Business Dynamics and Scenarios of Change

Transkriptio

1 Tekes Review 274/2010 Business Dynamics and Scenarios of Change Petri Ahokangas, Miikka Blomster, Lauri Haapanen, Matti Leppäniemi, Vesa Puhakka, Veikko Seppänen & Juhani Warsta

2 10

3 Petri Ahokangas, Miikka Blomster, Lauri Haapanen, Matti Leppäniemi, Vesa Puhakka, Veikko Seppänen, Juhani Warsta Business Dynamics and Scenarios of Change affecting business models and value creation within the ICT sector OULU BUSINESS SCHOOL more value for your investment Tekes Review 274/2010 Helsinki

4 Tekes, the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation Tekes is the main public funding organisation for research and development (R&D) in Finland. Tekes funds industrial projects as well as projects in research organisations, and especially promotes innovative, risk-intensive projects. Tekes offers partners from abroad a gateway to the key technology players in Finland. Tekes programmes Tekes choices for the greatest impact of R&D funding Tekes uses programmes to allocate its financing, networking and expert services to areas that are important for business and society. Programmes are launched in areas of application and technology that are in line with the focus areas in Tekes strategy. Tekes programmes have been contributing to changes in the Finnish innovation environment for twenty years. Copyright Tekes All rights reserved. This publication includes materials protected under copyright law, the copyright for which is held by Tekes or a third party. The materials appearing in publications may not be used for commercial purposes. The contents of publications are the opinion of the writers and do not represent the official position of Tekes. Tekes bears no responsibility for any possible damages arising from their use. The original source must be mentioned when quoting from the materials. ISSN ISBN Cover picture: Pasi Hytti Layout: DTPage Oy 4

5 Abstract This document discusses the dynamics and scenarios of change within the ICT sector in five areas of the ICT business ecosystem: consultants, application software developers, infrastructure software developers, system and infrastructure integrators, infrastructure and application service providers, and hardware developers. Specifically, the focus is on the change in business models and value creation within the ICT ecosystems. Earlier work by Tekes has lead to the identification of hundreds of business drivers, limitations and challenges, that could be summarized in the form of two ICT scenarios verticals (positions in sector-specific or segment-specific value chains) and horizontals (positions in cross-sectional value chains and customer groups). Based on this earlier work, two major areas of change were identified to affect business models and value creation. The first of these was consumers a) diverging media landscape, especially in the form of social media and social data, and b) the changing role of information, contributing to consumers attention divergence. Secondly, even with converging technologies (networks, devices) and industries, cloud computing seem to be changing the rules, business models and value creation mechanisms of the ICT businesses. Based on 21 in-depth interviews within the ICT sector, the results indicate that for consultants it is the horizontals that provide new opportunities, e.g., in packaged services and cross-industry integration. For application software developers the horizontals might provide opportunities in the form of new services utilizing advertising, context awareness, or data intensiveness. Infrastructure software developers seemed to be hoping that the business shall remain within the existing verticals by seeing mobile and fixed businesses as one. For system and infrastructure integrators the opportunities might be found in horizontals; service delivery platforms and content aggregation/access services. For infrastructure and application service providers, content or access to it appeared as an opportunity, but also diversification seemed to provide alternative opportunities, especially in the businessto-business sector. For hardware providers the new opportunities might be found in the short-cuts connecting directly verticals with not-so-apparent horizontals. As a summary, the research indicates that divergence and fragmentation of the consumers media landscape is overriding the consequences of convergence all over the ICT sector. Access, identification, and utilization of user data is increasingly becoming the source of value creation and competitive advantage. Social media and its phenomena change industry structures and business models in unpredictable ways, contributing to the deteriorating of purely horizontal or vertical business models and thus making ICT companies to look for value chain short-cuts, sidetracks, and opportunities across traditional segmentation strategies. 5

6 Contents Abstract...5 Part 1: Introduction...9 Purpose and objectives of the research...11 The theoretical starting points of the research...11 Research methodology...13 Part 2: Initial analysis...16 Industry analysis...16 ICT technology convergence...16 Analyzing industries...17 Industry environment and structure...23 Conclusions from industry analysis...30 Business ecosystem analysis...31 Consultants...31 Application software developers...33 Infrastructure software developers...35 System and infrastructure integrators...35 Infrastructure and application service providers...36 Hardware developers...37 Other types of actors...38 Conclusions from the ecosystem perspective...38 Part 3: Secondary analysis...41 Network analysis: social networks in convergence...41 Introduction...41 Theoretical approach: Social networking nature of business. management in the new business creation...41 Empirical results: Network action in the development of. new business under dynamic circumstances...44 Discussion...46 Resource analysis...48 The resource-based view...48 Indicative results of the resource-based analysis

7 Part 4: Conclusions...51 Introduction...51 The trends themselves...52 Media landscape and its connection with convergence...52 Social media...55 Some remarks regarding the trends...56 Towards the business models of the future...57 Strategies used within the ICT sector...58 Theoretical conclusions and Implications for future research...61 References...62 Tekes Reviews in English

