emba managing-innovations comments

8/3/2019 EMBA Managing-Innovations Comments

1/17

1EMBA Managing Innovation

Managing Innovation

Courses notes

Contents1. Innovation Management...................................................................................................2

a. Introduction and context...............................................................................................2

b. Source and types and patterns of innovation...............................................................3

i. Sources.....................................................................................................................3

ii. Types of Innovation...................................................................................................4

iii. Patterns of innovation...............................................................................................7

c. Standards and design dominance...............................................................................10

d. Market entry timing....................................................................................................11

e. Application of above...................................................................................................11

2. Case Study Corning Incorporated.................................................................................12

a. Company background.................................................................................................12

b. Build strategic growth.................................................................................................14

c. Looking forward..........................................................................................................17

Looking forward


2/17


1. Innovation Management

a. Introduction and context

Framing Successful internal management of innovation requires understanding the context:

Industry (Porter approach) Technology (how technologies effects the industry?) Supporting structures What drives customer needs/desires

Today, well focus on elements external to the firm.

Example: how really invented the television? RCA has developed televisions (RadioCorporation of America): they had transmission towers around the USA by controlling thetowers and the transmission media, they were able to control the deployment of the coloredtelevisions. The guy who has invented the colored television couldnt push his innovation onthe market by himself.

Schumpeter (1943) Capitalist engine results from innovation and new organizational forms.

New combining systems, technologies, organization can generate innovation. Creative Destruction: destroying old economic structures and creating new ones.

When creating something new, we destroy something old. What drives innovations, evolutions?

Business strategy in the context of its creation, and in its role of creative destruction. How we want to operate our business? How we want to create value? What did

this new opportunity will destroy? Price and quality competition pale next to the competition from innovation.

Low costs and low prices are not always relevant in regard of the competitionfrom innovation.

Even the threat of innovation influences strategy Look over our shoulder: where is the next innovation which can threat my

current business? (E.g. Kodak, Sony (MP3)) need to catch the wave ofinnovation.

See article creative destruction

Rosenbloom & Cusumano (1987)

See article The birth of the VCR Industry

Three firms succeeded, three did not. WHY? Paper touches topics/issues we will cover today and some you might want to learn

more about: Relationships & alliances Competitors tried to work together, in order to create synergies, to learn

faster, to share the risks In the case of VCR: 2 different standards if they do not work together, the

competitors will suffer from several standards by working together, theypush their own common standard

Where do new products come from? Awareness of top management where these products should be: used for

television stations, for the mass market. Time horizon

In Japan, the management thinks really on long term issues it allows theconsistency of the actions. (In contrary, in the USA, they think on more short

term activities) Appropriability of technology

Patents can protect the innovations. Standards development Role of government


3/17


Supporting the development of the new technologies, in order to help newindustries (Tax incentives, competitive protection, helps for newinvestments)

In Japan, when new industries come, they really keep the competitioninternally in Japan to get the firms stronger and stronger, before goingoutside of the country

Character of complementary (non-tech) assets In the case of VCR, RH and movies by themselves offer opportunities for

deploying this innovation. (Amount of data that can be put on these tapes) Chicken and egg issue

If you dont have enough movies, people will not adopt the technology. Onthe other hand, if the device is not ready, the movies will not be distributed.

Same issues with 3D contents (movies & TV) Idem for tablets: iPAD, Kinddle, etc. (Difference of formats, that can affect

their future success on the market) Another example: mobile phone is only good only of the other persons have

one. Else this is totally useless Sources of innovation

Where does this industry come from? In many cases, they come from oneidea from another industry. Or two industries converges in one (Example:several years ago, we have telephony and computers now we havesmartphones)

State of industry evolution In the very innovative type of thing, sometime, the market is clearly not

ready. Relationship between the design, the innovation, and how to bring it into

the market ? (manufacturing, cost level, etc.) Consistent strategy Very good view of where to go: actions where consistent within

that Learning perspective: they learn from what they did. trying by learning

Milgrom & Roberts (1990) Rent seeking: implies extraction of uncompensated value from others without making

any productive contribution. Relationship between information availability & openness and potential for

redistribution of rents. Paper gets at the management of technological resources. Notes the resource allocation problem: how does one assign resources to projects, the

value of which may be better known by the assigned resources? Who is really pushing innovation ? Who is really giving incentives for

innovation? How can equitable arrangements be made so that both the individual and the

organization are not rent seeking?Movie: Glengary Glenross

a. Source and types and patterns of innovation

i. SourcesInnovation in Your Industry

Think about your industry When did it start? How did it start? What have been important innovations? Where do you see it going?

