7-Tips To Consider Around Your Innovation Training Efforts

In recent years an increasing number of innovation professionals have been exploring opportunities to training, connect and engage employees around innovation skills. As this competency becomes more established, chatter and analysis is generated (just see many of the great articles on Innovation Management) and, perhaps inevitably, vendors create some interesting solutions. It is pretty exciting.
Before proceeding further, and in the interest of full disclosure, you should know that I run an innovation training company called Culturevate . However, it may be worth noting that the thinking in this article is based on my experience in creating and running a successful innovation training program at BNY Mellon. So I may have some bias, but it is based on corporate experience, which perhaps is a bias in and of itself. Anyway, I am getting too meta. You get the idea.
So training employees around innovation skills is no small feat, with lots of details that can (and likely will) go wrong. With that in mind, you really do want to get this kind of activity right, driving the most value to your organization and making you look like a champion in the process.
So, what are some important elements to consider as you explore innovation training for your organization:

1) Alignment of training approach to existing processes

There are many different approaches and methodologies to innovation. It is important that the training aligns with the organization’s existing processes and approaches. In my experience, this type of training should also incorporate information on Corporate, Business Unit and Innovation Program priorities. Additionally, consider including information around the various channels and tools that are available to employees to assist their innovative thinking.

2) Targeted audience

Be sure that the training you are setting up is aligned with the needs of the intended audience. Too often I see training that is developed for one audience, but shoe-horned into another employee segment (career level, cultural, Business Unit, geographic, etc.). Taken further, think about how training approaches and content may differ by segment. For example, senior leaders may benefit from more personalized, in person experiences, but economic pressures may dictate more scalable, cost effective approaches for junior employees.

3) Engaging format

Is the training going to really engage and educate employees in ways that they can use to create business value? Online training is all the rage these days, but I often wonder how impactful it is in engaging employees. If 55% of online page views are under 15-seconds, how is someone expected to engage with a webpage for 60-minutes? Your training needs to get participants thinking about how the lessons can be applied to their day-to-day role. Hybrid online / offline training models can be ways to address this issue more effectively.

4) What happens after the training?

It is relatively easy to get everyone excited about a new approach while they are in a room with colleagues. It is more difficult to consider what is going to happen to graduates when they get back to their day-to-day role.
Here are some examples of ways to tackle this issue:

• Booster courses: Getting participants to come back and do another “booster” course can encourage ongoing behavior change and knowledge retention.
• Network development: Organizations have been developing innovation employee networks, using names such as Intrapreneurs, Catalysts, Champions, etc. for some time now. Training can be positioned as an entry-point into these networks. Networks can also provide ongoing support to trained employees, with a goal of seeding the broader organization for broad behavior change.
• Technology: Utilize technology platforms to continually engage trained graduates with discussions, new content, tools and templates. Just be aware that these efforts need to be managed over time and it is easy to lose focus on them, while providing a high quality resource.
• Include participant’s bosses: These people have a big impact on participants before, during, and after the training. Consider how they can be engaged and directed with your efforts?
• Rewards and Recognition: Encourage behavior change, during and after the training, with some nice recognition carrots, including promoting successes to the organization. More broadly position the training as a desirable value add to participant’s career development.
• Track learnings: While lots of training efforts track employees during the training, it is equally important to track the retention of learnings once the training is completed. This kind of data can be tough to source, but is really valuable in terms of tracking success.
  

5) Take the long-term perspective

As I mentioned, these efforts can get complicated really quickly. Even if only looking at a pilot training effort, be sure to take some time to consider some long-term questions, such as:

• What internal partners do you need to make this effort work?
• What will training really do for my program and the business overall?
• How does the training support or link with my other activities and channels?
• How can these newly trained people be useful to me beyond the training?
• How can I make this easy for myself?
  

Of course, there are no right or wrong answers here. It is just important to consider these issues, by yourself and as a discussion with your colleagues.

