170C h a p t e r12 innovation with it1It is well k.docx

170
C h a p t e r
12 innovation with it1
It is well known that innovation with IT enables new business
models (e.g., Amazon, iTunes), new products and services (e.g.,
tablets, mobile banking), new or improved processes (e.g., ERP,
supply chain), and cost savings (e.g., self-service, offshore
sourcing). Yet, such innovation is still very much a hit-or-miss
proposition. For as
many successful innovations as there are with technology, there
are an equal or greater
number of failures. Furthermore, although it is possible to do
many innovative things
with technology, it is much more difficult to find the ones that
will deliver real and sus-
tainable value to an organization.
IT organizations have always been expected to improve what is
currently being
done but it is much more difficult to undertake something that is
different from what has
traditionally been done. When innovating with technology, not
only must the market
be ready for the innovation (i.e., timing), but also network
effects and complementary
products and services must be available for it to succeed (e.g.,
one telephone is not
very useful; mobile banking failed before the introduction of
smart phones). Finally,

many innovations fail because an organization’s culture cannot
sustain or exploit
them (e.g., Kodak with digital imaging). In short, successful
innovation is still a bit of
a mystery and many IT leaders are trying to explore how best
to operationalize it to
deliver real business value.
This chapter explores innovation—an organization’s need to
reinvent its products
and services and occasionally itself—with a focus on IT-enabled
innovation. We begin
by examining why innovation is critical, and how/why IT is
driving most innova-
tion today. Following this, we examine various types of
innovation. Then we present a
typical innovation life cycle and examine some of the
challenges encountered by orga-
nizations when attempting to achieve innovation. In the final
section of this chapter, we
offer advice for managing IT-enabled innovation.
1 This chapter is based on the authors’ previously published
article, McKeen, J. D., and H. A. Smith. “Strategic
Experimentation with IT.” Communications of the Association
for Information Systems 19, article 8 (January 2007):
132–41. Reproduced by permission of the Association for
Information Systems.
Chapter 12 • Innovation with IT 171
The Need for INNovaTIoN: aN hIsTorIcal PersPecTIve
It is well-established that the need to innovate is necessary for

long-term organiza-
tional survival (Christensen and Raynor 2003; Hamel and
Välikangas 2003). According
to Christensen (1997), there are two types of innovation:
sustaining and disruptive.
Sustaining innovation improves an existing product or enhances
an existing service for
an existing customer. In contrast, disruptive innovation targets
noncustomers and deliv-
ers a product or service that fundamentally differs from the
current product portfolio.
Sustaining innovation leaves organizations in their comfort zone
of established mar-
kets, known customers, and realizable business models.
Disruptive technologies enjoy
none of these benefits. To be successful for the initiating
organization, the disruptive
innovation must meet two basic requirements: it must create
value as perceived by cus-
tomers, and it must enact mechanisms to appropriate or capture
a fair share of this
new value (Henderson et al. 2003). For other organizations and
particularly dominant
players, disruptive innovation can be devastating. Christensen
(1997) refers to this as
“the innovator’s dilemma.” For an excellent discussion of
disruptive technologies and a
review of six leading theories of innovation, see Denning
(2005).
Innovation comes about through organizational change, and
here, too, we see
two dominant forms: continuous change versus punctuated
equilibrium. Brown and
Eisenhardt (1997) describe continuous change as “frequent,
relentless, and perhaps

endemic to the firm,” whereas the punctuated equilibrium model
of change “assumes
that long periods of small, incremental change are interrupted
by brief periods of
discontinuous, radical change.” In this latter case, change is
primarily seen as “rare,
risky, and episodic.” Although it is tempting to equate
sustaining innovation with
continuous change and disruptive innovation with punctuated
equilibrium, it is
not so simple. In fact, Brown and Eisenhardt (1997) cite
examples of firms that have
successfully reinvented themselves through continuous change
as opposed to abrupt,
punctuated change. These authors suggest “in firms undergoing
continuous change,
innovation is intimately related to broader organization
change.”
The Need for INNovaTIoN Now
Today, there is an increased sense of urgency about innovation
with technology. “Our
business partners now ‘get’ the importance of IT,” said one
manager. “But they’re
looking for IT to tell them what’s possible.” Another added,
“They’re telling us ‘We
don’t know what we don’t know’ and they expect IT to make
new things possible.”
What this means is that IT leaders are being challenged by
business leaders to spear-
head innovation in their organizations. This is a new mandate
for IT.
Different industries are feeling different levels of pressure
about innovation.

