På under tre uker har studentene rigget og gjennomført tre talkshows (som er en del av deres eksamen i Innovasjon og kreativ prosjektutvikling) hvor de har hanket inn et stjernelag av smarte og spennende gjester! ⭐️
📈Det første talkshowet hadde Prosjektutvikling i IT-bransjen som tema, og dersom du syntes temaet virker kjedelig kan jeg love at der tok du feil! Helga Stumo (Prosjektleder og salgsansvarlig i KF samt styreleder Intersoft Management Systems og styremedlem i Kulturstudier) og Hanne Hofsæth Fredheim (prosjektleder i Digitaliseringsdirektoratet, tidligere en rekke år i politiet) tok oss med på en eksotisk reise til den mytiske offentlige sektor og hvordan man må manøvrere seg mellom anskaffelseslovverk på den ene siden, og bruke opp midler innen kalenderåret på den andre, og til privat sektor hvor «-man må løpe litt mer etter penga», samt hvordan kommunikasjon, ledelse og kunsten å se mennesker er viktige deler i prosjektarbeid uavhengig om man jobber etter en vannfallsmetodikk eller en smidig metode. Og at prosjektledelse innimellom handler om å ta upopulære avgjørelser, samtidig som noe av det beste ved å være prosjektleder er å få folk til å vokse og skinne, og at kommunikasjon er roten til mye bra.
🎯 Det neste talkshowet hadde strategi, og spesielt merkevarestrategi på menyen, og dynamittpanelet som besto av Wenche Witberg (Undervisningsleder, Kristiania), Karl-Fredrik Tangen (høyskolelektor, Kristiania) og Per Egenæss Stilling (Training.no og tidligere i Hansa Borg) var ikke vanskelige å få i tale! «– Strategi er som satan», åpnet Karl-Fredrik Tangen og tok oss med på en speedreise fra Harvard Business School, til Coca Cola og hvordan denne drikken ble markedsført som at «brainworkers ble kvitt impotensen sin» og videre til valg av Audi og sosial klasse, mens både Wenche og Per sa seg uenig med flere ting ved denne reisen og påpekte at strategi jo handler om å tjene penger. Hvordan kan man vite verdien av en merkevare, spurte vertene når de kom til ordet, og fikk som svar fra Per at - «Det kan du ikke vite før det går dårlig!» og forklarte oss at kvalitet kan defineres som «leveranse i henhold til forventning». Wenche nikket enig med Per mens hun påpekte at et godt og betegnende navn er viktig for en merkevare mens hun gikk for favoritt twisten Cocos som sto på bordet i talkshowstudioet vi hadde forvandlet klasserommet til. Mens Per takket nei til en twist fra Wenche, løftet han derimot opp Farrisflasken fra det samme bordet og kunne forklare at den var så full av kullsyre for å dekke over smaken av alt saltet som var oppi. Vannet som er tappet i Olden derimot (som er en merkevare i Hansa Borg bryggeriet) er det reneste vannet man kan få tak i. Så nå drikker neppe noen av oss blå Farris fremover.
