DOCSLIB.ORG

En and the Art of Selling by Robert M

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
En and the Art of Selling by Robert M THE AUTHORITY ON THE FUTURE OF TECHNOLOGY May/June 1992 A Better Mousetrap www.technologyreview.com Selling Consciousness Selling versus Engineering Selling Curriculum en and the Art of Z BY ROBERT M. METCALFE ’68 Selling Zen and the Art of Selling by Robert M. Metcalfe wenty-eight years ago I was an The meeting fell silent as I sketched world went to support the selfless teachers MIT freshman, and I wish some- my concept for a better mousetrap and and researchers at MIT’s Robert Metcalfe Tone had sold me then what I plan to then sat back. A moment of suspense Laboratory for Mousetrap Technology. sell you now—the idea that selling is an passed, and then the meeting came alive art to practice no matter what your calling. with enumerations of the many advan- After decades of painful on-the-job sales tages of the mousetrap I had proposed— Selling Consciousness training, I am sad to find that the MIT cul- all in what seemed to me like slow mo- I have been waking up from this fantasy ture, at all levels, is still permeated with tion. As enthusiasm built, and after only for 28 years. In reality, inventors who be- the notion that professional salespeople my occasional corrective interjection, lieve that better mousetraps automatically are properly placed in the food chain just a consensus formed around what was bring the world to their door are in the below green slime. thereafter referred to, on every occasion, lowest of the four states of selling con- That attitude relegates too many MIT as “Bob’s mousetrap idea.” sciousness: the unappreciated state. And students to bleak Saturday nights alone, For years after the meeting, my long, they are probably alone in the bushes. because they think it unseemly to do contemplative weekends were too often I moved up to the next higher state of the bit of selling conducive to lining up interrupted by ceremonies at which I selling consciousness when I ventured a date. But there are also serious profes- graciously accepted prestigious awards out to hit people over the head with facts sional and institutional effects as well as for my mousetrap idea and its many de- they were too lazy or stupid to find out personal ones: Too many MIT professors rivatives, all of which, no matter how re- for themselves—that they should have are marginalized and their ideas ignored, mote, were scrupulously traced back and been beating a path to my door, buy- not in technical journals or academics or credited to me. I was invited to posh par- ing my mousetraps. In this state of con- science, but where they are most needed: ties by the most hip and happening mouse sciousness—the argumentative state—I in the corridors of power. Too many MIT exterminators and was approached often told people to buy my mousetraps. They administrators, paralyzed by false notions with outrageous propositions from beau- argued with me, I snickered at their igno- of academic dignity, fail to put MIT’s best tiful strangers. rance, and I expected that my clever and feet aggressively forward to win the Ivy Among the many checks I received decisive counterarguments would force League endowments that MIT deserves. spontaneously in the mail, I cashed only them to buy. This occasionally worked, And too many MIT entrepreneurs launch those from companies whose commercial but only up to an unsatisfying point. companies that give no thought to selling applications of my mousetrap idea were In our free-market system, of course, and so promptly crash and burn. socially responsible, environmentally sen- people are not compelled, even by I can tell you firsthand that selling is sitive, and politically correct. My fantastic overbearing cleverness, to buy a better one of the highest arts in entrepreneur- wealth grew, and all but the modest frac- mousetrap. And so, with experience and ship. Most companies, even successful tion required to support my ascetic ex- desire to succeed, I moved up to the third high-tech companies in Silicon Valley, istence in various hideaways around the state of selling consciousness: suffering spend 10 times more on selling than on fools gladly. I quietly listened to con- engineering. And if it’s proof you need, cerns about buying my mousetraps and then read “How to Succeed in Business: was careful not to call them stupid. I ex- An Interview with Edward B. Roberts,” Most of our plained in single-syllable words why my in the February/March 1992 Technology mousetraps were superior. I found that Review. Roberts shows the strong correla- reluctance to people respond positively to politeness tion between the success of startups and and simplicity. Increased sales resulted. the marketing orientation—the sales con- sell comes from I have observed, however, that people sciousness—of their founders. stuck in the fool-suffering state of sell- In short, nothing happens until some- ing consciousness are twisted by their thing gets sold. fear that if we own insincerity and soon stoop to the So now let me tell you about a fanta- kind of overselling and underdelivery sy of mine to which I think MIT grads ask for the order that have given sales its poor reputa- will relate. tion. What ultimately separates the we will be told sheep from the goats in this field is A Better Mousetrap understanding that prospective buyers “NO.” of mousetraps are not fools. I learned It began with my attending a meeting that they are in fact experts—in know- about better ways to catch mice. The ing what they need. When they did not