|
Post by David Wyld on Nov 22, 2013 22:07:00 GMT -6
Students, Please view and comment on this link of the day - yes, for your education, but also for the points, of course! Watch the video below: TITLE - Tom Peters - Off the Cuff: Innovation Within Large CompaniesThen, post a comment in reply to this discussion thread. Again, what to post? Here are some ideas: + What did you take away from the video? + How does the video relate in some way to your past experience (work, as a consumer, family, school, etc.)? + How might you use these ideas in your own career? Good luck! David
|
|
|
Post by sunnigrabert on Dec 8, 2013 19:19:58 GMT -6
I don't think I like Tom Peters. He says good things, but when he talks he sounds incredibly negative. It makes me not want to listen to what he says.
|
|
|
Post by bethanyhunt on Dec 10, 2013 17:31:45 GMT -6
Sometimes big companies think they can't be innovative enough or any more so they buy other companies that may not be at their level yet. The big company doesn't really resolve their initial issue of low innovation, but instead just buys a smaller company to put some of their ideas into. But like Tom says, if the situation seems hopeless, you might as well try something else more interesting.
|
|
|
Post by pellirf22 on Jan 29, 2014 16:39:09 GMT -6
TITLE- Tom Peters- Off the Cuff: Innovation Within Large Companies
Big companies have such a firm foundation both in their business and with their product that they obviously aren’t going to make huge changes in innovation. Rather they continue doing what they have seen work and add to their possibilities by buying small businesses that can contribute to their overall success. Continuous innovation is surely the goal of these big companies but it seems nearly impossible for businesses of this status to make drastic changes in innovation.
|
|
|
Post by kelseywatson on Jan 29, 2014 17:10:36 GMT -6
I learned some new things from the innovating with large companies video. Large companies have poor performance according to this video because they become conservative as they grow. This inhibits innovation. Employees who are innovators end up leaving to go to smaller companies because they don't want to be limited.
|
|
|
Post by rjmonico on Jan 29, 2014 21:48:16 GMT -6
I would definitely share this video with colleagues and friends! Thank you Professor! I would have never thought that a big company would not really take big risks when it comes to innovation. Tom Peters points out that a company like Microsoft would be involved in a merger before making a significant change in innovation. I have worked for big corporations in my lifetime and never really thought about a company not taking big risks in order to acquire more in their particular industry. I now see how these big companies stay in business for a long time!
|
|
|
Post by wwerner on Feb 4, 2014 11:38:48 GMT -6
Of course companies like Microsoft are not going to take a chance a create something drastically new. Because if they create a new product no one has seen and the consumers do not like it then Microsoft will take a huge hit to their stock price. That's why Microsoft just buys out other companies that have created a niche in the market and they know there service is valued by the consumers. It is a win win situation for the small company, Microsoft and us the consumers.
|
|
|
Post by kati3 on Feb 6, 2014 15:51:02 GMT -6
In some situations it just doesn't make sense to come up with something completely new. Microsoft understands this and just buys other companies and builds on them instead of hitting people with something they know nothing about. Microsoft comes out with updated versions of Office every three years instead of completely revamping their product they just build on what people are already familiar with which makes it a popular product that is consumer friendly. I couldn't imagine having to completely relearn an Office program every three years. Sometimes it is just more realistic to introduce advancements to people gradually.
|
|
|
Post by racheleperes on Feb 6, 2014 22:37:42 GMT -6
I agree with him. It's important for large companies to keep innovating if they want to keep their customers. As technology changes, it is important that businesses change to fit those technological changes. Social media is a huge innovative change in the business world, so businesses should get their name out on social media so that they stay current and stay connected with their customers, as well as reach out to future customers. I also agree with the point that he said Apple will no longer be relevant in 20 years. I find that to be true because in the smartphone market, they are not as technologically innovative as the other smartphone companies. The same also goes with Apple computers. Right now in the market, touchscreen and more innovative computers are the latest thing; Apple has yet to manufacture or release news they would ever manufacture touch screen computers for everyday use. If Apple does not make their products more innovative, they won't make it much longer on the market.
|
|
|
Post by brittanycompton on Feb 6, 2014 23:18:01 GMT -6
I do understand that large companies want to have conservative employees in a sense inorder to protect their wealth. I think that kind of discourages people who have these innovative ideas. i think that some of these companies taking more innovative and completely new ideas are good not only for them but the consumer what new and exciting thats why they come out with anew iphone every year. but in reality its not much different from the previous one. i think these companies who use more conservative investors and suppliers are being greedy. I have always thought that by now our technology would be much more advanced and i think this issue is due to this.
|
|
|
Post by ken9390 on Feb 7, 2014 8:15:10 GMT -6
I will start by saying I have not done my own statistical research on the innovative tendencies of large companies, so I almost have to just accept what Tom Peters is saying at this moment until I do so. This video made him sound somewhat condescending, but there was still some validity in what he had to say. The Microsoft point was a valid one, and it will curious to see how it plays out over the next few years.
|
|
|
Post by darnette on Feb 8, 2014 23:52:56 GMT -6
Large companies are not always relying on the ideas of smaller and newer companies. I work for Walmart distribution center and we are always improving how we do things at the warehouse. But Walmart in general are always coming up with creative ideas and innovations. Where are most of the ideas coming from? Their associates. They are the people dealing with the day to day operations of the stores and warehouses so who better to know how to improve day to day operations to continue to live up to the company motto?
|
|
|
Post by mwinner123 on Feb 9, 2014 14:31:11 GMT -6
This is a very interesting video, because it would easily cause a large debate among different opinions. Using Apple for example, in 2007, the iPhone was released and completely revolutionized the way that phones were used. However, over the years, the iPhone has been labeled as "boring" because it doesn't allow you to have the same freedoms that the Galaxy phones may have. Whenever we get minor upgrades to each iPhone, it is labeled as dumb or "Apple is doomed". I think we often get so spoiled with our gadgets that any little upgrade is never enough. Now, I do understand the politics aspect of larger businesses. Whenever you get so large, workers are generally forced at being stuck in one position because the big shots and CEO's are calling every shot and are very reserved about keeping their long earned customer base and success. I believe that, in order to begin moving forward again, each business and person needs to work together and not always be in such a super rush to find that one special feature that wears off in 2 years. Along with that, big companies should listen to each level of their employees, especially the ones who are hands on every day within the business.
|
|
|
Post by asanchez on Feb 9, 2014 17:57:44 GMT -6
I don't know if I agree with the way he characterizes Apple as a anomaly. I think what Apple does is great. I like their unconventional unconservative approach to business. I think Google is the same way. In my opinion, it is companies that break away from convention and conservative ideas that make a mark on this world. I'd rather be anything but conventional and it sounds like he's acting like there's something to be proud of in being mediocre. I just don't think he can say for a fact that Apple and Facebook are going to go the way of Microsoft. Microsoft was never the "cool" company. Sure they had inventions and people liked the products, but the cool factor was always dominated by Apple.
|
|
|
Post by godwesso on Feb 9, 2014 23:49:15 GMT -6
Obviously innovation within big companies is very slow and takes times due to the size, bureaucracy and resources involved. One thing I learned from this video was the conservative nature of huge corporations and how goals of companies change over the long term. Am believer in longevity of businesses that keep up with trends and are innovative, despite what Peters said about the companies being non existent in the long run. I still think times and technology will allow for companies to keep staying relevant over the long run.
|
|