|  | | | Reflections on Value Networks and Knowledge Innovation from the practitioner perspective. |
|
| | Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:08:00 PDT | | | The GenIsis Middleware Suite Version 2.0 for Value Networks was today released in its Alpha version to the development environment for testing. Running Oracle 10g, featuring a read/write API to the Workbook (desktop Excel 2003 client) and a read/write API to the web based Open GL Network Browser it is already beginning to set new processing records. The updated Excel 2003 client was tested successfully up to the limits of Excel 2003 (about 65 000 transactions and 1100 nodes), while the Access 2003 version was tested successfully with 290 000 transactions and 14 400 nodes. The Alpha version is being tested for implementation on client and server levels. Functional developments planned before shifting to a Beta version are integration with a normalized web based ONA survey, client optimization for MS Office 2007 and various expansions of business analytics. Testing with up to 1 million transactions and 200 000 nodes is planned for the fall as part of a client project. The Beta release is planned for Q1 2008, with a production release in Q2 2008. A full web services version remains planned for Q3 2008. | |
| | Mon, 30 Jul 2007 02:32:00 PDT | | As previously mentioned the Customer Value Network is the value network that enables an individual or organization to deliver value to their clients. The key to understanding how this value network is generated lies in taking a scenario driven perspective from the perspective of the individual or organization that is supposed to benefit from the products or services of an organization.
Let us take the travel industry as an example. One customer group of relevance could be frequent long haul business class flyers - usually a pretty interesting group since the relevant margins are pretty high! A challenge often voiced by airlines is how to increase the share of wallet and lifetime value. One way of approaching this is, instead of now just focusing on the transactions associated with boarding to departure of the airplane, let us consider the whole travel scenario that begins with the traveler needing to coordinate a complete round trip from their home to an event and back - including all the various travel modes (i.e. car, plane, taxi, hotel, etc.), the various stops (i.e. home, airport, customs, lounge, boarding etc). This would be our scenario. We can then move to identifying the roles and transactions needed to support this scenario using NetMat. Following this the key participants of the roles identified (i.e. travel transporter, lodging provider, travel mode switcher, etc) can be identified and GenIsis used to map out the relevant networks of organizational alliances and collaborations. When we then sequence the scenario carefully we are able to identify for example the switches between tangible and intangible transactions (often rather inconvenient media breaks), areas where third party services have merged to bridge interoperability issues, or areas where a tighter connection of roles through synchronized mechanisms would make a lot of sense.
Each of the above scenarios has its own value network that will be considered by the relevant industry value network(s). The important thing to recognize though is that the premium interoperability is often enabled by industries not directly related - Visa´s Global Platform, IT standards, common software applications, common hardware such as RFID, data standards such as XBRL etc. Any customer value network hence, by default, is enabled by numerous tradition industry verticals.
The fact that the customer value network leverages a number of different industry verticals makes it especially difficult to design solutions that increase the performance of these scenarios since the relevant industries are often heavily siloed and struggle to work in a cross-boundary manner for many reasons. It is for this reason that the other tiers are critical to understand as a specific industry value network needs to be architected to address the solution creation. In many cases we also see that besides the challenges of nurturing collaboration across industries per se, there are major challenges of nurturing collaboration among industry verticals of single organizations that have structured themselves in accordance with the verticals (this is typical in the software and services industries).
To summarize, the customer value network can be considered as that value network that manifests itself when turning the traditional value chain associated with a customer scenario into a value network perspective. The purpose of this is to identify the cross-industry roles, transactions, and participants that are part of the scenario, and based upon that architect a higher performance sequence that can be designed on tier 2 - the market space value network. | |
| | Sun, 29 Jul 2007 08:55:00 PDT | | One of the most fascinating application of value network centric thinking is in business development. In this particular area of thought, value networks centric concepts are used to identify business opportunities, create the right product/service solution to serve the opportunity, to deliver the solution to those participants of the market space in a fast and low cost manner, and finally to involve the final beneficiary of the solution in such a manner as to create the main street (versus early adopter) market from the earliest stages of solution development.
This approach relies on being able to identify, integrate and energize five interlocked value network levels (so called "tiers") and can be considered as follows:
Tier 1: The Customer Value Network - this is the value network that enables an individual or organization to deliver value to their clients. An example might be the value network associated with virtual work in a global organization. This value network is usually based on a series of well defined processes, supported by technology, that are shifted to a value network perspective using the GenIsis application suite in combination with NetMat exercises.
Tier 2: The Market Space Value Network - this is the value network that depicts the key roles and interactions across multiple vertical industries based on use cases identified with key participants of the identified value network roles. At this level the GenIsis application suite is used to process large amounts of data from multiple industries in order to identify the underlying high performance archetypes of the market space. These archetypes are hence distilled from information and then validated by the participants. A key goal is to identify white space (opportunities for interoperability) with a high probability of being addressed by emerging services and technologies. An example would be the manner in which the Visa Global Platform "glues" use cases together in the travel industry. The purpose of this value network is to deliver value to a customer based on a variety of use cases (i.e. supply chain integration).
Tier 3: The Industry Value Network - this is the value network that draws together the key participants of the Market Space Value Network and ancillary roles (i.e. technology vendors or system integrators) in order to create the space for architecting the high potential solutions needed to pre-empt identified interoperability opportunities in the Market Space Value Network. Key participants of the Market Space Value Network assume the roles of Customers and Competition in this value network, while others such as marketeers for the future solution and funders make an appearance. At this level the GenIsis application suite continues to provide relevant business intelligence for fleshing out the potential solutions, however the primary tool of relevance is the expanded form of the NetMat tool using wallmaps and NetMat+ that supports the prediction of the dynamics in the Market Space Value Network. The purpose of this value network is to find that solution which has the highest probability of meeting (emerging) market space value network needs and making this explicit enough to initiate a relevant development project to be executed by the Project value Network.
