[Business of Design] - Final Response: My Ideal Future
Already, I have an awesome summer internship lined up at Hot Studio, an experience design company in San Francisco. I’ll be working there amongst their user experience team as an interaction designer. I hope that working at such an established and popular design agency will allow me to explore and use the most innovative tools and approaches to solve problems and create meaningful experiences. As I mentioned in a previous post, I desire a work environment that respects autonomy and encourages mastery to further develop my strengths and abilities, as well as satiate my creative and curious mind. I do believe Hot Studio will provide this, along with people and a culture that believe and desire the same things. I have high hopes this summer for being a part of something big and influential.
In my upcoming final school year, I must choose an idea to explore as my thesis. To be honest, I am not sure yet as to what it will be, but I hope it’ll be something that empowers others, spurs thought, connects people, and is delightful. That is in part, my definition so far of a meaningful experience.
I chose to put a hold on my full-time career to go back to school because I wanted to apply the energy and passion I have to innovate and create. I wanted to move from an act of thinking to an act of doing. After grad school, I want to keep this momentum going in whatever I do. I want to cause change and make an impact. I want to add value to people’s lives in meaningful and wonderful ways, and I want to do it by designing experiences at any level necessary, in whatever form or medium it may be.
[Business of Design] - Response 11: Ideal Company Culture
I’m seeking to work at a company—and perhaps one day create a company—with a profound company culture. I have previously mentioned that my personal values are to create meaningful experiences that engage, empower, connect, and delight people in new and wonderful ways. This fills me with a sense of purpose, or a drive to use all the skills, tools, and resources available to do the best work possible. This idea of value or purpose are huge components of both Dan Pink’s and Simon Sinek’s talks on innovation and motivation in the workplace. It’s not about what we do, it’s about why we do it. A company with a strong sense of purpose will attract like-minded employees. These employees will then build meaningful products and services that customers will highly value because these products and services always set themselves apart from others that aren’t made with a sense of purpose. Everyone wants to be a part of something special, whether they are creating it or buying it. Filling basic needs isn’t enough.
Dan Pink, in his book and talk Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us, he advocates for creating a work environment that allows autonomy and encourages mastery. People want to succeed and become better at what they do, and giving them the freedom to do this can be immensely empowering. This can take the form of providing paid time for employees to explore whatever projects they wish (like Atlassian), or this can take the form of providing employees with the resources and support necessary to serve the customer in the best possible way (like Zappos). The basic premise is to treat people as intelligent and creative human beings capable of doing amazing things, not as machines meant to follow instructions and produce one deliverable after another.
Tim Brown, CEO of IDEO, brings one last element of value to my ideal company culture, which is the inclusion of creativity and play in the workplace. He speaks to the ultimate creative freedom we have as children, not being inhibited by any sense of wrong. To solve problems and create experiences that are innovative, it’s critical to provide an environment for people to think and propose ideas without fear, no matter how crazy or ambitious they may be. This environment can be fun and encourage play, to help put us in the mindset of what it’s like to think freely like a child again.
[Business of Design] - Response 10: Lessig vs. Valenti on Creativity, Commerce, and Culture
If you’re interested in learning more about the issues surrounding copyright protection and whether or not it imposes upon the creation of creativity, commerce, and culture, you should check out the debate between Larry Lessig, Professor of Law at Stanford University, and Jack Valenti, former President of the Motion Picture Association of America.
It’s probably not too difficult to figure out from the speakers’ titles alone who takes position on what side. Jack Valenti, 80-years old, has played a significant role in a major industry that spends millions of dollars producing entertainment that can be sold again and again in different formats. It’s in his best interest that he protects his industry’s content—for as long as possible…even “indefinitely, minus a day”—from being copied because it nets him and his clients more money. Valenti truly believes that a content creator deserves these rights at an almost extreme level, but when so much money is involved, it’s hard for me to believe that this is okay when such a big industry throws its weight at the government to secure what seems very much like a monopoly.
