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.
Today there seems to be a lot of confusion about the trends that are developing on the Market. That is, for each Trend, there are…
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…
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.
We are sure that we understand what radical (disruptive) innovation is?
The inability to understand the essence of change leads us to think that the response to the reduced spending of the Customers must be a reduced price of the product. But the plus point of the product is not the low-price (which is also necessary), but in its sustainability.
“Futuristic vision” and insustainable products: cases of Flying cars, self-driving cars and electric city car°
Flying Cars, Self-driving cars are a typical case of unsustainability of “futurist” projects. Here we commit the typical error of the application of the linear evolution mindset in a disruptive context (ie we try to solve a problem without trying to go to the root of this problem).
With a really disruptive innovation it is possible to have solutions to the really effective traffic problems (also in the case of the “Flying cars”).
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.
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 “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.