6) Appropriate metrics

Running an innovation program within a corporation is always a tricky balancing act. You are trying to create a sense of creativity, but at the same time, you need metrics that align with business value creation. While metrics around attendance, session / presenter ratings, etc. are important, more substantive metrics need to be considered. For example, participant perceptions around the organization being innovative, or employee engagement are valuable, especially if tracked over time.
More substantive metrics can come from tracking the business impact of ideas or thinking generated from the training. These kind of harder, more impactful metrics should be built into your training efforts as much as practical.

7) Ranking elements

You can’t have everything, so consider what are going to be the most important elements to make your training a success. Scalability, cost, online / offline, tailored or set content, participant time commitment, management time commitment, perceived value of training entity, etc. It is important that you define what elements of a training program are going to be most important to participants, the organization and your innovation goals.
A couple of other quick points to consider, which are from more of a personal perspective:

• Focus on what drives value: Don’t get distracted by bells and whistles. Focus on what will drive a positive result for your program and the participants.
• Personal relationships: You won’t be working with the sales person long term, so ignore them. Focus on the account managers and vendor leadership. What are they like? Are they going to make your training program a success?
• Consider the real cost: Vendors will talk about costs, but other prices will emerge over time, so make sure that you really understand what the eventual cost of the program.
  

Training and engaging employees around innovation skills is where both corporates and the vendor marketplace is heading. It is an exciting point to be and I am happy to provide you with my insights. The above list is not exhaustive, so let me know what else you have come across?

Three Common Ways Organizations Trip When It Comes to Innovation

While there are many ways to trip, see if you recognize one of these three common ways in your organization. Fixing them can turn into a fast win and create the momentum necessary to get all the other pieces in sync.

We don’t have problems; we have challenges

“I don’t want to hear about problems, show me solutions.” Sound familiar? There are multiple reasons why different corporate cultures come up with different terms to beat around the fact that problems exist. Some cultures use “challenges,” “hiccups” or “issues,” for example. I’m sure you can think of others. Language both reflects and shapes thinking and behavior. What does this do to the overall culture?

Let me introduce you to Alexej. He has been hired from a startup-gone-bust into product development for a large German corporation. His first weekly report is greeted frostily. He has identified a problem, but merely naming in a report is considered unethical finger-pointing because of a silent consensus on whose fault it was. This bright young man learns this lesson fast. His reports turn into a list of “last week’s accomplishments.” He hides from others the challenges he is working on and stays away from sharing the opportunities for improvement he comes across. This already siloed organization not only loses the creativity and enthusiasm of a highly skilled individual, but also foregoes the enormous potential residing in an all-one-team approach to tackling problems.
Organizations should acknowledge: Human life is problem solving. For people, any level on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs can quickly turn into a problem. Processes and entire departments are there to solve problems: “I don’t know next quarter’s financial results.” Industries solve problems, too: “I can’t communicate with a far-away person.”

The Russian innovation thinker Genrich Altshuller, inventor of the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ), observed: What sets the inventor apart is his or her ability to spot problems where the rest of us have grown accustomed to living with the hassle. Indeed, at times we don’t even notice that hassle anymore, that is, until someone comes up with the solution. Did anyone have a problem before the wheel was invented?
So firstly, from an organizational perspective, learn to recognize and acknowledge problems at face value, and to value the individuals who spot and communicate these problems.

Innovative = creative = good

To many of us this equation of “innovation = creative = good” appears right. Innovation being a loosely defined term, though, it is full of traps. To a cognitive psychologist, “innovative” is just one way of being creative. In this view, naming the creation of novelty “innovation” under-appreciates all other styles of being creative.

With the Kirton Adaption-Innovation (KAI) instrument, you can reliably measure people’s creative problem solving style on a continuum from highly adaptive—like Edison—to highly innovative—like Tesla. All too often, though, people confuse style (“How am I creative?”) with level (“How creative am I?”). Obviously, problem solving teams need problem solving diversity. Yet, taking a different style for an inferior level can lead to disastrous results. Unfortunately, the working together of and the later rivalry between Edison and Tesla is not the only example. People can be creative in so many ways—if only they acknowledged and also appreciated diversity better.

