What makes Business Ecosystems different in how we approach them, the answer lies in our mindset? Are our existing ways of approaching business design different and within this, how important is a radical mindshift in any Business Ecosystem thinking?

Business ecosystems do need to be understood as radically different from how ‘we’ have undertaken the way we have “gone about our business” and think this through for the potential promise it might offer. Most businesses operate within their protected environment of designing, building, optimising and going to market. It is very singular, and everything is channelled through them.

A single entity undergoes and contract with selected suppliers and often stays with them for many good reasons, they conduct their proprietary research, build there own concepts of products and services and undertake the build to deliver internally within their selected ecosystem of stakeholders. This works and continues to function, but up to a certain point.

Today, this often silo thinking does need to be challenged and at least an initial rethink for instance about Partner Ecosystems and the value they can bring in different approaches, thinking, market offerings and mindsets does lead on to the broader adoption of Business Ecosystems. Applying a radically different collaboration thinking for co-creation can offer significant benefits, returns and rewards.

In markets that are rapidly changing, solutions required are becoming more complex to design and the challenges needed to be overcome are getting tougher to resolve the design of a closed system meets constraints. Those systems are optimised for internal efficiencies, but they, over time, become rigid, and less agile to spot and adapt to changes happening at increasing pace.

Over time, the performance does seem, so often, to continue to spiral down, in finding radical or distinct solutions. Layering over time different and  additional processes and requirements that are required and placed upon them, so often due to the constraints imposed by limited resources, funds and access to broader knowledge, does alter the reactive nature of a business.

The organization itself does gets trapped in its own potential demise . Extracting efficent performance we lose “effective” performance, unable to rapidly respond to changing market conditions or customer needs.

The (un)settling effect

Performance “settles” and lacks that entrepreneurial energy and, even with all the extra effort or incentive, lacks the ‘sparks’ that do make a difference in product design, in new business activities or being comfortable enough to change the existing business model from fear, legacy and often, may I say it, the complacency of being comfortable with what you have got.

The result is an outcome yielding a steady return until the inevitable finally confronts you or the future leaders who takes over and recognizing the symptoms so often does require radical surgery.

Ecosystem thinking and designs open up the potential for change.

By adopting a more collaborative approach you draw in a network of diverse views, knowledge and opinion to challenge the existing paradigm and set a radical y different way to undertake business.

To achieve this, embracing a mind shift in thinking is crucial for effectively navigating and leveraging the dynamics of ecosystems.

Here are some of the most essential differentiating factors and recognitions or triggers that could prompt a shift in mindset needed for Business Ecosystems:

1. Interconnectedness:

• Difference:
  • Traditional Approach: Focus on standalone operations and competition.
  • Ecosystem Approach: Emphasizes interconnected relationships between suppliers, partners, competitors, and customers.
• Mindshift:
  • Recognizing that success is not solely determined by individual performance but by how well you collaborate and integrate within a broader network.

2. Collaboration Over Competition:

• Difference:
  • Traditional Approach: Emphasizes competition and market share.
  • Ecosystem Approach: Encourages collaboration to achieve common goals and mutual benefits.
• Mindshift:
  • Seeing competitors as potential collaborators and understanding the power of collective success.

3. Value Creation through Network Effects:

• Difference:
  • Traditional Approach: Value creation is often internal and product-centric.
  • Ecosystem Approach: Value is created through network effects, where the value of a product or service increases as more participants join the ecosystem.
• Mindshift:
  • Shifting from a product-centric mindset to understanding the value of broader network effects and external contributions.

4. Open Innovation:

• Difference:
  • Traditional Approach: Innovation often occurs internally within the organization.
  • Ecosystem Approach: Embraces open innovation, where ideas, resources, and expertise are sourced from external partners.
• Mindshift:
  • Recognizing that innovation can come from various sources beyond the organisation’s boundaries.

5. Customer-Centric Focus:

• Difference:
  • Traditional Approach: Customer focus, but often limited to the company’s products or services.
  • Ecosystem Approach: A holistic customer-centric focus considering the entire customer journey and experience within the broader ecosystem.
• Mindshift:
  • Understanding that the entire ecosystem influences customer satisfaction and loyalty, not just individual transactions.

