M&A Innovation

Published date: August 9, 2023 в 11:25 am

Written by:

Category: Innovation,Strategy

Relying on Mergers and Acquisitions for growth sends a signal that you don’t know how to innovate or how to manage it. M&A has other problems, too. Companies tend to overpay which actually destroys shareholder value. At best, firms end up paying full value, neither better or worse off financially. The firm grows in size, not value, and pays in the form of distraction.

What if you could use the tools and processes of innovation in mergers and acquisitions?

How could it help?

  1. Would you select acquisition targets better?
  2. Could it help understand the valuation better so you get a better deal?
  3. Might it help you implement better?

I believe innovation techniques could be applied to all three.

Here is one example: targeting – deciding who to buy.

Imagine you are the CEO of a bank, perhaps headquartered in Europe. You and the other board members have decided its time to deliver more value to the shareholders by growing the business. You decide to acquire another bank with all the spare cash you have accumulated (rather than just give it to its rightful owners.) The question is: Which bank? Should we buy one in Europe to expand our share while eliminating a competitor?  Should we expand to the U.S. market and buy one there?  Should we buy a struggling bank, get it cheap, and restore it to profitability?

No, no, no. Too simple and obvious. Nothing innovative here at all. Let’s instead apply the Subtraction Tool from Systematic Inventive Thinking and see how we can re-frame the question. Start by listing the components of your bank.

1.    Employees

2.    Customers

3.    Assets

4.    Property plant and equipment

5.    Brand

6.    Systems

7.    Management

Now, one at a time, let’s remove a component, then ask ourselves which bank we should acquire.  Imagine you had no customers. You still have all the other components, just no customers. What bank could you acquire that had the ideal customer base for YOUR bank given what it’s all about? Would you want customers who were more diverse, higher income, more profitable, lower cost to serve, more loyal, etc.? In other words, acquire a bank that delivers the perfect complement of customers. Now remove employees. You have all the other components, just no staff. Now what bank would you buy? Which has the ideal employee base for who you are? Would you go after employees who are smarter, less costly, more diverse, younger, older, etc.?

The same process, done for each component in succession, gives you a whole new innovative perspective on who to acquire. It helps you understand why you are buying, what you are getting, and how you expect to create new value and competitiveness. It helps you understand The Bet – what the deal is really all about.

M&A is an expensive way to grow. By adding the gift of innovation to the process, shareholders stand a better chance of seeing more value.

(Originally published in 2008)

WALK, DREAM -> CREATE

Published date: July 6, 2023 в 5:12 pm

Written by:

Category: Innovation,Innovation Facilitation

My colleague Hila Pelles wrote an intriguing internal post for our SIT team, citing two thought-provoking articles.

The first is from INC.:

Research Suggests We’re All Getting Less Creative and Scientists Think They Know Why, by Jessica Stillman

The gist:

  • Scores on the Torrance Test, considered by many to be a reliable indicator of creativity, have been steadily declining since the 90’s.
  • The reason, scientists claim (the article claims), is that we are all spending too much time on digital screens instead of acting in the world or engaging in leisurely thoughts.
  • The solution: dedicate time to thinking, go on long walks, limit screen time and vary your routine.

The second article, published on LIT HUB (excerpted from: First Steps: How Upright Walking Made Us Human) expands on one of the first article’s recommendations:

On the Link Between Great Thinking and Obsessive Walking, by Jeremy DeSilva

I am doing a dis-service to this article by summarizing it, since it is more literary in spirit, but, using examples from Charles Darwin to Virginia Woolf, it convincingly makes the case for walking as a stimulus for creative thinking, supported by several experiments that found superior results and stronger brain connectivity in subjects who walked versus couch potatoes.

