Innovators Dna Free Essays

string(43) " for virtually every CEO around the world\." (Continued from front flap) is the Horace Beesley Professor of Strategy at the Marriott School, Brigham Young University. He is widely published in strategy and business journals and was the fourth most cited management scholar from 1996–2006. is a professor of leadership at INSEAD. We will write a custom essay sample on Innovators Dna or any similar topic only for you Order Now He consults to organizations around the world on innovation, globalization, and transformation and has published extensively in leading academic and business journals. is the Robert and Jane Cizik Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School and the architect of and the world’s oremost authority on disruptive innovation. â€Å"Businesses worldwide have been guided and in uenced by e Innovator’s Dilemma and e Innovator’s Solution. Now e Innovator’s DNA shows where it all starts. is book gives you the fundamental building blocks for becoming more innovative and changing the world. One of the most important books to come out this year, and one that will remain pivotal reading for years to come. † Chairman and CEO, salesforce. com; author, Behind the Cloud â€Å" e Innovator’s DNA is the ‘how to’ manual to innovation, and to the fresh thinking that is the root of innovation. It has dozens of simple tricks that any person and any team can use today to discover the new ideas that solve the important problems. Buy it now and read it tonight. Tomorrow you will learn more, create more, inspire more. † Chairman of the Executive Committee, Intuit Inc. â€Å" e Innovator’s DNA sheds new light on the once-mysterious art of innovation by showing that successful innovators exhibit common behavioral habits—habits that can boost anyone’s creative capacity. † author, e 7 Habits of Highly E ective People and e Leader in Me Having worked with Clayton Christensen on innovation for over a decade, I can see that e Innovator’s DNA continues to stretch our thinking with insights that challenge convention and enable progress in the important cause of innovation . . . so critical to competitiveness and growth. † retired Chairman of the Board and CEO, e Procter Gamble Company Also by Clayton M. Christensen: Bestselling Author of e Innovator’s Dilemma You can be as innovative and impactful— if you can change your behaviors to improve your creative impact. In e Innovator’s DNA, authors Je Dyer, Hal Gregersen, and bestselling author Clayton M. Christensen ( e Innovator’s Dilemma, e Innovator’s Solution) build on what we know about disruptive innovation to show how individuals can develop the skills necessary to move progressively from idea to impact. By identifying behaviors of the world’s best innovators—from leaders at Amazon and Apple to those at Google, Skype, and Virgin Group—the authors outline ve discovery skills that distinguish innovative entrepreneurs and executives from ordinary managers: Associating, Questioning, Observing, Networking, and Experimenting. Once you master these competencies (the authors provide a self assessment for rating your own innovator’s DNA), the authors explain how you can generate ideas, collaborate with colleagues to implement them, and build innovation skills throughout your organization to sharpen its competitive edge. at innovation advantage can translate into a premium in your company’s stock price—an innovation premium—that is possible only by building the code for innovation right into your organization’s people, processes, and guiding philosophies. Practical and provocative, e Innovator’s DNA is an essential resource for individuals and teams who want to strengthen their innovative prowess. (Continued on back flap) 100092 00 i-vi r1 rr. qxp 5/13/11 6:52 PM Page i THE INNOVATOR’S DNA 100092 00 i-vi r1 rr. qxp 5/13/11 6:52 PM Page ii 100092 00 i-vi r1 rr. qxp 5/13/11 6:52 PM Page iii THE INNOVATOR’S DNA MASTERING THE FIVE SKILLS OF DISRUPTIVE INNOVATORS Jeff Dyer Hal Gregersen Clayton M. Christensen H A R VA R D B U S I N E S S R E V I E W P R E S S BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 100092 00 i-vi r1 rr. qxp 5/13/11 6:52 PM Page iv Copyright 2011 Jeff Dyer, Hal Gregersen, and Clayton M. Christensen All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise), without the prior permission of the publisher. Requests for permission should be directed to permissions@hbsp. harvard. edu, or mailed to Permissions, Harvard Business School Publishing, 60 Harvard Way, Boston, Massachusetts 02163. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Dyer, Jeff. The innovator’s DNA : mastering the ? ve skills of disruptive innovators/ Jeff Dyer, Hal Gregersen, Clayton M. Christensen. p. cm. ISBN 978-1-4221-3481-8 (hardback) 1. Creative ability in business. 2. Technological innovations. 3. Entrepreneurship. I. Gregersen, Hal B. , 1958– II. Christensen, Clayton M. III. Title. HD53. D94 2011 658. 4’063—dc22 2011008440 The paper used in this publication meets the requirements of the American National Standard for Permanence of Paper for Publications and Documents in Libraries and Archives Z39. 48-1992. 100092 00 i-vi r1 rr. qxp /13/11 6:52 PM Page v Contents Introduction 1 Part One Disruptive Innovation Starts with You 1 The DNA of Disruptive Innovators 17 2 Discovery Skill #1 41 Associating 3 Discovery Skill #2 65 Questioning 4 Discovery Skill #3 89 Observing 5 Discovery Skill #4 113 Networking 6 Discovery Skill #5 133 Experimenting Part Two The DNA of Disruptive Organizations and Teams 7 The DNA of the W orld’s Most Innovative Companies 157 100092 00 i-vi r1 rr. qxp 5/13/11 6:52 PM Page vi vi CONTENTS 8 Putting the Innovator’s DNA into Practice 175 People 9 Putting the Innovator’s DNA into Practice 93 Processes 10 Putting the Innovator’s DNA into Practice 215 Philosophies Conclusion: Act Different, Think Different, Make a Difference 235 Appendix A: Sample of Innovators Interviewed Appendix B: The Innovator’s DNA Research Methods Appendix C: Developing Discovery Skills Notes Index Acknowledgments About the Authors 241 245 249 261 269 283 295 100092 00a 001-014 INT r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:53 AM Page 1 Introduction I It’s the lifeblood of our global economy and a strategic priority for virtually every CEO around the world. You read "Innovators Dna" in category "Papers" In fact, a recent IBM poll of ? teen hundred CEOs identified creativity as the number-one â€Å"leadership competency† of the future. 1 The power of innovative ideas to revol utionize industries and generate wealth is evident from history: Apple iPod outplays Sony Walkman, Starbucks’s beans and atmosphere drown traditional coffee shops, Skype uses a strategy of â€Å"free† to beat AT and British Telecom, eBay crushes classi? ed ads, and Southwest Airlines ? ies under the radar of American and Delta. In every case, the creative ideas of innovative entrepreneurs produced powerful competitive advantages and tremendous wealth for the pioneering company. Of course, the retrospective $1 million question is, how did they do it? And perhaps the prospective $10 million question is, how could I do it? The Innovator’s DNA tackles these fundamental questions— and more. The genesis of this book centered on the question that we posed years ago to â€Å"disruptive technologies† guru and coauthor Clayton Christensen: where do disruptive business models come from? Christensen’s best-selling books, The Innovator’s NNOVATION. 1 100092 00a 001-014 INT r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:53 AM Page 2 2 INTRODUCTION Dilemma and The Innovator’s Solution, conveyed important insight into the characteristics of disruptive technologies, business models, and companies. The Innovator’s DNA emerged from an eight-year collaborative study in which we sought a richer understanding of disruptive innovators—who they are and the innovative companies they create. Our project’s primary purpose was to uncover the origins of innovative—and often disruptive— business ideas. So we interviewed nearly a hundred inventors of revolutionary products and services, as well as founders and CEOs of game-changing companies built on innovative business ideas. These were people such as eBay’s Pierre Omidyar, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Research In Motion’s Mike Lazaridis, and Salesforce. com’s Marc Benioff. For a full list of innovators we interviewed whom we quote in this book, see appendix A; virtually all of the innovators we quote, with the exception of Steve Jobs (Apple), Richard Branson (Virgin), and Howard Schultz (Starbucks)—who have written autobiographies or have given numerous interviews about innovation—are from our interviews. We also studied CEOs who ignited innovation in existing companies, such as Procter Gamble’s A. G. Lafley, eBay’s Meg Whitman, and Bain Company’s Orit Gadiesh. Some entrepreneurs’ companies that we studied were successful and well known; some were not (for example, Movie Mouth, Cow-Pie Clocks, Terra Nova BioSystems). But all offered a surprising and unique value proposition relative to incumbents. For example, each offered new or different features, pricing, convenience, or customizability compared to their competition. Our goal was less to investigate the companies’ strategies than it was to dig into the thinking of the innovators themselves. We wanted to understand as much about these people as possible, including the moment (when and how) they came up with the creative ideas that launched new products or businesses. We asked them to tell us 100092 00a 001-014 INT r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:53 AM Page 3 3 Introduction about the most valuable and novel business idea that they had generated during their business careers, and to tell us where those ideas came from. Their stories were provocative and insightful, and surprisingly similar. As we re? ected on the interviews, consistent patterns of action emerged. Innovative entrepreneurs and executives behaved similarly when discovering breakthrough ideas. Five primary discovery skills—skills that compose what we call the innovator’s DNA—surfaced from our conversations. We found that innovators â€Å"Think Different,† to use a well-known Apple slogan. Their minds excel at linking together ideas that aren’t obviously related to produce original ideas (we call this cognitive skill â€Å"associational thinking† or â€Å"associating†). But to think different, innovators had to â€Å"act different. † All were questioners, frequently asking questions that punctured the status quo. Some observed the world with intensity beyond the ordinary. Others networked with the most diverse people on the face of the earth. Still others placed experimentation at the center of their innovative activity. When engaged in consistently, these actions—questioning, observing, networking, and experimenting—triggered associational thinking to deliver new businesses, products, services, and/or processes. Most of us think creativity is an entirely cognitive skill; it all happens in the brain. A critical insight from our research is that one’s ability to generate innovative ideas is not erely a function of the mind, but also a function of behaviors. This is good news for us all because it means that if we change our behaviors, we can improve our creative impact. After surfacing these patterns of action for famous innovative entrepreneurs and executives, we turned our research lens to the less famous but equally capable innovators around the world. We built a survey based on our interviews that taps into the discovery skills of innovative leaders: associating, questioning, observing, networking, and experimenting. To date, we have 00092 00a 001-014 INT r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:53 AM Page 4 4 INTRODUCTION collected self-reported and 360-degree data on these discovery skills from over ? ve hundred innovators and over ? ve thousand executives in more than seventy-five countries (for information about our assessments for individuals and companies, go to our Web site: http://www. InnovatorsDNA. com). We found the same pattern for famous as well as less famous leaders. Innovators were simply much more likely to question, observe, network, and experiment compared to typical executives. We published the results of our research in Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, the top academic journal focused on entrepreneurs (details of our study are reported in appendix B). 