Impact of Crisis on Sustainable Business Model Innovation—The Role of Technology Innovation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This article makes COVID-19 pandemic as the background, considers the unsustainable impact of a series of crises on business models, relies on mining experience text from enterprise practice and coding the logic relationship, discusses how to deal with the specific technology for realizing specific sustainable business model type. Compared with previous quantitative research, this article has a certain case contribution and practical significance. However, I think further changes are needed before publication：

1.     It is suggested that the authors quote the relevant literature to confirm several sentences in the introduction section , for example, ”Organizational crisis strategies gradually change the ways in which the business world operates. Most scholars focus on the relationship between technology and sustainable business model innovations. Crisis research mainly focuses on public and product crises and fail to explain the internal logic of crisis and sustainable business model innovations.” ,“ In today's normalized crisis, technology innovation is one of the most efficient means to promote the sustainable adjustment, optimization, and innovation of business models to 59 sustain enterprises.”

2.     The authors use the multi-case exploratory analysis and select multiple enterprises. Please explain the advantages of this method and its differences from the quantitative analysis method.

3.      In the article there are many abbreviated names of companies. They can be sorted into a table, in which the full name of the company, the address of the company, and the business content of the company can be systematically explained, so as to promote readers to further understand.

4.     Please cite the relevant literature to confirm the reasonableness of the subcategory hierarchy diagram of technology innovation.

5.      It is suggested that the authors should firstly define concepts of introduced, socialized, and differentiated technology innovation, efficient, novel, and co-benefit business model innovations in combination with the relevant literature before interpretation of the logical relationship among crisis, technology and sustainable business model.

Author Response

Response 1:

We are grateful for your valuable comments.

According to your comment, we have referred to some more literature to make the paper more convincing.

• We have supplemented the corresponding literature to confirm and explain some viewpoints in the introduction For example, "organizational crisis strategy gradually changes the way the business world operates. Most scholars focus on the relationship between technology and sustainable business model innovation (Jaksic, 2017; Vidmar, 2018)"; "Crisis research mainly focuses on public and product crises, and fails to explain the internal logic of crisis and sustainable business model innovation (Samaraweera, 2016)" and "in today's normalization crisis, technological innovation is one of the most effective means to promote sustainable adjustment, optimization and innovation of business models (Rayna & Striukova, 2015)". References are as follows:

Jaksic, M. L. Sustainable innovation of technology and business models: rethinking business strategy. Association of Economic Universities of South and Eastern Europe and the Black Sea Region(2),2017.

Vidmar, D. Technology Enabled Sustainable Business Model Innovation. Paper presented at the 31st Bled eConference: Digital Transformation – From Connecting Things to Transforming Our Lives, 2018, June 18 – 21,  Bled, Slovenia.

Samaraweera, G. C. Product Harm Crisis,2016.

Gausemeier, Jürgen & Kage, Martin. From rapid prototyping to home fabrication: How 3D printing is changing business model innovation.Zeitschrift für wirtschaftlichen Fabrikbetrieb 2017,112(7-8), 459-464.doi:10.3139/104.111744.

(2)In response to these problems, this paper adds "3.1 Study Methodology" to explain the reasons for selecting the multi-case analysis method and the differences between it and the quantitative analysis method.

The advantages of this method and the differences between it and quantitative analysis methods are mainly explained as follows: Looking at the existing studies, crisis research mainly adopts quantitative analysis methods such as questionnaire analysis and empirical analysis, focusing on single representative industries, with a single point of view and distorted data, and the universality and commonality of research results are not sufficient to cover most industries. Compared with the quantitative analysis method, this paper adopts a multi-case exploratory research method, which breaks the limitation of previous scholars' perspective of focusing on a single industry and makes the research more universal, which will provide some guidance for future research on crisis response solutions in various industries. In addition, it can more effectively demonstrate the holistic, dynamic, and dialectical nature of the research content, which helps to form new concepts and theories.

(3)Thank you for your careful review. We apologize for not describing the companies and platforms mentioned in the paper more clearly. We have now added a table with profiles of the companies and platforms in the article.

