Modul 4

April 30, 2019

By valebala100

When looking through the ideas to screen I realize I am very biased to what I believe would work for myself, thus not talking into consideration that many of the ideas target the general population and not solely academics or students.  I also noticed that even though I liked an idea and it could be implemented and serve people it was in the end given a low score due to the fact that it was not going to generate any money.

These are, in a way, the very same questions we are asking ourselves in my company. Even though our customers might enjoy our new implemented ideas, in the end, if it does not help us grow and make us money to further develop our business the idea is a dead end. We are investing in something with no future return. Thus, the idea screening within the company is made with the presumption that the idea that we pick will help us generate more customers and increase our revenue down the road.

The question I find myself asking from reading all the ideas from my fellow course colleagues is:

Is it right to withhold and investment in something that will do good but won’t generate a return?

In many of the ideas posted the incentive from my side to invest was low due to the fact that the return would be minimal. My opinion is that a company cannot survive solely from wanting to do good, there must be an incentive to make profit. One way that our company works with this is by laying out our top chosen ideas and then comparing the cost of implantation to “the good of the customer” (kundnyttan). This way we can roughly estimate what value per invested krona we get from a specific investment. By doing this we narrow down the options and compare the possible outcomes. Furthermore, by involving our clients in the final selection we are guarding ourselves from “picking the wrong idea”.