The correlations of:
(1) New Public Management (2) Organisational Structures (3) Business design (4) Innovation
Moving beyond bureaucracy in the Australian public sector. Could marketplace business models be the solution to innovation?
Foreward
Perched atop a skyscraper on Nanjing East Road, looking out onto the Bund, Shanghai’s lights are shining and the skyline is incredible. It’s the sheer size that’s intimidating — the realisation that this is bigger than myself, than every other person in the room and that there lay the cause of the ripples from the East felt in Australia. Australia needs to keep pace in a globalised world and achieve economic growth.
Each age has its golden era; the Belle Époque in the late 1800’s was characterised by Montmartre, bohemians, Art Nouveau artists and the perfection of champagne. Wall Street in New York started to boom from finance during the early 1900’s. In 2018 Shanghai is a global economic powerhouse. Finance is in abundance; everyone’s a Venture Capitalist and the champagne seems to grow on trees. The advancement of technology doesn’t wait; rail transport is a sound example of this where both 320 km/h bullet trains and 120 km/h sleeper trains co-exist. This dynamic of developing and developed has propelled the nation of China forward, as if in 2018 it’s Shanghai, the Paris of the East, that’ll define the twenty-first Century.
Businesses and work are changing — we’re now presented with what’s referred to as the fourth industrial revolution.
In South Australia the environment that I grew up in was inward looking, there was an approach that was levelled but not challenging for what my education would be, what my work would be and what type of life I would live. There’s a strong cultural mind-set of a higher education — profession and full-time employment sequence that emerged out of the nineties. What was happening at a larger scale, even within my global region, that is the Asia Pacific, I was insulated from. I did not seek to understand, though I could have — this was a limited mind-set. However what I did seek was why and how I would obtain further education, a profession and an employment pathway.
Significant investment is being deployed into innovation in South Australia in response to the decline of manufacturing.
Australian higher education has been made entirely accessible and standardised. However reflecting on my own pathway the challenge for my eighteen year-old self, at an undergraduate level, is how might I study, support myself and ensure that I transition into the workforce as well as self-discover and pursue my passion. In the knowledge economy this is crucial (P, Drucker. 2005). As I began on the road to overcome these challenges I began to understand entrepreneurship; the restraints placed upon us merely make up a maze so we may weave — walls are no boundaries. It’s through challenges that creativity and innovation is optimised.
Innovation can be achieved with the right mind-set.
Abstract
From an Australian perspective our world is changing; our trade deals are impacting our everyday, people are disconnected from our political system (Gregory. K, 2018), and the skills that one needs to succeed in this new world are of that to make your opportunities. Siloed disciplines don’t matter anymore; what matters is to collaborate between them. Mind-sets should be shifted
I had to be enterprising and investigative as well as have exceptional management of time, venture and innovation to succeed in achieving my pathway. With this I shifted and so did the work I do. Where I came from was redundant and the education — profession — employment sequence innovated to make way for the organisations of the future that I’ve been involved in and that will shape the future economy. After all, how better to demonstrate leadership other than to try overcome our greatest challenges by re-thinking and re-organising the system itself. This is innovation.
Arthur Koestler in the Act of Creation (1964) explains creativeness as the result of bisociation, of putting together unconnected facts or ideas to form a single new idea. This is the Tetralogy, the bringing together of unconnected ideas with the objective to provide a solution for government to achieve innovation. Through the interdisciplinary approach of this report to combine public policy, organisational management, economic and business design, as well as through this innovative format, I intend to achieve an exemplar of the new possibilities. This report takes an Australian perspective on public policy and innovation. Our world is changing; startup companies have brought disruption to every industry within the private sector. However innovation is yet to hit the public sector. This sector is dominated by traditional bureaucratic structures that are thought to be incapable of innovating. This report presents marketplaces as viable business models to achieve innovation in the public sector as well as provide greater efficiency, productivity whilst being more democratic. We need democracy to ensure equality — this is that individuals have the ability to be the decipherer of their own success. . Moving beyond bureaucracy, platforms are applied as an alternative to administer as well as a solution for innovation.
