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

net/publication/375825449

Metaverse and Society 5.0: Pivotal for Future Business Model Innovation

Article in Journal of Business Models · November 2023

DOI: 10.54337/jbm.v11i3.8124

CITATIONS READS

2 235

3 authors:

Claus Andreas Foss Rosenstand Jacob Brix

Aalborg University Aalborg University Business School
26 PUBLICATIONS 50 CITATIONS 45 PUBLICATIONS 680 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Christian Nielsen
University of Bologna
135 PUBLICATIONS 2,216 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Jacob Brix on 22 November 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 62-76

Metaverse and Society 5.0: Pivotal for Future Business

Model Innovation

Abstract
The area of interest is future business model innovation in Society 5.0. This is important as the tran-
sition from Society 4.0 to Society 5.0 is happening at an exponential pace driven by the Metaverse.
Thus, the research question is: how should companies think and do business model innovation in the
Society 5.0 / Metaverse space? The method is conceptual, where the business model characteristics
of Society 1.0 to 4.0 are empirically stated for inductive arguments for equivalent characteristics of
Society 5.0. This is framed with Society 5.0 theory, Metaverse theory, and Osterwalder and Pigneur’s
nine business model building blocks from their iconic Business Model Canvas (BMC). The contribu-
tion is a framework cross-tabulating Society 1.0 to Society 5.0 with the nine BMC elements. Finally, a
discussion is provided with findings and implications for managers regarding business model inno-
vation, new businesses, outcome logic, ecospheres, and currencies.

Introduction which economic and political barriers of the current

According to Taran et al. (2022), based on the work of Internet could be overcome. As such, the metaverse
Keeley et al. (2013), business model innovation holds is a candidate to become the next generation of the
promise for the most significant value creation po- Internet, a possible interface or platform of Web 3.0.
tential. Civilisation, as we know it, is on the verge of (Ritterbusch and Teichmann, 2023), it holds promise
transitioning from Society 4.0, the industrial society, for catalysing future business model innovation.
to the super smart Society 5.0. In a recent report,
McKinsey & Company (2022) estimates that by 2030, The field of business model innovation has matured
the Metaverse has the potential to generate up to considerably in the last decade, and the business
USD 5 trillion in value. The metaverse is a megatrend model discipline has undergone some distinct de-
and one way to encompass the digital future, in velopment stages (Zott et al., 2011; Nielsen et al.,

Keywords: Metaverse, Society 5.0, business model innovation, foresight

Please cite this paper as: Rosenstand, C.A.F., J. Brix & C. Nielsen (2023), Metaverse and Society 5.0: Pivotal for Future Business
Model Innovation, Journal of Business Models, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp.62-76

62
 Journal of Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 62-76

2018). According to (Aagaard & Nielsen, 2021), the provides avenues for future research and spotting
fifth research stage relates to the role of business new business opportunities.
models in times of increased instability in society
and the uncertainties associated with these. With
the intent to identify critical trajectories towards a Introducing the Metaverse
2030 horizon, Aagaard & Nielsen (2021) argue that In its most basic form, the Metaverse includes three
business model innovation must be able to provide features: 1) a sense of immersion, 2) real-time in-
value for society because while technology may teractivity, and 3) user agency. Ultimately, the full
solve problems, value is created through its inclu- version of the metaverse will include platforms and
sion in viable and scalable business models that live devices that work seamlessly with each other, allow-
up to the norms and standards expected by socie- ing thousands of people to interact simultaneously
ty. We also see new tendencies emerge around the and use cases that go well beyond gaming. To some
globe where a human-centric approach is expected extent, the Metaverse is already present in limited
to be an integral part of technological innovation form in online video games and virtual worlds as the
and business model innovation – e.g., Japan’s policy Web 3.0 iteration of the internet supports online 3-D
on Society 5.0 (Japan Cabinet Office, 2016) and the virtual environments through conventional person-
European Commission’s policy brief on Industry 5.0 al computing and virtual and augmented realities.
(Breque et al., 2021). The logic behind this tendency Companies are already using tools and methodolo-
to include the human-centric perspective is that the gies associated with the Metaverse. For example,
current way of working for society has created giant Boeing uses the Metaverse to design and test new
leaps in technological innovation and stretched the aircraft. Siemens uses it to create digital twins, as
boundary for what earlier was considered almost im- a virtual representation of the physical objects and
possible, but aspects of social innovation and focus systems of its factories and production lines, used to
on the societal development and aligning society to simulate, analyse, and control its counterpart. Gen-
these many innovations have been down-prioritized eral Motors uses the metaverse to train its workers
(Gershenfeld et al., 2017). to assemble new vehicles.

