We are opening up our thinking about where and with whom, to collaborate.

We are evaluating and changing our existing focus from closed (internal orientation) into one that is having a far more open stance. We are searching for more collaborative innovation (external orientation) combining external partners into more ‘collective thinking’.

The shifts taking place are offering us the promise of “extra acceleration” that is needed to improve our innovation performances from concept to market delivery. Or, we hope it is!

Collaborative innovation is also leading us to higher chances of achieving greater impact and success, as nearly all novel ideas lay are mostly outside the organization’s domain of understanding. We need to always bring the knowledge inside and build from it.

As we increasingly include the customer and their more exacting needs within our understanding, these multiple collaborations and dialogues are building this better internal understanding to align our innovation with specific opportunities, relevancy and needs.

There also seems that many organizations are presently searching for new business models of innovation delivery or architecture.

Equally, we are constantly moving from managing in linear innovation processes and making these more adaptive, constantly looping back when new information or data is being discovered, increasing this knowledge and insight in highly dynamic, constantly evolving and informing ways.

I’d say we are presently in a state of flux on adjusting to all of what this might mean, in customer and market offerings, as well as internally adapting our structures to the new forms required in these business model changes.

Adjusting to many different forms of external relationships

We are forming external relationships in many different ways as this increased diversity does matter to each organization for building different competitive positions in their innovation offerings.

We are creating the potential to deliver innovative products and services through new business models that would not have been enabled by only having one organization attempting it. Collaborations are definitely adding value to the innovation equation.

Also, we are seeing complexity rising significantly. The search for finding greater value is shifting even further, increasingly forming around innovation ecosystems, loose federations of vested interest, forming and dispersing when the job is complete.

Our innovation exploration will become far more evolutionary and requires a completely different way to think and manage these ‘relationship contracts that are forming around a given concept of platform engagements.

As we tap into all the expertise up and down the value chain we will become far more aware and will need to explore all the depth in thinking, contributing and making available through extending our connections in deeper and broader ways. Knowing how to adjust, accommodate and shift our thinking requires us to become more agile, finding new ways of connecting and working.

Do you notice how the single industry focus is seemingly in decline?

Opportunities exist everywhere. We need to look well beyond our own industry to evaluate different perspectives and seek out the potential of different concepts that can be adapted to our own industry.

Many companies are exploring the value of becoming involved in a business ecosystem that crosses a variety of industries to build new communities that have the capacity to transform existing environments.

As an example, let’s take the “battle of mobile devices” has now become a war of building a better ecosystem. It is not one single product it is chasing an increasing share of minds, preferences, changing habits and tastes and to achieve this ‘paradigm’ shift the search is on for forming the ecosystem that can deliver this ‘transformation’. This is coming through apps, technology, and different value propositions built into a platform of offerings that combine through your mobile device.

We are seeking out relationships, not just within given industry sectors but into partnerships that allow us to deliver different offerings, that would not be possible without broader collaborations.  The relationship between NGOs and the private sector used to be combative rather than collaborative.

However, that is rapidly changing

Take for instance the Oxfam and Unilever partnership have been working together since 2010 to improve the livelihoods of smallholder farmers. Also the External Alliances department of the Nestlé Research Center(NRC) manages external collaborations and partnerships to complement the internal Nestlé R&D pipeline and innovation process. Currently, NRC participates in more than 200 external scientific collaborations worldwide.

Then Unilever created  The Unilever Foundry, a new platform that unites and expands the company’s existing efforts to work with startups.

The Foundry will serve as Unilever’s flagship, global tech collaboration and investment program, providing an accessible mechanism for startups to interact with them in their “pitch to pilot” approach.

Offering more one-stop, connecting places to go about your business
Interesting examples are how Autodesk and Adobe are building the environment for others to join, build and participate within. The focus is on rapid prototyping in collaborative environments. They are offering one-stop shops where technology, 3D printing, software design, their engineering services can be combined to work on your ideas, all ‘housed’ in one location.

For start-ups, small and medium-sized organizations are given even more chances to bring their concepts to life and find the opportunity to compete with larger organizations through this approach. They are helping you to bring your prototypes to life and create real functional end-use parts with additive manufacturing, production processes and software applications.

