VALUE EXCHANGE AND GOVERNANCE …api.ning.com/files/hhXki1INxcGSDI3h98T0vJfc0XDkcCLqtUgqk...D 6.5: Value Exchange and Governance Framework v1 646133 - TCBL Textile & Clothing Business

VALUE EXCHANGE AND GOVERNANCE

FRAMEWORK – V1

TCBL 646133 DELIVERABLE 6.5

30th June 2016

Co-funded by

Horizon 2020

DELIVERABLE

PROJECT ACRONYM: TCBL

GRANT AGREEMENT N.: 646133

PROJECT TITLE: Textile & Clothing Business Labs

D6.5: Value Exchange and Governance Framework – v1

V 3.1, 04.07.2016

AUTHORS: Matteo Castagno (ISMB) Enrico Ferro (ISMB)

Michele Osella (ISMB) Jesse Marsh (Prato)

REVIEWERS: Francesco Molinari (CCA) Darko Fercej (eZavod)

Simon Delaere (iMinds)

CO-FUNDED BY THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION IN H2020 TCBL: TEXTILES & CLOTHING BUSINESS LABS, GRANT AGREEMENT N. 646133

Dissemination Level

PU Public

Co-funded by

Horizon 2020

3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The following deliverable represents a first issue of a series of four releases that will be

submitted annually throughout the life of the project. The document intends to provide an

overview of the value architecture and the governance framework present within the TCBL

ecosystem.

More specifically, the analyses conducted for this first release aimed at investigating the

following aspects:

The level of operational maturity of the ecosystem

The key contributions of the ecosystem to the T&C industry in terms of services

offered and needs addressed

The degree of diversification of the value propositions offered by the different

Business Labs affiliated to TCBL either as partners or associates

The alignment of TCBL-enabled innovation opportunities with the call requirements in

terms of user-involvement, triple sustainability1 [1] (see the Glossary of used terms for

the definition) and data exploitation

The business model that may support the survival of the ecosystem after the grant

period.

From a methodological point of view, the activities of data collection and analysis relied on

semi-structured interviews and business model ontology design techniques (namely the

business model and value proposition canvases).

The preliminary results obtained show that over 65% of the Business Labs are fully

operational and almost 60% of them have already built a community that may be leveraged to

promote open innovation activities. The value propositions offered by Labs revolve around

training, testing, consulting/mentoring activities as well as sharing of tangible and intangible

assets. Such activities represent a response to a number of perceived needs in the T&C

sector having to do with ‘hands-on’ experimentation, the access to facilities, in particular for

the creation of prototypes and short-runs of production, and to knowledge, as well as the

acquisition of new skills to be re-used in the market arena.

In terms of diversification, the ecosystem is currently well balanced as the three Lab typologies

(Design, Make, Place) are equally represented. This generates, at least in principle, significant

collaboration opportunities linked to the exploitation of complementarities as well as some

opportunities deriving from the reach of a critical mass necessary to meet the needs of large

organizations.

Based on the preliminary results of an ongoing discussion that cuts across many WP6 tasks

(from T6.3 to T6.1, not to mention T6.4 responsible for the present deliverable and T6.5 which

is scheduled to begin only in March 2017), the following first guidelines emerge for the

definition of a governance approach for TCBL:

Openness to diversity: legitimacy of different languages and frames of self-interest

Value-driven community, with a strong role for a shared Commons

Trust in the community’s capability for self-organisation: decentralized management

Radical scalability based on clear roles with ‘lots and lots’ of participants

Process oriented approach with iterative planning open to emergent processes

1 “The triple bottom line” was first coined in 1994 by John Elkington

D 6.5: Value Exchange and Governance Framework Version 1

646133 - TCBL Textile & Clothing Business Labs

4

From these guidelines, a set of 7 principles has been defined, compliance to which has been

used as the main selection criterion for the first Call for Expression of Interest launched in

early 2016, leading to 106 new Associate Members of the TCBL value-based community.

For what concerns the alignment of the TCBL-enabled innovation with the call requirements,

the ecosystem currently seems to be equipped to promote a sector evolution in terms of open

innovation and triple sustainability. A reflection shall be conducted by the consortium on

whether and how to reinforce the data exploitation dimension either through the recruitment of

new Labs or through an evolution of the service offering of current ones.

Moving on to the business model to implement after the end of the project, a first preliminary

internal discussion on post-grant scenarios has highlighted the possibility to substitute the

consortium of partners with a very lean and agile organization that may conduct a light form of

ecosystem governance thanks to the collection of an association fee paid by the different Labs

in exchange of the value derived from belonging to the ecosystem. Such fee may be covered

by a three pronged value proposition that the TCBL ecosystem will be able to offer and that

will focus on community management, capacity building and consultancy services.

5

GLOSSARY OF USED TERMS

Term Definition and source

BM Business Model2: it describes how a business venture works in

terms of value delivered to customers, internal resources,

partnerships and selling techniques.

BMC Business Model Canvas [2]: It is a strategic management tool

which allows to design, detail and refine a business model. See

section ‘2.2 Value modelling’

Data triangulation Data collection technique which assures the validity of research

through the use of a variety of sources to gather data on the same

topic. The purpose of data triangulation is to both cross-validate

data and to capture different dimensions of the same topic.

TCBL ecosystem A socio-digital business experimentation framework for exploring

innovations to the three main strategies undertaken so far by the

European T&C sector to handle global competitive pressure: cost-

oriented, product/service oriented and productivity-oriented.

Adapted from the TCBL DoA, p. 3 (abstract)

TCBL approach T&C business model innovation based on three main levers: 1)

the emerging opportunities of the new “Making Economy” (e.g.

personal robotics, home production, etc.); 2) redirecting the

capacities of “old artisans” and family workers (or “fasonists”) and

re-connecting their knowledge with e.g. new entrepreneurs, young

and creative people; 3) taking full advantage of the benefits of

Future Internet technologies for the T&C global supply chain

(diffused e-commerce networks, IoT tracking systems, virtual

warehouses, customer engagement, etc.) in the light of a new

customer-driven approach based on market intelligence.

Adapted from the TCBL DoA, part B, p. 17.

TCBL Associates

programme

TCBL aims to gradually populate the ecosystem with T&C actors

covering the entire value chain by means of yearly calls for

expression of interest. Three types of Associates will be looked

for:

Business Labs (Design, Making, and Place)

Business Systems (Laboratories and Factories)

Business Service Providers.

Associates joining the TCBL ecosystem will not receive funding as

such, but rather specific services from project partners (as part of

the relevant workpackage activities) plus the TCBL label as being

part of the network.

2 https://hbr.org/2015/01/what-is-a-business-model

https://hbr.org/2015/01/what-is-a-business-model

D 6.5: Value Exchange and Governance Framework v1


6


There will also be a call for expressions of interest for start-ups;

like the Associates, they will be receiving services from partners

(in this case incubation services such as travel, consultants, office

space, labs) rather than funding.

Adapted from the TCBL DoA, part B, pp. 13-14.

TCBL Business Labs Physical and/or virtual spaces in which actors involved in TCBL

can draw on existing and emerging business models to freely

experiment with new ways of designing, making, producing within

specific locations in the countries covered by the TCBL

partnership. TCBL includes three types of labs: Design Labs,

Making Labs and Place Labs.

The essential purpose of TCBL Business Labs is to produce and

transfer knowledge and innovation into T&C Business Systems,

motivating potential pilots to emerge. By so doing, Business Labs

freely explore more or less radical innovation trajectories in T&C,

structured according to a coherent framework and relying on

existing and emergent models.

Adapted from the TCBL DoA, various pp.

TCBL Business

Process Support

Services (in short:

TCBL Services)

Training and performance support facilities linked to innovative

business process models and other third party services facilitating

Business Labs and Business Systems in accessing, assimilating

and adapting the new knowledge created through the Knowledge

Spaces and in valorising it to enable new ways of working in T&C

to be developed and implemented.

Adapted from the TCBL DoA, various pp.

TCBL Business

Systems (Pilots or

Pilot Businesses)

Pilot activities within TCBL based on existing and concrete supply

and value chains including social enterprises, primarily in, but not

limited to the T&C manufacturing sector, to establish

methodologies for “innovation transfer” of business model

elements.

Business Systems will include:

Pilot laboratories (small existing structures with small-scale

operations based on concrete and material labour of an artisan

nature, including home businesses). They will pilot some small

scale activities and productions, with an emphasis on developing

‘social innovations’ that have an impact on the local community.

Pilot factories (bigger units that typically have a sufficient number

of workers so that the organisation of labour becomes a key factor

of production). They will experiment with existing innovations or

new processes (e.g. reorganisation of working positions, multi-

tasking, etc.).

Adapted from TCBL DoA, part B, p. 8 and p. 35.



7


Triple sustainability

(or Triple bottom

line)

Three-pronged accounting framework for evaluating a company’s

performances from a broader perspective [3]. It takes into account

the so-called 3Ps – People, Planet and Profit – respectively

identifying the social, environmental and economic factors

enabling organizations to better evaluate the future consequences

of decisions. See also Deliverable 4.1 for further details.

