Management Review Quarterly

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-022-00309-1

Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled

literature review and research agenda

Joan Ofulue1 · Morad Benyoucef1

Received: 1 June 2022 / Accepted: 8 November 2022

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022

Abstract
Data is one of the most valuable resources in the world. The new data economy has
led to several data use cases and one of them is monetization. Given how recent the
concept of data monetization is, this study aims to investigate it, better understand its
meaning, implications and issues in the academic literature and provide guidance for
practitioners as well as direction for further research. A systematic literature review is
conducted on English literature from 2013 to 2022. 54 articles were identified from
where a topic and sub-topic categorization and a conceptual framework is developed.
The paper makes contributions in three areas: (1) providing a holistic understanding
of data monetization models through the extension of a framework from the literature,
(2) categorizing of the key topics and trends in data monetization, and (3) using a sys-
tematic approach to identify managerial implications and a future research agenda.

Keywords Data monetization · Big data monetization · Data commercialization ·

Data monetization model · Data monetization strategy · Data monetization
infrastructure · Data business model

JEL Classification M150 · Y800 · O390

1 Introduction

The concept of data monetization is new in the academic literature. However, practi-
tioner firms like Gartner (Moore 2015), EY (EY Global 2018), Deloitte (Deloitte AI
Institute 2021), KPMG (Mohasseb 2015), and academic institutions such as MIT (Bar-
bara and Jeanne 2017), (Wixom, Cashing in on your Data 2014), (Moore 2015) have
published several articles on the concept. As companies continue to generate mas-
sive amounts of data and handle existing historical data, they are turning to consulting

* Joan Ofulue
[email protected]
1
Graduate Studies Office, Faculty of Engineering, University of Ottawa, SITE 1024, 800 King
Edward Ave, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

companies to help them understand how to maximize the value of their data. Data mon-
etization is the commercialization of data and information assets. Data monetization
occurs when organizations exchange data and information assets for financial return or
something with equivalent value (Buff et al. 2014). According to Prakash (2014), data
monetization refers to the organization’s ability to create additional revenue from exist-
ing data sources (internal and external), to create useful information, insights, and obser-
vations. Fortune 500 organizations such as Amazon, Facebook, and Apple focus on data-
driven business models to develop new products and services and improve the customer
experience while generating additional revenue streams. This concept focuses on data as
a product and as such is managed that way (Marcinkowski and Gawin 2020).
Data monetization goes beyond selling raw or processed data therefore the con-
cept of “monetization” may be misleading. Beyond selling the data directly for cash,
data monetization occurs when organizations use data to create value driven prod-
ucts, convert data and analytics into financial returns and other tangible benefits
such as supplier funded advertising and discounts, or by avoiding costs that could
come from operational inefficiencies.
Data monetization either aims to reduce operational costs by leveraging internal
data and/or generate revenue through other models such as selling data and wrap-
ping data around products and services.1
The data monetization global market is estimated to grow from US$2.1 billion
in 2020 to US$15.5 billion in 2030 (compound annual growth rate of 22.1%) (Kan-
haiya et al. 2022). This will be driven by the increasing magnitude of generated
data, awareness of data monetization, emerging technology opportunities and trends
(Moore 2015) such as Business Intelligence and Analytics (BI&A), cloud comput-
ing, blockchain, Internet of Things (IoT), social networks and post-COVID-19 pan-
demic business approaches and strategies (Mordor Intelligence 2022).
Organizations wanting to develop a successful data monetization strategy will
require a good understanding of the different data monetization models, their impli-
cations, opportunities, and limitations. Given the recency of data monetization as a
discipline, efforts have been dedicated towards producing academic research across
different areas, however there is still work to be done. The first published Systematic
Literature Review (SLR) was conducted by Liu and Chen in 2015 to raise awareness,
within the academic community, on the potential of data monetization research. The
authors contributed to understanding data monetization by providing use cases,
guiding principles and a framework that combines Analytics 3.0 (advanced ana-
lytics) and BI&A 3.0 (mobile and sensor-based analytics) to better understand the
subject. Analytics 3.0 is a stage where organizations realize measurable business
impacts from the combination of traditional analytics, big data and powerful data
gathering and analysis methods to a company’s offerings, embedding data smartness
into the company’s products and services. This review was limited to a short period
(i.e., from 2010 to 2015) and only considered articles that contain “data moneti-
zation” or “monetization” within their titles thereby excluding papers that discuss

1
Wrapping is when products are augmented with analytics features or experiences to increase the value
and price of the product, market share, or customer satisfaction and loyalty.

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

data business models that are not explicitly titled “monetization”. In 2016, Thomas
and Leiponen conducted an SLR on data commercialization based on 51 articles.
They chose the term commercialization rather than monetization to differentiate the
trade in data through commercial transactions. They identified monetization chal-
lenges and models beyond the internal use case for monetization. The identified
models included data suppliers, data managers, data custodians, application devel-
opers, service providers and data aggregators. While the authors considered broader
terms beyond “data monetization”, the review was limited to a short review period
(i.e., from 2010 to 2013) and narrowly focused on monetization models through the
lens of the players involved and therefore did not provide insights beyond a single
construct (players). Hanafizadeh and Nik (2020), using an SLR, proposed a con-
figuration model called “Data monetization configuration” (DaMoc) and tested it
with a real application (i.e., Cardlytics). They identified the following global themes
categorized into different layers: the monetization layer (theme consisting of trad-
ing model, goods, end consumer), the data refinement process layer (theme consist-
ing of assets, data driven operation and value), the base layer (theme consisting of
resources and supplies) and the accessing and processing restrictions layer (theme
consisting of privacy, legal and ethical issues of data processing). Similar to Liu and
Chen (2015), the review only considered articles that contained “data monetization”
within their title thereby significantly limiting their scope. In addition, despite the
longer publication period (i.e., from 2006 to 2018), the authors had a small paper
sample of only 18 papers. Faroukhi et al. (2020a, b) used a longer publication period
(i.e., from 2000 to 2020) and a larger paper sample (i.e., 97 papers) to conduct an
SLR using a Big Data Value Chain (BDVC) framework. The BDVC framework
describes steps for administering an organization’s data related processes. The steps
range from data generation to data exposition. They further proposed two monetiza-
tion models: a reduced data monetization model and a full data monetization model.
The reduced data monetization model aims to monetize data only through the stor-
age and visualization phases. The full data monetization model is more generic,
expensive and supports monetization along the whole BDVC. Unfortunately, this
study does not show how BDVC and data monetization are integrated, and it does
not provide a reconciliation to existing literature.
While the abovementioned SLRs have contributed to a domain-based review on
data monetization, there continues to be a notable lack of comprehensive work in the
academic literature that seeks to systematically map the literature in a way that con-
solidates and structures knowledge in the domain for both the academic and practi-
tioner community, highlights areas in need of further research, and guides the plan-
ning of new research while supporting claims of relevance and novelty.
This paper conducts a technology empowered SLR. The data is electronically
sourced from online scientific databases, which is then analyzed through a combina-
tion of VOSviewer2 and manual effort. The SLR provides a thorough evaluation of
the literature, going beyond monetization models that focus on trading data or data
monetization in the context of data value chains. Indeed, the study finds, identifies,

2
https://​www.​vosvi​ewer.​com/.

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

selects, analyzes, evaluates, and systematically synthesizes work that focuses on dif-
ferent models of data monetization. The work described in this paper is not limited
by industry and geography. It consolidates the existing literature, develops a content
categorization and a corresponding conceptual framework, and provides a structure
for exploring specific research areas in data monetization that cater to a variety of
stakeholders such as academic researchers, business managers and decision mak-
ers. The paper further provides practitioners with insights into existing data mon-
etization models, which may serve as a starting point for various data monetization
initiatives.
The literature review seeks to answer the following research question: What are
the main subjects, challenges, and opportunities of data monetization in the aca-
demic literature and what are the corresponding implications for practitioners and
academic researchers?
To achieve this objective, the study describes the areas of data monetization,
maps the literature on the subject, proposes a categorization and corresponding con-
ceptual framework highlighting the literature which has been produced till date, pro-
poses new research questions capable of increasing the quality and relevance of the
academic literature and proposes managerial implications for organizations.
The paper is structured as follows. The conceptual background is presented in
Sect. 2, Sect. 3 defines the research method, followed by a discussion of the find-
ings, managerial implications and research agenda in Sect. 4. Section 5 presents the
conclusion, limitations, and considerations for future work.

2 Conceptual background

2.1 Data

Data is a public good that is consumed by people but whose supply is not affected by
people’s consumption (non-rivalrous) (Thomas and Leiponen 2016). Non-rivalrous
means that multiple actors can exploit a single dataset, it is replicable and using it
does not make its value disappear however once the data is revealed its value drops.
Data value varies by the way one uses it, combines it and whether one can make it
available at the right time (Parvinen et al. 2020). Most organizations now acknowl-
edge data as a strategic asset and many practitioners have gone as far as calling data,
not oil, the most valuable resource in the world thereby making data one of the most
important assets for digital transformation.
As the world becomes more digital, the volume of data continues to increase, and
the notion of big data is becoming a widespread phenomenon. Big data is a major
enabler of data monetization and has quickly gained popularity among industries
that own huge data assets. Gartner in its glossary defines big data as a “high vol-
ume”, “high velocity”, “high variety” information asset that requires a cost-effective,
innovative form of information processing that enables enhanced insights, decision

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

making and process automation.3 According to Faroukhi et al. (2020a, b) “high vol-
ume” indicates large amounts of generated data that cannot be processed through
traditional processing and storage means. “High velocity” indicates the speed at
which data can be generated. “High variety” refers to the characteristics of data that
come in different formats including structured formats such as traditional relational
database values, semi structured formats like XML, and unstructured formats which
could include email and IoT data. While the benefits of big data is real, its character-
istics are often constraining. Big data often has data quality issues, which make its
use challenging. It must be well arranged and free from gaps and erroneous records
to enable efficient data-based decisions (Marcinkowski and Gawin 2020). In addi-
tion, the violation of data privacy leads to several ethical and legal issues (Faroukhi
et al. 2020a, b).
The analysis of this data is so rampant and has become one of the four technol-
ogy trends of the decade together with mobile, cloud, and social business (Saynajoki
et al. 2017). Organizations are sitting on large amounts of data (historical and trans-
actional) with no clue on how to maximize its value. The new data economy has led
to several data use cases and one of them is monetization. Since the term Data and
Big Data monetization are used interchangeably throughout the academic literature,
this paper will use data to mean both big data and data.

2.2 Data monetization

Data monetization is an evolution from Business Intelligence (BI), which has

become a strategic tool for many organizations in the last two decades. BI is the
process, strategy and technology involved in using business information by organi-
zations for data driven analysis to extract usable and shareable information. During
the 2000s, data was used for descriptive analytics, which allowed organizations to
extract, process and aggregate data for internal use within the organization (Zakaria
et al. 2020). With the proliferation of digital technologies such as big data analyt-
ics, IoT, Cloud, Machine Learning, and Artificial Intelligence (AI), data monetiza-
tion has become a formal discipline and models beyond traditional BI have been
developed. This is demonstrated when Liu and Chen (2015) developed an analytics
framework for data monetization by adapting two evolution models: the evolution of
Business Intelligence and Analytics (BI&A) and Analytics 3.0 framework.
With this, it can be said that organizations have been performing internal
data monetization by improving internal operations through traditional analyt-
ics capabilities and data mining approaches to improve their bottom line returns
(Alfaro et al. 2019), meet business needs and solve internal problems (Najjar
2013). In the literature, Alfaro et al. (2019) investigated the monetization jour-
ney of BBVA (a global financial group) which improved pre-existing internal
monetization activities, and pursued new approaches by establishing a data sci-
ence center of excellence and getting the center to collaborate with the business

3
https://​www.​gartn​er.​com/​en/​infor​mation-​techn​ology/​gloss​ary/​big-​data.

