The Collapse of Complex Business Models

I gave a talk last year to a group of TV executives gathered for an annual conference. From the Q&A after, it was clear that for them, the question wasn’t whether the internet was going to alter their business, but about the mode and tempo of that alteration. Against that background, though, they were worried about a much more practical matter: When, they asked, would online video generate enough money to cover their current costs?

That kind of question comes up a lot. It’s a tough one to answer, not just because the answer is unlikely to make anybody happy, but because the premise is more important than the question itself.

There are two essential bits of background here. The first is that most TV is made by for-profit companies, and there are two ways to generate a profit: raise revenues above expenses, or cut expenses below revenues. The other is that, for many media business, that second option is unreachable.

Here’s why.

* * *

In 1988, Joseph Tainter wrote a chilling book called The Collapse of Complex Societies. Tainter looked at several societies that gradually arrived at a level of remarkable sophistication then suddenly collapsed: the Romans, the Lowlands Maya, the inhabitants of Chaco canyon. Every one of those groups had rich traditions, complex social structures, advanced technology, but despite their sophistication, they collapsed, impoverishing and scattering their citizens and leaving little but future archeological sites as evidence of previous greatness. Tainter asked himself whether there was some explanation common to these sudden dissolutions.

The answer he arrived at was that they hadn’t collapsed despite their cultural sophistication, they’d collapsed because of it. Subject to violent compression, Tainter’s story goes like this: a group of people, through a combination of social organization and environmental luck, finds itself with a surplus of resources. Managing this surplus makes society more complex—agriculture rewards mathematical skill, granaries require new forms of construction, and so on.

Early on, the marginal value of this complexity is positive—each additional bit of complexity more than pays for itself in improved output—but over time, the law of diminishing returns reduces the marginal value, until it disappears completely. At this point, any additional complexity is pure cost.

Tainter’s thesis is that when society’s elite members add one layer of bureaucracy or demand one tribute too many, they end up extracting all the value from their environment it is possible to extract and then some.

The ‘and them some’ is what causes the trouble. Complex societies collapse because, when some stress comes, those societies have become too inflexible to respond. In retrospect, this can seem mystifying. Why didn’t these societies just re-tool in less complex ways? The answer Tainter gives is the simplest one: When societies fail to respond to reduced circumstances through orderly downsizing, it isn’t because they don’t want to, it’s because they can’t.

In such systems, there is no way to make things a little bit simpler – the whole edifice becomes a huge, interlocking system not readily amenable to change. Tainter doesn’t regard the sudden decoherence of these societies as either a tragedy or a mistake—”[U]nder a situation of declining marginal returns collapse may be the most appropriate response”, to use his pitiless phrase. Furthermore, even when moderate adjustments could be made, they tend to be resisted, because any simplification discomfits elites.

When the value of complexity turns negative, a society plagued by an inability to react remains as complex as ever, right up to the moment where it becomes suddenly and dramatically simpler, which is to say right up to the moment of collapse. Collapse is simply the last remaining method of simplification.

* * *

In the mid-90s, I got a call from some friends at ATT, asking me to help them research the nascent web-hosting business. They thought ATT’s famous “five 9’s” reliability (services that work 99.999% of the time) would be valuable, but they couldn’t figure out how $20 a month, then the going rate, could cover the costs for good web hosting, much less leave a profit.

I started describing the web hosting I’d used, including the process of developing web sites locally, uploading them to the server, and then checking to see if anything had broken.

“But if you don’t have a staging server, you’d be changing things on the live site!” They explained this to me in the tone you’d use to explain to a small child why you don’t want to drink bleach. “Oh yeah, it was horrible”, I said. “Sometimes the servers would crash, and we’d just have to re-boot and start from scratch.” There was a long silence on the other end, the silence peculiar to conference calls when an entire group stops to think.

The ATT guys had correctly understood that the income from $20-a-month customers wouldn’t pay for good web hosting. What they hadn’t understood, were in fact professionally incapable of understanding, was that the industry solution, circa 1996, was to offer hosting that wasn’t very good.

This, for the ATT guys, wasn’t depressing so much as confusing. We finished up the call, and it was polite enough, but it was perfectly clear that there wasn’t going to be a consulting gig out of it, because it wasn’t a market they could get into, not because they didn’t want to, but because they couldn’t.

