Guest post by Freek Duppen

As the knowledge partner of the World Innovation Forum, Capgemini Consulting has recently completed its global innovation survey on the current state of innovation. The study offers a unique perspective by looking at the differences in behavior of innovation leaders vis-à-vis laggards across five key areas (strategy, capabilities, technology, innovation function, and spending) in order to identify what drives the success of companies that view themselves as successful innovators.

The study is based on an online survey, generating responses from 375 executives (representing the full range of industries, regions, functional specialties, and seniority) and 13 follow-up interviews – to get a better understanding of the context of the findings and to add depth to the result interpretation.

In summary, this study reveals that:

• Given the strategic priority companies allocate to innovation and their corresponding spending plans, the maturity of their formal innovation governance structure lags behind considerably. To overcome many of the innovation bottlenecks encountered, it is time to establish an innovation function that is able to deal with this kind of innovation governance and decision-making.

• Furthermore, there is an enormous unlocked potential for innovation in the involvement of external parties in the innovation process. Innovation leaders may have out-paced their peers by simply being better at involving external parties, leveraging a much broader innovation network and increasing innovation potential.

• The study also shows that more value, in terms of impact on business results, is to be expected from business model innovation, than from any other form of innovation. Targeting new business opportunities in emerging markets is much more likely to be successful when approached outside of the traditional competitive landscape.

Many people are interested in how a new Value Proposition is created. Of course, understanding this process and being able to execute it, provides a basis for continuously staying ahead of competitors; it would be the Holy Grail of business. In workshops I have used various methods such as Blue Ocean and TRIZ. These methods help to frame thoughts and give directions. What they do not do is provide you with a new Value Proposition gift wrapped.

Creating a new Value Proposition can be done in several ways, each of which differently partitioned into stages. Here is an example of how the creation process is broken down, brought in a very creative way; in an animated Chinese painting style. The movie clip is by Ada Kwok and is presently really popular on youtube. Clicking tot Ada’s website it is clear that the company does graphic business design. Ada has used succesfully as a mechanism to draw traffic to her site. This is yet an other example of how youtube can significantly boost the number of potential customers.
I really like how each of the creation phases is broken down and expresses in the video:

• Imagination
• Visualization
• Formation
• Transformation
• Bring to life

[pro-player]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce9f0JP6eks&feature=fvst[/pro-player]

Recently Business Models and Business Model Innovation received increased attention. The term devaluated during the high rise of the Internet Bubble, when all you needed to get venture capital was a new type of Business Model, without any sanity check.

Now in an era of ever increasing competition from emerging markets, re-thinking your Business Model seems very appropriate as being an incumbent player in your market. Difficulty is maintaining the relationship with your current customers while achieving growth. Key is consistently managing your identity.
Traditionally companies focus on technology when driving innovation. This is not strange from a R&D perspective, but what to do with the great new technology created? Will this sell itself?

The answer is NO. Look at examples history provides us with such as Philips’ Video2000 system. With the hindsight from today many people state that Philips did have the superior system, but lacked the capability to successfully sell it, loosing the battle to set to standard to VHS.

This presentation shows the necessity to take Business Model Innovation into account as well as Technology Innovation. Building a portfolio which contains provide a sound basis for future growth and success.

During the Internet Bubble Business Model was one of the buzz words. Companies did not need a real strategy, a special competence, or even customers. The only thing needed was a web-based Business Model making vague promises about wild profits in a distant future (source Joan Magretta, HBR, 2002). Not strange that the term itself lost most of its power.

Now years further and wiser we know a business model definitely matters. Without a sound Business Model firms can launch as many new products and services they want to, only confusing customers more.
Companies with a sound Business Model know the value proposition, what the target client group is, which channels to use to approach them, what kind and type of relationship to maintain, what capabilities are required in-house or at a partner, how value is configurated, and of course how cost and revenue stream flow.

Having a proper Business Model not only clarifies things for you as a company; it helps to build and manage your reputation among your current and future clients.