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

on data monetization projects. Marcinkowski and Gawin (2020) shared insights

from a facility that evolved from “service based” to “data driven”, which led to a
strong and loyal customer base as well as additional collaborative opportunities.
Internal data monetization focuses on reducing operational cost and improving
business operations (existing processes and products). It informs strategic busi-
ness decisions and refines business processes by inputting data into the manage-
ment process (Schroeder 2016). Internal monetization is usually the first stage for
organizations as they deal with limited organizational and technological resources
(Lange et al. 2021).
Data monetization as a concept has been heavily studied by MIT’s Center for
Information Systems Research (MIT CISR). One of their very first case studies was
Owens and Minor (OM). In the early 2000 OM, a distributor of healthcare supplies,
created information offerings based on data from products and services distributed
from hundreds of suppliers to several thousand hospitals. These offerings, called
“Spend Analytics”, were sold to hospitals and supplier organizations that needed to
make better decisions about procurement and product distribution/market penetra-
tion respectively. OM later evolved by creating a separate solution that focused on its
information-based offerings (Wixom, Cashing in on your Data 2014). By 2014, MIT
CISR started to produce more data monetization research in the form of research
briefings. This was an early case of external data monetization.
Several papers in the literature have tackled external data monetization from dif-
ferent perspectives. In terms of holistic case studies, Najjar and Kettinger (2013)
studied the data monetization journey between retailers, suppliers, and a supplier
portal. The paper identified three pathways to monetization and followed the third
pathway where the retailer built a technical data infrastructure (supplier platform)
and leveraged the analytics capabilities of the suppliers. Parvinen et al. (2020) stud-
ied 24 companies to provide a wide-ranging view of data-monetization practices in
large and middle-sized companies. They identified three models: selling data, sell-
ing analysis, and selling data-based services. They created a matrix of these models
against customer types (current customers, actors in the current value chain, any-
one), devised a path using this matrix and came up with steps on the path to mon-
etization. De Reuver et al. (2015) studied the case of 3cixty (a data platform for
mobile context-aware travel applications) which developed a multi-sided platform
to serve multiple users (advertisers, app developers, government organization and
end-users). The objective of a multi-sided platform is to facilitate the transactions
between different user groups such as consumers and app developers. The platform
provides apps and services for city visitors. The paper explored different revenue
models from the end-user perspective. The authors discovered that the more willing
a user is to share data, the less likely the user is willing to pay for the app. De La
Vega et al. (2018) introduced data monetization in the context of IoT based on the
study of two companies; Company A provides smart city services, Company B owns
a smart building, they propose a data marketplace with a peer-to-peer architecture
powered by blockchain to enforce trust and non-repudiation among peers.
Another traditional business model that has influenced data monetization is a
two-sided market, defined as a trading platform dealing with two distinct user groups
that provide each other with benefits. The trading platform involves a data broker, a

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

data provider, and a data consumer. The data broker acts as an intermediary which
connects two or more market participants via the platform and simplifies their inter-
actions. Large companies operate their own data platforms to manage regular data
interactions with third parties, while smaller companies tend to exchange via neutral
platforms (Spiekermann 2019). The two-sided platform is a component of a data
marketplace where firms and individuals can buy, sell or trade second or third-party
data. Examples of data marketplaces include: Salesforce’s Data Studio, Oracle’s
BlueKai, Adobe’s Audience Marketplace (Sinha 2019) and Snowflake Data Market-
place. The two-sided markets were studied by Agarwal et al. (2019), Bataineh et al.
(2020a, b) and Saleh et al. (2021).
With nascent digital technologies such as Blockchain, data monetization contin-
ues to evolve. Al-Zahrani (2020) proposed a subscription-based data sharing model
that not only leverages blockchain but also Data as a Service (DaaS), data centers
in the cloud concept. In this model users subscribe to a data provider for a specific
period and pay for the data access based on the selected subscription plan. Javaid
et al.(2020), Abubaker et al. (2022), Madinen et al. (2022), Khezr et al. (2022a; b)
leveraged IoT with blockchain technology to provide trustful trading through auto-
matic review systems for monetizing IoT data using Ethereum smart contracts.

3 Research method

A systematic literature review (SLR) is a rigorous research methodology, not just to

gather, organize and analyze existing research on the subject but to help research-
ers develop evidence-based guidance for research in their area of study. This SLR
follows Kitchenham’s 2004 approach for conducting a systematic literature review,
which consists of three stages: (1) identification and selection of studies; (2) data
collection and extraction; and (3) data synthesis and interpretation.
Scopus, Web of Science Core and ABI/INFORM Global were selected as the
databases of choice. The search strategy was developed by first identifying key ter-
minologies and synonyms from the research topic, which were then translated into
Boolean queries. These words are “data monetization model”.
The initial search was conducted in Scopus to assess the validity of the query at
a high-level. From the results, a paper was selected based on how close the title was
to the research topic. Additional terms were identified such as “information model”,
“data business model”, “data commercialization”, etc. The paper in question was:
Advancing data monetization and the creation of data-based business models
(Parvinen, et al. 2020). This approach, called Pearl growing (also known as ‘Cita-
tion mining’ or ‘Snowballing’) ensures that all relevant literature has been identi-
fied. This approach was also leveraged to extract papers manually.
The query results were extracted into Mendeley4 to support export to Covidence.5
All papers from the three databases were exported into Covidence for de-duplica-
tion. The abstracts were initially screened in Covidence to exclude all papers that

4
www.​mende​ley.​com.
5
www.​covid​ence.​org.

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

Fig. 1  Systematic review selection and review procedure adapted from PRISMA (2009)

are either not relevant or do not meet the inclusion criteria by identifying papers as
either “Yes”, “No” or “Maybe”. The results were exported back from Covidence to
Mendeley for the papers to be extracted for a full text review.
In addition to the papers identified by the initial query, four papers were manually
identified through “backward snowballing”.
The query used is broken into three blocks. The first block captures “data” related
terms, and the second block captures “monetization” related terms. These two sets
of words are separated by a proximity operator to capture articles where the terms
appear a few words apart. The third and last block of words captures “model” related
terms. The query is shown below:
((data OR insight OR information OR "digital business" OR "business Intel-
ligence") W/4.
(moneti* OR commerciali* OR "revenue generat*")) AND.
(model OR strategy OR approach* OR offering).

3.1 Exclusion criteria

Results prior to 2013 were excluded given the recency of the topic. The practice of
data monetization, although common since 2000 (Wikipedia 2014) has only been
published since 2013. This is evident from the initial results of our query where

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

Fig. 2  A network visualization of terms based on keyword co-occurrence in 54 data monetization articles
using full counting and the 75 most relevant terms. The size of the nodes indicates the frequency of the
keyword. In this case, a minimum threshold of 4 is set as a frequency. The link between nodes indicates
the similarity of keywords, i.e., the closer the node, the greater the similarity. Red (Cluster 1) = chal-
lenges, blue (Cluster 3) = business model, and yellow (Cluster 6) = marketplace, light blue (Cluster 4) and
purple (Cluster 5) = revenue and players, green (Cluster 2) = platform

we searched the database to identify when papers on “data monetization” were first
published.

3.2 Inclusion criteria

The systematic literature review prioritizes peer reviewed journal and conference
papers. Selected papers should explicitly describe at least one model for data mone-
tization and only work published in the English language was considered. The paper
selection steps are represented in the PRISMA results flow diagram in Fig. 1

3.3 Content analysis

To answer to the research questions, both thematic and co-occurrence analyses were
performed. Given that the literature on data monetization is nascent and the final
number of articles selected for analysis was only 54, the thematic analysis was per-
formed manually and supported by the co-occurrence analysis using a tool.
Firstly, the authors independently identified key themes from all 54 papers.
Secondly, to aid the development of key themes, the authors developed a term
co-occurrence map based on the titles and abstracts of all 54 papers (see Fig. 2)
using VOS Viewer’s6 enrichment technique called co-word network analysis. Co-
word analysis assumes that words that frequently appear together have a thematic

6
https://​www.​vosvi​ewer.​com/.

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

relationship with one another. Thematic analysis is an analysis that requires

researchers to systematically extract qualitative data (e.g., text) from a collection
of documents (e.g., articles, interviews) for identifying, analyzing, and reporting
on a theme. Thematic analysis empowers researchers with autonomy in dealing
with the themes that manifest themselves from the research data (Naveen et al.
2021), (Marc et al. 2022).
Each color in Fig. 2, below, represents a thematic cluster and each node in a
network represents an entity (e.g., article, author, country, institution, keyword,
journal), and in the case of Fig. 2, a keyword in the title and abstract of all 54
papers. The size of the node indicates the number of times that the keyword is
used. The bigger the node, the greater the occurrence of the keyword. Each cir-
cle in Fig. 2 represents a term that appears at least four times in the titles and
abstracts of all 54 papers. Setting the criterion that keywords are included when
they have appeared in a minimum of four articles helps curate a pragmatic set of
clusters for network visualization based on how prolific or prominent the key-
words in the clusters are in the corpus (Marc et al. 2022). The link between the
nodes represents the keywords that co-occur or occur together. The thickness of
the link signals the number of times that the keywords co-occur or occur together
(Satish et al. 2022).
The network map produced six clusters. The authors then reconciled the themes
identified from the manual exercise conducted independently. The explanation for
each cluster was developed and the themes were identified manually, wherein key-
words in each cluster were organized to convey a coherent narrative that explains
the essence and scope of the similarities within a cluster. As a result, the map was
further refined and re-categorized and coded as can be seen in Appendix A: Themes
mapped to clusters and paper count which shows the number of articles that dis-
cuss each concept. Where discrepancies occurred between the authors, there was
elaborate discussions until a mutual agreement was reached. As a result, three final
categories where identified: Data Monetization Strategy (DMS), Data Monetization
Infrastructure (DMI) and Data Monetization Challenges (DMC).
DMS was extracted from several clusters. Clusters 3 and 6 (blue and yellow net-
works) were refined to form the data monetization models, while Cluster 5 (purple
network) and Cluster 4 (light blue network) were for the players and the revenue
models. DMI was identified based on Cluster 2 (green network) with terms such as
Internet, platform, IoT, blockchain, and device. DMC was identified based on Clus-
ter 1 (red network) with terms such as challenge, gap, security, and privacy. Using
this as a foundation, the authors included the additional themes that were identified
and agreed upon from the manual exercise.
Hence DMS includes operating model, players, and revenue model and DMI
includes cloud, blockchain, sensors and IoT. For DMC related terms, challenges
related to data monetization were extracted from all 54 papers. Using a word art,
the top seven challenges were identified as security, privacy, pricing, contract
design, data quality, beliefs, and data skills. The total number of papers that discuss
the identified themes can be found in Appendix A: Themes mapped to clusters and
paper count. The breakdown of papers by themes can be found in Appendix B: Cat-
egorization of papers by themes identified.

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

Fig. 3  Count of papers by year and article type

Fig. 4  Data Monetization Framework. “Adapted from Barbara and Jeanne (2017), Susan Moore (2015),
Parvinen et al. (2020) and Zakaria et al. (2020)”

4 Findings and proposed research agenda

4.1 Basic characteristics of the literature

A total of 54 papers were collected for data extraction and synthesis. In Fig. 3,
we illustrate the trend of publications with a significant spike in 2020 and 2021,
accounting for about 50% of the total publications. In Appendix C: Overview of stud-
ies, year, journal and paper methodology, we illustrated the breakdown of papers by
journal and methodology. About 35% of publications were made in an IEEE/data
related journal or conference with about 20% leveraging the case study approach,
23% literature review, 14% mathematical approach and the other 40% some form

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

of qualitative and exploratory approaches. Given that the query was last executed
in Oct 2022 there is a risk of missing newly published papers that have not been
captured.
In the following subsections, and based on the network visualization map gener-
ated through VOS Viewer and a review of all 54 papers, we answer the research
question: What are the main subjects, challenges, and opportunities of data moneti-
zation in the academic literature and what are the corresponding implications for
practitioners and academic researchers? We do so by identifying categorization and
subcategorization areas and proposing areas for further research at the categoriza-
tion level. We also point to the managerial implications of our findings.

4.2 Data monetization strategy (DMS)

The data monetization framework presented in Fig. 4 was devised to visualize the
main components of a data monetization strategy. The framework includes the mod-
els to the left, the players to the right, and the revenue models to the top. This frame-
work builds upon existing classifications in the literature and enhances them by
introducing the players organized by the value they add to the monetization ecosys-
tem, as well as the overarching revenue models. The mapping of the revenue models
to the monetization players is represented in Table 1. In addition, the studies that
discuss the DMS category and subcategories are shown in Appendix B: Categoriza-
tion of papers by themes identified.
In Sects. 4.2.1, 4.2.2 and 4.2.3 the authors describe the findings and in Sect. 4.2.4
and 4.2.5, the authors present managerial implications and a research agenda
respectively.
Figure 4 is the first attempt to visualize the monetization models identified from
the literature. The categorization by Wixom (2014) (data wrapping, bartering, and
selling) and Parvinen et al. (2020) continue to be a basis in the data monetization lit-
erature. We contribute to the literature by enhancing the existing models with criti-
cal elements such as the revenue model and players based on the value generated
within the ecosystem.

4.2.1 Operating model (OM)

The operating model is depicted to the center left of the framework in Fig. 4. The
first dimension is the type of data monetization (internal, indirect, and external
data monetization). Internal data monetization is when a company has data assets,
extracts value from them, and does not wish to share those assets with other parties.
Internal data monetization has existed long before the concept was introduced. Any
company using data to improve its performance can be considered as involved in
internal data monetization.
Internal data monetization seeks to reduce operational cost, improve busi-
ness operations, and improve its reputation (Alfaro, et al. 2019). Marcinkowski
and Gawin (2020), Alfaro et al. (2019), Najjar (2013), Schroeder (2016), Lange
et al. (2021), Firouzi et al. (2020), Quach et al. (2022) all describe an internal data

13
 Table 1  Mapping of revenue models to monetization players. Adapted from Spiekermann (2019), Kemppainen et al. (2018), Thomas and Leiponen (2016)
Value generated Players Freemium Advertising Subscription Pay-per-use Transaction Service Licensing
based Model based model

Generate Data Data Providers ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Combine Data Data Aggregators ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Improve Data Data Managers ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Define and Enforce Data Standards Data Regulators
Custodians of Data Data Bank ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

Facilitate Data Transactions Data Brokers ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Data Facilitators ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Tool Providers ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Enrich Monetization Ecosystem Service Providers ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
App Developers ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Consultant ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Consume Data Data Consumers ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

monetization model. Examples of internal data monetization would include efforts

to help banks optimize the placement of bank branches, data from sensors in build-
ing to complement service driven operations leading to decreasing property utiliza-
tion cost, developing business intelligence and analytical capabilities to meet busi-
ness needs and solve internal problems.
External data monetization is when a company shares its data assets with other
parties such as suppliers and customers. External monetization can take various
forms. Susan Moore (2015) proposed direct and indirect data monetization types. In
direct monetization, the trade in data is through commercial transactions that involve
monetary rewards. The indirect method uses data, refines it, and produces infor-
mation assets, services or products that can be sold. Indirect monetization can, for
instance, help identify new customer needs and create new revenue opportunities.
Direct monetization involves selling data directly and indirect monetization involves
data wrapping and bartering.
Barbara and Jeanne (2017) defined three business models within external data
monetization, namely data wrapping, bartering, and selling. Data wrapping involves
wrapping core offerings with an analytics feature. Here you are making money by
distinguishing offerings with features and experiences. An example is when com-
mercial banks create a financial tool for customers that automatically categorizes
their transactions into common budgeting categories (Alfaro, et al. 2019), (Firouzi,
et al. 2020), (Quach et al. 2022). In a 2014 poll by MIT CISR, 73% of executives
chose wrapping as the data monetization approach that offers the greatest future
potential for their companies (Wixom, Cashing in on your Data 2014). The desired
outcome of wrapping includes increased value, market share, product price cost
effective services.
Data bartering involves providing data in exchange for non-monetary rewards
such as reports, favorable terms, free services, benchmark metrics, or analytics soft-
ware (Wixom, Cashing in on your Data 2014). This is popular amongst social media
companies such as Facebook who provide free access to social media platforms
in exchange for user data. The key concern with bartering is that organizations or
individuals may not recognize the true worth of the information they are giving up.
Therefore, data regulations need to be established to protect both parties.
Data selling is the most common form of external data monetization. Common
methods involve retailers selling Point of Sale (POS) transaction data to consumer
research firms like IQVIA, Kantar, Nielsen, etc. Given that selling raw data poses
privacy concerns and questions contractual obligations, companies are developing
alternate revenue streams by selling information from reports and analytics (Wixom,
Cashing in on your Data 2014). Data selling can take various forms, from a mar-
ketplace model where data providers can offer their data (Grubenmann et al. 2017),
(Faroukhi et al. 2020a, b), (Rao and Ng 2016), (Kemppainen, et al. 2018), (Spiek-
ermann 2019), (Firouzi, et al. 2020), (Lange et al. 2021); to watching targeted ads
for rewards (Yu et al. 2020), (Trzaskowski 2022); to subscription based data shar-
ing models (Al-Zahrani 2020) or merchant models where a third party collects data
from its owners, processes it and sells the information to consumers (Saleh, et al.
2021).

