Business Model Innovation and Organizational Performance

Business Model Innovation and Organizational Performance

Allan Njeru, Dr. Joanes Kyongo, Dr. Eunice Wandiga

School of Business and Economics, Daystar University Nairobi, Kenya

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.909000704

Received: 14 September 2025; Accepted: 19 September 2025; Published: 27 October 2025

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of business model innovation on the performance of insurance firms in Kenya. The study employed a descriptive and correlational research design, focusing on all 52 insurance companies in Kenya. The target population comprised general managers, underwriting managers, claims managers, and marketing managers, totaling 156 participants. A census approach was adopted due to the manageable population size. Primary data was collected using a structured questionnaire, which was pre-tested on 16 respondents from the insurance sector who were excluded from the main study. The validity of the questionnaire was ensured through face validity, while reliability was measured using Cronbach’s Alpha, with a threshold of 0.7. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics (means, frequencies, and standard deviations) to summarize data and inferential statistics (Pearson’s correlation and multiple linear regression) to examine relationships between variables. The findings revealed that value creation innovation, value proposition innovation, and value capture innovation each had a positive and significant effect on the organizational performance of insurance firms in Kenya. Specifically, value creation innovation (β=0.294, p=0.001), value proposition innovation (β=0.329, p=0.000), and value capture innovation (β=0.229, p=0.000) were all positively associated with performance. The study concluded that adopting premium discounts for low-risk customers improves retention, while using risk-based pricing models enhances market share and profitability. It was recommended that insurance firms should invest in digital platforms for customer engagement and adopt advanced technologies like Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning to enhance claims processing and underwriting efficiency.

Keywords: Business Model Innovation, Insurance Firms, Organizational Performance, Disruption Innovation Theory, Resource Based View Theory, Dynamic Capabilities Theory.

INTRODUCTION

The insurance industry in Kenya plays a critical role in economic development by providing risk management solutions, fostering financial security, and enabling investments. Despite a steady annual growth in Gross Written Premium (GWP) of 8% (IRA, 2023), profitability in the sector has remained stagnant due to rising operational costs and increasing claims, particularly in health and motor insurance. This situation highlights the need for innovative approaches to enhance profitability and sustainability in the sector. One such approach is Business Model Innovation (BMI), which involves redefining how a firm creates, delivers, and captures value (Schaller & Vatananan-Thesenvitz, 2019).

Business model innovation (BMI) is a strategic approach that goes beyond product or service improvements, transforming the core operational structure of a business. It encompasses value creation innovation, which focuses on optimizing internal processes and leveraging technology to enhance efficiency (Andreini et al., 2022). It also includes value proposition innovation, which involves offering differentiated products and services to meet customer needs, and value capture innovation, which aims at optimizing revenue streams and reducing operational costs (Martinez et al., 2021). In a competitive and evolving market, BMI is crucial for firms seeking to maintain or improve performance.

Globally, insurance firms have leveraged BMI to enhance competitiveness. In Europe, Allianz has adopted AI-driven underwriting and predictive analytics, improving customer retention (Pfeifer & Langen, 2021). In the United Kingdom, Aviva has enhanced profitability through AI-powered dynamic pricing (Oduro et al., 2022). In Africa, South Africa’s insurance market, which accounts for 70% of the continent’s premiums, has shown significant growth through BMI, emphasizing customer engagement and technology adoption (Huneberg, 2020). Nigeria’s insurance sector, despite a low penetration rate of 2-2.4%, has seen improvements among  firms like AXA Mansard, which have adopted digital platforms for customer engagement (Odunmbaku et al., 2024).

Kenya’s insurance sector is composed of 52 licensed insurance companies (28 non-life, 15 life, and 9 composite insurers), alongside numerous intermediaries, including 221 insurance brokers, 9348 insurance agents, and 31 medical insurance providers (IRA, 2023). The sector is regulated by the Insurance Regulatory Authority (IRA), which enforces industry standards, monitors solvency, and ensures consumer protection. Despite these measures, many firms in the sector struggle with outdated technology, inefficient processes, and inadequate risk management strategies, which hinder profitability and market share growth (Njuguna et al., 2022). The study is underpinned by Disruptive Innovation Theory, Resource Based View Theory, Dynamic Capabilities Theory, and Institutional Theory.

Business Model Innovation

Business model innovation, as defined by Lastras (2023), involves creating, modifying, or redefining a business model’s essential components to introduce new value propositions, explore untapped markets, and achieve a competitive advantage. Climent et al. (2021) describe it as the simultaneous transformation of an organization’s core operational model and value proposition to enhance competitive advantage and value creation.

