Category Archives: Management

Innovation and the Scientific Method

Leave a reply

Innovation and the Scientific Method

GUEST POST from Jesse Nieminen

Most large organizations are led and managed very systematically, and they pride themselves on that. Managers and leaders within those organizations are usually smart, educated, and want to make data-driven, evidence-based decisions.

However, when it comes to innovation, that can be a part of the problem as Clayton Christensen famously pointed out.

Many leaders these days are well aware of the problem, but even if they are, they may still have a hard time leading innovation because the approach is so different from what most of them are used to in their day-to-day. The mindset, mental models and frameworks needed are just fundamentally different.

So, to get it right, you need to pick out the right frameworks and mental models and use those to lead both your own thinking, as well as your teams. Because innovation has become such a hot topic, there’s been an explosion in the number of these. So, how do you know which ones to adopt?

Well, in these situations, it’s often beneficial to take a step back and go to the roots of the phenomenon to figure out what the timeless fundamentals are, and what’s just part of the latest fad.

So, in this article, we’ll look at arguably the oldest innovation framework in the world, the scientific method. We’ll first explore the concept and briefly compare it to more modern frameworks, and then draw some practical takeaways from the exercise.

What is the scientific method and how does it relate to innovation?

Most of us probably remember hearing about the scientific method, and it’s generally seen as the standard for proving a point and for exploring new phenomena. Having said that, given that even to this day, there still isn’t a clear consensus on what the scientific method actually is, it’s probably a good idea to explore the term.

The scientific method is a systematic, iterative, and primarily empirical method of acquiring knowledge.

Some of the key ideas behind the scientific method actually date back to ancient times and several different cultures, perhaps most famously to Ancient Greece. The initial principles evolved gradually throughout the years, but it took until the Enlightenment before the term “scientific method” began to be used, and these principles became popularized.

With that background we can safely call the scientific method the oldest innovation framework in the world. In the end, applying this method is where most of the big technological innovations and breakthroughs we all now know and benefit from every day, have come from throughout history.

But enough about history, what does the process actually look like? Well, as mentioned, that depends on whom you ask, but the key principles everyone agrees on are that it is a systematic, iterative, and primarily empirical method of acquiring knowledge.

Again, there’s no consensus on the exact steps used in the process, and there are also minor variances in terminology, but the four steps practically every version seems to have can be seen from the chart below.

Scientific Method Chart

While traditionally the scientific method has been used primarily for basic research, it’s been the inspiration for many recent, popular processes and frameworks around business innovation.

Just look at Lean Startup, Design Thinking, Growth Hacking, Discovery Driven Growth, and the list goes on.

At a high level, most of these are very similar to the scientific method, just applied to a more specific domain, and that come with some practical guidelines for applying said methods in practice.

With so many similarities, there’s clearly something there that’s worth paying attention to. Let’s next dive deeper to understand why that is the case.

Why are the frameworks so similar?

By definition, innovation is about creating and introducing something new. Sometimes that can mean small, incremental changes, but often we’re talking something much bigger.

And, in today’s globalized, hyperconnected and rapidly moving world, a lot of volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (VUCA) will always be involved, especially when you’re moving into these uncharted waters.

This leads to two fundamental problems:

  • You usually can’t have all the information before making a decision
  • Whatever plans and assumptions you initially make will likely be wrong

What that in turn means is that many of the practices and frameworks leaders have applied for years in managing people and projects as they’ve risen through the ranks of the business, will not be applicable here. In fact, they can even be counterproductive as we pointed out in the introduction. Some leaders have a hard time accepting this and adapting to the new reality, and that usually doesn’t end well.

Humility and pragmatism are key for innovation

On the other hand, some leaders that have realized this have decided to go to the other extreme. They’ve heard stories of these great visionaries and innovators that had a dream of the future and just refused to take no for an answer. While there is a lot to like in that approach, the mistake that often happens is that once these leaders embark on that journey, they refuse to adapt their vision to meet the reality.

Finding the right balance is always tricky, but what helps with that is adapting the iterative, exploratory, and empirical approach of the scientific methodand the other frameworks and processes we mentioned before.

This doesn’t mean that it would be a free-for-all, on the contrary. These processes are in fact systematic and usually quite structured.

The purpose of the scientific method is to create structure and understanding from what seems like an incomprehensible mess.

To put it in another way, the purpose of the scientific method is actually to create structure and understanding from what initially seems like an incomprehensible mess – and that is the foundation that most great innovations are built on.

What can we learn from that?

Let’s now reflect on what that means for the day-to-day job of innovators and leaders managing innovation.

For me, it essentially boils down to three main takeaways. We’ll next cover each of them briefly.

Innovation is a learning process, just like the scientific method

As we just covered, most innovation processes abide by the same key principles as the scientific method. They are iterative, empirical, and exploratory. But they are also systematic, evidence-based, and most importantly, focused on learning and solving problems.

With innovation, your first priority is always to be skeptical of your initial plan and question your assumptions. When you do that and look at the data objectively to try figure out how and why things work the way they do, you’ll unlock a deeper level of understanding, and that level of understanding is what can help you solve problems and create better innovations that make a real difference for your customers and your organization.

To sum up, when you’re trying to build the future, don’t assume you’re right. Instead, ask how you’re wrong, and why. Often the hardest part about learning is to unlearn what you’ve previously learned. This is what’s often referred to as first principles thinking.

“Trying things out” isn’t unscientific or non-evidence-based

We still see leaders in many organizations struggle to admit that they, either as a leader or as an organization, don’t know something.

There’s often resistance to admitting a lack of understanding and to “trying things out” because those are seen as amateurish and unscientific or non-evidence-based, approaches. Rational leaders naturally want to do their homework before choosing a direction or committing significant resources to an initiative.

The scientific method is about learning

However, with innovation, often doing your homework properly means that you understand that you don’t know all the answers and need to figure out a way to find out those answers instead of just trusting your gut or whatever market research you might have been able to scrape together.

“Trying things out” is how more or less every meaningful innovation has ever been created. By definition, there’s always an amount of trial and error involved in that process.

So, if you recognize yourself struggling to embrace the uncertainty, take a hard look in the mirror, be more pragmatic and have the courage to make yourself vulnerable. If you have the right talent in your team, being vulnerable is actually a great way to gel the team together and improve performance.

On the other hand, if you understand all of this, but your boss doesn’t, it might be a good idea to politely remind them of how the scientific method works. While it’s not a silver bullet that would be guaranteed to convert everyone into a believer at once, I’ve found this to be a good way to remind leaders how science and progress really gets made.

Essentially, you need to convince them that you know what you’re doing and have a rational, evidence-based plan purpose-built to combat the VUCA we already talked about.

It requires a different management style

As you’ve probably come to understand by now, all of that requires a very different style of management than what most managers and leaders are used to.

To make innovation happen in an organization, leaders do need to provide plenty of structure and guidance to help their teams and employees operate effectively. Without that structure and guidance, which good innovation processes naturally help provide, you’re essentially just hoping for the best which isn’t exactly an ideal strategy.

However, managing innovation is more about setting direction and goals, questioning assumptions, as well as removing obstacles and holding people accountable, than it is about the way most people have learned to manage as they’ve risen in the ranks, which is by breaking a project or goal into pre-defined tasks and then simply delegating those down in the organization.

The traditional approach works well when you have a straightforward problem to solve, or job to accomplish, even if it’s a big and complicated project like building a bridge. These days, the laws of physics related to that are well understood. But if you’re entering a new market or innovating something truly novel, the dynamics probably won’t be as clear.

Building bridges is complicated, not complex

Also, when it comes to capital allocation for innovation, you can certainly try to create a business plan with detailed investment requirements and a thorough project plan along with precise estimates for payback times, but because odds are that all of your assumptions won’t be right, that plan is likely to do more harm than good.