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

As part of data selling, Parvinen et al. (2020), Firouzi et al. (2020) and Calvin
et al. (2021) identify three business models that align with the information offering
consumption path identified by Buff et al. (2014). These are described below.
Selling data (data offering) This involves selling raw and prepared data directly.
Selling analysis (insights offering) This involves selling analysis and restricting
access to the original data. Given that data doesn’t change hands, privacy and secu-
rity concerns are mitigated. The less versatile use of the analysis given that buyers
cannot combine it with other data sources brings to light questions around value.
Criteria such as data quality and business context relevance also play a critical role
in determining the value of insights (Rix et al. 2021a, b).
Selling data-based services (action offerings) This involves creating a new ser-
vice that can provide customers with relevant signals on the business environment,
help scale how data is delivered using multi-sided business models and can help
customers act on insight. An example of a business model that provides custom-
ers with relevant signals on the business environment include Facebook’s sale of
advertising space that enables publishers to target their specific user groups based on
their user data (Matsakis 2018). Business models that help customers act on insights
could include consulting, onsite support, process automation and process outsourc-
ing. This is similar to services provided by major management consulting firms such
as KPMG, Deloitte, PWC etc.
Faroukhi et al. (2020a, b) introduced data monetization from a Big Data Value
Chain (BDVC) perspective. The BDVC describes steps that aim to administer organ-
izations’ data related processes. These steps are: data, acquisition, preprocessing,
storage, analysis, visualization and exposition. Given the importance of the data life-
cycle, the steps are mapped against the data consumption path (selling data, selling
analysis, and selling data-based services). Data monetization can occur at any step.
Selling raw data occurs in the initial value chain steps (data generation to data stor-
age). As data becomes more refined, the rest of the steps facilitate selling analysis.

4.2.2 Players (P)

The data monetization ecosystem consists of a variety of players as identified to the

right of Fig. 4. Players can be individuals, organizations, or systems. To make an
effective external data monetization strategy, a data consuming party and a data pro-
viding party must exist. A data monetization player can take on a variety of roles
which adds complexity to the ecosystem. The roles could range from public cloud
platform providers to third party brokers, facilitators, and consultants (Najjar 2013),
(Rix et al. 2021a, b). Thomas and Leiponen (2016) describe data monetization play-
ers as models of value creation within data ecosystems. They include data suppli-
ers, data managers, data custodians, application developers, service providers and
data aggregators. Faroukhi et al. (2020a, b) proposed to build data business mod-
els around four pillars, namely data users, data providers, data facilitators and data
aggregators. Rix et al. (2021a, b) proposed 10 roles for the data ecosystem. As per
the literature, the following are data monetization players and the value they provide
to the monetization ecosystem.

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

Data providers These are the originators/owners of the data (Grubenmann

et al. 2017) (Spiekermann 2019) (Thomas and Leiponen 2016) (Rix et al. 2021a,
b). They can also be called data suppliers as they generate the data leveraged in
the ecosystem. It could be smart phone users or individuals having some personal
data to sell (Bataineh et al. 2020a, b).This could include user generated, IoT sen-
sor generated or company data. Data providers may play multiple roles such as
all the other roles defined below. For a multi-sided market, stability of the data
providers in the ecosystem and the nature of the domains and parties involved in
collecting and sharing data determine the success of this market (Bataineh et al.
2020a, b), (Parvinen et al. 2020).
Data aggregators They combine the data and provide users with aggregated
services and data, thereby enabling them to produce a targeted advertising busi-
ness model. They also perform data crawling and visualization. The most com-
mon data aggregators are price comparison services such as the travel search
engine Kayak (Faroukhi et al. 2020a, b), (Gopalkrishnan 2013), (Hartmann
2016). There are also aggregators such as Meta, Google, and Twitter where the
user does not pay to use the services, but the aggregator monetizes the service
through advertising (Robinson 2017).
Data managers They improve the data. These are organizations that catalogue,
clean, and parse data that is not in an easily usable format or improve the value
of the data with additional context. They add value to data by improving the effi-
ciency, interpretability, and the overall functionality of the data (Thomas and
Leiponen 2016), (Klaus 2011), (Saynajoki et al. 2017).
Data regulators They define and help enforce data standards. These organiza-
tions recommend and ensure the security, privacy, and ethical use of data. They
define standard data technologies and standardization of data transfer (Faroukhi
et al. 2021).
Data banks They are the custodians of the data. Data banks are organizations
that enable the reuse and resale of data by providing a ‘trusted’ infrastructure
(Thomas and Leiponen 2016), (Schwab 2011). According to Saynajoki et al.
(2017) data banks orchestrate external data distribution between companies. They
also reassure end users and data consumers through provenance validation and
certification and auditing services to ensure that the integrity and the quality of
data is maintained from sourcing to use (Perrin 2013).
Data brokers They collect and bundle data for prospective buyers. The broker
is a platform equipped with the needed infrastructure to store and share data. They
provide services that enable providers and consumers to perform data selling
and buying transactions (Bataineh et al. 2020a, b), (Lin et al. 2020), (Schroeder
2016). They can be referred to as orchestrators (Rix et al. 2021a, b). Examples of
such platforms are Snowflake and the Azure data marketplace. Lin et al. (2020)
proposed that adopting brokers has three advantages. First, brokers can continue
the trading process when both sides are offline. Second, brokers facilitate a refund
thereby protecting the rights of participants. Third, parties do not need to reveal
sensitive information because of a decentralized architecture. Brokers resolve pri-
vacy issues as they are the bridges that link data providers and consumers.

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

Data facilitators They are the typical third parties with the required capabilities
to share data with data consumers. Facilitators do not own the data but provide ser-
vices such as data cleaning, data analytics and consulting services (Najjar 2013).
Data facilitators could correspond to a technical platform based on tools for data
collection, integration, processing, storage, analysis, and visualization (Faroukhi
et al. 2020a, b). They provide the physical architecture and the provision of out-
sourced analytics services.
Tool Providers Schroeder (2016) and Calvin et al. (2021) identified this player
category. Hardware and software infrastructures are a significant facilitator of data
monetization. From IOT to cloud to on-premises tools, the producers of these tools
have a significant contribution to make as they enable all players in the monetization
ecosystem. Examples include but are not limited to Microsoft, AWS, and Google
who provide both software and hardware solutions. Data brokers, facilitators and
tool providers facilitate transactions within the data monetization ecosystem.
Service providers Service providers develop new services for data, distinct to the
resale, analysis or repackaging of data or the development of specific applications
(Perrin 2013), (Saynajoki et al. 2017).
Application developers They are organizations and software entrepreneurs that
design, build and sell applications that enable data monetization (Hammell 2012),
(de Reuver et al. 2015). They design and build tools to analyze data (Saynajoki et al.
2017).
Consultants They demonstrate the value of data monetization to data provid-
ers and support them in developing strategies (Rix et al. 2021a, b). They can also
provide data sourcing and consultation services to help buyers find the right data
according to their use case (Luch Kelly 2022). The complexity of the data monetiza-
tion ecosystem brings about new questions such as what are the use cases for data
monetization? What is the best and most scalable architecture that supports a chosen
strategy? How can the organization’s structure be designed to successfully deploy a
chosen strategy? What are the privacy and ethical considerations to be made? How
can existing processes be optimized based on findings from the data? etc. Answering
these questions and guiding organizations through their data monetization strategy
and execution has brought about a myriad of services offered by consulting firms
such as IBM, KPMG, Deloitte, etc. Service providers, application developers and
consultants enrich the data monetization ecosystem with their products and services.
Data consumers These are the parties that need and consume the data. They are
individuals, businesses or systems that use collected data from various sources such
as product usage, behaviors, preferences, Internet activities, IoT, etc. (Faroukhi et al.
2020a, b) and are willing to buy real-time data streams (Lin et al. 2020). Data con-
sumer requirements vary in terms of the type, quality, and amount of data based on
their scope and the applications they need (Bataineh et al. 2020a, b). Al-Zahrani
(2020) refers to these players as data subscribers.

4.2.3 Revenue model (RM)

The data monetization ecosystem consists of several revenue models as identi-

fied at the top of Fig. 4. The identified operating models leverage one or more

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

revenue models, which serve to provide compensation to the players within the
ecosystem. A revenue model is seen as one fee or a combination of fees for differ-
ent players (Kemppainen et al. 2018). The revenue model determines how players
will be charged/rewarded for the value they receive/provide in the monetization
ecosystem. Data monetization models can use a combination of revenue models
to achieve the desired objectives. Spiekermann (2019) using eight revenue mod-
els and Kemppainen et al. (2018) using 14 revenue models created a revenue and
price model taxonomy which serves as a conceptual starting point. For any rev-
enue model, users’ willingness to pay for and share personal data is critical to
success. De Reuver et al. (2015) discovered that the more a user is willing to
share data, the less likely they are to pay for an application. As per our literature
review, the following consolidated data monetization revenue models have been
identified.
Free of charge A strategy to attract users and build a community. This is some-
times referred to as a freemium model where businesses give away basic data to
encourage further engagement and charge a premium for access to more detailed
data (Thomas and Leiponen 2016), (de Reuver et al. 2015). Popular music and
movie streaming platforms such as YouTube, Spotify, Alexa, and Hulu music allow
users access to a broad collection of music selection and movies, attracting a large
user base and restricting the services offered to freemium members.
Advertising Revenue is mainly generated from advertisers. The competitive
advantage for models relying on advertising as the main source of revenue lies in
platforms, enabling better ways to gather and evaluate information (Tucker 2014).
Kemppainen et al. (2018) propose that when adopting a human centered approach
to personal data management, no advertising policy serves as the foundation of a
revenue model. The no advertising model reflects the changing attitudes towards
personal data usage, individual rights to privacy and companies’ need for finding
alternative revenue models.
Subscription (membership) Several subscription-based models exist in the litera-
ture. Subscriptions can either be free of charge or fee based to be renewed periodi-
cally. Organizations utilize package levels where basic level data (raw data) is the
most basic level while more refined, aggregated data is the top level (Najjar 2013),
(Spiekermann 2019). In an advertising and subscription-based revenue model, the
key drivers of revenue are the number of users and their willingness to pay (Kemp-
painen, et al. 2018).
Pay-per-use A price is charged per unit of data consumed with this unit needing
to be defined. This option is popular for Application Programming Interface (API)
access.
Transaction based model Consists of a transaction fee that is time or volume
based. The platform operator facilitates data transactions between the stakeholders
(Kemppainen et al. 2018).
Service based model Consists of a service fee, a connection fee, and a member-
ship fee. The platform operator generates revenue by offering value-adding services
on the platform or charging for the usage of the platform (Kemppainen et al. 2018).
Licensing Data marketplaces often provide standardized licensing models as well
as regulations regarding data access and usage (Spiekermann 2019).