For instance, Autodesk facilities at Pier 9, in San Francisco is a place for design and fabrication, it includes a cutting edge digital fabrication lab, a woodworking shop, a metalworking shop, a 3D printing lab, laser cutting and printing capabilities, an electronics workshop, a commercial test kitchen, and an industrial sewing centre as well as smaller speciality project areas.

Stepping out is stepping up

Today there is a growing realization that thinking ecosystems can allow us to have a new framing of possibilities and offer us different mindsets that tap into different and diverse relationships, partnerships, alliances and collaborations.

This was unthinkable until recently, without the enablers to make these connections through technology and more open platforms where you can come together and collaborate.

The increasing value of participating in ecosystems or collaborative environments allows for large and small organizations to come together, share, exchange, create, scale and serve markets in ways that were not thought of before as we did not have the ‘ways and means’ of how technology connects us in so many different ways to new possibilities.

We are having the increased ability to interact and co-create in increasingly sophisticated and novel ways opens up new opportunities. These ecosystems form a bond of shared interest, of recognition and purpose which quickly becomes established as the new ‘commons’ in sharing and contributing.

Opening up to being supported should accelerate your innovation

Any opening up should be clearly designed to accelerate new innovation but as you build these external relationships or participate in these innovation centres, it can often equally ‘complicate’ the original intention by this different layering in of complexity.

Keeping it initially simple, exploring and exploiting, building and adding increasing value as you grow, enables an evolving value proposition that keeps you keen to extend beyond your borders from the increasing returns and more distinctive offerings you can provide.

We do need to open up, learn from others, look for and engage in far more collaborative ways across more diverse groups than ever before, each vested in a better outcome and then build this ‘acquired’ knowledge into your thinking and offerings for delivering better outcomes.

The post Opening up our innovation to stay relevant first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

Jeffrey Phillips of Ovo Innovation and I wrote a White Paper, we called our foundation document, on “Accelerating or inhibiting innovation – understand your role for innovation success”. You can read the full paper here

We strongly believe there is a real Innovation leadership gap

My last article “Developing talent to drive innovation” was questioning the spending of new funds on developing talent for innovation, unless the organization and its leadership is not clear on what it is specifically looking for, or how it is prepared to back their words with specific actions beyond ‘just’ new funding levels, then this might not be money well spent.

Developing talent for innovation requires commitment across a whole range of structure, creating conditions, adapting or designing new systems, processes and providing clear governance. Senior executives need to understand innovation is often far more frustrating than most executives imagine it to be and a awful lot of hard work. Innovation is very demanding but the rewards can be spectacular in new growth, improved earning and organizations ‘sense of pride and identification’.

There are no best practice solutions to fall back on for your specific organizations to seed and cultivate innovation, a trap many fall into. You don’t switch innovation on or off to meet short term needs, it is certainly not faddish, innovation is simply, a or the, core driver of growth, future performance and your valuation barometer.

The innovation buck in responsibility for innovation is firmly at the top.

The innovation buck stops at the top, it will not work in just being ‘pushed down’ the organization. It is the role senior executives  must fill for achieving a greater innovation success.

If the leadership of the organization fail to formally integrate innovation into the core of any strategic- management agenda where it ‘constantly runs through’ the decision making process innovation will remain disappointing in its impact. Our leaders need to explicitly lead and manage, they need to close the gap between aspiration and execution where everyone up and down the organization can feel more confident that innovation is a core focus and needs developing.

It is against this clear observation from our and many others research initiatives, that the place to focus is getting the leadership to fully understand their key role and engage in innovation, to make it a central core to their own destiny, in top and bottom results.

So our opening thoughts in the white paper on this leadership void.

Here’s a vital question to answer that will make a difference to your organization’s survival: which individual in your organization is most important for innovation success? Many people will argue it is the most creative person in the company, the individual with the best ideas. Others will argue that it is the person who can make the idea a reality.

Perhaps these answers are true in entrepreneurial companies or very small firms, but these responses aren’t true in larger organizations. In larger organizations we believe the CEO or another empowered senior executive is the most important person for innovation success, since they have the ability to:

• link innovation to strategy, and
• create focus, engagement and passion for innovation, and
• direct funds and resources to good innovation programs, and
• speed good ideas to market as new business models, products and services, and
•  ensure the processes and metrics exist so innovation is sustainable.