Where does innovation come from? Beyond the individual innovator and supporting structures Suppliers

Computer industry: disk drives supplier, miniaturization allows smaller powersupply.

Customers They have specific needs


4/17


Customers also can use products in a very different manner than planned. Collaborative networks

Technology clusters In Lyon: biomedical cluster. In New Jersey, Philadelphia area. The silicon

valey (computers technology) Technology spillovers

People move from one company to another : and they share their ideas /also between friends outside the company.

Sources of innovationReinganum, J. F. (1983), "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly", American EconomicReview, Vol. 73, pp. 741-48

Who innovates: incumbents or entrants? Reinganum (1983)

Under conditions of uncertainty (e.g., radical innovations), entrants investmore.

No steady state industry entrants. Under conditions of certainty (e.g. incremental innovation), incumbents invest

more.

Incumbents have a better view of the market: they want to invest morein order to keep the entrants out.

Why?Both invest in different way, in different kind take new technologies put it to in anotherplace or create a new organization with different management in order to bring newcombinations, to develop new ideas.

i. Types of Innovation Incremental vs. Radical Architectural vs. Component Product vs. Process Competence-enhancing vs. Competence-destroying Sustaining vs. Disruptive

Incremental Innovation: Refine/Improve current concept Minor changes, exploits potential of initial design Certain questions not revisited in context of the dominant design

Radical Innovation: Introduce new concepts Requires Engineering design difference Based on different principles Opens up new markets and potential applications Changes both components & interaction between them

Innovation Consequences Each type of innovation generates different consequences require different org.

capabilities Organizational capabilities take time to develop and implement.

Organizational capabilities are difficult to create and costly to adjust Its difficult for someone else to replicate, because of the inner complexity.

Incremental innovation: reinforces existing capabilities Radical innovation: forces a new set of challenges

new questions, new skills, and new problemsolving approaches Big effect of the organization: you cant count on the same information flows,

the same processes, etc. This is why new firms are doing more easily radical innovations, because they

are more flexible, and they dont have develop routines and capabilities todeeply so they are able to change them.

Architectural vs. Component/Module Innovation Previous two types of innovation cant explain all different technological

innovations in real world.


5/17


Whole of parts is a system; architectural innovation is change to system withoutchange in components

Schumpeters Creative Destruction Destroys usefulness of design concept without destroying component

knowledgeExample of the cars: engines, seats, design, etc. the concept is the same, but the way

to put it together is different.Concept of hybrid cars and batteries: we keep some of the components: wheels, etc.but a lot of other things will become useless. The power source is changing.

Linkage between the same core concepts and the components:

Architectural Innovation impact on the Organization Communication channels:

developed around critical interactions to conduct task relationships aroundwhich organization builds architectural knowledge

Information filters: allow firm to identify immediately what is most crucial in its information stream

achieve higher focus and efficiency of information

Problem-solving strategies: store of knowledge about solutions already tested solution to routine

problem

Product vs. Process Innovation: Between Growth, Adaptation & Competition

In a mature industry, how can we make this product better and cheaper? Improve processes

Example of airplanes: at the beginning, a lot of different type of product innovations.But it decreases when the industry became mature. But then, the process innovationstarted to grow faster development, improve manufacturing process, improveefficiency, decrease costs by improving the processes.

Same things happened for financial services, creation of different packages, etc.

Competence-enhancing vs. Competence destroying: Two classes ofdiscontinuous innovations:

Competence Destroying: Invention introduces benefit previously unobtainable; gives new entrants CA.


6/17


Disrupts industry structure. Skills and knowledge base required to operate core technology shift.

Competence Enhancing: Invention dramatically outperforms current invention; dramatically alters

previously obtainable price/perform ratios. Invention builds on the industrys know how and relationships, which are

strengthening as the incumbents consolidate leadership while the industry seesan increase in barriers to entry.

