I am reading a lot about the concept of value creation recently, it answers everything but tells us so often nothing about how it is made up or it is truly present. It seems to have that same ‘heady vaulted position’ as innovation in that we all talk far more about the ‘promise’ of it, we want it but still are not prepared to put the real effort into it to make it happen.

So let me try and explain my thoughts on value creation. So what is behind value creation? What drives it? What will tell us this is an organization where value creation seems to well invest in, nurtured, built and protected?

So what is value creation?

Value creation is highly dynamic, it is going on all the time and can increase, decrease or transform, in different ways, when you exploit your different capitals that will be in constant change and adjusting to reflect your organization’s business activities and eventual outputs. This is when you can begin to see the value created by the use of deploying all the capitals to build new growth and what I call “stock” that along with “flow”. I loved this explaination of the two.

Value is not just from within, it is the links our organizations are constantly making with others, in the interactions, relationships and the combining of the activities. The important need is to manage the stocks and flows of the capitals

The role of all the capitals is crucial to understand, they create or destroy value. It is the constant flow between all the capitals deployed that makes up the value creation process.

Our management within our organizations needs to know where this real value creation resides.

Understanding all the makeup of capitals needs to be approached in practical ways.

The place to focus is on recognizing the material components of what is making up the specific value creation aspects that will provide benefits that have been captured, understood, maintained and then enhanced for the additional value creation

Clearly, the ultimate objective is to enhance the organization’s abilities in the longer-term to appreciate the growth strategy. The more we know as outsiders of the value creation process the more likely this will attract greater investment. Often this is determined by the final product, service or business model outcome.

Today we lack the measures to judge longer-term adequately, that this is enough in organizations. We are judging them on their innovation activity going through the immediate pipeline and that judgment often lacks the real makeup of the application of the different capitals, invested in the knowledge that can provide the sustaining growth- today we are far too geared on immediate expectations and those are locked up in the short-term.

It is becoming critical to understand our sources of knowledge, it gives us the unique capital that differentiates one Enterprise from another. The intangibles today are up to 80% of the value assigned to the (market value) worth. Managing these intangibles is critical to our future. Yet, we still have a very poor grasp of how to capture these and drive this knowledge capital. That needs to change.

It is the Knowledge and Innovation combined that make the firm competitive. There is this positive correlation between these two. One amplifies the other, one deepens the other in the connected understanding. The basis for this comes from both human and artificial intelligence. As we learn to capture from both we build our capital base and strengthen our future potential. We make ourselves more sustainable as well as increasingly adaptive.

The greater the stock of knowledge understanding will increase the potential flows of innovation and this “powers” the future value creation.

Greater engagement or not?

We can leave this knowledge building to the management, just sit back as investors or consumers and simply expect increased dividends and new products. We actually need to dig a little deeper and push management to inform us we will not enjoy many of those nasty surprises when the results fail to materialize. The argument is that the investors, the stakeholders within a business, need to understand the business logic far more, to make a more informed decision to continue to invest or partner with a particular organization. That logic comes partly from the abilities to create value

Knowing the successful generation of all the intangible values and their transformation into tangible forms and how this is systematically being harnessed tends to confirm the realization of the business goals or what the possible risks are.

Organizations are certainly fairly reluctant to discuss these except behind closed doors to selected investment parties in their investor’s briefings. Making these more visible leads to greater accountability and to be ‘accountable’ you need to understand the makeup of your capitals.

The present incentive for business organizations to become more vocal in explaining their business models, their process for value creation and offering more insight on all their capitals is their need to grow and that comes from investors wanting to invest and customers wanted to buy something that has a sustaining future!

 Exposing the softer side of value creation is the key.

The need is to understand value creation is often coming from the ‘softer’ side, those often intangibles that remain hidden for the real value enhancing aspects of a business but are constantly at work, generating knowledge, understanding and new thinking. These need drawing out more.

The real capital that contributes to value creation is coming from knowing answers to these questions offered below.

Many of these can be reported upon and that would enhance the understanding and attract investment. By thoughtfully measuring and reporting upon these builds that external confidence that the business is focusing on the sustaining values relevant to its goals and growth objectives.

Just work through this list of aspects of value creation that we should be gaining insight into:

* The ways an organization is setting about combining and utilizing networks and relationships

* How are they actively advancing their creative and innovation capabilities and competencies? Are there specific frameworks and approaches.

* The ways they are actually seeking out in explicit ways that deepening of customer understanding

* The purposeful ways that reputation is being protected, quality is being enhanced

* How are the brands protected, enhanced and improved to add increasing value

* How they are capturing new knowledge internally and the ways this flows and gets translated into new value through specific value enhancing stores

* How the focusing on social issues and values is contributing to society and equally underpinning their value into both local and global communities

* What are the plans and intent to link social, environment and harness the intellectual capitals, to enhance and strengthen society and the organization’s linkage, and the outcomes being achieved?

* Where they are recognizing, strengthening and exploiting the value chain linkages

* Providing a greater depth of explaining and extending the organizations skills and capacities to learn and absorb, through advancing specific capabilities, and deepening capacities.

* How they continue to build loyalty and trust and what aspects need repairing or renewing due to difficult decisions or changing circumstances, showing a clear pathway of achieving this responsiveness and flexibility.

* How and where does innovation fit, for achieving the growth perspectives and discussing any shortfalls, through prescribed or alternative actions? Are you building a common sense of innovation purpose?

* Are there explicit innovation competencies, processes, and governance actively being managed, that provide support to the activities being undertaken and being consistently risk assessed?

* What is the risk appetite for innovations? How is this managed? How is this explained and celebrated?

* Lastly, what they are exploring in the different forms of evaluation, experimentation and ongoing assessment to ‘measure’ the real underlying asset wealth of the organization.

This is their learning journey and its growing value to all associated with this to achieve that better visibility into our organizations, Better outcomes and a greater relationship between investors and the organization needs to be achieved. I think it is possible but it is a journey many are reluctant to travel. Value often gets locked up, caught in the internal world of the one organization and so often never becomes value creation.

We need to talk about what makes up “value creation”.

Value Creation is really important to know about. Where is it coming from, what is being put into place to nurture, develop and allow its creation to evolve and spread, so it has the ability to attract more understanding for value and creation? The more we open up our thinking and ideas the more we can build from this. That openness offers so much more value creation possibility yet we don’t talk about it, we simply generalize it like a “buzz word”

There is a growing need to know where the value creation is coming from and what the management of our organizations is doing to protect and enhance it. Knowing the makeup of the material capitals that form into a value creation is so important to this. We should talk of value creation in specific and detailed ways. That gives those listening confidence it is being taken seriously and not just given lip service.

