Continuing the Uber’s business model discussion, this article provides practical examples of startups that have ‘chosen to create a mobile-enabled service business rather than just a technology layer’.
“There is no doubt to us that if we want to be successful, and if we want to be in the cleaning of clothes business, then we have to own that business,” says one of the articles interviewees. “It’s very difficult to get the kind of consistent quality that you need to provide to keep customers without doing it yourself.”
I too agree that it is better for business to own more of its core process, not less. And what do you think?
A ‘back-to-basics’ article from the Harvard Business Review on disruptive innovation. Concerned that:
In our experience, too many people who speak of “disruption” have not read a serious book or article on the subject. Too frequently, they use the term loosely to invoke the concept of innovation in support of whatever it is they wish to do. Many researchers, writers, and consultants use “disruptive innovation” to describe any situation in which an industry is shaken up and previously successful incumbents stumble. But that’s much too broad a usage.
its authors set out to recapture the original tenets of the theory of disruptive innovation and apply it to the Uber transportation company.
The 5 key contexts of Strategic Business Architecture series continues with this new article on how Strategic Business Architecture plays a critical bridging role between the external industry environment and enterprise Target Operating Model. Indeed, taking into account underlying industry dynamics creates a model that is flexible, agile and interconnected to channel enterprise resources to where needed.
A frank look at what strategy is by Jack Welch:
Strategy, then, is simply finding the big a-ha and setting a broad direction, putting the right people behind it, and then executing with an unyielding emphasis on continuous improvement. There’s no mystery to it!
Difficult to disagree with his view from the very top C-suite, although more technical detail on the ‘winning move’ is usually needed to ensure intended implementation the closer to the operational frontline it gets.