The Joys of Giving Up … Embracing the Motivations and Gratifications of Intentional Value Uncapture in Sustainable Development

Kabalska, Agnieszka; Wagner, Ralf Article — Published Version The Joys of Giving Up … Embracing the Motivations and Gratifications of Intentional Value Uncapture in Sustainable Development Business Strategy and the Environment Provided in Cooperation with: John Wiley & Sons Suggested Citation: Kabalska, Agnieszka; Wagner, Ralf (2024) : The Joys of Giving Up … Embracing the Motivations and Gratifications of Intentional Value Uncapture in Sustainable Development, Business Strategy and the Environment, ISSN 1099-0836, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, Vol. 34, Iss. 2, pp. 1972-1992, https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.4078 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/319326 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Business Strategy and the Environment, 2025; 34:1972–1992 https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.4078 Business Strategy and the Environment RESEARCH ARTICLE OPEN ACCESS The Joys of Giving Up … Embracing the Motivations and Gratifications of Intentional Value Uncapture in Sustainable Development AgnieszkaKabalska1 | RalfWagner2 1Faculty of Management, AGH University of Krakow, Kraków, Poland | 2School of Economics and Management, University of Kassel, Kassel, Germany Correspondence: Ralf Wagner ([email protected]) Received: 22 August 2024 | Revised: 30 October 2024 | Accepted: 13 November 2024 Funding: The paper was prepared under the AGH IDUB: Excellence Initiative—Research University grant—Action 6: Funding international internships for young employees and doctoral students. Keywords: gratifications| motivations| selfdetermination theory| sustainable value| value uncaptured ABSTRACT This study examines the concept of sustainable value (SV), focusing on SV derived from social interactions within entrepreneurial processes. We introduce the novel concept of value intentionally uncaptured (VIU), exploring its dimensions at both the individual and collective levels. This research employs uses and gratification theory and selfdetermination theory to conceptualize motivations for leaving VIU (MVIU) and gratifications from leaving VIU (GVIU). We challenge traditional notions of value creation and capture, positing that entrepreneurs can generate and capture social and environmental value by intentionally not capturing economic value. This intentional relinquishment evokes the ambiguity inherent in SV, suggesting that motivations and gratifications in VIU are interconnected, dynamic, and fluctuating, not linear. Methodologically, we integrate theory development with empirical evidence, including expert reviews and interviews, to ask whether it is reasonable to leave value uncaptured. Our findings reveal that motivations for and gratifications from VIU are reciprocal and coactive, challenging the traditional view that positive outcomes are derived solely from proactive actions. This conceptual study both broadens the perspective on value creation and capture and significantly contributes to understanding individual and collective gratifications from intentionally uncapturing value, emphasizing the benefits of not engaging in certain activities. 1 | Introduction Contemporary management faces the difficulty of reconciling and addressing conflicting interests among multiple stakeholders, including the need to effectively operate a profitable firm, benefit society, and minimize the organization's adverse environmental effects. Furthermore, entrepreneurs have diverse motivations and expectations in operating a business, for example, generating profits, pioneering business paths for themselves or others, garnering public admiration, pursuing stimulating projects, and changing the business landscape. In a complicated business environment, pursuing shortcuts may be expedient but is likely to yield insufficient or ineffective outcomes. To successfully execute a value strategy, it is essential to diverge from the established corporate perspective (McCarthy2004). This study rests on the concept of sustainable value (SV), comprising economic, social, and environmental value (Baldassarre etal.2017), especially the value from social interactions (e.g., collaboration) as a benefit of entrepreneurship. We explore the concept of “value left on purpose” or “value intentionally uncaptured” (VIU) (e.g., for other individuals, companies, and participants in the business ecosystem) and assess the extent of value uncaptured (VU). Specifically, we suggest measuring both individual This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons AttributionNonCommercialNoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is noncommercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. © 2024 The Author(s). Business Strategy and the Environment published by ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 1972 VU at the entrepreneur's level and collective VU at the organization (business) and business ecosystem levels. We introduce the gratifications arising from purposefully not capturing value to benefit another, asserting that entrepreneurs can create and capture social value by deliberately eschewing economic value. VIU is both an ambiguity itself and a potential solution to overcoming SV ambiguity. To illustrate the investigated approach to VIU, we introduce the concept of a sustainability trailblazing strategy for VIU. It represents the approach where innovators (“sustainability trailblazers”), particularly in sustainabilityfocused ventures, deliberately leave VU to pursue broader, longterm social and environmental goals. Thus, instead of solely maximizing their profits or benefits, trailblazers intentionally forgo certain financial gains or competitive advantages to create value for the common good—such as promoting environmental sustainability, social equity, or community wellbeing. Furthermore, our scholarly strategy discussion indicates the concept of VIU, which describes the value that trailblazers willingly sacrifice, leading to lower profits, shared resources, or open innovation to benefit society or the environment. Sustainability trailblazers, in contrast to traditional entrepreneurs, prioritize higher order goals over maximizing their returns. Their motivation stems from a desire to address systemic challenges (e.g., climate change, social inequality), and they recognize that shortterm financial sacrifices may be necessary to drive longterm sustainability transformations (Gregori and Holzmann2022). This study provides a conceptual contribution, with the single case study serving as an illustration of the concepts themselves. Generalization arises from the concepts rather than the illustrational case of conceptual advancement in business strategy, specifically, developing a sustainability trailblazing strategy for VIU, which was informed by expert discussions. We argue that contemporary business strategy frameworks should incorporate VIU, as demonstrated by the argumentation presented in the paper. Our research logic rests on Kuhn's(1962) speculations. Initially, we found inspiration in recognizing that scientific progress is not gradual and steady but occurs through successive abrupt, distinct paradigm shifts. We link this with our understanding of the existing framework, engaging in problemsolving and theory enhancement—specifically, selfdetermination theory (SDT) and uses and gratification theory (UGT)—and employ known methods to gradually accumulate information. Subsequently, we encountered the scientific revolution stage (Starbuck2006), which occurs when a novel paradigm (here, VIU) arises from identified ambiguities, supplanting the previous one. These novel enigmas offer a firmer foundation for comprehending anomalies and directing further research. Such a switch from one paradigm to another is rarely seamless but rather an intricate, even contested process. We embrace Kuhn's claim that rival paradigms are frequently incommensurable, as they cannot be directly juxtaposed due to their distinct standards, ideas, and techniques. Thus, we argue that the motivations and gratifications of VIU are interconnected and cannot be understood in a simple, processlike approach (motivations lead to gratifications); rather, they resemble reciprocal, dynamic coactions, with one dynamic leading to various others for multiple actors. This conceptual article aims to establish connections and clarify the detected conundrum. We use theory to develop additional theories, but our statements and considerations are supported by both theory (or concepts) and empirical evidence (Schad etal.2016). Our research question—Is it reasonable to leave uncaptured value uncaptured?