(4)To confirm the reasonableness of the subcategory hierarchy diagram of technology innovation, we have checked the relevant literature and found some literatures to support it in the section “4.2 Spindle Encoding”.

Combining the definition and classification of technology innovation in the relevant literature(Schumpeter, J.A.,1934;Drucker, P. F. ,1985;Wang, J.W. and Ye, Y.B. ,2017) and the theory of technological capability (with the enhancement of technological capability, the evolution of the trajectory model of technology innovation should progressively evolve from imitative innovation to cooperative innovation and autonomous innovation)(Rogerio, Calia & Fabio, et al., 2007.), a sub-category hierarchy diagram of technological innovation can be obtained (see Figure 2 ).

Related references are as follows：

Schumpeter, J.A. Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.1934.

Drucker, P. F.Innovation and entrepreneurship: Practice and principles. New York: Harper and Row.43. Potocan, V. Technology and corporate social responsibility.1985.

Wang, J.W. and Ye, Y.B.Research on Selection of Technological Innovation Mode for Large and Medium-Sized Construction Enterprises in China. Technology and Investment 2017,8, 131-141. https://doi.org/10.4236/ti.2017.82011.

Rogerio, C., Calia, and, Fabio, & M., et al. Innovation networks: from technological development to business model reconfiguration. Technovation 2007. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation. 2006.08.003.

(5)We deeply appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion. According to the reviewer’s comment, we have added a more detailed interpretation of the concepts of introduced, socialized and differentiated technology innovation, efficient, novel and co-benefit business model innovations.

Among them, introduced technology innovation refers to the process of digestion, absorption and reinvention of introduced technologies and products by enterprises through reverse engineering and other means（Schumpeter, J.A. ,1934）. Social technology innovation is a creative social action oriented to social needs and social problems, mainly initiated by social organizations or promoted by multifaceted cooperation with government and profit-making organizations, which represents a new mechanism for the government to respond to social challenges and promote social development(Drucker, P. F. ,1985), and it can be a product, a technology, an action method or a business model. Differentiated technology innovation, on the other hand, refers to a company's attempts to be distinct in its industry in certain aspects that are commonly valued by its customers.

The business model innovation can be divided into efficiency type and novel type from the perspective of transaction mode within the industrial ecosystem, and the relationship between the two is neither orthogonal nor exclusive(Zott, C .& Amit, R.,2007). The efficiency type focuses on transaction cost optimization and implements activities that can improve transaction efficiency; The novel type focuses on transaction mode and develops new value proposition and builds new transaction mode innovation activities; In addition, the co-benefit business model innovation focuses on transaction participants and adopts the co-benefit value of innovation activities. Consequently, all three types of business model innovations can be present in any business model.

Schumpeter, J.A. (1934) Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Drucker, P. F.Innovation and entrepreneurship: Practice and principles. New York: Harper and Row.43. Potocan, V. Technology and corporate social responsibility.1985.

Zott, C. & Amit, R. Business Model Design and the Performance of Entrepreneurial Firms. Organization science 2007, 18(2):181-199.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The following comments can improve the article:

1. Introduction section:

A- The author must highlight the literature gap and novelty of the study in the last paragraph of the Introduction section.

B- Some sentences in the introduction should be referred to the appropriate reference.

2. literature review section:

A- A separate Literature review section must be added to describe the research background and literature gap. 

B- current literature section must be shorter and integrated.

3. In the Methodology section, the process is unclear; a flowchart must be provided.

4. Results are clearly presented, but this manuscript needs an in-depth explanation.

Author Response

Response 2:

We are grateful for your valuable comments.

