The Education Business Model Canvas

Mission Model Canvas

GUEST POST from Arlen Meyers

The business model canvas is one of many useful tools to design, evolve and test products and services business models. While the original model was proposed to help founders create a viable and scaleable business model, it has also helped non-profit executives, as the mission driven business model, and those looking to make a career change, using a personal business model as the Business Model You.

Personal Business Model Canvas

The construct is also useful if you are an edupreneur, trying to create and launch new educational products and services, including new courses, certificates, programs or degree offerings.

Edupreneurship rests on several foundational principles:

Having an entrepreneurial mindset
Intra- and entrepreneurial knowledge, skills, abilities and competencies
Design thinking focused on creating stakeholder and beneficiary defined outcomes
A systems engineering approach to solving wicked problems, like how to fix outcomes disparities and their social determinants
A different business model
More respect for and attention to edupreneurial champions
Better teacher education and training
An incentive and reward system for not just tweaking a failed system , but rather, making it obsolete given the basic structural changes in the US economy
Eliminating unnecessary and burdensome bureaucracy, credentialing that does not add value and administrivia
Paying more attention to and measuring student defined outcomes
Better public-private integration
K-20 integration and alignment

13. Teaching students what they need to win the 4th industrial revolution

14. Embracing cradle to career integration

15. Creating a competent diverse and equitable talent pipeline

We has seen several recent advances in edupreneurship.

Here is the boomer’s guide to teaching millenials.

The UGME steering committee recognizes that medical education programs are faced with the ubiquitous challenge of repeated calls for innovation and that, frequently, these calls do not adequately address the associated resource demands. As medical educators, we have become highly creative in identifying strategies to do more with less, but as we know, this is not a sustainable model of stewardship. In 2016 and 2017, the UGME section collaborated with the Group on Business Affairs (GBA) to explore evolving models to support and sustain UGME programming. A result of this work is the Business Model Canvas for Medical Educators. The original Business Model Canvas was proposed by Alexander Osterwalder in 2008 and has been modified over time to fit other needs. The Table of Contents will direct you to resources, including the Business Model Canvas for Medical Educators template and two examples submitted by institutions who have successfully used the template to secure funding from within their own institution.

The edupreneurship business model canvas has a few modifications to the traditional startup one:

Customer segments: The primary customer are students. However, there are many other education stakeholders, including admininstrators, alumni, donors, employers and parents. In addition, for any given subject, potential students will have different backgrounds and experience in the subject, will have different jobs they want done, and, therefore, will have different applications for what they learned, be it finding a job, getting a promotion, or adding value where they presently work.

Value proposition: For each customer segment , you have a specific value proposision. You typically describe it in the course syllabus, telling users about the intended audience, the goals of the course, the learning objectives, and the curriculum. For example, the value proposition for a course I teach to xMBA/HA students is :

This course will introduce graduate level students in healthcare administration and leadership to the principles and practice of healthcare innovation and entrepreneurship defined as the pursuit of opportunity under volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous conditions with the goal of creating stakeholder defined value through the deployment of innovation using a valid, automatic, scaleable and time sensitive (VAST) business model.

Following completion of this course, you should be able to:

1. identify gaps in your health entrepreneurship competencies and develop a personal and professional development plan to address them

2. create an organizational culture of innovation, lead innovators and overcome the barriers to healthcare innovation dissemination and implementation

3. identify the multiple clinical and non-clinical ways to practice healthcare entrepreneurship

4. Create a plan to solve a problem inside or outside of your organization that meets the goals of the quintuple aim (Quality, cost, access, experience, waste/business operations)

5. Identify the startup life cycle and challenges at each stage

Channels: This describes how you will deliver your course. Will it be face to face, online or some hybrid model with elements of both?

Customer relationships: This describes how you will get, keep and grow the numbers of students who will take the course, e.g. promoting in the course catalog, attending a career or course proposal day, creating awareness on social media or using word or mouth dissemination from previous students.

Revenue model: This describes how your employer or you will generate revenue from the products. Traditionally, universisty based courses use a “butts in the seats” model, but COVID and new eductional technologies have radically changes the revenue generating possibilities, inluding advertising, freemium models, subscription models and others.

Key resources: This describes the human, physical, intellectual property and financial resources you will need to build, execute and scale your initiative. For example, do you want to copyright your materials, or , do you want to make them an open educational resource using a Creative Commons license?

