The future and design thinking We may think that the visualization of ideas of products, services and experiences through prototypes or videos is an important component of design thinking and therefore the constant improvements and adaptations of new technologies are facilities at the presentation of projects with a systemic and complex character. And it seems […]
The future and design thinking
We may think that the visualization of ideas of products, services and experiences through prototypes or videos is an important component of design thinking and therefore the constant improvements and adaptations of new technologies are facilities at the presentation of projects with a systemic and complex character.
And it seems reasonable to assume that the optimization of each component of a system independently leads to not optimization of the system per se (as a whole).
However when we think of the problem as a whole, integrative thinking, to work the parts, requires an interdisciplinary team to identify and develop solutions to each component of this larger system.
For integrative thinkers “their models capture the complicated, multi-faceted and multidirectional causal relationships between the key variables in any problem. Integrative thinkers consider the problem as a whole, rather than breaking it down and farming out the parts. Finally, they creatively resolve tensions without making costly trade-offs, turning challenges into opportunities.”
The meeting of all participants at the beginning of the design process to optimize the interactions between components enables them to minimize the cost of operations, increase efficiency and effectiveness, significantly reduce the impacts, and eliminate costly errors resulting from the lack of effective communication between the various actors. This is interdisciplinary teaming.
It is in differentiation between interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary (not integrative mixture of disciplines) lies the great strength and advantage of the first. Its power lies in its ability to stimulate meaningful collaboration in good time.
When the teams begin to work all the different perspective is covered, synergies are identified, the creative solutions developed, avoid irreversible errors, and we make a time management through effective coordination with open and effective communication.
With interdisciplinarity we create the possibility of integrating opportunities that otherwise would not exist, we make decisions in a timely manner and we create innovative synergies.
However these scenarios presented here are not the only ones in which we think. Also there are dangers when the interdisciplinary teams seek to integrate the full potential of its members.
Many times in the development of outreach work interdisciplinary problems can arise under the influence of contexts on the effectiveness and efficiency of the team. This means that the traditional processes to overcome social barriers that hinder the effectiveness of cognitive, team, must be innovative.
The problems with the effectiveness of the teams are related to the context and not with the process. Also are not technical, but social and cognitive barriers that diversity often carries.
One could say that the more fragmented is the larger context will be the barriers, but also the greater the wealth of work produced.
We must generate new ideas within the teams to show a context in which people can start questioning themselves and compare the concepts, and to allow the “client” of the work see the solution in a different way.
A context, a story.
Questioning and comparing concepts means that who listen can formulate a new construction of thought that can be tested in view of the experience of the past or with others, allowing people to assimilate a new framework and a new perspective on the issue under discussion.
“Innovation is only possible when questioning and challenging the norm to one brief has been given, becomes inherent to working when trying to find the best possible answer to the problem. More precisely opportunity when finding becomes more important than problem solving, which leads to answers that were not apparent or existing before – where designing is very closely related to inventing .
Nurturing the right breeding ground for design thinking, will make it necessary to overcome hierarchies between disciplines and to fully embrace the symbiosis of engineering, finance, operation and design, all the disciplines needed during the project to guarantee successful outcome. The recognition of the need for joint efforts on an equal level is important not only for product but also for service and business design.“ – Christiane Drews
Generally speaking, people really learn when they are curious and eager to ask. At that time, people become available to listen or find their own answers.
Do you want to comment?
I walk in the garden and felt an intense aroma! It was Jasmine! Something tells me that not having time is not having the idea of the things we have to do. Maybe a little more dramatic, not having time is not having the opportunity and freedom to feel the beauty of a garden with all the […]
I walk in the garden and felt an intense aroma! It was Jasmine!
Something tells me that not having time is not having the idea of the things we have to do. Maybe a little more dramatic, not having time is not having the opportunity and freedom to feel the beauty of a garden with all the strength of our senses.
Despite this apparent desperation, losing the notion of time is one of the clearest creative flow features.
And to be creative does not only come in moments of serendipity or brightness of stars. Creativity needs inspiration-friendly environments. To get the best ideas we need to align the components of the environment around us, including the voluntarism of people that make up our group or community.
And this is important because whenever I come across a problem I appeal to my creativity and the others’ creativity to find a solution. This way the sudden intuition, which is a special activity that generally occupies us shortly, may become a regular activity and a producer of satisfaction.
Being creative is so good and so useful that deserves more space in our agenda.