The metaverse can significantly create a more hu- The Metaverse concept was first introduced in Ste-
man-centred, sustainable, and inclusive society by phenson’s novel “Snow Crash” (Stephenson, 1992),
introducing new technologies that improve people’s describing a 3D virtual reality populated by avatars
lives and create a better world. This article describes of real people. To this end, the metaverse refers to
the relationship between the metaverse and Society a virtual reality existing beyond reality (Key et al.,
5.0 and the types of technologies and mechanisms 2021). In common parlance, the Metaverse often re-
they rely on. The research question we discuss and fers to a world created by a creator, where the users
unfold is: How should companies think and do busi- must “live” under the creator’s rules (Hwang & Chien,
ness model innovation in the Society 5.0 / metaverse 2022). As the metaverse is an emerging technol-
space? ogy, the concept is not consistently defined. Thus,
a broader definition should be applied, including a
As part of our response to this research question, broad range of immersive technologies such as vir-
we develop a framework which can be used to de- tual, augmented, and mixed reality (Vistisen et al.,
velop strategies for business model innovation in 2023), where mixed reality allows interactions be-
the metaverse/Society 5.0 context. The remain- tween real and digital objects.
der of this article is organised as follows: First, the
metaverse is introduced, followed by an introduction From a business perspective, Metaverse is often
to Society 5.0 that includes a depiction of different defined as a platform for activity. To this end, Meta,
types of value creation. The fourth section introduc- formerly known as Facebook, defines it as a place
es our framework for business model innovation in to “connect, work, play, learn, and shop” (Meta, n.d.).
the metaverse and Society 5.0, and the conclusion However, researchers tend to define the Metaverse

63
 Journal of Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 62-76

with platform-independent characteristics, as seen resolution of social problems by a system that highly
in the 28 research definitions in a structured litera- integrates cyberspace and physical space” (Japan
ture review by Ritterbusch and Teichmann (2023). Cabinet Office, n.d), where cyberspace is equivalent
Their study illuminates a highly interdisciplinary to virtual reality. The last part of the definition, “… a
interest in the phenomena, including arts and hu- system that highly integrates cyberspace and physi-
manities, business management, accounting, com- cal space,” is equivalent to the market perspective
puter science, engineering, environmental science, on the Metaverse, where the physical and digital
medicine, and social science (ibid.). To encompass worlds come together. Therefore, it can be argued
both a platform and platform-independent perspec- that the Metaverse is the very technology that con-
tive, they suggest “… that the metaverse will be a stitutes the future infrastructure of Society 5.0. The
single three-dimensional online environment with logic is, hence, that the Metaverse and Society 5.0
many metaverse platforms, in which each metaverse are two closely related concepts bound by the pres-
platform is embodied in the form of virtual spaces” ence of technological advances such as 6G (Ahokan-
(ibid.,p. 12375). gas, 2023), AR, XR, digital twins, web3, digital assets,
NFTs (Schmück, 2023), and Generative AI (Haefner &
The Metaverse is still in its infancy but holds promise Gassmann, 2023).
of substantial change for many industries. For exam-
ple, the Metaverse can be used in manufacturing to
create digital twins of factories and production lines Introducing Society 5.0
to simulate and optimise production processes. The Since the early ages, we have seen different arche-
same could go for ships and aircraft; in logistics, types of society that have emerged, mixed with a
the Metaverse can track the movement of goods new archetype, and continued this trajectory, where
and materials in real-time. In the retail sector, the what was useful was kept, what was no longer func-
Metaverse would lead to virtual stores where cus- tional was abandoned, and what was new was adopt-
tomers can browse and purchase products immer- ed and put in use. The logic with these societal shifts
sively. In education and healthcare, the Metaverse is that new societal movements emerge to solve the
can improve accessibility and quality in training, problems created within the existing and prior soci-
learning, and interaction. In addition to these spe- etal forms (Huang et al., 2022).
cific industry applications, the Metaverse will likely
have a broader impact on how we work, learn, and Society 1.0 is often referred to as the ‘hunter-gath-
socialise. For example, the Metaverse enables and erer society’. This societal form was characterised
enhances remote work as we know it today, attend- as a non-productive economy, focusing on gather-
ing virtual conferences and other events without ing food and surviving by finding food, fishing, and
travelling. It could also create new social networking hunting. The transition to Society 2.0 occurred as
opportunities and foster collaboration between peo- knowledge was created about agriculture and farm-
ple from different cultures. ing. This societal form is often referred to as ‘the
agricultural society’. The logical transition from 1.0
The market size of the Metaverse is growing expo- to 2.0 occurred because the hunter-gatherer soci-
nentially, doubling nearly every second year. Here, it ety could not provide enough food for the increasing
is defined “… as the next iteration of the internet, the population. Therefore, the 2.0 way of living solved
metaverse is where physical and digital worlds come the problem that the 1.0 form could not. In the ag-
together” (Statista, n.d.). From USD 19 billion in 2021 ricultural society, living standards increased as the
to an estimated 100 billion USD in 2026. Following food supply became self-sufficient. Therefore, new
this broad market definition from Statista, we are activities came into focus, such as weaving fabrics
close to another megatrend, namely Society 5.0, as and creating pottery like in ceramics. In this era, we
a concept originated from the Japan Cabinet Office. saw the first industrial revolution with light industry.
Society 5.0 is defined as a “… human-centred soci- This development led to a barter economy between
ety that balances economic advancement with the large groups of families and settlers.

