Your piece presents an interesting perspective I hadn’t heard before. In class we haven’t considered gaining more value from going from open to closed innovation, but for Facebook this makes sense. I worry that this also gives companies like Facebook far too much power going forward. Their lack of accountability re: Cambridge Analytica was disappointing — they knew of the data breach for too long without doing anything to inform their users. Going forward, our government will have to treat tech companies like Facebook less like technology companies, and more like the media companies that they are proving themselves to be. Great read!
Great explanation of the contrasts between two topics we’ve covered this term. Integrating AM with JIT seems like a logistical nightmare right now, but the technology is improving rapidly. As Andrew mentioned above, it’s on AM manufacturers to improve the technology for widespread factory use, and at a worthwhile price. Still, as you mentioned, there’s a lot of value in developing prototypes using AM, and integrating it in small ways will free up floor space. Great piece!
Agree with Mike’s comment above. A tablet alone can’t replace LEGOs…kids need to be hands-on. I think the opportunity is there to incorporate VR into their offerings, even in the form of a global “build-a-thon.” Overall, I really enjoyed this article. It’s very cool that a product as seemingly simple as LEGOs can gain so much value from an open innovation framework.
Awesome article. The move to 3D print manufacturing is definitely a positive one. I don’t see it detracting from Nike’s design-focused brand. Consumers are still going to want the same colorways that LeBron & Serena are wearing on the court. The only thing that might change is that there will be fewer purchase returns due to a better-fitting shoe. Since their main focus right now is arguably increasing their speed to market, they should invest in proprietary 3D technology. Nike needs to make sure that they’re still shaping the global conversation around sports culture, and one of the best ways to do that is to be first to market with their innovations.
Smart of FCA to double down on its strengths and recognize that it needed to partner with industry experts to remain competitive in the race to self-driving. I agree that FCA risks further increasing their ML knowledge gap by choosing not to invest in in-house development. I think it’s recognition that they’re too far behind to compete with the leaders in the space. The industry is really “adapt or die” – now more so than ever. To that end, this was the only option left for FCA.
I agree with Scipio’s post above – I don’t see this product gaining much traction with real practitioners of meditation. I’m also skeptical that beginners will be eager to buy it as a training tool. There are several meditation apps that provide guided meditations for free, and do so in a surprisingly organic and non-intrusive way. In my opinion, this product defeats one of the main purposes of meditation – to practice mindfulness by exercising our ability to self-identify when our minds wander.
The technology could be applied to a host of other applications, especially those in the medical field.