Strategic Innovation Planning

What truly is a disruptive technology? We throw around the term freely these days to refer to any novel technology that we come across. But not all new technologies actually meet the bar. Michael Porter reminds us that a disruptive technology is one that invalidates important competitive advantages of incumbents, enabling a new entrant to leap ahead in the market. Take the Internet for example. It was disruptive where the mechanism for delivering information was fundamental to the product or service. Like travel agents or the recorded music business. But for many other markets, it wasn't disruptive at all, since it was easy for existing incumbents to simply add it as a new channel for communicating with their customers. As GenAI and LLMs become the latest technology innovation, we should ask ourselves, where will it actually be disruptive? Certainly not a chat bot that any incumbent can easily add on. But maybe in the world of search, where LLMs are finally able to deliver a superior answer, potentially disrupting the ironclad superiority Google has maintained for decades. To decide whether something is disruptive, two questions are helpful: 1) To what extent does the new technology invalidate traditional competitive advantages? 2) To what extent can incumbents embrace the technology without major negative consequences for their business? I have no doubt AI will be a disruptive technology, but think we are only in the first inning of discovering exactly where that disruption will occur.

𝗛𝗕𝗥@𝟭𝟬𝟬 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗽𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝟲 𝗗𝗶𝘀𝗿𝘂𝗽𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗧𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝗶𝗲𝘀: 𝗖𝗮𝘁𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗪𝗮𝘃𝗲 — 𝗖𝗹𝗮𝘆𝘁𝗼𝗻 𝗠. 𝗖𝗵𝗿𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗲𝗻 Christensen (with Bower) uncovers a pattern repeated across industries: leading companies often lose their crown when new waves of technology emerge. Giants like Xerox, Goodyear, and IBM missed the next big thing — not because they lacked talent, but because they stuck too closely to the needs of existing customers. 🧠 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜𝘀 𝗮 𝗗𝗶𝘀𝗿𝘂𝗽𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗧𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝘆? Sustaining technologies improve performance for current customers. Disruptive technologies, by contrast, start off inferior in traditional metrics but are cheaper, simpler, or smaller. These technologies often serve underserved or non-customers at first — a market that incumbents don’t prioritize. Over time, as they improve, they can overtake mainstream markets — displacing well-established players. ⚙️ 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗗𝗼 𝗕𝗶𝗴 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝗠𝗶𝘀𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗪𝗮𝘃𝗲? 𝘝𝘢𝘭𝘶𝘦-𝘕𝘦𝘵𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬 𝘓𝘰𝘤𝘬-𝘪𝘯: Established companies are bound by their existing value networks — their processes, customer base, and profit models — which make emerging, low-margin opportunities less attractive. 𝘖𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘋𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘯��: By continually improving products for their best customers, incumbents overshoot what the rest of the market needs, leaving room for simpler, disruptive options. 𝘚𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘉𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴: Modular or strongly function­-oriented teams can lose sight of shifts in product architecture, making it hard to spot disruptive innovations coming “from below.” ✅ 𝗔𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗦𝘁𝗲𝗽𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀 & 𝗜𝗻𝗻𝗼𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀 𝘉𝘶𝘪𝘭𝘥 𝘢 𝘴𝘦𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘵: Give a small, nimble team the freedom to explore disruptive tech outside your core business. 𝘔𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘰𝘳 𝘯𝘰𝘯-𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘶𝘮𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯: Identify markets your customers aren’t serving — gaps that disruptors could fill. 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮: Resist the urge to kill low-margin, early-stage projects just because they don’t scale immediately. 𝘐𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵: Encourage cross-functional collaboration so that your organization understands how new architectures could reshape your business. 𝘉𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘳𝘶𝘱𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘧: Rather than waiting to be displaced, consider whether your next wave could come from within. ✨ 𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗧𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁 Disruption isn’t just about being innovative — it’s strategic. Great companies don’t just respond to change — they ride the wave. To lead in the next era, you have to tune into what’s coming before it’s obvious. 💬 𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘣𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘹𝘵 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘳𝘶𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘺 — 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘤𝘩 𝘪𝘵?