Recognizing the external Triggers for a Mind shift for thinking about Business Ecosystems

• Market Disruptions: Disruptions, such as technological advancements or changes in consumer behaviour, can prompt a reassessment of traditional business models.
• Competitive Pressures: Increased competition or the emergence of new players adopting ecosystem approaches can push organizations to reconsider their strategies.
• Customer Expectations: Changing customer expectations for seamless and integrated experiences may drive a shift towards ecosystem thinking.
• Industry Trends: Observing successful ecosystem models in similar industries can inspire a reevaluation of business strategies.
• Regulatory Changes: New regulations or industry standards may require businesses to collaborate more effectively within an ecosystem.

A Mindshift enhances distinctive personal and business needs required today:

• Adaptability: Business ecosystems thrive on adaptability and responsiveness to change. A mindset shift enables organizations to navigate evolving landscapes more effectively.
• Innovation: Ecosystems foster innovation through diverse perspectives and collaborative efforts. A mindset focused on openness and collaboration enhances innovation capabilities.
• Resilience: Business ecosystems can provide a more resilient structure as entities within the network can support each other during challenges. A mindset shift helps organizations embrace this collective resilience.

Business Ecosystems are radically different.

They require an actual opening up, a willingness to share and collaborate, and a belief that co-creation brings growing knowledge, insights, diversity of opinion and potential validation to make real change. We can challenge and construct radically different business models that offer real potential for radically connecting those past individual solutions into a bundle of more oriented, market- and customer-looking solutions.

We can offer combined solutions that connect many fragmented parts not able to be fully achieved in a single organization into a new collaborative offering that solves customers problems, reducing their complexities within transactions, improving levels of satisfaction and gratification, providing a more seamless, effective and efficient way to go about their business, personal or social need.

In summary, a mind shift towards the building blocks of business ecosystems is essential for organizations to stay competitive, foster innovation, and adapt to the evolving business landscape. Triggers for this reflection often arise from external changes or internal recognition of the limitations of traditional business models.

Still, more importantly, it is our willingness to open up our thinking and achieve a mindset shift of how to undertake business in the future, in open, highly collaborative ways of mutual sharing of the value and returns has greater sustaining potential.

The post Knowing the different mindsets for Business Ecosystem Thinking? first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

“Making something harmonious” often means we have to reconcile differences to balance out the tensions and issues to enable and make them compatible to work.

“Fusing” human engagement with technology enablement involves creating a harmonious integration of human collaboration and technological tools to enable an ecosystem’s successful development and operation. Is that possible?

How do we go about evaluating all the possible needs of customers, as they are mostly our success arbitrators? We must gain insights and refer through multiple information sources- digital data and direct human responses – than ever before; these insights are becoming essential to our businesses.

Calibrating the right way to use technology to create mutual benefit is an increasing theme across businesses, which means we need high levels of interdependence.

We must strive towards this “harmony.”

What do we need to consider? Leveraging the strengths of both human creativity and technological efficiency needs a pathway to follow that can enable an ecosystem through this fusion of making the human and technology sides work.

I loved this quote: “Two companies could roll out the same technology, but one might be a success, and one might fail,” says Nick Bouch, data and analytics partner at PwC UK. “The difference comes down to culture, communication, trust, and understanding—all human qualities. You need those things before technology can add any value. You need a balance of humanity and technology.” So it seems one seemingly comes before the other.

We need to work through the following, not in any specific order, as it depends on independent assessments. Still, all these shown below have their place to be considered or determined, especially if you are building out an ecosystem of collaborators.

Identify Ecosystem Goals and Stakeholders: Clearly define the goals and objectives of the ecosystem. Identify the different stakeholders involved, including individuals, organizations, and partners.

Human-Centered Design: Begin with a human-centered approach. Understand the needs, preferences, and pain points of the stakeholders. Design solutions that resonate with them and address their challenges.

Select Appropriate Technologies: Choose technologies that align with the ecosystem’s goals and the needs of stakeholders. Consider tools for communication, collaboration, data sharing, and decision-making.

Collaborative Platform Integration: Implement collaborative platforms facilitating communication and collaboration among ecosystem participants. These platforms can include project management tools, shared workspaces, and virtual meeting spaces.

Training and Skill Development: Provide training and support to ecosystem stakeholders on effectively using the chosen technologies. This ensures everyone is comfortable with the tools and can maximize their benefits.