Key activities: This what you need to do to perform and deliver on your value proposition, like what you will do using a learning management system, like create videos, run office hours, moderate asynchronous virtual discussions and design and grade exams and quizzes

Key partnerships: This describes who can help you, be they guest faculty, educational technology partners, corporate sponsors, e.g. if you are using project based learning techniques or online tools and resouce producers, e.g cases from the Harvard Business School collection.

Costs: This describes the tangible and intangible costs to produce your product. In most instances, your time, opportunity costs and effort will overshadow the monetary costs.

COVID has accelerated the pace of change in higher education, forcing them to create entrepreneurial universities. Teaching faculty how to use the education business model canvas should be part of faculty development to mimimize projecdt and product failure.

Here is what I learned, using the business model canvas, teaching sickcare innovation and entrepreneurship to first year medical students at the University of Colorado.

In this post , Steve Blank offers a new definition of why startups exist: a startup is an organization formed to search for a repeatable and scalable business model.

So is a new course or certificate. Use the education driven business model to make your product desireable, feasible, viable and adaptable and be sure to document your success when it comes time for your evaluation,promotion and tenure review. More likely, though, you will be including it in your failure resume, since, like the vast majority of new products, yours is likely to fail because 1) you offered a product students don’t want to buy or someone does not want to pay for, and 2) you do not have a VAST educational product business model.

Image credits: Strategyzer

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

Innovative Tools for Enhancing User Research

Leave a reply

Innovative Tools for Enhancing User Research

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In the fast-paced world of innovation, understanding the needs and behaviors of users has never been more crucial. As organizations strive to create products and services that truly resonate, effective user research becomes indispensable. Fortunately, a suite of innovative tools is now available to enhance the way we conduct user research. This article explores some of these tools and illustrates their impact through real-world case studies.

Innovative Tools for User Research

In the digital age, a plethora of user research tools has emerged, offering user researchers unprecedented insights into consumer behavior. Among these tools, augmented reality (AR) user testing, AI-driven sentiment analysis, and real-time collaboration platforms have gained prominence. These tools facilitate deeper understanding and engagement with users, often leading to breakthroughs in product and service design.

Case Studies

Case Study 1: XYZ Inc. Leverages Augmented Reality for User Testing

XYZ Inc., a tech company focused on smart home solutions, incorporated augmented reality (AR) into their user research strategy. By utilizing AR for user testing, they allowed participants to interact with virtual prototypes of their new home-automation system in a realistic environment. This approach not only reduced the costs associated with physical prototyping but also provided users with a more intuitive experience.

Through AR, XYZ Inc. gathered valuable feedback on user interactions with interfaces, uncovering usability issues that traditional methods would have overlooked. As a result, the company was able to refine its user experience design significantly before launching the product, leading to higher customer satisfaction and adoption rates.

Case Study 2: ABC Corp. Utilizes AI-driven Sentiment Analysis

ABC Corp., a financial services firm, implemented AI-driven sentiment analysis to interpret user feedback on their mobile banking app. By integrating AI algorithms that processed thousands of feedback entries, they were able to detect not only the content but also the emotional tone of user comments.

This tool provided insights that went beyond what conventional surveys and interviews could capture. ABC Corp. discovered specific pain points related to security and navigation and identified that sentiments were particularly negative among users aged 50 and above. Armed with this knowledge, they prioritized user-friendly designs and security enhancements tailored to meet the needs of this demographic, resulting in a significant uptick in positive user feedback and app engagement.

Conclusion

The integration of innovative tools in user research is transforming the landscape of user-centered design. As illustrated by the case studies of XYZ Inc. and ABC Corp., adopting new technologies such as AR user testing and AI-driven sentiment analysis can lead to profound insights and significantly enhance product design and user satisfaction. Embracing these tools not only strengthens the research process but also places organizations at the forefront of innovation, ultimately fostering a deeper connection with the end-users.

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

Image credit: Pixabay

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

The Interplay Between Culture and Organizational Change

Leave a reply

The Interplay Between Culture and Organizational Change

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In today’s rapidly evolving business landscape, successful organizational change is not merely a strategic imperative but an existential necessity. At the heart of this change lies an intricate and often underappreciated force – organizational culture. Culture, the unwritten ethos of any organization, influences how change is perceived, implemented, and sustained. As a human-centered change and innovation thought leader, I aim to explore this interplay between culture and change through insightful case studies that underline this dynamic relationship.

Case Study 1: Acme Corp – The Culture Catalyst

Acme Corp, a leading player in the tech industry, was facing a critical phase. Despite strong technical capabilities, they found themselves lagging in innovation and customer satisfaction. The root cause was traced back to the company’s culture, which was mired in risk aversion and departmental silos, stifling cross-functional collaboration and creativity.