2 We also published our ? ndings in an article titled â€Å"The Innovator’s DNA,† which was the runner-up for the 2009 Harvard Business Review McKinsey Award. We then turned to see what we could learn about the DNA of innovative organizations and teams. We started by looking at BusinessWeek’s annual ranking of innovative companies. This ranking, based on votes from executives, identified companies with a reputation for being innovative. A quick look at the BusinessWeek lists from 2005 to 2009 shows Apple as number one and Google, number two. OK, intuitively that sounds right. But we felt that the BusinessWeek methodology (executives voting on which companies are innovative) produces a list that is largely a popularity contest based on past performance. Indeed, do General Electric, Sony, Toyota, and BMW deserve to be on the list of most innovative companies today? Or are they simply there because they have been successful in the past? To answer these questions, we developed our own list of innovative companies based on current innovation prowess (and expectations of future innovations). How did we do this? We thought the best way was to see whether investors—voting with their wallets—could give us insight into which companies they thought most likely to produce future innovations: new products, services, or markets. We teamed up with HOLT (a division of Credit Suisse Boston that had done a similar analysis for The Innovator’s 100092 00a 001-014 INT r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:53 AM Page 5 5 Introduction Who Is Classified as an Innovator? Perhaps one of the most surprising findings from the past thirty years of entrepreneurship research is that entrepreneurs do not differ signi? cantly (on personality traits or psychometric measures) from typical business executives. a We usually meet this ? nding with skepticism, since most of us intuitively believe that entrepreneurs are somehow different from other executives. Note that our research focused on innovators and, in particular, innovative entrepreneurs rather than entrepreneurs. Here’s why. Innovative entrepreneurs start companies that offer unique value to the market. When someone opens a dry cleaner or a mortgage business, or even a set of Volkswagen dealerships or McDonald’s franchises, researchers put them all in the same category of entrepreneur as the founders of eBay (Pierre Omidyar) and Amazon (Jeff Bezos). This creates a categorization problem when trying to ? nd out whether innovative entrepreneurs differ from typical executives. The fact is that most entrepreneurs launch ventures based on strategies that are not unique and certainly not disruptive. Among entrepreneurs as a whole, only 10 percent to 15 percent qualify as â€Å"innovative entrepreneurs† of the kind we’re discussing. Our study includes four types of innovators: (1) start-up entrepreneurs (as we described earlier), (2) corporate entrepreneurs (those who launch an innovative venture from within the corporation), (3) product innovators (those who invent a new product), and (4) process innovators (those who launch a breakthrough process). Our process inventor category includes folks like A. G. La? ey, who initiated a set of innovative processes at Procter Gamble that sparked numerous new product innovations. In all cases, the original idea for the new (continued) 00092 00a 001-014 INT r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:53 AM Page 6 6 INTRODUCTION business, product, or process must be the innovator’s idea. While these different types of innovators have numerous similarities, they also have some differences, as we will show in the chapters that follow. a. This is evident in the conclusions of numerous studies on entrepreneurs, including the following: â€Å"After a great deal of research, it is now often co ncluded that most of the psychological differences between entrepreneurs and managers in large organizations are small or non-existent† (L. W. Busenitz and J. B. Barney, â€Å"Differences Between Entrepreneurs and Managers in Large Organizations,† Journal of Business Venturing 12, 1997). â€Å"There appears to be no discoverable pattern of personality characteristics that distinguish between successful entrepreneurs and non-entrepreneurs† (W. Guth, â€Å"Director’s Corner: Research in Entrepreneurship,† The Entrepreneurship Forum, winter 1991). â€Å"Most of the attempts to distinguish between entrepreneurs and small business owners or managers have discovered no differentiating features† (R. H. Brockhaus and P. S. Horwitz, â€Å"The Psychology of the Entrepreneur† in The Art and Science of Entrepreneurship, 1986). Solution) to develop a methodology for determining what percentage of a ? rm’s market value could be attributed to its existing businesses (products, services, markets). If the ? rm’s market value was higher than the cash ? ows that could be attributed to its existing businesses, then the company would have a growth and innovation premium (for our purposes, we’ll just call it an innovation premium). An innovation premium is the proportion of a company’s market value that cannot be accounted for from cash ? ws of its current products or businesses in its current markets. It is the premium the market gives these companies because investors expect them to come up with new products or markets—and they expect the companies to be able to generate high profits from them (see chapter 7 for details on how the premium is calculated). 100092 00a 001-014 INT r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:53 AM Page 7 7 Introduction It is a premium that every executive, and every company, would like to have. We unveil our list of the most innovative companies—ranked by innovation premium—in chapter 7. Not surprisingly, we found that our top twenty-five companies include some on the BusinessWeek list—such as Apple, Google, Amazon, and Procter Gamble. These companies averaged at least a 35 percent innovation premium over the past five years. But we also learned that companies such as Salesforce. com (software), Intuitive Surgical (health care equipment), Hindustan Lever (household products), Alstom (electrical equipment), and Monsanto (chemicals) have similar premiums. And as we studied these ? rms in greater detail, we learned that they are also very innovative. As we examined both our list and the BusinessWeek list of innovative companies, we saw several patterns. First, we noticed that compared to typical companies they were far more likely to be led by an innovative founder or a leader who scored extremely high on the ? ve discovery skills that compose the innovator’s DNA (their average discovery quotient was in the eighty-eighth percentile, which meant they scored higher than 88 percent of people taking our discovery skills assessment). Innovative companies are almost always led by innovative leaders. Let us say this again: Innovative companies are almost always led by innovative leaders. The bottom line: if you want innovation, you need creativity skills within the top management team of your company. We saw how innovative founders often imprinted their organizations with their behaviors. For example, Jeff Bezos personally excels at experimenting, so he helped create institutionalized processes within Amazon to push others to experiment. Similarly, Intuit’s Scott Cook shines at observing, so he pushes observation at Intuit. Perhaps not surprisingly, we discovered that the DNA of innovative organizations mirrored the DNA of innovative individuals. In other words, innovative people 100092 00a 001-014 INT r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:53 AM Page 8 8 INTRODUCTION systematically engage in questioning, observing, networking, and experimenting behaviors to spark new ideas. Similarly, innovative organizations systematically develop processes that encourage questioning, observing, networking, and experimenting by employees. Our chapters on building the innovator’s DNA in your organization and team describe how you too can actively encourage and support others’ innovation efforts. Why the Ideas in This Book Should Matter to You Over the last decade, many books on the topic of innovation and creativity have been written. Some books focus on disruptive innovation, such as Clayton Christensen’s The Innovator’s Dilemma and The Innovator’s Solution. Others, such as Ten Rules for Strategic Innovators (Govindarajan and Trimble), Game Changer (A. G. La? ey and Ram Charan), and The Entrepreneurial Mindset (Rita McGrath and Ian MacMillan), examine how organizations, and organizational leaders, encourage and support innovation. Others look more speci? ally at product development and innovation processes within and across firms, such as How Breakthroughs Happen (Andrew Hargadon) and The Sources of Innovation (Eric von Hippel). Other books on innovation look at the roles individuals play in the innovation process within companies, such as The Ten Faces of Innovation and The Art of Innovation (both by Tom Kelley of IDEO), or A Whole New Mind (Daniel Pin k). Finally, other books like Creativity in Context (Teresa Amabile) and Creativity (Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi) examine individual creativity and, more speci? cally, theories and research about creativity. Our book differs from the others in that it is focused squarely on individual creativity in the business context and is based on our study of a large sample of business innovators, including some big-name innovators such as Jeff Bezos (Amazon. com), Pierre Omidyar (eBay), Michael Lazaridis 100092 00a 001-014 INT r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:53 AM Page 9 9 Introduction A Disclaimer . . . Sort of We think it is important to remember three signi? cant points as you read The Innovator’s DNA. First, engaging in the discovery skills doesn’t ensure ? nancial success. Throughout the book, we tell stories of people who were manifestly successful at nnovating. We focus on the success stories because we are all more naturally drawn to success than failure. However, in our sample of ? ve hundred innovators, only two-thirds launched ventures or products that met our criteria of success. Many were not successful. The innovators developed the right skills— questioning, observing, netwo rking, and experimenting—that produced an innovative venture or product, but the result was not always a ? nancial success. The point is that the discovery skills we describe are necessary, indeed critical, for generating innovative business ideas, but they don’t guarantee success. Second, failure (in a ? nancial sense) often results from not being vigilant in engaging all discovery skills. The more ? nancially successful innovators in our sample demonstrated a higher discovery quotient (scored higher on the discovery skills) than less successful ones. If you fail with an innovation, it may be that you didn’t ask all the right questions, make all of the necessary observations, talk to a large enough group of diverse people, or run the right experiments. Of course, it is also possible that you did all these things but an even newer technology emerged or some other bright innovator came up ith an even better idea. Or maybe you just didn’t excel at executing on the idea or have the resources to compete with an established ? rm that imitated your invention. Many factors can prevent a new product or business idea from gaining traction in the market. But the better you are at asking the (continued) 100092 00a 001-014 INT r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:53 AM Page 10 10 INTRODUCTION right questions, engaging in the right observations, eliciting ideas and feedback through networking with the right people, and running experiments, the less likely you are to fail. Third, we spotlight different innovators and innovative companies to illustrate key ideas or principles, but not to set them up as perfect examples of how to be innovative. Some innovators we studied were â€Å"serial innovators,† as they had developed quite a number of innovations over time and appeared motivated to continue doing so. Others bene? tted by being in the right place at the right time to make a critical observation, talk to a key person with particularly useful knowledge, or serendipitously learn from an experiment. They made an important discovery once, but they might not necessarily be apable or motivated (perhaps due to financial success) to continue generating innovative ideas. In similar fashion, we have found that innovative companies can quickly lose their innovative prowess, while others can quickly improve it. In chapter 8, we show that Apple’s innovation prowess (as measured by its innovation premium) dropped dramatically after Jobs left in 1984, but then jumped up dramatically a few years after he returned to lead the company. Procter Gamble was a solid innovation performer before La? ey took the helm, but increased its innovation premium by 30 percent under his leadership. The point is that people and companies can change and may not always live up to our lofty expectations. (Research In Motion/BlackBerry), Michael Dell (Dell), Marc Benioff (Salesforce. com), Niklas Zennstrom (Skype), Scott Cook (Intuit), Peter Thiel (PayPal), David Neeleman (JetBlue and Azul airlines), and so on. The premise of our book is that we explain how these big names got their â€Å"big ideas† and describe a process 100092 00a 001-014 INT r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:53 AM Page 11 11 Introduction that readers can emulate. We describe in detail five skills that anyone can master to improve his or her own ability to be an innovative thinker. Ask yourself: Am I good at generating innovative business ideas? Do I know how to ? nd innovative people for my organization? Do I know how to train people to be more creative and innovative? Some executives respond to the last question by encouraging employees to think outside the box. But thinking outside the box is precisely what employees (and executives) are trying to ? gure out. We’ve even watched some executives answer the â€Å"How do I think outside the box? † question with another equally generic (and unhelpful) answer, â€Å"Be creative. † If you ? d yourself struggling with actionable answers to these questions, read on to gain a solid grasp of ? ve skills that can make all the difference when facing your next innovation challenge. All leaders have problems and opportunities sitting in front of them for which they have no solution. It might be a new process. It might be a new product or service. It might be a new business model for an old business. In every case, the skills you build by putting into practice the innovator’s DNA may literally save your job, your organization, and perhaps your community. Indeed, we’ve found that if ou want to rise to the highest levels of your organization— to a business unit manager, president, or CEO position—you need strong discovery skills. And if you want to lead a truly innovative organization, you likely will need to excel at those skills. We hope that The Innovator’s DNA will encourage you to reclaim some of your youthful curiosity. Staying curious keeps us engaged and our organizations alive. 