The dilemma: Execution or Innovation

The 20th century was of significant innovations taking place all over the world. The world saw new products getting emerged in all walks of life. Be it military innovations or civil advancements, the world was full of innovations, and many patents were created that set the basis for the next century. For example, the patent for 'Client-server architecture using the Internet and public switched networks [US 5995606 A]' was published in 1999. Today we see our world build around client-server technology. The classic producer-consumer problem also dates back to the last century.

At the start of the 21st century, the focus shifted to execution. It appeared that there was a good innovation base ready to prepare newer and advanced products that can appeal to the masses and create a perception of better lives. Back in those days, the focus was on getting a phone that could play different audio and video formats. Nokia proudly labeled its feature phone as a music phone, and the phones sold like hotcakes. What happened eventually is known to all; the Symbion operating system lived out its time, leaving world's top phone maker Nokia, nowhere to go.

Apart from the reduced need for newer innovation, the risk in building an innovative company also increased because of a significant increase in various companies' market value. The more tempted a company is for innovation, the higher is the risk of falling from the cliff.

There are several examples where companies got stuck in 'executing' what they had and lost significant opportunities when the time was right for transformation. All of us have heard of Yahoo! story, once an internet giant, eventually reduced to a mere player. A similar thing happened with Microsoft, from 'only' Operating System provider to just another software company after a debacle that saw it lost on multiple counts, lost media to Netflix, Cloud to Amazon, lost Operation System to Google/Apple, etc.

Apple is also working its way around the innovation that geniuses discovered earlier (though the 21st century) and focusing more on getting the execution right to explore new venues to sell its products. There are gradual customer experience changes, but the big bang innovation is still missing from last almost half a decade. The innovation that saw the company going from producing mere wooden box computers to iPods, iPhones, iPads, and Macs is not visible in product launches. The recent story about its car platform business adds to more woes than to hurrahs.

Earlier things were a bit easy as the transition across technologies was not abrupt. For example, in the early 2000s, when the DVD business at STMicroelectronics was nearing saturation, it paved the way for a more rewarding space in Set-Top Box. The technology was extended and people were absorbed in what one can call a smooth transition without disturbing the kind of work. Now, we hear news of Set Top Box reaching saturation, and there is no new innovation to replace this field.

Many people are building strong optimism around IoT (Internet of Things). Still, it appears more a logical next step in the road-map of embedded devices where they become connected devices. Similarly, driver-less cars create buzz around with news of trials of driver-less cars taking place here and there. However, this is a massive deployment and requires the cities to be built altogether differently.

Now, when we stand in the second half of the second decade of the 21st century, the need to shift back to innovations is higher than ever. The opportunity cost is gradually coming down with mergers and acquisitions making way for larger entities to maintain legacy business while creating the resources to innovate.

Time will tell whether the focus goes back to innovators or have more steam left for executors. Whatever it be, the need for sustainable and long-term innovation is at its prime, especially for the embedded industry.