See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/357485403

Strategic Business Model Canvassing for Terracotta Pottery Entrepreneurs in

India

Article in International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business · January 2022

DOI: 10.1504/IJESB.2022.10035507

CITATIONS READS

0 868

5 authors, including:

Bharat Dahiya Parveen Siwach

Thammasat University National Institute of Food Technology Entrepreneurship and Management
96 PUBLICATIONS 923 CITATIONS 9 PUBLICATIONS 20 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Shilpa Sindhu Shweta Dahiya

The Northcap University National Institute of Food Technology Entrepreneurship and Management
28 PUBLICATIONS 95 CITATIONS 15 PUBLICATIONS 21 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Shilpa Sindhu on 16 August 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Int. J. Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Vol. X, No. Y, xxxx 1

Strategic business model canvassing for terracotta

pottery entrepreneurs in India

Anupama Panghal and Shweta Dahiya

Department of Food Business Management and
Entrepreneurship Development (FBM&ED),
National Institute of Food Technology Entrepreneurship and
Management (NIFTEM),
Sonipat, Haryana, India
Email: anupamaniftem@gmail.com
Email: shweta.dahiya@yahoo.co.in

Shilpa Sindhu*
School of Management,
The NorthCap University,
Gurugram, India
Email: shilpasindhu@ncuindia.edu
*Corresponding author

Parveen Siwach
Department of Food Business Management and
Entrepreneurship Development (FBM&ED),
National Institute of Food Technology Entrepreneurship and
Management (NIFTEM),
Sonipat, Haryana, India
Email: Siwach.parveen23@gmail.com

Bharat Dahiya
Research Center for Sustainable Development and Innovation,
School of Global Studies,
Thammasat University,
Learning and Laboratory Building, Piyachart 2,
99 Moo 18 Klong Luang, Rangsit,
Pathumthani 12121, Thailand
Email: bharatdahiya.tu@gmail.com

Abstract: The paper discusses strategic entrepreneurship vis-à-vis terracotta

pottery production in Delhi, India. Pottery artisans face changing regulatory
and market forces, which could result in a severe financial and technological
burden on them. The study suggests strategies to protect this sustainable and
traditional art of entrepreneurship. Present status of business of potters’
community is examined using the business model canvas (BMC) and Porter’s
(2001) industry analysis and value chain model, and a new BMC is proposed.

Copyright © 20XX Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

2 A. Panghal et al.

The strategies based on the new BMC are modelled through Decision-Making
Trial and Evaluation Laboratory Technique (DEMATEL). To sustain
entrepreneurship of terracotta art in India, the proposed strategies include
stakeholders to focus on reducing production costs, conducting training and
development, promoting product innovation, and exploring direct marketing
channels and new customer segments.

Keywords: business model canvas; BMC; terracotta pottery; Porter’s industry

analysis; strategic entrepreneurship; DEMATEL; India.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Panghal, A., Dahiya, S.,
Sindhu, S., Siwach, P. and Dahiya, B. (xxxx) ‘Strategic business
model canvassing for terracotta pottery entrepreneurs in India’,
Int. J. Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Vol. X, No. Y, pp.xxx–xxx.

Biographical notes: Anupama Panghal is an Assistant Professor in the

Department of Food Business Management and Entrepreneurship Development
(FBM&ED) at the National Institute of Food Technology Entrepreneurship and
Management (NIFTEM). Her areas of research interest include agribusiness
management, food supply chain, and agri-entrepreneurship. She is a PhD in
Management and is having more than 13 years of experience in corporate and
academia.

Shweta Dahiya is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Food Business

Management and Entrepreneurship Development (FBM&ED) at the National
Institute of Food Technology Entrepreneurship and Management (NIFTEM)
located in Delhi-NCR. Her areas of research interest include entrepreneurship
and human resource management. She is having more than five years of
experience in academia.

Shilpa Sindhu is an Assistant Professor in the area of Marketing and

Entrepreneurship in the School of Management at The NorthCap University,
Gurugram, India. She is having more than 12 years of experience in corporate
and academia and holds a PhD in Business Administration.

Parveen Siwach is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Food Business

Management and Entrepreneurship Development (FBM&ED) at the National
Institute of Food Technology Entrepreneurship and Management (NIFTEM)
located in Delhi-NCR. He is having the research interest area of
entrepreneurship and finance. He is having three years of experience in
academia. He is currently working in the area of SME IPOs.

Bharat Dahiya directs the Research Center for Sustainable Development and
Innovation at the School of Global Studies, Thammasat University, Bangkok,
Thailand. He is a Distinguished Professor at the Urban Youth Academy, Seoul.
He combines cutting-edge research with policy analysis and development
practice aimed at examining and tackling socio-economic, cultural,
environmental, and governance issues in the global context of sustainable
development.
 Strategic business model canvassing for terracotta pottery entrepreneurs 3

1 Introduction

Strategic entrepreneurship is central to making and assisting transitions in businesses big

or small. Such transitions are both internally generated within businesses or externally
induced. In both cases, it becomes crucial for entrepreneurs and their partners and
stakeholders to understand the evolving circumstances that may include growing or
shrinking markets for products and services, waves of new inventions (Kuratko, 2011;
Time, 2019), and innovations – such as those in diverse and changing social needs for
enhanced connectivity (Dana and Dana, 2005; Seiter, 2016), growing number of
(disruptive) start-ups (Florida and Hathaway, 2018), (instable) financial markets, and all
varieties of regulatory changes (Konara et al., 2016), to name a few. While all these
conditions pose new and unprecedented challenges to entrepreneurs, they also bring
unique opportunities to them to explore and expand new frontiers in developing business.
Terracotta pottery is a traditional way of manufacturing pottery products that reflect
the sustainable and strategic livelihood of a set of people trained in this specialised craft.
Terracotta is one of the forms of earthenware. In India, the earliest evidence of
earthenware vessel production is found as early as 9,000 BCE in the Lahuradewa of
Eastern Uttar Pradesh (Tewari et al., 2008). This art of pottery has evolved and taken
many forms. It has been prevalent in various parts of India, including the states of Andhra
Pradesh, Bengal, Bihar, Delhi, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, and
Uttar Pradesh. Throughout India, the art of terracotta pottery is practiced as occupation
by various artisan communities of potters. One such artisan community is the Prajapati
or Potters’ Community – chosen as a study area for this research – is situated in Uttam
Nagar, Delhi. The Potters Village, India’s most significant potters’ settlement, is known
as ‘Kumhar Gram’. Around 700 terracotta potters of Kumhar Gram’s Prajapati
Community make creative handcrafted earthenware including diyas (earthen lamps),
pots, teacups, showpieces, water vessels, artefacts for socio-religious purposes, and clay
figures. This age-old tradition of pottery making is still the only occupation of the
Prajapati Community.
In the 21st century, the overall business model of traditional pottery artisanship and
the related market for pottery products in India suffers from many important factors:
• small-scale or home-base localised production
• non-standardisation of pottery products
• low levels of technology adoption
• lack of standardised training of terracotta potters compared to in the past
• limited availability of funds for product innovation and promotion
• low sale prices of pottery products that are often sold in local markets
• lack of awareness and education among Potters Community on how to improve their
business or business model.
This traditional art helps in the sustainable development of the country (Dana, 2000;
Lewis, 2008; Satpathi, 2011; Toledo-López et al., 2012; Alonso and Bressan, 2014;
Singh and Fatima, 2015; Sankaran, 2018). However, the intervention of different parties
outside the craft community is a key influencing factor that forces traditional artisans to
4 A. Panghal et al.