VNA Value Network Analysis makes explicit the value exchange

relationships among the actors of an ecosystem. The method

helps to evaluate the participants both individually and on the

benefit they bring to the overall ecosystem [4]

VPC Value Proposition Canvas [5]: It is a plug-in of the BMC and it

helps to understand how the value proposition generates value for

customers. See section ‘2.2 Value modelling’

8

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 3

GLOSSARY OF USED TERMS .................................................................................... 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................. 8

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 10

2. METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................. 13

2.1 INTERVIEWS OUTLINE ..................................................................................... 13

2.2 VALUE MODELLING ........................................................................................ 14

3. VALUE ARCHITECTURE MAPPING ................................................................... 18

3.1 BUSINESS LABS PROBLEM-SOLUTION FIT ............................................................ 18

3.2 PRELIMINARY BUSINESS MODEL FOR THE TCBL ECOSYSTEM.................................. 25

4. CURRENT STATUS OF THE TCBL ECOSYSTEM ................................................ 28

5. GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK........................................................................... 39

5.1 GOVERNANCE APPROACH............................................................................... 39

Lessons from Evaluation..................................................................................... 39

Lessons from the Ecosystem Architecture ............................................................. 41

The First Call for Expressions of Interest ............................................................... 42

5.2 TCBL PRINCIPLES ........................................................................................ 43

Operationalisation of Principles ............................................................................ 44

5.3 ECOSYSTEM ROLES ...................................................................................... 47

6. CONCLUDING REMARKS ................................................................................. 49

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................................................................................................... 51

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................... 52

LIST OF TABLES..................................................................................................... 53

DOCUMENT INFORMATION ..................................................................................... 54

REVISION HISTORY.................................................................................................. 54

STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY ...................................................................................... 54

COPYRIGHT ........................................................................................................... 54

DISCLAIMER........................................................................................................... 55

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................. 55

ANNEX I: INTERVIEW STRUCTURE .......................................................................... 56

ANNEX II: TCBL LABS VALUE PROPOSITION CANVASES ........................................ 58

ANNEX III: BUSINESS SERVICES VALUE PROPOSITION CANVASES......................... 67

ANNEX IV: ALIGNMENT OF THE DIMENSIONS OF INNOVATION WITH THE CALL

REQUIREMENTS..................................................................................................... 71



9

ANNEX V: 3D FRAMEWORK OF THE DIMENSIONS OF INNOVATION.......................... 72

10

1. INTRODUCTION

According to the DoA:

This Task [6.4 Value Modelling and Scaling Scenarios] draws on the findings of

the previous ones to model the value propositions of the different ecosystem

components (clusters of similarly structured business models, for instance

publicly funded business labs) and the transactional patterns between them. The

investigation activity conducted will employ a mix of methodological instruments

belonging to the business model ontology domain among which we may find:

business model canvas, value proposition canvas, value network analysis (VNA)

and e3Value. The combined use of such complementary tools will allow to

generate a multi-perspective synoptic representation of the overall TCBL

ecosystem. In addition, a scenario analysis will be conducted in order to explore

alternative scaling options based on the transactional behaviour of different

players as well as possible technological and/or regulatory developments that will

emerge from the scouting and policy analysis conducted in WP2 and WP7.

(…)

D6.5: Value Exchange and Governance Framework – version 1 [month 12]

Defines the perimeter and dynamics of the overall TCBL ecosystem across and in

light of the value modelling trials, scenario building and governance toolbox

analyses carried out in Tasks T6.4 and T6.5 above. In the context of the

Technical Ecosystem Framework set forth in D6.1 and the stakeholder dynamics

monitored in Task 6.3, this deliverable analyses the transactional value of the

business relationships emerging in the project in terms of the specific benefits for

each of the stakeholders involved. Drawing on specific cases of service models

hypothesized by the Business Labs and composed by Business Pilots to define

innovative business scenarios, the value added of each of the TCBL elements in

these processes is generalized to form a high-level business model framework.

The governance implications of these processes, as captured by Task 6.5, are in

parallel developed together with proposed models and solutions to be tested in

the successive phases, leading towards a final governance model for the

sustainability of the TCBL ecosystem.

The deliverable represents the first issue of a series of four releases which are going to be

submitted every year till the end of the project. They will contain updates and refinements that

will follow the TCBL ecosystem evolution with the intent to highlight how such process of

maturation will impact in terms of value exchanges and adjustments required in terms of the

governance framework.

The present document aims at defining the initial scenario of the TCBL ecosystem by mapping

all the actors involved in the ecosystem from a value perspective: what needs they intend to

address, through which services and how they interact (or intend to) among themselves.

These activities will allow to elicit the value exchanges occurring within and outside the TCBL

environment. In addition, another crucial objective of the current document is to shed light on

the TCBL ecosystem as a whole and how it may evolve in terms of business model.

From a functional point of view, the content of the following deliverable will play a strategic role

in informing the management board of the project. As a matter of fact, the output of the



11

investigation activities conducted for the preparation of this deliverable will allow to shed light

on the following aspects:

- The level of operational maturity of the ecosystem

- The key contributions of the ecosystem to the T&C industry in terms of services

offered and needs addressed

- The degree of complementarity/substitution of the value propositions offered by the

different Business Labs

- The alignment of TCBL-enabled innovation opportunities with the call requirements in

terms of user-involvement, triple sustainability and data exploitation.

- The business model that may support the survival of the ecosystem as a whole after

the grant period.

The contents of this deliverable are structured as follows:

Section 2 (Methodology) provides a brief account of how the methodological framework

adopted for modeling the value architecture of the TCBL ecosystem has been operationalized

and of which aspects the analytical efforts have focused on. A series of semi-structured

interviews were conducted with key informants from each Lab, focusing on four main areas of

investigation:

1. Core operations

2. Community mapping

3. Potential integration with the TCBL ecosystem

4. Innovators identification

For the activities of data analysis relied we relied on data triangulation (see Section 2.2 Value

modelling and business model ontology design techniques (namely the business model and

value proposition canvases). The interview script is reported in Annex I. The full range of

TCBL Labs and Business Services value proposition canvases are reported in Annexes II and

III, respectively.

Section 3 (Value Architecture Mapping) takes all the available/interviewed 17 Business Labs

into consideration, providing for each of them a brief profile in table form, composed of three

sections:

1. Main services and products offered

2. Target groups

3. Beneficiaries’ jobs.

In this way it has been possible to distil the very essence of the problem-solution fit for every

Business Lab. Overall, the services and products of the TCBL Labs mainly aim at providing

support to the beneficiaries in terms of training, testing and consulting activities, offering

shared facilities and knowledge to T&C businesses and start-ups according to a “hands-on”

attitude. Based on this evidence, some preliminary reasoning has been done on the possible

value configuration that TCBL as an ecosystem could adopt in order to allow the creation of an

umbrella organization that may replace the role currently covered by the project consortium in

the orchestration and promotion of the ecosystem evolution.

Section 4 (Current Status of the TCBL Ecosystem) provides a comprehensive analysis, at

ecosystem level, of the current innovation capacity against the three macro challenges

presented in Deliverable 4.1 (see Figure 38 in Annex V) and of their alignment with the call

requirements (see also Table 6 in Annex IV: Alignment of the dimensions of innovation with

the call requirements).

Some preliminarly answers have been provided therein to the following questions:



12

1. What is the current level of maturity of the TCBL ecosystem in operational terms?

2. To what extent Labs represent innovation hubs offering access to established

communities of practice?

3. To what extent are the current value propositions offered by Labs enabling innovation

along the dimensions identified in D4.1?

4. How many Labs are in line with the call requirements?

5. Which is the degree of heterogeneity and/or homogeneity of the ecosystem, in terms

of value proposition offered by the different Labs?

Considering all the Labs within the TCBL ecosystem, 65% of them are already active, while

those which have not started their operations yet will do so in the upcoming months, for sure

before the end of this year. Even the present rate of involvement of communities is well above

half. In fact, 59% of the 17 communities (associated to each Lab) are already established.

Although it is not possible yet at this stage to trace a proper value network analysis (VNA) of

the TCBL Labs, an initial in-depth study is presented about the evaluation of both the

homogeneity and the heterogeneity aspects of the ecosystem. Due to incomplete information

available at this state, the areas of innovation have been analyzed through the three macro

dimensions of the 3D framework presented in Deliverable 4.1 - User, Sustainability and Data -

but in the following versions of this deliverable the unit of analysis will be more fine-grained

and take into account every sub-dimension.

As far as the governance implications of the above processes are concerned, the reader

should be warned that Task 6.5 activities have not yet been started by the time the present

deliverable is released. Nevertheless, Section 5 below provides some first elements of the

TCBL governance framework and an overview of the so-called TCBL principles as emerged

from the consortium level reflections surrounding the launch of the first Call for Expressions of

Interest, in Spring 2016, which has led to 106 new Associate Members of the TCBL value-

based community.

Section 6 provides some concluding remarks and directions for follow-up work.

13

2. METHODOLOGY

The methodological framework adopted for modeling the value architecture of the TCBL

ecosystem relies on two main operational tools: semi-structured interviews and the business

model ontologies – VPC and BMC. The combination of such tools allowed handle the

complexity inherent within the ecosystem, thanks to the flexibility offered by interviews at, the

same time, to provide a formally valid model of the value flows that each Lab is generating or

intends to generate (thanks to the Business Model and Value Proposition Canvases). The

present section provides a brief account of how the methodological approach has been

operationalized and of which aspects the analytical efforts have focused on.

2.1 INTERVIEWS OUTLINE

A series of semi-structured interviews were conducted with key informants from each Lab (see

Annex I: Interview Structure).

The interviews took place via video conferencing with the addition of some e-mail

communications. A draft of the interview was circulated in advance to provide the informants

with an overview about the information we need to gather. Such interviews mainly consisted of

closed-ended questions that were descriptive in nature. The interviews administered to the

Labs focused on four main areas of investigation:

1. Core operations

2. Community mapping

3. Potential integration with the TCBL ecosystem

4. Innovators identification

The above-mentioned sections of the interview were elaborated for highlighting the evolution

of each Lab considering as a starting point the scenario before the integration with TCBL and

then clarifying the sought TCBL-enabled situation. In addition, they were important for

gathering information about the future potential interactions with the other Labs and about the

possible existence (or creation) of a community of interest involved in the activities. The last

section instead aimed at investigating some inspiring innovative business ventures in the radar

screen of each Lab.

Finally, all the open-ended questions were more exploratory in nature and served purposefully

for generating additional insights into the future TCBL-enabled scenario. For example, these

questions focused on how TCBL would create value for the Lab and what are the additional

benefits it can offer to the target groups. The closed-ended questions were more focused and

straightforward touching upon the intrinsic Lab operations and community engagement that

then could be made available to the whole TCBL ecosystem. Although we followed an

interview protocol as a part of our data collection, the interviewees were allowed to deviate

and discuss the topics they felt were relevant.

We did not tape record the interviews but we took notes during the interviews. Later, we

refined the notes and mapped the value generated by each Lab through proper tools (see

section 2.2 Value modelling). The interviews’ outcomes were sent to the Labs contact

people for a final validation before they could be included in the deliverable document. To

ensure correctness of our findings and methodological robustness, we adopted two

methodological controls. First, we included secondary data (both qualitative and quantitative)

such as press releases, industry reports, documents and publicly available third-party

interviews (with other informants) for our analysis [6]. Second, we adhered to data

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qKG4arzxe6NhZfQJ_xBRwEo-thE-OZevb2CBuCVe6pc/edit#heading=h.nkh24icvy2to

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qKG4arzxe6NhZfQJ_xBRwEo-thE-OZevb2CBuCVe6pc/edit#heading=h.nkh24icvy2to



14

triangulation [7] because it is a relevant technique which makes easier the validation of data

through cross verification of different sources. By adopting such a method it is possible to

combine multiple observers and empirical materials in order to get rid of intrinsic biases and

problems related to single-method and single-observer analyses. To ensure triangulation we

made use of artefacts in form of demos, videos and tutorials and of archival data.