The post Recognizing it is all about Value Creation first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

Organizations have been focused for far too long around the importance of financial capital. It determines and drives organizations destinies. We are caught in a constant focus upon our achieving a return on our (financial) capital as our measuring criteria. Organizations strive for improving their ROCE, RONA, IRR,  EVA and a host of other financial measures.

As Clayton Christensen has been arguing the agenda of organizations begins and ends with the “search for numbers”. I think there is a time for changing this, we need to search for the knowledge that makes-up eventually the numbers.

There has been a distant voice for some time putting forward the need to appreciate and value the other capitals sitting within organizations. Much of the discussions have been housed under the term “intellectual capital” which denotes the sum of knowledge made up and contributed by our human assets, our organizational structures and our relationships that are developed.

These are the ‘capitals’ that transform into economic value through organization action. It is the financial capital that simply finances this.

Financial capital dominates any discussions

Yet financial capital and all its associated aspects rules, no, it utterly dominates. It totally fails to tell us in numbers alone where and what creates the value, it simply reports it.

It is this financial capital through our profit and loss, our balance sheets hides the value, or spreads it out in ways no one really understands its make-up.

Certainly those attempting to judge an organization just have to rely on a ‘history of numbers’ and some ‘selective’ market view to make investment judgements.

Equally those often running our organizations have a restricted view of where their real capital lies, as they focus on the numbers and then work down.

Today,we are  in a rapidly changing world and we need to understand it differently

The reliance of financial capital being the absolute measure is being challenged thankfully. Our business world is facing considerable disruptions from the accepted past practices, performance has become more volatile, more dynamic, more reliant on understanding that knowledge is where the value lies.

“Business as usual” is thankfully in a steep but protracted decline, the necessity today is to be constantly evolving and learning and that comes from knowledge acquisition, assimilation and then transforming and exploiting this into new value. We need to find new models for evaluating our real value and capital stock.

These ‘absorptive capacities’ are where we need to manage our knowledge flows better to translate and direct our understanding of new, value creating capital. We need to report on these far more as they offer the ‘residing’ and new stock that gives us new innovation potential and fresh value.

Learning capital needs to emerge and dominate future discussions

We need to give increasing incentives for organizations to learn. We need to judge the quality of this learning, not listen to ‘bland’ statements often presented. We need to know where this knowledge is targeted in narrative, discussions, spillovers and interactions.

What is being exploited, what is being determined in the decision-making process to give greater confidence that our invested financial capital is “in good hands”.

Keeping reliant on just discussing the financials within organizations we know is not enough. We have to force better discussions on the make-up of the other capitals, as these are still poor, left to individual interpretation and variable and we need to change this.

We are increasing opening up

As organizations become more open (open innovation for instance) the strength of linkages, of knowledge exchange, the translation of these activities is becoming really valuable to understand and focus upon more.

Through many of our activities we actually ‘borrow’ and it is then the ‘dynamic linking’ that we bring into the process, gives up the increased potential of innovation. It is the ease of learning, the ability to acquire and apply knowledge that creates the potential for innovation.

How many organizations really articulate their knowledge capital in acquisition, assimilation and transformation? Do we know how ‘path dependent’ they are- are they lagging in the market, are they simply opportunistic, are they locked-in far too much in potential downside risks.

Do they suffer from cognitive failure, do they lack the appropriate competencies to meet the constant challenges occurring around them. How much of this can you really extract from cold, hard numbers? Not a great deal.

Recognizing where our true value resides

The real problem we have is the lack of appreciation of what makes up our value, the real underlying wealth creating value, the one that truly ‘generates’. The tangible part is easier to appreciate (plant, land, material etc.) but is becoming a significantly declining part of the total sum of value of our organizations- sometimes it is only making up 30 percent..

It is our difficulties of understanding the intangibles as it is a very challenging task. Yet this has huge implications on the ‘health’ of the organizations we continue to invest in. Most organizations resort to “inferring” the value. This needs to change. The value today is in the interactions between the different components that make up our intangibles, out intellectual capital.

We are in need to identify what ‘drives’ organizations and that is our knowledge stock

For gaining and sustaining real advantage, and showing why it has the potential for creating new wealth we need to understand our capital stock.

This needs to be far more forwards looking; it needs to be more open and more transparent and it needs to ‘flow through’ the organization to find the potential to find new value from innovation. The call is growing increasingly for a new valuation model.

Static knowledge where we view financial numbers, never take our knowledge beyond what we are reading, failing to connect it and advance it is just not good enough, we do need to understand the underlying dynamic capabilities that make-up the organization. We need to access, absorb and translate our knowledge stock, allow it to flow and be developed into greater value-adding stock and innovation outcomes.

The post Struggling with counting ALL the sums of our capital first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

There is a growing need for having some dynamic tensions within the organization’s system; these helps generate the better conditions for innovation to thrive. We are learning more on the better tools, techniques and approaches available for putting the learning tensions into our work, making them more dynamic, linked and increasingly relevant to the work to be done.

1). A common language is essential

Any dynamics in the system needs that ability to talk the same language, something that becomes common and embedded to support the routines and move quicker to the concepts and solutions, as others can ‘understand’ them as well. It is through working on the inner stories and appreciating the history, it is having an appreciation of events, good and bad, it is through local slogans, your jargon and dialogues that bring people together. The power of storytelling helps gain adoption and identification to those needs for working on a common cause.

2). Creating constant opportunities for conversations

So many organizations don’t work on the ongoing conversations, design workshops, road shows and dialogue sessions that give everyone linkage and growing identification. You begin to identify your sense of purpose and value contribution if there is a consistent diffusion of messages; these should be always lead from the top or moved up and down the organization to allow for these ongoing conversations.

3). Using the knowledge that resides

Organizations like to believe they are building domains of expertise but often they are actually building the silo’s to restrict the flow of knowledge. Knowing where the right functional expertise lies, the relevant skills, experiences or relevant insights ‘reside’ is increasingly important to throw open to all, to tap into, extract and contribute. This expertise can help with our daily routines by offering different thoughts, ideas and practices that may have a real impact on how you can change.

4). Wrapping up intelligence to give it real value and knowledge understanding

The bundling of intelligence is becoming critical. It needs to be increasingly shared across the organization at real time speed. As we look increasingly outside our organizations, our focal markets sensing and seizing the information and being able to connect it, to bundle it into knowledge that has potential application or relevance allows for absorptive capacities to really come to live. Those are able to learn to bring into the organization by accessing, anchoring and diffusing that external capacity for creating and exploiting new value.

5). Capturing and extracting tacit knowledge

Our ability to capture and access the tacit knowledge that resides in all our employees is a critical issue to achieve new dynamic tension. How do we harness tacit knowledge, capture it, even recognize its value we need to encourage a continuous learning environment, we need to have clear organization learning strategies. Tacit knowledge helps us tackle the unknowns associated with discovery. The more we share, put effort into collaborative ventures the more we learn. The more we engage with external experts the more we should gain from these exchanges. Context becomes vital, as does striving for that common language and association.

