Archive for the Uncategorized Category

I finally was able to make it into an Apple store this weekend and get my hands on the Apple iPad to see if all the buzz about the device was warranted.  As a follow-up to my post about the iPad, I’d like to make a prediction.  I do not believe that the device will sell nearly as well as all the analysts predict.

I say this despite the fact that it technically is great.  The screen resolution, responsiveness to the touch, and ease of use is really as good as people have been exhorting.  However, I cannot help but wonder what its positioning is in the mind of the customer.  In fact, as I stood in the Apple store playing with the iPad, a gentlemen came up to me and said, “Why do I need this?  Is it any better than what I have here?”  He was pointing to a MacBook he had tucked under his arm.  I responded by repeating some of the benefits I had heard, but ended the conversation thinking that perhaps he has a point.

As a precursor, the Wall Street Journal is reporting today that Palm is looking to sell itself.  Despite the fact that its new webOS has received very favorable reviews and hits on many of the unmet needs customers have while being mobile, the company has had a difficult time gaining sales.  I believe this is absolutely due to their lack of a valued position in the market.  RIM has unambiguously staked its claim for the BlackBerry as the device for mobile professionals who need to stay connected to the office and Apple has positioned the iPhone as the elegant, sophisticated multimedia and gaming hand-held.  Even Google has pushed Android as the open platform for the “techies.”  What comes to mind when consumers think of the Palm Pre/Pixi?  Not much. That is the problem.

Back to the iPad.  As long as it is positioned as another hand-held device rather than a replacement for the computer, I don’t think the masses will buy it in volumes.  Sure, the “innovators” and “early adopters” will get theirs.  However, I believe without a clear and credible point of distinction in the mind of the consumer, like Palm’s Pre/Pixi, this product will struggle, at least by Apple’s standards.  What do you think?

What will it take for the rumored Apple Tablet to be successful?  After working on the IBM engineering team for the failed PC Jr., I realized there must be a better way to guarantee a product or service’s success at launch.  What I have found during the past 20 years of study and research is that most companies do not have a disciplined, predictable business process for listening to consumer needs and turning that into true innovation.

Yes, Apple has had some huge successes.  The iPod, iPhone and Mac, just to name a few.  But with those successes came a number of failures including the Cyberdog, ROKR, Macintosh Portable and the Newton.  What’s curious is that Apple has had a product fail miserably in almost every category they have ever entered. If the Apple Tablet is to become a success, it must:

Help people get important “jobs” done that they cannot get done effectively on today’s laptops or iPhones. If Apple wants to convince folks to ditch their laptops altogether, the new device must help people do all the things that a laptop does. PLUS it must offer some cool new features – such as managing the book reading or photo sharing experience as well as it currently manages the overall music experience.

Change the entire way people consume media. iPods changed the way we buy, search for and listen to music. How much of a “game changer” will the Apple Tablet be? For example, will there be an app for the new Tablet that allows us to change the way we create and give presentations? Will it let the presenter see what is on the screen behind him? Capture questions from the audience to assist in improving the presentation? Translate questions into the presenter’s native language in real time? It must help people get an important job done really well and in its entirety.

Offer and perfect a new interface. People draw on tablets. If Apple can perfect this interface and create apps that make it easy to translate hand-drawn diagrams into powerful presentations, then buyers will have a new tool to get an important job done.

Simply said, the Apple Tablet must fill an important void and help consumers get important jobs done. If it’s just a pretty product that features the “same old, same old,” we could see another Apple flop.

Reflecting on the tragedy in Haiti, as well as the recovery and relief efforts that have ensued, I can’t help but have mixed emotions – sadness, for everyone that has been impacted by the earthquake and lost loved ones; pride, for my country and a world that has come together in this crisis; and frustration, for why we haven’t solved the issue of effectively getting people, food, water, supplies and other resources into an area that has been devastated by a natural disaster.

What I have realized is that no matter the disaster, the “job” – whether it’s restoring power or delivering food and water – stays the same.  Yes, the circumstances change, making relief efforts more or less complicated. But the fundamental jobs that need to get done don’t change.

It is this underlying common element that allows us to learn from previous disasters in order to improve our efforts in future disasters. While we have seen much improvement in readiness since Katrina here in the United States, we have yet to innovate substantial improvement for worldwide relief efforts. Now is the time to study this job, while our relief efforts in this current disaster are still active. We need to begin to understand the environmental and human constraints – and other factors – that have prohibited us from effectively deploying aid after a natural disaster.

