Technology changes. Yet, methodology remain. When managers develop strategies for their companies, many still use the methods and tools of the traditional organization. As mentioned in the previous post on the Lean Startup Business Model Pattern, there are new methodologies in town. However, the traditional business strategy formulation frameworks still fail to adapt technology change and the network economy, as well as the understanding of entrepreneurship as process but a whim. I reckon that there are some trajectories especially fruitful for adaption.
- Take Michal Porter’s frameworks for an example. How do you apply the value chain framework to networked businesses, two-sided markets (e.g. social networks, online dating, auction sites, search marketing, credit cards, banks, etc.) where manufacturing is not the locus of value creation . Management and consultants of all colors tend to stand by the former, but are the models still valid?
- Also consider whether entrepreneurs have the time and resources to sit down and carefully lay out their long-time strategy. Or whether strategy formulation should come as consequence of processes where resources are scarce and uncertainty is extreme. This calls for new frameworks that embrace entrepreneurial learning and change methodologies. To site Steven Blank, A Startup is Not a Smaller Version of a Large Company. Instead early stage ventures require their own tools and techniques.
- Commodification of web services, API’s and social media allows unstructured strategic models to become structured. That is, conceptual models would integrate data about your customers, such as user behavior and demographics to aid in decision support and increased responsiveness. Similarly, how does rapid collaboration and the free flow of information that are made possible with the social web affect the technology adoption life cycle?
The management challenges presented by entrepreneurship are different . Nevertheless, the management challenges presented by the networked economy (read cloud computing, social web, you get it) are different. Network companies create value by facilitating connections between two or more customers. Not by efficiency in A-to-B manufacturing. Too often managers try to use traditional strategy methodologies when dealing with new technology paradigms. Similar to what Clayton Christensen & co may think of as cramming. When dealing with the introduction of disruptive technologies of any kind, managers still have to align with entrepreneurial approaches. Indeed, there is a need for change methodologies.
 There are some excellent work on value networks and multi-sided markets by among others Ø. Fjeldstad and E. Andersen‘s Casting of the Chains , Tom Eisenmann, and the contributors at the Catalyst Code blog.
 This post was also inspired by Is Entrepreneurship a Management Science? by Eric Ries for Harvard Business Review