Instead, it’s usually better to allocate capital more dynamically in smaller tranches, even if your goals are big. This can help stay grounded and focus work on solving the next few problems and making real progress instead of executing on a grandiose plan built on a shaky or non-existent foundation.

Conclusion

The scientific method is arguably the oldest innovation framework in the world. While it has naturally evolved, it’s largely stood the test of time.

The scientific method has allowed mankind to significantly accelerate our pace of innovation, and as an innovator, you’d be wise to keep the key principles of the method in mind and introduce processes that institutionalize these within your organization.

Innovation is an iterative process of learning and solving problems, and succeeding at it takes a lot of humility, pragmatism, and even vulnerability. With innovation, you just can’t have all the answers beforehand, nor can you get everything right on the first try.

When you’ve been successful on your career, it’s sometimes easy to forget all of that. So, make sure to remind yourself, and the people you work with, of these principles every now and then.

Fortunately, there’s nothing quite like putting your most critical assumptions to test and learning from the experiment to bring you down to earth and remind yourself of the realities!

This article was originally published in Viima’s blog.

Image credit: Unsplash, Viima

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

Discipline Has a Role in Innovation

Leave a reply

Discipline Has a Role in Innovation

GUEST POST from Jesse Nieminen

Innovation is, without a doubt, a creative endeavor. However, many people still think it’s all about creativity. There’s a magical a-ha moment, and the rest is history.

Well, as we’ve explained before, that’s just not true. Those that have really been trying to innovate know that there is much more hard work than there is fun and games in the process of creating and scaling an innovation.

Thus, discipline plays a huge role in innovation. In fact, I’d argue that discipline is one of the least spoken about, yet most important factors determining whether individuals and organizations succeed at creating innovations.

So, in this article, we’ll dive deeper into the topic and discuss the role discipline plays in innovation to hopefully help you and your organization do a better job at it.

What is discipline?

As a term, discipline is commonly used to just refer to being strong-willed enough to put in a lot of hard work. In other words, self-discipline.

However, if we look at a dictionary, there are a few distinct but connected uses for the word. One refers to it as a branch of science, skill or type of work, another as the practice of regulating the behavior of people in a system, and the third as a synonym for punishing people for undesirable behavior in that system.

Well, innovation is certainly a discipline in the first meaning of the word, but it’s also one that takes a lot of discipline to succeed at, in the second meaning of the word.

“Innovation is a discipline that takes a lot of discipline to succeed at.”

Let’s dive a bit deeper on that second meaning for the word. For our purposes, we can further divide that it into two categories:

  • Self-discipline
  • Organizational discipline

There’s obviously a lot these have in common, but for an organization to succeed at innovation, you need both.

In a nutshell, you need self-disciplined individual willing to put their head down and persist. But you also need organizational discipline to focus on what matters, and to create the incentive structures needed to reinforce all of that.

Why is discipline so important for innovation?

So, with that covered, we can dive deeper into why discipline is so important for innovation and how that happens in practice.

We’ll next cover each of the main points briefly.

Viima Art of Discipline

It takes hard work, persistence, and focus to create an innovation

Because our software is centerer around ideas, we often have to explain that while every innovation starts from an idea, an idea is maybe 1% of the way there towards a real innovation. It still needs development, refinement, implementation, scaling, and so on.

Going through that whole process takes a lot of hard work for pretty much every idea, even if the idea might seem trivial at first. The fact is that by the time you get an idea, hundreds, thousands or maybe even millions of people have probably had the same idea before. Most have just never bothered to implement it, or at least haven’t succeeded at it.

“Every innovator will face plenty of challenges on the way, and there will be plenty of times when things look dire, and you could give up.”

Every innovator will face plenty of challenges on the way, and there will be plenty of times when things look dire, and you could give up. Most do. But to succeed, you need to persevere and persist through these hardships.

To do that, you’re going to need a lot of discipline to avoid potential distractions, keep your head down and focus on what matter.

Trust the process and keep going

If you’ve ever been following a challenging fitness program, you know the feeling when it looks like you’re working your butt off and not making any progress.

The weights feel even heavier than they did the last time. That’s because you’ve been accumulating stress on your body, and it hasn’t yet had the opportunity to respond. Once you get some rest and recover from that stress caused by the exercise, the body will react to the stress and make you stronger.

Innovation takes hard work and trust in the process

Well, the journey is the same with innovation: facing those stressors will feel challenging, but if you don’t give up, that’s what will make both you and the innovation better.

To keep using the same metaphor, if you’d like to run a 3-hour marathon, your fitness program will obviously look very different from if you instead wanted to squat 500 pounds. Similarly, if your strategy calls for incremental innovation, your innovation processes will look very different from those aiming for disruptive innovation, but more on that here.

Regardless, the key in each of these situations is to just trust the process and keep going. Even when things don’t look great. The challenges you face will shape your innovation for the better, and the results will follow – or you’ll run out of money. Regardless, you just need the discipline to persist and stay on track.

While following the process is what will eventually get you there, you of course need to make sure you’re on the right path in the first place, and that is where disciplined thinking comes into play. 

It’s easy to fool yourself without disciplined thinking

Our brain has a natural tendency to take mental shortcuts. We have an ability to recognize patterns and use those to make quick decisions efficiently and thus save energy. In most everyday situations, that ability is obviously very beneficial.

However, with innovation, this is often problematic. It’s these mental shortcuts that lead to many of the root causes behind issues that prevent organizations from innovating. This is perhaps easiest captured in common sayings like “This is how we’ve always done it” and “There’s no way that could work”.

“Our brain has a natural tendency to take mental shortcuts, which is the root cause behind many obstacles for innovation. Disciplined thinking is how you combat that.”

What’s more, if you’re an optimistic person, as most people working on innovation usually are, it’s easy to fool yourself to think that you have created something valuable even when you really haven’t. We often prematurely fall in love with that solution, instead of the problem.

Remaining highly analytical and rational in your decision-making while still being creative and aspirational is a tough combination for any person, or even for a team, to have.

Achieving that balance takes a lot of disciplined thinking. You need to stay grounded in reality, be willing to question yourself, and go back to first principleswhile still relentlessly moving forward. It’s a mindset anyone can learn, but that requires constant discipline to maintain.

Most organizations lack discipline

However, even if you are a good innovator, and have a great team that ticks all the boxes we’ve talked about above, it doesn’t mean that you’re automatically going to succeed.

One of the big barriers for that is the lack of organizational discipline. This is common for both startups and large organizations alike.

The idea is simple to understand. Just like an individual must remain focused to become great at something, so does an organization.

You need to make tough choices to have a clear strategy. That means saying no to a lot of things, so that you can focus on the things that will truly make a difference.

Clear focus and disciplined execution are necessary for innovation

Sometimes you might have to keep investing in these truly strategically important areas, even if there’s no quantifiable ROI in the near term. Again, at the same time, the organization needs the discipline to not think about sunk costs and ruthlessly kill innovation projects that have proven to not be able to live up to their potential to free up resources for the ones that have the best odds of success.

That might sound like a paradoxical combination, and to a certain extent, it is. But that’s what makes it interesting.

On the execution side, you need a lot of discipline to have clear roles and set clear goals so that people have the prerequisites for succeeding, but also leave innovators with enough freedom to explore the best way to reach those goals. Again, that is a difficult combination to achieve. It requires a lot of discipline at all levels of the organization.

In our experience, most organizations just aren’t there yet, even if many individuals within the organization would be, and that is a big barrier for innovation.

As a result, corporate innovators often end up burning out or losing their motivation just trying to navigate the maze of organizational hierarchy for one permission and approval after another before they even get to start working on an innovation. That is a clear sign of an organization that isn’t disciplined – or alternatively has chosen to not innovate.

