Thứ Sáu, 27 tháng 7, 2018

Auto news on Youtube Jul 27 2018

I usually don't suggest to people they should be disruptive.

But if you're starting a growth startup a disruptive innovation

strategy is your most likely path to success.

By the end of this video you'll understand what is a disruptive innovation

and how that's different from a sustaining innovation.

And we'll go through an example to try to make it that much clearer as to what exactly

does disruptive innovation mean.

And then we'll talk about the proof the research that strongly suggests

that a disruptive innovation strategy is your path

to a higher likelihood of success.

And then we'll try to pull it all together by talking about how you can apply

all of what you've learned to create your own disruptive innovation

strategy so you can increase your chance of startup success.

So what is a disruptive innovation?

A disruptive innovation is a process.

It's a process that begins when there are customers that get left

behind. Customers tend to get left behind when you have sustaining

innovation. That's when you have multiple companies in a market that are

competing head to head

and they each introduce new products

with more features more capability more performance.

The products get better and better so that they can get a little more

market share and get more revenue.

Perfectly natural thing to happen.

But as that happens the other thing that tends to come along

with it is an increase in price

and because of that more

and more customers get left behind.

Which means there are customers that would love to have the capability they'd probably

even be okay with a little less capability

but they don't have access to it because it's just not in their

price range. A disruptive innovation begins when

another company realizes that there's that gap.

There are customers that have been left behind

and they create a product that's actually less capable.

Usually less capable usually smaller usually not

as attractive but at a lower price

and a product that although it's less capable is good enough

for at least a lot of the customers that got left behind - the customers

who can't afford the other products that are on the market if they could

they'd certainly prefer those

but they can't afford it.

And if you offer a product that's good enough even

though it's not as fancy as the products that are available elsewhere t hat

creates a disruptive innovation.

Once a company takes advantage of a disruptive innovation - they they

provide this lower capability product - they get a

toehold in a market selling to these sort of low end of the

market customers and then over time they slowly

improve their product: sustaining innovation.

And as the product gets better

and better eventually it becomes acceptable to

the mainstream customers.

And if the company can do that while maintaining their cost advantage

that then is a key for taking over a market

and that's what happens in your classic disruptive innovation.

So let's talk about an example the U.S. auto market back in the 60s.

Now in the 60s Ford Chrysler

and GM owned the car market in the United States

and they kept competing head to head offering more feature s

better performance more horsepower

and so forth each trying to eke out a little more revenue

and gain market share over the others.

But in doing that they left a lot of customers behind.

There were customers who couldn't afford a Ford Chrysler

or GM. And yet they wanted a car.

They were forced to buy an unreliable used car

or walk or take the bus. They didn't want that.

They wanted a new reliable car

but they simply couldn't afford it.

Well, some companies in Japan Toyota Honda

and Nissan recognized that opportunity

and started providing cars that were fit for those

customers that got left behind.

Now they were smaller

and cramped definitely not as nice as the cars that were

being made by the Big Three.

They were less safe - they were smaller they were less safe if

you got into an accident

and they were definitely not cool.

I mean these were looked out way back then as a sort of toy cars

they were real cars - real cars were Ford Chrysler

and GM. It was almost a little embarrassing to be seen in

one of these cheap Japanese imports.

But if that's what you could afford to get a reliable new car well

it became a good enough solution.

It was lower price better mileage which made it even

lower price really to operate

and it was more reliable so it even had lower repair costs.

So all of those factors made it good enough for the people who

couldn't afford a real car from Ford Chrysler

and GM. What ended up happening?

Well of course Toyota Honda and Nissan kept then introducing

new cars with more features more capabilities more performance

and eventually their cars became acceptable to the mainstream

market. And eventually as you know Toyota

became the number one car company in the world.

So that's a simple example of how a disruptive innovation can

be an effective way for a new entrant to enter a market where there are

very well established dominant competitors already in the market by

going after those customers that have been left behind

and then eventually take over that market.

That's the potential of a disruptive innovation.

So let's talk about the research that's behind a disruptive innovation

and that research was done by Thomas Thurston.

Thomas used to work for Intel Capital which is one of the biggest venture

capital companies in the world.

