|
|
 |
Innovation Newsletter from OVO
 |
 |
OVO Views
Conversations about Innovation
|
June 2008
- Vol 2, Issue 11
|
|
 |
|
In This Issue
|
 |
|
 |
|
Quick Links
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
Greetings!
|
 |
The summer seems like it is already half way
over, but we're just getting started with
innovation.
In this issue, we'll look first at the
strategic choices you need to make when
defining an innovation program or competency.
What you leave in, and what you take out
(intentionally or not) has a great impact on
your success.
We'll look at the trend of social networking
and "wisdom of crowds" approaches for
innovation, and detail four concerns with
these methods when you are innovating.
Next, we'll review a new book just out by the
consultants at Innosight - The Innovator's
Guide to Growth.
Finally, we'll look at the upcoming fall
schedule for conferences. There are a number
of programs scheduled for the fall that you
may want to take advantage of, including the
PDMA's Fall conference.
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
Innovation Model
In everything we do in a business, there's an
implicit or explicit model of how things
should be done, or what we want to
accomplish. A strategy is a plan and a model
for how the firm should operate and what it
should do. Business processes are models for
how the organization should function and
create value. Yet few firms take the
necessary time to define a model for their
future growth and differentiation -
innovation.
If innovation is important to ongoing growth
and differentiation, then it is far too
important to be left to chance. If it is
important, innovation efforts should be
planned and the organization should have a
model for its efforts, goals and expectations.
Compare and Contrast
Since this is an article about innovation,
we'd be remiss if we didn't include Apple and
Google, so here's the required reference.
Apple and Google are referred to quite often
as innovators, because they are innovative.
Yet, if you carefully consider their
innovation models and how innovation is
deployed at these two firms, you'll learn
that there is no one perfect innovation
model.
Google has a free-wheeling, open to anything
attitude that expects everyone to innovate.
After all, there's the famous 10% time
available to Google employees. Most Google
employees simply have to find an idea they'd
like to work on, pursue it and gain
credibility by attracting others to the idea,
then scale it up. Google's model expects
everyone to actively participate and is
generally decentralized.
Apple, on the other hand, has a very
different innovation model. Most ideas come
from the top (cough, cough Jobs) down. Most
of these ideas are worked in very small
teams, locked down away from the rest of the
organization. Innovation is centralized and
often seeks to disrupt an established market.
So, you have two "icons" of innovation, very
successful in their own rights, with
dramatically different innovation models.
Takeaways
There are several takeaways from this quick
review of Apple and Google. First, there's
no one "right" model of innovation. These
two firms demonstrate very different models
but have both been successful. Second,
a strong innovation culture and innovation
leadership are evident in both firms, so
culture and leadership are
paramount. Third, both of these models
expose "facets" or decisions that were made
about innovation models, and those facets are
of interest to your firm.
Facets
The innovation models we've just examined
demonstrated certain consistent
characteristics or what we'll call facets.
For example, Google's model is fairly
decentralized, while Apple's is fairly
centralized. Google's model is highly
participative, while Apple's is very
secretive and controlled. Two important
facets of your innovation model are the
measure of centralized control -
decentralized or centralized, and the breadth
of participation - broadly participative, or
like Apple, a skunkworks approach. As we've
seen from these two examples, either approach
may be correct for the specific company, its
culture and its chosen innovation model.
Facets Outlined
We believe there are at least eight key
facets to consider when building an
innovation capability, or initiating an
innovation project. In many cases, firms
rush in before adequately defining these
facets, only to create confusion and lack of
clarity about purpose and scope. Thinking
through these facets and creating an explicit
innovation model will simplify your work,
clarify your objectives and make it easier to
align to critical strategic goals.
We've defined these facets as:
- Open/Closed - the degree to which your
firm accepts ideas from customers or
partners
- Participative/Skunkworks - the
degree to
which your firm encourages broad
participation in innovation
- Incremental/Disruptive - what is the
intent of the innovation program?
- Centralized/Decentralized - where is
innovation controlled?
- Suggestive/Directed - how should
ideas be
generated
- Individual/Team - who should work on
ideas?
- Wisdom of crowds/Experts - who should
rate and evaluate ideas
- Product/Service/Business model -
what's
the appropriate outcome of ideas
Facets reviewed
Clearly these facets are not mutually
exclusive - it is entirely possible to run an
incremental campaign and a disruptive
campaign in the same organization.
Additionally, these facets are configurable.
Defining a "closed" innovation process at
the outset does not mean that a firm won't
accept ideas from consumers or partners
eventually.
