Taking global innovation to Stavanger

Looking forward to welcoming global strategy & innovation expert, Rita McGrath to Stavanger. She’ll be speaking at Statoil’s Competitiveness Day at the end of March.

Rita’s globally recognized as one of the top thinkers in strategy and her latest book has been awarded “Strategy Book of the Year” on several occasions. Rita’s key message; companies need to learn how to innovate and change even faster.

We are also delighed to have Rita as member of our global advisory board.

RIta’s first business trip to Norway comes at just the right time for an industry trying to innovate outside of its traditional core business. This is really taking global innovation to Stavanger.

 

We also recommend her excellent talk at the Global Peter Drucker Forum in Vienna.

 

 

 

 

Taking global innovation to Stavanger

Meet the transformers

In times of change, do you cut costs or innovate? Most executives are trained, hard-wired to cut costs. Some, they innovate and change – radically. We call them the Transformers.
Meet them at Strategy Summit.

There are three kinds of innovations

According to one of the world’s leading experts on corporate innovation, Professor Clay Christensen, there are three kinds of innovations; Efficiency innovations, Performance-improving innovations and Market-creating innovations.

#1 Efficiency innovations allows you to do more with less. Often, this means cost cutting, downsizing and making more efficient use of capital. Improving production lines, LEAN and organizational restructuring are all elements of this first category of innovations.

This kind of innovation can easily be handled in spreadsheets and financial assumptions. It quickly gives you improved financial metrics and will often make the board both comfortable and happy.

#2 Performance-improving innovations replace old models with newer models. iPhone 6+ or iPad 3 are perfect examples of ever-improving products. Flexible business models with a high degree of learning and adaptability are performance-improving innovations.  This category has many known factors and any innovation can be reasonably estimated on cost/benefits/market size/customer uptake and future cash flow.

Often, this kind of innovation follow a linear logic, as the same core product or service keeps getting incrementally better over time. As such, these innovations often fall prey to the radically new or highly disruptive forces.

 #3 Market-creating innovations are a very different category. These innovations create things that does not exist. They deliver value to consumers you do not know in markets you have never been. They require a bold, forward-looking board and management team to take a number of calculated risks as most factors are yet unknown. Market size? Who can tell? Price Point? Only volume and experience will show, but it is likely to trend towards. Required technology? Plenty, some of which does not exist. Business Models? We hope we will figure them out as we go.

Recent successes; Tesla Motors, Amazon Cloud, SpaceX, Zaptec, Uber, Snapchat and Facebook.

This third kind of innovation makes most executives and boards highly uncomfortable. It requires risks, aspirations, bold ideas and a high degree of business model flexibility to master.

What did you learn in school?

We need all three kinds of innovations. But, the problem is, most executives and boards are trained in the first two, with most emphasis on number one, Efficiency innovations. Spreadsheets, economic assumtions and safe calculations are the fall-back reflex to most executives facing troubling times.

Today we read in Norwegian newspapers; ‘’we’re facing a crisis”. The oil price is dropping; from $€115 to $47, with some analysts predicting $20. Our Prime Minister, Erna Solberg, speak publicly on the need for “more legs to stand on”, on the need for Norway to develop new industries. Industries using our technology, our skills and our advanced know-how, onto new areas and new markets. The Prime Minister is calling for Transformation. The Prime Minister is calling for Market-Creating Innovations. Problem is, most executives do not know how.

Leading strategic transformations

An increasing number of companies are starting to realize they need to change, to innovate and in many cases deeply reinvent themselves. The assumptions they took for granted; market stability, rate of external change, customer loyalty, global oil prices are changing faster than any scenario predicted – if they even ran scenario analysis.

One client of ours discussed a scenario workshop his team ran a year ago. He suggested, as a scenario, that the oil price would drop to $70 – or just below. Most executives in the room laughed it of, stating “That would be a huge problem for us”. Well, today it’s sitting near $45 – and dropping rapidly.

Industries outside the energy field are facing similar scenarios. Increased competition from abroad, using newer technology and lower cost structure cause the base assumptions to come under pressure, leaving management and the board searching for a near-term, quick-fix solution.

Across these industries, what they should be focusing on is learning to lead strategic transformations. What they should develop is the deep capacity for market-creating innovations.

