THE ROLE AND INTEGRATION
OF VIRTUAL REALITY
TECHNOLOGY
BY COMPANIES
IN THEIR VALUE CHAIN
ESCARAVAGE HELOISE
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
1)Literature review:
1.1 - VR ..…………………………………………………………………………p.1
1.2 - Primary/secondary activities theories……………...………………………..p.6
1.3 - Deductive qualitative method……………………………………………….p.7
2) Sources and Methods of Collecting Data & Limitations
2.1 - Research questions and sub research questions……………………...…..…p.8
2.2 - Explanations on how the thesis will be conducted……………………..…..p.9
2.3 - Method…………………………………………………………………..…p.10
3) Analysis/ recommendations/conclusions
3.1- Results, data analysis……………………………………...………………..p.12
3.2 -Discussions…………………………………………………..………….….p.19
4) Sources…………………………………………………………...…...……p.20
ii
1)Literature review:
Before jumping into the sources and methods of collecting data, a literature review of core elements of the research is
necessary to better apprehend and define them. These already existing definitions, more or less technical of VR
technology, VR market situation, Primary and Support activities theories in a business, and the Deductive method,
strengthen a theoretical view of such core elements and feeds us with knowledge to better apprehend data gathering,
and to have a deeper and more interesting discussion that will answer to the research question.
1.1 - Virtual Reality definition overview:
The authors William R. Sherman, Alan B. Craig (2018) define Virtual Reality by combining both virtual and reality
definitions from Webster New Universal Unabridged dictionary in 1989. Virtual: “being in essence or effect, not in
fact”, is directly related to computers and data storage hardware. Reality is:“Something that exists independently of
ideas concerning it. Something that constitutes a real or actual thing as distinguished from something that is merely
apparent”. Reality is a place that exists and we can experience.
Their final definition of Virtual Reality is “A medium composed of interactive computer simulation that senses the
participant’s position and action and replace or argument the feedback to one or more senses, giving the feeling of
being mentally immersed or present in the simulation (a virtual world).” VR indeed gives users a sense of activity
(Grigore C. Burdea, Philippe Coiffet, Wiley Interscience, 2013).
Virtual reality (VR) terminology constitutes a paradox. Indeed, this reality isn’t real because programed and virtual.
But the system and technologies allowing a VR experience make this fake virtual reality as realistic and immersive as
possible. This is why William R. Sherman and Alan B. Craig, 2003, state the four basic features of VR: “immersion,
interaction, collaboration, and flexible narrative.” Two basic distinctions of input to a VR application also exist: user
monitoring and world monitoring.
Grigore C. Burdea, Philippe Coiffet and Wiley Interscience, (2013) teach us that VR’s essence can be summarized by
three conceptual core elements, named as the three “I’s”: “Immersion” (the experience has to look real to users for
them to be captivated), “Interaction” (responsive to users’ input) and “Imagination” (user ability to interpret VR
elements and their VR experience as real through their own imagination) (www.virsabi.com).
Grigore C. Burdea, Philippe Coiffet, Wiley Interscience (2013) further add that VR is “a simulation in which
computer graphics is used to create a realistic-looking world”. VR makes an unreal environment look real, to confuse
human brain with graphics and details. The VR universe created is moreover reactive to the users’ “input” thanks to
sensors technology. This is “real-time interactivity”, core to VR. This enables users be the actors of their experience in
this virtual universe, just like they are the actors of their own life. VR gives them an impression and a sense of control.
It “captivates” their attention. VR however is a computer simulation, programmed and fully controlled by engineers
other than the users.
VR also is a new form of media, used to deliver a message. It can have multiple forms: the system transmission of a
physical act of resistance over a surface (surgery in medicine), persuasive (in marketing to convince buyers to
purchase a product) or more subtle (admire the beauty of virtual graphics and enjoy a unique VR experience).
VR terminology is still young and rapidly evolving. It is sometimes mentioned without really knowing its meaning.
Practitioners and scholars’ definition of VR isn’t the same as marketing specialists and the mass media. They solely
consider its potential to increase productivity. Little we know about VR, bigger misinterpretation and unclear
understanding of it we hold.
1
The author William R. Sherman, Alan B. Craig (2018) further list additional key VR components: “the medium”, “the
human participant”, “physical immersion technology”, “virtual world presentation” and “interaction”.
Human participant and virtual world presentation constitute respectively the human input and output on both medium
side. Those people as human input (human input force that interacts and experiences VR technology in different
unique ways) and output (designers of the VR world who want to communicate to VR users their own idea of VR
experience, sensitivity, interpretation and meaning of VR) are key to define VR.
VR is the response of a computer program to the user’s inputs through connected sensor objects, which are the
communication medium between the user and the computer program. All in all, VR is the communication between
human inputs with pre-programmed technologies. From the perspective of the programmer, VR is a new way to
communicate a message, while for the users it is perceived as a new interactive and immersive experience.
Grigore C. Burdea, Philippe Coiffet, Wiley Interscience (2013) provide us with a more technical description on VR
technology basics. Five classic components of VR system architecture are: task, user, I/O devices, VR engine,
Software and database. External components are task and user. Internal components are I/O devices, VR engine,
Software and database. All of them are linked to one another to enable indirect communication of data to VR user.
Data are chosen accordingly to users’ moves and inputs thanks to a complex IT system.
Task is an input to user. User generates a task. User interacts with I/O devices (sensors). I/O devices give orders and
communicate with the VR engine. VR engine enables responsiveness to I/O orders thanks to large amount of data
stored in database. A database is composed of a hardware that enables data storage, and a software which enables data
use service such as data communication to VR engine.
The article further explains that input devices (trackers, navigation and gesture interface) and output devices (graphics,
three-dimensional sound, haptic display) communicate with one another. Input devices can be: trackers, trackballs, 3D
probes, sensing gloves. They capture user’s inputs simultaneously in real time to transmit it to host computer running
the simulation. Simulation response to user input is conveyed through interfaces. Different types of VR immersion
also exist. According to Staffan Björk and Jussi Holopainen in their work Patterns In Game Design, there are six types
of immersion: sensory-motoric immersion, cognitive immersion, emotional immersion, spatial immersion,
psychological immersion and extrasensory immersion. (www.wikipedia.org).
Modern computer systems include additional hardware devices to provide users with position sensing, sensory display
and the programming of suitable interaction. VR experience and support technology are different separate core entities
to VR. They constitute independent but related issues. VR is not only visual, it can also involve taste, smell, body
moves and hearing sensations too (Grigore C. Burdea, Philippe Coiffet, Wiley Interscience, 2013).
The Market Line report (2022, globaldata.com) adds that sensations that make VR experience more realistic are
allowed by three technical components: motion tracking, eye tracking and audio. The report illustrates and explains
these components with VR headsets. A brief description of the technology: “a screen enables a total virtual
immersion”, “autofocus lenses positioned between the eyes and the screen respond to the user’s eye movements to
convert 2D images into stereoscopic 3D”. “Connection with other device (PC, console, smartphone) allows visuals to
appear”.
2
Eye tracking is allowed by “sensor-based technology that (…) measur[es] users’ point of gaze and eye movement”.
This technology is deep-learning, it enables the development of a human-machine interface that measures and learns
to identify and respond to eye moves. More this technology is trained and experienced, better it tracks eyes’ moves. It
uses “varifocal lenses or custom-built nested panels” to improve image quality and “screen resolution” in the space
where the user is looking at, while decreasing image quality of “peripheral” areas the user isn’t looking at.
