Posts Tagged ‘Accenture’

Co-creation. Elements of Open Innovation!

23 de Junho de 2010

 (Texto em Português depois deste)

Who participate?

In Open Innovation Goes All the Way, Stefan Lindegaard said, “Companies miss out on the full potential of open innovation when they more or less deliberately shut down for external resources later in the process.”

This caught my attention to something which seems essential and which I had given little attention.

It is the co-creation.

“Co-creation is a form of market or business strategy that emphasizes the generation and ongoing realization of mutual firm-customer value. It views markets as forums for firms and active customers to share combine and renew each other’s resources and capabilities to create value through new forms of interaction, service and learning mechanisms. It differs from the traditional active firm – passive consumer market construct of the past.”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-creation) 

According to a report McKinsey Quarterly companies have three ways to win with the adoption co -creation.

– Firms can capture the value of the product or service co- created the good ideas commercializes resulting networks. Ex : Lego

– Companies can capture value by providing a complementary product or service. Ex: Red Hat

– Companies can benefit indirectly from the co- creation, for example, through a better brand or strategic position.

The approach of co-creation seems promising but of course some obstacles or difficulties have arisen.

It would be nice to think that companies are prepared to face these obstacles but it does not. Although companies with Open Innovation approach had gain more experience they have yet to overcome some challenges.

Attracting and motivating co- creators?

What is the role of the local internal?

What kind of path tracking and controlling flows of ideas?

The ideas and creations may arise by virtue of challenges or accidentally without apparent connection to an unsolved problem. These two starting points can converge on a solution, but often what is sought is to solve problems.

An important part in ensuring the co-creation is how problems are structured to facilitate participation.

Keeping the whole problem, it is often necessary to its fragmentation to enable the participation of a greater number of co -creators.

That’s the case:

“When Italian automaker Fiat wanted to test new design concepts for its Punto, it invited potential customers to visit the Fiat Web site and select from an array of features. More than 3,000 people participated. As a result, Fiat was able to capture valuable insight into the likes and dislikes of a targeted consumer group, test different design concepts at low cost and design a car far more reflective of customer preferences. For their part, customers got a car closer to what they actually wanted.” –  Accenture

According to Mackinsey communities are productive when they have clear rules, clear leadership, and transparent processes for setting goals and resolving conflicts between members.

The new leaders assume a very important and demanding to carry out the project co -creation. They command a big ship.

And one of their tasks and concerns is how to maintain or increase, from a diverse crowd, a level of quality in participation and hence the result.

Although the general notion is that the products have co -created values of higher quality companies are not abdicating their wisdom to apply to business-critical situations.

In fact the marks that you end up with the intellectual property of the co -creation is understandable that his position on quality is the final decision and the other co -creators acknowledge this.

But by recognizing these understandably expect the property by the marks of course another type of compensation.

What recognition and reward may have the co-creators?

For professional online communities, trust and affinity are important.

It is recognized that people who participate in co-creation do it with brands that of which are supporters or “fans” and often being not they refuse to participate. There is therefore a reward for affinity; they are pleased to participate in something that they can use.

Moreover, there are incentives to participants as the fame, the fun and pure altruism (possibility of participation) is a good reason to justify membership in many cases.

“The effectiveness of co-creation will depend on how much value is created for both customers and producers. Companies will have to select opportunities with the highest potential payoff, as well as structure relationships to manage risks while reducing the effort required to fully realize this new value. But that potential payoff will be substantial—a new source of competitive advantage that encourages customer loyalty to a specific value proposition in the eEconomy” – Accenture

Companies do not have to redesign their business systems or its functional structure to begin to experience co -creation. In many cases, the first step is to identify similar initiatives in the company of co-creation and start sharing these experiences online.

Companies must be flexible and look initially to co- create as a learning process. There is still much to explore and refine, but it seems a good bet.

 

Participação empresa-utilizador!

Em Open Innovation Goes All the Way, Stefan Lindegaard diz que, “As empresas perdem o potencial de inovação aberta, quando, mais ou menos deliberadamente, se desligam de recursos externos no final do processo.”

