I have attended a case presentation contest in my college today. To my wonder, frustration and disappointment, all the presenters stuck to the theory, frameworks and toed the line of academic presentations. I now wonder why? Why can't we present things differently? Why should we always stick to frameworks, generic and outdated strategies and borrowed ideas?
This made me think in terms of innovation. Is innovation so hard to come? How different or difficult is it to innovate? Or more fndamentally, should we always innovate? Are we expected to come out with kick ass ideas, jump start sales and double profits? I am sure it never happens in the real world. My idea of a case analysis is to raise pertinent questions and find simple answers just by evolving the question. If the frameworks come handy, so be it. But using frameworks for the sake of it, Sorry! Anyway the best guys got the prize, alls well that ends well. Isnt it?
This made me think in terms of innovation. Is innovation so hard to come? How different or difficult is it to innovate? Or more fndamentally, should we always innovate? Are we expected to come out with kick ass ideas, jump start sales and double profits? I am sure it never happens in the real world. My idea of a case analysis is to raise pertinent questions and find simple answers just by evolving the question. If the frameworks come handy, so be it. But using frameworks for the sake of it, Sorry! Anyway the best guys got the prize, alls well that ends well. Isnt it?
Comments