ENTREPRENEURSHIP & INNOVATION
MANAGEMENT
January, 2012 Marcello Tonelli
DAY _1 : 6hrs
SUMMARY OF CONCEPTS
1. Innovation – Entrepreneurship – Economic Development
2. Innovation Concepts
Collaboration Strategies
3. Strategic Management of Innovation
4. Organizing for Innovation
5. Managing New Product Development Process
6. Managing New Product Development Teams
7. Conclusions
8. Social Innovation
Implementing
Innovation
Strategies
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND INNOVATION
Innovation
GEM Study
Australia
Economic Development
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
1. What is Entrepreneurship?
ENTREPRENEURSHIP DEFINITIONS
• Starting a business
• Being self-employed
• Undertake an effort to transform innovations into economic goods
• The catalyst to growth
• Creating new opportunities
• Any activity that adds value to a business, an organization, supply chain,
value chain, .... anything where there is commerce... or not
Value, success: TBL
Entrepreneurship is...
THE FIELD OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP
• High growth entrepreneurship
• Social entrepreneurship: organize, create and manage a venture with the
emphasis towards social change.
• Corporate entrepreneurship: the process whereby an individual or a group of
individuals, in association with an existing organisation, create a new
organisation or instigate renewal or innovation within that organisation
(Sharma and Chrisman 1999)
• Indigenous entrepreneurship
• Women entrepreneurship
• Immigrant entrepreneurship
• Technopreneurship: university spinouts
• Youth entrepreneurship
• Necessity/survival entrepreneurship
• Entrepreneurship education/training
• Family business
ENTREPRENEURSHIP NEXUS
Remote Environment
Close Environment
CREATOR(S) CREATING PROCESS NEW VALUE
CREATION
Individuals
Teams
Organizations
Opportunity discovery
and assessment
Exploitation decisions
Resource
accumulation and
gestation
New venture
creation (and
subsequent
development)
Innovations
INNOVATION
GEM Study
Australia
Economic Development
ENTREPRENEURSHIP & INNOVATION
Creative destruction: economic change revolves around innovation
(Schumpeter 1942)
The essence of entrepreneurship is innovation (Drucker, 1985) leading to
‘value’ creation (Khandwalla, 1987).
Entrepreneurship is about new value creation in the form of innovation
(Gartner 1985; Zahra et al. 1999).
DEFINING INNOVATION
2. What is Innovation?
INNOVATION
Innovation is not invention in that innovation refers to the use of a new idea or method,
whereas invention refers more directly to the creation of the idea or method itself.
Innovation is the creation of better or more effective products, processes, services, or
ideas [technologies] that are accepted by users [desirability], and proposed at the right
time according to governments and society [viability].
What is
viable in the
marketplace
What is
possible with
technology
What is
desirable to
users
Innovation
INNOVATION
I invented nothing new. I simply assembled into a car the discoveries
of other men behind whom were centuries of work... Had I worked
fifty or ten or even five years before, I would have failed. So it is with
every new thing. Progress happens when all the factors that make for
it are ready, and then it is inevitable. To teach that a comparatively
few men are responsible for the greatest forward steps of mankind is
the worst sort of nonsense
– Henry Ford
INNOVATION
Al Bundy in ‘Married with Children; God’s
Shoes Episode – November 3, 1991
Vibram FiveFingers – 2005
Viktor & Rolf Sock Boots - 2009
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
GEM Study
Australia
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
It is widely acknowledged that entrepreneurship is a key driver for economic
development. New businesses often introduce innovations into the market, create
jobs and help to secure the competitiveness of the national economy (Acs & Szerb,
2009).
Entrepreneurship Economic
Development
Job Creation
Innovation
Productivity Growth
Entrepreneurship (attitudes, activity and aspirations) is affected by national conditions.
Entrepreneurs with high aspirations materialize better in countries with a stable
economic and political climate and well-developed institutions (in fact they may
migrate to other countries to pursue their ideas).
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Factor-Driven Economies
Algeria*, Guatemala*, Jamaica*, Lebanon*, Morocco, Saudi Arabia*, Syria*, Kingdom of
Tonga, Uganda, Venezuela*, West Bank and Gaza Strip, Yemen.
Efficiency-Driven Economies
Argentina, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Chile*, China, Colombia, Croatia*, Dominican
Republic, Ecuador, Hungary*, Iran, Jordan, Latvia*, Malaysia, Panama, Peru, Romania*,
Russia*, Serbia, South Africa, Tunisia, Uruguay*.
Innovation-Driven Economies
Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Iceland,
Israel, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland,
United Kingdom, United Arab Emirates, United States.
*Country in transition to a more advanced stage
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
As an economy matures and its wealth increases, one may expect the emphasis in industrial activity to gradually shift toward an expanding service sector that caters to the needs of an increasingly affluent population and supplies the services normally expected of a high-income society.
The industrial sector evolves and experiences improvements in variety and sophistication. Such a development would be typically associated with increasing research & development and knowledge intensity, as knowledge-generating institutions in the economy gain momentum.
This development opens the way for the advance of innovative, opportunity-seeking entrepreneurial activity that is not afraid to challenge established incumbents in the economy. Often, small and innovative entrepreneurial firms enjoy an innovation productivity advantage over large incumbents, enabling them to operate as ‘agents of creative destruction.’
To the extent that the economic and financial institutions created during the scale-intensive phase of the economy are able to accommodate and support opportunity-seeking entrepreneurial activity, innovative entrepreneurial firms may emerge as significant drivers of economic growth and wealth creation.
In innovation-driven economies, the proportion of opportunity-driven versus necessity-driven entrepreneurship is expected to be higher than in factor- and efficiency-driven economies.
Entrepreneurship in Innovation-Driven Economies
INNOVATION
Given entrepreneurship's potential to support economic growth, it is
the policy goal of many governments to develop a culture of
entrepreneurial thinking. This can be done in a number of ways: by
integrating entrepreneurship into education systems, legislating to
encourage risk-taking, and national campaigns.
Government Strategies
INNOVATION
Australia
GEM
ACE is the Australian partner for the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor
(GEM) which measures entrepreneurial activity in more than 80 countries.
Each national team conducts a survey of at least 2,000 adult individuals (a
representative sample) annually using a proven methodology (see
http://www.gemconsortium.org). The main indicator of entrepreneurship is
the Total Early-Stage Entrepreneurial Activity rate (TEA) which measures
the propensity of a country to be entrepreneurial. (Reynolds 1998)
The GEM STUDY
(Global Entrepreneurship Monitor)
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2009
54 APS: Data Sets per Year
Total
180,297
1,233,500
2008
AUSTRALIA
BUT WHERE DOES AUSTRALIA
RANK IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP
WHEN COMPARED WITH OTHER
MAJOR INNOVATION-DRIVEN
ECONOMIES?
AUSTRALIA
With 7.8% of the adult population involved in setting up a new business or owning a
newly founded business (TEA rate), Australia ranks second only to Iceland among
the innovation-driven (developed) economies – GEM Global Report 2010.
Entrepreneurship is alive and well in Australia
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
Italy
Jap
an
Belg
ium
Den
mark
Germ
an
y
Sp
ain
Po
rtu
ga
l
Slo
ven
ia
Sw
ed
en
Sw
itzerl
an
d
Gre
ece
Isra
el
Fin
lan
d
Fra
nc
e
Un
ited
Kin
gd
om
Ko
rea
Irela
nd
Neth
erl
an
ds
Un
ited
Sta
tes
No
rway
Au
str
ali
a
Icela
nd
Innovation-driven economies
Perc
en
tag
e o
f ad
ult
po
pu
lati
on
betw
een
18–64
95%
Confidence
Intervals
Point
Estimates
AUSTRALIA
The GEM data clearly show that Australia also compares well with other major
economies in terms of the “quality” of entrepreneurial activities being pursued.
Indeed, not only the quantity of entrepreneurs but also their aspiration and business
goals are important drivers for economic growth.
On average for each business started in Australia out of the necessity to earn a living
due to a lack of alternatives, there are three businesses where the founders want to
take advantage of a lucrative business opportunity in order to increase their personal
income or enjoy greater independence.
With respect to job growth expectations, a respectable 10% of the entrepreneurs aim
to grow their businesses larger than 20 employees in the next five years.
Both these indicators are higher than the average for innovation-driven economies.
Slightly below average is the international orientation of Australian entrepreneurs.
Most likely due to the large distances from international markets just 10% aim at a
substantial share of customers from international markets.
Quality of entrepreneurial activities
AUSTRALIA
So what are the drivers for this high quantity and quality of entrepreneurship in Australia?
The data point to a combination of both business opportunities and entrepreneurial skills.
Approximately 50% of the Australian population perceive opportunities to start-up and
state that they have the necessary skills to start a business.
Furthermore a large majority of the Australian population report high media attention for
entrepreneurship in Australia providing successful role models for prospective
entrepreneurs.
As a result 8.7% of our respondents have the intention to start a business within the next
three years. These numbers are all well above average when compared to the other
major economies.
Drivers of entrepreneurial activity
AUSTRALIA
We also find a very high proportion of female entrepreneurs. Australia is the only
major country where men and women participate equally in this important economic
activity. This paints a healthy picture of access to entrepreneurial opportunities for
Australian women.
Female entrepreneurship is thriving in Australia
Percentage of Female
Entrepreneurs in 2010
in Innovation-Driven
Economies: Source GEM
Global Report 2010
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Kore
a
Japan
Norw
ay
Irela
nd
Isra
el
Denm
ark
Slo
venia
Port
ugal
Icela
nd
Fin
land
United K
ingdom
Germ
any
Sw
eden
Gre
ece
Spain
Neth
erla
nds
Fra
nce
Italy
Sw
itzerla
nd
Belg
ium
United S
tate
s
Austr
alia
% o
f F
em
ale
Entr
epre
neurs
SUMMARY OF CONCEPTS
1. Innovation – Entrepreneurship – Economic Development
2. Innovation Concepts
Collaboration Strategies
3. Strategic Management of Innovation
4. Organizing for Innovation
5. Managing New Product Development Process
6. Managing New Product Development Teams
7. Conclusions
8. Social Innovation
Implementing
Innovation
Strategies
Main Source: Strategic Management of Technological Innovation – Melissa A. Schilling
TYPES OF INNOVATION
1. Product vs. Process Innovation Honda: hybrid electric vehicle
Biotechnology firm: a genetic algorithm that can quickly search a set of
disease-related genes to identify a target for therapeutic intervention.
2. Radical vs. Incremental Innovation 3G wireless communication technology
From exposed keyboard to flip cover; new service plans; etc.
3. Competence-enhancing vs. Competence-destroying Innovation Hewlett-Packard: handheld calculator
Keuffel Esser slide ruler
4. Architectural vs. Component Innovation Transition from high-wheel bicycle to bicycles with gears
Dunlop (pneumatic tires); Raleigh (three speed)
IMPACT OF INNOVATION ON SOCIETY
YEAR INVENTION
1800 - 1800 Electric battery
- 1804 Steam locomotive
- 1807 Internal combustion
engine
- 1809 Telegraph
- 1817 Bicycle
1820 - 1821 Dynamo
- 1824 Braille writing system
- 1828 Hot blast furnace
- 1831 Electric generator
- 1836 Five-shot revolver
1840 - 1841 Bunsen battery
- 1842 Sulfuric ether-based
anesthesia
- 1846 Hydraulic crane
- 1850 Petroleum refining
- 1856 Aniline dyes
1860 - 1862 Gatling gun
- 1867 Typewriter
- 1876 Telephone
YEAR INVENTION
- 1939 Atom fission
1940 - 1942 Aqua lung
- 1943 Nuclear reactor
- 1947 Transistor
- 1957 Satellite
- 1958 Integrated circuit
1960 - 1967 Portable calculator
- 1969 ARPANET
- 1971 Microprocessor
- 1973 Mobile phone
- 1976 Supercomputer
- 1981 Space shuttle
- 1987 Disposable contact
lenses
- 1989 HD television
- 1990 WWW protocol
- 1996 Wireless Internet
2000 - 2003 Map of human
genome
YEAR INVENTION
- 1877 Phonograph
- 1878 Incandescent light
bulb
1880 - 1885 Light steel
skyscrapers
- 1886 Internal combustion
automobile
- 1887 Pneumatic tire
- 1892 Electric stove
- 1895 X-ray machine
1900 - 1902 Air conditioner
- 1903 Wright biplane
- 1906 Electric vacuum
cleaner
- 1910 Electric washing
machine
- 1914 Rocket
1920 - 1921 Insulin
- 1927 Television
- 1928 Penicillin
- 1936 Computer
Innovation enables a wider range of goods and services to be
delivered to people worldwide. In this way it can be described
as the catalyst of economic development.
IMPACT OF INNOVATION ON SOCIETY
THE GREAT MAN THEORY OF INNOVATION
Edison did not invent the light bulb, but the idea of how that
could be brought together with other elements to change the
way we live. While his first patent application for a light bulb
was declined because too similar to one filed 40 years earlier,
he ended up with 368 patents around the system of electric
lighting.
Nothing Microsoft has ever made money on was developed
internally. MS-DOS (Seattle Computer Company), Excel (Lotus
123), Word (Xerox PARC), Windows (Apple’s Macintosh)
Henri Ford did not invent the first car. His ideas was mass
production and to do so he combined four existing core
technologies:
• Interchangeable parts
• Continuous flow of production through the chain
• Assembly line
• Electric motor
The Great Man Theory of Innovation.
