Category Archives: Innovation

3 Steps to a Truly Terrific Innovation Team

GUEST POST from Robyn Bolton

“What had a bigger impact on the project? The process you introduced or the people on the team?”

As much as I wanted to give all the credit to my brilliant process, I had to tell the truth.

“People. It’s always people.”

The right people doing the right work in the right way at the right time can do incredible, even impossible, things. But replace any “right” in the previous sentence, and even the smallest things can feel impossible. A process can increase the odds of doing the right work in the right way, but it’s no guarantee. It’s powerless in the hands of the wrong people.

But how do you assemble the right group of people? Start with the 3 Ts.

Type of Innovation

We’re all guilty of using ‘innovation’ to describe anything that is even a little bit new and different. And we’ve probably all been punished for it.

Finding the right people for innovation start with defining what type of innovation they will work on:

Incremental: updating/modifying existing offerings that serve existing customers

Adjacent: creating new offerings for existing customers OR re-positioning existing offerings to serve new customers

Radical: new offerings or business models for new customers

Different innovation types require teams to grapple with different levels of ambiguity and uncertainty. Teams working on incremental innovations face low levels of ambiguity because they are modifying something that already exists, and they have relative certainty around cause and effect. However, teams working on radical innovations spend months grappling with ambiguity, certain only that they don’t know what they don’t know.

Time to launch

Regardless of the type of innovation, each innovation goes through roughly the same four steps:

Discover a problem to be solved
Design solutions
Develop and test prototypes
Launch and measure

The time allotted to work through all four steps determines the pace of the team’s work and, more importantly, how stakeholders make decisions. For example, the more time you have between the project start and the expected launch, the more time you have to explore, play, create, experiment, and gather robust data to inform decisions. But if you’re expected to go from project start to project launch in a year or less, you need to work quickly and make decisions based on available (rather than ideal) data.

Tasks to accomplish

Within each step of the innovation process are different tasks, and different people have different abilities and comfort levels with each. This is why there is growing evidence that experience in the phase of work is more important than industry or functional expertise for startups.

There are similar data for corporate innovators. In a study of over 100,000 people, researchers identified the type and prevalence of four types of innovators every organization needs:

Generators (17% of the sample): Find new problems and ideate based on their own experience.

Conceptualizers (19%): Define the problem and understand it through abstract analysis, most comfortable in early phases of innovation (e.g., Discover and Design)

Implementers (41%): Put solutions to work through experiments and adjustments, most comfortable in later stages of innovation (Develop and Launch)

Optimizers (23%): Systematically examine all alternatives to implement the best possible solution

Generators and Conceptualizers are most comfortable in the early stages of innovation (i.e., Discover and Design). Implementers and Optimizers are most comfortable in the later stages (e.g., Develop and Launch). The challenge for companies is that only 36% of employees fall into one of those two categories, and most tend to be senior managers and executives.

Taking Action

Putting high performers on innovation teams is tempting, and top talent often perceives such assignments as essential to promotion. But no one enjoys or benefits when the work they’re doing isn’t the work they’re good at. Instead, take time to work through the 3Ts, and you’ll assemble a truly terrific innovation team.

Image credit: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Valuing the Intangible Assets of an Innovation Culture

Leave a reply

Beyond ROI

Valuing the Intangible Assets of an Innovation Culture

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

Every quarter, innovation leaders are faced with the same reductive question: “What is the ROI of that experiment?” This question, while financially necessary for short-term accounting, is fundamentally flawed when applied to strategic innovation. It traps innovation in a transactional mindset, demanding a dollar value on ideas that are, by definition, intended to create entirely new markets or transform existing systems.

The true, sustainable value of an innovation program is not found in the immediate Return on Investment (ROI) of a single project. It resides in the Intangible Assets — the cultural and organizational capabilities — that the program builds. These assets, though difficult to quantify on a balance sheet today, are the ultimate determinants of long-term survival, market resilience, and future dominance. A relentless focus on short-term ROI kills the critical exploration necessary for genuine disruption.

The Four Intangible Assets of a High-Innovation Culture

When an organization invests in systematic, human-centered innovation, it accrues four non-financial assets that provide exponential returns over time:

The Adaptability Quotient (AQ): Innovation programs are essentially training grounds for AQ, the organization’s capacity to recognize, navigate, and thrive in constant change. They force teams to unlearn old methods, embrace ambiguity, and pivot quickly. A high AQ is the organization’s most valuable insurance policy against unforeseen disruption.
The Intellectual Agility Network: Innovation breaks down departmental silos by forcing cross-functional teams to solve wicked problems together. The resulting trust, shared language, and established network of communication — from engineering to marketing to legal — enables the entire organization to execute any strategic pivot faster and with less friction. This network connectivity is a massive advantage over siloed competitors.
Attraction and Retention Currency: Top talent, especially younger generations, prioritize purpose and the opportunity to create impact over stability. A demonstrated commitment to challenging the status quo and funding experimental projects acts as a powerful magnet. It transforms the company brand from a cost-center employer to a future-focused destination for change agents. The cost of replacing talent far outweighs the cost of running a few failed experiments.
De-risked Market Intelligence: Every failed innovation project provides invaluable information about what the market doesn’t want, what the technology can’t do, or what the internal structure won’t support. This failure is not a cost; it is cheap, high-fidelity market intelligence. It allows the organization to de-risk the next, larger investment by avoiding pitfalls already discovered in smaller, faster experiments.

Case Study 1: The Financial Firm’s Crisis Resilience

Challenge: Organizational Complacency and Inability to Pivot

A global financial services firm faced paralysis when FinTech startups eroded their lending division. Their internal structure had zero Adaptability Quotient (AQ), making change slow and painful.

Intangible Asset Focus:

The firm launched an internal Venture Studio program. While the immediate financial ROI of the first ten projects was poor, the program successfully created a pipeline of innovation leaders and built the Intellectual Agility Network via mandatory cross-functional teams. Two years later, when a major, unforeseen regulatory change hit, the company leveraged this new internal network to execute a massive, complex systems pivot in six months — a timeline that was previously unthinkable. The intangible asset of AQ saved the company hundreds of millions in potential fines and preserved market share, a value that exponentially exceeded the cost of the failed initial projects.

Measuring the Intangible: Shifting the Innovation KPI

To move beyond ROI, leaders must adopt Innovation Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that directly measure the accrual of these intangible assets. These should be tracked alongside traditional financial metrics:

Network Score: Percentage of innovation project members who come from non-traditional departments (e.g., Legal, HR).
Unlearning Rate: Number of old, inefficient processes officially decommissioned due to learnings from an innovation project.
Talent Flow: Promotion rate or retention rate of employees who participate in high-exposure, cross-functional innovation projects.
Failure Value: Clear documentation of the “most valuable lesson learned” from projects that failed to launch.

