15 07, 2013

#OUI2013 Conference Summary in One Picture

By | 2018-06-14T06:34:24+00:00 Juli 15th, 2013|Featured Research, Open/User Innovation|

The OUI 2013 conference just started at the University of Brighton. Many of the core people from the community will be presenting their research here during the next three day.

While Joel West probably will cover the event much better than I do, here the entire conference in three graphs, as presented ny host Steve Flowers in the opening talk:

– Top and minor themes in the papers.

– Tags pro-duced from the titles

– The sociale network of topics

Oui_pictures

11 06, 2013

[OIA Market Study 2013] Who Participates in Open Innovation: A Solver and Community Perspective on the Market for Open Innovation

By | 2018-06-14T06:47:09+00:00 Juni 11th, 2013|OI Market Study 2013, Open/User Innovation|


OIAS coverIn a series of postings, we introduce some key figures and results from
our 2013
OIA Study – A Market Report & Comparison
of more than 160 Open Innovation Accelerators (OIAs)
— intermediaries, brokers, platforms, and consultancies for open innovation
and customer co-creation.


OIAs build on the involvement of
a community.
OIAs connect clients through their communities with a
variety of external actors, most of them are new and unknown to the client
(this "looking out of the box" is exactly the value of open
innovation
).

OIA services differ
significantly regarding their community composition. In average, we find that OIAs have an existing pool of participants
(their "community") of 20,000 members. But OIAs specializing on
ideation or technical contests often have community of more than 100,000
members.

OIA graphic51
The general level of expertise of the community
significantly differs among the different services. OIAs offering technical
search services in form of technology scouting, for example, have access to
high level expert communities, while OIAs focusing on ideation and concept
generation often have a broad, very heterogeneous community of "average"
consumers.

From this pool, about
200 members finally join a
particular project
(in the case of contests, this number is 300). Again
methodological aspects of the services influence the total participant number.
Workshops have a natural limit for participants to be able to generate
meaningful output. 

OIA graphic52
To join the pool of
participants, prospective participants have to accept general terms and
conditions, but in general do sign not a formal contract. This is a core
difference of open innovation via OIAs compared to traditional forms of R&D
networks or alliances.

OIA graphic53
Our study clearly
shows that managers have to take large care when selecting an OIA.T the
composition in terms of expertise and heterogeneity of the community offered by
different OIAs is very heterogeneous and demands special attention – in the
end, the task have to fit the community.

We find a general
focus on applied sciences. Yet expertise background is influenced by project
targets. Services like technical search involve individuals with expertise
preferable in natural and applied sciences and less in social sciences or arts.
On the contrary community members for contests, e.g., design contests, or
market search are characterized by experience in the field of arts or social
sciences. Similar to the characteristic by background of expertise is the
characteristic by the level of expertise. Problem solving projects demand a
higher expert level than projects focusing on consumer insights.

 THIS IS THE LAST POST OF SELECTED FINDINGS FROM THE OIA 2013 STUDY.
Find all earlier postings here.

For the full picture, refer to The Market for Open Innovation: The 2013
RWTH Open Innovation Accelerator Survey
, with many more details, authored by Kathleen Diener & Frank Piller, 2nd
edition, May 2013. Lulu Publishing: Raleigh, USA

Check all options how
to get the study at study.open-innovation.com

6 06, 2013

[OIA Market Study 2013] Who purchases Open Innovation services? Non-profits and public agencies are coming up

By | 2018-06-14T06:47:12+00:00 Juni 6th, 2013|OI Market Study 2013, Open/User Innovation, Technologies & Enablers|

OIAS coverIn a series of postings, we introduce some key figures and results from
our 2013
OIA Study – A Market Report & Comparison
  of more than 160 Open Innovation Accelerators (OIAs)
— intermediaries, brokers, platforms, and consultancies for open innovation
and customer co-creation.

In our 2013 market study, we also investigated who is
using the services offered by the OIAs
. First, we find that clients are served
globally
, and at the same time, OIAs often have the opportunity to also search
and call globally for participation. The U.S., however, still is clearly
leading the OI field of applications.


OIA graphic41
 
 

Open innovation is not focused on special industries.
We were surprised by the breadth of industries covered by the OIA's client
lists. Especially the electronics industries are strong. Agriculture could
benefit from a larger attention for OI.

However, within all industries, clients from SMEs are still the
minority
. OI still is a game of global organizations with a dedicated
innovation management function.

Interestingly, we today find rather larger share of non-profit
organizations among the clients of the OIAs
. NGOs and clients from the public
sector are strongly increasing. This may be the outcome of recent "Open
government" trend.

