Many people start talking about entreprenuership without any own experiences. That's interstesting. How do they get these ideas about enterpreneurship and how do they become so sure about what makes an enterpreneur so succesfully? It seems so that the more you talk about it the more you have a good reason not to start at all. Many myths are created around the topic of enterpreneurship.
Daniel Isenberg illustrates through stories of real business builders the new rules of starting and growing a business.In his new book
A new book of Evolution of Innovation management will be published on the 15th of February 2013, edited by Alexander Brem and Eric Viardot. The book is about the fact that Innovation is seen as a key driver for performance and growth in business. It provides a strong competitive advantage and is one of the best ways to speed up the rate of change and adaptation to the global environment. Concurrently, the topic of innovation is also gaining increased visibility and interest among academic communities worldwide.
However, some of the challenges of innovating are remarkably consistent and recent times have shown the emergence of new ways for stimulating and
managing the innovation process, especially from an international perspective. Even if these processes are taking place in very different industries, there are many parallels in successfully managing them.
The new book explores these new routes and assesses their value both for markets and companies. More specifically, the book is organized around three themes:
• Innovation Strategies
• Innovation Management Tools
• International Perspectives
Together with Robin Chu (team member in my Business Innovation team and one of our top strategic analyst) I wrote chapter 15: “Creating an Environment for Successful Innovation - A Management Consultant's Perspective”
To view detailed content of the book, please visit Palgrave
Notes on Contributors
Symbiotic Innovation: Getting the Most Out of Collaboration; R.J.Thomas & Y.Wind
Performance Measurement of Co-Creation Initiatives – A Conceptual Framework for Measuring the Value of Idea Contests; V.Bilgram
Measuring the Success of Open Innovation; E.Brau, R.Reinhardt & S.Gurtner
Can SMEs in Traditional Industries be Creative?; J.M.Zabala-Iturriagagoitia
Scenario-based Learning Architectures as a Management Tool; N.Pfeffermann & H.Breuer
Social Network Analysis – an Important Tool for Innovation Management; G.Drexler & B.Janse
The Evolution of Mobile Social Networks through Technological Innovation; V.Ratten
Exploring the Role of Early Customers in the Commercialization of Innovation; F.Frattini, G.Colombo & C.Dell'Era
Managing Communities of Practice to Support Innovation; S.Borzillo & R.Kaminska
Joining Innovation Efforts using both Feed-forward and Feedback Learning: the Case of Japanese and Korean Universities; I.Oh
Capgemini Consulting, the global strategy and transformation consulting brand of the Capgemini Group, has announced that its study conducted with the MIT Center for Digital Business -- ‘Digital Transformation: A road-map for billion-dollar organizations’ -- was ranked among the top 5 thought leadership publications of the last decade by Source*, following a thorough analysis of some 22,000 consulting reports globally.
Source, a leading market analyst firm for the consulting industry, assesses firms’ Thought Leadership performance through its White Space initiative. To celebrate 10 years of White Space, Source has identified five pieces of thought leadership from the last decade which have stood out and have been rated particularly highly. Capgemini Consulting was selected for a thought leadership research study revealing that only one third of large companies are succeeding in reshaping their business through digital technologies. The first phase of the study was published in November last year and phase two is due for launch later this year.
Didier Bonnet, one of the co-authors of the report and sponsor of Capgemini Consulting’s Digital Transformation programme, said: “We strongly believe that understanding the business implications of the new digital economy is at the top of the transformation agenda of business leaders. It is therefore very pleasing that Source has recognized the quality of our thinking on this critical topic.”
Fiona Czerniawska, Joint Managing Director, Source and Founder of White Space, said: “Capgemini Consulting’s work on digital transformation stands head-and-shoulders above other material in this space and will help put the firm in a strong position in this key market.”
White Space includes thought leadership from about 30 of the world’s leading consulting firms and provides detailed analysis. This analysis is updated regularly, giving up-to-date market intelligence on the state of the thought leadership market.