Case Study 2: The Energy Company and the Talent Magnet

Challenge: Stagnant Image and Failure to Recruit Digital Talent

A traditional energy company struggled to attract top software engineers and data scientists, who saw the firm as technologically backward and environmentally unfriendly. The firm needed to visibly signal its commitment to a sustainable future.

Intangible Asset Focus:

The company invested in highly visible “moonshot” innovation labs focused on renewable energy grid optimization and carbon capture (projects with very high financial risk and long ROI timelines). They openly publicized the failures and learnings. The immediate ROI was negative, but the intangible return was immense: Attraction and Retention Currency. Potential recruits saw the firm was actively funding high-risk research into societal problems. By positioning the firm as a place where engineers could solve societally relevant wicked problems, the recruitment metrics soared, allowing them to fill their critical digital talent gap and secure the specialized knowledge required for future core business transformation.

Conclusion: The Portfolio of Capabilities

Innovation is not a vending machine where you insert budget and expect immediate profit. It is an insurance premium and a strategic investment in organizational capabilities. When you only focus on short-term ROI, you are essentially demanding that a corporate training program must immediately produce a best-selling product. It’s an illogical mandate.

True visionary leadership understands that the investment in a strong innovation culture builds a Portfolio of Intangible Capabilities — a resilient organization that can adapt, attract talent, and learn faster than the competition. These are the assets that don’t appear in quarterly reports, but they are the only ones that guarantee relevance a decade from now.

“If you can’t measure the return on a healthy culture, you haven’t yet calculated the staggering cost of a fearful, rigid one.” — Braden Kelley

Your first step toward valuing the intangible: Change the primary success metric for your next three innovation experiments from ‘Revenue Generated’ to ‘Most Valuable Lesson Learned and Applied.’

Extra Extra: Because innovation is all about change, Braden Kelley’s human-centered change methodology and tools are the best way to plan and execute the changes necessary to support your innovation and transformation efforts — all while literally getting everyone all on the same page for change. Find out more about the methodology and tools, including the book Charting Change by following the link. Be sure and download the TEN FREE TOOLS while you’re here.

Image credit: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Why is it important to innovate in 2023?

1 Reply

Why is it important to innovate in 2023?

GUEST POST from Janet Sernack

At ImagineNation™ we have just celebrated 10 years as a global innovation consultancy, learning, and coaching company. During this time, we’ve identified some of the common patterns that people demonstrate as a result of feeling uncomfortable, frozen, inert, stubborn, and confused and as a result, are resistant to innovation. Where many organizations, teams, and leaders appear to walk backward as if they are sleepwalking through this time in their lives.

At the same time, we know that innovation is transformational, and why, at this moment in time, it is more important than ever to create, invent and innovate. We also know that is crucial to be better balanced, resilient, and adaptive to grow and flow, survive and thrive, in today’s chaotic BANI environment. We also know exactly what transformative innovation involves, and how to enable and equip people to connect and collaborate in new ways to effect constructive and sustainable change in a world of unknowns.

Innovation is, in fact, the water of life!

Shaping the next normal

According to a recent article by McKinsey and Co “The future is not what it used to be: Thoughts on the shape of the next normal” the coronavirus crisis is a “world-changing event” which is forcing both the pace and scale of workplace innovation.

Stating that businesses are forced to do more with less and that many are finding better, simpler, less expensive, and faster ways to operate. Describing how innovative health systems, through necessity, constraints, and adversity have exploited this moment in time, to innovate:

“The urgency of addressing COVID-19 has also led to innovations in biotech, vaccine development, and the regulatory regimes that govern drug development so that treatments can be approved and tried faster. In many countries, health systems have been hard to reform; this crisis has made the difficulty much easier to achieve. The result should be a more resilient, responsive, and effective health system”.

We all know that it is impossible to know what will happen in the future and yet, that it is possible to consider and learn from the lessons of the past, both distant and recent. On that basis, it’s crucial to take time out, be hopeful, and positive, and think optimistically about the future. To be proactive and innovate to shape the kind of future we all wish to have, through making constructive and sustainable changes, that ultimately contribute to the common good.

Strategically deciding to innovate

Strategically deciding to innovate, is the first, mandatory, powerful, and impactful lever organizations, teams, leaders, and individuals can pull to effect constructive and sustainable change that enables people to execute and deliver real benefits:

Deal with, and find solutions to a world full of complex and competing social, civic, and political problems that are hard to solve and aren’t going away.
Better adapt, respond to, and be agile in fast-changing circumstances, uncertainty, instability, and to random and unexpected Black Swan events, like the global Covid-19 Pandemic and the Russian-Ukraine war.
Become human-centric to help people recover and manage their transition through the challenges of the global pandemic and enable them to exploit the range of accelerating technological advances in the digital age.
Develop corporate responsibility, sustainability, diversity, and inclusion strategies that are practical and can work and really deliver on their promises.
Compete by applying and experimenting with lean and agile start-up methodologies and take advantage of the opportunities and possibilities of the global entrepreneurship movement’s new models for leadership, collaboration, and experimentation.
Align to the range of changing workplace dynamics and trends, resulting from the pandemic, including WFH, the “soft resignation” and the demands of a hybrid workplace.
Shift individual, group, and collective consciousness towards collaboration and experimentation in ways that rebuild the trust that has been lost through incompetence, corruption, greed, and dishonesty.
Respond creatively to meet the increasingly diverse range of customer expectations and choices being made around value.

Important to innovate – three elements

To take advantage of living in a globalized world, where we are interconnected through technologies and values and where we have an interrelated structure of reality, we can:

Accept that innovation-led adaptation and growth are absolutely critical and develop targets and a willingness to invest in new scalable business models, achieve fast and effective developments, and launch processes to reflect these.
Invest in a coherent, time-risk balanced portfolio of initiatives and provide the resources to deliver them, at scale, strategically, to innovate to the right market, at the right price, at the right time, and through the most effective channels.
Adopt an ecosystem approach to adapt and grow by creating and capitalizing on both internal and external networks, and stakeholder management through developing workforce ecosystems – a structure that consists of interdependent actors, from within the organization and beyond, working to pursue both individual and collective goals.

