Innovation and Management →
- 25 Feb 2013
- Research & Ideas
Lean Strategy Not Just for Start-Ups
Established companies often experience innovation stagnation. The fix, says Intuit founder Scott Cook, is for these companies to adopt a lean start-up model. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 28 Jan 2013
- Research & Ideas
Helping Yelp Create More Accurate Reviews
Over time, Yelp's reader rating system of restaurants can make or break an operation, but professor Michael Luca shows the program has flaws. Can a more accurate, fairer system be created? Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 07 Jan 2013
- Lessons from the Classroom
Culture Changers: Managing High-Impact Entrepreneurs
In her new Harvard Business School course, Creative High-Impact Ventures: Entrepreneurs Who Changed the World, professor Mukti Khaire looks at ways managers can team with creative talent in six "culture industries": publishing, fashion, art-design, film, music, and food. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 19 Oct 2012
- Research & Ideas
Digital Technology’s Profound Game Change for Marketers
Within a few years, chief marketing officers will spend more on technology--digital marketing--than CIOs. Jeffrey Bussgang says it is clear that technology is radically transforming the marketing function and the role of the marketing professional. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 19 Sep 2012
- Research & Ideas
Book Excerpt: “The Architecture of Innovation”
In his new book, The Architecture of Innovation, Josh Lerner explores flaws in how corporations fund R&D. This excerpt discusses the corporate venturing model and how incentive schemes make it successful. Open for comment; 0 Comments.
- 19 Sep 2012
- Research & Ideas
Funding Innovation: Is Your Firm Doing it Wrong?
Many companies are at a loss about how to fund innovation successfully. In his new book, The Architecture of Innovation, Professor Josh Lerner starts with this advice: get the incentives right. Open for comment; 0 Comments.
- 07 Sep 2012
- Working Paper Summaries
IP Modularity: Profiting from Innovation by Aligning Product Architecture with Intellectual Property
Firms increasingly practice open innovation, license technology out and in, outsource development and production, and enable users and downstream firms to innovate on their products. However, while such distributed value creation can boost the overall value created, it may create serious challenges for capturing value. This paper argues that in order to optimize value capture from a new product or process, an innovator must manage the artifact's intellectual property (IP) and its modular structure in conjunction. In other words, each module's IP status needs to be defined carefully and its boundaries must be placed accordingly. Fundamentally, IP modularity eliminates incompatibilities between IP rights in a given module, while permitting incompatibilities within the overall system. This in turn allows a firm to "have its cake and eat it too": It can reap the benefits of an open architecture while at the same time reducing the costs of opportunism on the part of suppliers, complementors, and employees. Key concepts include: By managing a system's modular structure in conjunction with its IP, firms can overcome intrinsic conflicts between distributed value creation on the one hand, and value appropriation on the other hand. The details of IP modularization must be determined by engineers and legal experts working together. But beyond the technical and legal concerns, IP modularity affects a firm's strategies for value appropriation in increasingly complex and fragmented technological spaces. With own IP, IP modularity helps to reconcile distributed value creation with value capture, and to avoid IP "leakage" to suppliers and employees. With external IP, an IP-modular architecture reduces holdup risk and other transaction costs of licensing, and may allow a firm to establish control over external, originally open IP. Under conditions of uncertainty, "anticipatory" IP modularity creates option value: it allows a firm to better exploit upcoming opportunities for distributed value creation and to counter threats from inadvertent IP infringement. Beyond products and processes, the concept of IP modularity also extends to organizations. An example is "Chinese Walls," the virtual barriers between different organizational units that prevent information exchange between these units. These units constitute "IP modules" within the organization, and the Chinese Walls between them are module boundaries. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 02 Aug 2012
- Working Paper Summaries
The Rich Get Richer: Enabling Conditions for Knowledge Use in Organizational Work Teams
Individuals on the periphery of organizational knowledge-sharing networks, due to inexperience, location, or lack of social capital, may struggle to access useful knowledge at work. An electronic knowledge repository (KR) offers a practical solution to the challenges of making knowledge available to people who might otherwise lack access to relevant expertise. Such a system may function as a knowledge-access equalizer. However, the presence of a knowledge repository will not solve the problem of access to knowledge for those at the periphery of the organization unless it is used. In this paper, the authors begin to theorize the social and structural conditions that support KR use by exploring whether individuals on the organizational periphery take advantage of KRs, or whether KRs function more to enrich individuals whose experience and position already provide them better access to other knowledge sources. Using extensive data on KR use at a global, outsourced provider of software services, the authors' results show that despite the seeming promise of a KR to integrate