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

4.2.4 Managerial implications of DMS

Today, due to access to a wealth of information, almost every business can aim to be
a data business. For an organization to effectively develop a data monetization strat-
egy, there are key considerations to be made. The first step is to access the current
ecosystem to identify opportunities, gaps and risks. Organizations need to under-
stand where they are at in the monetization journey and where they want to end up.
This evaluation requires careful consideration of the data asset inventory, character-
istics of the data that are central to realizing benefits, and metrics for assessing the
value of data and return on investment (Quach et al. 2022). In addition, organiza-
tions need to determine the value of their data as not all data is of equal value, what
insights it can produce, who would be interested (entities internal or external to the
organization), how to deliver the information in the most useful format, how much
can be paid (revenue model), when to deliver this data as some data may be required
in real-time, and finally how to process the data to add value. These questions need
to be answered through both internal assessment and competitive market research.
Furthermore, the structure of the organization as well as its analytical and techni-
cal capabilities will determine the most successful pathways to data monetization.
The evaluation of the organization’s structure involves answering questions such
as: How is the personnel organized to successfully deliver on data mandates? What
is the organization’s attitude towards innovation and disruption? Are there dedi-
cated resources for data monetization? Analytical capabilities involve evaluating
data skillsets and identifying skill gaps, while technical capabilities involve evalu-
ating the technical data infrastructure (digital platform). Organizations can decide
to build inhouse platforms which can be expensive or leverage data marketplaces
which provide productive and transparent means for data monetization. Data mar-
ketplaces provide a platform to sell datasets, data services or APIs. Data market-
places enable data monetization by providing an access to a network of data buyers,
avoiding costly data integration operations, and enabling small companies to grow
data monetization capabilities. A data marketplace offers three benefits. Firstly, it
empowers individuals and organizations to monetize rich data that is automatically
generated and has become rampant due to the advent of IoT. Secondly, it allows
non-technical users such as business managers to easily navigate the complex world
of data as these marketplaces are designed like regular everyday websites. Thirdly,
it can thrive as a result of big data and the network effect of a two-sided model that
brings data producers and consumers together.

4.3 Research agenda on DMS

The following three DMS areas require further research. (1) To understand the
factors to be considered in an effective data monetization strategy. Such factors
could range from establishing a data monetization center of excellence as signified
by Alfaro et al. (2019) to developing a data monetization strategy that is part of
the organization’s broader strategy. (2) With the myriad of players, there is a need
for the academic community to further investigate the interdependencies between

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

multiple roles that players can take on, the value co-creation process, as well as
how the overall data monetization ecosystem is governed. (3) There is a need to
understand data monetization revenue models based on business models and players
within the data monetization ecosystem. Although Kemppainen et al. (2018) studied
revenue models at a conceptual level by looking at business models that are suitable
for other multi-sided markets, there is insufficient literature on revenue models for
data monetization.

4.3.1 Data monetization infrastructure (DMI)

As per the literature, we identified the Cloud, Blockchain, Sensors and IoT as data
monetization infrastructures. In Sects. 4.3.1, 4.3.2 and 4.3.3 we describe the find-
ings and in Sect. 4.3.4 and 4.3.5 we present the managerial implications and the
research agenda respectively. In addition, the studies that discuss the DMI category
and subcategories are presented in Appendix B: Categorization of papers by themes
identified.

4.3.2 Cloud (C)

Cloud computing delivers on-demand computing on a pay-as-you-go model via

the Internet. It enables organizations to switch from a CAPEX (capital expendi-
tures) model to an OPEX (operating expenses) model for Information Technology
resources. Data monetization relies on distributed architectures such as cloud com-
puting and a trustless (i.e., involved participants do not need to know or trust each
other) data trading infrastructure. Cloud computing remains a suitable solution to
provide a secure, comprehensive, robust, scalable, and elastic ecosystem to host data
monetization. It also provides an efficient model for data monetization as a service
(Faroukhiet al. 2020a, b). In the data economy, most data and IoT services reside
in the cloud. Massive amounts of data is being generated with the growth of IoT
and the value of the data needs to be extracted by a supportable ecosystem such
as IoT-Cloud that solves the problem of network resource occupation, high latency,
and additional network load by distributing the execution of the computing task in a
balanced manner to maximize the benefits of the system (Yu et al. 2020a, b). Cloud
computing enables the provision of complimentary data for AI-driven services.
Complimentary data is data formed by integrating multiple data types from multiple
sources (Saleh et al. 2021). Cloud computing enables data platforms that implement
the most valuable data monetization business models. The platforms are not only for
selling data but also for delivering various data products and services (Lange et al.
2021).
Cloud computing can be deployed either as Infrastructure as a service (IaaS),
Platform as a Service (PaaS) and Software as a Service (SaaS). It supports various
data models such as Analytics as a Service (AaaS), Data as a Service (DaaS), etc.
Analytics as a Service (AaaS) provides a data analytics platform service in the
cloud. With huge volumes of data being available, people want answers, not more
data. Moreover, the cost of the in-house infrastructure that supports data analytics

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

continues to rise. AaaS, sometimes referred to as ‘agile analytics’, is defined as gen-

erating insights from data wherever this data may be located and turning a general-
purpose analytical platform into a shared utility (Demirkan and Delen 2013). AaaS
is a multifaceted concept that can be offered as SaaS when presented as a reporting
application for business end-users. It can also be offered as PaaS that provides data
scientists with a data analysis suite for their development. Finally, it can be offered
as IaaS that provides virtualized resources to host vast amounts of data (Naous et al.
2017).
Data as a Service (DaaS) is a data management framework provided through ser-
vices in the cloud to bring data storage, integration, processing, analysis services,
security, availability, elasticity, and quality directly to the consumer. DaaS provides
data centers on the cloud. It enhances data accessibility through different channels,
allows the cleansing and enriching of data to occur in a centralized place and elimi-
nates geographical and scalability limitations. This data is offered to different sys-
tems, applications, or users with elastic access to data, scalability, high availability,
and system performance by demand (based on service level agreements—SLAs)
regardless of geographical or organizational separation of the network (Rajesh
2012).

4.3.3 Blockchain (BC)

Blockchain is a distributed and decentralized ledger with the main purpose of

removing third parties. It is a series of data blocks, produced and joined chronologi-
cally. It consists of a consensus method, distributed ledger, smart contracts, peer-to-
peer network and blocklist containing a cryptographic hash that guarantee reliable
transactions by executing a decentralized consensus protocol (Al-Zahrani 2020).
The technology uses digital networks in which different types of users can interact
and share data (Xie 2020). For data monetization that relies on decentralized peer-
to-peer architecture and IoT, this monetization technique is highly effective given
there is no need for a third party and high interoperability exists between fog nodes
(Khezr et al. (2022a; b). Fog computing is also referred to as edge computing. In a
fog computing architecture, companies can make data available to other companies
in a peer-to-peer fashion, without needing a cloud intermediary, thereby maximiz-
ing the locality of the processing, and avoiding bottlenecks. In this architecture, data
processing, filtering and stream-based event generation is done in a fog node. Block-
chain allows relationships, commercial agreements, data delivery, access control and
access logs to be performed directly between data producers and consumers without
the need for mutual trust or a central entity (De La Vega, et al. 2018) (Kolade 2022).
Data security is established, and the data users have some confidence in the quality
of the data (Javaid, et al. 2020) because poor data quality does not only have finan-
cial impacts, but it also has a negative impact on the productivity and the businesses
reputation. Blockchain provides a secure, transparent, anonymous, cost effective and
decentralized solution for IoT data (Javaid, et al. 2020), (Khezr et al. (2022a; b).
It reduces the risk of privacy incidence and avoids disputes with transactions (Xie
2020). In blockchain driven data monetization, ownership rights and identity authen-
tication, the performance of the blockchain network, pricing, security, privacy, and

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

transparency (Al-Zahrani 2020) all contribute to the effectiveness of this monetiza-

tion infrastructure. Blockchain can help address privacy concerns by offloading the
computation over sensitive data to an external network where it may be broken into
different nodes and apply cryptographic techniques (Shrobe et al. 2018).
The design features of blockchain such as immutability, transparency, and trace-
ability are being applied to several fields such as medicine, economics, IoT, etc.
In 2022, there has been an uptick in the literature on blockchain technology for
data monetization as researchers continue to find solutions to resolve the dominance
of storage and delivery networks by cloud providers. This has mainly been due to
the successful utilization of technologies such as Non-Fungible Tokens (NFT).
NFT is a digital asset that offers ownership guarantees for every asset added on the
blockchain network. Blockchain solutions promise not only to provide users with
the ability to control their data but also alternatives to challenges found in central-
ized frameworks (e.g., security and availability) (Madine et al. 2022), (Khezr et al.
(2022a; b).

4.3.4 Sensors (S) and IoT

The proliferation of sensors and IoT based devices has led to Analytics 3.0, allowing
organizations to make data driven decisions and unlock value through data moneti-
zation (Faroukhi et al. 2020a, b). The goal of IoT is to increase the connectedness
of people and things. Sensors drive the IoT ecosystem as they detect and measure
changes in position, temperature, light, etc. Sensors turn objects into data-generat-
ing mediums that often interact with their environment. Infrastructure is required to
support data collection, transmission, processing, analysis, reporting and advanced
querying. The use of sensors is common in industries such as Energy and Mining,
Power and Utilities, Healthcare, Transportation and Vehicles, Industrial Internet,
Hospitality, Technology, Financial Services, and retail. Lengyel et al. (2015) pro-
posed a Sensor Hub framework set up as Platform as a Service (PaaS) that serves
as an enabler for data monetization. The solution enables collecting sensor data,
transmitting, processing, analyzing, and supporting the utilization of data. For smart
buildings, for instance, knowledge gleaned is used in optimizing cleaning and waste
management processes, preserving heating, cooling, and lighting energy (Saynajoki
et al. 2017). IoT is typically enabled by distributed and decentralized architectures
such as cloud computing and blockchain, which can offer a secure and dependable
way for monetizing IOT data.

4.3.5 Managerial implications of DMI

Given the variety of data sources for data monetization, organizations need to have
the right technical infrastructure to retrieve, store, share and track data. Therefore,
infrastructure is the technological facilitator for data monetization. There are several
infrastructure configurations that support data monetization, ranging from the most
fundamental leveraging of a web plugin that controls the access of ad platforms
to a user’s browser profile (Parra-Arnau 2017) to data management platforms, to
cloud network environments via interfaces and communication protocols (Faroukhi

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

et al. 2020a, b), to data trading platforms that build a secure, reliable and scalable
data sharing infrastructure (Lin et al. 2020), (Madine et al. 2022), (Abubaker et al.
2022). In a data marketplace, platform architecture can be based on a centralized or
decentralized approach. In a centralized approach data products are offered by dif-
ferent providers via a central location which could be a cloud infrastructure. This
central location contains semantified (restructured and optimized to capture con-
textual relationships) and reconciled data that application developers can access via
an application programming interface (API) (de Reuver et al. 2015). In a decen-
tralized approach, the data products remain with the data provider and examples of
such framework include blockchain. A data monetization strategy must take infra-
structure into consideration since a technical data infrastructure can be developed
in-house, outsourced, or delivered as a service (Najjar 2013). Organizations need to
consider the following questions: what data is required and how will it be acquired?
In what way will the data be processed? In what way will the data be distributed?
(Marcinkowski and Gawin 2020).
Infrastructure considerations must include the following. (1) Data-as-a Service
(DaaS) for providing raw and anonymized data. Such direct data monetization strat-
egy is indicated when the organization lacks sufficient infrastructure and analytics
capabilities. (2) Insights-as-a-Service (IaaS) for when the organization has the capa-
bility to aggregate both internal and external data to produce analytical insights and
visualization. (3) Analytics-as-a-Service (AaaS) for when the organization not only
provides analytical insights but empowers the data consumers with BI tools requir-
ing zero setup and maintenance. Notice that this is similar to cloud models such as
IaaS, PaaS and SaaS and therefore has a huge infrastructure burden on the providing
organization. (4) An indirect strategy such as data-driven business models that lever-
age existing data to improve productivity and increase efficiency (Trianz 2022).
With the many infrastructure opportunities come challenges with security, legal
and privacy issues, as well as the need for suitable standards. Organizations must
avoid the tendency of using an existing infrastructure to enable data monetization as
existing infrastructures may be unable to fulfil storage, bandwidth, processing and
security requirements. Organizations must plan for a dedicated infrastructure that is
secure, scalable, accessible, and well governed (Trianz 2022).
Today, data marketplaces are platforms that allow organizations to share their
data with internal and external partners as well as the public. Studies show that
organizations that leverage next-generation data marketplaces will gain a competi-
tive digital edge because data marketplaces are the best demand generation plat-
forms and the easiest route to data monetization. A data marketplace can be personal
(because it allows consumers to get paid for sharing their data), B2B and IoT based,
with B2B marketplaces understandably making up the majority.
Data marketplaces can offer large volumes of actionable data and APIs without
having to complete complex transformations. They can be offered both as central-
ized and decentralized platforms (Luch Kelly 2022), although there has been an
increased interest in decentralized platforms due to their promise to address security
and privacy challenges.

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

4.3.6 Research agenda on DMI

The following three DMI areas require further research. (1) Academic research still
needs to develop seamless, elegant architectures that can address models for data
monetization. Consideration should be given to architectures that support plug-and-
play of the components based on the specific monetization model under considera-
tion. Also, additional research needs to be dedicated to addressing how the cloud as
a data monetization infrastructure can help resolve challenges such as data quality,
security, and privacy. (2) Research on the application of blockchain to data moneti-
zation remains highly theoretical and its potential remains untapped due to integrat-
ing challenges with existing technologies (Dimitrios et al. 2021). Academic research
on blockchain for data monetization infrastructure must progress to the applicability
stage. (3) The integrated application of both centralized (i.e., cloud computing) and
decentralized (i.e., blockchain) technologies needs to be further explored.

4.4 Data monetization challenges (DMC)

The top seven challenges across all 54 papers are discussed below. Privacy/trust/
security and contract design/pricing are the most re-occurring themes in the data
monetization literature. 24 papers identified privacy as a major challenge to data
monetization given that external data monetization involves distributing raw data or
data insights.
In Sects 4.4.1–4.4.6 we describe the findings and in Sects. 4.4.7 and 4.4.8 we
present the managerial implications and research agenda respectively. In addi-
tion, the studies that discuss the DMC category and subcategories are defined
in Appendix B: Categorization of papers by themes identified.

