• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation
 

Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation

on

  • 225 views

Research indicates that organizations that successfully apply collective innovation methods are able to reconcile seemingly contradicting management situations. Further it is shown that people in ...

Research indicates that organizations that successfully apply collective innovation methods are able to reconcile seemingly contradicting management situations. Further it is shown that people in liminal conditions, e.g. periods of transitions or on the borderlines between organizations, experience a state of flux where contradictions arise: assigned roles, and goals are difficult to understand for those individuals.

more: clicresearch.org/peter-pribilla-stiftung/?page_id=122

Statistics

Views

Total Views
225
Views on SlideShare
225
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation Presentation Transcript

    • Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 1
    • Visualizing the InvisibleResolving Dilemmas inCollective InnovationProject leaders:Tobias Fredberg, Pascal Le Masson, Blanche Segrestin, Martin WienerTeam Members:Marine Agogué, Elsa Berthet, Martin Stötzel, Anna YströmMunich, October 24th, 2011
    • Dilemmas of collective innovationMotivation Share assets Protect assets Well-known dilemmas No authority Slow convergence in innovation Free commitment No work division Multiple stakeholder Conflict of interests In case of collective innovation: Multiple perspective Shared vision – Some dilemmas are reduced: larger and Take risk Explore Exploit Reduce Risk cheaper access to knowledge and ideas… Create Knowledge Reuse Knowledge – A lot of new dilemmas emerge! Management Dimension Managers of collective Recent insights in the literature suggest that innovation? 1. Successful collective innovation is based on the capacity to solve these dilemmas (see Ihl 2010) 2. There are today managers of collective innovation who might be able to organize this simultaneous solve (see Fredberg et al. 2011, Agogué & Yström 2010)  Managing for solving the dilemmas of collective innovation: actors, activities, methods? Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 3
    • Collective innovation manager?State of the art Research Questions: Research has focused on the innovation leader (“focal firm”) who makes use of external resources for his own goals… (Elmquist, Fredberg, Olilla 2009) 1. Where and how are Recent results have underlined that these “heroes of open these managers of innovation” actually rely on organized milieux, structures and collective innovation processes: doing this? – First approaches have studied open innovation market 2. What are the key intermediaries (Innocentive, Ninesigma,…) (Diener & Piller 2010) management areas to – These works underlined the limits of pure brokering: limited create conditions for cooperation, knowledge transfer rather than knowledge creation, for collective limited exploration (Sieg et al. 2010, Birkinshaw 2011) innovation initiatives? – Some works described more complex innovative milieux, 3. How can we help collaborative ecosystems, platforms and colleges (Gawer 2009, Le collective innovation Masson et al. 2011) that support the activities of open innovators managers to visualize/manage Hence there might be managers of collective innovation that are these areas? more than pure brokers... But their role, management areas and methods are largely hidden (research gap) Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 4
    • Four case studies to uncover a new actor: The collective innovation managerResearch Background and Method Management Exploration Centralized Dimensions vs. Exploitation vs. Decentralized Innovation Organization strategy Protecting Conflicting vs. Revealing vs. Collective Simultaneous IP Interests/ Solve? management Goals Governance Focus Hierarchical Company vs. Autonomous vs. Network Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 5
    • Four case studies to uncover a new actor: The collective innovation managerResearch Background and MethodManagement Dimensions Exploration Centralized vs. Exploitation vs. Decentralized Four Case Studies to help “visualize” the Innovation strategy Organization invisible collective innovation manager Protecting Conflicting vs. Revealing vs. Collective Simultaneous IP Interests/ Solve? management Goals Governance Focus Hierarchical Company vs. Autonomous vs. NetworkToward a new management actor:The collective innovation manager,relying on specific managerial techniques: visualizing the unknown, visualizing the interdependencies, visualizing the nature of the OI place, visualizing network creation Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 6
