Combining Ideas – a Key to Innovation - Tim Kastelle, School of Business the University of Queensland
Thursday, December 24, 2009 at 09:17PM One of the challenges of managing innovation is figuring out what your industry is going to look like in a few years’ time. The big difficulty here is that you are juggling data from three domains, and all of them are changing rapidly: the external environment that shapes your industry, innovations within your industry, and innovations within your organisation. These act together to create non-linear feedback loops which make the change process nearly impossible to predict or manage. How do we manage this?
The act of innovation consists of combining ideas in new ways, and then executing the this new combination effectively (If you’re nerdy, I’ve got a fairly technical model of how this works in the paper I wrote with Jason Potts & Mark Dodgson for this year’s DRUID Conference). One of the ways that we deal with the complexity we face is by innovatively connecting ideas. We can try to do this in a way that guides the future of our industry, but to do this we need to figure out what ideas to connect. Where should they come from?
Yesterday I talked about Robert Sutton’s contention that we shouldn’t take ideas from people that claim to have solved the exact problem that we’re facing. His point is that this will not lead to innovative solutions to your problem, and I think this is correct. This means that we need to find ideas from people that have solved problems that are similar to ours, but not identical.
There is a striking example of some of the issues here in this conversation between Jay Rosen and Clay Shirky.
The whole discussion is worth watching, but the part that I find really striking comes in Shirky’s first section. He talks about how when he started writing about the challenges that the internet would pose for newspapers, he was a bit nervous because he thought that he was getting to the party too late – that others had already said everything there was to say on the topic. And this happened in 1993! There was a lot of discussion about what would happen to journalism as people became aware of the web’s capabilities – and this was before google, before craigslist, and before amazon. The main thing that was happening then was that we were already starting to see an impact on the music industry.
How did it take 16 years for this problem to become important to news organisations? I think that a big part of it is that they spent a lot of time arguing why news was different from music, or anything else that might have served as a useful analogy. So my corollary to Sutton’s rule is – you must ignore people that say that the problem you face is completely unique. Even game-changing radical innovations are not completely unique – everything is embedded within the existing economy. The very nature of our network economy means that everything is connected.
That statement is general enough that it might sound trivial, but it’s not. This connectedness means that whatever industry you are in, there will be similar, related industries. An important innovation skill is to be able to combine ideas from these related areas with your ideas. These new combinations can become path-breaking innnovations.
Innovation is making new combinations. Scanning for ideas that you can connect with is a critical innovation skill. If you view your problems as unique, it makes it harder (impossible?) to find these new ideas. So look for problems that are like yours, and see if other people have found solutions that you can adapt to your situation.
(If you’re interested in the issues facing news in particular, this post collects all of the entries that we have made discussing business model innovation in news)
Reader Comments (1)
I have also defined and even written a book on "Opportunity". What is an opportunity and how do you systematically search for one - and its very simple.
One of my articles below:
”La Salle Matrix Thinking – A structured approach to Business Building”
By Roger La Salle © 2009
www.matrixthinking.com
The Business Plan
Do you know anybody that has ever written a loosing business plan?
Whenever anybody has a new idea or initiative, before investment dollars are won, the necessary prerequisite of a business plan is demanded, as it should be. The problem is, too often those tasked with writing the business plan are the very same people that conceived the idea, and thus they are biased even before they start.
The final page of most business plans is usually a spreadsheet that quantifies the opportunity. What happens if when the numbers are “run”, the outcome is not quite as good as you expected … easy, change the numbers to get the result you always knew would be correct.
Unfortunately the above scenario occurs all too often. Thus, not surprisingly most new ventures, even those supported by a “winning business plan” usually fail.
Market failure is the biggest Risk
Further, if we examine the reason for such failures, by far the single biggest is market failure – you just don’t sell as many widgets as you forecast.
Indeed there have been some classic market failures, even after the most in-depth and rigorous market research. The infamous Edsel Ford motor car in the 1950’s is just one classic text book study. The much heralded Apple Newton and the SEGWAY two wheel transporters were also less than impressive in the commercial realities of consumerism.
Why bother with a Business Plan?
A valid question at this point may then be, “why bother with the business plan at all” or perhaps better still, ”how can we reduce the risks in writing business plans?”
Business plans start you on the journey and are usually demanded, especially by astute investors as a test of your commitment and competence. It is often said, investors invest in people more so than the opportunity. Hence the necessary test of your capability in developing a logical business plan that considers all the important issues and presents a good business case.
At this point, perhaps we should perhaps dispel the common myth that if we persist we will succeed. This is nonsense; no amount of persistence will turn a “dog” into a “star”.
Perhaps this is best summed up in the following:
Persistence is an important element of success
Persistence is an essential element of failure. © La Salle 1995
The business plan is the first step that wins funding, allows you to assemble a competent team and commence the journey. Few if any people who take this first step towards a goal actually end up where they expected. Indeed the astute entrepreneur will most often find that the real “pay dirt” is off to the side somewhere, but they are astute and brave enough to recognise this and capture the real target.
