The document discusses different generations of innovation models, from the first generation technology push model to the sixth generation open innovation model. It describes the characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses of each generation. The key aspects of the sixth generation open innovation model are that it focuses on opening up innovation to external partners and ideas, allowing ideas and paths to market to come from both inside and outside the company. The document also discusses some of the advantages and disadvantages of the open innovation approach.
Presenation on Open Innovation in geo organizations in the Netherlands. On innovation, open innovation, findings, future research, relation to geo-information.
Open Innovation, Business Model Innovation, Lean InnovationGino Tocchetti
APRIRSI PER INNOVARSI: i vantaggi per le aziende -
Workshop organizzato da TasLab, nell'ambito del Progetto CentraLab -
Sede della Provincia Autonoma di Trento, Sala Wolf, 12/6/14 -
#aprirsixinnovare
La innovación abierta (Open Innovation), término acuñado por el Profesor Henry Chesbrough, es una nueva estrategia de innovación bajo la cual las empresas van más allá de los límites internos de su organización y en particular donde la cooperación con profesionales externos pasa a tener un papel fundamental. Open Innovation significa combinar el conocimiento interno con el conocimiento externo para sacar adelante los proyectos de estrategia y de I+D. Significa también que las empresas utilizan tanto canales internos como externos para poner en el mercado sus productos y tecnologías innovadoras. Bajo este contexto, universidades y centros de investigación ofrecen nuevas perspectivas y soluciones a las compañías que utilizan este modelo. Este tipo de innovación responde a la posibilidad de ocurrencia de lo que se conoce como inteligencia colectiva.
R&D Research & Development Strategy & ManagementChief Innovation
Am one of the few people I know who has an R&D Strategy background, but you almost never can sell projects in that area unless you have a domain PhD. Most of this is from 3rd Generation R&D, written by former colleagues from Arthur D. Little, Phil Roussel, Tammy Erickson and Kamal Saad. Phil is no longer with us, great guy and good friend (always tell people, I taught him how to use a fax machine, 'Jay, how do I work this thing.' - 'Phil, put the page in there, and push that big green button.' - 'Oh, that was easy.' Safe to say, 23 years later I still have never written a cool book, but did know something he did not! This had 3 slides at the end of it that I cannot remember where they came from, think in the book but not in order.
Standardization Efforts: The Relationship between Knowledge Dimensions, Searc...Ian McCarthy
We explore how a standardization effort (i.e.,when a firm pursues standards to further innovation) involves different search processes for knowledge and innovation outcomes. Using an inductive case study of Vanke, a leading Chinese property developer,we show how varying degrees of knowledge
complexity and codification combine to produce a typology of four types of search process: active, integrative, decentralized and passive, resulting in four types of innovation outcome: modular, radical,incremental and architectural. We argue that when the standardization effort in a firm involves highly codified knowledge,incremental and architectural innovation outcomes are fostered, while modular and radical innovations are hindered. We discuss how standardization efforts can result in a second-order innovation capability, and conclude by calling for comparative research in other settings to understand how standardization efforts can be suited to different types of search process in different industry contexts.
WHO IS THE GREATER INNOVATOR ?
WHAT ARE THE INNOVATION OBSTACLES?
Original Source www.ctca.ca, share here for discussion at www. facebook.com/xtrategist
Business modelling in the fuzzy front end of innovation camera ready 29june11Sander Limonard
How to inform technological decision making in long term, networked innovation? This presentation proposes a methodology that enables decision makers in networked R&D projects to select, align and enrich strategy formation, business model identification and technology design.
Discussion Dynamics of Cooperation and CompetitionBeing successfuLyndonPelletier761
Discussion: Dynamics of Cooperation and Competition
Being successful in today’s business environment requires more nuanced thinking than just stressing competition. Consider General Electric, which found that a highly effective way to improve its KPIs in the aircraft engine market was to actually partner with a competitor. It seems counter-intuitive, but it worked. When General Electric and Snecma created an alliance to build aircraft engines, General Electric shielded certain sections of the production process to protect against the excess transfer of technology (“Snecma, GE Renew CFM Agreement,” 2008).
