable protocol (Li et al,
2015). Ng and Wakenshaw (2017) point out that more research should focus on making the
exchange and use of personal data beneficial for both the firms and the individuals as, for
example, through personal data markets. At present, the company collecting the data has
custodial right to it. However, the authors suggest that the current model of the data economy
is about to change thanks to HAT,4
a personal data platform where the user has full custodial
rights to his data. If having a HAT becomes a standard, customer relationship management will
evolve into vendor relationship management with the customers being able to decide what can
be done with their data (Ng and Wakenshaw, 2017). Customers, in that case, will play the roles
of suppliers.
The main issues in IoT security are summarised by Tryfonas et al (2016) in the Figure 10:
4
https://www.hubofallthings.com/
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 47 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 10: Security issues in IoT
Li et al (2015) call for the further development of access control and trust management in
particular. It is the mutual interactions of IoT devices that raise the question of how to guarantee
the access permission for the authorization process (Sicari et al, 2015). Trust as a concept is well
developed in IS/ ICT research.
Trust is a higher-level concept, which extends dependability by adding individual and social
behaviour, norms, and patterns to shape the Social Capital (Truong et al, 2017), see Figure
below. The trust in the IoT environment, however, requires a special evaluation that differs to
usual computer science approach due to the convergence of physical, cyber and social network
layers: One of the trust model designed for (social) IoT specifically combines data and
information covering the three dimensions: Reputation (global opinions), Personal
Experiences, and Knowledge (based on direct observation) – REK model (Truong et al, 2017) –
see Figure 11. The model separates the trust evaluation in humans and devices. Other
approaches to trust evaluation utilize the elements of honesty, cooperativeness, and
community interest (Sicari et al, 2015).
Figure 11: (a) Trust concept in relation to dependability and social capital; (b) Three main aspects of
trust in the social IoT environment
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 48 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Trust building tools and techniques
Trust can be classified into three dimensions: technical trust (e.g. data security, operability of
platform), business/trading/community/network trust (e.g. image or credit), and human trust
(perceived by individual human or group of members) (Lee, 2015). Suryanarayana and Taylor
(2004) classify trust (in terms of trust management) into three types: policy-based, reputationbased,
and social network-based. Trust could be also built and maintained along three
dimensions: human-to-human trust; human-to-object trust and object-to-object trust. Trust
mainly concerns beliefs, credentials, delegation, recommendation and reputation; however,s
interconnected with security issues (comprising confidentiality, integrity and authentication) as
well as reliability, dependability and ability and finally also privacy (Lee, 2015). This means that
building and maintaining trust must include also these aspects.
Trust building and maintenance starts with awareness of what helps to create and support trust
and what may hamper or even destroy trust followed by understanding based on studying the
facts (from the experience) and existing knowledge. Belief about trust (and its elements and
linkages) is created afterwards and beliefs lead to some action (s).
There are several models, tools and techniques developed for the trust management for
internet cloud platforms and IoT environment. Detailed information could be found for instance
in Noor et al (2013) or in Noor and Sheng (2011), Lee (2015). From the management perspectives
some ideas how to build a trusted cloud ecosystem are suggested by Ernst and Young company
(EY, 2014). Such an ecosystem contains Trusted design (controls addressing key areas of risks);
Trusted execution (controls execution) of cloud ecosystem and Trusted certification. Six cloud
control domains exist in the ecosystem – organizational, technology, data, operational, Audit
and compliance and Governance. Lee (2015) refers to the model developed within the EU 7th
Framework Programme´s project OPTET. The model covers relevant aspects of trust for software
development and software operation life cycle, so not directly focused on cloud platform,
however model can be inspiring for the ReCiPSS project.
Finding the right balance between providing and protecting the data is crucial, because undue
data protection is counterproductive: without data, the companies are unable to provide
“smart” services and achieve cost decrease by data-based optimizations (Lee and Lee, 2015).
Overrated data confidentiality can also eliminate the optimization opportunities of big data for
sustainability enhancement, “which naturally leads to the question of whether emerging
technologies can be used to provide the necessary environmental solutions (Tseng et al, 2018).
For initiatives of reuse, remanufacture, recycle to be effective, the operational data needs to be
disclosed within cross-industry networks of multiple supply chains (Tseng et al, 2018).
3.2.6 Existing general circular economy business models
Some scholars try to provide a framework that can be useful for CBM design, development or
change of the linear model, drawing on the Osterwald and Pigneur’s (O&P) Canvas Model. Here
we present also sustainability-grounded models which might be inspiring for CBMs as well, one
sharing economy canvas model and one IoT general canvas business model.
For example, Joyce and Paquin (2016) adapt the O&P Canvas model to include sustainability and
suggest a BM Canvas with three layers, making more clearly the existence of different
components of value creation, delivery and capture: economic, environmental and social. For
this project, it is important to consider the environmental layer, which tries to capture “how the
organization generates more environmental benefits than environmental impacts” (Joyce and
Paquin, 2016, p. 1478). This layer, with nine building blocks that are interlinked with the 9
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 49 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
building blocks of O&P canvas, can provide useful insights into the design of CBM. Figure 12
presents the framework suggested by the author for the environmental layer.
Figure 12: Environmental layer of the Triple Layer Business Model Canvas
Sempels and Hoffmann (2013, p. 39) add shared costs, costs for society and the environment,
shared benefits and benefits for society and the environment as the new components into the
canvas and adapted value proposition into the sustainable value proposition in their view on a
sustainable business model (see Figure 13Figure 9Figure 13).
Figure 13: Sustainable business model canvas
Bocken et al (2018, p. 82) suggest the adapted sustainable business model canvas containing
value proposition not only for customers but also for the planet, systemic view stressed in some
elements of the model, reverse logistics in key stakeholders and possibilities to retrieve products
within the channel (Figure 14).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 50 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 14: Adapted sustainable business model canvas
Hoffmann et al (2017, p. 174) suggest C3 Business model canvas (see Figure 15), where C3
stands for the three integrated ecological, social and economic dimensions of sustainable
development within the circular economy. There are several problems with this model. First,
the authors redefined logic, structure and elements of the original BCM (as they confess)
without any argument why and what the redefinition of logic and structure means for whole
model architecture. Second, from the text, it is not clear how much do they know about
stakeholders, the real meaning of costs and key resources, network relationships or channels as
these components are much more complicated to understanding and trying to nest them into
the general model. Third, as with other circular business models, the circularity is not visible
from the canvas at all.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 51 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 15: C3 Business model canvas
Barquet et al (2013) also provide some useful insights for this project, by providing an
application of the O&P Canvas for product–service systems (Figure 16). These are related to the
changes in the ownership model mentioned previously, and to the shift “a new business
orientation that considers functionalities and benefits delivered through products and services”
(Barquet et al, 2013, p. 693).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 52 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 16: Product-services systems and the O&P canvas
Lewandowski (2016, p. 21) proposed the extension of the O&P Canvas two including 2 extra
building blocks (Figure 17): the take-back system and the adoption factors for his understanding
of a circular business model.
Figure 17: CBM canvas
Muñoz and Cohen (2017) identified seven distinct dimensions of sharing business models: 1)
platforms for collaboration 2) under-utilized resources, 3) peer-to-peer interactions, 4)
collaborative governance, 5) mission-driven, 6) alternative funding, and 7) technology reliance.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 53 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
IoT technologies present an opportunity to establish innovative business models or to create
new solutions for existing ones (Lo and Campos, 2018). Dijkman et al. (2015, p. 676) developed
a framework for IoT business models and identified types for the building blocks (Figure 18).
Figure 18: Framework for IoT business models
Based on interviews and a survey among IoT professionals, they concluded that value
proposition is the most important building block in IoT business models while convenience,
getting the job done, performance, comfort and possibility for updates are viewed as the most
important types within this block. High importance was also attributed to key partnerships and
customer relationships.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 54 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
4 Systematic literature review. Circular business
models and innovative tools
4.1 Circular business models and innovative tools
Deliverable D2.1 should identify existing “tools” (this term will be used for the simplification in
the text when dealing with the purpose of the SLR) that may help companies (and specifically
both demonstrators) in their move towards (more) circular business model. As Geissdoerfer et
al (2017) in their comparison of sustainability and circular economy debate, no clear and unified
opinion on some clear dividing line between these two approaches exist, nevertheless this
report concentrates on the tools that were invented, developed and created primarily for the
circular economy. Such an approach enables focusing on the potential specificities of tools;
however, it also can eliminate some important and beneficial approaches that have not been
presented as more general or applicable also for the circular economy.
Not only “tool” is reviewed in this systematic review, we have also searched for the concepts
that can be understood as the synonyms to the core idea. This means that also frameworks,
methods, models and modelling approaches, strategies, schemes, patterns and roadmaps
entered the review. We are fully aware of the fact that probably other synonyms could be added
to the list as well (e.g. tactics, ways, procedures, mechanisms, practices), but several attempts
did not help to enlarge the already found results.
Very common situation is with the expression of the use of the methods. We involved innovation
and change as well as the transformation and transition and shift and adaptation in the search
to cover as many as possible terms that cover the process from the existing business model to
the circular one or to the more circular one. We omitted the term “improvement” which –
despite its importance – does not reflect the real procedural need of both demonstrators.
Though, improvement is a natural part of most of the tools we detected. For the simplification,
the term “transition” represents all possible synonyms in the following text.
All synonyms have been taken into account during the documents review.
There are several arguments why the SLR on the “tools” for the move of companies towards CE
is needed. First, “tools” available for the changes or innovation of the linear business models
may have limited value for the far more complex solutions in CE (Nuβholz, 2017b). Second, even
the most recent literature, points to and stress that “tools” are missing. These tools can either
support particularly large and traditional manufacturing businesses to increase their
understanding regarding consequences of CE business model transitions (Lieder et al, 2017) or
enable and accelerate transition as well as identify and tap potentials of transition both on
company, inter-company and/or whole network level (Lieder and Rashid, 2016; Leising et al,
2018).
Body of knowledge of “tools” for the business models transition towards circularity is immature,
mostly conceptual and covers individual company business models, mostly the niche market
pioneers, but rarely (if at all) the mass-market incumbents and relevant network stakeholders
of the whole ecosystem (Diaz Lopez et al, 2019; Parida and Wincent, 2019). Parida and Wincent
(2019) also highlight that most of the existing research focuses on the business model per se
rather than on the process of transformation and offers a static view of a reality, which is actually
very complex and dynamic. Supporting argument may be that the existing literature on the
circular economy has been developed in the domains outside the management and
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 55 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
organizational theory (Lahti et al, 2018). However, management and organizational theory is
built largely on the investigation of the practice (of the management processes, managerial
mindset, cognitive schemes and the conceptual representations), but only very few companies
have managed the transformation towards the circular business yet (Lieder and Rashid, 2016;
Lahti et al, 2018; Parida and Wincent, 2019).
Finally, until now, no SLR mapping the “tools” for the transition, transformation or adaptation
of business models for circular economy exists.
Table 6 shows strings used for the search in three databases (Web of Science – WoS, Scopus and
Proquest), types of documents and results.
Search strings Interpretation
WebofScience
(TS = ("business model" AND "circular economy" AND
("tool*" OR "method*" OR "approach" OR "strateg*" OR
"model*" OR "framework" OR "scheme" OR "roadmap"
OR "pattern*" OR “mechanism” OR “practice*”) AND
("trans*" OR “innov*” OR “chang*” OR “shift” OR
“adapt*”)) AND LANGUAGE: (English)
DOCUMENT TYPES: (Article OR Book OR Book Chapter OR
Proceedings Paper)
LANGUAGE: English
Indexes=SSCI, CPCI-SSH, BKCI-SSH, ESCI
The documents were
checked for the
presence of keywords in
the search string in
Topics (encompassing
titles, keywords and
abstracts) (“TS=”
operator).
This query generated 87
hits.
Scopus
TITLE-ABS-KEY ("business model" AND "circular economy"
AND ("tool*" OR "method*" OR "approach" OR "strateg*"
OR "model*" OR "framework" OR "scheme" OR
"roadmap" OR ”pattern*”) AND ("trans*" OR “innov*” OR
“chang*” OR “shift” OR “adapt*”)
DOCUMENT TYPES: (Article OR Book OR Book OR Book
Chapter OR Conference Paper OR Review OR Article in
Press)
LANGUAGE: English
The query had identical
structure/function as
above.
This query generated
196 hits.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 56 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
ft("business model" AND "circular economy" AND ("tool*"
OR "method*" OR "approach" OR "strateg*" OR
"model*" OR "framework" OR "scheme" OR "roadmap"
OR ”pattern*” OR “mechanism” OR “practice*”) AND
("trans*" OR “innov*” OR “chang*” OR “shift” OR
“adapt*”))
DOCUMENT TYPES: Scholarly journals OR Conference
Papers&Proceedings
LANGUAGE: English
250
From 87 document found in Web of Science and 196 documents found in Scopus 70
pieces are the same. Proquest detected 64 new documents. This means that 269
documents in total from both databases entered the first screening.
“trans*” aims to search for both transition and transformation processes towards circular business
models;
“innov*” aims to search for the innovative (…) or innovation in the endeavour of companies to cope with
the CE challenges;
“chang*” aims to search for changing and/or changes in and “adapt*” for adaptation of parts or of a whole
current business model; the same logic is also with the “shift” search keyword.
Table 6: SLR on tools for business models innovation - search queries for two databases
The same search string was also used in Google Scholar. The search revealed 47 000 documents
(in this database only first 100 documents were analysed for the purpose of this review).
The first screening was based on the titles, abstracts and keywords to assess the compliance
with the research aim and research question. 85 documents from WoS and Scopus remained for
further analysis, but 8 documents had to be excluded because the text was not available. In the
next step, 77 documents were subjected to the content analysis of the full text.
From Proquest 22 unique documents enrich the outputs of the initial review of titles, keywords
and abstracts and from this number 12 document were added into the sample for the next step.
Google Scholar search generated 11 documents; however, after the abstract scanning, only 6 of
them remained for the whole text review.
During the review of the documents, also a snowball technique was adopted and through the
citations made by the authors, additional 9 documents were included in the final sample. Theses
and tools designed by some organizations and institutions fell into this number.
Finally, 104 documents were examined thoroughly according in harmony with the research
purpose. Reading helped to exclude additional 69 documents which – despite promising
abstracts, titles and keywords - were irrelevant for the purpose of the SLR – either because they
did not contain any “tool” for the “transition”, or their quality was rather low, or their character
was too speculative and reasoning not sufficiently relevant or the tools were extremely simple.
In the end, only 35 documents and almost all of the academic articles comprise, to some level
the relevant tools. This finding confirms conclusions from the literature about big deficiency in
the methodological support for the CE transition.
During the SLR also some article which contains a review of existing “tools” that were found in
the literature for designing circular business models have been found. The aims of the articles
and the perspectives are substantially different as the purpose of the SLR for the ReCiPSS
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 57 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
project. However, the overview of this information could also be inspiring. The next subchapter
introduces this overview briefly.
4.1.1 Existing reviews on circular business models and tools for the transition
Comprehensive review aiming to systematize the state-of-the-art of available approaches
supporting circular-oriented or sustainability-oriented business model innovation process has
been elaborated by Pieroni et al (2019). The approaches are systematized in three streams. First,
based on the Teece´ dynamic capabilities-based view into three categories: (1) Sensing:
approaches that help to identify opportunities and generate new BM ideas; (2) Seizing:
approaches that systematically design and test new BM concepts or configurations; and (3)
Transforming: approaches that help to build new competencies and implement organizational
renewal. Second, based on three BMI characteristics: boundaries of analysis (organizational,
inter-organizational and societal), abstraction level (aggregated, moderated aggregated and
details) and time-related view (static and dynamic). And third, based on the approach type:
conceptual framework, guideline manuals, process model, cards/serious game, visualization
tool and simulator/software. Some of the articles analysed by the authors constitute a part of
the SLR for ReCiPSS project and will be presented in the following subchapter.
Singh et al (2019) identified 145 best practices or approaches to resource efficiency and the
circular economy in order to reduce energy and material demand in the product sectors.
Approaches include durable product design, enhanced repair and upgrade services, and product
take-back models and provide important insights into planning more circular business to
resource efficiency.
Lieder and Rashid (2016, pp. 40-42) summarize outcomes of their review of CE categorized
according to the three perspectives: “resource scarcity”, “environmental impact” and
“economic benefits”. Frameworks, tools, models and methods for decision-making according to
these perspectives and selected based on the possible applicability for the transition and shift
towards the circular economy, in general, are introduced in Table 7. As can be seen, they differ
in depth and breadth, focus and areas of interest and range from very general and probably
rather abstract to very narrow and specific.
resource
scarcity
 approach for multi-scale integrated analysis of societal metabolism
 multiobjective pinch analysis eco-industrial park assessment
 promotion of a generic CE concept
environmental
impact
 sustainable supply chain networks as a suitable means of designing closed-loop production
systems
 the model that allows for the analysis of the flow of Waste Electrical and Electronic
Equipment (WEEE) through the reverse chain from the point of collection through to final
disposal
economic
benefits
 combination of substance flow analysis approach with resource productivity indicator
 the theoretical framework of corporate sustainability development (CSD) drivers
 stocks and flows model for the dynamic assessment of material demands resulting from
infrastructure transitions
 indicator for “reuse potential” to help both material and waste managers sort out decisions
about the technical feasibility of reusing discards
 unified CE index System under the condition and trend of green supply chain management
 physical input and monetary output model for industrial symbiosis evaluation
 hybrid material and energy flow analysis approach at the company level
 extended economy-wide material flow analysis model
 extended lifecycle assessment (LCA) tool for resource efficiency and more specifically waste
management at the end of life products
 a discontinuous three-stage model of industrial symbiosis drawing on biological, ecological,
organizational and systems theory
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 58 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
 CE indicator system
 exploration of methodological issues encountered in the application of LCA to various
research questions arising from industrial symbiosis
 model for CE evaluation
 implementation framework for CE
 three-level education framework to meet the theoretical and technological needs of CE
implementation
 a new approach called Ecological Sanitation
The
intersection of
the three
perspectives
 a methodological framework to measure target and planned resource-conserving and
environmental-friendly development
 analysis of emerging integration of business value and environmental returns in the context
of China's CE
 approach to prevent waste and other global impacts based on precycling, CE policy and
recycling insurance
Table 7: Frameworks, tools, models and methods for decision-making in CE
Pieroni et al (2018b) conducted a comprehensive review of the literature with the purpose to
explore the existing methods, which aim to support the development of circular business models
and their level of the consideration of and/or integration with product design processes. They
identified 10 methods that fulfil more or less the integration of circular business models
development and product design. As the authors conclude, weaknesses of the methods from
the list reside in their relatively high level of abstractions, missing “how-to” guidance or
methodological support and they also lack a more holistic perspective and the connection to
commercialisation and operationalization. Despite the authors´ evaluation, some of them are
on the list of “tools” as beneficial for the ReCiPSS.
4.1.2 Results of SLR
Results from SLR have been systematized according to several groups of criteria: business model
content, i.e. components or elements of BM; ReSOLVE framework combined with 6 business
strategies for slowing and closing loops suggested by Bocken et al (2016) and the strategy for
narrowing the loops; Pieroni et al (2019) extended boundaries of analysis and adapted approach
types and type of work.
Classification according to the BM components [value proposition (VP), customer –stakeholder
segment (C/SS), customer/stakeholder relationships (C/SR), channels (CH), key processes (KP),
key resources (KR), key partners (KP), cost structure and negative impacts (CS+ NI), revenue
streams and positive impacts (RS+PI)] or whole model (WM) helps to understand the
importance of the specific features of the components and the ways how they can be evaluated,
changed or created, designed or developed as the new ones into the circular model with the
concrete tool for CBM innovation.
ReSOLVE framework, circular loops and business strategies help to classify “tools” to be adopted
as suitable for the specific circular business target or orientation. Following abbreviations will
be used in the text: Regenerate (R), Share (S), Optimize (O), Loop (L), Virtualize (V) and Exchange
(E); and slowing and specific strategies/value recovery processes for slowing (Sl –xxx), closing (C
-xxx) and narrowing (N).
The extended boundaries represent specific business functions (BF), organization (O), network
(N), (eco)system (eS) and society (S) and assigning the “tool” to some of these categories enables
to see the level of complexity regarding to the organization of processes within circular business.
The last approach types are adapted into the:
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 59 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
conceptual framework (CF), conceptual method (CM), guideline (G), process (P), process
model/method (PM), game (Gm), visualization tool (VT), software simulation (SS) and
(statistical) mathematical modelling (MM). The role of this categorization is only in offering a
better overview and for the evaluation of the applicability in the concrete situations (considering
for instance time, competencies, or other resources available).
Type of work means purely theoretical (conceptual) (T), theoretical and tested in “laboratory
conditions” (TTL), theoretical and tested or verified in a real environment (TTR). No purely
empirical “tool” was found in the literature.
The last criterion evaluates the maturity of the “tool” based on the practical application and
verification. We use a scale from 1-5 from the least mature (1) to the most mature “tool” (5)
being fully aware of the very subjective evaluation.
If the abbreviations are in the brackets in the Table 8 below, this means that their indication is
not of 100% value.
Whole circular business model (WM)
Framework for
sustainable circular
business model
innovation
(Antikainen and
Valkokari, 2016)
The framework may be suitable for the evaluation of the
transition towards circularity – it considers macro, meso
and micro environment
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
O, N, eS, S
CF, VT
TTR
1-2
Circular business
experiment cycle
Bocken et al (2018)
The purpose of the Cycle is to help in designing or
redesigning for any sustainability-oriented business
model that utilize IoT strategies.
The framework combines a level of control between
product and user, sustainable design strategies, IoT
strategies (capabilities) and the other strategies.
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
O, N, eS, S
CF, P, VT
TT(R)
2-3
The Ecology of
Business Models
Experimentation map
(Bocken et al, 2019a)
A relatively comprehensive tool for designing new and
redesigning existing business model – both for
sustainability and circularity. Comprehensiveness lies in
many aspects the model involves and in the mutual
linkages.
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
BF, O, N, eS, S
CF, P, PM, VT
TTR
3-4
A framework to
support PSS design to
encourage sustainable
behaviour using IoT
strategies
(Bocken e al, 2019b)
The framework combines 4 IoT strategies (monitoring,
control, optimization and autonomy) connected
to/focused on either user or product and other non-IoT
strategies (not listed) with 7 sustainable design strategies
(considering the level of control (if with the user or
product)
(R), (S), O, L, V,
(E)
Sl, C, N
BF, O, N, eS
CF, VT
TT(L)
2-3
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 60 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
A roadmap for circular
business model
transformation
(Frishamar and Parida,
2019)
The roadmap contains 4 phases with the individual
objectives for every phase, a checklist for the important
issues in every phase, checklist of the Key activities and
the expected outcome
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
O, N, eS, S
CF, P, PM
(TTR) created
on the
empirical
research
2-3
The use-it-wisely
(UIW) approach
(Granholm, G. and
Grösser, 2017)
The UIW-framework is used as a template for system
implementations of practices to develop a Product service
system and for support of a systematic adaptation to
changing needs by developing business models and
technologies to support collaborative efforts.
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
N, eS
CF, P, PM
TTR
3
Tool for Orchestrating
Value Networks
(Janssen and Stel,
2017)
Proposal of a conceptual framework for the circular
business network “governance” – with some roots in the
Balanced Scorecard method
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
BF, O, N, eS, S
CF, (P)
T(L) (R)?
1 (some
potential)
Cascade use
methodology
(Kalverkamp et al,
2017)
Brief proposal to use cascading of materials in product life
management
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
BF, O, N, eS, S
CM, (P)
T(L) (R)?
1 (some
potential)
Collaboration tool for
CE
(Leising et al, 2018)
Tool or framework consists of the following building
blocks: visions, actor learning, network dynamics and
business model innovation. Tool is suitable for managing
Key processes and activities, Key partners´ relationships
and mutual value creation, delivery and capture in interorganizational,
network or whole social system setting.
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
BF, O, N, eS, S
CF, P, PM
TTR
2-3
Agent-based
modelling approach
Model and tool help to identify proper marketing and
pricing strategies to obtain best fit demand behaviour. The
approach integrates socio-demographic and buying
behaviour factors of customers (relative preferences of
S, O, V
BF, O, N
SS, MM
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 61 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
(Lieder and Rashid,
2017)
product attributes price, environmental friendliness and
service-orientation), product utility functions, social
network structures and inter-agent marketing
communication in order to comprehensively describe
behavior on individual customer level.
TTL
3
BECE framework
(Mendoza et al, 2017)
BECE (Backcasting and eco-design for the circular
economy) framework is also a method and methodology
that integrates strategic planning approach Backcasting
with the process design in the framework of a circular
economy. This means that 3 CE principles, ReSOLVE
framework with added action IMPLEMENT and developed
individual actions with so-called iReSOLVE and finally 4
basic CE frameworks create the playground to develop
circular business model.
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
BF, O, N, eS, S
CF, CM, P, PM,
VT
TTL -(R)
4
Business cycle canvas
(Mentink, 2014)
Method and methodology to develop circular business
model
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
BF, O, N, eS, S
CF, P, PM, G,
(Gm), VT
TTL -(R)
2-3
Circular business
model mapping tool
(Nußholz, 2018)
Tool can help a) identify which interventions are used and
which not and a holistic overview on possible
interventions could indicate opportunities to potentially
capture more of the embedded value and organise valueadding
activities; b) helps examine whether the
configuration of business model elements is suitable for
efficiently supporting the additional cycles, such as
whether value propositions are compelling for users in
additional cycles or whether key resources and capabilities
are present to manage the different cycles; c) can
potentially unravel a larger variety of phenomena
compared to the traditional business model canvas, e.g.
key partners, costs and revenues for each cycle; d) could
help show interdependencies between the interventions
and how shaping business model elements in one
intervention enables value creation from other
interventions.
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
BF, O, N, eS, S
CF, P, PM
TTR
2-3
Process model of
ecosystem
transformation
toward a circular
economy paradigm
(Parida et al, 2019)
Process model contains 2 steps with the individual
activities – ecosystem readiness assessment and
ecosystem orchestration mechanisms
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
BF, O, N, eS, S
CF, P, PM
TTR
3-4
Evaluation tool
“Value-Circle”
Methodology including the Evaluation tool for five
different values created (and captured) in CBM, Visual tool
and the Value metric checklist. “The value circle evaluation
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 62 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
(Ritika, 2017)
scheme assists companies in operating their CBM through
an improved understanding of their potential to create
value, from a multi-stakeholder perspective”.
BF, O, N, eS, S
CF, CM, P, PM,
VT
TTR
3-4
Value proposition (VP)
“Checklist” (and a
design tool) of the
main factors
influencing the
perception and
acceptance of circular
solutions
(Camacho-Otero et al,
2018)
main drivers (main factors which influence behaviour of
three CE solutions) can serve as a checklist for the design
of value proposition of the access-based PSS and for the
consumer segmentation
S, O, V
Sl
BF, O, N
CF
TTL
2-3
Emotional Durability
Design Nine
(Haines-Gadd et al,
2018)
Framework that can be applied at multiple points during
the designing new product “to increase the likelihood that
‘emotion building’ features are integrated into an end
product”, and so to support prolonging the life of products
instead of promoting or being passive within a throwaway
society. With nine themes the authors developed also 38
strategies incorporate into the product design
S, O, L
Sl, (C), (N)
BF, O, N, eS, S
CF, CM, P, PM,
VT, (Gm)
TT(R)
4
Conjoint analysis
(general statistical
method)
(Lieder et al. 2018)
“As choice-based method conjoint analysis is beneficial to
break down CE value propositions and to identify to what
extent particular service-related attributes and productrelated
attributes contribute to overall customer utility”
O
(Sl)
BF, O, N. S
MM
TTR
4-5
Framework “design
for circular behavior”
(Wastling et al, 2017)
Framework which enables to design products and
services to encourage desired circular behaviours based
on Design for behavior change and Behavior Change
Wheel
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
BF, O, N, eS, S
CF, CM, P, PM,
VT
TT(R)
2-3
Customer/stakeholder
segment (C/SS)
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 63 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
“Checklist” of the
main factors
influencing the
perception and
acceptance of circular
solutions
(Camacho-Otero et al,
2018)
See above
main drivers (main factors which influence behaviour of
three CE solutions) can serve as a checklist for the
consumer segmentation
S, O, V
Sl
BF, O, N
CF
TTL
2-3
Emotional Durability
Design Nine
(Haines-Gadd et al,
2018)
See above with Value proposition
Applicable for characterising segments
S, O, L
Sl, (C), (N)
BF, O, N, eS, S
CF, CM, P, PM,
VT, (G)
TT(R)
4
Customer/stakeholder relationship (C/SR)
“Checklist” of the
main factors
influencing the
perception and
acceptance of circular
solutions
(Camacho-Otero et al,
2018)
See above
Checklist can also be used for the evaluation of the
promises fulfilment and relationship maintenance with
consumers in CE (especially in the access-base PSS).
S, O, V
Sl
BF, O, N
CF
TTL
2-3
Emotional Durability
Design Nine
(Haines-Gadd et al,
2018)
See above with Value proposition
Applicable for building and maintaining the relationships
S, O, L
Sl, (C), (N)
BF, O, N, eS, S
CF, CM, P, PM,
VT, (G)
TT(R)
4
the Pro-Circular
Change Model (P-
CCM)
(Muranko et al, 2018)
Model may identify and influence “pro-circular
behaviours” of customers
(R), (S), (O), L
Sl, C, N
BF, O, N, S
CF, VT
T
1
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 64 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Consumer
Intervention Mapping
(CIM) Tool
(Sinclair et al, 2018)
Tool for creating future product strategies for CE PSS. The
tool visualises the points within a product’s lifecycle
where stakeholders are able to intervene in the product’s
expected journey. CIM contains concentric rings that
enable to indicate the degree to which an organisation is
able to control consumer interventions, with decreasing
ability moving away from the centre of the map. At the
narrowest level of detail, CIM offers 18 discrete phases of
the interventions. The tool can also be used for portraying
how a particular product lifecycle moves in and out of an
organisation’s control.
(R), S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C
BF, O, N
CF, CM, VT
TTL
2
Key resources (KR)
ICT infrastructure for
PSS
(Asif et al, 2018)
Proposed infrastructure for access-based PSS for the
washing machine which incorporates various features and
properties (e.g. predictive maintenance, ticketing etc.)
S, O, L, V
Sl, C
BF, O, N
CM, P
T
2- 3
conceptual
framework for
mapping
functionalities of
digital technologies to
enable CE transition
(Bressanelli et al,
2018)
simple framework/checklist for evaluating two categories
of digital technologies (IoT and big data and analytics) as
the enablers of increasing resource efficiencies, extending
lifespan and closing the loop.
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
BF, O, N, eS, (S)
CF
TT(R)
1-2 (potential)
Circular Material
Library
(Virtanen et al, 2017)
the Circular Material Library should work as a tool to
support industrial symbiosis, open to the different
stakeholders and to promote the use of recycled
materials.
S, O, L, V
Sl
BF, O, N, eS, S
CM, P
T
2- 3
Key processes (KP)
Predictive
maintenance model
(Franciosi et al, 2017)
Periodic preventive maintenance model establishes the
optimal maintenance period for each system component,
which minimizes conventional, environmental, and social
costs generated by maintenance interventions and
enables to choose the most suitable parts from the
sustainability perspective
S, O, (L), V, (E)
Sl, C, (N)
BF, O, N, eS, S
CM, MM
TTR
3-4
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 65 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
“Checklist” for key
processes (strategies)
enabling closing and
slowing the loops
(Mestre and Cooper,
2017)
Simple checklist with the summarized key processes
enabling closing and slowing the loops (and to some
extent also narrowing the loops)
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, (N)
BF, O, N, eS, S
CF, P, VT
TT(R)
1-2
“Typology of
upgrades” and
“checklist of
practices” for the
upgradable PSS
(Pialot et al, 2017)
Proposal of hybrid systems called “Upgradable ProductService
System (Up-PSS)” which combine upgradability
with optimised maintenance, valorisation of end-of-life
parts and with the servitisation of the offer. The system
can be used as a checklist for practices within PSS when
upgrading is needed and as a typology of upgrades
S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, N
BF, O, N, (eS)
CF, P, PM
TTR
2-3
Cost structure and negative impacts (CS+ NI)
Tools for the assessment and measurement and evaluation of performance, costs and negative
impacts
Environmentally
extended input–
output analysis
(EEIOA) for circularity
interventions
(Aguilar-Hernandéz et
al, 2018)
Explanation of the main benefits and problems with the
input-output analysis for four circularity scenario and
presentation of the process how to use this method for CE
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, (N)
BF, O, N, eS, S
PM, MM
TT(R)
4
Multi-method
simulation technique
for the economic and
environmental
performance of the
circular product
system
(Asif et al, 2016)
Comprehensive agent-based model and multi-methodbased
simulation technique which incorporates various
categories of inputs from the external and internal
environment, causalities and inter-dependencies to
measure and evaluate different economic and
environmental dimensions of the circular product service
system performance
S, O, L, (V) (E)
Sl, C, (N)
BF, O, N, (eS)
CF, CM, P, PM,
SS, MM
T
4
Guidelines for Life
Cycle Assessment of
Product Service
Systems
(Kjaer et al, 2018)
Guidelines for the process of LCA considering specificities
of 3 different PSS. Guidelines reflect relatively detailed
inputs and different requirements from the actors.
R, S, O, L, V E
Sl, C, N
eS
CF
TTL
3-4
Analytical calculationbased
tool for
assessment of the two
BM ways of value
capture
A simple analytical tool allowing manufacturers to quickly
evaluate and compare the potential attractiveness of a
circular business model – selling and leasing. “The tool
shows which parameters drive profit and TCO and permits
an easy sensitivity analysis”
S, O
Sl
BF, O, N
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 66 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
(van Loon et al, 2017)
CM, MM
TTL
3-4
Framework for
evaluating the
environmental value
propositions of CE
business models
(Manninen et al, 2018)
- Framework consists of an environmental value
propositions table (EVPT) and a step-by-step
approach towards an evaluation process
- Framework can be used both for planning and designing
new CE business models or for the assessment of the
environmental benefits and for the assessment of the
contribution to sustainability
-Framework, content of the EVPT and approach has been
tested with one recycling company and two renting
companies (one is Homie)
R, S, O, L, V E
Sl, C, N
eS
CF
TTR
3
List of several
methods and tools for
measurement of the
impacts on the
environment
(Pajula et al, 2017)
- Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
- Carbon Footprint measurement and tracking of
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
- Water footprint = tool for the assessment of potential
water-specific environmental impacts of water use
associated with a product, process or organisation
- Handprint - a measurement of the positive
changes of actions and the beneficial impacts created
within the life cycle of products, services, processes,
companies, organizations or individuals
R, S, O, L, V E
Sl, C, N
BF, O, N, eS, S
CF, CM, PM
T
3
Retention streams, benefits, positive impacts
Environmentally
extended input-output
analysis (EEIOA) for
circularity
interventions
(Aguilar-Hernandéz et
al, 2018)
See above
Possible to apply also for revenue streams and benefits
R, S, O, L, V, E
Sl, C, (N)
BF, O, N, eS, S
PM, MM
TT(R)
4
Two-stage
dismantling planning
method for value
recovery
(Cong et al, 2017)
Two-stage dismantling planning method that considers
both preservation of functional value of components and
increasing profitability by applying suitable dismantling
technologies. In this paper, disassembly is defined to be
preservative disassembly, which means that components
are kept intact during disassembly
S, O, L, E
Sl, C, N
BF, O, N, eS, S
CM, SS, MM
T, TTL
3
Table 8: SLR results - tools for the BMI for CE
Most of the existing “tools” are conceptual and they exist in the form of a proposal, despite the
fact that some of them have been tested in “laboratory” environment or during the interviews
with practitioners. Only a few were tested in the more complex form. “Tools” for the revenue
streams or benefits are almost non-existent. This might be due to the early stage of existing
circular businesses or due to the conscious or unknown problems with capturing intangible
benefits (probably more typical for circular business in the early period. The same situation is
with segments (either customers or other relevant stakeholders). Only two tools fall into that
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 67 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
component. “Soft tools” prevail. This is not negative, as transformation or transition of the social
system as a business, requires soft tools. Nevertheless, softness could be in more harmony with
more complex elaboration. As evident from the Table 8, frameworks represent the majority of
“tools” and very big share of them are really only outlines of real frameworks.
The case studies through which some or most of the “tools” were tested show that the authors
are probably cautious or those few bigger companies which turn their attention toward CE are
either not known to the authors or they want to take care for the transition themselves. In most
cases, small companies and/or start-ups cooperated in the research.
The overview also shows that from the ReSOLVE framework principles “Regenerate” and
“Exchange” are not often equipped with the tools. There are basically no guidelines and only
few process models or methods exist. One comment should be added here – despite the
existence of several tools and toolkits in the form of games (and online games), these are only
sporadic studied in the literature. What is almost missing are the tools, which could be used for
the IoT or cloud manufacturing, and IT platform based business models.
Based on the review, several tools seem to be appropriate for both demonstrators.
Experimentation (Bocken and her co-authors) with relatively mature methodology is very
effective for building and maintenance of the organizational and inter-organizational culture
and procircular commitment and enthusiasm. Experimentation and other “tool” that involve
more stakeholders and support sharing, and mutuality of goals, views, and open the space for
mutual strategies play a pivotal role in any change management. BECE framework, a process
model for ecosystem transformation and Emotional Durability Design Nine can also be very
beneficial for such social movement. The only problem is that both demonstrators are from
global mass-market manufacturing and existing experimentation and other tools that help to
connect different stakeholders in a one-time window are very challenging if not even impossible
to apply. Simulation (mathematical or statistical) tools are from the other end of the spectrum,
but for large global enterprises with mass production are necessary. Another example is
visualisation, especially in the case of a complex and dynamic environment. Visualisation tools
are helpful in any case and the same can written about any form of the Lifecycle analyses. This
is why we recommend using for instance Kjaer et al´ Guidelines for Life Cycle Assessment of
Product Service Systems.
SLR did not detect any special tool for one of the demonstrators and their business, although
some of tools seem to be focused on consumers and mass consumer goods. Somehow surprising
is the scarcity of “tools” for logistics and supply chains and for the digital infrastructure
management. A Balanced Scorecard (BSC) method, which exists also in the adapted version for
sustainability oriented business and is broadly accepted by managers for both strategy
development, strategy deployment and resulted performance evaluation, is surprisingly not
reflected in circular business models at all except one paper (involved in the SLR, however the
method is not well applied). BSC offers well elaborated methodology, it is enough flexible and
open method to encompass and reflect also CE aspects and principles and managers are familiar
with the method.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 68 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
5 Environmental scanning and market analysis –
Bosch
The circularity of products is not a new idea for Robert Bosch GmbH since this company belongs
according to the Persistence Market research (PMR, 2018) among key players at the global
automotive parts remanufacturing market:
 BORG Automotive A/S
 Detroit Diesel Corporation
 Caterpillar Inc.
 Jasper Engines and Transmissions
 Motorcar Parts of America, Inc.
 Marshall Engines
 Robert Bosch GmbH
However, circularity in the automotive aftermarket – as will be shown in the following text has
substantially non-circular character. This situation is the result of the forward and reverse
supply chains character which is far from circular. In most of the practice, the flows of products
coming back for remanufacturing (or for other reasons, e.g. warranties) take the linear path
and usually copy the forward route. This situation has a very long tradition which is
accompanied with the long-term build and maintained relationships between the trade levels
with the aim to deliver the product to the final customer with the best quality of service (right
product to the final local destination as fast as possible at the best price). Trends that have
emerged in the automotive manufacturing and automotive aftermarkets recently offer the
chance to change such patterns. The aim of the Bosch is to streamline the reverse logistics
process with the help of the internet cloud-based platform.
It is important to consider the lifecycle of passenger cars since this is relevant for the
management of the automotive aftermarket business. The Capgemini´s automotive passenger
car lifecycle model (Capgemini Consulting & University of St. Gallen, 2010), which describes the
usage patterns of end customers in their consumption of parts and services and considers the
average use of an automotive passenger over a period of 13 years5
, splits the lifecycle into three
phases. The first phase runs from one to four years of the car’s age, and mainly corresponds to
the warranty period of the car. Phase two describes the years from four to seven. Finally, the
third phase describes the years from seven to typically 13. Typically, the older the car gets, the
more sales of parts at OEM-owned retail and franchised dealerships to decrease in favour of
independent retailers. OEMs are continually seeking solutions to minimize this situation as the
parts business offers attractive margins. (Capgemini Consulting & University of St. Gallen, 2010).
Aftermarket industry contains all activities related to maintaining a car after its initial sale and
until the end of its lifecycle (Capgemini Consulting & University of St. Gallen, 2010). It represents
an important share of the whole automotive industry revenues, representing around 20%
(Breitschwerdt et al, 2017, Koggersbøl et al, 2018). It also exhibits higher profitability than most
of the other subsectors of the industry (Breitschwerdt et al, 2017).
The global value for the automotive aftermarket, in 2015, was of approximately USD 760 bn,
with North America representing 35%, Europe 31% and China 10%. (Breitschwerdt et al, 2017).
Globally, the market is growing (Capgemini Consulting & University of St. Gallen, 2010), driven
5
In the EU countries the average age of passenger cars in 2018 was 10,5 years (ACEA report, 2018),
while in the USA the age is increasing and in 2018 it was 11,8 (Szatkowski, 2019).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 69 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
by a growing car park and new sales, longer vehicle lifetime and, finally, new digital products
and services (Koggersbøl et al, 2018), although there are differences in growth rates across
regions: North America and Western Europe are quite mature markets and will exhibit a slower
growth, compared to Eastern Europe and Asia (Breitschwerdt et al, 2017; Koggersbøl et al,
2018). In Europe, towards 2025, the aftermarket is projected to grow at 2.4% in Western Europe
and 5.0% in Eastern Europe annually, and it is expected to reach EUR 161 billion by 2025
(Koggersbøl et al, 2018).
The aftermarket is becoming increasingly important to the automotive industry compared to
new car sales (Capgemini Consulting & University of St. Gallen, 2010). Considering the total
revenue stream of a typical 13-year car lifetime, in Western Europe only 37% of the total
revenue stems from the new car sale. The aftermarket business accounts for the remaining 63%
(Capgemini Consulting & University of St. Gallen, 2010).
The automotive aftermarket includes both the service business (maintenance and repair of the
vehicle) and the parts business. In Europe, the service business generates about 45% of total
aftermarket revenues in Europe, while retail and wholesale of vehicle parts make up the
remaining 55% (Breitschwerdt et al, 2017). The European automotive parts aftermarket was
witnessing a rapid growth (ReportBuyer, 2018) and was estimated at EUR 123 billion in 2017
(Koggersbøl et al, 2018).
In terms of business growth, there is a difference between Western and Eastern European
countries, which is reflected in the firms´ strategies. Because of slow growth and intense
competition of the Western European aftermarket, marketing and sales activities concentrate
on promoting customer loyalty to dealers and repair shops across the car lifecycle. Eastern
Europe aftermarket is growing faster and has a relatively moderate competitive intensity. Here,
most companies are mainly confronted with the need to improve activities across marketing
and sales, sourcing, distribution, planning and reverse-logistics processes. (Capgemini
Consulting & University of St. Gallen, 2010).
Despite the growth of the market and the increased business opportunities, the aftermarket is
surprisingly inefficient, due to the excess of infrastructure and inventory (FTI Consulting, 2017).
To solve inefficiency problem, it is necessary to find the balance between costs and customer
proximity, developing a more cost-efficient distribution network, leading potentially to a
reduction in the density of warehouse locations, wholesalers and workshops (Capgemini
Consulting & University of St. Gallen, 2010).
There are two distribution channels within the automotive parts sector, these being original
equipment (OE) sales of the original equipment manufacturers´ (OEMs) products and the
independent aftermarket (IAM). OEM products flow to the markets through both OEM
distribution network(s) and via the IAM players (see Figure 19) (Breitschwerdt et al, 2017, p. 9).
Each of these distribution channels has around 50 % of the market at the consumer level. Three
main players exist: OEMs that are usually multinationals, independent operators that are mainly
SMEs, and parts manufacturers that can be both multinationals or SMEs. Vehicle manufacturers
are themselves usually OEMs only in respect of their unique intellectual property, typically the
engine and transmission systems (Parker et al., 2015).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 70 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 19: Distribution channels for parts forward delivery
Europe is home to some of the leading Original Equipment Suppliers (OES), but vehicle
manufacturers produce only about 20% of the components themselves (FIGIEFA, 2019). The rest
of the parts is produced by parts manufacturers, i.e. first equipment suppliers and independent
parts producers who supply the independent aftermarket exclusively.
The automotive industry is one with the longest tradition in remanufacturing and the world´s
largest remanufacturing sector (Linde et al, 2014; Matsumoto et al, 2016). Remanufacturing is
a very complex process which begins with collecting the core (or more precisely in designing
products suitable for remanufacturing). Operating in the aftermarket entails a significant
number of services and parts activities, and the set-up of crucial supply chains. It is necessary to
excel in a wide range of activities like sourcing, planning, marketing and sales, distribution, and
reverse logistics. It is also necessary to develop inter-firm collaboration with a large set of
stakeholders, both in the supply chain and in distribution chains, namely suppliers, wholesalers,
distributors and dealers/repair shops, covering all partner relationships. (Capgemini Consulting
& University of St. Gallen, 2010)
This complex process becomes more interesting and challenging recently due to the higher
consciousness of environmental issues and directives from the European Union such as the endof-life
vehicles (ELV) directive and due to the increasing average age of the existing vehicles fleet
globally. (Lind et al, 2014). There are many reasons of such complexity, for instance because of
the existence of very complex aftermarket forward supply chains through several trading levels
(TL), very complex products as cars are and even because of very complex suppliers base of the
automotive manufacturers – Olugu e al (2010) report that in a typical automobile manufacturer,
there exist between 200 and 300 suppliers. However, automotive aftermarket (AA) is extremely
important for sustainable business. As CapGamini study (2010) reports, from the total revenue
stream of a typical 13- year car lifetime, only 37% of the total revenue stems from the new car
sale. The markets with the highest growth of the remanufactured spare parts demand in the
future are APAC (Asia Pacific countries) (McKinsey&Company, 2017; PMR, 2018).
The complexity of automotive aftermarket reflects the situation in the forward supply chain.
According to the Deloitte (2014) report, the automotive industry’s supply chains are among the
world’s most complicated. As the car as a product is getting more complex, it is accompanied by
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 71 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
a growing number of stock-keeping units (SKUs). Forward (and reverse) supply chains have
several levels (see Figure 29 as an example for the European market – the picture is very
simplified as every country has its specific structure) and this has an impact on the physical,
financial, and information flows which are of course also increasingly complex and difficult to
manage. Also, the price of such a mass product as the cars are is extremely high – again, this
issue is reflected in both forward and reverse flows complexity.
