At this years AGSM annual cocktail function we asked Daniel Petre to speak on disruption. As the prior Vice President of the Workgroup Division, Director of Advanced Technology and Director of the Asia Pacific Region for Microsoft he certainly had a range of helpful views.
His passion for IP enabled devices was a strong underlying theme – i.e. devices that are connected and accessible via the internet. But why is this so important? It’s important because its growing exponentionally and also allows life to be measured – measured in more and more granular ways. And with this measurement, there are new ways to identify value and also to serve customers.
Another theme was the skill levels of Boards to govern disruption. Very few boards have deep digital and online skill sets. Very few Boards have the skills to foresee the massive and systemic change impacting the markets in which its company may operate. Yet these very Boards are empowered to make the largest strategic decisions. Daniel raised this issue as a major concern. Im in full agreement and belie new board models are required.
Disruption from the digital and internet enabled economy will not slowdown. Companies that are proactive and engage in this change will be the leaders of tomorrow. Id enjoy discussing how to address the above concerns with any company.
The attached picture is courtesy of AGSM/UNSW
It was just a random catchup. Someone I’d not seen for two years and had no real interest to connect with as time was precious that morning. I said a quick hello and passed by this old colleague.
We met at the same event some minutes later and felt obliged to chat about what had transpired in the last years since meeting. We both had both taken different roads and this is where things became interesting. Our differences were unique and interesting. Our skills has expanded and were complementary. Within 10 minutes we had developed a new product/solution for the market and agreed to meet in the coming days to develop it further.
1. Value the differences between people
2. Don’t expect people will remain the same years down the track
3. Make time for the random connections with people.
Id be interested to hear stories of similar “random connections“.
This is a great article on dealing with ambiguity. We are often taught that ambiguity is a bad thing and something to be rid of. Ambiguity presents the opportunity to learn, to innovate and to see things in a fresh way.
Enjoy the read.
Over the past two years, Ive had the chance to meet with a diverse set of leaders, managers and change agents across many sectors. They are under pressure to rethink so many aspect of their business. Not just products, not just distribution, the whole business.
And they are struggling.
Who teaches a rebuild of an entire business model? Who has deep skills in managing such a transition? Very few and fewer still who have a track record of many years in such pursuits. Deep experience from the old economy is still a valuable asset, however new skills are a must to compete in new look markets.
If your business has no digital, online and ecommerce strategy it is likely to be under immense pressure. If your business has no way to position itself in social conversations it is being left behind.
Im enjoying working with companies on the new look disciples in this field and imparting new ways to look at changing markets with confidence and clarity. Please call me if you would like to learn more about how to manage with focus in these new conditions.
There are those who innovate for pure need. They are so frustrated, they create something to solve a real and immediate need. Then there is a different group who dont have a personal need but like to work with others to solve a wider need, maybe in their company department or maybe in a voluntary manner. Further, there are those who seem to be full of ideas and have a need to express those views, with or without an immediate need.
Just considering these groups alone (certainly not exhaustive) , there may be merits in each depending on your context and need. I the first case, if you have a similar issue, there may be a real desire to see how the problem was solved by another individual. In the second group, who juist enjoy teams and working together, this also attracts people who share this way of working and hence can allow connections between departtments and work well for complex business issues. Finally, the last group can be valuable when there is a lack of ideas to catalyse new thinking. This is most beneficial in companies who have been operating the same way for many years and seem wed on staying the same no matter the cost.
Id like to hear other views on styles and approaches that are either helpful or raise problems.
I must have been asked this question countless times. I seem to get two different groups of people; those who are clear in their own mind what innovation means to them and those who seem ‘lost’ and can’t really define innovation.
For me, innovation is the ability to create something new and valuable. By new, it may combine old approaches in new ways or its may be new as in never been created beforehand. By valuable, I mean this it has merit to someone, even if just to the creator of the innovation. Finally, by the word create, I mean an action, not just a thought.
So innovation uses actions focused on value creation.
Of course, the above views only commence a discussion on this topic and I hope that others will share views from their own experiences.