Talk:OERu/Open business model canvases/Aggregated OERu partner canvas

From WikiEducator
Jump to: navigation, search


Thread titleRepliesLast modified
We need your feedback and confirmation of acceptance of the draft OERu aggregated business model.411:39, 17 September 2015

We need your feedback and confirmation of acceptance of the draft OERu aggregated business model.

Please let us know what you think:

  1. Is the resultant aggregated open business model a fair and reasonable summary of the draft business models developed and discussed by participants at the Oceania and North American regional meetings?
  2. How can we improve on the draft model?
  3. Are there any missing components?
  4. Additional thoughts and feedback?
Mackiwg (talk)14:42, 15 September 2015

Wayne, I'm wondering if there is a section where "value for provider/participant" is captured, if that value isn't "revenue" strictly speaking? For example, I would've thought OER contributions could be a major marketing channel (evidence of producing high-quality, up-to-date materials) for many tertiaries. I'm wondering if the "revenue streams" section could be expanded to accommodate, e.g. "Revenue and value recovery streams"?


That's an excellent question.

Drawing on the data from our Input evaluation, it is clear that a large number of OERu partners are participating in OERu as part of their social service mission and consequently less interested in generating "new" revenue from charitable OERu activities.

Key "value streams" are missing from the canvas. I think the best way to address this is to change the "Revenue streams" heading to "Revenue and value streams." In this way we can articulate the values derived from engagement with OERu.

What do others think?

Mackiwg (talk)15:33, 16 September 2015

Agree that the social service mission is a real value many seek - that value is intended to be captured in Social Good. Also agree that revenue streams don't necessarily capture all the value. However, one thing I want to emphasize is that Revenue Streams focus on realized value as opposed to potential value - a bit like the difference between inventory and actual sold goods. So while I think changing Revenue to Revenue and Value Streams has potential I want to emphasize that block is all about realized value - while inventory has potential value that value isn't realized until its sold. A marketing channel promoting high quality OER sounds more like a channel to customers or a key resource and would usually be seen as an expense not a revenue or realized value. So for me, at least right now, I'd need to see more examples of a non revenue value stream to really get on board with this idea.

Pgstacey (talk)07:21, 17 September 2015

Ok, thanks for that insight, Paul - a useful distinction between realised and potential value (agree that marketing is a cost, not revenue). Listing it in a channel to customers or key resource... *rubs chin* will have to ponder the ontological implications :)