Developing and Managing a Successful Technology & Product Strategy

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Symantec 2010 Windows 7 Migration EMEA Results. Methodology Applied Research performed survey 1,360 enterprises worldwide SMBs and enterprises Cross-industry.
Advertisements

Symantec 2010 Windows 7 Migration Global Results.
AGVISE Laboratories %Zone or Grid Samples – Northwood laboratory
AG Barr Proc 1 © The Delos Partnership 2003 Sales Forecasting and Demand Management The process.
& dding ubtracting ractions.
Operations Management Maintenance and Reliability Chapter 17
CHAPTER 4 Environmental Scanning and Industry Analysis
Purchasing and Supply Chain Management by W.C. Benton
10-1 McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2010 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
1 Science Technology and Innovation in the chemicals sector: the role of SusChem Andrea Tilche European Commission DG Research Head of the Unit « Environmental.
Addition and Subtraction Equations
Welcome to ! Entrepreneurial Marketing. Session 1: Entrepreneurship and Marketing.
Creating Value: Understanding patterns of market evolution.
TechnologyStrategy. What is a Successful Technology Strategy? VALUECAPTURE VALUEDELIVERY VALUE CREATION.
1. 2 Begin with the end in mind! 3 Understand Audience Needs Stakeholder Analysis WIIFM Typical Presentations Expert Peer Junior.
CALENDAR.
FACTORING ax2 + bx + c Think “unfoil” Work down, Show all steps.
1 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt Wants.
Year 6 mental test 10 second questions
© 2002 Prentice-Hall, Inc.Chap 17-1 Basic Business Statistics (8 th Edition) Chapter 17 Decision Making.
Part 1 Marketing Dynamics
A Fractional Order (Proportional and Derivative) Motion Controller Design for A Class of Second-order Systems Center for Self-Organizing Intelligent.
9th Northumbria International Conference on Performance Measurement in Libraries and Information Services York, UK. Aug. 22 nd – 26th, 2011 Leifang HeLeifang.
The basics for simulations
Operations Management For Competitive Advantage © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 2001 C HASE A QUILANO J ACOBS ninth edition 1 Strategic Capacity Management.
Chapter 5 – Enterprise Analysis
Steel - the road forward Nicholas Walters. Steel: A key driver of the worlds economy.
Table 12.1: Cash Flows to a Cash and Carry Trading Strategy.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2013 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc
PP Test Review Sections 6-1 to 6-6
Chapter 11 AC Power Analysis
Technology Forecasting Dr. Seth Bates – Tech 198 Unit 5: Technology Transfer and Assessment.
2014 Baldrige Performance Excellence Program | Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence.
Why Do You Want To Work For Us?
The Longevity Economy The Emerging Market in Plain Sight.
New-Product Development and Product Life-Cycle Strategies
Copyright © 2012, Elsevier Inc. All rights Reserved. 1 Chapter 7 Modeling Structure with Blocks.
Target Costing If you cannot find the time to do it right, how will you find the time to do it over?
Charging at 120 and 240 Volts 120-Volt Portable Vehicle Charge Cord 240-Volt Home Charge Unit.
Adding Up In Chunks.
Least Common Multiples and Greatest Common Factors
TCCI Barometer September “Establishing a reliable tool for monitoring the financial, business and social activity in the Prefecture of Thessaloniki”
1 Impact Assessment. 2 Demographics 3 Sex and Age.
MANAGEMENT RICHARD L. DAFT.
Lesson Menu Five-Minute Check (over Lesson 5–7) Main Idea and Vocabulary Key Concept: Percent of Change Example 1:Real-World Example: Find Percent of Change.
Before Between After.
Benjamin Banneker Charter Academy of Technology Making AYP Benjamin Banneker Charter Academy of Technology Making AYP.
 Find the difference between the two numbers on the red boxes.  If the difference of the red boxes matches the blue box say “deal” f not, it’s “no.
Purple Market Research at INSIGHT 2006 November 2006 OLD MEETS NEW : using the Delphi Method to research the latest technology.
Subtraction: Adding UP
1 Begin the Transformation: Mapping the Course DOWNLOAD ME!
Setting Product Strategy
Static Equilibrium; Elasticity and Fracture
Converting a Fraction to %
Numerical Analysis 1 EE, NCKU Tien-Hao Chang (Darby Chang)
PSSA Preparation.
International Strategy and Organization
Decision Analyst Prepared for: Strategic Research Analytics Modeling Optimization Inside The Mind Of the Residential Homeowner Consumer.
Motivation and Learning Work Preference Inventory: Intrinsic & Extrinsic Motivation.
Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten 05/04/15 Seite 1 Training EPAM and CANopen Basic Solution: Password * * Level 1 Level 2 * Level 3 Password2 IP-Adr.
Innovation Management
Material produced and owned by
KODAK Evaluate Kodak’s digital imaging strategy to date Evaluate Kodak’s digital imaging strategy to date –“B+” or “F”? How would you evaluate the decision.
Developing and Managing a Successful Innovation Strategy.
Generating Growth in the Operationally Driven Company Professor Rebecca Henderson MIT Sloan School of Management Phone: (617) ,
Managing Organizational Competence Professor Rebecca Henderson MIT Sloan School of Management Phone: (617) ,
Tehnoloogiastrateegia. “Laenatud” ettekanne Developing and Managing a Successful Technology & Product Strategy Prof. Rebecca Henderson, MIT
MAS967 Technology Strategy for New Enterprises Class 2: The evolution of industries, technologies & markets Professor Fiona Murray.
Stuck! Professor Rebecca Henderson & Professor Nelson Repenning
Presentation transcript:

Developing and Managing a Successful Technology & Product Strategy Professor Rebecca Henderson MIT Sloan School of Management Phone: (617) 253-6618, Email: Rhenderson@mit.edu, http://www.mit.edu/people/rhenders/home.html

Who are you, and why did you come?

Who am I? Eastman Kodak LFM Professor, MIT Sloan School SB in Mechanical Engineering, MIT PhD in Business Economics, Harvard Research focus: Building on technology to generate growth: why is it so hard and what can be done? Work in: Semiconductor capital equipment, Aerospace, Automotive, Branded Consumer Goods Pharmaceuticals & Biotech, IT, Telecommunications

What is a “strategy” anyway?

Effective strategies answer three key questions: How will we Create value? How will we Deliver value? How will we Capture value? 8

How will we create value? How will the technology evolve? How will the market change? How will we capture value? How should we design the business model? Where should we compete in the value chain? How should we compete if standards are important? How will we deliver value? How do we manage the core business and growth simultaneously? How do we use our strategy to drive real resource allocation?

Outline: Why do I need an innovation strategy? How will we create value? How will we capture value? How will we deliver value? Doing strategy in practice 4 85

Why have a strategy?

Why have a strategy? 1. To make choices

Is This Your Project Pipeline?

Overload at PreQuip Rate of Utilization (percent) –– 289.9 307.9 226.9 54 123 86 286 24 352 75 215 153 29 Resources Required for Completion (months) Active Projects 1 2 3 4 5 . 26 27 28 29 30 (formal development projects by number) Implied Development Resource Allocation (months) This year Next year Year after that 40 38 50 92 24 48 62 60 29 14 36 172 150 13 80 93 23 22 120 95 8 24 12 20 4 36 9 30 18 3 Months to Completion (desired) (customer support, troubleshooting) All Other Support Activity –– 430 Total Development Requirements –– 2783 2956 2178 Available Resources (months) –– 960 Rate of Utilization (percent) –– 289.9 307.9 226.9

Overcommitment destroys productivity Average Value-Added Time on Engineering Tasks 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 Number of Projects per Engineer

The Timing and Impact of Management Attention Phases Knowledge Concept Basic Prototype Pilot Manufacturing Acquisition Investigation Design Building Production Ramp-Up High ABILITY TO INFLUENCE OUTCOME Index of Attention and Influence ACTUAL ACTIVITY MANAGEMENT PROFILE Low

