Skip to main content

A framework for thinking about the success of Digital Economies

As promised in a previous post about information symmetry, I’ve now completed my first-draft framework for assessing the success of digital economies. 



Digital education was quite a tough ask as it’s a broad ranging subject. I think it condenses into three topics, though:
  • Higher education, because we’re in an age of discovery and people need to be both intellectually inquisitive and able to learn. My view is that a properly thought out higher education system which emphasises self-study is fundamental to the success of nations. I have major issues with the idea that those who wish to learn should have to pay for that learning excessively as it encourages competition based on perceived rather than real outcomes (why go to a college where it’s harder to get a good grade?)… but I accept that I’m a throwback in this regard and that commercial undergraduate education is here to stay. I don’t care about what subjects are being studied either – it’s simplistic to suggest that STEM topics are more valuable than traditional arts. The Digital Economy is a human-centric one.
  • Creative generalism, since the real skill of this age is being able to look at problems from an objective perspective and then assemble and arrange the right skills to solve it. Hyper-specialism is short-termist as inevitably in the connected global economy specialist skills become commoditised. A culture of collaboration is for life.
  • Digital business practices, which emphasise validated learning and collaboration above MBA-school processes and hierarchy. By ‘business practices’ I include all sectors equally.


So there’s a structure. Now I need to assemble some proper measures. No rest for the wicked.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Impacts of a handset leasing model on mobile telcos

Following yesterday's post, here's some related thinking on the impacts on operators of handset leasing. Handset sales represent around 25% of operator revenues in a typical European market, but generate only around 5% of margin. It may therefore be the case that the scenario described would lead operators to a more profitable structural model than exists today. Oil companies are consistently and acceptably profitable, despite being (literally in some cases) the ‘dumb pipe’ that operators are so desperate to avoid becoming. One of the reasons for the oil majors sustained profitability is clear focus on their role in the value chain – to supply the fuel that enables transportation, relying primarily on location, then brand and finally product innovation to compete. BP or Shell do not need to subsidise the purchase of a car in order to drive consumption of fuel because consumers are ‘hooked’ on it (it gets them from place to place) and there are many credible car manufacturers an...
9 comments
Read more

Differences between Industrial and Digital businesses

Since I'm stuck on a Eurostar crawling through western France I thought I'd use the downtime to share this table I've made on the differences between Industrial and Digital companies across the main business functions. A strange insight into how my mind works... but hopeful a useful summary!
10 comments
Read more

Value drivers for telecoms retail

I've been doing a really large number of driver trees recently - we've taken to using them on every project to get really into the guts of value creation for businesses and thus decide where to focus initiative development (How To Win, if you're keeping score). Anyhow, I had to pause for thought recently to work out how to represent the subscription aspect of telecoms retail for a client. Since it took me a minute, I thought I'd share... its lack of elegance suggests that its not quite right, although it was enough to demonstrate that there was a certain lack of coverage in the initiatives that my client was pursuing and thus spark a debate. Enjoy.
3 comments
Read more