Disruptive vs. Sustaining InnovationSustaining Perceived as less risky Steady rate of product improvement Listen to your customers! Can open entirely new marketDisruptive

Innovators Dilemma Innovators Solution Performance sacrificed Attributes not yet valued Financially unattractive

Performance can be price performance, technology performance: elements that drivethe innovation to the market. Over the time, the sustaining innovation improves slightly,but at a certain time the disruptive technology can go at an upper level.

Look at your suppliers, your components, products you are using detect if there willbe a potential disruptive technologies? Who it will impact your own products or services?

So Who Holds the Key? Senior Executives: who understand the market, the business Managers: manage the conversations, how to put things together, etc.

Engineers: who understand the technology of your industry NOT Existing Customers: persons who apply your product and use it in anotherway

4 Steps to Spotting and Cultivating Disruptive Technologies:1. Determine whether the technology is sustaining or disruptive.2. Define the strategic significance of the disruptive technology: identify where is

the opportunity for our company make our products obsolete, or could improvethem.

3. Locate the initial market for the disruptive technology: where might you sold thenew technology?

4. House the disruptive technology in an independent entity: relationship betweeninnovation and new organization forms, new communication paths, no filters.

Performance TrajectoriesThe rate at which the performance of a product has improved, and is expected to

improve, over time.


7/17


How is it really affecting the way our business works?

i. Patterns of innovation

Technology S-curves

Fluid state: Is the manufacturing process really optimized? The performance is going up: ideas are working better Maturity state: here, we can apply the process innovation : who do we improve the

manufacturing process?

With new technologies, sometime, you have disruptions: the performance can be a bit lower,or the prices are more expensive. When the new curve is growing next generation oftechnology can have better performance than the previous mature technology.


8/17


Technology S-Curve: Example of computers going quicker, quicker and quicker,smaller, smaller and smaller, and the prices are becoming more reasonable.Market has similar S-Curve: computers were firstly used by the militarydepartments (e.g. GPS: came from military navigations applications), thenindustry, and then the end users. The same appears in telephony, computing,etc.

Consumption S-curves


9/17


Percentage of devices that USA end users have athome:

Telephone Electricity Auto Stove

Radio Refrigerator Clothe washer Clothe drier Color TV Air conditioner Dishwasher Microware Computer Cellphone Internet

The time page is going faster to faster. This is due tothe high improvement of the communication media

(from letters to e-mail / blogs / due to internet (viaradio, television, etc.)) People have more and moreaccess to information, and are become more and moreaware of innovations. Product lifecycles are shorter, and there is a fasterturnover Lower prices generate higher access to the products higher competition

For electricity, or Internet, there is a part of thedeployment due to the infrastructure providers haveto install these infrastructures. Government can supportthat.For the other devices, they also supported byinfrastructure improvement (railways, roads, for abetter logistics and distribution of them). E.g. forcellphones, the communication towers should havebeen build.

Example of Facebook

Today, we can print information of a product, in thefuture; we can have 3D printers which can build theproduct no need of express delivery.

Why does technology spread?R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and ProductionAudretsch & Feldman (1996)

Why does technology spread? Knowledge effects may be geographic mediated. If knowledge spillovers play an important role and the distance from their source

matters, we should see geographic concentration. i.e., the flow of tacit knowledge may be constrained by proximity and location

Observations(Audretsch & Feldman, 1996)


10/17


Innovative activities tend to cluster more in industries where knowledge spillovers playa decisive role.

Resourcedependent industries (e.g., when skilled labor is relatively important)tend to be more geographically concentrated

Clustered innovations do not induce clustered production

Case: In search of the perfect battery(See slides and the 2 articles)Major issues to solve is the weight, the time to recharge the battery, the security (stableproduct)For car battery, we are at the early stage of the S-Curve: the choice of the future technologyis still under evaluation.Implications: ecology / type of energy which will be spent.

Chicken and egg: between battery and electric cars.

Batteries and cars: this is an architectural innovation it can lead to design changes.

a. Standards and design dominanceStandards and Competition in Technology-Intensive Industries

Key factors in emergence of dominant design: increasing returns to adoption; path dependence; Government regulation.

Relationship to First mover Advantage When should a firm jump into the market relative to the emergence of a

dominant design?

