Log In   |  Register Free Newsletter Subscription
Skip navigation
Zibb
Subscribe to Manufacturing Business Technology
FirstLight 

What I Learned: Is Innovation or Product Pipeline Killing Profitability?

July 15, 2009

What I learned this week … came from Bill Poston at Kalypso in his reply to a Business Week article titled “Innovation Interrupted - The Failed Promise of Innovation in the U.S.” Bill’s commentary really got me thinking about a really fundamental question. BuinsessWeek June CoverDo companies have too few product innovation ideas, or are we just not good at turning those ideas into profitable products? It also made me ask a separate question, “is this really a U.S. -centric issue or is this a global issue?”

Overview

The original article, written by economist Michael Mandel, appeared in BusinessWeek in June. In the article, Michael makes some strong assertions that  the U.S. has not been as innovative over the last decade as it has been in the past, and goes further to point to this lack of innovation is a contributor to the current U.S. financial trouble. He points out a number of areas that held promise in the late 1990’s that failed to live up to market expectations, including:

  • Biotech
  • Alternative energy
  • MEMS (microelectromechanical systems)

Michael explains that “the commercial impact of most of those breakthroughs fell far short of expectations,” and points out the information technology (IT) market as the shining star of innovation over the last decade. What Bill picked up on was what I believe is the story within the story. In Bill’s words, “the problem is more often in the basic fundamentals of new product development and commercialization.” Mr. Mandel supports this as well by saying “Many of the technological high hope of 1998, it turns out, were simply delayed” and “if the current rate of commercialization picks up” the U.S. Economy may recover more quickly. Bill comes down clearly on his viewpoint, saying that “We do not believe that we lack the ability to deliver innovation nor that success is necessarily dependent on brilliant insights or strategies” but that companies “need to focus on the fundamentals and make better business decisions.”

My Perspective

Is this an innovation problem, or a product pipeline problem? Or am I just splitting hairs, and the definition of “innovation” should end with “to make a profit?” I think if I looked through my archives I would find that I define profitability as a core part of my definition of innovation. To me, this story (and Bill’s response) is what I hear from manufacturers everywhere I turn:

  • We have enough ideas, we just don’t know how to sort through them to find the valuable ones
  • We don’t have a process to effectively take innovation and turn it into profitable, commercial products

Digging deeper, we would probably hear:

  • We have too much junk in our portfolio / product pipeline
  • Our product pipeline is overloaded
  • We can’t move new product development projects through the pipeline fast enough
  • We don’t kill projects soon enough

What does all of this mean? Like Bill says, most companies are missing the fundamentals. There are very good, proven best practices that a lot of manufacturers have not adopted. Many companies face the same problems. They are solvable. A process for innovation is important, but a process to commercialize that innovation is a fundamental requirement for a commercial business.

Implications for Manufacturers?

The implications? I will keep this brief. Focus on innovation, but don’t just focus on coming up with great ideas. Focus on new product development and (like the tagline of my old company Sequencia) turning product innovation into profits! Sounds simple, but there is a lot of work to do and it is time to get started.

So that is what I learned this week, I hope you found it interesting. Let me know what you think.

Posted by Jim Brown on July 15, 2009 | Comments (1)

July 16, 2009
In response to: What I Learned: Is Innovation or Product Pipeline Killing Profitability?
Mark Senninger commented:

Jim,
I agree with what manufacturers are saying, and suggest that the majority of firms lack people who can lead innovation from invention through to market. Companies of all sizes have excellent leaders but not those who can move a discovery all the way through. Firms are populated with plenty of people who are leaders in their field but somehow the dots do not get connected.
Several generations of business leaders have evolved in an environment of hyper-focus on quarterly profit that has warped their vision and crippled their ability. They have produced astonishing financial results, worked hard, and guided their firms to monetary success. But this frequently has no lasting power. It is the kind of misdirected effort that, when carried to the extreme, is epitomized by CDOs and other new financial products. There is no physical product at all. And, worst of all, it is a house of cards, ready to collapse.
Improvements in both business and product development tools over the last several decades have amplified the impact of the greed that drives so many investments. The outstanding companies today have mastered these and produce superb innovation as well as very respectable quarterly and long term returns. Looking carefully at these, I see one inspired person who knows a successful innovation when he or she sees it and carries it completely through to market.
Modern firms have fine systems of product development, hard working executives and innovation teams, but often there seems to be no place for leaders to do what is needed to make an outstanding product. The established systems are so slick and efficient that they have often become meaningless. They have become obstacles to the very development they were made to support.
The lack of innovation is an indicator of just how far our real economy has fallen.

It seems our corporate system has stifled the leaders who have the inspiration, drive, and skills to truly lead product development. It still occurs, but the obstacles have increased and made it tougher to fully, passionately lead with the degree of commitment to deliver innovation.
It is no accident the Apple brought the iPhone to market, Toyota, the Prius, Google, the world’s finest search engine, outstanding email, and a wide variety of online apps. The story is repeated over and over in companies large and small. They each have leaders who have lived innovation from the ground up. They have either invented the product or been present when their team invented it. They were not financial or marketing powerhouses who took the lead of a company. They were innovators who either took the lead or created a new company.

I hope the focus swings more toward innovation serving people with great new products and away from quick profit. The money will follow, and we will rise out of the economic pit in which we now find ourselves.
Mark Senninger
www.innovationalive.com

POST A COMMENT
Display Name
captcha

Before submitting this form, please type the characters displayed above. Note the letters are case sensitive:

Advertisement
Advertisement
ARCbanner
NEWSLETTERS
Mid-Day Report
Innovation Strategies
Intelligent Manufacturing
Lean Enterprise



Please read our Privacy Policy

About Us   |   Advertising Info   |   Site Map   |   Contact Us   |   FREE Subscription   |   Affiliate Links   |   RSS
© 2009 Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Use of this Web site is subject to its Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
Please visit these other Reed Business sites