Martinez et al. (2021) emphasize that business model innovation (BMI) is crucial for firms to adapt to changing market conditions and customer preferences, ensuring long-term sustainability and competitiveness. Sjödin et al. (2020) define BMI as the process of enhancing value creation, value proposition, and value capture by reengineering processes, differentiating offerings, and optimizing revenue streams, enabling firms to maintain operational efficiency and financial viability.

Organizational performance

Sweis et al. (2019) defines organizational performance as the degree to which a company accomplishes its goals, emphasizing the fulfillment of predetermined goals. From the perspective of Mura et al., (2021), organizational performance includes financial performance, product-market performance, and shareholder returns. Shet et al. (2019) posits that organizational performance represents the effective execution of processes to meet organizational goals efficiently. Akpa et al., (2021) characterize it as the quantification of efficiency and effectiveness in organizational actions.

Traditionally, organizational performance has centered on financial metrics such as profit margins and ROI to show an organization’s economic health. Financial indicators signal the capacity to generate shareholder wealth, though they often overlook other essential non-financial performance dimensions like customer satisfaction, market growth, product/service quality, and employee engagement (Adam et al., 2022).

Insurance firms in Kenya

Kenya’s insurance sector consists of 52 licensed insurers, including 28 non-life insurers, 15 life insurers, and 9 composite insurers, alongside other participants such as 221 insurance brokers, 9348 insurance agents, 32 insurance surveyors, 142 insurance investigators, and 31 medical insurance providers. The sector is regulated by the Insurance Regulatory Authority (IRA), which enforces the Insurance Act to ensure financial stability, consumer protection, and market growth. The IRA oversees licensing, monitors insurers’ solvency, and enforces risk-based capital requirements, promoting transparency and accountability. However, the sector continues to face challenges, including adapting to digital advancements and evolving customer expectations (Kajwang, 2021).

Business Model Innovation and Organizational Performance

Kieti et al. (2021) conducted a study to explore how an aggregator platform for digital agriculture services can create value at an industry level and support the digital transformation of agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa,

with a focus on Kenya. The researchers employed a parallel convergent mixed methods approach. Quantitative data were gathered from 405 respondents and analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis, which adapted a two-factor structure based on Amit and Zott’s (2001) e-Business value creation framework. Additionally, thematic analysis of 369 qualitative responses examined further platform inclusivity aspects. The study found that search costs related to user experience were most influential in driving efficiency across the platform. It was also found that the platform’s ability to guarantee quality and reliability significantly impacted user loyalty. The study concluded that an aggregator platform for digital agriculture services can create industry-wide value by improving efficiency and fostering loyalty through quality assurance.

Widayanti and Meria (2023) conducted a study on Business modeling innovation using artificial intelligence technology. Using a sample of 162 global startups, the researchers developed a taxonomy of business models for AI companies. Four archetypal business models were identified from this sample, including deep technology researcher, data analytics supplier, AI product and service provider, and facilitator of AI development. Three key components of startup business models for AI companies were identified from the results. These included novel value propositions, value-creation applications of data, and general business logic.

Schmidt and Scaringella (2020) explore how value proposition innovation (VPI) contributes to disruptive innovation and business performance in Germany. The study used survey data collected from 98 German strategy executives and analyzed it through partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). The study found that VPI activities, specifically around new offerings and channels, is a key mechanism through which value proposition innovation led to increased business performance. The study concluded that VPI is crucial in translating dynamic capabilities into disruptive innovation.  The study presents a conceptual gap since the focus was on the value proposition innovation element of BMI. The current study considers other elements which are value creation innovation and value capture innovation.

Meeme and Bichanga (2022) investigated how Kenyan commercial banks’ financial performance was affected by different client value propositions, including superior, functional, economic, and symbolic. As of 2020, a descriptive research design was employed to examine Kenya’s forty licensed commercial banks. The study gathered primary and secondary data for analysis, focusing on managers of operations, retail banking, and finance from each bank. The findings showed that the financial performance of Kenyan commercial banks is positively and significantly impacted by all four value propositions: superior (β = 0.242, P < 0.05), symbolic (β = 0.151, P < 0.05), economic (β = 0.155, P < 0.05), and functional (β = 0.139, P < 0.05). The results imply that better financial outcomes for the banks result from a greater uptake of these value propositions. According to the study’s findings, value propositions are essential for financial performance, and banks should continuously evaluate client demands and modify their value propositions to draw in and keep more clients.