—addresses a research gap regarding the rationale for being an entrepreneur by considering who creates, delivers, and captures SV and who uncaptures it. Our research aims are (1) investigating the interconnectedness between VIU's motivations and gratifications, which is closer to an intermittent than a linear process, and (2) examining the empirical aspect of a case study organization that stopped using a wellestablished, functioning business model and “left it for others.” Our theoretical framework called SelfDetermination Theory for Intentional Value (Un)captured employs the lens of SDT to consider motivations for leaving VIU (MVIU). Our framework (Uses and) Value (Un)captured Gratification Theory employs UGT to examine gratifications from leaving VIU (GVIU). Additionally, our framework includes VU and VIU components. Three components constitute the process of demonstrating the relationship between VIU motivations and gratifications: (1) the conceptual argumentation based on prior research, (2) the illustration using a single case study, and (3) the experts' assessment of triangulating the case illustration with their prior knowledge and our conceptualization. This paper is structured as follows: Section2 describes SV, VU, and related ambiguities of SV capture and uncapture as well as the MVIU and GVIU concepts. Section3 explains the research process, motivations, and coding schemes. Section4 discusses the multifariousness of entrepreneurs' VIU motivations and gratifications by analyzing public interviews and experts' evaluations. Section5 reflects on the ambiguities of VIU logic and of creating and (un)capturing SV from a point–counterpoint perspective. In Section 6, we describe ambiguities within the motivation–gratification relationship (commonalities and discrepancies) before the closing remarks (Section7). We offer several theoretical contributions. First, we consider two perspectives (owners' and experts') on VIU motivations and gratifications. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, like gratifications, have distinctive functions; although intrinsic motivation may yield enjoyment through gratification, it is not the fundamental motivating factor. Second, we discuss various perspectives on understanding value creation and (un)capture ecosystems. Our contribution is the emphasis on value capture and uncapture rather than the conventional entrepreneurial value creation perspective. Next, we introduce VIU and the related concepts of MVIU and GVIU. Lastly, the paper may interest business trailblazers by identifying robust sustainable management perspectives for actual or 1973 prospective VIU entrepreneurs seeking inspiration for new valuecapturing avenues. 2 | Literature Review 2.1 | Ambiguities of SV (Un)captured 2.1.1 | SV: Captured and Uncaptured SV encompasses concepts and procedures that address global sustainability concerns to increase stakeholder value (Heuer, Khalid, and Seuring2020). An SV proposition creates value for numerous stakeholders by considering the needs of customers, shareholders, suppliers, partners, the environment, and society (Baldassarre etal.2017). The concept encapsulates three value categories: • Economic value: profitability, efficiency enhancements, and cost reductions • Social value: a company's positive societal impacts from improving its wellbeing and stakeholders' quality of life • Environmental value: a company's positive impact on the environment through reducing emissions, conserving resources, and protecting ecosystems and biodiversity SV creation necessitates the alignment and emphasis of strategy, capabilities, choices, activities, and outcomes with the principal value drivers of a business (McCarthy2004). We argue that the value captured is the gratification obtained by entrepreneurs and other stakeholders (Wagner and Kabalska2023a). The value captured transcends simple “monetary to nonmonetary” translations of value (that are identifiable now or later) and includes value recognized by the creator or capturer (e.g., the stakeholder), publicly recognized and socially praised value, hidden value, and so forth. 2.1.2 | The Dilemma of Capturing SV Versus Sustainably (Un)capturing Value Capturing SV entails systematically integrating economic, environmental, and social components in an organization's business models to generate sustainable competitive advantages, employing operational effectiveness, groundbreaking ideas, and ethical methods to improve economic outcomes while addressing societal requirements and mitigating environmental consequences (Gans and Ryall 2017). The desired business model enhances profitability and contributes to broader sustainability (MéndezLeón, ReyesCarrillo, and DíazPichardo2022). We contend that capturing SV is always an advantage for the valuecapturer, but it may disadvantage others (i.e., destroyed value). Sustainably uncapturing value provides an advantage for stakeholders, the gratification being the stakeholder's feedback or the ability to create one's own or capitalize on others' value. VU denotes the potential value not acquired in a company's business model at the moment and, most recently, in its VU chain (Wagner and Kabalska2023a); it is value that has yet to be captured. VU can take various forms (Yang, Vladimirova, and Evans2017, 1797): • Surplus value: “Value which exists but is not required” • Absence of value: “Value which is required but does not exist” • Missed value: “Value which exists and is required, but is not exploited” • Destroyed value: “Value with negative consequences” We define the uncapturing of SV (here, VIU) as identifying and using untapped benefits throughout an entrepreneurial process. The concept encompasses evident elements, for example, discarded materials and underutilized resources, as well as concealed aspects, for example, a surplus workforce and untapped knowledge. Organizations can enhance sustainability, efficiency, and overall value generation across the product lifecycle by recognizing and using these unexplored assets (Wagner and Kabalska2023a, 2023b), most obviously in valuedestroyed components. We acknowledge that the notion of using (capturing) value that another entity or person has generated and purposefully left behind is a prominent ambiguity; it provides a starting point for investigations of the motivations and gratifications that stakeholders encounter in VIU.1 This study highlights the VIU phenomenon, which is a novel concept based on the VU; thus, it has received very little attention in recent studies compared to the value captured and VU (Figure1), with the latter represented by only a few research papers indexed in the Web of Science database. However, we anticipate its development and increased prominence in future research. Given the established research on value capture and the growing interest in the VU concept, we acknowledge VIU as the next step in the scholarly discussions on VU. We see VIU as a part of the bigger value logic ecosystem and an important part of the sustainability trailblazing strategy because “the value of individual activities cannot be separated from the whole” (Porter1996, 72). The recent contributions to VU in business focused on analyzing the VU and its implications within the framework of business models (Borchardt et al. 2024; Osmanovic, Barth, and Ulvenblad2024). VU may facilitate new value creation and present chances for entrepreneurs through the interaction of diverse value flows, which we acknowledge as a rationale for developing the VIU. Therefore, our particular emphasis is placed on discerning the motivations and gratifications of sustainability trailblazers in their deliberate pursuit of VU. 2.2 | Relevant Theories for VIUCentered Investigations 2.2.1 | The Why? Question: SDT for VIU SDT explains human motivation in social situations by distinguishing between autonomous and controlled motivation (Deci and Ryan 2012; Ryan and Vansteenkiste 2023), suggesting that although humans develop gradually and are subject to social Business Strategy and the Environment, 2025 1974 influences, they are naturally active, internally motivated, and oriented toward holistic selfdevelopment. In SDT, three fundamental psychological needs are essential for healthy growth: competence, autonomy, and relatedness (Newman and Newman2022; Strauss and Parker2014). Financial incentives, intimidation, and competition can hinder autonomy, whereas positive feedback and flexible decisionmaking can improve