2.2 VALUE MODELLING

In order to perform an in-depth analysis of each Lab, providing the micro foundations of the

TCBL ecosystem, we investigated the goals the labs target groups desire to achieve and the

jobs they would like to get done by the labs. Such analysis consists in the identification of the

so-called problem-solution fit which is the first fit3, out of three (described in the current

section), that any business venture should aim to achieve. The objective of this stage is to find

a problem worth solving and thus to discover a viable solution.

For this purpose, the Value Proposition Canvas [5] – VPC – (Figure 1) has been selected for

rationalizing such a fit by mapping the value generated by each Lab. In general, the VPC is a

tool that creates a simple and shared language to discuss value propositions across

organisational and entrepreneurial boundaries. In this specific case, the value proposition is

offered by the Lab (which is the reference entity) to the beneficiaries of its services and

activities. It is important to remark that in the analysis present in this document the words

‘beneficiaries’ and ‘target groups’ have been used instead of the word ‘customers’. This

decision was taken in order to highlight the TCBL values which are based on social inclusion,

distribution of skills, sharing of knowledge and open contents and not on pure trading

dynamics.

The VPC has two sides:

1. Customers Profile

2. Value Map

3 https://leanstack.com/bootstrapping-a-lean-startup



15

Figure 1: Value Proposition Canvas (VPC)

With the former one, it is possible to make the understanding of customers clear (‘observe

customers’) and so the Labs might fully enlighten their beneficiaries’ priorities and needs. The

customer profile description in the VPC is made up of three sections, as follows: Customer

Jobs, Gains and Pains. The Customer Jobs describe the things that the beneficiaries are

trying to do and to attain by engaging with the Labs. Customer Jobs could be the tasks they

are trying to accomplish, needs they are trying to satisfy, or the problems they are trying to

solve. Gains describe the outcomes beneficiaries want to achieve or the benefits they seek

from a particular Lab service. Pains, for their part, explain bad outcomes, risks and obstacles

related to the customer jobs.

The latter side describes the features of a specific Lab value proposition (‘create value’). The

Value Map is divided in three sections, namely, Products and Services, Pain Relievers and

Gain Creators. Products and Services list all the offerings of a Lab, both single products and

bundle of products and services that help the beneficiaries to accomplish their goals and to

satisfy their requirements. For example, Products and Services might be tangible physical

products, intangible services, digital products and financial products. Gain Creators describe

how the products and services spark customer gains (i.e., the outcomes that customers want

to achieve or the benefits they seek). The last part of the Value Map, the Pain Relievers

highlights how the products and services alleviate customer pains.

Considering a broader perspective of analysis, the overall TCBL ecosystem has been

represented by the Business Model Canvas [2] – BMC – which is the complementary tool of

the VPC considered as a plug-in that connects value propositions and customer segments, as

illustrated in the Figure 2 below.



16

Figure 2: Value Proposition Canvas embedded w ithin the Business Model Canvas

The BMC is a strategic management and entrepreneurial tool – undeniably the most renowned

and recognized one – employed by companies to design, describe and map their business

models from different perspectives.

Figure 3: Business Model Canvas (BMC)



17

The BMC is made up of nine blocks that collectively represent different aspects of a

company’s entire business model, and they are briefly described as follows:

1. Customer segments: the different groups of people or organizations or beneficiaries a

company aims to reach and serve with its products and services.

2. Value propositions: products and services that generate value for customers.

3. Channels: how the value propositions are delivered to customers and how an

enterprise communicates with them.

4. Customer relationships: the types of relationships established by a company with its

customers.

5. Revenue streams: the mechanisms of sale and pricing implemented by a company for

making money from every customer segment.

6. Cost structure: all the expenses a company has to face for running its operations.

7. Key resources: set of assets and resources needed by a company for making a

business model work.

8. Key activities: set of activities to be run by a company for ensuring the correct

business model’s mode of operation.

9. Key partnerships: network of partners and suppliers that allows the company to

increase the scalability and efficiency of the business.

It has to be specified that in this document the BMCs of the Business Labs have not been

elaborated because the majority of them are still in the start-up phase and their operations

have not started yet. And so, many of the nine sections described above are still uncharted but

it will be possible to complete them when all the Labs will be fully operational.

What it was possible to do was to sketch a first draft of the overall TCBL ecosystem’s BMC, as

reported in section 3.2 Preliminary Business Model for the TCBL Ecosystem. In fact, that

business model describes how TCBL as a whole intends to deliver value to its customers and

how the model will become self-sustainable and able to scale the market. This very last

concept is crucial because, getting back to the three-stage fit mentioned at the beginning of

the paragraph, the BMC elucidates the so-called product-market fit which “[...] means being in

a good market with a product that can satisfy that market4.” The TCBL business model is thus

the sought ending point after the funding period when the economic sustainability will be

unavoidable and totally depending on the gained product-market fit.

4 http://web.stanford.edu/class/ee204/ProductMarketFit.html

18

3. VALUE ARCHITECTURE MAPPING

In order to cast light on the value generated by the Business Labs, a Value Proposition

Canvas has been created for each of them (see

19

Annex II: TCBL Labs Value Proposition Canvases). Moreover, even if a complete analysis of

the Business Services is contained in the Deliverable 6.1 – which describes the overall

technical framework – for the sake of completeness of the current document all the Business

Services have also been described through the VPCs included in the

20

Annex III: Business Services Value Proposition Canvases.

3.1 BUSINESS LABS PROBLEM-SOLUTION FIT

Table 1 below shows the core elements of the problem-solution fit (main services & products

offered and beneficiaries’ jobs) plus on the target groups which the value offer is delivered to.

The table allows to elicit and single out the most relevant jobs and needs for the individuals

and the organizations interacting with each TCBL lab. At the same time, permits to understand

the extent to which the value proposition offered by each Lab is able to meet those needs. In

order to provide a synthetic and intuitive overview of the analysis conducted, two word clouds

were generated and inserted in Figure 4 and Figure 5. The picture allows to glimpse into the

main features and the commonalities of the various value propositions and into their ability to

properly fulfil the beneficiaries requirements.

The table below includes a brief profile for each Lab, structured into three sections:

1. Main services and products offered

2. Target groups

3. Beneficiaries’ jobs.

In this way it is possible to distil the very essence of the problem-solution fit for every Business

Lab.

CONNECTING EXPLORERS

Main services & products offered

Support for network creation Tutoring for projects set-up Bringing people together

Beneficiaries’ jobs Developing knowledge Sharing knowledge Engaging with the actors and the community members

Target groups Individuals Fashion designers Education institutes Students Professionals

TCBL ACADEMY


Facilities & guidance support Development of ‘maker’ attitude Training activities

Beneficiaries’ jobs Being aware of emerging technologies and changes Having an easy access to knowledge Experimenting new ways of designing

Target groups Individuals Small organizations & startups Students



21

Professionals Craftmen

YOUR TEXTILE TOOLS


Training on building tools & machines Downloadable machine/tools cut sheets

Beneficiaries’ jobs Using properly tools and machines Building working machines Sharing tools and machines

Target groups Individuals Small organizations & startups Students Professionals Craftsmen

TCOE DESIGN LAB


Support in feasibility studies Training activities Shared knowledge & expertise

Beneficiaries’ jobs Acquiring new skills Developing creative ideas Evaluating economic value of design concepts

Target groups Individuals Education institutes Small organizations & startups Students Professionals Companies People w/ social issues

TCOE MAKE LAB


Provision of facilities Training activities Implementation of design concepts

Beneficiaries’ jobs Implementing design concepts Making products viable Accessing directly to the market

Target groups Individuals Education institutes Small organizations & startups Students Professionals



22

Companies

SANJOTEC DESIGN LAB


Mentoring & support Matchmaking w/ prototyping and production facilities Product design methods & tools

Beneficiaries’ jobs Developing new ideas and products Working on prototypes Innovating & rethinking old paradigms

Target groups Individuals Small organizations & startups Students Professionals Companies

OLIVA


Consultancy on social innovation Entrepreneurial & innovation support services

Beneficiaries’ jobs Developing entrepreneurial skills Creating prototypes Developing social ventures

Target groups Individuals Small organizations & startups Professionals People w/ social issues

ETRI


Co-working facilities Training activities

Beneficiaries’ jobs Making short-runs & prototypes Developing new projects

Target groups Individuals Small organizations & startups Professionals

HISA


Hands-on experience Training activities & courses



23

Beneficiaries’ jobs Reinventing themselves Learning new methods of production Being socially included

Target groups Individuals Professionals People w/ social issues

LOTTOZERO


Testing facilities Shared spaces Design office services Contacts network creation

Beneficiaries’ jobs Creating prototypes and short-runs Developing projects Sharing resources Meeting people w/ different skills

Target groups Individuals Fashion designers Small organizations & startups Professionals Companies

TEXTILE MUSEUM


Training activities Broad archive available Design events organization

Beneficiaries’ jobs Matching design skills w/ societal needs Storing & organizing its own archive Having access to T&C heritage

Target groups Individuals Fashion designers Students Education institutes Professionals

LABORATORIO DEL TEMPO


Direct support to socially excluded people Wide range of courses



24

Beneficiaries’ jobs Reinventing themselves Acquiring new skills Having a second chance

Target groups People w/ social issues

LANIFICIO PAOLETTI


Training activities Physical & online archive

Beneficiaries’ jobs Learning new wool processing methods Finding design inspirations


DESIGN LAB ATHENS


Educational & training activities Design challenges orchestration Prototyping facilities Consulting services

Beneficiaries’ jobs Working on and creating prototypes Getting closer to the industry Finding design inspirations

Target groups Individuals Fashion designers Small organizations & startups Professionals Companies

MAKE LAB ATHENS


Guidelines & tutorials preparation Training & consulting services Testing facilities

Beneficiaries’ jobs Facing new challenges Expanding the network Exploring new materials, processes & technologies Improving products sustainability

Target groups Individuals Fashion designers Education institutes



25

Students Professionals Companies

FABBRICA ARCA


Due diligence consulting Training modules Wearable technology design & testing

Beneficiaries’ jobs Exploiting innovative technologies Liaising with relevant players Studying project feasibility & sustainability


PLACE LAB PALERMO


Collection of artisanal knowledge Capture & transmission of pattern cutting knowledge Collection & digitalization of reference material

Beneficiaries’ jobs Mixing tradition and innovative ideas Innovating old practices adopted in T&C sector Gaining in-depth knowledge about T&C heritage

Target groups Individuals Fashion designers Education institutes Students Professionals

Table 1: Labs problem-solution f its & target groups



26

As anticipated, the following two word clouds, elaborated with Tag Crowd™5, are meant for

pinpointing the most common elements among both the offerings around which the value

propositions are built and the various jobs extracted from the VPCs (see Annex II: TCBL Labs

Value Proposition Canvases).

