At the Epicenter of COVID-19-the Tragic Failure of the Global Supply Chain for Medical Supplies.

The tragic failure of the global supply chain in the face of the current coronavirus outbreak has caused acute shortages of essential frontline medical devices and personal protective equipment, crushing fear among frontline health workers and causing fundamental concerns about the sustainability of the health system. Much more coordination, integration, and management of global supply chains will be needed to mitigate the impact of the pandemics. This article describes the pressing need to revisit the governance and resilience of the supply chains that amplified the crisis at pandemic scale. We propose a model that profiles critical stockpiles and improves production efficiency through new technologies such as advanced analytics and blockchain. A new governance system that supports intervention by public-health authorities during critical emergencies is central to our recommendation, both in the face of the current crisis and to be better prepared for potential future crises. These reinforcements offer the potential to minimize the compromise of our healthcare workers and health systems due to infection exposure and build capacity toward preparedness and action for a future outbreak.

How open innovation can help you cope in lean times.

A recession often forces you to cut R&D as you refocus on your core. But innovation need not go by the wayside. By placing certain assets and projects outside your walls, you can actually preserve opportunities for future growth while you shore up the fortress. Chesbrough, of Haas School of Business, and Garman, of New Venture Partners, identify five strategic moves that open the door to innovation by, ironically, letting it out of the house. Some inside-out moves permit outside firms to invest in and develop your projects; others call for spinning off projects as separate ventures that still allow you to retain some equity. Whatever the specific approach, you can meet the inherent cultural and organizational challenges of inside-out open innovation by approaching it holistically and placing it under the leadership of senior executives in strategic roles.

A better way to innovate.

Harvard professor Henry Chesbrough takes a look at leading-edge companies' latest moves to harvest ideas from outside and to benefit from sharing their own R&D with others--even with competitors.

Making sense of corporate venture capital.

Large companies have long sensed the potential value of investing in external start-ups, but more often than not, they fail to get it right. Remember the dash to invest in new ventures in the late 1990s and the hasty retreat when the economy turned? This article presents a framework that will help a company decide whether it should invest in a particular start-up by first understanding what kind of benefit might be realized from the investment. The framework--illustrated with examples from Intel, Lucent, and others--explains why certain types of corporate VC investments proliferate only when financial returns are high, why other types persist in good times and in bad, and why still others make little sense in any phase of the business cycle. The framework describes four types of corporate VC investments, each defined by its primary goal--strategic and financial--and by the degree of operational linkage between the start-up and the investing company. Driving investments are characterized by a strong strategic rationale and tight operational links. Enabling investments are also made primarily for strategic reasons, but the operational links are loose. Emergent investments, which are characterized by tight operational links, have little current--but significant potential--strategic value. Passive investments, offering few potential strategic benefits and only loose operational links, are made primarily for financial reasons. Passive corporate VC investments dry up in a down economy, but enabling and driving investments usually have more staying power. That's because their potential returns are primarily strategic, not financial. In other words, they can foster business growth. Emergent investments may make sense even in a weak market because of their potential strategic value--that is, their ability to help companies identify and spark the growth of future businesses.