Search results

The (A) case describes the evolution between 1999 and 2005 of an unusual innovation team within the office of the chief information officer at oil and gas giant BP. This team helped business units conceive, develop, and implement novel, value-added applications for emerging information technologies. The team leader, vice president and chief technology officer Phiroz Darukhanavala (“Daru”), eschewed a large group and venture budget in favor of a small, lean team intimately engaged with BP's business units. The case describes several mechanisms created by the CTO office during its early evolution: “Blue Chalk” events that expanded executives' appreciation of emerging technology capabilities, a network of relationships through which emerging technologies were scouted and vetted, a structured technology transfer process, and annual “game-changer” projects.

The (B) case describes how the CTO office team members in 2011 again solicited advice from their ecosystem of thought leaders and held workshops to significantly enhance their impact. As a result, they began developing solutions for broader, more fundamental business problems that came to be known as Grand Challenges: extremely difficult business problems whose solutions could potentially create hundreds of millions—or billions—of dollars in business value.

After reading and analyzing the case, students will be able to:

• Understand the management challenges associated with realizing the business value of new technologies

• Explore how innovation management evolves as an innovation team learns from its successes and failures and, more importantly, builds a reputation within and outside the company

• Examine a prototypical “advocate” model of corporate entrepreneurial practice

• Explore a leading example of a successful internal innovation program

Understand the management challenges associated with realizing the business value of new technologies

Explore how innovation management evolves as an innovation team learns from its successes and failures and, more importantly, builds a reputation within and outside the company

Examine a prototypical “advocate” model of corporate entrepreneurial practice

Explore a leading example of a successful internal innovation program

The (A) case describes the evolution between 1999 and 2005 of an unusual innovation team within the office of the chief information officer at oil and gas giant BP. This team helped business units conceive, develop, and implement novel, value-added applications for emerging information technologies. The team leader, vice president and chief technology officer Phiroz Darukhanavala (“Daru”), eschewed a large group and venture budget in favor of a small, lean team intimately engaged with BP's business units. The case describes several mechanisms created by the CTO office during its early evolution: “Blue Chalk” events that expanded executives' appreciation of emerging technology capabilities, a network of relationships through which emerging technologies were scouted and vetted, a structured technology transfer process, and annual “game-changer” projects.

The (B) case describes how the CTO office team members in 2011 again solicited advice from their ecosystem of thought leaders and held workshops to significantly enhance their impact. As a result, they began developing solutions for broader, more fundamental business problems that came to be known as Grand Challenges: extremely difficult business problems whose solutions could potentially create hundreds of millions—or billions—of dollars in business value.

After reading and analyzing the case, students will be able to:

• Understand the management challenges associated with realizing the business value of new technologies

• Explore how innovation management evolves as an innovation team learns from its successes and failures and, more importantly, builds a reputation within and outside the company

• Examine a prototypical “advocate” model of corporate entrepreneurial practice

• Explore a leading example of a successful internal innovation program

Understand the management challenges associated with realizing the business value of new technologies

Explore how innovation management evolves as an innovation team learns from its successes and failures and, more importantly, builds a reputation within and outside the company

Examine a prototypical “advocate” model of corporate entrepreneurial practice

Explore a leading example of a successful internal innovation program

The case compares two U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) programs from the 1970s and 1980s: (1) “stealth” combat aircraft, capable of evading detection or engagement by anti-aircraft systems, and (2) precision attack of hardened ground vehicles from “standoff” distances, i.e., far behind the battle lines. Conceived at roughly the same time, motivated by the same strategic challenge, and initially driven by the same DoD organization, stealth combat aircraft progressed from idea to deployment in less than eight years---an astounding pace for a complex military system---while a demonstrated system for standoff precision strike against mobile ground targets was not fully implemented. The case highlights the critical role of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), part of the DoD, regarded as one of the most innovative entities in the U.S. federal government.

The case highlights factors that facilitate rapid, successful implementation of radically innovative or disruptive concepts. Students are introduced to the organizational realities facing such projects, including issues of strategic clarity, interdepartmental competition and cooperation, executive leadership, and timing. Comparing the differences in implementation of the two programs in the case reveals issues relevant to any large organization seeking to bring innovative concepts to fruition.

1. Understand how the corporate lifecycle could trigger a necessity of making a tough decision to develop new business ventures based on the corporate lifecycle theory; and how changes in the external environment could hasten such a decision.

2. Analyze how a company can leverage its internal organizational structure to share and utilize cross-departmental resources and capabilities to support new venture businesses according to the synergy effect perspective.

3. Undertake a resource-based view analysis to evaluate the external and internal resources needed for corporate new venture development.

4. Identify the best course of action for the decision-maker by comparing, contrasting, applying and evaluating the two different models of corporate new venture development in the e-commerce business: the centralized organizational model and the decentralized organizational model and evaluate the pros and cons associated with each mode in the context of Dahan’s external and internal environments.

Since its inception in 2003, Dahan’s traditional business in SMS (Short Message Services) and data had gained thousands of customers across China and won top rankings in the industry. Despite its achievements, Dahan encountered difficulties when it entered the new e-commerce market, as the domain knowledge about the new business was very different from the domain knowledge in its traditional business. Furthermore, the emerging B2B e-commerce industry was very different from the traditional business in that the former mainly targeted corporate clients and the latter targeted individual customers in the B2C industry. This case examined the critical decisions that Xiaofen Huang, the CEO of Dahan E-Commerce Corporation and Co-Founder of Dahan Tricom Group, had to make and external, especially Internal, resources the Dahan Group needed in developing its new venture.

Specifically, this case explored how Huang would go through the mental process to make the best possible decision to help the company not only to survive, but also thrive in the rapidly-changing and competitive digital environment: it urgently needed to finalize an organizational incubation model to support the further development of its e-commerce and future new venture activities with two options to choose from: the centralized organizational model or the decentralized organizational model. A key challenge facing Huang was to decide which option was best suited to motivate salespeople in different departments to help one another, especially in the new B2B e-commerce business and to grow that new business.

In the case, Dahan’s growth aspirations and its motivation to transform its traditional business into a new e-commerce business were discussed. Second, when external challenges were examined, how Dahan explored the B2B e-commerce business using a trial-and-error learning process was explained. Third, when internal challenges were examined, how Dahan incubated its new B2B e-commerce business and its practices for leveraging and sharing resources/capabilities, as well as cross-departmental and cross-divisional collaboration through a resource-based lens, were illustrated. Last, the most critical learning in the case presented an immediate decision-making dilemma on which organizational incubation models to choose from for further new business development, where students learn to analyze both external and internal factors and consider Dahan’s available resource and founder’s aspiration, available strategic options to derive a best possible decision to suit the stage of the company’s lifecycle and founders’ vision.

This case was designed for use in undergraduate courses on corporate innovation, new venture development, corporate innovation, corporate entrepreneurship, e-commerce and growth.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 11: Strategy.