In other words, you have to know when something is not working, stop and find the real opportunity.
Making the Purchase Decision
Turning now to the question of reducing the risk in writing business plans, the answers lie in understanding the market, the value proposition, the value chain and the real meaning of innovation?
In simplistic terms people only purchase things for one reason, they see value for money. Be it a power tool or a ROLEX watch, people assess and reach the value decision before they make a purchase.
The value proposition simplified says:
If I spend A$ to get B
I will only do so if I believe that B is at least equal to or greater than A$.
We need to understand this value equation and relate it to the venture on which we are about to embark.
In addition we need to consider the participants in the chain of events that will get a product to the market. This is commonly referred to as the “value chain” and includes all the players from the inventor or creator through the distribution network to the seller, the purchaser, the user, and now even the disposer. (It is the breakdown of the value chain in the case of the disposer than promises to spell the demise of the plastic bag in supermarkets).
Finally consider the new value chain player, the carbon footprint. If your new venture is not carbon friendly (a small carbon footprint) then beware as you will likely have great market resistance.
All players in the value chain need to have a positive value proposition. Even in the case of “loss leader” items, the sums have been very carefully done to ensure the ultimate value or return on the investment is obtained.
Notice also that in some cases the user is not the purchaser. Such cases need special consideration as to what value the purchaser gains. This case may apply to purchases of special treats or toys for children, but there are also examples of industrial products that have failed because of a failure to understand that the purchaser was not the one deriving the ultimate value.
Understanding Market Risk
To gain a snap shot of market risk consider the following diagram that can be representative of any product or service.
On the horizontal axis are the sectors that characterise everything, these being Industrial/Commercial products and services, Consumer products and services and finally Fashion and products and services.
In the case of industrial/commercial products such as power tools, fax machines, and high speed photocopiers etc the value proposition can usually be easily quantified and a rational purchase decision reached.
In the case of consumer products, advertising is what attempts to establish a value proposition, such as “this brand tooth paste cleans whitest of all” etc. People who are not moved by this type of argument often purchase lower priced home brand items.
Finally there are the fashion items where the value propositions are so abstract they beggar belief. Fashion companies spend many millions of dollars establishing their “Brand” as their value proposition.
On the vertical axis of the market risk map is the degree of novelty. How new is it, is it completely novel or have I seen if before? Unfortunate newness often spells high risk.
It is important in developing a business plan to understand where you fit on this map.
The blue area is the ideal place to be because items in this area usually have a quantifiable value propositions and have low novelty that allows people to relate to what they are purchasing and how it can be used.
Any mechanic will instantly relate to the benefits of a double ended or shifting spanner compared with a single ended one.
The top left hand yellow area represents products that when introduced were completely novel. These include such things as the photocopier, the fax machine, the PC and even the internet.
The thing common to all these high novelty products is that they all had long and difficult gestation periods. People simply could not relate to them or how they could be best used. Indeed many of these products took decades to pervade the market.
Moving to the top right hand corner, it is virtually impossible to make even the vaguest estimate of the likely sales volume of such an abstract product where the value is virtually impossible to understand. True the Rubik’s Cube was a remarkable success, but if asked in advance where would you invest your money, a Rubik’s Cube or an improved spanner, I believe the answer is quite obvious – the product for which you can both see the value and understand its function..
Innovate – don’t Invent
The lesson to be learned is to Innovate not invent.
The word innovate is best defined as “Change that adds Value” ©La Salle 1999.
The ideal way to mitigate business risk is to remove market risk by finding something that everybody is doing or purchasing, improve or “innovate it” and go back to the market with a better one, preferably at a better price. This is a low risk strategy founded on the certain notion that anything can be innovated, or improved.
If you wish to challenge that statement, choose any item, and suggest that in 100 years it will be identical. Of course this is not the case, so don’t wait, innovate it now.
Fast Second is a Great Strategy
This classic business strategy is often referred to as “fast second”.
Rather than the questionable so called advantage of being, “first mover”; in many cases being second is better, and certainly carries a lot less risk.
New ventures that actually succeed that are not in some way protected by patents, regulations or a high degree of innovation find that competitors, seeing the profits of these success stories, enter the market as followers, wanting to cash in on the riches that are available. The result of course is that over time the profits of these initially highly successful ventures fall and ultimately decline to a level of a little over the prevailing bank interest rate. At that time there is a market shake out leaving a few to survive in businesses that are now only modestly profitable.
City based convenience stores are a striking example. The early ones were amazing success stories charging exorbitant prices for “must have” conveniences. Look now and you will find most cities saturated with these stores all fighting for a share of a now much diluted market. Video rental shops are another example as are farmers where crops are planted in accordance with market trends.
Being a Follower has some Benefits
If we accept that pioneering may be a risky, perhaps the best way to enter or improve your business is to remain vigilant and be early to spot the emerging successes and then “innovate” the successes and go back to the market with a better offering.