So they had a pretty large portfolio to take a look at.

What Thomas noticed though was that the vast majority of companies

that Intel invested in were not successful.

And he had to wonder isn't there a better way to pick

your investments to increase your odds of success.

What he did was he took a look at a portfolio of 48 companies

and he decided to test four hypotheses.

Hypothesis One was that if the company was

applying a sustaining innovation to get into

an existing market a market it was already in it was already competing

in, and that meant by sustaining that they

were doing a better product a product that was better that had better features

performance - some edge on the existing competition

in that market segment.

If they did that then his hypothesis was that their odds

of success were pretty good. Because that's a classic sustaining

innovation kind of opportunity.

On the other hand if he looked at doing a sustaining

innovation offering a better product

and more features more capabilities more performance

and going into a market that was a new market for

that company

his prediction was that's likely to not work.

Now why would that be.

Well you can think of a couple of reasons.

You're offering a better product in a market that's

a new market for you that has entrenched competitors

those competitors look at you

and say This company is going after our best customers

and they'll do everything they can to try to make sure that you don't succeed.

So you immediately get a response from the entrenched

competition when you're going after their best customers.

So it kind of makes intuitive sense.

On the other hand looking at a disruptive innovation where you're going after

the underserved the customers that have been left behind.

If it's an existing market opportunity where a company again

is let's say entering a market they're already in.

But now they're saying oh hey we're not getting to everybody in this market.

Let's go after those customers that have been passed

up. Well his prediction was that that was a recipe

for a disaster.

One reason. Well think about it if you have a product line in an existing

market that's higher margin that is going after the mainstream

customers who'll pay more - if you invest in a lower end product

for customers who can pay less it's going to be less revenue

and lower margin. That's not very attractive.

It's very easy to get into that discussion that says hey why are we spending money

on this low end product. Look at how much money we're making on our mainstream products.

If we took the money we're wasting on these low end cheap low margin

products and invested them in our high margin businesses

we'd make a lot more money.

And that's what tends to happen in a situation where

you try to do a disruptive innovation.

So again his prediction was no success.

The final hypothesis was if you do a disruptive innovation

when you're tackling a new market

or a market you're not addressing already then the odds

of success there are much higher.

Again intuitively kind of makes sense.

You're doing a disruptive innovation much like the Japanese car companies did in

the U.S. auto market by going after those customers that were

left behind. They can't pay as much as mainstream

customers and the entrenched competition tends to ignore you

because after all you're going after customers that they're really not that motivated

to go after. Those were his hypotheses.

And the question was based on those hypotheses

could he predict the winners

and the losers in the Intel portfolio.

We went through that portfolio of 48 companies

and he categorized each one into

one these four categories.

Were they sustaining existing, sustaining new,

disruptive existing, or disruptive new.

And based on what category they were in

and based on no other data he predicted whether

or not they'd be successful.

Let's take a look at the results.

The results actually were pretty impressive.

There were 48 companies. Now what happened in reality was

out of 48 companies there were just five successes.

In this situation he defined success as a company that survived

pretty basic success measure.

So out of those forty eight companies five of them survived

which meant there were 43 that failed.

Now that does say something about the odds of success in startup businesses

at least in the business is that Intel Capital was investing in.

What did he predict.

Well he predicted that there would be six successes

and forty two failures.

So he wasn't 100 percent spot on

but out of those six successes he predicted he correctly

identified four of the five winners.

Now that means he identified a couple of companies he

thought would be winners that weren't winners

and one of the companies that he identified as a loser

ended up being a winner. So its prediction wasn't perfect

but it was pretty darn good.

In fact statistically the odds of him getting something that was that

close to being correct one in 2,500.

So those are pretty impressive odds.

Based solely on knowing whether

or not they were disruptive

or sustaining and whether they were entering a new market opportunity

or an existing market he was able to predict

success with that kind of accuracy

and that's pretty compelling evidence that if you are a startup

entering a new market opportunity which by definition

is what you're doing if you're an early stage startup a disruptive innovation

is a pretty good strategy to follow.

So how can you take these lessons to heart

and figure out how you can disrupt a market.

