Expanding the definition of disruptive innovation
Zipcar counts as a disruptive innovation. Uber doesn’t. The latter is according to Clayton Christensen, Michael Raynor, and Rory McDonald in their recent HBR article “What is Disruptive Innovation?” The authors explain that disruption “describes a process whereby a smaller company with fewer resources is able to successfully challenge established incumbent businesses.” They also write that “disruptive innovations originate in low-end or new-market footholds.” Zipcar, qualifies as a disruptive innovation because it created a whole new market: demand for cars rented by the hour (as well as by the day). For them, applying technology in a totally new way — to reserve and open the cars — was a key enabler of this new market segment. Without the internet and wireless communications, car rental by the hour was an impossibly expensive and tedious transaction for such a small increment of time. Founded back in 2000, Zipcar effectively modeled how technology could be applied to open up entirely new markets, as well as new ways of using existing assets. Christensen, Raynor, and McDonald argue that Uber is not disruptive because it offers neither a low-end service, nor a new market. Using that lens, we can agree that Uber is basically a taxi service. It provided a well-designed app that took the dispatch function out of the black car and traditional taxi markets. This was not world changing. But what was totally disruptive was when Uber adopted Lyft’s model: enabling people to drive their own cars as taxis, particularly via its UberX service. The breakthrough lay in tapping excess capacity: downtime from your other means of earning income and making use of the car you already owned.
Do you think that Christensen’s disruption theory is incomplete and missing the new disruption in town?
How would you defend your point of view regarding disruptive innovation (Give your own understanding of Christensen’s theory)
It is no surprise that Virtual Reality has made a splash into today’s world. The technology is unique and has unlimited potential. VR has the ability to place users in a simulated environment and allow them to interact in 3D worlds. Many companies including Google, GoPro, Apple, and Sony are investing into VR which means that it may become commonplace in the near future. The article talks about the potential of VR marketing. For example, a person can experience business class on a flight or a luxury-style apartment before payment. Well, this may become possible with VR advertising. Car brands have realized the potential of this advertising and companies such as Audi, Jaguar, and Volvo already releasing VR ads. VR advertising gives consumers the ability to essentially try out and see the product in a new way before committing to a purchase.
- Do you think more companies will adopt this new trend of VR advertising? Are there any downsides?
- Where other markets and industries do you think we will see VR in?
- As a company who may see VR as a threat to their business, how would you suggest they approach this threat?
Big data has been a growing topic for some time now, however, not all companies both large and small may realize its potential to running a successful business. Big data is becoming more mainstream and is now being used to drive businesses as opposed to simply look back and reflect on previous performance. The article states that not all businesses are aware of the value this data can bring which can lead to a lack of vision, plan, and communication.
1.) How do you see big data shaping the way companies do business?
2.) Do you think big data is necessary for all companies whether it is a large corporation or a small local business?
In today’s world of sports, data is being collected everywhere. From sports management and broadcasting to gaming and fantasy companies, data is being collected and used in a variety of ways to both make money and improve the overall experience. Teams utilize statistics to analyze players, build teams, and determine their strategies. Management analyzes data in order to improve ticket sales, merchandising, and marketing. Coaches keep track of data on training, diet, and overall health to help their players to learn and excel. It seems the entire sports world revolves around the collection, analysis, and utilization of data.
Do you think big data is being used to it’s fullest potential in the sports world?
Do you see any uses of data that have not been adopted yet in the sports world?
Do you think the sports industry would survive if it took a step back from its reliance on big data?
Does Face recognition as simple as google image search intrude with our personal privacy? Us as individual, we don’t really think about how our personal features are being used to come in contact with personal data. Some of the features we identify a person are by finger print, ethnicity, and etc. The way those features are used are under confidential use. These days there are facial recognition that will identify their names, addresses, and also other personal data that the individual might have share about their life on public media. All of those data that have been attached to basically just pictures of an individual and anyone in this world would be able to find out information about another individual by easily searching another through facial recognition of some sort.
Does this intrude your privacy?
What are some way that you might protect yourself from others finding out information about you that you don’t want others to know about?
