Fostering Digital Innovation at Large Organisations

1. fostering digital innovation
Nick Corr
Head of Portfolio Management
Australia Post - Identity Services
May 2018

2. intro
- Look at various product management and
development methodologies I’ve encountered
over 20+ years
- snapshot of my perspective on the way
different companies tackled digital innovation
and development;

3. Sensis
circa-2005
Philosophy: product-centric silos
Gating process: resources funded based on size of product revenue
Well resourced and freedom to experiment – but hard to change
course
Cons:
 focussed more on product extensions
than new ideas or innovation;
 lack of shared knowledge or
capabilities between product silos;
Pros:
 autonomy for Product Managers
to grow existing revenue;
 committed products/projects
well resourced;

4. circa-2006
Philosophy: be disruptive
Gating process: ad-hoc executive approval
Chaotic but reasonably effective
Cons:
 inconsistent resource planning;
 poor quality control;
 no clear link between effort and
opportunity;
Pros:
 rapid new product development;
 highly energized and engaged
development teams;
 singular clarity of vision;

5. Ebay
circa-2009
Philosophy: power of three
Gating process: development effort (“train seats”)
Well structured and planned but stifling for innovation
Cons:
 considerable upfront effort with
limited guarantee of progressing;
 disengaged development teams;
Pros:
 autonomy for Product Managers
to deliver on approved projects;
 committed products/projects
well resourced;

6. circa-2011
Philosophy: focus on core proposition
Gating process: near-term revenue/growth opportunity
Energized and focussed but very short-sighted
Cons:
 lack of long-term vision;
 ceded a lot of power to partners;
 missed major opportunities in social
and mobile;
Pros:
 forced focus due to leaner
resource availability;
 better cross-functional
development processes;
 high employee engagement;

7. circa-2012
Philosophy: organizational synergies
Gating process: alignment with existing MSFT targets /12 month revenue
goals
Disciplined but directionless
Cons:
 loss of autonomy for product owners;
 executive decision making paralysis
(“stop and look-up”);
 no singularity of vision;
Pros:
 highly refined program/product
management processes;
 seemingly infinite resources –
development, infrastructure;
 Massive existing customer/install
base;

8. circa-2013
Philosophy: fight to retain revenue and relevance
Gating process: short-term revenue
Appetite for new opportunities but shackled to legacy systems
Cons:
 extremely mature product
management processes;
 short-term revenue expectations;
 competing global priorities;
Pros:
 extremely mature product
management processes;
 open to explore new
opportunities;
 Heritage brand;

9. circa-2016
Philosophy: investing in innovation
Gating process: annual business case with quarterly check-ins
Appetite for innovation but a big machine to change
Cons:
 legacy infrastructure and processes;
 large breadth of existing product
offerings to support;
 Inconsistent retail environments
Pros:
 Appetite for re-invention;
 Trusted heritage brand;
 Omnipresent physical footprint;

10. Summary
Philosophy and methodologies evolve with the goals of the
organization
But a few core themes emerged for me:
 Be consumer led - you never go wrong listening to your
customers, owning mistakes, learning from them
 Strike the right balance between formal
planning/budget while still trusting and backing your
vision and teams
 Bring people along for the journey – I’ve done more
with less resources if they believe in the product and feel
like they’ve helped shaped it

11. thanks for listening
Any questions?