Figure 4: Word cloud of products & services

As the Word cloud above exemplifies, the services and products of the Labs mainly aim at

providing support to the beneficiaries in terms of training, testing and consulting activities,

offering shared facilities and knowledge. The products and services of the VPCs reflect the

importance of the Business Labs which are the key pillars of the overall TCBL ecosystem.

Figure 5: Word cloud of the beneficiaries’ jobs

From the word cloud above, it can be noticed that the beneficiaries’ jobs are indeed well

addressed by the Labs products and services. In fact, the words show a very dynamic nature

of the jobs and the leitmotiv seems to be the experimentation and a ‘hands-on’ attitude. In

addition, it is also important the access to facilities, in particular for the creation of prototypes

5 http://tagcrowd.com/

http://tagcrowd.com/



27

and short-runs of production, and to knowledge, as well as the acquisition of new skills to be

re-used in the market arena.

3.2 PRELIMINARY BUSINESS MODEL FOR THE TCBL

ECOSYSTEM

The analysis conducted in the previous sections of the deliverable focused its attention on the

organizational actors composing the TCBL ecosystem (Business Labs and Business

Services). In the following, the unit of analysis will move up by a level of abstraction to take

into consideration the entire TCBL ecosystem. Aim of this activity is to conduct some

preliminary reasoning on the possible value configuration that TCBL as an ecosystem could

adopt in order to allow the creation of an umbrella organization that may replace the role

currently covered by the project consortium in the orchestration and promotion of the

ecosystem evolution.

This deliverable is being drafted at month 12 of a 4-year project. It goes without saying that the

following attempt must be interpreted as a first step in the definition of a long-run strategy in

terms of value architecture design that may be subject to significant readjustments due to

possible priorities changes depending on both exogenous and endogenous factors (e.g.,

changes in the T&C market or policy environment, emergence of new pressing needs, etc.).

The Business Model Canvas was chosen as a methodological tool to represent and describe

the design choices made in terms of value creation, distribution and appropriation. Post-it

notes have been used to identify the different elements present within each building block of

the canvas, while colours have been utilized to provide a visual support in the identification of

the different market segments and their associated revenue streams.

To date, the consortium is inclined to opt for the creation of a very lean, agile and cost

effective umbrella organization that will play a very lightweight coordination role to support the

survival and growth of the entire ecosystem. The organization is envisaged to sustain itself

through the affiliation fees that Business Labs belonging to the ecosystem will be required to

pay in exchange of the value they will extract from the overall TCBL community. The payment

of such fees should be justified by a set of value added activities that have been captured in

the canvas presented below (Figure 6). In fact, the sale of those services can be coordinated

and fostered by the umbrella organization. And so, for example it will be possible to better

target both individuals and businesses for the provision of training courses, SMEs for offering

consultancy services, and to better manage rent solutions for specific machineries and tools.



28

Figure 6: BMC of the TCBL ecosystem

The ecosystem will focus its activities along three main business lines: community

management and engagement to favor open innovation activities, capacity building for social

inclusion and to maintain market attractiveness and, lastly, business consultancy to ignite

innovation paths along the three dimensions identified in Deliverable 4.1.

Moving to the customer segments block, the three services described above will be targeted to

three different market segments: self-employed professionals looking for peers to partner with

or market opportunities they could not be able to tackle on their own; T&C enterprises willing

to explore new paradigms of production and management in order to reach currently

unexplored potential market opportunities; finally, public administrations intending to stimulate

inclusion processes or to support the competitiveness of local T&C ecosystem of SMEs.

In order to properly deliver the three-folded value proposition to the targeted customer

segments, it will be very important to establish strong channels. As it is possible to observe on

the dedicated building blocks on the BMC below, there are two main types of channels

referring to the communication and to the physical presence. The former ones include the

TCBL events, workshops, seminars, web presence and the word of mouth. The latter ones are

identified by the Business Labs which can be considered ‘touchpoints’ connecting the

Business Pilots with the people operating in the TCBL ecosystem. In addition, another relevant

aspect to be considered is the implementation of an efficient customer relationship system

because it is the means for fostering both the inclusion of the participants in TCBL activities

and their retention. Furthermore, the co-creation and the community-driven relationship

approaches will empower the participants by giving them a central and active role in all the

activities run by the Business Labs, as already mentioned in the sections above.



29

If we shift the focus on the left side of the canvas it is easy to notice that the cost structure

reports the expenses which will have to be faced by the umbrella organization for covering all

the services and activities offered. And so, for instance, such building block includes the costs

related to the purchase of the materials for the training courses and the expenses to be

considered for events organization.

The key resources are the most important assets, available to the organization, for making the

business model work. In this case, it is possible to observe four different post-its in the

dedicated section and they reflect the four main areas covered by the TCBL assets: the

community, online and offline repositories and archives, the physical spaces and TCBL brand

diffusion. The features of those assets are also mirrored by the key activities which will have to

be run by the organization. However, they also report all those actions required for organizing

the training courses and the consultancy services, in addition to the creation and management

of the communities and to the building of brand identity.

Lastly, it goes without saying that – stepping into the shoes of the umbrella organization – the

partnerships will be crucial in order to be able, and be enabled in some cases, to make the

business model work. For example, the micro-factories will be of paramount importance for

ensuring the hands-on experiences in building prototypes and short-runs of production, while

the service providers will allow to create and visualize online tutorials.

30

4. CURRENT STATUS OF THE TCBL ECOSYSTEM

This section aims at providing a comprehensive analysis, at ecosystem level, of the Business

Labs. The total number of the Labs is 176 while the interviews for gathering information were

9, corresponding to the different affiliations.

At this initial stage, it is important to evaluate if the Labs already started their operations or not,

if each of them has an active community and how they engage with their target groups, if

some of them might join forces or focus in different fields of application, if they can be mapped

against the three macro-innovation challenges presented in Deliverable 4.1 (see Figure 38 in

Annex V) and their alignment with the call requirements (see also Table 6 in

6 Only the internal Labs have been interviewed, so Secret Studio has not been included in the

analysis while FabLab Venezia at the time of the interview was not considered eligible.

31

Annex IV: Alignment of the dimensions of innovation with the call requirements).

Such analysis has thus been conducted in order to answer the following questions:

1. What is the current level of maturity of the TCBL ecosystem in operational terms?

2. To what extent Labs represent innovation hubs offering access to established

communities of practice?

3. To what extent are the current value propositions offered by Labs enabling innovation

along the dimensions identified in D4.1?

4. How many Labs are in line with the call requirements?

5. Which is the degree of heterogeneity and/or homogeneity of the ecosystem, in terms

of value proposition offered by the different Labs?

In order to answer the above-mentioned questions, Table 2 below has been created for

recapping the information extracted from the interviews and from the Deliverable 3.1 which

reports the description of the various Business Labs.

As it is possible to observe, the table has seven different columns described as follows:

Affiliation: it indicates the TCBL partner reference for the associated Lab;

Lab: it reports the name of the Lab as written in the “Call for Lab” application form

created by WAAG;

Type of Lab according to D3.1: it defines the type of Lab, namely Make, Design,

Place, as reported in the deliverable where all the Labs are presented;

Operational / Set-up: number 1 means the Lab is already operating while number 0

means the Lab has not started its operations yet but it is in the startup phase. It thus

specifies the maturity of the Lab;

Presence of the community: it states whether there is a community of practice

gravitating around the associated Lab or not;

Reference key dimension according to D4.1: it points out which of the three macro-

innovations - User, Sustainability, Data - can be referred to the Lab;

Alignment with call requirements: it shows the call requirement(s) that better fits the

nature of the considered Lab.



32

Partner affiliation Lab name

Lab

Type [ref

D3.1]

Already

Operation-

al [Y/N]

Active

communi-

ty [Y/N]

Reference

key

dimension

[ref D4.1]

Alignment w /

call

requirements

Waag Connecting explorers

Place N Y User Linking different actors

TCBL academy

Design Y Y User Linking different actors

Your textile tool

Make N Y User Customer-driven supply chain; distributed manufacturing

TCoE Design Lab TCoE

Design Y Y User Integrated BM solutions; novel design solutions

Make Lab TCoE

Make Y Y User Distributed manufacturing

Sanjotec Sanjotec Lab Design Y Y User Integrated BM solutions; distributed manufacturing

Oliva Lab Place Y Y Sustainability

Promotion of social inclusion

eZavod Etri Place Y N Sustainability & user

Business model solutions

Hisa Place Y N Sustainability


Prato Lottozero Design N N User Distributed manufacturing; novel design solutions

Textile museum

Design N Y Sustainability & user

Promotion of social inclusion; novel design solutions



33

Partner affiliation Lab name

Lab

Type [ref

D3.1]

Already

Operation-

al [Y/N]

Active

communi-

ty [Y/N]

Reference

key

dimension

[ref D4.1]

Alignment w /

call

requirements

Place Lab Prato

Place Y N Sustainability


UCV Lanificio Paoletti

Make7 Y Y Sustainability & user

Solutions for local sourcing and supply; linking different actors

HCIA Design Lab Athens

Design N N User Novel design solutions

MIRTEC Make Lab Athens

Make Y N Sustainability & User

Reducing environmental footprint; solutions for local sourcing and supply

ARCA Fabbrica Arca

Make Y N Sustainability & user

Solutions for local sourcing and supply; distributed manufacturing

Place Lab Palermo

Place N Y User Linking different actors

Table 2: Labs analysis

Considering all the Labs within the TCBL ecosystem, 65% of them are already active,

meaning they run daily activities which are ready to be shared with other Labs and exploited

by the potential Business Pilots engaging with them. Among the three different types of Labs,

the Make Labs are all active and this is due to the fact that they are managed by actors which

have a long-lasting experience in the T&C sector (e.g., TCoE and MIRTEC). In addition, if we

compare those kinds of Labs to the Design and Place ones, they have to cover higher up-front

expenses for buying the machineries and the related software suites. It is significant indeed

the case of Fabbrica Arca which is already active but in a different field of application:

electronic and mechatronic. They already have the machines and the technologies that are

ready to be applied for finding new innovative solutions within the T&C sector.

The Labs which have been categorized as ‘Set-up’ have not started their operations yet but

they will do so n the upcoming months: as of writing, they are buying the machines – such as

7 It became a Place Lab after the interview took place



34

Your textile tool by WAAG or the Design Lab of Athens – or have started focusing on the

actors engagement process – such as the Textile museum in Prato. The overall evaluation is

thus satisfactory because more than 50% of the Labs are currently operating and this

percentage is likely going to increase up to nearly 100% by the end of this year.

