Archiv der Kategorie: Einfachheit

How To Run A Virtual Company

Kommentar verfassen

How To Run A Virtual Company

Although Yahoo! called everyone back to the office, you might be moving forward with an open, flexible work environment. Perhaps you don’t need all your employees physically present and you want to open the door to talented individuals across the country — or the globe.

Before you act, make sure you know what it takes to succeed as a virtual business.

Your Number-One Challenge: Social Interaction

Many people think the hardest part of transitioning to a virtual work life is learning the art of self-motivation. In reality, people struggle most with the social change. They don’t realize how much they interact with others in the office — or how those conversations break up the workday.

If you’ve hired solid employees, they’ll get their work done in either environment. But they’re not machines. They need personal connection; it’s what makes us human. Social interactions can waste time, but they’re also necessary for motivation. 

Closing the Cultural Gap

As you transition, the biggest difference for leadership is the loss of subconscious culture. Leaders have to be intentional about how they communicate and fill the social gap. My companies implemented some tactics to make the change feel less drastic:

  • All meetings that can be held via video must be, and you should allot a few minutes at the beginning and end of each meeting for open conversation.
  • Send a “feel good” email every Monday. Ours contains personal announcements, such as employee birthdays or vacation photos, along with articles about motivation and happiness.
  • Maintain company practices of recognizing accomplishments. Share big successes and milestones in emails and meetings, and recognize those who got you there.

Managing Virtually

Managing in a virtual environment requires rethinking traditional approaches to management and how those tactics translate over calls, video chats and email.

Key management challenges include:

  • Vision casting. Do the vision and company direction “stick” even when management isn’t around? Management needs to find ways to mentor, coach and share its vision in a virtual environment.
  • Autonomy. Can employees understand assignments and self-motivate when working remotely? What feedback and review systems need to be in place to help team members self-correct? Is the team empowered to make specific decisions without waiting for supervisor approval?
  • Meeting Schedules. Finding the balance between focused work time and meeting time can be challenging in any environment, let alone a virtual one. Set guidelines for the length and space between meetings. You should encourage five-minute meetings driven by agendas, rather than rely on longer, sprawling meetings.

The Art of Simple, Clear Communication

The best virtual teams will learn the importance of packaging the “who,” “what” and “why” of an assignment concisely (e.g., “John needs an article about the history of sword-fighting kittens written and approved by Bob by next Wednesday so we can make it to print in two weeks.”).

This clear communication can reduce friction and clarify details in advance, removing the need for excessive back-and-forth communication. Traditional work communications are plagued by repetitive clarification; virtual teams will relish the time savings of streamlined communication.

Working with Different Personality Types from Afar

A huge factor to keep in mind as you move toward a virtual setting is the difference between tech-oriented people and creative people. To succeed, you need individuals who are self-motivated, and this is even more important in virtual companies.

People with highly technical job responsibilities (developers, programmers, technicians) react differently to tracking their work than those with more creative roles (graphic designers, account representatives, even managers).

The Tech Crowd: Tracking time or task completion makes sense for many tech projects; it helps techies stay motivated throughout lengthy development processes. A large percentage of these workers are introverts who work well alone, and most don’t mind their work being tracked in detail.

The Creative Types: This is where you’ll meet resistance to tracking. When you implement tracking — even logging hours — it interrupts their thought process. The more you track them, the more they feel like drones and the poorer their work is.

The best way to approach tracking with creatives is to focus on results. Face-to-face interactions (including video) help keep them motivated and energized, as many creatives need to bounce ideas off others.

If you have a virtual customer service team, create systems to listen in on representatives’ calls and offer feedback. You can still use customer satisfaction to rate work, but the process should be more involved and intentional.

If you can be completely results-focused for reviews and feedback, that’s great. You can track all employees on your own terms. If you have to bill clients, don’t be afraid to make everyone log hours — just keep in mind that some won’t like it.

 

If you decide to take the plunge and become a more virtual business, be smart about it. Consider what needs to be done differently and what will remain the same. Make your decisions based on what’s best for your company and team, and you’ll find that going virtual will only make your business stronger.