The equation “innovative = creative = good” has other implications, too. Have you ever heard the term “corporate antibodies”? They resist innovation. If innovation is good, then that means the antibodies are bad. But wait. We all have antibodies in our bloodstream. Do you have any desire to get rid of them?

First of all, resistance to innovation and change is the healthy reaction of a healthy organism. Your Innovation organization needs to learn to deal carefully with its own immune system. It may stand in your way if you want to implant a new liver, but don’t discard it for that sake. Instead, find ways of creating and dealing with novelty within your organization:

• Appreciate the many different ways of being creative—from Edison and Tesla to all the rest of us somewhere between them.
  
• Overcome the learnt “phobia for innovation” and build your creative confidence instead.
  
• Develop your corporate immune system such that risk can be minimized and novelty embraced.
  

Let’s form a team

While bringing together diverse and balanced teams is important, it’s only important if you actually need a team. We often see organizations over-do the one-approach-fits-all “let’s form a team” solution. All that forming, storming and norming has to be worth it. You can’t just take the “big team gun” and shoot from the hip.

Consider this example from a producer of sophisticated electronic parts. The company had recently branched into the assembly of solutions for customized printed circuit boards, shipping these systems in boxes of 20, 25, 50 and 100 pieces. Every now and then, however, these boxes arrived at their destination with pieces gone loose in their slots. Such “salad bowl” shipments led to mechanical defects and customer complaints. This being a global client-problem, a commensurate task force was formed. Soon after the team members from sales, quality, product management and several other functions started following up—each pressing his or her own case—with the one designer in a remote development center in charge of the new shipment boxes. This over-steering resulted in chaos and stress on all sides.

Luckily, the team understood what was going on and got back to square one, preparing a problem description using the 5W2H approach, in this case. Their insight: Not all “who are concerned” (the first “w” in the 5W2H) need to be involved in finding a solution because the “where” the problem arises (the second “w”) can be narrowly defined. As a result, the designer is freed up from any other task, can meet an expert from the subcontractor who produces the boxes and together they find a simple, viable technical solution which can be sustainably implemented by a broader team.
Once a problem is clearly understood you should ask: Can one person solve this problem alone? If so, then give the problem to that person and only grow the team as more diversity in skills and creative styles is needed.

Now do something about it

Change starts from the very top and with shared clarity. Alan Mulally, who recently stepped down as CEO from Ford Motor Co., found a culture of “we don’t have problems” when he took the reign in 2006. “You can’t manage secrets,” he famously said. As reported at the time by The Wall Street Journal, the moment of truth came when one manager showed the poor performance of his unit. “Great visibility,” Mulally is said to have applauded. Within a month, the organization got to “the yellows and the reds” [traffic lights] on their performance charts. For a reason, Forbes named Mulally as an “innovation CEO for the record books.”

I recently worked with operational excellence (OPEX) organizations in the financial and pharmaceutical industries on formulating their operational innovation strategies. The corporate cultures of these two companies favored adaptive, Edison-like, problem solving. Interviews confirmed that “crazy ideas,” “out-of-the-box exploration” and the questioning of “conceived wisdom” could turn into career killers.

Now what about the OPEX teams inside these organizations? You would assume that people who preach problem solving along the gospel of Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control (DMAIC) would be more Edison-like, right? To everyone’s surprise (even their own), they turned out to be “the Teslas” who had taken refuge from their otherwise more adaptive business climate. Would Edison be happy if Tesla explained to him how to approach things in a systematic way? Is it any surprise that these two OPEX teams felt they had little grip in their organizations? Would the deployment of more “innovation” really be the solution?



Between the HBR book The Wisdom of Teams and the journal of Team Performance Management, a lot has been said on teams and how to make them successful. To get started quickly, consider this: The nature of the problem drives the method for finding the solution. The method drives team composition and team management. Here’s a simple decision tree for forming the right team to address a clearly understood problem:

• Is a process management system in place? If not, put that in place.
  
• Is the solution known? If yes, use classical project management.
  
• Is the solution-space well-defined? If yes, use rapid problem solving like kaizen.
  
• Will we stay with the same process, product or service? If yes, use Lean Six Sigma type approaches.
  