Even the present rate of involvement of communities is well above half. In fact, 59% of the 17

communities (associated to each Lab) are already established. This is very important because

communities are the main means of engagement and dissemination, allowing to enlarge the

operational boundaries of the Lab by both attracting people and making the Lab known.

Going into details, there are already communities with a strong impact on the local area

despite not all the associated Labs are already operational (e.g., Waag, Prato, Palermo), while

the communities that still need to be created are the ones associated with eZavod, MIRTEC

and Fabbrica Arca. In reality, it is not a worrying situation because the first two affiliations –

MIRTEC in particular – already have a consolidated network of contacts and collaborations so

they have to properly focus on the community creation process; Fabbrica Arca, considering

what said above, cannot have an established community in the T&C sector but for its creation

can rely on the Place Lab Palermo which belongs to the same organization and already has

community around.

Taking into account questions 3 and 4, it is immediately clear that all the Labs operations are

associated with just one or two of the three key dimensions of the 3D framework presented in

Deliverable 4.1: User, Sustainability and Data. And consequently, even the alignment with the

call requirements follows this trend without showing any records about “Practical solutions for

the ownership, control and management of the related supply chain data”. This aspect should

remind the importance of solutions focusing on data for T&C supply chains. This data is really

powerful for better managing the different supply chain phases, in order to take more informed

decisions and formulating better forecasts about, for instance, customer requests and material

provisions. As pinpointed in the Deliverable 4.1, in the 3D framework, 5 different categories of

data to be considered in the T&C sector, especially within the context of TCBL, have been

identified: product, supply chain, market, user needs and user profile. But no one of these has

come out of the Labs analysis.

Surely, the other two dimensions are completely represented by the Labs activities; in

particular, it is worth to highlight that the user dimension takes the lion’s share (53%), followed

by a blend of Sustainability & User dimensions (29%) and by the Sustainability one (18%).

The focus is clearly on the central and active role users have, or will acquire, in the various

phases, from idea / design generation to making processes, and on the inclusion of them

within the Lab and thus into the reference community.

The Sustainability & User label refers specifically to, respectively, the local “solutions for local

sourcing and supply” and to the linkage of different actors (e.g., “home-based" designers and

manufacturers). And so, it adds to the previous dimension the focus on environment and

social-oriented activities, as the Make Lab of Athens or Lanificio Paoletti.

The Sustainability alone plays an important role too and the associated Labs – as in the cases

of Hisa, Place Lab Prato and Oliva – specifically address the needs of socially isolated people

who want to acquire new skills useful for finding a job or for having the chance to be re-

integrated in the society.

For answering the last question, the Labs have been initially split up by type as it is reported in

the graph in Figure 7.



35

Figure 7: Labs pie chart

As it is possible to note, the initial scenario of the TCBL ecosystem seems to be balanced

because the pie chart shows that the types of Labs are evenly distributed.

This is a positive result because it indicates a good distribution of the skills and of the activities

across all the Labs. And so, even the potential collaborations among them may not tend one-

sidedly towards few specific Labs. Despite the first good evaluation, a full-fledge analysis is

still missing and so in the last part of this section an initial in-depth study is presented about

the evaluation of both the homogeneity and the heterogeneity aspects of the ecosystem.

At this stage it is not possible to trace a proper value network analysis (VNA) of the Labs

because not all of them are in touch and because some of them have still to kickstart their

activities. But it is very important to lay the foundations of the VNA and to structure the

analysis of the similarities and complementarities among the Labs, because both these

analytical parts will be further developed and enriched in the subsequent versions of this

deliverable. Furthermore, they will be the cornerstones around which a complete aggregate

analysis of the TCBL ecosystem will be based.

Taking stock of the various Labs that have been interviewed, the rationale adopted for

evaluating the degree of their homogeneity consisted in identifying to whom the Labs will offer

their services and, obviously, what they will offer. The latter refers specifically to the Lab type

and to the key dimensions of innovation they are associated to. In this way, it has been

possible to represent the market segments served by the Labs and the area of innovation of

each Lab. It must be said that due to the still existent degree of uncertainty and lack of

information (which is acceptable at this stage of the project) the areas of innovation have been

analyzed through the three macro dimensions of the 3D framework presented in Deliverable

4.1 - User, Sustainability and Data - but in the following versions of this deliverable the unit of

analysis will be more fine-grained and take into account every sub-dimension.

Homogeneity has been thus represented by two matrixes, reported below.



36

The first one refers to what each Lab is going to offer in terms of specialization represented by

the three dimensions of innovation. The matrix conveys two main messages depending on the

reading order:

By row: it indicates the degree of horizontal integration of each Lab. Two instances

can occur: 1. The Lab is horizontally integrated touching upon different core

competencies, showing a remarkable ‘breadth’ of the services offered; 2. The Lab is

highly focus in a core competence, showing a high ‘depth’ of the services offered;

By column: it reports the extent of the ‘coverage’ of each area of innovation.

Dimensions of innovation

Lab type Lab name User Data Sustainability

Make Your textile tool X

Make Lab TCoE X

Fabbrica Arca X X

Make Lab Athens X X

Lanificio Paoletti X X

Design TCBL academy X

Design Lab TCoE X

Sanjotech X

Lottozero X

Textile museum X X

Design Lab Athens X

Place Connecting explorers X

Laboratorio del tempo X

Place Lab Palermo X

Etri X X

Hisa X

Oliva X

Table 3: Ecosystem homogeneity w ith regards to the dimensions of innovation

Through the matrix above it is possible to come to grips with the key competences of each

Lab, having a representation of both their coverage and the horizontal integration of each Lab.

The first clear aspect is that the coverage of the Data dimension is absent. This reflects what

was anticipated above in the text and should remind about the importance the management of

the supply chain data has in the T&C industry.



37

Then it is possible to notice that the User dimension is the most covered, basically by all the

Labs, and that the Sustainability has a high coverage among the Place Labs. The results are

acceptable because the central role of the user is probably the most prominent value of TCBL

and it shows indeed a full coverage; on the other side, the sustainability, in particular

conceived in its social nuance, is mostly represented by the Place Lab which are the

laboratories of people and human interactions.

Considering the competence integration, it is possible to observe that main tendency is to be

more specialized but, as of now, more detailed considerations are postponed to the following

versions of the document.

The second matrix within the scope of homogeneity’s evaluation highlights the market served,

expressed in terms of target groups, by each Lab.

Even in this case, the matrix provides two main insights depending on the reading order:

By row: it shows the market segmentation of the considered Lab. The higher number

of records per row, the broader the market served. The lower number of records per

row, the deeper (and so more specialized) the market served:

By column: it expresses the coverage the considered target group has considering

from how many Labs is served.

Before presenting the matrix, it should be specified that the target groups in there have been

grouped by general labels in order to have the broadest representation of the various

instances. And so, they are not ‘frozen’ but they can be changed in the following versions if

this can create a more compelling analysis. Considering the state of the project, after just one

Labs application, it would have been limiting to associate the each of them to specific labels.

But, a tentative taxonomy should have been done for the sake of comparability.

The taxonomy of the target groups has been conceived as follows:

Individuals: it represents ‘home-based’ workers, creative people willing to develop a

project, people who have an idea they desire to implement, people who just want to

learn something new and people who want to reinvent themselves. But it also

associated to people who operate, or used to, in the T&C sector and to self-

employees.

Designers: it is made up of fashion designers, designers not only operating specifically

in the T&C sector but also in other field of applications.

Students: it identifies all type of students and include also every kind of educational

institutes.

Small organizations & startups: it represents micro business ventures and startups

which need tutoring and consulting services or ask for using machines and tools they

cannot buy.

Companies: it identifies medium or big companies.

People with social issues: it is the more specific label because it refers to socially excluded

people such as unemployed, drugs addicted, migrants, etc.



38

Target groups

Lab Type

Lab Name

Indivi-duals

Design-ers

Stu-dents

Small orgs & startups

Com-panies

People w/

social issues

Make Your textile tool

X X X

Make Lab TCoE

X X X X

Fabbrica Arca

X X X

Make Lab Athens

X X X X

Lanificio Paoletti

X X X X

Design TCBL academy

X X X

Design Lab TCoE

X X X X X

Sanjotec X X

Lottozero X X X X

Textile museum

X X X

Design Lab Athens

X X X X

Place Connect-ing explorers

X X X

Labora-torio del tempo

X

Place Lab Palermo

X X X

Etri X X

Hisa X X

Oliva X X

Table 4: Ecosystem homogeneity w ith regards to target groups



39

The matrix shows that the breadth of market segmentation is considerable because, except

‘Laboratorio del Tempo’ Lab which has a specific focus on people with social issues, every

Lab independently from the type shows at least three records. This reflects the nature of the

Labs that are the lighthouses in their respective communities, offering their services to

different kinds of beneficiaries.

If the reading order by column is applied, it is possible to observe two interesting trends:

‘Individuals’ has the highest number of entries;

‘Companies’ has the lowest8 degree of coverage;

This is valuable because TCBL in general addresses the needs and wants of ‘home-workers’

(sometime known with the moniker ‘micropreneurs’), individuals and creative people interested

in the T&C sector, fostering the distributed knowledge and the distributed manufacturing. Skills

and competencies are not only owned by companies which tend to keep them private but they

are shared openly to every beneficiary engaging with the Business Labs.

Lastly, for studying the complementarity of the various Business Labs, measured by means of

synergies, all the Value Propositions should be considered in order to observe which services

will be exchanged among the Labs. As of now, it would be too far-fetched to define the value

exchanges among them because, as said before, not all the Labs have already started their

operations and so they cannot be completely aware of each other’s value offers. But, once the

Labs are fully operating it will be easy to map the network of exchange among the them.

The idea for building such a network is to propose a methodology of analysis which will be

filled out with precise information in the subsequent versions of the document. The starting

point of the methodology is a square matrix with the Labs both on the rows and on the

columns. The inner cells of the matrix will contain the Value Proposition of each Lab,

highlighting the exchange direction with two subscripts as in the following example:

V23 : the services (to which the Value Proposition is built around) of the Lab n.2

are provided to the Lab n.3.

The resulting matrix will thus be shaped as follows.

Lab 1 Lab 2 Lab 3 Lab 4 Lab n

Lab 1 ----- V12 V13 V14 V1X

Lab 2 V21 ----- V23 V24 V2X

Lab 3 V31 V32 ----- V34 V3X

Lab 4 V41 V42 V43 ----- V4X

Lab n VY1 VY2 VY3 VY4 -----

Table 5: Matrix of complementarities

8 In reality, ‘People w/ social issues’ has the lowest number but this is the most specific label

referring to a particular category of beneficiaries.