Isto chamou-me a atenção para um aspecto que me parece fundamental e ao qual eu tinha dado pouco relevo.

A co-criação.

Co -criação é uma forma de mercado ou de estratégia de negócios que enfatiza a produção e realização em curso de mútuo valor empresa/cliente. Ela vê o mercado como fóruns para empresas e clientes activos para compartilhar, combinar e renovar -se de recursos e capacidades para criar valor através de novas formas de interação, de serviços e mecanismos de aprendizagem . Ela difere da empresa tradicional activa – mercado consumidor passivo construção do passado. – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-creation)

Segundo um relatório de McKinsey Quarterly as empresas têm três maneiras de ganhar com a adopção co-criação.

– As empresas podem capturar o valor do produto ou serviço co-criado ao comercializar boas ideias resultantes das redes. Ex: Lego

– As empresas podem captar valor, fornecendo um produto ou serviço complementar. Ex: Red Hat.

– As empresas podem beneficiar indirectamente do processo de co-criação, por exemplo, através de uma marca melhor ou posição estratégica.

A abordagem da co-criação parece promissora mas naturalmente alguns obstáculos ou dificuldades têm surgido.

Seria bom pensar-se que as empresas estão preparadas para enfrentar esses obstáculos mas tal não acontece. Apesar de as empresas com abordagens à Inovação Aberta ganharem mais experiência elas ainda têm de vencer alguns desafios.

Como atrair e motivar os co-criadores?

Qual o papel da comunidade local interna?

Que tipo de trajecto seguir e como controlar fluxos de ideias?

As ideias ou criações podem surgir por força de desafios ou acidentalmente sem ligação aparente a um problema por resolver. Estes dois pontos de partida podem convergir numa solução, mas frequentemente o que se procura é resolver problemas.

Uma parte importante na viabilização da co-criação é a forma como os problemas são estruturados para facilitar a participação.

Mantendo o problema como um todo, muitas vezes é necessária a sua fragmentação para possibilitar a participação de um maior número de co-criadores.

È o caso:

“ Quando a fabricante auto italiana Fiat quis testar novos conceitos de design para o seu Punto, convidou os potenciais clientes a visitar o site da Fiat e seleccionar de uma variedade de recursos. Mais de 3.000 pessoas participaram. Como resultado, a Fiat foi capaz de capturar opiniões valiosas sobre os gostos e desgostos de um grupo de consumidores alvo, testar conceitos de design a baixo custo e design de um carro muito mais reflexivo das preferências do cliente. Por seu lado, os clientes tem o carro mais perto do que eles realmente queriam – accenture

Segundo a Mackinsey as comunidades são produtivas quando têm regras claras, uma liderança clara, transparente e processos para a definição de objectivos e para resolução de conflitos entre os membros.

Os novos líderes assumem um papel extremamente importante e exigente para levar a cabo o projecto de co-criação. É como comandar um navio de grande porte.

E uma das suas tarefas e preocupações é como manter ou aumentar, face a uma multidão diversa, um nível de qualidade na participação e consequentemente no resultado.

Embora a noção geral seja a de que os produtos co-criados apresentam valores de qualidade mais elevados as empresas estão não abdicam da sua sabedoria para aplicar às situações críticas de negócio.

De facto sendo as marcas que acaba por ficar com a propriedade intelectual da co-criação é compreensível que a sua posição sobre a qualidade seja a decisão final e os restantes co-criadores reconhecem isso.

Mas estes ao reconhecer compreensivelmente a propriedade pelas marcas esperam naturalmente um outro tipo de compensação.

Que reconhecimento e recompensa poderão ter os co-criadores?

Nas comunidades online profissionais, a confiança e afinidade são importantes.

É reconhecido que as pessoas que participam em co-criação o fazem com marcas de que são adeptos ou “fans” e muitas vezes não sendo recusam-se a participar. Existe portanto uma recompensa pela afinidade, uma satisfação por participar em algo que poderá utilizar.

