1. Innovation in the New Economy
Minder Chen
Professor of MIS
California State University Channel Islands

2. Importance of Innovation
“In a world of ever-accelerating change, innovation is the only insurance against irrelevance.
In an environment of steadily decreasing friction and crumbling entry barriers, innovation is the only antidote to margin-crushing competition.
And in a global economy where knowledge advantages dissipate ever more rapidly, innovation is the only brake on commoditization.“
Gary Hamel, “Introduction” to the Innovation to the Core

3. Evolution of Dominant Market Demand and Firm’s Focus
Flexibility &
Agile
Innovation
Quality
Cost Efficiency
Firm’s
Focus
Choice, Time
of Delivery
Uniqueness
Market
Demand
Quality
Price
Time
- 70s s s th Century
Adapted from Felix Janszen, The Age of Innovation, 2000, p. 19.

4. Innovation: Creative Destruction
A commercialization process based on
the application of new materials and their components,
new technical methods,
new markets and
new forms of organization.
Joseph Schumpeter
The innovation involves both technical world and business world. A change in technology only is just an "invention“.

5. Innovation Arena: TAMO
New processes
New services
Technology World
A problem looks for a solution.
Invention
New materials and components
Business World
A solution looks for a problem.
Innovation
Adapted from Felix Janszen, The Age of Innovation, 2000, p. 9.

6. Definition of Innovation
An innovation is the creation and application of a new or significantly improved
technology,
product/service,
process, or
business model
that is accepted by markets and society.
Adapted from OECD 2005 and Wikipedia.
Innovation applies ideas and new knowledge to the production of goods and services to improve product/service quality and process performance.
UK Design Council

7. Formula for True Innovation
America’s advantage, if it continues to have one, will be that it can produce people who are also more creative and imaginative, those who know how to stand at the intersection of the humanities and the sciences. That is the formula for true innovation, …
Opinion
The Genius of Jobs
By WALTER ISAACSON
Published: October 29, 2011
ONE of the questions I wrestled with when writing about Steve Jobs was how smart he was. On the surface, this should not have been much of an issue. You’d assume the obvious answer was: he was really, really smart. Maybe even worth three or four reallys. After all, he was the most innovative and successful business leader of our era and embodied the Silicon Valley dream writ large: he created a start-up in his parents’ garage and built it into the world’s most valuable company.
Enlarge This Image
Ji Lee
Related
Times Topic:Steve Jobs
Related in Opinion
Room For Debate: Career Counselor: Bill Gates or Steve Jobs?
But I remember having dinner with him a few months ago around his kitchen table, as he did almost every evening with his wife and kids. Someone brought up one of those brainteasers involving a monkey’s having to carry a load of bananas across a desert, with a set of restrictions about how far and how many he could carry at one time, and you were supposed to figure out how long it would take. Mr. Jobs tossed out a few intuitive guesses but showed no interest in grappling with the problem rigorously. I thought about how Bill Gates would have gone click-click-click and logically nailed the answer in 15 seconds, and also how Mr. Gates devoured science books as a vacation pleasure. But then something else occurred to me: Mr. Gates never made the iPod. Instead, he made the Zune.
So was Mr. Jobs smart? Not conventionally. Instead, he was a genius. That may seem like a silly word game, but in fact his success dramatizes an interesting distinction between intelligence and genius. His imaginative leaps were instinctive, unexpected, and at times magical. They were sparked by intuition, not analytic rigor. Trained in Zen Buddhism, Mr. Jobs came to value experiential wisdom over empirical analysis. He didn’t study data or crunch numbers but like a pathfinder, he could sniff the winds and sense what lay ahead.
He told me he began to appreciate the power of intuition, in contrast to what he called “Western rational thought,” when he wandered around India after dropping out of college. “The people in the Indian countryside don’t use their intellect like we do,” he said. “They use their intuition instead ... Intuition is a very powerful thing, more powerful than intellect, in my opinion. That’s had a big impact on my work.”
Mr. Jobs’s intuition was based not on conventional learning but on experiential wisdom. He also had a lot of imagination and knew how to apply it. As Einstein said, “Imagination is more important than knowledge.”
Einstein is, of course, the true exemplar of genius. He had contemporaries who could probably match him in pure intellectual firepower when it came to mathematical and analytic processing. Henri Poincaré, for example, first came up with some of the components of special relativity, and David Hilbert was able to grind out equations for general relativity around the same time Einstein did. But neither had the imaginative genius to make the full creative leap at the core of their theories, namely that there is no such thing as absolute time and that gravity is a warping of the fabric of space-time. (O.K., it’s not that simple, but that’s why he was Einstein and we’re not.)
Einstein had the elusive qualities of genius, which included that intuition and imagination that allowed him to think differently (or, as Mr. Jobs’s ads said, to Think Different.) Although he was not particularly religious, Einstein described this intuitive genius as the ability to read the mind of God. When assessing a theory, he would ask himself, Is this the way that God would design the universe? And he expressed his discomfort with quantum mechanics, which is based on the idea that probability plays a governing role in the universe by declaring that he could not believe God would play dice. (At one physics conference, Niels Bohr was prompted to urge Einstein to quit telling God what to do.)
Both Einstein and Mr. Jobs were very visual thinkers. The road to relativity began when the teenage Einstein kept trying to picture what it would be like to ride alongside a light beam. Mr. Jobs spent time almost every afternoon walking around the studio of his brilliant design chief Jony Ive and fingering foam models of the products they were developing.
Mr. Jobs’s genius wasn’t, as even his fanboys admit, in the same quantum orbit as Einstein’s. So it’s probably best to ratchet the rhetoric down a notch and call it ingenuity. Bill Gates is super-smart, but Steve Jobs was super-ingenious. The primary distinction, I think, is the ability to apply creativity and aesthetic sensibilities to a challenge.
In the world of invention and innovation, that means combining an appreciation of the humanities with an understanding of science — connecting artistry to technology, poetry to processors. This was Mr. Jobs’s specialty. “I always thought of myself as a humanities person as a kid, but I liked electronics,” he said. “Then I read something that one of my heroes, Edwin Land of Polaroid, said about the importance of people who could stand at the intersection of humanities and sciences, and I decided that’s what I wanted to do.”
The ability to merge creativity with technology depends on one’s ability to be emotionally attuned to others. Mr. Jobs could be petulant and unkind in dealing with other people, which caused some to think he lacked basic emotional awareness. In fact, it was the opposite. He could size people up, understand their inner thoughts, cajole them, intimidate them, target their deepest vulnerabilities, and delight them at will. He knew, intuitively, how to create products that pleased, interfaces that were friendly, and marketing messages that were enticing.
In the annals of ingenuity, new ideas are only part of the equation. Genius requires execution. When others produced boxy computers with intimidating interfaces that confronted users with unfriendly green prompts that said things like “C:\>,” Mr. Jobs saw there was a market for an interface like a sunny playroom. Hence, the Macintosh. Sure, Xerox came up with the graphical desktop metaphor, but the personal computer it built was a flop and it did not spark the home computer revolution. Between conception and creation, T. S. Eliot observed, there falls the shadow.
In some ways, Mr. Jobs’s ingenuity reminds me of that of Benjamin Franklin, one of my other biography subjects. Among the founders, Franklin was not the most profound thinker — that distinction goes to Jefferson or Madison or Hamilton. But he was ingenious.
This depended, in part, on his ability to intuit the relationships between different things. When he invented the battery, he experimented with it to produce sparks that he and his friends used to kill a turkey for their end of season feast. In his journal, he recorded all the similarities between such sparks and lightning during a thunderstorm, then declared “Let the experiment be made.” So he flew a kite in the rain, drew electricity from the heavens, and ended up inventing the lightning rod. Like Mr. Jobs, Franklin enjoyed the concept of applied creativity — taking clever ideas and smart designs and applying them to useful devices.
China and India are likely to produce many rigorous analytical thinkers and knowledgeable technologists. But smart and educated people don’t always spawn innovation. America’s advantage, if it continues to have one, will be that it can produce people who are also more creative and imaginative, those who know how to stand at the intersection of the humanities and the sciences. That is the formula for true innovation, as Steve Jobs’s career showed.
Walter Isaacson is the author of “Steve Jobs.”
Walter Isaacson is the author of “Steve Jobs.”