As society we tend to recall an idea and a single man in a single
point in time. But is this what really happens?
Johann Gutenberg Printing press 1450
Christopher Columbus America 1492
James Watt Steam engine 1769
Eli Whitney Cotton gin 1793
Michael Faraday Electric motor 1821
Cyrus McCormick Reaper 1831
Samuel Colt Revolver 1835
Samuel Morse Telegraph 1837
Alfred Nobel Dynamite 1866
Alexander Graham Bell Telephone 1876
Thomas Edison Light bulb 1879
Marchese Marconi Radio 1895
Wright Bros Airplane 1903
Henry Ford Automobile 1908
Picasso Cubism 1910
Philo T. Farnsworth Television 1925
Alexander Fleming Penicillin 1928
William Shockley Transistor 1948
Watson & Crick The double-helix 1953
Elvis Presley Rock and roll 1954
Bill Gates Personal computers 1984
Steve Jobs iPod 2001
WHAT IS INNOVATION ?
Most of what we look at as innovation is not truly new. The true
breakthroughs, the things that change society overnight, do so not because
they are new.
The novelty is not what drives the breakthrough. It is the combination, the
particular way in which they are used.
Innovation is about connecting, not inventing. It is about taking the pieces that
are already out there and finding ways to put them together in combinations
and bring them to people who have never seen them before.
That’s how profound change happens!
NETWORK IS THE KEY
SOURCES OF INNOVATION
3. What Are Sources of Innovation?
SOURCES OF INNOVATION
Linkages between different components (firm’s relationships with customers,
technology transfer from universities to firms, etc.)
Sources of Innovation as a System
Individuals Universities
Private
Nonprofit
Government
Funded
Research
Firms
SOURCES OF RESEARCH WORK
R&D by firms is the major source of firm innovation
Roberts, E. (2001) Benchmarking Global Strategic Management of
Technology, Research Technology Management, 25-36.
Firms’ Rank Ordering of the Importance of Sources for R&D Work 1999
Rank Order of Sources of Research Work Rank Order of Sources of Development Work
1 Central corporate research Internal R&D within divisions
2 Internal R&D within divisions Central corporate research
3 Sponsored university research Suppliers’ technology
4 Recruited students Joint ventures/alliances
5 Continuing education Licensing
6 University liaison programs Customers’ technology
7 Consultants/contract R&D Continuing education
8 Joint ventures/alliances Acquisition of products
SOURCES OF RESEARCH WORK
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1953 1958 1963 1968 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 1999 2002
U.S. Spending on R&D by Source, 1953-2002 (Billions $)
Total R&D Industry
Federal government Other non-federal government
SOURCES OF RESEARCH WORK
Percent of R&D Funds by Source and Country, 1999
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Industry
Government
Other domestic
Abroad
COLLABORATION STRATEGIES
New Research Joint Ventures Registered under the US National Cooperative
Research Act 1985-2000
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Do
me
sti
c R
ese
arc
h J
oin
t V
en
ture
s
COLLABORATION STRATEGIES
Worldwide Formation of New Technology or Research Alliances, 1980-2000
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Ne
w S
tra
teg
ic T
ech
no
log
y A
llia
nce
s
COLLABORATION STRATEGIES
Technology Alliance Strategies
Source: From Y. Doz and G. Hamel, 1997, “The Use of Alliances in
Implementing Technology Strategies.” In M.L. Tushman and P. Anderson,
Managing Strategic Innovation and Change.
A
GE-SNECMA
alliance
B
Corning Glass
Alliances
C
Thomson-JVC
alliance
D
Aspla
Individual Alliance Network of Alliances
Capability
Complementation
Capability
Transfer
COLLABORATION STRATEGIES
Summary of Trade-offs between Different Modes of Development
Speed Cost Control Potential for
Leveraging
Existing
Competences
Potential for
Developing New
Competencies
Potential for
Accessing
Other Firms’
Competences
Solo Internal
Development
Low High High Yes Yes No
Strategic
Alliances
Varies Varies Low Yes Yes Sometimes
Joint ventures Low Shared Shared Yes Yes Yes
Licensing In High Medium Low Sometimes Sometimes Sometimes
Licensing Out High Low Medium Yes No Sometimes
Outsourcing Medium/High Medium Medium Sometimes No Yes
Collective
Research
Organizations
Low Varies Varies Yes Yes Yes
SUMMARY OF CONCEPTS
1. Innovation – Entrepreneurship – Economic Development
2. Innovation Concepts
Collaboration Strategies
3. Strategic Management of Innovation
4. Organizing for Innovation
5. Managing New Product Development Process
6. Managing New Product Development Teams
7. Conclusions
8. Social Innovation
Implementing
Innovation
Strategies
Main Source: Strategic Management of Technological Innovation – Melissa A. Schilling
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OF INNOVATION
4. Why do so many innovation projects fail to generate an
economic return?
THE IMPORTANCE OF STRATEGY
Most innovative ideas do not become successful products (1:3,000) –Stevens,
G. and Burley, J. (1997) 3,000 Raw Ideas Equals 1 Commercial Success!, Research Technology
Management 16-27.
In the Pharmaceutical industry: 1 in 5,000 compounds makes it to shelf
1 in 15,000 breaks even
The Innovation Funnel
3,000 Raw
ideas
(unwritten)
300
Submitted
Ideas
125 Small
Projects
4 Major
Developments 2 Launches
1 Successfull
New Product
INNOVATION PROCESS
PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY (2:40-5:45)
INNOVATION PROCESS
What do we know about the process of innovation?
How does it happen?
How to manage it?
Rather than trying to be another great man, try instead to make a difference
quickly and effectively. The way to do so is to fundamentally accept that
innovation is about moving existing ideas from where they are known to where
they are not, often in new combinations.
that is the way to become capable of “a minor invention every ten days and
a big thing every six months or so” (Thomas Edison at Menlo Park Laboratory in
1876)
INNOVATION PROCESS
In-House
Creation
within a
unit
Cross-
Pollination
Collaboration
across units
External
Collaboration
with parties
outside the
firm
Selection
Screening
and initial
funding
Development
Movement from
idea to first
result
Spread
Dissemination
across the
organization
Key
Questions
Do people
in our unit
create
good ideas
on their
own?
Do we create
good ideas by
working
across the
company?
Do we source
enough good
ideas from
outside the
firm?
Are we good
at screening
and funding
new ideas?
Are we good at
turning ideas
into viable
products,
businesses,
and best
practices?
Are we good at
diffusing
developed ideas
across the
company?