My pragmatic take on these articles, in two parts:

1) Caveat reader

a. In 25 years of experience working with diverse publics in dozens of countries I haven’t noticed any signs of decline in creativity. In fact, I believe there are many signs of a widespread increase in creativity and productive thinking – not always for the good of humankind, not even correlated with individuals’ happiness or wellbeing, but that is another issue. Instead, I believe that what the findings may be showing is the decreased relevance of the Torrance test itself, whose relevance I suspect was always less than its PR.

b. Although I resent the time my daughters spend on screens lately, I don’t think the blame for declining creativity, if real, should be placed on digital activities. Bertrand Russell famously wrote in praise of idleness in his homonymous book and article (“The idea that the poor should have leisure has always been shocking to the rich.”), showing that lack of idleness is not a new affliction and that it can equally affect both sides of the digital divide.

2) Practical facilitation tips:

a. In f2f sessions, move people around every now and again, sometimes ask them to stretch, and when possible – even to dance to music. Much more difficult in remote sessions, but very much worth the effort.

b. 2-3 times an hour, give participants the chance to chat with their neighbor(s) for 3-4 minutes on a task that doesn’t require too much concentration.

My 20-second summary, so you can go ramble: move around, take it easy, and you’ll be more creative (or, if not, I suspect, at least a bit happier).

Driving Automotive Innovation: maybe it’s time to change gears

Published date: June 21, 2023 в 1:08 pm

Written by:

Category: New Product Development,Strategy

In the 1st part of this article, I named the main forces that drive car innovation today and listed the main areas of focus for this industry.

In this part (2) I will share some recommendations for where, in my opinion, the industry should channel more attention and resources.

From the point of view of someone who studies and analyzes innovation, and after arguing that large parts of automotive innovation are too common and obvious, it is only fair to identify other areas for innovation that could lead to interesting results.

Here are some possible directions to explore. Some of them are applicable for all businesses and some are more specific to the car industry:

  1. Finance and Business Model Innovation: Often overlooked, this realm presents immense promise. By revolutionizing financing options and business models, companies can unlock new avenues of growth and profitability.
  2. Evolving Customer Dynamics: As the demographic landscape shifts, so too must our perception of value. Understanding the changing needs and expectations of different generations can lead to disruptive innovations that resonate deeply with customers.
  3. Ownership Redefined: The traditional ownership models—full, shared, and partial, as well as leasing and renting, have served us well. However, it’s time to think beyond these boundaries. By creating new models of ownership that provide greater flexibility and opportunities, we can reshape the way people interact with vehicles.
  4. Challenge the status quo by reimagining vehicle design and functionality: By breaking free from structural fixedness, we can create revolutionary concepts that enhance user experiences and redefine the purpose of vehicles.
  5. Modular Assembly: Introducing greater modularity into vehicle assembly and component design enables flexible customization, efficient production, and cost-effective maintenance. This modular approach promises a more agile and adaptable automotive industry.
  6. Spare Parts On-Demand: The ability to rapidly produce and supply spare parts on-demand is a game-changer for both manufacturers and consumers. Leveraging advanced manufacturing techniques and supply chain innovations, we can minimize downtime and enhance customer satisfaction. Tesla led the way by making upgrades and repair easy, simple and inexpensive, but this is more of being best in the game instead of changing the rules of the game.
  7. Technological Enablers: Embracing blockchain technology opens new avenues for secure data sharing and transactions within the automotive ecosystem. By harnessing the power of blockchain, we can build trust, streamline processes, and accelerate innovation.
  8. Accessibility for All: Let’s strive to make vehicles more accessible to individuals with disabilities. By developing adaptive technologies and inclusive features, we can empower a broader range of individuals to enjoy the freedom of driving and car ownership.
  9. Enhancing Productivity: Innovation can significantly enhance productivity by enabling firms to achieve greater output with the same inputs or maintain the same output with fewer inputs. This focus on productivity gains can fuel competitiveness and sustainability.

Innovation thrives when we foster a conducive environment. To truly unlock the potential of innovation, we must manage it as a robust business process. This entails embracing iterative approaches, holding management accountable, allocating time and resources for creative thinking, and fostering a culture that values both attempts and results.