Why is it so hard to kill project #26? It’s a “good” project! Good managers can meet stretch goals (and I’m a good manager) Making difficult decisions takes time & energy It’s very hard to kill projects without a strategy

Reasons to have a strategy: 2. To be able to change it

A Key Framework: The industry life cycle Era of Ferment/ Discontinuity Maturity “Dominant design” emerges Incremental Innovation 14

The Industry Life Cycle as an S curve Performance Maturity Discontinuity Takeoff Ferment Time 6 17

The S-curve Maps Major Transitions Maturity Performance Discontinuity Takeoff Ferment Time 6 17

Transitions often challenge existing organizations severely

But they also create major opportunity Corning glass Cookware to optical fiber HP Instrumentation to computers IBM Mainframes to PCs to Services Eli Lilly “Random” drug discovery to genetics and genomics

Discontinuities are hard! Answers to the key strategic questions: How do we create value? How do we capture value? How do we deliver value? CHANGE!

Course Outline: First Day: Second Day: How will we create value? How will the technology evolve? How will the market change? How will we capture value? How should we design the business model? Where should we compete in the value chain? How should we compete if standards are important? Second Day: How should we deliver value? How do we manage the core business and real growth simultaneously? How do we use our strategy to drive real resource allocation? 4 85

How shall we create value?

The first of 3 key questions How will we Create value? How will we Deliver value? How will we Capture value? 8

Creating Value: Understand how technologies will evolve (Both your own and those on which you rely) Understand how customer needs will evolve Develop world class products and services that meet customer needs

Agenda Predicting Technological Change The Delphi Model Trend extrapolation Predicting the Evolution of Customer Needs Basic segmentation Crossing the chasm New technologies, new needs

Can one forecast the path of technological change? But Delphi models Forecasting by analogy Trend extrapolation

Delphi Models Ask the experts! Pros Cons A committee? Structured questionnaires? Pros Field experts are often years ahead of day to day practice: technologies do not “come from no where” Cons They sometimes have little knowledge of possible applications They can be enthusiastic

Forecasting by Analogy The Internet will be like: Personalized medicine will be like: The Xbox will be like:

Forecasting by Analogy Is nanotechnology like semiconductors? Or like biotechnology? Or like something else altogether?

Dimensions in Silicon and in Biology red blood cell ~5 m (SEM) diatom 30 m Simple molecules <1nm DNA proteins nm bacteria 1 m 10-10 10-5 10-9 10-7 10-6 10-8 10-4 10-3 10-2 m Photo credits, bio, L-R GFP: RCSB Protein Data Bank http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/ E.Coli: Dennis Kunkel http://www.pbrc.hawaii.edu/kunkel/catalog/by_category/ Red Blood Cells: James A. Sullivan, www.cellsalive.com Diatom: Dept of Biology, Indiana University Silicon, L-R CdSe nanocrystal: Andreas Kadavanich, Alivisatos Group, Dept of Chemistry, UC Berkeley Nanotube memory device: Lieber Group, Dept of Chemistry, Harvard University SOI transistor/Cu wiring/PowerPC Microprocessor chip: IBM SOI transistor width 0.12m semiconductor nanocrystal (CdSe) 5nm Circuit design Copper wiring width 0.2m Nanometer memory element (Lieber) 1012 bits/cm2 (1Tbit/cm2) IBM PowerPC 750TM Microprocessor 7.56mm×8.799mm 6.35×106 transistors control biological machines

Is nanotechnology like biotechnology?

Is nanotechnology like biotechnology?

Trend analysis The future is often much like the past, only more so

Trend extrapolation: Semiconductors

Issues in Trend Extrapolation Which parameter shall I predict? Do all good things come to an end? Exploring the difference between progress as a result of the passage of time, and progress as the result of returns to effort Predicting progress in complementary technologies

Do all good things come to an end? Technological exhaustion Physical limit? Performance Performance is ultimately constrained by physical limits E.g.: Sailing ships & the power of the wind Copper wire & transmission capability Semiconductors & the speed of the electron Time 9 20

