5 strategies to ensure your innovation ideation workshop delivers

5 strategies to ensure your innovation ideation workshop delivers

Sep 12, 2019 | Collaboration, Innovation

People quite like the freedom of a workshop where there are no limits, where the objective is to generate as many ideas as possible. They then feel satisfied that they have done their bit for the innovation efforts of their employer.

Nonsense.

Unfocussed Ideation bears little relationship to innovation.

Having done many workshops over the years, there are some practices I have found by trial and error that work.

Closely define the innovation assignment.  

Usually this is done by clearly articulating the problem to be solved. The more you understand about the problem, the context in which it occurs, and the costs it generates, the more relevant and ultimately useful the ideas for possible solutions will be.

Diversity.

This is not a call for a politically correct workshop group, but one that acknowledges that people have different ways of looking at problems and potential solutions. Everyone has a differing style of thinking and expression, and all are useful. Having a range of practical, professional and analytical skills, domain knowledge, personal commitment to a solution,  and organisational position creates the sort of cross pollination opportunity that can lead to insight. However, a significant hurdle I often see is where there is someone of organisational power in the group, who fails to throw off the mantle of the position for the duration of  the workshop. Better that they were absent, having offered their support to the process.

Have a structure.

It seems counter intuitive to have a structure to run an ideation workshop, but without structure you risk skating over the surface. The structure needs to ensure everyone has equal voice, and opportunity to use it. There needs to be appropriate idea  generating techniques used,  and the workshop needs to be adaptable as things evolve, and importantly, it must be interesting, engaging and fun. It also must be recognised as the serious exercise it really is, not just some junket for a couple of days.

Have a professional facilitator.

This need not necessarily be someone from the outside, but it needs to be someone who stays in the background, separated from but directing the conversations. The facilitators job is to direct the traffic, ensure the right questions are asked and answered, and to ensure that the light is thrown in all the possible corners.

Create expectations.

Ensuring the exercise is taken seriously is partly dependent on what happens after the exercise, as everyone will be watching. Follow up on the workshop outcomes by allocating specific tasks, accountabilities and timelines to individuals and groups. This will ensure as far as possible the workshop has ‘legs,’ and people do not just go back to their normal jobs next week. It will also frame their expectations of the next step. Using the SMART framework can help, as does creating some urgency in the discussions, as in: something must be done now!

Ideation is a core part of the innovation process, not some sort of separate exercise, and the expectation that that outcomes will play a serious part in the whole innovation process is really important for the depth of thinking that goes on in the workshop.

Need a hand with this stuff, give me a call.

 

 

 

The sad and entirely avoidable death of a great old FMCG brand.

The sad and entirely avoidable death of a great old FMCG brand.

Aug 26, 2019 | Branding, Innovation, Marketing, Strategy

Currently in my cupboard almost gone, is a bottle of detergent, a well known and trusted brand, formerly the market leader, been around for ages.

It will not be bought again by anyone in my household.

Here is what I suspect happened.

Sales of the brand were eroding as cheaper, usually house branded product ate into the volumes. Somewhere in the multinational that owns the brand there was a bright young thing charged with resurrecting volumes, a project to ‘test their metal,’ requiring a 20% increase for success to be declared.

He, or more likely these days, she, did the corporate rounds seeking inspiration.

The R&D people believed they could improve the performance of the product by utilising a new emerging technology, but it required an extensive  R&D program to clarify some of the technical issues. No budget available.

The Engineering people reckoned they could speed up the line, reducing costs by updating, at considerable capital cost, the existing machinery, making production cheaper and more flexible. This would  reduce the systemic out of stock problem caused by the long runs required to generate factory efficiencies. These factory KPI’s are completely disconnected to the increasing difficulty of forecasting sales as volumes erode and become more erratic. No capital budget available.

The accountants are arguing for a price increase as well as a reduction in retailer promotional spend, as the gross margins fall below their target rates. Neither tactic seems well suited to the problem at hand.

The advertising agency strongly recommended a multi million dollar integrated TV, Magazine and digital marketing campaign, designed to bring back lapsed users to the brand, while intriguing new users to give it a try. No budget available.

The marketing he/she concerned reckoned it would be easier and cheaper to make the hole in the top bigger, make the product flow faster, encouraging a quicker usage cycle and therefore increasing replacement sales.

On a spreadsheet it looks logical, sensible, and with a great ROI. Everybody was happy, especially the product manager, who could see the trappings of corporate success coming his/her way by Christmas.

Whoops: forgot the value conscious consumer, to whom the integrity of the brand had remained, until now,  an important consideration, and who is not stupid. She is my wife, (who still does the bulk of the shopping) and believe me,  she is absolutely unforgiving.

Being captured by the interaction of functional KPI’s, status quo management processes, and resistance to any change, is a common corporate problem. It is unsolvable by anyone other than the Boss, who is mostly too busy contemplating the forest next door (or their navels) to see the trees in the forest they currently occupy, and take some decisive action.

When your brand, marketing, and innovation processes need a reality check, call me to tap into the ‘experience bank’ in my possession. 

Algorithm groundhog day

Algorithm groundhog day

Jun 19, 2019 | Governance, Innovation

In 1911, Frederick Winslow Taylor published his book ‘The Principals of Scientific Management’, which used logic and maths to describe the pathway to efficiency. It shaped the practice of management for the next 80 years, until, slowly, we realised that not all behaviour was rational, able to be broken down in a binary way. In fact, most of our behaviour is not binary in the way envisaged by Taylor. It is shaped by the forces that have driven our evolutionary success, best described by Daniel Kahneman in his great book, ‘Thinking, Fast & Slow’.

Increasingly I am seeing and reading stuff that reflects the explosive growth of AI, and the impact it will have on our lives, working and private. I cannot help but wonder if this is another manifestation of the same mistake that Taylor made.

