Post on 22-Jan-2018
Open, online, flexible,
technology-enhanced… and
sustainable? Understanding new
business models for distance
and blended learning
The Online, Open and Flexible Higher Education
Conference 2017 Milton Keynes, 26th October 2017
Dr. Dominic Orr, d.orr@fibs.eu
Prof. Martin Weller, martin.weller@open.ac.uk
Dr. Robert Farrow, rob.farrow@open.ac.uk
The OOFAT Question
What do sustainable models of open, online, flexible and
technology-enhanced (OOFAT) approaches to higher
education look like?
Background
• Diverse institutional forms of HE “delivery”
• Nearly all employ some aspects of OOFAT
• What are the different approaches, combinations?
• What strategies are HEIs following? What works?
• Can we draw general conclusions, identify exemplars?
Methodological approach
• Steering committee
• Prototypes of different providers
• Desktop research
• Survey
• Interview
• Analysis
Methodological approach
• Steering committee
• Prototypes of different providers
• Desktop research
• Survey
• Interview
• Analysis
Methodological approach
• Steering committee
• Prototypes of different providers
• Desktop research
• Survey
• Interview
• Analysis
The OOFAT Conceptual model
3 core processes
• Content development
• Delivery of learning
• Recognition of learning
2 dimensions
• Flexibility (organizational
openness)
• Inclusion (social openness of
processes)
Specifications of the OOFAT model
Category Sub-categories Dimension: Flexibility Dimension: Inclusion
Content Resources How adaptable is the content to
an individual learner?
How open is the provision of
content?
Assessment Is assessment static, and one
size fits all?
Are there restrictions on who
can be assessed?
Who does the assessing (e.g.
peer review)?
Delivery of HE Access to content How flexible is delivery by
time/location/pace
How open is the institution to all
learners?
Access to
guidance and
support
How flexible is access to full
support?
Who can access support?
Who can provide support?
Recognition Content and
process
Can different elements
contribute to recognition?
Are there flexible paths to
recognition?
Is recognition available from
multiple groups or one body?
Methodological approach
• Steering committee
• Prototypes of different providers
• Desktop research
• Survey
• Interview
• Analysis
Methodological approach
• Steering committee
• Prototypes of different providers
• Desktop research
• Survey
• Interview
• Analysis
Products /services
Target group
Communication
channels
Value chain
Competitive advantage
Networks
Profitability /sustainability
Open University of China
Defender-related characteristics versus Prospector-related characteristics
Business model innovation typology
Taran, Boer & Lingdren (2015)
Global coverage
• Coverage: the study covers 49 HEIs from 26 countries
• HEIs whose provision is: primarily online, primarily
distance or primary campus-based
• Mega-universities and small HEIs from public and private
sectors
Methodological approach
• Steering committee
• Prototypes of different providers
• Desktop research
• Survey
• Interview
• Analysis
Methodological approach
• Steering committee
• Prototypes of different providers
• Desktop research
• Survey
• Interview
• Analysis
Mode of provision by size of enrolment 47 cases that provided full data
75%
33%
33%
50%
20%
8%
50%
25%
47%
58%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Less than 1,000 (n=4)
1 – 20,000 (n=15)
20 – 100,000 (n=12)
More than 100 ,000 (n=10)
Primarily online providers (n=21)
Primarily distance and correspondence providers (n=9)
Primarily campus-based providers (n=17)
Technologies used 47 cases that provided full data
5%
14%
52%
33%
71%
33%
57%
29%
43%
57%
43%
81%
95%
71%
86%
86%
0%
0%
33%
44%
44%
11%
56%
0%
22%
56%
11%
78%
44%
78%
78%
89%
6%
18%
18%
29%
29%
35%
35%
41%
41%
65%
71%
71%
82%
82%
94%
94%
Artificial Intelligence
Digital Badging
Learning Analytics
Teleconference
Virtual Learning Environment (VLE)
Wikis
Massive Open Online Course (MOOC)
Blogging and micro-blogging
Eportfolios
Videoconference
Bring Your Own Device (BYOD)
Mobile Learning
Online Assessment
Social Media
Open Educational Resources (OER)
Learning Management System (LMS)
Primarily online (n=21) Primarily distance/correspondence (n=9)
Primarily campus-based (n=17)
Inclusivity and exclusivity of core processes49 cases that provided full data