Open Communication Channels: Establish open communication channels encouraging transparency and active engagement. Use technology to facilitate ongoing discussions, updates, and feedback loops.

Co-Creation and Ideation: Use technology-enabled platforms to engage stakeholders in co-creation and ideation. Encourage sharing ideas, feedback, and suggestions to foster a collaborative environment.

Virtual Collaboration Events: Organize virtual events, workshops, and hackathons that leverage technology to bring stakeholders together for brainstorming, problem-solving, and innovation.

Data Sharing and Analysis: Employ technology to enable data sharing and analysis. Collect and analyze relevant data to inform decision-making, identify trends, and measure progress toward ecosystem goals.

Feedback Integration: Continuously gather stakeholder feedback through surveys, polls, and interactive discussions. Use technology to process this feedback and iterate on ecosystem strategies.

Innovation Challenges and Competitions: Host innovation challenges or competitions that encourage stakeholders to develop solutions using technology. This fosters engagement and generates fresh ideas.

Digital Storytelling: Utilize technology to share success stories, case studies, and updates within the ecosystem. Digital storytelling can inspire participation and showcase the impact of collaboration.

Empowerment and Ownership: Empower stakeholders to take ownership of their roles within the ecosystem. Use technology to provide them with tools to contribute, collaborate, and lead initiatives.

Regular Assessments and Adaptation: Regularly assess the effectiveness of the technology-enabled strategies. Adapt and refine approaches based on feedback, data insights, and changing stakeholder needs.

Cultivate a Collaborative Culture: Foster a culture of collaboration, innovation, and continuous learning within the ecosystem. Technology can support this culture by providing the means for constant interaction and knowledge sharing.

By integrating technology as an enabler of collaboration, communication, and data exchange while keeping human engagement and creativity at the forefront, you can create a dynamic ecosystem that thrives on innovation, inclusivity, and shared goals.

The post Fusing Human and Technology to Enable Innovation Ecosystems to Thrive first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

This month I am completing a series on cross-sector innovation ecosystem collaborations. This is the second post that I am sharing here on my dedicated ecosystem thinking site and also through my paul4innovating posting site, which has different audiences to discuss this with.

For me, cross-sector collaborations are becoming essential to our future in tackling highly complex challenging issues that need collaborative resolution

Cross-sector innovation ecosystem collaborations do have real differences and I am to draw these out and my aim is to draw these out in this series.

There is a unique skill set that needs identifying and consider based upon the following and these include:

1. Interdisciplinary thinking: Participants in cross-sector collaborations must be able to think outside of their respective fields and understand the perspectives of other sectors. They should be able to integrate different knowledge domains and apply them to complex problems.
2. Communication and collaboration: Effective communication and collaboration skills are essential for building relationships and trust among participants. Participants must be able to share ideas, give and receive feedback, and work towards shared objectives.
3. Creativity and innovation: Participants must be able to generate creative ideas and innovative solutions to complex problems. They should be comfortable with taking risks and experimenting with new approaches.
4. Adaptability and flexibility: Cross-sector collaborations are often dynamic and unpredictable. Participants must be able to adapt to changing circumstances and be flexible in their approaches to problem-solving.
5. Project management: Effective project management skills are essential for keeping cross-sector collaborations on track. Participants should be able to manage timelines, budgets, and resources, as well as measure progress and evaluate outcomes.
6. Cultural competence: Participants must be able to navigate cultural differences and understand the diverse backgrounds and experiences of other participants. They should be able to work in multicultural teams and be sensitive to different cultural norms and practices.
7. Strategic thinking: Participants should be able to think strategically and understand the broader context of the collaboration. They should be able to identify opportunities and challenges, assess risks and benefits, and develop strategies to achieve the collaboration’s objectives.
8. Cultural Differences: Cross-sector collaboration can bring together individuals from different backgrounds, cultures, and working styles. It is essential to recognize and address these differences to create an inclusive and collaborative environment.
9. Intellectual Property: When collaborating across sectors, intellectual property (IP) ownership and protection can become more complex. It is important to establish clear guidelines and agreements regarding IP ownership and use to avoid any potential legal issues.
10. Governance: The governance structure of the collaboration should be well-defined and established. It should clearly define the roles and responsibilities of each participant, as well as the decision-making process.
11. Funding and Resources: Collaboration across sectors can require significant funding and resources. A clear plan for funding and resource allocation should be developed early on to ensure the collaboration is sustainable.
12. Measurement and Evaluation: To ensure the success of the collaboration, it is important to develop clear metrics for measuring progress and evaluating outcomes. These metrics should be agreed upon by all participants and monitored regularly to ensure the collaboration is meeting its goals.
13. Regulatory Compliance: Depending on the sectors involved in the collaboration, there may be regulatory compliance issues to consider. It is essential to understand and comply with any relevant regulations to avoid any legal or reputational risks.
14. Communication and Engagement: Effective communication and engagement with all stakeholders, including participants, sponsors, and the broader community, is crucial for the success of the collaboration. Regular updates and feedback mechanisms should be established to ensure everyone is informed and engaged.

