We are continually learning more about all the different tools, techniques, and approaches available for innovation that will certainly help in putting the learning tensions into our work, making them more dynamic, linked, and increasingly relevant to the work-to-be-done.

We do need to embrace a more open, experimental approach to explore and then extend concepts, tools or frameworks that seem to work. I say “seem to work” as each situation often needs different paths to get the best out of any innovation work.

Yet before we jump into all the frameworks and tools that are available, let’s think about establishing the “common” environment innovation needs. Set this up, and you have the potential to create those dynamics out of your innovation activity. So here is a handy few to think about

1). A common language is essential

Any dynamics in the system need the ability for all to talk the same language, something that becomes common and embedded to support the routines and move quickly to the ideas, concepts, and solutions, as others can begin to ‘understand’ them and their connections as well. It is through working on the personal 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 of those needs for working on a common cause.

2). Creating constant opportunities for conversations

So many organizations don’t work on the ongoing discussions. They tend to dive straight into design workshops, build roadshows, and limit 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, an on-going dialogue. By investing in lots of engagement, ones that should be initially lead from the top, then allowed to move up and down the organization, to allow for these ongoing conversations to build through growing confidence and trust.

3). Using the knowledge that resides

Organizations like to believe they are building domains of expertise, but often they are actually creating lots of individual silo’s to further 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 needs a well-designed knowledge sharing structure. This extracting expertise can help with not just our daily routines by offering different thoughts, ideas, and practices that may have a real impact on how you can change but as timely contributions into group activities.

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

The bundling of data 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, we need to gather a more exceptional ability for ‘sensing and seizing’ on the information. As we accumulate this 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 life. By bringing into the organization the process of 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 understanding 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 human capital. It can, through creative acts, give a strong feeling and provide a real sense of commitment. The more we explore, the more we ‘ignite our passions,’ We all need to consciously find the time to explore. It is by clearing the path to allow the absorbing to take place. As we set about to extract the knowledge, carefully, through putting any challenge into context, we are setting the basis for knowledge content to build by allowing time to access, anchor, and diffuse by validating back to our pre-determined setting.

The ability to harness our dynamics is vital

The ability to make our environments more dynamic means they become more engaging, more challenging. The dynamics offer far of a more a place to learn and contribute. It gives us greater potential for innovation and growth. As we build the dynamics of learning, there is a real growth potential for the organization and its people. The ability to set about making sure all the different intellectual capitals can combine. When you can connect those human capitals (knowledge, skills, and experiences), relationship ones (social and through our networks) or through the structural ones, (where you pool knowledge, use routines, and systems)you put into place a more abundant “stock” of innovation potential.

Proper 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 the acquisition, in assimilation and then into eventual transformation then this allows known knowledge to become new wealth-generating innovation

By setting up your innovation environment before you jump into all those useful tools, techniques, and frameworks will give you such a good “heads start.”

The post Achieving a more dynamic innovating environment first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

We need many more organizations to get out of this survival trap and exploiting innovation in bolder ways, become fitter in their innovating purpose.

The harsh reality is this is becoming a very crowded, increasing uncomfortable place to be, as we reduce our capabilities to take a risk, too invest, to make those decisions that create more radical innovation.

If we don’t offer value creation, we become increasingly unattractive and not regarded as essential but simply become disposable, pushed aside by others, more nimble, aware, and innovative.

The more we play ‘safe’, the more we run the risk of being disrupted. We are failing to leverage much of the liberating power within innovation. Is our business world today is it so predictable?  No, it is well and truly ‘dynamic’ and evolving, and we have to respond to it in faster, more bolder ways. There is an awful lot of creative destruction going on, and I’ve also written previously about the Innovation Era: Creative Destruction or Destructive Creation where the replacement rate is continuously speeding up, we are facing more uncertainty and incoherence than ever.

So much of what we do actually is ‘static’ work, activities that are merely repeating what we have done time and time again, gaining us little new knowledge and offering reduced value-creating worth. These activities on their own keep us happily ‘treading water’ and does the job of locking us comfortably into the ‘efficient and effectiveness clan mindset that most business organizations like to be ^keep us all continually working within.

We need to place the emphasis back on the “creative” innovation part and not the ‘destructive’ nature we have been moving towards recently. To achieve this we need to understand innovation far better than we currently do. This is partly where my exploring the dynamics of innovation through fitness landscapes comes in.

What we do need to do is constantly evolve our innovation capabilities to perform in more dynamic and flexible ways. We need to acquire that consistent aim of achieving a more adaptable and adjusting approach to innovation in all its parts. We need to meet the changing circumstances and challenges we are all facing to regain the real growth needed from our economies and organizations, making what we do at the same time, more sustainable. Delivering better innovation outcomes is central to this task.

Knowing your innovation ‘stock’ and ‘capital’ potential

So what do we need to do?

We need to know our ‘innovation stock’, a large part of our wealth-generating capital, and where it can be best put to use. We are valuing the knowledge perspective far more and with this, we increasingly recognize the importance of the intellectual capital that makes up the organization.

We certainly need to re-think many of the old world value delivery systems to assess organizations and make much more of a concerted effort to create innovations stand out. Innovation that renders different, unique value outcomes, that keep pushing the boundaries of strategic advantage within any business.

We need to ‘master’ our understanding of the skills, processes, routines, organizational structure, and disciplines that enable firms to build, employ and orchestrate innovation as this is increasingly needed for participating in more complex open collaboration efforts. To achieve this, we first need to know ourselves and our capacity to innovate, both the strengths and weaknesses.

Each organization does need to know its innovation fitness to thrive in the future

We are searching for what makes up the present system and what needs to be part of the future to create a ‘best’ innovation capability environment that is sustainable in the longer-term. We need to find those capabilities that can be continually ‘orchestrated’ so they can be adapted continuously to meet the strategic need.

We are striving towards a true ‘innovation coherency premium’ in design, knowing what makes up your core dynamic components and how to bring them together for greater value-generating productive use. The outcomes of knowing where to invest, what to dampen down and what aspects can evolve naturally and be ‘taken along’ as you focus upon the ones that are more dynamic and relevant to your innovation needs are critical to understand and manage.

No journey is without pitfalls.

Finding the dynamic capabilities of innovation that ‘fit’ with the strategic needs of each organization will be different based on their own respective challenges and position. We need to stop merely copying others and create our own ‘dynamics’ to strengthen our own unique advantage points for sustaining our future.

Do you want to become an innovation fit or be part of a past history of extinct organizations that failed to adapt?

The post Do you know your innovation fitness? first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

There is this compelling and urgent need to accelerate low-carbon technology innovation if the world can achieve decarbonization of the energy sector between now and 2050, to significantly contribute to meet international climate goals set out in the 2015 Paris Agreement.

The twin combination of energy efficiency and renewable energy seems to be the only plausible way to achieve 90% of the emissions reductions needed by 2050 with renewables accounting for two-thirds of the primary energy supply by this date (IRENA analysis).  The essential requirement for energy efficiencies and renewable energy needs is to come from significant technology innovation and systemic innovation, so as o achieve these ambitious numbers. Will it?

