wawc workshop 4.8.2005 how to evaluate the disruptiveness potential of new wireless technologies –...
Post on 21-Dec-2015
219 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
WAWC Workshop 4.8.2005
How to evaluate the disruptiveness potential of
new wireless technologies –
perspectives of ICT industry players
Liisa-Maija Sainio, Senior Lecturer
Themes of the presentation
1. Background & goal of the study
2. Propositional framework & concepts
3. Methodology
4. Propositional analysis
5. Conclusions
Background
- Doctoral dissertation project; 4 cases:
1) Bluetooth – national operator
2) WLAN – local operator A
3) Grid computing – software company
4) Mobile Peer-to-peer paradigm – comparison between device manufacturer and local operator B
Goal of the study
- How do firms interpret potentially disruptive technologies or operating models in their own strategic context
- Themes of the framework:
PR 1) Product characteristics and added value
PR 2) Technology and market uncertainty
PR 3) Changes in product-market positions
PR 4) Competence destruction
PR 5) Changes in value network positions
Amount of radical changes in business model?
Propositional framework
Disruptivenesspotential of anew technology
Strategicimportanceof a new technology
Changesin business model-Customer benefits-Core strategy-Resources-Value network
Features of
a disruptive
technology
PR 1
PR 2
PR 3
PR 4
PR 5
PR 6
Disruptivenesspotential of anew technology
Strategicimportanceof a new technology
Changesin business model-Customer benefits-Core strategy-Resources-Value network
Features of
a disruptive
technology
PR 1
PR 2
PR 3
PR 4
PR 5
PR 6
Concepts
Disruptive technology: (vs. technical operating model)
- Different value proposition
- Rapid improvements in performance; ultimately meets the needs of mainstream markets
- Destroys the competences of existing industry players
Business model: Unique combination of activities, resources and strategies with which the company delivers value to customers and captures profit from the market.
Methodology
- Combination of technology forecasting and strategic analysis
- Firm-level qualitative analysis and cross-case analysis (how did the framework function?)
- group discussions with ICT industry experts- Why group discussions?
- Efficient way of gathering rich data- Quick feedback (evaluation & control)
EXPERTISE IN TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMICS
www.lut.fi
Wiredconnection
Wireless, ad hocconnection
GRID COMPUTING: dynamic,virtual resource allocation
(storage, calculations)
BLUETOOTH:Personal Area Networking
~10 m
WLAN:wireless access in public
spaces ~100 m
MOBILE P2P PARADIGM:decentralized operating
model
Computing power:product service
Low-cost networkaccess, 3 G?
Low-cost cable replacement, hot spotservices
Vs. centralized client-server models
INVESTIGATED CASE TECHNOLOGIES:
Technology Proposition
Bluetooth /National operator
WLAN / Local operator A
Grid computing / Software company
Peer-to-peer paradigm /device manufacturer
Peer-to-peer paradigm / Local operator B
1: If the technology enables changes in product characteristics and added value, it is potentially disruptive.
Confirmed. - Convenience - Changes application-specific
Confirmed. - Mobility, flexibility - Added value especially strong in mobile devices - No behavioural changes, except in recognizing security risks
Confirmed. - Same functions with a different operating mode - Intelligence to shared servers - Increases performance criteria - Knowledge needed to gain trust
Confirmed. - Interesting new features (e.g., gaming), but difficult to determine their significance in markets
Partly confirmed. - Low-cost/free services for different types of communities - Competitive advantage not always clear compared with centralized approach
2: If the amount of uncertainty relating to markets and technology is high, the technology is potentially disruptive.
Confirmed. (excl. cable replacement where there is low uncertainty) - Service application market more uncertain
Confirmed. - Unreliability, natural disturbances, problems with security - wireless networks vs. 3G?
Not confirmed. - Technological uncertainty not high (esp. company-internal systems, clear benefits) - Market uncertainty high: Consumer market more uncertain
Not confirmed. - Technological uncertainty low: already established technologies, but lack of standardized approach and problems with security - Market uncertainty high: how to provide expected low-cost services, fragmentation of P2P solutions
3: If the technology enables or drives changes in product-market positions, it is potentially disruptive and of strategic importance to the firm.
Partly confirmed. - Better usability of existing applications - Effect on mission complementary - Customer trust a benefit in service market
Not confirmed. - Strong link to mission, but complementary, “something extra” - Needs the support of cable network
Confirmed. - Fit with current mission - As demand for data security grows, creates more business - Risk: commoditization of security solutions? moving to niche markets
Partly confirmed. - No effect on mission - Certain changes in product concept, scale? - Smartphones with p2p gaming as a market test
Confirmed. - Certain threat to mission; some cannibalization of SMS market, problems with service quality - Hard to create profitable service concepts (local usage, low volumes)
Technology Proposition
Bluetooth /National operator
WLAN / Local operator A
Grid computing / Software company
Peer-to-peer paradigm /device manufacturer
Peer-to-peer paradigm / Local operator B
4: If the technology is competence destroying, it is potentially disruptive and of strategic importance to the firm.
Not confirmed. - Logical continuation of current competences (service management, technological know-how and their integration)
Not confirmed. - Logical continuation of current competences (technical know-how & data security) - Risk: used to highly reliable systems attitude limitation?
Not confirmed. - Enhancement of current competences (distributed systems, CRM, wireless PKI)
Not confirmed. - No signs of competence disruption (competences: user interface, design, branding)
Partly confirmed. - Strong competence in voice & data traffic in different networks - If p2p reflects paradigm change, then disruption might occur
5: If the technology drives or enables changes in the positions of players in the value network, it is of strategic importance to the firm.
Not confirmed. - General development of mutual co-dependence, role of Bluetooth minor - Role of device manufacturers
Partly confirmed. - Electricity companies as potential new players. - WLAN to mobile phones what will happen?
Confirmed. - May increase dependency (more actors & partners) - Fragmentation of activities? - Role of operator controversial
Partly confirmed. - Changes in operators’ positions expected
Confirmed. - Growing role & bargaining power of customers! - Changes in device manufacturer’s role (?)
Different dimensions of disruptiveness:
• Improvements in performance criteria (Bluetooth)• Not taken seriously in its initial stages (”WLAN is
a bit of joke technology”)• May change pricing structures (P2P)• May change the product concept and distribution
model (Grid computing)• New functions to existing applications
Conclusions
- Results not generalizable!- The value in the process itself; providing a holistic
perspective on a new technology- Cross-case analysis result: Proposition 4 possibly not
reliable! - Contradiction between changes in product characteristics
and uncertainty vs. strategic response! Knowledge structures enforce the belief in current
competences Sign of vulnerability in the face of potentially disruptive
technologies
top related