Re: The Trouble with Putting Goals Ahead of Strategy

[Nathan Borson]

Hi Mike,

 

First, thanks for the article. I'm sorry for the verbose response, and for narrowing your general Gustavus planning thoughts to specifically address communications! Possibly there is a bigger idea to be discovered of which communications is only a part?

 

That's an interesting take on Microsoft's history. I'm a top-down, idea-driven person myself, but I think the author uses hindsight to attribute much of Gates' early success to a big idea. My take is there was a lot of chance involved, and Gates was smart and able (and visionary) enough to capitalize on an opportunity that was not his idea. His idea (or plan, strategy, or goal?) was to sell DOS to IBM, but they only wanted to license it! I guess once he was stuck owning an operating system he had to come up with a big idea for how to maximize license fees. There are many other cases of Microsoft's strength being not visionary big ideas, but adaptability to changing market conditions and other people's ideas. For example, at ComTech in 1997 I heard a Microsoft representative say they thought "the Internet is greatly over-hyped." That's when Microsoft's big idea was MSN -- an online service similar to AOL and Compuserve, of which only vestiges remain. Only after Netscape rose to prominence and it became obvious that Microsoft was wrong about the Internet did Microsoft change course, develop and give away Internet Explorer, embrace Internet technologies, and bury Netscape. Gates and his successors are visionary thinkers, but I think their success (in contrast to Apple's) has more to do with their adaptability and business acumen. In the long term, Microsoft's adaptability served Microsoft better than Netscape's big idea served Netscape. Likewise, adaptability may serve Gustavus broadband better at this juncture than any "big idea."

 

But if we were to embrace the "big idea" -> strategy -> goals paradigm the author describes, what would be the "big idea" to improve communications in Gustavus?

• Would a big idea be like a vision?
• My big idea is a fast, reliable last-mile network that can serve all communication needs for decades, is capable of serving every potential customer in the city, and is affordable and open to all uses and providers because it is built for the future and is owned by the public (a municipal network) or its customers (a co-op).
• Or is it a more specific?
• My big idea is a hybrid fiber-coax network built and owned by the City of Gustavus and operated as an open-access network.
• Charlotte, NC had a big idea that they would extend the infrastructure of their municipal electric utility to create a municipal broadband network.
• Or more general?
• My big idea is public investment in and ownership of open-access communication networks in areas where insufficient private investment and lack of competition has resulted in monopoly pricing for inadequate service.

Regardless of what our big idea looks like, we are like Gates in the late 70s in that our idea matters less than our circumstances. Right now, any big ideas, visions, goals, or strategies we might come up with will be trumped by national and state-wide decisions.

 

The FCC is now establishing "tailored service obligations" that will require Alaska Communications to provide broadband service in many areas that are currently unserved in order to continue receiving "high cost area" subsidies from the Connect America fund (formerly the Universal Service Fund). Gustavus is one such area but we do not yet know what the service obligations will be for Gustavus. Once the FCC announces those obligations (probably by the end of August), ACS will have 60 days to accept them or to decline support on a statewide basis (no "cherry picking").

Alaska Communications Response to FCC offer	FCC Tailored Service Obligation
	Includes Gustavus Broadband*	Excludes Gustavus Broadband
Accept	ACS receives subsidy through about 2020, must provide broadband Internet access throughout Gustavus within 3 years.	ACS receives subsidy through about 2020, does not need to do anything new in Gustavus.
Reject	ACS receives no subsidy and incurs no obligation to deliver broadband service. The subsidy is available to others who bid to provide broadband and voice service.

* Broadband requirement will likely be at least 4 Mbps and at most 10 Mbps, far short of the 100 Mbps capability of the last-mile network proposed in the 2012 Gustavus Broadband Plan.

So the FCC's implementation of the National Broadband Plan (specifically, reform of the Universal Service Fund) is well underway with big implications for last-mile in Gustavus. Meanwhile, Competitive middle-mile options are opening up. The Southeast Conference is working on a regional middle-mile big idea. And Byte Networking has alluded to a plan for building last-mile in Gustavus.

 

Bottom line: the bad news is that things are in a state of flux right now that makes pro-active Gustavus communications planning -- whether traditional or "big idea" -- just about impossible. The good news is that a state of flux is much better than the state of stagnation and hopelessness we were in through 2014.

 

Six months from now the communications picture for Gustavus will be quite different, but we don't know how! I suggest the city's best broadband strategy for the moment is Microsoft's adaptability: keep our goal in mind, collaborate with others on big new ideas, watch developments closely, and be alert and prepared for opportunities to advance the local public interest.

 

Nate

 

------ Original Message ------

From: "Michael Taylor" <mikean...@shizendou.net>

To: "Nathan Borson" <na...@borson.net>

Sent: 06/23/15 20:21:43

Subject: The Trouble with Putting Goals Ahead of Strategy

 

Hi Nate. Thought you might be interested in this article. I'm thinking how it applies to planning for Gustavus.   See link below.

 

Best regards,

Mike

http://m.strategy-business.com/blog/The-Trouble-with-Putting-Goals-Ahead-of-Strategy

 

 

Sent from my iPhone