by Richard Veryard
Philip’s post on Managing over the whole governance cycle draws on some important work by Max Boisot, and I wanted to expand on this a little.
In his book Information and Organization, Boisot identifies four stages in the knowledge cycle, which he associates with four organizational cultures. These can be associated in turn with different strategies.
| Knowledge |
Diffused |
Codified |
Culture | Industry Cycle |
Typical Strategy |
| Public |
Yes | Yes |
Market |
Competition |
Cost-Based (Sub- Contract, Outsourcing) |
| Proprietary |
No |
Yes |
Hierarchy |
Monopoly |
Product-Based (Licensing, Hoarding) |
| Personal |
No |
No |
Network |
Start-Up |
Problem-Based (Trading, Intention Economy) |
| Common-sense |
Yes |
No |
Clan |
Oligopoly |
Service-Based (Joint Venture, Mashups) |
Philip characterizes Microsoft as following a product-based strategy. I think this characterization is supported by the comments made by Bill Gates in his Mix06 keynote – for example, his idea that Microsoft customers benefit from the existence of other Microsoft customers because a large user base helps Microsoft to improve the product.
Meanwhile, companies like Google and Amazon are following a service-based strategy, and the evidence from the way they are used in mashups shows others are using their services to make the ‘jump’ to start new cycles (see interoperability landscapes). Can they also make this ‘jump’ – to start a new cycle at the next level up? Should they? How would such a strategy be accounted for commercially?