8 8

9 Part 1 Introduction Research on business organizations has started to show signs of shifting the focus from the management of existing companies more efficiently to the creation of new businesses or business models (Christensen 1997; Ghoshal, Bartlett and Moran 1999; Hamel 1998; McGahan 2004). This new line of inquiry criticizes the view of the modern time, which sees businesses to be best developed and renewed by planning and controlling existing businesses and hoping that somehow ruling the game will make things click (e.g. Porter 1985). These studies argue that the reality of the post-modern knowledge economy is far too complex, turbulent, ambiguous and vague to be kept under control (Hamel 1999). The challenge companies, and whole economies, face today is not how to achieve a competitive equilibrium position but how to break equilibriums and to live in constant state of disequilibrium (Carlsson and Eliasson 2003). Starting from the above considerations, the ICT industry is not an exception of this post-modern development. The ICT sector in general is currently facing the consequences of the fast changes and maturation of the industry in all its business sectors and major markets. One of the key drivers in this development is the technological convergence taking place within the industry. The starting point to this piece of research is within the Tekes originated GIGA Converging Networks programme, and especially its work group number 4 activities. The Tekes/GIGA work group started a major effort to create a coherent picture of convergence and the change drivers and consequences of convergence on Finnish ICT businesses. The results of this original work can be found on the Tekes web site In this report our aim is not, however, to cover the findings and conclusions of the GIGA work group, i.e., the drivers of change and the scenarios of change for the ICT industry, but rather use these findings and conclusions as the starting point for defining the research questions and methodology set forth for this particular report. Over the past few years, the business model concept has generated growing interest among academics and practitioners. It has been particularly popular among e-businesses and with research on e-businesses (Timmers, 1998; Afuah and Tucci, 2001; Amit and Zott, 2001; Applegate, 2001; Cheng et al., 2001; Rayport and Jaworski, 2001). However, the empirical use ofthe concept has been criticized for being unclear, superficial, and not theoretically grounded (Porter, 2001). As a cursory review of the literature is likely to reveal, numerous definitions of business models have been proposed by academics and practitioners alike. While some of these conceptualizations are similar, there is definitely a lack of consensus as to the most appropriate way in which this emerging phenomenon should be defined. This may be due to the fact that the business models are conceptualized from seemingly incongruent perspectives (e.g. e-business, strategy, technology, and information systems). Indeed, the viewpoint of each author always drives term definition; by peering through different lenses, authors are seeing different things. For a systematic study of business models, we need to define business model and distinguish business model s critical elements, i.e. unique building blocks or components. In an attempt to help managers better understand business models, Shafer et al. (2005) conducted an extensive review of the extant literature. Overall, their literature review yielded 12 distinct definitions of business model. The authors also carried out a detailed analysis of the identified conceptualizations to identify and classify common elements and recurring themes among them. The analysis identified 42 business model elements that were classified into four primary categories: strategic choices, the value network, creating value, and capturing value (see Figure 1). Based on the review and analysis of business model elements, Shafer 9

10 Figure. 1. The components of a business model. (Rajala 2001) Components of a Business Model Strategic choices Customer (Target Market, Scope) Value Proposition Capabilities / Compentencies Revenues / Pricing Competitors Output (Offering) Strategy Branding Differentiation Mission Create Value Value Network Suppliers Customer Information Customer Relationship Information Flows Product / Service Flows Capture Value Cost Financial Aspects Profit Resources / Assets Processes / Activities et al. (2005) proposed that the business model is best conceptualized as a representation of a firm s underlying core logic and strategic choices for creating and capturing value within a value network. By the same token, Hamel (2000) defines business model as a business concept which includes 1) customer interface, 2) core strategy, 3) strategic resources, and 4) value network. Broadly speaking, common to all definitions of business models is an emphasis on how a company makes money, i.e. creating and capturing value. Thus, a fundamental issue that a business model should describe is the way in which the key business processes generate revenue. As indicated by Rajala et al. (2001) value creation processes describe who are in it and what they do and value appropriation processes describe what s in it for the company. Therefore, it is important to emphasize that a business model is not a strategy. While a strategy refers to an overall plan for deploying resources to establish a favorable position (Grant, 1998, p. 14), a business model does facilitate analysis, testing, and validation of a firm s strategic choices. Stated differently, a business model is a practical action plan designed to fit into a specific market situation in order to execute strategic plans (Rajala et al., 2001). Another relevant question related to the business model is that what creates added value to a customer. Amit & Zott (2001) argue that value added emerges from novelty, efficiency, complementarities, and ties. Novelty can be measured as new business structures, new content or as new players. Efficiency results from search costs, size of the searching area, availability of information, simplicity, speed of search and scale economies. Complementarities can emerge between verticals and horizontals, from the resources required, between technologies, and between activities. Ties between the buyer and the seller can stem from changing costs, for example due to standards, tailoring, trust or loyalty programs and from the direct or indirect network effects. As the objective of the whole research project is to clarify the business context and its effects on business models and corresponding value creation mechanisms, there is a need for a combination of compatible theoretical approaches. In this research they include 1) the business model and value creation perspective described above, 2) the dynamic resource-based perspective, 3) the network perspective, 4) the business ecosystem perspective, and 5) the industry analysis perspective. These will be discussed in a more detailed way in the following chapters. 10