take up other professions (Gupta, 1988; Middleton, 2007; Kennedy, 2010; McKitterick
et al., 2016). The terracotta artists need motivation and support to sustain their old age
traditional knowledge and culture of producing pottery (Lewis, 2008; Toledo-López
et al., 2012; Bhatta and Chan, 2016).
The Prajapati Community has been facing severe challenges in recent years. The
Delhi Pollution Control Committee raised concerns that the traditional kiln furnaces use
saw husk, sawdust, rice straw, and cow dung cakes as a fuel that generate a significant
amount of air pollution. As a consequence, the National Green Tribunal in July 2019
‘issued directions to close down around 1,200 pottery units causing air pollution in west
Delhi’ (Press Trust of India, 2019). The artisans, therefore, are left with few options:
either to shift to modern furnaces like electric/gas-based or to change their occupation.
But the options are challenging for the artisans.
Given the above, the objectives of this paper are fourfold:
• to analyse the present state of business of Prajapati potters’ community in Delhi
using business model canvas (BMC)
• to examine the complete industry environment for potters and their complete value
chain using Porter’s (2001) industry analysis and value chain model respectively
• to develop and propose a new BMC for the Prajapati potters’ community
• to model the strategies based on the new BMC through Decision-Making Trial and
Evaluation Laboratory Technique (DEMATEL).
In this study, BMC is used as a tool for mapping the various dimensions of the terracotta
pottery business both in the present scenario and while considering the changing industry
and regulatory requirements. Porter’s (2001) Industry Analysis is applied to examine the
impact of the multiple external forces on the terracotta pottery business so that the
Prajapati Community can decide on which aspects they should target to sustain and
expand their business. Porter’s (2001) value chain model has been used to identify the
weak links in the complete value chain; it can help in identifying the potential activities
which need immediate attention for revamping or survival of a business. Lastly, the
DEMATEL technique has been used to propose a strategic entrepreneurship approach for
Prajapati Community and the relevant stakeholders to protect this traditional art in the
evolving and dynamic business scenario.
The remainder of the paper follows a structure as section 2 presents the literature
review on the general concept of sustainability and terracotta pottery as well as on the
different approaches used in the study, including BMC and Porter’s (2001) industry
analysis and value chain model. Section 3 highlights the key features of the research
design. Section 4 focuses on the results of this study and related discussion on the two
models under study. Section 5 presents the new BMC and the outcomes of the
DEMATEL technique as a strategic approach. Finally, Section 6 offers some concluding
remarks.

2 Literature review

Entrepreneurship is the practice of starting new organisations or revitalising mature

organisations, especially those involving new business generated in response to identified
 Strategic business model canvassing for terracotta pottery entrepreneurs 5

opportunities (Anderson and Ronteau, 2017; Dana, 2000; Leitch et al., 2012; Runge,
2014; Sarkar and Pansera, 2017). Sustainable entrepreneurship brings together social,
environmental, and economic benefits to the society (Anggadwita et al., 2017; Cohen and
Winn, 2007; Dean and McMullen, 2007; Cohen et al., 2008; Henry and Dana, 2017;
Ratten and Dana, 2017; Hockerts and Wustenhagen, 2010; Diochon et al., 2011; Ratten,
2014; Schaltegger and Wagner, 2011; Bjørnskov and Foss, 2013; Gray et al., 2014; Belz
and Binder, 2015; Vuorio et al., 2018; Lu et al., 2019). The WCED (1987, p.43) defined
sustainable development as the “development that meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Sustainability in
business involves all such processes which take into consideration immediate economic
gains for the organisation as well as resource-saving for future generations (Gibb and
Adhikary, 2000; Westhead et al., 2001; Cohen et al., 2008; Foss and Foss, 2008; Closs
et al., 2011; Huang and Rust, 2011; Toledo-López et al., 2012; Sankaran, 2018; Haldar,
2019). Natural resources help in promoting sustainable development (Grynspan, 2012;
Toledo-López et al., 2012).
Conservation of cultural heritage is the need of the world for sustaining local
economies (Cantacuzino, 1990; Winter and Daly, 2012; Bhatta and Chan, 2016; Ferreira
et al., 2018; Sankaran, 2018; Ahmed, 2019; Marques et al., 2019). The pottery industry
needs a high degree of creativity and dedication with an artistic mind that gives life to
soil (Thistlethwaite, 1958; Huyler, 1996; Perry-Smith and Coff, 2011; Sarma, 2018).
Terracotta is derived from the Latin, and the Italian word means bake (Sarma, 2018).
Evidence of terracotta’s sophisticated pottery has been traced from Indus Valley
Civilization and from the Roman times (Burr, 1933; Menon and Varma, 2010; Mohapatra
et al., 2016). Potters used natural resources like clay, ivory, terracotta to produce the
craft, and other terracotta artefacts (Alonso and Bressan, 2014; Gangopadhyay and Sen,
2019). In India, the pottery artisans are commonly known as ‘Kumhars’ that comes from
‘kumbhakära’ in the Sanskrit language. The ‘Kumhar’ Community is also known as the
‘Prajapati’ Community. In the Indian Tradition, Prajapati is known as the ‘lord of
creation’; as the Prajapati fashions the creation, even so, the ‘Kumhar’ crafts pottery
objects. Potters use clay which acts as a natural resource that is procured from in
producing artefacts (Menon and Varma, 2010; Rice, 2015; Panda et al., 2019). Clay is
regarded as a goddess (Huyler, 1996). Pottery artefacts preserve the nutritional value of
food if the latter is stored in them (Bodke, 2016). Potters Village keeps Indian terracotta
craftsmanship alive. The traditional craft production of terracotta pottery includes
refining of clay to remove impurities from the clay, preparation of clay by kneading,
throwing on the wheel, drying, colouring, and firing the earthen artwork. The traditional
art of making terracotta pottery uses clay as a base material for producing pottery, which
is quite a unique art in itself, but not much spoken and documented in literature yet
(Kuzmin, 2013; Alonso and Bressan, 2014; Panda et al., 2019).

2.1 Business model canvas

Every organisation has a business model, which characterises its structure broadly and
describes its functioning (Brea-Solís et al., 2015; Demil et al., 2015; Vial, 2016). At its
core, a business model supports value creation and value capture for the organisation
(Velu and Khanna, 2013; Demil et al., 2015; Ladd, 2018; Sort and Nielsen, 2018;
Wahyono, 2018). BMC, as outlined by Osterwalder and Pigneur (2010), showcases
business with nine elements including who the customers are, customer relationships,
6 A. Panghal et al.

value propositions, key partners, key activities, key resources, channels, cost structure,
and revenue streams (Ballon et al., 2015; Beh et al., 2016; Crick and Crick, 2018; Daly,
2016; Daidj and Egert, 2018; Ojasalo and Ojasalo, 2018; Drejerska et al., 2019). BMC
helps in identifying the potential of business from different perspectives, which helps an
entrepreneur to focus on the required dimension(s). It is considered as a comprehensive
tool for analysing the nuances of business models from different nine perspectives
holistically (Pedersen and Netter, 2015; Wirtz et al., 2016; Muller, 2018).

2.2 Porter’s industry analysis

The ‘Industry analysis’ or the ‘five forces model’ was propounded by Michael Porter
from the Harvard Business School in 1980 (French et al., 2011). This model identifies
and analyses five prominent external forces that can impact any business from different
perspectives, by using an ‘outside-in perspective’ (Karagiannopoulos et al., 2005;
Johnson et al., 2008; Lumpkin et al., 2011; Bruijl, 2018). The five forces as mentioned by
Michael Porter are
• bargaining power of buyers
• bargaining power of suppliers
• potential new entrants
• substitute products and services
• intra-industry rivalry.
The model aids in identifying the status of any entrepreneur or business in terms of its
external environment.

2.3 Porter’s value chain model

Michael Porter proposed a ‘value chain model’ as a tool to analyse a firm’s activities
across the value chain (Porter, 2001). The value chain model is used by several
businesses across different sectors as a strategic tool for identifying the cost drivers and
stages of differentiation in the complete value chain. The value chain model can help in
improved decision making and business development for small and medium scale
enterprises, too (McLarty, 2005). The value chain model, with little modifications, has
found its usefulness in conducting sustainability modelling for firms, too (McPhee,
2014).
All the three models, viz., BMC, Porter’s industry analysis, and Porter’s value chain
model are useful for strategic decision making. This paper is, therefore, an attempt
towards highlighting the present status of the Prajapati Community potters in Uttam
Nagar in Delhi, with the help of BMC, and proposes a new BMC for the Prajapati
Community potters, based on analysis of the industry environment through Michael
Porter’s industry analysis and Michael Porter’s value chain model.
 Strategic business model canvassing for terracotta pottery entrepreneurs 7

3 Research design

As the aim of the paper is to systematically understand the problems faced by the pottery
artisans in Delhi, an exploratory qualitative research design was chosen for the study.
Such type of study design helped researchers to understand the artisan respondents and to
get appropriate responses from them in a systematic and focused manner.
Table 1 Demographic information of respondents

