Like Apple did, Makerbot Industries offered its first product in the form of a kit. Enthusiasts, who wanted to build their own 3D printer and enter the brave new world of personal manufacturing could create any object in their imagination-as long as it was no bigger than a coffee cup. The founders of Makerbot--Bre Pettis, Adam Mayer and Zach Smith--were each passionate to bring affordable 3D printing to the masses. Moreover, they would not betray their commitment to open technology and open innovation. Above all else, they wanted to make their 3D printers understandable to and modifiable by users. They did this by keeping every aspect of their 3D printers' hardware and software open and adaptable. Through the creation of Thingaverse.com (a universe of things), an expanding army of Makerbot enthusiasts could upload, share and modify a growing array of 3D objects including toys, small inventions, medical devices and even architectural models. What advantages did Makerbot's strategy of openness bestow? How was Makerbot positioned for future battles in the emerging personal manufacturing industry with Hewlett-Packard and others? Lastly, how did Makerbot turn a unique research endeavor into a powerful idea attracting venture funds from Jeff Bezos, The New York Times and venture capitalists?

Appirio, a Cloud Computing services and consulting business, is experiencing explosive growth buoyed by its successful strategic partnerships with Google and Salesforce.com. The company practices what it preaches -- choosing to keep all of its systems in the cloud. Appirio's senior leadership team is convinced that building its venture on the cloud offers extreme competitive advantages in terms of agility, ability to scale and employee empowerment to drive rapid innovation. Will Appirio ascend to rocket heights or are the skies darkening with challenges that will hurt a cloud pure-play such as Appirio? What lessons, if any, are there for other entrepreneurs hoping to turn their IT systems into an entrepreneurial growth engine?

Could a small, employee-owned company meet its ambitious growth goals without compromising its high-involvement culture? LightWorks Optics, based in Orange County, California, made highly sophisticated optical components for defense aeronautics, space exploration, and commercial applications. Early in its history, LightWorks had set up an employee stock ownership plan, or ESOP, under which employees gradually built up equity in the closely held firm. In 2007, the three founders indicated that they hoped to sell their shares to the ESOP trust in a leveraged buyout in 2012. In order for that to happen, the company needed to improve its revenue and profitability significantly; that, in turn, would require that it bring in more contracts, especially ones requiring high-volume production. But, LightWorks had to pay attention to its core capabilities and what it could, and could not, do effectively. Moreover, the company prided itself on its culture of ownership-one in which all employees had a stake in the business and a voice in its decisions. Could the president, Dan Barber, and his top management team reach a consensus on how to expand production without losing the benefits of a culture of ownership?