or equalize peripheral players, it instead enriches knowledge access for people who are already well positioned. Findings thus suggest that KR use is not simply an individual activity based on need, but is instead enabled by certain social conditions (such as familiarity and experience) and inhibited by others (such as status disparities and remote location). An organizational KR thus fails to serve as an equalizer absent intervention. Key concepts include: There is a cautionary note for managers: In this study, KRs supported team performance by enriching the knowledge access of central players in the organization. KRs were less effective at ensuring much-needed access for those on the periphery. If individuals cannot get the knowledge that they need, then both their performance and their careers may suffer. Although some individuals are deployed into positions seen as organizationally necessary - such as remote offices or onto teams where they all may not know each other - in these positions they are less likely to make use of available organizational resources. There is a pattern of greater use of a KR and success for teams working in more supportive conditions. Individual and team characteristics enable people to support each other, make use of available resources, and perform effectively. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 23 May 2012
- Research & Ideas
Five Ways to Make Your Company More Innovative
How do you create a company that unleashes and capitalizes on innovation? HBS faculty experts in culture, customers, creativity, marketing, and the DNA of innovators offer up ideas. From HBS Alumni Bulletin. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 16 Feb 2012
- Op-Ed
Nitin Nohria: Why US Competitiveness Matters
Harvard Business School Dean Nitin Nohria discusses the multidimensional quality of the American competitiveness problem, and why it matters to all. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 14 Feb 2012
- Working Paper Summaries
Relational Contracts and Organizational Capabilities
If capabilities are indeed a source of sustained competitive advantage, why don't they diffuse more rapidly? Capabilities diffuse slowly even when managers acknowledge that they are behind and are spending heavily to catch up, and where there appears to be industrywide agreement about best practice. This paper by R. Gibbons and R. Henderson suggests that the often slow diffusion of competitively significant capabilities is because many key managerial practices rely on relational contracts: an economist's term for collaboration sustained by the shadow of the future, as opposed to formal contracts enforced by courts. Building these relational contracts requires moving beyond task knowledge to the development of "relational knowledge." Relational knowledge may be substantially more difficult to develop than task knowledge both because there is much more of it and because its acquisition is complicated by incentive problems. Overall, while it is well established that organizations are replete with relational contracts, these informal understandings may be one of the reasons that competitively important practices are sometimes surprisingly slow to diffuse. Key concepts include: Many organizational capabilities rest on managerial practices that in turn rely on relational contracts, informal agreements sustained by the shadow of the future. Many relational contracts are hard to build and to refine, and that this is often why managers "can't get the organization to get it done." Building and refining relational contracts requires solving two distinct problems: the problem of credibility and the problem of clarity. Each of these problems can be quite difficult in isolation, and in combination they may create a substantial barrier to imitation. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 12 Dec 2011
- HBS Case
HBS Cases: Clocky, the Runaway Alarm Clock
There had not been an innovative breakthrough in alarm clock design since the snooze button until entrepreneur Gauri Nanda created Clocky. Her runaway hit has been the inspiration for several cases written by Professor Elie Ofek. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 04 Nov 2011
- Working Paper Summaries
Multi-Sided Platforms
Research in multi-sided platforms (MSPs) studies how payment networks bring together cardholders and retailers, shopping malls bring together shoppers and retailers, and video game systems bring together gamers and game developers. Andrei Hagiu and Julian Wright propose a new definition of MSPs that aims to capture what makes eBay, shopping malls, Yellow Pages directories, and dating websites different from "regular" firms such as a bakery or car dealership, as well as how to characterize less clear-cut examples. They also discuss the economic trade-offs that determine where organizations choose to place themselves on the continuum between MSPs and resellers, or between MSPs and input suppliers. Key concepts include: Hagiu and Wright define a MSP to be an organization that creates value primarily by enabling direct interactions between at least two distinct types of affiliated customers. Each of the italicized terms is a potential point of difference with existing definitions, with important implications for how organizations make strategic decisions. Contrary to most existing definitions, cross-group network effects or indirect network effects are neither necessary nor sufficient for an organization to be a MSP. Existing definitions based on network effects are both under- and over-inclusive. By requiring that MSPs enable direct interactions, the authors clarify what distinguishes MSPs from resellers such as grocery stores and retailers. By requiring that multiple customer types be affiliated, they also clarify what distinguishes MSPs from input suppliers. The extent to which organizations, especially firms, enable direct interactions is often a decision variable: they can choose where to position themselves on the continuum between re-sellers and MSPs. Among policy implications, this definition of MSP should help competition and regulatory authorities. Authorities have taken mixed approaches in settings identified as two-sided markets or MSPs, sometimes considering both sides of the businesses together and at other times just focusing on one side and wrongly ignoring the other. This definition should also give policymakers and courts a firmer basis for deciding the extent to which a business is a MSP. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 29 Sep 2011