3 Imagine how competitive your company will be ten years from now without innovators if its people didn’t find any new ways to improve its processes, products, or services. Clearly, your company would not survive. Innovators constitute the core of any company’s, or even country’s, ability to compete. 100092 00a 001-014 INT r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:53 AM Page 12 12 INTRODUCTION How The Innovator’s DNA Unfolds Like a pocket-sized map in a foreign place, our book serves as a guide to your innovation journey. The first part (chapters 1 through 6) explains why the innovator’s DNA matters and how the pieces can combine into a personalized approach to innovation. We put ? esh onto the â€Å"think different† slogan by explaining in detail the habits and techniques that allow innovators to think differently. The chapters in part one give rich detail about how to master the specific skills that are key to generating novel ideas—associating, questioning, observing, networking, and experimenting. The second part (chapters 7 through 10) ampli? es the building blocks of innovation by showing how the discovery skills of innovators described in part one operate in organizations and teams. Chapter 7 introduces our ranking of the world’s most innovative companies based on each company’s innovation premium, a market value premium based on investors’ expectations of future innovations. We also provide a framework for seeing how the innovator’s DNA works in the world’s most innovative teams and organizations. We call this the â€Å"3P† framework because it contains the discovery-driven building blocks of highly innovative organizations or teams—people, processes, and philosophies. Chapter 8 focuses on building-block number one, people, and describes how innovative organizations achieve maximum impact by actively recruiting, encouraging, and rewarding people who display strong discovery skills—and blending innovators effectively with folks who have strong execution skills. Chapter 9 shows innovative team and company processes that mirror the ? ve discovery skills of disruptive innovators. In other words, innovative companies rely on processes to encourage—even require— their people to engage in questioning, observing, networking, experimenting, and associating. Chapter 10 focuses on the funda- 100092 00a 001-014 INT r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:53 AM Page 13 13 Introduction mental philosophies that guide behavior within innovative teams and organizations. These philosophies not only guide disruptive innovators but also get imprinted in the organization, giving people the courage to innovate. Finally, for those interested in building discovery skills in yourself, your team, and even the next generation (young people you know), in appendix C we guide you through a process of taking your innovator’s DNA to the next level. We’re delighted that you’re starting or continuing your own innovation journey. We have watched scores of individuals take the ideas in this book to heart and who describe how they have dramatically improved their innovation skills as a result. They continually confirm that the journey is worth taking. We think you’ll feel the same way once you’ve finished reading about and mastering the skills of a disruptive innovator. 100092 00a 001-014 INT r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:53 AM Page 14 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 15 PA R T O N E Disruptive Innovation Starts with You 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 16 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 17 1 The DNA of Disruptive Innovators â€Å"I want to put a ding in the universe. † —Steve Jobs, founder and CEO, Apple Inc. D to generate innovative, even disruptive, business ideas? Do I know how to ?nd creative people or how to train people to think outside the box? These questions stump most senior executives, who know that the ability to innovate is the â€Å"secret sauce† of business success. Unfortunately, most of us know very little about what makes one person more creative than another. Perhaps for this reason, we stand in awe of visionary entrepreneurs such as Apple’s Steve Jobs, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, and eBay’s Pierre Omidyar, and innovative executives like P A. G. La? ey, Bain Company’s Orit Gadiesh, and eBay’s Meg Whitman. How do these people come up with groundbreaking new ideas? If it were possible to discover the inner O I KNOW HOW 17 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. xp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 18 18 DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION STARTS WITH YOU workings of the masters’ minds, what could the rest of us learn about how innovation really happens? Ideas for Innovation Consider the case of Jobs, who was recently ranked the world’s number-one best-performing CEO in a study published by Harvard Business Review. 1 You may recall Apple’s famous â€Å"Think Different† ad campaign, whose slogan says it all. The campaign featured innovators from different ? elds, including Albert Einstein, Picasso, Richard Branson, and John Lennon, but Jobs’s face might easily have been featured among the others. After all, everyone knows that Jobs is an innovative guy, that he knows how to think different. But the question is, just how does he do it? Indeed, how does any innovator think different? The common answer is that the ability to think creatively is genetic. Most of us believe that some people, like Jobs, are simply born with creative genes, while others are not. Innovators are supposedly right brained, meaning that they are genetically endowed with creative abilities. The rest of us are left brained—logical, linear thinkers, with little or no ability to think creatively. If you believe this, we’re going to tell you that you are largely wrong. At least within the realm of business innovation, virtually everyone has some capacity for creativity and innovative thinking. Even you. So using the example of Jobs, let’s explore this ability to think different. How did Jobs come up with some of his innovative ideas in the past? And what does his journey tell us? Innovative Idea #1: Personal Computers Should Be Quiet and Small One of the key innovations in the Apple II, the computer that launched Apple, came from Jobs’s decision that it should be quiet. His conviction resulted, in part, from all the time he’d spent 00092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 19 19 The DNA of Disruptive Innovators studying Zen and meditating. 2 He found the noise of a computer fan distracting. So Jobs was determined that the Apple II would have no fan, which was a fairly radical notion at the time. Nobody else had questioned the need for a fan b ecause all computers required a fan to prevent overheating. Getting rid of the fan wouldn’t be possible without a different type of power supply that generated less heat. So Jobs went on the hunt for someone who could design a new power supply. Through his network of contacts, he found Rod Holt, a forty-something, chain-smoking socialist from the Atari crowd. 3 Pushed by Jobs, Holt abandoned the ? fty-year-old conventional linear unit technology and created a switching power supply that revolutionized the way power was delivered to electronics products. Jobs’s pursuit of quiet and Holt’s ability to deliver an innovative power supply that didn’t need a fan made the Apple II the quietest and smallest personal computer ever made (a smaller computer was possible because it didn’t need extra space for the fan). Had Jobs never asked, â€Å"Why does a computer need a fan? † and â€Å"How do we keep a computer cool without a fan? the Apple computer as we know it would not exist. Innovative Idea #2: The Macintosh User Interface, Operating System, and Mouse The seed for the Macintosh, with its revolutionary operating system, was planted when Jobs visited Xerox PARC in 1979. Xerox, the copier company, created the Palo Alto Research Center (PARC ), a research lab charged with designing the office of the future. Jobs wrangled a visit to PARC in exchange for offering Xerox an opportunity to invest in Apple. Xerox didn’t know how to capitalize on the exciting things going on at PARC, but Jobs did. Jobs carefully observed the PARC computer screen ? led with icons, pull-down menus, and overlapping windows—all controlled 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 20 20 DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION STARTS WITH YOU by the click of a mouse. â€Å"What we saw was incomplete and ? awed,† Jobs said,â€Å"but the germ of the idea was there . . . within ten minutes it was obvious to me that all computers would work like this. †4 He spent the next ? ve years at Apple leading the design team that would produce the Macintosh computer, the ? rst personal computer with a graphical user interface (GUI) and mouse. Oh, and he saw something else during the PARC visit. He got his ? rst taste of objectoriented programming, which became the key to the OSX operating system that Apple acquired from Jobs’s other start-up, NeXT Computers. What if Jobs had never visited Xerox PARC to observe what was going on there? Innovative Idea #3: Desktop Publishing on the Mac The Macintosh, with its LaserWriter printer, was the ? rst computer to bring desktop publishing to the masses. Jobs claims that the â€Å"beautiful typography† available on the Macintosh would never have been introduced if he hadn’t dropped in on a calligraphy class at Reed College in Oregon. Says Jobs: Reed College offered perhaps the best calligraphy instruction in the country. Throughout the campus every poster, every label on every drawer, was beautifully handcalligraphed. Because I had dropped out and didn’t have to take the normal classes, I decided to take a calligraphy class to learn how to do this. I learned about serif and san serif typefaces, about varying the amount of space between different letter combinations, about what makes great typography great. It was beautiful, historical, artistically subtle in a way that science can’t capture, and I found it fascinating. None of this had even a hope of any ractical application in my life. But ten years later, when we were designing the ? rst Macintosh computer, it all came back to me. And we designed it all into the Mac. It 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 21 21 The DNA of Disruptive Innovators was the ? rst computer with beautiful typography. If I had never dropped in on that single course in c ollege, the Mac would have never had multiple typefaces or proportionally spaced fonts. And since Windows just copied the Mac, it’s likely that no personal computer would have them. 5 What if Jobs hadn’t decided to drop in on the calligraphy classes when he had dropped out of college? So what do we learn from Jobs’s ability to think different? Well, first we see that his innovative ideas didn’t spring fully formed from his head, as if they were a gift from the Idea Fairy. When we examine the origins of these ideas, we typically ? nd that the catalyst was: (1) a question that challenged the status quo, (2) an observation of a technology, company, or customer, (3) an experience or experiment where he was trying out something new, or (4) a conversation with someone who alerted him to an important piece of knowledge or opportunity. In fact, by carefully examining Jobs’s behaviors and, speci? ally, how those behaviors brought in new diverse knowledge that triggered an innovative idea, we can trace his innovative ideas to their source. What is the moral of this story? We want to convince you that creativity is not just a genetic endowment and not just a cognitive skill. Rather, we’ve learned that creative ideas spring from behavioral skills t hat you, too, can acquire to catalyze innovative ideas in yourself and in others. What Makes Innovators Different? So what makes innovators different from the rest of us? Most of us believe this question has been answered. It’s a genetic endowment. Some people are ight brained, which allows them to be more intuitive and divergent thinkers. Either you have it or you don’t. But does research really support this idea? Our research con? rms 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 22 22 DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION STARTS WITH YOU others’ work that creativity skills are not simply genetic traits endowed at birth, but that they can be developed. In fact, the most comprehensive study con? rming this was done by a group of researchers, Merton Reznikoff, George Domino, Carolyn Bridges, and Merton Honeymon, who studied creative abilities in 117 pairs of identical and fraternal twins. Testing twins aged fifteen to twenty-two, they found that only about 30 percent of the performance of identical twins on a battery of ten creativity tests could be attributed to genetics. 