Recently I stumbled upon an interesting article which states that we should not focus on the things we are good at, but concentrate on the areas we are not so great at. The theory behind it is based on researching to-be chess masters. Of course this differs 180 degrees from our common sense.

Applying this line of thinking to business it even becomes more interesting. Most companies have a strong focus on what they are good at, mainly because here the largest part of the cash flow is generated. In the excellent areas firms want to become ever more excellent, with trajectories such as Six Sigma. Nothing wrong here, unless you want to stay on top of business and innovate. Then you have to be aware of your current strengths, and more important where the room to grow is.

In the presentation I have plotted this concept on different Business Model areas.

Growth is something which can be realized in many different ways: operational excellence with Six Sigma trajectories; product or technology innovation, either incremental or radical; business model innovation; or plain old mergers and acquisitions (M&A). Of course calling it plain old does no justice to the complexity of these kinds of transitions. But fact is that when you only focus on bringing value which directly shows in your balance sheet M&A can provide you with a quick fix. The real challenge start then with Post Merger Integration (PMI), so after the purchase. According to Strategy Business to road to successful PMI goes by the cities Vision, Architecture of Change, Architecture of the New Company, and Leadership. Further research has shown that when success of M&A is compared to industry peers only 48.7% resulted in increased value. Most of the times M&A is quite costly, so how to increase the success and value?

In many cases failure of PMI is said to be based on things such as cultural differences, not only between companies, but also countries of origin. When failure is due to cultural aspects the new organisation lacks a common language which normally grows quite organic during years and of course a company’s leadership. Cultural differences can only be resolved through long, extensive projects in which everybody needs to get to know everybody and all have to agree, basically not an option when the goal is to increase value on the short run. Setting up a new business model, based on competencies and capabilities, does provide such a common language. Moreover PMI is the moment to set a new business model. Due to the central position of a business model in the ways business is done, this also reflects on the culture. Cultural differences can be overcome by creating a new common language, and culture, by setting a new business model.

Back from the Austrian slopes there was the news that China has introduced its first commercial passenger jet, the ARJ21 (Advanced Regional Jet). Not really strange; China is evolving its industrial capababilities is almost every business segment so why not commercial jets. China Aviation Industry Corporation start in the 70-90 passenger segment, in which demand is expected to reach 3,700 jet of which China”s contribution will be 330.
First jet is expected to take of end of 2009.
What is the new in this news? China Aviation Industry Corp (AVIC). is not just one company; it is a large conglomerate of 100 companies, Chinese as well as European and US based.

Bloomberg mentions the necessity of a strong network for maintenance and parts. “Even certification from overseas regulatory bodies is unlikely to guarantee sales for the ARJ21, which will need an extensive network of maintenance and spare-parts providers, industry officials have said.”
“The challenge would be bigger because the network doesn’t exist,” Robert Laird, senior vice president of greater China sales for commercial airplanes at Boeing, said in September. “They’d have to establish it through partnerships.’” (Source: Bloomberg)

AVIC already does business with GE and Rockwell for parts, so the basis for the network is there. If all goes well AVIC will create a new type of Ecosystem in which it will collaborate with its partners to develop new jet, also for other segments. And with development costs just above 1.1 billion dollars (8 billion Yuan at the current rate), compared to 20 billion which would be needed in the west there future will probably bring more news about Chinese commercial jets.

As mentioned in the former post this blog focuses on new ways of delivering value. In delivering value there has to be an understanding of what value is and moreover how it is created. On the creation of a generic business model, suitable for discussion on how to innovate it, Alexander Osterwalder PhD has done great work. He has done his PhD research at the University of Lausanne in Switzerland. His work can be used as a starting point for innovation in the heart of business itself, the business model. The ways in which new value can be achieved is very much dependent on the ambition level of a company and the phase it is in in the innovation growth model.

Please find a high-level graph of a generic business model below (adapted from Alexander Osterwalder).