In his book, The Innovation Acid Test: Growth through Design and about the innovation that would appear in the popular magazine or news show of most.
73 pages
137 KB – 73 Pages
PAGE – 2 ============
Intentional Innovation: How Getting More Systematic about Innovation Could Impro ve Philanthropy and Increase Social Impact Prepared for the W. K. Kellogg Foundation August 2008 By Gabriel Kasper, Monitor Institute and Stephanie Clohesy, Clohesy Consulting
PAGE – 3 ============
FOREWORD FOREWORD Foreword ––––––––––––––––– ––––––––– –––––––––– –.–..–––. 4 Introduction Œ Three S hort Stories about Systematic Innovation ––––––––––– ..–––– ..–– 6 A Framework for Thinking About Innovation in Philanthropy ––––––––––––––– ..––. 11 Setting the Conditions –––––––––––––––––––––– ..–––––– .–..–.–.. 14 Problem or Opportunity Definition –––––– . –––––––––––– ..––..––..–..– 15 Idea Generation ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– .–––– 18 Piloting & Prototyping ––––––––––––––– ––––––––––––– –..––– 22 Diffusion & Scaling ––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––– ––..–– 26 Culture for Innovation –––––––––––––––– ––––––––––––– ..––– 29 Opportunities for Innovation in Philanthropy –––––––––––––––––––– ..––––– 34 Roles in the Innovation Process –––– ––––––––––––––––––––––– .–..–– 57 Conclusion ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– .––– 65 Selected Resources –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– .–– 68 FOREWORD FOREWORD FOREWORD TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE – 4 ============
By Sterling Spe FOR EWORD By Sterling Speirn, Anne M osle and Tom Reis, W.K. Kellogg Foundation Innovation is about what™s new and what™s next. It™s about that exciting leap forward into uncharted territory. Innovation is also about what works– better. It™s about that incremental step forward that makes old ideas new again and repurposes the familiar into the unexpected. Innovation Šwhether small or incremental, large or disruptive Šis about change. For most of us the idea of fiinnovationfl is laced with positive and desirable assumptions about something tha t will be shinier, faster, cooler, better than whatever we have. For some, innovation also comes wit h questions about whether we really need so much that is finewfl Šand if the new thing s are so great, then h ow do we help everyone to get them? The W.K. Kello gg Foundation , along with many of our sister foundations, has a long history of supporting social innovators around the world. But at a time when the roles of the sectors are shifting , new technologies are emerging by the minute , and the number of uncertai nties is growing, there is a concern that foundations could become less relevant and less effective if we don™t work even harder to examine old assumptions and refresh our approaches. To help spark and sustain a conversation about innovation in the socia l sector, we partnered with two firms with deep expertise in these issues Šthe Monitor Institute and Clohesy Consulting. This report represents the findings of our work together , pulling into one place the best of current innovation theory and practice, and exploring how innovation could be come a more consistent and reliable commodity for social good. We want to stress the ideas, methods, tools and fivalue statementsfl in this report were not created or developed by this foundation. We ourselves are early stag e learners and users of thes e tools and concepts Šnot fithe experts .fl Indeed we hope you interpret this report as a learning dialogue versus a lecture . The report itself could perhaps be viewed as a firapid prototype ,fl far from complete yet sufficient to crea te ongoing dialogue , and so we invite your engagement to improve and refine the content moving forward. Having set that context, t he innovation landscape Šas we observed it at the start of this project Šis characterized by several interrelated assumptions: The social sector is rich in innovation . Every day people all over the world meet their own needs and those of others, including scarcity and hardship, with ingenious new ideas and adaptations of materials and concepts to their particular purposes. Too many social innovations seem episodic and isolated. Often those innovations created out of immediate and urgent needs tend to stay in too small a sphere without appropriate resources to grow to scale. A systematic commitment to innovation seems to yield greater benefits to more people over time. With systematic innovation, needs and opportunities are carefully understood, the search for ideas is open, and the culture nurtures the development and scaling of innovations to yield a continuous pattern of inno vation. The business sector and some areas of government have typically made the boldest commitments to systematic innovation; yet the social sector Šon the front lines of so many of our planet™s and our communities™ most challenging situations Šis only just beginning to explore more systematic approach es. New technologies are changing the social sector. Emerging technological tools give us new options for how we connect with others, share information, and do our work. Technology literally is changing how w e think.