8. T-Shaped Talents: skills, abilities, and knowledge
T-shaped professionals are in
high demand because they
have both depth and breadth
They combine expert thinking
(depth in one or more areas)
and complex communications
(breadth across many areas)
Cross-disciplinary communication
Service system design, management, and modeling
Value co-creation analysis
Service lifecycle analysis (for quality assurance)
Service supply and demand management
New service development
Business project management
Business case development and analysis
Organizational change management
Marketing and sales
Creative and critical thinking
Communication skills
Leadership and collaboration skills
complex communication
This is a set of skills defined for IBM based on what did not exist in our taxonomy in 2008
Note the focus on interdisciplinary work. Service underlying concepts (vs manufacturing) and the client contribution of value
expert thinking
Wendy Murphy & Bill Hefley, “What’s new in service science, management, and engineering?”
Presented at Frontiers in Service Conference, October 2008

9. Innovation is inherently multidisciplinary
Knowledge sources driving innovations…
Business
Administration
and
Management
Technology
Innovation
Business
Innovation
Science &
Engineering
TQM
Reengineering
Laser, seminconductor
Medicine: Bloodless surgery, laser healing, surgical treatment, kidney stone treatment, eye treatment, dentistry
Industry: Cutting, welding, material heat treatment, marking parts, non-contact measurement of parts
Military: Marking targets, guiding munitions, missile defence, electro-optical countermeasures (EOCM), alternative to radar, blinding troops.
Law enforcement: used for latent fingerprint detection in the forensic identification field[31][32]
Research: Spectroscopy, laser ablation, laser annealing, laser scattering, laser interferometry, LIDAR, laser capture microdissection, fluorescence microscopy
Product development/commercial: laser printers, optical discs (e.g. CDs and the like), barcode scanners, thermometers, laser pointers, holograms, bubblegrams.
Laser lighting displays: Laser light shows
Cosmetic skin treatments: acne treatment, cellulite and striae reduction, and hair removal.
Social-Organizational
Innovation
Demand
Innovation
Global
Economy
& Markets
Social Sciences
Grameen Bank (Bank of the poor, Micro lending)
Groupon
Gang Printing 合版印刷

10. “Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration.”
Creativity
Creativity is the quality or ability to create or invent something original.
“Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration.”
Thomas Edison
Creativity is about coming up with the big idea. Innovation is about executing the idea — converting the idea into a successful business.
Vijay Govindarajan
Innovation is applied creativity.

11. Idea, Discovery, Invention, and Innovation
“If an idea begat a discovery,
and if a discovery begat an invention,
then an innovation defined the lengthy and wholesale transformation of an idea into a technological product (or process) meant for widespread practical use.
Almost by definition, a single person, or even a single group, could not alone create an innovation. The task was too variegated and involved.”
The Idea Factory, by Jon Gertner

12. Discovery vs. Invention
Discovery lightning was a form of electricity.
Applied creativity — taking clever ideas and smart designs and applying them to [create] useful devices.
– Walter Isaacson
(link)

13. Invention vs. Innovation
iPod wasn't the first portable music device (Sony popularized the "music anywhere, anytime" concept 22 years earlier with the Walkman; MP3)
What made Apple innovative was that it combined all of these elements -- design, ergonomics and ease of use -- in a single device, and then tied it directly into a platform that effortlessly kept that device updated with music.
Apple invented nothing. Its innovation was creating an easy-to-use ecosystem (with iTune Store, iTune, and iPod) that unified music discovery, delivery and device. And, in the process, they revolutionized the music industry.  Creative destruction
Or think about Apple’s winning combination of iTunes and iPod. Before there was an iTunes Music Store, there was Napster. And before we had the iPod, we had flash memory, MP3 decoders, digital-to-analog converters, lithium batteries, and basically everything else inside the device. None of the essential components of the iPod are unique; they can almost be bought off the shelf. What made iPod such a winner was the way Apple combined all of those elements, infused the whole thing with classic Apple attributes—user-friendliness, cool design,
Skarzynski, Peter; Gibson, Rowan ( ). Innovation to the Core: A Blueprint for Transforming the Way Your Company Innovates (p. 37). Perseus Books Group. Kindle Edition.
Source:

14. Technology Innovation
Technology Innovation

15. Does Customer Know What They Want?
Seeing what customers have not yet imagined but will instantly desire.
“If I had asked my customers what they wanted, they’d have said a faster horse.”
- Henry Ford
Going beyond continuous improvement and customer focus groups

16. Ford Model T A model for business success    *
Ford Model T
07/16/96
A model for business success 
Technology – Combustion engine 
Product – Model T 
Process – Assembly line. 
Business Model – National dealerships *

17. Process Innovation Moving assembly line
Model-T: a true innovation available to a wide audience. pleasure car  passenger car
Moving assembly line
Steal from : Meat Packing Plant
High wage;

18. Drivers for Innovation
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Where there is a friction (frustration), there is an opportunity.
Zappos.com: Founder Nick Swinmurn could not found the Airwalks hiking boots in 4 different shoes stores.
Chinapages.com: Jack Ma could not find Chinese beers on the web.
Dropbox file sharing: Drew Houston reportedly conceived the idea for Dropbox after repeatedly forgetting his USB drive 
Zappos
He typed 'beer' in the Yahoo! search and got a number of results. Then he typed 'China' but this gave no results. This made him decide to start a company to bring information regarding Chinese companies on to the Internet. After arriving back to Hangzhou, Ma resigned his teaching job, borrowed US$ 2,000 and started chinapages.com, China's first commercial website which contained a list of companies operating in China...

19. Product & service Innovation
One-Hour Photo Finishing Shops
Product & service Innovation
Polaroid Camera (Instant Camera)

20. Dissect and reconfigure: Types of Restaurants
Hotpot 火 鍋
Teppanyaki-type
鐵板燒
Restaurant
(i.e., Benihana)
Source: Service Is Front Stage
Dissect and reconfigure.