Consider the dynamics of cooperation and competition in the future business environment. For organizations that are in an environment of increasing cooperation/competition, consider the proactive role the HR department can serve in helping the C-suite think about balancing competition and cooperation. As part of the Discussion, give specific examples.
To prepare for this Discussion,
Review this week’s Learning Resources, especially:
· Resource fit in inter‐firm– See pdf
· Interpretive schemes – See pdf
· Knowledge transfer to partners – See pdf
· Two Favors of Open Innovation - See pdf
Assignment:
Post a cohesive and scholarly response based on your readings and research this week that addresses the following:
Tommy McMillian request letters from you that can show the parole board that he has a support system waiting outside.
Conduct additional research to analyze the dynamics of cooperation and competition in future business environments.
· From your research, discuss specific ideas or concepts regarding what proactive role can the HR department serve in helping the C-suite think about balancing competition and cooperation?
· Does cooperation/competition require equal resources from all partners?
· How are the decisions made about the levels of resources committed by each partner?
· If there is a wide disparity in net worth or market share of the partners, is it reasonable to expect each to commit the same percentage of resources?
· How are conflicts around cooperation and competition anticipated, planned for, and resolved by the HR department?
· No Plagiarism
· APA citing
FROM THE EDITOR
James A. Euchner
TWO FLAVORS OF OPFNINN01MFI0N
Since Henry Chesbrough published Open Innovation
(2003), the paradigm he described has been a subject of
great interest and experimentation in corporations. Ches-
brough defined open innovation as breaking down the
boundaries of the corporation so that "valuable ideas can
come from inside or outside the company and can go to
market from inside or outside the company, as well." He
contrasted this open paradigm with the more-traditional
closed innovation paradigm based on the captive R&D
laboratory.
Chesbrough's work encouraged companies to create
porous innovation pipelines and to become more aggres-
sive about licensing, working with start-up companies,
spinning out concepts that don't fit wi ...
Presenation on Open Innovation in geo organizations in the Netherlands. On innovation, open innovation, findings, future research, relation to geo-information.
Open Innovation, Business Model Innovation, Lean InnovationGino Tocchetti
APRIRSI PER INNOVARSI: i vantaggi per le aziende -
Workshop organizzato da TasLab, nell'ambito del Progetto CentraLab -
Sede della Provincia Autonoma di Trento, Sala Wolf, 12/6/14 -
#aprirsixinnovare
La innovación abierta (Open Innovation), término acuñado por el Profesor Henry Chesbrough, es una nueva estrategia de innovación bajo la cual las empresas van más allá de los límites internos de su organización y en particular donde la cooperación con profesionales externos pasa a tener un papel fundamental. Open Innovation significa combinar el conocimiento interno con el conocimiento externo para sacar adelante los proyectos de estrategia y de I+D. Significa también que las empresas utilizan tanto canales internos como externos para poner en el mercado sus productos y tecnologías innovadoras. Bajo este contexto, universidades y centros de investigación ofrecen nuevas perspectivas y soluciones a las compañías que utilizan este modelo. Este tipo de innovación responde a la posibilidad de ocurrencia de lo que se conoce como inteligencia colectiva.
R&D Research & Development Strategy & ManagementChief Innovation
Am one of the few people I know who has an R&D Strategy background, but you almost never can sell projects in that area unless you have a domain PhD. Most of this is from 3rd Generation R&D, written by former colleagues from Arthur D. Little, Phil Roussel, Tammy Erickson and Kamal Saad. Phil is no longer with us, great guy and good friend (always tell people, I taught him how to use a fax machine, 'Jay, how do I work this thing.' - 'Phil, put the page in there, and push that big green button.' - 'Oh, that was easy.' Safe to say, 23 years later I still have never written a cool book, but did know something he did not! This had 3 slides at the end of it that I cannot remember where they came from, think in the book but not in order.
Standardization Efforts: The Relationship between Knowledge Dimensions, Searc...Ian McCarthy
We explore how a standardization effort (i.e.,when a firm pursues standards to further innovation) involves different search processes for knowledge and innovation outcomes. Using an inductive case study of Vanke, a leading Chinese property developer,we show how varying degrees of knowledge
complexity and codification combine to produce a typology of four types of search process: active, integrative, decentralized and passive, resulting in four types of innovation outcome: modular, radical,incremental and architectural. We argue that when the standardization effort in a firm involves highly codified knowledge,incremental and architectural innovation outcomes are fostered, while modular and radical innovations are hindered. We discuss how standardization efforts can result in a second-order innovation capability, and conclude by calling for comparative research in other settings to understand how standardization efforts can be suited to different types of search process in different industry contexts.