6). Allowing time to explore and improve our human capital

Tacit knowledge as it becomes embedded in shared values, assumptions and beliefs you can qualify and map tacit knowledge. Our tacit knowledge increases the human capital. It can, through creative acts give strong feeling and give a real sense of commitment. The more we explore, the more we ‘ignite our passions’ but you need to consciously find the time to explore by clearing the path to allow the absorbing to take place and then extract the knowledge through putting any challenge into context, allowing time to access, anchor and diffuse.

The ability to harness our dynamics is vital

The ability to make our environments more dynamic, more engaging, more challenging, more a place to learn and contribute allows greater movement and potential for innovation and growth. A growth that is for the organization and its people, to provide all the different intellectual capitals to combine, be those human (knowledge, skills and experiences), relationship (social and through our networks) or through the structural ones you put into place (where you pool knowledge, use routines and systems).

Good use of our intellectual capitals and knowing what these are, does allow for a greater unlocking of innovation value. The more we ‘work and encourage’ our learning capitals, combining the power that lies in the dynamic linkages we can forge, in acquisition, in assimilation and then into eventual transformation then this allows known knowledge to become new wealth-generating innovation

The post Putting some dynamic tension into the system first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

Should we care, does it matter? I would argue it does, increasingly so. Within our innovation capital lies the future of the organisation and holds one of the really important ‘golden keys’ to the sustaining performance of the company and its future growth potential.

We need to find a way to unlock this as we are constantly being pushed for new business models that create, deliver and capture value. It is in the entire makeup, the value structure around the offering, and this is made up of distinct capitals that drive the new business towards success.

How do I define innovation capital?

“Innovation capital is the sum of all that promotes the development and changes required for achieving innovation outcomes, within one organisation or its broader networked environment, for marketplace advantage”.

“These are made up of the resources, processes, knowledge and capabilities, that are constantly evolving and highly dynamic, to build greater innovating capacity.”

The hard part is valuing innovation capital as these are constantly being renewed and evolving.

Innovation capital is a set of renewal capabilities and understanding what these are is critical but today is not well understood. We find it extremely difficult to report clearly on the makeup of our innovating capital and where we should focus in their development

Determining and being able to articulate the value within these capitals would be truly valuable and would help us differentiate between those that are static or simply repeating, and those that are dynamic, ever evolving, searching for new knowledge.

Building stock, generating flows

It is the generating of ‘new stock’ that builds the values of our future capital. It is these unique bundles of an organisations resources and assets that give us our new innovation value, through the process and flow of new knowledge and its value creation, that lead to commercialization. We need to constantly create fresh innovation capital.

It is the dynamic interactions and flows between the different innovation capital assets and the other intellectual assets that innovation requires for successful activity and outcomes. This is where absorptive capacity plays its vital part in structuring this process.

How can we capture and articulate the innovation capital?

So, the key to identifying innovation capital lies in its stocks and knowledge building assets and their uniqueness in the resources that make this up, in constantly evolving and learning, these are the real strategic asset to nurture and build. Leveraging and continually building the ‘stock’ of our innovation capital can render different productive value outcomes.

It is our ability to ‘mix and combine’ the innovation activity that it consists of, in all the decisions and activities that occur, from the recognition of a need or a problem, the decisions and then the activities that occur that build through researching, developing concepts through to the eventual release into commercialization into successful market outcomes that feeds and builds the combined innovation capital.

Knowing this make-up of our innovation capital provides us with the potential for driving our future growth. Identifying the real capital that will drive and sustain the real advantage, providing the future potential for new wealth should be the essential way we measure organisations performance, not on past financial performance or personal perception, built on limited understanding.

Holding the future back if we lack a deep understanding of our innovation capital

If we had a better understanding of the make up the innovation capital, and what makes up its critical enablers, then we are better positioned to qualify and even quantify a more confident future, based on the capital that ‘feeds’ the future potential.

We need to understand the strategic importance and take the time to explore where our innovation capital lies to understand all the value-building points. At present most corporate boards lack any clear line of sight into this, it significantly holds innovation back, it constrains growth, and it can make us all far more cautious of the future, for knowing where to invest and grow as we lack the level of what innovation capital should we be leveraging in our understandings.

I think it is the time we did clarify our innovation capital in far better ways. Need any help?

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

The post Is Innovation Capital important to us? first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

Leaders want to hear this, the sad truth is getting a ‘decent ROI’ for innovation constructed (note constructed) is really hard. If the innovation is new to the world, how can it have a clear financial return on investment until much later, much becomes an ‘educated’ guess?

We need to appreciate new innovation balance sheet thinking

Why a balance sheet thinking? There are hard and soft measures to measuring or judging our innovation. It goes way outside financial numbers. Would we have seen the emergence of Facebook, Apple Watches, Uber etc etc if those that were determining success from their investments had actually insisted on guaranteeing the ROI before launch or within short time frames, that many of our established organizations insist upon? No it was the belief and ‘seeing’ the potential that encouraged those investing to make the initial investment and then continue on ‘future’ returns.

There was a growing recognition that a ‘flexible’ and broader set of metrics was needed, to permit time and critical mass to continued to accelerate away, so the eventual returns on the emerging business model would have the time to evolve and provide the valuation potential expected. It was the measuring of value- potential and realized – that along with the beliefs and response provided by the owners that gave ‘investor confidence’

My first thought: do we know enough about the thinking for VC’s on how they judge investment?

Venture Capital is a driving force behind entrepreneurship and innovation. It fuels the economy, creates growth opportunities for companies large and small and, it funds the business development strategies of major corporations. What can we learn to apply in established organizations for judging innovation differently so “risk” becomes higher in factoring in so as not to reject ideas far to early in their life but to encourage them.

Thankfully the venture capital community has a different set of measures to judge the longevity and potential. Clearly financial returns always loom within the thinking, possibly even more so, as those investing funds are highly focused and demanding returns. Yet it is more considered by the VC on where to invest venture capital to gain real ‘return’ becomes a portfolio of investments.

There is this continued recognition that many investments made are lost in a portfolio of risky investments. The thinking is based upon how we assess ‘our’ investment, in how many ventures as ‘we’ recognize many will be losses before we hit the jackpot and recoup all the investment over the one winner to cover all the numerous losers and make significant returns on top.

Why do we not measure the health of our innovation investment far more?

In many ways our established organizations can move far more into a portfolio of investments as they should have the confidence in their knowledge, competencies and people to make ‘greater’ investment. The problem is they most probably don’t have this confidence and part of this reason does lie in a narrow range of measurements they are taking of the ‘return’ on their investments and not looking much harder at the ‘heath’ of the organization to give this confidence.

