The Corporate Innovation Blog

Links to the New Blogs...

2009-03-25T10:28:00.004-04:00

Hi All

Apologies for the delays in writing this - but the Corporate Innovation Blog is now no longer being added to - instead, we've opted to go the more personal approach, allowing each of our contributors to exercise their own voices in their own blogs - this has resulted in far more content, more expert insights, and giving you a deeper interaction with each of our experts.

To go to Boris' Blog - http://www.completeinnovator.com

To go to Mark's Blog - http://markturrell.wordpress.com

I sincerely hope you enjoy the new offerings!

Best Regards

Boris Pluskowski

http://www.completeinnovator.com

Corporate Innovation - On a Break

2007-11-29T04:07:00.000-05:00

When we started the Corporate Innovation Blog a some years back, there were relatively few places to go to get information and insight on innovation. This has now changed, with regular sections in BusinessWeek, a plethora of conferences around the world, and several blogs on innovation, idea management and related topics.

Rather than be just another voice, we are going into hibernation mode with this blog, and working on one specifically for Imaginatik, our company. We'll post a link to the new blog as soon as it is ready for prime-time.

In the mean-time [sic], have a read through the past content - there are some great insights and links to fab resources in here.

All the best,

The Imaginatik Research Team
(Mark, Boris, Matt & Dave)

How Fast Are You Failing?

2007-08-08T16:30:00.000-04:00

Tucked at the end of a Business Week profile of the challenges facing Merck (full disclosure: client) are details of a "kill fee" incentive for scientists to declare certain initiatives as failed. Reaching critical "no-go" decisions sooner means those lessons can be shared with others -- potentially heading off other unproductive efforts -- with resources shifted to more promising projects.

This shows why unit sales, income or new product introductions are flawed metrics in determining innovation success. Mean-time-to-failure or mean-time-to-action can be just as valuable in identifying whether process and projects are effective. Imaginatik Research has seen incentives for participation prove as motivating as recognition for leading an ideation event.

Management consultants say rewarding misses as well as hits is the right idea, and one that the entire industry will need to adopt. "The earlier you determine when something should be killed, the better," says Charlie Beaver, vice-president at consultant Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. Still, he warns, changing a corporate culture from one that thrives on success to one that also accepts failure "is a very large hurdle to overcome."

Mobilizing Minds

2007-07-13T15:46:00.001-04:00

The latest in innovating management from McKinsey & Co. is the book Mobilizing Minds, which tries to prepare people and companies for a 21st century model of success.

Forget 'work smarter, not harder' -- this book suggests that profit-per-employee yardsticks to measure effective use of knowledge is a far better barometer than ROI or capital spending.

In his book review that explains the book's thesis, FT columnist Stefan Stern appears to sing a chorus from the Imaginatik songbook: "the great majority of businesses are underperforming precisely because their most important intangible assets -- the ideas and creativity of their knowledge workers -- are unwittingly suppressed by the way in which these businesses are set up to operate."

At issue is a complexity that mirrors the traffic and congestion on overfilled highways. You can do business using a 20th century model (just as you CAN travel from LA to Long Beach on a roadway at rush hour) but never before has it taken more time, wasted more resources and involved more people in the futile attempt.

From Business to Baseball -- With Apologies to Cubs Fans

2007-07-11T13:49:00.001-04:00

Xerox offers a keen example of how corporate innovation and problem-solving can run in cycles, counter to the business cycles that usually define success. When creative thinking is needed most, many companies move toward safe, less-challenging strategies. This story from the July 9 Fortune referenced in a blog across town recaps how Sophie Vanderbroek has revived a culture of innovation, at the place that brought us the computer mouse, Ethernet and countless other technologies. Those inventions became crucial to every business. Now, Xerox is on to "reusable paper" that goes blank at a particular time for another document -- after noticing that 40 percent of paper used in offices ends up in the trash

The quest for uniformity (whether it's predictable earnings, people who think similarly, herd mentality in the industry) is a clear sign it's time to change the status quo. One reason companies don't shake things up is they may be succeeding financially but on the 'slippery slope' to a shortfall of new products/services. Think of pro baseball -- it's July and the All-Star Break -- that too much spent on star players can starve budgets for farm teams and developing internal talent for much less money.

Look to Imaginatik for collaborative solutions, and other ways to tap the collective genius in your organization -- before it becomes a crisis (or your team fails to make the playoffs). For those readers overseas, please substitute "football" for "baseball" and the name of your worst local club for "Cubs."

A Pioneering, Breakthrough, Innovation Blog Item ( no really)

2007-06-27T12:43:00.001-04:00

Waggener Edstrom Worldwide (Microsoft’s PR firm) has studied what it takes to be perceived as an innovator. Not surprisingly, it requires telling people you’re innovative – using keywords such as “creative” or “pioneering.” This emotional appeal can communicate and convince people of your image more powerfully than mere facts, figures or details.

What? You wanted wisdom from a PR firm?

The agency tracked two sets of innovation keywords that were topical (patents, design, labs, innovation etc ) and sentimental ( revolutionary, cutting-edge, genius etc.) against media coverage of 20 IT companies in the top 15 business publications over the period Jan 2005-June 2006.

Coincidentally . . . the time period leading up to Microsoft’s introduction of the Vista operating system. You can read more, it’s only four pages long and not very breakthrough in its details or presentation, which is surprising since the company claims to have invented Innovation Communications(SM).

Imaginatik/Pfizer innovation webinar

2007-06-25T09:47:00.000-04:00

You're invited to a webinar spotlighting idea management innovation solutions from Imaginatik and the world's most advanced companies.

Tuesday - June 26 - 10am EDT "Near Shore Innovation" will be presented by Dr. Rob Spencer of Pfizer, recently profiled in BioIT World magazine (and the BBGM blog)

Please e-mailresearch@imaginatik.com for registration. And, yes, spaces are limited so we need an RSVP.

Spencer explains how 'open innovation' provides an advance view of where your market or industry is heading, while minimizing security concerns and creating new partnerships for growth. Pfizer has done all three and expanded idea management to a widely used tool serving thousands of people around the world.

Happy Just To Be Nominated

2007-06-19T12:52:00.000-04:00

Thanks to Rafael Navarro of Cranfield University in UK and his Best of Enterprise 2.0 blog for a list of Top 10 companies best positioned for 21st century consulting and business. Imaginatik is one of only two 1990s vintage companies recognized and we're glad to be included.

You'll find a YouTube video for new IBM business simulation Innov8 that illustrates the impact of new processes and Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) . The simulator pulls back the curtain on how computing power has moved away onto the network. Contact us for more information -- research@imaginatik.com

Navigating successfully from Knowledge Management to Idea Management and Innovation is a unique position that means we've seen what hasn't worked but more importantly, what DOES work and continues to deliver results. That experience helps us harness the power of innovation programs and technologies that are now mature enough to deliver on Web 1.0 promises.

Excessive Innovation?

2007-06-13T14:32:00.001-04:00

This WSJ story outlines the difficulties of being Avery Dennison, which had an over-abundance of "good ideas" that overloaded its innovation program. Sounds like time for an 'idea management' solution. . . . And thanks to the George Group for suggestions on creating a more efficient new product pipeline. These include radical concepts such as building in slack time to help manage for delays or cross-training workers among different functions to solve staff shortages.

Seems Avery Dennison couldn't cope having too many good ideas. With too many activities at the end of the pipeline, it's easy to chase diverse projects that may all seem worthwhile. Each company needs methods for evaluating, reviewing and queueing up ideas for action and implementation -- much like an air traffic control operator -- to ensure smooth flow, appropriate resources and ongoing "management" of the innovation process.

This story echoes a blog/item in CIO magazine about comments from Disney CIO Tony Scott who said "In some respects there's too much innovation, or not enough scale out of the innovation we have."

A mind is a terrible thing to waste . . .

Job Security for Innovators

2007-06-11T09:45:00.000-04:00

This brief, bloggy history lesson by Don Dodge of Microsoft provides details on how first movers DON'T always capture the castle by innovating. His advice is that companies need to look farther ahead -- though his ever-accelerating version of "Innovator's Dilemma" means that instead of 10-to-20 years for a challenger to overtake established players, it can be done in only a few years. Even new stars can burn out quickly.

His advice: Keep running hard because you never know who's gaining on you or how the market will change. Maybe he's a student of Satchel Paige. . .

http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2005/10/innovate_or_imi.html

Innovation Is The Rule, Not The Exception

2007-06-06T13:36:00.001-04:00

Thanks to the Connected Collective Innovation blog for this article on how "innovation is the new normal" in the news media.

More than a decade or more into the Internet Revolution, some fans of online news, e-mailed headlines and hyperlinked social media are saying its time to retire the moniker "new media" and just call it "media." This may be a shameless ploy by carbon-based news organizations to claim they 'get it' and have joined the 21st century. Media companies took longer than most to learn about transparency, audience participation and other 'interactive approaches' but the article also shows that any one-way-only business model can't last.

How long before the TV network news or the NY Times credits a story to an independent blogger?

Come here, Innovation, I want you

2007-05-29T16:34:00.000-04:00

This past weekend's Financial Times offers a 13-step process on How to Innovate. David Bodanis provides a few interesting suggestions, viewed through the career of Alexander Graham Bell, less well-known as a tutor to deaf youth in Boston. His motivation as an inventor could also have been his pursuit of one of his students Mabel Hubbard, and the connections or wealth the Hubbard family offered.

Spoiler alert: Bell may, or may not have invented the telephone. German inventor Philipp Reis claims to have a similar device built as early as 1863. But Bell got the girl and married Mabel in 1877 -- a year after patenting the telephone in the U.S.

Moving Ideas To Action

2007-05-24T14:22:00.000-04:00

Thanks to the nice folks at the BBGM blog for recapping a BioIT World presentation where Pfizer (an Imaginatik client) gave 'idea management' another nudge into the common vernacular. They get it. Just having an idea isn't enough -- ideas have to be merged with existing knowledge and then move to action to test or implement to see how the audience responds.

Having a shared language is key to bringing new concepts alive -- defining concepts and goals, removing uncertainties and setting out clear expectations (even if that means keeping an open mind for the unexpected -- remember, Viagra research began as a heart disease remedy). At Imaginatik Research, we're reminded of this daily.

We tackle the challenge daily of joining clients, co-workers and partners around the world and asking them to share technical jargon about rapidly changing corporate concepts. And without the entertaining, IT double-speak of "mission-critical innovation" or "Web 2.0 solution provider."

Send two boxtops and an e-mail if you need a decoder ring. . . .

Yesterday's Failure = Tomorrow's Breakthrough

2007-05-23T16:41:00.000-04:00

A recent PBS show on the challenges of the first trans-Atlantic telegraph cable contained a historical factoid that shows how long it can take good ideas to germinate.

One challenge was having a boat large enough to carry such a huge coil of cable that would span the thousands of miles from the Irish coast to Newfoundland in Canada. After a massive ship, the Great Eastern, failed as a British tourist vessel designed for luxury travel to Australia, it was chartered 'for 2 percent of its construction cost' to unspool the trans-Atlantic cable in 1865.

Now for the payoff: The ship was the largest in the world -- six times larger than any rival -- when initially built and had a double-hull construction that would be "rediscovered" a century later as a way to make ships safer against hull damage (from, say, icebergs. . . .) and to make oil tankers more secure against leaks.

Talk about your lemons into lemonades.

Pimp my Ride? Nope, Smell my Phone . . .

2007-05-16T14:03:00.000-04:00

One really interesting session from the Front End of Innovation included a scented all-natural plastic from the Innovation Lab at Eastman Chemical Co. Gaylon White, director of Design Industry Programs at Eastman, demonstrated a plastic made from wood pulp that has the feel, sound and quality of wood – yet is bio-degradable as a plastic so it wins points from environmentalists.

Auracell – this is where the smell comes in – resulted from efforts with two other companies to add scent or deliver anti-microbials to avoid infectious disease. White has a Razr phone cover that smells like pina colada from Fone Gear – one of five available flavors.

In 2005, the innovation lab itself ran into a wall when several of its champions left the company. Some executives wanted to return to less innovative approaches, including supporting the sales process through trade shows and handshaking instead of more visionary or disruptive methods.

Creativity always meets resistance and we’re no different than anybody else in that sense,” White says. “Externally, innovation lab was a hit but even our employees didn’t know what we were doing with our materials. The biggest mistake we made was that there wasn’t sufficient internal communications, a bigger splash, more frequent and closer communication,” he said. “The resistance was the mar/com group which had traditionally been reliant on trade shows -- they saw us as taking away money from things they could be doing.”

His message: “We’re transmitting, you’re not receiving” was aimed at both executives and sales people who weren’t open to changes that support and sustain innovation. White suggests taking extra care to ensure your mission and message can be clearly understood within the company, among consumers and stakeholders. Any confusion can lead to reluctance or, worse, efforts at undermining change – especially if it means a loss of prestige or resources.

One solution included reorganizing the innovation lab’s website to serve audiences inside Eastman and to engage customers outside. The plastic samples White once gave out as small chips have been reborn as yin-yang shaped ‘pebbles’ that have become collector items -- all 22 different scents, colors, finishes are eagerly saved among designers or packaging executives.

Get to Know CECOR

2007-05-11T10:49:00.000-04:00

General Electric could do for innovation what Ford did for factory production or Motorola did for process in developing Six Sigma.