4.4.1 Security (S) and privacy (PV)

Data monetization cannot be discussed without security and privacy. A major obsta-
cle to data sharing is a lack of trust and security. Data security refers to the pro-
cess of keeping data confidential and protecting it from theft, errors, and accidental
destruction (Parvinen et al. 2020). Earlier research on privacy suggests that people
make trade-offs between utility, price, and privacy (de Reuver et al. 2015). Even
though consumers value their privacy, they tend to provide their information for a
monetary value or a service (e.g., users of online services such as Google and Face-
book) (Sánchez 2022). There is an increasing regulatory and security concern into
the behavior of organizations that sell personal data (Thomas and Leiponen 2016).
Security and privacy issues prevent data owners from sharing data amongst them-
selves despite the profitability from data sharing.
Users’ perception of privacy infringement will continue to pose a risk to the free
flow of data between data monetization players. Empirical studies reveal that there
has been a dichotomy in human behavior that continues to baffle privacy experts
and has been a major hurdle in the development of models that put a price on pri-
vacy. Parra-Arnau (2017) attempted to resolve privacy in a web tracking scenario

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

by creating a privacy model that allows for the optimal trade-off between economic
reward and privacy. The user’s privacy is ensured by a means of collaborative mask-
ing. Rao and Ng (2016) introduced the idea of obfuscation of user information to
protect user privacy. Individual personal identifiable information (PII) is stripped off
or noise is introduced to the data before the data is sold.
Effective contract designs can help alleviate security and privacy concerns
through the establishment of appropriate assurance practices (Najjar 2013). Regula-
tory complexity and the absence of a legal framework may lead to considerable legal
uncertainty with regards to trading data. The current regulatory environment does
not have a cohesive and comprehensive set of laws to support a data monetization
ecosystem. The ones in existence are siloed given they are created in an ad hoc man-
ner for different institutional purposes (Spiekermann 2019). For example, in the US,
there is no single regulation to protect personal privacy. There are a set of laws and
regulations for sectors of activity or regions such as California Consumer Privacy
Act (CCPA) and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).
However, in the EU, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) exists as a sin-
gle body of rules protecting privacy and personal data (Perrin 2013).

4.4.2 Pricing (PC)

Putting a price tag on data is not an easy task. The reason is that in order to accom-
modate diverse demands, data sellers devise different plans and pricing schemes
for their buyers because buyers can obtain varying utility from the same data. This
could be because data users have different uses of a particular data, different skill-
sets and varying complementary knowledge (Sinha 2019) (Rix 2021a; b). The play-
ers involved must mutually agree on the valuation of the traded data. The following
characteristics of data by Agarwal et al. (2019) further make this a unique problem:
data can be replicated at zero marginal cost, its value to a firm is combinatorial (i.e.,
the value of a particular dataset to a firm may depend on other datasets available),
and the authenticity and usefulness of data is difficult to verify a priori without first
applying it.
Rao and Ng (2016) proposed an information market for Internet users to enable
the exchange of data. Their model gives users an idea about the value of their infor-
mation using the concept of Shannon’s information theory, which is a measure of
uncertainty of information. Using this, one can estimate the value and price of the
information type in the information market. While Shannon’s information theory
helps understand the amount of information that has been divulged, there is a need
to understand the demand in the information market from the buyers interested in
the information. So, the buyers state the amount they would be willing to pay for an
information category and the average is used to determine the demand in the infor-
mation market. Another technique identified by Chao Li (2013) includes linking the
price of the data with the amount of noise added to the data by a third party called a
“market marker”. In this scenario, the market maker can be prone to act maliciously
since they have the unperturbed data. Al-Zahrani (2020) proposes a subscription-
based data-sharing model where the users subscribe to a data provider for a specific
period and pay for the data access based on the selected subscription plan. Thomas

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

and Leiponen (2016) argued that data packaging and pricing models must be consid-
ered to identify what data can be made available, in what mode and at what prices
while taking into consideration associated costs.
Recently, there has been more focus on pricing data, but there is still work to be
done. Calvin et al. (2021) using a topology formation derived three pricing mod-
els for manufacturing from 11 features, namely price determination, price discovery,
measurement unit, payment flow, timing of price determination, bundle component,
bundling type, degree of integration, differentiation, price dynamics, and value crea-
tion. While this topology can be applied beyond manufacturing, academic research
needs to consider quantitative and practical applications.
Stein Hannah et al. (2021) proposed a framework that provides four approaches:
criteria-based for internal qualitative valuation, reporting-based for external quali-
tative valuation, cost-based for internal quantitative valuation and transaction-
based for external quantitative valuation. This was tested using a case study in the
manufacturing context, yet it needs to be tested in a broader context using multiple
industries.
Monteiro et al. (2021) identified the need to focus on the value dimension of the
Vs of big data. They acknowledge that academic research on value is lacking com-
pared to the three classical dimensions (Volume, Velocity and Variety) and existing
studies do not agree on the right way to measure and define this value.

4.4.3 Contract design (CD)

Data is non-rivalrous and only partially exclusive. Non-rivalry means that the same
data can be used by many and partially exclusive implies that data is only exclusive
within a specified type of use. These characteristics of data emphasize how critical
it is to have clear contractual agreements (Thomas and Leiponen 2016). A contract
is a legal agreement that states how parties must interact and fulfil their obligations.
Contracts involve NDAs (non-disclosure agreements), data sharing and purchase
contracts.
Given that data monetization involves strategy designs that involve multiple play-
ers and revenue structures, designing an optimal and fair contract agreeable by all
parties is critical. Designing contracts helps address IP (intellectual property), pri-
vacy, and security issues by ensuring data sold or shared is used for the intended
and agreed upon purpose (Najjar 2013). Sinha et al. (2019) propose a contract-the-
oretical framework to accommodate heterogeneous honest buyers as well as adver-
sarial types. The framework proposes that the seller add noise to data query answers,
charge more for lower noise, and thwart rational adversaries by levying fines.
Further academic research needs to consider answering questions that tackle how
contracts should be designed to cater for IP protection, pricing concerns, regulatory
complexity, data reuse/licensing and data quality.

4.4.4 Data quality (DQ)

The quality of data plays a major role in data monetization. Data quality addresses
issues such as accuracy, completeness, consistency, interpretability, and reliability

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

(Thomas and Leiponen 2016). Depending on the quality of data, organizations can
choose to only be involved in specific models for data monetization. For low quality
data and organizations not willing or able to process data, data monetization may
simply be selling raw datasets. Mature organizations with the right infrastructure
can sell more than just raw data. They can sell insights, data-based products, and
other refined data outcomes. According to Faroukhi et al. (2020a, b) data users often
scramble with low quality data, diverse data sources, data management, regulated
strategies, and the violation of data privacy. They propose a data management plat-
form to ensure end-to-end integrity of all the processes within an organization to be
able to exploit valuable information. Javaid et al. (2020) propose a review system
based on blockchain technology that holds the review of users who have used IoT
data so that other users can trust the data they are using. The system provides con-
fidence to users that the quality of data is satisfactory. IoT data is heterogenous in
nature and therefore create compatibility issues on different platforms (Al-Zahrani
2020). Poor quality data cost business an average of $15 million of losses per year
(Moore 2018). Poor quality data has a negative impact on customer trust, product
reliability and ultimately business reputation (Al-Zahrani 2020).

4.4.5 Beliefs (B)

Perceptions are difficult to change given they are inherent deep-rooted beliefs of
individuals and organizations, hence the need to nurture trust between the parties
involved. The lack of trust and security can cause data providers to fear that compet-
itors could benefit from disclosures of in-house data (Spiekermann 2019). It could
also discourage data owners from participating as there is a tendency for organiza-
tions who have economic benefit to optimize surveillance and manipulation tactics
(Trzaskowski 2022). No doubt that contracts can help alleviate concerns. However,
having shared values is required to give players in the ecosystem a chance. For a
collaborative mutually beneficial relationship, demonstrated trustworthiness, inter-
organizational coordination to establish governance mechanisms and successful and
repeatable interactions demonstrate reliability (Najjar 2013).

4.4.6 Data skills (DS) and other challenges

Having the right skillset can make or break a data monetization agenda. The right
data skillset includes both the technical skills required to orchestrate data from data
providers to data consumers. Organizations need to develop strategies to hire and
retain the talent required to deliver an end-to-end data strategy (Alfaro et al. 2019).
Other DMCs identified throughout the literature include identifying a trade-off
between information transparency and risk of losing information advantage to data
consumers (Najjar 2013), the organization’s position in the value network, organiza-
tion type and culture (Parvinen et al. 2020), IP protection (Thomas and Leiponen
2016), poor infrastructure (Bram et al. 2015), willingness of users to share personal
data with app developers and pay for platform applications (de Reuver et al. 2015),
lack of demand for data (Spiekermann 2019), regulatory complexity (Najjar 2013),
data provenance (Schroeder 2016), standards and accessibility (Schroeder 2016),

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

and internal politics (Schroeder 2016). In the context of Big Data Value Chain
(BDVC) and cloud, challenges are related to deployment, scalability, exposition,
networking, and enormous resources (Faroukhi, El Alaoui, et al. 2021).

4.4.7 Managerial implications for DMC

Organizations looking to monetize data must deploy security systems such as cen-
tralized authentication and authorization, role and data based access control, encryp-
tion and data anonymization. The owners of data monetization infrastructure must
consider the legal risks, data protection barriers, competitive barriers, data availabil-
ity problems, and data delivery methods. Data marketplaces can address many of
these challenges as they rely on privacy assured, transaction secured and transparent
platforms. They remove the effort of finding data providers and foster trustworthy
transactions (Luch Kelly 2022).
Given the risks of cybersecurity incidents and the reputational implications of
such incidents, many industries (e.g., the health sector) choose not to monetize data.
But privacy and data protection laws provide the tools required to ensure individual
data is protected and organizations are transparent (i.e., they reveal their commercial
practices) (Trzaskowski 2022).
With regards to pricing, the million-dollar question remains what are the most
effective means to determine price equilibrium for all the players? Since data is
experienced goods, how can pricing mechanisms function if there is less willing-
ness to pay given that buyers do not recognize the value of data because it has not
been fully disclosed (Spiekermann 2019), (Rix 2021a; b)? How can pricing models
be developed to consider the cost of collecting, maintaining, and making data avail-
able? In a data marketplace, how do you determine pricing that satisfies consum-
ers and covers the cost for providers? Without financial incentives, datasets will be
poorly maintained. Can someone get the same (or better) data for free somewhere
else? Finally, can organizations ensure that data is accurate, updated and obtained
through ethical means? These questions still need to be further explored.

4.4.8 Research agenda for DMC

The following DMC related research questions have been identified. (1) Investigate
how data monetization can be designed with issues such as privacy and security
at the forefront. Designing data-based services with security and privacy in mind
is called privacy by design and is particularly important since legal developments
are outpaced by technological developments. Privacy by design is an approach that
takes privacy into account in the designing of a data product or service. There are
reports and principles that provide such design guidance. Examples of such princi-
ples include privacy as the default, end-to-end security, avoiding false dichotomies
such as privacy vs. security, etc. (2) Contribute to the academic literature on pricing
models for data products and develop pricing packages and contract designs with
security and privacy in mind. (3) Conduct research on developing data standards
that improve quality, accessibility, and combinatorial insights. (4) Conduct research
on developing regulation and policies around different types of data such as open

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

data, proprietary data and social media data given that these three types of data
barely overlap, and have different sources, uses and implications (Schroeder 2016).
(5) Conduct research on developing contracts that are designed to cater for IP protec-
tion, pricing concerns, regulatory complexity, data usage/licensing and data quality.

5 Conclusion and limitations

This paper contributes to improving the understanding of data monetization in three

ways. First, it provides a holistic understanding of areas within data monetization
using a framework derived from the literature. The framework outlines the existing
business models based on the research of Wixom (2014), Parvinen et al. (2020),
Faroukhi et al. (2020a, b) and enhances it by introducing the players based on value
contribution to the monetization ecosystem and the revenue models. The framework
categorizes the models based on identified dimensions. The models include internal
monetization, indirect monetization, data wrapping, data bartering and data selling
with most of the literature describing a model for selling data. The framework goes
further by mapping the data selling models against the BDVC phases. Second, the
paper systematically derives a broad categorization and sub-categorization for the
key themes in data monetization. The categories are Data Monetization Strategy
(DMS), Data Monetization Infrastructure (DMI), and Data Monetization Challenges
(DMC). The literature review identifies challenges such as privacy, data manage-
ment, pricing, contract agreement and security which can serve as input for industry
as they carve out their data monetization strategy. Third, the paper highlights mana-
gerial implications and future research agendas based on the proposed categoriza-
tion. For DMS, the paper proposes that academic researchers focus on understand-
ing factors to be considered in designing an effective data monetization strategy,
developing data monetization revenue models based on chosen business models and
players within the monetization ecosystem and on the interdependencies between
multiple roles players can take on, the value co-creation process as well as how the
overall ecosystem is governed. Organizations need to understand the structure as
well as the analytical and technical capabilities that can determine the pathway to
data monetization. As stated by Hartmann et al. (2016), there is a need to understand
factors that impact data monetization strategies from an ecosystem perspective. This
includes the characteristics of data and technological interdependencies that impact
data monetization. There is a need to understand how different factors such as data
quality impact the choice of a monetization model. For DMI, the paper proposes the
development of a cloud and blockchain architecture that supports data monetization
models as well as practical applicability of cloud/blockchain to address DMC issues.
For DMC, the paper proposes that future research and practice should consider how
data monetization can be designed with privacy and security at the forefront, devel-
oping data standards that improve quality, accessibility, and combinatorial insights,
developing regulation and policies around different types of data and developing
contracts that alleviate data monetization concerns.
To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first that considers all the data
monetization models that currently exist in the academic literature. Note that the

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

selected literature addresses data monetization from a business perspective, treating

data as a resource to generate revenue. Current academic literature does not address
monetization from a social perspective where data is treated as a public good or for
social initiatives (e.g., Open Data initiative). Insights from data monetization have
several sociological and cultural aspects that require research exploration (Thomas
and Leiponen 2016).
Inevitably, the work has limitations due to the research design and exploratory
nature of content analysis. From a research design perspective, the determination of
the sample based on the search string, selection of timelines, database identification
and criteria for paper selection (via inclusion and exclusion criteria) contribute to
this limitation. Also, since the research follows an exploratory approach, the authors
acknowledge the subjectivity of the outcome. Given the novelty of the research area,
the authors do not anticipate that changes to these parameters may alter the overall
findings.
For future work, we suggest expanding the search criteria by introducing grey
literature. The data monetization framework can be further refined to improve the
validity of the findings beyond academia. Researchers can also take up alternative
methods such as semantic analysis to search for new concepts and better categoriza-
tion or even to validate the findings of this review. Finally, identified research areas
can be further explored to improve the discipline of data monetization.

