Skip to main content

Innovation in the Automobile Industry

In the 1900s the automobile industry was the most important and innovation industry in the USA.  But one could question if this was good for our society in the long run.  And one could question if they actually innovated.

In the early 1900s there were few automobiles, very little infrastructure created to support the industry.  For example the road system was still designed for horse drawn wagons and the wagon wheel (remember a steal rim and wooden compression spoke wheel).  The future US Highways, or the 1950s Interstate Highway System at the cost of $425 billion were decades and many innovations away. There was no gas service station, there were however horse stables, farriers, and blacksmiths in each town along the roads.  There was no real "road map", there was no road naming system, like was created in 1926 - the United States Numbered Highway System.

The industry employees millions of people, and was a large factor in the economy of the USA.  It created or was created by major cities in the USA - for example Detroit.  Countless pattens are related to the industry, yet what has been truly innovative about the industry.  I'm sure we could list wonderful innovations from the industry.
Roberts Electric Car -1896
This is a partial list, but if you look at the history of each of these inventions a pattern emerges.  The pattern is one of slow innovation, delay in introduction of improvements, and sometimes downright refusal to adopt life saving improvements without government interventions.  But the innovation that tops them all is the internal combustion engine.  The first automobiles had a variety of propulsion methods.  The combination of petrol's energy storage and the internal combustion engine create a real innovation.  However it wasn't a quick adoption either.  And it displaced a technology that might have been a better alternative - the electric vehicle (e.g. the 1896 Roberts EV gets 40 miles on a charge, same as the 2010 GM Volt).  Yes, early options were both steam driven and electric motor driven autos.  So why did the petrol version win the market share?

Perhaps it had something to do with the petroleum industry - a synergy of innovations.  The ease of oil drilling and distillation created a ready source of energy in a compact form for use in autos.  And the two industries became very powerful.  Capable of controlling the political process with respect to  many aspects of air quality, safety of the populations, protection of the environment, legislation of all types, and the ability to protect access to  resources via waging wars.

Had the electrical generation and distribution industry been a few decades earlier in development perhaps we would have a different transportation system.  One that was based on Telsa's AC Motor and wireless power transmission.  Perhaps we would be 20 years closer had GM not killed the EV in 1990s.
Tesla Roadster vs Bugatti Chiron
This morning (Jan. 2018) sitting in the Original Pancake House, the table beside us was talking of Tesla Motor Company and the CEO Elon, as if they were the best of pals and they were very proud of Elon's many endeavors.  Being a stock holder I found this overheard conversation encouraging.  And it go me thinking ... do I know the CEO's of any of the other auto companies?  No, no I don't, I wonder if you do?  Then investigating I ran across this article:

New CEO Jim Hackett has promised a new way forward for Ford, including "a total redesign of the surface transportation system with humans and community at the center."
And one article leads to the other:

That starts with two new, fully electric models next year—then at least 18 more by 2023.
Yet, innovation comes from the disruptors:

"Dyson has vast experience with electric motors, and is constantly working to make them more powerful and efficient. Those motors, which power everything from air conditioners, to pool pumps, to heavy machinery, use 40 percent of electricity globally. Making them even a little bit better would lead to big energy savings—and give Dyson a competitive advantage."
See Also:

Nokia's CEO Elop's Announces a Burning Platform - What does a good Product Owner Need?

From Names to Numbers: The Origins of the U.S. Numbered Highway System by Richard F. Weingroff

Steve Job's 2001 eHub strategy plays out... What competes with an iPad?
Post a Comment

Most Popular on Agile Complexification Inverter

Exercise:: Definition of Ready & Done

Assuming you are on a Scrum/Agile software development team, then one of the first 'working agreements' you have created with your team is a 'Definition of Done' - right?

Oh - you don't have a definition of what aspects a user story that is done will exhibit. Well then, you need to create a list of attributes of a done story. One way to do this would be to Google 'definition of done' ... here let me do that for you: Then you could just use someone else's definition - there DONE!

But that would be cheating -- right? It is not the artifact - the list of done criteria, that is important for your team - it is the act of doing it for themselves, it is that shared understanding of having a debate over some of the gray areas that create a true working agreement. If some of the team believes that a story being done means that there can be no bugs found in the code - but some believe that there can be some minor issues - well, …

Elements of an Effective Scrum Task Board

What are the individual elements that make a Scrum task board effective for the team and the leadership of the team?  There are a few basic elements that are quite obvious when you have seen a few good Scrum boards... but there are some other elements that appear to elude even the most servant of leaders of Scrum teams.

In general I'm referring to a physical Scrum board.  Although software applications will replicated may of the elements of a good Scrum board there will be affordances that are not easily replicated.  And software applications offer features not easily implemented in the physical domain also.

Scrum Info Radiator Checklist (PDF) Basic Elements
Board Framework - columns and rows laid out in bold colors (blue tape works well)
Attributes:  space for the total number of stickies that will need to belong in each cell of the matrix;  lines that are not easy eroded, but are also easy to replace;  see Orientation.

Columns (or Rows) - labeled
    To Do
    Work In P…

Webinar: Collaboration at Scale: Defining Done, Ready, and NO.

I was invited to participate in a Scrum Alliance Webinar.  Maybe you would like to listen to us in a discussion of techniques to collaborate at scale (remotely and with many people).  The topic is one that I've got some experience in discussions - yet I never seem to get to done...
Collaboration at Scale: Defining Done and Ready and NO for Distributed Teams
With Joel Bancroft-Connors, Agile Organizational Coach; David A. Koontz, Agile Transition Guide; and Luke Hohmann, CEO and Founder of Conteneo, Inc.

14 February 2018 11 a.m. ET (USA).

The Scrum Guide is pretty clear on the criticality of the definition of Done: "When a Product Backlog item or an Increment is described as "Done," everyone must understand what "Done" means. However, the Scrum Guide ALSO says that the definition of Done can "vary significantly per Scrum Team." This leads us to examine when and how the definition of Done should vary, how distributed teams should cr…

A T-Shaped 21st Century Knowledge Worker

Knowledge workers in the 21st Century must have many areas of deep knowledge, while also be capable of collaboration across multiple other domains with dissimilar T-shaped individuals.  This description of a person is a metaphor.  Compare it to the shape of the "I" in the classic saying there is no "I" in Team.

I first read about Scott Ambler's term "Generalizing Specialist" - but it's so hard to remember the proper order of the words... get it backwards and it has an inverted meaning... T-Shaped is easier to remember. 
A generalizing specialist is someone who:
Has one or more technical specialties (e.g. Java programming, Project Management, Database Administration, ...). Has at least a general knowledge of software development. Has at least a general knowledge of the business domain in which they work. Actively seeks to gain new skills in both their existing specialties as well as in other areas, including both technical and domain areas.  General…

A FAILURE to Communicate

I was working with a failing team some time ago.  I use "failing" to describe the outcome of the team - not the people on the team.  Are you OK with that description?

An issue arrose in the stand up - a team member that was to verify the quality of a procedure did so and reported that there were a few records that didn't match expectation in the data set.  Upon inquire the number of records not matching was over 2000.  Most people acknowledged immediately the exaggeration - I could tell by the laughter.  After about 10 minutes of discussing the details of the problem - it appeared the team had a handle on the specific situation.

I stopped the discussion and inquired if they could name the impediment.  One team member did a great job of describing the impediment as a _communication gap_.  Wonderful - I could work with that - the problem had a name and it didn't include anyones Proper Name.

"If the problem has a first name; we are going to have a problem."