Patia McGrath, marketing director at GE detailed specific tools, techniques and approaches to continuous corporate-level innovation. When CEO Jeffrey Immelt challenged GE to deliver 8 percent annual growth, it meant producing a $10-12 billion in value – roughly the size of Nike or British Airways. That doesn’t happen with a single Eureka!

You’ll be hearing more about CECOR, acronym for the process Calibrate, Explore, Create, Organize, Realize. CEC is strategy and OR is commercialization. Not an easy match when creativity has to play nicely with strategy and commercial development.

CEC can be repeated to refine learning and approaches. The entire spectrum is question-based: asking for information instead of listing assumptions and to-do lists. It’s important to recognize how much you don’t know and can’t predict.

“We take the opposite view when people say a giant company can’t be nimble,” McGrath told the Front End conference. GE uses a toolkit – including Idea Central – that combines idea markets, processes and events to support “Imagination Breakthroughs” or IBs.

With more than 100 IBs in the works, GE has also gotten comfortable with the idea that some initiatives fail – a very different approach than during the Jack Welch era.

TRIVIA ALERT – GE is the only company continuously listed in the Dow Jones Index since the index began in 1896.

Talking to a Blog -- with unexpected results

2007-05-10T11:03:00.001-04:00

Jott From Boris Pluskowski (Involved the new service www.jott.com). You call and speak a message that is recorded and can be sent via e-mail, convertedfrom speech to text. This post required a fair amount of editing -- even these few sentences didn't make it clearly into the blog's HTML.

Instead of listening to customer problems and having them send solutions -- a favorite example of Open Innovation -- you might focus instead on the customer experience since THEY are the ones who have a problem YOU can solve. Following the 'voice of the customer' sounds like you're getting close to your consumers but often leads to the wrong issue and, thus, the wrong solution.

After all, the customer can't really innovate or solve issues in YOUR company without knowing more about the reasons why things happened the way they did. They see the events and perceive causes and effects very differently than employees or executives

Hope you'll check back for postings and updates from the Front End of Innovation conference in Boston, today and tomorrow. Instead of 'track back' perhaps you'd like to 'talk back' . . . .

Listen to audio
Set reminders, assign, and manage this jott on Jott.com

Brought to you by Jott Networks, Inc.

Is 'Attention' Innovation?

2007-05-03T16:56:00.000-04:00

A "Fashion Journal' column in the WSJ makes extensive use of the I word (innovation) in lamenting that upscale, luxury retailers are neglecting clients and less prestigious, but more service-focused, offerings are taking the place of traditional luxury.

The idea is that once luxury sellers (Tiffany, Starbucks, American Airlines and other carriers that began in the golden age of aviation) go mainstream they lose their cache and risk being viewed as no longer innovative. Yet companies that offer creative and targeted services can SEEM customer-focused (Virgin Airlines, Target, Apple) even if they are not luxury brands. A company that interacts with its customer and, even better, identifies them as special through events, groups, services can break out in a big way.

Being seen as cool (W Hotels, Apple, Mini) may be more valuable than the perception of a luxury brand (Ritz-Carlton, Cadillac) if those brands get associated with older, mainline rivals. At the Imaginatik User Group Conference coming up next week, we'll ask about the role innovation plays in creating the 'cool factor' (see also: "Boss" "Hip" "Phat" "Stylin" and "Neat-o").

Big I and Little i Innovation

2007-05-02T17:22:00.000-04:00

Wharton Prof. George Day advises that big and little innovations are critical to sustaining corporate growth. His thoughts on how to close the 'growth gap' appear in a Knowledge@Wharton article (free registration required) describing how a portfolio of long-term and short-term objectives need to be identified, along with the change management route for incorporating ALL these factors when planning ahead.

Successful companies look to repeat the very thing that delivered results, one example of how even risks that pay off can turn an organization cautious and incremental. Conversely, a company in decline - seeing a widening gap -- may take an excessive risk, hoping for one 'massive I' that saves the day. Somewhere in-between the two is a prudent set of large and small bets -- a good strategy for this weekend's Kentucky Derby wagering as well.

Day points to GE and McDonald's (both Imaginatik clients by the way) as prime examples of robust corporate innovation management portfolios. Both companies have learned from big initiatives, some occasional duds but a persistent innovation strategy which has led to market leadership positions.

One could (and should) also argue that corporate innovations extend beyond the concept of little and large. Both big and small I should be spread out across all the innovation dimensions - to ensure that not only variable sizes of innovation, but to spur innovations in all aspects of your organisation. The more dimensions employed in innovation, the more competitive your edge can be in the long run (or the home stretch).

"Rigor" can mean stiffness or intensity

2007-04-16T15:27:00.000-04:00

We prefer the intensity definition. Intuit CEO Steve Bennett added nicely to our Six Sigma thread (without knowing it) when he used the word "rigor" to describe how his management skills - honed at GE - were applied at the Silicon Valley software maker. These comments come from the 4/16 WSJ.

In a Q&A, Bennett contends:
1. Customer-driven innovation wins consistently against technology-driven innovation.
2. Great companies have innovation and rigor; they are complementary, not in conflict.
3. Process is an enabler to achieve an outcome; it is not the desired outcome.

His point? A clear and process-driven approach to innovation makes it even more successful -- in the past few years Intuit has introduced more new products than ever in company history. What Bennett calls "strategic and operational rigor" makes it more feasible to execute on ideas that emerge.

After all, ideas without action are dreams . . . . What's on your to-do list for today?

Rembrandts In YOUR Attic?

2007-04-13T15:33:00.000-04:00

Chris Zook of Bain & Co. wrote the book "Unstoppable" and an op-ed in the WSJ on "hidden assets" that turned around Apple, GE, Nestle and others. These companies "discovered" existing products, markets or innovations but only when key players chose to pursue them. Apple built its platform on the iPod, GE tapped the strength of GE Capital and other survivors found their solutions in-house.

Nine of 10 companies that renewed themselves in the past decade used assets that had not been maximized. Zook's research found that half of the Global 500 companies since 1994 have seen their world changed by core business threats. Sounds like the situation Bristol Myers-Squibb faced when the company turned to idea management tools - details at http://www.imaginatik.com/webdoc_idea_case_bms.

About half of those challenged companies used merger/bankruptcy to lose their positions. The other half made risky fundamental strategy changes to grow and survive. Stories like these are reminders that species have to adapt to survive. After all, Nokia began as a wood/paper company. . . so cell phones and snow tires took it a long way from its roots (insert groan here).

Six Sigma Improves Innovation

2007-04-09T14:20:00.000-04:00

Those of you puzzling over how to combine Six Sigma quality initiatives with the creativity of innovation might consider a May 10 webinar by Bob Carter, a senior consultant at Raytheon USA. (Shameless plug) His success at building teams of diverse thinkers by merging the science of engineering with the free-thinking creativity of problem-solving is worth every penny (or Euros or quid).

“Process and methodology is more important than results to many Six Sigma people. But innovation relies on variation – precisely what Six Sigma is supposed to remove,” he says. “One key is to adapt the tools to the problems and not vice versa.” After all, he warns, focusing too closely on sales or other metrics can drive your company to copy others and, potentially, move you farther away from goals or customers.

Bob was a featured speaker at recent Imaginatik Research master session that explored how Six Sigma can strengthen idea management to build a stronger innovation platform. Taking DMAIC process steps and applying them to production, improvement and deployment of ideas can make any organization a hothouse for innovation. Stay tuned for more in the next Imaginatik Research newsletter.

Customers Determine Innovation

2007-04-03T17:47:00.000-04:00

A tiny item in the April 3 WSJ on Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn offers a big insight on the future of vehicles and the current 'green energy' movement. Asked about how Nissan plans to compete with the diesel, gas/electric hybrid or or hydrogen-powered engines -- especially given Toyota and Honda's leadership -- Ghosn replied "At the end, we don't decide, the customers decide."

Despite all the technology promise, if the buyer doesn't buy it, there's a fundamental problem. The lesson is that consumer education (marketing) and plenty of other 'things' have to change for innovation to succeed over the status quo. Some are external and beyond your control (in this case gasoline prices, ecological concerns) but the window of opportunity has to be open. Then you can create the right circumstances and be ready to capitalize.

What are you driving at? And what sort of engine does it have?

A Conversation Starter?

2007-04-03T16:59:00.000-04:00

As if you don't have enough reading with blogs, Wikis, newsletters, books and magazines, here's another competitor for your limited time and attention: Harvard Business School Publishing hopes to capture eyeballs and minds by sparking online exchanges with influential business thinkers. Tom Davenport and Larry Prusak are among the first and a "conversation starter" is designed to spark a response.

Just remember where you heard of it and c'mon back here for deep thoughts. For many of us, it's as close to the hallowed halls of Harvard as we'll get.

Pharma Innovation Comes from Ideas

2007-03-26T17:56:00.000-04:00

If you've ever wondered how a global pharmaceutical company manages ideas, check out a new report from Gartner that explains how software, events and deep expertise all combine to power a world-class innovation program. This profile of Pfizer – an Idea Central client -- includes several operations that have longstanding experience with Imaginatik tools.

Sorry to say, the report isn't available for public purchase. But Gartner clients can access it by using the code G00146286.

Carol Rozwell wrote the report, which was released in late February. She’s a vice president at Gartner and leader of its Research Community on Innovation. She focuses on the Life Sciences sector (pharmaceutical, biotech and medical products companies) and examining the impact of technology and standards on business models, processes and channel relationships.

Time is on my side. Or is it?

2007-03-22T16:30:00.000-04:00

A virtual 'thank you' to Intranet Benchmarking Forum blog for an electro-shout out on the reasons for idea events with time limits. The power of closing time is a motivator -- in bars, schools, offices . . . . Think of how the upcoming vacation creates a frenzy. When people see time slipping by, they react. Some panic, others sharpen their focus and perform at peak efficiency. There's nothing quite like a deadline to spur action.

Can management handle innovation?

2007-03-20T14:47:00.000-04:00

In the Financial Times, Richard Straub asks reasonable questions about how executives learn to manage the new realities of innovation and collaboration -- unruly processes that often involve people outside your organization. Is management ready to change itself and try a new approach? We've heard about the end of military-style "Command and Control" management in favor of more nimble and decentralized methods. What makes your top executives outperform the competition? Do they "get it" about new tech and new approaches?

Are you learning from the Web? Or is it learning from you? Mike Wesch, an anthropology professor at Kansas State University, tackles the intriguing issues of Web 2.0 using a great 'music video'. Check theYouTube video and call it distance learning. It is must-see education for top executives. So, put down the Blackberry for five minutes and let us know what you think. Then share this with your manager and explain what it means.

Here's a good idea: Be persistent

2007-03-13T12:10:00.000-04:00

Installment 2 of the CNBC series "The Business of Innovation" aired on Sunday with a few suggestions that approach daily usefulness -- be creative, be patient, and find where service/product gaps are.

Because this is American TV, the focus is on personalities and superstar CEOs who champion innovation. So it may leave the impression that the CEO or innovation leader is behind the success. There have been mentions of client-centric or open innovation programs but some of the IBM commercials are more compelling than the program itself -- especially one spot detailing Project Checkmate, a response to possible bird flu outbreaks by national governments, emergency responders and other agencies worldwide. That message is clear -- you need knowledge and preparation to be ready for opportunities/crises. And you need a group of people with complementary skills who can bring deliver in a combined effort.

I hope you'll tune in to the Imaginatik Research newsletter, where this month we'll look at the shelf-life of ideas and the need to build on them over time. Very few breakthroughs happen on the first attempt, and the greatest impact often comes from incorporating different inputs (financial, marketing, business model) that are reinforcing. Even Frankenstein had to go through some ugly beta versions before he hit the big-time in Hollywood. . . .

2007-03-07T14:40:00.000-05:00

When will they learn?
Innovation without value creation is just wheel-spinning...

Forrester Research recently announced a new survey that looked at innovation from a macro level - this is an excerpt from InformationWeek :

"Investing in knowledge -- a term that in this context encompasses funding for research and development, higher education, and software -- is seen as a way to create national wealth, enhance geopolitical power, solve social problems, and bolster national pride.

Developed nations spend an average of $1,270 per capita yearly to improve knowledge yet fail to achieve the desired benefits, according to Forrester's study.

The U.S. spent almost $300 billion in public and private money on R&D in 2003, about half of all R&D spending by the 30 member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). America can claim 35% of all patents filed in Europe, Japan, and at home. But such spending doesn't create jobs or boost the number of goods and services produced by a country -- also known as the gross domestic product (GDP)"

Why is it taking countries so long to realize the best practices of innovation learned long ago -- often through hard failures -- at top companies worldwide? Unless there are goals or a clear focus on creating value, there's no reason to start innovating. Have we learned nothing from the failures of the Knowledge Management era?

Knowledge intensive initiatives that don't focus on targeted and directed creation of actual benefits and value will waste the time, money and goodwill of workers, partners, customers or taxpayers. This applies equally for companies seeking bottom line dollar value or governments seeking socio-economic benefits.

From a corporate standpoint, companies too often set out fluffy so-called "innovation" projects purely to check a box on the next annual report. These 'keep up with the Joneses' attempts have no aims, no metrics, no focus on solving a particular issue, and worst of all, no plan to impact the bottom line.