64
 Journal of Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 62-76

In the transition towards Society 3.0 – the ‘indus- Society 5.0 - the super smart society
trial society’ – the invention and application of We currently stand on the edge of a transition to-
machines and more advanced technology (com- wards Society 5.0, which is referred to as a ‘super
pared to, e.g., axes, shovels, and needles) began smart society’ (Japan Cabinet Office, 2016; Huang et
to replace many of the hitherto manual labour pro- al., 2022) and ‘the imagination society’ (Keidanren,
cesses. Here, we saw the second industrial revo- 2018). Society 5.0 is, as mentioned, defined as:
lution and the beginning of heavy industry and the
use of, e.g., chemicals. Small factories started to “A human-centred society that balances eco-
sprout, and the Industrial Revolution started with nomic advancement with the resolution of so-
machines and factories, e.g., related to the textile cial problems by a system that highly integrates
industry. What also occurred in Society 3.0 was cyberspace and physical space.” (Japan Cabinet
the establishment of critical infrastructure such Office, 2016).
as ports, railways, and roads and, in addition to
this, electricity, water, and sanitary installations in Central to Society 5.0 is creating a balance between
households. Moreover, an essential aspect at this economic development and solving societal issues.
point was that people started gaining rights. At this The outcomes and potentials associated with Soci-
point, we witnessed the third industrial revolution ety 5.0 include improving citizens’ health and well-
with the introduction of computers and the Inter- being, attracting and retaining talent, and ensuring
net to large companies and universities. Currently, long-term prosperity. The ambition is that it is now
we are in Society 4.0, ‘the information society’ rec- time to grab the social aspects of innovation and let
ognised by individuals having access to their own both technological- and social innovation co-evolve
ICT devices, the development of IoT, automated much closer and better than we have seen until now.
manufacturing, Machine Learning, and Augmented Hence, collaboration and co-production have be-
Reality. These technologies represent the fourth come new ways of working across administrative
industrial revolution, which is taking place as we and sectoral boundaries (Brix et al., 2020). While the
write this chapter. Society 5.0 movement could seem like a far-away
abstraction, it is possible already to see tendencies
Currently, we can instantly share information, inter- where this ‘new way of working’ is taking place. In the
act, and know what happens when it happens, and region of Eindhoven in the Netherlands, a range of
it also, to some extent, is possible for us to forecast local companies and organisations from both public,
tendencies. The problems that our way of living in private, and third-sector organisations have cre-
society 4.0 has created are, e.g., a high degree of ated a large-scale collaboration with a shared vision
environmental impact, mass consumption of scarce for the region, where close collaboration, common
resources, and nations around the globe, where dif- strategies, and alike have been developed to solve
ferences between living standards and quality of the problems of the region, e.g., attracting a critical
life have not developed the same pace as technol- mass of talents for the tech-companies. This con-
ogy (i.e., Japan Cabinet Office, 2016; Gershenfeld crete example of a movement that can be defined
et al., 2017; Huang et al., 2022; Breque et al., 2021). as a small-scale society 5.0 is called ‘Brainport Eind-
The down-prioritised focus – at least in the early hoven (n.d.) – the home of Pioneers’.
stages of Society 4.0 has led to a new emerging ten-
dency: Society 5.0. In the last decade, we have been With the increasing attention towards the mix of
introduced to the 17 United Nations Sustainable cyberspace and physical space, we already see the
Development Goals, and Japan and the European Metaverse as an approach to turn data into things
Commission have put human-centricity on the po- and things into data to create more value and better
litical agenda for solving the problems we have cre- lives (Gershenfeld et al., 2017; Nielsen & Brix, 2023).
ated ourselves. One of the tendencies that are forecasted to shift

65
 Journal of Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 62-76

is, e.g., the movement from economies of scale and business model innovation literature is already en-
the efficiency pervasion towards focusing on value- riched by knowledge and intellectual development
creation in the word’s broadest terms. Our evidence in the ‘private value’ perspective, which we have just
for this postulate can be found in the European Com- unfolded above. However, we can potentially find
mission’s policy brief (Breque et al., 2021). new value-related themes in the business model lit-
erature by delving into the literature on public value,
“Industry 5.01 recognises the power of industry co-production, and outcome logic (Durose et al.,
to achieve societal goals beyond jobs and growth 2015; Brix et al., 2020). The critical aspect of public
to become a resilient provider of prosperity by value is that organisations who (co-)produce pub-
making production respect the boundaries of lic value, on the one hand, must focus intensely on
our planet and placing the wellbeing of the in- internal efficiency and effectiveness, implying that
dustry worker at the centre of the production waste, in the broadest term, must be avoided. While
process.” (Breque et al., 2021, p.14) having this internal focus, it is also essential that the
organisation’s way of working and what they create
Value creation - private value, public value, and live up to the expectations of users (and citizens in
outcome logic general), e.g., related to sustainability, the UN SDGs,
While the value-creation construct is a central part and the UN Global Compact. Therefore, the same
of business models in general, where the notion of organisations, on the other hand, must ensure that
the value proposition towards the user of a given the services (and the artefacts related to these) they
product/service/technology also plays a central make available are relevant and valuable to the citi-
role, and it captures the way value is delivered, cap- zens and users (Colon & Guérin-Schneider, 2015). The
tured (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010), and according logic is that no one is better off with services that do
to Nielsen (2023a) also dispersed among the stake- not work or matter. As a third parameter, this implies
holders of a company. Our logic is that when we ap- that organisations must continuously evaluate if and
ply a Society 5.0 filter on the current understanding how they live up to their strategies and what they
of value-creation about business models, we might have promised in these strategies, and also – ideal
benefit from applying the distinction between pri- typically – to include users in this evaluation (Moore,
vate value and public value (Moore, 1995) and intro- 2019). The premise for this perspective is that if
ducing the perspectives of outcome logic (Funnel & the organisation does not live up to its promise, or
Rogers, 2011). The business model innovation pro- if the users or citizens, in general, are sceptical in
cess can capture more societal and social nuances this regard, value conflict or perhaps even value de-
if the business model’s value construct is further struction could potentially occur (Nabatchi, 2018).
unfolded and elaborated with this inspiration from This implies that organisations must unfold critical
sociology and political science. outcome logic explicitly related to the value creation
expected to materialise in their business model.
Private and Public Value
The classic distinction between private and public Outcome logic
value is that private organisations create private An outcome logic – also known as the effect logic –
value, for example, growth and new jobs. In contrast, is an explicit account of not only the concrete out-
public organisations create public value, such as put that is created because of a range of activities
service delivery to citizens, where the citizens, us- (e.g., a product) but also the effect that this product
ers of services and alike experience the service(s) to will have on the medium and long term on the users,
be meaningful and valuable (Moore, 1995). There is, on the environment, socially, etc. (Pawson & Tilley,
however, more to it than what is stated in this dis- 1997; Kringelum & Brix, 2020). Our point is that when
tinction (Try and Radnor, 2007). Our point is that the political ambitions such as the definitions found by
the European Commission stage well-being, etc.,
The European Commission’s policy brief does explicitly
1 explicitly, it is also essential that organisations
mention Society 5.0 start including this line of thinking in their business

