Sie sind auf Seite 1von 18

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

SI 451
Organizing for Design and Innovation
Spring 2011
TR 2:00 – 3:30 Room 220

Professor Siobhan O’Mahony Office: 631a

Associate Professor, Strategy and Phone: (617) 358 6073
Innovation Fax: (617) 353 5003
Boston University School of E-mail:
Management Office Hours: T 3:45 – 5:00
595 Commonwealth Avenue
Boston, MA 02215

Course Overview:

This course examines how managers and leaders can create the
conditions for innovation at the individual, team and organizational levels –
and how those conditions differ for startup and mature organizations.
Managing innovation includes the generation of ideas; the integration of
those ideas into new product concepts; and the commercialization of those
ideas. While core strategy courses address the questions of what innovations
to pursue and whether and when those innovations will bring value, this
course addresses the question of how managers can create organizations to
deliver sustainable innovations of value.

Thus, the course will focus on the practices, processes and structures
that mangers need to put in place to enable organizations to execute on an
innovation based strategy. In doing so, students will evaluate how to balance
the challenges of organizing, managing and leading innovation with the need
to produce concrete, routine and expected outcomes within the organization.

The course will examine the difference between invention and

innovation and what is needed to make this critical transition occur. To be
innovative, any new idea must resolve the innovation paradox – introducing

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

enough novelty to appeal to new markets while retaining enough familiarity

to tap into existing behaviors. Because design and innovation are frequently
inseparable in managing this paradox, the class will assess how design
thinking and design principles contribute to innovations in product, process
and business models across industry sectors.

More recently scholars recognize that innovations do not arise from

inside any one firm alone. Thus, the course also considers the role that all
sources of innovation play – including communities and other forms of open
innovation. Students will be asked to reflect upon innovations that have
been critical to their lives, and how these innovations were produced and
gained market traction. Throughout the course, students will evaluate cases
of innovation success and failure and develop a comparative framework.
Cases include companies well known for their design ethos such as Apple,
Mozilla, IDEO, OXO, Alessi, Bang & Olufsen, Xerox, Intel as well as companies
less well known for innovation and design.

Course Objectives:

1. Learn how to apply design thinking to innovation challenges

2. Learn how design principles affect innovation processes and outcomes
3. Understand the role design and innovation play in competitive strategy
4. Learn how design creates aesthetic value and changes in meaning
5. Understand what organizing options are appropriate for particular
innovation outcomes
6. Learn how to design and manage innovation teams
7. Understand what types of innovation are best pursued within the firm
and which types require an external approach
8. Understand ways to manage innovation risk

Course Requirements:

Participation 25%
2 Individual Written Assignments 25%
In class case analysis 20%
Group Project 30%

Your grade will be based on:

1) Participation. Participation counts for 25% of your grade and includes

class attendance, informed involvement in class discussions, cases and
exercises. Each member of the class is expected to attend all
sessions, to read all assigned readings for the day and to be
prepared to discuss those readings. Extra participation points can be

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

earned by sharing relevant innovation stories, research and links that are
relevant to the class either in class or through the class website on SMG

Attendance is critical for your learning in the class – if you cannot attend
class, notify me in advance via e-mail. I will cold call (ask you to speak
even if you have not volunteered) so it is a good idea to do the readings,
reflect on the discussion questions and come prepared for discussion for
every class. Attendance is necessary but insufficient for securing
an A for participation. Perfect attendance with little other
evidence of involvement or preparation will result in a C for

In class, good classroom discussions occur when everyone listens well,

responds directly, and is courteous, and professional at all times.
Disagreement is helpful when discussing a complex issue, but keep the
conflict at a professional, not personal, level. Participation grades will be
reduced for unprofessional comments, lack of attention, or ignoring your
fellow students’ comments. If you are tempted to check your email
or IM in class, I encourage you to either not bring your laptop to
class or to keep it at a 45 degree angle and use it only for taking

2) 2 Individual Written Assignments – Two writing assignments will

together be worth 25% of your grade. Each assignment is designed to
examine how the concepts taught in class work “in practice” and must be
completed individually.

Assignment #1: To be completed by Jan 27 at start of class.