Evolution of Measurement-While-Drilling tools S-Curve Physical limit: signal attenuation Continuous M.P. - FSK 3G Continuous M.P. - BPSK 3G Performance = Data Transmission Rate (bit per second) Continuous M.P. - 2G Shallow wells only All well conditions Continuous M.P. - 1G Positive Mud Pulse 2nd Generation Negative Mud Pulse Positive Mud Pulse Dominant Design = Continuous Mud Pulse Telemetry R&D Effort (measured in Generations = +/- 3 years )

The Evolution of Palomar’s Products: Laser Based Skin Treatment Ruby Laser Material Product Price Cost Year EpiLaser™ $150K $80K 1996 E2000™ $130K $60K 1997 LightSheer™ $100K $40K 1998 SLP1000™ $65K $25K 2000 EsteLux™ $40K $ 4K 2001 MediLux™ $50K $ 4K 2003 NeoLux™ $30K $ 4K 2003 StarLux™ $80K $ 5K 2004 Lux Handpieces $10K $ 1K 2002-4 Home Devices ? ? ? LightSheer 400 pounds MediLux 48 pounds 120 Pounds

Moore’s Law at Work 4.25 years 10x reduction every 7.5 years $1,000,000,000.00 10x reduction $100,000,000.00 every 7.5 years $10,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $100,000.00 10x reduction every 4.25 years $10,000.00 Dollars per MIP $1,000.00 $100.00 $10.00 $1.00 $0.10 $0.01 1959 1969 1979 1989 1999 2009 [Source: Hans P. Moravec 1998-2003]

Modeling the returns to effort vs. time Performance Performance may be a non linear function of effort expended: in mature industries more and more effort may lead to less and less progress, while progress in emerging industries may be “surprisingly” fast Effort 9 20

Reflections on the S Curve Which unit of analysis? Industry? Firm? Technology? Product? Which dimension of performance? Effort vs. time? Can performance limits be predicted? The S curve is best viewed as a tool for triggering discussion, not as a “scientific reality”

The Evolution of Markets or Predicting the pattern of customer needs

Market Evolution over the Life Cycle Market segmentation Crossing the chasm New markets, new needs: The Innovator’s Dilemma 29

The Key Question: Who buys a technology as it evolves? Performance Time 30

Understanding market dynamics: Basic segmentation (Rogers) Units Bought Early Majority Late Majority Early Adopters Laggards Innovators Time Adopters differ by, for example, social, economic status -- particularly resources, affinity for risk, knowledge, complementary assets, interest in the product 14 19 31

Understanding market dynamics: Crossing the chasm: (Moore) Units Bought Crossing the chasm? Early Majority Late Majority Early Adopters Laggards Innovators Time Making the transition from “early adopters” to “early majority” users often requires the development of quite different competencies: e.g. service, support capabilities, much more extensive training. 20 14 32

Managing customers at moments of discontinuity Who buys a technology when it is first introduced? Performance New technologies sell to: - New customers - With new needs - Often at lower margins Time 21 33

The Innovator’s Dilemma: “Disruptive” technologies may threaten established firms Invasive Technology Established technology Performance Mainstream customer needs Niche customer needs Time Clay Christensen: The Innovator’s Dilemma 34

Unpacking the Innovator’s Dilemma: The case of the power bar

Step & Repeat aligners initially sold to customers with different needs: Speed Scanning Projection Aligners Step & Repeat Aligners Yield 35

But then they improved enough to take the whole market Speed Scanning Projection Aligners Step & Repeat Aligners Yield 35

S&R 2 Scanning Projection Aligners S&R 1

Initially, PDAs did not seem to be a threat to PCs: Speed, Power, Memory PCs ? PDAs Time 35

PDAs sold to customers with different needs: Speed, Power, Memory PCs PDAs Weight/cost 35

But as PDAs improve they may come to challenge PCs ? Speed, Power, Memory PCs PDAs Weight/cost 35

Or consumer preferences may change Speed, Power, Memory PCs ? PDAs Weight/cost 35

Exercise: Industry Evolution Consider the two industries: Publishing (Books or music) Cellular telephony For each industry: Sketch the relevant S curves. What are the appropriate (technical) measures of performance? Are there more than one? Where is this industry now? Are there major growth areas or discontinuities on the horizon? Sketch the likely trajectory of customer needs Choose one industry and be prepared to present your results to the group 24

Managing the change in customer groups may be the hardest task! Performance Leading edge customer focused research may be a critical capability Effort 24 36

The marketing strategy issue at a major materials supplier: Biomaterials work CR&D SBU 3 SBU 2 SBU 1 ? ?

