Tag Archives: frameworks

Customer Experience Improvement

Leave a reply

A Complete Framework for Getting It Right

Customer Experience Improvement

by Braden Kelley and Art Inteligencia

Customer experience improvement is the most consequential and most frequently mismanaged investment in modern business. Organizations spend billions annually on CX improvement programs — new technology platforms, journey redesign initiatives, service training programs, personalization engines — and yet Forrester’s CX Index has declined for four consecutive years. The investment is going up. The experience is going down.

The problem is not that organizations don’t care about improving the customer experience. It is that they are improving the wrong things, in the wrong order, without a clear understanding of what is actually driving the outcomes they are trying to change.

This guide provides a practitioner’s framework for customer experience improvement that works — one grounded in accurate diagnosis, disciplined prioritization, and the cross-functional execution discipline that turns insight into measurable change.

What is Customer Experience Improvement?

Customer experience improvement is the systematic process of identifying where the current customer experience is falling short of customer expectations and competitive standards, and making targeted changes that measurably improve loyalty, retention, and revenue outcomes.

Three elements of this definition are frequently absent in practice:

Systematic — Most CX improvement is reactive rather than systematic. Organizations respond to the most recent customer complaint, the current quarter’s NPS dip, or the loudest internal advocate rather than working from a comprehensive, prioritized understanding of where improvement will generate the greatest return. Reactive improvement produces activity without consistently producing the right outcomes.

Falling short of customer expectations and competitive standards — Improvement is relative, not absolute. An experience that was excellent three years ago may be merely adequate today as customer expectations have risen and competitors have invested. CX improvement that measures itself only against internal benchmarks will fall behind organizations that measure themselves against the best available alternatives.

Measurably improve loyalty, retention, and revenue — The purpose of CX improvement is business outcomes, not better scores. Organizations that improve NPS while churn remains flat, or increase CSAT while expansion revenue stagnates, are improving metrics without improving the underlying customer relationship dynamics that drive financial performance.

Why Most CX Improvement Programs Fall Short

The failure modes of CX improvement programs are consistent and well-documented:

Improving what is easy to measure rather than what matters most
Organizations systematically over-invest in improving the touchpoints they are measuring — post-service CSAT, NPS at renewal, purchase satisfaction — and under-invest in the unmeasured journey stages that often drive the most important loyalty outcomes. 38% of customers feel they have had negative experiences with brands much more than brands think they do — a gap that exists precisely because the experiences customers find most frustrating are often the ones organizations aren’t measuring.

Technology before diagnosis
83% of companies working with CX consultants see positive ROI within 12 months — but the organizations that don’t are typically those that invested in CX technology without first understanding what the actual experience failures are. A personalization engine deployed on top of a broken onboarding experience produces a more personalized version of the same bad experience. Technology amplifies existing experience design; it does not substitute for diagnosis.

Touchpoint optimization without journey thinking
Improving individual touchpoints in isolation — better support chat, faster checkout, cleaner onboarding emails — often produces local improvements that don’t translate to loyalty gains. On average, customers utilize nine different contact points to interact with businesses, and their loyalty is determined by the cumulative journey experience, not the quality of any single interaction. Touchpoint improvement disconnected from journey context is the most common form of CX investment waste.

Improvement without ownership
In 2026, the differentiator is not bigger dashboards — it is faster fixes, clearer ownership, and visible follow-through. If experience data doesn’t drive visible change within 30 days, it’s not insight. CX improvement programs that produce reports without producing owners consistently fail to close the gap between diagnosis and action.

One-time initiatives rather than ongoing capability
Customer experience improvement is not a project — it is a management discipline. Organizations that treat experience improvement as a periodic initiative rather than an ongoing operational capability fall behind organizations that are continuously diagnosing and fixing experience failures. Customer expectations rise continuously. Competitive experience standards rise continuously. A CX improvement program that produces a one-time lift and then stops is not a CX improvement program — it is a CX event.

The Customer Experience Improvement Framework

Effective customer experience improvement follows a consistent framework regardless of industry, organization size, or the specific experience challenges being addressed:

Step 1: Diagnose Before You Prescribe

The foundation of every effective CX improvement program is an accurate, evidence-based understanding of where the experience is falling short — not what internal teams assume is falling short, but what customers are actually experiencing. This diagnosis requires three complementary perspectives:

The customer’s perspective — What do customers actually experience across the full journey? Where is friction accumulating? Which moments of truth are being handled adequately when they should be handled exceptionally? What are customers experiencing with competitors that they are not experiencing with you? This perspective requires direct customer research — interviews, journey walking, and observation — not just survey data.

The data perspective — What does the behavioral and operational data reveal? Where are the highest-contact touchpoints (indicating friction or failure)? Where are churn rates elevated by segment, channel, or cohort? Where is the gap between intended and actual experience visible in usage patterns, support volumes, and retention curves?

The competitive perspective — How does the experience compare to the best available alternatives? Where are you losing customers not on price but on experience quality? What are competitors doing better that your customers are now expecting from you? This perspective requires actually walking competitive experiences, not just monitoring competitive review scores.

A customer experience audit integrates all three perspectives into a single, comprehensive diagnostic — providing the accurate, evidence-based foundation that effective CX improvement requires.

Step 2: Prioritize by Revenue Impact

Not all experience failures are equally worth fixing. Effective CX improvement prioritizes investments by their estimated impact on the outcomes that matter most — customer loyalty, retention, and revenue — rather than by which failures are most visible, most recently complained about, or easiest to fix.

A rigorous prioritization framework evaluates each identified experience gap across three dimensions:

  • Frequency — How many customers encounter this experience failure? High-frequency failures affecting large portions of the customer base have proportionally higher revenue impact than low-frequency failures, regardless of individual severity
  • Loyalty impact — How significantly does this failure affect customer trust, satisfaction, and likelihood to stay and expand? Failures at moments of truth — onboarding, first service incident, renewal — typically have higher loyalty impact than equivalent failures at lower-stakes touchpoints
  • Competitive gap — Is this a failure where competitors are performing significantly better? Competitive gaps are more urgent than absolute failures — customers will tolerate imperfect experiences more readily when alternatives are equally imperfect

The highest-priority CX improvements are those that address high-frequency failures at high-loyalty-impact touchpoints where competitive alternatives are meaningfully better. These are the investments that produce the largest, most durable improvements in the outcomes organizations are trying to move.

Step 3: Fix the Root Cause, Not the Symptom

The most common and expensive CX improvement mistake is fixing symptoms rather than causes. High support contact volumes are a symptom — the root causes are the product failures, process gaps, and communication failures generating the contacts. Negative service satisfaction scores are a symptom — the root causes are the empowerment failures, system limitations, and escalation friction that prevent agents from resolving issues effectively.

Effective CX improvement traces every significant experience failure to its root cause — the upstream decision, design gap, or organizational misalignment that is producing the downstream customer impact — and invests in fixing the cause rather than managing the symptom. This approach is harder and slower than symptom management, but it is the only approach that produces durable improvement rather than temporary score recovery.

Root cause analysis for CX failures requires the same disciplines applied in operational contexts: asking “why” repeatedly until the underlying cause is identified, mapping the causal chain from customer experience to organizational behavior to structural decisions, and resisting the pressure to stop at the first plausible explanation.

Step 4: Design the Improved Experience

With root causes identified and prioritized, CX improvement requires deliberate experience design — not just removing what is broken, but designing the experience you intend to deliver in its place. This means applying the principles of human-centered design to the specific touchpoints and journey stages being improved:

Start with the customer’s goal — What is the customer trying to accomplish at this touchpoint? What would success look and feel like from their perspective? The improved experience should be designed from the customer’s goal outward, not from the organization’s process inward.

Prototype and test before implementing — The most effective CX improvements are tested with real customers before full implementation. Rapid prototyping — paper mockups, role plays, service simulations — surfaces problems and opportunities that design teams cannot anticipate from internal planning alone. A case study in the financial services sector highlights the measurable benefits of a CX-focused approach — by prioritizing customer satisfaction and aligning teams on CX responsibilities, one company reduced defections by 16% through targeted improvements.

Design for the emotional as well as the functional — The most durable CX improvements address both what customers can do (functional design) and how they feel doing it (emotional design). Functional improvements make the experience easier and more effective. Emotional improvements make customers feel more valued, more understood, and more confident. Both are necessary for the kind of loyalty that resists competitive alternatives.

Step 5: Implement with Cross-Functional Alignment

Most experience failures have cross-functional root causes — they exist at the intersections of product, operations, technology, and service rather than within a single function’s control. Fixing them requires cross-functional alignment and shared accountability that most organizations struggle to sustain.

