研究与开发
您将了解市场领导者进行研究与开发 (R&D) 的方式、检查案例研究并探索当今具有前瞻性思维的公司的行动。
在本次培训中，您将
- 探索现代研究与开发 (R&D) 的状态。
- 了解亚马逊和谷歌如何进行研发。
- 了解研发指标。
- 探索研发最佳实践。
将要探索的技能
关于指南：
发现突破性产品有助于转型创新；一个新颖的概念可以一举颠覆一个行业，并使一家公司成为市场领导者。这是创新者的梦想。
令人沮丧的是，转型创新也难以捉摸。根据 杰 特威利格, writer for Creative Realities, Inc., an innovation consulting firm, “transformational innovation is exceedingly rare. Think about it: how many truly new-to-the-world ideas happen in a year? In a lifetime? Not many!”
The scarcity of breakthroughs is largely because few occur organically. Breakthroughs occur with hard work, focus, and often long-term effort to explore a vision, solve a problem, or tweak an existing prototype, and that’s all before the product is successfully brought to market. So, what is it that keeps firms investing heavily in R&D and pursuing ever-distant, world-changing concepts?
Perhaps the more realistic purpose of R&D investment is to sustain a competitive market position in an environment where advances are coming thick and fast. R&D investment builds the moats, through IP and operational efficiencies, that can secure a firm’s future amidst the seemingly infinite barrage of competition from corporates and startups alike. That is what R&D means to firms and why it is so important to them. Fall behind and fall out of the market.
研究与开发 (R&D) 自第一家公司成立以来就已存在。 由 Investopedia 定义 as “the investigative activities a business conducts to improve existing products and procedures or to lead to the development of new products and procedure.”
Some of the world’s most recognizable innovations are products of R&D labs. In the past, AT&T’s Bell Labs gave us the transistor and the cellular telephone. Today, we see R&D products in the form of Amazon Echo, Google’s autonomous car unit, and digital health wearables that measure heart vitals, temperature, and can track when someone falls. The breakthroughs are irrefutable — but what is less difficult to quantify, is how best to pursue R&D. What strategies work? How much should a firm invest in R&D? What factors lead to breakthroughs or transformation innovation?
The following two articles attempt to answer the questions that today’s CEOs and entrepreneurs have concerning the value of R&D, best practices to follow, and how to develop a focused plan that builds creativity and an R&D portfolio while technology is rapidly advancing around them.
现代研发现状
“The enterprise that does not innovate ages and declines. And in a period of rapid change such as the present, the decline will be fast.”
— 彼得·德鲁克, 传奇商业作家和管理顾问
在人工智能、增强现实和虚拟现实、机器人和 3D 打印等技术进步的推动下，对研发投资的兴趣正在上升。所有这些技术以及更多技术正在为改变我们生活和工作方式的新产品铺平道路。
这种胃口反映在庞大的研发企业预算上。专业研发税务顾问 Swanson Reed 报告说，2015 年， 美国企业研发支出达$3560亿，比上一年增加了近 5%。 Swanson Reed 还报告说，公司也将更多的自有资金投入到研发中，尤其是制造公司，占国内研发支出的 60% 以上。
这股研发活动的洪流，在某种程度上基于许多人认为研发是通往市场领导地位的方式，掩盖了研发支出与公司绩效之间没有科学相关性的事实。
战略和创新咨询公司 Benneli Jacobs 的管理合伙人 Tendayi Viki 认为， 研发支出在某种程度上与创新、收入增长和利润增加有关 只是一个假设。
PwC’s 战略＆ 发表了 1000 家最具创新力的公司 在过去 12 年或更长时间的年度报告中。有趣的是，每年前 10 名最具创新力的公司很少是研发支出前 10 名的公司。
So, why are companies investing so heavily in a strategy that has no empirical connection to profits?
从根本上说，公司花费在研发上是为了保持领先地位。虽然销售和运营使公司能够维持生计，但研发是公司必须利用的工具之一，以发展和为未来做好准备。与专注于发现和快速跟进机会的增长和创新工具中的其他一些工具不同，研发是一项长期战略，它创造了由知识产权和独特效率支持的原创护城河。虽然研发支出可能不会带来即时的利润丰厚的突破，但 使公司保持在公平的竞争环境中 随着技术和行业实践的进步（除了提供 税收优惠.)