Introduction
During the Renaissance management theory was being studied and comprehended and thus it’s something that people have been thinking about for a very long time; from a historical perspective how we might re-think management with alternative approaches shouldn’t be so new. Bureaucracy has been the dominant administrative system in Western society and has informed both public administration and enterprise management; and so, if private sector management is thinking about how best to adjust to post-industrial disruption, so should the public sector. As politics is assigned to policy it’s challenging to experiment, as Mike Cannon-Brookes, Co-founder of Atlassian says “experimentation in government is really, really hard to do because you get voted out […] I don’t know how you change that other than somehow the population accepting that we can get stuff wrong — that’s what experimentation is” (F. McDuling, 2018, pg. 23). New Public Management offers alternatives and signs that government is open to innovation. Tim Draper from the Draper Venture Network insists that the public sector being the only industry to have been excluded from disruption, now presents opportunity. The public sector’s high bureaucratic walls have insulated it from the effects of disruption years into the emergence of technology. However this preservation has heightened the opportunity. The recent emergence of govtech signals this.
Achieving innovation is required for economic growth and during a post-industrial period; innovation strategy is now on the agenda. Bureaucracy once informed public colonial strategy to merge and acquire in order to grow, as well as inform the enterprises that emerged out of the industrial revolution. Platforms, emerging out of the technological revolution should inform public management as “in the new market major businesses can be invaded and conquered in a matter of months by an upstart with none of the resources traditionally deemed essential for survival” (Parker. G, Van Alstyne. M, Choudray. S. 2007:3). The report will explore the viability and compatibility of marketplace organisational models to achieve innovation in the public sector. This report will characterise the policymaking process and New Public Management approaches to public administration, taking democracy into consideration. Moving beyond bureaucracy in the Australian public sector, marketplace business models could be the solution to innovation.
Part 1 — Bureaucracy in public and private spheres
The institutional mechanism that has traditionally managed the public sector is the bureau. This classical model of administration is derived from Max Weber’s top- down approach of management through offices, where workers report to managers and are held accountable by superiors (Pififfner, J, 2004). This method of management was dominant throughout the industrial revolution.
1.2 The Industrial Revolution
The 19th century was the height of the industrial revolution period. This was a time of discovery and invention. Organisation structures of this time were based upon theories that advocated structure, and repetition. Pipelines dominated businesses models where value is created through a linear process; this process benefits supply- side economies whereby scale reduces costs.
1.3 Scientific Management
F.W Taylor’s extreme management theory inspired Henry Ford and the management of his factories. This same thinking was also in the public sector. Coinciding with the similarities of public and private management methods was merging of economics with politics. Various schools of thought discovered people’s nature to be inherently self-interested under the conditions of pressure and persuasion. George Stigler in 1971 discovered the major social cleavages (divisions): land, labour and capital.
1.4 Producer and Consumer Groups
Land, labour and capital make up for producers. The central element of social cleavages is there integration of their political behaviour under a larger body of economic influences. There were numerous attempts through theories of economics, political science and sociology to understand the functioning and nature of organisations in order to make them more democratic.
Part 2 — Technological Revolution
2.1 Marketplaces connecting producers and consumers
In the old market, producers make products or services for consumers’ therefore new innovations from this industrial period came from producers. However upon the emergence of technology, in a new market innovation happens though consumers (Eric von Hippel). In contrast to the old market, consumers innovating are more democratic as they are not under economic influence.
In policy producer groups represent the major economic divisions in society and consumer interests are reliant on the representation of not-for-profit groups. The new market conditions enable a power shift from the traditional relationship of producers and consumers. This lessens the need for groups in society and empowers individuals.
Platforms could begin to challenge established notions of how companies are organised. “Technology makes it conceivable that the old model of a corporation with employees is an elaborate hierarchy of specialised functions could one day give way to leaner core organisations that rely on a loose network of external providers for many activities” (Forge. 2017, p. 50). J.P.Pfiffner says that “in contemporary times, the most obvious alternative to bureaucracies is a market system” (2004), that is a network of buyers, sellers and other actors coming together to trade products or services.
2.2 New Public Management
New Public Management (NPM) is the trend of Government’s reform continuum — in theory, if government is to reform it must adopt new approaches to increase efficiency and service delivery (Lane, J. 2000, p 8).