 Select three principles of user centered or human centered design
as articulated by Don Norman that you think are most important to
good product design.
 How can these principles affect a firm’s ability to create innovative
products and services?
 How does Apple’s design philosophy either embrace or violate these
principles? Illustrate your points with examples.
 Your essay should be written in complete sentences, double spaced,
12 point font, and no more than three pages submitted to SMG tools
by Thurs Jan 27 before the start of class.

Assignment #2: To be completed by Thursday March 31.

• Select an open innovation community to examine. The
community you select could be associated with a for profit firm (Utube, flickr,

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

Digg, threadless, patientslikeme) or a nonprofit (Linux) but it must have some

type of open participation and contribution forum. It is ok to select a
community that you are active in but it cannot be a social networking
community like Facebook.

• Study how participation in the community functions. What

affordances does the site provide to users and participants? How difficult is it
for new members to participate? What are the formal or informal rules that
guide participation? Note what is required for people to submit new ideas or
creative material (reviews, photos, songs, code, content, etc.). How are these
contributions received either by the community host or other members?
Where does innovation occur? Do people build upon the ideas of others?

• Using course concepts and drawing upon your observations,

analyze how such a community fosters or inhibits innovation.
Consider the effects for both individuals and firms. For example, in what ways
do firms and individuals benefit from engagement with this community? In
what ways do individuals or firms innovate? How are ideas filtered and
integrated to foster innovation? If not, how could they be?

• Submit your assignment to SMG tools by March 31. It should be

no longer than 3 double spaced pages.

3) In class case analysis – will constitute 20% of your grade. You will
be asked to read a case and answer some questions about it, applying
what you have learned thus far in the course. Answers will be submitted
by class end to SMG tools on Tuesday March 8th. The analysis will be
“open book”, but I do not expect external sources to be of much help as
what will matter is your ability to think through the innovation dilemma
faced in the case. The basis for assessment will be your ability to apply
what you have learned about design and innovation to both analyze the
nature of the dilemma and how you might resolve it.

4) Group Project - ‘Turn Around Teams’ – You are free to form your own
groups of 4-6 people to rescue or “turn around” an innovative product or
service that is flat or stalled in its adoption. This will constitute 30% of
your grade. Innovations that are new to the world do not always take
hold right away and may require retooling and redesigning before gaining
widespread adoption. Consider that handheld computers were on the
market for almost 20 years before they were widely adopted. Many
companies that invested resources in the handheld market failed until Jeff
Hawkins at Palm computing simplified the design and functionality of the
Palm pilot.

Knowing how to end, revive or redesign an innovation that is stalled is an

essential job of anyone managing innovation and requires redeploying or

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

realigning organizational resources as well as reevaluating the design of

the innovation and its relationship with users. The mistake people often
make is to view this as a marketing problem as opposed to reevaluating
the relationship between the product or service and the end user. Your
team will not make this mistake.

Your group will select an innovation that may end up in the large discard
pile that includes such things as external zip drives, vacuum tube
computer monitors and walkmans. Will Tivo be next? Consider that
competition for the survival of new products can come from external or
internal sources. For example, Apple’s own introduction of the ipod touch
could cannibalize their existing line of ipods.

Your focus should be at the product or service level as opposed to the

firm level (e.g. Netflix mail distribution services not Netflix the firm). To
have enough time to develop the project, you must turn in a short
description of your team and your project by February 3rd. I am
happy to meet with teams to discuss the feasibility of your project. I will
also allocate time to meet with each group before spring break
on March 10 (class 15).
Your project will have three parts:

I) Analyze why your innovation has not met with the success that was
expected. This will be due for review on March 3rd. It will not
be graded but I will provide feedback to the team on March

II) Plan a course of action to either redesign it or redirect the

organization’s resources to new areas and:

III) Align and structure the product team to achieve this course of

After analyzing what went wrong, you may decide to change your
business model or stop production or redeploy organizational resources.
Regardless of the action you choose, it will be critical for your team to
justify the course of action you choose and to properly align and structure
your organization to pursue the selected course of action. That is, you will
not be graded according to what you choose, but on the analytics and
coherence of your plan.

The project will consist of a 10-12 page group paper analyzing the three
areas outlined above: the factors responsible for the demise of this
innovation; your planned course of action and how you will achieve it. If
possible, interview members of your organization to gather ideas.

