Posts Tagged innovation consulting

Directed Innovation

Directed Innovation, the most effective way to create a corporate culture of innovation

Many companies are attempting to create a corporate culture of innovation by establishing a centralized Innovation Center of Excellence. Decisions on how to structure and staff such a center can make or break it—and can affect the company’s ultimate success or failure.

There are two common approaches to creating a culture of innovation:

  1. Everyone is responsible for innovation. Organizations that take this approach train hundreds, even thousands, of employees as part of a change management effort. They want all their employees to think differently about innovation.
  2. A specialized team is responsible for innovation. Organizations that take this approach place responsibility for innovation upon a small team and call upon that team as needed.

In our experience, both approaches are flawed. Companies that take the first approach, which is the more common, see innovation as being inextricably linked to broad cultural change in the organization. But it doesn’t need to be. What we have learned is that innovation as most commonly understood—that is, product and service innovation, geared toward growth—should not be everyone’s responsibility. Only those who decide what products to place in the development pipeline should concern themselves with innovation. These are the people who need to think and act differently so that only products that will create significant new customer value and contribute to revenue growth enter the development process to begin with. The rest of the organization simply has to do what it has always done—that is, validate, prototype, design, build, create, ship, and launch those products. Training the entire organization to be innovators is a time-consuming, costly, and unnecessary activity.

But the second approach is also flawed, and at a fundamental level. The problem with creating an internal team of innovation consultants is that there is a mismatch between the time it takes to develop the needed skills on the one hand and the demands that the organization is likely to place on the team, once trained, on the other. It takes a long time to obtain the skills and expertise needed: if this group is not involved in constant innovation, those skills will get rusty (and may never develop properly in the first place). But most organizations are not generating that level of innovation throughput. All too often, organizations that take this approach end up dissolving the innovation team. It simply lacks the skills needed to sustain itself.

So what is the solution?

We have introduced an innovation culture-building model called “directed innovation.” The directed innovation model enables an organization to grow through innovation quickly, with the least investment.

Instead of requiring the entire organization to be responsible for innovation, the directed innovation model requires a small group of people to form the nucleus of the Center of Excellence. But this model differs from approach number two because this team is not responsible for actually creating growth plans. Rather, it is responsible for assisting Strategyn’s professionals in the creation of such a plan and for managing its execution. The team does not have to develop the skills required for selecting and sizing markets, and it does not have to conduct job-based research. The innovation team, or Center of Innovation of Excellence, has three responsibilities:

  1. It must identify the markets that will generate growth.
  2. It must work with Strategyn to create a growth plan for those markets.
  3. It must oversee the execution of that growth plan.

With our assistance, the Center of Excellence presents a visionary growth plan to the sponsoring division, along with supporting information and financial justification. The sponsoring division takes it from there and works with the center to execute the growth plan. We will often work with the division as well, to ensure the plan is being executed as envisioned and to teach them how to use the plan’s insights to manage growth for years to come.

The diagram below illustrates the three recommended areas of focus for a Center of Innovation Excellence.

To find out more about how using directed innovation can help companies achieve their growth objectives without a major cultural overhaul, read our article “Building a Corporate Culture of Innovation.” Please feel free to contact us at info@strategyn.com with any questions or comments.

 

 

 

The Right Product for the Right Job

What if you could frame an innovation challenge, gather and analyze data, and develop customer value propositions, concepts, and plans in just four weeks? Some suggest that this can’t be done – at least, not at a price that many can afford. But what if it could be?

Conventional consulting wisdom encourages expansive research and multi-month engagements. And yet, this practice may be over-serving some of you in some innovation contexts. Our Innovation Track Record Study found that ODI’s innovation success rate is 5x the industry average. And yet, the verbatims from this study revealed that some of our best clients struggle with an over-abundance of data. Others are underserved, because despite plenty of clear data that points them in the right direction, they struggle to overcome entrenched, old patterns of organizational behavior. And almost universally, they desire to use ODI in more contexts, to speed it up, and reduce costs.

These are important issues, and two key breakthroughs came in my personal search for answers. The first, and most important, was the publishing of the New York Times bestselling book, Switch: How to Change Things When Change is Hard by Chip Heath and Dan Heath.

Switch: How to Change Things When Change is Hard

Switch: How to Change Things When Change is Hard

The Heath brothers say that Innovation is fundamentally about change, and the primary obstacle to change is a conflict that’s built into our brains. The rational mind wants a great beach body; the emotional mind wants that Oreo cookie. The rational mind wants to change something at work; the emotional mind loves the comfort of existing routine. This tension can doom an innovation effort – but if it’s overcome, innovation can come quickly. I’m proud to announce that we’re now partners with the Heath brothers. I am trained, certified, and licensed to use Switch to help you and your teams achieve quick wins and to get more out of ODI.

The second breakthrough came from the emergence of new research methods that are changing the rules of the game. My work in automating the gathering of customer needs has led to a 4x reduction in the time it takes to identify customer needs in many markets. The emergence of do-it-yourself quantitative research tools further reduces the time it takes to get data back from the field while simultaneously reducing cost.

As a result, I’ve created Strategyn’s ODI + Switch Quick-Win Innovation Workshop. Think of the workshop as having a flexible ODI front end, in which we take advantage of the time-saving and cost-saving new research methods, with a Switch backend, which results in innovation concepts that are, by design, easier to implement organizationally and easier for customers to adopt because Switch’s ground-breaking change-management principles are taken into account.

Skeptics may object. It is often said that one month feels too short in duration to reveal actionable insight. As an innovation scholar and consultant I take objections like this seriously. So, I tried it for myself.

