FQ2: Ecosystem Applications
Once again, we are fuzing the qubes — this time from Q6 to Q9! As always, please don’t hesitate to provide us with feedback on our articles and summaries — we’re always looking for ways to improve our delivery. 😊
Ecosystem Applications
Over the past few weeks, we have moved from the foundations toward identifying some of the core application areas of ecosystems. This is, naturally just a starting point — there is plenty more to cover, which will give the blog plenty to expand on in the weeks and months ahead.
To begin with, in Q6, we discussed ecosystems from the standpoint of seizing opportunities, and how underutilized resources can be strategically acquired and subsequently deployed to improve organizational outcomes by emphasizing complementarities between actors. Digital innovation is allowing us better coordination, opening doors to better management of collaborations and interdependencies within and between organizations. For the managers who prioritize ecosystem building and orchestration, this enables resource optimization at unprecedented levels.
But these value propositions have some barriers to entry — a prominent of which is trust (as discussed in Q7). Collaboration is at the peak of importance for ecosystem building and orchestration, but if the trust between actors isn’t there, it’s all a non-starter. But, there are ways to ease into it — which is what transition mechanisms are for. These allow organizations to move from low-risk, community-based ecosystems (like open-ended digital platforms) to more comprehensive structural ecosystems as tangible prospects for formal collaborations arise. Nonetheless, even at the community-based level, some real benefits are at companies’ disposal.
As covered in Q8, with innovation being the focal point that keeps organizations thriving over time, the collaborative dynamics of ecosystems can enable participants to embrace generativity and innovate with perspective from all relevant stakeholders, without losing control of the represented vision and values. And, with the transition mechanisms mentioned in Q7, this can be done with various degrees of commitment, and allow ecosystem participants to draw upon the resources and inspiration of other participants moving toward similar holistic objectives — all without interfering while placing the needs of one’s own organization first.
These prospects do, however, inevitably come with some difficulty. As the final piece of this series (Q9) states, the return of ecosystems is predicated on organizations being open to modifying their structures, at least externally — which rarely is smooth sailing. Structural change is challenging to organizations due to the many interdependencies involved, and with that, ecosystem building does not always have the expected outcome. However, in cases where ecosystem building and orchestration do not go according to plan, there are remedies. Some require organizations to emphasize lower-order changes to technology and tasks, while others demand more conscious consideration of the significant interdependencies between structures and the people subjected to them. Resistance to change is (understandably) one of the main difficulties to grapple with for structural change, and the impact on people should never be neglected in this context. But, if as an ecosystem orchestrator, one stays conscientious about these dynamics, the results are uniquely valuable to organizations.
So, with that, some final thoughts: ecosystems have a diverse set of application areas, many of which regard expanding the set of opportunities and resources available to an organization through seamless trust building, resulting in active resource sharing and co-creation. Ecosystems thus enable business paradigms where collaboration and competition go hand-in-hand, and mutualistic symbiosis can occur — something we want significantly more of.
Bardia Bijani
Managing Partner, FuzeQube Group
