GUEST POST from Drew Boyd

Companies can reduce the risk of adopting new innovation methods by testing them first. A short, pilot program that addresses a specific product or service line helps you understand whether a new method is right for your company. Pilot programs help keep your costs in line, and they help you reduce resistance to adopting new methods.

To organize an innovation pilot program:

1. Make the Case

A pilot program will take time and money, so you will need to build the business case before you can secure funding. Positioning is critical. The key is to show what has changed in the market creating a need to do things differently. Show the contrast how the firm’s future state would be improved if a new method is found. Offer up the pilot as a way to experiment without making huge commitments. Be sure not to attack the prevailing methods or departments responsible for innovation. Otherwise, they will push back.

2. Build the Base

Enroll other divisions to share the risks…and rewards…from the pilot. Ask peers to chip in part of the expense, even if it is a small amount. By “syndicating” support of the pilot program, you broaden the exposure to the outcome. If you try to go it alone and do the pilot without your peers, you may be seen as the “lone wolf.” If the pilot flops, you are exposed. If it is wildly successful, the others who were not involved may feel resentful.

3. Select a Method

Do your homework to understand how the method works. Make sure you can explain it to others. Study the data and know its efficacy. Has it worked in the past and will it work on this project? How is the method different from what is being done today?

4. Choose the Consultant

Once you have selected an innovation method to test, choose the right consultant to deliver it. Be sure not to do it the other way around! Innovation consultants fall into four broad categories:

• Invention: These are consultants that help you create new-to-the-world ideas. They have a particular expertise in creativity methods or idea generation tools. Their main focus is generation of many new product or service ideas.
• Design: These are consultants that take an existing product, service, or idea and put some new, innovative form to it. They have a particular expertise in industrial design or human factors design. Their main focus is transforming the way a product is used or experienced.
• Engineering: These are consultants that help you make the new idea work in practice. They have a particular expertise in technology, science, research, and problem solving. Their main focus is building it.
• Actualization: These are consultants that help you get the innovation into the marketplace. They have a particular expertise in marketing processes, brand, or commercial launch of a product or service. Their main focus is selling it.

The challenge is many consultants claim to be all of these. How do you know what type the firm really is? Study the biography of their founder. What was the founder’s education, experience, work background, interests, etc. The founder is where the core orientation of the firm begins. Select the consultant that is best suited to deliver the method and is well matched to the business case.

5. Recruit the Team

Bring together a “dream team” of talent to participate in the exercise. The ideal number of participants is twelve. They should be from diverse, cross-functional areas of the company. Strive for one third commercial, one third technical, and one third customer-oriented (sales, packaging, customer service). Gender diversity is essential – an equal number of men and women is the ideal. Be sure participants all commit to full participation. Avoid those who want to selectively “surf” into the pilot off and on. These are your eventual naysayers who will claim they experienced the method and “didn’t find it very useful.” Chances are they beholden to another method – their sacred cow.

6. Measure and Share

Develop a factual and credible story of what happened in the pilot. Don’t focus too much on downstream output, though. These measures are often subjective and unsupportable. Instead, focus on the only measure that counts – would the team leader from the pilot program recommend using the method to his or her colleagues? Advice from one’s peers will ultimately move other teams to act.

7. Make it Stick

Can we continue to use the method without the consultant going forward? Are the methods clear? Are there training aids and tools to help teach others? Can the pilot program be extended to a general training program? What is the retention rate one month out? Six months out? How many people could be trained within your current budget cycle? How do you continue to build innovation muscle?

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

GUEST POST from Drew Boyd

To build innovation muscle, companies must include innovation in their competency models. A competency is a persistent pattern of behavior resulting from a cluster of knowledge, skills, abilities, and motivations. Competency models formalize that behavior and make it persistent. They prescribe the ideal patterns needed for exceptional performance. They help diagnose and evaluate employee performance. It takes a lot of work to develop one, but it’s worth it.