Throughout the entire debate, Valenti continuously cites the law and court decisions to back his sentiment that copyright protection in its ongoing form shouldn’t be questioned. The problem here is that Jack, even in his wise old age, doesn’t put the argument into context, which Larry Lessig continues to provide. Issues surrounding copyright infringement isn’t new, but the methods and mediums with which content is distributed have changed drastically and even exponentially in the last 30 years. From Betamax to the Internet, it has become increasingly easier to copy and share information. But rather than innovate around these new technological advancements that provide incredible opportunities to reach out and build a customer base, major content industries like the Motion Picture Association of America have thrown vast resources against sharing of any kind, at least that of which they can’t control. People want content easily accessible on whatever devices they have, and when irrational restrictions impose on what people want and think they should be able to do, those people will seek the means to break it and work around it. In the case of Napster, people enjoyed downloading and sharing digital formats of music. The record label companies rebelled against this. But fast forward to today, and you can see that they eventually caved-in to what was obviously a better and more efficient way to access and enjoy content.
Copyright isn’t always bad, but when it is allowed to continue on and on, it inhibits other people from adapting stories and experiences into new stories and experiences. To move forward, we must show restraint on imposing restraint. Jack Valenti should realize that too much of a good thing can actually be a bad thing. ©
[Business of Design] - Response 9: Working at Goldman Sachs
Read Greg Smith’s letter of resignation to Goldman Sachs, published in the New York Times, and see him bring to light how drastically Goldman Sachs culture and moral values have changed for the worse over the twelve years since he began working there. The client and their interests are no longer held to the highest level. They have instead become merely “muppets,” being pushed and pulled in directions that only serve Goldman Sachs and their needs, filling their pocket books. By publishing his resignation online—and through a major news outlet no less—Smith is sending a loud and clear message to the board of directors: “Get the culture right again, so people want to work here for the right reasons. People who care only about making money will not sustain this firm — or the trust of its clients — for very much longer.”
Although directed at the highest levels of the firm, Smith’s message impacts everyone who works there. This may prove difficult for people who agree with him, but don’t have the freedom to leave as he did. If I were put in this position, I would have some explaining to do to my clients, as well as my friends and family. I would take this opportunity to side with Smith, and do everything in my power to communicate that the service I am providing is in the client’s best interests. It might take more time to prove that, but its a huge opportunity to distinguish myself in a firm who now has to change after this public shaming, or else. All eyes are on the board of directors, but as they take their time to decide upon the responsive action, I can best serve my clients and myself by being legitimate and honest.
On March 14, 2012, Greg Smith resigned as a Goldman Sachs executive director and head of the firm’s United States equity derivatives business in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.
[Business of Design] - Response 8: Support the Triple Bottom Line
I think one important area a designer can contribute to in a company’s financial discussions is being a champion for the triple bottom line. Traditionally, there has always been one “bottom line,” which is about the measurement of corporate profit and loss. However, it has only been recently gaining in acceptance that there are two other bottom lines, which measure responsibility toward people and the planet. Most designers are trained to take both of these things into account as the focus of their profession. It makes sense they can and should be advocates of social and environmental responsibility throughout the operations of a company.
In an age where global communication is instant, brands risk too much to not take these things into consideration. Designers are definitely in tune with brand, as well as user values and experience. They understand the implications of company decisions and that they will eventually go noticed by the public. Designers don’t underestimate their customers and their capacity to care. Upholding that trust is critical.
Where measuring profit and loss can be relatively easy, measuring responsibility toward people and the planet isn’t so much. Designers are used to solving problems where there are no clear answers, especially when tackling issues regarding people and the planet. Because of their experience and training, designers can actually provide that measure companies need.
![[Business of Design] - Response 7: The “consumer decision journey”
In his article on Branding in the Digital Age, David C. Edelman describes a new way consumers connect with brands. Rather than systematically narrowing in on a single choice from a large number of choices (“The Funnel Metaphor”), consumers today utilize digital interactions and social media to add and subtract brands from a group during an extended evaluation phase (“The Consumer Decision Journey”). After purchase, consumers enhance their relationship with the brand by sharing their experience online, as opposed to focusing their relationship on the product or service itself.
