Royal Philips: Metaphor or operating logic?

Infographic showing Philips’ strategic fork with two paths: Tier 1 ecosystem orchestrator with neutral governance, open platforms and strategic optionality, and Tier 2 subordinate contributor with a company‑centred network, control trap and subordinate trajectory.
Philips must choose between staying a company‑centred contributor or becoming a true ecosystem orchestrator, using neutral governance and open platforms to unlock innovation at system scale.

Roy Jakobs has been saying the right words for a while now. At Davos in January 2026, freshly reappointed as Philips CEO, he called for an “open ecosystem” in which Philips adopts other companies’ AI into its workflows rather than trying to build everything itself. By March, he was describing Philips’ shift from standalone devices toward integrated AI platforms, while also warning that slower growth leaves less room to keep investing in innovation. Then in July, alongside the Dutch government’s €102.5 million MedTech commitment, he returned to the same theme: “innovation thrives when we come together around a shared ambition”.

That is not random messaging. It is a CEO describing something close to an orchestrator strategy. The question is whether Philips’ actual architecture matches what its CEO is now saying in public.

A simple test helps. If Philips disappeared from HealthSuite tomorrow, would the hospitals, AI vendors, and researchers connected to it keep building together on their own? Or would the whole thing simply stop? If the honest answer is “it would stop,” then Philips does not yet have an ecosystem in the full sense. It has a company-centred network using ecosystem language. That distinction – metaphor versus operating logic – is the most useful lens for reading Philips’ current strategic fork.

Continue reading

Germany’s industrial memory loss: Why an engineering engine is losing the ecosystem play

Germany’s Industrial Memory Loss

Germany may be about to do something few believed possible: lose not just industrial output, but the industrial memory that made it Europe’s most admired manufacturing power. Since the pandemic, the country has lost nearly a quarter of a million manufacturing jobs, industrial production has fallen every year since 2022, and more than 31 per cent of industrial firms now say they are less competitive globally. Paul Hobcraft’s Intelligent Integrated Business Ecosystem (IIBE) offers a sharp way to read this. It helps explain how a country can still have world-class firms, skills and institutions, yet begin to lose the architecture that allows them to learn, align and adapt together.

Some will argue that Germany is simply going through the same shift every mature economy faces. Lower-value production moves elsewhere; higher-value engineering, design and coordination stay at home. In that reading, Germany is not declining. It is upgrading.

It is a neat story. It is also too easy.

Continue reading

Treating Ecosystems as a new asset class

Appreciating Assets as a new Ecosystem accounting class

It is time for us to consider treating Ecosystem assets as an appreciating capital asset class – because they grow stronger through use – and our accounting must shift from measuring cost/return to measuring what is being built and how fast it appreciates.

Ecosystem assets are the only capital class that becomes more valuable every time it is used. Investing in them is not a cost – it is the foundation of compounding advantage. In some ways applying this logic offers a real breakthrough, it reframes the entire investment conversation in ecosystems – and you can turn compounding from a metaphor into a management system.

Current accounting fails ecosystems. Traditional accounting assumes assets wear out, value declines with use and treats relationships as expense, knowledge is seen as overheads, coordination is a cost and trust is intangible and is left untracked.

*** Depreciation logic was built for assets to die.

Continue reading

Comparing Industrial Ecosystem Strategies Through the IIBE Lens

Comparisons through the IIBE Lens for Ecosystem Opportunities

So the question here is “What the IIBE Lens reveals that Strategy reviews so often fail or miss in their assessments.” Ecosystems over time naturally build “tensions” progressively. The aim of the IIBE lens is to identify these tensions and gaps and assist management to recalibrate their Ecosystem in more dynamic ways to evolve.

Here, we are using the Intelligent & Integrated Business Ecosystem (IIBE) Lens to compare four global industrial leaders — Siemens AG, GE Vernova, Schneider Electric, and ABB — all of whom have been evaluated previously through IIBE informed analysis.

The IIBE is a diagnostic systematic approach designed to assess how well an organization is designed to operate, adapt and evolve through ecosystems, especially under changing market conditions. It seeks out tensions, gaps and opportunities that so often cannot be named but are giving cause to growing discomfort.

The intent here, in post two of this short series, is not to explain IIBE principles, but to focus on observable outcomes through what the IIBE lens offers: how each company positions its ecosystem, how attractive and usable those ecosystems are for customers and partners, the maturity of their platforms, and where gaps or constraints remain.

Continue reading

the iibe defines the “category of need” in the ecosystem collaborative world required today

The IIBE approaches complexity in a comprehensive Ecosystem approach

The Interconnected Integrated Business Ecosystem (IIBE) is pioneering the next logic of Businesses recognising collaboration and co-creation in a world where increasing complexity cannot be solved by today’s evaluation and operating models. The need is in delivering tomorrows advantage.