Audio sensors include a “360-degree surround sound technique that mimics real-life auditory capabilities” thanks to
“speakers positioned in such a way as to generate the illusion of 3D sound”. Other VR audio technologies respond to
the users’ movements. 3D spatial audio is the most popular VR software, it offers flexibility for VR developers to
create their own audio content. It is however not expected to improve.
Motion tracking “captures head and body movements in all directions” of the user in the virtual world. It involves
body tracking and head tracking technologies allowed thanks to controllers and sensors that “track the smallest
movements of the human body, incorporated into VR headsets to deliver 6 degrees of freedom (6DoF) for realistic 3D
experience. It captures 360-degree movements to enable users to move freely in the virtual environment”. Full body
tracking system is still in development, hand movements controllers are available only. Head tracking is achieved
thanks to cameras that capture had movements with “inside-out system” that uses “base stations that triangulate user’s
head position in a given space” to properly localize it in space.
Motion tracking technical illustrations:
(Market Line report PDF: Virtual Reality: VR will become a $51bn market by 2030, but VR is still chasing
mainstream appeal, 26 Apr 2022, globaldata.com, Cyrus Mewawalla
Moreover, four VR ecosystem prerequisites for a long-term success in the VR industry seem to be in favour for
companies to program, develop and create independently from any VR technical provider their own VR platform and
VR software : (1) “immersive content and applications that allow creation on VR platforms”, (2) “VR engines games
to write VR codes independently from software developers”, (3) “VR engine enterprises that provide companies with
software to help them build their own VR app systems that depend on real-time AI to interpret the vast amounts of
sensor-based generated by VR experiences”, and lastly (4) “application delivery networks and content delivery
networks for distribution of VR apps and content”. (Market Line report PDF: Virtual Reality: VR will become a
$51bn market by 2030, but VR is still chasing mainstream appeal, 26 Apr 2022, globaldata.com).
This teaches us that to be successful, companies have to build and incorporate an entire ecosystem for users rather
than simply manufacturing hardware. They have to cover expenses of VR components such as the ones in appendix
A.
Enterprises have to specialize themselves in VR. VR has to be one of their core activity, and therefore one of their
primary activity. However other successful companies may use VR as supportive secondary activity.
Global market view of VR technology :
The Global Virtual Reality market’s actors include technology manufacturers or social media conglomerate
responsible for VR headset, VR hardware and VR applications production. Leading players have diversified portfolio,
or a wide ecosystem of software developers or VR materials providers. VR services is also used by these companies to
collaborate with industries primarily not reachable by them (retail or tourism).
Hardware VR segment dominates the VR market with almost 70% of the market value in 2021. It involves the
physical part of a VR engine, more costly and complex to produce. Big VR hardware producers and owners such as
3
Facebook dominate the segment. Software VR is the second largest segment. It is more competitive with thousands of
small software producers and large corporations (Microsoft) developing VR systems for a specific use of VR, which is
more achievable and less costly (no material cost like with hardware production).
Upsides of the global VR trend: In 2021 the Virtual Reality global market had a high value of $15.8 billion, with a
promising forecasted volume of 171.4 million units in 2025. As the applications of VR have expanded, the type of
buyers have evolved: from end consumers to various industries. VR can be used to enhance functionality of businesses
in many applications: teaching and training practices, automotive design, gaming, telecommunications, online retail,
healthcare, marketing, real estate, tourism and education.
Grigore C. Burdea, Philippe Coiffet, Wiley Interscience, 2013 further informs us on VR’s history, from private use
(military field) to a global market use, open to consumers and to various industries. First in surgery, rehabilitation,
education, art, entertainment. Then in military, army use of VR, in the navy, Air force. Lastly in manufacturing,
virtual prototyping, Robotics, Robot programming, Teleoperations, Visualization, Oil exploration and Well
management, Volumetric Data visualization. Ideas about VR use varies through time. VR variations involve the
evolution of VR components and core elements, along with VR functions of use, over time.
The new VR technology products released such as Facebook’s Oculus Quest launched in 2019, offered for the first
time a fully-integrated VR device that didn’t require additional functionalities on phone or on PC. It lead to an
increase of the market consumption and accessibility of VR technology.
Downsides of global VR market include the deceleration of market growth in mid-term. Lower investment in VR
technology may occur as a result of VR technology not evolving that the pace of consumer’s expectations, and as
consumers wait for the technology to become more advanced before committing to purchasing it. Buyer power in this
market is strong, VR technology is considered as an unessential merchandise. Small low end mobile VR headset
manufactures grants them with access to low-quality and low-cost VR experiences. For instance, Facebook introduced
Oculus Voice in 2017, but the service was basic, with just four commands. The limited functionality was lagging
behind popular virtual assistants such as Amazon Alexa or Google Assistant. (MarketLine Industry Profile PDF,
Global Virtual Reality, marketline.com, 2021)
Commercial VR in the Technology Adoption Life Cycle of individual end consumers (Ryan Bromsgrove, vrcave.ca,
2021)
According to Ryan Bromsgrove (October 2021), VR technology is still in the adoption phase in the technology
adoption life cycle curve. As seen earlier in the MarketLine Industry report (marketline.com, 2021), consumers wait
for the technology to become more advanced before committing to purchase VR. The gap between the adoption of VR
technology is bigger as Early adopters and innovators that own VR technology strongly believe in it, it “appeals to
them on a personal level”. The launch of VR tools to Early adopters by big corporations such as Facebook with the
Oculus Quest headset in 2019 and the technology advancements that came along made VR technology more
consumer-friendly and more affordable to a small part of end consumers. On the other side, Early majority, late
majority and laggards adopters refuse to commit financially despite the affordability of VR headset tool on the market.
The technology is indeed “not yet a part of day-to-day life for most people”. The largest potential adopters size of VR
remains uninterested by the technology and its technical limitations. (Ryan Bromsgrove, blog.vrcave.ca, 2021)
4
1.2 - Primary and secondary activities theories in a business:
According to Michael Porter in 1985, companies can be viewed as “processes” grouping many “systems” and
“subsystems” known as activities of the companies. These activities transform input resources: “money, labour force,
materials, equipment, building”, intellectual property, “land, administration or management” into outputs that are
valuable for the business.
Primary activities, directly involved in the production and sales of the finished product may include “inbound” and
“outbound logistics”, “operations”, “marketing and sales” and “service” that “receive, store and transform” any inputs
received by supplier into outputs then distributed and sold to the end consumer with strategies and plans of actions
designed to lead consumers to the purchase and to keep the product or service working effectively after the purchase
and delivery.
Secondary type activities may include “Procurement”, “Human Resource Management”, “technological development”
and “Infrastructure”. These activities are designed to support “the acquisition of resources and inputs by the firm”, and
manage them effectively, be it with “recruiting, hiring, training, compensating labour force”, or by ensuring
acquisition and access to “hardware, software, procedures, technical knowledge”. Secondary activities may also be
part of every primary activities department to support them internally. (Porter, Michael E. (1985), Rowe, Mason,
Dickel, Mann, Mockler; (1994), www.ifm.eng.cam.ac.uk)
Porter’s value chain scheme (Addison-Wesley, ifm.eng.cam.ac.uk)
According to Brigitte Borja de Mozota (1998), businesses have to find innovative ways to link their activities together
to add value, be it through the scope of money, psychological or organizational value. This is referred to as
management design of activities. It is described as “problem solving activity”, “creativity activity”, “systemic activity”
or a “co-ordinating activity”. It differs mainly from any other generic managerial activity as it brings an artistic and
cultural approach. It is more “novelty, creativity and originality” oriented, rather than “control” and “strategy
oriented”. Strategic design management completes the definition of the value chain of Michael Porter, according to
whom companies may achieve a sustainable competitive advantage based on their value chain’s activities.
