As medical researchers and pharmaceutical companies race to develop treatments and a vaccine for COVID-19, they show how repurposing knowledge, resources, and technology already at hand can be a valuable innovation strategy.
How does organizational decision-making change with the advent of artificial intelligence (AI)-based decision-making algorithms? This article identifies the idiosyncrasies of human and AI-based decision making along five key contingency factors: specificity of the decision search space, interpretability of the decision-making process and outcome, size of the alternative set, decision-making speed, and replicability. Based on a comparison of human and AI-based decision making along these dimensions, the article builds a novel framework outlining how both modes of decision making may be combined to optimally benefit the quality of organizational decision making. The framework presents three structural categories in which decisions of organizational members can be combined with AI-based decisions: full human to AI delegation; hybrid-human-to-AI and AI-to-human-sequential decision making; and aggregated human-AI decision making.
This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article. Most research on open innovation has focused on the use of ideas and knowledge from outside the organization in the development of products and services. But openness can be useful for process innovation, too. The authors' research shows that manufacturers can benefit substantially when they look for ideas beyond the factory gates, especially when their operations are already advanced. In this article, the authors analyzed nine years of survey responses from 1,000 Swiss manufacturers, as well as 200 interviews with personnel at the Volvo Group (AB Volvo), a manufacturer of trucks, buses, construction equipment, and marine and industrial engines that is based in Gothenburg, Sweden. Although the authors concede that some companies have good reasons for keeping process innovations concealed, they found that for many manufacturers, such defensiveness deprives companies of a valuable source of ideas for productivity improvement. The authors present six ideas to help manufacturing companies open up their innovation process. The first idea is to encourage factories within a large company to share innovative practices and success stories with one another. Companies that already do this informally, the authors say, can extend their activities with a systematic effort inside their factory networks and lay the groundwork for other open information sharing about processes. The second idea is to focus on the pace of process improvement. The third idea is to recognize that increased use of data access systems leads to greater production cost reductions. Customer relationship management, supply chain management, and enterprise resource planning software systems all require codification of tacit knowledge, which enhances a company's capacity to spread external process ideas and technology to the people who need it. As a fourth step, the authors recommend improving the organization's ability to absorb and implement ideas from
The companies that consistently generate revenues through innovation - GE, P&G, Nestle, and others - are highly selective about the projects they pursue.
The best way to foster an appreciation for intellectual property rights in China is to let partner firms experience the benefits of locally generated knowledge.
This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article. What is the optimum growth rate to maximize total return to shareholders? This is a critical question facing both managers and investors. An answer is found in the concept of a company's growth corridor, which is set by the upper bounds of a financially sustainable growth rate and the lower bounds of the competitive growth rate. Using data from Fortune Global 500 companies, the authors find that those companies that grow within their respective growth corridor create above average total shareholder returns. Drawing examples from companies such as AES, BMW, Marks & Spencer, Ao, and Wal-Mart, they show how managers can identify their growth corridors, and how they can restore healthy and smart growth.
We highlight 20 ideas just bubbling up to the surface in 2006. Howard Gardner contends that the ability to synthesize information will be the most valued trait for leaders. Dan Williams explores how body area networks can lower health care costs and improve safety. William McDonough describes China as a seedbed for environmental innovation. Nitin Nohria and Thomas A. Stewart say the next frontier for business will be managing incalculable uncertainty. Jeff Cares outlines the challenge confronting business as networks face off against networks. Claire Craig reports how scientists are going beyond the lab and using the world outside as their petri dish. Ted Halstead recommends that every newborn in America receive $6,000 as a down payment on a productive life. Georg von Krogh warns that customer-collaborators are starting to demand a stake in IP. Ged Davis envisions an OPEC-like organization to benefit consumers instead of producers. Nancy M. Dixon describes a model for peer-to-peer leadership development. Harris Allen and Sean Sullivan contend that investment in employees' health can pay for itself. David Weinberger says that stores should imitate Web design. Gerd Gigerenzer shows how a leader's personal rules of thumb influence employees. Zachary Karabell discusses the growing gap between nations' and companies' economic performance. Paul Hemp tells why avatars make good customers. Philip Parker explains why creating private labels for your retail customers is smart strategy. Judith Samuelson and Claire Preisser describe how companies are combating short-term thinking. George Stalk Jr. explains why many firms aren't benefiting from China sourcing. Michael S. Gazzaniga punctures inflated expectations about what neuroscience can do for business. E.L. Kersten says employees shouldn't expect their jobs to provide meaning. HBR also offers a list of important business books due out in 2006.
This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article. To grow steadily and avoid stagnation, a company must learn how to scale up and extend its business, lengthen its expansion phase, and accumulate and apply new knowledge to products and markets faster than competitors. Managers can't leave growth to chance. They need a plan that renders consistent sales growth over the long term--one that captures management's vision for expansion and that addresses the product and market combinations the company intends to pursue, the size it hopes to achieve in a particular time frame, and the know-how and organizational structures needed. Three thriving companies demonstrate three different strategies in action. The Netscape experience shows how a company can scale up--do more of what it already does well. Netscape went from $80 million in sales in 1995 to $500 million just three years later. IKEA used duplication by repeating the business model in new regions. According to the authors, IKEA's success is tied to the way it manages and transfers knowledge. SAP's growth strategy is an example of granulation--growing select business units. SAP started with a basic enterprise-resource-planning system, then moved to multiple products for e-commerce and Internet activities. Using one product as a platform, it began allowing customers to fine-tune virtually any resource-planning system. The authors emphasize the importance of combining strategies for growth with explicit strategies for learning. Companies must decide what kind of growth strategy they want to pursue, given their capabilities and market opportunities. They must then make the strategy work by changing their structure and processes in a way that lets them acquire or create specific knowledge about new technologies, customers, and industries.