What do Flash, Android, Hotmail, Google Analytics and Powerpoint all have in common? Can you guess?
The answer is: None of them were produced by the companies who now own them. They were acquisitions.
These products have continued to develop at their new homes, but the seed of innovation that sparked an actual, new product came from the outside. The key word here is innovation.
Sometimes you wonder how much huge companies really innovate. A significant amount of today’s most well loved and successful products originated with smaller companies which were shortly gobbled up by one of the huge players (Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, IBM, Oracle, etc).
We’d like to call this phenomenon “innovation by acquisition.”
Here not more than is a small sample of well-known, successful products that started their lives outside the very huge companies who now own them:
There are plenty of additional prominent examples. How in this area Postini (bought by Google), YouTube (bought by Google), Feedburner (bought by Google), Flickr (bought by Yahoo), Tasty.com (bought by Yahoo), and we could just keep going.
We picked these examples because they are widely known products by huge, well-known companies. Though, look at any really huge company within any industry and you are likely to find examples of innovation by acquisition.
That said, some companies are more aggressive than others when it comes to acquisitions. Google comes to mind here. Within the last two weeks, Google has bought Picnik, an online photo-editing application, and DocVerse, an online document collaboration service. Expand your lasso to include a full month, and you can add another two companies (Aardvark and reMail).
Really, since its IPO in 2004, Google has been on such a spending spree that entrepreneurs often jokingly (or not) refer to “getting bought by Google” as an brilliant exit strategy and business plot.
These huge companies have resources aplenty. For example, Google has more than 7,000 public in research and development. Microsoft has even more. That’s a huge amount of brain power if channeled effectively. So why don’t we see innovation in proportion to those numbers? They should be innovation powerhouses.
One problem for huge companies is that they are saddled with a lot of inertia and overhead. They have plenty of money, but they are simply not lithe anymore. Smaller outfits can be flexible and instant, because they don’t have an existing corporate infrastructure to maintain. Thoughts can flow unhindered.
This is for example what Google desires to simulate with its well-known 20% time. Fascinatingly, they seem to have gained some success with it, because according to Google, 50% of their products come out of projects started this way. (For an fascinating perspective, check out this article by Scott Berkun in this area Google’s 20% time.)
We’re sure that many additional companies have similar, if perhaps not quite as drastic, ways of cheering in-house innovation. But innovation also desires to be recognized, and if you have a huge corporate infrastructure and thousands of employees, things tend to get lost in the shuffle.
Another dilemma is that huge companies with a lot of existing products often need to spend a significant amount of effort and resources on the continued development and maintenance of those products. This backlog of products is paying the bills, so they are vital. This is a problem (or luxury) that startups don’t have; instead they can spend all their energy on that new, exciting product. They don’t need to maintain the status quo.
There are of course upsides to innovating by acquisition. If you can throw money at a problem to decipher it quickly, or explore an opportunity, this can be very effective. And huge companies usually have money in droves, just waiting to be invested.
Acquisitions are in no way inherently terrible or evil. It’s just a different way of accomplishing a goal. Still, you can’t help but be fascinated when you look at some of the more acquisition-pleased companies and realize that a huge part of their product portfolio originates from outside the company.
On the additional hand, they should get two thumbs up for recognizing the potential of the companies they bought.

From:
Innovation by acquisition