These "lazy innovators" are shocking only in that the executives leading the charge must have (again) fallen victim to unscrupulous consultants, vendors, and yes-men who are too scared or inexperienced to point out obvious flaws. Too often, the only objective is increasing employee participation, or hunt through a tub of random ideas that might contain one tiny golden nugget.

"Innovation" has tons of definitions but I have yet to see one from any credible source that doesn't involve "creating value" as a key factor. Leading innovators -- Whirlpool, Coca-Cola, Pfizer, and Google -- recognize this vital point. Without a clear value objective, what follows is failure, finger-pointing and a laundry list of other problems including:

-Loss of respect from senior staff who only see a frivolous cost center to be cut at the next downturn.
-Indifference and scorn from employees, suppliers, customers, and participants whose time and good intentions got wasted. Plus the frustration and disappointment when no action results from their intellectual input.
-Anger from shareholders who see money wasted on initiatives that could deliver great value -- and often do create benefits at other organizations -- but are child's play for a team that knows how the game is played.

For governments, the message is the same - just replace the word "taxpayer" for various stakeholders. The wrong-headed belief that more money will solve the woes at universities and other research facilities has meant years of throwing money at problems that don't respond. Maybe there's a golden nugget there in an overlooked patent application . . . .More likely, it's another expensive misadventure from people who haven't learned their lessons.

2007-03-06T13:56:00.000-05:00

A TV Series on Innovation?

One sign that the innovation buzz may have reached its apex is the number of companies declaring themselves "innovative." Another is the five-part weekly TV series "The Business of Innovation" that premiered Sunday in the U.S. on the cable network, CNBC.

The first installment was largely a discussion scrum with experts debating various definitions of innovation and then differing on methods for achieving success. Profiles of companies and CEOs ranged from the expected 'let's be like Google' to a warmed-over recap of why influential top executives may turn out to be evil (Bernie Ebbers, Dennis Kozlowski) even when they're transforming a company. Anyone find the show useful?

2007-03-05T13:21:00.000-05:00

We're Back!

Firstly - apologies for the long silence on the blogsphere - with Imaginatik finally hitting the big time and going public on December 15 2006 (LSE:IMTK.L) I'm afraid the workload and excitement got to us all! However- all things are now back on track - and we welcome a ton of new changes for Imaginatik Research and the Corporate Innovation Blog. Most changes will become apparent to you in the coming months (a new dedicated website, new look and feel, new content, new tools at your disposal, etc) - but first and foremost of these is the brand new "tsar" for Imaginatik Research, Editor David Wallace - who will be a great addition to the regular editorial staff of myself, Matt Chapman, and Mark Turrell. David comes from a rich background in journalism (including NY Times and Wired magazine) and was one of the first journalists to consider and write on the impact of innovation on the corporate environment. Needless to say, we're all very excited to have his contributions going forward! We hope that you are too and I look forward to continuing our mutual goals of advancing the boundaries of corporate innovation through 2007 and beyond!

2006-11-08T21:03:00.000-05:00

Vodafone innovation unit split up

Vodafone have taken a surprising step just 6 months after creating the “Innovation Unit” and have reversed their strategy, which they set back in April 2006, and have now scraped the unit and parted with its international head, Thomas Geitner, who developed the Vodafone Live! mobile content platform four years ago.

This change has been reported as part of a resolution to improve overall operational performance following poor share price performances. Initially “the ‘New Business and Innovation Group’ was responsible for adopting Vodafone's "mobile plus" strategy and exploiting the arrival of convergence, including the possibility of offering broadband services over fixed-line”. However, these activities will be split between Vodafone’s group and marketing divisions, within its European operation run by the newly appointed deputy chief executive Vittorio Colao.

2006-10-25T06:31:00.000-04:00

People's Daily Online -- Ten percent of enterprise revenue made through innovation in China

This is an interesting article with lots of stats and a survey of 1600 senior managers who generally believe that income generated by innovation will increase in the future. From a survey by the National Statistics Bureau 70% of China’s enterprise revenue comes existing products and services, 20% from improvements to these products and services and 10% from innovation. Private enterprises profit most from innovation at 13% whilst state owned companies’ revenue from innovation is below the national average.

The group of senior managers surveyed generally believes that income generated by innovation will increase in the future. To achieve this 87% are looking to investment in increasing human resources in the next 3 years, 73% in better equipment and 15% plan to spend more on patent purchasing.

2006-10-04T16:23:00.000-04:00

End of Day One....

So – more interesting stories – this time from people like Jeneanne Rae and Sirius' Mary Pat Ryan – but the same themes still – Passion the vital ingredient for innovation; ideas are nothing without execution; innovation happening at the combination of different worlds and viewpoints (a point I'm sure will be hammered in tomorrow when Frans Johansson takes the stage). Clay Rockefeller and Josh Kopell also presented interesting stories.

All the stories today have been pretty interesting – hell, innovation's an interesting topic – and many share common traits that betray the truths of working in an innovative environment and taking innovation into reality. As such, I guess this conference has been a success (and I won't waste space here going over what so many other of my fellow Corante bloggers (http://innovation.corante.com) are covering in such a great way already) – but I have to remark on what a shame that questions haven't been allowed – for one of the greatest truths of the knowledge management era (and let's face it – that's what this essentially is – an exercise in knowledge transfer through storytelling) – is that people never know the full depth of what they know until they need to use it. Allowing questions might've released some of the more hidden knowledge nuggets the innovators here had to share – something very valuable indeed....

2006-10-04T11:47:00.000-04:00

Lunchtime...

So the talks themselves have so far been the predicted mix between intellectually fun with the odd practical tidbit thrown in – hardly setting the innovation world on fire. So the focus instead has been on looking at the underlying themes behind the stories that people are sharing. The big one from my perspective, has been the constant mentions of the need for “passion” in the innovation that people are trying to make a reality. True, not exactly a breakthrough thought (I mean, if you're passionate about something, you're more likely to work harder to make something work and therefore the more likely you are to make something work) – but still something that is frequently forgotten/ignored in big corporates. In fact, the more I think about it – it's funny how people always say that the difference between big companies and small competitors is the small company's ability to be more “flexible”, and more “reactive” to changing demands when compared to the big lumbering machine that a big company can be. However the real issue is that people in a small company are more likely to be engaged and passionate about the business – they just work harder as a company overall because everyone is more committed to making that company's vision a reality. The trick for big companies is figuring out how to instill that entrepreneurial passion in a corporate environment that doesn't always reward it – but desperately needs it if projects are to be as successful as they should be. Enough rambling – back to the conference....

Oh if you want Larry Keely's pretty pictures:

http://clientweb.doblin.com
username BIF
password: innovation

I believe access is only good for two weeks – so go get them now.

2006-10-04T09:46:00.000-04:00

BIF – Day One

Morning...

So am at BIF today – an innovation conference run by a local no-profit organization in Rhode Island with a bit of a twist: Rather than focusing on “gurus” regurgitating books and practitioners giving case studies, instead this conference focuses on the personal stories around innovation – presumably leading to a Steven Demming approved notion that the stories will aid the absorption of the lessons behind the stories. But does a day (or two if you stay for both days) of listening to innovators talk about their personal experiences really end up giving you something new and practical to take home to your company to use – or will it just be fodder for intellectual amusement. Realistically I'm hoping a mixture of both – but nevertheless, this intrigued me enough to make the 1 ½ hour commute, battling rush hour on both ends, from Boston to Providence to see the results. I'll try and post the odd blog entry over the time I'll be here which will also be the first time I think we've actually posted directly from a conference on a conference (I've posted from conferences tons of times in the past – but usually because I find my own intellectual creativity stimulated in the lulls created by duller speakers ;) ) - So let's see what happens...

2006-09-27T12:42:00.000-04:00

Thought you'd be interested in the new report from Deloitte called the "Glittering Prize:
How financial institutions can drive growth through process and service innovation."

The comment by HSBC's Chairman "Product innovation gives less than three months competitive advantage. Process innovation gives at least 12 months competitive advantage" reminds me of the innovation challenges our financial services clients face and how they use Imaginatik's innovation infrastructure to turn consumer insights into service and process innovations, that are difficult for competitors to copy.

A major recommendation from the report that we've enabled our financial services clients to excel at is "Aligning infrastructure. Innovative companies often have dedicated systems and tools to support the innovation process. Their performance measures and incentive structures align with the organization’s overall innovation goals – rewarding employees for figuring out how to do things better. They also use knowledge networks, enterprise portals and other technology tools to promote collaboration and information-sharing – a critical first step on the road to innovation."

The outcome is an effective innovation process that produces a "steady stream of sustaining and breakthrough ideas: new products; new services; new processes; new business models — innovations that enable a company to create and capture value in entirely new ways, ultimately leading to continuous revenue growth."

2006-09-18T11:53:00.000-04:00

Kimberly-Clark turns to outsiders on R&D

As more companies enter the Innovation Arms race, those with maturing Innovation Infrastructures are looking to increase their innovation capabilities. One such way that has been getting a lot of press recently has seen the promotion of open innovation with the likes of P&G, Kraft Foods and now Kimberly Clark openly reporting their capabilities.

This change has seen Kimberly Clark look outside its Research & Development (R&D) department for innovation by doing away with their vertically integrated model of product development with remarkable results. For example, by turning in part to people outside their organization, Kimberly Clark has managed to slash the time to bring new products to market by 30 percent.

One of the key reasons for the switch in strategy was due to the demand on the product pipeline that Kimberly-Clark’s senior vice president and Chief Innovation Officer (CIO), Cheryl Perkins, adopted three years ago when she began leading the company’s R&D operations. Like many companies, the demand for continual growth is leading to an increase in the Innovation Revenue Growth Gap, between known and unknown innovations, as companies struggle to find new sources for innovative ideas. Kimberly-Clark has overcome this by changing their focus and engaging with outside parties in the development and launch of products. Last year alone, Kimberly-Clark formed more than 30 partnerships. This has created some remarkable results, including; Huggies liquid baby powder, Huggies Cleanteam that hit the market shelves in 12 months instead of the typical 2-3 years and SunSignals, which have increased the sales of the Huggies swim pants whilst reaching a wider audience.

Crucially, Kimberly-Clark has not forgotten the importance of people in the process. They have assigned relationship managers for each of the partnerships and from a very early stage they agreed on who owns the intellectual property, before unresolved issues get a chance to erupt acrimoniously. Furthermore, whilst product and technology innovations have been the main focus, Kimberly-Clark have also looked at other Innovation Dimensions, including design. This has resulted in Kimberly-Clark planning to open a design studio in early September 2006. Such focus has created a more advanced, disciplined and successful innovation process. This is a great read. Open innovation is on the march….

2006-09-18T06:54:00.000-04:00

Five Key Strategies for Making Metrics

One of the key things for any business serious about innovation is how to measure it, what metrics to use and where/when to use them appropriately. These of course need to be tied back some financial measure; such as the Innovation Revenue Growth Gap with key metrics and targets agreed with management at all levels of the organization. Without these being pre-defined what are organizations really aiming at? Committed targets for metrics are critical to driving innovation; having metrics will not drive it.

There are some nice points made in this article.

Firstly, rewarding innovative behaviors as people correspond to the metrics that you measure them against is key. If people aren’t rewarded and recognized, why should they participate? Also companies need to have meaningful/representative ways to evaluate ideas i.e. appropriate metrics for measuring new products, services and business models.

I find ‘connecting the metric to the rhetoric’ a facilitating point. If an employee is solely measured on the day-to-day performance, such as a call centre worker, or year-to-year performance targets such as a salesman without any tie to longer-term innovation goals - they are clearly not aligned with a company’s innovation strategy or the company with them. This is a very short sighted approach. Innovation should not be evaluated solely within such time limits as there effects, if given the appropriate time, can bring great rewards.

Having metrics that supports or can support all types of innovative ideas is critical. Otherwise great ideas maybe lost or cast aside as they don’t meet the criteria or have a process them forward appropriately if/once identified. This is not just about metrics that people can use to evaluate ideas but about the people who assess ideas themselves and their ability to reform the process to allow a great idea to be properly evaluated rather than dismissed out of hand for failing the current criteria.

Likewise having different measures for incremental and breakthrough innovation is key, as they need to be treated differently, not only in how they are measured but how they are developed. Breakthroughs can be hard to measure with precision, as a company may not have anything to compare with previous experiences on its performance. Although this can be grown as a company matures in producing breakthrough innovations.

Innovation process metrics are lead indicators of innovation success. Without them, how do you know you have arrived? How do you know if the process is working, how it can be imporved or what value it is returning for your investment?

2006-08-22T08:52:00.000-04:00

Big Blue Brainstorm

IBM have recently undertaken an open innovation event or Innovation Jam as they call to collect ideas from some 100,000 minds, including employees, consultants, employees families and 67 clients from the Bank of America to Massachusetts Institute of Technology. By tapping into the wisdom of crowds IBM are looking to transform industries, alter human behaviour, and ultimately lead IBM to new business.

With IBM’s stock value remaining fairly flat for the past 3 years the impetus to do something different is very strong within the company. The company’s current reputation for constant incremental innovation hasn’t inspired investors. This commitment to do something very different is clearly singled by the company CEO, Samuel J. Palmisano who is investing $100 million behind the strongest ideas as they hunt for grand-scale innovation breakthroughs around the four topics of transportation, health, the environment, and finance and commerce.