competence and selfdetermination, boosting intrinsic motivation. A comprehensive macrotheory, SDT explains the causes and consequences of human agentic action (Adams, Little, and Ryan2017; Vansteenkiste, Williams, and Resnicow 2012). Keeping VU and forgoing profit are means of overcoming limitations that hinder an entrepreneur's autonomy. Under SDT, intrinsic motivation characterizes people with complete autonomy who derive satisfaction from instigating their own actions (Chen and Bozeman2013), have a strong internal locus of control, and see themselves as active causal agents. Intrinsic motivation embraces both identified motivation (accepting regulations because they align with one's values) and introjected motivation (engaging in behaviors to avoid negative feelings). Both identified motivation and intrinsic motivation are deemed autonomous motivation. By contrast, extrinsic motivation responds to external demands or rewards and has an external locus of control. In the business context, companies encounter a range of motivations that drive their decisions and actions (Shah and Arjoon2015). Leaders in the robust implementation of strategic sustainability initiatives have a strong sense of ethical motivations and strategic endeavors (BonillaPriego, NájeraSánchez, and Font2022). SDT is relevant to investigate how the extent of sustainability activities, investments, and products influences trailblazers' decisions regarding the firm's economic performance, as well as offering an appropriate framework for analyzing practices that may impact economic and environmental concerns, to name a few (D'Angelo, Cappa, and Peruffo2023). Selfdetermination for VIU (i.e., MVIU) describes the proactive approach of individuals (entrepreneurs) or organizations that leverage intrinsic motivation and internal autonomy to identify and use VU by others (e.g., entrepreneurs or businesses). 2.2.2 | The What for? Question: Uses and Value Uncapture Gratification Theory UGT explores how individuals actively seek media to satisfy specific needs and desires (Katz, Blumler, and Gurevitch1973; Ruggiero 2000). Individuals' motivations—for example, selfdetermination, personal identity, integration, and social interaction—drive behavior. The impact of media depends on how actively the audience engages with them and to what extent their needs are satisfied. The UGT traditionally explains media consumption, but we adapt it to the context of VU and VIU, inspiring the concept of GVIU. Building upon Katz, Blumler, and Gurevitch'(1973) five categories of mediarelated needs (Rauschnabel2018), we propose four entrepreneurial gratifications: 1. Cognitive gratifications, for example, determining particular phenomena (establishing the rules) 2. Affective gratifications, for example, emotional experiences (e.g., innovating with team members) 3. Social integrative gratifications, for example, creating new and maintaining existing social relationships (e.g., public recognition, someone building on one's idea) 4. Personal integrative gratifications, for example, enhancing one's status, confidence, or credibility (e.g., confidence building) Autonomyrelated factors primarily inspired us to adapt UGT to an entrepreneurial context. We recognize that, from the FIGURE 1 | Value capture, VU and VIU: publications' asymmetry. Source: Authors based on Web of Science database. 1975 UGT perspective, entrepreneurs focus on activities aligned with their interests and aims, demonstrating independent decisionmaking, hence focusing on personal agency. Taking the UGT perspective, we perceive that entrepreneurs' needs mirror an individual's independent endeavor for welfare and contentment. MVIU indicates that satisfying the demand for autonomy amplifies motivation and involvement; GVIU suggests that people are more involved in SV creation and (un)capture when deliberately adopting it to fulfill personal desires. Given this context, we analyze (by means of motivations among gratifications) whether it is reasonable not to capture VU. The addressed research gap pertains to the rationale for being an entrepreneur, specifically focusing on individuals responsible for creating, delivering, and capturing SV and those who give up such value—innovators who we perceive as sustainability trailblazers, adapting the sustainability trailblazing strategy for VIU. 2.3 | The Hamster Wheel of Motivations and Gratifications in VIU Motivations and gratifications in VIU are dynamic fluctuations— progressive and digressive—that are not linear. Innovation in social forms arises for the sustainability trailblazers when the potential to acquire resources through organizing reaches a critical threshold, coupled with the resonant flow of information across individuals. This nonlinear interaction between resource acquisitions and information synthesis reveals that motivations and gratifications are not fixed or steadily progressive. They are subjected to dynamic shifts as individuals and systems respond to changing environmental cues, ultimately disrupting the status quo and necessitating new forms of organizing (Hazy and Ashley2011). This is depicted further in Figure6. Motivations and gratifications are reciprocal, reinforcing and driving one another in a continuous loop. Anticipation or expectation of gratifications often sparks motivations, driving sustainability trailblazers to act in pursuit of rewards, satisfaction, or the fulfillment of desires. Upon achieving gratifications through material, emotional, or cognitive rewards, reinforcement of the behavior or effort that led to the reward strengthens motivations. This creates a cycle where the experience of gratifications fuels further motivations to pursue similar or greater rewards, and the desire for gratifications serves as the primary driver of future motivations. Furthermore, SDT suggests that intrinsic motivations—driven by satisfying psychological needs like autonomy, competence, and relatedness—lead to feelings of gratifications (Deci and Ryan2012), reinforcing and strengthening motivations. As sustainability trailblazers feel more influential and autonomous, they are highly motivated to engage in impactful work, creating a cycle of increasing gratifications and motivations over time. 3 | Methodology and Research Process 3.1 | Research Context Single case studies are adapted in management research to deepen theoretical understanding or challenge existing beliefs and allow researchers to explore significant phenomena in unique or complex conditions (Eisenhardt and Graebner2007). Gioia, Corley, and Hamilton (2013) assert that generalization from a case study is feasible if the instance generates concepts or principles that apply to another domain. Considering this, our decision to incorporate the VIU concept into current research was further confirmed by Siggelkow's(2007, 21) observation that “there might be something missing in the theory,” FIGURE 2 | Map of Rebread's business journey. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2025 1976 highlighting the need for subsequent investigation and a more refined conceptualization of the VIU phenomenon. Entities that deliberately eschew capturing “full” value (or a portion thereof) allow other market participants to (re)adapt and capitalize on it. Value may not be entirely captured due to, for example, deliberate underutilization of existing technologies, untapped markets, inefficient resource allocation, and organizations not fully capitalizing on intellectual property (e.g., by adopting an openinnovation model). Our case study company represents such a logic, illustrating the reasoning behind VU and VIU and pinpointing contradictions in the motives and satisfactions of entrepreneurs. Depicting and examining the organization's specifics is far less significant. We focus on Rebread, a startup that collects and recycles leftover bread (Rebread n.d.). Located in Kraków (Poland), Rebread was established to further the activities of Handelek, an artisan bakery in Kraków. Its concept originated during the COVID19 pandemic, when typical beneficiaries of stale bread (farmers who used it as animal fodder) collected it only sporadically (Figure2). Because of limits on transportation and the subsequent decrease in sales, Handelek faced an escalating problem of unsold bread. In response, the owners (individuals with an IT and media/ advertising agency background) established Rebread (from “repurposed bread”) as a “circular economy startup, tackling the problem of bread waste” [2]. 