 
OIA graphic42
OIA graphic43

For the full picture and many more details, including detailed profiles of 160 Open Innovation Service Providers, refer to The Market for Open Innovation: The 2013
RWTH Open Innovation Accelerator Survey
, co-authored by Kathleen Diener & Frank Piller, 2nd
edition, May 2013. Lulu Publishing: Raleigh, USA

Check all options how to get the study at study.open-innovation.com

28 05, 2013

[OIA Market Study 2013] Ideation contests dominate the Market for Open Innovation

By | 2018-06-14T06:47:15+00:00 Mai 28th, 2013|OI Market Study 2013, Open/User Innovation|


OIAS coverIn a series of postings, we introduce some key figures and results from
our 2013
OIA Study – A Market Report & Comparison
  of more than 160 Open Innovation Accelerators (OIAs)
— intermediaries, brokers, platforms, and consultancies for open innovation
and customer co-creation.

According to our research, service providers for open innovation
(OIAs), can be structred along two
fundamental principles:
(1) The kind of information required and (2) the
method to identify and initiate the collaboration with an external actor:

(1) The type of information searched by clients:

  • Market information is information about customer and market needs, i.e.
    information about preferences, needs, desires, satisfaction, motives, and etc.
    of the customers and users of a new (potential) product or service offering.
  • Technological information is information on (technological) solution
    possibilities, i.e. information about how to apply a technology to transform
    customer needs into new products and services best.

Our research revealed a significant difference between
OIAs and the methods applied for projects searching for market/need
information, compared to those searching for technological/solution
information. Solving of specific technological problems favors different
approaches than searching for need information. Also, both kinds demand very
different kinds of participant communities and incentive schemes.

(2) How to initiate the coordination with external participants:

  • An Open Call refers to a
    problem statement that is publicly announced, directed to a heterogeneous, and
    generally large, network of external actors. Potential solution providers
    ("solvers") decide via self-selection whether they want to
    participate in the process. The "seeker", i.e. the entity issuing the call, then
    selects the best submissions.
  • Open Search refers to a broad search for information and sources,
    conducted by the OIA with neither too concrete pre-assumptions about
    information aspects nor source details. A core idea is to actively seek for
    potential external contributors using advanced sampling methods, engaging in
    pre-screening specific characteristics (e.g., "lead user"
    characteristics), using social networks or network analysis to identify central
    actors from different domains.
  • In addition, our study revealed a third form of
    finding partners
    and initiating collaboration: a selective call. The
    selective call is a hybrid between call and search. OIAs applying this
    mechanism follow a two-step procedure. They pre-select a number of potential
    external actors who might hold the desired information and then call for
    participation within this sub-sample.

Combining these two general principles, we can
distinguish between different methods for open innovation. We call those "OIA services", as these are the
services and solutions offered by the OIA (look at this earlier post for a table):

  • Contests: Generating
    contributions to a technical and/or market related task with the objective to
    identify the "best" submission in response to an open call.
  • Workshops: Generating technical
    and/or market information by performing workshops.
  • Open market search: Searching and
    observing defined areas for market information (e.g., Netnography in online
    forums).
  • Technological search: Searching and observing defined areas for technical
    information (patents, technologies, user bases).

Among these categories, we find in our 2013 market
study that the majority of OIAs focus on providing ideation contests
or other
contest for technical problem solving.

 
OIA graphic3

For the full picture and many more details, including detailed profiles of 160 Open Innovation Service Providers, refer to The Market for Open Innovation: The 2013
RWTH Open Innovation Accelerator Survey
, co-authored by Kathleen Diener & Frank Piller, 2nd
edition, May 2013. Lulu Publishing: Raleigh, USA

Check all options how to get the study at study.open-innovation.com

23 05, 2013

[OIA Market Study 2013] Market for Open Innovation Services to Top $6bn in 2014

By | 2018-06-14T06:47:18+00:00 Mai 23rd, 2013|OI Market Study 2013, Open/User Innovation|


OIAS coverIn a series of postings, we introduce some key figures and results from
our 2013
OIA Study – A Market Report & Comparison
  of more than 160 Open Innovation Accelerators (OIAs)
— intermediaries, brokers, platforms, and consultancies for open innovation
and customer co-creation.


The market for open
innovation is still growing.
Almost monthly, new OIAs enter the market. They are attracted by the
growing market size for OI services. A self-assessment by the OIAs participating
in our study reveals an estimate of the recent
market volume of €2.7 billion
.