11 Purpose and objectives of the research This research rests on the premise that a constant renewal process is taking place in the highly turbulent and dynamic ICT business environment. In this kind of business environment predictions and assumptions based on earlier experience or prior research do not necessarily explain or help us to understand what is going to happen in the business environment and what kind of strategies or business models should be used in the future (e.g., Sarasvathy 2001). We believe that converging networks have created a business environment where both vertical and horizontal changes are dynamic and unstable to a degree that companies are simply forced to develop new business models and ways of creating value. Based on the above argumentation, the general purpose of this research project is to describe and understand the drivers behind the development of business models and value creation in companies within the ICT sector. More specifically, the aims of the project are to study (1) the technological impacts to vertical integration needs, strategies in vertical integration, and business models in vertical integration, (2) the emergence, divergence and heterogeneity of different company strategies and business models depending on their level of horizontal integration and its impact to those, and (3) the value networks in the companies that are dealing with the converging networks. The conceptualization of the horizontal and vertical businesses adopted in this research project reflects the conceptualization adopted within earlier Tekes/ GIGA related research streams. Based on the research purpose and objectives stated above the following questions can be placed in the core of this report: 1. What could be the core elements and perspectives that could be used to capture and explain change with the ICT companies? a. In order to answer the above question, what kind of tools, perspectives and theories we can use to explain and understand the ICT sector and the companies in it? 2. What are currently the most important drivers of change if the change scenarios developed by the GIGA work groups are used as a starting point for research? a. In order to answer the above question, what kind of consequences the identified drivers and scenarios have on the companies, their business models and value networks? 3. What are the extreme scenarios for ICT companies in practice and how we can identify their consequences for companies? a. And finally, in order to answer the above question, what kind of business models and value networks could help companies succeed in their particular businesses? To process by which we aim to answer these questions is two-fold: first, we start by an initial analysis where the focus is in the data analysis, specifically based on interviews of key informants from the ICT industry reflected against selected theoretical starting points. Secondly, we aim to conclude with a coherent view of the combined interviews and selected theories, and come up with conclusions emerging from the triangulation of the interviews, theoretical tools, and secondary data on the ICT sector. The theoretical starting points of the research Due to the rather practical questions set forth for the research, the theoretical starting points of the research consist of a variety of theories and perspectives relevant in understanding and analyzing business environments and business contexts, business models, and value creation in networks. The selected theoretical starting points for this research were the following: Business models and value creation (e.g., Hamel, Prahalad, Hambrick & Fredrickson, Amit & Zott, Kim & Mauborgne) Resources and dynamic competences (e.g., Barney, Amit & Schoemaker, Peteraf, Grant) Networks and value creation (e.g., Axelsson & Easton, Håkansson, Snehota, Möller) Ecosystem view (e.g., Messerschmitt and Szyperski, Seppänen & Warsta) Industry and Industry competition (e.g., Caves & Baines, Porter, Buelling & Woerter) The above mentioned theoretical starting points enable us to approach the ICT sector form viewpoints that provide us with complementary perspectives and insight into the drivers of change and scenarios as well as business models and strategies used within the ICT sector. Our primary target is to be both practical and scientific in this 11

12 Figure. 2. The role of background theories in answering to the research questions. Dynamic resourcebased theory Network theory Business ecosystem theory Theories on industry development Business models / value creation within convergence Research question 1 Research question 2 Research question 3 research and we hope to contribute to both developing business as well as concepts and theories used within business research. The theoretical approaches used in the research will be briefly presented in the following chapters of the report. However, the same way as business model is at the core of this research, also the network thinking utilized in this research requires a short primer as it plays a crucial role in value creation. Strategic networks has wide variety of different definitions, but maybe the most abstract one is the Håkansson s and Ford s (2002, 133); structure where a number of nodes are related to each other by specific threads. Further, Iacobucci and Hopkins (1992, 5) have defined a business network much similarly as a composite of a larger number of actors and the pattern of relationships that ties them together. Thorelli (1986, 38) instead has brought out that a business network can also be seen as an intermediary or alternative form of governance between pure markets and pure hierarchies, where two or more firms which, due to the intensity of their interaction, constitute a subset of one (or several) market(s). Generally the definition of the networks goes that the networks between organizations are constructed from the linked relations of the actors (Håkansson and Snehota 1995, 7-10). The importance of the research of networks comes from the point that by defining the surrounding network, the actor or the organization can recognize the other relevant actors, resources, actions, complexity, continuity and informality of the network (e.g. Håkansson and Johansson 1992, 28-30; Håkansson and Snehota 1995, 7-10). There is rich field of studies made from the business networks. Miles and Snow (1984; 1986) and Snow et al. (1992), for instance, discuss about dynamic networks that often emerge around hub or lead firms and typically rely on a core skill like manufacturing, R&D, design, assembly, or brokering. Achrol (1997), for example, has identified three different kinds of networks: 1. Vertical market networks or marketing channel networks, which correspond to the traditional suppliermanufacturer-distributor channels organized around focal organizations, 2. Inter-market or concentric networks, which are networked alliances among firms operating in a variety of industries and are characterized by their dense interconnections in resource sharing, strategic decision making, culture and identity, and collective action (e.g. the Japanese keiretsu), and 3. Opportunity networks, which are market-driven networks of organizations formed around a marketing company that specializes in collecting and disseminating market information, negotiating, coordinating projects for customers and suppliers, and regulating product standards and exchange behaviors within the network. The focus in the current study is on strategic networks. Jarillo (1988, 32) describes strategic networks as longterm, purposeful arrangements among distinct but related for-profit organizations that allow those firms in them to gain or sustain competitive advantage vis-à-vis their competitors outside the network. Further, a strategic network can be described as the total pattern of 12