Key
Performance
Indicators
Number of
high-quality
ideas
generated
within a
unit.
Number of
high-quality
ideas
generated
across units.
Number of
high-quality
ideas
generated
from outside
the firm.
Percentage
of all ideas
generated
that end up
being
selected
and funded.
Percentage of
funded ideas
that lead to
revenues,
number of
months to first
sale.
Percentage of
penetration in
desired markets,
channels,
customer groups,
number of
months to full
diffusion.
Source: Morten Hansen and Julian Birkinshaw
DAY _2 : 3hrs
SUMMARY OF CONCEPTS
1. Innovation – Entrepreneurship – Economic Development
2. Innovation Concepts
Collaboration Strategies
3. Strategic Management of Innovation
4. Organizing for Innovation
5. Managing New Product Development Process
6. Managing New Product Development Teams
7. Conclusions
8. Social Innovation
Implementing
Innovation
Strategies
Main Source: Strategic Management of Technological Innovation – Melissa A. Schilling
ORGANIZING FOR INNOVATION
5. Are there particular types of innovation activities for which
large firms are likely to outperform small firms? Are there types
for which small firms are likely to outperform large firms?
Google Case Study
VALUE INNOVATION
Business Type: Circus Entertainment
Customer Type: Families with Children
High
Big League
Small League
Low
Source: Chan Kim and Renee Mauborgonee
VALUE INNOVATION
Business Type: Circus Entertainment
Customer Type: Families with Children
High
Big League
Small League
Low
Source: Chan Kim and Renee Mauborgonee
ORGANIZING FOR INNOVATION
Excuses:
Our people are bright but not challenged to innovate
Our organizations are not designed for innovation
Companies take a long time to innovate
Organizations have to respond to multiple pressures –
innovation becomes one of them
DOES SIZE MATTER?
1. Bigger is better (Schumpeter 1940s)
2. Small are more flexible and entrepreneurial: more careful and efficient result in
a larger number of patents per dollar
3. Industries with large development scale (aircraft, pharma) use large firms.
Advantages Disadvantages
Easier to obtain financing for R&D Difficult overtime to effectively monitor and
motivate employees
Better developed complementary
activities (marketing, financial planning)
Less dynamic and responsive to change due to
many layers of authority that create bureaucratic
inertia.
Greater global reach for information and
resources
Communication and coordination more difficult and
decision-making delays
Learning curve advantages due to
repetition
Strategic commitments to customers and suppliers
(Icarus Paradox: Xerox, Canon 1980s)
Able to take on large risky innovation
projects
Large fixed-asset bases
STRUCTURAL DIMENSIONS OF THE FIRM
Formalization Standardization Centralization
Use of rules, procedures,
and written documentation
to structure behaviours
The degree to which
activities are performed in
a uniform manner
The degree to which
decision-making authority
is kept at top levels of
management (geography
and power location)
Can substitute for some
degree of managerial
oversight
Operations run smoothly
and yield predictable
outcomes (quality)
Greater division of labour
among R&D specialists.
High degree makes a firm
rigid stifling employees
creativity
Excessive minimization of
variation can stifle
innovation
Generally industry-specific:
decentralised for research
intensive firms.
++ mechanistic
- - organic
CENTRALIZATION
Centralized and Decentralized R&D Activities
Headquarters
R&D
(a)
Centralized R&D Decentralized R&D
Headquarters
(b)
R&D
R&D
R&D
R&D
R&D
AMBIDEXTERITY
• Make large firms feel small. Break into smaller subunits and
General Electrics, Hewlett-Packard, Johnson & Johnson, General Motors
• Encourage an entrepreneurial culture within these subunits
• Disaggregation into smaller, specialized autonomous divisions
• Especially those characterized by high-speed technological change
• New terminology: virtual organization, network organization, modular
organization.
The Ambidextrous Organization
• Complex organizational form: multiple internally inconsistent architectures that
can collectively achieve both short term efficiency and long term innovation
• High formalization and standardization in some divisions but not in R&D (the
Macintosh team at Apple).
• Some divisions need a more organic structure to encourage creativity while
others do not (USA Today).
• Frequent reorganization of personnel (Motorola, Texas Instruments).
MODULAR PRODUCTS
• Standardize a number of common components and
• Using flexible manufacturing technologies that can quickly shift from
one assembly configuration to another
• Produce a wide range of product models just by changing which
components are combined (IKEA, Tata Motors)
• Cost effective
• More valuable when customers have heterogeneous demands
• Highly modular products require modular production systems
reduce amount of coordination required.
INNOVATION ACROSS BORDERS
• International R&D activities (R&D divisions abroad in the late 1990s): Netherlands and Switzerland > 50% ; 30% of Western Europe ; 5% USA
• Customization of products and services to local markets makes them
particularly difficult to transfer
• The benefit is more on leveraging technological innovation rather than
sharing innovations.
• 4 main strategies
Center for global Local for local Locally leveraged Globally linked
All innovation activities are
conducted at a central
hub and innovations are
then diffused throughout
the company.
Each subsidiary of
the firm conducts
its own R&D
activities, tailored
for the needs of the
local market.
Each subsidiary conducts
its own R&D, but the firm
attempts to leverage
resulting innovations
throughout the company
(champion or international
brand custodian)
Innovation activities are
decentralized, but also centrally
coordinated for the global
needs of the corporation.
May not closely fit the
needs of foreign markets.
Lack of scale.
Redundancy in
activities.
Is effective if the different
markets served have similar
needs.
Expensive in time and money
and requires intensive
coordination.
MULTINATIONALS
Overall the objective of multinationals is to make centralized innovation activities
more effective while making decentralized innovation activities more efficient.
1. Encourage reciprocal interdependence among the divisions of the firm.
2. Utilize integration mechanisms across the divisions (e.g. Rotating personnel
across divisions)
3. Balance the organization’s identity between its national brands and its global
image.
Ericsson: sending teams of 50-100 engineers to a different subsidiary a year or
two.
ORGANIZING FOR INNOVATION
We can learn from global leaders in organizing for innovation
The innovation process can be managed (tools: scenario analysis,
value innovation, etc.)
…but ultimately it comes down to the PEOPLE we have and the
BEHAVIOURS we encourage.
SUMMARY OF CONCEPTS
1. Innovation – Entrepreneurship – Economic Development
2. Innovation Concepts
Collaboration Strategies
3. Strategic Management of Innovation
4. Organizing for Innovation
5. Managing New Product Development Process
6. Managing New Product Development Teams
7. Conclusions
8. Social Innovation
Implementing
Innovation
Strategies
Main Source: Strategic Management of Technological Innovation – Melissa A. Schilling
MANAGING NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT
PROCESS
6. What are the benefits and costs of involving customers and
suppliers in the development process?