    • 1. Our case findings support the assumption that collective innovation managers apply simultaneous solves in several management dimensionsCase Study Results (Siemens) Simultaneous Solve1)  Centralized: Structures, guidelines, processes and tools Organization  Decentralized: Responsible for running collective innovation initiatives  Protecting: Intellectual property is systematically secured in patents IP Management  Revealing: Unused IP and technologies are commercialized via licenses and Spin-outs  No top-down targets and KPIs, and no pure bottom-up activities Governance  Idea selection: Bottom-up pre- selection (short-listing) via voting, but final top-down management decision1) Harvey balls: = simultaneous solve identified; = simultaneous solve not identified Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 7
    • Example: Simultaneous solve, based on the visualization of the unknown (1/2)Case study result (I-care)EXPLOITATIONS Known competences and skills Established firms and interactions with partners Stable identity of the objectsEXPLORATIONS Re-discussing the identity of the objects Exploring new ideas Based on most recent design theory Involving new actors (C-K theory, Hatchuel & Weil 2003, 2009) Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 8
    • Example: Simultaneous solve, based on the visualization of the unknown (2/2)Using C-K referential : Cases of ST-Microelectronics and of I-Care Generated actions of C-K referential 1. Define new projects for established firms 2. Build new partnerships 3. Expand the scope of action for institutions who want to act as an open innovation facilitator 4. Foster new ways to interact (seminars) Identifying complementary actors who 2 have the knowledge and/or skills that are currently lacking Identifying missing knowledge, and interesting concepts to develop Mobilizing existing 1 knowledge in a different 3&4 + + concept is attainable for Launching collaborative workshops with relevant actors to fill the established firms knowledge gaps and to explore interesting unexplored concepts Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 9
    • Example: Visualize Conflicts to manage collective innovation (1/2)Initial situation Agrosystem Local That produces food for Auth. humans NGO That provides food of Research good quality Center Farm Maximizing yields Preserving natural equilibria Coop Only with profitable With areas of regulations Farm crops (grasslands) Farm Using chemicals, Using ecosystem Farm fertilizers… services Initial situation: no Few relationships common ground between stakeholders Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 10
    • Example: Visualize Conflicts to manage collective innovation (2/2) Concepts Knowledge List of attributes from a productive and from an ecological perspective: Common/cleaving attributes A productive agrosystem that preserves natural equilibria Potential values associated to these attributes Functions having an Functions having a Without With individual potential value collective potential value grassland grasslands Design parameters i.e. reduce the use of i.e. use fertilizers to Frequent No mowing in (DP) activated at an herbicides to preserve No mowing increase grassland yields mowing Summer individual level groundwater i.e. coordinate grassland i.e. coordinate grassland DP activated at a Use of Use of Reduced No use of localization to reduce localization to maximize collective level herbicides herbic. herbic. herbicides individual costs for farmers biological control Without Without With localization of localization localization grasslands Visualize opportunities for open innovation that overcome the initial dilemma Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 11
    • 2. Building on the identified simultaneous solves, we were able to identify four key management areas for collective innovation initiativesKey Management Areas Centralized vs. decentralized Media organization Infrastructure How can we find the relevant people and through what channels/tools? Interdepen- Issue and dencies opportunties Collective Innovation How can we go Exploitation vs. How can we use Management from conflicting Conflicting vs. exploration what we know to interests to strategy open the box? collective collective goals? Focus interests/goals How can we create a legitimate place for open Company vs. innovation? network focus Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 12
    • Uncover an (unexpected) collective innovation management…Key Management Areas More than incentives… …Commit the right people Media to contribute to collective Infrastructure innovationBefore sharing How can we findknowledge … the relevant people …Share an and through what agenda of channels/tools? open issues Interdepen- Issue and dencies opportunties Collective Innovation How can we go How can we use Management from conflicting Don’t avoid what we know to interests to conflicts, don’t open the box? collective goals? look for trade Focus offs… How can we …Deal with Not a shared vision! create a conflicts in aA legitimate place for collective legitimate place creative way innovation for open innovation? Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 13