By exploring these uncharted areas of innovation, we can revolutionize the automotive industry and shape a future where mobility seamlessly integrates with societal needs and aspirations.

If you found this article insightful, I invite you to engage in a discussion and share your thoughts on the potential areas for automotive innovation. Together, let’s shape the future of mobility.

Driving Automotive Innovation: Maybe it’s time to change gears

Published date: June 16, 2023 в 5:06 pm

Written by:

Category: New Product Development,Strategy

A few weeks ago, I participated in a discussion organized by the innovation team of a very large car company. The discussion, naturally, had to do with innovation. Most of the participants were excited about new emerging technologies and the promise of almost-here self-driving cars.

I have been in these conversations many times before – people tend to confuse Innovation (New + Unique + Applicable) with new (better, stronger, faster, technology-based…). I thought that it will be interesting to try and analyze the state of innovation in the automotive industry and see what conclusions we can draw.

In the 1st part of this article, I will name the main forces that drive car innovation today and list the main areas of focus for this industry.

In part 2 I will share some recommendations for where, in my opinion, the industry should channel more attention and resources.

 Part 1

Over the last 20+ years, I have collaborated and participated in innovation activities in the automotive sector. It’s widely known that regulations serve as a driving force behind automotive innovation. Every year, the public, due to new regulations put in place and the enforcement of existing regulations, expects new models to be more efficient, safer, more environmentally friendly, and more sustainable. Here as some of the key factors influencing the current state of innovation in car companies:

  1. Technological Parity: With technology becoming readily accessible to all players in a matter of months, gaining a technological advantage has become increasingly elusive. Automakers must now navigate a realm where everyone has access to similar advancements. Where does true innovation lie when the playing field is level?
  2. Battery Revolution: The remarkable drop in battery prices, a staggering 60% over the past five years, has ushered in a new era for electric vehicles (EVs). With the cost per kilowatt-hour (kWh) now at $250, compared to $1,000 in 2010, EVs are poised to achieve cost parity with their gasoline counterparts within the next five years. This revolution paves the way for more sustainable and environmentally friendly transportation.
  3. The Impact Equation: In general, economists have noted a decline in the impact of innovation on our lives, as new enabling technologies no longer exhibit the transformative power they once did.
  4. Changing the Rules: While many players focus on excelling within the existing automotive landscape, there is a bigger promise in changing the rules of the game. Automakers and adjacent industries should be investing their innovation efforts and resources in reshaping the very foundations of the industry. By challenging conventional wisdom, they will be more successful at unleashing untapped potential.

Many of the automotive developments we see, presented to us as innovation, are actually common practice and known among the category players.

There are many different characterizations and definitions for INNOVATION. To be able to distinguish it from ‘normal’ R&D, Continuous Improvement, Process Excellence and product / technology evolution, we apply a few different models. You can learn more about the main characteristics I used to create this list in this TED talk.

The leading topics in most of the innovation discussions I have seen, both physical and online, are:

  1. Re-designing the cockpit and updating the passenger experience.
  2. Minimizing the environmental footprint – supply chain, materials, carbon emission etc.
  3. Adapting bold and unique design platforms based on computer algorithms that allow different angles and cuts to be merged on surfaces in several layers.
  4. Evolution, continued improvements, available/affordable technologies.
  5. Electric cars – software, hardware, and engineering.
  6. Autonomous cars – pushing forward technologies and regulations.
  7. Advanced active safety systems with artificial intelligence, mainly based on the development of radar, sensors, and cameras to create augmented reality decoded by artificial intelligence capability.
  8. Major collaborations – for example: Ford and Google announced recently a unique strategic partnership that will accelerate innovation in the automotive industry and reinvent the customer experience in the connected car. Ford has also chosen Google Cloud as its preferred cloud provider, and will leverage Google’s global expertise in data, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML). As part of the new six-year partnership, starting in 2023, millions of Ford and Lincoln cars of all price tags will be based on the Android operating system, including all Google services and applications.
  9. Data security and data privacy technologies.
  10. Augmented reality displays in vehicles.
  11. Wireless charging for electric vehicles.
  12. Advanced infotainment systems, including voice recognition and touchscreens.
  13. Vehicle-to-vehicle communication technology.
  14. Predictive maintenance using machine learning and AI.
  15. Augmented reality maintenance and repair guides for technicians.