A recent experience I had that reflects this “consumer decision journey” was when I bought my digital camera this past summer. I had previously owned a Nikon D40, an entry level digital SLR that came out about four or five years ago, and a much older Nikon film SLR camera prior to that. I had a strong brand loyalty and had invested over a thousand dollars in Nikon specific lenses and equipment. So when it came to purchasing a new camera, I naturally was going to go with the latest generation of Nikon, which supported HD video capabilities, a major reason for an upgrade. However, I quickly learned Nikon wasn’t the only brand that produced such cameras. Canon was the logical competitor, but comparing technology and specifications only got me so far. Through various blogs, retail sites like Amazon, and photo and video services such as Flickr, YouTube, and Vimeo, I discovered other brands that were making moves into this HD video space with other technology and in other form factors. I found myself adding and subtracting brands, as well as specific cameras, constantly. I went to a few online forums, I emailed a few photography friends I knew, and I watched a lot of online video reviews. In the end, I finally decided to buy Panasonic’s Lumix GH2, a micro four thirds digital camera, and a new lens specific for that camera. This was huge because I was so entrenched with Nikon. I have had such a good experience with my GH2 that I’ve tweeted about it and have tagged it in just about every video I’ve posted online. I even wrote a review on it, which I’ve never done before. I think all this is very exemplary of Edelman’s “consumer decision journey,” which goes to show how important it is to recognize the significance of the evaluation stage and how customer experience shared online can have a huge influence on new customers.](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m0ixviAWjo1qzhohco1_500.png)
[Business of Design] - Response 7: The “consumer decision journey”
In his article on Branding in the Digital Age, David C. Edelman describes a new way consumers connect with brands. Rather than systematically narrowing in on a single choice from a large number of choices (“The Funnel Metaphor”), consumers today utilize digital interactions and social media to add and subtract brands from a group during an extended evaluation phase (“The Consumer Decision Journey”). After purchase, consumers enhance their relationship with the brand by sharing their experience online, as opposed to focusing their relationship on the product or service itself.
A recent experience I had that reflects this “consumer decision journey” was when I bought my digital camera this past summer. I had previously owned a Nikon D40, an entry level digital SLR that came out about four or five years ago, and a much older Nikon film SLR camera prior to that. I had a strong brand loyalty and had invested over a thousand dollars in Nikon specific lenses and equipment. So when it came to purchasing a new camera, I naturally was going to go with the latest generation of Nikon, which supported HD video capabilities, a major reason for an upgrade. However, I quickly learned Nikon wasn’t the only brand that produced such cameras. Canon was the logical competitor, but comparing technology and specifications only got me so far. Through various blogs, retail sites like Amazon, and photo and video services such as Flickr, YouTube, and Vimeo, I discovered other brands that were making moves into this HD video space with other technology and in other form factors. I found myself adding and subtracting brands, as well as specific cameras, constantly. I went to a few online forums, I emailed a few photography friends I knew, and I watched a lot of online video reviews. In the end, I finally decided to buy Panasonic’s Lumix GH2, a micro four thirds digital camera, and a new lens specific for that camera. This was huge because I was so entrenched with Nikon. I have had such a good experience with my GH2 that I’ve tweeted about it and have tagged it in just about every video I’ve posted online. I even wrote a review on it, which I’ve never done before. I think all this is very exemplary of Edelman’s “consumer decision journey,” which goes to show how important it is to recognize the significance of the evaluation stage and how customer experience shared online can have a huge influence on new customers.
[Business of Design] - Response 6: Open Source Architecture
I just watched Cameron Sinclair’s TED Talk video on “Open Source Architecture” and was impressed with his demonstration on how passionate designers and architects can respond to world housing crises. His company, Architecture for Humanity, is a nonprofit organization that brings design, construction, and development services to where they are critically needed. They have created the Open Architecture Network, a hub where people around the world can collaborate and share ideas, designs, and plans to help solve local problems and respond to the specific needs in their communities.
If I could ask Cameron Sinclair a question, I would ask him why hasn’t this made a bigger splash in the United States? I can’t speak for other countries, but being in the world of design, and having an 8-year educational and professional background in landscape architecture here, I just haven’t heard about his company or Sinclair’s network. I’ve seen the power of open source and the mass collaboration of people, so I know his idea is very sound. Why isn’t this being advertised more? Why aren’t more U.S. schools and businesses involved? When I go to the website, it does appear a little dated, which makes me wonder if Architecture for Humanity needs a bit of a refresh in their branding and outreach. How do we get more designers and architects involved in what they’re doing?
[Business of Design] - Response 5: Keep it Fluid
Blog on why entrepreneurs or startup employees need to “keep it fluid” (as defined in Sull’s article).
In his article titled Disciplined Entrepreneurship, Donald N. Sull suggests an important concept to help entrepreneurs and startups construct and form their ideas, which he calls “keep it fluid.” Through his studies, Sull found that committing to a business model too early results in failure in almost every case. It’s important to realize that things can change and revisions must be possible in the light of new information (there are known unknowns, and there are unknown unknowns). Being flexible or “fluid” early in the process allows a budding company to adapt and survive.