40

In this way, it is easy to understand what is exchanged and in which direction (i.e., from which

Lab to another one). The matrix will make the reader understand the complementarity among

the Labs and then, the differences of their Value Propositions.

Consider the following simple and practical example, which is not specifically contextualized in

the T&C sector: there are three actors. Two of them are suppliers, respectively of coffee (C)

and sugar (S). C has thus a different VP compared to S because they provide two different

services. The remaining actor is a cafe (B). B buys both C and S for being able to provide its

customers with both plain coffee and coffee with sugar. C and S are then complementary

because we observe that B needs both the two services. This concise example underlines

thus the concurrent presence of two known and complementary services bought by one actor.

If the example is applied to the Business Labs, considering that all their VPs are known, it will

be immediate to recognize the degree of complementarity by observing the connections

among them. The step further will be the creation of a graph which will have the Labs on the

nodes, the VPs on the arcs and the direction of the exchanges will be given by the subscripts.

Figure 8: Graph of value exchanges

The outline of the proposed graph should pave the way for the creation of a full-fledge VNA of

the overall Business Labs ecosystem. Furthermore, by following the idea of the Design Lab of

Athens, the VNA might be corroborated with the implementation of a TCBL credits system.

This should consist in the introduction of a ‘TCBL currency’ which can be used for buying or

selling services into a Lab or from a different one.

In this way it can be established a system of incentives that pushes people to share their skills

and competences in return for TCBL credits which can then be used for buying other skills and



41

competences from other Labs. Such a system of exchange can become the means through

which Business Labs would start cooperate together. In fact, as of now, many Labs revealed

the necessity to collaborate with others but anything have been put in place. It is actually

difficult to create the right incentives system for some affiliation such as, for instance, TCoE

which is already well-established in the market with in-house machines, an active community

and many collaborations with companies.

42

5. GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK

While the specific activity related to governance, Task 6.5 “Business Ecosystem Governance”,

is scheduled to begin only in project month 21 (March 2017), important governance issues for

TCBL have nonetheless emerged to gradually define the general terms within which Task 6.5

will construct the most appropriate governance structures. While the analysis of value in the

preceding chapters focuses on the Business Labs and their role in the TCBL ecosystem, the

following discussion focuses on the ecosystem overall in its four main elements: the Labs, the

Business Systems, the Knowledge Spaces, and the Business Services.

Figure 9. TCBL Ecosystem elements

Each of these ecosystem elements corresponds to a key Work Package in TCBL (WPs 3, 4, 1,

and 5 respectively), so the discussion below is a synthesis of findings from across these

activities, generally in relation to:

Task 6.3 “Process and impact evaluation”, which defined the general structural

framework for the governance approach (ref. D 6.1).

Task 6.1 “Technical ecosystem framework”, which contributed to our understanding of

the object of governance (ref D 6.3).

Task 9.4 “Associate Programme Management”, which trialled several aspects of the

governance approach in execution of the First Call for Expressions of Interest. (ref D

3.1, 4.1 and 9.3).

5.1 GOVERNANCE APPROACH

LESSONS FROM EVALUATION

The starting point for defining the governance approach can be found in the methodological

considerations of D 6.3 (Chapter “The Approach to Evaluating TCBL”). In general, key

features of TCBL are identified which can in turn be seen as driving the governance approach:



43

Emergence: this means that the identification of governance structures needs to

capture and structure emergent properties of network relationships

Open systems: this means that TCBL requires an open governance approach, which

is capable of constantly bringing in new actors and services

Experimental: this means that governance methods need to be developed through

actual testing and co-design in a constructivist approach

Diversity of experience: this means that the governance approach needs to respond

to different disciplinary world views and reference models.

The document further identifies three main baseline theories for TCBL: the ecosystems

perspective, the complexity perspective, and the theory of Large Scale Change. Each of these

can be seen to contribute to our understanding of governance, as shown in the following.

Key concept Aspects Governance implications

Ecosystems Ecosystems themselves (as natural systems) cannot be governed, but their conservation and development can be managed. Business ecosystems models focus on dynamic interactions among entities.

Self-organisation capacity of the system.

Focus on emergent system management rather than rational strategies.

Decentralisation and stakeholder engagement.

Multiple value frameworks (social, environmental…)

Resilience, stability, creativity, vitality…

Complexity Non-linear and unpredictable development processes. Interconnected and interdependent system elements and dimensions. Phase space: emphasis on patterns of system behaviour. Context-sensitive adaptive agents driving self-organisation.

Adaptive governance of non-linear behaviours.

Governance based on patterns of interaction in context.

Inclusion and sense-making as central features of governance.

Large Scale Change

“The emergent process of mobilising a large collection of individuals, groups and organisations towards a vision of a fundamentally new future state”

Vision-centred governance, identification of key themes

Multiples of things – ‘lots and lots’ – requiring open and agile governance

Distributed leadership and challenges to current balance of power

Capture mutually reinforcing change across systems

Emergent planning based on process understanding through weak signals.



44

LESSONS FROM THE ECOSYSTEM ARCHITECTURE

Work on the Technical Ecosystem Architecture further reinforced some aspects of the above

approach. Technical ecosystem properties defining the governance approach are identified

with a substantial isomorphism compared to the business ecosystem model above: coverage,

openness, loose coupling, interaction, scalability, self-organisation, and evolution.

In addition, the analytical approach adopted in D 6.1 suggests a process architecture that can

shape the definition of emergent governance structures:

Figure 10. TCBL analytical approach (from D 6.1)

As applied to governance, these three steps can be interpreted as follows:

Mapping involves the identification of actors, roles, and system elements to be

governed.

Visualising involves the definition of hypothesis structures and rule sets that

represent the mapped interactions to all players.

Understanding captures the lessons and insights learned and the tensions that

develop as the system evolves, leading to new mappings.

Finally, the technical ecosystem architecture developed in D 6.1 presents an open

composition of interacting (and to different degrees interoperable) elements with four “views”

that shape how these components are used and which are most visible. This architecture has

two implications for defining the governance approach:

While the emphasis in the evaluation, as well as in the value modelling discussion in

the previous chapters of this document, is mainly focused on the interplay between

Business Labs and Associate Enterprises (the T&C businesses using Lab services),

the focus here is rather on the interplay between the two service elements of the

Knowledge Spaces and the Business Services. This helps to complement our

understanding of the ecosystem overall, as represented in figure 9 above, which

includes both types of interaction.

While the role of the Knowledge Spaces and Business Services emerges clearly from

a service delivery perspective, what also emerges is the central role of the cloud

services at the core of the technical ecosystem architecture. The implication of this is



45

that governance of the TCBL ecosystem will need to take into consideration both

specific ecosystem elements as well as common services, according to a governance

model of the Commons.

Figure 11. TCBL Technical Architecture (from D 6.1)

THE FIRST CALL FOR EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST

To sum up, the following first guidelines emerge for the definition of a governance approach

for TCBL:

Openness to diversity: legitimacy of different languages and frames of self-interest

Value-driven community, with a strong role for a shared Commons

Trust in the community’s capability for self-organisation: decentralized management

Radical scalability based on clear roles with ‘lots and lots’ of participants

Process oriented approach with iterative planning open to emergent processes

In this context, the occasion of the first Call for Expressions of Interest provided the

opportunity to test and develop some concrete elements of this approach. The goal of the Call

was to bring labs and enterprises into the TCBL ecosystem as participants in the first pilot

cycle of experimentation. The development and management of the Call involved the

clarification of the value proposition to new Associates, while the evaluation procedures

essentially involved a process of defining the substance of what participation in the TCBL

community means. Two outcomes are relevant to the governance approach: the definition of

TCBL Principles and the clarification of TCBL Roles.



46

5.2 TCBL PRINCIPLES

The discussion on the evaluation criteria for the Calls for EoI during the period Dec 2015 –

Feb 2016 paralleled the development of an awareness of TCBL as a ‘global movement’ and

the emergence of ‘TCBL as a label’. This in turn led to the conception of TCBL as a value-

based community. In addition to the coherence with the governance approach described

above, the specific value proposition to Call candidates was to establish a ‘platform of trust’

and shared values that can lower the transaction costs (or innovation risk) for participating

enterprises and labs to define experimental partnerships.

The idea of using compliance to a set of principles as the main selection criterion for the Calls

first emerged for the Labs, but it soon became apparent that it was equally relevant for the

Associate Business Pilots. At first it seemed risky to ask businesses to provide information on

general principles rather than information about their company or project ideas, but it seemed

important to extend the same approach to all Call participants, as well as hoping for a positive

reaction to clear signs of discontinuity. (The unexpectedly high response to the Call, nearly

120 Application Forms against a target of 60, later bore out this hypothesis.)

A general set of principles was thus defined as the cornerstone of the TCBL governance

approach, an ethical and moral definition of the TCBL community and its vision. They are as

follows:



47

OPERATIONALISATION OF PRINCIPLES

These general principles provide a Manifesto-like vision for the TCBL community, but can also

generate more operational guidelines as application of each principle to a specific domain or

issue. This was in fact a necessary step to define the actual evaluation criteria for the two

different Calls for the Labs on the one hand and the Pilots on the other. In addition, the same

principles were used to genera a Data Policy for activities in WPs 1 and 5 (as first set forth in

D 6.2).

Description

1. Curiosity Creative exploration of new paths, roles, social constructs and business models. Learning-driven action research as a way of life, including learning by errors and mistakes. Learning as both an individual and collective process of knowledge creation. Reframing and rethinking what exists, respect for different disciplines and methods. Trying new experiences, playfulness, randomness, having the courage to try radically new approaches.

2. Viability Things should stand on their own feet, but can do so by equally increasing the prosperity of businesses and the well being of communities; this is our ultimate goal. Importance of both monetary and non-monetary transactions.

3. Durability Commitment to the environment, towards circular economy and zero km. Above all, reduce consumption and a consumption-driven culture, work towards sustainable fashion. Reduce waste, design for durable relations, focus on reuse and recycling, save water, reduce emissions (atmosphere and toxic waste). Durable and resilient systems.

4. Multiplicity Value of different cultures, traditions, opinions. Roles for both professionals and amateurs, different labour specialisations. Designing for diversity of needs and tastes. Allowing for multiple business models to co-exist and complement each other.

5. Openness Trusting others by sharing of resources and information. Search for common processes, platforms and standards: interoperability. Participatory decision-making, using social media, connecting with others. Transparency of practices, supply chains, cost structures, etc. Sharing of new insights and information. Recognition of the contributions of all (age, gender, etc.) overcoming marginality.