Due to this complexity and to the strong interdependence between stakeholders, information
technology is a key business enabler and is essential to manage activities, namely for
coordinating and supporting the processes, to transparency increase within the supply chain,
and to better control and realization of end-to-end decisions. (Capgemini Consulting &
University of St. Gallen, 2010)
In Europe, there is an increased complexity source, related to national differences in their buyer
preferences, trading practices, income levels, demographic structures and tax systems (Brenner
et al, 2018). There is a marked difference between countries in terms of characteristics of the
car parks (vehicle age and price segment), in the needs and expectations of repair shops and
their customers, and in warranty arrangements (Brenner et al, 2018). This diversity hinders the
scaling up of business models across Europe. Picture visualizing the structure of the automotive
aftermarket in Europe in simplified form is available as Figure 20 (Wolk after sales experts, 2018)
Figure 20: Aftermarket structure in Europe
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 72 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
More information about the roles of the major actors is depicted in the following Figure 21
(Kalverkaamp and Raabe, 2018, p. 120):
Figure 21: Groups of Actors in the Automotive Remanufacturing Marketing System
Remanufacturing and reman cores business create a substantial part of the aftermarket
business. The agreed definition6
of a reman part7
and a core8
requires fulfilment of some
preconditions, as for instance: logistically mature country enabling the core collection process;
reman plant close to target market; economics of core collection; close-loop from core
collection to sales; legal Issues: authorization of reman products and processes in different
countries, legislation to support remanufacturing and circular economy (Bosch, 2015).
All existing consultancy studies mention that the European automotive aftermarket is in the
midst of profound structural change, affecting stakeholders’ positions as strategies. We can find
relevant changes in several areas.
6
Agreement was made between The European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA), Motor & Equipment
Remanufacturers Association (MERA), Automotive Parts Remanufacturers Association (APRA), Automotive Parts
Remanufacturers National Association (ANRAP), European Organization for the Engine Remanufacture (FIRM) and
Remanufacture Committee of China Association of Automobile Manufactures (CPRA)
7 “A remanufactured part fulfils a function which is at least equivalent compared to the original part. It is restored
from an existing part (CORE), using standardized industrial processes in line with specific technical specifications. A
remanufactured part is given the same warranty as a new part and it clearly identifies the part as a remanufactured
part and states the remanufacturer.” (available at: https://www.mera.org/news/remanufacturing-associations-
agree-international-industry-definition-0)
8 “A core is a previously sold, worn or non-functional product or part, intended for the remanufacturing process. During
reverse logistics, a core is protected, handled and identified for remanufacturing to avoid damage and to preserve its
value. A core is not waste or scrap and is not intended to be reused before remanufacturing” (available at:
https://www.mera.org/news/remanufacturing-associations-agree-international-industry-definition-0)
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 73 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Deloitte report presents four key challenges for this industry (p. 3):
• High refurbish and disposal costs
• Lack of accountability for returned goods
• A high percentage of “no warranty found” claims
• Limited visibility into reasons for returns.
Challenges regard especially the collection of cores and influence – unfortunately negatively efficiency
and effectiveness of remanufacturing and sale of remanufactured spare parts
(Matsumoto et al, 2016). There are several issues linked to the challenges presented above:
1. the need for service parts increases with the age of the car;
2. the need to have spare parts for older cars due to a legislation-based time period;
3. small-scale new production for the aftermarket is expensive.
Owing to the rather complicated and complex forward supply chain, a lack of the control
regarding the potential flow of returned products, their quantity, quality and timing as well as
of directions of the returned products exist. To achieve a steady flow of cores or to achieve a
flow of cores when needed with the right quantity and quality (so-called delivery performance)
is the biggest challenge for remanufacturers in the automotive aftermarket (Lind et al, 2014).
This is also supported in the report of the European Remanufacturing Network) where one of
the study participants from the automotive aftermarket expressed this situation as: “Not always
are certain cores available on the market and therefore it is needed to buy certain cores no
matter if they are currently required” (ERN report, 2016, p. 57).
According to McKinsey&Company market study (2017), about half of the revenues come
currently from wear-and-tear parts, followed by crash-relevant parts, diagnostics products,
services, and other parts. Going forward, it is expected that the growth of wear-and-tear parts
will slow down due to increasing part quality, e-mobility or e-cars, and price pressure.
The lack of control is caused by: a) “reflection of the uncertain life of a product; b) product life
cycle stage and the rate of technological change and c) the dispose behaviour, which results in a
stochastic return pattern” (Sundin and Dunbäck, 2013, p. 2) and due to the fact that the demand
for cores is greater than the supply (Lind et al, 2014). The dispose behavior, which makes
problems with the steady and right quantity and quality flow of cores means that there is
sometimes a lack of awareness of the value of the cores (even if the deposit for return is used
as the incentive) and that the quality of a core is unknown. Such a situation may lead to the
potential scrapping of cores which may have value for remanufacturing (Lind et al, 2014).
The uncertainties in the supply and demand make problems for remanufacturing companies
with balancing supply and demand which means to try to balance between the risk of building
up excessive amounts of inventory or low levels of customer service (Sundin and Dunbäck,
2013).
The bargaining power of the players - suppliers in the automotive aftermarket - regards to the
reverse logistics processes shows that especially in sorting and cleaning the power is higher with
suppliers as the demand for cores is much greater than supply. As Lind et al (2014) conclude,
“remanufacturer must surrender to the suppliers’ wishes, and therefore, there are no incentives
for the supplier to sort out bad cores before supplying the remanufacturers. A further positive
aspect for the supplier to send the cores unsorted is that it is possible that the remanufacturer
lets a bad core ‘go through’ the sorting process, and the supplier will therefore get paid for a
useless core. The suppliers to the remanufacturers are thus in a favourable situation, where they
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 74 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
can avoid the sorting cost and also earn more money by selling bad cores.” (pp. 11-12). This leads
to the situation that the remanufacturers normally cannot remanufacture 20% to 40% of the
cores that they purchase; however, they do not consider this to be a major problem (according
to the findings of Lind et al, 2014).
Core logistics is central to get the right cores. Remanufacturers can procure cores from several
sources; namely, they own products, warranty returns, from other manufacturers or from core
dealers (Kemény Boehme & Company & ReMaTec, 2017). Figure 22 below (Kemény Boehme &
Company & ReMaTec, 2017) illustrates how different stakeholders use these options, knowing
that the choice depends on the type of business and on the access to the end consumer.
Figure 22: Sources for cores
Five different types of core suppliers can be identified:
 Original equipment manufacturer (OEM),
 Independent car dealerships (ICDS),
 Core dealers (brokers),
 Scrap yards,
 Workshops (Lind et al, 2014)
Östlin et al (2008, p. 3) identified seven categories of relationships within a closed-loop supply
chain in the automotive aftermarket – based on the relationship focus and core control level:
 “Ownership-based: this type of relationship is common when the product is owned by
the manufacturer and operated by the customer, as for example in a rental, lease or productservice
offer. Here, the control of the installed base is high and often regulated by contracts.
 Service-contract: this type of relationship is based on a service contract between a
manufacturer and a customer that includes remanufacturing.
 Direct-order: the customer returns the used product to the remanufacturer, the product
is remanufactured, and the customer gets the same product back (if it is possible to perform a
remanufacturing operation).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 75 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
 Deposit-based: this type of relationship is common in the automotive industry. When the
customers buy a remanufactured product, they are obligated to return a similar used product,
thus also acting as a supplier to the remanufacturer.
 Credit-based: when the customers return a used product they receive a specific number
of credits for the returned product. These credits are then used as a discount when buying a
remanufactured product.
 Buy-back: the remanufacturer simply buys the wanted used products from a supplier
that can be the end user, a scrap yard or similar, or a core dealer.
 Voluntary-based: the supplier gives the used products to the remanufacturer. The
supplier can also be a customer but do not have to be.”
Bosch applies a deposit-based relationship.
Problems with the cores:
A core could travel several ways back into the closed-loop supply chain. One way could be that
the end customer chooses to go to a licensed or independent repair shop, and from there, the
core is delivered to the remanufacturer. Another way could be from scrapping, where the core
could be sent directly from the scrap yard to the remanufacturer or pass through a core broker
(Sundin and Dunbäck, 2013). The major problem is that despite the deposit existence there is
no guarantee that the core will take the same route back as with the car in the forward flow.
What is even worse, it is not sure at all that the core will arrive at the right remanufacturer (OEM
= remanufacturer as in the case of Bosch). Some of the reasons were presented above, among
some others, for instance, the lack of time of people working in workshops, bad (or no) evidence
of spare parts, zero or low commitment to the distributor/seller and also some calculations exist.
Workshops are always sure they will get some money for the core returned. And the evidence
and tracking of the core today are not as perfect as it would be needed. This is also one of the
major findings from the survey of CLEPA9
and FIGIEFA10
from 2017:
“In the large majority of the participants “, the information shared by OEMs with the IAM
participants has to be manually compiled for their catalogues on a one-to-one basis, resulting
in significant time spent for complete review/update of their catalogues. None of the
respondents could report that the shared information included a full set of Vehicle
Identification Numbers (VINs) and related OE part numbers to ensure unequivocal parts
identification. The large majority of the respondents (>70%) expect the issues around parts
identification and the development of IAM catalogues to worsen over the next 5 years mainly
due to the increase in complexity of vehicles and the lack of parts identification information
provided by OEMs.” (Löhr et al, 2017, p. 2).
Also, research by Kalverkamp (2017) focused on the problems with cores, the role of corebrokers
and comparison of the procurement strategies and e-procurement competencies
between the U.S. and European market confirms existing gap and reveals potential progress.
With such a core and information leakage connected to the return routes of cores, there are
also other problems.
9
CLEPA is the European Association of Automotive Suppliers (further information available at:
https://clepa.eu)
10
FIGIEFA is the European Federation and political representative in the EU of the independent
wholesalers and retailers of automotive replacement parts and their associated repair chains (further
information available at https://www.figiefa.eu)
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 76 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Lower as the needed quality of cores that are coming back is also associated with the
information value. Bosch as every remanufacturer would need more information regards the
core – e.g. condition of using the car, level of care for the car etc. Many information is not
possible to keep with core or to engage into the core now. Low-quality cores, if accepted in the
previous step(s) represent lost money in deposit and money extra for the core that must be
scrapped as a waste (often with part of hazardous waste).
It is of utmost importance to get the right (appropriate, good quality) cores, since they are the
raw material for the next remanufacturing cycle. Cores are usually obtained through a reverse
logistics and deposit system in the automotive distribution chain or from specialized core
dealers (APRA Europe & ReMaTec, 2018). In fact, the continuous access to cores for reman is
heavily dependent on the provision of financial incentives for core return. These can work
differently for different stakeholders as illustrated in the Figure 23 below (Kemény Boehme &
Company & ReMaTec, 2017).
.
Figure 23: Incentives for the core sourcing and returns
Summary of the problems with the cores in return flows in general (also reflected in Bosch
and C-ECO business):
1. Time (longer routes back);
2. Wrong “destination” – lack of cores (not right quantity) and risk of “losing the knowhow”
to some extent;
3. Demand and supply of the cores are not in balance, especially if a certain type of core
is needed in a specific period in the market where the actors do their business;
4. Scrapping of the cores considered to be of low quality despite the fact that they could
be remanufactured;
5. Bad or insufficient quality of cores detected in the final phase before remanufacturing
processes;
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 77 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
6. Leakage of information about cores;
7. Sometimes lower profit (if the “deposit surplus” stated by the TL is lower than the
potential margin from the sale of reman product);
8. Extra money, time and effort costs associated with handling the cores within return
processes – individual TLs;
9. Extra costs for scrapping useless core at the C-ECO partners or Bosch as remanufacturer.
10. Lower profit due to the need to buy a new parts for the core – Bosch as remanufacturer.
11. More money, time and effort costs associated with active purchasing of cores out of the
forward supply chain for Bosch as remanufacturer.
12. Unused capacity and fluctuation of capacity utilization of Bosch remanufacturing.
13. Lower satisfaction of Bosch customers if the supply does not cover demand for reman
parts due to the shortage of cores – the price of the new spare parts is higher.
Market trends
McKinsey&Company market study also revealed six trends that are expected to disrupt the
automotive aftermarket (highlighted in Figure 24). Most, resp. all of them will have an impact
on Bosch and C-ECO circular business model.
Figure 24: 6 trends specific to automotive suppliers with a high potential for disruption
1. Consolidation among parts distributors.
According to the study of McKinsey, the consolidation, especially in the European market has
started already and this market is - through the M&A (mergers and acquisitions) - approaching
the US market with only four big wholesalers having more than 40% share. In 2018 in Europe,
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 78 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
the three leading players together accounted for around 15% of the market (Brenner et al,
2018). M&As in Europe have been more expressive in the UK, Germany and the Netherlands.
They involve American and Canadian firms wishing to exploit the European market (e.g. LKQ
Corporation (USA), Genuine Parts Company (USA), Uni-Select Inc. (Canada)), but also European
player, namely German, trying to reinforce their market position through acquisitions (e.g. Hess
Group Wessels+ Müller, Stahlgruber) (Breitschwerdt et al, 2017; Brenner et al, 2018). This
consolidation crusade enables to exploit economies of scale, with cost-savings in parts
procurement, logistics and warehousing, as well other strategic motives like expanding the
global procurement network, diversifying product portfolio and gaining immediate access to
more customers (Brenner et al, 2018). Consolidation is accompanied by the growing closing of
some businesses. In Germany, the Federal Statistical Office recorded 638 insolvencies in the
vehicle repair trade in 2017, 9% more than in the previous year. Distributors of car parts and
accessories are in particular trouble: 105 filed for insolvency protection that year, one-third up
on 2016 (Brenner et al, 2018).
Consolidation can be an advantage and opportunity for Bosch and C-ECO as it is easier to handle
and do forward and reverse business with fewer big players, but on the other side also some
threat due to the growing bargaining power of these wholesalers regards the prices for instance.
There is also a clear trend toward larger and more professionalized workshops to cope with
increasing vehicle complexity. The increasing complexity of car parts will rise towards the
production of the more complete vehicle subsystems. Authors of McKinsey&Company 2018
study argue that this will help suppliers establish their own touch points with the end customer
to capture further aftermarket spend.
2. OEMs aggressively expanding their aftermarket activities.
These activities are more obvious in markets with higher average age, but the trend can be seen
everywhere. The increased penetration OEMs into aftermarket activities (Breitschwerdt et al,
2017; Global Market Insights, 2018; Koggersbøl et al, 2018) is primarily driven by superior access
of OEMs to in-vehicle data, which increases the share of vehicles in fleets under OEM control
and facilitates new service offerings to customers Koggersbøl et al (2018).
Several practices exist - OEMs are starting to occupy some parts of the aftermarket value chain
by, for example, creating their own networks of non-car brand-specific repair shops. They also
try to “automate” decision making related to service and repair through the offer of special
services to create a customer experience, for instance with leveraging vehicle connectivity and
so to localize them. Good relationships with OEMs can utilize such a trend as an opportunity for
Bosch and C-ECO.
3. Digitization of channels and interfaces
It is expected that the e-commerce share of parts sales will increase to 20 to 30% by 2035.
“Currently, traditional distributors dominate sales to workshops: while about 85 to 95% of
workshop orders are placed on B2B platforms or physical channels of traditional distributors
across analysed markets, less than 5% of the orders are placed through specialized online players
or mass merchandisers in Germany, the UK, and France and only 10 to 15% in Poland and
Russia.” (p. 21). The value chain will shorten as some of the trade levels will not be able to reach
the critical mass and leverage economies of scale. Opportunity can be seen if the intermediaries
will be able to connect customers and services.
4. Access to car-generated data.
Capabilities and competencies to work with big data and advanced analytics also in the
automotive aftermarket are considered to be an indispensable asset in the future. As this trend
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 79 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
is very fast, most automotive aftermarket players are not adequately prepared. This can be seen
as a big competitive advantage of Bosch and C-ECO and should be turned into the value
proposition for the cores business. The same advantage is with the fact that the car is becoming
a platform for software and applications and so profit might shift to tech giants (as Bosch is) or
new software entrants (McKinsey&Company, 2018). Study of McKinsey&Company from 2018
points to the one important fact and questions behind this trend – digital connectivity
potentially opens the car as a system to aftermarket players. However, the question is: Who will
own customer contact in the future? According to the research realized by McKinsey&Company
(2018) OEMs will be the key players. But the degree to which various players will control data
and customer interfaces will highly depend on future regulatory guidelines. Car data and new IT
and ICT technologies give rise to the new market “Diagnostics 2.0” that might be captured by
the OEMs (Breitschwerdt et al., 2017).
5. Increasing influence of (digital) intermediaries.
There is a trend towards the entrance of new players in the market, namely (digital)
intermediaries. They provide specific solutions like telematics, fleet management systems and
professional logistics. (Breitschwerdt et al, 2017).
Another important trend which probably will change current playground for the automotive
aftermarket is the fleet management (in business as well as in a customer fleet context). “The
rise of car sharing users and professional fleets opens up new opportunities to steer and optimize
maintenance and repair services. Partnerships will likely emerge between intermediaries and
workshop chains, and the workflow and parts logistics can be fully automatized.” (p. 20). Study
of McKinsey&Company from 2018 even stresses the growth of the share of business customers
and points to the other associated trend - service management of B2B customer´s fleet will
become more centralized with professionalized purchasing processes and service operations.
This means that the total cost of ownership shifts into focus and needs to be considered in
service offerings and pricing policy. However, big B2B end customers are easier to approach for
the sale of parts, sale of service and for collection of cores, especially if they search for highquality
products and services with a strong brand.
6. Higher price transparency and greater diversity of supply for customers.
E-commerce growth in the spare parts market is also associated with the expanding crossborder
trade within Europe. This trade is also fuelled with the possibility to compare prices for
spare parts and non-existing barriers for purchasing online at the EU market. However, for
suppliers of spare parts, the effect of price transparency might mean a decrease in price and
greater price transparency through e-commerce and big data might challenge the current
margins. “Online could be an opportunity for suppliers to start their own online presence or
partner with successful platforms. Some players have already set up their own online channels,
e.g., Hella. Finally, a digital sales model may be the key to a shorter, leaner value chain that
benefits suppliers. By eliminating the need for intermediaries and streamlining the distributor
layer, suppliers may see bigger margins and savings they may decide to pass on to their
customers.” (p. 21)
Big hopes are connected to the use of blockchain technology for tracking and tracing spare parts.
For instance, just recently Mera published in the News from November 19th, 2018 that Daimler
Trucks North America (DTNA) has completed the project testing the use of blockchain
technology for aftermarket remanufacturing operations with the goal to improve its commercial
vehicle maintenance program by automating and streamlining remanufacturing through a
partnership with Filament, the blockchain solutions provider. A USB device and software called
Blocklet will “interface with DTNA´s legacy systems to digitize supply chain ledgers to trace, track
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 80 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
and also verify shipping and transaction data in the parts remanufacturing process” and so to
facilitate data capture. Blocklet TVA (Trusted Vehicle Applications) connected vehicle blockchain
platform “includes a chipset that plugs into a passenger vehicle's OBD-II port or commercial
vehicle's J1939 port to capture and record data such as that coming from the engine's electronic
control unit. The system also has environmental sensors that can detect temperature, humidity,
and more and a motion sensor that can track things like acceleration, G-forces, and incline. Builtin
and dedicated GPS adds coordinates and location info”. (Mera, 2018). Unfortunately, there
are only a few published works (e.g. Drescher, 2017 or Rajkov, 2018) which offer some pieces of
information about the technical features of this technology for tracking the parts and identifying
challenges (both technical, relationship and legal).
Based on the forecast of a digital future for the automotive aftermarket KPMG study (KPMG,
2017, p. 11) proposes a strategic approach to reverse logistics (see Figure 25):
Figure 25: Traditional versus strategic approach to reverse logistics
Although some legislation favours the reman business, there are also some barriers that are
driven by institutional changes. Two examples can be found: i) the eCall regulation may
undermine the regulation for the aftermarket for parts and services by allowing OEMs to adapt
vehicles for OEM-specific telematics, favouring OEMS and shifting maintenance and repair away
from independent aftermarkets(Parker et al, 2015); .ii) car scrappage schemes that have been
introduced in some EU countries during the last financial crisis (Austria, France, Germany, Italy,
Portugal and Spain) have encouraged consumers to purchase new vehicles to generate growth
in the sector, to the detriment of repair (Parker et al, 2015).
Another trend that can negatively affect the remanufacturers business is the increasing
competition from imports of low-cost new products or of repaired or reconditioned (i.e. not
fully remanufactured) parts, predominantly from the Far East (Parker et al, 2015).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 81 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Simultaneously, the aftermarket players are changing their business models. (Breitschwerdt et
al, 2017). New business models like eCommerce, digital platforms and service aggregation are
gaining momentum (ReportBuyer, 2018).
Currently, online trade represents a very small part of the sales channel (around 5%) and online
platforms are considered immature due to insufficient product range and availability as well as
an inability to assist workshops in identifying right parts. Despite this small figure, multiple
platforms for online parts sales exist already in several levels of the value chain: Suppliers, OEMs,
distributors, and workshop chains (Breitschwerdt et al, 2017). The numbers should increase,
reaching 20 to 30% by 2035, either by the increased use of the existing platforms and by
launching new online trade platforms (Breitschwerdt et al, 2017). The online channels will not
have the same importance in all parts: logistically demanding parts, e.g., windshields and
airbags, which are difficult to transport or part of complex workshop processes, will continue
mainly being sold via the traditional OEM or IAM wholesale channels (Breitschwerdt et al, 2017).
This trend can have different meanings for different stakeholders: Traditional parts
manufacturers, distributors, and workshops can face increased competitive pressure as OEMs,
intermediaries, and online providers may attempt to increase their influence on end customers,
shrinking the margins of players accustomed to having the full attention of end customers
(Breitschwerdt et al, 2017).
Digital technologies will not have an impact on sales channels. Digital platforms can become
true game change in the articulation of actors throughout the value chain (Koggersbøl et al,
2018).
In terms of aggregation, there is evidence that regional part distributors in Europe are likely to
shift focus from just mechanical parts to a mix of both collision parts and electro-components
(ReportBuyer, 2018).
5.1 In-depth interviews with trade levels
In total 22 in-depth interviews were realized in Germany and France (11 in Germany and 11 in
France).
In Germany 9 companies belong to the biggest IAM distributors at the market, 1 company is
buying group and 1 company is a core-broker (with the sales volume and turnover also ranks to
the big players). Most of the German companies deal with purchase and sale of cars and spare
parts, provide repairs of cars and also leasing of cars. This means, that these companies are not
only distributors but provide also workshop services (garages). Three companies (from the IAM
distributors) are the wholesalers and retailers only for the 1 car manufacturer (Daimler-Benz,
Opel), the others are independent and work for many suppliers.
In France 1 company (IAM distributor) deals also with recycling cars, 2 are core-brokers and IAM
distributors. Only the one third of the companies provide also repair, most of the companies,
purchase, sale and/ or dismantle the cars. About half of companies are independent and the
other half is a member of some buying group. No company is directly connected to any car
manufacturer. French companies are on average much smaller in size, but some of them do
business globally (what is not the case of German companies which mostly do their business
locally or regionally).
No only-garage-business (workshops) has been interviewed as the majority of garages do also
some purchase and sale and even some wholesale. There are only a few buying groups in both
countries due to the high level of concentration and it is extremely difficult to find contacts. The
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 82 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
end-garages could be easily approached locally during the demonstration, however their pain
points, awareness, experience, expectations are very likely to be the same as in the case of IAM
wholesalers.
Some companies (IAM wholesalers) has their own system for tracking the cores (and spare
parts), some use the information system of the supplier (or even more information systems if
different suppliers use different systems and these suppliers have a strong bargaining power to
press companies (IAM wholesalers) to use their systems). These companies are very dependent
on decision making regarding the software made by the suppliers. Some companies (working
both as IAM wholesalers and workshops) also use to have their own software and information
system (developed solely for the company) for many years (even more than 20 years). On
average, they are satisfied, but some problems were detected (see below). No one company has
real experience with cloud manufacturing or cloud services for the operations and even not
enough knowledge.
One buying group (the purchase is their only activity) has no pain points in the core return and
in the purchase of parts and reman parts.
Usually, suppliers do quality checking and the other reverse logistics processes. Interviewed
companies provide only simple visual quality control and pack and store the cores. They see no
big problems with these operations – however, again also with this issue some pain points could
be found. No capacity barriers for stock keeping exist. There are almost no outsourced processes
except transport in some cases. Managers cannot imagine what activities could be worth of
outsourcing – either they do a minimum of reverse logistics processes (and externalize them),
or they consider them as their core activities and they do not want to lose business and take
jobs from the employees.
Summary of pain points and “typical” categories of representants introducing the pain:
 Different information systems used for different operations – purchase of parts, evidence
of cores – and to some extent also for different suppliers and customers (depends on the
volume of the core business and on the dependency with the supplier (manufacturer,
buying group) – IAM distributor;
 Some data needs to be manually entered into the systems due to non-existing
compatibility – time-consuming and potential loss of data or mistake made – IAM
distributor;
 Time – waiting for the decision making about the quality of cores and deposit return
(more than 2 weeks or even more than 2 months) – IAM distributor;
 Loss of the cores returned to wholesalers and the necessity to keep evidence tracking and
to remind yourself for the deposit reimbursement – IAM distributor;
 Money in the system – the circularity of spare parts and cores if dependent on deposit
and time for return represents lost opportunity and problems with the cash flow – IAM
distributor;
 Transparency of the reimbursement process is rather low – companies often do not know
why the sum of the deposit is as it is – they would prefer clear information connected to
every piece of core. This is special problem in the case when the share of cores in the
business is rather high and the volume as well – IAM distributor.
 Lack of tools for diagnosis of the new spare parts especially for the electric and hybrid
cars and lack of knowledge of the correct evaluation of quality – IAM distributor;
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 83 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
 Quality or state of a core not correctly evaluated for the acceptance of the supplier (lack
of knowledge, skills and diagnosis equipment), which leads to lower or no pay back of
deposit – IAM distributor;
 The same pain as above, which results in a loss of deposit if the spare parts is evaluated
to be scraped – IAM distributor, core-broker and also remanufacturer;
 Time – waiting until the number of cores is sufficient – this is related with the need to
store the cores and provide some minimal handling (internal transport, evidence keeping
etc.) – IAM distributors, wholesalers, core-brokers and remanufacturers;
 Not enough cores on the stock – demand cannot be satisfied at the right time (depends
on the frequency of deliveries in the forward flows and on the intensity of work provided
by the supplier) – IAM distributors, core-broker and remanufacturer;
 Cores not enough clean for acceptance by supplier – IAM distributors;
 Risk of cloud-based infrastructures – data confidentiality (maybe because of the
insufficient knowledge of how clouds work) – IAM distributors, wholesalers, core-brokers
and remanufacturers;
 Image of the cloud services provider is crucial – IAM distributors, wholesalers, corebrokers
and remanufacturers;
 Chinese competition is growing with cheap and low-quality spare parts – this trend makes
a problem for business – mostly core-brokers or those IAM distributors with high share of
reman parts for sale.
5.2 Internal environment
The Automotive Aftermarket division of Robert Bosch GmbH is a part of the Mobility Solutions
business sector, one of the four sectors of the company. The division offers a comprehensive
range of automotive spare parts (both new and reconditioned) and repair, diagnostic and repairshop
solutions for the aftermarket and for repair shops worldwide. Spare parts and solutions
are delivered to more than 16,500 Bosch certified car service garages (with more than 90 years
long history) globally within the market of Bosch Car Service and AutoCrew, two independent
repair-shop franchises under the Bosch Service Network. Spare parts are distributed to Bosch
customers (automotive manufacturers' headquarters, dealerships networks, mostly
wholesalers and to licensed workshops) from Karlsruhe, Germany to 150 different countries –
approx. 25000 items per day in approx. 150 trucks daily. The division also manages a further 24
warehouses around the world. (Bosch annual report, 2017, p. 26; Bosch Automotive
Aftermarket online and Bosch History Blog online).
Through special Bosch eXchange program, an extensive range of exchange parts 30 different
product groups and around 11,000 order numbers can be offered to the workshops. Bosch
processes the core return with the core return service provider CoremanNet – an independent
brand of C-ECO. CoremanNet runs the world´s largest reverse logistics service network for the
return of automotive spare parts for remanufacturing. Solutions for other sectors are being
developed. CoremanNet has today a well-established network with more than 20 collection
points globally. C-ECO is logistics services and solutions provider for Bosch, but also for other
companies which demand the reverse logistics services. These services are realized through the
network of contract partners.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 84 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Franchise Bosch Car Service provides all-around solution scheme. The concept has several
branding advantages: Global largest automotive aftermarket service brand; Quality car parts
supply; Car diagnosis, service technology and management support; Systematic talent training
plan and Service activity with the target at car owners. Besides spare parts and diagnosis
equipment, professional car repair knowledge and services under the technical and service
training system are provided to franchisors together with strong marketing and management
development support. (Franchise Bosch car service, 2015).
Major strengths of Bosch are not only in the sustainable and globally competitive market(s)
position and financial resources, but also in research and development capabilities and IT and
ICT competencies among all other intangible capital categories.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 85 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
6 Environmental scanning and market analysis -
Gorenje
The ambition related to the new circular business model for washing machines is in line with
strategic aims of Gorenje in two areas: to help minimise the environmental impact of both
Gorenje`s production and products and to strengthen the Gorenje`s position as an innovative
and premium producer. In 2017, the revenue share of innovative products and premium brands
reached nearly 30 per cent (Gorenje group, annual report, 2017). This chapter will first discuss
the main facts, environmental forces and trends that will affect washing machine and laundry
business in the four markets (Austria, Denmark, Netherlands and Slovenia)11
that are relevant
for the RECiPSS project. It further presents the results from the empirical survey realized in these
countries.
6.1 External environment
As in other industries/markets, the competition in the washing machine (WM) market is tough.
Besides traditional producers, the companies focusing on lower segments by low price strategy
have strengthened their position by remarkable production quality improvement and as such
they became relevant actors on the mid-range market for WM. In other words, the price/value
ratio they offer is a clear order winner for potential customers.
In this situation, the smart households’ equipment seems to be a promising segment: According
to the GfK research (GfK, 2018), the market for smart washing machines (in Europe) was growing
over-proportionally thanks to the connectivity factor, which enables a surcharge of 50 per cent
compared to conventional products.
Smart appliances can provide additional value to their consumers in many ways – due to the
sensors and the Internet connectivity new functions can be provided as well as new business
models, which includes sharing or renting/leasing12
/pay-per-use. The alternative ownership
models can appeal to heterogeneous consumer groups, with specific motivation and
requirements.
Based on business experience, the consumers, in general, assess the renting and leasing by
economic criteria in the first place. The purely altruistic motives are of lesser impact, despite
what consumers sometimes claim. More realistic view on decision criteria (excluding the price)
are as follows: environmental and health effect on consumer`s family and consumer
him/herself, direct economic effect (lower water and energy consumption), and the
altruistic/societal effects as least important. The order of decision criteria may reflect the
consumers’ real understanding of the eco-products in general.
At the same time, it is risky to perceive consumers as a single homogenous group. For instance,
the cross-cultural differences are apparent: In Europe alone, the business models need to take
the fact into account that the ownership prevails dominantly in southern European countries as
11
Data and information about the four markets freely available come from different sources and have different
structure and character.
12
In this report both concepts – renting and leasing – are used due to the fact that the innovative business model of
Gorenje with the pay per use (wash) solution can be a part of both approaches. According to the
www.businessdictionary.com (http://www.businessdictionary.com/article/1063/lease-vs-rent-d1412/) renting in
comparison to leasing involves a shorter time period and a less formal agreement and is preferred by customers
usually for the temporary needs.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 86 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
apparent in high rates of houses/flats ownership compared to the north countries. Another
difficulty related to consumer understanding: the consumer behaviour concerning washing
machines is very different from other household equipment such as kitchen appliances and that
knowledge cannot be applied in the context of washing machines mechanically.
The consumers who consider a washing machine renting/leasing instead of the ownership,
expect more than just an access to the machine: the renting/leasing of a tangible product needs
to be supplemented by some additional services for consumers. From the business point of view,
such value-added service constitutes the order winners.
As customers change the washing machine on very special occasions only (such as fatal
breakdowns, residence change, or during a complete upgrade of the kitchen/bathroom), their
requirements on the product quality have increased; at the same time this means the higher
demand for longer-lasting products (the average length of WM usage is around 10 years
according to GFK study).
There is also a rationale behind that: the purchasing cost makes smaller part of total cost of
ownership for the consumer, so higher purchasing (forefront cost) are compensated by lower
operating cost in the future (Saccani et al., 2017). The longer product life should be accompanied
by longer warranties.
The focus on longer lasting WM makes sense also from the technical side: In this case, the
production costs are higher by approx. 70 %, but the duration of use is extended by (far) more
than 70%.
The aspects outlined above raise the question of product remanufacturing as a viable strategy.
Remanufacturing (and other reprocessing options) will probably play a more important role
shortly because of the raw material scarcity, which is and which will further be reflected in
increasing prices. The implementation of remanufacturing into the production represents a
complex change, as it relates to diverse aspects of business processes and relationships. It
includes among others:
 Technical aspects (adjustments to product design, redesign of reverse logistics/closing
the loop in supply chain…),
 Legislation issues (diverse approach to waste across countries, technical
requirements/norms – e.g. to sell products in 90 countries, Gorenje needs the approx.
200 certificates now).
 Consumer perception: remanufacturing raises concerns for user safety of the
used/remanufactured product. Product exterior cannot be demerged on visible parts
(scratches...) or be smelly (which indicates cleanness in consumers’ perception).
At the same time, some technical burdens for remanufacturing and for renting/leasing business
models are eased by recent ICT technology advances (wireless sensors, the blockchain,…).
Competition and renting/leasing and pay per use models
The four markets in which the demonstration of the new PSS model will be implemented are
very different in terms of the market development and/or a “product life cycle” when talking
about renting/leasing as such and pay per wash (pay per use, or access-based models).
The most mature market with both models (renting/leasing-based or fixed fee model without
pay per wash and a purely pay per wash model) is the Netherlands. Three start-ups offering one
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 87 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
or both of these models serve the market and one big retailer with brick-and-mortar shop and
e-shop offers solely leasing (probably more retailers do the same). These companies differ in
many aspects. The first company in the market (established in 2014) – Bundles – with both the
pay per wash model and renting/leasing/fixed fee is substantially supported by Miele company
(the washing machines are Miele) and by an accelerator programme funding. Bundles offer its
products across the whole Netherlands. Two other start-up companies were established both in
2017. Bluemovement is supported by Bosch GmbH and (so Bosch washing machines are
serviced). Homie is a spinoff of the TU Delft and works with Zanussi brand. CoolBlue is a big
retailer. In addition to the differences in founders and supporters or owners, year of beginning
the business, market coverage, and brands they work with, these companies also differ in their
product range. Homie has only 1 type of washing machine and solely offers a pay per wash
model, while Bundles provides 2 types of washing machines with two types of product/services
packages. The premium washing machine (Premium) is offered only with an auto-dose and
includes detergent. A basic machine (Basic) is provided without auto-dose and detergent. Both
machines are offered as fixed fee or a combination of fixed fee and pay per wash.
BlueMovement offers 3 types of washing machines, however only leasing and no pay per wash
model. In their subscription-based models, CoolBlue offers only leasing and 2 types of washing
machines. Companies have very different systems of deposits, times for contract and conditions
for deposit return and of course in other payments. For instance, Homie does not require any
monthly fees (and probably even no deposit, but this information is not available at their
webpage which is the only channel for the entry information), while the competitor Bundles
requires monthly fees also in the case of pay per wash. Bundles offers a discount price if
customers rent 2 or more appliances. BlueMovement enables to use discount coupons and also
up to 35 euro cashback via https://www.cashbackxl.nl. Differences are also in delivery times.
Bundles communicates in Dutch, English and German, Homie in Dutch and English, while
BlueMovement only in Dutch, CoolBlue Dutch and English. To give a little bit broader picture
regards the market position of the start-ups (CoolBlue is not evaluated), numbers of Facebook
followers and likes are introduced (30th
April 2019): Bundles - 2652 likes and 2699 followers,
BlueMovement - 2652 likes and 2699 followers and Homie – 145 likes and 150 followers.
Austrian and Danish markets are rather well developed in case of subscription (renting/leasing)
of home appliances (washing machines included) – many retailers or special service
organizations offer this possibility. No business with pay per wash (or use) was detected. The
least mature market is Slovenia.
Even though the French market is not involved in ReCiPSS project, one case is relevant. Company
Lokéo, established already in 2009 is the leading player with very broad product portfolio which
business is only in renting home appliances and other products. They have 59 different types of
several different brands of the washing machine in their offer. However, no pay per wash model
is offered.
6.1.1 Austria
GOVERNMENT
There has been a living public discussion about circular economy issues in Austria under the
umbrella term of Kreislaufwirtschaft for many years, yet the term of the circular economy is a
present in the discourse too. An overview of successful Austrian projects was summarised in
2016`s document: Regionale Kreislaufwirtschaft - Inputpapier für die Implementierung von
RESET2020 (RepaNet, 2016), which suggested several circular model solutions that could be
applied on regional level by different actors: for the enterprises the most promising approaches
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 88 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
included the slowing down of product loops, cascading principle, renting and repairing among
others.
Generally, the Austrians position in circulatory initiatives and achievements is very good. In a
recent ranking of the EU-countries, Austria took a 9-th position in countries circularity, but with
mixed results – whereas it excels in food waste, recycling and trading of recyclable raw materials,
it is behind the EU average in private investment into circularity and in patents (Hervey, 2018).
Austria belongs to countries that applied the pay as you throw the system (usage-pricing;
payment for the waste according to its weight). Such a system is running in 17 EU-countries, but
in three of them only it is applied in all municipalities and Austria belongs to them (Circular
Future (n.d.). The EU’s 2020 municipal waste recycling target has been already reached
(European Commision, 2019), which confirm good position of the country in terms of waste
management and recycling also due to government initiatives such as imposing the Austrian
Recycled Construction Materials Regulation and starting the waste prevention program
(Bundes-Abfallwirtschaftsplan) (European Commision, 2017).
According to The Environmental Implementation Review, Austria focuses on reuse activities in
its transition towards a circular economy. In 2018 also an Austria's Circular Futures Platform was
launched.
ECONOMY
In the Austrian economy, the proportion of secondary raw materials in processed materials
amount to 8.5% and the share of recycled materials in interim outputs made 16.8% (Jacobi et
al., 2018). Some facts suggest that the waste separation is not enough for circular economy
transition: out of the material pre-processed by industry, 9 per cent is recycled, the rest 91 per
cent are virgin materials. The environment is encumbered with 10 tons of waste per person per
year. The recycling is based on rather simple technologies (Initiative Wachstum im Wandel,
2019).
The Eurostat data for Computer and personal and household goods repair suggest that repair
activities are less frequent than in Austria compared to other EU-countries (it should be noted.
However, that the economic impact of repair activities is marginal even in the states that
dominate in this statistic – in Croatia or in the Czech Republic it makes 0.3 % of economic value
added without financial sector) (Eurostat, 2018).
On the other hand, Austria is a front-runner when it comes to product reuse – Austrian
government-supported network is well developed and offers a second-hand product of highquality
(European Environment Agency, 2017).
CUSTOMERS – smart home and washing
The Austrians belong to the IoT fans: in 2016 surveyed GfK market research agency, Austria
ranked on 14-th position worldwide in so-called the Connected consumer index. This index
measures the extent to which the consumers are connected to the Internet through various
appliances. The extent of smart home appliances in Austria is eight times greater than the global
average and three times than the West Europe average (GfK, 2018).
Austrians´ attitude to a smart home is positive (52 % compared to 14.6% of negative responses);
however, it does not mean the positive perception is shared among all groups equally. Males
and the younger generation are more positive about smart homes. In terms of smart product
risks, the consumers are afraid of the collection of private data and hackers’ attacks.
When it comes to washing machines, the findings are a bit contradictory: Out of 15 product
groups listed in the consumer survey, the smart washing machine took the fourth position
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 89 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
among the most frequently used smart products (after TV, motion sensors, and smoke sensor)
(Marktmeinungmensch,2017). However, when being asked about smart product purchase
intention (during the next three years), the washing machine took 13th
position only with 5.8 %
consumers intending the purchase.
The average lifespan of a washing machine in Austrian household is 8.3 years, but it has a
decreasing tendency, as the span was 11.9 in a survey conducted four years earlier. Speaking
about consumers’ view on home appliances lifespan/durability in general, the satisfaction
prevails (45 per cent against 30 per cent of unsatisfied) (Wieser and Tröger, 2015).
The market research also indicates a higher preference of Austrians towards larger-capacity
appliances (although the most common ones are medium-sized washing machines with a
capacity of 6.0- 8 kg (Euromonitor, 2019a). The price per wash is decreasing as a result of
cheaper laundry care products (due to private labels and frequent sales promotions)
(Euromonitor, 2019b).
In a typical Austrian household, the washing is males’ responsibility (Nielsen, 2017). Even if
women see washing in a more positive light than men, it is not an entertaining activity for any
gender (Marktmeinungmensch, 2018).
Preferences of washing machines features and functions are depicted in the following Figure
26 (Euromonitor International Analyst Pulse Survey, 2015).
Figure 26: Preferences of washing machines features and functions
6.1.2 Denmark
GOVERNMENT
Danish government initiatives toward a circular economy
To accelerates the transition towards the circular economy last year Danish government
launched the new strategy, which follows the recommendations (formulated in four main areas:
the circular value chain, design, and production, consumption and recycling) of the
government’s Advisory Board on circular economy (State of Green, 2019). To help companies to
accelerate their circular progress, the Danish government has set aside EUR 16 million with six
focus areas and 15 initiatives (e.g., strengthen the companies as the motivating force for the
circular transition; support the circular economy through data and digitalisation; enhance the
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 90 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
circular economy through design; change consumption patterns through circular economy;
create a well-functioning market for waste and reused goods; generate more value from
buildings and biomass) (Food nation, 2019; MFVM, 2019).
All those initiatives have stemmed from results of case study on Denmark, conducted by the
Ellen MacArthur Foundation, which showed that introducing the circular economic principles to
the Danish economy would:
 Increase GDP by 0.8 – 1.4 %
 Reduce consumption of selected resources by up to 50 %
 Reduce the Danish carbon footprint by 3-7 %
 Create 7 000 – 13 000 jobs by 2035
Moreover, according to DAKOFA13
(2019) more and more companies are becoming aware of the
significant growth opportunities in the circular economy. Danish companies are developing
pioneering circular economy solutions that benefit the environment, climate and economy. In
2015, Denmark was even awarded the World Economic Forum’s Young Global Leaders award
‘The Circulars’ for being a global front-runner in exploiting the potential for a circular economy
(Copcap, 2015).
All these initiatives indicate that there is huge potential for companies to implement a
circular business model
Danish government and digitalization
According to Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI) Denmark continues to occupy the
position as EU’s most digital country. Since Denmark government is aware of the huge potential
of the tech ecosystem, in 2018 it allocated 134 million EUR to initiatives running until 2025 as a
part of a new “Digital Growth Strategy.” The strategy contains 38 concrete initiatives, which
aim to secure and enhance Denmark’s position as an attractive digital hub by providing a boost
to the Danish tech ecosystem and improve conditions for businesses to be able to utilize the full
benefits of new technologies. In this context, Brian Mikkelsen (Danish Minister of Industry,
Business and Financial Affairs) states that: “The government wants Denmark as a digital
frontrunner, where all Danes get a share of the benefits of digitalization. The new technologies
can make us richer as a nation and has the potential to improve our environment, healthcare,
and lives in many ways. We have to utilize that opportunity and bring Denmark into the digital
future.” (Christensen, 2018a; Christensen, 2018b).
As regards comparison with 2017, Denmark has experienced a growth in the percentage of ICT
specialists and Denmark continues to be on the forefront when it comes to the use of technology
by businesses. Danish businesses are increasingly embracing digital technologies, such as cloud
computing (38%) and social media (29 %) (Christensen, 2018).
In the context of the circular economy, researchers at DTU14
have developed a new digital tool
that can help manufacturing companies in their transition to a circular economy. This tool is
targeted at manufacturing firms from all industries without a difference in size. Thanks to
sharing strengths and opportunities and benchmark against other companies from the same or
other industries, Danish companies may be able to optimize their circular economy initiatives
and thus better utilize their raw materials or residual products (Frederiksen, 2018). To digitally
enhance SMEs, Danish EPA has launched a website to help small- and medium-sized companies
13
Waste and Resource Network Denmark
14
Technical University of Denmark
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 91 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
to participate in the circular economy. It is supposed to provide information on greener
production and how this can be used in marketing a business (CW Research, 2019).
ECONOMY
Danish economy and future forecast
Denmark has a prosperous economy, which stems from economic results. In 2018, the country
recorded a GDP growth of 2% according to IMF estimates, with forecasts of 1.9% and 1.8% for
2019 and 2020, respectively. The national Ministry of Finance and FocusEconomics analysts are
however slightly more conservative and expect growth of 1.7% in 2019, which is down 0.1
percentage points from last month’s forecast, and 1.6% in 2020 (FocusEconomics, 2019; Nordea,
2019).
Although, it is expected that in total the economy should strengthen this year - driven by stillsolid
domestic demand amid a tight labour market and robust wage gains, uncertainty regarding
this year´s election can pose big risks. According to the latest polls suggest the Social
Democrats—headed by Mette Frederiksen—hold a commanding lead ahead of general
elections which must be held by 17 June, and the centre-left bloc is on course for a parliamentary
majority. A centre-left victory is unlikely to change the current prudent fiscal stance significantly
and will likely have a minimal impact on growth prospects this year (FocusEconomics, 2019).
Danish business scene
According to the World Competitive Yearbook 2018, Denmark ranks 6th in the top most
competitive business nations and is considered to be one of the greenest countries in the world.
This is confirmed by the latest moves on the Danish business scene also reveal another key
strength: the eagerness of local start-ups to embrace the circular economy model. Moreover,
apart from public recycling programs, the preference for a waste-free future can also be seen in
recent business practices (Young Upstarts, 2019).
In 2017, the Danish Environmental Protection Agency conducted a survey and based on
responses from 610 small and medium-sized companies state that:
 9 out of 10 small and medium-sized companies think the circular economy is beneficial
and want to be part of the change.