meeting opened with a superficial dis- buy my mousetraps, it was either be- cussion of mousetraps, to which I per- cause they didn’t need them or because functorily listened. Having settled on I failed to sell them competently. one of several ideas that occurred to me Now, in this fourth and highest state during the discussion, I spoke. of selling consciousness, I learned to Technology Review May/June 1992 listen to prospective buyers to find the Toward the end they would learn the maximum overlap between their mouse- difference between sales and market- elimination needs and the mousetraps I ing. It would be hard to cram all this had to offer. I worked hard to understand into the existing four-year programs, my buyer. I learned to communicate the but selling, like engineering, requires benefits of my mousetraps, first estab- lifelong learning. lishing my credibility and always keep- So now, while I work on getting MIT ing in mind that it is not mousetraps that to establish the new Interdisciplinary buyers need, but fewer mice. “ elling is a Program in Selling, perfecting your sales I learned to ask buyers for their order, S skills is something that each of you has to listen for their objections, to handle to do on your own. Start with the most objections creatively, and to ask for high calling, and intimidating part of selling—asking for their order again … and again. I deliv- the order. Most of our reluctance to sell ered my mousetraps when needed and I learned to revel comes from our fear that if we ask for ensured that buyers were satisfied. the order, we will be told no. This was selling as a high calling, in the subtleties If there is one trick to selling, it is get- and I learned to revel in the subtleties ting over the fear of rejection, and I can of its practice. of its practice.” suggest a strategy for doing it. Decide that you are going to sell some- thing today. Start with something simple, Selling versus Engineering joint subsets: the set of buyers (includ- like selling the idea of going to a partic- ing my mother) who will automatically ular restaurant for lunch. Find a couple Let me flash a few numbers by you about buy mine, the set of all mousetrap buy- the relative importance of selling and en- of people with whom you would like to ers who will never buy mine (parents of have lunch and ask them to go with you gineering. Let’s say a buyer spends $181 my competitors and the like), and the set on a Metcalfe Mousetrap. Right off the to this restaurant. Then force yourself to of mousetrap buyers who will buy mine stop talking so you can listen to the an- top, $81 goes to distribution—the out- only when competently sold. side people responsible for locally sell- swer. If they say yes, you can move on to Clearly the sizes of these sets vary more challenging sales situations. ing and delivering our product. Believe both absolutely and relatively, but the me, they earn it. But what if your worst fears are real- third set is much larger than many MIT ized, and your associates say no? This is Of the $100 after distribution, about people think. Selling matters. $50 goes to manufacture the mouse- it, the moment of truth. Smile and just traps, including $40 to buy the parts, $9 ask why. Listen to the objections and try for overhead, and $1 for the direct labor Selling Curriculum to deal with them. The way to overcome to actually assemble the device. Admin- that paralyzing fear of rejection—the istrative expenses absorb $5, taxes take Let’s say I am successful in selling the whole trick of selling—is to hear “no” as $7, and shareholders receive $10 for the MIT faculty on the importance of sell- a learning opportunity. That’s the distil- use of their capital.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Marconi Society - Wikipedia
    9/23/2019 Marconi Society - Wikipedia Marconi Society The Guglielmo Marconi International Fellowship Foundation, briefly called Marconi Foundation and currently known as The Marconi Society, was established by Gioia Marconi Braga in 1974[1] to commemorate the centennial of the birth (April 24, 1874) of her father Guglielmo Marconi. The Marconi International Fellowship Council was established to honor significant contributions in science and technology, awarding the Marconi Prize and an annual $100,000 grant to a living scientist who has made advances in communication technology that benefits mankind. The Marconi Fellows are Sir Eric A. Ash (1984), Paul Baran (1991), Sir Tim Berners-Lee (2002), Claude Berrou (2005), Sergey Brin (2004), Francesco Carassa (1983), Vinton G. Cerf (1998), Andrew Chraplyvy (2009), Colin Cherry (1978), John Cioffi (2006), Arthur C. Clarke (1982), Martin Cooper (2013), Whitfield Diffie (2000), Federico Faggin (1988), James Flanagan (1992), David Forney, Jr. (1997), Robert G. Gallager (2003), Robert N. Hall (1989), Izuo Hayashi (1993), Martin Hellman (2000), Hiroshi Inose (1976), Irwin M. Jacobs (2011), Robert E. Kahn (1994) Sir Charles Kao (1985), James R. Killian (1975), Leonard Kleinrock (1986), Herwig Kogelnik (2001), Robert W. Lucky (1987), James L. Massey (1999), Robert Metcalfe (2003), Lawrence Page (2004), Yash Pal (1980), Seymour Papert (1981), Arogyaswami Paulraj (2014), David N. Payne (2008), John R. Pierce (1979), Ronald L. Rivest (2007), Arthur L. Schawlow (1977), Allan Snyder (2001), Robert Tkach (2009), Gottfried Ungerboeck (1996), Andrew Viterbi (1990), Jack Keil Wolf (2011), Jacob Ziv (1995). In 2015, the prize went to Peter T. Kirstein for bringing the internet to Europe. Since 2008, Marconi has also issued the Paul Baran Marconi Society Young Scholar Awards.