Sjödin et al. (2020) explored how alignment in value capture activities during business model innovation influences business success in Sweden. The study examined six case studies, two successful and four unsuccessful, of business model innovation shifts. The researchers developed a process model to analyze the three phases of collaboration with customers: value proposition definition, value provision design, and value-in-use delivery. The study found that aligning the design of the value offering and determining a profit formula are critical to effective value capture. The study concluded that successful business model innovation requires alignment of value capture activities across all phases of the process.

The causes and effects of business model innovation in Pakistan’s IT sector were examined by Bhatti et al. in 2021. 78 development managers were chosen by stratified sampling from 119 IT companies in Pakistan that were the subject of the study. Data analysis using SEM revealed that organizational agility, top management mindfulness, and knowledge absorption ability were antecedents of business model innovation. The results demonstrated that senior management’s agility, attention, and capacity for information absorption all significantly contribute to business model innovation. Furthermore, it was found that business model innovation acted as a mediator in the relationship between these factors and company performance.

Zhang et al. (2023) investigated how business model innovation acted as a mediator between the digital change of manufacturing and business performance. 255 Chinese manufacturing companies participated in the survey. Using the ambidexterity hypothesis, the researchers divided digital transformation into two categories: exploitative and explorative. The results demonstrated that business model innovation has a major mediating effect and that both exploitative and exploratory digital revolutions have a significant and beneficial impact on corporate performance.

Similarly, Bashir et al., (2023) studied the mediating effect of business model innovation on the relationship between managerial ties and SME performance. The study used the institutional theory. The study involved 280 Saudi-based small and medium-sized firms. The respondents included the top level and middle level managers. A 9-item scale measuring BMI was adopted from Spieth and Schneider (2016). SME Performance was measured in comparison with directly competing firms using a five-item scale based on that of Venkatraman and Ramanujam (1986). The study found that BMI partially mediates the relationship between managerial ties and firm performance.

Waithaka (2023) investigated how organizational culture moderates the link between competitive advantage and strategic competitive intelligence inputs among Kenyan commercial banks. This study employed a descriptive and explanatory research approach, and primary data was gathered at each bank’s head office, which is located in Nairobi. Utilizing a semi-structured questionnaire, primary data was gathered. Both descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data. The association between competitive advantage and strategic competitive intelligence inputs among Kenyan commercial banks was shown to be moderated by organizational culture.

METHODOLOGY

This study employed a combination of descriptive and correlational research designs. Descriptive research design was chosen for its capacity to collect comprehensive data from a large sample efficiently and cost-effectively, while the correlational design enabled the assessment of relationships between independent and dependent variables, determining their strength and direction without establishing causality.

The population of the study consisted of all 52 licensed insurance firms in Kenya, which include 28 general insurers, 9 life insurers, and 15 composite insurers. The target population was the general managers, underwriting managers, and claims managers from these firms. This study used a census approach due to the small size of the population (156 managers across 52 firms). A census approach ensures complete coverage of the population and avoids sampling bias, making the results more accurate and representative. Therefore, all 156 managers (general managers, underwriting managers, and claims managers) from the 52 insurance firms in Kenya were included in the study. Primary data was collected using a structured questionnaire which helped in collecting both quantitative and qualitative data. Before the actual data collection, pre-testing was conducted to assess the clarity and completeness of the questionnaire. A sample of 16 respondents from the target population participated in the pretest. The reliability of the questionnaire was evaluated using the Cronbach’s Alpha.

RESULTS

Table 1: Reliability Results

Source: Research Data (20

Correlation Analysis

Product Pearson Moment Correlation analysis was conducted to determine the strength and direction of the relationship between business model innovation and organizational performance. The results were as shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Correlation Analysis

The findings showed positive and significant relationship between value creation innovation and organizational performance (r=0.686, p=0.000). This implies that an improvement in value creation innovation would lead to an improvement in performance of insurance Companies in Kenya. The findings agree with that of Freudenreich et al. (2020) who established that enhancing value creation through innovative service delivery and customer-centric strategies significantly improved organizational performance. Value creation acts as a key driver of competitive advantage and positively influences the financial and operational performance of firms by fostering customer loyalty.

The findings also revealed that value proposition innovation and performance of insurance firms are positively and significantly related (r=0.769, p=0.000). This indicates that more value proposition in the insurance companies would result to an improvement in performance. The findings concur with that of Schmidt and Scaringella (2020) who found that a strong value proposition enhances customer perception, satisfaction, and trust, which in turn drives better organizational performance, particularly in knowledge-intensive and service-oriented industries. Similarly, as per Osterwalder et al. (2020) organizations adapt their products or services in ways that align with specific customer pain points, thereby enhancing the customer experience through value proposition innovation.