To undertake such a radical redesign of the energy system, to pilot and rapidly scale critical renewable energy technologies requires a dramatic set of shifts in such an energy transformation. Can we?

Can you imagine the different sectors of the energy system that takes you from power generation through to the end-user segments of energy demand and all the changes each needs to make? Each part will need to undergo a massive improvement with deployment rates that enable the shift from fossil fuel to renewables. Mapping it is one thing, ensuring it happens is another. Translating theory into an actual (hard-nosed) sustaining return that has financial and societal benefit is one huge leap of faith, or is it? What will deliver the compelling case to make such a change? Are we making as strong a case as we could do?

IRENA, in their research, argues that to deliver on the goals for renewables the share of the total energy consumption needs from these has to rise seven-fold per year. Is this possible? Is there such an investment appetite? Are the technology solutions capable to be scaled at this rate?

Is the complexity of the energy transition to big?

How are we going to navigate such a complex shift away from fossil fuels to renewables to achieve this decarbonization energy sector? A full-scale energy transition takes decades to change as the ability to ‘enact’ the different technical steps, the lifespan of existing capital assets and the embedded role of fossil fuels competing on a price make for such a difficult transition.

The primary arguments of economic benefit are not enough. Although we can achieve a different lifestyle change from combustion-engine cars to electric ones, does this change so much of our lifestyle?

At present, we are focusing on convincing those within the energy system to contemplate change, and that is not a real imperative unless the climate concerns become compelling and force change. No amount of new technology breakthroughs in smart grids, different storage methods that can accommodate variable renewable energy power are enough to displace fossil fuel consumption at the rates required.

We can push harder to replace internal combustion cars, but we are not yet able to point at real scale in implementing such a shift to electric vehicles as we lack infrastructure, the relevant scale of production or the incentives to shift the consumer at such a level to make changes in the short-term.

Realistically we are in trouble.

The momentum behind such an energy transition is getting diffused and occurring in fragmented ways. We lack any clear roadmaps or commitments from industry sectors, governments, or institutional framework. In any significant change from one system to another, in this case, the global energy system needs not just a compelling reason but a massive injection of fiscal and policy frameworks and incentives to “push,” “nurture,” “facilitate” and catalyze the “pull” we need; of one where the party undergoing the need for change “wants” the solutions as a “must-have”.

We need a significant concerted effort for a robust international collaboration from all solution providers, and that is not easy to obtain when individual participants have “vested” interests in both maintaining the existing (fossil fuel solutions) and the new, emerging renewables (wind, solar). Is it a conflict, or can it be balanced?

My concern and for many others is the sheer complexity of this challenge is way beyond one specialized agency, one government or one corporation, it cuts across industries and infrastructure established and proven solutions. How can we create a robust, viable, and determined sustainable transition pathway, where all involved undertake their part?

Achieving a 2015 Paris Agreement on climate targets was an achievement that is still in some level of being undermined at Government level. To change “agreement” into a sustainable set of policies needs to be determined. Enabling policy to drive the energy transition, in the shift away from existing subsidized policies supporting fossil fuels, of allowing fossil fuel designs still to come on stream, to continue to actively support the extraction of our resources and many, many more existing supporting policies need to be switched into supporting and funding renewables. We need to have policies and financial incentives to scale up renewable deployment. For this, we need to accelerate innovative technology solutions.

Although we look towards Governments to be in the crucial enabling role in the past, we operate in a very different globally connected world. One government cannot influence the level of change in such a globally connected world. We need to form a new global order that has as its mission to resolve the world’s most pressing problems, something beyond the existing United Nations that galvanizes the world into a change.  Will that happen? Who can offer the leadership to catalyze this?

To navigate the energy transition

As we up the pace of economic change being undertaken in renewables, in electrification, in new forms of energy systems, we still have not crossed that magic “tipping point.”  We are today caught up in innovators, early adopters in changing their operations. We are seeing an early majority of adopters in different industries, as the solution providers beginning to have an influence or take opinion leadership positions, yet we need the most demanding push yet, to achieve the vast majority within the energy system considering adoption, to make the energy transition.

This push to achieve majority adoption needs to come within the next few years. The current skepticism, doubt, sense of being a laggard does need changing dramatically, certainly in these next few years. Otherwise, we lose momentum. Who takes the lead role in this influencing? Governments, Solution Providers or (the power of) Society demanding change?

Innovation is at the core of the energy transition

The power of innovation can serve a growing and significant part of this transition. Innovation becomes the tool, instruments, and the solutions that can galvanize change. Innovation is far broader than just technology; it needs to be emphasized that the solutions offered are part of the complete system design, in radically different operating systems and in what it can provide in new business models.

Innovation drives competition; it delivers the changed environment where those investing “steal a march” and take winning positions that alter the dynamics of industries, of energy solutions themselves.

I hear the constant beat of the drum of “we need more and faster innovation-.” Yes, this is true, but it is the higher call we all need to hear, the one that innovation provides the compelling system design to make the change. Innovation offers the potential for new competitive positioning, and give economic advantages when it is the core in any integrated business cases, one that will make a more significant difference that offers both commercial and societal benefits.

Innovation within energy is focused on solutions for electrification to decarbonize the planet. Innovation is providing solutions to digitalize all parts of the energy supply chain.  Innovation can offer reduced costs through its new solutions.  It can be designed to deliver flexibility to address many of today’s capability restrictions. Innovation can galvanize change in all the end-use sectors of transport, buildings, home use, and industry, it can provide solutions to turn “dirty fossil fuel” into “clean fuel” in the heart of energy generation and within solutions can capture greenhouse omissions,  to deliver more efficient systems than we have today

We need to talk up innovation, not for the sake of it but for its ability to bring about change, to be recognized as the catalyst of change that will bring about the significant shift we need. Innovation can unite all the parties involved in energy transition as they see the social, business, and policy values of innovation uptake. Innovation can decarbonize, digitalize, decentralize and above all democratize all that is locked up in the existing energy system

We do need to emphasis the value translation of innovation in its contribution to this energy translation.

**Disclosure: Part of my work in research and advising in the energy transition is due to being involved in the Siemens #SiemensInfluencer community or #SIEx. I want to emphasis the opinions and views expressed here are my own.

The post Confusion or Diffusion in Energy Transition? first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

In the past few months, I have been placing an increasing focus on the energy transition we all need to undertake in our energy systems, to build a more comprehensive understanding of the parts that make up the whole of this transition.

It is one of the most critical places where innovation application is required and able to be conducted to deliver a sustaining impact in our world. Innovation solutions will provide the energy transition needed, and that is what makes it such a compelling area to focus upon.

For me, the energy transition that the world is undertaking requires all forms of innovation, to offer technically advanced, as well as breakthrough solutions, to an incredibly complex system of energy delivery. To redesign a complete energy system in twenty to thirty years, which is the current time frame being wanted to be achieved, is as demanding as you can get. I certainly want to play a role in this transformation, it is exciting, challenging, and demanding on all involved.

