臺大管理論叢 NTU Management Review VOL.29 NO.1

53 NTU Management Review Vol. 29 No. 1 Apr. 2019 organizational level, and appropriate value with partners on a strategic level (Shafer, Smith, and Linder, 2005). Inappropriate dual BM choice may cause conflicting marketing activities and delayed access to wider market coverage. Moreover, we pay special attention to uncovering the supplier’s dynamic capabilities in linking strategy with various types of dual BMs over time (Day, 2014; Teece, Pisano, and Shuen, 1997). Taking these inquiries into consideration, our research undertakes an explorative, case-based study within the context of a single company with multiple product lines (Yin, 1994). We collect longitudinal archival data on four major product lines from the case company and verify different types of operating models undertaken by the company over time for cooperating with channel resellers and OEM buyers in the business ecosystem and transforming products’ value propositions into business results (Adner, 2012). Taking each BM as a unit of analysis (Zott et al., 2011) and supported by more than 20 in-depth interviews with executives, we can draw insights by exploring the rich content of this case. Our study contributes to the extant literature in two ways. First, for BM literature, we provide a feasible framework based on a capabilities-based view (e.g., Day, 2014) for decision makers to effectively define their options for dual BMs. We pinpoint the critical considerations of product/service innovation potential and segment-making capabilities in defining appropriate dual BMs for products. These considerations blend an outside-in adaptive capabilities view for responding to new demands from a fast-changing market (Day, 2011, 2014) with an inside-out dynamic capabilities view for pursuing new business opportunities (DaSilva and Trkman, 2014). Decision makers’ choices result in four types of dual BM instead of the one type mentioned by previous literature (Lee and Chen, 2000). Each type represents a different combination of own-brand business and OEM business. Second, while there are four types of synergy—organizational learning, resource pooling, cross-signal effect, and long-short term outcomes—discussed in this article, our findings from in-depth case studies show that the strategic motivations underlying dual BM decisions vary by OEM products’ status. For exploratory products, the most critical motivation is organizational learning from OEM buyers for improving one’s own technology development abilities, as volume demand for OEM products is smaller (Itami and Nishino, 2010). For exploitative products, searching for a balance of long-short term outcomes is the key motive, because OEM services provide beneficial short-term outcomes that can in turn support brands’ long-term business development (Lavie,