Respondent Age (year) Education Experience in terracotta pottery

1 63 Secondary Since childhood
2 85 None 65+ years
3 40 Senior secondary More than 25 years
4 33 Secondary Since childhood
5 20 Pursuing a bachelor’s degree Five years
6 40 None 15 years
7 46 Secondary 20 years
8 32 Graduation 12 years
9 60 None Since childhood
10 44 Senior secondary 12 years
11 62 None Since childhood
12 24 Graduation 10 years
13 47 Secondary 30 years
14 40 Senior secondary 25 years
15 56 Primary Since childhood
16 59 Middle school Since childhood
17 52 None Since childhood
18 50 None 40 years
19 48 Primary Since childhood
20 25 Senior secondary 8 years
21 28 Senior secondary education 10 years
22 68 None 45 years
23 42 Secondary education 30 years
Notes: Graduation denotes a bachelor’s degree completed; senior secondary education
denotes grade 12 completed; secondary education denotes grade 10 completed;
middle school denotes grade 8 completed; primary education denotes grade 5
completed; none denotes no formal education.
Source: Author’s survey
For the qualitative study, a representative sample was chosen from the entire community.
The respondents were interviewed with the help of a semi-structured questionnaire
consisting of few open-ended interview questions. The demographic description of the
respondents is mentioned in Table 1. The questionnaire was divided into two significant
portions: the first part was aimed at collecting information on the respondent, and the
second part focused on the business model changes expected due to the regulation and
8 A. Panghal et al.

consumer demand changes. In total, 23 pottery artisans were interviewed for about 30
minutes each. The authors collected data through fieldwork in the Potters Village over
four days in January 2020. The responses shared by the respondents were used for
framing the BMC and Porter’s value chain model and conducting Porter’s industry
analysis. Secondary data was also used for information validation.
The BMC was created for the artisans for their current business model, and then the
external business environment was analysed with the help of Michael Porter’s industry
analysis model. As the shift from traditional furnaces to modern furnaces impact all the
functions of the business, therefore Porter’s value chain analysis model for competitive
advantage was used to identify the functions which need more focus to get aligned with
the changing regulatory structure.
Further, the strategies proposed as per the new BMC were modelled through the
DEMATEL Technique. To apply DEMATEL, expert opinion was sought from three
experts: a senior faculty of strategic entrepreneurship, an experienced pottery artisan, and
an active researcher in the field of entrepreneurship); thus the necessary information was
collected in the required format. The outcomes are discussed in further sections.

4 Results

The challenges posed to the Prajapati Community potters in Uttam Nagar in Delhi by the
decision of the National Green Tribunal (Press Trust of India, 2019) are three-fold. First,
the potters lack the technical know-how for using modern furnaces. Second, compared to
traditional furnaces used by the potters for millennia, modern furnaces are costly.
Artisans informed the authors at the time of the primary survey that the approximate cost
of building a traditional furnace was Indian Rupees (INR) 25,000 (equivalent to the
US$230); compared to this, the cost of a modern furnace ranged between INR one and
four lakhs (or between the US$1,312 and US$5,248). Third, the potters lack educational
qualifications and skills to shift to other occupations. In addition to this, changing
consumer preferences are also a matter of concern for this business. Now, consumers are
getting more oriented towards other raw material-based artefacts, because of reasons such
as less cost and more durability. The terracotta potters are finding difficulty in matching
with changing consumer demands (Sankaran, 2018). Authors, therefore, have examined
and explored the potential modifications in the current business model of potters so that
they can remain engaged with this occupation sustainably and profitably.

4.1 Current BMC for Prajapati Community

To make BMC – by mapping the business dimensions for terracotta pottery entrepreneurs
both in the present scenario and while considering the changing industry and regulatory
requirements – the responses were collected from the potters of Prajapati Community on
different sections of the BMC, like who are their key partners and their key activities, etc.
The majority of responses were similar for all the artisans, and accordingly, the BMC was
developed (Table 2).
A brief description of the BMC is as follows:
• Key partners: Key partners of Prajapati Community are the organisers of different
exhibitions, where artists display their products for sale; raw material suppliers
 Strategic business model canvassing for terracotta pottery entrepreneurs 9

which include suppliers of clay, wood, paints, etc.; other inventory suppliers like a
plastic bucket and mould suppliers, paintbrush, paper, etc.; customers.

Table 2 The BMC model for Prajapati Community potters

Value Customer Customer

Key partners Key activities
proposition relationships segments
• Exhibition • Promote • Artistic skills • Community • Connectors
organisers traditional
• Traditional art • Product • Other ceramic
culture
• Customers customised to artists
• High-quality
• Terracotta customer
• Raw material artefacts • Diversified
pottery preference
suppliers buyers
• Traditional
• Glazed
• Other knowledge of • People who
earthenware
inventory pottery value
suppliers • Ritualistic traditional
pots custom
• Other artefacts • Art lovers
• Wholesalers
Cost structure Key resources Revenue streams Channels
• Purchase of raw material • Clay • Sales of • Craft exhibitions
artwork
• Travelling cost • Water • Craft fairs
• Wages to workers • Equipment • Own galleries
• Operational costs • Furnaces • Wholesaler
• Wood
• Burada (sawdust)
• Cow dung cakes
• Land
• Financial resources
Source: Prepared by authors based on the primary survey

• Key activities: Prajapati Community is performing several activities like to make

different types of terracotta pottery which includes glazed earthenware, ritualistic
pots, and other artefacts; to promote the traditional culture of India by retaining the
traditional art of pottery making.
• Value proposition: Value Proposition means the way customer needs will be
satisfied through the products and services offered to them (Osterwalder and
Pigneur, 2010). The value propositions offered by the Prajapati Community to its
customers is artistic skills, traditional art, high-quality artefacts along with the
traditional knowledge of pottery.
• Customer relationships: Prajapati Community builds and maintains a healthy
relationship with customers through the community like greeting them with respect
and offering small clay toys as gifts. Also, artisans develop long-term relationships
with customers by making customised products as per their preferences.
10 A. Panghal et al.

• Customer segments: Customer segment included different characteristics of the

customers with different needs (Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010). The customer
group of Prajapati Community is diversified art lovers, connectors, other ceramic
artists, international tourists, and the people who love Indian tradition and culture.
• Key resource: Resources that are required to make artefacts and get revenue stream
by Prajapati Community are clay, water, equipment, furnaces, wood, Burada
(sawdust), cow dung cakes, land, financial resources, and manpower resources.
• Channels: The key channels of selling the artwork and reaching to the customers for
the Prajapati Community are craft exhibitions, craft fairs, own galleries, wholesales,
and direct sales on customer's demand.
• Cost structure: The cost structure of the Prajapati Community business model
consists of the purchase of raw material, travelling cost, wages to workers,
operational costs.
• Revenue streams: Prajapati Community generates revenue by selling of artwork that
is the outcome and result of providing value propositions to the customers.
The current BMC for the Prajapati Community gave lots of more profound insights into
the business of the Prajapati Community. For the further drawing of conclusions,
Porter’s industry analysis and Porter’s value chain analysis was done (see Subsections 4.2
and 4.3).

4.2 Industry analysis for Prajapati Community

Five different forces suggested by the model were screened for the Prajapati
Community. The information on the same, as provided by various government websites,
published journals and magazines were validated by the respondent artisans through
personal discussions. Accordingly, the industry analysis was conducted, as depicted in
Figure 1.

Figure 1 Industry analysis for Prajapati Community (see online version for colours)

Source: After Porter (2001) and further information filled by authors based on
the primary survey

• Potential new entrants: The cost of installation of the traditional kiln was relatively
low, and no other expensive raw material was used, and no other highly specialised
 Strategic business model canvassing for terracotta pottery entrepreneurs 11

skills were needed. Therefore, until the time of the survey, the threat of new entrants
into this profession was very high. But with the requirement of modern electrical/gas
furnaces, the threat of potential new entrants seems to decline. The new entrants may
include makers of new formats of pottery and advanced ceramics makers. However,
a few artisans believed that traditional artisans lack the knowledge for modern
furnaces, so there are chances that new generation entrepreneurs with good
knowledge of modern equipment and furnaces may enter their profession and capture
their business.
• Bargaining power of buyers: Prominent buyers for traditional pottery products are
other artisans, household consumers, art lovers, international tourists, etc. The
bargaining power of buyers seems to be high for this sector because of close
substitutes available and a variety of products available with minor price differences.
With the introduction of modern furnaces, product quality will be different, the
success of which depends on customer acceptance.
• Bargaining power of suppliers: For the pottery sector, the raw material (such as clay)
other inventory items – like potter’s wheel, hand tools, work tables, racks for storage
and display glaze, and other tools used for decorating artefacts, are furnished by
suppliers. The bargaining power of suppliers is not much presently because the raw
material access and availability is not a challenge. But with the introduction of
modern electrical/gas furnaces, the supplier base will change. Presently for Prajapati
Community, there are not many suppliers of the gas/electrical furnaces. Also, if
potters should change their product type to match the changing consumer demands,
then they would need to identify the suitable suppliers for the changed raw materials;
this may create supplier dominance over the artisans.
• Substitute products and services: Non-traditional ceramic products, metal, glassware,
decorative wooden items are close substitutes for the traditional pottery products.
• Intra-industry rivalry: Small business units at the international and national levels
compete with each other.
These findings, based on the application of Porter’s industry analysis, reflect the external
environment for the Prajapati Community, which seems not to be very promising for the
artisans, especially with the probable introduction of modern furnaces in the years to
come.

