Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ravila White on May 11, 2009 at 7:09am

Page 2 comments –
We’ve stated “The business model innovation tools seem like a perfect extension to the analytical tools that Kim and Mauborgne…” this is passive voice due to the use of the word ‘seem’ use active voice to reinforce to the reader that they want to blend your method with the Blue Ocean method.

We’ve stated “Together they provide an interesting concept to question existing business models…” what is interesting about it and exactly what existing business models will your concept challenge? Tell the reader which models will be challenged and why. Perhaps provide a gaps analysis for your blended model against the others. May be more ‘compelling’ than interesting…again use active voice rather than passive to lead the reader down the road you’d like them to take.

We’ve stated “By blending some of Kim and Mauborgne’s analytical tools…” which tools exactly do you recommend blending and why. Give the reader the out of why the tools you recommend work best otherwise they might tell others to invest in the BOS book rather than yours. Its not about bashing other models, its showing how yours fills the gaps others do not address.

Page 3 comments
I got a bit lost on this page though I thought it was excellent. I had to reread it several times to grasp the concepts, however I’m a novice and trying to absorb as much knowledge as possible.
Page 6 comments
This is really good information. The focus appears to be from a competitor perspective which is great. It would be most helpful if we can drill down and show how such a concept might work within a company that must support or interact with other business units. We want the reader to understand how they can influence overall business operations and organizational develop by whether they report up the chain, need to garner support cross divisional or need to build a stronger team down-stream. Pardon me for not being aware, but are matrixed organizations taking hold in Europe? They are here in the states. Consider mentioning how such a blended model can support the matrixed organizations and any other organization models that are in demand today.
Overall comments
Remove all passive voice references and replace with active voice to give power and direction to the material. Are there some companies you can reference to show what happens when someone doesn’t use the BOS approach or practice business modeling. Try to find those as a kind of “don’t let this become you” sort of approach. Real examples leave a meaning in peoples mind….Fannie Mae perhaps.

Cheers....Ravila

Permalink Reply by Alex Osterwalder on May 12, 2009 at 8:38am

Ravila, thanks for the extensive feedback. Here my take:

P.2. passive voice & exactness: ABSOLUTELY! Point this out whenever we fall into passive voice or when we are a bit vague in our phrasing.

P.3. How exactly do you think we could improve this page to make it easier to read? Do you think it will be easier to read when it is part of the whole book, rather than a "disconnected" book chunk?

p.6. I think it would be dangerous to go into implementation issues, such as organization structures, at this point. That should be part of a follow-up book, or so. I believe there is only a certain amount of things that we can introduce at at time. Mrs Kaplan & Norton spread their Balanced Scorecard & Strategy Map approach over several books ;-)

Permalink Reply by Ray Lai on May 11, 2009 at 12:03pm

Alex,

Great to know that you have managed to blend BOS tools with BM. A great concept indeed.

I would like to share my approach in deploying BM/BSC in my practice. The sequence of activities is as follows:

a) Map your "As Is" BM of your current business
b) Identify dominant non-customers and their commonalities (as emphasized by BOS)
c) Use 6 paths to create differentiated value factors
d) Deploy BOS four actions framework to reposition the new and existing value factors (to add value and reduce cost simultaneously)
e) Position the new, "raised" and "reduced" factors into their respective blocks of BM
f) Review the "to be" BM to strengthen each of the blocks through differentiation and cost reduction process (note that activities b and c above may not generate enough information for the all the BM blocks).
f) Check this "to be" BM with your "as is" model and with those in the industry or your strongest competitors. Have you differentiated your BM enough to make competition irrelevant? Is your cost and pricing structure feasible for you to make a good profit?
f) Share and fine-tunre the "to be" BM with other key stakeholders where appropriate

We could be talking the same thing, but in a slight different way.

Ray

Permalink Reply by Ray Lai on May 11, 2009 at 12:59pm

Sorry,

I mean BM/BOS approach....

Permalink Reply by Alex Osterwalder on May 12, 2009 at 8:40am

Wonderful! Thanks for sharing. I consider you the thought leader on blending the BOS/BM Canvas and think you will be able (if willing) to share a lot of valuable insights on the business model innovation Hub once it goes beyond the book - to become a knowledge sharing platform on business model innovation. Interested?

Permalink Reply by Ray Lai on May 13, 2009 at 7:25am

Thanks, Alex. It will be interesting to be part of the action. I will share with the hub where I feel I can add value from time to time.

Permalink Reply by Mike Lachapelle on May 13, 2009 at 2:55pm

@Ray

Thanks for the ideas on using BOS. I like the way you summarized an approach to integrating the two approaches.

@Alex

Ray's contribution raises two thoughts. There may not be room in the book, so this may be an activity for the hub community. It would be great to have similar approach summaries (or even more detailed talks on implementation), of the various innovation approaches identified in the book. What would also be interesting is a guide to when a certain approach may be a best practice, or even a good practice.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page