What I found most interesting in this weeks reading was the section about Corning. I was not aware that any companies still followed the centralized research lab set up that was so common a half century or more ago. It appears that success can still be had with this type of innovation strategy.
The section I found confusing was on Routine Innovation. And for the questions that I would have for the author would be at what point of change would an innovation be disruptive or radical instead of simply routine? Also due to the high cost of innovation in general, would it be a good trade off to try and tackle a radical innovation as the market leader?
There is nothing that i disagreed with in this article, it was well written and gave me further insight into the efforts companies must put into growth in improvement to stay alive.
No comments:
Post a Comment