The sustainable business model of spa tourism enterprise: Results of research carried out in Poland

Szromek, Adam R. Article The sustainable business model of spa tourism enterprise: Results of research carried out in Poland Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity Provided in Cooperation with: Society of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity (SOItmC) Suggested Citation: Szromek, Adam R. (2021) : The sustainable business model of spa tourism enterprise: Results of research carried out in Poland, Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, ISSN 2199-8531, MDPI, Basel, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, pp. 1-19, https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7010073 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/241658 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. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity Article The Sustainable Business Model of Spa Tourism Enterprise—Results of Research Carried Out in Poland Adam R. Szromek   Citation: Szromek, A.R. The Sustainable Business Model of Spa Tourism Enterprise—Results of Research Carried Out in Poland. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021,7, 73. https://doi.org/10.3390/ joitmc7010073 Received: 29 January 2021 Accepted: 23 February 2021 Published: 25 February 2021 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Copyright: © 2021 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). Department of Organization and Management, Institute of Economy and Informatics, Silesian University of Technology, 44-100 Gliwice, Poland; szr[email protected] Abstract: The article presents the results of the analysis of the elements of business models of spa tourism enterprises in the context of the principles of sustainable development in tourism business. In the process of defining individual rules for tourist enterprises, an approach based on sustainable tourism criteria and an attempt to adjust them to individual conditions resulting from the specifics of the tourist business activity being carried out was proposed. The characteristics of the individual components of business models were based on the results of interviews conducted in 17 tourism enterprises. The CANVAS scheme was used to examine the structure of the business model. It was found that the business models of spa tourism enterprises not only fail to conform to the principles of sustainable development, but are also not used as managerial tools. Their knowledge among managers is very poor. The analysis was supplemented with additional roles played by Polish sanatoriums in preventing the SARS-Cov2 virus pandemic. The research also revealed an example of cooperation between several spa companies, in the framework of coopetition and exchange of knowledge and services, which can be considered as the initiation of cooperation based on open innovation. Keywords: sustainability; management; health resorts; spa tourism; business models; open innovation 1. Introduction The changes that took place in the economy of many countries in the nineteenth century indicate an increasing share of the service sector in creating national wealth. This is due to the fact that it is the employment services sector that has the largest number of employees, ahead of the production sector in this respect. The scientific literature shows that this significant change in the world economy was the reason for the emergence of a post-industrial society, in which knowledge has become a resource and a source of income for societies [ 1 , 2 ]. The dynamic development of technology as a consequence of these changes initiated the so-called the third post-industrial wave [ 3 ], preceded by the agricultural and industrial waves. The innovative solutions and modern technologies influencing the social changes manifesting themselves in the new lifestyle and even in the way of perceiving reality became a manner of facing the expectations of modern generations that seek instant gratification of their desires and needs, awakened by the modern media. However, it should be noted that the dynamic technological development in a postindustrial society also has many negative consequences. They are not just about technology itself, as with influencing social change through social media, but cover nearly all social aspects. This is also the case with the impact of tourism on the natural environment [4,5] . The scientific literature indicates that the antidote to this problem is the concept of sustainable development. However, it is not about a narrow understanding of this concept by reducing it to an impact only on the natural environment, but a broad meaning of this concept. This concept also includes counteracting tourist dysfunctions, including the excess of tourists, invasive expansion of tourist infrastructure, and displacement of local culture from the area where it was created. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021,7, 73. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7010073 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/joitmc J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021,7, 73 2 of 19 The cognitive aim of the article is to identify the factors of change in the key elements of the tourist enterprise’s business model, and thus to adapt it to the form of a sustainable business model. The proposed changes presented in the article result from research carried out by the author in the 17 largest spa tourism enterprises in Poland. In the analysis of the structure of business models, the concept of the CANVAS model was used, which made it possible to evaluate the components of the model and the possibility of extending them with elements of sustainable tourism and opportunities to exchange knowledge within open innovation. 2. The Problem of Sustainability in the Tourism Business Modern managers have many opportunities to support their decision-making abilities. Among them are business model schemas. Sustainable business models have also become increasingly popular in the first and second decade of the 21st century. 2.1. Business Models The concept of the business model is multi-layered. Literature presents it both in terms of the characteristics of the enterprise model [ 6 ] and the relationship between the elements forming the model [ 7 ]. The most frequently noticed approach is the practical approach that recognizes the business model as a decision-making tool [ 8 ]. It is not uncommon to find a pragmatic approach to this issue, in which the business model is a story about how a company works [9]. One of the most accurate definitions of a business model is the definition of JB Wit [ 9 ], which states that the essence of a business model is a visual presentation of the logic of the organization’s functioning and its elements or projects in the form of appropriately named, interrelated template elements, which provides a logical understanding of the process of functioning, survival, and development of the organization. Other authors [ 10 ] define a business model as a conceptual tool containing a set of elements and their relationships with specific goals that allow the presentation of the company’s business logic. D. Teece [ 8 ] treats business models as a tool describing the design or architecture of the mechanisms of creation, supply, or capture of value, and S. Prendeville and N. Bocken [ 11 ] described the business model as a conceptual tool describing activities