In summary here, overall, cross-sector innovation collaborations require participants with a diverse set of skills and perspectives who are committed to working together towards shared goals. Effective cross-sector collaboration requires a willingness to learn from others, build relationships, and work towards common objectives in a collaborative and inclusive manner.

Although many are required for both single and cross-collaborations, it is where you often place the emphasis on these that makes them more relevant or essential to ensure you have these covered.

What specific toolkit is required for cross-sector innovation collaborations?

Cross-sector innovation collaborations require a variety of tools and resources to support effective communication, collaboration, and project management. Specific tools that need to be available, compared within the consortium so these have the robustness to meet all the stages of the challenge within any cross-sector innovation collaborations include:

1. Project management software: Software tools such as Asana, Trello, or Basecamp can be helpful for managing tasks, timelines, and project resources across multiple teams and stakeholders.
2. Virtual collaboration tools: Platforms like Zoom, Skype, Team or Google Meet can facilitate virtual meetings, videoconferencing, and remote collaboration across different locations and time zones.
3. Knowledge management systems: Knowledge management systems such as Confluence, SharePoint, or Google Drive can help to centralize project information, documents, and data in a shared online space.
4. Innovation management software: Innovation management software such as IdeaScale, Brightidea, Wazoku, QMarkets, Sopheon or Hype Innovation can facilitate ideation, collaboration, and feedback among different stakeholders, as well as track and measure the impact of innovation initiatives.
5. Intellectual property management tools: Tools such as PatSnap, Lexus Nexus, IPlytics, and Clarivate Innography can help to manage intellectual property rights, patents, and trademarks across different organizations and sectors.
6. Cultural competence training: Cultural competence training can help to promote understanding and communication across different cultures and diverse backgrounds, improving collaboration and reducing the risk of misunderstandings and conflicts.
7. Data analytics and visualization tools: Tools such as Tableau, Microsoft Power BI, Qlink Sense, Looker or Domo can help to analyze and visualize complex data sets, enabling stakeholders to make data-driven decisions and measure the impact of innovation initiatives.

Overall, the specific toolkit required for cross-sector innovation collaborations will depend on the nature of the collaboration, the goals and objectives, and the stakeholders involved. The tools should be carefully selected to support effective communication, collaboration, and project management across all the partners involved, and should be adaptable and flexible enough to meet the changing needs of the collaboration over time. Getting different organizations to find common platforms takes time, patience and negotiations to offset existing agreements, cloud differences and specific licence arrangements.

Post three builds out different aspects of CSIC and what to consider as “top line” needs to compare and broadly agree as the ‘going-in’ position

*Researched and developed, including separate validations from chat.openai.com

The post Specific skills and toolkits are needed for cross-sector innovation ecosystem collaborations. first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

This month I am completing a series on cross-sector innovation ecosystem collaborations. This is the second post that I am sharing on both my dedicated ecosystem thinking site and also through my paul4innovating posting site, which has different audiences to discuss this with.

For me, cross-sector collaborations are becoming essential to our future in tackling highly complex challenging issues that need collaborative resolution.

Cross-sector innovation ecosystem collaborations do have real differences and my aim is to draw these out in this series.