3.2 | Research Motivations, Process, and Coding The investigation of the Rebread case study started in August 2023, influenced by three factors: (1) The company's Krakow location and coverage of its business story in local media (2) Startup's unique nature and the intriguing contradictions in its operations (an artisanal bakery producing niche alcohol) (3) The owners' idiosyncratic business decisions The comprehensive study phase concluded in August 2024. The research comprised two stages. First, following Kozinets (2020), we conducted netnographic research using secondary sources (August 2023–July 2024). We first gathered research materials from the company's website [3], which featured interviews by Rebread officials in conventional and digital media. We found additional interviews through an online search using the keyword “Rebread.” Of 25 examined interviews, we used 22 for further evaluation; pseudointerview material containing identical quotes was omitted. One of this paper's authors translated the material from Polish to English. A summary table (see TableS1) contains all references to the direct sources of quotations used in the text. The second stage was an expert review (May 2024–July 2024). The participating experts were deliberately selected and possessed the following characteristics: • Expert No. 1: a sociologist and university professor • Expert No. 2: an academic focusing on economic sciences • Expert No. 3: an employee of an academic consulting firm that supports startups • Expert No. 4: a former academic lecturer who runs a consulting business focused on sustainability reporting The experts' broad expertise and diverse backgrounds yielded many valuable academic and business assessments. They addressed questions regarding the VIU motivations and gratifications of various Rebread stakeholders (current and prospective). In both research stages, we identified VIU motivations and gratifications at the individual (entrepreneur), collective (organization), and business ecosystem levels. The coding of data from secondary sources centered on motivations (using MVIU components) and gratifications (adopting GVIU elements). We limit our selection of quotations to the most representative examples (see TableS2, and the text below). Next, we searched for both SV captured and uncaptured in the extracted quotations (Figure3). The second research stage followed the same procedure for the expert interviews. Unlike with the material from desk research, we introduce the experts' opinions as direct quotations complementing the results from the previous research stage. Subsequently, the quotes were categorized into groups based on the primary motivations driving the entrepreneurs and organization and on the rewards derived from these motivations (TableS3). 4 | Research Results 4.1 | Breadcrumbs Into Gold: Motivations and Gratifications in Entrepreneurs' Public Stories The motivations and gratifications of VIU derived from coding interviews were used to identify categories of primary reasons for and behind VIU (Figure 4); these clusters were identified based on VIU patterns. Next, metacategories were derived from the clusters, specifically focusing on the paradoxes of the motivations and gratifications. For a better presentation, we colorcoded our findings by the three perspective levels: individual (colored yellow), business (pink), and ecosystem level (the most comprehensive viewpoint, colored red). Notably, most motivations and gratifications associated with VIU are at the organizational and ecosystem levels. Only two MVIUs are at the individual level (the entrepreneur). This demonstrates the comprehensive perspective on business management of the entrepreneurs, who assessed decisions and resulting gains primarily from the standpoint of their firm, its significance in the business ecosystem, and its interactions with other participants. Rebread's main motivations and gratifications concern tackling the economic, social, and environmental challenges 1977 arising from bread waste. A market gap that required filling and a lack of industry motivated the founders, whose aimed to become the market leaders while increasing public awareness by introducing a unique business model and, after its successful application, abandoning it, leaving the VU. By seeking external financing and grants, they also promoted cooperation and knowledge exchange with other involved parties to achieve both economic benefits and public recognition. Their motivation sprang from a desire to address substantial societal problems (e.g., food waste), aiming to garner worldwide recognition and positively impact sustainability. They derived satisfaction from shaping market dynamics and customer perceptions, inspiring others through innovation and transparent intersectoral collaboration. The need to solve logistical issues and adjust to changing market conditions increased the incentive to create a globally flexible business model supporting circular economy principles. The VIU pathways refer to various avenues through which businesses can create, capture, or leave VU, particularly in uncertain or evolving market conditions. When adopting these pathways, sustainability trailblazers may explore different business strategies for integrating value creation and (un)capture into their business models, emphasizing innovation and longterm societal and environmental impacts. By balancing these components, businesses can strategically align sustainability goals with economic objectives, frequently navigating uncertainty to foster competitive advantages. 4.1.1 | VIU Pathway I (CompanyDevelopment Level): Innovation, Market Leadership, and Sustainable Strategic Business Development The primary impetus for establishing Rebread was the financial setbacks caused by unsold bread at Handelek as well as the multifaceted economic, social, and environmental predicaments of the situation. The owners recognized and addressed a specific market gap by implementing this sustainabilityoriented project: “We believed there was still a gap in the market for real bakeries. There are more than 20 artisan bakeries in Krakow, but it's still not enough” [4]. This clearly indicates business competence at the entrepreneurial level, although the entrepreneurs lacked formal economics expertise. They perceived the challenge as an external motivational force: “We're trying to catch up, because the market is pressuring us. But that's a good thing, because the motivation is then much higher” [5]. Rebread's creators acknowledged the absence of any rival Polish bakery, whether small scale or large scale, that had executed their business concept, confirming their good orientation in competitive environments and their initiative's good business positioning. They aimed to fill this market gap and gain a sustainable competitive advantage by pioneering their original idea in the industry (demonstrating business competence at the market level): “We are eager to implement this idea. We don't have competition yet, either in Poland or FIGURE 3 | Coding scheme for differentlevel motivations and gratifications for VIU. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2025 1978 abroad, and we want to be the first with such a model internationally” [6]. They recognized potential competition and other market challenges: “These are the kinds of products that can hit the market quickly. That's why we have prioritized them. We aim to swiftly launch our products into the market and gauge their reception” [7]. The anticipated gratifications from this initiative were cognitive: pioneering the market (“Our focus is on signing letters of intent, establishing cool partnerships, and working out together what we want to do. We place a high value on bringing … knowledge we gain from our relationships with major players to the community”) [8], blazing a path for others (“Our goal is to inspire others and encourage cooperation between different industries”) [9], and receiving public recognition beyond narrow business paths (“Most people think of us as a manufacturing company. We see this business differently”) [10]. 4.1.2 | VIU Pathway II (BusinessProcess Level): Overcoming and Exploiting Operational and Logistical Challenges The problems Rebread encountered on its entrepreneurial journey further inspired its founders to leave the conventional business path and seek opportunities for further development rather than merely “doing business”: “The main obstacles [were] all those dynamic changes, an unstable period, and having to make a lot of decisions, so we were forced to [step back] to eventually move forward” [11]. Such statements confirm the entrepreneurs' deliberate choice to willfully forgo potential benefits; this weighty decision was, they believed, a tactic to progress, expand the company, and motivate others, moving beyond the profitoriented perspective: “Our product received media attention, and we were able to enter various business incubators. Despite our initial enthusiasm, we swiftly veered away from the alcohol FIGURE 4 | Matrix of VIU motivations and gratifications. 