Here is a nice example of an innovation competency modeled developed at Central Michigan University through a collaboration of authors. It could be customized to address the specific needs of a company or industry.

Core Competencies of Innovation

Creativity

• Generating Ideas: Coming up with a variety of approaches to problem solving.
• Critical Thinking: Logically identifying how different possible approaches are strong and weak, and analyzing these judgments.
• Synthesis/Reorganization: Finding a better way to approach problems through synthesizing and reorganizing the information.
• Creative Problem Solving: Using novel ideas to solve problems as a leader.

Enterprising

• Identifying Problem: Pinpointing the actual nature and cause of problems and the dynamics that underlie them.
• Seeking Improvement: Constantly looking for ways that one can improve one’s organization.
• Gathering Information: Identifying useful sources of information and gathering and utilizing only that information which is essential.
• Independent Thinking: Thinking ‘outside the box’ even if this sometimes may go against popular opinion.
• Technological Savvy: Understanding and utilizing technology to improve work processes.

Integrating Perspectives

• Openness to Ideas: A willingness to listen to suggestions from others and to try new ideas.
• Research Orientation: Observing the behavior of others, reading extensively, and keeping your mind open to ideas and solutions from others. Reading and talking to people in related fields to discover innovations or current trends in the field.
• Collaborating: Working with others and seeking the opinions of others to reach a creative solution.
• Engaging in Non-Work Related Interests: Being well-rounded and seeking information from other fields and areas of life to find novel approaches to situations.

Forecasting

• Perceiving Systems: Acknowledging important changes that occur in a system or predicting accurately when they might occur.
• Evaluating Long-Term Consequences: Concluding what a change in systems will result in long-term
• Visioning: Developing an image of an ideal working state of an organization.
• Managing the Future: Evaluating future directions and risks based on current and future strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.

Managing Change

• Sensitivity to Situations: Assessing situational forces that are promoting and inhibiting an idea for change.
• Challenging the Status Quo: Willingness to act against the way things have traditionally been done when tradition impedes performance improvements.
• Intelligent Risk-Taking: Being willing and able to take calculated risks when necessary.
• Reinforcing Change: Encouraging subordinates to come up with innovative solutions. Recognizing and rewarding those who take initiative and act in a creative manner. Facilitating the institutionalization of change initiatives.

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

GUEST POST from Drew Boyd

Companies should avoid the temptation to brand their innovation program. While it seems like a great way to bring excitement and focus to innovation, branding these programs does just the opposite. Employees become cynical, they wait it out, and they go right back to doing what they were doing before.

I liken this advice to that from Edwards Deming on quality. His 14 Key Principles are legendary in the quality movement worldwide. Principle Number 10 says:

“Eliminate slogans, exhortations, and targets for the work force asking for zero defects and new levels of productivity. Such exhortations only create adversarial relationships, as the bulk of the causes of low quality and low productivity belong to the system and thus lie beyond the power of the work force.”

In other words, don’t cheer people on to do something they already do or, worse, don’t know how to do. For example, don’t place huge banners in the cafeteria or on the employee website about the importance of quality. That’s because…they already know it! It annoys employees when the company condescends.

The same is true with innovation. Branding your corporate innovation with hyperbole and slogans only defeats the purpose. But there are some who would argue the merits of branding. It signals leadership support, and it creates enthusiasm. GE’s “Ecomagination” for example, makes a clear statement about the company’s emphasis.

What to do? A recent study on the effects of time pressure on innovation outcome might lend some insight. Michael Hsu and Hsueh-Liang Fan demonstrated that putting time pressure to innovate in a company that already has a high organizational innovation climate actually hurts performance. In other words, cracking the whip on employees who already perform well makes them perform worse. On the other hand, creative outcomes will be enhanced by putting time pressure in companies with a poor innovation culture.

Perhaps the same could be said for branding your innovation program:

• In corporate cultures where the innovation climate is strong and well supported, branding the innovation does absolutely no good. It may signal that something is wrong, or the leadership just doesn’t get it.
• In corporate cultures where the innovation climate is weak or non-existent, branding the innovation program may give a short term burst of energy and results. ‘Might as well try it…nothing else seems to work.

