Tag Archives: Netflix

What is Digital Transformation anyway?

Digital Transformation is the third wave of digital evolution.

What is Digital Transformation anyway?

GUEST POST from Howard Tiersky

The first wave was brochureware. Enterprises created websites that communicated their story. As simple as this idea is, it was revolutionary. The business value of providing instant sales and marketing material at the click of a mouse is hugely valuable.

The second wave was eCommerce. Enterprises connected customer-facing digital front-ends to their back-end systems, so that customers could engage in transactions directly via their browser or mobile device. This wave generated much more value than brochureware, because it reduced the cost of customer interaction, and removed friction from the user experience. Businesses who have mastered eCommerce have been able to trump former market leaders. In today’s world, if you can’t provide elegant digital options for the customer throughout their entire journey, you’re toast.

Now we find ourselves in the third wave: Digital Transformation. eCommerce added new pathways for pre-existing offerings, but companies going through digital transformation need to reinvent themselves for a digital age. Netflix made the transition from being a mail-order company to a streaming company. Though they still focus on their core value proposition of providing extended choices and increased convenience, their entire solution offering had to shift, along with their customer experience, pricing, contracts with suppliers, marketing, and more. Furthermore, given new methods of interacting with the consumer, it became practical for them to focus serious resources on content creation, as well. While the Netflix DVD-by-mail service was definitely eCommerce enabled (i.e. you could order DVDs via their web site), their digitally transformed value proposition is fundamentally impossible without digital.

Uber is doing the same thing for transportation. While plenty of taxi and limousine companies have apps that allow you to order their vehicles, Uber created a business model that was completely digitally focused. This meant that they didn’t need to own any vehicles or hire any drivers to become the largest ground transportation company in the world. It’s worth noting that Uber didn’t really go through a digital transformation, it was born digital. Digital Transformation is what pre-digital companies must undertake to compete in the newest wave of the digital age.

But even those companies that are “born digital” will need to focus on ongoing transformation. There are multiple examples of early digital successes, companies like Yahoo and MySpace, that failed to continue to transform.

Digital Transformation also requires a different mindset around where digital “lives” within the organization. You can visualize the way digital transformation works in the enterprises like this:

Wave 1 – Brochureware: Digital was part of marketing.
Wave 2 – eCommerce: Digital is a support service, creating digital pathways to pre-existing services like ordering, customer support, and billing.
Wave 3 – Digital Transformation: Digital reimagines the entire value proposition and business model of the company.

The goal of Digital in Wave 2 is to support the strategy and operations of the company by augmenting non-digital channels with more efficient and elegant digital alternatives. But in Wave 3, digital is driving the bus. The entire company — its value proposition and business model — is reimagined with digital at the center. This requires some substantial shifts in organizational structure, roles, and mindset; these shifts make companies hesitant to move towards true digital transformation. They engage in what is sometimes called Digital Decoration, that makes them seem progressive while protecting the “integrity” of their legacy business structures.

This is a losing strategy. There’s a long history of companies who decided to protect their existing models over supporting new ones. Kodak suffocated its early digital camera products; Blockbuster resisted focusing on digital delivery of entertainment. Western Union scoffed at the telephone.

In fact, here’s an example of an internal memo sent at Western Union:

“Why would any person want to use this ungainly and impractical device [a telephone] when he can send a messenger to the telegraph office and have a clear written message sent to any large city in the United States?”

Western Union opted out of the “digital transformation” of its era and I predict the same outcome for pre-digital companies who take a similar approach.

This article originally appeared on the Howard Tiersky blog
Image Credit: Pexels

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

What Disruptive Innovation Really Is

Leave a reply

What Disruptive Innovation Really Is

GUEST POST from Geoffrey A. Moore

I recently read an article in ZDnet by Sherin Shibu discussing disruptive innovation, primarily through the lens of Clay Christensen’s work at the Harvard Business School. The article itself is very sound, and yet I found myself disagreeing with it on a number of points. In this blog, I want to interleave what Shibu says (presented in standard font) with my own commentary (inserted in italics) so that readers can develop their own point of view from the interaction.

What is disruptive innovation?

Disruptive innovation theory is a cautionary concept for large, established companies: There’s danger in becoming too good at what you do best. Delivering to the mainstream market is good and all, but a disruptor could target a market underserved by your current product with a new business model.

For me, disruptive innovation has a much bigger footprint because it also underlies virtually all venture capital investment. Its fundamental promise is to release an enormous amount of trapped value by reengineering an established system or process. The reason it is a cautionary concept for large established companies is that they are the custodians of the legacy systems and processes that are trapping the value. Yes, they can reduce the overhead by optimizing what they have, but no, they cannot compete with a categorically better way of doing things.

Harvard Business School professor Clayton Christensen developed the concept of disruptive innovation in the 1990s with his groundbreaking book The Innovator’s Dilemma, and the theory became wildly popular in the decades to follow. But in some respects it has become a victim of its own success: “Despite broad dissemination, the theory’s core concepts have been widely misunderstood and its basic tenets frequently misapplied,” notes The Harvard Business Review.

Disruptive innovation is a process by which entrepreneurs break into a low-end or new market and create business models that are different from existing ones in those markets. Disruption has occurred when their business model becomes mainstream.

So, a new company targets an overlooked customer base — and manages to deliver a better product at a lower price point. At first, the incumbents don’t take the threat seriously, which allows the potential disruptors to gain a foothold. Then the disruptors target the incumbents’ mainstream customers. If the potential disruptors create something that the mainstream adopts in volume, they have successfully disrupted the market.

I think this reading of the model overemphasizes the need to attack the low end of the market. Yes, that is a proven path, but it is not the only one. The iPhone disrupted from the high end, for example, as has Tesla.

What is disruptive innovation not?