Three types of design models exist and are used by businesses to address one specific structural issue.
The design action model is economy-driven. It focus on a few functions and activities (primary) to pursue a
competitive advantage based on outside matters that is economic performance: prices, market share, innovative
activities and new technologies, product quality. This approach leads to optimization of company’s image and
reputation and to build client’s trust, to dominate and cover the market, or to meet higher consumers’ standards.
The design function model facilitates inside business operations on a managerial coordinative level. Support
secondary activities’ relationships with the value chain are optimized to create synergy, a know-how competitive skill.
This approach is used for product development, to better address customer needs, and to strengthen customer value.
Design vision focuses on addressing the company’s visions and missions, restructuring its core culture to change its
workers behaviour, on a functional, strategic and deeper cognitive level. This approach goes beyond the first two
design models, as it goes beyond economic performance or company operational functional structure. It requires to
understand the environment, the corporate history and time management of the business. Brigitte Borja de Mozota
(1998)
1.3 - Deductive qualitative methodology for interviews:
5
Qualitative (non directly-measurable facts, dictionary.cambridge.org) approach allows to analyse certain data
(Acharya & Gupta, 2016a; Acharya & Gupta, 2016b; Gupta, Ganguli, & Ponnam, 2015) quantitative (directly
measurable facts, dictionary.cambridge.org) methods aren’t appropriate to treat (Pandey & Singh, 2016) or “pose
restrictions” to (Ghanshala, Pant & Pandey, 2013; Pandey & Singh, 2015a; Pandey & Roberts, 2012; Pandey &
Varkkey, 2017).
“Qualitative methods allow the researcher to study issues in depth; data collection is not limited to predetermined
categories. Qualitative methods produce a wealth of detailed data on a small number of individuals” (Patton, 1991). A
qualitative study seeks to identify underlying concepts and the relationships between them (Frankfort-Nachmias and
Nachmias, 1996). The data for a qualitative study might include transcripts of in-depth interviews, observations or
documents (Patton, 1991). Kenneth F. Hyde, 2000
Qualitative content analysis is the “technique for making inferences by objectively and systematically identifying
specified characteristics of messages” (Holsti, 1969, p. 14) in “verbal, visual and written form” (Cole, 1988).
Neuendorf, 2002 (p. 10) describes it as “a summarizing, quantitative analysis of messages not limited to types of
variables or context of messages” or “not necessarily from an author’s or user's perspective” (Krippendorff, 2004, p.
3). Qualitative analysis can also use “procedures to make valid inferences from text” (Weber, 1990, p. 9). Content
qualitative analysis for instance establishes “categories and concepts that aid in the development of a model or
conceptual map” (Elo & Kyngäs, 2008).
The advantage of content analysis is that it leads to “developing practical action guides” with “valid and replicable
findings from contextual data, which further help in generating new data” and leads to “enhance existing knowledge”
(Klaus, 1980). This method is therefore sensitive to subjective situations and contexts. It allows the formulation of a”
flexible research design for dealing with meaning and intention, identifying critical processes” (Downe-Wamboldt,
1992; Harwood & Garry, 2003; Klaus, 1980). Content analysis is a core method for textual analyses “ such as
“transcripts of interviews” (Graneheim & Lundman, 2004). Jatin Pandey, 2019
A deductive process seeks to see if “generalisations” previously stated “apply to specific instances” (Kenneth F. Hyde,
2000). This approach is suitable for this research paper that follows a qualitative research method as this “theory
developed from qualitative investigation is untested”. It follows a post-positivist paradigm (“not everything is
completely knowable”, all knowledge isn’t acquired with reason, logic, experience (Krauss, 2005)). “It seek to explain
the particular” (Kenneth F. Hyde, 2000).
One approach for theory testing is by “pattern matching”. It consists in testing a theory by confronting and
“comparing” data gathered with “the predictions of the theory and predictions of the countertheory”. “Support is
demonstrated for the theory if the case data matches the predicted pattern of outcomes of the theory more closely than
it matches the predicted pattern of outcomes for the counter-theory”. “If the results fail to show the entire pattern as
predicted, the initial propositions need to be modified” (Campbell, 1975).
“Pattern matching'' deductive qualitative method involves a series of steps: (1) theoretical propositions are stated
before data-gathering commences; (2) a counter-theory is also stated; (3) a case-by-case comparison of the deductive
dataset with the theory and the counter-theory is undertaken by independent judges; (4) a record of hits and misses is
established (Wilson and Vlosky, 1997; Wilson and Wilson, 1988; Woodside and Wilson, 1995). This method for
interviews’ transcripts analysis suits well this research paper. It will be used and applied to make sense of interview
data gathered. (Kenneth F. Hyde, 2000).
2) Sources and Methods of Collecting Data & Limitations
2.1 - Research question : Do companies and organizations use Virtual Reality technology in their
primary value chain activities or in their secondary/support activity ?
Sub questions: How companies take benefits from Virtual Reality technology?
How do companies implement Virtual Reality in their value chain operations?
6
There has been a change in research proposal, due to the broadness and impreciseness of the topic. The research core
topics switched from happiness as a purpose in non-profit organizations to a more practical framework based on VR
use and integration in primary/secondary activities in companies’ value chain. A framework was found using the
deductive approach. After elaborating the framework, the inductive approach can be used to further analyse interviews
data insights.
The research question had to change too. It was not concrete and precise enough (“What is the relationship between
VR and happiness ? Can VR be used efficiently by non-profit organizations, supposed to be an intermediary that
brings happiness to people by protecting their fundamental needs and rights?”). To not reduce further the scope, and
because the gathering of data could have been more complicated and time-consuming, the research explores the
potential of VR as a technology in any industry, rather than one specific VR technology along with one particular
industry of application of VR. This is why the interviewees all have different backgrounds and their professional
missions belong to different industries. They each have found different applications of VR technology as implemented
in their business. Considering this helps us further explore the potential of VR technology.
2.2 - Explanation on how the thesis will be conducted
Sources and methods for collecting data:
Data gathered is primary-type. To collect it, semi-structured interviews (a list of general questions along with an
adaptation to the interviewee turning into a discussion) have been conducted on online meeting platforms or by phone
call. The interviewees, questioned one single time, were recorded with the consent of the interviewees to allow to go
back to collected information.
Interviewees’ profiles have been primarily selected based on the fact that they are professionals who have been
implementing VR in their business activities and in their business value, with more or less impact. Other interviewed
professionals however do not use VR, they are late adopters. Asking them about boundaries and obstacles that have
restricted their access and use of VR remains relevant, to better understand the limits of VR technology.
The primary source to find such profiles using VR as a priority was My Job Glasses platform, which offers a database
of professionals’ contacts. This platforms provided a direct access to professionals that belong to a wide variety of
field of activity or industry. As they all are alumni of the school, their time to answer to my interview requests were in
average pretty fast. Professionals specialized in the VR technology were targeted as a priority.
