No flash player!

Generally speaking, technology companies grow through either innovating in technology or in markets.  Most of the time, the company grows by incrementally improving their technology or by modestly extending their markets.  This is the bread and butter of the existing Strategy Business Units (SBUs) and progress is ground out by existing general mangers, marketing managers, and engineers. 

On the other hand, changing both the technology and the market is extremely dangerous and an established company has little competitive advantage heading down this path.  After all, who in the company has the seasoned judgment to make the right decisions on technology and marketing?  What infrastructures exist to drive competitive advantage?  Who hears the voice of the customer?

Two generally fruitful areas for attempting to supercharge growth are changing either the market or the technology (but not both).  Note that, of these, changing the market is generally considered to be the more risky.  The very same dynamic that mundanely and virtuously drives corporate productivity improvement is inimical to the growth effort.  General managers are squeezed and squeezed for improved margin.  Anything that costs resources is a natural target for the ax.  Growth efforts generally need faith and protection for many quarters.

In creating a new market, one will have to eventually create a new SBU to focus on that market.  In creating a new technology, one can keep within the existing SBU structure, though enhanced corporate protection is often required, e.g., the nurturing environment of a corporate laboratory.