1979 Experts highlighted the need to recognize viewpoints that have not been fully considered and emphasized uncertainties in decisionmaking. E1 underlined that “The nonhuman perspective is that everything is able to oblige you to do things that you are not convinced to do in that way, but objectively driving you in that direction.” E3, however, noted the uncertainties arising from the unnecessary transfer of property, namely, a social purpose that has not been fulfilled (charity), which he TABLE 3 | Gratifications from VIU. Current value creators and capitalizers Driving force SV category Relevant quotation Employees Palpable impact Social “You … are not only part of the big corporation's machinery.” (E2) Positive selfperception Social “You're [fulfilling] your own beliefs. If you believe that people should help the environment by buying from a company that clearly reduces waste, you'll feel better about yourself.” (E2) Customers Convergent values Social Environmental “On one hand, highquality products and, on the other, satisfaction from contributing to environmental conservation efforts.” (E2) Supporting sustainable businesses Social “Highquality, ecofriendly products and … satisfaction from supporting a good cause. Even if it's more expensive, they would probably say, ‘OK, yeah, but by supporting things like reducing food waste, we're doing something good here.’ So that would probably be a good aspect for good gratification benefits.” (E4) Local bakeries (competitors) Additional source of income Economic “Maybe a little bit of money if Rebread is paying for the waste.” (E2) Positive brand image Economic Social “Better brand image due to the sustainable practice.” (E2) Cost efficiency Economic “The efficient collection services so they don't have to care about that stuff, and the reduced waste disposal fees.” (E4) Positive public recognition Economic Social “Enhanced public image. The bakeries are not throwing stuff away. Huge benefit for them.” (E4) Research community Professional benefits Economic Social “Opportunities for research and publications. Also, enhanced reputation through involvement in sustainability projects.” Distilleries Cost and resource efficiency Economic “The benefit would be a consistent supply of bread.” (E4) Local communities Local support Social “Job creation and community engagement initiatives, something where you could actually involve people from the area.” (E4) Business Strategy and the Environment, 2025 1986 did not observe in the situation being examined: “They're not producing a large amount of bread that is not sold at the end of the day; there could be cooperation with social groups or NGOs. They can pick the bread up and distribute it to people in need.” 4.2.3 | Gratifications From VIU The gratifications reported by stakeholders engaged in sustainable activities such as Rebread's are complex and strongly connected to both personal and professional principles. Employees perceive actual impact and develop a favorable selfimage by recognizing their significant contribution to environmental preservation, rather than feeling like insignificant parts of a large corporation (E2). This raises questions about the importance of economic, social, and environmental concerns, including whether employees choose to work for and support sustainable organizations against their own financial interests and whether they prioritize financial rewards over sustainability (Table3). Customers find joy in patronizing sustainable firms and purchasing highquality, environmentally friendly items, aligning their buying with their ecological principles (E2, E4). Local bakeries as rivals generate extra revenue via trash trades, achieve cost savings, and improve their brand reputation and public visibility through sustainable activities (E2, E4). The research community benefits from opportunities for research and publishing and an improved reputation through participation in sustainable initiatives. Distilleries gain satisfaction from cost and resource efficiency through an uninterrupted supply of bread (E4). Jobs and programs that engage with the community positively impact local communities, in turn promoting local support. NGOs attain organizational objectives for environmental preservation and enjoy favorable public acknowledgement for reducing food waste (E2). Supermarket chains see improved supplychain efficiency, brand image, and consumer loyalty, meeting sustainability criteria and decreasing waste (E2, E4). Agriculturesector entities see costreduction advantages and a dependable Prospective value capturers Driving force SV category Relevant quotation NGOs Reaching internal goals Environmental “Achieving NGO organizational goals related to environmental conservation.” (E2) Positive public recognition Social “Increasing public awareness and engagement in food waste reduction efforts.” (E2) Supermarket chains Positive public recognition Economic Social Environmental “Improved supplychain efficiency. … improving brand image and customer loyalty due to engagement in sustainable practices, which big retail chains and supermarkets aren't really famous for. [Some] consumers are not happy with their behavior, so … such cooperation would be like a little thing that can improve their image.” (E2) “Building consumer demand is basically where you can actually market it … if we don't sell it, we don't throw it away.” (E4) Meeting sustainability standards Social Environmental “Reducing waste, improving corporate social responsibility.” (E4) Agriculturesector entities Cost reduction Economic “Access to affordable, … really highquality animal food.” (E2) “Reliable supply and cost effectiveness.” (E4) Packaging and manufacturing companies Cost efficiency Economic “Improved market competitiveness and … consumer appeal.” (E2) TABLE 3 | (Continued) 1987 provision of superior fodder (E2, E4). Packaging and manufacturing enterprises derive satisfaction from cost efficiency, enhanced market competitiveness, and increased customer appeal through sustainable innovations (E2). 4.2.4 | Other ValueOriented Gratifications E1 noted the importance of understanding benefits resulting from the flow of ideas, something beyond the narrow frame of “regular” entrepreneurship: “The economic system needed something, ideas, that you combine [with] the traditional way to produce things ….” Synergy and collaboration toward joint sustainability and interaction with others were among the most important aspects the experts noted. They recognized the need to create a shared sustainable story (“Our narrative offers a fresh outlook on sustainability. Sustainability involves integrating the environment into our daily tasks, … our operations, and utilizing it as a key component in our preparation and usage processes. This is a new and innovative approach to sustainability: the community” [E1]); to integrate diverse backgrounds and experiences (“This is something where you needed … expertise to help that certain network do that, or if it's something that basically everybody can do that you're pitching the idea. Potential founders who say, OK, this is a good idea. Let's do it” [E4]); and to promote the exchange of ideas (“Sustainability practices are really hard to implement on their own … it makes more sense to think about it in a more networked structure. So, if you're thinking about the circular economy, how can different companies … cooperate so that they share resources and maybe sell each other products that they don't need anymore?” [E3]). 