13 relationship within a group of actors, striving to reach a common goal and the network is planned, has borders and the actors are known to each other (Klint and Sjöberg 2003, ). Möller and Rajala (2007) identify seven different networks. Vertical and horizontal demand-supply networks can be regarded as established networks whereas business renewal (benchmarking) networks and customer-solution (projects and VARs) networks can be regarded as renewal networks. Demand-supply and renewal networks can be characterized as stable value-creation networks. The only type of network potentially leading to dynamic value creation is emerging networks that comprise application networks (for application development), standardization networks (such as 3GPP), and innovation networks. Järvensivu (2007, 16) has defined strategic business network as intentionally developed and managed interorganizational cooperation between three or more organizations for the pursuit of mutually beneficial strategic business goals. His definition is built largely on the ideas presented by Jarillo (Jarillo 1988), Gulati et al. (2000), Möller et al. (2005), Möller and Svahn (2003), and Klint and Sjöberg (2003). Within that definition, the present study considers the following as the key characteristics of a strategic business network: 1. A strategic network is defined by intentionality: strategic networks are intentionally created, developed, maintained, and managed (Möller and Svahn 2003). 2. The existence of a strategic network is motivated by the pursuit of strategic business goals and benefits, which means that a strategic network exists in order for the network members to obtain a better competitive stance over competitors outside the network. The goals of the network may be more or less explicit. 3. A strategic network exists to pursue shared business goals that are mutually beneficial although individual network members may also pursue non-shared goals through network cooperation as long as these do not contradict the network s shared goals. 4. A strategic network strives to be defined by fairly clear boundaries, meaning that its members should try to gain a mutual understanding of the organizations that belong and do not belong to the network (Klint and Sjöberg 2003). Without clear boundaries, it will be hard for network members to agree on shared goals and, in general, network management will grow difficult. 5. A strategic network often has at least one key player (i.e. a hub ) that often takes the initiative in developing and managing the network, as well as other players that have a less visible or less powerful role in the network. Sometimes there may be several, more or less equal key players. Still, this does not necessarily mean that these hubs have total control of the network in terms of development and management. 6. A strategic network usually includes several for-profit organizations. However, such a network may also include one or several non-profit organizations, such as universities, research institutions, or non-profit associations. This concludes the discussion on the concept of strategic networks. In the next section this concept is compared with another closely related concept: strategic collective-action networks. (Järvensivu, 2007, 16-17) Research methodology By answering these research tasks given above this research project brings about new knowledge on the dynamism and heterogeneity of converging networks and especially why, how and to what direction the development of business models and ways of creating value takes place in the selected setting. By using the results of this research project companies will be more able and ready for the creation of new kinds of business models and value propositions inside the converging networks regime. We use the resource based view, network action perspective, ecosystem approach and industry analysis perspective, outlined later in this paper, to understand how and why converging networks change the business landscape and how companies might deal with these changes. We approach these research objectives by using research methods that are practical and solution-oriented, contextually embedded, respect the process research techniques, and are empirically fact-driven. The research methods used in the research project include both qualitative and quantitative data either to be collected during the project or to be derived from earlier studies conducted within Tekes/GIGA research streams. The practical work packages, data collection and analysis methods are described in detail in the project plan of this research. 13

14 The data collected during comes mainly from in-depth interviews (using a semi-structured interview questionnaire) with industry key informants representing different types of businesses, business models, value networks, positions in value networks, and business strategies. The sampling of companies was based on the ecosystem thinking; the companies identified for analysis represented technology, product, system, or service providers operating on both infrastructure and application sides of the ICT ecosystem. In totality 21 interviews were made in different companies. In addition, two panel group discussion sessions were organized (one in Helsinki, one in Oulu) to acquire more in-depth information on the emerging topics and point of views identified during the research process. Process research on organizations has grown significantly (Dooley and Van de Ven, 1999). The grounding idea of process research is that world consists of entities acting in events, which can change along time (Van de Ven and Poole, 2005). Therefore, research based on process epistemology searches for necessary causality instead of rational causality, generalization based on versatility and flexibility of explanations, temporal order of explanations, layers of causalities and discontinuations of explanations (Langley, 1999; Van de Ven and Poole, 2002; Van de Ven and Poole, 2005). The seminal article by Pettigrew (1997) requested more organization research based on processual method. He advocated for the idea that if we want to understand organizations more deeply we should acknowledge human behavior to be embedded in time, agency, structures, contexts, emergence and development (see also Dawson, 1997; Orton, 1997; Dubois and Gadde, 2002). This means that organizations as human, social processes involve change, shape in time and consist timeless internal identity (Van de Ven and Poole, 2005). Therefore, organizations and their business modesl are not seen in the present study as research objects that can be explained by using variance-based methods but as social constructions in continuous flux requiring longitudinal, qualitative process research (Fox- Wolfgramm, 1997; Sarasvathy and Dew, 2005). Further, we lean on Sarasvathy s (2001) notion that organizations are merely means driven than goal driven and that our objective as researchers is to understand this meaning-building rather than goal achievement. Van de Ven and Poole (2005) have proposed there to exist four approaches to conduct processual organization research: (1) variance-based research where static independent variables explain change as a dependent variable, (2) variance-based research where time-dependent dynamic and complex systems of organizational processes are modeled, (3) process research where path-dependent phases of an organization along its development are described and (4) process research where the social construction of emergence and continuous re-emergence of an organization is narrated. As we define organizations ontologically made of human, social processes instead of natural things and epistemologically as events embedded in time and context instead of variables there is no alternative to a case study approach when analyzing dynamic changes of a complex phenomenon (Dooley and Van de Ven, 1999; Langley, 1999). According to Langley (1999) good process research can take variety of routes and she presents seven generic strategies for process research. The different strategies for process research are; narrative, grounded theory, temporal bracketing, visual mapping, synthetic strategy, quantification and computer simulation. According to Langley different strategies make different kind of senses, therefore the objective of the study is the key factor affecting on which strategy is best for implementing the research though every strategy has its weaknesses. In process research there is close linkage between theory and data therefore both inductive and deductive approaches should be mobilized simultaneously when researching phenomenon processually (Langley, 1999). Case research is a particularly strong research strategy for studying change in network level processes (Borch and Arthur, 1995; Easton, 2000; Dubois and Gadde, 2002; Halinen and Törnroos, 2005). We argue for the principles of realist case research (Tsoukas, 1989; Easton, 2000) to explain the sequence of events over the development process of business models. At the level of research design realist case study means emphasis on understanding a process and search for the contingent, necessary causal mechanisms that underlie the process (Tsoukas, 1989; Easton, 2000). Through systematically gathering and analyzing empirical data from multiple sources and multiple levels and searching for the intricate details of the case under study it is 14