21. Business model Innovation
Southwest: Low Fare Airline
Zara: Fast Fashion
Dell: Direct sales
IKEA: Self-assembled furniture
Apple: iPod & iTune  ecosystem innovation

22. Business Model Examples*
07/16/96 *

23. Product and Process Innovation
Adapted from J . Abernathy and W . Utterback, “A dynamic model of process and product innovation”, Omega , vol. 3, no.6 . ( 1975 ) , pp

24. The Rate of Innovation: Product vs. Process

25. Key Factors at Three Phases
Fluid
Transitional
Specific
Product
Radical, frequent
Dominant design
Incremental,
rare
Process
Rare, rely on skills
General equipment
Specialized equipment
Organization
Organic
Semi-structured
Hierarchical
Market
Fragmented
Segments
Commodity
Competition
Increasing but different
Decreasing & more similar
Few and similar
VariableFluid PhaseInnovationProduct changes/radical innovationsProductMany different designs, customizationCompetitorsMany small firms, no direct competitionOrganizationEntrepreneurial, organic structureThreatsOld technology, new entrantsProcessFlexible and inefficient

26. Architecture of Innovation
Intersection & Integration
Science/Technology
Humanity/Art
Business Model Innovation
Process Innovation
Consumer
Product Innovation
Service
Product
Component
Experience
Innovation
Service Innovation
Product Innovation
Technology
Innovation
Time
Imagination and Creativity
Business

27. Innovation Diffusion
New adopters at a given time period indicating adoption rate.
S-Curve indicates the
accumulative no. of adopters over time.
% of people adopted the innovation over all potential adopters
Time
Everett M. Rogers ( ), Diffusion of Innovations, 4th edition (1995)

28. 5 Factors of Innovation Adoption Decision (Roger)
Definition
Relative Advantage
How improved an innovation is over the previous generation. Ex: Faster, Cheaper, Better, Bigger/Smaller
Compatibility
The level of compatibility that an innovation has to be assimilated into an individual’s life. Ex: Backward compatibility, standard-based products
Simplicity or
Complexity 
If the innovation is perceived as complicated or difficult to use, an individual is unlikely to adopt it. Ex: Burbn Instagram
Trialability
How easily an innovation may be experimented. If a user is able to test an innovation, the individual will be more likely to adopt it. Ex: Freemium model , trial version.
Observability
The extent that an innovation is visible to others. An innovation that is more visible will drive communication among the individual’s peers and personal networks and will in turn create more positive or negative reactions. Ex: Intel Inside, McDonald golden arches

29. The Process of Innovation-Decision
Invent
Adopt
Persuade
Decide
Reject
Accept
Implement & Adapt
Abandon

30. Technology Adoption Life Cycle
Conservatives:
Stick with what’s proven!
Visionaries:
Get ahead of the herd!
Pragmatists:
Stick with the herd!
Skeptics:
Just say No!
Techies:
Just try it!
Early Market
Mainstream Market
There is a chasm between the early adopters of the product (the technology enthusiasts and visionaries) and the early majority (the pragmatists).

31. Crossing the Chasm by Geoffrey Moore
Gartner
The marketer should focus on one group of customers at a time, using each group as a base for marketing to the next group.
Visionaries and pragmatists have very different expectations Techniques to successfully cross the "chasm," including choosing a target market, understanding the whole product concept, positioning the product, building a marketing strategy, choosing the most appropriate distribution channel and pricing.

32. Double S-Curves Competitive Advantage Time Product Performance
Decay
Transformation
or Discontinuity
Next generation
technology/product/process/business model
Grow
Decay(Maturity)
Competitive Advantage
Optimization
Ferment - This is the when a product or industry is completely new. A dominant design has not been recognized and competition to create the dominant design is fierce. 
Takeoff - If a dominant design has been determined and the innovation crosses the chasm of death you will see a rapid period of growth as the innovation moves towards full market acceptance. 
Maturity - The product or industry has become a completely accepted by the general public and has matured. It is at this point that only a few large players exist and the markets are clearly defined. This is also the point when products become completely standardized and the products are less and less unique.  
Discontinuity - Once a product has reached maturity it runs that risk of being discontinued by newer technologies a great example of this was the transition from film cameras to digital cameras. 
大順者，所以養生送死、事鬼神之常也。故事大積焉而不苑，并行而不繆，細行而不失。深而通，茂而有間。連而不相及也，動而不相害也，此順之至也。故明於順，然後能守危也。故禮之不同也，不豐也，不殺也，所以持情而合危也。
The following three remarks are inspired by 達剛。
1.時間軸下的波動
2.波動背後之成因
3.波動的周期性和斷續性
The diagram is a typical double-S curve for product life cycle mapping to 元亨利貞和始壯究。
Innovation
Grow
(Takeoff)
Start
Start
(Ferment)
First generation
product/Technology
Time
Ending is the start of another beginning (e.g., commencement).
Think about next generations of products/services all the times.

33. Technology Forecasting
“I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.”
Thomas Watson, Chairman, IBM (mainframe giant), 1943
“This telephone has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.”
Western Union (telegraph) internal memo, 1876
“There is no reason why anyone would want a computer in their home.”
Ken Olsen, Founder, Digital Equipment Corp. (minicomputer giant) 1977

34. Technology Adoption
Time for new technology to reach 25% of US population

35. Disruptive Innovation/Technology

36. Type of Innovations
Sustaining Innovation: An innovation that does not affect existing markets.
Evolutionary: An innovation that improves a product in an existing market in ways that customers are expecting. (E.g., fuel injection)
Revolutionary (discontinuous, radical): An innovation that is unexpected, but nevertheless does not affect existing markets. (E.g., the automobile)
Disruptive Innovation: An innovation that creates a new market by applying a different set of values, which ultimately (and unexpectedly) overtakes an existing market.
For example, the lower priced Ford Model T
Bower, Joseph L. & Christensen, Clayton M. (1995). "Disruptive Technologies: Catching the Wave" Harvard Business Review, January–February 1995

37. Innovator’s Dilemma
Good firms are usually aware of the innovations, but their business environment does not allow them to pursue them when they first arise, because they are not profitable enough at first and because their development can take scarce resources away from that of sustaining innovations (which are needed to compete against current competition).
"Generally, disruptive innovations were technologically straightforward, consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that was often simpler than prior approaches. They offered less of what customers in established markets wanted and so could rarely be initially employed there. They offered a different package of attributes valued only in emerging markets remote from, and unimportant to, the mainstream."
* and Christensen, Clayton M. (1997), The innovator's dilemma: when new technologies cause great firms to fail, Boston, Massachusetts, USA: Harvard Business School Press, ISBN

38. Reverse Innovation Examples:
Reverse innovation or trickle-up innovation is a term referring to an innovation seen or used first, in the developing world before spreading to the industrialized (developed) world.
Examples:
Red Bull: Inspired by functional drinks from Thailand, Dietrich Mateschitz from Austria founded Red Bull in the mid 1980's. He developed the unique marketing concept of Red Bull.
Gatorade: The drink’s origins can be traced to Bangladesh, where for centuries practitioners of ayurvedic medicine have used liquid concoctions of carbohydrates, sugar, and salt to quickly hydrate patients.  &
GE is now selling an ultra-portable electrocardiograph machine in the U.S. at an 80% markdown for similar products. The machine was originally built by GE Healthcare for doctors in India and China.

