Search results

A corporate innovation strategy implies that a firm’s strategic intent is to continuously leverage entrepreneurial opportunities for growth- and advantage-seeking purposes. Corporate innovation has gained greater research attention with a focus on the factors that influence an organization’s willingness to initiate and sustain an innovation strategy. In the current disruptive age, firms acknowledge the importance of corporate innovation (also referred to as corporate entrepreneurship) as the critical element for sustained competitive advantage in the global economy. Yet, it has been reported that many organizations struggle with the actual implementation of an innovative strategy. While there are key challenges that must be addressed by today’s corporate innovative leaders in this age of disruptive innovation, many of today’s technological companies are finding success in reaching for the future. As research on corporate innovative activity has evolved, there is still a need to examine some of the latest innovative developments with the technological sector since they are regarded as leading this disruptive age. This chapter examines the most recognized companies in the technological space and discusses their newest explorations. In addition, a framework is presented to illustrate similarities and differences in their approaches to corporate innovation activity.

Marissa Mayer has been asked to think about factors that were impacting Google's ability to innovate and adjust its strategy so that the organization could remain one of the world's foremost leaders in technology. In an industry (and at a company) that was changing and growing exponentially, it would be difficult to pinpoint specific variables and trends. But Mayer knew that one element crucial to Google's ongoing success would be its ability to recruit the best talent available and foster an environment that would encourage that talent to generate the best ideas. As Mayer contemplated how to ensure this, she considered that women currently represented only a small fraction of Google's engineers, suggesting a missed opportunity.

This paper looks at small spaces. In particular, it aims to focus on small gestures of resistance and the objects which accompany them. It takes its inspiration from Goffman's “secondary adjustments”, in other words, from reactions to organizational socialization, but draws most of its theoretical support from the literature of exile and architectural concepts of structure.

The paper is located in the interpretative paradigm and draws on Goffman's observations, photographic approaches, and artistic and literary works on exile. It does not work with psycho‐analytic approaches to object‐relations and has merely an affinity with science and technology studies.

The primary findings concern the relationship between work and its other. At a time when work has extended to define all areas of life, the paper considers the relationship between exile and homeland, between memories and aides memoires. The paper examines the intimate relationship between the prevailing conditions of exile and the miniscule gestures which might help to give consolation, offer compensation and serve as resistance to the relentless demands of work.

The paper outlines some of the conceptual concerns. An empirically based study will follow. Its practical relevance lies in its questioning the blurring of boundaries between home and work and raises issues about the importance of personal belongings in the workspace.

The paper's originality lies in the emphasis it gives to the small spaces of resistance which it characterises.

The purpose of this paper is to track the uses of humans for document search and retrieval into the now increasing problem of accessing electronic information.

Search has evolved into a top priority for internet users and will continue to expand as the new application platform. In the last year, Google has become the superstar of finding and accessing digital information. Information fracture, the multiplying effect of information processing, continues to send shock waves across computing environments.

Computing has shifted to distributed systems delivering from the network, not the local storage device. Locating a particular digital item is difficult. Google and other search engine companies are becoming application platforms. Google provides applications on different devices at different price points, including free of charge, with a variety of technology infrastructure. Innovations will be driven by user behavior.

Electronic information is doubling every 12 to 18 months. Search will drive the future of next‐generation applications. Publishing is already feeling the impact of this new shock wave. What is next may not be known yet, but Google already has 60 products and services out.

This paper shows the evolution of information in search and retrieval methods, and how search will drive next‐generation applications. Google is the primary market maker, with more patents applied for in the first six months of 2005 than all of its previous history, going back to 1998.