15 possible to create a novel understanding of the specific phenomenon. We advocate for the use of Langley s (1999) recommendations to sense-make the complicated situation by using the narrating, the visual mapping and the temporal decomposition strategies. We claim for the narrating strategy to construct a detailed story from the raw data and to prepare a chronology of events for further analysis. The visual mapping strategy is used to build on the narrative with a view to making the changes in the behavior of the firms in the selected setting. A relevant event in the process is defined as the one relating to change in the focal net of a firm. These two strategies are used as supporting steps to a temporal decomposition strategy. We define periods of development as having certain continuity within each period and certain discontinuity at their frontiers. This decomposition of the data allows us to examine how actions in one period lead to changes in the context, which in turn affects actions in subsequent periods. The idea is to attain a novel understanding of the studied phenomenon through systematically gathering and analyzing empirical data from multiple sources and searching for the intricate details of the case. In order to ensure reliability, validity and the overall quality of the research work, a triangulation approach is used. Due to the high degree of firmspecific contextual dependence of the strategies and business models within the research setting, the results of this research are not expected to be directly generalized in the positivist sense. In fact, generalization was not among the purposes of this study. However, it is argued that the theoretical frameworks constructed and chosen for this research is transferable to the study of other firms in other contexts and with other research methods. Our approach is based on triangulation of the data source (respondents, times, places), the research method (interviews, surveys, panel discussions.), the data type (qualitative and quantitative), different theories or theoretical perspectives, and researchers. 15

16 Part 2 Initial analysis Industry analysis ICT technology convergence The current global communication network convergence is shaping the boundaries, competitive positions, and service characteristics of the information and communication technology -industry. The emergence of next generation packet-based networks using the internet protocol (IP), digitalization of the content and the availability of multi-media devices are driving vertical, independent communication networks towards horizontal network architecture (OECD 2008). In these converged networks the continuously expanding communication services can be accessed and used across different networks, regardless which radio access technology will be used. (von Hertzen et.al. 2007). Digital broadcasting is a good example of converged content videos can be distributed and accessed through television, internet, wireless networks or mobile networks, in most cases globally. Nowadays even the contents are provided by dispersed sources with various technologies. Convergence shapes industry boundaries, ICT related services, devices, legislation, and regulation. Convergence has undoubtedly an industry-wide impact on the competitive setting. Growing and emerging markets appeal new entrants and, thus, increases intra-industry competition. The possibility to deliver voice, video and data regardless the access point brings new service, application, and content providers to the markets. Convergence related rapid technological development, uncertainty regarding the dynamic business environment, and multipoint competition are leading internationalizing high technology firms to a situation, where they are unable to sustain their competitive advantage. Ahokangas and Juho (2008) suggest in their study, that this is especially the case with fast-internationalizing firms. Also, already before 2008 there has been some indications that companies within the ICT industry that have been able to take the lead in defining the software architecture and at the same time have been able to position themselves strategically within this architectural framework and industry, have also been the best performers (Messerschmitt and Szyperski, 2003). Convergence has also concurrent effects on the industry level. OECD s (2008) scenario strongly anticipates that the convergence is leading to increasing horizontal integration. Keeping in mind the strong presence of big international operators, regardless the ambitious attempts of smaller companies to penetrate these markets, the services might be bundled by a few players having the needed resources, the economics of scale and market power. Outcome might be a reduction in competition within the communications industry. In line with this discussion, the interviewed industry informants ponted our several viewpoints on convergence. Picked from the interviews. Niin no, mun käsitys on se, että näiden yritysten kannalta, joille verkot on jollain tavalla merkittävässä osassa liiketoimintaa, niin konvergoitumisella on tietysti paljon seurauksia. Ja toisaalta, niille, että, se varmaan avaa samanaikasesti mahdollisuuksia monille uusille palveluille ja sitä kautta uusille ansaintamalleille, mutta koska muilla toimijoilla on tämä sama mahdollisuus, niin kokonaisuutenahan kilpailu siis lisääntyy. Eli, käytännön esimerkkinä: jos aatellaan jotain sellaista matkapuhelintyyppistä päätelaitetta, joka on näihin päiviin asti useimmiten ollut sidottu johonkin yksittäiseen, ja nimenomaan yhden operaattorin, verkkoon ja sitä kautta tavoitettavissa oleviin palveluihin, niin jos nyt aatellaan, että se sitte monessa tapauksessa jo tänäkin päivänä, mutta vielä enemmän tulevaisuudessa, niin, voi samanaikasesti hyödyntää sitten avoimia wlan-verkkoja, jotka on täysin operaattorien ulkopuolella, tai jotain muit verkkoteknologioita, niin toki sillon niiden verkkoja ylläpitävien ja operoivien, ja niissä palveluita tarjoavien tahojen kannaltahan on 16

