The Three Traps That Stymie Reinvention
Organizational identity, architecture, and collaboration can be either assets or liabilities to pursuing growth in new sectors.
Topics
Nash Weerasekera
Steve Jobs walked onto the Macworld stage in San Francisco on Jan. 9, 2007, and announced, “Today, Apple is going to reinvent the phone.” He promised that the first-generation iPhone would be available for purchase in just six months — but the prototype Jobs held in his hand was far from a finished product. His team was still working on developing a more durable touchscreen for the smartphone. Although glass was one option, Apple had been unable to find a material that did not shatter when the phone was dropped.
Immediately after the presentation, Jobs called Wendell Weeks, CEO of Corning, the company that Thomas Edison had engaged to create the glass encasements for the world’s first light bulbs. Jobs gave Weeks just a few days to decide whether Corning would partner with Apple to develop a durable glass touchscreen. For Weeks, such a commitment would mean redirecting critical resources and 300 people away from the company’s successful LCD business, a division delivering much-needed cash flow. He also noted a palpable fear of failure, telling me later, “There were some in the company who thought what Jobs wanted was an impossibility. If we took this on and failed, Jobs would turn Corning into a pariah because we would have been the ones who stopped the iPhone.”
Get Updates on Innovative Strategy
The latest insights on strategy and execution in the workplace, delivered to your inbox once a month.
Please enter a valid email address
Thank you for signing up
Corning’s dilemma — how and when to divert limited resources and know-how to an unproven new product line — represents a common reinvention challenge that most organizations face at some point. When successful, reinvention can lead to breakthrough innovations like Gorilla Glass, the product that emerged from Corning’s decision to partner with Apple and has since been used in over 8 billion devices by more than 45 major brands.
In more than a decade of researching innovation, I have observed how organizations respond to new opportunities, technological changes, or unexpected market shifts that threaten to upend their current business models. This process, which I call reinvention, may occur proactively or reactively.
References
1. W.K. Smith and M.L. Tushman, “Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams,” Organization Science 16, no. 5 (September-October 2005): 522-536.
2. T. Borders, “From Local, to Global, to Gone: On the Rise and Fall of Borders Books,” in “Among Friends: An Illustrated Oral History of American Book Publishing and Bookselling in the 20th Century,” eds. B. Teacher and J.B. Teacher (New Hope, Pennsylvania: Two Trees Press, 2023).
3. R. Raffaelli and R. Noe, “Organizational Emplacement as a Response to Digital Threat: The Novel Resurgence of Independent Bookstores,” working paper 23-033, Harvard Business School, Boston, December 2022.
4. R. Raffaelli, M.A. Glynn, and M. Tushman, “Frame Flexibility: The Role of Cognitive and Emotional Framing in Innovation Adoption by Incumbent Firms,” Strategic Management Journal 40, no. 7 (July 2019): 1013-1039.
5. A.K. Gupta, K.G. Smith, and C.E. Shalley, “The Interplay Between Exploration and Exploitation,” Academy of Management Journal 49, no. 4 (August 2006): 693-706.
6. R. Raffaelli, R. DeJordy, and R.M. McDonald, “How Leaders With Divergent Visions Generate Novel Strategy: Navigating the Paradox of Preservation and Modernization in Swiss Watchmaking,” Academy of Management Journal 65, no. 5 (October 2022): 1593-1622.