• Is at least the concept for the solution known? If yes, use design-type approaches like Design for Six Sigma.
  
• Are we developing a completely new product, process or business model? If yes, then use innovation-type approaches.
  

Problem description and approach will guide you fast to forming, leading and coaching the right team in the right way.

First, you must address the three common ways of tripping yourself up. Only then will you be well-set for getting in place all the rest it takes to making innovation and problem solving in your organization not only effective but also rewarding and even fun to lead and contribute to.

Innovation Games: Going Beyond the Traditional Creativity and Analytical Tools and Methods

Toys, either handmade or bought, have been most of the times the first tools for toddles to start their learning path. Nowadays we speak about educative tools that help kids to learn the letters, ride a bicycle, with the help of PlayStation we can learn how to play guitar and with Wii, how to dance or play sports. There are lot of different tools available on the market and the offer is continuously growing. Nintendo’s Wii video game console for example says that “brings gaming to people of all ages” so in today`s world games are not just for minors but also to all age ranges.

Regarding the above question, games are part of growing and educational process and their essence relies in bringing pleasure to its users. The secret behind the success is the awareness that has been raised about human psychology, nevertheless of age we tend to respond well to games. In the light of innovation management it is relevant the fact that children are more creative than adults. This was scientifically proved already back in 1968 when George Land (Land and Jarman, 1993) measured the creative performance of a group of children when they were 5-year-olds, at 10 years of age, again at 15 years of age and then compared it to same test performed among large number of adults. 5 year olds showed 98% of natural creativity, 10 year olds 30%, 15 year olds 12% and adults performed only 2% for their creativity.

This is seemingly drastic drop. In that way, innovation games can perhaps well be the most efficient methods to bridge this gap of natural creativity loss. The amount of rules and regulations that one has to follow during the traditional schooling process is considered to vanish natural creativity as we grow up. Nevertheless of the area of everything being connected and the manifested Y Generation overcrowding the digital space (offsprings born between year 1980 and 2000), the original pillars and methodologies of worldwide educational system have not much changed since the study was published so its output is still quite valid.
How can we provoke an individual to engage more during the era of everything already being highly connected?
It is proved that people need social objects to fuel interaction and socialization is all about building this engagement points and human connections. This is also why companies are getting more interested in games. Bringing in psychical engagement elements can nurture motivation and engage their employees more efficiently.

A growing demand for game mechanisms

According to Gartner predictions published back in April 2011, by 2015, More Than 50 Percent of Organizations That Manage Innovation Processes Will Gamify Those Processes. “Gamification describes the broad trend of employing game mechanics to non-game environments such as innovation, marketing, training, employee performance, health and social change” said Brian Burke, an analyst at Gartner.

Gamification is commonly described as practice of employing game mechanism to serious business environments. Gabe Zichermann, the CEO of Gamification Co. explains it as taking the best lessons from the games and applying them to specific situations. By creating alluring online and offline conditions organisations stimulate and hopefully awake the talent in each collaborator. There rests a bit of Maverick in every individual. Sometimes all one might need for unlocking personal virtue and treasures is more casual and laid-back stage to speak up. Virtual collaborative platforms assist in that respect and provide vivid recognition and appreciation mechanics in order to encourage knowledge sharing. In terms of productivity, gamification speaks the digital language of the future generations. Gamification Co., the leading source for gamification news & info, underlines that by understanding what makes games fun on a personal level, young professionals require a shorter learning curve for gamified programs and applications.

Social Games Observer also predicts that Gamification Market to Reach $2.8 Billion in US by 2016. But also according to research conducted by Social Games Observer there is another interesting finding: there is evidence that social games seem to appeal to males and females alike. This is a positive insight for organizations that face workplace gender issues, low innovation climate and maybe even weak talent development. Both, online and offline innovation games are extremely powerful tools. Once the organizational goals are meaningful to the employees, they become engaged at an emotional level according to Gartner Inc. Engagement leads to taking up new challenges in work and when something is done with will, this achievement certainly drives success. Besides, gaming elements allow to build a growth path and in that way employees can feel that they are progressing while the complete another and another challenge, receive achievement after hard work and arrive to the end of next rewording pleasure loop.