We are seeing more and more companies embracing open innovation strategies to engage people through their various partnership networks, from employees families, retirees, clients, and suppliers to name but a few. In doing so these companies are turning to experts, like Imaginatik, to provide the necessary ‘Innovation Infrastructure’ that unlocks a companies potential to engage in ‘World Class’ open innovation programs. The landscape for idea generation is no long bounded by a companies four walls. These boundaries are breaking down as corporate innovators are extending their networks as they look to embrace the rich diversity of people from outside their organisations.

2006-08-03T12:27:00.000-04:00

Cheap 3D copying is enabling new Innovations

There's a fantastic article in the Wall Street Journal today on 3D printers that allow companies to create rapid prototypes.

For those of you who have no idea what a "3D Printer" is - imagine a machine looking very similar to an office photocopying machine - only rather than spitting out paper and ink copies of the intern's backside - it sprays out plastic resin and adhesive - to enabl companies to quickly and easily make physical prototypes of 3 dimensional CAD (Computer Aided Design) models.

These machines have existed for quite some time now - but the high price of the machine has meant that only a few companies have been able to afford to buy and run these machines. However, it now turns out that the price for a 3D printer has come down to the $20-50K range - bringing it within reach for most businesses as well as enabling a whole range of previously impractical business models and products.

Timberland use 3D printers now to create prototype shoes rather than waiting for modellers to to carve it out a week later - instead they can have a plastic resin version overnight.

Dassault - the French software company - on the other hand, are currently planning to build software that would enable kids to design their action figures. The kids would then go onto a website where they can order the figures they've just designed for $25-$30 a pop. At the other end, it's just a simple 3D printer, and a shipping and packaging service - both low cost services. Just think of the other possibilities for custom designed simple tools and products that could be made in a similar fashion!

We're apparently also not far from a 3D printer that can "print" out most of its own composite parts - the plastic ones anyway. The catch is that it can't (currently) print out the semiconductor parts - but it still means that to buy a second printer you buy will only cost you the semiconductors necessary to run it, and the cost of the plastic needed to print the other parts.

Although the article didn't go as far as saying so - we're obviously not getting that far away from a "Star-Trek"-like reality - where you can order something by name and a machine in the corner of the room "prints" it out for you in the time it takes you to cross the room. After all, it's more or less the same idea, just different molecules, right?... Bring on the future!

2006-07-28T08:23:00.000-04:00

How Failure Breeds Success

One of the key components in corporate innovation is how executives embrace failure to allow their companies to strive for those all important breakthroughs. BusinessWeek have interviewed executives from the likes of Coca-Cola, Virgin and Intuit to find out how they “cozy up to the risk taking that innovation requires” on how they manage, embrace and communicate failure within their organizations.

Communicating the message from the top that failure is part of the innovation process has been something that E. Neville Isdell, CEO and Chairman of Coca-Cola, did at their recent annual meeting in April 2006, where he declared that “you will see some failures. As we take more risks, this is something we must accept as part of the regeneration process”. Isdell wants Coca-Cola to take bigger risks, tolerate failures and change Coke’s traditional risk-averse culture. Failure is so important to the experimental process, without it you simply aren’t learning. The key is to have intelligent failures, and preferably those that happen early and inexpensively which lead to new insights about customers. Reflecting on failure and passing that knowledge on is paramount, so many companies embarrassed by failure want to quickly forget it ever happened. In a recent celebration of failure by its marketing team, Intuit Chairman, Scott Cook, emphasized that “it’s only a failure if we fail to get the learning”.

A clear example of this in practice can be seen by Virgin Atlantic J2000 angled reclining upper class seats. Whilst such seats had existed in upper class, Virgin was the first to announce its offering to the business class. However, a year later British Airways trumped them and rolled out a truly flat bed for business class. Whilst there had been initial excitement about the J2000, some people complained about the sliding movement of the seat and general discomfort. In the end the J2000 was wildly unsuccessful and widely recognized as inferior to their principal competitor. However, Virgin entrusted their head of design, Joe Ferry, with a huge $127 million overhaul of the airline’s upper-class sears to reclaim their lost position. Their new version was a solid success and exceeded their target to increase Virgin’s business market share by 1%. This re-design saw the business-class seat leap beyond just being flat. “Flight attendants flip over the back and seat cushions to make the bed, allowing for different foam consistencies for sitting and sleeping”.

If top executives employ faith in ‘intelligent failures’, people can and will embrace risk. By noting errors on the job, not repeating them but learning from them should not only be supported but valued. This is a great read on how to manage failure within innovation. Enjoy.

2006-07-12T12:11:00.000-04:00

FT.com / Business Life - GE keeps innovation in harness

General Electric is a powerhouse of Global Research, employing 2,600 scientists on a site covering 550 acres with an incredible $500m a year budget. As you would expect from a company of its heritage, innovation is a key component in unlocking this R&D potential for GE. However, this is not a one off activity. Over the years GE have seen that even the greatest of their innovation breakthroughs, such as the light bulb, lasers and non reflective glass for optical lenses, become commoditised products.

“Companies need to keep innovating if they are to keep growing”.

Therefore, GE’s growth has been built upon its capability, sustainability and scalability to successfully innovate and bring new and better products to market. After all, as Mark Little, head of GE global research says “It is easier to sell good things than bad things”.

With the constant pressures from globalization and the emergence of low-cost manufacturing in Asia and elsewhere, other companies, if they are not already doing so, are rapidly coming to the same conclusions as GE and harnessing their innovation potential to drive growth in profits and market share.

Yet how do you keep 2,600 scientists from spending too much time and money perusing intellectually promising projects that maybe too difficult or costly to execute commercially and instead steer them to create workable inventions?

One of the key elements of this success has been GE’s decision to infiltrate there Global Research team with commercially minded business program managers who are given control of their budget, which creates an interesting dynamic within the group to ensure that the money is well spent. This article is an interesting examination, of these business program managers, as one of the key elements for a successful innovation program and is well worth diving into for a deeper read. Other key lessons and best practices from these business program managers include:

- Spread and manage risk
- Avoid overlap
- Communicate realistic expectation of innovations
- Develop clear paths for projects to market
- Be ruthless about failing projects

2006-06-19T10:42:00.000-04:00

Champions Of Innovation - Have you ever wondered what ‘Innovation Champions’ do, who they are, and what some of their key innovation messages are?

Well wonder no more. BusinessWeek have surveyed a group of 25 ‘Champions of Innovation’ or as they are becoming more commonly know, Chief Innovation Officers (CIOs), who in the past three years have increased their numbers four-fold in numbers.

What are they doing?

These CIOs are charged with making “innovation routine, not random; central, not marginal; exciting, not scary. They educate, inspire, cajole, hire, bribe, punish, build -- all to transform their companies' cultures”.

Why are these CIO’s charged with such a mission?

The answer is fairly straightforward. “In an era when Six Sigma controls no longer guarantee competitive advantage, when outsourcing to China and India is universal, when creeping commoditization of products, services, and information hammers prices, innovation is the new currency of competition. It is the key to organic growth, the lever to widen profit margins, the Holy Grail of 21st century business”.

How do they achieve this mission?

Whilst there is no single uniform description for these CIOs, they do possess common traits that help them achieve their mission. Firstly they are customer focused – in its broader sense (although the article describes this more specifically as design and user-friendliness). Secondly, “they derive their clout from the top” i.e. the CEO is fully supportive and behind innovation. Thirdly, 70 percent of them are women, although how indicative this sample is of all the ‘CIOs’ and if women are more creative than men is not verified.

What are their key innovation messages?

From the broader group of 25, five ‘CIOs’ from Google, Old Navy, P&G, Hewlett-Packard and Citigroup were interviewed in more detail to accompany the main article. These are well worth a read, if only to see what a typical day is like for a ‘CIO’ in one of these organizations. Although I’m still trying to imagine how Marissa Mayer from Google manages on 5 hours of sleep! So what are some of the key messages?

Ideas come from everywhere, share everything you can (ideas, projects etc.), if you’re brilliant we’re hiring, license to pursue dreams, innovation not instant perfection, don’t politic use data, creativity loves restraint, worry about usage and users not money, don’t kill projects – morph them. Extracted from the ‘Nine Notions of Innovation’ - Marissa Mayer, Google.

“You can’t get the right outputs without giving people the right inputs” – Ivy Ross, Old Navy.

“Innovate by being connected and inspired by people around you. By creative by being transparent, open and stimulated by outside, global ideas (i.e Open Innovation)” – Claudia Kotcha, P&G.

Live and breathe with the customer – Sam Lucente, Hewlett-Packard.

Build a portfolio of small, ethnographically derived and metric-proven innovation ideas. Build Failure into the model. “Racking up early wins is key to getting widespread buy in”. – Amy Radin, CitiGroup

This is a good read and great insight into the daily lives of this newly emerging group of C-level managers. Enjoy.

2006-06-06T06:08:00.000-04:00

Financial News - Yahoo! TowerGroup Underscores Need for Innovation Among Financial Institutions Looking to Differentiate, Drive Results:

Following on from the Front End Innovation Conference, players from the global financial institutions gathered in Boston last week to discuss, "Differentiation, Execution and Results" and what this means to their industry. Unsurprisingly, the strongest call-to-action in response to this question was the need for financial institutions to invest in innovation to drive competitive differentiation both with other financial institutions and adjacent industries.

This has been keenly observed by the TowerGroup, who highlighted that "over the next few years, emerging markets will provide more attractive growth opportunities than the developed world for banks that can be adaptive and innovative in their approach to reaching these previously under banked populations. The ultimate leaders will bring new ideas and best practices both to and from their global expansion."

This is a key point for CEOs who are looking to gain true market leadership position. Consequently, it is expected that there will be a separation from the leaders, who engage with new ideas and embrace best innovation practices and the followers who do not, as companies enter The Innovation Arms Race.

Furthermore, "there has been a resurgence in innovation in the global capital markets, in many cases disrupting long-stagnant business models and driving new and sustainable growth. Innovative players are leveraging the evolution of new products like derivatives and hedge funds, revolutionizing new services in retirement income planning, and implementing new processes that better manage such diverse areas as market data and operational risk."

The message is clear. Companies need to innovate to drive competitive differentiation in order to continue the delivery of value to their customers, whilst sustaining the high levels of performance and return that their shareholders (and like) demand.

2006-05-19T07:31:00.000-04:00

Leader: The business of innovation - IT Director - Breaking Business and Technology News at silicon.com

We have all heard how IT is becoming a commodity and being outsourced to areas in the world such as India. A new report out from Gartner highlights the seriousness of the problem for CIO (in this case Chief Information Officer) and recommends that how they need to focus more energy on innovation and becoming better aligned with other business teams outside of IT as sources of ideas and inspiration. I couldn't agree more.

One of the key point the report highlights is that people outside of IT's inner circle don't have any preconceived notions about its limits. Diversity is such a key ingredient in innovation. Ask the same people the same questions to solving a problem and you will end-up with the same answers. If you can tap into a diverse employee base of people who have different relationships with customers, a company's products/services and ask them the same question the results are very different, and will produce new and innovative solutions.

Gloomy predictions are ahead for any CIOs who do not take this seriously. However all is not lost, CIOs can tap into these relationships. Imaginatik Research has produced a white paper on this very topic "A new approach to idea management". This makes good reading for any CIO's and others who need to understand how they can tackle innovation and tap into this rich resource of diversity within their company.

2006-05-10T17:58:00.000-04:00

The Fear of Innovation

It's always interesting to see how despite all the talk and bravado that so many CEOs are giving on how innovation is of "top importance" to their innovation (you only have to watch any CEO interview on CNBC, or read one of the by now hundreds of surveys written by every consulting company imaginable to see this in action) - very few CEOs are actually doing innovation.

The reason for this is several fold - but mainly various forms of Fear - especially the Fear of Change and the Fear of Risk.

For the longest time now, we , as business people, have known about the effect of change on an organization - we've even come up with entire books, divisions, and consulting practices designed to manage the effects of change. But innovation as a topic goes beyond that - for the real promise of what innovation is trying to achieve is to institutionalize regular and sustainable change.

Embracing Innovation means embracing and enforcing a commitment to be constantly changing and adapting to stay ahead of the game - and that can be a scary proposition for lesser CEOs. Not only that, but Innovation has the power to change not just what you sell and how you sell it, but also the power to change the very business itself. How hard must it be running a Forestry company that innovates itself into the cellphone business? Or how about the change from making typewriters to outsourced business services?

Not all companies are facing the same levels of change that Nokia and IBM (the two examples above) have gone through to be where they are now - but they will do. Almost every large company in existence that has been around for more than 100 years is no longer doing what they originally started off doing. Embracing innovation is more than a short term strategy for the wise CEO - it's a long term recipe to leaving a legacy.

Innovation can be a a risky exercise (especially if you don't choose your partners wisely!) that requires substantial investment and experimentation and that doesn't always guarantee the immediate payback that more risk adverse managers look for. However - as many CEOs are finding out - the risk of not innovating is far greater than any other alternative - the market needs change, the market demands change, the market rewards change.

You simply cannot deliver the ambitious growth targets that the markets demand by doing business as usual, by looking for incremental changes and mere line extensions, by hoping that innovations just rise to the top. Innovation by accident is not a strategy - it's a recipe for demise.

