ENTRE- 521

advertisement
ENTRE- 521
Autumn 2004
Corporate Entrepreneurship and Innovation
Meeting at:
Balmer 304, Mondays 6.15- 9.30
Instructor: Sandip Basu
Office: 222 Lewis Hall, Phone: 206 543-6706
Office hours: Monday 4.00pm- 6.00pm or by appointment
E-mail: [email protected]
Class website: http://staff.washington.edu/sb4/CorporateEntrepreneurship
I. COURSE OBJECTIVES AND FORMAT
The competitiveness of large, established corporations is continuously being challenged
in today’s fast changing environment. In an effort to find ways to stay competitive,
executives in these organizations are recognizing the critical role that entrepreneurial
thinking plays in creating opportunities for growth and renewal. This course will focus on
how entrepreneurial skills and processes can be applied effectively in corporations. It
will examine the theory and best practices associated with the process of converting new
ideas to new products, technologies and businesses, within the boundaries of a large
corporation.
The central focus of the course is therefore to examine how large corporations can
become more adept at creating opportunities for change, capitalizing on them, and
reacting to disruptive changes in the environment. Accordingly, the course objectives are
two fold: (1) to develop an awareness and understanding of the range, scope, and
complexity of issues involved in the creation of an organizational climate that helps
recognize, nurture, and grow entrepreneurial activities within large firms; and (2) to gain
insight into the effective commercial exploitation of technological and organizational
innovations in such a context.
The course will be taught primarily through case discussions, supplemented with lectures,
films and external speakers. During the course, the participants will be placed in the role
of a project manager or key decision maker and asked to address issues related to the
creation and reinforcement of both an individual business venture and an innovative
parent organization.
1
II. ASSIGNMENTS & GRADING
Grading will be determined as follows:
•
•
•
Individual classroom contribution
Group projects
Final exam (individual case analysis)
35%
30%
35%
The final grade awarded will be on the curve with the mean grade per the school norms.
Class Contribution. During case discussions, class contribution is essential because not
only your learning but also that of the entire class depends upon it. Your class
contribution will be based on: (1) evidence of careful preparation of cases and readings,
(2) ability to summarize key concepts and recommendations in the articles and important
information in the cases, and (3) the clarity and insightfulness of your recommendations
on the cases based on convincing qualitative and quantitative analysis. It is crucial that
your preparation for each class be thorough and consistent from class to class. This
includes reviewing the assigned readings and cases for that session and preparing for
discussion of the indicated questions.
Group Projects. The group project presents an exciting opportunity to apply the
concepts and skills developed in this course to take your own business ideas to their
hypothetical fruition, within the boundaries of a real corporation. The plan for the venture
will be developed stage-wise over the period of the course, and class time is available for
presentation and discussion of these various stages. In the last session, each group will
put all the modules together and present an integrated plan for 15 minutes to the class, as
well as submit a five-page report (12 pt., 1.5 space, not including tables and figures) to
the instructor. Performance on the project will be evaluated on 1) quality of ideas at each
stage, 2) clarity and skill displayed in the presentation and written report. Detailed
information for conducting the group projects will be provided during the first class
session.
Final Exam. Students can work individually or in teams of two to analyze a specific
case that will be distributed in the last day of class. This analysis must again be around
five-pages long (12 pt., 1.5 space, not including tables and figures) and address the
important issues in the case that you are asked to evaluate. Exam performance will be
assessed based on whether the recommendations for each of these issues are clear and
thoughtful, and whether arguments for proposing them are convincing and theoretically
driven. Any material might be referred to while writing the exam. Classmates outside the
team could be consulted prior to writing the exam, but not during it.
2
III. TEXT & READINGS
Textbook:
McGrath, R.G.; & MacMillan, I.C.; “The entrepreneurial mindset: Strategies for
continuously creating opportunity in an age of uncertainty”; Harvard Business
School Press, 2000 (henceforth called “EMS”).
Strongly Recommended Book (not necessarily during course):
Christensen, C.M., & Raynor, M.E.; “The innovator’s solution: Creating and
sustaining successful growth”; Harvard Business School Press, 2003.
Readings:
ENTRE-521, Autumn 2004 Course Pack available at the Balmer Copy Center
Some readings from the physical or on-line library resources as indicated
Other readings in class as distributed by the instructor
IV. DETAILED SYLLABUS
Monday, October 4th
Corporate Entrepreneurship: Imperatives and Difficulties
Issues:
What is CE and why is it important?
Why do corporations find it difficult to practice it?