We know that without ambition we got nothing and without work we do not reap fruit.
To begin we try to define the problem clearly and check what the constraints are. Creativity often works with constraints but not always of time.
Nature induces us to observation and contemplation, and flows without giving time for that. To choose a place or environment which we feel warm, for instance the nature is the step that we need to create or to a whirlwind of moments in which many ideas come and go and therefore pick up the pencil and write is a sensible attitude.
It doesn’t matter if the ideas are good or bad, is not the time to evaluate. Often gathering the notes we find usefulness on old ideas. During this time we were able to see shapes, movements and colors, listen noise and melodies or feel smells and play with varying degrees of sensitivity.
During this time we felt!
It was not just the satisfaction of a balanced management of time that we get. It were also left impressions that have changed the way we wiil perceive, i.e. in the background we create a new frame of reference to incorporate future information.
Above all we create willingness to creativity and take conscience that the regular exercise of this kind of experience refines our creative capacity.
Observe and look deeply a complex system like ours, us, the environment and the interactions of the elements that compose it, allow us to face the problems in a balanced way with the help of creativity.
The inspiration is not only needed to write a book, make a film or paint a picture, it is needed every day, even to dream.
When we want something (even the aroma of Jasmine) we must win!
Want to comment?
To think about people and their environment “The future belongs to entrepreneurs who put people and the planet before short-term profit.” – Richard Branson When companies develop their activity with focus on short-term profits they lay on the table the quality of his game. They don’t care about the championship and just want the outcome of […]
To think about people and their environment
“The future belongs to entrepreneurs who put people and the planet before short-term profit.” – Richard Branson
When companies develop their activity with focus on short-term profits they lay on the table the quality of his game. They don’t care about the championship and just want the outcome of a game.
This dominant frame of mind and leadership that is easily wrapped up the whole organization, often results from hiring talent of election that in his brief passage through the companies eventually ensure amazing results but not the Organization’s sustainability.
The future is the result of a Championship and not a game and as Michael Jordan “Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships.”
It seems to be true that in this long transition from the “age of employment” to the age of projects and entrepreneurship, most companies have forgotten their important role as deadline stretched which is to ensure the well being of people and the environment.
Be aware of the needs of people and work towards building a sustainable and healthy balance is a challenge that only new generations of entrepreneurs seem to want to grab.
To create business thinking in the future is to take care of people and nature.
The new entrepreneurs are people who challenge the status quo and break the rules and reject many of the assumptions graciously offered by representatives of traditional enterprises.
Create business and breaking the rules or break the rules and create business can be a new dance at the interaction of people.
“I think we have to subvert the rules. If institutions, as Nobel Laureate Douglass North once famously described them, are the “rules that shape human interaction,” then the rules are broken. You know it, and I know it: if you play by the rules today, you’re probably going to end up broke, lonely, miserable, exploited, and empty. When the rules are broken, never play by the rules. Maybe you should walk away from that underwater mortgage. Maybe that degree doesn’t have to be in something “employable,” like finance — and maybe, if you push, it doesn’t have to take four years to finish it. Maybe you don’t have to get married, don’t have to get a “job,” buy two minivans and a McMansion, pack it bulgingly full of stuff you’ll never use, and call it a life. Maybe it’s only by breaking the dismally broken rules that you can rewrite better ones.
I think we have to invest differently. If the future looks uncertain or desolate, perhaps that has as much to with what we don’t consider part of “the economy” — love, trust, purpose, passion, human growth — as what we do: money, machines, and shiny stuff lining the beige exurban aisles. Maybe it’s time to invest in the soft stuff — people, experiences, ideas, your own human, social, and intellectual capital — instead.” – Umair Haque
The tremendous demand for shiny things is certainly not the best way to build a future with quality of life and we know that “The dream of wellbeing of some is not sustainable for all.”
Be it on the role of entrepreneur or in the role of consumers or users, it’s time to redefine our ability to invest in the future by providing new and better experiences when thinking of the well-being and success of the balance of this planet.
The transition from school “quick and easy profit” for the lasting and sustainable welfare school is made with an open mind and belief in the potential of people.
Do you want to comment?
Reasons for storytelling When we hear tell a story about the success that a team had and how they did it, we feel like if we’re working with our team, but without knowing, what to do in relation to some crucial issues, such as our business model. -The story can help make sure that all […]
Reasons for storytelling
When we hear tell a story about the success that a team had and how they did it, we feel like if we’re working with our team, but without knowing, what to do in relation to some crucial issues, such as our business model.