There is a unique skill set that needs identifying and considered based upon the following, these include:

1. Interdisciplinary thinking: Participants in cross-sector collaborations must be able to think outside of their respective fields and understand the perspectives of other sectors. They should be able to integrate different knowledge domains and apply them to complex problems.
2. Communication and collaboration: Effective communication and collaboration skills are essential for building relationships and trust among participants. Participants must be able to share ideas, give and receive feedback, and work towards shared objectives.
3. Creativity and innovation: Participants must be able to generate creative ideas and innovative solutions to complex problems. They should be comfortable with taking risks and experimenting with new approaches.
4. Adaptability and flexibility: Cross-sector collaborations are often dynamic and unpredictable. Participants must be able to adapt to changing circumstances and be flexible in their approaches to problem-solving.
5. Project management: Effective project management skills are essential for keeping cross-sector collaborations on track. Participants should be able to manage timelines, budgets, and resources, as well as measure progress and evaluate outcomes.
6. Cultural competence: Participants must be able to navigate cultural differences and understand the diverse backgrounds and experiences of other participants. They should be able to work in multicultural teams and be sensitive to different cultural norms and practices.
7. Strategic thinking: Participants should be able to think strategically and understand the broader context of the collaboration. They should be able to identify opportunities and challenges, assess risks and benefits, and develop strategies to achieve the collaboration’s objectives.
8. Cultural Differences: Cross-sector collaboration can bring together individuals from different backgrounds, cultures, and working styles. It is essential to recognize and address these differences to create an inclusive and collaborative environment.
9. Intellectual Property: When collaborating across sectors, intellectual property (IP) ownership and protection can become more complex. It is important to establish clear guidelines and agreements regarding IP ownership and use to avoid any potential legal issues.
10. Governance: The governance structure of the collaboration should be well-defined and established. It should clearly define the roles and responsibilities of each participant, as well as the decision-making process.
11. Funding and Resources: Collaboration across sectors can require significant funding and resources. A clear plan for funding and resource allocation should be developed early on to ensure the collaboration is sustainable.
12. Measurement and Evaluation: To ensure the success of the collaboration, it is important to develop clear metrics for measuring progress and evaluating outcomes. These metrics should be agreed upon by all participants and monitored regularly to ensure the collaboration is meeting its goals.
13. Regulatory Compliance: Depending on the sectors involved in the collaboration, there may be regulatory compliance issues to consider. It is essential to understand and comply with any relevant regulations to avoid any legal or reputational risks.
14. Communication and Engagement: Effective communication and engagement with all stakeholders, including participants, sponsors, and the broader community, is crucial for the success of the collaboration. Regular updates and feedback mechanisms should be established to ensure everyone is informed and engaged.

In summary here, overall, cross-sector innovation collaborations require participants with a diverse set of skills and perspectives who are committed to working together towards shared goals. Effective cross-sector collaboration requires a willingness to learn from others, build relationships, and work towards common objectives in a collaborative and inclusive manner.

Although many are required for both single and cross-collaborations, it is where you often place the emphasis on these that makes them more relevant or essential to ensure you have these covered.

What specific toolkit is required for cross-sector innovation collaborations?

Cross-sector innovation collaborations require a variety of tools and resources to support effective communication, collaboration, and project management. Specific tools that need to be available, within the consortium so these have the robustness to meet all the stages of the challenge within any cross-sector innovation collaborations include:

1. Project management software: Software tools such as Asana, Trello, or Basecamp can be helpful for managing tasks, timelines, and project resources across multiple teams and stakeholders.
2. Virtual collaboration tools: Platforms like Zoom, Skype, Team or Google Meet can facilitate virtual meetings, videoconferencing, and remote collaboration across different locations and time zones.
3. Knowledge management systems: Knowledge management systems such as Confluence, SharePoint, or Google Drive can help to centralize project information, documents, and data in a shared online space.
4. Innovation management software: Innovation management software such as IdeaScale, Brightidea, Wazoku, QMarkets, Sopheon or Hype Innovation can facilitate ideation, collaboration, and feedback among different stakeholders, as well as track and measure the impact of innovation initiatives.
5. Intellectual property management tools: Tools such as PatSnap, Lexus Nexus, IPlytics, and Clarivate Innography can help to manage intellectual property rights, patents, and trademarks across different organizations and sectors.
6. Cultural competence training: Cultural competence training can help to promote understanding and communication across different cultures and diverse backgrounds, improving collaboration and reducing the risk of misunderstandings and conflicts.
7. Data analytics and visualization tools: Tools such as Tableau, Microsoft Power BI, Qlink Sense, Looker or Domo can help to analyze and visualize complex data sets, enabling stakeholders to make data-driven decisions and measure the impact of innovation initiatives.