66
 Journal of Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 62-76

Table 1.

Output (short term) Outcome Short term Outcome medium term Outcome long term

A product is pro- The hearing aid is sold/ The user might find it The user’s individual well-
duced, e.g., a hear- given to a user. easier to socialise in being is increased, s/he
ing aid The user starts hearing general and take more becomes physically and
(better), experiences to be active part in sports, mentally healthier and the
better included in conver- and / or other hobbies, degree of democracy is
sations, and perhaps also and hence increase the higher since the user can
feels safer when walking feeling of inclusion in lo- engage in dialogue easier
because of warning sounds cal community. than before.
might better be heard.

Table 1: An illustrative example of an outcome logic (Source: Authors’ development)

models and reporting, perhaps as a new account- Regarding inclusivity, the Metaverse can be used to
ability measure. Table 1 gives an illustrative short ex- make our society more inclusive and accessible to
ample of an outcome logic for inspiration. everyone. For example, people with disabilities could
participate in activities they would otherwise be un-
We believe that adding a public value outcome logic able to do through Metaverse technologies. Overall,
when revisiting existing business models or recog- the Metaverse has the potential to play a significant
nising opportunities for new business models is a role in helping to create a more human-centred, sus-
relevant and potentially soon-required avenue. tainable, and inclusive society. The Metaverse and
Society 5.0 also focus on how technology improves
people’s lives and creates a better world.

Analysis: BM perspectives on the As argued above, the Metaverse is the future infra-
Metaverse and Society 5. 0 structure of Society 5.0 and, thus, also a system
We are currently leaping into a super-smart and needed to operate and communicate in Society 5.0
human-centred society. An essential aspect of this and its businesses. From a communication science
definition is the focus on ‘highly integrating cyber- perspective, the following accumulative progression
space and physical space’, where the Metaverse from Society 1.0 to 5.0 can be argued regarding soci-
plays a key role cf. our perspectives above. In Soci- ety format, communication activity, involved parties
ety 5.0, the digital and real-world interact – this is the in communication, spatial distance, and infrastruc-
Metaverse. The digital and real-world interactions ture.
play a vital role in the transformation towards Soci-
ety 5.0 in several ways. Regarding personalisation, The ambition is not a media historical contribution,
the Metaverse can be used to create tailored expe- as this is a well-established field (e.g., Finnemann,
riences for individuals in, for example, healthcare, 2005). This article investigates the framing of Soci-
education, and entertainment. The Metaverse can ety 5.0 and its infrastructure according to business
also play a role in reducing our environmental impact models. To this end, we leverage the nine elements
through virtual meetings, conferences, or virtual ex- of Osterwalder and Pigneur’s Business Model Can-
periences instead of travelling. vas (BMC) for developing, describing, and analysing

67
 Journal of Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 62-76

Table 2.

Society Society format Activity Involved Spatial Value Infrastructure

1.0 Hunter-gatherer Speak Person-to-person Close Prey & plants Air

2.0 Agrarian Write Person-to-person Distant Yield Postal

3.0 Industrial Print Person-to-people Distributed Goods Publishers

4.0 Information Browse People-to-people Digital Service Internet

5.0 Smart Immerge AIs to people Virtual Intelligence Metaverse

Table 2. Cross-tabulation of society-format and media history. (Source: Authors’ development)

