Thursday, December 6, 2018

What is new in Value (2013 - 2018)? How to do a Literature review as an Open Researcher

I am writing an update to my literature review, now that I have published v1 of The Little Book of Value. But this is the first literature review I am writing as an Open Researcher. So I am considering how do I write this as an open process. Some options:
The Little Book of Value: figshare.
  • Endnote - too proprietary. Sharable. I doubt it. 
  • Onenote - Microsoft. Ick! Too complicated. 
 Now I am thinking I will use a Google Doc, with sections:
  • Authors 
  • Journals 
  • Papers 
  • Quotes 
So my research question is: what is new in value theory (2013 - 2018). Let's begin. Will update this post with my progress.

I posted a request to the Australia/NZ Open Research Slack channel (ANZORN) and had responses:
  • Zotero - "a free, easy-to-use tool to help you collect, organize, cite, and share research" ,but it is a download to desktop tool.Ugh! Where is the work in the open? Also has Zbib for a quick bibliography from DOI.
  • google doc (view/comment only): sharable, unstructured, public, free, simple. See the Literature Review in progress. Current paper count: 40. Current Author search: Gronroos, Vargo and Lusch, Akaka. Current Journals: Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, Industrial Marketing Management, Marketing Theory, MIS Quarterly, Journal of Creating Value (and more) plus books.
Will update here as progress continues. See the Google Doc for live updates.
Update 1 (24.1.19): Summary of Value Lit. published as an update in The Little Book of Value (version 3).
Significant new literature noted: Mazzucato, M. (2018). The Value of Everything. Includes an economic history of value theory including focus on land (physiocrats), labour (Classical, Adam Smith, Ricardo, Marx ie industrial revolution), trade (mercantilists). Focus on productive and unproductive growth - making and taking.

See also a network visualisation of Innovation and Value creation at (opens full page), and embedded below. On a bigger screen you can choose between two views: - Innovation and value creation - thinkers (an overview of the literature review in my PhD 2012) - Value theory of innovation (the PhD model). NB: After clicking on a node, click top-right corner to close description.

Tuesday, April 3, 2018

Is there a business case for the National Broadband Network?

I made a model to calculate the value of NBN for the Business Case Inquiry, using an online calculator(JavaScript) called an Observable Notebook.
See introduction to Observable Notebooks at:

I had a class in Feb at Melb Uni which showed these HTML sliders controlling the colour of a box; and I thought it would be cool if you could make a model of NBN's finances and use a bunch of sliders to check out various scenarios eg

  • people leave NBN for mobile
  • people leave/stay with FTTN because too slow/good enough
  • when to replace FTTN with FTTC/FTTP (I ended up using two sliders. One to put $$$ aside to replace FTTN, as % of cash profit. The other is what to replace FTTN with, FTTC or FTTP or mix.)
So I wondered with a bunch of sliders, say six, could you model 100M possible scenarios.

As I say in my submission:
This submission introduces an online model which describes financial scenarios of NBN’s business over the next 20 years; including replacing FTTN with FTTC/FTTP, repaying debt, upgrading to gigabit services and the potential fallout of not replacing FTTN, to calculate NBN’s financial value under these different possible futures.

Figure 1. NBN Cashflow graph and four sliders.

Here the Observable model is - NBN Financials from 2021 on. The model rates a Base Case value of NBN at $31B.

I was so rushed getting it finished, and 5pp summary(see figshare link) for NBN inquiry, didn’t think to share here, at Whirlpool, for comment. I should have.

Here is the link to the version with explanations;

Key findings of the model

  • NBN cash profit(EBITDA) after 2021 $2.44B per year
  • can afford to replace FTTN In 6-8 yrs depending on FTTC/FTTP, if not repaying debt
  • each loss 1% of customers worth $1B in NBN value
  • gigabit services can add $20B to NBN value
  • FTTN replacement pays for itself if 30% of FTTN users upgrade to gigabit
  • customer satisfaction has big impact on NBN value
  • where gigabit costs 2* avg ARPU...but higher margin...
  • Model suggests NBN will have enough $$$ to replace FTTN, if don’t have to repay debt urgently. Otherwise run into FTTN end of life and possible loss of customers...
Disclaimer; model had no tax, interest, inflation, price rises, but was built in four weeks, so there you go. The next thing I would add would be interest on debt, and a slider for the rate, to add a time dimension/penalty to the replacement of FTTN.

Any comments, as usual, appreciated.

Twitter mention:

Thursday, February 8, 2018

Why walk on the footpath when you can walk on the grass? ...a value choice...

Walking to the train this morning, I noticed the long grass verge next to the footpath, as if for the first time. They are upgrading the train near my house, so for the last three months I have had to walk for ten minutes to the 2nd closest train station. It is summer here, and so I had my slip on shoes on to keep cool.

On a whim, I took my shoes off, and walked on the grass instead of the footpath. My 900m walking commute suddenly became a walk in the park. #shoesOff The footpath in bare feet seemed alien and unfriendly. The grass, while uneven and coarse, I realised was gently massaging my feet.

I realised how dull my feet felt in shoes on pavement. While barefoot on grass, I felt more alive, more in touch with nature, more normal.

Then a young woman, headphones on, frightened me as she scooted past on the footpath, walking briskly. Left Right Left Right, she was soon gone up the road, as I ambled along enjoying the tickle of the grass on my soles.

Aha. I was having a value moment. In that choice between grass and concrete, between fast and slow, between smooth and bumpy, we were each finding our value. Hers was quick and smooth and efficient, while mine was bumpy, slow and (like an Aussie wit) laconical. Her value was functional while mine was pleasureable. Hers was a means to an end, while mine was an end in itself.

Monday, I will probably be scooting down the footpath, on a cooler day, socks and shoes on.

Value is thus an individual choice, in a perceived context, between value dimensions eg function vs pleasure, each according to their current momentary needs. That choice for me happened in an instant today, but not occurred to me over the previous three months.