Discipline in practice

We’ve covered a lot of ground, and most of that has been pretty abstract, so before we wrap up, I’ll share a more practical example with you.

It’s a cliché to use Steve Jobs and Apple as an example for innovation, so I don’t usually like to do that. However, for this specific topic, I think it’s the perfect illustration because people usually see Jobs as this creative visionary and the ultimate ideas guy who couldn’t care less about processes or discipline.

But in fact, the first thing he did when coming back to Apple in 1997 wasn’t to come up with cool new products. It was to introduce a ton of discipline in everything they did and ruthlessly cut back on anything that didn’t truly help them innovate and create better products going forward.

First, he cut 70% of the products the company offered, and as a result, had to lay off 3,000 employees.

Apple's innovations came from following a disciplined process

Jim Collins does a great job summarizing some of the other actions in his book Great by Choice:

“They cut perks, stopped funding the corporate sabbatical program, improved operating efficiency, lowered overall cost structure, and got people focused on the intense ‘work all day and all of the night’ ethos that’d characterized Apple in its early years. Overhead costs fell. The cash-to-current-liabilities doubled, and then tripled.”

That provided Apple with the financial stability needed to invest in innovation and allowed them to focus their leadership and top talent purely on creating new innovations that ended up shaping the future of the company.

Also, from the Walter Isaacson biography of Jobs (which I highly recommend), it becomes obvious how diligent and disciplined Jobs and the rest of the team at Apple were in perfecting every little detail of their products, processes, and even the look of their stores (sometimes to a fault).

Conclusion

To conclude, it takes a lot of discipline to succeed at innovation. That discipline is at least as important as the creativity we usually associate with the term innovation. And, because it’s so underrated, I’d argue it’s the part most of us need to focus on.

After all, it is that disciplined execution of an idea that usually makes the difference between those that succeed and fail.

Thomas Edison did a great job in summarizing discipline when asked about his failed attempts at a lightbulb:

“I have not failed. I have successfully found 10,000 ways that will not work.”

Discipline is, without a doubt, about putting in the work, but there’s a bit more to it than that. It’s also about staying focused and grounded in reality, both of which are well displayed in that quote.

“Being disciplined, both as an individual as well as an organization can be very challenging. The good thing is that it is a muscle that you can develop.”

Even if it might not be immediately obvious, lack of discipline either as an individual or as an organization, is the root cause behind a significant portion of challenges organizations face when trying to innovate.

To be frank, being disciplined, both as an individual as well as an organization, for extended periods of time can be very challenging. The good thing is that it is, figuratively speaking, a muscle that you can develop. Most would-be innovators and leaders just aren’t quite there yet.

If you recognize yourself or your organization from this article, there’s no need to hide that – and there’s nothing to be ashamed of. We’ve all been there. Each of us has areas in our life where we lack discipline, or at the very least, times when we’ve failed to keep that up.

In fact, as an individual or organization, you need to be honest and admit that this is a problem for you. Once you do, you can take steps to address that, and you’ll be much closer to becoming a successful innovator.

This article was originally published in Viima’s blog.

Image credits: Unsplash, Viima

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

Is Scrum or Kanban Right for Your Team?

Leave a reply

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In the fast-paced world of software development and project management, two agile methodologies stand out: Scrum and Kanban. While both aim to improve efficiency and productivity, they each have unique attributes that make them suitable for different types of teams and projects. Understanding these differences is crucial in making an informed decision about which methodology to implement for your team.

Understanding Scrum

Scrum is a structured framework for managing complex projects. It divides work into set periods known as sprints, typically lasting 2-4 weeks. The hallmark of Scrum is its focus on regular, iterative progress and transparency. Key roles include the Scrum Master, who facilitates the process, and the Product Owner, who prioritizes the backlog of work items.

Key Features of Scrum

  • Time-boxed sprints
  • Daily stand-up meetings
  • Defined roles and responsibilities
  • Regular reviews and retrospectives

Understanding Kanban

Kanban, on the other hand, is a visual method for managing workflow. It doesn’t prescribe fixed iterations or roles but relies on a board (physical or digital) to visualize tasks as they move through different stages of completion. Kanban aims to optimize the flow and limit work in progress (WIP).

Key Features of Kanban

  • Visual workflow management
  • Continuous delivery
  • WIP limits
  • Flexibility and adaptability

Case Study 1: XYZ Software Development

The Challenge

XYZ Software Development was struggling with long development cycles, leading to delayed product launches and stakeholder dissatisfaction. The company needed a structured approach to manage their complex projects more efficiently.

The Solution: Scrum

Adopting Scrum allowed XYZ to break their projects into manageable sprints. The introduction of clear roles and regular stand-ups fostered better communication and accountability. After implementing Scrum, XYZ saw a 30% reduction in development time and an increase in stakeholder satisfaction.

Case Study 2: Alpha Marketing Agency

The Challenge

Alpha Marketing Agency faced difficulties in adapting to sudden project changes and managing a high volume of small tasks. Their team needed a flexible method to handle continuously incoming work without predefined time constraints.

The Solution: Kanban

Switching to Kanban enabled Alpha to visualize their workflow. The flexible approach allowed them to quickly adapt to changes and effectively manage small, incoming tasks. By implementing Kanban, Alpha improved their task completion rate by 25% and achieved greater flexibility in their operations.

Conclusion

Choosing between Scrum and Kanban largely depends on your team’s specific needs and the nature of your projects. If your team thrives on structure, clear roles, and regular iterations, Scrum may be the better choice. However, if your team needs flexibility and the ability to adapt on the fly, Kanban could be the way to go. By understanding the strengths and applications of each methodology, you can make an informed decision that will drive your team toward greater efficiency and success.

Remember, the goal of both methodologies is to improve productivity and facilitate better project management, so it may also be worth considering a hybrid approach that leverages the strengths of both Scrum and Kanban.

Bottom line: 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: Pexels

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

Advances in the Management of Worthless Meeting Syndrome

Leave a reply

Advances the management of worthless meeting syndrome

GUEST POST from Arlen Meyers

Now that we have all been stuck inside for almost two years, many of us are suffering from an exacerbation of worthless meeting syndrome (WMS) , most recently remotely.

Of course, worthless meeting syndrome is a well-described chronic disease which has periodic exacerbations. It can be endemic or global with recovery and remissions. Here are the signs and symptoms.

One meeting expert notes that bad meetings are the bane of the corporate world — and yet despite what appears to be an overwhelming consensus that they’re often unnecessary and unproductive, many workplaces continue to struggle to avoid them. In this piece, the authors discuss the psychological pitfalls that lead us to schedule and attend too many meetings, and share strategies to help employees, managers, and organizations overcome those challenges. While there’s no way to completely eliminate the universal human biases that drive these tendencies, a greater awareness of the psychological factors at play can help us all work towards healthier communication norms, more-effective interactions, and cleaner calendars.

My recommended treatment is to refuse to attend any meetings:

  1. Where there is no agenda

  2. Where it is informational that could be communicated some other way

  3. Where we discuss what we discussed last time without taking action

  4. Where my input is required to inform a decision or take action on something

  5. Where there is no psychological safety

  6. Where a working group could have done the grunt work offline and reported their findings for approval or modification

  7. On weekends or nights unless absolutely required due to mission critical time zone issues or deadlines

  8. The meeting last longer than 45 min, if not 30

  9. No one takes minutes and there are action items for next (if necessary) meeting

  10. There are more than 7 people in the meeting

  11. Lobby your congressional delegation to make them illegal As remote work becomes more widespread, the parliament of Portugal recently passed a law banning bosses from contacting employees after working hours by phone, message or email. Violations of the new law — designed to “respect the privacy of the worker,” including rest and family time — could result in fines. Employees there have also been given the right to opt out of remote work, and to be reimbursed for expenses incurred while working from home.

