Archive | atg RSS feed for this section

Corporate R.& D. as the Ringmaster of Innovation – NYTimes.com

Much of traditional corporate R.& D. spending, he said, has been subsidized by profits that are increasingly under Internet-era pressures. “The economic case for a lot of in-house R.& D. no longer makes sense,” Mr. Schrage said.

The best bet for corporate R.& D. labs, he said, is to adopt a “federated” model that leverages all the innovative work by outsiders in universities, start-ups, business partners and government labs. The corporate lab’s role, then, is to be more of a coordinator and integrator of innovation, from both outside and inside the company walls.
(Link: Corporate R.& D. as the Ringmaster of Innovation – NYTimes.com)

BusinessWeek & BCG – The 50 Most Innovative Companies 2009

While the 2009 list includes some stalwarts in their usual top positions—namely Apple and Google—15 newcomers have joined the lineup, the biggest change since BusinessWeek and Boston Consulting Group first partnered on this proprietary survey in 2005. These include more companies headquartered outside the U.S. than in the past, such as Volkswagen, Infosys, and Telefónica.
(Link: BusinessWeek & BCG – The 50 Most Innovative Companies 2009)

Success on the Side — The American, A Magazine of Ideas

It is not just start-ups who decide focus, focus, focus will lead to a better outcome than encouraging engineers to dabble of their own volition. Apple used to have a skunk works program in the 1980s but has discontinued it, and does not offer side-project time to employees. Over the past decade it has reined in its more experimental R&D experiments. “Apple’s $489 million R&D spend is a fraction of its larger competitors. But by rigorously focusing its development resources on a short list of projects with the greatest potential, the company created an innovation machine,” noted a Booz Allen report in 2005.
(Link: Success on the Side — The American, A Magazine of Ideas)

Gall's law – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

“A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. The inverse proposition also appears to be true: A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be made to work. You have to start over, beginning with a working simple system.” (p. 71)
(Link: Gall’s law – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Apple's design process – BusinessWeek

10 to 3 to 1
Apple designers come up with 10 entirely different mock ups of any new feature. Not, Lopp said, “seven in order to make three look good”, which seems to be a fairly standard practice elsewhere. They’ll take ten, and give themselves room to design without restriction. Later they whittle that number to three, spend more months on those three and then finally end up with one strong decision.
(Link: Apple’s design process – BusinessWeek)

Hashrocket Founders Interview:

3-2-1 launch promises a lot to customers. What processes allow you to get so much work done in so short a period of time?
The short answer: Rails.

We also only hire top talent. We don’t interview. We come make them pair with an actual project for a week. The original hires all came and worked for free before an offer was made. Anyone can fake an interview but nobody can fake a week of pair programming with 2 or 3 other top developers. Obie pairs with everyone also, as it is ultimately his brand to maintain.

The other key aspect to meeting this goal is to help our clients learn how to release just their core app initially. In other words, teach them how to “Get Real”.
(Link: Hashrocket Founders Interview:)


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.