Modeling a Business Ecosystem from the Point of View of a Particular Participant
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7250/csimq.2026-46.01Keywords:
Business Ecosystems, Modeling, Structural Coupling, Autopoiesis, Fractal Enterprise Model, FEMAbstract
The scientific literature related to business ecosystems is growing. However, the majority of this literature is devoted to so-called Digital Business Ecosystems (DBE), which are largely related to the networking aspect of business ecosystems, i.e., the exchange of values among their participants. Other parts related to the work of a participating enterprise, as well as its suppliers and regulators, are often excluded. In this work, we take a different approach, namely, to model an ecosystem that exists around a specific enterprise. The work is based on concepts transferred from biological cybernetics to business, such as structural coupling and autopoiesis. In this work, the Fractal Enterprise Model (FEM) is used for modeling business ecosystems. The research follows the Design Science methodology. The goal is to suggest some patterns expressed in the modeling language that can help an enterprise build a model of the ecosystem of which the enterprise is in focus. The patterns can help identify activities that are missing in the enterprise itself, thereby providing a basis for improving its functioning.
References
J. F. Moore, The Death of Competition. Leadership and Strategy in the Age of Business Ecosystems – A Biological Ecology Framework for Managers and Collaborative Relationships. Harper, 1997.
F. Nachira, P. Dini and A. Nicolai, “A network of digital business ecosystems for Europe: roots, processes and perspectives,” in Digital Business Ecosystems, European Commission, 2007, pp. 1–20.
M. de Reuver, C. Sørensen and R. C. Basole, “The digital platform: A research agenda,” Journal of Information Technology, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 124–135, 2018. Available: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41265-016-0033-3
A. Tiwana, Platform Ecosystems: Aligning Architecture, Governance, and Strategy. Morgan Kaufmann, 2014. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/C2012-0-06625-2
A. Gawer, “Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework,” Research Policy, vol. 43, no. 7, p. 1239–1249, 2014. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.03.006
R. Kapoor, “Ecosystems: Broadening the locus of value creation,” Journal of Organization Design, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 2018. Available: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41469-018-0035-4
N. Luhmann, “The autopoiesis of social systems,” in Sociocybernetics Paradoxes, pp. 172–192, 1986.
N. Luhmann, Introduction to Systems Theory. Polity Press, 2013.
H. Maturana and F. Varela, Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living. Springer Dordrecht, 1980. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8947-4
S. Beer, The Heart of Enterprise. Wiley, 1979.
C. Tsai, J. Zdravkovic and J. Stirna, “Modeling Digital Business Ecosystems: A Systematic Literature Review,” Complex Systems Informatics and Modeling Quarterly, CSIMQ, no. 30, pp. 1–30, 2022. Available: https://doi.org/10.7250/csimq.2022-30.01
B. Pittl and D. Bork, “Modeling Digital Enterprise Ecosystems with ArchiMate: A Mobility Provision Case Study,” in Serviceology for Services. ICServ 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 10371, pp. 178–189, 2017. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61240-9_17
I. Bider, E. Perjons, M. Elias, and P. Johannesson, “A fractal enterprise model and its application for business development,” Software & Systems Modeling, vol. 16, pp. 663–689, 2017. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-016-0554-9
I. Bider, E. Perjons and V. Klyukina, “Tool Support for Fractal Enterprise Modeling,” in Domain-Specific Conceptual Modeling, 2022, pp. 205–229. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93547-4_10
Fractalmodel.org, Fractal Enterprise Model.
I. Bider and E. Perjons, “Identity Management in an Institution of Higher Education: A Case Study Using Structural Coupling and Fractal Enterprise Model,” Complex Systems Informatics and Modeling Quarterly, CSIMQ, no. 27, pp. 60–86, 2021. Available: https://doi.org/10.7250/csimq.2021-27.03
A. R. Hevner, S. March, J. Park, and S. Ram, “Design Science in Information Systems Research,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 75–105, 2004. Available: https://doi.org/10.2307/25148625
I. Bider, P. Johannesson, and E. Perjons, “Design science research as movement between individual and generic situation-problem-solution spaces,” in Designing Organizational Systems. Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation, vol. 1, 2013, pp. 35–61. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33371-2_3
I. Bider, M. Henkel, and E. Perjons, “Modeling a Business Ecosystem from the Point of View of a Particular Participant,” in Perspectives in Business Informatics Research. BIR 2025. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 562, 2026, pp. 172–182. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-04375-7_11
F. J. Varela, H. Maturana, and R. Uribe, “Autopoiesis: The organization of living systems, its characterization and a model,” Biosystems, vol. 5, no. 4, p. 187–196, 1974. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/0303-2647(74)90031-8
L. Fell and D. Russell, “An introduction to ‘Maturana’s’ biology,” in Seized by Agreement, Swamped by Understanding, 1994.
