Thanks for posting on this interesting topic.
In my opinion, this is as much as a marketing process than an open innovation one as mentioned in your post. In this day and age, all beauty brand try to create a community and to engage a conversation with them. One of the other major beauty success of the last years was Kylie Jenner and her make-up brand Kylie cosmetics. The reason for this success was her massive following and loyal community on social media.
Glossier has created a community and I feel that their open innovation process is just a way to interact with them, make them a part of the process. I am not sure that their product are superior to the competition but do they need to?
After all it is simpler to sell to your loyal customers what they ask you for …
Great article, cant wait to print my nike basketball shoes in my room just before heading to Shad.
I think that the greatest advantage of this process is that the shoes are extremely customisable and your shoe will adapt to every feature of your feet. This might be the biggest reason of the incredible performance of the 2 athletes mentioned in your post.
I believe that Nike should focus on running before moving to other sports with their 3D process for the moment. They are still in the experimental phase and they have to get it perfect before moving to other sports. Like we have seen in the nike football case in marketing, the goal is not to be the first to develop this product today but to have the best product on the market when the market is mature.
Nice to learn about this new technology in the agricultural sector. Your point about the capital allocation is very interesting but I don’t think that plenty should focus on the highest performing crops but on the one with the highest market potential.
For the moment it seems that they are building indoor farms and collecting and analysing data from those. But at what point they will have to convince farmers of the benefits of the product and as seen in the Indigo Agriculture case, farmers are really reluctant to change. How will they change the farmers mentality and is it not better to make them part of the process and to develop the system with them on real outdoor farms and not controlled indoor farms.
God I wished this product existed 15 years ago….
I didnt knew anything about this topic and I learned a lot with your post. I really believe that it is the technology of the future. The market percentage of aligners is small right now. One of the reasons might be that aligners are much more expensive than traditional braces. But as the 3D-printing technoogy progress, aligners will be more affordable and take over the orthodontic industry.
Congrats for the article. Very pleasant to read.
It seems that the folks at Clover have a good process in place. As you suggested in your conclusion, rolling the concept nationally or overseas will be a big challenge but I think they can do it. The key is to have local regional independent entities that will roll up the process in their region.
The government having a stake in the new ‘independent’ credit scoring entity with the 7 other players is very disturbing. Is the government goal to have access to all the financial information of the customers and if so, what will they do with it. The sector is relatively new and the legislator have to write law but there is not need for a government investment to control the capital structure of this entities. A clear line need to be drawn