The University of British Columbia
UBC - A Place of Mind
The University of British Columbia Vancouver campus
ETEC 522 – Ventures in Learning Technologies
  • Startup
    • How to Begin?
    • Objectives
    • Course Manual
    • Outline & Schedule
    • Participation Guide
    • Assignments
    • ☛ Introduce Yourself!
    • 👥 Authors
  • W01: Emerging Markets
    • W01: Emerging Market Teams
  • W02-04: Bootcamp
    • Global Dynamics
    • Who is the Customer?
    • What is a Venture?
    • 👥 Opportunity Horizon
    • W03: Analyst Bootcamp
    • A Game with Three Pitches
    • Deconstructing a Pitch
    • 👥 Pitch Critique
    • W04: Entrepreneur Bootcamp
    • Venture Genesis
    • Opportunity Activation
    • The Right Stuff
    • 👥 Founders Parade
  • W05-12: Opportunity Forecasts
    • W05: Personalized Learning
    • W06: Mobile Learning
    • W07: Game-Based Learning
    • W08: Big Data & Learning Analytics
    • W09: Immersive Experience
    • W10: Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning
    • W11: Microlearning
    • W12: Wearables
  • W13: Launch
    • Venture Forum Resources
  • Forums
    • W01 – Emerging Markets
    • W02 – Market Projections
    • W03 – Pitch Pool
    • W04 – Founders Parade
    • W05-12 – Opportunity Forecasts (A2)
    • W13 – Venture Forum (A3)
    • Analyst Reports (A1)
  • Global Feeds
    • Announcements
    • Eva’s Café
    • Radio 522
  • LOGIN
Sort By
Show only these categories:
Show only this category:

Eva’s Cafe: Innovative Value Propositions, Clashes & Fun exercises?

By Bobbi K on June 5, 2014

I had a unorthodox thought about “unique” value propositions I thought I’d share:

In my undergrad before pitching/critiquing new ideas for product design, we were taught an exercise to sum up the uniqueness or edge of existing designs in one or two sentences. We had to do so while imagining that we were pitching it to a stranger who knew nothing about the product. What is the promise/essence it has over something else?  Sometimes, we’d go around in a circle as a group helping each other to refine the idea or definition until it was keen and sharp, then moved on to our own ideas. This helped distill these to see if they were really unique.

Oddly, the most innovative or disruptive ideas often “clashed” with the way two concepts are integrated or with how something is or used to be done. We were told to look for and create clashes because they catch attention, go against the grain, and generate interest/curiosity (particularly amongst those who long for change). This is not always a successful strategy, but in an entrepreneurial sense a really fun and creative angle to play with. Sometimes the clashes created by mixing/splicing contentious issues make powerful solutions?

I see Anne’s post about Edmodo as a great example of this: splicing social media with learning. After all, “social media is a distraction for students isn’t it? It’s entertainment which goes against “serious” education efforts doesn’t it? Well now, it’s all in how you apply technology isn’t it? Maybe social media can be used for good, let’s build something on that!” ; )

Clashes: serious vs social/ education vs entertainment/

Chris’s example of Codeacademy also illustrates this type of clash. “Coding is for adult/professionals and computer science majors isn’t it? Wait, what? It can be made accessible to everyone? Let’s build that!” (Incidentally, this is also how I see littleBits).

Clashes: open vs closed/ free vs paid/ expert vs novice/ elite vs commonplace/ training vs DIY

3407714106_7f0cfd01f4_o

Anyway, I thought it might be fun to start a “clash-radio” conversation here. If anyone has any cool examples please post them! Rock on! lol : )

Rating
Average: 4.5/5 Stars
 
 
 
 
 
0 Thumbs Up!

Read More | No Comments

Loading...
16 Jul Posted on Eva’s Cafe: Innovative Value Propositions, Clashes & Fun exercises?

@Kendra, yes of course... I view that the educational merit of an educational venture should be at least conceivable or believable particularly if it is unproven. That said, there are actually a number of successful ventures that were not intended for education that have had huge impacts in the realm (social media is indeed one example) that educators simply can't ignore. There are so many theories that educators are willing to test out simply because they have permeated popular culture (educational gaming, virtual environments etc.) that are highly enticing regardless of little or no proven educational benefit. It's an interesting conundrum. I don't think there is any right formula here but hitting critical mass in culture makes some contentious and experimental solutions hard to ignore.

16 Jul
0 Thumbs Up!
Bobbi K @bobbik

@Kendra, yes of course... I view that the educational merit of an educational venture should be at least conceivable or believable particularly if it is unproven. That said, there are actually a number of successful ventures that were not intended for education that have had huge impacts in the realm (social media is indeed one example) that educators simply can't ignore. There are so many theories that educators are willing to test out simply because they have permeated popular culture (educational gaming, virtual environments etc.) that are highly enticing regardless of little or no proven educational benefit. It's an interesting conundrum. I don't think there is any right formula here but hitting critical mass in culture makes some contentious and experimental solutions hard to ignore.