As the market gains speed and the pace of Innovation and change increases, the necessary complexity of change needed to gain traction in the market is also increasing (get the recent Innovation Dimensions Research Report from research@imaginatik.com for more). Lazy and inefficient innovators are punished by short innovation advantage times (ie the time for which any particular innovation provides a unique and substantial advantage in your competitive landscape) and the discipline and effort required by companies to enter the Innovation Arms Race gets higher.

So the question really is - can you afford to let these fears dominate your business? The longer you wait to take on the innovation challenge your company faces, the harder it will be for you to catch up to your competitors who move now.

2006-05-10T13:57:00.000-04:00

Optimize Magazine - "Top-down Innovation" - May 2006

An interesting article from Optimize's Bob Violino that looks at what potential barriers CEOs need to overcome to push the innovation agenda in their companies.

Some of the most interesting findings are from the recent IBM Consulting
survey of 765 CEOs that found out that "Without a supportive corporate culture, proper funding for investment, and a cooperative workforce, even the best plans for innovation will
falter"

The article as a whole has some very interesting insights, albeit with a bit
of a heavy technology bend on it (not surprising considering the bulk of
Optimize's readers are in IT), but the three charts provided by IBM were of
particular interest:

I frequently see culture continuously blamed for a lack of innovation within
a company, yet in reality culture is rarely ever the real culprit. In the
triumvate of key innovation factors (Leadership, Culture, Processes) - the
cultural differences between the top and bottom companies is not that great. I
don't know if that's a residue from the knowledge management days when everyone
was hell-bent on improving knowledge flow, increasing collaborative work
practices, and dissuading knowledge hoarding - but the simple fact of the matter
is that most companies have employees who have absolutely no problem or lack of
desire to contribute ideas to help the business. (see the chart below to see the
proof of that!) - rather the problem is almost always that they lack the
necessary processes to allow them to contribute in meaningful and effective
manners - or they lack leadership that truly encourages and supports innovation activities.

In addition to inadvertently laying to rest the "culture issue" - I
also found the above chart interesting to see the increasing importance of Open
Innovation - especially the somewhat controversial recent idea of collaborating
with competitors.

It was also very interesting to see an increasing number of CEOs now focusing
on Business Model Innovation - which would suggest that as innovation is
becoming more ingrained in the organisation, companies are beginning to look for
innovations that will have a longer lasting impact on the business.

Great stuff!

2006-04-26T13:59:00.000-04:00

The World's Most Innovative Companies - Following on from Global Fortune's 'Most Admired for Innovation 2006' list BusinessWeek and Boston Consulting have lifted up the Hood on these Innovation companies to examine and share some of the best-practices in how they are achieving this.

There are many elements in this must read article that stood out for me including:

- Innovation Dimensions
- Innovation Metrics
- Corporate Change
- Innovation Obstacles
- The Wisdom of Crowds
- Rewards
- Ethnography

It's great to hear that more companies are realizing innovation isn’t just about developing new products and occurs across a whole host of 'Innovation Dimensions' such as technologies, strategies and business models to name but a few. This highlights how corporate innovation is changing and taking these “organizations built for efficiency and rewiring them for growth and creativity”.
If you would like to read more about ‘Innovation Dimensions’, Imaginatik Research has identified 20 different types and has produced a research report upon the topic. To get a copy of the full research report on ‘Innovation Dimension’ by Imaginatik Research, please email research@imaginatik.com

With the widening of this pool of ideas the challenge for corporate innovators has now become about selecting and executing the right ideas and bringing them to market in record time. This is why measuring innovation through metrics is so vital. Innovation metrics are fundamental for organizations to be fully and properly cognitive of how their innovation process is performing and delivering.

However, there is a lot of debate on which metrics to use, such as the ratio of products that succeed, or the ROI of innovation projects and how to use them. This report highlights that company’s need between 8 and 12 innovation metrics, which could include numbers driven as well as subjective assessments. Thankfully some two thirds of managers in the report highlighted that metrics were used to select the right idea to fund and develop. Alarmingly though only 47% of them used them sporadically after a product or service was launched. This topic also opens up the debate about tying to tie incentives and rewards to metrics, which may then lead to inappropriate behavior by managers as they play the system.

This is good read and opens up a lot of debates as well as giving a glimpse on some innovation best-practices.

2006-04-19T09:52:00.000-04:00

Gartner Voice: New Approaches to Innovation - For those of you who are always on the go, Gartner have produced a concise 10 minute Podcast (MP3 audio file) on the New Approaches to Innovation.

This discussion examines these new approaches and some of the toolsets that have been seen to underpin innovation over the past 4 years which include:

1. Different commitment to the concept of innovation
2. Innovation happening differently - experiencing more collaboration both internal & external.
3. IT playing a stronger role in setting up an ‘Innovation Infrastructure’.

These three points combine to make a very important statement that to be successful in innovation, companies need to view innovation as a process that can be understood and improved upon, not only in terms of investment in technology but also in the behaviors of people. Critically I would add it is equally important to measure innovation.

This is an interesting presentation of insights into the new innovation approaches companies are adopting today. Download, listen and enjoy!

2006-04-11T08:21:00.000-04:00

Dawn Of The Idea Czar - Following the discussions we have had in the Imaginatik Research office around recruiting and attrition rates within innovation teams (see Mark Turrell's blog on the subject http://innovationbbl.blogspot.com/) I read this article with particular interest. This builds on some of these discussions and looks at the particular need of companies to appoint a CIO (where the 'I' stands for innovation) to drive the

"thirst for internal growth across Corporate America that has made innovation a critical management mandate".

Interestingly, the appointment of a CIO is one of the critical ingredients that we have also identified at Imaginatik Research for company's and CEOs wishing to be successful at innovation.

These CIO's or Idea Czars are appearing in a variety of companies including AMD, Citigroup, Coca-Cola, Humana to name but a few. In addition, it has been observed that these posts have increased four-fold in the last three years. Interestingly the qualities these new CIOs have are quite varied and include "a diverse experience, gregarious personality and a penchant for disrupting traditional ways of thinking". Furthermore, they seem to require a blend of different skills to become a CIO. For example AMD's Billy Edwards is seen as part marketer, technologist, strategist and business person.

The importance of applying innovation across more than one dimension within a company is not lost on the CIO as they look to encompass many aspects including new products, new business models, customer insights and shaping a more creative culture. This is such a critical point (this was discussed in the recent Quarterly edition of the Corporate Innovation Newsletter) for any innovation program - you need to look at all of innovation dimensions, "The most powerful [innovations] cross a lot of boundaries".

And the rewards for these new CIOs? Candidates are drawn by the high visibility of the position and the rewards that could accompany success. This isn't innovation for innovation sake; this is making new things happen that adds value to companies through a new, dynamic and exciting role that comes with the opportunity to really make a visible difference in the corporate world.

2006-04-06T07:19:00.000-04:00

Blinding Science: China's Race to Innovate - This article examines China's innovation plans and attempts to look under the public veneer of the popular press.

The Government is very much at the heart of innovation program - that much is clear. They are pushing diverse areas of science and engineering in traditional and new markets - many without the restrictions (e.g. stem cells) of the West in an attempt to get ahead of the competition. The funding levels for R&D are also reported to rise to the same levels as Japan and USA by 2020. Furthermore, "By 2050 China aims to become the biggest player in Science". - China is making a very public announcement of its intent that is clear. However, is this all achievable? Not quite.

The article points to many road-blocks, such as a lack of English speaking engineers and scientists and China's lax attitude to counterfeiting, which needs improving to safeguard intellectual property. Whilst all of this is being driven by the government, foreign companies are contributing, too. SAP is planning to open an R&D operation and Motorola are opening another centre to add to the 16 they already have. An Interesting observation was noted by Colin Giles, Senior VP and manager of China handset business for Nokia that design plays a much greater role in purchase behavior.

Will all these ambitious targets be met? Many don't think so. I hope however, that some attention is given to the environment. Thankfully, this article points to the need for China to find a more sustainable model for growth - if driven by economic reasons rather than concern for the environment.

2006-04-04T05:39:00.000-04:00

Innovation Briefing: Innovation in the Boardroom - This is an interesting article which examines the shift of innovation from the periphery of many corporate agendas to it becoming a core element for strategic growth. Specifically it focuses on who has the overall responsibility for innovation and how this has moved from its traditional homelands towards the CEO or a new Chief Innovation Officer (CIO).

This change is something we have observed in particular at Imaginatik Research with the people we work. In addition, you only have to look at the job adverts in recent years to see the rise in CIO creation/recruitment. Interestingly this article highlights the three different roles that CIOs are operating within at these companies:

Role 1 - Leading the development and introduction of innovation
Role 2 - Helping move the innovation agenda into new spaces
Role 3 - Seeding the future

These three roles remind me of the Orchid Model Developed by Imaginatik Research , which identified four personality types of Doer, Creator, Helper and Inquisitor within idea management and innovation.

Role 1 is primarily a doer role.
Role 2 is a more of a helper role.
Role 3 is a creator role.

2006-04-03T12:53:00.000-04:00

New era of innovation
Toyota's Scion aimed at younger buyers looking for the unconventional

This is an interesting example of Customer Innovation and Pricing Model Innovation in an industry that is currently facing tough challenges. Through the production of a highly customizable car with a non-negotiable price, Nissan are hoping to attract young buyers to a market who are looking for something other than a conventional car.

2006-04-03T12:30:00.000-04:00

Apple Marks 30 Years of Innovation - This is a good overview article that describes the innovation journey of Apple over the past 30 years. Happy Birthday Apple!

2006-04-03T11:34:00.000-04:00

CIO Innovation Rising: This is a long article that has some interesting messages for CIOs who are seemingly trapped in operational efficiencies and continuous improvement programs, where the innovation juice has just about been squeezed out of them.

Whilst these programs benefit from being easily quantifiable the new challenge is to refocus CIOs thinking, culture and processes towards IT innovation and to improve their wider engagement with the business in areas of customers and markets. I cannot concur with this point enough. The more I read and engage with innovation and companies who are serious about it I see innovation as a company-wide enterprise and collaboration. The benefits through all and between business units should be sort and can be found. You just have to know where to look and how to ask the right questions etc.

As a final point to this article. Collecting ideas from employees is a good start, collecting them at a single event and giving away a single cash prize for the best one....I don't think is the best approach for so many reasons.

2006-03-14T10:38:00.000-05:00

Chemie.DE News-Center: Innovation and portfolio optimization strengthen BASF's Agricultural Products division

Here is a timely reminder about the results that innovation can bring. BASF have just announced their figures which are being driven by new and innovative products whilst highlighting their pipeline is also looking promising for years to come. This is an interesting point that we have observed at Imaginatik research. Innovation is a repeatable process that can deliver consistent value over many years. To achieve this you need to build a pipeline of good ideas, concepts etc. to continually achieve corporate goals.

2006-03-14T10:24:00.000-05:00

MacDailyNews - Apple and Mac News - Welcome Home Apple Computer No. 1 on Fortune's 'Most Admired for Innovation 2006' list

What to see who's on the list (surveyed by the Hay Group from 8,645 executives and directors at those companies, as well as to analysts) for the most admired for innovation from the Global Fortune lists apart from Apple....Oh and you can also see who isn't or check to see where you came...

2006-03-13T08:32:00.000-05:00

Xinhua - English China seeks growth impetus from technological innovation

We have all pretty much heard that innovation in China is coming. In the last few months, "the blueprint of national economic and social development for the 2006-2010 period has been submitted to the ongoing annual session of the National People's Congress (NPC). This will see China speed up building an innovation-oriented country in the coming years. For example, The Chinese government will invest 71.6 billion yuan (8.95 billion U.S. dollars) to encourage innovation this year, 11.526 billion yuan (1.44 billion U.S. dollars) more than that in 2005, up 19.2 percent." However, where is all this spending being targeted? On a relentless pursuit of economic wealth?

Interestingly, "in terms of the cost efficiency of resources, China trails behind 53 others on a list of 59 countries, according to a research report on sustainable development released by the Chinese Academy of Sciences at the end of February". It would seem that the first clear innovation challenge for China is perhaps a more environmental sustainable one.

2006-03-13T07:27:00.000-05:00

CRN IBM PartnerWorld: Change Is In The Air IBM's New Mantra: 'Innovation That Matters'

Here's an interesting one. IBM are moving from "On Demand" to "Innovation that Matters" as the company mantra. From the article "On Demand" was defined as the technology foundation. Innovation is more directed to focusing on solutions that drive the business. I agree that innovation is very much about delivering value (to the company, consumer and those all important share-holders). I hope this is taken forward properly and is not just a marketing ploy to use the innovation word to attract customers? I'm sure it's not especially as it came from IBM’s vice president of technical strategy and innovation, Irving Wladawsky-Berger.

It also appears that IBM are opening their research labs to help all of its business partners, and not just their top clients, to solve those tricky problems. This I hope is a good thing by extending the innovation pipeline along the partner route (one of many types of innovation) by giving them access to experts they may not have been able to collaborate with in the past. "On Demand" is dead long-live "Innovation that Matters"...