My friend and colleague, Zac Lyons, has a grandmother’s whose ability to live independently has suffered greatly in the past few years. Zac’s mother now assists her with most of the activities of daily living. Zac has observed the physical and emotional toll it takes on his mother and caregivers like her. We asked, “Is there something ODI can do to help them?” We didn’t have a lot of money or time to invest, but this was a case in which directional insight would be better than guessing.

As a starting point, we picked the market of “caregivers bathing an elderly family member or spouse.” Applying the new research methods, we were able to gather the needs in one week, create, deploy, and gather data from the field in two weeks, and analyze the results in one week. We discovered the top unmet need was, minimize the risk of falls. The problems that contribute to the risk of falls are many: failing eyesight, muscle weakness, slippery floors, and high tub walls (to name a few). These are tough innovation problems to solve, especially within a budget affordable to seniors living on a fixed income.

And yet, we found a bright spot – those who had installed and used adaptive features such as grab bars and transfer seats were better satisfied. Using Switch, we transformed a hard innovation problem (“How can we address the frailties of age or remodel the bathroom?”) into an easier innovation problem (“How can we get more people to adopt and use relatively inexpensive grab bars and transfer seats?”) It turns out that some elderly bathers resist adopting and using assistive features because it’s an admission of a loss of ability and a sign of old age. Others are willing to adopt these features but struggle to implement them. Both are behavioral innovation challenges – ones well suited to quick-wins through the application of the Switch framework.

Innovation teams used to think that they had to choose between conducting a full, comprehensive ODI study (with its commensurate time and cost), using an outdated innovation method, or worse – guessing (and guessing wrong). Now there’s a new option. Applying these new methods in engagements with Microsoft, Johnson & Johnson, TD Bank, Dun & Bradstreet, and Ingersoll Rand have proven effective.

Don’t get me wrong. This is not a replacement for a comprehensive ODI study. The Quick-Win Innovation Workshop is best used for early-phase learning or to spur new thinking when you need to improve a product or service in an existing market quickly and when the innovation challenge is not purely technical, but also requires behavioral change. Complex product categories such as smartphones, highly technical categories such as medical device, and difficult to contact audiences such as business decision makers still require the breadth and depth of insight provided by a comprehensive ODI study.

How would being able to quickly understand your customer’s needs change the way your team innovates? Our goal is to make ODI accessible in a way that matches appropriate research breadth, depth, and investment with your innovation need. If you’re interested in improving your skills at planning and executing change, please leave a comment or send me a note at eeskey@strategyn.com.

Silence the Voice of the Customer (VOC)

There is much debate surrounding the methodologies of VOC.  Leading-edge companies have come to realize that VOC methods do not guarantee success. In fact, a recent blog post by Andrew McInnes of Forrester Research, mentions a growing number of companies are not feeling the business value of their VOC programs. Forrester conducted a survey that revealed nearly half of the respondents felt their VOC programs were not delivering financial results.

This is no surprise to us at Strategyn. Based on our research we have discovered that today’s VOC methods are fraught with ambiguity and actually cause the failures that companies are trying to avoid.  So why is this? As the blog suggests, and what we firmly believe, is that most companies think about customer needs from the wrong perspective.

By focusing on the “job-to-be-done,” instead of the product or the customer, companies are able to create breakthrough products and services that garner them the financial success they seek. Thinking about innovation from this perspective is what makes our patented Outcome-Driven Innovation (ODI) process different. Using ODI, companies are able to discover customer insights that VOC simply cannot. The result is an impressive 86% innovation success rate. You can read more about Strategyn’s view on VOC and the ODI process in this White Paper.

To learn more, join us in our upcoming webinar on April 20th, 1pm EST. Sign up here. Contact Strategyn directly to find out how our consulting services can help your organization: Toll free (866) 729-8400

Measuring Innovation Success

I recently received an email from Chris, a former innovation management consultant, who challenged the results of Strategyn’s Track Record Study. You may recall that this study found that products and services launched using our Outcome-Driven Innovation methodology had an 86 percent success rate.

He criticized us, saying we failed to address issues such as “starting point, talent, industry dynamics and tons of other independent variables.” This led him to the following conclusion: “Clearly, ‘process’ is 90 percent of (your) equation. Seems horribly overstated. What about the myriad of other factors at play?”

Chris is right. The thesis behind our Outcome-Driven Innovation methodology is all about the process that companies use to determine which products and services to bring to market. Clearly, companies aren’t struggling with developing products. But they are struggling to put out the right products. That’s why the average product success rate is 17 percent.

By using Outcome-Driven Innovation, we help companies identify unmet customer needs and look for the greatest opportunities to meet those needs using our patented process. The reason our success rates are so high – 86 percent is unheard of in the industry – is that customer needs are identified before a product or service is ever introduced into the pipeline.

We don’t think companies need to revamp their product development or launching process. Companies do a great job of executing these elements of the innovation process. What they don’t do well is the upfront process – everything that happens before invention takes place.

In an hour-long conversation with Chris (he invited me to spar with him), we talked about many things. But I think the big stumbling block for many in the innovation field is: how do we measure innovation success?

At Strategyn, we measure success by how well our clients meet their customer’s needs by producing products and services that grow revenue, market share and deliver value. It’s not about how many products an organization launches, it’s about launching the right products. And when organizations feel that happens, that’s success.

I loved Chris’ final comment in his email to me. “Your piece,” he said, “was successful in being provocative and raising my blood pressure.”  When we hit a nerve and get to talk to someone about our innovation theory, they often come away convinced that this is a common sense approach. I can guarantee that Chris’ blood pressure is much lower after our conversation.