OIAs expect that this volume will double within the
next two years (until 2015) to €5.5
billion
.

 

OIA graphic22

When comparing our 2013 data with data from an earlier
study in 2010, we find that about 20 percent of the 2010 OIAs do not exist any
longer
or have been acquired by other players. We expect an even stronger wave of acquisitions and mergers
for the coming years.

At the same time, we realize that growing competition
also means lower prices
, especially when comparing reported project costs with
our 2010 study.

This is especially true for ideation contests (idea
contests for customer co-creation), where new web-service based offerings start
to take substantial business from established full-service players.

The average price
for an OI project for a client of an OIA is €43,000.
But project costs
differ widely
, ranging from €12 (for a basic monthly description of an OIA
web-service) to €164,000 EUR (for an OI consulting service).

The main project cost
driver
is personnel capacity. In
the end, OIAs are no IT services or "self-service internet
platforms", but knowledge-intensive service businesses. Recruiting
experienced project managers and analysts becomes a major challenge for many
OIAs.


For the full picture
and many more details, including detailed profiles of 160 Open Innovation Service Providers, refer to The Market for Open Innovation: The 2013
RWTH Open Innovation Accelerator Survey
, co-authored by Kathleen Diener & Frank Piller, 2nd
edition, May 2013. Lulu Publishing: Raleigh, USA

Check all options how to get the study at study.open-innovation.com


21 05, 2013

[OI Market Study 2013] Key Results – Global Market for Open Innovation Support

By | 2018-06-14T06:47:20+00:00 Mai 21st, 2013|OI Market Study 2013, Open/User Innovation, Technologies & Enablers|

OIAS coverWhen engaging in OI, organizations face the challenge of creating the internal ecosystem
that allows them to profit from external input in an efficient and effective
way. Professional assistance is offered by Open
Innovation Accelerators
(OIA)

OIAs are intermediaries,
consultancies, and agencies helping their clients to accelerate an open
innovation project by providing dedicated tools, methods, access to an
established community of solvers or participants, but also education and
process consulting.

 With more than 160 players, the market for OIAs however is getting
complex and difficult to navigate. Hence, we reached out to 160 providers of (inbound) open innovation
services
to join a 90 min survey investigating the OIA’s business model and
environment, productivity, services offered, project specifics, and
characteristics of their participant pool. In addition, we asked about
estimates for the development of the open innovation market.

59 (37 percent) of
the OIAs contacted provided us with a complete data set. For the remaining
companies, we used secondary data sources.

In total, our study
is the largest inquiry of the global market of open innovation services. In the
following, we will provide some high-level results.

OIA
Market Structure

OIAS graphic 1We find that the
market for open innovation is getting mature
. On average, OIAs have already
conducted a high number of client
projects
, many of them 200 and more. Still, the market for OIAs shows continuous growth

Ideation contests are seen as the most promising open innovation format. They cover
almost 80 percent of the entire open
innovation market. Secondary services like software support, consultancy, or
executive education enhance the offerings of many OIAs.

But we find that OIAs also
increasingly reach out to functions
beyond new product development
. The core idea pattern of open innovation to
engage an open, undefined network of people in form of an open call or open
search activity seems to be transferrable to a variety of tasks, including
marketing, customer service, recruitment, knowledge management, and HR.

When comparing our 2013 data with data from an earlier
study in 2010, we find that about 20 percent of the 2010 OIAs do not exist any
longer or have been acquired by other players. We expect an even stronger wave of acquisitions and mergers
for the coming years.

The average
cost
for an OI project with an OIA is €43,000. But project costs differ
widely, ranging from €12 (for a basic monthly description of an OIA
web-service) to €164,000 (for an OI consulting service). The main project cost driver is personnel capacity. In the end, OIAs are no IT services or
"self-service internet platforms", but knowledge-intensive service
businesses. Recruiting experienced project managers and analysts becomes a
major challenge for many OIAs.

OIA
Services & Methods

In general, OIAs differ, first of all, regarding their
approaches how to tap into an external knowledge space. These approaches can be
differentiated according to the way how
contributors for a specific project are selected
and the collaborative
process is being initiated. We find three options:

  • Open Call: Calling for individuals to identify themselves by
    contributing to a given task;
  • Open Search. Searching for relevant information or individuals
    according to a given task
  • Selective Open Call: Calling for individuals, but within a pre-defined set
    of potential participants (a hybrid between the previous two options)

These three options also help to structure the service
types that OIAs offer when we add the type of information requested by the
client: information about market needs or information about technical solutions:

 

OIAS chart 1

Table: Open Innovation Approaches and practical examples

 

Working
with an OIA

Picking the right intermediary depends, first of all, on the type of task and the nature of
the innovation problem. Not all OIAs are suited for every open innovation
challenge. OIAs further differ with regard to the breadth, scope, and structure
of their pool of potential participants, and the options for clients to control
access to this pool and the interaction within a given project. Furthermore,
outcomes of an OIA project can range from raw ideas to sophisticated concepts –
and selecting an OIA very much depends on the expected outcome and preferred degree of outsourcing the OI
function to the OIA.