Defining disruptive innovation isn’t easy and not everyone is going to agree on every example. Classic disruptive innovation should not simply describe just any situation of upheaval. If a new company shakes things up a bit for incumbent competitors, that scene is not necessarily one of disruptive innovation — that could simply be a breakthrough. In order for this theory to have power and be used as an analytical and predictive model, it needs to be precisely defined.

My definition of disruptive innovation is one that overthrows and is incompatible with the existing business model or operating model of an industry. In the case of the iPhone, it was Apple’s ability to go over the top of the carrier to provide products and services directly to the consumer. In the case of Tesla, it is its ability to bypass the dealership model not only in sales but in services as well.

Christensen, for example, argued that Uber is not a disruptive innovator according to his definition. It fails to meet two requirements, in that it did not start in a low-end or new market. Instead, it built a name for itself in a mainstream market and then started drawing unserved customers with less expensive solutions. And being less expensive or creating an app to hail rides sustains the existing model rather than disrupts.

This is just wrong and shows the limitations of the “start at the low end” concept. Uber reengineered both the operating model and the business model of on-demand car transportation, allowing consumers to call a taxi to themselves, and allowing Uber to build a fleet of cars and drivers at no capital expense.

Not everyone thinks that’s the case and other perspectives can be found that argue Uber actually is a disruptive innovator. From this perspective, Uber started with a low-market foothold by offering on-demand black car services. It was only when the startup introduced UberX, a low-end market offering, that it was able to move into the mainstream.

What counts as disruption is up for debate, especially as Christensen’s theory is applied to shifting contexts.

In the case of Uber, focusing on the low end simply misses the point.

Why is it important to define disruptive innovation?

Disruption isn’t a fixed point; it’s the evolution of a product or service from the fringes of customers to the mainstream. It’s important to define it this way because then it becomes more about the experimental nature of the process than about the output. See, disruptive innovations don’t always succeed and not every successful company is a disruptor. The process is about building new business models previously unseen in the target industry and appealing to a more niche customer base at first.

In my view, disruptive innovation is a function of a breakthrough technology intersecting with a pool of trapped value, enabling the reengineering of a system or process that eliminates one or more whole categories of spend in its value chain. It is a categorical innovation as opposed to a product or marketing innovation.

Is disruptive innovation the primary way innovation operates?

No, it is not the primary factor of innovation. According to HBR, “disruption theory does not, and never will, explain everything about innovation specifically or business success generally.” It does, however, help predict which businesses will succeed and it provides a solid foundation for further research – it’s captured academic attention for 27 years.

I agree with the point that disruptive innovation is not the primary type. Most innovation is sustaining, meaning that it improves an existing system rather than overthrowing it—evolution, not revolution. What I disagree with wholeheartedly, on the other hand, is the notion that the theory helps predict which businesses will succeed. Historically, the advantage has gone to start-ups because they are unconflicted in their commitment to the new way. Established enterprises, however, have learned that they can neutralize start-ups if they are willing to be fast followers. Microsoft’s Azure is a superb example of a company that has done this. Disney’s response to Netflix is another good example, and it appears as if General Motors is on a comparable path toward neutralizing Tesla.

What is an example of disruptive innovation?

Netflix was around since 1997, and at first, it didn’t appeal to Blockbuster’s core clientele. Renting movies usually happened in person, and Netflix was all online. Plus, Netflix took a few days to deliver movies because selections came through the mail. Blockbuster could easily ignore Netflix because it didn’t have the brick-and-mortar infrastructure needed to dominate the market at that time.

This glosses over what was the initial disruptive innovation that Netflix provided with its home delivery model based on DVDs. The key differentiator at the beginning was designing out late fees.

Over time though, as streaming technology developed, Blockbuster’s target clients were drawn toward Netflix. The same impulsiveness that made renting a movie right away more desirable than getting a movie a few days later translated into wanting to watch movies with a click of a mouse instead of going to a physical location to rent a DVD. Disruptive innovation technology, in this case, streaming, goes hand in hand with implementing innovation.

There is another story playing out in Netflix’s transition from DVD shipping to streaming. It required the company to disrupt itself. This is an extraordinary ask, as most successful disruptive innovations attack someone else’s profit pool, not one’s own. Reed Hastings deserves enormous credit for leading the company through this change, and I would encourage the academy to focus its research lens on how in the world he was able to do so when so many CEOs have fallen short.

Are there any disruptive innovation technologies to keep an eye on?

Online learning is a technology to watch because it’s reaching a population that in-person learning can’t reach at a lower price point.

The main technologies to keep an eye on are the ones that tackle an underserved market and have the potential to expand their offerings to appeal to the mainstream.

Something like autonomous vehicles, for example, can seem innovative, but they aren’t disruptive according to the theory because they’ll be quickly absorbed into existing industries. The incumbent advantage is strong.

The important thing to remember is that innovation does not always lead to disruption.

I strongly support the idea that online education delivery has the power to disrupt the education market—again, a breakthrough technology intersecting with a boatload of trapped value. I think the point about autonomous vehicles is interesting as well because I agree they will be absorbed into the existing industries. But while they may not disrupt the automotive industry, I do think they can reengineer transportation and logistics.

Overall, I support Shibu’s main thesis which is that we have come to take disruptive innovation for granted and have become careless with how we apply the term. And while we part ways on how best to apply it, I still endorse Clay’s breakthrough insights in The Innovator’s Dilemma, which had a huge impact on a whole generation of companies in Silicon Valley.

That’s what I think. What do you think?

Image Credit: Pexels

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

The Reality Behind Netflix’s Amazing Success

Leave a reply

The Reality Behind Netflix's Amazing Success

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

Today, it’s hard to think of Netflix as anything but an incredible success. Its business has grown at breakneck speed and now streams to 190 countries, yet it has also been consistently profitable, earning over $12 billion last year. With hit series like Orange is the New Black and Stranger Things, it broke the record for Emmy Nominations in 2018.

