Thomas F. Huang

  • I find the most interesting industry that autonomous vehicles will disrupt is the emergency services industry (police, emt, firefighters). When and if autonomous vehicles reach a critical mass, emergency services will be able to communicate with the cars on the road to tell them to get out of the way in order for them to travel as quickly as…[Read more]

  • I agree with Dan. I don’t believe Apple can disrupt the luxury watch market. A smartwatch has a life cycle, a watch by Rolex or Omega does not. You are expected to purchase a new smartwatch when the next iteration comes around, while the value of the luxury watch increases as it ages. Apple watches may be more functional, but no one buys a…[Read more]

  • I like the concept. Right now it’s invite only but the button is free for Prime members so I can see a lot of people jumping on it.
    If you see an item that needs restocking and the button to replenish it is right next to you, then the integration is more seamless than having to purchase the item on your computer, smartwatch, smartphone or going…[Read more]

  • Thumbnail

    As our presentations draw closer, I did some research on how best to present ideas to the panel of judges who would be considered angel investors.

    I found a nice Forbes article by Carmine Gallo with five […]

    • I think most of the advice in common knowledge because its expected that when you present you should be engaging and that the product should solve a problem. I think tip number 3, “the presenters should be passionate about their product during their pitch” and tip number 4, “if the product does not solve a problem, investors will likely not care about it are tips that will help our presentations because its important to be passionate and enjoy the product/app you are creating. If you believe in your product and you know it will solve a problem, the investors will be more likely to invest in your product.

  • Honesty and transparency are very important in the workplace as long as the feedback is objective. Additionally, the feedback should be distributed in such a way as not to raise emotions so those providing the feedback should be careful about their tone during communications.
    The only time I can see withholding bad news as being the better choice…[Read more]

  • In our first meeting with our mentor, he expressed serious concerns regarding our marketing strategy. This was because we didn’t have one. Each of us may have had some sense of how we wanted to market the application, but there wasn’t a clear direction.

    This Entrepreneur article provides five marketing tips for a startup.

    1. Focus on customer experience

    This means designing a simple application that is easy to use. No matter how good an application is, if people have difficulty using it, they won’t.

    2. Cross promotions/exposure

    Know your target demographic. Where do they usually hang out (online or offline)? Promote your products at these places.

    3. Content strategies

    “Establish your brand as a subject-matter expert.”

    4. Build virality into your product/experience

    How can you get people to share your startup naturally?

    5. Media exposure

    If you can’t get top-tier media exposure, getting blogs to write about you is a good start.

    This is in no way a comprehensive list. Do you agree or disagree with these points? Are there tips that you would consider more valuable than the ones listed above?

    • I think it’s a good list, though the 4th point is a bit odd. If you strive to be “viral,” you may lose sight of creating quality content because you’re focusing so much on being popular. I think that something else that isn’t really mentioned is outreach/back-links and general SEO things. In the online space especially, connecting with experts who can push your content or provide content for you is essential to being successful.

  • I think the best way is to hold workshops that encourage “deeper” thinking. The workshop should have examples that combat narrow minded thinking. For example, many people consider the McDonald’s coffee lawsuit to be frivolous. The workshop can begin with getting everyone’s opinion on this topic. When most people agree with this assertion (which is…[Read more]

  • I like the idea of the self evaluation. It provides a back and forth conversation that allows you to counter negative aspects of your review. However, I can see it backfiring if your reviewer does not agree with your points and they may view it as you questioning their authority. In addition, when most people talk about their achievements, they…[Read more]

  • Thumbnail

    This article regarding performance reviews says that reviews a few times a year are meaningless. It states that company performance reviews should be like that of sports teams, immediate feedback as opposed to […]

    • I believe that informal and formal reviews are the best way for employees to grow and add value in an organization. Informal feedback sessions can help keep employees on task, as well as keeping them motivated to continue different projects in the short run. This can also help keep employees excited about the work that they are doing. More formal feedback sessions should be kept for career mobility, compensation discussions, and larger, longer term projects. These are different motivation factors that need to be addressed, and are more appropriate in a formal, documented session.

  • As long as people using Uber understand that self-driving cars are safer than human operated cars, they will continue to use Uber. For me personally, I want to get from Point A to Point B and have no interest in speaking with the driver about their long days slaving away at work so I very much enjoy the idea of driverless cars.
    It really depends…[Read more]

  • Thumbnail

    http://www.theverge.com/transportation/2015/3/17/8232187/elon-musk-human-drivers-are-dangerous

    We discussed heavily in class the disruptive innovation of autonomous vehicles. What I found most interesting […]

    • I think once autonomous car adoption reaches a critical mass, autonomous cars will be required to drive on the road. However, like the article you posted said, it will take about 20 years before autonomous cars enter the mainstream. Therefore, that leaves a lot of time for the general public to fully realize the benefits of autonomous cars. Once people see the time and money that could be saved as well as the increased safety, the public will be looking toward autonomous cars and so a government mandate won’t face too much backlash. I also don’t believe the government would need a cash for clunkers program or 0% interest loans because in 20 years the technology will get cheaper and auto manufacturers will be able to make more affordable models of autonomous cars.

