Comments on: The Times they are a changing—or maybe we’re just waking up to reality http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2006/07/22/the-times-they-are-a-changing%e2%80%94or-maybe-we%e2%80%99re-just-waking-up-to-reality/ Tasty Little Nuggets of Design and Innovation Goodness Tue, 06 Jan 2009 09:20:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: madonna porn http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2006/07/22/the-times-they-are-a-changing%e2%80%94or-maybe-we%e2%80%99re-just-waking-up-to-reality/#comment-2875 madonna porn Wed, 20 Sep 2006 04:01:29 +0000 http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2006/07/22/the-times-they-are-a-changing%e2%80%94or-maybe-we%e2%80%99re-just-waking-up-to-reality/#comment-2875 <strong>porn...</strong> qwnujroe ssismifs piawkkinq ... porn…

qwnujroe ssismifs piawkkinq …

]]> By: Robert Gemmell http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2006/07/22/the-times-they-are-a-changing%e2%80%94or-maybe-we%e2%80%99re-just-waking-up-to-reality/#comment-1420 Robert Gemmell Mon, 31 Jul 2006 16:16:55 +0000 http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2006/07/22/the-times-they-are-a-changing%e2%80%94or-maybe-we%e2%80%99re-just-waking-up-to-reality/#comment-1420 I've been around the IT industry for 25 years; sales mainly and completed the MBA last year. My focus was predicting the unpredicatble....i.e. predicting disruptive innovation. I like the connection between physical laws and business behaviour and suggest there is some real mileage in this.... The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is about the flow of energy through entropy. I suspect entropy plays a big part in destructive processes leading to the historical demise of these majors. However, I think managing the risks of environmental innovation may be possible if we focus on value migration rather than invention and commercialisation per se. E.g. there is a revolution going on in IT driven by increments in broadband performance. The innovation effects are touching many industries entertainment more than most. But it is recognising the movement of value that remains the challenge. E.g. for Google is there more value in brokering digital IP than advertising? Does BSkyB need to vertically integrate to manage the threat of new distribution entrants? I’ve been around the IT industry for 25 years; sales mainly and completed the MBA last year. My focus was predicting the unpredicatble….i.e. predicting disruptive innovation. I like the connection between physical laws and business behaviour and suggest there is some real mileage in this…. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is about the flow of energy through entropy. I suspect entropy plays a big part in destructive processes leading to the historical demise of these majors.

However, I think managing the risks of environmental innovation may be possible if we focus on value migration rather than invention and commercialisation per se. E.g. there is a revolution going on in IT driven by increments in broadband performance. The innovation effects are touching many industries entertainment more than most. But it is recognising the movement of value that remains the challenge. E.g. for Google is there more value in brokering digital IP than advertising? Does BSkyB need to vertically integrate to manage the threat of new distribution entrants?

]]> By: niblettes http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2006/07/22/the-times-they-are-a-changing%e2%80%94or-maybe-we%e2%80%99re-just-waking-up-to-reality/#comment-1358 niblettes Thu, 27 Jul 2006 19:24:25 +0000 http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2006/07/22/the-times-they-are-a-changing%e2%80%94or-maybe-we%e2%80%99re-just-waking-up-to-reality/#comment-1358 That a good point, its very likely the case that the frame has started to change rather than us overcoming limited perceptions. Of course the legacy or old frames do limit perception (I think we see what is in terms of what was rather than on its own terms). Six-sigma is my favourite whipping boy for such limitations from legacy frames. That a good point, its very likely the case that the frame has started to change rather than us overcoming limited perceptions.

Of course the legacy or old frames do limit perception (I think we see what is in terms of what was rather than on its own terms). Six-sigma is my favourite whipping boy for such limitations from legacy frames.

]]> By: hannes treichl :: das ANDERS|denken blog » Archiv » Schnee von gestern - Jack Welch’s Ignoranz der Gegenwart http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2006/07/22/the-times-they-are-a-changing%e2%80%94or-maybe-we%e2%80%99re-just-waking-up-to-reality/#comment-1354 hannes treichl :: das ANDERS|denken blog » Archiv » Schnee von gestern - Jack Welch’s Ignoranz der Gegenwart Thu, 27 Jul 2006 12:19:28 +0000 http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2006/07/22/the-times-they-are-a-changing%e2%80%94or-maybe-we%e2%80%99re-just-waking-up-to-reality/#comment-1354 [...] Quelle: CNN Money via Niblettes [...] [...] Quelle: CNN Money via Niblettes [...]