Capgemini Consulting, the global strategy and transformation consulting brand of the Capgemini Group, in partnership with IESE Business School, the top ranked business school of the University of Navarra, today announced the findings of its annual global Innovation Leadership Study, examining innovation management strategies at organizations around the world. The study reveals that innovation leadership is becoming increasingly important, with 43 percent of respondents stating they have a formally accountable innovation executive in place, responsible for driving innovation, compared to just 33 percent last year. This rise of the ‘chief innovation officer’ suggests driving innovation is becoming a key priority for companies everywhere. However, despite this, the majority of companies (58 percent) still do not have an explicit innovation strategy in place, with most companies considered ‘innovation laggards’ (38 percent) and just 7 percent classed as ‘innovation leaders’.
The study, which surveyed over 260 innovation executives globally, suggests that while innovation is an emerging functional area within organizations, limited organizational strategies for driving innovation are impairing growth. Only 30 percent of respondents agree they have an effective organizational structure in place for driving innovation and less than a quarter (24 percent) believe innovation efforts within their companies are effectively aligned. This is mainly due to not having a formal organizational structure for innovation (45 percent) or a well-defined governance structure (45 percent) in place, or a lack of clear roles and responsibilities for innovation (40 percent). 39 percent of respondents also referenced the lack of an effective decision making process for innovation, largely due to not having a well defined process in place to prioritize and allocate time and funding to innovation projects
Every two years a collaborative platform of The Consumer Goods Forum, Capgemini, HP and Microsoft formulate key trends for the Value Chain. Together with top Executives from the Retail and Manufacturers Industry the third version is submitted.
In 2006 the first report 2016: A Vision of the Future Value Chain came out. The platform worked with 80 Executives of Global Organizations to collect the key trends for the industry. 2 global workshops are initiated (Utrecht, NL & Chicago, USA). The key message was: New Ways of Working Together in the Value Chain.
Two years later (2008) the second edition was born 2018: Succeeding in a Volatile Market. In this year already 130 Executives participated in several workshops: Global workshop (Utrecht, NL), Asian workshops: Hong Kong (Asian region), Mumbai (Indian market), Tokyo (Japanese market). The key trends pointed out: Changing society, Rising cost (and scarcity) of raw materials, Increasing awareness and action on sustainability, Growing consumer access to technology and Changing business models.
In 2010 the last report was fomulated 2020: Building Strategies for the New Decade. The number of participants in several workshops had been 200 Executives. Global workshop (Chantilly, FR), Regional workshop GS1 in Europe (Antwerp, BE) en diverse Country workshops: Australia (Melbourne), France (Paris), Netherlands (Utrecht), US (Chicago), Mexico (Mexico City). De most important trends from this year are: Make our business more sustainable (From niche to norm), Optimize a shared supply chain (Collaborate differently, compete differently); Engage with technology-enabled consumers (The consumer in the driver’s seat), Serve the health and wellbeing of consumers (Focus on quality of life). For more detailed outcome of the report please visit my slide share space.
What we see in the past 6 years is that Asia is rapidly becoming the key region for the new global innovative business strategies for corporate players. I like the discussion about the outcome of the Future value Chain reports during my Academic Guest Lectures or when I speak at international Innovation forums.
My experiences is that many organizations are talking about it but a few are acting upon it.
"When a word is used too many times a year and the context in which the word is used broadens in every article, it is very likely that the management community develops a sort of immunity. There are multiple examples of management terminology being coined as fast as falling out of favor.
Co-creation, as a phenomenon, was destined to have a similar lifecycle. The question that arises in such matters, is whether the term was a hype introduced by some management gurus, or an emerging domain just struggling with its maturity. As we see the world now, co-creation is here to stay. No matter what you would like to fit in the definition, co-creation is the result of a broad and irreversible shift in the society and corporate culture. During the growth to maturity we wonder what is left beyond the hype. What is the essence of co-creation? Which forms of co-creation proved to be most beneficial for the initiators and participants? Which processes are most suitable for ‘outsourcing to the crowd’?"
In a new report we will give you insights into the current status of co-creation, as perceived by top managers out of the FEM500 business list.