    • … with relevant visualization techniquesKey Management Areas More than incentives… …Commit the right people Media to contribute to collective Infrastructure innovationBefore sharing How can we find Visualize the emerging, relevantknowledge … the relevant people networks …Share an and through what agenda of channels/tools? open issues Interdepen- Issue and dencies opportunties Collective Visualize the Innovation How can we go How can we use unknown Management from conflicting Don’t avoid what we know to interests to conflicts, don’t open the box? collective goals? look for trade Focus offs… How can we …Deal with Not a shared vision! create a conflicts in aA legitimate place for collective legitimate place creative way innovation for open innovation? Visualize Visualize the legitimate place interdependencies Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 14
    • 3. A workshop concept to help visualizing and managing each of the 4 key management areasVisualization Workshops Visualize the opportunity WORKSHOP STRUCTURE 1 space Objectives Conclusion Media Infrastructure How can we find the relevant people and through what channels/tools? Visualize the infrastructure Issue and opportunties Interdependencies 2 (and performance) How can we use what we Collective Innovation Management How can we go from conflicting interests to know to open collective goals? the box? Focus How can we create a legitimate place for open Visualize conflicts and innovation? 3 interdependencies Diagnosis technique (Tutorial for) (visualization) Practical application Visualize the nature of 4 collective innovation Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 15
    • Workshop – Visualizing the Unknown1) Purpose 6) Conclusion Unveiling innovation strategies dilemmas “exploration vs. exploitation”  Visualizing unknown paths of innovation created at a collective level can help an open Can a innovation lock-in situation be diagnosed, and is it possible to objectify the gap between innovation manager in solving conflicting situations. expected innovations and the ones that are currently attainable by existing innovation capabilities ?2) Case study 5) Tutorial for an open innovation manager Harnessing ICT innovation to augment the lives of the fragile and elderly people in the Rhone- Alps region (France) An assessment : demand on the market increases (aging population) whereas few products or services arrive on the market today and provide successfully solutions An orphan innovation situation : an innovation highly expected by society, but that no actor or consortium of actors can manage to process whereas all the structural conditions to foster it are gathered.3) Initial diagnosis There is a gap between attainable exploitations (that mobilize known competences and skills, established firms and interactions with partners, dealing with a stable identity of the objects) and expected explorations (that re-discuss the identity of the objects, explore new ideas and involve new actors) 4) How can an OI manager solve the dilemma?  Visualizing the unknown can make it possible to overcome an exploration / exploitation dilemma Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 16
    • Workshop Visualizing the Communication Infrastructure (Performance) 1. Scope Definition 4. Analysis and Conclusions Workshop Tutorial Platform  1. Scope  a) Define relevant user attributes for Origin Ideas Evaluation/Rating quantitative analyses (e.g., region, age,Idea contributors with department etc.) Databasedifferentiating attributes b) Define quality measure(e.g., geography, age, Stars „Untapped“sector, department etc.) (e.g., user rating, Stars degree of novelty, Who contributes, How good are feasibility, business how much? the contributions? (Quality) Quantity Quality benefit) (Quantity) 2. Heat Maps a) Extract data and 2. Visualization I: Heat Maps calculate distribution of Number of Ideas by Region 3. Visualisation II: Integrated Tree Map ideas for each selected (Attribute 2) user attribute b) Draw heat maps Max. 3. Integrated Tree Map Attribute Number of Ideas by Age 1 a) Rank attributes and 140 (Attribute 1) associated categories 120 Max. by idea concentration 100 high Attribute 2 (maxmax top left) 80 medium 60 low b) Draw tree map 40 Attribute 4. Quantity vs. Quality 20 3 a) Identify high quality 0 < 25 25 - 35 35 - 45 45 - 55 > 55 ideas and map into tree b) Derive conclusions 11 February 2013 Martin Wiener; Martin Stötzel
