個案總覽

Crowdfunding is attractive to startups as an alternative funding source and offers nonmonetary resources through organizational learning. It encompasses the outsourcing of an organizational function, through IT, to a strategically defined network of actors (i.e., the crowd) in the form of an open call-specifically, requesting monetary contributions toward a commercial or social business goal. Nonetheless, many startups are hesitant to consider crowdfunding because little guidance exists on how the various types of crowdfunding add value in different life cycle stages and which type is best suited for which stage. In response to this gap, this article introduces a typology of crowdfunding, the benefits it offers, and how specific benefits relate to the identified crowdfunding types. On this basis, we present a framework for choosing the right crowdfunding type for each stage in the startup life cycle, in addition to providing practical advice on crowdfunding best practices. The best practices outlined have shown demonstrable contributions toward achieving funding goals and are likely to prove valuable for startups.

Websites such as Indiegogo and Kickstarter have attracted much attention for their ability to enable organizations and individuals to raise funds from ordinary people, who contribute for a number of reasons. This phenomenon is called crowdfunding. Crowdfunding permits organizations and individuals to obtain investments they otherwise might not receive from more traditional sources such as banks, angel investors, and stock markets. A number of now well-known startups had their origins in crowdfunding. More recently, established organizations have begun to use crowdfunding websites not only as a source of finance, but also as marketing platforms. In this way, they have been able to ensure a ready market for their new offerings, with full sales pipelines, and to use the platforms as vehicles to boost brand image and gain support for brand-related causes. This adaptation of crowdfunding for marketing purposes is not without its problems, however, and organizations would be well advised to consider not only the opportunities these platforms provide, but also their limitations and risks.

The benefits provided by employment and identified with a specific employing company are referred to as employer branding. We argue that when employees use IT to transmit employer branding-sharing and accessing work-related experiences openly across organizations-their expectations and assessments of workplaces change. We collected 38,000 reviews of the highest and lowest ranked employers on Glassdoor, an online crowdsourced employer branding platform. Using IBM Watson to analyze the data, we identify seven employer branding value propositions that current, former, and potential employees care about when they collectively evaluate employers. These propositions include (1) social elements of work, (2) interest and challenge raised by work tasks, (3) the extent to which skills can be applied in meaningful ways, (4) opportunities for professional development, (5) economic issues tied to compensation, (6) the role of management, and (7) work/life balance. We clarify that these value propositions do not all matter to the same extent, and demonstrate how their relative valences and weights differ across organizations, especially if institutions are considered particularly good or bad places to work. Based on these findings, we show how employers can use crowdsourced employer branding intelligence to become exceptional workplaces that attract highly qualified employees.

Tapping into the creativity of a crowd can provide a highly efficient and effective means of acquiring ideas, work, and content to solve problems. But crowdsourcing solutions can also come with risks, including the legal risks associated with intellectual property. Therefore, we raise and address a two-part question: Why-and how-should organizations deal with intellectual property issues when engaging in the crowdsourcing of solutions? The answers lie in understanding the approaches for acquiring sufficient intellectual property from a crowd and limiting the risks of using that intellectual property. Herein, we discuss the hazards of not considering these legal issues and explain how managers can use appropriate terms and conditions to balance and mitigate the risks associated with soliciting solutions from a crowd. Based on differences in how organizations acquire intellectual property and limit associated risks, we identify and illustrate with examples four approaches for managing intellectual property (passive, possessive, persuasive, and prudent) when crowdsourcing solutions. We conclude with recommendations for how organizations should use and tailor the approaches in our framework to source intellectual property from a crowd.

Crowdsourcing is the deliberate use of crowds to solve problems, create new products, and improve consumer experiences. When used by brands, crowdsourcing engages consumers by asking them to be part of a deliberate call to action. Crowdsourcing provides interesting and dynamic marketing opportunities for brands, given the consumer engagement it entails. This conceptual study examines the literature on crowdsourcing and brand community, and makes a series of propositions regarding this rich marketing arena. Herein, we discuss managerial implications of the relationship between crowdsourcing and brand community dynamics and propose a typology for brands to better assess customer bases and market realities.

When managers are unable to use quantifiable time series data to make forecasts or decide on uncertainties, they can either rely on their own intuition and judgment or resort to the insights of others. The Delphi technique is a well-known forecasting technique that relies on the pooled perspectives of experts to predict uncertain quantities or the outcomes of events. This relies on polling the opinions of experts, aggregating these opinions, feeding them back to the responding experts along with their own estimates, and having them repeat their judgment calls until some level of consensus is reached. More recently, however, the opinions of many others who are not experts have been sought on a range of topics in a loose assembly of similar techniques bundled under the title of crowdsourcing. This article compares Delphi and crowdsourcing as prediction and estimation tools for managers. It notes their differences and similarities, and provides a simple tool for executives to use in deciding whether or not to use these tools, and if so, which tool or combination of them will work best in a given situation.