From a client perspective, the OIA business has two major characteristics, distinguishing it from
conventional innovation consultants. These two characteristics also should be
key decision criteria when selecting an
OIA
:

First, software plays an essential part of any open innovation venture. Web 2.0 and social software technologies allow OIAs
to operate globally and integrate large numbers of participants without high
transaction cost. In 90 percent of all cases, OIAs offer a distinct software
solution. Hence, selecting an OIA also means deciding whether the software
solution should be implemented in-house (following a traditional license model) or using it as a web-service or via a hosted service of the OIA.

Secondly, OIAs build on the involvement of a community. OIAs connect clients through their communities with a
variety of external actors, most of them are new and unknown to the client
(this "looking out of the box" is exactly the value of open
innovation). OIA services differ significantly regarding their community
composition. In average, we find that OIAs have an existing pool of
participants (their "community") of 20,000 members. But OIAs
specializing on ideation or technical contests often have communities of more
than 100,000 members. To join the pool of participants, prospective
participants have to accept general terms and conditions, but in general do
sign not a formal contract. This is a core difference of open innovation via OIAs
compared to traditional forms of R&D networks or alliances.

Between communities, the general level of expertise of its members differs significantly among the
different services. OIAs offering technical search services in form of
technology scouting, for example, have access to high level expert communities,
while OIAs focusing on ideation and concept generation often have a broad, very
heterogeneous community of "average" consumers.

For the full picture, refer to The Market for Open Innovation: The 2013 RWTH Open Innovation
Accelerator Survey
. authored by Kathleen Diener & Frank Piller, 2nd
edition, May 2013. Lulu Publishing: Raleigh, USA
(available via study.open-innovation.com).

Check back from more updates and key results from the OIA 2013 market study!

18 05, 2013

Just Released: Completely New 2013 Edition of Our Open Innovation Market Study

By | 2018-06-14T06:47:26+00:00 Mai 18th, 2013|Co-creation, OI Market Study, Open/User Innovation, Research Studies, Technologies & Enablers|

OIA_2013Fresh from the press! For the second time, our open innovation study explores that market of open innovation accelerators (OIA), organizations that help their clients to include external experts in all stages of an innovation project.

Open innovation today has become a core tool in innovation management. But which is the right method for open innovation? Which are the criteria to plan an open innovation project? Which intermediary or service provider has specific knowledge and expertise in, e.g., crowdsourcing, the lead user method, Netnography, idea contests, technology scouting, or broadcast search? This totally updated, 2013 edition report provides a comprehensive analysis of the providers and platforms for open innovation.

We take a detailed look on the methods, cost, project and community structures, and market size. Our purpose is to support strategic decisions when planning an open innovation venture. Managers will gain an overview of the intermediaries available for open innovation and will get advice how to identify partners for their project.

We invited more than 160 intermediaries to join our survey investigating
the OIA’s business model and environment, productivity, services offered, project specifics, and characteristics of their participant pool. In addition, we asked about estimates for the development of the open innovation market. Besides a lot of highly interresting findings about the market for open innovation in general and the intermediary's role in it, we were also able to compile 188 detailed accelerator profiles.

In the following weeks, we will post a series of articles with selected findings from the market study!

The study is available via Lulu.com in both a paperback and an ebook version.

A preview can be found here.

24 04, 2013

[Participate] Konferenz Effizienter Staat 2013 | 15.-16. Mai | Berlin, Germany [In German]

By | 2018-06-14T06:47:38+00:00 April 24th, 2013|Events, Open/User Innovation|

OGD-KonferenzIn wenigen Wochen beginnt in Berlin die 16. Konferenz "Effizienter Staat" mit dem diesjährigen Motto: "Moderne Verwaltung: offen, vernetzt und effizient". Am zweiten Tag der Konferenz (16. Mai) findet parallel die 2. Open Government Data D-A-CH-LI-Konferenz (ODG) statt.