Most of all, the company has consistently disrupted the media business through its ability to relentlessly innovate. Its online subscription model upended the movie rental business and drove industry giant Blockbuster into bankruptcy. Later, it pioneered streaming video and introduced binge watching to the world.

Ordinarily, a big success like Netflix would offer valuable lessons for the rest of us. Unfortunately, its story has long been shrouded in myth and misinformation. That’s why Netflix Co-Founder Marc Randolph’s book, That Will Never Work, is so valuable. It not only sets the story straight, it offers valuable insight into how to create a successful business.

The Founding Myth

Anthropologists have long been fascinated by origin myths. The Greek gods battled and defeated the Titans to establish Olympus. Remus and Romulus were suckled by a she-wolf and then established Rome. Adam and Eve were seduced by a serpent, ate the forbidden fruit and were banished from the Garden of Eden.

The reason every culture invents origin myths is that they help make sense of a confusing world and reinforce the existing order. Before science, people were ill-equipped to explain things like disease and natural disasters. So, stories, even if the were apocryphal, gave people comfort that there was a rhyme and reason to things.

So it shouldn’t be surprising that an unlikely success such as Netflix has its own origin myth. As legend has it, Co-Founder Reed Hastings misplaced a movie he rented and was charged a $40 dollar late fee. Incensed, he set out to start a movie business that had no late fees. That simple insight led to a disruptive business model that upended the entire industry.

The truth is that late fees had nothing to do with the founding of Netflix. What really happened is that Reed Hastings and Marc Randolph, soon to be unemployed after the sale of their company, Pure Atria, were looking to ride the new e-commerce wave and become the “Amazon of” something. Netflix didn’t arise out of a moment of epiphany, but a process of elimination.

The Subscription Model Was an Afterthought

Netflix really got its start through a morning commute. As Pure Atria was winding down, Randolph and Hastings would drive together from Santa Crux on Highway 17 over the mountain into Silicon Valley. It was a long drive, which gave them lots of time to toss around e-commerce ideas that ranged from customized baseball bats to personalized shampoo.

The reason they eventually settled on movies was the introduction of DVD’s. In 1997, there were very few titles available, so stores didn’t stock them. They were also small and light and were easy to ship. Best of all, the movie studios recognized that they had made a mistake pricing movies on videotape too high and planned to offer DVD’s at a level consumers would buy them.

In the beginning, Netflix earned most of its money selling movies, not renting them. However, before long they realized that it was only a matter of time before Amazon and Walmart began selling DVD’s as well. Once that happened, it was unlikely that Netflix would be able to compete, and they would have to find a way to make the rental model work.

The subscription model began as an experiment. No one seemed to want to rent movies by mail, so they were desperate to find a different model and kept trying things until they hit on something that worked. It wasn’t part of a master plan, but the result of trial and error. “If you would have asked me on launch day to describe what Netflix would eventually look like,” Randolph wrote, “I would have never come up with a monthly subscription service.”

The Canada Principle

As Netflix began to grow it was constantly looking for ways to grow its business. One idea that continually came up was expanding to Canada. It’s just over the border, is largely English speaking, has a business-friendly regulatory environment and shares many cultural traits with the US. It just seemed like an obvious way to increase sales.

Yet they didn’t do it for two reasons. First, while Canada is very similar to the US, it is still another country, with its own currency, laws and other complicating factors. Also, while English is commonly spoken in most parts of Canada, in some regions French predominates. So, what looked simple at first had the potential to become maddeningly complex.

The second and more important reason was that it would have diluted their focus. Nobody has unlimited resources. You only have a certain number of people who can do a certain number of things. For every Canadian problem they had to solve, that was one problem that they weren’t solving in the much larger US business.

That became what Randolph called the “Canada Principle,” or the idea that you need to maximize your focus by limiting the number of opportunities that you pursue. It’s why they dropped DVD sales to focus on renting movies and then dropped a la carte rental to focus on the subscription business. That singularity of focus played a big part in Netflix’s success.

Nobody Knows Anything

Randolph’s mantra throughout the book is that “nobody knows anything.” He borrowed the phrase from the writer William Goldman’s memoir Adventures in the Screen Trade. What Goldman meant was that nobody truly knows how a movie will do until it’s out. Some movies with the biggest budgets and greatest stars flop, while some of the unlikeliest indy films are hits.

For Randolph though, it’s more of a guiding business philosophy. “For every good idea,” he says, “there are a thousand bad ideas it is indistinguishable from.” The only real way to tell the difference is to go out and try them, see what works, discard the failures and build on the successes. You have to, in other words, dare to be crap.

Over the years, I’ve had the chance to get to know hundreds of great innovators and they all tell a different version of the same story. While they often became known for one big idea, they had tried thousands of others before they arrived at the one that worked. It was perseverance and a singularity of focus, not a sudden epiphany, that made the difference.

That’s why the myth of the $40 late fee, while seductive, can be so misleading. What made Netflix successful wasn’t just one big idea. In fact, just about every assumption they made when they started the company was wrong. Rather, it was what they learned along the way that made the difference. That’s the truth of how Netflix became a media powerhouse.

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

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

Your Brand Isn’t the Problem

Leave a reply

GUEST POST from Mike Shipulski

Cigarette companies rebranded themselves because their products caused cancer and they wanted to separate themselves from how their customers experienced their products. Their name and logo (which stand for their brand) were mapped to bad things (cancer) so they changed their name and logo. The bad things still happened, but the company was one step removed. There was always the option to stop causing cancer and to leave the name and logo as-is, but that would have required a real change, difficult change, a fundamental change. Instead of stopping the harm, cigarette companies ran away from their heritage and rebranded.

