Resilience analysis of the ICT ecosystem

From Adaptive Cycle
Jump to: navigation, search

Authors: T.G. Koslowski, P.H. Longstaff, M. Vidal, T. Grob

Publication Year: 2012


Journal: 23rd European Regional Conference of the International Telecommunication Society, Vienna, Austria.

Categories: Organizational Change, Adaptive Cycle, Resilience


This paper describes the research on resilience on the telecommunication market. The research question is: how can the adaptive cycle-model help decision makers to understand the dynamic, evolving and complex ICT market and plan strategies/interventions at the optimal point in the process? At their analysis of the current telecommunications market they state that trends and developments require a new understanding of the market and a renewal of the current regulatory regime is necessary. They state that the technology and innovation driven markets should depart from the current regulatory paradigm at which the objective was to open up the market. Instead the focus should be on promoting dynamic efficiency to encourage innovation. To create a new perspective on the telecom market a realignment of the regulatory regime is required. There are strong indications that telco-ecosystems represent complex adaptive systems as they exhibit several generic properties. Therefore the existing explanation of ICT markets need to be reexamined to change the regulatory forces to provide a more comprehensive basis for policy makers. Because the markets have the need to be reexamined the adaptive cycle model is applied on the market. The authors analyzed the telecom market and took as starting point the market liberalization in the late 1990s. At this state the market was in the Reorganization and restructuring phase. The resilience of the market is increasing. In the early 2000s the exploitation and growth phase was at hand, with the introduction of 3G the Resilience was high. Regulations enforced on static efficiency and regulation to prevent monopolies. In the late 2000s the conservation phase was active. The resilience is decreasing and telephone companies were cautious to invest in new technologies like fiber optics. The market revenues were stagnant. At the early 2010s the Decline and Release phase was at hand. The revenues and profits were decreasing and the resilience is very low, the telephone companies were reluctant to invest in new technology. The adaptive cycle envisages three possible scenarios for the future of the market: 1) the cluster disappears, 2) the cluster undergoes a phase of renewal, or 3) a new cluster emerges and replaces the old paradigm. The authors conclude that because of complexity and uncertainty of future ICT ecosystems in order to secure a functioning and resilient ICT infrastructure new tools and a theoretical framework is needed for regulators and industrial actors. The policy makers need to rethink the Internet value chain in order to ensure equal opportunities and competitive conditions for all players along the Internet value chain. Different solutions to provide this are presented by Friederiszick et al. (2011).

Critical Reflection

This paper is important in a way that it tries to sketch the ICT ecosystem in combination with the adaptive cycle. This paper learns us that the telecom market is changing and needs a new innovation to keep up the cluster (according to the adaptive cycle). In order to make this possible it is needed for the policy makers to rethink about the regulations currently active at the market. This paper gives a very good insight in how the telecom market is changing and how the adaptive cycle can be applied on an ICT ecosystem. Although this paper is a clear written paper, I think that the paper would benefit to split into two pieces an analysis on the current telecom market and an analysis on how the policy makers can change the regulations to optimize the market for equal opportunities and competitive conditions. The paper loses its focus in some of the paragraphs. Also the connection why the regulations have such an enormous impact on the market is not clearly argued.