A total of 7 interviews were conducted. 5 were VR-users, 2 were non-VR users. You can find in Appendix C the
scripts for each interviews. Those conducted in French were translated in English.
Limitations:
One main limit of this study is the fact that the source is unique and not diversified. Data were mainly gathered thanks
to the school alumni network.
Another limit is the unequal amount of interviewees using VR and interviewees not using VR. The data given by non
VR users is hypothetic, as they do not use VR already, they made suggestions on where and how to implement VR in
their activities. This adds up additional biases and limits to the study.
Another point is that not all companies may have a similar industry they primarily operate in, their use of VR is
mainly subjective and depends on their field of industry and on what they consider to be their primary and secondary
missions. Therefore, comparing many industries may lead to very different uses and perception of VR. Companies
working in the IT service industry may better consider and use VR technology more compared non-profit oriented
organizations for whom primary human needs are more important, for instance.
2.3 - Method:
Common themes were identified from all the interviews. These themes guided me through the choice of my
research question, the method to use and through an insight on expected results, in an inductive manner.
These themes were:
- Professional and personal experience and approach to VR technology
7
- Use applications of VR in a business: as training and learning tool, as visual testing and exploration
content creation tool, as meeting and cooperation booked virtual space, as a B2B service or as a
technical tool for activities
- Pros and cons of VR technology
- Non-adoption of VR technology, use and access barriers
Interviews questions:
Common questions:
1. What is your background and your affinity with VR technology ?
2. What do your missions consist of ?
These two first questions are useful to provide with a clear understanding on interviewees’ activities, job
position in their company, their company’s field of industry, their company location in the value chain
(distributor, retailer, wholesaler). Knowing about their affinity and level of experience with VR technology
is another valuable insight to appreciate a stronger explanation of their activities and of their way of using
VR technology in their activities, in a more context-based approach.
3. Which needs do you have as a professional in your activities? Does VR meet them?
4. How has or how could VR meet your professional activities’ needs and missions ?
The common questions 3. and 4. are essential as they exhibit the factors that facilitated or hardened the
adoption of VR technology in a company’s activities, and how VR technology has been or could be
implemented.
5. What have been or what could be the expected effects of VR implemented in your activities ?
6. If you could change anything in VR technology to optimize your use of it or to maybe adopt it in
your activities, what would it be?
Common questions 5. And 6. are useful to observe the potential and the limits of VR technology in its
implementation and use by a company for its activities.
Questions for VR adopters:
1. What is your background and your affinity with VR technology ?
2. What do your missions consist of in your organization ?
3. What type of VR do you use in your missions and how do you use this technology ?
4. To what extend do you think that VR technology serves your purpose? What are the effects observed
in your use of VR technology in your activities ?
5. If you could change anything in VR technology, what would it be ?
Questions for non VR adopters:
1. What is your background and your affinity with VR technology ?
2. What do your missions consist of ?
3. Which needs do you have as a professional in your activities?
4. Why not testing VR in your activities? Which needs VR doesn’t meet ?
8
5. What would be expected effects of VR implemented in your activities ?
6. If you could, would there be something you would change about VR technology that would maybe
make you use it in your activities ?
Text-analysis method:
To answer the research question, a qualitative method had to be used. The deductive general approach was selected to
make sense quantitatively of the qualitative interview data gathered, by establishing a list of testable affirmations the
interview text scripts meet or not. Text analysis is the method to analyse the data and to score interview scripts match
or mismatch with the affirmations list.
My research paper mixes both inductive (formulation of a general theoretical hypothesis that has to be tested to
answer a specific research question, from a set of literature review and from an overall overview of interviews’ data)
and deductive (test and confront a large theoretical hypothesis to a series of specific particular cases to see how far the
theoretical hypothesis is valid) approaches.
The “pattern-matching” method:
The qualitative approach suited for texts and interview data will be followed. More importantly, the pattern-matching
method for theory testing will be applied to test the initial theory: to be successful companies most commonly
incorporate VR technology in their primary activities; and the counter-theory: to be successful companies most
commonly use and incorporate VR technology in their secondary supportive activities or not at all.
“Pattern matching'' deductive qualitative method involves a series of steps: (1) theoretical propositions are stated
before data-gathering commences; (2) a counter-theory is also stated; (3) a case-by-case comparison of the deductive
dataset with the theory and the counter-theory is undertaken by independent judges; (4) a record of hits and misses is
established (Wilson and Vlosky, 1997; Wilson and Wilson, 1988; Woodside and Wilson, 1995). (Kenneth F. Hyde,
2000).
Step (1): theoretical propositions established:
Name of the model under test M1: “VR integrated in primary activities”. Name of the competing model M2: “VR
technology integrated in secondary activities or not integrated at all”
Goal: examine the extent to which companies and corporations integrate VR in their value chain activities.
Data collected from 1 main source: My JOB glasses. Also from the school alumni network after asking contacts to my
Data analysis teacher: redirected me to a full time teacher (teaches Work and Organization studies) at NEOMA.
Research commences with inductive model building: interview questions are oriented towards the utility/use and
integration/adaptation of changes of professionals’ company to VR technology. Factors judged to be decision-makers
by professionals in their company’s choice to integrate VR: experience, affinity with technologies, infrastructures,
consumers’ expectations, visionary goals, brand reputation. Semi-structured interviews with professionals who are late
adopters of VR tech in their activities. Factors judged to be decision-maker for professionals who are late VR tech
adopters: access to VR technology, missions’ priorities, history and evolution of their activities, operating industry.
Establish a model, named “Model 1” of 12 testable propositions that illustrate companies’ and professionals’ decision
making process/reasons that lead them to chose to integrate VR in their primary activities, based on collected database
and on literature review.
9
MODEL 1 M1: “VR integrated in primary activities”
(P1) Embrace new trends, new technological potentials, expand the field of activity to new sectors/industries, to
connect with new innovative industries (the Metaverse) and to offer services and applications in these industries,
establish connections with them
(P2) For product development
(P3) Build an entire business model using VR technology as their core activities
(P4) Direct spontaneous need for VR technology to keep running activities
(P5) VR as a service to sell to another, B2B, marketing to develop around new technologies, new types of services to
offer
(P6) Bring B2B expertise to clients already using VR in their operations and activities, help integrate and incorporate
VR, design and program a VR software interface to meet clients’ business needs
(P7) The firm already works in the innovative tech industry and wants to offer innovative services to its clients, B2B
(P8) To meet customers’ needs in more personalized ways, for a personalized designed virtual interface to offer
services such as visiting hostels that were booked
(P9) To have a larger reach on customer segment
(P10) To optimize customer engagement, better brand image
(P11) To raise awareness about a phenomenon, a reality
(P12) To entertain end users
Establish a model, named “Model 2”, of 12 testable propositions that illustrate companies’ and professionals’
decision-making process/reasons that lead them to choose to integrate VR in their secondary activities or to not
integrate VR technology in their activities at all, based on collected database and on literature review.