Recognizing this, the leadership embarked on a cultural transformation journey aimed at fostering a more agile and collaborative environment. Here’s how they did it:

Leadership as Culture Champions: Leaders demonstrated the desired behaviors, championing open communication and empowering employees to take calculated risks.
Redefining Values and Behaviors: They revisited their core values, aligning them with the new strategic vision, and communicated these through storytelling and workshops.
Structural Adjustments: The company restructured teams to promote cross-functional collaboration and introduced dynamic project teams to address complex challenges.

Within two years, Acme Corp experienced a marked increase in innovation output and customer satisfaction scores. By making culture a focal point, they were able to unlock the full potential of their organizational change initiatives.

Case Study 2: HealthCo – Navigating Cultural Resistance

HealthCo, a large healthcare provider, embarked on a digital transformation journey aimed at enhancing patient care and operational efficiency. However, the initiative faced significant resistance rooted in a deeply ingrained hierarchical culture. Employees were accustomed to rigid procedures and hesitant to embrace new technologies.

HealthCo’s approach to overcoming this challenge involved:

Inclusive Change Design: Involving employees at all levels in designing the change process, which provided a sense of ownership and reduced resistance.
Targeted Training Programs: Comprehensive training sessions were held to equip staff with the necessary skills and confidence to use new digital tools effectively.
Recognition and Feedback Loops: Establishing mechanisms for recognizing adaptation efforts and fostering an ongoing feedback culture to continually refine the processes.

While the transformation at HealthCo took longer than anticipated, the focus on gradually reshaping their culture ensured a sustainable, long-term embrace of digital practices, ultimately leading to improved patient outcomes.

Conclusion

The interplay between culture and organizational change is both intricate and profound. As seen through the experiences of Acme Corp and HealthCo, understanding and harnessing cultural dynamics is crucial to effective change management. Leaders must recognize that culture is not merely an abstract concept but a tangible influence on strategy and execution. By proactively aligning culture with change objectives, organizations can drive innovation, enhance performance, and thrive in a fast-paced world.

Whether you are in the nascent stages of a transformation or managing ongoing change, always remember: culture is the lens through which change is viewed and valued. Cultivate it wisely, and it becomes your greatest ally in transformation efforts.

Image credit: Pixabay

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

Cybersecurity Concerns in Emerging Technologies

Leave a reply

Cybersecurity Concerns in Emerging Technologies

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

As we stand on the brink of a new era defined by exponential technological growth, cybersecurity continues to emerge as a critical focal point in the adoption and deployment of emerging technologies. The accelerating pace at which these technologies are being integrated into business processes and our daily lives underscores the importance of developing robust security measures to safeguard against increasing cyber threats.

Risks and Implications

Emerging technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI), Internet of Things (IoT), blockchain, and quantum computing are revolutionizing industries. However, they also come with their set of cybersecurity risks. As digital transformation permeates more deeply into organizational structures, ensuring the security of digital infrastructures becomes paramount.

Case Study: Internet of Things (IoT) Vulnerabilities

The proliferation of IoT devices has brought unprecedented connectivity and convenience. However, it has also multiplied the attack surfaces for cybercriminals. A notable incident was the Mirai Botnet attack in 2016, which exploited IoT devices to carry out a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack, crippling major websites worldwide.

The lack of proper security measures in many IoT devices, such as default passwords and inadequate patch management, allows attackers to gain control and recruit these devices into botnets. This case illustrates the necessity for stronger security protocols and standards in the manufacturing and deployment of IoT devices.

Case Study: Blockchain and Cryptocurrency Threats

Blockchain technology underpins cryptocurrencies and offers enhanced security characteristics due to its decentralized and immutable nature. However, the rise of cryptocurrencies has also attracted cybercriminals seeking to exploit vulnerabilities in exchanges and wallets.

The infamous 2018 Coincheck hack in Japan exemplifies the risks associated with insufficient security in cryptocurrency exchanges. The hackers stole over $500 million worth of NEM cryptocurrency, highlighting how inadequate security measures and lack of regulatory oversight can lead to significant financial losses.

This case underscores the importance of implementing comprehensive cybersecurity strategies and regulatory frameworks to protect digital assets and enhance trust in blockchain-related technologies.

Moving Forward

As organizations increasingly adopt emerging technologies, a holistic approach to cybersecurity becomes essential. This includes prioritizing the security of digital assets, fostering a culture of cybersecurity awareness, and advocating for global standards and regulations tailored to evolving threats.