This is a very long list!

While these are impactful improvements that will provide a lot of value to the market, I would consider these efforts as necessary, expected, common and good. This is ‘natural evolution’ of a healthy industry. In addition to that, I would expect to see some more unique, counter-intuitive directions.

In part two of this article we will suggest some possibilities to be considered by business and innovation leaders in the car industry.

INNOVATION as EVOLUTION and as CROSSING a SWAMP

Published date: June 8, 2023 в 8:39 am

Written by:

Category: Innovation,Strategy

(Originally published on December 1st, 2021)

When talking to people about innovation and SIT, whether in casual conversation or as part of a teaching or facilitation scenario, many of us have found that the easiest way to convey what we are about, and the best way to make the (metaphorical…) penny drop, is often by using a metaphor.

 

The Evolutionary Metaphor

Ideas are like species. There are many of them out there. They struggle for attention and resources, and only the fittest survive. In “idea nature”, random variations of ideas emerge through accident and luck. Some of these variations – the 3M Post It, Penicillin – turn out to be useful and successful while others (the majority) disappear. What SIT does is to create the variations non-randomly. Thus, SIT is about systematic or directed creation of “idea mutations” or “idea variations”. Randomness is thus taken out of the idea evolution process. Some non-obvious advantages:

  1. SIT variations are created using the 5 patterns. Thus, beyond speeding up the process by proactively creating variations, SIT leads to types of variations that tend to have a higher probability of survival.
  2. Through the FFF structure, SIT not only speeds up generation of variations, but also accelerates selection, by passing each variant immediately through market and implementation filters.
  3. As the SIT method evolved (!), additional tools and practices have been incorporated to make sure that those ideas that have been non-randomly selected, get to be packaged to support their survival.

 

The Firm/Marshy Ground Metaphor

Common wisdom is that when individuals deal with everyday notions and ordinary activities, they are on firm ground, stable and safe, while innovative ideas live in “marshy terrain” and, thus, in order to achieve innovation, one must be willing to leave firm ground and wade through marshes in the hope of reaching undiscovered territory. Due to the buzz around innovation, people push themselves into the marshes but, intuitively, they fear the thought of getting muddy, sinking or not being able to return to the firm ground from which they ventured out.

SIT’s novel claim is that this underlying assumption – that innovation lives in the marshland – is misleading and altogether false. Rather, the innovative idea resides on ground as firm and stable as that on which current thoughts and modes of being exist, and it is merely the path to this innovative idea that requires wading through the marsh.

SIT concedes that, indeed, to achieve innovation one must be willing to wade through these marshes. This wading process may be quite unpleasant and cannot, by any stretch, be considered as primarily entertaining (“we’ll have great fun”). There are, however, two consolations: first, a structured methodology goes a long way in guiding you safely through the marshy ground, and second, once the innovative idea is reached, one finds oneself, again, on firm and stable ground.

Innovation communities of practice – Part 1

Published date: May 31, 2023 в 12:34 pm

Written by:

Category: Innovation Facilitation,Organizational Innovation

Innovation Coaches in action

This one is for all our worldwide Innovation Coaches community of practice, their supporting managers, and everyone interested in launching an organizational innovation program.

Nowadays, the term “coach” is widely used for almost any role that has to do with helping others attain or practice new skills, overcome a barrier, or generally improve. Given that innovation has a crucial function in business, strategy, and organizational change processes, it is no surprise that SIT has worked for many years to develop and advance Innovation Networks in which Innovation Coaches take an active role.