Por outro lado incentivos aos participantes como a fama, a diversão e o puro altruísmo (possibilidade de participação) são uma boa razão para justificar a adesão em muitos casos.

 “A eficácia da co-criação vai depender de quanto valor é criado para os clientes e produtores. As empresas terão de seleccionar oportunidades com maior potencial de retorno, bem como as relações estrutura para gerir os riscos, reduzindo o esforço necessário para concretizar este novo valor. Mas essa recompensa potencial será substancial, uma nova fonte de vantagem competitiva que estimula a fidelidade do cliente a uma proposição de valor específica na eEconomia.” – Accenture

As empresas não têm de reformular os seus sistemas de negócio ou a sua estrutura funcional para começar a experimentar a co-criação. Em muitos casos, o primeiro passo é identificar dentro da empresa iniciativas semelhantes de co-criação e começar a partilhar essas experiências on-line.

As empresas têm de ser flexíveis e encarar, inicialmente, a co-criação como uma aprendizagem. Ainda há muito a explorar e a refinar, mas parece uma boa aposta.

Anúncios

Networks, Design Thinking and Open Innovation

17 de Março de 2010

 

Design, as a business model, is a process of innovation!

This is a revised material (English version)

It is also a way to find the problem, to structure and to solve it.

By talking about design thinking, we are talking about learning to do, where the crash early is good and where in the beginning of the process there is no trial. Centered on people, design thinking, works with ambiguity and look for external users.

Roger Martin said that design thinking is an approach to designing products and services, which takes into account not only the needs of consumers, but also its social and cultural infrastructure.

Here, social networks present their credentials, not only as facilitators of an innovation process but rather as facilitators of inputs and outputs of ideas.

The networks provide a picture of the systems and ecosystems that makes it understandable and therefore contributes to the opening of silos and acceptance of Open Innovation.

These social and cultural structures are complex systems, i.e., are composed of several elements (people), different, but interconnected. Social structures are presented, or are seen as a whole, not highlighting particular aspects.

This is important because a system must be treated as such for the emergent properties that cannot be static and therefore possess the ability to change and learn from the experience.

A health system is a clear example of complexity, where the ability to change is remarkable, especially when we see some catastrophic situations. It is also remarkable the capacity to learn and adapt to new situations, so they are treated as complex, adaptive systems, which incorporate a dynamic interdisciplinary.

 

The interdisciplinary teams in health have produced good examples not only of the process (design thinking) as well as co-creation of solutions.

“Open innovation is the use of purposive inflows and outflows of knowledge to accelerate internal innovation, and expand the markets for external use of innovation, respectively. [This paradigm] assumes that firms can and should use external ideas as well as internal ideas, and internal and external paths to market, as they look to advance their technology.” – Henry Chesbrough

In the form of concept and even so, there are commonalities between the process of design thinking and open innovation. There is a culture of sharing that is maximized with interdisciplinary teams.

“Sixty-three percent of executives in our survey acknowledged that open innovation is an inexpensive alternative to traditional development. About half also agreed that open innovation can tackle the shortage of ideas at home. “Accenture

It is in the development of the concept, in design thinking, meeting needs, brainstorming or prototyping, which deepens the co-creation. The results will be as better as greater the diversity of disciplines that constitute the interdisciplinary teams.

The interdisciplinary and co-creation are now a reality, which is evident in Web 2.0. The exchange of experience and knowledge is facilitated at enormous speed and distances have long ceased to make sense. If there is resistance to change is a sign of comfort and lack of openness, and that is where we must also “make the design”

As Roger Martin said, “support and enhance productivity with web-based tools is a challenge and an opportunity (such as Enterprise 2.0, knowledge management 2.0, etc…) Combine the design thinking and approaches to managing complexity (based on principles of connectivity, adaptability and emergency) are the theoretical basis of my consultancy work.”

“The best products in the world cannot succeed if customers are confused with them. Designing products that are simpler to understand and use, is part of the answer. – Accenture

What do you think?