If you insist on bringing high visibility to your innovation program, don’t brand the entire program. Rather, brand the innovation training program. Signal to your employees that you are serious about giving them the skills that matter most – the ability to create new and useful innovations across the entire enterprise. THAT is worth bringing attention to.

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

GUEST POST from Drew Boyd

Non-profit organizations need innovation every bit as much as for-profit firms. Some might argue they need it more because they lack the resources and cash flow of large commercial firms. Non-profits need innovation in:

• Fund Raising
• Expanding their reach
• Mission delivery
• Resource utilization

The need for innovation in the non-profit sector is widely recognized. Awards, grants, and other forms of recognition for innovative programs help stimulate managers to be more aggressive.

While the need is recognized, the approach to innovating non-profits is not. These organizations should use the same methods found so effective in corporate innovation. Structured methods based on patterns inherent in inventive solutions can be applied to the non-profit business model just as effectively as the for-profit model. A method like S.I.T. can help an organization “break fixedness” about its role, resources, and process, thus opening new possibilities and approaches.

Here is how I would do it. Start by making a list of the components of the non-profit, both internal to the firm as well as external. The list might include:

1. Office
2. Volunteers
3. Phones
4. Fund Raising Events
5. Web site
6. Promotional Material
7. Donations and Grants
8. Beneficiaries
9. Benefactors
10. Mission Statement
11. Management Board
12. Executive Director

Start with a tool like Subtraction. Try removing an essential internal component (for example, donations and grants). Use “Function Follows Form” to imagine benefits and uses of all the remaining components. Try it with other components. Next, use the Task Unification tool. This tool helps you see existing resources in a new light, usually creating innovative ways to use those resources. Finish the exercise with one of the three remaining tools. Division, for example, will likely create new configurations of the non-profit and stimulate innovative ideas. For example, try dividing out some of the executive director’s roles but placing them somewhere else back in the “Closed World.” Where would those roles go and why would that be beneficial?

Here are some creative examples from the non-profit sector (courtesy of PSFK):

1. Nonprofit Shopping Mall is a new service that turns consumer dollars into charitable donations. The organization partners with major online retailers like Target, Amazon, Home Depot, Bloomingdales, Expedia, Petco, and iTunes. They donate a percentage of each purchase to the nonprofit of choice. A shopper begins on Nonprofit Shopping Mall, choosing a charity and clicking through to a retailer. Tracking data is used to identify which shoppers came via Nonprofit Shopping Mall, and which charities they’ve chosen to donate to.
2. Holiday Matinee recently worked with a local, non-profit charter school-offering its students an opportunity to design their own silkscreen tees, which they then voted on which designs to take part in their Artist Series. 100% of all the proceeds from these shirts go to school funding.
3. Can Too is an Australian non-profit program that provides professional training in running and swimming in exchange for charitable fund raising. Members are given twice-weekly training sessions, daily guides, speakers and social events. In return, they have to raise funds for Cure Cancer Australia. Runners can train for 10K or half marathon and full marathon events while swimmers can choose from among 1 km, 2 km and 2.7 km ocean swims and raise funds when they participate in their respective events. Can Too has raised more than AUD 4 million for Cure Cancer Australia.
4. The MarkProf Foundation is a non-profit organization in Manila. Its main event is an all-expenses paid, seven week “boot camp” led by multinational CEOs and reputable captains of local industry. Participants from diverse socio-economic backgrounds are ranked based on two core virtues: innovation and inquisitiveness. The proof of success is in quality job creation. “MarkProf is already the biggest source of management trainees for some of the top multinational companies in the Philippines” says current president, Jem Perez who also refers to the organization as a “resume equalizer”.

