The R&D expenses of three tech companies, Apple, Samjeon, and Maso, which have s

The R&D expenses of three tech companies, Apple, Samjeon, and Maso, which have sales of more than 250 trillion won, are about 10%, which is around 25 trillion won to 30 trillion won.

Tech companies with sales of 30 to 50 trillion won, AMD or Nvidia (NVIDIA will exceed 100 trillion won this year, but it was much smaller until last year.) It is about 25 to 27% of sales, about 8 trillion won.

Intel, the midway point between the two groups, spent about 20 trillion won on sales of just over 100 trillion won before the sharp drop in sales. It means between 17 and 20 percent.

Looking at the number between groups above, the element of R&D is a very effective means of strengthening competitiveness when a company's sales are small. Even 27% of sales are invested in R&D.
However, as the scale grows, the efficiency gradually decreases. It decreases to about 20%, and when it becomes larger again, it decreases to 10% of sales. You might think, "What is lowering efficiency by reducing investment growth in the sector?" However, because the company's management is not stupid, the company's expenses are sufficiently efficient. The larger the company's sales increase, the lower the proportion of R&D, which means that the additional revenue produced by the increase in R&D creates a typical marginal harvesting curve that is less efficient. (Law of disciplining marginal return)

We need evidence to say that the three wars crisis or Intel's crisis was caused by bureaucratic and financial superiors ignoring engineers and lowering R&D costs, but in fact, these companies' overall R&D costs have never decreased. This explanation is only a superficial analysis, not an analysis of the real cause.

The total R&D costs were executed according to the law of marginal harvest at scale. The question should be raised about leadership and organizational culture, such as (1) whether it was invested in high-priority areas or in low-impact areas, and (2) why the use of R&D expenses did not lead to sales and competitiveness enhancement for Samjeon and Intel organizations, and why the efficiency of the organization decreased. Of course, these problems are also analyzed if you think of the answer in a way such as 'management lacked leadership and insights, and the organization became bureaucratic and full.' This is also not a result or cause.

Analysis of the cause of an abnormal crisis can also be complacent. This is because fixing the cause cannot solve the problem once a crisis occurs. (This means that the problem cannot be solved at the level of organization's ripping and fixing to increase R&D efficiency.)
So what? In the next post.

[Rainmaker]