Comments on: Three Ways to Win With Your Great Ideas

By: What if We Don’t Know What Our Business Model Is? « Innovation Leadership Network

Thu, 09 Sep 2010 07:54:47 +0000

[...] are many different Business Model models in use at the moment – but all of them include similar components such as target market, value [...]

By: New! Improved! Shiny! Yes, It’s Innovation 7.0!!! « Innovation Strategy « Innovation Leadership Network

Mon, 08 Mar 2010 19:15:46 +0000

[...] out the concept of innovation just yet. I think there are a lot of great ideas out there that we still need to execute. You can forget “Innovation 7.0″, but we still need “innovation”. 2 people [...]

By: Designing Espresso Innovation « Business Models « Innovation Leadership Network

Wed, 03 Mar 2010 00:42:42 +0000

[...] is another great example of the difference between invention and innovation. The patent for the espresso capsule was granted in 1976, but the first Nespresso machine was not [...]

By: Why Your Great Idea Will Fail « Aggregate « Innovation Leadership Network

Mon, 01 Mar 2010 07:47:32 +0000

[...] fail because it isn’t executed, or it isn’t execute well. We’ve talked about the problems with focusing just on ideas many times before. Last week I read an outstanding post by Matt Perez and realised why this is a [...]

By: Grit versus Intelligence in Innovation « Book Reviews « Innovation Leadership Network

Sat, 06 Feb 2010 06:27:15 +0000

[...] effort. But the simple fact of the matter is that to successfully innovate, we need perseverance. Execution is at least as important as ideas, probably more [...]

By: Tweets that mention Three Ways to Win With Your Great Ideas « Business Models « Innovation Leadership Network -- Topsy.com

Wed, 13 Jan 2010 21:48:58 +0000

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Matt Perez, Ken Gillgren, Paulo Alves, Ralph-Christian Ohr, Tim Kastelle and others. Tim Kastelle said: New blog post: Three Ways to Win With Your Great Ideas (with better execution, networks, or business model) http://bit.ly/4RpoHK #innovation [...]

By: Tim

Tim — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 06:44:39 +0000

Thanks for all the extra information Anders – I see your point!

By: Anders Sundelin

Anders Sundelin — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 05:20:21 +0000

I understand the point you want to make, it is highly relevant, 95% of patents are useless or used for other purposes such as communicative reasons to get the interest from investors or to print on the product to motivate higher margins for being unique.

Regarding Google, check out the video with Eric Schimdt (full version exists on my blog) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zi3Q40EPUjk
or read about one of their algorithms PageRank http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PageRank

“The name “PageRank” is a trademark of Google, and the PageRank process has been patented (U.S. Patent 6,285,999). However, the patent is assigned to Stanford University and not to Google. Google has exclusive license rights on the patent from Stanford University. The university received 1.8 million shares of Google in exchange for use of the patent; the shares were sold in 2005 for $336 million.”

Take care,
Anders

By: Tim

Tim — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:24:05 +0000

Thanks for the thoughtful comment Anders. I agree that IPR is useful. However, I also think that there are many cases where formal IP protection doesn’t help much. Your Google example is interesting. They obviously rely heavily on proprietary methods – particularly their algorithms. But those aren’t patentable. It seems to me that the use secrecy & complexity more than they use formal IP methods.

That said, part of my argument here is just rhetorical. Too many of the people that I talk to think that patents are the only way to make money from ideas, so I end up spending a lot of time trying to tell them about other ways to do it.

Thanks for the book tip too!

By: Anders Sundelin

Anders Sundelin — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 22:28:20 +0000

Nice work Tim!
I agree with you that execution, network and business model innovation is highly important, and I’m thankful for the link, though I’m not consider myself competing to win in any way with Alex and Henry

However, I am also a believer in intellectual property rights as one tool to create and capture value. There are of course great differences between creating a business model for an internet start-up with a novel service that might survive 5-10 years and spending hundreds of millions on finding new biomarkers in collaboration with different actors, that might be relevant for 25+ years. Even when designing open innovation platforms smart management of innovations and IP are crucial to create the right incentives for organizations to commit key resources, trust each other, find investors etc.

Google, considered one of the most open and transparent companies providing much of their services for free, have a business model that is highly dependent on IPRs.

Take care,
// Anders

PS. I recommend the book The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else by Hernando De Soto, its an interesting read.