17 nimenomaan kilpailu lisääntynyt, mutta samanaikaisesti tullut nimenomaan uusia mahdollisuuksia sitten palveluille, ja niiden ansaintamalleille. Oli ne nyt mitä tahansa työryhmäkalenteria tai tavoitettavuuspalvelua tai muuta tällaista, niin kaikille näille, tämän tyyppisille palveluillehan konvergenssi mahdollistaa yhä enemmän toimijoita ja yhä enemmän toteutustapoja; jolloin sitten taas niitä hyödyntävien yritysten kannalta, niin, valikoima kasvaa ja hinta ehkä laskee, mutta samanaikaisesti saatetaan sitten vaatia enemmän osaamista näiden kaikkien käyttöön ja toisaalta valintaan. Osittainhan konvergenssi joillekin yrityksille tarkoittaa jakelukanavien, jakeluteiden, näiden monipuolistumista. Niitä tulee lisää siis omille vähemmän fyysisille tuotteille. Sitten samalla tavallaan medioiden määrä kasvaa siis monissa muissa funktioissa kuin jakelukanavassa, elikkä vaikkapa asiakaspalvelun kannalta tai after-salesin kannalta tai markkinoinnin, medioiden kannalta. tää on ehkä yks olennainen pointti konvergenssin kannalta, et kun nyt aatellaan, että konvergenssi tarkoitti just pitkälti sitä, että käyttäjällä on uudenkarhee päätelaite, ja se juttelee erilaisten verkkojen ja palveluiden kanssa sujuvammin ku aikasemmin, niin ihan varmaan on suhteess isot haasteet nimenomaan näill palvelumuotosilla jutuilla tulla sieltä läpi, vaikka niille, niinku, teknologisessa mielessä hyvät mahdollisuudet oliskin. Eli nää kamerakännykät, paikannus, ja ehkä tulevaisuudessa NFC:kin, niin tota, nehän kaikki jollain tavall on nimenomaan menestynyt siinä mielessä, että käyttäjä käyttää niitä yksittäisinä tuotteita tai toiminnallisuuksina, mutta ei välttämättä ollenkaan samalla tavalla hyödynnä, niin, niihin liittyviä palveluita, jotka olis nimenomaan ehkä vielä sen konvergenssin isompi hyöty. tää voi toimia toisin päinkin, että läppärillä voi tehdä asioita vaikka nyt VoIP-puhelu esimerkkinä jotka aikaisemmin ois meinannut sen kännykän käyttöö, et siinä mielessä mobiilipäätelaitteet, kännykällä ja näillä, on ehkä enemmän voitettavaa kuin hävittävää, koska kännykällä ei nyt oo alkuperäsesti tehty juuri muuta ku puhuttu, ja ehkä sen jälkeen lähetelty viestejä. Niin, on niin paljon voitettavaa tietokoneelta ja muilta laitteilta, nimenomaan kännyköillä, et sit taas tietokoneilla on ehkä sit taas suhteessa enemmän hävittävää, koska tietokoneilla on jo nyt kuitenkin tehty niin paljon asioita ajankäytöllisestikin. Se oikeestaan mikä nyt näitten kuituverkkojen myötä tulee mahdolliseks niin tällanen et saadaan sieltä samasta töpselistä oikeesti kaikki. Et kodit teknistyy ja kaikki telkkarit, tietokoneet, puheet niin ne saadaan sielt kuidun kautta, et ei tarvi mitään kuparia enää vedellä sinne. No, tavallaan se kaikki kulkee siellä IP*-putkessa, ehkä ne suurimmat haasteet on tavallaan sen asiakkuuden konvergenssissa, joka tavallaan kulminoituu siihen, että kun sulla on useita accessmetodeita, niin kuluttajalle ei tulis erillistä laskua jokaisesta kanavasta, kiinteistä puheluista, mobiilipuheluista, kodin laajakaistasta, IPTV:stä, mobiili-tv:stä, jostain lisäarvotoiminnallisuudesta, auton navigaattorista, jostain palvelusta sun niinku koti-networkissa, elikkä se konvergenssi tavallaan siellä sisällön puolella, tai sanotaan siellä tiedon välityksen puolella, niin... se vaatii sitä, että tapahtuu myös konvergenssiä taas tässä asiakkuuden hoidossa. että kaikista palveluista sulle tulee vain yks lasku. Käyttäjä ja käyttökokemus. Ihan silleen toisaalta on samantekevää, mitä kautta se televisio-ohjelmansa saa, ei sitä kiinnosta sitä oikeesti, kunhan ne tulee sieltä. Ja kunhan ne tulee yhtä helposti kun ne tulee tänä päivänä. Et mikäli sen pitää jotain näppylöidä, tietokoneita ennen televisio-ohjelmansa näkemistä, niin se voi unohtaa. Ei kukaan semmosta rupee tekemään. Siinä pitää olla yks nappula suurin piirtein, mitä käyttää kun menee kotiin. Sekin on liikaa, että huokastaan niin sieltä pitäis tulla kuva päälle, [epäselvää] ohjelma. Mutta sitten jos, tota, se käyttöliittymä tavallaan, millä se saa palvelun sitten käyttöön, on semmonen, mitä ihmiset entisaikona on tottunut siihen, että se on helppoa, sieltä vähän näkyy jotain lumisadetta, niin ei silläkään ollut merkitystä, koska siellä jotain näkyi kuitenkin. Jos siinä pitää tehdä hirveen monia temppuja ja aina viritellä uusiksi tai tilailla jotain jostakin, niin se voi unohtaa. Eikö se oo jo vanha juttu se konvergenssi*, nyt puhutaan, että NGN, next generation networks. The viewpoints presented by the interviewed indicate that they see the consequences of convergence at different levels of strategy, and that the consequences also appear to be partly contradictory in nature. Analyzing industries Traditionally industry analysis focuses on explaining the market structures and competitive conditions within the selected industry. Understanding the prevailing competitive conditions and market dynamics makes possible to draw some predictions of the attractiveness and future evolution of the industry. Industry analysis is the basis for strategic planning, i.e., companies can continuously analyze competitors 17

