TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY MANAGEMENT; ENTREPRENEURSHIP & INNOVATION
Lecturer of Entrepreneurship & Innovation
Executive Director of Kellogg Innovation Network
Professor Wolcott's article, Four Models of Corporate Entrepreneurship, with collaborator Dr. Mike Lippitz, appeared in the Fall 2007, issue of the MIT Sloan Management Review. His article with Mohan Sawhney and Inigo Arroniz, Twelve Different Ways for Companies to Innovate, was the most downloaded article of 2006 from the MIT Sloan Management Review.
In 2003, Professor Wolcott co-founded (with Mohan Sawhney) and directs the Kellogg Innovation Network (KIN), a network of senior executives dedicated to driving sustainable innovation. Members include Cargill, Cisco, PepsiCo, IBM, DuPont, FedEx, Chamberlain Group, Microsoft, Motorola and SC Johnson, among others.
He also co-founded and serves as Managing Partner of Clareo Partners LLC, a corporate strategy and innovation management consultancy. Clients include ABN Amro, Kraft, Microsoft, ADT, Herman Miller, HP, Chamberlain, Ricoh, TKH Group (Netherlands), Rio Tinto Iron Ore, SAP and Motorola. Clareo partners with clients, both global corporations and entrepreneurs, to build plans for and launch new businesses. Dr. Professor Wolcott also consults to the Pentagon as an adjunct of the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA), Alexandria, VA.
Through 2001, Professor Wolcott served as Director of Innovation Process at XL Tech Group (xltg.com), a publicly traded firm (UK) located in Melbourne, Florida, building new technology-based businesses. XLTG owns a $1 billion+ portfolio of firms traded on the public markets in addition to its private holdings.
Entrepreneurship
Innovation
Small Business Management
- Recent Media Coverage
Fast Company (FC Expert blog): Iceland, back from the brink - 1/8/2010
Hamilton Spectator (Canada): Unleashing your entrepreneurial spirit at work - 12/21/2009
BusinessWeek: India's Next Global Export: Innovation - 12/2/2009
Fast Company (FC Expert Blog): Five Ways to Know If You're Cut Out to Be a Corporate Entrepreneur - 11/30/2009
See all Kellogg in the Media
- Recent Kellogg News
Entrepreneurship isn't just for entrepreneurs - 1/5/2010
Donald Jacobs named ‘Master Entrepreneur’ - 6/3/2008
See all Kellogg News
How can established organizations build successful new businesses on an ongoing basis? In their study of nearly 30 corporations as diverse as Google, DuPont and Cargill, the authors identified two dimensions under the direct control of management that consistently differentiated how companies approach corporate entrepreneurship. The first is organizational ownership: Will the primary ownership for the creation of new businesses be focused in a designated group, or will it be diffused across the organization? The second is resource authority: Will projects be funded from a dedicated corporate pool of money or in an ad hoc manner, perhaps through business-unit budgets? Together the two dimensions generate a matrix with four basic models of corporate entrepreneurship: the opportunist, the enabler, the advocate and the producer. Each of the four models has a different objective, function and set of challenges. Whichever model is chosen, the crucial thing to remember is that corporate entrepreneurship needs to be nurtured and managed as a strategic, deliberate act.
The article presents a rigorous tool for measuring the level of innovation at any company with regard to all ways in which the company does business. It also provides a comprehensive view of all of the dimensions of the "business system" on which companies can innovate, broadening the innovation dialogue from products and technologies to all aspects of how companies do business.
The authors present insights for the education sector developed through exploring relevant research from the field of Industrial Engineering and Management Science, as well as management practices applied for scale-up within industrial firms. The chapter proposes applications for effective scale-up for innovative educational programs.
Use with Case #5-404-752 (KEL334).
Tom McKillop, CEO of AstraZeneca, faced the classic quandary of large pharmaceutical firms. The firm’s patent for Prilosec (active ingredient omeprazole) was expiring. Severe cost-based competition from generic drug manufacturers was inevitable. Patent expirations were nothing new for the US$15.8 billion in revenues drug firm, but Prilosec was the firm’s most successful drug franchise, with global sales of US$6.2 billion. How could the company innovate its way around the generic cost-based competition and avoid the drop in revenues associated with generic drug market entry? AstraZeneca had other follow-on drugs in the pipeline—namely Nexium, an improvement on the original Prilosec molecule. Additionally, the company had the opportunity to introduce its own version of generic omeprazole, hence becoming the first mover in the generic segment, and/or introduce an OTC version of omeprazole that might tap into other markets. Ideally, AstraZeneca would like to move brand-loyal Prilosec customers to Nexium. In this market, direct-to-consumer advertising has remarkable efficacy. Classical marketing challenges of pricing and promotion need to be resolved for the Nexium launch as well as possible product and place challenges for the generic or OTC opportunity. Which combination of marketing options will allow the firm to best sustain the value of the original omeprazole innovation?