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

Your turnaround team will make a group presentation on the final three
days of class. This presentation, combined with the paper, is worth 40%
of your grade. The paper will be due on April 28. Each member of the
group will be asked to evaluate every other group member anonymously
on the last day of class on the following dimensions: attendance at group
meetings, effort, meeting deadlines, and quality of work. Individual
student ratings will be adjusted according to the group feedback.

Class Deadlines

Thurs Jan 27: Individual Assignment #1 due (before start of class

SMG tools)

Tues Feb 3: Group Project team descriptions due (before start of class
in paper form)

Thurs March 3: Group Project Part I assessment due (for feedback only, not
“Why hasn’t this innovation met with the success that was

Tues March 8: In class case analysis

Thurs March 10: Group Project Meetings

Thurs March 31: Individual Assignment #2 due (before start of class SMG

Thurs April 28: Final paper due (before start of class in paper form)

April 28-May 4: Final presentations and team assessments

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

Schedule of Classes

Class # Date
Module 1: Innovation and Design Thinking
Professor Tues Jan 18
O’Mahony What is Innovation Spring 2011
2 Thurs Jan 20 Introducing Design Thinking
3 Tues Jan 25 Design Thinking and Innovation at Apple
*4 Assignment
* Indicates Thurs Jan 27 User Centered Design (Don Norman)
Module 2: Building Organizational Capabilities for Innovation
5 Tues Feb 1 Creating the Organizational Context for
*6 Thurs Feb 3 Designing and Managing Innovation Teams
Module 3: Experimenting and Prototyping Innovative Ideas
7 Tues Feb 8 Developing Flexible Development Processes
(Internet Time)
8 Thurs Feb 10 Learning from Lead Users (3M)
9 Tues Feb 15 Simulation and Experimentation (Team New
10 Thurs Feb 17 Designing Repeatable Innovation Processes
Tues Feb 22 NO CLASS – Monday Schedule
Module 4: Design Based Innovation Strategies
11 Thurs Feb 24 Designing Products for Function (OXO)
12 Tues March 1 Designing Products for Form (Alessi)
*13 Thurs March From Products to Business Models (Bang &
3 Olufsen)
*14 Tues March 8 Design & Innovation of Services (Bank of
America) in class case analysis
15 Thurs March Group Project Meetings
Module 5: Managing and Designing Innovation Communities
16 Tues March Managing Innovation Communities (Firefox)
17 Thurs March External Sources of Innovation (Connect &
24 Develop)
18 Tues March Innovation Tournaments (Cisco)
Module 6: Managing R&D Risk & Large Scale Ventures
*19 Thurs March Managing R&D Product Portfolio (Le Petit Chef)
20 Tues April 5 Managing High Risk Ventures (Iridium)
21 Thurs April 7 Managing High Risk Ventures (Cape Wind)
Module 7: Balancing Exploration and Exploitation
22 Tues April 12 The Innovator’s Dilemma (Encyclopedia
23 Thurs April Balancing Innovation with On-going Operations
24 Tues April 19 Exploring the Innovation Landscape (Intel
Thurs April NO CLASS – Monday Schedule
25 Tues April 26 Leading for creativity and innovation
Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

Course Reading Assignments

Module I: Innovation and Design Thinking

Class 1: What is innovation?

Hargadon, A. 2003. Chapter 2 “Recombinant Innovation and

the Sources of Invention” in How Breakthroughs Happen.
Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA, pp 3-30.

Fleming, L. 2007. “Breakthroughs and the “Long Tail” of

Innovation, MIT Sloan Management Review, SMR265.

Classroom Discussion Questions

1. How does innovation differ from routine work?
2. What are the sources of innovation?
3. What is necessary for innovation to occur?

Class 2: What is “Design Thinking” and how does it relate to


Brown, Tim. 2008. “Design Thinking”. Harvard Business

Review (June): 1-9, Reprint R0806E.

Boland, Richard J. Jr. and Fred Collopy. 2004. “Design Matters

for Management”, pp 1-18 in Boland, R. and Collopy, F. (eds)
Managing as Designing, Palo Alto: Stanford Business Books.

Classroom Discussion Questions

1. Why is design important for innovation? For business
2. Why is design receiving more attention in industry now?

Class 3: Design Thinking and Innovation at Apple

Design Thinking and Innovation at Apple, HBS Case 5-610-105

Classroom Discussion Questions

1. What has made Apple so successful?
2. Is there a systematic approach to innovation at Apple? If yes,
how would you characterize it? What design principles can
you identify?
3. Can this approach be easily imitated?