Blockchain technology has been on the cutting edge of IT innovation in business recently. IBM is the first to launch a functional “Blockchain as a Service” offering (yesterday) largely due to IBM developers played a large role in the Hyperledger Fabric project (integrating blockchain into apps/solutions). This release gives IBM a huge advantage in winning market share because they are the first to offer an enterprise platform to firms without them having to take on the risks of deploying the technology themselves. IBM is already working on multiple blockchain applications including a Canadian “digital identity” app and a “green asset management platform.”
Do you think Blockchain as a Service will become a popular enterprise platform (noting the security risks)?
Jones, David. “IBM Launches Enterprise-Strength Blockchain as a Service.”TechNewsWorld.com. Tech News World, 20 Mar. 2017. Web. 21 Mar. 2017. <http://www.technewsworld.com/story/IBM-Launches-Enterprise-Strength-Blockchain-as-a-Service-84390.html>.
The article (cited below) explores the possibility of artificial intelligence replacing 13% of lawyer hours, which would replace 2.5% of lawyers per year over five years. Big law firms are currently looking to AI to perform such duties as document searches and contract writing. This would make technology a greater asset to the legal field than it has ever in the past.
- Do you think in the future that technology can become a form of cost savings (ERP, DM) and even further down a form of making money (knowledge transfer) to legal firms?
- If you do, how long do you it will take?
- Does this make AI (potentially) a disruptor in the legal field?
On the global battlefield of cyberwarfare, there’s a vast army of faceless foot soldiers and they’ve just been revealed as double agents. The directed denial of service (DDoS) attack that brought the Internet to its knees one day last month used everyday household appliances like cameras, universal remotes, DVRs and even washing machines. That’s likely to become increasingly commonplace in a technology-dependent world, experts say.The stakes are mounting as “smart home” devices connected by increasingly ubiquitous Internet of Things technology and designed to help consumers run their homes with ease now come with a distinct risk. They are being transformed into drones for security breaches.Such devices now number more than 6 billion. A big problem is that most consumers use default passwords on these appliances that can easily be hacked. Because of their limited computing capacity, “most of the IoT devices were not designed with serious protection capability, and so are susceptible to attack,These devices usually don’t have the additional processing power needed to carry out the extra load for security protection. The disruptive ability of hackers is also amplifying concerns about artificial intelligence, a booming technology market in itself that is increasingly intertwined with IoT. The massive trove of data these devices produce is a potential gold mine for tech manufacturers and malicious actors alike.
- What do you think is the best way to protect your house from these hackers?
- Do you current smart home devices in your house?
Wearable devices are a hot topic and at the center of discussion related to the Internet of Things (IoT), as illustrated by the new $5,000 “Make it Wearable” challenge recently issued by Intel. Some of the first evolution of the functionality that wearable devices are already delivered are related to identification and security. Maybe you don’t consider the badge you wear at work a wearable device. Health- and fitness-oriented wearable devices that offer biometric measurements such as heart rate, perspiration levels, and even complex measurements like oxygen levels in the bloodstream are also becoming available. Other function such as ingratiating wearable device with your smart-home, being able to read other people health conditions.No matter what direction wearable devices evolve over the next few years, it seems that they will need to be a more integrated element in the IoT in order to provide the wide range of features we’re all expecting.
What other break through opportunity do you see coming from wearable devices?
What issues do you see in there wearable devices?
Big data has become one of the biggest trends through the years, with the number of businesses collecting big data increasing by 58% in 2013. Securing this data has become one of the main problems of having and managing big data. It is costly to add security practices, but breaches are more costly. Network breaches of Target and Sony have cost these companies $1.1 billion and $171 million dollars respectively. These breaches have put pressure on companies to protect their data, and for some companies, their data is always increasing/changing. There are also issues with assigning the right people to access the systems, a single point of breach can lead to vulnerabilities to the whole system. With many systems using a distribution model for big data, there are concerns of multiple points of vulnerabilities and securing the transfer of data through these systems can become a challenge.
There are practices that can be implemented to secure data. The addition of security software and real-time monitoring software can detect intrusions. Companies can also monitor and analyze audit logs to see what is happening to their systems and what attacks are being launched on the systems. Finally, managing privileges and access while having strong passwords and limited password attempts can prevent unauthorized access.
- Can companies fully protect themselves from cyber attacks like the ones on Target and Sony?
- Would you trust companies with your data? If not, what would you want them to do to earn your trust?
- What are other preventive measures you would implement to protect big data?