We need to appreciate the magnitude of the innovation challenges

Nearly all of our energy supply is, or has been, reliant on fossil fuels (oil, coal, gas) which are non-renewable and are the primary source of the carbonization problems we have today. Omitted Carbon gets trapped in our atmosphere and has been the growing concern as the principal source of our warming planet.

After the famous and groundbreaking 2015 Paris Agreement, where we witnessed for the first time, all nations agreeing to a common cause, one to undertake ambitious efforts to combat climate change and adapt to its effects. From this agreement as such, it has been the catalyst to charting a new course in the global climate effort.

Central to this is that the world needs a decarbonization energy sector by the second half of the century. The encouraging view from work undertaken by the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) suggests that the combination of energy efficiencies and renewable energies already known and worked upon has the potential to achieve 90% of the emissions reduction needed by 2050.

This massive shift from our present reliance on fossil fuels projects to renewables (regarded as clean energy) can account for two-thirds of our primary energy supply by this 2050 mark. Today, renewables (wind, solar, hydropower, biofuels) is presently only supplying around 16-18%. For such a significant change to happen, we need to focus on a massive global scale. To undertake such a considerable difference, we need economically and scalable solutions.

The growing concern today is we are not raising the deployment rate; it is currently far too slow to meet the potential by 2050. Deployment here is not just in the market, but it is in commercializing concepts; from the invention, concept validation, prototype stages, demonstration, integration into our parts of the system, through to full scale to commercialization and final proof of stability, and offering financial and justifiable returns.

The critical enabler will come from technology and systemic innovation.

Innovation needs to be broader than just being conducted through technological research and development; it requires a more significant integrated innovation model that has business models, policies, processes, and market design as part of the solutions.

As this energy transition is such a seismic shift, it requires clear Government support and enabling policies on a coordinated basis. There are at present plenty of pledges to boost public spending but to achieve this evident energy transformation, it needs to be conceptualized, validated, and then delivered. Any change of this magnitude requires sustained consistent investment over the thirty-odd years to 2050 and even increased where the present-day energy infrastructure is so out of data, it will require radical redesign and an even more significant capital commitment.

Any undertaking like a complete transformation of the worlds energy system will require significantly increased collaborations between public and private investments, institutions and researchers, but a growing recognition from the public that this ‘sense of united commitment’ is essential to provide us a more sustainable planet. Sadly that “compelling story” is yet to be articulated, it is far too fragmented today to galvanize the level of change understanding.

Articulating the real need for energy (consumption) change is critical

The concern becomes, will it be continued “crisis” that brings us to a united understanding of the need to radically change? Today we are still caught up in the extremes of denial or over-hype. The longer we “fiddle,” the harder this transformation will become to manage our growing needs of more energy, from an increasing world population and maintaining aging infrastructure, still reliant on very outdated central energy grid models and only fossil fuel solutions.

All of this ambition to change the energy system needs a radical approach, lots of fresh thinking, and that underlying coordinated action for all involved to undertake such a journey. The question is, will we?

Innovation has to be applied not just to resolving the physical integration and operation of the energy system to change from established sources of energy supply (oil, gas, coal) but to find imaginative solutions to a more variable renewable energy (VRE) solutions. Critically it has to be applied to solutions for much of our industrial process and within the transport systems.

In the industry sector, particularly cement, iron and steel, and chemicals account for 17% of our worlds current carbon dioxide emissions. In freight and aviation, they account for 11% of global CO2 emissions,. Our future energy solutions need to convince stakeholders that switching energy sources, over to electricity reliance, can be managed in economical ways with many of the innovative solutions on offer today, or in the innovation development pipeline, can offer a sound business case.

The societal inhibitor is a real impediment.

Technology-centric innovation can make a difference, but in this case of the Energy Transition, in the end, it is Society that has to demand it. At present there is indifference. They still have not been presented with the compelling case for change. Is it when we have more floods, power outages, hurricanes, power and water shortages that we will  finally get it?

To galvanize governments, investors, private organization, and institutions, we need to create these needs of change to become part of the dialogue we need in our fabric of society today, we need to raise global consciousness. To achieve a transformation where we are aiming for a zero-carbon outcome in thirty years is unparallel in ambition.

To undertake this energy transition is as tricky as any global initiative we have taken on before. Our institutions need to be galvanized, not by the voices of science or technology, or by individual governments or private organizations they need the “United voice of all nations through its people.”

A united voice where people demand change and demand Governments construct the new world order, to integrate, coordinate the full gambit of interventions in economic, political, technological and social systems to make this energy value chain realizable as a significant part of reducing the climate crisis of depleting resources, warming temperatures and natural disasters, caused mainly by carbonizing our world. Can we find this voice?

Managing the Energy Transition is of Real Complexity

To say this energy transition is complex is an understatement, as any pace of transformation requires real sustaining commitment, significant resources, and abundant capital, along with the urgency of deployment to rapidly switch to renewables for our energy sources.

The emerging new technologies in grid management, local and grid-scale energy storage, distributed systems, the application of mini-grids, the digitalization of energy services, energy generation, etc., are all deployed today but at variable speed and in very ad hoc fashion. We do need to formulate more detailed roadmaps for the energy transition in a highly coordinated way as part of this change. Equally, to get to more and faster deployment, we need both technological and systemic innovation to be vigorously applied.

Are we going to bring together multiple parties on multiple fronts at the speed and scale and investments we require? It is hard to imagine but essential to achieve

Where innovation fits within the energy transition story, it becomes the accelerant of change:

As you get into the complexity of this energy transition, you realize the difficulties. Innovation will be the key driver; it needs the following:

1). Deliver technology breakthroughs that provide renewable solutions to offer cost-effective alternatives to conventional energy technology,

2) technology innovation that improves the existing renewable technologies to reduce current cost and achieve more significant deployment,

3) new business models that allow new investors to be attracted to the energy system,

4) exploring new concepts that promote scale-up of renewable technologies,

5) supports new financing models and justification and validation for fresh capital investments,

6) enabling policies and regulatory changes to offer change incentives for different market access,

7) contribute substantially to fresh market designs and concepts,

8) encourage and provide opportunities for new energy system operators to undertake part of the transformations needed.

If ever I see a need for a shift it towards a clear innovation paradigm, it is in this energy transition we need to accelerate, support, and deliver.

Our world is becoming highly vulnerable to not being able to reverse the climate conditions of a warming planet; it does need to urgently reduce its dependency on fossil fuels, invest in a massive change in renewables and an energy system that can change and be sustainable.

The world needs to build further on its initial global commitment; this time it is driven by societies recognition that we need to change our models of power supply, transportation, industry and building reliance from fossil dependency to renewables. It is galvanizing the innovation system to provide the transformation enablers as crucial to this. It is offering new opportunities for prosperity, growth, society, and economic gain.

To conclude, I read a comment within my researches from the EIT Climate Knowledge and Innovation Community (EIT Climate-KIC) that stated any transition needs to be 1) Mission-led, 2) Portfolio-based and 3) Community-delivered. We need all three fully connected up and well-identified and being well supported.