What can be done? “Ready, aim, fire” Small scale experiments Market research of all kinds: Conjoint analysis Direct customer contact Virtual products Lead user research Significant resources required?

Creating Value: Understand how customer needs will evolve Understand how technologies will evolve (Both your own and those on which you rely) Develop world class products and services that meet customer needs

How shall we capture value? Uniqueness, Complementary Assets & the Structure of the Value Chain

The second of two key questions: How will we Create value? How will we Deliver value? How will we Capture value?

How shall we capture value? How should we design the business model? Where should we compete in the value chain? How should we compete if standards are important?

Or: What determines the Inventor’s Share? Suppliers Customers Imitators, followers Inventor 54

Is it the case that great ideas = pots of money? Coca Cola Xerox (early) Wal Mart Viagra Dell Nylon Value captured Apple Xerox (late) RC Cola Value created (through “raw” invention) 53

Three key ideas: Uniqueness Complementary assets Controlling the knowledge generated by an innovation Complementary assets Controlling the assets that maximize the profits from innovating Understanding the dynamics of the value chain Should we buy our suppliers? Distributors? Should we outsource our manufacturing… distribution… sales… capability? 55 39

Uniqueness is very important: If a particular innovation, or the knowledge on which it rests, can be completely “appropriated” (i.e., completely controlled or protected) then the innovating firm may be able to maintain a unique position. This is a tremendous source of bargaining power. 58

Sources of Uniqueness Intellectual property protection Secrecy Speed Patents Finite length The right to prohibit “producing” Copyrights The right to prohibit “copying” Secrecy Trade secrets & non compete clauses “Tacit” knowledge Speed 59

IP in historical perspective

Boston University and NBER The 2003 Intellectual Property Owners Association Survey on the Strategic Management of Intellectual Property in America’s Corporations Iain Cockburn Boston University and NBER Rebecca Henderson MIT and NBER

Survey methodology Targeted at senior IP managers, typically Chief Patent Counsel Depth at the expense of breadth: 18 page questionnaire, more than 120 questions! Core sample frame: IPO membership, supplemented with additional mailing to Delphion list Response rate: 1/3 of IPO membership, 5% of others. N=66.

Sample characteristics Sample of responding companies dominated by large manufacturing companies Chemicals 22% IT and communications 44% Life sciences 15% Mechanical 16% Average sales $20bn, 2001 market cap $44bn Average of 14 full time IP attorneys, 264 patent applications, $91MM licensing revenue

We found: Many companies report limits to the effectiveness of patents: 43% (!) agree that “many of our most important ideas cannot be effectively protected with patents” Yet most rate formal IP rights the most important means of controlling the use of technology Contract law (NDAs, NCAs etc.) also highly rated

Strategic use of IP? Our overall impression is that the IP strategy of the majority of companies is defensive Non-confrontational responses to competitors Relatively conservative and cautious policies Companies are ambivalent about the role of IP in business strategy Many report that profitability and returns to R&D are linked to strong IP positions and aggressive strategic posture, but few report activity by their company consistent with this…

Competitive interaction in IP 65% of surveyed companies report that the most profitable companies in their industry “react aggressively to IP activity by competitors” But Less than 20% would attempt to “fence in” an aggressive competitor by building IP assets More than 90% do not “always evaluate competitor reactions” when filing patents Only 1/3 anticipate triggering an “arms race” if many new patents are filed

So It is critically important to proactively develop an IP strategy that is tightly integrated to the strategic goals of the business But…

Uniqueness is powerful but often difficult to maintain Legal mechanisms can be costly to create, and then even more costly to enforce: and sometimes they require public disclosure Secrecy may be difficult to maintain Speed is hard work, and sometimes imitable 60