6. Respect Protection of privacy, authorship, and IP. Dignity of the individual, power of social knowledge. Value of place and territories. Caring for things, establishing emotional links with the clothes we wear and looking after them. Respect for those who make the things we have. Equity of business relations, payment of a Fair Price. Capacity building wherever we go.

7. Responsibility Commitment to reliable, trustworthy, professional behaviour. Accountability for the consequences of our actions. Responsible design, responsible production, responsible selling, responsible consumption. Responsible choices of who we work with. Ensuring the right human and physical resources are available and good working conditions within our own organisations. Stable management and accountability.

48

Principle Lab Criteria Pilot Criteria Data Policy

8. Curiosity Explorative, innovative character. Outcomes feed into new, replicable business models. Exploring new business models by reframing.

1. Ability to identify problems of relevance to the industry.

2. Interest in engagement with innovation initiatives.

3. Willingness to learn and experiment.

Data is a common scientific good, and should have clear licensing to facilitate access from external sources.

9. Viability Economic sustainability of lab structure. Value creation to the community: public events, communication and awareness. Including monetary and non-monetary transactions.

4. Market relevance of issues raised. 5. Alignment with relevant trends.

6. Added business value.

Data services should be part of viable business models and maintenance policies clearly stated.

10. Durability Explore ways to reduce waste. Work with low-impact materials and processes. Work towards emotionally durable design.

7. Commitment to the environment.

8. Commitment to durable design. 9. Scalability of sustainability approach

proposed.

Data services should rely on energy-efficient storage and transmission infrastructures.

11. Multiplicity Open to both professional and non-professional competences. Gender equivalency and open opportunity structures. Exploration of un-met and un-expressed needs.

10. Disciplinary and cultural richness. 11. Orientation to customer needs.

12. Business model innovation potential.

Interoperability should facilitate the use of different formats and standards while promoting convergence.

12. Openness Open and freely accessible participation. Sharing knowledge, findings and networks. Interoperable and where possible open source technology and software.

13. Contribution to shared resources and

services. 14. Willingness to adopt open innovation.

15. Commitment to transparency.

Data should be open by default and data services available to the community.

13. Respect Tools and processes that empower users. Restore the dignity, value and satisfaction of productive making

16. Soundness of authorship, IPR and privacy policies.

Data services should respect the confidentiality and privacy interests of those who provide or generate data.

49

activities. Fair and ethical operations. 17. Respect for supply chain business

information. 18. Social responsibility and fair trade

practices.

14. Responsibility Spaces and equipment in a safe and secure environment. Availability of support knowledge for processes, machinery, etc. Consultancy and follow-up to participants interested in business development.

19. Availability of appropriate resources and facilities.

20. Capacity to implement business projects.

21. Quality assurance.

Data services should embed accountability to guarantee privacy, security and service quality.

50

In the actual management of the Call evaluation process, it is interesting to note the quite

different processes applied to the two Calls for the Labs and Pilots (further developed in D 3.1

and D 4.1):

The Call for Labs was invitation-only and involved a mix of Labs proposed by project

partners or by external actors close to project partners, completing the Lab profile

(including sections on adherence to the Lab Principles) on a specific Lab platform.

The Lab Principles were used as criteria to guide a collective learning process

involving two cycles of Lab self-descriptions, as well as the co-design of the Lab

platform itself. In this process, some Lab proposals were generally agreed to be not

yet ready to begin operations.

The Call for Pilots was open to any applicant and involved the compilation of an on-

line form, the core of which involved questions related to the Pilot Principles.

Applications were then evaluated by a team scoring mechanism (7 teams with 3

evaluators each), with thresholds for each of the seven criteria and total scores. The

outcomes were determined through consensus first within teams then across the

group in a series of 6 weekly skype meetings.

These different evaluation methods, also in part due to the different numbers involved, imply

the emergence of different governance approaches to explore in the coming months.

5.3 ECOSYSTEM ROLES

The Call process, in particular the evaluation of the Call for Associate Business Pilots, also

served to clarify ecosystem roles. The original conception in the Calls foresaw three types of

Associate:

Associate Labs

Associate Business Pilots

Associate Service Providers

The first role is clear, and consists in the Business Labs that are at the heart of the TCBL

concept (and name). The second role was originally intended to refer to the participants in the

Business Systems of WP4 and were the subject of the second Call. During the evaluation

process, however, two issues emerged.

The majority of applications where from real, operational T&C business of different

sizes and styles – exactly what we were looking for – but there were many coming

from Associations, consultants, etc. who might be playing a different role in pilot value

chains.

The high response rate of high quality applications (we were not forced to make a

competitive selection based on, say, a limited amount of funding), led us to make that

distinction in order to focus our efforts in WP4 on those actually or potentially

participating in new value chains as compared to those supporting innovation

processes.

We thus split the applications for Associate Business Pilots into two roles:

Associate Enterprises: the actual T&C businesses (78 accepted, close to the target of

60)

Associate Advisors: associations, agencies, consultants, etc. (28 accepted)

Following this, it also became clear that the Associate Advisors could not only support WP4

partners in providing advice to Associate Enterprises, but the Associate Advisors could also

play a leading role as the Knowledge Champions of WP2, providing and managing information

in the Knowledge Spaces of WP1 (see D 2.1).



51

Finally, there are a few Pilots who have been accepted as Associate Advisors but who are

actually closer to the role of Associate Service Providers. This is an intentional move, since it

brings a core group into the TCBL Associates ecosystem and will allow us to experiment the

role and needs of external ICT service providers with the TCBL platform environment and co-

design the terms and requirements for the Call for Associate Service Providers.

These different roles have been highlighted through the use of colour-coded badges on the

TCBL website, so that now we have a clear set of roles that match the TCBL Ecosystem

Architecture as shown below.

Figure 12. TCBL Ecosystem roles and elements

The first cycle of experimentation with the starting round of TCBL Associates will explore the

governance models most appropriate for each of the four types, as well as the general

governance model for the TCBL Commons.

52

6. CONCLUDING REMARKS

The present document intended to provide an overview of the value architecture and the

governance framework present within the TCBL ecosystem.

More specifically, the analyses conducted aimed at investigating the following aspects:

- The level of operational maturity of the ecosystem

- The key contributions of the ecosystem to the T&C in terms of services offered and

needs addressed

- The degree of diversification of the value propositions offered by the different labs

- The alignment of TCBL-enabled innovation opportunities with the call requirements in

terms of user-involvement, triple sustainability and data exploitation.

- The business model that may support the survival of the ecosystem as a whole

From a methodological point of view, the activities of data collection and analysis relied on

semi-structured interviews and business model ontologies techniques (business model and

value proposition canvases).

The preliminary results obtained show that over 65% of the Business Labs are fully

operational and almost 60% of them has already built a community that may be leveraged to

promote open innovation activities. The value propositions offered by Labs revolve around

training, testing, consulting/mentoring activities as well as sharing of tangible and intangible

assets. Such activities represent a response to a number of perceived needs in the T&C

having to do with ‘hands-on’ experimentation, the access to facilities, in particular for the

creation of prototypes and short-runs of production, and to knowledge, as well as the

acquisition of new skills to be re-used in the market arena.

In terms of diversification, the ecosystem is currently well balanced as the three Labs

typologies (Design, Make, Place) are equally represented. This generates significant

collaboration opportunities linked to the exploitation of complementarities as well as some

opportunities deriving from the reach of a critical mass necessary to meet the needs of large

organizations.

For what concerns the alignment of the TCBL-enabled innovation with the call requirements,

the ecosystem currently seems to be better equipped to promote a sector evolution in terms of

open innovation and triple sustainability. A reflection should be conducted by the consortium

on whether and how to reinforce the data exploitation dimension either through the recruitment

of new Labs or through an evolution of the service offering of current ones.

Moving on to the business model to implement after the end of the project, this will develop as

a function of the governance structure that emerges for each of the four main ecosystem

components, which in turn determines the nature of what will be needed to ensure the

sustainability of the common structures and services. A first preliminary internal discussion on

post-grant scenarios has highlighted the possibility to substitute the consortium of partners

with a very lean and agile organization, whose main role would be to represent and manage

the TCBL label, involving:

Maintenance of the TCBL principles and their operational application to different

specific circumstances

Definition of roles in the TCBL ecosystem, including the continuous mapping of the

value exchanges between roles

Minimum operational requirements (management of yearly Calls, coordination of

platform services, coordination of yearly events, etc.)



53

Such a light form of ecosystem governance could be maintained through the collection of an

association fee paid by the different roles in exchange for the value derived from belonging to

the ecosystem, which could vary according to the different roles of Labs, Enterprises,

Advisors, and Service Providers. For each role, the fee may be covered by a three pronged

value proposition that the TCBL ecosystem will be able to offer and that will focus on

community management, capacity building and consultancy services.

Shifting the focus to future developments, for the sake of completeness, it is important to

underline that in the following versions of this deliverable we should validate the information

gathered from the interviews with the Labs and the related outcomes presented in Section 4.

Current Status of the TCBL Ecosystem directly with the Pilots. They are indeed the

beneficiaries of the Labs offerings, and so they can represent the perfect testbed for refining

the hypotheses and the analyses of the overall ecosystem.

The second year of the project will also allow to conduct a full-fledge VNA which in this release

of the deliverable has been conceived, but not outlined, at the end of the section 4.

Current Status of the TCBL Ecosystem. This would be a turning point for clearly

understanding the value exchanges between ecosystem roles and services and the level of

complementarity within the ecosystem. In this way the analysis which has been proposed in

this deliverable for the Associate Labs could also be applied to the Associate Business Pilots

and Service Providers in order to map all the value exchanges occurring within the TCBL

ecosystem.

54

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[1] J. Elkington, Cannibals with Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business,

Capstone, 1997.

[2] A. Osterwalder and Y. Pigneur, Business Model Generation, Hoboken: John Wiley &

Sons, 2010.

[3] T. F. Slaper and T. J. Hall, “ The Triple Bottom Line: What Is It and How Does It Work?,”

Indiana Business review, vol. 86, no. 1, 2011.

[4] O. Peppard and A. Rylander, “From value chain to value network: Insights for mobile

operators.,” European Management Journal, no. 24.2, pp. 128-141, 2006.

[5] A. Osterwalder, Y. Pigneur, G. Bernarda and A. Smith, Value Proposition Design: How to

Create Products and Services Customers Want, Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2015.

[6] D. Silverman, Interpreting qualitative data: A guide to the principles of qualitative

research, Los Angeles, CA: Sage, 2011.

[7] M. B. Mles and A. M. Huberman, Qualitative data analysis, Newbury Park, CA: Sage,

1985.