Why do standards come into being and why are they so important? Path dependence:

What we do today is based on what has been done before, either by us or by

others De facto vs. de jure

What is the role of government? Of other standardssetting entities? Shape the corporation

Will it be a low growth, single product firm, a coherent diversifier or aconglomerate?

Story of QUERTYQwerty keyboard came from avoidance to have

Standards warsVarious type of wars

Rival technologyCompatible Incompatible

Your technology Compatible Rival evolutions Evolution vss revolution

Incompatible

Revolution vs. evolution Rival Revolutions

Strength in standards wars determined by: Control of installed base IPR Ability to innovate FMA Manufacturing abilities Complementary products

Brand name & reputationAdvises:

Before you go to war, assemble allies Preemption is a critical tactic Managing customer expectations is crucial


11/17


When youve won the war, dont rest easy If you fall behind, avoid survival pricing

First mover advantages: do first movers always win? Apples Newton: reposition success, discontinued in 1995 AT&T s EO Discontinued in 1994

FM Radio: radio entry delayed for 30 years! Color Television: delayed entry about 20 years Audio cassette: late 1970s. LP price increase drove consumers to cassettes Video cassette record: took 20 years, had good run until DVD Videodisc players: RCA withdrewin 1994 Compact disks: growth until MP3 Palm Pilot: fastest selling computer through 1998

a. Market entry timing

b. Application of above

Working group (14h30) Get into groups of 3 or 4 Consider an industry

When and how did it start? How did dominant design emerge? Where is it along the S curve? What standards battles exist(ed)? What major innovations shaped the industry? Who were leaders? Followers? Who is winning? What potential disruptive innovations are on the horizon?


12/17


1. Case Study Corning Incorporated

Website: http://www.corning.com/index.aspx

Budget: 10% in RD&E (Research, Development and Engineering) during difficultperiod, they increased and formalized the amount of time, money and resources

objective to double rate of innovation.

Creation of an organization: Strategic Growth: collaboration with corporate researchto identify and develop new, large and profitable business opportunities

a. Company background Early history:

1851 acquirement of a glass company by Houghton Perception that glass is poorly understood and vastly underutilized The company went public in 1945 chief executives outside the Houghton family)

keep familys commitment to innovation (46% dedicated to RD&E) Applications

High quality glass with consistent color Bulbs for electric lights (1879) Creation of a corporate research center (1908) Heat resistant glass shatterproof lanterns for railroads (1912) Pyrex (1915) laboratory equipments + consumer cookware products Ribbon machine (1926) 2000 bulbs per minute Silicones (1930s) Electrical sealing (1938) (tanchit) Joint ventures (fiber glass, glass blocks, silicones producers) (1938 1943) Improvement in optical glassmaking (1940s) Cathode-ray tube for radar detection systems (1942) Television picture tubes (end 1940s) make TV affordable for mass market Electricity conducting coated glass, fused silica and color television tubes

(1950s) New process for producing glass ceramic materials Ceramic heat-resistant reentry shields and glass windshields for the Apollo

Moon program (1960s) Cellular ceramic structures key components of automobile catalytic

converters (1970s) (new emission control requirements) First optical fiber telecommunications Glass substrate for liquid crystal used for high quality flat display panels

(1980s) Cyclical slowdowns in the 70s and 80s

Downturn in the 1970s Glass envelopes housing TV pictures tubers competition from Japan

sales plunged

Danger in 1974-1975: recession, reducing the workforce to 29000employees

1980s companys growth uneven Consumer products sales (Pyrex, CorningWare and Corelle dinnerware) slip Light bulb production halted
http://www.corning.com/index.aspxhttp://www.corning.com/index.aspx


13/17


The Telecom Bubble

Optical fiber: the deregulation of the U.S. phone industry boom (2000/2001) Ramping up in production capacity Revenue jumped from 4,7b$ 7b$ 75% of total sales 40000 employees

65% of RD&E focused on fiber optics. Less profitable businesses (house wares, medical testing, drug research, television,

laboratory glass) sold off or closed down concentration on telecom July 2001: shambles victim of the telecom bubble, the fiber optic craze orders

abruptly stopped. (Stock plunged) 2002: reorganization / painful cuts / slashing workforce

