CONCEPT DESTRUCTION PLATINUM SERIAL

вЂњWhen the goal is to scale,' Blank explains, 'businesses tend to put processes in place, and innovation dies a little bit.вЂќ Managing Growth Successfully The problem, Blanks believes, arises when small companies scale and stop thinking like entrepreneurs. But, he adds, companies like these act like startups, creating entirelyВ new products and services.ДЄnd while bigger businesses have to strive to act like startups, entrepreneurs have the advantage of actually running a startup (startups are defined here as smaller companies still run by the founder). ' create new industries and destroy existing ones.вЂќД«lank says creating disruptive innovation, repeatedly, is what extraordinary companies, such as Apple (iPhone), Amazon (Kindle) and Toyota (Prius) do. 'This type of innovation creates new products or new services that did not exist before,' he says. Disruptive innovation, which, as Blank explains, is the innovation we associate with startups. Continuous innovation, which also involves building on your core strengths, but, Blank says, also requires that new elements be created.Д¤. Process improvement, which occurs when businesses strive to improve their current products, essentially those that are part of their core business.ДЈ. Individual initiative, which is centered around the concept that anyone in a company can suggest an idea and start a project.Дў. But in a business context, the meaning gets more nuanced.вЂќ Blank says there are four types of innovation you canВ buildВ in a business:ДЎ. 'At its most basic,вЂќ Blank explains, вЂњinnovation means to introduce something new. That viewpoint, however, opens the door for savvy entrepreneurs.Д«ut are entrepreneurs capable of building truly innovative companies? Learning to Innovate Despite that threat, Blanks says traditional firms вЂњvalue efficiency over innovation,вЂќ which stacks the deck against investment in long-term innovation. This resurgence of startups, fueled, Blank says, by the вЂњroaringвЂќ comeback of venture capital investment in the past five years, means existing companies are confronting a tidal wave of competitors 100 times more than what they experienced 25 years ago. And the newer dominant industries, Blank says, вЂњeverything from the Internet, to electric cars, genomic sequencing, mobile apps and social media were pioneered by startups, not existing companies.вЂќ вЂњThe industries we all grew up with that enjoyed decades of market dominance, such as newspapers, bookstores, video rentals and personal computersВ are being swept away,вЂќ Blank notes. And while Apple didn't actually ship its first iPhone until June 2007, it's managed to take a commanding lead of the smartphone market: Today, NokiaвЂ™s global share of the smartphone market is just 5 percent.

Then he pointed out that seven years ago, Nokia owned 50 percent of the handset market, and Apple owned 0 percent. To illustrate this point, Blank asked the crowd at the speech in Barcelona to hold their phones in the air, and he noted the lack of Nokia phones on display. Schumpeter, who's been credited with coining the word 'entrepreneur,' defined capitalism as вЂњan evolutionary process where new industries and new companies continually emerge to knock out the old.вЂќДЇifty years later, Blank says, another Harvard professor, Clayton Christensen, developed the theory of disruptive innovation, which actually described how creative destruction worked: вЂњDisruptive innovation leads to the creative destruction of businesses that once seemed preeminent and secure.вЂќ In a speech given in March to graduates of the ESADE Business School in Barcelona, Spain, Blank explained that the theory of creative destruction started with Joseph Schumpeter, an economist who taught at Harvard in the 1930s and '40s.

CONCEPT DESTRUCTION PLATINUM SERIAL

Steve Blank, a serial entrepreneur, academician and the spark behind the Lean Startup concept, believes this is the case. For a while now, 'disruption' has been the word du jour in the entrepreneurial world, and everyone is striving to be the chief disruptor.Д«ut is that even possible? Are we innovating so quickly these days that one disruptive moment is immediately succeeded by another? Instead of creative disruption, are we engaged in creative destruction? And could that possibly be a good thing?

Concept destruction platinum