Editor’s Note: Be sure and also check out our FREE white paper on Charitable Innovation

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

GUEST POST from Drew Boyd

The athletic footwear market is maturing, so it will need sustained innovation to keep growing. “Performance footwear” emerged with the ancient Greeks and has since grown to a $50 billion global industry. Innovations such as vulcanized rubber, high tops, arch support, specialized functions, endorsements, and branding have kept the industry vibrant and growing, especially for the dominant three players: Nike, Adidas, and Reebok. Now it’s crunch time!

For this month’s LAB, we will use the corporate innovation method, S.I.T., to create new athletic shoe concepts. The method works by taking one of the five patterns (subtraction, task unification, division, multiplication, and attribute dependency) and applying it to an existing product or service. This morphs it into a “virtual product,” which is an abstract, ambiguous notion with no clear purpose. We then work backwards (Function Follows Form) to find new and useful benefits or markets for the virtual product.

Here are five innovations created by graduate students at the University of Cincinnati as part of their graded requirements in the innovation tools course.

1. FEET HEAT: Insole of the shoe heats up and keeps the feet of the athlete warm even in extreme conditions. A battery in the sole provides power to a metal plate-heater. Shoe can be connected to regular power-outlets and recharged within minutes. (SIT TOOL: task unification – assigning an additional job to an existing resource)
2. COLOR EX: The color of the fabric changes according to the physiological signs of the athlete (heart rate, lactic acid level). Different colors are designated to different levels of exertion/intensity that the athlete’s body has been enduring. Color EX Benefits: allows athletes to see whether they need to work harder or slower. Helps athletes train within a specific performance range. Also alerts coaches, trainers, and teammates as to how hard the athlete is really working. (SIT TOOL: attribute dependency – one feature of the product changes as another feature of the product or the environment changes)
3. SMART SOLE: The surface of the sole adjusts to the type or conditions of the ground to improve performance. As ground conditions change (example: hard wood floor, gravel, wet cement, rocky terrain, grass), the thickness, stickiness, and durometer of the sole adjusts to optimal configurations for that surface. Benefit: allows athletes in sports that cross over different surfaces to perform better. (SIT TOOL: attribute dependency – one feature of the product changes as another feature of the product or the environment changes)
4. STRENGTH PRO: Holes in the soles allow athletes to add various sized weights to the shoe. Weights can be exchanged or completely removed. Training device to increase stamina, speed, endurance, strength, and vertical leaps. Weight is easily removed so that the shoe can be used regularly (same shoe for practice and competition). Weights can be quickly increased or decreased based on workout purpose and individual needs. (SIT TOOL: task unification – assigning an additional job to an existing resource)
5. INVERTED SPIKES: The spikes of the shoe are inverted into the bottom into the athletes foot. The spikes are softned and dulled so as to provide a message therapy as the athlete moves. Benefit: improves foot circulation, endurance, and comfort. (SIT TOOL: multiplication – copying a component and changing it in some way such as size, location, etc)

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

GUEST POST from Drew Boyd

A church needed a new bell ringer. When a man with no arms applied for the job, the doubting priest asked, “Can you ring the bell?” The applicant climbed the bell tower, took a running start, and plowed his face into the bell producing a beautiful tone. He suddenly slipped, fell to the ground, and died. The crowd of onlookers asked the priest, “Do you know this man?” The priest replied,

“No. But his face rings a bell.”

If you are like most people, you laugh at jokes at their very end, not the beginning. Why? Because jokes make sense only in hindsight after we hear the proverbial “punch line.” We have no context to start laughing at the start of the joke. But once we hear the final line, our mind works its way backwards to make sense of it. We laugh.

So it is with innovation. An abstract concept remains abstract until our mind works backwards to make sense of it. Only then do we see the value. Edward de Bono describes this phenomena in his new book, Think! Before It’s Too Late. As de Bono puts it, “All creative ideas will be logical in hindsight.”

