# Value Creation with Digital Twins: Application-Oriented Conceptual Framework and Case Study
## 4 Application-Oriented Digital Twin Framework
### Application-Oriented DTF  
The elements presented in this chapter are shown in their interaction in the application-oriented DTF in Figure 9. It contains all dimensions, sub-dimensions and specifications of the previous scientific DTF and uses the same color code to distinguish the three dimensions of value creation.The main difference between the application-oriented DTF and the scientific DTF consists of the decision to structure the framework as a closed-loop model and, in turn, to omit the three-dimensional representation. From a scientific point of view, desirable granularity is lost, but in return, a more operational view could be realized, which brings some advantages in practical use. With this change, further elements, which were missing in the scientific DTF or were only implicitly available, could be added as explicit graphical elements. An apparent addition is the integration of the DT as a prominent separate graphic element. As with the previous framework, many practitioners wondered where to locate the framework's namesake DT. Furthermore, the framework could be focused even more on value creation by integrating services, the value proposition, and the users for whom the DTs create value. In addition to the user, their interactions via the demanded and offered services, and their optional interpretation of the data was also integrated. In the revised framework, the product life cycle is centrally located, as many practitioners see it as the connecting element of internal and external value creation with DTs. In addition, twelve common activities have been integrated into the product life cycle phases, providing practitioners with the direct link points for the use cases they want to create.  
The data resources that flow bidirectionally back and forth between internal and external dimensions, between the DT and the user, and between the data sources (also data recipients) are now visualized with additional graphic elements. Another addition is the smart analysis box, in which applications and tools relevant to the preparation and structuring of data can be visualized. Further additions of technical elements, such as interfaces and connectivity solutions, were omitted in favor of clarity. In the application-oriented DTF, highly relevant elements, depending on the use case, can be easily added during instantiation, just as elements that do not exist or are not relevant can be removed. This makes the application-oriented DTF the required and called-for tool for practice.  
A significant change in the designations was made to the \"Value Creation Hierarchy\" sub-dimension in the scientific DTF, as it became apparent that practitioners did not intuitively understand this. In the application-oriented DTF, this sub-dimension is referred to as \"Product Management Hierarchy\", and the top level has been renamed \"Portfolio\", as the previous designation \"Master\" led to confusion, especially among practitioners from the IT sector. The common term \"product management\" was chosen since most practitioners with whom the research was conducted used a distinctly product-centric vocabulary, even if their companies offer intangible products or even pure services (for example, financial service providers). This is also the reason why the term \"product\" was kept for the data related to the real-world counterpart, and the term \"product\" was consistently added to the \"life cycle\" subdimension.  
Figure 9: Application-oriented conceptual reference framework for value creation with digital twins (application-oriented DTF).