Note: Ivermectin has not been shown to be clinically effective.

If your boss insists that you attend and you are accused of not being a team player, then get a note from your doctor. They are available online at www.wms.com

For the meeting junkie who has everything, we are also offering a clock at our WMS store that not only measures the length of the meeting, but also the prorated amount of money you are paying for the people to attend the meeting, similar to the US National Debt clock.

Image credit: BringTIM.com

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

Scaling Innovation – The What, Why, and How

3 Replies

Scaling Innovation – The What, Why, and How

GUEST POST from Jesse Nieminen

Given that innovation is responsible for roughly 85% of economic growth, it’s without a doubt a pretty big deal for the success of both individual organizations, as well as for the society at large.

However, to achieve the level of impact that many are looking for from innovation, you can’t simply “create something new”, and then just hope the results will come. You will need to commit to systematically pursuing those results by scaling viable ideas into products or businesses that create value – at scale.

That is of course easier said than done. If you think it’s hard to come up with innovations, just try scaling one up. In this article, we’ll explore the topic in more detail and provide you with actionable tips on how to actually scale an innovation.

What does it mean to scale an innovation?

To explain what it means to scale an innovation, let’s first take a step back and look at the lifecycle of an innovation.

To begin, every innovation starts from a rough idea or concept. Often you may have a specific goal in mind, or a problem to be solved, but sometimes it can just be a cool idea that you think could really make an impact. From there, you first need to validate that the idea makes sense, and then build a product or a service that meets a real need in the market.

With these steps taken care of, the next part is to scale the innovation. At this point, we have all the pieces in place to create value, but we haven’t yet unlocked that value for the vast majority of the available market.

Lifecycle of an Innovation

So, as you may see from the chart above, scaling is the part where most of the value creation and impact comes from. With that said, we can define scaling an innovation as the process of expanding the presence and the use of the innovation to be as widespread as possible to maximize that impact.

Scaling innovation is the process of expanding the presence and the use of the innovation to be as widespread as possible to maximize the impact the innovation can have.

While on paper that sounds straightforward enough, it’s extremely important to first clarify the vision of what successful scaling looks like for your innovation, and what metrics you will use to measure your success here. For some, it might just be revenue or profit, for others it could be the number of customers or users, the impact you’ve delivered, and so on.

Most of these metrics are of course related, but when you start with the end in mind and gradually work backwards from there, you are much more likely to succeed because everyone in the organization will know what it actually is that you’re aiming for.

With that goal in mind, you can start narrowing in on the methods required to get there, which is what we’ll be focusing on next.

Dimensions of scaling an innovation

Traditionally, scaling innovation is seen as a matter of advancing the adoption, or the diffusion, of innovation. This is best visualized with a chart depicting the adoption curve, which you’ll find below.

Technology Adoption Lifecycle

The idea is that to scale an innovation, you need to cross that chasm and go from a few early adopters to the mainstream market where the volumes are significantly higher.

While that is certainly true, we can dig a bit deeper to understand scaling in a more nuanced, and more practical, way.

In reality, there are three dimensions to scaling an innovation.

Dimensions of Scaling Innovation

Let’s look at each of them a little closer.

Scaling Up

First, scaling up is about creating the preconditions for scaling effectively.

Before we start talking about scaling up, we’ll assume that the basic prerequisites for scaling are in place, namely that there’s a clear vision and a product-market fit for your innovation, and that the market potential is large enough for there to be something to scale to, even if the market isn’t there today.

Assuming those prerequisites are there, you need to ensure that:

  1. you can produce enough of the innovation to scale
  2. you can do that efficiently enough to be financially and operationally viable

For some products, such as software and other immaterial goods, that first part is pretty straightforward. For others, such as most complex manufactured goods, even the first one will be a real challenge.

Having said that, the second part of being efficient enough will prove to be a challenge for virtually every innovation. Even for a software product, acquiring, serving, and retaining customers profitably at scale is often more difficult than people realize. For other, fundamentally less scalable goods and services, this is often excruciating.

In addition to these two more practical aspects, there’s a third and more ambiguous component to scaling up, and that is the social and institutional adoption of the innovation.

How well you scale up affects how large of a scale you can ultimately reach.

For example, with an innovation as mundane as the modern umbrella, men who used it were initially ridiculed. So, before the umbrella could really take off as an innovation, societal norms needed to change. In other cases, there may be regulatory hurdles or other institutional considerations that might need to be addressed before an innovation can ultimately scale.

Regardless of the specifics, scaling up is necessary for every innovation that wants to reach significant scale.

However, what many people don’t pay enough attention to is that how well you scale up affects how large of a scale you can ultimately reach. If you can’t produce the goods at volume, and at low enough of a price while still being profitable at a unit economics level, there’s an obvious limit to your potential to scale.

Scaling Out

Scaling out is what most people think of when it comes to scaling an innovation. It’s the geographical or demographical expansion of the innovation to a larger audience.

In its simplest form, scaling out simply means getting a wider market share and audience for the innovation within an existing market. As we covered earlier, this typically means moving from those early adopter market segments towards the mainstream.

Scaling out is what most people think of when it comes to scaling innovation as it’s where you expand the innovation to a larger audience.

However, it doesn’t have to be limited to just that. Sometimes the same products or services can be sold and used in other geographical areas, or even in other industries or entirely different use cases, both of which unlock new markets and additional demand, and thus lead to a larger impact for the innovation. A well-known example of this is Tesla using their experience and innovations in electric car batteries to expand to stationary energy storage.

Paths for Scaling Out

Regardless of which path you choose, often these efforts to scale out to new segments or industries do require additional work to adapt the innovation or its positioning to the differing characteristics of these new segments, markets, and audiences.

Scaling out to new market segments can increase complexity a lot, so be mindful of the operational implications of your strategic decisions here.

This naturally adds complexity, which makes the scaling up part we covered earlier more challenging. So, be mindful of how you scale out and what the operational implications of your strategic decisions here will be.

Scaling Deep

The third, and the least well-known method for scaling innovation is scaling deep. This essentially means that you unlock more impact for your innovation by expanding and maximizing the use of it, typically for the people who already have access to it.

This usually requires you to either change people’s behavior to increase usage, or alternatively come up with innovative means for improving the utilization rate by enabling more people to make use of the same assets. Scaling deep is partly a matter of culture and mindset, and partly a more practical matter of having the right components in place for enabling and encouraging active use of the innovation.

Social Media

A classic, albeit somewhat controversial example of the first type would be social media algorithms. They are designed to provide users with engaging content to keep them entertained and thus stay in the service for longer, which leads to more revenue from the same number of users.

An example of the second type would be cloud computing. By adding network, virtualization, and software layers on top of the computing hardware, cloud providers can get more use out of the same hardware, which unlocks value for both the service provider and the customers.

This is how Amazon not just significantly reduced costs in one of their major cost centers, IT infrastructure, but actually turned that into Amazon Web Services (AWS), an additional growth business that now accounts for the majority of the profits for the entire organization.

Scaling deep is about unlocking more impact for your innovation by expanding and maximizing the use of it. This can help reduce the need to scale up or out, or alternatively maximize the impact from doing so.

Scaling Deep can reduce the need to scale up or out, or alternatively, maximize the impact from doing so. As such, it’s an excellent compliment for most innovations. However, it’s just that: a compliment. Your primary method of scaling should always be either to Scale Up or Scale Out depending on whether your bottleneck is more on the supply or demand side.

Even in the case of AWS, which has created entirely new vectors for scaling out and has dramatically subsidized their costs for scaling up, it obviously wouldn’t have been possible without Amazon already being at significant scale.

What’s the takeaway? These dimensions are distinct but very much intertwined.