Facebook rebranded itself because its offering caused cancer of a different sort. And they, too, wanted to separate themselves from how their customers experienced their offering. The world mapped the Facebook brand to bullying, harming children, and misinformation that destroyed institutions. Sure, Facebook had the option to keep the name and logo and stop doing harm, but they chose to keep the harm and change the name and logo. Like the cigarette companies, they chose to keep the unskillful behavior and change their brand to try to sidestep their damaging ways. Yes, they could have changed their behavior and kept their logo, but they chose to change their logo and double down on their unhealthy heritage.

The cigarette companies and Facebook didn’t rebrand themselves to move toward something better, they rebranded to run away from the very thing they created, the very experience they delivered to their customers. In that way, they tried to distance themselves from their offering because their offering was harmful. And in that way, rebranding is most often about moving away from the experience that customers experience. And in that way, rebranding is hardly ever about moving toward something better.

One exception I can think of is a special type of rebranding that is a distillation of the brand, where the brand name gets shorter. Several made-up examples: Nike Shoes to Nike; McDonald’s Hamburgers to McDonald’s; and Netflix Streaming Services to Netflix. In all three cases, the offering hasn’t changed and customers still recognize the brand. Everyone still knows it’s all about cool footwear, a repeatable fast-food experience, and top-notch entertainment content. If anything, the connection with the heritage is concentrated and strengthened and the appeal is broader. If your rebranding makes the name longer or the message more nuanced, you get some credit for confusing your customers, but you don’t qualify for this special exception.

If you want to move toward something better, it’s likely better to keep the name and logo and change the offering to something better. Your brand has history and your customers have mapped the goodness you provide to your name and logo. Why not use that to your advantage? Why not build on what you’ve built and morph it slowly into something better? Why not keep the brand and improve the offering? Why not remap your good brand to an improved offering so that your brand improves slowly over time? Isn’t it more effective to use your brand recognition as the mechanism to attract attention to your improved offering?

In almost all cases, rebranding is a sign that something’s wrong. It’s expensive, it consumes a huge amount of company resources, and there’s little to no direct benefit to customers. When you feel the urge to rebrand, I strongly urge you to keep the brand and improve your offering. That way your customers will benefit and your brand will improve.

Image credit: Pixabay

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

Balancing Creativity and Feasibility in Innovation

Leave a reply

Balancing Creativity and Feasibility in Innovation

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

Innovation. The very word pulsates with the promise of progress, often conjuring visions of breakthroughs that reshape industries and improve lives. Yet, beneath the glamour of the “aha!” moment lies a truth often overlooked: a brilliant idea, no matter how disruptive, is merely a whisper in the wind until it can be brought to tangible reality. This is the central paradox, the vital tension, at the heart of truly impactful innovation: the intricate dance between unbridled creativity and grounded feasibility.

Far too often, organizations stumble by overemphasizing one aspect at the expense of the other. Some become playgrounds for “innovation theater,” where whiteboard sessions brim with fantastical concepts, yet none ever see the light of day. These companies generate a flurry of ideas but lack the rigor to assess and execute them. Conversely, others are so risk-averse and steeped in pragmatism that their innovation becomes painfully incremental. They prioritize what’s immediately achievable, effectively stifling any truly transformative thinking and missing the larger opportunities that emerge from challenging the status quo.

“Ideas are easy. Execution is everything.” – John Doerr, Kleiner Perkins

The Indispensable Partnership: Creativity & Feasibility

Imagine creativity as the boundless ocean – vast, deep, and full of unexplored possibilities. It’s the engine of divergent thinking, pushing us to challenge assumptions, question norms, and explore uncharted territories. It asks, “What if? What else could we do? How might we completely reimagine this?”

Feasibility, then, is the experienced navigator and the robust ship. It represents convergent thinking, meticulously evaluating constraints, assessing available resources, and charting a realistic, sustainable course. It asks, “Can we truly build this? Is it sustainable at scale? Do we have the necessary resources and capabilities? What are the inherent risks, and how can we mitigate them?”

The magic happens not when one dominates the other, but when they engage in a continuous, iterative dialogue. An initial creative spark is immediately subjected to a feasibility lens. This check doesn’t kill the idea; rather, it often sparks *new* creative solutions to overcome identified obstacles, refine the concept, or pivot towards an even stronger, viable solution. It’s a cyclical process, a perpetual feedback loop where each refines and strengthens the other.

Case Study 1: Apple’s iPhone – Synthesizing Vision with Viability

Apple’s iPhone – Synthesizing Vision with Viability

When Steve Jobs unveiled the iPhone in 2007, it wasn’t just another mobile phone. It was a audacious creative leap – a seamless convergence of a phone, a widescreen iPod, and a breakthrough internet device, all controlled by a revolutionary multi-touch interface. The vision was to eliminate physical buttons, create an intuitive operating system from scratch, and integrate a vast, extensible application ecosystem.

However, the true genius of Apple wasn’t just in the audacious creative vision; it was in their unparalleled mastery of feasibility. They didn’t just dream big; they possessed the engineering prowess, supply chain expertise, and manufacturing discipline to turn that dream into a polished, mass-market reality. They painstakingly solved immense technical hurdles: perfecting the responsive multi-touch screen, miniaturizing powerful processors, optimizing battery life for constant connectivity, and building a robust, scalable software platform (iOS) that could attract developers. This wasn’t merely invention; it was the meticulous synthesis of creative foresight with an unwavering commitment to practical execution and scalability. Apple understood that for the creative vision to truly disrupt, it had to be undeniably *feasible*.

Case Study 2: Blockbuster vs. Netflix – The Peril of Myopic Feasibility

Blockbuster vs. Netflix – The Peril of Myopic Feasibility

Consider the stark contrast between Blockbuster and Netflix. Blockbuster, once the reigning king of video rentals, was deeply anchored in the feasibility of its existing physical store model. Their enormous physical infrastructure, established supply chains, and predictable revenue from late fees represented a very profitable, tangible business. When a nascent Netflix proposed a mail-order DVD service (a creative new approach), Blockbuster famously dismissed it, seeing it as a niche, unfeasible threat to their dominant brick-and-mortar empire.

