“Radical innovation cannot be too radical if we want it to be commercially successful.

” Argue either in favor of or against

this statement.

I totally agree in this statement. Simply because a radical innovation holds a great potential, its success depends on a
well-cleared strategy. Companies must approach radical products with a clear perspective, finding a good strategic plan
to face the challenges associated with market such as acceptance, risk, and targeted marketing. Following these steps
can help introducing of radical innovations, so companies can optimize their chances of achieving both commercial
success and groundbreaking impact.

1. Finding a strategy to deal with Market resistance and Acceptance:

Introducing a radically innovative product can be met with resistance due to its departure from established norms and
consumer expectations. Consumers are generally more receptive to incremental changes rather than radical shifts. By
developing a strategic plan, companies can gradually introduce radical features or functionalities, allowing consumers to
adapt gradually and increasing the chances of acceptance and market penetration.

2. Finding a strategy for uncertainty and risk:

Radical innovations inherently involve a higher degree of uncertainty and risks. Without a well-thought-out strategy, the
chances of failure increase significantly. By carefully planning the product launch, companies can identify potential risks
and develop contingency measures. This strategic approach minimizes potential pitfalls and enhances the probability of
commercial success.

3. Finding a strategy to deal with Targeted Marketing and Communication:

Radical products often require a different marketing and communication strategy compared to conventional ones.
Companies must educate potential consumers about the benefits and value proposition of these groundbreaking
solutions. With a strategic plan in place, companies can find their marketing efforts to effectively highlight the unique
features, competitive advantages, and potential impact of the radical product. This targeted approach helps build
awareness, generate interest, and drive demand among the intended audience.

This is why finding a new strategy is important to introduce a radical innovation most of the time it is it the key to
success .unlike Xerox company who had the innovation product but they didn’t had any strategy to imply it to the
market so they lost their golden chance .

Do you see a logical contradiction in Xerox’s willingness to devote millions of dollars to support pure research sites like
the PARC and its refusal to commercially introduce the products developed?

After reading the case I cannot say there is logical contradiction in Xerox strategy in spending millions of dollars to
support the innovation and refusing to introduce the product to market. This might come from their unclear vision of
what to do next. They failed in finding a comprehensive strategy for their radical innovation ALTO instead they
introduced model 800. This shows their weakness in implying a well-designed long term strategy and management
failure in finding an innovative plan to their ALTO. So because of their illogic plan they lost their chance on 1979.
How does Xerox's strategic vision work in favor of or against the development of radical new technologies such as the
Alto?

As mentioned in the case study, first, they spent a lot of money to develop and research the ALTO. After while ALTO was
so advanced for them to handle .so, they shift to introduce other products. Finally, when competitor IBM released a new
electric typewriter, Xerox responded in the same incremental way.by this way they lost their chances to introduce their
Alto and all they were doing is to keep up with their competitors. By following A neck-to-neck strategy instead of
creating new strategies to introduce ALTO to the public.

What other unforeseeable events contributed to making Xerox’s executives unwilling to take any new risks precisely at
the time the Alto was ready to be released?

In the case study it was clear that Xerox stopped the Alto to introduce a safer product that has less risk and uncertainty
Model 800 was the given example. Such a decision was taken because that Xerox management was focusing on their
competitors such as IBM who lead in office automation and an IBM were rival companies. However , model 800 wasn’t
success at that time and Alto couldn’t do anything so they decided to start new projects.in short , we can say that
because of organizational structure at Xerox did not allow any one division or key manager to become the leader for
new technologies like the Alto.