It would be easy to regard this as short-sighted on their part, but that ignores the realities of culture. For a century, ATT’s culture had prized—insisted on—quality of service; they ran their own power grid to keep the dial-tone humming during blackouts. ATT, like most organizations, could not be good at the thing it was good at and good at the opposite thing at the same time. The web hosting business, because it followed the “Simplicity first, quality later” model, didn’t just present a new market, it required new cultural imperatives.

* * *

Dr. Amy Smith is a professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at MIT, where she runs the Development Lab, or D-Lab, a lab organized around simple and cheap engineering solutions for the developing world.

Among the rules of thumb she offers for building in that environment is this: “If you want something to be 10 times cheaper, take out 90% of the materials.” Making media is like that now except, for “materials”, substitute “labor.”

* * *

About 15 years ago, the supply part of media’s supply-and-demand curve went parabolic, with a predictably inverse effect on price. Since then, a battalion of media elites have lined up to declare that exactly the opposite thing will start happening any day now.

To pick a couple of examples more or less at random, last year Barry Diller of IAC said, of content available on the web, “It is not free, and is not going to be,” Steve Brill of Journalism Online said that users “just need to get back into the habit of doing so [paying for content] online”, and Rupert Murdoch of News Corp said “Web users will have to pay for what they watch and use.”

Diller, Brill, and Murdoch seem be stating a simple fact—we will have to pay them—but this fact is not in fact a fact. Instead, it is a choice, one its proponents often decline to spell out in full, because, spelled out in full, it would read something like this:

“Web users will have to pay for what they watch and use, or else we will have to stop making content in the costly and complex way we have grown accustomed to making it. And we don’t know how to do that.”

* * *

One of the interesting questions about Tainter’s thesis is whether markets and democracy, the core mechanisms of the modern world, will let us avoid complexity-driven collapse, by keeping any one group of elites from seizing unbroken control. This is, as Tainter notes in his book, an open question. There is, however, one element of complex society into which neither markets nor democracy reach—bureaucracy.

Bureaucracies temporarily suspend the Second Law of Thermodynamics. In a bureaucracy, it’s easier to make a process more complex than to make it simpler, and easier to create a new burden than kill an old one.

In spring of 2007, the web video comedy In the Motherhood made the move to TV. In the Motherhood started online as a series of short videos, with viewers contributing funny stories from their own lives and voting on their favorites. This tactic generated good ideas at low cost as well as endearing the show to its viewers; the show’s tag line was “By Moms, For Moms, About Moms.”

The move to TV was an affirmation of this technique; when ABC launched the public forum for the new TV version, they told users their input “might just become inspiration for a story by the writers.”

Or it might not. Once the show moved to television, the Writers Guild of America got involved. They were OK with For and About Moms, but By Moms violated Guild rules. The producers tried to negotiate, to no avail, so the idea of audience engagement was canned (as was In the Motherhood itself some months later, after failing to engage viewers as the web version had).

The critical fact about this negotiation wasn’t about the mothers, or their stories, or how those stories might be used. The critical fact was that the negotiation took place in the grid of the television industry, between entities incorporated around a 20th century business logic, and entirely within invented constraints. At no point did the negotiation about audience involvement hinge on the question “Would this be an interesting thing to try?”

* * *

Here is the answer to that question from the TV executives.

In the future, at least some methods of producing video for the web will become as complex, with as many details to attend to, as television has today, and people will doubtless make pots of money on those forms of production. It’s tempting, at least for the people benefitting from the old complexity, to imagine that if things used to be complex, and they’re going to be complex, then everything can just stay complex in the meantime. That’s not how it works, however.

The most watched minute of video made in the last five years shows baby Charlie biting his brother’s finger. (Twice!) That minute has been watched by more people than the viewership of American Idol, Dancing With The Stars, and the Superbowl combined. (174 million views and counting.)

Some video still has to be complex to be valuable, but the logic of the old media ecoystem, where video had to be complex simply to be video, is broken. Expensive bits of video made in complex ways now compete with cheap bits made in simple ways. “Charlie Bit My Finger” was made by amateurs, in one take, with a lousy camera. No professionals were involved in selecting or editing or distributing it. Not one dime changed hands anywhere between creator, host, and viewers. A world where that is the kind of thing that just happens from time to time is a world where complexity is neither an absolute requirement nor an automatic advantage.