relating to business transactions between clients, partners, and suppliers and the organization, and their participation in the development and acquisition of value. There is also an abstract approach to business models. This is how they are perceived by M. Al-Debei et al. [12]. Only in the last two years (2020–2021) have interesting results of research on business models been presented by L. Laidroo et al. [ 13 ]. They discuss the differences between the FinTech hotspot business models in Central and Eastern Europe. It is also worth taking into account the evolutionary approach to business models proposed by R. Costa Climent and D.M. Haftor [ 14 ]. An interesting solution in building innovation in business models is presented by W. Wannakrairoj and C. Velu [ 15 ], who use change in the net asset turnover ratio. K. Randhawa, R. Wilden, and S. Gudergan, on the other hand, describe the role of dynamic capabilities in supporting innovative business models [ 16 ]. On the other hand, U. Alpsahin Cullen and R. De Angelis discuss the role of business models in the circular economy as inspiration in the functioning of the ecosystem without waste [17]. There are also solutions for models for companies in the health sector regarding medical transport [ 18 ]. It is also extremely creative to propose the so-called frugal innovations in business models [ 19 ]. This is a solution for the introduction of inexpensive products by unconventional thinking on emerging markets. The creativity of scientists in inventing schematics for business models is enormous. It is worth noting that almost every concept shows them slightly differently. Some have a two-dimensional structure [ 20 ] and others have a multidimensional structure [ 21 , 22 ]. Some show a network of values [ 23 ], while others present an interdisciplinary approach [ 24 – 26 ]. Schemes of business models also differ in terms of the number of components that make J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021,7, 73 3 of 19 up the business. There are four-factor concepts such as Seizing the Whitespace [ 27 , 28 ], five-element [ 29 ] and six-element templates in the form of a circle [ 30 ], six-factor Open Innovation [ 31 – 34 ], seven-block templates by P. Lindgren [ 20 , 21 ], ten-element templates by O.D. Doleski [35], and even thirteen-element models of social business [36]. Probably the most popular model of business models is the concept of CANVAS by A. Osterwalder and Y. Pigneur [ 10 ]. This model includes nine interconnected and interacting elements (components). These are: customer segments, value propositions, distribution channels, customer relationships, revenue streams, key resources, key activities, key partners, and cost structure (Figure 1). J.OpenInnov.Technol.Mark.Complex.2021,7,xFORPEERREVIEW3of20  vationsinbusinessmodels[19].Thisisasolutionfortheintroductionofinexpensive productsbyunconventionalthinkingonemergingmarkets. Thecreativityofscientistsininventingschematicsforbusinessmodelsisenormous. Itisworthnotingthatalmosteveryconceptshowsthemslightlydifferently.Somehavea two‐dimensionalstructure[20]andothershaveamultidimensionalstructure[21,22]. Someshowanetworkofvalues[23],whileotherspresentaninterdisciplinaryapproach [24–26].Schemesofbusinessmodelsalsodifferintermsofthenumberofcomponents thatmakeupthebusiness.Therearefour‐factorconceptssuchasSeizingtheWhitespace [27,28],five‐element[29]andsix‐elementtemplatesintheformofacircle[30],six‐factor OpenInnovation[31–34],seven‐blocktemplatesbyP.Lindgren[20,21],ten‐element templatesbyO.D.Doleski[35],andeventhirteen‐elementmodelsofsocialbusiness[36]. ProbablythemostpopularmodelofbusinessmodelsistheconceptofCANVASby A.OsterwalderandY.Pigneur[10].Thismodelincludesnineinterconnectedandinter‐ actingelements(components).Theseare:customersegments,valuepropositions,dis‐ tributionchannels,customerrelationships,revenuestreams,keyresources,keyactivities, keypartners,andcoststructure(Figure1). ThefirstofthemodelelementsareCustomersegments,meaninggroupsofpeople andorganizationsthattheenterprisetriestoreachandservice.Characterizationofthis componentrequiresgroupingthecustomersaccordingtotheircharacteristics,similari‐ ties,andbehaviors.  Figure1.TemplateofCANVASbusinessmodel.Source:ownstudybasedontheCANVASconcept [10]. Distributionchannelsareanelementindicatinghowtheenterprisecommunicates withparticularsegmentsofitscustomersandhowitoffersitsvalueproposalsforthe customer.Thesearecontactpointsbetweenthecustomerandenterprisethatintheend influencetheimpressiontherecipienthasontheofferedproductsorservices. Customerrelationsaretheelementcontainingthecharacteristicsofrelationsbe‐ tweenthecompanyandtherepresentativesofaspecificsegmentofrecipients.Theycan beestablishedbyacquiringnewcustomers,retainingloyalones,andbyincreasingthe valueofthetransaction(saleincrease). Revenuestreamsarecashgeneratedbythecompanyduetotheservicingofeach segment.Theyareawideelementofthemodelencompassingsuchissuesasthesizeof specificrevenuesstreamsintotalrevenuesandpaymentmethods. Figure 1. Template of CANVAS business model. Source: own study based on the CANVAS concept [10]. The first of the model elements are Customer segments, meaning groups of people and organizations that the enterprise tries to reach and service. Characterization of this component requires grouping the customers according to their characteristics, similarities, and behaviors. Distribution channels are an element indicating how the enterprise communicates with particular segments of its customers and how it offers its value proposals for the customer. These are contact points between the customer and enterprise that in the end influence the impression the recipient has on the offered products or services. Customer relations are the element containing the characteristics of relations between the company and the representatives of a specific segment of recipients. They can be established by acquiring new customers, retaining loyal ones, and by increasing the value of the transaction (sale increase). Revenue streams are cash generated by the company due to the servicing of each segment. They are a wide element of the model encompassing such issues as the size of specific revenues streams in total revenues and payment methods. Key resources are the most important resources held by the company influencing the correctness of its operation. They are at the same time an issue that leads to the determination of which resources are needed for other model elements in their separate and joint functioning. The importance of particular resources and their groups can depend on the type of the business activity being carried out. Key activities are an element created by the key activities that the company must undertake for its model to function correctly. They are a wide spectrum of activities de- J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021,7, 73 4 of 19 pending on the type of the business activity being carried out, without which the company cannot function. This element usually contains a list of key activities that make possible the creation of value for the customer and the functioning of particular components. Key partners are a network of suppliers and co-workers, whose activity is crucial for the effective company functioning. At the same time, they are an attempt to identify who needs to be considered a key partner or supplier, which resources are sourced from the suppliers, and which activities these key partners undertake. Key costs