2006-03-13T06:57:00.000-05:00

futurethink's Innovation Tracker Taps 2006'S Best Innovators; Survey Finds Corporate Climate is Key to Successful Innovation:

This is something you have probably read a lot in innovation books and hear at conferences but to have the message again reinforces one of the key ingredient that innovation leaders cite as key for firms wishing to take innovation seriously in that they need to approach innovation as an overall business strategy with direct impact on financial stability and growth. Consequently, they have created an environment (climate) that not only invites but stresses calculated risk taking as standard procedure.

The article goes onto highlight that just focusing on the breakthrough ideas do not make a company innovative. I would agree with this, it makes sense to have a balanced portfolio between the different types of innovation, whether they are breakthrough or incremental in nature, let alone which one or combination of the 20 or more types of innovation we have identified at Imaginatik research.

The most effective innovators were companies that engendered a risk-taking climate and continually worked at it. "Top innovative companies respect the demands of a constantly changing marketplace. What product is selling today can be easily eclipsed by technology and competition come tomorrow (remember the the Sony Walkman?). They understand that innovation is a long term business practice, only as effective as the environment that sustains it."

One respondent put it quite succinctly in reference to Apple "they are on an 'innovation bullet train'. Innovation is integrated into everything they do. Apple has created an environment that expects and rewards risk taking. They depend on sustainable and rapid innovation but to lead in the marketplace". My take-aways from this are sustainable, rapid, reward innovation that is integrated into everything they do. It may seem obvious to some but innovation is a repeatable and sustainable process across an entire organization. Drive it positively, rapidly enough, with reward and it can become exciting and self-fulfilling not only for the individual but the entire company.

The remainder of the article goes on to define what innovation is and that creativity alone doesn't mean you will be innovative. I can't grumble with that. Innovation needs to be focused on achieving value, not only for the company but the consumer. The definition we have at Imaginatik Research states that "innovation is a process of handling new things that deliver value". It is multidimensional and repeatable. This is critical. Whilst innovation produces things, people may think innovatively, it's actually much wider than that and it's about the process delivering time-and-time again across an entire organization innovating in all the many different dimensions and knowing how to manage each of them accordingly as they can require different approaches.

2006-03-13T05:53:00.000-05:00

Components in Electronics - CIE -British Public expects UK innovation to benefit society.

This survey from QinetiQ, conducted by MORI, highlights that the types of technological innovation that the British public expect will have the most positive impact upon, including slow-releasing cancer drugs (47%), renewable energy sources (38%), and new drugs to treat AIDS (37%). It also points out those innovations can have had a negative effect, with mobile phones and text messaging combining to be 25%. It would be interesting to understand if these are social or health concerns? I would imagine it's both.

"Looking further ahead, the issues most people want addressed through innovation in the next 20 years include disease (54%), pollution (42%), famine (37%), terrorism (37%), climate change (28%), road congestion (22%), recycling and waste (22%)."

Sounds like innovation has some very rewarding and adventurous goals to achieve in the coming years. However, whilst technology will play a large part in bringing these to society, we mustn't forget the role that people (who have the imagination to take us there) and government (who can guide and co-ordinate effort) amongst others can bring in concert to these issues. Technology alone will not solve them. This is highlighted in the article by Stephen Lake, QinetiQ's Director of New Business, although with a slightly different intent and take to mine where he highlights that entrepreneurial and political will is present but focused government funding to take it forward is lacking. This is an interesting comment from the partly owned government defense organization (23.7%), who recently released more shares on the market thus reducing the central governments ownership of it.

2006-03-13T05:11:00.000-05:00

Components in Electronics - CIE It's not often I come across a short but interesting article that highlights my own belief about innovation but today I read such an article.

In a recent study, conducted by the organizers of MDT 06, 46% of UK's leading medical device manufacturers report that they are using innovation rather than price to take on their competitors.

I recently has the pleasure of meeting one of these companies in the UK and got hear first-hand how they innovate their medical devices by spending time with the customer, and no not the people in procurement but the medical technicians, doctors and patients who use their devices. The point that really impressed me was that they took a representative from every aspect of their organization (many eyes see different things) to observe what was happening, along with a video camera. The insight that provided and the connection from the engineer to the patient became a personal experience that really drove them to be innovative. For example, I saw a heart resuscitator being used in an ambulance that had been originally designed for use in a hospital. As a consequence, a vital cable to charge the device was practically impossible to plug in when the ambulance was in motion, owing to its position in the ambulance. This could potentially lead to the device not being charged and ready for action. As soon as the engineer saw this device being used in a different environment the improvement to the device was made, amongst many others.

Surely, and particularly in the medical device industry, this behavior towards the consumer should be encouraged. It can't be all about cost? Well not in the UK medical device industry anyway I'm please to highlight...

2006-03-09T13:11:00.000-05:00

CEOs find innovation hard to achieve: survey??Reuters.com IBM have just published an interesting survey that states

"nearly two-thirds of the world's top chief executives said that due to pressures from market and competitive forces, they plan to radically alter their companies over the next two years, and corporate leaders are increasingly looking to innovation in their business models to drive growth".

What interested me further about this article was not the proportion of CEOs that are turning to innovation but the follow-up statement from Ginni Rometty from IBM Enterprise Business Services "that it's no longer about product innovation....it's about understanding how to innovate a business model, or an operational process..." This reminds me of an earlier post where I mentioned the how Imaginatik Research has identified over 20 types of innovation (this paper is being prepared a I write). There are so many different areas you can focus on. Ignore them at your peril, one of your competitors wont.

In addition, these findings from IBM identified that only 14% of CEOs thought internal R&D were good sources of new ideas. I'm not surprised by this. Companies we work with at Imaginatik utilize idea management across their entire organizations, to great effect and of course across the many different types of innovation.

And the biggest obstacle these CEO's identified in taking innovation forward? Internal problems in their own organization rather than external ones. And the top one they polled? An unsupportive culture and climate. The main reason they infer is that they are poor at managing change, some 80% of CEOs said they had been very unsuccessful in doing this in the past. I would question what are the common themes here? Was change used to reduce head-count? Were employees engaged properly or at all in any of these change programmes? So change may now be viewed as a bad thing for employees instead of an energizing thing? Innovation is about adding value, CEOs are waking-up to this but their are tough challenges ahead but the good news is there are people who can help.

2006-03-09T12:16:00.000-05:00

How Whirlpool Defines Innovation - I have just finished reading this facinating and insightful view on how Whirlpool do Innovation. This article highlights so many of the important things a company should do to innovate:

Soliciting ideas from everywhere and everyone (some 61,000-employees in total).
Estabishing a seed fund for innovation
Having a team of seasoned and trained innovators.
Setting an innovation goal and acheiving it!
Building an innovation pipeline and knowing how big it is/needs to be/what's in it etc...
Defining innovation metrics/innovation criteria for projects
Keeping senior management and employees engaged and rewarded

Still the process is always being improved, as they highlighted , the issue of killing ideas that aren't going to work early enough is something they struggle with..

And the rewards? They have netted $422 m on sales of $14.3 billion, share prices at an all time high. Excited and engaged employees. This is a must read.

2006-02-10T11:34:00.000-05:00

Friday, February 10, 2006

Don't Follow the Leader - I have just read a short and sweet example of how Enterprise Rental Cars rocketed there revenues to nearly $7 billion vs. the former market leader Hertz, $5 billion, by pursuing different types of innovation, not just those like service. This has been highlighted before, like all good ideas, but to see the revenues attributed in such a way by a company thinking about the different types of innovation highlights the potential rewards it can bring. Imaginatik Research has identified more than 20 different innovation types for example - if you're interested in a presentation containing those - just send a request to research@imaginatik.com

BusinessWeek Online: Category Timeline

2005-12-28T14:15:00.000-05:00

Pure-Play is dead! - It's always frustrating to see so called pure-play technology companies try to convince corporate would-be clients that Innovation is, at the heart of it, a very simple process - that it is simply being overly complicated by consultants. When will they learn that this subject is NOT about the technology. In fact - business and commerce as a whole is not about technology anymore.

Be it consumer electronics or business software, the leading products in each industry lead by adding value to the customer to give them an advantage/benefit above and beyond what is possible with just the technology alone. Take the iPod - one of the most cited innovation examples in recent history. At the heart of it, it's really not more than a glorified hard drive. What it's added however, is a clever design and some superb marketing to give status and desire that other companies focusing on sellign a technology alone simply aren't able to compete. That's not to say that the other technologies don't work - but they certainly don't deliver the level of benefit (in this case, coolness, status factor, etc) that the iPod delivers to its customers. People are making a big deal of the VideoPod now - but how many realise that Apple was not the first one to the market with this product? Creative, for example, have had a video offering for quite some time, yet were unable to make it as useable and desireable as Apple have been able to in one stroke.

The same goes for innovation software. The technology itself is, at least on the face of it, not exactly rocket science from a layman's point of view. Get some kind of input into a collaborative space, followed by an evaluation piece and see what comes out - right? Sounds really simple - but when it comes down to actual useage - the above system would fail abysmally. Why? Because the process isn't as simple as it seems - every company has different needs, different aims, and different cultural issues that will affect what can/can't be done. Not only that, but you have to then understand that innovation is, at the heart of it, a people issue - and people are anything but "simple".

So don't let pure-play technology companies pull the wool over your eyes. Any company that tells you that innovation is "simple" is just hiding their lack of understanding of the issues that you will face - which means you'll be on your own when the inevitable problems start happening. There are several reputable companies out there that understand this - so make sure to quiz whoever you use as to the depth of their understanding of the subject as the only thing "simple" about innovation - is how easy it is to screw it up....

2005-12-27T07:07:00.000-05:00

The Innovation-through-Acquisition Strategy: Why the Pay-off Isn't Always There Prof Saikat Chaudhuri of Wharton writes an interesting article in this Konwledge@Wharton - which sets out to debate whether ot not an Innovation-through-Aquisition Strategy is a good one to follow or not. The shame is, whilst he makes some good points in describing the various risks of the strategy, he fails to make the most important analysis - the effectiveness of the strategy when compared to a strategy of Internal Innovation - and instead takes it as an all-or-nothing problem. In that respect, the dangers of innovation are exactly the same whether you're purchasing it outright from another company - or developing it internally. The very nature of innovation - essentially the management of new and unknown markets,products and processes - is rife with risk that needs careful analysis and development prior to full production - regardless of the source of that innovation. That's not to say that innovation shouldn't be done - but it needs to be done carefully and purposely - and analyzed and managed in the same way as any other business critical process would be.

It's an interesting read though - and well worth a quick gland at pages 2 and 4 to see what he sees as the Challenges, and the solutions to the problem.

2005-12-08T16:55:00.000-05:00

How George Heilmeier Met the Future - BusinessWeek - Dec 12 2005 This interview with George Heilmeier (the man who invented the LCD amongst many other things - and soon to be recipient of the Kyoto Prize) is full of little interesting tidbits and insights from the legendary inventor. My favourite is a comment made to him by Vladimir Zworkyn - the chap frequently cited as the father of the black and white TV. When he asked George how he was able to come up with so many breakthroughs in the electro-optical fields, George admitted that he'd simply stumbled across some of them. Vladimir's reply was "Stumbled? Perhaps -- but to stumble, you have to be moving..."

Brilliant stuff! A good read for the innovation historians amongst you.

2005-12-06T17:22:00.000-05:00

Newsday.com: Strategy in tough times: a new idea Kudos goes out to Charles V. Zehren and/or Professor David Willemon of Syracuse University - one of which coined what I'm sure will be the innovation catch phrase de rigeur for 2006 - "Does your company suffer from Innovation Deficit Disorder?" - symptoms include "stagnation, a scarcity of new products or services, a lack of growth and profits, slow development cycle times, projects delivered late and over budget, conflict over innovation failures, and missed market opportunities. Check for customer dissatisfaction, low employee morale, loss of valued personnel and "systems overload." - Let's see how quickly the consultants jump onto that one - $5 gift voucher goes to the first person to report a sighting...

2005-12-06T17:11:00.000-05:00

Strategy + Business - "Money Isn't Everything" - 12/5/05 - So it turns out that Booz Allen Hamilton have released the results of a survey of what they call their "Global Innovation 1000" - in this case, the list is comprised of the top 1000 publicly held companies that spent the most on R&D in 2004. Ignore for a minute if you will, the ridiculous notion that all R&D spending is hardly a good measure of a company's ability to innovate - not least of which because innovation is FAR more than R&D - and there are some relatively interesting results here - some good - and some just funny...

The major (good) findings were:

1) It's the process, not the pocketbook - The survey showed that success was a function of the quality of the organization's process for innovation rather than the amount of money it actually spent pursuing individual projects.

2) Collaboration is Key - Enabling cross cultural and organizational groups to work together to, for example, commercialise a product is a crucial element of success

And the funny?....

1) Money doesn't buy results - Rather amusingly, their very first result is that there is absolutely "no relationship between R&D Spending and the primary measures of economic or corporate success, such as growth, enterprise profitability, and shareholder return." - In other words, they're either suggesting that, as far as they're concerned, innovation doesn't contribute to success, or it's an admission that maybe they just picked the wrong 1000 companies...

2) Size matters - Apparently being bigger helps....Why?...because if you're bigger (and make more money) - you can spend the same amount of money as a smaller company and it only represents a smaller proportion of your overall revenue! Duh....Why didn't we think of that?...

The report actually then goes onto a far more detailed version of the findings which actually has some interesting nuggets in it too - but only of use for those of you really looking at Product Development in depth.