Meghana Foods does ₹200 crore a year. Nearly 70% of that revenue comes from one dish — their Special Boneless Biryani. They have 29 other items on the menu. Customers don't come for those. This is the lean menu principle, and it's the opposite of how most food founders think when they launch. → Most new restaurants open with 40+ items, assuming more options means more customers → The smarter move is to start with 12–15 focused items → Prep time drops below 10 minutes — and Swiggy/Zomato's algorithm rewards that with organic ranking boosts → Staff training becomes faster because the process stays simple → Most importantly, customers remember you for something specific Founder takeaway: One dish that people can't stop talking about will always outperform a 40-item menu that nobody remembers. If you're planning your food business menu right now, ask yourself — what's the one thing you want to be known for? 👉 Follow for more cloud kitchen and food business insights

Menu design isn’t a creative exercise. It’s a commercial lever. On the left: Tomato Soup – $6 On the right: Slow-roasted tomato soup with vine-ripened tomatoes, fresh basil, and a touch of cream – $9 Nothing changed in the kitchen. Everything changed in perception. That is menu engineering in its simplest form. A better description does more than describe a dish. It shapes value. It can: • anchor price perception • guide guest decisions • increase willingness to spend • shift demand toward higher-margin items • support the broader commercial strategy of the asset Yet in luxury resorts, menus are still often treated like static lists rather than revenue tools. That is where value gets lost. Because pricing is not just cost plus markup. It is perceived value. And revenue optimisation does not stop at rooms. In many high-value assets, restaurants, bars, spas, and retail account for 30% to 60% of total revenue. But they are rarely managed with the same precision as rooms. That is the gap. And that is where asset management matters. Not by adding more outlets. Not by pushing prices blindly. By engineering each guest touchpoint to increase spend, strengthen perception, and improve experience at the same time. Same soup. Different strategy. Very different profitability. ➕ Hi, I am Judith Cartwright CRME, CHBA, ISHC, I post daily tips to increase profits. ♻️ Share this with your network. Black Coral Consulting

This week, I had the honor of facilitating an Innovation Workshop for senior leaders at a leading European firm in its industry. Identifying “sustaining innovations” with them was relatively easy, but working on disruptive innovation was a much greater challenge. One of the cases we explored was the very recent example of DeepSeek. Our discussion focused exclusively on its business model and how clearly it aligns with disruptive innovation theory: a "good enough" solution at just 5% of the incumbents' cost. Today, I came across two related articles reinforcing this point. The first, from HBR, states: "This is classic disruption theory in play. An inferior technology at its inception, customized to specific low-end tasks, emerges as a threat to incumbents who focus solely on high-end customers with greater margins. Slowly but steadily, the disruptor improves its offering, and the incumbent loses market share segment by segment. Disruption theory predicts the rise of DeepSeek and similar players. In fact, we may soon see even more disruptors—especially small language models (SLMs) that use fewer resources and produce lower-quality content, yet could challenge American and Chinese LLMs in the near future." https://lnkd.in/dmc9jesG The second is by my innovation colleague Howard Yu, arguably one of the world's foremost experts on this topic. He offers a simple but powerful framework: - Is this startup serving an overlooked segment with a simpler, cheaper product? - If so, you might be witnessing early-stage disruption in real time. - And when you see a small startup blindsiding a mega-corporation, you’ll understand why. https://lnkd.in/d78TnHXE If we fail to recognize the power of “good enough” solutions, let’s not forget how these names started: Netflix, Airbnb, Revolut, Zara, Duolingo… you name it! Wishing you all a disruptive weekend! #DisruptiveInnovation #AlwaysOn #GoodEnough Image from Howard’s article.

As sponsor of the Digital Disruption Chair - ESSEC, I'm pleased to share with you the first results from our collaboration with ESSEC Business School and Sia. The annual Digital Disruption Matrix 2025 is based on a combination of expertise from academics and business industries with 1000+ multi sector professionals surveyed, as well as data crunched from social listening and patents screening. This in-depth analysis allowed the identification of six transformative technologies scored on a scale from 0 to 100, places Generative AI in a dominant position with the highest disruption score.   Key Findings: - Generative AI: 89/100 - The most disruptive technology in the study despite its recent emergence. - Descriptive AI: 49/100 - The foundational technology, leading in academic publications and patent filings. - Renewable Energy and Storage: 40/100 - Maintains a strong position with high volume, citation rate, and significant cross-sector impact. - Quantum Computing: 32/100 - A frontier technology, often misunderstood, seen as a future transformation driver. - Robotics and Automation: 19/100 - Benefiting from the democratization of AI simulations, viewed as a means to alleviate low-value daily tasks. - Blockchain: 12/100 - Despite stable publication and citation volumes, its real impact remains below professional expectations, even with the recent interest in cryptocurrencies.   These insights are invaluable for steering the judicious adoption of technology and fostering innovation. They also underscore the significant outcomes that can be achieved through the collaboration between the academic world and industry. I look forward to continuing this journey of excellence.   Thank you to everyone involved in making this initiative a success.   Download the full report at https://lnkd.in/esM74Zpm #Innovation #DigitalDisruption #EmergingTechnologies #CollaborationwithAcademics