6 Appendix A: Themes mapped to clusters and paper count

Theme Category—Number of papers that discuss Cluster #- Color

Data monetization strategy (DMS)—54

1.1 Operating model (OM)- 19 Cluster 3, 6- Blue
1.2 Players (P)—29 Cluster 4- Yellow, Cluster 5- Purple
1.3 Revenue model (RM)—10
Data monetization infrastructure (DMI)—24
2.1 Cloud (C)- 10 Cluster 2- Green
2.2 Blockchain (BC)—14
2.3 Sensors (S) and IoT—9
Data monetization challenges (DMC)—33
3.1 Security (S)—13 Cluster 1-Red, Cluster 7- Orange
3.2 Privacy (PV)—24
3.3 Pricing (PC)—15
3.4 Contract design (CD)—3
3.5 Data quality (DQ)—7
3.6 Beliefs (B)—6
3.7 Data skills (DS)—4

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

7 Appendix B: Categorization of papers by themes identified

No Article Title DMS OM P RM DMI C BC S

1 A Fully Decentralized Infrastructure for Subscrip- ✓ ✓ ✓

tion-based IoT Data Trading
2 A General Approach on Privacy and its Implica- ✓ ✓ ✓
tions in the Digital Economy
3 A marketplace for data: An algorithmic solution ✓
4 A Novel Approach for Big Data Monetization as ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
a Service
5 A Peer-to-Peer Architecture for Distributed Data ✓ ✓ ✓
Monetization in Fog Computing Scenarios
6 A review of data monetization: Strategic use of ✓
big data
7 A User-Centric Approach to Pricing Information ✓ ✓ ✓
8 Advancing data monetization and the creation of ✓
data-based business models
9 AI-Driven Data Monetization: The Other Face of ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Data in IoT-Based Smart and Connected Health
10 An adaptable Big Data Value Chain (BDVC) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
framework for end-to-end big data monetization
11 An Edge Intelligent Blockchain-based Reputation ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
System for IIoT Data Ecosystem
12 An Intelligent Game based Offloading Scheme ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
for Maximizing Benefits of IoT-Edge-Cloud
Ecosystems
13 BBVA’s data monetization journey ✓
14 Big data business models: Challenges and oppor- ✓ ✓ ✓
tunities
15 Big data commercialization ✓ ✓ ✓
16 Big data monetization throughout Big Data Value ✓
Chain: a comprehensive review
17 Big Data Monetization: Platforms and Business ✓
Models
18 Blockchain and NFTs for Time-bound Access and ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Monetization of Private Data
19 Blockchains and the disruption of the sharing ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
economy value chains
20 Capturing value from big data- a taxanomy of data ✓ ✓
driven business
21 Cloud as platform for monetizing complementary ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
data for AI-driven services: A two-sided coop-
erative game
22 Cloud Computing as a Platform for Monetizing ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Data Services: A Two-Sided Game Business
Model

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

No Article Title DMS OM P RM DMI C BC S

23 Conceptualizing Data Ecosystems for Industrial ✓ ✓ ✓
Food Production
24 Configuration of Data Monetization: A Review of ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Literature with Thematic Analysis
25 Data commercialisation: Extracting value from ✓ ✓
smart buildings
26 Data Marketplaces: Trends and Monetisation of ✓ ✓ ✓
Data Goods
27 Data monetization: Lessons from a retailers ✓ ✓
journey
28 Data-driven business model development: insights ✓ ✓ ✓
from the facility management industry
29 Data-driven secure, resilient and sustainable ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
supply chains: gaps, opportunities, and a new
generalised data sharing and data monetisation
framework
30 Data-driven value extraction and human well- ✓
being under EU law
31 Decentralizing the Semantic Web: Who will pay ✓ ✓
to realize it?
32 Designing viable multi-sided data platforms: The ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
case of context-aware mobile travel applications
33 Digital technologies: tensions in privacy and data ✓ ✓ ✓
34 Emerging Revenue Models for Personal Data Plat- ✓ ✓
form Operators: When Individuals are in Control
of Their Data
35 From Qualitative to Quantitative Data Valuation in ✓ ✓
Manufacturing Companies
36 How much is your information worth—A method ✓ ✓ ✓
for revenue generation for your information
37 Ideation is Fine, but Execution is Key: How ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Incumbent Companies Realize Data-Driven
Business Models
38 Insight monetization intermediary platform using ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
recommender systems
39 Monetizing Mobile Data via Data Rewards ✓
40 Monetizing Personal Data: A Two-Sided Market ✓ ✓
Approach
41 Monetizing the user’s information asset in internet ✓ ✓ ✓
information market
42 Pay-per-tracking: A collaborative masking model ✓ ✓ ✓
for web browsing
43 Pricing Models for Data Products in the Industrial ✓ ✓ ✓
Food Production
44 Reputation System for IoT Data Monetization ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Using Blockchain
45 SensorHUB: An IoT driver framework for support- ✓ ✓ ✓
ing sensor networks and data analysis

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

No Article Title DMS OM P RM DMI C BC S

46 Some remarks and ideas about monetization of ✓
sensitive data
47 Subscription-Based Data-Sharing Model Using ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Blockchain and Data as a Service
48 Toward monetizing personal data: A two-sided ✓ ✓
market analysis
49 Towards a secure and dependable IoT data moneti- ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
zation using blockchain and fog computing
50 Towards data markets in renewable energy fore- ✓ ✓ ✓
casting
51 Trustful data trading through monetizing IoT data ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
using BlockChain based review system
52 Untangling the Open Data Value Paradox: How ✓ ✓
Organizations Benefit from Revealing Data
53 User incentives for blockchain-based data sharing ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
platforms
54 Utilization and Monetization of Healthcare Data in ✓
Developing Countries
No Article Title IOT DMC S2 PV PC CD DQ B DS

1 A Fully Decentralized Infrastructure for

Subscription-based IoT Data Trading
2 A General Approach on Privacy and its Impli- ✓ ✓ ✓
cations in the Digital Economy
3 A marketplace for data: An algorithmic solu- ✓ ✓
tion
4 A Novel Approach for Big Data Monetization
as a Service
5 A Peer-to-Peer Architecture for Distributed
Data Monetization in Fog Computing
Scenarios
6 A review of data monetization: Strategic use
of big data
7 A User-Centric Approach to Pricing Informa- ✓ ✓ ✓
tion
8 Advancing data monetization and the creation ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
of data-based business models
9 AI-Driven Data Monetization: The Other Face ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
of Data in IoT-Based Smart and Connected
Health
10 An adaptable Big Data Value Chain (BDVC) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
framework for end-to-end big data moneti-
zation
11 An Edge Intelligent Blockchain-based Reputa-
tion System for IIoT Data Ecosystem
12 An Intelligent Game based Offloading Scheme ✓
for Maximizing Benefits of IoT-Edge-Cloud
Ecosystems
13 BBVA’s data monetization journey ✓ ✓

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

No Article Title IOT DMC S2 PV PC CD DQ B DS

14 Big data business models: Challenges and ✓ ✓ ✓
opportunities
15 Big data commercialization ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
16 Big data monetization throughout Big Data
Value Chain: a comprehensive review
17 Big Data Monetization: Platforms and Busi- ✓ ✓
ness Models
18 Blockchain and NFTs for Time-bound Access
and Monetization of Private Data
19 Blockchains and the disruption of the sharing
economy value chains
20 Capturing value from big data- a taxanomy of
data driven business
21 Cloud as platform for monetizing comple-
mentary data for AI-driven services: A
two-sided cooperative game
22 Cloud Computing as a Platform for Monetiz-
ing Data Services: A Two-Sided Game
Business Model
23 Conceptualizing Data Ecosystems for Indus- ✓ ✓ ✓
trial Food Production
24 Configuration of Data Monetization: A ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Review of Literature with Thematic
Analysis
25 Data commercialisation: Extracting value ✓ ✓ ✓
from smart buildings
26 Data Marketplaces: Trends and Monetisation ✓ ✓ ✓
of Data Goods
27 Data monetization: Lessons from a retailers ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
journey
28 Data-driven business model development: ✓ ✓ ✓
insights from the facility management
industry
29 Data-driven secure, resilient and sustainable
supply chains: gaps, opportunities, and a
new generalised data sharing and data mon-
etisation framework
30 Data-driven value extraction and human well- ✓ ✓ ✓
being under EU law
31 Decentralizing the Semantic Web: Who will ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
pay to realize it?
32 Designing viable multi-sided data platforms: ✓ ✓ ✓
The case of context-aware mobile travel
applications
33 Digital technologies: tensions in privacy and ✓ ✓ ✓
data
34 Emerging Revenue Models for Personal Data
Platform Operators: When Individuals are in
Control of Their Data

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

No Article Title IOT DMC S2 PV PC CD DQ B DS

35 From Qualitative to Quantitative Data Valua- ✓ ✓
tion in Manufacturing Companies
36 How much is your information worth—A ✓ ✓ ✓
method for revenue generation for your
information
37 Ideation is Fine, but Execution is Key: How ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Incumbent Companies Realize Data-Driven
Business Models
38 Insight monetization intermediary platform ✓ ✓
using recommender systems
39 Monetizing Mobile Data via Data Rewards
40 Monetizing Personal Data: A Two-Sided
Market Approach
41 Monetizing the user’s information asset in ✓ ✓ ✓
internet information market
42 Pay-per-tracking: A collaborative masking ✓
model for web browsing
43 Pricing Models for Data Products in the ✓ ✓
Industrial Food Production
44 Reputation System for IoT Data Monetization ✓
Using Blockchain
45 SensorHUB: An IoT driver framework ✓
for supporting sensor networks and data
analysis
46 Some remarks and ideas about monetization ✓ ✓
of sensitive data
47 Subscription-Based Data-Sharing Model ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Using Blockchain and Data as a Service
48 Toward monetizing personal data: A two- ✓ ✓
sided market analysis
49 Towards a secure and dependable IoT data ✓
monetization using blockchain and fog
computing
50 Towards data markets in renewable energy ✓ ✓
forecasting
51 Trustful data trading through monetizing IoT ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
data using BlockChain based review system
52 Untangling the Open Data Value Paradox:
How Organizations Benefit from Revealing
Data
53 User incentives for blockchain-based data ✓ ✓
sharing platforms
54 Utilization and Monetization of Healthcare ✓ ✓ ✓
Data in Developing Countries

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

8 Appendix C: Overview of SLR studies, year, journal and paper

methodology

Title Authors Year Journal Paper methodology

Data Monetization: Najjar, M.S., Ket- 2013 MIS Quarterly Execu- Case study
Lessons from a tinger, W.J tive
retailer’s journey
A review of data mon- Liu, C.-H.; Chen, 2015 International Confer- Literature review
etization: Strategic C.-L ence on Electronic
use of big data Business (ICEB)
Designing viable de Reuver, M; Haaker, 2015 Lecture Notes in Case study with survey
multi-sided data T; Nikayin, F; Kos- Computer Science
platforms: The case man, R
of context-aware
mobile travel appli-
cations
How much is your Rao, D; Ng, W K 2015 IEEE International Deductive: Markovian
information worth— Conference on Big decision process
A method for rev- Data
enue generation for
your information
SensorHUB: An IoT Lengyel, L; Ekler, P; 2015 International Journal Descriptive and case
driver framework for Ujj, T; Balogh, T; of Distributed Sen- study
supporting sensor Charaf, H sor Networks
networks and data
analysis
Utilization and Bram, J T; Warwick- 2015 Big Data Exploratory
Monetization of Clark, B; Obey-
Healthcare Data sekare, E; Mehta, K
in Developing
Countries
A User-Centric Rao, D; Ng, W K 2016 IEEE 2nd Interna- Shannons information
Approach to Pricing tional Conference theory
Information on Big Data Com-
puting Service and
Applications
Big data business Ralph Schroeder 2016 Cogent Social Sci- Interview
models: Challenges ences
and opportunities
Big data commerciali- Thomas, L D W; 2016 IEEE Engineer- Systematic literature
zation Leiponen, A ing Management review
Review
Capturing value Hartmann, P.M., Zaki, 2016 International Journal DDBM frawework with
from big data—a M., Feldmann, of Operations and clustering algorithm
taxonomy of data- N., Neely, A Production Manage- on 100 companies
driven business ment
models used by
start-up firms