5 | Discussion and Conclusions Instead of adapting the conventional discussion logic, this section introduces a point–counterpoint flow of argumentation. Due to this research's theoretical character and analytical findings, we utilize a nontraditional argument–counterargument presentation strategy. This section clarifies the uncertainties regarding the motivations and gratifications of VIU; VIU is not contingent upon empirical validation or justification since, by now, it remains a theoretical concept. The point–counterpoint response strategy facilitates the development of a repertoire of interpretative techniques applicable to complex tasks (Rogers1990). This format is meant to be controversial; it comes with some risks, but it also leads to more active and useful discussions, which advance the field through the tensions that arise when different ideas and perspectives are present (Westwood and Clegg2009). This point–counterpoint discourse examines identified dilemmas from divergent perspectives, urging readers to critically evaluate the theoretical underpinnings of their endeavors. As Ketokivi(2016) argues, “Agreement is overrated; let us instead invite different, even opposing points of view, so that we can learn something new.” 5.1 | Ambiguities of VIU Logic Uncapturing SV (in particular, VIU) involves identifying and using untapped advantages generated by individuals or businesses. The concept includes conspicuous components (e.g., abandoned raw materials and unused resources) and hidden elements (e.g., an excess workforce and untapped expertise). Organizations can improve sustainability, efficiency, and total value creation across product lifetimes by acknowledging and FIGURE 6 | Value Intentionally (Un)Captured Chain. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2025 1988 using these untapped opportunities. We concede the significant ambiguity of using the value that another entity or person intentionally failed to create. This ambiguity inspired our investigations into the motivations and gratifications from VIU experienced by diverse stakeholders, leading us to address the existing gap in VIU research and adopt the SV perspective. To answer the research question, we investigated the multiform ambiguities identified in intentionally uncapturing SV, having identified a need to develop a typology of VIU. Studies on SV creation and capture are advised to deem VIU a rational choice of stakeholders (current or future value capturers). 5.2 | Ambiguities of Creating and (Un)capturing SV: Point–Counterpoint Perspective SV encompasses three key categories—economic, social, and environmental values (Baldassarre et al. 2017; Hart and Milstein2003)—which means juggling management of a profitable business, contributing to social good, and preserving the environment (Wagner and Kabalska2023a, 2023b). The following multivocalities regarding SV creation and (un)capture refer to Rebread but exemplify such logics. 5.2.1 | Economic Versus Social Value VIU 5.2.1.1 | Companies Can Create Economic Value by Uncapturing Social Value. Rebread established a profitable, alcohol production–based business model (economic value), yet the operation contributed to a societal problem (alcoholism). By capitalizing on stale bread collected from other bakeries, Rebread could decide to donate the unsold bread to people in need or local NGOs targeting homelessness and poverty (social value). 5.2.1.2 | Companies Can Create Social Value by Uncapturing Economic Value. By deciding to quit producing the profitable yet controversial product, the company inspires other businesses to focus on social value creation. The two situations represent the ongoing profit versus social good dilemma, questioning whether contemporary business should prioritize economic wealth over societal contribution (MéndezLeón, ReyesCarrillo, and DíazPichardo2022). 5.2.2 | Economic Versus Environmental VIU 5.2.2.1 | Companies Can Create Economic Value by Uncapturing Environmental Value. New breadbased products (e.g., nonalcoholic beverages or cosmetics) can provide new profit streams, but developing formulas through trialanderror requires a significant amount of raw materials (stale bread) that will be wasted in the process. 5.2.2.2 | Companies Can Create Environmental Value by Uncapturing Economic Value. Deciding to tackle negative environmental impacts from bread transportation in favor of local collaboration, the company eschews prospective profits from selling expensive niche alcohol. Every production incurs an environmental toll (Heuer, Khalid, and Seuring2020). Here, the predicament is whether creating additional items (e.g., packaging or cosmetics) that need significant amounts of raw materials and that customers may not embrace is justified. 5.2.3 | Social Versus Environmental VIU 5.2.3.1 | Companies Can Create Social Value by Uncapturing Environmental Value. Stepping away from stale bread–based alcohol production, which can negatively impact local customers and society generally, may produce a growing amount of bread waste (environmental value). 5.2.3.2 | Companies Can Create Environmental Value by Uncapturing Social Value. Developing new technologies to address and exploit food waste may negatively impact society, that is, may inspire the misconception that there is no need to reduce the production and consumption of food products (why reduce food purchases when someone like Rebread can use it later?). Prioritizing environmental goals versus creating social good reflects the ongoing question of where contemporary businesses should focus attention, calling for an investigation of the validity of creating novel technologies and products that preserve the environment while indirectly promoting consumption, for example, by introducing new products that inspire customers' mistaken belief that their production incurs no environmental expenses. From a purposeful standpoint, transparency functions as both the objective and the outcome, wherein strategies, policies, and behaviors designed to attain openness are sought for their inherent worth (BaraibarDiez, Odriozola, and Fernández Sánchez2017), establishing an ongoing loop (Hamster Wheellike sequence) of motivations and gratifications. 5.3 | Trailblazing New Strategic Approach The sustainability trailblazing strategy for VIU is an approach where sustainability innovators intentionally leave VU to pursue broader social and environmental goals. The concept of VIU describes the value trailblazers willingly sacrifice, particularly profits, shared resources, or their innovations, to benefit society or the environment. Innovative sustainability trailblazers forgo financial gains or competitive advantages to create value for the common good. Their motivation is to address systemic challenges like climate change and social inequality as they recognize that shortterm financial sacrifices may be necessary for longterm sustainability transformations (Gregori and Holzmann2022). Thus, we offer a theorybuilding contribution, recognizing that the practical application of the concept requires further elaboration through additional research. The point–counterpoint discussion provides reflections at a conceptual level, focusing on the antecedents, such as motivations and gratifications, rather than their consequences. We recognize it as an essential perspective on VIU, explicated by Porter's (1996, 77) claim that “Strategy renders choices about what not to do as important as choices about what to do.” 1989 We adhere to Mintzberg's(1977) viewpoint that a strategy is defined as a pattern within a sequence of decisions; when a series of decisions on a certain component of an organization demonstrates consistency over time, a strategy emerges. Examining the discussed scenario from this perspective demonstrates the applicability of the idea in the sustainability trailblazing strategy for VIU, where a path dependency exists. When the sustainability trailblazers make specific strategic decisions, such as ceasing alcohol production, it becomes challenging to resume it; conversely, if they opt to continue production, they acknowledge the detrimental impact of supplying alcohol on individuals or consent to address transportation challenges that adversely affect the environment. Therefore, we assert that VIU is open to revision while value captured remains unaffected. Edwards(2021, 3091) exemplified this reasoning by stating, “Inclusive balance means that economic growth is pursued in service of socialecological wellbeing and not the other way around.” 5.4 | VIU Chain Porter's (1985) value chain is a leading strategic management framework that identifies and analyzes a company's primary (inbound logistics, operations, outbound logistics, marketing and sales, customer service) and secondary (firm infrastructure, human resources management, technology development, procurement) activities that create value and differentiate it from competitors. Expanding on this notion, the VU chain (Wagner and Kabalska2023a) provides practitioners and researchers with a framework to systematically identify uncaptured value across three dimensions: primary and secondary business operations, founder responsibilities, and alignment within the entrepreneurial ecosystem. Developing both concepts further, we propose the VIU chain (Figure6). Since the focus is on the sustainability trailblazers and their decisions to intentionally uncapture value, it encapsulates their motivations for and gratifications from VIU, which we tied with their strategic decisions and actions. Although the chain was developed based on the Rebread's case, it can be applied to other cases because it represents strategic logic and ambiguities of strategy development. For that reason, we put the context of the case illustration in brackets. 