Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

The flat of the curve: are we scared of innovation?

By | April 19, 2009, 8:11am PDT

Summary: Are our businesses are scared of innovation - of challenging the talent of their executives to embrace technology and global delivery models, and work more closely with their suppliers and partners to achieve this?

Kevin O’Marah, AMR Research’s Chief Strategy Officer, blogs a thought-provoking piece that highlights how so many retailers and manufacturers have failed to embrace collaborative supply chain models through fear of “giving more than they’ll get”.  Kevin argues that consolidation amongst suppliers will accelerate in this environment as major industrials drive cost out of their supply chains by reducing their supplier bases.  He adds,”what we have since seen is that cooperation takes a lot more than just setting up EDI, reverse auctions, or visualization.  It takes trust, which apparently is still in short supply.” 

Kevin refers to a piece of analyst foresight from nine years’ ago, where the logical next step in achieving supply-chain value was productivity gains across the economy driven by bilateral relationships (meaning win-win) between trading partners:

B2B Adoption Phases  

 

When some analyst designed that graphic, we’d just come through a major period of innovation where the Internet was forcing businesses to explore new business models - or face death by failure to change. So what happened to put the kibosh on businesses revolutionizing their supply/demand models?

When we look at the rise of global sourcing of back office support processes, namely IT support and finance, the common thread is cost-reduction, cost-reduction, cost-reduction.  Where immediate cost-savings are on the table, companies can’t wait to disrupt their businesses.  However, where they need to work more closely with others to improve speed-to-market, control inventory, or access new geographies and markets, it appears that an unwillingness to take a “risk”, and a lack of competence to embrace collaborative supply chain models are holding firms back.  Dare I say that our businesses are scared of innovation - of challenging the talent of their executives to embrace technology and global delivery models, and work more closely with their suppliers and partners to achieve this?  Moreover, if firms are incapable of embracing these models themselves, how long will it be before before business leaders reach out to third-party providers who do get it?

Something tells me it’s been the recent years of easy credit, easy growth, a sense of entitlement and a fear of disrupting business models that has stagnated innovation in global business delivery.  However, fear of change can only last as long as these business survive.  As Kevin’s headline emphasizes: “Consolidation and death”.  Many businesses will only change when they are forced to, and it will require a new wave of firms which are prepared to embrace new collaborative business models that will form the next wave of growth in our economy.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

8
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

Not Scared - Documented Out of Existance
madrucke@... 24th Apr 2009
The problem is not so much fear of innovation as much as all the new ways to Micromanage through ISO Standards and non-sensical FIATs.

The amount of inertia inherent even in risk taking to innovate is so daunting it is easier to just go with the flow.

Take my job. We are being force fed ISO 17025 and basically it takes all the things that makes me a great technician and requires they be Documented, Codified, and Folded, Spindled and Mutilated.

I can't risk doing **anything** that isn't already legal for fear of, at the least, a good chewing out.

Even though I have 40 years in Electronics.

By definition I can't even have my own personal tech library unless it's in the official library. Of course then it ceases to be mine.

Why try? Why even think for ones self? Managment doesn't want to do anything that they can't micromanage. And, if they don't understand it they are scared of it.

Of course the implementation of the standards are so rigid that even if you had the best Idea since sliced bread you couldn't push it through their red tape with an atom bomb!

That's why I am leaving Metrology forever.

They don't want innovative lovers of the state of the art!

Mike Sr.

If You want Innovation you **MUST** Empower and Enable **NOT** hinder and hobble.
0 Votes
+ -
Let the Government run like (they own GM now)
Christian_<>< 19th Apr 2009
Let the big Obongo Government take everything over,
they do such a great job of spending trillions
and giving it away to their other friends and
crooks from Chicago.

I think we should be like the Sovite Union, live
in squalor and look to our great 'Kenyan Usurper'
for our existence.
0 Votes
+ -
What we need
javajunkie@... 20th Apr 2009
like it_wk suggests is:

1) an administration that tortures people to give us a good name and create goodwill

2) a tax policy to give breaks to the wealthiest so they can invest in China

3) Gov. agencies who will overwrite scientific reports so we can remain clueless

4) blind adherence and unquestioning to religion

5) no Goverment so that individual gun dealers can sell to anyone and everyone including Mexican drug lords.

I completely agree with it_wk that Obama is not doing these things and is doing things wrong. I know Obama would agree with us too (since it is surely impossible for him to do everything right).

What this has to do with the story, neither it_wk nor I know but the Lord is the judge and not you so please spare us your judgmental comments!
0 Votes
+ -
Given that competitive behaviour
dilgreen@... Updated - 20th Apr 2009
is a pillar of capitalism, and that many aspects of competition involve being 'economical with the truth', I am not at all surprised.

