上海财经大学期刊社
菜单

最优区分视角下新创企业商业模式创新的动态演化——基于理想汽车的案例研究

The Dynamic Evolution of Business Model Innovation in New Ventures from an Optimal Distinctiveness Perspective: A Case Study Based on Li Auto

董保宝，霍连群

2026 第 48 卷 第 08 期 页码 133-152

DOI: 10.16538/j.cnki.fem.20260527.401

PDF全文下载 HTML全文

摘要

在新兴产业快速演进和制度环境持续变化的背景下，新创企业商业模式创新既要回应制度规范和市场认知的一致性要求，也需通过创新活动塑造差异性竞争优势。然而，对于新创企业如何在一致性与差异性张力约束下推动商业模式创新动态演化，现有研究仍缺乏系统解释。基于最优区分理论，本文选取理想汽车开展纵向单案例研究，探讨新创企业商业模式创新的动态演化机制。研究发现，新创企业商业模式创新并非创新活动的简单累积，而是随着产业情境挑战的变化，在二元合法性与双元创新的协奏下实现阶段性跃迁。具体而言，起步期，企业面临结构性挑战，通过构建型二元合法性与组合式双元创新形成门槛协奏，实现适应型商业模式创新；扩张期，企业面临认知性挑战，通过修复型二元合法性与平衡式双元创新形成补偿协奏，实现聚焦型商业模式创新；转型期，企业面临系统性挑战，通过重构型二元合法性与协同式双元创新形成整合协奏，实现复杂型商业模式创新。本文揭示了最优区分由门槛协奏、补偿协奏到整合协奏的动态实现过程，也为理解二元合法性、双元创新与新创企业商业模式创新之间的联动关系提供了新的解释框架。

Against the backdrop of rapid industrial evolution and institutional change in emerging industries, business model innovation in new ventures must address conformity requirements from institutional norms and market cognition while building distinctive competitive advantages through innovation. However, there has been insufficient explanation on how new ventures promote the dynamic evolution of business model innovation under conformity–distinctiveness tensions. Drawing on the optimal distinctiveness theory, this paper conducts a longitudinal single-case study of Li Auto to examine the dynamic evolution mechanism of business model innovation in new ventures. The results show that business model innovation is not a simple accumulation of innovation activities, but a staged transition achieved through the orchestration of dual legitimacy and ambidextrous innovation as industrial contextual challenges change. Specifically, in the start-up stage, structural challenges lead to threshold orchestration between constructive dual legitimacy and combined ambidextrous innovation, resulting in adaptive business model innovation; in the expansion stage, cognitive challenges lead to compensatory orchestration between restorative dual legitimacy and balanced ambidextrous innovation, resulting in focused business model innovation; in the transformation stage, systemic challenges lead to integrative orchestration between reconstructive dual legitimacy and synergistic ambidextrous innovation, resulting in complex business model innovation. This paper reveals the dynamic realization of optimal distinctiveness from threshold orchestration to compensatory and integrative orchestration, and offers a new explanation of the linkage among dual legitimacy, ambidextrous innovation, and business model innovation in new ventures.