In mid-sized and large companies, leadership and engagement from CEOs and senior executives are vital to innovation success. What’s more, these leaders want innovation to happen, more consistently, more purposefully and with better result.

Not only do CEOs and executives want innovation, they demand innovation to drive organic growth, profits and create differentiation. We know this because you’ve made it clear. In survey after survey the vast majority of CEOs report that innovation is one of their top three priorities. Yet the gap between “saying and doing” indicates a gap between vision and implementation. The consequences of this gap are significant:

• Poor execution of innovation goals
• Failure to achieve strategic goals
• Limited organizational design to sustain innovation
• The growth of disbelief or cynicism when innovation isn’t pursued.

We also believe CEOs and senior executives play a vital role in the success or failure of innovation.

Unfortunately, those roles haven’t been well-defined. Since the roles are poorly defined, they are rarely well executed. It’s not enough for executives simply to demand more innovation – senior executives must demonstrate links between corporate strategy and the work of innovation, between their vision and the activities necessary to create new products and services and between their expectations and the actual culture of the organization.

Executives fail to fill this vital role when they:

• are unaware of the role,
• don’t understand the importance of their role,
• delegate the role to others who don’t have the power to execute the role, or
• under-perform in the role.

Understanding the importance of innovation, and the barriers that innovation will encounter, helps define key activities an innovation senior executive must undertake, and what he or she must do to fill the role effectively. This leads to an important question: if innovation is strategically important, and if engaged senior executives are critical to innovation success, what keeps executives from filling the role effectively?

There are a number of reasons why executives have difficulty filling an innovation leadership role,including:

• Lack of innovation experience
  • Concern about short-term financial reporting goals
  • Difficulty managing “important” versus “urgent” tasks
  • Difficulty converting their vision into reality
  • Lack trusted innovation tools and frameworks
  • Unaware of the level of resistance and inertia
  • Concerned about upsetting the status quo

Many senior executives lack innovation experience. They often move into their positions through excellent financial management, cost cutting or other demonstrated operational successes. Thus, they lack innovation experience and are unfamiliar with its methodologies, tools and frameworks and often have few trusted sources for well-tested methods and insights.

Innovation is especially challenging because it is so unfamiliar, so potentially disruptive and yet so important. Innovation requires change that can impact the status quo and disrupt the firm’s ability to achieve short-term financial goals. Only an engaged, committed senior executive can create a sustained innovation capability or discipline, yet many lack experience, tools and awareness of the importance of the role.

The seven essential capabilities for innovation leadership

Understanding the innovation environment critical to innovation success led us to identify seven essential capabilities that senior executives must provide in order to fill those roles effectively. These relate to skills, capabilities and the capacities for innovation to thrive.

These include:

• creating alignment,

• deploying trusted methods and tools,

• effective communication and engagement,

• empowering people, providing skills,

• refocusing attitudes, perspectives and rewards ,

• defining a corporate “governance” for innovation

Leaders can drive innovation through thoughtfully designing the strategic innovation framework.

This initial White Paper became the prelude to the Executive Innovation Work Mat. The Work Mat, which provides a unique examination of the executive’s role in innovation, it helps executives understand the vital role they must play for innovation to succeed, and provide a framework that companies can adopt to ensure linkages between strategy and innovation, innovation and capabilities, innovation and culture.

More can be read on this website to extend your understanding of the work mat, for example.

For innovation to really take hold and become a sustaining and systematic function, it is for the leadership of our organizations to become strategically engaged, by providing the framework, the guidance, the direction and necessary top management commitment to ‘make this happen.’

Lastly leaders in organizations, big or small, need a lot of help in working all of the implications through, believe me……and many others fed up with leaders disappointment when they fail to fully engage in strategic framing approaches and making the time and the commitments themselves !

The post The role senior executives must fill for innovation success first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

What is so remarkable about innovation is that it can be highly dynamic.  It’s a task that anyone could do, given the time, education, clarity of purpose and commitments from our organizations, those that recognize the true understanding of the contribution all their people can potentially make towards innovation.

Today, too few people are actually allowed to work on innovation activities, yet the outcomes are ones that everyone wants, and certainly want to be part of. We all want that sense of belonging, of working on or in something that is exciting, dynamic and forward-looking.

We really do need to find ways to allow innovation to be part of each person’s daily jobs. Having a sense of purpose to improve or change something through innovation is such a powerful enabler.