Advances in digital technologies have increased the possibilities for outsourcing business activities to crowds of independent contributors. Using the collective intelligence of a crowd opens a new range of business opportunities. In fact, crowdsourcing has led to the emergence of entirely new business models. Such crowd-based business models (CBBMs) can lead to an important competitive advantage while simultaneously presenting new challenges to entrepreneurs and executives. The author identifies and discusses three key challenges in designing and managing CBBMs: determining (1) the crowd's value to the firm, (2) how to create superior value for the crowd, and (3) how to capture value from the crowd effectively. Building on the crowd capital perspective and an analysis of the tactics and practices of successful CBBMs, this article offers propositions on how to overcome these challenges and manage such business models effectively. The identified practices can inspire decision makers when designing innovative CBBMs for their industries. Finally, the article concludes with a framework with the key decisions and tactics for effectively managing CBBMs.

Crowdsourcing can test a company's willingness to relinquish control to key stakeholders. Using past examples of four failed crowdsourcing initiatives, we explore the negative and unintended consequences of crowdsourcing in an age when stakeholders are empowered to speak their minds, make a mockery of organizational initiatives, and direct initiatives as it suits their own agenda. The concepts of crowdthink and crowd hijacking are introduced, and advice is given on how managers can avoid or anticipate some of the potential issues that arise during crowdsourcing endeavors. With these considerations, managers can harness the power of crowds effectively to achieve organizational goals with limited negative consequences.

Vertical integration, a major competitive advantage at Tiffany, is entrenched for two reasons: a deeply held belief that great houses of luxury should craft their own designs, and an equally strong conviction that diamond traceability is the best means of ensuring social and environmental responsibility. Tiffany's focus on sustainability began about 25 years ago, in the context of growing awareness about the toxic chemicals used in extracting precious metals and about "conflict diamonds" from countries at war. Since then the company has been an industry leader in addressing environmental and human rights concerns. Its stones are laser-inscribed with microscopic codes indicating their provenance so that Tiffany can ensure its chain of diamond custody.

For much of the past five decades, financial capital was considered a scarce resource. Today, however, capital is abundant and cheap, and the authors expect that to be the case for another 20 years or more. They point out that global financial assets have been growing faster than global GDP, and they explain why that trend is likely to continue. They note, too, that as the supply of capital has increased, the cost has plunged, making it possible for many large firms to borrow funds for next to nothing. What all this means is that companies can no longer sustain competitive advantage simply by allocating capital skillfully. In this new climate, the authors argue, business leaders need to lower hurdle rates and change their investment strategy, moving away from a few big bets and instead pursuing numerous small, varied growth opportunities. Not all will pan out, but embracing the risk of failure is necessary for success. Executives must also recognize that human capital is the truly scarce resource today. Organizations need to manage their workforces as carefully and rigorously as they manage their financial assets, unleashing and supporting the talent within their organizations.

Although CEOs are charged with recognizing when their firms need a major change in direction, their power and privilege often insulate them from information that would help them perceive looming opportunities or threats. No one in the company wants to tell the CEO of problems, much less that he or she is mistaken. In interviews with 200 executives, Gregersen came across hardly any who didn't recognize this challenge. But he also saw that a few innovative leaders, like Walt Bettinger of Charles Schwab and Marc Benioff of Salesforce, have found a way to overcome it. Such executives take pains to get honest feedback from a broad range of constituents. They also venture off the beaten path, regularly putting themselves into situations where they are unusually uncomfortable, unexpectedly wrong, and uncharacteristically quiet. This helps them ask the right questions, discover new insights, and detect early weak signals of impending market shifts.

Aspiring to be innovative and agile, today companies of all shapes and sizes want to recruit entrepreneurial managers. But most firms lack a scientific way to separate the true entrepreneurs from other candidates. To address that problem, Butler compared the psychological testing results of over 4,000 successful entrepreneurs and of some 1,800 business leaders who described themselves as general managers but not as entrepreneurs. His analysis uncovered three factors that differentiate entrepreneurs: "thriving in uncertainty," a "passion for ownership," and unique "skill at persuasion." In this article Butler dives deep into the skills, mindset, and traits of entrepreneurs, explaining what the stereotypes about them often miss. For instance, they aren't always more creative or in love with risk, but they are deeply inquisitive, open to new experiences, and comfortable with the unpredictable. He also offers evidence-based, practical advice for interviews and resume screening that hiring managers can use to identify entrepreneurial leaders.

For years, Walmart's unrivaled customer research capabilities helped it dominate retailing. Then along came the internet, and Walmart suddenly found itself playing catchup to e-commerce pioneers like Amazon. In 2014 the board appointed Doug McMillon as CEO and gave him an imperative: Bring Walmart into the future--without sacrificing its longtime strengths. McMillon, who began his career unloading trucks at a neighborhood Walmart, respects tradition but is impatient for change. In this interview with HBR editor in chief Adi Ignatius, he describes the ups and downs of transforming America's largest company. Going digital is a top priority--which is why Walmart recently paid $3 billion to acquire e-tailer Jet.com. But the company also wants to strengthen the in-store experience. "The reality," notes McMillon, "is that customers want everything"--low prices, convenience, and seamless interactions online and in person. In this new world, all employees, including those on the sales floor, will need to be tech savvy. And the management team can no longer make strategic decisions on an annual or even quarterly basis; "strategy is happening on a much faster cycle time," says the CEO.