I will be taking the energy transition story further in future posts

The emphasis within future posts will be more focused on discussing where innovation will play a vital role in this transition undertaken.

In this opening post, I wanted to provide a short opener to a complex subject. I hope it does offer enough of an overview of the global energy transition we are presently undertaking. In future posts, I plan to get down and into the weeds of energy transformation a little more, showing where innovation is contributing.

The energy transition is so essential, but within the world of innovators, it offers such a compelling story of how innovation can make such a contribution and be the catalyst of change needed.

Energy transition and innovations contribution, on this global scale, is as powerful a demonstration of the actual value and contribution that innovation does bring; it needs highlighting and drawing out.

**Disclosure: Part of my work in research and advising in the energy transition is due to being involved in the #SiemensInfluencer community or #SIEx. I want to emphasis the opinions and views expressed here are my own and do not reflect those of Siemens.

The post Managing Energy Transition through Innovation first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

Innovation is becoming far too complex for the innovation process installed within the (one) organization. It is far too self-contained and not open to the collaborative environment we need today, where others outside the one organization can freely exchange and collaborate on the same platform.

I have argued for some time we do not have an “innovation fit-for-purpose” system, we still are focusing far too much on having separate solutions for the front end (IP discovery), then idea generation, and then keep separately the pipeline and portfolio management. We are still randomly applying a range of tools that individuals have collected for themselves to complete their part of the job and the outputs can’t be shared. We continue to exchange across different social channels, often seen as a necessary evil to be bridged, as often systems do not “speak” to each other.

We fail to connect up all of our innovation process and design. When will we have a fully integrated, end-to-end innovation system? Some software solution providers seem to be working towards it but tend to keep adding pieces and not stepping back and designing a fully integrated process. Why? We are managing innovation at often very sub-optimal levels of effectiveness.

As organizations are being forced to deal in increasing complexity and environmental turbulence and focusing more and more on ‘adapting the appropriate response,’ they are increasingly being forced to respond early and provide back into the marketplace incremental innovation. Stepping out of the incremental trap and looking for new growth curves remains increasingly a difficult one to master. It actually needs a bold move to radically overhaul the innovation process and practices, without risking to disrupting the current innovation system as you go through the changes this requires.

We are caught in a new innovation dilemma

Yet are there any innovation processes, practices, and system solutions up to the job of handling complex products, in highly collaborative environments, where open exchanges are needed, outside the one entity? The tendency is to stay fixed on what they have got within the existing regime and try to extend it out into a more open collaborative system but these continuous “bolt-ons” do not provide enough change, it needs a radical new design approach.

We need to put into place a more robust innovation system and process to handle more complex, radically designed innovation solutions from end-to-collaborative end needed. For me, that is designing an end-to-end collaborative platform solution, one dependent on the cloud, having a robust technology solution that manages the complete innovation process from end-to-end.

Organizations are caught in a real tug of war within much of what they do in business today; in their responses and reactions to many of the dramatic business conditions they are facing, many deteriorating or being challenged by greater global competition or being disruptive by technology becoming a growing part of any innovation design. We are facing a very uncertain future if we base our actions and measure the outcomes on past practices.

I would argue the market is changing, customers are demanding more connected, technological innovation solutions to meet their needs. We need a new innovation thinking model, one where we are pushing to seek increasing new knowledge constantly on learning continuously about what that innovation solution can provide, right up until the time of launch and then beyond in new insights and improvements.

Past practices and systems are inadequate for today’s globally connected world

In our past management practices, we have operated and exploited the linear world for ever-increasing efficiencies and effectiveness as the critical focal point. Innovation has tended to fit within this, hence why we have so much incremental innovation, it is improving on what we have got.  This approach was fine when we operated and relied on stability, predictability and a willing end-user, ready to accept ‘our’ offer of product or service. All three of these conditions are increasingly absent from our world today and will increasingly be challenged in the future.

The world is increasingly being disrupted, are markets are becoming more unpredictable as more competitors enter the global chase for business growth and the end-user has become increasingly savvy in knowing how to search for the best deal or finding solutions that some limited adaption to his/her needs is good enough to get their job done, even on a sustaining basis.

We are not responding to the underlying changes and demands of our customers in many industries still, we give them what we have, until the nimble, new entrepreneurial enterprise spots weakness and recognizes the real need.

To be ready to respond we must be ready to seek out unexpected outcomes, or unmet needs. To achieve this we need to have a deeper digital connection into our customers, a constant two-way flow to be increasingly exposed to new opinions, experiences and learn from all those insights, spot opportunities, adjacencies and new connections to add and define new potential  value that can be offered, within our domain of expertise or recognize it needs to be brought in through a collaborative environment, so as to meet these needs or outcomes..

There is this constant set of discussions about changing structures and models to become more adaptive, agile, lean, flexible and fluid; to react and deal with the increasing turbulence occurring all around us but our innovation system of purpose stays rigid and structured to optimize a “repeatable process” when we often seem to miss one critical point, new innovation should be (radically) different.

We need to shift from ideas into impact and that needs a different delivery approach.

We actually are in urgent need of new innovation management operating model based more on technology solutions that can generate digital innovation and deliver greater impact as a connected solution made up of product, service and technology design.

For the way, we undergo innovation and its development of turning ideas into winning concepts of value, the principles of platforms and ecosystems make a “compelling” sense. It draws in the value of technology, connecting up the access to multiple solutions for the client to assess and incorporate in their innovation needs. It brings in outside expertise and specialization to build a solution that has a greater value proposition as it combines physical product, service design, and technology inclusion. A Nike running show has technology built into it, it offers the service of providing the data knowing how you are performing and delivers the right product designed for the job it needs to do. That is an innovative solution that needs a collaborative design to deliver.

We need to raise up our thinking for future innovation design.

We need a new management practice to deal with our digital world that can extract the value it offers. One real need is for increasing knowledge and then being equipped in interpreting this in our learning, daily routines and activities are becoming paramount to break out of a declining performance cycle.

Our increasing connectivity brought about by our digital world is giving us increasing volumes of insights, richness in options possible at increasing speed. We are in a hyper-connected world, potentially global for all of us and increasingly we will be forced to operate in interdependent ecosystems and platforms that allow us to collaborate and share, driving up awareness and performance and bring these insights into products that match this need.

The world is also shifting in the need to design or extend products to prolong their life. We expect to see extended life cycles to support the limited resources we have available in the world. We will see more digital enter into our innovation practices, in cognitive, automating and in analytics and data collection, to speed up innovation cycle times but to increasingly add different value throughout the lifetime generation of that product offering.

Are we able to update products at scale, to extend their useful value by offering additional value propositions? Do our innovation systems set out to purposefully design for longer lifetime use? The consumer is expecting this increase in a resource-stretched world where essential materials are under increasing pressure and recycling is not extracting enough to offset new demand created by updated versions of something. Think Smartphones here, requiring rare earth metals but just being thrown away in the chase for the latest version.

Our world is shifting from scalable efficiency to scalable learning.