At level one, experienced by virtually every industry, new
forms of technology are
driving up the expectations of both business and consumers for
more mobility, more
usability, more customer-friendliness, and more cost-
effectiveness. “There’s a market-
place shift happening towards the customer,” said a manager.
“We are moving from
being product and process-centric to being customer-centric.”
This shift is driving
more horizontal views in the organization and demand for end-
to-end processing, as
opposed to the deeply vertical, siloed perspectives of the past.
172 Section III • IT-Enabled Innovation
Within level two industries, there is a belief that IT can be a
strategic differentia-
tor for an organization and that technology is a fundamental
component of business
strategy. “Our business sees technology as the key to new
growth,” said a manager.
Unfortunately, this pressure plus the greater availability of
technology in the cloud is
leading some in the business world to “take technology
decisions into their own hands”
and “do an end-run” on the IT department thinking that they
don’t need IT. In response,
IT is feeling new pressure to get ahead of business needs and
demonstrate its innova-
tive capabilities.
Level three industries experience a deep sense of unease that
the fundamental

assumptions upon which their business is based are changing.
“We can no longer be com-
placent,” said a manager. In these industries, there is growing
uncertainty and fear that an
upstart company could steal away huge chunks of business
value by using technology to
provide their products or services more cheaply or effectively.
At this level, innovation is
about survival and making sure that an organization is able to
quickly adapt to new busi-
ness models and withstand strategic challenges. Companies in
these industries have seen
that threats today can come from non-traditional competitors
and they recognize that
innovation with technology is the only way to ensure they will
continue to stay viable.
UNdersTaNdINg INNovaTIoN
Innovation with technology is a complex concept. One
participant defined it as, “Fresh
ideas that create value.” It can include a variety of new things
that are created by or
enabled with technology, such as new markets, new products,
new demand, new pro-
cesses, new capabilities, and new practices. “It’s all about
value,” he stressed. “I, like
many others, am guilty of sometimes getting distracted by
shiny, new gadgets rather
than focusing on the value that innovation brings.” Typically,
innovation is not the
invention of something completely new, but its use in a new
way, bringing something
new to an industry for the first time, or combining it with
another service to provide
new value. In short, innovation in an organization lies at the

intersection of the answer
to three significant questions that create the strategic
environment within which inno-
vation with technology can deliver value (see Figure 12.1):
• What is viable in the marketplace?
• What is desirable to the business?
• What is possible with technology?
Ideally, innovation also refers to the process whereby a
company creates new
things that deliver value. There is no generally accepted
methodology for innovation
but we have learned that effective, successful innovation has at
least five stages. The
first stage is ideation—generating innovative ideas. There are
many ways of doing this—
ranging from focused executive meetings to the modern online
version of the sugges-
tion box. This stage must address two questions: How do we get
people to share their
ideas? How do we respond to their ideas? In
most cases, thereare lots of ideasout there.
In fact, managers noted that attempts to stimulate innovation in
their organizations led
to them being initially deluged with new ideas. However,
lacking the ability to screen
and prioritize or act on them, the ideas soon dried up. Research
shows that the biggest
reason why people do not share their ideas is that past
experience has shown them that
management doesn’t respond to or act on them (DeSouza 2011).