Frog Design Case Study
• The ability to develop new products quickly, efficiently and effectively
is today the most important factor driving firm success.
Computer hardware and software, telecommunications, automobiles, and
consumer electronics.
• Firms depend on products introduced within the past 5 years for more
than 50% of their sales.
• Failure rate for new products remains extremely high.
> 95% of all new product development projects fail to return in an
economic return
MANAGING NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT
PROCESS
How do we make the new
product development process
more effective and more
efficient?
• Maximizing fit with customer requirements.
Have a clear sense of which features customers value the most
Overestimate the customer’s willingness to pay for some features
Resolving heterogeneity in customer demands
Philips in the video game industry: 1989 CD-i (before Sega Saturn and Sony
PlayStation): priced too high, complex.
• Minimizing cycle time
Early entry advantages: Build brand loyalty, build customer switching costs,
more time for complementary goods.
Many development costs are directly related to time
Maximize the product life cycle (electronics: 12 mo)
More quickly revise and upgrade its offering
Avoid: sloppy product testing, overburdening development teams
• Controlling development costs
Good PM to avoid costs having ballooned too much efficient development
efforts.
THE KEY OBJECTIVES
DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES
• Communication challenge
• No early warning system: risk to iterate
back and fourth time lengthening
Commercial
production
Process
design
Sequential Process
(a)
Cycle
Time
Opportunity
identification
Concept
development
Product
design
Partly Parallel Development Process
(b)
Cycle
Time
Opportunity
identification
Concept
development
Product
design
Process
design
Commercial
production
R&D
Manufacturing
Engineers
• Much closer coordination
• Not ideal for markets with rapid changes and
uncertainty risks of high costs and
reluctance to change by managers
Adopting parallel development processes
Using project champions: senior executives with the power and authority
to fight for a project.
Anti-champions (devil’s advocate)
Involving customers in the development process
Best to identify the maximum performance capabilities and minimum service
requirements (beta testing)
Use lead users instead of mass sample: same the same needs of the
marketplace well before.
Involving suppliers in the development process
For alternative inputs with same functionalities but at lower costs
METHODS
PRODUCT INNOVATION - TRENDS
1. FUN – Colori vivaci, forme sinuose, superfici decorate ed imperfezioni ad hoc strizzano l'occhio ad oggetti
e realtà di altri contesti.
2. TOUCH – Le persone raramente sono intimidite dagli oggetti che desiderano toccare. L'interazione fisica
rivela la natura e le qualità di un prodotto.
3. CUSTOM – La personalizzazione di un prodotto, dal dettaglio grafico fino alle varianti tridimensionali, lo
rende un oggetto personale e speciale.
4. HEALTH – La cura della propria salute è l'interesse più importante per ognuno di noi, sempre più
desiderosi di soluzioni in-home efficaci e di facile utilizzo.
5. FEMININE – I gadgets non sono più cose da maschi! Sempre più aziende propongono versioni più
raffinate dei propri prodotti, per le donne che vogliono essere “geek chic”.
6. SIMPLEXITY – Un prodotto ricco di funzioni deve essere anche accessibile, ergonomico e di facile utilizzo
per essere accettato dall'utente. “One click or no click!”
7. GREEN – I designers hanno la missione di creare oggetti innovativi e sostenibili, migliorando la nostra
qualità di vita, senza danneggiare il pianeta nè privare le generazioni future delle nostre medesime
opportunità.
8. MEANING – Scegliamo un oggetto non in base a quello che fa, bensì in funzione del suo significato, di ciò
che ci comunica e del modo in cui ci permette di relazionarci con gli altri.
9. SOCIAL – Ogni nuovo prodotto genera una comunità reale e virtuale, che si riconosce in un insieme di
valori condivisi, e collabora per la soddisfazione e la serenità di tutti i suoi partecipanti.
10. MASS GEEK – La conoscenza sempre più approfondita e dettagliata di qualsiasi prodotto ci rende utenti
esigenti, bisognosi di performance elevate ed esperienze d'uso ineguagliabili.
Creating go/kill decisions points with stage gate processes
Cooper’s stage-gate process
At each stage use a cross-functional team
Preceding each stage is a go/kill gate
Each gate has 3 components
1. Deliverables: results of previous, now inputs
2. Criteria: metrics for the go/kill
3. Outputs: decision, action plan for next gate
TOOLS
STAGE-GATE PROCESS
Source: From “Doing It Right: Winning with New Products”. By R. G. Cooper, Ivey Business
Journal, July/August 2000, Vol.64, No.6
GATE 1 Idea Screen
Does the idea
merit any work?
GATE 2 Second Screen
Does the idea justify
extensive
investigation?
GATE 3 Decisions to
Develop Is the
business case
sound?
GATE 4 Decision to Test
Should the project be
moved to external
testing?
GATE 5 Decision to Launch
Is the product ready
for commercial
launch?
IDEA SCOPING BUILING
BUSINESS CASE
DEVELOPMENT TESTING &
VALIDATION
LAUNCH POST-
LAUNCH
REVIEW
STAGE 1 • Preliminary
market
assessment
• Preliminary
technical
assessment
• Preliminary
financial and
business
assessment
• Action plan
for Stage 2
STAGE 2 • User needs and
wants study
• Competitive
analysis
• Value proposition
defined
• Technical
feasibility
assessment
• Operations
assessment
• Product definition
• Financial analysis
STAGE 3 • Technical
development work
• Rapid prototypes
• Initial customer
feedback
• Prototype
development
• In-house product
testing
• Operations
process
development
• Full launch and
operations plans
STAGE 4 • Extended in-house
testing
• Customer field trials
• Acquisition of
production
equipment
• Production trials
• Test market/trial
sell
• Finalized launch
and operations
plans
• Post launch and life
cycle plans
STAGE 5 • Market launch
and rollout
• Full production
• Selling begun
• Results
monitoring
• Post launch and
life cycle plans
under way.
How did we
do vs.
projections?
What did we
learn?
DEVELOPMENT TIME AND COSTS BY STAGE
There is an escalation, only as uncertainty decreases
Source: From Frederick D. Buggie, “Set the Fuzzy Front End in Concrete”, Research
Technology Management, Vol. 45, No. 4, July/August 2002.
Stage Time Cost
0. “Here’s an idea!”