Tier 4: The Project Value Network - this is the value network that provides the framework for creating the actual solution decided upon, whereby it is not created by the project team, but adapted from standard proven methodologies such as proposed by PMI or Prince2. Key participants of the Industry Value Network are involved in the actual development of the solution and while the GenIsis application suite is used for simulation of the impact of various product design features, the primary tool is a NetMat customized for the project management approach of choice, and used for negotiations among stakeholders and general project management. The purpose of this value network is to create and deliver the solution identified by the Industry Value Network.
Tier 5: The Solution Value Network - this is the value network as supported by the solution created by the Project Value Network. It is based on the manner in which solution functionalities are linked in order to support the high performance workflow of the Market Space Value Network. The purpose of this value network is to support and enable the value proposition of the Customer Value Network. The GenIsis application suite is part of the embedded business intelligence of the solution and provides continual monitoring and simulation capability to optimize performance management.
When these five value networks tiers are integrated the opportunities for value network centric business development can quickly be seized and the organizational business model effectively shifted from an industrial production mode, to one of continuous co-creation and innovation of products/services with all participants of the market space. In future posts the issues of organizational forms, suitable management forms, financing models, and IP protection will be explored, along with a series of case studies where value network centric business development has helped jump-start and accelerate value creation both inside and outside of organizations in a manner that directly impacts the bottom line. | |
| | Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:31:00 PDT | | Hello everyone,
We are currently convening a value network with participants from the travel and hospitality industry in order to develop a "proof of concept" that integrates the GenIsis application suite with an ERP module delivered via a portal architecture. In collaboration with a major ERP vendor, their qualified solution providers, and a venture capital group the intent is to set up a 3-4 month project that integrates the relevant technology as a proof of concept. Design, execution, and delivery will be performed by the value network itself.
In order to support this effort we would like to invite members of the travel and hospitality industry to join the project and benefit from the relevant learning and (potentially) a first user advantage. The effort is currently intended to follow a research format with the ERP vendor providing basic cost coverage and everyone else contributing resources and data. The venture capital group would be providing advice on how to design the effort for later funding rounds.
If you, or anyone you know in the industry, is interested in such an exploratory effort please contact me. We are also currently negotiating what can be fed back into this group and what components of the technology solution provided as open source at www.openvna.com. Industry participants will be expected to provide operational data (under non-disclosure) that is then used for the "proof of concept".
One very interesting aspect of this effort is that contrary to the traditional approach of identifying value networks, or creating the conditions for them to emerge, we are consciously architecting the roles and participants based on some deep research efforts conducted earlier in this year. The intent is therefore to also prototype a process for conscious and explicit creation of value networks with resolution of all the relevant funding, IP, project management issues etc. | |
| | Sun, 22 Jul 2007 11:48:00 PDT | | We had a very interesting conversation recently about whether a software application (workflow focused) could be considered as the key participant in a role based on the fact that it had a degree of autonomous decision making capability due to embedded artificial intelligence routines. While software of any kind should usually be considered only a mechanism for enabling transactions or supporting activities in roles, the artificial intelligence component brings a new perspective into play.
The role traditionally describes a behavior that participants of that role evidence in executing transactions in the value network, i.e. the role of "Seller" would be focused on transacting deliverables such as proposals or products, while receiving deliverables such as inquiries and orders. Traditionally we would also assume that individuals participate in this role to enable its behavior.
Assume now that we have a piece of software that is able to perform all of the behaviors needed for the transactions independently of human support. Could the software then be considered a participant? I would definitely argue that this can and should be the case, although we need to look at the intangibles the relevant role is involved in. The higher the number of intangibles a role is involved in, the more I would assume that it operates in a complex environment and hence required higher sense making skills (rather than simple transaction processing). This is obviously the point that artificial intelligence can be considered as the growing capability of software to work in increasingly complex environments. The greater the artificial intelligence, the more capable the application is in handling growing complexity and hence assume roles transacting more and more intangibles.
In a similar vein we could draw upon the growth of functionalities in GenIsis to consider whether it could be nurtured to a point where it contains artificial intelligence and then assume a role in our own value network. To date, there are no artificial intelligence components embedded, however the first step there would not be a significant one at this stage (assuming the relevant client engagement of course).
The vision underlying GenIsis is the ability to architect optimal value networks for value conversion, and then to automatically design workflow to operationalize this. Earlier reflections had included seeing the value network itself as a neural network (we did some exploratory design in this direction last year) and hence if achieved, would in itself create value networks with an embedded intelligence / learning capability. The steps involved are creating the value network, shifting it to a performance simulator (Vensim plays this role currently), and then architecting workflow based on this networks driven "user interface". As the value network (powered by GenIsis) gains experience in architecting and applying value networks to workflow, it will then also be in a position to re-configure itself based on scenarios being handled and experiences gained in past workflow configuration (experience is here equated with feedback from the workflow system into the performance simulation). GenIsis hence assume the role of "workflow configurer" for the ERP system and works as (or even more) autonomously that a typical business process group in an organization. Compared to a "human" participant GenIsis would not need more or less guidance or support than any such "living" participant.