are the category determining the structure of costs borne due to the business activity being carried out and the costs generated by the business model. Here, the financial expenditures of key activities and resource costs are estimated, and the sources of the highest costs are identified. They can be directed towards costs minimization, building value for the customer of low prices, and mass-scale of products and services being offered (cost-driven) or towards a highly specialized offer (value-driven), or to use both approaches at the same time. The element not discussed so far is value proposal, which is a set of products and services generating value for a given customer segment. It is, therefore, a reason why customers prefer the offer of a given company, as well as a solution to problems of customers and satisfaction of their needs. We can assume that this is a key element of a business model deciding on its effectiveness. As a result, it is being enriched with subsequent value proposals, not only customer-oriented, but also enterprise-oriented, by way of capturing values resulting from its business activity. From the moment the CANVAS scheme was published, its popularity in business practice and among researchers has kept increasing, as it is very simple, creative, and flexible when it comes to development and relations establishment. One can indicate numerous publications that develop this concept [ 37 ]. E. Bojar and B. Wit [ 38 ], using as a base the scheme by A. Osterwalder and Y. Pigneur, complemented the CANVAS model with corporate responsibility towards own activities and the environment. The nine elements of the CANVAS model were enriched with external and internal factors of corporate responsibility in three dimensions (economic, social, and environment) and the risk assessment. In turn, A. Joyce and R. Paquin [ 39 ] implemented two additional dimensions: environmental and social. It is at the same time an important focus on social influence components, in reference to sustainable development. B.W. Wirtz et al. [ 40 ] quote yet another division of components of business model. They divide the integrated business model into three component groups: (1) strategy components, (2) customers and market components, and (3) value creation components. Within each component, they list three groups of key elements establishing specific categories. The literature on business models cites their examples, very rarely formulated for tourist enterprises. To give an example of such studies, one can list the research of J. Souto [ 41 ], who, when carrying out research on business modeling and introducing innovation, made innovation analysis in the hospitality industry. In turn, K. Herman and A.R. Szromek [ 42 , 43 ] developed a business model for cultural heritage tourist enterprises and made attempts to apply CANVAS with regard to entities operating on the market of spa tourism [44]. Several other works deal with the subject of business models in tourism, but only in the context of defined business models components and not in the context of the whole model itself. An example is the work of F. Mantaguti and E. Mingotto [ 45 ] that tackles the subject of relations with the customers on tourist market. The customer relations in social media in the business context are discussed by J. Miguéns, R. Baggio, and C. Costa [ 46 ], as well as A. Inversini, Z. Xiang, and D.R. Fesenmaier [47]. In turn, C. Ciurea andF.G. Filip[ 48 ]discusstheissueofestablishinganinter-organizational network in culture tourism facilities. The component analyzed the most is the value proposal for the tourist. A. Bodenau [ 49 ], E. Cranmer, T. Jung and M. Dieck [ 50 ], T. Haaker et al. [51], as well as E. Havemo [52] and N. Prebenseni J. Dahl [53] deal with this subject. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021,7, 73 5 of 19 Scientific publications also discuss models for tourism and gastronomy. An example is the publication by M. Diacon and A. Dutu [ 54 ], who developed innovative business models, or the article by N. Langviniene and I. DaunoraviÞinjtì[ 55 ], who formulate important guidelines for tourism enterprises. This topic is also taken up by M. Hossain [19]. Literature also notes some critical opinions on business models [ 56 ]. M. Porter [ 57 , 58 ] warns against incorrect thinking and delusions given by this concept, especially in a situation of ignoring other crucial business analyses. He also points out to a research gap in the scope of lack of adjustment of business models components to sectoral conditions. Here it is also worth noting another weakness, which is the lack of business models components directly focused on counteracting the negative effects of business operations. It is a wide issue of individual interactions that globally have extremely destructive consequences. A popular subject of modern international policy is fighting with global warming, environmental pollution, and responsibility for actions. Yet, these threats are noticed very rarely when not one but several independent issuers are present. This also applies to organizers and servicing of tourist traffic. Currently, in tourist destinations, one can often notice such dysfunctions as blurring of the unique nature of local culture, industrialization of valuable natural habitats, or expansive drainage of natural resources, as well as overtourism, quite often discussed in the last decade [ 59 ]. Of course, the effects of collective actions often blur the responsibility for their negative consequences, and—as a result—the willingness to bear the costs of systemic solutions that would reverse the situation or bear the costs of preventions also decreases. 2.2. Sustainable Business Models The negative impact of enterprises on the natural and social environment required the development of a slightly different concept of business models. The answer to this need was a sustainable business model. Literature defines them as a set of components where the interactions between them and between these components and the stakeholders create, provide, capture, and list sustainable value for many stakeholders [ 60 , 61 ]. The value proposition in business models has thus been extended to include value not only the customer and enterprise, but also the natural environment and the local community [62]. A good example of a conceptual approach to a sustainable business model is the article by S. Nosratabadi et al. [ 63 ], who distinguished 14 thematic areas. They also concerned activities in the field of tourism. S. Nosratabadi et al. [ 63 , 64 ] and other authors [ 42 , 44 , 65 ] suggest the need for partner networks to create and deliver such lasting value. Additionally, F. Boons and F. Lüdeke-Freund [ 66 ] analyze the business model in terms of sustainable innovations, proposing the features of sustainable innovations in the business model. In turn, L. Zhenhua [ 67 ] indicates six areas that should be considered in the context of sustainable tourism. It is the role of tourism demand, the nature of tourism resources, the imperative of intergenerational justice, and the role of tourism in promoting socio-cultural progress, measuring sustainability and forms of sustainable development. In the last year, this topic has already been taken up in research on other markets, e.g., banking [ 68 ], electric energy [ 69 – 72 ], services [ 51 ], industry [ 73 , 74 ], and even in the mining industry [75] and brewery [76]. The implementation of the