🎨At alle gode ting er tre fikk vi bekreftet da det siste talkshowet som handlet om kreativitet gikk av stabelen. I sofaen satt kunstner Tor Einstabland og Fredrik Frogner Juul, som er kreatør i Trigger. Er kreativitet noe som kan læres var et av spørsmålene de ble stilt, og ja, til en viss grad var svarene vi fikk. De var enige i å tenke at noen mennesker er mer utsatt for å like å være mer kreative enn andre, og det å lage talkshows i undervisningen mente de var bra for å nettopp utsette seg for å være kreativ. Men mens Tor ble stressa bare av tanken på å koke sammen en god ide på en workshop var dette dagligdags for Fredrik, som la til viktigheten av å innimellom finne seg et sted hvor man kan være helt alene, som for eksempel ta seg bad. «- Ingen forventer at man er tilgjengelig når man tar seg et bad», sa Fredrik som også oppfordret til å skaffe seg en hobby hvor man kan medialisere et annet sted enn på jobben. Tor som tilbringer dagene alene i ateliet hadde derimot torsdager som «fagdag» hvor han oppsøkte ulike åpninger for å få faglig inspirasjon fra andre. Han bruker også musikk som inspirasjon i sin kreative prosess, selv om stedatteren forleden spurte om noen «- kunne skru av den bråkete alarmen» (les. Tor sin inspirerende musikk). Alle fikk for øvrig veldig lyst til å se julekampanjen til Kreftforeningen, hvor de snudde om konseptet fra å peke på det triste ved å ha kreft til å fokusere på det som er bra. I kampanjen allierer Trigger seg med flere overleger og som får bli med når de gir beskjed til pasienten om at hun/han er kreftfri. Her kan du se’n om du ble like nysgjerrig som oss: https://youtu.be/bxuyfF6wOJg #GarantertRørtGaranti
Det som er ekstra gøy er at alt som gjestene sa kan kobles direkte til pensum! Panelene viser veldig godt til de ulike perspektiver innenfor prosjektledelse, strategi og kreativitet som finnes i forskningen og litteraturen. Det gjelder bare å oversette til «norsk». Tusen takk til Hanne, Helga, Per, Wenche, Karl-Fredrik, Tor og Fredrik som tok seg tid til å gjeste studentenes talkshow uten å få en eneste krone for det <3 Studentene og jeg var enige ved dagens slutt at jaggu hadde dette vært både lærerikt og moro!
New publication out with professor Runar Døving about how dating platform's matching machinery base their suggestion of 'good matches'. Key findings is that three platforms (Match, Møteplassen and Academic Singles) uses a model based on the persons' similarities along psychological and personal aspects, while one (Sukker) is based on a ‘the more similar along all kinds of axes' model. following a strict assortative mating model when creating matches is worrying, as similarity in these factors risks producing an increasing number of couples of equal status, which might lead to a larger gap between classes and reinforce their social status. Following in this line, all the platforms ignores well-known sociological and anthropological aspects for choosing a partner (hypergamy and homogamy principles). We speculate if this is due to the platforms using the psychological literature on partner preferences in their matching model, which mainly points to mate value (=the perceived degree of attractiveness from the opposite sex as a potential mate) as a key indicator when choosing a heterosexual partner, but because three of the four platforms are developed by IT-men - the male components in mate value (= attractiveness, youthfulness, figure, and body features which are uncontrollable qualities) is highlighted by the platforms, and not female's mate value components (= status, ambition, job prospects and physical strength, traits that can be controlled or achieved).
Other findings is that the platforms use characteristics to match people that are more important when being in a relationship, rather than prior to establishing one; all suffer from severe methodological weaknesses in the process of creating a profile; the platforms scientific claims for how their algorithmic machinery work is not convincing. The paper is available as open access in Nordic Journal of Science and Technology: https://lnkd.in/dJexAD39 #dating #platforms #digitalanthropology
Bruker du datingapper (Tinder, Match, Møteplassen, etc) til dette? Eller traff du partneren din ila det siste året gjennom en datingapp? Er du i tillegg mellom ca 25 og 50 år? Om ja, vil vi veldig gjerne snakke med deg!
Oppdatering juni 2022: Vi er ferdige med å intervjue folk. Takk til alle som stilte til intervju!
Vi gjennomfører et forskningsprosjekt hvor vi ønsker å få innblikk i folks erfaringer i å bruke datingapper til å finne en person for et seriøst og langsiktig forhold. Vi vet at mange bruker datingapper for å finne en partner, men vi vet mindre om hvordan folk opplever å bruke slike apper. Dette er kunnskap som er viktig i en tid der mange er ufrivillig single. Dine erfaringer vil kunne hjelpe oss og andre med å få et bedre kunnskapsgrunnlag om datingapper og mulighetene de gir for å få en partner.
Hva innebærer det å være med i studiet?