Example: Adopting new applications based on games is a global trend among innovation driven organisations. Sweden based international company Uponor Group is currently on a doorstep of starting to implement its roadmap for change. Company Strategic Research & Innovation Manager, Süleyman Dag, identify as main driver for this process the company need to extend and go beyond the current product portfolio. He explains that as for the collaborative platforms prefers social network type of solutions as fun emotion should make it easier to implement and keep it alive.

Promoting games experiences

Creativity and extended knowledge analytics leads to sound innovation solutions. For being a good leader, mastering customer experience strategies and tactics is always a requirement.

It looks war times. Napoléon himself made battlefield analytics. First he tested it by using models to seriously play a war game. Visualization and manipulation of different variables tested in a safe environment mastered his levels of trust and autonomy. Several days of prototyping different scenarios he reach a conclusion and now he will implement on real time, he plan for the right moment. Napoleon engagement levels in relation to the ultimate goal leads towards the victory. He had built strong principles of the battlefield with the help and power of game mechanisms, which was an important instrument of cognitive stimulation.

Operationally, game mechanisms can be considered the interface between real and simulated problems planned and implemented for individuals or groups. With both a dynamic system and intrinsic and extrinsic rewards. Smart gamification is an example of a compelling and fun process, providing a meaningful experience for players.

Gains are both qualitative and quantitative. Concept design and strategies with symbolic games provide a sustainable benefit and ROI [Return On Innovation]. For organizations, the magic of game mechanics relies in the value that it can help to create. Besides the monetary prize situations, companies are focused on social networking as loyalty is becoming virtual too. When we think about marketing campaigns, their viralty is both, a concern and a goal.

Leaders benefit from experiences acquired on games, extending their customer experience capabilities and reinforcing corporate culture. Ronaldo and Messi scores records are absolutely amazing. With innovation games, managers can be the leading team heroes. Design storytelling games rewards learners achieving recognition. Collecting trends in the crowd will be awarded by direct the business to F1 fast lane growth demands, mobile game based skills combined like-minded goals.

Big issues that concern the business world and that directly have a huge impact on society, as the case of agriculture and food, finance, health and wellness, energy and transport, are always good topics for games experiences. The idea of using games mechanisms apply to different services and products and will lead to safe and reliable environment.

Achieve that trust can play thinking, sharing, developing and thus implement a coherent strategic vision. Will be useful to explore the specific practices and obtain an increase in productivity and education of the behaviors that we all want to achieve.
How?

1. Understand the topic
   
2. Identify the content
   
3. Define the mission
   
4. Play the game
   
5. Develop the mechanism
   
6. Test, monitor and evaluate
   

We wish to promote other good examples that connects business requirements to high value innovation games experience. Share with us your valuable insights!

Innovation Management,Skills & Its Areas of innovation

1. What is Innovation management?

• Innovation- It is the generation of new idea, device or process that is always ahead of other things and resides out of the box. Innovation is also described as the implementation of better solutions that meet new requirements or existing market needs. This is achieved through more effective products, processes, or ideas that are readily available to markets.

• Innovation management- It is the process of managing innovation. It can be both product and organizational innovation. Innovation management consists of different set of tools that allow managers to cooperate with a common understanding of processes and goals.

2. Efficient way to learn innovation skills

• Required Resources -To learn innovation skills there are various things like online learning, coaching, knowledge sharing,Online Training, tools, resources which require time, efforts & money.

• Efficient way of learning -However one of the efficient method to learn innovation skills is Online learning process which include all these things together and saves time & is cost efficient.

3. Importance of Innovation in Business

• Helps to understand why traditional business models are no longer reliable in today’s business context.
• Helps to craft better business strategy & planning
• Make your innovation management skills and strategic thinking more effective.
• Helps to take bigger chances without incurring huge risk.
• Improve personal ideation & hunting skills.
• Develop leadership insights among personals.