The organizational prerequisites for effective CX improvement implementation are:

  • Executive sponsorship — CX improvements that require cross-functional coordination consistently stall without executive support that transcends functional boundaries
  • Named improvement owners — Every improvement initiative needs a specific owner with the authority and resources to execute it, not a committee with shared responsibility and no clear accountability
  • Cross-functional working groups — Improvement initiatives that touch multiple functions need a dedicated cross-functional team with representatives from each affected function and a clear mandate to solve the customer problem rather than protect functional turf
  • Clear success metrics — Every improvement initiative should have defined success metrics that connect the specific change to measurable customer and business outcomes

Step 6: Measure the Right Outcomes

The measure of CX improvement success is not better satisfaction scores — it is measurable improvement in the customer and business outcomes that satisfaction scores are supposed to predict. Effective CX improvement measurement connects each improvement initiative to its expected impact on:

  • Churn reduction in the affected customer segment
  • Support contact volume reduction at the improved touchpoint
  • NPS improvement among customers who have experienced the changed journey
  • Expansion revenue increase in the cohort most affected by the improvement
  • Customer effort reduction at the specific touchpoints redesigned

73% of CX leaders outperform competitors financially, generating 5.7x more revenue from superior experiences. The organizations generating these returns are not those with the best measurement frameworks — they are those whose measurements are connected to decisions and actions that actually change the experience.

Step 7: Build Continuous Improvement Capability

The final and most important step in customer experience improvement is building the organizational capability to improve continuously — not just executing a one-time improvement program, but embedding the diagnosis, prioritization, design, and measurement disciplines into how the organization operates on an ongoing basis.

88% of customers say that good service will likely make them purchase again — but the standard of “good” rises continuously as competitive experience quality improves. Organizations that build continuous improvement capability — regular journey reviews, systematic feedback integration, periodic experience audits, and ongoing competitive benchmarking — consistently outperform those that treat experience improvement as a periodic initiative.

7 Steps to Customer Experience Improvement Infographic

The Highest-Leverage CX Improvement Opportunities

While every organization’s specific improvement priorities will differ based on their experience audit findings, research consistently identifies several categories of improvement that generate disproportionately high returns across most industries:

Onboarding redesign
Onboarding is the highest-risk stage of the customer journey for experience failure — and one of the most consistently underinvested. Customers arrive with expectations shaped by the sales process and encounter the reality of implementation. Organizations that invest in onboarding redesign — shorter time to first value, clearer guidance, proactive success check-ins — consistently see significant improvements in 90-day retention and long-term expansion revenue.

Friction reduction in high-volume touchpoints
The touchpoints customers encounter most frequently — login, billing, routine service requests, account management — accumulate the most friction tax over the lifetime of a customer relationship. Small friction reductions at high-volume touchpoints produce large cumulative improvements in customer effort scores and loyalty metrics.

Service recovery excellence
The service recovery paradox — that customers who experience a well-handled issue become more loyal than customers who never had an issue — remains well-documented in 2026. Organizations that invest in transforming their service recovery from adequate to genuinely excellent — empowering agents to resolve problems completely, proactively communicating when things go wrong, and following up after resolution — consistently generate significant loyalty improvements from a relatively targeted investment.

Proactive communication at high-risk moments
By 2026, 40% of customer service organizations will adopt proactive strategies, enabling them to anticipate needs, resolve issues before they escalate, and contribute directly to revenue growth. Proactive outreach at the moments customers are most likely to struggle — early in onboarding, during known product issues, at renewal — prevents the passive experience failures that accumulate into churn decisions without ever generating a complaint.

Consistency improvement across channels
73% of consumers desire the ability to seamlessly transition between different communication channels. Customers who have excellent experiences in some channels and poor experiences in others develop uncertainty that suppresses engagement and loyalty. Closing the consistency gap — bringing lower-performing channels up to the standard of higher-performing ones — produces broad-based loyalty improvements across the affected customer base.

CX Improvement Opportunities Infographic

How a Customer Experience Audit Accelerates CX Improvement

The single most common reason CX improvement programs underperform is that they are built on an incomplete or inaccurate picture of what the experience actually is and where the highest-value improvement opportunities lie. Internal knowledge, survey data, and VoC programs all provide useful signals — but they systematically miss the silent majority of customers who have poor experiences without complaining, the competitive gaps that customers experience without articulating, and the journey stage failures that drive churn without generating a negative survey response.

A customer experience audit provides the complete, accurate diagnostic foundation that CX improvement requires — walking the actual customer journey across all touchpoints, comparing it against competitive alternatives, quantifying the revenue impact of identified gaps, and producing a prioritized improvement roadmap that connects experience investment to business outcomes.

Organizations that invest in an experience audit before building their CX improvement program consistently achieve better outcomes than those that build on internal assumptions alone — because they are fixing the right things rather than the most visible things, in the right order rather than the most convenient order, with a clear understanding of the competitive and financial stakes of each improvement decision.

Frequently Asked Questions About Customer Experience Improvement

What is customer experience improvement?

Customer experience improvement is the systematic process of identifying where the current customer experience is falling short of customer expectations and competitive standards, and making targeted changes that measurably improve loyalty, retention, and revenue outcomes. Effective CX improvement is grounded in accurate diagnosis of actual experience failures — not internal assumptions — prioritizes investments by their revenue impact rather than their visibility or ease, fixes root causes rather than symptoms, and measures success by business outcomes rather than satisfaction scores.

How do you improve customer experience?

Improving customer experience effectively requires seven steps: accurately diagnose where the experience is falling short through customer research, journey walking, and competitive benchmarking; prioritize improvements by their revenue impact rather than their visibility; trace failures to root causes rather than symptoms; design the improved experience from the customer’s goal outward using human-centered design principles; implement with cross-functional alignment and named improvement owners; measure success by business outcomes (churn reduction, expansion revenue, NPS improvement) rather than activity metrics; and build continuous improvement capability so that experience quality rises consistently rather than only after a one-time initiative.

What are the most effective ways to improve customer experience?

The highest-leverage CX improvements across most industries are: onboarding redesign (reducing time to first value and improving early success rates); friction reduction at high-volume touchpoints (where small improvements produce large cumulative loyalty gains); service recovery excellence (transforming adequate resolution into genuinely impressive recovery that builds rather than merely repairs trust); proactive communication at high-risk moments (preventing the passive failures that accumulate into churn decisions without generating a complaint); and consistency improvement across channels (closing the gap between high-performing and low-performing touchpoints to reduce the uncertainty that suppresses engagement and loyalty).

Why do customer experience improvement programs fail?

CX improvement programs most commonly fail for five reasons: improving what is easy to measure rather than what matters most; investing in technology before diagnosing what the actual experience failures are; optimizing individual touchpoints without considering the journey context they exist within; producing insights without assigning clear improvement ownership and timelines; and treating improvement as a one-time initiative rather than an ongoing management discipline. The organizations that generate the strongest financial returns from CX investment are those that address all five failure modes — building systematic, owned, continuously improving programs grounded in accurate experience diagnosis.

How do you measure customer experience improvement?

The most important principle in measuring CX improvement is connecting improvements to business outcomes rather than just satisfaction scores. Effective measurement tracks churn reduction in the affected customer segment, support contact volume reduction at improved touchpoints, NPS improvement among customers who experienced the changed journey, expansion revenue increase in the most affected cohort, and customer effort reduction at redesigned touchpoints. Organizations that demonstrate how CX improvement drives revenue, retention, and profitability are 29% more likely to secure sustained CX investment — making business-outcome measurement not just analytically valuable but organizationally necessary.

How does a customer experience audit support CX improvement?

A customer experience audit provides the complete, accurate diagnostic foundation that CX improvement requires — walking the actual customer journey across all touchpoints, comparing it against competitive alternatives, and quantifying the revenue impact of identified gaps. Without this foundation, CX improvement programs are built on internal assumptions that systematically miss the experience failures customers have without complaining, the competitive gaps they experience without articulating, and the journey stage failures that drive churn without generating a negative survey response. Organizations that invest in an experience audit before building their improvement program consistently fix the right things in the right order, producing better outcomes than those that improve based on the most visible or most recently complained-about failures.

Ready to build a CX improvement program on a foundation of accurate diagnosis? Start with an Experience Audit →

Content Authenticity Statement: The topic area, key elements to focus on, etc. were decisions made by Braden Kelley, with a little help from Claude and Google Gemini to clean up the article, add images and create infographics.

Image credits: Google Gemini

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

Innovation Frameworks

Leave a reply

A Practitioner’s Guide to the Most Important Models

Innovation Frameworks

by Braden Kelley and Art Inteligencia

Every organization wants to innovate. Few do it consistently. The difference is almost never creativity — most organizations have more ideas than they can act on. The difference is structure: a repeatable way of thinking about innovation that aligns effort with strategy, channels creative energy toward real opportunities, and builds the organizational capability to innovate continuously rather than occasionally.

That’s what an innovation framework provides. And after two decades of working with organizations on innovation and change — and developing my own frameworks including the Eight I’s of Infinite Innovation, the Value Innovation Framework, and the Human-Centered Innovation Toolkit™ — I’ve developed strong views on which frameworks work, which ones fall short, and how to choose the right one for your situation.

This guide covers the most important innovation frameworks in use today, what each one does well, where each one is limited, and how to choose the right framework for your organization’s specific innovation challenge.

What is an Innovation Framework?

An innovation framework is a structured approach that helps organizations systematically identify opportunities, generate and evaluate ideas, and move from concept to implemented value. A good innovation framework does three things: it provides a common language that aligns leaders, teams, and stakeholders around what innovation means and how it works in your context; it sequences the activities of innovation so that effort is directed toward the highest-value opportunities; and it builds repeatable capability — so that innovation becomes a way of working rather than a periodic event.