Getting back on track

Period of extreme introspection Soul searching Define clear company identity Technology company: 10% of sales dedicated to RD&E Take the long view / long term oriented Mitigate the downsize

Stabilizing balance sheet Have a more careful approach to its financial management

Change the companys approach to managing innovation Science &Technology organization (S&T)

Changes within S&T

Dr. Joseph Miller hired at Chief Technology Officer (from Dupont company): fresheyes

Science and research not led directly by Cornings Display technologies Environmental technologies Telecommunications Life sciences

Development and Engineering (D&E): 60% of the budget Implementation of new innovations

40% remaining: funding for longer range and exploratory research managed byS&T

Provide support for research project aligned with existing businesses Fund non directed exploratory research led by scientists Play a role in supporting new business development

Centralizing corporate research to address business-aligned andexploratory research

2 Strong central labs (New-York and France) longest history and greatestculture of innovation

Change of the leadership team. Cut more than 100 active projects Recreation of the project portfolio Create synergy among projects (avoid research silos) Cross-pollinate across areas (project management approach)

Scientists motivation: spend 10% of their time on work they feel isimportant.

Challenge: reestablishing linkages between corporate research and non-telecom businesses (before : 70% of the RD&E budget dedicated totelecom, and 30% for non-telecom) + credibility

First: focus talents on relatively short-range problems: objective was tomake major businesses back on their feet

Next: working on business on major new products (extensions or renewal) get back on track with exploratory and business-aligned research

project / better communication / greater interaction / more credibility New business development

Two-sided assessment Technology side Market side: Inbound marketing function

part of the research organization Help maintain diversification in the portfolio Ensure that corporate research is directly contributing to the companys

growth


14/17


Previous trials of marketing approach 1970s: love-hate relationship between established business and the

business (resources, etc.) 1980s: Corporate marketing: people had to find applications and

market for cool new technologies. Very hard job. Benchmarking (IBM, Johnson & Johnson): approach not to be done halfway,

need an accountable person with strong commercial and technicalcredibility

Creation of Strategic Growth Cornings innovation recipe

Observations about competencies High competency on glass and optical physics Build Key stone component of systems (inside the displays, etc.) :

the value chain doesnt work without Cornings products Combination of materials expertise and deep process know-how (e.g.

type of glass for bulb and ribbon machine make light bulbs costeffective). Same for television industry

Necessitated strategic positioning (they cant compete on price alone) They compete by creating a strategic position based on intellectual

property (IP) and their ability to defend it Institutionalization of the recipe.

a. Build strategic growth Mission

In partnership with research, fuel the strategic renewal of Corning Incorporated byidentifying and developing new, profitable, large ($0.5B) business opportunities

Objectives Identify large, complex system problems that could be solved through the

development of keystone components

Evolve the opportunity into a business proposition, and where appropriate, rampthe business so that it can stand on its own.

Organization chart

Additional points

Focus on white space markets and technologies Innovation process as an organizing principle (5-stage innovation process based on

marketing, technology and manufacturing requirements Stage 1: build knowledge Stage 2: determine feasibility


15/17


Stage 3: test practicality creation of new business unit or division Stage 4: prove profitability Stage 5: manage lifecycle

Pre-stage 1 activities: early-stage opportunity identification

Driven by technology and market-oriented resources Opportunities identified through workshops, other connections and activities :

commercial, scientists and external experts are involved White papers : opportunity analysis done by a pair: one person with a technical

background and one with a marketing focus Conferences / networking with academics, scientists, government agencies,

potential customers gather more information about the opportunity (6-8 months) Build recommendation Go No Go to elaborate a research project Done in collaboration with corporate research resources (inputs, expertise,

sponsorship) Reduce transition phase and a good way to find motivated collaborators

Stage 1 activities : building knowledge

Research projects are launched after early-stage opportunity analysis Perform experiments (build companys technical knowledge) Early-stage assessment : market analysis Corporate research resources formally assigned by the research directors

(discussion and mutual decision based in skills requirements, preferences, needs) 4-5 people involved 10-12 persons

The research organization saw that they were valued (crisis period) 1 3 years Steering committee formed Definition of expected deliverables (viability of the technology concept, number of

samples to make, significant market pull, technology conductive for a feasiblemanufacturing process