39. User Driven Innovation
New or unintended usages of the product

40. Platform Innovation: Maximizing Asset Value
A platform connecting demands and supply of valuable asset drives the value creation.

42. Innovation Arithmetic
Build up the pipeline
Quantity matters
(resource required)

43. From Ideas to Product/Service/Business
Between the conception
And the creation
Between the emotion
And the response
Falls the Shadow
- T.S. Elliot
Idea
Is it possible?
Is it attractive?
Uncertainty
Is it do-able?
Is it what our customers want?
How do we implement it?
Product/Service/
Business
Resource allocated
Source: Felix Janszen, The Age of Innovation, 2000, p. 99.
And

44. Screening/Filtering criteria

45. Startup Curve Emotional Curve Product-Market Fit
Experimenting and Pivoting

46. Five Innovation Myths
Myth No. 1: People know what they want; just ask them
Reality: People are unreliable at knowing what they want.
Solution: Determine preferences via observation, rather than direct questioning.
Myth No. 2: ROI is the most important innovation metric
Reality: ROI doesn't work in exploration mode, because there are too many unknowns to make an accurate prediction.
Solution: Adopt "goal post" (range) and "time to truth" metrics and measures to manage uncertainty.
Five Innovation Myths You've Probably Fallen For, Published: 3 September 2014
Analyst(s): Mary Mesaglio, Ed Gabrys from Gartner.

47. Time to Truth Measures Obtain Quick Win
Create a prototype of a new idea in 48 hours or less.
Rapid prototyping creates a digital or physical manifestation of an abstract concept quickly, within hours or days. It often includes a basic interface and a basic level of interactivity (for example, by making a prototype clickable). IT teams need to create this as a repeatable capability to ensure they can respond to fuzzy initial ideas with more concretion.
Need Moderate Work
Run a high-velocity/low-cost experiment in an area of uncertainty and importance. Aim to run the experiment in four weeks or less.
Instead of relying on experts and assumptions, high-velocity experimentation obtains direct user feedback by getting innovations quickly into beta. The goal is to experiment often and at a low cost. How fast can you create a hypothesis about what a customer or citizen might value, and test that hypothesis in a real-world setting? For example, a financial services CIO might hypothesize that customers would buy more loans if they could do so with zero queuing, complete the transaction in less than 10 minutes and do so on a tablet. How fast could you run that experiment?
Require Commitment
A/B test a digital innovation. Aim to A/B test all customer interfaces and changes to those interfaces as a matter of course.
A/B testing is used to passively capture customer feedback to determine the impact of any changes to a design. Internet giants, such as Netflix, eBay, Google and Amazon, have used A/B testing for years to refine their digital innovations. IT teams have not used AB testing systematically, but should start to, since this capability can reduce the guesswork in hitting on a promising idea.

48. Five Innovation Myths
Myth No. 3: You know who your best innovators are
Reality: Many of your best innovators are invisible to you.
Solution: Look for innovators in unlikely places.
Myth No. 4: The value of a new idea is self-evident
Reality: New ideas do not sell themselves, and the best ideas often start off looking stupid.
Solution: To sell the value of a new idea, show, don't tell.
Myth No. 5: Big problems require big solutions
Reality: Small changes/innovations can have extraordinary effects if you know where to look.
Solution: Focus on "little elephants.“ Microinnovation

50. Disruptive Technology
Disruptive entrants from the low-end benefit from two advantages high-end entrants do not.
Disruptive products create asymmetric motivation by targeting incumbents’ least desirable customers or creating new markets with new customers; the disruptor wants to sell to those customers, and incumbents are happy to let go of their least desirable customers, or feel no pain from the unrealized opportunity.
Disruptive products initially don’t offer as much performance as traditional offerings, customers are willing to give up some performance for the disruptive products’ overwhelmingly lower prices, which incumbents cannot match because their model cannot achieve profitability at the lower prices.
The world is enamored with Tesla. Auto journalists praise its cars and financial analysts constantly tout the company’s potential. But there’s a critical problem with Tesla’s product strategy: it’s not actually disruptive, which will likely cause it to struggle to scale. This may seem like heresy—even the analysts who are bearish on Tesla in the short-run are bullish on its long-term potential. But Telsa is starting from the top of a market, selling high-end vehicles at high prices. To scale, Tesla will eventually have to grow down market but there are real impediments to doing so. That’s why the most successful innovators usually do the reverse.
There are three internal barriers to “growing down the market” that are akin to sailing against the wind. The first is the company’s overhead structure. A company’s starting point determines the characteristics of its overhead structure that, barring a major restructuring, it will carry throughout its life. Companies that start at the bottom of the market develop overhead structures that are profitable at low unit prices. When the company moves into a higher-price market, it keeps the lean cost structure, so its margin grows and profits increase. Conversely, firms that start at the top of the market develop costly overhead structures that require high unit prices to support their high service levels. As they grow down the market and each unit is sold at a lower price, there are fewer dollars to pay for high overhead costs, and so margins shrink.
Additionally, the incentive structure is misaligned for employees and value chain partners. Tesla currently sells only one model, the Model S, a $75,000 four-door hatchback, but it plans to launch two additional models over the coming years. First, the Model X, an SUV expected to debut towards the end of this year. In 2012, the Model X was expected to cost approximately $50,000 but Tesla now says that it will cost approximately the same as a comparably equipped Model S. In 2017, Tesla plans to launch a “mainstream” luxury car, the Model 3, which it estimates will cost $35,000, although analysts have begun to question the feasibility of reaching that price point.
Consider a Tesla salesperson tasked with selling all three models. That individual is incented to sell as many of the most expensive model (the Model S) as possible. Regardless of commission structures, the nature of the sales process ensures this. It likely takes approximately the same amount of time and effort to sell a Model S as it would to sell a Model 3, so the sales person will rationally attempt to make the most productive use of their time by selling as many expensive items as possible. Overcoming this would require an inefficient and cumbersome incentive program to encourage sales of Model 3’s, but that’s exactly what the company doesn’t want—Tesla wants its sales people to focus on the highest margin item; it has to if it’s going to be profitable.
The third issue that plagues companies attempting to move down-market is the nature of their priorities. A colleague at Harvard Business School is fond of saying “Tesla doesn’t know how to do cheap.” And that’s exactly why they have not delivered on a price target for any of their vehicles yet. Faced with the decision of omitting a fantastic feature or adding it and raising the price by just a little bit, Tesla will consistently add features. Individually, the decisions have no impact; collectively, they add up to real money and cars that were targeted for one price point end up launching at a much higher one. A well-known analog to this was Apple’s failed “cheap iPhone,” the 5C, which was supposed to compete head-to-head with low-price Android phones; but like Tesla, Apple’s genetics don’t allow it do “cheap,” and the 5C launched in no-man’s land—an underperforming expensive phone and an outrageously over-priced cheap phone. Expect a similar outcome from Tesla’s attempts to move down-market.
Unfortunately for Tesla, the problems with growing down-market are only compounded when competitors begin to respond. Entrants that attempt to compete in established markets with large incumbents must compete from a resource disadvantage, which is extraordinarily difficult to overcome. Resources are anything that can be hired or fired, bought or sold. Examples include cash, brands and institutional knowledge, and resources accumulate over time. One of the most important resources for companies in the auto industry is the model lineup.
Companies like Audi, BMW and Mercedes have built broad model lineups, with products to suit every need and fancy. By comparison, Tesla has one—the Model S—and any customer that doesn’t want a 4-door hatchback cannot buy a Tesla. Tesla recognizes this and plans to expand its product lineup over the coming years with the introduction of its Model X SUV and Model 3 lower-priced sedan. But this isn’t a simple process; the company needs to triple its model lineup while simultaneously competing in the Model S market. For a small company with limited engineering resources this is difficult and requires making tough tradeoff decisions between investing in the current product or the model extensions. The challenge is much less significant for incumbents who already possess enormous product teams working on each model in their lineup. It’s almost like Tesla is fighting with one hand tied behind its back.
By entering into a high-end niche, Tesla was able to initially avoid this problem and actually competed on a resource advantage. Its initial customers strongly prefer electric drivetrains to non-electric platforms. Therefore, Tesla was the only company with a product in the category, but the critical factor preventing incumbent competition also limits growth—the market is a small niche that isn’t big enough to justify a competitive response. Incumbents’ only option would be to spend billions of dollars to create completely new EVs, but the market is too small to justify that investment, so competitors couldn’t respond. But as Tesla grows out of its niche, each new customer it targets cares less about the electric drivetrain and increasingly values other attributes. This means that each future sale is more dependent on resources for which incumbents have a significant advantage, making each “next sale” more difficult than the last.
But wait, don’t companies that enter at the low end face a similar problem? They do, but disruptive entrants benefit from two advantages high-end entrants do not. First, because disruption creates asymmetric motivation, incumbents aren’t actually fighting against the entrant; the importance of which cannot be overstated. Disruptive products create asymmetric motivation by targeting incumbents’ least desirable customers or creating new markets with new customers; the disruptor wants to sell to those customers, and incumbents are happy to let go of their least desirable customers, or feel no pain from the unrealized opportunity.
Second, disruptive products are built with business models that are profitable at much lower prices than incumbents’. Therefore, while they initially don’t offer as much performance as traditional offerings, customers are willing to give up some performance for the disruptive products’ overwhelmingly lower prices, which incumbents cannot match because their model cannot achieve profitability at the lower prices. Together, these factors level the playing field and give the disruptive entrant a much higher probability of success.
As Tesla attempts to scale, it’s likely to discover that its internal impediments, combined with competitor responses, make it much harder than anticipated. The symptoms of these problems will manifest as product launch delays, cost overruns, and higher than expected prices. Better approaches would be either to focus exclusively on a high-end niche that is too small to entice incumbents or to enter the bottom of the market with a low-price product and disruptive business model.
Thomas Bartman is a member of the Forum for Growth and Innovation, a Harvard Business School think tank studying disruptive innovation. Follow him on Twitter
Why Tesla Won’t Be Able to Scale

