Comments on: Thinking about innovation and business models http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/ a blog about information Tue, 16 Mar 2010 18:24:13 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Jay Greasley http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/comment-page-1/#comment-528231 Jay Greasley Sat, 30 May 2009 06:59:08 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/#comment-528231 Have you seen http://curetogether.com/ which is a step in that direction. I guess drug trials will be a bigger hurdle because of the regulatory frameworks in place. Have you seen http://curetogether.com/ which is a step in that direction. I guess drug trials will be a bigger hurdle because of the regulatory frameworks in place.

]]> By: PaulSweeney http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/comment-page-1/#comment-523708 PaulSweeney Tue, 12 May 2009 21:26:39 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/#comment-523708 On a tangent to the main here: Phase Review Process is patented by Robert G. Cooper, and the excellent book PACE, "Product and Cycle Time Excellence" gives a good introduction. I did a (small) bit of research on medical trials and CEBP and guess what, there's an application. Medical trials need LOTS of people to partake in late stage trial, because people don't take their meds on schedule, don't record their intake properly, and don't take them EXACTLY when they are supposed to. Using CEBP decreases the amount of people and time you need to run the trial because the trial is run more accurately. On a tangent to the main here: Phase Review Process is patented by Robert G. Cooper, and the excellent book PACE, “Product and Cycle Time Excellence” gives a good introduction. I did a (small) bit of research on medical trials and CEBP and guess what, there’s an application. Medical trials need LOTS of people to partake in late stage trial, because people don’t take their meds on schedule, don’t record their intake properly, and don’t take them EXACTLY when they are supposed to. Using CEBP decreases the amount of people and time you need to run the trial because the trial is run more accurately.

]]> By: Paramendra Bhagat http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/comment-page-1/#comment-522710 Paramendra Bhagat Mon, 11 May 2009 00:32:48 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/#comment-522710 http://technbiz.blogspot.com/2009/05/reimagining-office.html http://technbiz.blogspot.com/2009/05/reimagining-office.html

]]> By: JP http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/comment-page-1/#comment-522667 JP Sun, 10 May 2009 21:18:25 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/#comment-522667 I was quite taken by this reference, tweeted to me by @crc. It is definitely worth a read. http://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2009/05/01/richard-smith-the-polypill-is-about-demedicalisation-not-medicalisation/ I was quite taken by this reference, tweeted to me by @crc. It is definitely worth a read.

http://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2009/05/01/richard-smith-the-polypill-is-about-demedicalisation-not-medicalisation/

]]> By: Peter Wagner http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/comment-page-1/#comment-522232 Peter Wagner Fri, 08 May 2009 17:56:15 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/#comment-522232 Check out www.innocentive.com. That's where you find open source drug development. Check out http://www.innocentive.com. That’s where you find open source drug development.

]]> By: Eric Davidove http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/comment-page-1/#comment-522051 Eric Davidove Fri, 08 May 2009 07:16:45 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/#comment-522051 People often like to "fondle their hammer" and skip over the value creation question and this limits or diminishes the innovative process. Too often, in business settings, we are driven by the need to drive revenue and profit for the "things" we do or have rather than start our thought process from the knowledge of what the "customer" wants or needs. We also spend too much time trying to protect our ideas and assets and believe this is the stuff the differentiates our competitive advantage. I look forward to the day when more and more people "think opensource" because this is when we will see some dramatic breakthrough ideas. People often like to “fondle their hammer” and skip over the value creation question and this limits or diminishes the innovative process. Too often, in business settings, we are driven by the need to drive revenue and profit for the “things” we do or have rather than start our thought process from the knowledge of what the “customer” wants or needs. We also spend too much time trying to protect our ideas and assets and believe this is the stuff the differentiates our competitive advantage. I look forward to the day when more and more people “think opensource” because this is when we will see some dramatic breakthrough ideas.

