Marifel L.

Famorcan

G12 – ABM, S.Y. 2019-2020

AMA Online Education

Article Reviewed:

Oberg, Cristina, et.al. (2018), Additive Manufacturing and Business Models: Current

Knowledge and Missing Perspectives: Sheffield Hallam University: Sheffield Hallam

University Research Archive (SHURA). Vol. 8: Issue 6, pp. 14 – 34.

The purposes of this article were to summarize current knowledge on additive

manufacturing within management and business research, and to discuss future

research directions in relation to business models for additive manufacturing through

examining the emergence of additive manufacturing that affect existing business

models. The authors figured out the research gaps in the intersection of additive

manufacturing and business models. The impacts of additive manufacturing in business

models of the companies and contingent factors driving performance in management

and technological areas were also determined.

To such a complicated issue, the authors adopted a holistic perspective on the

company’s business models and linked various activities together which were identified

as canvas and non-canvas models. According to Walder, canvas models refer to

illustrative descriptions of a company’s different processes such as resource provision,

value creation and customer offering. While non-canvas models refer to textual

descriptions of content, structure and governance of activities (Zott, 2010).

 As a result, the authors conducted two separate searches so as to capture

business models and model changes in the additive manufacturing and 3D printing

literature. This was a good approach for how the problem of multiple value systems and

accountability should be handled. The first search provided a very limited number of

articles; the second search focused on additive manufacturing and 3D printing in

business, management, and operational management. This was an exploratory study

using multiple case research methodologies such as descriptive, explanatory and

methodological approaches, using 116 articles based on the assumptions made about

additive manufacturing in relation to companies.

The potential impacts of additive manufacturing were identified by reviewing the

previous literatures. For the concerned keys resources, key partners, key activities, the

value proposition, customer relationships, customer segments, channels revenue

streams, or cost structures, the article followed the literature on additive manufacturing,

as well as the theories arisen from technology management literature. The qualitative

information was collected by means of documentary analysis to measure the

effectiveness of additive manufacturing in these aspects.

The following are the results yielded by this article. As reflected in Table 1 where

there are six (6) articles concerning key partners, forty-two (42) articles for key activities,

twenty-nine (29) key resources, thirteen (13) value proposition, three (3) customer

relationships, four (4) cost structure, one (1) revenue stream, four (4) policy/societal

level, fourteen (14) not in focus; for a total of one hundred sixteen (116) classified

journal articles.
 The article derived and provided empirical insights regarding optimization of

additive manufacturing and its business model. This article revealed that most of the

companies in their internal processes were expected to adjust their core competencies

to new production methods rather than link these to partnerships. Thereby, these

findings also demonstrated that the holistic business influence of additive manufacturing

was not described in previous researches.

This empirical research had been conducted by means of qualitative data.

Therefore, researchers were encouraged to test the propositions by quantitative

measures. This article contributed to expanding the literature by depicting explicit links

between the implementation of this revolutionary technology and business strategies

and performance.

This article provided accurate data with vivid explanation and supporting

evidences. Evidences of a literature review were relevant and recent, critically

appraising the previous work and not merely describing them. The language used was

easy to comprehend. Moreover, all authors were experienced, knowledgeable, and

expert in their field led them to sequential, precise and clear.

Article Reviewed:

Oberg, Cristina, et.al. (2018), Additive Manufacturing and Business Models: Current

Knowledge and Missing Perspectives: Sheffield Hallam University: Sheffield Hallam

University Research Archive (SHURA). Vol. 8: Issue 6, pp. 14 – 34. Retrieved from:

https://core.ac.uk/reader/222841326