Over the last years I’ve spent most of my working hours designing, managing, and leading innovation networks and training programs. With the sustainable innovation approach becoming more and more common, I am often asked under what circumstances an organization should develop inhouse innovation related capabilities. Two recent – very different in scope and style – training cohorts, led me to think about all the innovation coaches I’ve trained, their inspiring success stories, and diverse challenges.

So, in case you never had a chance to collaborate with an iCoach – I hope to convince you that you should; and if you are an active iCoach – this is the moment where you get to kick back, recall how amazing and important the work you do is, and then – share with your friends and colleagues. I am confident that many people in your organization will be happy to learn more about your innovation training, knowledge and activities, and how you can help promote innovation and business impact.

Making room for your innovation community

Innovation coaches help others to innovate in what they do, primarily by driving small-scale innovation activities aimed to generate new ideas, solutions, collaborations, and inspiration which in turn drive business impact. Most organizations we (SIT) advise have adopted our role definition and refer to someone as an innovation coach (iCoach) upon completing our onboarding training and practice. These initial programs make them valued members in the organizational community, as well as part of SIT’s global innovation community of practice.

The idea of defining a new – innovation based – role to individuals is key to designing and rolling out a fruitful organizational innovation strategy. Setting such a mechanism is key to the organization’s ability to nurture and scale innovation efforts alongside its core activities. Strong innovation communities can also enhance additional organizational efforts such as promoting new concepts, ideas, tools, and insights – which many organizations find challenging to implement when merged into their day-to-day tasks.

A community of active innovation coaches is at the core of a meaningful, impactful innovation framework. It is where the top-down and bottom-up strategies come together in the form of ongoing activities providing additional value. Community size will vary based on organization’s size and structure and innovation objectives – from 10 to +1000.

 

What does an innovation coach do?

Innovation coaches are trained to initiate, plan, and moderate internal innovation activities to generate new ideas and solutions in the context of a specific business topic. When designing the coaches training program, we define and adjust the role to reflect the organization and its innovation strategy and capabilities so that in time (and practice) they will be able to meet Return on Innovation (ROI) goals.

SIT’s Innovation Coaches are trained in conducting Mini-Sessions using a structured and systematic method. These sessions in which one or two coaches collaborate with a small group of colleagues to generate new ideas, solutions, and insights to benefit a specific business topic across the innovation process and framework. Active and impactful innovation coaches will usually run around 10 Mini-Sessions a year (and participate and lead additional innovation activities – alone and with their fellow coaches).

 

Who should become an innovation coach?

This is one of the questions I am most frequently asked. Anyone in the organization can innovate and contribute through innovation. Yet iCoaches hold a unique function and therefore their nomination is important on the individual, team, and the organization levels.

 

Here are three useful tips to consider when nominating iCoaches:

  1. Having an active interest and motivation in innovation is a strong indicator to one’s success and activity level over time. The importance of being passionate or interested is true for most endeavors, and it is more so for tasks that require taking initiative, challenging existing practices and mindset, and engaging others.
  2. Active and impactful iCoaches are usually the ones who are “going places” within the organization. They bring in their organizational experience and knowhow to achieve goals yet are not so senior that won’t have the time to take on additional responsibilities.
  3. Having a group of motivated and experienced nominated individuals in your iCoach team is great, but not enough. An effective iCoach team is aligned to the organization’s business functions and echoes its structure and strategy. This way, as a group can form an active, interactive community of practice.

Building your dream team of iCoaches is kind of a combination between science and art. If you are currently engaged in this process, here is my (maybe surprising) advice: look for those people that everyone would like to have in their team, those who are busy yet somehow always take on another interesting and challenging task (or two).

An active innovation coach requires training, mentoring and management support.

In our next post we will share insights about the life of an iCoach. Meanwhile, we invite all our active iCoaches to share their thoughts via email, DM, or comment below.

We know you are here 😊.