Meet the transformers


Strategy Summit 2015 Tranformation _Meet the transformers 1

Around the world, a handful of companies are busy developing the deep capability of transformation and repeat reinvention. DSM, Dutch company with 24.000+ employees have gone through five significant waves of transformation, most recently leaving the oil industry to transform itself into a global leader in advanced life- and materials sciences. Behind this transformation is a long-term, capability building in innovation and new business development.

Shackelton Energy Company is leading the development of the next phase of the global energy industry. Their transformation is on a industry level (see the Innovation Pyramid and Nine Levels of Innovation). Their aspiration; putting gas stations in space and – over time – become just another boring utility…. Says the company, “Our fuel stations will change how we do business in space and jump-start a multi-trillion dollar industry. Much like gold opened the West, lunar water will open space like never before.”. Interestingly, the company is now travelling to the Nordics to team up with mining, oil and energy experts to develop the industrial operations. It is, says the company, “It’s like building an offshore oil rig—only in space’’

Now you can meet them, and learn first hand from these transformative companies, on January 29th.

Welcome to Strategy Summit

We believe most companies need to learn how to develop the capacity for market-creating innovations. Most executives need to understand what transformation means for their companies and most boards need to handle the risks and uncertainties in deep transformations. That’s why we invite you to our second annual Strategy Summit: Transformation. Taking place in Stavanger, Norway on January 29th, Strategy Summit, this one-day conference is all about  how you can lead strategic transformation.

Program Highlights

Putting gas stations in space: fueling the space frontier
Jim Keravala, co-founder, Shackelton Energy Company

Making space investible: show me the markets!
Erika Ilves, co-founder Transplanetary

Leading strategic transformation: DSM’s journey from mining to sciences
Rob Kirschbaum, frmr vp open innovation, dsm

Newspace – it’s time to think outside the planet
Ole Gunnar Dokka, member of the board, think outside the planet and strategy & innovation director, INT

The architecture of strategy & transformation
Christian Rangen, Partner, Engage // Innovate, co-founder Innovation Dock

And network with change leaders and innovators and learn new strategy tools for transformation.

Hope to see you in stavanger on january 29th.
Learn more at www.strategysummit.no

E-post signatur_UuberMvisma

Meet the transformers

The need for new strategy tools

What strategists need _ Engage Innovate Blog

Since 2010, we’ve been on a misson to “develop and share new strategy tools”. Our work goes under the title, ”Strategy Tools for the Next Generation“. In the the latest McKinsey Quarterly, the consulting firm lays out their case for a world in need of new strategy tools. It’s a strongly recommended read

The evidence is abundant. The world needs new strategy tools. The process of strategy; how companies shape their own future is rapidly changing. Yet the challenge remains; how do we solve tomorrow’s challenges using yesterday’s tools. Well, simply put. We don’t. Most of the strategy tools in actual use around the world were built for a time of slower change, less integrated markets, a more stable industry structure and a far longer life-time of most large companies.

This is just the reason we are in need of new tools, new thinking and a fundementally new logic around strategy. We’ve been proposing this for a number of years through “Two Lenses on Strategy“.

Two lenses on strategy
Two lenses on strategy by: Engage // Innovate’s Strategy Tools for the Next Generation

With this background in mind, we found McKinsey’s recent “What the Strategists Need: A Meeting of the Minds”, to be an incredibly valuable contribution to the field.  In a lenghty conversation between Strategy Officers, CEO’s, Strategy Professors and McKinsey’s Head of Strategy Practice, we get a great look into the current thinking around ”the state of the discipline,…with an emphasis on innovation in a changing world”.

We’ve chosen a few sections for summary of the talk (in italic) and our own comments below.

Old tools are actively misleading

”Yes, I think we may need new tools or frameworks. When the environment changes profoundly, the maps with which we navigate it may need to shift as well. For instance, from telco to healthcare to computers, sector boundaries are changing or dissolving, and new business models are redefining the competitive landscape. So tools such as Michael Porter’s five forces, created for a more stable, more easily definable world, don’t just lose their relevance—they become actively misleading”

This is a crucial point. The stable industry structure most strategists are comfortable with is increasingly getting challenged. Rita McGrath suggests “arenas” as fields of competitive thinking. A failure to acknowledge and understand these forces, will lead executives to view the world through wrong and directly misleading lenses.