Most menus fail before customers even order. Here’s why - and how to fix it: 1. Cognitive load theory → Too much clutter kills decisions.. → People get overwhelmed, delay ordering, and default to cheaper dishes. → Cleaner layout speeds up decisions and makes mid-tier upsells easier. Ask yourself: can your menu be understood in under 10 seconds? 2. Goldilocks Effect → Price anchoring changes the way people spend. → It makes $30 feel like a deal compared to $45. → This isn’t about selling the steak - it’s about selling more roast chicken. Customers want to feel smart, not cheap. Are you giving them that feeling? 3. Serial position effect → Put top sellers high on the menu. → Bold the margins you want people to notice. → Isolate premium items with white space. People scan, they don’t read. → So what are their eyes landing on first? → Are they seeing what you want to sell? Visual hierarchy isn’t decoration - it’s psychology. Design decisions aren’t cosmetic - they’re economic. Don’t let your layout leave money on the table. Follow for more Facts over Folklore

MENU ENGINEERING: HUNT FOR YOUR MARGIN HEROES If 80 % of your profit comes from 20 % of the menu, why do we spend 80 % of our time arguing about the other 80 %? Because we love our “signature” dishes, even when the P&L hates them. I run a simple 2-axis exercise with the team monthly: Sales Volume vs Contribution Margin. Old-school “Star–Dog” grid. Takes seconds when generated by the system. Saves thousands. Below is how we do it in Gastronomica and why it works in GCC markets that juggle VAT, fluctuating protein prices, and five delivery apps fighting for your margin. STEP 1 – PLOT THE GRID • Pull the last 30 days of data from the POS + cost sheet.   • High/Low split is the median; don’t overthink stats.   • Colour-code: ⭐ Stars, 🍔 Plowhorses, 🥣 Puzzles, 🌭 Dogs. STEP 2 – INTERROGATE EACH QUADRANT  ⭐ Stars – high sales, high margin. Give them hero photography, bundle them on delivery apps, and never discount them.   🍔 Plowhorses – high sales, low margin. Shrink the portion by 10 g, substitute a cheaper garnish, or raise the price by 0.500 AED and watch COGS calm down.   🥣 Puzzles – low sales, high margin. Usually premium items (truffle fries) that guests can’t “find.” Move to prime real estate on the menu or turn into an LTO.   🌭 Dogs – low sales, low margin. Sentimental favourites your chefs defend with tears. Test a 30-day LTO; if volume stays flat, retire with honours. STEP 3 – ACTION BOARD & OWNER We print the report, slap it on the kitchen whiteboard, and write ONE action per dish with an owner and a date. No action? The dish isn’t worth debating. GCC-SPECIFIC TACTICS • VAT Buffer Pricing – Always round up in 0.500 AED/KD increments; keeps receipt totals psychologically tidy and protects margin from future VAT hikes.   • Protein Swap Rule – When beef prices spike (Eid demand), try a chicken variant in the same sauce. 60 % of guests pick price over protein.   • Aggregator-Only Combos – Bundle a Star + Puzzle and list as “Delivery Exclusive.” Basket value jumps, commission stays flat.   • Pictures Talk – In markets with mixed Arabic/English literacy, a glam shot boosts Puzzle sales better than copywriting ever will. REAL-WORLD WINS • Kuwait burger brand: retired two Dogs, upsold Stars, food, cost dropped 1.2 pts in a single period.   • Riyadh casual dining: renamed a Puzzle steak as “Wagyu Express,” added table-side sizzle video, sales up 44 %, moved to Star status.   • Doha casual dining: halved Plowhorse portion by 15 g, added micro-greens for height; guest satisfaction unchanged, margin up 9 % on that SKU. Menu engineering isn’t a fancy spreadsheet; it’s a conversation starter between finance, ops, and chefs. Run the grid, make one brave decision per dish, and watch hidden profit walk back onto the P&L. #MenuEngineering #RestaurantFinance #GCCFandB #MarginHeroes #OperationalExcellence

