Innov/Strat High
Megan Rizzi
Good afternoon everyone,
In milestone one, I chose discontinuous innovation based on the financial data that was provided to us. In the short term, incremental innovation would have provided a greater return on investment (ROI), however, over the long term (after year three), discontinuous innovation would provide the greater ROI. Along with the greater financial incentive, discontinuous innovation would allow our company to be at the forefront of market trends.
In milestone two, it was decided to that we would continue to move forward with discontinuous innovation. In order to manage the innovation process, it was decided that the use of the stage-gate process would allow for a “conceptual and operational road map to move our new-product project from idea to launch – a blueprint for managing the new-product process to improve effectiveness and efficiency” (Cooper, 2020). We do need to be flexible and ensure that we are taking into consideration the needs and wants of our consumers.
My recommendation for the organization structure promotes a climate for innovation by promoting collaboration and creating an environment that is conducive to experimentation. It is important that employees feel comfortable within their work to take chances and be able to stumble and learn.
Cooper, R. G. (2000). Winning with New Products: Doing It Right. Ivey Business Journal, 64(6), 54
Response –
Megan Scott
Initially in Milestone One, I erroneously chose incremental innovation. At that time, my line of thinking was based around short term profits and expenses. I thought that making small changes over time would be less expensive and would allow the company to “catch up” with the competition in regard to the amount of technology being implemented in the automobiles. That was obviously short sighted on my part as I clearly didn’t pay attention to the graphs we had created in Module Two when looking at the long term gains of each strategy, or perhaps I just didn’t put it all together quick enough that those charts were related to the companies. I blame a momentary lapse in my ability to think. However, after looking at the information again, it became apparent that discontinuous innovation was the right answer because the company was looking to implement new technology and race to be first to the market with a fully autonomous product, trying to claim as much market share as they could before the competition could make it to the market (Tidd, J., Bessant, J., Kouzes, J., & Posner, B., 2021, p. T-34).
In Milestone Two, I chose the stage gate process for product development. It made the most sense to me because it gives you the ability to take a moment to look at the project to see if it is still worth continuing forward with its development. If it is, you can continue looking at the market to see what customers are asking for and pivot your project to fit those needs. If it does not look like the project is going to get the results you were looking for, these breaks give you the chance to stop product development before any more resources have been exhausted. Between discontinuous innovation and the stage gate process, these two strategies will help drive new product development to get ahead of the competition while still providing an avenue to pivot or exit the project if it proves to not be successful.
Tidd, J., Bessant, J. R., Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2021). Innovation, Strategy, and High-Performance Organizations for Southern New Hampshire University. Wiley Global Education US.
Response –