Getting from where we are today, seemingly bogged down in many of the legacies of past innovation understanding, seems to me something we must tackle sooner than later also.

There is no time like the present to overhaul the existing innovation thinking and upgrade it with a faster, more focused innovating machine that yields greater returns due to this overhaul .

We do, in many of our larger organizations,  still seem to have a real reluctance to make the really investments needed, for building more robust innovation systems and structures. Why is that?

Often we even can’t adopt a basic common approach to innovation as a minimum and this will continue to limit all the ‘promise’ that is surrounding innovation. Innovation remains often poorly aligned and isolated, still disconnected from much that is going on within our organizations, where it can make such a contribution.

The choice is the innovation express train or the one that ‘stops’ at all stations.

Recognising some of market challenges and their implications that are coming rapidly towards us we have choices. We can jump on the innovation express train as long as we make a higher investment.

Of course we can take the easier, cheaper option of following along, on that slow all station stopping train, which jogs along, getting further and further behind that faster one speeding out into the distance.

The problem is, far too many organizations decide to save their money and not invest in a more promising future where innovation can take them, they stay locked in the present.

When they realize, often they have left it far too late to arrive at any ‘growth and opportunity’ destination, they have found themselves shoved into a side track while the express passes them by.

Some of their wiser competitors have already arrived and often well on their way on different journeys of exploration and discovery. These were made possible by investing in the right understanding of all the connections needed and knowing clearly the reasons for those chosen destinations.

Some of those competitors were looking out of the window of the express train as it passed wondering why you are not ready to connect into this train and still standing still, waiting. They recognized the potential advantage in investing in innovation.

Buying the innovation train ticket you have the choice of classes. There is ‘just’ incremental innovation but you might want to explore the more radical, breakthrough and business model opportunities that are requiring different innovation capabilities and skills. By making the appropriate investment, experimentation and exploration the innovation journey has a potential for sustaining a real momentum.

What are the implications of not advancing in innovation understanding?

We do need to rethink how innovation fits within the organization. If not then we will never achieve innovation’s real potential and we will be left simply standing in those less important places or me-too organizations watching as the innovation express train rushes past, heading for growth and opportunities for those who have the innovation ticket.

A ticket paid for by building the right innovation capabilities, capacities and competencies to make success happen. A 1^st class ticket where the new routines are sustaining ones, aligned to strategy, built on sound foundations and practices that give you the inside track to better innovation destinations.

The willingness to explore

We need this growing willingness to explore the different types of innovation and deepen the understanding of what each type can provide as a deliberate policy is altering the competitive landscape even more in the chase for growth.

Establishing the right approach, and experimenting to learn what can become the right business proposition in its design is becoming a ‘must have’ skill in evaluation and execution. We need to adapt, be agile and flexible, we need to have a clear sense (and understanding) of the worth of innovation.

Where is your organization?

So is your organization still sitting on the slow train or is finally recognizing the value of investing for a faster growth and business prospect by jumping on the innovation express.

To allow the innovation train within your organization to move onto the mainline, that faster track, to growth and new business opportunities that offer new jobs, you need to make a sustaining commitment to understanding ‘what makes up innovation’ in its capabilities, competencies and capacity to exploit all its value-generating points.

There is a growing hope we are in the final death throes of the older organization regarding innovation, treating it as not mainstream but isolated and disconnected.

Innovation should be a core competence. Investing in innovation offers the future, it allows you to speed up your activities and get to the destination of your customers’ needs a lot more effectively as well as potentially offer more of an exciting experience for those aboard.

This is certainly the time to jump on the innovation express.

The post Innovation can be so remarkable if we can fully embrace it first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

I have been lucky to see part of this taking shape in my 15 odd years being based in Asia until recently. For twelve years I was based in Singapore and it is still, like all of Asia, on my advisory radar. Innovation in Asia is quite different; here are some of the dynamics. Others will follow.

The combinations abound are ‘rich and heady’.

With the attraction of fast-growing markets, rapidly growing middle classes, rising education standards with millions of graduates emerging across Asia and plentiful state funding you have a powerful cocktail to ‘kick start’ innovation.

For many countries in Asia they are well passed the ‘kick start’ and more into the establishing and maturing of their specific ‘brand’ of innovation.