大科技如何研发
虽然企业正在支出 比以往更 在研发方面，同时，国家层面的研发生产力是 在下降.此外， United States has dropped out of the top 10 in Bloomberg’s Innovation Index.
While R&D is struggling on a macro-level, the leaders in the modern economy — “ Big Tech” (Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, etc) — all have fruitful R&D programs. In the following section, we dive into examples of Big Tech R&D strategy.
Choosing an R&D strategy requires following a model, preferably one based on quantifiable data. One problem that Knott’s RQ highlights is the difficulty inherent in determining the impact of R&D.
R&D is difficult to benchmark among firms because R&D practices and strategies are unique to individual firms. For example, Amazon’s practice of expensing R&D hides the firm’s economic earnings. 根据瓦伦斯研究, for Amazon, “GAAP guidelines that require R&D costs to either be expensed or capitalized from acquisitions as in-process, or written off later leads to a low-quality earnings number and an unreliable balance sheet.”
因此，像诺特那样比较不同公司和行业的研发结果来寻找模式是很麻烦的。例如，科技公司在研发上的支出比美国任何其他公司都多（2017 年为 23%，根据普华永道）。相比之下，消费品 (CPG) 公司的支出仅占其中的一小部分（2017 年为 3%，根据普华永道），和 60% 到 80% 的预算 对现有产品进行翻新和维护。
来源： 普华永道创新 1000, 2017
放大科技公司，图片变得更加模糊。占收入的百分比， 苹果等公司在研发上的投入很少，为 3%，而 Facebook 则为 21%根据 Quartz 记者 Alice Truong 的说法。
来源： 长, 2014
行业和公司的比较是有问题的，因为有太多的变量。
This lack of relationship doesn’t mean R&D shouldn’t be pursued – Amazon, Facebook, Google, and Microsoft all have high (and increasing) R&D expenditures and are also considered some of the 世界上最具创新性.尽管研发是一个高度个性化的过程，并且在宏观层面上无法轻易衡量趋势，但我们可以将这些大型科技公司视为良好研发的宝贵示例来源。
研发案例研究
头条新闻体现了市场领导者之间正在进行的下一次突破性转型的竞赛。例如：
“Google continues its explosive spending on R&D,” Chris O’Brian, VentureBeat
“Amazon Is Spending Insane Amounts of Money on Research So That It Keeps Crushing Rivals,” 林赛·里滕豪斯， 街道
“Apple R&D Spend Exceeds $3 Billion for the First Time, up $410 Million from September,” 米奇坎贝尔, 苹果内幕
“Alibaba is Doubling its R&D Spend to $5 billion — But that’s Less Than a Third of What Amazon Spends,” 拉尼·莫拉, 重新编码
Here’s a closer look at two of the most interesting R&D leaders, Amazon and Google, and their approaches to R&D.
亚马逊：作为一种文化的研发
Amazon’s most visible efforts are found in Lab126, an R&D subsidiary based in Sunnyvale, California. This is the branch responsible for all of the hardware products tied to Amazon — the Kindle, Echo, and the [ashamed] Fire Phone. The lab 继续推出设备, launching the Echo Show, Echo Spot, and redesigning the Fire TV and original Echo — all within a matter of months.
据《华尔街日报》记者丹·加拉格尔 (Dan Gallagher) 称， 亚马逊 2017 年第二季度支出超过 $55 亿，同比增长超过 40%，该公司的研发支出没有放缓的迹象。
Amazon’s profitability has benefited from its growing cloud business, which has provided some buffer against the R&D spending that does not provide breakthrough products. But Amazon persists in R&D even in markets where it is already beating its rivals.
Amazon’s Echo dominates the voice-activated speaker market yet the company has issued a newer version that is priced 45 percent less than its predecessor, a move expected to increase the market value of Echo five-fold by 2026. And, referring to the Alexa platform, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos said: “expect us to double down.”