abovementioned elements is often associated with obstacles. The literature provides many examples of such obstacles, especially in the co-financing of solutions counteracting dysfunctions [77]. From the point of view of this publication, one of the key divisions of models is the one where the diversification criterium is the type of market relations. The introduction of sustainable development rules into business activity cannot be limited only to the business and ignore the situation of its surroundings. It requires the expansion of ideas and practical activities towards other business partners (suppliers, recipients, competition, local community). However, the process of expanding sustainable business requires a relation between the stakeholders. M. Norris and S. West [ 78 ] identify several forms of J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021,7, 73 6 of 19 market relations between stakeholders, while P. Grefen [ 79 ] enriches this concept with new types (Table 1). Table 1. Type of relationship in business. Type of Relationship Description of the Relationship B2C (Business-to-Customer) Relation aiming to win individual customers by focusing the relation on the direct recipient B2B (Business-to-Business) Relation between the enterprise and other enterprises by focusing on group recipients (wholesalers, contract recipients, state recipients, etc.) B2A (Business-to-Administration) Relation including the entrepreneurs and public administration bodies C2B (Customer-to-Business) Relation in which the access to wireless devices is used, making it possible to carry out the transaction C2C (Customer-to-Customer) Targeting the activities to the possibility of direct exchange of goods between the consumers C2A (Customerto-Administration) Relation between natural persons and public administration P2P (Peer-to-Peer) The use of Internet in such a way to make direct exchange of data possible without the need to send them through the main server B2R (Business-to-Reseller) Relation, where the relation entities are entrepreneurs and resellers G2B and G2C (Government–to-Business and Government–to-Customer) The government is one of the parties to the relations with entrepreneurs and customers B2S (Business-to-Society) The society becomes the beneficiary of values generated by the business influencing the natural environment and the community Source: Based on own study. In time, a discussion concerning their review and complementation has been undertaken. Currently, the starting point in terms of searching for relevant solutions can be the decisions made during the Cape Town Declaration on Responsible Tourism of 2018 [ 80 ]. In accordance with the declaration, the result of the sustainable tourism among others minimizes negative economic, environmental, and social impacts, and generates greater economic benefits for local people or involves local people in decisions that affect their lives and life chances. Another source of sustainable solutions are the criteria of the Global Sustainable Tourism Council (GSTC) [ 5 ]. There are four pillars: sustainable management, socioeconomic impacts, cultural impacts, and environmental impacts. The proposed rules were formulated separately for hotels, tour operators, and tourist destinations. The United Nations Development Program [ 4 ] promotes 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which build on the success of the Millennium Development Goals. An interesting scientific study is the article by P. Siakwah, R. Musavengane, and L. Leonard [ 81 ], who refer to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and the tasks that tourism can implement in this context. One of the elements is to emphasize the role of spa tourism. This is quite an important issue in relation to the topic discussed in this article. According to the adopted assumptions, the goal of health tourism is to ensure a healthy life and to promote well-being for all, of all ages, as good health and well-being guarantee a sustainable livelihood. However, it should also be remembered that new rules should not be implemented if managers and employees of the enterprise are not convinced that they are relevant to them. The literature cites assumptions preceding the occurrence of behaviors responsible J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021,7, 73 7 of 19 for the natural environment [ 82 – 84 ]. The manager must be aware of the consequences of the company’s impact before he feels responsible for acting for the environment, while the sense of responsibility increases the personal norm of engaging with behaviors responsible for the environment. 2.3. Open Innovation Based Busienss Model Developing and Innovaiton The issue of business models, taking into account the three perspectives of creating a value proposition (value for the client, value captured by the enterprise, and value for the local community and the natural environment [ 62 ]), is extended with new values and perspectives for developing a business model. J.J. Yun [ 85 ] presents four different developing circle business models for customers in the role of consumers, entrepreneurs, social entrepreneurs, and engineers, respectively. This complementation of the business assumptions gives the opportunity to develop, utilize, and enlarge creative business models, and even switch business models towards creating innovations. Literature also emphasizes that business models are a very useful tool for creating innovative solutions, but at the same time they can themselves be a platform for the exchange of innovation. The development in this direction concerns both the evolution of innovative business models [ 15 , 86 ], and the mutual exchange of knowledge between market participants. This enables the creation of further solutions and products within the concept of open innovation [87,88]. H.W. Chesbrough [ 31 , 89 ] discussed an interesting Business Model Framework (BMF) for assessing the potential for new business model innovation, a framework for carrying it out, and a management plan for decision making. He concluded that an organization must give a senior manager the resources and take the risk of experimenting with its own business models. R. Amit and C. Zott [ 90 ] recall that business model innovation can occur in a number of ways: (1) by adding novel activities, (2) by linking activities in novel ways, or (3) by changing one or more parties that perform any of the activities. They emphasize that changes in the business model can be subtle and can bring important benefits to the innovator, even when they do not have the potential to significantly influence the industry. J.J. Yun and X. Zhao [ 91 ] did a thinking experiment based on a rectangular compass concept model. They have developed 17 business model patents to validate the model. Their research proved that open innovation, which is based on a new combination between technologies and market, is the engine of sustainable business model innovation dynamics. An interesting example of the application of open innovation is the publication of J.J. Yun et al. [ 92 ], who indicate the significant benefits of using open innovation for environmental protection. They discuss these benefits in the context of the car-sharing industry. From the case study, they developed a causal loop model of the car-sharing industry. They note that open innovation efforts had positive impacts on accelerating basic reinforcing loops between system, revenue, and responsibility. The above-mentioned issues of open innovation may also contribute to the orientation of research in spa services to the exchange of innovative solutions in spa tourism enterprises . 