Many people nowadays are talking about innovation, especially innovation in media. That’s a nice concept but you need to question what is innovation, in fact. Do they even know what they are talking about?
Innovation is more that acquiring the future. Acquiring the future can be a very expensive and risky enterprise. For it to succeed, if the new acquisition is to reinvigorate the old, the acquirer has to be prepared to embrace the new.
Also, innovation is more than brilliant ideas. To be a market leader – even in media – you need to be more than clever. You need to be able to consistently deliver on both your promise and your potential. It is also about your ability to implement or execute those ideas brilliantly, and brilliant execution is all about how effectively you manage your resources so you can deliver on the promise. This means putting Smart People, Smart Process and Smart Technology together to ”Do More With Less” while at the same time getting the market excited about doing business with you.
In this post I thought to give you a link to a very interesting and well-written post that explores how the world’s most innovative companies can help the newspapers and how can the Newspaper Industry “take away” from adopting their “recipes”; it’s mainly about what we can learn from Apple (not only recognized as the world leader in product innovation but also recognized as the world leader in Supply Chain Management).
In short, what this text is about? Here are some excerpts:
“How easy would it be for the New York Times or News Corp. to become the next Apple? Actually, as experience has proven, the technology barriers to entry are negligible. The real barrier for the newspaper industry is cultural. The challenge then is for the newspaper industry to re-imagine who and what it wants to be in the future.
At the heart of No Logo was the simple message that Corporate America was no longer in the business of making things. It was now in the business of Brand Management. So it is somewhat ironic that the mass media industry completely missed Naomi Klein’s message. While the rest of the American Economy appears to have exchanged making things for the Global Branding rights America’s Media Moguls still think they are in the business of making newspapers, magazines, TV and Radio content.
Yet all too often we discover the old simply feeds on the new. For many global acquirers innovative start-ups are little more than corporate fast food. You could say that they satisfy the urge but they don’t feed the profit engine because all too often the Mergers and Acquisitions equation looks more like 1+1=½ than the much touted 1+1=3.
The barriers to success are cultural and that’s why MBA programs would probably be better off teaching the impact of Game Theory and the mathematics of social interaction than presenting endless case studies on Global Merger and Acquisitions programs. Clearly, if newspapers are to evolve, they will have to do it internally. They will have to rediscover the Corporate Innovation DNA that is buried deep within their culture and that will be very hard.
In the 1960’s you could profile a potential customer by the Newspaper they read or the TV program they watched. Today it is the mobile phone they carry and that’s why Apple is winning, and the newspapers are losing, the race to own the future of the MobCon.” (www.excapite.wordpress.com)