As the knowledge partner of the World Innovation Forum, Capgemini Consulting has recently completed its global innovation survey on the current state of innovation. The study offers a unique perspective by looking at the differences in behavior of 375 innovation leaders vis-à-vis laggards across five key areas (Innovation Strategic Outlook, Innovation Capabilities, Innovation Technology, Innovation Function, Innoation Spending Outlook) in order to identify what drives the success of companies that view themselves as successful innovators.
In summary, the study reveals that:
- Given the strategic priority companies allocate to innovation and their corresponding spending plans, the maturity of their formal innovation governance structure lags behind considerably. To overcome many of the innovation bottlenecks encountered, it is time to establish an innovation function that is able to deal with this kind of innovation governance and decision-making.
- Furthermore, there is an enormous unlocked potential for innovation in the involvement of external parties in the innovation process. Innovation leaders may have out-paced their peers by simply being better at involving external parties, leveraging a much broader innovation network and increasing innovation potential.
- Also, the study shows that more value, in terms of impact on business results, is to be expected from business model innovation, than from any other form of innovation. Targeting new business opportunities in emerging markets is much more likely to be successful when approached outside of the traditional competitive landscape.
In my advisory practice we work a lot with large corporate companies. In our annual Global Innovation Survey we see the focus on Business Model Innovation and co-creation in the value chain getting more attention every year. The far majority of corporate companies invest in new business models to create sustainable value in a different way. A growing area for changing the current business model is to outsource not only supporting processes like Finance, IT or HR but also primary business processes such as Purchasing, R&D, Logistics and Manufacturing. Many well known Technology companies left their original core competences behind and become a Design, Marketing and Sales company (Philips is a clear example). I understand the business drivers behind this and that senior executives are seduced to go for short term sales growth and stock value. But I believe this is not a sustainable model for a leading innovator. In my opinion there is a need for a balance between R&D, Operations and Marketing & Sales within the boundaries of a corporate company in combination with an open innovation strategy to the outside world. Open innovation and co-creation seems to flourish if a company keeps substantially own core capabilities. The pitfall for large extend of outsourcing is that the company expect to manage the core process with contracts and SLAs. We see often that short term and top line successes are still hard to find. What is missing is a holistic view on collaboration an doing business! The leading success factor is all about trust and long term relationships.
I like to share two examples of successful business models in which core competences are not outsourced, the focus is not on short term money but collaboration with the outside world is based on many different but integrated aspect like economics, politics, social integration and education, green & sustainability, new style of leadership.
The first example is the Region of Voralberg in Austria. This is one of the most innovative industrialized export oriented region of traditional Europe. Many successful SMEs, traditional craft manufacturers like metal, wood, nutrition, electro, differentiate based on Product (high quality), Design (Modern Trendsetting) and Functionality (usable). There collaboration network enables them to find new product-market-combinations in a high frequency. The schools and education programs are a close partner in their network. The Region is relative small (less than 400.000 habitats) and accelerate on smartness, trust and regional proud rather than volume and power. (source: Prof. GJ Hospers, University Twente)
The second example is American Apparal. American Apparel is a vertically integrated manufacturer, distributor and retailer, based in downtown Los Angeles, California. We currently employ approximately 10,000 people globally (about 5,000 in LA), and operate more than 285 retail stores in 20 countries.
Within our business model, knitting, dyeing, cutting, sewing, photography, marketing, distribution and design all happen in the company's facilities in Los Angeles. The company operates the largest garment factory in the United States, at a time when most apparel production has moved offshore. With our recently opened stores in China, we are now selling Made in USA clothing in the largest consumer market in the world.
American Apparel leverages art, design and technology to advance the business process, while continuing to pioneer industry standards of social and environmental responsibility in the workplace.
(source: americanapparel website)
The most interesting thing about these examples is the strong vision and leadership on sustainable innovation. The strong believe in integrating the most important aspect of human life and living environment into the business model of their companies. It is not about short term, it isn’t about making fast and a lot of money, it isn’t about power play, it is about honesty, fairness, trust and real collaboration for every involved partner. And they are and will be successful! In my opinion the most corporate organization can learn a lot of these role models.