3. Materials and Methods Spa tourism is one of those forms of health tourism that should particularly intensively implement the principles of sustainable development in its tourism activities. An integral form of the implementation of spa tourism is spa treatment, which in Poland is part of the health care system. Health resort activities conducted as part of health tourism may only be performed in health resort areas. These are the areas with raw materials and infrastructure for the provision of treatment, accommodation, and catering services. Only 45 localities have this status in Poland [ 93 , 94 ]. The assumption of the spa activity is the use of medicinal raw materials and the climate to achieve economic benefits without threatening the continuity of the availability of raw materials. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021,7, 73 8 of 19 The aim of the empirical research undertaken by the author in 2018 in spa tourism enterprises was to define the structure of the business model used in Polish spas. The research concerned the elements that make up business models. The theoretical basis of the research was the CANVAS business model [10]. The research was carried out with qualitative methods using an in-depth interview and multiple case studies. In the first stage of the research, the interview consisted in making an eight-page research questionnaire available to the management of these spa companies, and in the second stage, a complementary and in-depth conversation was initiated. The analysis covered the 17 largest spa tourism enterprises in Poland. These enterprises were represented by top-level managers or advisers appointed by them (operational managers, lawyers). The companies were selected on the basis of the list of health resorts of the Ministry of Health of the Republic of Poland. The author’s intention was to conduct research in the largest enterprises of the spa tourism market, which would cover a total of 25–50% of the domestic market (measured by the number of overnight stays during the year). Therefore, the boards of 30 spa companies were approached. Ultimately, approval was obtained to conduct research in 17 enterprises. Their total share in the market of spa services amounted to 33%. These enterprises included from one to 15 spa facilities that provide treatment in the field of balneology and physical medicine. Thus, the research covered 95 spa facilities (belonging to 17 selected companies). The research questionnaire used in the interviews consisted of two parts. The first part of the survey consisted of 18 questions about the structure of the business model, while the second part was about general information about economic activity and its sources of financing (eight questions). For the purposes of additional in-depth interviews, a third part of the questionnaire was also developed. It concerned the undertaken crisis actions and the conduct of sustainable tourism. However, due to the thematic diversity and extensive scope of this research material, these issues are the subject of other publications by the author. The statistical analysis of the collected material consisted mainly of a one-dimensional analysis with the use of the mean value (x av ), supplemented by the standard deviation ( ± SD) or substantiative feature indicator ( Φ ), based on the structure indicators, that was weighed with the use of ratings given by the managers. Statistical series of two features expressed on a quantitative scale were tested with the Shapiro–Wilk test to determine whether the distribution of features is close to the normal distribution. The test showed that both variables had a distribution close to the normal distribution; therefore, classic descriptive measures were used. The managers were able to evaluate individual components of the business models. Due to the diversity of these components, it was necessary to use different measurement scales. The respondents could both indicate individual elements of the model components as well as those not included in the questionnaire, as well as weigh them in relation to the significance in the business model. Therefore, the overwhelming majority of statistical features had a qualitative scale; therefore, the results were presented as percentages or their quantification using weights. None of the questions asked in the interview covered sensitive and unethical issues, and therefore did not require the approval of the bioethics committee and did not expose managers to the disclosure of personal information and confidential information about the company. 4. Results The research showed that managers of five out of 17 surveyed companies know and apply business models in spa operations (29.4%). This is a small percentage of managers, but even they knew only fragmentary business models. They most often indicated such components as key activities, market segments, communication channels, and customer relations. Their nomenclature, however, was very common. In-depth interviews with managers showed that the actual knowledge of business models among managers of spa enterprises is much lower than initially declared. When de- J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021,7, 73 15 of 19 (3) The value proposal in business models should define not only values for the customer and enterprise, but also values for the community (especially the local one). This value should be defined in terms of ecological perspective, referring, in particular, to nature resources and used natural raw materials, but also in terms of economic development and solving local community problems. (4) The tourist enterprises should support initiatives that promote the preservation of local culture and art to maintain the regional identity of the locals. The role of local customs and folk art is an intrinsic element of sustainable tourist development. An example of such activities can be the organization of fairs, music festivals, exhibitions, sale of souvenirs, and handcrafts sourced locally. (5) An important task of ecological campaigns should be education of tourists on proecologic behaviors and the importance of local tax. Awareness of one’s behavior that fosters improvement of natural environment and surroundings of the place the tourist chose as their destination can improve the image of the said destination, relations with local community, and tolerance of limits imposed in a given area. It can foster better effects in terms of pro-ecology activity in the health resort surroundings. (6) The costs of activities associated with carrying out sustainable tourism should be identified and recognized in tourist enterprises business models cost streams. In turn, in revenue streams, it is worth also taking into account the elements of benefits resulting from the sustainable business activity. (7) The business model of health resort enterprise in the component describing key resources should also take into account the natural resources, not only the resources that the enterprise directly uses, but also those with which it directly interferes (air, soil, water resources). (8) Among key activities, models of tourist enterprises should include activity oriented towards research and development that would cover the implementation of pro-ecology and social