We need to explore and scale differently, we need to spend more time on rationalizing our ideas by validating them. The shift from ideas into scaling and execution calls for a broad, ecosystem-orientated business model and this calls for increased scale, speed and set of collaborations, increasingly built on-platform engagement. We need to accelerate decision-making and through access to an ecosystem of innovation partners, there is increasing access to better knowledge and deeper understanding.

Classic models of management are presently being broken down and rebuilt in new ways based on platform and through a more ecosystem approach, this has such exciting potential for applying to innovation management.

This means a more “open” approach, a highly collaborative one, where the power of many can focus on delivering better, more engaging and valuable solutions. We are expecting a more continuous and collaborative structure that stays in place with customers and partners, increasingly reliant on each other, building up trust and mutual value appreciation.

Collaborating in collective ways helps break down complexity.

You have to be open, prepared far more to share, to build trust and seek out increasing relationships and diversity of knowledge and much of that comes from external sources of new knowledge.

What will be rewarded in this connecting world is agility to respond, the ability to absorb and learn quickly, and the nimbleness to translate and adapt new learning into insights and eventual outcomes, that build out our businesses, keeping them healthy, growing and sustainable. That will only come from a more highly collaborative environment, where multiple organizations come together and contribute their expertise.

An ecosystem design for innovation to extract that scalable learning through a platform design where individual organizations recognize they need to collaborate more openly, on an innovation platform fit for today’s environment, where all involved in the design and delivery of innovative solutions, that include the  final customer, are purposefully engaged to achieve the best resuilt.

The post Recognizing an innovation need first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

This GII report investigates and reports on 129 countries and then analyzes and ranks them accordingly.

When you are caught up in generating innovation within a business these sorts of reports can often pass you by as not so relevant to your everyday job of innovation.

I can certainly understand that but as a barometer of the health and investment going into innovation, it will eventually filter through to you and has more relevance than you first imagine.

This report is mainly for those interested in forming national policy on innovation, or judging where they are within the global race on innovation, yet it tells us all some really important points on the current health of innovation.

Yet the innovation message is for us all. If nothing else read this summary.

The really important message to hearten all involved in innovation is “that formal and informal innovation seems to be blossoming globally” (pg 2) even though the concerns are growing on the effects of both economic and geopolitical uncertainties are taking their toll on global economic growth. The report suggests this is “losing momentum”. As innovation is a major engine to investments and productivity growth around the world this is signaling some problems ahead unless things change.

The suggestion in the report is there are two possible bottlenecks from the innovative perspective might be contributing to the forward-looking innovation investment and adoptions needed

These being, firstly a decline in the level and speed of innovation, partly due to lower investments in research and development and also a continuing uneven adoption of innovation across individual economies and the world at large. This fits very much with the present needs of innovators, managing on the job, are struggling to scale and attract the right levels of investments or have sufficient resources to implement innovation. Then as we continue to run our innovation activities in many unstructured ways, failing to provide a comprehensive approach to innovation from end-to-end we do limit adoption and identification. Both of these policy issues are very much part of the incumbent innovator’s dilemma to resolve. Policy and Reality seem to mirror the same issues.

The scope of “breakthrough innovation” is coming increasingly reliant on digital technologies, automation, data processing and artificial intelligence (AI) the view is this has a longer-term impact and is potentially drawing from the immediate and medium-term innovation as this shift in innovation continues to gather momentum. This longer-term focus might not provide the productivity growth in the medium term as we go through the changes that these technology and digital solutions require. Again, I think this mirrors the current organization dilemmas on making the level of commitment to changing and adapting to technology and what it will bring in any new innovation activity.

The two other crucial observations that emerge from this GII report are, firstly “businesses do not seem to engage in innovation processes, products and solutions evenly, leading to slower productivity growth” I view this comment validating the struggle many organizations are facing moving from a closed innovation approach into a more open one, even embracing platforms and ecosystems which point far more to greater growth potential.

Secondly, they worry over “knowledge gaps” are still prominent and possibly growing. Perhaps we are losing more experience in capabilities and competences and becoming a little over-reliant on automating the process would be a question I would have from this comment?

The really encouraging messages for us all are these.

The really encouraging messages that should give belief into the innovator working in the trenches from this report are the following

1. Innovation is recognized by all economies as vitally important to nurture and develop. In the past, it was the domain of the high-income economies but the developing economies are getting the “innovation message, where they have an “abundance” of natural resources they need innovative thinking and policies to boast both economical and social development. The interest in innovation is getting wider appreciation and attention. That is a good thing for innovators in those countries to get the sense of identity of innovations importance and their need to embrace it.
2. Then the recognition that innovation covers “all realms of the economy” and finally “breaking the myth” innovation is solely concerned with science-driven and high-tech driven outputs is a potential breakthrough for the sustaining health of innovation into the future. We need solutions to countless global challenges so we need to recognize innovation’s place within this.
3. The ability to conceptualize innovation has radically altered innovation understanding. The active interest in promoting local, frugal and inclusive innovation is taking hold and blending far more with local cultures, crafts, and skillsets. This recognizing innovation is local, it can evolve in local ways that may on the surface not be traditional but can encourage a platform of new entrepreneurs and creative thinkers to release themselves from the shackles of doctrine and just experiment, explore and discover innovation “their way”.

What I take away here is the changing recognition we are having of the importance of innovation globally.

This bottom-up movement of innovation activity is so much more productive than imposing innovation conditions from the top. The policy should be far more towards enablers and facilitators, measuring engagement and achievement so much differently than we do today. Grass-roots innovation leads to green-shoots of economic and social stimulus and growth. The policy should be more nurturing and more sustaining.

Each of these has stimulated modern-day trend shifts in innovation policy.

• The realization of societal challenges, such as food security, environmental challenges, energy transitions, and health is gaining increased attention and realization that innovation is central to these.
• The organization of innovation is for all. Innovation stimulus or activity is not the focus of one department or ministry, it has become cross-ministerial in the task and collective government attention. This allows for greater potential in public and private collaborations as dealing across ministries was always a significant barrier, that seems to be finally addressed.
• The really major shift is towards dynamic innovation ecosystems. The report is detecting the gravitating from “just” fostering science and R&D expenditure to the striving for the creation and upkeep of sound and dynamic innovation ecosystems. This is absolute (lovely) music to my ears, focusing my time and energy onto dynamic innovation ecosystems.
• The last one is how date-based evidence and innovation metrics are increasing at the center of crafting, deploying and evaluating innovation (policies).

Equally, the good thing is innovation is gravitating into a healthier recognition of its critical role at the national country level.

The report points towards a growing awareness for promoting “increased curiosity of science and entrepreneurship in children and students, on how to make public research more relevant to business, how to promote inward technology transfers and foster business innovation expenditure to be designed into innovation policies to gain increased adoption of innovation and enabling the conditions for this to happen.

The underlying messages from the GII report.

The underlying message one gets is the realization (finally), at national level, to anchor policy objectives into innovation is necessitating investment in these enabling conditions such as infrastructure in research and technology transfer, in education and skills, in promoting entrepreneurs and seek to attract venture capital as occurring, not just as part of past practice for a few developed economies but for the vast majority seeking ways to reduce the divides and gaps, finally recognizing that within their possession is a cadre of innovators who can make a real difference in their national economies but also increasingly on the global stage,.

