... where visionaries, game changers, and challengers discuss business models
In the previous two postings I looked at three business models for non-profit health care that were identified and documented in this wonderful article from MIT Global Health:
In this posting I would like to bring all three of the approaches together in one canvas (using the Business Model Toolbox app for the iPad).
By putting the three models (in high form) on the same page we can see how each has individualized their approach to delivering health care to specific populations. This is what I have seen in the models:
Note: the cream coloured notes are elements common to all, or two of the 3 business models.
Smile Train (salmon)
I hope this was an interesting analysis. I look forward to comments, or other interpretations.
Further to the material you identified on Polarity Management, a good companion book to Johnson's approach is Roger Martin's The Opposable Mind: Winning Through Integrative Thinking. Martin is the Dean of the Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto. His thoughts are focussed on the ability to hold two opposing ideas at once and to reach a synthesis containing elements of both; refusing to accept trade-offs and conventional options.
He has another great book on design thinking called The Design of Business
I have had a brief read of Roger Martin's book The Opposable Mind..and have not seen his more recent one as yet. Books cost an arm and a leg here in Australia!
My favourite though is Dr Charles Hampden-Turner from Cambridge University. Charles writes about dilemma theory. I know him very well and for those interested will attach two of his papers- one on 9/11 and the other on GFC.
What I noticed was that the BM Canvas managed to penetrate into one's consciousness, something that the narrative alone did not do sufficiently. The use of different colored notes for comparing the comonalities and differences also increased comprehension.
Supplementing the article with the reference to the MIT piece increased the value of information.
The use of visuals to aid in understanding is a significant area of activity and research. Here's a talk given by Tom Wujec at TED on the subject of how the brain understands and how visuals help.
You may also want to look up work by Dave Sibbet of The Grove, and his books Visual Meetings and Visual Teams
However, I couldn't use the video resource as I happen to be deaf. In fact, it was the deafness that makes visual communications even more meaningful for me.
If you go to the TED site (link in my previous post) in the menu on the right side of the talk, there is an option for interactive transcript that you can use in conjunction with the video - or read separately.
That was a great resource! Thank you.
I have a question about the analysis for Smile Train.
I'm wondering if you could also look at the organisation as a multi-sided platform. In the pure sense it is not - however, I wonder if there is merit in seeing the done as almost a type of customer. Without the Donors there is no organisation - so making sure that donors are getting the right donor experience is essential - there are a lot of equally worthy organisations out there all vying for people's discretionary income. (Actually I looked at donating to Smile Train recently and because as a donor I could not easily find the information I wanted and so be assured of the donor experience I require, I have yet to commit to donating to them)
The reason I have been giving this issue of 'key partner as customer' some thought is that I run a small consultancy that relies on contractors as a key resource pool. This means that we also have to provide them with the kind of relationship and experience they want from being associated with our consultancy. To ensure that they get the focus they need to prefer working with us, I am experimenting with seeing them as a form of customer group. We certainly have to market/sell to them to get the stickly/loyal relationship we need.
This is a very interesting perspective Joanne, thank you for sharing.
It is similar to a third party pay model in which an organization receives funding from party A to deliver services to party B. Party A may be a Foundation, Philanthropic body, or a government. It is very important the organization realize Party A is a client segment and understand the nature of the value proposition to that organization to ensure the continuation of revenues. Often the captured value from Party B will be data to prove the social impact has happened, to justify the funding from Party A.
The concept of treating donors as a client segment, for which you are competing against other organizations, puts one into the same model as above. You have to be very clear and understand the value proposition you are delivering to the donors to justify them giving you their money. That would also imply a need to understand the channels to connect with those donors and the CRM to ensure the relationship is long-lasting.
I have done work with charitable organizations and with government departments, and I always emphasize the need to document the funding body as a client segment. Until now I have looked at donors more as a supplier (partner) than a client (someone for whom you are crafting a vp).
Well done, lots to think about.
where did you get your electronic template?
The canvas is a picture generated by the ipad app BMToolbox. Canvases created in the app can be exported as jpg images.