[8] K. Y. Robert, Case study research. Desing and Methods, 4 ed., Thousand Oaks: Sage,

2009.

[9] “Triple Bottom Line,” The Economist, 17 November 2009.

[10] M. D. Myers, Qualitative research in business and management, Los Angeles, CA: Sage,

2013.

55

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Value Proposition Canvas (VPC) ................................................................... 15 Figure 2: Value Proposition Canvas embedded within the Business Model Canvas............. 16 Figure 3: Business Model Canvas (BMC) ..................................................................... 16 Figure 4: Word cloud of products & services ................................................................. 24 Figure 5: Word cloud of the beneficiaries’ jobs .............................................................. 25 Figure 6: BMC of the TCBL ecosystem ........................................................................ 26 Figure 7: Labs pie chart ............................................................................................. 32 Figure 8: Graph of value exchanges ............................................................................ 37 Figure 9. TCBL Ecosystem elements ........................................................................... 39 Figure 10. TCBL analytical approach (from D 6.1).......................................................... 41 Figure 11. TCBL Technical Architecture (from D 6.1)...................................................... 42 Figure 12. TCBL Ecosystem roles and elements............................................................ 48 Figure 13: VPC Connecting explorers .......................................................................... 58 Figure 14: VPC TCBL Academy .................................................................................. 58 Figure 15: VPC Your textile Tool ................................................................................. 59 Figure 16: VPC TCoE Design Lab ............................................................................... 59 Figure 17: VPC TCoE Make Lab ................................................................................. 60 Figure 18: VPC Sanjotech Lab.................................................................................... 60 Figure 19: VPC Oliva Lab .......................................................................................... 61 Figure 20: VPC Etri ................................................................................................... 61 Figure 21: VPC Hisa ................................................................................................. 62 Figure 22: VPC Lottozero........................................................................................... 62 Figure 23: VPC Textile museum.................................................................................. 63 Figure 24: VPC Laboratorio del tempo ......................................................................... 63 Figure 25: VPC Lanificio Paoletti ................................................................................. 64 Figure 26: VPC Design Lab Athens ............................................................................. 64 Figure 27: VPC Make Lab Athens ............................................................................... 65 Figure 28: VPC Fabbrica Arca .................................................................................... 65 Figure 29: VPC Place Lab Palermo ............................................................................. 66 Figure 30: VPC ARgh! ............................................................................................... 67 Figure 31: VPC bpSquare .......................................................................................... 67 Figure 32: VPC Fablabs.io ......................................................................................... 68 Figure 33: VPC iMinds cloud ...................................................................................... 68 Figure 34: VPC Ning groups ....................................................................................... 69 Figure 35: VPC Strategyzer........................................................................................ 69 Figure 36: VPC Thela ................................................................................................ 70 Figure 37: VPC vDiscover .......................................................................................... 70 Figure 38: 3D framework of the dimensions of innovation................................................ 72

56

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Labs problem-solution fits & target groups ........................................................ 24 Table 2: Labs analysis ............................................................................................... 30 Table 3: Ecosystem homogeneity with regards to the dimensions of innovation .................. 33 Table 4: Ecosystem homogeneity with regards to target groups ....................................... 35 Table 5: Matrix of complementarities............................................................................ 36 Table 6: Alignment of the dimensions of innovation with the call requirements.................... 71

57

DOCUMENT INFORMATION

REVISION HISTORY

REVISION DATE AUTHOR ORGANISATION DESCRIPTION

V0.1 01.03.2016 Matteo Castagno ISMB Table of Contents

V0.2 15.03.2016 Enrico Ferro ISMB Draft of interviews definition

V1.0 21.06.2016 Matteo Castagno ISMB Full draft except

governance sections

V2.0 01.07.2016 Jesse Marsh Prato Chapter 5

02.07.2016 Francesco

Molinari

CCA Changes to glossary,

execsum, introduction and

various edits around

V3.0 04.07.2016 Matteo Castagno ISMB Changes according to the

last review round

V3.1 04.07.2016 Michele Osella ISMB Refinement according to

the suggestions of the

previous version

V3.1.1 04.07.2016 Simon Delaere iMinds Review and various edits

around

V3.2 05.07.2016 Matteo Castagno ISMB Final touches according to

the previous suggestions

STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY

This deliverable contains original unpublished work except where clearly indicated otherwise.

Acknowledgement of previously published material and of the work of others has been made

through appropriate citation, quotation or both.

COPYRIGHT

This work is licensed by the TCBL Consortium under a Creative Commons

Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, 2015. For details, see

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

The TCBL Consortium, consisting of: Municipality of Prato (PRATO) Italy; German Institutes

for Textile and Fiber Research - Center for Management Research (DITF) Germany; Istituto

Superiore Mario Boella (ISMB) Italy; Skillaware (SKILL) Italy; The Open University (OU) UK;

iMinds (iMINDS) Belgium; Tavistock Institute (TAVI) UK; Materials Industrial Research &

Technology Center S.A. (MIRTEC) Greece; Waag Society (WAAG) Netherlands; Huddersfield

& District Textile Training Company Ltd (TCOE) UK; eZavod (eZAVOD) Slovenia; Consorzio

Arca (ARCA) Italy; Unioncamere del Veneto (UCV) Italy; Hellenic Clothing Industry

Association (HCIA) Greece; Sanjotec - Centro Empresarial e Tecnológico (SANJO) Portugal;

Clear Communication Associates Ltd (CCA) UK.



58

DISCLAIMER

All information included in this document is subject to change without notice. The Members of

the TCBL Consortium make no warranty of any kind with regard to this document, including,

but not limited to, the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose.

The Members of the TCBL Consortium shall not be held liable for errors contained herein or

direct, indirect, special, incidental or consequential damages in connection with the furnishing,

performance, or use of this material.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The TCBL project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 Programme

for research, technology development, and innovation under Grant Agreement n.646133.

59

ANNEX I: INTERVIEW STRUCTURE

GENERAL INFORMATION.

● Lab name:

● Type of Lab (D-Design, M-Making, P-Place)::

● Number of people involved:

CORE OPERATIONS.

● Main services/products offered:

○ Training/coaching activities offered (if any):

● Beneficiaries of the services/products delivered (target groups):

● Technologies (e.g., machineries, materials, softwares, etc.) available:

● Relevant partnerships (if any) with companies and/or other Labs:

● Expenses unavoidable for running the activities:

● Monetization (if exists) of the services/products offered:

○ External funding (if applicable)

● Geographical market arena (target groups):

COMMUNITY MAPPING

● What types of actors is the community composed of?

● How is the community internally organized?

● Can you list the main competences characterizing the community?

● Is the community characterized by any shared values? If so, which?

● Which are the community engagement channels?

● Is the community connected with other communities (design and making for

instance)? If so, how?

● Is the Lab a facility provider or a relationships enabler?

● Is there a competition or a collaboration between communities and/or community

members?

● On which scale does the community operate?

● Are there service exchanges among community members?

POTENTIAL INTEGRATION WITH THE TCBL ECOSYSTEM.

● Is there a technology you’d like to implement, that is not currently available at your

premises?

● Which facilities would you be willing to share for developing potential new ideas?

● Can/Do you enable the start of new projects, through ad hoc coaching/support

services?

● Which are your missing competences or assets? In which directions would you like to

expand your portfolio of competences/services in order to provide a better and more

valuable experience to your stakeholders/customers?

● Which are currently unmet needs of your stakeholders/community/customers?

● Are there any potential opportunities for fostering the Lab scalability?

● What would you like TCBL to do for you? (as a project and as an ecosystem)

INNOVATORS IDENTIFICATION

● What are two inspiring examples of companies of start-ups adopting innovative

innovation approaches in the textile & clothing sector?



60

● Is your lab engaged with some innovative companies? In what type of activities?

61

ANNEX II: TCBL LABS VALUE PROPOSITION

CANVASES

Figure 13: VPC Connecting explorers

Figure 14: VPC TCBL Academy



62

Figure 15: VPC Your textile Tool

Figure 16: VPC TCoE Design Lab



63

Figure 17: VPC TCoE Make Lab

Figure 18: VPC Sanjotech Lab



64

Figure 19: VPC Oliva Lab

Figure 20: VPC Etri



65

Figure 21: VPC Hisa

Figure 22: VPC Lottozero



66

Figure 23: VPC Textile museum

Figure 24: VPC Laboratorio del tempo



67

Figure 25: VPC Lanif icio Paoletti

Figure 26: VPC Design Lab Athens



68

Figure 27: VPC Make Lab Athens

Figure 28: VPC Fabbrica Arca



69

Figure 29: VPC Place Lab Palermo

70

ANNEX III: BUSINESS SERVICES VALUE

PROPOSITION CANVASES

Figure 30: VPC ARgh!

Figure 31: VPC bpSquare



71

Figure 32: VPC Fablabs.io

Figure 33: VPC iMinds cloud



72

Figure 34: VPC Ning groups

Figure 35: VPC Strategyzer



73

Figure 36: VPC Thela

Figure 37: VPC vDiscover

74

ANNEX IV: ALIGNMENT OF THE DIMENSIONS OF

INNOVATION WITH THE CALL REQUIREMENTS

Dimension Call Requirement

User Integrated business model solutions for customer-driven supply

chain management.

Novel distributed manufacturing, sourcing and design solutions

linking individual "home-based" designers and manufacturers to

the supply-chain [...]

Sustainability Solutions for local sourcing and supply, thus reducing the

environmental footprint.

[...] Promotion of social inclusion

Data Practical solutions for the ow nership, control and management

of the related supply chain data

Table 6: Alignment of the dimensions of innovation w ith the call requirements

75

ANNEX V: 3D FRAMEWORK OF THE DIMENSIONS

OF INNOVATION

The three identified dimensions have three different focuses: users, sustainability and data.

Each of them, or their combination, will characterize all the innovation itineraries that TCBL will

make available to the different Business Pilots. Moreover, those three pillars are split in

various sub-dimensions for a deeper understanding of how an innovation will be implemented

and how the business model transitions will be articulated.

The overall framework below has to be considered as a checklist for evaluating the starting

and the final point of the innovation path. In this way it is possible to track the changes within a

specific business model by observing the undertaken game-changing actions along the three

dimensions of analysis.

For further explanation it is suggested to refer to Deliverable 4.1.

Figure 38: 3D framew ork of the dimensions of innovation

Documents

VALUE EXCHANGE AND GOVERNANCE …api.ning.com/files/hhXki1INxcGSDI3h98T0vJfc0XDkcCLqtUgqk...D 6.5: Value Exchange and Governance Framework v1 646133 - TCBL Textile & Clothing Business