However, thinking through these facets and
defining the innovation model reveals
implications. For example, if we decide to
receive ideas from customers or partners,
what are the reviews necessary to ensure the
receiving firm owns the IP and does not
violate another firm's IP? This additional
effort alone may be enough to convince a firm
not to accept ideas from customers or
partners initially.
Innovation Model
Once your team has determined how each facet
should be deployed in the innovation program,
you've defined an innovation model. That
model is not fixed, but it does define the
approach and outlook and expected outcomes
for innovation in the short term. The model
helps everyone understand what is in scope
and important, and what ideas may not be
appropriate at this time. Defining the model
and communicating its expectations and scope
will help everyone get "on board" more quickly.
Conclusion
Alexander Pope once wrote that "fools rush in
where angels fear to tread" and we believe
that's the case for innovation. Many firms
rush into innovation without a
defined model or clear objectives or
outcomes. Taking the time to consider each
facet and how it aligns to your business, its
culture and capabilities, and making explicit
decisions about your innovation model will
pay off down the road.
|
|
 |
Why social networking is not innovation
|
 |
|
Social Networking
As innovators, we are often called on to
watch for and synthesize trends, so we can
help our clients predict the future and
create new products and services. One new
trend we've been watching for a while is the
concept of innovation using social networking
and wisdom of crowds. As you'd expect from
this newsletter, we have strong opinions
about these phenomena.
Gathering ideas
A number of new software products and
websites have sprung up recently to encourage
the submission of ideas - online idea
suggestion boxes, social networking sites,
innovation forums and many others. The most
well-known and well-publicized site is Dell's
IdeaStorm site. These sites allow anyone,
anywhere to submit ideas about topics of
interest to them. While there are some
advantages to this approach, there are some
significant concerns to think about before
taking this approach. In particular:
- Keeping the idea generation focused on
topics that are important to you
- Managing the volume of ideas - Dell's
Ideastorm has over 9000 currently
- Implementing a process to do something
with the ideas beyond collecting and voting
- Gaining real insights beyond the
expectations and knowledge of the crowd
If something seems too easy
If it seems to be too easy to be true, then
it's probably a new website. Innovation
requires more than simply collecting a lot of
ideas from a generally dispersed audience and
allowing them to vote on the ideas they
submitted. If you don't direct the idea
generation into topics of interest to you,
the suggestion box will be full of ideas of
interest to the submitters but quite possibly
at odds with your product or service
strategy. Then you've collected ideas and
set expectations about those ideas with your
customers that you don't want to implement.
Drowning in ideas
Just as your IT team is drowning in data from
all the system that they manage, this
approach can literally drown the innovation
team in ideas. As mentioned, Dell's
IdeaStorm has over 9000 ideas, and a well
run, one or two week idea campaign can easily
generate several hundred on one topic. Talk
about finding a needle in a stack of needles!
Then consider the time necessary to review
and process those ideas. Assume for a second
that each idea requires between five and ten
minutes for a person to review and decide to
move forward with, request more information
or kill. 9000 ideas at 5 minutes each (an
underestimate) is 45,000 minutes or 750 hours
- almost a third of a man year just dedicated
to a quick review of each idea. Then add in
the fact that ideas from customers and
partners need a legal review for IP
ownership, and you'll see that more ideas is
not always the best answer.
Workflow
Many social networking sites and forums don't
provide workflow or idea management beyond
the capture of the idea and a simple voting
or rating process. Idea capture is the
easiest part of an innovation process, but
the bottlenecks exist just downstream -
effectively reviewing the ideas, evaluating
them and transitioning them into new products
or services or business models. Without an
effective innovation process to manage the
ideas after collection, innovation breaks
down. Again, you've set the expectation that
these ideas will be captured and reviewed.
If not, the submitters will become frustrated
and will refuse to submit ideas, and your
innovation program and efforts will flounder.
If you know it and I know it
A final concern with social networking and
wisdom of crowds is that these programs
primarily generate very incremental ideas,
and since these approaches are very open,
collaborative and web-based, they expose
ideas to a large number of people. The
larger the group, the more the thinking and
ideas will revert to the mean. So you can't
expect really insightful or disruptive ideas
from this approach, nor can you expect that
the ideas you generate from this approach are
uniquely yours. Your competitors are
listening to and engaging your customer base
just as frequently as you are, so broadly
distributed idea platforms will result in
ideas that have been seen and reviewed by a
number of firms.