Similarly, the study established that value capture innovation and performance were positively and significantly related (r=0.728, p=0.000). Thus, enhancing value capture innovation in the insurance firms in Kenya would result to improved performance. This result is in tandem with that of Urbinati et al. (2019) that value capture innovation is paramount in translating created value into measurable performance outcomes, especially in dynamic and competitive markets like the insurance industry. Schreieck et al. (2021) also presents that the necessity of value capture innovation lies in its ability to drive organizational growth by creating efficient, sustainable revenue streams.

Regression Analysis

A multiple linear regression analysis was used to show the effect of value creation innovation, value proposition innovation and value capture innovation on organizational performance of Insurance firms in Kenya. Analysis results are displayed with Table 3 containing the model summary, while Table 7 and 8 contains the ANOVA results (model fitness) and regression coefficients respectively.

Table 3: Regression Analysis

Model Summary

From the results in Table 3, the R is 0.0858 which shows that the business model innovation aspects have a strong positive and significant relationship with organizational performance of insurance firms in Kenya. The R square is 0.737 which indicates that 73.7% of the variation in organizational performance of insurance firms in Kenya is explained by business model innovation that encompasses value creation innovation, value proposition innovation and value capture innovation. This shows that 26.3% of the variations in performance of insurance firms is explained by other factors not in the current study. This suggests a very strong relationship between BMI and organizational performance of insurance firms in Kenya.

ANOVA results in Table 3 shows the fitness of the model predicting the relationship between value creation innovation, value proposition innovation and value capture innovation and organizational performance of insurance firms in Kenya. The calculated F statistic was 124.997 and the corresponding p value was 0.000. This shows that the model summary explaining the relationship between Business Model Innovation and performance of insurance firms was significant. It implies that value creation innovation, value proposition innovation and value capture innovation are significant predictors of organizational performance of Insurance firms in Kenya. The model demonstrates that implementing innovative business models such as redefining value propositions, enhancing value creation and capture mechanisms, or restructuring delivery channels contributes meaningfully to improving the overall performance of insurance firms. As Roldán and Schilling (2022) note, organizations with a robust culture of innovation prioritize creative problem-solving and establish systems that reward continuous experimentation. This approach enables the creation of transformative solutions, positioning the organization to excel in increasingly complex and competitive environments.

The results of regression analysis in Table 3 showed that value creation innovation have a positive and significant effect on organizational performance of insurance firms in Kenya (β=0.294, p=0.001). This implies that a unit improvement in value creation would lead to an improved performance by 0.294 units. The findings agree with that of Kulkov et al., (2023) who emphasized that value creation innovation through the development of new products, services, and business models significantly enhances organizational performance by enabling firms to meet evolving customer needs. Nethravathi et al. (2022) also opine that organizations employing value creation innovation see enhanced customer retention rates, which translates into sustained revenue growth and a stable customer base. Similarly, it was found that value proposition innovation has a positive and significant effect on organizational performance of insurance firms in Kenya (β=0.329, p=0.000). It shows that a unit increase in value reposition innovation would lead to an improved performance in insurance firms by 0.329 units. The findings concur with that of Meeme and Bichanga (2022) that value propositions are essential for financial performance, and banks should continuously evaluate client demands and modify their value propositions to draw in and keep more clients.

Furthermore, there was positive and significant effect of value capture innovation on organizational performance of insurance firms in Kenya (β=0.299, p=0.02). This shows that a unit increase in value capture innovation would lead to an improved organizational performance by 0.229 units. This agrees with the findings by   Sjödin et al. (2020) who found that aligning the design of the value offering and determining a profit formula are critical to effective value capture among Swedish businesses. De Stefano et al., (2022) emphasizes that value capture innovation improves performance by helping firms adjust pricing, manage costs, and refine revenue models to suit market demands.

From the findings, the regression model was thus:

Performance =0.197 + 0.294 value creation innovation+ 0.329 value proposition innovation + 0.229 Value Capture innovation +e

DISCUSSION

The findings from the correlation and regression analyses underscore the significant influence of business model innovation dimensions—namely, value creation, value proposition, and value capture—on the performance of insurance firms in Kenya. The positive relationship between value creation and performance supports Freudenreich et al. (2020), who asserted that firms that innovate around customer-centric service delivery enhance customer loyalty and gain a competitive advantage. Similarly, Nethravathi et al. (2022) emphasized that firms leveraging innovative value creation mechanisms experience improved customer retention and sustained revenue growth. This suggests that insurance firms adopting proactive strategies to meet evolving client expectations are better positioned to enhance operational efficiency and strategic performance outcomes.