The report concludes there is true progress in fostering innovation on the ground globally to foster innovation. Now that enables all innovators and can help in recognizing and delivering the foundations for innovation-driven growth, something we all need to work towards.

The post Checking for the global pulse of innovation first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

We all need to begin to grapple with what is redefining work in knowledge, skills, our experience, and our necessary abilities to be viable and useful

We continue to hear and begin to see the effects of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. It continues to impact skills, tasks, and jobs.

The implications are a growing concern that both job displacement and talent shortages will impact business dynamism and societal cohesion. It is the pervasive power of technology integration that will change the business models of all industries.

Yet we are recognizing it will also giving rise to a number of emerging jobs yet to be identified or formulized to be trained in. A proactive and strategic effort is needed but based on what? We need to manage reskilling and upskilling to mitigate against both job losses and talent shortages but prepared the future workforce to be more nimble, agile and fluid. Here is where innovators are going to be well-positioned.

Working within the innovation space will be one of the best launching pads for being more comfortable for the future of work. Let me explain why

First, we have to recognize “Human capital is still the most crucial asset of any business—in fact, even in an age of ubiquitous technology, it is human skills, creativity, and capability that will form the competitive edge for any organization” (WEF report quote). We will continue to have basic components of a job. Aptitude in Knowledge, in our Skills and our Abilities, to do the job on hand. Then it will also rely on the experiences we have gained in education, in improving on what we know and the work-related experience.

A detailed report for the World Economic Forum in 2018 “Towards a Reskilling Revolution: Industry-led action for the future of work”, in collaboration with Boston Consulting Group, investigated viable and desirable job transition pathways on the Future of Jobs. What struck me was the role innovation plays in all three categories: today’s skills (2018), those that will have demand in 2022, and those that will decline in 2022.

Look at the skills predicted to decrease in 2022, many of which are still being taught in our schools, and many that we continue to traditionally focus on within our present work. Transitioning from skills we find comfortable today to skills that will be new to many of us, is a journey for each of us.

This list of skills we all need to increase is the source of innovation thinking, technology certainly gives us knowledge and insights but it is capabilities to “string this together” in connections that might not be capable to be provided on the pure reliance of algorithms, artificial intelligence or machine learning. Humans are better at making the randomness form connections that are often described as “light bulb” moments or eureka discoveries. We seem to connect more of the unconnected and reform it into a new connect.

We all need to recognize and begin to adapt to this transition that we will all need to become readier to accept being self-managed. That’s a good thing. For many, it is a little uncomfortable to not be supervised but for the innovator within us, it is the pathway to creative freedom. So, we need to look around and see what might help us.

We need to understand how to become more intrapreneurial, agile, and adaptable, and continuously seek out a diverse set of collaboration spaces as places where we can be seen, appreciated, and valued. Working in the innovation space offers you the opportunity to grow and learn what this means and how it works for you.

So, the value of becoming more engaged in being creative, wanting to participate in innovations, will position those people at a significant advantage in the new world of skills we will be needing.

The Big Takeaway for me is the positioning of working in the Innovation Space

Working in the innovation space will greatly enable you to build skills that will become increasingly valuable.

Just STOP here and re-evaluate this skill demand 2018 vs 2022- What do you see? Differences that you need to adjust too and learn now.

Just take this insight into our roles, the role to influence, to change existing roles, to influence and lead others, and lay claim to mastering the skills that are needed in 2022. Prepare yourself, innovators, and take that “future of work” hill.

How can we “give voice” and influence bigger challenges? How can we project ourselves beyond those that know us? By taking a more outward action, even we can get re-engaged to influence and change things that can make a difference. Innovation is a terrific enabler to gain confidence, to show your worth, and to feel like you are contributing to the future. We need to focus on bringing value into what we do, and innovation is one of those uplifting ways to achieve this.

Let’s think about this a little more with some higher-level thoughts.

Recognition of being empowered by innovation

Innovation needs to transform from being some abstract, distant, vague thing that seems still separated in its specialized unit and not seemingly part of the core of the business we work in. Innovation is central to surviving in the future; it is where we provide not just something new but a better advancement on what we presently have. It is far more than a means to make things faster, cheaper, or slightly different; it is a place to show transformation – to become more radical in what can be possible and seen as highly valuable. Breakthroughs in health, food, energy, agriculture, and tourism can all be more “sustainable” for our planet and for us to live better lives.

Have you noticed everyone has a different definition of innovation? We all struggle with our own definitions of what innovation means. So what? Get over it, and let’s recognize that innovation needs to have outcomes that give a certain uniqueness or that sustaining edge to what is presently available.  We need to finally nail innovation down, it aims to improve on what we have. Look for your innovation to be distinctly different, empowering, motivating, and showing engagement.

The Big Recognition Innovators All Need

As you innovate, you grow your personal value. You get exposed to risk and uncertainty, and how you react gives you confidence or can equally drain that confidence away. Whether you gained confidence in your actions or lost it, it is the experience that lets you grow. It helps you navigate unknown scenarios better, and this skill increases the more you expose yourself to risk. Engaging in innovation can have a profound impact on you. Is this why we shy away from innovation when it seems to have far too many obstacles? Or do we push back and overcome these obstacles? As we push back, we are reshaping ourselves to be far more ready for a different future. Not a bad thing in my mind. It all prepares us to be more confident in the future.

When we feel our culture to innovate is wrong, what should we do about it? Should we disengage, or should we show its viability and make your voice one that matters in that validation? We are pushing ourselves as we equally need to push our organizations. We are becoming more entrepreneurial or intrapreneurial in seeking curiosity, creativity, and human capability, to demonstrate why the culture should change, and here’s why in your endeavors you look for those positive climates and environments, that can allow you to innovate.

We all must get far more comfortable with dealing in all the unknowns coming towards us.

The innovation spaces provide plenty of the unknowns; how we go about overcoming them is the gift we have as humans. Machines can help, but humans can recognize and relate far more. We see multiple patterns if we open our minds to them. Machines help us, but ingenuity is with us for a long time.

We often have a natural reflex to go back into safe mode, especially when it comes to innovation. We see the over-investment in productivity that not only drives out variances, but it can also drive out the space and time for creativity equally. We must fight this. Evolution is not built around today’s operations. We need increased flexibility. In shorter production runs to cater increasingly to individual customer demand, we need to tailor our responses far quicker, and we need to be highly adaptive and agile. So, when you feel that reflective urge to revert, fight it. You become far quicker and skillful in what you do.

Raise your voice; offer sound reasons why a different culture would help find better answers to grow the business and keep your ‘own eye on the ball’ when it comes to your personal learning. You will be in increasing demand in the future with these skills shown above.

Can you push for more “foundation” investment in innovation?

Just reconsider this list of the roles that need greater investment and the ones that will decline and will over a fairly short time have a declining investment in. This becomes a very compelling argument for skill investments, on where to spend the organization’s money to re-equip it for its future. Let machine learning, artificial intelligence take over the “declining list” as its natural place. Fight to make human space in the increasing skills you need, where humans do have a significant advantage.