MODEL 2 M2: “VR technology integrated in secondary activities or not integrated at all”
(P1’) Better cooperate with partners with online meeting spaces, VR as a cooperative tool (P2’)
Introduce VR technology in an organization to bring attractiveness, dynamism and innovation to it (P3’)
To bypass time and space constraints for meetings held virtually
(P4’) More fun innovative and interactive ways to operate support activities such as staff training
(P5’) As a test experimentation to further develop a project, an idea, an innovation
(P6’) Build expertise upon more performing technological tools (gaming)
(P7’) Reinforce existing knowledge and competences on VR technics and technology
(P8’) More efficiency in operations
(P9’) Reinforce existing activities
(P10’) For strategy development/corporate development
(P12’) Copy competitors, remain competitive
Define population from the study sample:
10
(1)VR direct users : use VR in their direct primary operations, VR integrated into their own business operations as a
necessary tool for them to perform their activities. They are experts who program, design and conduct technical
research on VR (Frédéric and Michele), or simply VR adopters who chose to integrate it as a core element in their
activities but without having to manipulate the technology (Pierre-François).
(2) VR indirect users : use VR indirectly in their operations, VR is part of their operations but isn’t core to them.
They sell VR technology without having to manipulate the technology (Jean-Baptiste, Gregory).
(3) VR non adopters: haven’t used or integrated VR in their operations for several reasons. They refused VR and
choose to not integrate the technology (Danielle) or they have no/little knowledge on VR technology/not enough
financial resources and therefore are not capable of integrating it in their activities (Jean-Louis).
Questions asked to interviewees that are VR users that will be investigated in the analysis:
What do your missions consist of ?
Which needs do you have as a professional in your activities? Does VR meet them?
How has or how could VR meet your professional activities’ needs and missions ?
Questions asked to interviewees that are VR non-users that will be investigated in the analysis:
Why not testing VR in your activities? Which needs VR doesn’t meet ?
What would be expected effects of VR implemented in your activities ?
These questions were key as they provide us with clues to test each of the 24 propositions. For one interviewee,
several testable propositions can be selected. One interviewee can score testable propositions from both model 1 and
model 2 at the same time, as their scope of professional activities was sometimes large and diversified.
Step (2): counter-theory stated :
Initial theory: to be successful, companies most commonly incorporate VR technology in their primary activities.
Counter-theory: to be successful companies most commonly use and incorporate VR technology in their secondary
supportive activities or they do not incorporate it at all.
Explanation and justification of the initial theory using the literature review:
Overall, companies are expected to implement VR as an innovative technology in their primary activities for several
reasons:
The biggest VR market actors produce and own production centre and components value chain for VR hardware and
software. To be competitive and to be a leader in the VR industry, they have a high control over VR production,
manufacturing, distribution and selling. Furthermore the success of companies in the VR industry requires them to
already have knowledge and experience over VR. Starting from scratch to build a whole business model using VR at
the core of activities for the sake of delivering value to consumers holds high chances of failure.
Furthermore, what we can also hold as valuable from the literature review that explains our primary theory is that as
VR has developed over time to be more realistic, displaying and offering high quality and immersive virtual
environment where sensations become more and more integrated into the VR experience, some investors and actors
decide to highly invest in VR technology as a way to differentiate themselves from competitors, to build a highly
innovative brand image, to specialize themselves into VR to offer technical expertise and audit to B2B clients, or to
11
reinforce customer relationships. VR is seen as an opportunity which, even with a slow technology adoption pace,
remains highly exciting and promising for companies and investors.
There exists limitless possibilities of application of VR, as a way to connect to existing applications such as the
Metaverse or to new industries. Such possibilities are highly attractive for companies who can take benefit from VR to
widen and expand their operating ecosystem.
Explanation and justification of the counter-theory using the literature review:
Because the adoption pace of VR technology is slow and because of its defects and defaults that include motion
sickness, inconvenient and comfortable items, other companies prefer using VR technology to reinforce their activities
by integrating it in their secondary supportive activities such as training or strategy planning.
Given the infinite amount of applications of use VR technology offers, some companies moreover perceive it mainly
as a helpful tool that helps for secondary operations. Maybe these corporations aren’t ready to or prefer not taking the
risk to change their whole structure to adapt themselves to VR technology because of their history, of their brand
reputation already established. They prefer to remain loyal to their structure, values and ways of operating.
Moreover it seems that given the large amount of companies and startups specialized in offering VR services and
expertise (such as the design of a personalized VR interface operated thanks to VR software tools, programming
codes, interfaces, databases, clouds and access interfaces for end users), already-established companies that did not
primarily use VR in their activities ask for their expertise to integrate it where they can. It mainly is in their support
activities, to limit adoption failure risks and negative consequences such as damaging their operating structure, making
it weaker by using an inappropriate tool. Moreover implementing a technology takes time, knowledge and experience
in an organization, this factor could also explain the refusal or the secondary adoption of VR technology by companies
in their value chain.
Step (3): case-by-case comparison of the deductive dataset with the theory and the counter-theory:
No other judge than the student who conducted the thesis were involved. Categories of decision factors grouped
together under common similar themes were established in a summarizing and objective manner. This aims at
providing a complete and detailed summary of all the possible causes, reasons, and manners that could lead companies
and professionals to decide to adopt and integrate VR technology in their activities. These categories are also based
upon a study of existing literature on VR technology and based on an overall complete review of the collected data
sample.
The score equal of the sum of each tested propositions will be established for both Model 1 and Model 2.
These scores will be compared. If the score of Model 1 is higher than the score of Model 2, then initial theory: “to be
successful companies most commonly incorporate VR technology in their primary activities” will be valid, and
the counter theory will be invalid.
If the score of Model 2 is higher than the score of Model 1, then the counter-theory: “to be successful companies
most commonly use and incorporate VR technology in their secondary supportive activities or they chose to not
integrate it at all” will be valid, and the testable primary theory will be invalid.
3) Analysis/recommendations/conclusions
3.1 - Analysis:
WHAT TYPE OF VR DO YOU USE IN YOUR MISSIONS AND HOW DO YOU USE THIS TECHNOLOGY ?
Michele:
12
TUI utilizes virtual reality (VR) technology for conducting workshops and creating simulated in-person meetings,
providing a unique and immersive experience for participants. (M2, P3’) PVR is also employed by TUI for training
purposes, allowing employees to enhance their hard and soft skills (M2, P4’). This is especially beneficial during the
hiring season, as VR training can cover various roles ranging from cleaning rooms to reception skills.
To enhance customer reception situations, TUI explores ways to utilize VR to augment the travel
experience for its users. By integrating virtual elements, they can create memorable and interactive
experiences for their customers. I have been initiating the project to develop at TUI a platform that enables
them to provide a wide range of travel-related experiences to their users. This includes the use of virtual tour
guides, allowing travelers to explore destinations virtually and gain valuable insights (M1: P1, P8, P9).
This platform acts as a middle layer, connecting users with immersive travel experiences. As part of our
strategy, we considers purchasing VR assets to support our initiatives and enhance our VR capabilities
(M2: P8’, P9’). By investing in high-quality VR equipment and software, we can ensure a seamless and
immersive experience for our users.
Gregory:
In our missions, we utilize various types of VR technology to provide immersive 3D/AR/VR services. Here's how we
use this technology:
Design and storage: Our company specializes in designing and storing virtual spaces (M1: P4). Using technologies
such as Unity, similar to those used in video games, we create virtual environments tailored to the specific needs of
our clients (M1: P6). This involves programming and developing virtual spaces that serve various business
purposes (M1: P1). 3D scanning camera system: We utilize camera systems to make 3D scans of physical spaces. This
enables us to capture the intricacies and details of real-world environments, which can then be translated into
virtual experiences (M1: P7). Cloud storage and accessibility: We record video tours of the virtual visits and store
them on the cloud. This ensures easy access for customers, who can view the tours at their convenience, share
them with others, and make informed decisions (M1: P8) based on the immersive experiences provided.