Class 4: User Centered or Empathetic Design

**Assignment #1 to be submitted on SMG tools by the start of class.

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

Norman, Donald, The Design of Everyday Things. Norman, Don

A. 1988.
Chapter 2 The Psychology of Everyday Actions

Leonard, Dorothy and Jeffrey F. Rayport. 1997. “Spark

Innovation Through Empathetic Design, Harvard Business
Review (November-December), pp 103-113, Reprint

Classroom Discussion Questions

1. What is good design? How has our notion of design evolved
over time?
2. Why are so many things poorly designed or difficult to use?
Why is design so frequently an after thought?
3. Do you agree with Don Norman’s analysis? Why or why not?

Module 2: Building Organizational Capabilities for Innovation

Class 5: Creating the Organizational Context for Innovation

Hargadon, A. and R. I. Sutton. 2000. “Building an Innovation

Factory”, Harvard Business Review, reprint R00304.

Fleming, Lee. “Perfecting Cross-Pollination” Harvard Business

Review, September 2004, Reprint F0409C.

Classroom Discussion Questions

1. How do the organizational conditions that are conducive to
innovation differ from the organizational conditions that are
conducive to routines?
2. How do you create these conditions?

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

Class 6: Designing & Managing Innovative Teams

**Group Project Descriptions due at start of class

Amabile, Teresa . Elizabeth Schatzel. 2003. “The Satera Team

at Imatron Systems Inc.” Harvard Business School Case 9-803-

Kelley, Tom. “Ten Faces of Innovation”, Rotman Magazine,

summer 2006, pp 30-33.

Leonard, Dorothy, Susan Straus. 1997. Putting Your

Company’s Whole Brain to Work, Harvard Business Review
July-August, pp 110-121.

Classroom Discussion Questions

1. What is the major problem facing Gary Pinto?
2. Assess the source of the problem, its evolution and its
3. Are the interactions of Ira Lovas and David Bennett
symptomatic of “creative abrasion” or simply destructive
4. What should Gary Pinto do?
5. How can you overcome these issues when you use
competition to spur two teams to explore the innovation

Module 3: Experimenting and Prototyping Innovative Ideas

Class 7: Developing Flexible Development Processes

Iansiti, M. & A. MacCormack. 1999. “Living on Internet Time:

Product Development at Netscape, Yahoo!, NetDynamics,
and Microsoft”, HBS Case 9-697-052.
Iansiti, M. & A. MacCormack. 1997. “Developing Products on
Internet Time”, HBR reprint 97505.

Classroom Discussion Questions

1. How are the four approaches to organizing innovation
described similar or different?
2. What drives these differences?
3. What lessons from the Internet environment can be applied
to other industries? (e.g. cars, fashion, consumer goods?)

In Class Handout:
Thomke, S. 2000. “Developing Products on Internet Time: A
Process Design Exercise” 600121.

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

Class 8: Learning from Lead Users

Thomke, Stefan. Innovation at 3M Corporation (A), HBS Case


Classroom Discussion Questions

1. How does the Lead User research process differ from and
complement other traditional market research methods?
2. How has 3M’s innovation process evolved since the
company was founded?
3. Has the Medical-Surgical team applied the Lead User
research process successfully? Why or why not?
4. What should the Medical-Surgical Lead User team
recommend to Dunlop: the three new product concepts or a
new business strategy? What are the risks to the new Lead
User process at 3M? What are the risks to the Medical-
Surgical business unit?

In class handout: Innovation at 3M Corporation (B)

Class 9: Simulation and Experimentation

Iansiti, Marco, Alan MacCormack (1997): “Team New Zealand.”

Harvard Business School Case 9-697-040.

Classroom Discussion Questions

1. How would you evaluate Team New Zealand’s use of
simulation technology? What are its advantages and
2. Which of the three yacht construction strategies should
Team New Zealand follow?
3. When you cannot build prototypes can you still experiment?
If so how?

Class 10: Developing Repeatable Innovation Processes

Thomke, Stefan and Ashok Nimgade M.D., IDEO Product

Development, Harvard Business School Case 9-600-143.

