Session 3 , January 19, 2016
Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J. M. Innovation management tools
Group 6
–
13:57 » Was there examples about the industries that are implementing or would most benefit from
technology watch? Is this rather industry specific?
13:55 » Also innovation doesn't happen in a vacuum
13:53 » No
13:53 » no
13:50 » 4
13:50 » 4
13:49 » 4
13:49 » no
13:48 » So there are softwares implementing the TW, but who in the company uses it; the Head of
IT, product development or business development, or all of them in collaboration?
13:48 » Can the same people be observers and analysts? Who should the be assigned to these roles
(researchers, consultants etc)?
13:48 » What's benchmarking to do with innovating?
13:48 » 4 -- good presentation, nice examples
13:48 » Is there a way you could implement TW to gather information from services?
13:48 » 4
13:48 » no
13:47 » 5
13:47 » What's your own opinion in the usefulness of TW? Would you use it in your own
corporation or firm?
13:47 » 5
13:47 » good slides 4
13:46 » no
13:45 » Is this tool only used by large corporations? Sounds a bit heavy for small companies or
startups...
13:44 » Will the top management be interested in TW?
13:43 » Where are the pictures from?
13:42 » Technology watch sounds quite a heavy process to implement? Any examples to reflect on
or contradict this assumption?
13:40 » I find the lean startup methodology with the lean startup process more up-to-date and
compelling http://theleanstartup.com/principles
13:39 » no
13:39 » no
13:39 » No
13:38 » no
13:38 » no
13:37 » no
13:37 » Nice summarization
13:37 » Good explanation
13:37 » Yes :)
13:37 » no
13:37 » good outline
13:36 » NO!
13:36 » YES
13:36 » no
13:36 » No
13:36 » no
13:36 » No
13:36 » No :(
13:36 » NO
13:36 » Yes
ChatS3 - Pisano, G. Profiting from innovation and the intellectual property revolution
28 22h ago
S3 - Pisano, G. Profiting from innovation and the intellectual property revolution
Group 5
–
13:34 » pretty plain looking slide show
13:33 » 3
13:33 » next presenters!
13:32 » lets end this
13:31 » Yes -- 4 --- Good job!
13:29 » Can you think of an example where firm influences is appr. regime to be tighter?
13:28 » Yes, he did
13:28 » Invention is the idea - not necessarily profitable, innovation is when you make it profitable.
13:28 » innovation must bring it
13:28 » invention doesn't necessarily brings value
13:28 » Did Pisano think that Teece's article was still valid?
13:28 » you made me feel sleepy
13:27 » 3
13:27 » 3
13:27 » Yes - 4 - Great presentation, but a bit too long
13:27 » 4
13:27 » 3
13:26 » 4
13:26 » 4
13:26 » 4
13:26 » 5
13:26 » yes - 4 - good work!
13:26 » Yes - 4 - great examples
13:26 » Open Source is a good example of weakening appropriability regimes...
13:25 » Example on Genomics talks about Merck versus private firms in the 1990s during the
period. Private firms were attempting to patent the genes in order to profit. Merck decided to
collaborate with Washington University to create a public database of the human genome. This way
they avoided a severe value impairment of their complementary asset position.
13:25 » Also those who want to weaken the appropriability regime lobby.
13:24 » Good storytelling, be careful about pictures on top of layout details and pictures with a
different shade of the white background, it doesn't look so good. With that said, love the amount of
pictures! Clear speech, but the same person were talking a bit too long.
13:24 » Any other examples than genomics about weakening the appropriability regimes?
13:24 » Digitization and digitalization are used interchangeably, not sure if they have the same
meaning
13:24 » 4
13:22 » 4
13:22 » yes
13:21 » 4
13:21 » Yes
13:20 » No
13:19 » Digitization is the process of digitizing: converting from analogue into digital. Whereas,
digitalization is the adoption or increase (restructure) in use of computer technology.