The West views Asian innovation through the wrong lens.
Cultures have a complex make up too and it does influence our thinking. Cognition works differently it seems, depending on your cultural background and upbringing influences.

Asia clearly ‘see’ innovation solutions in different ways. The generating of ideas, developed by different thinking approaches or modes is an interesting area to discuss further, but not here. One critical outcome leads to a more ‘collaborative’ approach in Asia, while the West would be more pursuinga  far more “open’ one.

The history of innovation is different

Most of the Asian countries have for many years (thousands) been heavily controlled by the state and it is only recently that the heavy hand of regulation has been gaining a lighter touch.

There is a present battles going on between market based outwardly looking approaches (for example in India & China) and those internal diehards, seen as solid nation defenders, wanting only a inward-looking set of approaches to solve many of the internal structural problems that still beset these countries.

This provides a lot of tension on where the ‘push’ for innovation should go. There is still enormous scope for the ‘pull’. This tug of control and deregulation creates many mixed signals of state or market driven to evaluate.

Asia has mastered much of the outsourced innovation, in many industries it is a world leader. Many of the countries have become technically adept and moving beyond fast followers into global outsourced leaders.

The West simply comes at innovation at a different point and ,yes, you can argue it is more advanced but you do have to careful on this generalised statement.

There are many emerging examples where the West is lagging the East and this will only increase unless a thorough, thoughtful analysis of the differences to give true ‘differentiation’ to focus precious resources behind them is made.

Western policies still are too generalized when it comes to innovation areas they support. This needs greater ‘rifle targeting’ not ‘shot gun’ approaches.

Everyone in Asia is snapping at each other’s heels

With so many knowledge parks, high tech zones and innovation centres of excellence springing up across Asia these are breaking down many past barriers of where innovation resides.

Nearly every global company has transferred some or even all of its R&D research to specific places in Asia as protection, quality of researchers and the availability of grants and incentives becomes overwhelming not to take up.

Knowledge is flowing East to the many hot spots and the airport connections simply accelerate this knowledge exchange. Scientists, corporate managers and serial entrepreneurs are connecting daily face-to-face or through all the available means open to them in technology and communications.

Going in reverse
We have been recently discussing reverse innovation, frugal innovation or appropriate innovation. All are well beyond ‘fads’ they are the outcome of products adapted for Asian markets increasingly finding new homes in the West, where many products are over-engineered, over-designed and over-spec.

Stripping away what is not needed for customers is going to be the winning play in the next few years and the Asian centres of innovation development are more equipped to manage this within their type of innovation methodology and ‘proving’ grounds close to the production sites, mostly situated with these countries. Appropriate innovation is going to become a key battleground.

The other type of reverse is still the flow of reverse migration. The returning Asians, picked out by their countries’ roving ambassadors were attracted back due to the ‘heady’ cocktail mentioned above.

Let’s be honest having your budgets cut, working through constant layers of ‘push back’ going on in the West (our famous red tape) or being fast tracked back into your natural society, with a more attractive package of money, contacts, feeding ambition and blending your Eastern and Western techniques, understandings and methods.

Of course, this is not always easy and many have found out the promise was not to their liking for many lingering inhibitors or obstacles. Many are staying and thriving.

Relationships- those are often not as ‘open’ as you think

Asian countries do have a real intensity. This can make for some really insecure relationships with external collaborators. If you don’t start on the same page, in harmony, you certainly will never end on that same page without enormous blood, sweat and tears.

The ‘prize’ within collaborations needs to be well worth it. All the Asian countries are as hungry as you can get for recognition as emerging equals to the West. Not only as it shows the virility, it does often shows the prowess and their adeptness. They still maybe weak on certain aspects but I don’t think the West can claim perfection!

Yes Asia is often accused of fast following, exploiting and sometimes stripping down innovation emerging from other places or organizations but as they strengthen the intellectual property regimes and have well qualified researchers this will take on a really different level of sophistication.

They will increase this type of ‘investigative’ innovation and produce many different and new products ‘schooled’ in reverse engineering or simply employing the latest skilled researcher, to break down the code, product or molocule and apply different intellectual logic bolted on to ‘sensing’ new value opportunities, exploiting the gaps.

Again, Asians do think and research differently often at a higher level of intensity of purpose and with different biases and ideas of potential value.

Exploiting their own intellectual property is clearly happening.