Overall therefore I would argue that the more intelligence is embedded in an application, the more suited it becomes to assuming a role just as is done by a human participant. The starting point will in any case having the application as a mechanism enabling transactions, and then moving "closer and closer" to the role as its learning capabilities grow. Can a value network perhaps be completely automated - I would definitely argue so and believe that this is already partially the case in many industrial areas.
From a technical development standpoint the next step would be to architect the roles as neural networks and to begin simulations to train the value networks for decision making. The ideal context for such an effort would be the white space of an industry value network with participants that are already closely aligned and seek to automate high value sequences (i.e. in relation to customer loyalty). | |
| | Sat, 21 Jul 2007 01:22:00 PDT | | In preparation of facilitating a major customer event for an ERP manufacturer, we are currently working on a version of NetMat that will enable users, after drafting an initial value network, to predict short, medium, and long term dynamics of the value network with reasonable accuracy. The theoretical base lies in the considerations behind the Delphi method for one and social network analysis (SNA) as applied to value networks thinking.
In this preparation we are consolidating a list of indicators (based on our benchmarking data base) and experiences in applying system dynamics modeling to value networks, in order to identify those roles, transactions, and white space that are most likely to shift over time, to then go through a simplified and dynamic Delphi approach that can be completed in around 10-20 minutes. There will be some similarities with the stock market type of trading approach taken in other predictive perspectives, however the key difference will lie in identifying the change points from a (value) network perspective.
The other piece of the equation is that you cannot simply look at a value network and predict its overall development. The challenge is to first use the value network to identify the scenarios served by the value network and then to identify the structural issues from a use case perspective. An example might be breaks in a tangible process that are in the process of being glued by services - the loyalty program industry in travel and transportation is a wonderful example of this, as are the developments in the credit card industry (Visa is playing a leading role here by the way).
The specific value that this exercise will entail is that often when using NetMat, participants will ask questions whether they should model the current or future state of the network. The default approach asks for modeling first the current state, and then reflecting on what the future state should look like. The shape of the future state to date has been based on applying the exchange analysis developed by Verna - in itself a powerful approach of course! Growing from the exchange analysis then, the predictive NetMat exercise will include not only the indicators from the expanded network analysis (VNA and SNA), but also draw upon probability prediction approaches and deeper understanding of structural indicators.
Just as NetMat is intended as a primer to value networks thinking (the next step usually involves a couple of yards of butcher paper on the table as started by Glenda Turner), the predictive NetMat exercise will also be a primer to the more complicated evaluations that will be enabled by GenIsis. As things develop in the next months we will be driving GenIsis to point directly and automatically to those points in the value network that are most susceptible to change from a short, medium, and long term perspective. Due to the fractal nature of value networks this definitely appears as a viable approach for migrating from a current to a future state.
So... NetMat+ here we come and watch out for some experience reports - the last months have seen solid long term accounts established in aerospace, telecommunications, ERP and FMCG industries whereby the average number of value network sessions being run is probably breaking 100/month by now. NetMat+ will accelerate even further of course - plus the planned addition of ONA components to NetMat. | |
| | Mon, 09 Jul 2007 02:41:00 PDT | | In the last week some interesting developments occured in respect to the technical roadmap of GenIsis I thought I would share - especially since writing about it helps me make sense of the relevant opportunities a lot more effectively.
Of special significance is that we have been invited to submit a proposal for integrating GenIsis into a leading CRM On Demand offering, whereby the invitation has come from the software house itself. They are additionally championing further partners to chip in significant development resources and also socialize the solution to be in their customer environment. On the business model side this is also interesting since the project will involve consciously architecting a value network and also applying value network principles in the project management itself. Commercially it is also the first move into solid six figure technology solution projects - which is in itself rather pleasing.
Another encouraging development was the request of a large German travel services provider to explore applying GenIsis to a years worth of transaction data (no doubt more than 10 million transactions). You might image we took a long deep breath when hearing this requirement, however recent efforts to refine the data model from a performance perspective, the addition of a powerful server hosting company to our partner network and some trial runs on a simple Oracle 10g application let us feel confident that this project can be delivered.
Frustrating on the other hand this week was that in development efforts it became very clear that we have reached the technical limits of our current development environment in Germany. The needed infrastructure is also going beyond what we usually pick up at the local computer store or rebuild ourselves - anyone have connections to help us out? Need a handful of loaded high performance workstations...
The exciting times continue and it seems as if we are truly turning onto mainstreet here and being invited to some very new and promising parties! | |
| | Tue, 03 Jul 2007 07:32:00 PDT | | After hitting a new record of over 500 spam emails in the last 18 hours I have finally switched fully to using my Google email account. Please forgive me for not posting it here, but any email address posted online invariably ends up on dozens of spamming lists. I am still checking all my other accounts though so the shift will be gradual for you. The interesting thing though is that as I switched my email handling this morning it became clear to me why Google email is so incredibly successful - it clearly assumes vital online correspondence roles that "normal" users are simply not able to deal with very easily. Let me list a few of these:
1. Centralized spam controller - users benefit from a centralized and up to date spam identification taxonomy that other providers simply do not have.
2. Easy spam abuse notifier - it only takes me two clicks to vent my anger at being spammed. No idea how I would do this otherwise.
3. Simple mobile access provider - it took me under a minute to install a simple functioning mobile client for my Nokia that gives me full access to the web services.
4. Centralized virus controller - I use several PCs and laptops with a very good hourly update on virus signatures and have highest security settings on all applications. By moving to web based services I can save a lot of hassle and resources.