PAGE – 5 ============
INTENTIONAL INNOVATION 5 Working from these assumptions , we went out to learn more so that we could understand what drives and supports innovation. We also wanted to go beyond a merely descriptive report to one in which tools and methods could help us all to go from thi nking about innovation to fidoingfl it more practically and productively. In the process , our team read more than 30 books ; scoured through hundreds of articles in business, academic , and social sector publications ; interviewed a dozen major thought leaders ; and reviewed a wide range of reports, blogs , and websites about innovators and innovation. Along the way we have learned some things that we believe will change our own approach to innovation. For example, though we may continue to be hopeful about the next big, new , and magical leap, we will make room for the common sense and methodical thinking that actually make innovation systematic and sustainable. We are beginning to absorb the big headline from this project: We can make innovation happen and can m ake it more useful by being deliberate and dedicated over time . Using a framework, such as the one suggested in the report , can help bring to the innovation process the same kind of discipline that we have learned to use in strategic planning, business dev elopment, venture investment decisions , and more. We can see that innovation is not just about creating new ideas ; it is about finishing thin gs we start, and about having the patience and commitment to help innovations go to scale, not just seeding the development of new things. Within the proposed innovation f ramework , we have been fascinated to learn about the rapid multiplication of tools and methods for opening up the generation of ideas. From the excitement of open- and crowd -sourcing to more humble ideas like upgrading the way we brainstorm, we see a range of new options for refreshing our everyday work habits. Our assumptions about needing to do the firightfl thing fiperfectlyfl have been challenged by digging into case studies about rapid prototypin g and ex perimentation. In other words, can we learn to put forward a good -enough first model and let users and stakeholders help to adapt and refine the idea? At the same time our reality is that we work with big ideas and major social change and justice movements in which rapid prototyping can be a frustrating concept. So we are intrigued by the concept of fislowfl prototyping that depends on more intuitive and viral self -organizing that empowers people and networks. Our work on innovation also helped us learn about the various roles that are needed inside an organization to designate responsibility and/or accountability for exploring, doing, and sustaining innovation. It helped us see all aspects of our work, from program strategy to the accounting function , as opportunity spaces for generating innovation ; and we found many examples to demonstrate innovation that is already underway across sectors. Gabriel Kasper and Stephanie Clohesy ( along with their respective teams at the Monitor Institute and Clohesy C onsulting) were invaluable guides through this process, and they wrote this report, working in close collaboration with our colleague Karen Whalen and others at WKKF ( see page 71 for full acknowledgements) , to share what we learned more broadly with in Kell ogg and across the field. As we said above, w e are looking forward to the dis cussion (and debate) that the report will likely generate inside the Kellogg Foundation. And we would like to be in dialogue with others who are beginning their own explorations of innovation , as well as with those who are leading the field. If you have thoughts or would like to discuss the ideas in this report further, please feel free to contact us at : [email protected] Sterling Sp eirn, Anne Mosle and Tom Reis
PAGE – 6 ============
INTENTIONAL INNOVATION 6 INTRODUCTION THREE SHORT STORIES ABOUT SYSTEMATIC INNOVATION fiInnovation is often given complex definitions . We prefer the simple one: ‚new ideas that work.™fl Œ Geoff Mulgan 1A growing body of literature and practice now suggests that innovation does not have to be such an uncontrollable force. Instead, it can be a rational management process with its own distinct set of processes, practices, and tools. In fac t, research shows that this type of systematic innovation in an organization typically yields much more productive, scalable, an d sustainable ideas over time. Innovation is everywhere. From the advertisements on TV to the design of the iPod in your pocket to the social services delivered on the streets of Delhi, people and organizations are always creating new ideas , services, and products and adapting old ones to fit their changing circumstanc es. This is especially true in the social sector, where the old adage finecessity is the mother of invention fl drives NGOs, social entrepreneurs, and others to creatively experiment with new solutions to pressing local problems and intractable global challen ges. So why is it more important than ever for philanthropy and