2005-11-30T17:44:00.000-05:00

Equating R&D With Innovation May Understate Actual Spending - Innovate Forum An interesting set of stats from the Confederation of British Industry based on a survey of 750 UK companies in this report.

The major thrust of the report is that R&D spending as a whole is a misleading indicator of the real amount of money companies are really spending on "innovation activities" - 2% vs 12%. Suggesting that the western world is ever more looking away from the recent trend on relying on technology to provide new improvements in the marketplace - only 20% of companies agreed that all innovation is dependent on technology developments. The major force instead seems to be the Service industries - which currently accounts for 70% of the UK economy. Interesting stuff.

2005-11-18T16:45:00.000-05:00

I was talking to a recent Imaginatik client just yesterday who was telling me about a revelation that he had. When he told his colleagues that he was looking at getting Idea Management software, it elicited the response: "Idea Management - what do we need that for?". After thinking for a bit he said - "You guys already have an Idea Management system....it just SUCKS."

After wiping the tears of laughter from my eyes, I realized that, to an extent, he was absolutely right. All companies already manage their ideas in some format - just in most cases this system is horribly inefficient and erratic. Formalizing and enabling this process using software is really about making a process most companies still take for granted, and enabling it to produce regular (and valuable) results that drive future business profitability. Six Sigma that!

I can see the next ad campaign now....

2005-11-15T10:15:00.000-05:00

So I am sitting here at the Forrester Exeutive Strategy Forum 2005 in Boston - and was half listening to "Ginny" Rometty, an SVP of IBM Global Services - when something she said finally grabbed my attention. As you can guess - it had to do with innovation - and she was talking about a recent string of mini-conferences IBM had been holding. During these meetings, it emerged that 50% of business executives ranked Innovation as the no.1 most important business capability to growing their businesses. No real surprise there, except that the next thing she mentioned was that she'd identified 3 (yes, only 3) different ways in which you could innovate - Product Innovation, Process Innovation, and Business Model Innovation.

Those of you who have read my comments in the past will know that Imaginatik has done work in the past that has identified more than 20 different ways in which you can innovate (btw - apologies for those of you who requested that paper via the research@ e-mail, turns out the paper wasn't publicly publishable in the format we had, and I simply haven't had the time to sanitise it to be able to send it out to you!). However, it got me thinking about that paper - something I brought up whilst chairing the innovateEurope 2005 conference in London recently (which was fantastically succesful by the way - outstanding speakers, some real deep insights from some of the world's leading innovators - the conference notes and video will be available soon, and I'd strongly reccomend that those of you who were unable to attend to purchase it from the conference website (http://www.innovateeurope.com) - and pay special attention to Art Fry, Ray Buschman, Dean Bellefleur, Mauro Pennella, Ciaran McArdle - hell all of them! Just a lot of great content there!) .

During one of my mid-session blurbs (I always like to give people some discussion topics during breaks - for discussion upon the return, I thought I'd challenge people to come up with as many different types of innovation as possible. Figuring that a group of lead innovators would come up with some interesting answers, I was shocked then with the very first answer I got from the audience upon their return.

"2,192" replied Howard Smith of CSC

"2,192? Pretty exact number....why did you come up with that number?" (seeing as he wasn't carrying a sheet of paper as long as a toilet roll, I was assuming that he hadn't written them all up and counted them up...

"Because that's roughly the number of discrete business processes and functions that are used by the average business" he replied.

BINGO! The real answer is that there is no part of the modern enterprise that shouldn't be trying to innovate, to change, to improve in order to achieve some level of competitive advantage as you never know where the next real advantage is going to come from. Look at the most successful companies in the world - very few of them are still doing what they started off doing. Nokia started off in Forestry products are rubber boots - now in Telecoms. IBM started off making computers - now mostly business services. New products and new business models are just the tip of the iceberg - what about marketing innovation, launch innovation, knowledge innovation, resource innovation - and the myriad of other places that competitive advantage can come from? Innovate globally folks!

2005-11-15T10:11:00.000-05:00

Apologies.... - I have to apologize to all the Corporate Innovation readers for being so lax in keeping this blog up to date - the sheer amount of travel that I've been subjected to recently has prevented me from writing as often as I'd like to - but rest assured I'm back on the case - so stay tuned because a lot of new stuff is in the pipeline!

2005-08-31T15:54:00.000-04:00

Gary Hamel's Idea Hatchery Ah, you gotta love journalists and their flair for trying to make old hat seem new. This time, it's BusinessWeek and well known author and consultant Gary Hamel, who has decided to start a "Management Innovation Lab" at the London Business School where he resides part time. Sounds cool doesn't it? Unfortunately the "lab" is a thinly masked way for Gary to get some publicity for his latest consulting offering - a two day workshop which essentially is there to get business leaders from Ground Zero, to the first steps towards creating a cohesive innovation strategy for that firm (Essentially the "Framing" stage of the Innovation Pipeline).

Not that I blame him for trying to make "a buck" as they say here in the US. In fact, he does actually make an interesting distinction for what he calls "A hierarchy of innovation":

'Economic progress is driven by three forms of innovation: institutional innovation, which includes the legal and institutional framework for business; technological innovation, which creates the possibility of new products, services, and production methods; and management innovation, which changes the way organizations are structured and administered. Management innovation has produced the most profound shifts [in business productivity].'

The article's not worth reading - but I'll be keenly watching to see if he writes more on the innovation hierarchy in the future.

2005-08-26T14:37:00.000-04:00

Innovation Most Critical Factor to Success, Say U.S. Business Leaders; Cisco Innovation 2005 Study Although I have no idea as to why a company like Cisco is actually conducting this kind of study on Innovation (must be a marketing angle in there somewhere...I'm such a skeptic!), there were a couple of interesting stats coming out of this - for example:

"-- Innovation is clearly the most important factor in business success, according to business and technology leaders. Fifty-three percent cited it as having the biggest impact on competitiveness, while increasing employee education and skill levels was favored by 26 percent. Reducing wages (14 percent) and cutting corporate taxes (7 percent) were not seen as strong drivers of competitiveness.

-- Given the focus on innovation, it is not surprising that many business and technology leaders are seeking improvements in the education system. In particular, a solid majority cited a need for greater creative thinking and problem solving skills (58 percent) from students. A third of those polled called for stricter student requirements to accomplish this goal. Twenty-one percent proposed improved communications among teachers, parents and students while the same amount advocated broader access to global subject matter."

Interesting - not really worth reading in full though.

2005-08-18T16:55:00.000-04:00

HBS Working Knowledge: Operations: Six Steps to Operational Innovation Seems like Michael Hammer has caught up to his old buddy James Champy (the two of them were behind the business process re-engineering craze of the mid-90s) in jumping on the innovation bandwagon - hey, better late than never!

In this article in HBS' Management Update, he sets out 6 key factors that make the difference between success and failure in the innovation:

1) Process focus - focusing your innovation efforts on a very small area, means that you are also limiting the scope of the benefits you'll get from innovation.

2) Process owners - Assign a process owner (a senior executive empowered to make the changes needed) to own the process for the whole enterprise.

3) Full-time design team - Use a full-time team to conduct the necessary process redesign rather than asking team members to do this part-time. Then invest in them - their education, methodology, etc.

4) Managerial Engagement - Actively engage the senior management team in the implementation process to make sure the projects don't languish in limbo and to ensure that departmental heads are released from their narrow focus to instead consider the end-to-end implications.

5) Building Buy-In - Engage participants throughout the redesign process so as to engage and enable buy-in into the process as it is developed, and to reduce the stress of future changes.

6) Bias for Action - Develop a solution that provides most but not all desired capabilities, get into the field quickly, and then enhance it over time. This approach allows concepts to be tested, builds momentum and credibility, and delivers early benefits that silence critics and sway doubters.

Overall an interesting short piece (he uses Scheider as a case study in this) that has some good, if slightly re-hashed, tips for change management and process design.

2005-07-27T15:04:00.000-04:00

Champy: Get proactive about innovation It's always nice to see other people picking up on concepts you've been going on about for ages - and this article by James Champy is just that. In it he encourages companies to innovate - but not just on products. He then lists 3 other types of innovation - Business Model innovation, Process Innovation, and Experience Innovation. Short and sweet, this article is fine for beginners looking to start exploring beyond the narrow boundaries of product innovation - but falls well short of a comprehensive list. Imaginatik Research has identified more than 20 different innovation types for example - if you're interested in a presentation containing those - just send a request to research@imaginatik.com

2005-05-30T14:54:00.000-04:00

NPR : Gates: U.S. Losing Advantage in Innovation Race This NPR interview with Bill Gates had Gates talk (amongst other issues) about an interesting dilemma his company has. He believes that the only time Microsoft sell a version of its operating system is when there have been sufficient innovations in the current version to justify them upgrading to the next version. As such, he believes that what Microsoft are really selling, in what is typically seen as a stolid monopoly market, is breakthrough innovations.

That comment got me thinking - especially with innovateEurope 2006 this year focusing on "Breakthrough and Beyond" (btw - 3M's Art Fry is a keynote speaker there in what I believe is his first ever appeaance in Europe, and certainly his first talk on innovation for many years!). In a monopoly market such as Gates', is a breakthrough innovation defined by a point of view? At what point do the cumulative incremental, or minor innovations add up to make a "breakthrough innovation" in his point of view? Then there's also the issue that you rarely purchase this "breakthrough" in isolation. How many times have you upgraded your operating system without upgrading any other component of your technology base? Personally, I find myself holding onto my version of Windows, until the cumulative increases in both Windows technology AND laptop technology have increased to the point at which I justify the cost of a new machine - so can a bundle of innovative products that go hand in hand constitute a single "breakthrough innovation"?

2005-04-22T13:06:00.000-04:00

IndustryWeek : Pipeline = Lifeline IndustryWeek's John Teresko writes an interesting piece commenting on research that predicts that 70% of today's manufactured goods will be obsolete in six years. In addition, companies with strong enabling R&D strategies (read: those that still conduct significant R&D in-house rather than rely on outside sources to sell them innovative products) are 73% more profitable.

Compare those results then with a Deloitte study of 650 companies in North America and Europe that revealed that while manufacturers cite launching new products and services as the No. 1 driver of revenue growth, they also view supporting product innovation as one of the least important priorities.

Bizaare!

Teresko does also look at the trend toward "outsourcing" of innovation to developing and re-developing countries such as India and China - but in a twist that he neglects to notice - the companies he talks about are not conducting this outsourcing in the classic way being popularized in the media at the moment. They are not, in other words, relying on outside companies in those coutries to provide them with innovative products - but rather building R&D centers in those countries to take advantage of the unique human resource quality of the country's population (namely high education, low wages) without giving up the control over the IP and maintaining the competitive advantage of in-house R&D.

The advantages of capturing the brainpower from geographically and culturally dispersed intelligent people is not new though - Idea Management and Knowledge Management as disciplines have both looked into the role and value of diversity in the knowledge pool.

This is quite a heavy article that covers a wide range of topics and is certainly a great read!

2005-03-30T23:24:00.000-05:00

Latest Imaginatik Research Study Finds Idea Central Yields Significant ROI on Innovation Initiatives Imaginatik Research's latest study is now available. Entitled "The Long Term Financial Benefits of Idea Management" the report, takes a close look at the return on investment (ROI) of 17 companies that have used Imaginatik's Idea Central idea management software for a period of at least two years. This study is the first accurate study to looked at the actual realised benefits accrued by companies using Idea Management software.

The study found that the average ROI in the first year of an Idea Central initiative was 251% with an average net return of $19,851 per 100 employees. The benefits and savings were magnified after year two to an average ROI of 927% and average net return of $104,983 per 100 employees.

2005-03-30T23:13:00.000-05:00

TomorrowToday.biz : Failing your way to Innovation Success - March 2005 Raymond de Villiers picks up on the recent trend towards embracing failure in order to achieve innovation leadership. He argues that the perception that failure is always a costly exercise is holding companies back. He goes on to suggest that "There are a few things in your world that your competitors can never copy, and your failures fall into this category. Your failures are uniquely yours, so why not benefit from them?"

So what does he suggest?
1) See failure as an investment
2) Analyze failure and learn from it
3) Create a safe space to share failures
4) Focus on increasing the quantity of ideas generated, not just their quality
5) Distinguish between excusable and inexcusable failure

2005-03-23T13:13:00.000-05:00

Online Extra: Commentary: Apple's Blueprint for Genius An interesting high-level look at Apple's Innovation program and what makes it different from its competitors. The answer? It's insistence on keeping key functions that give it competitive advantage, like design, internal rather than going to Asian outsourced design manufacturers - and Steve jobs - interesting stuff.

2005-03-08T09:05:00.000-05:00

HBS Working Knowledge: Globalization: The Rise of Innovation in Asia Yet another article in the rising tide of news pieces looking at Asia, Outsourcing, and Innovation. This one looks at key findings from a recent conference on innovation at Harvard Business School. Some of these include:

- A survey of 200 companies found an "irreversible process" of traditional white-collar jobs being sent to Asia.

- Respondents said they are likely to send work to the following countries: India (69 percent); China (8 percent); the Philippines (5 percent); Latin America (5 percent); Eastern Europe (4 percent); and the Caribbean/Mexico (2 percent).