With #ProMat around the corner, this is a timely report. It asks the question “what vulnerabilities exist in the warehouse-of-the-future?” We will spend a lot of time in Chicago next week talking about the value of new technologies but should also pause to ask 'what could go wrong?' One of the downsides of digitization and automation is that they create new, and sometimes bigger, risks. And the more efficient a supply chain becomes, the greater the impact of a disruption is likely to be. Based on extensive research, including interviews with many warehousing and technology experts, the report lays out five major categories of disruptions to which modern, automated warehouses are susceptible.. 1. Cyber attacks. The ‘attack surface’ is growing. 2. Power and network outages. Power grids are becoming more fragile. 3. Technology sabotage. Internal or external.   4. Technology failures. Bugs, cross platform integration etc. 5. Accidents from human-machine interaction. The report describes the new technologies that create these vulnerabilities... - Cloud-based software systems - Proliferation of tech systems - Data (quality and protection) - Autonomous Mobile Robots - Automated Retrieval Systems - New battery systems ...etc... The report also points out that, unless designed with resilience and agility in mind, an automated warehouse is likely to be less agile and resilient than a traditional, more manual warehouse. There is often no 'Plan B'. So What? Some of the advice in the report... - Many of these risks can be best (or only*) mitigated during the design/build-out of a new warehouse or during retrofitting and is a key part of assessing technology providers. - Designing and implementing cyber risk strategies must be part of this. - A ‘without or with-limited automation' plan B (including on-prem backup) is a necessary part of business continuity planning (start with an assessment of the financial cost of a system outage for 1 day). - System monitoring and predictive maintenance analytics are critical. - Workforce training should start with the ‘why is this good for you and your job’ and include new safety training. * power grid failure is an example of a risk that is hard for a company to control and is one of the reasons that companies should educate themselves on DC Microgrids. More on this here: https://bit.ly/3EFH6eL   Congratulations to Eva Ponce, Kellen B. and Miguel Rodríguez García and the team at MIT Center for Transportation & Logistics for putting together an excellent report. The full report is here: https://bit.ly/3FikIIL #SupplyChain #Warehouse #Technology #RiskManagement #MIT #promat2025 Jim Rice Chris Caplice Yossi Sheffi Alexis Bateman Rick Blasgen Matthias Winkenbach Maria Jesus Saenz Jarrod Goentzel Christopher Mejia Argueta Kellen B. Brian Laung Aoaeh, CFA Radu Palamariu Rushit Shah Dr. Marcell Vollmer Daniel Stanton Scott Luton Ravi Heerwani Gary S. Lynch Knut Alicke Kevin Lawton, CLTD Julian Counihan

Why Menu Mix Analysis Is the Hidden Driver of Catering Profitability In catering and multi-unit F&B operations, menu engineering is not a marketing exercise it is a financial and operational strategy that directly determines long-term profitability. Many leaders still evaluate menus only on sales volume, while the real impact lies in margin analysis, demand behavior, and cost dynamics. Step 1: Define the Financial Framework Contribution Margin (CM): Selling Price Food Cost per portion. Example: Dish A sells for $12, costs $4 to produce → CM = $8. Menu Mix % (MM%): (Units sold ÷ Total units sold) × 100. Example: Dish A sold 800 units out of 4,000 total → MM% = 20%. Weighted Contribution (WC): CM × Units Sold. This reveals the actual cash profit per dish, not just the margin percentage. Step 2: Build the Menu Engineering Matrix Each dish is placed into a quadrant: Stars (High CM, High MM%): Protect and promote. These are your anchors. Ensure consistency, availability, and marketing visibility. Plow Horses (Low CM, High MM%): Manage carefully. They generate volume but erode profit. Solutions include portion adjustments, supplier negotiations, or introducing premium versions. Puzzles (High CM, Low MM%): Push strategically. Often overlooked by guests but financially attractive. Improve through placement on the menu, staff upselling, or bundling with popular items. Dogs (Low CM, Low MM%): Rationalize. They consume resources without return. Remove or repurpose ingredients into higher-margin dishes. Step 3: Operational Insights Beyond Finance 1. Procurement: Menu engineering drives smarter purchasing. For example, knowing “Dish A” consumes 35% of chicken stock allows procurement to negotiate better contracts. 2. Labor Efficiency: Low margin, labor intensive dishes create “hidden costs.” Measuring prep time per dish ensures labor impact is factored into menu decisions. 3. Waste Management: Engineering highlights slow-moving items that tie up inventory and increase spoilage. 4. Menu Design Psychology: Placement, description, and pricing strategy (decoys, bundle pricing, anchoring) can shift guest demand toward profitable items. 5. Seasonality & Volatility: Quarterly reviews adjust menus for raw material price swings (meat, dairy, seafood) to safeguard margins. Step 4: Link to the P&L Outlet-Level P&L: Contribution analysis per dish rolls up into unit-level profitability. Multi-Unit Consolidation: Comparing the same dish across outlets reveals performance gaps (why a dish is a “Star” in Outlet A but a “Plow Horse” in Outlet B). Strategic Reporting: Menu engineering results should be presented alongside labor cost and overhead allocation to give leadership a full view of financial health. A disciplined menu engineering review every quarter transforms the menu into a strategic profit tool. Instead of chasing revenue, leaders focus on balancing sales mix, contribution, and operational impact.