Å delta i prosjektet innebærer en fortrolig samtale med en av oss to forskerne som jobber med dette prosjektet. Samtalen vil ta omtrent en time og vil foregå der du ønsker (hjemme hos deg, på din arbeidsplass eller på Høyskolen Kristiania, alt ettersom hva som er best for deg - dog i nærheten av Oslo - eller på Zoom eller telefon). Vi finner en tid til samtalen som passer best for deg - enten det er på dagtid eller om ettermiddagen.
Prosjektet er meldt inn til og godkjent av Norsk senter for forskningsdata (NSD) og følger alle forskningsetiske regler. Alle som deltar i studiet er sikret anonymitet og ingenting av det som kommer frem i samtalen vil kunne spores tilbake til deg. Ønsker du mer informasjon om prosjektet eller ønsker du å dele dine erfaringer med oss? Ta i så fall uforpliktende kontakt med prosjektleder Lene Pettersen på epost lene.pettersen alfakrøll kristiania.no så kan vi enten ringe deg eller sende deg et informasjonsskriv om prosjektet som du kan kikke på før du bestemmer deg for om du vil delta eller ei.
Hilsen førsteamanuensis Lene Pettersen og professor Faltin Karlsen, begge ved Institutt for kommunikasjon, Høyskolen Kristiania.
Teknologigigantene anklages for markedsdominans, og da er tiltakene tradisjonelt regulering eller oppsplitting. Her kan det være viktigere å gjøre noe med selskapenes tilgang til brukerdata.
De store teknologigigantene ble grillet i Kongressen i august pga sin markedsmakt. Men for å begrense deres markedsmakt er begrensning i deres tilgang til og distribusjon av brukerdata minst like viktig som oppsplitting og regulering av selskapene, skriver jeg i #DagensNæringsliv.
Utdaterte strategidokumenter. Ledere som prøver og feiler. Er strategifaget egentlig brukbart i så usikre tider som nå? Ja, mener strategieksperter.
Strategiekspertene er enige i at toget har gått for å jobbe med strategidokumenter og planer en gang i året. Tvert om gir digitale ressurser og datainnsikt, etter mitt syn, organisasjoner og ledere i dag nye muligheter til å utøve strategi på en daglig basis og på mer dynamiske måter. I tillegg minner jeg om at strategimodellene ikke er en one size fits all: helsesektoren er for eksempel noe annet enn å drive hotell.
En strategi er ikke bare fine ord i styrevedtak. Vi må ha planer, men vi kan ikke følge dem uten refleksjon, mener strategiforsker Lene Pettersen.
– Strategi er noe man gjør. Det er en dynamisk prosess som blir endret hele tiden, sier jeg til Titan.uio.no. Det som virket fornuftig i går, er ikke nødvendigvis like fornuftig i dag. Det var ikke nødvendigvis galt i går, men forutsetningene har endret seg.
Hvordan fattes beslutninger i kritiske situasjoner?
Jeg skriver i Dagsavisen i dag at strategisk beslutningstagning ikke er en rasjonell prosess - og at uavhengig av om myndighetenes beslutninger i ettertid bli kritisert eller applaudert, vil deres strategi og valg typisk bli løftet frem som årsaken til det som vil bli utfallet av koronasituasjonen i Norge – selv om det kan være helt andre årsaker (som flaks eller økning i antall joggeturer i frisk luft) – til hvordan resultatet vil se ut til slutt.
📣Gla' nyhet midt i koronadramatikken: strategibabyen av en bok kom fra trykk i dag og levert av bud nå på døra til hjemmekontoret, hurra 🎉 Tusen takk til min eminente fødselshjelper/redaktør Erik Juel 🙏 Boka - som er tenkt som et supplement til andre strategibøker - kan bestilles her: https://www.universitetsforlaget.no/hva-er-strategi-1
En presis, konsis og oppdatert oversikt over strategifaget.
