What we’re thinking
In the progress economy we find it beneficial to name some specific progress states.
These serve as waypoints that we can refer to and reason about on progress journeys (see progress as a verb).
Without further delay, let’s delve into the five commonly used named states!
Naming states
Here’s the five named progress states we’ll refer to often in the progress economy.
| description | |
|---|---|
| progress sought | represents the more desirable state that a progress seeker aims to reach |
| progress origin | the starting point for the progress seeker in a progress attempt |
| progress offered | the progress state that a progress helper offers to assist the progress seeker reach when they engage with a progress proposition |
| progress potential | phenomenological judgement, at a specific point in time, of the progress state that could be reached in a progress attempt |
| progress reached | phenomenological judgement, at a specific point in time, of the progress state that has been reached during a progress attempt |
Used as progress attempt WAYPOINTS
We use these named states as waypoints on progress attempts as shown in this diagram.
With progress attempts starting from the seeker’s individual progress origin aiming to end at the seeker’s individual progress sought.
However, when engaging a pogress proposition, the end point transitions to the proposition’s progress offered. This may differ from the progress sought, and the seeker needs to judge if that is acceptable and sufficient.
Progress origin
This is the progress seeker‘s starting point for a progress attempt.
It moves over time as seekers gain resources from other progress attempts (including in other markets and industries).
Progress propositions also need to assume a progress origin. And helpers can segment progress origin to offer more relevant propositions.
Progress sought
This is the desired state a progress seeker wishes to reach. It’s the end point of progress where maximum value has been created.
It evolves over time due to experiences, influences (even from other markets and industries) and changing circumstances.
For practical reasons we usually consider specific aspects of progress sought at a time. And progress helpers often segment their offerings based on progress sought to offer more relevant propositions.
Progress offered
This is the progress state that a progress helper offers to assist the progress seeker reach when they engage with their progress proposition.
While it has a connection to progress sought, it need not match it exactly. Offering an exact match requires customisation which likely increases the equitable exchange progress hurdle. Helpers may offer compromised propositions that target different seeker segments to reduce that hurdle.
Some helpers look to deviate from mainstream segment. Disruptive innovation and blue ocean strategy are two approaches that follow this idea.
Two named states represent phenomenological judgements of progress: progress potential and progress reached.
Progress potential
The phenomenological judgement, at a specific point in time, of the progress state that could be reached in a progress attempt.
We can interpret this as judgement of future value that could be created and is judged prior to and during a progress attempt.
It is predominantly judged by seekers. Though in some cases helpers also judge potential with a seeker, deciding to not make resources available if it is judged as too low.
Progress reached
The phenomenological judgement, at a specific point in time, of the progress state that has been reached during a progress attempt
It is judged during and after a progress attempt, predominantly by sekers. And it reflects the level of value that has emerged during the attempt. Though, importantly, this may differ from value actually recognised by the seeker.
Helpers may also make judgements, and they can differ to seekers – which is a likely sign of value co-destruction.
Relating to value
Naming of states generates no value to a seeker. But it does allow us to reason about what value has emerged and has been recognised:
| relating to value | |
|---|---|
| progress origin | No value so far created; progress potential exists if seeker has judged that. |
| progress sought | Maximum value has been created when reaching this state. |
| progress offered | Maximum value has been created when reaching this state if it matches progress sought. When differing from progress sought the eventual value created differs. It may be: * less if progress offered is less than progress sought * more if progress offered is more than progress sought and seeker realises value in the extra progress * same if progress offered is more than progress sought and seeker recognises no extra value in the extra progress (be aware, the seeker may see higher progress hurdles due to this unnecessary extra progress) |
We also use two named states to keep track of seekers’ phenomenological judgements of progress:
| relating to value | |
|---|---|
| progress potential | An indication of future value that may be realised |
| progress reached | An indication of value that has emerged; this may differ from value recognised depending on the seeker’s value recognition approach |
Relating to innovation
Innovation should aim to increase seekers’ judgements of progress potential towards progress sought. Doing so means seekers may realise increasingly more value towards maximum value.
For helpers this means their propositions need to increase their progress offered towards progress sought. Helping seeker’s increase their judgements of progress potential and increase progress reached.
Helpers also need to innovate to manage the ever evolving progress sought and likely evolving progress origins.
I’ll leave you with one last quote before you dive into each named state, it cones as a consequence of what I’ve just written:
Innovate or die
P. Drucker via “Innovation on the fly”, HBR
Co-create value through discussion…