Profits fall as competition emerges
Profit
See the opportunity and enter the
market here (Fast Second)
Bank interest rates
Exit the market here
while profits are still high
Time
Henry Ford did not invent the motor car but when he saw the market opportunity afforded by the first clumsily built and expensive cars, he “innovated” the process of manufacture and thus brought cars to the masses.
Bill Gates was not first with the Windows style GUI, indeed many would argue he was third after Xerox and Apple, but look at the success of this third market entrant.
IBM is another example of a company that was not first into the personal computer market, but when it realised the market potential of personal computers it quickly moved into the market, as fast second. In doing so IBM virtually stole the business, thus making the IBM compatibly the industry standard.
How do you do it – Innovation?
Innovation is a systematic process, so too the sourcing of infinite opportunities, it just need some structure. This is not black magic of science fiction, but engineering at its best.
La Salle Thinking Matrices have been developed for the innovation of:
• Products
• Services, that is, the way you do business
• Processes, that is, how the business operates.
• Finding Opportunities – That is - How does one walk down the street and find a business opportunity?
• Generating your specialised Innovation matrix
For example, Innovation of products can leverage off the four fundamentals, called “Seeds”, these underpin any product.
The seeds are:
• Change or add value to your product in some way. - No product is immune from change for the better. If you disagree with this you are essentially saying that any product will remain unchanged for eternity, a highly unlikely proposition
• Add Accessories to your products - Many companies today exist just by selling accessories, just look at the chains of shops selling auto accessories, to cite just one example
• Add Complementary Products - When somebody is about to make a purchase, you should take advantage of the mindset they have at the time by offering them complementary items, such as a drink or fries with a hamburger
• Enhance the Sales Channel -The existing channel or the access you have to your customer, is a valuable asset that can be leveraged. - This is like the petrol station being certain that you will come into their shop to pay the fuel bill, so they also offer extremely high priced commodities once they have you figuratively, “captured”.
Once you realise the business building opportunities afforded by embracing these seeds, the next thing to do is find ways to stimulate your mind in developing ideas based on the seeds. Catalysts are the fuel for this thinking and twelve key ones have been identified.
Some of the catalysts include:
• Tracking - If you follow your product through its life you will find a multitude of opportunities. Such as putting honey into squeeze containers as a result of observing the frustration of users with messy jars.
• I Wish - Like making a wish about your product, such as a glass that never gets empty and solving this with a pressure sensor and miniature radio transmitter that signals a drink waiter to refill your drink
• Frustration – this may well be the biggest source of all business opportunities. Listen for somebody cursing a product and you will have an instant opportunity for innovation
By arranging both seeds and catalysts in a rectangular grid, a matrix results for thinking. Each intersection of Seed and Catalyst creates a stimulus for creativity. The difference with this innovation matrix, unlike most other way to stimulate thinking, is that the thinking is immediately and directly applicable to your products.
“La Salle Product Innovation Matrix”
Cat’sts
Seeds
Tracking
I Wish
Frustration
Change
Access’y
Complement
Channel Enh’mnt
At the bottom of all thinking matrices is the catalyst of Consequential Change. This is the trigger to think of the consequences of what you are about to initiate, and moreover, perhaps create a consequence for you business that will have a positive effect. For example, finding a way to deliver a strong word of mouth message to a customer, this is possibly the most powerful means of promotion, far more so than advertising..
The important thing to remember is that getting started in business is the hard part. After that, moving to the next level is a systematic process of innovation based leverage and, if done properly, it can be virtually risk free.
In the case of services and service companies a similar innovation approach is employed; only in this case the seeds are a little different.
In the case of processes, a Process Innovation Matrix is used; again in this case the seeds and catalysts are quite different. A similar approach is used to identify new business opportunities using an Opportunity Matrix.
With the knowledge of seeds and catalysts for each particular situation and their application to any business, breakthrough thinking can be developed as it applies directly to your products, processes and services.
The generic term for this type of structured thinking I refer to as “La Salle Matrix Thinking”. The fundamentals are clearly quite simple, and universally applicable.
The message is clear
Business plans are essential, but understand that what underpins success is the value you are delivering, how people will relate to your offering and most of all realise that the business plan is just the start of a very long journey. Finally, “Innovate” your offering at every turn and teach your staff to be constantly searching for opportunities.
Roger La Salle, is the creator of the "Matrix Thinking"™ technique and is widely sought after as an international speaker on Innovation, Opportunity and business development. He is the author of three books, Director and former CEO of the Innovation Centre of Victoria (INNOVIC) as well as a number of companies both in Australian and overseas. He has been responsible for a number of successful technology start-ups and in 2004 was a regular panellist on the ABC New Inventors TV program. In 2005 he was appointed to the "Chair of Innovation" at “The Queens University" in Belfast. Matrix Thinking is now used in more than 26 countries. www.matrixthinking.com
and “La Salle Matrix Thinking”© are trademarks of “Rudders RLS” Pty. Ltd.
A.B.N. 27. 101. 159. 960
Cheers