The most important thing to understand about innovation frameworks is that no single framework covers all types of innovation equally well. Frameworks that excel at incremental product improvement are not designed for disruptive business model innovation. Frameworks built for startup environments don’t always transfer to large, complex organizations. The first step in choosing a framework is understanding what type of innovation challenge you are actually facing.

The Most Important Innovation Frameworks

McKinsey’s Three Horizons Framework

Developed at McKinsey and popularized in the book The Alchemy of Growth, the Three Horizons Framework helps organizations balance their innovation portfolio across three time horizons:

  • Horizon 1 — Extending and defending the core business. Incremental improvements to existing products, services, and business models. Typically 70% of innovation investment.
  • Horizon 2 — Building emerging businesses. Adjacent opportunities that leverage existing capabilities in new markets or segments. Typically 20% of innovation investment.
  • Horizon 3 — Creating genuinely new options. Transformative innovations that may cannibalize the core business or create entirely new markets. Typically 10% of innovation investment.

Strengths: The most useful framework for having conversations about innovation investment allocation at the executive level. Forces organizations to acknowledge that they need different innovation approaches for different time horizons, and that Horizon 3 work requires protection from the short-term pressures that dominate Horizon 1 management.

Limitations: The 70-20-10 split is a guideline, not a rule — and organizations in different competitive situations need different allocations. The framework also doesn’t tell you how to innovate within each horizon, just how to allocate investment across them. And the original framework assumed horizons of roughly 0-2, 2-5, and 5+ years — in fast-moving industries today, those timeframes may be compressed significantly.

Best for: Portfolio strategy, investment allocation conversations, and helping leadership teams understand why protecting Horizon 3 work from Horizon 1 pressures is essential.

Jobs to Be Done (JTBD)

Developed by Clayton Christensen and refined by Tony Ulwick and Bob Moesta, Jobs to Be Done reframes the innovation question from “what product should we build?” to “what job are customers hiring this product to do?” The insight is that customers don’t buy products — they hire them to make progress in specific circumstances, and understanding the underlying job opens innovation opportunities that product-focused thinking misses entirely.

Strengths: The most powerful framework available for identifying genuinely unmet customer needs and generating breakthrough product and service concepts. The “milkshake marketing” insight — that people hired McDonald’s milkshakes for a morning commute job, not a dessert job — is one of the most cited examples in innovation literature because it illustrates how different JTBD thinking is from conventional market research. JTBD consistently surfaces opportunities that product roadmaps and voice-of-customer surveys miss.

Limitations: Requires significant qualitative research skill to apply well. The interviews and observation needed to surface real jobs-to-be-done are more demanding than standard customer research. JTBD also doesn’t provide a framework for the full innovation process — it’s an insight methodology, not an end-to-end innovation system.

Best for: Product and service innovation, identifying white space opportunities, and challenging assumptions about why customers actually use your products.

Lean Startup

Developed by Eric Ries and drawing on Toyota’s lean manufacturing principles, the Lean Startup framework centers on the Build-Measure-Learn loop: build a minimum viable product (MVP), measure how real customers respond, and learn whether to persevere with the current direction or pivot to a different approach. The core insight is that the biggest risk in innovation is building something nobody wants — and that risk is best mitigated through rapid, cheap experimentation rather than elaborate upfront planning.

Strengths: The most influential innovation framework of the past two decades in the startup world, and increasingly in corporate innovation. The MVP concept has genuinely changed how organizations think about early-stage development. Lean Startup’s emphasis on validated learning — testing assumptions with real customers before significant investment — reduces the waste that kills most innovation programs.

Limitations: Developed for startup environments and doesn’t fully account for the complexity of large organization constraints — governance requirements, brand risk, organizational politics, and the need to coordinate across functions. “Move fast and break things” works differently when you are breaking an established brand or regulatory relationship. Also focuses primarily on product and technology innovation rather than business model or organizational innovation.

Best for: New product development, digital product and service innovation, and any context where rapid experimentation and validated learning are possible.

Disruptive Innovation Framework

Clayton Christensen’s theory of disruptive innovation describes how new entrants typically begin by serving overlooked, over-served, or non-consuming segments with simpler, cheaper solutions — and then move upmarket over time, eventually displacing established players who were focused on serving their most profitable customers. The framework provides a lens for understanding competitive threats that conventional competitive analysis misses.

Strengths: The most powerful framework for understanding how industries are disrupted and for identifying both threats and opportunities from disruptive dynamics. Helps established organizations avoid the innovator’s dilemma — the tendency to dismiss disruptive threats as irrelevant to their core market until it is too late.

Limitations: Better as a diagnostic and strategic lens than as a practical innovation process. The framework tells you where disruption is likely to come from and why, but doesn’t tell you what to do about it. Also, the theory has been misapplied so frequently — with “disruptive” used as a synonym for any significant innovation — that it has lost some of its precision.

Best for: Competitive analysis, strategic planning, and helping leadership teams understand the threats they are systematically underestimating.

Open Innovation

Coined by Henry Chesbrough, open innovation describes a model in which organizations use both internal and external ideas and paths to market to advance their innovation. Rather than relying solely on internal R&D, open innovation deliberately leverages external partners — startups, universities, customers, suppliers, and even competitors — to access capabilities and ideas that would take too long or cost too much to develop internally.

Strengths: Dramatically expands the innovation surface area available to an organization. Companies like Procter & Gamble, whose Connect + Develop program targeted sourcing 50% of innovations from outside the company, demonstrated that open innovation can transform both the scale and velocity of an innovation program. Particularly powerful for organizations that need to access rapidly evolving technology capabilities.

Limitations: Requires significant organizational capability to manage external relationships, evaluate external ideas, and integrate external technologies without destroying their value. The “not invented here” syndrome — the organizational immune system’s tendency to reject external ideas — is a powerful force that many open innovation programs underestimate. Also raises complex IP and partnership issues.

Best for: Technology-intensive industries, organizations seeking to accelerate innovation velocity, and any context where the external innovation ecosystem is moving faster than internal R&D can match.

Design Thinking

Formalized at Stanford’s d.school and popularized by IDEO, design thinking is a human-centered, iterative problem-solving methodology built around five stages: Empathize, Define, Ideate, Prototype, and Test. At its core, design thinking insists that innovation must begin with deep understanding of the people being served — not with technology capabilities or product roadmaps.

Strengths: The best framework available for ensuring that innovation addresses real human needs. Design thinking’s emphasis on empathy and prototyping has genuinely changed how organizations approach product and service development. The methodology transfers well beyond product design to organizational change, service design, and public policy — anywhere that complex human-centered problems need to be solved creatively. For a full treatment, see our guide to the design thinking process.

Limitations: The Empathize and Define stages require significant time investment that organizations under delivery pressure often shortcut — producing the tool’s use without its value. Design thinking also doesn’t address the full innovation pipeline beyond concept validation: scaling, organizational alignment, and change management are outside its scope.

Best for: Product and service innovation, organizational change design, and any context where the problem is not fully understood and human needs are the primary design constraint.

Braden Kelley’s Innovation Frameworks

After applying and observing the frameworks above across hundreds of organizations, I developed my own frameworks to address the gaps I consistently encountered — particularly the absence of frameworks designed for building continuous innovation capability rather than managing individual innovation projects.

The Eight I’s of Infinite Innovation

The Eight I’s of Infinite Innovation is a continuous innovation framework built around eight interconnected elements: Inspiration, Insight, Ideation, Invention, Implementation, Illumination, Improvements, and Infinity. Unlike project-based innovation frameworks, the Eight I’s is designed to be a perpetual cycle — the outputs of one round become the inputs for the next, creating a self-reinforcing engine of continuous innovation rather than a series of discrete projects.

The framework is particularly suited to organizations transitioning from a product-centered to a customer needs-centered structure — where innovation must be ongoing and adaptive rather than periodic and planned. The Eight I’s is most powerful when combined with the Value Innovation Framework, which provides the strategic lens for determining which opportunities are worth pursuing. Read more about the Eight I’s of Infinite Innovation →

Eight I's of Infinite Innovation

The Value Innovation Framework

The Value Innovation Framework addresses the question that most innovation frameworks leave unanswered: will this innovation actually succeed in the market? Most frameworks focus on generating and validating ideas, but provide little guidance on predicting whether an innovation will achieve real-world adoption. The Value Innovation Framework fills that gap with a simple but powerful equation:

Innovation = Value Creation × Value Access × Value Translation

The components are multiplicative, not additive — which is the key insight. Do two of the three brilliantly and one poorly, and the innovation can still fail. All three must be executed well for an innovation to succeed:

Value Creation — The innovation must create incremental or entirely new value large enough to overcome the switching costs of moving from the old solution (including the “Do Nothing” option). New value can be created by making something more efficient, more effective, possible that wasn’t possible before, or by creating new psychological or emotional benefits. If the value created doesn’t exceed the friction of switching, adoption won’t happen regardless of how well the other two components are executed.

