Find insights and inspiration on modern innovation management.
Being among the pioneers (see e.g. here or here) in making the case that dual approaches to modern corporate innovation are mandatory for innovation impact, we have recently been delighted about two things: First, more and more companies are appreciating our arguments as the following data suggest (sources can be provided upon request): Second, two concepts that we’ve been advocating …
As published in a recent post, we have initiated a Peer Group of leading European companies which share our view that Best Practices with respect to scaling up validated concepts (successfully emerging from the “Fuzzy Front End”) to business impact need to be in place to sustainably increase overall corporate innovation performance. It has become obvious that Scaling-Up really seems …
Research shows that growth fueled through organic innovation is more profitable than growth driven by acquisition, in part because the organizational capability required is vastly different. But the litmus test is: How can established organizations build successful new businesses through corporate entrepreneurship, also referred to as Intrapreneurship, on an ongoing basis? This is also one of the key questions that …
The race is on for companies to find big, explorative or even “disruptive” innovation ideas. ‘Disrupt yourself or someone else will’, it has been said. Almost every company shifts into overdrive to create ‘smart’ products, to turn a product business into a service business, to create new business models or to reach out beyond their traditional industry boundary. This race …
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 …
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 an …
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 …
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 …
dual-innovation.net’s mission is to help companies solving their Corporate Innovation Problem™ which means that the Return On Innovation is too low. As we have outlined HERE, we see three root causes for the Corporate Innovation Problem (for easier readability, we skip the ™-sign in the rest of the article): The complexity problem – Conducting innovation in a globally dispersed set …
As we have pointed out in earlier posts (see HERE and HERE), we are forming a peer group process with Process Industries VPs from Innovation, Marketing and Sales within larger companies: “Digital Transformation – What it really means at the VP level”. Companies from Chemicals, Paints, Health&Nutrition, Oils&Additives, Food, Dairy, Beverage and Life Science industries are lining up for participation …