Quelle: http://www.ceo.com/leadership_and_management/how-to-run-a-virtual-company/

The 12 Most Influential Mobile Phones

Kommentar verfassen

Motorola engineer Martin Cooper made telecommunications history when he placed the first cellphone call 40 years ago. And who did he call, you ask? His rivals at Bell Labs, of course. Oh snap!

Still, it took another decade for the mobile phone to reach the masses, because Motorola didn’t make the DynaTAC available until March 1983. And in an example of just how quaint the tech business was back then, Motorola had a press event 10 years before the phone was on sale.

Which brings us to April 3, 1973, when the company that eventually brought us the Razr and Droid introduced the mobile phone. Forty years later, we’re still dropping calls like bad habits and struggling to get a signal inside a supermarket. Not that it matters, because we rarely use our phones to make phone calls. Instead, they’re a gateway to our digital lives, a means of doing everything from sending texts to updating our status to posting photos and listening to music.

Thousands of phones have come and gone, and most of them seem to run on Android. But the number of handsets that could be called truly groundbreaking is surprisingly small. Here they are.

Yeah, yeah, we’ve probably missed your favorite. And you’ll probably tell us about it in a comment typed on your phone.

Above: Motorola DynaTAC 8000X — 1983

The DynaTAC was the first commercially available cellphone and the culmination of all the research Cooper had done since joining Motorola in 1954.

The phone resembled those the military used in the field. The svelte handset weighed 28 ounces and was 10 inches tall, not including the antenna nearly as long as the phone. It wasn’t exactly something you could shove in a pocket or purse. Still, it wasn’t attached to a car and you could walk around with it, so there was that.

Such mobility wasn’t cheap. The DynaTAC would dig a $4,000 hole into your bank account. But that didn’t stop early adopters from diving into the swanky world of mobile calling. The phone had a cameo alongside Gordon Gekko in Wall Street and with über-preppy Zack Morris on the teen drama Saved By the Bell.

Photo: Motorola

Motorola MicroTAC — 1989

The MicroTAC introduced the flip-phone form factor that would eventually be adopted by the StarTAC. Beyond setting the standard for phones, it popularized the idea of being able to put a mobile phone in your pocket.

The phone, billed as the “MicroTAC Pocket Cellular Telephone,” was the smallest available when it was released. It was a lilliputian 9 inches long when open and weighed a mere 12.3 ounces. For the sake of comparison, the enormous Galaxy Note II is just shy of 6 inches long and weighs 6.4 ounces.

Still, the “little” phone packed a lot of amazing features, including security codes, currency calculator, hands-free operation and, perhaps most conveniently, a phone book to store names and numbers. It was the beginning of the end of having to actually remember anyone’s number.

Photo: Motorola

Nokia 3210 — 1999

The Nokia 3210 was, for many people, the gateway drug of phones. It also was among the first to tuck the antenna inside the handset. (The Toshiba TCP-6000 was the first, but that was the phone’s only claim to fame.) The little Finnish candybar phone was the first mobile communication device of the masses.

Its monochromatic screen did more than give you a heads up about incoming calls. It introduced a generation to the greatest mobile-phone game ever: Snake. The addictive game, based on computer game from the 1970s, featured a snake that grew as it consumed pixels. The object was to make the longest snake possible without having it eat itself.

And you thought Angry Birds was silly.

Nokia sold 160 million T9-enabled 3210s before replacing it with 3310 in late 2000.

Photo: Nokia

Sony Ericsson T68I — 2002

The T68i was the bridge between dumb phones and smartphones and, it could be argued, the most awesome cellphone ever. It included such groundbreaking features at Bluetooth, two-way MMS, simple WAP browsing and e-mail. And it had a cool color screen, a first for Ericsson.

The phone was so far ahead that it appeared in the Bond film Die Another Day. If it was good enough for 007, it was good enough for you. And it proved that people wanted more from their phones than calls and texts. Although the phone never saw the sales numbers of the Nokie 3210, it enjoyed a cultlike following.

