NBF 2013 Vijay Govindarajan Talk 1

Vijay Govindarajan on 3 Box Innovation

My thoughts on the speech lies underneath. 

As you can see I did not manage to get them all done yet. These take some time but I must say that I'm super happy for taking proper notes (for once!)

Also feel free to comment of course. Especially those who were present at the event.

3 Box Innovation

Is actually a term coined to give a person a different focus point to look at innovation in all of its possible forms related to time. In the end we all know that time is the deciding factor in innovation. It would not pose a huge effect to the world if you were to come up with a new way to build a light up an oil lamp.

With his example Vijay brought up high jump and it's four different styles/ways of jumping in olympics. I won't go into much detail to the example because you'll come up with many of your own once you see what the 3 box thinking is about.

1 Box - Operational Excellence

When most people are given a task their first idea is to see how it is done around them. This is common sense after all. It is of human nature to look examples. This is what some people call: monkey see - monkey do. I've got nothing against monkeys but the truth is that most of the time this way of working won't get you far in business or in life for that matter.

How many of you have trained the high jump sciccor style?

But this is the way hundreds and thousands of companies work everyday. They think that they must work in a certain way only because it's the industry standard. Too bad that most of the time common sense is not common practise. Which leads us to the second box...

2 Box - Best Practise

In this box we can "find" the way the current industry leaders operate. They have found out the best ways to get stuff done for their company and their industry.

These things can be ways of leaderhip or use of the best tools for the job and trade. Sometimes it just means being more stubborn and hardworking than the competitors. Other times it can be just a great "innovative" use of other industrys way of work that suits to you and gives you the advantage over your competition.

The biggest challenge with the "Box 2 company" is that they have the highest fall to fall. To be the industry leader and having blind faith in the ways of your (present) success might actually be the reason for you downfall (This wouldn't be a blog about innovation without a reference to Nokia...) Which leads us to the "last" box.

3 Box - Tomorrow

Now we step into the most complex of the boxes with out of the box thinking (lovely word play isn't it?)

This is something where you cannot still exist but you should be thinking and designing for. So actually you are designing something for a market or a customer that doesn't know about the place yet. Enter Mr. Ford:

So instead of just trying to perfect and lubricate the thing you are currently doing is never enough in the long run. Here lies the best thing about innovation. It is not going to remain the same. There will always be ways to improve the current world and ways of working. Mostly because we still haven't even realized or created the problems that we will be facing in the future.

The biggest learning point for me was the idea to segment innovation related to time. There is a right place and time for (almost) everything.

Ideas that popped into my mind with this talk?

Where do I or my company use energy and focus?

How am I tracking the weak signals to base my innovations about?

What sort of adjecant fields can I find next to myself or my business? Is there something I could add or learn from those businesses (box 2 & 3)?



I've also added here the wonderful visualized notes from Linda Saukko-Rauta.

Pictures:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/EthelCatherwood1928.jpgwww.nbforum.fi

NBF 2013 Malcolm Gladwell

Malcolm Gladwell on innovation and innovation leadership

My notes and thoughts on Malcolms talks in Nordic Business Forum 2013

As I promised on my earlier post I'm going to go over all the talks of NBF and share the great insights (at least the ones that I was able to find) of the event. If you feel that these posts are not long enough or do not go deeply enough to the matter I'd love for you to let me know. I'll be coming back to these topics on a later notice.

Why is it good to be the third one to innovate?

In the first talk Malcolm dove head first in to innovation via an example from the year 1982. Example was taken from a battle in the 82 Lebanon war. In the battle Israelian air forces took apart the opposing air and anti-air forces through innovation.

1. Innovation order

In Malcolms example there were three distinctive innovations put to an effective use against the opposing forces by the Israelians. These innovations were in no particular order: AEW&C Aircrafts, Homing missiles and a modern aerial combat doctrine. Also you have to take in to consideration the fact that any of these innovations were not made by the Israelians and both forces had the same kind of possibilities to be the "Innovative" one.

