Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Sunday, March 6, 2011
Reverse Innovation - An emerging product development model
A couple of years ago when GE was developing a ultra-portable electrocardiograph machine specifically directed at the needs of developing nations like India and China, no one envisioned that it would result in a disruptive innovation model. The consequence - when the same device was tweaked up to suit the US market with minimal modifications, it resulted in an 80% markdown in comparison to other similar products in the US market.
Infact Darmouth professors Vijay Govindarajan and Chris Tremble, who along with GE's Jeffrey R. Immelt were instrumental in introducing the concept of reverse innovation believe that innovation is not all about creativity. They substantiate by saying that creativity is about coming up with the big idea whereas Innovation is about executing the idea and converting the idea into a successful business.
When we look from an intellectual asset perspective, companies should strongly consider protecting these ideas at conceptualization stage of product life-cycle. The company's projected market cap numbers are dependent on long term product demand and volume that the company is expected to sell. Hence its not just the 'speed to market' that will give them a competitive edge but the real crux lies in sustaining it over a prolonged period of time by having a offensive IP strategy that will prevent competitors from replicating your concepts as soon as your product is launched in the market.
If a product developed for a specific nation is not IP protected for an overseas market where there could be potential export opportunity, it could result in a huge setback. There are likely chances that manufacturers in overseas countries may get to reverse engineer the product as soon as it is launched in the market and they may come out with a similar product in a shorter span of time. We come across a lot of Chinese IPads available in the market at cheaper costs. These are ideal examples of inefficient IP Strategy on the part OEMs.
Having said that, IP Strategy is not just about patenting technologies across multiple geographies. It encompasses a list of activities which run throughout the product lifecycle. Will keep discussing on this...
Infact Darmouth professors Vijay Govindarajan and Chris Tremble, who along with GE's Jeffrey R. Immelt were instrumental in introducing the concept of reverse innovation believe that innovation is not all about creativity. They substantiate by saying that creativity is about coming up with the big idea whereas Innovation is about executing the idea and converting the idea into a successful business.
When we look from an intellectual asset perspective, companies should strongly consider protecting these ideas at conceptualization stage of product life-cycle. The company's projected market cap numbers are dependent on long term product demand and volume that the company is expected to sell. Hence its not just the 'speed to market' that will give them a competitive edge but the real crux lies in sustaining it over a prolonged period of time by having a offensive IP strategy that will prevent competitors from replicating your concepts as soon as your product is launched in the market.
If a product developed for a specific nation is not IP protected for an overseas market where there could be potential export opportunity, it could result in a huge setback. There are likely chances that manufacturers in overseas countries may get to reverse engineer the product as soon as it is launched in the market and they may come out with a similar product in a shorter span of time. We come across a lot of Chinese IPads available in the market at cheaper costs. These are ideal examples of inefficient IP Strategy on the part OEMs.
Having said that, IP Strategy is not just about patenting technologies across multiple geographies. It encompasses a list of activities which run throughout the product lifecycle. Will keep discussing on this...
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)