Thus, the second stage is advocacy. Good ideas need a sponsor
who firms up prom-
ising innovative suggestions, seeks funding for them, and acts
as a mentor to take them
to the next level. One company has an advocacy process that
seeks advocates from
a business unit other than the one where an idea is generated,
thereby encouraging
broader organizational support for good ideas.
Stage three is proof of concept. This can consist of laboratory
testing over a period of
a few weeks to explore the viability of key technologies or ideas
that are central to the
success of an innovation. This part of the process is very agile
and adaptive and highly
dependent on business–IT collaboration. Teams are kept small
and focused.
A successful proof of concept can lead to a fuller trial or pilot
in stage four where
the innovation is exposed to the market in a limited and
measured way. A market
segment is defined, and certain customers (who may be
employees) are offered the
chance to experiment with the new product or service.
Measurements are taken to
understand results, which may include marketing/branding
issues, financial price
points, and operational impacts. Typical pilots take about four
to twelve weeks, but
may be extended.
The fifth and final stage is transition or “go to market,” where
the innovation enters

into the mainstream IT production process to ensure the idea is
“industrial strength.”
Many shortcuts, which served well enough for the pilot, must
now be engineered to
meet production standards. For example, in one proof of
concept, a financial organi-
zation developed a mobile application without privacy or
security protections. These
were then added in at this final stage.
Unlike other types of IT projects, the goals of innovation
projects can be fuzzy.
Focus group participants stressed that innovation projects
should not have to meet the
same ROI or defined benefits as other IT projects. “Enforcing
traditional stage gate cri-
teria too early in our innovation process killed off a lot of good
ideas,” said one man-
ager whose company has now changed this practice.
Furthermore, the full value of
some innovations may not be immediately apparent. “We are
innovating to develop a
platform for direct customer interaction,” said a manager, “but
we are not telling our
sales staff this right now.” The results of this process can be
both “‘big I’ innovation
that refers to substantial and significant changes and ‘little i’
innovation that refers to
smaller ongoing improvements,” explained one participant.
What Is
Possible with
Technology
What Is Desirable
to the Business

What Is Viable
in the
Marketplace
Innovation
fIgUre 12.1 The Organization’s Strategic Environment for
Innovation with Technology
A major difference between innovation projects and more
traditional IT proj-
ects is that failure at any stage is anticipated for many ideas and
should be expected.
Participants stressed that the learning gained from unsuccessful
ideas is an asset that
is valuable. “We need to document our failures so that we can
learn from them in the
future,” said one. “Innovation is not a binary process,” said
another. “We need to recog-
nize that we can leverage many elements in different ways over
time to build successful
innovations.” Thus, feedback from all participants and at all
stages of innovation is an
especially crucial component of the innovation process (see
Figure 12.2).
The valUe of INNovaTIoN
Increased business value is the goal of innovation, but
sometimes it is not always

clear what that value is. Many innovations do not deliver results
in terms of ROI or
other measureable metrics. “You can’t use traditional metrics,
like revenue generation,
when it comes to innovation,” said a manager. “Value can’t
always be quantified,” said
another. Yet, it is important to understand where and how value
is delivered by innova-
tion or this effort will soon lose out to more measurable
initiatives that have a clearer
short-term value.
Communication of value is therefore essential to ensuring
innovation is sus-
tainable in the organization over the long term. From this
perspective, value has two
components:
1. Is it desirable? “Our business users and customers can’t
always articulate a
clear value proposition,” said a manager “but they can tell you
if they want it
and like it.” Therefore, customer testimonials and social media
comments can be
Ideation
Advocacy
Proof of
concept
Pilot
Transition

Results
Vendors, Employees,
Others
Business
Leaders
Support
Top
Ideas
First Users
Successful
POCs
Stage
Gate
Valuable
Innovations
The Strategic Environment
fIgUre 12.2 The Technology Innovation Process
good mechanisms for companies to tell if they are on the right
track with innova-
tion and user perceptions of value should be carefully
monitored. “Even a simple