To better understand the origin of Amazon’s R&D strategy, we can look at Bezos’ 2010 致股东的信。 贝索斯解释了为什么亚马逊积极投资技术，而且它超越了 Lab126：
“All the effort we put into technology might not matter that much if we kept technology off to the side in some sort of R&D department, but we don’t take that approach. Technology infuses all of our teams, all of our processes, our decision-making, and our approach to innovation in each of our businesses. It is deeply integrated into everything we do.” Bezos adds, “these techniques are not idly pursued – they lead directly to free cash flow.”
This quote explains the importance of R&D activities while at the same time highlighting aspects of Amazon’s culture: innovation and growth are built into every segment of the company, not just R&D.
Amazon’s R&D strategy suggests many best practices. Here are two:
- 在整个组织中使用技术，而不仅仅是将其作为分区研发活动的一部分。
- 识别核心能力并最大限度地发挥它们。
Google X：寻找根本性突破
R&D, rather than siloed off to a separate corporate arm or department with a separate budget, is often tied throughout a company’s operations, as is evident in Bezos’ letter to shareholders. At the same time, R&D can also be responsible for many of these companies most ambitious (and sometimes bizarre) projects that are not part of a firm’s core competencies.
Google has a sandbox meant solely for these types of projects — “X.” X, aptly subtitled, “The Moonshot Factory,” focuses on radical projects that are 10 times better than any existing solution. Why? According to Astro Teller, director of Google X, a 10 times improvement is 通常比提高 10% 更容易.
Teller 解释说，在寻求 10% 的改进时，公司会依赖于现有的技术和解决方案，但是当拍摄 10 次时，一切都会发生。 Moonshots 处于一个巨大的问题、一个激进的解决方案和一项突破性技术之间的交叉点。
谷歌 X 最引人注目的努力是它的自动驾驶汽车项目，它作为一个名为 Waymo 的 Alphabet 子公司分拆出来。 Waymo Moonshot 的构图如下:
问题： 全球每年有近 125 万人死于道路上，其中 94% 的事故是由人为错误造成的。
激进的解决方案： What if cars could drive people safely from point A to point B at the push of a button — without needing a human to take over driving at any time?
突破性技术： 车辆可以具有内置传感器，以检测距离最多两个足球场的各个方向的行人、骑自行车者、车辆、道路工程等。智能软件可以预测物体和道路使用者的行为，帮助车辆在日常交通中安全驾驶。
- 来源： 威摩, 2017
今天，Waymo 是自动驾驶汽车领域的领跑者。 《财富》记者 Lucinda Shen 写道，摩根士丹利的分析师已经 estimated the firm’s value at or near $70 billion dollars. Waymo 于 2017 年与 Lyft 建立了合作伙伴关系，后者在美国的乘车服务量中排名第二。此外，沉报告称，Waymo 和本田即将敲定 建造自动送货车，这是一个巨大的商业化推动，它产生了 90%的收入 from advertising. But this success doesn’t come without struggles.
Google X kills projects — a lot of them. For every Waymo or Verily (Google X’s life science spinoff), there are countless projects that don’t make the cut. “仅去年一年我们就杀死了 100 多个调查,” Teller states in a 2017 Ted talk.
该组织行动迅速，经常失败，并根据反馈进行迭代。 Teller 描述了背后的思考过程 杀死他们的浮力货船项目:
“However cheap they would be in volume, though, we found out it was likely to cost close to $200 million for the R&D and materials to design and construct the first one. Since X is structured around tight feedback loops of making mistakes, learning, and new designs, $200 million is way too expensive for us to get the first data point on whether we’re on the right track.”
— 天文出纳员
这种成本效益分析必须贯穿每一个决策，从平凡到冒险。谷歌和亚马逊这两个组织都体现了对研发组合的掌握，将资源分配给渐进式和根本性的进步。
Google’s R&D strategy also suggests best practices that the lay company can apply:
- 以投资者和利益相关者的容忍度来平衡风险和潜在的突破目标。
- 制定残酷的投资组合选择策略。
研发优化的指标和最佳实践
“Chief executives struggle to make the case to the Street that their managerial actions can be relied on to yield a stream of successful new offerings…The pursuit of the new feels haphazard and episodic.”