Why do established businesses ignore the investment rationale for delivering real innovation winners that can change the fortune of their business? They often leave this ‘venturing’ to others to search and achieve transformational solutions, ones that can even radically alter existing business value propositions and then we hear them ‘crying’ over being disrupted or ‘we’ did not innovative enough? Something needs to change.

But while Venture Capital is an integral part of the global economy , the unique inner workings of venture capital firms and their processes are sometimes suggested are a well-guarded secret, so we need to tease these out and find ways to adopt many of them in our established organizations thinking as well. There is perhaps no ‘secret sauce’ just investor confidence and the imperatives to make returns or be themselves out of business.

I know some of our established organizations are attempting to do this ‘venturing’ yet we do need to ‘pool this thinking’ to open up the measurement for innovation investment in the future to be part of each organizations mind-set for measuring success.

Here are my contributing thoughts to take the health of innovation as more central in our measures.These are not VC related but underscore believe, commitment and the drive towards structured learning, in a more balanced way.

Measuring more of the ‘health’ of innovation within established organizations

Shown below are a list of the factors I feel can be major contributors (far from exhaustive), firstly into the soft side of our balance sheet that is made up of culture, climate and environment as our creative and engagement capacity. This side of the innovation balance sheet gives the commitment and sense of belief that can encourage investment, as the people side equates to the measurement of the team within a new venture. It determines much of the belief this is worth investing in.

Some of these initial suggestions of course are inter-changeable or become reliant on each other, but it gives a decent understanding of what makes up the balance sheet needs we all must have in place to have a thriving innovation organization. It needs to address the creative, engagement and relationship part that innovation always needs.

Informal mechanisms (the contributors to the left side of our innovation balance sheet)

Those that are leading to improving the softer aspects of innovation (our left side of the innovation balance sheet) that would contribute to its build and health.

• Uncovering good and emerging practices in innovation
• The value of good leadership & distinct culture creating the linkages
• Targets and partner identification for relating and collaborating
• Skill of working together effectively – team building, encouraging diversity
• Integrating external parties to leverage through networks and relationships.
• Framing ambitions and plans of strategic targets and relating those to individuals
• Engaging the outer peripheries to capture insights and needs to drive engagement
• Exchanging expertise and seeking synergy in exchanges
• Story telling/ narratives, those relating and explaining, sharing and extending
• More bottom up engagement in formulation – sharing and informing
• Seeking individual insights, encouraging an open learning environment
• Developing the agility to quickly react to changes, effective and decisive intent
• Work on speed, external orientation and improvisation,flexible and adaptive
• To promote “doing more with the same”, less rework.
• The CEO acts as the central source of encouragement and determination
• Encourage informally at all levels in exchange

The formal mechanisms (the contributors to the right side of the innovation balance sheet)

Those that contribute to the make-up of the harder aspects of innovation or our right side of the innovation balance sheet that build this part, beyond ‘just’ financial.

• Ingraining innovation as a corporate function
• Determining how you lead and manage this, how you develop this out in its parts
• Identify the constraints , articulating the resolutions, recognizing the boundaries
• Optimizing the process and structures, constantly reviewing to improve
• Determining the allocation of funds to offer the balance needed to achieve the goals
• Innovation portfolio management designed
• Type of openness to innovation flows to encourage and drive outcomes
• Embedding technology and capacity for rapid experimentation, and discovery
• Rapid ideas, discard failing ones & triple investment on good ideas
• Distance from Customer – determining the importance and setting about the connecting
• Ingrain as a corporate functionality the need to always be conscious of greater alignment
• Determining how you lead and manage through governance and design.
• Identify the constraints and boundaries, pushing and probing
• Optimizing the process and structures on an ongoing basis
• Determining the allocation of funds into the different framing activities
• Innovation portfolio management, striving for value, impact and return
• Type of openness to innovation flows and external engagements needed
• Embedding technology and capacity for rapid results and early wins
• Rapid ideas, discard failing ones & triple investment on good ideas, experiment and explore
• Involvement from both Customer and other stakeholders within your innovation process

Irrespective, for me, the health measuring equation you decide to follow has to be robust

It clearly has to account for a more holistic view of innovation – a more balance view of what ‘makes up innovation’. We need to constantly focus on the outcomes, less on the inputs or outputs, as although these are valuable to measure the effort being put in, it is my believe we should be mostly focusing on measuring the outcomes, those that are successful in learning and advancement, ones that lead to real new innovation outcomes. Those outcomes that give return, both immediate and for the future.

This can offer a different risk and opportunity assessment that can be underpinned by this ‘health’ innovation that builds what is ‘sound’ and ‘solid’ to invest onto as the metrics build more on the dynamic innovation capabilities.

This measuring of the ‘health’ of our innovation across a balanced view will give a growing confidence by the board to invest, by providing more leading indicators and engagement justifications will potentially encourage investment into a more riskier level of initiatives. Confidence grows with learning, discovery and engagement.

Pushing  for more ‘measured’ risk it certainly makes a ‘innovation portfolio’ more demanding to manage but potentially far more rewarding in its total returns in learning, in advancement, in capability and capacity building and in growth potential. Having measurements that ‘push’ learning and discovery can reveal more distinctive and radical innovation potential through greater engagement. The outcome is relating more by looking  out into the world. providing solutions that customers relate too and are more prepared to provide the stronger financial returns we want from innovation, as they see the different increasing value that is being offered.

Yes, our measurements do make a difference, it is time we took a fresh look at providing new ways to measure the health and potential to encourage greater innovation investment we need.

The post Rethinking the measuring of innovation first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

We are in the ‘cusp’ of a fundamental change that technology, platforms and connected ecosystems will bring into the mix for connecting and collaborating in dramatically different ways than in the past.

One of the implications will be our need in measuring the metrics within companies. The measurement of inputs, throughout and outputs need to become far more focused on delivering speed and scale potential as the critical points. We are far more needing to focus on the outcomes as our primary point of measurement.

This is a further post on discussing outcomes as the focal point of our innovation measurements, following my recent one of “Shifting to Ultimate Outcomes”

Recognizing the emergence of the outcome economy

The outcome economy which is emerging has many implications within it and how we measure and value these will become increasingly important. Companies will need better data to calculate costs, evaluate its potential value and will be modelling far more the risks and tracking the factors required to deliver within any outcome-based value promised.

To quote from a recent World Economic Forum report:

“In the outcome economy phase, companies will shift from competing through selling products and services, to competing on delivering measurable results important to the customer. This is a much more challenging prospect. Among other things, providers will require a deeper understanding of customer needs and contexts in which products and services will be used. Value based on output also entails quantifying results in real-time. Both of these requirements have been nearly insurmountable obstacles to scale – until now. It is the digital age that makes the outcome economy possible”.

There are a number of implications as we move from a ‘push’ into a ‘pull’ environment where results are measured by the customer as valuable to them. For example, pricing practices of a solutions end result will clearly change, based on sold performance, as will the emergence of more predictability modelling of delivering certain outcomes and their potential value.

We are becoming part of the connected world, comprising new market ecosystems and technology platforms that ‘look in’ and foresee, expect, and even predict new outcome results. This will require a far more dynamic environment, one that is responsive, agile, fluid and highly adaptive to meeting customer needs, in real-time.

Internally this is going to challenge organizations in significant ways. As we break down the present silo view of ‘our’ assets, bring into more into play a system of assets that we will evolve into a system of systems, this could fundamentally redefine businesses, the way they work, collaborate and utilize what is available to them and what needs to be ‘drawn in’ to get the job done.

We are facing an evolution from “solutions” to “outcomes”.

Our measurement system has been established on “value-added” principles or should have been at the very minimum. These have been based on “pushing out” the end result to customers, products and services offered in particular bundles of broad appeal.

Today we need to target and develop offerings that meet specific customers’ true needs. The customer has been evolving into a far more knowledgeable and increasingly sophisticated one, as they are closer to the end market, hold the relevant data and can determine and decipher changing patterns far quicker than those further back in the supply chain.

They have better visibility today. Often they feel they really don’t need the help of the salesperson, they have most of the means increasingly available to them, in a globally connected world, if they chose to exploit this.

The shift within suppliers of products and services is taking place, engaging even deeper with customers’ needs.

This focus to accelerate and determine their value to the customer needs to have a clearer understanding of their unique needs and then set about designing and delivering true solutions that meet these needs and are seen as highly valuable. Strategic relationships are increasingly important for maintaining ‘line of sight and value’ to the customer.

As we move far more to the art of selling outcomes, it will bring together sophisticated capabilities, based around technology. There will be an increased recognition of ecosystems that are seen as needing to combine for addressing customer strategic issues where higher value can be extracted.

These outcome-based approaches will be strategic, long-lasting partnerships where shared risk and reward become central to all parties. It changes the dynamics of relationships and offers radically different competitive advantages to shoot for.

The traits of outcome-based solutions

These will be very much custom based-solutions, they will be increasingly based on configurable solution- architecture. They will have clarity in “understanding the challenges and commitments to deliver specific outcomes on critical business needs”. They will be based on platforms that can design, deliver and operate the solutions.

This becomes more a customer partnering model, formed on a partner ecosystem strategy and clear solution architecture to allow it to flow. It will be designed for cross-organizational enablement, seeking – in real-time – customer intelligence to provide a better outcome.

The value for all involved is the opportunity to share in a greater value-creating solution that is based for on delivering the outcomes desired and needed.

How GE are switching their approach.

One outstanding example of how this outcome-based proposition is evolving, is by evaluating and reading about the GE Predix solution offering the software platform for the Industrial Internet through predictivity technologies covering health, extreme machines, lighting, aviation, oil & gas, transportation and energy.

They are building a platform for igniting the next industrial revolution and their white paper outlines this. This is not an easy sell, it has a significant time lag as many of the existing products already in the market are products that have less technology built-in them and have significant life spans to constrain this concept, but “predictive technology” has the potential in providing a real value-adding story into the GE selling story, where it may provide some changing competitor advantage if structured well.

This new industrial platform is here, we need to focus on outcomes.

With it has come the opportunity to make a broad-based change across the industrial world. The time to start is now and that requires a radical shift away from the past 20th-century measuring and metrics model into recognizing the significant shit to redirecting your business to outcome solutions.

Each person within your organization should be measured on outcome-based solutions, I’d junk all those income, throughput and output ones, these are holding you back if you want to release innovation. We are all in need of just focusing on outcome-based solutions, these are what customers want providing they deliver what they need to improve their business returns.

You certainly do “get what you measure” and that has a real challenge in today’s connected world where we need to collaborate, connect and share far more to achieve greater value-adding outcome-based solutions as the way forward to earn the trust of the customer by providing solutions they need but are also building better, lasting value into your product offerings.

The post The Connected Art of Selling Outcome-Based Solutions first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

From this writer’s point of view, their innovation activity gets caught up in plenty of unintended consequences, to put it mildly, in wasted debate, discussion & bad decisions through wrong measurement criteria.

Firstly, we are still locked in the old paradigm of thinking this is an industrial economy where we set about measuring inputs to innovation (R&D expenditure, capital investment) and then focused on the intermediate step of throughput and then outputs (publications, production units, patent filing, end products).

We also perceive innovation far too much still as an activity within just one company – viewed as linear, with considerations for services more of an afterthought (like ‘bolt-ons’). Production systems remain far too often the driving force of performance judgement.
Today, the world of innovation is completely different. We need a far more open set of resources (many outside our own company) to enable innovation.

The process has clearly been recognized as non-linear. The chase for more ‘real-time metrics reflects the shift to a knowledge-based network economy to accommodate growing uncertainties, the multiple choices and varying outcomes that innovation offers.

We need to move our measuring to ultimate successful outcomes

Recognizing the need to change our measurement culture

This shift means we have to push a whole lot more on challenging established measurements and metrics – question if they are still valuable or just ‘simply’ established and have never been questioned in a way to overhaul the whole process. Everywhere we look within innovation systems, there are significant legacies in place.

We need to do a better job at measuring knowledge flows – it is the increasing emphasis and use of technology that allows us to challenge the old measurement paradigms. We still love to count machinery use, transactions, production of widgets with an engrained efficiency mindset.

Sadly it is not as effective, nor relevant, to the world today. Actually, most of these are just statistics that don’t drive us forward; they constantly make us look back. It is not ‘forward accounting’ for the knowledge built to underlie new creation and valuing the way this is developed and diffused in the future.

This also brings to the surface the need to understand our intellectual capital. If you understand that, you have a better chance to be more innovative, inventive and creative as you move far more towards a learning environment focusing on the value of all the intangibles that generate knowledge or leverage through relationships, human engagement or dynamic structures that shape and respond.

Valuing our network relationships more.

The value of networks is still not accounted for as well as it should be within our measurements. We collect the number of connections, yet we fail to capture the knowledge generated by these interactions; they stay resident often just with the receiver, not captured within the organization’s brain to understand and put to better, more effective use, applying the multiplier effect.

Technology is rapidly changing this, and this collective knowledge and networking are being leveraged more, but is it really being measured as a vital metric that provides value?

The conditions to generate really insightful innovation often remains ‘hidden in plain sight:

• Are we matching context, aligning innovation activities closely to strategic company needs?
• Are we actively seeking to match expectations and capabilities to deliver on the innovation that will lead to new forms of company value?
• Are we searching for ‘intelligent’ indicators where those initiatives shift the ground and advance on previously intractable issues?
• Do we know the true dynamics within innovation, what is either static or just simply repetitive and needs more constant monitoring, more likely through technology than human involvement?

Today we are working through the impacts of the Industrial Internet (IoT)

This promises to be transformative; it will change the basis of competition and, through this, the basis of how we measure ourselves. Not only will the industries have their boundaries withdrawn, but there will also be a new wave of disruptive companies challenging the incumbent since they don’t suffer the legacies of the past.

Technology is driving the change:

• The world will improve its operational efficiency in dramatically different ways (time, asset-utilization) through more predictive maintenance and increasingly remote management.
• We will become far more comfortable with connected ecosystems, forming around software platforms that will break down and blur traditional industry and working boundaries.
• We will see increased collaboration between humans and machines, and even machines to machines, which will shift productivity into a new realm – which we need to understand to capitalise on the potential this offers.
• Lastly, we are rapidly moving to the outcomes economy, fuelled by software-driven services, innovation built into the hardware, and the increased visibility into products, processes, location, customers and partners.

It is in this last shift of outcomes that we need to build our measurements and metrics around.

We constantly move towards the era of outcome-based services.

Businesses will be forced to shift from measuring the inputs and outputs of products to outcome-based results, where a business competes on its ability to deliver measurable results to customers.

This delivery on outcomes will radically shift how we measure and reward our progress. It will call for significant levels of increased collaborations across a growing, ever-changing ecosystem of business partners, bringing together those involved to combine products and services with meeting customers’ needs.

Platforms and ecosystems will become far more commonplace to facilitate and capture the data, translate the pockets of knowledge, so these are shared, aggregated and exchanged across these growing ecosystems, where we are all increasing working to create and capture value for ourselves and contribute to others within the platform ecosystem.

Our participation in platforms is helping us to facilitate transactions, interactions and mobilization and increasing extending out to learning platforms, each of us looking to achieve a successful and ultimate new outcome that improves on the existing.

These shifts in the ways we form collaborations give us broader connected knowledge that creates different insights and eventually new business models. To achieve this, we are becoming increasingly reliant on the partnership network or relationship we form within different (chosen) ecosystems to learn, distribute and monetize these in new products and services that fit our needs, all occurring at unprecedented scale and speed to capitalize on opportunities and create a new competitive lock-in or contribution to our needs.

These are providing increasingly new products and services that meet customer needs based on the learning outcomes and exchanges.

Moving from outdated measuring criteria

How we embrace the daily changes means we must challenge much of the way we presently measure and manage innovation. Innovation can’t stay hidden behind closed doors, safe within a selected group or siloed off. We can’t keep working with outdated measuring systems that focus on inputs, throughput and outputs.

We need to shift to the greatest judgement criteria. Our measures and metrics all need to become outcome-based solutions as the only really measuring point. In successful outcomes, we come closer to solving the real needs, tackle the problems and opportunities you find in innovation as others measure success seen and judged on the outcome.

The ultimate outcome from innovation that understands the real customers need and then understood, constantly iterated, translating what we learn and building with increasing speed and scale towards the lasting solution – and we all get paid or rewarded far more on the value of the result from successful ultimate outcomes judged by focusing only on the result.

The post Shifting to Ultimate Outcomes first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

Not understanding what makes up the capital is holding innovation back. We are actually constraining growth through this lack of understanding as it makes us all cautious of the future.

If we don’t fully understand the make-up of all our capital should we invest or divert resources to delivering on it? I think it is high time we did.

So what makes up our innovation capital and why is it important to know?

Should we care, does it matter? I would argue it does, increasingly so. Within the innovation capital lies the future of the organization and holds one of the real golden keys to the sustaining performance of the company, or not.

The generally accepted view is that Innovation boosts a company’s earnings, speeds growth, ensures an advantage over competitors, and greatly appeals to shareholders. Put another way, businesses that deliver earnings growth based on a continuous stream of new products and services and new ways of doing business capture the innovation premium.

So tell me, why are we seemingly so bad at identifying what actually makes up our innovation capital, apart from some sweeping generalised statements attached in the accompanying comments within the financial result statements?

We need to find a way to unlock this as we are constantly being pushed for new business models that create, deliver and capture value. It is in the entire make up, the value structure around the offering, and this is made up of distinct capitals that drive the new business towards success.

How do I define innovation capital?

“Innovation capital is the sum of all that promotes the development and changes required for achieving innovation outcomes, within one organization or its broader networked environment, for market place advantage”.

“These are made up of the resources, processes, knowledge and capabilities, that are constantly evolving and highly dynamic to build greater innovating capacity.”

We are searching for what makes-up and provides the true value creation in successful outcomes; in final product, services, knowledge understanding or executing within further business models.

We need to understand what makes up innovation capital far more in the future.

Mostly this innovation capital comes from the different intellectual capitals, those unique sums within each organization, of knowledge made up of our human assets, organizational structures and social partners making up the organizations eco system.

It is when we bring these together in different, evolving ways we transform the knowledge into new economic value, through this organization and personal actions. Financial capital cannot do that; it can only fuel the other capitals, it lies idle until we employ the other capitals.

The hard part is valuing innovation capital as these are constantly being renewed and evolving.

Innovation capital is a set of renewal capabilities and understanding what these are is critical but today is not well understood. We find it extremely difficult to report clearly on the makeup of our innovating capital yet investors are increasingly attributing more to the intangibles, based on limited knowledge.

Determining and being able to articulate the value within these capitals would be truly valuable and would help us differentiate between those that are static or simply repeating, and those that are dynamic, ever evolving, searching for new knowledge.

How can we capture and articulate the innovation capital?

I believe we can. One of the big key’s to identifying innovation capital lies in its stocks and knowledge building assets and their uniqueness in the resources that make this up, in constantly evolving and learning, these are the a real strategic asset.

Leveraging the ‘stock’ of our innovation capital can render different productive value outcomes.

It is our ability to ‘mix and combine’ the innovation activity that it consists of, in all the decisions and activities that occur, from the recognition of a need or a problem, through research, development and commercialization of an invention into successful market outcomes builds the capital.

Knowing this make-up of our innovation capital provides us the potential for driving our future growth. Identifying the real capital that will drive and sustain real advantage, providing the future potential for new wealth should be the essential way we measure organizations performance, not on past financial performance or personal perception, built on limited understanding.

We need greater insights into all our organizations ‘collective’ capitals

It is the ‘combination effect’ of leveraging all our capitals that yields the real lasting sustaining values. Today, we are lost in numbers and details, financials dominate most discussions, we need to encourage exploration into the make up of all our capitals.

Until we can peer under the organizations ‘hood’ a little more and understand the make up of all the capitals then we will continually fail to understand the real innovation activity that generates the value.

We need to know more on what can and does ‘drive’ future performance, what lies at its core or is being built-in for new capabilities and capacities to innovate, looking to secure the future.

If we had a better understanding of the make up the innovation capital, and what makes up the critical enablers, then we are better positioned to qualify and even quantify a more confident future, based on the capital that ‘feeds’ this future potential.

The post Holding the innovations of the future back first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

I expect you could answer this fairly comfortably.

It might need a little added help from your finance department but you could produce and show significant details that we are all ‘schooled’ to understand and generally have accepted, under common definitions and standard practice.

Our businesses are measured constantly on their financials, we produce a constant flow of reporting documents that provide useful insight and allow for a more informed judgement by present and future investors on the health of the company. We are ‘wedded’ to our financials and ignore the real value within our organizations of all the other critical capitals that generate and strengthen the business.

What if that same person came to you and asked instead: “what makes up the innovation capital of the company?’” could you answer this as clearly as the financial one – I would suggest most probably not. (By the way, if you feel you can then please let me know I would be more than interested).

We are focusing more on past performance and not future generating potential by staying fixated on just the financials within all that makes up our organizational  capital

So what makes up our innovation capital and why is it important to know?
Should we care, does it matter? I would argue it does, increasingly so. Within the innovation capital lies the future of the organization and holds one of the real golden keys to the sustaining performance of the company, or not.

The generally accepted view is that Innovation boosts a company’s earnings, speeds growth, ensures an advantage over competitors, and greatly appeals to shareholders. Put another way, businesses that deliver earnings growth based on a continuous stream of new products and services and new ways of doing business capture the innovation premium.

So tell me, why are we seemingly so bad at identifying what actually makes up our innovation capital, apart from some sweeping generalised statements attached in the accompanying comments within the financial result statements?

We need to find a way to unlock this as we are constantly being pushed for new business models that create, deliver and capture value. It is in the entire make-up, the value structure around the offering, and this is made up of distinct capitals that drive the new business towards success.

How do I define innovation capital?

“Innovation capital is the sum of all that promotes the development and changes required for achieving innovation outcomes, within one organization or its broader networked environment, for marketplace advantage”.

“These are made up of the resources, processes, knowledge and capabilities, that are constantly evolving and highly dynamic to build greater innovating capacity.”

These innovating capitals build upon the capabilities of ‘sensing, seizing and transforming‘ so as to build new capital that focuses more on the dynamics within innovation.

You are searching for what makes up and provides the true value creation in successful outcomes; in the final product, services, knowledge understanding or executing within further business models”

We need to understand what makes up innovation capital far more in the future.
Mostly this innovation capital comes from the different intellectual capitals.

Those unique sums within each organization, of knowledge are made up of our human assets, organizational structures and social partners making up the organization’s ecosystem.

It is when we bring these together in different, evolving ways we transform the knowledge into new economic value, through this organization and personal actions. Financial capital cannot do that, it can only fuel the other capitals.

Within these capitals lie the three primary components of intellectual capital: human capital, structural capital and relational capital. These do the heavy lifting to generate the value in the capital.

Human Capital is perceived as the knowledge and learning abilities of the human resources, it primarily as comprising knowledge (explicit and tacit), skills, intellect and talent of individuals.

Structural Capital provides the organizational mechanisms and architecture for retaining, packaging, reinforcing and transferring knowledge along with business activities.

Relational Capital represents a firm’s accumulated knowledge and ability to absorb, exploit and extend knowledge from its relationships to create, develop and maintain conditions that serve the interests of both the firm and increase its principal external partners.

Increasingly other capitals are being given the increased focus

Technological Capital includes efforts in R&D, technological infrastructure, and intellectual and industrial property.

Organizational Capital includes elements such as organizational culture, values, attitudes, information and telecommunications capability and organizational structure.

Strategic Capital that builds up the layers to offer a viable business, it provides increasingly the logic and purpose that ‘connects and attracts’ and ‘accounts’ for delivering the business model, that provides to the market and delivers on the need to build and sustain the organization and keeps it viable and evolving..

We need to make greater efforts to measure these capitals, as they possess the value of all the knowledge used, combining human with physical capital to generate outputs that drive progress and future outcomes.

We are highly vulnerable unless we know what makes up our capital stock.

Financial Capital is useless on its own to generate growth unless it has its ‘feeding stock‘ and that is within the other capitals.

It is the ‘stock’ of these that generates the values. It is these unique bundles of a organization’s resources and assets that give us our new innovation value, through the process and flow of knowledge and its creation, leading to commercialization. We need to constantly create fresh innovation capital.

It is the dynamic interactions and flows between the different innovation capital assets and the other intellectual assets that innovation requires for successful activity and outcomes. This is where absorptive capacity plays a vital part in structuring this process.

The hard part is valuing innovation capital as these are constantly being renewed and evolving.

Innovation capital is a set of renewal capabilities and understanding what these are is critical but today is not well understood. We find it extremely difficult to report clearly on the makeup of our innovating capital yet investors are increasingly attributing more to the intangibles, based on limited knowledge.

Determining and being able to articulate the value within these capitals would be truly valuable and would help us differentiate between those that are static or simply repeating and those that are dynamic, ever-evolving, searching for new knowledge.

Perhaps a good example here is to think of Apple and its innovation premium.

Apple delivers on its innovation promise in products, we, as customers seem to want. They have mastered the convergence of ‘breaking’ technology, placing a significant emphasis on design, user experience, combining materials to deliver products that make that statement of quality, fulfill our increasing appetite for technology we see as increasingly valuable to our daily lives.

Then they bundle it by providing ease of use within the make-up of the product, offering closed platforms to enhance individual experiences and deliver this ‘bundle’ through the sheer generation of excitement and buzz.

They seem to be able to leverage all their different capitals. They build in the emotional capital, the reputation, a trust factor, raising our expectations of a future promise. They are leveraging all parts of their capital stock extremely well, on a constantly evolving platform of knowledge and learning. Can others emulate this combination effect?

How can we capture and articulate the innovation capital?

So the key to identifying innovation capital lies in its stocks and knowledge building assets and their uniqueness in the resources that make this up, in constantly evolving and learning, these are the real strategic asset. Leveraging the ‘stock’ of our innovation capital can render different productive value outcomes.

It is our ability to ‘mix and combine’ the innovation activity that it consists of, in all the decisions and activities that occur, from the recognition of a need or a problem, through research, development and commercialization of an invention into successful market outcomes builds the capital.

Knowing this make-up of our innovation capital provides us the potential for driving our future growth. Identifying the real capital that will drive and sustain real advantage, providing the future potential for new wealth should be the essential way we measure organizations performance, not on past financial performance or personal perception, built on limited understanding.

We need greater insights into all our organizations ‘collective’ capitals
It is the ‘combination effect‘ of leveraging all our capitals that yields the real lasting sustaining values. Today, we are lost in numbers and details, financials dominate most discussions.

Until we can peer under the organization’s hood a little more and understand the makeup of all the capitals then we will continually fail to understand the real innovation activity that generates the value and we will always have a lack of measuring an organization’s performance in any comprehensive way.

We rely too much on historical numbers, alongside a judgement of the rhetoric offered by the board about the promise of future performance. Judging innovation’s performance is based partly on current product launches and announced future pipelines where the board is typically cautious.

It often makes us as those investors equally cautious. We need to know more on what can and does ‘drive’ future performance that lies at its core or is being built in new capabilities and capacities.

If we had a better understanding of the make up the innovation capital, and what makes up its critical enablers, then we are better positioned to qualify and even quantify a more confident future, based on the capital that ‘feeds’ the future potential.

Holding the future back

We need to understand the strategic importance of the make-up of the innovation capital and presently most corporate boards lack any clear line of sight into this.

It holds innovation back, it constrains growth, it makes us cautious of the future, if we don’t fully understand the make-up of our capital. I think It is time we did.

The post What makes up your innovation capital? first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

Let me offer some further thoughts on its value to really capture and understand, so we can measure it within our organizations.

We have the three components; of physical capital, knowledge capital and human capital that are the innovation-related assets, these make-up Innovation Capital.

I have been arguing that innovation capital draws from the core of intellectual capital and its suggested (and broadly recognized) components of human, structural and relational capitals or social capital.

I have previously discussed this converging up, as the ‘nesting effect’
Innovation capital needs assessing and measuring so we can understand the relationship between these innovation capitals (and their present and future potential) and organization performance. We need to know the innovation capital ‘stock’.

Why, well ‘stock’ can be ‘static’ and we need to make this more ‘dynamic’ so innovation can ‘flow’ from this constant renewing of our capitals and be transformed into new value.

Let me explain the innovation capital stock in (my) five parts

• It is a bundle of the firm’s resources and assets that renders complementary services in the process of new knowledge (innovation) creation and commercialization

• Innovation capital as renewal capabilities of our organizations in the form of producing intellectual properties that offer value and extracting from our intangible assets

• Innovation capital possesses attributes that make it a ‘strategic’ asset with the key lies in specifying the nature and application of these assets in relation to the new knowledge ‘flowing’ into the organization, for generating and commercializing concepts and ideas, into new forms of innovation

• The innovation capital is made up of the ‘dynamic interactions between the intangibles employed and the ongoing development of these intangible assets.

• It is the ‘effective use’ of all the different kinds of intangibles that contribute to the activity into innovation capital.

For me it is these tangible and many intangible assets that fire innovation, they make innovation combustible, to ‘spark’ new value creation.

Innovation will continue to struggle if we don’t understand its capital make-up.

If we don’t understand where the innovation value resides, we will certainly struggle to continue to build innovation’s position in the organization.

Today innovation is still regarded as ‘expendable’, sacrificed on the altar of short-termism.

This creates a growing uncertainty, often reducing innovation down as that no real ‘sense of urgency’ and becomes ‘contained’ in discrete projects, failing to offer that real, substantial, ongoing value for the enterprise.

We simply don’t ‘unlock’ the real value of innovation. If we lack the understanding and abilities to build this sustaining operational capacity for innovation we have ongoing problems.

There is the need as its longer-term goal, to be simply fully embedded inside the organization that it ‘resides’ and simply becomes indistinguishable, it becomes the operating core, constantly aligned to the strategic needs and goals. Innovation’s benefits must be outstanding and well understood.

Innovation will remain tentative, always stuttering along, lacking this absolutely organization innovation rhythm if it is not fully understood in where it generates it capital from and what new capital and stock it provides.

Actually, most of our innovation capital is learning capital.

The more we strengthen our knowledge and value our people, the more we can generate new knowledge, build greater narratives, deepen discussions, make better connections and build our interactions across growing communities.

The more we discover, the more knowledge we gain does lead up to determining potentially better decision-making and value-creating potential.

This should, in theory, give greater confidence, both internally and externally, that our invested financial capital is in good hands.

The power lies in the linkages we can forge, in the acquisition, in assimilation and then into eventual transformation, that allows known knowledge to become new wealth-generating innovation.

Our learning capital needs to emerge and dominate future discussions in improving its quality and value contribution. We need to increase incentives for organizations and their people to learn new things or update their existing knowledge.

We need to learn how to articulate knowledge in its acquisition, assimilation and transformation and that comes back to understanding absorptive capacity.

Managing organizational learning and innovation, more ICT is needed.

To successfully manage innovation capital and understand the make-up of the intellectual assets, the new main role of ICT is pulling together Web 2.0/3.0, collaborative technologies, social networking tools, wikis, internal blogging and knowledge capture, so as to help people share this growing body of knowledge through common platforms and electronic storage.

As our social networks expand they become a vital source of intellectual capital and innovation understanding. These relationships and networks need to be fostered, constantly measured in their value and contribution, and structured in ways to communicate and interpret outcomes for ‘directing’ future value creation.

The whole promising ‘wave’ of collective intelligence, social networking and building real useful communities of knowledge is a real challenge today to pull together. It is becoming a crucial factor and investing in the physical capital this needs, does allow for people to share knowledge through common platforms and strengthen the knowledge, with the human capital that innovation requires, to drive real growth.

For instance, EU investments in ICT’s are due to increase by about 25% under Horizon 2020 compared to FP7. This EU investment will support the whole chain from basic research to innovation that can deliver new business breakthroughs, often on the basis of emerging technologies.

We also need to recognize the work-to-be done, not work already done!

Work to be done is the need for our future growth and well-being to be derived through innovation activities. These so much made up of intangible parts will provide the new wealth of organizations in the knowledge sharing economy of today and the near future.

We need new forms of evaluation to measure the real asset wealth of the organization to understand the points of intensity, their connected dynamics and what is required to reconfigure the changing capabilities and capacities needed to grow in the future. There is a lot of work to be done out there.

Shifting our investments into today’s more valued capital- Innovation
It is how much we are able to adapt to fast-moving changes that will determine our success. It is the combination of the sum of our capital and knowing what factors and assets contribute to making our innovation capital that will determine the ‘health’ of our future.

I think it is essential going forward that we need significantly increase our innovation capital focus, so it can be fully unlocked, so as to release the true dynamics within the system and structures of our organizations to realize innovation’s potential.

For me, Innovation Capital and its make-up is where we need to focus, understand and invest. It drives our ability to create and sustain value creation.

The post Exploring the Value Of Your Innovation Capital first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.