I am not saying that Google email is the best thing since sliced bread. It has however masterfully assumed some key new roles in the electronic communication segment that are important for users like me.
Specifically it means vastly eased mobile access to multiple email accounts, more effective spam and virus control, plus what will be a hugely decreased technology budget since I can shift the relative maintenance to Google - I essentially just need a terminal server attitude. I was about to say that I need bandwidth, but then remembered that GPRS is actually fully sufficient for my mobile needs.
The moral of the story ? Well, seen from a roles perspective the success of Google was predictable. The next killer app will be the one allowing us to easily port email coordinates away from the relevant hosting organizations - it is already disruptive innovation at its finest in the telco industry. | |
| | Sun, 01 Jul 2007 04:47:00 PDT | | Just spent a while answering multiple queries regarding the modules in the practitioner qualification, so, in best blogging tradition I will answer this way :) Please remember there is also an advanced analyst qualification and an accredited graduate level course in "Value Networks Analysis and System Dynamics" that has been getting rave reviews. The below is for the practitioner qualification:
Module 1: Orientation
An introduction to the ValueNet Works™ Fieldbook, GenIsis™ application and Workbook, and online value network community. Review of course materials, software requirements, and reading. Identification of certification project and scenarios.
Module 2: The ValueNet Works™ Method
The value network approach puts people front and center as the active agents for value creation. Using the ValueNet Works™ method to map both tangible and intangible exchanges moves beyond process views to consider value creation as a dynamic living system. This module covers the history and theory base for the ValueNet Works™ Method.
Module 3: The Value Network Map
Three simple elements can be used to map the value creation dynamics of work groups, business functions, business units, business webs, and purposeful networks. This session covers mapping basics, scope and boundaries, participants and roles, transactions and deliverables, and sequencing. You will also begin using the GenIsis™ Workbook.
Module 4: Exchange Analysis
Once value exchanges have been mapped, the initial analysis seeks to understand the patterns of exchange across the whole system. The Exchange Analysis poses questions that will surface bottlenecks, imbalances, and missing links or relationships. This session also includes more on working with diagrams and using Visio.
Module 5: Impact Analysis
No single participant in a value network or organization can manage the whole system. What people can and do manage are their inputs and outputs. The Impact Analysis considers all the value inputs a participant or group receives and their impact on the organization, including cost/benefit analysis. This session also includes performance indicators and understanding perceived value at the participant and transaction levels.
Module 6: Value Creation Analysis
Value Creation Analysis looks at how each participant is adding value to the system. The roots of this analysis lie in the principles of value-added accounting. This session also includes distinctions in using cost/benefit analysis, ROI, and value conversion.
Module 7: Advanced Analytics
An introduction to advanced modeling and analysis integrating ValueNet Works™ with ONA, SNA, and system dynamics methodologies. Tutoring in the 2-D, 3-D, and 4-D visualization and interpretation of network maps using advanced research tools. | |
| | Sat, 30 Jun 2007 05:14:00 PDT | | Although we have been developing GenIsis over the past years and have gained significant understanding of how to evolve in particular the client, the recent focus on web based solutions and database integration have opened up a completely new series of challenges.
One of the biggest challenges has been to expand the software development team from 2 to 10. With the need for competency in ASP.Net, server configuration/maintenance, and data base administration, we have had to grow the team and partnered with a very skilled group in India.
In this growth process it has again become clear how long it takes to develop and understanding of the value networks paradigm and in fact change the complete way try to IT enable the systems based view of the organization/enterprise. A nice small example of this is that while process tools in fact usually allow for modelling workflow without identification of responsible organizational units or people, value networks demand this to be considered - no transaction can exist without a relevant sending and receiving role. This may appear rather trivial, but it is actually fundamental - no task can be accomplished when modeling workflow from a value network perspective without identifying at least the roles involved! In process modeling this happens continuously and always leads to a lack of workflow ownership by those later made responsible.
On a technical side this will always demand the development of dynamic connections between deliverables, roles and participants versus the more traditonal static linkage between relatively stable and isolated functions and events. It takes time to develop this understanding and to develop the ability to sense the suitable architectures.
What this is also making clear is that the next growth challenge ahead will be the education of IT departments in "value" network thinking, since classical architectures support the traditional linear process model. Implementing a middleware with value network perspectives will hence not only stretch business operations, but also the supporting activities considerably. | |
| | Fri, 29 Jun 2007 09:23:00 PDT | | One of the clearest indicators of value networks thinking going mainstream is the rising number of individuals and companies offering services under this label. As far as I know there are about 40 such "competitors" out there at the moment in fact. All of them are either using the term "value networks" as a sort of mutated social network analysis, or in fact leveraging Verna's brand directly, but then delivering only up to the holomapping, without any understanding of the importance of the next steps in the methodoloy, i.e. Exchange analysis, value creation and impact analyses for example. I am sure it will not be long before GenIsis suffers the same fate.
While there is in principle nothing wrong with this, indeed the methodology has been freely available on the web for years, and an open source version of GenIsis exists, the question arises whether or not these other perspectives create any value? In a recent project we found that other project members considered VNA so simple that they decided to "do it themselves" and it looks as if they will need about 10 times the time and money to come to a perhaps similar impact. I say "perhaps", because it is clear that the less a person has fully mastered the full methodology (as the qualified practitioners have) the more they will tend to oversee the subtleties of the mapping process itself and hence be drawn quickly back into the traditional mental models that are causing the challenges being faced in the first place.
