To Disrupt or
To Be Disrupted


To Disrupt or To Be Disrupted

Many people may have failed to notice the exponential growth technology has enjoyed and has slowly s tarted to alter what customers want.

Many businesses who are steadfast in their beliefs and in their old ways have been faced with constant barrage of problems, and even the giants such as Blockbuster, Kodak, or even retailers such as Toy R Us, all have experienced bankruptcy or corporate downsizing.

In contrast, recently emerging corporations such as Google, Netflix, or Tesla only spent a short amount of time to grow and acquired immense wealth by utilizing completely novel forms of innovation.


Corporate Innovation is the winning keyto stay ahead of the curve in this fast-moving world.


Innovations are ways of thinking, practices, or the creation of new things which lead to a change for the better, or to solve problems encountered, just as Sergey Brin and Larry Page created their own search engine after deciding that the search engines available on the Internet twenty years back couldn’t really provide an answer to users’ demands.

Closer to home, in Thailand, SCG represents one of the case studies of a large organization who has been around for more than a hundred years whilst still retaining its position as an industry leader by continually adapting itself to the ever-changing world. Its 3 core businesses, in cement, construction materials, and chemicals, all have constantly engaged in developments and deployments of innovations in their operations. These range anywhere from being advanced and safe (CiBot, an analytical robots monitoring piping system in boilers that can work faster than any human can and can temperature), to energy-saving (Emisspro, a heat-reducing chemical coating to aid fuel-saving measures) to being environmentally conscious (FEST, a food packaging material which is biodegradable), and more.

It can be seen that these organizations all have begun with the generation of ideas, along with utilizing their skills and sound managements to give rise to new forms of businesses to best satisfy customers’ demands in various ways. This paved the way for them to becoming advantageous in business competitions. On the contrary, having a technology at hand while failing to bring it to solving a problem leads to nothing but wasted opportunity. Case in point: an engineer at Kodak was responsible for discovering a technology which essentially gave birth to digital cameras since almost 40 years ago, but the organization’s executives opposed core business, which was in producing photographic films. This resulted in Kodak becoming a market follower, rather than a leader in the newly emerging digital camera business, and it was all because the organization chose to comply to its own belief rather than responding to what the consumers truly wanted.