WHO IS THE GREATER INNOVATOR ?
WHAT ARE THE INNOVATION OBSTACLES?
Original Source www.ctca.ca, share here for discussion at www. facebook.com/xtrategist
Business modelling in the fuzzy front end of innovation camera ready 29june11Sander Limonard
How to inform technological decision making in long term, networked innovation? This presentation proposes a methodology that enables decision makers in networked R&D projects to select, align and enrich strategy formation, business model identification and technology design.
Discussion Dynamics of Cooperation and CompetitionBeing successfuLyndonPelletier761
Discussion: Dynamics of Cooperation and Competition
Being successful in today’s business environment requires more nuanced thinking than just stressing competition. Consider General Electric, which found that a highly effective way to improve its KPIs in the aircraft engine market was to actually partner with a competitor. It seems counter-intuitive, but it worked. When General Electric and Snecma created an alliance to build aircraft engines, General Electric shielded certain sections of the production process to protect against the excess transfer of technology (“Snecma, GE Renew CFM Agreement,” 2008).
Consider the dynamics of cooperation and competition in the future business environment. For organizations that are in an environment of increasing cooperation/competition, consider the proactive role the HR department can serve in helping the C-suite think about balancing competition and cooperation. As part of the Discussion, give specific examples.
To prepare for this Discussion,
Review this week’s Learning Resources, especially:
· Resource fit in inter‐firm– See pdf
· Interpretive schemes – See pdf
· Knowledge transfer to partners – See pdf
· Two Favors of Open Innovation - See pdf
Assignment:
Post a cohesive and scholarly response based on your readings and research this week that addresses the following:
Tommy McMillian request letters from you that can show the parole board that he has a support system waiting outside.
Conduct additional research to analyze the dynamics of cooperation and competition in future business environments.
· From your research, discuss specific ideas or concepts regarding what proactive role can the HR department serve in helping the C-suite think about balancing competition and cooperation?
· Does cooperation/competition require equal resources from all partners?
· How are the decisions made about the levels of resources committed by each partner?
· If there is a wide disparity in net worth or market share of the partners, is it reasonable to expect each to commit the same percentage of resources?
· How are conflicts around cooperation and competition anticipated, planned for, and resolved by the HR department?
· No Plagiarism
· APA citing
FROM THE EDITOR
James A. Euchner
TWO FLAVORS OF OPFNINN01MFI0N
Since Henry Chesbrough published Open Innovation
(2003), the paradigm he described has been a subject of
great interest and experimentation in corporations. Ches-
brough defined open innovation as breaking down the
boundaries of the corporation so that "valuable ideas can
come from inside or outside the company and can go to
market from inside or outside the company, as well." He
contrasted this open paradigm with the more-traditional
closed innovation paradigm based on the captive R&D
laboratory.
Chesbrough's work encouraged companies to create
porous innovation pipelines and to become more aggres-
sive about licensing, working with start-up companies,
spinning out concepts that don't fit wi ...
Success Factors of Open Innovation - A Literature ReviewWaqas Tariq
This paper reviews the research on the open innovation process in order to identify critical success factors. The study consists of a systematic review of 29 referred empirical articles on the open innovation process. The studies reviewed highlight different success factors for the open innovation process. These factors are grouped into nine themes: 1) relational aspects, 2) the people involved in the process, 3) governance, 4) facilitators, 5) provision of resources, 6) strategy, 7) process management, 8) leadership and 9) culture. Based upon the findings, the study proposes a number of future research directions that may stimulate more intensive investigation of this field.
