Thanks, Emilio! For the winning team among local university students, SIA would sponsor a trip to Silicon Valley for all team members. They would apparently get to meet executives at companies e.g. Airbus, Google and IBM. The winning idea from the global participants pool would win round trip tickets to any destination of their choice, plus monetary rewards. Runner-ups would earn some mileage and monetary prizes.
To answer your question on IP, contestants would get to keep their IP if they do not win in the competition. Winning teams would hand over their IP to SIA, but are given an opportunity to work alongside the company to implement the ideas.
That’s really cool that your friend gets to travel for free for 4 years!!
I agree with you that safety is definitely a very important challenge for Boeing to widen the scope of AM parts. I read another TOM challenge essay about the use of 3D-printing in cars, which has also been limited to minor accessories thus far. I think one way to accelerate the useful life testing of AM-produced parts is to actually collaborate with Airbus on the project. It may sound counter-intuitive, but I think this is an important step towards helping to reduce costs for the whole industry and the efforts of two giants will definitely yield better results than Boeing alone.
I think there are a lot of opportunities to be captured from the Foundry. Through the program, Unilever can benefit from ideas that may not have been obvious to them. I agree with you that Unilever needs to ensure they develop long term partnerships with start-ups to ensure that the ideas have a long-lasting impact on Unilever’s top-line. Based on the marketing class we did yesterday, I also think that there could be an opportunity for brand builders in different regions to source ideas from start-ups in their local markets, collaborate with them and present the ideas to brand managers at the head office as those ideas may be applicable to other markets that Unilever operates in as well.
Open innovation seems to be ingrained in Xiaomi’s identity since they built their first products based on Mi fans’ feedback. I think my main concern about their entrance into markets for other products would be whether those innovations would actually result in sales. Consumers may feel engaged and excited by the prospect of participating in the company’s product development process, but they may not actually end up purchasing those products especially if their quality is poorer than other brands. Additionally, what customers demand may sometimes not be congruent with the image or purposes that the brand wants to work towards.
Thanks Colm! I think you made a really good point on opportunities to collaborate with other airlines who have seen their market share declining due to the expansion of Emirates, Etihad and Qatar. I also see a potential for Singapore Airlines to work with US airlines i.e. American, Delta and United, who recently expressed their concerns around an unfair competition due to the $40bn subsidies that the UAE and Qatar provide to their state-owned airlines. With the Gulf carriers entering the US market with large fleets of new jets and award-winning service, I think the US airlines would be more than motivated to innovate and win back their market share.
Thanks for your post! That was a question I had in mind as well i.e. whether this was all just for advertising and whether SIA would actually implement the ideas. I think it is definitely a great way for them to attract talents both from local universities and a wider pool of people who participated.
I think your point on Goldman’s need to integrate proprietary insights into its decision-making process is spot on. Having worked in Goldman’s corporate lending, I think part of the reasons why it is so difficult to gather data is because there are still so many groups of people passing data on manually at each decision-making step. The investment team also worked separately from those who ultimately booked the lending onto the firm’s balance sheet. Goldman indeed recognize the need to improve its information flow and have been recently implementing centralized data-collecting systems. I am optimistic about the potential for machine learning to work alongside humans to improve the quality of the firm’s lending practices.
I agree with Thomas regarding the ride-sharing trend. However, there could still be a market for personalization depending on which target market VW would like to focus on i.e. VW could position its 3D-enabled cars as premium products that compete with brands such as Porsche, Bentley and Jaguar. I do believe that close research partnerships with AM technology companies will help VW speed up the implementation of this technology, enabling it to scale AM to cover current models of VW as well.
I find this topic very intriguing! I have personally sat through too many hours of traffic and agree with you that an algorithm-driven solution to this problem will contribute so much more than just reducing hours spent on the road (a friend of mine came up with his remote doctor start-up idea as doctors in large cities nowadays waste too much time while stuck in the traffic).
To address your question on software vs. hardware, I definitely think that focusing more on the software will allow them to develop a more advanced solution that takes into account and learn from multiple variables. I think there is even a potential for the data collected through Rapid-Flow to help plan road constructions to minimize traffic jam in developing countries as well.
One thing I am not 100% clear on is that if Rapid-Flow decides to interact directly with the customers, would they serve the same purpose as Google Maps and Waze? I can see a scenario where the company becomes a price taker if they work exclusively with governments, but am unsure if they can remain competitive as they directly approach end-customers.