Boklanseringen av Hva er strategi? blir erstattet av et frokostseminar når koronasituasjonen har roet seg. Inntil da får vi vaske hender, bidra til fellesdugnaden og skaffe boka via nettet .
Vi søker etter en PhD stipendiat i digital økonomi og forretningsmodeller til forskningsprosjektet ‘Data as value creator in business models’. Søknadsfristen er 13. januar 2020 https://www.jobbnorge.no/ledige-stillinger/stilling/179368/stipendiat-innen-digital-oekonomi-og-forretningsmodeller?fbclid=IwAR2btHkCDPpKcTfAm1D00ci7MK07HvXAC_w3MaX3SrLnRYGlgPYWk3JrIUY
Mer informasjon om prosjektet (utdrag fra prosjektbeskrivelsen):
Introduction
In order to meet societal (e.g. better services to citizens), environmental (e.g. reduce global climate change or hunger crisis) and economic (e.g. innovation or create a more efficient public sector as well as nurturing business opportunities for actors in the private sector) challenges we face today, digitalization is a well-known key player. Digitalization in this project proposal, denote when organizations or companies use data from ICT systems as an enabler to change established organizational processes (Yoo, Lyytinen, Boland, & Berente, 2010) and services (innovate established business models) or to create new processes or services (establish new business models). Simplified, ‘data’ is any sequence of one or more symbols given meaning by specific act(s) of interpretation. ‘Data’ requires interpretation to become information, and in order to translate data to information, several factors must be considered.
However, some of the main barriers for organizations to realize its societal, environmental and economic potential that is expected from digitalization is found to be (1) poor data quality, (2) data hidden or locked-up in information system (IS)-siloes, (3) data lacking a standardize form that can be meaningful also when being detached from a certain organization or company, and (4) low data-flow (sharing of data) between organizations or companies. For example, low data quality is often a hidden cost that outweigh revenue, productivity as well as services provided. However, other barriers can be related to organizational, structural or technologogical aspects and dimensions, and we need more knowledge about these diverse aspects. This research project investigates alle these dimensions in order to gain a better understanding of the opportunities and pitfalls of ‘data’ as a key resource in established and new business models. More specifically, the research questions that guides this project are:
- How, and to what extent, can data be a key resource for value creation and value capture in business models?
- How can data provide social as well as economic value?
- To what extend is data used to innovate an organization’s existing business model?
- What are the key barriers for organizations to make their data valuable?
Theoretical approach
Digitalization
As already stated, digitalization denote when organizations or companies use data from ICT systems as an enabler to change established organizational processes (Yoo, Lyytinen, Boland, & Berente, 2010) and services (innovate established business models), or to create new processes or services (establish new business models).
Digitalization extends beyond the mere conversion of manual data into a digital format (i.e. digitization) (Tilson, Lyytinen, & Sørensen, 2010; Yoo et al., 2010). Rather it involves the transformation of socio-technical structures formerly mediated by non-digital artifacts into ones mediated by digitized artifacts (Yoo et al., 2010). Gebre-Mariam & Bygstad, 2019; Pettersen, 2018). Thus, digitalization concerns both organizational change and the invention of new kinds of organizations or companies, services and business models. Both are closely related to innovation, in which in the literature and the industry is typically interpreted as new objects or products, including ideas or practices that individuals perceive as new (Rogers, 2010).
Business innovation
Francis and Bessant’s (2005) framework on business innovation is commonly used in research. Francis and Bessant (2005) categorize innovation into four P’s:
1. product (changes in products/services);
2. process (changes in how products/services are created and distributed);
3. position (changes in how products/services are framed in a specific context);
4. paradigmatic innovation (changes in an organization’s mindset, values and business models).
Storsul and Krumsvik (2013) added a fifth dimension to Francis and Bessant’s (2005) framework when they categorized media innovation into five types, namely:
5. social (changes that meet social needs and improve people’s lives).
