
Twice the R&D Budget Doesn't Get You Twice the Innovations - taylorbuley
http://web.hbr.org/email/archive/dailystat.php?date=080311
======
bane
But having a healthy R&D can make a huge difference to the bottom line.

An example I just recently came across while researching some retrogaming
articles:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_development_teams>

Sega also had a number of very important and successful R&D teams (AM1, AM2,
AM3, etc.)

They're large investments no doubt, but both of these companies did, or are
doing, very well because of the R&D efforts.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, I once was contracted to work with a
large defense system integrator who kept the R&D team I was assigned to on
less than a shoe string budget. The result? Missed deadlines for months and
months while the team awaited funding resulting in an incomplete system and no
business at the end of it because there was nothing to show the eventual
customer.

------
tyree732
I think this goes without saying, but product announcements are not the only
indication of successful R&D. A company can also do serious R&D and gain value
from any patents acquired or products they didn't ship as a result. If
anything, I think it indicates where R&D beyond a certain point goes.
Companies needs R&D to advance their core products, but if you're doubling R&D
spending past that you're probably researching "pie in the sky" ideas that are
either far away from feasibility or not directly tied to any core products you
currently ship.

------
bugsy
Seems like a silly distraction claim since they only look at raw number of
things and not their quality or return.

Would you rather invest $10,000 10 years ago and get a PHP calendar app, or
invest $20,000 and get Google search? Both are single products.

------
softbuilder
The major assertion is that the trend predicted by a few variables will
continue on. What if it's parabolic? What happens if you put in 10x the amount
of investment? What if it's harmonic and there are sweet spots?

------
rch
It would if you could use that budget to hire twice as many genuine
innovators. But those folks can be difficult to find....

~~~
bugsy
Not really, we are easy to find and all over the place. It's just that typical
corporate environments are threatened by the highly talented, and those that
aren't are unwilling to pay the market rate. Not a problem since others are
and when that's not the case such as with Google's founders, they just create
their own business and run it themselves.

~~~
rch
...you've managed to mention most of the factors that make it difficult for
the average business to identify and retain talent. The market is
extraordinary competitive, given the wealth of options that capable people
have these days.

If innovators were everywhere, then I could just walk over to the campus
adjacent my office and hire up a storm... but I can't. And I wouldn't have it
any other way.