Furthermore, the influence of value proposition innovation on performance aligns with Schmidt and Scaringella (2020), who observed that a clear and differentiated value proposition fosters customer satisfaction and trust—both of which are critical for performance in service-oriented industries. The significant effect of value capture innovation further corroborates Urbinati et al. (2019), who highlighted the role of innovative revenue models in translating created value into financial success. As De Stefano et al. (2022) argue, effective value capture enables firms to adapt their pricing, cost structures, and revenue streams in response to market pressures. Taken together, these findings affirm the theoretical perspective that business model innovation is a strategic lever through which insurance firms can navigate dynamic environments, unlock value, and achieve sustainable performance improvements.

CONCLUSION

It was concluded that value creation innovation positively influences the performance of insurance firms in Kenya by enhancing customer retention and market share through premium discounts, risk-based pricing, and cross-selling strategies. It was further concluded that value proposition innovation improves customer satisfaction and loyalty by offering personalized services tailored to customer needs and ensuring transparency in claims processes. Additionally, it was concluded that value capture innovation promotes a customer-centric and performance-oriented culture, rewarding low-risk customers, utilizing risk-based pricing, and implementing loyalty programs to drive revenue growth.

SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

Future studies should consider conducting cross-country comparisons within Africa to explore how business model innovation (BMI) influences firm performance under different regulatory and cultural conditions. Researchers should aim to incorporate longitudinal data to assess how BMI affects firm sustainability over time. Future work could also examine the role of mediating and moderating variables to unpack the mechanisms through which BMI impacts performance. It is recommended that upcoming studies include qualitative methods, such as interviews or case studies, to capture managerial experiences with innovation. Researchers should also explore how digital transformation and sustainability-focused innovations are shaping outcomes in the insurance industry.