“Distributed Perspectives on Innovation: Open Innovation, User Innovation and Beyond.” Keynote talk given 5 May 2010 at the Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, for workshop entitled “New Forms of Collaborative Production and Innovation: Economic, Social, Legal and Technical Characteristics and Conditions”
The integration between innovation and business is a key factor in competitiveness between organizations. That is, innovation applied to a business makes no sense if not considered as an integral tool for the processes of the organization. Companies should therefore adopt a policy where innovation plays a strategic role in the design of business models to become lean, effective and competitive entities (Moraleda, 2004). The objective of this paper is to show the importance of innovation within companies, identifying the concept, the various models that different entities might adopt in order to develop better processes of innovation, as well as indicators that represent innovation at global and national levels in order to develop strategies that lead to an increase in competitiveness. For this work the method used was a bibliographical review of relevant articles from a range of authors was conducted.
In the world of the enterprise, innovation must extend from the initial ambitious ideas gathered from R&D labs around the world, all the way through applied R&D with industry partners, and into the development and commercialization of technology products and platforms.
Innovation starts with the spark of the right culture and talent meeting that ambitious and once hidden idea. But it doesn’t stop there. In the world of the enterprise, I see the practice of innovation as encompassing a full lifecycle. It starts with those crazy and ambitious ideas that are then iterated and shepherded through a rigorous process of applied R&D. For the ideas that finally prove their worth, new technology products
and platforms that address significant business problems are created and taken into the marketplace.
I call this multi-phase process: Full Lifecycle Innovation. It is a practical approach to one of the most creative and essential practices in business today:
Transforming Ideas form the Lab Into Marketplace Realities
The practice of Full lifecycle innovation requires a layer of processes, resources and decision criteria – each one a little different for the four phases of the journey:
1. Open Innovation
2. Applied R&D
3. Product and Platform Development
4. Commercialization
At each step, truly powerful events are triggered, explored and nurtured as different players, technologies and ideas enter the mix. All of them are serving the goal of creating something that is substantially bigger and more impactful than the simple sum of its parts. Something that is truly remarkable.
At NTT i3, we believe that Full Lifecycle Innovation is about:
Curating a culture of ambitious ideas
With rebellious talent from around the world
Dedicated to turning hidden opportunities into real products
That make a difference for the enterprise
Google X - Think Tanks as a Source of Disruptive Innovation in Large Corporat...Thomas Klaffke
My seminar paper on Think Tanks as a Source of Disruptive Innovation in Large Corporations tries to propose a viable solution to the problem many large organizations nowadays have: robust, inflexible structures, processes and cultures in which the creation and development of disruptive innovations is almost impossible.
My solution: outsourced, creative, clandestine think tanks or labs that are focusing solely on disruptive innovation outside of the core business of the organization. How can this be a viable solution? Google X might be a popular and successful example.
Read my paper to know why!
The Effects of Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence on the Analysis of Environmental Big Data and the Prediction of the Future of the Environment
When listening about building new Ventures, Marketplaces ideas are something very frequent. On this session we will discuss reasons why you should stay away from it :P , by sharing real stories and misconceptions around them. If you still insist to go for it however, you will at least get an idea of the important and critical strategies to optimize for success like Product, Business Development & Marketing, Operations :)
Reflect Festival Limassol May 2024.
Michael Economou is an Entrepreneur, with Business & Technology foundations and a passion for Innovation. He is working with his team to launch a new venture – Exyde, an AI powered booking platform for Activities & Experiences, aspiring to revolutionize the way we travel and experience the world. Michael has extensive entrepreneurial experience as the co-founder of Ideas2life, AtYourService as well as Foody, an online delivery platform and one of the most prominent ventures in Cyprus’ digital landscape, acquired by Delivery Hero group in 2019. This journey & experience marks a vast expertise in building and scaling marketplaces, enhancing everyday life through technology and making meaningful impact on local communities, which is what Michael and his team are pursuing doing once more with Exyde www.goExyde.com
Salma Karina Hayat is Conscious Digital Transformation Leader at Kudos | Empowering SMEs via CRM & Digital Automation | Award-Winning Entrepreneur & Philanthropist | Education & Homelessness Advocate
Best Crypto Marketing Ideas to Lead Your Project to SuccessIntelisync
In this comprehensive slideshow presentation, we delve into the intricacies of crypto marketing, offering invaluable insights and strategies to propel your project to success in the dynamic cryptocurrency landscape. From understanding market trends to building a robust brand identity, engaging with influencers, and analyzing performance metrics, we cover all aspects essential for effective marketing in the crypto space.