Artificial intelligence will be a huge boon to all sorts of tasks, it is way better than we mere humans at all sorts of things, but it cannot, at least yet, reflect the nuances of human behaviour, and reactions to the things that makes us a successful species.

How will AI deliver us the elements of pride and accountability we have in a complex job, when that job is broken down into a series of sequential tasks to be done by the ‘recipe’ without variation? Where does the insight and creativity that comes from doing such a job emerge when it is being done by the numbers generated by a machine?

My mother in law used to do paintings by the numbers, her unit had quite a number of ‘originals’ by famous artists, all done by the numbers, with great care and attention, and the application of considerable skill in attending to the minutest details. However, they were not the  originals, not even great copies of the originals, they were by the numbers.

Algorithms are great, but not at everything.

 

 

 

5 things you need to change an industry

5 things you need to change an industry

May 27, 2019 | Change, Innovation, Small business

Today, I will be engaged in a workshop with a client who has a small business on the leading edge of a large, conservative, price driven industry, with established supply chains and relationships, that is about to get a kick in the guts.

We have to map out how a bootstrapped small business can be a catalyst for that kick, and ultimately benefit strategically and financially from the changes they will drive.

Not an easy task, with a considerable  number of unknowns.

This session is an exercise in identifying the key business processes required, and starting the process of building them out, while keeping the wolf from the door. It is also an opportunity to consider the modest number of macro factors from which will emerge the drivers of the growth we are planning for.

Strategy.

In order to make good choices at this early stage, we need to be able to see the whole game, at least our version of what it will be. This is making some bets on what the future of this industry might look like, figuring how we might change it, and assembling the resources to make it happen.

Timing.

Timing of the commercialisation of innovations is a critical and under considered factor in every industry that undergoes change. It is often not the first into the game that ends up the winner, but it is always the one who is best able to recognise the  inflexion points as they occur, and shape them to their benefit. Apple did not introduce the first MP3 player, but changed the world when they lunched theirs. Tesla is not the first electric car, to find that you need to go back well over  100 years, to  Thomas Parker’s vehicles, amongst several.

Value chain influence.

Every business operates in an eco-system of some sort, where there are others upon whom they rely for components, communication, services, and all sorts of items that together make up the differentiated product offering being created.  When you are a small business, without financial or technical resources of any great depth, just a vision of the future and a huge dose of passion, the challenge is to exercise influence over your value chain, way out of proportion to the financial and organisational muscle you can assemble.

Deliberate Design.

In this homogeneous world, looking great is essential, but being great is way more than looking great. It is the attention to the detail, certainty and transparency of processes, and emotional engagement that can be generated that really counts. This means that deliberate design of everything you do is a necessity. Deliberate design also involves the characteristic of stability, and creativity evolves out of stability, because you are able to hypothesise, experiment,  and quickly adopt what works, while discarding what does not. 

Audacity and belief.

Actually believing you can change the direction and nature of an established industry, with little more than the shirt on your back is audacious. It is not just thinking big, it is being prepared to do the work, and take the risks to make it happen.

It is going to be fun!!

The header photo is of one of Parkers vehicles outside his home in Wolverhampton, about 1895. Parker is in the middle.

 

Electric Vehicle manufacturing: The prospects for Australia.

Electric Vehicle manufacturing: The prospects for Australia.

Apr 29, 2019 | Change, Innovation, Leadership

One of the more fanciful of a grab bag of fanciful bullshit surrounding the ‘debate’ on electric cars a fortnight ago was the assertion that South Australia could become a world centre of electric vehicle manufacturing.

It seems superficially logical, all those car assembly and supplier plants sitting idle, and all those manufacturing skills being wasted as the former  employees become unemployed baristas. However the entry barriers to successful manufacturing and export, and infrastructure requirements for domestic market penetration beyond central suburban areas, are significant.

GM in the US is quietly packing its bags on EV development and manufacturing to shore up profits, particularly in the light of the halving of federal Green House Gas ( GHG ) subsidies. The Californian ZEV credits scheme to encourage electric vehicles, which contributed greatly to the initial research momentum may not be enough by itself to maintain the momentum.  Tesla, the poster boy of electric vehicles is walking a financial tightrope, despite its undoubted success in the market.

Labor appears to have done a bit of homework, if reports are correct, so perhaps there is hope. However, it seems to me the core of electric vehicles, where Australia has some level of competitive ability that can be protected and leveraged is the R&D solving the storage problems, subsequent battery production, and lithium mining and processing.

Lithium, the base of current battery technology is not easily available. However, Australia has considerable Lithium resources, well behind Chile and China, but carrying more sovereign certainty despite the regulatory and political hurdles.

Let’s hope the flights of oratorical fancy yet to come in this election campaign are founded on fact and solid strategic thinking, rather than what sounds good in front of a populist audience.

Anyone for a debate on Adani? (some facts and consistency of argument would be nice)

 

 

Can ‘Platforms’ replace assets?

Can ‘Platforms’ replace assets?

Mar 18, 2019 | Innovation, Strategy

The new commercial behemoths of the 21st century, Google, Facebook, Amazon, et al, are all ‘Platform’ businesses. They leverage technology to create connections up and down value chains, replacing as they have businesses that have hard assets that make stuff.

They are facilitators, not producers.

When was the last time you ate a steak produced by a ‘facilitator’?

In order to produce the stuff we need to live and prosper, we need hard, productive, assets. Bits and algorithms help to leverage the hard assets, to build their productivity, but to believe they will replace them is to believe we can eat them and live.

Amazon may not produce the goods they sell, but somebody does, and it is these ‘somebodies’ Amazon relies on, as do the rest of us, to live.