Osterwalders BMC for "Service Designers"

1. Why SD needs BMD

1.1. the best design scenarios have to face the reality test (often users are the smaller problem) --> org capabilities, external forces and existing value constellations (partner networks etc.) have to be taken into account to deliver new value/experiences --> operationalize and execute the delivery of new value forms

1.2. SD knows how to create value / BMI discourse knows how capture some of it!

1.3. brand experience is also increasingly determined/staged by factors like pricing models

1.4. strategy as a pattern in a stream of decisions --> the BM provides the experience (SD often is just the "customer interface") --> the experienced pattern = brand experience / value provided

1.5. if you want to design for "transformation" --> no way of getting past BMD knowledge

2. General Advantages of the BM-Visualizations/Ontologies

2.1. common horizon of understanding

2.1.1. formulate and capture essential parts of the business logic

2.1.2. (at best) visualize complex interdependencies

2.1.3. communicate and share highly strategic content in an easily accessible way --> build commitment, increase organizational intelligence, foster discussion with important internal and external stakeholders

2.2. structured analysis

2.2.1. helps identifying critical KPI's

2.2.2. systemic observation/tracking of changes in the business (or even industry) logic

2.2.3. planning and facilitation of internal and external change processes (which actually EVERY major SD innovation is!)

2.2.4. better decisions --> shared mental model a.k.a. same "head cinema" ;)

2.2.5. MISC: increased reaction times / better alignment of trade-off's

2.3. future perspective

2.3.1. BM is THE LOCUS of innovation in the 21'st century

2.3.2. simulate and test a low-fi prototype at no/low risk --> DT

2.3.3. holding an anticipative portfolio of BM derivatives --> better preparation for market changes, e.g. competitors moves

2.4. makes patenting easier

3. Why BMD needs SD

3.1. SD informs the most important "building blocks" --> customer interface + value proposition

3.2. there is no BMD without the exploratory preparatory work of SD!!! --> SD and BMD cannot be separated/SD is part of BMD (p. 86)

3.3. lack of methodologies and systemic approaches for uncovering "real" user value / innovation opportunities

3.4. BM remains always incomplete --> interactions built in!

4. Positive personal Experiences in ...

4.1. Status-quo Mapping

4.1.1. it uncovers internal mental models --> what the company means to its people --> fosters common understanding

4.1.2. helps developing an elevator pitch

4.1.3. cool way of benchmarking own logic with competitive offers/alternative solutions from a users POV

4.1.4. serves as kind of a guided checklist :)

4.2. Ideation

4.2.1. you can't break sth. --> it's "just" a thought experiment

4.2.2. staging of brand experiences: unit of analysis + facilitation tool for brand development

4.2.3. best input comes from outside: co-creation w/ users

4.2.4. helpful for finding the right balance between the optimal experience (desirability) and viability (finance) + feasibility (resources, etc.)

4.2.5. BMC is perfect for "blue ocean" intellectual games

4.2.6. for me one of the best methods to describe strategy

4.2.7. gives first idea on how org "silos" have to work together --> they often know better how to achieve the new configuration/value proposition

5. Experienced Weaknesses/Problems ..

5.1. DANGER! --> seemingly exhaustive and seductive view on BMI: but only one perspective (for mapping and brainstorming in early stages of innovation processes) --> alone not sufficient to answer critical questions, like ...

5.1.1. business definition (solution)

5.1.2. value proposition development

5.1.3. value creation and architecture

5.2. value proposition part is very weak --> too simplified / gains vs. pains perspective --> oldschool

5.3. often different terminology as in (service) design or technology envrionments --> but meaning the same

5.4. business systems (pattern) are often mixed types --> same is true for the value creation logic (chain, network, shop, etc.) --> hard to disentangle

5.5. core logic becomes only partly visible --> hard to display cause and effect linkages (virtuous cycles) --> assumption testing becomes harder

5.6. tensions between its partner and customer blocks in co-creation scenarios can’t be visualized properly in the canvas --> Value Flows

6. Why use the BMC in SD projects as an standard tool?

6.1. Increase the chance of implementation --> many concepts are written, none are executed properly

6.2. Ask the right questions: dont forget/oversee critical constraints --> base for briefing

6.3. Pricing as a critical factor of ux --> ...

6.4. The more complex/radical the service innovation becomes, the more building blocks of a current bm it affects

6.5. Interactions need to be built in! Busines ppl don't know how to do that --> THIS IS OUR CHANCE!

6.6. Serves as an discussion/reality check basis for discussing the implications of a service launch with the other functional units of an org --> commitment

6.7. Helps finding weak spots when confronting with industry logic/paradigm --> better line of reasoning from the beginning of the project

6.8. Etc.

6.9. Services which affect the customer interface alone can often be copied easily by competition --> systemic changes, also in backend are more hard to copy

6.10. Provides another view on a typical service blueprint