The result of half an hour internet search: 49 different definitions (04.09.2013)

The consensus, «innovation is…

something new (original or improved),

that creates value

Origins

Latin root is NOVATION: first appeared in thirteenth century law texts and referred tonewness.

Innovation began taking root as a term associated with science and industry in thenineteenth century, matching the forward march of the Industrial Revolution, although thelanguage of that period focused more strongly on technical inventions.

Contemporary definition offered by Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter (1936) whodefined innovation as a process of new combination of existing resources (i.e. embodiment,combination, and/or synthesis of knowledge)

2

3

Closed Innovation Open Innovation

Bounded rationality,

over-embeddedness

4

Not at all….

incremental innovations

Absorptive capacity

Challenge of long-term outsourcing

«Open Innovation is a new paradigm that assumes that firms can and should useexternal ideas as well as internal ideas and internal and external paths to market, asthe firms look to advance their technology», H. Chesbrough, University of California,Berkeley

The logic

Good ideas are widely distributed. No one has a monopoly on knowledge

Need to Access expternal IP

Need to profit own IP by allowing others to access

5

6

7

The complexity of products

is increasing

i.e. Freemium, community

funded, nowism, etc.

Different regions of the world have

developed unique skills and

capabilities

i.e. Sustainability-focused products

8

9

10

11

12

13

4

1: Develop a Global Collaboration Strategy

In many firms, little thought was given to strategy; these companies typically began using

global partners to lower costs, and did not evolve from that goal even after executing a

half dozen or more projects. The result was a de facto, unarticulated cost-reduction

strategy, driven at a departmental or divisional level. Collaboration received little senior

management attention; when it did, it was because expectations were not being met.

Leading firms, by contrast, developed an explicit strategy for collaboration, designed to

support their business goals. In contrast to organizations that viewed collaboration only

as a tool for reducing cost, these firms considered a variety of more strategic benefits, in

particular, assessing how collaboration could improve their top line through increased

product differentiation. Successful organizations achieved this in two ways: first, by

leveraging a partner’s superior capabilities (i.e., know-how that the firm did not possess

internally); and second, by accessing a partner’s contextual knowledge (i.e., knowledge

that the partner possessed by virtue of its local position). In combination, these benefits

comprise the “3C’s” of a global collaboration strategy (see Figure 1; Table 1).

Figure 1: The 3Cs of a Global Collaboration Strategy

Drivers of Product Differentiation

Cost

Capability Context

Drivers of Product Differentiation

Cost

Capability Context

[hidden cost of coordination]

leveraging a partner’s superior

capabilities

accessing a partner’s contextual

knowledge

14

Innovations are increasingly brought to the market by networks…

Degree of inclusiveness

Cooperation

Collaboration

Co-opetition

15

We often use these words interchangeably, but they represent fundamentally different ways of contributing to a group and each comes with its own dynamics and power structures that shape groups in different ways

When collaborating, people work together (co-labor) on a single shared goal.

Like an orchestra which follows a script everyone has agreed upon and each musician plays their part not for its own sake but to help make something bigger

When cooperating, people perform together (co-operate) while working on selfish yet common goals.

The logic here is “If you help me I’ll help you”

16

17

Co-opetition is defined as a strategy embodying simultaneous cooperation and competition between firms

18

While collaboration is associated with strong ties, both cooperation and co-opetition are associated with weak ties

19

20

21

22

P&G used to be a very closed organization

Financial crisis in 2000

Fundamentally had a growthproblem

«Connect and Develop» andopen innovation programme

Aim to acquire %50 of allinnovations of P&G from externalsources

Become the open innovationpartner of choice

Three dimension of knowledge

23

Proximity

Geographical,

Cultural,

Cognitive

InnoCentive.com (a challenge market place, spun off Eli Lilly)

Solver network: 250,000 registered solvers from 200 countries

Challenges posted: more than 1,420 public challenges

Award dollars posted: more than $35 million

Range of awards: $500 to more than $1 million, based on the complexity of the problem and the nature of the challenge

Average success rate: more than 50%

24

Convergence of Big Data analysis and artificial intelligence

An on-going Project: artificial compositor

25

Biomimicry: imitation of the nature

An on-going Project: synthetic photosynthesis

The sun light emitted by the earth in 1 hour is equal to 1 year consumption of all human kinds

Photosynthesis has been applied successfully by the nature in the last 2 Billion years

26

Solving the secrets of the brain

An on-going Project: re-covering memory neurons

Average human life increase vs. neuro-generative diseases

Functional substitution of underperformed neurons with chips

27

okankara@gmail.com

http://tr.linkedin.com/in/okankara/

28