ADMN 415 v2: Strategy and Technology Innovation Report a Broken Link

Lesson 1


Required Readings
Griffin, A. (2002). Product development cycle time for business-to-business products. Industrial Marketing Management. For a number of years, firms have been implementing changes in the way they develop new products, changes that are targeted at reducing overall product development cycle times. And over the years, a number of academics have conducted research trying to understand the factors that are related to reducing new product development (NPD) times. But the question remains — just how long does product development generally take in absolute numbers? Information on how long product development takes is helpful to firms for planning and controlling the flow of products into the marketplace and in determining resource needs for NPD.
Anderson, J., & Markides, C . (2007). Strategic innovation at the base of the pyramid. MIT Sloan Management Review. Although there has been a burst of interest in recent years in how economic growth is unfolding in the developing world, most of the research on strategic innovation is focused on developed markets. However, based on our research, companies that understand the dynamics of growth at the base of the economic pyramid in emerging markets have significant opportunities to unlock value.

Lesson 2


Supplementary Readings
Amabile, T. M. (2008). Creativity and the role of the leader. Harvard Business Review. In today's innovation-driven economy, understanding how to generate great ideas has become an urgent managerial priority. Suddenly, the spotlight has turned on the academics who've studied creativity for decades. How relevant is their research to the practical challenges leaders face? To connect theory and practice, Harvard Business School professors Amabile and Khaire convened a two-day colloquium of leading creativity scholars and executives from companies such as Google, IDEO, Novartis, Intuit, and E Ink. In this article, the authors present highlights of the research presented and the discussion of its implications.
Jørgensen, F., Laugen, B. T., & Boer, H. (2007). Human Resource Management for Continuous Improvement. Creativity and Innovation Management. This paper investigates the relationship between HRM practices and Continuous Improvement (CI) activities in order to gain an understanding of how the HRM function may be utilized to improve CI implementation success, and consequently, company performance.

Lesson 3


Required Readings
Johnson, M. W., Christensen, C. M., & Kagermann, H. (2008). Reinventing your business model. Harvard Business Review. Why is it so difficult for established companies to pull off the new growth that business model innovation can bring? Here's why: They don't understand their current business model well enough to know if it would suit a new opportunity or hinder it, and they don't know how to build a new model when they need it. Drawing on their vast knowledge of disruptive innovation and experience in helping established companies capture game-changing opportunities, consultant Johnson, Harvard Business School professor Christensen, and SAP co-CEO Kagermann set out the tools that executives need to do both.
Supplementary Readings
Anderson, P., & Tushman, M. L. (1990). Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: A cyclic model of technological change. Administrative Science Quarterly. An evolutionary model of technological change is proposed in which a technological breakthrough, or discontinuity, initiates an era of intense technical variation and selection, culminating in a single dominant design. This era of ferment is followed by a period of incremental technical progress, which may be broken by a subsequent technological discontinuity. A longitudinal study of the cement (1888-1980), glass (1893-1980), and minicomputer (1958-1982) industries indicates that when patents are not a significant factor, a technological discontinuity is generally followed by a single standard.
Adomavicius, G., Bockstedt, J. C., Gupta A., & Kauffman, R. J. (2007). Technology roles and paths of influence in an ecosystem model of technology evolution. Information Technology Management. We propose a new conceptual model for understanding technology evolution that highlights dynamic and highly interdependent relationships among multiple technologies. We argue that, instead of considering technologies in isolation, technology evolution is best viewed as a dynamic system or ecosystem that includes a variety of interrelated technologies.

Lesson 4


Required Readings
Suarez, F. F. (2004). Battles for technological dominance: An integrative framework. Research Policy. This paper proposes an integrative framework for understanding the process by which a technology achieves dominance when “battling” against other technological designs. We focus on describing the different stages of a dominance battle and propose five battle milestones that in turn define five key phases in the process. We review the literature from several disciplines to identify the key firm- and environment-level factors that affect the outcome of a technology battle and posit that the relative importance of each factor will vary depending on the phase considered. Our framework complements and extends existing literature and has implications both for theory and for management practice.
Shapiro, C., & Varian, H. (1999). The art of standards wars. California Management Review. Competition in the information age often takes the form of a standards war: a battle for market dominance between incompatible technologies. After classifying standards wars and identifying seven key assets that firms can use to successfully establish a new technology, the authors recommend three tactics in standards battles: building alliances, exploiting first-mover advantages, and managing consumer expectations.