1. Formulate-describe and sketch 1 week $100
2. Conduct preliminary investigations 2 weeks $1,000
3. Design and define specifications 1 month $10,000
4a. Develop prototype and test
4b. Market research
4c. Strategic fit evaluation and NPV
risk analysis
2 months $100,000
5a. Scale up, build pilot plant
5b. Market test 8 months $1 million
6a. Build plant
6b. Promote, launch, market 16 months $10 million
$11,111,100
Cost
28 Months Time
EXTENDED SYSTEM
Exxon Research and Engineering’s Stage-Gate System
• Adaptation to meet specific needs of the firm
• Inclusion of directed basic research to develop a research plan and identify
possible business opportunities
Stage
A
Stage
B
Stage
5 Stage
4
Stage
3
Stage
2
Stage
1
Gate A Gate B
Gate4 Gate 3 Gate 2 Gate 1
Opportunity
Identification
Enabling Science &
Idea Growing
Lead
Definition
Pre-
development
Assestment
Development Validation Commercialization
Defining design targets with Quality Function Deployment
QFD: to improve communication and coordination (Japan)
Takes managers through a structured problem-solving process
House of Quality: matrix to map customer requirements against product attributes.
1. Identify customer requirements
2. Assign weights from a customer’s perspective (out of 100)
3. Identify engineering attributes of performance
4. Enter correlations between attributes (+ ; - )
5. Fill the matrix with values that represent the strength of relationship (low number is
weak, high strong)
6. Multiply customer importance rating of each feature by its relationship to an
engineering attribute. Sum per each column what is the most important
engineering attribute?
7. Evaluate the competition (1-7): low is not addressed, high is satisfied.
8. Using these values and the importance ratings, target values for each design
requirements are established.
9. Create a product design based on the design targets of step 8.
TOOLS
THE HOUSE OF QUALITY
Quality Function Deployment House of Quality for a Car Door
A heavy door reduces the
stiffness of the hinges
-
Design for Manufacturing (DFM)
Facilitate integration between engineering and manufacturing
Articulate a series of design rules to ease manufacturing
Ease to manufacture few assembly line steps higher productivity
lower unit costs
Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA)
A type of risk analysis
Identify potential failures in a system, classify them, prevention plans
Landing gear doe not descend
Reservation not found
Prioritize development efforts to target potential failure modes
Apollo Space Program ; Ford Pinto (gas tank position, fire-related deaths,
lawsuits)
TOOLS
Computer Aided Design (CAD) / Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM)
systems
Test product designs
Low price, high power graphics
3D easily adjustable models
Reduce cycle time
Communication with non-engineers
TOOLS
Using metrics to assess performance of the new product development
process
They vary substantially across firms
Benchmarking
Multiple measures
Avg. Cycle time, how many projects met deadlines, stayed in budget,
were completed
At firm’s level: firm’s return on innovation, % of products that
achieve sales goals
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT TOOLS
DAY _3 : 3hrs
SUMMARY OF CONCEPTS
1. Innovation – Entrepreneurship – Economic Development
2. Innovation Concepts
Collaboration Strategies
3. Strategic Management of Innovation
4. Organizing for Innovation
5. Managing New Product Development Process
6. Managing New Product Development Teams
7. Conclusions
8. Social Innovation
Implementing
Innovation
Strategies
Main Source: Strategic Management of Technological Innovation – Melissa A. Schilling
MANAGING NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT
TEAMS
7. What are the trade-offs in choosing a team’s size and level of
diversity?
Skullcandy Case Study
BUILDING TEAMS
- New product development requires activities that are the responsibility of
various departments.
- Formation and management varies: size, composition, structure, leadership,
administration.
SIZE
- A few > 100s
- Adv. more knowledge
- Disadv. more admin costs, communication problems, social loafing
BUILDING TEAMS
COMPOSITION
- cross-functional teams:
facilitate communication faster, less mistakes, cost effective
wide variety of information sources more solutions
- MKT-R&D -> customer fit
- R&D-MFG -> quality and price
- Different time, cultural diversity, gender, age
- Homophily: tendency to like similar people communication barriers
Long-term, intensive interaction, personalities.
STRUCTURE
- Functional, lightweight, heavyweight, autonomous
CEO
R&D MFG MKT
CEO
R&D MFG MKT
TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT TEAMS
CEO
R&D MFG MKT
CEO
R&D MFG MKT
a) Functional Team
Structure
b) Lightweight Team
Structure
c) Heavyweight Team
Structure
d) Autonomous Team
Structure
No cross-functional
integration; employees
remain within functional
departments.
Employees remain within
functional departments but
project manager provides
cross-functional integration.
Project manager provides
cross-functional
integration; team
members are collocated
but still report to
functional managers also.
Project manager provides
cross-functional
integration; team
members are collocated
and report only to project
manager.
Project
Manager
Project
Manager
Project
Manager
TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT TEAMS
Summary of Characteristics of Team Types Characteristics Functional
Team
Lightweight
Team
Heavyweight
Team
Autonomous
Team
Project manager None Junior or middle Senior manager Senior manager
Power of project manager N/A Low High Very high
Time spent on team
activities
Up to 10% Up to 25%
100% 100%
Location of team members Functions Functions Collocated with
project manager
Collocated with
project manager
Length of commitment to
team
Temporary Temporary Long-term but
ultimately temporary
Permanent
Evaluation of team
members
Functional
heads
Functional
heads
Project manager and
functional heads
Project manager
Potential for conflict
between team and functions
Low Low Moderate High
Degree of cross-functional
integration
Low Moderate High High
Degree of fit with existing
organizational practices
High High Moderate Moderate-low
Appropriate for: Some derivative
projects
Derivative
projects
Platform projects /
breakthrough projects
Platform projects /
breakthrough projects
LEADERSHIP
BUILDING TEAMS
LEADERSHIP
- Communication between team and senior management
- Act as concept champion, conflict resolution, multi-language
ADMINISTRATION
- Project Charter: project mission, goals, vision statement, team info “Dell laptops will be the market standard for performance and value”
- Contract Book: negotiated between core team members and senior
management
Plan: resources, time, outcomes
Benchmarks and deadlines
Sense of ownership for the team sign
MANAGING VIRTUAL TEAMS
- Needed skills defines the appropriate pool of people.
- Many challenges: rich face-to-face communication, informal interaction
- Select the right people
Comfortable with those technologies
Strong interpersonal skills
Work independently
Strong work ethic
Establish ground rules:
quickly respond to messages
have regular group meetings
have mandatory unstructured “chat” time develop trust, exchange tacit
knowledge, resolving conflict
TOWARDS VIRTUAL TEAMS
Source: From O. Gassman and M. von Zedtwitz, 2003. “Trends and Determinants of
Managing Virtual R&D Teams”, R&D Management Vol.33, No.3, pp.243-262
Decentralized Self-
Coordinated
System Integrator as
Coordinator
Core Team as System
Architect
Centralized Venture Team
All R&D conducted by
decentralized divisions
that coordinate loosely
with each other.
Most R&D activity conducted
by decentralized divisions,
but each coordinates with
central integrator.
Core team takes lead role
in R&D activities while
also coordinating the R&D
activities of the
decentralized divisions.
