Most of the considerations on the near future of Business are wrong because they are based on a “linear” conception of the evolution of the Market that is not able to perceive what the real changes are taking place.
Radical changes are not an option: those who do not adapt to the are out of the Market.
There are a lot of misandestundings about .
In times of radical change () like the current one, to develop an effective Innovation – changes in strategies – it is necessary to follow the principles of Disruptive Innovation, or changes are produced that do not bring anything positive to the Value of the product (to the results of sales).
That is, when you are in a phase of non-linear evolution () it is necessary to make a radical change° of mindset and structures (a true change of the Business Paradigm).
The Disruptive Innovation
In the eras of disruption it is necessary to develop new skills of interpreting the (a Trends Forecasting more suited to the new ). Trends Forecasting for the Disruption Age
Today it is necessary to develop a that overturns its paradigm, the Marketing of pro-sumers (the Participated Marketing).Toward to New Marketing (1): Beyond the tools of the current market
To understand the New Demand, it is necessary to understand that either we adapt to trends
with a correct interpretation or sooner or later we are thrown out of the market (or politics). Trends Forecasting for the Disruption Age
We do not need intellingent factories, but intellingent people capable of conceiving radically new products, production and distribution methods.
It is therefore not a question of improving machines, but of improving the human factor of design / production / distribution.
My Articles on Misunderstandings about innovation
Today there seems to be a lot of confusion about the trends that are developing on the Market: for each Trend, there are interpretations of a completely opposite sign.
At the basis of everything there is – as often happens in modern culture – a semantic question, of meanings of terms.
It happens that over time some terms that describe social aspects of human life take on a different meaning from the original one.
● The difficulty of understanding (to explain) the concept of radical change (disruptive innovation) - There is a lack of of the meaning of the terms referred to innovation like "radical", "different" ("disruptive"). This does not allow the majority of the Market Player to develop a truly salable value. These terms indicate a substantial difference, or something absolutely new which is found on a plan completely different from the previous one. but today efforts are being made to develop "different" strategies which, however, remain on the same level, on the same qualitative level as the previous strategies.
● The basic misunderstanding on real (disruptive) innovation - Disruptive innovation is a “revolution” of the context in which it operates: this means “radical change” (from the roots) of culture, of the mindset used up to that point (change of operating principles, of conception of values, of a design approach, of types of communication, etc.).
● The lack of a real Innovation - Today there is no real innovation (attractive and sustainable for Customer), both by the part of the Big Player of the Market and by the part of the Public Administration.
● Disruptive innovation: religion, scam or necessity for those who want to stay in the market? – Today the market continues to apply a non-disruptive mindset even when the data indicate this modality inexorably fails.
To innovate means to change. When there are major changes in the Society, it is necessary to adapt. There is no choice.
Are we sure that we understand what radical (disruptive) innovation is?
● The misunderstanding on Innovation by Manager, Consultants and Pundits - Today Managers and Consultants & the “intellectuals” are focused on the past: it is not bad faith, but it is a lack of ability to recognize the new.
● The misunderstanding on Industry 4.0: towards Manufacturing 4.0 - The “revolution” (dirsruption) that is transforming the world of production is a phenomenon radically different from the one today defined as Industry 4.0.
The change concerns not only the product, but everything connected to it. Today it is necessary: a rethinking - the why of a product - the ideation/design process - the production/distribution process. We move on to a new era of the new Economy: the Context economy.
● Does it really exist to the possibility of having an Artificial Intelligence? (the unsustainability of the AI)  - Can a “machine” actually make correct decisions? Science, with foundamentals principles (many Nobels) says No.
● The great Firms are not able to develop disruptive innovation within them - the consolidated companies of the market literally can’t develop disruptive innovation within them. they are the object of disruption, and therefore can not be the subject. the problem: ● lack of “intuition” ● lack of culture of (real) innovation. a real (disruptive) innovation can only come with a fresh start, from new comers.<
My Articles on Industry 4.0
THE CURRENT CONCEPTION OF INDUSTRY 4.0 DOES NOT REPRESENT A REAL INNOVATION at all. A radically new concept of product is needed, and from this a new concept of Production and Distribution must be born.
The need of a disruptive innovation of method of the Industrial Age
● The misunderstanding on Industry 4.0: towards Manufacturing 4.0 - There is a profound misunderstanding on Trend Industry 4.0. To develop products capable of satisfying the new Demand there is a need for a disruptive innovation of production that goes beyond the industrial phase. We move on to a new era of the new Economy: the Context economy.
● Industry 4.0: the Smart manufacturing (& SmartFAB)° - THE CURRENT CONCEPTION OF INDUSTRY 4.0 DOES NOT REPRESENT A REAL INNOVATION at all. New truly disruptive trend is developing from the point of view of the Product and the Production/Distribution phases: Smart Manufacturing.
● Towards a radically new model of Industry 4.0: introduction to a Smart Fabrication plan - The Fab Labs are part of the Market that is now at sunset (a failed Model). But from some qualities of Fab Labs new Business Models can be born (and new ways of Production/Distribution).
The Market (big Players) is unable to develop real innovation
● The great Firms are not able to develop disruptive innovation within them – Big Players of the Market literally can’t develop the radical innovation required by the new Demand (disruptive innovation ) within them.
Incumbents ARE THE OBJECT OF DISRUPTION, and therefore CAN NOT BE THE SUBJECT.
● The lack of a real Innovation - Today there is no real innovation (actractive and sustanable for Customer), both by the part of the Big Player of the Market and by the part of the Public Administration. It is necessary TO RESET THE INNOVATION.
● The need of an Ecosystem of Innovation – In a period of radical change in every sector of social life (and production activities), innovation needs to be developed in a brand new general Ecosystem.
The change in the Work
There will be a new Culture of Work in which the work will again become subordinate to everyday life. The work return to being creative (artisan): EACH WORKER WILL BE ABLE TO BRING THEIR OWN PERSONAL QUALITIES AS ADDED VALUE TO THE PRODUCT. And it will be developed IN A COLLABORATIVE DIMENSION.
[ INNOVA site ]
● “the new way of working” – There will be a new Culture of Work in which the work will again become subordinate to everyday life. The work return to being creative (artisan): EACH WORKER WILL BE ABLE TO BRING THEIR OWN PERSONAL QUALITIES AS ADDED VALUE TO THE PRODUCT. And it will be developed in A COLLABORATIVE DIMENSION.
[ TrendInsights site ]
● The new dimension of Work – The introduction of new tools (based, on ICT, IoT, …), and the development of new ways of social interaction and new modes of work and consumption, is inducing a virtuous circle of evolution in the Society.
● The need to update the Peters Principle – The Peter principle must be updated as the Market has changed profoundly since the text was written: TODAY COMPETENCE IS ALREADY EXCLUDED IN THE RECRUITMENT PHASE.
In the future there will be a radical transformation of the way of working, primarily in relation to competence. Paradoxically, incompetence is required as a quality at the time of recruitment because the real competence (on the qualities that the product must have to satisfy the needs of the consumer) comes into conflict with the spin-oriented qualities of the big players.