Classroom Discussion Questions

1. How does IDEO manage their innovation process? What
tests do they do, when and on whom?
2. How many of IDEO’s processes are applicable outside the
specific design-focused context in which they operate?
3. Which IDEO practices would be useful in an established
firm? In a startup?

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

Module 4: Design Based Innovation Strategies

Class 11: Designing Products for Function

OXO 1996 : “OXO International”, Harvard Business School Case


Lojacono, G. & Zaccai, G. 2004. “The evolution of the design-

inspired enterprise.” MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(3): 75-

Classroom Discussion Questions:

1) What is the single most important factor responsible
for OXO’s success as a design oriented business?
2) How does OXO’s product design and development
process work? Who is responsible for what?
3) What is Alex Lee’s problem? What should be his next
steps? How will this decision affect the future of the

Class 12: Designing Products for Form

Alessi: Evolution of an Italian Design Factory (A), (B), (C),

Harvard Business School Cases 9-504-018; 019; 020, February
2, 2004.

Verganti, Roberto. 2006. “Innovating Through Design”, Harvard

Business Review (December): 1-8, Reprint R0612G.

Optional Background Reading

Verganti, Roberto. 2009. Chapter 2: “Design and Meanings”, pp
19-38 in Design Driven Innovation: Changing the Rules of
Competition by Radically Innovating What Things Mean,
Harvard Business Press: Cambridge, MA.

Class Discussion Questions

1) How does Alessi’s approach to design and
manufacturing compare with OXO?
2) How important are individual designers to Alessi?
3) How does Alessi’s position within the region compare
to OXO? Is the Alessi model replicable in other areas?
4) What is Alessi’s challenge?

In class handout: Alessi: Evolution of an Italian Design Factory

(D), Harvard Business School Cases 9-504-022, January
29, 2004.

Class 13: From Products to Business Models

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

**Final Project Part I assessment due (for feedback only, not


Robert, D. Austin and Daniela Beyersdorfer. “Bang & Olufsen:

Design Driven Innovation”, Harvard Business School Case

Hargadon, A. 2005. “Leading with vision: The design of new

ventures.” Design Management Review (Winter), pp 33-39.

Class Discussion Questions

1) How important are designers to Bang & Olufson? How
does design fit in the company’s strategy?
2) Why does this need to change?
3) How is designing a venture or business model different
from designing a product?
4) What organizational changes are needed to integrate
design and strategy?
5) What can Bang & Olufson learn from Apple’s success
with the iPod?

Class 14: Design and Innovation of Services

**In class case analysis

Thomke, S. Bank of America (A), HBS Case 9-603-022

Pine, B. Joeseph II and James H. Gilmore. 1998. “Welcome to

the Experience Economy”, Harvard Business Review (July-
August): 97-105, Reprint 9840.

Class 15: Group Project Meetings in Class


Module 5: Outside the Firm - Managing Innovation Communities

Class 16: Managing Innovation Communities

O’Mahony, Siobhán and Nikhil Raj. 2007. “The Mozilla

Foundation: Launching Firefox 1.0,” (A) Harvard Business
School Case 907-015.

Von Hippel, Eric. 2005. Democratizing Innovation. Cambridge,

MA: MIT Press. Chapter 7: “Innovation Communities”, pp 93-
106. Available at

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011 for free


Classroom Discussion Questions

1. How has the Mozilla browser project and team
survived despite several ownership changes? What has
been critical to its success?
2. What should drive product development within
Mozilla? How does one “lead” such a project/organization?
What functions should the organization retain? Which
functions should the community lead?
3. What are the consequences of moving to a revenue
based model for the Mozilla Foundation? For the

In Class Handouts
O’Mahony, Siobhán and Nikhil Raj. 2007. “The Mozilla
Foundation: Launching Firefox 1.0,” (B) Harvard Business
School Case 907-025.

Class 17: Recruiting External Sources of Innovation

Boudreau, Kevin J. and Karim R. Lakhani. 2009. “How to

Manage Outside Innovation” MIT Sloan Management Review.
Reprint SMR323.

Cook, Scott. 2008. “The Contribution Revolution: Letting

Volunteers Build Your Business”, Harvard Business Review,
Reprint R0810C.

Huston, Larry and Nabil Sakkab, “Connect and Develop: Inside

Proctor & Gamble’s New Model for Innovation,” Harvard
Business Review, March 2006, pp. 58-67.