Problem-solving, cultural change, and improving people’s lives

It is more important than ever to make innovation transformational, so that it delivers constructive, ethical, and sustainable change, by building on three critical successful abilities:

Seeing and sensing the real systemic problem or breakthrough opportunity:

What problem are we solving? And is there a customer who wants to pay to have that problem solved?
What problem are we solving for the customer? Who needs this?
What are the possibilities and opportunities available to us? And is there a customer who wants to pay to have this opportunity realized?
What are some of our strengths? What are some of the things we are doing well that we can build upon or exploit?

Shifting the culture:

Where are we today? Where do we want to be in the future?
What are our prevailing mindsets? How can we measure and contextualize their impact? What mindsets might we embrace to adapt and grow in an uncertain world?
How ready and receptive are we to really embrace change?
What do we need to unlearn and relearn to ensure our people are open-minded, hearted, and willed to embody and enact the desired change?
How engaged and passionate are our people in problem-solving?
How might we harness our people’s collective intelligence to solve problems and realize opportunities?

Aligning technologies, processes, artifacts, and behaviors as a holistic system:

What is our appetite for risk? How do we define risk in our context?
What type of innovation do we strategically want to plan for and engage in?
What old legacy technologies no longer serve your needs? What new technologies might you be willing to invest in for the future?
What disciplines are in place to ensure that people have a common understanding of the key processes and comply with managing them?
How are we ensuring that everyone is motivated and skilled to innovate?
How are we ensuring that people are acknowledged, rewarded, and organized to repeatedly innovate?
What are the key mindsets and behaviours that enable and equip people to embody and embrace repeatedly innovate and design solutions with the end customer in mind?

Become an adaptive and resilient difference maker

As many of us are aware, Toys R Us and Blockbuster were huge companies, that enjoyed massive success; however, this was all brought to an end due to their failure to innovate.

We can all avoid this fate by choosing to innovate and create constructive and sustainable change through:

Accepting and acknowledging that to survive and thrive in a BANI world, where necessity is still the mother of all invention, and the urgency to do this is more important than ever.
Identifying, understanding, and dealing with our own resistance to innovation, safely and proactively, and transforming resistance into resilience, to be adaptive and safely innovate.
Understanding where we are today and then assessing the gap to what we want to be in the future, and mitigating the risks of both closing the gap and leaving the gap wide open.
Enabling leaders, teams, and individuals to connect, explore, discover and navigate new ways of approaching and delivering commercially viable, value-adding, constructive and sustainable change, and outcomes.
Leveraging innovation to transform an organization, a business, the way people lead and team, to improve the quality of people’s lives in ways they appreciate and cherish.

“In order to transcend mere adequacy and make a mark of creative transcendence on the world, organizations need to stop walking backward, following a trail that has already been blazed. The motto of the British Special Air Service is, “Who dares, wins.” It is time for businesses to be bold, inspired, and look to the horizon. The next great innovation is out there. Will you have the guts to create it?”

Will you make a fundamental choice to innovate?

According to McKinsey and Co “The point is that where the world lands is a matter of choice – of countless decisions to be made by individuals, companies, governments, and institutions”.

Will you make a fundamental choice to use the current crisis to lead to a burst of innovation, productivity, resilience, and exploration in 2023, to take advantage of our connected world to create the constructive and sustainable changes we all want to have?

Or will you continue walking backward and sleepwalking through life, and fail to take advantage of this moment in time, to innovate, and continue life with the same thinking that is causing the current range of results, that many of us don’t want to have?

Find out more about our work at ImagineNation™

Find out about our collective, learning products and tools, including The Coach for Innovators, Leaders, and Teams Certified Program, presented by Janet Sernack, is a collaborative, intimate, and deeply personalized innovation coaching and learning program, supported by a global group of peers over 9-weeks, starting Tuesday, February 7, 2023.

It is a blended and transformational change and learning program that will give you a deep understanding of the language, principles, and applications of an ecosystem focus, human-centric approach, and emergent structure (Theory U) to innovation, and upskill people and teams and develop their future fitness, within your unique innovation context. Find out more about our products and tools

Image Credit: Unsplash

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Finding Innovation Gold in a Single Customer Story

Leave a reply

The Power of One

Finding Innovation Gold in a Single Customer Story

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

We live in the Age of Big Data, where innovation decisions are often filtered through algorithms, heatmaps, and massive statistical models. Leaders demand large-scale surveys and multi-million dollar data warehouses to validate a new direction. Yet, history consistently shows that truly breakthrough ideas rarely emerge from the average — they emerge from the outlier, the extreme user, or the single, compelling narrative that exposes a deep, unmet human need.

This is the Power of One: the profound, catalytic value contained in a single, deeply understood customer story. While Big Data tells us what is happening (correlation), Small Data — the qualitative, ethnographic insight — tells us why it is happening (causation and motivation). For human-centered change and innovation, the Single Customer Story is the most efficient and emotionally resonant path to finding innovation gold.

The Problem with the Average and the Gift of the Outlier

When you design for the average customer, you create an average product. Statistical models, by their nature, normalize outliers. They smooth over the strange, inconvenient behavior that is often a leading indicator of market disruption. If a single customer is using your product in a way it was never intended — that is not a bug; it is a Signal of Innovation. That single story contains a kernel of truth that 10,000 data points will obscure. It reveals the critical gap between what you think your product does and what the human needs it to do.

Innovation thrives in the gap between the status quo and the ideal human experience. The Single Customer Story serves as the emotional bridge that allows a team to move from abstract data points to genuine empathy, driving radical redesign and bypassing organizational inertia.

Three Strategies for Mining the “Power of One”

Leaders must institutionalize practices that deliberately seek out and amplify these singular narratives, transforming anecdotal evidence into strategic insight.

Embrace Observational Research (Ethnography): Instead of relying solely on surveys (which capture conscious opinions), go into the user’s natural environment to observe their unconscious behavior. Watch how they struggle, how they improvise, and where they introduce unnecessary steps. The innovation is often found in the user’s duct tape solution — the hack they use to get around your product’s limitations.
Design for the Extremes, Not the Center: Actively seek out the extreme user. This could be the power user who pushes your limits, the non-user who actively avoids your product, or the person using your product in an unexpected cultural context. Designing a robust solution for a highly complex or unusual need will often simplify and improve the experience for the mainstream user. The extreme user’s story sets the highest bar for innovation.
Institutionalize the Narrative Transfer: A single story is only powerful if it becomes a shared vision. When a team finds a powerful customer narrative, it must be captured as Persona, a Day-in-the-Life Journey Map, or a visceral video and put directly in front of engineers, marketers, and executives. This human input cuts through data silos and provides a shared, emotional imperative for change that abstract data cannot match.