Overall, the specific toolkit required for cross-sector innovation collaborations will depend on the nature of the collaboration, the goals and objectives, and the stakeholders involved. The tools should be carefully selected to support effective communication, collaboration, and project management across all the partners involved, and should be adaptable and flexible enough to meet the changing needs of the collaboration over time. Getting different organizations to find common platforms takes time, patience and negotiations to offset existing agreements, cloud differences and specific licence arrangements.

Post three builds out different aspects of CSIC and what to consider as “top line” needs to compare and broadly agree as the ‘going-in’ position

*Researched and developed, including separate validations from chat.openai.com

The post Specific skills and toolkits are needed for cross-sector innovation ecosystem collaborations. first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

For nearly all business entities, the ability to fully connect up the organization across people, processes, design, structures and strategies is always a work-in-progress, never worked upon to the fullest extent and rarely achieved without the most radical transformation.

I come up against the barriers to change caught up consistently in this lack of interoperability. So I have to bring it into this exploring ecosystem and platform designs posting views.

What do we miss in not having that connectivity? Recognizing silos of unconnected knowledge needs changing; we need to leverage all of our diversity and expertise. Do you really know your capabilities, competencies and capacities?

1. Focusing on making technology work across organizations, internally and externally, with partners that share a common purpose. Our need is to find new growth engines and, more, sustaining. business value. it is our understanding to make exchanges work to enable creativity, and we need technology across processes to talk to each other- called interoperability.
2. Uncertainty, fear of the unknown, reluctance to share and partner, or to mutually “pool” intellectual property or our research know-how in a shared collaborative effort is hard. We often hold onto our knowledge as our “source of power”, this we need to let go of and embrace a new way of believing, trusting and collaborating. We will gain far more than we lose.
3. We must ask the important questions and fully recognize the answer to “what do we do well? How can we leverage and build out from this?” Are we investing enough time in networking, exchanging insights or building relationships? Knowing our core capabilities, competencies, and capacities is essential.

Let’s tackle one tough one- interoperability makes or breaks much of what we struggle to do -exchange knowledge.

Now I do not want to get caught up in the “weeds” of definitions, challenges or issues relating to interoperability. Still, this need is essential if we want to achieve open connectivity to exchange data, thinking, dialogues etc.

So what’s interoperability?

Think of interoperability as how technologies function in conjunction with other technologies. Take email as that ability to communicate how email needs to work makes each system (Google, Thunderbird, Yahoo etc.) interoperable. We wouldn’t be able to send an email using Gmail to someone’s Thunderbird email account if it was not interoperable.

Thankfully we have a lot of open, available tools that enable interoperability.

APIs — application programming interfaces — allow people to use Google or Facebook, or Thunderbird logins to sign in to other companies websites. For example, Twitter data such as tweets, conversation threads and query language using an API.

Open APIs provide the ability for developers with access to proprietary software applications or web services and allow computer programs to ‘talk’ to one another so they can request and share information.

So interoperability is the design of things to work together, having to conform to operating standards to achieve compatibility and integration; they can extend, sync, share, and enable a common exchange and understanding between disparate systems.

Recognising the importance of interoperability

Efficient automated data sharing between applications, databases, and other computer systems is crucial throughout networked computerized systems.

It is difficult for organizations to resolve this sharing due to layering or hundreds of legacy systems written over time in different codes that hold “open sharing” back. This constrains system-to-system performance.

Achieving recognition of that interoperability, to make use and form of the four levels of interoperability: foundational, structural, semantic, and organizational can all become cross-cutting through technological innovations to ensure consent, security, and integrated workflows move smoothly between different groups.

When being discussed, open standards rely on a broadly consultative and inclusive grouping of all those holding a stake in recognising that a common standard is developed.

The difference discussed and debated of each competing system to establish the technical and economic merits, demerits and feasibility of a proposed common or standards protocol to get to a common position. This can take years and numerous meetings before the resulting common document is endorsed as a common standard.