 56% of the companies are already focusing on reducing their use of raw materials and
the production of waste.
 88% of companies have a positive attitude towards a circular economy.
 51% of the companies feel that their knowledge of a circular economy is inadequate.
 53% believe that there is business potential in a circular economy (State of Green, 2017).
Danish market with washing machines
Since the Danish housing market continues to prosper and increase between 2017 and 2018 by
0.6 %, the market with washing machines is also growing. Thanks to this the home laundry
appliances have become the particularly competitive category in Denmark. Moreover, between
two main factors influencing purchasing decisions in 2018 belong price and energy efficiency.
Since Denmark put a lot of attention to new technologies, it is not surprising that connected
home laundry appliances have started to become a topic of conversation in 2018. Moreover,
the results of Euromonitor's survey show that more than half of the respondents knew about
the connectivity features between washing machines and smartphones. This suggests a clear
increase compared to 2017, especially among older age groups (Euromonitor, 2019).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 92 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Denmark’s washing machine competitors:
The majority position is held by Samsung, who belongs between the first movers implementing
the latest technological advancements in home laundry appliances. They recently launched the
new Quickdrive range which perfectly fits with current customers’ trends: The washing time is
half that of the average, which is a big plus in the hectic lifestyles of Danish consumers and it
also resonates with the convenience trend. Moreover, BSH’s Siemens brand put emphasis on
technology and connectivity when it comes to marketing its home laundry appliances. Its Home
Connect app puts full control of its connected consumer appliances in the hands of tech-savvy
customers through their smartphones.
CUSTOMERS
Danish consumers
Denmark has enjoyed a relatively steady growth in population; however, in recent years it has
been increasing. That is the consequence of the higher number of not only births but also
immigrants (make up 13.3 % of the population). In 2019, Denmark has an estimated population
of 5.78 million, according to the latest census figures and another growth is expected in the
future. According to the forecast, there will be roughly over 6 million people living in Denmark
by 2028. As regards population density, it is 136 per Km2, which ranks 86th in the world (World
Population Review, 2018).
The Figure 27 shows the development of the total population in Denmark by age. In 2018,
people from 20 to 39 years old (1,46 million) formed the two the largest groups among Danish
inhabitants, followed by age group 0 to 19 years old (1.31 million). The median age of the
population is of 42.2 years. Thanks to a nearly equal number of the old and young Danish
population, the same distribution is also expected for the future (Statista, 2019).
Figure 27: Total population in Denmark from 2007 to 2018, by age group (in millions)
It is not surprising that Denmark, as the most digital country in EU, has one of the most advanced
information societies in the world. Danish consumers quickly adopt new technologies and hightech
products, which stems from their openness to change and risks. They are also considered
to be highly-skilled customers with innovating and critique point of view. With regards to
purchasing behaviour, despite the fact that Danish consumers are opened to change and risks,
when they are buying a product, they are rather conservative. They favour products from
companies that have been operating in the country for a long time, which speaks for well and
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 93 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
long-established companies. Danish consumers also have high expectation, especially in the
case of product quality (the highest rate in Europe). Moreover, they put a lot of attention on
health, the environment, ethics towards animals and taste (Banco Santander, 2019).
Despite a high level of income tax, Danish consumers generally enjoy one of the best qualities
of life in the world - high connectivity with modern infrastructure. This also reflects consumers
purchasing power. According to the latest analysis, on average, Danish households enjoy a
disposable income of about USD 65 000 a year, 70% of which is used for consumption. Based on
this, it may be said, that the average Danish consumer is relatively well-off. Moreover, Danes
had also been repaying their mortgages at the fastest pace in a decade. Thanks to this, their
Research&Development and innovative capabilities, production, quality management have
large amounts of discretionary income to consumption (Euromonitor, 2018). According to the
latest available data, in the fourth quarter of 2018, consumers spending counted 233101 DKK
Million, and until 2020 it is expected its growth to 248152.00 DKK Million (Trading economics,
2019).
Positive forecasts on the Danish market in case of consumer spending are also supported by
consumers’ confidence. Despite the fact that the consumer confidence index went down slightly
to 3.7 points from 3.8 points in March 2019, Danish consumers are still optimistic. According to
Burke (2019) April’s dip was mainly driven by consumers’ less positive view of their personal
financial situation over the next 12 months. Moreover, consumers grew increasingly pessimistic
about making major purchases. Since the purchase of a washing machine is not considered to
be such a large purchase, the washing machine market can be expected to be unaffected.
Widespread use of technologies in Denmark is also supported by the internet access. Culpin
(2018) estimates that there are about 5.4 million Internet users in Denmark, which represent
97% of the total population. Latest available data show that over two-thirds of these regularly
use the internet for shopping, meaning there is a large potential for selling product through e-
shop.
Consumers and renting
Denmark is rated as one of the most “livable” locations in the world, where every month over
1000 people move into the Greater Copenhagen region alone. Since the cities are no growing
so fast the removers are facing problems with finding a place for living. And thus, it is then no
wonder that rent is one of the most discussed subjects in Denmark. Charlies Roof (2019) even
describes the Danish rental market as incredibly complex, competitive and completely crazy.
Since people rent both type of houses - furnished as well as unfurnished, there is a big potential
for renting household appliances such as washing machines, dryers, dishwashers, etc., which
new removers will need.
Consumers and the sharing economy
According to Marton (2018), there is 10% of the population being participated in the sharing
economy in some form in Denmark. The small participation in the Danish sharing economy also
confirms survey conducted by NS Gallup for Nordea Denmark, which shows that only very small
percentage of the population engages in sharing economy transactions by providing their own
assets and services and using other people’s assets and services (Fjalland, and Landbo, 2017).
This result is surprising because as similar to other EU´s countries, in Denmark are widespread
platforms such as Airbnb, UberPop, BlaBlacar, Deliveroo, GoMore, DriveNow and Resecond,
through them consumers share private homes, cars, clothes, and so on.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 94 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Since the government realized the great potential of sharing economy when it comes to securing
a better use of resources and giving consumers opportunities, the Danish government
announced a sharing economy strategy according to Levring and Wienberg (2017). Denmark
wants to bring the so-called sharing economy into its legal codex so that companies like Uber
and Airbnb can be absorbed into the Scandinavian welfare model. In this context business
Minister Brian Mikkelsen said: “If you want people to understand the prospects, in terms of new
jobs and new technology, then it also has to contribute to the financing of the welfare society
we live in.”
Consumers and loT
Martin Lobel, CEO of Teracom, said: “The interest for IoT solutions and the demand for Internetof-things
connectivity is growing dramatically in Denmark” (Ryan (2019). This also confirms the
latest statistic which shows that the Internet is the only media platform whose share of daily
users is increasing. In 2017 the Internet was even more by most Danes on a daily basis (88% of
the population aged 16-89) (EPRA, 2018).
As regards smart devices, Danish consumers prefer the electronics offering convenience and
connectivity, such as wireless products, and wearables and novelty products at a reasonable
price. The new attention is paid to the electronics goods that are more connected and to be able
to merge as many services as possible into one device such as wireless speakers and
smartphones (Euromonitor, 2019). The importance of smartphones also confirms the latest
statistic, according to them, Denmark has the highest penetration of smartphones in the world
- with 77% of the population using a smartphone. This is reflected in the e-commerce industry,
with one in four online purchases in Denmark made using a cell phone. This pointed out that the
seller website, especially e-shops should be adapted to the mobile interface as well (Ecommerce
News, 2019).
Consumer interest in connected home devices does not remain behind. Danish consumers more
and more own a home camera, surveillance system or smart home appliance (Statistica, 2019).
6.1.3 Netherlands
GOVERNMENT
Netherlands government initiatives toward a circular economy
Netherlands government is taking various measures (fostering legislation and regulations,
intelligent market incentives, financing, knowledge and innovation, international cooperation)
to encourage the transition to a circular economy (for more information read Government of
Netherlands, 2019a).
Government:
 seeks to develop further the legislation and regulations that encourage innovation,
which includes rules promoting a sharing economy.
 encourages producers to use raw materials that can be reused more often.
 invests in entrepreneurs who are active in the fields of renewable energy, energy
saving and reducing CO2 emissions.
 stimulates the creation of knowledge networks and different ways of exchanging
knowledge.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 95 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
 works with other countries as much as possible, in the European Union and also in the
United Nations.
In September 2016 the Netherlands government launched wide programme for a Circular
Economy. It has selected five economic sectors and value chains that will be the first to switch
to a circular economy. These sectors (biomass and food, plastics, manufacturing industry,
construction sector, consumer goods) are important to the Dutch economy and have a big
impact on the environment. As regards the manufacturing industry, the government wants to
make the business community more aware of the vulnerability of natural resources. By 2050
many critical materials will have to be reused and recycled, including scarce raw materials like
‘rare earth’ metals (Government of Netherlands, 2019b).
Netherlands government and digitalization
According to “Dutch Digitalisation Strategy” report the Netherlands is in an excellent position
to capitalise on the economic and social opportunities created by digitalization. They have a
world-class digital infrastructure. Wi-Fi and Bluetooth were invented in the Netherlands. The
AMS-IX, one of the most important internet exchange points in the world, is located in the
Netherlands. Moreover, the Netherlands has a highly educated workforce at an international
level, and Dutch consumers often lead the way in embracing new digital applications
(Government of Netherlands, 2019c).
ECONOMY
Netherlands economy and future forecast
Dutch economy grows at a dynamic pace: growth was estimated at 2.8% of GDP in 2018 driven
primarily by domestic demand, but the pace of expansion is expected to ease from 2.6% and
2.3% in the next couple of years mainly due to slowing private consumption and investment
(IMF).
Since the external environment becomes more challenging, defined by lingering global trade
tensions and Brexit-related uncertainties, it is expected that economic growth will moderate
and grow by 1.7% in 2019 and 1.6% in 2020 (FocusEconomics, 2019a).
Services sector account for over 70.3% of national revenue and employ 81.4% of the workforce.
The services sector is focused mainly on transportation, distribution, logistics, banking and
insurance, water engineering and new technologies (Nordea, 2019).
Dutch market with washing machines
As the focus is now on energy efficiency in most appliances (reflecting consumers’ demand),
there was a shift also towards energy efficient automatic dryers, automatic washing machines,
and automatic washer dryers.
In 2018 there were price reductions, especially for automatic washing machines where volume
sales were declining, and manufacturers were trying to push volumes using attractive prices
(Euromonitor, 2019).
Nederland’s washing machine main competitors:
1) Whirlpool Nederland
 In 2018 it registered disappointing results in home laundry appliances, with
volume sales declining. The company seems unable to stabilize after its
restructuring in 2015.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 96 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
2) Samsung Nederland BV
 the fastest growing player in home laundry appliances in 2018 in the
Netherlands
 the leading player in automatic washer dryers and offers a wide range of models
to choose
3) Electrolux Home Products
 enjoyed marginal retail volume growth in 2018 partly because of its focus on
the greater specific value offered by AEG-Electrolux and less on the economic
Zanussi-Electrolux.
4) Miele
 It is the only remaining manufacturer that uses 100% reusable or recyclable
materials.
New trends in the laundry market
The rapid development of digital technology has been unlocking better and longer use of the
product. The idea of an ‘Internet of Things’ (IoT) has captured public attention and permeates
the mainstream tech and business media. Dutch start-up, Bundles, is demonstrating the benefits
of a holistic view by applying IoT technology to the laundry (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2019).
Laundry leaders such as P&G, Unilever and Henkel are not staying behind. They are responding
to consumer´s changing needs and demands and aiming to save consumers time with premeasured
or all-in-one offerings. Moreover, they are using collaboration with start-ups, who
deliver soap to consumers’ homes or who create new mobile apps offering additional services
to customers (Geller, 2018). A similar approach is also used by Bundles, however, as regards
coffee machines - customers subscribe to the use of a high-quality coffee machine and
automatic delivery of coffee beans, based on personal preferences and amount of coffee usage.
 Future potential:
Since the consumer demands products which save their time and are environmentally
sustainable, it worthy of considering this market-niche. A consumer might subscribe to
the use of high-quality washing machine and delivery of laundry detergent, based on
their preferences (aroma, type – gel/powder, type of cloths – white/black/color, for
sensitive skin, for babies, etc.).
Moreover, members of the Board for Washing Excellence have created a whitepaper of what
can be expected through 2030 looking at four categories in the laundry cleaning process. There
are stated only examples (for review see Hydrofinity, 2018).
1) Mechanical action - Smart Laundry Technology
2) Chemical action - A Different Approach to Detergent
3) Temperature effect - Reducing the Use of Resources
4) Time savings - Reducing the Use of Resources
CUSTOMERS
Dutch consumers
The Netherlands is one of the world’s most densely populated nations and similar to most
western European countries has an ageing population. Figure 28 captures the household
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 97 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
composition from 2016 to 2060 (Statista, 2019). The forecast indicates that composition will
change very slightly in the following years. As regards population density, in 2018 it was reported
at 506 sq. Km (StatisticsTimes, 2019).
Figure 28: Forecast of the household composition in the Netherlands from 2016 to 2060, by number of
people in the household (in 1,000s)
The Dutch population has been found to be among the happiest in the world. Dutch consumers
are enjoying a comfortable standard of living, with a buoyant economy, low unemployment and
a generous pensions system, which helps to maintain demand for a range of discretionary
products and services (Euromonitor, 2018). Despite this general positivism, last year has brought
a pessimistic especially as regards households’ financial situation, which lasts until this year.
Customer sentiment index dropped further in March of this year, which resulted in a decrease
in consumers’ willingness to buy. On the other hand, private consumption is expanding at 1.6%
in 2019, which is unchanged from last month’s estimate. In 2020, the panel expects private
consumption to grow 1.7% (FocusEconomics, 2019b).
Dutch consumers are characterized by caution and are very sensitive to prices and special offers.
Also, quality is also an important factor influencing their purchase behaviour. Therefore, they
are willing to pay a premium price for a product of higher quality. Dutch customers prefer
practical, healthy and sustainable products, which reflect their greater interest in social
responsibility. Moreover, younger consumers are embracing mindfulness and betterment,
which may be reflected in their buying habits. Interesting enough, consumers of all ages are
questioning ownership as flexible, minimalist living gains popularity (Angus, 2018).
Dutch consumers are also highly connected online and social relationships are extremely
important to them. This new trend lasts, which confirms also Rene Djuricek, Owner of
Netherlands-based Meesterslijpers, who says, "The days of customers using only email and
telephone to contact businesses are over. Customers want to contact a business the same way
they contact their friends and family." (Metselaar, 2019). Thus, technology has become critical
to consumer behaviour changes, especially mobile technologies and internet access (NVC,
2019). This also results in the way how Dutch businesses do customer service. They started to
incorporate new customer service tools, improve customer care overall, and forge more human
relationships with customers on channels, which the customers prefer. Interestingly enough,
the channels like chat, Twitter and WhatsApp will grow significantly. Through chat, firms can
connect with potential customers it would not connect with otherwise (Metselaar, 2019).
Consumers and renting
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 98 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Consumer habits are changing quite often nowadays. Following on from the house, apartment
and vehicle rentals, the rental business has now spread to household goods such as electrical
appliances, DIY tools, and even clothing. Although the older generations were more reluctant
about renting thing, the need to balance household budgets, greater geographical mobility, and
new consumer habits are all reasons why nowadays many people prefer not to invest long term
in equipment for the home. Moreover, renting brings many benefits, because in addition to
saving on the cost of installation and any necessary repairs, renting a home appliance can enable
the consumer to obtain a tailored service (Frontière, 2014).
There are currently several successful business models such as NeoSquat (Startup rents out
furniture) or Bundles (Startup rents out washing machines), home appliance renting which
seems to indicate that this is a promising business with numerous advantages.
Consumers and the sharing economy
There are numerous sharing economy initiatives across the Netherlands. For example,
Amsterdam has created dozens of new digital platforms encouraging citizens to participate in
the sharing economy. In addition, the digital application contributes to concerted effort to
reduce waste and remove one per cent of all cars from roads in Europe.
Sharing is popular in many services like food and drink, accommodation, renting cars, etc. From
the public sector’s point of view, sharing and collaboration are valuable tools in the drive
towards achieving a sustainable and friendly city. Nanette Schippers15
in the context of sharing
economy said: "‘Everything indicates that people continue sharing because of a whole bunch of
other reasons such as a sustainable society. Now, we know who is willing to share – those
between the ages of 20 and 45 are more likely to share. But our role is to expand this group to
include low-income groups and the elderly. We want a pro-active, open attitude which
understands the sharing initiative and helps everyone."(Apolitical, 2019).
Consumers and loT
 The European IoT market is still growing – in 2018, there are around 11 billion connected
'things,' where 60-65% are consumer devices.
The Netherlands is one of the leaders in capability and initiatives within Europe. According to
Statistics Netherlands report, smartphones (85 % of all households) and laptops (78 % of all
households) were the most frequently used internet devices used by households in 2017. Dutch
older adults are increasingly active in using smart devices, which indicate the potential of a loT
market in the Netherlands. On the other hand, GfK research pointed out that the interest in
adopting smart home solutions was declining in 2018 compared to 2017 (less than 50% of the
people claim to be interested). Between benefits associated with smart home solutions for the
Dutch consumers belong the ability to save energy and the convenience of being able to control
your devices from anywhere. And, the barriers preventing people from adopting the trend are
cost and privacy issues (Siliconcanals, 2018)
15
Program manager, sharing economy for innovation office, at the government of Amsterdam
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 99 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Therefore, to promote loT services, CBI16
(2019) highlights that good communication between
customer and service provider is essential. Unclear communication may cause
misunderstandings and disagreements, which can lead to disputes.
Customers and laundry
Recent launched Unilever’s market research shows, that generation of millennials (age 22-37
years), who earn more than a quarter of the world’s income, have a different approach to
laundry than other age groups. They are less loyal to traditional brands and have new demands,
including those products, save time and be environmentally sustainable. Moreover, many young
customers want to spend as little time as possible on laundry. In this context, 36-year-old Olivia
Tusinski said that “washing too often wears your clothes out faster” and that she doesn´t like to
waste water or energy (Geller, 2018).
Additionally, the majority of millennials consists of students, who are living in rented houses and
do not consider buying white goods (such as washing machine) but rent it along with the home.
An example is Splash Lease, who rents/leases out washing machines, dryers, etc. (included
delivery and repairs) to students and student houses all over the Netherlands from € 9,- per
month (Splash Lease, 2019).
With regards to customer preferences when choosing a washing machine, a recent survey
conducted by Euromonitor International (Figure 29) revealed that the most important features
for consumers were energy and water efficiency, which were followed by features that
increased convenience, such as time-saving features, while design and appearance features and
other more technological advances interested consumers less (Euromonitor International
Analyst Pulse Survey, 2015). Therefore, it is important to highlight to consumers’ needs and not
only promote technological prowess (Baus, 2015).
Figure 29: What features do consumers consider most important in washing machines?
6.1.4 Slovenia
GOVERNMENT and ECONOMY
For the further development in Slovenia, the Circular Economy Roadmap of Slovenia that was
officially launched in May 2018, is of high relevance. The Roadmap is based on principles of
16
We are part of the Netherlands Enterprise Agency and are funded by the Netherlands Ministry of
Foreign Affairs.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 100 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
collaboration and co-creation among different stakeholders. Potential ways of transition in
Slovenia include product-service systems, sharing, or switching from consumers to users’
approach. Digitization, including blockchain technologies, is seen among key enablers in the
roadmap.
To assess the readiness of Slovenia for circulatory transition, two rankings are of relevance:
Slovenia reached the 6th position in the EU Eco-innovation Index for 2017 (the European
Commission, 2017) as “the Slovenian Government significantly strengthened its support and
activities related with circular change”. Slovenia also took 7th position in circularity among 28
EU-countries, although the results are mixed: Slovenia over performs other countries in food
waste processing, recycling and trading of recyclable raw materials, but it lacks in private
investment into circularity and in patents (Hervey, 2018).
The latest achievements of Slovenia in circularity transition was summarized by The
Environmental Implementation Review as follows:
 “Slovenia has adopted new spatial planning legislation (the Spatial Planning Act and the
Construction Act) to become fully compliant with EU law on environmental assessment
and access to justice.
 On nature conservation, Slovenia has made good progress in mapping and assessing its
ecosystem services.
 Slovenia has strengthened its economic instruments to increase the budget available
for residual waste treatment.” (European Commission, 2019).
Slovenian institutions are also partnering European projects promoting CE, such as MOVECO
(Mobilising Institutional Learning for Better Exploitation of Research and Innovation for the
Circular Economy) in the Danube region.
Nevertheless, some problems and barriers still exist. A recent study focused on the view and
readiness of Slovenian small and medium enterprises. The SMEs complained about the
inadequate fiscal policy set by the government, and they also felt a lack of interest and readiness
among consumers’ payment of higher prices associated with pro-circular products. Other
barriers relate to little information and knowledge of circularity among all groups of
stakeholders (Širec et al., 2018).
The understanding the CE itself is rather limited: In a pilot survey, 68% of companies claimed to
have heard about the CE, but they did not know what means while 20% of the Slovenian
companies have heard of the circular economy and know the concept well (Baggia, 2017).
CUSTOMERS
In the adoption of smart home appliance, the Slovenian consumer are fans of IoT technologies:
the presence of smart home products in their households is above the average for Central
Europe, it is even higher than it is in the typical or average west-European household, but, e.g.
Austrians adopted the smart home appliances three times more often than Slovenians (GfK,
2018) however; in older survey, Slovenians expressed more willingness for smart home
appliances than Austrians (Mert et al., 2009).
Besides digitization, the sharing economy is another circularity enabler that is established in
Slovenia – in the form of small online platforms that are extremely popular. “The issue has been
a “hot topic” in the media since 2015 when the government intensified its efforts to start the
debate on legal reforms to accommodate foreign sharing economy companies in Slovenia” (Cost
Association, 2019). The legislation in Slovenia is a burden for sharing economy services in
accommodations, especially (Grifoni et al, 2018).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 101 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Some data suggest that environmental awareness is limited: Majority of Slovenian consumers
consider material composition when buying apparel, while only a small percentage consider
ecolabels and the environmental impact (Žurga and Forte Tavčer, 2014). The willingness to buy
green electricity showed to be moderated by age and education, and environmental awareness
too, but the most powerful factor is the income (Zoric and Hrovatin, 2012). The value system of
Slovenians is quite traditional; thus, the environment (e.g. the value of clean air) is important,
but some other environmental-awareness related factors are of lesser importance (such as
social cohesion, equality, green food) (Redek et al, 2012).
6.2 The results of pilot surveys in Austria, Denmark, the
Netherlands, and Slovenia
6.2.1 The sample description
The quantitative study presented in this section serves as pilot research to supplement the
secondary data about market readiness for circular business models. The data collected from
consumers in four countries provide inputs for business model design in terms of motivation
and barriers for renting of washing machines, participation in collaborative consumption, usage
of remanufactured washing machines, and idea about the ideal washing machine. One section
of the survey included the inputs for conjoint analysis, which tested preferences for four product
attributes.
The online questionnaire was distributed through professional research agency in the first week
of April 2019. Quota sampling was employed, the final sample size amounted to 659 cases
representing the four countries equally (see the Figure 30).
Figure 30: The respondents' nationality and the age structure
The number of women slightly outweighed men (52 vs 48 per cent). The average age was 44
years (49 years for men and 41 years for women) and did not differ across countries as tested
by ANOVA (f = 274.4, df = 3, p = 0.433). The high school is the most frequent education level; in
Austria and the Netherlands, more than 50 per cent of respondents belong to this group. There
is no significant difference in education level between males and females across countries (see
Figures below).
25%
27%24%
24%
Austria Denmark the Netherlands Slovenia
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
18-23 24-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61 and more
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 102 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 31: Education
Figure 32: Settlement structure
Most respondents live in private house/cottage except for Austria, where the apartments are
significantly more frequent (64%) since the apartments also dominate in small towns in Austria.
In other countries, the apartments are typical for big towns only, whereas in villages the share
of the private houses makes over 80% (Table 9: Living conditionsTable 9 and Figure 33).
Austria Denmark the Netherlands Slovenia Total
private house/cottage 34.60% 52.20% 57.00% 56.00% 49.90%
the apartment 64.10% 42.20% 39.60% 42.00% 47.00%
other 1.30% 5.60% 3.40% 2.00% 3.10%
Table 9: Living conditions
12,3%
20,0%
0,7% 3,3%
54,5% 33,8%
52,7% 45,4%
17,5%
32,5% 28,4% 39,5%
15,6% 13,8% 18,2%
11,8%
0,0%
10,0%
20,0%
30,0%
40,0%
50,0%
60,0%
70,0%
80,0%
90,0%
100,0%
Austria Denmark the Netherlands Slovenia
primary education high school bachelor degree master degree and more
42,20%
16,90% 24,80% 32,70%
18,80%
35,60%
43,00%
40,00%
39,00%
47,50%
32,20% 27,30%
0,00%
20,00%
40,00%
60,00%
80,00%
100,00%
Austria Denmark the Netherlands Slovenia
village small town big town
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 103 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 33: Living condition related to the settlement
The data about income per person was collected by the closed-ended question, which response
categories were set as quintiles – the intervals in national currencies taken from public Eurostat
data. As apparent from Figure 34, the most representative sample from this point of view comes
from the Netherlands as all the five groups are of similar size.
Figure 34: Income per person
The majority of respondents live in a household with a partner without children (34%) or with
one or two children (25%). Living alone is three and a half times more often in Denmark (36%)
compared to Slovenia (10%). For Slovenia, living with parents or grandparents in one household
is more common than in other countries (Figure 35).
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Austria - village
Austria - small town
Austria - big town
Denmark - village
Denmark - small town
Denmark - big town
the Netherlands - village
the Netherlands - small town
the Netherlands - big town
Slovenia - village
Slovenia - small town
Slovenia - big town
private house/cottage the apartment other
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
80,00%
90,00%
100,00%
Austria Denmark the Netherlands Slovenia
1st quintile 2nd quintile 3rd quintile 4th quintile 5th quintile
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 104 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 35: Structure of households
In terms of acceptance of new products and new trends, there is a slight difference with Danish
respondents, as they perceive themselves more often as a late majority – at the same time, the
early adopters are underrepresented there. Slovenian and Dutch people are more innovative
when compared with the other two countries (Figure 36).
Figure 36: Technology adoption life cycle
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
80,00%
90,00%
100,00%
Austria Denmark the Netherlands Slovenia
other
friends/ schoolmates/colleagues
parents and/or grandparents (more than 3 persons)
parents and/or grandparents (2-3 persons)
partner with 3 and more children
partner with 1-2 children
partner without children
alone
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Austria
Denmark
Netherlands
Slovenia
inovator early adopter early majority late majority laggard
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 105 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Majority of consumers are “eco-friends” or neutral concerning the environmental issues, in
Slovenia the proportion of consumers profiling themselves as neutral to friendly is higher
substantially (Figure 37).
Figure 37: Eco-friend/fan/campaigner
Three-quarters of households own the washing machine; other three quite frequent types
include collaborative consumption (sharing the WM with other flats in the house of flats),
leasing/ bought on credit, and landlords’ ownership, each amounting to 6 per cent of the share.
Speaking about countries specificities, less ownership in favour of the collaborative
consumption and using the landlords` WM is typical for Denmark. More owning and less
collaborative consumption is characteristic for Slovenia, whereas renting is more common in
the Netherlands (Figure 38 and Table 10).
Figure 38: Status of washing machine (in %)
0,00% 20,00% 40,00% 60,00% 80,00% 100,00%
Austria
Denmark
the Netherlands
Slovenia
not at all - 1 2 3 4 5 - absolutely
0 20 40 60 80 100
Washing machine
I/we bought it/got it
I/we use WMinour house of flat–
we payfor the use
I/we leased it/bought on credit
I/we use WM owned by our landlord
I/we rent it
I/we use the laundromat
Other
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 106 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Austria Denmark The Netherlands Slovenia Total
I/we bought it/got it 81.3% 62.3% 72.2% 85.4% 75.2%
I/we use WM in our house of flat – we
pay for the use
3.9% 16.4% 5.3% 0.7% 6.7%
I/we leased it/bought on credit 6.5% 6.3% 6.0% 6.6% 6.3%
I/we use WM owned by our landlord 3.2% 10.1% 6.6% 5.3% 6.3%
I/we rent it 3.2% 1.9% 5.3% 0.7% 2.8%
I/we use the laundromat 0.6% 0.0% 0.7% 0.0% 0.3%
Other 1.3% 3.1% 4.0% 1.3% 2.4%
Table 10: Status of the washing machine in the cross-country comparison
43 per cent of respondents wash once or twice a week, three or four times a week is a typical
frequency for 27 per cent. In this aspect, the Danish respondents show less frequent washing;
however, this is probably due to the higher number of Danish singles in the sample (Figure 39).
Figure 39: Frequency of washing
6.2.2 The main results of statistical analysis
This analytical part covers several areas of consumers` approach to washing: their experience,
motivation and barriers related to different kinds of access-based consumption are explored.
Additionally, the desired features of the washing machine are investigated in the end. Each topic
is presented in the form of frequency counts for the whole research sample, followed by a bivariate
analysis which uncovers meaningful and statistically significant differences and strength
of associations for countries or consumers` socio-demographic and behavioural
characteristics.17
6.2.2.1 Experience with access-based consumption
The consumers are rather inexperienced when it comes to access-based consumption; among
the three types inquired, the renting is the most common way with almost 47 per cent of
consumers who rented something at least once. The renting experience is similar across the
17
Several methods of bivariate analysis have been applied, namely measures of Association (Cramer´s V,
Spearman rank correlation, ANOVA)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Austria
Denmark
the Netherlands
Slovenia
less than once a week 1-2 times per week
3-4 times a week more than 4 times a week
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 107 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
countries. The Austrians have less experience with both pay per use and collaborative
consumption. In Slovenia, there are more people who tried pay per use once or twice (see the
appendix for exact data).
Figure 40: Experience with access-based consumption
The experience decreases with the age of consumers – the younger the customer is, the more
often he/she uses access-based consumption (F = 12.11, p= 0; F = 21.33, p = 0; F = 12.34, p = 0).
In the group of washing machine owners, all three access-based consumption models are less
frequent: this is evident specifically for pay per use (Cramer`s V = 0.270, p = 0.00) and
collaborative consumption (Cramer`s V = 0.304, p = 0.00). For the renting the relation to
ownership is weaker (Cramer`s V = 0.134, p = 0.004). The data suggest that washing machine
owners prefer the ownership also of other products than washing machine as this group is
underrepresented in the answer of “often” – another way round: the people who often use any
kind of access-based consumption own the washing machine less frequent.
The experience is related to many consumers’ characteristic. In short, the experience with
access-based consumption is related to:
- Approach to innovations and new technology (innovators and early adopters have
more experience)
- Eco-friendliness (positive relationship)
- A higher level of education (positive relationship)
- Location in towns (positive relationship)
Just for renting, intensive washing frequency, higher income and gender (males) are also
positively related to extensive experience.
6.2.2.2 Renting of washing machine
Out of diverse motives of transition from owning to renting, the following four factors seem to
be the most relevant (Figure 41):
- Getting rid of the responsibility for washing machine maintenance (if maintenance is
offered together with renting)
- Smaller risk of breakdowns due to professional maintenance done by a service
company and due to the high quality of washing machine (within renting usually higher
quality machines are provided)
- Opportunity to test the washing machine (e.g. brand I would like to have)
- Environmental concerns (renting requires durable products that operate for a longer
time)
71
62
53
21
33
40
8
6
7
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Collaborative consumption
Pay per use
Renting
No experience Once or twice OftenD
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 108 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
The aspect of cost/money is relevant, but to some extent only.
Figure 41: Motivators for renting of washing machine
Although there are severaldifferences across countries, only two of them are of higher statistical
power – both refer to Slovenia. In this market, the customers are substantially more motivated
for renting by the opportunity to test the washing machine (without buying it; adjusted
residuals = 5.3) and by environmental concern (adjusted residuals = 3.7).
The sociodemographic characteristics are not related to motivation. Among other consumers’
characteristics, four of them are related to motivation for renting (Table 11):
 New product approach – consumers profiling themselves as more innovative towards
new technologies would like to avoid the upfront cost and declare to have a lesser
interest in ownership; they are more considerate to environmental protection.
 Eco-friends share the motives with the above group, but testing, cheaper cost and risk
avoidance are relevant too.
 Washing machine ownership is negatively related to factors of no reason for buy and
other reasons.
Lower age is associated with higher importance of six motivators.
no
upfront
cost
no
reason
to buy
it is
cheaper
to test no
responsibility
no risks enviro. other
reasons
New product
approach
-.111** -.178** -0.053 -.088* -0.034 -0.079 -.142** -0.045
Eco-friends .189** .120** .123** .136** .126** .170** .328** 0.071
Washing frequency -0.005 -0.010 -0.024 .092* 0.005 -0.020 -0.005 -0.059
WM owners -0.058 -.210** -.093* 0.043 0.014 0.009 -0.026 -.150**
Education 0.048 0.043 0.054 -0.005 0.038 0.077 .081* 0.021
Location 0.056 0.066 0.042 -0.025 0.026 0.050 0.009 0.016
Income -0.013 -0.063 0.029 -0.006 -0.034 -0.030 -0.012 -0.033
Gender 0.036 -0.002 0.053 0.038 -0.003 0.024 0.055 0.000
Age -,135** -,103* -,122** -,092* -0,054 -,092* -,164** -0,073
Note: ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed), * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Table 11: Renting - rank correlations between motivators and consumers factors
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
other reasons
no reason to buy
no upfront cost
it is cheaper
environment
to test
no risks
no responsibility
no to some extent yes
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 109 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
6.2.2.3 Pay per wash
The similar battery of items inquired the motivation for pay per wash system (Figure 42). The
relevance of factors for pay per wash is like those for renting. In countries comparison, only
the position of Slovenia is specific: the Slovenian consumer would be motivated more for pay
per wash by chance to test a new washing machine and to avoid the upfront cost.
Figure 42: Motivators for pay per wash (in %)
Among other consumers’ characteristics, the approach to innovations, eco-friendliness, age, and
washing machine ownership are associated with most of the factors, as apparent from the Table
12).
no
upfront
cost
it is
cheaper
to test no
respons.
no risks Enviro. Cost
overview
impress
others
Other
New prod.app. -.088* -0.064 -.093* -0.051 -0.018 -.098* -.087* -.196** -.097*
Eco-friends .215** .145** .185** .169** .200** .330** .183** .202** .088*
Washing freq. -0.025 -0.061 0.063 -0.014 -0.032 -0.008 -0.03 .083* -0.027
Age -.126** -.103* -.103* -0.073 -.092* -.133** -.090* -.167** -.138**
Edu. 0.074 .093* 0.031 .133** .102* .105* 0.063 0.073 0.023
Location .088* .085* -0.023 0.08 0.044 0.051 0.046 0.008 0.047
Income -.089* 0.005 -0.019 -0.023 -0.036 -0.037 -0.067 -0.059 -0.043
Gender 0.077 0.058 0.019 0.015 0.061 .083* 0.069 -0.061 -0.04
WM owners -0.07 -.123** -0.053 -0.024 -0.048 -0.036 -0.055 -.232** -.314**
Note: ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed), * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Table 12: Pay per wash - rank correlations between motivators and consumers factors
Among barriers that could discourage people from pay per wash, the two are of the most
importance: insisting on ownership and the belief that pay per wash is a more expensive
option in the end compared to owning. To the contrary, fear of personal data leakage or misuse
is rather limited.
The view on barriers is uniform across countries. The association of barriers with other
consumers’ characteristics is sporadic: pay per wash as an expensive alternative is perceived by
0 20 40 60 80 100
other reasons
impress others
it is cheaper
no upfront cost
to test
cost-overview
environment
no risks
no responsibility
no to some extent yes
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 110 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
older people and in the group of washing machine owners (this group puts more stress on the
factor of ownership as a barrier too). Preference of ownership is more important for those who
wash more frequent. For eco-friends, ownership is a barrier of lesser impact.
Figure 43: Barriers to pay per wash (in %)
6.2.2.4 Collaborative consumption
The first battery of question covered diverse motives that would persuade the consumers to get
involved in collaborative consumption. The most relevant factors are as follows (in decreasing
order - Figure 44):
 Flexibility – getting rid of the ownership ties
 The belief that washing would be cheaper
 Avoiding upfront purchasing cost
 Environmental concerns
 To get rid of the responsibility for washing machine maintenance
Figure 44: Motives for collaborative consumption (in %)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
other
provider knows too much
insuffiicient data protection
anxiety
financial liability
missing knowledge
more expensive
owning preference
no to some extent yes
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Other
impress others
socialize
no need to buy
no responsibility
to test
environment
no upfront cost
it is cheaper
flexibility
no to some extent yes
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 111 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
The countries differ in the above motives in minor aspects only – generally, the perception of
motives is shared across all the four countries. Like results for renting, also in case of
collaborative consumption Slovenian would be more motivated by chance to test the products.
The issue of getting rid of the responsibility for maintenance is stronger in this country too.
The association with consumers’ features is similar to previous results: the motivation is related
to approach to innovations (negative correlations in the table results from coding scheme –
lover innovativeness was coded with higher number), eco-friendliness, age, and washing
machine ownership (the relation is negative here – people who own washing machine
expressed lover motivation in seven out of ten factors). See Table 13.
no
upfront
cost
no need
to buy
it is
cheap
to test no resp. Enviro. flexibility impress
others
socialize Other
New product
app.
-.081* -.132** -.103* -0.064 -0.049 -0.075 -0.061 -.121** -.137** -,092*
Eco-friends .145** .127** .149** .102* .135** .230** .192** .156** .182** 0,05
Washing
freq.
-0.047 -0.04 -0.016 -0.067 -0.064 0.004 -0.026 0.041 -0.024 -0,079
Age -.129** -0.076 -
.120**
-0.054 -0.067 -.093* -0.068 -.156** -.083* -,095*
Edu. 0.078 0.065 .122** 0.033 0.051 .104* 0.062 0.028 0.009 0,055
Location -0.025 0.068 .092* -0.017 0.033 0.049 .084* 0.036 0.028 0,042
Income -0.075 -0.031 0.012 -0.036 -0.075 -0.071 -0.079 -.082* -0.06 -0,058
Gender -0.012 -0.077 -0.018 -0.039 -0.025 0.032 -0.038 -0.021 -0.053 -0,059
WM owners -.157** -.152** -.085* -0.052 -0.07 -0.049 -.106** -.252** -.147** -,230**
Note: ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed), * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Table 13: Collaborative consumption - rank correlations between motivators and consumers
characteristics
6.2.2.5 Refurbished and remanufactured washing machine
The vast majority of consumers (70%) have no experience with refurbished or remanufactured
products; this inexperience is slightly higher in Austria (78%) compared to the other countries.
No more substantial differences were identified across countries.
A battery of questions inquired the perception of these products in diverse aspects (Table 14).
For all respondents, regardless of their experience, the essential factor when thinking about
reman/refurbished washing machine is brand reputation. They also perceive such products as
inferior compared to new production. At the same time, a contradictory statement (reman is of
the same value as new productions) is present quite often too, suggesting that there might be
two or more consumer segments when it comes to reman/refurbished products views.
Surprisingly, out of seven aspects, it is just one that differs between the group of experienced
and inexperienced respondents: consumers with the experience with reman/refurbished
products are more afraid of problems with the reliability of washing machine after its
warranty period is over.
It is worth to mention that elderly people more disagree with most statements. No other
associations to consumers’ characteristics were identified.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 112 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
refurbishing/reman experience: no yes Total
brand reputation essential 3.36 3.35 3.36
reman is inferior 3.26 3.37 3.29
concern about hygiene 3.2 3.27 3.22
reman valued as new 3.19 3.27 3.21
reliability problems 3.13 3.36 3.2
less enviro. Impact 3.01 3.13 3.04
resources protection 2.96 3.12 3.01
Note: values represent means on scale 1 (fully disagree) to 5 (fully agree)
Table 14: Perception related to experience with reman/refurbished products
6.2.2.6 Ideal washing machine
The respondents expressed dis/agreement (on scale 1 (not at all) to 5 (absolutely)) with a battery
of statements describing diverse features of the washing machine. Overview of features that
were assessed is in the Table below.
I would like a washing machine that:
 is robust and durable so that it lasts longer
 is smart and Internet-connected so that I can manage and control washing online
 tells me in advance if something in the washing machine has to be cleaned or repaired
 works with my personal profile, so it recommends me how and when to wash (to
optimize water, energy and detergent consumption)
 is upgraded by the service provider so I can always have the up-to-date machine
 has an auto dose for the detergent (auto dosing washing machines will weigh your
clothes in the drum and set the perfect detergent amount automatically)
 an online calendar connection
 online expert advice (available 24 hours/7 days per week – tutorials, videos etc.)
 gives me information about energy and water consumption
 gives me information about the price for wash
Table : Overview of washing machine features assessed by consumers
The differences among features are not dramatic (see the Figure 45); using the mean as a
measure of central tendency – it spreads from 3.18 to 2.49 (least preferred feature). Three of
the most willing options include:
- a function that informs a consumer in advance about necessary cleaning or repair
(cleaning/repair warning)
- the up-to-date washing machine that is upgraded by the service provider (upgrading up
to date)
- a function displaying the price of the washing cycle (the price of washing cycle info)
Online calendar functionality is relatively less important, but it is the robustness that is required
at least.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 113 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 45: Features of an ideal washing machine
The view of consumers across countries is rather similar (see the figure depicting the differences
in the appendix), the only thing that can be distinguished is the view of Slovenian vs Dutch
consumers that is elaborated in the next section.
In terms of consumer characteristics, the specific association is identified for eco-friends – these
people are less interested in five out of ten assessed features. Elderly people and washing
machine owners are less interested in robustness of the machine and in online calendar
functionality.
6.2.2.7 Country profiles: The Netherlands vs Slovenia
After conducting several bi-variate tests and applying multivariate methods such as cluster
analysis and tree analysis, a significant difference among countries was identified in two of them
– in consumers from the Netherlands and Slovenia. Denmark and Austria are neither identical
nor “average”, but the consumers here share many views/preferences with each other as well
as with Dutch and/or Slovenian consumers – this does not allow for creation of a unique country
profile.
The following figures visualize those aspects that distinguish Slovenian and Dutch consumers
the most. In short, these factors are of higher importance in Slovenia in comparison to Dutch
customers:
The motivation for renting:
- Avoidance of up-front cost
- A chance to test new/other product
- Getting rid of responsibility for maintenance
- Environmental concerns
- Smaller risk of breakdowns due to professional maintenance
The motivation for pay per wash (same as above, plus):
- Better overview of the cost of washing
- To impress others
3,18 3,15 3,14 3,1 3,05 3,05 3,05
2,82 2,68
2,49
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 114 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Slovenians feel more anxiety related to PPW caused by limited knowledge of this business model
(its risks) and are more aware of data protection risks.
The biggest motivators for Dutch consumers are no responsibility and no risks (in case of renting)
and no risks and costs overview (in case of PPW).
Figure 46: Renting (in %)
Figure 47: PPW (in %)
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
the Netherlands Slovenia
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
80,00%
the Netherlands Slovenia
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 115 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 48: PPW barriers (in %)
6.2.3 Conjoint analysis
6.2.3.1 Research goal and methodology for the conjoint analysis part of the pilot
survey
As the new circular business model for Gorenje demonstrator might mean a substantial change
for customers, assessment of market readiness is essential for its successful implementation.
However, market acceptance can depend even on details in the business model configuration.
The problem is that empirical testing of such details/particularities would require multiple
(representative) studies (in multiple countries) and that would go far beyond the pilot survey.
For this reason, we focused in detail on one aspect only within the pilot survey (the pricing),
even though the demonstrator has already started with detailing diverse product versions
(labelled as the Gold, Silver, and Bronze provisionally). Reliable testing the product design in its
full complexity/completeness would be impossible due to both the methodological issues and
resource constraints.
The research aim for conjoint analysis is twofold:
RQ1: What is the customers` view on the pricing of pay per wash (willingness to pay, the
payment scheme)?
RQ2: What are the customer differences in pricing perception across the four countries?
Conjoint analysis belongs to the group of the most frequently used method/research design in
marketing studies focusing on customer research. Specifically, it is able to provide a deeper
understanding of customers’ preferences – the understanding that is usually more reliable than
a traditional, simple scale-based assessment of preferences (the researched factors). The main
benefits come from the fact that conjoint analysis requires the respondents (the customers) to
CONsider the factors JOINTly. In other words, the customers are not asked to assess the
potential factors (e.g. affecting the purchasing decision) one by one on scale measure
(agree/disagree; important/unimportant), but they express the preferences by assessing
(sorting/ranking) the virtual products called the profiles. Each profile contains a specific
combination of factors (the different levels of product attributes). From the ranked list of
profiles, the statistical tools infer the importance of each factor (the attribute and its levels).
Working with virtual products rather assessing some factors on the scale is what classify the
conjoint analysis as an experimental method.
0,00%
5,00%
10,00%
15,00%
20,00%
25,00%
30,00%
35,00%
40,00%
45,00%
50,00%
anxiety - no anxiety - to
some
extent
anxiety -
yes
data
protection -
no
data
protection to
some
extent
data
protection -
yes
the Netherlands Slovenia
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 116 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Conjoint analysis is especially beneficial, if the factors to be assessed (product attributes) are
inter-related and if there is a trade-off between some of the factor (such as product price vs
product quality). For this reason, the conjoint analysis was employed for the analysis of pay per
wash pricing.
The conjoint method was applied in a traditional way – the respondents ranked the profiles from
the most preferable to the least. Instead of physical cards, the respondents manipulated with a
virtual profile on the screen of their computer; the conjoint analysis was conducted online as a
part of the customer's surveys. The instruction was as follows:
“The cards (product profiles) below represent diverse washing options. Please rank the cards in
terms of your preferences (drag them by mouse and drop them in the right-hand box). At the top
of your list, there will be the most preferable (the most desired) washing option, whereas the
least willing one will be put on the bottom.”
The analysis focused on four products attributes (each containing three levels) – price, payments
scheme, condition of mashing machine, and contract duration. The levels of attributes are
summarized in the next table.
Price for one wash cycle
Austria: 0,40 Eur 0,80 Eur 1 Eur
Denmark: 3 DKK 6 DKK 7,5 DKK
the Netherlands: 0,40 Eur 0,80 Eur 1 Eur
Slovenia: 0,30 Eur 0,60 Eur 0,80 Eur
Contract duration
flexible (monthly) yearly long-term (5 years)
Washing machine condition
New As new (ca. 5 years) Re-used (ca. 10 years)
Billing scheme
Pre-paid (and pay up the rest) Post-billed Instant (directly after laundry event)
Table 15: Product attributes tested in CA
The number of attributes (and their levels) was balanced with the statistical requirements for
conjoint method: The higher number of attributes enters the analysis, the higher cognitive load
for respondents is necessary, as more attributes requires more product profiles to be ranked
(for keeping the same level of statistical significance of the regression model).