51. Key Challenges to Innovation
■ ROI is not effective in exploration mode; different innovation metrics are required. ■ People are unreliable when it comes to knowing what they want. ■ Many of your best innovators are invisible to you. ■ New ideas do not sell themselves, and the best ideas often start off looking stupid. ■ Small changes can have extraordinary effects if you know where to look.
Five Innovation Myths You've Probably Fallen For, Published: 3 September 2014
Analyst(s): Mary Mesaglio, Ed Gabrys from Gartner.

52. Roger’s Process of Innovation Diffusion

53. (link)

54. Roger’s
(link)

55. Underlying Drivers in Growth Markets
“Technology Adoption Strategies”
Pragmatists:
Stick with the herd!
Conservatives:
Stick with what’s proven!
Visionaries:
Skeptics:
Just say No!
Get ahead of the herd!
Techies:
Just try it!
Copyright © Geoffrey A. Moore, 2005, from the book “DEALING WITH DARWIN”

56. Early Market vs. Mainstream Market

57. Technology Adoption Life Cycle
! Pragmatist’s Don’t Trust Visionaries !
Main Street
Tornado
Early Market
Chasm
Bowling Alley
Copyright © Geoffrey A. Moore, 2005, from the book “DEALING WITH DARWIN”

58. Update 2011 ? Instant Success ? In 4th year after launch.
( ie 6 years )
This is as fast as it gets.
Update 2011
NB. Apple's fiscal year ends in September. This means that Q1 includes the holiday season, which accounts for jumps in the data. Fiscal Q1 is Oct - Dec of previous year. So Q1 of 2008 is Oct - Dec of 2007, Q2 of 2008 is Jan - Mar of 2008 and so on.

59. The Roadmap

60. http://www. slideshare

61. The Startup Curve

62. https://markkolier.com/2016/05/12/lets-start-a-company-isnt-childs-play/the-startup-curve/

63. Existing Market “Chasm”
No Chasm
Main Street
Tornado
Early Market
Bowling Alley
Copyright © Geoffrey A. Moore, 2005, from the book “DEALING WITH DARWIN”

64. Resegmented Market “Chasm”
Main Street
Tornado
Early Market
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Chasm
Bowling Alley
Copyright © Geoffrey A. Moore, 2005, from the book “DEALING WITH DARWIN”

65. New Market “Chasm” Main Street Tornado Early Market Chasm
Bowling Alley
Tornado
Main Street
New Market Hockey Stick Sales Curve
Copyright © Geoffrey A. Moore, 2005, from the book “DEALING WITH DARWIN”

66. Roger’s Works
5th edition is the latest.  This is 3rd edition
This is a good one; easier to understand and read

67. Stages of Growth

68. SRI’s Definition of Innovation* *
SRI’s Definition of Innovation
07/16/96
07/16/96
Ensure everyone is working in the same direction
Innovation
The creation and delivery of new customer value in the
marketplace with sustainable value for the enterprise
People confuse inputs from outputs. The goal is not entrepreneurship (input skills) it is innovation (output) * * ##

69. Five Disciplines of Innovation (5DOI)
Important Customer &
Market Needs
Discipline 2:
Value Creation
Discipline 3:
Innovation Champions
The workshop is based on the concepts outlined in the book
“Innovation: The Five Disciplines for Creating What Customers Want”
By Curt Carlson, President & CEO of SRI International, and Bill Wilmot, Director of the Collaboration Institute
Book is available on Amazon.com and through other online book retailers
The five disciplines that we will cover in the workshop are:
D1: important customer & market needs – the foundation for enduring innovation with immediate and long term value
D2: value creation – the heart of the program, tools & methodology for systematic creation of innovation value
D3: innovation champions – the individuals with the special drive & spark to make innovations happen
D4: innovation teams – the group of people with complementary skills that advance an idea into invention and on to innovation
D5: organizational alignment – creating an innovation culture within an organization
Discipline 4:
Innovation Teams
Discipline 5:
Organizational Alignment
© 2013 SRI International