6 | Research Implications 6.1 | Ambiguities Within Motivation–Gratification Relationships The examples illustrate the intricate relationship between motives and gratifications among diverse stakeholders in sustainable initiatives, which we identified from both secondary materials and expert evaluations. Although common factors motivate stakeholders, for example, economic advantages and environmental benefits, the precise satisfactions obtained from these motives may differ greatly depending on stakeholders' roles and perspectives. The concept of VIU itself can be further illustrated not only to emphasize its relevance but also to expand its scope beyond motivations and gratifications, addressing the potential consequences. While our adapted approach addresses the “why,” it leaves the “what” unanswered, particularly regarding the outcomes or future paths for sustainability trailblazers and the sustainability trailblazing strategy for VIU. Moreover, this case study exemplifies a conceptual advancement in corporate strategy by formulating a sustainability trailblazing strategy for VIU, highlighting the need for cuttingedge business strategy frameworks to integrate VIUbased decisions. 6.1.1 | Commonalities 6.1.1.1 | Economic Value. Businesses are mostly driven by economic incentives, for example, opportunities to earn money and reduce costs. By engaging in sustainable projects and collaborations, they generate more income, reduce trash disposal expenses, and enjoy an enhanced brand reputation. Their business partners may profit from a steady, affordable supply of materials, ensuring efficient operations and financial advantage. 6.1.1.2 | Social Value. The prospect of favorable public acknowledgment and adhering to sustainability goals drives sustainable businesses and their stakeholders. Businesses benefit from enhanced brand reputation, increased customer loyalty, positive public acknowledgement, and meeting environmental protection goals. 6.1.1.3 | Environmental Value. Sustainable businesses are motivated by aspirations to contribute meaningfully to environmental preservation and a sense of purpose and impact rather than being associated with a big, impersonal organization. People in such initiatives enhance their selfimage by measurably affecting the environment. Consumers experience contentment by purchasing environmentally friendly items and endorsing sustainable businesses, strengthening their individual ecological principles. 6.1.2 | Discrepancies 6.1.2.1 | Economic Value. Rebread's sustainability focus inspired the objective of establishing a worldwide framework for repurposing surplus (stale bread), necessitating significant investment and pioneering endeavors. This motive stems from an aspiration to achieve market dominance and ensure longterm viability. The gratification is inconclusive, as the possibility of market domination is counterbalanced by the difficulties of largescale expansion, gaining acceptance from consumers, and complying with regulations. Endeavors to introduce new ideas may not yield straightforward satisfactions due to these uncertainties. 6.1.2.2 | Social Value. Potentially advancing their professional development, conducting toplevel research, and publishing in prestigious journals drive the research community, which is also motivated by opportunities to enhance its reputation through sustainable projects. The community derives satisfaction from professional advantages and esteem linked to its sustainability contributions. Rebread's proposed that an openinnovation approach may weaken competitive advantage and intellectual property rights, however, resulting in conflict between collaboration and proprietary concerns. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2025 1990 6.1.2.3 | Environmental Value. A desire for costeffectiveness and maximal use of resources through collaboration drives prospective business partners (e.g., agriculturesector entities and packaging/manufacturing enterprises), who benefit from dependable, cheaper, highquality raw materials/products (e.g., fodder), improved market competitiveness, and customer appeal via sustainable innovations. This could lead to overproduction and overconsumption, however, negatively impacting the environment. A typology of motivation–gratification relationships would lessen the ambiguities of VU and inspire the reconceptualization (Schad etal.2016) of wellestablished concepts, for example, VU (Yang, Vladimirova, and Evans2017) and the valueuncaptured chain (Wagner and Kabalska2023a). This paper presents a single case study combined with experts' appraisals, which urge academics and business practitioners to reflect more deeply and provide additional examples of VIU—a call for lessons learned for and from sustainability trailblazers. 7 | Closing Remarks Answering the research question of whether it is reasonable to leave VU uncaptured, this study offers supportive evidence of its reasonableness. The paper's main contribution is pioneering a theoretical conceptualization for analyzing and guiding these decisions. Based on the results, we identify the following ambiguities that should be addressed and investigated further. • Economic ambiguity of VIU. Value not created/not captured is both economically sustainable (leading to more commercially attractive new products) and unsustainable (by abandoning wellestablished business models and “leaving” the profitable business idea to others). • Social ambiguity of VIU. Value not created/not captured is both socially sustainable (eschewing supporting alcohol consumption) and unsustainable (“allowing” other businesses [e.g., bakeries] to produce alcohol). • Environmental ambiguity of VIU. Value not created/not captured is both environmentally sustainable (reducing transportation's environment impact) and unsustainable (new products increase raw material usage). Acknowledgments The authors have nothing to report. Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. Conflicts of Interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest. Endnotes 1 Ambiguity is the phenomenon of anything having more than one feasible interpretation and so possibly generating confusion (Cambridge Dictionary2024). References Adams, N., T. D. Little, and R. M. Ryan. 2017. “SelfDetermination Theory.” In Development of SelfDetermination Through the LifeCourse, edited by M. Wehmeyer, K. Shogren, T. Little, and S. Lopez, 47–54. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 7 / 9 7 8 - 9 4 - 0 2 4 - 1 0 4 2 - 6 _ 4 . Baldassarre, B., G. Calabretta, N. M. P. Bocken, and T. Jaskiewicz. 2017. “Bridging Sustainable Business Model Innovation and UserDriven Innovation: A Process for Sustainable Value Proposition Design.” Journal of Cleaner Production 147: 175–186. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . j c l e p r o . 2 0 1 7 . 0 1 . 0 8 1 . BaraibarDiez, E., M. D. Odriozola, and J. L. Fernández Sánchez. 2017. “A Survey of Transparency: An Intrinsic Aspect of Business Strategy.” Business Strategy and the Environment 26, no. 4: 480–489. https:// doi. o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / b s e . 1 9 3 1 . BonillaPriego, M. J., J. J. NájeraSánchez, and X. Font. 2022. “Beyond Ethics: The Transformational Power of Overlapping Motivations in Implementing Strategic Sustainability Actions.” Business Strategy and the Environment 31, no. 3: 685–697. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / b s e . 2 9 1 2 . Borchardt, M., M. G. da Silva, M. N. M. de Carvalho, et al. 2024. “Uncaptured Value in the Business Model: Analysing Its Modes in Social Enterprises in the Sustainable Fashion Industry.” Journal of Creating Value 10, no. 1: 79–101. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 1 7 7 / 2 3 9 4 9 6 4 3 2 3 1 2 2 0 7 7 7 . Cambridge Dictionary. n.d. “Ambiguity.” Accessed July 25, 2024. h t t p s : / / d i c t i o n a r y . c a m b r i d g e . o r g / p l / d i c t i o n a r y / e n g l i s h / a m b i g u i t y . Chen, C. A., and B. Bozeman. 2013. “Understanding Public and Nonprofit Managers' Motivation Through the Lens of SelfDetermination Theory.” Public Management Review 15, no. 4: 584–607. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 1 4 7 1 9 0 3 7 . 