Readings:
EMS Chapters 1,2
Markindes, C.; “Strategic innovation in established corporations”; Sloan Management
Review; Spring 1998 (course pack)
Christensen, C.M. & Overdorf, M.; “Meeting the challenge of disruptive change”;
Harvard Business Review; March-April 2000 (course pack)
Case:
Intel Corporate Venturing, Darden case # UVA-ENT-0011 (course pack)
• How would you describe the culture at Intel? Why has this firm been
so successful? What role has the culture played in its success?
• How would you approach the four distinct problems that Hake faces at
the end of the case?
• Does growing Green Businesses require radical or incremental reform?
Monday, October 11th
Recognizing Opportunity
Issues:
How can corporate managers be better at recognizing opportunities or creating new ones?
How can one determine whether an idea is a workable opportunity?
Toolkit:
Opportunity recognition frameworks
3
Readings:
EMS Chapters 3-6
Drucker, P.F.; “The discipline of innovation”; Harvard Business Review; August 2002
(course pack)
Sarasvathy, S.; & Kotha, S.; “Management of Knightian Uncertainty in the New
Economy: The RealNetworks Case”; E-Commerce and Entrepreneurship, 2001 (course
pack)
Case:
CNBC (A): NBC and its start-up friends; HBS case 300-090 (course pack)
• What are the main challenges facing Pamela Thomas-Graham as the
new CEO of CNBC.com, a venture within a giant, established
corporation? What are advantages does CNBC.com get as part of NBC
and GE? Are there any disadvantages?
• What advice would you give Thomas-Graham about how to avoid the
problems that new ventures face in dealing with the corporate
mainstream? And about how to deal with complex alliances and
shared ownership (NBC and NBCi)?
• What should be the future organization’s model? Should CNBC.com
remain a separate venture?
Video: The Triumph of the Nerds
• Is it luck or foresight that results in a successful opportunity?
Monday, October 18th
Championing Ideas
Issues:
What are requisites of an internal entrepreneur in a large corporation?
What can a venture manager do to ensure adequate support for the venture?
Toolkit:
Managing political processes
Readings:
EMS Chapter 7
Ginsberg, A., & Hay, M.; “Confronting the challenges of corporate entrepreneurship”;
European Management Journal; December 1994 (course pack)
Block, Z. & Macmillan, I.C.; “The internal politics of venturing”; Chapter 11, “Corporate
Venturing: Creating new businesses within the firm”; Free Press: NY, 1993 (course pack)
Case:
“Internal entrepreneurship at the Dow Chemical Company”; IMD case # 3-1117 (course
pack)
• What is your evaluation of Ian Telford, the internal entrepreneur?
• How adequately did his superiors support Telford?
• What are some limits that his actions need to be within?
Group Work:
Development of a venture idea within the context of a real corporation
4
Monday, October 25th
Creating the Climate
Issues:
What are the ingredients for an enterprising organization and what role do leaders play?
Toolkit:
Distributed model of entrepreneurship
Readings:
EMS Chapter 12
Amabile, T.M.; “How to kill creativity”; Harvard Business Review; September- October
1998 (course pack)
O’Connor, G.C., & Rice, M.P.; “Opportunity recognition and breakthrough innovation in
large established firms”; California Management Review, Winter 2001 (on-line)
Case:
“3M Optical Systems: Managing corporate entrepreneurship”, HBS case # 9-395-017
(course pack)
• As Andy Wong, how would you handle the authorization for
expenditure (AFE) for the re-launch of the privacy screen?
• As Paul Guehler, would you approve the AFE if Wong sent it up to
you?
• How effective has Wong been as a front-line manager? How effective
has Guehler been as 3M’s Division President?
• What makes 3M perhaps the most consistently entrepreneurial large
company in the world?
Group Work:
Assessment of corporation’s innovation process, and mechanisms to generate corporate
support
Monday, November 1st
Incubating Ventures
Issues:
How should emerging new business ideas from within be supported to maximize benefits
to the corporation?
Toolkit:
Real options reasoning
Readings:
EMS Chapter 8
Kanter, R.M.; “Swimming in newstreams: Mastering innovation dilemmas”; California
Management Review; Summer 1989 (on-line)
Burgelman, R.A.; “Designs for corporate entrepreneurship in established firms”;
California Management Review; Spring 1984 (on-line)
Case:
“Lucent Technology Ventures”, HBS case # 9-300-085 (course pack)
• From the point of view of the specific NVG enterprises and their
founders, assess the benefits and also the problems or tensions
associated with starting up within a giant company. Have these
5
ventures encountered the typical dilemmas of newstreams versus
mainstreams?