Neben vielen weiteren interessanten Referenten wird auch Prof. Dr. Frank T. Piller sprechen und sich der Frage widmen, ob Open Innovation in der öffentlichen Verwaltung als große Chance oder doch letztlich nur Utopie zu betrachten ist.

Das Gesamtprogramm beginnt am Mittwoch (15. Mai) um 9.00 Uhr im dbb forum berlin, Friedrichstraße 169-170 (Anfahrtsskizze unter www.effizienterstaat.eu), endet gegen 18.00 Uhr und wird am nächsten Tag um 9.00 Uhr fortgeführt (Ende gegen 17.15 Uhr).

Weitere Informationen zur Konferenz finden Sie bitte auf der offiziellen Website.

23 04, 2013

[Interview] Don’t Tell Stories, Seek Solutions: The Story of the Problem Solution Conferences

By | 2018-06-14T06:47:43+00:00 April 23rd, 2013|Co-creation, Crowdsourcing, Events, Interview, Open/User Innovation|

En-mode-solutionsWe have been reporting on the format of teh "Seeks Solution" conferences before. The idea is both simple and surprisingly effective: turn a scientific conference upside down: Skip the presentation of successful research and undertakings and focus, together, on what is really interesting for everybody: challenges yet unsolved.

The event in question is, of course, the by now fairly popular series of "Seek Solutions" conferences.

Deutsch-cSince the first conference in Quebec, things have evolved and been refined. Christophe Deutsch of En Mode Solutions, the organization now planning and executing solution-seeking conferences in innovative hubs around the world, has kindly agreed to answer some of our questions on the concept, its evolution and the future – and how you can be part of it.

 

FTP: Christophe, your
"seek solutions" program takes a slightly different approach to
problem solving than usual. Can you explain in some brief words how it works
and what makes it special?

CD: We have developed a 4-Step Process that has given,
over the years, great results!

1 -Call for Problems: The promoter of the event asks his community to
submit complex problems that defy the standard analyses of his experts in the
field.

2 – Formulate Selected Problems: We help the promoter to select the problems most
likely to garner interest at the event and to formulate them so that they can
be more easily shared. An expert of the problem’s domain, called an ambassador
in our case, is put in contact with the solution seeker. Just by asking some
basic questions, the ambassador is able to help the solution seeker further
define the problem and ensure that the description that will ultimately be
posted on a web-based platform is sufficiently clear and broad.

3 – Disseminate to a wider community – Problem broadcast: We disseminate the problems to be addressed to a
vast range of specialists in a variety of fields. They can provide a different
outlook on the problems raised, ask preparatory questions and participate in
the event. Broadcast is done through a web-based platform including as much
information as possible, such as figures, references, or details of failed
solutions.

Two strategies are employed during the
problem-broadcast step. A general broadcasting approach ensures that everyone
who thinks they could help has the opportunity to participate. A targeted
broadcast to specialists based on expectations about what type of expertise
might be relevant to a particular problem is also used in parallel.

4 – Seeking Solutions Events: The last step is what differentiates the Seeking
Solutions approach from other open innovation techniques, because it involves a
real event where non-virtual collaboration arises. Solution seekers and problem
solvers come together during a full-day session to focus on the selected
problems. Careful preparation is required to ensure maximum output from the
event. The collaboration process is divided into three phases: i) divergence,
ii) exploration, and iii) convergence. Our facilitation methods allow for
significant and creative interaction with experts who are normally not part of
the same networks, and take full advantage of the “cross-pollination” of
brainpower effect.

You’ll be surprised to see that creative solutions
have been found to your complex problems in environments completely different
from your own.

FTP: From your website
one can tell that you have been organizing a number of solution seeking
conferences in the past. What did you learn from these? (How) did the concept
evolve over time?

CD: The call for problems for the
first event – Quebec Seeks Solutions (QSS) – was launched in June 2010. Ten
problems were submitted by nine industrial companies from the Quebec City area.
The problems were broadcasted online in early November 2010. On December 14,
2010, 175 people gathered at the Convention Centre in Quebec City to attend the
first problem-solving conference (Quebec Seeks Solutions).

For this first event, the largest
perceived gain was:

  • Networking outside the
    "normal" network,
  • The generation of new ideas for
    applications
  • A better understanding of the
    problem
  • Initiation of research contracts
    with real benefits and return on investment for the companies

A second edition of Quebec Seeks
Solutions took place in May 2012. Nine solution-seeking companies and 162
problem solvers participated in the two-day event. The outcomes were as good as
the first edition with some very nice success stories as a bonus.