4.3 Value chain model analysis for Prajapati Community

Value chain model is used as a strategic tool for identifying the competitive advantage of
any business. Authors tried to explore such activities in the business of artisans which
actually can define the competitive advantage tool for their business. A brief description
of the same follows:

4.3.1 Primary activities

1 Inbound logistics: The cost and structure of inbound logistics may not alter much,
except that few raw materials may become redundant like wood, sawdust, etc.
12 A. Panghal et al.

2 Operations: This function of the value chain may be impacted hugely, as the
new-age furnaces need a different type of functional requirements. The cost of
operations may also increase.
3 Outbound logistics: Since the final output may be costlier than the existing one, it
may be necessary to explore new channels; accordingly, the cost of outbound
logistics and functions may alter.
4 Sales and marketing: The artisans may need to explore new marketing channels and
platforms for selling their products in the future.
5 Service and support: This function of the value chain may not need much alteration
in the future.

4.3.2 Support activities

6 Firm infrastructure: The Prajapati Community has been comfortably carrying out
its business activities with the existing resources and does not seem to require much
change to the resources and infrastructure. But in the event of the need to adopt
modern furnaces and production of different product types, artisans responded that
they might need either to make a change in their existing infrastructure or might need
a new production setup altogether.
7 Human resource management: With changing times and due to the requirement of
adopting electrical furnaces, the artisans may require training for their workers and
artists in the future.
8 Technology development: Artisans are very well-versed with their age-old methods
of pottery making with traditional kilns. However, if they need to shift to other types
of furnaces, their products and process technologies may need to be altered per the
requirements.
9 Procurement: The process of raw material procurement may also change, and it may
need to be modified as per the requirement of new-age furnaces.

Figure 2 Value chain model

Source: After Porter (2001)

 Strategic business model canvassing for terracotta pottery entrepreneurs 13

Value chain mapping through Porter’s model (Figure 2) highlights that in the scenario of
shifting from traditional kiln furnaces to new-age (e.g., electrical/gas-powered) furnaces,
pottery artisans may need to focus on a majority of their primary and secondary activities
to gain customer value with sustainable margins. Artisans strongly believe that they alone
cannot achieve this without government support.

5 Proposed new BMC and DEMATEL approach

Based on the outcomes of Porter’s industry analysis as well as the value chain model,
there are a few focus areas on which artisans may think and act upon to rebuild their
business model. The proposed BMC highlights those focus areas and present them by
each segment. Further, the strategies proposed in the new BMC were then modelled as
per DEMATEL and discussed further in this section.

5.1 Proposed new BMC

The new BMC for the Prajapati Community of potters is proposed as in Table 3. The
suggestions for artisans regarding proposed action steps under each segment are
highlighted as italicised text in Table 3.
As per the outcomes of Porter’s industry analysis as well as the value chain model, a
few areas were identified where specific actions need to be taken either by the artisans or
the government:
• Upgrading of skills vis-à-vis new equipment: As with the introduction of modern
furnaces and equipment, the ‘threat of new entrants’ might be increased if
technology-savvy artisans start entering the business. But from one aspect, the threat
of new entrants might be less if the costs of adopting modern furnaces and new
techniques were much higher than the revenues. One of the ways to address this
concern is the provision by the government of subsidies for modern electric/gas
furnaces to traditional artisans. Another way is to conduct a (series of) skill
upgrading program(s) for traditional artisans to enable them to use modern furnaces
and equipment. Through either or both of these strategies, traditional artisans are
likely to become confident and deal with the threat of new entrants into their
business domains.
• The key partnership with suppliers of new equipment: Artisans have a strong belief
that as they may need to shift to modern furnaces or the latest clay base, they may
have to identify new suppliers. As production through modern furnaces may need
specialised equipment and differentiated raw materials, the suppliers may show their
monopoly or higher bargaining power. As a solution to this, the authors proposed
that artisans need to identify a few key suppliers for themselves. Then, they may
have a long-term contract with the suppliers. Artisans need to design the
procurement process and the inbound logistics in close association with the
suppliers. In this way, the suppliers may become the artisans’ key partners in their
business, rather than merely participating as a value chain stage.
• Product innovations: New entrants and substitute products are the most alarming
threats to the artisans of Potters Village in Delhi. A multitude of products has entered
14 A. Panghal et al.

the market, including different varieties of ceramics, clay, plastic base, glass, and
wooden artefacts. Potters need to focus on product innovations as per consumer
demand. They need to bring product and process-focused innovation smoothly into
their business.
Table 3 New BMC for Prajapati Community of potters

Value Customer Customer

Key partners Key activities
proposition relationships segments
• Exhibition • Promote • Artistic skills • Community • Connectors
organisers traditional culture
• Traditional art • Product • Other ceramic
• Customers • Terracotta pottery customised to artists
• Promote
customer
• Raw material • Glazed artisan • People who
preference
suppliers earthenware value
• Decorative
• Government traditional
• Other • Ritualistic pots pottery
funded custom
inventory
• Other artefacts • Co-creation campaigns or
suppliers • Foreign
with art shows
• Long-term customer base
• Government customers
contracts with
departments
suppliers
• Trainers
• Procurement
• Few key process to be
suppliers co-designed with
key suppliers
• Specific training
and skill
development
• Exploring new
sales and
marketing
channels
Cost structure Key resources Revenue streams Channels
• Purchase of raw • Clay • Sales of artwork • Craft exhibitions
material
• Water • Providing pottery • Craft fairs
• Travelling cost training/workshop
• Equipment • Own galleries
s
• Wages to workers
• Land • Wholesaler
• Renting the
• Efforts to keep
• Financial products for • Online retailers
operational costs
resources functions
low • The online website of
• Innovation • Govt. subsidies on potter’s community
• Govt. subsidy on
electric furnaces
purchasing • Modern • Connect buyers to
electric/gas furnaces sellers directly by
furnaces developing some
• New ceramic
mobile app
• Govt. subsidy on base
electricity/gas costs • Govt. funded shop or
for running the space on airports or
furnaces near airports
Source: Prepared by authors based on the findings of the primary survey and
further modelling
 Strategic business model canvassing for terracotta pottery entrepreneurs 15

Figure 3 Combined inferences and interrelationships between the three models understudy
(see online version for colours)

Source: Prepared by authors based on the findings of the primary survey and
further modelling

• Focusing customer relations: As consumers are now getting attracted to cheap,

durable, and readily available substitute products, the terracotta pottery artisans need
to focus on all these aspects of their products. They may go for product co-creation
with the customers (value proposition) and may think of bringing innovative
products, such as decorative pottery items. If the government highlights and
promotes the benefits of traditional terracotta clay pottery products through art shows
and campaigns like ‘Make in India’ (2020), then this may help in developing
customers’ relationship with the pottery artisans.
• Managing the costs: Authors propose that artisans ought to think for such
collaborations either with government departments or buyers and suppliers, which
16 A. Panghal et al.

can support their business in keeping their cost of operations low as competition
increases.
• Direct marketing channels: Artisans need to explore and develop new channels for
sales and marketing, such as online marketing, so that the outbound costs could be
reduced, and new markets, could be explored. They should also think of having a
website for their community’s products, which can portray their art and
masterpieces. Artisans can also connect directly to their customers with the help of
mobile apps.
• New consumer segments: Indian terracotta pottery products are famous not only
within India but in other countries as well. Therefore, the authors proposed the
artisans to target their sales at foreign and domestic customers through online portals
and by requesting the government to provide space to artisans to install their
shops/kiosks either inside or outside the various airports to sell to foreign and
domestic customers. The government, in turn, could finance such proposals through
funds available in schemes like ‘Make in India’ or other employment schemes.
• Other revenue options: In present times, to make their livelihood sustainable,
artisans need to explore other streams of revenue generation. Artisans may provide
training or conduct workshops on pottery art for art lovers as well as the new
generation of children and adults. Another strategy may be to provide pottery
products on rent for social and official functions/events.
A diagrammatic representation of interrelationships framed between different
components of the three models used in the study is presented in Figure 3.