business models: Customer segments, Value Prop- segments align with the involved and spatial col-
ositions, Channels, Customer Relationships, Rev- umns from Table 2. In the hunter-gatherer Society
enue Streams, Key Resources, Key Activities, Key 1.0 with close person-to-person involvement, cus-
Partnerships, and Cost Structure (Osterwalder & tomer-to-customer (C2C) models were the norm.
Pigneur, 2010). The agrarian Society 2.0 extended this to distant
person-to-person involvement, allowing business-
We argue that each of the nine BMC elements has to-customer (B2C) models to be developed. Then,
different qualities regarding success in different so- with the industrial Society 3.0 with distributed per-
ciety formats. The method is thus inductive, as we son-to-people (one-to-many) involvement, a mar-
from business history know the accumulative quali- ket for business-to-business (B2B) arose. Moreover,
ties from Society 1.0 to 4.0, and we use this knowl- with the information Society 4.0, online people-to-
edge to extrapolate suggestions for accumulative people (many-to-many) involvement is leveraged
business model qualities in the upcoming Society for platform economy with hybrid forms of earlier
5.0. The suggested general qualities, both from his- business models such as business-to-business-to-
tory, today, and in the future, are suggestions and, customer (Hybrid) models. Because AI is involved
thus, to some extent, examples that can be debated. in communication in the Metaverse, we will see AI-
The contribution is an imaginative framework for 2-Hybrid models emerge in the smart Society 5.0.
developing business models for Society 5.0 with the
Metaverse as the most important communication Value Proposition
infrastructure. In the following, we give examples of The unique value that a business offers to its cus-
each element from the business model canvas. tomers. Generally, this follows the primary ex-
changed values of different societies outlined in
Customer segments Table 2. In the hunter-gatherer Society 1.0, the value
They identify the different groups of people or or- was natural resources in the form of prey and plants,
ganisations a business aims to serve. The customer and the value proposition for offering this was simply

68
 Journal of Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 62-76

survival. In the agrarian Society 2.0, the value was established through merchants. In the industry So-
cultivated resources in the form of yield from, e.g., ciety 3.0 with shops, customer relationships are es-
farming and mining, resulting in quantity as an tablished through shops offering standard goods.
emerging value proposition. In industrial Society Today, in Information Society 4.0, mass customised
3.0, where the value was in mass-produced goods, services are expected. Following this forward, chan-
convenience emerged as a value proposition. Today, nels for mass-individualised tailor-made offers will
in information Society 4.0, where value comes in be expected.
the form of services, the value proposition is trans-
formative. Taking this further into the smart Society Revenue streams
5.0, where the value is intelligence, whether artifi- The way a business makes money from its custom-
cial, human, or hybrid, the value proposition will be ers. The revenue stream generally aligns with the
different forms of meaning, probably in the form of society format and value from Table 2. In the hunt-
artificial or mixed minds. Another essential aspect er-gatherer Society 1.0, where prey & plants were
that will become increasingly important is the dual valued, money or income, or broader speaking rev-
focus on both private value and public value and the enue, was generated from barter. Trade generated
ability of (and expectations too) organisations to op- revenue in the agrarian Society 2.0, where yield was
erationalise the outcome logics of how their supply valued. Later, delivery generated revenue in the in-
impact business, society, and wellbeing. dustrial Society 3.0, where goods were valued. In
today’s information Society 4.0, where services are
Channels valued, subscription generates revenue. Following
The various ways a business delivers its value propo- this into the smart Society 5.0, where intelligence is
sition to customers. In general, the channels align valued as a commodity, revenue will be generated by
with the customer segments of the societies. In the artificial or hybrid minds.
hunter-gatherer Society 1.0 with C2C businesses,
the channels were personal. This evolved into mar- Key resources
kets as a new general channel where business own- The critical resources required to operate the busi-
ers could sell directly to customers (B2C) in seasons ness, deliver the value proposition, maintain cus-
when yield was harvested. The following industrial tomer relationships, and achieve profitability. The
Society 3.0 with mass-produced goods was not sea- essential resources are aligned with the source of the
son-dependent, and thus, permanent shops for B2C value from Table 2. So, in the hunter-gatherer Society
became the norm. Today’s information Society 4.0 is 1.0, the source of prey & plants was nature, thus the
characterised by the exponential growth of internet critical resource. Later, in the agrarian Society 2.0,
trade through online channels with hybrid business the source of yield was cultivated nature as the key
models such as platforms for sharing economy. From resource. Then, in Industrial Society 3.0, the source
the definition of Metaverse with many virtual spaces of goods was the factory and thus the key resource.
primarily owned by different businesses (Teichmann, Today’s information Society 4.0 is characterised by
2023), a virtual space will probably be the future pri- services, where the source for this is data as the key
mary channel for AI delivering value propositions to resource. Taking this further into the smart Society
hybrid customer segments. 5.0, where the value is intelligence, the source is al-
gorithms generating information as the key resource.
Customer relationships
The type of relationship a business establishes Key activities
with a customer. Customer relationship is gener- The essential activities or operations required to
ally aligned with the channels that characterise a achieve the business objectives. This aligns with
society. In the hunter-gatherer Society 1.0, per- how key resources are leveraged to create value
sonal channels were established as ad hoc cus- propositions. In the hunter-gatherer Society 1.0, the
tomer relationships. Later, in the agrarian Society key activity hunt & collect created the value propo-
2.0 with marketplaces, customer relationships were sition of survival in nature. In the agrarian Society

69
 Journal of Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 62-76

Table 3.