Case Study 1: The Design Fix that Transformed a Financial Software Product

Challenge: Stagnant Adoption of a Financial Software Tool

A B2B software company saw high initial sign-ups for a new financial analysis tool but very low sustained usage. The drop-off rates were massive, but the data offered no explanation for why users abandoned the product after the first week.

The Power of One Intervention:

The Head of Product focused on a single, frustrated junior analyst. By spending a day shadowing this one user, the team discovered that her workflow required her to export data from their tool, import it into Excel, manually clean the data using six specific formulas, and then run the final analysis. The software was saving 20% of her time, but the 20-minute manual data cleaning ritual was the breaking point. The single story revealed the key unmet need: integrated, automated data cleansing. They integrated the analyst’s six formulas directly into the software. This small fix, driven by the qualitative insight of one user, led to a 300% spike in sustained usage and became the flagship feature of a whole new product line.

Case Study 2: Uncovering a Global Market Opportunity in a Remote Village

Challenge: Designing for Remote Infrastructure in Emerging Markets

A global manufacturer was developing a decentralized power source for off-grid communities. Prototypes were too complex and failed in field testing. Market data lacked the crucial context of how people prioritized power usage.

The Power of One Intervention:

An ethnographic team focused on a single family and their local economy in a remote African village. They noticed that the family’s biggest pain point wasn’t general lighting or charging phones; it was the single battery they relied on for a crucial, single use: running a small milling machine to grind grain for the entire community. This task was vital to the village economy, and the battery’s failure was a social crisis. The innovation was not in designing a complex micro-grid, but in designing a simple, hyper-robust, easily repairable “Power Hub” optimized solely for the continuous reliability of that single, high-value, high-impact task. This focus on one critical application, revealed by one village story, unlocked the blueprint for a highly scalable, successful product line across dozens of similar low-infrastructure markets globally.

Conclusion: From Correlation to Causation

Big Data is essential for scale and validation. But Big Ideas are almost always born from the intimacy of Small Data. When you bypass the spreadsheet and spend genuine time with the human experience, you achieve a level of empathy that moves your team from guessing at correlation to knowing the root cause. This is the difference between incremental improvement and market disruption.

“The Power of One is the ultimate antidote to organizational inertia. A single, painful, well-told customer story can override months of contradictory data, mobilize an entire company, and define the next decade of innovation.” — Braden Kelley

Embrace the qualitative journey. Your essential first step: Find the most frustrated, extreme, or resourceful user of your product, sit with them for an hour, and simply watch them work. Then, build the solution to their one painful, repeated problem.

Extra Extra: Futurology is not fortune telling. Futurists use a scientific approach to create their deliverables, but a methodology and tools like those in FutureHacking™ can empower anyone to engage in futurology themselves.

Image credit: Dall-E

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

3 Things Politicians Can Do to Create Innovation

Leave a reply

3 Things Politicians Can Do to Create Innovation

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

In the 1960s, the federal government accounted for more than 60% of all research funding, yet by 2016 that had fallen to just over 20%. During the same time, businesses’ share of R&D investment more than doubled from about 30% to almost 70%. Government’s role in US innovation, it seems, has greatly diminished.

Yet new research suggests that the opposite is actually true. Analyzing all patents since 1926, researchers found that the number of patents that relied on government support has risen from 12% in the 1980s to almost 30% today. Interestingly, the same research found that startups benefitted the most from government research.

As we struggle to improve productivity from historical lows, we need the public sector to play a part. The truth is that the government has a unique role to play in driving innovation and research is only part of it. In addition to funding labs and scientists, it can help bring new ideas to market, act as a convening force and offer crucial expertise to private businesses.

1. Treat Knowledge As A Public Good

By 1941, it had become clear that the war raging in Europe would soon envelop the US. With this in mind, Vannevar Bush went to President Roosevelt with a visionary idea — to mobilize the nation’s growing scientific prowess for the war effort. Roosevelt agreed and signed an executive order that would create the Office of Scientific Research and Development (OSRD).

With little time to build labs, the OSRD focused on awarding grants to private organizations such as universities. It was, by all accounts, an enormous success and lead to important breakthroughs such as the atomic bomb, proximity fuze and radar. As the war was winding down, Roosevelt asked Bush to write a report to continue OSRD’s success peacetime.

That report, titled Science, The Endless Frontier, was delivered to President Truman and would set the stage for America’s lasting technological dominance. It set forth a new vision in which scientific advancement would be treated as a public good, financed by the government, but made available for private industry. As Bush explained:

Basic research leads to new knowledge. It provides scientific capital. It creates the fund from which the practical applications of knowledge must be drawn. New products and new processes do not appear full-grown. They are founded on new principles and new conceptions, which in turn are painstakingly developed by research in the purest realms of science.

The influence of Bush’s idea cannot be overstated. It led to the creation of new government agencies, such as the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and, later, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). These helped to create a scientific infrastructure that has no equal anywhere in the world.

2. Help to Overcome the Valley of Death

Government has a unique role to play in basic research. Because fundamental discoveries are, almost by definition, widely applicable, they are much more valuable if they are published openly. At the same time, because private firms have relatively narrow interests, they are less able to fully leverage basic discoveries.

However, many assume that because basic research is a primary role for public investment that it is its only relevant function. Clearly, that’s not the case. Another important role government has to play is helping to overcome the gap between the discovery of a new technology and its commercialization, which is so fraught with peril that it’s often called the “Valley of Death.”

The oldest and best known of initiative is SBIR/STTR program, which is designed to help startups commercialize cutting-edge research. Grants are given in two phases. In the first, a proof-of-concept phase, grants are capped at $150,000. If that’s successful, up to $1 million more can be awarded. Some SBIR/STTR companies, such as Qualcomm, iRobot and Symantec, have become industry leaders.

Other more focused programs have also been established. ARPA-e focuses exclusively on advanced energy technologies. Lab Embedded Entrepreneurship Programs (LEEP) give entrepreneurs access to the facilities and expertise of the National Labs in addition to a small grant. The Manufacturing Extension Program (MEP) helps smaller companies build the skills they need to be globally competitive.

3. Act As a Convening Force

A third role government can play is that of a convening force. For example, in 1987 a non-profit consortium made up of government labs, research universities and private sector companies, called SEMATECH, was created to regain competitiveness in the semiconductor industry. America soon regained its lead, which continues even today.

The reason that SEMATECH was so successful was that it combined the scientific expertise of the country’s top labs with the private sector’s experience in solving real world problems. It also sent a strong signal that the federal government saw the technology as important, which encouraged private companies to step up their investment as well.

