• Student

Activity Feed

Really interesting read! As we saw in the HBS IDEO case, IDEO tries to generate as many ideas as possible in their exploratory phase of product development. The use of crowdsourcing to make the process funnel wider is a great strategy to increase idea generation. To this degree, I would be interested to know more about how IDEA identifies and selects societal challenges, how IDEO ensures a diverse range of ideas in the open innovation process, and how IDEO processes the ideas submitted and decides which ones to use. I’d also be curious to know how many of the ~16k ideas submitted actually made it to the next phase of the product development cycle. Are there any success stories that really stand out?

A friend once told me, “there are two kinds of companies. A company that has been hacked and a company that does not know they have been hacked.” The risk of cyber attack is a universal business problem in the 21st century. HackerOne’s product sounds like an incredibly creative and effective way to mitigate this risk. While I’m worried about the contractor v. employee debate as well, I’m more worried about HackerOne’s ability to attract and retain hackers through an open innovation model. Open innovation is key to their success but as the trend continues to grow and expand into other industries, it will be imperative for HackerOne to develop strategies to stay competitive in the gig labor market.

On November 15, 2018, PLM commented on To Infinity and Beyond – 3D Printing in Space :

While this is a fascinating idea, I can’t help but feel very skeptical of the process. Did you get a sense for how quality differed for products developed in space compared to earth? What about cost for products developed in space v. earth? Is the main barrier to production gravity or is it manpower, materials, etc… Are there other companies developing 3D printing capabilities for space? Can this process be studied in phases? Perhaps first in a controlled environment on earth instead of the international space station?

I understand that 3D printing in space is a very new idea and the company is still young – it will be interesting to see how management addresses these kinds of questions in the near-future!

I wonder if Nike’s ability to reduce the product development cycle, through additive manufacturing, gives them additional avenues to connect with their consumer. Nike could consider crowdsourcing designs from consumers to create a new, engaging experience. In the past, Nike has created emotional connects with their consumers through athletic experiences. This design-creation experience could be a way to create brand loyalty among a new consumer group, and it’s more feasible now because of the decreased lead time in the product development cycle.

On November 15, 2018, PLM commented on Cedar: Making Paying Doctors Much Easier :

While this sounds like great technology and a promising product, I worry since a lot of these applications have failed in the past, despite seeming to satisfy a need. The market is becoming saturated with healthcare technology solutions meant for improving workflows around engagement, health management, and payments. “Personal health records” seem to increasingly be picking up traction and insurance companies are investing significantly to improve their mobile applications in an effort to differentiate their product to consumers. And of course, the traditional Electronic Health Record industry is actively trying to maintain their dominant market share in this space. I think the real challenge for Cedar is figuring out how to market itself. Is this a B2B product, a B2C product, can it be both? Are there additional features they should incorporate to make the product “stickier”? Can they partner with one of these other players to grow their product and reach a critical mass of consumers?

On November 15, 2018, PLM commented on Deep Think at German Car Manufacturers :

Really interesting article! As you pointed out, the stakes are very high with self-driving cars and while the public perception seems skeptical, my understanding is that there’s great potential to actually increase safety with autonomous vehicles. Is this true? Given the seriousness of safety, does Daimler include additional safety checkpoints in the product design process?

I understand there’s a lot of movement on this technology within Google, Tesla, etc… but my sense is Daimler can develop this tool more effectively because it is their sole product/focus. As Daimler refines this product, they could enjoy a first mover advantage. As such, it would be interesting to understand how they think about marketing this product to the rest of the car industry.