What Does It Take To Lead In Open Innovation

We've mentioned the benefits of open innovation on this blog before. We're fans of it if used correctly, which isn't all that easy sometimes. When established organizations attempt to innovate, they usually go down the tried and true path of structured, bureaucratic, top down innovation, from brainstorming to launch.

This is, as we know, not always effective in producing truly innovative results. Pure innovation is often the purview of entrepreneurial firms with no structure of which to speak and a rough and tumble environment. Out of this very model has come though, a prototype for effective leadership in an open innovation system

...open innovation communities provide an opportunity to develop theories of human and social capital in a novel context that lacks pecuniary incentives, hierarchical authority, and formal structure.

A post, Leadership in Open Innovation Communities, builds upon that opportunity and discusses several types of leaders that are present in open innovation communities and takes a stab at which is more effective.

Leadership in such communities depends more on the trust and mobilization of peers than on approval of superiors. To wit, members cannot be fired or forced to participate in any activity, nor can they be compelled to pay attention to any other member. Ascendancy in such relationships relies purely, to borrow a phrase from politics, on "the power to persuade"

The post goes on to discuss "brokers", calculating and politically-savvy operators those most likely to have made it to the top of traditional organizations. And "boundary-spanners" defined as well respected guardians who redirect crucial information both within and outside the firm. Each of these leadership styles has its merits, but boundary-spanners tend to be more respected in an open innovation environment.

This is, of course, obvious. In an open innovation situation, where leadership is determined by the group rather than by upper level management, participants will be most likely to look to the one who garners the most respect AND has the ability to lead.

Unfortunately, far too often, those with a repository of knowledge are not in leadership positions in a corporation, which means for open innovation to truly work, the management structure needs to be broken down. Participants need to disregard title and seek knowledge and innovative thinking, which may be why creative product development groups in corporations tend to be people with young employees not yet as aware of the hidden power structure within the corporation.

Is it possible to change this paradigm? Can we create open innovation working groups in large corporations by assigning group members from various functions and expect them to ignore position and title?

Well. Yes. Maybe. The make-up of the team, in terms of personality and ability to lead or follow plays perhaps a bigger role than in traditional work terms where expertise is valued. In some ways a Machiavellian approach to putting together a team of personalities seems to be in order. Careful consideration of how team members will interact and who might emerge as a leader seems appropriate.

Does this follow true to the spirit of open innovation? I don't know, but it's one avenue for large, established corporations to follow.

Interview: Rodney Gainer

I have been very fortunate to be in touch with Rodney Gainer over the last couple of years. He has worked as the Director of Business Enhancement for the Innovation Resource Centre for more than four years. During his time there, he assisted new inventors and established entrepreneurs on their commercialization efforts.

Rodney holds a business administration diploma from the college of New Caledonia and currently works as web developer for Noratek Solutions, one of the largest technology companies in North-Central BC.

I had the opportunity to interview Rodney about the Innovation Resource Centre and innovation in general. Here are his responses to these questions.

What is the Innovation Resource Centre?

Innovation Resource Centre enables economic growth and diversification based on the commercialization of innovative technology in the Central Interior of BC. We provide support to new and established entrepreneurs through both one to one advising as well as workshops and seminars. We organize networking and idea exchange opportunities and pursue an active communications and research program that creates a broader, better understanding of the role of technology in our economy.

Who were your early role models and what were the main things you learned from them?

Ray Savidan the owner of a forest company. I learned not only to work hard but to work smart. Physical strength only get you so far. Ray taught me to work smarter not harder and to trying new things, not to be afraid to think outside the box.

Dawn Miller, former Executive Director at Innovation Resource Centre, taught me to know my limits and how to work within them. By knowing your limits you learn when to ask for help before you actually need it. Also the ability to be a good listener and how to look at he big picture.

In your opinion what are the key trends affecting the innovation landscape?

Available talent and connectivity are keys to innovation.

The current labor shortages changing how people do business. They are embracing more automated systems that are able to do the jobs that used to be done by a person. The simplest example is the voice mail I got left the other day about the latest Canadian Blood Services blood drive campaign.

Connectivity is more than just a connection to the Internet. It is also to your personal and business networks. It is not only what you know it is who you know who has access to the resources that you will help you achieve success.