    • Workshop Visualize Interdependences1) Initial goal 6) Conclusion Overcome conflicting objectives e.g. “farming production vs. environment protection”  Visualizing interdependences between stakeholders and new potential values created at a collective level can help an open innovation manager in solving conflicting situations. Is it possible to transform a conflicting object into an asset source of collective innovation? 5) Tutorial for an open innovation manager2) Case study 3° Represent existing design paths, and 1° Diagnose the conflict: Specify the propose intermediary paths that create a attributes (design parameters, A French cereal plain : How to combine crop production & environment protection (as common ground between actors functions) of the conflicting object intensive agricultural practices are threatening the environment) 2° Identify the potential values of A solution proposed by ecologists is to reintroduce grasslands in the agrosystem to preserve cleaving attributes + Find new natural equilibria DP1 DP2a attributes with potential values DP3 a Problem: it is a conflicting solution. Grasslands are less profitable than crops, so this solution triggers high individual costs for farmers DP1 4° Visualize interdependences between DP2b b actors created by the new solutions proposed, and stimulate innovative3)Initial diagnosis collaboration Stakeholders (farmers, naturalists…) have divergent interests in rural areas (agrosystems): visualize convergences and divergences 4) How can an OI manager solve the dilemma? Agrosystem (Concepts) List of attributes from a productive and (Knowledge) That produces food from an ecological perspective: for humans Common/cleaving attributes Consensual A productive agrosystem that Potential values associated to That provides food of attributes preserves natural equilibria these attributes good quality Functions having an Functions having a Without With individual potential value collective potential value Maximizing Preserving natural grassland grasslands yields equilibria Design parameters i.e. use fertilizers to i.e. reduce the use of (DP) activated at an increase grassland yields herbicides to preserve Cleaving Frequent No mowing individual level groundwater No mowing Individual innovation attributes With areas of mowing in Summer Only with profitable DP activated at a i.e. coordinate grassland i.e. coordinate grassland crops regulations (grasslands) collective level localization to reduce localization to maximize Use of Use of Reduced No use of individual costs for biological control herbicides herbic. herbic. herbicides farmers Using chemicals, Using ecosystem fertilizers… services Without With Open Without localization localization localization innovation of grasslands f. Visualize opportunities for open innovation that overcome the initial dilemma 11 February 2013 E. Berthet, B. Segrestin
    • Workshop – Creating Legitimacy in Open Innovation How can we create a legitimate Diagnosis place for Open collective innovation is paradoxical to participants. They need to optimize both for the collective and for the home organization. The result is a number of tension/dilemmas that must be resolved in order for the open innovation collaboration to be perceived as a legitimate place to share open knowledge and generate ideas. innovation?1. Conduct interviews with a Trust 4. Identify and emphasize Offices subset of involved key people: critical manifestations of Relations What are the tensions that they legitimacy in the hips with Logo others experience between the home open innovation organization and the arena? Career OI Loyalty What are the specific dilemmas Arena collaboration Business SAFER Academic legiti- cards papers involved in managing these tensions? macy Knowledge SharedAnalyze Generation Con- tracts Experi- ences Office2. Define Manifest Solution key Who are the key people that must be involved in dialogues to solve the tensions? What rules need to be established to enable an open and honest conversation? 3. Characterize the type of higher level solutions needed re- Trust solve the dilemmas in the open innovation collaboration Higher level solution Example Higher level solutions to be developed in open dialogues between stakeholders Home Collective Career Loyalty organization effortSolutions Risks viewpoint viewpointThe dilemmas are partly solved by creating If the process of creating legitimacy islegitimacy on the project level, but also on not open, you end up in a game likea higher level, where management plays Knowledge situation where no joint developmentan important role generation Career actually takes place.Arrange dialogue Resolve dilemmas Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 19
    • Conclusion An (emerging) model of the management of collective innovation… Market-based models of open innovation: Emerging model of collective innovation brokers, planning & optimisation management: shaping the unknown Known interests, known Discover interests, values, If the new competences, known techniques, stakeholders… If the new changes the futures… changes the game  game  management Visualize the unknown, managementlimits the new Incentives, knowledge and creative use of conflict, broadens theto stabilize the networks expansion, value sharing = unknown! game legitimate cooperative optimisation & planning place … in which “visualizing the invisible” (the unknown) is critical Thanks to PPF support, this research opens a promising research program, with a new research network! Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 20
    • Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 21
    • BackupResolving Dilemmas inCollective Innovation