Video unity engine and virtual spaces: We leverage the power of the video unity engine to create virtual spaces for
companies. This allows us to offer virtual conferences and virtual online shops, providing unique and engaging
experiences for both businesses and their customers (M1: P1). Virtual visits and room assemblies: With the scanned
data, we can create assemblies of rooms and present them on screens. This allows us to offer virtual visits of
apartments, hotels, or any other space that people wish to explore remotely. Users can navigate and interact with
the virtual environment, experiencing a realistic representation of the physical space. Interactive communication
during visits: Our VR technology enables us to facilitate interactive communication during virtual visits. This means
that users can connect with sales representatives or relevant personnel in real-time (M1: P8), enhancing the
customer experience and providing an opportunity for direct engagement and assistance (M1: P10).
Frédéric:
In my missions as a VR-AR-Unity developer at Thales, I utilize various types of VR technology to
support virtual reality consulting, application development, and C# programming (M1: P7). One of
the primary technologies I work with is Unity, a versatile game development engine (M1, P4).
However, my work extends beyond the realm of video games. I apply my cross-functional skills in Unity
to diverse projects that require VR solutions for specific objectives (M1, P1). As an engineer and
programmer, I analyze the unique needs of potential clients and design tailored solutions (M1, P8). This
involves developing websites, modules, and custom applications. I also conduct multiple verification
tests to ensure the functionality and quality of the VR experiences (M1, P6). Part of my role also
includes bug fixing, where I address and resolve any issues that arise during the development process.
(M2: P5’, P6’, P7’)
Jean-Baptiste:
13
In our missions, we primarily utilize Virtual Reality (VR) technology to achieve our goals (M1: P2, P3,
P4). The specific type of VR we use with Vista-AR (VR technology name for digital technology allowing
VR software development) which combines virtual reality and augmented reality elements to create an
immersive and interactive experience. We employ Vista-AR in our website project that spans both sides of
the Channel Sea, aiming to assist territories with cultural heritage in their development efforts (M2:
P5’). Through this technology, we create attractive tools that entice visitors to explore and engage M2:
P2’) with the cultural heritage of these countries.
Our approach involves the creation of digital content by our partners in England and Neoma. They work
on integrating this content into the organizational framework and heritage sites (M2: P1’), including
guides and integrating them into tour paths. By doing so, we enhance the visitor experience and offer a
seamless integration of VR technology into the cultural journey (M1, P1). We adopt a comprehensive
and holistic approach, ensuring that our VR experiences provide access to the cultural heritage of these
countries, even if visitors are physically isolated or unable to travel (M1, P10). This widens the reach
and impact of the cultural project, making it accessible to a broader audience (M1, P9). To support our
initiatives, we secure European funding, particularly through the ERDF (European Regional Development
Fund). These funds facilitate cross-channel cooperation between England and France, benefiting regions in
both countries and enabling the successful implementation of our VR-based projects.
Pierre-François:
We utilize tools such as WebIXAR, developed by IXAR industry, which enables us to create virtual reality
experiences without the need for specific applications (M1: P6). Additionally, we collaborate with
companies such as Mozilla Hubs, which develops its own VR software (M2: P1’), and Fireforks, a
company I have previously worked with.
We also utilize VR headsets to access the interfaces they offer, particularly for engaging with the
concept of the Metaverse (M1, P1). The Metaverse can be described as an immersive web or spatial
internet, where individuals can connect with each other and access vast amounts of information, all
experienced through their senses. Within the Metaverse, users can have customizable digital identities
represented by avatars (M1, P8), which serve as visual representations of themselves. The use of
blockchain technology ensures decentralized transactions and enables the tracking of digital identities and
movements throughout different virtual spaces.
By utilizing VR technology, we aim to create an internet experience in 3D and real-time, transcending
the limitations of the traditional 2D screen and providing a more immersive and interactive environment.
Our focus is on exploring how these virtual spaces can influence people's behavior within the digital
world (M2: P5’, P6’, P7’). For example, we consider the concept of a virtual library where individuals can
engage in calm and quiet activities. We strive to understand the extent to which we can apply these
principles to VR experiences, taking into account the absence of physical constraints but also considering
the digital weight of files and their impact on performance. Additionally, we seek to develop tools that can
measure the complexity or openness of virtual spaces, tailoring them to different activities (M1: P1)and
creating environments that are more or less open, depending on the desired experience.
TO WHAT EXTEND DO YOU THINK THAT VR TECHNOLOGY SERVES YOUR PURPOSE? WHAT ARE THE
EFFECTS OBSERVED IN YOUR USE OF VR TECHNOLOGY IN YOUR ACTIVITIES ?
Michele:
The incorporation of virtual reality (VR) in business activities has yielded positive outcomes, exceeding
initial expectations. It has proven to be highly effective in enhancing various aspects of business operations.
Although there was initially some resistance among individuals due to its unfamiliarity, the use of VR in
business has gradually gained acceptance as its benefits became evident. Concerns regarding motion
sickness, a potential negative effect of VR, have been minimal, with less than 1% of users experiencing any
discomfort. This low occurrence has contributed to the overall positive reception of VR technology. People
14
have expressed a strong preference for VR interactions, finding them more engaging and human-like
compared to traditional video calls. The immersive nature of VR allows for a deeper level of connection
and collaboration (M2: P3’, P4’). The integration of VR in business activities has proven to be sustainable
and environmentally friendly. By eliminating the need for travel, VR helps conserve resources and reduce
carbon emissions, contributing to a more sustainable approach to conducting business.
Gregory:
I believe VR technology serves our purpose to a great extent in various aspects of our activities. Here are the
overall positive effects observed in our use of VR technology:
SEO and marketing: VR technology enables us to create immersive and engaging experiences that can
attract and retain users. By incorporating VR into our SEO and marketing strategies, we can lead users
to our platform and generate interest in our offerings (M1: P5). The unique and captivating nature of
VR experiences helps us stand out in the competitive digital landscape (M2: P10’, P12’). B2C
expansion: VR technology has the potential to significantly expand our reach to the general public (M1,
P9). By offering compelling VR experiences to consumers, we can showcase the benefits and possibilities of
the technology. This, in turn, can generate curiosity, attract new users, and create a loyal customer base.
Enhanced user engagement: VR technology has a profound impact on user engagement (M1: P10). By
immersing users in virtual environments, we can provide them with interactive and memorable experiences.
This heightened level of engagement leads to increased interest, longer periods of interaction, and a stronger
connection to our platform and services.
Improved brand perception: Integrating VR technology into our activities helps us position our brand as
innovative, forward-thinking, and technologically advanced. By leveraging VR, we demonstrate our
commitment to providing cutting-edge solutions and delivering exceptional user experiences. This can
positively impact our brand perception among both B2B partners and the general public. Accessible and
inclusive experiences: VR technology has the potential to break barriers and make experiences accessible to
a wider audience. By offering VR experiences that cater to different interests, preferences, and accessibility
needs, we can ensure inclusivity and reach individuals who may not have had access to certain activities or
locations otherwise.