So, a few years ago people were asking "What is VNA?", now they are asking "Who is the best provider for VNA?" While Verna is of course the unparalled "guru" and the qualified practitioners around her are the highest quality deliverable competence, there are many others that could be considered depending on the quality of the work needed and the budget available! The most important thing however is that whoever is chosen to supply VNA services, the Value Networks Information Object Model should never be compromised - it is the leading standard in the field and assures that at least the foundation for services offered is of high quality.
In order to support the market providing value network services this model has been made freely available and is supported by the Value Network Industry Consortium (sponsored by companies such as Cisco, Boeing and SAP). It is also the heartpiece of GenIsis - "Made by Verna" and "Powered by GenIsis" are the quality standards to look for! | |
| | Tue, 26 Jun 2007 05:43:00 PDT | | There is an on-going discussion about the extent that value networks perspectives can be automatically generated and whether the quality of the insights can come anywhere close to the quality of those created by approaches based more on socialization and story telling. I would be the last to argue that anything can replace the value of face-to-face communication, however I will also be the first to argue that this needs to be augmented by automation methods when scaling into large enterprises for cost and speed issues.
Recent experience in a research project for example has shown that while it takes several weeks for an interview based methodology to garner information from a specific number of respondents, an automated evaluation leveraging the GenIsis middleware was able to come to a comparable level of insights for the same number of projects within a few hours... The importance here lies in the fact that the results of the analysis are used as one of many inputs to a decision making process - the fidelity of the input generated through the use of GenIsis was sufficient to create the same impact as the more encompassing effort. The reasons for this lie in the fact that GenIsis works off of network archetypes and living systems (esp.. fractal) based logic.
The biggest resistance to these sort of insights comes from the research community in fact. This is a natural reaction and maybe similar to the resistance of the music industry to peer-to-peer file sharing technologies. If the same impact and benefit can be achieved with 10% of the budget and within 10% of the time of a traditional project, the relevant research community is in trouble and will of course bring all weapons to bear on this approach. Please don not get me wrong - primary research, especially through face-to-face approaches has a huge value for certain contexts - on a large enterprise setting it can be rather expensive and cumbersome though. Dave Snowden for example has worked with software that automates gathering of stories to identify behaviors and dynamics in organizations - also very powerful and we have been looking for an opportunity to "feed" this data through GenIsis as well. In the end the traditional research approach acts most effectively in a validation mode for the insights generated.
In the end we are seeing that GenIsis can approximate value network patterns sufficiently from tangible information sources to lead to insights that create impact and benefit of equal value to more traditional research approaches - important for business managers, a threat to the traditional research community if it does not believe in co-creation. | |
| | Mon, 25 Jun 2007 02:04:00 PDT | | You may enjoy the new look and feel of www.value-networks.com. John Maloney has done a great job of getting the site polished up and to the next level of maturity! The new site is sponsored and coordinated by John for the Value Networks Consortium (VNC) which is the global network leading value network standards, taxonomies, visualization, analytics, vocabulary, methods, open tool development, benchmark datasets and techniques. Of further note are http://kmblogs.com/public/blog/102137 and http://kmblogs.com/.
New open source developments for the GenIsis application suite will become available in the fall and probably incorporate interface to Vensim (www.vensim.com), an updated Information Object Model based on ground-breaking work with a leading aerospace manufacturer, and an easily manipulable network browser (see previous post). Documentation will of course also be updated and with a bit of luck we will also be able to release VNA/SNA standard queries for an MS Access version of the data model. | |
| | Fri, 22 Jun 2007 06:22:00 PDT | | In our on-going work to evolve GenIsis into an enterprise middleware solution we are currently re-evaluating whether functionalities should be tailored to Visio as a visual modeling tool, or rather whether we should switch to Vensim (www.vensim.com).
The advantage of Vensim is that it provides a free learning edition that runs more easily on a greater variety of platforms. At the same time it provides for powerful system dynamics modeling and simulation capability - something that is becoming increasingly important as value network usage matures. Handling of connectors is also easier for the user and the file formats are easier to create.
Disadvantages of Vensim are linked to the strengths of Visio. Visio is a significantly more mature application with powerful visualizations, XML interfaces, close integration with the Office package and a lot more functionalities, including data base connectivity and object oriented structures.
Its a tough call if we wanted to shift emphasis. The goal has always been to make GenIsis as easily accessible as possible to as many people as possible. In parallel we are of course also building our own modeling tool (the network browser previously announced), but the investment for expanding that appears to stand in no relationship to the achievable benefits.
For the moment therefore I think we will simply focus directly on the client needs, but keep in mind that the overall focus must be to create a stable systems view-based middleware solution with advanced analytical and visualization capability. Commercially definitely a lot more interesting as well of course, assuming that the blend of open and classical business model currently evolving will prove sustainable. | |
| | Tue, 19 Jun 2007 07:49:00 PDT | | Need to invite others to an event focused on VNA? Check out the following internal seminar invitation from a new Fortune 500 client (used with permission). I think its pretty good and can only encourage re-use :)
Title: Value Network Analysis: Overview and Application
Interested in sharpening you business skills in the new knowledge economy?
Want to better understand new business models, especially where relationships are critical? Looking for new tools to strengthen your approach to organizational design? Then come to the Value Networks Analysis seminar on and learn from an internationally recognized thought leader, Verna Allee, author of The Future of Knowledge.