Tom McKillop, CEO of AstraZeneca, faced the classic quandary of large pharmaceutical firms. Within the year, the firm’s patent for Prilosec (active ingredient omeprazole) was expiring. Prilosec was a US$6.2 billion/year blockbuster that revolutionized the treatment of chronic gastro-esophageal reflux disorders (GERD). Severe cost-based competition from generic drug manufacturers was, however, inevitable. Patent expirations were nothing new for the US$15.8 billion in revenues drug firm. AstraZeneca had Nexium, an improvement on the original Prilosec molecule, in the pipeline. Ideally, it would like to move brand-loyal Prilosec customers to Nexium. Additionally, the company had the opportunity to introduce its own version of generic omeprazole, hence becoming the first mover in the generic segment, and/or introduce an over-the-counter (OTC) version of omeprazole. Tactically, AstraZeneca would like to use regulatory incentives and intellectual property rights to strengthen its competitive position. How could the company use its entire portfolio of intellectual properties—including patents and trademarks—to actively manage the priced-based competition and achieve a revenue growth strategy in the GERD market? Use with Case Supplement #5-404-753 (KEL335).
The case describes the evolution between 1999 and 2005 of an unusual innovation team within the office of the Chief Information Officer of BP. The team leader, Vice President and Chief Technology Officer (CTO) Phiroz Darukhanavala (“Daru”), eschewed a large group and a venture budget in favor of a small, lean team intimately engaged with BP’s business units. The case described several mechanisms created by the CTO office during its early evolution, aimed at expanding executives’ appreciation of emerging technology capabilities, building a network of relationships through which emerging technologies are scouted and vetted, and providing structured mechanisms for technology transfer. In late 2005 the CIO’s Advisory Group challenged the CTO office to “keep reinventing yourselves.” Students are asked to assume Daru’s role and suggest new processes and structures to continue the evolution of the CTO office. The teaching note describes what the team actually did, and addresses questions raised at the end of the case.
The case describes the evolution between 1999 and 2008 of a family-owned contract manufacturing company into a publicly traded, US$400 million global firm. The son of the founder, Bernie Auyung, assumed the CEO position with the company during this period and has worked with his father to build a broader, professional management team. In the process the company has applied a range of leading-edge innovation management and strategy tools that put it far ahead of most Chinese peer companies. Computime provides an exceptional model for other companies in developing countries looking to evolve from a low-cost competitor into a global leading company with its own technologies and brands. Students are asked to assume Bernie’s role and suggest the path forward. The teaching note describes what the team actually did, and addresses the questions raised at the end of the case.
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 learning objective of this case is to highlight factors that facilitate rapid, successful implementation of radically innovative or disruptive concepts. Students will be introduced to the organizational realities facing such projects, including: issues of strategic clarity, inter-departmental competition and cooperation, executive leadership, and timing. While some of these elements have a different slant in government than they do in a large corporate setting, comparing the differences in implementation of these programs reveals issues relevant to any large organization seeking to bring innovative concepts to fruition.
The case presents a $1+billion technology company seeking new growth through the introduction of a radically new product platform. During its first ten years, PTC Corporation grew faster than Microsoft did during the similar period of its evolution. By the late 1990s PTC was faced with intensified competition and saturation in its core markets. To maintain growth, the company introduced a completely new product platform. While PTC focused in developing and selling the product, it failed to recognize that this new product was so different from its traditional offerings that it required a new organizational structure, sales capabilities, support processes, and market strategy. The case traces the company’s evolution from development and launch of Windchill through the four-year period post-launch, during which its founding CEO was forced out and the company transformed. Ultimately, Windchill became a top seller for PTC, but not until after significant internal change. The PTC case illustrates what it means to build a new business within the context of an existing, successful firm. It can also be used to explore what it takes to accomplish a successful new product launch for a substantially new product platform. Sales and channel strategy also figures prominently in the case.
In December 1999, Thomson Financial (TF) began a radical transformation from 41 divisions toward a more integrated firm, organized around customer-segments. This required active, coordinated involvement from business, organization and technology functions, as well as sustained investment and execution through the crises of the technology market crash and September 11, 2001. By 2005 TF had emerged as one of the top three financial information firms globally (with Bloomberg & Reuters). LEARNING OBJECTIV Understand: 1. Building the customer-centric firm; ‘Synchronizing’ marketing (branding and sales), organizational, and technological infrastructure to focus on customer segments rather than products. 2. Making transformative, long-term investments under difficult circumstances. 3. Coordinating business, organization and technology strategies throughout a long-term transformation process.