What are Complementary Assets? Those assets that allow a firm to make money, even if the innovation is not unique: The answer to the question: If our innovations were instantly available to our competitors, would we still make money? Why? 61

In the best case, complementary assets should be tightly held Complementary assets that are tightly held are not easily available to entrants or to most competitors 62

Types of Complementary Assets Things you can do Manufacturing capabilities Sales and service expertise Things you own Brand name Distribution channels Customer relationships COMPETENCIES RESOURCES 63

In successful firms, competencies create resources, and vice versa:

Exercise: Complementary assets are: Uniqueness is: Position: Frozen foods Publishing Cell phones Your industry/firm Complementary assets are: Available Tightly held Easy to maintain Uniqueness is: Hard to maintain 67

Uniqueness & Complementary Assets over the Life Cycle: Maturity Takeoff Ferment 80 52

Managing discontinuities means managing complementary assets: Maturity Performance Discontinuity Takeoff Which of my complementary assets are useful? Ferment Time 6 17

Uniqueness & Complementary Assets: Strategic Imperatives Defend uniqueness if possible and appropriate Build complementary assets in advance of competition At moments of discontinuity ask: Are my complementary assets useful? If so, which ones?

How shall we capture value? How should we design the business model? Where should we compete in the value chain? How should we compete if standards are important?

Power in the Value Chain

Porter’s “5 (actually at least 7) Forces”: Thinking about the balance of power Political, regulatory and institutional context Entrants “Complementors” Suppliers Rivals Buyers Substitutes 69

C.Assets/Uniqueness speak to Rivalry and the Threat of Entry. Entrants Suppliers Rivals Buyers Substitutes 69

Porter reminds us to think about the structure of the value chain: Entrants Suppliers Rivals Buyers Substitutes 69

Powerful suppliers and buyers may constrain profitability 69

Does this mean that if the money is down (up) stream we should forwards (backwards) integrate?

If the money is in lobster restaurants, should the lobster fisherman go into the restaurant business?

Key Questions: When should an entrepreneurial firm develop it’s own: Manufacturing Distribution Sales ….. capabilities? When should a mature firm outsource it’s:

Exercise: Under what conditions should an entrepreneurial firm develop it’s own: Manufacturing Distribution Sales ….. capabilities? And when should it subcontract/partner for them?

Comparing “make” vs. “buy” Startup Asset Supplier Startup Asset Supplier

Key Considerations: How easy is it to write contracts? How tight is the IP regime? How much uncertainty is there? “Specificity” of the asset – how “thick” is the market? What will happen to “entrepreneurial energy”? What will be the key complementary assets going forward?

Make vs. Buy over the life cycle Performance Mostly Buy? Mostly Make? ???? ???? Time 6 17

So “make” (i.e. do it in-house) if: There are significant IP worries There are likely to be contractual problems We can’t be sure of getting the “fair” price We can’t be sure they’ll do the work “right” I.e., when market are “thin” or there is limited information We have unique competencies that are relevant And if buying won’t destroy everyone’s incentives to be creative and energetic

But remember… One cannot “buy” profit – if everyone knows it is there – it will be in the price Besides, shouldn’t we “stick to our knitting”? Wouldn’t you rather deal with an independent firm, whom you could fire, than an internal subsidiary?

Control & Coordination Make vs. Buy Entrepreneurial Drive, Freedom from the “old ways” Make Buy Control & Coordination

Standards and Strategy: Competing in Increasingly Open Worlds Professor Rebecca Henderson MIT Sloan School of Management Phone: (617) 253-6618, Email: Rhenderson@mit.edu, http://www.mit.edu/people/rhenders/home.html

What is a standard? A standard is a specification that allows for interoperability Eg: Cups and lids Pistons and engines Telephones and sockets Speakers and amplifiers Hardware and software

Questions: What is a standard? What are switching costs? What are network effects? What is positive feedback? What does increasing returns mean? What does it means when a market “tips”? What is lock-in? What is the significance of “winner-takes-all”?