-The story can help make sure that all aspects of the business model have been addressed. .
-The history allows you to verify that all aspects of the business model are consistent with each other.
-The history allows checking whether everyone understands clearly the business model. The business model is the concrete topic for discussion on how everything fits and reduces or negates any misunderstandings.
-The story lets draw and redraw the communication processes.
In these times we experience the story, as if we had enjoyed a wonderful meal.
In a story, the idea that resides inside the story can become part of people. They don’t feel the story as outside observers, or as a critique about something or someone. They feel the story as active participants in story.
If we look back and walk through the moments that we remember, we consider that what happened build what we are today. It’s our history and our story.
No matter that the assignment of responsibilities for the good and bad times, because those moments were experienced and leave a trail that marks the path traveled.
And that’s why a story is a fact dressed with an emotion that obliges the action and that transforms our world.
The truth is that when we tell a story, when we look at the past, it doesn’t always arises in the same way. There will be times when the past look more smiling and others in that the bad times will prevail.
However, if we look to the future and if we want to tell our story, the story of what will happen, we also do not avoid the past. The past determined the way up here, and makes the decision for the future, not least by denial of unpleasant experiences, which should not be repeated.
Tell the story of the future is a matter that should be present in the leaders of the organizations that have the purpose of innovation. But it is not a a discipline held in schools where analysis and synthesis occupy the most of our area of reasoning.
“This kind of approach requires completely new capabilities. The successful strategists of the future will have a holistic, empathetic understanding of customers and be able to convert somewhat murky insights into a creative business model that they can prototype and revise in real time. To do all that, they’ll have to be good communicators, comfortable with ambiguity and ready to abandon the quest for certain, single-point answers.” – Roger Martin
If our project is to make our idea that is, new business models, to be adopted by others then we have a compelling story.
We can complement the numeric data to be presented with examples, stories, metaphors and analogies to make our positions. The use of color given by story combined with a language of the living word, lends a convincing quality and tangible to our point of view.
We know to tell our story with emotion and we are able to pass on to those who hear. With the story of our idea, our business model, it is the same thing, we tell our idea inside out and we put all the elements fit each other, so that the effect become maximum and causes emotions that we seek in the other.
An idea that we want innovative has to be transmitted with groundbreaking passion. It is the heat of passion which makes vibrate our listeners, readers or viewers.
Do you want to comment?
The construction of an experiment “To think like a designer can transform the way you develop products, services, processes, and even strategy”. – Tim Brown Design thinking process must be seen as a system of overlapping spaces, (inspiration, ideation and implementation) rather than a sequence of ordered steps. Design thinking is a mindset that this Kyudo’ […]
The construction of an experiment
“To think like a designer can transform the way you develop products, services, processes, and even strategy”. – Tim Brown
Design thinking process must be seen as a system of overlapping spaces, (inspiration, ideation and implementation) rather than a sequence of ordered steps. Design thinking is a mindset that this Kyudo’ quote can help us to understand.
“Kyudo, the practice of Zen archery, is a form of meditation on move – and a unique martial art. The focus of practice is in “clear mind” instead of taking aim. The target becomes a mirror that reflects the quality of a mind at the time of release the arrow. “
The problems are opportunities for inspiration that generate energy for the search for solutions. It’s like the target that we have seen when we have the bow and an arrow in hands.
Ideation is a process of generating, developing and testing ideas. Resembles a curve, which we imagine, designed by arrow path.
During the implementation we see all the way from design through to meet with people. It is time to release all of our energy and let the arrow leave.
“Working with the precision of form, develops a natural process by which the practitioner has the opportunity to see the mind more clearly. The target becomes a mirror that reflects the qualities of heart and mind at the time of the release of the arrow. “- www.zenko.org
Similarly a design thinker reflects the emotions and the needs of the consumer/user by virtue of a natural relationship that establishes with the ecosystem where they are inserted.
As Claudia Kotchka (P & G) said “design thinking is both a process and a mindset, and that always begins with the consumer.”
Design thinking is not an exclusive of the designers but there are some features in the profile of those people who should be noted!
One of those is empathy. They can imagine the world from multiple perspectives with a people-centric approach and also can imagine solutions based on the explicit needs, not articulated needs or even hidden needs from these people. The observation of details of environment where people cohabit has an important role in the identification of problems.