When ecosystems change and inflexible institutions collapse, their members disperse, abandoning old beliefs, trying new things, making their living in different ways than they used to. It’s easy to see the ways in which collapse to simplicity wrecks the glories of old. But there is one compensating advantage for the people who escape the old system: when the ecosystem stops rewarding complexity, it is the people who figure out how to work simply in the present, rather than the people who mastered the complexities of the past, who get to say what happens in the future.

136 Responses to “The Collapse of Complex Business Models”

  1. Click World News » Blog Archive » Institutions Will Seek To Preserve The Problem For Which They Are The Solution Says:

    […] already wrote a detailed analysis of Clay Shirky’s recent writeup on complex business models. However, a few of you have sent over Kevin Kelly’s recent post about Shirky’s piece that also […]

  2. Free Readings Online » Blog Archive » Institutions Will Seek To Preserve The Problem For Which They Are The Solution Says:

    […] already wrote a detailed analysis of Clay Shirky’s recent writeup on complex business models. However, a few of you have sent over Kevin Kelly’s recent post about Shirky’s piece that also […]

  3. I don’t think necessity is the mother of invention – invention, in my opinion, arises directly from idleness, possibly also from laziness. To save oneself trouble. « the scenic route Says:

    […] the collapse of complex business models. from eddy […]

  4. PIXELS – i’d like to go that way « cmfn – beats, bits n' bitches Says:

    […] I was reading somewhere about the old guard of media. I think this proves that anything they could do, we can eventually on our desktops, and we can do it way fucking better. They have paychecks, we have passion. […]

  5. Round Up – April 8, 2010 « Restrained Radical Says:

    […] Joseph Tainter postulated that each new social problem solved introduces a new layer of complexity with diminishing returns until finally the returns turn negative and the whole system collapses. It happens with civilizations as well as businesses. I find it a compelling argument that I’m not smart enough to rebut. The Collapse of Complex Business Models […]

  6. A Terrible Beauty « The Wired Jester Says:

    […] second post I read was by Clay Shirky, on the evolution of complex business models: “About 15 years ago, the supply part of […]

  7. Billion-dollar ad agencies versus twelve-dollar branded content « Ad Warrior Says:

    […] Clay Shirky’s recent post, “The Collapse of Complex Business Models,” does a nice job of explaining why big organizations struggle to react to the threat posed by cheap, low-quality competition: […]

  8. Simplicity is King « I Dig a Pony Says:

    […] Clay Shirky is a genius.  If you haven’t already, go and read his latest blog post on The Collapse of Complex Business Models now.  He is undoubtedly much smarter than me and his insights are much more valuable than mine.  […]

  9. SICDADS – The Collapse of the Model of Complexity | ape9's Blog Says:

    […] Clay Shirky […]

  10. ‘Warning! BPM is not accurate. Switch on your brain!’ « Welcome to the Real (IT) World! Says:

    […] Be warned, as it is a long post, but quite worthwhile. Then there is Clay Shirky’s ‘The Collapse of Complex Business Models’, also referenced in a post of similar name by Jacob Ukelson.  Please read them if you have the […]

  11. Making new friends… | Stearns Fatherblog Says:

    […] let’s look at the Shirky piece you had for homework. In pairs, using your homework as a guide, answer these […]

  12. Shirky: Complexity goeth before a fall : Contrarian Says:

    […] systems, writes Clay Shirky, have a habit of collapsing catastrophically, and that, he says, is the best way to […]

  13. Just Be And You Are - Can we keep up with evolution? Says:

    […] The Collapse of Complex Business Models by Clay […]

  14. In duress | b r a n t s Says:

    […] when I read Clay Shirky’s amazing post ‘The collapse of complex business models‘, I sensed a tangential connection. To broadly summarise, the post uses Joseph […]

  15. El mundo de Rupert « Castor Ex Machina Says:

    […] lo menciona también en su crítica al iPad, pero otro artículo en Boing Boing apunta además a un texto de Clay Shirky sobre el futuro de los modelos existentes de la producción de contenidos, a la luz de la pretensión de personajes como Rupert Murdoch de regresar al mundo como era antes […]

  16. Still reading. « Ruminations at large.. Says:

    […] 08Apr10 Interesting grab from an article written by Clay Shirky, lifted from his blog. To pick a couple of examples more or less at random, last year Barry Diller of IAC said, of […]

  17. Planting, Replanting and Everything In Between « City of God Says:

    […] Andrew Sullivan linked the other day to a a couple pieces on why the US financial system, and network TV, like the Mayan empire are doomed to collapse (no, really). The argument here is roughly that as […]

