Building out the four main components of Innovation Ecosystems

The interplays and interfaces available from technology and AI applications available to us today can deliver completely different, more compelling innovations. I have been looking at the combination effect of humans, technology and AI in this new interplay on my paul4innovating.com site.

Within this research, I have been questioning how innovation has changed in the last ten years but, more importantly, how design thinking will adapt due to this technology and AI adoption as the avenue of future exploration.

Couple this with Ecosystem thinking and design, and we are moving towards a different, more integrated framework for innovation ecosystems. I provided the story for Innovation Ecosystems as needed to be explained in a previous post.

I see four main components within innovation ecosystems that must be expanded to give this framework meaning. Value creation, knowledge transfer, co-creation and competitive positioning.

Why these four components?

The story for Innovation Ecosystems needs to be explained.

I have been evolving my thinking within the concept of innovation ecosystems. The Integrated Framework for Innovation Ecosystems is a conceptual framework which emphasises the importance of recognizing the interconnectedness of value creation, knowledge transfer, co-creation and competitive positioning when combined with how the different strands interact for innovation within ecosystem thinking.

“Effective engagement within innovation ecosystems relies on recognizing the interconnectedness of value creation, knowledge transfer, co-creation, and competitive positioning while navigating the dynamic nature of these networks and measuring the multifaceted impact of innovation, all facilitated by an integrated framework that fosters collaboration and strategic decision-making.”

The emerging story of Integrated Framework for Innovation Ecosystems

I have been looking for a transformative concept now discussed here as the Integrated Framework for Innovation Ecosystems. This framework was not just a combination of ideas but an inspiration for practitioners and researchers seeking to unlock the potential of innovation in various corners of the globe, in organizations and in collaborations of all those wanting to engage in change, growth and sustainability.

Let me explain as the field of innovation ecosystems is highly dynamic and can vary significantly based on specific contexts, goals and different stakeholder involvement. Yet, some principles and components combine into powerful levels of interconnectedness:

Recognizing the integration challenges of Business Innovation Ecosystems

Integration for Ecosystems needs fresh thinking

Integration Challenges are tough when you are building out anything new in structure, systems and approach; these changes are demanding. It is no different when approaching the design of Ecosystems:

Ecosystems often involve integrating various technologies, systems, and platforms that must be designed to work together across multiple organizations. Ensuring seamless integration can be technically demanding as they must “speak” and exchange seamlessly to gain ongoing value and collective insight. I think it is helpful to consider the challenges this might have:

Integration challenges within ecosystems stem from the need to connect and coordinate different technologies, systems, and platforms that were not originally designed to work together. This complexity can lead to significant problems that hinder the seamless operation of the ecosystem. Let’s consider the challenges faced

Technology is the critical enabler of Ecosystems.

I have been spending time arguing for and validating why and how ecosystems in business and applying innovation in their design and thinking are the growing future mechanism for managing new growth, delivering impact and value within Business, and for the final consumer of the goods and services.

The potential within deploying ecosystem thinking can be derived from this highly collaborative approach in finding new ways to design and deliver different options to the existing offerings, offering a different value creation potential, providing for more compelling solutions and finding different ways of solving often complex problems with this co-creating approach.

Yet, I have realized that I have not given the time or attention to the technology issues associated with the move towards adopting an ecosystem approach. So, this post begins to address this.

I believe technology is a vital enabler for building out thriving ecosystems.

Does our technology understanding in organizations and its application to Ecosystem thinking and design fail to be clearly understood as needing a different, perhaps distinctive, structural approach or system?

Building out capability based on a single organization’s needs is a mistake. Understanding the differences in collaborating, co-creating and exchanging across organizations needs a very different design, security and approach mentality.

Where are the success stories of Ecosystem thinking in the Energy Transition?

A range of success stories showcase the value of ecosystem thinking in different industries relating to the energy transition. These are important to emphasise as they recognize the importance of combining a mix of stakeholders, technologies and organizations in interconnected and interdependent ways.

Ask how we can leverage and use Ecosystem thinking and design to promote innovation within the Energy Transition, as it is a powerful approach to radical change. By fostering collaborations and synergies, you can accelerate the development and adoption of innovative solutions for the energy transition.

Before we look at examples of ecosystem thinking and designs applied, we should consider a step-by-step guide to use and apply ecosystem thinking and design applicable to the energy transition.

Find your Marketplaces; they can be the secret to your success.

The theory goes you identify an Ecosystem of like-minded businesses that share a common need to solve a vexing problem, challenge or concept. Then, one party sets up a platform or gains the agreement of one already available, a neutral platform, to use it. Hence, it has all the technology, governance and structure to enable the group to communicate, exchange and build the (emerging) solution to work and then have the structure for it to (rapidly) scale.

The marketplace, the third part, often gets left to last when those achieving this new solution realize it needs a place for actual exchange, a thriving buyer/seller market.