Value Access — Also thought of as friction reduction. How easy is it for people to access, use, and do business around the new solution? A highly valuable innovation that is difficult to access, purchase, integrate, or use will fail. Value Access covers the full spectrum of friction that stands between a customer and the value an innovation creates — distribution, pricing, integration complexity, learning curve, and switching costs.

Value Translation — How well does the innovation communicate its value in terms that resonate with the people it is designed for? Apple’s iPad launch illustrates this perfectly: the initial announcement failed to translate the value clearly, putting the launch at risk — until a single Out of Home advertisement showing a person relaxing with an iPad on their lap communicated in seconds what no amount of technical specification could. Value Translation is about helping people understand how the innovation fits into their lives, not just what it does.

The Value Innovation Framework is an innovation success prediction tool — it can be applied to evaluate existing innovations, diagnose why past innovations failed, and guide the development of new ones. It is most powerful when combined with the Eight I’s of Infinite Innovation – which can be downloaded as an 11″ x 17″ reference for free here. Read the full treatment in Innovation Is All About Value →

Value Innovation Framework

The Human-Centered Innovation Toolkit™

The Human-Centered Innovation Toolkit™ is the most comprehensive of my innovation frameworks — a complete system for building innovation capability inside organizations. It draws on the best of design thinking, jobs to be done, and lean startup while adding the organizational change management dimension that none of those frameworks adequately address.

The central insight driving the toolkit is that innovation programs fail most often not because of insufficient creativity or inadequate process, but because the organizational change required to implement innovations is underestimated and under-managed. The Human-Centered Innovation Toolkit™ integrates the innovation process with the change management process — giving organizations a single system for generating validated concepts and successfully implementing them.

How to Choose the Right Innovation Framework

The right framework depends on your innovation challenge, organizational context, and where you are in the innovation process. Use this guide to match your situation to the most appropriate approach:

Your situation Best framework(s)
Deciding how to allocate innovation investment across time horizons Three Horizons Framework
Identifying unmet customer needs and white space opportunities Jobs to Be Done
Validating new product concepts quickly and cheaply Lean Startup
Understanding competitive disruption threats Disruptive Innovation Framework
Accessing external innovation capabilities and ideas Open Innovation
Solving complex human-centered problems Design Thinking
Building continuous innovation capability across the organization Eight I’s of Infinite Innovation + Value Innovation Framework
Integrating innovation and change management into a single system Human-Centered Innovation Toolkit™
Full-spectrum innovation from insight to implementation Human-Centered Innovation Toolkit™ + Change Planning Toolkit™

Most organizations benefit from combining frameworks rather than selecting one exclusively. The Three Horizons gives you the portfolio lens. Jobs to Be Done gives you the customer insight. Design Thinking gives you the problem-solving process. Lean Startup gives you the validation methodology. The Human-Centered Innovation Toolkit™ ties them together with the organizational change capability that determines whether any of them actually produce results at scale.

The Most Common Reasons Innovation Frameworks Fail

Even the best innovation framework will fail if applied poorly. Here are the most common failure modes I’ve observed across organizations:

Selecting frameworks based on trend rather than fit. Design thinking is enormously popular. That doesn’t mean it’s the right framework for every innovation challenge. Before selecting a framework, diagnose your actual situation — what type of innovation are you pursuing, what is your primary constraint, and what organizational capability do you most need to build?

Treating frameworks as one-time events. A design thinking workshop is not a design thinking capability. A Lean Startup bootcamp is not a Lean Startup organization. Frameworks only build organizational capability when they are practiced repeatedly, supported by leadership, and embedded in how work actually gets done — not when they are run as standalone events.

Ignoring the organizational change dimension. Every significant innovation requires organizational change to implement — changes to processes, structures, skills, culture, and resource allocation. Most innovation frameworks are silent on this dimension, which is why so many validated concepts never get implemented. Building an innovation framework without a corresponding change management approach is the single most common reason innovation programs produce learning but not results.

Applying corporate constraints to startup frameworks. Lean Startup and Design Thinking were developed for environments where speed, flexibility, and risk tolerance are high. Large organizations often apply these frameworks while maintaining governance structures, approval chains, and risk management processes that fundamentally undermine the methodologies’ core principles. The frameworks need to be adapted for corporate environments, not applied verbatim.

Under-investing in the human side. The best innovation frameworks are collaborative, not expert-driven. They are designed to be used with the teams and stakeholders who will implement innovations, not by consultants or innovation functions who deliver conclusions to leadership. Organizations that use frameworks as expert tools rather than collaborative platforms consistently get lower-quality insights, lower ownership, and lower implementation rates.

Top Reasons Innovation Frameworks Fail

Frequently Asked Questions About Innovation Frameworks

What is an innovation framework?

An innovation framework is a structured approach that helps organizations systematically identify opportunities, generate and evaluate ideas, and move from concept to implemented value. It provides a common language for talking about innovation, a sequence of activities for managing the innovation process, and a set of principles that reflect how successful innovation actually works. The best innovation frameworks are adapted to the specific type of innovation challenge an organization faces — there is no single framework that is right for all situations.

What are the most widely used innovation frameworks?

The most widely used innovation frameworks include McKinsey’s Three Horizons Framework (for portfolio allocation), Jobs to Be Done (for identifying unmet customer needs), Lean Startup (for rapid concept validation), Disruptive Innovation (for competitive strategy), Open Innovation (for accessing external ideas and capabilities), and Design Thinking (for human-centered problem solving). Most experienced innovation leaders use multiple frameworks in combination rather than relying on any single approach, selecting frameworks based on the specific innovation challenge at hand.

What is the difference between an innovation framework and an innovation process?

An innovation framework is a broader conceptual structure — a set of principles, lenses, and approaches that guide how an organization thinks about and pursues innovation. An innovation process is more specific — a defined sequence of steps, activities, and decision points for managing innovation from idea to implementation. Most innovation frameworks include or imply a process, but the framework encompasses more than the process: it includes the mindsets, organizational capabilities, and strategic logic that determine whether the process produces results.

How do you build an innovation framework for your organization?

Building an innovation framework for your organization involves four steps. First, diagnose your actual innovation challenge — are you trying to improve the core business, explore adjacent opportunities, or develop transformative new capabilities? Different challenges require different frameworks. Second, select the frameworks that best fit your challenge and organizational context. Third, adapt those frameworks to your specific environment — accounting for your governance requirements, risk tolerance, and organizational culture. Fourth, build the organizational capability to use the frameworks consistently over time, not just as one-time events. This requires leadership support, training, embedded practice, and the organizational change management capability to implement what the frameworks reveal.

Why do innovation frameworks fail in large organizations?

Innovation frameworks fail in large organizations most often for four reasons: they are applied as one-time events rather than ongoing practices; they are selected based on trend rather than fit; they ignore the organizational change dimension required to implement innovations; and they are applied by expert consultants rather than collaboratively with the teams who will execute the work. The organizations that get the most value from innovation frameworks are those that adapt them to their specific context, practice them consistently, and invest equally in the change management capability needed to turn innovation concepts into implemented results.

Content Authenticity Statement: The topic area, key elements to focus on, etc. were decisions made by Braden Kelley, with a little help from Claude and Google Gemini to clean up the article, add images and create infographics.

Image credits: Google Gemini

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

OKRs vs. KPIs: Choosing the Right Framework for Innovation

Leave a reply

OKRs vs. KPIs: Choosing the Right Framework for Innovation

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In the world of innovation, measuring success is as crucial as the innovation process itself (a powerful one being The Eight I’s of Infinite Innovation from Braden Kelley). Among the most popular tools for tracking progress are OKRs (Objectives and Key Results) and KPIs (Key Performance Indicators). Though they often appear interchangeable, each serves distinct purposes and can significantly impact the direction and success of innovation initiatives. So, how do we choose the right framework for fostering innovation?

Understanding OKRs and KPIs

OKRs are a framework that sets ambitious objectives linked with quantifiable key results. Invented by Intel and popularized by Google, OKRs encourage stretching beyond comfort zones to achieve groundbreaking advances.

“OKRs are not about spreadsheets. They are about focused and inspired work.” – John Doerr

KPIs, on the other hand, are metrics used to evaluate the performance of organizations, employees, or particular activities. They are generally well-defined and are used to track targets and processes that are stable and need consistency.

Case Study 1: Google – The Triumph of OKRs

Google’s remarkable growth and innovation can, in part, be attributed to its successful use of OKRs. Larry Page and Sergey Brin adopted OKRs from Intel, aiming to balance daunting aspirations with precise actions.

In a pivotal instance, Google aimed to “organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.” The associated key results included increasing the number of pages indexed and enhancing user satisfaction through a streamlined user interface. This clear alignment of bold objectives and tangible results spurred innovation without stifling creativity, showcasing the transformative power of OKRs.

Case Study 2: A Traditional Manufacturer – The Stability of KPIs

Consider a traditional manufacturing company focused on operational efficiency and quality control. Here, KPIs are indispensable for maintaining precision and reliability in production.

The company aimed to reduce waste and improve product quality. By utilizing KPIs such as scrap rate, production downtime, and customer defect rate, they implemented incremental improvements that led to significant cost savings and enhanced quality.

This structure allowed them to consistently meet customer expectations and stay competitive, showcasing how KPIs serve businesses prioritizing stability and incremental innovation.