    • Publication related to PPF projectPublikationen (Zeitschriften, Buchkapitel, etc.) aus den Jahren 2010 und 2011 AGOGUÉ, M., LE MASSON, P. & ROBINSON, D. K. R. 2011. Orphan Innovation, or when path-creation goes stale: missing entrepreneurs or missing innovation? Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, (submitted). AGOGUE, M., YSTRÖM, A., & LE MASSON, P. 2011. Expanding the Role of Intermediaries – Achieving collaborative radical innovation by managing exploration processes. International Journal of Innovation Management (submitted). BERTHET, E., BRETAGNOLLE, V. & SEGRESTIN, B. 2011. Introduction of semi-perennial forage crops in an intensive cereal plain to restore biodiversity: a need for collective management Journal for Sustainable Agriculture (accepted). ELMQUIST, M., FREDBERG, T., OLLILA, S. & YSTRÖM, A. forthcoming, 2011. Role Confusion in Open Innovation Intermediary Arenas. In: WITTKE, V., HANEKOP, H. & SPINDLER, G. (eds.) Collaborative production and innovation. GIANNOPOULOU, E., YSTRÖM, A. & OLLILA, S. 2011. Turning Open Innovation into Practice: Open Innovation Research through the Lens of Managers. International Journal of Innovation Management, 15, 505–524. GIANNOPOULOU, E., YSTRÖM, A., OLLILA, S., FREDBERG, T. & ELMQUIST, M. 2010. Implications of Openness: A Study into (All) the Growing Literature on Open Innovation. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 5, 162-180.Konferenzbeiträge aus den Jahren 2010 und 2011 BERTHET, E. 2011. From common pool resources to collectively designed resources: A need for innovative governance systems. Poster presented at Elinor Ostrom’s Doctoral Master Class. Montpellier, 21st June 2011. EKLÖF, A., YSTRÖM, A. & OLLILA, S. 2011. Open Innovation -Anything goes? A Review of Empirical Research on Open Innovation. EURAM. Tallinn, Estonia, 1-4 June, 2011. ELMQUIST, M., OLLILA, S. & YSTRÖM, A. forthcoming, 2011. Enabling knowledge creation among competitors: the open innovation arena. Nordic Academy of Management conference. Stockholm, August 22-24, 2011. STÖTZEL, M. & WIENER, M. 2011. Managing Open Innovation--Trade-off or Simultaneous Solve? In: Informatik Proceedings, 2011. STÖTZEL, M., WIENER, M. & AMBERG, M. 2011. Key Differentiators of Open Innovation Platforms – A Market-oriented Perspective. In: Wirtschaftinformatik Proceedings, 2011. YSTRÖM, A. forthcoming, 2011. Exploring an open innovation project unleashing the creative potential: Stories of resistance and emancipation. EGOS. Gothenburg,Sweden, 7-8 July 2011. YSTROM, A. & AGOGUÉ, M. 2011. Radical open innovation: the new role of intermediaries. Findings from collaborative intermediary arenas in Sweden and France. International Product Development Management Conference. Delft, the Netherlands. Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 23
    • In 2010, a group a researchers started collaborating on a joint researchproject funded by the Peter-Pribilla-FoundationResearch Setting Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 24
    • Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 25
    • Collaboration (Meetings, Topics) Team Workshops Gothenburg Munich 22 Mar 2011 24 Oct 20111. Four reference cases: identify critical dilemmas, techniques to solve them, efficiency of these Kick-off 1 Case studies Final techniques presentation2. Visualization Management Techniques of the OI manager (building the OI square): a) Visualize the unknown b) Visualize interdependencies c) Visualize communication networks Individual Case Studies d) Visualize an identity3. A workable format to help OI managers: “how do you design your own OI leader” Nuremberg Paris Paris a) Interactive, based on experiences 15 Dec 2010 30 Jun 2011 15 Sep 2011 b) Cumulative c) Self evaluation: what kind of dilemma 1 Case studies 1 Case studies 2 Visualization do you solve. 2 Visualization 3 OI Manager Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 26
    • Ambidexterity is an established theme in management researchTheoretical Background • Ambidexterity is the state of being equally adept in the use of both the left and the right hand • In management research, ambidexterity is usually referring to organizations who manage to efficiently run their current business while at the same time preparing for a changing future: • Relevant literature, examples: o Duncan, R. 1976. The Ambidextrous Organization: Designing Dual Structures for Innovation o March, J. G. 1991. Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning o Tushman, M. L. and O’Reilly, C. A. 1996. Ambidextrous Organizations: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change o Raisch, S. and Birkinshaw, J. 2008. Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 27
    • Prior research indicates that successful collective innovators applycontradicting approaches simultaneously for managing theirinnovation activitiesMotivation Simultaneous Solve: Research Questions: Management Dimension Successful collective innovators seem to reconcile contradicting management approaches Ambidexterity (Simultaneous Solve), but… Examples: 1. Where and how are they doing EXPLOITATION EXPLORATION this? 2. What are the key management areas for collective innovation initiatives? 3. How can we help collective PROTECTING REVEALING innovators to visualize/manage these areas? Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 28