As I wrote the last time, during the credit crisis companies continue proactively looking for innovations to growth their business value. However, the credit crisis has significantly changed the perspective of the consumer. Before the crisis the consumers are mainly driven by an almost unconscious impulsive buying behavior now the consumer’s attitude is mainly focused on deliberately making choices. Capgemini’s research (published in October): trends in Retail 2009-2010: uncertain consumers back to square one, it appears displays the purchase decisions on the knife-edge.
"Partly as a result of the economic instability perceptions and value sets of consumers are finally changed in the last eight months. In addition to the focus on so-called “price-set”, responsible “Choice-set” and the attractive alternatives became essential. Striking is that a good service (ease), and a high level of attractiveness (pleasure) of the formulas by the consumer to be regarded as a hygiene factor: they are not distinctive, but they will be missed if they are not directly be observed by the consumer. "
Companies of consumer products and services, would do well to proactively anticipate on the new trends and translate these in new concepts. However, I hear you thinking: this is much easier than done. And I will not deny that it isn’t easy to put successfully new concepts on the market, but it is certainly possible. Richard Brandson describe his successes in his book: Business Stripped Bare: Adventures of a Global Entrepreneur. I highly recommended this book. Despite the sometimes detailed descriptions of specific cases it makes it very clear what, according to Richard, what is the core to be successful by putting new concepts in, for him, new markets. I cherry-picked the following aspects:
Never include a legacy of someone else, but start your own business
Have patience, create great plans (large) but building the concept slowly
New concepts needs to be as simple as to be executed in your own
You need to stay full of passion for your own idea all the way
Take every opportunity to clarify the new concept and be consistently
Highly regulated environment will create medium results
Take people on the basis of their mentality, skills training is always possible
Teams are perishable and will continuous change of composites
The fun of the book by Richard Branson is that we in our innovation team, recognizes a great deal of his approach and experience the success in doing business.
Capgemini published a survey where 375 executives from Leading Innovator companies shared their vision on: Innovationas a Competitive Success Factor During Times of Economic Recession: a short inroduction of the report ...
Capgemini Consulting, in conjunction with HSM, the sponsors of the World Innovation Forum, conducted a survey of more than 375 executives on the subject of innovation. Traditionally, it seems that companies have used periods of economic downturn to cut back on the untested, focusing instead on ways to maintain the status quo at a lower cost. Given current global economic conditions, we were eager to find out whether innovation had lost its appeal. Would our respondents have similarly cut back during the current recession, we wondered?
We were pleasantly surprised to discover that this was not the case, especially for companies that consider themselves leading innovators. In fact, now more than ever, innovation is seen as a critical business priority, and a “must-have” to position for future recovery. As one interviewee described it, innovation is a matter of “organizational sustainability.” Leading innovators overwhelmingly agreed that they were using the current economic downturn as an opportunity to fundamentally transform their businesses.
Perhaps more important than the fact that companies were continuing to innovate was the extent to which innovation has evolved as a core principle for many businesses. Our interviews with successful innovators confirmed our hypothesis that successful innovation is embedded in the corporate DNA, rather than being treated as an extraordinary add-on by the organization.
Innovation leaders stressed the importance of organizational factors in supporting innovation: creating a learning organization; supporting a culture that encourages risk taking; rewarding smart failures as well as successes; encouraging continuous customer conversations; establishing formal innovation processes, and infusing employees throughout the organization with the spirit of innovation. None of these ideas is new. However, the challenge is to operationalize and execute on these concepts. Our respondents agree that while this is difficult, it is critical to long-term survival.
Some have fundamentally restructured the way their organizations do business to support innovation. Others propose new partnership models to support open source innovation and new methods of ideation and experimentation. Still others are making creative use of the global labor force and new collaborative tools to better serve their customers.
And it is all about the customer. Our respondents consistently agreed that innovative companies are always looking outward, focusing on how to better serve their customers’ needs, including currently unmet-, and even as yet unknown-, needs. New tools, technologies and media make it easier than ever to communicate with customers, and the most successful innovators are taking advantage of them to maintain meaningful customer conversations.
Innovators are also engaging customers earlier in the development process, shifting from a top-down research and development model to a bottom-up, decentralized model that takes advantage of customers’ first-hand insights. By creating constant conversations with their customers and practicing proactive listening, companies are better able to position themselves to be truly innovative."