While Francis and Bessant (2005) four types concern elements related to the organization, Storsul and Krumsvik’s (2013) fifth type concerns aspects detached from the organization with a specific result listed: reach a certain change on a societal level. More specifically, Storsul and Krumsvik’s (2013) fifth type includes “new practices for resolving societal challenges, which are adopted and utilized by the individuals, social groups and organisations concerned” (Ní Bhroin, 2013, p. 219).
Whilst Francis and Bessant (2005) four types primarily focus on value capture (changes in the production chain, se next section), Storsul and Krumsvik’s (2013) fifth type includes value creation (the perceived benefit to the customer).
Hence, digitalization concerns all the five P’s listed above in order to meet societal, environmental and economic challenges.
Business model
There is no shared understanding in the literature of what a business model is except from the understanding of it facilitating value creation and value capture (Pettersen & Krumsvik, 2019). However, the different perspectives acknowledge that the business model is a unit of analysis that is distinct from the product, firm, industry or network; that it explains how firms do business and that it explains both value creation and value capture (Zott et al., 2011).
Osterwalder & Pigneur (2010) offer a framework that enables us to study which part in established business models that could be changed for the better. Osterwalder & Pigneur (2010) build their framework on three key value propositions: value creation, value capture, and value delivery. Value creation denotes the perceived benefit to the customer, value capture refers to changes in the production chain, and value delivery involves everything needed for delivering value smoothly and satisfying the customer (e.g. order processing, inventory management, delivery/fulfilment, troubleshooting, customer support). The three value propositions are organized in Osterwalder and Pigneur’s (2010) Business Model Canvas (BMC) framework as a business model’s back end and front end (Figure 1). In Osterwalder and Pigneur’s (2010) BMC framework, a business model consists of nine interrelated building blocks (see Figure 1). Numbers two to four in the framework constitute value-delivery items, numbers six to eight concerns value-creating elements, while numbers five and nine are related to value capture elements. These nine elements are divided into the front end and back end of the business model framework. The front end (the right side of the figure) emphasizes value, while the back end (the left side of the figure) is predominantly efficiency-driven (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010, p. 49). Put differently, one might say that the back end traditionally concerns the internal factors of a business, while the front end is related to external factors (Pettersen & Krumsvik, 2019).
Figur 1: Figure of back end and front end of business models in Osterwalder and Pigneur’s (2010) Business Model Canvas framework (CC BY-SA 3.0).
A key fundament for realizing the full potential of digitalization is, as already stated, data. In Osterwalder and Pigneur’s (2010) BMC framework, data would typically be listed as a key resource located in the framework’s back end (6. Key resource). Thus, data is a key asset for value creation in the business model framework. However, data alone represents little value. Its valuable potential relies in 1) the data’s quality, and 2) data analytics and the organization’s analytical capability. Moreover, data enables the construction of new business models. As example, the business models of media have changed from a predominantly linear mode of production of news offerings and a value or supply chain, to a predominantly networked mode of co-production that is characterized by fundamentally different structures and dynamics (Karlsnes & Pettersen, 2019). Today, value configuration in the online media industry is characterized as a value-network with user-data as a key element in the business models, where distribution has become a competitive advantage (Karlsnes & Pettersen, 2019). Nonetheless, ‘data’ requires interpretation to become information, and in order to translate data to information, several factors must be considered, and it is the aim of this project to reveal such factors as well as barriers and opportunities.
Business model innovation
A less explored corner in the innovation literature concerns business model innovation: changes in established business models. Research from a Norwegian context shows that only a small proportion of companies have changed their business model over time (Saebi, 2016). The studies indicate that there are two reasons for the low degree of innovation in business models: (1) managers are not aware of the company’s business model; or (2) they hesitate to change the status quo.
There are many ways that firms can change or innovate their established business models. According to Foss & Saebi (2015), organisations can do this by:
(a) targeting new customer segments;
(b) offering new value propositions (new bundle of services and products);
(c) capturing value in a novel way (novel pricing mechanisms or new main source of revenue); and/or
(d) finding new ways of producing, delivering or distributing existing or new products and services to existing or new customer segments.