the social sector to take a fresh look at innovation? It isn™t just about chasing the latest fad, or about innovation for its own sake. It™s about finding new ways to make a difference in the world. The convergence of a number of dynamic forces Šnew and emerging technologies, new ways of connecting people and organizing work, and new ideas from around the world and across sectors Šis creating exciting opportunit ies for breakthroughs in how publ ic problems are solved. It is now possible to do old things in new ways, and to try completely new things that weren™t possible before. As these forces accelerate the pace of change in the social sector, there is also a very real danger that by just con tinuing to do philanthropy the way we do it today, our efforts will no longer match the emerging realities of tomorrow. There is a need to identify and pioneer innovations in practice that will fit the challenges and opportunities of the future. But not e nough funders have a clear sense of what innovation really means , or how to intentionally and consistently make it happen . The inspirational flashes of creativity that we typically associate with innovation have led to many great advances in almost every aspect of our lives. But in practice, these flashes are unpredictable and often difficult for an organization to manage. Potentially great innovations are routinely squandered or lost because they don™t fit, aren™t noticed, can™t scale, or are too overwhe lming to absorb. 1 Geoff Mulgan, Social Silicon Valleys: A Manifesto for Social Innova tion , Young Foundation (Spring 2006).
PAGE – 8 ============
INTRODUCT ION INTENTIONAL INNOVATION 8 Starting about 1435, the ruling Medici family started supporting an amazing variety of worthy innovators from all over Europe Šartist s, painters, sculptors, scientists, inventors and philosophers Šwho came together from many different nations to debate, discuss and discover new ideas. Art historians estimate that more than one -third of Europe™s professional artists lived or worked in Flo rence at some time during this extraordinary period. Renaissance innovations gradually made their way around the world, mixing and combining with other cultures in highly creative ways. Great artwork was just the beginning. Dozens of life -changing inventi ons were introduced during this time that eventually transformed the standard of living for millions of people, including clocks, indoor plumbing, the printing press, eyeglasses, surgical instruments and even such mundane inventions as wallpaper. So what can we learn from the Medici in the 21 st century? Johansson and other scholars cite several major lessons that are especially relevant in today™s philanthropic arena: Collaborate . Forget the normal boundaries and bring together talented people from a wide variety of fields and disciplines to work together and cross -fertilize. Look both inside and outside your existing organization for new types of innovation partnerships. Create an active support s ystem . Develop a culture that supports, nurtures, and deve lops innovation in a systematic way. Creativity is only one part of the innovation picture. A disciplined yet flexible process is needed to launch new ideas and then scale them to the opportunity or problem at hand. Change agents are needed. Senior leader ship support for innovation is important, of course. But an organization also needs specialists who can foster innovation throughout the organization, both on specific projects and in structural ways that impact daily operations. Use new technology. Germa n scribes mocked the early printing presses as unreliable ficontraptionsfl that would never replace hand -written books. Forward -looking organizations should identify and embrace new technologies that can increase the flow of input from external sources and s implify operational work such as the grantmaking process. 2. Googling Innovation Fast -forward to today. Many of the same principles that intuitively guided the collective innovation of the Renaissance are now being deliberately and systematic ally applied within the world™s fastest growing companies. Among these businesses, the internet giant Google stands as one of the most innovative. From the corporation™s launch in the mid -1990s, Google™s founders, Sergey Brin and Larry Page, were trying to push their company to go beyond any existing online search . And Google as a company still aims to continuously innovate to find new ways to organize and present the information that its users say they need and want. New products like GoogleMaps, GoogleEarth, GoogleNe ws, gMail, and GoogleDocs continue to keep the company at the forefront of the field. In his book, Th e Innovation Acid Test: Growth t hrough Design and Differentiation , Andrew Jones details a number of the cultural and strategic principles behind Google™s exceptional ability to consistently develop innovative solutions : Get everyone involved. Google expects everyone in the company to innovate, even administrative and finance staff. The source of the innovation matters less than the innovation itself.
