If you’re anything like me, you forget the meaning of value every other day. Is it value in the sense that it’s important? Is it value in monetary terms? Is it value referring to standards of behavior? So many different scenarios mean that this word can mean something completely different at any given moment. In other words, value depends on its context.
In Information Systems, this is no different. Personas and storytelling are all about providing context to the problem. In digital strategies, value isn’t only created through technology; it also has to be communicated through narratives that convince users, governments, and investors that a solution is worth adopting. If a digital strategy doesn’t fit its context, is it actually creating value, or is it just creating another crutch users can depend on?
So be prepared for another massive rant this week as we dive into what I understand when I hear the term “value.”
Changing Lenses
In digital strategy, value is created by aligning technology with business goals. This can be done through a number of methods, namely:
- Reducing costs via automation (which becomes unethical at some point, in my opinion).
- Building flexible IT infrastructures, such as migrating to the cloud.
- Leveraging big data in decision-making.
But let’s just think about this for a second. If automation reduces cost but has a negative impact on the job market, whose value is being prioritised here? The shareholders or the community? Just food for thought
Most of these can be implemented using specialised tools. However, value in digital strategy has shifted from value-in-exchange to value-in-use. What I mean by this is that value no longer comes from simply acquiring the solution to a problem, but rather it comes from the problem being addressed by the solution in the real world or the outcome of the solution in action. Essentially, we now ask ourselves: “Does the end justify the means, and does it actually work in this context?” Furthermore, if a digital strategy acts as a “crutch” that provides a quick fix while eroding long-term internal capability, is it actually creating value? Or is it slowly destroying your ability to solve your own problems?
Let’s begin this week’s rant with a case study.
For example, let’s look at the narrative surrounding the lack of implementation of Starlink in South Africa. Earlier this year, we saw a dispute between the Department of Communications and ICASA.
On the surface, Starlink is a very appealing and tempting proposition. However, its owner, Elon Musk, says “our outdated economic policies” are blocking progress. He tries to frame Starlink as an oasis for rural communities yet has spent years refusing to comply with our 30% local ownership rule, citing it as red tape. But it’s not just red tape. It’s a clash of fundamentals.
The Workaround? Minister Solly Malatsi has pushed for Equity Equivalent Investment Programmes (EEIPs). But this question comes to mind: Is a pledge of R500 million a fair exchange to bypass regulations that every other internet service provider (ISP) has to follow? As citizens, we are well aware of our country’s history with “handling” R500 million.
To me, this is where the definition of value starts to get confusing. If a global giant refuses to comply with our country’s socio-economic goals, what is the value to be captured? Allowing someone in the more rural parts of the country to scroll on TikTok? No matter how you look at it, the value will always change based on the context we’re discussing it in. If someone with that much power and influence constantly undermines and mocks our local laws, are they trying to provide value to those who need it or is this Digital Colonialism? We see this as the failure of value-in-exchange.
A Clash of Personas
Personas are a way of providing context. These personas shape what each actor believes counts as “value,” which is why the same technology can be celebrated by one group and resisted by another. In the case of my Starlink scenario, Elon Musk’s persona for Starlink is the “disruptor” who bypasses local red tape to bring internet to the masses. However, the South African government’s “persona” for a telecom provider is a partner in transformation.
The Value-in-Use for the South African government isn’t just everyone having internet access. It’s the jobs created by local ISPs, the taxes they pay, and the local ownership that keeps wealth within our borders. The implementation of Starlink immensely reduces opportunities for this model to prosper. When those two personas clash, you can forget about a strategic fit. Instead, you get a stalemate. This shows that value in digital strategies is not fixed but socially negotiated between stakeholders who each prioritise different outcomes.
Sovereignty in War Time
If we need more proof that value is contextual, sticking with Starlink, let’s see how it is used globally. In the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, we’ve seen Starlink becoming a de facto sovereign power.
We’ve seen how “whitelisting” and “geofencing” have become tactical weapons. By deciding which terminals are operational and which are “bricked,” Starlink in directly influences the success of military operations. If a country makes Starlink the digital backbone of its economy, they aren’t just buying a service. They are handing over their digital sovereignty. In a wartime context, value isn’t speed, it’s control. If you don’t control the switch, you don’t have the value.
The Brass Tacks
The strategic fit for Starlink in South Africa currently looks like everything citizens have fought against for years. While it may provide internet access for all, it comes at the cost of our national agency. Most days, it would be seen as a luxury. However, in war, it’s a liability that can be weaponized by the owner of the service at any moment.
What I hope this blog post made clear was the many different forms value can take and how it changes based on the context. Strategic fit isn’t just about the tech; it’s about the narrative we choose to support it.
Song of the week – “As the World Caves In” by Matt Maltese
Being on the precipice of WW3 just has me feeling some type of way.