70. SRI’s Five Disciplines of Innovation (5DOI)
Important customer and market needs – begin with a meaningful problem
Value creation – articulate Need, Approach, Benefit, Competition (NABC) – common language to discuss and create value
Innovation champions – appoint someone who is passionate about the project and its success
Innovation teams – ensure collaboration within and across organzations
Organizational alignment – manage to achieve innovation success

71. 5 Disciplines Build Toward Commercialization
Concept
Innovation Plan
Venture Plan
Business Plan
Planning evolves and expands over time.
Each stage of planning is important and one builds upon the prior.
Question: Lots of learning goes on which results in … what?
Click: It starts with an idea. The idea can come from an R&D lab, from wanting to improve something, from anywhere.
Question: What is the goal of an innovation plan?
Click: An innovation plan needs a champion. The plan must clearly define NABC. The value proposition should be polished through multiple value creation forums and iterations.
Question: What is the goal of a venture plan?
Click: A venture plan needs a well rounded team. The value chain should be defined. A go-to-market plan outlined. The business model identified and spreadsheets constructed.
Question: What is the goal of a business plan?
Click: A business plan rounds out the team with further staffing. Processes are put into place and production gets underway.
Our focus in this week long boot camp is on building your venture plan.
Team
Value chain
Go-to-market plan
Business model
Goal: funding
Staff the company
Process
Production
Goal: Commercialize
Champion
NABC
Value proposition
Goal: seed or internal investment
Inventor
Idea
Invention
© 2013 SRI International

72. Stages of Growth for a Startup
Source: C. Gordon Bell, High-Tech Ventures, 1991, p.266.

74. For Innovation Opportunities
Demographics
New Perception
New knowledge
Rule breaking

75. Testing for Innovation
(link)

76. - John Locke Innovation
New opinions are always suspected and usually opposed, without any other reason but because they are not already common.
- John Locke

77. An Innovation Process

78. The Art of Innovation The Art of Innovation – Guy Kawasaki
The Art of Innovation – Guy Kawasaki at Gartner Barcelona
20 November , :521) Make Meaning… not money
Make the world a better place. When you are building something ask yourself “is this making the world a better place?”
2) Make Mantra
Most people come up with a Mission Statement. Most mission statements are developed through the following process.
50 senior employees have an off site week. This is usually run out of a hotel with a golf course
The company will bring in an external consultant. Most often a woman. Most often wearing all black and a turtle neck. Most often she will also have a dual career and moonlight as a lemans coach because getting a mission statement is similar to delivering a baby.
Cross functional team building. Fall into each others arms and sing Kumbaya.
Once this has happened for 2 days everyone is pissed off that their time has been wasted so they want at least one word in the missions statement. This is why Mission statements are super long and bullshit.
Don’t have a mission statement, have a mantra.
FedEx: Peach of Mind
Nike: Authentic Athletic Performance
Explain your goal in 3 words.
3) Jump to the next curve
In the beginning there were ice farmers. Ice farmers would go to frozen lakes and rivers and cut lines in the ice and farm the ice. This is 1.0.
Next came centralised ice factories. These were huge buildings filled with giant freezers. The freezers would produce the ice and they would have vans that would go out and deliver the ice to people who needed it. This is 2.0.
Lastly came the fridge. This is your own personal ice factory. This is 3.0.
The Ice Farmers never jumped to become Ice Factories. The owners of Ice Factories never jumped to build Fridges.
You must be able to jump to the next curve.
You should always define yourself by what you provide, not what you do. These examples were all about providing a clean and cold environment, not about the farming or the factories or the machine.
Uber: Transport
AirBnB: Hotels
TaskRabbit: Errands
4) Roll the Dice
You need to be able to stand out from the crowd. The chances are there’s going to be other people competing in your area. You need to roll the dice.
For that you need to focus on 5 things
Depth: Reef came out with a thong with a beer bottle attached in the sole. This doubled its usefulness.
Intelligence: MyKey from Ford allows the owner of the car to program the key and set a maximum speed of the car. Intelligence.
Complete: If you’re building a service then provide it entirely. Produce documentation, API’s, Video training, Webinars.
Empowering: The product should make you feel like you can accomplish more. The Dell is just shit. It competes on price. The Apple Air makes you feel empowered, like you can do anything.
Elegant: Herman Miller changed the face of chairs through a beautiful elegant design.
5) Don’t worry, be crappy.
Ship your product even though it has some shitty bits. That doesn’t mean ship a shitty product, it means it doesn’t have to do everything before you ship 1.0.
By being first to launch you gain all the benefits because there’s nothing else out there that can compete with you.
6) Let 100 flowers blossom
If people want to use your product in a different way, go with it and reproach the market in a new way.
A skin care product called “Skinbesoft” was released. It was a luxury product that was targeted at middle aged women to help keen their skin looking young and soft. The product sold well with their target market, however it wasn’t because it kept their skin soft. Instead the mothers found that it was an excellent insect repellent and wasn’t as harsh as DDT on the skin of their children.
This was the point at which they should have kept the product but changed their approach and marketed it in a different way.
Let your product blossom where ever it can.
7) Polarize People
Great products polarise people. Great products create emotion, emotions can cause polarity.
This of the Mac vs Windows, the iOS vs Android. The iPhone and Samsung S4. These consumers are polarised and LOVE their product. Great products polarise people.
8) Churn, baby Churn
Listen to your customers after launch. Adapt to your changing customers needs. If you’re willing and able to churn then you’re in the perfect place to jump to the next curve.
If you miss the next curve you’ll never make the double jump.
Don’t be afraid to churn and adapt to the changing market. Focus on what you’re providing, not how you’re doing it.
9) Niche thyself
On a simple graph of Uniqueness vs Value. Gartner or another analysis will charge you $500,000 to explain this to you. Here’s the break down in 4 simple bullet points ($125,000 per point).
Unique=0, Value=100: This corner, bottom right, is all about the price. It’s the Dell approach to computing. The value of Dell is huge however it’s not unique at all, therefore you’ve got thousands of competitors all vying for the best price.
Unique=100, Value=0: This corner, top left, is called the Stupid corner. You have a product that is completely unique, but there’s absolutely no value in it. Quit, or be acquired by Google.
Unique=0, Value=0: This corner, bottom left, is the dot.com corner. This is the dogfood .com example. When the dot.com boom hit people bought petfood.com. This was based upon the following idea. There are 69,926,000 dogs with owners in the US. Each of those dogs will eat at least 1 can of dog food every day. That’s 69,926,000 cans of dog food consumed every day, or 25,522,990,000 cans of dog food every year. The supply chain of dog food goes Cow – Killed – Chopped – Canned – Store – Consumer. By cutting out the Store you could save the consumer the hassle of driving to the store and the additional markup on dog food to help pay for the storefront and employees to stack the shelves and serve the customer at the till. If you could conservatively get 1% of the market and made just $1 per can of dog food then your income would be $699,260 PER DAY; $4,894,820 PER WEEK; and $255,229,900 PER YEAR. Even at 0.5% of the market that is a huge amount of profit. To get that 1% you need to be cheaper or more convenient. You can drop the price by $1 because you’re without the storefront and employee’s, but now you need to factor in the shipping costs to send out these cans of dog food to your 1% of home shoppers. That adds the $1 back onto the price. Well lets focus on the convenience. Now the dog owners don’t have to get in their car and drive all the way to the store, but because the dog food is delivered by a courier then they need to be at home to receive the dog food, and the courier will be there between 8am and 12pm, or 1pm and 5pm. Now the dog owner has to stay at home for half the day to buy a can of dog food for the same price they can get it from the shop because it’s more convenient for them… oh wait it’s not. Finally, because you can make over 1/4 of a trillion dollars with just 1% of the market you have petfood.com, dogfood.com, pets.com, dogs.com and thousands of other competitors. ZERO VALUE, ZERO UNIQUENESS.
Fandango – Buy tickets for a movie and guarantee your seat. You don’t need to line up when you get there. Unique and convenient. Smart Car.
10) Perfect your pitch.
Customise your introduction. This creates a sense of comfort within the room that the pitch is designed just for the client. Take pictures of yourself with the product they sell, the the city they are based… something to customise your pitch.
Follow the 10 – 20 – 30 rule.
10: Slides. No more.
20: Minutes. No more. It could take 40 minutes to get the wifi and projector working… you need to be able to nail your pitch with the time you have left. No one has ever been disappointed that a meeting has finished before the hour mark.
30: Point Size. This is the easiest to read. If you need to reduce the point size to fit text on the screen then you’ve got too much text. What usually happen 15 seconds into a presentation like this is that the audience will realise you’re reading the slide and work out that they can read faster than you can talk… and then you’ve lost them. Another way to look at it is halve the audience age. 70yo=35pt, 60yo=30pt, 40yo=20pt.
11) Don’t let the bozo’s drag you down.

