Startup Engagement in Corporate Innovation

Recently, Match-Maker Ventures and Arthur D. Little have released an interesting report, titled “The Age of Collaboration“. The study does a good job in synthesizing the global state of play of corporate-startup collaboration and latest findings on success requirements for its implementation. More and more corporations seek to engage with startups by pursuing corresponding activities across dedicated ecosystems and incorporating them […]

Continue Reading · Comments { 1 }

SCALING UP: From Corporate Startup to Innovation Impact

More than three years ago, we noticed a pain point in corporate innovation: How should companies balance the different requirements in searching for tomorrow’s business and in running today’s business? We wrote a well-received article series urging the need for organizational ambidexterity, i.e. implementing dual corporate innovation structures.   First important steps have been taken Our […]

Continue Reading · Comments { 0 }

Organizational Agility Entails Complementary Innovation

Recently, I’ve come across a couple of posts and articles debating on the question: In order to increase agility, should organizations aim to become more nimble across their existing structures or should they capitalize on separated units/ventures – such as innovation or digital labs – being dedicated to initiate and develop explorative ideas and opportunities? Let’s define agility as […]

Continue Reading · Comments { 3 }

Corporate Innovation Ventures: Separation vs. Integration

Probably the most critical structural ingredient for innovation capability is how new ventures – internal as well as external ones – are to be implemented in the organization in order to get validated and scaled. Should a new venture be entirely separated from the core business as stand-alone venture? Should it be integrated into an existing business unit? Or is it […]

Continue Reading · Comments { 4 }

The Case for Dual Innovation

The first time I was advocating the idea of a dual innovation approach, here also referred to as organizational ambidexterity, is now more than 5 years ago. At this time it became pretty obvious to me that this concept – academically worn-out but deficiently or not at all put into practice in most organizations – would be of increasing importance […]

Continue Reading · Comments { 2 }

A Model for Integrative Innovation Management

In previous posts, I have shared my view on important cornerstones for successful innovation management systems. As pointed out several times, balanced and up-to-date innovation management requires organizational ambidexterity, i.e. the capability to explore novel offerings and capabilities while simultaneously exploiting existing ones. In the following, I would like to summarize and complement these thoughts by suggesting an innovation management model that may help organizations to innovate more […]

Continue Reading · Comments { 5 }

Key Innovation Issues for 2016 and Beyond

In the course of this first month of 2016, I was asked a couple of times what my prospects are for the year ahead when it comes to key innovation issues. Hence, I gave it some thought, starting by revisting an earlier reflection: Beginning of 2013, Tim Kastelle and I identified four key issues in innovation management for the time […]

Continue Reading · Comments { 3 }

Innovation Requires Dedicated Management

For quite some time, I’ve been advocating the idea that successful and sustainable corporate innovation management systems should be based on the following cornerstones: Organizational ambidexterity: Sustainable innovation management is required to account for organizational ambidexterity, i.e. optimizing existing businesses and developing new businesses have to be driven in parallel. Failing to achieve an individually optimal balance will not lead to company success in the short and long […]

Continue Reading · Comments { 1 }

Organizational Models for Breakthrough Innovation

As we have suggested earlier, innovation activities that are radical or disruptive in nature, should be separated from incremental innovation around a company’s established core business. The main reasons are: Required capabilities, structures, approaches, success metrics and culture for radical/disruptive innovation are highly incompatible with those required for incremental innovation. Radical/disruptive innovation activities need full-time resources to get executed properly and time-efficiently. However, separation is a […]

Continue Reading · Comments { 1 }

Innovation and Organizational Culture

Recently, the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) has published key findings of their latest “Most Innovative Companies 2014” survey. Beside the annual ranking, headed by the top three companies Apple, Google and Samsung, some insightful outcomes with regard to organizational and cultural requirements have striked my eye. According to BCG’s research, successfully innovating companies approach innovation as a system. The system is rooted in experimentation, […]

Continue Reading · Comments { 11 }