2.3 The fourth Industrial Revolution
Professor Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, describes the enormous potential for the technologies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution as well as the possible risks. These risks are “that organisations might be unable to adapt [and that] governments could fail to employ and regulate new technologies to capture their benefits (Marr. B, 2018).”
2.4 Platforms
Platform businesses are significantly different from funnel businesses, whereby value is created from the product or service that is inputted. There are stages within the funnel where the input must effectively pass through each before a final product is produced. The product can then be passed onto consumers. Creating greater value involves greater input and greater efficiency through the funnel.
A platform directly connects producers and consumers. Producers create the platform’s offerings and consumers buy or use the platform’s offerings (Parker, G. G., Van Alstyne, M. W. & Choudary, S. 2016). Efficiency is gained and increased when supply and demand sides interact with one another: this is producers and consumers in high-value exchanges. Platform chief assets are information and interactions. In the new market businesses may be designed as funnels, platforms or a combination of both; Apple is an example of this where they produce laptops and phones and the app store.
Since the 1980’s development has been accelerated, Figure 2 visualises a summary of Part 1 and Part 2, to demonstrate the coming together of multiple organisational structures, theories, business types and technologies to define the current technological revolution. 2018 has been labelled the Fourth Industrial Revolution.
This chart exemplifies the foundation being laid for disruption. The rate at which change has happened since the 1980’s is fast, in less than forty years we have seen an emergence of new policy making that’s evolved from the scientific management of the 1900’s. Bureaucracy has existed for thousands of years, informing organisational structures within our societies, and with the wake of the fourth industrial revolution, we see for the first time an opportunity to innovate it, with technologically enabled platforms. The success of other platform businesses (of which will be discussed in Part 5) is proof of their immense power.
Moving onward from 2018, it’s the relationship between producers and consumers that will continue to change. To ensure that this change is positive new public management, platforms and the technologies propelling the fourth industrial revolution, should be adopted.
Part 3 — Innovation
3.1 The public sector and disruption
The public sector is yet to experience disruption as every other industry has. Figure 3 shows all companies with a valuation of over $1 billion globally. Fintech has the largest number of unicorns (31), with e-commerce/ marketplaces coming in with a close 30. Following sectors are: Internet and software services: 26, on-demand: 19 and healthcare: 17. Govtech companies do not make the unicorn list, however facilities management startup Wework (US) and Mofang Gongyu (China) do.
3.2 Government Innovation Agenda
Australian governments have invested in “maker spaces, incubators, and accelerators with the hope of attracting entrepreneurs and building critical mass to attract skills and investors” (PWC, 2018). “We know that almost all net new job creation comes from businesses less than five years old, so our future prosperity is going to be dependent on Australia continuing to foster and support startups and ensuring these growing businesses can access workers with the right skill sets” (Startup Talent Gap, Startup AUS, 2018).
The Australian Private Equity and Venture Capital Association Limited (AVCAL) tracks all private equity and venture capital investments in Australia across all investment types. In 2017 there was a sharp increase the in Public Sector investment type, overall showing increasing VC commitments from Government. There have been three peaks in government investment since 2011 of which are highlighted in Figure 3. In 2011 a third round of Government-backed Innovation Investment Fund (IIF) programme was invested. The peak in 2013 is a result of government-funded programmes: $40m of matching funds came from the IIF and into the Carnegie Innovation Fund №2 (reported to have raised a total of $80m).
The most significant peak, last year in 2017 resulted from: a Federal Government $250m Biomedical Translation Fund, a $100m CSIRO Innovation Fund (Sequence Ventures), and the creation of a $50m innovation fund from South Australian Government. Given that in 2017 Government Investment accounted for 23% of all investment types this is a sign of a strong innovation agenda as they have accounted for nearly one quarter of all PE and VC investments of which are typically committed to by private organisations due to the risk. This is an example of New Public Management — assigning service delivery to external providers; Government have assigned the management of funds to fund managers with proven track records of investment in order to achieve their innovation objectives.
3.1 Innovation diffusion theory
Everett Rogers developed innovation diffusion theory to explain the adoption of new technologies. The innovation diffusion process is when “innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among members of a social system” (Sevcik, P. 2004). Change agents are essential in this process of adoption. These are people who are knowledgeable in their field and can communicate the benefits of an innovation.
