The leading blog on nanocellulose
Having demonstrated the viscosity stabilizing effect of Exilva in starch adhesives, for this third blog post in the corrugated boards application series, I will focus on the effect on glue ability and production speed.Read more
Most innovation is focused on improving core business, both in small increments and large jumps, to keep ahead of competitors. Disruption can make such innovation worthless e.g. in 2004, wet film photographic technology was overwhelmed by digital photography.
In this article we look at how innovation is becoming a vital part of corporate risk management, developing alternative survival strategies as disruptive changes hit organisations.
Faced with disruptive changes to the economic environment, only those businesses that are flexible and responsive can survive and prosper. Those not responding quickly enough will die off like the dinosaurs, but it’s getting harder to react enough in time – now you need to pre-empt change.
This article continues to illustrate the risks of not being ahead of the game so looks at investing wisely in exploiting advances in materials and technology to survive and prosper, like the birds.
Long-standing policies towards research and development no longer support manufacturers’ success, as mergers and globalization continue, due to: 1) Demands for bigger profits from investors who are distant from the business reality; 2) Bigger investment in innovation needed to give future success; 3) Shortening timescales as globalization introduces pressures from BRIC economies.
The investment in change needed for high business performance in five years will compromise business performance in the short- to medium-term. The trade-off facing the Executive of any organisation is between investment in strategic goals and delivering acceptable (‘survival’) performance in the meantime. Here are 4 high-level approaches you should consider – and a hot tip from our side.
The business case is central to directing investment in most organisations, but business cases are often biased substantially in favor of the outcome desired by their authors. It is the role of a responsible Executive to reject such ‘fantasy’ business cases, but this can lead to hard rules that also reject strategic investments in innovation.