Netflix, on the other hand, embraced a creative vision of convenience and accessibility that challenged the norm. They started with a relatively simple, feasible model (DVDs by mail) and continually iterated, demonstrating the feasibility of streaming and eventually content production. Blockbuster’s fatal flaw was allowing the perceived short-term feasibility and profitability of their existing model to blind them to the disruptive creative potential of a new one. Their inability to pivot and invest in a new, feasible model for digital distribution, even when the market signals were clear, led to their eventual demise. Netflix, by continuously balancing its creative vision for entertainment delivery with the evolving feasibility of technology, conquered the market.

Cultivating the Innovation Sweet Spot

So, how can organizations consciously foster this crucial balance? It demands a deliberate, integrated approach:

Embrace Structured Ideation & Rigorous Filtering: Encourage boundless brainstorming sessions, but immediately follow with structured evaluation frameworks that assess both creative potential (novelty, value proposition) and practical viability (technical feasibility, market fit, resource requirements).
Assemble Cross-Functional Catalysts: Break down silos. Bring together diverse perspectives – creative thinkers (designers, strategists), technical experts (engineers, data scientists), and operational pragmatists (finance, supply chain). This diversity ensures ideas are challenged and refined from all angles.
Prototype and Test Relentlessly (Lean & Agile): Don’t strive for perfection upfront. Build Minimum Viable Products (MVPs) and prototypes quickly to test core assumptions about both user desirability (creative validation) and technical/business feasibility. Iterate rapidly based on real-world feedback, making feasibility an ongoing learning process, not a final gate.
Develop Clear Innovation Pathways: Establish transparent stages in your innovation funnel where ideas are not just generated but rigorously evaluated and refined against both creative aspiration and practical viability criteria. This ensures a healthy pipeline of both breakthrough and incremental innovations.
Cultivate a Culture of Psychological Safety: People must feel empowered to propose radical ideas without fear of immediate dismissal, and equally safe to voice genuine concerns about feasibility without being labeled as negative or unsupportive. Open, honest dialogue is paramount.

Ultimately, true innovation isn’t about conjuring magic; it’s about disciplined imagination. It’s understanding that the most brilliant ideas are only half the battle. The other, often more challenging half, is the art and science of transforming that brilliance into tangible value for customers and the organization. By consciously nurturing the dynamic interplay between creativity and feasibility, organizations can transcend mere ideation and consistently deliver impactful innovation that truly reshapes the future.

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

Image credit: Pexels

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

Integrating User Feedback into Your Designs

Leave a reply

The Unseen Revolution: Placing the User at the Heart of Innovation

Integrating User Feedback into Your Designs

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In the whirlwind of digital transformation and perpetual innovation, it’s easy for organizations to become entranced by the siren song of cutting-edge technology and brilliant new features. We chase the next big thing, pouring resources into development cycles and marketing campaigns, often with the best intentions. Yet, a fundamental truth, often overlooked, remains: true innovation isn’t born in a vacuum; it’s forged in the crucible of human experience. It’s about solving real problems for real people. And to do that effectively, we must embrace the power of user feedback, integrating it not as an afterthought, but as the very heartbeat of our design process.

As a human-centered change and innovation thought leader, I’m here to tell you that the organizations that truly thrive are those that listen intently, observe diligently, and adapt tirelessly based on the voices of their users. This isn’t just about collecting data; it’s about fostering empathy, building trust, and creating products and services that resonate deeply with the people they are designed to serve. Think of user feedback as the compass that guides your innovation ship, ensuring you navigate towards true user value, not just perceived opportunity.

So, how do we move beyond lip service and genuinely integrate user feedback into our designs? Let’s explore the strategic imperatives and practical methodologies that can transform your approach.

The Business Imperative: Why User Feedback Isn’t Just “Nice to Have”

Beyond the philosophical alignment with human-centered design, there’s a compelling business case for prioritizing user feedback. Neglecting user voices can lead to:

Increased Development Costs: Building features no one wants or solving problems that don’t exist is a colossal waste of resources. Iterating based on feedback early on prevents costly reworks down the line.
Higher Customer Churn: Products that don’t meet user needs or solve their pain points will inevitably see users migrate to competitors.
Stagnated Innovation: Without real-world input, innovation can become insular, leading to solutions that are technologically brilliant but practically irrelevant.
Damaged Brand Reputation: A brand perceived as unresponsive or out of touch with its users will struggle to build loyalty and command market respect.

Conversely, a strong feedback loop leads to **increased customer retention, accelerated product-market fit, and a higher return on investment** for your design and development efforts.

Beyond the Survey: Cultivating a Feedback Culture

The first step is to recognize that user feedback isn’t a one-off event; it’s a continuous conversation. Forget the annual, dreaded customer satisfaction survey that gets filed away and forgotten. Instead, cultivate a culture where feedback is actively sought, openly discussed, and systematically acted upon.

This means:

Democratizing Feedback Channels: Make it easy for users to provide feedback through multiple touchpoints – in-app prompts, dedicated feedback sections on your website, social media monitoring, and even direct communication with support teams. Think of every interaction as a potential feedback opportunity.
Empowering Front-Line Teams: Your customer service representatives, sales teams, and even delivery personnel are often the first point of contact for users. Equip them with the tools and training to capture, categorize, and escalate feedback effectively. They are your eyes and ears on the ground.
Celebrating Feedback: Acknowledge and appreciate users who take the time to offer their insights. Show them that their voices matter by publicly demonstrating how their feedback has led to improvements. This reinforces positive behavior and encourages more participation.
Leadership Buy-in: Ensure that leadership actively champions the importance of user feedback, dedicating resources and time to its collection and analysis.

From Data to Design: The Iterative Loop

Once you’re collecting feedback systematically, the real work begins: translating those insights into actionable design changes. This requires a robust iterative loop, where feedback informs design, design leads to testing, and testing generates new feedback. It’s a continuous dance of discovery and refinement.

