Learning-by-Doing, Organizational Forgetting, and Industry ...
Organizational Fields and the Book Industry
-
Upload
peter-brantley -
Category
Business
-
view
3.904 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Organizational Fields and the Book Industry
peter brantleyinternet archivesan francisco ca
concept of an “organizational field”(defined)
often complex groups orsets of actors involved.
stable industry indicates stable network
for both organizations and people
Disruption in core aspects: production,means, distribution of goods/services –creates conflicts
good example:digital rights for backlist titles
rights to the latent rents were never arbitrated
confusing enough issue to be amajor component of GBS proposal(“Author-Publisher Procedures”)
authors X agents X publishers
roles suddenly become vague,technology makes apparent buried conflicts in contracts
outcome:
rosetta, wylie v. random house
well what is interesting ... ?books enter digital market.
the present condition of the book industry:
a new threshold, for industry-wideno dominant paradigm for product
the automotive industry:imagine planes vs. cars(what if planes offered personal commuting alternative – wow!)
ebook characterization is happening in shadow of historical print pattern
the efforts to build a new market stasis-
determine the primary “axis of competition”:product | pricing | services
deep technology shiftsusually remove the ability to focus on a single axis
digital (creation, distribution)have {many} {new}
implications for ubiquity and control of products, services
fields that have become disrupted are naturally subject to the formation of new emergent biases in conduct.
(there is no existing practice)
any newly introduced stressesproduce unexpected outcomes evolving by positive feedbacks,counters are weak.
such as a tendency for progressive furthering ofemerging monopolies
international rights will force new emergent practices
uncertainties are easily introducedfor digital books vs. print products
National historical book price fixing lawssubject to stress from international firms because digital stresses different vectors
tensions exacerbated by complexities international vs national legal regime –changes in law difficult to negotiate
something could emerge in EU or GATT / WTO context
strikingly uncertain right now in an international context:
who will sell what to whom for what
this does not even touch on definition of redistribution or secondary markets nationalor international in context!
e.g. consider digital first sale!
an issue common to software (shrink wrap licensing) less an issue for music, movies in the past (although might change)
or LENDING ...
not as straightforward as buying adigital copy and putting it on shelf
digital lending requires a newcoordinated technology infrastructure with access-based accounting systems quite different than traditional lending
and ...
publisher recalcitrance to provide lending inventory to libraries due to perceived loss of a new revenue opportunity
might force establishment of new large library consortia acting as theirown platform services providers –
many outcomes might emerge.
“Hold Hands”, wickenden, Flickr
in organizational fields like publishingthat have had a long period of stabilityimplicit rules formed to govern action
typically bluffs are not called and brinksmanship is avoided
(consider wylie v random house–agent and publisher work it out)
one can see this in technology:
patents are usually cross licensed -not worth divisive shoot_foot_self
lawsuits typically signal a breakdown in normative practiceswithin an organizational field
the core publishing industry dependenciesestablished a rich set of interactions:
author / agent / publisher / selling-agent
as historical patterns erodethe early stage survivors of market disruption to rebuild using existing networks
(e.g., R_Nash’s Cursor Books)
author / agent / publisher / selling-agentincreasingly subject not to redefinition but re-articulation
Not “what is a publisher” Now “what is publishing”
as industry, publishing is lucky it has laid claim to an obvious higher-goal:
disseminating information
this reference point acts to reduce friction, mitigating damage from rent seeking
networks alter dramatically when powerful new entrants impact adisrupted organizational field –
1) technologies have changed, and 2) new domains have entered field
that would be Silicon Valley:
Apple Google Amazon
New entrants are not bound by any extant dependencies.
Network “damage” occurs when new org field actors first interact.
Odds of engendering wholly unexpectedconsequences is dramatically multiplied.
New actors predominately occupy distinctorganizational networks, in different fields
It is this “asteroid from outer space”characteristic that makes the industryraw and exposed for the first time indecades
out of field (technology) disruption demands engagement with different industrial sectors, for radical change.
transmedia and web based delivery are examples where new entrants better able to produce, distribute
trying to mold oneself like plastic sheet wrap around disrupting agents
(Absorb the Mongols!)
is not a strategy for long term survival
Google's entrance into vending books (as opposed to mining them for data)
is only part of a larger product portfolio to convenience its existing partners and to place pressure on valley competitors.
on the bright side ...
we have stunning new rangeof opportunities to build newservices
peter brantley
co-founder, open books alliancedirector, bookserver project
internet archivethe presidio, san francisco, ca
@naypinya (twitter) [email protected]