5.2 DEMATEL approach

The strategic components proposed for artisans as per the new BMC were interpreted for
their cause-and-effect relationships by using DEMATEL, which is an inclusive approach
for establishing a causal relationship model for interrelated variables related to any
subject (Tzeng et al., 2007; Lin and Wu, 2008; Lin and Tzeng, 2009; Shieh et al., 2010;
Lamba and Singh, 2018). The strategic components are shown in Table 4.
Table 4 Strategic components

No. Component
1 Managing costs
2 Direct marketing channels
3 Strategic partnership with suppliers
4 Offering value propositions
5 Focusing on customer relations
6 New customer segments
7 More revenue options
8 Training and skill development

The stepwise description of DEMATEL is discussed as follows:

 Strategic business model canvassing for terracotta pottery entrepreneurs 17

Step 1 Direct relation matrix (A)

As the first step in DEMATEL, the pair-wise relationship between the identified
variables is established. To accomplish this step, the authors approached three experts:
first was a senior faculty of strategic entrepreneurship, the second was an experienced
pottery artisan, and the third was an active researcher in the field of entrepreneurship.
These experts were provided with the list of strategic components identified, and they
were asked to assign values to the pair of variables on a scale of 0–4, where value ‘0’
means ‘no impact’ and ‘4’ means ‘extremely strong impact’ of one component on
another. A non-negative matrix (n * n) for n variables is achieved for each expert. Then
the average value is taken for the responses of all experts. Accordingly, the average
matrix (A) was prepared as in Table 5, which reflects the initial direct relation of


1 n
variables. The formula followed for the same is A = Ak .
n k =1 ij

Table 5 Direct relation matrix (A)

No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 0 4 4 4 3 4 2 4
2 4 0 0 3 4 4 4 0
3 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
4 4 1 0 0 4 3 4 0
5 4 2 0 1 0 1 1 0
6 4 4 0 1 2 0 4 0
7 2 2 0 1 1 3 0 1
8 4 1 2 3 3 2 3 0

Step 2 Normalised initial direct relation matrix (X)

The normalised initial direct relation matrix (X) is obtained by normalising the initial
direct relation matrix (A) (Table 6) by using the formula:
1
X = kA, where k = , i = 1, 2, 3,

max n
a ij
1 i  n j=1

Table 6 Normalised initial direct relation matrix (X)

No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 0.00000 0.16000 0.16000 0.16000 0.12000 0.16000 0.08000 0.16000
2 0.16000 0.00000 0.00000 0.12000 0.16000 0.16000 0.16000 0.00000
3 0.16000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.04000 0.00000
4 0.16000 0.04000 0.00000 0.00000 0.16000 0.12000 0.16000 0.00000
5 0.16000 0.08000 0.00000 0.04000 0.00000 0.04000 0.04000 0.00000
6 0.16000 0.16000 0.00000 0.04000 0.08000 0.00000 0.16000 0.00000
7 0.08000 0.08000 0.00000 0.04000 0.04000 0.12000 0.00000 0.04000
8 0.16000 0.04000 0.08000 0.12000 0.12000 0.08000 0.12000 0.00000
18 A. Panghal et al.

Step 3 Total relation matrix

Total relation matrix (T) was obtained from the normalised matrix by following the
formula: T = X(I – X)–1, where I represent the identity matrix.
The total relation matrix (Table 7) shows that how one variable influences the other
variables.
Table 7 Total relation matrix

No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 D
1 0.31787 0.34493 0.22876 0.32028 0.33421 0.37428 0.32111 0.22370 2.465148
2 0.38677 0.18297 0.06792 0.25321 0.32619 0.34145 0.34019 0.07549 1.974204
3 0.21956 0.06241 0.03825 0.05627 0.05937 0.06890 0.09616 0.03898 0.639893
4 0.34687 0.19507 0.06092 0.12202 0.29469 0.27514 0.30485 0.06769 1.667257
5 0.27812 0.17666 0.04853 0.12809 0.10644 0.15418 0.14793 0.05042 1.090363
6 0.34367 0.29527 0.06037 0.16700 0.22956 0.17392 0.30896 0.06735 1.646092
7 0.21751 0.18043 0.04117 0.12570 0.14744 0.22536 0.11953 0.07958 1.136728
8 0.37249 0.19738 0.14528 0.24433 0.27546 0.25153 0.28607 0.07104 1.843592
R 2.482879 1.635121 0.691201 1.416902 1.773353 1.86476 1.924808 0.674253

Step 4 Developing the causal model

For preparing the causal model, the sum of rows (D) and the sum of columns (R) for each
variable was calculated first. Here, ‘D’ represents the influence of one variable on the
other variables, and ‘R’ represents the influence of other variables on the respective
variable. Therefore, (D + R) reflects the relative importance of the variable in the system
as well as the degree of relationship between each variable with the other remaining
variables. The higher the value of (D + R), the more substantial is the relationship of that
variable with the other remaining variables. Whereas (D – R) reflects the kind of
relationship between the variables. When (D – R) is positive, the variable belongs to the
cause group; if the (D – R) value is negative, then the variable belongs to the effect
group. Finally, the values of (D + R) and (D – R) are shown in Table 8 and are plotted to
obtain the causal model (Figure 4).
Table 8 The sum of influences

No. Components D R D+R D–R

1 Managing costs 2.465148 2.482879 4.948027 –0.01773
2 Direct marketing channels 1.974204 1.635121 3.609325 0.339083
3 Strategic partnership with suppliers 0.639893 0.691201 1.331094 –0.05131
4 Product innovation 1.667257 1.416902 3.08416 0.250355
5 Focusing customer relations 1.090363 1.773353 2.863716 –0.68299
6 New customer segments 1.646092 1.86476 3.510852 –0.21867
7 More revenue options 1.136728 1.924808 3.061536 –0.78808
8 Training and skill development 1.843592 0.674253 2.517845 1.169339
 Strategic business model canvassing for terracotta pottery entrepreneurs 19

Figure 4 Causal model (see online version for colours)

5.3 Discussion
As a result of developing the causal model (as shown in Table 8), the proposed strategic
components got arranged as per their relevance and importance to the system as well as
based on their respective (D + R) value. Accordingly, ‘managing costs’ (component 1)
got the highest (D + R) value, followed by ‘direct marketing channels’ (2), ‘new
customer segments’ (6), ‘product innovation’ (4), ‘more revenue options’ (7), ‘focusing
customer relations’ (5), ‘training and skill development’ (8), and ‘strategic partnership
with suppliers’ (3). At the same time, the values of (D – R) being positive or negative,
categorise the components into ‘causal group’ or ‘effect group’. In this study,
components, viz., ‘training and skill development’ (8), ‘direct marketing channels’ (2),
and ‘product innovation’ (4), with positive values of (D – R), got categorised into the
‘causal group’. Whereas component ‘training and skill development’ (8), with highest
(D – R) value, signifies its strategic importance in influencing the other remaining
variables that were justified by its high ‘D’ value; however, the (D + R) value for this
component (‘training and skill development’) is low due to low ‘R’ value, which shows
that it gets least impacted by others. Similarly, ‘direct marketing channels’ (2) has both
(D + R) and (D – R) values as high with strong ‘D’ value but little low ‘R’ value; this
shows that this component is strategic for the system and causes a significant impact on
other components. The component ‘product innovation’ (4), with high (D – R) value but
moderate (D + R) value (due to low ‘R’ values), signifies that it causes an impact on the
other remaining components being moderately related with the system and getting less
impact from others.
The ‘effect group’ components, with negative (D – R) values, reflect their tendency to
get affected by other components. The ‘more revenue options’ (component 7) shows the
highest negative (D – R) value, with low D and (D + R) values but high R values; this
reflects that this component (7) is significantly impacted by others while being
moderately significant for the system. Similarly, the next component, ‘focusing customer
relations’ (5), with the high negative (D – R) value and low ‘D’ and (D + R) values
follows the same suit. The component ‘new customer segments’(6)have both the (D + R)
and (D – R) values high, with low ‘D’ and high ‘R’ values, which makes this component
a strategically important component being impacted by others. While ‘strategic
partnership with suppliers’ (component 3) shows very low (D – R) and (D + R) values,
with least ‘D’ value and very low ‘R’ value, making it the least strategic component with
20 A. Panghal et al.