programs or financial support of research institutes established for that purpose, or funding research grants with the aim of developing local communities. (9) The value proposal for the customer and for the enterprise and local community should include components strengthening the satisfaction coming from providing or making use of rest that does not burden the natural environment and local communities. (10) In case of health resort areas, the tradition of which dates back several centuries, a component of sustainable tourism can be natural heritage tourism in the context of historic spa heritage. It is a proposal combining spa tourism with cultural heritage tourism, which, in turn, can bring about benefits of bringing tourists and local community together. (11) Spa treatment facilities, especially sanatoriums, can act as a reservoir of medical capabilities of the health system. This was shown by the experience of 2020, when during the peak of SARS-Cov 2 cases, there were no beds in hospitals. In cases of reduced disease, Polish sanatoriums dealt with post-COVID therapy. The solutions proposals presented in Table 3result from literature studies and empirical research carried out in Polish health resort enterprises. Their conclusions are not limited to solutions of a specific area as, due to similar problems of many tourist destinations, they can be successfully applied to create sustainable business models in health resort tourism in many countries. Finally, it is worth noting that sustainable business models significantly contribute to both the practical implementation of the principles of sustainable development and the implementation of formal assumptions resulting from the European Union’s commitment to sustainable development, thanks to the 2030 Agenda [ 4 ], adopted by EU countries. Spa tourism companies can mainly pursue the third goal of the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (Goal 3: good health and well-being), by contributing to the improvement of health and well-being of the society, while saving natural healing resources and caring for the natural environment in spas. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021,7, 73 16 of 19 The knowledge obtained through research carried out in Polish health resorts may contribute to a better design of business models for enterprises operating in the health resort. This advantage was also emphasized by the managers themselves, because most of them, thanks to the conducted research, could learn about new methods of designing business mobs. On the other hand, managers who already know business models had the opportunity to learn about the possibilities of orienting the assumptions of the model to the assumptions of sustainable tourism. An interesting direction for further research may be a more detailed examination of the principles of knowledge exchange between networked enterprises as part of open innovation. It may be particularly valuable to indicate the mutual benefits of conducting the practice of open innovation and to define the form of a business model that will support these business activities. One can also notice the limitations of the research carried out. It should be noted that spa tourism in Poland has its own legal and social conditions that can differ from other countries (especially in places where spa tourism does not make a part of health care system). The presented research was not directed towards sustainable tourism activity, but to the assessment of the contents of business model components. On this basis, it was possible to form recommendations that can help in transformation of business models into sustainable business models. Yet, the effectiveness of proposed solutions requires verification studies. Author Contributions: A.R.S. prepared all elements of the article. The author has read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This paper was published as part of the research project “A business model for health resort enterprises” No. 2017/25/B/HS4/00301, supervised and financed by the National Science Center in Poland and as part of statutory research ROZ 1: BK-235/ROZ-1/2020 (13/010/BK_20/0042) at the Silesian University of Technology, Faculty of Organization and Management, and as part of grant 13/010/RGJ21/0054 from the Rector of the Silesian University of Technology. Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable. Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable. Data Availability Statement: Data available in a publicly accessible repository. Conflicts of Interest: The author declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, Analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results. References 1. Touraine, A. The Post-Industrial Society. Tomorrow’s Social History: Classes, Conflicts and Culture in the Programmed Society; Random House: New York, NY, USA, 1971. 2. Bell, D. The Coming of Post-Industrial Society; Harper Colophon Books: New York, NY, USA, 1974; pp. 5–23. 3. Toffler, A. The Third Wave; Bantam Books: New York, NY, USA, 1980; p. 31. 4. United Nations. The United Nations Development Programme. 2016. Available online: http://www.undp.org/content/undp/ en/home/sustainable-development-goals.html (accessed on 1 August 2020). 5. The Global Sustainable Tourism Cuncil. GSTC Criteria for Hotels. GSTC Criteria for Tour Operators. GSTC Criteria for Destinations. 2019. Available online: http://www.gstcouncil.org/gstc-criteria/ (accessed on 1 August 2020). 6. Magretta, J. Why business models matter? Harv. Bus. Rev. 2002,80, 86–92. [PubMed] 7. Battistella, C.; Toni, A.; Zan, G.; Pessot, E. Cultivating business model agility through focused capabilities: Amultiple case study. J. Bus. Res. 2017,73, 65–82. [CrossRef] 8. Teece, D. Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Plan. 2017,51, 1–10. [CrossRef] 9. Wit, B. Ekologistyka w Systemie Zarz ˛adzania Odpadami Niebezpiecznymi; Towarzystwo Naukowe Organizacji i Kierowania: Toru´n, Poland; Stowarzyszenie Wy˙ zszej U˙ zyteczno´sci Dom Organizatora: Toru´n, Poland, 2016; p. 138. 10. Osterwalder, A.; Pigneur, Y. Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers; Paperback; John Wiley and Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2010; p. 59. 11. Prendeville, S.; Bocken, N. Sustainable business models through service design. Procedia Manuf. 2017,8, 292–299. [CrossRef] 12. Al-Debei, M.; El-Haddadeh, R.; Avison, D. Defining the business model in the new world of digital business. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Toronto, ON, Canada, 14–17 August 2008. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021,7, 73 17 of 19 13. Laidroo, L.; Koroleva, E.; Kliber, A.; Rupeika-Apoga, R.; Grigaliuniene, Z. Business models of FinTechs—Difference in similarity? Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2021,46, 101034. [CrossRef] 14. Costa Climent, R.; Haftor, D.M. Value creation through the evolution of business model themes. J. Bus. Res. 2021 ,122, 353–361. [CrossRef] 15. Wannakrairoj, W.; Velu, C. Productivity growth and business model innovation. Econ. Lett. 2021,199, 109679. [CrossRef] 16. Randhawa, K.; Wilden, R.; Gudergan, S. How to innovate toward an ambidextrous business model? The role of dynamic capabilities and market orientation. J. Bus. Res. 2020, in press. [CrossRef] 17. Alpsahin Cullen, U.; De Angelis, R. Circular entrepreneurship: A business model perspective. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021 , in press. 