## table cohesive column-wise structure and row-wise structure. what i mean by that is, if you choose any two rows and two columns and call the four cells A (row1, col1), B (row1, col2), C (row2, col1), D (row2, col2), then A:B = C:D (row wise cohesiveness) and A:C = B:D (column wise cohesiveness) should hold. ## writing style - to add cohesiveness, invent one sentence each at the end of each section that summarizes current section and bridges the next section (MAKE READERS CURIOUS e.g. after explaining resource rationality ratio, you should question, different ratios are being observed in different contexts - how much can agent's irrationality be accounted for this heterogeneity? which would help readers curious about decision making process and operations-market reasoning and action. this'd increase reader's absorptive capacity) - to add cohesiveness, explain how each figure and table are related with each other. assign agent to each figures and tables and allow them to understand each other. let's call this process `connect(table_fig)` and you MUST include `connect(table_fig)` if the table and fig appear in the same section (e.g. table1-fig2, table2/3-fig3). the others are your choice. ## eg(table) The table demonstrates remarkable cohesiveness: - Column-wise: Each strategy type (e.g., IP vs Value Chain) maintains consistent relationships across all rows. For example, IP:Value Chain always represents a CONTROL:EXECUTION relationship - Row-wise: Each pair of attributes (e.g., Customer Focus and Innovation Type) maintains consistent relationships across strategies. EXISTING:NEW users maps consistently to COMPONENT:SYSTEM innovations | Strategy | 🦠Intellectual Property | 🐬Value Chain | 🐅Disruptor | 🐘Architectural | | ------------------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Nickname | THE THINKERS | THE PARTNERS | THE HUSTLERS | THE BUILDERS | | Tagline | "Ideas Factory" | "Core Competency" | "Creative Destruction" | "Zero to One" | | Customer Focus | DELIVER value for EXISTING users | DISCOVER value for EXISTING users | DISCOVER value for NEW users | DELIVER value for NEW users | | Innovation Type | Develop GENERAL COMPONENT innovations | Develop SPECIALIZED COMPONENT innovations | Develop SPECIALIZED SYSTEM innovations | Develop GENERAL SYSTEM innovations | | Orientation | Orientation towards **👥**COLLABORATION and investment in CONTROL | Orientation towards **👥**COLLABORATION and investment in EXECUTION | Orientation towards **🥷**COMPETITION and investment in EXECUTION | Orientation towards **🥷**COMPETITION and investment in CONTROL | | Resources & Capabilities | Leverage FUNCTIONAL RESOURCES | Build FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITIES | Build INTEGRATED CAPABILITIES | Leverage INTEGRATED RESOURCES | | Value Creation Hypothesis | VENTURE CREATES VALUE because its COMPONENT INNOVATIONS deliver value for EXISTING users | VENTURE CREATES VALUE because its COMPONENT INNOVATIONS discover value for EXISTING users | VENTURE CREATES VALUE because its SYSTEM INNOVATIONS discover value for NEW users | VENTURE CREATES VALUE because its SYSTEM INNOVATIONS deliver value for NEW users | | Value Capture Hypothesis | VENTURE CAPTURES VALUE because it CONTROLS a key FUNCTIONAL RESOURCE | VENTURE CAPTURES VALUE because it EXECUTES on key FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITIES | VENTURE CAPTURES VALUE because it EXECUTES on key INTEGRATED CAPABILITIES | VENTURE CAPTURES VALUE because it CONTROLS a key INTEGRATED RESOURCE | | Examples | Harry Potter, Getty Images, Xerox, DOLBY, INTELLECTUAL VENTURES, Genentech | Foxconn, PayPal, Madaket, Mattermark, DRIZLY, STRATACOM | NETFLIX, Zipcar, Salesforce, Amazon, Skype, oDesk | Facebook, AngelList, eBay, Ford, Etsy, Dell |