REFERENCES

1. Adam, A., Abdullah, W. R. W., Maruhun, E. N. S., Anwar, I. S. K., & Salin, A. S. A. P. (2022). The resource-based view theory and women microbusiness entrepreneurs: a contribution to business sustainability. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 12(10), 2915-2932. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v12-i10/15103
2. Akpa, V. O., Asikhia, O. U., & Nneji, N. E. (2021). Organizational culture and organizational performance: A review of literature. International Journal of Advances in Engineering and Management, 3(1),361-372. https://www.publications.calebuniversity.edu.ng/caleb_uploads/2024/04/Organizational-Culture-and-Organizational-Performance-A-Review-of-Literature.pdf
3. Al-Nimer, M., Abbadi, S. S., Al-Omush, A., & Ahmad, H. (2021). Risk management practices and firm performance with a mediating role of business model innovation. Observations from Jordan. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 14(3), 113. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm14030113
4. Al-Zuhairi, A. K. H. (2024). Analysis of Underwriting Activity and its Impact on the Profitability Ratios of the Insurance Companies Listed in the Iraq Stock Exchange. Studia Universitatis Vasile Goldiş, Arad-Seria Ştiinţe Economice, 34(2), 1-31. https://intapi.sciendo.com/pdf/10.2478/sues-2024-0006
5. Andreini, D., Bettinelli, C., Foss, N. J., & Mismetti, M. (2022). Business model innovation: a review of the process-based literature. Journal of Management and Governance, 26(4), 1089-1121. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10997-021-09590-w.pdf
6. Ariwibowo, P., Saputro, F. B., & Haryanto, H. (2021). Analysis of Strength & Weakness, Using the Concept of Resource-Based View with the VRIO Framework in Sharia Cooperatives. Jurnal Manajemen Strategi dan Aplikasi Bisnis, 4(1), 279-294. http://www.ejournal.imperiuminstitute.org/index.php/JMSAB/article/view/31
7. Asmal, Z., Bhorat, H., Martin, L. C., & Rooney, C. (2023). Technological Change in the Insurance Sector in South Africa. https://commerce.uct.ac.za/sites/default/files/media/documents/commerce_uct_ac_za/1093/DPRU%20WP%20202306.pdf
8. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17(1), 99-120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
9. Bashir, M., Alfalih, A., & Pradhan, S. (2023). Managerial ties, business model innovation & SME performance: Moderating role of environmental turbulence. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 8(1), 100329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2023.100329
10. Beamish, P. W., & Chakravarty, D. (2021). Using the resource-based view in multinational enterprise research. Journal of Management, 47(7), 1861-1877. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206321995575
11. Bhatti, S. H., Santoro, G., Khan, J., & Rizzato, F. (2021). Antecedents and consequences of business model innovation in the IT industry. Journal of Business Research, 123, 389-400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.003
12. Chatterjee, S., Chaudhuri, R., Vrontis, D., & Thrassou, A. (2023). Revisiting the resource-based view (RBV) theory: from cross-functional capabilities perspective in post COVID-19 period. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2023.2182447
13. Chiaramonte, L., Dreassi, A., Paltrinieri, A., & Piserà, S. (2020). Sustainability practices and stability in the insurance industry. Sustainability, 12(14), 5530. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12145530
14. Christensen, C. M. (2006). The ongoing process of building a theory of disruption. Journal of Product innovation management, 23(1). https://www.academia.edu/download/54709292/The-Ongoing-Process-of-Building-a-Theory-of-Disruption.pdf
15. Clauss, T., Abebe, M., Tangpong, C., & Hock, M. (2019). Strategic agility, business model innovation, and firm performance: an empirical investigation. IEEE transactions on engineering management, 68(3), 767-784. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2019.2910381
16. Clauss, T., Breier, M., Kraus, S., Durst, S., & Mahto, R. V. (2022). Temporary business model innovation–SMEs’ innovation response to the Covid‐19 crisis. R&d Management, 52(2), 294-312. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12498
17. Climent, R. C., & Haftor, D. M. (2021). Value creation through the evolution of business model themes. Journal of Business Research, 122, 353-361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.007
18. De Stefano, F., Bidwell, M., & Camuffo, A. (2022). Do managers capture the value they create? Drivers of managers’ value capture in a large retail chain. Strategic Management Journal, 43(10), 1983-2011. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3401
19. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American sociological review, 48(2), 147-160. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691229270-005
20. Freudenreich, B., Lüdeke-Freund, F., & Schaltegger, S. (2020). A stakeholder theory perspective on business models: Value creation for sustainability. Journal of business ethics, 166(1), 3-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04112-z
21. Ghumiem, S. H., Alawi, N. A., Abd A-A, A. R., & Masaud, K. A. (2023). Corporate culture and its effects on organizational performance: multi-group analysis evidence from developing countries. European Journal of Business and Management Research, 8(2), 142-148. http://dx.doi.org/24018/ejbmr.2023.8.2.1890
22. Greenwood, R., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms. Academy of Management journal, 49(1), 27-48. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.20785498
23. Haaker, T., Ly, P. T. M., Nguyen-Thanh, N., & Nguyen, H. T. H. (2021). Business model innovation through the application of the Internet-of-Things: A comparative analysis. Journal of Business Research, 126, 126-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.12.034
24. Hellström, D., & Olsson, J. (2024). Let’s go thrift shopping: exploring circular business model innovation in fashion retail. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 198, 123000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.123000