For the innovation practitioner, this ability to automate our thinking and “see value in hindsight” is a crucial skill, one that can be trained and learned by anyone. It can be strengthened and perfected with practice. Once we develop an inate ability to see value in hindsight, the practitioner needs to develop a way to create the abstractions. That is where the use of innovation patterns comes in. Five simple patterns – subtraction, task unification, division, multiplication, and attribute dependency – guide us to create abstract concepts. They help us innovate systematically, on demand.

What is unique about these patterns is that they have emerged from products already deemed innovative. They do not rely on random generators. They do not rely on special cognitive abilities of individuals. They do not rely on unique insights gained from customers. The patterns act like a cognitive prosthetic that creates the abstractions for you. All you need to do then is “see the value in hindsight” just as you do with a good joke.

The church continued searching for a bell ringer. Another man applied – the twin brother of the man who died. The priest asked, “Can you ring the bell?” The applicant climbed the bell tower as his brother had done and ran straight at the bell. He suddenly slipped, fell to the ground and died, almost in the same spot. Stunned onlookers asked the priest, “Do you know THIS man?”

“No, but he’s a dead ringer for his brother.”

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

GUEST POST from Drew Boyd

Crowdsourcing has a crowd of critics. Crowdsourcing is the notion of distributed problem-solving where problems are broadcast to large groups of solvers in the form of an open call for solutions. The belief is that the “wisdom of the crowd” yields superior results over what individuals can do. The use of the term has spread to just about any activity that involves groups of people tackling an issue.

The critics have a point. Crowdsourcing seems to be an old story retold a new way. The idea of collaborating with others is not new. The idea of reaching out to thousands to gain insights about a problem is not new either. Here are two examples held out as crowdsourcing best practices that make the point. A Catholic church in Germany launched an online open idea competition. On the competition platform, young people are encouraged to submit their ideas about what they would like to change at the Catholic Church.

That is not crowdsourcing. That is market research.

Here is another. CreateMyTattoo connects customers with a community of 700 tattoo artists who compete to design the perfect custom tattoo. Customers see several variations of their tattoo idea and provide feedback to the artists during the contest. The site guarantees at least ten unique custom tattoo designs or your money back!

That is not crowdsourcing. That is competitive bidding.

Here is a better example that starts to move in the right direction. DHL, a courier company, is testing a way to use city residents to deliver packages along the route as they go about their daily travel. The programs is called “bring.BUDDY,” and it hopes to reduce road congestion and DHL’s carbon emissions. Participants use a smartphone app to specify their travel. An alert is sent to them of any package that needs to be delivered along their route. In return, the participants receive points which they can redeem at local stores.

This is novel. But DHL could go further with the concept. What else do people know or do (explicitly or tacitly) that DHL could use to improve operations, reduce cost, or increase revenue? For example, what if DHL had a way to know what delivery routes are optimal based on information fed to it by customers (through cellular technology)? What if the crowd could identify open parking spots, report packages that need picked up, or spot activities that might demand the use of courier delivery?

There is a better way to leverage the crowd. Rather than “source” the crowd for their explicit ideas, we “cache” their tacit, day-to-day routines to detect patterns and insights. In “crowdcaching,” people don’t know that they are contributing their small, incremental movements and decisions to a larger pool. It is like digital ethnography. We collect large samples of tiny decisions to “bootstrap” our insights and decisions.

The Task Unification tool is perfect for this exercise. The tool works by assigning an additional task to an existing resource. Crowds of people become such a resource. We start with a phrase like this: “The crowd of customers will deliver information that reduces our cost to service them.” Then, using Function-Follows-Form, we work backwards to consider how this would happen, why it would happen, and what benefits would accrue to all involved.

Let’s revisit our two previous examples of the Catholic church and tattoo shop. Perhaps we “crowdcache” the movements of young catholics as a way to spread the gospel by carrying the message when it is needed most. Perhaps the church has a way to track their location and proximity to others (via smartphone…with their permission) The system knows when a young member of the parish is with a person who is particularly troubled or in need of the Gospel. It develops new outreach programs from this data.