change can go viral if users perceive its value,” said a manager.
“And customers
also know when the value is not there,” added another.
2. Does it build our innovative capabilities? Innovations in
many industries rapidly
become table stakes. “The real value of innovation is the ability
to innovate continu-
ously and consistently,” said a manager. The capability to
rapidly scan the environ-
ment, incorporate new ideas and technologies into an evolving
business strategy,
make the associated organizational and technological
adaptations, and execute
quickly, is the real prize. “Innovation isn’t a one-time project,
but the ability to
deliver over and over again,” said a manager.
INNovaTIoN esseNTIals: MoTIvaTIoN, sUPPorT, aNd
dIrecTIoN
Three conditions are necessary for innovation to be successful:
(1) motivation, (2) sup-
port, and (3) direction. As one manager stated, “Without
motivation, little will happen;
without support, little can happen; and without direction,
anything can happen.” The
focus group’s recommendations to others seeking to improve
their innovation practices
include the following:
1. Motivate: Establish rewards for innovation. Although many
individuals are
naturally drawn to innovation, the demands of everyday work
often drive this
interest and inclination into remission. Furthermore, innovation

is risky, and not
all people are willing to jeopardize their reputations. As a
result, innovation does
not flourish without intervention. According to focus group
members, the way
to create an innovation-enabled organization is twofold: provide
incentives and
rewards to support innovation and risk taking, and make it
everyone’s job. Good
ideas are good ideas, and experience shows that they are as apt
to originate at the
customer interface as they are within the laboratory or the
executive ranks.
Taking this a step further, one company has made innovation a
compo-
nent of everyone’s annual performance assessment. This
organization offers
specific types of formal rewards for different types of
innovation that range from
patentable ideas to emerging business opportunities. Not all
rewards need be
formal though. One firm uses a system of frequent informal
rewards (e.g., books,
tickets, cards, recognition days, and executive citations) to
recognize innovative
ideas and encourage and reward innovation with IT. Another
company discovered
that the best reward for IT personnel is simply the opportunity
to work and play
with new technology! In this company, enterprising IT
personnel win the right to
experiment with new technology without the need for
champions or sponsors.
According to the manager involved, this activity is funded by
“skunkworks” and

“beg and grovel.”
2. Support: Create infrastructure to sustain innovation.
Offering rewards for
innovation sends employees the signal that innovation is
encouraged and will be
recognized and valued. This provides the motivation for
individuals to experiment,
but organizations need to provide support for such
experimentation if they want it
to happen. Over time, the combination of recognition and
support builds a culture
of innovation.
Many firms believe it is also necessary to build some
infrastructure around IT
innovation. One company, for instance, created the position of
“chief scientist” and
provided that office with a budget and resources. This was the
organization’s “way
to signal to everyone that the lifeblood of the organization is
discovery . . . not just
innovation,” said the manager involved. At this company,
“innovation is a given”
and expected in all parts of the business. “Discovery,” however,
conveys a sense of
urgency as well as the notion that the company needs to
continually reinvent itself
to survive in the marketplace.
Many companies have formal centers (or laboratories) to
support innovation.

Depending on the firm, the roles of these centers vary from
“new product
introduction” to “new technology introduction” to “business
venturing” to
“incubation centers.” Where IT is considered a key business
driver, they usually
focus almost exclusively on strategic IT innovation. The critical
aspect of their
creation is the provision of support and infrastructure to enable
idea review and
experimentation. Most centers are formally entrenched within
the organization with
ongoing funding, permanent staffing, and well-developed
procedures and pro-
cesses to encourage, guide, and support innovation. According
to one manager, the
key element is “to link sponsorship to innovation,” reflecting
the fact that “good
ideas don’t make it on their own.”
Companies in the group reached consensus on the mandate for
innova-
tion centers, but they disagreed about their governance. Two
distinct strategies
surfaced:
• Insulate. This strategy creates innovation centers as places
where “all lines of
business can come together to address common problems.”
According to pro-
ponents, the key benefit of this approach is the ability to foster
synergies across
the business in the belief that innovation is best “nurtured away
from the main-
stream business.”

