Following this consideration, if value is associated with use and context, the focus necessarily shifts from the units of output to the interactions. A service, therefore, represents “the process of doing something beneficial for and in conjunction with some entity, rather than units of outputs – immaterial goods- as implied by the plural ‘services’” (Vargo & Lush 2008, p.
The value of the intangible over the tangible. It is interesting to think of how there is a shift from the value of the goods to the value of the interactions mediated through goods and channels. It encourages a more human lens for which businesses can evaluate what exactly they are providing to their customers and how.
That’s what I would rather say. It’s funny because I had someone ask me what I was an “expert” at and I didn’t really know how to answer it.
First, I would never consider my expert of anything. Second, I would not want to be an expert at any one thing.
I’d rather know a little about a lot.
Expertise and expert status is something that works if you want to put yourself into a box, but who wants to be in a box? It seems like there is some cultural pressure these days to be the expert in something. The one guy who you call about this one thing. And then you can be that unicorn or something. I would rather have a wide knowledge base and have people say, “for a good conversation, talk to her” than “she is the expert in [blank].”
Generate and build knowledge over being gaining expertise in one thing.
MG wrote a post yesterday about scoffing in the technology world. It’s a great read, especially going into the new iPhone and “iWatch” launch today.
It also reminded me of all the scoffing I’ve heard in my time as an investor these 9+ years. Things like:
"User generated content can’t…