Over the years, China has picked up an image of being a copycat in technology, creating knock-off products already produced in the U.S or elsewhere. That image is quickly disappearing.
With the world changing so rapidly virtually every established company feels the imperative to innovate. Executives, managers and employees across the globe are working hard to figure out how to succeed with innovation. The lessons that are emerging from this work are sometimes counterintuitive and challenge many long held assumptions.
It was an intriguing idea, Kalil thought: Could the U.S. government get better research results if it offered prizes? Could it become a “third leg of the stool”–in addition to contracts and grants – for the federal government to support innovation? “It occurred to me that the government has trillions of dollars contingent on failure,” Kalil recalled in an interview. “Why don’t we make payments that are contingent on success?”
Gary Shapiro, CEO of trade group Consumer Technology Association (CTA), applauded China’s approach to technology investment, noting the country took a successful US model and improved on it.
In the last week, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two important rulings limiting patent rights. The decisions, which were both unanimous, significantly scaled back the ability of patent holders to slow innovation by competitors, tipping scales that many legal scholars believe have become badly imbalanced.
Government does not always appear to be driving innovation, notes Scott Gregory, chief digital innovation officer for the California Department of Technology. But several technology-forward state and local governments are changing that.
With the cloud channel revolution, the bar to innovation has been lowered in terms of committed capital and time to market. The newest generation of tech companies uses hackathons and the latest methods of collaborating with entrepreneurial, self-taught coders to reach business decision makers (BDMs).
One of the primary justifications we hear for why patents are social goods is that they encourage innovation. Specifically, the argument goes, patents incentivize companies and individuals to invest in costly research and development that they would not otherwise invest in because they know they will be able to later charge supracompetitive prices and recoup the costs of that development.
Is there a relationship between innovation and chances of long-term prosperity? Intuition would lead one to think there has to be. But, does data support this assumption? The results are more complicated than counterintuitive.
“Innovation and creative endeavors are indispensable elements that drive economic growth and sustain the competitive edge of the U.S. economy.” Thus reads the start of the executive summary for the 2016 update to the Intellectual Property and the U.S. Economy...