Innovation

The conventional planning process does not work for strategic experiments that are truly bleeding edge. Nevertheless, many companies cling to what they know & #8212; planning that holds managers responsible for numbers. But that is not practical for entering completely new territory, when numbers are essentially pulled out of a hat and their underlying assumptions rarely revisited. A better approach to planning comes from researchers at Dartmouth College’s Tuck School of Business. It emphasizes learning instead of numbers, and it draws on in-depth studies of such companies as New York Times Digital, Thomson Corp., Corning and Analog Devices. Their approach, theory-focused planning, diverges from conventional planning in six critical ways. Companies that use it concentrate on a few critical unknowns instead of the usual horde of details in conventional plans; they focus on the theory underlining the predictions rather than the predictions themselves; they look for trends rather than numerical benchmarks; they review the plan often, in response to important new data, instead of annually; in that review, they consider the experiment over time instead of just for the current period; and they emphasize leading indicators rather than financials. Companies still hold managers of strategic experiments responsible for performance, but performance is gauged according to how quickly managers learn from new data. To be successful in uncharted waters, the ability to learn from experience is paramount.

Disruptive innovation has usually been considered by established businesses as an attack that must be met through defensive measures. And indeed, disruptive technologies and business models have toppled many established industry leaders and will likely continue to do so. The real story behind disruptive innovation, however, is not one of destruction, but of its opposite: In every industry changed by disruption, the net effect has been total market growth. Moreover, disruption can be a powerful avenue for growth through new market discovery for incumbents as well as for upstarts. There are several keys to the successful navigation of this growth path. The first is recognizing that disruption is not an immediate phenomenon -- it can take years and even decades before the upstart business encroaches heavily on the established market. The second is finding the new customers who are eager to be served by the disruption. The third key is building an organization that is capable of serving the new customers. The author explains each aspect in detail, drawing on extensive research involving online newspapers, minicomputers, cardiology and semiconductors.

As competition intensifies and profit margins shrink, managers are under overwhelming pressure to create value. Traditional prescriptions such as cost reduction, reengineering and outsourcing, while critically important, cannot solve the problem. The need to innovate is greater than ever, but the focus of innovation must change, say the authors. Managers are discovering that neither value nor innovation can any longer be successfully and sustainably generated through a company-centric, product-and-service-focused prism. By synthesizing societal trends and early experimentation in companies such as General Motors, LEGO and Medtronic, the authors paint a picture of the "next practices" of innovation in which the locus of value creation will inevitably shift from products and services to "experience environments." The intent of experience innovation is not to improve a product or service, per se, but to enable the co-creation of an environment in which personalized, evolvable experiences are the goal, and products and services are a means to that end. Profitable company growth will then result from individual consumers co-creating their own unique value, supported by a network of companies and consumer communities. From that perspective, say the authors, managers must learn to view existing and emerging technologies not as enhancers of products, features and functions, but as facilitators of experiences. They offer examples of how technological capabilities such as miniaturization, networked communication and adaptive learning are fostering experience innovation at companies such as Sony, Apple, Microsoft and TiVo, illustrating their contention that technology will be the key facilitator of the nascent trend toward experience innovation.

Companies are increasingly looking beyond their boundaries for help with innovation -- working with customers, research companies, business partners and universities, and even competitors. They are also expanding the purposes for which they consider external sources appropriate. Businesses today are using external sources for all phases of innovation, from discovery and development to commercialization and even product maintenance. While these changes sound good and are benefiting a great many companies, they add a new layer of complexity to the manager's tasks. And unfortunately, despite the growing acceptance of external innovation, the authors have found that many companies lack a sourcing strategy to guide them in managing it. They often take an ad hoc approach that produces uneven results, the very problem they are trying to avoid. Instead of dealing with external sources one by one and one at a time, companies should systematically examine and rationalize the increasingly important activity of innovation sourcing. The authors explain how companies can organize their use of external sources holistically, using innovation channels just as they manage specific distribution channels to reach end customers.

An overview of new research on innovators’ incentives and the innovation process.

Companies are increasingly rethinking the fundamental ways in which they generate ideas and bring them to market — harnessing external ideas while leveraging their in-house R&;D outside their current operations.

Developing the right strategy for product innovation requires a fundamental understanding of how technical modularity affects R&;D. In a modular design, a change in one component of a product has relatively little influence on the performance of the system. In a nonmodular, or coupled, design, the components are highly interdependent, and the result is that a minor change in one part can cause an unexpectedly huge difference in the functioning of the overall system. Generally speaking, modular designs make R&;D more predictable, but they tend to result in incremental product improvements instead of important advances. Coupled designs are riskier to work with, but they are more likely to lead to breakthroughs. This trade-off between predictability and innovation can be visualized as a technology landscape, with gently sloping hills corresponding to incremental product improvements that are based on modular components & #8212; and with soaring, craggy peaks representing breakthrough inventions that rely on tightly coupled parts. Developing new products requires a search across such technology terrain, and companies should first choose the type of landscape that suits them best and then develop the appropriate strategy for navigating that topography.

In recent years, many companies have learned to use the Internet as a powerful platform for collaborating directly with customers on innovation. But direct interactions & #8212; facilitated by customer advisory panels, online communities and product-design tool kits & #8212; have limitations. They don’t always allow companies to reach the right customers at the right time and in the right context. Thus, to fully exploit the Internet as an enabler of innovation, companies need to complement their direct channels of customer interaction by using third parties that can help them bridge gaps in customer knowledge. The authors call this process of indirect, or mediated, innovation innomediation and the third-party actors at the center of it innomediaries. In their research, the authors identified three distinct types of innomediary and observed how each one can help companies acquire different forms of customer knowledge. Using case studies, they suggest ways in which companies can begin to think about exploiting the power of these emerging intermediaries. For businesses that learn to use customer knowledge from both direct and indirect sources, the Internet holds the key to a multichannel innovation strategy.