If you can scale on all three of these dimensions in a coordinated way, you will not only be much more likely to achieve significant scale with your innovation in the first place, but also maximize the potential for scale and impact from those efforts. If you build momentum on one of the dimensions, some of that momentum will carry over to the other dimensions, which again helps you accelerate change going forward.

As such, pay attention to each of these dimensions and try to consider all of them in your plans to scale innovation. That doesn’t mean you should focus on all three from the get-go, on the contrary, but planning with the big picture in mind can allow you to make much more educated decisions.

Scaling innovation in practice

As we’ve established above, there unfortunately isn’t a one-size fits all solution to scaling innovation.

Achieving breakthrough success with an innovation, which is the goal of scaling innovation, always requires many related and adjacent (usually more incremental) innovations.

This is an extremely common pattern that you will see happening over and over again if you just start paying attention to it. Square co-founder Jim McKelvey has done a great job in describing that in more detail in his recent book called the Innovation Stack.

A well-known example is the lightbulb. Edison patented his famous design back in 1879, but most households didn’t yet have access to electricity, so it wasn’t something they could benefit from. It took countless other innovations and another 45 years before even half of US homes had one, even though the benefits were obvious.

In practice, scaling an innovation is simply an iterative and exploratory process where you focus on eliminating whatever bottleneck is preventing you from scaling, one by one. And, as we saw in the example of the lightbulb, sometimes these can be much bigger and more fundamental than you may think at first.

Process of Scaling an Innovation

Often you can just copy solutions other people have already used for the same or a similar problem (which you should always go for if you can), but many times you will also need to innovate something completely new and occasionally even go beyond your core product.

With that said, there are some common patterns that can be helpful for structuring your thinking when faced with some of these bottlenecks. However, as each innovation is ultimately new, and thus unique, these won’t necessarily fit every case.

Having said that, we’ll share one framework for each dimension of scaling below. We’ve also created a toolkit that includes the frameworks as editable templates, along with some examples and other supporting material, which you can download here.

Overview of Scaling in Practice

Demand side

For most organizations and innovations, the demand side is likely the source of most bottlenecks.

The way we see it, this is not just about drumming up interest and demand for your product, but also about making sure that it fits the needs and budgets of the buyers in your market. And of course, you need to make sure you’re in a market, or at least one that has the potential to become, large enough to accommodate your scaling efforts.

Unlike what people often think, product-market fit isn’t enough for a business to be scalable. You also need to have the right business and operating models, as well as use the right channels.

In other words, scaling out isn’t just about product-market fit, as people often mistakenly think. You also need to have the right business and operating models and use the right channels. Brian Balfour has written an excellent five-part series about this, which I highly recommend you read.

Product-Market-Model-Channel Framework

The basic idea is pretty simple: your business needs to align all of these aspects in a cohesive manner to be able to scale. If even one of them is wrong, growth will feel like, as Balfour puts it, “pushing a boulder uphill”. It will take way too much capital, effort, and time. However, get the four elements right together, and the growth will come naturally.

What’s important to understand here is that the model isn’t a static picture you just do once. If the market changes, or you run into challenges that force you to change one of these elements, you’ll need to review each element and make sure the big picture still works.

Supply side

For some products and businesses, especially those with physical products, the supply side often becomes a key consideration.

Here, the bottlenecks can be extremely varied, and dependences on external suppliers can lead to challenges that are hard to overcome.

In general, what top innovators do differently from the rest of the companies is that they almost always vertically integrate their value chain as they are working towards scaling up.

There are many benefits to this approach, such as reduced overhead, but the key differences are in increased quality, and most importantly, the company’s ability to control their own destiny and innovate more freely because they’re not being constrained by their supply chain.

Top innovators vertically integrate their value chain to address bottlenecks and turn cost centers into additional sources of growth and profit.

The classic example is Apple, and the way that they control both the hardware and software of their products. In recent years, they’ve been increasing that integration in both directions. They’re moving upstream to offer more services on top of their operating systems, as well as downstream by designing their own processors, which has provided them with a big performance advantage.

Apple vertical integration

However, there are many others. Amazon, Microsoft, Tesla, Google, Netflix, Nvidia, and pretty much every innovative company is trying to do the same in the scope of their own business.

The basic idea is again simple: if a part of your supply chain becomes a major bottleneck, or is a major cost center, you should try to take control of those parts to address the bottlenecks and turn cost centers into additional sources of growth and profit, just like Amazon has done with AWS, but also warehousing and shipping.

That isn’t to say that vertical integration wouldn’t be challenging or have downsides. It certainly is and does. Because of these limitations, it’s generally advisable to only vertically integrate to the parts of your supply chain that either are a clear bottleneck or could become a key competitive advantage for you. However, top innovators often have little choice but to take these steps if they want to move fast enough and have enough control to be able to scale their innovation to its full potential.

Vertical Integration

Another key consideration on the supply side is simply the architecture of your products and services, and the process you have for delivering them. It’s obviously much easier to have a scalable architecture and automated processes for purely software or content focused businesses, but how you craft these does  play a huge role for complex physical products too.

This is again a very extensive topic on its own, but the goal should be to try to make the manufacturing, delivery, and service of your products as seamless and scalable as possible. As with everything else we’ve discussed so far, this too is an iterative process.

However, to provide you with a slightly more practical framework to get started, here’s Elon Musk explaining how he’s learned to approach this topic after his early struggles of trying to do that with the extremely complex products at SpaceX and Tesla.

While Musk specifically talks about the process in the scope of engineering for scale, these same principles also apply to your organization and internal processes too.

And, as Musk explained in the video, it’s easy to get tempted by the promises of optimizing for efficiency and automation, but if you haven’t addressed the big picture first, these will often end up just being a big waste of time and money.

So, make sure to start by first eliminating those unnecessary requirements and parts or tasks, and try to simplify the design before you focus too much on optimizing for efficiency and automating.

Process of Engineering for Scale

Utilization

In addition to supply and demand, we still have the third dimension of utilization to cover. The idea with this “scaling deep” part is to find creative ways to make the most out of existing supply to either unlock new demand, maximize the utilization of those assets, or simply to increase your customer retention by finding ways to get more value for them from your products.

As you may have guessed by now, the specifics vary quite a lot on a case-by-case basis, but the flowchart below can hopefully serve as a starting point for your efforts in this area.

Pathways for Scaling Deep

To summarize, there are three common paths you may take here.

The first is to find ways to increase the usage of assets that are only being used a fraction of the time through practices such as asset sharing and virtualization.

The second is to move from one-off purchases to a subscription to eliminate friction and increase the usage of the services.

The third is to find additional ways to expand the use of the product. This is usually done either by finding new value-adding uses for the same product, or simply by activating usage through means such as improved quality, usability, better communication etc.

However, sometimes it might even be necessary to work around tougher and more pervasive issues, such as regulatory considerations or even the changing of societal norms.

While increased utilization isn’t often that glamorous or exciting, it can really make a difference in making your business and operating models efficient enough to allow you to scale volume faster and more sustainably.

Conclusion

Scaling an innovation won’t be easy. It will always take years, and an endless amount of hard work with an extreme focus on solving each and every bottleneck standing in your way.

Hopefully you’ll find some of the frameworks and playbooks we’ve introduced in this article useful for shaping your thinking, and for building your organization and processes, but you’ll inevitably come across plenty of challenges where you’ll just need to figure out the solutions yourself. Still, if you want to truly succeed with innovation, that’s what you’re in for.

So, be prepared for those challenges, and be realistic with your expectations and timelines. For example, the “growth gap” can easily sneak up on your organization if top management has unrealistic expectations for the financial returns of innovation.

In general, large organizations have some disadvantages, but they also have huge advantages when it comes to scaling an innovation, so look for ways to leverage those advantages to your benefit.

And finally, make sure to surround yourself with top talent that’s prepared for the ride. Scaling innovation is teamwork, and it takes a special kind of a team to pull it off. You need people that are used to constant change, have a growth mindset, and the skills needed to solve whatever problems your domain may have.