• Incubate. Those following this strategy place their
innovation centers within
specific lines of business (LOBs). Proponents suggested that
forcing innovation
to be housed within a single LOB focuses innovation on “real”
problems and
opportunities with committed local ownership.
The innovation infrastructure that was common to virtually all
organi-
zations in the group was the maintenance of an intranet for
launching ideas.
These sites are considered to be effective for soliciting, vetting,
and sharing ideas
and/or opportunities. According to one manager, an intranet’s
chief value is
that “anyone can input and everyone gets access” to build on
ideas. In firms
with innovation centers, intranets are effective “feeder”
systems. In organiza-
tions lacking the formal support of an innovation center, ideas
identified on
the intranet require a sponsor to marshal support to turn them
into realizable
products and/or services.
A common form of financial support is the establishment of
internal venture
funds. In about half of the participating organizations, funding
mechanisms had
been set up to support IT innovation. Typically, such funds are
made available on a
competitive basis with an oversight committee in place to award
resources and to
monitor progress and completion.

3. Direct: Manage innovation strategically. One manager
pointed out that
“experimentation never fails as long as there has been
learning.” Strictly speak-
ing, the focus group agreed but felt that “any such learning
would have to be
strategically important for the organization” for it to be
considered successful.
According to the group, learning for the sake of learning was
“an activity enjoyed
by academics”—much to our chagrin! They suggested that
providing motivation
and support for individuals to experiment freely would be a
recipe for disaster.
Organizations must provide direction for these activities.
Strategic IT innova-
tion does not occur by happenstance. Some participant
suggestions for direct-
ing IT innovation in order to ensure that it was strategically
relevant include the
following:
a. Link innovation to customer value. A simple yet effective
way to accomplish
this is to focus on emerging pain points. At one company, all
new ideas had
to articulate the specific customer pain point (CPP) that would
be addressed.
This requirement, in and of itself, produced results. As the
manager involved
related, “The identification and surfacing of CPPs stimulated
considerable and

sometimes heated discussion. Many people were surprised to
learn of CPPs,
and many potential solutions emerged. It was a case of ‘if only I
had known.’”
Unfortunately, failure to articulate business value to the
customer is a common
phenomenon.
b. Link experimentation to core business processes. The
opposite approach
focuses IT experimentation internally on core business
functions. One
participant, whose organization is “currently reluctant to
experiment in the
market,” focuses all its experiments on core business activities.
“Our belief
is that innovation is strategic only if it produces significant
efficiencies
for internal operations in a way that can be captured on the
bottom line,”
she said.
c. Use venture funds to guide strategic initiatives. Although
establishing
venture funding for innovation is a form of support (as already
noted), the
governance of such funds can be instrumental in achieving
strategic alignment.
Venture funds are typically given for initiatives that do the
following:
• Make greater use of innovation resources
• Focus on new business models
• Explore new/disruptive technologies
• Focus on penetrating new markets
• Leverage cross-organizational capabilities

• Streamline decision making
• Focus on opportunities that can be scaled.
challeNges for IT leaders
Although all of the managers in the focus group felt strongly
that innovation is essential
both to the future of their organizations and IT, they expressed
a number of caveats and
concerns about how innovation and an innovation process would
be implemented in
their organizations. These fell into four major themes:
1. Strike the correct balance. IT managers are acutely aware
that they have the
responsibility to ensure that their organization’s data and
systems are kept safe,
secure, and private. Furthermore, many of the so-called
“bureaucratic IT processes”
were put in place for good reason, such as to ensure quality,
interoperability, and
cost-efficacy. “We don’t want to go back to the days when
cowboys ran IT,” said one
manager. “There’s a risk to throwing out all our rules for the
sake of rapid innova-
tion.” In fact, in many highly regulated industries, such as
finance and health care,
laws and risk-aversion prohibit much innovation. “We need to
balance urgency and
quality, and not forget architecture and integration,” said
another manager. “These
‘innovations’ can turn into a legacy nightmare very quickly.”