    [Show full text]
  • I: the Conception
    Excerpt from: Mayo, Keenan and Newcomb, Peter. “How the Web Was Won,” Vanity Fair, July 2008. I: The Conception Paul Baran, an electrical engineer, conceived one of the Internet’s building blocks—packet switching— while working at the Rand Corporation around 1960. Packet switching breaks data into chunks, or “packets,” and lets each one take its own path to a destination, where they are re-assembled (rather than sending everything along the same path, as a traditional telephone circuit does). A similar idea was proposed independently in Britain by Donald Davies. Later in his career, Baran would pioneer the airport metal detector. Paul Baran: It was necessary to have a strategic system that could withstand a first attack and then be able to return the favor in kind. The problem was that we didn’t have a survivable communications system, and so Soviet missiles aimed at U.S. missiles would take out the entire telephone- communication system. At that time the Strategic Air Command had just two forms of communication. One was the U.S. telephone system, or an overlay of that, and the other was high-frequency or shortwave radio. So that left us with the interesting situation of saying, Well, why do the communications fail when the bombs were aimed, not at the cities, but just at the strategic forces? And the answer was that the collateral damage was sufficient to knock out a telephone system that was highly centralized. Well, then, let’s not make it centralized. Let’s spread it out so that we can have other paths to get around the damage.
    [Show full text]
  • Program on Information Resources Policy
    INCIDENTAL PAPER Growing Up With the Information Age John C. B. LeGates April 2011 Program on Information Resources Policy Center for Information Policy Research Harvard University The Program on Information Resources Policy is jointly sponsored by Harvard University and the Center for Information Policy Research. Chairman Managing Director Anthony G. Oettinger John C. B. LeGates John LeGates began his career as an entrepreneur in the earliest days of computer communications and networking. He was the first to put computers in schools and later in hospitals. He built the first academic computer-resource-sharing network and was a member of the Arpanet NWG, the original Internet design team. Since 1973 he has been a member of the Harvard faculty, where he co-founded the Program on Information Resources Policy. Copyright © 2011 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. Not to be reproduced in any form without written consent from the Program on Information Resources Policy, Harvard University, Maxwell Dworkin Bldg. 125, 33 Oxford St., Cambridge MA 02138. 617-495-4114 E-mail: [email protected] URL: http://www.pirp.harvard.edu ISBN 0-9798243-3-8 I-11-3 LeGates Life and Times DRAFT February 1, 1998 NOTES ON GROWING UP WITH THE INFORMATION AGE John C. B. LeGates WHAT IS THIS DOCUMENT? In 1997 I was approached by a writer for The New Yorker magazine, who asked if they could do a "life and times" article about me. It would be the feature article in one of their issues - a minimum of twenty pages. Alternatively it might be longer, and be serialized over several issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Computer Network
    Computer network A computer network or data network is a telecommunications network that allows computers to exchange data. The connections (network links) between networked computing devices (network nodes) are established using either cable media or wireless media. The best-known computer network is the Internet. Network devices that originate, route and terminate the data are called network nodes. Nodes can include hosts such as servers and personal computers, as well as networking hardware. Two devices are said to be networked when a process in one device is able to exchange information with a process in another device. Computer networks support applications such as access to the World Wide Web, shared use of application and storage servers, printers, and fax machines, and use of email and instant messaging applications. The remainder of this article discusses local area network technologies and classifies them according to the following characteristics: the physical media used to transmit signals, the communications protocols used to organize network traffic, along with the network's size, its topology and its organizational intent. History In the late 1950s, early networks of communicating computers included the military radar system Semi- Automatic Ground Environment (SAGE). In 1960, the commercial airline reservation system semi-automatic business research environment (SABRE) went online with two connected mainframes. In 1962, J.C.R. Licklider developed a working group he called the "Intergalactic Computer Network", a precursor to the ARPANET, at the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA). In 1964, researchers at Dartmouth developed the Dartmouth Time Sharing System for distributed users of large computer systems. The same year, at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, a research group supported by General Electric and Bell Labs used a computer to route and manage telephone connections.