As mentioned, scaling innovation is a journey that happens in small increments, and at times, it will feel frustrating. But if your team persists, keeps on learning and solving problems, you can eventually close in on whatever the full potential of your innovation is.

Image credits: Pexels, Viima

This article was originally published in Viima’s blog.

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

Cultivating a Growth Mindset Among Your Team

Leave a reply

Cultivating a Growth Mindset Among Your Team

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In today’s ever-evolving business landscape, the ability of a team to embrace challenges, learn from setbacks, and continuously strive for improvement is paramount. This adaptability is rooted in what psychologists Carol Dweck and her colleagues have termed the “growth mindset.” It’s characterized by the belief that abilities and intelligence can be developed through dedication, hard work, and the right strategies. This article delves into the principles of fostering a growth mindset within your team and presents two real-world case studies that illustrate its transformative power.

Principles of a Growth Mindset

  • Embrace Challenges: Encourage your team to step out of their comfort zones and tackle difficult projects.
  • Learn from Criticism: Constructive feedback should be seen as a tool for improvement rather than a personal attack.
  • Persistence: Promote perseverance, even when tasks become tough, and celebrate small victories along the way.
  • Effort is Essential: Recognize hard work and effort as pathways to mastering new skills and achieving goals.
  • Celebrate Growth: Acknowledge progress and development, not just end results.

The Roadmap to Cultivating Growth Mindset

Implementing a growth mindset culture requires consistent effort and intention. Start by exemplifying the mindset yourself and follow through with coaching, training, and an environment that allows for experimentation and constructive failure.

Case Study 1: XYZ Tech Innovators

Background: XYZ Tech Innovators was a startup struggling with high employee turnover and stalling project deadlines. The leadership team identified a fixed mindset culture as the core issue.

Approach: The company implemented a series of workshops focused on the principles of a growth mindset. Managers were trained to deliver constructive feedback focused on effort and strategies rather than innate talent. The company also encouraged employees to set personal growth goals and paired them with mentors.

Outcome: The initiative transformed the workplace environment. Employees started taking on more ambitious projects, and team collaboration improved. Within a year, employee turnover decreased by 30%, and project completion rates soared by 50%.

Case Study 2: ABC Retail Group

Background: ABC Retail Group was facing stagnation in innovation and product development. Team members were hesitant to pitch new ideas, fearing failure and criticism.

Approach: To shift the cultural mindset, ABC Retail Group introduced an “Innovation Lab” where employees could experiment with new ideas without the pressure of immediate success. The lab was a failure-tolerant environment where learning from mistakes was encouraged and expected.

Outcome: Within six months, the lab produced several viable new products. Team members reported feeling more creative and less anxious about proposing ideas. The company’s innovation index, a measure of new product success, increased by 40% in the following year.

Conclusion

Instilling a growth mindset within your team is a dynamic and rewarding process. As evidenced by these case studies, the benefits extend beyond individual performance improvements to foster a culture of continuous learning, innovation, and resilience. By embracing the core principles of a growth mindset, your team can navigate challenges more effectively and unlock unprecedented levels of success.

Bottom line: 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: Pexels

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

Why Change Failure Occurs

Leave a reply

Why Change Failure Occurs

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

Never has the need for transformation been so dire or so clear. Still, that’s no guarantee that we will muster the wisdom to make the changes we need to. After all, President Bush warned us about the risks of a global pandemic way back in 2005 and, in the end, we were left wholly vulnerable and exposed.

It’s not like pandemics are the only thing to worry about either. A 2018 climate assessment warns of major economic impacts unless we make some serious shifts. Public debt, already high before the current crisis, is now exploding upwards. Our electricity grid is insecure and vulnerable to cyberattack. The list goes on.

All too often, we assume that mere necessity can drive change forward, yet history has shown that not to be the case. There’s a reason why nations fail and businesses go bankrupt. The truth is that if a change is important, some people won’t like it and they will work to undermine it in underhanded and insidious ways. That’s what we need to overcome.

A Short History Of Change

For most of history, until the industrial revolution, people existed as they had for millennia and could live their entire lives without seeing much change. They farmed or herded for a living, used animals for power and rarely travelled far from home. Even in the 20th century, most people worked in an industry that changed little during their career.

In the 1980s, management consultants began to notice that industries were beginning to evolve more rapidly and firms that didn’t adapt would lose out in the marketplace. One famous case study showed how Burroughs moved aggressively into electronic computing and prospered while its competitor NCR lagged and faded into obscurity.

In 1983, McKinsey consultant Julien Phillips published a paper in the journal, Human Resource Management, that described an “adoption penalty” for firms that didn’t adapt to changes in the marketplace quickly enough. His ideas became McKinsey’s first change management model that it sold to clients.

Yet consider that research shows in 1975, during the period Phillips studied, 83% of the average US corporation’s assets were tangible, such as plant, machinery and buildings, while by 2015, 84% of corporate assets were intangible, such as licenses, patents and human capital. In other words, change today involves mostly people, their knowledge and behaviors than it does strategic assets.

Clearly, that changes the game entirely.

What Change Looks Like Today

Think about how America was transformed after World War II. We created the Interstate Highway System to tie our nation together. We established a new scientific infrastructure that made us a technological superpower. We built airports, shopping malls and department stores. We even sent a man to the moon.

Despite the enormous impact of these accomplishments, none of those things demanded that people had to dramatically change their behavior. Nobody had to drive on an Interstate highway, work in a lab, travel in space or move to the suburbs. Many chose to do those things, but others did not and paid little or no penalty for their failure to change with the times.

Today the story is vastly different. A crisis like Covid-19 required us to significantly alter our behavior and, not surprisingly, some people didn’t like it and resisted. We could, as individuals, choose to wear a mask, but if others didn’t follow suit the danger remained. We can, as a society, invest billions in a vaccine, but if a significant portion don’t take it, the virus will continue to mutate at a rapid rate, undermining the effectiveness of the entire enterprise.

Organizations face similar challenges. Sure they invest in tangible assets, such as plant and equipment, but any significant change will involve changing people’s beliefs and behaviors and that is a different matter altogether. Today, even technological transformations have a significant human component.

Making Room For Identity And Dignity

In the early 19th century, a movement of textile workers known as the Luddites smashed machines to protest the new, automated mode of work. As skilled workers, they saw their way of life being destroyed in the name of progress because the new technology could make fabrics faster and cheaper with less workers of lower skill.

Today, “Luddite” has become a pejorative term to describe people who are unable or unwilling to accept technological change. Many observers point out that the rise of industry created new and different jobs and increased overall prosperity. Yet that largely misses the point. Weavers were skilled artisans who worked for years to hone their craft. What they did wasn’t just a job, it was who they were and what they took pride in.

One of the great misconceptions of our modern age is that people make decisions based on rational calculations of utility and that, by engineering the right incentives, we can control behavior. Yet people are far more than economic entities, They crave dignity and recognition, to be valued, in other words, as ends in themselves rather than as merely means to an end.

That’s why changing behaviors can be such a tricky thing. While some may see being told to wear a mask or socially distance as simply doing what “science says,” for others it is an imposition on their identity and dignity from outside their community. Perhaps not surprisingly, they rebel and demand to have their right to choose be recognized.

Building Change On Common Ground

The biggest misconception about change is that once people understand it, they will embrace and so the best way to drive change forward is to explain the need for change in a very convincing and persuasive way. Change, in this view, is essentially a communication exercise and the right combination of words and images is all that is required.

Yet as should be clear by now that is clearly not true. People will often oppose change because it asks them to alter their identity. The Luddites didn’t just oppose textile machinery on economic grounds, but because it failed to recognize their skills as weavers. People don’t necessarily oppose wearing masks because they are “anti-science,” but because they resent having their behavior mandated from outside their community.