When to Use OKRs

OKRs shine in environments where transformative change is sought. Think of startups, tech firms, or any company looking to disrupt the status quo. OKRs encourage risk-taking, freeing teams to explore uncharted territories. They are ideal for organizations that embrace experimentation and are willing to pivot based on insights and discoveries.

When to Use KPIs

KPIs are optimal for situations that require reliability, consistency, and precise tracking. They fit well in established processes where steady improvement and performance monitoring are crucial. Industries like manufacturing, logistics, or healthcare, where the margin for error is minimal, benefit greatly from KPIs.

Integrating OKRs and KPIs for Holistic Innovation

Rather than choosing between OKRs and KPIs, consider blending them. Organizations can leverage the ambitious spirit of OKRs while grounding them with the stable, measurable metrics of KPIs.

For instance, a tech company could set ambitious OKRs to innovate a new product line with radical features, using KPIs to monitor development timelines, budget adherence, and defect rates. Such integration ensures a balance between aspiration and accountability, driving sustainable innovation.

Conclusion

The choice between OKRs and KPIs ultimately hinges on your organizational objectives, industry demands, and desired outcomes. Understanding their intrinsic differences and strategic applications is paramount in optimizing innovation effectiveness.

By carefully considering your framework choice and exploring the potential of combining these tools, businesses can foster an innovative culture that is both adventurous and accountable, paving the way for sustained success.

Innovation thrives on clarity, ambition, and measurable outcomes. Whether through OKRs, KPIs, or a tailor-made blend, harnessing the right framework is key to nurturing the next breakthrough.

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: Pexels

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

Outcome-Driven Change (ODC)

4 Replies

Outcome-Driven Change (ODC)

When it comes to business, many people would say it is outcomes that truly matter, especially investors on wall street. Investors don’t care what kind of software you’re running or what your stack looks like, or how you do what you do, as long as you deliver the financial outcomes they are looking for in order to earn a return on their investment.

Doctors also focus on outcomes and insurance companies are becoming obsessed with them, forcing doctors and customers into Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs). In healthcare, the outcomes obsession is called Outcomes-Based Management or Outcomes-Based Healthcare. In education, the outcomes obsession has led to an obsession with standardized testing and a practice called Outcomes-Based Education (OBE).

And in the innovation space, Tony Ulwick and Strategyn created Outcomes-Driven Innovation (ODI). In the innovation space this approach can be very beneficial as it helps companies move away from asking questions like “What can this technology do?” to questions that create better outcomes and more value, questions like “What is the customer trying to do?” or “What is the job to be done (JTBD)?”

Whether it is healthcare, education, business, or innovation, a focus on outcomes can be very helpful, but in these contexts we are looking at managing to a certain set of outcomes, or improving a certain set of outcomes, at a fixed point in time.

In the area of organizational change however, the focus often is not on outcomes, but on behaviors. Far too much of the literature and practice focuses on behavior change, which could also be described as “what people do.” And this focus on behaviors instead of aligning thoughts, feelings, behaviors and outcomes is part of why up to 70% of change efforts fail.

Too many people are jumping in head first and not approaching organizational change holistically, having the tough conversations around not only around how behaviors (doing) need to change but also how the how the outcomes need to change, along with how people’s thoughts and feelings need to change.

And when it comes to organizational change, we are not trying to achieve a certain set of outcomes or optimize a certain set of outcomes, but instead to ascertain what the relevant outcomes are in the current state and what we want them to become in the future state.

To help change leaders work though these incredibly necessary conversations and to help change managers achieve alignment within the organization around how all four components need to change (outcomes, thinking, feeling, doing) as part of a planned and coordinated effort, I have created the Outcome-Driven Change (ODC) Framework and worksheet to add to the Change Planning Toolkit™ v7 for existing subscribers and new subscribers alike.

Change is Possible

Thinking, feeling, doing…

People have been linking these terms together since at least 1895 when E.W. Scripture released an interesting book titled Thinking, Feeling, Doing on how scientists conduct research affecting these three parts of our humanity. Many people have added to the conversation since then speaking about how we are of three minds (Merriam-Webster dictionary definitions below), which are the:

1. Cognitive

Of, relating to, being, or involving conscious intellectual activity (such as thinking, reasoning, or remembering)

2. Affective

Relating to, arising from, or influencing feelings or emotions

3. Conative

An inclination (such as an instinct, a drive, a wish, or a craving) to act purposefully

Not coincidentally, these match up with the three domains of learning, defined as early as 1956 by educational psychologist Benjamin Bloom.

Others like to ascribe these three elements of humanity into Mind, Body, and Soul.

The key thing to remember from all of this discussion is that we are speaking about three very distinct things:

  1. Thinking
  2. Feeling
  3. Doing

IT IS possible, and happens with surprising frequency, that all three are not in agreement when you are dealing with human beings. Which the obvious truth of course is that in any change effort, or project for that matter, you are. People are fully capable of thinking one thing, feeling another, and end up doing something totally incongruent with either OR both whatever they are thinking and feeling. Confused yet?

Author F. Scott Fitzgerald once famously said:

“The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.”

This is one reason why change of any kind, organizational or personal, is so hard. Because, in order to be successful you must achieve alignment between all three elements of human reaction to the change in order to achieve the outcomes you seek.

Hopefully I’ve captured all of this in this single image of the Outcome-Driven Change Framework and this single quote from it:

“When what people do aligns with what they think and feel, then and only then, will you achieve the outcomes you’re looking for.”

Outcome-Driven Change Framework by Braden Kelley

In the Change Planning Toolkit™ v7 paying subscribers will find 11″x17″versions of this framework and the Outcome-Driven Change™ Worksheet to help your change planning team guide the conversations with change leaders that will help you surface the outcomes you’re currently achieving and what people in the organization are thinking, feeling, and doing to create the current outcomes and what members of the organization will need to think, feel, and do in order to achieve the new set of outcomes that you determine are necessary for the change to be successful.

People purchasing a commercial license and organizations or governments purchasing a site license or city/state/country license will get access to a poster size version (35″x56″) of the Outcome-Driven Change Worksheet.

This is just a taste of the kinds of frameworks, worksheets, and other tools you will find in the Change Planning Toolkit™ that I introduced in my latest book Charting Change along with a lot of great case studies and other next practices shared by some of the leading minds in the areas of organizational change and innovation.

So what are you waiting for?

  1. Get started using the Outcome-Driven Change Framework to spark dialogue among your change planning and leadership teams
  2. Download the 10 free tools from the Change Planning Toolkit™
  3. Grab your copy of Charting Change and get access to even more tools for free from the Change Planning Toolkit™ (including the Change Planning Canvas™)
  4. And then when you’re ready, get a license to all the rest of the 50+ frameworks, worksheets and other tools, and beat the 70% change failure rate!

Still have questions about how the Change Planning Toolkit™ can help your organization get better at change?

Then please contact me!

Or check out the Introduction to the Change Planning Toolkit™ webinar below:




Accelerate your change and transformation success

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

What’s Next – The Human-Centered Innovation Toolkit™

Leave a reply

What's Next - The Human-Centered Innovation Toolkit™… and a new Innovation Intervention service.

People have been asking me recently – What’s next?

I think managers and leaders are wondering now that I’ve written two popular books (Charting Change and Stoking Your Innovation Bonfire) and a chapter in a third (A Guide to Open Innovation and Crowdsourcing), if I’ll ever write another book.

But, they’re also curious given all the great tools in the Change Planning Toolkit™ that can fundamentally transform how we plan our projects and change initiatives, helping individuals and organizations move beyond theory to practice, whether I’ll ever create anything similar to help companies increase their innovation success.

The answer to both questions is a resounding YES!

I am pursuing, in parallel, the Define, Design, and Develop phases on a number of different tools to form the basis of a Human-Centered Innovation Toolkit™ for organizations to leverage in pursuit of my evolution of value innovation.

If you’ve attended one of my innovation keynotes or workshops you’ve seen how my innovation viewpoint (Innovation is All About Value) leads to all types of innovation, including disruptive innovation, and how it links to LEAN methodologies so that organizations can organize and execute across the entire spectrum of improvement and innovation possibilities.

Some of my most recent clients, including The Bank of Montreal and OSF Healthcare, have received an advance preview of some of the early components of the upcoming Human-Centered Innovation Toolkit™.

At the same time, I am also finishing efforts to define a new Innovation Intervention service offering to help organizations who have started an innovation effort or built an innovation program, only to see it go off the rails. I will work with organizations in an Innovation Intervention to help them get back on track towards success and build a foundation capable of sustaining continuous innovation. Forward-thinking organizations that haven’t begun an innovation program or a focus on innovation and want to get off to a strong start will be able to leverage this upcoming Innovation Intervention service too.

Finally, when I do write a third book, it will probably dig deeper into how to build an organization wired for continuous change, including successfully executing a digital transformation and sustaining full spectrum innovation and improvement excellence.

So, this is what’s next.

If you’d like to find out more about my Innovation Intervention or Human-Centered Innovation Toolkit™ in advance of their launch, in order to get a jump on your competition, please contact me.

