In today’s business environment, where startups play an increasingly important role and disruptions come from unexpected corners of the business arena, embracing external sources of knowledge as part of an open innovation strategy becomes crucial!
Rotterdam School of Management launches a new programme focused on implementing such an open innovation strategy with a particular focus on the role of startups. What is the role of startups in today’s business environment and how can corporates and startups effectively cooperate? During this intensive two-day RSM Executive Education programme, you will discover the latest academic perspectives of corporate venturing and its role in the corporate innovation process. Building on company cases and your own experience, you will learn best practices from experts, and exchange knowledge and experience with your peers.
A while ago I sat down with Machiel Wetselaar & David van Dinther to create a list of innovation methodologies for a course we’re developing. Up to now we’ve gathered 71 different methodologies for implementing innovation in your organization. We are still looking for ways to categorize them, but for now we’ve based our categorization on the maturity of the organization.
We’re pretty sure there are many more methodologies out there. Please drop a comment if you would like one or more methodologies included in this overview. The list is almost random.
Remember me? I’m a Silly Valley serial entreprenerd. I’m well-known for using startup jargon, which I learned from Forbes, Fortune and TechCrunch. Shall I share my story with you? Beware: this small piece of text contains 73 jargon words.
When I was 16 I launched my first B-to-B business. Some FFF helped me to leverage my first MVP and both an incubator and accelerator thought that monetizing the Business Model would disruptexisting markets using our bleeding edge technology and lead to ROI quickly. In the beginning the business was just ramen-profitable, but by pivoting our way through the first months, iterated the profit model to a B-to-Cmarket, we created traction, penetrated new markets and gathered the low hanging fruit. Read more →
In the most recent edition of the Journal of Creativity and Innovation Management, I ran into an interesting article about being a startup versus being an early adaptor. The article suggests that early adaptors have a higher probability to succeed in the case of non-technological environments than the startups that proceed them.
2015’s Innovation Management conference (ISPIM) was all about Open Innovation. In fact, it was one of the most keywords – and definitely the most specific one – used amongst all 233 papers presented during the conference. Although the articles are not completely available yet (if you’re not a member), I have used it to draw up a list of the 15 best articles presented on the conference on Open Innovation of 2015 so far. I have added elements of the abstracts here, but following the links you can download the full papers from the ISPIM website.
Last week, 233 papers have been presented at the ISPIM conference. Although not proceeded yet, the papers and abstracts are already available for ISPIM members. Being a member, I was able to scan all the abstracts, titles and keywords for trending topics. After a few manual adjustments, such as combining words and ignoring research-related terminology I could come up with the following wordcloud. It identifies the main topics that are currently trending in innovation management. Read more →
“If you go from Moscow to Budapest, you think you are in Paris. And if you go from Paris to Budapest, you think you are in Moscow,” as Gyorgy Ligeti very sharply noticed, perfectly describes the location of the XXVI ISPIM Conference in Budapest. ISPIM, short for International Society for Professional Innovation Management, organized this worldwide event once a year. A place to be for everyone involved in Innovation Management, both practitioners and scholars.
I’m in the lucky position to run into quite a few business owners, corporate directors and leaders on a daily occasion. And when talking to them about innovation – and their ambitions – it almost always comes down to one simple question: “How can we implement innovation in our organization?”. A question which seems easy to ask, but needs a complicated answer.
For quite some years already, we (as in educational institutes) have been trying to set up the best ‘creative classroom’ possibile, because we believe that it is an essential element of modern education. I believe it contributes to collaborative learning and a strong attitude towards innovation. We are not the only one, many institutes are testing educational concepts based upon collaborative workspaces, Babson College and the Design School probably the most well-known of them.
I stumbled upon the following article about the ‘design zone’ at Babson College. After some years of analysis, they conclude that these zones:
increase student participation and therefore create more positive energy;
increase personal contact between lecturers and students;
the layout can be easily adjusted to the requirements needed at the moment.
There are also some challenges:
Set-up and clean-up times take away part of lecture times;
Because of its size and layout, these rooms don’t work well for presentations (i.e. sharing knowledge);
It requires more participative teaching methods by the lecturers, which some seem to struggle with.
I have found it relieving that ‘even’ Babson College seems to deal with the same problems as we do. On the other hand, it strikes me that even there, they are still small-thinking in terms of classrooms (with walls), whereas we can easily find much better examples especially in business.
Do you know of any extraordinary collaborative workspaces that increase sharing and learning? What is your experience with this way of working?
I believe this article by Sune Gudiksen is interesting because it explores the rationale of game theory in combination with business model innovation. The article argues that gamification (in the innovation process) could lead to novel business model insights.Gudiksen describes game theory by referrin the ‘magic circle’: “As stated bypioneering play researcher Huizinga (1949), itis a playground in which special rules apply.He further argues that magic circles are ‘temporary worlds within the ordinary world, dedicated to the performance of an act apart’ (Huizinga, 1949, p. 10). Salen and Zimmerman(2004) argue that within the magic circle, specific meanings can emerge. Building upon the experiential learning model, in which learning happens as a result of concrete experiences, reflective observations, abstract conceptualization and active experimentation (Kolb, 1984), Kolb and Kolb (2010) suggest that the ludic learning space is the highest form of experiential learning. The ludic learning space is characterized by principles such as the freedom to play, the chaos of uncertainty, welcoming foolishness and stepping out of real life. Such a temporary space can allow for the various perspectives and forms of professional expertise to come alive in the search for newbusiness model initiatives.”
Gudiksen concludes with the statement that there are three reasons for using games in business model innovation:
Games can be a beneficial way of combining various interests.
Games challenge assumptions.
Games create surprises that might eventually lead to innovation.
Games offer the freedom to improvise, suggest, play and test alternative and future business model scenarios.