To ensure that all information is treated in an appropriate manner to the satisfaction of people’s needs, design thinkers use integrative thinking. It is not enough to use the analytical procedures to be able to choose among existent possible solutions, we must identify the salient aspects, even contradictory, and build an option that goes beyond existing limitations. Instead of choosing between A and B, we built C.
In the same sense, that is, being a potential solution better than the existing alternatives, the optimism of design thinkers leverages victories over the challenges to be met, even if this means to break with incremental innovation and embrace disruption. It is often during experimentation that disruptive solutions arise.
Today, seems to be very present in our minds the idea of the increasing complexity of products, services and even some experiments that are proposed to us. To arrive at this point it was needed a job that no longer fit with the traditional figure of the inventor or creative genius and lonely.
Today, what is being proposed is the result of collaboration between several people representing different disciplines, from various points of the globe and this brings to us special colored solutions.
Designers, engineers, psychologists, economists, anthropologists, etc, meet to collaborate and to find, at the intersection of their ideas, proposals that are economically viable, technically feasible and desirable for the people.
It is not from one day to the next that this shift entails, such as the quality of our mind in Kyudo, but if we imagine an environment where ideas have the smell of sea breeze, where windows and doors of the organizations open, both for consumers and for design thinking, then we have an environment that is conducive to a culture of innovation.
In design thinking there is all the necessary dignity, to face the challenges presented by consumers. It is now a matter of removing obstacles.
Do you want to comment?
Disruptive? Yes, but… The act of engaging consumers or users directly in the process of creation and innovation of products or services, allows organizations to maintain a regular contact with them. This contact is established at an early stage of the ideas and concepts, and allows the use of this community as a resource throughout […]
Disruptive? Yes, but…
The act of engaging consumers or users directly in the process of creation and innovation of products or services, allows organizations to maintain a regular contact with them.
This contact is established at an early stage of the ideas and concepts, and allows the use of this community as a resource throughout the development life cycle of product or service.
Online communities have a very high creative capacity and commitment to those enterprises. Existing tools of “Social Media” help to accelerate this link and now people from different places and occupations can exchange ideas with astonishing speeds among themselves and with companies. Companies now have a new challenge ahead of them and can no longer close up in their “castles”.
Companies need to be flexible and consider co creation as a learning process because there is so much yet to explore and refine.
Companies don’t have to redesign their business systems or its functional structure to start experimenting the co creation. In many cases, the first step is to identify similar initiatives of co creation within the company and start sharing these experiences “online”.
Leaders of organizations involved in co creation or the “new leaders” are of an extremely important and demanding role to carry out such projects.
And one of its tasks and at the same time concerns is how to maintain or increase a high level of quality in the participation and consequently in result with a community characterized by diversity.
It is generally accepted that the co created products, fruit of diversity, have higher quality values than those which originate only in enterprises ‘ internal resources. This notion was appointed by me in an article “Fostering diversity is to promote creativity and reinvent the Organization.”
Despite this notion can match the “one truth”, companies do not relinquish their wisdom, to apply their own solutions, to business critical situations.
In fact being the companies who ends up staying with the intellectual property of co creation, it is understandable that its position on quality is the final decision, a fact that the remaining co creators recognize and accept.
But then what kind of compensation has the community when they recognize the ownership of companies of co created goods?
What kind of recognition and reward may have the co creators?
In online communities, affinity and trust are important. The members of these communities feel rewarded by affinity, which translates into a satisfaction to participate in the creation of something which they could use.
It seems to be recognized that people who participate in co creation, are adherents or “fans” of certain brands and often refuse to participate if the brand or company is not of its own choosing.
On the other hand participant’s incentives such as fame, the fun and the pure altruism (possibility of participation) are a good reason to justify the membership in many cases.
But it’s good to remember that the effectiveness of co creation will depend a lot of value created by interested parties.
On the one hand, companies must be able to identify opportunities with the greatest potential for return, and simultaneously manage the risks that the activity involves without adding effort to their activity. On the other hand, being a new activity a competitive advantage that encourages customer loyalty also represents a need to recognize and reward the new creators.
This mutual co creation relationship affects both the user/consumer and the company. In the enterprise it leverages a new way of thinking, interact and innovate, where the role of customers is no longer passive and is now more like agents of change.
People no longer are seen as those who purchase goods or services, but products that provide a service and a value that depends on their experience. This naturally brings with it major implications for companies regarding the understanding of the “new customers”.