This course addresses the emerging practice of "corporate entrepreneurship," also called "intrapreneurship," broadly defined as the application of entrepreneurial capabilities to the development of new ventures within an existing firm. In this course, we will examine intrapreneurship from the perspective of corporate strategy; relate intrapreneurship to other functions such as corporate venturing, new product development (NPD), research and development (R&D) and corporate labs; examine entrepreneurship for clues to the successful practice of intrapreneurship; explore actual intrapreneurial ventures with practicing executives; and develop an “intrapreneurial toolset.” Although there are no textbooks required for this course, Peter Drucker’s "Innovation & Entrepreneurship" is recommended for context. All readings will be included in the course pack, including a summary article of Drucker’s book from the HBR.
Corporate Innovation & New Ventures (ENTR-903-B)
This course counts toward the following majors: Entrepreneurship & Innovation
This course addresses the emerging practice of "corporate entrepreneurship," also called "intrapreneurship," broadly defined as the application of entrepreneurial capabilities to the development of new ventures within an existing firm. In this course, we will examine intrapreneurship from the perspective of corporate strategy; relate intrapreneurship to other functions such as corporate venturing, new product development (NPD), research and development (R&D) and corporate labs; examine entrepreneurship for clues to the successful practice of intrapreneurship; explore actual intrapreneurial ventures with practicing executives; and develop an “intrapreneurial toolset.” Although there are no textbooks required for this course, Peter Drucker’s "Innovation & Entrepreneurship" is recommended for context. All readings will be included in the course pack, including a summary article of Drucker’s book from the HBR.
Global Innovation: Kellogg Innovation Network (ENTR-915-0)
This course, which focuses on global business challenges to be addressed at the Kellogg Innovation Network Global Summit (KIN Global), challenges students to put their professional experiences and classroom knowledge to work.
Teams of four or five students produce research projects concerning real-world challenges outlined by our partner organizations — the U.S. Department of State, The Nordic Council, Kraft, Raytheon and others. The teams will work closely with faculty advisors, corporate delegates and other partners. Students are then invited to not only present their projects, but also to enhance and expand their research with KIN Global delegates at the summit.
This one-credit course spans both winter and spring quarters. Students may designate the full quarter for either winter or spring, or they may count one half-credit per quarter. As a member of the class, you will also be a delegate at KIN Global, May 17 to 19, 2010. For more information, please visit kinglobal.org.
Global Innovation: Kellogg Innovation Network (ENTR-915-A)
This course, which focuses on global business challenges to be addressed at the Kellogg Innovation Network Global Summit (KIN Global), challenges students to put their professional experiences and classroom knowledge to work.
Teams of four or five students produce research projects concerning real-world challenges outlined by our partner organizations — the U.S. Department of State, The Nordic Council, Kraft, Raytheon and others. The teams will work closely with faculty advisors, corporate delegates and other partners. Students are then invited to not only present their projects, but also to enhance and expand their research with KIN Global delegates at the summit.
This one-credit course spans both winter and spring quarters. Students may designate the full quarter for either winter or spring, or they may count one half-credit per quarter. As a member of the class, you will also be a delegate at KIN Global, May 17 to 19, 2010. For more information, please visit kinglobal.org.
Global Innovation (ENTR-915-B)
This course, which focuses on global business challenges to be addressed at the Kellogg Innovation Network Global Summit (KIN Global), challenges students to put their professional experiences and classroom knowledge to work.
Teams of four or five students produce research projects concerning real-world challenges outlined by our partner organizations — the U.S. Department of State, The Nordic Council, Kraft, Raytheon and others. The teams will work closely with faculty advisors, corporate delegates and other partners. Students are then invited to not only present their projects, but also to enhance and expand their research with KIN Global delegates at the summit.
This one-credit course spans both winter and spring quarters. Students may designate the full quarter for either winter or spring, or they may count one half-credit per quarter. As a member of the class, you will also be a delegate at KIN Global, May 17 to 19, 2010. For more information, please visit kinglobal.org.
The course will focus on innovation within business entities, from the typical technology and product innovation programs, to broader, process, marketing and other forms of innovation. The course will address innovation as a holistic strategic management imperative not limited to Research & Development or New Product Development. While the course will provide a theoretical foundation, the focus will be on real world issues, products and systems.
PHONE: 847-467-5507
FAX: 847-467-5505
Jacobs Center Room 5250