2 0 1 2 . 6 9 8 8 5 3 . D'Angelo, V., F. Cappa, and E. Peruffo. 2023. “Green Manufacturing for Sustainable Development: The Positive Effects of Green Activities, Green Investments, and NonGreen Products on Economic Performance.” Business Strategy and the Environment 32, no. 4: 1900–1913. https:// doi. o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / b s e . 3 2 2 6 . Deci, E. L., and R. M. Ryan. 2012. “SelfDetermination Theory.” Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology 1, no. 20: 416–436. https:// d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 4 1 3 5 / 9 7 8 1 4 4 6 2 4 9 2 1 5 . n 2 1 . Edwards, M. G. 2021. “The Growth Paradox, Sustainable Development, and Business Strategy.” Business Strategy and the Environment 30, no. 7: 3079–3094. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / b s e . 2 7 9 0 . Eisenhardt, K. M., and M. E. Graebner. 2007. “Theory Building From Cases: Opportunities and Challenges.” Academy of Management Journal 50, no. 1: 25–32. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 5 4 6 5 / A M J . 2 0 0 7 . 2 4 1 6 0 8 8 8 . Gans, J., and M. D. Ryall. 2017. “Value Capture Theory: A Strategic Management Review.” Strategic Management Journal 38, no. 1: 17–41. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / s m j . 2 5 9 2 . Gioia, D. A., K. G. Corley, and A. L. Hamilton. 2013. “Seeking Qualitative Rigor in Inductive Research: Notes on the Gioia Methodology.” Organizational Research Methods 16, no. 1: 15–31. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 1 7 7 / 1 0 9 4 4 2 8 1 1 2 4 5 2 1 5 1 . Gregori, P., and P. Holzmann. 2022. “Entrepreneurial Practices and the Constitution of Environmental Value for Sustainability.” Business Strategy and the Environment 31, no. 7: 3302–3317. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / b s e . 3 0 7 7 . Hart, S. L., and M. B. Milstein. 2003. “Creating Sustainable Value.” Academy of Management Perspectives 17, no. 2: 56–67. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 5 4 6 5 / a m e . 2 0 0 3 . 1 0 0 2 5 1 9 4 . Hazy, J. K., and A. Ashley. 2011. “Unfolding the Future: Bifurcation in Organizing Form and Emergence in Social Systems.” Emergence: Complexity & Organization 13, no. 3: 57–79. 1991 Heuer, M. A., U. Khalid, and S. Seuring. 2020. “Bottoms Up: Delivering Sustainable Value in the Base of the Pyramid.” Business Strategy and the Environment 29, no. 3: 1605–1616. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / b s e . 2 4 6 5 . Katz, E., J. G. Blumler, and M. Gurevitch. 1973. “Uses and Gratifications Research.” The Public Opinion Quarterly 37, no. 4: 509–523. https:// doi. o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 6 / 2 6 8 1 0 9 . Ketokivi, M. 2016. “Point–Counterpoint: Resource Heterogeneity, Performance, and Competitive Advantage.” Journal of Operations Management 41, no. 1: 75–76. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . j o m . 2 0 1 5 . 1 0 . 0 0 4 . Kozinets, R. V. 2020. Netnography: The Essential Guide to Qualitative Social Media Research. London: Sage. Kuhn, T. S. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. McCarthy, B. F. 2004. “Instant Gratification or LongTerm Value? A Lesson in Enhancing Shareholder Wealth.” Journal of Business Strategy 25, no. 4: 10–17. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 1 0 8 / 0 2 7 5 6 6 6 0 4 1 0 5 4 7 3 4 0 . MéndezLeón, E., T. ReyesCarrillo, and R. DíazPichardo. 2022. “Towards a Holistic Framework for Sustainable Value Analysis in Business Models: A Tool for Sustainable Development.” Business Strategy and the Environment 31, no. 1: 15–31. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / bse. 2871. Mintzberg, H. 1977. “Strategy Formulation as a Historical Process.” International Studies of Management and Organization 7, no. 2: 28–40. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 0 0 2 0 8 8 2 5 . 1 9 7 7 . 1 1 6 5 6 2 2 5 . Newman, B. M., and P. R. Newman. 2022. Theories of Human Development. New York: Routledge. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 4 3 2 4 / 9 7 8 1 0 03014980. Osmanovic, S., H. Barth, and P. Ulvenblad. 2024. “Uncaptured Value in Sustainable Business Model Innovation: The Missing Link.” Technological Sustainability 3, no. 3: 262–285. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 1 0 8 / T E C H S - 0 2 - 2 0 2 4 - 0 0 1 0 . Porter, M. E. 1985. The Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. New York: Free Press. Porter, M. E. 1996. “What Is Strategy?” Harvard Business Review 74, no. 6: 61–78. Rauschnabel, P. A. 2018. “A Conceptual Uses & Gratification Framework on the Use of Augmented Reality Smart Glasses.” In Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality: Empowering Human, Place and Business, edited by T. Jung and M. T. Dieck, 211–227. Cham: Springer. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 7 / 9 7 8 - 3 - 3 1 9 - 6 4 0 2 7 - 3 _ 1 5 . Rebread. n.d. “LinkedIn profile.” LinkedIn. Accessed July 25, 2024. h t t p s : / / p l . l i n k e d i n . c o m / c o m p a n y / r e b r e a d c o m . Rogers, T. 1990. “A Point, Counterpoint Response Strategy for Complex Short Stories.” Journal of Reading 34, no. 4: 278–282. Ruggiero, T. E. 2000. “Uses and Gratifications Theory in the 21st Century.” Mass Communication and Society 3, no. 1: 3–37. https:// doi. o r g / 1 0 . 1 2 0 7 / S 1 5 3 2 7 8 2 5 M C S 0 3 0 1 _ 0 2 . Ryan, R. M., and M. Vansteenkiste. 2023. “SelfDetermination Theory.” In The Oxford Handbook of SelfDetermination Theory, edited by R. M. Ryan, 3–30. New York: Oxford University Press. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 9 3 / o x f o r d h b / 9 7 8 0 1 9 7 6 0 0 0 4 7 . 0 1 3 . 2 . Schad, J., M. W. Lewis, S. Raisch, and W. K. Smith. 2016. “Paradox Research in Management Science: Looking Back to Move Forward.” Academy of Management Annals 10, no. 1: 5–64. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 1 9 4 1 6 5 2 0 . 2 0 1 6 . 1 1 6 2 4 2 2 . Shah, K. U., and S. Arjoon. 2015. “Through Thick and Thin? How SelfDetermination Drives the Corporate Sustainability Initiatives of Multinational Subsidiaries.” Business Strategy and the Environment 24, no. 6: 565–582. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / b s e . 1 8 3 8 . Siggelkow, N. 2007. “Persuasion With Case Studies.” Academy of Management Journal 50, no. 1: 20–24. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 5 4 6 5 / a m j . 2 0 0 7 . 24160882. Starbuck, W. H. 2006. The Production of Knowledge: The Challenge of Social Science Research. New York: Oxford University Press. Strauss, K., and S. K. Parker. 2014. “Effective and Sustained Proactivity in the Workplace: A SelfDetermination Theory Perspective.” In The Oxford Handbook of Work Engagement, Motivation, and SelfDetermination Theory, edited by M. Gagné, 50–71. New York: Oxford University Press. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 9 3 / o x f o r d h b / 9 7 8 0 1 9 9 7 9 4 9 1 1 . 001. 0001. Vansteenkiste, M., G. C. Williams, and K. Resnicow. 2012. “Toward Systematic Integration Between SelfDetermination Theory and Motivational Interviewing as Examples of TopDown and BottomUp Intervention Development: Autonomy or Volition as a Fundamental Theoretical Principle.” International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 9: 1–11. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 1 8 6 / 1 4 7 9 - 5 8 6 8 - 9 - 2 3 . Wagner, R., and A. Kabalska. 2023a. “Between Involvement and Profit: Value (Un- )captured by a BornSocial StartUp.” Journal of Social Entrepreneurship: 1–26. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 1 9 4 2 0 6 7 6 . 2 0 2 3 . 2199765. Wagner, R., and A. Kabalska. 2023b. “Sustainable Value in the Fashion Industry: A Case Study of Value Construction/Destruction Using Digital Twins.” Sustainable Development 31, no. 3: 1652–1667. https:// d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / s d . 2 4 7 4 . Westwood, R., and S. Clegg, eds. 2009. Debating Organization: PointCounterpoint in Organization Studies. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Yang, M., D. Vladimirova, and S. Evans. 2017. “Creating and Capturing Value Through Sustainability: The Sustainable Value Analysis Tool: A New Tool Helps Companies Discover Opportunities to Create and Capture Value Through Sustainability.” ResearchTechnology Management 60, no. 3: 30–39. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 0 8 9 5 6 3 0 8 . 2 0 1 7 . 1301001. Supporting Information Additional supporting information can be found online in the Supporting Information section. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2025 1992