In many industries today--including aerospace, electronics, chemicals, software, global construction, global investment and commercial banking, and international manufacturing--even simple product or service innovations can become complicated, because so many companies now operate in ecosystems made up of powerful and highly interconnected stakeholders. That means you can't focus exclusively on the customer and yourself: You need value propositions that stakeholders in your ecosystem can also buy into, which vastly complicates the process of identifying innovation opportunities. The authors have developed a tool-based ideation process that a major pharmaceutical company has rolled out worldwide. They describe the six steps in the process: (1) Identify key stakeholders and their most pressing needs; (2) outline stakeholder consumption chains; (3) categorize features of the current offer and build offer profiles; (4) create growth opportunity profiles; (5) map stakeholder tensions; and (6) choose your best opportunity.

Brands spend billions of dollars a year on lavish efforts to establish and maintain a social media presence. But do those campaigns actually increase revenue? New research provides an answer to this question, which has vexed marketers ever since social media burst upon the scene. In a series of experiments, the researchers tested four increasingly interactive ways in which Facebook might affect customers' behavior. First, they explored whether liking a brand--passively following it--makes people more likely to purchase it. Second, they examined whether people's likes affect their friends' purchasing. Third, they looked at whether liking affects things other than purchasing (for example, whether it can persuade people to engage in healthful behaviors). And fourth, they tested whether boosting likes by paying to have branded content displayed in followers' news feeds increases the chances of meaningful behavior change. The results were clear: Merely liking a brand neither increases purchasing nor spurs friends to purchase more. Supporting likes with branded content, however, can prompt meaningful behavior change.

B2B customers are deeply uncertain and stressed. With virtually infinite information available on any solution, a swelling raft of stakeholders involved in each purchase, and an ever-expanding array of options, customers are increasingly overwhelmed and often more paralyzed than empowered. The authors' solution, developed through work with hundreds of sales organizations globally, is a proactive, take-charge prescriptive approach that sweeps away obstacles and guides customers through decision making. Companies that have mastered prescriptive selling share a set of practices: They work to understand customers' purchase journeys; identify significant customer challenges at each buying stage; arm their sellers with tools to help overcome each challenge; and track customers' purchase progress so that they can intervene to keep the process on track.

Companies must reorganize periodically to keep pace with changes in market conditions. But executives grapple with conflicting advice about whether, when, and how to do so. The term "reorganization" encompasses two distinct change processes: restructuring and reconfiguration. Each delivers value if pursued in the right way. "Restructuring" involves changing the structures around which resources and activities are grouped and coordinated--for example, function, business line, customer segment, technology platform, geography, or a matrixed combination of these. "Reconfiguration" involves adding, splitting, transferring, combining, or dissolving business units without modifying the company's underlying structure. The goals for both tend to be the same: to boost innovation and, ultimately, financial performance. But the authors' research shows that success is almost always situational. In this article, they offer four guidelines to help companies decide which type to pursue when, how to space their reorgs, what should be reorganized, and what else needs to change in the process.

Early-stage research is expensive, risky, and unpredictable--so corporations generally shy away from it, leaving many opportunities unexplored. They could revitalize their research operations by adopting the approach taken by Bob Langer, a chemical engineer whose lab at MIT is one of the most productive and profitable research facilities in the world. HBR senior editor Steven Prokesch reports in depth on Langer Lab's proven formula for accelerating the pace of discoveries and getting them into the world as products. It includes: (1) a focus on high-impact projects--ones that could make a major difference to society; (2) a process for crossing the proverbial "valley of death" between research and commercial development; (3) methods for facilitating multidisciplinary collaboration; (4) ways to make the constant turnover of researchers and the limited duration of project funding a plus; and (5) a leadership style that balances freedom and support. By drawing on the Langer Lab values and model, companies could make the world a better place--and make lots of money in the process.

If your company is undergoing a merger or acquisition, you're apt to feel anxious. Roughly 30% of employees are deemed redundant when firms in the same industry merge. But you needn't dread the outcome, say the authors, who draw on their experience as academics and consultants. They've found that employees usually reap great rewards if they embrace the M&A process as a chance for introspection and growth. Your first step should be to figure out where you stand. The authors recommend conducting a SWOT analysis: Assess your strengths and weaknesses and the opportunities and threats that the deal presents. Then get involved in the integration effort--in a way that lets you showcase or sharpen your skills. Executing transition plans, innovating, and collaborating with new colleagues are all postmerger opportunities for personal growth. If you prove adept, you will be well positioned for success in the hybrid organization--or at another company. The authors suggest specific questions to ask yourself as you take stock of the situation. They provide tips on how to make sure you have a role in the integration work. And they present brief case studies of four professionals who followed the recommended approach and emerged from their companies' M&A deals as "winners."

The famous Duke University basketball coach discusses his four-decade career, how he recruits and disciplines his players, the difference between college basketball and Olympic basketball, and how he views retirement.