Many experts are urging established companies to radically innovate-and disrupt themselves before someone else does. The trouble is, large firms aren't designed for moon shots. Their owners don't like the risks and won't kill the goose that lays the golden egg. As a result, all too often they end up defaulting to incremental innovation. But there is a solution: Incumbents can partner with entrepreneurial start-ups or with intrapreneurs that have ideas for breakthrough products. By doing that, they can leverage their significant resources while increasing the odds that those ideas will take off. This approach does require careful management, however. Drawing on the experiences of more than a dozen large multinationals, including Atlas Copco, Enel, and Epiroc, this article outlines a three-stage innovation process for incumbents to follow: First, set up numerous projects with multiple partners, nurturing them until their chances of success become clear. Next, once a venture has a breakthrough, gradually increase your commitment and help it remove roadblocks. Finally, when its business model is viable and it has a critical mass of customers, rapidly mobilize the resources it needs to scale up quickly.

Research into how some industrial companies have succeeded at digital transformation shows that those taking a steady, gradual approach may have the best results and the lessons learned apply across other sectors as well. The authors discuss the circumstances in which company leaders might be best served by taking a more incremental approach to digital business, and when they might choose to pursue a more revolutionary change.

For manufacturers, remaining competitive depends on their ability to digitalize their business models (i.e., offer digital and digitally enhanced products and services). To achieve this, they must engage with new digital partners and help their existing suppliers, partners, and other stakeholders to digitalize. Orchestrating this growing ecosystem is challenging. Manufacturers struggle with this endeavor because of specific barriers associated with their existing legacy business model and related to their lack of digital vision, product-centric value chains, and a bias toward firm-centered profit formulas. To overcome these barriers, leading manufacturers have developed new approaches to ecosystem orchestration.

How do incumbent firms respond over time to a potentially disruptive technology? This article documents the strategies of 12 large pharmaceutical firms over 25 years as they addressed the opportunity/threat of biotechnology. All showed awareness of biotechnology's potential, but their response profiles varied dramatically in terms of timing (early/late) and focus (external/internal). Late movers mostly made large acquisitions to "catch up," but early movers maintained their lead in terms of biotechnology-based drug sales and profitability, and those with a more "open" response profile performed better. This response involves a three-step process: building awareness (sensing), building capability (responding), and building commitment (scaling).

Governing a city is arguably one of the most complex management tasks facing organizational leaders. Based on an analysis of Vienna, London, and Chicago, this article demonstrates that city leaders treat cities as ecosystems, structured and governed either as "extended enterprises" where inputs from specialized organizations are coordinated and integrated into the final service or as "platform markets" where direct interactions between third-party service providers and citizens are facilitated by the city leaders. If cities are viewed as the "ecosystem of ecosystems," then successful city governance requires an orchestration approach where leaders choose the appropriate structure and manage the ecosystem dynamically in a constantly changing environment.