PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Chris Zook

Publications and source records attributed to Chris Zook.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Growth outside the core.

Growth in an adjacent market is tougher than it looks; three-quarters of the time, the effort fails. But companies can change those odds dramatically. Results from a five-year study of corporate growth conducted by Bain & Company reveal that adjacency expansion succeeds only when built around strong core businesses that have the potential to become market leaders. And the best place to look for adjacency opportunities is inside a company's strongest customers. The study also found that the most successful companies were able to consistently, profitably outgrow their rivals by developing a formula for pushing out the boundaries of their core businesses in predictable, repeatable ways. Companies use their repeatability formulas to expand into any number of adjacencies. Some companies make repeated geographic moves, as Vodafone has done in expanding from one geographic market to another over the past 13 years, building revenues from $1 billion in 1990 to $48 billion in 2003. Others apply a superior business model to new segments. Dell, for example, has repeatedly adapted its direct-to-customer model to new customer segments and new product categories. In other cases, companies develop hybrid approaches. Nike executed a series of different types of adjacency moves: it expanded into adjacent customer segments, introduced new products, developed new distribution channels, and then moved into adjacent geographic markets. The successful repeaters in the study had two common characteristics. First, they were extraordinarily disciplined, applying rigorous screens before they made an adjacency move. This discipline paid off in the form of learning curve benefits, increased speed, and lower complexity. And second, in almost all cases, they developed their repeatable formulas by studying their customers and their customers' economics very, very carefully.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗

Open-market innovation.

Companies in many industries are feeling immense pressure to improve their ability to innovate. Even in these tough economic times, executives have pushed innovation initiatives to the top of their priority lists, but they know that the best ideas aren't always coming out of their own R&D labs. That's why a growing number of companies are exploring the idea of open-market innovation--an approach that uses tools such as licensing, joint ventures, and strategic alliances to bring the benefits of free trade to the flow of new ideas. For instance, when faced with the unanticipated anthrax scare last fall, Pitney Bowes had nothing in its R&D pipeline to help its customers combat the deadly spores. So it sought help from outside innovators to come up with scanning and imaging technologies that could alert its customers to tainted letters and packages. And Dow Chemical and Cargill jointly produced a new form of plastic derived from plant starches--a breakthrough product that neither company could have created on its own. In this article, Bain consultants Darrell Rigby and Chris Zook describe the advantages and disadvantages of open-market innovation and the ways some companies are using it to gain competitive advantage. By importing ideas from the outside, the authors say, companies can collect more and better ideas from different kinds of experts. Creative types within a company will stick around longer if they know their ideas will eventually find a home--as internal R&D projects or as concepts licensed to outside buyers. Exporting ideas also gives companies a way to measure an innovation's real value. However, the authors warn against entering into open-market innovation without properly structuring deals: Xerox and TRW virtually gave away their innovations and had to stand by while other companies capitalized on them.

Commerce↗