6 In contrast, roughly 80 percent to 85 percent of the twins’ performance on general intelligence (IQ) tests could be attributed to genetics. 7 So general intelligence (at least the way scientists measure it) is basically a genetic endowment, but creativity is not. Nurture trumps nature as far as creativity goes. Six other creativity studies of identical twins con? rm the Reznikoff et al. esult: roughly 25 percent to 40 percent of what we do innovatively stems from genetics. 8 That means that roughly two-thirds of our innovation skills still come through learning—from first understanding the skill, then practicing it, and ultimately gaining con? dence in our capacity to create. This is one reason that individuals who grow up in societies that promote community versus individualism and hierarchy over merit—such as Japan, China, Korea, and many Arab nations—are less likely to creatively challenge the status quo and turn out innovations (or win Nobel prizes). To be sure, many innovators in our study seemed genetically gifted. But more importantly, they often described how they acquired innovation skills from role models who made it â€Å"safe† as well as exciting to discover new ways of doing things. If innovators can be made and not just born, how then do they come up with great new ideas? Our research on roughly ?ve hundred innovators compared to roughly ? ve thousand executives led us to identify five discovery skills that distinguish innovators from typical executives (for detail on the research 00092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 23 23 The DNA of Disruptive Innovators methods, see appendix B). First and foremost, innovators count on a cognitive skill that we call â€Å"associational thinking† or simply â€Å"associating. † Associating happens as the brain tries to synthesize and make sense of novel inputs. It helps innovators discover new directions by making connections across seemingly unrelated qu estions, problems, or ideas. Innovative breakthroughs often happen at the intersection of diverse disciplines and ? elds. Author Frans Johanssen described this phenomenon as â€Å"the Medici effect,† referring to the creative explosion in Florence when the Medici family brought together creators from a wide range of disciplines—sculptors, scientist, poets, philosophers, painters, and architects. As these individuals connected, they created new ideas at the intersection of their respective fields, thereby spawning the Renaissance, one of the most innovative eras in history. Put simply, innovative thinkers connect fields, problems, or ideas that others ? nd unrelated. The other four discovery skills trigger associational thinking by helping innovators increase their stock of building-block ideas from which innovative ideas spring. Speci? cally, innovators engage the following behavioral skills more frequently: Questioning. Innovators are consummate questioners who show a passion for inquiry. Their queries frequently challenge the status quo, just as Jobs did when he asked, â€Å"Why does a computer need a fan? † They love to ask, â€Å"If we tried this, what would happen? † Innovators, like Jobs, ask questions to understand how things really are today, why they are hat way, and how they might be changed or disrupted. Collectively, their questions provoke new insights, connections, possibilities, and directions. We found that innovators consistently demonstrate a high Q/A ratio, where questions (Q) not only outnumber answers (A) in a typical conversation, but are valued at least as highly as good answers. 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 24 24 DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION STARTS WITH YOU Observing. Innovators are also intense observers. They carefully watch the world around them—including customers, products, services, technologies, and companies—and the bservations help them gain insights into and ideas for new ways of doing things. Jobs’s observation trip to Xerox PARC provided the germ of insight that was the catalyst for both the Macintosh’s innovative operating system and mouse, and Apple’s current OSX operating system. Networking. Innovators spend a lot of time and energy ?nding and testing ideas through a diverse network of individuals who vary wildly in their backgrounds and perspectives. Rather than simply doing social networking or networking for resources, they actively search for new ideas by talking to people who may offer a radically different view of things. For example, Jobs talked with an Apple Fellow named Alan Kay, who told him to â€Å"go visit these crazy guys up in San Rafael, California. † The crazy guys were Ed Catmull and Alvy Ray, who headed up a small computer graphics operation called Industrial Light Magic (the group created special effects for George Lucas’s movies). Fascinated by their operation, Jobs bought Industrial Light Magic for $10 million, renamed it Pixar, and eventually took it public for $1 billion. Had he never chatted with Kay, he would never have wound up purchasing Pixar, and the world might never have thrilled to wonderful animated ? ms like Toy Story,WALL-E, and Up. Experimenting. Finally, innovators are constantly trying out new experiences and piloting new ideas. Experimenters unceasingly explore the world intellectually and experientially, holding convictions at bay and testing hypotheses along the way. They visit new places, try new things, seek new information, and experiment to learn new things. Jobs, for example, has tried new experiences all his life—from meditation and 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 25 25 The DNA of Disruptive Innovators living in an ashram in India to dropping in on a calligraphy class at Reed College. All these varied experiences would later trigger ideas for innovations at Apple Computer. Collectively, these discovery skills—the cognitive skill of associating and the behavioral skills of questioning, observing, networking, and experimenting—constitute what we call the innovator’s DNA, or the code for generating innovative business ideas. The Courage to Innovate Why do innovators question, observe, network, and experiment more than typical executives? As we examined what motivates them, we discovered two common themes. First, they actively desire to change the status quo. Second, they regularly take smart risks to make that change happen. Consider the consistency of language that innovators use to describe their motives. Jobs wants to â€Å"put a ding in the universe. † Google cofounder Larry Page has said he’s out to â€Å"change the world. † These innovators steer entirely clear of a common cognitive trap called the status quo bias—the tendency to prefer an existing state of affairs to alternative ones. Most of us simply accept the status quo. We may even like routine and prefer not to rock the boat. We adhere to the saying, â€Å"if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,† while not really questioning whether â€Å"it† is â€Å"broke. In contrast, innovators see many things as â€Å"broke. † And they want to ? x them. How do innovators break the status quo? One way is to refuse to be dictated by other people’s schedules. Just glance at an innovative executive’s typical calendar and you will ? nd a radically different schedule compared to less inventive executives. We found that innovative entrepreneurs (who are also CEOs) spend 50 percent more time on discovery activities (questioning, observing, experimenting, and networking) than CEOs with no innovation track 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp /13/11 9:56 AM Page 26 26 DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION STARTS WITH YOU record. That translated into spending almost one more day each week on discovery activities. They understand that ful? lling their dreams to change the world means they’ve got to spend a signi? cant amount of time trying to discover how to change the world. And having the courage to innovate means that they are actively looking for opportunities to change the world. Embracing a mission for change makes it much easier to take smart risks, make mistakes, and most of all, learn quickly from them. Most innovative entrepreneurs we studied felt that mistakes are nothing to be ashamed of. In fact, they are an expected cost of doing business. â€Å"If the people running Amazon. com don’t make some signi? cant mistakes,† Jeff Bezos told us, â€Å"then we won’t be doing a good job for our shareholders because we won’t be swinging for the fences. † In short, innovators rely on their â€Å"courage to innovate†Ã¢â‚¬â€an active bias against the status quo and an un? inching willingness to take smart risks—to transform ideas into powerful impact. In summary, the DNA of innovators—or the code for enerating innovative ideas—is expressed in the model shown in ? gure 1-1. The key skill for generating innovative ideas is the cognitive skill of associational thinking. The reason that some people generate more associations than others is partly because their brains are just wired that way. But a more critical reason is that they mo re frequently engage in the behavioral skills of questioning, observing, networking, and experimenting. These are the catalysts for associational thinking. Of course, the next question is, why do some people engage these four skills more than others? The answer is that they have the courage to innovate. They are willing to embrace a mission for change and take risks to make change happen. The bottom line is that to improve your ability to generate innovative ideas, you need to practice associational thinking and more frequently engage in questioning, observing, 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 27 27 The DNA of Disruptive Innovators FIGURE 1-1 The innovator’s DNA model for generating innovative ideas Courage to innovate Behavioral skills Cognitive skill to synthesize novel inputs Questioning Challenging the status quo Taking risks Observing Associational thinking Networking Innovative business idea Experimenting networking, and experimenting. That will likely only happen if you can somehow cultivate the courage to innovate. As innovators actively engage in their discovery skills over a lifetime, they build discovery habits, and they become de? ned by them. They grow increasingly con? dent in their ability to discover what’s next, and they believe deeply that generating creative insights is their job. It is not something to delegate to someone else. As A. G. La? ey declared, â€Å"innovation is the central job of every leader—business unit managers, functional leaders, and the CEO. †9 The Innovator’s DNA We’ve just told you that the ability to be innovative is not based primarily on genetics. At the same time, we’re using the DNA metaphor to describe the inner workings of innovators, which suggests that it is. Bear with us for a moment. (And welcome to the world of innovation, where the ability to synthesize two seemingly opposing ideas is the type of associating that produces novel 00092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 28 28 DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION STARTS WITH YOU insights. ) Recent developments in the ? eld of gene therapy show that it is possible to modify and strengthen your physical DNA, for example, to help ward off diseases. 