For the tattoo shop, it would be more interesting to search tattoo designs by what others are doing (social proof). This site could show real-time tattoo designs being inked by 700 tattoo artists. Tattoo shoppers select a design and see information about others who wear the same or similar design. Demographics, affiliations, attitudinal data, etc, would help the prospective tattoo-ee decide on appropriate designs thanks to the wisdom of the tattooed crowd. The crowd delivers useful information without even knowing it. The tatto shop “caches” this information to deliver better service.

By the way, “crowdcaching” is an old story retold in a new way, too. Think Amazon.

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

GUEST POST from Drew Boyd

Creating innovative TV commercials is more effective when using patterns embedded in other innovative commercials. Professor Jacob Goldenberg and his colleagues discovered that 89% of 200 award winning ads fall into a few simple, well-defined design structures. Their latest book, Cracking the Ad Code, defines eight of these structures and provides a step-by-step approach to use them.

Here are the eight tools:

1. Unification
2. Activation
3. Metaphor
4. Subtraction
5. Extreme Consequence
6. Absurd Alternative
7. Inversion
8. Extreme Effort

The Inversion Tool conveys what would happen if you didn’t have the product…in an extreme way. It show the benefits “lost” by not using the product. While it produces memorable commercials, it should be used only when the brand and its benefits are understood by the viewer.

To use the Inversion Tool, start with the components of the brand promise. Take each one away one at a time and envision in what ways the consumer would be affected…in an extreme way…if it did not have this aspect of the promise.

Here are two examples of the Inversion Tool:

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

GUEST POST from Drew Boyd

Blackberry is taking a shellacking from iPhone and Android. It’s market share has declined 4% in four months. Why? The company drifted from a strategy built around its core competency and is frantically chasing its app-crazed competitors. Though Blackberry defined the smart phone category, it will lose its lead unless it changes.

Blackberry needs innovation. This month’s LAB outlines an approach for using the corporate innovation method, S.I.T., to Blackberry. The focus is how to disrupt iPhone and Droid and re-assert dominance in the smart phone category.

The first step is to pick the core benefit that Blackberry can lead with. Using the Big Picture marketing framework, we need to identify a “dynamic variable” that is tied directly to RIM’s core competency – secure communications. Blackberry uses powerful codes to encrypt messages as they travel between a BlackBerry server and the BlackBerry device. All BlackBerry traffic runs through RIM data centers and servers which encrypt and unscramble messages. The iPhone and Droid communicate directly with ordinary email servers – unsecured.

My recommendation is to compete on privacy (NOT security which is more of the “how,” not the “why”). Blackberry cannot compete with iPhone and Droid on functionality (apps) and design. Instead, it needs to raise the Importance and Perception of privacy in the minds of the market. Privacy is highly desired by people and organizations, and Blackberry is the only technology that can do many functions securely. The trick is to extend the idea of privacy management beyond just emailing. Blackberry wants to convince the market that privacy is more important than apps and design.

Here is how I would apply an innovation method to this problem. First, I would frame the problem as: “How do we give our customers more privacy?” Notice the problem statement is devoid of technology, process, product, or anything that implies the “how.” Next, I would apply Task Unification, one of the five templates of S.I.T., to each of the following scenarios:

1. Resources of Blackberry: To use this scenario, we make a list of the major components of the Blackberry system including the handheld device and the other components, internal and external to RIM. It would include: keyboard, display, case, phone, email, wireless network, phone network, Blackberry Enterprise Servers, firewall, the Internet, phone networks, and Exchange servers. One by one, we take each component and assign it the additional job “giving our customers more privacy.” Some components already have a role, so the trick in to envision new ways that the component can deliver the value proposition.
2. Applications of Blackberry: With this approach, we create a list of all key functions and applications now on the unit. It would include the standard things like email and phone. We add to the list common smart phone applications like Maps, GPS, SMS Texting, Weather, Contacts, Calendar, Photos, and more. One by one, we contemplate ways to innovate with Blackberry delivering a secure version of the app. RIM has done this already with its version of SMS. It needs to go further to things like Maps (“Blackberry protects your privacy about your current location”). The point is to show the market that for every popular app on the iPhone and Droid, the Blackberry has a secure, private version of it.
3. Day-In-The-Life: To use this scenario, we list out in detail the aspects of our everyday routine. It would include important as well as seeming trivial items. The list might include the following: wake-up, shower, dress, take medication, eat, drive to work, check mail, have meetings, call clients, go shopping, drive home, watch TV, eat dinner, go to bed. One by one, we take each activity in the day and make the statement: “Blackberry gives me privacy about (fill in the blank).” For example, Blackberry keeps it private where you shop or what route you drive to work in the morning. With this “virtual product,” we identify potential benefits and potential ways to deliver the benefit.
4. Privacy-From-Whom: In this version, we create a list of people and organizations you want to keep out of your affairs. The list could include: family members, neighbors, co-workers, strangers, government, banks, employers, stores, churches, etc. Once again, we take each component and create the virtual product by stating, “Blackberry will protect my privacy from (fill in the blank).” For example, Blackberry routes all book purchases through its private network. We test the value of this new service, then direct the technology teams to create it.
5. Privacy-About-What: The final version is to delineate the types of information to be protected. List the major types of personal information: financial, political, religious, demographic, employment, educational, relationship, etc. One by one, create the hypothetical scenario: “Blackberry protects all my (fill in the blank) interests.” We test the value if the hypothetical service to understand its market benefit. If worthy, we begin seeking technological solutions.

RIM stands for “Research in Motion,” a clear indication of its drive with technology. Now it needs to evolve so the commercial agenda leads technology development.

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

GUEST POST from Drew Boyd

In honor of election day in the United States I thought I would run this post:

The Division template of the corporate innovation method, S.I.T., works by listing the components of the product or service, then dividing out a component either physically, functionally, or by preserving the characteristics of the whole. Here is a unique example of the Division template with political elections. This idea comes from innovation consultant, Lauchlan Mackinnon, in his blog, Think Differently!!.

“Political parties may say or do ‘anything’ to get elected. They will make alliances of convenience with powerful interests such as the media, big business, or unions, and they will take populist poll driven positions (which is not necessarily bad in itself in a democratic system). When a party gets elected however, it is not always the best person for the job who fills any role: it is a complex allocation system that balances party relationships and internal politics with the capabilities and contributions of members to fill the leadership roles.

My proposition is simple: what if we could split western democratic elections in to two phases or stages: a first election about the ideas and directions for the next term in government – the goals and aspirations that the people want the government to fulfill. Then run a second and completely independent election to determine the best people to fill those specific roles. Thus for example a democratic population could vote in not only the directions that are appropriate, for example health reform or financial reform, but they can also then call for suitable candidates to lead each portfolio and vote in specific people with appropriate backgrounds (for example in health reform or financial reform) to lead those portfolios and the implementation of those changes. A professor of health administration or economics or business administration or someone with deep industry experience in those areas would then have a much better chance of being selected than in our current system. And perhaps also we could focus each individual representing the country on serving the country and the world, rather than any party system.”

To extend this idea further, imagine “dividing” the political candidate out from their constituency and territory. Voters from another area would choose a candidate knowing they would not have to live with the results. After listening to the campaign promises, they elect a candidate based on issues that do not affect them. The benefit would be these voters can be more objective and not take into consideration territorial factors.

Another division observable in the U.S. midterm elections is separating the candidate from their party affiliation. Many campaign advertisements leave the political party out so voters pick candidates on the merits of their case rather than through party biases.

“Preserving” division divides the product or service into many smaller versions, each preserving characteristics of the whole. In this example, imagine voters had 100 votes instead of one. They could distribute votes to more than one candidate as a way to express preference on the issues. For example, if they liked a candidate from one party yet still liked some aspects of the other candidate, they might cast their 100 votes with a 70-30 split.

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.