Stay tuned for more information on these efforts soon!

Innovation Audit from Braden Kelley

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

10 Free Change Planning Tools

Leave a reply

Get Your 10 Free Change Planning ToolsHave you downloaded your ten free change planning tools?

NEWSFLASH: I’ve added sample QuickStart Guide content to the download package, so if you’ve already downloaded the 10 Free Change Planning Tools, you’ll want to download them again to get this bonus content.

Research shows that 70% of change efforts fail. There are many reasons why, including that many people find the planning of a change effort overwhelming and lack tools for making the process more visual, collaborative and human.

Following the successful launch of my latest book Charting Change and a suite of tools called the Change Planning Toolkit™, I have made several access levels available to spread the methodology and help get everyone literally on the same page for change:

Get 10 Free Downloads from the Change Planning Toolkit™I am making 10 free change planning tools from the toolkit available as 11″x17″ downloads along with JUST ADDED sample content from the QuickStart Guide,
Get 26 of the 50+ Change Planning Toolkit™ toolsbut book buyers will get access to the Change Planning Toolkit™ Basic License (26 of 50 tools) at 11″x17″ size — a $500 value,
Get all 50+ tools in the Change Planning Toolkit™and buyers of the Change Planning Toolkit™ Bronze License will get access to all 50+ tools for individual educational use at an 11″x17″ size — a $1,200 value.

Change Planning Toolkit Levels and Free Downloads

I am very excited to share with you the Change Planning Toolkit™, including the popular Visual Project Charter™, Change Planning Canvas™ and many other great tools for increasing your change success!

Increase your consulting revenue or your organizational agility and get a jump on your competition!

Click here to get your 10 Free Change Planning Tools

Site licenses are available for professional or commercial use starting at $2/yr per employee*, and include access to poster size versions of many of the tools (35″x56″).

*Bronze Site Licenses have a one-time setup fee of $299. Site License fee based on total number of employees in the organization.

Below you’ll find a downloadable presentation that gives you five reasons to invest in the Change Planning Toolkit™:

Click here to get your 10 Free Change Planning Tools
Sign up for the latest news and alerts

Click on the tool name to read the article about each of the 10 Free Change Planning Tools:

  1. Five Keys to Successful Change
  2. Architecting the Organization for Change
  3. Building a Global Sensing Network
  4. Visual Project Charter™
  5. Motivation Ability Worksheet
  6. PCC Change Readiness Framework
  7. Eight I’s of Infinite Innovation™
  8. ACMP Standard for Change Management® (Visualization)
  9. Organizational Agility Framework
  10. The Eleven Change Roles™


Accelerate your change and transformation success

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

Eight I’s of Infinite Innovation – Revisited

Leave a reply

Eight I's of Infinite Innovation

Some authors talk about successful innovation being the sum of idea plus execution, others talk about the importance of insight and its role in driving the creation of ideas that will be meaningful to customers, and even fewer about the role of inspiration in uncovering potential insight. But innovation is all about value and each of the definitions, frameworks, and models out there only tell part of the story of successful innovation.

I’ve been talking for a while now in my innovation keynotes how crucial value is to innovation. It is no consequence as a result that value sits at the center of my definition of innovation:

“Innovation transforms the useful seeds of invention into widely adopted solutions valued above every existing alternative.”

In this definition you will see that I draw a distinction between useful and valuable, and I develop it further in Stoking Your Innovation Bonfire.

“Often usefulness comes from what a product or service does for you, and value comes from how it does it. If you’re looking to truly deliver innovative products and services into the marketplace, then once you succeed at the designing and developing the ‘what’, don’t forget to also focus on achieving excellence in the ‘how’.”

One of my favorite examples of the useful versus valuable distinction is the mousetrap. Despite the hundreds or thousands of patent applications submitted every year for new mousetrap designs, most people still purchase the same simple snapping mousetrap that you see in cartoons and that has been around for a hundred years. The mousetrap is a great example of how easy it is to generate innovation investment opportunities and how difficult it is to create something that is truly valuable.

This distinction between useful and valuable is one that you must seek to understand and by turning this into a lens through which you can look at the potential of your innovation investment opportunities, the higher the return you will have from your innovation portfolio.

Innovation is All About Value

Speaking of which, maybe we should stop talking about idea generation, idea management and idea evaluation and instead begin thinking about ideas as innovation investment opportunities. Just changing the language we use in talking about innovation can change the way we think about things and the outcomes that we are able to generate. The images we choose and the language we use is incredibly important and we’ll discuss this in more detail here in a moment. But first I would like to share my innovation equation to counter the popular (innovation = idea + execution) equation. I like to say that:

Innovation = Value Creation (x) Value Access (x) Value Translation

Now you will notice that the components are multiplicative not additive. Do one or two well and one poorly and it doesn’t necessarily add up to a positive result. Doing one poorly and two well can still doom your innovation investment to failure. Let’s look at the three equation components in brief:

Value Creation is pretty self-explanatory. Your innovation investment must create incremental or completely new value large enough to overcome the switching costs of moving to your new solution from the old solution (including the ‘Do Nothing Solution’). New value can be created by making something more efficient, more effective, possible that wasn’t possible before, or create new psychological or emotional benefits.

Value Access could also be thought of as friction reduction. How easy do you make it for customers and consumers to access the value you’ve created. How well has the product or service been designed to allow people to access the value easily? How easy is it for the solution to be created? How easy is it for people to do business with you?

Value Translation is all about helping people understand the value you’ve created and how it fits into their lives. Value translation is also about understanding where on a continuum between the need for explanation and education that your solution falls. Incremental innovations can usually just be explained to people because they anchor to something they already understand, but radical or disruptive innovations inevitably require some level of education (often far in advance of the launch).

Done really well, value translation also helps to communicate how easy it will be for customers and consumers to exchange their old solution for the new solution. My favorite example of poor value translation and brilliant value translation come from the same company and the same product launch – The Apple iPad. It’s hard to believe, but Apple actually announced the iPad with the following statement:

“Our most advanced technology in a magical and revolutionary device at an unbelievable price.”

iPad BillboardThis set off a firestorm of criticism and put the launch at risk of failure. But amazingly Apple managed to come up with the Out of Home (OOH) advertisements with a person with their feet up on a couch and the iPad on their lap (see above) by the time the product shipping. If a picture is worth a thousand words, this particular picture will probably end up being worth billions of dollars to Apple.

Never Forget!

Value creation is important, but you can’t succeed without equal attention being paid to both value access and value translation…

Because innovation is all about value…

Value Creation (x) Value Access (x) Value Translation = Success!

Creating a Continuous Innovation Capability

To achieve sustainable success at innovation, you must work to embed a repeatable process and way of thinking within your organization, and this is why it is important to have a simple common language and guiding framework of infinite innovation that all employees can easily grasp. If innovation becomes too complex, or seems too difficult then people will stop pursuing it, or supporting it.

Some organizations try to achieve this simplicity, or to make the pursuit of innovation seem more attainable, by viewing innovation as a project-driven activity. But, a project approach to innovation will prevent it from ever becoming a way of life in your organization. Instead you must work to position innovation as something infinite, a pillar of the organization, something with its own quest for excellence – a professional practice to be committed to.

So, if we take a lot of the best practices of innovation excellence and mix them together with a few new ingredients, the result is a simple framework organizations can use to guide their sustainable pursuit of innovation – the Eight I’s of Infinite Innovation. This new framework anchors what is a very collaborative process. Here is the framework and some of the many points organizations must consider during each stage of the continuous process:

1. Inspiration

  • Employees are constantly navigating an ever changing world both in their home context, and as they travel the world for business or pleasure, or even across various web pages in the browser of their PC, tablet, or smartphone.
  • What do they see as they move through the world that inspires them and possibly the innovation efforts of the company?
  • What do they see technology making possible soon that wasn’t possible before?
  • The first time through we are looking for inspiration around what to do, the second time through we are looking to be inspired around how to do it.
  • What inspiration do we find in the ideas that are selected for their implementation, illumination and/or installation?

2. Investigation

  • What can we learn from the various pieces of inspiration that employees come across?
  • How do the isolated elements of inspiration collect and connect? Or do they?
  • What customer insights are hidden in these pieces of inspiration?
  • What jobs-to-be-done are most underserved and are worth digging deeper on?
  • Which unmet customer needs that we see are worth trying to address?
  • Which are the most promising opportunities, and which might be the most profitable?

3. Ideation

  • We don’t want to just get lots of ideas, we want to get lots of good ideas
  • Insights and inspiration from first two stages increase relevance and depth of the ideas
  • We must give people a way of sharing their ideas in a way that feels safe for them
  • How can we best integrate online and offline ideation methods?
  • How well have we communicated the kinds of innovation we seek?
  • Have we trained our employees in a variety of creativity methods?

4. Iteration

  • No idea emerges fully formed, so we must give people a tool that allows them to contribute ideas in a way that others can build on them and help uncover the potential fatal flaws of ideas so that they can be overcome
  • We must prototype ideas and conduct experiments to validate assumptions and test potential stumbling blocks or unknowns to get learnings that we can use to make the idea and its prototype stronger
  • Are we instrumenting for learning as we conduct each experiment?