Lesson 5


Supplementary Readings
Lieberman, M. B., & Montgomery, D. B. (Summer, 1988). First-mover advantages. Strategic Management Journal. This article surveys the theoretical and empirical literature on mechanisms that confer advantages and disadvantages on first-mover firms. Major conceptual issues are addressed, and recommendations are given for future research. Managerial implications are also discussed.
Boulding, W., & Christen, M. (2001). First-mover disadvantage. Harvard Business Review. The article examines a survey of 365 business units competing in consumer goods markets and 861 units competing in industrial markets, spanning the years 1930 to 1985. Pioneers in both consumer goods and industrial markets gained significant sales advantages, but they incurred even larger cost disadvantages. The research should not be interpreted to mean that companies ought to dismiss the importance of a speedy market entry. Rather, it suggests that executives need to focus on market entry plans that assume that being first will inevitably create long-run profit advantages.

Lesson 6


Supplementary Readings
Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1989). Strategic intent. Harvard Business Review. In the early 1970s when Canon took its first halting steps in reprographics, the idea of a fledgling Japanese company challenging Xerox seemed preposterous. Fifteen years later, it matched the U.S. giant in global unit market share. The basis for Canon's success? A different approach to making strategy--an approach that emphasizes an organization's resourcefulness more than the resources it currently controls. Familiar techniques like portfolio planning and competitor analysis lead to strategies that rivals can easily decode. The sum total is a pathology of surrender that leads many managers to abandon businesses instead of building them. Canon and other world-class competitors make strategy in a different way: on the basis of strategic intent. The result is a global leadership position and an approach to competition that has reduced larger, stronger Western rivals to an endless game of catch-up ball.
Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review. In the early 1980s, GTE was positioned to become a major player in the information technology industry. NEC was much smaller and had no experience as an operating telecommunications company. Today NEC is among the top five companies in telecommunications, semiconductors, and mainframes. GTE has become essentially a telephone company with a position in defense and lighting products. What happened?

Lesson 7


Supplementary Readings
Yu, O. (2008). Application of real options analysis to technology portfolio planning: A case study. The International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management. The concepts of real options analysis, which transfer options analysis for financial investments to those involving real properties, such as land and plant facilities, have already existed for 30 years. However, the actual application of real options analysis to technology portfolio planning has not been as widespread as expected. Among others, a major barrier to such applications appears to be a lack of appreciation and acceptance of real options by technology executives. However, the experience in the case study provides successful approaches for overcoming these barriers.

Lesson 8


Supplementary Readings
Hagedoorn, J. (1993) Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences. Strategic Management Journal. Interfirm strategic alliances appear to have become more important as apart of (international) business. In this contribution an attempt is made to clarify our understanding of the motives that lead firms to cooperate in their innovative efforts.
Rothaermel, F. T., & Boeker, W. (2008). Old technology meets new technology: Complementarities, similarities, and alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal. Alliance formation is commonplace in many high-technology industries experiencing radical technological change, where established firms use alliances with new entrants to adapt to technological change, while new entrants benefit from the ability of established players to commercialize the new technology. Despite the prevalence of these alliances, we know little about how these firms choose to ally with specific firms given the range of possible partners they may choose from. This study explores factors that lead to alliance formation between pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies.

Lesson 9


Required Readings
Henkel, J. & Reitzig, M. (2008). Patent Sharks. Harvard Business Review. R&D companies are increasingly falling prey to patent sharks: firms with hidden intellectual property that surface, threatening to sue, when their rights are inadvertently infringed. The attacks usually come out of the blue, and companies' traditional lines of defence, designed for fighting off visible competitors, are essentially useless in this type of guerrilla warfare. Munich University of Technology's Henkel and London Business School's Reitzig offer five principles to help companies avoid attack.
Honeyman, J. M., & Vittengl, S. M. (2009). Diversify patent portfolios with design patents. Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal. The article reports on the significance of investing in design patents by technology companies in the United States. It provides a discussion on the differences between utility and design patents and presents the benefits offered by design patents, including minimal cost, easiness in receiving approval, and easy identification of infringement. It states that considering design patent, along with utility, will play an essential role in protecting the product's unique appearance.

Lesson 12


Required Readings
Edmondson, A., & Nembhard, I. (2010). Innovation and learning in teams: The challenges = the benefits. Rotman Magazine. The challenges of teamwork can be formidable, but if navigated skilfully, these same challenges can help to build individual and team resilience.