Expert innovators know from experience how to innovate while minimizing hassle, needless tasks and wasted effort – they’ve been successful (and unsuccessful) countless times through trial and error. Using flight simulators and surgical learning tools as examples, it’s been proven that teaching veteran skills to ‘newbies’ isn’t science-fiction, especially in more ‘exact’ disciplines such as medicine and math. But is it possible to design a crash-course that teaches young and inexperienced innovators the less-definable skills, attitudes and insights necessary to ideate, champion and implement without having to go through all the awkwardness of being a rookie? We think so, and here’s why.
Over 650 submitted projects from all over the world, over 70 international partners including UNESCO, governments, NGOs and media – these are the first facts and figures from the Bringing tech&science closer to people campaign, launched in November 2016. All the best projects were officially presented on Closertopeople.com last week, the effect is mind-boggling.
We can all see that global commerce has evolved, innovative excellence has advanced and entrepreneurialism has accelerated. Just to make things more interesting, all of this change happened extremely rapidly. But how about our own intelligence? Are we really smart enough for 2017 and beyond? Ambition encourages us to reach for success, so let’s test our own entrepreneurial intelligence to see if we’re up to the challenges of 2017.
Engagement of teams is a must-have when addressing the key issues related to sustainable innovation programs. In the second of a series of articles focused on Innovation Culture, we are going to share our views about the way organizations should stimulate and encourage the creation of teams truly committed with innovation. Besides the more usual ad hoc requirements regarding team and individual creative performance, having a clear focus on team management is essential to achieve a more balanced and sound innovation program.
The products and services we use are developing in two seemingly opposite directions: We want customized and localized solution – but they should fit into a global network of services and brands. A business model to meet this paradox is to create global platforms that enable a large number of actors to create very local and personalized solutions.
Platforms and processes, rather than products, will become the focus of new business creation as we move forward. The main characteristic of a handful of new trends in business – Collaborative consumption, Sharing, the Maker movement and the Circular economy – is that the value creation is less about adding some new feature to a product. Instead, the appeal of these models is that they can deliver more value for less by involving a number of stakeholders, including the users, in co-creating solutions.
In this series of three articles Paul Hobcraft explores the value of knowledge and education for innovation. Concluding the discussion, in part three the author reviews faulty innovation practice and argues in favor of recognizing innovation as a value enhancing and organizational life-changing event we need to move towards increasingly.
In this series of three articles Paul Hobcraft explores the value of knowledge and education for innovation. Continuing the discussion, in part two the author investigates the various aspects of modern knowledge exchanges including their psychology, mechanisms and complexities that govern them.
In this series of three articles Paul Hobcraft explores the value of knowledge and education for innovation. In part one he opens the discussion by exploring some of the biggest challenges faced by organizations today and provides encouragement to explore emerging practices.
This concludes the survey by the Association for Information and Image Management (AIIM), the global community of information professionals, authored by Andrew McAfee, a principal research scientist at the MIT Sloan Center for Digital Business and the AIIM Task Force on Social Business and Innovation.
How does a major global corporation go about creating a new innovation capability from scratch? At Orange, the mobile carrier of France Telecom, executives decided to create a separate entity to be their innovation engine. Nicolas Bry played a major role in the new initiative. Here he begins a two part, warts and all, account of the lessons learned.
There has been a shift from the emphasis on what people called the “information value chain” to “knowledge value chain” for quite some time. The environments are shrewd and unpredictable in this world of growing competition and rapid technological progress. The information value chain just served as a database of “best practices” whereas “knowledge value chain” emphasizes on the active sense making of human beings handling business.