Digital Business Model Innovation Analysis Combining Business Model Canvas and Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) in Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24905/icobis.v2i1.22Keywords:
Business Model Canvas, Service-Oriented Architecture, Digital Transformation, Higher Education, Competitive Advantage, Innovation Management, Science Research MethodAbstract
Digital transformation in higher education often fails to yield a sustainable competitive advantage due to the structural disconnect between high-level business strategies and rigid legacy IT architectures. To resolve this misalignment, this study proposes a hybrid framework combining the Business Model Canvas (BMC) and Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) to foster digital business model innovation in higher education institutions. Adopting a Design Science Research Method (DSRM), the framework was developed and evaluated by a panel of 15 subject matter experts using manual thematic matrix coding and descriptive statistical analysis. The quantitative results demonstrate a high level of strategic technical synergy, achieving an overall Strategic-Technical Alignment Score (STAS) of 4.48 out of 5.00 (89.53%) across all nine BMC building blocks. Operationally, the integration of reusable RESTful APIs and decoupled web services resulted in a 76.67% reduction in new service development time (from 30 days to 7 days) and a 73.33% savings in system integration costs. These findings confirm that aligning business model flexibility with modular software architecture enables universities to rapidly deploy innovative offerings such as micro-credentials and flexible online certifications thereby securing operational agility and a lasting competitive edge.
References
Al-Fraihat, D., M. Joy, R. M., & Sinclair, J. (2020). Evaluating E-learning systems success: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior, 102, 67-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004.
Bican, P. M., & Brem, A. (2020). Digital Business Model, Digital Transformation, Digital Entrepreneurship: Is There a Difference? Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 47, 582–601. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.04727
Erl, T. (2016). Service-Oriented Architecture: Analysis and Design for Services and Microservices, 2nd ed. Prentice Hall.
Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
Janssen, Y. G. and M. (2021). The value of enterprise architecture in the public sector: Services orchestration and IT assets alignment. International Journal of Information Management, 60, 102363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102363
Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee. (2007). A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45–77. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302
Pigneur, A. O. and Y. (2010). Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers. John Wiley & Sons. Rachmin, R. M. C., Warnars, H. L. H. S., & Utomo, W. H. (2022). Higher Education Digital Transformation Alignment Framework Using Zachman Framework and Enterprise Architecture. IEEE Access, 10, 112045–112060. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3216890
Rosemann, M., & Brocke, J. vom. (2015). The Six Core Elements of Business Process Management. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-451003_5
Teece, D. J. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z