]]> By: Innovation Zen http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2006/07/22/the-times-they-are-a-changing%e2%80%94or-maybe-we%e2%80%99re-just-waking-up-to-reality/#comment-1210 Innovation Zen Sun, 23 Jul 2006 11:15:31 +0000 http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2006/07/22/the-times-they-are-a-changing%e2%80%94or-maybe-we%e2%80%99re-just-waking-up-to-reality/#comment-1210 Interesting take on the issue. However there is one point where I do not agree 100%. You said "Has much of what we’ve held to be true, including Welch, only seemed true because of our limited perceptions?" I think what we've held to be true WAS true indeed, but true for a specific time frame, the industrial age. It is no longer true because the environment has change and the pace of such changes is also accelerating dramatically. Interesting take on the issue. However there is one point where I do not agree 100%.

You said “Has much of what we’ve held to be true, including Welch, only seemed true because of our limited perceptions?”

I think what we’ve held to be true WAS true indeed, but true for a specific time frame, the industrial age. It is no longer true because the environment has change and the pace of such changes is also accelerating dramatically.

]]> By: niti bhan http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2006/07/22/the-times-they-are-a-changing%e2%80%94or-maybe-we%e2%80%99re-just-waking-up-to-reality/#comment-1209 niti bhan Sun, 23 Jul 2006 06:46:01 +0000 http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2006/07/22/the-times-they-are-a-changing%e2%80%94or-maybe-we%e2%80%99re-just-waking-up-to-reality/#comment-1209 Taking your very insightful observation and attendant thoughts one step further, an interesting case we debated in Strategy class in my MBA program is Philips vs Matsushita: A new century, a new round from HBS. The reason was that (I can't seem to find my copy, I'll confirm) we learnt Matsushita had created a 100 year strategic plan. That was their version of long term. And we discussed that 'long term' was usually considered 10 years or so, medium term 3-5 years and the short term 1-3 years for corporate planning and strategy. I believe that these figures have changed dramatically in the past 5 or 6 years, particularly after the first internet boom, and general consensus seems to be everything is rapid, 'move, move, move' short term results. In fact this [just found] article says it better than I could have, http://www.westga.edu/~bquest/2004/thinking.htm and to quote their final paragraph: <em>At the end of the day, the success and even the survival of a corporation will depend on its ability to strike the right balance between short and long-term goals, and there is no scientific method to determine where this “right” balance would be at every point in time. On the other hand, market pressure may now indeed be increasing the weight of the short-term component in this magic mix, but the balance still needs to be there. A corporation that forgets this is like a marathon runner who, trying to impress the public, started sprinting at full speed from the very beginning of the race: he would most certainly rush well ahead of all the other runners for the first few hundred meters, but then he would never make it to the end of the race… just like Enron.</em> So coming back to the conclusion of your post, I'd say that it has less to do with the theories of prudent business management so much as just chucking them out the window and just responding to the market. And while I do agree with you that "administration and innovation are not just different but antithetical", my question would be whether the crux of your problem as stated has more to do with the assumption that "innovation = good management " - wouldn't you say that innovation, like our old friend design, is but an example of operational effectiveness? If you throw out any long term goals and just focus on quarterly tactics, you'll certainly pound the enemy in the short run but are you building anything of value for the long run? ps. since there's no preview, I'm hoping for the best that this comment is comprehensible. Taking your very insightful observation and attendant thoughts one step further, an interesting case we debated in Strategy class in my MBA program is Philips vs Matsushita: A new century, a new round from HBS. The reason was that (I can’t seem to find my copy, I’ll confirm) we learnt Matsushita had created a 100 year strategic plan. That was their version of long term. And we discussed that ‘long term’ was usually considered 10 years or so, medium term 3-5 years and the short term 1-3 years for corporate planning and strategy. I believe that these figures have changed dramatically in the past 5 or 6 years, particularly after the first internet boom, and general consensus seems to be everything is rapid, ‘move, move, move’ short term results. In fact this [just found] article says it better than I could have, http://www.westga.edu/~bquest/2004/thinking.htm and to quote their final paragraph:

At the end of the day, the success and even the survival of a corporation will depend on its ability to strike the right balance between short and long-term goals, and there is no scientific method to determine where this “right” balance would be at every point in time. On the other hand, market pressure may now indeed be increasing the weight of the short-term component in this magic mix, but the balance still needs to be there. A corporation that forgets this is like a marathon runner who, trying to impress the public, started sprinting at full speed from the very beginning of the race: he would most certainly rush well ahead of all the other runners for the first few hundred meters, but then he would never make it to the end of the race… just like Enron.

So coming back to the conclusion of your post, I’d say that it has less to do with the theories of prudent business management so much as just chucking them out the window and just responding to the market. And while I do agree with you that “administration and innovation are not just different but antithetical”, my question would be whether the crux of your problem as stated has more to do with the assumption that “innovation = good management ” - wouldn’t you say that innovation, like our old friend design, is but an example of operational effectiveness? If you throw out any long term goals and just focus on quarterly tactics, you’ll certainly pound the enemy in the short run but are you building anything of value for the long run?

ps. since there’s no preview, I’m hoping for the best that this comment is comprehensible.

]]>