Also Intelisync, our cutting-edge service designed to streamline and optimize your marketing efforts, leveraging data-driven insights and innovative strategies to drive growth and visibility for your project.
With a data-driven approach, transparent communication, and a commitment to excellence, InteliSync is your trusted partner for driving meaningful impact in the fast-paced world of Web3. Contact us today to learn more and embark on a journey to crypto marketing mastery!
Ready to elevate your Web3 project to new heights? Contact InteliSync now and unleash the full potential of your crypto venture!
What You're Going to Learn
- How These 4 Leaks Force You To Work Longer And Harder in order to grow your income… improve just one of these and the impact could be life changing.
- How to SHUT DOWN the revolving door of Income Stagnation… you know, where new sales come into your magazine while at the same time existing sponsors exit.
- How to transform your magazine business by fixing the 4 “DON’Ts”...
#1 LEADS Don’t Book
#2 PROSPECTS Don’t Show
#3 PROSPECTS Don’t Buy
#4 CLIENTS Don’t Stay
- How to identify which leak to fix first so you get the biggest bang for your income.
- Get actionable strategies you can use right away to improve your bookings, sales and retention.
2. “It’s war: Innovate or Die”
Cooper wrote 2005 in his book Product Leadership: “It’s war: Innovate or Die”.
3. INTRODUCTION
Every year innovation becomes not only more vital for the success but also determines a company’s
very existing. The ability to innovate is one of the core competence needed for an organization to
compete in the ever increasing challenging and highly changing environment (Cooper, 2005).
4. Importance of innovation in company’s agenda
The Boston Consulting Group’s annual
global report shows this awareness from
firms very clearly. For the year of 2015,
79% of the respondent’s ranked
innovation as either the top priority or a
top three priority (see Table 1.). Since
2009, the importance in a company’s
agenda for innovation has raised by 15%
(Ringel, M., Taylor, A., & Zablit, H.,
2015).
5. For companies to become more innovative, they need to be ready for change and to have set up
mechanisms that will support the process.
6. Understanding of the process of innovation at the firm-level has evolved throughout recent decades from
simple linear and sequential models to increasingly complex models embodying a diverse range of inter
and intra stakeholders and processes.
Innovation at the firm-level has evolved
Rothwell (1994) documented five shifts or generations, demonstrating that the complexity and integration
of the models increases with each subsequent generation as new practices emerge to adapt to changing
contexts and address the limitations of earlier generations (Ortt and van der Duin, 2008) .
More recently and following on from the seminal work of Rothwell’s innovation generation model
typology, researchers (Kotesmir and Meissner, 2013) have suggested that Chesbrough (2003) open
innovation model represent the latest wave of innovation models.
7. Model Generatio
n
Characteristic Strengths Weaknesses
Technology
Push
First Simple linear
sequential process,
emphasis on R&D
and science
Simple
Radical
innovation
Lack of
feedbacks
No market
attention
No networked
interactions
No technological
instruments
1st Generation
8. Model Generation Characteristic Strengths Weaknesses
Market Pull Second Simple linear
sequential process,
emphasis on
marketing, the
market is the
source of new
ideas for R&D
Simple
Incremental
innovation
Lack of
feedbacks
No technology
research
No networked
interactions
No technological
instruments
2nd Generation
9. Model Generation Characteristic Strengths Weaknesses
Coupling Third Recognizing
interaction between
different elements
and feedback loops
between them,
emphasis on
integrating R&D and
marketing
Simple
Radical and
incremental
innovation
Feedbacks
between phases
No networked
interactions yet
No technological
instruments
3rd Generation
10. Model Generation Characteristic Strengths Weaknesses
Interactive Fourth Combination of
push and pull
models, integration
within firm,
emphasis on
external linkages
Actor networking
Parallel phases
Complexity
increment of
reliability
No technological
instruments
4th Generation
11. Model Generation Characteristic Strengths Weaknesses
Network Fifth Emphasis on
knowledge
accumulation and
external linkages,
systems integration
and extensive
networking
Pervasive
innovation
Use of
sophisticated
technological
instruments
Networking to
pursue innovation
Complexity
increment of
reliability
5th Generation
12. Model Generation Characteristic Strengths Weaknesses
Open Sixth Internal and external
ideas as well as
internal and external
paths to market can
be combined to
advance the
development of new
technologies
Internal
and external
ideas as well as
internal and
external paths to
market can be
combined
Assumes capacity
and willingness to
collaborate and
network
Risks of external
collaboration
6th Generation
13. More recently and following on from the seminal work of Rothwell, innovation generation model typology
researchers have signalled that open innovation represents the latest wave of innovation models. Reflecting
a dominant orientation to the preceding network models of innovation, the open innovation approach is not
limited to internal idea generation and development, as internal and external ideas in addition to internal and
external paths to market (licensing, insourcing etc.) are facilitated within the innovation development chain
(figure. 5).