  18. The “New Cheap” – Inventory is Cheap and Production Getting Cheaper | Direct Response Television Advertising Agency Says:

    […] this brilliant article The Collapse of Complex Business Models by Clay Shirky he surmises what the media executives are thinking, “Web users will have to pay […]

  19. What’s wrong with Clay Shirky’s post on The Collapse of Complex Business Models « Smart People I Know Says:

    […] 7, 2010 · Leave a Comment This post by Clay Shirky, The Collapse of Complex Business Models, has been getting alot of attention, as it should. Let me cut to the chase and by slightly […]

  20. Murdoch and Collapsing Business Models « apm35 Says:

    […] The Collapse of Complex Business Models — shirky.com Jenna Wortham says: Clay Shirky’s latest transmission investigates the industry of institution (via @psfk) […]

  21. Clay Shirky On The Complexity And Collapse Of Business Models - PSFK Says:

    […] The Collapse of Complex Business Models […]

  22. Il collasso dei sistemi complessi | TheBlogTV Says:

    […] Lumer (ceo –founder di cascaad e consigliere di TheBlogTV) per avermi segnalato questo brillante articolo di Clay Shirky: il collasso dei modelli di business complessi. Riprendendo il lavoro di Joseph […]

  23. Kvick Tänkare « Travels with Shiloh Says:

    […] So Clay Shirky wrote a very interesting post about how complex systems (specifically the media) are unable to simplify when faced with […]

  24. Quelle sera l’entreprise 3.0 ? « noVa geNeration Says:

    […] Globalement l’entreprise 3.0 sera à l’opposée de l’entreprise « industrielle » sectorisée, qui présente un éclatement des moyens de relflexion/production et créant donc des liens complexes (B2B) avec son environnement : Jetez une oeil à cet article intéressant : « La chute des modèles économiques complexes » The Collapse of Complex Business Models. […]

  25. links for 2010-04-07 « Köszönjük, Emese! Says:

    […] The Collapse of Complex Business Models « Clay Shirky When the value of complexity turns negative, a society plagued by an inability to react remains as complex as ever, right up to the moment where it becomes suddenly and dramatically simpler, which is to say right up to the moment of collapse. Collapse is simply the last remaining method of simplification. (tags: businessmodel publishing crisis) […]

  26. You Need No Other News and Information Source. Guaranteed or Your Money Gladly Refunded « Out Of My Mind Says:

    […] The dinosaur’s death throes…. Make that deserved death throes…. […]

  27. Clay Shirky’s Collapse of Complexity — Does It Also Require a Collapse of Quality? « The Scholarly Kitchen Says:

    […] yet another insightful column on the shifting landscape for media producers, this one discussing the downfall of complex business models. While his column is smart and accurate, it also falls prey to the myopia that’s so common […]

  28. Counterpoint: The Power of Simplification — Why the Digital Age Means the End of Top-Heavy Bureaucracies « The Scholarly Kitchen Says:

    […] Crotty’s perspective on Clay Shirky’s recent post has its merits, but I think David misses the point Shirky is trying to […]

  29. links for 2010-04-07 | Estate of Flux Says:

    […] The Collapse of Complex Business Models « Clay Shirky (tags: onlinenews mediacompanies) […]

  30. Drumbeat: April 6, 2010 : Hawaii Clean Power Says:

    […] Clay Shirky: The Collapse of Complex Business Models Tainter’s thesis is that when society’s elite members add one layer of bureaucracy or demand one tribute too many, they end up extracting all the value from their environment it is possible to extract and then some. The ‘and them some’ is what causes the trouble. Complex societies collapse because, when some stress comes, those societies have become too inflexible to respond. In retrospect, this can seem mystifying. Why didn’t these societies just re-tool in less complex ways? The answer Tainter gives is the simplest one: When societies fail to respond to reduced circumstances through orderly downsizing, it isn’t because they don’t want to, it’s because they can’t. […]

  31. You Get The . Info » Why We Need Better Metrics For Measuring User-Generated Content – 3642th Edition Says:

    […] of user-generated content – including on the traditional media that Clay Shirky has recently argued are fatally too complex to survive – we must have better measurement of the phenomenon. […]

  32. The Collapse of Business Models And The Decline of Nations « Let A Thousand Nations Bloom Says:

    […] April 6, 2010 tags: Clay Shirky, Joseph Tainter, Kevin Kelly, sclerosis by Mike Gibson A recent Clay Shirky post on the rise and fall of big media is stirring up some discussion. (Isegoria here and Anomaly here.) […]