4. How innovation help succeed companies

• Enhance capabilities for organizations to create innovative products.
• Increases innovation skills of employees in a time and cost effective way.
• Develops a systematic approach to go forward with better ideas.
• Helps to build sustainable innovation management capabilities for organizations.
• Innovation processes helps to fulfill business targets.
• It's a sustainable Innovation Solutions through online learning.

5. Important areas of innovation
   There are Six major areas of innovation which can be achieved through online learning innovation programs, tools & resources. All these major areas of innovation are mentioned below:-

• Knowing how to identify and sort ideas.
• What are the available channels, tools and resources.
• Business plan elements – to ensure the idea can get a proper evaluation.
• Stakeholder buy-in – to prevent premature death of ideas.
• Development planning – the next step after the business plan.
• Building inter-personal relationships. 

Top 10 Masters in Innovation Management Worldwide

The Top 10 of best master programs that are entirely dedicated to innovation management. The ranking shows that France is strongly represented with 4 programs. English taught programs can be found in The Netherlands, China, Denmark and Spain.

1. MSc in Management of Innovation, Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University (Rotterdam, the Netherlands)
This one year, full-time programme (taught in English) at one of Europe’s top ten Business Schools is for recent bachelor graduates with a solid background in business administration, economics, science & business, engineering or industrial design and the ambition to become expert in innovation management. In this programme you will explore how organisations can gain competitive advantage through innovation by turning good ideas into a commercial success. Innovations may concern new products, services, processes and business models. Students gain an in-depth knowledge of innovation and innovation management by integrating the latest commercial, social, financial, technical and legal dimensions needed to turn innovative ideas into success.

2. MSc Management de la Technologie et de l’Innovation, EMLYON Business School (Lyon, France)
This one year program (taught in French) has recognized that innovation has become a major issue and a priority for companies facing globalizing markets. Companies eagerly seek managers who know how to implement innovation in all its forms to create true value. Constantly reviewed in the light of current issues in business innovation, this Specialized Master transforms its participants to real managers of innovation.
3. MSc in Innovation, Universidad Adolfo Ibanez (Santiago, Chile)
This Spanish taught master in Santiago, Chile has the objective to provide students with thorough knowledge of theories of innovation in all aspects, acquiring analytical models and implementation strategies based on a critical evaluation of a number of emblematic examples of innovations, some successful and others failed, at both the national and international level. Also, the program aims to develop skills that lead to successful innovation processes and improvements in the competitiveness of a company, based on the development of a innovation supportive culture. The program also aims to develop the creative skills of the students and ability to organize equipment and processes that are necessary to successfully innovate in any production system.

4. Management de la Technologie et de l’Innovation , Université Paris-Dauphine (Paris, France)
This master aims to train senior executives in the field of technology management and innovation. Engineers, scientists, managers and economists are those that will be able to promote firms’ ability to develop products, services and innovative processes. With its variety of academic and commercial partners and powerful alumni network, this master is a major training program in innovation management.

5. MBA in Innovation Management, State University of Management (Moscow, Russia)
The State University of Management is the leading Russian university in the field of management education. The main educational programs of higher education at the university are implemented in four forms: full-time, part-time (evening), distance studies and external studies. Today SUM is the also the largest Russian management university with over then 15.000 students in 17 bachelor, 8 master directions, 24 specialties and 55 specializations. There are 20 directions of postgraduate study with more than 800 students. Every year about 1500 specialists and business managers take a professional development course. SUM is a member of many international organizations and associations as The International Association of Universities (IAU), European Foundation for Management Development (EFMD), Central and East European Management Development Association.

6. MS Management de l’Innovation Technologique, Toulouse Business School (Toulouse, France)
This master programme (taught in French) aims to give participants the tools to operate within a technologically innovative business environment, international settings, and anticipate major changes. Students also learn to ignite strategy oriented creativity, identify the exploitation of new ideas and the opportunities of technical inventions to extract maximum value from markets and develop economically viable and sustainable activities. Also, students are trained in decision making, strategy development, technological innovation project management, and change management. Students develop leadership skills, negotiation skills, and collaborative skills within multicultural multidisciplinary teams. Eventually, students acquire the knowledge and expertise to be a manager, developer of innovative activity or designer.