— Bansi Nagji 和 Geoff Tuff, 摩立特集团合伙人
99% 的成熟公司在进入新市场时都失败了，这使得大胆的研发风险既高风险又成本高。对研发的长期投资可以在很长一段时间内产生收益，但对于寻求短期结果的投资者和董事会成员来说，这可能很难。然而，CEO 和企业可以制定研发战略，将长期投资和增长需求与治理、财务和竞争压力相结合。
The way that a portfolio is managed reflects a company’s organizational culture and infrastructure. If a company doesn’t already have a culture that accepts risk or an infrastructure that shields labs from day-to-day operations, then robust, data-driven assessments (ROI, value assessments) will be the only way to convince stakeholders to invest. But, this is short-sighted.
有关文化的更多信息，请参阅我们的 创新文化建设指南 包括来自 Microsoft、Netflix、Facebook 等的示例。
Bansi Nagji and Geoff Tuff are partners at Monitor Group and leaders of the firm’s global innovation practice. They have researched best practices for R&D portfolio management considering the pressures of market expectations, investors, and global competition.
Nagji 和 Tuff 讨论了他们纳入创新雄心矩阵的三种类型的研发或创新：核心创新，基于优化现有产品；相邻创新，扩展现有业务和产品；和转型创新，旨在开发突破性产品。
作者开发了创新雄心矩阵来帮助公司做出将资金分配给研发和增长计划的决定，并在他们的报告中详细解释了它 文章 在哈佛商业评论中。
Nagji 和 Tuff 解释说，对于某些项目，估算开发研发组合的回报很容易。在评估与核心业务一致的研发时，传统的财务指标（如净现值和投资回报率）是适用且直接的。这些计算假设了新产品或想法的采用率和价格点等变量，这对于核心产品是完全可行的。
However, where transformation efforts are concerned, making such assumptions is impractical. Some products are abstract, some products build platform stickiness and, in some cases, to quote the late Steve Jobs, “People don’t know what they want until you show it to them.” Estimating transformational ROI and attempting data-drive assessments, in this context, is pointless. Companies need to think differently.
创新野心矩阵
来源： 纳吉和凝灰岩, 2012
The matrix helps managers to assess ongoing R&D initiatives, the number of initiatives and the level of investment. It provides a way to shape the overall ambition for the company’s innovation, whether it be short or long-term small projects that complement existing products, or high-risk efforts that might offer a breakthrough or a bigger payoff.
But there’s an additional problem in addition to the difficulties in valuing transformational R&D strategies.Nagji and Tuff found that, because chief executives often do not have a strong grasp of the myriad initiatives that might already be underway in their organizations, 研发可能是偶然的和偶发的.
根据 Nagji 和 Tuff 的说法， “the companies that have a strong track record of creative endeavors articulate a clear R&D ambition, balance core and transformational ventures, and have the infrastructure, tools, and capabilities to manage and integrate initiatives.”
确定研发重点
Beyond the core, adjacent, and transformational lens introduced above, firms must decide on where to focus their R&D efforts in relation to their product offerings. For the majority of companies, the focus has shifted towards software. From Strategy&’s, “软件作为催化剂” report:
“Most of the world’s major innovators are in the midst of the same transformational journey. R&D is shifting more and more toward developing software and services. Software increasingly carries the burden of enabling product differentiation and adaptability, and enhancing customer experiences and outcomes.
This transition is for a good reason — it’s the same tactic that has skyrocketed tech giants ahead of the competition. According to Ben Thompson of Stratechery, “while digital infrastructure obviously needs to be maintained, by-and-large the investment reaps dividends far longer than the purchase of any physical good.”
— 战略＆
Thompson goes on to provide examples of the strides made due to tech giants’ R&D:
开发大型机的成本很高，但 IBM 可以重用专业知识来构建它们，最重要的是运行它们所需的软件；每个新的大型机都比上一个更有利可图。
开发 Windows 的成本很高，但微软可以在所有计算机上重复使用该软件；售出的每一台新电脑都是纯利润。
建立谷歌的成本很高，但搜索可以扩展到任何有互联网连接的人；每个新用户都是展示更多广告的机会。
开发 iOS 的成本很高，但该软件可以在数十亿部 iPhone 上使用，每部 iPhone 都能产生巨大的利润。
建立 Facebook 的成本很高，但该网络可以扩展到 20 亿人，而且还在不断增加，所有这些人都可以展示广告。
除了对软件的普遍偏好之外，指标还可以帮助指导公司在创建研发组合时的努力和支出。
— Ben Thompson, 亚马逊 Go 和未来, 2018
公司未能选择最佳研发组合的地方
与任何投资一样，研发应该随着时间的推移实现回报最大化。很多时候，治理、利益相关者和消费者的压力意味着短期发展优先于需要更长时间范围的激进变革。马里兰大学的 Rachelle Sampson 和 Yuan Shi 的一项研究 found a correlation between failure to invest in the long term and a decrease in a firm’s innovativeness.