R&D resources
transferred to centralized
venture team, which then
conducts all R&D
activities.
Decentralization Centralization
PROPER HUMAN RESOURCES
Design-Driven Innovation
Innovate = technology + application
Business-Driven Innovation
Innovate = technology + business models
Youth
Maturity
CREATIVITY MYTH
• A common myth is that only certain people are creative (E. Glasman).
• Creativity is not inherited.
• We are born innovative – we all have a curious child within us
• Reviving many of the child-like ways of looking at the world that we have
lost as adults.
• Adults use many devices to think routinely and create inhibitors to
creative thinking.
• We need to practice innovative habits on a daily basis. Innovation is a
skill that must be cultivated.
BLOCKS TO CREATIVITY
Environmental blocks
1. Physical surroundings
2. Lack of cooperation or trust in a group
3. An autocratic leader
4. Lack of physical, economic, or organizational help
Cultural blocks
1. Fear of inability, making a bad choice, or a mistake; fear of
failing, or of risking too much.
2. No appetite for chaos: inability to tolerate ambiguity.
3. Judging rather than generating ideas
4. Inability to incubate, to "sleep on it.“
5. Lack of motivation, lack of enthusiasm.
6. Excessive zeal
7. Awareness and control of reality and fantasy
CATALYSTS FOR CREATIVITY
• Open questions
• Non-conventional influences
• Emotional/spiritual awareness
• Proper equipment and facilities
• An open classroom where all can feel they belong
• Having the freedom/support to take risks and learn from one another
• Encouragement to persevere
• Confidence that peers will give everyone space
• Brainstorming exercises
• …..
Promote an environment that prompts innovation
BRAINSTORMING
• Criticism is ruled out; all ideas are accepted and recorded.
• Free-wheeling is welcomed -- the wilder the idea the better.
• Quantity of ideas is emphasized as much as quality.
• Involve no fewer than five and no more than seven people to guarantee "critical mass" and
to allow everyone to participate.
• Always hold meetings in a neutral place, such as a conference room, or off-site location.
• Use a round table whenever possible -- all people should have positions of equal
prominence.
• Use visuals -- flip charts, blackboards, and places to hang or mount exhibits -- for easy
reference later.
• Tape record sessions, if desired.
• A designated leader, preferably not the person with the primary responsibility for the
problem, should lead the discussion, pose questions, and ask for reactions.
• A facilitator, other than the leader, should handle mechanics, such as note taking and
writing on the flip chart.
• Always notify people in advance so they can think about the issue prior to the meeting and
schedule the meeting when people are fresh and undistracted.
SUMMARY OF CONCEPTS
1. Innovation – Entrepreneurship – Economic Development
2. Innovation Concepts
Collaboration Strategies
3. Strategic Management of Innovation
4. Organizing for Innovation
5. Managing New Product Development Process
6. Managing New Product Development Teams
7. Conclusions
8. Social Innovation
Implementing
Innovation
Strategies
CONCLUSIONS
1. LEADERSHIP in innovation: Three essential traits for innovation
leadership are positive encouragement, a tolerance for failure, and
patience. “Innovation is central to strategy” (Patrick Cescau Group
CEO, Unilever)
2. Celebrate an innovation CULTURE: A mindset open to innovation
builds upon first principles, doesn’t rely on assumptions and accepts
failure. Significant innovation requires significant funding – it must be
conststent and sufficient even in economic downturns. “We never
accept the status quo, we never accept conventional thinking” (Art
Levinson CEO, Genentech)
3. Engage more innovation PARTNERS: Innovative companies pursue
multiple approaches to access external innovative talent and
expertise: joint ventures, technology clusters, venture funds, open
innovation models. “There is so much knowledge and skills in the
company – but we don’t have enough in terms of skills and
capabilities” (Olli-Pekka Kallasvou CEO, Nokia)
CONCLUSIONS
4. Encourage DIVERSITY & POSITIVE FRICTION: Cultural diversity
stimulates innovation because individuals from different
backgrounds/experiences working together create more innovative
solutions. “One of our core values is cultural diversity” (Franz
Fehrenbach CEO, Bosch)
5. Use COSTUMERS judiciously: Excessive attention to customers’
short-term requests inhibits the far-horizon speculation and
imagination. “Two things are key for innovation: one is listen to the
customers, and the second is not listen to the customers” (Henning
Kagermann CE, SAP)
6. Encourage YOUTH to challenge: Supporting and encouraging youth
can advance innovation because is typically more open to new ideas.
“The biggest challenge is creating a sense of urgency for innovation
where things are going well” (Narayana Murthy Chairman Infosys)
CONCLUSIONS
• The pace of innovation is ACCELERATING globally
• We need innovation-centric POLICIES and FRAMEWORKS
• Keep faith in the ability of PEOPLE to innovate; encourage them to
PRACTICE INNOVATIVE HABITS
• DESIGN innovation into the core of your organization
• SMALL ACTIONS can go a long way – each one of us can MAKE
A DIFFERENCE and create a TIPPING POINT.
• The PHYSICAL workspace represents the “body language” of an
organization.
o Terrific spaces help teams stay fresh and foster an
environment that sparks new ideas. They can also suck the
life out of an organization!
o It is the stage for your team’s performance.
• You need to innovate to SURVIVE, grow and prosper
• Treat life as an EXPERIMENT
CONCLUSIONS
The supreme achievement is to blur the line between work and play
(Arnold J. Toynbee)
Good at
Born
To Do
Pay you
to do
CONCLUSIONS
• Breath instead of depth
breadth
depth
1
Constant prototyping instead of optimization
CONCLUSIONS
Siede la terra dove nata fui
su la marina dove ‘l Po discende
per aver pace co’ seguaci sui.
amor, ch’al cor gentil ratto s’apprende,
prese costui de la bella persona
che mi fu tolta, e ‘l modo ancor m’offende.
Amor, ch’a nullo amato amar perdona,
mi prese del costui piacer si forte,
che, come vedi, ancor non m’abbandona.
Paolo e Francesca
Continuo a leggere
la Commedia
Forse leggerò anche Francesca da
Rimini di Riccardo Zandonai
Paolo e Francesca
Francesca da Rimini
di Riccardo Zandonai
Gabriele D’Annunzio
Ronchi dei legionari
Rimini
Il Grand
Hotel
Fellini
Oscar
Andrew
Lloyd Webber
Evita
Che
Guevara
DEPTH FIRST
BREADTH FIRST
CONCLUSIONS
Depth Breadth
Approfondire mi fa apprezzare davvero
quel che merita di essere approfondito
Resto superficiale e rischio abbagli
Approfondendo imparo a capire a fondo Ma imparo a istituire collegamenti
The devil is in the details É più probabile che mi imbatta in una cosa
che ritengo degna di essere approfondita...