    [Show full text]
  • From Packet Switching to the Cloud
    Professor Nigel Linge FROM PACKET SWITCHING TO THE CLOUD Telecommunication engineers have always drawn a picture of a cloud to represent a network. Today, however, the cloud has taken on a new meaning, where IT becomes a utility, accessed and used in exactly the same on-demand way as we connect to the National Grid for electricity. Yet, only 50 years ago, this vision of universal access to an all- encompassing and powerful network would have been seen as nothing more than fanciful science fiction. he first electronic, digital, network - a figure that represented a concept of packet switching in which stored-program computer 230% increase on the previous year. data is assembled into a short se- was built in 1948 and This clear and growing demand for quence of data bits (a packet) which heralded the dawning of data services resulted in the GPO com- includes an address to tell the network a new age. missioning in July 1970 an experi- where the data is to be sent, error de- T mental, manual call-set-up, data net- tection to allow the receiver to confirm DATA COMMUNICATIONS 1 work that used modems operating at that the contents of the packet are cor- These early computers were large, 48,000bit/s (48kbit/s). rect and a source address to facilitate cumbersome and expensive machines However, computer communica- a reply. and inevitably a need arose for a com- tions is different to voice communi- Since each packet is self-contained, munication system that would allow cations not only in its form but also any number of them can be transmit- shared remote access to them.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethernet: an Engineering Paradigm
    Ethernet: An Engineering Paradigm Mark Huang Eden Miller Peter Sun Charles Oji 6.933J/STS.420J Structure, Practice, and Innovation in EE/CS Fall 1998 1.0 Acknowledgements 1 2.0 A Model for Engineering 1 2.1 The Engineering Paradigm 3 2.1.1 Concept 5 2.1.2 Standard 6 2.1.3 Implementation 6 3.0 Phase I: Conceptualization and Early Implementation 7 3.1 Historical Framework: Definition of the Old Paradigm 7 3.1.1 Time-sharing 8 3.1.2 WANs: ARPAnet and ALOHAnet 8 3.2 Anomalies: Definition of the Crisis 10 3.2.1 From Mainframes to Minicomputers: A Parallel Paradigm Shift 10 3.2.2 From WAN to LAN 11 3.2.3 Xerox: From Xerography to Office Automation 11 3.2.4 Metcalfe and Boggs: Professional Crisis 12 3.3 Ethernet: The New Paradigm 13 3.3.1 Invention Background 14 3.3.2 Basic Technical Description 15 3.3.3 How Ethernet Addresses the Crisis 15 4.0 Phase II: Standardization 17 4.1 Crisis II: Building Vendor Support (1978-1983) 17 4.1.1 Forming the DIX Consortium 18 4.1.2 Within DEC 19 4.1.3 Within Intel 22 4.1.4 The Marketplace 23 4.2 Crisis III: Establishing Widespread Compatibility (1979-1984) 25 4.3 The Committee 26 5.0 Implementation and the Crisis of Domination 28 5.1 The Game of Growth 28 5.2 The Grindley Effect in Action 28 5.3 The Rise of 3Com, a Networking Giant 29 6.0 Conclusion 30 A.0 References A-1 i of ii ii of ii December 11, 1998 Ethernet: An Engineering Paradigm Mark Huang Eden Miller Charles Oji Peter Sun 6.933J/STS.420J Structure, Practice, and Innovation in EE/CS Fall 1998 1.0 Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the following individuals for contributing to this project.