7. MS Management Techologique et Innovation, Grenoble École de Management (Grenoble, France)
The objective of this Specialized Master is to enable students (in French) to build their professional profile and build their own network in order to facilitate subsequent entry into the job market. In this sense, its education is an approach based on “learning by doing”, which implies a systematic and practical application of the courses taught. It thus the program is strongly linked to outside parties, has presence in business life, uses case studies and tutored assignments conducted at the request of companies (e.g., on innovative project marketing, strategic analysis, business plans, technology, etc.)

8. MBA in Technology and Innovation Management, National Chengchi University (Taipei, Taiwan)
The Graduate institute of Technology & Innovation Management (TIM) in the college of commerce at National Chengchi University was founded in 1994. The MBA is taught in English and concentrates on 3 fields. These are basic business, basic management, and professional technology management. Professional technology management is further divided into four subfields, including technology management, innovation management, high-tech business strategies, as well as technological environment and policies.

9. MSc in Economics and Business Administration – Innovation Management, Aarhus University (Aarhus, Denmark)
This programme (English taught) creates a unique opportunity to experience the challenges throughout the new product development process and to develop a mutual understanding about the rationales on the technology as well as on the business management side. There is a broad empirical basis that such a mutual understanding is a key prerequisite for successful cooperation between R&D and marketing and ultimately for innovation success. The aim of the programme is therefore to enhance students’ understandings about strategies, structures, processes, people and cultures to develop successful innovations and to enhance the innovative capability of firms.

10. MBI – Master in Business Innovation, Deusto Business School (Bilbao, Spain)

This English taught program has the objectives to enable students to: promote the search for new business opportunities; improve the development, implementation and commercialization of strategic ideas; create a culture that fosters innovation and entrepreneurship within organizations; facilitate the integration of I+D+i activities and production/final service activities; experience innovation in practice through the Applied Innovation Project; develop themselves as a leader to transform the organisation´s ability to innovate.

Should I Talk About My Co-creation Partners?

Contemporary academic and practitioner thought no longer view firms as closed entities that transform inputs into outputs to create value. Instead, firms co-create value by interacting with consumers and other types of stakeholders during the innovation process (Mahr, Lievens and Blazevic, 2014). For example, Heineken engages consumers, professional designers, and internal Heineken employees to co-create a new club space, with the rationale that these seemingly unrelated, diverse stakeholders would combine their resources and produce creative outcomes.

Emerging research on consumers’ reactions to co-created products has mainly investigated how the average consumer reacts when he or she knows that a product is the result of co-creation activities between a firm and other consumers. In the context of co-creation with one stakeholder type, initial results of recent studies confirm the assumption that such information influences consumer attitudes. This influence can be positive as well as negative. For example, Schreier, Fuchs and Dahl, (2012) find that consumers are more likely to purchase breakfast cereals and T-shirts if they are aware that these products have been designed with users. Conversely, Fuchs, Prandelli, Schreier and Dahl, (2013) find that when luxury items are labeled as designed with consumers, consumers are less likely to buy these products.

However, firms have increasingly started to include multiple stakeholders during the innovation process. For example, Carlsberg recently announced a collaboration with customers, suppliers and other stakeholders to advance sustainable packaging. Given this increased involvement of multiple, diverse stakeholders during the innovation process, insights regarding the impact of communication about stakeholder co-creation on consumer adoption of new products is highly relevant (MSI, 2014). Therefore, we wanted to investigate whether consumers also value stakeholder co-creation, and to what extent they value stakeholder co-creation more than consumer co-creation or internal development of new products.

Additionally, we aimed to explore the underlying mechanism that would drive such potential higher valuations for stakeholder co-created products. Do consumers think stakeholder co-created products are of better quality? Or do they think the firm brings in additional competences by collaborating with multiple stakeholders? Or both?