Photo: Sony Ericsson

Danger Hiptop/Sidekick — 2002

While the suits and salesmen went nuts for RIM’s BlackBerry, the rest of us typed texts on our own QWERTY keyboard six-shooter, the Danger Hiptop. The phone, aka the T-Mobile Sidekick, was just as connected as a BlackBerry sans BBM, but didn’t make you look like a dork.

The Hiptop had online connectivity and a huge (for the time) 2.6-inch screen that flipped out, making it the swtichblade of the truly connected nerd. It came with a monochrome screen to start, but that soon gave way to color.

Designed by Danger, the Hiptop’s OS supported apps and could communicate not only via SMS but also with instant messaging services like AOL’s AIM. Adored by nerds and teenage girls alike, the Hiptop was the first real smartphone to hit the market.

Photo: Danger

BlackBerry 6210 — 2003

While the T68i put e-mail in your pocket, and the Hiptop made nerds drool, it was the BlackBerry 6210 that made cellphones indispensable to the business world by giving us instant, always-on access to our e-mails.

Little did we know that blessing would become a curse.

Its QWERTY keyboard and solid ability to actually, you know, make phone calls introduced the world to the modern BlackBerry experience of web browsing, e-mails, BlackBerry Messenger and SMS. It jump-started the smartphone market and spawned a class of humans known as crackberry addicts.

The combination of leading-edge technology and an excellent keyboard allowed RIM to utterly dominate the smartphone sector until a small company in Cupertino, California, decided to join the party.

Photo: BlackBerry

Treo 600 — 2003

After filling the pockets of nerds with its PDA (personal digital assistants), Palm set its sights on the mobile phone market with the Treo brand. The phone set the standard for smartphone features that followed.

The Treo 600 came with a camera, an MP3 player and an OS that would influence the iOS dock and the Android homescreen. Apps? Mappable keys? Everything laid out in a neat grid? Yeah, the Treo had all that, with a QWERTY keyboard.

The Treo’s 2.5-inch screen held a world of possibilities. Unfortunately, Palm was slow to update its OS and couldn’t keep up with the competition, even after releasing the Palm Pre with WebOS.

Photo: PalmOne

Motorola RAZR — 2004

The Razr was the first must-have phone. The thin flip phone was stylish and, if the commercials were to believed, would stick like a knife if dropped onto the floor.

While throwing the phone at walls like a knife was a bad idea, the Razr had a great four-year run, selling 130 million units. Is there any wonder why?

The Razr looked like it was straight out of the future. The numerical keyboard was cut from a single piece of metal. Its clamshell aluminum body and colored glass screen were gorgeous. And the damn thing worked like a charm. It was the last dumb phone that truly mattered.

Never mind that it also was the last Motorola phone that truly mattered.

Photo: Ariel Zambelich/Wired

Motorola Rokr — 2005

The Rokr was the first phone to play nicely with iTunes, and it was such a big deal that Steve Jobs himself introduced the phone to the public. Too bad it was a horrible, horrible phone.

Sure it worked with iTunes, but it held no more than 100 songs. And getting them onto the phone was as quick and comfortable as a root canal without anesthesia. And then there was the UI. Dear god, the UI. Sluggish doesn’t begin to describe it.

Still, the Rokr was a milestone because it opened the door to the phone as a media player. It could have been the iPhone. Instead, it inspired Apple to make the iPhone.

Photo: Motorola

Nokia N95 — 2007

The N95 expanded on ideas first seen in the T68i, with features usually found in smartphones and without the gigantic physical QWERTY keyboard form factor. It was stylish and functional, two things sorely missing in the smartphone world.

The N95 wasn’t the first to feature GPS with optional turn-by-turn navigation, a 5-megapixel camera that shot video, or a radio tuner. But it packaged those features in a gorgeous phone. It made design matter. The front of the phone slid up to reveal a numeric keyboard and slid down to reveal media buttons that controlled the onboard MP3 player.

It looked good, had a ton of functions and, thanks to the camera flash, those late-night photos at the club actually looked good.