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

Title Authors Year Journal Paper methodology

Monetizing Personal Bataineh, A S; Miz- 2016 Procedia Computer Experimental analysis
Data: A Two-Sided ouni, R; El Barachi, Science
Market Approach M; Bentahar, J
Monetizing the user’s Rao, D; Ng, W K 2016 IEEE International Mathematical analysis:
information asset in Congress on Big Information pricing
internet information Data model
market
Some remarks and Piotrowska, A M; 2016 Lecture Notes in Analyze monetization
ideas about moneti- Klonowski, M Computer Science protocol developed by
zation of sensitive Bilogrevic et al
data
Data commercialisa- Säynäjoki, A; Pulkka, 2017 Buildings Exploratory: Litera-
tion: Extracting L; Säynäjoki, E.-S.; ture and qualitative
value from smart Junnila, S analysis
buildings
Decentralizing the Grubenmann, T; 2017 CEUR Workshop Exploratory
Semantic Web: Who Dell’Aglio, D; Proceedings
will pay to realize it? Bernstein, A; Moor,
D; Seuken, S
Pay-per-tracking: A Parra-Arnau, J 2017 Information Sciences Experimental analysis
collaborative mask-
ing model for web
browsing
A Peer-to-Peer De La Vega, F; Sori- 2018 Wireless Communica- Case study
Architecture for ano, J; Jimenez, M; tions and Mobile
Distributed Data Lizcano, D Computing
Monetization in
Fog Computing
Scenarios
Emerging Revenue Kemppainen, Laura; 2018 Journal of Business Qualitative question-
Models for Personal Koivumäki, Timo; Models naire
Data Platform Pikkarainen, Minna;
Operators: When Poikola, Antti
Individuals are in
Control of Their
Data
A marketplace for Agarwal, A; Dahleh, 2019 2019 ACM Confer- Descriptive: Mathemat-
data: An algorithmic M; Sarkar, T ence on Economics ical model
solution and Computation
BBVA’s data moneti- Alfaro, E; Bressan, M; 2019 MIS Quarterly Execu- Case study
zation journey Girardin, F; Murillo, tive
J; Someh, I; Wixom,
BH
Data Marketplaces: Spiekermann, M 2019 Intereconomics Exploratory and quali-
Trends and Mon- tative
etisation of Data
Goods
A Fully Decentralized Lin, C.-H.V.; Huang, 2020 IEEE International Exploratory
Infrastructure for C.-C.J.; Yuan, Conference on
Subscription-based Y.-H.; Yuan, Z.-S.S Blockchain
IoT Data Trading

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

Title Authors Year Journal Paper methodology

Advancing data mon- Parvinen, P; Pöyry, E; 2020 Communications of Qualitative: Exploratory
etization and the cre- Gustafsson, R; Lai- the Association and descriptive
ation of data-based tila, M; Rossi, M for Information
business models Systems
An adaptable Big Faroukhi, A Z; 2020 Big Data and Cogni- Systematic literature
Data Value Chain Alaoui, I E; Gahi, Y; tive Computing review
(BDVC) framework Amine, A
for end-to-end big
data monetization
An Intelligent Game Yu, M; Liu, A; Xiong, 2020 IEEE Internet of Mathematical analysis
based Offload- N N; Wang, T Things Journal
ing Scheme for
Maximizing Benefits
of IoT-Edge-Cloud
Ecosystems
Big data monetization Faroukhi, A Z; El 2020 Journal of Big Data Systematic literature
throughout Big Data Alaoui, I; Gahi, Y; review
Value Chain: a com- Amine, A
prehensive review
Data-driven business Marcinkowski, B; 2020 Journal of Facilities Qualitative case study
model development Gawin, B Management
†“ insights from
the facility manage-
ment industry
Monetizing Mobile Yu, H; Wei, E; Berry, 2020 IEEE Journal on 2 stage Sackelberg
Data via Data RA Selected Areas in game
Rewards Communications
Reputation Sys- Javaid, A; Zahid, 2020 Lecture Notes in Net- Exploratory
tem for IoT Data M; Ali, I; Khan, works and Systems
Monetization Using R.J.U.H.; Noshad,
Blockchain Z; Javaid, N
Subscription-Based Al-Zahrani, F A 2020 IEEE Access Inductive: Model crea-
Data-Sharing Model tion
Using Blockchain
and Data as a
Service
Toward monetizing Bataineh, A S; Miz- 2020 Future Generation Mathematical analysis
personal data: A ouni, R; Bentahar, J; Computer Systems
two-sided market El Barachi, M
analysis
A Novel Approach for Faroukhi, A Z; El 2021 Advances in Intel- Systematic literature
Big Data Monetiza- Alaoui, I; Gahi, Y; ligent Systems and review
tion as a Service Amine, A Computing
Big Data Monetiza- Monteiro, D.S.M.P., 2021 Iberian Conference Systematic literature
tion: Platforms and Meira, S.R.L., Fer- on Information Sys- review
Business Models raz, F.S tems and Technolo-
gies, CISTI

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

Title Authors Year Journal Paper methodology

Cloud as platform for Bataineh, A.S., 2021 IEEE International Modelling
monetizing com- Bentahar, J., Wahab, Conference on
plementary data for O.A., Mizouni, R., Services Comput-
AI-driven services: Rjoub, G ing, SCC
A two-sided coop-
erative game
Conceptualizing Calvin, R., Hannah, 2021 IEEE 23rd Confer- Design data ecosystem
Data Ecosystems S., Qiang, C., Jana, ence on Business and Case study
for Industrial Food F., Wolfgang, M Informatics, CBI
Production
Data-driven secure, Bechtsis, D., Tsolakis, 2021 International Journal Literature review and
resilient and sustain- N., Iakovou, E., of Production case studies
able supply chains: Vlachos, D Research
gaps, opportunities,
and a new gener-
alised data sharing
and data monetisa-
tion framework
From Qualitative to Stein, H., Holst, L., 2021 IFIP Advances in Case study & explora-
Quantitative Data Stich, V., Maass, W Information and tory action research
Valuation in Manu- Communication
facturing Companies Technology
Ideation is Fine, but Lange, H.E., Drews, 2021 IEEE 23rd Confer- 19 experts interviews
Execution is Key’: P., Hoft, M ence on Business and literature review
How Incumbent Informatics, CBI
Companies Realize
Data-Driven Busi-
ness Models
Insight monetization Hanafizadeh, P; Bark- 2021 Electronic Markets Design science: Litera-
intermediary plat- hordari Firouzabadi, ture review and model
form using recom- M; Vu, K M creation
mender systems
Pricing Models for Rix, C., Frank, J., 2021 IFIP Advances in Exploratory follow-
Data Products in Stich, V., Urban, D Information and ing the procedure of
the Industrial Food Communication typology formation by
Production Technology Welter
Towards data markets Goncalves, C; Pinson, 2021 IEEE Transactions on Mathematical analysis
in renewable energy P; Bessa, R J Sustainable Energy
forecasting
Untangling the Open Enders, T., Benz, C., 2021 Lecture Notes in Semi structured experts
Data Value Paradox: Satzger, G Information Systems interviews
How Organizations and Organisation
Benefit from Reveal-
ing Data
Blockchains and the Kolade, O., Adepoju, 2022 Strategic Change Conceptual paper
disruption of the D., Adegbile, A
sharing economy
value chains
Data-driven value Trzaskowski, Jan 2022 Electronic Markets Exploratory
extraction and
human well-being
under EU law

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

Title Authors Year Journal Paper methodology

Cloud Computing as a Bataineh, Ahmed 2021 IEEE Transactions on Modelling
Platform for Mone- Saleh, Jamal Benta- Network and Ser-
tizing Data Services: har, Rabeb Mizouni, vice Management
A Two-Sided Game Omar Abdel Wahab,
Business Model Gaith Rjoub, and
May El Barachi
AI-Driven Data Mon- Firouzi, Farshad, 2020 IEEE Internet of Conceptual, reference
etization: The Other Bahar Farahani, Things Journal architecture and case
Face of Data in IoT- Mojtaba Barzegari, study
Based Smart and and Mahmoud
Connected Health Daneshmand
A Scalable, Standards- Figueredo, Ken, Dale 2020 IEEE Internet of Conceptual, reference
Based Approach for Seed, and Chong- Things Journal architecture and case
IoT Data Sharing gang Wang study
and Ecosystem
Monetization
User incentives for Jaiman, Vikas, Leon- 2022 Plos one 17 Architecture proposal
blockchain-based ard Pernice, and and evalution
data sharing plat- Visara Urovi
forms
Trustful data trading Abubaker, Zain, Asad 2022 Concurrency and Exploratory
through monetiz- Ullah Khan, Ahmad Computation: Prac-
ing IoT data using Almogren, Shahid tice and Experience
BlockChain based Abbas, Atia Javaid,
review system Ayman Radwan, and
Nadeem Javaid
Blockchain and NFTs Madine, Mohammad, 2022 IEEE Access Exploratory
for Time-bound Khaled Salah, Raja
Access and Mon- Jayaraman, Ammar
etization of Private Battah, Haya Hasan,
Data and Ibrar Yaqoob
Towards a secure and Khezr, Seyednima, 2022 Cluster Computing Exploratory and evalu-
dependable IoT data Abdulsalam Yass- ation
monetization using ine, and Rachid
blockchain and fog Benlamri
computing
An Edge Intelligent Khezr, Seyednima, 2022 IEEE Transactions on Exploratory and evalu-
Blockchain-based Abdulsalam Industrial Informat- ation
Reputation System Yassine, Rachid ics
for IIoT Data Eco- Benlamri, and M.
system Shamim Hossain
A General Approach Sánchez, Mariola 2022 Journal of Economic Exploratory
on Privacy and its Issues
Implications in the
Digital Economy
Digital technologies: Quach, Sara, Park 2022 Journal of the Acad- Exploratory
tensions in privacy Thaichon, Kelly emy of Marketing
and data D. Martin, Scott Science
Weaven, and Robert
W. Palmatier

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

9 Appendix D: Summary of players and value generated

Value Generated Players Definition

Generate data Data providers Originators/owners of the data/data suppli-

ers as they generate the data leveraged in the
ecosystem. It could be smart phone users or
individuals having some personal data to sell. It
could be user generated, IoT sensor generated
or company data
Combine data Data aggregators Combines the data and provides aggregated
services and data, thereby enabling them to
produce a targeted advertising business model.
They also perform data crawling and visuali-
zation. Common data aggregators are price
comparison services such as the travel search
engine Kayak. Others include Meta, Google,
and Twitter
Improve data Data managers These organizations catalogue, clean, and parse
information that is not in an easily usable
format or improve the value of the data with
additional context. They add value to data by
improving the interpretability and the overall
functionality of the data
Define and enforce data standards Data regulators Define and help enforce data standards. These
organizations recommend and ensure the secu-
rity, privacy, and ethical use of data
Custodians of data Data bank Custodians of data that enable the reuse and
resale of data by providing a ‘trust’ infrastruc-
ture
Facilitate data transactions Data brokers Collect and bundle data for prospective buyers.
The broker is an online platform or cloud plat-
form equipped with the needed infrastructure to
store and share data. They provide services that
enable the data provider and data consumers to
perform data selling and buying transactions.
They can be referred to as the orchestrators
Data facilitators Have the capabilities to share data with data
consumers. Facilitators do not own the data but
provide services such as data cleaning, data
analytics and consulting services. Data facilita-
tors could correspond to a technical platform
based on tools for data collection, integration,
processing, storage, analysis, and visualization.
They provide the physical architecture and the
provision of outsourced analytics services
Tool providers Provide hardware and software infrastructure for
data monetization. Examples include but are
not limited to Microsoft, AWS, and Google
who provide both software and hardware solu-
tions

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

Value Generated Players Definition

Enrich monetization ecosystem Service providers Develop new services for data, distinct to the
resale, analysis or repackaging of data or the
development of specific applications
App developers Design, build and sell applications that enable
data monetization
Consultant Demonstrates the value of data monetization to
data providers and support them in developing
strategies
Consume data Data consumers Consume/subscribe to the data. They are
individuals, businesses or systems that use
collected data

Author contributions All authors contributed to the study’s conception and design. Protocol preparation,
execution of query and application of inclusion and exclusion criteria were performed by JO. The final
papers selected was validated by MB. JO and MB identified themes from the selected papers. The first
draft of the manuscript was written by JO and was reviewed and updated by MB. All authors read and
approved the final manuscript.

Funding This research is funded, in part, by a Discovery Grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineer-
ing Research Council of Canadas (NSERC).

Data availability All data analyzed is from published, secondary sources, available in the public domain.