Today, we have witnessed a rapid expansion of the Marketplace on offer. Marketplaces are increasingly being stretched, and the boundaries of their understanding keep extending. We have moved from simply listing, though, to transactional marketplaces ( travel, delivery), full-stack marketplaces (on-demand services- Uber), Market Maker (for homes, cars, jobs) into eCommerce(fashion, groceries) and Direct-to-Consumer( food, banking, wellness, lifestyle and eyewear)

By participating at an Ecosystem level, you are putting clear skin in the game; the platform provider tends to drive the roadmap, provide the governance and often play the lead role. There are so many “neutral” platform providers that much of the technology and engineering solutions can be resolved by using established platforms that many of the tensions, when ecosystems are formed, can fall away, allowing those working on a challenge to focus specifically on that and spend their time breaking down the IP and the returns, building the new solution.

Yet it is the role of the Marketplace that determines increasingly the success. Just reflect on some of the most prominent marketplaces. You have Amazon, Alibaba, Airbnb, Salesforce, Booking, eBay, LinkedIn, etc.

Reducing today’s Volatility with Innovation Ecosystem Thinking and Design

Innovation ecosystem thinking and design, our growing need

Much of business today is caught up in managing short-term change that is growing in complexity and challenges.

So the challenges in the past year have been highly focused on supply chain disruptions, plugging gaps in technology solutions that can provide a higher flexible, agile, and advanced planning and production environment and continue to keep moving towards securing a more sustainable future that reflects the need to become carbon neutral, net zero.

Yet disruption is increasing; we are in a volatile world of constant change.

Today’s systems are highly stretched and have been designed and built for a steady, repeating business, the era of yesterday. Flexibility, agility, and adaptability have yet to be addressed sufficiently in design or mind shifts for our present and future operations to provide a different, more agile operating environment. Consistently has been the norm, whereas today it reacts to constant change coming from multiple, often unpredictable situations.

We need to change how we operate.

The benefits of participating in cross-sector innovation ecosystems

The Benefits of Participating in Cross-Sector Innovation ecosystems

I can remember getting completely “hooked” on Business Ecosystems by a series from Deliottes and one specific report, introduced and coordinated by Eamonn Kelley, with many contributors including Kelly Machese, Anna Muoio, John Hagel, and Larry Keeley. It was called “Business ecosystems come of age” and maybe it did not change my life, but it gave it a clearer focus- innovation ecosystems. Take a read, it is well worth it, its value then, 2015 has only matured in my mind.

I was also looking at another great piece by Deloitte on tapping into the Silicon Valley innovation ecosystem under a report called “How to Innovate the Silicon Valley Way” that came out in 2016. Another great motivation for focusing on innovation ecosystems.

One question asked in the Silicon Valley piece was “Why should enterprises give up transactional approaches in favor of dynamic, ecosystem-led innovation?

Today I would reverse that question “Why would any company still be locked into transactional approaches only functioning on its own resources?”

Today the struggle is to deal with increasing complexity, undoing the “knot” of difficult challenges and these cannot be undone or solved without collaborations outside one organization’s walls. We need to push this even further and totally accept that the hardest but best collaborations come from being involved in cross-industry or sector innovation systems.

Visualizing the Composable Innovation Enterprise Framework

The design concept of the Composable Innovation Enterprise Framework

After a series of posts introducing and explaining the thinking and design behind the Composable Innovation Enterprise Framework, I thought it would be a good idea to put this into a sequence of visuals that should take you through this to provide a decent understanding of its make-up and logic.

Organizations in today’s business environment need to adapt rapidly and dynamically, have the need to bring the innovation management process into a constant technological advancement, and be more tailored in its design by their own specific needs and not “offered” as a rigid set of solutions. We need to embrace a significant change in the way we “set about” innovation.

If you are interested in reading more in the series I have been posting then here are the links in the order of posting.

The importance here is recognizing the shift in mindset and thinking towards a Building Block approach to build up the Innovation Stacks. Each stack “sits” on a technology platform. Thinking through what this means requires understanding, relating, and putting a clear context of innovation, what you want to achieve, and how to set about this.

Building Up to the Composable Innovation Enterprise Framework Validation

Introducing the Compüosable Innovation Enterprise Validation

On Monday 12th June 2023 I made a proposal that innovation is in need of a radical redesign. The post was my “The Final Perspective: A Composable Innovation Enterprise Framework“. This recommendation had been built out over the past three months toward this final conclusion.

Here I want to summarize the posts that were part of this build-up, that build the compelling business case for the need to change our thinking about innovation.

I looked at the present limitations of existing innovation software, emphasizing the value and contribution that having more of an innovation ecosystem thinking and design and then introducing different more technology-related concepts such as building blocks, innovation stacks, and key component relationships built on a platform approach were highlighted and explained in these posts.

The “final perspective” post proposed the Composable Innovation Enterprise Framework as a comprehensive approach to addressing today and the future complexities of innovation management.