Consider these critical elements and methodologies:

Qualitative and Quantitative Harmony: Don’t rely solely on quantitative data (numbers, metrics). While valuable for identifying trends, qualitative data (user interviews, usability testing observations, open-ended survey responses) provides the “why” behind the numbers, revealing pain points, motivations, and unmet needs. Combine the ‘what’ with the ‘why’.
Rapid Prototyping and Testing: Once you have an idea for an improvement, don’t wait for a full-scale development cycle. Create low-fidelity prototypes (sketches, wireframes, click-through mocks) and get them in front of users quickly through usability testing. This allows for rapid iteration and minimizes the cost of failure. Fail fast, learn faster.
Customer Journey Mapping and Empathy Maps: These powerful tools help visualize the user’s experience with your product or service, identifying touchpoints, pain points, and opportunities for improvement based on collected feedback. They build empathy within the design team.
Closed-Loop Feedback: It’s not enough to just collect feedback and make changes. Close the loop by informing users about the changes you’ve made based on their input. This builds trust, encourages continued engagement, and demonstrates that their voice is truly heard.

Case Study 1: The Evolution of Slack’s Notifications

When Slack first launched, its notification system was robust but, for some users, overwhelming. While highly customizable, the sheer volume of notifications could lead to fatigue and missed important messages. Instead of dismissing these concerns, Slack’s product team actively sought feedback.

They conducted extensive user interviews, observed user behavior through analytics, and analyzed data on notification settings. They discovered that users craved more nuanced control and better filtering mechanisms. Based on this feedback, Slack iteratively introduced features like “Do Not Disturb” modes, granular channel-specific notification settings, and intelligent highlighting of direct mentions. They didn’t just add features; they redesigned the notification experience to be less intrusive and more helpful. This continuous refinement, driven by user feedback, transformed a potential pain point into a key strength, reinforcing Slack’s reputation as a productivity tool that respects user focus and reduces cognitive load.

Case Study 2: Netflix’s Recommendation Engine Refinement

Netflix’s recommendation engine is legendary, but it wasn’t built in a day. Early iterations, while functional, sometimes struggled to truly capture the eclectic tastes of its diverse user base. Netflix understood that the success of its platform hinged on users finding content they loved.

They employed a multi-pronged approach to user feedback. A/B testing was central, allowing them to test subtle variations in the recommendation algorithm and measure their impact on watch time and user satisfaction. They also conducted extensive user surveys, focus groups, and analyzed vast amounts of viewing data, gathering qualitative insights into how users perceived the recommendations and what they felt was missing. This feedback led to significant improvements, including the introduction of “Thumbs Up/Down” ratings for more explicit preferences, personalized rows based on specific genres or actors, and even the now-iconic “Skip Intro” button – a brilliant user-driven innovation that addressed a common, minor but pervasive frustration. By continuously learning from user interactions and preferences, Netflix cemented its position as the world’s leading streaming service, demonstrating that even a minor improvement based on feedback can have massive impact.

Overcoming Obstacles: Navigating the Feedback Landscape

While the benefits are clear, integrating user feedback isn’t without its challenges. You might encounter:

Conflicting Feedback: Different users have different needs. Prioritize based on impact, frequency, and strategic alignment.
Sifting Through Noise: Not all feedback is equally valuable. Develop criteria for filtering and categorizing insights.
Organizational Resistance: Some teams may be hesitant to embrace changes based on external input. Demonstrate quick wins and the positive impact of user-driven design.
Analysis Paralysis: Don’t get bogged down in endless analysis. Set clear timelines for decision-making and action.

Addressing these challenges requires strong leadership, clear processes, and a commitment to continuous learning.

The Innovation Imperative: Designing for the Human

In a world saturated with choices, the differentiator is no longer just about features or price; it’s about the quality of the human experience. Organizations that embrace user feedback as a core tenet of their design philosophy are not just building better products; they are building stronger relationships, fostering loyalty, and ultimately, creating a more sustainable future. This principle extends beyond digital products into service design, physical goods, and even organizational processes. Every interaction is an opportunity for human-centered improvement.

Remember, innovation isn’t about what you think is best; it’s about understanding what truly resonates with the people you serve. So, open your ears, open your minds, and let the voice of your users guide your journey towards meaningful and impactful design. The revolution isn’t coming; it’s already here, and it’s powered by you, the user, and the organizations brave enough to listen. Start listening today. Your users are waiting.

Image credit: Pexels

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

A Human-Centered Approach to Mastering Disruption

Leave a reply

A Human-Centered Approach to Mastering Disruption

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

Disruption. The word itself can evoke a sense of panic in the boardrooms of established organizations. It represents the unknown, the sudden shift that threatens to destabilize markets, render existing strategies obsolete, and even collapse empires. Yet, in our volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) world, disruption is not just a possibility; it’s a relentless certainty. The true differentiator for success in this era isn’t about avoiding disruption, but about mastering its management. And at the heart of this mastery lies a profound commitment to human-centered change and innovation. It’s about recognizing that people – your employees, your customers, your partners – are not merely components of the machine, but the very engines of resilience and reinvention.

Effective disruption management transcends mere contingency planning. It demands an organizational culture that is inherently adaptable, relentlessly curious, and deeply empathetic. It requires the courage to challenge assumptions, the agility to pivot rapidly, and the wisdom to learn from every experience – both good and bad. Let’s explore how leading organizations have exemplified these principles through two powerful case studies, revealing the human thread that weaves through their triumph over turbulence.

Case Study 1: The Global Logistics Industry & The COVID-19 Shock

From Supply Chain Gridlock to Agile Lifeline

The dawn of 2020 brought with it a disruption of staggering scale: the COVID-19 pandemic. For the global logistics and supply chain industry, it was an existential shockwave. Traditional systems, built on predictable flows and just-in-time efficiencies, buckled under unprecedented demand surges, crippled by sudden labor shortages, and fractured by international border closures. The world watched as shelves emptied and critical medical supplies became scarce.