Nevertheless, they
recognize that there is a need to reconcile these competing
priorities and rethink IT
processes to facilitate innovation, although at present, there is
no accepted way of
doing this.
2. Create a sustainable process. One focus group company was
on its third
innovation process. During the first one, they had lots of input
from employees
but a lack of interest from executives in taking action on their
ideas. The second
process, designed to rectify this problem, gave funding to the
CIO to implement
innovative ideas, but executives flooded the pipeline with ideas
to get the “free”
IT funding. Now, in its third iteration, the process is focused on
innovation in busi-
ness intelligence and how this will improve the way work gets
done. “Whatever
process is put in place, it must be collaborative and include a
process for flesh-
ing out ideas,” said the manager involved. “There are too many
half-baked ideas
out there.” In addition, there must be recognition from
executives that innovation
requires risk. Thus, the innovation process must enable rapid
proof of concept and
trial development, and link into traditional development
procedures during the
transition stage.
3. Provide adequate resources. IT staff often become too busy
“fixing messes” and
doing other types of IT work to undertake innovation. In fact,

many companies
have had to address this resource gap by carving out specific
resources or time peri-
ods dedicated for innovation. This is not ideal and most
managers would rather
see innovation integrated into everyone’s job. Similarly, many
executives are simply
“too busy” to focus on work with such a vague return. As a
result, “there is no real
alignment in either IT or our organization about how to
undertake and resource
innovation,” said a manager. Thus, many IT functions are
waiting for senior man-
agement to say “go” before implementing a serious innovation
process.
4. Reassess IT processes and practices. The IT function needs
to be characterized
by disciplined thinking, rapid action, agile development, and
supported by new
technologies that facilitate this. We need to transition from “IT
control” to “IT coor-
dination,” explained a manager. “Our structures need to be
changed to enable us
to get us 80% of the way in a project and then to pivot and
change direction, if
necessary,” said another. A third noted that IT and
organizational rewards need to
be restructured to motivate more innovation. Finally, existing
structures and gov-
ernance mechanisms need to be changed to accommodate
innovative practices. For
example, as already noted, traditional stage gates are not
appropriate for early-
stage innovation projects. As well, roles such as relationship
manager, which serve

as gatekeepers into the business, may prevent the learning and
collaboration that is
needed to promote innovation.
facIlITaTINg INNovaTIoN
In spite of these challenges and reservations, the focus group
agreed that IT’s goal
should be to develop an organization with the capability to
change and adapt in order
to deliver value with technology. Focus group organizations
were trying a variety of
practices to facilitate innovation. From these, a number of
guiding principles for effec-
tive innovation may be inferred:
• Focus on achievable targets. Innovation should be
manageable and targeted but, at
the same time, built so they can scale up easily. According to
one manager, “It is far
easier to ramp up a proven venture than to plan, build, and
deliver a winner.” At one
company an innovation involved a “proof …
Module 8 Discussion
Contains unread posts
Brenda Sutton Sutton posted Jun 25, 2020 12:26 AM
Subscribe
A) How does the lower demand for U.S. dollars affect the value
of the U.S. dollar, and consequently, is this good or bad for
U.S. businesses looking to sell abroad?
The U.S. dollar decreases when the value of the dollar is lower

comparing it to other countries currencies in the exchange
market. It means that the index of the dollar falls which is a
good and bad thing. Its bad because that means euros can have a
stronger value and can buy more dollars when the U.S. currency
weakens. A weaker dollar buys less in foreign goods which
means that will increase the price of imports contributing to
price increases. On the good side a weakening dollar helps U.S
trades, which means that their goods will seem cheaper to
foreigners and that will boost the economic growth in the U.S,
which will attract foreign investors to U.S stocks. In other
words the lower demand for the U.S. dollar reduces the value of
the dollar. This means dollar will fetch less of the other
currencies now that it used to before the decline in demand.
This means that the exchange rate for the dollar decrease.
investors payless than face value and receive a higher yield.
B) Discuss another real-world example of how changing
currency value that have affected people’s daily lives.
Consider oil prices as a example, when the dollar strengthens,
it make American made goods more expensive and less
competitive compared to foreign produced goods. This reduces
U.S. exports and slows economic growth. Its also leads to lower
oil prices, as oil transacted in dollars. Whenever the dollar
strengthens, oil-producing countries can relax the price of oil
because the profit margins in their local currency are not
affected. For example, if the dollar is worth 3.75 in one
country. A barrel of oil worth one hundred dollars which make
the cost 375 dollars in that country. If the dollar strengthens by
20% in another country's currency the valve of the dollar that is
fixed to that country has also risen by 20% against the country
currency that strengthen by 20%.
References
Lioudis, N. (2018, June 15). 3 factors that drive the U.S. dollar.
Retrieved March 18, 2018,
from https://www.investopedia.com/articles/forex/09/factors-
drive-american-dollar.asp