18 strategies and actions in the attempt to align their own strategies to the continuously changing market situation. Recently, in the spectrum of the business and corporate strategies, the magnitude of vertical and horizontal integration has been increasing. Industry analysis is usually divided into analysis of the macro-level factors, industry environment and intraindustry analysis. Understanding of the business environment is the prerequisite for successful corporate (in which industries to be engaged in, vertical integrations and disintegrations) and business (how to survive from the competition) strategies. Macro-level factors. Gartner s Key Predictions include the following top 10 trends that are highlighted and considered to be the technology areas that executives and IT professionals should strongly focus on. The full impact of these trends may not appear immediately, but, according to Gartner, companies need to act now so that they can exploit the trends for their competitive advantage. (Gartner Newsroom. it/page.jsp?id=593207). 1. By 2011, Apple will double its U.S. and Western Europe unit market share in Computers. Apple s gains in computer market share reflect as much on the failures of the rest of the industry as on Apple s success. Apple is challenging its competitors with software integration that provides ease of use and flexibility; continuous and more frequent innovation in hardware and software; and an ecosystem that focuses on interoperability across multiple devices (such as ipod and imac cross-selling). 2. By 2012, 50 per cent of traveling workers will leave their notebooks at home in favour of other devices. Even though notebooks continue to shrink in size and weight, traveling workers lament the weight and inconvenience of carrying them on their trips. Vendors are developing solutions to address these concerns: new classes of Internet-centric pocketable devices at the sub-$400 level; and server and Web-based applications that can be accessed from anywhere. There is also a new class of applications: portable personality that encapsulates a user s preferred work environment, enabling the user to recreate that environment across multiple locations or systems. 3. By 2012, 80 per cent of all commercial software will include elements of open-source technology. Many open-source technologies are mature, stable and well supported. They provide significant opportunities for vendors and users to lower their total cost of ownership and increase returns on investment. Ignoring this will put companies at a serious competitive disadvantage. Embedded open source strategies will become the minimal level of investment that most large software vendors will find necessary to maintain competitive advantages during the next five years. 4. By 2012, at least one-third of business application software spending will be as service subscription instead of as product license. With software as service (SaaS), the user organisation pays for software services in proportion to use. This is fundamentally different from the fixedprice perpetual license of the traditional on-premises technology. Endorsed and promoted by all leading business applications vendors (Oracle, SAP, Microsoft) and many Web technology leaders (Google, Amazon), the SaaS model of deployment and distribution of software services will enjoy steady growth in mainstream use during the next five years. 5. By 2011, early technology adopters will forgo capital expenditures and instead purchase 40 per cent of their IT infrastructure as a service. Increased high-speed bandwidth makes it practical to locate infrastructure at other sites and still receive the same response times. Enterprises believe that as service oriented architecture (SOA) becomes common cloud computing will take off, thus untying applications from specific infrastructure. This trend to accepting commodity infrastructure could end the traditional lock-in with a single supplier and lower the costs of switching suppliers. It means that IT buyers should strengthen their purchasing and sourcing departments to evaluate offerings. They will have to develop and use new criteria for evaluation and selection and phase out traditional criteria. 6. By 2009, more than one third of IT organizations will have one or more environmental criteria in their top six buying criteria for IT-related goods. Initially, the motivation will come from the wish to contain costs. Enterprise data centres are struggling to keep pace with the increasing power requirements of their infrastructures. And there is 18