Open Innovation
Figure 5 Open Innovation Model
Source: du Preez and Louw (2008)
14. What is Open Innovation?
Henry Chesbrough (2003)
“Open innovation is a paradigm
that assumes that firms can and should use
external ideas as well as internal ideas,
and internal and external paths to market,
as the firms look to advance their technology.
Open innovation combines internal and external
Ideas into architectures and systems whose
requirements are defined by a business model.”
15. Open innovation is considered as a paradigm shift
Open innovation is considered as a paradigm shift whereby competitive advantage can result from
leveraging discoveries beyond the confines of a single internal R&D unit (inbound open innovation) and can
equally benefit from relying exclusively on their own internal paths to market through engaging with external
organisations that may be better positioned to commercialize a given technology (outbound open
innovation).
16. In a similar vein, Enkel et al. (2009) identifies three core processes can be differentiated in open innovation:
(1) The outside-in process: which involves enhancing and extending an enterprise’s own knowledge base
through the integration of suppliers, customers, and external knowledge sourcing.
(2) The inside-out process: which refers to securing commercial/revenue benefits by bringing ideas to market
faster than internal development via licensing IP and/or multiplying technology, joint ventures, and spin-offs.
(3) The coupled process: which combines co-creation with partners through alliances, cooperation, and
reciprocal joint ventures with the outside-in process (to gain external knowledge) and the inside-out process
(to bring ideas to market).
Three core processes can be differentiated in open innovation
17. The sixth generation requires interaction networks and innovation systems (Bochm and Frederick,
2010). Marinova and Philimore (2003) are consistent with the Integration in network model in these
two points. However, the “Innovative Milieux” has as central element the innovative milieu, which is
described as combination of knowledge and specific competencies. Additionally, the territorial
organization as well as the technical and economic process are key elements.
sixth generation requires interaction networks and innovation systems
19. The described sixth generation models aren’t focused on internal ideas or close networks anymore
but focus on opening up to the whole market. With this new aspects, ideas can also be generated
externally by customer, states or other companies. Figure 6. shows the difference between a closed
and an open innovation.
Difference between a Closed and an Open Innovation
20. Henry E. Chesbrough wrote in “The Era of Open Innovation” that sooner or later all industries will change
from close to open innovation. On the one hand this gives companies the chance to push internal ideas
outside, e.g.: start us with own personal for ideas that are not fitting the company’s strategy. On the other
hand they can pull ideas from the outside inside to commercialize them (Chesbrough, 2003).
The Era of Open Innovation
21. Open innovation offers several benefits to companies operating on a program of global
collaboration:
● Reduced cost of conducting research and development
● Potential for improvement in development productivity
● Incorporation of customers early in the development process
● Increase in accuracy for market research and customer targeting
● Improve the performance in planning and delivering projects
● Potential for synergism between internal and external innovations
● Potential for viral marketing
● Enhanced digital transformation
● Potential for completely new business models
● Leveraging of innovation ecosystems
Advantages
22. Implementing a model of open innovation is naturally associated with a number of risks and challenges,
including:
● Possibility of revealing information not intended for sharing
● Potential for the hosting organization to lose their competitive advantage as a consequence of
revealing intellectual property
● Increased complexity of controlling innovation and regulating how contributors affect a project
● Devising a means to properly identify and incorporate external innovation
● Realigning innovation strategies to extend beyond the firm in order to maximize the return from
external innovation
Disadvantages