Classroom Discussion Questions

1. When do you want to recruit an external community to
pursue innovation?
2. What type of innovation challenges are best suited for
community approaches?

Class 18: Innovation Tournaments

Jouret, Guido. 2009. “Inside CISCO’s Search for the Big Idea”,
Harvard Business Review, September, Reprint R0909C.

Terwiesch, Christian, Ulrich, Karl T. 2009. Chapter 2 and 4 in

Innovation Tournaments: Creating and Selecting Exceptional

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

Classroom Discussion Questions

1. When are innovation tournaments appropriate?
2. What are the benefits and risks of using them?

Module 6: Managing R&D Risk & Large Scale Ventures

Class 19: Managing a Product Innovation Portfolio

**Assignment #2 to be submitted through SMG tools at the start of class

MacCormack, A., S. Sucher (2002): “Le Petit Chef.” Harvard

Business School Case 9-602-080.

Terwiesch, Christian, Ulrich, Karl T. 2009. “Interdependence:

Forming Opportunity Portfolios”, Chapter 7 in Innovation
Tournaments: Creating and Selecting Exceptional
Opportunities, pp 125-143.

Classroom Discussion Questions

1. What are the challenges of managing an innovation or product portfolio?
2. What is wrong with the current portfolio at LePetit Chef?
3. What should Gagne do? Which projects should she fund and why?
4. What factors explain Le Petit Chef’s poor performance? What actions
would you recommend to remedy the situation?

Class 20: Managing High Risk Ventures

The Rise and Fall of Iridium, HBS Case No. 601-040

Classroom Discussion Questions

1. At what point could you have known Iridium would fail?
2. Who or what was to blame for Iridium’s failure?
3. What changes would you have made to increase the
probability of a successful outcome?
4. What general lessons does Iridium provide for high risk

Class 21: Managing High Risk Ventures

“Cape Wind: Offshore Wind Energy in the USA” HBS Case


D’Agnese, Joseph. “Falling in Love with Wind”, On Earth

magazine, National Resource Defense Council. Summer, 2007.

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

Classroom Visitors: Bill Moore, CEO Deepwater Wind and

Ricky Guo, BU Doctoral Candidate

Class Discussion Questions

1. Why doesn’t the US have any offshore wind production?
2. What are the challenges of developing offshore wind
energy? How do these differ from land based wind?
3. What could Jim Gordon have done differently? Why has he
encountered such resistance?
4. How would you compare the development approaches of Jim
Gordon and Bill Moore? How does the socio-economic
context of these two development sites differ?

Module 7: Balancing Exploration and Exploitation

Class 22: Confronting the Innovator’s Dilemma

The Crisis at Encyclopedia Britannica, Kellogg Case 5-306-504.

Christensen, C. (1997) “How Can Great Firms Fail?” Chapter 1

in The Innovator’s Dilemma (Harvard Business School Press),
pp. 3-28.

Class Discussion Questions

1. Why is it so difficult for leading firms to cope with new
2. Why did a digital product pose such challenges for
Encyclopaedia Britannica?
3. Would you have managed the transition to a digital
encyclopaedia differently?

Class 23: Balancing Innovation with On-going Operations

Govindarajan, Vijay and Chris Trimble. “Stop the Innovation

Wars”, Harvard Business Review, July-August 2010.

Class 24: Exploring the Innovation Landscape

Maccormack, Alan, Kerry Herman (2005): “Intel Research:

Exploring the Future.” Harvard School of Business Case 9-605-

Classroom Discussion Questions

1. Does Tennenhouse’s approach to designing an exploratory
research organization solve the problem of disruption?
2. What are the main elements of the Intel Lablet program?
How do these elements work together? How could its
design be improved?

Professor O’Mahony Spring 2011

3. Should Intel fund projects like PlanetLab and Sensor

Networks? How do they generate value?

Class 25: Leading for Creativity and Innovation

Amabile, T.M. and Mukti Khaire. 2008. “Creativity and the Role
of the Leader” Harvard Business Review.

Goffee, Rob., Gareth Jones. 2007. “Leading Clever People”,

Harvard Business Review, pp 72-79.

Class 26: Final Project Presentations

All final papers due at start of class in paper form

Class 27: Final Project Presentations

Class 28: Final Project Presentations