Relationship between User and Producer Innovators

by ⋅ 3 Comments

We all agree that innovation is important because it can fulfil the user needs, benefits the society and helps the firms to gain profits. There are also lots of other benefits of innovation but the most important factor which determines the quality of innovation is the originator of the innovation. Now here comes the interesting part. Most of us will say that the originators or sources of innovation products are manufacturers or firms which sell them. However, it is not true.I  will try to explain the real originators of innovative products which are Users

First of all, let me clear the difference between users and manufacturers.

  • Users of the products are people or firms who use the product
  • Manufacturers are the firms or organizations who sell the products

So there are two basic components in the whole innovation process and there is a clear relationship between these two acting components.

The key point is that every innovation starts with user. It is the user who is always the originator of the innovation product. This whole process can begin because of the following factors related to user:

  • User finds a problem or need and he wants to fix it but there is no solution available in market
  • User wants to innovate because of enjoyment or pleasure
  • User wants to innovate something because he wants to learn
  • User wants to innovate for social welfare

No matter what the reason is, it is the user who starts to innovate. Manufacturers do not take part at this point because they see no market here. As the user builds a product, other users see the benefits and modify or improve the product for their own needs. Gradually, the product starts to be used by many users, each adding something in the product innovation process.

Now the manufacturer jumps in and says to users that their part is over, Now it is his time to take the product to the next levels, He takes the product and makes it in a fancy way and sells it.

Untitled

Figure 

Producers believe that the product is their innovation and the first user innovative product which is in fact a part of their whole product is just a crap.

Users make their innovations products open so that other users can help them to improve the product.

Today, manufacturers are driven out of the innovation products because

  • Users are better in creating them
  • Users are greater in number than manufacturers
  • Users can combine the best solutions by other users because they share it open
  • Users can get the best of all solutions but no producer can because of Intellectual Property

So the moral of the story is that users are feed stock of innovation process and there is a need for protection of this precious resource of innovation by the community.

 

The Modularisation of Entrepreneurship

by ⋅ Leave a Comment

I just had a fantastic evening at the STHLM Tech Meetup, and what it featured was not only a series of interesting pitches (of launched and not-yet-launched ventures) but also a very compelling introduction to event supporters. One of these really struck my interest by the nature of what they do. It was a firm, called “The Service Corporation”, presented by the founder and CEO himself. They offer a global expansion It wasn’t the actual start-up which was compelling, but rather the thought that followed. By now, there are so many firms that do not directly produce any smart venture ideas, but rather fit into the start-up process of others.

It’s about the trend of “enabling entrepreneurship”, and that is done in a modular behaviour. We’ve seen ventures like this before. Rocket Internet (GER), which capitalise on ‘replicating’ successful business models from the US in Europe – and, thus, act as a “globaliser” to the original start-up. Or “The Service Corporation”, which offers to team up with start-ups and give them the resources needed to penetrate foreign markets. It’s not about incubating anymore; these ventures follow the definition of modularisation. If one thinks of four principle steps: Discovery, Validation, Creation, Building – one will realise that all these are somewhat modules, and the value propositions of these “Enabling” start-ups.

Likewise, one of the first guest lectures, Joakim Fohlman outlined that “Cubimo” bases on helping others discover and develop venture ideas (First Module; Discovery). Furthermore, “FundedbyMe” or “Kickstarter” fit in as the second module of “Validation”. These not only are tools to gain proof of concept status, but also enable the following step of funding. The next module (Creation) is given; players such as “TED” or “STHLM Tech Meetup”, which help reach the desired customers and offer growth opportunities. The fourth step is given by todays presenter, and inspiration to this; ventures like “The Service Corporation” enable growth into new markets.

This might not be too novel of a thought, but what I can identify are the two types of innovation; Product- and Process-Innovation. And from remembering the strategy lectures, Process Innovation follows Product Innovation – and that might indicate a lacking venture ideas in the entrepreneurs market.  I don’t hope that is the case, but it could rather be that we have exhausted current technologies. Perhaps, this can be derived from the fact that big, enabling technologies take a lot of time to develop – far more time than is needed to launch a bunch of start-ups that capitalise on them (especially with the popular lean start-up structure). I interpret it as a call for forward-thinking innovation – strategically going for product innovation when process innovation is “in cycle”.