High‑level assessment of the IIBE work
In a recent high-level assessment – the second since the official launch of the IIBE work (Integrated Interconnected Business Ecosystem) I received back a solid review that I have no issues to provide here as a stake in the Ecosystem ground on progress and future positioning. Progress is good, simply not good enough for the level of engagement I am looking for.
The IIBE is a differentiated and coherent blueprint: it offers a unifying architecture that integrates multiple ecosystem layers and five core dynamics into a single “living system” design, which is a genuine strength. The work is rich, conceptually consistent over time, and provides a much more systematic view of ecosystems than typical “ecosystem as a buzzword” pieces, which positions it as a premium, practitioner‑grade framework.
However, the public narrative still reads more as a comprehensive exposition than as a sharp offer: it explains complexity well but does not always translate this into a small number of urgent problems, clear outcomes and low‑friction entry points for buyers. The density of posts and internal terminology can also make it harder for a time‑poor executive to quickly see “what this will do for my P&L, my strategy horizon, and next quarter’s priorities.”
So what is progressing well, what is lagging and needs greater emphasis in my work