(1)Introduction section

1) First of all, we increase the research on the background of this research and the reading of relevant literature to integrate the understanding of various scholars. We add a paragraph at the end of the introduction section to describe the literature gaps in this research field, and propose the novelty of this research in combination with the innovative perspective of this research and the application value of the conclusions. The details are as follows:

Most of the research on crisis focuses on perspective of consumers and market, such as its impact on enterprise’s market performance(Van Heerde, Harald et al.,2007), consumer transfer(Saradhi & Palshikar, 2011), brand image building under various crisis scenarios(Ma, Baolong, et al.,2010), ignoring the impact of crisis on the organizational level. Recently, more and more studies have confirmed the important role of crisis on sustainable business model innovation(Clau, T.,et al., 2021), however, business model innovation is a process of value-added and need to be promoted steadily. Through commercialization of technology, the value-added of business innovation is transferred to the long-term contribution for enterprise or more important parcipants. Consequently, technology innovation plays a crucial role in the realization of sustainable business model innovation(Snihur, Y.,et al.,2020). Nevertheless, the existing literature does not pay attention to the research on the impact of crisis on the process of sustainable business model innovation through technology innovation. In order to further enrich the research on sustainable business model innovation, it is of great theoretical and practical value to better answer the question of how Chinese enterprises should act on technology innovation in the crisis and eventually achieve sustainable business model innovation.

The corresponding references cited in the above paragraph are as follows:

Van Heerde, Harald; Helsen, Kristiaan; Dekimpe, Marnik G.The Impact of a Product-Harm Crisis on Marketing Effectiveness. Marketing Science 2007, 26(2), 230–245. doi:10.1287/mksc.1060.0227

Saradhi, V. V., & Palshikar, G. K. Employee churn prediction. Expert Systems with Applications 2011,38(3), 1999-2006. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2010.07.134.

Ma, Baolong; Zhang, Lin; Li, Fei; Wang, Gao. The Effects of Product-Harm Crisis on Brand Performance. International Journal of Market Research 2010,52(4), 443–458. doi:10.2501/S1470785309 201399.  

Clau, T., Breier, M., Kraus, S., Durst, S., & Mahto, R. Temporary business model innovation – smes' innovation response to the covid-19 crisis. R& D Management 2021,doi: 10.1111/radm.12498.

Snihur, Y., Zott, C., & Amit, R. R. Managing the value appropriation dilemma in business model innovation 2020,doi: 10.1287/stsc.2020.0113.

2)We have supplemented the corresponding references for some sentences and opinions in the introduction section as follows:

Van Heerde, Harald; Helsen, Kristiaan; Dekimpe, Marnik G.The Impact of a Product-Harm Crisis on Marketing Effectiveness. Marketing Science 2007, 26(2), 230–245. doi:10.1287/mksc.1060.0227

Saradhi, V. V., & Palshikar, G. K. Employee churn prediction. Expert Systems with Applications 2011,38(3), 1999-2006. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2010.07.134.

Ma, Baolong; Zhang, Lin; Li, Fei; Wang, Gao. The Effects of Product-Harm Crisis on Brand Performance. International Journal of Market Research 2010,52(4), 443–458. doi:10.2501/S1470785309 201399.  

Clau, T., Breier, M., Kraus, S., Durst, S., & Mahto, R. Temporary business model innovation – smes' innovation response to the covid-19 crisis. R& D Management 2021,doi: 10.1111/radm.12498.

Snihur, Y., Zott, C., & Amit, R. R. Managing the value appropriation dilemma in business model innovation 2020,doi: 10.1287/stsc.2020.0113.

(2)Literature review section

1) In the literature review part, we added a separate literature review at the end. On the one hand, we comprehensively collated the preceding research results, summarized the content already described, evaluated the research trend, and depicted the background of the research. On the other hand, consider the gaps in the current research, analyze the directions that can be further studied, raise questions, and affirm the necessity of this research. In order to assure that the literature review, review and thinking expansion are justified, we also cited some documents, as follows:

Hurst, D. K.Crisis & Renewal: Meeting the Challenge of Organizational Change. Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship 1999,11.

Martins, L. L., Rindova, V. P., & Greenbaum, B. E. Unlocking the hidden value of concepts: a cognitive approach to business model innovation. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 2015, 9(1), 99-117. doi: 10.1002/sej.1191.

Clauss T. Measuring business model innovation: conceptualization, scale development, and proof of performance. R & D Management 2017,47(3), 385-403. doi: 10.1111/radm.12186.