P. Hoverstadt, “Defining Identity by Structural Coupling in VSM Practice,” in UK Systems Society, Oxford, 2010.
M. Zeleny, “On Social Nature of Autopoietic System,” in Evolution, Order and Complexity, 1996, pp. 122–145.
H. Cadenas and M. Arnold, “The Autopoiesis of Social Systems and its Criticisms,” Constructivist Foundations, vol. 10, no. 2, 2015.
P. Hoverstadt, “The Viable System Model,” in Systems Approaches to Managing Change: A Practical Guide, 2010, pp. 87–133. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-809-4_3
R. Espejo and A. Reyes, Organizational Systems: Managing Complexity with the Viable System Model. Springer, 2011. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19109-1
V. Mott, “Knowledge comes from practice: Reflective theory building in practice,” in New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, pp. 57–63, 1996. Available: https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.36719967209
I. Bider, E. Perjons and P. Johannesson, “Just Finished a Cycle of a Design Science Research Project: What’s Next?” Complex Systems Informatics and Modeling Quarterly, CSIMQ, no. 22, pp. 60–86, 2020. Available: https://doi.org/10.7250/csimq.2020-22.05
I. Bider, G. Regev and E. Perjons, “Using Enterprise Models to Explain and Discuss Autopoiesis and Homeostasis in Socio-technical Systems,” Complex Systems Informatics and Modeling Quarterly, CSIMQ, no. 22, pp. 21–38, 2020. Available: https://doi.org/10.7250/csimq.2020-22.02
I. Bider and A. Lodhi, “Moving from Manufacturing to Software Business: A Business Model Transformation Pattern,” in Enterprise Information Systems. ICEIS 2019. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 378, 2020, pp. 514–530. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40783-4_25
I. Bider, “Structural Coupling, Strategy and Fractal Enterprise Modeling,” in Research Challenges in Information Science. RCIS 2020. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 385, 2020, pp. 95–111. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50316-1_6
P. Hoverstadt, The Fractal Organization: Creating Sustainable Organizations with the Viable System Model. John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
I. Bider and E. Perjons, “Discovery Rules for Depicting Tacit Knowledge Usage and Management in Fractal Enterprise Models,” in Perspectives in Business Informatics Research. BIR 2024. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 529, 2024, pp. 209–224. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-71333-0_14
P. Senyoa, K. Liu, and J. Effah, “Digital business ecosystem: Literature review and a framework for future research,” International Journal of Information Management, vol. 47, pp. 52–64, 2019. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.01.002
J. Gordijn and H. Akkermans, “Value-based requirements engineering: Exploring innovative e-commerce ideas,” Requirements Engineering, vol. 8, pp. 114–134, 2003. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-003-0169-x
G. Poels, F. Kaya, Verdonck and J. Gordijn, “Early Identification of Potential Distributed Ledger Technology Business Cases Using e3value Models,” in Advances in Conceptual Modeling. ER2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 11787, 2019, pp. 70–80. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34146-6_7
J. Schuir, J. Vogel, F. Teuteberg, and O. Thomas, “Understanding the augmented and virtual reality business ecosystem: an e3-value approach,” in Business Modeling and Software Design. BMSD 2020. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 391, 2020, pp. 240–256. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52306-0_15
H. Maturana, “Autopoiesis, Structural Coupling & Cognition,” Cybernetics & Human Knowing, vol. 9, no. 3–4, pp. 5–34, 2002.
R. Wieringa, W. Engelsman, J. Gordijn, and D. Ionita, “A Business Ecosystem Architecture Modeling Framework,” in 2019 IEEE 21st Conference on Business Informatics (CBI), pp. 147–156, 2019. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/CBI.2019.00024
V. Felch and E. Sucky, “In search of a consensus definition of business ecosystems: a qualitative study,” Journal of Modelling in Management, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 1834–1857, 2023. Available: https://doi.org/10.1108/JM2-09-2021-0240
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ilia Bider, Erik Perjons (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