The four attributes with three levels each resulted in nine profiles through the procedure of
orthogonal design in the SPSS. These nine profiles were supplemented by two additional,
holdout profiles that are not used for parameters calculation, but for statistical testing of the
statistical model behind the conjoint analysis. The example – the complete list of profiles for
Austrian survey - can be found in the appendix. To rank eleven profiles is the quantity which is
within the recommended limits of cognitive load for respondents as suggested by the literature.
Nevertheless, the number of cases with incomplete answers relating to the conjoint part of the
survey (the cases with missing values) reached 37%. The high amount of missing values can be
traced back to the high load for respondents compared to other questions in the survey. The
no-response was extreme in the case of Slovenia, where 47% of respondents omitted the
conjoint part of the survey.
The final sample size for each country was around 100 cases (for exact sample sizes see the table
below), which was enough for conjoint model calculation as documented in the next section of
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 117 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
results. The ranking of the eleven profiles took the respondents 177 sec (approx. three minutes)
as measured by 5% trimmed mean on data from an online survey system. The ANOVA
supplemented by post-tests didn’t indicate any cross-country differences in time the
respondents spent on this task.
All cases The final sample for CA Missing cases
Country Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Freq. Freq. in %
Austria 162 24.8 105 25.6 57 35.2%
Denmark 174 26.6 118 28.8 56 32.2%
Netherlands 157 24 102 24.9 55 35.0%
Slovenia 160 24.5 85 20.7 75 46.9%
Total 653 100 410 100 243 37.2%
Table 16: Initial and final sample for CA
6.2.3.2 The initial model for conjoint analysis
The initial model reflected the assumption about customer evaluation of the attributes as
follows: The increasing price for the product (pay per wash) was expected to lower the utility of
the product for customer – the relation in the conjoint model was set as linear and decreasing
(linear less). The contract duration was also linear and decreasing as longer contracts should
decrease the utility by diminishing the flexibility for customers. For the condition of the washing
machine and for payment (billing) scheme, there was no assumption – both the factors were
modelled as a discrete (nominal) variable.
Product attribute Utility definition
Price for one wash cycle:
0.40 Eur 0.80 Eur 1 Eur (values for Austria)
Contract duration:
flexible (monthly) yearly long-term (5 years)
Washing machine condition:
New As new (ca. 5 years) Re-used (ca. 10 years)
Billing scheme:
Pre-paid Post-billed Instant
Linear less
Linear less – original
model
Discrete – second model
Discrete
Discrete
Table 17: The utility definition for CA
The analysis – calculated for each country separately - indicated an extensive number of
reversals, which are the cases not meeting the expected utility profile in one or more attributes.
In approx. one-third of cases, the contract duration was evaluated opposite to expectation: the
longer duration, the higher utility it brings (see table below). Based on this, the model was respecified
so that contract duration was set as a discrete (nominal) attribute. The final number
of reversals dropped to those related to price (second line in the table below). All the results
presented further on in this study refer to the second model, in which the contract duration
is set as a discrete variable (without any utility profile specified in advance). The conjoint
analysis was calculated for each country individually, and the fifth calculation included all
respondents regardless of their country of origin (in the further text labelled as “together”). All
the models are statistically significant (see the table with the model fit).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 118 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Austria Denmark NL Slovenia Together
Reversals in contract duration 35 33 35 26 129
Reversals in price 23 36 28 26 113
1 reversal 40 47 41 34 162
2 reversals 9 11 11 9 40
Table 18: Reversal in the initial model
Model evaluation Austria Denmark Nl Slovenia Together
Pearson`s R 0.985 0.989 0.998 0.978 0.989
Sig. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Table 19: Final model fit
6.2.3.3 Results of CA
In the first part of the analysis, the importance of each attribute for purchasing behaviour is
analysed and compared among countries. In the next step, each attribute is elaborated in terms
of utility associated with different attribute level18
and – again – the four markets are compared.
The most remarkable similarity across countries refers to the contract duration - it is the most
important factor for decision making in all countries (see Table 20 and Figure below). The
distance from remaining attributes is largest in Austria; the washing machine status, payment
scheme, and price are distinctively less powerful, and their importance is comparable. For the
Netherland, the price is a characteristic feature, because in no other country the price takes the
second position among factors, it is third or fourth (Austria). For Denmark, the contract duration
and washing machine status are of similar importance; whereas in Slovenia, the result suggests
a rather equal role of all the factors except for contract length. The profiles of countries as
depicted in the figure below.
Attribute importance (%) Austria Denmark Nl Slovenia Together
Contract duration 31.214 27.493 29.395 27.951 29.014
Washing machine status 23.207 26.065 23.780 24.982 24.540
Payment scheme 23.508 21.817 20.416 23.281 22.205
Price 22.072 24.626 26.409 23.786 24.241
Table 20: Attribute importance
18 From the ranked list of profiles, the statistics calculate part-worth utilities. These utilities are numeric expressions
estimating the value for the consumer that is associated with each particular attribute`s level. The summation of partworth
utilities for attributes` levels of specific product measures the total utility of the product for the customer.
Next, the comparison of part-worth utilities expresses the preference for attributes and their levels (for details see
Lieder et al., 2018).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 119 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 49: Comparison of attributes priorities in four countries and for the whole sample
For product variant assessment and for product optimization, the main inputs are presented in
Table, which contains the part-worth coefficients (estimating the utility associated with the
particular attribute level). The sum of the part-worth coefficients (together with the constant)
measures the utility of the whole product as perceived by customers. If the calculation is
conducted flawlessly, the highest utility is associated with the product profile, which the
respondents preferred most often (see Table 21).
Part-worth coefficients Austria Denmark Nl Slovenia Together
Contract duration:
Flexible 0.454 0.545 0.467 0.302 0.452
Yearly 0.384 0.223 0.131 0.275 0.252
Long-time -0.838 -0.768 -0.598 -0.576 -0.704
Washing machine condition
New 0.241 0.463 0.438 0.431 0.393
As-new 0.083 -0.215 -0.255 -0.263 -0.159
Re-used -0.324 -0.249 -0.183 -0.169 -0.235
Payment
Pre-paid 0.006 0.028 0.245 -0.125 0.045
Post-paid -0.200 -0.311 -0.271 -0.176 -0.245
Instant 0.194 0.282 0.026 0.302 0.200
Price – pay per wash
Low price -0.724 -0.729 -0.770 -0.855 -0.764
Mid -1.448 -1.458 -1.539 -1.710 -1.528
High -2.171 -2.186 -2.309 -2.565 -2.291
the constant 6.448 6.458 6.539 6.710 0.348
Note: for the price, which was the only attribute modelled as linear, the utilities for low price express the beta
coefficients (regression coefficient). The mid and high prices are then calculated as the beta multiplied by two (midlevel
price) and three (high-price).
Table 21: Part-worth coefficients
The Figure 50 visualizes the distribution of answers to the question about the most preferred
product profile. For approx. ¼ of respondents the most preferred one was the profile no 7. (new
washing machine, monthly contract duration, price of 0.40 Eur, pre-paid) and for 17 per cent of
respondents, it was profile no.2 (re-used washing machine (10 years), yearly contract, price of
0.40 Eur, instant payment).
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Austria Denmark the Netherlands Slovenia together
Importanceof attributes
Contract duration Washing machine status Payment scheme Price
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 120 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 50: Frequencies of the most preferred profiles
For each respondent, the conjoint procedure generated utility estimations for all attribute levels
and from these estimations, it derived the utility of each profile (that can be interpreted as
customer preference for profile). Employing these profile utilities, we can analyse the
respondents -the means for four countries are in Table 22 below: Red colour highlights the
higher values, whereas low values are in blue. The result is similar to the one in the figure above
(which took the most preferred profile into consideration only, positions on second and other
remaining position was neglected). The least preferred is profile 11 (re-used washing machine
(10 years), 5-year contract, 1 EUR and pre-paid).
The analysis of variability provides supplementary information: The second part of Table 22
(St.dev/Mean) shows the unity in profiles assessment (cells in blue colour) and the divergences
(cells in red colour). It is apparent that the preference for profile no. 7 (the highest rated profile)
is unified, whereas in case of the least preferred profile (no. 11) such unity is missing. The colours
also uncover a slightly different position of Slovenians respondents; except for no. 11 (least
preferred profile), their view is slightly more uniform (as expressed by blue-colour cells in Table).
Table 22: Utilities of profiles (Score 1 – 11) and variability across respondents
0,0
5,0
10,0
15,0
20,0
25,0
30,0
35,0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Distribution of the most prefered product profile
Austria Denmark the Netherlands Slovenia
Mean
SCORE1 SCORE2 SCORE3 SCORE4 SCORE5 SCORE6 SCORE7 SCORE8 SCORE9 SCORE10 SCORE11
Austria 5,01 5,98 4,93 4,76 4,60 5,47 6,43 4,86 4,77 4,70 3,12
Denmark 4,88 5,99 4,99 4,99 4,98 5,04 6,77 4,66 4,44 4,65 3,28
the Netherlands 4,47 5,74 5,01 5,01 4,87 5,12 6,92 4,68 4,65 4,53 3,69
Slovenia 4,49 6,26 4,96 5,41 5,16 4,89 6,46 4,93 4,84 4,67 3,27
Total 4,73 5,98 4,97 5,02 4,89 5,14 6,65 4,77 4,66 4,64 3,34
St.dev/Mean
Austria 0,53 0,44 0,46 0,53 0,44 0,34 0,38 0,42 0,47 0,47 0,74
Denmark 0,51 0,42 0,46 0,52 0,44 0,37 0,36 0,40 0,48 0,53 0,75
the Netherlands 0,55 0,52 0,44 0,50 0,47 0,34 0,32 0,38 0,46 0,49 0,69
Slovenia 0,55 0,40 0,41 0,49 0,37 0,40 0,40 0,39 0,53 0,51 0,76
Total 0,53 0,45 0,44 0,51 0,43 0,36 0,36 0,40 0,48 0,50 0,73
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 121 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
6.2.3.4 Analysis of attribute levels
The contract duration is the most important factor in customers’ decision – accounting for 29
per cent of the impact on average. As described in the methodological section of conjoint
analysis part, the contract duration was expected to be (negatively) related to the utility for
customers, but the high number of reversals (the respondents answer contradicting this
hypothesis), in the final calculation it was modelled as a nominal variable. The part-worth
coefficients taken from the Table 21 and visualised in Figure below put shed on the root of the
problem – for Austria and Slovenia, the flexible (monthly) and yearly contracts both generate
similar positive utility, much different from the 5-year long contract, with the negative effect on
utility. This explains why it would be ineffective to model the attribute as linear.
Apparently, the country comparison suggests that the respondents can be divided into two
groups according to the contract duration: Austria and Slovenia vs Denmark and the Netherlands
– in the latter group, it is sensible to distinguish between monthly and yearly contracts.
Figure 51: Part-worth coefficients for the contract duration
In terms of washing machine condition (Figure 52), the customers form the Netherlands, and
Slovenia shares their view: the re-used (approx. 10 years old washing machine) is preferred over
as-new (5 years old) – see Figure below. Unfortunately, the quantitative study is unable to
uncover the motivation for this result. In other words, this analytical outcome would deserve
further research to find out any explanation of the phenomena. The order of preferences in
Austria and Denmark is similar; however, Austria is the only country, where the as-new washing
machine increases the total utility for customers (the part-worth coefficient is positive). The new
washing machine is the most preferred choice generally.
-1
-0,8
-0,6
-0,4
-0,2
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
Austria Denmark the Netherlands Slovenia
Contractduration
Flexible Yearly Long-time
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 122 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 52: Part-worth coefficients for washing machine condition
The price is the only attribute that is perceived similarly in all four countries: the higher price for
one washing cycle leads to the lower whole utility (Figure 53). As described above, the price as
a factor is more important for Dutch customers.
Figure 53: Part-worth coefficients for price levels (pay per wash)
To the contrary to the price attribute, the payment scheme differs substantially across the
countries: The only thing that is shared is the negative approach to post-paid option (see the
orange-colour bars in the Figure below). In Austria and Denmark, the instant (online) payment
is the most preferred choice. The customers here are indifferent towards pre-paid system – this
option adds an only negligible amount of utility. Instant payment is the only positive option for
Slovenian customers. Dutch customers` preferences don’t resemble any another country:
Instant payment is not relevant for them; the only sensible choice is pre-paid scheme.
The diversity in perception of payment scheme needs to be relativized for practical usage: As
stated at the beginning of the analytical part, the importance of payment scheme is the lowest
among all the four attributes - that is also apparent from the low values of part-worth
coefficients for payment scheme (the values on vertical axis in Figure 54).
-0,4
-0,3
-0,2
-0,1
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
Austria Denmark the Netherlands Slovenia
Washing machine condition
Washing machine condition - new As-new Re-used
-3
-2,5
-2
-1,5
-1
-0,5
0
Austria Denmark the Netherlands Slovenia
Price
Low price mid high
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 123 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 54: Part-worth coefficients for the diverse option of payment scheme
6.2.3.5 Identification of customer segments
The calculated part-worth utilities can be interpreted regardless of their nationality. In other
words, all the respondents can be grouped based on attributes` evaluation – the expressed
customers` preferences. The segmentation / clustering in the next text employed the utilities
calculated in the conjoint analysis only, without any additional socio-demographic data. The aim
was to test the existence of specific segments and to uncover their characteristic features.
Methodologically, the complete sample of 410 cases was clustered by Ward`s method (distance
measured as Squared Euclidean distance) into three clusters – the decision about a number of
clusters was based on Proximity distance as calculated in the hierarchical cluster analysis. All the
variables used for clustering have statistically different means across the cluster (as tested by
ANOVA) suggesting the good quality of final clustering. The importance of each variable for
clustering is summarized in Figure 55 – the utility associated with 5-year and monthly contract
duration, and price (beta coefficient) is the most relevant for cluster membership of
respondents. To the contrary, the options of a new washing machine and pre-paid system are
the factors with least distinguishing power, as these choices are perceived positively/neutrally
by the vast majority of respondents
As a result of clustering, the sample split into uneven groups – the first includes almost half of
respondents (Cluster 1), the second (Cluster 2) makes 30 per cent and the third (Cluster 3)
remaining 21 per cent.
-0,4
-0,3
-0,2
-0,1
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
Austria Denmark the Netherlands Slovenia
Paymentscheme
Pre-paid Post-paid instant
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 124 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 55: Cluster structure description and predictors importance (squared eta coefficients)
Cluster 1: – Price-sensitive Consumers - with its 49% respondents represents the most typical
customer: It is the customer with high price sensitivity meaning that any increase in price in pay
per wash diminishes the utility much more than in the other two groups. This customer prefers
instant payment and dislikes the post-payment scheme. Long contract duration (5 years) is
unacceptable; the optimal duration is one-year; monthly contracts are acceptable too. In terms
of the washing machine, the view is not clear-cut: A new machine is preferred over reused (10
years), but the utility loss associated with the as-new washing machine is not so extensive and
could be potentially compensated with the right mix of other attribute levels (e.g. price).
Cluster 2: Long-term Consumers - includes customers with mostly opposite preferences as
compared to Cluster 1: the customers of Cluster 2 are the least price sensitive. They refuse very
old washing machines and prefer a new one, but the as-new condition is also desired and can
be accepted without any problems. The standard deviations of utilities related to washing
machine condition are very high suggesting the view on this attribute is not uniform (see the
Appendix). Cluster 2 is focusing on long term contracts; shorter contract duration is rejected.
The optimal payment is the post-paid (pre-paid could also be accepted – the potential loss in
the utility is rather small).
Cluster 3: Flexible consumers - representing 21 per cent of customers is strongly focused on
flexibility in contract duration. Monthly contract brings very high utility for these people (the 5year
contracts are unacceptable). Other attributes are not so important - the newer machines
are preferred over the older; the instant payment is the optimal choice for them. Their price
sensitivity is rather low.
199
49%
124
30%
87
21%
Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6
Pre-paid
New WM
Yearly contract
As new WM
Instat payment
Reused WM
Post-paid
Price
Monthly contract
5-year contract
Predictor importance
-1,5
-1
-0,5
0
0,5
1
Cluster 1
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 125 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 56: Clusters comparison
6.2.3.6 Summary of CA results
The outputs of conjoint analysis can be interpreted from the whole sample perspective, or from
cross-country comparison, or customer segments, which ignore the nationality of respondents.
The cross-country analysis and segmentation study were enabled by relatively large sample size;
the conclusions from this group comparison have a direct link for managerial implications that
are summarized as follows:
 Out of the four tested attributes, the contract duration turned out to be the most influential
factor for customers’ decision. On the other side, the evidence suggests that the payment
scheme is the least influential. This conclusion is based on the average customer, but for
some groups of customers it could be relevant or even the most important factor.
 The analysis of variance indicates that customers are quite certain in their choices
concerning preferred products, but it is not the case when it comes to unpreferred options
This high variance raises the question of segmentation. The uniform view on customers
might not work well here.
 Austria is the only country, in which washing machine in the as-new condition is positively
assessed by typical customers – besides the new washing machine, which is the choice
related to positive utility in all countries.
 The contract duration should be set to one month (i.e. flexible contracts) in the Netherlands
and Denmark specifically. The Austrians and Slovenians are indifferent in terms of monthly
-1,2
-1
-0,8
-0,6
-0,4
-0,2
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
Cluster 2
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Cluster 3
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 126 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
and yearly contracts leaving more room for choices about product design specification. If
there is just one product version to be launched on the market, it should avoid long term
contract in any of the countries, because as such a choice would decrease the utility for
customer substantially.
 In the same vein, the post-paid option of billing scheme is ineffective for a typical customer
in all countries.
 By neglecting the country affiliation, three customer segments can be distinguished. In
terms of interpretation and managerial implications, working with these three clusters is
more effective than cross-country comparison, because the differences among typical
(“average”) representants of countries are rather small. The three segments enable better,
more complex understanding of diverse customers wishes/needs:
o Price-sensitive Consumers: The most typical customer (49%) is highly pricesensitive
(for pay per wash payment), prefers one-year contract, and besides a
new washing machine he/she is willing to consider a reused washing machine
as well (Cluster 1)
o Long-term Consumers: Customers of Cluster 2 (30%) can be labelled as longterm
customers, as they prefer 5-year contract with a new or as-new (5 years
old) washing machine. A specific feature of this group is its price insensitivity.
o Flexible consumers: The smallest Cluster 3 (21%) represents customers
requiring flexibility (monthly contract duration), new washing machines
supplemented by choice of instant payment. The price sensitivity is low.
6.3 Internal environment
On the market of WM, GOR profiles themselves as experts for washing who take over this task
from customers, who need not care for washing anymore. This ambition is closely related to the
focus on smart products. In recent years, higher customer demands stimulated Gorenje to the
extension of its product lines and product varieties. This process was accompanied with further
development of products` functionalities, resulting in higher complexity of products and the
production. In that way, the focus on digitisation (smart product, the IoT, and Ana bot19
in
Slovenia (or Anna bot for other countries), on the one hand, the planned upgrade of internal
company-wide information system - including ERP – on the other) is a natural follow-up of the
past steps. The digital strategy is further speeded up due to Gorenje’s takeover by China’s
Hisense Electric.
In contrast to smart production, the circularity concept is much more in the beginning: Gorenje
didn’t focus on reuse or remanufacturing in the past. The attention was paid to forward logistics,
and the reverse one was not among corporate priorities. From this perspective, a circular
business model is a big challenge, which impact is of long-term, strategic nature - even for
practical reasons: the development of a new WM model takes around 3 years of teamwork.
Gorenje doesn’t start its circularity activities from scratch: It can draw on the knowledge
accumulated during the Rescom project (Resource Conservative Manufacturing - the European
Union’s Seventh Programme for research, technological development and demonstration; No
603843), in which Gorenje was one of the project partners. Another source of circular economy
19
Ana bot is Gorenje´s virtual shopping assistent helping consumers with online advices
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 127 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
related knowledge can also stream from Sweden`s Asko company, the Gorenje’s subsidiary,
which expertise covers the design and design methods in particular.
Circular model is one of the ways (but not the only), where Gorenje is looking for new business
opportunities.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 128 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
7 Current business models
Following subchapters describe current business models of both demonstrators (in context to
the product and problems solved in the ReCiPSS projects). For the detailed circular business
model development, more information should be incorporated to be able to elaborate on
innovative dimensions and processes.
7.1 Current business model - Bosch
In the automotive sector repair services, remanufacturing and dealing with used vehicles are a
common and established practice. Vehicle manufacturers and parts suppliers, like Bosch, have
established delegated divisions to serve this market. This is where the corporate division
Automotive Aftermarket (AA) of Bosch comes in because it is specialized to provide products,
know-how and services for the automotive aftermarket.
As a first step in understanding the business model of remanufacturing at AA, the value
proposition canvas is presented (Figure 57). Starting with the customer profile, the targeted
customer segment is a generalized workshop. Thereby, it is important to consider that the
market has multiple trade levels. Starting with the remanufacturing plant, the parts supplier
(Bosch AA), followed by wholesalers with local dealer network, the automotive repair shop and
finally the vehicle owner as the end customer. Consequently, the customer in this business
model, who makes the decision whether to buy a remanufactured part or not is the repair shop,
not the end customer. Additionally, the market is divided in several trade channels, the service
organisation of the care manufacturer (Original Equipment Services OES) and the independent
aftermarket (IAM).
The main task of the repair shop is to ensure the maintenance of a car because end customers
go to repair shop to get their vehicles repaired. Therefore, the demand of the repair shop is the
long-term spare parts supply. There are various gains and pains for the repair shop by carrying
out its tasks. One gain for the repair shop is to offer a most reasonable and high-quality repair
service to the end customer. Thereby, another gain is to have a high customer loyalty. Normally
the OES sales channel is dominating the service for newer vehicles, losing their market after
three and seven years to the IAM dominating the aftermarket for older vehicles. This time span
emerges through the fact that within the first two years all repairs are covered by the warranty
of the car manufacturer and afterwards the situation arises in which end customers must pay
for their repairs and often second hand vehicle owners have less loyalty to the vehicle
manufacturer. Consequently, they switch between the offers provided by the repair shops.
Therefore, a gain for the workshop is that the car remains in service. Lastly, revenue streams are
a gain for the customer. Pains for the repair shops are high costs for the end customer, long
repair times and too many cars blocking space in the repair shop if the workshop depends on
brand new produced original spare parts. To overcome this barrier, remanufactured parts are
provided, which are used by the workshop.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 129 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure 57: Value proposition of remanufacturing at Automotive Aftermarket
Turning to the value map of the value proposition canvas (Figure 57), the products offered to
the repair shops consist of a broad product portfolio of remanufactured parts for cars and
commercial vehicles. The remanufactured products feature the same high quality, durability and
warranty as a new product. Brands and customers’ brand awareness play an essential role when
selling remanufactured products. Remanufactured products are sold as a reasonably priced
solution, not a cheap solution which is offered on the market through reproductions from low
cost countries. These reproductions generally are of the same price as remanufactured ones but
feature a poorer quality with a durability of approximately 10 to 30 percent of a new part,
whereas the remanufactured version provides the full durability and quality. In addition to it,
the remanufactured spare part is immediately available, and it is to be installed easily.
Besides the sale of the remanufactured product, a return option is sold to incentivize the
workshop to return the defective part. Concretely, with the purchase of a remanufactured
product the workshop receives the right to sell back a defective part to the remanufacturer.
Once the wholesaler sells the remanufactured part to the repair shop, it collects the defective
part and returns the core to the remanufacturer, who in turn refunds the amount of the return
option. The invoice shows both the price for the remanufactured product and the amount of
the return option. Thereby, it is important to notice that the repair shop usually only considers
the price for the product, not the amount of the return option because the workshop assumes
that it is able to redeem the defective part and subsequently to receive the refund of the made
return option. The amount of the return option plays a crucial role. The amount should be at
least more than twice as high as the residual value of the core. The residual value is the value of
the core at the end of its service life, which is traded on the market, for example it is the price
that a specialised dealer would pay for the used part, the core. As a result, if the amount of the
return option is not significantly higher than the residual value, the customer has no incentive
to return the core to the remanufacturer.
The products offered create several results and advantages for the repair shops. First, the
remanufactured product can easily be assembled in the vehicle without requiring special
knowledge of the repair shop. Second, it has the same durability as a new part. Third, the
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 130 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
customer receives full warranty on the remanufactured product. Fourth, the remanufactured
part is on average up to 30 cheaper priced than a new part. In this way the end customer
obviously perceives the price difference, which is an advantage for the repair shop. The repair
shop can easily explain the price difference to the end customer by highlighting that in turn of
providing the remanufacturer with a defective part; the end customer purchases a like-new part
with the same quality, durability and warranty. Thus, the end customer choses a reasonably
priced solution in comparison to a new product. Lastly, the remanufactured part is quickly
available for the repair shop even for older vehicles. In this way the customer’s pains such as
high costs, long repair times and blocked space in the repair shop are relieved and the vehicle is
in a maintained condition.
As a result, a match between the customer profile on the left hand side and the value map of
the right hand side of the value proposition (Figure 57) is achieved, because the corporate
division Automotive Aftermarket addresses important tasks, solves severe issues and enables
substantial advantages, which are important for the repair shop. Achieving this match is the
cornerstone of creating vale propositions. Afterwards, the elements, customer segments and
value proposition are dovetailed with the business model canvas, illustrated in Figure 58.
Starting from the customer perspective (Figure 58), the distribution channel in the business
model is an automotive distribution network. This implies that AA does not directly sell the
products to workshops but rather to several trade levels upfront, including wholesalers and
buying groups, who sell the remanufactured products to workshops Through the return of the
core, AA promotes a stronger customer loyalty of the workshops. Bosch uses the CoremanNet
service network, provided by C-ECO, to fulfil the task. A particularly designed repair shop
concept is the main customer relationship instrument. The revenue streams are input-based
meaning that workshop pay for the delivered remanufactured products.
Figure 58: Business model of remanufacturing at Automotive Aftermarket
Turning to the right-hand side of the business model (Figure 2) which takes the infrastructure
perspective, the identified key resources in the business model are logistics, distribution,
qualified production workers, remanufacturing plants and financial expertise. The expert
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 131 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
stressed that conventional enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems cannot model circular
economy flows, hence 80 percent of the complexity of the business model lies on financial
issues. Option trading knowledge is of great significance meaning who acquired an option, when
does an option expire and are there any buying cooperation.
These key resources are the basis for the organization’s key activities which include collection
of cores and reverse logistics, remanufacturing of used automotive parts and distribution of
remanufactured parts. Furthermore, the communication of the value proposition is of foremost
importance for illustrating the advantages of a remanufactured product. For the
implementation of the activities collection of cores and reverse logistics, AA cooperates with the
reverse logistics partner CoremanNet. The last element of the business model is the cost
structure which describes all important costs incurring for key resources, key activities and key
partners.D
raft
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and
innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and
innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
7.2 Current business model Gorenje
The aim of this section is to outline the initial position of the company: its processes, factors and
open questions that are relevant for transformation toward the circular business since Gorenje's
current business is linear, rather than circular character.
VALUE PROPOSITION
Gorenje profiles itself as “Design-driven innovators” on household appliances market,
recognizing its responsibilities for social and environmental sustainability (“Gorenje Group 2017
annual report,” 2018, p. 19). The innovations focusing on aesthetics, ergonomics, and userfriendly
controls specifically, are the way Gorenje provides extra value/incentive to the
customers. Besides the innovations, the other value streams include “safe and high-quality
products and services, fair prices, quality and rapid service, and appropriate after-sales services
(“Gorenje Group 2017 annual report,” 2018, p. 23).
Gorenje washing machines´ value proposition for the European markets and different customer
segments (due to the relatively wide range of washing machines in the portfolio) differs to some
extent, however in average rests in familiarity, reliability, good value for money and in the
innovativeness and design/aesthetics.
CUSTOMER/CONSUMER SEGMENTS
Gorenje group operates under 8 brands, of which washing machines brand Gorenje and Asko
are the global ones, making 67.8% and 12.5 % of total revenues. The remaining sig brands
comprising other than washing machines products (Atag, Mora, Pelgrim, Etna Upo, and Körting)
are offered on local markets only.
In terms of market segments, the Asko are positioned as premium brands and Gorenje as mid,
and with some models could be perceived as almost the budget brands (“Gorenje Group 2017
annual report,” 2018). Asko machines are produced for both consumer and business or
professional market, while Gorenje only serves the consumer market (but of course could be
purchased by small businesses for instance in the hospitality sector).
CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIPS
For consumer communication, the common mix of media is employed, which include call centre,
product websites, social media, brand magazines, electronic newsletter, and promotional
materials (“Gorenje Group 2017 annual report,” 2018, p. 23). For Gorenje, as a company
operating internationally, the language translations are of importance: In numbers, it means
that Gorenje is running approximately 60 website presentations internationally in 40 languages.
Special attention is paid to the Internet in the communication strategy. Via the Internet, Gorenje
answers questions from customers, provides customer support and also collects feedback. To
be more specific: Gorenje does press clipping (media monitoring), which includes mass media
and customer communities (blogs, discussion forums, social networks). The company’s www
presentation (both global and local) are monitored by Google analytics. Market research
applying different methods for diverse topics /problems is also employed.
In general, getting feedback from the business partners (corporate customer, trading partners
– intermediaries) is more difficult. Gorenje makes on-site visits to the distributors once or twice
a year. The co-operation with some distributors is close: They prepare reports about end-
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 133 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
consumers for Gorenje; they collect and provide feedback (which otherwise would be a task for
Gorenje).
CHANNELS
For product distribution, Gorenje uses a hybrid model consisting of indirect and direct
distribution. Slovenia is a specific case, as this is the only country where Gorenje operates its
own e-shop, covering full product portfolio. The other 5 e-shops (for different countries)
typically sell an accessory for Gorenje’s products; in other words, the assortment is limited.
KEY PARTNERS
Gorenje develops a relationship to the distributors: The quality department collects feedback
from them (in a monthly video conference call) and takes this occasion for streaming
information both sides. The distributors inform about operations problems to get advice.
Gorenje informs the business partners about its plans. Having the information about short as
well as long plans, the distributors are not getting nervous about the future of the cooperation
(e.g. regarding the digitalization process, etc.).
KEY ACTIVITIES AND PROCESSES
Circularity related activities that are realised in the current business model include after-sale
service and reverse logistics. The extent of these activities at Gorenje and the experience with
them is rather limited: In some countries, the after-sale service is done by Gorenje themselves;
in the remaining markets, these services are outsourced to specialized companies.
Regarding the reverse logistics, the end-of-life products are disposed of according to the
national legislative requirements. In Slovenia, the collection and disposal of old washing
machines are in the responsibility of ZEOS (55 % of their shares are owned by Gorenje); the same
company can also fulfil the legislation requirements for Gorenje in countries where Gorenje
operates indirectly. In those countries, ZEOS pay the recycling fee for products introduced to
the market – the fee calculation is based on export data for a particular country. However,
reverse logistics in other countries is extremely limited.
The reverse flow also consists of 10 000 returned Gorenje’s products in an Internet shop.
Gorenje just recently (summer 2018) has started to map what happens with the return of
washing machines in their market. Mapping should reveal if any potential profit and business
exist, if the processes would be internalized to some extent and not realized by the second
parties as it is everywhere. Not only a financial loss but also an information loss could be the
result of outsourcing.
KEY RESOURCES AND CAPABILITIES
Research&Development and innovative capabilities, production, quality management, brand
image and brand position in some countries, IT solutions
COST STRUCTURE
Currently, costs are a barrier for circularity: remanufacturing and refurbishment are too costly
resulting in higher prices for remanufactured or refurbished products for the customer when
compared to brand new products. Transportation is another cost-related barrier: product
transportation to some central reprocessing facility result in relatively high costs, which further
limits the circularity principle.
Production costs, cost for R&D, for IT development and for marketing are the major categories
of costs currently.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 134 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
REVENUE STREAMS
Indirect sale of products via independent retailers represent the main revenue stream. Sales via
own e-shop are still relatively very small. Revenues from the sales of used products and excess
materials are very limited. Some revenue is from selling production waste.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 135 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
8 Target circular business models
In this chapter content of the circular business models (in Table 23 for Bosch and in Table 24 for
Gorenje) for both demonstrators is suggested base on the review of existing theoretical
knowledge and based on the empirical research within ReCiPSS project. Core ideas related to
the models that explain the key logic are introduced before models themselves and challenges
and questions concerning the individual elements which should be approached during the
demonstration are introduced after the models.
8.1 Circular business model Bosch
Three customer segments may be the targets for the demonstration of the IT platform with
interest to streamline the process of the cores return flow and being able to manage the planned
amount of spare parts on their forward route to customers and back.
Bosch eXchange programme partners and Bosch OE distributors are relatively easy to reach
and persuade to participate in the demonstration and/or in the involvement to the platform use
and after understanding and experiencing the benefits they may stay connected. The reason
behind this segment selection lies in the findings from the in-depth interviews regarding the
dependency between the major suppliers and trade level as a customer in the software
utilization – it is often the suppliers who equip their customers with the specific software.
IAM buying groups are – on the contrary – rather difficult to convince for the trial. They have
their own software (or other commercial software like i.e. SAP but tailored-made) and it is them,
who decide, which software to use. Core benefits of the platform must be very carefully
explained and small steps during the negotiation have to be done. Costs, time, flexibility,
excellence of all services offered through the cloud, scope of services and perception of a win
to use the cloud (first mover advantage?) are the key issues to persuade. Personal relationships
and some history of platform existence are important. Bosch as the important OEM can have
some bargaining power for the trial. Buying groups are potentially very perspective partners
because of the amount of the spare parts they trade with. But buying groups very seldom handle
the return processes. The targeted groups should belong to those, which do it.
Core-brokers – particularly in France – may be curious (if supported) if they are independent
players and their software is not the best one.
Platform functionality is highly dependent on the capability of the spare parts to be the IoT
product. If a spare parts become the IoT products they will be not only the physical objects but
the tangible things ”equipped with identifying, sensing, networking and processing capabilities
that will allow them to communicate with one another and with other devices and services over
the Internet to achieve some useful objective“ (Cortés et al, 2015). The capability of spare parts
to be the IOT product depends on many factors – features of the spare part (in some time) as
for instance size, perishability, durability, value; on the purpose of spare parts (except their basic
functionality and in terms of Circular economy the purpose can be repairability,
remanufacturability, recyclability, repeated usability); on the level of research development but
also financial resources (capability and ability to involve more smartness into the part) etc.
Depending on the capability of a spare part to be an IoT product the cloud platform may provide
different functions (Ben-Daya et al, 2017):
 Tracking the route of a part (and a core in reverse flows), it means to identify the actual
location, tracing the part and so to be able to identify the initial source (e.g. OEM) and/or
final destination (if known);
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 136 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
 Real time visibility and real time information of location and status (to some extent) as
well as of the amount of spare parts;
 Status tracking (quality) – to certain extent;
 Accompanied data and information tracking – e.g. conditions of parts use, deposit status
(paid, waiting for return, returned…)
The above mentioned functions enable:
 Advance planning and predictive modelling and decision making of related and
follow-up processes and needed capacities (e.g. transport, warehousing,
remanufacturing etc.) and
 Product assortment and sourcing across the supplier network (specially in case of
multiple sourcing);
 Real time performance tracking and performance data for analysis;
 Automated sharing (based on the contracts) of data and information about the
parts, cores, demands, supplies – so again the capacities of the platform members
can be optimised;
 More efficient inventory management (inventory accuracy; reduction of inventory
misplacement);
 Rerouting based on demand and automated deposit management redirection;
 Savings in scanning and recording the parts;
 Theft reduction.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 137 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Business vision
Become pioneers in the real circular cloud-based platform solutions for core management in
a global scope
A Customer segment (s)
A1 Existing Bosch (e.g. Bosch
eXchange programme partners) OE
distributors
A2 IAM buying group(s) A3 Core-broker(s)
B Value proposition for stakeholders in the system
B1 Cores route online tracking
B2 Transparency of the processes along the cores route
B3 “One-stop” database for forward and return data processing
B4 Cloud as the trading and exchange platform
B5 First-movers to cloud-based business world and industry 4.0 logistics
B6 Higher cores availability in the system
B7 Fast quality assessment and deposit transfer
B8 Credibility of cloud platform provider
B9 Compliance with existing and readiness to the new legislation and policies B10
Circular economy image – many informants are very conscious of the environmental
problems and policies and of the rapidly growing trend which strengthens the effort around
C Customer relationships
C1 Trust building
C2 Personal assistance
C3 Online support
C4 Membership
C5 Privacy assurance
D Channels
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 138 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
D1 Sales representatives
D2 Conferences
D3 Fairs and exhibitions
D4 News – own web, associations, professional media
D5 Seminars
D6 Meetings
D7 Trainings
D8 Events
D9 Web
D10 Social media (linkedin, youtube…)
D11 Word-of mouth
D12 Platform itself
E Key activities
E1 Software and hardware development
E2 Processes and functionality tracking
E3 Spare parts and cores tracking
E4 Money (deposit) flow tracking
E5 Advisory to customers
E6 Relationships maintenance
E7 Online advisory
E8 Standards development and certification
E9 Collection and other cores-related reverse logistics processes
F Key resources
F1 IT staff
F2 Intellectual property
F3 Process managers
F4 Sales and advisory service providing staff
F5 Quality managers specialized in software and hardware quality
F6 Standards
F7 Finance
F8 Cloud platform itself
F9 Quality diagnosis tools
G Key partnerships
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 139 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
G1 Server hosting services provider
G2 Universities
G3 Financial institutions
G4 Logistics services providers
H Costs structure
H1 Cloud maintenance and governance costs
H2 Intellectual property protection costs
H3 ICT development costs (staff)
H4 Server hosting costs
H5 Insurance
H6 Legal advisory costs
H7 Incentives to try the platform
I Revenue streams
I1 Efficiency improvement
I2 Lost opportunity avoidance Software sale
I3 Leasing of hardware
I4 Usage fee
I5 Software sale
I6 “Cross-selling” and “up-selling”
Table 23: Components of Bosch circular business models
Following issues should be examined and answered during the demonstration:
B VALUE PROPOSITION
B1 Cores route online tracking – due to the prevalent deposit system companies (Trade levels)
consider cores as their own property (their money are embedded in cores) and if they do not
know where their money is (or where their core is) they do not feel well.
B2 Transparency of the processes along the cores route – this proposition is interlinked with the
previous one. There is one major risk when reaching such value proposition – how high the
transparency should be at the expense of the security and privacy.
B3 “One-stop” database for forward and return data processing – the platform can solve
problems of – probably – many wholesalers who work with several software applications.
B4 Cloud as the trading and exchange platform – this proposition should respond to the existing
gap between demand and supply in the relationships between only a few partners. Placing cores
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 140 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
“online” may lead to closing this gap and to the reduction of waiting time until the stock is ready
to sell.
B5 First-movers to the cloud-based business world and industry 4.0 logistics = readiness.
B6 Higher cores availability in the system – reduction of potential losses.
B7 Fast quality assessment and deposit transfer – higher level of unification of the quality
assessment and reduction of waiting time for decision making.
B8 The credibility of the cloud platform provider – image of a reliable, responsible and wellknown
provider is crucial.
B9 Compliance with existing and readiness to the new legislation and policies – cores return and
remanufacturing as well as the sale of reman parts is global business with many cross-countries
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 141 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
processes and interlinkages, however legislation related to this business is national or regional
and may create barriers – for privacy, security, packaging etc.
B10 Circular economy image – many informants are very conscious of the environmental
problems and policies and of the rapidly growing trend which strengthens the effort around.
C CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIPS
C1 Trust building – being on the platform is extremely sensitive – this means that understanding
the components of trust and techniques and means for trust building is crucial (see Chapter
3.2.4).
C2 Personal assistance – especially in the beginning of platform operations online 24/7 personal
(face-to-face, online or telephone) assistance is needed.
C3 Online support – constant online passive and interactive support for various functionality
features must be offered.
C4 Membership – membership supports commitment and mutual knowledge and experience
sharing.
C5 Privacy assurance – data and information leakage protection from the technical and business
point of view presents key pillar of relationships.
D CHANNELS
At the beginning of the demonstration – or before – mutual development of platform
functionalities and various aspects is crucial.
D5, D6, D7 Visits, meetings, co-creation sessions promote commitment and interest.
D2 and D3 For the wider audience after the platform starts to be tested, conferences and fairs
and exhibitions are suitable.
E KEY ACTIVITIES
E1 continuous development and even co-creation in development and upgrading of platform
with the customers and other stakeholders is necessary which requires online communication.
E8 Standards development and certification – for many processes related to the cloud design
and cloud processes design as well as for the cloud development, specific standards should exist
- this is even more urgent with the global presence.
E8 Standards may be turned into the DIN or even ISO standards to be used for the certification.
F KEY RESOURCES
F1, F3, F4, F5, F9 4 IT staff, knowledge, the capability to keep pace with the digital revolution
and sales competencies and capabilities are the core for success.
G KEY PARTNERSHIPS
G1 Server hosting services provider – in case Bosch or C-ECO would not be the owner.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 142 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
G2 Universities – for the ICT development – innovative and creative solutions and source of job
applicants especially in IT.
G3 Financial institutions – for payments flow (connection to the platform should be solved).
G4 Logistics services providers – it is recommended to invite LSPs to join the platform to some
extent (product and core tracking, transport and other logistics services tracking and
transparency).
H COSTS STRUCTURE
H2 Intellectual property protection costs – it is possible that functionality of the platform will be
based on multiple parts coexistence – if possible such solutions should be protected.
H3 ICT development costs (staff) – probably the highest share of all costs – global sourcing can
be helpful but also with higher risks.
H4 Server hosting costs – depends on the ownership.
H5 Insurance – platform, processes, data protection should be insured.
H6 Legal advisory costs – in front, for contracts and for processes.
H7 Incentives to try the platform – trust is necessary to build, and trials could be beneficial.
REVENUE STREAMS
I1 Efficiency improvement in whole system gains for every member of the network joined in.
Efficiency improvement leads to potential higher profitability.
I2 Lost opportunity avoidance – lost opportunity can happen in the case if the sufficient quality
cores are thrown away like scrap or if complaints about the deposit return are not solved
properly. In the first case effective online tracking of cores and processes (e.g. quality checking)
with all documented and more or highly visible evidence can help to reduce wrong evaluation
of quality and hamper to throw away valuable core. In the second case service recovery should
be applied so customers are not dissatisfied.
I3 Leasing of hardware – rather questionable stream, however, could be considered in some
situations. This depends on hardware equipment elements that either enables the platform
functionality and complements the functionalities (e.g. smart connected quality checking
equipment or diagnosis tools). Such tools might be expensive and represent investment costs
for the platform network participants.
I4 Usage fees (for extra functionalities of the cloud service).
I5 “Cross-selling” and “up-selling” of additional products (diagnosis tools, computers) – depends
on the organisations involved in platform development and provision of all functions of the
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 143 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
platform and on their “possession” of the above mentioned products and on demand of the
network members.
I6 Software sale – for the clones of the software.
8.2 Circular business model Gorenje
The circular business model of Gorenje, as outlined so far, integrates circularity with digitization
strategy and propose three life cycles/stages for each product being offered within this business
model. In the testing phase (demonstration phase), 300 units should be brought to the markets.
The rationale behind the number of WM included in the demonstration is twofold. The number
is small enough to enable some improvisations (managerial, technical, logistics etc.). Second,
the quantity is possible to integrate with the current systems of Gorenje.
The demonstration model belongs to (semi-)professional product line (ASKO product line). As
the model expects to go through three life-cycles, its construction needs to withstand over
20 000 washings cycles. The model will be equipped with a Wi-Fi module (and some other
modules if needed, such as coin machine20
). Technologically, the Wi-Fi module implemented
into WM is an essential feature for implementation of both the IoT and CE. The Wi-Fi integration
with the WM is the biggest technical challenge for product development. After application in
this premium product line, the Wi-Fi module will be added to the middle class – Gorenje brand,
as well.
For the second and third-life washing machines, there are no special business models suggested
further. However, some implications within the components of BM are outlined below.
The following table explains the content of the components of suggested circular business
model for Gorenje.
Business vision
Become the global manufacturer of washing machine and provider of laundry pay per wash
system and so to help the planet and society to be sustainable and concurrently to ensure own
long-term sustainable competitiveness.