The Value Network is remotely related to the value chain, but is more non-linear and flexible. While the value chain considers the movement of tangible items (materials, money, products) in a fairly linear manner, the Value Network explores other kinds of transactions as well, including exchanges of knowledge and other intangibles (trust, loyalty, reputation, etc.) between the entities involved in a business. Value Network tools can explore business models at the fuzzy front end or in fully developed states, and can consider the numerous relationships and roles that exist. Analyzing and visualizing intangible and tangible transactions between key parties can add critical insights missed by other methods. | |
| | Tue, 19 Jun 2007 07:48:00 PDT | | One of the interesting phenomena we are encountering in some organizational change efforts using widespread VNA mapping across multiple organizations is the more participants see the same overall map as it matures, the more they begin to identify themselves with specific locations on the map (i.e. The call center roles are top right). Changing the position of these role clusters invariably leads to confusion and loss of ownership.
As a result of this we have become highly sensitized to expanding the current capability of the GenIsis Plug-In from handling coordinates and generating them in accordance with SNA algorhythms, to handling positional coordinates manually maintained by users. Although this does mean that pattern evaluation can no longer be supported by established perspectives such as Fruchtermann-Rheingold or Kamada-Kawai when user coordinates are handled, it does lead to increased ownership of the visuals and enhances their suitability for supporting ongoing organizational (re-)design efforts. A strange feeling when workshop participants begin assuming full ownership of the VNA mapping process - always a proclaimed goal, but uneasing for the facilitator! So, look out for enhanced layout controls in the next release versions... | |
| | Fri, 15 Jun 2007 11:51:00 PDT | | Coding the interface between GenIsis and the system dynamics application Vensim currently, and struggling not with the coding per se, but the low fidelity of models that are created there by users. This is beginning to become a common issue and emphasizes the intent of more sophisticated intentions (here the simulation of complex systems based on performance measures), and the extent that users are in fact able to apply these in their contexts. This is serving as a powerful reminder that the value that can be created by a tool is directly related to the context we are applying it to. In this specific case it is showing that the small core of GenIsis (roles, deliverables, and transactions) ensures that it can be applied to an amazing variety of contexts because it can deal with very low fidelity information. Vensim can do this to some extent, but by pushing its mathematical functionality to the foreground automatically reduces the potential user population.
This in fact leads back nicely to John Maloney's point about emphasizing the "popular" network browser nature of the visual interface we are fine-tuning. Simple entry and manipulation of connections between objects of the real world being the key to wide-spread adoption. We originally went down this path by leveraging data input via simple Excel tables for example - no csv or text formats that most "general" users do not know how to generate; no binary tables or black boxed code. I realize that this may make the tools less interesting to the expert network researchers, but at the same time eases the acceptance of their work by less specialized individuals who simply appreciate being able to apply their tacit pattern recognition capabilities easily to data at their finger tips.
You may wonder how these reflections are relating to coding an interface between applications? Well, an interface is essentially a data structure, in this case consisting of tables and attributes. For each attribute the decision must be made whether it MUST be available when importing data (ie from Vensim) or not - the lower the fidelity of the data being imported, the less of these "NOT NULL" conditions must be set. The other critical part is deciding on the enforcement of data formats being accepted, ie do you demand integers or will you accept text? The more stringent the demands, the less data can be imported and hence the smaller the data sample that can be evaluated (and the more strenuous the modeling demands on users). The less stringent the demands, the less we are able to apply advanced analytical capability.
Balance is therefore the challenge, and in this remembering who the tool is supposed to be supporting and in what. A single wrongly set requirement for a single attribute can prevent adoption.
This is what is keeping me up these days... | |
| | Thu, 14 Jun 2007 00:45:00 PDT | | We are busy customizing the GenIsis data model for a client implementation at the moment (data base is hosted on a file server with MS Access 2003 and multiple clients) and have for the first time been faced with the challenge of identifying the class Family for deliverables, roles, and transactions. While we have been tasked to keep the data model as flexible as possible due to low data quality and fidelity in the context, we decided to enforce the class Family since it embeds the data gathered in a stronger structural framework. The challenge is that normally only transactions are captured (two roles, deliverable and its nature) - the class Family has been largely ignored to date for many reasons.
The solution we came up with was to have the user manually give the value network being modeled a name and to use that as the identifier of the class Family for deliverables, roles, and transactions. This needs to be done manually since the data entry is manual (no automated import from the ERP system), whereby we are encouraging the naming of the value network to be linked to its purpose. As more and more value networks with a similar purpose are gathered by different users, we can then proceed to begin identifying the relevant archetypes as the basis for work flow modeling.
For those not familiar with the GenIsis data model please check some preliminary documentation at http://www.valuenetworkcomposer.com/ or https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=183750. It is the central "filter" or turning the traditional organization/process view into the value network / systems perspective and enforces the structures that are needed to gain a reasonable degree of accuracy.
Another interesting extension we are implementing in the data model is that when models are exported to the data base, the relevant user identification is also captured - may seem obvious to most, but new perspectives for us as we explore what it means to have a central repository for multiple value network users of their models :) | |
| | Tue, 12 Jun 2007 20:19:00 PDT | | Somebody recently asked about our GenIsis visualizationc ability and we realized that there was in fact a "lab" emerging that is beginning to take on contours. Here the first cut of the pattern we are seeing emerge:
*************************************************************
GenIsis Labs are the research & development teams supporting GenIsis development with a special focus on the generation of 3-d and 4-d visualizations to support the exploration of value networks - http://www.openvna.com/
Based on the maxim that value networks as living systems, have a form related to their function and performance, developments in game playing, molecular visualization, and system dynamics are used to continuously expand possibilities.