25. Huneberg, S. (2020). The future of robo-advisors in the South African insurance industry: Is the South African Regulatory Framework ready?. SA Mercantile Law Journal, 32(2), 175-204. https://hdl.handle.net/10520/ejc-jlc_samlj-v32-n2-a1
26. Ige-Gbadeyan, O. O. (2023). Evaluation of operational efficiency and financial health of non-life insurance companies in South Africa (Doctoral dissertation). https://doi.org/10.51415/10321/5300
27. Kajwang, B. (2021). Challenges facing insurance brokers in Kenya. European Journal of Business and Strategic Management, 6(2), 30-36. https://doi.org/10.47604/ejbsm.1438
28. Key, T. M., Clark, T., Ferrell, O. C., Stewart, D. W., & Pitt, L. (2020). Marketing’s theoretical and conceptual value proposition: Opportunities to address marketing’s influence. AMS Review, 10, 151-167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00176-7
29. Kourtzidis, S., & Tzeremes, N. G. (2020). Investigating the determinants of firm performance: A qualitative comparative analysis of insurance companies. European Journal of Management and Business Economics, 29(1), 3-22.
30. Kraus, S., Vonmetz, K., Orlandi, L. B., Zardini, A., & Rossignoli, C. (2023). Digital entrepreneurship: The role of entrepreneurial orientation and digitalization for disruptive innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 193, 122638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122638
31. Kulkov, I., Ivanova-Gongne, M., Bertello, A., Makkonen, H., Kulkova, J., Rohrbeck, R., & Ferraris, A. (2023). Technology entrepreneurship in healthcare: Challenges and opportunities for value creation. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 8(2), 100365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2023.100365
32. Kyi, S. S. (2023). Customer Satisfaction of General Insurance Claims Process in KBZMS General Insurance Company Limited (Doctoral dissertation, MERAL Portal). file:///C:/Users/HP/Downloads/Su%20Su%20Kyi,%20MBF-51,%20MBF%20(Day)%20Batch%203%20(3).pdf
33. Lastras, F. S. A. (2023). A holistic approach for Business Model Innovation in the EV ecosystem: a role-based approach for analyzing BMI (Doctoral dissertation, Université Paris-Saclay). https://theses.hal.science/tel-04506554/
34. Latifi, M. A., Nikou, S., & Bouwman, H. (2021). Business model innovation and firm performance: Exploring causal mechanisms in SMEs. Technovation, 107, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102274
35. Mahto, R. V., Belousova, O., & Ahluwalia, S. (2020). Abundance–A new window on how disruptive innovation occurs. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 155, 119064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.008
36. Martinez, G., Renukappa, S., & Suresh, S. (2021). Business model innovation in small enterprises from developing countries during COVID-19 outbreak: exploring drivers and BMI outcomes. International Journal of Business Environment, 12(4), 364-388. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBE.2021.118554
37. Meeme, J. G., & Bichanga, J. (2022). Influence of Customer Value Proposition on Financial Performance of Commercial Banks in Kenya. Journal of International Business, Innovation and Strategic Management, 6(1), 40-57. https://www.jibism.org/core_files/index.php/JIBISM/article/view/179
38. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American journal of sociology, 83(2), 340-363. https://doi.org/10.1086/226550
39. Meyer, J. W., & Scott, W. R. (1994). The Legalization of Workplace. University of Chicago, 99(4), 944-971. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2781736
40. Morara, K., & Sibindi, A. B. (2021). Assessing the solvency, underwriting Risk and Profitability of the Kenyan Insurance Sector. Acta Universitatis Danubius. Œconomica, 17(5). https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=1010674
41. Moreno, I., Parrado-Martínez, P., & Trujillo-Ponce, A. (2022). Using the Z-score to analyze the financial soundness of insurance firms. European journal of management and business economics, 31(1), 22-39. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJMBE-09-2020-0261
42. Mugendi, K. S., & Kihara, A. (2024). Influence of Innovation Strategies on the Performance of Insurance Firms in Kenya. Journal of Business and Strategic Management, 9(6), 26–41. https://doi.org/10.47941/jbsm.2297
43. Mura, M., Micheli, P., & Longo, M. (2021). The effects of performance measurement system uses on organizational ambidexterity and firm performance. International Journal of operations & production management, 41(13), 127-151. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-02-2021-0101
44. Mwangi, G. W. (2021). Influence of innovativeness on organizational performance among insurance companies in Kenya. http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/5130
45. Nethravathi, P. S., Adithya, K. M., & Aithal, P. S. (2022). How to align the Vision, Mission, and Objectives of HEI with the Leadership and Governance–A Case of Srinivas University, India. International Journal of Case Studies in Business, IT and Education (IJCSBE), 6(2), 50-66. https://doi.org/10.47992/IJCSBE.2581.6942.0184
46. Njuguna, E., Kabata, D., & Wambugu, H. (2022). Strategic orientation and the performance of insurance companies in Kenya. http://41.89.246.19/handle/123456789/757
47. Odunmbaku, A., Diyaolu, G., Salami, W., & Ganiu, S. (2024). Customer Relationship Management and Organisational Performance of Selected Insurance Firms in Ogun State, Nigeria. UNIZIK Journal of Marketing, 1(3), 124-133. https://journals.unizik.edu.ng/ujofm/article/view/4770
48. Oduro, B., Akpabot, S., Akakpo, A., & Gyasi, E. A. (2024). Market Disruption in the Insurance Industry and Use of Foresight and Futures Thinking to Meet Challenges: A Case Study of Aviva PLC. In Futures Thinking and Organizational Policy, Volume 2: Case Studies for Managing Rapid Change in Social Media, Shift in Wealth and Government Instability (pp. 183-224). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-55956-3_8