Photo: Nokia

Apple iPhone — 2007

This is the phone that changed everything. It was the first smartphone with features people wanted, even if they didn’t know it yet. It was different in every way, from its stunning design to its ease of use to the things it would allow us to do.

Of course, we didn’t see that at first. All we could do was gripe about an app store with empty shelves, a single button on the bezel and the fact we couldn’t cut-and-paste anything. It seems so quaint now, when so much of what iOS pioneered has become the norm for smartphones.

No less important was how Apple changed how handset makers dealt with carriers. The balance of power shifted from the likes of AT&T and Verizon to Apple and Samsung.

Nearly six years and five iterations later, the iPhone still sets the standard.

Photo: Ariel Zambelich/Wired

HTC Dream — 2008

The Dream, marketed as the T-Mobile G1 here in the United States, was the first Android phone when it hit the market in 2008. That made it the first phone to challenge the iPhone in the touchscreen smartphone wars.

At first, it was a QWERTY-only affair, but the update to Android 1.5 introduced an onscreen keyboard so you no longer had to slide the screen up to tap out messages. The 3.2-inch screen showcased the operating system that Google purchased from Android Inc.

While the HTC Dream and the first version of Android were a bit of a dud next to the iPhone, the operating system and phones that ran it became more and more impressive as the years passed. Now Android devices are on par, or better than, the phone from Cupertino.

But as we’ve seen before, all of this could change. Like Apple did before, a company with zero history in the phone market could emerge with a new and exciting way to call your friends and tell them, “Hey, guess what I’m doing,” and change the industry again.

Photo: HTC

Quelle: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2013/04/influential-cellphones

creating new product ideas – by creating new possibilities for the user

Kommentar verfassen

Jony Ive talking about creation process of new products, why Apply doesn’t use focus groups, and why the simple asking for problems doesn’t automatically produce good world-class products.

It’s simple, because users of today are not aware of the usage possibilities of the future.
Only if you are at least a few steps ahead of the market
– with current todays‘ views – and you are really trying hard to achieve something that is not new, but solves one of the problems – you are not yet aware about that you are facing them – then you are likely to succeed.
dieIdee InnovationsAgentur, March 2012

Sir Jonathan Ive, Jony to his friends, is arguably one of the world’s most influential Londoners. The 45-year-old was born in Chingford — and went to the same school as David Beckham. He met his wife, Heather Pegg, while in secondary school. They married in 1987, have twin sons and now live in San Francisco.

(c) by http://www.thisislondon.co.uk

As Apple’s Senior Vice President of Industrial Design, he is the driving force behind the firm’s products, from the Mac computer to the iPod, iPhone and, most recently the iPad. He spoke exclusively to the Evening Standard at the firm’s Cupertino headquarters.

Q: You recently received a Knighthood for services to design – was that a proud moment?

A: I was absolutely thrilled, and at the same time completely humbled. I am very aware that I’m the product of growing up in England, and the tradition of designing and making, of England industrialising first. The emphasis and value on ideas and original thinking is an innate part of British culture, and in many ways, that describes the traditions of design.

Q: Is London still an important city for design?

A: I left London in 1992, but I’m there 3-4 times a year, and love visiting. It’s a very important city, and makes a significant contribution to design, to creating something new where previously something didn’t exist.

Q: How does London differ from Silicon Valley?

A: The proximity of different creative industries and London is remarkable, and is in many ways unique. I think that has led to a very different feel to Silicon Valley.

Q: Why did you decide to move to California?

A: What I enjoy about being here is there is a remarkable optimism, and an attitude to try out and explore ideas without the fear of failure. There is a very simple and practical sense that a couple of people have an idea and decide to form a company to do it. I like that very practical and straightforward approach.

There’s not a sense of looking to generate money, its about having an idea and doing it – I think that characterises this area and its focus.

Q: What makes design different at Apple?

A: We struggle with the right words to describe the design process at Apple, but it is very much about designing and prototyping and making. When you separate those, I think the final result suffers. If something is going to be better, it is new, and if it’s new you are confronting problems and challenges you don’t have references for. To solve and address those requires a remarkable focus. There’s a sense of being inquisitive and optimistic, and you don’t see those in combination very often.