- More and more, the work being outsourced goes beyond call centers and similar services to include research, HR functions, and engineering services. Researchers expect organizations to create Web-based organizational structures that will help them compete globally.

Technology is again seeming to be the great enabler for asian companies - could the US economy be dying as a result of all the outsourcing? Japan used to rule the Innovation game in the 80's, the US in the 90's, could we now be in a Chinese dominated 00's?

2005-02-24T15:07:00.000-05:00

SINA.com - 17 Feb 2005 For those of you who have been following the latest innovation discussion on the Corporate Innovation group site (and you should really check it out if you've missed it so far!) - here's yet another article that suggests China's growing potential in the global innovation arms race.

Senior Chinese ministers are talking about the building of a national innovation mechanism to spur more scientific and technological breakthroughs. Very much unlike the current US government's attitude, the Chinese are instead considering adopting new incentives to help nurse innovative ideas and human forces for scientific innovation.

What's most impressed me is the stress on not borrowing/buying the technologies needed from the developed countries - thus ensuring they have the intellectual capability to innovate beyond the current technologies... the debate continues..

2005-02-24T14:45:00.000-05:00

Guardian Unlimited | Online | Where do you wear your thinking cap? - Jan 27 2005 The Guardian's Jamile Milne reports on new research that shows that 81% of people have their best ideas outside of the office - usually while in bed or in the car. The survey looked predominantly at men and woem n working in so called "progressive" areas such as IT and biotech.

Here are some of the highlights:

Where did you have your last implemented good idea?
- 25% whilst socialising
- 18% in bed
- 6% in the bathroom/restroom/lavatory

- 65% of people felt creative at their desks
- 80% thought meetings helped creativity
- Off site meetings were seen to be more creative by a majority, although fewer saw the need for outside influences or triggers for more creative ideas.

Interesting, if not amusing, results - the rest of the article looks at what to do with those ideas - although it's flawed by the typical British Government viewpoint that Innovation and Invention are one and the same - and as such, starts talking about getting marketing plans and the like ready for your idea...oh well.

2005-02-24T13:35:00.000-05:00

Fast Company | Fast Take: Imagination This short blurb on how Boeing's Connexion subsidiary uses their imagination to gather insights and ideas for scenario planning that takes into account potential competitive moves is quite interesting.

Not in the respect that it's new - but in the respect that it signifies a growing trend towards the increasing use of ideas, and idea management, for many more uses than just product development. Many client companies of Imaginatik's Idea Central have reported using the software and the event process to regularly gather competitive intelligence, conduct scenario planning, high level strategic planning, conduct post merger synchronisation, and many other strategic topics like these.

The reality is that people are finally starting to explore the true value of what can be achieved when you harness the brainpower of your company's employees, suppliers and customers. And you know what? They're finding that value to be unbelieveably high.

2005-02-10T17:39:00.000-05:00

Innovation Ships Out - outsourcing - impact on innovation and supply chains as big U.S. computer makers move R&D overseas - CIO Magazine - Jan 15,2005 For all those of you who didn't believe the predictions in the Jan/Feb issue of Corporate Innovation on how Innovation Outsourcing and the continuing strength of the Asian super-economies - have a look at this article.

CIO's Christopher Koch looks at the increasing trend for IT companies to outsource not only the manufacturing and fullfillment parts of the industry (as is the norm nowadays) - but to outsource their whole R&D function too to save money.

But might this this whole push to save money at any cost backfire in the long run? Already, spending on R&D by U.S. companies declined more in 2002 (3.9 percent) than it has since the National Science Foundation began tracking the number in 1953. In addition, according to the senior economist at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, most of the remaining spend has been on incremental improvements rather than original research.

What really shocks me is that for a country that built up its competitive advantage and economic wealth on a strong base of leading edge research during the industrial age - the US, and US companies, are being remarkably slow to react to what is really the outsourcing of one of the greatest sources of competitive advantage for them. Just how long will it take for the foreign companies who are providing the outsourced innovation services to turn the tables and take over more and more of the process until they are the powerhouses and not vice versa? Already some Far Eastern ex-allies have begun to retalliate - BenQ, a former supplier, has now begun selling its own cellphones and other equipment in the US under its own brand - offering good quality for a lot less price.

You've got to wander just what will be left of US companies - will they simply become outsourced sales and marketing organisations?...

2005-01-25T14:29:00.000-05:00

Strategy+Business / knowledge@wharton - How Companies Turn Customers' Big Ideas Into Innovations - January 2005 In this jointly published article, the two publications jointly look at the factors stopping firms from improving innovation processes and list out the key characteristics of successful companies:

1) Employees use the product
2) They conduct vigorous market research of customer needs
3) The Engineers stay close to the market
4) Companies perform R&D around the world
5. Innovative companies seek understanding of customer behaviour and motivations

An interesting article, although a slightly long winded way of saying "listen to your customers"...

2005-01-11T15:37:00.000-05:00

Triz Journal - January 2005 - Sustainable Innovation as a Corporate Strategy Anyone looking for a well written primer on Corporate Innovation strategy would be well served by this paper written by M. Rashid Khan and Mohammed Al-Ansari which was published in the TRIZ Journal. The authors do a pretty decent job of summarizing the basic questions around Innovation - including a reasonable evaluation of the differences between old-style innovation management techniques compared to those required for sustainable corporate innovation. Certainly a good starting point for people new to Innovation, but lacking in anything new for more experienced managers.

2004-12-27T11:27:00.000-05:00

More Innovation stats - Boston Consulting Group A press release by BCG has given some interesting stats on corporate innovation (study of 500 execs, 47 countries, all major industries):

- 73% of companies will increase innovation spending (64% in 2004)

- Average increase in spending = 15%

- Consumer Products and Technology lead spending increases, Telecoms lagged.

- Asia Pacific area will see most increase in 2005

- 67% of companies ranked innovation as one of their company's top 3 strategic priorities

- However, only 49% said they were happy with the financial return so far

The 3 biggest problems they've identified so far?:

1) Moving quickly from idea generation to initial sales
2) Leveraging suppliers for new ideas
3) appropriately balancing risks, timeframes, and returns

"It's a positive sign that companies continue to invest heavily in innovation," said Jim Andrew, a Senior Vice President at BCG, a global management consulting firm. "The problem is that if the returns continue to disappoint, senior executives may begin to rethink their plans. Unless companies improve their approach to innovation, increased investment may in fact lead to increased disappointment."

2004-12-23T06:02:00.000-05:00

KM World's Judith Lamont looks at some of the emerging software solutions for idea management, and has a nice mini-case study on Sun Life Financial as well as some good insights on idea management from Sun Life's Jay McBurney

2004-12-21T10:49:00.000-05:00

What is... Idea Management? - Editorial - CMO Magazine Elaine Cummings pens this excellent primer on Idea Management, which concisely tackles the questions most people ask when they first hear of the term "idea management". If you're only just starting to research this area, a brief look at this article will serve you well!

2004-12-19T05:18:00.000-05:00

How Their Garden Grows - CFO IT - Winter 2004 Issue - CFO.com WR Grace talks about how they've generated new product ideas over the last year that have the potential to achieve sales of $6 million.

2004-12-10T08:44:00.000-05:00

Six Sigma 101 With Six Sigma being applied and referred to in the same breath as innovation more and more, it's useful to know exactly what Six Sigma is - and this introduction to the subject in Sales and Marketing magazine does an admirable version of a 101-type class - enjoy!

2004-12-02T15:11:00.000-05:00

Fast Company Innovation Awards - December 2004

It seems like Fast Company and Monitor Group have joined forces to come up with an Innovation Scorecard with which to rate companies' innovation past and present to find out what are the top innovation companies in each industry. This series of reports (published once every 3 months) will look at one industry at a time, and for its inaugural version, has chosen the Telecoms industry to look at.

As Monitor's CEO says, "Competitive advantage roots best in soil nourished by disciplined, sustained innovation -- in assets, their configuration, the offerings they make possible, and the business models that support them, but such discipline is impossible to sustain without rigorous -- and relentless -- efforts to measure and improve performance along all relevant dimensions." - an admirable, and totally correct, statement.

It's a shame then, that having understood the importance of measurement to innovation, that they've developed and applied such a badly thought out and sloppily applied scorecard.

According to the article, they (presumably Monitor Group) assessed 119 public companies on "three 'crucial' criteria":

1) How they fared over the past five years?

2) How do the next five years look?

3) How have companies invested in R&D? and what are expectations for growth?

oh yes - and 4) What is their capacity for innovation?

Now, besides the inability to count criteria, there are several problems with the above statements. For starters, Financial performance bears little direct correlation to innovation capability and capacity, neither past nor future. Although innovations in themselves can affect a company's bottom line in profound ways, financial measurements alone can be too easily affected by one-off blips, accounting treatments, lucky accidents, and external factors. For example, US companies that are have significant presence in Europe, are currently getting a nice rise in their expected earnings from the weakness of the dollar in comparison to the Euro. A sale over there is counting for far more than it used to. Seeing as the dollar seems unlikely to regain strength any time soon, financially, things would look pretty good for these companies too. Now does this mean that these companies are more innovative all of a sudden? Of course not, yet financial results and forecasts dominate the Scorecard's criteria..

Their other main criteria is R&D Spending as a % of Revenue. The problem with this is that it assumes that R&D will provide all the innovation, and as such, is a very blinkered view of innovation within a company. It ignores a company's ability to innovate around it's marketing, packaging, business models, internal processes, etc.

For example, Apple, although occasionally innovative on the product side (which would be reflected in the R&D spend), it is far more innovative on the marketing side, where it bulges its biggest muscles. Dell, hardly innovative in products nor marketing, has exhibited most of its innovations in the area of Business Model Innovation. For both commpanies, their true innovation capacity and capability would be totally underplayed by a simplistic look at its R&D spend.

There's a train of thought that used to pervade in the Knowledge Management market that says "it doesn't matter if it's not 100% accurate, it's more important to at least get started just measuring something" - it seems like this scorecard has embraced that concept in full...

2004-11-30T16:27:00.000-05:00

Fortune Magazine - November 29 2004 - Get Employees to Brainstorm Online Although short, this excellent article by Fortune's Anne Fisher is full of interesting data. Some bullet points?

- According to a study by PricewaterhouseCoopers, almost half (45%) of lucrative ideas—whether breakthrough products or services, new uses for old ones, or ways to cut costs—come from employees.

- Grace's chemical-manufacturing division has run 34 online campaigns to solicit employee suggestions. From those efforts a total harvest of 2,685 ideas has yielded 76 new products and 67 distinct improvements in how things get done

- Employees, responding to a campaign called Customers Do the Darndest Things, reported that customers were telling them about unexpected uses for existing products, leading the company into new markets that have boosted annual revenues by as much as $3 million.

- At Georgia-Pacific, management zeroed in on shaving the cost of the cardboard tubes inside rolls of paper towels. The company spends about $30 million a year on the components, that the "consumer really doesn't care about." Mill workers from among the company's 16,000 North American employees quickly responded with little changes that shaved about $1.2 million a year, or roughly 4%, off the cost of the tubes.

Some great benchmarks for all corporate innovators!

2004-11-29T17:44:00.000-05:00

EUbusiness - November 25 2004 - Innovation is Europe's answer to China challenge: report This year's European Competitiveness Report, published by the European Union, touched on an important global trend that threatens the major industrial nations of the Western World. According to the report, the recent trend of countries such as China, which used to focus on labor-intensive goods and low-skill industries, to now become low-cost providers in high-skilled industries, is changing the face of the global economy.

As a result, the EU has identified that if it is to compete in this changing environment, it has to do so through supporting a strong knowledge based economy in its member countries - and in specific, EU companies need to excel at innovation in order to compete.

2004-11-29T15:32:00.000-05:00

Fast Company - December 2004 - The Care and Feeding of the Creative Class Fast Company's Linda Tischler talked to the managers of several creative enterprises to find out what the secrets of managing a truly creative team was all about - this is what she found:

1) Recruit for diversity, but hire for philosophy - you want your team to be diverse to spark ideas and generate energy - but you must make sure everyone's aligned on what drives them with the direction you want to go in

2) Rehab the neighbourhood - change the team's surroundings to encourage them to do things a little bit different. "Light, space, wall art, and goofy toys are critical to the alchemy of the creative process"

3) Within limits, let them make the rules - Understand that the creative process is not linear and that treating creatives like line workers will backfire. Allowing them input into the setting of their own deadlines for example will have them more committed to delivering ontime.

4) Keep their eyes on the prize - make sure people are committed to finishing what they've started

5) Feed their heads - Keep stimulating creative's imagination through the introduction of outside stimuli: outside speakers, art and photo exhibits, and social events for example.

6) Teach them a new language - Communication is key - being able to communicate your idea to people outside your area of competence can make the difference in having your idea accepted. For example, Try giving your technical staff basic "business-speak" courses and vice versa

7) Allow time for blue-sky thinking - give people time to take creative leaps by giving them to work on projects of their own choosing - even those that aren't technically part of their jobs

8) Protect your team from creativty killers - "The essential difference between creative workers and everybody else is that their work product is a personal expression of who they are. As a result, they're more emotionally exposed than other workers and more vulnerable to criticism". It's important to explain why some ideas are no good so creatives have an understanding of where they went off the rails -- and how to improve.

9) Add libral doses of fun - "Fostering an environment where fun isn't viewed as goofing off is absolutely critical"