KevinMcFarthing's blog

Why is innovation like a swan?  Of course, the picture is elegant and graceful.  But below the surface there is a lot of management legwork going on that you just don’t see.  Many companies achieve remarkable things with innovations that add tremendous value to the daily lives of customers and the companies that help them; but the emphasis is almost always on the output, whether that be product, service or business model, not on the work that delivered them.

While leadership and management are inextricably linked, they remain different.  When it comes to innovation, they remain crucial to the ability of an organization to deliver growth.  Good innovation management is fundamental, but without strong leadership, much of the good work done in management can be undone. 

The early stages of innovation are inevitably quite uncertain and poorly defined.  The Front End process gradually clears the fog, you’ve done your research experiments and confirmed that you have both technical and market feasibility.  There comes a point when the development target is clarified, and this is where the Trinity of product development takes over.

The members of this special group are:

Hamlet’s line “To be or not to be…” is one of Shakespeare’s most famous. And he did write quite a few good ones. Hamlet’s concern is a choice between living a troubled life; and embracing death. OK, it’s a fairly deep analogy when it comes to innovation, but the choice of embracing or avoiding innovation choices can lead to corporate death – think Kodak.

Innovation is hard, isn’t it?  That seems to be the prevailing wisdom.  This was going through my mind when I read a good post from Tim Kastelle recently.  Tim described how some of his innovation consultancy projects go through three phases – simplistic, complex and finally, simple.  The objective is to produce an innovation that is simply communicated and easily understood; simple is the end objective of all good innovation.

I’m a big fan of the annual Pipeline Conference.  This year it’s on June 6^th, and as usual has a great mix of keynote speakers and online resources.  The event is online, with registered participants having access to presentations and resources for 12 months afterwards.  Not only do you not have to travel, registration is also free.

This year’s speakers include:

The stereotype image of a large company is one of distance, secrecy and lack of speed. Yet Shell is actively trying to change this view. This mega company with a turnover of $451bn recently invited a small group of bloggers to visit Shell Technology Centre Amsterdam (STCA) to tell them about their innovation plans. My invitation arrived out of the blue so, not being sure what I’d done to deserve it, I accepted with a growing sense of curiosity.

I read a fascinating article last week about Google X, the X representing 10; making problems 10 times better in a timeframe of 10 years.  This part of the company is challenged to produce “moonshots”.  At Google, a moonshot has three criteria.  First, it can potentially solve a really big problem for the world.  Second, it has to have radical, almost science fiction-like technology.  Finally, it has to show progress, giving it a glimmer of hope that it could actually be possible.

Here’s a proposition – a company will never succeed with innovation unless the culture is supportive. It’s best encapsulated in the phrase “culture eats strategy for breakfast”, attributed to Peter Drucker, the noted management guru. 

Here’s a proposition – a company will never succeed with innovation unless the culture is supportive. It’s best encapsulated in the phrase “culture eats strategy for breakfast”, attributed to Peter Drucker, the noted management guru.  In this, the first of four articles focused on creating a culture of innovation, building on a previous blog, I propose that action is what changes culture, and there is a specific sequence to be followed. 

A lot has happened in Open Innovation since Henry Chesbrough coined the term in his 2003 book.  The term appears to be well understood, many companies have implemented it and a lot has been published.  And yet……. 

This is a two-part article, co-written by Innovation Fixer’s Kevin McFarthing and Ralph-Christian Ohr from Integrative Innovation.

Facing increasingly dynamic and unpredictable environments, firms are required to develop convenient innovation strategies, constantly adapt them to changing conditions and properly implement strategically-aligned initiatives throughout their organizations. Innovation portfolio management (IPM) can act as the pivotal tool to translate strategic objectives and priorities into project-based innovation activities. Furthermore, it provides a framework to convert raw ideas into real investment opportunities, based on their risk profile.

A question often asked when considering the fit of innovation within corporate strategy is whether you want to be a leader or a follower.  Some examples are fairly clear.  Most research-driven pharmaceutical companies want to launch the first medicine in its class and to maintain leadership with ongoing clinical support.  At the other end of the spectrum it would be highly unusual for a retailer to introduce the first entrant to a new category as a private label. 

Many words and expressions are clearly relative, such as “larger” or “smaller”.  These are easy adjectives as they often invite the word “than” after them.  Other words are more subtly relative, like innovation; not grammatically but inherently. 

In a previous corporate life, I was on the board of trustees of a very large pension fund.  Our role was to ensure income in retirement for thousands of current and former company employees.  The key lesson I learned was that the most important decision we had to make was on the mix of investments in the portfolio.  The return had to link to the objectives and requirements of the fund, now and in the future.  Portfolio management was the pivotal tool for success.