Businesses, governments, and individuals must collaborate to ensure that the innovative potential of emerging technologies is harnessed responsibly, and that cybersecurity strategies evolve to counteract the sophisticated attacks of the future.

Image credit: Pixabay

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

Bureaucracy and Politics versus Innovation

4 Replies

Bureaucracy and Politics versus Innovation

Innovation in military hardware is really hard.

I wanted to call this article “Corruption versus Innovation” but I sailed back from the precipice to a more forgiving title to give the government and military contractors the benefit of the doubt that the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) program – aka Little Crappy Ships – was not corporate welfare but merely a poorly executed military contract.

Back in 2004 the Bush administration decided it wanted to increase military spending.

One of the ways they decided to do this was to initiate a new shipbuilding program that benefited Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics. The initial phase of the project called for two ships of each design to be built at an estimated cost of $220 million each. The initial phase of this suspect shipbuilding program went so poorly that congress canceled the second ship each company was scheduled to build and re-opened bidding.

The government pushed for fixed price contracting, and despite agreeing to a fixed price of $432-437 million each, the first ship set sail at a price of $637 million and the second at a whopping $704 million. This for a ship that was initially envisioned to only need a crew of forty sailors (eight officers and 32 enlisted) to operate. This was later changed to a crew of 73 sailors and 20 airmen to operate helicopters, UAV’s or other special equipment.

After beginning the LCS program in 2004, it wasn’t until 2013 that the initial LCS achieved its first deployment – to Singapore. That’s nine years from initiation to product launch. Think about how much has changed in the last nine years – we’ll come back to this point later.

The continuing poor performance of both the program (never-ending cost overruns), and the ship itself, forced the US Navy to reduce its orders from 55 of the ships to 32. Despite this reduction in the number of ships, the Navy chose to still take delivery of all 120 of the helicopters designed to pair with the ships, deeming it more expensive to cancel the contract for the excess helicopters than to go ahead and take delivery.

You can probably see now why I was going to call this article “Corruption versus Innovation” as the billions of dollars siphoned from the taxpayers to the military contractors and their shareholders pile up.

What’s worse, not only have the ships proven to be THREE TIMES more expensive to acquire than advertised, but they break down all the time and cost nearly as much to operate annually as an Arleigh-Burke Destroyer AND they have still yet to deploy their mine countermeasure and anti-submarine warfare capabilities.

The situation is so bad that the Navy is abandoning the program and looking to replace its little crappy ships (LCS) with a new Frigate program – the FFG (X) to be constructed by an Italian shipbuilding firm.

So, what went wrong?

Through the eyes of both a U.S. Navy Veteran, and as an innovation professional, here are my thoughts about how the U.S. Government can require its contractors to leverage more innovation best practices in their provision of services on behalf of the American people. Here are five places to start:

1. Pick the Right Time Horizon for Your Design Challenge

One of the biggest mistakes that organizations make is not consider how long it takes to develop, launch and market a new product or service without considering how an identified customer insight might change over that timeframe. For example, if it takes you two years to launch a new product and you’re developing that product based on a customer insight identified today, there is a chance that two years from now the customer may no longer value the key elements of the solution you’re designing. So, you must make sure that you’re designing against a customer insight that will still be relevant at the end of your product development and launch timeline.

Innovating for the Future Present

For more, see my article Are You Innovating for the Past or the Future?

2. Make Sure You’re Solving a Problem Worth Solving

It is really easy to latch on to a single problem and decide to solve it. But is it the right problem to solve?

Smart organizations don’t jump to problem solving too soon, but instead start with problem finding in a divergent manner before converging via problem prioritization, then diverge again in a problem deep dive and finally converge into a problem summary and a research brief focused on a carefully chosen problem worth solving.

Preparing to Solve the Right Problem

For more, see my article Picking a Problem Worth Solving From a Sea of Problems

3. Identify Potential Fatal Flaws

No idea is perfect, and so when you can identify the potential fatal flaws or the high hurdles that have to be overcome, you can challenge them, you can solve for them, you can unleash the passion of your team on trying to find a way around them.

The fatal flaws are always there, and the wise innovator doesn’t ignore them or assume that they will overcome them at some point in the future, but instead invests energy upfront into both trying to identify the fatal flaws of their idea and into identifying whether they can isolate the solutions before moving the idea forward.