  • Expand
  • 0 Replies
  • in reply to Eva’s Cafe: Innovative Value Propositions, Clashes & Fun exercises?
  • Loading...
12 Jul Posted on Eva’s Cafe: Innovative Value Propositions, Clashes & Fun exercises?

Although I agree that innovation and change comes from the dissonance David mentions, education always seems to push back against change and revel in keeping the two ideas separate :) You can see this in our discussions this week around social media - there's a resistance to adopting new technologies or ideas - beyond proof of concept you need proof of learning. To gain acceptance, any really powerful idea or tool must clearly demonstrate how it improves student learning in a way that makes educators think "that will make a difference". Any district or business I dealt with all asked me the same three questions - Where's the research to show that this improves learning? - Who's implemented it successfully and can we talk to them? Does it support the (Common Core State) standards. It's very difficult to take an iterative "MVP" approach in education. Few are willing to take a chance - buy/invest in your product - playing it safe with the big companies. I experienced this with my company, especially when we started. People knew that "training" teachers on the software didn't work, but they still wanted to do it. Then, there's the whole "substitution" model that we seem to get stuck on - using the new technology simply to replicate what you did before. We're seeing this with iPads - this game changing device is used to deliver drill and practice apps. When I argued not to use the device in this way 50% of those polled disagreed. (Imagine :) http://www.learningandleading-digital.com/learningandleading/20130607?pg=5#pg5 Many of the "mom & pop" startups I'm working with aren't going to change the world. They are more interested in supporting a niche market where there's a pressing need, perhaps taking advantage of innovation but not necessarily creating it. That being said what you both said has given me a great deal to think about! (Sorry if I got off topic)

12 Jul
0 Thumbs Up!
Kendra Grant @kendragrant

Although I agree that innovation and change comes from the dissonance David mentions, education always seems to push back against change and revel in keeping the two ideas separate :) You can see this in our discussions this week around social media - there's a resistance to adopting new technologies or ideas - beyond proof of concept you need proof of learning. To gain acceptance, any really powerful idea or tool must clearly demonstrate how it improves student learning in a way that makes educators think "that will make a difference". Any district or business I dealt with all asked me the same three questions - Where's the research to show that this improves learning? - Who's implemented it successfully and can we talk to them? Does it support the (Common Core State) standards. It's very difficult to take an iterative "MVP" approach in education. Few are willing to take a chance - buy/invest in your product - playing it safe with the big companies. I experienced this with my company, especially when we started. People knew that "training" teachers on the software didn't work, but they still wanted to do it. Then, there's the whole "substitution" model that we seem to get stuck on - using the new technology simply to replicate what you did before. We're seeing this with iPads - this game changing device is used to deliver drill and practice apps. When I argued not to use the device in this way 50% of those polled disagreed. (Imagine :) http://www.learningandleading-digital.com/learningandleading/20130607?pg=5#pg5 Many of the "mom & pop" startups I'm working with aren't going to change the world. They are more interested in supporting a niche market where there's a pressing need, perhaps taking advantage of innovation but not necessarily creating it. That being said what you both said has given me a great deal to think about! (Sorry if I got off topic)

  • Expand
  • 0 Replies
  • in reply to Eva’s Cafe: Innovative Value Propositions, Clashes & Fun exercises?
  • Loading...
8 Jun Posted on Eva’s Cafe: Innovative Value Propositions, Clashes & Fun exercises?

Absolutely, yes David. I love your quote. : ) I hadn't really thought of it in those terms outside of my own discipline. You describe this so well in relation to ventures, it helps enrich my understanding. In design we were similarly told that a willingness to "disrupt" the status quo is often the difference between incremental gain and innovation (evolution vs revolution) as you mention. Attempting this (or even theorizing about it) can be quite intimidating. I actually had a class all about this in my final year at ECU called "Design Futures." Each week we had to find visual examples of innovation and disruption. We then had to examine the unspoken approach used and distil the description down into one "general solution" that could be re-applied as a generative tool our design practice. These could originate from art, architecture, furniture, products, software, or really anything of interest. Each week had to show up for class with 3 different "general solution" statements (in the form of a visual poster + statement) and "pitch" them to the instructor. If these were suitably specific-yet-general, and disruptive-yet-promising for new product generation, we could leave in the first ten minutes of class! (We got extra points for hanging around to help classmates). The balance was so tenuous and the expression so exacting. If our "general solutions" were not disruptive enough, we had to keep researching. If we couldn't get something right, we had to stay until we did (or come in extra days).  It was such a bizarre class, but extremely stimulating. Your elaboration makes me remember this quite vividly. "Clash" was just one of the many different approaches, there was also extraction, combine/splice/remix (most typical), intentional lack, asymmetry, universality, nesting, and a whole host of other interesting approaches. These vary between disciplines but also share many commonalities. It perhaps looks much different in an industrial design application than a software/venture application. Here's some of the more playful ones: https://virtual.educ.ubc.ca/wp/etec522/files/2014/06/ID-general-solutions.png I hadn't realized how much the two worlds share in common, thanks for elaborating. This is exceptionally cool! :)

