Most industries are vulnerable to digital disruption of established business models. The question is whether industry should seize the opportunity to reposition themselves in a changing market. Or whether they should wait to be disrupted by external forces, with the prospect of a one-way ticket to oblivion.

A new report by UTS Business School for the McKell Institute shows that the pace of digital transformation is now disrupting one of the government's largest and most iconic business enterprises -Australia Post.

Traditionally, mail volumes have grown in alignment with GDP growth. But between 2008-09 and 2013-14, mail volume declined by 25% to 4.5 billion items. This, in turn, has contributed to a major deterioration in financial performance. In the first half of 2014-15, the loss in the mail business was A$151 million and it is expected to be over $300 million for the full year.

The consequence of digital disruption to the long established mail business is that, without significant business realignment, total Australia Post losses could reach $6.6 billion over the next 10 years, with losses in the mail business reaching $12.1 billion. The government's equity in Australia Post, currently $1.7 billion, would quickly be destroyed.

Price increases and discounter slower deliveries may assist Australia Post to retain its current business model. However, such remedies only offer a short-term solution.

Abandoning the letters business on the premise that "the letter is dead" runs counter to community service obligations in rural and remote communities, as well as obligations to employees. But if Australia Post fails to change or expand its services, its continued existence may no longer be viable.

To address the challenge imposed by digital transformation, Australia Post must itself become a "digital enterprise", where the adoption, application and use of digital technologies is at the forefrontof strategy. It must move from a focus on evolution and improvement to one of innovation, co-creation and disruption.

For example, Australia Post retail outlets could be transformed to operate as digital communication hubs, specialising in the marketing and sale of digitally enabled products and services. These hubs could provide digital services and access to people who for various reasons cannot access digital communication devices and services.

This article was adapted from an article published on The Conversation by John Hamilton Howard, Emmanuel Josserand, and Roy Green. Significant parts of the article have been modified from its original form.

Questions

1. Present elements of an Argument Map that you can associate with the information provided in the article.

a) What is the conclusion?

b) What are three premises to support the conclusion?

c)What could be an objection? (2marks)d)What could be a rebuttal?

2. Choose any two of Paul & Elder's universal standards and evaluate the quality of the argument advanced in article.

NOTE:

In answering question 2, you should adopt a critical thinking approach, which demonstrates Paul & Elder's (2014) universal intellectual standards of:

a. Clarity -The presentation of the argument is clear.

b. Accuracy -The facts being presented are accurate, and any assumptions have been clearly identified.

c. Precision -The information being presented is specific.

d. Relevance -The evidence provided is relevant to the conclusion.

e. Depth -The information provided reflects the complexity of the issue being discussed.

f. Breadth -The argument examines the evidence from multiple perspectives.

g. Logic -The supporting premises are logically connected to the conclusion.

h. Significance -The supporting evidence is important, and not trivial or superficial.

i. Fairness -The viewpoints of others are presented sympathetically and are not distorted, nor oversimplified.