For more, see my article Innovation and Entrepreneurship Fatal Flaws

4. Create an Experimentation Strategy and a Plan for Learning Fast

When it comes to innovation, it is not as important whether you fail fast or fail slow or whether you fail at all, but how fast you learn. And make no mistake, you don’t have to fail to innovate (although there are always some obstacles along the way). With the right approach to innovation you can learn quickly from failures AND successes.

The key is to pursue your innovation efforts as a discrete set of experiments designed to learn certain things and instrumenting each project phase in such a way that the desired learning is achieved.

The central question should always be:

“What do we hope to learn from this effort?”

My Experiment Canvas is a great free tool you can download from this web site to help you design and execute a series of carefully selected experiments to help you get the right learning and to help identify early on whether or not you can realistically solve for the potential fatal flaws – as early as possible – while investments are low.

For more, see my article Don’t Fail Fast – Learn Fast and download your free Experiment Canvas poster to print or to use as a background to lock down and put virtual sticky notes on top of in online whiteboarding tools like Miro, Mural, LucidSpark or Microsoft Whiteboard.

5. Design for Modularity to Reduce Obsolescence

The LCS was promised to be a modular warship capable of performing multiple missions, but the contractors have failed to deliver on this promise.

It takes a really long time to put a new ship design to sea and into service. So, if you get it wrong, like with the LCS program, it will be many more years before you can replace a faulty design with a new design.

We rarely successfully predict the future, so it is important to design in the capability to adapt solutions as they are developed to match emerging realities. Otherwise, you can end up designing a solution for a problem that goes away.

To reduce the chances of designing a new ship for a mission that may no longer be needed by the time it is put to sea, it is imperative that each ship is designed to be intentionally modular. It is imperative that each ship is designed as a platform of platforms.

The automobile industry has gotten really good at designing in this way. Different trim levels have different stereo options, for example, or a dealer can install a spoiler or a luggage rack pretty easily if a customer desires it.

Designing with modularity and upgradeability in mind to change out key components to different mission needs that may emerge over time or new technologies that may create new or enhanced capabilities, is an incredibly powerful way to extend the usefulness and lifespan of each new maritime defense hull.

Conclusion

The U.S. Navy is in a quandary about what to do with the Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) it already has.

So much so that it has reached out to fleet commanders to inquire what missions the ships should be deployed against – according to Naval Surface Forces Vice Adm. Roy Kitchener.

The Navy should consider opening up their queries for help even wider, perhaps to the global innovation community.

But, with that said, as a U.S. Navy veteran I think the perception of the success or failure of this program would be seen much differently if they had successfully deployed the Anti-Mine Countermeasure and Anti-Submarine Warfare capabilities BEFORE the Surface Warfare capabilities.

Frigates and Destroyers are much more capable surface warfare platforms, and in hindsight the billions of dollars wasted on this program could have been much better spent for the benefit of the American people.

So, I hope that military contractors and the U.S. Government will improve their ability to deliver increased value at a decreased price as they pursue future shipbuilding programs and leverage some of the innovation best practices above.

Grabbing a copy of Stoking Your Innovation Bonfire would also be a great place to start.

Go Navy!

Image credit: Wikimedia Commons (ship photo)
All other images: Braden Kelley (All Rights Reserved)

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

Overcoming Common Challenges in Innovation Measurement

Leave a reply

Overcoming Common Challenges in Innovation Measurement

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

Innovation is both an art and a science, requiring an ability to measure progress and impact accurately. Yet, many organizations struggle with this aspect of innovation management. With the right insights and tools, these challenges can be transformed into opportunities for growth.

Understanding the Challenges

At its core, innovation measurement is about assessing not only the outcomes but also the process of generating new ideas. Common challenges include defining relevant metrics, addressing the subjectivity of success criteria, and the difficulty in quantifying intangible benefits.

Case Study 1: TechCorp’s Innovation Metric Overhaul

TechCorp, a leading technology company, faced difficulties in linking their innovation activities with overall business performance. Their existing metrics focused too heavily on short-term financial returns, ignoring longer-term strategic value. As a result, many potentially groundbreaking projects were starved of resources too early in their development.

To address this, TechCorp adopted a holistic innovation measurement framework. They introduced a balanced scorecard approach, incorporating non-financial measures such as customer satisfaction, employee engagement, and patent activity. Over the next two years, the company witnessed a 25% increase in successful project transitions from development to market, as well as improved alignment of innovation efforts with long-term strategic goals.

Case Study 2: InnovateSoft’s Journey to Quantifying Intangibles

InnovateSoft, a software development firm, struggled with capturing the intangible benefits of their innovation programs, such as brand reputation and knowledge sharing. These benefits were acknowledged qualitatively but lacked quantitative support, making it difficult to justify spending to stakeholders.

InnovateSoft tackled this challenge by developing an “innovation impact scorecard” that included metrics for brand mentions, industry recognition, and internal knowledge transfer sessions. The introduction of these new metrics allowed InnovateSoft to visibly connect their innovation practices with market presence and internal culture enrichment. As a result, the company gained increased budget approvals and, crucially, experienced an uplift in employee morale and creativity.

Concluding Thoughts

Measuring innovation is not a one-size-fits-all endeavor, but the success stories of TechCorp and InnovateSoft demonstrate that with the right framework and commitment, the inherent challenges can be effectively navigated. Organizations must be willing to adapt their measurement approaches to align more closely with their unique strategic objectives while embracing both qualitative and quantitative metrics.

Ultimately, mastering innovation measurement empowers organizations to not only track and report progress but also to foster a culture of innovation that is sustainable and impactful.

Image credit: Pixabay

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

Cross-Functional Collaboration in Design

1 Reply

Breaking Down Silos

Cross-Functional Collaboration in Design

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In today’s rapidly evolving business landscape, the traditional silos that once segmented different departments within organizations are becoming increasingly detrimental. Cross-functional collaboration is no longer optional but essential, especially in the field of design where the synthesis of diverse perspectives can spur innovation and lead to holistic solutions. Here’s a look into why breaking down silos is crucial for impactful design and how real-world examples are leading the way.

The Importance of Cross-Functional Collaboration in Design

Design is the nexus where aesthetics meet functionality, and understanding the client or customer is crucial. By involving diverse teams, organizations can ensure their designs are not only visually appealing but also technically feasible, user-oriented, and market-ready. This collaborative approach encourages creativity and helps identify unforeseen challenges early in the design process.

Case Study 1: XYZ Tech’s Product Development

Background

XYZ Tech, a leader in consumer electronics, wanted to develop an innovative smart home device. Historically, the design team and engineering teams worked independently, leading to delays and frequent iterations.

Approach

To break down the silos, XYZ Tech initiated a series of cross-functional design sprints that brought together designers, engineers, marketers, and customer service representatives. The goal was to leverage each department’s expertise from the outset.

Outcome

This integration led to a faster development cycle. By combining insights from each team, the initial prototypes were more refined, and the final product launch was accelerated by six months. In addition, the collaboration resulted in a product that not only met technical specifications but exceeded customer expectations in user experience and aesthetics.

Case Study 2: ABC Fintech’s Mobile App Revival

Background

ABC Fintech faced declining user engagement with their mobile app. Feedback indicated issues with functionality and user interface which had been designed in isolation.

Approach

To tackle this, ABC Fintech organized workshops that included members from UX design, IT, customer support, and analytics teams. This cross-functional team worked collaboratively in real-time, sharing insights and user data to inform design decisions.

Outcome

The collaboration brought vital customer insights to the forefront, leading to a redesigned app that was intuitive and responsive. Post-launch analytics showed a 40% increase in user engagement and a positive shift in user satisfaction scores.

Conclusion

Breaking down silos and fostering cross-functional collaboration are keys to fostering innovation in design. The synergy derived from diverse perspectives can lead organizations to not only design better products but also to achieve greater efficiency and customer satisfaction. As these case studies demonstrate, the collective strength of interconnected teams is a formidable force in the world of design.

“Collaboration is the essence of life. The wind, bees, and flowers work together, to spread the pollen.” – Amit Ray

Image credit: Pexels

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

Teaching Old Fish New Tricks

1 Reply

Teaching Fish New Tricks

We used to assume that the world was flat.

We used to assume that the sun orbited around the earth.

We used to assume that it was impossible to go faster than the speed of sound.

These assumptions were all challenged and proved to be wrong, fundamentally extending the boundaries of potential innovation and exploration in the decades that followed.

Challenging orthodoxies or questioning your assumptions is one of the key techniques to use with your innovation teams to uncover new insights to form the seeds of future innovation.

This isn’t always easy to do, and in workshops it can be a challenge to put people in the right frame of mind for questioning assumptions and challenging orthodoxies.

I find that having a stable of short videos can help in setting the stage for the very important innovation work.

Now, let’s have a look at one of my new favorite assumption-challenging videos…

Who says you can’t teach old fish new tricks?

Yes, I said fish, not dog – which challenges an orthodoxy in and of itself.

I was intrigued to hear recently that scientists in Israel have managed to teach goldfish how to drive a car.

Don’t believe me?

Check out the video:

Gradually, we are finding out that humans aren’t as special as we like to believe.

We’ve learned that trees can communicate via root systems, research is progressing into plant sentience and yes apparently, goldfish can be taught to drive.

Now that you’ve seen this video, you can now see that the assumption that fish can’t navigate vehicles through physical space – is incorrect.

What other assumptions do we make about goldfish and other living creatures that might be incorrect.

How might we set up experiments to test these assumptions?

What are some of your favorite short videos to put people in the right mindset to challenge orthodoxies and question assumptions?

Add them to the comments!

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

Best Practices for Managing Agile Teams

Leave a reply

Best Practices for Managing Agile Teams

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In today’s rapidly changing business environment, effective management of agile teams has become critical. Agile methodologies emphasize flexibility, collaboration, and customer-centricity. However, managing agile teams comes with its unique challenges that require a nuanced approach. In this article, we delve into some of the best practices for managing agile teams and provide insights through two compelling case studies.

Best Practices for Managing Agile Teams

1. Embrace Transparency

Transparency is the cornerstone of agile team management. Ensure that all team members have access to the relevant information and understand the project goals. This clarity helps in fostering trust and aligning team efforts towards a common objective.

2. Foster a Collaborative Culture

Encourage a culture of collaboration by organizing regular stand-up meetings and retrospectives. These practices enable teams to share feedback, tackle challenges collectively, and continuously improve their processes.

3. Empower Teams with Autonomy

Empowering teams means giving them the autonomy to make decisions and take ownership of their work. Autonomy drives innovation, increases motivation, and enhances accountability.

4. Focus on Continual Learning

Agile environments thrive on continual learning. Encourage your team members to engage in learning opportunities, whether through workshops, online courses, or learning communities. This leads to growth both for individuals and the organization.

Case Study Examples

Case Study: Spotify’s Squad Model

Spotify, a great example of agile success, has implemented a unique Squad model. Each Squad works like a mini-startup with its own mission, a small cross-functional team, and complete autonomy over their area of work. This model has fostered innovation and increased agility across the organization.

Best Practice Highlighted: Empowerment through autonomy – Spotify empowers squads to make decisions independently, enabling rapid innovation and adaptation to market changes.

Case Study: ING’s Agile Transformation

ING, a Dutch multinational bank, underwent a large-scale agile transformation. ING adopted agile principles enterprise-wide, moving away from traditional hierarchical structures. The bank formed tribes, squads, and chapters to streamline operations and improve customer experiences.

Best Practice Highlighted: Transparency and collaboration – By breaking down silos and fostering collaboration, ING improved communication and accelerated product delivery.

Conclusion

Managing agile teams effectively requires a balance of transparency, collaboration, empowerment, and a commitment to continual learning. By following these best practices, organizations can harness the full potential of agile methodologies and drive meaningful innovation and growth. As illustrated by the case studies of Spotify and ING, adopting these practices can lead to exceptional organizational transformation and success.

Remember, driving change and fostering innovation in agile teams is a dynamic journey. Begin by embracing these best practices, and watch your agile teams flourish.

Image credit: Pexels

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

Four Innovation Ecosystem Building Blocks

Leave a reply

Four Innovation Ecosystem Building Blocks

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

It’s hard to find anyone who wouldn’t agree that Microsoft’s 2001 antitrust case was a disaster for the company. Not only did it lose the case, but it wasted time, money and—perhaps most importantly—focus on its existing businesses, which could have been far better deployed on new technologies like search and mobile.

Today, Microsoft is a much different organization. Rather than considering open source software a cancer, it now says it loves Linux. Its cloud business is growing like wildfire and it is partnering widely to develop new quantum computers. What was previously a rapacious monopolist, is now an enthusiastic collaborator.

That’s no accident. Today, we need to compete in an ecosystem-driven world in which nobody, not even a firm as big and powerful as Microsoft, can go it alone. Power no longer comes from the top of value chains, but emanates from the center of networks. That means that strategy needs to shift from dominating industries to building collaborative ecosystems.

1. Connect to Startups

In its heyday, Microsoft enthusiastically followed Michael Porter’s five forces model. It saw threats coming not only from direct competitors, but also suppliers, customers, substitute products and new market entrants. Startups, in particular, were targeted for either acquisition or destruction if they were seen as posing a potential threat.

Today, however, Microsoft actively supports startups. Take, for example, its quantum development effort, in which it is partnering with more than a dozen entrepreneurial companies. These firms also get free access to Microsoft technologies, such as its Azure cloud platform and go-to-market resources and advice, through its Microsoft for Startups program.

Another approach that many firms take is corporate VC programs which actively invest in promising new companies. Unlike a typical investor, corporations bring a wealth of market and technical expertise, can help with things like distribution, supply chain management and marketing acumen. Corporations, for their part, get far more insight into new technologies than they could as an operating company.

Scott Lenet, President of Touchdown Ventures, which operates venture funds for corporations, told me that, “Startups thrive on new ideas and big firms know how to scale and improve those ideas. We’ve seen some of our investments really blossom based on that kind of partnership.”

2. Form Ties to the Academic World

When Sun Microsystems co-founder Bill Joy said, “no matter who you are, most of the smartest people work for someone else,” he was explicitly referring to Bill Gates’s assertion that Microsoft was an “IQ monopolist.” Joy’s position was that “It’s better to create an ecology that gets all the world’s smartest people toiling in your garden for your goals. If you rely solely on your own employees, you’ll never solve all your customers’ needs.”

Make no mistake. Innovation is never a single event. It is a process of discovery, engineering and transformation and those three things almost never happen in the same place or at the same time. That’s why the most innovative companies work hard to build links to the best minds in the academic world.

Today Microsoft has an extensive academic program that extends grants to graduate students and faculty members that are pursuing research that is of interest to the company. Google takes it even a step further, inviting dozens of the world’s top minds to work alongside its scientists and engineers for a sabbatical year.

Microsoft and Google are, of course, firms with enormous resources. However, just about any business can, for example, support the work of a young graduate student or postdoc at a local university. For even a senior researcher to collaborate with your staff is rarely prohibitively expensive. Researchers care far more about genuine support of their work than the size of your investment.

3. Leverage Domain-Specific Consortia

By the mid-1980’s, the American semiconductor industry seemed like it was doomed. Tp respond to what it saw as a national security threat, the American government created SEMATECH in 1986. It was a consortium of government agencies, research institutions and private firms focused on making the industry more competitive. By the mid 1990’s, the US was once again dominating semiconductors.

Any significantly complex technology takes years—and often decades—to develop before it becomes mature enough to engineer into a marketable product. So there is great potential in collaborating, even with competitive firms, in the pre-competitive phase to figure out the basic principles of a nascent technology.

For example, Boeing and Airbus are arch-rivals in aviation, much like DowDupont and BASF are in chemicals. Yet all of these companies, along with many others, collaborate at places like the Composites Institute (IACMI). They do this not out of any altruism, of course, but self-interest, because it is at places like the Composites Institute that they can collaborate with academic scientists, National Labs and startups working in the space.

As technology becomes more complex, domain specific consortia are becoming essential to any ecosystem strategy. The Composites Institute is just one node in the network of Manufacturing Institutes set up under the Obama Administration to support this type of collaboration. In areas ranging from advanced fabrics and biofabrication to additive manufacturing and wide-gap semiconductors, firms large and small are working with scientists to uncover new principles.

And the Manufacturing Institutes are just the start. The Internet of Things Consortium is helping bring computation to the physical world, while the Partnership on AI focuses on artificial intelligence and the Joint Center for Energy Storage Research is helping to develop advanced battery technology. All are open to the largest multinationals and the smallest startups.

4. Move From Hierarchies to Networks

Back in the 90s, when Microsoft still dominated the tech world, markets were still based on linear value chains dominated by one or two industry giants. Yet as I explain in Cascades, we are quickly moving from a world of hierarchies, to one dominated by networks and ecosystems. That changes how we need to develop and grow.

In a hierarchy-driven world, the optimal strategy was to build walls and moats to protect yourself against would-be invaders, which is why Microsoft fought tooth and nail to protect its operating system monopoly. Today, however, industry lines have blurred and technology moves too fast to be able to build effective barriers against disruption.

That’s why today “Microsoft loves Linux”, why it developed an academic program to collaborate with scientists at universities and why it often partners with startups instead of always trying to crush them. The technology being developed today is simply too complex for anyone to go it alone, which is why the only viable strategy is to actively connect to ecosystems of talent, technology and information.

Power today no longer sits at the top of hierarchies, but emanates from the center of ecosystems and you move to the center by widening and deepening connections. Closing yourself by erecting barriers will not protect you. In fact, it is an almost sure-fire way to hasten your demise.

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

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