Nußholz, J., Rasmussen, F. N., & Milios, L. Circular Building Materials: Carbon Saving Potential and the Role of Business Model Innovation and Public Policy. Resources Conservation and Recycling 2019,141, 308-316.doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.10.036. 

Fu, S., Wang, H., & Chiang, D. Study on positive and dynamic enterprise crisis management based on sustainable business model innovation. Advances in Information Sciences & Service Sciences 2013,5(1), 535-543.

2)At the same time, for the content of the literature review, this paper also makes a shorter and concise description and expression while ensuring the integrity based on the principle of "clear viewpoint logic and avoiding redundant and overlapping viewpoints".

(3)Methodology section

Thank you for your careful review. We apologize for not more clearly describing the research process. In this paper, based on the qualitative analysis of the case material (including 3 stages of open coding, spindle coding, and selective coding), we induct, deduce, and refine the scope of the relevant concepts, and establish and develop new theories, and also finally adopt a case supporting theoretical model. We have now added the Rooted Research Flowchart to clarify the research methodology process. For more information, see “3.1 Study Methodology”.

(4)Results secition

For the three path results presented in the article, we have made more in-depth explanations and supplements, and found more literature to support the conclusion.

The first path: Production factor crisis—introducted technology innovation—efficient business model innovation. We discovered that under the situation of factor of production crisis, enterprises normally display supply disruption and labor shortage. In the case of resource interruption and resource imbalance, enterprises can correctly introduce mature and new technologies to help enterprises enhance production efficiency, optimize resource allocation, merge innovation accomplishments and adjust the existing value chain (Serfati & Claude, 2008), which helps to achieve efficient and sustainable business model innovation.

The second path: Market environment crisis—differentiated and socialized technology innovation—novel business model innovation. We discovered that under the market environment crisis situation, the crisis confronted by enterprises is normally manifested as excessive competition and customer loss. The ineffective or inefficient market environment will weaken the core competitiveness and product attraction of enterprises, which is manifested as the active or passive decline of customers' market willingness to pay, At this time, differentiated and socialized technological innovation helps enterprises adjust and innovate their operation modes under the market environment full of crisis, so as to strengthen their competitive advantages and brand image and achieve sustainable business model innovation (Jetter, Satzger & Neus et al., 2014).

The third path: Business ethics crisis—socialized and differentiated technology innovation—co-benefit business model innovation. We discovered that under the situation of business ethics crisis, the crisis confronted by enterprises is normally manifested as intellectual property infringement and customer data security threat, which greatly affects the reputation of enterprises and organizational development. Consequently, the corresponding socialization and differentiation technology improvement can preserve the corporate image to a great extent, assure the information security of customers and the rights and interests of enterprises with technology, generate common beneficial value (Liu, Mu & Hu, 2018), achieve mutual benefit and win-win results, and make full use of crisis scenarios to gain sustainable business model innovation.

In addition, for the mechanism derivation and interpretation process of all conclusions, we have also made more literature supplements to strengthen the rationality and persuasiveness of the model mechanism interpretation process. The following references are added:

Serfati, Claude. Financial dimensions of transnational corporations, global value chain and technological innovation. Journal of Innovation Economics 2008, 2(2), 35–. doi:10.3917/jie.002.0035.

Jetter, M., Satzger, G., & Neus, A.Technological innovation and its impact on business model, organization and corporate culture–ibm's transformation into a globally integrated, service-oriented enterprise. WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK 2009, 51(1), 43-52. doi: 10.1007/s11576-008-0105-2.

Liu, Z., Mu, R., Hu, S., Wang, L., & Wang, S. Intellectual property protection, technological innovation and enterprise value-an empirical study on panel data of 80 advanced manufacturing smes. Cognitive Systems Research 2018, 52(DEC.), 741-746. doi: 10.1016/j.cogsys. 2018.08.012.

Khalilabadi, S., Zegordi, S. H., & Nikbakhsh, E. A multi-stage stochastic programming approach for supply chain risk mitigation via product substitution. Computers & Industrial Engineering 2020, 149, 106786. doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2020.106786.