Customer segment(s) – consumer market
Demographics: Customers living in (bigger) towns or near bigger towns, with a higher level of education,
students, people who move often, single households, young couples:
who would do their laundry as much as possible carefree, who would like to test the machine, have an
environmental concern
and/or customers: who consider upfront costs
who like to have an overview of costs and consumption
who like to test something new
For the second and third life washing machines:
Younger or on the contrary older customers
20
Coin (or card or app-payment operated)– washing machine can be used in case of washing machine sharing, e.g.
in appartment building
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 144 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
price sensitive customers
environmentally focused customers
Austria Denmark Netherlands Slovenia
100 units (due to the
shorter distance to
manufacturer, dense
network of retailers,
quality and brandsensitive
demand)
foreigners often moving
students
young couples
costs and investment
sensitive people
quality and brand
(Scandinavian) focused
people
40 - 80 units (due
to the distance to
the manufacturer
and current supply
chain character of
Gorenje)
single households
students
young couples
40 - 80 units (due to
strong competition)
students
young couples
foreigners often
moving
100 units (due to the
shorter distance to the
manufacturer and potential
interest to test Gorenje
premium brand which is
targeted for Western
Europe)
students
young couples
innovators
quality and brand
(Scandinavian) focused on
people who do not want to
invest
Customer segment(s) – landlords and summer/winter cottage/house owners for renting
Those who do not want up-front costs, desire a durable long-lasting robust product and desire constant
costs tracking
For the second and third life washing machines:
Start-ups or newcomers in the segments
Price and costs sensitive customers
Environmentally focused customers
A Value proposition
Aa For customers (specific value proposition content for
every individual country should be taken from the survey
and conjoint analysis)
Ab For
environment
Ac For society
Aa1 Getting rid of the responsibility for washing machine
maintenance
Aa2 Smaller risk of breakdowns due to professional
maintenance and due to the high quality of washing machine
Aa3 Opportunity to test the washing machine
Aa4 Environment (renting requires durable products that
operate for a longer time)
Aa5 No up-front costs needed
Aa6 Online tracking of costs
Aa7 Consumption behaviour related to advisory – sparing
money, improving consumption patterns
Aa8 Bundle of a tangible product – laundering function +
functionality services + detergent and softener (if
demanded and deliveries are possible) + personal advice
and assistance
Ab1 Less energy
consumption
Ab2 Less water
consumption
Ab3 Less
environmental
pollution due to
production
Ab4 Less raw
materials
extraction
Ac1 New jobs
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 145 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Aa9 if detergent and softener – reusable packaging
Ad For Gorenje management Ae For service
providers
(logistics and
maintenance)
Af For Gorenje
owner
(shareholder)
Ad1 Big data about consumer behaviour
Ad2 A higher level of control of forward and reverse supply
chain processes and maintenance and service needs as well of
spare parts management
Ad3 Improvement of operational management (big data for
quality management, for planning…)
Ae1 Job
Ae2 Earnings
Ae3 New
knowledge of
PPW services
(e.g. online
provision of
repair,
upgrading)
Ae5 Network
involvement
Af1 Image;
conformity with the
legislation and
policies; “first
mover” benefit
For the second and third life washing machines:
a) Customers: costs, image of environmentally-friendly person; value for money
b) Environment: less raw material extraction and use – less transport and production pollution
c) Society and Service providers: job opportunities in refurbishing and remanufacturing market and
in complemented service provision
d) Gorenje management and Gorenje owner: costs reduction, image of the environmentally-friendly
company, compliance with legislation, new “second-hand” market reach, better product life and
total cost of ownership knowledge
B Customer relationships
B1 Personal assistance, create customer loyalty through PSS
B2 Membership
B3 Automated services
B4 Self –service (if required)
B5 Co-creation (experience sharing, mutual learning and product development)
For the second and third life washing machines:
loyalty
C Channels
Austria Denmark Netherlands Slovenia
Carinthia and Styria,
resp. also Tyrol:
a combination of
Velenje staff
and online channel
(cloud platform web-
based)
Asko retailers
network
Start in Copenhagen
or another university
town
Asko staff retailers
network
or
Asko staff direct web
channel (common to
Slovenia)
Velenje staff – web
solution - cloud (the
cheapest way and the
highest level of
information flow and
control)
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 146 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Other lands:
Current retailers network
Chain of retailers
associated in (Gorenje
brand is sold by
some members already):
https://www.mietenstatt
kaufen.info/
partnership with Energie
Steiermark:
https://www.e-
steiermark.com/privat/lei
stungen/haushaltsgeraete
-mieten/
Print ads: colleges and
universities hostels
Expat webpages
Webpage (linked as
the platform to Asko
staff and Velenje)
Print ads: colleges
and universities
hostels
Ambassadors and
word-of-mouth
For Copenhagen
airnbnb partnerships
Webpage (linked as
the cloud platform
to Asko staff and
Velenje)
Print ads: colleges
and universities
hostels
Ambassadors and
word-of-mouth
Expat webpages
For Amsterdam
airnbnb partnerships
Partnership with
Homie
Print ads: colleges and
universities hostels
Ambassadors and word-of-
mouth
Print and online news
TV - news
For the second and third life washing machines:
Could be the same as with the new products + internet marketplaces for refurbished products
D Key activities
D1 IoT platform management and continuous improvement of the platform across countries
D2 High quality, online and offline and 24/7 days services (advisory, repair, logistics to and from
consumers to some extent)
D3 Complaint management
D4 Marketing communication
D5 Pricing
D6 Big data analyses
D7 Online and offline world cross-management
D8 Customer relationships and network partners’ relationships
D9 Refurbishing and remanufacturing
D10 Washing machine production
D11 Legal advisory – GDPR and intellectual property, country-specific legislation
D12 Payment tracking
D13 Accounting and Lifecycle analyses
D14 Market analysis (customer service satisfaction, communication, competitors, legislation)
D15 Innovation management and design research and management
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 147 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
E Key resources
E1 Intellectual property to the cloud platform and IoT solution
E2 Service personnel
E3 IT specialists
E4 Quality management staff
E5 Intellectual capital
E6 Stakeholders relationships
E7 Finance
F Key partnerships
F1 Customers and customers as a community
F2 Services providers
F3 Supply chain network’ partners
F4 Financial institutions (payments flows)
F5 Media
F6 Universities and colleges
G Costs structure
G1 Fixed costs connected to the production and brick-and stone facilities for the operations and
for the Intellectual property protection
G2 Variable costs for services provision and other activities (Marketing, IT development, quality
management, refurbishment, the motivation of salespeople and sales partners)
G3 Environmental costs (transport)
For the second and third life washing machines:
Reverse logistics, refurbishing, remanufacturing, forward logistics, marketing
H Revenue streams
H1 Pay per wash
H2 Deposit fees
H3 Co-branding (detergent and softeners brand)
H4 Sale of refurbished washing machine
H5 Sale of materials from refurbished or remanufactured machines
H6 Sale of waste
H7 Avoiding costs for washing machine early end-of-life disposal
Table 24: Components of Gorenje circular business models
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 148 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Some more detailed information and questions raised to be answered during the
demonstration:
VALUE PROPOSITION
The potential benefits from the new circular model for the customer include the following (due
to the IoT functionality):
 Better monitoring and controlling of WM
 In the future, the connectivity should serve as a tool for preventative maintenance –
based on usage and system monitoring; the system should suggest the preventative
maintenance actions (parts replacement etc.).
 The warranty/liability could be extended for low usage of WM owners.
 The introduction or the application of a bot Ana (and associated IoT-functionality) for
PPW system may provide quick advice in a problem situation (saving the time and cost
for the consumer and Gorenje or its PPW service providers) as well as supporting
customer relationship management and sharing real information (not distorted by
transcription) to all interested parties in real time (if needed).
 Signalling function - (end of washing signal, red sock detection, …).
 Upgradability of WM software enables the reaction to new customer demands relating
to their new life situations (baby born, etc.). In other words, the software updates can
provide new washing programs option being purchased later.
 For B2B customers: for laundries, IoT application enables the functionality of
order/scheduling system for end-consumers (laundry’s customers).
 Because the new model should be used more intensively (be more robust), it needs to
be designed for intuitive control and resistant to wrong customer usage (poka-joke):
higher system availability is appreciated by consumers and businesses (e.g. laundries).
 High-quality product design / appealing product design appreciated by end-consumers
in the first and second lifecycle of the washing machine. (Aesthetics is, however,
unimportant in laundries and similar business).
 Longer lifespan
Pay per wash system:
 eliminate the problem of a high upfront cost (purchasing cost)
 responsible utilization due to the decrease in washing frequency.
Value proposition for environment exists in potential less energy and water consumption
through both the optimisation of washing machine usage by customers and also in production
processes. Less environmental pollution due to production could be reached if production is less
extensive (less new machines produced). Less material extraction may occur if washing
machines stay longer in usage life and if materials are gained through dismantling and recycling
of machines at the end-of-life.
Value proposition for service provide in terms of new job opportunity may be created in case of
big data analysis (and processing). This is specific capability, usually outsourced to experts who
have not only big data statistics analysis knowledge and skills but are also able to deliver
structured results and provide suggestions how to use results.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 149 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
CUSTOMER/CONSUMER SEGMENTS:
Diverse consumer/customer groups are relevant for proposed circular mode, as demonstrated
on the list below. It is expected that motivation in some groups might be similar or might
overlap; however, because of other factors and groups characteristic it is reasonable to start the
analysis with a broader list of segments, not for value proposition only, but for the design of
other elements of the business model (such as customer relationship).
I. Households
 Individuals (singles)
 Poor (no up-front costs)
 Students
 “Eco-mothers”21
 Savers (energy, water…)
 Environmentalists
 IoT fans
 “No-invests” willing
 Movers
 Trends-followers
 Care-free (not willing to care, not able to care)
 “Controllers” (costs, performance…)
 High-quality brand followers
 “Eco-snobs”22
 “Non-materialists”
II. Laundrettes
 Low operation costs seekers
 Care-free (no extra maintenance costs and effort)
 Ethical values fulfillers (ethical codex)23
 Governmental policy and legislation fulfillers
 Technology leaders
 Trend followers
III. Business (other than laundrettes) – wash for themselves
21
Eco-mothers (or green eco-mothers, green moms, eco-moms) are women with children who show extraordinary
caring passion not only for their children (and family) but also for their environment. They are very active in searching
for and sharing the information about the best for their families and usually are rather innovative. The prevalently
belong to middle class and are well-educated (Cairns et al, 2014).
22 Eco-snobs are people who want to distance themselves from the masses and to be superior through the purchase,
consumption and promotion of green-labelled products (and services), however usually products which are in
fashion, are not necessary and are expensive (for instance because they are imported form very far distance. These
people want to have the best and or something special. Some characteristic features are common with eco-mothers
(Sustainable, 2019).
23 Ethical value fulfillers are people who try to behave the best according some ethical rules or standards, which used
to be written and even codified. If they present some organization and the organization is a member of some
association or belongs to some specific industry exposed to public interest, their effort is focused on the maximal
compliance with the existing rules, despite the fact that their personal values may be very different (Hartmann, 2014).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 150 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
 Hotels, restaurants, masseurs, spas….
 Developers
 Landlords
CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIPS:
The new functionality of the circular model and the IoT feature provides potential benefits for
Gorenje, for developing longitudinal relationships with users:
 A new way of individual communication with the potential to gain an emotional bond
with consumers.
 More effective direct marketing activities
 IoT can improve and/or enhance the brand image
 Customer feedback (data) about the intensity of washing and washing programme
usage can be used for the washing programs optimization (product quality
improvement) and for marketing communication
 Feedback gathered from online appliances can be used for improving the traditional
offline products too
 The IoT data may improve forecasting if spare parts are resulting in lower aftersales cost
and improved customer service.
The IoT functionality raises some questions that need to be solved and addressed in customer
communication:
 Private data leakage – Because the data will be collected internally by Gorenje, there is
full control of the data. The system would also require users to register themselves into
the cloud-based system and agree with the conditions (see GDPR).
 Non-IoT status: The Wi-Fi functionality (IoT functions) can be switched off by the
customer. If the IoT module is broken down, the appliance should continue working
without problems.
 IoT and all the feedback for Gorenje need not bother the customers – factor of
simplicity.
 Guarantee for the IoT software updates: the customers should be informed about the
time span, after which Gorenje stops upgrading the software of IOT system.
Whereas many of the above points had relation to IoT, the remanufacturing aspects also deserve
attention in customer relations. These are examples of some crucial issues:
 The companies, in general, avoid communicating the total cost of ownership (TCO), as
the TCO puts more light on the expected cost structure for the customer and on the
system availability. Due to reasons such as brand image protection, the companies
operating on consumer markets avoid mentioning any facts that could address the
problem of operating cost, disposal cost or maintenance cost. However, TOC is essential
information in the circular economy. Leaving the task of public education about TOC to
the governments or consumer associations, the question is how to communicate TOC
when offering the pay per use service and its benefits?
 During purchasing, customers should get information, which products are repairable
and which not.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 151 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
 How to motivate the customers to considerate renting the products?
KEY ACTIVITIES:
D11 Legislation restriction on business model activities:
At the moment, the legislation restricts usage of old parts in a new product, which is sold to the
customers. However, such refurbishing activities are possible in the pay per use system, as the
ownership remains to the manufacturer. The legislation in this field is changing/relaxing,
however.
Legislation regarding renting in the four demonstrator markets could be different and can
negatively influence business model.
D2 High quality, online and 24/7 days services can be a competitive advantage (current
competitors work only 5-6 days and from-to during the day for fast help) but also extremely
challenging (personnel costs and capabilities and partners for service provision – again costs and
relationships)
D7 Online and offline world cross-management – despite many activities provided online, the
move to PPW system will require vigorous step toward more integrated cross-management of
the offline and online business mainly in cross-channels cooperation across different countries,
logistics and marketing. The purpose of such a cross-management is to harmonise business
models, avoid product (market) cannibalization, keeping the promises given to customers, unify
the message of Gorenje and optimise value-added processes globally (as the introduction of
PPW in the four markets requires support also form other markets).
D9 Refurbishing and remanufacturing – recommended to keep in house (Gorenje) at least for
the first period – for knowledge leakage risk
D1, D6 Cloud platform, IoT solutions and data management - recommended keeping in house
across the markets
D2 Quality assurance problem:
Currently, regular products are being tested for 10 months to get reliable information about
their technical life and conditions. The testing period for the long-lasting product would be too
long if the same test methodology is used. Some alternative procedures need to be developed,
to test the reliability and longevity of the washing machine.
KEY RESOURCES:
E1 IoT platform – this needs to be extremely high-quality managed and supervised – up-to-date,
security, intellectual property
E2, E3 Knowledge workers and service personnel – for the IT solution innovation and provision
and service personnel as the key pillars for customer journeys and their satisfaction. PPW
product service system in both consumer and business customer market is extremely sensitive
on various interactions (person-machines, machines-persons, persons-person) and any problem
requires immediate response from the service provider. Moreover, there will be bundles of
services in several packages probably (transport, installation, consulting, detergent delivery,
repair, contract changes, payment solution, moving etc.), which will be provided also by the
external parties and so mutual dependence on fast and high quality work is crucial. Knowledge
of which (even potential) pain points customers perceive throughout their journeys of finding
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 152 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
all relevant information, through contract closure, washing machine delivery, washing, technical
and IT problems solutions with washing machine and services, and which critical incidents
emerge during such journeys belong to key resources and capabilities to approach them as well.
KEY RELATIONSHIPS:
F1 Customers and customers as a community – extremely important for word-of-mouth and cocreation
– services and product development
F6 Universities and colleges – for the innovative solutions, community involvement and word-
of-mouth
COSTS STRUCTURE:
G1 Fixed costs connected to the production and brick-and stone facilities for the operations and
for the Intellectual property protection - brick-and stone facilities for the operations represents
all facilities needed for services provision not able to do at customers, logistics (specially
warehousing), refurbishing and remanufacturing together with repackaging etc.
REVENUE STREAMS:
H3 Co-branding (detergent and softeners brand) – eco-detergent and eco-softeners are
preferred
H7 To avoid cannibalisation, the new, long-lasting WM will be provided by per pay use system
only (not sell to customers). As the circular business model (pay-per-use) is new to many
customers, they should get a chance to test the service first, for some period of time, before
making a long-term contract.
8.3 Potential synergies between the models for both
demonstrators
Several synergies exist or potentially may exist between both circular business models.
a) Potential synergy: access-based model for both demonstrators
Whereas in Gorenje case the access-based model is the primary choice, to keep ownership
of the spare parts (and further of the core) might seem to be advantageous idea.
Nevertheless, the complexity of car parts is growing, especially for the electric parts (and
electric and hybrid parts). So, there will be less parts in production and in cycles and more
module that will be changed in the cars. Traceability of such modules is easier than
traceability of parts and the price (and the height of the incentive) will be much higher. This
will lead to the higher flow of money in the forward and return processes – for many actors
in the market rather problematic situation. Renting instead of selling spare parts could be
solution for streamlining the process and for simplifying the database of parts and cores in
the cloud platform. The pay per use system can be also discussed. Revenue streams will be
different if involving such an approach(es).
b) Expected synergy: cloud-based circular business
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 153 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Continuous product and stakeholders´ behavior tracking, quick (online) response to
behaviour, closing the cycles, less inefficient processes, less waste.
c) Expected synergy: keeping ownership (Gorenje) and keeping governance over the
cloud platform (both demonstrators) enable to maximize slowing the resource loops.
d) Expected synergy: knowledge and skills sharing (Outcomes of Synergy session at
General Assembly meeting, Delft, May 2019):
a. cleaning of cores (Bosch) and cleaning of washing machines (Gorenje)
b. reverse logistics, recovery processes (Bosch) for Gorenje
c. ICT knowledge (Bosch to Gorenje)
d. Sector-wide solutions (Bosch to Gorenje)
e. Quality assurance of used and reman products (Bosch to Gorenje)
f. Localization of collection hubs (Bosch to Gorenje)
g. Promotion and sharing the common ideas and goals across whole company
(Bosch to Gorenje)
h. User-centred design (Gorenje to Bosch)
i. Ana bot (service app) (Gorenje to Bosch)
j. Marketing towards end-users (Gorenje to Bosch)
e) Expected synergy: applying principles from (R)eSOLVE framework – “R” is, however,
rather complicated to apply in the near future for both demonstrators
8.4 “Tools” suitable for the transition and adaptation of
business models to be (more) circular
Bosch and Gorenje will have to make their potential customers to follow the path of
awareness, interest, desire and action (or through other stages of so called hierarchy effects
models). For these individual mental processes, attraction of customers is necessary.
Gorenje – when working with final consumers – can apply more intensive action-based and
group involving tools, as for instance the experimentation models are.
From the SLR following “tools” seem to be the most appropriate and convenient – without the
exclusion of the other from the review:
Tools demonstrator
Circular Material Library both
Predictive maintenance model esp. Gorenje
The Ecology of Business Models Experimentation map both, but more
appropriate for Gorenje
A framework to support PSS design to encourage sustainable
behaviour using IoT strategies
both
Process model of ecosystem transformation toward a
circular economy paradigm
both
Evaluation tool “Value-Circle” both
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 154 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
“Typology of upgrades” and “checklist of practices” for the
upgradable PSS
esp. For Gorenje,
potentially also for Bosch
Environmentally extended input–output analysis (EEIOA) for
circularity interventions
both
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 155 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
9 Conclusions
The aims of this report are to define the current baseline of business models of two companies
– demonstrators and based on the results of the markets analyses to define target/improved
circular business models and impact of market characteristics on these models. Both
demonstrators belong to the European industrial leaders operating also globally. While the first
demonstrator - Robert Bosch GmbH (Bosch) and its reverse logistics service provider Circular
Economy Soluthions GmbH (C-ECO) have been engaged in two of the most typical processes of
circular economy – in the aforementioned reverse logistics and remanufacturing of cores for a
longer time, the second demonstrator, Gorenje Gospodinjski Aparati D. D. (Gorenje) is more of
a newcomer to the circular economy initiatives (except some recycling activities).
Bosch and C-ECO intend to be among the first who try to change current patterns of reverse
supply chains behaviour in returns of automobile spare parts, which are not at the end of life
and due to the character of spare parts production, character of demand for spare parts and
due to the recovery value of cores, it is economically advantageous to reprocess them. Current
reverse logistics processes with cores most often follow the same path – in reverse direction –
as the new or remanufactured spare parts delivered to the markets. Despite the existing logic
behind such behaviour, which has its roots in the benefits of the traditional distribution through
several trade levels – from manufacturers to the local retailers (and garages) – the development
of information and communication technologies open the possibilities to streamline often
rather time consuming, complicated approach. Streamlining reverse logistics processes may
bring reduction of costs (for warehousing, transport, handling processes) of the individual trade
levels and if organised well, it also can help to lessen pollution (reducing transport) and
maximize the usage rate of cores for remanufacturing (and so to reduce raw material extraction,
transport and processing).The second expected benefit, connected to the development and
testing of the internet cloud-based platform for various processes concerning tracking and
tracing the flow of cores and reman parts, their status and for managing relationships between
the users and providers of platform, is the simplification, higher transparency and higher speed
of reverse logistics processes. Awareness, interest, intention to be involved, involvement, trust
building and trust maintenance and the existence of proof of the efficiency and effectiveness
of being in the cloud are the key building blocks for the success of this aim. Breaking the long
tradition and existing relationships, as well as to reach win-win situation for all interested
parties in the cloud, reverse logistics, remanufacturing and sales of reman parts are the main
challenges.
Gorenje´s aim is different at first sight. Nevertheless, to change traditional way of doing business
through the introduction of new approach with the utilization of ICT (and IoT) has some
commonalities with the Bosch and C-ECO plan. Gorenje wants – besides its current linear
production system (take-make-dispose) to test circular business where the sales of washing
machines (with only minimal control over the life after the sale) will be substituted with
retaining the ownership and start with the access-based Product Service System, more
specifically with the pay per wash approach. Retaining the ownership of washing machines will
enable to prolong the life of these products, also reduce raw materials extraction, transport and
processing, potentially promoting loyalty of customers (through the second and third life of
washing machines) or gaining new customer segments. Broadening the knowledge about
customer-washing machine interaction for customer relationship management and for own
research and development and innovation processes are another potential benefits. Also third
markets can be approached – with the sale of second hand materials and recycled materials. IoT
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 156 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
and cloud help to monitor behaviour, usage and status of washing machines, monitor and
optimise washing behaviour of customers (and so be more environmentally friendly as well as
to spare costs) and help to manage operations and relationships with customers. The key
building block for the success are the same as in the case of Bosch and C-ECO. The main
challenges are to persuade customers to give up the ownership of washing machine (further
maybe also other products) and stay profitable.
To be able to fulfil the tasks several steps had to be done. First, literature review to find out
what knowledge, experience, proofs of best practices or examples of mistakes to be aware of
when doing business according the circular economy principles has been done. Both state of the
art review and two systematic literature reviews were undertaken. Because innovation of
business models is central for both demonstrators, the most extensive and intensive review
was targeted to find existing tools that help companies to change, transform or develop new
business models within circular economy. Second, several secondary and primary market
research activities have been realized. Their aim was to summarize trends and forces that
enable or hamper the transition of both demonstrators in their way towards circular (or more
circular) business. Primary collection of data had two forms. Online quantitative survey with
end consumers in four European markets for Gorenje (to determine attitudes, beliefs,
experience of consumers related to pay per wash system, sharing washing machines and to
second and third life washing machines. For Bosch and C-ECO, in-depth interviews in two
countries with several representatives from the automotive aftermarket were done. The main
aim was to reveal which pains they have with reverse logistics of cores (and associated
processes) and what attitudes, experience and beliefs as well as fears they have with clouds.
Review on circular business models unveils that there are still many unknown areas, or not
sufficiently known issues. Case studies mapping CBMs development, implementation and
testing of large companies for several years are almost absent. More complex understanding of
how CBMs of large companies work (if any), and what are the circumstances for the concrete
functioning do not exist as well.
Very little knowledge exists with the tools appropriate for the innovation steps towards circular
business models. Most of the existing stress stakeholders´ participation and co-creation of the
elements of business models. Only few examples are developed more thoroughly and can serve
as some guide for companies. Measurement and measures for the assessment of a change (or
development) and impact of the transition are missing. Also, tools which would help in the
transition of different functions are very rare (for instance marketing, human resource
management, finance). Tools for logistics and supply chain management processes and for
information management processes and their innovation and transformation for circular
economy reality are also missing.
The question of ownership must be explored in both demonstrators’ cases. The Bosch and CECO
knowledge from B2B value and B2B network, and value relationship theory must be studied
to understand specificities for value proposition formulation and value delivery. There are only
fragmentary information and knowledge about how clearinghouse for payments and other
transactions works. Also, this must be studied comprehensively. Performance management and
measurement for understanding cost structures (of the relevant stakeholders) and revenue
streams related to the relevant customers requires another research. It may be that
performance management and measurement approaches would not fit many circular business
models. The conclusion is that many challenges exist both in practice and in research to get
deeper and broader insights into the business life in a circular economy.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 157 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
References
[1] Aaker, D. A. (1989). Managing assets and skills: The key to a sustainable
competitive advantage. California Management Review, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 91-106.
[2] ACEA report (2018). Vehicles in use. Europe 2018. European Automobile
Manufacturers Association.
[3] Accenture (2014). Circular Advantage Innovative Business Models and
Technologies to Create Value in a World without Limits to Growth.
[4] Adjei, M. T., Noble, S. M. and Noble, Ch. H. (2010). The Influence of C2C
Communications in Online Brand Communities on Customer Purchase Behavior. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 38, No.5, pp. 634–53. Amit, R. and Zott, C. (2001).
Value creation in e‐business. Strategic management journal, Vol.22, No. 6‐7, pp. 493-520.
[5] Anderson, J. C., Narus, J. A. and Van Rossum, W. (2006). Customer value
propositions in business markets. Harvard Business Review, Vol. 84, pp. 1-4.
[6] Annarelli, A., Battistella, C. and Nonino, F. (2016). Product service system: A
conceptual framework from a systematic review. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol.139,
pp. 1011–1032.
[7] Antikainen, M., Lammi, M., Paloheimo, H., Rüppel, T. and Valkokari, K. (2015).
Towards circular economy business models. In: ISPIM Innovation Summit 2015: Changing
the innovation landscape. International Society for Professional Innovation Management
(ISPIM).
[8] Antikainen, M. and K. Valkokari (2016). A framework for sustainable circular
business model innovation. Technology Innovation Management Review, Vol. 6, No. pp.
5–12.
[9] Antikainen, M., Uusitalo, T. and Kivikytö-Reponen, P. (2018). Digitalisation as an
Enabler of Circular Economy. Procedia CIRP, Vol. 73, pp. 45-49.
[10] Arend, R. (2013). The business model: Present and future-beyond a skeumorph.
Strategic Organization, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 390–402.
[11] Asif, F. M. A., Lieder, M. and Rashid, A. (2016). Multi-method simulation based
tool to evaluate economic and environmental performance of circular product systems.
Journal of Cleaner Production, No. 139, pp. 1261-121.
[12] Asif, F.M.A., Roci, M., Lieder, M., Rashid, A., Štimulak, M., Halvordsson, E. and
De Bruijckere, R. (2018). A practical ICT framework for transition to circular manufacturing
systems. Procedia CIRP, 72, pp. 598-602
[13] Baines, T. S., Lightfoot, H. W., Evans, S., Neely, A., Greenough, R., Peppard, J., ...
and Alcock, J. R. (2007). State-of-the-art in product-service systems. Proceedings of the
Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, Vol. 221,
No. 10, pp. 1543-1552.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 158 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[14] Bardhi, F. and Eckhardt, G. M. (2012). Access-Based Consumption: The Case of
Car Sharing. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 39, No. 4, pp. 881–898.
[15] Barquet, A. P. B., de Oliveira, M. G., Amigo, C. R., Cunha, V. P. and Rozenfeld, H.
(2013). Employing the business model concept to support the adoption of product–service
systems (PSS). Industrial Marketing Management, Vol.42, No. 5, pp. 693-704.
[16] Baumeister, C. K. (2014). Access versus Ownership: Consumers’ Reactions to an
Alternative Consumption Mode. PhD Thesis, Technische Universität München.
[17] Baxter, W., Aurisicchio, M. and Childs, P. (2017). Contaminated Interaction:
Another Barrier to Circular Material Flows. Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp.
507–516.
[18] Belk, R. and Llamas, R. (2012). The Nature and Effects of Sharing in Consumer
Behavior. Transformative Consumer Research for Personal and Collective Well-Being. pp.
625-646.
[19] Ben-Daya, M., Hassini, E. and Bahroun, Z. (2017). Internet of things and supply
chain management: a literature review. International Journal of Production Research. pp.
1-24.
[20] Bititci, U. S., Martinez, V., Albores, P. and Parung, J. (2004). Creating and
managing value in collaborative networks. International Journal of Physical Distribution &
Logistics Management, Vol. 34, No. 3/4, pp. 251-268.
[21] Bittar, A. de Vicente (2018). Selling Remanufactured Products: Does Consumer
Environmental Consciousness Matter? Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 181, pp. 527–
36.
[22] Blomsma, F. and Brennan, G. (2017). The emergence of circular economy: A new
framing around prolonging resource productivity. Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 21, No.
3, pp. 603-614.
[23] Bocken, N. M. P., Short, S., Rana, P. and Evans, S. (2013). A value mapping tool
for sustainable business modelling. Corporate Governance, Vol. 13, No. 5, pp. 482-497.
[24] Bocken, N. M. P., Rana, P. and Short, S. W. (2015). Value Mapping for
Sustainable Business Thinking. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, Vol. 32,
No. 1, pp 67–81.
[25] Bocken, N. M. P., de Pauw, I., Bakker, C. and van der Grinten, B. (2016). Product
design and business model strategies for a circular economy. Journal of Industrial and
Production Engineering, Vol, 33, No. 5, pp. 308-320.
[26] Bocken, N. M. P., Schuit, C. S. C. and Kraaijenhagen, C. (2018). Experimenting
with a circular business model: Lessons from eight cases. Environmental Innovation and
Societal Transitions, No. 28, pp. 79-95.
[27] Bocken, N. M. P., Boons, F. and Baldassarre, B. (2019a). Sustainable business
model experimentation by understanding ecologies of business models. Journal of Cleaner
Production, No. 208, pp.1498-1512.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 159 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[28] Bocken, N. M. P., Ingemarsdotter, E. and Gonzalez, D. (2019b). Designing
Sustainable Business Models: Exploring IoT-Enabled Strategies to Drive Sustainable
Consumption. In: Sustainable Business Models Innovation, Implementation and Success.
Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 61-88.
[29] Bosch (2015). Remanufacturing in the context of today’s focus on circular
economy and urban mining. REMANUFACTURING FOR THE AUTOMOTIVE AFTERMARKET.
(online). Available at: https://docplayer.org/49955734-Remanufacturing-for-the-
automotive-aftermarket.html
[30] Botelho, A., Dias, M. F., Ferreira, C. and Costa Pinto, L. M. (2016). The Market of
Electrical and Electronic Equipment Waste in Portugal: Analysis of Take-Back Consumers’
Decisions. Waste Management & Research, Vol. 34, No. 10, pp. 1074–80.
[31] Brandt, V. (2018). How to approach digital transformation. (online).
https://blog.bosch-si.com/business-models/approach-digital-transformation/
[32] Bressanelli, G., Perona, M. and Saccani, N. (2017). Reshaping the washing
machine industry through circular economy and product-service system business
models. Procedia CIRP, Vol. 64, pp. 43-48.
[33] Bressanelli, G., Adrodegari, F., Perona, M. and Saccani, N. (2018a). The role of
digital technologies to overcome Circular Economy challenges in PSS Business Models: an
exploratory case study. Procedia CIRP, Vol. 73, pp. 216-221.
[34] Bressanelli, G., Adrodegari, F., Perona, M. and Saccani, N. (2018b). Exploring
How Usage-Focused Business Models Enable Circular Economy through Digital
Technologies. Sustainability, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 639-660.
[35] Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2003). Business research methods. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
[36] Bunk, A. (2017). Executive interview: Leadership in digital transformation.
(online). https://blog.bosch-si.com/digital-transformation/interview-leadership-digital-
transformation/
[37] Butler, B. S. (2001). Membership size, communication activity, and
sustainability: A resource-based model of online social structures. Information systems
research, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 346-362.
[38] Cairns, K., DeLaat, K. Johnston, J. and Baumann, S. (2014). The caring,
committed Eco‐Mom: Consumer deals and lived realities. In Green Consumption: The
Global Rise of Eco-Chic. (Barendregt, B. and Jaffe, R., eds.), pp. 100-114. Bloomsbury
Publishing.
[39] Camacho-Otero, J., I. N. Pettersen, a C. Boks. 2017. Consumer and User
Acceptance in the Circular Economy: What Are Researchers Missing? In: 2nd Conference
on Product Lifetimes and the Environment (PLATE), Delft Univ Technol, Fac Ind Design
Engn, Delft, Netherlands, pp. 65-69.
[40] Camacho-Otero, J., Boks, C. and Pettersen, I. (2018). Consumption in the
Circular Economy: A Literature Review. Sustainability, Vol. 10, No. 8, pp. 1-26.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 160 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[41] Casadeus-Masanell, R. and Ricart, J. E. (2011). How to design a winning business
model. Harvard Business Review, Vol. 89, No. 1-2, pp. 101–107.
[42] Catulli, M. (2012). What uncertainty? Further insight into why consumers might
be distrustful of product service systems. Journal of Manufacturing Technology
Management, Vol. 23, No. 6, pp. 780-793.
[43] Catulli, M., Lindley, J. K., Reed, N. B., Green, A., Hyseni, H. and Kiri, S. (2013).
What is Mine is NOT Yours: Further insight on what access-based consumption says about
consumers. Research in Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 15, pp. 185 – 208.
[44] Charro, A. and Schaefe, D. (2018): Cloud Manufacturing as a new type of
Product-Service System. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing.
[45] Cheng, C. C. and Chou, H. M. (2018). Applying the concept of circular economy—
Using the cultural difference of European consumers as an example. In: 2018 IEEE
International Conference on Applied System Invention (ICASI), Chiba: IEEE. pp. 449-452.
[46] Cherry, C. and Pidgeon, N. (2018). Why Is Ownership an Issue? Exploring Factors
That Determine Public Acceptance of Product-Service Systems. Sustainability, Vol. 10, No.
7, p. 2289.
[47] Chesbrough, H. and Rosenbloom, R. S. (2002). The role of the business model in
capturing value from innovation: evidence from Xerox Corporation's technology spin‐off
companies. Industrial and corporate change, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 529-555.
[48] Ceschin, F., Vezzoli, C. and Zingale, S. (2010). An Aesthetic for Sustainable
Interactions in Product-Service Systems? http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/6727.
[49] Cohen, B. and Munoz, P. (2016). Sharing cities and sustainable consumption and
production: towards an integrated framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 134, pp.
87-97.
[50] Cong, L., Zhao, F., Sutherland, J. W. (2017). Value recovery from end-of-use
products facilitated by automated dismantling planning. Clean Technologies and
Environmental Policy, Vol. 19, No. 7, pp. 1867-1882.
[51] Cortés, B., Boza, A., Pérez, D. and Cuenca, L. (2015). Internet of Things
Applications on Supply Chain Management. World Academy of Science, Engineering and
Technology. International Journal of Computer, Electrical, Automation, Control and
Information Engineering, Vol. 9, No. 12, pp. 2493-2498.
[52] Coskun, A., Kaner, G. and Bostan, İ. (2018). Is smart home a necessity or a
fantasy for the mainstream user? A study on users’ expectations of smart household
appliances. International Journal of Design, Vol. 12, No 1, pp. 7-20.
[53] Dahlbo, H., Aalto, K., Eskelinen, H. and Salmenperä, H. (2017). Increasing textile
circulation—Consequences and requirements. Sustainable Production and
Consumption, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 44-57.
[54] Daly, H. E. (1977). The Steady-state Economy. The Sustainable Society:
Implications for Limited Growth. New York: Praeger, pp. 107-114.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 161 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[55] Davidsson, P. (2003). The domain of entrepreneurship research: Some
suggestions. In Katz. J. A. and Shepherd, D. A. (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to
entrepreneurship research (Vol. 6, pp. 315-372). Oxford: Elsevier Science.
[56] DaSilva, C. M. and Trkman, P. (2014). Business model: What it is and what is not.
Long Range Planning, Vol. 47, No. 6, pp. 379–389.
[57] Deloitte (2014). Moving forward in reverse Why reverse logistics needs a
dedicated channel. Available at:
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/Documents/process-and-
operations/us-cons-moving-forward-inreverse-091714.pdf
[58] Demil, B. and Lecocq, X. (2010). Business model evolution: in search of dynamic
consistency. Long range planning, Vol. 43, No. 2-3, pp. 227-24.
[59] Denzin, N. K. (1989). The research act. A theoretical introduction to sociological
methods (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
[60] Denyer, D. and Tranfield, D. (2009). Producing a systematic review. In D.A.
Buchanan & A. Bryman (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational research methods (pp.
671–689). London: Sage.
[61] de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. L., Jabbour, C. J. C., Godinho Filho, M. and Roubaud, D.
(2018). Industry 4.0 and the circular economy: a proposed research agenda and original
roadmap for sustainable operations. Annals of Operations Research, Vol, 270, No. 1-2, pp.
273–286.
[62] Dijkman, R. M., Sprenkels, B., Peeters, T. and Janssen, A. (2015). Business
models for the Internet of Things. International Journal of Information Management, Vol.
35, No. 6, pp. 672–78.
[63] Diaz Lopez, F.J., Bastein, T., Tukker, A. (2019). Business Model Innovation for
Resou rce-efficiency, Circularity and Cleaner Production: What 143 Cases Tell Us change.
Ecological Economics, No. 155, pp. 20-35.
[64] Doane D. and MacGillivray, A. (2001). Economic Sustainability-the business of
staying in business, London: New Economics Foundation.
[65] Drescher, D. (2017). Using the Blockchain. In Blockchain Basics (pp. 223-233).
Apress, Berkeley, CA.
[66] Dyllick, T. and Muff, K. (2016). Clarifying the meaning of sustainable business:
Introducing a typology from business-as-usual to true sustainability. Organization &
Environment, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 156-174.
[67] EC (European Commission) (2015). Circular Economy Package: Questions and
Answers.
[68] Edbring, E. G., Lehner, M. and Mont, O. (2016). Exploring consumer attitudes to
alternative models of consumption: motivations and barriers. Journal of Cleaner
Production, Vol. 123, No. 6, pp. 5-15.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 162 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[69] Edvardsson, B., Tronvoll, B. and Gruber, T. (2011). Expanding understanding of
service exchange and value co-creation: a social construction approach. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 327-339.
[70] EMF (Ellen MacArthur Foundation) (2013). Towards the Circular Economy—
Economic and Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transition; Ellen MacArthur
Foundation: Cowes, UK, Vol. 1, pp. 1-98.
[71] EMF (Ellen Macarthur Foundation) (2015). Delivering the Circular Economy: a
toolkit for policymakers. V1.1. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, pp. 1-177.
[72] EY (Ernst&Young) (2014). Building trust in the cloud. Creating confidence in your
cloud ecosystem. Report.
[73] Falcone, R. and Sapienza, A. (2018). On the Users’ Acceptance of IoT Systems: A
Theoretical Approach. Information, Vol. 9, No. 3, p. 53.
[74] Fernandes, T. and Remelhe, P. (2016). How to engage customers in co-creation:
customers’ motivations for collaborative innovation. Journal of Strategic Marketing, Vol.
24, No.3-4, pp. 311-326.
[75] Franciosi, Ch., Lambiase, A, Miranda, S. (2017). Sustainable maintenance: a
periodic preventive maintenance model with sustainable spare parts management. IFAC
PapersOnLine, Vol., 50, No. 1, pp. 13692-13697.
[76] Frenken, K. (2017). Political economies and environmental futures for the
sharing economy. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A, 375(2095), 20160367, pp. 1-15.
[77] Galvagno, M., and Dalli, D. (2014). Theory of Value Co-Creation: A Systematic
Literature Review. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, Vol. 24, No. 6, pp.
643–83.
[78] Gao, L. and Bai, X. (2014). A Unified Perspective on the Factors Influencing
Consumer Acceptance of Internet of Things Technology. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing
and Logistics, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 211–231.
[79] Gartner, B. (2016). Market Share Analysis: Consulting Services, Worldwide,
2015. https://www.gartner.com/doc/3317117/market-share-analysis-consulting-services
[80] Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N. M. and Hultink, E. J. (2017). The
Circular Economy–A new sustainability paradigm?. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 143,
pp. 757-768.
[81] Geissdoerfer, M., Morioka, S. N., de Carvalho, M. M. and Evans, S. (2018a).
Business models and supply chains for the circular economy. Journal of Cleaner
Production, Vol. 190, pp. 712-721.
[82] Geissdoerfer, M., Vladimirova, D. and Evans, S. (2018b). Sustainable business
model innovation: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 198, pp. 401-416.
[83] GfK (2018). Press release [WWW Document]. URL
https://www.gfk.com/insights/press-release/ifa-2016-mda-en/ (accessed 11.28.18).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 163 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[84] Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., Ulgiati, S. (2016). A review on circular economy: the
expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems.
Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 114, pp. 11–32.
[85] Gnoni, M. G., Mossa, G., Mummolo, G., Tornese, F. and Verriello, R. (2017).
Supporting circular economy through use-based business models: the washing machines
case. Procedia CIRP, Vol. 64, pp. 49-54.
[86] Gorenje Group (2017). Annual report [WWW Document], 2018. URL
https://www.gorenjegroup.com/en/media/news/2018/03/7981-Gorenje-Group-2017annual-report
(accessed 11.30.18).
[87] Granholm, G., Grösser, S.N. (2017). The use-it-wisely (UIW) approach (2017). In:
Dynamics of Long-Life Assets: From Technology Adaptation to Upgrading the Business
Model, Springer Open, pp. 21-42
[88] Grant, M. J. and Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review
types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, No. 26, pp.
91 – 108.
[89] Haddaway, N. R., Collins, A. M., Coughlin, D. and Kirk, S. (2015). The role of
google scholar in evidence reviews and its applicability to grey literature searching. PLOS
ONE, Vol. 10. No. 9, pp. 1-17.
[90] Haddud, A., DeSouza, A., Khare, A., Lee, H. (2017). Examining Potential Benefits
and Challenges Associated with the Internet of Things Integration in Supply Chains. Journal
of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 28, No.8, pp. 1055–1085.
[91] Haines-Gadd, M., Chapman, J., Lloyd, P., Mason, J. and Aliakseyeu, D. (2018).
Emotional Durability Design Nine—A Tool for Product Longevity. Sustainability, Vol., 10,
No. 6, 1948.
[92] Hartmann, N. (2014, reprint). Ethics. Vol. 1. Routledge.
[93] Hawken, P., Lovins, A. and Lovins, L. (2000). Natural capitalism: The next
industrial revolution. London: Earthscan.
[94] Heinonen, K. (2004). Reconceptualizing Customer Perceived Value: The Value of
Time and Place. Managing Service Quality, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 205–215.
[95] Hofmann, F., Marwede, M.; Nissen, N. F. and Lang, K. D. (2017). Circular added
value: business model design in the circular economy. In: 2nd Conference on Product
Lifetimes and the Environment (PLATE), Delft Univ Technol, Fac Ind Design Engn, Delft,
Netherlands, pp. 171-177.
[96] Homrich, A.S., Galvão, G., Abadia, L.G. and Carvalho, M.M. (2018). The circular
economy umbrella: Trends and gaps on integrating pathways. Journal of Cleaner
Production, Vol. 175, pp. 525–543.
[97] Hopkinson, P., Zils, M., Hawkins, P. and Roper, S. (2018). Managing a Complex
Global Circular Economy Business Model: Opportunities and Challenges. California
Management Review, Vol. 60, No. 3, pp. 71-94.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 164 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[98] Janssen, K., Stel, F. (2017). Orchestrating partnerships in a circular economy – a
working method for SMEs. ISPIM Conference Proceedings, Vienna.
[99] Johnson, G., Scholes, K. and Whittington, R. (2008). Exploring Corporate
Strategy: Text & Cases. 8th
ed. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
[100] Järvi, H., Kähkönen, A. K. and Torvinen, H. (2018). When value co-creation fails:
Reasons that lead to value co-destruction. Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 34,
No. 1, pp. 63-77.
[101] Joyce, A. and Paquin, R. L. (2016). The triple layered business model canvas: A
tool to design more sustainable business models. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 135,
pp. 1474-1486.
[102] Kaasinen, E., Koskela-Huotari, K., Ikonen, V. and Niemeléi, M. (2013). Three
approaches to co-creating services with users. Advances in the Human Side of Service
Engineering, Vol. 286.
[103] Kalverkamp, M. Pehlken, A. and Wuest, T. (2017). Cascade Use and the
Management of Product Lifecycles. Sustainability, No. 9. Article Number 1540.
[104] Kalverkamp, M. (2017). Supplier relationship management in a circular
economy: core brokers in automotive remanufacturing. In: The Proceedings of the 22nd
International Symposium on Logistics (ISL 2017), Centre for Concurrent Enterprise,
Nottingham University Business School, pp.654-662.
[105] Kalverkamp, M. and Raabe, T. (2018). Automotive Remanufacturing in the
Circular Economy in Europe: Marketing System Challenges. Journal of
Macromarketing, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 112-130.
[106] Kang, G. D. and James, J. (2004). Service quality dimensions: an examination of
Grönroos’s service quality model. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, Vol.
14, No. 4, pp. 266-277.
[107] Kim, Y., Park, Y. and Choi, J. (2017). A study on the adoption of IoT smart home
service: using Value-based Adoption Model. Total Quality Management & Business
Excellence, Vol. 28, No. 9-10, pp. 1149-1165.
[108] Kirchherr, J., Reike, D. and Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualizing the circular
economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 127,
pp. 221-232.
[109] Kjaer, L. L., Pigosso, D. C., McAloone, T. C. and Birkved, M. (2018). Guidelines for
evaluating the environmental performance of Product/Service-Systems through life cycle
assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 190, pp. 666-678.
[110] KPMG (2017). Future-proof your reverse logistics. Available at:
https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/au/pdf/2017/future-proof-reverse-
logistics.pdf
[111] Kumar, N., Stern, L. W. and Anderson, J. C. (1993). Conducting
interorganizational research using key informants. Academy of Management Journal, Vol.
36, No. 6, pp. 1633-1651.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 165 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[112] Labes, S., Erek, K., Zarnekow, R. (2013). Common patterns of cloud business
models. Proceedings of the nineteenth Americas conference on information systems,
Chicago.
[113] Lacy, P., and Rutqvist, J. 2015. Waste to wealth: The circular economy
advantage. Springer.
[114] Lahti, T., Wincent, J. and Parida, V. (2018). A Definition and Theoretical Review
of the Circular Economy, Value Creation, and Sustainable Business Models: Where Are We
Now and Where Should Research Move in the Future?. Sustainability, Vol. 10, No. 8, pp.
6-19.
[115] Lay, G., Schroeter, M. and Biege, S. (2009). Service-based business concepts: A
typology for business-to-business markets. European Management Journal, Vol. 27, No. 6,
pp. 442–455.
[116] Lee, G.M. (2015). Standardisation of trust provisioning study. Technical report.
International Telecommunication Union.
[117] Lee, I., & Lee, K. (2015). The Internet of Things (IoT): Applications, investments,
and challenges for enterprises. Business Horizons, Vol. 58, No. 4, pp. 431-440.
[118] Leider, S. and Sahin, Ö. (2012). Contracts, biases and consumption of access
services, CESifo working paper: Behavioural Economics, No. 3698. Center for Economic
Studies and Ifo Institute (CESifo), Munich.
[119] Leising, E., Quist, J. and Bocken, N. (2018). Circular Economy in the building
sector: Three cases and a collaboration tool. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 176, pp.
976–989.
[120] Levänen, J., Lyytinen, T. and Gatica, S. (2018). Modelling the Interplay Between
Institutions and Circular Economy Business Models: A Case Study of Battery Recycling in
Finland and Chile, Ecological Economics, Vol. 154, pp. 373-382.
[121] Lewandowski, M. (2016). Designing the business models for circular economy—
Towards the conceptual framework. Sustainability, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 1-28.
[122] Li, A. Q. and Found, P. (2017). Towards sustainability: PSS, digital technology
and value co-creation. Procedia CIRP, Vol. 64, pp. 79-84.
[123] Li, S., Da Xu, L. and Zhao, S. (2015). The internet of things: a survey. Information
Systems Frontiers, Vol. 17, No.2, pp. 243-259.
