commodity called cash

It was on the slide.

https://gyazo.com/7b5e483d5dcc0aa4818a4580fa29732d

https://gyazo.com/6f2b945cf900a12b8365271b7e901cb2

2. basic stance on cooperation

In order to avoid "open innovation with just a mouthful," it is necessary to understand the win-win structure from the perspective of capability on the part of traditional companies and start-ups.

<What traditional companies need to understand

Seeds of innovation are held by startups (= not by traditional companies)

No technological or human legacy to build the "best possible solution based on current technology trends

Odds of innovation success are higher for startups (= more likely to fail in traditional firms)

Startups attack areas that can produce results relatively quickly due to availability of funds.

[Startups with low failure costs due to the lack of reputation building, and low operating costs due to their small organization and underdeveloped structure, can reach innovation success by making rapid PDCA cycles through quick management decisions that take advantage of their small organization.

Traditional companies cannot have what startups have.

Low break-even point, so products can be produced even if the market is not large.

https://gyazo.com/e0c3d6c5bb5fd2aa254e6eeb09476901

Collaboration

In the case of ownership of IP and deliverables, by starting from a spirit of equality based on differences in capability, it is possible to create a system that is more flexible, more flexible, more flexible, and more flexible.

Able to logically derive a win-win situation

From the explanation so far, it is clear that the logic that "because money was paid, the intellectual property and artifacts belong to the one who paid" is incorrect.

Traditional companies may have the money, but startups have the technology, the smarts, and the hands.

In fact, it would be more fair to say that traditional companies only offer the ubiquitous commodity of money.

→Since intellectual property and artifacts are created as a result of mutual resource allocation, the results are the property of both parties, and the distribution of the results should be based on the idea of "mutual property" and a fair distribution method should be considered.

Once we reach the foundation of "equitable distribution," we can create ZOPA (zone of possible agreement) to achieve marmalade distribution, since each of us wants different parts of the equation.

<Example of ZOPA

Traditional companies have an exclusive license for the specific field of application they wish to apply.

Purchase a license option if you have an application that you may use in the future outside of your specific field.

RoFR when licensing out to another entity in a different field or with a different product.

Call options on IP that they said they would implement but did not

⇒ The point is to realize a rational distribution of intellectual property in accordance with logic, without the traditional corporate side suffering from the irrational "intellectual property covet disease. In order to achieve this, it is important to have a clear definition of "what they want to do" and "what kind of strategy they are going to use for the collaboration.

relevance

---