Yes, the IIBE framework explicitly defines and pioneers the category of ecosystem collaborative design. Unlike many existing frameworks that focus on individual company strategies, specific capabilities, or isolated innovation efforts, IIBE provides a structured, systemic, and strategic blueprint for designing and orchestrating ecosystems as living, adaptive, co-creative systems.

“In the new economy, value is not found in what you own, but in what you can orchestrate. The IIBE frame is the engine that makes that orchestration both disciplined and achievable.”

Continue reading

Providing Client Solutions for Business Ecosystems – IIBE related

Client Solutions for the Integrated Business Ecosysten (IIBE)

I am being asked how I structure my IIBE offering in a commercial structure to offer a clear pathway for potential clients. These are evolving as more modules are coming on stream or currently “in the works” as being validated.

The Key in my approach is to offer A modular, flexible commercial structure enabling tailored pathways for clients at different ecosystem maturity levels.

The designing principle of the Core Commercial Logic

The IIBE commercial model is built as a progressive pathway, allowing clients to enter at different points depending on maturity, ambition, and urgency. All offerings align to four principles:
(1) Low-friction entry points
(2) Capability-building progression
(3) Implementation support
(4) Ongoing advisory and intelligence renewal

Every module is independent but connects into a broader arc of ecosystem capability formation.

Applicable from January 2026, subject to updates and change as portfolio of offers expands.

Continue reading

Are you Orchestrating the Intelligent Dynamics into Business Ecosystems?

Orchestration of the intelligence generated by applying dynamic value creation principles seems central, how so?

Orchestration by applying dynamic value creation principles is central because it transforms and pulls together fragmented business activities into an adaptive, unified knowledge architecture that continuously senses, learns, and responds to change, it gives the necessary intelligence.

Within the Integrated Interconnected Business Ecosystem (IIBE framework), this orchestration acts as the “beating heart” of the ecosystem: it continuously aggregates signals from both inside and outside the business, converts this intelligence into strategic actions, and enables all participants to co-create new value rather than simply compete for a finite share.paul4innovating+1

Continue reading

The Mindset Shift in Business Ecosystem Thinking

Opening up the Mind to Connected Ecosystem thinking

During this month of September 2025 I (finally) launched my comprehensive approach to Integrated Interconnected Business Ecosystems. It has all somewhat come out in one big rush. Fifteen posts in one month (!) but I took the view this needs explaining, exploring and expanding the thinking that went into it over a long learning and research period.

Moving from a business largely based on linear thinking is really hard to master initally. It takes a real mindshift and commitment to understand the why, how along with the what and when, and then where to apply this within your business, to explore and then learn for expanding it across the organization.

Nothing happens overnight, it does take a structured learning and implementation plan. It takes a dedicated approach of learning and experimenting.

Continue reading

Being Smart – Invest in Ecosystems During Recessions

Being Smart Invest in Ecosystems During Recessions

When economic headwinds hit, conventional wisdom urges organizations to tighten belts, cut costs, and hunker down. But history—and strategy—suggests a more nuanced approach. Recessions, while challenging, also offer rare windows for bold moves. One of the most powerful yet underutilized strategies during downturns is investing in ecosystems.

Ecosystems—collaborative networks of partners, platforms, and shared resources—can help organizations weather economic storms and position themselves for accelerated growth when the tide turns. But convincing leadership to invest during a recession requires re-framing the conversation. It’s not about spending more—it’s about spending smarter.

Putting some of my opening thoughts into some form of “good” order, here is a view for considering Ecosystems

Continue reading

Resolving Today’s Current Innovator’s Ecosystem Dilemma Progressively

Recognizing the Innovator’s Dilemma with Ecosystems

What would force us to change or radically adjust our existing business trajectory? Can we afford to take another period of uncertainty, what are the risks? Does it make sense to alter our existing Business Models?

At some time it is absolutely right for the C-level to ask! It cuts to the core of the Innovator’s Dilemma applied to organizational transformation.

A terrific book, an Innovation foundational one, was “The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail,” first published in 1997. It is most probably the best-known work of the Harvard professor and businessman Clayton Christensen. It describes how large incumbent companies lose market share by listening to their customers and providing what appears to be the highest-value products, but new companies that serve low-value customers with poorly developed technology can improve that technology incrementally until it is good enough to quickly take market share from established business (source Wikipedia). Today’ it is so different, anyone can take market share through applying technology thoughtfully.

This concept today faces far more “dilemmas” that can be more widely applied as the “disruptor” has even more “disrupting tools” at their disposal as they search and connect all the “dots” of opportunity that those incumbents will struggle to adopt though legacy or speed of market reaction. “Higher value” needs to be replaced with “Greatest Connecting Value”.

Continue reading