HOW BRAINSTORMING AND DESIGN THINKING f-AI-l

Published date: May 25, 2023 в 10:46 am

Written by:

Category: Methodology,Organizational Innovation

Automatizing Brainstorming using LLMs can result in plenty of rubbish. If people can create dozens of useless ideas with BS, imagine the sheer volume that can be generated with an LLM. AI can dramatically accelerate innovation, but the challenge is to do so effectively, getting rid of BS and its harmful effects on Design Thinking and innovation.

 

How did Brainstorming and Design Thinking become synonymous with ideation or innovation in spite of their flaws? 

Brainstorming initially played an important role promoting creativity in corporations, as executives received a license to share ideas freely. In the hierarchical culture of those times, this was a revolution. But 70 years later, both users and academic research confirm that it does not lead to novel ideas.

Why, then, do BS and DT continue to dominate the innovation field? Two possible reasons:

1) Both have cool proponents with strong PR (ad agencies and IDEO respectively).

2) Both give the illusion that innovating is easy and fun.

Design Thinking is useful in many aspects and therefore recommended for any innovator. BUT – it is flawed at the core. It consists of three steps:

1) Empathize and define needs

2) Ideate

3) Prototype and Test

DT is therefore a useful collection of tools for harvesting insights, visualizing and prototyping, organized in a sensible 3 (or 5) step process, but, since step 2 relies on BS, it lacks a method to break mental fixedness. Moreover, DT makes the baseless claims that to innovate:

a) One needs to think like a designer, and

b) All you need is to empathize and prototype, and

c) That the best way to innovate is to have fun.

BUT, in reality:

a) Why should designers be a model for rethinking company strategy, a chemical process or a history class? Some innovation, especially product development, has to do with design, but why should all innovation be conducted as if it were a design task?

b) The missing middle – Ideate – requires breaking one’s fixedness. This can be done with structured tools, such as ours, SIT, or other non-Brainstorming methods. Otherwise, old ideas are rehashed.

c) Having fun is nice but does not lead to innovation. Enjoying oneself may enhance persistence, but true innovation is contrary to “having fun”, requiring the pain of changing the way one thinks, and often arising from discontent and discomfort.

Brainstorming and Design Thinking are popular because they have great PR, are easy to use, give the illusion of novelty and are useful for non-innovative tasks. What does work, is a combination of empathic design, visualization, prototyping and experimentation, with a robust methodology for breaking fixedness.

Innovation Stigma

Published date: May 11, 2023 в 5:37 pm

Written by:

Category: Innovation,Organizational Innovation

There is an inherent bias against innovation despite the enormous value it holds for organizations.  Corporate executives know that innovation is the only true long term growth engine for their firm.  Yet innovation carries with it a certain stigma, a perception in the minds of executives, that it is “soft” and frivolous compared to other hard core business activities like productivity, quality, and demand generation.  This stigma deters executives from taking risk and investing in serious innovation initiatives.

The innovation industry itself is partly to blame.  Participants in the innovation space tend to perpetuate a mystique about innovation and creativity as though it is a deeply hidden secret that needs to be unleashed.  Walk into many innovation sessions and what you see are cans of Silly StringTM, Slinky(R) toys, Frisbees, and funny nose glasses.  The notion here is that people need to be more playful to have that “eureka” moment and invent the next blockbuster idea.  People are conditioned to believe innovation requires “skunk-works” in a specially-designed room to pursue “white space opportunities.”   Innovation is voodoo.

In an effort to differentiate themselves, participants in the innovation space create novel names for their programs and services.  Here is a very small sample: Innovations-Radar(R), Innovation Cube(R), Challenge AcceleratorTM, 360-IA(R), SpinnovatorTM, Idea BucketTM, AlphaStormingTM, Excursion DeckTM, Mindscan(R), IdeaSpring(R), Super Digilab(R), etc, etc.  The list is overwhelming and it tends to confuse the market.  More importantly, what is the efficacy of these tools?  Do they work?  The granddaddy of them all, Brainstorming, is certainly suspect given the many studies that suggest otherwise.

