Archive for the ‘Thinking’ Category
-
We’re moving forward with the project to the point that we need to pin down just how the service will work, so we know exactly what we’re building.
Within the framework of Agile software development, this phase of the project consists of writing user stories. With a service like this one, this phase consists of writing a lot of user stories. Each of the index cards on this very large wall is at least one user story (some are epic user stories, which, as the name suggests, means they need some breaking down):
User stories are short statements that describe what users want to do. Each user story specifies which type of user we are talking about (for example, an administrator versus an unregistered user) and then says what they want to do. Each also includes acceptance criteria — how we will know the goal of the user story has been met. Here’s an example:
As an SME, I want to report an internationalisation success story. [Acceptance criteria: success story must be attached to company name]
As you can probably surmise, the user story process is a long one, and the more you want your service to do, the longer the process takes! Last week we pulled together a group that included both UKTI representatives and Made by Many folks, and we got to work on the first round of user stories.
We made some headway on the project but the work is nowhere near done. Over the coming weeks we’ll continue generating new user stories and refining the ones we have until we are satisfied they are all clear and complete. From there we will estimate each (how much effort they take) and then prioritise them. The goal is to structure work so we release working software sooner than later, and then improve on or add to it in an iterative way.
We should be able to post more user stories in a more readable format in the next couple of weeks… we just need to work through a two-inch stack of index cards first!
-
Made by Many arrived back from Austin on Thursday after five days of rather intense thought and debate at SXSWi.
I attended a range of sessions on communication, cross-channel storytelling, creativity, and so on. One of the things I noticed over the course of the conference was the development of several themes. I don’t think this was a deliberate move by speakers and organisers; rather, I think the community as a whole is talking about these things right now.
Two of these themes — failure and creative leadership — are especially relevant to this project and the community of business start-ups, and for that reason I’d like to unpack them here. Any comments are very, very welcome — this is designed to start conversations rather than lay down an edict of how things should be!
-
Following on from Mike’s Our big presentation and The Model posts, I’d like to show some of our outputs from the vision phase.
These user journeys explore how three different users could interact with the site and how it might benefit them. Each journey touches on key screens from our model.
*Please note, you might have to view these full screen so the text is readable.
User Journey – BenView more documents from madebymany.User Journey – MaxView more documents from madebymany.User Journey – SachiniView more documents from madebymany. -
Here’s one of the diagrams we’ve been using to convey how our system works. You can download the PDF or click the image below to bring it up in a new window.
There are three main parts.
Search model
We figure that anyone searching for information about internationalising their business is going to be looking for 1 or more of the following types of information:
- Geographical location – i.e. Spain, London or EMEA
- Industry – this might be the user’s own industry (horizontal) or it may be the industry they are looking to serve (vertical)
- Subject – this might be something very general like taxation or something more granular such as VAT
We believe that many people will be looking for very specific bits of information but may also be making quite broad searches. We hope the service will provide information and classification at all these levels.
Participants
There are lots of different types of people who might use this service, and each type of person is going to be looking for different value from the service.
It’s important to ensure that the value is reciprocal and balanced. Service providers need to believe they are going to get some business by helping people on the service, UKTI need to have an understanding of how the value they add is measured, and UK SMEs want to get the information they need at the right time.
The guide
The guide is made up of goals. These are in turn made up of sets of prompts which are categorised by subject. The guide doesn’t give you answers or advice, it merely prompts you to think about the right kind of thing at the right time. Of course, some people won’t want to use a guide, and that’s fine. But some people like the idea of ticking off the things they need to think of.
This really encapsulates a lot of the thinking on this project, so if you have any thoughts or feedback, we’d love to hear them.
-
When I began on this project, I knew very little about internationalisation. It’s a huge and very daunting subject. This is because it can be different for every industry, market, product, founder, entry mode etc.
Any complex subject usually has a wealth of academic literature associated with it. And internationalisation is no exception.
From the beginning, we needed some form of robust model to understand the process that firms go through.
Early models of internationalisation, namely the Upsala model and Cavusgil’s I-model, suggested that firms gradually increase their involvement in overseas markets which they consider have some form of psychic proximity to their own domestic market. For example, many firms may consider the US to have a close proximity simply because we share the same language.
The following image conveys the I-model process of internationalisation (Cavusgil).
- Domestic marketing – Firm isn’t considering internationalisation and is carrying out marketing efforts solely in the domestic market
- Pre-export – Firm is researching and preparing for involvement in a new overseas market.
- Experimental involvement – Firm may be attending trade shows, missions, offering services in a new market in order to evaluate demand.
- Active involvement – Firm is trading directly in or with a new market. Typically less than 10% of revenue will come from this new market.
- Committed involvement – Firm has made a commitment to the new market and may be considering other new markets.
The crux of this model is the precis that firms experiment gradually into new markets, as opposed to jumping straight in head first.
However, this model has a number of problems.
The traditional staged models don’t account for the behaviour of some firms (e.g. ‘born globals’) who have the management expertise, a network of valuable contacts, a knowledge-based product (i.e. no physical shipping) and a desire to internationalise to many markets concurrently and rapidly to gain a first-mover advantage.
Born global firms becoming more and more common and is particularly important for UK Technology companies, where intellectual property and technology design form an integral aspect what the UK excels at.
The staged model is still very valid for some firms and we have witnessed a number of firms working in this manner in our own research. However, a more holistic model has been developed by Jim Bell, Ron McNaughton, Stephen Young and Dave Crick.
An integrative model of small firm internationalisation
The integrative model (Bell et al) takes into account not only the more proactive and competitive approach of born globals but includes the more traditional staged approach and even seeks to marry the two approaches with the concept of born-again global firms.
The model indicates the most stereotypical trajectories as opposed to rigid pathways and has served as inspiration for an approach to the design which prioritises versatility.
Most importantly, when incorporating the stages of internationalisation, the model tends to use them more as states, not stages. This thereby affords the potential for forward, backward or repetitive involvement in the ’stages’.
A flexible model, but does it suit you?
I would be interested to hear if you have internationalised your business and you feel you do not fit into the above model.
UK Technology Global Markets group