Sull cites in his article that the founders of ONSET Ventures, a venture capital firm who focuses on early-stage startups, discovered through a robust study of 300 startup successes and failures that those who succeeded underwent at least one major change before stabilizing.
![[Business of Design] - Response 4: Pitch
Blog on your most favorite and your least favorite pitch from “Eleven Startup Pitches”– tell us what specifically you like about your most favorite pitch and what you dislike about your least favorite.
My favorite pitch out the eleven was from the speaker for Apptentive. I thought he stated both the problem and his company’s solution clearly, and what it means for both the customer and the developer on the other side. He had a working prototype, and addressed concerns regarding ease of implementation as well as application across a broad range of popular operating systems. The idea itself is strong because it can provide a direct connection between the user and the developer within any application. That means the user doesn’t have to spend extra time going to a website for contact/support information, or perhaps writing a critical review that may or may not be seen by the developer.
My least favorite pitch was from MountainLogic. The idea is interesting—conserving energy through adaptive heating and cooling—but a lot is left unanswered about who is their target audience and how do they implement these systems into existing homes. One of the judges asked after the presentation how the user wouldn’t be left trying to override the system, and I have the same question. A lot of the solution seemed geared toward preheating rooms, but this inherently sounds wasteful, since people’s behaviors or patterns change. I see how a system like this would be beneficial for large homes, but how does it scale to small homes or apartments? How does this system utilize an owners existing heating/cooling source and vents? How is this system better than the Nest, which actively shows energy consumption and helps teach the user such things such as setting the thermostat higher won’t heat a person’s home any faster? The Nest seems like a much simpler and cheaper system to implement than trying to reconfigure every room with an adaptive system.
Additional reading: Scott Berkun’s “How to Pitch”](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lzg1myO3qa1qzhohco1_1280.jpg)
[Business of Design] - Response 4: Pitch
Blog on your most favorite and your least favorite pitch from “Eleven Startup Pitches”– tell us what specifically you like about your most favorite pitch and what you dislike about your least favorite.
My favorite pitch out the eleven was from the speaker for Apptentive. I thought he stated both the problem and his company’s solution clearly, and what it means for both the customer and the developer on the other side. He had a working prototype, and addressed concerns regarding ease of implementation as well as application across a broad range of popular operating systems. The idea itself is strong because it can provide a direct connection between the user and the developer within any application. That means the user doesn’t have to spend extra time going to a website for contact/support information, or perhaps writing a critical review that may or may not be seen by the developer.
My least favorite pitch was from MountainLogic. The idea is interesting—conserving energy through adaptive heating and cooling—but a lot is left unanswered about who is their target audience and how do they implement these systems into existing homes. One of the judges asked after the presentation how the user wouldn’t be left trying to override the system, and I have the same question. A lot of the solution seemed geared toward preheating rooms, but this inherently sounds wasteful, since people’s behaviors or patterns change. I see how a system like this would be beneficial for large homes, but how does it scale to small homes or apartments? How does this system utilize an owners existing heating/cooling source and vents? How is this system better than the Nest, which actively shows energy consumption and helps teach the user such things such as setting the thermostat higher won’t heat a person’s home any faster? The Nest seems like a much simpler and cheaper system to implement than trying to reconfigure every room with an adaptive system.
Additional reading: Scott Berkun’s “How to Pitch”
![[Business of Design] - Response 3
Blog on which business model area you find most challenging and why. What are you going to do to overcome this challenge?
In the article Innovating Across the Business Model, by Peter Skarzynksi and Rowan Gibson, you will find a very accessible definition and breakdown of what is a business model— essentially it is “a conceptual framework that describes how a company creates, delivers and extracts value.”
The authors here simply break the framework into five key components: who you serve, what you serve, how you provide it, how you make money, and how you differentiate and sustain an advantage. The questions each pose is best illustrated in Figure-1 above.
If I had to pick the one area I find most challenging, I would choose the middle one, how do we provide it? because this to me clearly ventures out of the designer realm, of which I am most familiar with. All the other questions are questions I consider a designer would actually be quite good at in figuring out. The money one sticks out a bit, but as shy as some designers might be about numbers, I believe most are familiar with the different payment models out there, at least when it comes to popular consumer industries.