From the framework of this research project, established business models can exploit data in ways that concern all these four drivers.
However, a key barrier for organizations to realize its societal, environmental and economic potential that relies in digitalization is (1) poor data quality, (2) data hidden in IS-siloes as well as (3) data lacking a standardize form that can be meaningful detached from a certain organization or company. Low data quality is often a hidden cost that outweigh revenue, productivity as well as services provided. To analyze data effectively, we need integrated systems to connect all the various data sources. At the same time, European organizations as well as international actors directing their services to European markets needs to comply with the privacy legislation and guidelines set forth by General Data Protector Regulation (GDPR).
Data
Simplified, ‘data’ is any sequence of one or more symbols given meaning by specific act(s) of interpretation. ‘Data’ requires interpretation to become information, and in order to translate data to information, several factors needs to be considered. The factors involved are typically determined by the creator of the data and the desired information. The term metadata is typically used to reference the data about the data. Metadata may be implied, specified or given. Data relating to physical events or processes will also have a temporal component. For example, when the temperature is received it is assumed that the data has a temporal references of "now". So the device records the date, time and temperature together. When the data logger communicates temperatures, it must also report the date and time (metadata) for each temperature.
Digital data is data that is represented using the binary number system of ones (1) and zeros (0), as opposed to analog representation. In ICT-systems, all data is digital. Data can be represented in computers in multiple ways, e.g. Random Access Memory (RAM), keys, data structures, repeating data structures, database and more. The value of customer data, user data, product data, health data and all kinds of other types of data represent value from a societal, environmental and economic point of view. However, data-duplicates, poor overview of where current data is stored, poorly structured data, as well as little reliable and outdated data can quickly hinder the many opportunities. With the introduction of GDPR, the importance of data quality has become even more important.
Moreover, if data quality is managed by the IT-department, the business side that uses and creates the value of the data has been left out. These kinds of organization typically does not acknowledge the strategic value of data for improved services and products, as well as organizational processes, sales, marketing, reporting, insight or strategic decision-making. Thus, ‘data’ needs to be a key component in the organization’s business model, yet without techniques, IT-programs as well as analytic skills and competences, the transformation of data into value is low and its potential is not exploited. Therefore, equally important to quality data are the capability to make the data valuable as well as integrating data into the organization’s business model. Organizational, structural as well as technological aspects are areas that might hinder organizations from fully exploit the potential that data have for innovation.
Methodological framework and research design
To answer our research questions, a qualitative multiple case study design is considered the most appropriate approach for this study because we want to understand in-depth the interplay of data and business models. A case study is an “empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident” (Yin, 2012, p. 13). A multiple case study enables the researcher to explore differences both within and between cases, and to draw comparisons (Yin, 2003, cited in Baxter & Jack, 2008). In a qualitative study, the sample is typically small, which makes it possible to first study each case (organization) in depth, and then study them comparatively. The qualitative methodological tools chosen for this research project are (1) unstructured in-depth interviews with approximately 6-10 informants from each of the cases and (2) ethnographic fieldwork lasting of approximately one month plus minus each. Ethnography is the close study of groups’ and people in their contextual settings (Emerson, Fretz & Shaw 2011; Hammersley & Atkinson 1995), e.g. in the office spaces, and other relevant arenas in the cases. (3) Key informant methodology. Ethnography is not a method, but has methods. Ethnographic field research involves a range of well-defined, although variable, methods: informal interviews, direct observation, participation in the activities in the object of study and collective discussions, shadowing key persons, analysis of documents, results from activities undertaken off- or on-line, and more.
The traditional criteria of doing fieldwork is being in the field for a longer period of time. However, how long it takes to reveal the ‘native point of view’ cannot simply be tied to a clock-time aspect, and several anthropological studies have made key contributions despite not spending years in the field. Examples are Fredrik Barth’s nominal models based on a weekend on a fishing boat (Eriksen 2013). It is not the length of a study that is key; it is what can be processed when being in the field. Thus, it is not the aim of this project to spend years in the field, but approximately one, two months (depending on the time the researchers has available for data gathering).