  33. Vaguely uncomfortable political cartoons… | Stearns Fatherblog Says:

    […] Read this argument from Clay Shirky about complexity and media.  Explain what his thesis is (it’s not so easy) and then analyze […]

  34. You Get The . Info » The Siren’s Call Of Complexity: How Legacy Businesses Get Led Astray – 3616th Edition Says:

    […] models by Clay Shirky, so it looks like he’s decided to do it again — this time taking on the “collapse of the complex business model.” As I said, it’s a must read piece that is really attacking the Innovator’s Dilemma […]

  35. The Inevitable Demise of Bureaucratic Content Enterprises « Notes in the Margin Says:

    […] a comment » Clay Shirky’s recent post, The Collapse of Complex Business Models, is typically astute and an interesting perspective on complexity and its limits. Building off the […]

  36. links for 2010-04-06 « burningCat Says:

    […] The Collapse of Complex Business Models (tags: business media economics innovation strategy culture history internet tv future journalism video article career models) […]

  37. The Rhyme Of History « millsworks Says:

    […] Kelly then directs us to a very good blog read from Shirky that fits with all of this: The Collapse Of Complex Business Models. As with all things Shirky, it’s concise and pithy and essential. He looks to find the way up […]

  38. The collapse of complex business models? « E-business Says:

    […] Read Clay Shirky’s latest epistle on the ‘collapse of complex business models’, here. Are the parallels between Tainter’s comments on complex societies and businesses compelling? […]

  39. Free Readings Online » Blog Archive » Why We Need Better Metrics For Measuring User-Generated Content Says:

    […] impact of user-generated content – including on the traditional media that Clay Shirky has recently argued are fatally too complex to survive – we must have better measurement of the phenomenon. Without […]

  40. Big Media’s Role in New Social Media « The Social Media Sharks Says:

    […] the conversation. To give some perspective, a similar instance involves the production of media: As Shirky writes, and I paraphrase, the production of costly media enables the production of inexpensive […]

  41. links for 2010-04-05 - Nerdcore Says:

    […] The Collapse of Complex Business Models « Clay Shirky (tags: DigitalAge) […]

  42. Shirky’s myth of complexity Says:

    […] new post — The Collapse of Complex Business Models — gives us a broad way of understanding why those who used to provide us with content will not be […]

  43. Links « Beautiful Discovery Says:

    […] The Collapse of Complex Business Models This doesn’t make any sense. Note that many of the even largest and most complicated businesses have made a successful transition into the Internet era. It wasn’t “complexity” that doomed the horsebuggy business. It was technology. […]

  44. links for 2010-04-05 « Jet Grrl Says:

    […] The Collapse of Complex Business Models « Clay Shirky (tags: business media economics) […]

  45. Planner Reads » Blog Archive » Keeping Social Initiatives Simple Says:

    […] that thinking, a recent blog post by Clay Shirky The Collapse of Complex Business Models really hit me hard. We are driven to increasing complexity yet that is the very thing that gets in […]

  46. Planner Reads » Blog Archive » Monday Reads Says:

    […] Highs Rolling Over: Volatility Ahead? (MarketBeat) • The Collapse of Complex Business Models  (Clay Shirky) • Can CNN Be Saved? (NYT) • You Don’t Need an iPad, but once you try one, you won’t be […]

  47. Complexity: Businesses, Bureaucracies, and People « CardinalRam's Blog Says:

    […] gets me to a link I came across today, courtesy of The Big Picture and Barry Ritholtz:  The Collapse of Complex Business Models by Clay Shirky.   When combined with a Rolling Stone article also referenced by today by TBP, it […]

  48. Clay Shirky + Kevin Kelly « Run, Motherfucker, run Says:

    […] clay shirky, kevin kelly Clay Shirky: “Institutions will try to preserve the problem to which they are the […]

  49. Akma » Critical Mass of Browser Tabs Says:

    […] could compel a number of administrators to read nad take a comprehension test on Clay Shirky’s “The Collapse of Complex Business Models.” Academic administration is one of those areas where the raison d’être for a complex […]

  50. Pay up? « *xa. Says:

    […] 5 04 2010 This post from the Clay Shirky blog takes an uncompromising view of the current breakdown of traditional […]

Comments are closed.