10 Likewise, it is metaphorically possible to strengthen your personal innovator’s DNA. Let us provide an illustration. Imagine that you have an iden tical twin, endowed with the same brains and natural talents that you have. You’re both given one week to come up with a creative new business idea. During that week, you come up with ideas alone, just thinking in your room. By contrast, your twin (1) talks with ten people— including an engineer, a musician, a stay-at-home dad, and a designer—about the venture; (2) visits three innovative start-ups to observe what they do; (3) samples five â€Å"new to the market† products and takes them apart; (4) shows a prototype he’s built to five people, and (5) asks â€Å"What if I tried this? † and â€Å"What would make this not work? † at least ten times each day during these networking, observing, and experimenting activities. Who do you bet will come up with the more innovative (and usable) idea? My guess is that you’d bet on your twin, and not because he has better natural (genetic) creative abilities. Of course, the anchor weight of genetics is still there, but it is not the dominant predictor. People can learn to more capably come up with innovative solutions to problems by acting in the way that your twin did. As figure 1-2 shows, innovative entrepreneurs rarely display across-the-board strength in observing, experimenting, and networking, and actually don’t need to. All of the high-pro? e innovative entrepreneurs in our study scored above the seventieth percentile in associating and questioning. The innovators seemed to hold these two discovery skills more universally. But the innovators we studied didn’t need world-class strength in the other behaviors. It certainly helped if they excelled at one of the four skills and were strong in at least two. If you hope to be a better 1000 92 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 29 29 The DNA of Disruptive Innovators Discovery Skill Strengths Differ for Disruptive Innovators To understand that innovative entrepreneurs develop and use ifferent skills, look at ? gure 1-2. It shows the percentile rank scores on each of the ? ve discovery skills for four well-known founders and innovators: Pierre Omidyar (eBay), Michael Dell (Dell), Michael Lazaridis (Research In Motion), and Scott Cook (Intuit). The percentile rank indicates the percentage of over ? ve thousand executives and innovators in our database who scored lower on that particular skill. A particular skill is measured by the frequency and intensity with which these individuals engage in activities that compose the skill. FIGURE 1-2 High-pro? le innovators’ discovery skills pro? le 100 90 Percentile rank 80 70 Mike Lazaridis Pierre Omidyar Scott Cook Michael Dell Noninnovators 60 50 40 30 20 10 or kin g Ne tw en tin g Ex p er im in g bs er v O ni ng io ue st Q As s oc iat in g 0 As you can see, the pattern for each innovative entrepreneur is different. For example, Omidyar is much more likely to acquire his ideas through questioning (ninety-fifty percentile) and (continued) 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 30 30 DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION STARTS WITH YOU bserving (eighty-seventh percentile), Dell through experimenting (ninetieth percentile) and networking (ninety-eighth percentile), Cook through observing (eighty-eighth percentile) and questioning (eighty-third percentile), and Lazaridis through questioning (ninety-sixth percentile) and networking (ninetyeighth percentile). The point is that each of these innovative entrepreneurs did not score high on all ? ve of the discovery skill s. They each combined the discovery skills uniquely to forge new insights. Just as each person’s physical DNA is unique, an innovator’s DNA comprises a unique combination f skills and behaviors. innovator, you will need to ? gure out which of these skills you can improve and which can be distinguishing skills to help you generate innovative ideas. Delivery Skills: Why Most Senior Executives Don’t Think Different We’ve spent the past eight years interviewing scores of senior executives—mostly at large companies—asking them to describe the most novel and valuable strategic insights that they had generated during their careers. Somewhat surprisingly, we found that top executives rarely mentioned an innovative business idea that they had personally generated. They were extremely intelligent and talented individuals who were accomplished at delivering results, but they didn’t have much direct, personal experience with generating innovative business ideas. In contrast to innovators who seek to fundamentally change existing business models, products, or processes, most senior executives work hard to efficiently deliver the next thing that should be done given the existing business model. That is, they 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 31 31 The DNA of Disruptive Innovators I’m Not Steve Jobs . . . Is This Relevant? OK, so you’re not Steve Jobs. Or Jeff Bezos. Or any other famous business innovator. But that doesn’t mean you can’t learn from these innovators. You can get better at innovating, even if most of your innovations are somewhat incremental in nature. We’ve seen it happen, and we’ve seen that it can make a difference. We’ve seen a pharmaceutical executive practice a questioning technique (see chapter 3) each day to identify key strategic issues facing his division. After three months, his boss told him that he’d become the most effective strategic thinker on his team. Within six months, he was promoted to a corporate strategic planning job. â€Å"I just improved my ability to ask questions,† he told us. We’ve seen MBA students in our classes use the observing, networking, and experimenting techniques to generate entrepreneurial business ideas. One got the idea for launching a company that uses bacteria to eat pollution from networking with someone he met at a neighborhood barbeque. Another observed that the best English speakers in Brazil were people who watched American movies and television. So he launched a company that sells software that helps people learn English by watching movies. Many innovative ideas may seem small, such as a new process for effectively screening job recruits or a better way to build customer loyalty, but they are valuable new ideas nonetheless. And if you come up with enough of them, they will de? nitely help you advance in your career. The point is this: you don’t have to be Steve Jobs to generate innovative ideas for your business. work inside the box. They shine at converting a vision or goal into the speci? c tasks to achieve the de? ned goal. They organize work and conscientiously execute logical, detailed, data-driven plans of action. In short, most executives excel at execution, including the 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 32 32 DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION STARTS WITH YOU following four delivery skills: analyzing, planning, detail-oriented implementing, and disciplined executing. (We’ll say more about these skills later in the chapter and in chapter 8, but for now we need only note that they are critical for delivering results and translating an innovative idea into reality. ) Many innovators realize that they are de? cient in these critical skills and, consequently, try to team up with others who possess them. For example, eBay founder Omidyar quickly recognized the need for execution skills, so he invited Jeff Skoll, a Stanford MBA, and Meg Whitman, a Harvard MBA, to join him. â€Å"Jeff Skoll and I had very complementary skills,† Omidyar told us. â€Å"I’d say I did more of the creative work developing the product and solving problems around the product, while Jeff was involved in the more analytical and practical side of things. He was the one who would listen to an idea of mine and then say, ‘Ok, let’s ? gure out how to get this done. ’† Skoll and Whitman professionalized the eBay Web site, added ? xed-price auctions, drove international expansion, developed new categories such as autos, and integrated important capabilities such as PayPal. Why do most senior executives excel in the delivery skills, but are only above average in discovery skills? It is vital to understand that the skills critical to an organization’s success vary systematically throughout the business life cycle. (See ? gure 1-4). For example, in the start-up phase of an innovative venture, the founders are obviously more discovery-driven and entrepreneurial. Discovery skills are crucial early in the business life cycle because the company’s key task is to generate new business ideas worth pursuing. Thus, discovery (exploration) skills are highly valued at this stage and delivery (execution) skills are secondary. However, once innovative entrepreneurs come up with a promising new business idea and then shape that idea into a bona fide business opportunity, the company begins to grow and then must pay attention to building the processes necessary to scale the idea. 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 33 33 The DNA of Disruptive Innovators The Discovery and Delivery Skills Matrix: How Innovators Stack Up To test the assertion that innovative executives have a different set of skills than typical executives, we used our innovator’s DNA assessment to measure the percentile rank of a sample of highpro? le innovative entrepreneurs (founder CEOs of companies on BusinessWeek’s list of the top one hundred most innovative companies) on both the ? ve discovery skills (associating, questioning, observing, networking, experimenting) and the four delivery or execution skills: analyzing, planning, detail-oriented implementing, and self-disciplined executing. We averaged their percentile rank scores across the ? e discovery skills to get an overall percentile rank, and then did the same thing across the four delivery skills to get an overall percentile rank. We refer to the overall percentile rank across the ? ve discovery skills as the â€Å"discovery quotient† or DQ. While intellectual quotient (or IQ) tests are designed to measure general intelligenc e and emotional quotient (or EQ) assessments measure emotional intelligence (ability to identify, assess, and control the emotions of ourselves and others), discovery quotient (DQ) is designed to measure our ability to discover ideas for new ventures, products, and processes. Figure 1-3 shows that the high-pro? le innovative entrepreneurs scored in the eighty-eighth percentile on discovery skills, but only scored in the ? fty-sixth percentile on delivery skills. In short, they were just average at execution. We then conducted the same analysis for a sample of nonfounder CEOs (executives who had never started a new business). We found that most senior executives in large organizations were the mirror image of innovative entrepreneurs: they scored around the eightieth percentile on delivery skills, while scoring only above average on (continued) 100092 01 015-040 r1 go. qxp 5/13/11 9:56 AM Page 34 34 DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION STARTS WITH YOU FIGURE 1-3 Discovery-delivery skills matrix 100 (Percentile score) 75 Discovery skills Founder CEOs at innovati How to cite Innovators Dna, Papers

Tobacco Litigation and the Youth Essay Example For Students

Tobacco Litigation and the Youth Essay Tobacco Litigation and the YouthAbstractOver the yearsthe tobacco industry has faced a number of controversies. Even though it hasbeen accused of everything short of murder it has managed to survive andthrive. Yet, the trend is changing the consumers are no longer to sit back andsign their death warrants and those of their children as they inhale the deadlysmoke that emerges from the manufacturer product. They are fighting back andthe law is backing them all the way. (Pierce JP et al 1991)Introduction. The business ofmaking tobacco products has come into the limelight as the conspiracy theoriesof the industry are being revealed. Through the litigation being carried outagainst them, it has been seen that the industry players are an oligopoly in afree market and are against the consumer. They have no values for the rights ofthe consumers and are working for sheer profit. They have together created thetrend of suppressing the development of less hazardous cigarettes so that thereare no ways for comparison against the more harmful cigarettes. The reason forthis is simple. The industry is one that is dependent on its product. If onecompany accuses another of making a product that is harmful or addictive theother companies will follow suit and if this happens the consumer would have tosit up and listen. They would then realize that all is not rosy and the messagebeing given to them that smoking is something done by successful, healthy,young, smiling people with very white teeth is wrong. (Herbert B. 1998)False AdvertisingThe tobaccoindustry is facing charges of false advertising. For years the firms havetargeted the audience making false claimsin spite of knowing the harm thatthe product causes. With the emergence of the global market the consumers havegotten smarter and realize that the tobacco companies have been giving them thewrong information regarding the marketing of their product. (New York Times;October 11, 1998.)Consider thestatements being made by the representatives of the tobacco companies thatsmoking is harmless. In 1994, the CEOs of seven tobacco companies testified,under oath, that nicotine is not addictive. And yet, the tobacco companies havelong known that nicotine is addictive. One industry document from 1963 says, . . . nicotine is addictive. We are . . . in the business of selling nicotine,an addictive drug. (http://www.womenof.com/Articles/le030298.asp)Similarly thetobacco industry has known that smoking causes cancer and yet, they have madepu blic claims that have stated that they do not have conclusive proof of thefact. We will write a custom essay on Tobacco Litigation and the Youth specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now Yet, in theirown files, the tobacco companies had plenty of proof that smoking cigarettesdoes cause cancer. A 1961 confidential memorandum, for example, describescigarette tobacco as:1. Cancercausing; 2. Cancerpromoting; 