• What, if anything, can Socolof and the NVG do to increase the
advantages and minimize the tensions to ensure speedier and easier
development of ventures within Lucent?
• What should Socolof recommend to upper management about the next
phase of the New Ventures Group? What has the NVG done well?
What has it done poorly? In light of problems at Lucent, should the
NVG continue in its present form, change its form, or disband?
Guest Speaker: Mr. David J. Smukowski, Senior Director, Boeing Ventures
Monday, November 8th
External Venturing
Issues:
How can external sources of knowledge be used as potential opportunities to realize
corporate objectives?
Toolkit:
Learning through networks
Readings:
Chesbrough, H.W.; “Making sense of corporate venture capital”; Harvard Business
Review; March 2002 (course pack)
Brody, P., & Ehrlich, D.; “Can big companies become successful venture capitalists?”;
McKinsey Quarterly; 2, 1998 (course pack)
Case:
“Intel Corporation: Berkeley investment project ”, HBS case # 9-600-069 (course pack)
• Why did Intel decide to Invest in Berkeley Networks? Why did
Berkeley Networks invite Intel to Invest?
• How does Intel Capital’s investment process differ from that of any
good private venture capitalist?
• What is Intel learning from its investment in Berkeley Networks?
What is Berkeley Networks learning from Intel?
• If you were an entrepreneur, would you want Intel as an investor in
your startup? Why or why not?
• What should Keith Larson do?
Group Work:
Evaluation of venture potential and proposed structure
Monday, November 15th
Allocating Resources
Issues:
What mechanisms work best for allocating resources to and monitoring new ventures?
Toolkit:
Discovery based planning
Readings:
EMS Chapter 10, 11
6
Clayton, J, Gambill, B., Harned D.; “The curse of too much capital: Building new
businesses and large corporations”; McKinsey Quarterly; 3, 1999 (course pack)
Chesbrough, H.W., & Teece, D.J.; “Organizing for innovation: When is virtual virtuous”;
Harvard Business Review; August 2002 (course pack)
Case:
“Pandesic- The challenge of a new business venture (A)”, HBS case # 399-129 (course
pack)
• What is your assessment of Pandesic’s strategy?
• What forces influenced the early development of the strategy?
• What should Harold Hughes do?
Guest Speaker: Ian Sands, Director, Innovations Group, Microsoft Corporation
Monday, November 22nd
Commercializing Innovation
Issues:
What are important considerations while entering new markets, commercializing new
products and promoting new technologies?
Toolkit:
Selling to mainstream markets
Readings:
EMS Chapter 9
Moore, G.A.; “High tech marketing enlightenment”; Chapter 2, “Crossing the Chasm:
Marketing and selling high-tech products to mainstream customers”; HarperBusiness:
NY, 1999 (course pack)
Shapiro, C.; & Varian, H.R.; “The art of standard wars”; California Management Review;
Winter 1999 (on-line)
Case:
“Hewlett- Packard: The flight of the Kittyhawk”, HBS case # 9- 697-060 (course pack)
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the way HP structured and
supported the Kittyhawk development team?
• How would characterize the way the team approached the market for
the Kittyhawk? Can you pinpoint the correct and wrong turns they
made?
• What, if any, are the root causes for the program’s failure? Could HP
have avoided program failure by addressing these root causes?
Group Work:
Planning for resource needs, complementary assets and commercialization
Monday, November 29th
Reacting to Change
Issues:
How can corporations recognize and effectively react to disruptive environmental
changes?
Toolkit:
Spotting disruptive technology
7
Readings:
EMS Chapter 13
D’Aveni, R.; “The empire strikes back: counter revolutionary strategies for industry
leaders”; Harvard Business Review; November 2002 (course pack)
Bower, J., & Christensen, C.; “Disruptive technologies: Catching the wave”; Harvard
Business Review; January 1995 (course pack)
Case:
“The Browser Wars, 1994-1998”, HBS Case 9-798-094 (course pack)
• How did Netscape outsmart its competitors?
• How was Microsoft able to catch-up with Netscape?
• What are the similarities and differences in Netscape's and Microsoft's
approach to competitive strategy?
• What was Netscape's response to Microsoft? Did it help or hurt
Netscape market position? Why or why not?
• What role, if any, did AOL play in Microsoft's strategy?
Wrap-up:
Key takeaways from the course
Monday, December 6th
Presentation of group projects
Feedback on the course and instructor
8
Download