Digitization has disrupted several industries, and one way in which that has most beenaffected is through digital platforms such as Uber, Airbnb and Amazon. In this way, producers and consumers are directly interacting with each other like never before. Disruption has not always been positive or democratic as is the commonly-held belief. Quite to the contrary a number of large music recording labels have profited from streaming platforms’ ubiquity where independents have struggled to hold down their place. Quite opposite though is the movement in the book publishing industry. The traditional big five- Harper Collins, Macmillan, Penguin Random House, Hachette and Simon & Schuster- have seen their overall market share thanks to the popularity of e-books where Amazon through its Kindle platform already holds an edge. The smaller firms here are also biting away at the big five’s chunks, taking advantage of the platform economy. A lot of independent writers too are getting their work published on the Kindle Direct Publishing platform instead of having to wait for the conventional giants’ approval as would otherwise be the case. They can also directly track their revenues rather than having to wait for months to hear about their pending royalties. Sentiment analysis conducted showed that positive reviews had a far higher result on the smaller players. With the bigger players, the market assumed the reviews were an outcome of their digital marketing savvy to get the positive ones listed on top. Twitter plays an important role in this as the place of discovery while Amazon is the final marketplace.

Source:https://knowledge.insead.edu/entrepreneurship/competition-in-the-age-of-amazon-7851

Uploaded Date:06 February 2018

Like human beings, companies also go through the process of selective memory filtration. One sees, only what one wants to. This affects the ability to spot and then execute relevant business innovations. The examples of Nokia, Garmin and Kodak are examples of such inabilities to spot trends and adherence to age-old practices that constrained innovation. Garmin was the market leader is GPS devices till 2012, but failed to detect the onslaught of digital platforms such as Google Maps or Waze which have totally disrupted their business. Bright Funds on the other hand is one firm that seized the moment. To impact organizational performances, several areas of concern need to be studied simultaneously. This includes the business model, innovation, change initiatives, key business relationships, corporate strategy planning and a performance culture. The top executives need to help in a variety of ways. To start off, they must enable a power of enquiry to be imbibed among the employees. This will foster an atmosphere of creativity and future outcome thinking. The company’s strategy must be geared towards combatting those of rivals and potential disruptors. A sense of personal awareness needs to be built in so that key change initiatives may be implemented.

Source:https://knowledge.insead.edu/blog/insead-blog/hidden-neural-patterns-could-be-limiting-your-performance-5181

Uploaded Date:19 January 2018

The historical trend of higher earning people being less busy at work in comparison to the lowest paid, has been turned on its head over the last three odd decades. Today it is common for the highest paid to put in double the hours of the low paid ones. This is especially true for those working in strategy or business consulting firms. Research firm Gallup says that about seventy percent of employees seeking psychological assistance do so for stress related matters. Employers have admittedly responded to this by adopting some proactive steps to ease the burden on employees. One way has been by simply paying professionals more. Another is by making the workplace more fun. Some have added corporate training programmes involving mindfulness or mental health to help the employees. Ultimately, nothing has worked that well, so instead employees need to respond in ways to cope themselves. One way to do so is by being strategic and focussing on the bigger picture. The overworked hours must be measurable, so clear metrics need to be defined in order to keep track. Instead of trying to change the pattern completely, a few incremental updates must be tried out as that is easier to implement for organizations. Changing small behaviours can only improve one’s productivity. Finally, one needs to find a work partner who can always remind the person about the erosion of time and effects on personal life or health. This person should not be afraid to speak out the blunt truth.

Source:https://hbr.org/2017/12/how-to-be-more-productive-without-burning-out?utm_campaign=hbr&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

Uploaded Date:19 January 2018

An age-old debate has been revisited. It pertains to the right moment when to decentralize decision-making. Most business executives during bouts of structure redesign, opt for a decentralized approach. The belief here is that front-line employees are closer to the actual customers and competitors so have an innate understanding of the market, in a way the top brass would lack. There are four qualities most associate with properly functional organizations. These are- responsiveness, efficiency, reliability and perennity or the ability to remain perennial. There remain four situations as well on when to decentralize. The first is when responsiveness is sought through immediacy. Here decentralization would be the ideal route. Reliability is sought through compliance, which can only be provided by a central hierarchy deeply rooted in the corporate strategy. Such a system works best at finance based organizations. Efficiency can be achieved through syndication of tasks. This allows several advantages such as economies of scale and avoidance of duplication. The principle of perennity meanwhile is best served through sheer detachment. This detachment occurs from a central authority, away from the frontline. It works best with radical innovations, knowledge and talent management schemes, product portfolio planning, withdrawals and brand capital. A one-size-fits-all principle does not work when it comes to decentralization and its opportune moment.

Source:https://hbr.org/2017/12/when-to-decentralize-decision-making-and-when-not-to

Uploaded Date:19 January 2018

In spite of the massive advantages digital goods bring to people in contrast to physical ones, customers tend to value the latter more. While digital goods can be stored very easily and reduce the material weight on people, they are perceived to be less controllable. In an experiment conducted, it was realized that people are ready to spend more on physical goods than on digital ones. This is true for books, DVDs, music etc. In fact, when books got compressed to their digital editions, the value of the original book itself fell in the eyes of the customers. It was also found out that people especially view the physical goods in higher esteem when they associate with the item. A Star Wars fan for example will value its original copy more, while there is little difference to a non-fan. The ownership pride can increase through a business innovation by adding touch interfaces and customization options, so that people feel in greater control. This overall trend may also not portend well for self-driving cars and other automated tools for the same reason of lacking control.

Source:https://hbr.org/2017/12/customers-wont-pay-as-much-for-digital-goods-and-research-explains-why?utm_campaign=hbr&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

Uploaded Date:19 January 2018

PwC which is one of the market leaders in the world of management consulting, has drawn a list of four alternative scenarios which is how the world may work by the year 2030. These four scenarios have been demarcated using a color code. In the first scenario of the Red World, innovation rules, so organizations battle it out to provide customers with what they want. Here, niche skill holders and specialists flourish. In the Green World, social responsibility and clean tech rule the roost as sustainability becomes the buzzword. In a Blue World as envisaged, it is large corporates who dominate and big company capitalism flourishes. In the fourth scenario, termed the Yellow World, people concerns are given greatest priority. Worker Guilds get set up, and people-centric brands come to prominence.

Source:https://www.strategy-business.com/article/What-Will-Work-Look-Like-in-2030?gko=e1d49

Uploaded Date:19 January 2018

Open Source communities have often been looked towards with extreme views. While some of the established proprietary concerns view them as business disruptors, others see them as great democratizers. The truth however, is somewhere in between. Within the tech sector for instance, Linux started out as a competitor for Microsoft’s more bureaucratic controls, but was eventually seen as ideal for long term business innovation, so got added protection from another giant in IBM. Other open source communities such as Word-press or even Android, are tightly influenced if not regulated by their original creators, Automattic and Google, respectively. Yet others like Apache, Cloud Foundry and Spark provide another model. Collaboration is possible even outside this open sphere as done through industry bodies such as National Association of Manufacturers or the American Petroleum Institute. Consortiums such as Joint Center for Energy Storage Research provide another way. But proprietary concerns such as Apple’s iOS which is completely company owned, need to understand that once a service or platform has been designated as open source, there is very little control it can keep. Instead, it is the market and its users who then decide the course.

Source:http://innovationexcellence.com/blog/2017/12/22/how-every-industry-can-learn-from-the-open-source-movement/

Uploaded Date:19 January 2018