Jorge Rodriguez posted Jun 23, 2020 11:54 PM
Subscribe
1. How does the lower demand for U.S. dollars affect the value
In regard to the depreciation of the US dollar depreciation and
what factors influence it, one believes that it depends on the
economy. The dollar is considered strong when it rises in value
against other currencies as one read in this week’s slides. If the
dollar is strong it can buy more foreign currency than before.
An example would be a strong dollar would benefit us as tourist
overseas but in return anyone living overseas would not be wise
to visit the us as it puts them in a disadvantage. This is a win
for us Americans as it makes us purchase cheaper imports and
cheaper foreign travel. This as result hurts us nationally as local
companies who relay in export there goods for example in El
Paso Texas we have a big dairy farms our next door city of Las
Cruses has a huge Pecan Farms and Hatch New Mexico has a
Huge Hatch green Chile as all these products are sent
internationally if a strong dollar is in play there export output
would be on a decline and there business would hurt .
2. Discuss another real-world example of how changing
currency values have affected people’s daily lives.
This has a direct connection to my day to day life. As one has
stated in previous discussions and papers, I’ve always lived in a
border town next to Mexico. Before Covid and I was younger
we were always taking trips next door to but groceries why the
dollar has always been worth more than the Mexican Peso, so
our value allows us to purchase more items with less money.
When one was 18 go out in Mexico was amazing as a whole
night of partying would cost average ¼ of the price one would
spend in the U.S. Now that awesome for us U.S citizens but
currently the Mexico peso is exceptionally low. As I went to

Nogales Mx 1 us dollar is the same as 22 pesos which is
amazing for me but my family who work and live a nice life and
have great Jobs they are hurting as they have to pay 23 pesos
for 1 dollar for them to use in out economy so there is no win
win factor as it will only benefit one and not the other .
Hopefully as Mexico’s economy returns back to prospering, we
will see the exchange rate lower to an average 16 pesos for 1
US dollar.
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/forex/051415/pros-cons-
strong-dollar.asp
Module 8 Discussion
Watch the NBC Learn video clip Some U.S. Businesses Profit
from a falling Dollar regarding the depreciation of the U.S.
dollar during the last recession. Your text mentions various
factors that influence the value of a currency. Consider the
effect of perceptions of economic stability. As the U.S.
economy weakens, foreign investors demand less dollars.
a. How does the lower demand for U.S. dollars affect the value
b. Discuss another real-world example of how changing
currency values have affected people’s daily lives.
Module 7 Discussion
After listening to the audio clip WTO sides with U.S. in Poultry
Dispute with China, consider the full impact of a restriction on
trade such as a tariff. Do trade restrictions evoke retaliation by
trade partners, and how would this affect the gains from trade?
Use this
link: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_status_

e.htm to begin your research on some of the trade disputes
brought before the WTO. What is the nature of the claim, and
does the action by the defendant impede free trade and therefore
deserve scrutiny?

170C h a p t e r12 innovation with it1It is well k.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 170C h a p t e r12 innovation with it1It is well k.docx

Similar to 170C h a p t e r12 innovation with it1It is well k.docx (17)

More from herminaprocter

More from herminaprocter (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

170C h a p t e r12 innovation with it1It is well k.docx