3. Poisonous;and 4. Stimulating,pleasurable, and flavorful. Adolescent SmokingWhat has reallycreated the fervor against the tobacco industry is the realization that theyare targeting our future and crippling it. It is targeting the youth. Accordingto a U.S. Surgeon Generals Report, every day 3,000 children become smokers. Ofthose 3,000 kids, 1,000 will die prematurely because of their tobacco habit. Tobacco use among minors has risen dramatically in recent years, despite thefact that it remains illegal for minors to purchase tobacco. Every year,425,000 Americans die from smokinga habit most of them began as teenagers. Toput that number in perspective, think about the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. Thats seven times the number of names on the Vietnam wall. (http://www.womenof.com/Articles/le030298.asp)The fact is thatsmoking for youth fewer than eighteen years of age is considered illegal andyet, companies still cater to the kids breaking the lawtime and time again. Joe Camel is although its not the only one is one of advertising aimeddirectly, and successfully, at kids. According tofiles from the tobacco industry polls were analyzed regarding the best mannerin which to sell cigarettes to kids from the age of 14-18. Kids were encouragedto shoplift to get cigarettes so that in the future they would become goodcustomers. Philip MorrissMarlboro, became the dominant brand by the early 1970s on the strength of itsappeal to young baby boomers. Documents show that every manufacturer sought toreplicate that success. Todays teenager is tomorrows potential regularcustomer, and the overwhelming majority of smokers first begin to smoke whilein their teens, noted a 1981 Philip Morris corporate memo. At leastpart of the success of Marlboro Red during its most rapid growth period wasbecause it became the brand of choice among teenagers who then stuck with it asthey grew older. The document defined teenagers as those 12 to 19 yearsold. (Fromson 1998)Litigation CausesIn lieu of thefacts that have been realized through some of the litigation cases the Congressbegan to consider forming a National Legislation that would allow all tobaccolawsuits to be settled. The reason for the legislation would be simple. Whilethe tobacco companies right to sell to adults would be predeterminedit wouldnot have the right to market to the youth. This would be done through providingthe public accurate information and considering the adults as having the rightto make an informed choice. The nationallegislation would then be in a position to make an effort so that thegovernment would make youth stop smoking. The national legislation would allow the nation to realizethe effects of tobacco on the children and be more appropriate than the statestrying to fight against the uncertain suits arising throughout its tenure. Thenational legislation would balance regulatory power between the states andfederal agencies. (Skretny MT, et al 1990)State of Colorado vs. the Tobacco Companies 1997The State ofColorado filed suit against tobacco companies because the industry over theyears has targeted youth with their products and has discounted the notion thattobacco was addictive. As a result, state Medicaid funds have been consumed atan alarming rate to address the health problems incurred by those who smoke. This settlement holds the tobacco industry liable for smoking-related illnessesand awards damages accordingly. The settlementreached between the five largest tobacco companies and attorneys general from46 states, four territories and the District of Columbia will total $206billion over 25 years. Colorado will receive nearly $2.7 billion over thatperiod. Colorados initial share is expected to be almost $33 million, with thestate receiving roughly $100 million per year under the terms of thesettlement. However, the final amount is based on several factors of whichinflation and tobacco consumption are major variables. .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d , .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d .postImageUrl , .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d , .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d:hover , .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d:visited , .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d:active { border:0!important; } .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d:active , .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u597d9d7539598c9c68d69c65f4c9931d:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Things They Carried By Tim O`Brien EssayA studyconducted by the University of California at Berkeley found that medical billsfrom tobacco-related illnesses total a staggering $72 billion in the U.S. eachyear. These expenses are truly outrageous and Colorado should use its share ofthe tobacco settlement to improve the health of Coloradans and prevent the highmedical bills associated with this deadly habit. Gale Norton StatementI am a proponent of personal responsibility forones actions. The history of the war on drugs demonstrates the difficulty ofregulating Americans use of substances. With 48 million Americans addicted tonicotine, I believe there is little chance of developing a public consensus atleast in the next 10- 15 years favoring tobacco prohibition, much lessovercoming the practical problems of administering a worthwhile enforcementprogram. Given these views, I was a tough sell on the idea that litigationagainst the tobacco industry was justified. However, as part of my duties to the Peopleof Colorado, my staff and I reviewed thousands of pages of documents revealingthe behaviors of the tobacco industry over several decades. After careful andthoughtful analysis, I concluded that the behaviors of the industry inmarketing to and encouraging the use of tobacco products by kids,misrepresenting the health effects of their products, and conspiring to keepsafer products off the mark et were illegal under well-established Colorado law. Given these violations of Colorado law, I filed suit. We sought civilpenalties, treble damages, and disgorgement of illegal profits, as well asinjunctions against future illegal conduct. I believe that Colorado has a solid case,and we are prepared to litigate. Nevertheless, I strongly support thesettlement agreement because I believe it provides a means to establish aconsistent and orderly resolution of the tobacco industry issues for the entirenation. It is clearly preferable to lengthy and uncertain litigation which mayresult in different results and regulation in each of the states. Thisagreement represents a compromise, which though not perfect, achieves as muchor more than litigation ever could, and provides a balance of regulatory powerbetween the states and federal agencies. Criticism of the settlement has tended tofocus on whether it went far enough in punishing the tobacco companies. Whilethe settlement reflects a hard-fought compromise, some of the public debatereflects the best in Monday-morning quarterbacking. For example, if youthsmoking reduction goals are not met, the settlement would impose the largestpenalty ever paid by any industry. This penalty accomplishes the objective ofreorienting the incentives for the industry: giving them a financial stake inpreventing underage smoking. This allows us to work with the industry to combatteen smoking. It allows us to use the manufacturers influence over theirdistributors and retailers to create a true change in industry mindset. (Norton Congressional Testimony 1997)Texas vs. Tobacco firms The tobaccoindustry agreed to pay a record $14.5billion to settle a lawsuit filed by the state of Texas, representing thelatest in a series of concessions by the beleaguered industry. (Torri andConnolly 1998)Under the termsof the settlement, private lawyers representing the state will walk with nearly$2.2 billion. The Texas lawsuit was one of 41 filed by state attorneys generalseeking billions of dollars to compensate states for the costs of treating sicksmokers through Medicaid programs. Under thepotential agreement, the state would receive an up-front payment of more than$1 billion and the remainder over 25 years. The industry would also fund amultimillion-dollar campaign aimed at stopping underage smoking, according to asource familiar with the talks. Along with a banon tobacco billboards, provisions of the Texas settlement include eliminationof cigarette vending machines from any place accessible to teenagers and theremoval of tobacco advertising from sports arenas, buses and trains, accordingto the Los Angeles Times. AnalysisSince the hugesettlement against the tobacco countries and the states in 1998 it would behoped that the incidence of youth smoking would be reduced. But such is not thecase. According to studies being conducted there are a large number ofadvertising magazines that are being read by teenagers that feature cigaretteads and actually since 1998, when they agreed in a court settlement they wouldnot target youths in their ads, the tobacco industries have actually increasedtargeting youth! (King C. 1998)State officialswho participated in the $206 billion settlement said the findings show tobaccocompanies may be violating settlement terms. Attorneys general from around thecountry are now in the discovery phase of an investigation into cigaretteadvertising placements, according to Washington Attorney General ChristineGregoire. Cigarette makers said the studies were misleading. One of the studieswas by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health and the American LegacyFoundation, a nonprofit group funded by the settlement, completed the other. Theresnothing that a tobacco company can do that wont receive criticism from thespecial interest groups that have their own political agenda, said MarkSmith, a spokesman for the Kentucky-based Brown and Williamson TobaccoCorporation. The 1998agreement settled lawsuits against cigarette manufacturers brought by 46 statesto recover the costs of treating sick smokers. One section of the settlementforbids tobacco companies from targeting people younger than 18 in theiradvertising, marketing and promotions. The Massachusetts study comparedcigarette advertising expenditures in magazines before and after thesettlement, focusing on 19 popular magazines with more than 15 percent of theirreadership between the ages of 12 and 17. Fifteen percent was the level used bythe Food and Drug Administration in its efforts to regulate tobacco. Magazinesin that category include Rolling Stone, Glamour and Sports Illustrated. In thefirst nine months of 1999, cigarette makers spent $119.9 million advertising,much of it on brands most popular with young smokers, in magazines with asignificant percentage of teen readers, the study found. That is almost $30million more than was spent in the same magazines in the corresponding periodbefore the settlement, the study said. Thus, the stateattorneys general have begun to conduct investigations to find wheater thetobacco companies have violated the 1998 national settlement by advertising toyoung people. Based on language in the settlement prohibiting tobacco companypractices that target youth, the tobacco enforcement committee ofthe National Association of Attorneys General is collecting evidence about whatcigarette companies are advertising, and where they are advertising it. Attorney GeneralChristine Gregoire of Washington state, an author of the 46-state tobaccoagreement, said the four-month-old investigation could trigger lawsuits againstthe industry if the group determines the tobacco ads are designed to lureteenagers.We have tried to reach an agreement with the industry on thisissue but have been unable to, Gregoire said. PresidentClinton had urged the attorneys general to take immediate and appropriateenforcement action to stop these practices. Yet, its been two years sinceand little headway has been made. .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0 , .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0 .postImageUrl , .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0 .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0 , .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0:hover , .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0:visited , .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0:active { border:0!important; } .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0 .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0 { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0:active , .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0 .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0 .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0 .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0 .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0 .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0 .