Frédéric:
From my perspective, the extent to which VR technology serves my purpose in terms of its capabilities and potential
is quite significant, but there are certain limitations and effects observed in its use in my activities. One observation
is that the adoption and use of VR technology by the general public is still relatively limited. Many people associate
VR primarily with gaming experiences or what they have seen on platforms like Facebook. There is a lack of
awareness and understanding of the broader applications and potential of VR beyond entertainment. Additionally,
the implementation of VR technology can be an expensive and resource-intensive process. It requires specialized
teams with multidisciplinary expertise to effectively utilize VR in various fields. This includes understanding not only
the technology itself but also the specific context and requirements of the end-users. Bridging the gap between
technology and user experience is crucial for successful VR integration. Furthermore, there are limitations in fully
grasping the possibilities and potential applications of VR technology. Exploring and understanding the diverse ways
in which VR can be used to enhance different industries and activities is an ongoing process.
Jean-Baptiste:
We believe that VR technology serves our purpose to a great extent. Through the use of VR, we have observed
several effects in our activities: the compatibility between visitors and the itinerary. By incorporating VR technology
into our projects, we can create engaging experiences that align with the interests and preferences of our visitors.
For example, in gardens, we implement technologies that not only educate but also captivate the players, adding
value to their overall experience (M1, P11, P12). However, we are mindful of potential challenges that arise when
using VR technology. For instance, some visitors may choose to turn up the sound while using VR, which could
disrupt the experience for others who are not using the technology. This necessitates finding a balance to ensure
that VR users can fully enjoy their experience while minimizing any disturbances to non-VR users.
15
Another effect we have observed is the coordination of projects for schools. By introducing VR technology into
educational settings, we are met with the challenge of redefining traditional customer relations. The integration of a
new technology requires adapting teaching methodologies and establishing infrastructure that provides access to
educational modules for classes. Additionally, we seek to utilize spaces with cultural and heritage potential to
enhance the learning experience and connect various stakeholders involved (M2, P1’).
Pierre-François:
In terms of serving our purpose, VR technology has been instrumental in achieving our goals. We prioritize
interoperability, ensuring that the avatars and virtual objects we create are compatible with various VR platforms.
This allows for a seamless experience across different interfaces, (M1, P1) including platforms like Mozilla Hubs,
which integrates blockchain technology and offers a decentralized environment. While some platforms may have
limitations in functionality or aesthetics, we strive to find solutions that provide a high-quality and immersive
experience for our users.
We have observed positive effects in our use of VR technology in our activities. The game Minecraft, which exists in
both 3D and VR formats, has become one of the most sold games in the world. This showcases the appeal and
engagement VR can provide (M1, P10), even if the visual aspects may not meet the highest standards of realism. In
fact, children often find enjoyment in the game regardless of its visual fidelity. Moreover, our projects have yielded
successful outcomes. One notable example is our collaboration with the association "In My Skin" in Morocco,
which supports single mothers raising their children alone (M2: P1’). Through a TV5 report and our website, such as
kimetic.artravs.com, we have been able to raise awareness (M1, P11) and provide a platform for the association's
initiatives (M1, P6). Another organization we have partnered with is "100% Mamans," and their page can be found
at centpourcentmamans.com.
WHY NOT TESTING VR IN YOUR ACTIVITIES? WHICH NEEDS VR DOESN’T MEET ?
Danielle:
Implementing VR in my training process is something worth considering, especially for individuals who have never
been on the ground in countries experiencing crises or have limited exposure to rural needs. VR can provide a
simulated experience that helps trainees understand and respond to current needs effectively while also
emphasizing preventive measures for the future (M2: P4’). There are certain areas within humanitarian work, such
as cash transfer simulations, where VR could be particularly useful. It can offer an immersive experience and give
participants a sense of what it's like to be in specific situations (M1: P11), allowing them to develop a better
understanding of the challenges and make informed decisions. VR furthermore has the ability to enhance the
training process by providing a more immersive and engaging learning environment. It can help participants retain
information better by creating memorable experiences and allowing them to practice skills in a realistic virtual
setting.
When it comes to integrating VR into my activities, there are several factors that can facilitate or hinder its adoption.
Some facilitating factors include the accessibility and availability of VR technology, its potential to provide added
value beyond traditional educational methods, and if it can be obtained at no cost or with affordable options.
Jean-Louis:
The implementation of VR in my activities is currently not feasible due to the lack of access to sufficient
financial resources. As a professional working with limited resources, my focus is primarily on addressing
the essential needs of the populations I serve. The financial resources for my activities mainly come from
membership fees within the non-profit organization and specific interventions funded by buyers or
organizations. These sources of funding, such as government funding from the United States, prioritize
supporting the core missions rather than investing in VR technology. While I am personally interested in
exploring the potential of VR in my activities, it is not currently a top priority. Given the limited resources
available, I must allocate them to areas that directly impact the concrete health and medical needs of the
16
populations I serve. Therefore, VR technology does not meet the needs of my activities at this time, as the focus
remains on essential interventions and support rather than investing in new technological tools.
WHAT WOULD BE EXPECTED EFFECTS OF VR IMPLEMENTED IN YOUR ACTIVITIES ?
Danielle:
The expected effects of implementing VR in my activities would be to immerse people and users in crisis and
conflict situations, enabling them to understand the scale of the problems at hand and assisting them in their
analysis (M1, P11). This immersive experience can be particularly beneficial in crisis and conflict countries where
accessibility and practical concerns may limit direct exposure to these situations. By using VR, individuals can gain a
deeper understanding of the challenges faced and make informed decisions and interventions based on that
understanding (M2, P4’).
Jean-Louis:
The implementation of Virtual Reality (VR) in my activities has not been explored yet, as I am not familiar
with this technology. However, I can see potential benefits it could bring to my missions. One area where
VR could be interesting is in engaging with community partners and redefining communication and
support strategies for the populations I work with (M2: P1’).
In terms of expected effects, if VR were to be used for training purposes in my activities, it could have a
positive impact. It could help raise awareness about the issues related to HIV/AIDS and the importance
of treatment (M1: P11). It could also facilitate better communication and collaboration among the
various stakeholders involved in my activities (M2: P1’). By providing a virtual experience, VR could
enhance the training of individuals working in the field (M2: P4’), equipping them with a deeper
understanding of the challenges faced by patients and the community. This, in turn, could lead to more
effective strategies to overcome economic obstacles and other barriers to treatment (M2: P9’, P10’).