But the issue isn’t as simple as telling executives to focus more on the future. There are many other factors that come into play when allocating funding to projects. A study by researchers Paola Criscuolo, Linus Dahlander, Thorsten Grohsjean, and Ammon Salter published in the Academy of Management journal 发现许多研发资助决策受到简单的人为偏见的破坏:
“The Biases That Keep Good R&D Projects from Getting Funded (…) R&D selection is not always based on objective estimates of a project’s costs and returns. We found that funding decisions in this organization were influenced by how novel a project seemed. Proposals that were deemed either too novel or not novel enough got little or no funding.”
— 克里斯库洛、达兰德、格罗斯让和索尔特
The illustration above developed by Criscuolo, Dahlander, Grohsjean, and Salter illustrates how R&D selection is not always conducted scientifically. How can this problem be overcome, and a best practice instituted for portfolio selection? Metrics can serve as the guide.
研发指标
研发组合
A portfolio for R&D should reflect a company’s position regarding risk and reward. According to Nagji and Tuff, that means building a portfolio that produces the highest overall return and that meets its appetite for risk.
在 管理您的创新组合、Bansi Nagji 和 Geoff Tuff 表示，非经济指标和内部指标的结合可以最好地评估早期阶段的转型努力。例如，研发计划的一项成就是团队通过探索和实验来学习。
“For example, what if the only hurdle an initiative must clear to receive continued investment is that the company is likely to learn (not earn) from it? That is how Google has assessed transformational innovation from the start,” state Nagji and Tuff.
This concept of valuing organizational learning can be a tough sell, but it’s an important one. The most innovative companies are all known for their tolerance of failure and their belief in building a learning organization. This is central to their cultures that fuel growth and innovation.
Metrics to measure learning are, therefore, crucial because when ROI is not a persuasive metric where investors are concerned – and it is not where transformational R&D is concerned – much of a company’s value is realized in the learning that is achieved and the knowledge and talent amassed in employees based on their professional experience both inside and outside the organization.
更可量化的传统衡量标准是专利数量。
衡量专利
The number of patents is one measure of R&D efficacy that has persisted for years. On the surface, this makes sense. Many researchers within R&D departments come from academic backgrounds and published papers are signals of success. However, this measure is the equivalent of a blunt instrument when assessing a firm’s innovativeness.
专利受制于 混杂变量的数量.例如，如果公司与一所大学合作，则专利的倾向更高。如果公司从事国际业务，则专利的倾向更高。此外，科技公司正朝着 开源软件开发, resulting in a lower propensity to patent. These factors hinder patents’ value as a measure of communicating value to stakeholders or the greater market.
这些限制促使专家创建新的指标，以更好地解决研发成功的复杂性。
现代研发指标
根据安妮·玛丽·诺特的说法, professor in Business at Washington University’s Olin Business School in St. Louis and author of the book “创新是如何运作的,” “despite all the experts dedicated to helping companies innovate, the money companies spend on R&D is producing fewer and fewer results. In fact, my research shows the returns to companies’ R&D spending have declined 65 percent over the past three decades.”
为了得出她的结论， Knott used a metric that she developed to measure R&D productivity – the output that firms get in return for innovation inputs – which she calls research quotient, or RQ. This metric is a useful one for managers trying to secure R&D budgets from decision makers and investors. RQ calculates the percentage increase in revenue from a 1 percent increase in R&D spending across the organization (for the theory of RQ, see “Estimating Firms’ 电阻研究商数 (RQ)”.)
Knott 认为公司 RQ 的下降反映了美国过去 30 年 GDP 增长的整体下降。
Knott 提出了三种理论，可以解释研发支出回报下降的趋势。首先是研发工作是 在当前时代更加困难，因为最好和最明显的想法很快就会被发现，而其余的想法则不那么新颖或具有开创性. The second theory is that there are diminishing returns to investment in research labor – more researchers decrease the number of innovations per worker due to duplicated efforts.
