by Larry Keely
https://www.doblin.com/ten-types
Which innovation framework, the 10 types of innovation or the business model
canvas, is more useful in helping people realise that 'innovation' isn't just about a
product (or service)?
by Osterwalder and Pigneur
http://businessmodelgeneration.com/canvas/bmc

The first iteration of the 10 types of innovation in 1998 had 4 categories
(Finance, Process, Offering and Delivery) and even had 'Business model' as
one of the elements.

In 2011, Keeley refreshed the analysis and slightly restructured and simplified the
framework, combining Finance and Process into one category called Configuration,
changing 'Business model' into 'Profit model', combining the 'Enabling process' and
'Core process' into one element (Process), and changing Delivery into Experience.

Elements in the Configuration category focus on the
innermost workings of an organisation

Elements in the Configuration category focus on the
innermost workings of an organisation
Elements in the Offering category focus
on the core products and services
offered by the organisation

Elements in the Offering category focus
on the core products and services
offered by the organisation
Elements in the Experience category
focus more on the customer-facing areas
of the organisation.
Elements in the Configuration category focus on the
innermost workings of an organisation

Turning to the Business Model Canvas (BMC), there are 9 elements, or building
blocks arranged spatially with the left side of the canvas focusing more on the
efficiency of the organisation, and the right looking more at the value it provides.
More on the 2 faces of the BMC later...

First, my attempt to see whether the 10 types of innovation could be mapped to the
Business Model Canvas (BMC).
+

They seem to map pretty cleanly. Profit model (how an organisation makes money)
stretches across both Costs and Revenue.

Customer Engagement (fostering compelling interactions with customers) sits
comfortable at the junction of Customer Relationships, Customer Segments, and
Delivery Channels.

An organisation's core offering (product performance and service system) is what
the BMC refers to as the Value Proposition.

Less clear was where to put 'Brand'. Keeley defines Brand as how an organisation
represents its offerings, which seems to be strongly associated with the Value
Proposition, so I've put it there, for now...

When I overlaid the Efficiency and Value categories, the blue Configuration
elements populate the Efficiency side, while the orange elements (Offerings and
Experience) populate the Value side. The elements in the centre, clustered around
the Value Proposition, are a combination of Efficiency and Value, though I wonder if
Brand should be shifted more to the Value side?

So, quite a lot of overlap in the basic elements of the 10 types and the BMC. But is
one better than the other for helping people understand that innovation goes
beyond products?

As a visual and communication aid, I use the BMC more, especially the jigsaw
version because it emphasises the human element and the relationships
between the building blocks. The spatial layout and the graphic representations
of the elements (a truck for delivery, a heart for customer relationships) are
fantastic learning and memory aids, particularly for people who aren't familiar
with the different elements of a business model.

But, I also use the 10 types of Innovation because the authors
conducted an impressive analysis on what best practice looks like for
top innovators. A few juicy titbits:
• 'more is mightier'--top innovators focus on 3 or more elements of
innovation whereas average innovators look at less than 2.
• 'Product performance', while important, is often the easiest for
competitors to copy and rarely results in a long-term competitive
advantage

Text and image
• Lorem ipsum dolor sit
amet, consectetur
adipiscing elit. Proin
id purus mi, nec
ornare est. Phasellus
nec lorem nisl.
Mauris hendrerit
porttitor consequat.
• This text is Arial 24
pt.