Really interesting article! It sounds like UNICEF’s Innovation Fund might benefit from focusing on startups/organizations who are trying to get Internet-connected technology into the hands of those who currently do not have it; both for the social good of what Internet access can provide to those who do not have it, but also for the opportunity to then collected anonymized data from these populations to better inform their operations (as in the case with Zika). I believe there are roughly 3 billion people on the planet (many in poor, rural areas) who do not have access to Internet, so chipping away at that issue could be a good investment for the long-term.
Great post! I’m curious about competitive echo in the pharma industry as well. What would stop an Amgen or Biogen from creating their own open innovation initiatives, potentially even with bounties (rewards) attached to submissions that lead to particularly promising compounds/drugs that may end up in their pipeline? To your point, there appear to be some risks in CO-ADD’s ability to stay relevant in the long-term.
One risk with AM is that parts may pass quality tests, but not end up performing to specification because of irregularities that current tests are not designed to find. I wonder how Daimler intends to upgrade its testing capabilities to ensure components manufactured via AM do, in fact, meet quality standards.
I found the concept of Caterpillar spinning off their data analytics capabilities as its own product to create a new revenue stream really compelling. You recommend that Caterpillar set up a centralized department inside the company to lead the data collection and learning effort. Is this is common practice in large organizations today, or would this approach be unique to Caterpillar? Is it possible for them to source related data that could be helpful (from the self-driving car industry perhaps)?
It seems like there’s a fine line between fitness insights and medical advice that WHOOP will need to pay attention to. In the example you mention about possibly offering guidance on the best rest regiment for recovery, how will WHOOP handle potential backlash from people who feel the advice they received wasn’t useful?
And on the topic of potentially sending out surveys to customers to augment their current data set, I wonder if there are risks if people check the wrong box or overestimate a metric. As this data will go into the machine learning algorithms, poorly written questions may yield data that would be hard to unwind from the ML algorithms after the fact.
Definitely an interesting strategic move by Adidas. You mention that “the shoes developed with additive manufacturing have received mixed reviews from customers so far.” I wonder what insights Adidas can glean from the negative reviews are. Are there issues with comfort and fit? Are 3D-printed shoes as durable as their traditional counterparts? You also mention that “cheaply produced variations of standard products that are closer to the tastes of customers will be critical [for Adidas] to take the lead.” Does Adidas currently manufacture variations on standard shoe products, or will this be a new endeavor for them? It also appears that Adidas has a chance to really establish themselves as an information partner with their customers, using customer data to design and deliver highly customized products. Will precision customization resonate with all Adidas customers? Will some customers find this offering distracting?