PAGE – 9 ============
INTRODUCT ION INTENTIONAL INNOVATION 9 Promote c reative time . Employees are given fi20 percent timefl to pursue fipetfl projects, unrelated to their core work, that they find interesting. Half of the new launches at Google emerged from this sanctioned time for innovation. Encourage volume, speed , an d iteration. Google pilots products early and often, in small beta tests. This allows people to test out ideas with others, and to iterate and refine the ideas, before launching them more broadly. Embrace failure . Google staff are encouraged not to worry if an fiexperiment in innovationfl fails. There is often something that can be learned or salvaged from any attempt. 3. Lessons from the Lab Systematic innovation is now stretching beyond the walls of big corporations and into the social sector. One of the most visible embodiments of this trend is in the emergence of new social innovation filaboratories.fl The lab terminology has grown increasingly popular for describing systematic innovation processes because it signals a willingness to experiment and learn, and conveys the promise of potential breakthroughs. Labs Šand their accompanying systematic processes to look for new ideas Šare becoming widespread in business, academia, government, and the social sector. MIT runs a Community Innovation Lab and a Poverty Lab; a group of scholars and companies run the Management Innovation Lab (MLab) ; Radio Shack™s Innovation Lab invites collaboration from anyone who wants to help invent products; and the Mayo Clinic Innovation Lab is transforming doctor -patient visits. The experiences of these labs Šand hundreds more that are emerging on campus es, in communities and companies , and particularly those operating in the social sector Šcan tell us a great deal about what it means to create spaces in which people are constantly and openly searching for innovation. The Civic Innovation Lab , for example, was created by the Cleveland Foundation in 2003 to boost economic development in Greater Cleveland and to recognize and mentor social entrepreneurship. For many, the idea that one o f our older cities could be teeming with clever new ideas for the economy and the society seems unlikely. And yet the Civic Innovation Lab has systematically searched for, found, funded, and nurtured more than 30 innovators and innovations that are changin g the economy and the social behavior of Cleveland. Most of the innovators are young and diverse, and they have the profiles of people who typically exit older and transitioning cities. But instead of leaving, these innovators have been identified and attr acted through the use of an inspirational message about the future, financial incentives, and a promise to develop their business skills and civic leadership. They are not only staying in Cleveland; they are redeveloping it through a network of innovations strategically identified for their business and civic potential. A different sort of laboratory, HopeLab, was created by Pam Omidyar (wife of eBay co -founder, Pierre) as a way of combining rigorous research with innovative solutions to improve the healt h and quality of life of young people with chronic illnesses. HopeLab began pursuing its mission by developing a video game that motivates young cancer patients to comply with the requirements of treatment. The resulting product, Re -Mission, plays like a c ommercial video game built for fun, but also has proven health benefits. Positive results of HopeLab’s randomized controlled trial of the game reveal that Re -Mission improves treatment adherence in patients who play, and these findings have been a major co ntribution to the growing fiInnovation is about courageous experimentation Štesting new approaches, tapping into unconventional sou rces for insight and inspiration. It’s why I founded HopeLab. Experiments often fail, which is part of the process. When successful, they can lead to game -changing discoveries.” – Pam Omidyar
PAGE – 10 ============