The how do we provide it? component can be scary to me as a designer because it really lifts something that is otherwise a concept to something that can be a reality. This is a huge and powerful transition that makes a core idea feasible in regards to human capability (money and sustainability still need to be worked out of course). There are so many different ways to provide a service, product, or system, and I wonder if providing answers to those really require a higher level of experience and expertise.
As a designer, I am often in the land of vision, ideas, and human experience. I identify most with the areas that touch the customer most. I think the key business model components of who we serve, what we provide, how we make money, and how do we differentiate ourselves from others in the eyes of the consumer make up a huge part of the experience the customer can see. How we provide it is also important to the customer experience because it ultimately supports it, but I think most of it goes, or should go, unnoticed by the customer.
To overcome this challenge best, I would need to be thrown into actually seeing a service, product, or system to reality. I don’t think there’s anything better than real experience, and I think real experience is necessary because other people need to be invested in the solution. Otherwise, conversations stay at a high level and it all just still remains an idea…
Alternatively, it would be highly beneficial for me to speak with people who have recently tackled this question and realized it. Startups come to mind, but I’m sure consultancies have certain systems themselves they enact to provide common answers. If I were starting up a business myself, I would definitely seek help or a partner in this area. From a manufacturing standpoint, I know my father would be able to provide a wealth of knowledge from his experience. He also has dealt with suppliers abroad, which can be advantageous to know in an age of outsourcing and mass production.
Image and content source: Innovating Across the Business Model - excerpted from A Blueprint for Transforming the Way Your Company Innovates by Peter Skarzynksi, Rowan Gibson](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lz32tlFzHz1qzhohco1_1280.jpg)
[Business of Design] - Response 3
Blog on which business model area you find most challenging and why. What are you going to do to overcome this challenge?
In the article Innovating Across the Business Model, by Peter Skarzynksi and Rowan Gibson, you will find a very accessible definition and breakdown of what is a business model— essentially it is “a conceptual framework that describes how a company creates, delivers and extracts value.”
The authors here simply break the framework into five key components: who you serve, what you serve, how you provide it, how you make money, and how you differentiate and sustain an advantage. The questions each pose is best illustrated in Figure-1 above.
If I had to pick the one area I find most challenging, I would choose the middle one, how do we provide it? because this to me clearly ventures out of the designer realm, of which I am most familiar with. All the other questions are questions I consider a designer would actually be quite good at in figuring out. The money one sticks out a bit, but as shy as some designers might be about numbers, I believe most are familiar with the different payment models out there, at least when it comes to popular consumer industries.
The how do we provide it? component can be scary to me as a designer because it really lifts something that is otherwise a concept to something that can be a reality. This is a huge and powerful transition that makes a core idea feasible in regards to human capability (money and sustainability still need to be worked out of course). There are so many different ways to provide a service, product, or system, and I wonder if providing answers to those really require a higher level of experience and expertise.
As a designer, I am often in the land of vision, ideas, and human experience. I identify most with the areas that touch the customer most. I think the key business model components of who we serve, what we provide, how we make money, and how do we differentiate ourselves from others in the eyes of the consumer make up a huge part of the experience the customer can see. How we provide it is also important to the customer experience because it ultimately supports it, but I think most of it goes, or should go, unnoticed by the customer.
To overcome this challenge best, I would need to be thrown into actually seeing a service, product, or system to reality. I don’t think there’s anything better than real experience, and I think real experience is necessary because other people need to be invested in the solution. Otherwise, conversations stay at a high level and it all just still remains an idea…
Alternatively, it would be highly beneficial for me to speak with people who have recently tackled this question and realized it. Startups come to mind, but I’m sure consultancies have certain systems themselves they enact to provide common answers. If I were starting up a business myself, I would definitely seek help or a partner in this area. From a manufacturing standpoint, I know my father would be able to provide a wealth of knowledge from his experience. He also has dealt with suppliers abroad, which can be advantageous to know in an age of outsourcing and mass production.
Image and content source: Innovating Across the Business Model - excerpted from A Blueprint for Transforming the Way Your Company Innovates by Peter Skarzynksi, Rowan Gibson
Business of Design - Response 2
Blog on cultural or technical trends that are influencing you now. How are they changing your behavior or beliefs?