Another methodological tool in this project is key informant methodology. This method is based on obtaining information, over time, from individuals who know the community well (Pelto & Pelto, 1978). To be chosen as a key informant requires a broad knowledge of the company, its services, and its people. Key informant methodology is also an excellent way to recover information about past events or ways of doing things that are no longer observable.
Other data collection methods and tools might occur, depending on the PhD student’s approach.
Sample
In order to gain a broad overview and in-depth understanding of how data is and can be used as a key component in business models, the potential barriers for using data in business models as well as for business model innovation, our sample seek to involve and represent different actors and kinds of services from both the private and public industry in Norway.
Tentative time schedule
This project is led by associate professor at the department of informatics, at the University of Oslo, Lene Pettersen. The project will enroll a PhD candidate that will be part of the University of Oslo’s doctoral program. However, the data collection from several of the cases will start before the PhD candidate is enrolled, and other researchers from the research group Digitalization and entrepreneurship at the Department of Informatics will also conduct research in several of the cases. A tentative time schedule for the research project is 2019-2023(24).
Funding, budget and expected outcomes
The Department of informatics, University of Oslo, will fund this research project as part of Pettersen’s start-package. The expected outcome of this research project are articles published in the basket of top eight journals[1] as well as publications in other relevant IS journals. The results will also be presented in the public, at conferences, in public debates and others so the public and industry, as well as the government, can benefit from this research’s findings.
This research project is reported to Norwegian Social Science Data Service (NSD)[2] in which ensures that collection, safeguarding, storing, and reusing of personal data in this study comply with ethical standards and legal requirements.
References
Baxter, P. & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–559. http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR13-4/baxter.pdf.
Emerson, R. M, Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2011).Writing ethnographic fieldnotes: University of Chicago Press.
Eriksen, T. H. (2013). Fredrik Barth: en intellektuell biografi. Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
Foss, N.J. & Saebi, T. (2015). Business models and business model innovation: Bringing organisation into the field, in: N.J. Foss & T. Saebi (Eds.), Business model innovation: The organisational dimension. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Francis, D. & Bessant, J. (2005). Targeting Innovation and Implications for Capability Development. Technovation, 25(3), 171-183.
Kalsnes, B. & Pettersen, L. (2019). Algoritmer, analysedata og automatisering i det digitale medielandskapet – en avkledningsmanøver. Lederartikkel, Norsk medietidsskrift 1/2019 (volum 26).
Gebre-Mariam, M. & Bygstad, B. (2019). What can enterprise architecture do for healthcare? A framework of antecedents and benefits. Electronic Government, an International Journal. ISSN 1740-7494. 15(2), s 213- 239. doi: 10.1504/EG.2019.098672
Hammersley, M. & Atkinson, P. (1995). Ethnography: Principles in practice: Psychology Press.
Ní Bhroin, N. (2015). Social media-innovation: The case of indigenous tweets. The Journal of Media Innovations, 2(1), 89-106.
Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business model generation: A handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. John Wiley & Sons.
Pelto, P. J., & Pelto, G. H. (1978). Anthropological research: The structure of inquiry. Cambridge University Press.
Pettersen, L. & Krumsvik, A. H. (2019). Rocking the Boat: Proposing a Participatory Business Model for News. Journal of Media Innovations. ISSN 1894-5562.
Pettersen, L. (2018). Digitalisering - Modernitetens flyttebyrå. Norsk Medietidsskrift, 4/2018. https://www.idunn.no/nmt/2018/04/digitalisering
Rogers, E. M. (2010). Diffusion of innovations. New York, US.: Simon and Schuster.
Saebi, T. (2016). Fremtiden for forretningsmodellinnovasjon i Norge. Magma, 19(7), 33-41.