18. Schiavone, F.; Mancini, D.; Leone, D.; Lavorato, D. Digital business models and ridesharing for value co-creation in healthcare: A multi-stakeholder ecosystem analysis. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021,166, 120647. [CrossRef] 19. Hossain, M. Frugal innovation and sustainable business models. Technol. Soc. 2021,64, 101508. [CrossRef] 20. Lindgren, P. Business model innovation leadership: How do SME’s strategically lead business model innovation? Int. J. Bus. Manag. 2012,7, 53–66. [CrossRef] 21. Lindgren, P. Models for Network-Based Open Business Model Innovation; NEFFICS D4.3, Work Package WP4; 2012; Available online: https://studylib.net/doc/8740493/models-for-network-based-open-business-model-innovation (accessed on 19 February 2021). 22. Lindgren, P.; Rasmussen, O.H. The business model cube. J. Multi Bus. Model Innov. Technol. 2013 , 135–182. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287975401_The_Business_Model_Cube (accessed on 21 February 2021). 23. Allee, V.; Schwabe, O.; Krause Babb, M. Value Networks and the True Nature of Collaboration; Innovation at the Intersection of Business and Technology; ValueNet Works; Meghan-Kiffer Press: Tampa, FL, USA, 2011; p. 33. 24. Gordijn, J.; Akkermans, H. Value based requirements engineering: Exploring innovative e-commerce ideas. Requir. Eng. J. 2003 ,8, 114–134. 25. Scheller, C.V.; Hruby, P. Modeling, services and intellectual property rights using POA (possession, ownership, availability). In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Value Modeling and Business Ontologies, Gent, The Netherlands, 4–5 March 2011. 26. Maurya, A. Metoda Running LEAN. Iteracja od Planu A do Planu, Który da Ci Sukces; Helion, wyd. II: Gliwice, Poland, 2013; p. 47. 27. Johnson, M.W.; Christensen, C.M.; Kagermann, H. Reinventing your business model. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2008,86, 50–59. 28. Johnson, M.W. Seizing the White Space: Business Model Innovation for Growth and Renewal; Harvard Business Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2010; pp. 113–173. 29. Afuah, A. Business Model Innovation. Concepts, Analysis, and Cases; Routledge: Abingdon-on-Thames, UK, 2014; p. 12. 30. Muehlhausen, J. Business Models for Dummies; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2013; p. 80. 31. Chesbrough, H.W. Open Business Models: How to Thrive in the New Innovation Landscape; Harvard: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016; pp. 1–272. 32. Westa, J.; Salterb, A.; Vanhaverbekecef, W.; Chesbrough, H. Open innovation: The next decade. Res. Policy 2014 ,43, 805–811. [CrossRef] 33. Seidenstricker, S.; Scheuerle, S.; Linder, C. Business model prototyping—Using the morphological analysis to develop new business models. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2014,148, 102–109. [CrossRef] 34. McGrath, R. Business models: A discovery driven approach. Long Range Plan. 2010,43, 247–261. [CrossRef] 35. Doleski, O.D. Integrated Business Model. Applying the St. Gallen Management Concept to Business Models; Springer Fachmedien: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2015. 36. Michelini, L. Social Innovation and New Business Models. Creating Shared Value in Low-Income Markets; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; p. 30. 37. Iheanachor, N.; David-West, Y.; Umukoro, I.O. Business model innovation at the bottom of the pyramid—A case of mobile money agents. J. Bus. Res. 2021,127, 96–107. [CrossRef] 38. Bojar, E.; Wit, B. Triple bottom line w szablonie modelu biznesu A. Osterwaldera i Y. Pigneura w perspektywie interesariuszy. In Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki ´ Sl ˛askiej, Organizacja i Zarz ˛adzanie; Publishing house of the Silesian University of Technology: Gliwice, Poland, 2016; Volume 99, pp. 37–53. 39. Joyce, A.; Paquin, R. The triple layered business model canvas: A tool to design more sustainable business models. J. Clean. Prod. 2016,135, 1484. [CrossRef] 40. Wirtz, B.W.; Pistoia, A.; Ullrich, S.; Göttel, V. Business models: Origin, development and future research perspectives. Long Range Plan. 2016,49, 36–54. [CrossRef] 41. Souto, J. Business model innovation and business concept innovation as the context of incremental innovation and radical innovation. Tour. Manag. 2015,51, 142–155. [CrossRef] 42. Szromek, A.R.; Herman, K. A business creation in post-industrial tourism objects: Case of the industrial monuments route. Sustainability 2019,11, 1451. [CrossRef] 43. Herman, K.; Szromek, A.R. Przedsi˛ebiorstwo Turystyczne w Uj˛eciu Modelowym. Model Biznesu w Przedsi˛ebiorstwie Turystyki Dziedzictwa Przemysłowego; Wydawnictwo Politechniki ´ Sl ˛askiej: Gliwice, Poland, 2018; pp. 180–202. 44. Szromek, A.R.; Naramski, M. A business model in spa tourism enterprises: Case study from Poland sustainable tourism—Ways to counteract the negative effects of overtourism at tourist attractions and destinations. Sustainability 2019,11, 2880. [CrossRef] J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021,7, 73 18 of 19 45. Mantaguti, F.; Mingotto, E. Innovative business models within niche tourist markets: Shared identity, authenticity and flexibile networks. The case of three Italian SMEs. J. Tour. Res. 2016,6, 9–10. 46. Miguéns, J.; Baggio, R.; Costa, C. Social Media and Tourism Destinations: TripAdvisor Case Study, Advances in Tourism Research. In Proceedings of the IASK International Conference on ‘Advances in Tourism Research’, Aveiro, Portugal, 26–28 May 2008. 47. Inversini, A.; Xiang, Z.; Fesenmaier, D.R. New Media in Travel and Tourism Communication: Toward a New Paradigm. 2011. Available online: https://inversini.files.wordpress.com/008/01/27_cont_9783110266535_inversini_xiang_fesenmaier1.pdf (accessed on 1 August 2019). 48. Ciurea, C.; Filip, F.G. Validation of a business model for cultural heritage institutions. Inform. Econ. 2015,19, 46–56. [CrossRef] 49. Bodenau, A. Innovative value of sustainable tourism practices. In innovation and value creation in experience based tourism. In Proceedings of the 22nd Nordic Symposium in Tourism and Hospitality Research, Bodø, Lofoten, Norway, 24–27 September 2013; pp. 23–25. 50. Cranmer, E.; Jung, T.; Dieck, M.C.T. The Value of Augmented Reality from a Business Model Perspective, E-Review of Tourism Research. 2017. Available online: https://ertr.tamu.edu/ (accessed on 1 August 2019). 51. Haaker, T.; MinhLy, P.T.; Nguyen-Thanh, N.; Hong Nguyen, H.T. Business model innovation through the application of the internet-of-things: A comparative analysis. J. Bus. Res. 2021,126, 126–136. [CrossRef] 52. Havemo, E. A visual perspective on value creation: Exploring patterns in business model diagrams. Eur. Manag. J. 2018 ,36, 441–452. [CrossRef] 53. Prebensen, N.; Dahl, J. Value co-creation significance of tourist resources. Ann. Tour. Res. 2013,42, 240–261. [CrossRef] 54. Diaconu, M.; Dutu, A. Business model in the hospitality industry, from traditional to open innovation. Sci. Bull. Econ. Sci. 2017 , 16, 3–10. 55. Langviniene, N.; Daunoraviˇci ¯ ut ˙ e, I. Factors influencing the success of business model in the hospitality service industry. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015,213, 908. [CrossRef] 56. Kadras, M. Poj˛ecia i typy modeli biznesu. In Zarz ˛adzanie, Organizacje i Organizowanie—Przegl ˛ad Perspektyw Teoretycznych; Klincewicz, K., Ed.; Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarz ˛adzania Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego: Warszawa, Poland, 2016; pp. 298–318. 