Aviso, K. B., Mayol, A. P., Promentilla, M., Santos, J. R., Tan, R. R. , & Ubando, A. T. , et al. Allocating human resources in organizations operating under crisis conditions: a fuzzy input-output optimization modeling framework. Resources Conservation & Recycling 2016, S0921344916301835. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.07.009.

Finnegan, D., & Willcocks, L. Knowledge sharing issues in the introduction of a new technology. Journal of Enterprise Information Management 2006, 19(6), 568-590. doi: 10.1108/17410390610708472.

Nath, P., & Panday, S. (2016). Innovative Strategies for Supply Chain Sustainability - in Competitive Global Business Environments. Paper presented at the International Conference on Integral Development for Wholesome Life - In the Pious Presence of H.H. Acharya Shri Mahashramanji With Special Focus on Morality & Ethical Value System for Wholesome Development Organised.

Higa, K. (2010). Organizational Innovation by Efficient Resource Allocation : A Proposal of Telework-based Organization. Japan Telework Society Conference.

Shirai, K., Koshijima, I., & Umeda, T. Technology and human resource alignment for business innovation program. Journal of International Association of Project & Program Management 2012. doi: 10.20702/iappmjour.7.1_147.

Lyssenko, N. , &  Support, T. Market Efficiency - Willingness to Pay.2015.

Hall, J. K., & Martin, M. Disruptive technologies, stakeholders and the innovation value-added chain: a framework for evaluating radical technology development. Social Science Electronic Publishing 2010, 35(3), 273-284.doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9310.2005.00389.x

Trachuk, A., & Linder, N. (2019). Knowledge spillover effects: impact of export learning effects on companies' innovative activities. Chapters. doi: 10.5772/intechopen.86255.

Chen, J., & Lu, J.Discussion of Smes' Technology Innovation Strategy in China under the Background of Post-Financial Crisis. Economic Management Journal 2012,(2), 37-43.

Lin, Z. Y., & Diao, Z. F. (2009). Study on the Enterprise Business Model Innovation Based on the Industrial Value Chain. 4th International Conference on Productinnovation Management.

Adda, G., Azigwe, J. B., & Awuni, A. R. Business Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility for Business Success and Growth. European Journal of Business and Innovation Research 2016, 4, 26-42.

Yang, H. , & Zhu, Y.Enterprise technological innovation and intellectual property rights system construction. Journal of Wuhan University of Technology 2011. doi: 10.3963/j.issn.1006-2823.2011.01.036.

King, N. J., & Raja, V. T. Protecting the privacy and security of sensitive customer data in the cloud. Computer Law & Security Review 2012, 28(3), 308-319. doi: 10.1016/j.clsr.2012.03.003.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Topic

The topic is very interesting and current

 

Introduction

The reader needs to know what motivated the study.

What was the literature gap identified?

What is the primary literature where the need to conduct the study was identified?

What is the contribution of the study to the literature?

 

Literature Review

The literature review encompasses the topics under study.

But what is the relationship between them?

The reader needs to see that relationship explained.

 

There is no initial research question.

No hypotheses or research questions have been identified.

 

Methodology

This section should answer the following questions:

Universe of study.

Criteria for sample.

Instruments for data collection.

Data treatment.

Method (Qualitative). What is the reason for the choice? Advantages and disadvantages?

 

Results

Do you want to identify a model?

Do you start from theory to practice or from practice to theory?

If from practice to theory, why not use grounded theory?

 

There is no results discussion section.

 

Conclusions

Highlight the contribution of the study to the literature and to business.

Author Response

Response 3:

We are grateful for your valuable comments.

(1)Introduction

1) In order to more clearly reflect the thought source and incentive factors of this research in the introduction, we added a description of the background of this research, For example, "with the deepening of science and technology and globalization, the market environment reflects more unstable factors. In addition to the flexibility and subjectivity of the internal organizational factors of enterprises, enterprises are confronting the normalization of crises(Gilbert, Claude,2007). However, many enterprises are still immature in their response to crises, and have fallen into the passive defense thinking of denying, evading and weakening crises (Coombs, W. T., et al.,1996).Therefore, this study wants to integrate positive crisis handling methods that can add value to enterprises under different crisis situations through some more successful crisis handling enterprise cases, such as through different forms of technological innovation, to solve the dilemma of passive response forcing losses under crisis situations. Therefore, it is necessary to explore how enterprises can positively transform crises and achieve sustainable business model innovation."

