Everybody who works in business is busy. There are deadlines, crises, urgent requests from on high, and email inboxes stuffed to bursting. How many times do you reply “very busy” when asked how things are going? Scheduling meetings is a diary nightmare; it’s easier to seek perfect alignment of the planets than to get eight senior people in the same room within the next month. The personal workload and efficiency challenge is particularly acute these days.
Open Innovation is now an accepted methodology for enhancing your new product or service development pipeline. It is deployed to varying degrees depending on the industry or even the company attitude.
We deal with attraction every day of our lives, sometimes with life-changing consequences, for example in our choice of life partner. Many factors are involved – looks, intelligence, humour, wealth, or if you’re really lucky, an extraordinary combination of all four. Attraction is important in business too, but how often do you step back and consider what makes you attractive?
In my last blog I outlined some of the challenges facing Open Innovation in the context of large contracting relationships. I’ll now move on to some of the top line considerations when working with suppliers, from the perspective of both customer and supplier.
The International Association for Contract and Commercial Management (IACCM) is a successful organization of professionals involved with large contracts, procurement and outsourcing. If you want to know about anything to do with this area, they are the “go to” people, and are very ably led by Tim Cummins. I was delighted when Tim asked me to present at their EMEA conference in Amsterdam in May on the subject of Open Innovation, Contracts and Relationships. I’ll cover some of the learnings in this and following blog posts.
A lot has been written about Intellectual Property (IP) and Open Innovation. It’s not surprising, because it’s one of the thorniest problems facing collaborators. In a recent blog I talked about the importance of having a flexible approach to IP policy, ensuring that you can deliver the deal that is most appropriate to the partner and opportunity under consideration. Now I’ll turn attention to a more difficult challenge – how do you protect Open Innovation collaborations where keeping the IP secret is the best way forward?
We all know the regular diary entries. Write monthly report. Produce monthly numbers. Set annual objectives. Plan summer holiday. Watch favourite TV program. These tasks come around with regularity and frequency and become part of our routine.
A lot has been written about Intellectual Property (IP) and Open Innovation (OI). It’s not surprising, because it’s often one of the thorniest problems facing collaborators. Recent research from the IACCM (International Association for Contract and Commercial Management) shows that IP is the fourth most commonly negotiated term in contracts; yet it doesn’t reach the top ten of terms leading to disputes. So why the focus on IP?
There seems to have been a lot of discussion around the innovation blogs recently about who is allowed to innovate; tapping into the creativity of everybody; allowing people to run with their ideas; and making sure that idea selection doesn’t just happen at the top of the business. The implication is that the originators of the idea should “own” the idea and be the right people to champion them.
Following the provocative article written by BrainJuicer's Chief Juicer, John Kearon, "The Death of Innovation?", John interviews Kevin McFarthing of Innovation Fixer to explore the challenges big companies face in the delivery of new categories and disruptive innovation.
Click here to go to the recording.