There are five critical attributes that influence the rate of adoption that dictate the level of success of the innovation (Sevcik, P. 2004):
- Relative Advantage — cost savings.
- Attracting traffic/ usage — the compatibility and aligning with existing values.
- Complexity — the difficulty to understand and use.
- Tryability — the extent of which an innovation can be experimented with.
• Observability — how visible the results are.
3.4 Govtech
Govtech is an emerging segment at the intersection of government and technology. A rise in new market entrants that are innovating the products and services currently provided by traditional government are contributing to the momentum and causing disruption to the traditional value chain.
Figure 5 Growth of US Govtech Market since 2013
Source: CB Insights coverage of venture capital funding into Govtech SMEs based on a keyword search that stripped out the largest corporate funding deals.
The above graph shows the growth of the US Govtech market from 2013 to 2016. The number of deals is not significant if there were to be a comparison on all other deals in the US market. However it is consistent over this four-year period, quarter on quarter. The deal value is on an upward trend, indicating not only the emergence and steady state of a new segment but an investment opportunity. “Historically, govtech has not been a hotbed for venture investment activity, but that may be changing now. (CB Insights Govtech Investments On The Rise May 23, 2017).
Govtech is at the Innovators stage. In comparison to ADV in Australia investment is at x%. As shown in Figure 5, since 2011 Government investment PE and VC has remained below 5%. In 2017 this sharply rose to 23%. According to the law of diffusion Government investment sharply moved from the Innovator category, through the early adopter category and into the early majority. We can expect, based on this sharp spike, further Government investment in PE and VC to achieve economic growth. Innovation funds are part of the strategy for startup creation. Marketplaces models have not been considered.
The South Australian $50m innovation fund compliments Lot Fourteen, a precinct dedicated to innovation. Its’ purpose is to be a place “all about nurturing talent and driving jobs for our children in some of the world’s fastest industries […]. “Highly skilled and agile talent will thrive” (Lot Fourteen, 2018).
Figure 7 depicts the Lot Fourteen approach. Platforms have not been considered as a way to create value and contribute innovation. “Public entities around the world need more than $8 trillion to fund social infrastructure projects through 2020, [the value creation that is achieved through platform businesses makes them compatible with government]. This figure exceeds the capital requirements of the oil and gas and mining industries combined […]” (Mckinsey, 2018).
Part 4 — Organisational Structures
Mintzberg is one of the world’s most influential writers in the field of management. Figure 8 applies this management theory to the policy cycle.
Figure 9 represents Mintzbergs Matrix whereby there are two key dimensions of variation in organisational structure: 1. Centralisation and decentralisation, 2. Standardisation and diversification. The Matrix is represented in the four dark grey boxes, whilst the policy cycle has been incorporated into the matrix and represented as white boxes (Althaus, C. Bridgeman, P. Davis, G).
It is at the centralised bureaucratic stage, where in the policy cycle program delivery agencies are used to achieve implementation and evaluation objectives. Policy instruments are utilised for implementation and evaluation. This is where new Public Managements also sits in the policy cycle. Governments seeking reform of bureaucratic management seek other instruments for service delivery (Lane, J 8:2000) in order to strike the attributes required to create civil society.
It’s important to consider the end goal of a private organisation being to provide returns to shareholders whilst the end goal of publics is to deliver for people.
As we see with the policy cycle, programs are delivered through decentralised bureaucratic and centralised bureaucratic organisational structures. It is only through decentralised organic and centralised organic organisational structures that network, communities, the public, cabinet and ministers are involved. Where it’s in these structures that innovation happens, replace agencies with technology and bureaucracy will have been innovated. In policy, by definition this process is considered New Public Management. During a conversation with Tim Draper about government and innovation, when asked is he knew what New Public Management was he responded no.
Part 5 — The Power of Platforms
Platform businesses bring together producers and consumers in high-value exchanges. Their chief assets are information and interactions, which together are also the source of the value they create and their competitive advantage (Parker, G. G., Van Alstyne, M. W. & Choudary, S. 2016).
Figure 9 shows two examples of platform businesses that have leveraged physical infrastructure to connect consumers and producers. On the left is Uber Eats, which connects restaurants with consumers. An example of this is Guzmen y Gomez, an Australian Mexican restaurant chain that utilises Uber Eats to connect to consumers and to sell its’ products. On the right is BlaBla Car, a business that connects drivers with people who want a ride, in this case BlaBla car utilises McDonalds car parks on the outskirts of cities as meeting points for drivers and riders. What’s interesting about the Blabla Car example is that it utilises public property at scale to facilitate the business operations.