Business model ele- Society 1.0 Society 2.0 Society 3.0 Society 4.0 Society 5.0
ments Hunter-gath- Agrarian Industrial Information Super
erer Smart

CUSTOMER SEGMENTS C2C B2C B2B Hybrid AI-2-Hybrid

VALUE PROPOSITION Survival Status Convenience Transformative Meaning

CHANNELS Personal Markets Shops Online Virtual

space

CUSTOMER Ad hoc Merchants Standard Customized Tailor-made

RELATIONSHIPS

REVENUE STREAMS Barter Trade Delivery Subscription Minds

KEY RESOURCES Nature Cultivated Factory Data Algorithms

KEY ACTIVITIES Hunt & collect Extracting Producing Analysing Sensing

KEY PARTNERSHIPS Tribes Guilds Value chains Ecosystems Ecospheres

COST STRUCTURE Health Workers Material Computing Mental

Table 3: Summary of business model analysis of Society 5.0 (Source: Authors’ development)

2.0, where the key resources were cultivated, the is transformative, the key activity is analysing key
value proposition of status was created through data resources. Projecting this into the smart Soci-
the key activity of extracting yield from e.g., farms ety 5.0 where the key resources are algorithms, the
or mines. Then, in industrial Society 3.0, the key value proposition is meaning created by sensing as
activity became producing goods from factories, the key activity.
hence creating scales of economy and lower costs
that made it possible for more consumers to afford Key partnerships
such goods as the value propositions. In today’s in- The organisations, suppliers, or other entities a
formation Society 4.0, where the value proposition business collaborates with to achieve its objectives.

70
 Journal of Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 62-76

In general, the key partnerships are aligned with the companies think and do business model innovation in
governance behind the performance of key activities the Society 5.0 and the Metaverse space?’ We discuss
leveraging key resources. To this end, the hunter- four relevant business model innovation trajectories
gatherer Society 1.0 was characterised by tribes as based on articulations of the Metaverse and Society
the key partnerships protecting its members and a 5.0 and our illustration of how they are connected to
platform for organising hunt & collect from nature. key business model elements.
Then, in the agrarian Society 2.0, key partners were
organised in guilds developing and sharing meth- The Metaverse as a space to create (new) busi-
ods of extracting from a cultivated nature. In the ness
following industrial Society 3.0, key partnerships Leaning on the above analysis, successful business
were organised in value chains. Today, in the Infor- model innovation in Society 5.0 will need to provide
mation Society 4.0, value chains have emerged into meaningful value propositions in virtual space(s).
value systems as loosely coupled value chains, also The logic is that customers are increasingly entering
termed ecosystems, where key partnerships are virtual reality where new offerings are made, e.g., it
configured to leverage data for analysis. Extending is possible to check out a rental apartment from the
this thinking into the smart Society 5.0 with loosely other side of the globe before accepting the lease. We
coupled ecosystems (see also Lingens 2023 and Ri- also see that some customer segments are adopting
cart, 2023), resulting in ecosystems of ecosystems, hybrid versions of former physical products/services
also termed ecospheres (Rosenstand, 2021, 2023), when offered. In the Central Region of Denmark, a
where platforms for partnerships are configured to theatre has started using virtual reality as part of the
leverage algorithms. physical performances, where VR goggles are used
by the audience to ‘travel back in time’ and experi-
Cost structure ence past local historical events. This implies that
The significant costs and expenses associated with successful value propositions must simultaneously
operating the business. This aligns with the prereq- be viable in the real world and be created to allow
uisite for the key activities. In the hunter-gatherer for integration in cyberspace or vice versa. Compu-
Society 1.0, the prerequisite for hunt & collect was tational power, AI, and AR (and other new technolo-
physical health as the cost structure. Then, the cost gies) will be able to create tailored individual solutions
structure became workers as the prerequisite for and experiences in real time for customers in virtual
extracting in the agrarian Society 2.0. The following spaces. Revenues, too, will be challenged. They will
industrial Society 3.0 cost structure was raw mate- be algorithm-based, and factoring in technology, pay-
rial as a prerequisite for producing goods. In today’s per-use or pay-per-intensity and pay-per-calculated
information Society 4.0, digital computing is the satisfaction will be viable revenue models.
prerequisite for analysing data. Taking this further
into the smart Society 5.0, the prerequisite for sens- In Society 5,0, technology plays a positive role in
ing is a healthy human and artificial psyche – mental the planet’s and citizens’ wellbeing. It can create
health. proximity in mixed spaces, ensuring access and af-
fordability to different geographies and customer
Summary of historical ideal types of business segments. In the future, the Metaverse, using these
model components throughout time mechanisms, can also improve citizen engagement
Summarising the logic and perspectives from sec- and democratic processes, which are at the core of
tion 4.1, the following patterns emerge in Table 3. Society 5.0.

Implications for managers

Based on these perspectives, we claim that manag-
Discussion and Implications ers must consider value propositions that are creat-
The section discusses and provides implications ed in the virtual space or are accessible through both
to our article’s research question, ‘How should real and virtual channels, and they should consider