    [Show full text]
  • Implications for the Future of Broadband Networks
    The Building of the Internet: Implications for the Future of Broadband Networks by Jeffrey A. Hart Department of Political Science Indiana University Bloomington, IN 47405 Internet: [email protected] Robert R. Reed Department of Political Science Indiana University Bloomington, IN 47405 Internet: [email protected] and Francois Bar Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy University of California Berkeley, CA 94720 Internet: [email protected] August 28, 1992 This paper appeared in _Telecommunications Policy_, November 1992 (Vol. 16, No. 8), and has been nominated for the Donald McGannon Communication Research Center's 1993 Communications Policy Research Award. ABSTRACT The rapid growth of traffic on the Internet, a loosely organized system of interconnected computer networks, suggests a bright fu- ture for switched broadband telecommunications. It also suggests that the path to that future is more likely to involve a broaden- ing of access to broadband networks to users in offices, fac- tories, schools, and homes rather than the transmission of enter- tainment video (high definition or otherwise) via the telephone and cable networks. This article develops the argument by exam- ining the history of the growth of the Internet from its origins in the ARPANET. It describes and explains the transition from ARPANET to the NSFNET in the United States, and discusses the politics behind the National Research and Education Network (NREN) and the gigabit testbeds which will bring broadband capa- bilities to the NSFNET and parts of the Internet. Finally, it examines the forces which are creating pressure for expanding ac- cess to the Internet to schools and libraries, thereby greatly increasing the number of users of the network.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Internet Pioneers
    List of Internet pioneers Instead of a single "inventor", the Internet was developed by many people over many years. The following are some Internet pioneers who contributed to its early development. These include early theoretical foundations, specifying original protocols, and expansion beyond a research tool to wide deployment. The pioneers Contents Claude Shannon The pioneers Claude Shannon Claude Shannon (1916–2001) called the "father of modern information Vannevar Bush theory", published "A Mathematical Theory of Communication" in J. C. R. Licklider 1948. His paper gave a formal way of studying communication channels. It established fundamental limits on the efficiency of Paul Baran communication over noisy channels, and presented the challenge of Donald Davies finding families of codes to achieve capacity.[1] Charles M. Herzfeld Bob Taylor Vannevar Bush Larry Roberts Leonard Kleinrock Vannevar Bush (1890–1974) helped to establish a partnership between Bob Kahn U.S. military, university research, and independent think tanks. He was Douglas Engelbart appointed Chairman of the National Defense Research Committee in Elizabeth Feinler 1940 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, appointed Director of the Louis Pouzin Office of Scientific Research and Development in 1941, and from 1946 John Klensin to 1947, he served as chairman of the Joint Research and Development Vint Cerf Board. Out of this would come DARPA, which in turn would lead to the ARPANET Project.[2] His July 1945 Atlantic Monthly article "As We Yogen Dalal May Think" proposed Memex, a theoretical proto-hypertext computer Peter Kirstein system in which an individual compresses and stores all of their books, Steve Crocker records, and communications, which is then mechanized so that it may Jon Postel [3] be consulted with exceeding speed and flexibility.
    [Show full text]
  • A Summary of Papers on Fieldexperiments.Com
    A SUMMARY OF PAPERS ON FIELDEXPERIMENTS.COM: ALL FIELD EXPERIMENTS POSTED John A. List1 January 2019 Back in 2000, I was moved by Charlie Holt’s website that collated exactly 2000 (mostly) laboratory experiments. That site continues to be quite helpful for my students, colleagues, and me when we have a need to trace the great work that experimentalists have done over the years in the lab. Need insights on multi-unit auctions, “visit Charlie’s site” I often say to my students and colleagues. That site compelled me several years ago to create my own bibliographical site http://www.fieldexperiments.com, which lists publications and discussion papers in experimental economics that make use of the "field" in some manner. The site remains quite active, with an open source that allows scholars to post their own work, and to download hundreds of field experimental papers. With the growth of field experiments, I felt it apropos to provide a site that collated papers using field experiments--both published and working. In my own work I have reserved the term "field experiment" for those cases where I observed subjects in their naturally occurring environments. I explicitly, therefore, discriminated between explorations in this environment and laboratory studies that used non-standard subject pools. In a JEL paper (Harrison and List, 2004), such important differences are accounted for via qualifiers. I followed this nomenclature on the site by placing studies into three groups: 1. Artefactual field experiments, which are the same as conventional lab experiments but with a non-standard subject pool (i.e., non-students).
