Tuesday, 27 December 2016

When "Innovation" + R&D Taxes Are Worth More Than Incrementalism

Innovation is a completely loaded word these days, and more, undecipherable from the original definitions created by Joseph Alois Schumpeter in early 1900's. Oddly these original Schumpeter definitions are the exact ones that firms are forgetting when discussing how they can further develop their organizations "innovation" competency as well as new product development pipeline. Why? Because innovation = disruption and that ruffles corporate feathers.

In an effort to bring this "innovation disparity" forward into the public eye as currently innovation disparity has become formally part of new tax credit systems specifically focused on increasing a firms ability to deliver necessary experimentation leading to new product enhancements, and eventually breakthroughs - the point and exact definition of innovation. As detailed in "The New and Improved R&D Tax Credit: The Tax Deal Manufacturers Will Be Celebrating for Years to Come" we see the underpinnings and full details of how innovators are taking advantage of this and as sanctioned by many governments worldwide.

 


 Share on Linked-In        Email to a friend        Share with a friend on Facebook          Tweet on Twitter           Share on Google+









. . . . . . . . . . . .


 

Tuesday, 20 December 2016

The Ameoba Innovation Model: Push Foward to Create, Pull Sideways to Align

Recently an article in Harvard Business review titled, "Aligning with the Consumer Decision Journey" discussed the value of "the loyalty loop" and it's value to the firms core ethos. Oddly however this is only 1 of two or more basic models. In short it is the corner stone of the quite valuable factor of: "the customer is always right" an adage that creates incredible loyalty in its own right. The question however is what value is asking groups who are primarily basing the understanding of "new" as an extension of the old. Aligning then is a pull strategy. 

Alternatively, and quite rightly so, a push model, suggests the "eat what you are given" model which often delivers greater "newness" but also at the expense and responsibility of the delivering organization to continue to innovate from within. Aligning with the consumer can then become another mechanism for tired design and complacency.


Aligning with consumers can be viewed as a mechanism for outsourcing "newness" to the group - that the social consensus holds more collective vision than a core team of specialized creators - the European model. Oddly, from within the design world: aesthetics, visual direction, and even in many cases functionality, specialized creators vastly push father than collective alignment.
 

Simply the innovation cycle comes from aligning by pulling, but 1st from creating by pushing, researching requiring development, investment and leader based deployment. Social media is not the answer, but primarily a step in the direction of awareness equaling breakthroughs and equaling innovation via creation deployment.


 Share on Linked-In        Email to a friend        Share with a friend on Facebook          Tweet on Twitter           Share on Google+









. . . . . . . . . . . .


Tuesday, 13 December 2016

R&D + Sales = Hand In Glove Innovation

The mechanism as described in The Impact Of Vertical R&D Cooperation On Firm Innovation - An Empirical Investigation BY Innovation Type Demand   details the Informal modes of R&D cooperation. 


With informal exchanges of technological knowledge a higher significance of innovation behavior occurs than formal efforts joint ventures, joint development teams etc. mechanisms leading to the strange conclusion that natural forms of influential users is the key to uptake in emerging technology and design efforts. 


 Share on Linked-In        Email to a friend        Share with a friend on Facebook          Tweet on Twitter           Share on Google+









. . . . . . . . . . . .


Tuesday, 6 December 2016

ROI Isn't The Only Function of Deisgn - But It Isn't The Last Either

How is it that creativity is mitigated in an environment of corporate watchdogs and ROI demands? As a balanced factor for getting the new into the now.


Five NPD models presented: the sequential, compression, flexible, integrative and improvisational detail a mechanism for product innovation management and illustrate a changing position to less mechanistic, and towards organic models of, in particular, creativity better accepted as Order or maybe “Disorder” in Product Innovation Models. Why is this case? Because without sales, there is no factor proportional enough to cause success for new products. Creativity is only as good as a market that pays for value.



 Share on Linked-In        Email to a friend        Share with a friend on Facebook          Tweet on Twitter           Share on Google+









. . . . . . . . . . . .




 


 




 
 

Tuesday, 29 November 2016

Design and Innovation Does Not Mean "Now" or Else. But How?

Mechanism for incremental NPD efforts is the assumption that the NPD efforts are based on "Now" and not a the time honored R&D model of investigative exploration.

 



With Innovate or Die - Is that a Fact? we see that skipping over the foundations of managing spontaneous ideas causes penthouses built on moving sand where as creating a long term innovation and R&D pipeline is the path to sustained market dominance.



 Share on Linked-In        Email to a friend        Share with a friend on Facebook          Tweet on Twitter           Share on Google+









. . . . . . . . . . . .


 

Tuesday, 22 November 2016

You Want Radial Design? Radical Innovation?

Through five case studies in radical innovation development, The Nexus of Corporate Entrepreneurship and Radical Innovation concludes that proactiveness, risk taking and autonomy are stimulants where as aggressiveness has a negative effect on development and performance.



An excellent example and framework for Innovation and disruptive design launches also comes from the work by Roberto Verganti in his seminal work "Design-Driven Innovation" where we can see the necessity for larger and more time consuming efforts to shepard into existence more forward thinking design initiatives. Such an example is the Topiade Moving Pin Building Fa├žade design completed in 2006 and launched in Russia in 2014 at the Sochi Olympics more than 7 years ahead of schedule.


 Share on Linked-In        Email to a friend        Share with a friend on Facebook          Tweet on Twitter           Share on Google+









. . . . . . . . . . . .


 

Tuesday, 15 November 2016

Design and Innovate or License? What's Best and When?

When mitigating the mechanisms for innovation vs. product launch, IP is the king and COST REDUCTION, LICENSING AND INCENTIVE TO INNOVATE details multiple mechanisms for bringing internal  R&D to ROI fuition ASAP.


Challenges include identifying key internal stakeholders, who is a roadblock to product launch success, market variables for timing mistakes, financial impacts of the sales cycle to bring innovations to the market, design and manufacturing challenges for production and economic models mitigating timing for technological adoption. A powerful toolset for designers and launch specialists alike.


 Share on Linked-In        Email to a friend        Share with a friend on Facebook          Tweet on Twitter           Share on Google+









. . . . . . . . . . . .


  
 



Tuesday, 8 November 2016

Adopting Designs, Tools, Engineering, Innovation: It's All In The Team

The issue with an adoption, a plant, a friend, a child, and entirely new effort for a firm is the way that the innovation is integrated with the overall firm itself.


The dilemma of when to bring it into fuition, how to get others to also adopt it and champion is well documented in “The Dynamics of Factors Affecting the Adoption of Innovations” providing necessary tools to make innovations happen while avoiding the disadvantage of facing the risks of failure.


 
 Share on Linked-In        Email to a friend        Share with a friend on Facebook          Tweet on Twitter           Share on Google+









. . . . . . . . . . . .