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u3ffdb88b8515bce19d43ed96585689b0:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: ETHICAL DECISION MAKING EssayIndustryofficials say they are abiding by the agreement and have discontinuedadvertising in magazines they believe appeal to young people. But there isdisagreement over how to determine exactly which magazines meet that criterion. A spokesman for Philip Morris Cos. said that his company will propose thatan independent, accurate third-party methodology be established fordetermining youth readership of magazines and be used as a standard for tobaccoadvertising. As part of the 1998 tobacco settlement, tobacco companies agreedto stop advertising on billboards and to avoid the Joe Camel typeof ads that many believed appealed primarily to young people. In addition, muchof the industry pledged to follow proposed Food and Drug Administrationguidelines that placed magazines with youth readership of more than 15 percentoff limits to cigarette ads. (Pierce JP 1998)When todays tobacco executives ask the public tobelieve that they are no longer targeting our children, they deserve the sametrust as their predecessors when they swore under oath before Congress thattheir products are not addictive, said Matthew Myers, president of theCampaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, after the studies were released. Tobaccocompanies increased m agazine advertising after their use of billboards wasprohibited. The companies also had to defend their markets in the face of sharpcigarette price increases that were imposed to cover the costs of their $206billion national settlement with the states. (Adelson A. 1997)ArgumentThe litigation against the tobacco countries has beenfocusing on the youth and yet, it has managed to increase the sales. The reasonfor this lies in human psychology. Over the years the tobacco industries havetargeted the youth but all the time sent the message that smoking is a maturething that is done by the adults. It is like dangling a carrot in front of thekids. (Washington Post news service November 9, 1997.)The youth in their attempt to compete against the adultshave begun to go for the forbidden fruit. By stating that cigarettes are anadults choice they are forcing the adolescents to rebel and show those aroundthem that they too are adults and have the right to make their own choices. Thus, the case is playing right into the hands of the tobacco companies andhanding them on a silver platter what they have been for years striving toattain. As Goodman(1996) wrote in her article The youth turf is in fact the tobacco companiesbriar patch. They love it there. In mid-May, when Philip Morris tried its endrun around government proposals on marketing to kids, a spokesman said with astraight face, `The time has come to address the issue of underage use oftobacco. That was just the latest in a long line of helpful hints on`underage smoking. Since 1979, the tobacco folks have recycled wholeseries of `tobacco education messages that describe smoking as `one ofthe many activities some people choose to do as adults, such as `voting,driving a car, drinking alcoholic beverages, marriage and havingchildren. There you go. Linkingcigarettes with driving, drinking and sex. What a turnoff!Thefact is that the only way to prevent the youth from smoking is by banning it tothe whole societ y. At the moment the youth are merely being tempted to do whathas been forbidden and the increase in smoking statistics is proving the fact. Adolescent smoking is not the result of youthful experimentation with aforbidden fruit, but has become in actuality the result of a deliberatepsychological assault by the tobacco industry and in order to counter thestrategy it must be fully comprehendedand combated. ConclusionInvestor Thomas A. Russo, a partner at Gardner Investmentsin Lancaster, Pa., who holds shares in Philip Morris for clients, said,What makes Marlboro such a remarkable consumer product is that its marketshare among 20-year-olds is as high as its share among 40-year-olds and60-year-olds.Today,Marlboro accounts for 75 percent of Philip Morriss domestic tobacco profits,according to analyst Black, and has nearly half of the U.S. market forfull-price cigarettes, which also explains why the companys profit margins arethe highest in the business. (Boston Globe October 13, 1998.)Thelitigation cases rampant around the nation are witness to the fact that theconsumers have finally become educated to the fact that smoking is injurious tohealthnot only as a label but as a fact. However, the tactic the states haveadapted to fight against the industries is wrong. The youth are increasinglyfavoring tobacco in different forms and the litigation cases banning youthsmoking are to vague to actu ally succeed. The case in advertisingwhere thetobacco companies still advertises is magazines is a fact to the case. Thus,unless tobacco industries are completely banned youth smoking willincreasesteadily and fatally. (Center for Substance Abuse PreventionJanuary/February 1995, p38-41.)References1. The Future of Tobacco Litigation and Policy by GaleNorton, Attorney General of Colorado available at http://www.womenof.com/Articles/le030298.asp2. TOBACCOSETTLEMENT:GALE A. NORTON (Congressional Testimony); 11-13-1997 STATE OFCOLORADO DEPARTMENT OF LAW OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HOUSE COMMERCECOMMITTEE GALE A. NORTON ATTORNEY GENERAL OF COLORADO November 13, 19973. EllenGoodman / Boston Globe, Youth anti-smoking campaign is tobacco firms briarpatch. , The Dallas Morning News, 06-09-1996, pp 7J. 4. Centerfor Substance Abuse Prevention. Growing Up Tobacco Free.Prevention Pipeline,Center for Substance Abuse Prevention January/February 1995, p38-41. 5. Editorial. The surge in teen smoking. New York Times; October 11, 1998. 6. Editorial. Joe Camels children Boston Globe October 13, 1998. 7. HerbertB. Pursuing children. OpED New YorkTimes; May 3, 1998. 8. PierceJP et al Does tobacco advertising target young people to start smoking?Evidence from California . JAMA 1991;266:3154-3158. 9. KingC. et al Adolescent exposure to cigarette advertising in magazines JAMA1998;279:516-522010. PierceJP et al Tobacco industry promotion of cigarettes and adolescent smoking JAMA 1998;279:511-515. 11. HoppockKC, Houston TP. Availability of tobacco products to minors. J Fam Pract. 1990;30:174-176. 12. SkretnyMT, Cummings M, Sciandra R, Marshall J. An intervention to reduce the sale ofcigarettes to minors. N Y State J Med. 1990; 90:54-55. 13. AdelsonA. Is anybody getting the picture: despite ads, teen-age smoking is unabatedNew York Times July 17, 1997. 14. Mixedresults seen in costly efforts on youth tobacco use Washington Post newsservice November 9, 1997. 15. Slugfest in the Smoke Ring By Brett D. FromsonWashington Post Staff Writer Sunday, March 1, 1998; Page H01 available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/tobacco/stories/slugfest.htm16. TobaccoFirms Set to Pay Texas $14.5 Billion By Saundra Torry and Ceci ConnollyWashington Post Staff Writers Friday, January 16, 1998; Page A01 available athttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/tobacco/stories/texas.htm

To see how long it takes the size of a hot object to cool down Essays

To see how long it takes the size of a hot object to cool down Essays To see how long it takes the size of a hot object to cool down Essay To see how long it takes the size of a hot object to cool down Essay Planning: I will make sure I devise a fair test by doing things correctly and fairly. The only variable I will be obtaining will be the temperature of the water at 80oc, and I will make sure it is fair by testing it with a thermometer. I will also make sure it is a fair test by adding more water into the bigger beakers because it wont all fit into the smaller ones so that will give the smaller beakers a fair chance as well, and I will measure the water in a measuring cylinder to make it fair.I will also make sure I devise a fair test by using a stopwatch to record the result every 30 seconds up to 2minutes, because it is more reliable and accurate. I will make sure it is fair when we record the results because when we get the temperature I will get a second opinion of my friend. I will also make sure my experiment is safe in all the possible ways I can. I will make sure we are safe by wearing rubber gloves just in case we spill some boiling water on our hands. Prediction: I predict that the bigger the beaker the faster it will cool, and the smaller the beaker the longer it will take to cool. I know this because of the Food Theory, the theory tells me that if there was a plate with a pile of hot food on it, it will take quite long for it to cool down, where as if you were to break that pile of hot food into smaller pieces of food then it will cool down much quicker because when you break it up you are giving it a bigger surface area so heat can escape around the sides, top and bottom. So therefore I think the same will happen with the beakers, but the bigger the beaker is obviously going to have a bigger surface area than the smaller beakers, where as in the theory the smaller food pieces have a bigger surface area than the pile of food, but that is because you cant break the beakers into pieces.Apparatus:* 4 different sized beakers* Water at 80oc* Kettle* Thermometer* Rubber Gloves* Stop watch* Pen Paper (for results)Method: First of all I got the equipment, which consists of 4 different sized beakers, a thermometer, a kettle, measuring cylinder and some water. Then I put the kettle on, when the water was boiled up to 80oc I measured it in the measuring cylinder and put the correct amount of water into the correct beaker, then we waited and every 30 seconds on the stop watch, we then measured the temperature of the water in the 4 beakers with a thermometer, then we recorded them on paper and plotted some graphs.Numbers and range: In total I will have 4 results for the 4 different sized beakers and for each beaker I will have two readings, and I will record the results every 30 seconds and at the end of all the results I will take away 2 minutes from 0 seconds for the first reading of the first beaker then I will do the same to the second reading for the first beaker then I will add them both and divide them by two which will give me an overall average for the first beaker, and I will carry that on for the next 3 be akers, in the end I should end up with 4 different averages with which I will plot a graph. Here are the 4 different beakers:BEAKER 1: The biggest with 150ml of waterBEAKER 2: The second biggest with 100ml of waterBEAKER 3: The third biggest with 75ml of waterBEAKER 4: The fourth biggest with 50ml of waterSafety: I will try and make my experiment safe by firstly wearing rubber gloves in case we spill the boiling water, secondly by consulting a teacher before and after we set up the experiment.CONCLUSIONCalculation: I calculated my averages by working out the difference between 2 minutes and 0 seconds for the first beaker and the first reading, then I did the first beaker and second reading, I then added the sums together and divided them by 2, to give me an average. I did this for the 3 other beakers as well. So I ended up with 4 overall averages.Pattern: I would say that a pattern did occur in both of my graphs, as you can see in the graphs labelled result 1 and result 2all the lin es go from a high temperature to a low one which shows that the temperatures did drop after some time, which was meant to happen, but then you see on graph result 1 the order from top to bottom is: beaker 1, beaker 4, beaker 2, beaker 3, which proves my prediction wrong about the bigger the beaker the faster it will cool, because beaker 4 is the smallest beaker and it cooled down faster than beaker 2 and 3, and also it starts off with beaker 1 which it should have, then it jumps straight to beaker4 which should be last, but then it carrys on as normal; beaker 2 and then beaker 3, so I think there was a problem within beaker 4. In the graph result 2 you can see the order from top to bottom is: beaker 3, beaker 1, beaker 2, beaker 4, so beaker 3 should be third but you can see that the rest is in order, so beaker 1, beaker 2, then it should have been beaker 3, then beaker 4, so I think there was a problem within beaker 3. In the graph labelled averages I think it all goes pear shaped, because the points are so far apart from each other, which made it harder for me to draw the line of best fit, you can also see the averages in order from highest temperature to lowest temperature is: beaker 2, beaker 4, beaker 1, beaker 3, so I think that because the averages have turned out like that and not how I expected which was beaker 1,2,3 and then 4, I think that the whole experiment must have went wrong from start to end.Evaluation: In my experiment I found that most of my results were quite off key, in the graphs result 1 and result 2 the orders were only one out of order. Then when it came to the graph labelled averages the order was completely wrong to what I predicted, I predicted the bigger the beaker the faster it will cool, if that happened the order would have been beaker 1, 2, 3, and then 4, but because it went wrong it turned out beaker 2, 4, 1 and then 3. if you look at the graph result 1 the problem was beaker 4, and in the graph result 2 the problem was beake r 3, I dont have a clue why those problems occurred, and by looking at the average I think I could have improved my experiment by doing it all over again but much more carefully this time round.