79. Business Models English inventor Michael Faraday conceived and built*
Business Models
07/16/96
The business model spells out how a company makes money
English inventor Michael Faraday conceived and built
the first electric motor, then tried to get the backing of
Prime Minister William Gladstone.
Gladstone wasn’t impressed with the crudely made invention.
“What possible good is it?” asked Gladstone.
Faraday’s reply changed Gladstone’s attitude:
“Some day you’ll be able to tax it.” *

80. Seven Innovation Myths
Innovation is risky.
Innovation is (only) about products.
Innovation is about "big" ideas.
Innovation can't be taught.
Innovation is a diversion.
Innovation is expensive.
Innovation is an exception.
Source: Innovation to the core

81. Not Seeing the Opportunities
Cannot see at its nascent stage
Don’t take it seriously once seen
Don’t understand when it has become successful
Wait until it is too late
視而不見見而不屑察而不懂行已不及
先見之明人棄我取摸透產業先人一著
［一篇值得您關心的話題］ 【老祝觀察】未來五年各行業將全面洗牌，你，會在哪裡？  SEC中研國際祝老師國內一位很著名的成功學大師說過：“趨勢就像一匹馬，如果在馬後面追，你永遠都追不上，你只有騎在馬上面，才能和馬一樣的快，這就叫馬上成功！” 一、移動互聯網的發展：   未來我們的生活會是什麼樣子呢？我們設想一下，晚上帶著家人去吃飯，拿出手機點擊附件餐廳，看完餐廳介紹，對比之後，挑一家評價好的、好吃又實惠的餐廳，在手機上領取一張會員卡，定好座位，等時間到了，點擊導航，直接去吃飯，不用排隊。   吃飯的時候，哪個好吃的就拍個照，放到微博或朋友圈，曬一曬，與朋友共用，因為以後朋友來這裡吃飯的時候，憑著你的分享，朋友可以優惠，商家還要給你返利，既能吃到好東西，分享又能賺錢，真的很愜意。   吃完飯，去商場購物，看到哪個產品喜歡的，拿起來掃一下二維碼，用手機比比價，放入網路購物車，逛完商場，在手機上點擊送貨時間和送貨地址，直接付款，不用拎東西，也不用排隊，然後去看電影，因為電影票在吃飯的時候已經用手機買好了。   這就是我們未來的生活，你覺得能實現嗎？我想很快！ 二、巨人的倒下：   世界上曾經有一家世界500強的企業，名叫“柯達”KODAK，在1991年的時候，他的技術領先世界同行10年，但是2012年1月破產了，被做數碼的幹掉了。   當“索尼”SONY還沉浸在數碼領先的喜悅中時，突然發現，原來全世界賣照相機賣的最好的不是他，而是做手機的“諾基亞”，因為每部手機都是一部照相機，近幾年“索尼”相機部門業績大幅虧損，於今年倒閉。   然後呢？   然後原來做電腦的“蘋果”出來了，把手機世界老大的“諾基亞”給幹掉了，而且沒有還手之力，2013年9月，“諾基亞”被微軟收購了。 發展倒逼轉型升級，整合、創新引領時代發展：   一、360的出臺，直接把殺毒變成免費的，淘汰了金山毒霸；   二、淘寶電子商務2012年一萬億的銷量，逼得“蘇甯、國美”(類似燦坤、全國電子)這些傳統零售巨頭不得不轉型，逼得“李寧服裝”(大陸最著名的運動服飾品牌之一)關掉了全國1800多家專賣店，連天上發了衛星的“沃爾瑪”都難以招架，如果馬雲“菜鳥”行動成功的話，24小時內全國到貨的夢想實現，那麼這些零售巨頭的命運又將會是如何？   三、馬雲“餘額寶”的出臺，18天狂收57個億資金存款，開始強奪銀行的飯碗。    三馬（馬雲、馬化騰、馬明哲）的網上保險公司的啟動，預計未來五年將會有200萬保險人員失業，其他保險公司將何去何從？   騰訊微信的出臺，6個億的用戶還在增加，直接打劫了中國移動、電信和聯通的飯碗。   所以，如果有一天你隔壁開火鍋店的張三，賣手機賣得比你好的時候，你不用覺得驚訝，因為，這是一個跨界的時代，每一個行業都在整合，都在交叉，都在相互滲透，如果原來你一直獲利的產品或行業，在另外一個人手裡，突然變成一種免費的增值服務，你又如何競爭？如何生存？
未來五年各行業將全面洗牌
  所以，未來的競爭，不再是產品的競爭、不再是管道的競爭，而是資源整合的競爭，是終端消費者的競爭，誰能夠持有資源，持有消費者用戶，不管他消費什麼產品、消費什麼服務，你都能夠盈利的時候，你才能夠保證你的利益，才能立於不敗之地。 引領時代的都是“騙子”： 30年前說下海能賺錢的人，被認為是騙子。 20年前說炒股能賺錢的人，被認為是騙子。 15年前說保險能幫到大家的，被認為是騙子。 10年前馬雲說互聯網能改變人們的生活，也被認為是騙子。 那些說別人是騙子的人，生活一成不変，生活品質一天比一天差！而那些當年所謂的“騙子”卻成了時代的標誌！ “每一次新的機遇的到來，都會造就一批富翁！”    當別人不明白的時候，他明白他在做什麼；當別人不理解的時候，他理解他在做什麼；當別人明白了，他富有了；當別人理解了，他成功了。任何一次機遇的到來，都必將經歷四個階段:“看不見“、“看不起“、“看不懂”、“來不及”。 任何一次財富的締造必將經歷一個過程: “先知先覺經營者；後知後覺跟隨者 ；不知不覺消費者 !  反省一下，你有錯過嗎？人生比努力更重要的是選擇！與時俱進是財富的源泉哦! 發生在身邊的變化： 第一、當摩托羅拉還沉醉在V8088的時候， 不知道諾基亞已迎頭趕上。 第二、當諾基亞還注重低端機市場時，約伯斯的蘋果已經潛入。 第三、當蘋果成為街機的時候，三星已經傲視天下。 第四、當中國移動沾沾自喜為中國最大的通訊商時，渾然不覺微信客戶已突破4個億。  第五、當中國銀行業賺的盆滿缽滿高歌猛進時，阿里巴巴已經推出網路虛擬信用卡。  第六、當很多人還在想租個門面房開個小生意時，光棍節一天中國互聯網上創造天價成交額。 不要說停止學習，就是慢一點都有可能被淘汰出局。 未來十年拼什麼？ 答： 整 ～借 ～學 ～變 一：整；資源整合! 你能整合多少資源，多少管道，你將來就會得到多少財富！ 二：借；造船過河不如借船過河。 趨勢，無法阻擋；抉擇，要有智慧！ 三：學；今天的企業家，贏在學習， 勝在改變！ 柯達、諾基亞、李寧、索尼都輸在了不學習、不改變。古人雲:富不學富不長，窮不學窮不盡！ 四：變；要想改變口袋，先要改變腦袋！    這個社會一直在淘汰有學歷的人，但是不會淘汰有學習力願意改變的人! 讀萬卷書不如行萬里路，行萬里路不如閱人無數，閱人無數不如名師指路，名師指路不如重疊成功人的腳步！ 面對挑戰我該怎麼辦？ 馬雲說：不要等到明天，明天太遙遠，今天就行動. 第一、改變一種行為不要拖到明天，否則它會變成你的習慣。 第二、拒絕一份誘惑不要拖到明天，否則它會造成你的傷害。 第三、抓住一次機會不要拖到明天，否則失去了就不會再來。 第四、不要讓今天的行動拖到明天，否則它無法帶來精彩。 第五、不要把今天的幸福拖到明天，否則它將一去不復返。 第六、不要把機會拖到明天，因機會是唯一的你還要等到明天 牛根生最後送上一句： 品牌的98%是文化，矛盾的98%來自誤會，資源的98%是靠整合。
I'm little...But I'm a Great Winner.  松鼠遇到突轚而來老鷹...
*I have no idea how this was filmed, but it's sure great to watch     