An emphasis is made on visualizing large data sets as typically made available in ERP systems or data warehouses, whereby a visualization framework is used that integrates this with Web 2.0. The GenIsis Network Browser at
http://wp1076354.wp016.webpack.hosteurope.de/wow/visualizer/visualizer.htm
is an early sample.
Programmed in OpenGL it allows for easy integration with leading edge artificial reality enhancement tools (i.e. heads-up displays, cave immersion systems etc). GenIsis Labs are staffed by a multinational virtual team from San Francisco through the UK, Germany and India.
*************************************************************
Exciting times - the wave keeps building! | |
| | Tue, 12 Jun 2007 20:13:00 PDT | | Lots of thinking in the past days around what GenIsis truly is - may seem strange considering we are in essentially version 2.0 of the software, however as engagements ramp up in volume and complexity, we needed to revisit this. The current perspective is nicely summed up in the following draft of a product sheet I would like to share:
*********************************************
GenIsis is an enterprise middleware solution that enables a whole systems perspective to be taken in enterprise resource management.
The whole systems perspective is made possible by a unique patented data model that leverages living systems principles as understood by the ValueNet WorksTM methodology of Verna Allee.
GenIsis is implemented in parallel to existing middleware solutions, draws upon existing data stores internal and external to the organization, and serves both organizational and proprietary applications.
Proprietary applications are:
- GenIsis client (standalone, Excel based)
- GenIsis Accelerator (add-on to GenIsis client)
- GenIsis Composer (standalone network visual generator)
- GenIsis Browser (standalone and web based, interactive OpenGL visualization tool delivered in Java shell)
- GenIsis Surveyor (web based survey and analysis tool for organizational and value network analysis.)
- GenIsis Analyzer (standalone and web based data mining and benchmarking
- GenIsis API package (collection of default application interfaces based on XML and XBRL)
GenIsis is typically used in complex, dynamic and complicated environments with low levels of data quality, accuracy and reliability to identify systems archetypes, evaluate and optimize systemic performance capability and workflow in real time, predict system performance on transactional and aggregated levels, and to enable rapid and radical redesign of organizations and industries.
GenIsis is typically delivered as a set-up script for a relational data base format preferred by the existing environment. GenIsis can be extensively and easily customized to optimize integration and organizational support. The application suite is provided in a modular manner.
GenIsis patents and copyrights are restricted to the data model, the benchmarking data and the embedded value networks methodology. All other elements are provided under creative commons licenses.
Ancillary services offered are:
- User training
- Analyst training
- ASP services
- Customization and integration
*********************************************
The implications of this shift in perspective is enormous as you might imagine and I will make a point of sharing thoughts as things mature. | |
| | Sun, 03 Jun 2007 17:30:00 PDT | | Currently visiting Verna, John and a few clients on the West Coast, and of course getting the chance to do a lot of reading (Hint: don't fly KLM if you need a power plug for your laptop...). At the same time doing a lot of thinking about how and where things are going - sort of feels like another growth-phase coming and I wonder whether we will be able to shift to a more pro-active acquisition of the really interesting projects versus drowning in simply needing to react to demand. Verna mentioned yesterday that maybe this all needs a new name? GenIsis is close to being dumped (assuming the investors come through) and maybe "VNA" also needs to fade little to let the benefits become clearer. As I have mentioned before no-one buys analyses - they buy knowledge supported by tools in order to gain specific benefits.
So, I am trying to figure out a new elevator pitch that allows room for the benefits, but also points to the immense rigor and validation underlying the approach.
What I am telling people mostly at the moment is that we analyse organizations to identify their tipping points and then help make these manageable. When asked how we do this I talk about the EBRF framework, VNA, system dynamics, and GenIsis as the tool enabling this.
I do honestly still struggle with communicating the critical role of the Information Object Model though - that is the lens that enables the above, but is of course a little difficult to make tangible for the non-techies :)
Interesting question recently as well by a client asking about IP of GenIsis modifications made for them. Difficult question as you will appreciate and now driving an even more modular development path (although the GUI will be revamped and then kept stable).
Before I forget the new web based browser should finally be out during the coming week so drop me a line if you are interested in beta testing - alpha testing is running fine. The browser also only displays demo data at the moment - interfaces lined up for handling though. The biggest challenge is simplification - what functionality to focus on - Google figured that out so I guess we will as well :) | |
| | Thu, 31 May 2007 05:50:00 PDT | | Hello everyone,
One of the questions currently in the "headlines" of value network engagements is what the "contract" between participants in a value network would look like. I would like to explore with you what this "contract" would look like, since I feel that we would all benefit from having a solid understanding of this. Especially those of you working with value network principles with clients will find this to be the answer to "How do we find a legally satisfactory agreement for the participants?". This is especially relevant when the value network is orchestrated to create intellectual property (IP).
To be quite frank this is also a deliverable that will be developed for a client, so that the "product" of this conversation, will be the result of an effort by the whole list. Instead of getting lost in IP discussions, I would propose that the product is simply made available to the world under creative commons? If you agree, read on.
Scenario: Imagine that a value network is convened for a specific purpose, i.e. to develop a product, and participants from all the roles pitch in resources (tangible and intangible) to create this product. All participants will gain from being able to (a) use the product internally, and (b) sell the product to their customers. All participants will input significant resources (both tangible and intangible). The product will be patented/copyrighted and contains business secrets of the participants.
Problems:
Who OWNS the product legally? I.e. can file for patent/copyright?
Should, and if so how should financial benefits achieved by participants be shared among the participants?
