home › lawrence lee in the news
Lawrence Lee in the news
Researchers at PARC give us a glimpse of the future
25 April 2013 | San Jose Mercury News
by Patrick May
"It was a high-tech speed-dating session, Silicon Valley-style:
I would sit in the storied memorabilia-laden Room 2306 in the bowels of PARC, the former Xerox research and development center in Palo Alto that gave us the 'ball' mouse, the Ethernet, and the graphical user-interface that inspired the Apple Macintosh. And seven of PARC's resident geniuses would drop by and in 15-minute bursts blow my mind with the technical wizardry each was working on to someday transform our lives."
The People Who Practice Everyday, Everywhere Innovation
28 January 2013 | Bloomberg
by Polly LaBarre
"Innovation as a Business: How to Create a Repeatable and Sustainable Innovation Engine" by Lawrence Lee announced as a finalist for MIX, Harvard Business Review, and McKinsey & Company's "Innovating Innovation Challenge"
Harvard Business Review and McKinsey & Company's M Prize: Innovating Innovation Challenge
22 January 2013 | Management Innovation eXchange
by Polly LaBarre
Lawrence Lee's "Innovation as a Business: How to Create a Repeatable and Sustainable Innovation Engine" chosen as a finalist.
What PARC Learned About Executing on Open Innovation
15 October 2012 | Harvard Business Review - HBR Blog Network
by Lawrence Lee
Lawrence Lee, Senior Director of Strategy at PARC, writes on PARC's lessons in how to turn open innovation into a repeatable business model.
"As an industry, I believe we are still realizing only a small fraction of the full potential of open innovation. How can we realize this potential? Here are some key strategies I've observed from PARC's experiences."
PARC showcases business models, not products, at 10 year anniversary
29 April 2012 | Ars Technica
by Nathan Mattise
"The message of the day was clear with the first words to greet guests at the registration table (via both conference workers and a commemorative bookmark). 'Just wanted to let you know, "Xerox PARC" is so 10 years ago. Today, we're "PARC, a Xerox company".'
PARC's Power of 10 is a year-long series of events, including public-friendly guest presentations and this half-day conference, to commemorate the company's first ten years of independent operation. In 2002 Xerox incorporated PARC as an independent, wholly owned subsidiary, shifting the R&D pioneers toward an open innovation business model that took center stage on Thursday.
...Chesbrough's point was best emphasized after his presentation. The rest of the afternoon featured panels with representatives from a few PARC-collaborators. They all shared their projects, but the most eye-catching were Nicole Tricoukes, Senior Maverick at Motorola Solutions, and Davor Sutija, CEO of Thin Film."
The Comeback of Xerox PARC
...Xerox's R&D subsidiary has a new strategy for innovation: make money.
21 December 2011
"PARC, which once served only Xerox, now has an expanding list of technologies in development with outside partners that include Fujitsu, Motorola, NEC Display Solutions, Microsoft, Samsung, SolFocus, and Oracle. The change in strategy has helped turn it from a multimillion-dollar financial sinkhole into a modest, but growing, innovation business.
For PARC, the partnerships are signs that open innovation is working. 'There are plenty of great ideas at PARC, but you learn early on that execution is often the hard part—execution and timing,' says St. Claire. '...You almost have to be as innovative in the commercialization—especially when you have game-changing technologies—as on the technology side.'"
Digitized Decision Making and the Hidden Second Economy
Techonomy [invited/ guest contributed]
10 November 2011 | Forbes
by Stephen Hoover
"There’s something big happening right now. I’m not referring to any of the popular technology memes per se—big data, social, cloud, mobile, augmented reality, context, post-PC devices, consumerization, 3-D printing, etc. I’m referring to something behind, and beyond, all of these technologies: the digitization of decision making. This increasing trend is creating a 'second economy' underneath and alongside the physical economy we know so well, and on a revolutionary scale…
[PARC visiting researcher and Santa Fe Institute external professor W. Brian] Arthur argues that this second economy, which author Nick Carr in turn dubs the age of 'deep automation,' may represent the biggest shift since the Industrial Revolution, and lead to increases in productivity output as well as decreases in physical jobs.