In order to trigger change by innovation co-creation needs to be implemented as disruptively as necessary and no-disruptively, as possible – Promise
Do you want to comment?
Trust and collaboration Never our ability to manage change and complexity was so important, as it is today, when we consider the extent to which we are bound by the fast pace of life that we take. If there are people who manage to maintain a healthy balance between the tensions of the various environments […]
Trust and collaboration
Never our ability to manage change and complexity was so important, as it is today, when we consider the extent to which we are bound by the fast pace of life that we take.
If there are people who manage to maintain a healthy balance between the tensions of the various environments that make up their lives, others despair and have no control with so much change, symbol of discomfort and adversity.
To manage (maintain balance/adapt) change, the first step is to understand the internal mechanisms that make the change so difficult, and that serve as food to our natural resistance, when faced with something new.
Doesn’t seem to have great importance the existence of these dimensions, but they begin to have meaning when we observe the resistance expressed by leaders from numerous organizations. It is then that we should be talking about courage to be free of the status quo and to take risks.
The psychological change, which leaders and all employees from the organizations are liable results from allowed changes or socially permitted in organizations structures and in drawings of hierarchies.
To change from a control zone to a zone of cooperation implies the acceptance of the new rules and the adoption of new behaviors.
Be used or accustomed to a particular posture does not require special effort to maintain it, even when this way of being is not perfect or the most appropriate.
Change requires an adjustment period and some questions about whether the change is actually a good thing because anything new always involves some risk on our part.
However, when organizations are living a culture of courage the acceptance of risk is seen as an invitation to explore opportunities and as a challenge to the capacities of individuals and organization.
Creating a culture of courage is not only create brave people who before were afraid to express their ideas and to experiment. It is mainly to create a mood of confidence, integrity and tolerance for taking risks.
To not control or obey a hierarchy established and allow the construction of a network of collaboration based on trust and not in inconsequential euphoric moments is a good way for a culture of courage.
When there is trust, courage emerges to be able to understand more deeply and with other eyes new opportunities to solve problems and this is only possible with an open mind to receive return of what one does.
To find the solutions that meet the needs identified we have to talk about business and this implies a strategy that includes not only provide a value and meaning to the user/consumer but also to create a competitive advantage and generate profit for the organization.
It is not enough to differentiate. It is necessary that our solution is viable and profitable and it only reaches through a collaborative work in team with a lot of interaction based on shared confidence and courage.
-Collaboration that must exist also in experimentation be it a product concept or a business model, where the ideas are experimented sooner and more quickly, taking advantage of the experience and perspective of all members of the respective teams or organization.
-Courage to try or to take the initiative and go to action, proceeding with pioneer steps facing adversity.
-Confidence to solve problems in a creative way and with eyes and ears in the user/consumer, traversing their daily lives through observation to detect opportunities and identify needs often hidden.
-Courage to trust abandoning control impulses and to listen to dissenting voices or to confront difficult issues or sensitive ones.
Courage to trust and trust to have courage can be important puns in the life of an organization.
Do you want to comment?
From extrinsic value to the intrinsic value When we talk about innovation, many of us want to say something created new which adds value. This value represents the reward for anyone who is innovative, be it an individual or a company. But it can be more than that and so this value can be the result […]
From extrinsic value to the intrinsic value
When we talk about innovation, many of us want to say something created new which adds value. This value represents the reward for anyone who is innovative, be it an individual or a company.
But it can be more than that and so this value can be the result of a proposal for co creation where the value is shared by the actors involved.
When organizations act in the market or in a given environment they are in an activity almost always stormy to create value that can be shared by its owners or shareholders.
These companies are under a careful observation on the part of investors on the market, who use a variety of analytical techniques to estimate the intrinsic value of securities in hopes of finding a company in which the true value of the investment exceeds its market value.
“The intrinsic value is the the actual value of a company or an asset based on an underlying perception of its true value including all aspects of the business, in terms of both tangible and intangible factors. This value may or may not be the same as the current market value. – Investopedia
This is just one of the interesting aspects of value creation in which the notion of value is based on a quantitative and private aspect, i.e. money.
There is, however, in the creation of value by a company as well as other interested parties, a qualitative meaning, which is, moreover, a common occurrence in nature.
Nature, environment in which we integrate, is a dynamic and evolutionary process, where everything that happens are moments and events of high quality whose value it draws is the fruit of our relationship with her or it (World).