49. Opeyemi, A. M., Popoola, A., & Yahaya, O. A. (2020). Firm specific attributes and financial performance of listed insurance companies in Nigeria. Gusau Journal of Accounting and Finance, 1(2), 16-16. https://doi.org/10.57233/gujaf.v1i2.37
50. Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y., Smith, A., & Etiemble, F. (2020). The invincible company: how to constantly reinvent your organization with inspiration from the world’s best business models (Vol. 4). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.54337/jbm.v12i2.8844
51. Pang, C., & Wang, Q. (2024). How digital transformation promotes disruptive innovation? Evidence from Chinese entrepreneurial firms. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 15(2), 7788-7818. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01413-7
52. Pfeifer, D., & Langen, V. (2021). Insurance business and sustainable development. Risk Management, 1-10. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=O7daEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA3&dq=BUSINESS+MODEL+INNOVATION+AND+ORGANIZATIONAL+PERFORMANCE+OF+INSURANCE+FIRMS+in+europe,+Allianz&ots=5DpD2Dw_0r&sig=xC9YSxuAVf-i2SFDmWCwYWRMDRQ
53. Priem, R. L., & Butler, J. E. (2001). Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 22-40. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.27879285
54. Schaller, A. A., & Vatananan-Thesenvitz, R. (2019, August). Business model innovation (BMI) process: A systematic literature review with bibliometric analysis. In 2019 Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET) (pp. 1-12). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.23919/PICMET.2019.8893797
55. Schmidt, A. L., & Scaringella, L. (2020). Uncovering disruptors’ business model innovation activities: evidencing the relationships between dynamic capabilities and value proposition innovation. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 57, 101589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2020.101589
56. Schreieck, M., Wiesche, M., & Krcmar, H. (2021). Capabilities for value co-creation and value capture in emergent platform ecosystems: A longitudinal case study of SAP’s cloud platform. Journal of Information Technology, 36(4), 365-390. https://doi.org/10.1177/02683962211023780
57. Shet, S. V., Patil, S. V., & Chandawarkar, M. R. (2019). Competency based superior performance and organizational effectiveness. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 68(4), 753-773. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-03-2018-0128
58. Sirnelä, L. (2021). Measuring organizational performance for profitability and operational success: the case of a private health care organization. https://www.theseus.fi/handle/10024/502742
59. Sjödin, D., Parida, V., Jovanovic, M., & Visnjic, I. (2020). Value creation and value capture alignment in business model innovation: A process view on outcome‐based business models. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 37(2), 158-183. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12516
60. Sounderajah, V., Patel, V., Varatharajan, L., Harling, L., Normahani, P., Symons, J., … & Ashrafian, H. (2021). Are disruptive innovations recognised in the healthcare literature? A systematic review. BMJ innovations, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjinnov-2020-000424
61. Sweis, R., Obeidat, B., & Kanaan, R. K. (2019). Reviewing the literature on total quality management and organizational performance. Journal of Business & Management (COES&RJ-JBM), 7(3), 192-215. https://doi.org/10.25255/jbm.2019.7.3.192.215
62. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z
63. Urbinati, A., Bogers, M., Chiesa, V., & Frattini, F. (2019). Creating and capturing value from Big Data: A multiple-case study analysis of provider companies. Technovation, 84, 21-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2018.07.004
64. Waithaka, P. W. (2023). Moderation Effect of Organizational Culture on the Relationship Between Strategic Inputs of Competitive Intelligence and Competitive Advantage among Commercial Banks, in Kenya. American Journal of Strategic Studies, 5(1), 40–62. https://doi.org/10.47941/ajss.1225
65. Wang, Z., Lin, S., Chen, Y., Lyulyov, O., & Pimonenko, T. (2023). Digitalization effect on business performance: role of business model innovation. Sustainability, 15(11), 9020. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15119020
66. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource‐based view of the firm. Strategic management journal, 5(2), 171-180. https://conference.untag-sby.ac.id/index.php/icoema/article/view/2196
67. White, J. V., Markin, E., Marshall, D., & Gupta, V. K. (2022). Exploring the boundaries of business model innovation and firm performance: A meta-analysis. Long Range Planning, 55(5), 102242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2022.102242
68. Widayanti, R., & Meria, L. (2023). Business modeling innovation using artificial intelligence technology. International Transactions on Education Technology, 1(2), 95-104. https://doi.org/10.33050/itee.v1i2.270
69. Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 991-995. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.318
70. Zahra, S. A., Sapienza, H. J., & Davidsson, P. (2006). Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: A review, model, and research agenda. Journal of Management Studies, 43(4), 917-955. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00616.x
71. Zarifis, A., Holland, C. P., & Milne, A. (2023). Evaluating the impact of AI on insurance: The four emerging AI-and data-driven business models. Emerald Open Research, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1108/EOR-01-2023-0001
72. Zhang, Y., Ma, X., Pang, J., Xing, H., & Wang, J. (2023). The impact of digital transformation of manufacturing on corporate performance—The mediating effect of business model innovation and the moderating effect of innovation capability. Research in International Business and Finance, 64, 101890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2023.101890