INTRODUCT ION INTENTIONAL INNOVATION 10 evidence -base for the emerging field of “serious games.” So-called fiserious games are now becoming a recognizable p art of the gaming landscape. HopeLab also created Ruckus Nation, an international, online idea competition to get k ids moving and prevent harmful sedentary behavior. The competition stimulated new thinking about how to motivate physical activity in kids, generating new product ideas from 37 countries. Innovators as young as 6 years old and as old as 82 submitted entrie s, and winners were announced in March 2008. These types of labs are teaching us a great deal about social innovation by reaching beyond traditional organizational boundaries: Open up the innovation process. Rather than choosing a select set of fifellows fl or finding innovators through a regular grantmaking process, the Civic Innovation Lab and HopeLab attempt to open up the innovation process to attract talent and ideas from people everywhere, across geographies and sectors. Prize money and aspirational s ocial visions help attract applicants and creativity. Provide a full range of support for innovators. Social innovators often need more than just capital. The Civic Innovation Lab surrounds its innovators with a wide range of supports, including mentorshi p, information and advice, connections and networks, and public visibility. Tap the creativity of filead users.fl HopeLab intentionally engages young people Šits target constituency Šin the development of ideas. This type of filead -user innovationfl encourages individual consumers and end users to modify existing products and services or to create entirely new ones that meet their specific needs. Translating Stories i nto Resources for Innovation This report draws lessons from these types of systematic innovato rs in order to translate best practice from business and government, internaliz e academic ideas and theories, lift up some of the gems of social sector innovation, and suggest how philanthropic institutions can both become more innovative themselves and pl ay a critical role in transferring systematic innovation practice to the social sector. The r eport offers four new resources to help philanthropic organizations deepen their understanding of innovation and find ways to capitalize on the strategic advanta ges of systematic innovation: A composite framework for innovation that builds a basic model for w hat it means to fidofl innovation. The framework introduces the fundamental elements of successful innovation processes and explores the classic reflection/act ion pattern of fithink, do, improve, and diffuse.fl A schema for understanding the different opportunity spaces where philanthropic institutions can innovate, along with a collection of examples of the innovations and experiments in philanthropic practice th at are going on across the country and around the world. A set of archetypes for the different innovation roles that can help an organization beyond random or episodic innovation in order to cultivate innovation. A series of helpful resources and links to help readers explore specific areas of innovation theory and practice that interest them in greater detail.
PAGE – 11 ============
INTRODUCT ION INTENTIONAL INNOVATION 11 A FRAMEWORK F OR THINKING ABOUT IN NOVATION IN PHILANTHROPY fiInnovation simply isn™t as unpredictable as m any people think. There isn™t a cookbook yet, but we™re getting there.fl – Clayton Christensen 2 Setting the conditions required to support innovation In many people™s minds, innovation is a mysterious force Ša serendipitous phenomenon that occurs in the brains of an elite class of brilliant, creative geniuses. The problem with this way of thinking is that such miraculous breakthroughs are by nature uncertain and irregular, making them incompatible with the normal flow of an organization. But literature and practice on innovation over the last decade reveals that it is, in fact, possibl e for an organization to be more system atic about innovation. We are discovering that what was once thought to be an art is actually more of a science, and the general outline of what it takes to successfully manage innovation is beginning to come into foc us. Following intentional, repeatable, processes can allow an organization to more effectively develop, test, implement, and share new ideas. To clarify these methods, innovation specialists have developed a number of valuable models and typologies that help elucidate successful innovation processes. We have pieced these various schemas together into an integrated framework to help structure thinking about the larger concept of innovation in philanthropy. This composite conceptual framework for innovati on includes five main stages that are held within a ficulturefl of innovation , depicted graphically in the diagram on the following page : Identifying the problem or opportunity about which you want to in novate Generating ideas to solve the problem or capture the opportunity Experimenting and piloting those ideas to test how well they work in practice Sharing the innovations with a broader set of stakeholders 2 Economist Special Report on Innovation, fiA Dark Art No More,fl October 11, 2007.
137 KB – 73 Pages