- Sharpening Your Skills
Sharpening Your Skills: Leveraging Intellectual Property
Many companies lack a coherent policy for maximizing the value of their intellectual property. In this collection from our archives, Harvard Business School faculty offer insights on the importance of IP and how best to protect and use it. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 06 Sep 2011
- Research & Ideas
How Small Wins Unleash Creativity
In their new book, The Progress Principle: Using Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement, and Creativity at Work, authors Teresa M. Amabile and Steven J. Kramer discuss how even seemingly small steps forward on a project can make huge differences in employees' emotional and intellectual well-being. Amabile talks about the main findings of the book. Plus: book excerpt. Key concepts include: Of all the factors that induce creativity, productivity, collegiality, and commitment among employees, the single most important one is a sense of making progress on meaningful work. Seemingly small signs of progress will induce huge positive effects on employees' psyches. On the other hand, seemingly small setbacks will induce huge negative effects. The catalysts that induce progress include setting clear goals; allowing autonomy; providing resources; giving enough time-but not too much; offering help with the work; learning from both problems and successes; and allowing ideas to flow. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 22 Aug 2011
- Research & Ideas
Getting to Eureka!: How Companies Can Promote Creativity
As global competition intensifies, it's more important than ever that companies figure out how to innovate if they are going to maintain their edge, or maintain their existence at all. Six Harvard Business School faculty share insights on the best ways to develop creative workers. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 08 Aug 2011
- Research & Ideas
The Death of the Global Manager
The "global manager" was a coveted job description sought by many leaders for many years, but times have changed—now we are all global managers, says Harvard Business School professor emeritus Christopher A. Bartlett, coauthor of the classic business book Transnational Management. He reexamines the ever-changing nature of running multinational corporations while confirming that, six editions and 20 years later, some challenges remain the same. Key concepts include: Multinational corporations must pursue three core strategies to build layers of competitive advantage: exploit worldwide operations to build global scale efficiency; develop sensitivity and responsiveness to national differences; and leverage the world for information, knowledge, and expertise. The organizational capability of a company to rapidly develop and diffuse innovation is incredibly important but difficult to cultivate. The term "global manager" is a misnomer—we all operate in a global environment. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 20 Jul 2011
- Research & Ideas
Five Discovery Skills that Distinguish Great Innovators
In The Innovator's DNA, authors Jeff Dyer, Hal Gergersen, and Clayton M. Christensen build on the idea of disruptive innovation to outline the five discovery skills that distinguish the Steve Jobses and Jeff Bezoses of the world from the run-of-the-mill corporate managers. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 26 Apr 2011
- Working Paper Summaries
The Contingent Effect of Absorptive Capacity: An Open Innovation Analysis
Does experience with adopting technology improve a person's capacity for inventing better technology? On the other hand, does invention experience increase the capacity for adoption? This paper explores how adoption and invention affect each other, using data from several programming competitions sponsored by The MathWorks Corporation. Research was conducted by Andrew A. King of the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College and Karim R. Lakhani at Harvard Business School. Key concepts include: "Absorptive capacity," a term coined in the late twentieth century, refers to the general ability to recognize the value of new information, choose what to adopt, and apply it to innovation. In general, both invention and adoption experience will increase invention capacity and adoption capacity. The effect of adoption experience on invention capacity is especially dramatic; adoption provides alternative ideas that spark new ones. However, inventors with a great deal of prior invention experience have an especially hard time suddenly switching to a new design path, even if that's what the project requires. The researchers believe this is because such inventors are saddled with both their old ideas and their recent ones, and thus need more time to warm up to brand new ideas mid-stream. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
Lessons from Running GM’s OnStar
Before teaching at Harvard Business School, Chet Huber ran the General Motors telematics subsidiary OnStar. Huber discusses how the lessons he learned in the field mesh with the lessons he teaches to students. Open for comment; 0 Comments.