Gilbert, Claude. Crisis Analysis: Between Normalization and Avoidance. Journal of Risk Research 2007,10(7), 925–940. doi: 10.1080/13669870701504731.

Coombs, W. T., & Holladay, S. J.Communication and attributions in a crisis: an experimental study in crisis communication. Journal of Public Relations Research 1996, 8(4), 279-295. doi: 10.1207/s1532754xjprr0804_04.

2)For the relevant studies on the topics involved in this study, we added a separate paragraph at the end of the introduction to highlight the literature gap of this study and show the limitations of current academic research.

3)In the last paragraph added in the introduction, the research of Claus, Breier, Kraus and other scholars, as well as Snihur, Zott and Amit, provides thinking and direction enlightenment for the research of this paper, and is the main reference for the formation of the research ideas and the promotion of the process. Claus, Breier and Kraus et al. (2021)recommended that when enterprises deal with exogenous crises, they will carry out corresponding temporary business model innovation according to the crisis scenario. Snihur, Zott and Amit (2021) proposed from the perspective of resources that when confronting difficulties, enterprises should innovate emerging technologies and strengthen the innovation of sustainable business models from the perspective of generating value for all stakeholders. Combining the views of the two scholars, it provides a space for this study to think, that is, under the crisis situation, will enterprises actively or passively form sustainable business model innovation through technology innovation, so as to turn crisis into opportunity and achieve sustainable development? The main documents are as follows:

Clau, T., Breier, M., Kraus, S., Durst, S., & Mahto, R. Temporary business model innovation – smes' innovation response to the covid-19 crisis. R& D Management 2021,doi: 10.1111/radm.12498.

Snihur, Y., Zott, C., & Amit, R. R. Managing the value appropriation dilemma in business model innovation 2020,doi: 10.1287/stsc.2020.0113.

4)In order to emphasize the theoretical contribution of this study and reflect the value of the article in the introduction part. After mentioning the existing literature gaps, we put forward the novelty of this research and the important value of carrying out this research from the perspective of practice and theory, and explained the important role of the results of this research in enriching theoretical research in this field.

(2)Literature review

1)The literature review part includes the corresponding literature integration of the topics involved in this study, and also reflects the relationship between the research topics. In order to more emphasizethe potential logical connection between the topics of this study, we have supplemented more literature to support the related research integrating crisis, technology innovation and business model innovation, For example, "Research on the relationship between crisis and technological innovation" and "Research on the relationship between crisis and business model innovation", combined with the important role of technological innovation on the realization of business model innovation mentioned above, help readers feel the potential links between various topics more intuitively. The supplemental literature is as follows:

Smajlović, S.; Umihanić, B.; Turulja, L. The interplay of technological innovation and business model innovation toward company performance. Manag. J. Contemp. Manag. Issues 2019, 24, 63–79. doi: 10.30924/mjcmi.24.2.5.

Zelong, Wei, Dong, Yang, Biao, & Sun, et al.The fit between technological innovation and business model design for firm growth: evidence from china. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 2014,44(3), 288-305. doi: 10.1111/radm.12069.

Schallmo, D., & Williams, C. A. Crisis-Driven Business Model Innovation – Decision-Making under Stress. Paper presented at the ISPIM Connects Global 2020: Celebrating the World of Innovation” - Virtual, 6-8 December 2020.

Baker-Brunnbauer, J. Business Model Innovation During the Corona Crisis,2021, doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18908.00640/1.

2)In order to more intuitively reflect our understanding of the relationship between various topics through the literature review part, as well as the existing problems and literature gaps found by summarizing previous research results, we have added a separate paragraph - literature review at the end of the literature review. While summarizing and integrating the previous text, we put forward our thinking in combination with the theoretical and practical background. For example, "Can enterprises use homogenization technology to resolve specific crises? In a particularcrisis, what technological and economic choices are suitable for enterprises to make? What kind of commercial effects will enterprises achieve with different technological choices?" It provides the direction for the research, affirms the necessity and theoretical and practical value of this research. Please check the last paragraph of the literature review in detail.

