It is interesting that across industries, the challenge for open innovation remains long- term engagement of innovation partners. It may be than in LEGO’s case, there is a campaign or a reward they could provide their innovators (essentially their customers). Another idea is to create a platform for enthusiasts, and provide enough stimulating content to drive engagement. In addition, they may need to find new potential sources of innovation outside of their customer base.
It appears that wherever there is innovation, ethics needs to be thought of carefully. In many instances, the need to experiment will require careful consideration of guardrails to ensure ethical conduct.
I believe UNICEF stands to gain a lot from open innovation, and their “office of innovation”, which has been established 12 years ago is best positioned to consider the ethics implications of all innovation ideas.
This reminds me of the mission of the organization “Little Home” in cities across Germany, they however build smaller homes, and they do not 3D print them.
I agree with the need to ensure quality and durability. But for the “…one third of urban dwellers globally, lack access to safe housing” I believe creating more of these houses and improving quality over time would be more impactful.
In addition, I think the point on 3D printing of smaller items, such as furniture, can be a potential revenue driver to enable this organization to continue operating and to bring more housing to more people in need.
Fascinating article. I wonder if 3D printing is slightly “overkill” when it comes to food preparation. Outside of Michelin- star winning restaurants, this device can potentially shed some of the accuracy required in other industries to produce a satisfactory product, allowing the manufacturers to reduce the price.
I would also be interested to know how this device is doing in terms of food safety. When dealing with tech- device manufacturing there is less (or no) need for ensuring the device is clean of harmful pathogens or other food contaminating factors, in the world of food manufacturing/preparation the ingredients themselves can become harmful if not removed appropriately.
To the point about losing the art of cooking, I would argue that in a similar way to restaurants not killing the “kitchen star”, individuals who want to engage in cooking as an art/bonding activity will likely continue to do so
While I do think that Zalando offers a different value proposition to its customers compared to Amazon, other players pose more of an immediate threat, as you point out.
I think using Machine Learning to establish how to combine clothing articles into an outfit, and how to best determine fit are not only great for Zalando as they will increase cross- selling and reduce costs (returns), respectively, but are also a much needed technological advancement in online shopping. I wonder if Zalando can expand into offering accessories or other compatible products that would “go with” an outfit. I also wonder how quickly Zalando can update the outfits they generate in order to keep up with the ever-changing world of fashion
I agree that there is great potential in using data to keep people healthy, thereby minimizing medical interventions. The question then becomes, as you point out, how do you protect people’s right to privacy and ensure their data is safe, especially since, in order to generate individual forecasts, the data cannot be truly anonymized (i.e. there will always be a key to link it back to the original subject)
Cyft will be able to shed light on correlations the medical community may not have thought of, but to do so will require plenty of “training data” where scientist and doctors will fine tune (or correct) the results. To this end, can companies like MedMinder provide their customers data freely? and even if they legally are able to, is it ethical to do so?