This transition to positioning ourselves for the jobs in the future is ALL ABOUT the needs of the innovator to get to build their knowledge, skills, and aptitudes in each of these listed above. Go back and look at the list. Innovators need all these and they need to focus on these even more as they are the basis of all work of the future.

My advice, start early and become an innovator and spend your time and energy learning and experiencing all these learning components can offer, to give you a set of experiences that position you for the future.

We need to build our personal roadmap.

We need to be clearer on our own personal ROI. To seek out challenges and opportunities, and go closer to the edge, we do see within ourselves, so much more, far more because we are experiencing the edge; the edge of discovery, investigation, and inquiry.

We gain personal power, and our voices are respected and recognized because we were just that bit bolder, edgier, or ready to take something on. Try it. It is invigorating and sometimes a little scary, but we are in that sort of world. The innovator’s skills will be in increasing demand, so be ready, willing and able.

The post Your Future Lies in Occupying the Innovation Job and Using the Skills it Provides first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

I have a group of Ecosystem Mind maps but I thought I’d share this one here to trigger further the thinking that needs to go into building an Innovation Ecosystem. Does it work for you? To be honest I am not sure if it conveys as much as I would like, to reflect on differences when you come to working in innovation ecosystem designs .

To get groups to think more openly about considering innovation in a more ecosystem approach to design and interaction I like to often refer to my mind maps to trigger discussions.

Sometimes it is mine, and mine alone, and I simply talk around it without showing the map, other times I show the map. The problem when you show maps, everyone works through it in their own unique way, however hard you try to get them to work through it in the way you want them too.

I have found mind maps are increasingly highly personal and it can take twice as long to explain something when you show the map to someone else. I think to put the mind map into a powerpoint “stages” it accordingly but it takes away the total map effect.

The key for me in the map shown below is to view considerations differently when you are thinking innovation ecosystems. There are your strategic considerations, there are tactical considerations and then there are value building considerations.

It is when you have these a little more firmly in your mind you have to repeat these different considerations for those other parties that are looking to be within the same innovation ecosystem. They can produce, seemingly, very different aims but it is working around this map you begin to see common goals or objectives.

Partners come into a collaborative ecosystem for different reasons and equally are looking for their own distinct outcomes, they can achieve in partnering with you. You might offer the product, they the service, the logistics, the linkages into technology designed into your innovation, etc., etc. Does the map make any sense to begin to structure thinking around innovation ecosystems?

I know I need to begin a version two fairly soo,n as there is a lot of other parts of this map that are missing to build a complete ecosystem approach. Presently these are ‘captured’ on separate ecosystem mind maps that help me in any preparation or referencing. The problem when you map them they become too complicated and “dense” that you cannot convey all the “connected parts” in an easy, quick way to grasp.

I need to think how to handle this but in the meantime, I just wanted to share my current (earlier version) as something to trigger your thoughts about considering innovation within a more ecosystem way of thinking. I hope you can read it, sorry but I think you will have to squint away on mobiles.

I need to change to a different approach to mapping complexity or linked parts. Any suggestion for me?

The post Facilitating the Innovation Ecosystem Design first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

The work-to-be-done is the need for our future growth and well-being to be derived from innovation activities.

These are so often made up of so many intangible parts that need exploring, investigating and discovering, the exciting parts of work. As we reveal ideas, concepts or new designs we are providing the new wealth of organizations, in the knowledge sharing economy of today and the near future. We are adding discovery.

Today we can share discovery far more easily, we can expand our thinking by exchanging in new collaborations, in growing networks and relationships. Technology is enabling us to look more towards the “work to be done” as the place to be.

As demand and uncertainty are all around, we need to find better ways to manage in this volatile environment. We have a choice (many sadly still do not) to hunker down and just keep repeating the work we are always doing, repeating the work done again and again, or being enabled to think about what needs changing and ask what is the ‘work to be done?’

Surprisingly Adam Smith identified this important difference back in 1776.

This can be explained as the ‘work done’ is the accumulated knowledge, which has built up and been embodied in the firm’s results with the innovations achieved in the past and is seen as the tangible capital.

The work to be done is how well it can adapt to change, how we can make these changes happen.  In the past century, we operated in mass production era, systems with standard goods and stable market conditions the ‘work done’ was equivalent to the ‘work to be done’, yet era has long gone but not our management mentality

In today’s global market, with its rapid technology diffusion, disruptive and constant change with a far greater emphasis on serving the ‘work to be done’ is more important than the ‘work done’ and intangible assets are fundamental to this. It is piecing together what we know, often tangible and “in front of our eyes” or we can explore the fragments of information, pursue some thoughts, chase a notion or simply push the boundaries of what is known.

They provide the intellectual capital, the regenerating force, to react to changing demand for the required future value creation that needs to be sustaining. It is the source for the value-creating that needs to be done.

Work to be done is the need for our future growth and well-being to be derived from 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 value creating effects. We need to ask what is required to reconfigure the changing capabilities and capacities needed to grow in the future.

We all need to stop and reflect. We need to step off the treadmill. Our need is to find out more of the emerging Work-to-be-done and less on the repeating work going on.

When we can recognize our need to change then our focus becomes one that is far more the dynamic force and place for innovation to happen. Then we are able to seek out ways to reduce the repeating work done into the exciting place of work needed to be done to thrive and prosper, then we need to validate it- that is the hard work, ticking off the ‘work done’

Here is the frontier of great discovery, we “find” new innovation in the exploration of the work-to-be-done, then we have to come back and recognize all of the work to be done to realize it. Happy innovation and discovery. All innovation is hard work!

The post I prefer the work-to-be-done for innovation. first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

When we are designing innovation for the future, the search is even more centered around strategically connected value creation.

The task of searching to resolve more complex problems allows Design Thinking to step up and become a far more visible component on how we can go about this.

Design thinking needs to work in harmony with many other thinking skills to make its contribution. Here I outline some of my “must go to” frames or tools.

The need when you “cast out” and look into the future we need to make a lot of connections, these can be really different, seemingly disparate in ideas and approaches. The whole search for diversity can generate so much fresh thinking if we open our minds to the alternatives.

We need to draw on insights, creativity but most importantly have a growing sense of the context we are thinking through to search for new ideas, concepts, and eventual new innovating solutions.

We often get caught up in data far too early, looking for the real nugget that can transform our thinking. I would guard against this, we always need the “larger” context. Never allow the “narrow prism” to dominate until any concept is getting clearer in its final design.

Context is so important to understand in any problem solving or future thinking

The power of context shifts everything and then gives it ‘shape’. It provides the conditions and the circumstances of time and place and why we need to find and deliver something different. It provides the innovation marching orders.

If we place innovation in a certain set of contexts, then those setting about the task are more sensitive to the needs and understanding, they can relate or can reject this. It can allow them to work more clearly and effectively, not necessarily efficiently as innovation is inherently messy.