Well it all starts with identifying a segment of customers

that have been left behind - customers who want some

capability other people mainstream customers are getting

that capability, but there's a segment of customers that aren't getting

that capability because they simply can't afford it.

If you can figure out how to provide a solution that's

acceptable to those customers that have been left behind something

that's good enough for them.

That probably doesn't have all of the features right

but even though it's less capable it's also at a price

at a cost that they can afford.

That is the opportunity for a disruptive innovation even though

you're offering something that's not acceptable to the mainstream market.

That's OK. That means the entrenched competition is probably

going to leave you alone because you're not going after their best customers.

And that in a nutshell is how to put together a disruptive

innovation strategy. It's not that complicated.

Start with customers that have been left behind identify a solution

that's acceptable to them that you can deliver actually at a lower cost.

And even though it's not acceptable to the mainstream

as long as those left behind customers will accept your solution

you're well on your way to a disruptive innovation.

And that's a wrap for this video and why you should build a disruptive startup.

If this was helpful please click the like button below

and if you haven't subscribed to the channel yet we've tried to make it easy you just

click on the logo over here

and you'll get to subscribe

and check out our next video which should air

next week. Thank you very much for watching.

For more infomation >> Why you should build a Disruptive Startup - Duration: 14:07.

-------------------------------------------

Creative: how to build a stage base with our new Necronic rolling pin. - Duration: 5:52.

Our Chamaleon paints welcome the‭ ‬millennial‭ ‬Necrons.‭

Two layers of Psychotic Illusions and Toxic Purple will provide the perfect metallic look.

We‭'‬ll then use acrylics to highlight the‭ ‬machine‭'‬s lens‭ ‬in green.

We need to create a scenic base,‭ ‬so we‭'‬ll make our own tubes.

Thanks to our Roll Maker,‭ ‬we can easily make as many as we like of different sizes.

Now,‭ ‬using our plain rolling pin and our new Necron rolling pin,‭ ‬we‭'‬ll‭ ‬make the base of the plinth.‭

Using talcum‭ ‬powder with the rolling pin will help us avoid getting the putty stuck to‭ ‬it.

Once dry,‭ ‬we‭'‬ll cut‭ ‬off a piece with a similar size to the‭ ‬plinth.

We‭'‬ll use the‭ ‬Rolling‭ ‬pin to decorate the columns made with‭ ‬chalk.‭ ‬That easy.‭

The plinth is ready‭ ‬for a layer of our grey primer.‭

Decoramos la peana y la base,‭ ‬con‭ ‬acrílicos,‭ ‬resaltando aristas y luces.‭

And of course,‭ ‬our tubes‭! ‬These‭ ‬are perfect‭ ‬for that mechanical feel we want‭!

Now,‭ ‬some abandoned helmets and our skulls to use as props.‭

Lastly‭…‬ We place our dastardly Necron‭! ‬Now,‭ ‬its ready for our game‭!

Subscribe to‭ ‬our social networks and keep up with all our latest updates‭!

For more infomation >> Creative: how to build a stage base with our new Necronic rolling pin. - Duration: 5:52.

-------------------------------------------

How Does McArthur Law Firm Build a Case? - Duration: 1:28.

When our firm becomes involved in it in a truck wreck hopefully we become involved early

on.

Because a truck company and their insurer will start their investigation immediately

on learning that the wreck occurred.

And so the best possible course for an injured person is that their investigation and the

collection of evidence to support their interests occurs as soon as possible, too.

If we become involved early on in a case, if there is still the opportunity to inspect

the scene and preserve physical evidence through photographs, documentation, mapping, that

type of thing with a collision reconstruction expert we want to do that as soon as possible.

We also want to contact the truck company to preserve the evidence that they control

and do an inspection of that evidence prior to filing suit, if possible.

Or if it's not possible to obtain access to that evidence without filing suit, we would

file suit on a case like that early on to use the legal process and the courts to obtain

access to that evidence that's controlled by the at-fault trucking company.

For a free consultation about your personal injury claim call 1-888-WE-FIGHT.

Không có nhận xét nào:

Đăng nhận xét