Storsul, T., & Krumsvik, A. H. (2013). What is Media Innovation? In T. Storsul & A. Krumsvik (Eds.), Media Innovations: A Multidisciplinary Study of Change. (pp. 13-26). Göteborg, Sweden: Nordicom, University of Gothenburg.
Tilson, D., Lyytinen, K., & Sørensen, C. (2010). Research commentary—Digital infrastructures: The missing IS research agenda. Information Systems Research, 21,748–759.
Yin, R.L. (2012). Applications of case study research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Yoo, Y., Lyytinen, K. J., Boland, R. J., & Berente, N. (2010). The Next Wave of Digital Innovation: Opportunities and Challenges: A Report on the Research Workshop'Digital Challenges in Innovation Research'. Available at SSRN 1622170.
Zott, C., Amit, R., & Massa, L. (2011). The business model: recent developments and future research. Journal of management, 37(4), 1019-1042.
[1]Please refer to https://aisnet.org/page/SeniorScholarBasket
New publication out with Miriam Eileen Nes Begnum and @Hanne Sørum about what interaction design students learn during their #IxD-studies. Key finding: big variations of what the educational institutions teach, and thus what students learn and therefore what the industry can expect from interaction designers skills https://ojs.bibsys.no/index.php/Nokobit/article/view/668/564
HIGHLIGHTSWe indicate the current content of interaction design (IxD) programs in higher education and document the lacking focus on universal design (UD).We id
New publication out with Miriam Eileen Nes Begnum and Hanne Sørum in Interacting with Computers where we identify Five Archetypes of Interaction Design Professionals and Their Universal Design Expertise in Norwegian study programs. "Our findings indicate the study programs do not deliver adequate training in UD, in order to fulfill the professional responsibilities related to ICT accessibility. From our findings, we extrapolate five ‘archetypes’ of interaction designers."
New publication out in Journal of media innovation with Arne H. Krumsvik where we argue that news actors need to rock their boats in order to innovate their business models in line with today’s media landscape. Open Access https://journals.uio.no/index.php/TJMI/article/view/6561/5979?fbclid=IwAR2paOqSIiVPdM0zXpmmQKi4a8pbTHIyJ2NcjpTJrogkfMFJ1rxiNb5cFh8
Lørdag 13. juli avslørte VG Helg hva vi i fagpanelet til Gift ved første blikk vektlegger når vi matcher par. Reportasjen er tilgjengelig på nett: https://www.vg.no/forbruker/livsstil/i/pLVneW/gift-ved-foerste-blikk-ekspertene-slik-matcher-de-parene
Første amanuensis Lene Pettersen fra Universitetet i Oslo har delt sin kunnskap om nettdating, hva vi mister med digitalisering og noen av teoriene bak digitaliseirngsfagområdet. Gjør deg klar for en spennende person med spennende fortellinger.
I siste episode av Digitaliseringspådden til Computerworld kan du høre programlederne Dag Rustad og Jens Christian Bang fra Already On og meg skravle om alt fra ulike ting jeg har gjort opp gjennom på veien fra frisørlinja og sikkerhetsvakt amerikanske fly, til å holde på med digitalisering, studere nettdatingplattformer og forretningsmodellinnovasjon i mediebransjen, være matchmaker i Gift ved første blikk, deltaker i 71 grader nord, og mye annet rart. Veldig stas å bli invitert som gjest!
Hvordan går det egentlig med Facebook i disse dager hvor tilliten til selskapet er tynnslitt og med trusler om millionbøter for en rekke personvernsskandaler hengende over seg? Hva tjener annonseplattformer som Facebook og Google egentlig penger på? Og vil Facebook forsvinne med det første? Hans-Petter Nygård-Hansen og jeg snakket om dette med mer i NRKs nye og lekre Studio 2 29 april: https://radio.nrk.no/serie/studio-2-p2#t=26m6.84s
Me and My Digital Tech Stuff @meandmysocialtechstuff - Tumblr Blog | Tumgag
