Tag Archives | Adaptability

Aligning Organizations for Digital Transformation

To understand the challenges and opportunities associated with digitalization, MIT Sloan Management Review and Deloitte surveyed more than 3,700 business executives, managers, and analysts from organizations around the world. They have recently published their findings in a report, titled “Aligning the Organization for Its Digital Future“. Some key outcomes (quoted and depicted in an infographic) as well […]

Continue Reading · Comments { 2 }

The Firm of the Future Will Manage Two Types of Businesses

Bain and Company has just published a worthwile article, debating on the question: What will the firm of the future look like? Among several characteristics, the authors also particularly anticipate future-proof companies to be required to manage two types of businesses by deploying distinct “engines”: Companies have always pursued innovation in their core business. Clayton Christensen has called […]

Continue Reading · Comments { 7 }

The Trinity of Dual Innovation and Transformation

Here is a chart, shown by Scott Anthony from Innosight during a worthwile talk on ‘Dual Transformation’ in July this year. It puts in a nutshell what he refers to as the “hardest challenge in business today”: Simultaneously strengthening today’s business while creating tomorrow’s. The chart greatly captures the fact that dual transformation involves three distinct playing fields: Transformation A: Strengthen Today […]

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 }

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 { 12 }

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 { 4 }

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 }

Balancing Innovation via Organizational Ambidexterity – Part 3

This is part three of a three-parts article co-written with innovation-3‘s Frank Mattes. The first part highlighted that radical and incremental innovation build on two different innovation set-ups (exploration and exploitation, respect. The second part showed in a sample of seven leading firms that ambidexterity is used in two main types – contextual and structural ambidexterity. In […]

Continue Reading · Comments { 0 }

Balancing Large and Small Firm Capabilities

As outlined in earlier posts, organizations need to balance exploitation (i.e. development of existing business) and exploration (i.e. creation of new businesses) in order to thrive on the short and long term.  The corresponding integration of incremental and radical innovation can basically be achieved in different ways:   Building ambidextrous and lean startup capabilities Established organizations with larger size usually target at extending their core business by incementally […]

Continue Reading · Comments { 5 }