What impact does it have if participants are strewn across the globe?
There are a plethora of other issues of course and we currently investigating whether legal forms such as joint-ventures might provide a suitable starting point. However I do sense that the value network business model is a unique one and needs to be crafted.
So... the result of this discussion should be a one pager that can be signed by all participants of such a value network. Thoughts? A good starting point might be the template at http://www.lectlaw.com/forms/f101.htm?
In any case, what´s in it for you in exchange for participating? No less than a business model validated by the community (and hopefully the Value Network Consortium).
I look forward to your thoughts
Cheers
Oliver | |
| | Wed, 30 May 2007 02:04:00 PDT | | We are currently helping a client to convene a workshop with participants of all roles in a specific market space. These roles and participants were identified through intensive research of the relevant market space from a value networks perspective and include key players ensuring interoperability as well.
At this workshop the participants will be tasked to explore what technical solutions will be needed in the market space in future and then to jointly-finance the development as such. Once these solutions have been developed the IP is owned by the value network and each participant can implement such in their relevant context(s) without relevant license fees or similar.
There is a lot of excitement about this emerging business model, and while it is clear to participants that there is a significant contribution in terms of resources and funds required - this is still a lot less than if they tried to build the solution on their own. Shared research and development costs are a critical part of this effort and indeed it is also often categorized as a "strategic alliance" - this is fine I would guess and we are working with the concept from a value networks perspective.
In essence we appear to have a joint-venture type structure emerging that consists of market space participants understanding the need to develop interoperability to ensure that from a customer perspective value is created in a convenient and seamless manner. We had spent a lot of time initially looking for who would be the main sponsor of such an effort, until we learned that all participants share the same importance in the fabric of the value network - hence, irregardless of their size, their sponsorship is critical.
On a technology side it was the GenIsis application that allowed us to crunch the industry data to learn about the relevant players across the market space. Data handling was of course a pain since automated interfaces to relevant industry databases do not yet exist, however we are hoping to grow functionality in this direction over time. | |
| | Mon, 28 May 2007 07:32:00 PDT | | Huge sigh of relief this morning! The two applications embedded in GenIsis for calculating 2D and 3D coordinates of network nodes (SoNIA and CCVisu) were successfully installed on the new web server and are running flawlessly. The huge effort made last year to identify the most suitable applications to do this has really paid off - we had looked at about 80 network visualization tools and decided on these two. This means we can now easily "feed" the new OpenGL based visualization applet without any problems - look out for this in the next couple of weeks!
We had long discussions around whether we should actually migrate the complete applications to the web server versus only the key functionality (coming from the Jung library and colt.jar set). There are arguments for both approaches, and in the end we wanted to keep as much functionality for future development as possible available - so we migrated the applications (now running in the newest JDK). Besides the coordinate calculation we hence have a huge amount of future functionality at our fingertips for further development.
What is now going through our mind is whether we should create a "free" access to these applications that allows anyone to quickly generate needed 2D and 3D coordinates for network nodes (based on accepted algorhythms) since usually it takes a lot of work with expert applications such as Pajek or Ucinet to gain access to these - although you really have to dig deep to get at the coordinates themselves (usually hidden so that the relevant application browser needs to be used).
Why is this important? Any future development of networking approaches depends on the ability to calculate the underlying network node coordinates - rocket science for the average business person to say the least and here easily developed. The GenIsis client has shown how useful and effective this is although it is beginning to suffer from growing MS Office 2007 adoption and diverse corporate intranet configurations. With this first step toward a web based functionality we hope to counter many of these themes.
You cannot imagine my sigh of relief.... | |
| | Tue, 22 May 2007 08:16:00 PDT | | Things are moving again on the technical development side and I thought it might be of interest to share what is happening - input and support is of course always of interest !
For one we are working on a web based version of the application(s) as a platform for a planned ASP solution. Programming is in .Net, Open GL and Java, whereby the database will initially be set up using Microsoft SQL. You may remember we were initially planning to go with Oracle 10g Express, however since we are preparing to integrate GenIsis with MS Active Directory and Sharepoint for a corporate client, we are putting that on hold for the moment.
For the web client we are putting user account functionality in place, ONA and SNA analysis capability, and a breaking edge visual network browser allowing for immersive visualization and integration with Web 2.0. APIs for ERP applications such as SAP or Oracle Application are also being prepared. All existing functionality of the client will of course still be provided. Real time value network monitoring will of course also be possible.
Of interest may also be that the new solution will allow for setting up and performing online ONA/SNA surveys with embedded VNA capability. This next generation organizational development approach is raising significant interest in its own right. On the data model side recent experiences have led to numerous changes especially since we have learned to distinguish more exactly between role and person attributes. In addition we have learned a lot about the interpretation of patterns in tangible transactions to identity intangible tipping points of identified value networks. The latter is leading slowly to new indicator sets as well.
In the continuing spirit of enabling ease of use and interoperability we are of course always focused on simplifying navigation and providing open interfaces, if not even open source solutions.
While the applications remain predominantly used by value network practitioners at the moment, we are seeing a rising interest to embed the tools in larger analytic packages such as data warehouse applications and are designing the new software to ease such a process.
Another interesting development in this respect has been an interest in using the GenIsis application to support outsourcing of key performance management related business processes.
So, lots happening and currently up to 5 people on the development team. Depending on client demand we are hoping to release the survey capability in the summer, the AD integration in the fall and an open web base ASP solution by the end of the year - stay tuned! | |
|
| |  |