Many organizations are dedicated to interoperability. They have in common that they want to push the development of the World Wide Web towards the semantic web. The goal of the Semantic Web is to make Internet data machine-readable.

We must not make the mistake of muddling interoperability with intraoperability that strictly focuses on operations within specific parameters. For example, it describes the exchange of data between systems that are fundamentally the same and generally developed by the same vendor (specialised and specific). There’s little need for custom extensions or working on opening up to extend beyond a given limited boundary.

Data exchange is difficult or limited if there is a lack of interoperability across partners due to different standards. This can be solved by having a network where the exchange between all providers and organizations builds upon their software those abilities to talk and exchange data. Often this is no easy task and can take significant time if data exchanges are complicated.

Improving interoperability includes standardization of terminology and normalization of data to those standards, which can be one of the fundamental blockages to why platform adoption still struggles.

The task is complex and needs significant orchestration and leadership to “set” these standards to achieve this potential interoperability.

Those that choose to collaborate become the natural ecosystem participants if the result provides a substantial advantage in advancing and unlocking complexity and communicating on common challenges and concepts of mutual value.

The post Tackling interoperability is critical to resolve first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

I want to relate adoption back to business platforms and anchor it in the process.

Today business platform adoption is a struggle. It needs a clear revisiting of the theory of diffusion and adoption to extract the relevant points of necessary practice.

What is vitally needed is the recognition that deciding on adopting a business platform approach has five stages or decision points to go through.

So often, platform providers automatically go to the assumption that their platform will be adopted. It simply will not without working through and gaining confirmation the five stages of adoption are clarified.

The five stages for business platform adoption decision.

Each of these needs a definitive engagement process by the business platform provider. Passing through the five stages of adoption needs relevance, identification and building out the relationship to pass through all these as distinct cascading steps.

Awareness and Knowledge – refer to a customer’s acknowledgement of the presence or existence of the new business platform and where they form a general perception of what it might entail. The intersection of need recognition often drives it through consistent education and marketing communications to show client value, not the platform provider’s prowess. This is the point of being inspired to find out more.

Persuasion and Interest – this occurs when a client processes the available information associated with the platform and considers the product or service’s appeal on this and its relevant value or potential to them Here, the client actively seeks out information and details and begins engagement. The critical point for any platform provider to manage well.

Decision and Assessment – Considering the persuasion factors, the client will decide whether to adopt, delay any decision, or reject the platform. Their activity in seeking advice, gathering data and comparing or making different assessments happen clearly here and need the contacted platform provider to understand the level of assessment and the issues. Here, costs begin to kick in, considering the switching costs and fresh investment needs and weighing the advantages. This is the hardest stage to understand. The ability to build a solid business case at this point is essential. My recent post, “Exploring points of value in adopting business platforms,” has some relevancy here.

Implementation and Exploration – These are the series of activities to put the platform to use in exploring its (multiple) points of value and validating these. The client employs the platform to a varying learning degree. The usefulness, impacts, and costs are determined, and they may search for further support or relevance value about it. Here the business platform provider needs to be really “on the case” in strengthening the engagement and anchoring it into more of a forward-looking partnership but working in parallel on this learning path, as adoption is a gradual journey.

Confirmation and Adoption– is mostly concerned with post-adoption behaviour exhibited by the adopter, reinforced by the platform’s actual delivery against the relative advantage ‘claims,’ its complexity and compatibility on their understandings. The individual finalizes their decision to continue using it and makes that ultimate investment in forming an ongoing, long-term partnership for extending its use to its full potential.

Develop this five stages  process of engagement in any adoption of business platforms

Suppose these five stages are not followed in the business platform adoption process; there is a higher probability of poor engagement, lost time in chasing leads, being distracted, and not getting the end result intended or stated or being the offering of compelling value believed as the stages of adoption were not followed and anchored in these transition points of understanding.

So I would always recommend understanding the theory of diffusion and adoption offered by Everitt Rogers in his Diffusion and Adoption theories for innovation ; it is as relevant for Business Platform adoption today as when he offered this for “straightforward” innovation.

Platforms are the new meeting place for innovation to happen. They diffuse and adopt as their key value but getting clients to think this through needs these five decision stages

The post The difficulties of adoption for the business platform first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.