71
 Journal of Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 62-76

how the virtual and real access channels enrich one with more accessible and more convenient access
another rather than cannibalising each other (see to knowledge, platforms, and business-to-business
also Nielsen & Lund, 2018). ecosystems. From an ecosystem perspective, busi-
ness model innovation must focus on joint value
Articulation of outcome logics propositions that draw the customers into the eco-
Pressures to document private and public value out- system, where several firms jointly meet the cus-
comes are well underway (Breque et al., 2019) and tomers’ jobs to be done (Christensen, 2016).
will be significant in the entrance to Society 5.0. Un-
derstanding and showcasing concrete examples of Implications for managers
outcome logic associated with activities in business For business model innovation, managers must
and how they form business model innovation will leave behind the perspective of their firm as the
become strategic success parameters, especially in central node. Also, the availability of smart tech-
recognition of opportunities for new business mod- nologies, instant connection, communication, and
els (Brix & Jakobsen, 2015). Outcome logic includes computational power will enable solutions with indi-
a focus on welfare and the health and well-being of vidual utility.
citizens, of which the technologies that enable the
Metaverse, such as 6G, AI, and digital twins, will be Normalising new currencies
pivotal. Outcome logic will also be a game-changer In the virtual space, it is not given that only traditional
in repurposing products and services for society and currencies will flow as part of the revenue streams
the environment. between organisations and their customers. Adopt-
ing new and safe payment methods will open new
Implications for managers markets and transactions. NFTs provide digitally
Based on these perspectives, we claim managers compliant trustees for monetary transactions, and
must consider citizen-inclusive business model in- blockchain offers digitally compliant trustees with
novation with a net-positive societal outcome. data.

From ecosystems to ecospheres Implications for managers

DLT and NFTs, including Blockchain technology, Based on these perspectives, we claim that man-
will create ecosystem interdependencies that can agers must enable the creation of business models
become trusted and distributed, e.g., ecospheres where blockchain and NFTs are standard compo-
(Rosenstand, 2023). Lock-in effects for custom- nents in linking individual consumers to value of-
ers are a vital value driver in many current business ferings from ecosphere-based, and often virtual,
model configurations (Taran et al., 2016), which will “producers”.
be mitigated with these new technologies. In such
a situation, companies will need to create business
models that are less dependent on close relation- Conclusion
ships (Peronard & Brix, 2018), or they will need to This article articulated how companies should think
create additional interactions to mitigate the as- and do business model innovation in Society 5.0 and
sociated risks. NFTs and the Metaverse complicate the Metaverse space. The theoretical implications of
the organisation and governance structure. First, our discussions point towards several aspects that
platforms and ecosystems disrupted incumbent need further scrutiny. Business model innovation
and non-digital firms concerning business model researchers should study how value propositions in
innovation. Now, we have the Metaverse and NFTs the Metaverse evolve and how they factor in the po-
disrupting platform business models and making tential cannibalisation of different access channels.
ecosystem management and governance difficult. Also, the effects of DLT and NFTs on customer lock-
in are valid for further probing because the lock-in
The Metaverse and NFTs can enable democracy effect has been crucial to so many successful busi-
and democratic processes by helping societies ness model innovations in the last decade. Also,

72
 Journal of Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 62-76

future research trajectories will welcome the theori-

sation of business models in ecospheres. The impli-
cations for managers are that many rules of thumb
and good examples of the last period might offer dif-
ferent probabilities of success in the Metaverse or
Society 5.0.

The metaverse is a new and rapidly developing arena

full of novel technologies that managers, academ-
ics, or consumers still need to develop or under-
stand fully. This poses challenges. The Metaverse
requires a significant amount of computing power
and bandwidth. This means that there are issues of
accessibility but also sustainability in terms of en-
ergy use. In addition, the Metaverse raises concerns
about privacy and security. For example, how will
consumer data be collected and used? How will us-
ers be protected from harassment and abuse? Final-
ly, it needs to be clarified how the Metaverse should
be regulated (Nielsen, 2023b).

73
 Journal of Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 62-76

References
Aagaard, A. & C. Nielsen (2021). The fifth stage of business model research: The role of business models in
times of uncertainty, Journal of Business Models, Vol. 9, No. 1, 77-90

Ahokangas, P. (2023), Hexa-X/6G as a general technology platform for business model innovation, Journal of
Business Models, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 51-56

Brainport Eindhoven. (n.d.). Home. https://brainporteindhoven.com/int/Brix, J., & Jakobsen, H. S. (2015).

Business model pretotyping: exploring pre-commercialisation opportunities in practice. International Journal
of Innovation and Learning, 17(1), 98-110. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJIL.2015.066066

Brix, J., Krogstrup, H. K., & Mortensen, N. M. (2020). Evaluating the outcomes of co-production in local govern-
ment. Local Government Studies, 46(2), 169-185. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2019.1702530

Brix, J., Tuurnas, S., & Mortensen, N. M. (2021). Creating opportunity spaces for co-pro-
duction: professional co-producers in inter-organizational collaborations. In Processu-
al perspectives on the co-production turn in public sector organizations (pp. 157-175). IGI global.
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4975-9.ch009

Christensen, C. M., Hall, T., Dillon, K., & Duncan, D. S. (2016). Competing against luck: The story of innovation
and customer choice. HarperBusiness.

Colon, M., & Guérin-Schneider, L. (2015). The reform of New Public Management and the creation of public val-
ues: compatible processes? An empirical analysis of public water utilities. International Review of Administra-
tive Sciences, 81(2), 264–281. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852314568837

Dionisio, J. D. N., W. G. B. Iii, and R. Gilbert, ‘‘3D virtual worlds and the metaverse: Current status and future
possibilities,’’ ACM Compute. Surveys, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 1–38, Jun. 2013, doi: 10.1145/2480741.2480751.

Finnemann, N. O. (2005): Internettet i mediehistorisk perspektiv [The Internet in a media historical perspec-
tive]. Samfundslitteratur.

Funnel, S. C., & Rogers, P. J. (2011). Processes to identify or develop a program theory. Purposeful Program
Theory: Effective Use of Theories of Change and Logic Models, 1, 95-148.