In June 2012, we conducted a
workshop on the same basis at the ISPIM Conference in Barcelona, Spain. The
process was slightly adapted to the duration of the event and the context of
the conference. The workshop lasted less than two hours and the call for
problems was for innovation management issues only. Thirteen problems were
submitted and 5 were selected for the workshop. The solution seekers
appreciated the experience even though it only gave them a preview of what
could be achieved in a full-day event.

What we first learned so far is
that the intellectual-property issues that our detractors raise are not a
problem
, mainly because the event in itself is an exploration where everybody
feels free to contribute. Intellectual-property challenges typically arise
"downstream" from this initial exploration.

Secondly, there is a real value
in local open innovation. Some
people say “Why connect locally when you can connect easily to the world
nowadays?” The answer is simple. Because a combination of open innovation and
collaboration on a local scale brings most of the benefits… without the
potential inconvenience of cultural differences!
Often the seeker and the
solver need to engage in collaborative research activities to achieve the
solution. Here, a regional conference offers much better opportunities than a
worldwide web platform.

Finally, it’s the importance of
the collaboration process in itself. The animation of such a conference cannot
be done in a conventional manner. The animators have to be experimented with
large groups and able to adapt depending on what happens.

Our approach is in constant
evolution and we still experiment during each event. For example at some point
in 2012
, we tried a two days event in order to see if the evening could bring
some special collaborations or new ideas. And in November this year, we will
introduce a technology push through a technology platform that local R&D
centers possess in our Quebec Seeks Solutions event. This may give ideas for
new problems or technology transfer and generate even more results!

FTP: You have three new
conferences planned for 2013, in June, September and November. Can you tell us
a bit about these? What to expect? Any big
changes?

CD: Yes, indeed, the Seeks Solutions approach is spreading around!

  • 2nd
    ISPIM Seeks Solutions, June 18, 2013 – Helsinki, Finland.
    A large conference is a great place to explore problems
    because you have experts from all around the world that can participate. I
    predict that you should see a lot more of these workshops in the future in
    numerous conferences because they offer a great way to collaborate and network!
  • Polymères en mode
    solutions
    , September 26, 2013 – St-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Canada.
     Sponsored by the
    Quebec Plastic Industry Consortium tihis one day event will focus on this
    industrial sector only. Plastic companies will submit problems they experiment
    but we may also have other industrial companies that submit problems which
    could be solved by the plastic industry.
  • 3rd
    Quebec Seeks Solutions, November 5-6, 2013

    This is where it all started! And in addition this year is the Seeking Solutions Summit – Methods and
    Policies Creating a Local Ecosystem for Technology Transfer, Collaboration, and
    Local Innovation
    . This is where we hope the open innovation world community
    will meet this fall!

Several other events are in the
midst for Canadian cities, industries and conferences! Stay tuned!

FTP: Pretending I was a
company with a problem I would like to have solved. What do I do to profit from
"seek solutions"?

CD: It’s very easy. You submit your
problem to any upcoming event we have on our calendar at www.enmodesolutions.com/en or contact Yahya Baby (yb@enmodesolutions.com) to
discuss about holding your own event in your area.

FTP: In my understanding
you are offering to organize problem solving conferences internationally, not
only in Canada. How can communities or administrations contact you for talks
about hosting a conference? How does the organizational process work?

CD: Yes
our team is ready and eager to work a lot more overseas even though we are very
busy as it is. The best way to engage into this process is to contact Yahya
Baby via email yb@enmodesolutions.com or by phone at 581-996-6778. Once we become
involved, we help the promoters organizing a successful event every step of the
way.

FPT: From your
experiences so far, do you think that this and other forms of open problem
solution concepts are already well-accepted? Do they work? Or: what needs still
to be done to unleash their full potential?

CD: Open innovation and open problem solving approaches
require a change of mindset to reach full potential. A change of mindset most
often requires a pain or an enormous challenge to work it’s way. The current
economical context in Europe and North America is a good enabler I would think!
Because status quo is not an answer for anyone, in any type of industry and in
any country right now!

Many problems that the companies are facing today are
complex because they mix technical, environmental, social, and political
issues. To face this growing complexity, classical problem-solving
methodologies are no longer appropriate. The Seeking Solutions approach has the
potential to address the complex challenges of the next decade and we believe
that it can help us to migrate from a collection of intelligences to a real
collective intelligence. The next step is to encourage more and more companies
to try local open innovation and to convince local governments to support this
movement. 

FTP: Christophe, many thanks for these extensive insights into your visions. It will certainly be a plasure to be part of a future solution seeking event again and I wish you all the best for this venture!

