1) What was the biggest surprise for you in the reading? In other words, what did you read that stood out the most as different from your expectations?
I was most surprised by the idea that many companies would try to copy the concepts that created innovation, such as splitting up R&D into teams, without any real goal in doing so. It seems like something that would be obvious but I hadn't considered that a company would just copy a style and hoped it worked for their company.
2) Identify at least one part of the reading that was confusing to you.
I initially found the four categories of innovation to be confusing, especially distinguishing between the radical and architectural categories. They gave good examples of them but I'm not sure I would be able to pick the right one given a different example.
3) If you were able to ask two questions to the author, what would you ask? Why?
The author mentioned that he did a lot of consulting for the businesses that he mentioned, I would ask him what types of consulting he did for the businesses and what types of changes came about from his input. I would also ask the author about his definition of "innovation strategy" at the beginning of the article. I would like to know if the strategy stems from the mission statement of the company or somewhere else.
4) Was there anything you think the author was wrong about? Where do you disagree with what she or he said? How?
The author had a lot of interesting points, I can't particularly disagree with any of it because most of the article gave specific examples of each type of innovation strategy.
No comments:
Post a Comment