Today, a number of new initiatives have been launched that follow a similar model. The most wide-ranging is the Manufacturing USA Institutes, which are helping drive advancement in everything from robotics and photonics to biofabrication and composite materials. Others, such as JCESR and the Critical Materials Institute, are more narrowly focused.

Much like its role in supporting basic science and helping new technologies get through the “Valley of Death,” acting as a convening force is something that, for the most part, only the federal government can do.

Make No Mistake: This Is Our New Sputnik Moment

In the 20th century three key technologies, electricity, internal combustion and computing drove economic advancement and the United States led each one. That is why it is often called the “American Century.” No country, perhaps since the Roman Empire, has ever so thoroughly dominated the known world.

Yet the 21st century will be different. The most important technologies will be things like synthetic biology, materials science and artificial intelligence. These are largely nascent and it’s still not clear who, if anybody, will emerge as a clear leader. It is very possible that we will compete economically and technologically with China, much like we used to compete politically and militarily with the Soviet Union.

Yet back in the Cold War, it was obvious that the public sector had an important role to play. When Kennedy vowed to go to the moon, nobody argued that the effort should be privatized. It was clear that such an enormous undertaking needed government leadership at the highest levels. We pulled together and we won.

Today, by all indications, we are at a new Sputnik moment in which our global scientific and technological leadership is being seriously challenged. We can respond with imagination, creating novel ways to, as Bush put it, “turn the wheels of private and public enterprise,” or we can let the moment pass us by and let the next generation face the consequences.

One thing is clear. We will be remembered for what we chose to do.

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— Image credit: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

The Phygital Future

Leave a reply

Designing Seamless Experiences Across Worlds

The Phygital Future

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

For too long, organizations have treated their physical and digital channels as separate silos, managed by different teams, budgets, and metrics. This disconnect is the root cause of friction, frustration, and failure in the modern customer journey. Customers do not think in channels; they think in experiences.

The future of customer engagement, employee empowerment, and service delivery is Phygital: the seamless, human-centered integration of the digital (technology, data, online) and the physical (locations, people, products). Phygital design is not about adding a screen to a store; it’s about using technology to dissolve the boundaries, focusing entirely on a single, continuous, and highly contextual journey. The goal is to maximize the utility and speed of the digital world while preserving the authenticity and human connection of the physical world.

The Failure of the Digital-First Mandate

The pendulum swung hard toward “Digital-First,” driven by efficiency and the push toward automation. While automation is vital, the pure digital-first mandate often fails at the last mile — the human interaction. Imagine a customer who spends 45 minutes online researching a product, only to have to repeat their entire story to an employee when they walk into a physical store. This is the Phygital Friction Gap — a moment where the digital intelligence is lost, forcing the human to restart the process. This failure occurs because the organization hasn’t designed the two worlds to share context, forcing the customer to carry the burden of the organization’s internal silos.

Phygital design solves this by recognizing that the highest value comes from the intersection, where the speed and intelligence of the digital world elevate the sensory and relational depth of the physical world.

Three Pillars of Seamless Phygital Design

Designing for the Phygital future requires a shift in mindset and strategy, moving from parallel channels to a single, interconnected Experience Architecture.

Contextual Continuity:
The fundamental rule of Phygital design is Never Ask the Customer to Repeat Themselves. The digital system must carry the customer’s intent, history, and context forward, regardless of the channel they jump to. This requires integrating the CRM, data analytics, and inventory systems so that an in-store associate can see the customer’s browsing history and cart status instantly via a mobile device.
Human-Augmentation, Not Replacement:
Technology should not be used to replace human interaction, but to augment the human professional. Use AI for mundane, high-volume tasks (data entry, scheduling) to free up employees to focus on high-value, high-empathy interactions (problem-solving, creative consultation). A Phygital environment uses digital intelligence to make the human associate smarter, faster, and more efficient.
Experiential Utility and Delight:
The physical space must be designed to maximize what the digital cannot offer — sensory experience, immediate gratification, and social connection. If a customer can buy the product cheaper and faster online, the store must offer a compelling reason to visit, such as interactive prototyping, localized expert advice, or a community event. Technology is used to add delight to the physical world, not just efficiency.

Case Study 1: Transforming the Bank Branch into a Consultation Hub

Challenge: Dying Relevance of the Physical Bank Branch

A major retail bank faced the imminent closure of many branches as customers shifted to mobile banking. The few customers who still visited branches were usually facing complex financial problems that demanded significant human expertise and time, clogging up service lines.

Phygital Intervention:

The bank didn’t just add tablets; they re-architected the entire journey. Customers were required to pre-book complex appointments through the mobile app (Digital). This allowed the digital system to collect context and queue the request to the correct specialist before the customer arrived. When the customer walked in, geo-fencing technology alerted the specialist (Physical) to the customer’s arrival. The specialist greeted the customer by name, already possessing their case history, eliminating the need to repeat their issue. This fusion of digital scheduling and physical, informed human contact cut wait times for complex issues by 70% and successfully repositioned the branch as a high-value Consultation Hub rather than a mere transaction counter.

The Ethical Imperative: Transparency and Trust

As we design Phygital experiences, we must address the ethical imperative. The constant collection of data (from location tracking to browsing history) to enable seamlessness can be perceived as invasive. Phygital Trust is built on transparency: customers must understand what data is being used and why, and feel they have genuine control. The seamlessness of the experience should always feel helpful, never creepy.

Case Study 2: Supply Chain Visibility in Manufacturing

Challenge: Lack of Visibility and Trust Between Partners

A global industrial manufacturer struggled with complex, long-lead-time orders, leading to constant back-and-forth communication and mistrust with clients regarding production status. Clients wanted the assurance of seeing the physical process but couldn’t visit the plant.

Phygital Intervention:

The manufacturer implemented a real-time Digital Twin strategy. They placed IoT sensors on key machines and production stations (Physical) and aggregated this data onto a secure, cloud-based platform (Digital). This allowed the client, via a secure web portal, to see the exact stage and location of their custom component in the plant, complete with real-time video feed snapshots and verifiable production data. The physical asset became the source of truth, but the digital interface provided the constant, transparent access the client needed. This Phygital visibility didn’t just improve efficiency; it transformed the client relationship from transactional to one of deep, shared trust, proving the ROI of transparency.

Conclusion: Experience Architecture is the New Battleground

The Phygital Future is here, and it demands that we stop designing for channels and start designing for the human journey. Leaders must champion Experience Architecture — a holistic view of the customer’s path. The organizations that win will be the ones that use the invisible power of data to create visible, human-first magic in the physical world.

