Paul Brody is a Global Innovation Leader in BlockChain Technology and a Solution Leader in the Industrial Internet of Things at EY. Paul has spent more than 15 years in the electronics industry and has done extensive research for his clients on technology strategy. Paul understands that technology is deeply rooted in strategy, but it gets complex as new technologies and disruptions arise in our modern world. For example, the moment self-driving cars are perfected, it will cause a huge disruption in our economy, so how can we navigate through it?
May 27, 2015 | By: Fredrik Harenstam, Ben Thuriaux-Aleman & Rick Eagar | In: Organization & Culture, Strategies
Most companies recognize the need for breakthrough innovation – it can change the fundamental bases of competition, “rewrite the rules” of an industry and transform the prospects of the successful innovator. There is no one-size-fits-all model for how best to respond to this challenge. Arthur D. Little surveyed over 80 large organizations to explore how to deliver a consistent pipeline of radically new products, performance features, business models and market space.
In the first part of a 3-part article series innovation-3’s Frank Mattes and Integrative Innovation’s Ralph-Christian Ohr worked out why successful firms need to balance radical and incremental innovation. They introduced the concept of organizational ambidexterity as an appropriate way for simultaneously conducting exploration and exploitation, the two paradigms behind radical and incremental innovation.This second part shows some best practice examples of how the most innovative firms are setting up organizational ambidexterity.
From incremental to breakthrough innovation projects, managers need to handle different activities and with them dissimilar venues of risks. In this article the internal, external and hidden risks of incremental, differential, radical, and breakthrough innovation projects are identified and ranked accordingly. In addition, for every category a general innovation eco-system has been analyzed.
Organizational ambidexterity is becoming a Key Factor for Success in many industries. With a proper ambidextrous set-up, firms can optimally balance radical and incremental innovation.This is part 1 of a 3-part article co-written by innovation-3’s Frank Mattes and Ralph-Christian Ohr from Integrative Innovation. In this article we are showing the need for organizational ambidexterity, introduce the concept, show how it can be implemented and provide two case studies from leading German firms
Innovation in the area of financial services has undergone increased criticism since the start of the difficulties in international banking. This has fueled a general negative perception of innovation in financial services. In this article Dr. Anne-Laure Mention argues that innovation is not something to be feared as such, actually it is a driver of competitiveness and that the full benefits for society might not yet be visible.
Higher education is facing unprecedented levels of change – MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) providing remote access, new providers developing new approaches, students’ expectations and demands rising. These changes will increase competition and require radical innovation from existing organisations in order to survive.
I have decided to take a small innovation psychology detour because I urge you to tap into an amazing innovation experience that I just had. After watching the documentary “el Bulli, Cooking in Progress” I realize that I was invited into a full innovation circle and I crave to share some of the great insights that two hours of watching offered me.
“Mad scientists”—rule-breaking geniuses whose resistance to convention sometimes produces radical innovations—are both a blessing and a challenge to R&D organizations. Recent studies suggest how such rogue innovators can shape a company’s culture and what can be done to channel their influence.
Radical innovation presents both a threat and an opportunity to firms. It has frequently turned entire industries on their heads. History shows us that large, successful firms may very suddenly become vulnerable when the underlying technology shifts. In this in-depth article Christian Sandström examines how radical innovation can be managed, despite the seemingly insurmountable problems created by the transition from one technology to another.
Can non-industry specific IP funds help to push the innovation envelope? Can we bridge the gap between industries and geographies to provide a systematic breeding place for forward-thinking inventions? Gunjan Bhardwaj explores.
This in-depth article provides you with fresh experiences and insights from how SCA, a consumer goods multinational company, has developed and worked with a new model for managing both incremental and radical innovation projects.