Eight I's of Infinite Innovation

5. Identification

  • In what ways do we make it difficult for customers to unlock the potential value from this potentially innovative solution?
  • What are the biggest potential barriers to adoption?
  • What changes do we need to make from a financing, marketing, design, or sales perspective to make it easier for customers to access the value of this new solution?
  • Which ideas are we best positioned to develop and bring to market?
  • What resources do we lack to realize the promise of each idea?
  • Based on all of the experiments, data, and markets, which ideas should we select?

You’ll see in the framework that things loop back through inspiration again before proceeding to implementation. There are two main reasons why. First, if employees aren’t inspired by the ideas that you’ve selected to commercialize and some of the potential implementation issues you’ve identified, then you either have selected the wrong ideas or you’ve got the wrong employees. Second, at this intersection you might want to loop back through the first five stages though an implementation lens before actually starting to implement your ideas OR you may unlock a lot of inspiration and input from a wider internal audience to bring into the implementation stage.

6. Implementation

  • What are the most effective and efficient ways to make, market, and sell this new solution?
  • How long will it take us to develop the solution?
  • Do we have access to the resources we will need to produce the solution?
  • Are we strong in the channels of distribution that are most suitable for delivering this solution?

7. Illumination

  • Is the need for the solution obvious to potential customers?
  • Are we launching a new solution into an existing product or service category or are we creating a new category?
  • Does this new solution fit under our existing brand umbrella and represent something that potential customers will trust us to sell to them?
  • How much value translation do we need to do for potential customers to help them understand how this new solution fits into their lives and is a must-have?
  • Do we need to merely explain this potential innovation to customers because it anchors to something that they already understand, or do we need to educate them on the value that it will add to their lives?

8. Installation

  • How do we best make this new solution an accepted part of everyday life for a large number of people?
  • How do we remove access barriers to make it easy as possible for people to adopt this new solution, and even tell their friends about it?
  • How do we instrument for learning during the installation process to feedback new customer learnings back into the process for potential updates to the solution?

Conclusion

The Eight I’s of Infinite Innovation framework is designed to be a continuous learning process, one without end as the outputs of one round become inputs for the next round. It’s also a relatively new guiding framework for organizations to use, so if you have thoughts on how to make it even better, please let me know in the comments. The framework is also ideally suited to power a wave of new organizational transformations that are coming as an increasing number of organizations (including Hallmark) begin to move from a product-centered organizational structure to a customer needs-centered organizational structure. The power of this new approach is that it focuses the organization on delivering the solutions that customers need as their needs continue to change, instead of focusing only on how to make a particular product (or set of products) better.

So, as you move from the project approach that is preventing innovation from ever becoming a way of life in your organization, consider using the Eight I’s of Infinite Innovation to influence your organization’s mindset and to anchor your common language of innovation. The framework is great for guiding conversations, making your innovation outputs that much stronger, and will contribute to your quest for innovation excellence – it is even more powerful when you combine it with my Value Innovation Framework (which I’ve done here in this article). The two are like chocolate and peanut butter. They’re powerful tools when used separately, but even more powerful when used together.

Sign up for Change Planning Toolkit™ launch updates

Click to access this framework as a FREE scalable 11″x17″ PDF download

Click to download the PDF version of this article

People who upgrade to the Bronze Version of the Change Planning Toolkit™ will get access to my Innovation Planning Canvas™ which combines the Value Innovation Framework together with the Eight I’s of Infinite Innovation, allowing you to track the progress of each potential innovation on the three value innovation measures as you evolve any individual idea through this eight step process.

Buy the Change Planning Toolkit™ NowNow you can buy the Change Planning Toolkit™ – Individual Bronze License – Advance Purchase Edition here on this web site before the book launches.

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

Building a Global Sensing Network – Revisited

Leave a reply

Building a Global Sensing Network - RevisitedWhen I first wrote about Building a Global Sensing Network I wrote in the specific context of the war for innovation and the need to make sure you’re fighting it outside your organization — not inside.

We looked at how most organizations hire the most clever, educated, experienced and motivated people you could afford and then direct them to come up with the best customer solutions possible, organize and execute their production and marketing predictably and efficiently, and do their best to outmaneuver the competition.

In short, most organizations pursue success by building a fortress from which the organization can defend its intellectual property and its market position utilizing the human resources it can assemble within the castle walls. At the same time most organizations focus on achieving organizational success by achieving the greatest overlap possible between the skills, abilities and talents of each job applicant and the job description for each role.

But most organizations (referred to as Typical Organizations in the graphic below) fail to harness ALL of the skills, abilities and talents of the individuals they have in their organization to achieve greater performance as a collective. In my mind this is painful, wasted human capital – painful for the organization (lost potential revenue and profitability) and painful for the individual (boredom, stress, and disappointment).

Typical Organization

But, a handful of more progressive, innovative organizations are trying to do better to harness the passions AND the skills, abilities, and talents of their individuals to better achieve the collective’s ability to generate revenue and profits (or other appropriate benefits) by engaging their employees in the innovation efforts of the organization, and allowing their employees to take some of their skills, abilities and talents and apply them to help fulfill other job descriptions. This looks something more like this:

Innovative Organization

But in the most progressive organizations, they not only provide a way to better harness a more complete set of their employees’ skills, abilities and talents to more than one job description, but they also find a way to harness more of the skills, abilities, and talents that employees are currently realizing outside the organization in their hobbies, volunteer work, or other places.

And the successful organizations of the future will not stop there. They will also harness the connections their employees have outside the organization to increase the innovation capacity of the organization, and better engage not only partners in helping to fulfill the needs of different job descriptions, but they will also even engage their customers in achieving the work of the organization.

Where customer or partner skills, abilities and talents intersect with the job requirements, work can get done, and where customer or partner skills, abilities or talents intersect with employee skills, abilities or talents intersect, communities and connections have the chance to form and be nurtured. This is what organizations of the future will look like:

Organization of the Future

In this scenario, where innovative organizations begin to move beyond better harnessing the internal innovation capacity of their employees, to also harnessing the external capacity to work (and to innovate) of individuals outside of the organization (and to expand the scope of the collective), and to attract partners and customers to participate, organizations that allow and even encourage employees to develop a personal brand and greater external connections, will claim an outsized share of the potential benefits to both the mission of the organization and to its innovation efforts.

If your employees lack the external exposure, the external connections, and the external personal brand equity and awareness, how much harder will it be for your organization to:

  • Attract the best partners to your innovation efforts
  • Recruit the best customers to co-create with you
  • Build a strong pipeline of potential future internal talent

Through this lens you can see that in the future, successful innovation and change will be determined not just by how strong the brand of your organization is (or the collective), but also will be shaped by the strength of the personal brands of the collective’s component individuals.

As the commercial battlefield continues to change, future business success will be built upon more fluid boundaries and the ability to leverage skills, abilities and talents of people and other organizations outside the company and also the ability to:

  1. Utilize expert communities.

  2. Identify and gather technology trend information, customer insights and local social mutations from around the globe.

  3. Mobilize the organization in organic ways to utilize resources and information often beyond its control.

  4. Still organize and execute production and marketing predictably and efficiently in the middle of all this complexity.

Market leaders in our evolving reality will be increasingly determined not by an organization’s ability to outmaneuver the competition in a known market, but by their ability to identify and solve for the key unknowns in markets that will continue to become more global and less defined. Future market leaders will be those organizations that build superior global sensing networks and do a better job at making sense of the inputs from these networks to select the optimal actionable insights to drive innovation and change.

By this point, hopefully you are asking yourself three questions:

1. How do I create more fluid boundaries in my organization?

2. What does a global sensing network look like?

3. How do I build one?

One View of a Global Sensing Network

Building a Global Sensing NetworkThe purpose of a global sensing network is to allow an organization to collect and connect the partial insights and ideas that will form the basis of the organization’s next generation of customer solutions. This involves collecting and connecting:

Click to access this framework as a scalable 11″x17″ PDF download

1. Customer Insights

  • Ethnography
  • Private Communities
  • Focus Groups
  • Surveys
  • Lead User Observation

2. Core Technology Trends

3. Adjacent Technology Trends

4. Distant technology trends

5. Local social mutations

  • Demographic trends
  • Sociological trends
  • Economic trends
  • Political trends (including regulation)
  • Behavioral trends

6. Expert Communities

  • University Research
  • Government Research
  • Corporate Research
  • Charitable Research
  • Hobbyists

To actually build a global sensing network you need to start from the inside out. You have to take a look around inside your organization and see what employees you have, what natural connections they have, and where they are currently located on the globe. At the same time you need to understand how employees in your organization naturally connect with each other and define what core, adjacent and distant technologies mean in the context of your organization. You must also look and see what tools you have inside the organization for managing insights, expertise and information within the organization, and what expert communities you may already have connections into.

I would recommend beginning to establish your global sensing network inside your organization before venturing to build it out completely with the resources and connections that you will naturally need outside your organization. This will enable you to get some really great feedback from employees on the connections that will be necessary to foster and manage outside of your organization and to prepare your information sharing systems and internal communications to enable increased sharing and improved innovation inputs and outputs.