However, amidst this chaos, giants like Amazon, FedEx, and a constellation of regional innovators didn’t just survive; they redefined their roles. Their success wasn’t born from static playbooks, but from a dynamic, human-centered response. They rapidly iterated and deployed contactless delivery models, adapting safety protocols not just for efficiency but for the psychological safety of both their workforce and customers. They harnessed the power of real-time data analytics, not just for route optimization, but to predict demand fluctuations and proactively reroute essential goods to areas of greatest need.

Perhaps most profoundly, their leadership empowered frontline employees. Truck drivers, warehouse workers, and delivery personnel became critical innovators, devising on-the-ground solutions for complex, evolving challenges. Leaders listened, decentralized decision-making, and invested in immediate support—from personal protective equipment to rapid retraining. This cultivated an extraordinary level of trust and shared purpose, transforming a fragmented network into a resilient, adaptive lifeline for global communities.

Key Lessons from the Logistics Response:

Distributed Intelligence & Empowerment: Equip and trust your frontline teams; they hold the most immediate insights and often the most pragmatic solutions.
Rapid Experimentation (Build-Measure-Learn): Don’t strive for perfection upfront. Test, learn from feedback, and quickly iterate new solutions, even under immense pressure.
Empathy-Driven Operations: Prioritize the physical and psychological well-being of your employees and customers; their safety and trust are foundational to resilience.
Data as a Human Enabler: Utilize data not just for efficiency, but to inform human decisions and adapt quickly to evolving needs and risks.

Case Study 2: Netflix vs. Blockbuster – The Empathy Divide

A Masterclass in Customer-Centric Disruption

The story of Netflix and Blockbuster is a cautionary tale and a beacon, respectively, in the annals of disruption. Blockbuster, the once-dominant king of video rentals, famously dismissed an opportunity to acquire a nascent Netflix in 2000 for $50 million. Their rationale? Netflix’s DVD-by-mail model seemed niche, and their own late fees were too lucrative to abandon. This was a classic product-centric, rather than human-centered, blind spot.

Netflix, conversely, was built on a foundation of deep customer empathy. They didn’t just offer DVDs; they offered a solution to the frustrations of physical stores, limited choices, and the egregious late fees that plagued Blockbuster’s customers. They listened to the human desire for convenience, variety, and a sense of fairness. As broadband internet became ubiquitous, Netflix didn’t hesitate to disrupt its *own* successful DVD-by-mail model. They recognized the evolving human need for instant gratification and personalization, investing heavily in streaming technology and, crucially, in data-driven content recommendations and original programming.

Blockbuster, meanwhile, clung to its brick-and-mortar legacy, unable or unwilling to shed the very aspects of its business that were becoming pain points for consumers. Their leadership failed to understand the human shift towards digital access and personalized entertainment experiences. Netflix, by consistently putting the customer’s evolving needs at the very core of its strategy – a true demonstration of Human-Centered Change™ in action – didn’t just manage disruption; it orchestrated it, evolving from a DVD service to a global entertainment powerhouse.

Key Lessons from Netflix’s Triumph:

Obsessive Customer-Centricity: Deeply understand and anticipate evolving human needs and frustrations; this is your ultimate compass.
Strategic Cannibalization: Be willing to disrupt your own profitable business models if it serves a superior, emerging customer experience.
Long-Term Vision over Short-Term Myopia: Resist the temptation to prioritize immediate gains when fundamental market shifts are underway.
Culture of Continuous Learning & Adaptation: Foster an organizational mindset that embraces new technologies and business models, even if they seem small or unprofitable at first.

The Human Thread: Cultivating Resilience and Reinvention

These case studies underscore a critical truth: successful disruption management is not a technological problem; it’s a human one. It demands a leadership commitment to fostering environments where curiosity thrives, experimentation is encouraged, and empathy guides every decision. To build an organization capable of not just surviving but thriving amidst continuous disruption, consider these human-centered imperatives:

Cultivate Psychological Safety: Create a culture where speaking up, challenging norms, and even failing fast are embraced as vital components of learning and innovation. Fear is the enemy of adaptation.
Empower the Adaptive Mindset: Invest in continuous learning, providing opportunities for employees to develop skills in areas like design thinking, agile methodologies, and data interpretation. Equip your people to be lifelong learners.
Champion Cross-Functional Collaboration: Break down silos. Disruptive challenges rarely fit neatly into departmental boxes; solutions emerge when diverse perspectives converge and collaborate.
Lead with Radical Transparency & Empathy: During times of uncertainty, clear, honest, and empathetic communication from leadership builds trust and reduces anxiety, freeing people to focus their energy on solving problems.
Design for Human Resilience: Build systems, processes, and a culture that is inherently flexible, capable of absorbing shocks, learning from them, and quickly reconfiguring. This means focusing on human capabilities and adaptability, not just rigid procedures.

Disruption is not a wave to be merely endured; it is a current that can be navigated, harnessed, and even ridden to new horizons. By placing the human element – our innate capacity for innovation, collaboration, and resilience – at the heart of your strategy, you can transform the daunting challenge of disruption into your greatest opportunity for sustained growth and meaningful impact.

Image credit: 1 of 850+ FREE quote slides from http://misterinnovation.com

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

Resilience in Leadership

Leave a reply

Thriving in Uncertainty

Resilience in Leadership

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In today’s fast-paced world, the only constant is change. Leaders must navigate through challenges and uncertainties with resilience, a quality that’s integral to successful leadership. Resilience enables leaders to sustain momentum, inspire their teams, and drive innovation even in the face of adversity. So how can leaders cultivate resilience?