“Phygital design is not about technology; it’s about context. It’s the art of giving the human everything they need, exactly where they need it, whether they are holding a smartphone or standing in a store.”

Your first step into the Phygital future: Map one critical customer journey and identify every point where Contextual Continuity is lost when the customer jumps from digital to physical. Eliminate that friction.

Image credit: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Trends in Medical School Innovation and Entrepreneurship Education

Leave a reply

Trends in Medical School Innovation and Entrepreneurship Education

GUEST POST from Arlen Meyers, M.D.

Biomedical and health entrepreneurship continues to expand around the world. Driven by global pressures to optimize the allocation of scarce resources, life science bioentrepreneurs are creating innovative products, platforms, service and systems that deliver more value. As a result, the demand for biomedical and health professional entrepreneurial talent has increased and biomedical and health innovation and entrepreneurship education and training (BEET) programs are growing to fill the gap.

Authors of a 2019 analysis of 171 allopathic medical schools conducted an exhaustive search of the published literature and websites of existing medical school innovation and entrepreneurship (MS I&E) programs, with an emphasis on answering the following three questions:

1. How are I&E programs organized and integrated with the medical school curriculum?
2. What are the core competencies of the I&E program?
3. How are the core competencies measured/evaluated?

Twenty-eight I&E-oriented medical education programs were identified from 26 schools; all of the programs integrated faculty leadership with backgrounds in medicine, engineering, and/or business/entrepreneurship. Of the programs, 57% (16/28) had been launched within the past four years and 75% (21/28) based program enrollment on a selective application process. Nearly all (27/28) incorporated lecture series and/or hands-on modules as a teaching technique. The most prevalent metric was completion of a capstone project (22/28; 79%). At least 15.2% (26/171) of American and Canadian allopathic medical schools include the option for students to participate in an I&E curriculum-based program.

In a few short years, educational offerings in MS I&E have accelerated, in part due to the impact of the COVID pandemic. Trends include:

Sharing lessons learned teaching medical students innovation and entrepreneurship
Experimenting with various program business models
Creating medical student entrepreneurs
Rethinking MS I&E
Designing a curriculum map and defining learning objectives, entrustable professional activities and knowledge,skills, abilities and competencies
Mentoring and guiding medical students
Offering non-clinical-career options
Providing exit ramps
Rethinking how we select medical students
Resetting the future of academic medical center work
Using principles of medical education reform and what we should be teaching in MedEd 2030
Training MS I&E faculty
Encouraging interprofessional and transdisciplinary entrepreneurship programs
Integrating premed, medical student and postgraduate programs
Encouraging life-long learning

We should teach innovation, entrepreneurship and the business of medicine in medical schools, not MD/MBA programs. MBE programs are a better option for those interested in getting an idea to a patient.

Here are the many reasons why physician entrepreneurship is important and why we are likely to see more of the international design, development and deployment of MS I&E programs in both allopathic and osteopathic schools as well as other health professional schools, including nursing, pharmacy and public health schools. Ultimately, as a result, patients and sickcare systems will be the beneficiaries and doctors will be better and happier.

Image credit: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Voting Closed – Top 40 Innovation Bloggers of 2022

1 Reply

For more than a decade I’ve devoted myself to making innovation insights accessible for the greater good, because I truly believe that the better our organizations get at delivering value to their stakeholders the less waste of natural resources and human resources there will be.

As a result, we are eternally grateful to all of you out there who take the time to create and share great innovation articles, presentations, white papers, and videos with Braden Kelley and the Human-Centered Change and Innovation team. As a small thank you to those of you who follow along, we like to make a list of the Top 40 Innovation Bloggers available each year!

Our lists from the ten previous years have been tremendously popular, including:

Top 40 Innovation Bloggers of 2015
Top 40 Innovation Bloggers of 2016
Top 40 Innovation Bloggers of 2017
Top 40 Innovation Bloggers of 2018
Top 40 Innovation Bloggers of 2019
Top 40 Innovation Bloggers of 2020
Top 40 Innovation Bloggers of 2021

Do you just have someone that you like to read that writes about innovation, or some of the important adjacencies – trends, consumer psychology, change, leadership, strategy, behavioral economics, collaboration, or design thinking?

Human-Centered Change and Innovation is now looking to recognize the Top 40 Innovation Bloggers of 2022.

It is time to vote and help us narrow things down.

The deadline for submitting votes is December 31, 2022 at midnight GMT.

The ranking will be done by me with influence from votes and nominations. The quality and quantity of contributions to this web site by an author will be a BIG contributing factor (through the end of the voting period).

You can vote in any of these three ways (and each earns points for them, so please feel free to vote all three ways):

Sending us the name of the blogger by @reply on twitter to @innovate
Adding the name of the blogger as a comment to this article’s posting on Facebook
Adding the name of the blogger as a comment to this article’s posting on our Linkedin Page (Be sure and follow us)

The official Top 40 Innovation Bloggers of 2022 will then be announced here in early January 2023.

Here are the people who received nominations this year along with some carryover recommendations (in alphabetical order):

Adi Gaskell – @adigaskell
Alain Thys
Alex Goryachev
Andy Heikkila – @AndyO_TheHammer
Annette Franz
Arlen Meyers – @sopeofficial
Art Inteligencia
Braden Kelley – @innovate
Brian Miller
Bruce Fairley
Chad McAllister – @ChadMcAllister
Chris Beswick
Chris Rollins
Dr. Detlef Reis
Dainora Jociute
Dan Blacharski – @Dan_Blacharski
Daniel Burrus – @DanielBurrus
Daniel Lock
David Burkus
Dean and Linda Anderson
Diana Porumboiu
Douglas Ferguson
Drew Boyd – @DrewBoyd
Farnham Street
Frank Mattes – @FrankMattes
Geoffrey A Moore
Gregg Fraley – @greggfraley
Greg Satell – @Digitaltonto
Helen Yu
Howard Tiersky
Janet Sernack – @JanetSernack
Jeffrey Baumgartner – @creativejeffrey
Jeff Freedman – @SmallArmyAgency
Jeffrey Phillips – @ovoinnovation
Jesse Nieminen – @nieminenjesse
John Bessant
Jorge Barba – @JorgeBarba
Julian Birkinshaw – @JBirkinshaw
Julie Anixter – @julieanixter
Kate Hammer – @Kate_Hammer
Kevin McFarthing – @InnovationFixer
Lou Killeffer – @LKilleffer
Manuel Berdoy