So there are more brains, more ideas, more innovation centres working in increasing connected networks in Asia. These are not just Asian specific but global in their intent and dissemination.

The West has to figure out what are its complementary skills to collaborate with this rising tide of innovation knowledge found in Asia. More innovation will clearly emerge from these collaborations but they are not going to be truly open, they are going to be open/closed, selective on what they bring.

There is an ever increasing flow of people, ideas, technologies, followed by money and chased by different organizations to commercialise. The pace of innovation is getting faster and faster to manage. The art of orchestration comes to mind and Asia is a networked environment of inter connected relationships.

It always has been in history, this time it is web driven making it even more ‘connected,’ fast and powerful.

One Asian country is certainly not another for innovation.

South Korea and Taiwan are both highly adapt at technology led innovation. They have highly connected networks of Conglomerates, Institutions and Government all drawn together on specific platforms to grow the internal competences of often the larger conglomerate operating out of these countries.

Often it is seen nationally as a struggle for survival so they have to innovation- it is an imperitive.  Yet state pressures and large companies often stifle new entrants or entrepreneurs through this extensive network- hence my open/closed analogy.

Korea and Taiwan still have difficulty attracting foreign investors due to this closed up approach unless you are brining the technology or processes that resolve part of their jigsaw for moving up the innovation value chain.

As for India, they are different, really different. They seem to stumble along but don’t be fooled by this. Their appetite for innovation is as big as it is for seeking food dependency. Indian have the premier networked system around the world.

Someone once said it is not an innovation system but an innovation networked class of global non-resident Indians embedded in social and business systems anywhere from Silicon Valley, to Australia, to Cambridge, UK, Singapore or Boston. Indians debate, then think, debate and think again even more, and then find ways to innovate, often to get around obstacles others would have given up upon long ago.

That is inbuilt within Indians who have had to navigate the roadblocks just to live in India on a day-to-day basis. They are really inventive. India is going to excel at many different types of innovation. India will become a real world centre for reverse or appropriate innovation.

Then we have China. They are mobilizing their amazing resource of people, both educated and partly skilled into a powerful innovating machine. China has such ambitions for growth over its different economic state plans.

Universities are ‘churning out’ more engineers than the West or near enough, it is attracting world class contributors to the education of the higher skilled and anchoring many multination innovation centres to build its momentum and depth.

Presently China focuses on the ‘hard’ of innovation, the more right brain, less on the ‘soft’ left brain, so engineering, research both flourish. Creativity, design and market empathy all lag behind. They are trying to move from their quantity to a more quality perspective but this is going to be a hard road for them to travel without some real mindshift to a more open culture.

The sheer power and commitment for making these ‘leaps’ in the global standing in many areas is frighening and innovation is in the centre of this determination to transform the Chinese society and be a global innovating powerhouse.

Many other contenders for parts of the innovation throne

When you look beyond these Asian innovation leaders you see Singapore constantly moving up the value curve. It has a unique model that attracts, employs and promotes innovation for its ongoing value creation. It stays fluid, adaptable and flexible in every way.

It is like the bamboo- strong, pliable, can bend when it needs too but is powerful in its ability to not break, it is a constant surprise. It is always fast growing and very versatile.

A place that keeps innovation in the forefront of its growth plans and systematically ‘picks off’ who and what it wants to anchor into its business in Singapore, to fulfil the growth plans of being a hotspot of ‘targeted’ innovation expertise. Singapore is famous for exploring boundaries in thinking and experimenting with lots of ‘seed’ money.

Then you have Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam, and the significant power of Japan- each has their own innovation model, one size or type does not fit all. Innovation in Asia is made up of many different models. I could dig into each but I will not for this blog. I’ve illustrated enough of the rising tide accelerating in Asia for innovation in enough ways. The innovation tide runs both deep and broad.

The changing landscape for innovation
Asian countries are remaking the innovation landscape. In the West, it is not best to dismiss this phenomenon and the West has to find imaginative ways to embrace these emerging innovation ‘tigers’.

Learning to collaborate and play to traditional strengths may not be enough and this thinking beyond needs a real clarity of mind, believe me.

Of course Asia is a fast learner and sometimes has incredible ‘blind spots. Understanding these and exploiting them takes knowledge and the tide is certainly coming in fast.

The post The Accelerating Innovation Tide Across Asia. first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.