    [Show full text]
  • 40-Year Anniversary of Ethernet Celebrated by Nexgen
    40-year Anniversary of Ethernet Celebrated by NexGen NexGen Networks, the premier provider of fiber optic-based network solutions to the world’s top financial services firms and global enterprises, marks the invention of Ethernet after forty years as it continues its commitment to Ethernet services. On May 22, 1973, Robert Metcalfe first documented the idea of Ethernet at what was then Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center. The name was inspired by the elegant but long disproven idea of a "lumineferous ether"—an invisible, omnipresent medium through which scientists in the 1800s believed light traveled. Metcalfe and his collaborators decided to in a sense make such a medium a reality, and to use it for the transfer of information through cabling. Ethernet has evolved dramatically since then, and it’s the prevailing standard in Local Area Networks (LANs) today. Nearly all computers and many associated devices ship with an Ethernet connection. NexGen Networks was formed in the New York Metropolitan area ten years ago, which corresponded with a landmark transition of Ethernet from a purely local area technology to a wide area network technology. The need to move larger files faster and the convergence of voice and data onto a single network had drastically increased demand for bandwidth, leading to the proliferation of Ethernet WAN. “NexGen helped to pioneer the building of carrier Ethernet networks with the ability to integrate legacy technologies as an interim step toward delivering end-to-end Ethernet services,” says NexGen’s Jeffrey Barth. “NexGen's expertise with large-scale deployment of the technology strongly positioned it to succeed from the start.
    [Show full text]
  • End-To-End Arguments in the Internet: Principles, Practices, and Theory
    End-to-End Arguments in the Internet: Principles, Practices, and Theory vorgelegt von Matthias Bärwolff Von der Fakultät IV Elektrotechnik und Informatik der Technischen Universität Berlin zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Doktor der Ingenieurwissenschaften (Dr. Ing.) genehmigte Dissertation Promotionsausschuss: Prof. Dr. Anja Feldmann (Vorsitzende) Prof. Dr. Bernd Lutterbeck (Berichter) Dr. David D. Clark (Berichter) Tag der wissenschaftlichen Aussprache: 22. Oktober 2010 Berlin 2010 D 83 Dissertation submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at Technische Universität Berlin in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Dr. Ing. Advisers: Prof. em. Dr. iur. Bernd Lutterbeck, Technische Universität Berlin Dr. David D. Clark, Massachusetts Institute of Technology I gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the German Academic Exchange Service (Deutscher Akademischer Auslandsdienst, DAAD) who have given me a scholarship for a stay at MIT in early 2009. Diese Doktorarbeit wurde mit finanzieller Unterstützung des Deutschen Akademischen Auslandsdiensts (DAAD) in Form eines dreimonatigen Doktorandenstipendiums im Jahr 2009 angefertigt. © Copyright 2010 by Matthias Bärwolff www.bärwolff.de [email protected] +49 30 20238852 rinciples are often more effective guides for action when they appear as no more than an unreasoned prejudice, Pa general feeling that certain things simply “are not done”; while as soon as they are explicitly stated speculation begins about their correctness and their validity. [ . ] Once the instinctive certainty is lost, perhaps as a result of unsuccessful attempts to put into words principles that had been observed “intuitively”, there is no way of regaining such guidance other than to search for a correct statement of what before was known implicitly.
    [Show full text]
  • Venture Capital and the Birth of the Local Area Networking Industry
    Research Policy 29Ž. 2000 1135±1155 www.elsevier.nlrlocatereconbase Venture capital and the birth of the local area networking industry Urs von Burg a,1, Martin Kenney b,c,) a UniÕersity of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland b Department of Human and Community DeÕelopment, DaÕis, CA 95616, USA c Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy, USA Received 17 September 1998; received in revised form 11 November 1998; accepted 6 September 1999 Abstract Venture capital has played an important role in funding the development of a number of US high-technology industries. Economists and business scholars utilizing models based in traditional economics have studied venture capital from the perspective of investment decision-making. These models provide significant insights, and yet they do not explain the actual operation of venture capital. This case study of the creation of LAN industry utilizes a synthesis of the dominant design and social constructionist perspectives to create a more nuanced explanation of how the practice of venture capitalists operates to create firms and industries. q 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Venture capital; Local area networking; Industry; Dominant design; Social construction 1. Introduction tive architecture of large numbers of networked, distributed computers. The deployment of a new In the mid 1990s, personal computers and other technology in a set of newly created firms, which devices linked through a local area networkŽ. LAN then becomes a new industry, is often accepted as had become the dominant computer architecture in unproblematic or natural. But, the manner by which institutions. Twenty years earlier, LANs were nearly a technology is embedded in social institutions is not non-existent with their deployment almost exclu- predetermined.
    [Show full text]