We use what we know

”One reason our frameworks often seem out of date is that managers persevere to the point of desperation with the familiar things they learned 10, 20, or 30 years ago”

This is something we see often with clients and workshop participants  – and it also explains why the field of strategy is moving slowly in established companies. Today’s top executives went to school 20-30 years ago, and the theories and tools they learned were already getting out-dated. It’s no wonder, and quite a natural explanation on “the stuff we learned, is the stuff we feel comfortable using”.

Our tools are getting out-paced 

“A major problem is that the theoretical and empirical research in strategy has moved so quickly… that its distillation into intuitive concepts and frameworks applicable to strategy-making processes of firms has lagged far behind”

Yet, the challenge is not only the executives learning slowly (see our previous point). It’s also very much a problem of academy moving too slowly. A typical strategy research project can take years to design and complete, and yet several more years and multiple reviews to get published. In the meantime, the research and emerging tools simply get out-dated. Erik Wilberg, a senior lecturer on strategy at BI – Norwegian Business School and a long-time researcher on the media industry stated, “by the time my research gets published, it’s already out-dated”. Yet, this is changing. Crowd-sourcing, built on an open, global platform is now driving speed in academic research and time-to-market. The best example has been the “The Capitalist’s Dillemma“, with it’s unique approch to research. We can expect to see more creative, disruptive models of research in the future.

First, think. Different

My view is that we need …to help executives rethink what they do”

A key starting point for any strategy process; what’s our mind-set.Our starting point is always to help explore existing dominant logics and thinking modes. Without this, most teams simply fall into the mental trap of “more of the same, within our hidden, predominant view of the world”, i.e. trapped deeply in the box.

Innovation Thinking Modes -by Strategy Tools for the Next Generation
Innovation Thinking Modes -by Strategy Tools for the Next Generation

There’s a superb selection of books, helping Strategy Officers challenge their existing mind-set. We recommend:
Creative Confidence, by the Kelly Brothers
Creating Minds, by Howard Gardner
Mindset, by Carol Dweck

Questions drive creative thinking

”Framing questions is the other tough challenge, and it’s one of the most important yet underappreciated parts of strategy development”

Yes! A core skill for any Strategy facilitator, Strategy Officer and CEO, is the ability to find and ask the right questions at the right time. The skill to ask mind-opening, exploring and energizing questions, while most people around the table simply expect another PowerPoint presentation is a trigger for good stratey processes.

Strategy is fundamentally a creative excercise 

”A strategy is not the obverse of an analysis. It usually comes from some creative insight”

Gary Hamel, Clayton Christensen, Rita McGrath, Bill Fischer, Alex Osterwalder and Yves Pigneur, Costas Markides, Scott Anthony and Mark W. Johnson are just a hand-ful of the strategy experts arguing strategy being a fundementally creative excercise. Yet, few executives are trained in the skills and tools to make this happen. Yet.

Strategic innovation is challenging 

”…but it’s darned difficult to create truly innovative strategy options.”

Strategy; from "linear plan" to "a portfolio of business models"
Strategy; from “linear plan” to “a portfolio of business models”

We see the field of strategy moving from “a linear plan” to “juggeling a portfolio of overlapping and competing business models”. Rita McGrath calls this “balance a transient portfolio” of business models.

Developing a series of strategy options is one thing. Developing and running a series of business models, and reinventing the company again and again around these various business models, that’s a whole other challenge. Today, Amazon and Apple are the two leading examples. Tesla Motors is emerging as another. Yet, the truth is, for most strategy executives today, ”…it’s darned difficult to create truly innovative strategy options.”

This is why we find our work around Strategy Tools for the Next Generation to be highly energizing and a fantastic challenge. The world is learning to work differently with strategy – and we hope to contribute to that movement. The McKinsey Roundtable is another great conversation on the topic and we will see more of these in the future. For us, the next will be in Vienna, in November, we’re we’ll be joining the 6th annual Global Drucker Forum, The Great Transformation. With many of the world’s leading strategy academics in session, we’re looking forward to the conversations on changing how the world works with strategy and innovation.

The need for new strategy tools

FT.com: Business Model Innovation

Note; 

This article by Dr. Oliver Gassman was so spot on, we just had to share it….. A very precise, brief explanation of business model innovation. Thanks FT.com! 

The danger in missing the innovation moment

Companies fail to identify future opportunities because they do not have fresh business models

Have you ever wondered why hyper-successful companies like Nokia or Kodak suddenly lose their edge? How companies such as Commodore Computers, Grundig, Nakamichi, Newsweek or Polaroid could possibly fail?

