Comments

Raj – This is a really fine piece. Thank you. Your writing and ideas are often brilliant and you have not fallen short here. As I was reading this piece I was reminded of why we join communities, virtual or real. The ecosystem that you have outlined here is the basis of community where sharing, building and creating a win win matter. If not, why even be a part?

Ecosystems seem like communities where goods are exchanged and built upon, leaving the product with a distinct imprint of the last hand held or applicable in another. This "invisible competitive advantage" is very real and it seems well worth the time they take to build. This is capitalism at its best: communal, global and sharing, not to mention exciting. I love your diverse examples.

Thanks again, Raj. This is a thoughtful piece indeed.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 11, 2009 10:21 PM

Thanks Judith for your kind words.

Have a great weekend.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at April 11, 2009 10:27 PM

Raj – In thinking further about healthy ecosystems, I also thought about the newspaper and newswire industries that are in trouble throughout the US. Some established papers took a hard stance against bloggers, not allowing access. But they paid for this and have since relaxed their policies. Bloggers simply found other means to get the same information elsewhere and less traffic went to the established online newspaper sites, not to mention the decrease in circulation.

The New York Times and the AP did not see bloggers as a win win. The AP does benefit from large blogs and internet companies. The Huffington Post and Google both have agreements with the Associated Press. This has not changed the information or news (the product) fundamentally. But it has created a kind of distinct product placement "application" and dissemination that seem similar to ecosystems. Although, the AP may not think it is altogether "healthy" for them, as there are many others monetizing from their sources without benefit to them. Where is the "invisible competitive advantage" there?

There is a competitive advantage for their agreements with Google and the HuffPost. But there are perhaps millions of others accessing this same information from Google and the Huffington Post that do not have such agreements. They seem to have the best competitive advantage, as they are benefiting from the agreements of Google and the HuffPost. Good luck in going after the millions of users all over the world that are a click away!

Are such information and news sites a part of an ecosystem? Is the AP's competitive advantage lessened? Arianna Huffington sees selling links as a means of being more competitive. By the way, what is the difference between ecosystems and the kind of licensing agreements that already exist? Can one exist without the other? This seems possible. With information and news, who is likely to benefit more in this kind of a system-the application of the technology notwithstanding?

I might have missed something altogether here, Raj. Please let me know.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 12, 2009 1:18 PM

Raj and Judith – An interesting exchange about newspapers. I very rarely buy a newspaper these days. If I buy one it's usually because I want something to read on a train on a business trip because I forgot to take the latest book I'm reading. I can find all I need to know either from TV news which is 24/7 these days or online news or Google. I wonder about the future of the traditional newspaper. When it comes to newspapers I’m afraid they don’t turn me on at all. I recall as a young man I looked forward to buying my newspaper on the way to work every day. This was of course when news was not available on continuous stream 24/7. In the words of the great Bob Dylan song "The times they are a changing" - Life is good – Happy Easter!

Posted by Trevor Gay at April 12, 2009 1:39 PM

Judith, Trevor:

We have an interesting thing going with the business of news. One one end, the current newspapers are not fully ready to embrace the new world order. On the other end, the new breed of journalists (bloggers) are being held to standards of a well-run newspaper.

Having said that, I do see a number of things that are changing. For instance, the move by NYT to acquire About.com (http://www.about.com) was interesting. They now have a property "almost" completely powered by the crowd.

Another example is the blog initiative from Harvard Business Review (http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org) where you can see an impressive list of bloggers creating compelling content and igniting insightful discussions.

While creative licensing agreements are one way of "loosening" their hold on something that can't be really held, what is required is "reinvention" of the news business model.

I do hope that will happen sooner than later.

My $.02 of course.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at April 12, 2009 5:24 PM

Thanks, Raj. Yes, I understand the reinvention necessity well. My focal question, however, perhaps not articulated well, is how, does this news technology problem relate to your idea of a healthy ecosystem? What you have written above is clearly seen. What I was wondering about is how it relates, for example, to the various examples that you have presented here, if at all?

Perhaps the lack of the ecosystem that you have presented here seems to be at the heart of the news techonology problem. Is there a kind of delivery, application, exchange, competitive advantage, healthy ecosystem here as what you have presented? Perhaps your simple answer was the need for reinvention. OK. Thanks for the Harvard Business Review link I'll check it out.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 13, 2009 7:33 AM

Hi Judith,

OK Now I understand the question. When I think about the news industry, I don't know whether they will go all out to create their own healthy ecosystems but there are signs of them participating in other ecosystems. An example of that is their arrangement with Amazon Kindle - one more way for them to distribute their news.

The call for re-invention is because it is now a necessity more than a luxury for the news industry. The way I look at it - building healthy ecosystems is one of the MANY things that they have to do to survive. Your example of licensing deals is show a sign of it but they are at the far end of the spectrum of a healthy ecosystem that I was thinking.

Have a great week ahead.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at April 13, 2009 9:08 AM

Raj,
Excellent post. One point I would like to highlight is that there is "Trust" that is implicit in an ecosystem. An ecosystem is constitutive of members that are competent, committed and reliable. These aspects lead to implicit trust. Good example is craigslist. I know if I have something that I want to get rid of, I can sell it on craiglist. Fraud is a big threat to such ecosystem because it breaks trust.

Posted by Ravi Char at April 13, 2009 10:31 AM

Thanks, Raj. Ravi's good point about trust also helps to address one aspect of my thinking as it relates to agreements and a healthy ecosystem. But beyond that there remains the whole delivery system and the other aspects you describe, especially relating to online businesses where information is essential.

At the heart of my thoughts was how does one build a healthy ecosystem online with its various components that creates a competitive advantage as well as one that creates a win win. This is the reason I brought up the news industry. Thanks for your reply. I too wish you a great week ahead.

Ravi - I appreciate your point. Thank you.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 13, 2009 11:04 AM

Ravi and Judith, Thank you.

Yes, "Trust" is an important factor in any relationship. In the context of an ecosystem, it gains higher importance as an ecosystem is typically a complex multi-party, multi-geography relationship.

Have a great week ahead both of you.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at April 13, 2009 12:43 PM