[124] Lieder, M. and Rashid, A. (2016). Towards circular economy implementation: a
comprehensive review in context of manufacturing industry. Journal of Cleaner
Production, Vol. 115, pp. 36-51.
[125] Lieder, M., Asif, F. M. and Rashid, A. (2017). Towards Circular Economy
implementation: an agent-based simulation approach for business model
changes. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, Vol. 31, No. 6, pp. 1377-1402.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 166 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[126] Lieder, M., Asif, F. M., Rashid, A., Mihelič, A. and Kotnik, S. (2018). A conjoint
analysis of circular economy value propositions for consumers: Using “washing machines
in Stockholm” as a case study. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 172, pp. 264-273.
[127] Lind, S., Olsson, D. and Sundin, E. (2014). Exploring inter-organizational
relationships in automotive component remanufacturing. Journal of
Remanufacturing, Vol. 4, No. 5, pp. 1-14.
[128] Linder, M. and Williander, M. (2017). Circular business model innovation:
inherent uncertainties. Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 182–
196.
[129] Lo, F. Y. and Campos, N. (2018). Blending Internet-of-Things (IoT) solutions into
relationship marketing strategies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 137,
pp. 10-18.
[130] Löhr, E., Guidorzi, E and Gibson, G. (2017). Parts identification survey. Final
report. Ricard energy&environment.
[131] Mani, Z. and Chouk, I. (2018). Consumer Resistance to Innovation in Services:
Challenges and Barriers in the Internet of Things Era. Journal of Product Innovation
Management, Vol. 35, No. 5, pp. 780-807.
[132] Manninen, K., Koskela, S., Antikainen, R., Bocken, N., Dahlbo, H. and Aminoff, A.
(2018). Do circular economy business models capture intended environmental value
propositions? Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 171, pp. 413-422.
[133] Margretta, J. (2002) Why business models matter. Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 80, No. 5, pp. 86-92.
[134] Matsumoto, M., Yang, S., Martinsen, K. and Kainuma, Y. (2016). Trends and
research challenges in remanufacturing. International Journal of Precision Engineering and
Manufacturing-green technology, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 129-142.
[135] McKinsey&Company (2017). The changing aftermarket game – and how
automotive suppliers can benefit from arising opportunities. Available at:
https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Industries/Automotive%20and%20Asse
mbly/Our%20Insights/The%20changing%20aftermarket%20game%20and%20how%20au
tomotive%20suppliers%20can%20benefit%20from%20arising%20opportunities/The-
changing-aftermarket-game.ashx
[136] McKinsey&Company (2017). Ready for inspection – the automotive aftermarket
in 2030. Available at:
https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/automotive%20and%20assem
bly/our%20insights/ready%20for%20inspection%20the%20automotive%20aftermarket%
20in%202030/ready-for-inspection-the-automotive-aftermarket-in-2030.ashx
[137] Mendoza, J. M. F., Sharmina, M., Gallego-Schmid, A., Heyes, G. and Azapagic, A.
(2017). Integrating Backcasting and Eco-Design for the Circular Economy: The B ECE
Framework. Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol., 21, No. 3, pp. 526-544
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 167 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[138] Mentink, B. (2014). Circular business model innovation: a process framework
and a tool for business model innovation in a circular economy.
[139] Mera (2018). Blockchain Could Help DTNA Accelerate Parts, Maintenance.
(online). https://www.mera.org/news/blockchain-could-help-dtna-accelerate-parts-
maintenance
[140] Merli, R., Preziosi, M. and Acampora, A. (2017). How do scholars approach the
circular economy? A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 178,
pp. 703-722.
[141] Mestre, A. and Cooper, T. (2017). Circular product design. A multiple loops life
cycle design approach for the circular economy. The Design Journal, 20(sup1), pp. 1620-
1635.
[142] Morris, M., Schindehutte, M. and Allen, J. (2005). The entrepreneur's business
model: toward a unified perspective. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 58, No. 6, pp. 726-
735.
[143] Mostaghel, R. and Oghazi, P. (2017). What are Circular Business Models (CBM)?
(online). Innovation Management. https://www.printfriendly.com/p/g/nvZYg2
[144] Mugge, R., Safari, I. and Balkenende, R. (2017). Is there a market for refurbished
toothbrushes? An exploratory study on consumers' acceptance of refurbishment for
different product categories. In: Plate Product Lifetimes And The Environment 2017:
Conference Proceedings, pp. 293-297 (Research In Design Series, Vol. 9).
[145] Muñoz, P. and Cohen, B. (2017). Mapping out the sharing economy: A
configurational approach to sharing business modeling. Technological Forecasting and
Social Change, Vol. 125, pp. 21-37.
[146] Muranko, Z., Andrews, D., Newton, E. J., Chaer, I. and Proudman, P. (2018). The
Pro-Circular Change Model (P-CCM): Proposing a framework facilitating behavioural
change towards a Circular Economy. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 135, pp.
132–140.
[147] Murray, A., Skene, K. and Haynes, K. (2017). The circular economy: An
interdisciplinary exploration of the concept and application in a global context. Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 140, No. 3, pp. 369-380.
[148] Mylan, J. (2015). Understanding the diffusion of Sustainable Product-Service
Systems: Insights from the sociology of consumption and practice theory. Journal of
Cleaner Production, Vol. 97, pp. 13-20.
[149] Neely, A. (2008). Exploring the financial consequences of the servitization of
manufacturing. Operations Management Research, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 103-118.
[150] Ng, I. C. and Wakenshaw, S. Y. (2017). The Internet-of-Things: Review and
research directions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 3-
21.
[151] Norden. (2015). Moving towards a circular economy. Successful Nordic business
models. Nordic Council of Ministers.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 168 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[152] Noor, T. H. and Sheng, Q. Z. (2011). Trust as a service: A framework for trust
management in cloud environments. In International Conference on Web Information
Systems Engineering (pp. 314–321). Springer.
[153] Noor, T. H., Sheng, Q. Z., Zeadally, S. and Yu, J. (2013). Trust management of
services in cloud environments: Obstacles and solutions. ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 46,
No. 1, pp. 1-35.
[154] Nußholz, J. L. K. (2018). A circular business model mapping tool for creating
value from prolonged product lifetime and closed material loops. Journal of Cleaner
Production, Vol. 197, pp. 185-194.
[155] Oghazi, P. and Mostaghel, R. (2018). Circular Business Model Challenges and
Lessons Learned—An Industrial Perspective. Sustainability, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 1-19.
[156] Olugu, E. U., Wong, K. Y. and Shaharoun, A. M. (2010). A comprehensive
approach in assessing the performance of an automobile closed-loop supply
chain. Sustainability, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 871-889.
[157] Okoli, C. and Schabram, K. (2010). A Guide to Conducting a Systematic Literature
Review of Information Systems Research. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information
Systems, Vol. 10, No 26, pp. 1-51. Available at: http://sprouts.aisnet.org/10-26
[158] Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y (2002). An eBusiness Model Ontology for modeling
eBusiness. 15 th Bled Electronic Commerce Conference – eReality: Constructing the
eEconomy. Bled, Slovenia, June 17-19.
[159] Osterwalder A (2004). The business model ontology: A proposition in a design
science approach. PhD thesis. Universite de Lausanne – Ecole des Hautes Etudes
Commerciales.
[160] Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y. and Tucci, C. L. (2005). Clarifying business models:
Origins, present and future of the concept. Communications of the Association for
Information Science (CAIS), Vol. 16, pp. 1-25.
[161] Osterwalder, A. and Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business model generation: a handbook
for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. John Wiley & Sons.
[162] Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y., Bernarda, G. and Smith, A. (2014). Value
proposition design: How to create products and services customers want. John Wiley &
Sons.
[163] Östlin, J., Sundin, E. and Björkman, M. (2008). Importance of closed-loop supply
chain relationships for product remanufacturing. International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 115, No. 2, pp. 336-348.
[164] Östlin, J., Sundin, E. and Björkman, M. (2009). Product life-cycle implications for
remanufacturing strategies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(11), 999-1009.
[165] Pagoropoulos, A., Pigosso, D.C.A. and McAloone, T.C. (2017). The Emergent Role
of Digital Technologies in the Circular Economy: A Review. Procedia CIRP, Vol. 64, pp. 19–
24.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 169 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[166] Pajula, T., Behm, K., Vatanen, S. and Saarivuori, E. (2017). Managing the life
cycle to reduce environmental impacts. In: Dynamics of Long-Life Assets: From Technology
Adaptation to Upgrading the Business Model, Springer Open, pp. 93-113.
[167] Parida, V., Wincent, J. (2019). Why and how to compete through sustainability:
a review and outline of trends influencing firm and network-level transformation.
International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, No. 15, pp. 1-19.
[168] Parida, V., Burström, T., Visnjic, I., Wincent, J. (2019). Orchestrating industrial
ecosystem in circular economy: A two-stage transformation model for large manufacturing
companies. Journal of Business Research, Article in Press.
[169] Park, J. Y. and Chertow, M. R. (2014). Establishing and testing the “reuse
potential” indicator for managing wastes as resources. Journal of Environmental
Management, Vol. 137, pp. 45-53.
[170] Parker, D., Riley, K., Robinson, S., Symington, H., Tewson, J, Jansson, K.,
Ramkumar, S. and Peck, D. (2015). Remanufacturing market study. European
remanufacturing network. (online). Avalilable at:
https://www.remanufacturing.eu/assets/pdfs/remanufacturing-market-study.pdf
[171] Perey, R., Benn, S., Agarwal, R. and Edwards, M. (2018). The place of waste:
Changing business value for the circular economy. Business Strategy and the Environment,
Vol. 27, No. 5, pp. 631–642.
[172] Petticrew, M. and Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences:
a practical guide. Malden, Ma: Blackwell Publishing.
[173] Pialot, O., Millet, D. and Bisiaux, J. (2017). “Upgradable PSS”: Clarifying a new
concept of sustainable consumption/production based on upgradablility. Journal of
Cleaner Production, Vol. 141, pp. 538–550.
[174] Pieroni, M., Pigosso, D. and McAloone, T. (2018a). Sustainable qualifying criteria
for designing circular business models. 25th CIRP Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) Conference,
Copenhagen. pp. 799-804.
[175] Pieroni, M., Pigosso, D. and McAloone, T. (2018b). Exploring the synergistic
relationships of circular business model development and product design. International
Design Conference – Design 2018. pp. 2715 – 2726.
[176] Planing, P. (2015). Business model innovation in a circular economy reasons for
non-acceptance of circular business models. Open Journal of Business Model Innovation,
pp. 1-11 (in press).
[177] Plé, L. and Chumpitaz Cáceres, R. (2010). Not always co-creation: introducing
interactional co-destruction of value in service-dominant logic. Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 24, No. 6, pp. 430-437.
[178] PMR (Persistence Market Research) (2018. Automotive Parts Remanufacturing
Market: Global Industry Analysis and Forecast 2017 – 2025. (online). Available at:
https://www.persistencemarketresearch.com/market-research/automotive-parts-
remanufacturing-market.asp
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 170 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[179] Poppelaars, F., Bakker, C. and van Engelen, J. (2018). Does Access Trump
Ownership? Exploring Consumer Acceptance of Access-Based Consumption in the Case of
Smartphones. Sustainability, Vol. 10, No. 7, p. 498-510.
[180] Porter, M. E. and Heppelmann, J. E. (2015). How smart, connected products are
transforming companies. Harvard Business Review, Vol. 93, No. 10, pp. 96-114.
[181] Programme des Nations Unies pour l'environnement. (2011). Towards a green
economy: Pathways to sustainable development and poverty eradication. United Nations
Environment Programme.
[182] Raja, J. Z., Bourne, D., Goffin, K., Çakkol, M. and Martinez, V. (2013). Achieving
customer satisfaction through integrated products and services: An exploratory
study. Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 30, No. 6, pp. 1128-1144.
[183] Rajala, R., Hakanen, E., Mattila, J., Seppälä, T. Westerlund, M. (2018). How Do
Intelligent Goods Shape Closed-Loop Systems?. California Management Review, Vol. 60,
pp. 20-44.
[184] Rajkov, D. (2018). Blockchain for aircraft spare part management: Evaluating the
robustness of the Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul business model. Master thesis. Delft:
Technical University Delft.
[185] Ranjbari, M., Morales-Alonso, G. and Carrasco-Gallego, R. (2018).
Conceptualizing the Sharing Economy through Presenting a Comprehensive
Framework. Sustainability, Vol. 10, No. 7, pp.1-24.
[186] Ranta, V., Aarikka-Stenroos, L. and Mäkinen, S. J. (2018). Creating value in the
circular economy: A structured multiple-case analysis of business models. Journal of
Cleaner Production, No. 201, pp. 988-1000.
[187] Rexfelt, O. and Hiort af Ornäs, V. (2009). Consumer acceptance of productservice
systems: designing for relative advantages and uncertainty reductions. Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 20, No. 5, pp. 674-699.
[188] Ritika, J. (2017). The Value Circle: Assessing Value Creation in Circular Business
Models. Master thesis. Lund University.
[189] Rizzi, F., Bartolozzi, I., Borghini, A. and Frey, M. (2013). Environmental
management of end‐of‐life products: nine factors of sustainability in collaborative
networks. Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 22, No. 8, pp. 561-572.
[190] RMS (2015). Remanufacturing market study. Europena Manufacturing Network.
For Horizon 2020, grant agreement No 645984. (online). Available at:
http://www.remanufacturing.eu/assets/pdfs/remanufacturing-market-study.pdf
[191] R2π (The route to circular economy) (2018. Stakeholders views report. Enablers
and barriers to a circular economy. Report. European Union´s Horizon research and
innovation programme funded project under grant agreement No. 730378.
[192] Rymaszewska, A., Helo, P. and Gunasekaran, A. (2017). IoT powered
servitization of manufacturing – an exploratory case study. International Journal of
Production Economics, Vol. 192, pp. 92–105.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 171 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[193] Saccani, N., Perona, M., Bacchetti, A. (2017). The total cost of ownership of
durable consumer goods: A conceptual model and an empirical application. International
Journal of Production, Economics, Vol. 183, pp. 1–13.
[194] Sarasini, S. and Linder, M. (2018). Integrating a business model perspective into
transition theory: The example of new mobility services. Environmental Innovation and
Societal Transitions, Vol. 27, pp. 16–31.
[195] Scott, J. T. (2015). The Sustainable Business a Practitioner’s Guide to Achieving
Long-Term Profitability and Competitiveness, 2nd ed. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.
[196] Seidel J., Barquet AP., Seliger G. and Kohl H. (2017) Future of Business Models
in Manufacturing. In: Stark R., Seliger G., Bonvoisin J. (eds) Sustainable Manufacturing.
Sustainable Production, Life Cycle Engineering and Management. Springer, Cham, pp. 149-
162.
[197] Schenkl, S. A., Rösch, C. and Mörtl, M. (2014). Literature study on factors
influencing the market acceptance of PSS. Procedia CIRP, Vol. 16, pp. 98-103.
[198] Scheepens, A. E., Vogtländer, J. G. and Brezet, J. C. (2016). Two life cycle
assessment (LCA) based methods to analyse and design complex (regional) circular
economy systems. Case: Making water tourism more sustainable. Journal of Cleaner
Production, Vol. 114, pp. 257-268.
[199] Schrader, U. (1999). Consumer Acceptance of Eco-efficient Services. Greener
Management International, No. 25, pp. 105-121
[200] Schuit, C. S. C., Baldassarre, B. and Bocken, N. (2017). Sustainable business
model experimentation practices: evidence from three startups. In: 2nd Conference on
Product Lifetimes and the Environment (PLATE), Delft Univ Technol, Fac Ind Design Engn,
Delft, Netherlands, pp. 370–376.
[201] Seitz, M. A. (2007). A critical assessment of motives for product recovery: the
case of engine remanufacturing. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 15, No. 11-12, pp.
1147-1157.
[202] Shafer, S. M., Smith, H. J. and Linder, J. C. (2005). The power of business
models. Business Horizons, Vol. 48, No. 3, pp. 199-207.
[203] Sicari, S., Rizzardi, A., Grieco, L. A. and Coen-Porisini, A. (2015). Security, privacy
and trust in Internet of Things: The road ahead. Computer Networks, Vol. 76, pp. 146–164.
[204] Sinclair, M., Sheldrick, L., Moreno, M. and Dewberry, E. (2018). Consumer
Intervention Mapping—A Tool for Designing Future Product Strategies within Circular
Product Service Systems. Sustainability, Vol. 10, No. 6, pp. 1-21.
[205] Singh, J., Cooper, T., Cole, C., Gnanapragasam, A., Shapley, M. (2019). Evaluating
approaches to resource management in consume product sectors - An overview of global
practices. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 224, pp. 218-237.
[206] Sousa-Zomer, T. T., Magalhães, L., Zancul, E. and Cauchick-Miguel, P. A. (2018).
Exploring the challenges for circular business implementation in manufacturing
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 172 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
companies: An empirical investigation of a pay-per-use service provider. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 135, pp. 3-13.
[207] Spieth. P., Schneckenberg, D. and Ricart, J. (2014). Business model innovationstate
of the art and future challenges for the eld. R&D Management, Vol. 44, pp. 237–247.
[208] Spring, M. and Araujo, L. (2017), “Product biographies in servitization and the
circular economy”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 60, pp. 126–137.
[209] Stahel, W. R. (1993). Re-use and recycling: Waste prevention and resource
savings in utilization. Ekistics, Vol. 60, pp. 358-359.
[210] Stahel, W. R. (1994). The utilization focused service economy: Resource
efficiency, in B. R. Allenby and D. J. Richards (eds), The Greening of Industrial Ecosystems,
Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, pp. 178–190.
[211] Stål, H. I. and Jansson, J. (2017). Sustainable Consumption and Value
Propositions: Exploring Product–Service System Practices Among Swedish Fashion
Firms. Sustainable Development, Vol. 25, No. 6, pp.546-558.
[212] Sundin, E., Lindahl, M., and Ijomah, W. (2009). Product design for
product/service systems: Design experiences from Swedish industry. Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 20, No. 5, pp. 723-753.
[213] Sundin, E. and Dunbäck, O. (2013). Reverse logistics challenges in
remanufacturing of automotive mechatronic devices. Journal of Remanufacturing, Vol. 3,
No. 1, pp. 1-8.
[214] Suryanarayana, G. and Taylor, R. 2004. A Survey of Trust Management and
Resource Discovery Technologies in Peer-to-Peer Applications. Tech. Rep. UCI-ISR-04-6,
The University of California, Irvine.
[215] Sustainable (2019). What is eco snobbism? (online). Available at:
https://sustainableresponsibleliving,com/2019/06/11/what-is-eco-snobbism/?
[216] Szatkowski, D. (2019). Average age of vehicles on U.S. roads hits 11,8 years.
Automotive News. (online). Available at: https://www.autonews.com/automakers-
suppliers/average-age-vehicles-us-roads-hits-118-years
[217] Taylor, M., Reilly, D. and Wren, C. (2018). Internet of things support for
marketing activities. Journal of Strategic Marketing, pp.1-12.
[218] Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long
Range Planning, Vol. 43, No. 2-3, pp. 172-194.
[219] Thompson, C. J. and Haytko, D. L. (1997). Speaking of fashion: consumers' uses
of fashion discourses and the appropriation of countervailing cultural meanings. Journal of
consumer research, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 15-42.
[220] Tran, T. and Park, J. Y. (2015). Development of a strategic prototyping
framework for product service systems using co-creation approach. Procedia CIRP, Vol. 30,
pp. 1-6.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 173 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[221] Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. and Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for
developing evidence‐informed management knowledge by means of systematic
review. British journal of management, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 207-222.
[222] Truong, N. B. (2018). Evaluation of trust in the Internet of Things: models,
mechanisms and applications. PhD Thesis, Liverpool John Moores University.
[223] Truong, N.B., Lee, H., Askwith, B. and Lee, G.M. (2017). Toward a Trust
Evaluation Mechanism in the Social Internet of Things. Sensors, Vol. 17 No. 6, p. 1346.
[224] Tryfonas, T., Li, H. and Li, S. (2016). The Internet of Things: a security point of
view. Internet Research, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 337–359.
[225] Tu, M. (2018). An exploratory study of Internet of Things (IoT) adoption
intention in logistics and supply chain management: A mixed research approach. The
International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 131-151.
[226] Tukker, A. (2004). Eight types of product–service system: eight ways to
sustainability? Experiences from SusProNet. Business strategy and the environment, Vol.
13, No. 4, pp. 246-260.
[227] Tukker, A. (2015). Product services for a resource-efficient and circular economy
– a review. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 97, pp. 76–91.
[228] Van Riel, A. C., Liljander, V. and Jurriens, P. (2001). Exploring consumer
evaluations of e-services: a portal site. International Journal of Service Industry
Management, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 359-377.
[229] Van Kranenburg, R. and Bassi, A. (2012). IoT challenges. Commun. Mob.
Comput, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1–5.
[230] van Loon, P., Delagarde, C. and Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2018). The role of
second-hand markets in circular busi ness: a simple model for leasing versus selling
consumer products. International Journal of Production Research, Vol., 56, No. 1-2, pp.
960-973.
[231] Van Weelden, E., Mugge, R. and Bakker, C. (2016). Paving the way towards
circular consumption: exploring consumer acceptance of refurbished mobile phones in the
Dutch market. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 113, pp. 743-754.
[232] Vargo, S. L., Maglio, P. P. and Akaka, M. A. (2008). On value and value cocreation:
A service systems and service logic perspective. European management
journal, Vol. 26, No.3, pp. 145-152.
[233] Vasantha, G. V. A., Roy, R., Lelah, A. and Brissaud, D. (2012). A review of
product–service systems design methodologies. Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 23,
No. 9, pp. 635-659.
[234] Verstrepen, S., Cruijssen, F., De Brito, M. P. and Dullaert, W. (2007). An
exploratory analysis of reverse logistics in Flanders. European Journal of Transport and
Infrastructure Research, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 301-316.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 174 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[235] Virtanen, M., Manskinen, K. and Eerola, S. (2017) Circular Material Library. An
Innovative Tool to Design Circular Economy, The Design Journal, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 1611-
1619.
[236] Wallendorf, M. and Arnould, E. J. (1988). “My favorite things”: A cross-cultural
inquiry into object attachment, possessiveness, and social linkage. Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 14, pp. 531-547.
[237] Wang, Y. and Hazen, B. T. (2016). Consumer product knowledge and intention
to purchase remanufactured products. International Journal of Production Economics, Vol.
181, No. 10, pp. 460-469.
[238] Wang, Y., Huscroft, J. R., Hazen, B. T. and Zhang, M. (2018). Green information,
green certification and consumer perceptions of remanufctured automobile
parts. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 128, pp. 187-196.
[239] Wastling, T., Charnley, F. and Moreno, M. (2018). Design for Circular Behaviour:
Considering Users in a Circular Economy. Sustainability, Vol. 10, No. 6, pp. 1-21.
[240] Wells, P. and Seitz, M. (2005). Business models and closed loop supply chains:
A typology. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 10, No. 4 pp. 249–
251.
[241] Westhead, P. and Wright, M. (2000). Introduction. In Westhead, P. and Wright,
M. (Eds.), Advances in entrepreneurship (Vol. I, pp. xii-xcvi). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
[242] Williams, M., Nurse, J. R. and Creese, S. (2016). The perfect storm: The privacy
paradox and the Internet-of-Things. In: 2016 11th International Conference on Availability,
Reliability and Security (ARES), pp. 644–652. Salzburg, Austria: IEEE.
[243] Wirtz, B. W. (2011). Business Model Management Design – Instruments –
Success Factors. Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag/Springer.
[244] Wirtz, J. and Lovelock, C. (2016). Services Marketing: People, Technology. World
Scientific Publishing Company.
[245] Wirtz, B., Pistoia, A., Ulrich, S. and Göttel, V. (2016). Business models: origin,
development and future research. Long Range Planning, Vol.49, pp. 36–54.
[246] Wolk after sales experts (2018). Aftermarket structure in Europe. (online).
Available at: https://www.wolk-aftersales.com/aftermarket-structure-in-europe.html
[247] Wu, J., Chen, J. and Dou, W. (2017). The Internet of Things and interaction style:
the effect of smart interaction on brand attachment. Journal of Marketing
Management, Vol. 33, No. 1-2, pp. 61-75.
[248] Yan, Z., Zhang, P. and Vasilakos, A. V. (2014). A survey on trust management for
Internet of Things. Journal of network and computer applications, Vol. 42, pp. 120-134.
[249] Yerpude, S. and Singhal, T. K. (2018). Internet of Things based Customer
Relationship Management–A Research Perspective. International Journal of Engineering &
Technology, Vol. 7, No. 2.7, pp. 444-450.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 175 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
[250] Yoo, J. J., Arnold, T. J. and Frankwick, G. L. (2012). Effects of positive customerto-customer
service interaction. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65, No. 9, pp. 1313-
1320.
[251] Zott, C. and Amit, R. (2009). Business Model Design: An Activity System
Perspective, Long Range Planning, Vol. 43, No. 2-3, pp. 216-226.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 176 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Appendix 1: References to the Gorenje environmental scanning
and market analysis
Austria and Slovenia
Circular future (n.d.) Fact Sheets (online). Available at:
https://www.circularfutures.at/bibliothek/fact-sheets/.
Cost Association (2019). Action CA16121 (online). Available at:
https://www.cost.eu/actions/CA16121/.
Euromonitor (2015). What Do Consumers Look For in a Washing Machine (online). Available at:
https://blog.euromonitor.com/what-do-consumers-look-for-in-a-washing-machine/.
Euromonitor (2019a). Home Laundry Appliances in Austria (online). Available at:
https://www.euromonitor.com/home-laundry-appliances-in-austria/report.
Euromonitor (2019b). Laundry Care in Austria (online). Available at:
https://www.euromonitor.com/laundry-care-in-austria/report.
European Commision (2017). Eco-innovation Action Plan (online). Available at:
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecoap/frontpage_en.
European Commision (2019). Country reports - Environment - European Commission (online).
Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eir/country-reports/index_en.htm.
European Environment Agency (2017). Waste prevention in Europe: policies, status and trends
in (online). Available at: https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/waste-prevention-in-europe-
2017.
Eurostat (2018). Computer and personal and household goods repair statistics - NACE Rev. 2 Statistics
Explained (online). Available at: URL https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-
explained/index.php/Computer_and_personal_and_household_goods_repair_statistics_-
_NACE_Rev._2.
GfK (2018). Connected Consumer Index (online). Available at: https://connected-
consumer.gfk.com/connected-consumer-index/?no_cache=1.
GfK (2018). Press release (online). Available at: URL https://www.gfk.com/insights/press-
release/ifa-2016-mda-en/.
Grifoni, P., D'Andrea, A., Ferri, F., Guzzo, T., Felicioni, M. A., Praticò, C. and Vignoli, A. (2018).
Sharing Economy: Business Models and Regulatory Landscape in the Mediterranean Areas,
International Business Research, Vol. 11, No. 5, pp. 62-79.
Hervey, G. (2018). Ranking how EU countries do with the circular (online). Available at:
https://www.politico.eu/article/ranking-how-eu-countries-do-with-the-circular-economy/.
Initiative Wachstum im Wandel (2019). Neues EUropainfo: Österreich auf dem Weg in die
Kreislaufwirtschaft – Wachstum im Wandel (online). Available at:
https://wachstumimwandel.at/neues-europainfo-oesterreich-auf-dem-weg-in-die-
kreislaufwirtschaft/.
Jacobi, N., Haas, W., Wiedenhofer, D., and Mayer, A. (2018). Providing an economy-wide
monitoring framework for the circular economy in Austria: Status quo and challenges.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 137, pp. 156–166.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 177 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Marktmeinungmensch (2017). Studie Einstellungen der Österreicher zu Smart Home und Smart
City 2017 (online). Available at: http://www.marktmeinungmensch.at.
Marktmeinungmensch (2018). Studie Wäschewaschen in Österreich (online). Available at:
http://www.marktmeinungmensch.at/.
Mert, W., Tritthart, W., and Watts, M. (2009). Smart domestic appliances in sustainable energy
systems – consumer acceptance and restrictions (online). eceee Summer Study proceedings
Available at:
www.eceee.org/library/conference_proceedings/eceee_Summer_Studies/2009/Panel_8/8.15
5/.
Nielsen (2017). Haushaltsführung in Österreich – wer erledigt was? (online). Available at:
http://www.nielsen.com/at/de/insights/reports/2017/gender-roles.
Redek, T., Ograjensek, I., Kostevc, C., and Godnov, U. (2012). On the Value System as a
Precondition for Sustainability: An Overview of Preliminary Survey Results for Slovenia. In L.
Galetic & J. Simurina (Eds.), Sixth International Conference: An Enterprise Odyssey: Corporate
Governance and Public Policy--Path to Sustainable Future: Proceedings. Zagreb: University of
Zagreb. pp. 36–37
RepaNet (2016). Regionale Kreislaufwirtschaft - Inputpapier für die Implementierung von
RESET2020, (online). Available at: https://www.repanet.at/re-use-toolbox/re-use-
repathek/regionale-kreislaufwirtschaft-inputpapier-fuer-die-implementierung-von-reset2020/.
Saccani, N., Perona, M. and Bacchetti, A. (2017). The total cost of ownership of durable
consumer goods: A conceptual model and an empirical application. International Journal of
Production, Economics, Vol. 183, pp. 1–13.
Širec, K., Hojnik, B.B., Denac, M., and Močnik, D. (2018). Slovenska podjetja in krožno
gospodarstvo: slovenski podjetniški observatorij 2017. Univerzitetna založba Univerze.
Wieser, H., and Tröger, N. (2015). Die Nutzungsdauer und Obsoleszenz von Gebrauchsgütern im
Zeitalter der Beschleunigung: Eine empirische Untersuchung in österreichischen Haushalten.
Vienna: Kammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte für Wien.
Zoric, J. and Hrovatin, N (2012). Household Willingness to Pay for Green Electricity in Slovenia,
Energy Policy, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 180–187.
Žurga Z, Forte Tavčer P. 2014). Apparel Purchasing with Consideration of Eco-labels among
Slovenian Consumers. FIBRES & TEXTILES in Eastern Europe, Vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 20-27.
Denmark
State of Green (2019). New national Danish strategy for circular economy. [online] Retrieved
from: https://stateofgreen.com/en/partners/state-of-green/news/new-national-danish-strategy-for-
circular-economy/
MFVM (2019). Circular Economy. [online] Retrieved from: https://en.mfvm.dk/focus-on/circular-
economy/
Food nation (2019). New national Danish strategy for circular economy. [online] Retrieved from:
https://foodnationdenmark.dk/news/new-national-danish-strategy-for-circular-economy/
Copcap (2015). Denmark wins international Circular Economy Award. [online] Retrieved from:
http://www.copcap.com/newslist/2014/denmark-wins-international-circular-economy-award
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 178 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Christensen Lasse Grøn (2018a). THE DANISH GOVERNMENT PRESENTS 'DIGITAL GROWTH
STRATEGY'. [online] Retrieved from:https://investindk.com/insights/the-danish-government-
presents-digital-growth-strategy
Christensen Lasse Grøn (2018b). DENMARK ONCE AGAIN THE MOST DIGITAL COUNTRY IN THE
EU. [online] Retrieved from:https://investindk.com/insights/denmark-once-again-the-most-digital-
country-in-the-eu
Frederiksen, Anne Kirsten (2018). New circular economy tool for Danish companies. [online]
Retrieved from:https://www.dtu.dk/english/news/2018/05/new-circular-economy-tool-for-danish-
companies?id=6c074412-f471-4628-bf29-ecf63ffd821f
CW Research (2019). Denmark launches portal on circular economy for SMEs. [online] Retrieved
from: https://chemicalwatch.com/59680/denmark-launches-portal-on-circular-economy-for-smes
FocusEconomics (2019). Denmark Economic Outlook. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.focus-economics.com/countries/denmark
Nordea (2019). The economic context of Denmark. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.nordeatrade.com/en/explore-new-market/denmark/economical-context?vider_sticky=oui
Young Upstarts (2019). Denmark’s Startups Are Ready To Switch To The Circular Economy
Model. [online] Retrieved from: http://www.youngupstarts.com/2018/07/20/denmarks-startups-are-
ready-to-switch-to-the-circular-economy-model/
State of Green (2017). Danish Companies Want A Circular Economy – A New Website Will Help
Them. [online] Retrieved from: https://stateofgreen.com/en/partners/state-of-green/news/danish-
companies-want-a-circular-economy-a-new-website-will-help-them/
Euromonitor (2019). Home Laundry Appliances in Denmark. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.euromonitor.com/home-laundry-appliances-in-denmark/report
Statista (2019). Total population in Denmark from 2007 to 2018, by age group (in millions) .
[online] Retrieved from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/570654/total-population-in-denmark-by-
age/
Euromonitor (2018). Consumer Lifestyles in Denmark. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.euromonitor.com/consumer-lifestyles-in-denmark/report
Trading economics (2019). Denmark Consumer Spending. [online] Retrieved from:
https://tradingeconomics.com/denmark/consumer-spending
Banco Santander (2019). DENMARK: REACHING THE CONSUMER. [online] Retrieved from:
https://en.portal.santandertrade.com/analyse-markets/denmark/reaching-the-consumers
Burke Steven (2019). Denmark: Consumer confidence softens in April. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.focus-economics.com/countries/denmark/news/consumer-confidence/consumer-
confidence-softens-in-april
Ecommerce News (2019). Ecommerce in Denmark. [online] Retrieved from:
https://ecommercenews.eu/ecommerce-in-europe/ecommerce-in-denmark/
Culpin Ben (2018). Denmark E-commerce - Your guide to Consumer Statistics and Channel
Recommendations. [online] Retrieved from: https://blog.wakeupdata.com/e-commerce-guide-to-
denmark-consumer-statistics-and-channel-recommendations
Marton Attila (2018). The not-so-sharing economy. [online] Retrieved from: http://www.bos-
cbscsr.dk/2018/07/09/the-not-so-sharing-economy/
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 179 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Levring Peter and Christian Wienberg (2017). Denmark Moves to Integrate the Sharing Economy
Into Its Legal System. [online] Retrieved from: https://skift.com/2017/10/10/denmark-moves-to-
integrate-the-sharing-economy-into-its-legal-system/
Fjalland, E. L. P., and Landbo, B. (red.) (2017). Sharing City: A Co-Created Magazine on the
Sharing Economy of Cities and Local Communities. [online] Retrieved from:
https://rucforsk.ruc.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/60587270/Sharing_City_Magazine.pdf
Daws Ryan (2019). Denmark is the latest country to receive nationwide IoT. [online] Retrieved
from: https://www.iottechnews.com/news/2019/apr/11/denmark-country-nationwide-iot/
E/RA (2018). Shift in media use points to Danes' acceptance of new media and adaptability to
new ways to access media content. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.epra.org/news_items/media-developments-in-denmark-summary-and-discourse-2018
Euromonitor (2019). Consumer Electronics in Denmark. [online] Retrieved
from:https://www.euromonitor.com/consumer-electronics-in-denmark/report
Statistica (2019). Which of the following connected home devices do you own or have ready
access to?. [online] Retrieved from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/884798/adoption-of-
connected-home-devices-in-denmark/
Euromonitor (2019). Home Laundry Appliances in Denmark. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.euromonitor.com/home-laundry-appliances-in-denmark/report
Netherlands
Geller M. (2018). FOCUS-Unilever confronts the ‘chairdrobe’ as consumers rethink laundry.
[online] Retrieved from: https://af.reuters.com/article/commoditiesNews/idAFL8N1VO0I6
Splash Lease (2019). Cheap rental for students. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.splash.nl/student
Baus C. (2015). What Do Consumers Look For in a Washing Machine? [online] Retrieved from:
https://blog.euromonitor.com/what-do-consumers-look-for-in-a-washing-machine/
Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2019). A model offering multiple benefits for multiple electronic
products. [online] Retrieved from: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/case-
studies/internet-enabled-pay-per-wash-a-model-offering-multiple-benefits
CBI (2019) The Internet of Things in Europe. [online] Retrieved from: https://www.cbi.eu/market-
information/outsourcing-itobpo/internet-things
Statistics Netherlands (2018). Trends in the Netherlands 2018. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/publication/2018/26/trends-in-the-netherlands-2018
Silicon canals (2018). Dutch consumers not really interested in adopting smart home technology
– yet. [online] Retrieved from: https://siliconcanals.nl/news/smart-home-trends-2018/
Euromonitor (2019). Home Laundry Appliances in the Netherlands. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.euromonitor.com/home-laundry-appliances-in-the-netherlands/report
Hydrofinity (2018). Commercial Laundry Service Trends You Should Know About. [online]
Retrieved from: https://www.hydrofinity.com/blog/commercial-laundry-service-trends
Government of Netherlands (2019a). Encouraging a circular economy. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.government.nl/topics/circular-economy/encouraging-a-circular-economy
Government of Netherlands (2019b). Transition to a circular economy. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.government.nl/topics/circular-economy/transition-to-a-circular-economy
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 180 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Government of Netherlands (2019c). Dutch Digitalisation Strategy. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.government.nl/documents/reports/2018/06/01/dutch-digitalisation-strategy
FocusEconomics (2019a). Netherlands Economic Outlook. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.focus-economics.com/countries/netherlands
FocusEconomics (2019b). Netherlands Consumer Confidence March 2019. [online] Retrieved
from: https://www.focus-economics.com/countries/netherlands/news/consumer-
confidence/consumer-confidence-falls-to-over-four-year-low-in
Nordea (2019). The economic context of the Netherlands. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.nordeatrade.com/en/explore-new-market/netherlands/economical-
context?&accepter_cookies=oui
Apolitical (2019). Amsterdam harnesses the sharing economy for social good. [online] Retrieved
from: https://apolitical.co/solution_article/amsterdam-sharing-economy-social-impact/
Santander (2019). NETHERLANDS: REACHING THE CONSUMER. [online] Retrieved from:
https://en.portal.santandertrade.com/analyse-markets/netherlands/reaching-the-consumers
NVC (2019). Top 10 global consumer trends for 2018. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.en.nvc.nl/news/item/top-10-wereldwijde-consumententrends-voor-2018/
Euromonitor (2018). Consumer Lifestyles in the Netherlands. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.euromonitor.com/consumer-lifestyles-in-the-netherlands/report
MPA (2019). Netherlands Consumer Trends. [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.pma.com/content/articles/2014/05/netherlands-consumer-trends
Metselaar Tessa (2019). Customer Service Trends in the Netherlands. [online] Retrieved from:
https://blog.olark.com/customer-service-trends-in-the-netherlands
Statista (2019). Forecast of the household composition in the Netherlands from 2016 to 2060,
by number of people in household (in 1,000s). [online] Retrieved from:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/524602/netherlands-household-composition-forecast-by-size/
Statisticstimes (2019). List of Countries by Population Density. [online] Retrieved from:
http://statisticstimes.com/demographics/countries-by-population-density.php
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 181 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Appendix 2: Bosch- in-depth interview protocol
(only protocol for the IAM distributor is presented here; for other two categories of AAM the
protocols are almost identical)
Introduction
My name is…….. I am from Masaryk University in Brno, Czech Republic and I cooperate in the
Horizon 2020 project Resource efficient circular product-service systems (the abbreviation is
ReCiPSS). It is a European Union funded research program aiming to foster circular economy –
one of the focus areas which is actively supported by the EU. We do this interview also
in…France/Germany (DEPENDS ON THE COUNTRY).
The research team is a big consortium of members from France, Germany (THE SEQUENCE
DEPENDS ON THE COUNTRY YOU MAKE THE INTERVIEW), Netherlands, Sweden, Slovenia,
Romania and Czechia. Members include the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Technical
University Delft, Frauenhofer Institute, Stuttgart etc.
Today, there is little knowledge about concrete pains and gains of buying groups, wholesalers
and garages when handling core returns. The main aim of the project is to find out how to
optimize existing reverse logistics processes of cores. The results of the project serve as an
information basis for EU policy makers and their decision making in the future – also in terms of
policies they develop for businesses.
Our research interest is to find out the way how automotive aftermarket stakeholders,
particularly trade levels, manage their core returns. We would like to investigate what
challenges they face and what potential solutions can be developed to overcome these
challenges. As a representant for the IAM distributor segment, we have identified your
company as a relevant information source to gain insights into your reverse logistics processes
of cores. We will neither ask you about any sensitive information nor financial data.
Would you mind if we record this interview? Recording is a common approach when doing
interviews as it is very challenging doing an interview and making notes at the same time. This
allows us to better analyze your answers. We can go back and forth in the interview dialogue
and do not loose important details of the conversation. Recording will be analyzed only by us.
The results will be summarized in an anonymous way and clustered according to type of trading
level, country and company size. If you desire, no individual data such as your name and your
company name will be ever published.
Here is the consent form……
Interview Questions
I. General information
1. What is your role in the company?  What are you responsible
for?
 Do you also deal
with….DEPENDS ON THE
ANSWER….
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 182 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
 purchase of spare parts,
 negotiation with suppliers,
 customer relationships,
 parts sales and negotiation
with customers
 cores handling,
 cores reverse logistics
 IT solution for logistics,
 IT solution for reverse
logistics…
2. Are you a member of some buying group?
If yes, which one(s)?
If no, why not?
What benefits do you have from
such a membership? Do they
concern also cores returns?
3. What is the field of action of your company? What
does your company deal with?
Compare and add to the profile of
the company if some other
activities are mentioned:
 Only purchase and sale of the
spare parts
 Car sales
 E-shop
 Repair
 If car sales…also leasing and
Insurance?
 Anything else?
4. How is your company structured? I mean do you
have special departments for – for instance –
purchase, sales, customer relationship, logistics, IT
etc.?
! ask only in case of companies
with more than 10 employees
! ask also for the chart…if they can
give you or draw
5. What percentage of your total business is related
to selling remanufactured products, in comparison
to your new product sales? I mean, how many new
parts and how many remanufactured parts do you
sell – as a ratio?
So, is business with reman parts
important for you?
6. In your opinion what are the major trends
affecting your business / market / industry?
For instance:
 How is it with the
concentration?;
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 183 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
 How is it with the legislation?;
 How is it with the IT
development in logistics?;
 How is it with the bargaining
power of your suppliers and
customers in case of
remanufactured spare parts?
7. Is there any specific trend – how the reman
business is evolving and probably will evolve?
For instance, higher demand for
reman parts, cheaper reman parts,
increasing speed of demand for
reman parts?
8. How many different suppliers for remanufactured
products do you work with? Are there some
changes – more or less suppliers? If yes, why?
II. Core return management and processes
9. How does your company manage core returns?
Are the processes centralized or decentralized?
! ask only in case of companies with more than 10
employees
And do you do it internally or as outsourced
processes?
Can we start with the physical
processes when collecting cores
from your customer? How do you
do it, how often, how much, who,
where…
 Collecting the cores
 Quality checking and sorting
 Gatekeeping (refusing low
quality cores)
 Transport
 Warehousing
 Scrapping low quality
 Delivering to the
remanufacturers
10. What are the reasons for managing your cores this
way?
Tradition? Efficiency?
Effectiveness? Convenience?
11. Have you considered other approaches? If yes,
why?
And why have you not changed? If not, why?
Outsourced, internalised, more or
less frequent
12. How do you know which core you have to return
to which supplier?
Do you have special database, do
cores have special marking?
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 184 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
commercial processes
13. How do you manage the different procedures for
different suppliers?
in terms of:
 physical logistics,
 acceptance criteria:
o technical core return
criteria (quality),
o amount of surcharge,
o time limits to redeem
the deposit
14. Do you apply the same core return conditions to
your customers as your supplier to you?
o technical core return
criteria (quality) – are your
conditions better, same or
more strict to your
customers?
o amount of surcharge – are
the amounts of deposit
same, higher or lower to
your customers or you
individualize/customize
them?
o time limits to redeem the
deposit - are the time
limits same, higher or
lower to your customers or
you
individualize/customize
them?
15. How often do your suppliers reject cores?
Do you take any steps when cores are rejected?
Which ones?
16. How often do you reject a core from your
customers and for what reason (quality, time limit,
no demand for the cores that time, loss of
money…)?
IF YES, how do you handle that?
If not, e.g.:
 it would damage my customer
relations
 I need the cores and I know I
can use most of them
somehow
 Immediately after checking –
personally through our sales
staff, via email, via shared
information system
 I have to give customers some
compensation instead
 I have to explain in detail the
reason…
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 185 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
17. How do you keep track on deposit balancing?
Does this influence which supplier you choose
(returning cores and purchasing reman products)?
HAVE IN MIND THE ANSWER TO Q.
11: IF THEY USE SOME SPECIAL
DATABASE TO KNOW WHICH
CORE TO RETURN TO WHICH
SUPPLIER
 Track keeping for some
suppliers is very demanding,
complicated
 to work with reports and
protocols is very demanding
etc.
IT and IS
18. Which information systems [eg. SAP, MS
Dynamics) do you use to manage cores?
Are you satisfied with this/these systems? If yes, why?
If not, why not?
 Do you use it/ (them – if
different) and SAME OR
DIFFERENT for all processes?:
o Evidence of collection,
quality checking and
sorting, warehousing,
evidence of transport,
o Evidence of deposits…
Easiness of use, speed,
transparency, compatibility with
other systems…ALSO WITH OUT
SUPPLIERS AND
CUSTOMERS´SYSTEMS
19. Which core related processes should be also
supported, which are not supported today?
20. What would you like to improve in the current
information flow related to the core handling?
eg.: software functions, hardware,
speed, sharing the information
and data
Cloud
21. What are your experiences with cloud-service?  Do you use any for the
purchase of spare parts,
inbound or outbound logistics,
for reverse logistics of cores?
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 186 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
 IF YES, what are the benefits
and what are the problems
(e.g. reliability, time, costs,
transparency…)?
 IF YES, who is the provider?
 IF NO, WHY NOT?
22. What are OR WOULD BE IF NO EXPERIENCE EXISTS
YET your requirements to a cloud-service?
23. Is the location where your data is or would be
hosted of importance to you?
If so, would you prefer some specific hosting
location? e.g. Europe, France, Germany,
India…
24. What needs to be provided to you to rely on the
cloud-service? So you feel safe, you can trust to it?
e.g.:
 Certifications
 Reputation of the provider
 Contracts
 References and
recommendations from other
firms…
III. What is going well and what not so well
Could we now summarize what is going well and
what not so well in your current core return
handling and management?
25. Which core return procedures are going well? physical and commercial
procedures, IT, processes towards
and relationships with customers
and suppliers:
 Time
 Costs
 Transparency
 Relationships….
