Посты с тэгом: S.I.T.

Complementary Innovation

Published date: September 10, 2008 в 9:19 pm

Written by:

Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,,,,,

Companies are enamored with chasing “white space opportunities.”  White space is the nickname for new, undiscovered growth segments.  It spins the notion that opportunity lies just ahead of us.  Telling colleagues you are working on white space opportunities suggests you are doing really important stuff.  It is the ultimate growth endeavor, the risk worth taking.  White space will save the day.

I’m not so sure.  I have two problems with white space.  It is neither white, nor a space.

White space has come to mean many things:

  • WhiteSpace (Resource Scheduling), name used since 2002 to denote available time for People or Resources when scheduling time
  • White space (visual arts), or negative space, the portions of a page left unmarked
  • Whitespace (computer science), characters used to represent white space in text
  • Whitespace (programming language), an esoteric programming language whose syntax consists only of spaces, tabs and newlines
  • White space (telecommunications), unused radio frequencies in the VHF and UHF bands allocated to television transmission.
  • White space (education), term used since 2007 in the Singapore Education System to denote time reserved for teachers’ personal reflection and planning.
  • White Spaces Coalition, a group of technology companies aiming to deliver broadband Internet access via unused analog television frequencies
  • White Space (business), the part of a market or segment that is available to a business or entity for new sales or customers
  • White Space (Process improvement and management), the area between the boxes in an organizational map, often an area where no one is responsible.

The common theme seems to be the notion of white space as a void, untapped and unused, free and clear – like powdered snow yet to be skied.  If only we could find it (or get the government to give it to us as Google is seeking)!

Where do companies look for white space?  Jim Todhunter at Innovating to Win has published a survey with some very important insights to this.  Most noteworthy is how low respondents rated Complementary Products, a mere 6.3% as a source for white space opportunities.  Jim’s advice:  “Reconsider how to look at the red ocean opportunity spaces to expand your market footprint through complementary offerings.  This could be a great less traveled path to revenue growth.”

I agree with Jim, but what is curious to me is why this path is less traveled in the first place.  My sense is that companies overlook these complementary innovations because they are too focused on new opportunity defined as a market space rather than a boundary or frontier.  White space is not a space at all.  It is the fringe of what your are currently doing.  The term – adjacency – seems to be a much better way to define it.  White space is not white either.  Complementary innovations are deeply colored by what we know and have experienced.  There is always an old idea buried in a new one.  This is why tools such as S.I.T. and Goldfire are so effective at innovating at the fringe of the current business model – they leverage what is known.

Fortune 100 companies will find more growth opportunities at the margin of what they are doing than by chasing far-flung, ethereal market voids.  Leveraging at the margin takes advantage of existing core competencies and strategic assets.  It yields innovations that stretch the portfolio and the brand.

Stop chasing white space and look for the brightly colored complementary innovations right next to you.

Innovation for the Ages

Published date: December 30, 2007 в 10:14 am

Written by:

Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,,,,,,,

I taught innovation to a group of 6th, 7th, and 8th graders as part of my son’s middle school enrichment program several years ago.  I had never taught children in a formal setting, and it was terrifying at first.  The course was called, “How to Be an Inventor,” and we met one hour a week for five weeks.
I had my doubts about this…whether someone could actually learn a systematic approach to innovation.  I had recently experienced the S.I.T. method as part of my company’s efforts to create new medical products.  I wanted to experiment to see if a templated approach to innovation could be taught…and applied…in a setting outside of my company.  So I taught these children the five templates: subtraction, task unification, multiplication, division, and attribute dependency.  On the final day, each student had to take a product that I would give to them randomly, apply one of the five tools, and create a new-to-the-world product – all in thirty minutes. They had to draw the invention on the blackboard and explain why it was useful.
The first student was given a ordinary wire coat hanger.  Using the Attribute Dependency tool, she invented a coat hanger that would adjust to the size, weight, and shape of the garment.  Sixth grade!  I had never seen such a product before.  Truth is it had already been invented by Henry Needles in 1953 (United States Patent US2716512), so technically, she failed the exam.  But she created something new to HER world, for sure.  Each student similarly created amazing new products, some incremental, and some far out (moon beam flashlight).
If 6th graders can learn to innovate in real time, so can the business world.  That is why companies are embracing more productive, systematic methods of innovating and shunning traditional methods.
Teaching children to innovate was an epiphany for me.  My next innovation experiment…senior citizens.  I believe a group of senior citizens could be an ideal scenario for innovating in real time.  They have time on their hands, they want to be productive, they have lots of world knowledge and experience, and they think about ways to improve their situation.
Innovation for the ages…stay tuned.

Why Innovation is Hard: Ten Most Popular Reasons

Published date: December 4, 2007 в 10:41 pm

Written by:

Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,,,

Here is what executives say when asked why their firms cannot innovate:
1. Risky
2. No Method
3. Fear of Failure
4. All the good ideas are gone
5. Unpredictable
6. Company Culture
7. Lack of Time
8. Lack of Resources
9. Fear of Change
10. Competing Priorities
A systematic, routine way to innovate can break through these challenges.  For example, a method such as S.I.T. (see www.sitsite.com) gives employees a way to innovate in real time.  This eliminates the first five reasons on the list.  With a routine and successful way to innovate, innovation is no longer risky, people are no longer afraid of failure, and innovation becomes predictable.  When properly applied, an innovation method will create many new ideas for products and services even though people assume all the good ones are gone.
What about the last five reasons?  From my experience, once a company experiments with an innovation method and sees how successful it can be, it is more willing to deal with the organizational aspects that hold innovation back.  Companies need to create a culture that provides both the time and resources to innovate.  A change in the culture can help overcome the fear of change.  Putting priorities in order is easier once companies know they can innovate on command.
Seeing is believing.  Put innovation in practice.

Get our innovation model that has worked for 1000+ companies.

    No thanks, not now.