关键词： 二元合法性,双元创新,商业模式创新,最优区分理论

参考文献

1 董保宝, 程松松, 张兰. 双元创新研究述评及开展中国情境化研究的建议[J]. 管理学报, 2022, 19(2): 308-316. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-884x.2022.02.017
2 郭长伟, 朱亚丽, 于振洋, 等. 大企业内部创业单元如何脱颖而出——基于最优区分视角的纵向案例研究[J]. 南开管理评论, 2024, 27(8): 161-171,184. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-3448.2024.08.015
3 彭新敏, 张祺瑞, 刘电光. 后发企业超越追赶的动态过程机制——基于最优区分理论视角的纵向案例研究[J]. 管理世界, 2022, 38(3): 145-161. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-5502.2022.03.009
4 唐方成, 靳晓曼, 顾世玲. 评价者分类视角下商业模式创新的合法化机制——以网约车的类别涌现为例[J]. 管理世界, 2023, 39(8): 114-131.
5 解学梅, 朱琪玮. 企业绿色创新实践如何破解“和谐共生”难题?[J]. 管理世界, 2021, 37(1): 128-149,9. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-5502.2021.01.009
6 尹西明, 武沛琦, 钱雅婷, 等. 先立后破: 场景驱动如何助力AI新创企业实现最优区分——基于微言科技的纵向单案例研究[J]. 南开管理评论, 2025, 28(12): 14-26. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-3448.2025.12.003
7 云乐鑫, 杨俊, 张玉利. 创业企业如何实现商业模式内容创新?——基于“网络—学习”双重机制的跨案例研究[J]. 管理世界, 2017, 33(4): 119-137,188. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-5502.2017.04.011
8 朱明洋, 张玉利, 曾国军. 网络自主权、企业双元创新战略与商业模式创新关系研究: 内部协调柔性的调节作用[J]. 管理工程学报, 2020, 34(6): 66-78. DOI:10.13587/j.cnki.jieem.2020.06.007
9 Adner R. Ecosystem as structure: An actionable construct for strategy[J]. Journal of Management, 2017, 43(1): 39-58. DOI:10.1177/0149206316678451
10 Amit R, Zott C. Crafting business architecture: The antecedents of business model design[J]. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 2015, 9(4): 331-350. DOI:10.1002/sej.1200
11 Andriopoulos C, Lewis M W. Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation[J]. Organization Science, 2009, 20(4): 696-717. DOI:10.1287/orsc.1080.0406
12 Bohnsack R, Kurtz H, Hanelt A. Re-examining path dependence in the digital age: The evolution of connected car business models[J]. Research Policy, 2021, 50(9): 104328. DOI:10.1016/j.respol.2021.104328
13 Cao Q, Gedajlovic E, Zhang H P. Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: Dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects[J]. Organization Science, 2009, 20(4): 781-796. DOI:10.1287/orsc.1090.0426
14 Choi Y R, Ha S, Kim Y. Innovation ambidexterity, resource configuration and firm growth: Is smallness a liability or an asset?[J]. Small Business Economics, 2022, 58(4): 2183-2209. DOI:10.1007/s11187-021-00507-3
15 Clauss T. Measuring business model innovation: Conceptualization, scale development, and proof of performance[J]. R& D Management, 2017, 47(3): 385-403. DOI:10.1111/radm.12186
16 Deephouse D L. To be different, or to be the same? It’s a question (and theory) of strategic balance[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1999, 20(2): 147-166. DOI:3.0.CO;2-Q" target="_blank">10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199902)20:23.0.CO;2-Q
17 DiMaggio P J, Powell W W. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields[J]. American Sociological Review, 1983, 48(2): 147-160. DOI:10.2307/2095101
18 Ding X Z. Digital leadership, digital platform capability and digital business model innovation of start-ups[J]. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 2026, 14: 100970. DOI:10.1016/j.jik.2026.100970
19 Dubois A, Gadde L E. Systematic combining: An abductive approach to case research[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2002, 55(7): 553-560. DOI:10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00195-8
20 Eisenhardt K M. Building theories from case study research[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1989, 14(4): 532-550. DOI:10.4135/9781473915480.n52
21 Ellis S J, Khanagha S, Aalbers R, et al. Middle managers at the crossroads: Navigating legitimacy tensions in pursuit of radical innovation in nascent ecosystems[J]. Research Policy, 2025, 54(8): 105287. DOI:10.1016/j.respol.2025.105287
22 Farzaneh M, Wilden R, Afshari L, et al. Dynamic capabilities and innovation ambidexterity: The roles of intellectual capital and innovation orientation[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2022, 148: 47-59. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.04.030
23 Foss N J, Saebi T. Fifteen years of research on business model innovation: How far have we come, and where should we go?[J]. Journal of Management, 2017, 43(1): 200-227. DOI:10.1177/0149206316675927
24 Gioia D A, Corley K G, Hamilton A L. Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology[J]. Organizational Research Methods, 2013, 16(1): 15-31. DOI:10.1177/1094428112452151
25 Gulati R, Puranam P. Renewal through reorganization: The value of inconsistencies between formal and informal organization[J]. Organization Science, 2009, 20(2): 422-440. DOI:10.1287/orsc.1090.0421
26 He Z L, Wong P K. Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis[J]. Organization Science, 2004, 15(4): 481-494. DOI:10.1287/orsc.1040.0078
27 Heij C V, Volberda H W, Hollen R M A. To replicate or to renew your business model? The performance effect in dynamic environments[J]. Long Range Planning, 2024, 57(3): 102440. DOI:10.1016/j.lrp.2024.102440
