Part A: Please Respond To The Following Discussion Question

Part Aplease Respond To The Followingdiscuss Whether The Term Corpor

Part Aplease Respond To The Followingdiscuss Whether The Term Corpor PART A Please respond to the following: Discuss whether the term "corporate entrepreneurship" is an oxymoron. Can corporations—especially large ones—be innovative? Support your answer with examples. Use the Internet to find an example of two corporate innovations—one brought about through autonomous strategic behavior and one developed through induced strategic behavior. Which innovation seems to hold the most promise for commercial success, and why?

Part B Please respond in a paragraph of at least 5–7 sentences to fully address the question(s). Then, respond to at least one classmate’s post. Be sure to use your own words! If libraries were closed and access to information privatized, what would be the impact on communities and schools? Perform a quick internet search for local libraries. How many did you locate? If they were all to close or become restricted, where would individuals go to receive vital information? Is there a situation in which restricting access to information would be beneficial to society?

Paper For Above instruction

The concept of "corporate entrepreneurship" often evokes the question of whether entrepreneurship and large corporate structures can coexist without contradiction, raising the debate of whether the term is an oxymoron. Traditionally, entrepreneurship involves innovation, risk-taking, and agility, traits that large, established corporations sometimes struggle to emulate due to bureaucracy and inertia. However, evidence suggests that large corporations can indeed foster innovative behaviors, challenging the notion that entrepreneurship is exclusive to startups or smaller firms. For example, companies like Google and Apple exemplify large corporations that consistently introduce revolutionary products and services, embodying entrepreneurial spirit within their organizational frameworks.

Google's development of the Android operating system exemplifies autonomous strategic behavior—an initiative driven by an internal team seeking to innovate independently of the company's existing product lines. This autonomous approach allowed Google to create a new and profitable ecosystem, ultimately becoming a dominant force in mobile technology. Conversely, induced strategic behavior can be seen in Apple's launch of the iPhone, which was driven by top-down strategic decisions aligned with market research and leadership vision. These innovations through induced strategies are often a result of deliberate corporate initiatives aimed at capturing emerging market opportunities.

Assessing which innovation holds more promise for commercial success depends on various factors such as market adaptability, scalability, and consumer acceptance. While Apple's iPhone revolutionized mobile communication and became a massive commercial success, Google's Android system has also captured a significant share of the smartphone market due to its open-source nature and adaptability across diverse devices. Between the two, the Android platform's widespread adoption suggests it may have greater long-term potential in terms of market penetration and commercialization, especially because of its flexible licensing model and compatibility with multiple manufacturers. This demonstrates how autonomous innovation can sometimes lead to broader market impact, potentially offering higher commercial promise.

Regarding the impact of the closing or restriction of local libraries, such developments could drastically affect communities and schools by limiting access to critical information, learning resources, and technological support. Many libraries serve as essential community hubs, providing free access to books, internet, and educational programs. A quick online search shows that numerous local libraries exist across different regions, highlighting their widespread importance. If all were to close or restrict access, individuals would need to turn to alternative sources such as internet cafes, community centers, or digital resources, which may not be accessible to everyone, especially in underserved areas. Restricted access to information could impede educational opportunities, widen inequality, and reduce community engagement. Nonetheless, in certain situations—such as in national security or public safety—restrictions might temporarily benefit society by preventing misinformation or protecting sensitive information. Ultimately, while some restrictions could be justified in specific contexts, maintaining open access to libraries remains vital for promoting inclusive education and community development.

References

• Christensen, C. M. (1997). The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Harvard Business Review Press.
• Guth, W. D., & Ginsberg, A. (1990). Guest Editors' Introduction: Corporate Entrepreneurship. Strategic Management Journal, 11(4), 5-15.
• Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1994). Competing for the Future. Harvard Business School Publishing.
• Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Harvard University Press.
• Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The Promise of Entrepreneurship as a Field of Research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217-226.
• Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating Dynamic Capabilities: The Nature and Microfoundations of (sustainable) Enterprise Performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.
• Yoffie, D. B., & Kim, R. (2010). Apple Inc. in 2010. Harvard Business School Case.
• Zahra, S. A., & Pearce II, J. A. (1989). Board of Director Involvement in Restructuring: Effects on Extra-Role Behaviors in Strategic Decision Making. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3), 554-576.
• Zeitz, G., et al. (1997). In Search of Corporate Entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(4), 285-310.
• Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business Model Generation. John Wiley & Sons.