    • I also saw many regulations while doing my research, and also read about the fact that one day people will no longer be able to drive themselves around. My first thought was that it would be impossible to accomplish that goal. But after thinking it over, I realized that these laws are almost 10-20 years away. If autonomous cars begin to sell in 5 years, in another 20 years they will be the only cars available. In 20 years, it will be mostly autonomous cars on the market, even used ones. An example would be Blackberry, that was at one point the world’s most popular phone. Today how many people in our class alone have a blackberry? None.

      Ford has also said they want to make their autonomous car affordable for their customers. One article I read, a Ford representative said what’s the point in making this amazing technology if not everyone can use it.

    • I think that were the government to adopt an “autonomous cars only” policy, it would have to prepare the public for the policy over an extended period of time. First, legislation would be introduced that would force automakers to gradually decrease the proportion of new non-autonomous vehicles they manufacture, and the government would announce the impending “autonomous cars only” policy’s date of effectiveness several years in advance. Next, the government would most likely offer the equivalent of a Cash-for-Clunkers incentive (as you mentioned) to encourage consumers to upgrade to autonomous vehicles. Lastly, it would begin enforcing the “autonomous cars only” policy, meaning that drivers of traditional vehicles (police officers and other emergency services personnel, perhaps?) would have to hold special licenses.

    • I think the most interesting part about this is how the insurance companies will regulate it. I also do not think the government will absolutely ban regular cars because as we said for stick shift, driving could become a hobby. How the insurance companies will deal with accidents caused by self driving cars will be pretty interesting to analyze in the long run.

  • 1.1 or 1.2 GHz processor for $1,300? It’s not disrupting anything.

  • Surviving Disruption

    We discussed extensively in class about what disruptive innovation is and provided examples of disruptive innovation. We did not cover as much on how to survive disruptive innovation.

    In the article that I’ve linked, Wessel and Christensen suggest that incumbents assess three factors to determine if they can survive the disruptive innovation:

    1. Identify the strengths of your disrupter’s business model

    Are there disadvantages in the disrupter’s business model that offsets their advantage? This will help determine the types of customers the disrupter will and won’t attract so the incumbent can figure if those customers are worth retaining.

    2. Identify your own relative advantages

    An incumbent must know its own business when a disrupter begins to disrupt so that it can determine how best to compete with them.

    3. Evaluate the conditions that would help or hinder the disrupter from co-opting your current advantages in the future

    So how can the incumbent better serve its customers to make the disrupter less attractive, thereby creating barriers for the customer to switch.

    Do you think these three are the best factors to determine how an incumbent may be able to survive a disrupter? Do you think there are other factors that the article does not cover?

  • Thumbnail

    http://www.cio.com/article/2421759/business-analytics/new-model-reinvents-how-it-gets-funded.html

    Instead of having a chargeback model for organizations with IT as Engine Room, do you think it is better for […]

  • 1. I think 5 million is the right number for them to manufacture just because this product is not innovative. They are currently playing catch up to a variety of vendors such as Samsung, LG, and Motorola. This is the first real product that Apple has come up with after Steve Jobs’ death so they are being cautious.

    2. With this product? No, this…[Read more]

  • Silicon Valley is the next Silicon Valley. There is simply no alternative.
    Las Vegas is not a city that white collar workers will want to live in. We talked about Iowa in class and how no one would want to go there for work, it’s almost the same thing with Las Vegas. If you have the talent, you will be going to Silicon Valley. If you don’t have…[Read more]

  • We discussed a lot about the merits of both on-premises and cloud based ERPs, but according to Gartner, on-premises ERPs will be considered “legacy systems” by 2016.

    The main argument from Gartner is that companies are seeking to lower IT costs and to increase flexibility. Additionally, on-premises ERPs created more value for consultancies that helped companies implement them than the companies themselves. The thought of an integrated ERP was great in theory, but many companies have failed to capture this supposed value. I don’t know if on-premises ERPs will be considered legacy by 2016 because many companies will be unwilling to abandon systems they’ve spent millions on, but I agree that they are on their way out, regardless of industry. Do you guys agree with Gartner’s assertion that on-premises ERPs will be considered legacy systems?

    http://www.pcworld.com/article/2092740/gartner-todays-onpremises-erp-systems-will-soon-get-the-legacy-label.html

    • I agree with Gartner’s assertion that on-premises ERPs will be considered legacy systems because new technology is constantly developing at an extremely rapid rate. Companies constantly have to customize their on-premises ERP systems, which tends to be very expensive and inconvenient. Technology experts will definitely come up with a better solution due to the need being in demand. I also agree with Gartner because it is a reliable source that utilizes highly trusted researchers as we learned in MIS2501.

  • 1) A difference between the two is that classification is manual, where categories are created beforehand for the data; clustering however, uses data to figure out where it should go without external […]

  • 1. Financial analysts can use decision trees to determine the probability of bear or bull in response to say, Microsoft’s recent unveiling. The fact that there were no leaks makes the probability of bull higher; […]

  • Load More
Skip to toolbar