These 'win-win' synergy arguments are those offered by socialist strategies - not known for being welcomed in capitalist circles...
0 Votes
+ -
What we need more of
pizzaman7 20th Apr 2009
1) An administration that befriends ruthless dictators and lets them walk all over them us in the name of "we want them to like us" while referring to their own citizens as arrogant and extremists.

2) A paper tiger president that has no clue on military matters.

3) Create more regulations that are the real culprit of capitalism and over-tax its citizens to ruin ingenuity, stop investments in its tracks, and kill job growth.

4) govt to get in bed with the environmentalists who have no scientific data to stand on.

5) a govt to take away one of our constitutional rights because they are afraid of their citizens to bear arms. our forefathers gave us this right to counter a government that will lord over its people.

6) we need bigger government to take over every conceivable area of our lives because people like you are incapable of individual thought and in dire need of nannies.

7) we need everyone to disregard the fact that unemployment is rising steadily, spending is out of control, cap and trade was a dismal failure in europe, other coutries unsatisfaction with universal health care and the pitfalls of such a system.

keep the faith. hope and change.
0 Votes
+ -
Perfect example of the problem
Lucky2BHere 20th Apr 2009
Stay focused, here. It is *not* government -
and particularly anything that is going on
*right now* - that has anything to do with
companies being afraid to innovate. Regardless
of who is in power, business is business. No
excuses. Was the recent announcement that Intel
has committed $1B to the education of a
Communist country (Vietnam) an "Obama problem"?
No, it was good business, and an excellent
example of the kind forward thinking that can
only come from industry itself. Take your
politics and stick 'em. Quit whining! It's
losers like you that drain our workplaces of
the focus and energy they need! Go back to work
and figure how *you* can make a difference.
0 Votes
+ -
RE:what we need more of
provincialplace@... 20th Apr 2009
since that rant was started as cynical rhetoric, let first say that I will try to stay away from that. I know we are in for a long rough ride, but I believe some intelligent society will emerge eventually. Probably not in my lifetime, but I am OK with that.

1) We need less rhetoric and more action. some actions will work others not and that is OK.

2) The current view of military power needs to be updated. Leaders who lead based on the old view alone will fail. It would be naive to think that talks alone will reign in people with guns, but it would be a worse mistake to exclude half the planet's population because they have leaders that we do not agree with. The final power solution needs to be inclusive to all parties. It would be foolish to think that because we have more nukes at our disposal we are stronger. Experiences in Vietnam, Afganistan, Irak and many other areas have shown that pure military might is not sufficient to change a culture. To build a culture takes generations...Bombs do not have a positive effect in a culture. When using bombs as a government building tool a lot of innocents get hurt.

3) Less greed. Humans are greedy. this is because we always fear to run out of something. That fear maybe justified. Since so many appear to be ready to destroy resources rather than share them.

4) there is a limited amount of space and resources...How do we support as many as we can? We need to stop waste...Polution is a wasted opportunity. But our air is finite, producing powerful neurotoxins and releasing them on our way to work is not sustainable. Once too many human toxins will be around, the current gene pool will cease. A new kind of human may emerge, but that is a very big gamble, the earth may just need to clear out humans for a while so it can clean up the environment.

5) we need more trust! I doubt that large enterprises will fully embrace the virtual procurement market place. But individuals and small companies have a huge opportunity in that space. If a good rating, communication and compensation system was in place, you could loosely organise independant workers into medium size company. This would allow these networks to creatively take on large corporations and innovate on a massive scale. The gap between what is technically possible and what is feasable for large corporation is massive. There is so much room for innovation if we could find a way to get in touch with trustworthy partners.
0 Votes
+ -
Trust and the American Business model
redking44 20th Apr 2009
This could be one of the shortest papers ever published
0 Votes
+ -
Not Scared - Documented Out of Existance
madrucke@... 24th Apr 2009
The problem is not so much fear of innovation as much as all the new ways to Micromanage through ISO Standards and non-sensical FIATs.

The amount of inertia inherent even in risk taking to innovate is so daunting it is easier to just go with the flow.

Take my job. We are being force fed ISO 17025 and basically it takes all the things that makes me a great technician and requires they be Documented, Codified, and Folded, Spindled and Mutilated.

I can't risk doing **anything** that isn't already legal for fear of, at the least, a good chewing out.

Even though I have 40 years in Electronics.

By definition I can't even have my own personal tech library unless it's in the official library. Of course then it ceases to be mine.

Why try? Why even think for ones self? Managment doesn't want to do anything that they can't micromanage. And, if they don't understand it they are scared of it.

Of course the implementation of the standards are so rigid that even if you had the best Idea since sliced bread you couldn't push it through their red tape with an atom bomb!

That's why I am leaving Metrology forever.

They don't want innovative lovers of the state of the art!

Mike Sr.

If You want Innovation you **MUST** Empower and Enable **NOT** hinder and hobble.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix