Remove Agile Remove LEAN Remove Radical Innovation Remove Strategy

Key Issues in Innovation Management – Revisited – Part 1

Tim Kastelle

At the beginning of 2013, Tim Kastelle and I identified four key issues in innovation management for the time to come. From our point of view, all of the issues pinned down at that time have gained significant importance, are being intensively debated and can still be considered cutting-edge for companies to stay ahead in managing innovation. Let’s have a brief look at each of them: Differentiating and integrative innovation concepts.

Startup Engagement in Corporate Innovation

Integrative Innovation

From an innovation perspective, the ultimate objective is to validate promising initiatives and selectively scale them up in order to adapt or even renew the existing core business. There are distinct differences by industry: Financial service corporates are leaning towards Corp-Up (63%), One-off events (56%) and CVC (38%), media players towards CVC (80%) and Corp-Up (60%), and telecoms towards Corp-Up (57%) and incubators/ accelerators (56%).

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Scaling Up Startups in Corporate Settings

Integrative Innovation

outsourcing’ uncertainty, particularly in early phases of radical/disruptive innovation activities. Those tools are often organized as independent units or activities within the corporation or are ideally embedded in a single unit dedicated to explorative innovation altogether along with internal ventures. However, startup engagement is also increasingly used for tapping into entirely new markets or technologies as well as spotting disruptive innovation opportunities.

Digital Innovation Units: Recommendations, Trends and Conclusions

Integrative Innovation

Infront Consulting and business magazine Capital recently published their second joint annual study (in German) on the Digital Innovation Unit landscape in Germany. The study authors differentiate between three types of Digital Innovation Units : Innovation Lab : Bundling of company-internal resources in one or more interdisciplinary. teams for repeated identification and prototyping of digital innovations. Recommendartions for action: Innovation Labs.

Balancing Innovation via Organizational Ambidexterity – Part 3

Integrative Innovation

The first part highlighted that radical and incremental innovation build on two different innovation set-ups (exploration and exploitation, respect. New research: ambidexterity well done is a key driver for innovation performance. One of the key findings of this paper is that “in uncertain [business] environments, organizational ambidexterity appears to be positively correlated with increased innovation, better financial performance and higher survival rates.”.

Scaling-Up: The Foundation

Integrative Innovation

The – in the truest sense of words – ‘billion-dollar-question’ we are addressing is: How can companies generate more business impact from non-incremental innovation? The solution to this question lies in the middle part of an end-to-end process for non-incremental innovation. In Dual Innovation, this Playing Field has its own, dedicated operating model, just like the explorative and the exploitative innovation domain.

Why radical and disruptive innovation might not always be the answer

Ideanote

Surely , in a time where terms like sustaining and incremental innovation have a negative light, who would glorify them ? Isn’t there a risk of next radical or disruptive innovation blindsiding the company, potentially bankrupting the organization ? . In a world where the image of corporations are sluggish, start-ups are the fast and agile destroyers and the elusive “entrepreneur” is the new golden ticket. Then, the company develops the innovation for this market.

Digital Technology MoshPit

Gregg Fraley

New Service Offering for Digital Technology Innovation. Discover Ideas for Long Term and Tactical Innovation Projects. Chicago, IL, August 1, 2018 — The MoshPit Innovation Service is an innovation project discovery service marketed by GFi (Gregg Fraley Innovation). It’s designed to uncover unlikely, but useful, combinations of technologies, products, services, trends, and insights that lead to breakthrough innovation.

Key Innovation Issues for 2016 and Beyond

Integrative Innovation

Hence, I gave it some thought, starting by revisting an earlier reflection: Beginning of 2013, Tim Kastelle and I identified four key issues in innovation management for the time to come. From my point of view, all of the issues pinned down at that time have gained significant importance, are being intensively debated and can still be considered cutting-edge for companies to stay ahead in managing innovation. Innovation can’t be tackled through broad-brush recipes or tools.

Balancing Large and Small Firm Capabilities

Integrative Innovation

The corresponding integration of incremental and radical innovation can basically be achieved in different ways: Building ambidextrous and lean startup capabilities. Established organizations with larger size usually target at extending their core business by incementally innovating their existing business model. This focus, however, often hinders them to explore new businesses, to drive radical innvation and to respond to disruptive shifts in their environment.

So Where Is Innovation Heading?

Paul Hobcraft

I have written a fair amount about the new innovation era, offering a view on its future design. One that is jumping to a fresh cycle of innovative design. We are in the middle of it, some of you may not have noticed its impact and change but it is significant on the understanding of innovation, in it’s future design. To achieve this innovation has gone digital, pure and simple. So the need to innovate comes from digital as the source.

The Case for Dual Innovation

Tim Kastelle

The first time I was advocating the idea of a dual innovation approach, here also referred to as organizational ambidexterity, is now more than 5 years ago. As recently outlined, I consider organizational ambidexterity to be a key innovation issue for organizations in 2016 and beyond. Let’s sum up some relevant findings of these studies, making the case for dual innovation management: BCG: Most Innovative Companies 2014 . Accenture: 2015 US Innovation Survey.

Survey 156

Building upon the four essential pillars for innovation

Paul Hobcraft

It is always welcome to read a thoughtful article that reminds me, no, it actually inspires me, by reinforcing my own belief that innovation is progressing, even if this is sometimes frustratingly slow. The innovation architecture is progressively being recognized and put into place, it’s forming the building blocks of the innovation platform we need to build upon, ones for more radical innovation outcomes. Establishing a Comprehensive Innovation Strategy.

Tools 138

The Case for Dual Innovation

Integrative Innovation

The first time I was advocating the idea of a dual innovation approach, here also referred to as organizational ambidexterity, is now more than 5 years. As recently outlined, I consider organizational ambidexterity to be a key innovation issue for organizations in 2016 and beyond. Let’s sum up some relevant findings of these studies, making the case for dual innovation management: BCG: Most Innovative Companies 2014 . Accenture: 2015 US Innovation Survey.

Entrepreneurship or intrapreneurship? What do you think?

The Future Shapers

If you are looking for models on how to manage innovation, I would strongly recommend “ Zone to win “. Because I would maintain that innovation and/or intrapreneurship are crucial for your business survival. Hence “Transforming Legacy Organisations: Turn your Established Business into an Innovation Champion to Win the Future”. The book also starts with the premise that innovation is much more difficult in established organisations than it is in startups.

Why do innovation programs fail

hackerearth

It is the failure to innovate that led to its “demise.”. In other words, it is because sometimes innovation strategies fail to produce products/ services that the customers want. Which brings us to the question, “Why do innovation programs fail?”. Below are 6 reasons why innovation programs can fail. Leaving innovation to chance is more often a gamble where odds are not always in your favor. Take the following innovation management process for example.