Haefner, N. and O. Gassmann (2023), Generative AI and AI-Based Business Model Innovation, Journal of Busi-
ness Models, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 46-50

Hwang, G., S Chien, Definitions, roles and potential research issues of the metaverse in education: An artifi-
cial intelligence perspective, Elsevier, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100082

Japan Cabinet Office (N.d): https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/english/society5_0/index.html

Keeley, L., Walters, H., Pikkel, R., & Quinn, B. (2013). Ten types of innovation: The discipline of building break-
throughs. John Wiley & Sons.

74
 Journal of Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 62-76

Kringelum, L. B., & Brix, J. (2020). Critical realism and organizational learning. The Learning Organization, 28(1),
32-45. https://doi.org/10.1108/TLO-03-2020-0035

Kye, B., N. Han, E. Kim, Y. Park, S. Jo, Educational applications of metaverse: Possibilities and limitations, J.
Educat. Eval. Health Prof., 18:32 (2021). https://10.3352/jeehp.2021.18.32

Lingens, B. (2023), How ecosystem management will influence business model innovation: Bridging the gap
between theory and practice, Journal of Business Models, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 97-104

Massa, L. (2023), Why uncertainty and sustainability will be key drivers of business model innovation, Journal
of Business Models, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 24-29

McKinsey & Company. (2022). Value creation in the metaverse. McKinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.
com/capabilities/growth-marketing-and-sales/our-insights/value-creation-in-the-metaverse

Meta (N.d.) https://about.meta.com/what-is-the-metaverse/?utm_source=about.facebook.com&utm_

medium=redirect

Moore, M. H. (2019). Reflections on the public value project. In Lindgreen, A., Koenig-Lewis, N., Kitchener, M.,
Brewer, J. D., Moore, M. H., & Meynhardt, T. (Eds.). Public value: Deepening, enriching, and broadening the
theory and practice (pp. 351–371). Routledge.

Nabatchi, T. (2018). Public values frames in administration and governance. Perspectives on Public Manage-
ment and Governance, 1(1), 59–72. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvx009

Nielsen, C. (2023a). The Impact Report: The Report that all Companies with a Conscience should be Disclosing.
Working paper, University of Bologna, available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=4594438

Nielsen, C. (2023b), How Regulation Affects Business Model Innovation, Journal of Business Models, Vol. 11, No.
3, pp. 105-116

Nielsen, C., & Brix, J. (2023). Towards Society 5.0: Enabling the European Commission’s Policy Brief ‘Towards
a sustainable, human-centric and resilient European Industry’. Journal of Behavioural Economics and Social
Systems, 5(1), 112-124.

Nielsen, C., & Lund, M. (2018). Building Scalable Business Models. MIT Sloan Management Review, 59(2), 65-69.

Nielsen, C., Montemari, M., Paolone, F., Massaro M., Dumay J. and M. Lund. (2018). Business Models: A Research
Overview. London, Routledge.

Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers,
and Challengers. John Wiley & Sons.

Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. Sage.

Peronard, J. P., & Brix, J. (2018). Sensemaking in collaborative networks: creating and balancing activities in
open business models. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 22(6), 545-561.
https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEIM.2018.095044

75
 Journal of Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 62-76

Ricart, J.E. (2023), Business Model Innovation as the new strategy arena, Journal of Business Models, Vol. 11,
No. 3, pp. 18-23

Ritterbusch, G. D. and M. R. Teichmann, “Defining the Metaverse: A Systematic Literature Review, IEEE Ac-
cess, 2022

Rosenstand, C. A. F. (2021). Selecting, Combining, and Cultivating Digital Ecosystems in a Digital Eco-
sphere. I D. Schallmo, & J. Tidd (red.), Digitalization: Approaches, Case Studies, and Tools for Strat-
egy, Transformation and Implementation (s. 305-312). Springer Nature. Management for Professionals
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-69380-0_17

Rosenstand, C. A. G. F. (2023). Ecosystem carryover in a digital ecosphere and market explosion. I XXXIV ISPIM
Innovation Conference

Schmück, K. (2023), How Blockchain disrupts business model innovation counting on lock-in effects, Journal
of Business Models, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 57-61

Statista (N.d.): https://www.statista.com/statistics/591181/global-augmented-virtual-reality-market-size/

Stephenson, N. (1992). Snow Crash. Bantam Books.

Taran, Y., Boer, H., & Nielsen, C. (2022). The Business Model Innovation Process: Preparation, Organization and
Management. (1 udg.) Routledge. Routledge Studies in Innovation, Organizations and Technology

Taran, Y., Nielsen, C., Thomsen, P., Montemari, M., & Paolone, F. (2016). “Busi-
ness model configurations: a five-V framework to map out potential innova-
tion routes”, European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 19. No. 4, pp. 492–527.
https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-10-2015-0099

Vistisen, P., Krishnasamy, R., & Nikolic, L. T. (2023). Motion Capture in the Metaverse - embodied co-present
hybrid theater. I J. Hagler, W. Hochleitner, & B. Hosea (red.), Synaesthetic Syntax Symposium IV: The Ghost vs
the Machine.

Zott, C., Amit, R., & Massa, L. (2011). The business model: recent developments and future research. Journal
of Management, 37(4), 1019-1042.

76

View publication stats