It is this kind of relationship that I think exists between a company’s customers and itself and that is the source of the shared value.
So here we have, on the one hand, the value most appetizing fruit by shareholders and on the other hand, the intrinsic value of the goods or services that consumers and users incorporate in their life when they assign meaning.
Reflecting a bit, we can see that throughout the ages, we packed up within our mind the reasons or justifications for thinking that something has value. Those are things in which we believe and which exist around us or that connect us to others for feelings of loyalty.
Those are beliefs that may or may not meet our deepest needs.
If we want to propose the creation of something that actually make a difference and with meaning we have to create intrinsic value that does not depend on what the world thinks, but that corresponds to a set of structured events, where each event incorporates the qualities of other events of this structure.
Imagine a whole range of experiences (events) that a trip (structure) provides and where the qualities of a restaurant (building) are included in the meal. In these circumstances we could say that there is an intrinsic value.
However, if there is no integration of qualities we are facing an “instrumental value (or extrinsic value, contributory value) that is the value of objects, physical objects and abstract objects, not as ends-in- themselves, but as a means of achieving something else”.
The intrinsic value is something of value to us, regardless of what others think.
Intrinsic value does not mean that something can have value only for a while, or even for a long period of time. On the contrary, intrinsic value is a value forever and that remains relatively unchanged, even if it is in our memories.
But then what value should we propose to the users and consumers of our services or products?
Some argue (Neil Rackha) that the intrinsic value is the value that people see on the product or service as a well and which can be quickly replaced by other competitive offerings, while the extrinsic value is a value that allows people to leverage the core competences of possible suppliers.
So if a “thing” is intrinsically good to meet people’s needs why we need extrinsic value?
Do you want to comment?
Is it good to ask questions with sense? If a company wants to have as a basic principle, to build an environment of innovation to be successful in a sustainable manner, this organization must be connected and need to leverage external ideas to his business to leave a mark of difference and meaning. The good […]
Is it good to ask questions with sense?
If a company wants to have as a basic principle, to build an environment of innovation to be successful in a sustainable manner, this organization must be connected and need to leverage external ideas to his business to leave a mark of difference and meaning.
The good ideas that flow on the outside walls of the companies did not arrive to the interior of the organizations if they are not searched and identified with a clear and well defined purpose and for this to happen we must ask questions.
But not any meaningless questions! The important thing is to ask the right questions when we think of innovation and the organizations must learn to do it.
If there is a climate of openness to new ideas in organizations there is place to opportunities to create things that are more exclusive and that allow the creation of a difference in the market.
This climate of openness push leaders to develop critical capacity to ask questions instead of having all the answers, a trend that keeps people more focused on problems and obstacles than solutions.
We ask about the future without putting in doubt the arrival and questioning not only the “how”, but also “the why” of attitudes and of the steps that you must take to get there.
It’s a bit like knowing the future best practice and understand the meaning of these practices devised within the context of the future and its possible impact on the whole organization.
You feel tomorrow as if it were in the past!
It is not easy to escape to what we learn by thinking that it is safe or appropriate for managing a particular process. It is worth pointing out that what was passed, almost always had as successful experiences support existed for hypothetical attitudes to be taken.
In the beginning of this century, we already can see that the speed that new things are available requires a different attitude.
Gary Hamel on “The future of Management” (putting principles to work), proposes an exercise that consists of redesigning, answers to a challenge, that is, describe the main features of a particular process that was chosen by applying the principles of the “new management.”
Once we have mapped the process, here are some questions we put to facilitate the response to the challenge, challenge that extends to all of us and that are revealing of how to ask questions:
– introduce a wide range of data, views, and opinions in the process? How would you draw the process that would facilitate rather than frustrate the continuous development of new strategic options and encourage the relentless experimentation?
– How would you redesign the process for successfully exploited market wisdom, rather than just the wisdom of experts?
– How would you redesign the process so that encourage rather than discourage dissenting voices?
– How could this process encourage employees to identify and connect with objectives that personally care?
– How could this process be redesigned in order to help the business be or become an even more exciting and vibrant place to work and a magnet for creative talents?
We’re at a time when the world is getting more turbulent and changing of what organizations are able to respond or adapt and that’s why we need better organizations and better people to manage.
Probably people adapt more easily to change than organizations putting challenge in another level and that is to make individual adjustments to match with the adaptation of the organization.