Number of HEIs by profile focus40 cases that provided full data
OOFAT visual models – even
OOFAT visual models – star
OOFAT visual models – single peak
OOFAT visual models – open access
Access to content -Flexibility
Access to content -Openness
Access to support -Flexibility
Access to support -Openness
Content -Personalisation
Content -Origin/Collaboratio
n
Assessment -Flexibility
Assessment -Recognition
OOFAT visual models – manifold
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Dual Peak Even Star Single Lopsided Manifold
OOFAT Cases by shape analysis
OOFAT Profile Distrubution
OOFAT business modelling strategyCore aspects Defender-like approach Prospector- like approach
Products and services We deliver and/or support core institutional
provision
We offer something different, complementary or
alternative to the main provision
Target group We target an existing market We are targeting a new (or non-traditional) market
Communication channels We interact with learners through traditional
channels
We interact with learners through new or innovative
relationship channels (physical or virtual)
Legacy or new value chain We develop, produce and deliver the provision by
making the most of legacy knowledge
We develop, produce and maintain our offering
through exploration of new approaches and innovation
Competitive advantage Our competitive advantage comes from traditional
competences (e.g., market knowledge, expertise,
improvement of existing technology)
Our competitive advantage comes from new,
unfamiliar, competences (e.g., new or emerging
technologies, innovation in working practices)
Networks We operate primarily within traditional institutional
or cultural parameters
We operate primarily in non-traditional or (dynamic)
networks (e.g., alliance, joint-venture)
Profitability and
sustainability
We maintain profitability through incremental cost
cutting and efficiencies
We maintain profitability through new processes to
generate revenues, or cost-cutting in existing
processes
OOFAT business strategy – examples
*Based on: Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational Strategy,
Structure, and Process. McGraw-Hill and Taran, Y., Boer, H., &
Lindgren, P. (2015). A business model innovation typology.
https://doi.org/10.1111/deci.12128
Products /services
Target group
Communication
channels
Value chain
Competitive advantage
Networks
Profitability /sustainability
Open University of China
Defender-related characteristics versus Prospector-related characteristics
OOFAT business strategy – examples
*Based on: Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational Strategy,
Structure, and Process. McGraw-Hill and Taran, Y., Boer, H., &
Lindgren, P. (2015). A business model innovation typology.
https://doi.org/10.1111/deci.12128
Products /services
Target group
Communication
channels
Value chain
Competitive advantage
Networks
Profitability /sustainability
Open University of China
Defender-related characteristics versus Prospector-related characteristics
Products /services
Target group
Communication
channels
Value chain
Competitive advantage
Networks
Profitability /sustainability
OERu
Defender-related characteristics versus Prospector-related characteristics
OOFAT business model strategies
OOFAT business strategies – complexity
Defender-like strategies
• The fixed core model – maintaining core, innovating on the edges
• The outreach model – maintaining core, but focus on new
relationships with their target group
• The service-provider model – focus on target group, innovating on the
edges
Prospector-like strategies
• The entrepreneurial model – innovating in all areas
• The entrepreneurial model with fixed core – innovating in all areas
apart from the core
OOFAT business strategies – emerging profiles
Conclusion
• The data shows OOFAT is being used to support a variety of
purposes globally
• Some HEIs are using OOFAT as part of an ambitious
organizational change strategy (prospectors), whilst others are
integrating it into existing services (defenders)
• Technological innovation tends to be somewhat conservative
• Our OOFAT model can be used to contrast and compare cases
• Exemplary cases are still being identified but could help identify
sources of future innovation
• The final report will be made available to ICDE soon