Approfondendo qualcosa, imparo a
rifuggire tutte le semplificazioni
...e allora colgo il meglio dei due mondi
<< Un essere umano deve essere in gradi di cambiare un pannolino,
pianificare un’invasione, macellare un maiale, guidare una nave, progettare un
edificio, scrivere un sonetto, tenere la contabilità, costruire un muro, aggiustare
un osso rotto, confortare i moribondi, prendere ordini, dare ordini, collaborare,
agire da solo, risolvere equazioni, analizzare un problema nuovo, raccogliere il
letame, programmare un computer, cucinare un pasto saporito, battersi con
efficienza, morire valorosamente. La specializzazione va bene per gli insetti. >>
(R.A. Heinlein, Lazarus Long l’immortale, 1973)
CONCLUSIONS
Good enough!
Mitigare la mania di ottimizzazione
Guadagno /
miglioramento
Sforzo / costo
6 Sigma
1 Sigma 690mila difetti per milione Efficienza
31%
2 Sigma 308mila difetti per milione Efficienza
9%
3 Sigma 67mila difetti per milione Efficienza
93%
4 Sigma 6mila difetti per milione Efficienza
99.4%
5 Sigma 230 difetti per milione Efficienza
99.97%
6 Sigma 3 difetti per milione Efficienza
99.99%
SUMMARY OF CONCEPTS
1. Innovation – Entrepreneurship – Economic Development
2. Innovation Concepts
Collaboration Strategies
3. Strategic Management of Innovation
4. Organizing for Innovation
5. Managing New Product Development Process
6. Managing New Product Development Teams
7. Conclusions
8. Social Innovation
Implementing
Innovation
Strategies
IS INNOVATION ALWAYS GOOD?
8. What are the advantages and disadvantages of technological
innovation?
SOCIAL INNOVATION
Reality Check: Innovation often also results in negative externalities such as
pollution, depletion of natural resources, moral dilemmas, antibiotic-
resistant strains of bacteria, etc.
Reasons: knowledge created through technological innovation is sometimes
applied to problems hastily, without full consideration of the consequences
and alternatives.
Social Innovation: “a process and a strategy to foster human development
through solidarity, cooperation, and cultural diversity”
The term has overlapping meanings. It can be used to refer to social
processes of innovation, such as open source methods and techniques.
Alternatively it refers to innovations which have a social purpose.
OPEN INNOVATION
Certainly one of the new trends of innovation is that is now more OPEN
and GLOBAL that before.
“Open innovation is a paradigm that assumes that firms can and should
use external ideas as well as internal ideas, and internal and external
paths to market, as the firms look to advance their technology”
Innovate through collaboration
OI advocates knowledge-sharing not only internally but also with actors
beyond a firm’s boundaries.
“Per ciascuno dei nostri 7,500 ricercatori in P&G ci sono almeno 200 scienziati e
ingenieri da qualche altra parte del mondo che sono almeno altrettando bravi –
forse un totale di un milione e mezzo di persone il cui talento potremmo usare”
L.Huston VP per l’innovazione e la conoscenza, P&G
SOCIAL PURPOSE
1. Pur registrando una riduzione dei rifiuti urbani smaltiti in discarica, l’Italia si colloca ancora significativamente al di sopra della media europea, con 286,1 kg di rifiuti per abitante. Si tratta del 52,7 per cento del totale dei rifiuti urbani raccolti su tutto il territorio nazionale
2. I cittadini stranieri iscritti nelle anagrafi dei comuni italiani all’inizio del 2010 sono oltre 4,2 milioni, il 7,0 per cento del totale dei residenti. Rispetto al 2001 sono più che triplicati; nel 2009 sono cresciuti dell’8,8 per cento, anche se, rispetto agli ultimi anni, il ritmo di crescita è meno sostenuto. Il rapporto tra popolazione giovane e anziana e popolazione in età attiva supera il 52 per cento (2009). L’Italia è ai primi posti nella graduatoria europea.
3. Praticano sport poco più di 19 milioni di residenti di tre anni e più (circa un italiano su tre): il 22,8 per cento in modo continuativo, il 10,2 saltuariamente. Pur non praticando sport, 16,5 milioni di persone svolgono un'attività fisica, mentre i sedentari superano i 22 milioni (2009)
4. I viaggi con pernottamento effettuati dai residenti per motivi di vacanza e di lavoro, sia in Italia sia all’estero, sono pari a circa 115 milioni, per un totale di oltre 680 milioni di notti (2009). Le durate medie dei soggiorni in Italia sono pari a 6,0 e a 2,8 notti, rispettivamente per vacanza e per lavoro.
Produttori di rifiuti
Anziani e stranieri
Attenti alla salute
ma pigri
Sempre in
viaggio
SOCIAL PURPOSE
Produttori di rifiuti
SOCIAL PURPOSE
Anziani e stranieri
in crescita Il prossimo obiettivo di Ibm è quello di semplificare la
telefonia mobile. L'azienda ha infatti annunciato di aver
avviato un programma di ricerca biennale che mira a
sviluppare nuovi modelli di cellulare di più facile utilizzo. Il
progetto vedrà la collaborazione del National Institute of
Design of India e della Tokyo University.
"Dato l'invecchiamento della popolazione europea e nord
americana, la necessità di strumenti ad hoc diventerà
incalzante", ha commentato Ben Wood, direttore della
società di consulenza britannica Css Insight.
Ma quali sono le caratteristiche che un cellulare deve
supportare per soddisfare le esigenze dei non più giovani?
Prima di tutto uno schermo grande e ben leggibile in ogni
condizione di luminosità. In secondo luogo, tasti grandi e di
facile utilizzo. Terzo, funzioni semplificate: in un mercato
ormai dominato dagli smartphone dotati di applicazioni,
giochi e funzionalità sempre più complesse, gli anziani
chiedono che il cellulare ritorni ad essere quello che era in
origine, uno strumento per telefonare.
SOCIAL PURPOSE
Attenti alla salute
ma pigri
SOCIAL PURPOSE
Sempre in viaggio
ASSIGNMENT: INDIVIDUAL CASE STUDIES
1. The power of yellow
2. Sesame Workshop: Empowering children through media
3. The Northern Rangelands Trust: A new model for development
4. Simple solutions that save lives
5. Why social innovators need design thinking
6. Social Innovation: A matter of scale
7. Scuba rice: Building a better food from past innovations
8. New ways to fund social innovation
9. Mobile money: A game changer for financial inclusion
10. Innovating for a better city
11. Big data, small wars, local insights: Designing for development with conflict-affected communities
12. Harnessing technology for transformation
13. Tapping corporate expertise to improve lives
14. Telling the world’s stories to promote change
15. Incubating innovation in social enterprises
THE END