Q: How does a new product come about at Apple?

A: What I love about the creative process, and this may sound naive, but it is this idea that one day there is no idea, and no solution, but then the next day there is an idea. I find that incredibly exciting and conceptually actually remarkable.

The nature of having ideas and creativity is incredibly inspiring. There is an idea which is solitary, fragile and tentative and doesn’t have form.

What we’ve found here is that it then becomes a conversation, although remains very fragile.

When you see the most dramatic shift is when you transition from an abstract idea to a slightly more material conversation. But when you made a 3D model, however crude, you bring form to a nebulous idea, and everything changes – the entire process shifts. It galvanises and brings focus from a broad group of people. It’s a remarkable process.

Q: What makes a great designer?

A: It is so important to be light on your feet, inquisitive and interested in being wrong. You have that wonderful fascination with the what if questions, but you also need absolute focus and a keen insight into the context and what is important – that is really terribly important. Its about contradictions you have to navigate.

Q: What are your goals when setting out to build a new product?

A: Our goals are very simple – to design and make better products. If we can’t make something that is better, we won’t do it.

Q: Why has Apple’s competition struggled to do that?

A: That’s quite unusual, most of our competitors are interesting in doing something different, or want to appear new – I think those are completely the wrong goals. A product has to be genuinely better. This requires real discipline, and that’s what drives us – a sincere, genuine appetite to do something that is better. Committees just don’t work, and it’s not about price, schedule or a bizarre marketing goal to appear different – they are corporate goals with scant regard for people who use the product.

Q: When did you first become aware of the importance of designers?

A: First time I was aware of this sense of the group of people who made something was when I first used a Mac – I’d gone through college in the 80s using a computer and had a horrid experience. Then I discovered the mac, it was such a dramatic moment and I remember it so clearly – there was a real sense of the people who made it.

Q: When you are coming up with product ideas such as the iPod, do you try to solve a problem?

A: There are different approaches – sometimes things can irritate you so you become aware of a problem, which is a very pragmatic approach and the least challenging.

What is more difficult is when you are intrigued by an opportunity. That, I think, really exercises the skills of a designer. It’s not a problem you’re aware of, nobody has articulated a need. But you start asking questions, what if we do this, combine it with that, would that be useful? This creates opportunities that could replace entire categories of device, rather than tactically responding to an individual problem. That’s the real challenge, and that’s what is exciting.

Q: Has that led to new products within Apple?

A: Examples are products like the iPhone, iPod and iPad. That fanatical attention to detail and coming across a problem and being determined to solve it is critically important – that defines your minute by minute, day by day experience.

Q: How do you know consumers will want your products?

A: We don’t do focus groups – that is the job of the designer. It’s unfair to ask people who don’t have a sense of the opportunities of tomorrow from the context of today to design.

Q: Your team of designers is very small – is that the key to its success?

A: The way we work at Apple is that the complexity of these products really makes it critical to work collaboratively, with different areas of expertise. I think that’s one of the things about my job I enjoy the most. I work with silicon designers, electronic and mechanical engineers, and I think you would struggle to determine who does what when we get together. We’re located together, we share the same goal, have exactly the same preoccupation with making great products.

One of the other things that enables this is that we’ve been doing this together for many years – there is a collective confidence when you are facing a seemingly insurmoutable challenge, and there were multiple times on the iPhone or ipad where we have to think ‘will this work’ we simply didn’t have points of reference.

Q: Is it easy to get sidetracked by tiny details on a project?

A: When you’re trying to solve a problem on a new product type, you become completely focused on problems that seem a number of steps removed from the main product. That problem solving can appear a little abstract, and it is easy to lose sight of the product. I think that is where having years and years of experience gives you that confidence that if you keep pushing, you’ll get there.

Q: Can this obsession with detail get out of control?

A: It’s incredibly time consuming, you can spent months and months and months on a tiny detail – but unless you solve that tiny problem, you can’t solve this other, fundamental product.

You often feel there is no sense these can be solved, but you have faith. This is why these innovations are so hard – there are no points of reference.

