In this episode, the leaders of the Idea Mill Program for Collaborative Innovation engage Dirty Maple CEO Harry Lundstrom to secure funding for the long term. How might the organization fund a collaborative innovation program—and justify doing so? What space—physical and conceptual—does this funding open for people?
This article brings the 6 step method of AULIVE. A case study of surfboard innovation is illustrating the process.
Part fifteen of the series finds our protagonist Charlie Bangbang mulling sustainability. How might he help Dirty Maple sustain the momentum generated by the launch of their first collaborative innovation challenge? What motivates people to continue to engage? Is innovation part of everyone’s day job? Is leadership?
Part fourteen of the series finds our leader Charlie Bangbang and his team resolving their first collaborative innovation challenge for the Idea Mill Program. How did it go? What did they do? And, is it to serve mett wurst for lunch, ahead of an afternoon collaboration session?
Innovation is about moving an organization forward. But many companies are trying to get there without an execution plan; without any way to assess the how, why, where, what and when, and to adjust when the unexpected comes along (as it always does). Those involved with innovation planning are increasingly understanding that the answers are found in product line roadmapping – a critical front-end process that has finally come of age.
We know that innovation capability is a critical driver of strategic growth targets. We also know that innovation success is not a one-time occurrence, but the result of an organization’s ability to conceive, develop and commercialize new products and services on a sustainable basis. In this article Dr. Scott J. Edgett discusses a model for measuring if your organization has a mature innovation process with well-internalized innovation capabilities.
The life cycle of products decreased by factor 4 the last fifty years. Innovation is essential. But it is difficult, risky and it demands a lot of resources. It’s no walk in the park. Innovation is an expedition.
Many people assume that creating new ideas is the beginning of the innovation process, but actually that’s not true. Ideation occurs in the middle of the disciplined innovation process, which we present in this chapter.
In today’s rapidly evolving world the ability to create new value and the ability to be innovative is now more important to an organisations survival than at any other time in our history and the ability of organisations to assign the right level of resources in the right manner is a critical to creating a successful innovation practise.
You can invent on your own, but in an organization you can never innovate alone! You need an awful lot of colleagues and bosses to share your vision before a big change can truly take place.
Innovation is successful when it targets customers’ needs, but how sure can we be that this is something we can predict effectively? In this article Tony Ulwick argues that the traditional voice of the customer methodology is the wrong tool to determine customer needs. Tony presents an alternative methodology that makes it possible to determine all the needs of a given customer group.
Innovation is essential. But it is difficult and risky. Inspired by great explorers like Columbus, Magellan, Amundsen, Hillary and Armstrong a method for ideating new concepts was developed, designed as an expedition.
When starting innovation, a lot of the same mistakes are made over and over again. Here is how you can recognize and avoid them.
If you want to innovate with a process or a service then try focusing on this word – rearrange. Describe your current process as a series of steps. Draw them out as a block diagram. Now try moving the blocks around and see where this leads.
Your teams did their market research. They ran an array of consumer insight sessions. They found the customers’ real Need. They ran professional ideation and storyboard sessions. They created prototypes and performed market tests. They developed their go to market strategy. They executed their plan. Product sales fell dramatically short of expectations. Why? What did they overlook?