Answers: A standard is a particular interface, format or system that allows for interoperability Switching costs are incurred when a customer changes from one supplier or marketplace to another. The greater the costs, the more difficult it is to switch A product or technology benefits from network effects or network externalities if a significant part of its value to a consumer lies in the size of its (actual or anticipated) installed base, or market share Positive feedback involves a chain of consequences that produces a dynamic outcome by feeding off itself – an amplification effect Success becomes self-reinforcing with increasing returns to scale. Demand creates further demand If consumers believe that one standard is going to capture a very large share of the market, and that a competing standard is not viable, then the market will “tip” towards the more successful standard Lock-in occurs once a market has tipped. Switching costs may be high, and it is therefore difficult to get a market to tip to an alternative standard The Microsoft operating system monopoly exemplifies “winner-takes-all”

Outline Moving from “product” to “systems” competition Coming soon to an industry near you: the push for public open standards Will all markets “tip”? – managing the complexity of standards evolution Making money in an open world

It’s not just about high technology Bicycles Financial services Health care Automobiles

The challenge Selling products Selling (parts of) interconnected Performance Selling (parts of) interconnected systems Time 6 17

Selling Interconnected Systems Selling Products Customers who care about products “on their own terms”: is this the right product for me? Build the “best” product Best designed Lowest cost Most reliable Selling Interconnected Systems Customers who care about the total system experience: will this connect with the rest of my world? Control the architecture Or Influence the architecture and build the best products within it

These transitions raise both strategic and organizational questions What strategy should we pursue? Performance How do we execute it? Time 6 17

The push for public open standards

The pros and cons of open standards

Thinking about the dynamics of the strategic space Access is: Open Closed Details of standards are available to all: no single firm has control over how they evolve: no charge for their use E.g. TCP/IP, HTML Standards are owned and controlled by the public sector but are not freely available E.g. Cryptography Public Control is: Details of standard are made available to all: but owner has control over how the standard evolves and may charge for use E.g. Nintendo, Palm OS Technology may be standard, but details are not made available beyond the firm E.g. Landmark Graphics, IBM 360 Private 64

In practice these boundaries are fuzzy: Access is: More Open More Closed More Public Linux Symbian Control is: IBM 360 CDMA Mercury/ Corba Windows More Private 64

Conventional logic (1): What do customers prefer? Access is: More Open More Closed More Public Control is: More Private 64

Conventional logic (2): What do producers prefer? Access is: More Open More Closed More Public Control is: More Private 64

Wireless communications in transition Market Share Service Provision T-Mobile Orange NTT DoCoMo Vodafone Network Operation Applications Vodafone Live! Nokia Symbian Series 60-90 Microsoft Linux Microsoft Live! Microsoft Windows UI Motorola Siemens Samsung Sony Ericsson UIQ SavaJe Operating Systems Windows Value Share Device Design Clones and Asians Device Manufacture EMS Players BREW Chipset Design Motorola I-250 and beyond Infineon Qualcomm W-CDMA Chipset Manufacture TI

Or: Getting a standard established Will all markets tip? Or: Getting a standard established

Tipping Markets “tip” when one standard becomes the preferred choice of nearly every consumer VHS Windows on the PC Not all markets tip: in some markets multiple standards co-exist UNIX vs. Windows on servers Sony vs. Microsoft in video games Palm vs. Windows CE in PDAs Multiple standards in cellular phones

“Great products” vs. “Architectures” Consumers base their purchase decision on the intrinsic value of the product to them What would this be worth to me if I were the only buyer in the world? Competition on the basis of features, price etc Architectures Consumers base purchase decisions on the size of the (actual or projected) installed base and/or the (actual or projected) availability of network externalities How many other people are likely to buy this product? Competition on the basis of the size of network effects: installed base, availability of complementary products etc

With Strong Network Effects Market Share Itself Creates Value Value of standards Driven product Value to consumer Conventional product Actual (or anticipated) size of the installed base 31 44

If network effects are important, markets may “tip” 1 Probability the next consumer chooses to buy A 28 A’s share of installed base 1 28 41