    • SAFER Context VINNOVA Swedish Road Administration Region Västra Götaland170 persons hold keys to SAFER office Autoliv CHALMERS Epsilon• 50% from Chalmers, 50% from other partners Gothenburg university Folksam SP Saab• ca 40 PhD students (40 % industrial) SMW VTI• 45 full time in SAFER TÖI Scan. Auto. Suppl. Viktoria institute Scania Imego AB Telia Sonera Sicomp AB Volvo CCFocus areas Volvo Group LSP Incidents and accidents Driver state/action/reaction Prediction for accident prevention Methods for evaluation of safety systems Electric Vehicles and Vehicle Combination Human Models and Biomechanics Pre-crash Crash Post-crash Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation
    • Organizational ambidexterity is a renown theme in managementscienceAmbidexterity • Ambidexterity is the state of being equally adept in the use of both left and right appendages (such as the hands) • In Management, organizational ambidexterity is usually referring to organizations who manage to efficiently run their current business while at the same time preparing for a changing future • Literature e.g.: o Duncan, R. 1976. The ambidextrous Organization: Designing dual structures for Innovation o March, J. G. 1991. Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning o Tushman, M. L. and O’Reilly, C. A. 1996. Ambidextrous Organizations: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change o Raisch, S. and Birkinshaw, J. 2008. Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 30
    • Each team is running their specific case study which is dedicated to the underlying research question Research QuestionSuccessful collective innovators seem to Trade-off:reconcile contradicting approaches for Management Dimensionmanaging their innovation activities(“Simultaneous Solve”), but…1. How are they doing this?2. What are the “hidden/invisible” Simultaneous Solve: variables (from a leadership, Management Dimension governance, process, and IT tool perspective) enabling them to resolve the resulting dilemmas? ambidextrous approach Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 31
    • We see leading companies apply ambidextrous approaches(Simultaneous Solve) with regards to innovation managementSimultaneous Solve - Examples • Organizational ambidexterity: Procter & Gamble have decentralized their R&D unit closer towards the business units and simultaneously created central innovation „think-tanks“ for disruptive innovations • Embedded Linux (OSS): Nokia and Philips in some cases have chosen Linux as operating system for their electronic devices. The developers engage with the Linux open source community and selectively share some of their own innovations while protecting (hiding) others • Procter & Gamble as well as Siemens systematically identify Intellectual Property (patents) which they do not use for their own business and commercialize it via Licensing and Spin-outs Source: Web research, press articles Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 32
    • Our case study: How does Siemens manage their Open Innovationinitiatives? Do they apply the Simultaneous Solve?Case Study • Founded 1857 • 400.000 employees • 31.000 R&D people • Annual R&D spend: ~4 bn. EUR, 56.000 active patents • # 34 in Business Week’s list of most innovative companies worldwide (ahead of Dell, Vodafone, Nike) How does Siemens manage collective/open innovation, and do they apply the Simultaneous Solve? Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 33
    • Siemens has a central Open Innovation unit which provides structures, processes and tools Open Innovation at Siemens *) “Service provider” Siemens CTO OI Industry Energy Healthcare Corporate Functions (cross-sector) Corporate Technology (CTO) Open Innovation CTO OI*) Organization as of 04/2011 Open Innovation Activities Framework (by Siemens CTO OI) Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 34
    • Our case study included interviews with the central OI unit as well as operating business units (which run OI initiatives) Case Interviews CENTRAL UNIT CTO Open Innovation • Interview with head of Unit Dr. “There is hard work to be Lackner done in opening doors while maintaining some • Interview with Open control, (…)” Innovation Specialist Dr. LacknerOPERATING BUSINESS UNITS Innovation Hubs Siemens Student Award Smart Grid Contest, 2011 Sustainability Idea Technology Contest (internal), Middle-East (Dubai), Contest (internal), 2010 Accelerators; Out- 2011 2011 licensing, spin-outs Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 35