In both examples what’s significant is that you can physically see the economy in action from the effects of these platforms. In Newtown, take a walk past Guzmen y Gomez and you’ll see a whole community of motorcycle riders interacting whilst they wait to collect their next delivery from a window — very similar to that of a McDonalds drive through. However instead of a big drive through lane and car park, the restaurant can operate from its’ small shop front and side delivery window that opens up onto the public laneway — O’Connell Street, where people and other organisations live. “The platform is […] a transformative concept that’s radically changing business, the economy, and society at large” (Parker. G, Van Alstyne. M, Choudray. S. 2007:3); Guzmen y Gomez have the capacity to not only compete with McDonalds, but potentially win market share with the help of platforms such as Uber Eats.
In Montpellier a McDonalds establishment is transformed with the emergence of BlaBla Car. The Montpellier McDonalds car park serves the perfect infrastructure and location for a meeting point for riders and drivers to connect. For riders, public transport links to the outskirts of the city and for drivers the car park is situated just off the highway. BlaBla car and Uber Eats are two examples of how technological platforms not only are scalable and powerful, how they can exploit unique assets — unique in that they’re public and also create communities and facilitate the real-world interaction of strangers. This is the very essence of democracy; “we need to open spaces and expand them to protect democracy” (Stears. M, 2018). Blabla car and Uber are two examples of organisations that are connecting producers and consumers in new ways and opening up public spaces.
Part 6 — Conclusion
Government needs to rearrange capabilities and resources to rethink value streams and design viable administration that’s capable of capitalising on the opportunities presented in the fourth industrial revolution. As an alternative to bureaucracy marketplaces should be used to administer public goods to achieve innovation, productivity, efficiency whilst maintaining accountability and democracy. Platforms are a way for democracy to open up, for people to connect and for communities and economies to grow.
This hybrid novelistic-report approach has expanded the place of academia from an institution and will eventuate into places of business, government and community, where narratives are important and critical for communication — understanding. The practicality of the research is therefore strongly enhanced. Not only are there contributions to academia, but also to the relevance of higher education during this changing time and to innovation, of which must go beyond centralised hubs and become a mind-set.
Part 7 — Recommendations “Re-thinking and re-organising the system”
What governments can do is constrained by the necessity of maintaining economic growth and employment (Fenna p. 31). The below model demonstrates how marketplaces can add economic value through making public goods accessible through technology. Instead of only investing into the creation of eco-systems: a combination of innovation hubs, investors and high skilled talent, Government should create more value for business, individuals and community groups by connecting their pre-existing assets directly to startups, community groups and individuals, resulting in greater administrative efficiency.
Figure 11 shows government on the left (represented as dots) that are able to connect their facilities to the community via a digital platform.
16
Bibliography
A.Jay, Management and Machiavelli, The Guernsey Press Co. Ltd., Guernsey, Channel Islands (1987). pp. 15–16, p. 94.
Althaus, C. Bridgeman, P. Davis, G. The Australian Policy Handbook. 2014. Allen and Unwin.
Baldwin, C. Y. (2012). Organization design for business ecosystems. Journal of Organization Design, 1(1).
Boudreau, K., & Lakhani, K. (2009). How to manage outside innovation. MIT Sloan management review, 50(4), 69. Retrieved from http://sloanreview.mit.edu/the-magazine/articles/2009/summer/50413/how-to- manage-outside-innovation/
CB Insights, Govtech Investments On The Rise May 23, 2017.
Clune, B. The Innovation Investment Fund Branded a Failure (2014). Smart Company. Retrieved from https://www.smartcompany.com.au/startupsmart/advice/startupsmart- funding/the-industry-innovation-fund-branded-a-failure/
Drucker, P. Managing Oneself (2005). Harvard Business Review, 83(1), pp.100–109.