What is an example of an innovative company that people have never heard of?

Alterna Energy Inc. believes the world should strive to maximize the value from precious natural resources. Hence the question most often heard around Alterna, 'Why combust when you can carbonize?' Most biomass energy conversion systems take biomass such as wood waste and process it to produce heat energy and ash through combustion or gasification processes. Alterna's 'enviro carbonization' process will produce high quality carbon and heat energy which can be converted into electricity. Carbon is found in all biomass and is used in hundreds of valuable carbon products used by people around the world. Carbon for medicinal use. Carbon for filtering our water. Carbon for use as a reductant in the metal smelting industry. Carbon is a key element in our complex world and can also provide a renewable source of green energy.

What is a biggest pitfall that impedes successful innovation?

People. Many inventors and entrepreneurs are very short sighted when it comes to the success of their inventions and businesses. They believe they can do everything to make their product or service successful which makes them their own worst enemy. To achieve success people need to work with people who can get their innovation to the next level. Is it better to have 100% of nothing or 10% of a million dollars?

List a few of your favorite sites on Innovation.

www.changethis.com - Change This ' uses pdf's, blogs and the web to spread important ideas and change minds.

www.sethgodin.typepad.com - Seth Godin's blog - the agent of change.

www.innovationtools.com - Innovation Tools - a collection of resources on business, innovations, creativity and brainstorming.

www.thecis.ca - The Centre for Innovation Studies - a non-profit in Calgary, Alberta that focuses on research, networking and education.

Thanks Again Rodney!

Protect Your Cleantech - IP May Play A Role In Determining Who Leads The Pack

With Vancouver named one of the top 10, "New Silicon Valleys" of the clean tech industry, worldwide that is, the role of innovation and the associated pitfalls is on my mind these days. Burnaby based, Ballard Power Systems may be said to have pioneered the fuel cell industry and ex employees are busily creating new companies and uses for the technology.

In the midst of all of this activity certain essential tasks associated with successful innovation can be overlooked. In any rapidly evolving industry, inevitably innovation will overlap and application of existing technologies will tend to be "discovered" by several, if not many different companies. So, it is in cleantech.

That activity that will play such an important role in the ultimate success of a clean technology product turns out to be protection of intellectual capital.

I've written before about the importance of intellectual property protection. A post Mass High Tech.com, Energy, Clean Tech and IP: Protecting Innovation, speaks specifically to the challenges firms in the cleantech industry face.

While an important component to any technology-based company's success, intellectual property is especially important for "clean tech" ventures encompassing energy or environmentally related technologies.

For clean tech companies, it's important to note that investors consider strong IP essential for both first to market companies and those that follow (to protect a key technology for later market entry or licensing/acquisition.)

Cleantech is, of course, an umbrella term that encompasses a wide variety of technologies and spans a variety of different industries. The rationale for application of intellectual property protection therefore varies by industry. Does it promote investor confidence? Is it important as a defensive strategy? Can it be used to encourage licensing down the road?

Clearly, whether or not the reason is immediately obvious, innovators in the space need to take steps early on to protect technological innovation and continue to revisit the applicability of those technologies as the company grows and the discovers new uses for existing patented processes.

Similarly, don't dismiss patent protection for clean tech ventures with a long time-frame to market or long technology lifespan. Strategic patent filing approaches may be available in some jurisdictions, increasing patent enforcement life, for example, until the effort reaches a certain state of commercial viability. It's also possible to file initial applications relating to core aspects of the technology, then stagger subsequent filings for incremental changes.

Like the early days of the dotcom boom, intellectual property protection will play a big role in who turns out to be the winners and the losers in cleantech. Those companies which use forethought and innovative thinking, in every aspect of their business, including legal protection, will be much better positioned to be on the winning end. As new uses for the current technology, as well as, new applications for technologies currently in development arise, appropriate intellectual property protection will be key.

I know I sound like an advertisement for the legal profession, but in an industry highly dependent on break through innovation, the appropriate IP may be the deciding point between leadership and second place.

You Just Don't Understand - The Conflict Between Corporate And Business Unit Innovators

One of the challenges that every large business seems to face is developing an actionable innovation strategy. In smaller companies innovation often happens naturally. Company employees and founders gather in a room to discuss day-to-day operations. The conversation veers off into a brainstorming session; everyone gets excited. Tasks to make the innovative new idea happen are assigned and off everyone goes to implement the latest great idea, often dropping other initiatives along the way. But, that's OK.