...Since joining PARC, a Xerox company approaching its 10-year anniversary as a business for open innovation with multiple clients, I have been focused on the following question: just what will happen to invention and innovation in this second economy? More specifically, what will be the role of R&D and innovation organizations in a new global innovation landscape?"
Reinventing Innovation at PARC
28 July 2011 | Harvard Business Review HBR Blog Network
by Teresa Amabile and Steve Kramer
"A few weeks back, we saw firsthand a hotbed of innovation in a place that many observers had long ago given up on. Its resurrection convinces us that other organizations can do the same by creating a culture of consideration, coordination, and communication, and marrying that culture to a responsive business model. That resurgent hotbed is PARC (formerly Xerox PARC)…
Over the past several years, PARC — spun off as an independent, wholly-owned subsidiary of Xerox in 2002 — has reinvented itself as a font of innovation for Xerox and a variety of other organizations worldwide. It has delivered a stunning array of software and hardware innovations to global corporations, startups, and the U.S. government, and it does a brisk business in IP licensing.
How is it that this place, widely ridiculed 20 years ago, has revived? When we visited, we not only saw pieces of PARC's storied past, but we saw what happens there today, how it happens, and how innovation continues to thrive."
Gladwell on Innovation: Truths & Confusions: Part 1 & Part 2
23 May 2011 | Forbes
by Steve Denning
From Part 1: "Malcolm Gladwell’s article on innovation in The New Yorker entitled Creation Myth is a brilliantly written piece that, in the process of killing some innovation myths, creates some new ones…What Gladwell’s article doesn’t shed any light on is how the Apple of the 2000s (and other firms) have learned how to generate continuous innovation in sector after sector, along with disciplined execution. Nor does it shed any light on how the world of innovation in the 1980s is fundamentally different from the world of innovation in 2011."
From Part 2: "What has emerged over the last decade is a group of firms...that have learned how to get to the root of the problem and combine continuous innovation with disciplined execution. They are managed in a radically different way from traditional management. Their practices create workplaces that are congenial to the 'commandos' while also generating disciplined execution and customer delight. There are five fundamental and interlocking shifts."
Innovation That Lays the Golden Eggs
22 May 2011 | Marketoonist
by Tom Fishburne
"There is an inevitable friction in bringing ideas to life within a company. That friction can polish an idea and make it stronger, sand the edges of the idea and make it weaker, or kill the idea altogether. Anyone who works in innovation is familiar with that tension. Navigating it is part of what makes innovation so difficult.
Malcolm Gladwell wrote an illustrative New Yorker article on the mythic 1979 story of Steve Jobs and Xerox PARC...
The modern day Xerox PARC replied to Gladwell’s article with a fascinating post on the merits of open innovation as one way to resolve that friction…
There is no longer merely a 'go' or a 'stop' in innovation, as Gladwell originally characterized. There are other options for the golden eggs."
Malcolm Gladwell Discovers That Innovation And Invention Are Not The Same
from the indeed dept
20 May 2011 | Techdirt
by Mike Masnick
"In his latest piece, Gladwell goes a step further in his exploration of innovation, in writing about the difference between invention and innovation, picking apart the classic story of Steve Jobs seeing the GUI/mouse combo at Xerox PARC and "copying" it for the Macintosh. Gladwell points out that the lessons that some take from the story aren't really correct…
It's interesting to see that the modern day PARC has responded to the story directly, pointing to some key 'lessons learned' that are demonstrated by the article, and with some additional background…
The PARC blog also talks up the importance of 'open innovation,' and sharing ideas outside of a company, recognizing (frequently) that others may be better able to take an idea and run with it by creating something really powerful on top of that."
PARC Responds – Apple and the Truth About Innovation
16 May 2011 | Blogging Innovation
[This post was syndicated to Blogging Innovation.]
PARC Fires Back at New Yorker, Claiming Old Apple Legend Misses Point of How Innovation Works Today
13 May 2011 | Xconomy
by Wade Roush
"Three staff members at PARC, aka Xerox’s Palo Alto Research Center, have published a feisty response to Malcolm Gladwell’s May 16 New Yorker article, 'Creation Myth: Xerox PARC, Apple, and the Truth about Innovation.' In short, the post acknowledges that the legend of Xerox PARC—the oft, oft, oft-repeated story (repeated once again by Gladwell) that Xerox 'flubbed the future' by giving away its best idea ever, the personal computer, to a young Steve Jobs—is basically true. But the essay points out that it took some circumstances unique to PARC to generate the idea in the first place, and that the story wouldn’t play out the same way if were happening today.
...PARC is now largely in the business of open innovation, helping its clients capitalize on their own technologies and seasoning them with concepts homegrown at PARC."
The Problem with Fitting New Ideas Into Old Business Models
13 May 2011 | Innovation Leadership Network
by Tim Kastelle
"Malcolm Gladwell retells the story of the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center in the latest issue of the New Yorker… The story of PARC is fascinating, and Gladwell provides a nice twist to it.
…This leads to a key point. PARC is still there, and they are still coming up with brilliant ideas. It has actually been an incredibly successful operation for an extended period of time. By focusing on the ideas that didn’t work so well for them, we recreate a myth of innovation – that every idea that we have must work for us to be successful."
We want to invent the next killer app
[invited/ guest contributed]
12 May 2011 | Front End of Innovation
by Tamara St. Claire
I can’t tell you how many times we’ve heard this... Because most companies have incremental and next-generation innovation down – it’s the disruptive, non-core, 'next big thing' innovation that eludes many and presents the most challenges. Yet this type of innovation is a necessity for any business that wants to access new markets, create a new line of revenue, or re-invent themselves in anticipation of future directions. So here’s my question: what happens AFTER you conceive the next killer app for your industry?
Executives Call for More R&D
29 April 2011 | Internet Evolution
by Michael Singer
"Research and development is under budgetary pressures these days, and yet more and more executives are touting its benefits. Why is there a disconnect? And what can be done about it?
The primary issue around R&D spending is that by itself, research and development doesn't guarantee profitability. Companies must weigh how much they are willing to invest in future innovations that may never pan out.
During the Internet Evolution Radio program this past week, Dr. Steve Hoover, CEO of the Palo Alto Research Center, noted that companies need to really prioritize research and development projects based on their long-term investments."
Managing Research as an Investment Portfolio: Lessons from PARC
[invited/ guest contributed]
16 February 2011 | Xconomy SF
by Lawrence Lee
As part of its transformation from an internal research center to a commercial business, PARC has needed to innovate its business practices, as well as its research and technology. How do we balance the seemingly conflicting goals of long-term research vs. short-term profits, of creating breakthrough innovations vs. providing client services, of diversifying research into many markets vs. developing critical mass in just a few?
What PARC Will Do with Its Next 40 Years
27 September 2010 | eWeek
by Chris Preimesberger
"In human terms, the Palo Alto Research Center is in middle age, but it continues to invent important things with youthful vigor..."
Six Definitions of Smart Content
24 September 2010 | The Intelligent Enterprise blog
by Seth Grimes
"Smart Content is information, typically originating in unstructured formats, that is findable, reusable, more profitable (however measured) for the producer, and more useful for the consumer. While technology facilitates smart content, it is business value -- not analytics, semantics, or XML storage -- that is central. This principle, and the realization that others from diverse backgrounds may have differing and informative views, underpin the Smart Content conference, October 19 in New York...
I recruited PARC's Mark Stefik...for the Visionaries Panel that opens the Smart Content conference. Mark's smart content definition, he says, came out of discussions at PARC..."