Price Waterhouse Coopers have recently launched a document outlining their new approach to outsourcing and collaboration. I think this is indicative of a massive swing in business towards more open ways of working and a decline in corporate monopoly.
Though there has been much written from the outside about co-design techniques being the fastest way for businesses to innovate, this is concrete evidence that the business world is changing its attitude away from defending assets towards inclusive participation.
What do you think?
Jun 12th, Andy Polaine said:
That ‘what do you think?” line at the end of your blog posts gets me every time.
I think that PWC and most others of their ilk aren’t really talking anything new when you read the details of the report. They always seem to have the knack of saying something really obvious in the most opaque and management jargon way possible. The real change highlighted in the report isn’t true participation or collaboration (where are the customers in the PWC model, for example?) nor much transparency, but thinking about growth beyond simple profits.
The evidence that nothing much has changed yet is in the least picked items cited as barriers to outsourcing:
‘ethics of moving jobs offshore’ (22%) and ‘concerns about public reaction’ (2%).
Unless I’ve read that wrong, this would seem to mean “we don’t care much about the ethics of it and we don’t care what the public think”.
Collaboration often (I would say always, for true collaboration) means flattening hierarchical structures. I wouldn’t imagine most folks from PWC or many of their clients would be able to deal with that that as a sensible way of working.
Jun 13th, Ivo said:
I think your right that my reading of this report is slightly idealistic. What you say about collaboration is true; it necessarily involves the dissolution of power and some kind of re-configuration of hierarchy. It becomes even more interesting then, that a company such as PWC (who I am not trying to adverstise here) are using the word ‘collaboration’. Though they are of course seeking profits and ,as you mention, are not very interested in public reaction, the fact that they are now looking to ‘collaboration’ as a motif for their business strategy marks a definite change in business ethos that is beoming more and more prevalent. My thinking on this has been influenced by the book Wikinomics; a discussion of how the web and new technologies have influenced business and production . You can read the first chapter here http://www.wikinomics.com/book/IntroAndOne.pdf
Jun 15th, Paul Thurston said:
I really can’t understand why you are so excited by this Ivo, the idea that large organisations are changing the way they work to a more collaborative way is nothing particularly new. What is exciting is the openness and democratisation of how they run, caused by much of the current buzz around people’s ability to participate through new technologies.
The idea that ‘their new approach to outsourcing’ is particularly puzzling given that almost all of PWC’s work has already been outsourced from other organisations…
Who is actually doing the work? who are they collaborating with? what does this actually mean and who is participationg in this?
Isn’t this another example of people talking rather than acting? The fact they are talking about these issues alone isn’t really that exciting is it…
Jun 15th, Ivo said:
Thanks Paul. Interesting stuff. I think the imporant point in all this is much broader than just what PWC are doing. I think that this document is a good indicator of a much deeper change in business ideology. Did you get a chance to read that pdf that I linked to above? that might help you understand this issue slightly better.
Its interesting that you separate collaboration from ‘openness and democractisation’. I see these three as bound up together; as Andy mentions above, collaboration ” often means flattening hierarchical structures”. Business is not ready yet to welcome ‘democratisation’ as a business model, but the fact that it is beginning to acknowledge the word ‘collaboration’ is indicative of a move towards this.
This change is not not simply being talked about. Businesss are acknowledgeing collaboration as the quickest way to innovate, the example of Lego’s design your own feature is a neat represenatation of how companies are having to collaborate with their users in order to give them what they want. What I am excited about is that this type of colalboration, which is being taken further than ever before, will result in more ethical, useful and responsible business in the future.
Jun 20th, Deborah Szebeko said:
I’m afraid Ivo I have to agree with Andy and Paul, I read the PWC document last night and found it extremely dry. I didn’t get any real sense that they cared or even understood the real benefits of collaborating with user. It felt like a tokenistic report using some of the current buzzwords.
On the other hand the Wickinomics book is much better and is a far more inspiring read!
Jun 21st, Paul Thurston said:
This is more interesting.
Our friends at 31 Volts in Holland have just posted these notes from AOL’s Ted Leonsis’ (Vice Chairman) keynote speech at an event in Washington a few months ago.
I feel that this is much more in line with what you are talking about. My favourite is his last point.
Here are some of the points some fella called Sam Decker captured from his presentation…
Give customers the opportunity to create, share, and self-express. It’s why there are 55 million blogs.
* Typically corporations want executives to ‘stay on message’ and to ‘be handled’…but that doesn’t pass customers’ sniff test. Mr. Leonsis, for example, typed his responses in chat room Q&A…typos and all.
* Their job at AOL was to surrender to the audience. To hold the mirror up to the audience.
* Fastest growing markets: Latino, African American, Boomers, Youth.
* Youth is an entirely different market (note: search Millenials on Google).
*He encourages kids to study Mandarin and Math. China is producing 260k college grade in Math. U.S. is producing 22k, 10k are foreign students.
* In a happiness study, factors of happiness are: Relationships, Community, Self-Expression, Giving Back, Pursuing a Higher Calling. Online can help these things.
* Book recommendation: “A Good Third Place”
* Ad spend is 8% online, while time per person per day is 17% online and growing. Shift in spend will follow.
* Early in his career he marketed to people. Now it’s marketing to algorithms and chipsets (ex: google). He gave a great story where his car told him he needed new tires and he went and got them…5 hours out of his day. Yet tire companies spend hundreds of millions to convince him to buy tires…his car prompted him. Customer is in control…your message needs to be there right time, right place. (my interpretation: strategic need for data flexibility, interoperability, democratization, normalization).
* Business Models 2.0 don’t need any marketing around them. AOL spent 10s of millions on spam technology. Someone recommended a “report spam” button. No marketing, self policing system. AOL now most spam-free system by user contribution.
* For his sports team, he captured 101 things customers didn’t like and he attacked them one at a time, and showed progress against them.
Create products that aren’t tricky.
* Embracing the customer: Listen (be open), Create good products with virtue, Make sharing easy, Mirror the community.
* 7 Web 2.0 Virtues: Generosity, Sharing, Politeness, Openness, Communication, Respect for Individuals, Diligence. He made note,
coincidentally, that the Jesuits considered these the secrets of success in life.
* Customers have two wallets: money and time.
Jun 25th, Deborah Szebeko said:
It also may be worth reading this report by David Simoes-Brown on the NESTA website.
Corporate open innovation – if it’s so good why isn’t everyone doing it?