NB: strategy growth does not own scientists. Scientists work on 1 to 3 projects at a

time. Stage 2 activities: determining feasibility

Once stage 1 has achieved metrics recommendation Transition of the project to the new business development team Program manager is named Focus shifted: no longer driven only by science and technology, but dominated by

customers and markets. Primary objectives:

Test prototypes with customers Refine product concepts based on their feedback Validate all assumption in the marketplace Develop a business model Establish customer pull

NB: most of the stage 1 projects transitioned to the stage 2 From 2 5 years Difficulty to balance efficiency / transparency. Conflicts / cultural differences

change of the responsibility of the project from research directors to newbusiness development team)


16/17


Progress from science to development and customer interaction changeof the mindset

Tension is unavoidable : people have to compromise Stage 3 activities; testing practicality

Begin the commercialization a new product Test practicality of the opportunity: focus shifted from research to development

Customer driven transition: being increasingly dependent on customer input make decisions risky

More resources from engineering become involved while some corporate researchresources transition out.

Complex to manage Evaluating and filtering projects: Cornings seven questions

Questions built around issues such as Is this thing an attractive commercial opportunity? Is it big? Is it connected to a megatrend? Is there a technical fit? Is Corning competent in this area?

Is it something that can be protected through intellectual property orspecialized manufacturing process?

Is the timing right? Questions are tailored to reduce uncertainty questions are becoming more

precise among the steps. Still judgments behind the answers.

The Corning technology council (CTC)

The decision to advance a project from one stage to another done by the CTC Monthly meetings open to a wider audience: keep member of the research

organization informed Decision are made in advance of the CTC meeting : discussions done before the

meeting Benefits of a structured process

Rigor without precision: know what you can know well Standard of value analysis applied to most of the problems it allows rejections of

irrelevant ideas Relationship between corporate research, Strategic Growth, and Development Process strategically aligned with the corporate direction: support of the board and

the CEO (commitment thanks to education sessions) String belief on early-stage work : championship is strong Adequate visibility within the organization of these growth-oriented activities Helps corporate strategy Help to pace and allocate resources to these programs Organizational benefits

Allocate resources to the right problems (avoid wasting precious resourcesand time)

No distraction in regard of the existing business : focus on newopportunities identification

Market based approach Need to be marketing-driven and not technology-driven Focus on problems that mattered (to the customers)


17/17


Find potential new synergiesa. Looking forward Still many issues to resolve, including challenges related to human resources and financial

management, as well as measuring and sustaining the success of strategic growth Human resource management

Problem : supply of scare resources (scientists):

Evaluate the best allocation of companys scientists Supporting the business Working with strategic growth Conducting exploratory research

Meeting each quarter to review the entire portfolio of research projects Balance between short-term vs. long-term solutions Need high level of communication Pb : Demand for scientists outstrip the available supply , particularly on earlier

stages can generate a bottleneck To address this imbalance:

Improve the project selection process Company cannot afford to commit scarce scientific resources with a high

probability of success Perception of stopped project for collaborators who spend a lot of time on it:

difficult Problem: redirecting resources after a project was closed down

Specially for highly specialized skills not easily transferrable collaboratorsneeds to have two plausible uses

People are more willing to come in the early stages than in later stagesbecause risks are high and management tension is high

Two factors to solve the HR challenges Even if they failed, the company give them new opportunities to be

successful (and they are the people who learned the most) Develop risktaking behavior

Discontinued projects are put on the shelf and not completely abandoned

the work can be reinvigorated when technological advancements, marketconditions, or customer demand appear more promising. Financial management

Problem: It takes years and years for opportunities to become profitable Need long exercises investments 17 years required for a business to achieve nominal profitability in a new

field The more new business moved into the development pipeline, the more

money the company will lose until the payback (eventual) Issue : the extent and the duration of the investment (with little or no payback)

10% of the sales dedicated to RD&E activities Concern: new opportunities may require more than these 10% in the next

10 years

Measuring and Sustaining success Effective financial management is intricately linked to measure and to sustain the

success of Strategic Growth. Difficulty linked to the real uncertainty of the activity One long term metric : Number of divisions formed within the company More difficult to set-up

Accomplishment of the desired end results in light of the sizableinvestments required, competitive pressures, and other complicated factors

emba managing-innovations comments

Documents