Famous Latin Americans in History

Famous Latin Americans in History The history of Latin America is packed full of influential people: dictators and statesmen, rebels and reformers, artists and entertainers. How to pick the ten most important? My criteria for compiling this list were that the person had to have made an important difference in his or her world, and had to have international importance. My ten most important, listed chronologically, are: Bartolomà © de Las Casas  (1484–1566) Although not actually born in Latin America, there can be no doubt about where his heart was. This Dominican friar fought for freedom and native rights in the early days of conquest and colonization, placing himself squarely in the way of those who would exploit and abuse the natives. If not for him, the horrors of the conquest would have been immeasurably worse.Simà ³n Bolà ­var  (1783–1830) The George Washington of South America led the way to freedom for millions of South Americans. His great charisma combined with military acumen made him the greatest of the different leaders of the Latin American Independence movement. He is responsible for the liberation of the present-day nations of Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia.Diego Rivera (1886–1957) Diego Rivera may not have been the only Mexican muralist, but he was certainly the most famous. Together with David Alfaro Siquieros and Josà © Clemente Orozco , they brought art out of the museums and into the streets, inviting international controversy at every turn. Augusto Pinochet  (1915–2006) Chiles dictator between 1974 and 1990, Pinochet was one of the leading figures in Operation Condor, an effort to intimidate and murder leftist opposition leaders. Operation Condor was a joint effort among Chile, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay, Bolivia and Brazil, all with the support of the United States Government.Fidel Castro  (1926–2016) The fiery revolutionary turned irascible statesman has had a profound effect on world politics for fifty years. A thorn in the side of American leaders since the Eisenhower administration, he has been a beacon of resistance for anti-imperialists.Roberto Gà ³mez Bolaà ±os (Chespirito, el Chavo del 8) (1929–2014) Not every Latin American youll ever meet will recognize the name Roberto Gà ³mez Bolaà ±os, but everyone from Mexico to Argentina will know el Chavo del 8, the fictional eight-year-old boy portrayed by Gà ³mez (whose stage name is Chespirito) for decades. Chespirito has worked in Tel evision for over 40 years, creating iconic series such as El Chavo del 8 and el Chapulà ­n Colorado (The Red Grasshopper).​ Gabriel Garcà ­a Mrquez (1927–2014) Gabriel Garcà ­a Mrquez did not invent Magical realism, that most Latin American of literary genres, but he perfected it. The winner of the 1982 Nobel Prize for Literature is Latin Americas most celebrated writer, and his works have been translated into dozens of languages and have sold millions of copies.Edison Arantes do Nascimento Pelà © (1940–) Brazils favorite son and arguably the best soccer player of all time, Pelà © later became famous for his tireless work on behalf of Brazils poor and downtrodden and as an ambassador for soccer. The universal admiration in which Brazilians hold him has also contributed to a decrease in racism in his home country.Pablo Escobar (1949–1993) The legendary drug lord of Medellà ­n, Colombia, was once considered by Forbes Magazine to be the seventh-richest man in the world. At the height of his power, he was the most powerful man in Colombia and his drug empire stretched around the worl d. In his rise to power, he was greatly aided by the support of Colombias poor, who viewed him as a sort of Robin Hood. Rigoberta Menchà º (1959–) A native of the rural province of Quichà ©, Guatemala, Rigoberta Menchà º and her family were involved in the bitter struggle for indigenous rights. She rose to prominence in 1982 when her autobiography was ghost-written by Elizabeth Burgos. Menchà º turned the resulting international attention into a platform for activism, and she was awarded the 1992 Nobel Peace Prize. She continues to be a world leader in native rights.

Potential Opportunity for Samsung to Market in China and Vietnam Case Study

Potential Opportunity for Samsung to Market in China and Vietnam - Case Study Example In the current environment of highly competitive global business, it now needs to explore and analyze market potential for its tablet in China and Egypt. Criteria for assessing potential opportunities for Samsung Tablets in China and Egypt Sn. Factors for assessment China Egypt 1. Population/popn growth 1338 mn/nil 81 mn/1.8% 2. GDP per capita $7599 $6180 3. Poverty (%) 36.3 18.5 4. UN education index 0.623 0.560 5. Contribution of private enterprises to GDP More than 50% na 6. PDI (personal disposable income in urban area $2515 na 7. Inflation (1-7 taken from BTI, 2012) 3.3 11.3 7. Credit rating (S&P) (S&P, 2013) AA- CCC+ 8. Country risk factors Political Technological Economic Social low low low high high low low high 9. e-Business readiness yes yes 10. Business forecast for 3 years (growth rate) 2012 2013 2014 7.8 8.0 8.2 (IMF, 2013) 113.13 126.29 138.48 (HSBC, 2012) China China’s economic reforms since 1978 have opened the market for overseas business and created viable en vironment for FDI and multinationals. It has shown incredible advancement in economy to become second largest in the world in 2010, surpassing Japan and biggest exporting country in 2009 (bti, 2013). At the same time, the stimulus package of $586 billion has challenged its dependence on fixed asset and new credit of about $ 2.5 trillion in 2009-2010 could lead to inflationary trend. Though there is wide income disparity with GINI index at 0.475 and urban-rural gap widening from 2.79:1 in 2000 to 3.3:1 in 2009, per capita disposable income in urban areas being $2515 as against $755 in rural areas. South Korea is one of the most important trading partners of China with good bilateral relations. FDI at $ 105.7 billion in 2010 encouraging, especially when private enterprises contribute more than 50% of the GDP and create more than 80% of new jobs. It has relatively high disposable income which makes it attractive for overseas business, especially, tablets which have huge demand with 41% rise in its demand (Stanley Morgan report, 2011). Egypt The country is continually in a state of high political instability but surprisingly it has not affected its economic development and structural improvement. The economic reforms introduced during 2004 by the Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif have continued with focused approach. The economic reforms and liberalization has not addressed the problems of literacy and unemployment which has considerably increased poverty and income disparity across the population. 40% of 83 million population comprising of nearly 20 million people are between 18 and 29 years, most of whom are vulnerable to poverty due to lack of education and unemployment. With high inflation rate of nearly 12% and relatively low GDP growth of 5%, the most populous country of Middle East has shown negative growth in both its export and import trade (BTI, 2012). Despite market liberalization, lack of nepotism and law enforcement has adversely impacted growth of domestic and foreign businesses. There is also rampant gender discrimination and human development index has continually shown down trend. It lacks political commitment and institutional capacity to address the problem of growing illiteracy and unemployment. Recommendation for China China has stable socio-political environment with high growth in GDP which has also made it attractive for overseas business. With increasing disposable income

Human Communication Theory and Research Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Human Communication Theory and Research - Essay Example Different scholars including philosophers have developed theories to help understand ways people communicate and assign meaning to what they say and hear. One of such theories is Referential Theory. The paper will discuss the theory by outlining its assumptions, strengths, and weaknesses. Â  Referential theory of meaning has its roots from the work of Aristotle, and he was the first person to expound on it in the 4th century BC (Hobbs, 2012). He had an assumption regarding words that people spoke and believed they had a meaning attached to them. According to his view, the meaning of a word consists in what it refers to (Hobbs, 2012). He gave several examples to prove his argument and as a justification that meanings are denoted by the words referred. For instance, the word "dog" is used to refer to all the dogs in the world and dogs are mammals that human beings rear at homes. Therefore, it is in order for one to hold that dog refers to all the animals who share the same similarities in the world. Similarly, knowing what dog refers to makes it easy for people to know the meaning of the word. Â  Besides, Aristotle argued by giving other additional examples towards justifying his statements. For instance, the meaning of a tree is the same one known, the meaning of a joke is the same joke we practice every day same to automobiles used in everyday life (Hobbs, 2012). Because of this, proponents of the theory believe that meaning of a term consists in its reference class. This implies that it falls into the category that the words refer. Â  The referential theory is cherished because of the identity it gives objects it refers to. The theory holds because of its ability to point to references class that is used in explaining the meaning of words used (UNC, 2015).