Who Innovates?


Schumpter first suggested that small entrepreneurial firms were the sources of most innovations. Later he changed his view and suggested that large firms with some degree of monopoly power were more likely to be the sources of technological innovation. He argued that large firms have the production and other complementary assets that are necessary to commercialize an invention; have the size to exploit the economies of scale that are prevalent in R&D; are more diversified and therefore more willing to take the kind of risk that is inherent in R&D projects; have better access to capital that smaller firms; and, as monopolists, do not have competitors ready to imitate their innovations and therefore are more likely to invest in them. By shifting the focus to the type of innovation, however, whether incumbents or new entrants are able to introduce and exploit innovation is a function of whether the innovation is incremental—a function of how new knowledge and the new product are.

My Consultancy–Asif J. Mir – Management Consultant–transforms organizations where people have the freedom to be creative, a place that brings out the best in everybody–an open, fair place where people have a sense that what they do matters. For details please visit www.asifjmir.com, and my Lectures.

Required Organizational Performance


Required organizational performance demonstrates that the same levels of performance will produce markedly different levels of success for different organizations; and in return, that the same degree of success can be achieved by different organizations putting in different levels of performance.

Required organizational performance is based on the interplay between two key variables and suggests that by linking these two variables we can predict the level of performance that an organization must deliver to succeed.

  • Duration of competition, defined as the period of time that an organization is actively planning for, that is to say the time they willing to wait until the benefits of their decisions start to materialize. Every decision that we make comes with an attached time scale – are we willing and can we afford to invest three years in a project, or do we  want results within the next three months or even the next three days?
  • Degree of competition, which reflects the openness of the marketplace  to new entrants and how fiercely other organizations are competing for the same customers. The degree of competition is determined by the market conditions.

My Consultancy–Asif J. Mir – Management Consultant–transforms organizations where people have the freedom to be creative, a place that brings out the best in everybody–an open, fair place where people have a sense that what they do matters. For details please visit www.asifjmir.com, and my Lectures.

Organizational Capabilities


If an innovation is radical in the organizational sense, incumbents have two problems in exploiting it. In the first place, since the change is competence destroying, they do not have the capabilities to exploit it. In the second place, and perhaps more important, the firm’s existing capabilities may not only be useless, they may actually be a handicap to the introduction and development of the innovation. Firms find it difficult to break their habits, the routines and procedures they had put in place to exploit the old technology. They must unlearn the old ways of doing things. New entrants, on the other hand, do not have the burden of the old technology and can go on unencumbered to build capabilities for the innovation and exploit it.

If, on the other hand, the innovation is incremental, incumbents tend to dominate since the required knowledge builds on what they already have, but new entrants would have to build it from scratch.

My Consultancy–Asif J. Mir – Management Consultant–transforms organizations where people have the freedom to be creative, a place that brings out the best in everybody–an open, fair place where people have a sense that what they do matters. For details please visit www.asifjmir.com, and my Lectures.

Strategic Leadership’s View about Investment in Innovation


The strategic leadership view argues that the strategic incentive to invest in an innovation or the failure to exploit it as a result of destroyed competence come only after a firm’s top management has recognized the potential of the innovation. Top management makes the decisions to invest in an innovation, or if such decisions are made by lower level managers, they still reflect the beliefs and values of top management. But incentive to invest in an innovation or its ability to embrace and exploit the innovation is a function of the extent to which the firm’s top management recognizes the potential of the innovation. This ability of top management to recognize the potential of an innovation is a function of its managerial logic, or view of the world, which in turn depends on management experiences, organizational logic, and industry logic. Thus whether a firm is a new entrant or an incumbent may not matter much. What matters is the strategic leadership’s dominant logic.

My Consultancy–Asif J. Mir – Management Consultant–transforms organizations where people have the freedom to be creative, a place that brings out the best in everybody–an open, fair place where people have a sense that what they do matters. For details please visit www.asifjmir.com, Lectures, Line of Sight

Threat of Entry


New entrants to an industry bring new capacity, the desire to gain market share, and often substantial resources. Companies diversifying through acquisition into the industry from other markets often leverage their resources to cause a shake-up.

The seriousness of the threat of entry depends on the barriers present and on the reaction from existing competitors that the entrant can expect. If barriers to entry are high and a newcomer can expect sharp retaliation from the entrenched competitors, he or she obviously will not pose a serious threat of entering.

My Consultancy–Asif J. Mir – Management Consultant–transforms organizations where people have the freedom to be creative, a place that brings out the best in everybody–an open, fair place where people have a sense that what they do matters. For details please visit www.asifjmir.com, Line of Sight

The General, Industry, and Competitive Environment


Through an integrated understanding of the external and internal environments, firms gain the information they need to understand the present and predict the future.

 The general environment is composed of elements in the broader society that influence an industry and the firms within it. These elements can be grouped into six environmental segments: demographic, economic, political/legal, sociocultural, technological, and global. Firms cannot directly control the general environment’s segments and elements. Accordingly, successful companies gather the types and amounts of data and information that are required to understand each segment and its implications so that appropriate strategies can be selected and used.

 The industry environment is the set of factors—the threat of new entrants, suppliers, buyers, product substitutes, and the intensity of rivalry among compititors—that directly influences a firm and its competitive actions and responses. In total, the interactions among these five factors determine an industry’s profit potential. The challenge is to locate a position within an industry where a firm can favorably influence those factors or where it can successfully defend against their influence. The greater a firm’s capacity to favorably influence its industry environment, the greater is the likelihood that the firm will earn above-average returns.

 How companies gather and interpret information about their competitors is called competitor analysis. Understanding the firm’s compititor environment complements the insights provided by studying the general and industry environments.

 In combination, theresults of the three analyses that are used to understand the external environment influence the development of the firm’s strategic intent, strategic mission, and strategic actions. Analysis of the general environment is focused on the future; analysis of the industry environment is focused on understanding the factors and conditions influencing a firm’s profitability; and analysis of competitors is focused on predicting the dynamics of compititors’ actions, responses, and intentions. Although we discuss each analysis separately, performance improves when the firm integrates the insights gained analysis of the general environment, the industry environment, and the compititor environment.

 My Consultancy–Asif J. Mir – Management Consultant–transforms organizations where people have the freedom to be creative, a place that brings out the best in everybody–an open, fair place where people have a sense that what they do matters. For details please visit www.asifjmir.com, Line of Sight