In other words, change is always, at some level, about what people value. That’s why to bring change about you need to identify shared values that reaffirm, rather than undermine, people’s sense of identity. Recognition is often a more powerful incentive than even financial rewards. In the final analysis, lasting change always needs to be built on common ground.

Over the next decade, we will undergo some of the most profound shifts in history, encompassing technology, resources, migration patterns and demography and, if we are to compete, we will need to achieve enormous transformation in business and society. Whether we are able to do that or not depends less on economics or “science” than it does on our ability to trust each other again.

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

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

Scaling-up, the next frontier for innovation organization

Leave a reply

Guest Post from Nicolas Bry

How to transform innovative bottom-up initiatives into a movement spread across the company? How to scale your innovation program widely? Here are a few lessons learned from creating innovation programs in Europe, and tweaking them to Africa and Middle-East contexts.

Leveraging local and global innovation

Supplementing wisely central techno-pushed innovation with local innovation, closer to the fields and to the user needs, opening new windows of opportunities, is the goal of the open and local innovation approach developed for Orange Africa.

The purpose is to balance the technical expertise from a central innovation division, with the possibility of bottom-up initiatives, experimenting locally up to 100 innovative solutions every semester with the circa 20 countries where Orange operates in Africa and Middles-East.

The local innovation focus is on agility, pragmatism, and value created for the users and for Orange business, while leveraging a key technological asset that Orange can bring to the innovative service.

Smartphone Noir

One emblematic story is the birth of Orange Money, a mobile money service solving the problem of money transfer and payment for unbanked people. The idea was born in Kenya, and it clearly could not have emerged in Europe where everyone is banked, even kids! Orange developed centrally a platform capable of supporting all African countries in their progressive roll-out over 18 countries: ten years later, 50 millions users signed in for Orange Money. Furthermore, the central Orange Money platform enables local developments blossom, tailored to each country needs, and being picked-up, and replicated from one country to another over the region.

This is probably the most brilliant innovation of Orange over the decade, still no cutting-edge tech embedded: it’s low tech (SMS). As it solves a real user problem, it transforms people’s life, and got a massive adoption rate.

Orange Money map

Conducting short experiments in connection with business units

I created Orange intrapreneurship program 5 years ago, with a view to help innovative ideas transition more fluently into business, with the help of a sponsoring business unit, and to open the innovation doors to every Orange employee, letting them benefit from a tunnel of goodwill around their idea. The program acted like an innovation center of expertise or incubator. It clearly involved the business units very upstream: I’m a strong believer in co-developing innovations that create opportunities for business units, giving them a competitive advantage or solving one of their problems. “Find out the business unit problem that your innovation is solving”, I kept saying to the innovators I mentored!

Now we are adapting the process for the 20 countries of Orange Africa taking into account contextual particularities. We keep the employees participation and the business unit ownership aspects, but we also try to test refinements on the exploration stage. The key here is to conduct innovation exploration with short experiments in connection with business units:

  • achieving quick business wins with innovative process improvement, impacting internal organization, and not only new product and services: for instance, streamlining the authentification process for new customers;
  • mixing employees and business representatives with startups that help experimenting quickly; this has been pioneered by Orange Belgium, and these teams are called innovation squads like in the Spotify vocabulary;
  • keeping the process nimble, in a stretched time frame of a few weeks, so as to conduct a high number of experiments, confronting mock-ups to users, and collecting a maximum of users’ feedback, finding The Right IT before any product development.

Our target is to build proximity with our target users, rather than falling in love with our product, to explore and conduct short experiments, and pave the way to exploitation capitalizing on users’ feedback.

Personne Pointant Sur Un Appareil Photo Noir Et Gris Près De Macbook Pro

Designing innovation program, boosting innovation community

I’ve been through 10 steps to design an corporate entrepreneur program in my book The Intrapreneurs’ Factory. These 10 milestones are also an appropriate framework to design the innovation process with the countries of Orange Africa.

10 steps

It’s important first of all to define the reason why you start the program, what problem you’re trying to solve, what goals and KPIs will make the management team satisfied if they are reached. Then, some delicate gates are:

  1. Finding out the right sponsor, both visible and accessible; sometimes a deputy sponsor can compensate a lack of avaibility!
  2. Involving the business side soon enough in the process to trigger ownership, and  further facilitate the exit, aka the transition from exploration to exploitation;
  3. Closely coaching the process along the way, sharing the innovation tools from design thinking and lean start-up, bespoke tools to design mock-ups, and conduct experiment, but also the very peculiar mindset of the successful innovator: flexible and stubborn at the same time as says Jeff Bezos, as the key relies in the management of iteration in short cycles.

To operate this innovation process, we move together with a community of 20 staggering innovation champions, representing the countries of Orange Africa. Not only we discuss the innovation process to test locally, but we share view on innovation organization, and share success stories during a weekly Radio Innovation.

Radio Innovation

Weekly Radio Innovation also puts forward tremendous testimonials to inspire the innovation community:

  • from innovation managers and communities connected to Africa:  Seedstars startups competition and programs for African entrepreneurs; Make Sense Africa incubator and the Dakar Citylab; Norrsken Kigali innovation hub, the startups gateway to East Africa; YUX Design Agency from Senegal, validating innovation ideas with users; innovation in the informal sector in Africa with GoodPoint/Archipel-co.com; Total Africa open innovation in Chad; Entrepreneurship Communities for innovation in Africa, with Archipel&Co and Africa Farmers Club; Liferay digital platform, and an Africa’s approach to tech and innovation; Innovation in Africa with Vodafone;
  • from startups growing their business in Africa: cloud telephony for SMEs, with Mteja from Kenya, and AfricaTalks; South-African MFS Africa: moving money across countries with one API that makes Africa look like one country; Kenya Pezesha loan marketplace for small African businesses; Chari.ma from Morocco, market place for local businesses; African startups investment report by Briter Bridges;
  • from Orange collaborators illustrating the group assets: Orange Ventures Africa seeds challenge; Social listening with Orange Data Studio in Guinea; Orange Fab Belgium innovation squads; Orange Senegal design thinking toolbox; Orange Slovakia  open innovation; Orange Amman innovation team; First 100% digital mobile offer Flex by Orange Polska; Orange Romania innovation ecosystem, and cooperation with startups;
  • from broader innovation experts: innovation community management at Gefco; Booster incubation studio at Total; innovation in the energy industry, Innovation Vesta Wind Systems; collaborating with startups through the Venture Client Model, by 27pilots.

For these innovation champions in charge of setting-up an organization for innovation in their country, the challenge is to seek for integration (integrating seamlessly innovation with the business) before seeking for success. These mind-boggling testimonials feed them, upgrade their skills, and consolidate their innovation culture.

Scaling-up innovation oragnization

Once the innovation program gets traction, the next step is about scaling-up the approach, engaging progressively all participants. If all Orange countries commit to the innovation process in Africa, that will lead to the tremendous portfolio of 100 creative solutions experimented per semester, 200 on a yearly basis on the regional footprint: what a eye-catching achievement!

At the innovation project level, one can use the scale-up canvas to check whether the project is ready to grow, and move from a start-up to a scale-up stage.

At the program level, Is your innovation organization resilient? is the topic of a short assessment I have designed to know how your innovation organization fare across 10 key areas, and cements its resilience. Whether you are leading open innovation, internal innovation, participative innovation and intrapreneurship, digital factory or disruptive labs, you will learn from this tool which works like an innovation calculator, it’s actually quite fun to run it! To start, click here, see how you rank, and get pieces of advice for improvement.