19 substantial potential to improve the environmental footprint, throughout the life cycle, of all IT products and services without any significant trade-offs in price or performance. In future, IT organisations will shift their focus from the power efficiency of products to asking service providers about their measures to improve energy efficiency. 7. By 2010, 75 per cent of organisations will use full life cycle energy and CO2 footprint as mandatory PC hardware buying criteria. Most technology providers have little or no knowledge of the full life cycle energy and CO2 footprint of their products. Some technology providers have started the process of life cycle assessments, or at least were asking key suppliers about carbon and energy use in 2007 and will continue in Most others using such information to differentiate their products will start in 2009 and by 2010 enterprises will be able to start using the information as a basis for purchasing decisions. Most others will stat some level of more detailed life cycle assessment in By 2011, suppliers to large global enterprises will need to prove their green credentials via an audited process to retain preferred supplier status. Those organizations with strong brands are helping to forge the first wave of green sourcing policies and initiatives. These policies go well beyond minimizing direct carbon emissions or requiring suppliers to comply with local environmental regulations. For example, Timberland has launched a Green Index environmental rating for its shoes and boots. Home Depot is working on evaluation and audit criteria for assessing supplier submissions for its new EcoOptions product line. 9. By 2010, end-user preferences will decide as much as half of all software, hardware and services acquisitions made by IT. The rise of the Internet and the ubiquity of the browser interface have made computing approachable and individuals are now making decisions about technology for personal and business use. Because of this, IT organizations are addressing user concerns through planning for a global class of computing that incorporates user decisions in risk analysis and innovation of business strategy. 10. Through 2011, the number of 3-D printers in homes and businesses will grow 100-fold over 2006 levels. The technology lets users send a file of a 3-D design to a printer-like device that will carve the design out of a block of resin. A manufacturer can make scale models of new product designs without the expense of model makers. Or consumers can have models of the avatars they use online. Ultimately, manufacturers can consider making some components on demand without having an inventory of replacement parts. Printers priced less than $10,000 have been announced for 2008, opening up the personal and hobbyist markets. A Tekes study made in 2009 discusses the global megatrends. According to the study, the following six trends were highlighted (Ahola & Palkamo, 2009): 1. Consumption-related expenses will decrease as the consumers become more aware of the global production costs. 2. Scarcity will shift the consumption. 3. Leisure time consumption will lead the consumption s way. 4. New customer movements shall shape global innovations. 5. Competences can be found in the core of economy. 6. Technological discontinuity will bring about new technology paradigms. Also Churchill lists top ten trends. 1. Demographics are destiny, creating opportunity. Baby boomers are an opportunity, including an ebay for information that exceeds the market for physical goods. This is a U.S./ Canada/U.K. trend. Baby boomers as the first Internet savvy seniors. Smart, active, group, entering AARP age. 75 million of them, half the U.S. workforce. In 2025, the entire country will look like Florida does today. Nothing will change that. Demographics are destiny. Over have of businesses and franchises are started by people in this group. At home, educated and Internet savvy. Services online will exceed market for goods online. Another market: the mental exercise market. If you are 35 or older, cognitive decline is at the same pace as 80 year olds. 2. The mobile phone will be a mainstream personal computer. With built in projector. Authentication. Credit cards on SIM cards. ID cards, passports, drivers licenses. Any information you need. 3. The rise of the implicit Internet. Today your permanent record exists; you create a trail of data exhaust, digital bread crumbs. Implicit da- 19

20 ta that exists in silence. Movie rentals, restaurant reservations, books purchased, Web sites visited, etc. All of this data existed in silence. No easy way until now to benefit from the data; but the silos are coming down. Google, Yahoo, Facebook, Mozilla collecting data. Trend is that big wave will come to companies that are able to novel and new ways to deliver information by crossing these silos, with implicit data on the Internet. Use social networking data to improve search. Conversion of data exhaust will create value in new and interesting ways. All of the panelists seem to agree that this is a key trend. 4. Betting on smart phones: The mobile device migration to smart phones from features phones will produce even greater disruption than PC industry moving from character mode to graphical interface. Used to be just Palm and Research in Motion. What you are really doing, is put in real software environments, with applications layer that separates network from physical device. Phones far more pervasive than PCs. Will take out Motorola. One of LG, Samsung or Sony Ericsson as well. Will be intensely disruptive. And it will hurt Microsoft. You cannot make a great consumer product with unbundled operating system. It will be incredibly disrupted. In five years, half of what we think of as phones will do something far more profound than what we think of a phone as doing. Design centers will fragment. An Amazon Kindle is a smartphone, with 3G network behind it. A life changer for people who use it. Will turn billion unit a year industry on its head. Assume Nokia, Apple, RIMM will do really well. 5. Water tech will replace global warming as a global priority. The world is running out of usable water and will kill millions more in our lifetime than global warming. One billion of 6 billion people do not have healthy water. We re losing close to 1 million people a year under 5 years old due to dirty water. 6. Evolution trumps design. Many interesting unsolved problems in computer science, nanotech, and synthetic biology require construction of complex systems. Evolutionary algorithms are a powerful alternative to traditional design, blossoming first in neural networks and now in microbial engineering. Nearterm trend: year or two, components of microbial engineering products will involve some form of evolution. Design for evolution. Has been used in neural networks. In microbial work, cripple a microbe, so it can do the one thing it does better and better. To make industrial chemicals. Applied to analog circuit design. In the future, artificial intelligence. 7. Fossilizing fossil energy. Oil and coal will have trouble competing with biofuels. 99% of discussion on the topic is completely irrelevant to the topic. In 4 5 years will have production proof that can sell biofuel at well below $2 a gallon at today s tax structure and no subsidy. Can t imagine how big oil can stay in business if that is an alternative. Zero land needed to replace 100% of our gasoline. The other major issue is electrical power generation, which is coal and natural gas. One of his companies signed deal for 175 MW solar plant at costs below natural gas. Cheaper and less subject to commodity pricing. 8. Venture Capital 2.0. Venture capital has underwritten most of the transformative software and Internet companies over last 20 years. Changing economics will have dramatic impact on the venture capital industry, in particular for software and IT. 9. Within 5 years, everything that matters to you will be available to you on a device that fits on your belt or in your purse. Massive shift in Internet traffic from PCs to smaller devices. You should all get a Kindle, and study this thing, Roger says. Apple has it in the long run, wrong. Won t be about watching created content, it will be about creating content. Within 10 years, more Internet traffic from your person than all other locations put together % of the world population will carry mobile Internet devices within 5-10 years. Dial-tone is going to be gone. By next year, people will put micro cells in your house. China Mobile has 500 million billable lines. Within 5-10 years will hit 5 billion global wireless phones. The trends listed in recent publications point our things that are commonly known by the ICT industry analysts and big players within the industry. Also, to some degree the above statements have been given to speed up the transformation of the industry to desired directions. The trends picked up from the interviews indicate that the informants are rather well aware of these known facts but they are also concerned with partly different 20