In larger organizations with more developed job descriptions; bonus structures tied to quarterly or annual performance and clear lines of communication drawn, taking an innovative idea to fruition can be frustrating and hampered by conflicting priorities.

So, it was interesting when I ran across this article The difference between corporate and business unit innovation at Innovate On Purpose I don't think you can be any clearer than

... the corporate team and business unit teams are a lot like a pushmi-pullyu - both want to innovate, for different reasons and purposes and have different motivations and concerns.

Corporate strategist are often the champions of innovation. They may be innovators at heart or they may just realize that the key to growth goes beyond continual improvement. Stellar growth requires a constant parade of new products and new ideas, as well as, improvements on existing ones.

However, corporate strategists, while great at cheerleading are rarely in a position to implement innovative strategies. Sometimes they are in advisory or ancillary roles and not in a line position with the authority to allocate resources. If they are responsible for a business unit, they may be so far or so long away from actual tactical responsibility that they may not be aware of the enormous resources needed to actually create and launch an innovative product or service. More importantly, they may not have the authority, which often comes directly from the top, to change priority so that time and resources can be given over for innovation.

Bottom up innovation is stymied because clear lines between business units and the corporate power brokers may be limited or, more often, corporate executives feel powerless or do not understand that a priority shift is needed to accomplish the goal of innovation. Worse, those with the power to allocate resources to innovation may they themselves have conflicting priorities. But there are options to break this gridlock.

- a corporate team focused on longer term disruptions that are suggested by the business units that simply don't have the time or bandwidth to focus on what's next, and a corporate team that provides trends and strategy insights to business unit teams to extend their visibility. A corporate team can provide resources and funding to assist the business units with their mid and longer term innovation needs and take on the creation of new markets or "blue oceans".

In my opinion, this outline has possibilities. It does however veer away from the traditional path toward innovation - setting up separate innovation teams. Managers pulled from various business units and assigned to a group tasked with developing innovative new products. While I agree that corporate innovators have their place. Engaging them in the process and more importantly, getting them to back the project and free up resources I think is a better role for them to play.

Real innovation travels up the corporate ladder, not down. Just give a cross functional innovation team the resources they need and the power to make things happen and get out of the way.

Finalists anncounced for the 2008 Burnaby Business Excellence Awards

The Burnaby Board of Trade announced their finalists for the 2008 Burnaby Business Excellence Awards. Congratulations to the nominees!

The finalists in the 8 award categories include:

Burnaby Community Spirit Award Finalists:
- Best Buy Canada Ltd.
- Brentwood Town Centre
- Scotiabank
- Vancity South Slope Community Branch
- Westminster Savings Credit Union, Metrotown Community Branch

Business Innovation Award Finalists:
- Day4 Energy
- Icron Technologies Corp.
- M&R Environmental
- Snap Technologies Marketing
- Web Tech Wireless

Entrepreneurial Spirit Award Finalists:
- Icron Technologies Corp.
- Image Path Printing Solutions
- Imagine Redesign
- MetroLeap Media Inc.
- Rock.Paper.Scissors Inc.

Environmental Sustainability Award Finalists:
- Day4 Energy
- Encorp Pacific (Canada)
- Jacques Whitford AXYS Ltd.
- M&R Environmental
- SFU Facilities Services

Non-for-Profit Organization of the Year Award Finalists:
- Basketball BC
- Bonsor Seniors Society
- The Neil Squire Society
- L'Arche Greater Vancouver
- Progressive Housing Society

Business Person of the Year Award Finalists:
- Keith Beedie, The Beedie Group
- Richard Davies, G&F Financial
- Don Hardman, 2007 FIFA U-20 World Cup
- Randy Hnatko, Trainwest Management & Consulting
- Coro Strandberg, Strandberg Consulting

Small Business of the Year Award Finalists:
- Binary Stream Software, Inc.
- Jubilee Cycle
- Petal Pushers
- Simba's Grill
- Snap Technologies Marketing

Business of the Year Award Finalists:
- ABC Recycling
- The Beedie Group
- Best Buy Canada Ltd.
- Kin's Farm Market
- Stormtech