From Haiti we’ve learned at least two lessons: (1) execution of the distribution process is still less effective than what is needed – the job is not being executed well enough today, even after all the lessons learned from previous disasters such as Katrina and the Tsunami, and (2) governments, non-profits, corporations and media must work in unison to effectively and rapidly respond. The partnership between the Red Cross and cell phone companies to execute the ‘text’ aid is a great example of how cooperation between entities can generate great results.  What we need is that same level of cooperation among a cross-section of organizations, resulting in innovative solutions to getting aid delivered and distributed.

With further assessment, we can create a solutions database and build a platform for collaboration among entities world-wide to innovate disaster relief efforts moving forward.

For more information on the Center for Social Innovation visit http://www.strategyn.com/about/strategyn-center-social-innovation/.

During the last 10 years, we witnessed stalled growth, financial markets with scant return, American companies giving up their manufacturing to China, organizations cutting into muscle that they thought was fat, and venture capitalists producing zero return.  To top it off, 2009 was met with the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression.  Reflecting on this, the last decade can only be dubbed, “The Lost Decade.”

What The Lost Decade did do was set the stage for renewal in the next decade.  In order to ensure that the next 10 years don’t look like the previous 10, here’s a few lessons learned – and, more importantly, what Big Business needs to do starting in 2010.

Who’s doing the big thinking? Thanks to corporate downsizing, managers find themselves having even less time and resources to spend on the important strategic planning activities that are needed to ensure company growth. To solve this problem, companies must reinvent their often fragmented and inefficient strategy and innovation processes, dedicate and entrust a small number of people to execute these new processes, and invest in new tools that will not only make sure big thinking takes place  – but that it takes place consistently, effectively and with few resources.

Don’t Follow the Crowd. Forget open innovation. Despite all the hype around companies soliciting ideas for their next breakthrough from outside the company, open innovation is a fad – a band-aid solution that masks the real problem. Many managers falsely believe that innovation is a “numbers game” and the more ideas they generate, the greater their chance for success. Instead, companies must use new and effective ways to uncover attractive markets and unmet customer needs before engaging in idea generation. When company employees know what unmet needs must be addressed, they are often the most qualified to devise new solutions.

What happens when the luck runs out? Less than 10% of new businesses succeed. Of those entrepreneurs that do succeed (according to a recent study), 73% said luck was a key factor in their success. In 2010, we’ll see more start-ups arise from thousands of Americans out of work. To succeed, they’ll need to start businesses in attractive, underserved markets – markets that consist of a large number of people who struggle to perform a specific job or task that they perform frequently. Next, they must offer a product or service that helps people perform that job or task better than competing solutions. Consequently, the entrepreneur must have a deep understanding of the job the customer is trying to get done. Lastly, entrepreneurs must work diligently and consistently to fine tune their offerings so they are always helping people get that job done better than competing solutions.

VC needs some TLC. The past decade has been a tough one for limited partners who invested in venture funds. After the dot com bubble burst, venture investors have significantly underperformed – especially if you factor in the risk that they ask their limited partners to take with high management fees and long-term capital commitments. The last decade has revealed that without a huge wave of technological change, like the personal computer or the internet, venture investors are not very good at identifying opportunities and investing in innovation. The venture model is fundamentally broken because traditional firms don’t create enough value for entrepreneurs. Money is not enough. The venture firms that succeed in the next decade will have to do the hard innovation work of identifying markets, discovering customer needs, creating company strategies, and generating solution ideas. This is how they will help entrepreneurs succeed.

“Crowd sourcing,” or “open innovation” – the practice of drawing from resources outside of a corporation to develop new ideas and products – is grabbing the attention of big companies on the hunt for their next level of growth. So-called open innovation portals are cropping up everywhere and there are countless books on the topic. Still, companies serious about innovation need to reconsider opening the door to ‘open innovation’ and stop following the crowd.  Here’s why:

Companies fail to realize that generating ideas is not the problem. In fact, developing numerous ideas just makes any business challenge that much more challenging. If nothing else, after spending time generating the additional ideas, you’ll need to sift through to determine the best one.  It’s much better to start with a clear understanding of the need you’re trying to solve. Success starts and ends with meeting those customer needs.