但 Knott 确实有另一种解释，那就是公司可能在研发方面变得更糟。
Knott researched the financial data of all publicly traded U.S. firms for the past 40 years and found patterns related to industry technological advancements that reflect already evident disruptions – for example, the replacement of typewriters by computers. Knott’s conclusion from her in-depth research is that companies are experiencing less growth from R&D efforts because they are worse at innovating, not because innovation has gotten harder.
But it’s not all doom and gloom. What Knott identified using RQ is that companies aren’t necessarily fated when an industry declines or is disrupted; they often find opportunities elsewhere by diversifying.
Knott claims that “if the top 20 firms traded on U.S. exchanges had optimized their 2010 R&D spending using the RQ method, the collective increase in market cap would have been an astonishing $1 trillion.”
Part of that optimization uses RQ to leverage the potential longer-term benefits. According to Knott, “RQ also allows companies to link changes in R&D strategy, practices, and processes more closely to profitability and value.”
将资源分配给核心、相邻和转型计划
Nagji and Tuff, referenced above, offer solutions on better optimizing R&D portfolios. The team conducted research on the industrial, technology, and consumer goods sectors that showed a pattern whereby the allocation of resources across core, adjacent, and transformational initiatives correlated with significantly better performance that was reflected in a firm’s share price.
According to Nagji and Tuff, “companies that allocated about 70 percent of their innovation activity to core initiatives, 20 percent to adjacent ones, and 10 percent to transformational ones outperformed their peers, typically realizing a P/E premium of 10 percent to 20 percent.”
While each company will look for a different balance depending on their risk profile, the authors stated that Google strives for a 70-20-10 balance and estimates that the 10 percent allocated to transformational efforts are responsible for the company’s new offerings.
Nagji 和 Tuff 表示，寻求赶上行业领导者的公司可能会选择风险更大的转型投资组合。一家已经占据主导地位的公司可能会决定降低风险并专注于核心计划，而不是转型计划。
并购作为一种新的研发形式
收购高科技初创公司的并购趋势已成为补充或模仿传统研发的流行策略。
据基金会称，在过去十年中，美国经济中基于技术的初创公司数量增长了近 50%。此外，风投支持的初创公司的就业和销售额增长比非风投支持的初创公司快 40%
包括 Garrett 在内的风险创业公司创始人小组与《洛杉矶时报》的 Paresh Dave 讨论了企业创新和投资。据 Salesforce 的马特·加勒特 (Matt Garratt) 称， it’s not just tech companies that are involved. Of the total number of tech acquisitions in 2016, Garratt says “around half were from non-tech buyers.”
The panelists noted that corporates who do invest and acquire tech startups are unfamiliar with the process and concepts such as “deal flow, diversifying bets, and portfolio company growth.”
We’ve built content detailing acquihires and technology acquisitions. Learn more about how M&A is being used to drive growth in our article “Why Pursue an M&A Strategy? Explore the Motivations Behind Deals and Best Practices to Help Them Succeed”
研发最佳实践
Based on Nahji and Tuff’s research and a case study analysis of Amazon and Google outlined in the previous article, “Research and Development – Who Does it Well and How,” we summarize some best practices of these market leaders.
- 阐明明确的研发目标（纳吉和凝灰岩，2012).
- 平衡核心和转型企业（纳吉和凝灰岩，2012).
- 在整个组织中使用技术，而不仅仅是作为分区研发活动的一部分（贝索斯，1997).
- 识别核心能力并最大限度地发挥它们（贝索斯，1997).
- 以投资者和利益相关者的容忍度来平衡风险和潜在的突破目标（纳吉和凝灰岩，2012).
- 制定残酷的投资组合选择策略（谷歌 X, 2016).
This dive into the R&D landscape has highlighted some best practices that companies can use toward a better strategy for their R&D efforts. Whether the decision is to pursue transformational innovation and the next breakthrough or to focus on broad learning through acquiring or strategic M&As, we hope we’ve offered some valuable data and insights. Below are additional resources that can supplement our R&D compendium.