In other words we have to transform organizations thinking in people and stop making “evolve” people thinking in organizations.
Do you want to comment?
The role of individuals and communities Today the increasing need to interact with the market and think more on services makes it necessary to create open spaces where creativity and new proposals are more sense. However this puts some questions: How can we co create new products and services and leave communities or ecosystems better […]
The role of individuals and communities
Today the increasing need to interact with the market and think more on services makes it necessary to create open spaces where creativity and new proposals are more sense. However this puts some questions:
How can we co create new products and services and leave communities or ecosystems better than they were before our arrival?
One way to achieve this is to bring these communities or the ecosystem to interact with the manufacturing companies and service providers through co creation.
“The traditional system of company-centric value creation (that has served us so well over the past 100 years) is becoming obsolete. Leaders now need a new frame of reference for value creation. In the emergent economy, competition will center on personalized co-creation experiences, resulting in value that is truly unique to each individual. The authors see a new frontier in value creation emerging, replete with fresh opportunities. In this new frontier the role of the consumer has changed from isolated to connected, from unaware to informed, from passive to active. As a result, companies can no longer act autonomously, designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels with little or no interference from consumers.
Armed with new tools and dissatisfied with available choices, consumers want to interact with firms and thereby co-create value. The use of interaction as a basis for co-creation is at the crux of our emerging reality. The co-creation experience of the consumer becomes the very basis of value.” – C.K. Prahalad, Venkat Ramaswamy
The role of the consumer has changed in this new frontier of value creation! But does the role of enterprises should be maintained?
According to a report from McKinsey Quarterly businesses have three ways to win with the adoption co creation.
-Companies can capture the value of product or service co created to sell good ideas arising from networks. Ex: Lego
-Companies can capture value, providing a complementary product or service. Ex: Red Hat.
-Companies can benefit indirectly from the co creation process, for example, through a better tag or strategic position.
This co creation’s approach seems promising but of course some obstacles or difficulties can arise:
How to attract and motivate the co creators?
What is the role of local communities?
What type of path to follow and how to control flows of ideas?
The ideas or creations can arise by virtue of challenges or accidentally without apparent connection to an unsolved problem. These two starting points may converge on a solution, but often what we are looking for is to solve problems.
An important part in the feasibility of co creation is how the problems are structured to facilitate participation. Keep the problem as a whole could be an option, but often it is necessary the fragmentation to allow the participation of a greater number of co creators. (Example Fiat)
If the challenges are motivating factors and problems are structured so communities can be productive but still need clear rules, transparent leadership and have processes for defining goals and for resolving conflict among the members who are after all the focus of co creation.
Putting the focus on unmet needs or consumer/user needs not articulated and making the integration of these in an open and interactive way, we make them the central aspect of the warp of co creation activities and co creators.
Co creation is above all collaboration. When we talk about co creation, we talk about how we can work together to solve problems, to combine perspectives and different approaches to a problem.
This may involve the collaboration of consumers/users to find results from a communications strategy that involves products, services and experiences.
Going back to the initial issue we check that the co creation assigns the value of the context to the sense of things by involving users and its ecosystem or community in the creation of something new.
This way the contextualization of the service or product becomes more visible.
Then there is an emotional dimension closest to the personal nature of each person (co-creator) that is translated into opportunity for collaboration and co creation synonymous with authorship and ownership.
It is these values that should be perceived and worked by companies as a means of recognition of persons involved in co creation.
Note: In this process of business transformation it is always useful design thinking, because DT offers a natural space of encounter for the technology, the business thinking and values of people.
Do you want to comment?
TagsAnalyses and intuition Art and innovation Ask questions Assumptions and innovation Behavior and innovation Behavior change Business model Business models Collaboration and innovation Connections and creativity Create value Creativity and diversity Creativity and empathy Creativity and sustainability Critical thinking Designthinking Design thinking and business Diversity and creativity Diversity and Innovation Emotional experiences Empathy and innovation Evaluation of ideas Innovation and Human Resources Innovation and Management Innovation and networks Innovation and observation Innovation and possibilities Innovation and trust Innovation Culture Inovattion Institute for the Future Interception of ideas Intuitive thinking Making decisions Marty Neumeir Motivation and collaboration Open Innovation Services Passion and creativity Protoypes Resistance to change Rethinking options Simplicity and innovation Time and creativity values and innovation White space
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- February 2016
- March 2014
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011