Another example was the mouse and graphic user interface by Xerox, Douglas Engelbart and Steve Jobs. 

Malcolm gave us three different levels of innovation based on the amount of resources the innovator has:

Early innovator or Inventer. This is most of the time the one who comes up with the idea or invention in the first place. It helps also if you have "unlimited" resources as did the soviets aerial doctrine inventors or Douglas Engelbart.

Fixer or Tweaker. These are the ones who see the first inventions and use them most of the time for their own uses. With the tweakers we see many high-tech guys and companies still with vast amounts of resources but mostly used very decentralized or without a common goal. Here we have Xerox who made a 300 $ mouse to be used with their already expensive products or Americans tweaking their missiles uncoordinated with the AEW&C planes in battle.

Implementer & Perfecter. Are the Isrealians and Jobs of the world. They do not have resources to waste. They have an goal oriented mind and attitude that needs to solve the challenges. What made the battle and Apple's case so uneven was the way they implemented and most importantly coordinated their innovations. 

2. Strategic Innovation = Coordinated Innovation

So the thing that matters here is the question why weren't both of the forces familiar with these technologies. And as it is mostly with innovation why did the other one take such a beating. A single innovation rarely wins a war. I'm sure that Syrian forces had made quite a few innovations on their own. What then is the innovation that matters.

In my opinion the term coordinated gives you the answer. A singular innovation, man, woman or say a player in a sports team rarely wins you the challenge. With innovation you need the same amount of coordination and leadership as with any other facet in business. You have to be able to see the different innovations complimentary. When you think innovations more as a single building blocks to a bigger combination than breakthroughs that make all the difference by themselves you'll be able to coordinate and lead your innovations yo your and your company's advantage.

3. Innovators social challenge

In his other talk Malcolm gave a really detailed trip to the discovery of chemotherapy for childhood leukemia.

Here we had a young US doctor who made it possible to cure earlier a 100% mortal disease by the combination of different poisons and so fathered chemotherapy. The challenge that lies with these kinds of innovations is the moral side of the story. When you are truly doing something others have no idea of you always run in to other peoples opinions and morals. So there is most of the time not only economical "risks" that you take when innovating. 

To take a lighter example for this we have Henry Fords words

To be an innovator is to try to truly change the world. Not only how the world works but also how the world thinks.

Things that came to me after the speech:

What was the last innovation that I've taken into everyday use and does its value rise when coordinate with an another innovation?

Where do I look for more innovations to take myself or my company to an another level?

When was the last time I thought about innovations that my competitors use and how to counter them?

Pictures: 

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Erik_Wallenberg_inventor_of_Tetra_Pak_first_package.jpg
www.nbforum.fi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Xerox_8010_compound_document.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IPhone_2G_PSD_Mock.png

Nordic Business Forum 2013

Nordic Business Forum 2013

There is a first time to everything

I've been trying to attend this wonderful (from what I've heard) seminar for the last two years. After having experience this year's program I do feel that I've missed something for missing the earlier Forums. But at the same time I'm super happy that I actually made it this year. A lot of ideas and most importantly talks that really made your brain twist (In the most positive ways imaginable)

Here's a video from last year and their website for those who might not know what's NBF about.

What's next?

I've for once made proper notes (for the first time in my life). Better to start later than never!

I'm planning to go over the talks I found the best and most ideasprouting and write about them to here. I just have to be sure to editor myself and not get carried away. Or how do you feel? Would it be better to try to keep the posts short and focused or go all out and post them as long as they ever might come? You can comment, tweet or send me an email to let me know. After all I'm here (mostly) for you :)

Updated blog

For those who have already been here before have most propably noticed something different about the blog. I've chosen to update the blog to express more about where I'm coming and thinking about right now.