Accelerate your change and transformation success

It is likely that many organizations will already be gathering some level of customer insight information from ethnography, private communities, focus groups, surveys, lead user observation, etc. but not have a good infrastructure, policies or procedures in place for sharing this information. If you’re truly serious about creating a deep innovation capability and working to achieve innovation excellence in the same way that you pursue operational excellence, you should experiment with your systems by making customer information more available.

Next, you should leverage your employees and existing partnerships to reach outside the organization to organize and establish stronger communication channels with the relevant expert communities, including those focused on university research, government research, charitable research, corporate research (industry associations and competitors), and even to inventors or hobbyists.

And then finally from the connections you’ve built to this point, you should have identified where you have good people internally to provide information on local social mutations (local developments of interest spawned by local demographic, sociological, economic, political and behavioral trends), and where you have gaps. Hopefully by this point you may have also identified people outside your organization in countries around the world that you already have formal or informal connections to that can be leveraged to fill the gaps in your global sensing network footprint.

Conclusion

If you’re already involved in innovation and change, or have read a lot on the topic, it should be obvious to you why your organization needs a global sensing network.

Building a global sensing network helps organizations:

  • Accelerate their innovation efforts
  • Create more fluid organizational boundaries
  • Embrace a more open approach to innovation
  • Monitor emerging and evolving technologies
  • Track changes in customer behavior in the unending search for new insight-driven ideas

But the main that should jump out as you look at the download titled Building a Global Sensing Network is that innovation can come from anywhere, so you need to be listening everywhere.

The purpose for building a global sensing network is much like the purpose for having a SETI program. We know that there must be intelligent life outside the four walls of our organization, but to find it, we must be listening. And we must be listening so that we can amplify, combine and triangulate the weak signals that we might pick up so that we can find the next innovation and change that our organization is capable of delivering – before the competition. After all, there is a war for innovation and change out there. The only true unknown is who’s going to win.

I hope you’ll come join me on this journey to improve the pace and execution of innovation and change efforts in our organizations!

Sign up for Change Planning Toolkit™ launch updates

Click to access this framework as a scalable 11″x17″ PDF download

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

The Five Keys to Successful Change

1 Reply

5 Keys to Successful Change

by Braden Kelley

My next book, Charting Change, is a followup to Stoking Your Innovation Bonfire and is now available for pre-order. While my first book helped people identify and remove barriers to innovation, my next book is designed to make the process of planning change efforts less overwhelming and more human.

Charting Change will introduce a visual, collaborative Human-Centered Change™ methodology designed to help get everyone literally all on the same page for change.

The toolkit begins by painting a different background for the landscape of organizational change. Here we introduce the first of more than fifty tools and frameworks comprising that make up the Human-Centered Change™ methodology.

When it comes to organizational change, most people focus on change management and there is even a couple of professional associations organized around the practice of change management, including the Association of Change Management Professionals (ACMP).

But change management is only one of the Five Keys to Successful Change:

Five Keys to Successful Change 550

Leave one out and eventually your change effort, no matter how big or small, will eventually fail. If you’re setting setting out to change the world, even a small corner of it, then you’ll want to be sure to consider each of the five keys and make sure that you proceed in a measured way that takes each into account.

Let’s look at each briefly in turn before we look at each area in more detail in future posts, and eventually in my new book in February 2016.

The Five Keys to Successful Change

1. Change Planning

Change Planning is the first key to successful organizational change, and it focuses on drawing out the key issues of the necessary change and puts some structure and timeline around them. You will find you have a better experience and a more successful outcome if you use a more visual, collaborative method using something like the Human-Centered Change™ methodology I will be releasing soon to help you create the necessary change plans, goals, metrics, etc.

2. Change Leadership

Change Leadership is the second key to successful organizational change, and is important because good change leadership provides the sponsorship, support and oversight necessary for the change activities to receive the visibility, care, and attention they need to overcome inertia and maintain momentum throughout the process of transformation.

3. Change Management

Change Management represents the third key to successful organizational change, and it is probably the one most people think of when they think about organizational change because it focuses on managing the change activities necessary to achieve the change objectives. The term itself has some challenges however as the term also refers to the management of code changes during the software development process and its relationship with project management is confused. We will dig more into the relationship between project management and change management in a future article.

4. Change Maintenance

Change Maintenance represents the fourth and probably most neglected key to successful organizational change. Many change leaders lose interest after the major launch milestones are achieved, and this is a real risk to sustained success of the change effort. During the change maintenance phase is when you measure the outcomes of the planned change activities and reinforce the change, to make sure the change effort has met the change objectives and when you ensure that the behavior change becomes a permanent one. Neglect this phase and people often slip back into their old, well worn patterns of behavior.

5. Change Portfolio Management

Every organization will have a broad collection of larger change efforts (digital transformation, merger integration, layoffs, etc.) and smaller change efforts (including all projects) underway or in the planning or maintenance stages at all times. This portfolio of change efforts must be managed and Change Portfolio Management represents the necessary activities for balancing all of the resource needs of this variety of change efforts.

Conclusion

This is the first step in the Human-Centered Change™ approach to organizational change that you can use to help change the world in the series of Big C and Little C change efforts that you may lead throughout your life. Big C change efforts are what most people think as change initiatives (mergers and acquisitions, layoffs, transformations, etc.) while Little C change efforts are any project that you might undertake (after all every project changes something).

If we want to do better than the 70% failure rate that change practitioners face in their work, we must look beyond change management or change leadership, and instead think more holistically about change, and to consider all Five Keys to Successful Change.

I hope you have found the article and the framework a useful first building block as we work together to build a strong foundation for successful organizational change. To be alerted when the Human-Centered Change™ methodology becomes available, please be sure and click the link below to join the mailing list, and stay tuned for the next article in this series!

Click to access this framework as a scalable 11″x17″ PDF download

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

Flaws in the Crawl Walk Run Methodology

Leave a reply

The Flawed Crawl Walk Run Methodology

Many of you may have heard of the Crawl Walk Run project methodology. For those of you that haven’t the idea is that if a project team is trying to achieve something big, that sometimes you have to evolve your approach in stages rather than trying to make all the changes all at once. Many people are quite fond of this approach and can be heard repeating the mantra “Let’s crawl before we walk, let’s walk before we run.” Others have evolved Crawl Walk Run into Crawl Walk Run Fly. One of those groups is Edelman (a public relations firm), which in the following image proposes the following Crawl Walk Run Fly approach to social media:

Crawl Walk Run Fly Edelman

Ultimately the Crawl Walk Run Fly project approach looks back to the following Martin Luther King, Jr. quote for its inspiration and structure:

“If you can’t fly then run, if you can’t run then walk, if you can’t walk then crawl, but whatever you do you have to keep moving forward.” – Martin Luther King, Jr.

But the flaw in the Crawl Walk Run project approach was exposed in a conversation I had yesterday with Stewart Pearson, a former client and friend, who happens to be the founder of Consilient Group, an emerging consulting group focused on helping clients undertake data-driven, insight-driven digital transformations to empower organizations to ignite sustainable growth and innovation.

Stewart was speaking about how some companies get stuck in this Crawl Walk Run mindset, and potentially jeopardize their future as a going concern. The truth is that Crawl Walk Run is only applicable to a small subset of projects, and definitely not appropriate for strategic projects because of the imminent danger of the competition transforming faster than you to better serve (and thus take) customers in the marketplace. Stewart captured this in the following way (slightly modified here by me):

“The danger of Crawl Walk Run is that while you’re busy crawling, a competitor is going to walk over you, right before another competitor runs over both of you.”

Then of course we can add in to this that if the customers wants and/or needs have changed, then simultaneously startups will not be crawling, or walking, or running, but FLYING by those incumbents engaged in a crawl, walk, or run strategies to maintain their relevance to the customers in the marketplace. But startups face their own danger in their FLY strategy, embodied in their lack of experience and infrastructure, and in many cases, their need to educate. This can cause startups to fly past the place where customers wants and needs have moved. So the flying strategy is not without risk.

Consulting clients or people inside your firm (depending on your context) may push back against this idea and again something like “Let’s crawl before we walk.” and it’s really seductive to give into this and tow the company line that achieving something is better than achieving nothing. But at the same time, the financial, human and capital resources that you might invest in implementing a broad crawl effort could potentially be more smartly implemented in a narrow run or fly effort off to the side that may then have the potential to be rolled out in a broad manner.

So, in situations where the company potentially faces more risk from moving slowly than from moving too fast, look for opportunities to craft a strategy that allows you to pick a small part of your business (possibly a single project or a single client) that you can begin building out a run strategy for (a strategy that leverages the existing experience and infrastructure of the organization) or a fly strategy (one that completely re-imagines your market approach).

The idea here being to prototype, test, learn, and then scale your transformative new market approach rather than gradually transforming your market approach in a series of phases. This is more like the approach we use in the innovation space, and has a lot of potential in helping to accelerate your ability to continuously transform your organization the maintain optimal value exchanges with your customers.

What do you think?

Do you think your organization could move away from the siren’s song of Crawl Walk Run, or are you stuck on all fours for the rest of your career with your existing client or employer?

This article originally was featured on Linkedin


Accelerate your change and transformation success

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