Companies need to adopt a strict process of innovation. In order to guarantee success, firms must develop criteria to determine if an idea is the right idea and discard it if it is a bad idea.  If your solution to innovation is simply to tap additional resources to create more ideas, then the only thing you will find is a higher failure rate.

It’s a common perception that markets change very quickly. But this is simply not the case.  The actual customer need or job that needs to be performed is very stable. It’s the delivery vehicle that changes.  Take the music distribution industry, for example.  Hundreds of years ago music was shared across parties by pen and paper which years later evolved to records, tapes, CDs and MP3s.  The platform in which music is delivered changed drastically over time, but the general job function – how do I get music from one place to the next – remained consistent.

Open innovation is not necessarily bad and more ideas are not necessarily good, but the key is to develop and deliver products, services and solutions that meet customer needs.

President Obama has gone on record stating that “the only way to fully restore America’s economic strength is to make the long-term investments that will lead to new jobs, new industries, and a renewed ability to compete with the rest of the world.”  He goes on to say that “I do not accept a future where the jobs and industries of tomorrow take root beyond our borders…it is time for America to lead again.”

In September 2009, the Office of the President issued “A Strategy for American Innovation: Driving Towards Sustainable Growth and Quality Jobs,” a report that outlines the administration’s innovation strategy. One of the key drivers behind the aforementioned vision, this strategy is funded by well over $100 billion of the $787 billion Recovery Act funds.  While the vision and focus on innovation has been widely praised, critics have raised concern over the lack of details included in the report.   Essentially, how can the government make its innovation initiatives actionable and measurable? How can it deliver guaranteed results? How can the government discover the industries of the future and help companies create valued products and services?

It’s time for innovative thinking about innovation policy. For this initiative to be successful, the government must adopt a proven process for innovation and embrace a long-term vision for success.  Our government innovation strategy must detail how to:

1. Select those markets poised for growth

2. Identify the unmet needs that exist in those markets

3. Create the products and service concepts that will drive market leadership

4. Direct and fund companies to develop and launch those products

By employing a proven process for innovation, the government, in partnership with the private sector, can identify which emerging markets will be the engine fueling future economic development. By being first to enter and lead those emerging markets, there is complete assurance that the U.S. will be positioned for ownership and dominance of the high-growth industries of the future. This means thousands of new jobs and sustainable economic growth.

To Accelerate Growth We Must Also Innovate Government Practices

An effective innovation process can also be used to achieve several highly leverageable successes by enhancing government practices that are intended to drive innovation – but fall short.

First, let’s consider how government contracts are written.  Although innovative solutions and added value are sought, our government typically specifies the products and services it wants created, leaving little room for creative solutions. Imagine, instead, if we were to provide suppliers with a set of metrics that define how value is measured. They would then be free to create innovative solutions. And they would have in place a measurement system to demonstrate just how much value they are creating. Innovation would flourish. Granted, changing government procurement processes would require patience but it is an idea worth exploring.

Secondly, let’s evaluate how and where we are bestowing grant funding.  Often, research programs are rooted in the specific interests or passions of the scientist or research team – or the government agency providing the funding. Many bright ideas get funded but there is little or no correlation between the research being done and the technologies that are needed to drive growth in emerging markets. Simply put, we need to revisit the criteria for how grant funds are distributed. If we were to harness the immense intellectual capital of our country’s academics, scientists and researchers and have them focus on creating the technologies, product, and services required to be successful in the markets of the future, we would further solidify the future success and security of our country and its people.

The United States is known for its ingenuity and is well positioned to lead the way in the systematic application of advanced innovation processes. Other countries are already doing this. By coupling a proven innovation strategy with our nation’s boundless enthusiasm and creativity, we can deliver on President Obama’s vision for “a high quality of life for this generation and future generations.”

About Strategyn and CEO Anthony Ulwick

Anthony Ulwick is the founder and CEO of Strategyn, Inc., and the author of the best -selling book, What Customers Want. He has published numerous articles on innovation management in the Harvard Business Review and the Sloan Management Review.  Founded in 1991, Strategyn has worked successfully with companies such as Microsoft, Chiquita Brands, Hallmark, IBM, Johnson & Johnson, WellPoint, Motorola and Pfizer, helping them establish effective innovation strategies and driving them through implementation. Visit www.strategyn.com for more information.