We see that it becomes vital to see Innovation as a holistic approach to create future business value. With my team of Business Innovators a new Strategic Business Innovation approach is develeoped. We incorporate Business Model Innovation on strategic level with Operating Model Innovation and Commercial Innovation on a tactical level.
International researches (as from 2006 up to and including most recent) indicates from that the members of the Council of Governing Board continue consider Innovation as the way to growth increase and secure continuity. The Credit Crisis hardly change anything in these thoughts.
The Top 3 most significant challenges for Innovation still remains: successful organizing innovation, increasing the speed of go-to-market and proving the profitability of innovation. Therefore, it is not a matter of new ideas but the realization of those ideas. In my opinion, the reason for this problem is caused by the phenomenon of:
The law of the Organization Gravitation.
The Organization Gravitation is the (economic and cultural) strength which prohibits organizational boarders to adapt to new ideas.
The key drivers behind this strength is the need of people to maximize continuity of their current status and maximizing security. If a critical mass of people in an organization sharing this need is reached, then they will be prepared to give up their individual freedom (free-thinking, experimenting, freedom of speech) for security provided by the organization. This way company rules, control mechanisms, technocracy and bureaucracy occurs. The aim of company’s technocratic staff departments and corporate centers is carrying out the control and maintain the rules: watch-dogging the company’s status quo. And then the organization gravitation is born.
In practice the Organization Gravitation has proven not be a constant but dependent. As the new idea is proportionally more radical (further outside the existing frameworks of the organization) the organization gravitation will increase. As the outside world becomes more unsafe the organization gravitation will increase proportionally. As the lack of vision and leadership is stronger the organization gravitation will increase.
In practice we see beautiful examples of this law and its developments. Radical innovation within the existing limits of large organization appears to be difficult. Dr. Axel Rosenø describes in the presentation “Developing Radical Innovation Capabilities in Established Firms” the tensions between the existing organization and radical innovation. Philips has chosen to spin out many innovations in order to avoid the Organization Gravitation (see also Henry Chesbrough and open innovation). The insecurity in the outside world has increased enormously by the Credit Crunch. As a result, the (corporate) rules have increased enormously. We see a strong tendency of centralizing the power to the corporate centers with the aim far-reaching standardization, shared service centers and cost cutting projects. Nearly every organization starts to behaves as a herd animal: in search of the security and surviving in the herd. But now is the moment to step outside the herd and act anti-cyclics. Again in the world of first class innovation the example comes from discounter Ryanair: not in spite of, but thanks to the economic crisis we are able to manage significant discount for the purchase of new, better planes (Michael O'Leary, the director of Ryanair). Examples of lack of vision and leadership are not only restricted to the businesses but also in politics this is not an exception. Although Obama and Merkel give it a fair try.
If the Organization Gravitation has reached a certain scope a so-called Organization Black Hole is born: an organization with maximum closed borders and internal autism for renewal and entrepreneurship. The attraction of the Organization Gravitation is so strong that escaping becomes impossible is. Only a terrible impact (bankruptcy or take-over) can break open the borders. By then Entrepreneurs and Intrapreneurs probably have left the organization already.
Many strategy knowledge centers like Insead, Havard Business School and McKinsey Global Institute are publishing many white papers on how to design (Innovation) Strategies. Yes, it is good stuff, but the key hurdle for a successful Innovation Strategy is the implementation of the design. During implementation you will face the daily hurdles of Business Transformation. When the ambition level of Innovation is high (like Blue Oceans or New Business Models) implementation will be harder proportionally.
During implementation of an Innovation Strategy you also will experience the speed of changes in the assumptions you made in the design phase of the strategy. You need to go for a Strategic Scenario Thinking approach. This approach enables you to translate different trends and business drivers into you Innovation Strategy. If significant changes occur you have already alternative scenarios in hand. Each scenario will indicate the need for adaption of your Innovation Portfolio as well. Together with Daan Giessen, I build an approach to challenge your Innovation Strategy and the way you can adapt your Innovation Portfolio:
