Now the report in its fifth edition, it is now spanning 23 countries where the opinions of senior innovation executives or the equivalent are sought out, covering 2,748 executives, with 1,915 being in the C-Suite.

This year the barometer decided to explore the perceptions of the (informed) public for their thoughts on innovation’s growing impact and in particular, the future of work and they interviewed 1,346 to gain some useful insights and pointers that separate business and the citizen in their understandings.

The report covers a significant amount of areas across innovation. Here I wanted to pull out just a couple that initially caught my eye. I might add to this in further posts.

The top line according to GE has six supporting key findings, many supporting their strategy, which sometimes leaves me uncomfortable but partly expected. Are they just looking for their own validation but are they drawing out the downsides and implications that might bring and challenge their model. Hopefully yes, they do have a head-start over many in the way they have been undertaking transformation in my opinion.

The top supported findings were:

• Creativity and problem-solving will be key for future work forces
• Minds and machines are working together (expected perhaps from GE)
• The ROI on Collaboration is constantly improving
• The Emerging markets are more fearless in embracing innovation
• The (constant) call for greater Government support to break down barriers
• The energy sector is ripe for disruption (again GE specific)

The four main themes that did emerge from the key findings from this report see’s pressure is rising but optimism as still prevailing. These needs considering as they do cover some of the critical forces that will push or limit the 4th Industrial Revolution many are talking about and discussed further below. These are:

• A welcome revolution. Both business executives and informed citizens are optimistic about the digital transformation of the world. In emerging markets they actually feel “empowered” by this as a radical transformation point. More on that later
• The Embracing of New Models and Technologies. The continued adapting of investments, partnerships and collaboration opportunities will inform decision-making far more.
• Disruptive Innovation: the solution and the challenge. The recognition that business needs to innovate radically most are mindful of the risk, yet fear being left behind and obsolete.
• Everybody’s starting up. The balance between safer, pursuing incremental innovation and protecting the core business is growing. Inertia and risk-aversion are growing. Yet meanwhile the “start-up” ethos is growing creating different innovation cultures within companies of all sizes.

Getting past the GE shaping in the opening part of the report when you dig a little deeper there are plenty of ‘nuggets of pure gold. I want to pick out a few only here. There seems a lot of denial, delusion and inertia under the surface.

Firstly setting this into context: The 4th Industrial Revolution is challenging us all

This report is timed for the Davos meeting of the World Economic Forum 2016, starting this week. Within the themes this year is the 4th Industrial Revolution is one of the main focal points, I felt we ought to bring this into this review of mine.

Dr. Klaus Schwab, the founder and executive chairman of the WEF wrote about this 4th revolution recently. He points out we stand on the brink of a technological revolution altering the fundamental ways we live, work and relate to one another. This is rapidly underway for each of us. It has scale, scope and complexity that is unlike what has come before. It is characterized, in his opinion, by a fusion of technologies that are blurring the lines between the physical, digital and biological spheres.

Its power will lie in velocity, scope and impact it will bring, more breakthroughs, exponential rather than linear in pace and will disrupt almost every industry in every country, it will eventually, sooner than later transform entire systems of production, management and governance.

The real fear is on the impact on business

The impact on business will be huge. In Dr.Schwab’s constant conversations with global CEO’s  is that the acceleration of innovation and the velocity of disruption are for most hard to comprehend, or even anticipate. The drivers of this revolution will deliver constant surprise, even for the best connected and most well informed.

Entirely new ways of serving needs, massively changing value chains disrupted constantly will require highly agile responses as the growing access to global digital platforms will oust well-established incumbents with improving on quality, speed, price and availability to serve emerging needs that are highly valued by the end user.

The main effects of this 4th revolution will be on seeing different customer expectations, changing rapidly product and service enhancements, the need for constantly adapting and collaborating in different ecosystems of partners and constantly changing organizational forms.

Nearly all we know in business will require some significant level of rethinking. It is against this scene the GE Global Innovation Barometer helps to unpick much of the complexity. The GE Innovation Barometer report is extensive it what it is providing. It has many avenues to explore

Early ‘stand-outs’ for me from this Barometer report at first glance

The aspects I pick out initially here are around Digital Darwinism, and The Start-Up Ethos, Internal Inertia and Ineffective Business Models

Digital Darwinism or is it simply full-swing Darwinism?

The consensus of both the business executive and the informed public is that more and more businesses face extinction, rapidly becoming obsolete, as technology is evolving far faster than many can adapt too. The feeling is that only a few are performing as quick adapters and implementing emerging technologies, many are simply lagging. One that I tend to believe does explore and exploit is GE, although its leaderships foresight and speed with the need to adapt is struggling to equally bring its organization up to speed, possibly it is not working “all the pumps” on this one. It needs too.

The gold standard is “being disruptive” but it is such a challenging goal. According to the report, even though 90% of innovating companies are claiming they not just launching new products and services but are creating a new market that did not exist previously.

Now I must admit I just find this totally at odds with what I see or read on a constant basis. I really would want to dispute this or those making this claim have very low threshold of what they define as ‘new’ and being created. Is this more delusional, believing incremental innovation is determining “new” in the broadest sense, to simply justify this claim? So where is all the real growth in the worlds business organizations then if this claim is valid? A question going beyond “not only launch” but ones that are proving real impact on the top and the bottom line (defined criteria needed) would define innovation a little better.

Time and time again I read reports on the lack of innovation, of dedicated resources, even the leadership has such limited time to put behind innovation. I really question this result.

Also 47% are claiming the development of entirely new products or services has contributed to the performance, yet 60% state it is difficult to come up with radical and disruptive ideas is still a key challenge. Definitions of ‘new’ certainly need clarifying. This slide shown can be highly misleading on real innovation progress.

Turning to the Digital Darwinism, it is not just digital in my mind, it is in understanding what is really in need of radically changing and adapting that companies need to do, in  innovating to meet this revolution that is clearly underway.

On the other side of this positive view of innovating reported, we then get the result that the majority of business executives continue to favor a “safer” approach to innovation. They want to maximize existing revenue (58% of those interviewed), protect the core (64%) with only 34% recognizing the development of new business models has contributed to the performance within their company. That is more in line with what I ‘see’ in the market.

The report also points out most businesses innovate incrementally as a way to mitigate risks, even while speed to market is increasingly a differentiator.  63% use incremental to improve existing products and solutions, while 46% try to get to market as quickly as possible to keep an edge over (existing) competitors (for me viewing in the back mirror) and not scanning for the upstarts or disruptive forces coming from different places .

When you look at the country breakdown, this protecting the core is dominant for most countries and a real lack of looking for long term payoff for innovation dominates company thinking. Most executives within most countries have difficulty coming up with radical and disruptive ideas with a growing challenge the highest concern in the USA, South Korea, France, Canada, Japan, Sweden, with the one sizable exception being China.

A growing perception difference on Innovating

The informed public think internal inertia and lack of leadership prevents business from innovating efficiently, while the exec blames ineffective business models (the poor worker blames his tools perhaps). The report specifically asked each, the business exec and the informed public to clarify the challenges preventing businesses ability to innovate efficiently. To level inertia and lack of leadership is a damning reflection of what the public think holds innovation back. I would not disagree.

Darwinism is certainly tapping on every organization’s door in the need for evolution. There are new ideas, concepts, combinations and much more all emerging. If organizations hold onto the totally mistaken belief that incremental will allow them to survive then we are seeing many heading for extinction.

In the past business has found ways where they thrived through stable markets and interlocking in ways we have known to keep thriving. In recent years we are losing many of our known beacons of business , whole rafts of previously well-established business sectors or industries, or ones are being forced to merge as they failed to evolve.

We will continue to lose many of our present organization as they are approaching the edge of a sheer cliff from keeping in denial.

Is this any different from our endangered wildlife species we are in the early stages of a mass extinction event if our businesses fail to become more radical, prepared to disrupt and challenge in a fashion unknown before. Of course the future is unknown but there are things we do know and we need to adapt and work with what we are being provided in this revolutionary period.

The fear of being obsolete is worrying that it is becoming faster than many can adapt to, it seems. This is something each business leader has to face up to and radically change within themselves and their organizations. It is the challenge of today.

I would say, others may not agree but I feel GE are attempting to head of these warnings in their way and taking to heart much within the Barometers past and present.

The “Start-Up” ethos and the chase for the talent has growing implications

• How are different parts of the world trying to catch up, leapfrog over others and become more radical to make this valuable to them?
• How is the larger company equally attempting to stay incremental for their core to protect it but also in using this “start-up” ethos increasingly?

The challenge is how to create an innovation culture within companies of all sizes that allow this- often referred to as the “dual” approach of simultaneously exploiting and exploring.

The report observes with digital transformation there is the rise of the nomad employee. These individuals do not seek full-time employment but favor freelancing or contracting modes. 71% of Business Executives confirm this trend and 84% of the informed public (the very people searching for this). This has implications on building a loyal cadre of employees or holding them within the one environment without significant adjustments to changing the working environment.

It is from the questions to the informed public they see the top elements to create a more productive work environment as 89% flexible working hours with a level of freedom to choose these working hours, 80% want participative management principles with a growing say and 79% want remote working on a regular basis. Other productive environments consist of flexible holidays (75%), more open (flexible) offices (71%), Minimal hierarchy (69%), Satellite offices (62%), participative salaries (60%) and hot desking facilities (50%)

The interesting ‘tension’ within companies is they are looking for creative problem solvers but this entrepreneur spirit is not fully embraced. The “start-up ethos” is not being fully exploited as it potentially might challenge the core and unleash ‘uncontrolled’ disruption within the organization that prides itself at being, foremost efficient and effective. These often run counter to entrepreneurship, and innovation.

The main attributes are still aligned to the business as usual not the need to think new Business Models, become more radical, look to be disruptive, although the Business Executive thinks perhaps they are embracing this “ethos”, the effort supporting these initiatives are “just but a toe in the water” testing the concept today.

Again I feel some level of denial, of not wanting to really embrace or face up to the real race for talent. Often we mistakenly ask the question to the company “what do you look for in candidates” but it is the candidate today that is asking “do I fancy working for them” and how does it fit in my personal journey, in my terms and wishes to achieve.

We come back to the embracing of the 4th Industrial Revolution

It was surprising within the Barometer report that most Business Execs and informed public are optimistic in embracing the 4th Industrial Revolution. That was surprising.

Embracing any future is full of uncertainty. According to this report there is surprising optimism, even some feeling of empowerment and the developing countries are leading this charge. Indonesia, Nigeria, Israel, Turkey, Algeria, China, Mexico, India, Poland, Malaysia, Brazil, Russia and South Africa feel certain positivity.

Those stuck in uncertainty are the ones who lose the most, these being Australia, Canada, USA, Sweden, France, South Korea, Germany and Japan.

It is within this group of ‘reluctant’ countries we find the most tension. The fear and needs in protecting the core, the difficulty of implementing (or wanting too) new business models, the worries of becoming obsolete, of being disrupted alongside the pressures of failing to attract and hold the talent as they are fighting in some respects and not fully embracing the “start up ethos.”

There is a lot to lose but equally to win. By not accepting that within any revolution, you can’t simply defend, you have to know where and how to attack, adapt and experiment, learning to evolve and embrace the changes at a really agile speed. Playing safe is not a winning option.

Safety first is a long-term losing strategy in my opinion

This ‘safer’ approach really needs changing. The absolute need is to embrace a more radical, disruptive stance of advancement. The urgency is where the leadership should be really  taking the important time of working all the revolutionary forces, exploring them, making them work to understand their changing environment, then disruption will be a force that catches them completely out. The CEO should devolve the day-to-day to the COO and get back to much deeper strategic thinking.

The challenging that needs to go on today is that most of the existing, prevailing assumptions are needing revising, even uprooting, forcing of the operating teams to relentless adapt, and become continuously good at innovating through new business models, products and services. Leaders need to be a whole lot bolder in setting a disruptive, technology driven agenda that radically alters the present offering. GE is certainly attempting this in my opinion.

We need to guide the evolution and find ways that are mostly yet to come so we have to be highly adaptive.  We need to break out of linear thinking, stop being absorbed by multiple crises and think strategically and longer-tern about all that is disrupting us and how innovation must shape the future.

The GE Innovation Barometer can only signpost, it is for us to extract the value it provides to help in any change journey. Find a copy and understand its implications on you personally, and more importantly its implications on your business.

Here is a link into the GE Innovation Barometer Report 2016.

The post GE and its Global Innovation Barometer 2016 first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

Yes you read it right- 2020, nearly nine further years, well beyond this President further term of office, if he gets re-elected.

The report commissioned by the U.S Conference of Mayors are equally predicting 363 metropolitan areas would not generate enough jobs to get back to pre-recession peaks until 2014, based on current world economics.

When you add in that metropolitan regions account for 86 per cent of all jobs you realize how stark this is. So we are entering that twilight zone for millions that have a number of lost years ahead of them to face a difficult, uncertain future.

The issue is not just the economic job loss but the types of job losses are just not easily going to be replaced. Many are simply gone, moved somewhere else in the world or just vanished forever.

The level of re-skilling that needs to take place to move old-line factory jobs into technology-related, advanced manufacturing for protecting added value areas or service sectors is simply massive.

Can innovation as is often suggested simply take up the slack? I think it is unlikely. We need to think differently, we need to think radically and innovation plays its delivery part in this.

Across the pond, in the UK and much of Europe, I suspect it is no different

Over in the UK, there was a recent talk by Sir Howard Davies, former director of the London School of Economics and inaugural chairman of the Financial Services Authority. He painted a picture of the UK, that has come crashing down from riding the wave of financialization, indulged in unsustainable public spending and is facing the painful adjustments needed to rebalance.

There is another talk of ‘seven lean years of rebalancing between investment and consumption”. He also pointed out that only one-third of the UK’s current manufacturing base was ‘promisingly defensible’. Again I repeat just one third, this is the one third that is too hard to shift overseas, but clearly, two thirds is vulnerable!

It is times like these that Politicians reach for those magic, inspiring words like “we are world-class in this or that”, “world-famous for open flexible economies”, “we are structuring more for flexible labour markets”, “look at us how politically stable we are” and “come invest here as we have robust legal systems to protect tyour IP”.

Quite frankly these well-used statements are simply not enough. Many countries are increasingly standing there, naked, and not sure what or with what to hide behind. “Ummm, Innovation sounds good to suggest as our pathway out of this mess,”can you hear this, I can?

Enter the time of increased focus of service innovation

The area that simply enters our thinking more and more comes from reinvention into a ‘service-centric entrepot’ but there are so many glaring infrastructures, technology and financing problems to overcome to storm up the service success ladder for many to overcome. Service has sadly not been as recognized in our economic planning as it should have been, many were looking elsewhere or simply looking away when ‘service’ was running away with itself (i.e Banks)

For anchoring service, it seems to follow the same habit of ‘clustering’ in certain regions where education, infrastructure and skill to name a few are available. This continues to unbalance what we know today, further disruption and uncertainty for many who don’t fit the knowledge-based demands required to be in the service sectors.

Chasing new investment there is a certain cold light reality. We know we all can’t be leaders in the same field that we all would like to be, and we are seeing granularity of leading definitions pop up to attract across regions hungry for investment. Innovation really does needs not just some creative thinking but some really hard thinking through, to change the lack of prospects found in many places in the developed world.

Asia is also seeing service as its next growth wave as its solution

Over in Asia they have their problems too. Demand from the West is softening, big surprise that, and the growth levels that have been expected by nations alike are beginning to stall and that is not meeting person aspirational levels, spelling more trouble ahead unless growth can be sustained.

Increasingly this is going to be at someone elses expense and we, in the West, will bare much of this unless we can find some different consumption patterns and values that need to be closer to home to deliver.

There is a growing argument that the present overdependence on manufacturing that does give growing economic volatility as global companies are constantly on the hunt for cheaper cost bases is an unsustainable model.

The inflows of unskilled labour and the distortions of subsidies, land and tax holidays needs shifting Asian Government policies to, wait for it, yes services. A growing consensus is suggesting taking a view to move rapidly through technology-intensive industries to more value-intensive to knowledge-based economies as the need to plan and execute even more.

So the very place the West is realizing it needs to focus upon, services, the East is also planning to attack with vim and vigour, and I bet you, greater tax and trained labour incentives than the West can currently offer.

The absolute need is for a really careful thoughtful analysis

If innovation is our vehicle of growth and services increasingly taking up a larger part of our wealth creating activities those responsible will really need to understand the two- innovation and services. I’m not sure Government’s understand either, nor metropolitan areas or the different regions in the UK or Europe.

Equally many of the C-level executives that were brought up in tangible industry thinking. Many involved in leading us out of this series of economic crisises needs a deep, rapid dive into service and innovation.

Also if we truely don’t know our competitive advantage, our true competitive advantages valued by others- customers, competitors, countries- we are going to stay increasingly vulnerable and not capable to re-grow our economies.

There is a certain time we need to make a set of fundamental shifts. Growth has been the main mantra of countries, business and societies. We need to do a radical rethink.

We need to make ‘real things’ age, to stop the disposing of ‘older’ items because a newer version has come out, we need to shift our values back to fit the times we are in. We need to shift the innovation focus.

We need to bring it back to within our community that has its higher value components necessary to be local. Perhaps we need to reverse innovate the global economy?

Conspicuous consumption needs a different innovation approach

Conspicuous consumption requires different innovative thinking. Products, services and experiences that are built to last become more vital to think about.

Making a product with a decent set of services, providing services with such a positive set of sustaining experiences and not simply expecting each to stand alone is the order of the past, the order of the future needs us to think about innovation differently; to combine in new ways .

This will be in the ways we learn to exchange, how we value in a rapidly changing economic order and how we create a different ‘value set’ from our innovation analysis and how we set about organizing it. It will actually be less entrepreneurial in “I have an idea” to “I have a well thought through innovative business model” that understands all the connected parts.

It is the ability to work out how to bundle up all the different aspects where innovation can play its part, less so perhaps for those huge growth leaps but for sustaining economies based on clear values of worth, not just simply wealth-related.

Innovation is just going to get harder so know your innovation fitness capabilities and capacities to seek new valued avenues of worth.

Innovation needs to become deeply collaborative, deeply connected in all its related parts to help solve our real social problems and allow new ‘prospects’ to lift us out of this tough, certain innovation bleakness, we are still facing for some time to come.

We need to enter the age of societal innovation, close to you so you can share and gain from and personally grow your worth.

The post Looking beyond that certain innovation bleakness is hard. first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

We need to push them a lot harder. We need to move away from business-only innovation into a society based.

The shifts taking place

Society has shifted, is shifting; the consumer is becoming the supplier of content, meaning, of their taste preferences, their emotions and the goods and services they will buy. Mass consumption, the model honed in the 20^th century doesn’t work anymore.

Customers are actually saying “less choice, more say” and seeking deeper self-determination. This personalising of preference can seem more complex for organizations but there are many ways to manage this it requires real change in organizations, oriented to society more, serving them more.

The marketing thinking is in need of adaptation also.
Consumers are searching for better well-being: through health and wellness, connectedness, personal growth and identity and control. Everything is coming more into a ‘context’ economy that places value on customization, adaptability and transformation with the overriding value statement of “what we will value as against what we consume”.

Social innovation becomes increasingly important within communities
Facing a fairly long period of economic restructuring in most developed economies, the consistent globalisation of local jobs, rapid technology change, and polarization of opinions we seemingly are all facing a world of great uncertainty and increasing complexity.

Our governments are searching for solutions. The premium seems to be centred on new knowledge acquisition to add jobs and promote new solutions to tackle unfamiliar or persistent problems within society.

We seemingly can’t afford or tolerate in capital markets anything that seems inefficient, applying unsustainable practices or not innovating well.
Innovation- based on social problems- offers a real meaningful solution for us all.

If we can harness the best ideas for emergent problems, and explore these in a timely fashion we can move beyond our existing crisis. We all searching for personal meaning and society does offer this really.

The four main areas that Social Innovation can address and are all near you!!

1. Resolving the problems around our growing physical needs and limited resources (age, health, education)
2. The increasing need for a different type of skill and capability set that innovation seems to require and often we are not taught- in school, business or society
3. A major shift in care and service- serving the needs of others, communities and those actually close to us
4. Psychic needs- the recognition, increased understanding and care that cuts across our societies in so many different, often in bewildering ways.

Innovation is social, social is the new innovation
Social and interpersonal aspects (social media, networks, relationships) are aspects of innovation that are increasingly being recognised and understood to be critical to the innovation process.

The realisation of innovation needs people, everything else is enablers.

People hold the key role in the innovation process as the creators and carriers of knowledge. They develop it, they translate it, and they consume it.

The increased art of collaboration and co-creation

Collaboration and co-creation is emerging that have the potential to provide those value creation points society requires.

We need to learn how to cooperate. I was reading a book recently by Gaurave Bhalla called “Collaboration and Co-creation: New Platforms for Marketing and Innovation” and he offers a simple but powerful framework- Listen- Engage- Respond.

A society that can be mobilized links the economic, social and environmental spheres; it can have a cumulative dynamic effect if we can harness it.

Pushing society to solve its growing problems needs to happen
We simply do have the capacity to solve our problems but it needs the combination of private, public, voluntary sectors, philanthropists, foundations and society to come together in different ways than we have seen in the past.

That is why we are entering the era of societal innovation and we need to get business even more tuned in than ever.

We need to develop a greater social and cultural lens to translate our concerns, fears and insecurities into beliefs, values and aspirations that offer a vibrant future.

Innovation is now needed in all walks of life- this is our societal challenge.

The post Societal Innovation – challenging our future thinking first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.