While the specific effects of implementing VR in my activities would need to be explored further, there is
potential for it to contribute to improved communication, training, and overall support for the populations
affected by HIV/AIDS
Step (4): Record of hits and misses
MODEL 1: M1
(P1) Embrace new trends, new technological potentials, expand their field of activity to new sectors/industries, to
connect with new innovative industries (the Metaverse) and to offer services and applications in these industries,
establish connections with them
M, G, G, F, JB, PF, PF, PF -> 8
(P2) For product development
JB -> 1
(P3) Build an entire business model using VR technology as their core activities
JB -> 1
(P4) Direct spontaneous need for VR technology to keep running activities
G, F, JB -> 3
(P5) VR as a service to sell to another, B2B, marketing to develop around new technologies, new types of services to
offer
G -> 1
17
(P6) Bring expertise to clients already using VR in their operations and in their activities, expertise, B2B, help clients
integrate and incorporate VR in their activities, B2B:, design and program a VR software interface for clients
G, F, PF, PF -> 4
(P7) The firm already works in the innovative tech industry and wants to offer innovative services to its clients,
B2B G, F -> 2
(P8) To meet customers’ needs in more personalized ways, for a personalized designed virtual interface to offer
services such as visiting hostels that were booked
M, G, G, F, PF, JB -> 6
(P9) To have a larger reach on customer segment
M, JB, G -> 3
(P10) To optimize customer engagement; better brand image
G, JB, G, PF -> 4
(P11) To raise awareness about a phenomenon, a reality: PF, D, JL, JB, PF, JL, JL -> 7
(P12) To entertain end users: PF, JB -> 2
TOTAL -> 42
MODEL 2: M2
(P1’) Better cooperate with partners with online meeting spaces, VR as a cooperative
tool G, JB, PF, JL, JB, PF, JL -> 7
(P2’) Introduce VR technology in an organization to bring attractiveness, dynamism and innovation to
it G, JB -> 2
(P3’) To bypass time and space constraints for meetings held virtually: M, M -> 2
(P4’) More fun innovative and interactive ways to operate support activities such as staff
training M, M, D, JL, JL -> 5
(P5’) As a test experimentation to further develop a project, an idea, an innovation
F, JB, PF -> 3
(P6’) Build expertise upon more performing technological tools (gaming)
F, PF -> 2
(P7’) Reinforce existing knowledge and competences on VR technics and technology
F, PF -> 2
(P8’) More efficiency in operations
M -> 1
(P9’) Reinforce existing activities
M, JL -> 2
(P10’) For strategy development/corporate development
18
G, JL -> 2
(P12’) Copy competitors, remain competitive
G -> 1
TOTAL -> 29
Interviewee name
Theoretical
proposition (verifies,
doesn’t verify)
Counter-theoretical
proposition
(verifies, doesn’t verify)
Michele
3:doesn’t verify
6: verifies
Gregory
11: verifies
4: doesn’t verify
Frédéric
5: verifies
3: doesn’t verify
Jean-Baptiste
9: verifies
4: doesn’t verify
Pierre-François
10: verifies
5: doesn’t verify
Danielle
1: doesn’t verify
1: doesn’t verify
Jean-Louis
3: doesn’t verify
6: verifies
SCORE TOTALS
42: verifies
29: doesn’t verify
RESULTS:
Hypothesis 1 is verified and validated, Hypothesis 2 isn’t verified and validated.
3.2 - Discussion:
The interviews’ results show us how easy it is to create a startup that uses new technologies such as VR as core in
their primary operations. Indeed most of the interviewees (4 profiles specialized in VR found on My Job glasses that
accepted to be interviewed out of 8 profiles specialized in VR in My Job Glasses in total) were part of a startup
company that is specialized in providing VR services to other companies. With background and experience with VR, a
specific type of technology with particularities, the project of using VR technology as a core asset to primary activities
of a company is feasible.
Companies that mostly adopt VR in their structure seem to do it following the design action model. VR is used in key
economic functions and primary activities that directly contribute in making profit, in the development of their
business brand and on an optimization of their sales. VR is a tool used to meet and satisfy the market’s needs, and
businesses needs to remain performing and competitive. One way for them is to be provided with VR services that
offer programming and integration of VR technology in their activities.
It is however not feasible with limited knowledge about VR. Given its relatively long time of apparition and adoption,
VR is a technology that evolves at a very fast pace. VR graphics and immersive sensors become more performing and
qualitative to provide more immersive VR experiences. VR users and clients have higher standards in terms of
technology and quality of experience as they are aware of the fast growing pace of VR technology. They however still
perceive it as leisure and entertainment, not as a tool they could use in their daily life. VR use therefore mainly
remains business oriented.
Furthermore, organizations which cannot keep up and have access to the newest technical progresses of VR hardly
remain competitive. This is why integrating VR hardware or VR software is not so easy given the current highly
qualitative VR contents on the VR market. The barrier of entry for new entrants is in addition mostly high. 4 out of the
7 interviewees use VR in their primary activities, in the service industry. This represents the majority of the sample,
and yet it is not always possible for companies to acquire and use VR.
VR content creation moreover seems to be an essential asset for companies overall. Many that have based their
primary activities on VR offer content creation services to other companies. The service industry is the most
19
represented industry in the sample. More they have experience in technology and essentially in VR, easier it is for
them to use this technology.
On the other hand, it is interesting to explain why so little adoption of VR in secondary activities or no adoption at all
by 2 of the 7 interviewees.
Not enough capital, already existing structure and mitigation of possible VR integration failure might explain their
choice. VR is judged as not worth the resource consumption. These actors do not already operate in the VR industry
and see VR as a competitive tool for differentiation, which doesn’t align with their priorities or activities.
VR is seen by them as obsolete or as useful for some, but not trustable and reliable enough to incorporate in the core
activities of the value chain. They sometimes have little knowledge about VR, it is a specific technology that has
known multiple evolutions and technical improvements over time. It is perceived subjectively and differently
according to each individual’s experience, which is in most cases for entertainment. This explains why VR is seen as
an obsolete technology, its potential for use and application is still not well known.
But even when knowing about its potential, would big corporations change their way of operating and take risks to
integrate VR more in their primary activities to remain competitive ? What would be the human/social effects of such
change ? Are there other substitute technologies that may even more limit the adoption of VR by companies and by
end users ?
4) Sources
Brigitte Borja de Mozota, 1998/2010??, “Management of design alliances, sustaining competitive advantage”, chapter
11, Structuring Strategic Design Management: Michael Porter's Value Chain, www.researchgate.net
Cyrus Mewawalla, 26 April 2022, Market Line report PDF: Virtual Reality: VR will become a $51bn market by
2030, but VR is still chasing mainstream appeal, globaldata.com
Grigore C. Burdea, Philippe Coiffet, 2013, Virtual Reality technology, 2nd edition, Wiley Interscience, John Wiley &
Sons. Inc., wiley.com
Jatin Pandey, 2019, Deductive Approach to Content Analysis, Qualitative Techniques for Workplace Data Analysis,
igi-global.com
Kenneth F. Hyde, 2000, Recognising deductive processes in qualitative research, Market Research: An International
Journal, Volume 3, Number 2, www-emerald-com.library.ez.neoma-bs.fr
Marketline, March 2021, MarketLine Industry Profile PDF, Global Virtual Reality, marketline.com Porter,
Michael E., 1985, "Competitive Advantage", Ch. 1, pp 11-15, 1985, The Free Press. New York, cam.ac.uk
Rowe, Mason, Dickel, Mann, Mockler, 1994, "Strategic Management: a methodological approach", 4th Edition,
Addison-Wesley. Reading Mass, cam.ac.uk
Ryan Bromsgrove, October 2021, Commercial VR in the Technology Adoption Life Cycle of individual end
consumers, vrcave.ca, https://blog.vrcave.ca/blog/commercial-vr-in-the-technology-adoption-life-cycle
William R. Sherman and Alan B Craig, 2003, Understanding Virtual Reality Interface, Application, and Design, The
Morgan Kaufmann Series in Computer Graphics Book, 2003 edition, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers
William R. Sherman, Alan B. Craig, 2018, Understanding Virtual Reality: Interface, Application, and Design,
2nd edition, Morgan Kaufmann Publisher
20