26. Which core return procedures are not going well? e.g.:
 Physical:
(centralized/decentralized
approach, collection, sorting
and quality checking, space,
dirty spaces, pickup
frequencies, capacity, costs…)
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 187 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
 commercial procedures (costs,
deposits, time limits, demand
and supply, customers and
suppliers relationships…)
 IT/IS (quality, capacity,
connectivity, availability,
software, hardware…)
IV. Claims and complaints – cores handling
27. What type of claims and complaints do you receive
from your customers regarding returned cores?
 Amount of deposit
 Time for returning the deposit
 Time for decision making
related to deposit
 Quality of cores
 Others?............
28. How many claims or how often do you receive
claims and complaints from your customers
regarding returned cores?
 How do you feel about it?
 Is it a problem for you or just
unpleasant?
29. How do you resolve the claims?
30. Do you complain to your suppliers in terms of your
core returns?
If yes, about what and how often?
 Amount of deposit
 Time for returning the deposit
 Time for decision making
related to deposit
 Quality of cores
 Others?............
31. How do you experience the complaint process?
Are you satisfied with the solutions?
If not, why?
 Length of the process
 Solution
 Power of supplier…
32. Are there issues that you cannot address with your
suppliers and/or customers in case of core
handling?
If yes, why?
V. Outsourcing
DO NOT INTRODUCE THIS TOPIC AS A
SPECIAL ONE – JUST CONTINUE WITH
ASKING
THERE ARE 2 VERSIONS OF
QUESTIONS…DEPENDS ON THE
ANSWERS IF THEY OUTSOURCE OR
NOT SOMETHING FROM THE
CORES HANDLING
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 188 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
A) NO OUTSOURCING:
33. Which activities from the core returns handling
would you be willing to yield to some other firm
and why?
Why not?
34. Which activities would you DEFINITELY like to keep
and why?
35. Could you imagine letting somebody else to do
core inspection and/or deposit management
(meaning that you do not do any selection and
evaluation)?
!!!ASK ONLY IF THEY DO NOT
MENTION IT WIH THE Q. 33
36. Can you imagine someone in your network doing
it? (garages, your sales branches)
If no, why not?
37. Can you imagine an independent third party doing
it? (logistics partner, such as DHL, UPS)
If no, why not?
B) THEY DO SOME OUTSOURCING
38. You mentioned that you outsource some
procedures from cores handling……. Which other
procedures or activities would you be willing to
yield to some other firm and why?
Why not?
39. Which activities are provided by other firms and
why?
!!!ASK ONLY IF THEY DID NOT
MENTION it before
40. Which activities would you DEFINITELY like to keep
and why?
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 189 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
41. Could you imagine letting somebody else to do
core inspection and/or deposit management
(meaning that you do not do any selection and
evaluation)?
!!!ASK ONLY IF THEY DID NOT
MENTION THESE ACTIVITIES
BEFORE….THAT SOMEBODY ELSE
DOES
42. Can you imagine someone in your network doing it
– IF IT IS NOT DONE THIS WAY YET? (garages, your
sales branches)
If no, why not?
43. Can you imagine an independent third party doing
it? – IF IT IS NOT DONE THIS WAY YET? (logistics
partner, such as DHL, UPS)
If no, why not?
VI. Trust
44. What would you need to see or to know to trust
the external party’s inspection of cores and
deposit management? Especially if the
transparency is needed…
e.g.:
 picture of the damage,
 a written report about the
inspection and deposit
management,
 direct call from the operations
team to discuss…

45. What evidence would you require to feel that you
keep control when inspection and deposit
management is provided by the external
party? ..So you can influence the process and the
outcomes…
Could certain information support you in that?
eg.:
 tracking where your cores are,
 transparency of your deposit
flows …online process is
directly connected to your
information system,
 core handling reports,
 core stock information…
46. Do you consider any data in the context of core
return as “confidential”?
What is confidential data for you and for what
reason?
eg. quantities – supply and sales,
customers, suppliers, deposit
values…..SENSITIVITY,
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 190 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
RELATIONSHIPS, SECRET…MY
OWN BUSINESS….
47. What information are you or would you be willing
to share in terms of core returns?
eg. quantities – supply and sales,
customers, suppliers, deposit
values, time limits…
Would you like to know more about the project and would you like to participate in the
demonstration? For instance, testing the online platform? (IF YES… we will give your contact to
the partners in our consortium to get in touch with you.
If you would like to demonstrate your participation in the research, your name and the name
of your company can optionally be listed in the final report to the European Commission and
in our academic articles. Are you interested in this?
Thank you very much for your answers and time.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 191 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Appendix 3: Questionnaires for the pilot survey in 4 markets for
Gorenje
English version:
Washing machine in circular economy – owing, pay per wash or pooling
The aim of the questionnaire is to find out attitudes, motives and barriers consumers feel and
have towards various circular economy solution of how to wash the laundry and how with
washing to help with the main goals of circular economy. Survey is a part of the European Union
funded project with the name ReCiPSS (http://www.recipss.eu/).
This questionnaire is fully anonymous and no sensitive personal data which can be misused are
collected.
Questionnaire is available in English, German, Dutch and Slovenian language.
If you are interested in the results summarizing all answers across four countries, please, add
your email address at the end of this questionnaire or write to: klapalov@econ.muni.cz.
Thank you very much for your cooperation.
Survey is realized in 4 countries: Austria, Denmark, Netherlands and Slovenia. The goals of
circular economy are to reduce waste to minimum, reduce negative impact of production and
transport on the environment, helps business and society to be sustainable through keeping
products as long as possible in the use (consumption) cycle and not to promote so called “throwaway”
society.
Circular economy solutions are: 1. to produce and deliver high-quality durable long-lasting
products (which are rather expensive); 2. to repair the products as long as possible (in the U.S.A.
and some other countries legislation promoting the right to repair exists, in the EU rules will
apply from April 2021); 3. to refurbish the products (making products as new); to remanufacture
the products (almost the same as to refurbish with some more processes involved); to recycle
the products (to use materials and components from the old products in the new production).
To keep products longer in the cycle could be also done through renting/sharing/pooling (so
called collaborative consumption) or pay per use instead of buying, owing and throwing away.
These ways are called “access-based consumption”.
On behalf of the ReCiPSS research team from Masaryk University, Faculty of Economics and
Administration, Brno, Czech Republic,
Alena Klapalová
1. Experience with access-based consumption:
a) What is your experience with renting or leasing of products (e.g. any home
appliance, car, tool, notebook etc.)?
No experience x I did it once or twice x I rent/lease things often
b) What is your experience with pay per use for products (e.g. any home appliance,
car, bicycle, tool, notebook etc.)?
No experience x I did it once or twice x I use pay per use system often
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 192 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
c) What is your experience with so called “collaborative consumption” (one form of
sharing products with the others – products may be bought by a group of people or
by one person or even an institution and offered for use for some compensation
(financial or product or service)?
No experience x I did it once or twice x I use collaborative consumption often
I. Renting washing machine
1. What reasons would persuade you to rent a washing machine instead of owing it?
(renting means to have a temporary contract with regular payment) In case, you do not
own a washing machine but you already rent it, what did make you to do you? Please,
choose from the answers (you can choose also more answers):
a. No upfront purchasing costs (no need to have money to buy it or to buy it on credit)
no to some extent yes
b. I do not want to buy and to own: If you answer “yes”, why? Please fill in the reason
bellow
no to some extent yes…Why?..........................
c. The belief that it would cost me cheaper
no to some extent yes
d. Opportunity to test the washing machine (e.g. brand I would like to have)
no to some extent yes
e. To get rid of the responsibility for washing machine maintenance (if maintenance is
offered together with renting)
no to some extent yes
f. Smaller risk of breakdowns due to professional maintenance done by a service
company and due to high quality of washing machine (within renting usually higher
quality machines are provided)
no to some extent yes
g. Environmental concerns (renting requires durable products that operate for longer
time)
no to some extent yes
h. Flexibility – no ownership ties
no to some extent yes
i. Something else……….fill in, please:……………………………………………
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 193 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
no to some extent yes
2. What reasons would persuade you to use a pay per wash service? Pay per wash means
that you do not buy washing machine, but you use it and you pay for each washing –
either at your home for your own individual use (usually you rent it or lease it) or within
collaborative consumption or in the laundromat). If you already use this possibility,
please, tick what did persuade you….in that case, do not choose “maybe”). You can
choose more answers.
a. No upfront purchasing costs (no need to have money to buy it or to buy it on credit)
no to some extent yes
b. The belief that it would cost me cheaper
no to some extent yes
c. Opportunity to test the washing machine (e.g. brand I would like to have)
no to some extent yes
d. To get rid of the responsibility for washing machine maintenance (if maintenance is
offered together with renting related to pay per wash)
no to some extent yes
e. Smaller risk of breakdowns due to professional maintenance done by a service
company and due to high quality of washing machine (within pay per wash usually
higher quality machines are provided)
no to some extent yes
f. Environmental concerns (as above – usually more durable washing machines are
used for this solution)
no to some extent yes
e. Overview of the payments for every wash
no to some extent yes
g. Impressing others (people would admire me for that…how Innovative I am)
no to some extent yes
h. Flexibility – no ownership ties
no to some extent yes
i. Something else…..what? ……………………….
no to some extent yes
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 194 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
3. Thinking about pay per wash instead of owning the washing machine, would these
factors discourage you from pay per wash? (pay per wash requires installing a module
that connects the machine over the internet with the provider and enables to offer
different supplementary functions)
a. I prefer to own things
no to some extent yes
b. the pay per wash provider would know too much about me
no to some extent yes
c. the pay per wash provider cannot guarantee perfect data protection
no to some extent yes
d. in the end, I pay more in comparison to owning washing machine
no to some extent yes
e. I have never heard, or I know minimum about pay per wash system
no to some extent yes
f. Anxiety from unknown (I feel there are many or some risks with pay per wash– I can
damage the product, the prices can rise…)
no to some extent yes
g. Pay per wash creates another financial liability for me, which is stressful (e.g. I do
not want to see billing every month)
no to some extent yes
h. Anything else? What?...........................
II. Collaborative consumption/use of a washing machine shared with the others
and pay per wash
4. What reasons would persuade you to not to dispose with the washing machine in your
household but wash within the collaborative consumption, e.g. one washing machine for
several households or in the laundromat?
a. No upfront purchasing costs (no need to have money to buy it or to buy it on
credit)
no to some extent yes
b. I do not want to buy and to own: If you answer “yes”, why? Please fill in the reason
bellow
no to some extent yes…Why?.............................
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 195 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
c. The belief that it would cost me cheaper
no to some extent yes
d. Opportunity to test the washing machine (e.g. brand I would like to have)
no to some extent yes
e. To get rid of the responsibility for washing machine maintenance (if maintenance
is offered together with pay per wash in collaborative consumption)
no to some extent yes
f. Environmental concerns (collaborative consumption requires durable products
that operate for longer time)
no to some extent yes
g. Smaller risk of breakdowns due to professional maintenance done by a service
company and due to high quality of washing machine
no to some extent yes
h. Flexibility – no ownership ties
no to some extent yes
i. Impressing others – people would admire me for that
no to some extent yes
Possibility to socialize with other people
no to some extent yes
j. Something else……….fill in, please:……………………………………………
No to some extent yes
III. Refurbished and remanufactured washing machine (Refurbished and remanufactured
washing machine is a used washing machine remanufactured to the new-like condition
through disassembly, cleaning, replacement of major components of the product, reassembly
and testing. It provides the same functionality (same electricity and water
consumption) and same quality as a new product or better. Remanufacturing requires more
operations and use of more new parts.
5. Do you have any experience with the refurbished and/or remanufactured product,
especially with home appliances and electronics?
No yes
6. What are your beliefs about refurbished and remanufactured washing machine?
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 196 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
a) I value the refurbished/remanufactured machine the same as if it were new
1) Fully disagree………………..5) fully agree
b) Purchasing a refurbished/remanufactured washing machine will help use less finite
resources
1) Fully disagree………………..5) fully agree
c) Buying refurbished/remanufactured washing machine can reduce harmful effects to
the environment.
1) Fully disagree………………..5) fully agree
d) I am afraid that the performance of refurbished/remanufactured WM is inferior to
performance of new ones
1) Fully disagree……………….5) fully agree
e) I am afraid of the problem with the reliability of washing machine after the end of
warranty period
1) Fully disagree………………….5) fully agree
f) I would be concerned about hygiene of a refurbished/remanufactured washing
machine
1) Fully disagree…………………. 5) fully agree
g) The brand's reputation is essential for making a purchasing decision regarding a
remanufactured washing machine
1) Fully disagree…………………. 5) fully agree
The cards (product profiles) below represent diverse washing options. Please rank the cards in
terms of your preferences (drag them by mouse and drop them in the right-hand box). At the
top of your list, there will be the most preferable (the most desired) washing option, whereas
the least willing one will be put on the bottom.
Price for one wash cycle
___________ _____________ ___________
contract duration
flexible (monthly) yearly long-term (5 years)
washing machine condition
New As new (ca. 5 years) Re-used (ca. 10 years)
service readiness
Within 1 day Within 4 days Within 1 week
billing scheme
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 197 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Pre-paid (and pay up the
rest)
Post-billed Instant (directly after
laundry event)
IV. Your ideal washing machine?
(please indicate your level of agreement with the statements below)
1. I would like washing machine that:
a) is robust and durable so that it lasts longer
1 (not at all)……………………..5 (absolutely)
b) is smart and Internet-connected so that I can manage and control washing online
1 (not at all)……………………..5 (absolutely)
c) tells me in advance if something in the washing machine has to be cleaned or repaired
1 (not at all)……………………..5 (absolutely)
d) works with my personal profile so it recommends me how and when to wash (to
optimize water, energy and detergent consumption)
1 (not at all)……………………..5 (absolutely)
e) is upgraded by the service provider so I can always have the up-to date machine
1 (not at all)……………………..5 (absolutely)
f) has an auto dose for the detergent (auto dosing washing machines will weigh your
clothes in the drum and set the perfect detergent amount automatically)
1 (not at all)……………………..5 (absolutely)
g) an online calendar connection
1 (not at all)……………………..5 (absolutely)
h) online expert advice (available 24 hours/7 days per week – tutorials, videos etc.)
1 (not at all)……………………..5 (absolutely)
i) gives me information about energy and water consumption
1 (not at all)……………………..5 (absolutely)
j) gives me information about price for wash
1 (not at all)……………………..5 (absolutely)
2. Do you consider yourself in acceptance and purchase of new products and acceptance
of new trends in general as:
a) innovator b) early adopter c) early majority d) late majority e)
laggard
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 198 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
3. Do you consider yourself as an eco-friend, eco-fan or even an eco-campaigner?
1 (not at all)……………………..5 (absolutely)
4. How is it with the ownership and purchase of the washing machine you use?
a) I (we – if you are in pair or a family) bought it/got it
b) I/we leased it/bought on credit (I/we will pay whole sum step by step)
c) I/we rent it (we have a temporary contract)
d) /I/we use washing machine in our apartment, but it is owned by our landlord
e) I/we use washing machine in our house of flat –(so called collaborative
consumption) – it is not our and I/we pay for the use
f) I/we use the laundromat in the town
g) Other…please, fill in how:
5. How often do you wash your laundry?
a) Less than once a week
b) 1-2 times per week
c) 3-4 times a week
d) More than 4 times a week
Your age group:
18-23 24-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 60
and more
Your education:
primary education high school bachelor degree and more
Your current place of residence:
Village small town big town
Your status:
Living alone
Living with partner without children
Living with partner with 1-2 child
Living with partner with 3 and more children
Living with parents and/or grandparents (2-3 persons)
Living with parents and/or grandparents (more than 3 persons)
Living with friends/ schoolmates/colleagues
Other: ……………………………
Your living conditions:
Living in a private house/cottage
Living in the apartment (house with apartments)
Other:……………..
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 199 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Your income group (xxx/person):
Danish version:
Vaskemaskine i cirkulær økonomi - eje, betaling pr. vask eller fælles
Formålet med spørgeskemaet er at finde ud af holdninger, motiver og barrierer, som
forbrugerne føler og har over for forskellige cirkulærøkonomiske løsninger, hvordan man vasker
tøjet og hvordan man vasker for at hjælpe med de vigtigste mål for en cirkulær økonomi.
Undersøgelsen er en del af det EU-finansierede projekt med navnet ReCiPSS
(http://www.recipss.eu/).
Dette spørgeskema er fuldt anonymt, og der er ikke indsamlet følsomme personoplysninger,
som kan misbruges.
Spørgeskemaet er tilgængelig på engelsk, tysk, hollandsk og slovensk.
Hvis du er interesseret i resultaterne, der opsummerer alle svar på tværs af fire lande, bedes du
tilføje din e-mailadresse i slutningen af dette spørgeskema eller skrive til: klapalov@econ.muni.cz.
Mange tak for dit samarbejde.
Undersøgelsen er udført i 4 lande: Østrig, Danmark, Holland og Slovenien. Formålet med
cirkulær økonomi er at reducere affaldet til et minimum, reducere negative virkninger af
produktion og transport på miljøet, hjælpe virksomheder og samfund til at være bæredygtige
ved at holde produkter så længe som muligt i brug (forbrug) og ikke fremme såkaldte "smidvæk"
samfund.
Cirkulære økonomiløsninger er: 1. At producere og levere holdbare langtidsholdbare produkter
i høj kvalitet (som er ret dyre); 2. at reparere produkterne så længe som muligt (i USA og nogle
andre lande findes lovgivning om ret til reparation i EU-reglerne fra april 2021) 3. at renovere
produkterne (gøre produkterne som nye); at istandsætte produkterne (næsten det samme som
at genopbygge med nogle flere processer involveret); at genbruge produkterne (at bruge
materialer og komponenter fra de gamle produkter i den nye produktion). Man kan bevare
produkterne længere i cyklus ved at leje/dele/være fælles (såkaldt fællesskabssforbrug) eller
betale pr. forbrug i stedet for at købe, eje og smide væk. Disse måder kaldes "adgangsbaseret
forbrug".
På vegne af ReCiPSS forskergruppen fra Masaryk University, Fakultet for Økonomi og
Administration, Brno, Tjekkiet,
Alena Klapalová
1. Erfaring med adgangsbaseret forbrug:
d) Hvad er din erfaring med udlejning eller leasing af produkter (f.eks.
husholdningsapparater, biler, værktøj, bærbare computere osv.)?
Ingen erfaring x Jeg har gjort det en eller to gange x Jeg lejer/leaser ofte ting
e) Hvad er din oplevelse med betal pr. forbrug for produkter (f.eks.
husholdningsapparater, bil, cykel, værktøj, bærbare computer osv.)?
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 200 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Ingen erfaring x Jeg har gjort det en eller to gange x Jeg bruger ofte systemet
med at betale pr. forbrug
f) Hvad er din oplevelse med såkaldt "fællesskabssforbrug" (en form for deling af
produkter med de andre - produkter kan købes af en gruppe mennesker, af en
enkelt person eller endda en institution og brug tilbydes så for en kompensation
(finansiel, produkt eller service)?
Ingen erfaring x Jeg har gjort det en eller to gange x Jeg bruger ofte
fællesskabssforbrug
V. Leje af vaskemaskine
4. Hvilke grunde ville overtale dig til at leje en vaskemaskine i stedet for at eje den? (leje
betyder at have en midlertidig kontrakt med regelmæssig betaling) Hvis du ikke ejer en
vaskemaskine, men allerede lejer en sådan, hvad fik dig til at gøre det? Vælg venligst fra
svarene (du kan vælge flere svar):
f. Ingen forudgående købsomkostninger (ikke nødvendigt at have penge til at købe
den kontant eller købe på kredit)
nej i nogen grad ja
g. Jeg ønsker ikke at købe og dermed eje: Hvis du svarer "ja", hvorfor? Udfyld venligst
årsagen nedenfor
nej i nogen grad ja…Hvorfor?..........................
h. Troen på, at det ville være billigere for mig
nej i nogen grad ja
i. Mulighed for at teste vaskemaskinen (f.eks. det mærke jeg gerne vil have)
nej i nogen grad ja
f. For at slippe af med ansvaret for vedligeholdelse af vaskemaskinen (hvis
vedligeholdelse tilbydes sammen med leje)
nej i nogen grad ja
j. Grundet vedligeholdelse udført af en professionel servicevirksomhed samt
vaskemaskinens høje kvalitet, formindskes risikoen for at maskinen lige pludselig ikke
fungerer (ved leje stilles der normalt maskiner af højere kvalitet til rådighed)
nej i nogen grad ja
k. Miljømæssige årsager (leje kræver holdbare produkter, der virker i længere tid)
nej i nogen grad ja
l. Fleksibilitet - ingen ejerforhold
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 201 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
nej i nogen grad ja
m. Noget andet……….udfyld venligst:……………………………………………
nej i nogen grad ja
5. Hvilke grunde ville overtale dig til at bruge en betal pr. forbrug service? Betal pr. vask
betyder, at du ikke køber en vaskemaskine, men du bruger den og betaler for hver vask
- enten i dit hjem til eget brug (normalt lejer eller leaser du den), ved fællesskabsforbrug
eller i vaskeri). Hvis du allerede bruger denne mulighed, skal du markere, hvad der
overtalte dig....vælg i så fald ikke "måske"). Du kan vælge flere svar.
h. Ingen forudgående købsomkostninger (ikke nødvendigt at have penge til at købe
den kontant eller købe på kredit)
nej i nogen grad ja
i. Troen på, at det ville være billigere for mig
nej i nogen grad ja
j. Mulighed for at teste vaskemaskinen (f.eks. det mærke jeg gerne vil have)
nej i nogen grad ja
k. For at slippe af med ansvaret for vedligeholdelse af vaskemaskinen (hvis
vedligeholdelse tilbydes sammen med leje relateret til betaling pr. vask)
nej i nogen grad ja
l. Grundet vedligeholdelse udført af en professionel servicevirksomhed samt
vaskemaskinens høje kvalitet, formindskes risikoen for at maskinen lige pludselig ikke
fungerer (inden for betaling pr. vask stilles der normalt maskiner af højere kvalitet til
rådighed)
nej i nogen grad ja
m. Miljømæssige årsager (som ovenfor - normalt bruges mere holdbare vaskemaskiner
til denne løsning)
nej i nogen grad ja
j. Oversigt over betalinger for hver vask
nej i nogen grad ja
n. Imponere andre (folk ville beundre mig for det...og for hvor innovativ jeg er)
nej i nogen grad ja
j. Fleksibilitet - ingen ejerforhold
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 202 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
nej i nogen grad ja
k. Noget andet.....hvilket? ............................
nej i nogen grad ja
6. Hvis du tænker på betaling pr. vask i stedet for at eje vaskemaskinen, ville disse faktorer
afholde dig fra betaling pr. vask? (betaling pr. vask kræver installation af et modul, der
forbinder maskinen via internettet med udbyderen og giver mulighed for at tilbyde
forskellige supplerende funktioner)
i. Jeg foretrækker at eje ting
nej i nogen grad ja
j. betaling pr. vask-leverandøren ville opnå for meget viden om mig
nej i nogen grad ja
k. betaling pr. vask-leverandøren kan ikke garantere fuldstændig databeskyttelse
nej i nogen grad ja
l. i sidste ende betaler jeg mere i forhold til at eje en vaskemaskine
nej i nogen grad ja
m. Jeg har aldrig hørt om det, eller jeg ved kun ganske lidt om betaling pr. vask-
systemet
nej i nogen grad ja
n. Utryg ved det ukendte (jeg føler, at der er mange eller nogle risici ved betaling pr.
vask. Jeg kan beskadige produktet, priserne kan stige...)
nej i nogen grad ja
o. Betaling pr. vask skaber endnu en økonomisk forpligtelse for mig, hvilket er
stressende (f.eks. jeg ønsker ikke at modtage en regning hver måned)
nej i nogen grad ja
p. Andre faktorer? Hvilke?...........................
VI. Fællesskabsforbrug/brug af en vaskemaskine der deles med andre og betaling
pr. vask
4. Hvilke grunde ville overbevise dig om ikke at anvende din vaskemaskine i din husstand,
men i stedet vaske ved anvendelse af fællesskabsforbrug, f.eks. en vaskemaskine der
deles af flere husholdninger eller er i et vaskeri?
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 203 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
k. Ingen forudgående købsomkostninger (ikke nødvendigt at have penge til at købe
den kontant eller købe på kredit)
nej i nogen grad ja
l. Jeg ønsker ikke at købe og dermed eje: Hvis du svarer "ja", hvorfor? Udfyld venligst
årsagen nedenfor
nej i nogen grad ja…Hvorfor?.............................
m. Troen på, at det ville være billigere for mig
nej i nogen grad ja
n. Mulighed for at teste vaskemaskinen (f.eks. det mærke jeg gerne vil have)
nej i nogen grad ja
o. For at slippe af med ansvaret for vedligeholdelse af vaskemaskinen (hvis
vedligeholdelse tilbydes sammen med betaling pr. vask i fællesskabsforbrug)
nej i nogen grad ja
p. Miljømæssige årsager (fællesskabsforbrug kræver holdbare produkter, der virker i
længere tid)
nej i nogen grad ja
q. Grundet vedligeholdelse udført af en professionel servicevirksomhed samt
vaskemaskinens høje kvalitet, formindskes risikoen for at maskinen lige pludselig
ikke fungerer
nej i nogen grad ja
r. Fleksibilitet - ingen ejerforhold
nej i nogen grad ja
s. Imponere andre - folk ville beundre mig for det
nej i nogen grad ja
Mulighed for at mødes med andre mennesker
nej i nogen grad ja
t. Noget andet……….udfyld venligst:……………………………………………
Nej i nogen grad ja
VII. Renoveret og istandsat vaskemaskine (Renoveret og istandsat vaskemaskine er en
brugt vaskemaskine, der er renoveret, så den fremstår som ny, via demontering, rengøring,
udskiftning af hovedkomponenter af produktet, samling og testning. Den har samme
funktionalitet (samme strøm- og vandforbrug) og samme kvalitet som et nyt produkt eller
bedre. Istandsætning kræver en større arbejdsindsats samt brug af flere nye dele.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 204 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
7. Har du nogen erfaring med renoverede og/eller istandsætte produkter, især
husholdningsapparater og elektronik?
Nej ja
8. Hvad er din opfattelse af en renoveret og istandsat vaskemaskine?
e) Jeg værdsætter den renoverede/istandsatte maskine på samme måde som var den ny
2) Helt uenig..................5) helt enig
f) Køb af en renoveret/istandsat vaskemaskine vil bidrage til mindre forbrug af
begrænsede ressourcer
2) Helt uenig..................5) helt enig
g) Køb af en renoveret/istandsat vaskemaskine kan reducere skadelige virkninger for
miljøet.
2) Helt uenig..................5) helt enig
h) Jeg er bange for, at ydeevnen af renoverede/istandsatte vaskemaskiner er ringere end
ydeevnen af nye
2) Helt uenig...................5) helt enig
h) Jeg har ikke den store tiltro til vaskemaskiners driftsikkerhed efter udløbet af
garantiperioden
1) Helt uenig......................5) helt enig
i) Jeg vil nok være bekymret for hygiejnen i en renoveret/istandsat vaskemaskine
2) Helt uenig...................... 5) helt enig
j) Mærkets omdømme er afgørende for at træffe en købsbeslutning vedrørende en
istandsat vaskemaskine
2) Helt uenig...................... 5) helt enig
Kortene (produktprofiler) nedenfor repræsenterer forskellige vaskemuligheder. Vær venlig at
angive rangfølgen af kortene baseret på dine præferencer (træk dem med musen og slip dem i
højre boks). Øverst på din liste vil der være den mest foretrukne (den mest ønskede)
vaskeopsætning, mens den mindst prioriterede vil være placeret nederst.
Pris for en vaskecyklus
___________ _____________ ___________
kontraktens varighed
fleksibel (månedlig) årlig langsigtet (5 år)
vaskemaskinens tilstand
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 205 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Ny Som ny (ca. 5 år) Genanvendt (ca. 10 år)
serviceberedskab
Inden for 1 dag Inden for 4 dage I løbet af 1 uge
faktureringsordning
Forudbetalt (og betal
resten af aftalens beløb)
Efterfaktureret Øjeblikkeligt (direkte efter
vasken)
VIII. Din ideelle vaskemaskine?
(angiv venligst din grad af enighed med nedenstående udsagn)
6. Jeg vil gerne have en vaskemaskine der:
k) er robust og holdbar, så den holder længere
1 (slet ikke)……………………..5 (absolut)
l) er smart og internetforbundet, så jeg kan styre og kontrollere vask over nettet
1 (slet ikke)……………………..5 (absolut)
m) informerer mig på forhånd, hvis noget i vaskemaskinen skal rengøres eller repareres
1 (slet ikke)……………………..5 (absolut)
n) arbejder baseret på min personlige profil, så den anbefaler mig, hvordan og hvornår
jeg skal vaske (for at optimere vand-, energi- og vaskeforbrug)
1 (slet ikke)……………………..5 (absolut)
o) opgraderes af tjenesteudbyderen, så jeg altid har en maskine med den seneste nye
teknologi
1 (slet ikke)……………………..5 (absolut)
p) har en selv-dosering af vaskepulver (selv-doserende vaskemaskiner vejer dit tøj i
tromlen, og indstiller automatisk den optimale mængde af vaskepulver)
1 (slet ikke)……………………..5 (absolut)
q) forbindelse til en online kalender
1 (slet ikke)……………………..5 (absolut)
r) online ekspertrådgivning (tilgængelig 24 timer/7 dage om ugen - vejledning, videoer
osv.)
1 (slet ikke)……………………..5 (absolut)
s) giver mig oplysninger om energi- og vandforbrug
1 (slet ikke)……………………..5 (absolut)
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 206 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
t) giver mig oplysninger om prisen for en vask
1 (slet ikke)……………………..5 (absolut)
7. Anser du dig selv for at være en der accepterer og køber nye produkter og generelt
acceptere nye tendenser som en:
b) innovator b) pionerer c) der er på forkant d) der ser tiden an e) der
halter bagefter
8. Betragter du dig selv som en øko-ven, øko-fan eller endog en øko-ambassadør?
1 (slet ikke)……………………..5 (absolut)
9. Hvordan står det til med ejerskabet og købet af vaskemaskinen du bruger?
h) Jeg (vi - hvis du er i et parforhold eller har en familie) købte den/fik den
i) Jeg/vi lejede den/købte på kredit (Jeg/vi betaler hele summen tilbage i rater)
j) Jeg/vi lejer den (vi har en midlertidig kontrakt)
k) /Jeg/vi bruger vaskemaskinen i vores lejlighed, men den er ejet af vores udlejer
l) Jeg/vi bruger vaskemaskinen i vores boligforening - (såkaldt fællesskabsforbrug) det
er ikke vores, og jeg/vi betaler for brugen
m) Jeg/vi bruger vaskeriet i byen
n) Andet...venligst, udfyld hvordan:
10. Hvor ofte vasker du dit vasketøj?
e) Mindre end 1 gang om ugen
f) 1-2 gange om ugen
g) 3-4 gange om ugen
h) Mere end 4 gange om ugen
Din aldersgruppe:
18-23 24-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 60 og
derover
Din uddannelse:
grundskole gymnasiet bachelor grad eller højere
Din nuværende bopæl:
Landsby lille by stor by
Din status:
Bor alene
Bor sammen med partner uden børn
Bor sammen med partner med 1-2 børn
Bor sammen med partner med 3 eller flere børn
Bor hos mine forældre og/eller bedsteforældre (2-3 personer)
Bor hos mine forældre og/eller bedsteforældre (mere end 3 personer)
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 207 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Bor hos venner/skolekammerater/kolleger
Andet: ……………………………
Dine levevilkår:
Bor i et privat hus/sommerhus
Bor i lejlighed (ejendom med lejligheder)
Andet:……………..
Din indkomstgruppe (xxx/person):
#
Dutch version:
Wasmachine in circulaire economie - verschuldigd, betalen per wasbeurt
of poolen
Het doel van de vragenlijst is om te achterhalen welke gedragingen, motieven en hindernissen
consumenten ondervinden en hebben ten opzichte van verschillende circulaire economieoplossingen
voor het wassen van wasgoed en hoe met wassen de belangrijkste doelen van
circulaire economie kunnen worden geholpen. De enquête maakt deel uit van het door de
Europese Unie gefinancierde project met de naam ReCiPSS (http://www.recipss.eu/).
Deze vragenlijst is volledig anoniem en er worden geen gevoelige persoonsgegevens verzameld,
die kunnen worden misbruikt.
De vragenlijst is beschikbaar in het Engels, Duits, Nederlands en Sloveens.
Als u geïnteresseerd bent in de resultaten met een samenvatting van alle antwoorden in de vier
landen, voeg dan uw e-mailadres toe aan het einde van deze vragenlijst of schrijf naar:
klapalov@econ.muni.cz.
Dank u wel voor uw hulp.
De enquête wordt gerealiseerd in 4 landen: Oostenrijk, Denemarken, Nederland en Slovenië. De
doelstellingen van een circulaire economie zijn om afval tot een minimum te beperken, de
negatieve impact van productie en transport op het milieu te verminderen en om de bedrijven
en de samenleving te helpen om duurzaam te blijven door producten zo lang mogelijk in de
gebruikscyclus (consumptie) te houden en de zogenaamde "wegwerpmaatschappij" niet te
promoten.
Oplossingen voor de circulaire economie zijn: 1. duurzame producten van hoge kwaliteit
produceren en leveren (die vrij duur zijn); 2. de producten zo lang mogelijk te repareren (in de
VS en in sommige andere landen bestaat een wetgeving die het recht op herstelling bevordert,
in de EU zullen er vanaf april 2021 regels van toepassing zijn); 3. producten opknappen
(producten als nieuw maken); producten opnieuw fabriceren (bijna hetzelfde als renoveren met
een aantal extra processen die erbij betrokken zijn); producten recyclen (materialen en
componenten van de oude producten in de nieuwe productie gebruiken). Producten langer in
de cyclus houden zou ook gedaan kunnen worden door het huren/delen/poolen (zogenaamde
gezamenlijke consumptie) of betalen per gebruik in plaats van kopen, betalen en weggooien.
Deze manieren worden "op toegang gebaseerde consumptie" genoemd.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 208 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
In naam van het ReCiPSS-onderzoeksteam van de Masaryk Universiteit, Faculteit Economie en
Administratie, Brno, Tsjechische Republiek,
Alena Klapalová
1. Ervaring met op toegang gebaseerd verbruik:
g) Wat is uw ervaring met het huren of leasen van producten (bijv. een
huishoudtoestel, auto, gereedschap, notebook enz.)?
Geen ervaring x Ik heb het een of twee keer gedaan x Ik huur/lease vaak dingen
h) Wat is uw ervaring met betalen per gebruik voor producten (bijv. een
huishoudtoestel, auto, fiets, gereedschap, notebook enz.)?
Geen ervaring x Ik heb het een of twee keer gedaan x Ik gebruik vaak het systeem
van betalen per gebruik
i) Wat is uw ervaring met zogenaamde "gezamenlijke consumptie" (een vorm van
producten delen met anderen - producten kunnen worden gekocht door een groep
mensen of door één persoon of zelfs een instelling en worden aangeboden voor
gebruik voor een bepaalde vergoeding (financieel of product of service)?
Geen ervaring x Ik heb het een of twee keer gedaan x Ik gebruik vaak gezamenlijke
consumptie
IX. Het huren van een wasmachine
7. Welke redenen zouden u ertoe aanzetten om een wasmachine te huren in plaats van
deze te bezitten? (huren betekent een tijdelijk contract met regelmatige betaling). In
het geval dat u geen wasmachine bezit, maar deze al huurt, wat heeft u ertoe gebracht
om dit te doen? Kies uit de antwoorden (u kunt ook meerdere antwoorden kiezen):
k. Geen directe inkoopkosten (u hoeft geen geld te hebben om het te kopen of om het
op krediet te kopen)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
l. Ik wil niet kopen en bezitten: als je "ja" antwoordt, waarom? Vul hieronder de reden
in
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja... Waarom?...........................
m. De overtuiging dat het me goedkoper zou kosten
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
n. Mogelijkheid om de wasmachine te testen (bijv. het merk dat ik graag zou willen
hebben)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 209 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
g. De verantwoordelijkheid voor het onderhoud van de wasmachine kwijtraken
(indien het onderhoud samen met huur wordt aangeboden)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
n. Kleinere kans op storingen door professioneel onderhoud door een servicebedrijf en
door de hoge kwaliteit van de wasmachine (bij huren worden meestal machines van
een hogere kwaliteit geleverd)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
o. Milieuaspecten (huren vereist duurzame producten die langer werken)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
p. Flexibiliteit - geen eigendomsverhoudingen
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
q. Iets anders ......Invullen: ...................................................
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
8. Welke redenen zou u ertoe brengen om een betalen-per-wasbeurt-service te
gebruiken? Betalen per wasbeurt betekent dat u geen wasmachine koopt, maar deze
gebruikt en u betaalt voor elke wasbeurt - bij u thuis voor uw eigen individuele gebruik
(meestal huurt u of leaset u de machine) of in gezamenlijke consumptie of in het
wassalon). Als u deze mogelijkheid al gebruikt, vink dan aan wat u heeft overtuigd... in
een dergelijk geval, niet "misschien" kiezen). U kunt meerdere antwoorden kiezen.
o. Geen directe inkoopkosten (u hoeft geen geld te hebben om het te kopen of om het
op krediet te kopen)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
p. De overtuiging dat het me goedkoper zou kosten
nee tot op zekere hoogteja
q. Mogelijkheid om de wasmachine te testen (bijv. het merk dat ik graag zou willen
hebben)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
r. De verantwoordelijkheid voor het onderhoud van de wasmachine kwijtraken (indien
het onderhoud aan het betalen per wasbeurt is gerelateerd)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
s. Kleinere kans op storingen door professioneel onderhoud door een servicebedrijf en
door de hoge kwaliteit van de wasmachine (bij huren worden meestal machines van
een hogere kwaliteit geleverd)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 210 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
t. Milieuaspecten (zoals hierboven - meestal worden duurzamere wasmachines
gebruikt voor deze oplossing)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
o. Overzicht van de betalingen voor elke wasbeurt
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
u. Indruk maken op anderen (mensen zouden me bewonderen omdat ik zo innovatief
ben)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
l. Flexibiliteit - geen eigendomsverhoudingen
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
m. Iets anders…..wat? ……………………….
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
9. Indien u erover denkt om te betalen per wasbeurt in plaats van een wasmachine te
bezitten, zouden deze factoren u ontmoedigen om te betalen per wasbeurt? (betalen
per wasbeurt vereist het installeren van een module die de machine via internet met de
provider verbindt en het mogelijk maakt om verschillende aanvullende functies aan te
bieden)
q. Ik geef er de voorkeur aan om dingen te bezitten
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
r. de leverancier van betalen per wasbeurt zou teveel van me te weten komen
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
s. de leverancier van betalen per wasbeurt kan geen perfecte gegevensbescherming
garanderen
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
t. uiteindelijk betaal ik meer in vergelijking met het bezit van een wasmachine
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
u. Ik heb nog nooit gehoord, of ik weet slechts heel weinig over het systeem van
betalen per wasbeurt
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
v. Angst voor het onbekende (ik denk dat er veel of sommige risico's zijn vebonden aan
het betalen per wasbeurt - ik kan het product beschadigen, de prijzen kunnen
stijgen...)
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 211 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
w. Betalen-per-wasbeurt creëert een andere financiële verantwoordelijkheid voor mij,
wat stressvol is (ik wil bijvoorbeeld niet elke maand een factuur zien)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
x. Was er nog iets? Wat?...........................
X. Gezamenlijke consumptie/gebruik van een wasmachine gedeeld met de anderen
en betalen per wasbeurt
4. Welke redenen zouden u ertoe brengen om de wasmachine in uw huishouden niet
weg te gooien, maar te wassen in het kader van gezamenlijke consumptie, bijvoorbeeld
één wasmachine voor meerdere huishoudens of in de wasserette?
u. Geen directe inkoopkosten (u hoeft geen geld te hebben om het te kopen of om
het op krediet te kopen)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
v. Ik wil niet kopen en bezitten: als je "ja" antwoordt, waarom? Vul hieronder de
reden in
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja... Waarom?..............................
w. De overtuiging dat het me goedkoper zou kosten
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
x. Mogelijkheid om de wasmachine te testen (bijv. het merk dat ik graag zou willen
hebben)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
y. De verantwoordelijkheid voor het onderhoud van de wasmachine kwijtraken
(indien onderhoud wordt aangeboden samen met betalen per wasbeurt in het
kader van samenwerkende consumptie)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
z. Milieuaspecten (samenwerkende consumptie vereist duurzame producten die
langer werken)
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
aa. Kleinere kans op defecten door professioneel onderhoud door een servicebedrijf
en door de hoge kwaliteit van de wasmachine
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 212 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
bb. Flexibiliteit - geen eigendomsverhoudingen
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
cc. Indruk maken op anderen - mensen zouden me daarvoor willen bewonderen
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
Mogelijkheid om te socialiseren met andere mensen
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
dd. Iets anders ......Invullen: ...................................................
nee tot op zekere hoogte ja
XI. Opgeknapte en gereviseerde wasmachine (een opgeknapte en gereviseerde
wasmachine is een gebruikte wasmachine die naar een nieuw-achtige staat is
gebracht door demonteren, reinigen, vervangen van de belangrijkste componenten
van het product, opnieuw monteren en testen. Het biedt dezelfde functionaliteit
(hetzelfde elektriciteits- en waterverbruik) en dezelfde kwaliteit als een nieuw
product of beter. Reviseren vereist meer handelingen en gebruik van meer nieuwe
onderdelen.
9. Heeft u ervaring met opgeknapte en/of gereviseerde producten, vooral met
huishoudelijke apparaten en elektronica?
nee ja
10. Wat vindt u van een opgeknapte en gereviseerde wasmachine?
i) Ik schat de opgeknapte/gereviseerde machine op dezelfde manier in alsof deze nieuw
was
3) Helemaal oneens………………..5) volledig eens
j) De aanschaf van een opgeknapte/gereviseerde wasmachine helpt om schaarsere
hulpmiddelen te gebruiken
3) Helemaal oneens………………..5) volledig eens
k) Het kopen van een opgeknapte/gereviseerde wasmachine kan de schadelijke gevolgen
voor het milieu verminderen.
3) Helemaal oneens………………..5) volledig eens
l) Ik ben bang dat de prestaties van een opgeknapte/ gereviseerde WM inferieur zijn dan
de prestaties van nieuwe
3) Helemaal oneens………………..5) volledig eens
k) Ik ben bang voor problemen met de betrouwbaarheid van de wasmachine na het
einde van de garantieperiode
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 213 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
1) Helemaal oneens………………….5) volledig eens
l) Ik zou me zorgen maken over de hygiëne van een opgeknapte/gereviseerde
wasmachine
3) Helemaal oneens……………….. 5) volledig eens
m) De reputatie van het merk is essentieel voor het maken van een aankoopbeslissing
met betrekking tot een gereviseerde wasmachine
3) Helemaal oneens……………….. 5) volledig eens
De fiches (productprofielen) hieronder vertegenwoordigen verschillende wasopties. Rangschik
de fiches op basis van uw voorkeuren (sleep ze met de muis en plaats ze in het rechtervak).
Bovenaan uw lijst staat de voorkeurwasoptie (meest gewenst), terwijl de minst gewenste
onderaan wordt geplaatst.
Prijs voor één wascyclus
___________ _____________ ___________
Contractduur
flexibel (maandelijks) jaarlijks lange termijn (5 jaar)
staat wasmachine
Nieuw Als nieuw (ca. 5 jaar) Hergebruikt (ca. 10 jaar)
servicegerichtheid
Binnen 1 dag Binnen 4 dagen Binnen 1 week
Factureringsschema
Voorafbetaald (en de rest
afbetalen)
Facturering achteraf Onmiddellijk (direct na de
wasbeurt)
XII. Uw ideale wasmachine?
(geef aan dat u het eens bent met de onderstaande verklaringen)
11. Ik wil een wasmachine die:
u) robuust en duurzaam is, zodat het langer meegaat
1 (helemaal niet)……………………..5 (absoluut)
v) slim en op het internet aangesloten is, zodat ik online het wassen kan beheren en
regelen
1 (helemaal niet)……………………..5 (absoluut)
w) me vooraf vertelt of er iets in de wasmachine moet worden schoongemaakt of
gerepareerd
1 (helemaal niet)……………………..5 (absoluut)
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 214 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
x) met mijn persoonlijk profiel werkt en me dus vertelt hoe en wanneer te wassen (om
het verbruik van water, energie en wasmiddel te optimaliseren)
1 (helemaal niet)……………………..5 (absoluut)
y) door de serviceprovider wordt geüpgraded, zodat ik altijd over een up-to-date
machine kan beschikken
1 (helemaal niet)……………………..5 (absoluut)
z) over een automatische dosering van het wasmiddel beschikt (wasautomaten met
automatische dosering wegen uw kleding in de trommel en stellen de perfecte
hoeveelheid wasmiddel automatisch in)
1 (helemaal niet)……………………..5 (absoluut)
å) een online verbinding met een kalender
1 (helemaal niet)……………………..5 (absoluut)
bb) online deskundig advies (24 uur/7 dagen per week beschikbaar - instructies, video's
enz.)
1 (helemaal niet)……………………..5 (absoluut)
cc) me informatie over energie- en waterverbruik geeft
1 (helemaal niet)……………………..5 (absoluut)
dd) me informatie over de prijs voor wassen geeft
1 (helemaal niet)……………………..5 (absoluut)
12. Ziet u uzelf nieuwe producten aankopen en nieuwe trends aanvaarden zoals:
c) innovator b) vroege aanvaarder c) vroege meerderheid d) late meerderheid e)
achterblijver
13. Beschouwt u uzelf als een eco-vriend, eco-fan of zelfs een eco-actievoerder?
1 (helemaal niet)……………………..5 (absoluut)
14. Hoe staat het met het eigendom en de aankoop van de wasmachine die u gebruikt?
o) Ik (wij - als u in een koppel of een gezin bent) heeft/hebben het gekocht/gekregen
p) Ik/we leaseden het/kochten op krediet (ik/wij zal/zullen alles in stappen betalen)
q) Ik/wij huur/huren het (we hebben een tijdelijk contract)
r) Ik/wij gebruiken de wasmachine in ons appartement, maar het is eigendom van
onze verhuurder
s) Ik /wij gebruiken de wasmachine in ons huis of flatgebouw - (de zogenaamde
gezamenlijke consumptie) - het is niet van ons en ik/wij betaal/betalen voor het
gebruik
t) Ik/wij gebruik(en) het wassalon in de stad
u) Anders ... Invullen hoe:
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 215 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
15. Hoe vaak doet u de was?
i) Minder dan een keer per week
j) 1-2 keer per week
k) 3-4 keer per week
l) Meer dan 4 keer per week
Uw leeftijdsgroep:
18-23 24-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 60 en
ouder
Uw opleiding
lagere school middelbare school bachelorsdiploma en hoger
Uw huidige woonplaats:
Dorp kleine stad grote stad
Uw status:
Alleenwonend
Samenwonend met partner, zonder kinderen
Samenwonend met een partner met 1-2 kinderen
Samenwonend met een partner met 3 en meer kinderen
Samenwonend met ouders en/of grootouders (2-3 personen)
Samenwonend met ouders en/of grootouders (meer dan 3 personen)
Samenwonend met vrienden/klasgenoten/collega's
Ander: ……………………………
Uw levensomstandigheden:
Wonend in een privé huis/cottage
Wonend in een appartement (huis met appartementen)
Ander:……………..