28 Hu J, Wang Y L, Liu S N, et al. Mechanism of latecomer enterprises’ technological catch-up in technical standards alliances–An ambidextrous innovation perspective[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2023, 154: 113321. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113321
29 Jansen J J P, Van Den Bosch F A J, Volberda H W. Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators[J]. Management Science, 2006, 52(11): 1661-1674. DOI:10.1287/mnsc.1060.0576
30 March J G. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning[J]. Organization Science, 1991, 2(1): 71-87.
31 McDonald R M, Eisenhardt K M. Parallel play: Startups, nascent markets, and effective business-model design[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2020, 65(2): 483-523. DOI:10.1177/0001839219852349
32 McKnight B, Zietsma C. Finding the threshold: A configurational approach to optimal distinctiveness[J]. Journal of Business Venturing, 2018, 33(4): 493-512. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2018.03.004
33 Navis C, Glynn M A. How new market categories emerge: Temporal dynamics of legitimacy, identity, and entrepreneurship in satellite radio, 1990-2005[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2010, 55(3): 439-471. DOI:10.2189/asqu.2010.55.3.439
34 Pamidimukkala A, Kermanshachi S, Rosenberger J M, et al. Evaluation of barriers to electric vehicle adoption: A study of technological, environmental, financial, and infrastructure factors[J]. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 2023, 22: 100962. DOI:10.1016/j.trip.2023.100962
35 Peprah A A, Giachetti C, Larsen M M, et al. How business models evolve in weak institutional environments: The case of Jumia, the Amazon. Com of Africa[J]. Organization Science, 2022, 33(1): 431-463. DOI:10.1287/orsc.2021.1444
36 Phillips D, Edwards B D, Rutherford M W. Conformity or Differentiation: Optimal distinctiveness through mediating channels[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2025, 189: 115154. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.115154
37 Snihur Y, Markman G. Business model research: Past, present, and future[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2023, 60(8): e1-e14.
38 Spivack A J, Lahti T, Burström T, et al. Legitimacy perceptions amid institutional pluralism: How hype over decoupled practices influences entrepreneurial ventures[J]. Journal of Business Venturing, 2025, 40(4): 106505. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2025.106505
39 Su J Q, Gao X, Tan J. Positioning for optimal distinctiveness: How firms manage competitive and institutional pressures under dynamic and complex environment[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2024, 45(2): 333-361. DOI:10.1002/smj.3549
40 Suchman M C. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1995, 20(3): 571-610. DOI:10.2307/258788
41 Taeuscher K, Bouncken R, Pesch R. Gaining legitimacy by being different: Optimal distinctiveness in crowdfunding platforms[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2021, 64(1): 149-179. DOI:10.5465/amj.2018.0620
42 Teece D J. Business models, business strategy and innovation[J]. Long Range Planning, 2010, 43(2-3): 172-194. DOI:10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.003
43 Tornikoski E T, Newbert S L. Exploring the determinants of organizational emergence: A legitimacy perspective[J]. Journal of Business Venturing, 2007, 22(2): 311-335. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.12.003
44 Wales W J, Kraus S, Filser M, et al. The status quo of research on entrepreneurial orientation: Conversational landmarks and theoretical scaffolding[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2021, 128: 564-577. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.046
45 Wang S Y, Li J, Zhao D T. The impact of policy measures on consumer intention to adopt electric vehicles: Evidence from China[J]. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 2017, 105: 14-26. DOI:10.1016/j.tra.2017.08.013
46 Yin R K. Case study research: Design and methods[M]. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2014.
47 Zhang Y L, Zhou X Y, Lyles M A. Reaching an optimally distinctive CSR strategy: Examining the antecedents of CSR scope conformity and emphasis differentiation among Chinese publicly listed companies[J]. Management and Organization Review, 2023, 19(1): 32-63. DOI:10.1017/mor.2022.20
48 Zhao E Y, Fisher G, Lounsbury M, et al. Optimal distinctiveness: Broadening the interface between institutional theory and strategic management[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2017, 38(1): 93-113. DOI:10.1002/smj.2589
49 Zimmerman M A, Zeitz G J. Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2002, 27(3): 414-431. DOI:10.2307/4134387
50 Zott C, Amit R. Business model design and the performance of entrepreneurial firms[J]. Organization Science, 2007, 18(2): 181-199. DOI:10.1287/orsc.1060.0232