Furthermore, we were interested in whether adding more parties to the innovation process, or more diverse parties mattered for the consumers. Therefore, we studied the impact of stakeholder composition according to the number and diversity of stakeholders involved. This article gives a short overview of the main results and implications of this study, which is currently under revision in an academic journal. Initial results of a first study are available in (Kazadi, Lievens and Mahr, 2014).

The Study

We conducted two experiments with a total of 394 participants, where we exposed consumers to an artificial press article describing the launch of a new product. In the first paragraph of each press article, we provided information about the product’s development process, such that the text stated the product was developed internally, with consumers, or with various stakeholders. Each consumer only saw one type of article, which allows us to compare across groups and see where we find differences in willingness to pay. The products we used were a new type of olive oil (low complexity) and a laptop (high complexity). All other information in the article remained constant.
Next, participants completed a questionnaire that captured their attitudes towards the product they were shown, and how much they were willing to pay for it. To measure consumers’ willingness to pay, we asked each participant how much he or she would be willing to pay for the product shown (Homburg, Koschate and Hoyer, 2005). By standardizing these numbers, we ensured that we could compare them across product categories.

We find that overall, consumers are willing to pay more for products co-created with multiple stakeholders than internally developed products. Interesting however, the higher valuation is even more pronounced for complex products, as opposed for non-complex products.

When examining the potential underlying mechanism, we find that consumers’ appreciation for stakeholder-co-created products is driven by their positive perceptions of the producer’s “innovative capability”, rather than positive perceptions about the product’s quality itself. This implies that consumers see a firm, that includes multiple stakeholders during the innovation process, as more competent in creating new products.

Furthermore, our study shows that consumers have a higher appreciation for diversity in the stakeholders involved in innovation management, than a higher number of a particular type of stakeholder involved in the development process of a product. It seems that consumers value the combination of different competences higher than bringing in more of the same type of competences.

Implications for managers

For managers, our study results suggests that if they decide to open their innovation process and engage in co-creation, they should seek advantages beyond simply improved innovation processes. Co-creation—and for complex products, mostly stakeholder co-creation—has a unique effect on adoption of new products. Our results indicate that consumers will pay premiums of up to 33% if they realize that a laptop has been co-created with multiple stakeholders. Therefore, communicating, not only about a product’s characteristics, but about the external parties involved during the innovation process thus is beneficial.

Moreover, managers should explicitly communicate about the different types of stakeholders involved during the innovation process and, if possible, stress their diversity. For example, a video campaign that explicates how a product was developed, as it is often the case for complex products such as cars or computers, may stress the different external stakeholders involved in the process.
The effect of stakeholder co-creation on consumers’ adoption of new products, stems from consumers’ positive perceptions of the collaborative innovation capability of the firm. Thus, consumers’ increased likelihood of adopting the new product might not be limited to a specific product in question. If it spills over to the firm’s or brand’s other products, firms have a powerful incentive to engage in and communicate about stakeholder co-creation projects.

For advertisers, our study confirms the somewhat counterintuitive finding that advertisers may consider focusing on the process of developing a product rather than the resulting product. This may be done by including facts about the innovation process in display- or video advertising. For example, Apple has launched many of its recent products with a video explaining the innovation process and resulting benefits. One recommendation resulting from our study might be to include information about the various parties involved during the innovation process, and how they collaborated throughout the process, in such videos.

Innovator’s Accelerator-Online Learning Program by InnovationManagement.se

The Innovator’s Accelerator® concentrated, independent online learning training program accelerates an individual’s ability to become more innovative. Enabled by a dynamic learning platform, lessons can be accessed anytime from virtually anywhere so your team members can participate at their own pace and when best fits their schedule.

With IA, participants will…
Increase their possibilities to fulfill business targets
Discover their own innovation techniques baseline with the “Innovator’s DNA Self-Assessment” and develop skills to make it grow
Learn how to create trailblazing solutions to workplace challenges
Practice breaking the confines of traditional thinking to ignite bold ideas
Apply new skills immediately in a personalized Action Plan

Personal coaching included
If you have any questions about how to best implement this new learning, take advantage of 60 minutes of personal coaching before you start the program with Lars Percy Andersson. There is no extra charge for this service.