Innovation Involves? MIT Slone on being Critical & Forbes on being Open Minded

Innovation, as a concept, has been gaining global interest for years now, but in 2015, interest in the concept, has sky-rocketed, as global leaders and business people, look to expand global growth, out of a slow global growth phase.

With that global interest in innovation, many turned to studying, the concept of  “Innovation” itself, including such global leading knowledge centers as MIT, Stanford and even top news units, such as Forbes News Group, that focuses on entrepreneurship.

1)

Definition:

A disruptive innovation is an innovation that helps create a new market and value network, and eventually disrupts an existing market and value network (over a few years or decades), displacing an earlier technology. Disruptive innovation, a term of art coined by Clayton Christensen, describes a process by which a product or service takes root initially in simple applications at the bottom of a market and then relentlessly moves up market, eventually displacing established competitors (See more):

Disruptive Innovation will ring a bell with fans of Joseph Schumpeter, on “Creative Destruction.” But both, Disruptive Innovation & Creative Destruction, does have a great many critics. One of them is MIT, ranked, one of the best university globally. And MIT said disruptive innovation may be right, but there is no substitute for “Critical Thinking.”

2)

Virtual Reality Review:

Yesterday, a well regraded tech research and review house, reports of its review of the first sports game, globally, to broadcast with Virtual Reality, with equipment from a high-tech firm that is a leader in the area. The review, basically, gave the product a very negative review, as providing a horrible experience. However, the review said, quote:

“This product could give us gimps into the future how sports will be watch.”

3)

MIT vs Forbes:

There is a great discussion & debate going on about Disruptive Innovation, pitching the likes of MIT Slone Management Review vs Forbes Magazine (1)

Slone has a good point that “Disruptive Innovation” is no substitute for “Critical Thinking” & Forbes has a good point that “Disruptive (2)

Innovation” cannot be stop, meaning, one has to be open to the concept & to me, based on the review of the Virtual Reality, I think both are right (3)

Think back to when the first episode of “Star Wars” hit the movie theatres, many prominent film critic, were critical, said movie a flop (4)

But “Star Wars” that first episode went on to “Revolutionized” the global film industry & think back to President Obama, in dealing with (5)

the financial crisis, propping up the US auto industry, investing government money into emerging industry & then at his health care (6)

When President Obama did those 3 things, among other, lots critics came out against those moves (7)

For example, Economist Magazine fiercely criticized Obama on US auto industry, some company, in emerging industry Obama got US government to invest in failed (8)

& look at Obama health care got trashed so badly, by a great many people, but u know what, in the end, Economist Magazine apologized to (9)

Obama on the US auto industry, then, there are important new technology discovered in some of those failed Obama companies in emerging industry, the Obama got the US government to invest in & the technology (10)

went on & became base for “Revolutionized” other industry & Obama’s health care saw millions upon millions more American with insurance (11)

I am in Thailand & I saw the same thing that occurred to Obama, occurred to a popular & elected Thai Prime Minister Thaksin (12)

Thaksin came out with a “Micro Finance” scheme (based on a Peru Economist thinking) called “Village Fund” & he was greatly criticized (13)

Thaksin came out with a “Universal Health Care” system & he was greatly criticized & there many more, i.e. Thaksin was a mobile phone (14)

business tycoon & he was criticized, for popularizing mobile phone, where the poor would buy his mobile phone, seen a wasteful spending (15)

But like Obama, with time, the most comprehensive research at global level found micro-finance such as Thaksin’s Village Fund, benefits (16)

the poor, & United Nations lauded Thaksin’s Universal Health Care & again, research found, mobile phone, do indeed, benefit the poor (17)

On this discussions & debate about “Disruptive Innovation” my point is not, that I lay blame, to the critics of people like Obama or Thaksin (18)

But I want to get back to what MIT Slone Management Review & Forbes Magazine has to say about “Disruptive Innovation” (19)

MIT Slone Management Review, basically say, we should remember to be “Critical” & Forbes Magazine, basically say (20)
we should keep an “Open Mind” (21)

In the end, for me, “Disruptive Innovation” from reading MIT Slone Management Review & Forbes Magazine, is about being, both (22)

“Critical & Open Minded” (23)

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s