Context gives us certain guard rails or borders to help gain a more united focus. Where we go after that, by pushing those borders will depend on those involved by seeing a greater value in an evolving context of mutual understanding. The ‘setting it in context’ allows for dialogue, adding more value to the thinking.

Design Thinking is increasing its role in innovation thinking

Design thinking can play a richer role and be a more powerful contributor to bigger problems but it needs to evolve and be seen in a wider context and not seen as specialized, narrow and limited. It can connect to a wider universe of problems and complexity of design itself, over the centuries has broken out of past confines. Design thinking makes us all design-conscious if we allow it too. It is the human-centered design that can draw out the best of our thinking if we do allow it too.

DT encourages us to abandon the linear thinking and keeps us constantly undergoing that looping circularity as the accepted process and that needs resetting mindsets significantly.  DT to evolve in all our minds, away from those past experiments limited to narrow, linear paths of design thinking understanding is highly liberating, sometimes scary but deeply satisfying when you truly break through a complex problem.

We need to connect multiple thinking, diversity and different experiences that so often diverge initially to then collectively find the path to converge, in a common understanding, to translate the combined creative thinking into real action, achieving valuable outcomes.

Sharing my Four Friends that are good to bring to the party, to align with Design Thinking

I like to refer to four frames or tools that I think should always be available to simply map to when you are in any design thinking phase. These are not in any “magic” order here so assess the value of each and see where and how you would apply these within the thinking you are about to undertake.

I am a great enthusiast for working through the Three Horizon model.

There is a sequence shown here to help aid future thinking. We work through a series of steps discussing what is in the market today, what is changing and then what might take its place in the future. We are structuring discussions based on this visual

You can read about the three horizons by putting “three horizons” in this blog post search box. A useful one to take a quick look at is “The Three Horizons – Providing a Common Language in its Innovation Use” to open up your thinking to this framework and its companionship to design thinking.

 The second view we always need to consider is a “System thinking” one.

I really love this visual for system thinking that outlines the key insights and tools needed to develop and advance a systems mindset for dealing with complex problem solving and transitioning to the Circular Economy. Keep checking if you are connecting your thinking up. Does it go beyond the existing?

“Systems thinking is a context for seeing wholes. It is a framework for seeing interrelationships rather than things, for seeing patterns of change rather than static snapshots.” – Peter Senge

Our quest should be finding answers to why innovation is often failing to deliver on our expectations and needs. So, for me “System thinking for Innovation, as a whole” should be grabbing more of our attention.

Yet we seem not to get our heads around this “whole” part so we set about redesigning the parts. Nothing wrong with that, it has lots of moving, sometimes unique parts, improvements are certainly happening, replacing past approaches but they still remain discreet parts but overall innovation performance, does it improve?

System thinking looks at ALL the interacting parts, their interdependence and how one part fits and reacts with another. We get caught up in the linear progression of one part and not considering enough the reinforcing loops or balancing the loops to foster stability or understand the impact across the wider system.

If we don’t have a well-understood view of the whole system of the innovative design, it does not matter how many separate parts we design or apply, the end result is this either ends up the same (disappointing), poorer, as it replaces something we failed to improve what was existing from the end-users perspective, or managed some increased ‘spike’ that needs constantly improving upon to get finally right.

Then I find the Divergent / Convergent approach in thinking as highly valuable

You need both to explore and exploit the multiple possible solutions. Divergent thinking is the ability and opportunity to offer different, unique or variant ideas adherent to one theme, while convergent thinking is the (eventual) ability to find the ‘correct’ solution to the given problem. You encourage and ideate many solutions, both possible and impossible, and then use convergent thinking to move towards a realizable resolution or solution.

I use this ‘divergent and convergent’ structure for many of my workshops, it allows for broader engagement and involvement and that eventual drawing together from this process. Once or twice you have to be nimble on your feet to move from one to the other but the discipline comes from timing these as shared spaces but giving each a clear discipline of dedicated time as you do need a very different mindset to think openly then begin to narrow the options down.

Creativity makes use of divergent thinking, which is solving problems with many possible solutions, as opposed to convergent thinking, which is solving problems

The process of figuring out a concrete solution to any problem is called Convergent Thinking. Divergent thinking is the process of thinking that explores multiple possible solutions in order to generate creative ideas. It’s a straight forward process that focuses on figuring out the most effective answer to a problem.

“Divergent thinking” is the process of coming up with new ideas and possibilities. We are more in a creative and intuitive mindset. We explore lots of possibilities and stay more at this point on the conceptual abstractions. We work this through then we go more into  “Convergent thinking”, this is associated with analysis, judgment, and decision-making. We become more analytical, rational, sequential and objective. We begin to explore constraint driven issues. It is the process of taking a lot of ideas and sorting them, evaluating them, analyzing the pros and cons, and making decisions, and exploring options that reveal, over time and discussion emerging value

My fourth frame is Cynefin, a sense-making device

When we are thinking through problems or looking into the future we do need to understand the challenges we are facing. The Cynefin sense-making framework allows you to relate to different domains. The domain where your current problem might lie and then gives you a number of triggers on how you can respond to arrive at a solution or a change.

The Cynefin framework provides a wonderful way to sort the range of issues faced by leaders and us all, into five contexts, defined by the nature of the relationships between cause and effect. Dave Snowden has been explaining these consistently for years. Four of these five are; obvious (formerly simple), complicated, complex and chaotic states and requires us to diagnose situations and then to act in contextually appropriate ways. The fifth one is a disorder, often overlooked or not fully appreciated. It is when something is unclear, it is in a disorderly, highly transitory state and needs to be rapidly stabilized into one of the other four to give it a more orderly state going forward.

Exploring a process of emergent discovery for innovation with the Cynefin framework

The real challenges come from the really ‘new’ in innovation as it becomes greater in new designs, changing functionality, different technology or significant improvements on the existing that involved greater research and development the more you travel around the Cynefin framework.

You often diverge/converge constantly as you work through the potential answers. The mindset here is different and it is more one that is based on the detection. Innovation is far more demanding, pushing frontiers, exploring discoveries, dealing in a series of exchanges and recognizing emerging patterns to piece together as real ‘new to the world’ innovation activities.

We need to recognize different types of innovation need to be managed differently

You need to build flexible systems that adapt, are dynamic and responsive and need that bandwidth for innovation exploration. It is a series of challenges evolving to be exploited, not reduced or eliminated.

It is deciding what complexity your innovation might have within the innovative design and then set about building the right capabilities and framing these appropriately, where they matter.

Taking a Design thinking approach to innovation is great. What I am suggesting we do need to consider the System, we need to place any problems or challenges into the ‘greater’ context. To help we need to reflect upon the different horizons aspects (3H), and we also need to wrestle with what problems we are tackling through the Cynefin sensemaking framework and finally, allow ample time to Diverge and then Converge all the diversity of these multiple perspectives.

To have a good understanding of these different thinking-through frames allows you to explore and exploit far better. Design thinking is well suited to addressing problems, but it is the context and what you are setting out to address, that these other frameworks have great value to explore or understand, equally as well.

The post All things considered for Innovation Thinking first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.