Q: How do you know you’ve succeeded?

A :It’s a very strange thing for a designer to say, but one of the things that really irritates me in products is when I’m aware of designers wagging their tails in my face.

Our goal is simple objects, objects that you can’t imagine any other way. Simplicity is not the absence of clutter. Get it right, and you become closer and more focused on the object. For instance, the iPhoto app we created for the new iPad, it completely consumes you and you forget you are using an iPad.

Q: What are the biggest challenges in constantly innovating?

A: For as long as we’ve been doing this, I am still surprised how difficult it is to do this, but you know exactly when you’re there – it can be the smallest shift, and suddenly transforms the object, without any contrivance.

Some of the problem solving in the iPad is really quite remarkable, there is this danger you want to communicate this to people. I think that is a fantastic irony, how oblivious people are to the acrobatics we’ve performed to solve a problem – but that’s our job, and I think people know there is tremendous care behind the finished product.

Q: Do consumers really care about good design?

A: One of the things we’ve really learnt over the last 20 years is that while people would often struggle to articulate why they like something – as consumers we are incredibly discerning, we sense where has been great care in the design, and when there is cynicism and greed. It’s one of the thing we’ve found really encouraging.

Q: Users have become incredibly attached, almost obsessively so, to Apple’s products – why is this?

A: It sound so obvious, but I remember being shocked to use a Mac, and somehow have this sense I was having a keen awareness of the people and values of those who made it.

I think that people’s emotional connection to our products is that they sense our care, and the amount of work that has gone into creating it.

Article quote from : http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/sir-jonathan-ive-the-iman-cometh-7562170.html?

Additional reading from: Waugh, Rob (20 March 2011). „How did a British polytechnic graduate become the design genius behind £200billion Apple?“. London: Dailymail. Retrieved 2 January 2012.

Schöpferische Zerstörung als Motor des Innovationsmanagements

Kommentar verfassen

Jede ökonomische Entwicklung (im Sinne von nicht bloß quantitativer Entwicklung) baut auf dem Prozess der schöpferischen bzw. kreativen Zerstörung auf. Durch eine Neukombination von Produktionsfaktoren, die sich erfolgreich durchsetzen, werden alte Strukturen verdrängt und schließlich zerstört.

Die Zerstörung ist also notwendig (und nicht etwa ein Systemfehler), damit Neuordnung stattfinden kann.

Auslöser für die schöpferische Zerstörung sind Innovationen, die von den Unternehmern mit dem Ziel vorangetrieben werden, sich auf dem Markt durchzusetzen.

Joseph A. Schumpeter: Kapitalismus, Sozialismus und Demokratie. UTB, Stuttgart 2005, ISBN 3-8252-0172-4

Praktische Beispiele gefällig?

I. Skype und Facetime (Videotelefonie) vs. Telekommunikationsindustrie (kein Angebot)

Michael Krammer (CEO Orange) forderte in der Panel Discussion „Mut zur Differenzierung“, die Telekommunikations-Big-Player mögen sich zusammenschließen und gemeinsam Skype kaufen.

„Die meisten von uns sind börsennotierte Unternehmen, die zweimal jährlich durchschnittlich zehn Prozent Rendite an unsere Aktionäre ausschütten, um diese zufrieden zu halten. Würden wir diese nur zweimal einbehalten, könnte sich beispielsweise die Telekom France Skype leisten, aber nein, das tun wir nicht. Wir sind in Wirklichkeit ein Junkbond.“

Karim Taga, Arthur D. Little zu 4 möglichen Szenarien in Zeiten der Mittelverknappung Synergien zwischen Telecom Playern, Content Playern und System Playern auszuloten.

  • Kooperation unter Netzbetreibern, um die laufenden Kosten zu minimieren.
  • Effizienzsteigerung, die auch durch Kooperation mit Geräteherstellern erreicht werden kann.
  • Die gemeinsame Entwicklung neuer Businessmodelle innerhalb der Branche.
  • Die Zusammenarbeit mit Partnerfirmen beziehungsweise deren Aquise, um in Bereichen wie Cloud Computing, Machine-2-Machine oder eHealth Fuß fassen zu können.

II. IPHONE Operating System (IOS 5) vs. NOKIA Operating System (Symbian)

Die Markteinführung des um 2-3 Jahre technologisch weiterentwickelten IOS Betriebssystem kostete Nokia die Marktführerschaft und in letzter Konsequenz sogar die Unabhängigkeit. Heute nutzt Nokia kein eigenes Betriebssystem mehr, und ist auf Windows Mobile angewiesen.

III. Tesla Roadster

Tesla Roadster als Innovationstreiber der altbackenen Fahrzeugindustrie?

„Im Jahr 2011 kommt bei wichtigen Elektrofahrzeugen der Serienstart. Nissan Leaf, einige Renaults, Mitsubishi i-MiEV mit den PSA-Kooperationen und GM Volt/Opel Ampera. Zusätzlich kommen noch Kleinserien im Transporterbereich. Damit geht 2011 erstmals das Elektroauto in nenenswerten Zahlen in den Markt. Wir rechnen mit über 100.000 Elektroauto-Verkäufen weltweit. Und 2012 wird das dann weitergehen. Natürlich sind 100.000 von 62,6 Millionen nicht der ganz große Marktanteil. Aber das Baby kommt zur Welt. Der große Durchbruch wird nach unserer Prognose auf dem Feld der Hybride und Plug-In Hybride kommen. Im Jahr 2025 werden nur noch 35% aller weltweit verkauften Neuwagen als reine Verbrenner verkauft. Das wären dann knapp 31 Mio. Pkw. Reine Batteriefahrzeuge liegen nach unserer Prognose dann im 5-Prozent-Bereich mit weltweit über 4 Millionen Verkäufen. Der Hybrid stellt dann knapp 52 Millionen Verkäufe.“

„Die Entwicklung in die teilelektrischen und elektrischen Antriebe läuft und ist durch nichts mehr aufzuhalten.“, Ferdinand Dudenhöffer, Die Welt

IV. Teamviewer vs. Nutzenangebote der Online-Zusammenarbeit?

Mal einfach virtuell mit dem Geschäftspartner zusammenarbeiten? Nutzen Sie es?
Wie führe ich soetwas kostengünstig durch? Nicht selten fällt die Wahl auf Skype oder www.teamviewer.de

Warum eigentlich liefert die Telekommunikationsindustrie (T-Mobile, Vodafone, Orange; die big-player anm.) kein eigenes System à la Facetime/Skype? Diskutieren Sie mit uns: innovativ@dieIdee.eu

Fazit:

Reflektieren Sie, wann waren Sie zum letzten Mal innovativ? Wann haben Sie Bestehendes in Frage gestellt, die Realtität realistisch betrachtet? Ihre Produkte nicht nach dem technischen Potential bewertet, sondern nach dem Kundennutzen?

Dabei sein, Innovation leben oder Untergehen. Ein Blick auf aktuelle Entwicklungen als Mahnung an alle Systemerhalter!

Quellen:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schöpferische_Zerstörung
http://www.carbodydesign.com/archive/2010/02/porsche-911-gt3-r-hybrid/

Die Suche nach der Einfachheit

Kommentar verfassen

Einfachheit ist oftmals schwieriger zu erreichen als Komplexität.

Es erfordert eine große Kraftanstrengung die eigene Denkweise klar zu machen, um etwas Einfaches zu kreieren.

Einmal diesen Punkt erreicht zu haben, Ihre eigenen Produkte auf die Denkweise Ihrer Kunden auszurichten, und sie einfach benutzerfreundlich zu gestalten, ist das Ziel.

Technologieverliebtheit? Beachten Sie zuerst das Design Ihrer Produkte, das was ihr Kunde fühlt, wenn er Ihr Produkt sieht, und es benutzt. Reine Technik allein, sollte niemals der Antrieb zu Handlungen sein.

Wie Einfach sind Ihre Produkte für Ihre Kunden?
Diskutieren Sie mit uns innovativ@dieIdee.eu