Part of a solution
So, just like brainstorming does not equal
innovation, but is an important tool or
component for innovation, many of these new
trends around innovation and social
networking are not complete solutions. In
fact, they may become great distractions.
Generating a huge number of ideas that are
relatively incremental doesn't add much to a
firm's ability to innovate or differentiate,
and may become a huge distraction from real
disruptive possibilities. Recognize that
innovation is a complex function and that
every tool - brainstorming, social
networking, innovation processes, creativity
and a whole list of others - all play into a
robust innovation capability and model. No
one solution provides all the answers.
|
 |
Innovator's Guide to Growth
|
 |
|
Book Review
We at OVO are privileged to receive new books
"hot off the press" on innovation to review.
We recently received a copy of The
Innovator's Guide to Growth and felt it
deserved a review in our newsletter.
The Innovator's Guide to Growth is a natural
continuation of the Innovator's series by
Clayton Christensen (Innovator's Dilemma,
Innovator's Solution, etc), but is written by
consultants from the firm that Christensen
founded, Innosight. In The Innovator's Guide
to Growth, the authors take a lot of the
concepts Christensen created in his books and
make them more applicable and practical for
an innovator. This is the first book that
moves from education and advocacy into
practical advice for innovators.
What we liked about the book
Scott Anthony and his co-authors have written
a book that provides a detailed plan for
innovation, breaking down the approach to
innovation into stages - planning,
identifying opportunities and building
processes. Anthony and the other authors
follow a lot of what Christensen said about
disruptive innovation - especially
identifying the underserved or those who
aren't served by existing offerings - what
they call nonconsumers. They leverage the
"jobs to be done" model from Christensen as
well, examining innovation from a customer's
viewpoint rather than an inside-out
viewpoint. There is a short but strong
chapter on innovation metrics as well.
The book focused less on success stories and
analogies and more on practical advice,
tools, techniques and templates.
Where we felt the book could be
stronger
The Innovator's Guide to growth assumes most
of the focus on innovation will be
disruptive, so it has less interest and
patience to consider incremental or
breakthrough thinking. The book assumes most
innovation will originate from developing
offerings for nonconsumers, so it spends less
time than expected in reviewing trends and
unidentified opportunities. The book doesn't
spend enough time on building out an
innovation competency - rather it focuses on
innovation projects, and doesn't address key
cultural issues like rewards, recognition and
culture.
Our Take
This book belongs on the desk of any
innovator who is leading an innovation
program. It has a good focus on disruptive
innovation and its early chapters on planning
and strategy are well developed. We'd
augment it with (shameless plug) Make
us more Innovative,
because we believe there's more definition
necessary in the innovation processes, roles
and responsibilities, and that the culture,
communication and rewards that innovation
requires are not well addressed.
|
 |
Fall Innovation Events and Conferences
|
 |
PDMA International
The PDMA holds an international conference
each year, and the focus of the event has
a strong focus on innovation. This year's
event is scheduled for September 13 - 15 in
Orlando. OVO is chairing a track in
this program on the skills and capabilities
necessary for innovation. At this year's
PDMA International conference, you'll have a
chance to interact with leading innovation
thinkers in the "Guru" studio and learn
practical tools and processes for innovation.
See more about the event here,
and if you
decide to attend, use this code SP08IC to get
a 20% discount. I hope we'll see you in
September in Orlando!
Frost & Sullivan Growth and Innovation
Conference
I've had the opportunity to participate in
this event.
I'd highly recommend it, since there is a
lot of opportunity for interaction and
exchange, and many of the attendees are
fairly senior in their roles and experience.
Frost&Sullivan does a good job with this
conference and encouraging interaction
between the attendees.
Business Innovation Factor Event
We've attended this event
for several years and find it inspiring and
encouraging for innovators. The Business
Innovation Factory sponsors a story telling
conference and brings in innovation
practitioners from a wide array of companies
to talk about their experiences. A small,
intimate program focused on lessons learned
and the experiences of starting or running
innovation programs.
|
 |
 |
 |
|
If you'd like to discuss how OVO can work
with you
to improve your innovation strategies, ideation
sessions, innovation processes or software,
contact us today at our website
or
(919) 844-5644 x789.
If you have a topic you'd like to see us
cover or a question you'd like to have us
address, please let us know via the website
above.
If you enjoyed this innovation newsletter, please
pass it along to your friends. If you wish to
unsubscribe, please see the link below.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey Phillips
OVO
phone:
919-844-5644 x789
|
 |
|