They all had abundant research and development resources, top employees and a profound knowledge of their markets. But they had another thing in common: they all missed the moment when they should have left their successful path to rethink their business models. They missed out on radical innovation because they were too busy managing daily business and serving current clients – instead of looking for future opportunities.

 

ON THIS STORY

It seems the business model

Products and companies do not differentiate winners from losers; it is the right business models that do. Of BCG’s 25 most innovative companies in 2013, 14 are business model innovators. For example, Apple became the biggest music retail seller without selling one CD; Netflix reinvented the video business without operating a single video store. Google continues to attack new industries with its data-based services and devices; Google’s products from glasses, to self-driving cars to smart thermostats are just a means for increasing and leveraging Google’s data-based consumer insights.

Business model innovation is more profitable and more sustainable than product innovation and is badly needed in Europe today.

How are we addressing this issue in business schools? Too often business schools preach interdisciplinary research and team thinking while teaching in functional silos such as strategy, marketing, operations or finance. Global competition requires a more holistic approach to business development that typically reflects business model thinking.

Managers taking a business model view ask who-what-how-why questions for every new product, for every new company and for every new process they develop. Who is our target customer? What are we offering our customer? How do we deliver the value proposition? And why does the business model generate profit? These questions are interdependent and often touch the dominant logic of an industry.

Business model innovators like Google, Amazon, Nestlé, Hilti and Daimler revolutionised their industries by overcoming its dominant logic. Amazon has become the biggest bookseller in the world even though it does not own a single brick-and-mortar store; Skype is the largest telecommunications provider worldwide even though it does not own any network infrastructure.

But overcoming the dominant logic of their industry remains the biggest barrier for experienced managers. Some innovators do it accidentally, some intuitively, but rather seldom as a systematic leadership task.

Compare this to engineering and engineering schools. Every engineer learns design rules for new product development in their first year, but business schools do not teach how to design new business models. Business engineering still seems to be an art that only a few gifted entrepreneurs such as Steve Jobs and Larry Page have mastered.

There are design rules and patterns for business model innovation, but they are rarely actively developed and taught. Developing a business model is a craft that can be learnt.

Research at St Gallen on more than 350 of the largest business model revolutions within the past 50 years found that 90 per cent of all business model innovations are based on 55 core patterns.

For example, when Nestlé invented Nespresso capsules in 1986 it revolutionised the coffee market and today 5bn capsules are sold annually. Nespresso’s strategy of selling its coffee machines for very little, while charging €80 per kg for coffee is based on Gillette’s razor-and-blade business model. Nestlé combined it with a lock-in pattern, where customers cannot switch to competitors’ cheaper products.

Executives, business engineers and innovators have to learn systematically how to develop new business models. Our action research as well as in-house company projects shows that executives can learn these patterns by being confronted with concrete and challenging questions. For example, how would Nespresso run your business? It is amazing how creative managers become once they begin to think in this way.

The biggest challenge is learning how to unlearn. This is a challenge that should be taken up by business schools.

The author is professor of technology management at the University of St Gallen

High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/b2ef363c-31c4-11e4-b377-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz3Cpv8TBe3

FT.com: Business Model Innovation

On Tesla’s TV

It’s kind of cool to get picked up and featured on Tesla Motor’s internal tv stream.

Earlier this year we held the Strategy Summit: Learning to Work Differently with Strategy.
29 CEO’s and business leaders gathered in Stavanger, Norway for a full day of hands-on strategy tools and strategy cases. One of these tools, and one of these cases was Tesla Motors.
We used the company as a case study on the “Three Levels of Business Models” tool.

Today, we noticed Tesla Motors is running this on their company internal smart tv solution.
Cool.

On Tesla’s TV

Great case: Transforming Korea Telecom

We’re big fans of the Mix – Management Innovation Exchange. It’s a fantastic platform for sharing and developing ideas around management innovation, HR, strategy and innovation.

KT

Recently, our friends at Strategos was featured in a transformation case they worked on with Korea Telecom.
This is a great case and a wonderful example of the holistic perspective required to succesfully lead large-scale transformations.

For special interest, we invite you to read the in-depth case by Julian Birkinshaw and Ken Mark.

Great case: Transforming Korea Telecom