Image credits: Pexels.com 1, Pexels.com 2

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

Innovation organization only thrives along with innovation culture

2 Replies

Guest Post from Nicolas Bry

Innovation organization doesn’t thrive without innovation culture: organization and process without culture are like a factory without raw materials; culture without organization and process is appropriate to initiate a handful of innovation projects, but doesn’t scale.

Looking at 3 major innovation programs I shaped (open innovation with internet user and entrepreneurs, empowering employees with intrapreneurship, exploring and experimenting in short cycles in Africa), this correlation between organization and culture became obvious to me. Some fundamental pieces to assemble have come to my mind, in order to make innovation organization match with culture in a complete jigsaw: these essentials let fledgling innovators fly the nest, and seasoned ones hit the nail even better. Thus entrepreneurship can emerge as a second nature, and a core value for organizations.

1. Innovation Organization

To set-up a streamlined innovation process, I find these 3 organization pieces to be paramount:

1. Test and learn iterative path

Share the virus of test and learn in short cycles with your innovators; confronting the value proposition with the customer target as soon as possible to capture insights, and iterating positively on your solution as on your target users; avoiding the product bias pitfall: ‘don’t fall in love with your product, fall in love with the user problem’ as Ash Maurya says; spending the initial time on materializing the value proposition, designing mock-up to let users clearly visualize it and express feedback and insights; sorting out the key hypothesis to validate and the appropriate tests to perform, and capturing The Right It, without yet engaging in significant product development;

2. Collaborative platforms design

Open innovation blossoms with shared goals and explicit knowledge; to facilitate knowledge sharing, entice innovators to create a platform that let others create value on top of it, applying modular design from the very beginning; having in mind end-users and developers ecosystem as 2 different user targets; exposing building blocks (APIs) that can be quickly reused internally and externally to create instantly new businesses;

3. Scale-up preparation stage

Once product market fit is on the trend to prove true, the innovator’s venture shall anticipate the acceleration of sales and operations, the scale-up. Crossing the chasm and industrializing processes (marketing, product, sales, recruitment and on-boarding, partnerships) requires preparation, just as if you were upgrading your sailboat from a promenade near the coast to a transatlantic journey with heavy wind blowing. Have also in mind that the corporate scale-up has simultaneously to win.

Homme Tenant Un Sac à Dos Noir

2. Innovation Culture

To instill an innovation culture, I find these 3 cultural pieces quite efficient:

1. Empowerment with creative tension

Unleashing creativity and autonomy is fine, but a framework actually helps innovators; At Google, they say ‘innovation loves constraints’, and ‘the faster, the better’: speed is a constraint that pushes you to focus on the core, and to eliminate the superfluous, leading to frugal execution. ‘Less is more’ claimed famous designer Mies van der Rohe. In that sense, speed triggers a positive tension;

2. Upstream aspiration with C-level and business units commitment

Innovators often start bottom-up initiatives; at a certain point, innovators need to be aspired with C-level and business units support to leverage the corporation assets; explain to these sponsors how innovation differs from ideation, and that it seeks for business impact, just like marketing and sales: innovation is about conquering new customers, improving loyalty, differentiating from competition, creating value for the users and for the company; align innovators endeavors with corporation strategy, and gain credibility with quick wins in your innovation portfolio; you’ll know you have succeeded when business units will include innovation KPIs across the organization;

3. Stimulation of boldness, and risk taking spirit

innovation contests and crowdsourcing stimulate ideation if appropriate recognition comes along; if we want employees to further engage with boldness in execution, failure has to be accepted as part of the innovation process, as Gore company shows it with its Celebrate Failure event; do not underestimate that, while a company has dozen of successful projects to hide a failure behind the curtain, it’s not possible for an employee to offset an experience on his resume; how to detect opportunities out of setbacks, how to become a learning organization is a necessary culture: ‘I never fail, I either succeed or learn’ claimed Nelson Mandela. It requires training for the employees and for the leaders: letting the leaders embrace and learn from failure during a ‘eat your own dog food’ workshop is a fruitful practice I’m a great believer in.

Propagating a culture of organized innovation, while organizing innovation culture, you will durably shape people to become successful innovators, and win the game. That’s the best mean to achieve impactful outcome: innovation that change people’s lives.

Image credit: Pexels.com

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

Understanding the Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) and Its Impact on Consumer Decision-Making

Leave a reply

Understanding the Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) and Its Impact on Consumer Decision-Making

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In this era of constant digital connectivity, consumers are experiencing an overwhelming fear of missing out (FOMO) on the latest trends, experiences, and opportunities. This fear has a profound effect on consumer decision-making and shapes how they engage with brands, products, and services. To truly understand FOMO’s impact, we must delve into its psychological roots and explore two compelling case studies.

Psychological Roots of FOMO:

Fear of missing out stems from the basic human desire for social connection, the need for validation, and the fear of being left behind. Countless studies have shown that individuals have a fundamental longing to be part of a community, to share experiences, and to feel accepted. FOMO amplifies these desires in the digital age, fueling anxiety-driven decision-making.

Case Study 1: The Influence of FOMO on Buying Behavior

In recent years, the beauty industry witnessed a significant rise in FOMO-driven purchasing behaviors. Brands cleverly utilize social media platforms and influencers to create a sense of scarcity and urgency, inducing FOMO within consumers. A prime example of this phenomenon is the limited-edition makeup collaborations, which generate immense buzz and excitement. By tapping into consumers’ FOMO, brands create a fear of not having the exclusive item, leading to impulsive purchases and even waiting in long queues.

An in-depth analysis conducted by a major cosmetics company revealed that 70% of consumers who bought limited-edition products did so due to FOMO. Furthermore, the study found that consumers were inclined to share their purchases on social media platforms, seeking validation and admiration from their peers. Thus, FOMO not only influences purchase decisions but also contributes to the amplification of social status online.

Case Study 2: The Effect of FOMO on Travel Choices

The travel industry faces a unique challenge in catering to FOMO-driven decision-making. Consumers are bombarded with picturesque imagery of exotic destinations, luxurious resorts, and thrilling experiences. This abundance of options creates a sense of FOMO, as individuals fear missing out on the next best travel experience. Travel companies have capitalized on this psychological state by emphasizing “limited availability” and “exclusivity” in their marketing strategies.

A case study conducted by a prominent travel agency demonstrated the impact of FOMO on consumer behavior. They offered two identical vacation packages: Package A was available without any time restrictions, while Package B was advertised as limited to the first 50 bookings. Despite Package B being slightly more expensive, it received 70% more bookings within 48 hours. The fear of missing out on an exclusive opportunity significantly influenced consumers’ travel choices, even at an increased cost.

Mitigating FOMO:

As human-centered professionals, it is crucial to understand the phenomenon of FOMO and its impact on consumer decision-making. To cater to consumers effectively, brands should consider the following strategies:

1. Transparent Communication: Be open and honest with consumers, providing clear information about product availability or event schedules.

2. Curated Exclusivity: Offer limited-edition products or experiences thoughtfully, but without exploiting consumers’ FOMO. Ensure that exclusivity is based on genuine benefits rather than artificial scarcity.

3. Customer Empowerment: Encourage consumers to make decisions based on their true preferences, rather than succumbing to FOMO. Provide ample information, resources, and reviews to help them make well-informed choices.

Conclusion

Understanding the fear of missing out (FOMO) is essential for human-centered professionals to navigate the ever-changing consumer landscape effectively. By recognizing the psychological roots of FOMO and analyzing case studies, we can see its tangible impact on consumer decision-making. Brands that acknowledge and address FOMO while promoting transparency, curated exclusivity, and customer empowerment are more likely to build trust, loyalty, and meaningful connections with their audience, ultimately shaping a more conscious consumer culture.

SPECIAL BONUS: The very best change planners use a visual, collaborative approach to create their deliverables. A methodology and tools like those in Change Planning Toolkit™ can empower anyone to become great change planners themselves.

Image credit: Pixabay

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