Posts Tagged ‘innovation’

All posts tagged innovation.

Posted: by chrisshipley on November 3rd, 2009 | No Comments »

Categorized: Observations, Startups

I started my day at SAP Labs in Palo Alto moderating a panel discussion about “Enabling Innovation: How does it happen? What’s the secret sauce?”  The room was filled with the managing directors of SAP Labs worldwide and their invited guests, the vast majority of them representing multi-billion dollar global businesses that are challenged, presumably, by the task of continual innovation.

The panel was representative of the of the Silicon Valley ecosystem:

  • Kimber Lockhart and Jeff Seibert, co-founders of Increo Solutions (the entrepreneurs)
  • Mark Radcliffe, partner at DLA Piper (the lawyer)
  • Dan Pistone, SR VP for tech banking at Bridge Bank (the banker)
  • Gamiel Gran, VP Business Development at Sierra Ventures (the VC)
  • and me (the analyst)

We started the conversation by level setting around the idea of innovation itself.  I usually argue that the word “innovation” is so easily tossed off that it has lost its meaning.  Everybody is “innovative,” even when we can’t be sure how or why.   I contend that innovation is what someone will buy.  Jeff’s definition is even better:  “delivering creativity to end users.”

As this part of the conversation unfolded, though, it became clear that innovation isn’t  a thing; it’s a process. Innovation doesn’t just happen.  It’s exercised and deliberate.  And it that regard, it also may well be a culture, a state of mind, a core value of an individual or organization.

So what marks an innovative company?  Surely, the list is longer than that which we discussed in 45 minutes this morning  (and I invite your additions to the list in the comments, please).  Our conversation kept coming back to these four ideas:

  1. Vet ideas early and often. Jeff and Kimber told the story of founding Increo as a process of testing ideas.  Did they dig the idea?  Did it resonate after the initial excitement wore off?  Did other people see value in it?  Brain storming twice a week helped the vet countless “incredibly great bad ideas.”
  2. Try something. Feedback is critical and there’s no better way to get feedback than to put something – anything – out for response. Again from the Increo founding story: “We weren’t coming up with any great ideas for a business, so we decided to just build an idea sharing site,” Jeff said.  The site morphed into an enterprise idea bank which morphed again into the Increo document collaboration platform, acquired by Box.net in August.
  3. Embrace failure, fail fast. Mark Radcliff was quick to point out that Silicon Valley is distinct from other technology ecosystems in its acceptance of failure, almost as a price of entry for innovation.  You can imagine that a roomful of corporate lieutenants would be loathe to celebrate failure with their management.  And frankly, I think “fail fast” is one of those Valley pablums that lose their meaning in bad practice.  Rather than failing fast, companies need to learn to fail smart.  They need to understand what went wrong and why, do it quickly, reset, and try again.
  4. Balance innovation and invention. As “delivered creativity,” Innovation implies an immediacy with the customer.  That’s great for solving today’s business problems, but may leave a large company like SAP flat footed in the long term if they don’t also engage in primary research on the path to invention.


Posted: by chrisshipley on October 31st, 2008 | No Comments »

Categorized: Entrepreneurship, Observations

Sometimes, maybe too often, I don’t realize what I think about an issue, topic, or trend until I’m asked about it.  That was certainly the case this week when Tech Policy Central’s founder Natalie Fonseca asked for my views on technology policy in the new administration.     Tech Policy Central is an outgrowth of the Tech Policy Summit, an annual event entering its third year that “brings together prominent leaders from the private and public sectors to examine critical policy issues impacting technology innovation and adoption in the United States and beyond.”   The event’s speakers are a Who’s Who of policy makers, technology executives, and elected officials.

As a lead up to the Summit in March 23-25, 2009 in the San Francisco Bay Area, Natalie has been polling her Advisory Board members (click here for her Q&A with Craig Newmark), and yesterday was my turn to respond to her questions.  I’d not put much though to tech policy in the context of the current economy, so Natalie’s questions sparked some thinking.

Here’s the Q&A:

Tech Policy Central: When it comes to promoting technology innovation, what do you think the top priorities should be for the next Administration and Congress?

Chris Shipley: Programs that promote and support entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurs are the driver of the technology economy, particularly in difficult times. They build the companies, hire the workers and create new value.

I’d like to see the National Science Foundation’s business development grants program expanded for technology innovation and tech transfer. The funding, relative to viable ideas/need, is remarkably little. I’d like to see investment in regional Innovation Centers. I’d like to see tax credits for entreprenerus who take personal risk to start their companies.

TPC: You meet with hundreds of entrepreneurs from around the world every year. Based on your conversations with those innovators and your own travels abroad, do you believe that Silicon Valley is in danger of losing its competitive edge in the global economy?

CS: I think Silicon Valley is learning that the global market is spawning innovation in every corner; that Silicon Valley doesn’t have a lock on great technology invention and innovation.  Still, the Valley remains the epicenter of innovation.  Foreign technology companies believe that they must come to the U.S., generally, and Silicon Valley, specifically, in order to grow their company and capture significant market share worldwide. Silicon Valley’s wealth of expertise, capital and experience is a magnetic pull for non-U.S. companies, and I believe it will continue to be in the foreseeable future.

TPC: If you were to name one tech policy area where you’d like to see greater federal government involvement, what would it be?

CS: Broadband digital infrastructure is critical to the economic competitiveness of the United States. And, as importantly, it bridges the divide in the U.S. between those who have and those who have not. Access to information is and will continue to be a tremendously valuable currency.  Investment in universal access to broadband infrastructure is an investment in a wide array of health and human services, including education, anti-poverty programs, public safety, crime prevention and the like.

Posted: by chrisshipley on March 11th, 2008 | No Comments »

Categorized: Observations

Often, the comments on TechCrunch and other blogs are more enlightening than the original posts. The a-ha’s come not necessarily for the comments themselves but from the biases and perspectives they reveal. Such is the case today with Mike Arrington’s post critiquing – no, slamming – Guy Kawasaki’s Alltop.

The criticism of the site seemingly comes from the simple implementation of Alltop’s list of top blogs and their RSS-fed headlines. The sight is short on graphic design. It required little developer skill to create. It likely cost little in either cash or time to build. And therefore, the comments seem to say, Alltop is not innovative.

Wow. What a pretentious and even arrogant definition of “innovation.”

Coincidently, I found myself discussing the definition of innovation over lunch yesterday with a senior director at the National Science Foundation. We agreed that innovation was best described on two vectors: novelty and market impact, and not necessarily on the technical achievement of an invention.

By that definition, it is not for a pundit to declare a product innovative. That’s up to the market. The challenge in attempting to be innovative is to put ideas into the market, iterate quickly, and be responsive enough to drive adoption. Only when an invention, a product, a service, a business model, or an idea is adopted by the larger market can it be truly innovative. Until then, it is just what it is: a concept waiting for someone to notice.