Declarations
Conflict of interest The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

References
Abubaker Z, Khan AU, Almogren A, Abbas S, Javaid A, Radwan A, Javaid N (2022) Trustful
data trading through monetizing IoT data using BlockChain based review system. Pract Exp
34(5):e6739
Agarwal A, Dahleh M, Sarkar T (2019) A marketplace for data: an algorithmic solution. In: ACM EC
2019—proceedings of the 2019 ACM conference on economics and computation. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1145/​33285​26.​33295​89
Alfaro E, Bressan M, Girardin F, Murillo J, Someh I, Wixom BH (2019) BBVA’s data monetization jour-
ney. MIS Q Exec. https://​doi.​org/​10.​17705/​2msqe.​00011
Al-Zahrani H (2020) Subscription-based data-sharing model using blockchain and data as a service.
IEEE Access. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​ACCESS.​2020.​30028​23
Bataineh AS, Mizouni R, Bentahar J, El Barachi M (2020a) Toward monetizing personal data: a two-
sided market analysis. Future Gener Comput Syst 111:435–459
Bataineh A, Mizouni R, Bentahar J, Barachi M (2020b) Toward monetizing personal data: a two-sided
market analysis. Future Gener Comput Syst. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​future.​2019.​11.​009
Bechtsis D, Tsolakis N, Iakovou E, Vlachos D (2021) Data-driven secure, resilient and sustainable supply
chains: gaps, opportunities, and a new generalised data sharing and data monetisation framework.
Int J Prod Res 60:4397–4417
Bram JT, Warwick-Clark B, Obeysekare E, Mehta K (2015) Utilization and monetization of healthcare
data in developing countries. Big Data 3:59–66
Buff A, Wixom B, Tallon P (2014) Foundations for data monetization. A SAS Best Practise White Paper

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

de la Vega F, Soriano J, Jimenez M, Lizcano D (2018) A peer-to-peer architecture for distributed data
monetization in fog computing scenarios. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing
de Reuver M, Haaker T, Nikayin F, Kosman R (2015) Designing viable multi-sided data platforms: the
case of context-aware mobile travel applications. In: Lecture notes in computer science (including
subseries lecture notes in artificial intelligence and lecture notes in bioinformatics). https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1007/​978-3-​319-​25013-7_​28
Deloitte AI Institute (2021) Data as a strategic asset. Deloitte AI Institute. https://​www2.​deloi​tte.​com/​
us/​en/​pages/​consu​lting/​artic​les/​data-​strat​egic-​asset.​html
Demirkan H, Delen D (2013) Leveraging the capabilities of service-oriented decision support systems:
Putting analytics and big data in cloud. Decis Support Syst 55:412–421
Donthu N, Kumar S, Mukherjee D, Pandey N, Lim WM (2021) How to conduct a bibliometric analysis:
an overview and guidelines. J Bus Res 133:285–296
EY Global (2018) How to monetize IoT data to create value. https://​www.​ey.​com/​en_​gl/​consu​lting/​how-​
to-​monet​ize-​iot-​data-​to-​create-​value
Faroukhi AZ, El Alaoui I, Gahi Y, Amine A (2020) Big data monetization throughout big data value
chain: a comprehensive review. J Big Data
Faroukhi AZ, El Alaoui I, Gahi Y, Amine A (2020a) Big data monetization throughout big data value
chain: a comprehensive review. J Big Data 7:1–22
Faroukhi AZ, Alaoui IEL, Gahi Y (2020b) An adaptable big data value chain (BDVC) framework for
end-to-end big data monetization. Big Data Cognit Comput. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​bdcc4​040034
Faroukhi AZ, El Alaoui I, Gahi Y, Amine A (2021) A novel approach for big data monetization as a ser-
vice. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing
Firouzi F, Farahani B, Barzegari M, Daneshmand M (2020) AI-driven data monetization: the other face
of data in IoT-based smart and connected health. IEEE Internet of Things Journal
Gartner Glossary (2013) https://​www.​gartn​er.​com/​en/​infor​mation-​techn​ology/​gloss​ary/​big-​data
Gopalkrishnan V, Steier D, Lewis H, Guszcza J, Lucker J (2013) Big data 2.0: new business strategies
from big data
Grubenmann T, Dell’Aglio D, Bernstein A, Moor D, Seuken S (2017) Decentralizing the semantic web:
Who will pay to realize it? In: CEUR workshop proceedings. https://​openr​eview.​net/​forum?​id=​
ryrkD​pyIW
Hammell R, Lewis H, Perricos C, Branch D (2012) Open growth: Stimulating demand for open data in
the UK
Hartmann PM, Zaki M, Feldmann N, Neely A (2016) Capturing value from big data—a taxonomy of
data-driven business models used by start-up firms. International Journal of Operations and Produc-
tion Management
Javaid A, Zahid M, Ali I, Khan RJ, Noshad Z, Javaid N (2020) Reputation system for IoT data moneti-
zation using blockchain. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems
Kanhaiya et al. (2022) Data monetization market research, 2030. Allied Market Research. https://​
www.​allie​dmark​etres​earch.​com/​data-​monet​izati​on-​market
Kelly L (2022) Data marketplaces: the ultimate guide. https://​about.​datar​ade.​ai/​data-​marke​tplac​es
Kemppainen L, Koivumaki T, Pikkarainen M, Poikola A (2018) Emerging revenue models for per-
sonal data platform operators: when individuals are in control of their data. J Bus Models.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​5278/​ojs.​jbm.​v6i3.​2053
Khezr S, Yassine A, Benlamri R, Hossain MS (2022a) An edge intelligent blockchain-based reputa-
tion system for IIoT data ecosystem. IEEE transactions on industrial informatics
Khezr S, Yassine A, Benlamri R (2022b) Towards a secure and dependable IoT data monetization
using blockchain and fog computing. Cluster Computing 1–14
Kitchenham B (2004) Procedures for performing systematic reviews. Keele University Technical
Report TR/SE-0401. https://​www.​inf.​ufsc.​br/​~aldo.​vw/​kitch​enham.​pdf
Klaus K (2011) On the importance of data quality in services: an application in the financial industry.
In: International conference on emerging intelligent data and web technologies, pp 148–152
Kolade O, Adepoju D, Adegbile A (2022) Blockchains and the disruption of the sharing economy
value chains. Strateg Change 31:137–145
Kumar S, Sahoo S, Lim WM, Dana LP (2022) Religion as a social shaping force in entrepreneurship
and business: Insights from a technology-empowered systematic literature review. Technol Fore-
cast Soc Change. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​techf​ore.​2021.​121393

13
 J. Ofulue, M. Benyoucef

Lange HE, Drews P, Höft M (2021) Ideation is fine, but execution is key: how incumbent companies
realize data-driven business models. In: IEEE 23rd conference on business informatics (CBI).
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​CBI52​690.​2021.​00030
Lim M, Rasul T, Kumar S, Ala M (2022) Past, present, and future of customer engagement. J Bus
Res. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jbusr​es.​2021.​11.​014
Lin CH, Huang CC, Yuan YH, Yuan ZS (2020) A Fully decentralized infrastructure for subscription-
based IoT data trading. In: Proceedings - 2020 IEEE international conference on blockchain,
Blockchain 2020
Liu CH, Chen CL (2015) A review of data monetization: strategic use of big data. In: Proceedings
of the international conference on electronic business (ICEB) (Proceedings of the International
Conference on Electronic Business (ICEB))
Madine M, Salah K, Jayaraman R, Battah A, Hasan H, Yaqoob I (2022) Blockchain and NFTs for
time-bound access and monetization of private data. pp 94186–94202
Marcinkowski B, Gawin B (2020) Data-driven business model development: insights from the facility
management industry. J Facil Manag. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​JFM-​08-​2020-​0051/​full/​html
Matsakis L (2018) Facebook’s targeted ads are more complex than it lets on. WIRED. https://​www.​
wired.​com/​story/​faceb​ooks-​targe​ted-​ads-​are-​more-​compl​ex-​than-​it-​lets-​on/.
Mohasseb S (2015) Framing a winning data monetization strategy. KPMG. https://​home.​kpmg/​mu/​en/​
home/​insig​hts/​2015/​10/​frami​ng-a-​winni​ng-​data.​html
Moore S (2015) How to monetize your customer data. https://​www.​gartn​er.​com/​smart​erwit​hgart​ner/​
how-​to-​monet​ize-​your-​custo​mer-​data/
Moore S (2018) How to create a business case for data quality improvement. https://​www.​gartn​er.​
com/​smart​erwit​hgart​ner/​how-​to-​create-​a-​busin​ess-​case-​for-​data-​quali​ty-​impro​vement/
Mordor Intelligence (2022) Data monetization market - growth, trends, COVID-19 impact, and fore-
cast (2022–2027). Mordor Intelligence. https://​www.​mordo​r inte​llige​nce.​com/​indus​try-​repor​ts/​
data-​monet​izati​on-​market
Naghizadeh P, Sinha A (2019) Adversarial contract design for private data commercialization. In: The
20th ACM conference on economics and computation. Phoenix, AZ, 19
Najjar MS, Kettinger WJ (2013) Data monetization: lessons from a retailers journey. MIS Quarterly
Executive 12. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://​www.​resea​rchga​te.​
net/​profi​le/​Moham​mad-​Najjar-​2/​publi​cation/​27344​7946_​Data_​Monet​izati​on_​Lesso​ns_​from_a_​
Retai​ler’s_​Journ​ey/​links/​58beb​8d745​8515d​cd28e​1cdc/​Data-​Monet​izati​on-​Lesso​ns-​from-a-​Retai​
lers-
Naous D, Schwarz J, Legner C (2017) Aanalytics as a service: cloud computing and the transforma-
tion and business analytics business models and ecosystems. European Conference on Information
Systems
Parra-Arnau J (2017) Pay-per-tracking: a collaborative masking model for web browsing. Information
Sciences
Parvinen P, Poyry E, Gustafsson R, Laitila M, Rossi M (2020) Advancing data monetization and the crea-
tion of data-based business models. Communications of the Association for Information Systems.
chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://​aisel.​aisnet.​org/​cgi/​viewc​ontent.​cgi?​
artic​le=​4212&​conte​xt=​cais
Perrin B, Naftalski F, Houriez R (2013) Cultural behaviour and personal data at the heart of the big data
industry. E&Y and Forum D’Avignon
Prakash SD (2014) Big data led big monetization. Vidwat 7(1):6. https://​login.​proxy.​bib.​uotta​wa.​ca/​
login?​url=​https://​www-​proqu​est-​com.​proxy.​bib.​uotta​wa.​ca/​schol​arly-​journ​als/​big-​data-​led-​monet​
izati​on/​docvi​ew/​15426​53322/​se-2?​accou​ntid=​14701
PRISMA (2009) PRISMA transparent reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. https://​www.​
prisma-​state​ment.​org/
Quach S, Thaichon P, Martin KD, Weaven S, Palmatier RW (2022) Digital technologies: tensions in pri-
vacy and data. J Acad Mark Sci 1–25
Rajesh S, Swapna S, Reddy P (2012) Data as a service (daas) in cloud computing. Global Journal of
Computer Science and Technology
Rao D, Ng WK (2016) A user-centric approach to pricing information. Proceedings - IEEE 2nd inter-
national conference on big data computing service and applications. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​BigDa​
taSer​vice.​2016.​46

13
Data monetization: insights from a technology‑enabled…

Rix C, Frank J, Stich V, Urban D (2021a) Pricing models for data products in the industrial food produc-
tion. In: IFIP advances in information and communication technology. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-
3-​030-​85914-5_​59
Rix C, Hannah S, Qiang C, Jana F, Wolfgang M (2021b) Conceptualizing data ecosystems for industrial
food production. In: IEEE 23rd conference on business informatics (CBI). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​
CBI52​690.​2021b.​00031
Robinson B (2017) How banks can become better aggregators than Google. October. https://​www.​linke​
din.​com/​pulse/​how-​banks-​can-​become-​better-​aggre​gators-​than-​google-​ben-​robin​son/
Saleh BA, Bentahar J, Wahab OA, Mizouni R, Rjoub G (2021) Cloud as platform for monetizing com-
plementary data for AI-driven services: a two-sided cooperative game. IEEE Int Conf Serv Comput
(SCC). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​SCC53​864.​2021.​00064
Sánchez M (2022) A general approach on privacy and its implications in the digital economy. J Econ
Issues 56:244–258
Saynajoki A, Pulkka L, Saynajoki E-S, Junnila S (2017) Data commercialisation: extracting value from
smart buildings. Buildings. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​build​ings7​040104
Schroeder R (2016) Big data business models: Challenges and opportunities. Cogent Soc Sci. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1080/​23311​886.​2016.​11669​24
Schwab K, Marcus A, Oyola JO, Hoffman W, Luzi M (2011) Personal data the emergence of a new
asset class. World economic forum. http://​www3.​wefor​um.​org/​docs/​WEF_​ITTC_​Perso​nalDa​taNew​
Asset_​Report_​2011.​pdf
Shrobe H, Shrier DL, Pentland A (2018) New Solutions for Cybersecurity. MIT Press
Spiekermann M (2019) Data marketplaces: trends and monetisation of data goods. Intereconomics.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10272-​019-​0826-z
Thomas LDW, Leiponen A (2016) Big data commercialization. IEEE Eng Manag Rev. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1109/​EMR.​2016.​25687​98
Trianz (2022) Data monetization strategies for revenue generation. April. https://​www.​trianz.​com/​insig​
hts/​data-​monet​izati​on-​strat​egies-​for-​reven​ue-​gener​ation
Trzaskowski (2022) Data-driven value extraction and human well-being under EU law. Electr Mark 1–13
Tucker CE (2014) Social networks, personalized advertising, and privacy controls. J Mark Res
Wikipedia (2014) Data monetization. https://​en.​wikip​edia.​org/​wiki/​Data_​monet​izati​on
Wixom BH (2014) Cashing in on your data. MIT Center for Information Systems Research. https://​cisr.​
mit.​edu/​publi​cation/​2014_​0801_​DataM​oneti​zation_​Wixom
WixomB, Jeanne R (2017) How to monetize your data. MIT Sloan Management Review, 58.3. https://​
sloan​review.​mit.​edu/​artic​le/​how-​to-​monet​ize-​your-​data/
Xie S, Zheng Z, Chen W, Wu J, Dai HN, Imran M (2020) Blockchain for cloud exchange: a survey. Com-
put Electr Eng 81
Yu H, Wei E, Berry RA (2020a) Monetizing mobile data via data rewards. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​JSAC.​2020a.​29718​67
Yu M, Liu A, Xiong NN, Wang T (2020b) An intelligent game based offloading scheme for maximizing
benefits of IoT-edge-cloud ecosystems. IEEE Internet Things J

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
and institutional affiliations.

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under
a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and
applicable law.

13