low cause and effect. Quite interestingly, the ‘managing costs’ (component 1) show the
least (D – R) value but the highest (D + R) value owing to the highest ‘D’ and ‘R’ values.
It shows that this component (‘managing costs’) is strategically vital for the system and it
impacts and gets impacted by other components; but since its slightly higher ‘R’ value
compared to its ‘D’ value, makes this component to fall into the ‘effect group’.
Therefore, from the causal model, it may be concluded that stakeholders should focus
most strategically on managing costs for the artisans, which in turn needs the support of
other strategic components and, if managed properly, can support the artisans to a great
extent in sustaining their art and livelihoods. Similarly, promoting direct marketing
channels, product innovation, and training and development can be useful support
strategies for the terracotta artisans in Delhi. Furthermore, although developing new
customer segments has a strong ability to hold up artisans, artisans need support to
develop new customer segments.

6 Conclusions

Terracotta pottery is a traditional art of pottery making that has been deep-rooted in
Indian society for millennia. It is a sustainable means of livelihood for millions of
artisans and their family members. Terracotta pottery is considered as sustainable
entrepreneurship and business because of its time-proven traditional techniques and the
use of natural raw materials. The trend of passing the know-how of this art from one
generation to the next has promised a well-developed livelihood and a gateway for
entrepreneurship for millions of artisans. This paper focuses on implicit unrest among the
pottery artisans of the Prajapati Community in Delhi. The changing regulations imposed
by the Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi and the National Green
Tribunal, and the emerging technological and market challenges, pose serious challenges
to the pottery artisans of the Prajapati Community in Delhi.
This paper has suggested strategic entrepreneurship options that can help to preserve
and sustain the ancient terracotta pottery craft for the Prajapati Community. The
proposed new BMC suggests that the traditional artisans who want to remain in the
business need upgrading of their skills to adapt themselves to use modern furnaces. Skill
upgrading may help the traditional artisans to deal with the threat of new entrants into the
pottery business. At the same time, artisans need funding support for buying modern
furnaces and the related equipment. Therefore, to protect this art, efforts from all
stakeholders are required. Artisans should make strategic collaborations with the
suppliers of raw material and equipment as per the changing conditions. The value chain
for the business participants needs to be envisioned strategically. The younger generation
of artisans needs to take proactive steps to match the consumer expectations and to offset
the effects of competition. The product and process innovation are the need of the hour.
Product co-creation with consumers and extensive promotion should be adopted.
Awareness about the cultural richness associated with the art of pottery can potentially
support the sector. Widening up more windows for sales and marketing is also required.
Strategies such as online retailing, mobile applications, and other technology supportive
platforms ought to be exploited by the younger generation. Promoting a foreign customer
base can also help in magnifying the essence of this art, which might support the artisans.
The DEMATEL approach highlighted that managing the costs is the most important
strategy for the artisans at this moment. And developing new customer segments with the
 Strategic business model canvassing for terracotta pottery entrepreneurs 21

help of strategies like direct marketing channels, product innovation, and training and
development, can support terracotta artisans. But as per the understanding of the authors
and the responses solicited from the artisans, none of the initiatives can sustain without
government support.
Although this paper focused on one community of terracotta potters based in Delhi,
the problems it highlights are symptomatic of other pottery artisan communities in India.
The challenges which surfaced during discussions with the Prajapati Community in
Delhi are a genuine matter of concern for the potters as well as the Delhi government.
Thus, this study can pave ways for future researchers to extend the discussions and
provide further suggestions for the other pottery artisan communities in India.

References
Ahmed, I. (2019) ‘Craftsman, informal heritage management and social capital in conserving
Chini-Tikri work of Kosaituli Mosque, Old Dhaka, Bangladesh’, Journal of Cultural Heritage
Management and Sustainable Development, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp.334–351, DOI: 10.1108/jchmsd-
07-2018-0050.
Alonso, A.D. and Bressan, A. (2014) ‘Collaboration in the context of micro-businesses the case of
terracotta artisans in Impruneta (Italy)’, European Business Review, Vol. 26, No. 3,
pp.254–270, DOI: 10.1108/EBR-08-2013-0107.
Anderson, A. and Ronteau, S. (2017) ‘Towards an entrepreneurial theory of practice; emerging
ideas for emerging economies’, Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, Vol. 9,
No. 2, pp.110–120 [online] https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-12-2016-0054.
Anggadwita, G., Luturlean, B.S., Ramadani, V. and Ratten, V. (2017) ‘Socio-cultural environments
and emerging economy entrepreneurship: women entrepreneurs in Indonesia’, Journal of
Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp.85–96 [online] https://doi.org/
10.1108/JEEE-03-2016-0011.
Ballon, P., Schuurman, D., Salminen, J., Rinkinen, S. and Khan, R. (2015) ‘Developing a regional
design support service’, Info, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp.81–90.
Beh, L-S., Ghobadian, A., He, Q., Gallear, D. and O’Regan, N. (2016) ‘Second-life retailing: a
reverse supply chain perspective’, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal,
Vol. 21, No. 2, pp.259–272, DOI: 10.1108/scm-07-2015-0296.
Belz, F.M. and Binder, J.K. (2015) ‘Sustainable entrepreneurship: a convergent process model’,
Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp.1–17, DOI: 10.1002/bse.1887.
Bhatta, K.D. and Chan, R. (2016) ‘Planning for heritage conservation and community
development: study of historic town ‘Thimi’ of Kathmandu Valley’, South Asian Journal of
Tourism and Heritage, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp.57–78.
Bjørnskov, C. and Foss, N. (2013) ‘How strategic entrepreneurship and the institutional context
drive economic growth’, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp.50–69,
DOI: 10.1002/sej.1148.
Bodke, M. (2016) Clay Pot Cooking: Preserve and Enhance the Nutrition in your Food [online]
http://www.wholesomeayurveda.com/2016/11/22/clay-pan-pot-cooking/ (accessed 12 March
2020).
Brea-Solís, H., Casadesus-Masanell, R. and Grifell-Tatjé, E. (2015) ‘Business model evaluation:
quantifying Walmart’s sources of advantage’, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, Vol. 9,
No. 1, pp.12–33.
Bruijl, G.H.T. (2018) ‘The relevance of Porter’s five forces in today’s innovative and changing
business environment’, SSRN Electronic Journal, pp.1–21, DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3192207.
Burr, D. (1933) ‘The terracotta figurines. Hesperia’, The Journal of the American School of
Classical Studies at Athens, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp.184–194, DOI: 10.2307/146508.
22 A. Panghal et al.

Cantacuzino, S. (1990) ‘A policy of architectural conservation’, in Imamuddin, A.H. and