(3)Methodology section

Thank you for your careful review. We apologize for not describing the methodology section more precisely. For this reason, we will improve the writing based on your comments by changing the secondary title undeeer “3 Study Design” with the following subsections: “3.1 Study Methodology “(to clarify the reasons for choosing a multi-case analysis research method and its advantages), “3.2 Case Selection” (to clarify the criteria for selecting cases), and “3.3 Text Collection”, where “3.3.1 Text Collection Method” is used to describe the methods and approaches for collecting texts, and “3.3.2 Text Analysis Method” is used to describe the text analysis methods and improve its text processing process.

(4)Results

Thank you for your careful review. We apologize for not describing the results section more precisely. For this reason, the following answers and revisions will be made based on your comments.

Based on the rooted theory, this article applies multi-case study analysis to derive three main model paths, namely, production factor crisis - introduced innovation - efficient business model innovation, market environment crisis - differentiated and socialied innovation - novel business model innovation, and business ethics crisis - social and differentiated innovation - co-beneficial business model innovation.

In order to clarify the idea of the article and to enhance the integrity of the article, the following sections will be added to this paper.

The first half of this article moves from practice to theory, based on rooted theory, using a multi-case study analysis method with three-level coding and analysis to extract the core and major categories from a fragmented and large set of raw data to attain three major theoretical models. The second half of this article will return from theory to practice and to increase the persuasiveness of the theoretical models. The models are explained mechanistically and supported by cases discription based on each model. You can check"5.4 Case Findings”. Through the mechanistic interpretation of the above model and the process of solving the crisis problem in the three case companies, it is found that the sustainable business model innovation of the companies formed by different technology innovation solutions differs in different crises. First, when Alibaba confronted a production crisis caused by a supply chain interruption due to supplier fraud, it introduced new technologies to enhance the company's business quality, thus driving the company to modify its profitability model, optimize transaction costs, and progressively develop an efficiency-based business model. This case demonstrates that "production factor crisis - introduced innovation - efficiency business model innovation". Secondly, when Vipshop confronted the market crisis brought by homogenization, it primarily analyzed heterogeneous technologies to promote the establishment of a new value proposition, while seeking partners to attract network flow, and eventually formed a novel business model. This case demonstrates that path of "market environment crisis - differentiation and social innovation - novel business model innovation". Eventually, when Baidu is confronting a business ethics crisis with a lack of ethics, it needs to apply cutting-edge technology to overhaul the company's loopholes and, most importantly, restore the company's image by sharing its existing resources and technology with consumers, society, and government, and becoming a stakeholder, thus forming a co-beneficial business model. This case supports the path of "Business Ethics Crisis - Social and Differentiated Innovation - Co-benefit Business Model Innovation".

(5)Conclusions

In the conclusion and outlook part, we have added a separate paragraph for the logical development process and final research results of this research to emphasize the theoretical contribution of this research to the field of "crisis, technological innovation and sustainable business model innovation" and the great application value of its results in practice, and affirm the necessity of this research and the value of the application of the results. Supplementary contents are as follows:

"This research enriches the research contents of the related fields of" the relationship between crisis, technological innovation and sustainable business model innovation ". It not only defines the crisis confronted by modern enterprises from a comprehensive perspective, but also comprehensively considers the four key crisis theories to divide the crisis types, and links them with the emerging concept of sustainable business model innovation, which broadens the scope of cross-field research, It has a very important theoretical contribution. In addition, under the background of passive and single crisis response mode of modern enterprises and complicated realization mechanism of sustainable business model innovation, this study systematically links crisis, technology innovation and sustainable business model innovation. Through multi-case exploration and analysis, three paths for enterprises to realize sustainable business model innovation under different crisis scenarios are obtained, providing positive solutions for enterprises to cope with and transform crises. It is of great practical significance to provide practical reference with high applicability and strong strength to realize sustainable business model innovation."

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors answered my comments and no further comments.