Difference between revisions of "Business Patterns"
(first draft) |
m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Since Fab7 there is talk (and questions) about the 7 "business models" we have identified -- I'd rather call them business design patterns, since they revole around some basic thoughts how a FabLab could generate enough income to sustain itself. The 7 patterns are: | + | Since Fab7 there is talk (and questions) about the 7 "business models" we have identified -- I'd rather call them business design patterns, since they revole around some basic thoughts how a FabLab could generate enough income to sustain itself. The 7 patterns are: |
| − | #grant-based | + | #grant-based |
| − | #embedded in institutions | + | #embedded in institutions |
| − | #operating as a prototype shop | + | #operating as a prototype shop |
| − | #access fees | + | #access fees |
| − | #educational activities<br> | + | #educational activities<br> |
| − | #techno tourism | + | #techno tourism |
#gurus for hire (managers of existing labs offer their insights for money to new labs) | #gurus for hire (managers of existing labs offer their insights for money to new labs) | ||
| − | Labs typically use a mix of these models. | + | Labs typically use a mix of these models. |
| − | == grant-based == | + | == grant-based == |
| − | Main income stream: public (or private) funding | + | Main income stream: public (or private) funding |
| − | Main service provided: solving some problem the funding body has allocated money for | + | Main service provided: solving some problem the funding body has allocated money for |
| − | + | Main advantage: running costs covered typically for several years | |
| − | Main | + | Main disadvantage: dependent on goals of funding body which are outside the control of the lab |
| − | + | == embedded in institutions == | |
| − | + | Main income stream: none, but running costs are covered by parent institution | |
| − | Main | + | Main service provided: adding to the (core?) activities of parent institution (e.g. education, providing a workshop, enabling certain activities) |
| − | Main | + | Main advantage: if part of core business of parent institution a view to long-term sustainability |
| − | + | Main disadvantage: institutions and open access are often hard to combine | |
| − | + | == operating as a prototype shop == | |
| − | Main | + | Main income stream: work for hire |
| − | + | Main service provided: building prototypes according to specification, ideally together with the customer | |
| − | Main | + | Main advantage: FabLab can play in the innovation field |
| − | Main | + | Main disadvantage: helping "inventors" can absorb large portions of lab's staffing time |
| − | == | + | == access fees == |
| − | Main income stream: | + | Main income stream: hourly, monthly or yearly access fees ("gym model") |
| − | Main service provided: | + | Main service provided: access to workshop |
| − | + | Main advantage: stable income stream | |
| − | Main | + | Main disadvantage: possible conflict with open access principle |
| − | Main service provided: access to knowledge, access to "official" cirquit of labs | + | == educational activities == |
| + | |||
| + | Main income stream: course and workshop fees | ||
| + | |||
| + | Main service provided: (ideally: officially approved/accredited) educational activities, lead by FabLab instructors | ||
| + | |||
| + | Main advantage: stable income stream | ||
| + | |||
| + | Main disadvantage: relatively high barriers for entry into the market (accreditation), dependent on money avaliable for external activities in the education system | ||
| + | |||
| + | == techno tourism == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Main income stream: event or activity based fees | ||
| + | |||
| + | Main service provided: leasurely encounters with digital manufacturing technology | ||
| + | |||
| + | Main advantage: relatively stable income stream | ||
| + | |||
| + | Main disadvantage: dependent on tourism economy | ||
| + | |||
| + | == gurus for hire == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Main income stream: consultancy or support fees | ||
| + | |||
| + | Main service provided: access to knowledge, access to "official" cirquit of labs | ||
| + | |||
| + | Main advantage: relatively stable income stream as long as number of labs keeps growing | ||
| + | |||
| + | Main disadvantage: even with rapid growth there is only room for a small number of "gurus for hire" labs, potential accusation of creating a ponzi scheme | ||
| + | |||
| + | Main disadvantage: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Revision as of 20:15, 1 January 2012
Since Fab7 there is talk (and questions) about the 7 "business models" we have identified -- I'd rather call them business design patterns, since they revole around some basic thoughts how a FabLab could generate enough income to sustain itself. The 7 patterns are:
- grant-based
- embedded in institutions
- operating as a prototype shop
- access fees
- educational activities
- techno tourism
- gurus for hire (managers of existing labs offer their insights for money to new labs)
Labs typically use a mix of these models.
Contents
grant-based
Main income stream: public (or private) funding
Main service provided: solving some problem the funding body has allocated money for
Main advantage: running costs covered typically for several years
Main disadvantage: dependent on goals of funding body which are outside the control of the lab
embedded in institutions
Main income stream: none, but running costs are covered by parent institution
Main service provided: adding to the (core?) activities of parent institution (e.g. education, providing a workshop, enabling certain activities)
Main advantage: if part of core business of parent institution a view to long-term sustainability
Main disadvantage: institutions and open access are often hard to combine
operating as a prototype shop
Main income stream: work for hire
Main service provided: building prototypes according to specification, ideally together with the customer
Main advantage: FabLab can play in the innovation field
Main disadvantage: helping "inventors" can absorb large portions of lab's staffing time
access fees
Main income stream: hourly, monthly or yearly access fees ("gym model")
Main service provided: access to workshop
Main advantage: stable income stream
Main disadvantage: possible conflict with open access principle
educational activities
Main income stream: course and workshop fees
Main service provided: (ideally: officially approved/accredited) educational activities, lead by FabLab instructors
Main advantage: stable income stream
Main disadvantage: relatively high barriers for entry into the market (accreditation), dependent on money avaliable for external activities in the education system
techno tourism
Main income stream: event or activity based fees
Main service provided: leasurely encounters with digital manufacturing technology
Main advantage: relatively stable income stream
Main disadvantage: dependent on tourism economy
gurus for hire
Main income stream: consultancy or support fees
Main service provided: access to knowledge, access to "official" cirquit of labs
Main advantage: relatively stable income stream as long as number of labs keeps growing
Main disadvantage: even with rapid growth there is only room for a small number of "gurus for hire" labs, potential accusation of creating a ponzi scheme
Main disadvantage:
