Open innovation platform, the grave digger of the big company

If the world's innovation, no patent protection, no title protection, our world will be better?

In today's list of Baidu's big talk speakers, Anderson, a former editor-in-chief of Wired magazine, is also the creator and practitioner of the concept of makers, the answer is yes.

Of course, in terms of business and business, open innovation has given up on property rights, and Anderson doesn't think it's a good thing, but he still insists that it will make the world a better place.

With Linux as an Open-source system and application, don't take Anderson as an example, so he says he prefers Android to being an Apple fan.

In this man's eyes, only an open platform to build an ecosystem can defeat large companies, using platforms to defeat large companies.

One of the most important propositions here is that the top-smart people will no longer work for big companies. In Anderson's view, it is far more important than the work itself to let some people do something different so that they can realize their ideas and get happy at work.

Of course, it's even more important than getting a reward for money.

Baidu Research Institute deputy Dean Yukei in his own sharing, but also to Anderson's view expressed the same view, he said in the recruitment, some people do not start to consider the position can give the salary benefits and company situation, but whether more interesting, interesting.

This is not good news for big companies because it could mean that the smartest people might be hiring them.

The bureaucracy and stifling office politics that exist in big companies are a huge disaster for those who are creative and interesting and interesting.

So, in Anderson's view, open innovation, in addition to providing a platform for "smart people" to do something different, needs to help them grow and get their value to play out in a larger context.

In the speech Anderson gave the protection of five levels of the reward structure pyramid, from the bottom of a T-shirt, to the highest level of equity, employment relationship incentives, we can also see that even open innovation, but also to solve the problem of continuous human motivation.

However, unlike the firm system of fixed contract relations, the mechanism of open synergy is more based on interest and hobby.

Less command and administrative intervention, nor does it come from the frustration of various improper comparisons within the company, and, more crucially, the high degree of consistency of individual values in pursuit of goals that can be achieved by the object of work, will be the driving force behind the "smart man" fleeing from large companies.

Another dangerous trend is that even with intelligent people who maintain a fixed employment relationship, providing stable income and reliable social security for the wise, large companies are no longer likely to have all of their employees, whether intellectual or temporal, in the full sense.

Because, in Anderson's view, the value of open innovation for startups or small companies is that open platforms can be used to attract smart people around the world and avoid risks: getting the right "participatory architecture" and the passion-led shift from volunteering to staff.

What I understand is that to find the smart people who have been hired by big companies, take advantage of their time and let their professional passions be renewed.

Father of Philosophy of management, Charles. Handy, in his famous "Beyond uncertainty," believes that the era of free exchange of security has gradually passed.

In his opinion, every company, like a broker company, needs to do is connect the technology and products of others.

Such a company is more like a monastery or community--professor Handy said.

This can be understood as a reflection of the disease of existing large companies and a solution to the creative release of intelligent people.

The concept of open innovation, which Anderson put forward, is in fact the same as handy.

Big companies are going to have nightmares when smart people are moving away.

The good news, though, is that if Anderson's dream comes true, an open and innovative platform that does not require property rights and patent protection will benefit from the sharing of technology and knowledge.

This time, however, it is not the result of the "independent innovation" of the smart people who hire them.

(Responsible editor: Lvguang)