Social:To begin, it’s difficult to overlook social online networking giants like Facebook and Twitter, but having been somewhat of an early adopter of these, my opinions and behaviors have shifted to one of welcome and delight to one of avoidance and stress. I began with MySpace long long ago, but have since then looked toward newer solutions like Google+, which allows you to group friends and family into “circles” (sharing only designated information with each), and most recently Path, a smartphone application that claims it’s more of a journal that you can only invite a limited number of individuals to view.
There’s a trend now of moving away from the massive “friends” list many of us have accumulated on Facebook (not to mention huge privacy issues and in my opinion, a horrible and inundating UI) and the public out-spewing of information to the world on Twitter (which I am guilty of too no less) to something much more elegant, simple, seamless, and meaningful. In the end, I believe the application Path does this best, bringing delight and ease to sharing personal things again (I just need to convince more of my family and close friends to join!).
But it’s difficult to drop the boat anchors that are Facebook and Twitter. Where else do you keep your network of grade school, high school, and college friends you no longer see? Where do you broadcast and publicize your thoughts and views to the world? Because these networks connect us worldwide from our pockets, news can spread and movements can form extremely quickly as we’ve recently seen. So they play an important part, and aren’t likely to go away.
I guess when it comes to social networks, I am driven to simplify my life with an app that does all, but maybe that’s impossible in the way I want it. In any case, my online communications I admit are fragmented and must be reigned in and simplified. I know some mobile operating systems are now trying to do this, combine them all under one interface, taking the stress and management off the user. But will the networks suffice to be just pipelines in this? Maybe they will have no choice to become something of what has become of email….of which in turn will likely fade away altogether.
Robotics/DIY/Modularity/Customization/Hacking: I’d like to mention that I’m excited to see a resurgence in robots. I believe the cost of making them, building them, and programming them is becoming more accessible then ever due to smaller, cheaper, and easier to assemble components, coupled with graphical user interfaces and coding language that’s “easier” to use. I believe this is helping to fuel the DYI (do-it-yourself) movement and the desire for modularity and customization. These things threaten the likes of Apple products today, which are inherently closed and super integrated with each other (a compromise many of us consumers make for elegant, simple, seamless, and consistent solutions).
DIY and hacking is extremely important because it allows people to explore their curiosities and seek solutions, which can be grounds for true innovations. In the rising era of smaller and more efficient businesses, I believe it’s incredibly important and even necessary to embrace this trend.
Ultimately, I believe we’ll come to a meeting point where we won’t have to make the compromise between an enjoyable and consistent user experience that Apple offers, and something we can customize or even build ourselves. 3D printers are already in people’s homes, and there are already prototypes of printers printing circuitry on a piece of paper.
Modernizing Education: There is a lot of outcry going on about the current state of education in the United States. As I am made more aware of it, I am becoming ever more compelled to do something about it, and using existing and future technology to do it. Although there has been some criticism surrounding Apple’s new effort behind education and interactive textbooks, it warms me to think that we can engage our youth—who are our future—with the best we have to offer.
A Gameful World: The word gameful was made up by Jane McGonical in direct opposition of the word playful, which she believes represents a light heartedness or casualness around an activity. In contrast, she came up with gameful as a way to more accurately describe gamers who are much more focused and driven toward overcoming an obstacle or objective. Having just saw her speak last night, I am delighted to share her vision of a world where we take the engagement, positiveness, and cooperation (to mention only a few) of gaming and apply it to real world issues. Already and most recently, gamers have solved and created a protein in 10 days that scientists hadn’t been able to solve in 10 years, in a free online game called Foldit.
Having been an avid gamer myself from the age of 4 across an incredibly wide range of games, I completely see the benefits of gaming heuristics (with a strong emphasis on meaning, engagement, and empowerment) on the real world. To a large extent, I believe I have applied this mentality to many design problems, but not necessarily realizing it. I’d like to put it to the forefront of some of my problem solving skills and see what happens.
Steve Jobs Solved the Innovator's Dilemma - James Allworth - Harvard Business Review
“They can do it because Apple hasn’t optimized its organization to maximize profit. Instead, it has made the creation of value for customers its priority. When you do this, the fear of cannibalization or disruption of one’s self just melts away. In fact, when your mission is based around creating customer value, around creating great products, cannibalization and disruption aren’t “bad things” to be avoided. They’re things you actually strive for — because they let you improve the outcome for your customer.”
Optional reading for Business of Design