Quickies 3

Quickies are a mini blog series which I'm starting to get going as fast as possible. Here you will find a short opener for a tweet of mine. This weeks quickie is about the real need of customers.

#Customer does not care about your execution. They care about how you deliver your execution for them. #business #success

First of all I'd like everyone to take a sec and think about who your customer is. As in who do you provide velue to. It isn't about who is paying to you. For example a teachers customer is not the school. School is a "secondary customer" in terms of value.

Now once you have your ideal and or worst case scenario customer in mind think again. Do you deliver. This is an easy question when you think about it for a while. If the customers you serve seem to be confused or ask a lot of questions it's usually a sign of not delivering. Also note that some times the customer is blinded by the execution of your work that they don't care about delivery. But in the long run they'll start to think about it also.

So next time you are with a client/customer ask this question: "Did I tell you clearly what we are delivering to you?" If the customer can't give you a good answer you could've done better. But if they give you a good answer you've reached the point below...

Photo is Creative Commons license from: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lukaszzelezny/

Keskustelun kadonnut taito?

This time in finnish. Sorry :)

Pyrin ottamaan osaa "julkiseen" keskusteluun ehkä toista tai kolmatta kertaa elämässäni. Jos muistan oikein olen kirjoittanut kerran tai kaksi jonkin lehden mielipidepalstalle.

Joten pyydän anteeksi jo etukäteen. Älä pahastu kielioppivirheistä tai mielipiteistäni. Tarkoituksena ei ole käännyttää ketään mihinkään suuntaan, mutta toivon, että onnistun herättämään ajatuksia johonkin suuntaan. Onhan kaiken keskustelun pohjimmainen tarkoitus pyrkiä opettamaan, laajentamaan maailmankuvaa tai kertoa virheistä, jotta kuulija ei astuisi samoihin ansoihin omilla retkillään.

Ensin konteksti eli muutama lause itsestäni. Olen 26-vuotias alemman korkeakoulun käynyt ihmisen alku, jonka tavoitteena on hämmästyttää ihmisiä. Olipa kyseessä arkinen tai erikoinen asia. Poliittinen suuntaukseni on kääntynyt vasemmalta jatkuvasti oikealle. En halua puhua politiikka, mutta ikävä kyllä monia asioita voidaan pitää politiikkana tai siihen sidottuna. Tällä hetkellä toimin yrittäjänä omassa yrityksessäni. Tähän asti olen halunnut pitää mielipiteeni pienen piirin tietona mutta toivon uskomattoman kovasti, että tämän tekstin lukisi muutama muukin ihminen perheen ja kolmen kaverin lisäksi...

Sitten asiaan: Sain kimmokkeen kirjoittaa jotain näinkin syväluotaavaa (ainakin omasta mielestäni) asiaa huomattuani kaksi peräkkäistä keskustelua Facebookin uutisvirrassani. Molemmat käsittelivät Aino Kopran Helsingin Sanomissa julkaistua mielipidekirjoitusta opintotuesta. En ota tässä kirjoituksessa kantaa siihen kuka on oikeassa tai miten pääomatulot vaikuttavat ihmisen maailmankatsomukseen tai kykyyn argumentoida asiasta tai toisesta.

Keskustelemmeko?

Pidän puhumisesta. Mutta vielä enemmän pidän kuuntelemisesta. (Tämä on yksi suurimmista kehittämiskohteistani ja olen tietoinen asiasta. Älä huolehdi. Teen parhaani ollakseni parempi ihminen ja kuuntelija.) Tämä johtunee mitä luultavammin tavastani puhua erittäin paljon ja joka paikassa. Tällöin kuuntelusta on tullut itselleni huomattavasti harvinaisempaa kuin kuuntelemisesta. Kuitenkin jokainen tietää, että kuunteleminen on huomattavasti mielekkäämpää puuhaa lopputuloksen kannalta kuin puhuminen. Aikuisen ihmisen mielipidettä on lähes mahdotonta kääntää yhden keskustelun aikana. Varsinkin silloin, kun kyseessä on julkinen tilaisuus/tilanne. Kun puhuminen ja kuuntelu yhdistyy harmoniaksi saadaan aikaan keskustelu. Keskusteluja, kuten kaikkia muitankin maailman asioita on säälittävän ja surkuhupaisan sekä ihmeellisen ja mullistavanlaisia kuin kaikkea näiden väliltä.