VHS Betamax

Tipping dynamics differ with the strength of network effects Products with extensive N.effects Value to consumer Products with “threshold” network effects Conventional product Actual (or anticipated) size of the installed base 44

Markets with moderate network effects only tip once critical thresholds are reached 1 Probability the next consumer chooses to buy from Firm A 1 Firm A’s actual or anticipated share of installed base

Will this market tip? Market Share Service Provision T-Mobile Orange NTT DoCoMo Vodafone Network Operation Applications Vodafone Live! Nokia Symbian Series 60-90 Microsoft Linux Microsoft Live! Microsoft Windows UI Motorola Siemens Samsung Sony Ericsson UIQ SavaJe Operating Systems Windows Value Share Device Design Clones and Asians Device Manufacture EMS Players BREW Chipset Design Motorola I-250 and beyond Infineon Qualcomm W-CDMA Chipset Manufacture TI

How are standards established? Standards “win” when a critical mass of consumers have adopted them OR: When a critical mass of key players believe that the standard will be adopted.

Establishing a standard: Sun Sun founded in 1982 to focus on the workstation market “Open” standard: Standard components, UNIX operating system

Sun (2) 1980: Apollo founded 1983: Apollo has $18m in sales, dominates the workstation market -- uses a proprietary operating system 1983: Sun has $1m in sales, mostly to universities Lead customer, Computervision “likes the technology but doesn’t find the company credible” -- “we love your technology but there is no way you can supply it. Apollo is the standard in the industry, well financed and well managed.” What should Sun do?

Establishing a standard Introduce a great “product” Come to market ahead of competition Build expectations Develop, or encourage the development of, complementary products and services Give it away: put the standard in the public sector

Making money in an open world

Where’s the money? Competition in a closed, private world

Where’s the money? Competition in an open private world

Where’s the money? The challenge of an open public world

Making money in an open public world Competing on a level playing field: Do it better, faster, cheaper, in a more integrated way… Leverage “complementary assets” Be part of the evolution of the playing field: Exploring “soft” standards

Business models in the different quadrants The technology is: Open Closed Compete on a level field Move to “soft” standards? Run hard Public Control is: Encourage the “ecosystem” Embrace/extend Run hard Deliver a best in class system Run hard Private 64

Exploring soft standards A “soft” standard is a specification that is completely compatible with current public standards but offers enhanced functionality and performance It offers customers the security of knowing that they have avoided being “locked in” and an upgrade path to the public standard Plus the functionality and performance of a more finely “tuned” technology May permit significant premium pricing and the generation of customer loyalty

Soft standards in action: Perf. Public standard Time

Managing soft standards Maintaining customer trust is critical: The instant they come to believe you’re trying to lock them in, there will be trouble The technology task is complex. The “soft” standard must be: Better than the public standard Compatible with the current version Compatible with future versions Ensuring that the “soft” technology is embodied in future generations of the technology may be a central strategic goal

Summary The move from “product” to “system” competitions raises both strategic and organizational issues And increases the force behind the push for open standards Not all markets tip: but as network effects (connectivity, complementary services, tools, products) become more important, more and more will. Getting a private standard established in these kinds of worlds is likely to be very hard Fortunately, there are ways to make money in an open world - but managing a “soft” standard requires sustained attention

Summary

Two day outline: How will we create value? How will the technology evolve? How will the market change? How will we capture value? How should we design the business model? Where should we compete in the value chain? How should we compete if standards are important? How will we deliver value? How do we manage the core business and real growth simultaneously? How do we use our strategy to drive real resource allocation?

Putting the pieces together…. Technology Competition Markets Organization Maturity Takeoff Ferment 87

Tomorrow: Organizational Competence & Change Performance ? ? Time 88

For tomorrow: KODAK Evaluate Kodak’s digital imaging strategy to date “B+” or “F”? How would you evaluate the decision to invest in digital imaging: In the 80s? In the 90s? Now? Given that they made the decision to invest, how would you evaluate their execution? What should Kodak do next? Where should they try to play in the digital value chain? How should they organize their digital efforts?