If you are interested in more information about En Mode Solutions and the conference format – or want to get in touch about hosting a conference yourself – please see the official website.

20 04, 2013

Open Co-Creation Dinner in the ELAT Region – 14 May 2013

By | 2018-06-14T06:47:46+00:00 April 20th, 2013|Co-creation, Crowdsourcing, Events, Open/User Innovation|

Creating an open mindset for collaborative innovation:
Dinner Networking & Co-Creation Event – 14 May 2013

ImportAOLENewsv41553575The Eindhoven-Leuven-Aken (ELAT) region is one of the most powerful innovative and high tech regions in the world. Enlarge your network and get to know CEOs and Innovation Directors of this ELAT-region by learning about co-creation in an interactive way!

In a joint dinner-workshop event between several industry associations in the ELAT region, we will discuss different approaches to co-create with customers and users.

But beyond implementing some tools, successful co-creation demands a set of internal capabilities of your organization to transfer the external input into successful innovation.

We will hence also discuss how to create an open mindset for collaborative innovation yourself.
Tuesday ,14 May 2013, 17:00 – 22:00 at C-Mine 10 bus 2, 3600 Genk, Belgium
More: Official Website and Registration Form

Program

17.00 Registration and reception
17.20 Welcome
Wim Dries, Mayor, City of Genk
17.30 Find your personal innovation challenge
Guided by Prof. Dr. Frank T. Piller
18.30 3 way dinner
18.50 Strategic partnerships, the future of innovation
Jos Pinte, Director Innovation, Agoria
19.00 BiELAT, who are we ?
Rob Janssen, chairman, Foundation BiELAT
19.30 Success story of Future Sketching with ELAT partners
Stephane Berghmans, R&D Manager, TE Connectivity
20.00 Co-creation, it is more than you think
Prof. Dr. Frank T. Piller
21.00 Co-creation design challenge, All participants, guided by Prof. Dr. Frank T. Piller
22.00     End
9 04, 2013

[Featured Research] Technology Innovation Management Review on Local Open Innovation

By | 2018-06-14T06:47:50+00:00 April 9th, 2013|MC/OI on the Web, Open/User Innovation|

TIMR_logoThis month's edition of Technology Innovation Management Review focusses on Local Open Innovation. There are some really interesting articles featured in this issue, which is available as a PDF file from the official website as well. It especially provides great background information on the "Seeks Solutions" (or "problem conference", as I use to call it) approach!!! To experience this method live, participate at the ISPIM Seeks Solutions!

25 02, 2013

ISPM Seeks Solution: Problem Conference in Crowdsolving Innovation Management Challenges

By | 2018-06-14T06:48:18+00:00 Februar 25th, 2013|Co-creation, Events, Open/User Innovation|


Bild grossOne of the most innovative approaches to open innovation
is coming again this year: The Problem Conference.

Here: For Management Challenges!

The core idea: Turn a conference upside down. Instead
of presenting "solutions" and "best practices" to impress the other
participants with your successes, present your hardest challenge
.
Present what you could not solve, and ask openly for help! The
(beginning of the) solution then will be co-created with the
participants.

Due to the great success of the first problem conference in 2010 we are proud to announce to you the 2013 edition of the ISPIM Seeks Solutions Conference!

Taking place 16:00 – 17:30, June 18th, at the ISPIM conference in Helsinki (Room: 304 – 3rd floor). The ISPIM 2013 conference offers the unique opportunity to engage in this new form of "local open innovation".

Call for problems: What is your problem with managing innovation?

You have a problem related to innovation management and want to use the intelligence of experts from all around the world to solve it? Here’s how you can do it!

Submit your problem to ISPIM Seeks Solutions and if your problem is selected your problem will be treated during the one hour and a half workshop on June 18th at the ISPIM conference in Helsinki.

To submit a problem, describe it using here

The process is based on the open innovation problem broadcasting approach. Problems can be submitted until March 29th. The “best problems” will then be selected and broadcasted on the web few weeks prior the event. Problem seekers will also get some support from ISPIM experts to well define the problem prior to broadcasting it. During the workshop in itself, ISPIM delegates participating to the workshop will collaborate around the selected problems and help you in understanding it better.

If you need more information: contact conference staff at ispim.helsinki@enmodesolutions.com

Banner

4 02, 2013

Lego CUUSOO: How Lego Turns Your Ideas Into Cubic Reality

By | 2018-05-07T15:19:22+00:00 Februar 4th, 2013|Cases-Consumer, Co-creation, Crowdsourcing, Design, MC Alternatives, Open/User Innovation, Technologies & Enablers|

LEGO's Factory (later called "LEGO Design by me") has been one of the pioneers of mass customization.However, times change and Lego closed this "build on demand site" about a year ago and focused entirely on customer co-creation in the innovation process.