Longeteig, K.R. (Eds.): Architectural and Urban Conservation in the Islamic World, pp.7–21,
The Aga Khan Trust for Culture, Geneva.
Closs, D.J., Speier, C. and Meacham, N. (2011) ‘Sustainability to support end-to-end value chains:
the role of supply chain management’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 39,
No. 1, pp.101–116.
Cohen, B. and Winn, M. (2007) ‘Market imperfections, opportunity, and sustainable
entrepreneurship’, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp.29–49.
Cohen, B., Smith, B. and Mitchell, R. (2008) ‘Toward a sustainable conceptualization of dependent
variables in entrepreneurship research’, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 17,
No. 2, pp.107–119.
Crick, J. and Crick, D. (2018) ‘Angel investors’ predictive and control funding criteria: the
importance of evolving business models’, Journal of Research in Marketing and
Entrepreneurship, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp.34–56 [online] https://doi.org/10.1108/JRME-11-2016-
0043.
Daidj, N. and Egert, C. (2018) ‘Towards new coopetition-based business models? The case of
Netflix on the French market’, Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship,
Vol. 20, No. 1, pp.99–120 [online] https://doi.org/10.1108/JRME-11-2016-0049.
Daly, P. (2016) ‘Business apprenticeship: a viable business model in management education’,
Journal of Management Development, Vol. 36, No. 6, pp.734–742.
Dana, L. (2000) ‘Creating entrepreneurs in India’, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 38,
No. 1, pp.86–92.
Dana, L.P. and Dana, T.E. (2005) ‘Expanding the scope of methodologies used in entrepreneurship
research’, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Vol. 2, No. 1, p.79.
Dean, T.J. and McMullen, J.S. (2007) ‘Toward a theory of sustainable entrepreneurship: reducing
environmental degradation through entrepreneurial action’, Journal of Business Venturing,
Vol. 22, No. 1, pp.50–76.
Demil, B., Lecocq, X., Ricart, J.E. and Zott, C. (2015) ‘Introduction to the SEJ special issue on
business models: business models within the domain of strategic entrepreneurship’, Strategic
Entrepreneurship Journal, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp.1–11, DOI: 10.1002/sej.1194.
Diochon, M., Durepos, G. and Anderson, A.R. (2011) ‘Understanding opportunity in social
entrepreneurship as paradigm interplay’, Social and Sustainable Entrepreneurship, pp.73–110,
DOI: 10.1108/s1074-7540 (2011)0000013008.
Drejerska, N., Bareja-Wawryszuk, O. and Gołębiewski, J. (2019) ‘Marginal, localized and
restricted activity: business models for creation a value of local food products: a case from
Poland’, British Food Journal, Vol. 121, No. 6, pp.1368–1381 [online] https://doi.org/
10.1108/BFJ-05-2018-0337.
Ferreira, J., Sousa, B. and Gonçalves, F. (2018) ‘Encouraging the subsistence artisan
entrepreneurship in handicraft and creative contexts’, Journal of Enterprising Communities:
People and Places in the Global Economy, Vol. 13, Nos. 1/2, pp.64–83 [online]
https://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-09-2018-0068.
Florida, R. and Hathaway, I. (2018) ‘How the geography of startups and innovation is changing’,
Harvard Business Review, 27 November [online] https://hbr.org/2018/11/how-the-geography-
of-startups-and-innovation-is-changing (accessed 22 April 2020).
Foss, K. and Foss, N.J. (2008)’Understanding opportunity discovery and sustainable advantage: the
role of transaction costs and property rights’, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, Vol. 2,
No. 3, pp.191–207, DOI: 10.1002/sej.49.
French, S., Kouzmin, A. and Kelly, S. (2011) ‘Questioning the epistemic virtue of strategy: the
emperor has no clothes’, Journal of Management and Organization, Vol. 17, No. 4,
pp.434–447, DOI: 10.1017/s1833367200001371.
 Strategic business model canvassing for terracotta pottery entrepreneurs 23

Gangopadhyay, A. and Sen, A. (2019) ‘Panchmura – the terracotta hub of Bengal: a contemporary
socio-economic study of handicraft workers engaged in terracotta craft’, International Journal
of Humanities and Social Science Studies, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp.42–64, DOI: 10.29032/ijhsss.v5.
i3.2019.42-64.
Gibb, A. and Adhikary, D. (2000) ‘Strategies for local and regional NGO development: combining
sustainable outcomes with sustainable organizations’, Entrepreneurship and Regional
Development, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp.137–161, DOI: 10.1080/089856200283045.
Gray, B.J., Duncan, S., Kirkwood, J. and Walton, S. (2014) ‘Encouraging sustainable
entrepreneurship in climate-threatened communities: a Samoan case study’, Entrepreneurship
and Regional Development, Vol. 26, Nos. 5–6, pp.401–430, DOI: 10.1080/08985626.2014.
922622.
Grynspan, R. (2012) The Role of Natural Resources in Promoting Sustainable Development UNDP
[online] http://www.undp.org (accessed 16 February 2014).
Gupta, K.C. (1988) Problems and Prospects of Pottery Industry in India, Mittal Publications, New
Delhi.
Haldar, S. (2019) ‘Towards a conceptual understanding of sustainability-driven entrepreneurship’,
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 26, No. 6, pp.1–14
[online] https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1763.
Henry, E.Y. and Dana, L.P. (2017) ‘Social and cultural capital: enhancing emancipatory Indigenous
entrepreneurship’, Academy of Management Proceedings, Vol. 16, No. 1 [online]
https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2016.14414abstract.
Hockerts, K. and Wustenhagen, R. (2010) ‘Greening goliaths versus emerging Davids – theorizing
about the role of incumbents and new entrants in sustainable entrepreneurship’, Journal of
Business Venturing, Vol. 25, No. 5, pp.481–492 [online] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.
2009.07.005.
Huang, M. and Rust, T. (2011) ‘Sustainability and consumption’, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 39, pp.40–54 [online] https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0193-6.
Huyler, S.P. (1996) Gifts of Earth: Terracottas and Clay Sculptures of India, Mapin Publishing
Ahmedabad.
Johnson, G., Scholes, K. and Whittington, R. (2008) Exploring Corporate Strategy: Text and
Cases, Prentice Hall, Harlow.
Karagiannopoulos, G., Georgopoulos, N. and Nikolopoulos K. (2005) ‘Fathoming Porter’s five
forces model in the internet era’, Vol. 7, No. 6, pp.66–76 [online] https://doi.org/
10.1108/14636690510628328.
Kennedy, T. (2010) ‘Safeguarding traditional craftsmanship: a project demonstrating the
revitalization of intangible heritage in Murad Khane Kabul’, Journal of Intangible Heritage,
Vol. 5, pp.74–85.
Konara, C.S., Barnard, R.T., Hine, D., Siegel, E. and Ferro, V. (2016) ‘The tortoise and the hare:
evolving regulatory landscapes for biosimilars’, Trends in Biotechnology, Vol. 34, No. 1,
pp.70–83 [online] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2015.10.009.
Kuratko, D.F. (2011) ‘Entrepreneurship theory, process, and practice in the 21st century’,
International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp.8–17.
Kuzmin, Y.V. (2013) ‘Origin of old world pottery as viewed from the early 2010s: when, where
and why?’, World Archaeology, Vol. 45, No. 4, pp.539–556, DOI: 10.1080/00438243.
2013.821669.
Ladd, T. (2018) ‘Does the business model canvas drive venture success?’, Journal of Research in
Marketing and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp.57–69 [online] https://doi.org/10.1108/
JRME-11-2016-0046.
Lamba, K. and Singh, S.P. (2018) ‘Modelling big data enablers for operations and supply chain
management’, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 29, No. 2,
pp.629–658.
24 A. Panghal et al.