Mari Anixter- @MariAnixter
Maria Paula Oliveira – @mpaulaoliveira
Matthew E May – @MatthewEMay
Michael Graber – @SouthernGrowth
Mike Brown – @Brainzooming
Mike Shipulski – @MikeShipulski
Mukesh Gupta
Nick Partridge – @KnewNewNeu
Nicolas Bry – @NicoBry
Nicholas Longrich
Norbert Majerus and George Taninecz
Pamela Soin
Patricia Salamone
Paul Hobcraft – @Paul4innovating
Paul Sloane – @paulsloane
Pete Foley – @foley_pete
Ralph Christian Ohr – @ralph_ohr
Randy Pennington
Richard Haasnoot – @Innovate2Grow
Robert B Tucker – @RobertBTucker
Robyn Bolton – @rm_bolton
Saul Kaplan – @skap5
Shep Hyken – @hyken
Shilpi Kumar
Scott Anthony – @ScottDAnthony
Scott Bowden – @scottbowden51
Shelly Greenway – @ChiefDistiller
Soren Kaplan – @SorenKaplan
Stefan Lindegaard – @Lindegaard
Stephen Shapiro – @stephenshapiro
Steve Blank
Steven Forth – @StevenForth
Tamara Kleinberg – @LaunchStreet
Teresa Spangler – @composerspang
Tim Stroh
Tom Koulopoulos – @TKspeaks
Tom Stafford
Yoram Solomon – @yoram

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

We’re curious to see who you think is worth reading!

The Anticipatory Leader

Leave a reply

Shifting from Reacting to Predicting Disruption

The Anticipatory Leader

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

The vast majority of organizational leadership today operates in a state of perpetual reaction. We manage by dashboard, optimize by quarterly report, and respond to crises only after they hit the headlines. This is the Victim Mindset of Leadership — believing that external disruption is an unavoidable, random event that must be absorbed. While this reactive approach might ensure short-term stability, it guarantees long-term decline.

In a world defined by exponential technology and complex global systems, the future belongs to the Anticipatory Leader. This is not about crystal balls or psychic predictions; it is a systematic, Human-Centered approach to sensing and preparing for future shifts before they become crises. It is the core capability that allows an organization to become the disruptor, rather than the disrupted. This shift requires trading the comfortable illusion of stability for the strategic discomfort of informed foresight.

The Three Domains of Anticipatory Leadership

Anticipation is built on a structured commitment to looking beyond the immediate horizon. It moves the leader from the transactional (managing today) to the transformational (designing tomorrow) across three key domains:

Sensing and Signal Detection (The ‘Where’):
This involves actively seeking weak signals — small, early indicators of massive change that are often dismissed as fringe ideas or anomalies. Reactive leaders only see trends; anticipatory leaders see inflection points. This means looking beyond industry trade journals into adjacent industries, geopolitical shifts, and emerging scientific research. It requires building diverse networks outside the company walls.
Scenario Mapping and Future Prototyping (The ‘What If’):
Anticipatory leaders refuse to plan for just one future. They create three to five plausible future scenarios based on their detected signals. These scenarios aren’t forecasts; they are mental models used to stress-test current strategies. Crucially, they use these scenarios to engage in Future Prototyping — building Minimum Viable Solutions (MVS) for future needs today, before the market demands them.
Building Organizational Adaptability (The ‘How’):
The best prediction is useless if the organization cannot pivot quickly. Anticipatory leadership requires embedding Agility and Resilience across the entire enterprise. This means flattening hierarchies, democratizing decision-making (empowering the edge), and constantly practicing unlearning — discarding outdated assumptions about the market, the customer, and the business model. This organizational fluidity is the ultimate defense against disruption.

Case Study 1: The Retail Giant and the E-Commerce Threat (The Cost of Reaction)

Challenge: The Slow Decline of Brick-and-Mortar Revenue

A massive, decades-old general merchandise retailer saw the emergence of e-commerce in the late 1990s not as a threat, but as a niche for booksellers. Their leadership was reactive, focused only on optimizing the square footage of their existing stores.

Anticipatory Leadership Intervention (Failure):

The retailer failed to detect the crucial weak signal: the shift in consumer expectations toward convenience and limitless choice. They ran a single, optimistic scenario: “Online sales will remain under 5% of total retail.” This reductionist view meant they did not prototype alternative logistics models (e.g., last-mile delivery, in-store pickup) until their market share began a terminal decline. Their leadership waited until the disruption was a crisis before reacting, resulting in an expensive, years-long struggle to catch up and a permanent loss of market leadership. The cost of reaction is always exponentially higher than the investment in anticipation.

The Human-Centered Imperative of Foresight

Anticipatory Leadership is inherently Human-Centered. It recognizes that the future is not found in spreadsheets alone; it’s found in the unmet, often un-articulated, needs of humans. By systematically looking for signals in human behavior — how younger generations are spending their time, how environmental awareness is shaping purchasing, or how trust is being fractured by digital life — the leader can predict the behavioral inflection points that drive market change.

Furthermore, leading through foresight mitigates the employee fear of change. When change is announced as a reaction to a competitor’s move, employees feel panicked and betrayed. When change is presented as the execution of a strategy anticipated two years ago, it breeds confidence and a sense of strategic purpose.

Case Study 2: The Software Company and the Open-Source Wave (The Power of Anticipation)

Challenge: The Commoditization of Proprietary Technology

A successful enterprise software company, whose entire business model was based on expensive, proprietary licensing, faced the rising tide of open-source software (OSS) in the early 2000s. The traditional leadership instinct was to view OSS as “low quality” or “non-commercial.”

Anticipatory Leadership Intervention (Success):

A small, empowered foresight team within the company detected a weak signal: the cultural shift among top developers who increasingly valued collaboration and transparency over vendor lock-in. Instead of dismissing OSS, the leadership team mapped two extreme scenarios — one where OSS failed, and one where it became the global standard. They quickly realized the latter was plausible and highly destructive to their core business.

Their action was anticipatory: they made a strategic pivot by quietly investing in and contributing heavily to several key OSS projects, and then repositioned their proprietary product not as a stand-alone license, but as a Premium Service Layer built on top of the open-source infrastructure. This shift transformed them from an expensive vendor into a trusted ecosystem partner, securing a new recurring revenue stream and attracting the very talent their competitors were losing. They predicted the disruption and changed their business model before their revenue plateaued.