The Essence of Resilience in Leadership

Resilience is more than just bouncing back from setbacks. It’s about growing through challenges and finding opportunities amidst obstacles. Resilient leaders possess emotional intelligence, adaptability, and the ability to lead with empathy. They create a culture of trust and psychological safety, which empowers teams to innovate and embrace change.

Case Study 1: Apple Inc.

Apple’s Journey Through Innovation and Setbacks

Apple Inc. is a quintessential example of resilience in leadership. In the mid-1990s, Apple faced significant financial challenges and was on the brink of collapse. Steve Jobs’ return to the company marked a turning point. Jobs exhibited resilience by simplifying Apple’s product line and investing heavily in innovation.

The launch of the iMac and later the iPhone not only revitalized Apple’s brand but also set new standards in the tech industry. Jobs’ visionary leadership, coupled with his ability to adapt and push the company’s boundaries, showcased resilience at every step. The company’s culture of innovation, combined with leadership that thrives in uncertainty, ensured its consistent growth and success.

Case Study 2: The Rise of Netflix

Netflix: From DVD Rentals to Streaming Giant

Netflix’s transformation from a DVD rental service to a global streaming giant illustrates resilience in the face of industry disruption. When digital streaming emerged as a threat to its core business, Netflix’s leadership embraced change rather than resisting it. Reed Hastings, co-founder, and CEO led the charge in pivoting the business model to a subscription-based streaming service.

Hastings demonstrated resilience by fostering a culture of experimentation and learning from failures. The Netflix of today is a testament to strategic foresight and an adaptive leadership approach. By prioritizing innovation and customer focus, Netflix thrived amidst the evolving media landscape.

Building Resilient Leadership

Here are some strategies to cultivate resilience as a leader:

Embrace Change: View change as an opportunity for growth rather than a threat.
Foster a Learning Culture: Encourage continuous learning and adaptability within your teams.
Build Emotional Intelligence: Enhance self-awareness and empathy to connect with and guide your teams.
Encourage Innovation: Create an environment where new ideas are welcomed and experimentation is rewarded.
Develop a Support Network: Engage with mentors, peers, and advisors who can provide guidance and perspective.

Conclusion

Resilient leadership is crucial for navigating the uncertainties of today’s world. By learning from companies like Apple and Netflix, leaders can understand the importance of adaptability, innovation, and a strong, value-driven culture. By cultivating resilience, leaders not only thrive in uncertainty themselves but also inspire their teams to do the same.

Remember, the measure of a great leader is not how well they perform in favorable conditions, but how skillfully they lead through the storms.

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: Pixabay

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

Navigating Industry Disruptions with Confidence

Leave a reply

Navigating Industry Disruptions with Confidence

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In today’s rapidly evolving business environment, disruption is the new normal. Companies that manage to thrive amidst continuous change aren’t necessarily those with the most resources but those that are agile, innovative, and prepared. As we navigate industry disruptions, understanding how to adapt and innovate becomes crucial.

The Essence of Disruption

Disruption can arise from various avenues—technological breakthroughs, regulatory shifts, market dynamics, or global events. The key to navigating these disruptions lies not only in responding to them effectively but anticipating them and embedding adaptability into the organizational fabric.

Case Study 1: Netflix – From DVDs to Streaming

Netflix’s journey is perhaps the quintessential case study of strategic adaptability and innovation. Originally a DVD rental service, Netflix faced significant challenges as technology favored streaming over physical discs. The impending obsolescence of its original business model didn’t deter Netflix; instead, it served as a catalyst for transformation.

By investing heavily in streaming technology and content production, Netflix successfully pivoted to a digital-first model. This shift not only retained its customer base but expanded it exponentially across the globe, making it a leader in content streaming. The company’s commitment to innovation didn’t stop at distribution; Netflix then disrupted the industry again by producing original content, winning numerous accolades, and setting new standards in the entertainment sector.

Lessons Learned

Anticipate shifts in consumer behavior to stay ahead.
Invest in technology to support scalable change.
Don’t just adapt; innovate to define new industry standards.

Case Study 2: LEGO – Reinventing Through Innovation

LEGO’s story reflects a different, yet equally powerful narrative of navigating industry disruption. In the early 2000s, LEGO faced a significant crisis—falling sales, high debts, and the growing allure of digital games threatened its core business model based on physical play.

LEGO’s response to this disruption was multi-faceted. They realigned their product strategies focusing on core themes that resonated with their customer base like City, Star Wars, and Technic. More importantly, LEGO embraced digitalization, launching video games, movies, and interactive experiences that extended its brand universe beyond physical bricks.

The introduction of the LEGO Ideas platform also marked a pivotal innovation, allowing fans to design new sets with the potential for actual production. This not only sparked greater brand engagement but harnessed the creativity of its community, reinforcing customer loyalty and market relevance.

Lessons Learned

Engage with your customer community for insights and innovation.
Diversify offerings to stay relevant across changing consumer preferences.
Leverage your brand’s strengths while exploring new growth avenues.

Strategies for Confidence in Disruption

Based on the insights from the case studies above, the following strategies can help organizations confidently navigate disruptions:

Build an Agile Culture

Cultivate a culture that embraces change. This means encouraging experimentation, tolerating failures, and iterating quickly. When employees are empowered to innovate and adapt, the organization becomes inherently more resilient.

Continuous Learning and Development

Equip your workforce with the skills needed to address future challenges. Investing in employee development fosters a dynamic environment ready to tackle new technologies and methodologies.

Customer-Centric Innovation

Your customers are your greatest source of feedback and inspiration. Design your products and services around their evolving needs to stay relevant. Use data analytics to glean insights and mold your strategies.

Conclusion

Navigating industry disruptions requires confidence, foresight, and an innovative spirit. Organizations that understand and implement these principles can not only survive disruptive forces but thrive in them. By embedding adaptability into your DNA, like Netflix and LEGO, you can pivot strategically and emerge stronger in any competitive landscape.

Image credit: Pexels

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