    • Our findings support first indications from prior literature that the simultaneous solve is applied in OI ManagementCase Study Findings (1/2) SIMULTANEOUSMGT. DIMENSION FINDINGS SOLVE 1)  The central open innovation unit develops structures and concepts, identifies technical solutions and solution providers, advertises the concepts across the Organization business units, and supervises the open innovation initiatives.  By contrast, the individual initiatives are then run as projects by the respective (decentral) business units with guidance and sparring from the central unit. • Open innovation initiatives are neither demanded top-down from the management, nor initiated autonomously by the internal or external Governance communities. It is rather the middle management that decides that open innovation may help in their business context • There are also no top-down targets set, neither for individual open innovation initiatives nor for the central open innovation unit • The decision process of selecting the best ideas uses a combination of bottom-up and top-down mechanisms: Short-listing of ideas is done via the votes of the community and a jury of managers and experts perform the final selection1) Harvey balls: Black ball = simultaneous solve identified. White ball = simultaneous solve not identified Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 36
    • However this does not apply to all dimensions. Motivation of participants seems to be limited to intrinsic mechanismsCase Study Findings (2/2) SIMULTANEOUSMGT. DIMENSION FINDINGS SOLVE 1)  IP protection is a well established practice because IP has always been vital for Siemens business success in competitive markets IP Management  A dedicated subsidiary (Siemens Technology Accelerator) works with venture capitalists to establish new start-ups that make use of un-used IP by developing innovative business models • Siemens heavily relies on intrinsic motivation. Receiving attention and feedback in virtual discussions with other participants seems to provide a Motivation sufficient motivation for employees to contribute. • For internal initiatives, the prospect of presenting own ideas in front of a management jury may motivate employees to invest significant efforts in open innovation activities Innovation • Innovation Strategy (exploration vs. exploitation) has not been discussed as Strategy and a management dimension, in the conducted case interviews ? other • Also, we could not yet identify additional management dimensions relevant for Open Innovation management dimensions1) Harvey balls: Black ball = simultaneous solve identified. White ball = simultaneous solve not identified Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 37
    • How does the Simultaneous Solve impact performance? Can wemeasure the performance of Innovation Communities?Performance of Innovation Communities Performance KPIs Attributes of participants • Intensity of • Specific role-profiles of participants communication • Technical / educational background of Measure • Number of idea & participants ment proposals • Time participants spend in the network (KPIs) • Selected ideas / • Geographical proximity solutions • Belonging to the same business unit / area • Business benefit • ... • ...Communication Infrastructure Performance Evaluation 1. Nodes = Participants 2. Arcs = Collaboration 3. Centricity = Performance 4. Colours = Attributes Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 38
    • AppendixResolving Dilemmas inCollective Innovation
    • 28 th June 2011 Paris, Pribilla groupResolving dilemmas in collective innovation The I-Care case Marine AGOGUE CGS, MINES ParisTech F-75 272 Paris, France Tel: +33 1 40 51 9201 Mail: magogue@ensmp.fr,
    • Diagnosing exploration / exploitation dilemmasC-K referential on ICT for autonomy in Rhône-Alpes region attainable exploitations expected explorations A C-K referential helps to diagnose the gap between reality and expectations, and provides a way to objectify the distance between attainable exploitation and expected exploration Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 41 Data : workshop analysis, interviews of firms, questionnaire (22 responses) Marine Agogué – MINES ParisTech
    • Visualizing the unknown to overcome dilemmas Using the C-K referential : cases of ST-Microelectronics and of I-Care Generated actions of C-K referential 1 – Define new projects for established firms 2 – Build new partnerships 3 - Expand the scope of action for institutions who want to act as an open innovation facilitator 4 - Foster new ways to interact (seminars) Identifying complementary 2 actors who have the knowledge and/or skills that are currently 3&4 lacking 1Mobilizing existing knowledge in a Identifying missing knowledge, and interesting concepts to developdifferent concept is attainable for + established firms Launching collaborative workshops with relevant actors to fill the knowledge gapsand to explore interesting unexplored concepts Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation 42 Marine Agogué – MINES ParisTech
