Introduction:
Primary Article: Article 6: Disruptive innovation for social change.
Supporting Articles: Article 1: I-form organization.
Article 3: Ambidextrous organization.
Should multinational corporations adopt a culture of catalytic innovation for social changes?
Coming from a developing country, India, I am aware of the social situation in the country. The inequality between the rich and the poor, lack of good medical facilities, high levels of pollution are all a part of almost every developing nation. This coupled with the high corrup-tion and exploitation of MNC’s from the western world for profit making and cheap la-bour, does not allow the local conditions to develop. Sure, it does generate employment, but only the educated class are able to enjoy the benefits of it. This in turn leads to rising gap of inequality. Having come across the topic of catalytic innovation, I found it very useful if implemented in developing countries as rightly mentioned in the article as well. If multi-national companies adopt a culture of social innovation, while maintaining their existing business separate in ambidextrous form, it could lead to an overall development of nation. We need social innovations that can show the way to a new developmental model, a model where high-end but low cost technologies help solve simple everyday problems. Hence to learn more about the concept and how it could be useful, the issue is chosen. First, a gen-eral understanding of the three concepts, Catalytic innovation, I-form organization and am-bidextrous organization is done. Then, how the 3 concepts support the issue/question in-volved and ultimately the conclusion about learning from the report. About Catalytic innovation: Disruptive innovation refers to creating a new market and value network disrupting an ex-isting market. There are two types of disruptive innovation. First if the incremental innova-tion and the other is catalytic innovation. Incremental innovation deals with innovations in commercially viable business models and offering the innovations to a specific set of peo-ple. An example of incremental innovation could be auto-pilot driving mode introduced by Tesla, Google Car and other companies. Indeed it is a breakthrough innovation but not a larger set of people will benefit from it. Catalytic innovation is primarily distinguished by its focus on social change on a larger scale. Either overserved market or under-served market is the customer segment for such innovations. It does not deal with not offering the perfect product. Its aim is to come with a product which is simple, has low cost but user consider them good enough considering their social conditions. Due to their low cost feature, they are often neglected by existing companies who focus on profit making products. This often results in low investment availability in such organizations. About I-Form Organization: The evolution from Standardization era to Customization era has further evolved into Innovation form of organization (I-Form). It is based on the market exploration mod-el, which …show more content…
This can be avoided by using the concept of ambidextrous organization. The core activities and innovations for social change can be separated while keeping the top management common. This will lead to inde-pendence and complete freedom to operate effectively and efficiently, enabling low cost-less complicated innovations for the larger part of population. Ambidextrous units require allowing of different processes, structures, procedures and culture. At the same time, they maintain strong relationships with the main organization through the top management. As per study, more than 90% of the ambidextrous organizations succeed in achieving their goals. Hence, to achieve the desired objective it would be beneficial to have such a …show more content…
Use of right technology and economies of scale would help in affordable and sustainable innovation for the needy. Examples of the health care in Kenya (Minute clinic) can be replicated in other countries as well. Just right amount of resources, manpower skills and a change in innovation attitude of the people is needed for bringing the much needed social change. Focus on commercial innovation along with social innova-tion is the need of the hour and MNC’s can support them with their available resources as a part of their strategy. This would mean more clientele for them in the long run and fulfil-ment of needs of the needy. Hence, I would like to conclude the essay report and the issue raised by stating that a win-win situation is possible through the combination of
Primary Article: Article 6: Disruptive innovation for social change.
Supporting Articles: Article 1: I-form organization.
Article 3: Ambidextrous organization.
Should multinational corporations adopt a culture of catalytic innovation for social changes?
Coming from a developing country, India, I am aware of the social situation in the country. The inequality between the rich and the poor, lack of good medical facilities, high levels of pollution are all a part of almost every developing nation. This coupled with the high corrup-tion and exploitation of MNC’s from the western world for profit making and cheap la-bour, does not allow the local conditions to develop. Sure, it does generate employment, but only the educated class are able to enjoy the benefits of it. This in turn leads to rising gap of inequality. Having come across the topic of catalytic innovation, I found it very useful if implemented in developing countries as rightly mentioned in the article as well. If multi-national companies adopt a culture of social innovation, while maintaining their existing business separate in ambidextrous form, it could lead to an overall development of nation. We need social innovations that can show the way to a new developmental model, a model where high-end but low cost technologies help solve simple everyday problems. Hence to learn more about the concept and how it could be useful, the issue is chosen. First, a gen-eral understanding of the three concepts, Catalytic innovation, I-form organization and am-bidextrous organization is done. Then, how the 3 concepts support the issue/question in-volved and ultimately the conclusion about learning from the report. About Catalytic innovation: Disruptive innovation refers to creating a new market and value network disrupting an ex-isting market. There are two types of disruptive innovation. First if the incremental innova-tion and the other is catalytic innovation. Incremental innovation deals with innovations in commercially viable business models and offering the innovations to a specific set of peo-ple. An example of incremental innovation could be auto-pilot driving mode introduced by Tesla, Google Car and other companies. Indeed it is a breakthrough innovation but not a larger set of people will benefit from it. Catalytic innovation is primarily distinguished by its focus on social change on a larger scale. Either overserved market or under-served market is the customer segment for such innovations. It does not deal with not offering the perfect product. Its aim is to come with a product which is simple, has low cost but user consider them good enough considering their social conditions. Due to their low cost feature, they are often neglected by existing companies who focus on profit making products. This often results in low investment availability in such organizations. About I-Form Organization: The evolution from Standardization era to Customization era has further evolved into Innovation form of organization (I-Form). It is based on the market exploration mod-el, which …show more content…
This can be avoided by using the concept of ambidextrous organization. The core activities and innovations for social change can be separated while keeping the top management common. This will lead to inde-pendence and complete freedom to operate effectively and efficiently, enabling low cost-less complicated innovations for the larger part of population. Ambidextrous units require allowing of different processes, structures, procedures and culture. At the same time, they maintain strong relationships with the main organization through the top management. As per study, more than 90% of the ambidextrous organizations succeed in achieving their goals. Hence, to achieve the desired objective it would be beneficial to have such a …show more content…
Use of right technology and economies of scale would help in affordable and sustainable innovation for the needy. Examples of the health care in Kenya (Minute clinic) can be replicated in other countries as well. Just right amount of resources, manpower skills and a change in innovation attitude of the people is needed for bringing the much needed social change. Focus on commercial innovation along with social innova-tion is the need of the hour and MNC’s can support them with their available resources as a part of their strategy. This would mean more clientele for them in the long run and fulfil-ment of needs of the needy. Hence, I would like to conclude the essay report and the issue raised by stating that a win-win situation is possible through the combination of