Ernst & Young. Public Sector Innovation. From Ideas to Action (2017). Retrieved from https://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/EY-innovation-public-sector- en/$FILE/EY-innovation-public-sector-en.pdf
Five Year Productivity Review, Supporting Paper no. 12 (2017). An Overview of Innovation Policy. Australian Government Productivity Commission, Commonwealth of Australia. Retrieved from https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/productivity- review/report/productivity-review-supporting12.pdf
Jay, A. Management and Machiavelli (1987). Hutchinson Business.
Kanigal, R. The One Best Way, NY: Viking 1997, pp. 492–495, 526–528.
6 B. G. Peters, The Future of Governing, 2nd ed., Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas 2001, pp. 3–12.
Klinenber, E. Worry Less About Crumbling Roads, More About Crumbling Libraries. 2018. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/worry-less- about-crumbling-roads-more-about-crumbling-libraries/570721/
17
Koestler, A (1964). The Act of Creation. Hutchinson.
Konig, K “Public Administration — Post-Industrial, Post-Modern, Post-Bureaucratic,” in New Trends in Public Administration and Public Law, European Group of Public Administration, Budapest University of Economic Sciences, Center for Public Affairs Studies 1996, p. 39.
Lane, J (2000). New Public Management. Routledge, London.
Marr. B, 2018 The 4th Industrial Revolution Is Here — Are You Ready? Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2018/08/13/the-4th-industrial-revolution- is-here-are-you-ready/#bae06e628b27
McDuling, F, The Politicisation of Mike Cannon-Brookes, Good Weekend August 25, 2018, p. 23 The Sydney Morning Herald.
Gregory, K. (2018). Young people disillusioned with political chaos. ABC. Retrieved from https://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/worldtoday/young-people-disillusioned- with-political-chaos/10147544
McKinsey&Company. Social Infrastructure. 2018. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/capital-projects-and-infrastructure/how-we- help-clients/social-infrastructure
Mintzberg, H. The Structuring of Organizations (1979). Retrieved from https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0907/ML090710600.pdf
National Innovation and Science Agenda (2018). Welcome to the Ideas Boom. Commonwealth of Australia, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Retrieved from https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/g/files/net3906/f/July%202018/document/pdf/natio nal-innovation-and-science-agenda-report.pdf
Parker. G, Van Alstyne. M, Choudray. S. (2007). Platform Revolution: How Networked Markets are Transforming the Economy and How to Make them Work for You: W.W. Norton & Company.
Parramatta 2038 (2013). Community Strategic Plan. Parramatta City Council. Retrieved from
https://www.cityofparramatta.nsw.gov.au/sites/council/files/__data/assets/pdf_file/00 06/122010/Parra2038.pdf
Pififfner, J (2004). Traditional Public Administration versus The New Public Management: Accountability versus Efficiency, published in Institutionenbildung in Regierung und Verwaltung: Festschrift fur Klaus Konig, A. Benz, H. Siedentopf, and K.P. Sommermann, eds. (Berlin,Germany: Duncker & Humbolt, 2004), pp. 443–454.
18
PWC. Gov.Tech The power to transform public services in the UK. 2016. Retrieved from https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/psrc/united-kingdom/assets/govtech-report.pdf
Rogers, E. 2001. Evolution: Diffusion of Innovations. volume 7, pp. 4982–4986, 2001, Elsevier Ltd. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA. Elsevier Ltd.
Schmidt, D. Why Business Design is the Most Important Skill of the Future (2018). Retrieved from https://medium.muz.li/why-business-design-is-the-most-important- skill-of-the-future-b0ed451003c7
See D. F. Kettl, The Global Public Management Revolution, Washington: Brookings, 2000, p. 59.
Sevcik, P. (2004) Innovation Diffusion. Business Communications Review; Sep 2004; 34, 9; ProQuest Central pg. 8.
Stears. M, (2018) How Australia can Change Democracy. Retrieved from https://sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2018/10/08/how-australia-can-change- democracy.html
Van Alstyne, M. W., Parker, G. G., & Choudary, S. P. (2016). Pipelines, Platforms, and the New Rules of Strategy. Harvard Business Review.
Weber, M. “Politics as A vocation,” in From Max Weber, H.H. Gerth and C.W. Mills, NY: Oxford University Press 1946, p. 95.
World Economic Forum, 2016, Global Competitiveness Report 2015–2016
19
Appendices Interview 1, Tim Draper, Draper Venture Network