Leitch, C., Hazlett, S.A. and Pittaway, L. (2012) ‘Entrepreneurship education and context’,
Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Vol. 24, Nos. 9–10, pp.733–740,
DOI: 10.1080/08985626.2012.733613.
Lewis, K. (2008) ‘Small firm owners in New Zealand: in it for the ‘good life’ or growth?’, Small
Enterprise Research, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp.61–100.
Lin, C.L. and Tzeng, G.H. (2009) ‘A value-created system of science (technology) park by using
DEMATEL’, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36, No. 6, pp.9683–9697.
Lin, C.J. and Wu, W.W. (2008) ‘A causal analytical method for group decision-making under fuzzy
environment’, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp.205–213, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.eswa.2006.08.012.
Lu, C.L., Huang, T. and Lin, F. (2019) ‘The intersection of potters and environmental sustainability
– pottery glaze cases’, E3S Web of Conferences, Vol. 93, DOI: 10.1051/e3sconf/
20199302006.
Lumpkin, G.T., Steier, L. and Wright, M. (2011) ‘Strategic entrepreneurship in family business’,
Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp.285–306, DOI: 10.1002/sej.122.
Make in India (2020) About Us, Make in India [online] https://www.makeinindia.com/home/
(accessed 2 April 2020).
Marques, C., Santos, G., Ratten, V. and Barros, A. (2019) ‘Innovation as a booster of rural artisan
entrepreneurship: a case study of black pottery’, International Journal of Entrepreneurial
Behavior and Research, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp.753–772 [online] https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-
02-2018-0104.
McKitterick, L., Quinn, B., McAdam, R. and Dunn, A. (2016) ‘Innovation networks and the
institutional actor-producer relationship in rural areas: the context of artisan food production’,
Journal of Rural Studies, Vol. 48, pp.41–52 [online] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.
09.005.
McLarty, R. (2005) ‘The essentials of value chain implementation in small and medium sized
enterprises’, Strategic Change, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp.45–58 [online] https://doi.org/10.1002/
jsc.709.
McPhee, W. (2014) ‘A new sustainability model: engaging the entire firm’, Journal of Business
Strategy, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp.4–12 [online] https://doi.org/10.1108/JBS-11-2013-0106.
Menon, J. and Varma, S. (2010) ‘Reading archaeological evidence’, Indian Historical Review,
Vol. 37, No. 2, pp.187–216 [online] https://doi.org/10.1177/037698361003700201.
Middleton, A. (2007) ‘Globalization, free trade, and the social impact of the decline of informal
production – the case of artisans in Quito, Ecuador’, World Development, Vol. 35, No. 11,
pp.1904–1928 [online] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2007.02.001.
Mohapatra, S., Nayak, A., Bhangadiya, A., Bagchi, I., Sharma, P.K. and Behere, S. (2016) ‘A
dilemma of terracotta professional – the case of implementing information systems in a
terracotta unit’, Emerald Emerging Markets Case Studies, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp.1–26.
Muller, J.M. (2018) ‘Business model innovation in small and medium sized enterprises, strategies
for Industry 4.0 providers and users’, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management,
Vol. 30, No. 8, pp.1127–1142, DOI: 10.3390/pr6120260.
Ojasalo, J. and Ojasalo, K. (2018) ‘Service logic business model canvas’, Journal of Research in
Marketing and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp.70–98 [online] https://doi.org/10.1108/
JRME-06-2016-0015.
Osterwalder, A. and Pigneur, Y. (2010) Business Model Generation – A Handbook for Visionaries,
Game Changers and Challengers, John Wiley and Sons, NJ.
Panda, T., Mishra, N., Rahimuddin, S. Pradhan, B.K., Rout, S.D. and Mohanty, R.B. (2019)
‘Traditional clay pottery of Odisha, India’, Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, Vol. 18,
No. 2, pp.325–332.
Pedersen, E. and Netter, S. (2015) ‘Collaborative consumption: business model opportunities and
barriers for fashion libraries’, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 19, No. 3,
pp.258–273 [online] https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMM-05-2013-0073.
 Strategic business model canvassing for terracotta pottery entrepreneurs 25

Perry-Smith, J.E. and Coff, R.W. (2011) ‘In the mood for entrepreneurial creativity? How optimal
group affect differs for generating and selecting ideas for new ventures’, Strategic
Entrepreneurship Journal, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp.247–268, DOI: 10.1002/sej.116.
Porter, M.E. (2001) The Value Chain and The Competitive Advantage: Understanding Business
Processes, Routledge, London.
Press Trust of India (2019) DPCC asks around 1,200 Polluting Pottery Units to Shut Operations,
Business Standard, 25 July [online] https://www.business-standard.com/article/ptistories/dpcc-
asks-around-1-200-polluting-pottery-units-to-shut-operations-119072501516_1.html (accessed
4 April 2020).
Ratten, V. and Dana, L.P. (2017) ‘Sustainable entrepreneurship, family farms and the dairy
industry’, International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development (IJSESD),
Vol. 8, No. 3, pp.114–129.
Ratten, V. (2014) ‘Encouraging collaborative entrepreneurship in developing countries: the current
challenges and a research agenda’, Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies,
Vol. 6, No. 3, pp.298–308 [online] https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-05-2014-0015.
Rice, P.M. (2015) Pottery Analysis, Second Edition: A Sourcebook, 2nd ed., University of Chicago
Press.
Runge, W. (2014) Technology Entrepreneurship: A Treatise on Entrepreneurs and
Entrepreneurship for and in Technology Ventures, 1st/2nd ed., KIT Scientific Publishing,
Baden, Karlsruhe.
Sankaran, P.N. (2018) ‘Traditional artisans as stakeholders in CSR: a rehabilitation perspective in
the Indian context, redefining corporate social responsibility’, Vol. 13, pp.119–141,
DOI: 10.1108/s2043-052320180000013011.
Sarkar, S. and Pansera, M. (2017) ‘Sustainability-driven innovation at the bottom: insights from
grassroots ecopreneurs’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 114,
pp.327–338, DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.029.
Sarma, K. (2018) ‘A study on economic prospects and problems of terracotta and pottery crafts of
Assam with special reference to Asharikandi Village of Dhubri District’, International Journal
of Management Studies, Vol. 2, No. 6, pp.1–9, DOI: 10.18843/ijms/v5i2(6)/07.
Satpathi, K.M. (2011) ‘Terracotta craft of Panchmura: problems and possibilities’, Chitrolekha
International Magazine on Art and Design, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp.61–74.
Schaltegger, S. and Wagner, M. (2011) ‘Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability innovation:
categories and interactions’, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 20, No. 4,
pp.222–237, DOI: 10.1002/bse.682.
Seiter, C. (2016) The Secret Psychology of Facebook: Why We Like, Share, Comment and Keep
Coming Back Buffer [online] https://buffer.com/resources/psychology-of-facebook (accessed
22 April 2020).
Shieh, J-I., Wu, H-H. and Huang, K-K. (2010) ‘A DEMATEL method in identifying key success
factors of hospital service quality’, Knowledge-Based Systems, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp.277–282,
DOI: 10.1016/j.knosys.2010.01.013.
Singh, A.K. and Fatima, S. (2015) ‘Role of handicraft sector in the economic development of Uttar
Pradesh’, International Journal of Research – Granthaalayah, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp.1–7.
Sort, J.C. and Nielsen, C. (2018) ‘Using the business model canvas to improve investment
processes’, Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp.10–33
[online] https://doi.org/10.1108/JRME-11-2016-0048.
Tewari, R., Srivastava, R.K., Saraswat, K.S., Singh, I.B. and Singh, K.K. (2008) ‘Early farming at
Lahuradewa’, Pragdhar, Vol. 18, pp.347–373.
Thistlethwaite, F. (1958) ‘The Atlantic migration of the pottery industry’, The Economic History
Review, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp.264–278, DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0289.1958.tb01640.x.
Time (2019) ‘Best Inventions 2019: 100 innovations making the world better, smarter and even a
little more fun’, Time Magazine [online] https://time.com/collection/best-inventions-2019/
(accessed 22 April 2020).
 26 A. Panghal et al.

Toledo-López, A., Díaz-Pichardo, R., Jiménez-Castañeda, J.C. and Sánchez-Medina, P.S. (2012)
‘Defining success in subsistence businesses’, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65, No. 12,
pp.1658–1664, DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.02.006.
Tzeng, G-H., Chiang, C-H. and Li, C-W. (2007) ‘Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning
programs: a novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL’, Expert
Systems with Applications, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp.1028–1044.
Velu, C. and Khanna, M. (2013) ‘Business model innovation in India’, Journal of Indian Business
Research, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp.156–170 [online] https://doi.org/10.1108/JIBR-08-2012-0068.
Vial, V. (2016) ‘A business model canvas for social enterprises’, Sains Humanika, Vol. 8,
Nos. 1–2, pp.1–8 [online] https://doi.org/10.11113/sh.v8n1-2.825.
Vuorio, A.M., Puumalainen, K. and Fellnhofer, K. (2018) ‘Drivers of entrepreneurial intentions in
sustainable entrepreneurship’, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and
Research, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp.359–381 [online] https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-03-2016-0097.
Wahyono, W. (2018) ‘Business model innovation: a review and research agenda’, Journal of
Indian Business Research, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp.348–369 [online] https://doi.org/10.1108/JIBR-
12-2017-0251.
Westhead, P., Storey, D.J. and Martin, F. (2001) ‘Outcomes reported by students who participated
in the 1994 Shell Technology Enterprise Programme’, Entrepreneurship and Regional
Development, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp.163–185, DOI: 10.1080/08985620010018273.
Winter, T. and Daly, P. (2012) ‘Heritage in Asia: converging forces, conflicting values’, in
Daly, P. and Winter, T. (Eds.): Routledge Handbook of Heritage in Asia, Routledge,
New York, NY.
Wirtz, B.W., Göttel, V. and Daiser, P. (2016) ‘Business model innovation: development, concept
and future research directions’, Journal of Business Models, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp.1–28 [online]
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1bca/3bb962761b1165dfbf42ef658bf7c179bb8b.pdf.
World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (1987) Our Common Future,
Oxford University Press, Oxford.

View publication stats