Kaiken keskustelun tavoitteena pitäisi olla oppiminen. On surullista huomata, että tällä hetkellä Suomessa ei saa sanoa mielipidettään monestakaan asiasta, ellei se ole tietyn konsensuksen mukainen. Ajattelemme usein, että joku ei saa sanoa mielipidetään (oli se "väärin" tai huonosti argumentoitu), jos ei ole "kokemusta". Kokemuksella tarkoitan: tohtorin hattua, poliittista tai taloudellista auktoriteettiä tai julkisuuden tuomaa arvovaltaa.

Hyvin usein keskustelut ovatkin tyhjänpäiväistä small-talkia, joka ei vie mihinkään tulokseen eikä kehitä keskustelijoita mihinkään suuntaan. Olemme kaikki varmasti osallistuneet useisiin tälläisiin keskusteluihin. Ja myönnän, että aina ei jaksa tai ajatukset ovat muualla. Mutta voisinko silti olla enemmän kiinnostunut kuuntelemaan keskustelukumppanini sanomaa. Yritänhän edes ymmärtää...

Eli mitä yritän sanoa: Sen sijaan, että kyseiselle henkilölle yritettäisiin kertoa miten asiat "oikeasti" ovat tai häntä yritettäisiin muulla tavalla opettaa, tartutaan heti verbaaliseen kiveen ja aloitetaan julkinen kivitys (myös Facebook on julkinen monella mittarilla mitattuna) ja käsketään nurkkaan häpeämään, koska vain opiskelijat saavat ottaa osaa tähän keskusteluun. Kaikki muut ovat väärässä tai eivät ymmärrä mistä on kyse.

Olen erittäin paljon "ilmaisen" koulutuksen kannalla. ("Ilmaisen", koska moni osallistuu tähänkin talkooseen maksamalla esim. veroja.) Mahdollisimman tasavertainen mahdollisuus kouluttautua luo tasa-arvoa parhaalla mahdollisella tavalla ja mahdollistaa monia positiivisia kerrannaisvaikutuksia yhteiskunnassa. Mutta olemmeko me oikeasti niin kyynisiä ja oikeassa, että joku nuori ihminen ei saa tuoda julki mielipidettään (huom. kyse on mielipiteestä. Ei mistään poliittisesta päätöksestä.) Tai kertokaa minulle kuinka paljon kyseinen henkilö pystyy oikeasti vaikuttamaan tähän käsiteltävään opintotuki-asiaan. Lisäksi ymmärrän kyllä Hesarin kyseenalaisen suhtautumisen mielenosoitukseen ja mielestäni Helsingin Sanomat asettivat itsensä erittäin hankalaa osaan tässä koko keskustelussa. Valinta sekin. Paljolta mielipahalta selviää maailmassa, kun ymmärtää mahdollisimman aikaisin, että jokainen ajaa tässä maailmassa omaa tai oman eturyhmänsä asiaa.

Eli annetaan kaikkien kukkien kukkia ja mikä tärkeintä opastetaan ja ohjataan. Erehdysten kautta oppiminen on paljon nopeampaa kuin onnistumisten. Ja onhan suomessa vielä mielipiteenvapauskin... Onhan?

ps. 28% 300 00 eurosta on 84 000 euroa. Kuinka paljon sinä maksoit veroja viime vuonna? (Ei tarvitse kertoa. Tämä oli provo ja trolli ja kaikkea muuta. Ruoskin itseäni näin alhaisestaa tempusta...)