57. Porter, M. Strategy and the internet. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2001,79, 62–77. [PubMed] 58. Klang, D.; Wallnofer, M.; Hacklin, M. The anatomy of the business model: A syntactical review and research agenda. In Opening up Innovation: Strategy, Organization and Technology; Imperial College Business School: London, UK, 2010; pp. 2–32. 59. Dodds, R.; Butler, R.W. Overtourism. Issues, realitis and solutions. In De Gruyter Studies in Tourism 1; De Gruyter Oldenbourg: Berlin, Germany, 2019; pp. 1–22. 60. Geissdoerfer, M.; Bocken, N.M.; Hultink, E.J. Design thinking to enhance the sustainable business modelling process—A workshop based on a value mapping process. J. Clean. Prod. 2016,135, 1218–1232. [CrossRef] 61. Abdelkafi, N.; Täuscher, K. Business models for sustainability from a system dynamics perspective. Organ. Environ. 2016 ,29, 74–96. [CrossRef] 62. Butler, R.W.; Szromek, A.R. Incorporating the value proposition for society with business models of health tourism enterprises. Sustainability 2019,11, 6711. [CrossRef] 63. Nosratabadi, S.; Mosavi, A.; Shamshirband, S.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Rakotonirainy, A.; Wing Chau, K. Sustainable business models: A review. Sustainability 2019,11, 1663. [CrossRef] 64. Porter, M.E.; Kramer, M.R. The big idea: Creating shared value. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2011,89, 62–77. 65. Naramski, M.; Szromek, A.R. Configuring a trust-based inter-organizational cooperation network for post-industrial tourist organizations on a tourist route. Sustainability 2019,11, 3542. [CrossRef] 66. Boons, F.; Lüdeke-Freund, F. Business models for sustainable innovation: State-of-the-art and steps towards a research agenda. J. Clean. Prod. 2013,45, 9–19. [CrossRef] 67. Zhenhua, L. Sustainable tourism development: A critique. J. Sustain. Tour. 2003,11, 459–475. 68. Badunenkoa, O.; Kumbhakar, S.C.; Lozano-Vivas, A. Interfaces with other disciplines achieving a sustainable cost-efficient business model in banking: The case of European commercial banks. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2021, in press. 69. Karami, M.; Madlener, R. Business model innovation for the energy market: Joint value creation for electricity retailers and their customers. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2021,73, 101878. [CrossRef] 70. Okur, Ö.; Heijnen, P.; Lukszo, Z. Aggregator’s business models in residential and service sectors: A review of operational and financial aspects. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021,139, 110702. [CrossRef] 71. Hiteva, R.; Foxon, T.J. Beware the value gap: Creating value for users and for the system through innovation in digital energy services business models. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021,166, 120525. [CrossRef] 72. Rövekamp, P.; Schöpf, M.; Wagon, F.; Weibelzahl, M.; Fridgen, G. Renewable electricity business models in a post feed-in tariff era. Energy 2021,216, 119228. [CrossRef] 73. von Delft, S.; Zhao, Y. Business models in process industries: Emerging trends and future research. Technovation 2021 , in press. [CrossRef] 74. Pieroni, M.P.P.; McAloone, T.C.; Borgianni, Y.; Maccioni, L.; Pigosso, D.C.A. An expert system for circular economy business modelling: Advising manufacturing companies in decoupling value creation from resource consumption. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2021,27, 534–550. [CrossRef] J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021,7, 73 19 of 19 75. Feng, J.; Liub, Z.; Feng, L. Identifying opportunities for sustainable business models in manufacturing: Application of patent analysis and generative topographic mapping. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2021,27, 509–522. [CrossRef] 76. Pachura, P. The role of space in the business models of microbreweries. Appl. Geogr. 2021,125, 102303. [CrossRef] 77. Ming Luo, J.; Fung Lam, C.; Haobin Ye, B. Barriers for the sustainable development of entertainment tourism in Macau. Sustainability 2019,11, 2145. 78. Norris, M.; West, S. E-Biznes; Wydawnictwa Komunikacji i Ł ˛aczno´sci: Warszawa, Poland, 2001; p. 179. 79. Grefen, P. Mastering e-Business; Routledge: Abingdon-on-Thames, UK, 2010; Volume 1, pp. 16–32. 80. Cape Town Declaration on Responsible Tourism. The Cape Town Conference on Responsible Tourism in Destinations. Responsible Tourism Partnership and Western Cape Tourism. Cape Town 2018. Available online: https://responsibletourismpartnership.org/ cape-town-declaration-on-responsible-tourism/ (accessed on 1 August 2020). 81. Siakwah, P.; Musavengane, R.; Leonard, L. Tourism governance and attainment of the sustainable development goals in Africa. Tour. Plan. Dev. 2020,17, 355–383. [CrossRef] 82. Onwezen, M.C.; Antonides, G.; Bartels, J. The norm activation model: An exploration of the functions of anticipated pride and guilt in pro-environmental behavior’. J. Econ. Psychol. 2013,39, 141–153. [CrossRef] 83. Stern, P.C. Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. J. Soc. Issues 2000,56, 407–424. [CrossRef] 84. Stern, P.C.; Dietz, T.; Abel, T.; Guagnano, G.A.; Kalof, L. A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Human Ecol. Rev. 1999,6, 81–97. 85. Yun, J.J. Business Model Design Compass. Open Innovation Funnel to Schumpeterian New Combination Business Model Developing Circle; Management for Professionals; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; pp. 1–248. 86. Bhatti, S.H.; Santoro, G.; Khan, J.; Rizzato, F. Antecedents and consequences of business model innovation in the IT industry. J. Bus. Res. 2021,123, 389–400. [CrossRef] 87. Aziz, E.; Mustapha, H.; Jamila, E.A. A bibliometric study of the recent advances in open innovation concept. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2020,175, 683–688. [CrossRef] 88. Banu, G.S.; Dumitrescu, A.; Purcărea, A.A.; Isărescu, S.W. Defining open innovation concept using business process modeling. Procedia Technol. 2016,22, 1020–1027. [CrossRef] 89. Chesbrough, H.W. Business model innovation: It’s not just about technology anymore. Strategy Leadersh. 2007 ,35, 12–17. [CrossRef] 90. Amit, R.; Zott, C. Creating value through business model innovation. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 2012,53, 41–49. 91. Yun, J.J.; Zhao, X. Business model innovation through a rectangular compass: From the perspective of open innovation with mechanism design. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2020,6, 131. [CrossRef] 92. Yun, J.J.; Zhao, X.; Wu, J.; Yi, J.C.; Park, K.; Jung, W. Business model, open innovation, and sustainability in car sharing industry—Comparing three economies. Sustainability 2020,12, 1883. [CrossRef] 93. Szromek, A.R.; Romaniuk, P.; Hadzik, A. The privatization of spa companies in Poland—An evaluation of policy assumptions and implementation. Health Policy 2016,120, 362–368. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 94. Szromek, A.R.; Kapczy´nski, A. Hypot heses concerning the development of Polish spas in the years 1949–2006. Tour. Manag. 2008 , 29, 1035–1037. 95. Health Resort Treatment. Health resorts, health resort protection areas and health resort communes act of July 28, 2005. J. Laws 2005 . Available online: https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU20051671399 (accessed on 19 February 2021). 96. Polska Grupa Uzdrowisk. Available online: www.uzdrowiska-pgu.pl (accessed on 19 February 2021).