Uw inkomensgroep (xxx/persoon):
German version:
Waschmaschine in der Kreislaufwirtschaft – Besitz, Pay-per-Wash oder
Pooling
Ziel des Fragebogens ist es, Einstellungen, Motive und Hindernisse herauszufinden, die
Verbraucher gegenüber verschiedenen Kreislaufwirtschaftslösungen empfinden, wie man
Wäsche waschen und wie man durch das Waschen bei den Hauptzielen der Kreislaufwirtschaft
helfen soll. Die Umfrage ist ein Teil des von der Europäischen Union geförderten Projekts mit
dem Namen ReCiPSS (http://www.recipss.eu/).
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 216 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Dieser Fragebogen ist völlig anonym und es werden keine sensiblen personenbezogenen Daten
erhoben, die missbraucht werden können.
Der Fragebogen ist in englischer, deutscher, niederländischer und slowenischer Sprache
verfügbar.
Falls Sie an den Ergebnissen interessiert sind, die alle Antworten aus vier Ländern
zusammenfassen, fügen Sie bitte Ihre E-Mail-Adresse am Ende dieses Fragebogens hinzu oder
schreiben Sie an: klapalov@econ.muni.cz.
Vielen Dank für Ihre Bemühungen.
Die Umfrage wird in 4 Ländern durchgeführt: Österreich, Dänemark, der Niederlande und
Slowenien. Die Ziele der Kreislaufwirtschaft sind Minimierung von Abfall, Verringerung der
negativen Auswirkungen von Produktion und Verkehr auf die Umwelt, Unterstützung von
Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft bei der Nachhaltigkeit durch die möglichst lange Beibehaltung von
Produkten im Nutzungszyklus (Verbrauchskreislauf) und Nichtförderung der sogenannten
“Wegwerfgesellschaft”.
Kreislaufwirtschaftslösungen: 1. hochwertige, haltbare und langlebige Produkte (die ziemlich
teuer sind) herzustellen und zu liefern; 2. Produkte so lange wie möglich zu reparieren (in den
USA und einigen anderen Ländern gibt es Rechtsvorschriften, die das Recht auf Reparatur
fördern, ähnliche werden in den EU-Vorschriften wird ab April 2021 gültig sein); 3. Produkte
wiederaufzubereiten (Produkte wie neu auszuführen); Produkte wiederaufzubereiten (fast
genauso wie bei der Überholung mit einigen weiteren Verfahren); Produkte zu recyceln
(Materialien und Komponenten von alten Produkten in neuer Produktion zu verwenden).
Produkte länger im Kreislauf zu halten, kann auch durch Miete/Verleihsystem/Pooling
(sogenannter kollaborativer Konsum) oder Pay-per-Use erfolgen, anstatt sie zu kaufen, sie zu
besitzen und sie wegzuwerfen. Diese Möglichkeiten werden als “zugangsbasierter Konsum”
bezeichnet.
Im Auftrag des ReCiPSS Forschungsteams der Masaryk-Universität, Fakultät für Wirtschafts- und
Verwaltungswissenschaften, Brünn, Tschechien,
Alena Klapalová
1. Erfahrungen mit zugangsbasiertem Konsum:
j) Welche Erfahrung haben Sie mit der Vermietung oder dem Leasing von Produkten
(z. B. Haushaltsgeräte, Kraftfahrzeuge, Werkzeuge, Laptops usw.) gemacht?
Keine Erfahrung x Ich habe es ein- oder zweimal versucht x Ich miete/lease Dinge
oft
k) Welche Erfahrung haben Sie mit Pay-per-Use von Produkten (z. B. Haushaltsgeräte,
Kraftfahrzeuge, Fahrräder, Werkzeuge, Laptops usw.) gemacht?
Keine Erfahrung x Ich habe es ein- oder zweimal versucht x Ich benutze oft das
Pay-per-Use-System
l) Welche Erfahrung haben Sie mit dem so genannten “kollaborativen Konsum” (eine
Form der Mitbenutzung von Produkten mit anderen Personen – Produkte können
von einer Gruppe von Personen oder von einer Person oder sogar einer Institution
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 217 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
gekauft und für eine bestimmte /finanzielle oder produkt- oder
dienstleistungsbezogene/ Vergütung angeboten werden) gemacht?
Keine Erfahrung x Ich habe es ein- oder zweimal versucht x Ich benutze
kollaborativen Konsum oft
XIII. Mietwaschmaschine
10. Welche Gründe würden Sie überzeugen, eine Waschmaschine zu mieten, anstatt für
sie zu besitzen? (Mieten bedeutet, einen befristeten Vertrag mit einer regelmäßigen
Zahlung zu haben) Falls Sie keine Waschmaschine besitzen, aber sie bereits mieten, was
hat Sie dazu veranlasst? Bitte wählen Sie aus den Antworten (Sie können auch mehrere
Antworten wählen):
p. Keine Vorab-Anschaffungskosten (keine Notwendigkeit, Geld zu haben, um sie zu
kaufen oder sie auf Kredit zu kaufen)
nein teilweise ja
q. Ich will nichts kaufen und besitzen: Wenn Sie “ja” antworten, warum? Bitte füllen
Sie den Grund unten aus
nein teilweise ja…Warum?..........................
r. Ich glaube, dass es für mich billiger sein würde
nein teilweise ja
s. Die Möglichkeit, eine Waschmaschine zu testen (z. B. Marke, die ich haben möchte)
nein teilweise ja
h. Um die Verantwortung für die Wartung der Waschmaschine loszuwerden (wenn die
Wartung zusammen mit der Vermietung angeboten wird)
nein teilweise ja
r. Geringeres Störungsrisiko dank professioneller Wartung durch ein
Dienstleistungsunternehmen und dank der hohen Qualität der Waschmaschine (im
Rahmen der Vermietung werden in der Regel hochwertigere Waschmaschinen
bereitgestellt)
nein teilweise ja
s. Umweltbelange (die Vermietung erfordert langlebige Produkte, die über einen
längeren Zeitraum betrieben werden)
nein teilweise ja
t. Flexibilität – keine Eigentumsverhältnisse
nein teilweise ja
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 218 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
u. Etwas anderes..............bitte ausfüllen:……………………………………………
nein teilweise ja
11. Welche Gründe würden Sie überzeugen, einen Pay-per-Wash-Service zu nutzen? Payper-Wash
bedeutet, dass Sie keine Waschmaschine kaufen, sondern sie benutzen und
für jeden Waschgang bezahlen – entweder bei Ihnen zu Hause für Ihren individuellen
Gebrauch (normalerweise mieten oder leasen Sie sie) oder im Rahmen des
kollaborativen Konsums oder im Waschsalon). Wenn Sie diese Möglichkeit bereits
nutzen, kreuzen Sie bitte an, was Sie überzeugt hat.....in diesem Fall wählen Sie nicht
“vielleicht”). Sie können mehrere Antworten wählen.
v. Keine Vorab-Anschaffungskosten (keine Notwendigkeit, Geld zu haben, um sie zu
kaufen oder sie auf Kredit zu kaufen)
nein teilweise ja
w. Ich glaube, dass es für mich billiger sein würde
nein teilweise ja
x. Die Möglichkeit, eine Waschmaschine zu testen (z. B. Marke, die ich haben möchte)
nein teilweise ja
y. Um die Verantwortung für die Wartung der Waschmaschine loszuwerden (wenn die
Wartung zusammen mit der Vermietung zusammen mit Pay-per-Wash angeboten
wird)
nein teilweise ja
z. Geringeres Störungsrisiko dank professioneller Wartung durch ein
Dienstleistungsunternehmen und dank der hohen Qualität der Waschmaschine (im
Rahmen von Pay-per-Wash werden in der Regel hochwertigere Waschmaschinen
bereitgestellt)
nein teilweise ja
aa. Umweltbelange (wie oben beschrieben – üblicherweise werden für diese Lösung
langlebigere Waschmaschinen verwendet)
nein teilweise ja
t. Übersicht über die Zahlungen für jeden Waschgang
nein teilweise ja
bb. Andere zu beeindrucken (die Leute würden mich dafür bewundern....wie innovativ
ich bin)
nein teilweise ja
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 219 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
n. Flexibilität – keine Eigentumsverhältnisse
nein teilweise ja
o. Etwas anderes.... was? ……………………….
nein teilweise ja
12. Wenn Sie Pay-per-Wash überlegen, anstatt die Waschmaschine zu besitzen, würden
folgende Faktoren Sie vom Pay-per-Wash abhalten? (Pay-per-Wash erfordert die
Installation eines Moduls, das die Maschine über das Internet mit dem Anbieter
verbindet und es ermöglicht, verschiedene Zusatzfunktionen anzubieten)
y. Ich bevorzuge es, Dinge zu besitzen
nein teilweise ja
z. Der Pay-per-Wash-Anbieter würde zu viel über mich wissen
nein teilweise ja
aa. Der Pay-per-Wash-Anbieter kann keinen einwandfreien Datenschutz garantieren
nein teilweise ja
bb. Schließlich zahle ich mehr im Vergleich zum Besitz einer Waschmaschine
nein teilweise ja
cc. Ich habe davon noch nie gehört, oder weiß über Pay-per-Wash nur sehr wenig
nein teilweise ja
dd. Angst vor Unbekanntem (ich habe das Gefühl, dass es viele oder einige Risiken in
Bezug auf Pay-per-Wash gibt – ich kann das Produkt beschädigen, die Preise können
steigen....)
nein teilweise ja
ee. Pay-per-Wash bedeutet für mich eine weitere finanzielle Verpflichtung, was mich
stresst (ich möchte beispielsweise nicht jeden Monat eine Abrechnung bekommen)
nein teilweise ja
ff. Sonstiges? Was?...........................
XIV. Kollaborativer Konsum / kollaborative Nutzung einer gemeinsam mit anderen
benutzten Waschmaschine und Pay-per-Wash
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 220 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
4. Welche Gründe sprechen dafür, dass Sie über keine Waschmaschine in Ihrem Haushalt
verfügen, sondern im Rahmen des kollaborativen Konsums Wäsche waschen sollen, z. B.
in einer Waschmaschine für mehrere Haushalte oder im Waschsalon?
ee. Keine Vorab-Anschaffungskosten (keine Notwendigkeit, Geld zu haben, um sie zu
kaufen oder sie auf Kredit zu kaufen)
nein teilweise ja
cc. Ich will nichts kaufen und besitzen: Wenn Sie “ja” antworten, warum? Bitte füllen
Sie den Grund unten aus
nein teilweise ja…Warum?.............................
dd. Ich glaube, dass es für mich billiger sein würde
nein teilweise ja
hh. Die Möglichkeit, eine Waschmaschine zu testen (z. B. Marke, die ich haben
möchte)
nein teilweise ja
ii. Um die Verantwortung für die Wartung der Waschmaschine loszuwerden (wenn
die Wartung zusammen mit Pay-per-Wash im kollaborativen Konsum angeboten
wird)
nein teilweise ja
gg. Umweltbelange (der kollaborative Konsum erfordert langlebige Produkte, die über
einen längeren Zeitraum betrieben werden)
nein teilweise ja
hh. Geringeres Störungsrisiko dank professioneller Wartung durch ein
Dienstleistungsunternehmen und dank der hohen Qualität der Waschmaschine
nein teilweise ja
ll. Flexibilität – keine Eigentumsverhältnisse
nein teilweise ja
mm. Andere zu beeindrucken – die Leute würden mich dafür bewundern
nein teilweise ja
Möglichkeit der Aufnahme sozialer Kontakte mit anderen Menschen
nein teilweise ja
nn. Etwas anderes..............bitte ausfüllen:……………………………………………
Nein teilweise ja
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 221 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
XV. Überholte und wiederaufbereitete Waschmaschine Überholte und
wiederaufbereitete Waschmaschine ist eine gebrauchte Waschmaschine, die durch
Demontage, Reinigung, Austausch von Hauptkomponenten des Produkts,
Wiederzusammenbau und Prüfung in den neuwertigen Zustand versetzt wird. Sie bietet die
gleiche Funktionalität (gleichen Strom- und Wasserverbrauch) und die gleiche oder noch
bessere Qualität als ein neues Produkt. Die Wiederaufbereitung erfordert mehrere
Tätigkeiten und den Einsatz von mehreren neuen Teilen.
11. Haben Sie Erfahrung mit einem überholten und/oder wiederaufbereiteten Produkt,
insbesondere mit Haushaltsgeräten und Elektronik?
Nein ja
12. Was denken Sie über überholte und wiederaufbereitete Waschmaschinen?
m) Ich schätze die überholte/wiederaufbereitete Waschmaschine genauso, als wäre sie
neu
4) Überhaupt nicht einverstanden………………..5) völlig einverstanden
n) Der Kauf einer überholten/wiederaufbereiteten Waschmaschine wird dazu beitragen,
weniger nichterneuerbare Rohstoffe zu verbrauchen
4) Überhaupt nicht einverstanden………………..5) völlig einverstanden
o) Der Kauf einer überholten/wiederaufbereiteten Waschmaschine kann schädliche
Auswirkungen auf die Umwelt reduzieren.
4) Überhaupt nicht einverstanden………………..5) völlig einverstanden
p) Ich befürchte, dass die Leistung von überholten/wiederaufbereiteten WM schlechter
ist als
die von neuen WM
4) Überhaupt nicht einverstanden……………….5) völlig einverstanden
n) Ich befürchte, dass Probleme bezüglich der Zuverlässigkeit der Waschmaschine nach
Ablauf der Garantiezeit auftreten können
1) Überhaupt nicht einverstanden………………….5) völlig einverstanden
o) Ich würde mir Sorgen über die Hygiene einer überholten/wiederaufbereiteten
Waschmaschine machen
4) Überhaupt nicht einverstanden…………………. 5) völlig einverstanden
p) Die Reputation der Marke ist für eine Kaufentscheidung bezüglich einer
wiederaufbereiteten Waschmaschine entscheidend
4) Überhaupt nicht einverstanden…………………. 5) völlig einverstanden
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 222 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Die folgenden Karten (Produktprofile) stellen verschiedene Waschmöglichkeiten dar. Bitte
bewerten Sie die Karten nach Ihren Präferenzen (ziehen Sie sie mit der Maus und legen Sie sie
in das rechte Feld). Am Anfang Ihrer Liste steht die bevorzugteste (die am meisten gewünschte)
Waschmöglichkeit, während die am wenigsten gewollte Waschmöglichkeit unten steht.
Preis für einen Waschgang
___________ _____________ ___________
Vertragslaufzeit
flexibel (monatlich) jährlich langfristig (5 Jahre)
Waschmaschinenzustand
Neu Wie neu (ca. 5 Jahre) Wiederverwendet
(gebraucht) (ca. 10 Jahre)
Servicebereitschaft
Innerhalb 1 Tages Innerhalb 4 Tage Innerhalb 1 Woche
Abrechnungsschema
Vorausbezahlt (und den
Rest bezahlen)
Nachberechnet Sofort (direkt nach dem
Waschen)
XVI. Ihre ideale Waschmaschine?
(Bitte geben Sie an, inwieweit Sie den folgenden Aussagen zustimmen)
16. Ich hätte gerne eine Waschmaschine, die:
ee) robust und langlebig ist, so dass sie länger aushält
1 (überhaupt nicht)……………………..5 (vollkommen)
cc) intelligent und mit dem Internet verbunden ist, so dass ich das Waschen online
verwalten und kontrollieren kann
1 (überhaupt nicht)……………………..5 (vollkommen)
gg) mir im Voraus mitteilt, ob etwas in der Waschmaschine gereinigt oder repariert
werden muss
1 (überhaupt nicht)……………………..5 (vollkommen)
hh) mit meinem persönlichen Profil zusammenarbeitet, daher empfiehlt sie mir, wie und
wann ich waschen sollte (um den Wasser-, Energie- und Waschmittelverbrauch zu
optimieren)
1 (überhaupt nicht)……………………..5 (vollkommen)
ff) vom Dienstanbieter aktualisiert wird, so dass ich immer die aktuellste Maschine haben
kann
1 (überhaupt nicht)……………………..5 (vollkommen)
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 223 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
jj) eine automatische Dosierung des Waschmittels hat (Waschmaschinen mit
automatischer Dosierung wiegen Ihre Wäsche in der Trommel und stellen automatisch
die genaueste Waschmittelmenge ein)
1 (überhaupt nicht)……………………..5 (vollkommen)
kk) eine Online-Kalenderverbindung hat
1 (überhaupt nicht)……………………..5 (vollkommen)
ll) Online-Expertenberatung hat (24 Stunden / 7 Tage pro Woche verfügbar – Tutorials,
Videos usw.)
1 (überhaupt nicht)……………………..5 (vollkommen)
jj) mir Informationen über den Energie- und Wasserverbrauch gibt
1 (überhaupt nicht)……………………..5 (vollkommen)
kk) mir Informationen über den Preis für einen Waschgang gibt
1 (überhaupt nicht)……………………..5 (vollkommen)
17. Sehen Sie sich bezüglich der Akzeptanz und des Kaufs neuer Produkte und der
Akzeptanz neuer Trends im Allgemeinen als:
d) Innovator b) Frühadopter c) frühe Mehrheit d) späte Mehrheit e)
Nachzügler
18. Betrachten Sie sich selbst als Öko-Freund, Öko-Fan oder sogar als Öko-Campaigner?
1 (überhaupt nicht)……………………..5 (vollkommen)
19. Wie steht es mit dem Eigentum und dem Kauf der Waschmaschine, die Sie benutzen?
v) Ich (wir – wenn Sie in einem Paar oder einer Familie leben) habe sie
gekauft/bekommen
w) Ich/wir habe/n sie geleast/gekauft auf Kredit (ich/wir werden den gesamten Betrag
Schritt für Schritt bezahlen)
x) Ich/wir miete/n sie (wir haben einen Zeitvertrag)
y) /Ich/wir benutze/n die Waschmaschine in unserer Wohnung, aber sie ist Eigentum
unseres Vermieters
z) Ich/wir benutze/n die Waschmaschine in meinem/unserem Haus oder Wohnung –
(sogenannter kollaborativer Konsum) – sie gehört uns nicht und ich/wir bezahlen
für die Nutzung
aa) Ich/wir benutze/n einen Waschsalon in der Stadt
bb) Sonstiges... bitte, füllen Sie die Weise aus:
20. Wie oft waschen Sie Ihre Wäsche?
m) weniger als einmal wöchentlich
n) ein- bis zweimal wöchentlich
o) drei- bis viermal wöchentlich
p) mehr als viermal wöchentlich
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 224 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Ihre Altersgruppe:
18–23 24–30 31–40 41–50 51–60 60 und
darüber
Ihre Ausbildung:
Grundbildung Sekundarschulabschluss Bachelorabschluss und darüber
Ihr aktueller Wohnsitz:
Gemeinde Kleinstadt Großstadt
Ihr Stand:
Alleinlebend
Mit Partner/in ohne Kinder lebend
Mit Partner/in mit 1-2 Kindern lebend
Mit Partner/in mit 3 und mehr Kindern lebend
Mit Eltern und/oder Großeltern (2-3 Personen) lebend
Mit Eltern und/oder Großeltern (mehr als 3 Personen) lebend
Mit Freunden/Schulkameraden/Kollegen lebend
Sonstiges: ……………………………
Ihre Lebensbedingungen:
In einem Privathaus/Ferienhaus lebend
In einer Wohnung (Haus mit Wohnungen) lebend
Sonstiges:……………..
Ihre Einkommensgruppe (xxx/Person):Đ
Slovenian version:
Pralni stroj v krožnem gospodarstvu – lastništvo, plačevanje po pranju ali
združevanje
Namen vprašalnika je ugotoviti, kakšen je v zvezi z načinom pranja perila in tovrstnim
prispevanjem h glavnim ciljem krožnega gospodarstva odnos potrošnikov do različnih rešitev
krožnega gospodarstva, kakšni so njihovi cilji glede tega in kakšne ovire pri tem zaznavajo.
Raziskava je del projekta ReCiPSS (http://www.recipss.eu/), ki ga financira Evropska unija.
Ta vprašalnik je popolnoma anonimen, z njim se ne zbirajo nobeni občutljivi osebni podatki, ki
bi jih bilo mogoče zlorabiti.
Vprašalnik je na voljo v angleškem, nemškem, nizozemskem in slovenskem jeziku.
Če vas zanimajo rezultati s povzetkom vseh odgovorov v vseh štirih državah, dodajte svoj epoštni
naslov na koncu tega vprašalnika ali pišite na naslov: klapalov@econ.muni.cz.
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 225 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Najlepša hvala za sodelovanje.
Raziskava poteka v štirih državah: Avstriji, na Danskem, Nizozemskem in Sloveniji. Cilj krožnega
gospodarstva je čim bolj zmanjšati količino odpadkov, zmanjšati negativen vpliv proizvodnje in
prometa na okolje, pomagati podjetjem in družbi k trajnostnosti z ohranjanjem izdelkov čim dlje
v uporabi (porabi) in ne spodbujati tako imenovane družbe »odmetavanja«.
Rešitve za krožno gospodarstvo so: 1. proizvodnja in dobava visokokakovostnih trajno vzdržnih
izdelkov (ki so precej dragi); 2. popravljanje izdelkov kolikor je mogoče dolgo časa (ZDA in
nekatere druge države že imajo zakonodajo, ki spodbuja pravico do popravila, v EU se bodo taka
pravila uporabljala od aprila 2021); 3. obnova izdelkov (da so kot novi); predelava izdelkov
(skoraj enako kot obnova z več postopki); recikliranje izdelkov (uporaba materialov in sestavnih
delov iz starih izdelkov pri proizvodnji novih). Daljše kroženje izdelkov se namesto nakupa,
lastništva in zavrženja lahko doseže tudi z najemom/delitvijo/združevanjem (t.i. delitveno
porabo) ali plačilom po uporabi. Te načine imenujemo »poraba po dostopu«.
V imenu raziskovalne skupine ReCiPSS z Masarykove univerze, Fakultete za ekonomijo in upravo
v Brnem na Češkem,
Alena Klapalová
1. Izkušnje s porabo po dostopu:
m) Kakšne so vaše izkušnje z najemom ali zakupom (lizingom) izdelkov (npr.
gospodinjskih aparatov, avtomobilov, orodja, prenosnih računalnikov itd.)?
Brez izkušenj x Enkrat ali dvakrat x Pogosto najemam/zakupujem
n) Kakšne so vaše izkušnje s plačevanjem po uporabi izdelkov (npr. gospodinjskih
aparatov, avtomobilov, koles, orodja, prenosnih računalnikov itd.)?
Brez izkušenj x Enkrat ali dvakrat x Pogosto plačujem po uporabi
o) Kakšne so vaše izkušnje s t.i. »delitveno porabo« (to je oblika delitve izdelkov z
drugimi – izdelke lahko kupi skupina ljudi ali ena oseba ali celo institucija in jih
ponudi v uporabo za nadomestilo (v obliki finančnega nadomestila, izdelka ali
storitve)?
Brez izkušenj x Enkrat ali dvakrat x Pogosto uporabljam delitveno porabo
XVII. Najem pralnega stroja
13. Kaj bi vas prepričalo, da bi lastništvo pralnega stroja zamenjali za najem? (najem
pomeni pogodbo za določen čas z obročnim plačevanjem) Če niste lastnik pralnega
stroja, ampak ga imate v najemu, zakaj ste se za to odločili? Izberite med temi odgovori
(lahko izberete tudi več odgovorov):
u. Ni neposrednih stroškov nakupa (ni treba imeti denarja ali vzeti posojila za nakup)
ne deloma da
v. Ne želim kupiti in imeti v lasti, in če »da«, zakaj? Razlog vpišite spodaj
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 226 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
ne deloma da…Zakaj?..........................
w. Po mojem mnenju je to ceneje
ne deloma da
x. Možnost preizkusa pralnega stroja (npr. znamke, ki bi jo želel imeti)
ne deloma da
i. Ne želim se ukvarjati z vzdrževanjem pralnega stroja (če je vzdrževanje vključeno v
najem)
ne deloma da
v. Manjše tveganje okvar zaradi strokovnega vzdrževanja servisnega podjetja in zaradi
visoke kakovosti pralnega stroja (v najem se običajno dajejo kakovostnejši stroji)
ne deloma da
w. Okoljska vprašanja (najemajo se trajni izdelki, ki delujejo dlje časa)
ne deloma da
x. Prilagodljivost – nisem vezan na lastništvo
ne deloma da
y. Nekaj drugega… vpišite tukaj: ……………………………………………
ne deloma da
14. Kaj bi vas prepričalo, da bi plačevali po pranju? Plačevanje po pranju pomeni, da
pralnega stroja ne kupite, ampak ga uporabljate tako, da plačate za posamezno pranje,
bodisi doma za lastno uporabo (ponavadi ga najamete ali zakupite) ali z delitveno
porabo ali v pralnici. Če to možnost že uporabljate, označite, kaj vas je prepričalo… v
tem primeru ne izberite »morda«. Izberete lahko več odgovorov.
ö. Ni neposrednih stroškov nakupa (ni treba imeti denarja ali vzeti posojila za nakup)
ne deloma da
dd. Po mojem mnenju je to ceneje
ne deloma da
ee. Možnost preizkusa pralnega stroja (npr. znamke, ki bi jo želel imeti)
ne deloma da
ff. Ne želim se ukvarjati z vzdrževanjem pralnega stroja (če je vzdrževanje vključeno v
najem v zvezi s plačilom glede na pranje)
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 227 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
ne deloma da
gg. Manjše tveganje okvar zaradi strokovnega vzdrževanja servisnega podjetja in zaradi
visoke kakovosti pralnega stroja (pri plačevanju glede na pranje se običajno
uporabljajo kakovostnejši stroji)
ne deloma da
hh. Okoljska vprašanja (kot zgoraj – običajno se pri tem uporabljajo vzdržljivejši pralni
stroji)
ne deloma da
y. Pregled nad plačili za vsako pranje
ne deloma da
ff. Vtis na druge (ljudje bi zaradi tega občudovali mojo inovativnost)
ne deloma da
p. Prilagodljivost – nisem vezan na lastništvo
ne deloma da
q. Nekaj drugega ... kaj? ……………………….
ne deloma da
15. Bi vas pri razmišljanju o plačevanju po pranju namesto lastništva pralnega stroja ti
dejavniki odvrnili od plačevanja po pranju? (pri plačevanju po pranju je treba namestiti
modul, s katerim je stroj prek interneta povezan s ponudnikom in omogoča različne
dodatne funkcije)
gg. Raje sem lastnik stvari
ne deloma da
ee. ponudnik plačevanja po pranju bi izvedel preveč o meni
ne deloma da
ii. ponudnik plačevanja po pranju ne more zagotoviti popolnega varstva podatkov
ne deloma da
gg. na koncu bi plačal več, kot če bi bil lastnik pralnega stroja
ne deloma da
hh. Še nikoli nisem slišal za sistem plačevanja po pranju ali o tem vem zelo malo
ne deloma da
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 228 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
ll. Strah pred neznanim (menim, da obstaja veliko ali nekaj tveganj s plačevanjem po
pranju – izdelek lahko poškodujem, cene se lahko povišajo …)
ne deloma da
mm. Plačevanje po pranju pomeni zame dodatno finančno breme, kar je stresno
(npr. ne želim prejemati mesečnih računov)
ne deloma da
nn. Še kaj? Kaj?.............................
XVIII. Delitvena poraba/uporaba pralnega stroja, ki se deli z drugimi in plačuje po
pranju
4. Kaj bi vas prepričalo, da v svojem gospodinjstvu pralnega stroja ne bi imeli v lasti,
ampak bi si uporabo delili, npr. en pralni stroj za več gospodinjstev ali v pralnici?
ll. Ni neposrednih stroškov nakupa (ni treba imeti denarja ali vzeti posojila za nakup)
ne deloma da
mm. Ne želim kupiti in imeti v lasti, in če »da«, zakaj? Razlog vpišite spodaj
ne deloma da...Zakaj?........................
qq. Po mojem mnenju je to ceneje
ne deloma da
rr. Možnost preizkusa pralnega stroja (npr. znamke, ki bi jo želel imeti)
ne deloma da
ss. Ne želim se ukvarjati z vzdrževanjem pralnega stroja (če je vzdrževanje vključeno v
plačevanje po pranju pri delitveni porabi)
ne deloma da
tt. Okoljska vprašanja (v delitveni porabi so trajni izdelki, ki delujejo dlje časa)
ne deloma da
uu. Manjše tveganje okvar zaradi strokovnega vzdrževanja servisnega podjetja in
zaradi visoke kakovosti pralnega stroja
ne deloma da
vv. Prilagodljivost – nisem vezan na lastništvo
ne deloma da
tt. Vtis na druge - ljudje bi me zaradi tega občudovali
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 229 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
ne deloma da
Možnost druženja z drugimi
ne deloma da
xx. Nekaj drugega……….vpišite tukaj: ……………………………………………
ne deloma da
XIX. Obnovljen in predelan pralni stroj Obnovljen in predelan pralni stroj je rabljen pralni
stroj, ki se predela tako, da je kot nov, tako da se glavni sestavni deli izdelka razstavijo,
očistijo in zamenjajo ter nato ponovno sestavijo in preizkusijo. Deluje enako (z enako porabo
električne energije in vode) in je enako kakovosten ali boljši kot nov izdelek. Pri predelavi je
potrebnih več opravil, uporablja pa se več novih delov.
13. Imate izkušnje z obnovljenim in/ali predelanim izdelkom, predvsem kar zadeva
gospodinjske aparate in elektroniko?
Ne Da
14. Kaj menite o obnovljenih in predelanih pralnih strojih?
q) Obnovljen/predelan stroj je zame enak novemu
5) Nikakor se ne strinjam........................5) Povsem se strinjam
r) Nakup obnovljenega/predelanega pralnega stroja pripomore k manjši porabi omejenih
virov
5) Nikakor se ne strinjam........................5) Povsem se strinjam
s) Nakup obnovljenega/predelanega pralnega stroja lahko zmanjša škodljive vplive na
okolje.
5) Nikakor se ne strinjam........................5) Povsem se strinjam
t) Skrbi me, da bi obnovljen/predelan pralni stroj deloval slabše
delovanje novih
5) Nikakor se ne strinjam........................5) Povsem se strinjam
q) Skrbi me zanesljivost pralnega stroja po koncu garancijskega obdobja
1) Nikakor se ne strinjam ……………………….5) Povsem se strinjam
r) Skrbi me higiena obnovljenega/predelanega pralnega stroja
5) Nikakor se ne strinjam........................ 5) Povsem se strinjam
s) Pri odločitvi za nakup predelanega pralnega stroja je bistven ugled blagovne znamke
5) Nikakor se ne strinjam........................ 5) Povsem se strinjam
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 230 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Spodnje kartice (profili izdelkov) predstavljajo različne možnosti pranja. Kartice razvrstite po
želji (povlecite jih z miško in jih spustite v desno polje). Najprimernejša (najbolj zaželena)
možnost pranja bo na vrhu vašega seznama, najmanj ustrezna pa na dnu.
Cena za en cikel pranja
___________ _____________ ___________
trajanje veljavnosti pogodbe
prilagodljivo (mesečno) letno dolgoročno (5 let)
stanje pralnega stroja
Nov Kot nov (približno 5 let) Ponovno uporabljen
(približno 10 let)
servisna odzivnost
V enem dnevu V 4 dneh V 1 tednu
način plačevanja
Predplačilo (in plačilo
preostalega zneska)
Po obračunu Takojšnje (neposredno po
pranju)
XX. Vaš idealen pralni stroj?
(navedite stopnjo strinjanja z navedenimi izjavami)
21. Želim pralni stroj, ki:
ll) je zanesljiv in trajen, da bo vzdržal dlje
1 (sploh ne)……………………..5 (seveda)
mm) je pameten in povezan z internetom, da lahko pranje upravljam in spremljam
po spletu
1 (sploh ne)……………………..5 (seveda)
qq) mi vnaprej pove, če je treba kaj očistiti ali popraviti
1 (sploh ne)……………………..5 (seveda)
rr) deluje prek mojega osebnega profila in mi zato priporoči, kako in kdaj naj perem (za
optimizacijo porabe vode, energije in detergentov)
1 (sploh ne)……………………..5 (seveda)
pp) ga ponudnik storitev nadgrajuje, tako da je ves čas posodobljen
1 (sploh ne)……………………..5 (seveda)
tt) samodejno odmerja detergent(pralni stroji s samodejnim odmerjanjem stehtajo
oblačila v bobnu in samodejno nastavijo ustrezno količino detergenta)
1 (sploh ne)……………………..5 (seveda)
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 231 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
uu) ima povezavo s spletnim koledarjem
1 (sploh ne)……………………..5 (seveda)
ss) omogoča spletno strokovno svetovanje (na voljo 24 ur/7 dni na teden – vodnik,
videoposnetki itd.)
1 (sploh ne)……………………..5 (seveda)
ww) me obvešča o porabi energije in vode
1 (sploh ne)……………………..5 (seveda)
xx) me obvešča o ceni pranja
1 (sploh ne)……………………..5 (seveda)
22. Ali po vašem mnenju pri sprejemanju in nakupovanju novih izdelkov ter sprejemanju
novih trendov nasploh spadate med:
e) inovatorje b) tiste, ki se zgodaj priključijo c) tiste, ki se zgodaj priključijo večini
d) tiste, ki se pozno priključijo večini e) zamudnike
23. Ste po vašem mnenju eko-prijatelj, eko-ljubitelj ali celo eko-promotor?
1 (sploh ne)……………………..5 (seveda)
24. Kako je z lastništvom in nakupom pralnega stroja, ki ga uporabljate?
ö) Kupil/dobil sem ga sam (smo ga, če ste v paru ali družini)
dd) Zakupil(i)/kupil(i) sem/smo ga na kredit (celoten znesek bom(o) plačal(i)
postopoma)
ee) Najel(i) sem/smo ga (pogodba za določen čas)
ff) Pralni stroj uporabljam(o) v svojem/našem stanovanju, vendar je v lasti
najemodajalca
gg) Pralni stroj uporabljam(o) v svoji hiši ali stanovanju (t.i. delitvena uporaba), vendar
ni naš in za uporabo plačujem(o)
hh) Uporabljam(o) pralnico v mestu
ii) Drugo… vpišite, kako:
25. Kako pogosto perete perilo?
q) Manj kot enkrat na teden
r) Enkrat do dvakrat na teden
s) Trikrat do štirikrat na teden
t) Več kot štirikrat na teden
Vaša starostna skupina:
18–23 24–30 31–40 41–50 51–60 60
ali več
Vaša izobrazba:
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 232 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
osnovna šola srednja šola diploma ali več
Vaš trenutni kraj bivanja:
Vas majhno mesto veliko mesto
Vaš status:
Živim sam
Živim s partnerjem brez otrok
Živim s partnerjem z 1–2 otrokoma
Živim s partnerjem s 3 ali več otroki
Živim s starši in/ali starimi starši (2–3 osebe)
Živim s starši in/ali starimi starši (več kot 3 osebe)
Živim s prijatelji/sošolci/sodelavci
Drugo: ……………………………
Vaše življenjske razmere:
Živim v zasebni hiši/koči
Živim v stanovanju (večstanovanjska hiša)
Drugo:……………..
Vaša dohodkovna skupina (xxx/osebo):
Ð
#
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 233 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Appendix 4: Additional data from pilot survey for Gorenje
Figure: age structure for each country
Austria Denmark NL Slovenia Total
alone 21.90% 36.00% 23.80% 9.90% 23.10%
partner without children 41.30% 30.40% 35.10% 29.80% 34.10%
partner with 1-2 children 25.80% 16.10% 19.20% 39.70% 25.10%
partner with 3 and more children 2.60% 6.80% 11.90% 2.00% 5.80%
parents and/or grandparents (2-3 persons) 3.20% 5.00% 4.60% 7.30% 5.00%
parents and/or grandparents (more than 3
pers.)
1.30% 2.50% 0.70% 7.90% 3.10%
friends/ schoolmates/colleagues 2.60% 1.90% 1.30% 1.30% 1.80%
other 1.30% 1.20% 3.30% 2.00% 1.90%
Table: living conditions
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 234 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Renting Austria Denmark The Netherlands Slovenia Total
No experience 52.5% 54.3% 52.9% 50.9% 52.7%
I did it once or twice 39.5% 39.3% 40.1% 42.8% 40.4%
often 8.0% 6.4% 7.0% 6.3% 6.9%
Pay per use
No experience 73.5% 60.3% 61.9% 50.3% 61.6%
I did it once or twice 22.8% 33.3% 29.0% 45.2% 32.6%
often 3.7% 6.3% 9.0% 4.5% 5.9%
Collaborative consumption
No experience 78.9% 68.4% 66.0% 72.2% 71.3%
I did it once or twice 14.9% 22.4% 23.1% 24.1% 21.1%
often 6.2% 9.2% 10.9% 3.8% 7.6%
Table: Experience with access-based consumption
New product
approach
Ecofriend Washing
frequency
Education Location Income Gender
Renting Spearman rho -.185** .142** .142** .122** .084* .133** -.106**
Pay per use Spearman rho -.199** .224** 0.078 .146** .141** 0.068 -0.046
Co. con. Spearman rho -.245** .198** -0.022 .124** .103* 0.024 -0.031
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed), * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Table: Experience with access-based consumption related to consumers characteristics
owning
pref.
provider
knows
too much
Insuff.
data
protection
more
expensi.
missing
knowledge
anxiety financial
liability
other
New product
app.
0.047 -0.048 -0.051 0.009 0.051 -0.035 -0.034 -0.017
Eco-friends -.128** 0.04 0.064 -0.018 -0.038 0.011 -0.002 0.027
Washing freq. .111** 0.004 0.025 -0.013 0.018 -0.016 0.014 -.119**
Age 0.028 0.052 0.025 .116** .100* 0.041 0.03 -.121**
Edu. -.103* -0.022 0.02 0.03 -0.048 -0.053 -.086* 0.035
Location -0.035 0.04 0.007 0.042 -0.009 -0.039 -0.044 0.02
Income 0.009 -0.043 -0.067 0.063 0.053 -0.063 -0.052 -0.025
Gender 0.052 -0.071 -0.009 -0.008 0.039 0.054 .090* -0.033
WM owners .196** 0.047 0.054 .130** .091* -0.011 0.049 -.197**
Table: pay per wash - rank correlations between barriers and consumers characteristics
reman
valued as
new
resources
protection
less
enviro.
Impact
reman is
inferior
reliability
problems
concern
about
hygiene
brand
reputation
essential
New product app. 0.059 .083* 0.023 0.004 0.02 0.05 .107**
Eco-friends -0.041 -.216** -.167** 0.029 -0.047 -0.053 -0.076
Washing freq. -0.01 0.007 0.015 -0.016 -0.074 0.044 0.028
Age -.132** -0.074 -.107** -.095* -.108** -.088* -0.079
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 235 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Edu. .104** -0.053 -0.016 0.037 .093* -0.028 0.015
Location 0.005 -0.051 -0.03 -0.007 0.029 0.013 -0.055
Income 0.019 -0.006 -0.001 -0.06 0.045 0.015 -0.022
Gender 0.031 0.029 0.028 0.007 -0.03 -0.033 0.07
WM owners -0.034 -.115** -.103* -0.053 -0.06 -0.001 0.005
Table: rank correlations between the approach to reman product and consumers characteristics
New
produc
t app.
Eco-
friends
Washing
freq.
Age Edu. Location Income Gender WM
owners
robust WM -0.023 -0.059 -0.026 -.174** 0.003 0.03 0.021 -0.017 -.245**
smart/online
control
-0.079 0.026 -0.023 -0.078 0.052 0.042 0.018 0.049 -.101*
cleaning/repair
warning
0.066 -.103* -0.074 0.001 0.056 -0.047 -0.048 -0.038 -0.054
personalised
recommendation
0.043 -0.038 0.035 -.086* 0.031 -0.008 -0.026 0.042 -0.033
upgrading up to
date
0.047 -.087* -0.04 -0.066 0.053 0.007 -0.047 -0.001 0.008
autodosing 0.045 -.125** -0.033 -0.047 0.015 -0.043 -0.008 -0.023 -0.073
online calendar -0.056 0.068 -0.033 -.105** .082* 0.019 0.064 -0.008 -.082*
online expert
advice
0.062 0.015 -0.058 -0.057 0.029 0.034 0.02 0.004 -0.051
energy/water
consumption info
0.068 -.156** 0.004 -0.025 -0.028 0.021 0.041 -.081* -0.003
price of washing
cycle info
0.063 -.165** 0.005 -0.056 -0.013 0.001 0.007 -0.039 -0.033
Table: rank correlations between requirements for ideal washing machine and consumers
characteristics
Figure: The ideal washing machine in the view of four countries
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
Austria Denmark the Netherlands Slovenia
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 236 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Figure: perception of remanufacturing/refurbishing in the Netherlands and Slovenia
Figure: perception of ideal washing machine in the Netherlands and Slovenia
CONJOINT PLAN=profiles.sav'
/SEQUENCE=CA1 TO CA11
/SUBJECT=IDorder
/FACTORS= contract (LINEAR LESS)
MWstatus (discrete)
payment (DISCRETE)
Price (LINEAR LESS)
/PRINT=SUMMARYONLY
/UTILITY='Utility.sav'
/plot= all.
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4
reman valued as new
resources protection
less enviro. Impact
reman is inferior
reliability problems
concern about hygiene
brand reputation essential
Slovenia the Netherlands
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4
robust WM
cleaning/repair warning
upgrading up to date
autodosing
online expert advice
energy/water consumption info
price of washing cycle info
Slovenia the Netherlands
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 237 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
Table: Original conjoint model (script in IBM SPSS)
Profile 1 Vertragslaufzeit: monatlich;
Waschmaschinenzustand: wie neu (ca. 5 Jahre);
Abrechnungsschema: online - sofort (direkt nach dem Waschen);
1 Euro Preis für einen Waschgang
Profile 2 Vertragslaufzeit: jährlich;
Waschmaschinenzustand: wiederverwendet (gebraucht) (ca. 10 Jahre);
Abrechnungsschema: online - sofort (direkt nach dem Waschen);
0,40 Euro Preis für einen Waschgang
Profile 3 Vertragslaufzeit: monatlich;
Waschmaschinenzustand: wiederverwendet (gebraucht) (ca. 10 Jahre);
Abrechnungsschema: nachberechnet;
0,80 Euro Preis für einen Waschgang
Profile 4 Vertragslaufzeit: 5 Jahre;
Waschmaschinenzustand: wiederverwendet (gebraucht) (ca. 10 Jahre);
Abrechnungsschema: online - sofort (direkt nach dem Waschen);
0,40 Euro Preis für einen Waschgang
Profile 5 Vertragslaufzeit: 5 Jahre
Waschmaschinenzustand: neu
Abrechnungsschema: online - sofort (direkt nach dem Waschen)
0,80 Euro Preis für einen Waschgang
Profile 6 Vertragslaufzeit: jährlich;
aschmaschinenzustand: wie neu (ca. 5 Jahre);
Abrechnungsschema: vorausbezahlt (und den Rest bezahlen);
0,80 Euro Preis für einen Waschgang
Profile 7 Vertragslaufzeit: monatlich;
Waschmaschinenzustand: neu;
Abrechnungsschema: vorausbezahlt (und den Rest bezahlen);
0,40 Euro Preis für einen Waschgang
Profile8 Vertragslaufzeit: jährlich;
Waschmaschinenzustand: wiederverwendet (gebraucht) (ca. 10 Jahre);
Abrechnungsschema: nachberechnet;
0,80 Euro Preis für einen Waschgang
Profile 9 Vertragslaufzeit: 5 Jahre;
Waschmaschinenzustand: wie neu (ca. 5 Jahre);
Abrechnungsschema: nachberechnet;
0,80 Euro Preis für einen Waschgang
Profile 10 Vertragslaufzeit: jährlich;
Waschmaschinenzustand: neu;
Abrechnungsschema: nachberechnet;
1 Euro Preis für einen Waschgang
Profile 11 Vertragslaufzeit: 5 Jahre;
Waschmaschinenzustand: wiederverwendet (gebraucht) (ca. 10 Jahre);
Abrechnungsschema: vorausbezahlt (und den Rest bezahlen);
1 Euro Preis für einen Waschgang
Table: Full list of profiles – example of Austrian survey
D
raft
D2.1 – Defining the current baseline and the target/improved
circular business models
Page 238 of 238This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 776577-2
monthly
contract
yearly
contract
5-year
contract
New
WM
As new
WM
Reused
WM
Pre-paid Post-
paid
Instant
pay.
Price
Cl 1 0.1424 0.5762 -0.7186 0.2797 -0.4657 0.1859 0.1893 -0.742 0.5528 -1.3945
Cl 2 -0.2339 -0.3038 0.5376 0.6613 0.2688 -0.9301 -0.1317 0.5376 -0.4059 -0.1142
Cl 3 2.1379 0.3027 -2.4406 0.272 -0.0651 -0.2069 -0.0345 -0.2222 0.2567 -0.2471
Total 0.452 0.252 -0.7041 0.3935 -0.1585 -0.235 0.0447 -0.2447 0.2 -0.7638
Table. Cluster centres – average part-worth utilities
Table. Standard deviation in part-worth coefficients across clusters
monthly
contract
yearly
contract
5-year
contract New WM
As new
WM
Reused
WM Pre-paid Post-paid
Instant
payment Price
Cluster 1 1,1313 0,87788 0,92786 0,94959 0,98063 0,95848 1,04092 0,94007 1,23564 1,30828
Cluster 2 1,18404 1,07783 1,07169 1,56346 1,15679 1,66979 1,17087 0,93773 1,07325 1,13704
Cluster 3 0,80141 0,93956 0,72335 0,97452 0,76052 0,98469 0,69705 0,70007 0,7326 0,78498
D
raft