Conclusion: Making Anticipation Your Operating System

The time lag between a disruption beginning and it hitting your P&L is shrinking every year. You cannot wait for the data to confirm what common sense and human insight already suggest. The Anticipatory Leader does not fear the future; they design for it.

“Reactive leaders spend their time climbing out of holes. Anticipatory Leaders focus on where to dig the next one. That gap is the difference between survival and sustained market dominance.” — Braden Kelley

Make sensing the future a daily habit, not an annual planning exercise. Your essential first step: Empower your best people to spend 10% of their time focused entirely on weak signals outside your current strategic boundary. This small investment in foresight is the greatest insurance policy you can buy against being disrupted.

Image credit: Pexels

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Intrapreneurship 2.0

Leave a reply

Empowering Employees to Be Startup Founders

Intrapreneurship 2.0

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

The single biggest threat to a successful, established company is rarely an external competitor; it is the Internal Antibody. This is the organizational immune system that attacks new ideas, citing rigid budget cycles, resource constraints, and ‘the way we’ve always done things.’ This institutionalized resistance is why so many large organizations fail to capitalize on the single greatest source of innovative ideas: their own employees.

Intrapreneurship 1.0 was about suggestion boxes, pitch competitions, and “20% time” — nice initiatives, but often disconnected from the strategic core, quickly defunded, and politically vulnerable. Today, in the age of rapid, complex disruption, we need Intrapreneurship 2.0: a systemic approach that treats internal innovators not as suggestion-givers, but as legitimate Startup Founders with the mandate, resources, and protection needed to scale. This is how you unlock a continuous capability for internal disruption.

The Three Pillars of the Intrapreneurial Operating System

To transition from a siloed corporate structure to a decentralized innovation engine, an organization must build three pillars, transforming its internal operating system to mimic a venture capital firm.

The Seed Funding and Protection Pillar:
The greatest barrier for an intrapreneur is not generating the idea, but navigating bureaucracy. Intrapreneurship 2.0 requires a dedicated, independently governed Internal Venture Fund separate from the traditional P&L and capital expenditure budget. Most importantly, it requires a “safe harbor” — a leadership commitment to shield these projects from the corporate antibodies, protecting the innovator’s career, even if the project fails after a disciplined experiment.
The Governance and Autonomy Pillar:
Intrapreneurs must have high autonomy over their team, budget, and execution methodology. Their reporting structure should be to an impartial “Innovation Review Board” (IRB), modeled after a VC board of directors, not to their traditional department head. This allows them to move with startup speed, pivoting based on market data rather than political consensus or departmental inertia.
The Talent and Rewarding Pillar:
Innovation is a retention strategy. The rewards for successful intrapreneurial ventures must be commensurate with the risk taken. This goes beyond a one-time bonus; it must include genuine equity-like incentives (e.g., profit-sharing on the new business line), career advancement into a new business unit established around the innovation, or formal recognition as a Chief Intrapreneur. This elevates internal innovation from a side project to a viable, exciting career path.

Case Study 1: Transforming Legacy Hardware into a Service Model

Challenge: Stagnant Revenue in a Global Industrial Manufacturer

A multi-billion-dollar industrial equipment company faced declining revenue as its traditional hardware sales became commoditized. The future was in “Equipment-as-a-Service” (EaaS), but the legacy sales force and technology platforms lacked the agility to transition.

Intrapreneurship 2.0 Intervention:

The leadership team sponsored a small, cross-functional team to form a fully-funded internal startup, deliberately naming it to sound external: Synergy Tech Solutions. The team was explicitly tasked with building the EaaS platform and customer experience outside of the main P&L. They were given a two-year budget and full autonomy to choose their cloud infrastructure and agile pricing model. Crucially, a formal Executive Steering Committee acted as their impartial VC board, providing guidance but never vetoing their market experiments. When the new service generated its first $10M in Annual Recurring Revenue (ARR), the core intrapreneurial team was given the option to merge their unit back into the core with significant promotion and profit sharing, effectively transitioning from founders to general managers.

The Anti-Bureaucracy Toolkit

The single greatest tool for the intrapreneur is the ability to say no to corporate overhead. Intrapreneurship 2.0 recognizes that speed is the only currency that matters. Leaders must provide a practical “Anti-Bureaucracy Toolkit” that includes:

Pre-Approved Legal Templates: Quick contracts for small vendors or pilot customers, bypassing the standard six-week legal review.
Shadow IT Access: Permission to use modern, rapid prototyping software (often blocked by corporate IT and security policies) with agreed-upon guardrails.
Fast-Track Procurement: A simplified purchasing card with a higher limit for immediate needs, eliminating cumbersome Purchase Order (PO) processes.

Case Study 2: Solving Internal Talent Drain with an Innovation Marketplace

Challenge: Losing Top Talent to Startups and Internal Siloing

A large technology company suffered from talent drain as its best engineers left to join external startups. Simultaneously, internal talent was siloed and locked into non-strategic maintenance work.

Intrapreneurship 2.0 Intervention:

The company created an Internal Innovation Marketplace, essentially an internal job board for mission-driven, intrapreneurial projects. Any employee with an approved idea could post a “Team Request” for talent. The powerful shift was institutionalizing a formal Talent Mobility Policy that allowed employees to dedicate 100% of their time to an internal startup for a defined period (6-12 months) with a dedicated manager bypass for high-priority projects. This marketplace acted as a decentralized innovation incubator. It gave existing employees the startup experience they craved — ownership, speed, and mission — without having to leave the company. Within 18 months, the company successfully launched four new business lines, and top talent attrition was cut in half, proving that the best retention strategy is often internal disruption.

Conclusion: Scaling the Founder’s Mindset

Intrapreneurship 2.0 is the evolution of innovation culture. It’s not a program; it’s an organizational design decision. It is the recognition that the person closest to the customer pain or the technical opportunity is often a mid-level employee, not an executive.

“If you want to create a culture of continuous innovation, you must stop treating your best ideas as suggestions and start treating your best people as founders. Give them the key to the innovation vault and the mandate to drive change.” — Braden Kelley

The time for hesitant, half-measures is over. Embrace the principles of Intrapreneurship 2.0 to transform your workforce into a legion of nimble, motivated internal entrepreneurs, securing your future through your own capacity for disruption. Your first step: Audit your current innovation budget and separate 10% into a true, autonomous Internal Venture Fund.

For more on this topic I encourage to explore the writings of my friend Braden Kelley, a two-time best-selling author, including Charting Change and Stoking Your Innovation Bonfire, and the creator of the Human-Centered Change™ methodology. He helps organizations drive innovation, overcome resistance, and embed continuous change capabilities.

Image credit: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.