Category Archives: Finance

Innovation Costs of Reducing the Flow of Immigrants and Travelers to USA

Innovation Costs of Reducing the Flow of Immigrants and Travelers to USA

September 11th was a traumatic event for the psychology of the nation but also for its innovation capacity. After 9/11 the United States started admitting fewer highly skilled immigrants, invited fewer students to come study here, and companies and consumers cut back on their travel budgets.

These factors, along with many others, combined to reduce the amount of face to face collaboration and created new innovation headwinds for the country.

In 2001, Michael Porter of Harvard Business School published a report ranking the United States as #1 in terms of innovative capacity. By 2009, the Economist Intelligence Unit had dropped the United States in its innovation rankings from #3 between 2002 – 2006 to #4 between 2004 – 2008. The most recent Global Innovation Index has the United States falling from #1 in 2009 to #7 in 2011 — behind Switzerland, Sweden, Singapore, Hong Kong, Finland, and Denmark.

If you’re the United States, not being #1 anymore is a definite concern. Innovation drives job creation, and any decrease in the pace of domestic innovation will ultimately lead to lower economic growth. As the United States slides down the innovation rankings, restrictive immigration policies suddenly look less smart.

The number of foreign student visas increased by a third during the 90s, peaking in 2001 at 293,357 before dropping post-9/11 by 20 percent nearly overnight. It took five years before foreign student visa numbers recovered to 2001 levels. Last year, 331,208 foreign student visas were issued.

But a drop-off in highly skilled immigration does not account for the entire drop in America’s innovation leadership. Another headwind that hit post-9/11 was the drop-off in travel in America. In August 2001, 65.4 million airline passengers traveled to the country. It took three years for passenger growth to resume.

Travel — both corporate and leisure — is important to innovation for three main reasons:

  1. People see and experience things that spark new ideas
  2. Face-to-face meetings deepen human connection and improve productivity and collaboration.
  3. Innovation partnerships and acquisitions are often made in-person.

The United States is at an innovation crossroads. We must commit to attracting more innovators to this country, and to traveling abroad more. Not doing so is guaranteed to exacerbate America’s slide from innovation leader to laggard.

This article first appeared on The Atlantic before drifting into the archive

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Business Model Innovation?

Business Model Innovation?

Nearly five years ago I wrote this article, but I think it is worth dredging it up out of the archives because there is such misunderstanding out there about what business model innovation is. This article highlights some of the misconceptions people have about what business model innovation truly is and looks quickly at a couple of more appropriate examples of business model innovation. But of course I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments, including your favorite business model innovation examples.

Here’s the article from 2007:

I came across an article on BusinessWeek.com that I just have to write about because it asserts that GM has achieved a business model innovation by shunting its retiree medical obligations onto the Union (and getting away with only contributing 70% of the outstanding obligations to the fund).

This is not a business model innovation, but purely a negotiation outcome and nothing that will give GM any sustainable competitive advantage. Ford and Chrysler will end up doing the same thing and the parity of competition amongst US manufacturers will be restored. A business model innovation is Southwest Airlines establishing a new airline focused on providing low fare point to point air travel instead of creating another airline based on a hub and spoke model, or Saturn selling their cars for a fixed price, not GM pushing obligations off their balance sheet.

GM is not losing in the automobile industry because of health care costs for retirees. They are losing because their operations result in cars that less and less people want to buy. GM needs to stop complaining about peripheral issues and trying to be like Toyota and instead focus on how they can be better than Toyota.

When workers come back on the job, nothing will have changed in their business, the business of designing, manufacturing and selling cars. If anything the workers are going to come back to work feeling like they have just given even more away to the corporation, just so that the CEO’s balance sheet look better. This is not a business model innovation. The Big Three will not avoid the inevitable by simply squeezing their union workforce, they need to design and manufacture better cars. This deal with the unions may slow the inevitable, but not avoid it. Toyota is passing GM, the Korean manufacturers are quickly improving their quality, and the Chinese will begin entering the US market in the next few years. One of the Big Three will go out of business in the next ten years. The real question is which one?

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

4 Days to Innovate

4 Days to InnovateThe clock is ticking on the congressional “supercommittee” – a panel comprised of six Republicans and six Democrats charged with issuing a plan to balance the nation’s budget. The bipartisan gathering has only four days until their deadline to submit such a plan. But how well can they, or anyone, innovate while the clock is ticking?

Continue reading the rest of this article on The Washington Post

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

How a Blizzard Saved the ATM

GUEST POST from Stephen Shapiro

“Build it and they will come.” We hear that mantra a lot. But with innovation, it is often more like, “Solve a pain and they will come.” The ultimate success of the Automated Teller Machine (ATM) is a great example of this.

The other night I was having dinner with someone who in the mid-1970’s worked with Citibank, the second largest bank at the time. He shared with me the story of the birth of the ATM, at least from his perspective.

In 1977, after investing hundreds of millions of dollars in ATM technology research and development, Citibank decided to install machines across all of New York City. But at first, they were not very popular. The technology was confusing to first-time users, the machines were not always accurate (they sometimes dispensed the wrong amount of money), and they were impersonal. I was told that customers who used ATM machines were so frustrated that many closed their accounts.

The ATM may never have been an instant hit if it weren’t for a natural disaster.

January 1978 will always be remembered for a blizzard that dumped as much as four feet of snow in the Northeast. In New York City, nearly two feet of snow brought the city to a halt. Banks didn’t open. Instead, people got their money from supermarkets. But most of those quickly ran out of money.

This created a massive ‘pain’.

Where did people turn? The ATMs. It is estimated that during the storms, use of the machines increased by over 20%. Soon after, Citibank started running TV ads showing people trudging through the snow drifts in New York City. That’s when the company introduced their wildly popular slogan, “The Citi Never Sleeps.” This was the real birth of the automated teller machine.

I found an interesting Fortune article that corroborates his story. The article claims that by 1981, Citibank’s market share of New York deposits had doubled. A lot of this growth could be attributed to the ATM.

This story illustrates an innovators dilemma. Brilliant innovations are not necessarily taken up by the masses. Some ideas just need time to incubate and gain acceptance. But can your business survive long enough to see the success? Too many ideas, like Webvan, could not endure the incubation period. Sometimes your innovations need a little boost.

As I have pointed out in previous blog entries, people take massive risks to eliminate their pains, but play is safe when it comes to adding convenience. ATMs were primarily about convenience. What did it take for them to become a success? A pain caused by a natural disaster.

Are your new ideas solving a pain? Or are they just a nice to have? If they are just a convenience, what can you do to create a pain – without having to rely on a natural disaster?

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.i