]]> By: Nick Smith http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/comment-page-1/#comment-521758 Nick Smith Thu, 07 May 2009 20:31:51 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/#comment-521758 Thanks JP, This made me think and helped me understand some stuff. But it took me in the other direction to the question you pose at the end. Made me wonder if as well as the opensource model hinting at a way through pharmacology challenges, there wasn't the risk of pharmacology problems hinting at where opensource could run into problems too. Just as the 'for-profit' tech industry has hit problems - Moore's Law meaning leading to businesses being unable to support the products they provide (see Nick Jones of Gartner http://bit.ly/CDaD1) isn't there a risk that there are some tasks / problems where the open source approach just requires too much effort to justify doing it without 'snake oil-like' commercial engines to drive value realisation? Haven't got my head round that properly, and am unable to express clearly - but there's a reverse to think about, too. That's my point. Thanks JP,

This made me think and helped me understand some stuff.

But it took me in the other direction to the question you pose at the end. Made me wonder if as well as the opensource model hinting at a way through pharmacology challenges, there wasn’t the risk of pharmacology problems hinting at where opensource could run into problems too.

Just as the ‘for-profit’ tech industry has hit problems – Moore’s Law meaning leading to businesses being unable to support the products they provide (see Nick Jones of Gartner http://bit.ly/CDaD1) isn’t there a risk that there are some tasks / problems where the open source approach just requires too much effort to justify doing it without ’snake oil-like’ commercial engines to drive value realisation?

Haven’t got my head round that properly, and am unable to express clearly – but there’s a reverse to think about, too. That’s my point.

]]> By: Rana http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/comment-page-1/#comment-521517 Rana Wed, 06 May 2009 22:34:01 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/#comment-521517 JP, that is good insight, and I fear that you may be right about the cause of the "delay" in this superdrug. Yet I still think the best answer remains within the pure scientific process. One of the commenters above mentioned the excellent work of the Cochrane Group, and I particularly recommend the writing of Dr. Ben Goldacre in his incessant argument for the same issues that concern you, including the need to register all trials even (especially) where they do not show a positive outcome. JP, that is good insight, and I fear that you may be right about the cause of the “delay” in this superdrug.

Yet I still think the best answer remains within the pure scientific process. One of the commenters above mentioned the excellent work of the Cochrane Group, and I particularly recommend the writing of Dr. Ben Goldacre in his incessant argument for the same issues that concern you, including the need to register all trials even (especially) where they do not show a positive outcome.

]]> By: Howard Rheingold http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/comment-page-1/#comment-521508 Howard Rheingold Wed, 06 May 2009 21:54:34 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/#comment-521508 JP, I think this summary of an article about "Paying for public goods" will interest you: http://www.cooperationcommons.com/node/381 JP, I think this summary of an article about “Paying for public goods” will interest you:
http://www.cooperationcommons.com/node/381

]]> By: Duncan Johnston-Watt http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/comment-page-1/#comment-521504 Duncan Johnston-Watt Wed, 06 May 2009 21:36:10 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2009/05/05/thinking-about-innovation-and-business-models/#comment-521504 I second Glenn's comment tha part of the problem is we are so risk averse that even an opensource model for trials could be a stretch unless we are prepared to do a couple of things - 1) Use modeling tools After all the generics are (or should be) well understood individually so the issue is really can a polypill (in your example) deliver the same effect as taking a cocktail of pills each with its own specific delivery mechanism (coated/uncoated) etc. 2) Introduce far greater scope for personal choice. There is a strong argument for personal decision making here. Clearly at one extreme if my life expectancy sans a particular drug therapy is be less than the time it would take to complete a trial, then I'm considerably more likely to opt for this join the trial as an open source contributor even if the trial data was imcomplete. Can't resist observing that here we are talking about an opensource model where we are the software! It's getting late. I second Glenn’s comment tha part of the problem is we are so risk averse that even an opensource model for trials could be a stretch unless we are prepared to do a couple of things -

1) Use modeling tools

After all the generics are (or should be) well understood individually so the issue is really can a polypill (in your example) deliver the same effect as taking a cocktail of pills each with its own specific delivery mechanism (coated/uncoated) etc.

2) Introduce far greater scope for personal choice.

There is a strong argument for personal decision making here. Clearly at one extreme if my life expectancy sans a particular drug therapy is be less than the time it would take to complete a trial, then I’m considerably more likely to opt for this join the trial as an open source contributor even if the trial data was imcomplete.

Can’t resist observing that here we are talking about an opensource model where we are the software! It’s getting late.

]]>