82. Manage the Product/Innovation Pipeline
Additional source:

83. Innovation Pipeline
Source:

84. What Is Disruptive Innovation?

85. Roger’s Process of Innovation Diffusion

86. 創新擴散理論（Diffusion of Innovation Theory）
“創新擴散理論” 是美國學者Rogers提出的。Rogers認為創新是：“一種被個人或其他採納單位視為新穎的觀念、時間或事物。””擴散理論(Diffusion Theory)主要在於分析一創新產品各時期所可能的銷售狀態，進而預測該產品在市場中為消費者所接受與採用的普及情形，並稱其為產品之「擴散」。創新的採用者分為創新者（Innovators）、早期採用者（Early Adopters）、早期追隨者（Early Majority）、晚期追隨者（Late Majority）及落後者（Laggards），相關理論模型的特徵為S型累積採用者曲線
創新者（Innovators）： 他們是勇敢的先行者，自覺推動創新。 創新者在創新交流過程中，發揮著非常重要的作用。
早期採用者（Early Adopters）：他們是受人尊敬的社會人士，是公眾意見領袖，他們樂意引領時尚、嘗試新鮮事物，但行為謹慎。
早期大眾者（Early Majority）：他們是有思想的一群人，也比較謹慎，但他們較之普通人群更願意、更早地接受變革。
後期大眾者（Late Majority）：他們是持懷疑態度的一群人，只有當社會大眾普遍接受了新鮮事物的時候，他們才會採用。
落伍者（Laggards）：他們是保守傳統的一群人，習慣於因循守舊，對新鮮事物吹毛求疵，只有當新的發展成為主流、成為傳統時，他們才會被動接受。
2013/10/25 下午 05:18:00 | 發表人： 夏松明 | 瀏覽人次:4290

87. 何謂科技S型曲線 ?
科技效能改善率和科技在市場採用率會重複地呈現一致性的S型曲線。 科技效能改善在科技初期階段是相當緩慢的，因為對科技的本質了解較少；隨著瞭解越多其改善速度變快；最後逐漸達到其最後限制而減緩。
並非所有的科技有機會達到其極限。他們也許會因新的不連續科技(discontinuous technologies)，而遭受淘汰。當創新滿足類似的市場需求，但卻由全新的知識基礎所建構時，此時的創新就是不連續的。例如從螺旋槳飛機到噴射機、從鹵化銀照相到數位照相、從碳粉複印到光學影印，從黑膠唱片（類比式卡帶）到雷射唱片。
這種不連續科技和當代科技 (incumbent technology) 相比，剛開始效能較差，例如其中一台最早的汽車，1971 年由邱格耐所開發，因為它的速度太慢而且比馬車還難控制，所以並沒有進行商業化生產。而且公司經常不願意轉換到新科技，因為效能的改善出奇是非常緩慢且昂貴的, 因此他們寧願投資在當代科技上。
每個新的 S 曲線在初始階段引起騷亂，接著快速改善，然後報酬遞減，最後會被另一個新的科技不連續所取代此新的科技不連續 (technological discontinuity) 的興起會顛覆既有產業競爭結構，導致出現新的領導者及新的輸家， 熊彼得(Schumpeter)稱此為「創造性破壞 (creative destruction)」的過程。
當新技術出現，造成產業結構革命性的變化，大幅改變競爭的本質，而公司必須採用新技術才能生存，此為技術典範轉移。
典範移轉時機有以下兩種:
1. 創新的「破壞性技術」已在利基市場上發展。 2. 現有技術成熟，且逼近或位於「自然極限」。
在科技不斷突破的時代，破壞性技術常在一技術未到達自然極限就出現。對於產業中既有公司而言，自行發展破壞性技術是為了以自我的資源與能耐，掌握先行者優勢，提早建立起產業標準，持續維持競爭力。
對新進者而言，如何掌握機會，順著技術S型曲線，將技術由小型利基帶向大眾市場，快速成長，是該獨自發展、亦或與既有公司合作以取得資源，是新進公司該做的重要決策。
2014/4/11 下午 05:35:00 | 發表人： 夏松明 | 瀏覽人次:4192