8 Jun
0 Thumbs Up!
Bobbi K @bobbik

Absolutely, yes David. I love your quote. : ) I hadn't really thought of it in those terms outside of my own discipline. You describe this so well in relation to ventures, it helps enrich my understanding. In design we were similarly told that a willingness to "disrupt" the status quo is often the difference between incremental gain and innovation (evolution vs revolution) as you mention. Attempting this (or even theorizing about it) can be quite intimidating. I actually had a class all about this in my final year at ECU called "Design Futures." Each week we had to find visual examples of innovation and disruption. We then had to examine the unspoken approach used and distil the description down into one "general solution" that could be re-applied as a generative tool our design practice. These could originate from art, architecture, furniture, products, software, or really anything of interest. Each week had to show up for class with 3 different "general solution" statements (in the form of a visual poster + statement) and "pitch" them to the instructor. If these were suitably specific-yet-general, and disruptive-yet-promising for new product generation, we could leave in the first ten minutes of class! (We got extra points for hanging around to help classmates). The balance was so tenuous and the expression so exacting. If our "general solutions" were not disruptive enough, we had to keep researching. If we couldn't get something right, we had to stay until we did (or come in extra days).  It was such a bizarre class, but extremely stimulating. Your elaboration makes me remember this quite vividly. "Clash" was just one of the many different approaches, there was also extraction, combine/splice/remix (most typical), intentional lack, asymmetry, universality, nesting, and a whole host of other interesting approaches. These vary between disciplines but also share many commonalities. It perhaps looks much different in an industrial design application than a software/venture application. Here's some of the more playful ones: https://virtual.educ.ubc.ca/wp/etec522/files/2014/06/ID-general-solutions.png I hadn't realized how much the two worlds share in common, thanks for elaborating. This is exceptionally cool! :)

  • Expand
  • 1 Replies
  • in reply to Eva’s Cafe: Innovative Value Propositions, Clashes & Fun exercises?
  • Loading...
8 Jun Posted on Eva’s Cafe: Innovative Value Propositions, Clashes & Fun exercises?

Extending your concept of "clash" a bit further, isn't that the basis of human creativity across art, science, business, relationships, etc? In science, which was my first love, there is a saying that, "the best measure of the greatness of any scientist is the amount of time she or he is able to impede the progress of science". Ideas are in constant minor motion, but great ideas are like intellectual earthquakes, able to suck up change-energy for decades or centuries. Disruptive new ideas often seem to work best with cognitive dissonance - a combination of two ideas that people are already comfortable with separately, but had never considered meshed together. Art that is 'arresting' of your attention usually works this way. That's the "Eureka!" moment that venture capitalists are looking for: a similarly arresting business model or product or service. Entrepreneurs need to showcase something in their venture that wakes people up with its originality, otherwise they'll be seen as part of the constant minor motion. Meshing up a new idea is tough enough, but it is usually even harder to find a way to communicate it compellingly. Images, stories, metaphors are your best tools for "crossing the chasm" of peoples' understanding and behaviour. Timing and luck play an important role. In human ideas, very much like plate tectonics, all kinds of invisible forces build tensions that can't even be measured until a major disruption happens when a single right idea occurs at the right place, at the right time.

8 Jun
0 Thumbs Up!
David Vogt @dvogt

Extending your concept of "clash" a bit further, isn't that the basis of human creativity across art, science, business, relationships, etc? In science, which was my first love, there is a saying that, "the best measure of the greatness of any scientist is the amount of time she or he is able to impede the progress of science". Ideas are in constant minor motion, but great ideas are like intellectual earthquakes, able to suck up change-energy for decades or centuries. Disruptive new ideas often seem to work best with cognitive dissonance - a combination of two ideas that people are already comfortable with separately, but had never considered meshed together. Art that is 'arresting' of your attention usually works this way. That's the "Eureka!" moment that venture capitalists are looking for: a similarly arresting business model or product or service. Entrepreneurs need to showcase something in their venture that wakes people up with its originality, otherwise they'll be seen as part of the constant minor motion. Meshing up a new idea is tough enough, but it is usually even harder to find a way to communicate it compellingly. Images, stories, metaphors are your best tools for "crossing the chasm" of peoples' understanding and behaviour. Timing and luck play an important role. In human ideas, very much like plate tectonics, all kinds of invisible forces build tensions that can't even be measured until a major disruption happens when a single right idea occurs at the right place, at the right time.

  • Expand
  • 0 Replies
  • in reply to Eva’s Cafe: Innovative Value Propositions, Clashes & Fun exercises?
  • Loading...
  • Previous
  • Next
Show only this category:
How to Begin

Custom Search

Tags

2014 2015 2016

Faculty of Education
Vancouver Campus
2125 Main Mall
Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z4
Website pdce.educ.ubc.ca/
Email pdce.educ@ubc.ca
Back to top
The University of British Columbia
  • Emergency Procedures |
  • Terms of Use |
  • Copyright |
  • Accessibility