For this, they are partnering with CUUSOO; the mother of all crowdsourcing sites for product development (we described them in our 2006 paper on Threadless already!).

The project is called Lego CUUSOO and wors fairly simple: Everybody can submit an idea of what he would deem a great Lego product. Customers get to vote online and if the proposal gets sufficient buyer pledges the company turns it into reality and produces the toy.

Noew, there is a nice video giving more detail on this idea, it makes you instantly grab a pen and paper and start drawing your own powertoy idea…

 

28 01, 2013

Our M-Prize Hack Made It to the Finals, Now We Need YOUR Help Again!

By | 2018-06-14T06:48:32+00:00 Januar 28th, 2013|Contests, Open/User Innovation|

Hbr-mck-mixEnd of the last year TIM Group posted about our group having been invited to participate at the the HBR-McKinsey M-Prize . Back then we asked for your support by liking our "hack", the solution proposal we submitted.

With your tremendous help, our hack has made it amongst the finalists in round one as announced by the jury!!! Thank you to everybody who liked it!

Now we are of course more than enthusiastic to win the challenge. This will, again, only be possible with your help!

One of the key criteria in the final judging for the winners of the Innovating Innovation Challenge will be how finalists further develop their entry in response to the comments and questions from their peers (thats you). Self-evidently, to do this, we need your ideas and comments. These do not have to be extremely elaborated, just give us your thoughts.

Therefore, if you like our proposal and would like to see it win the contest and maybe become a reality, please give us your support one more time by going to the official website and posting your comments and questions in regards to our hack*. We will do our very best to improve our proposal based on your input in this great example of academic open co-creation.

Thank you very much in advance and wish us luck!

* You will have to register on the website to be able to post a comment, it only asks for a name and an email address. This is just to prevent automated spam and increase credibility of the process. Of course it is free and without any strings attached. If you are not already registered on the MIX website, you can do so here and then just head over to our hack, scroll down and add your comment.

17 01, 2013

[Featured Research] Study Backs Long Term Claim with Hard Data: User-Generated Products Make More Profit

By | 2018-06-14T06:48:38+00:00 Januar 17th, 2013|Co-creation, Crowdsourcing, Featured Research, Furniture - Home, Open/User Innovation, Research Studies|

Since years we argue that customers / users not just have good ideas for new products & services, but that products with roots in user innovation are actually more profitable and superior to inhouse-developed products. There has been some anecdotal evidence to prove this claim, and lots of case studies, but not hard data. But now a study provides hard evidence:


Journal_of_marketingUser-generated versus designer-generated products: A performance assessment at Muji
, by: Hidehiko Nishikawa, Martin Schreier, Susumu Ogaw, in: International Journal of Research in Marketing (2013)

Our colleagues Hidehiko Nishikawa (Hosei University), Martin Schreier (WU Vienna University) and Susumu Ogawa (Kobe University) show that user-generated products perform better
on the market than their (professional) designer-generated counterparts. Their idea is to systematically compare actual market performance of user-generated products with firm (designer)-generated ones.


User innovation (red) vs firm innovationThe authors present a unique data set gathered from the Japanese consumer goods brand Muji, which has drawn on both sources of ideas in parallel in recent years. They demonstrate that user-generated products in the furniture category, which are found to generally contain higher novelty outperformed their designer-generated counterparts on key market performance metrics.

Specifically, in the first year after introduction, sales revenues from user-generated products were three times higher and gross margins were four times greater than those of designer-generated products.

These effects also increased over time: after three years, the aggregate sales revenues of user-generated products were, on average, 1.25 billion yen (approximately 16 million dollars) higher, or five times greater, than the sales of designer-generated products. The corresponding average margin was an impressive 619 million yen (approximately 8 million dollars) higher, or six times greater, than the margin for designer-generated products. Finally, user-generated products were more likely to survive the three-year observation period than designer-generated products (i.e., were still on the market three years after introduction).

These findings clearly favor the paradigm shift identified in marketing research and appeal to managers considering the integration of user ideas into the process of new product development. In their paper, the authors discuss the study’s limitations and identify important avenues for future research.

I find this study especially interesting as MUJI is world-wide admired for their great inhouse design team! Also, the study shows that this is more than a novelty effect: Customers did not know whether a product was user designed or not, they just liked (and purchased) the product!