13:19 » 5
13:17 » How do the different appropriability regimes help in getting rents?
13:14 » agreed
13:13 » You could have come up with an example outside of the article...
13:13 » no
13:13 » Recipes of medicines are not usually trade secrets, they are patented
13:13 » Great examples!
13:12 » Complementary assets lie only externally, not inside a company as well?
13:12 » Good start!
13:11 » Licensing is enabled by patent rights
13:10 » some slides looked a bit empty, nice opening example though
13:10 » YES
13:10 » Good slides!
13:10 » Nice example!
13:10 » yes
13:09 » yes
13:09 » Yes
13:09 » yes
13:09 » nice example
13:06 » No, I vote that this article is left out. On the basis that it just dabbles in everything and
doesn't provide any good insight.
13:05 » yes
13:03 » NB! it is already a new article
13:02 » yes
13:02 » YES YES
13:01 » yes
13:01 » 5
ChatS3 - Teece, D. Profiting from technological innovation
31 23h ago
S3 - Teece, D. Profiting from technological innovation
Group 9
–
12:51 » You could've used more up to date examples
12:50 » 4
12:50 » Workload seems to be divided evenly between the group members
12:49 » 4
12:48 » Do you think this article is relevant in 2016 with business model innovations?
12:48 » Do you believe complementary assets should be inhouse if they are specialized, but needed
only seldom?
12:47 » 5 -- Yes -- Great slides; pictures and short texts, bold to high-light, easy to overview and
understand each slide. Good examples.
12:47 » 5
12:47 » 4, yes
12:46 » Yes - 4 - might have been a bit too detailed and article cited for the management
12:46 » 4 good presentation!
12:46 » 4
12:46 » 4
12:46 » 4
12:46 » 4
12:46 » 4
12:46 » 4
12:46 » 5
12:46 » too detailed for managers
12:46 » 5
12:46 » 4
12:46 » 5
12:45 » yes
12:45 » 4
12:45 » 5
12:44 » I think it is rather common that the invention IPR is secured but the actual innovation what
makes the profit is not so much protected. This allows imitators to exploit the invention through
licensing or such procedures.
12:44 » 4
12:44 » What do you think now about previous weeks argument that the technology is easy to copy
but business models are not?
12:44 » Based on this knowledge which one do you consider to be more important for the company:
the potential impact and uniqueness/protectability of the innovation or the access and integration of
complementary assets?
12:39 » Did you use references in addition to Teece's article?
12:39 » Yes
12:38 » What do you think, how does the current more network-style business environment affect
appropriability regimes? Especially when companies are more specialized, and might have only one
core asset.
12:38 » When to choose contract or integration is presented in the framework (a figure in the
article). There is only one situation an organization should consider integration
12:37 » good table
12:37 » good and clear slides
12:36 » YES
12:34 » Can the imitators use this framework to find easily captured products and profit from
innovations of other companies?
12:34 » Good presentation so far you have made
12:34 » A good presentation so far!
12:34 » Nooo
12:33 » Nice one Lauri!
12:33 » Spoiler!!
12:33 » yes
12:33 » Yes, a great example!
12:33 » Good example (mobile phones)!
12:32 » Did you find this article a bit outdated? Or is it still relevant?
12:32 » yes!
12:32 » yes
12:31 » Meh
12:31 » Yes
12:31 » Yes
12:31 » yes
12:31 » What other appropriability regimes did you find?
12:31 » yes
12:31 » Hyödynnettävyyskehys
12:31 » Yes
12:31 » yes!
12:31 » yes
12:31 » Btw did anyone manage to find out what appropriability regime is translated in finnish?
12:31 » yes
12:30 » Yes
12:30 » YES
12:30 » yes
12:30 » Yes :-)
12:30 » yes !!
12:30 » YES
12:30 » yes
12:30 » Yes
12:30 » YES
12:30 » Yes
12:30 » YES YES!