    • How to build the C-K referential ? Toolkit for a OI leader C-K referential : A tool that requires to mobilize innovative design C-K theory and its formalisms * STEP 1 Gather classical knowledge (experts) & 3 3 list all the current projects STEP 2 From this first knowledge basis, build the 4 known paths of innovation STEP 32 Expand the knowledge basis, meet new experts and build a robust model of high- 1 level of abstraction STEP 4 & 5 Expand the knowledge and concept spaces until no more expertise or project seems out of the scope 56 5 STEP 6 Position projects on the innovation field mappingAn Open Innovation can then rely on such a tool for balancing between attainableexploitations and expected explorations * Bibliography : Hatchuel, A.Dilemmas inC-K design theory: An advanced formulation. Research in Engineering Design 19, 181-192. 4. Resolving & Weil, B. (2009) Collective Innovation 43 Hatchuel, A., Le Masson P., Weil,B. (2004). C-K theory in practice, lessons from industrial applications. Annual meeting of The Design Society, Dubrovnik. Marine Agogué – MINES ParisTech
    • Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation The case of open management of farming systems Elsa Berthet Blanche Segrestin October 2011 – Mines Paristech
    • Diagnosis of dilemmas:Initial situation Agrosystem Local That produces food Auth. for humans NGO That provides food of Research good quality Center Farm Maximizing yields Preserving natural equilibria Coop With areas of regulations Farm Only with (grasslands) profitable crops Farm Using chemicals, Initial Using ecosystem Farm fertilizers… situation: no services common Few relationships ground between stakeholders 45 Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation
    • Identify alternative ways to deal with thedilemmas (Concepts) List of attributes from a productive (Knowledge) and from an ecological perspective: Common/cleaving attributes Potential values associated to A productive agrosystem that these attributes preserves natural equilibria Without With Functions having Functions having a grassland grasslands an individual collective potential value potential value Frequent No mowing in Design i.e. use fertilizers to i.e. reduce the use of No mowing mowing Summer increase grassland yields herbicides to preserve parameters (DP) activated at an groundwater Use of Use of Reduced No use of individual level herbicides herbic. herbic. herbicides DP activated at i.e. coordinate grassland i.e. coordinate Without a collective level localization to reduce grassland localization to Without With localization of individual costs for maximize biological localization localization grasslands farmers control Visualize opportunities for open innovation that overcome the initial dilemma46 Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation
    • Ex. 1) Visualize grassland design parameters 2) Visualize interdependencies Grassland Watero rg. Local Auth. With fodder Without fodder production production NGO Research Frequent No mowing Center mowing in Summer Loss of harvest, Pests Farm Use of No use Use of Reduced No use herbicides of herb. herb. herb. of herb. Coop Farm Farm Without With Without With Biologicallocalization localization localization localization control Farm 47 Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation
    • Empty pattern3° Represent existing design paths, and propose intermediary paths that create a common ground 1° Diagnose the conflict: Specify the attributes (design between actors parameters, functions) of the conflicting object 2° Identify the potential values of cleaving attributes + Find new attributes with potential values DP1a DP3 DP2a DP1b DP2b 4° Visualize interdependences between actors created by the new solutions proposed, and stimulate innovative collaboration 48 Resolving Dilemmas in Collective Innovation
    • The visualization of the communication infrastructure and its performance is basedon the (quantitative) origin and the (qualitative) rating of idea contributionsAnalysis Framework Platform   Origin Ideas Evaluation/Rating Idea contributors with Database differentiating attributes (e.g., geography, age, job title, sector, department etc.) Quantitative Qualitative Analyses Analyses
    • Heat maps visualize the distribution of ideas by selected user attributes; bycombining heat maps, the tree map offers an integrated perspective on “hot spots”Visualization: Heat & Tree Maps (Idea Quantity) 140 Number of Ideas by Age (Attribute 1) Number of Ideas by Region (Attribute 2) 120 Max. 100 high 80 medium 60 low Max. 40 20 0 < 25 25 - 35 35 - 45 45 - 55 > 55 Tree Map: Number of Ideas by Attributes Max- Attribute 1 600 300 100 Max Attribute ... 400 200 Min- Max Attribute n 280 120 140 60
    • By comparing quantitative and qualitative “hot spots”, the collective innovationmanager can identify “untapped” target groups and derive corrective actionsEvaluation: Idea Quantity vs. Quality Quantity of Ideas (Count) Quality of Ideas (Rating) Same structure „Untapped“ Stars Stars More ideas, Fewer ideas, but lower but better Collective Innovation Manager: quality quality Pay special attention to “untapped” stars and take corrective actions