For “knowledge-based” to be more than a buzzword, managers must recognize that the concept has little to do with the kind of products they sell. Whether it‘s a cement maker like Holcim or a financial services company like CapitalOne, a company‘s knowledge base is predicated on how it uses knowledge to change processes, overcome traditional boundaries, set strategy, and create a corporate culture.

Does the belief that a manager‘s overriding duty is to maximize shareholder returns encourage socially destructive actions by corporations? Employing economic, legal and behavioral analyses, the author concludes that, although the shareholder theory is often inaccurately maligned, stakeholder theory may be more conducive to curbing the kind of impropriety seen at Enron and Global Crossing.

Although much has been written about how to manage joint ventures effectively, an estimated 50% to 60% of them fail. Examining joint ventures at General Mills and Nestlé, Ericsson and Hewlett-Packard, and Motorola, France Telecom and Orascom, among others, the author identifies five formation-stage minefields that can sabotage the relationship and ultimately damage its performance.

A generation of managers is obsessed with the idea of dramatic, turbulent change. This is misguided hype, say the authors. Drawing on management literature, history and company examples such as IBM, General Electric and British Airways, they contend that a sensible framework for change must recognize the subtle interplay of its various forms as well as the importance of stability and continuity.

For many years, when it came to setting goals, organizations took a top-down approach. It made sense: Goal setting requires information of the sort only top-level managers had, and it was their job to make the calls and pass them along to the lower levels of the company. Of course, this approach usually failed to [...]

The next practices of innovation must shift the focus away from products and services and onto experience environments -- supported by a network of companies and consumer communities -- to co-create unique value for individual customers.

Much attention has been paid to the negative implications of disruptive innovation for established companies. However, on the basis of research in a variety of industries (computers, heart-care, publishing and others) and at companies such as Johnson & Johnson, Teradyne, Hewlett-Packard and Knight Ridder, the author says that disruption always creates new net market growth and, to tap into it, disrupted companies should go on the offensive, seeking customers who are off their radar.

Leadership consists of opposing strengths, and most leaders have a natural tendency to overdevelop one at the expense of its counterpart. The resulting imbalance diminishes their effectiveness. But leaders who work to guard against such lopsidedness can increase their versatility and their impact.

The authors demonstrate how social-network analytic techniques can reveal the “energizers”

When a new technology begins to transform an industry, incumbents have only three viable strategic responses, say the authors, and each is characterized by immediate or eventual integration with the parent. As evidence, they draw on several studies encompassing more than 150 companies in a variety of industries. Case illustrations include Silicon Graphics, CVS, Walgreens, Charles Schwab and Merrill Lynch.

Although more and more companies are outsourcing innovation from early development to commercialization, many lack a comprehensive approach. The authors outline a variety of strategies that, contingent upon particular business needs, can systematically rationalize outsourcing goals and processes. Their research spans diverse industries — pharmaceuticals, high technology/electronics, automotive, retail, and oil and chemicals — and 40 companies, including Eli Lilly, Marks & Spencer and Procter & Gamble.

Although customer satisfaction practices have garnered attention for decades, they are losing effectiveness for companies and their customers. Pointing to the case of Volvo Cars, the author argues that companies expend too much effort fixing what has “gone wrong”

The potential for new information technologies such as broadband networks, mobile communications and the Internet to transform businesses often goes unrealized because companies have no clear guidelines on when and how to best employ them. To help managers make that determination, the authors identify 10 specific drivers on the basis of their research at 20 large North American and European companies, including easyJet, Toys ‘R‘ Us and Eastman Chemical Co.