Is there an innovation bias?  I am polling Fortune 100 executives to describe the characteristics of people who champion certain business causes.  I ask them to describe the typical age, experience, credentials, aspirations, and personality of:

  • Productivity Champions
  • Process Excellence Champions
  • Innovation Champions
  • Leadership Champions
  • Brand Champions

The early feedback suggests innovation champions, compared to the others, are seen as more eager, altruistic “dreamers” who are out of touch with the business.  One executive described innovation champions as necessary but had low expectations of actual results.  Of more concern is the perception executives have about themselves in this role.  My sense is business people shy away from championing innovation because they believe the stigma of failing at innovation is more career-damaging than failing at other ventures.

The innovation industry needs to play a role in improving the image of innovation.  Fortunately, there are resources like Innovation Tools and CREAX that consolidate the innovation space and help companies make sense of the different offerings.  More prominence needs to be given to the classic researchers in innovation and creativity like Ronald Finke, Thomas Ward, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, and Jacob Goldenberg.  We need to get back to the basics of what makes innovation work so we can skip the hype.

The innovation bias has to be overcome if companies want to make progress and grow.  Leaders need to address this head on.  How?  Just as they learned to champion leadership by first becoming an authentic leader, they need to champion innovation by first becoming an authentic innovator.

What do SOS and Innovation have in common?

Published date: May 2, 2023 в 10:50 am

Written by:

Category: Innovation,Methodology

For those of you familiar with SIT’s methodology, last week’s “survival” exercises are perfect examples of one of SIT’s principles: FFF, or Function Follows Form.

We took a deep look at the actions of Academy Award winner, Tom Hanks, playing the character of Chuck Noland in the film “Cast Away”. His limited available resources inspired his creativity, allowing him to survive on a desert island and finally to find his way back home. He did so by first looking at the form of the objects around him and then coming up with new ideas to best utilize them.

But survival on a desert island is not the only example of our principles – though it does make for an incredible story.

In SIT’s terminology, FFF is a leading principle and a structured framework for innovation, precisely because it forces one to examine possibilities that they would not seriously consider within a standard rational process. By applying the non-standard way of thinking, one improves the chances of coming up with innovative ideas that competitors may have missed.

Backwards is the right way for SOS

Trying to think of new applications for physical objects is not the only application of FFF. The principle also helps explain some well-known expressions.

First, let’s go back to our island.

 Last week’s article may have prompted you to watch the movie. If so, you probably remember that, when trying to contact a distant ship, Noland signals both by shouting and with the help of a flashlight three famous letters – a distress signal: SOS.

The famous distress signal, SOS, is itself an excellent example of the Function Follows Form principle.

Contrary to popular belief, the origin of the SOS code is not the acronym for “Save Our Souls” or “Save Our Ship”. The sequence of letters was originally created without any literal meaning; It simply represented the easiest to remember sequence of Morse letters: three dots / three dashes / three dots (…—…).

Germany was the first country to adopt this sequence in 1905. In fact, it was preceded by attempts to use other codes such as SSS DDD, and even CQD. Lucky for us, CQD didn’t catch.

Only a few years later in popular usage, SOS became associated with the words that help us remember the acronym. Can you think of another phrase to attach to the letters SOS?

No alt text provided for this image

S.O.S created with FFF mindset

Source

This action, expanding an existing word into the words of a phrase, is called a BACKRONYM.

Have you ever heard of this term? The act itself is a bit more common than you might think. Care for additional examples? Here are some:

If we’re already into movies, the global crime organization “SPECTRE” from the James Bond film series has become the acronym for Special Executive for Counterintelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion.

The PATRIOT Act is a landmark Act of the United States congress, signed into law by President George W. Bush. It was enacted following the September 11 attacks, with an intended goal of tightening US national security, particularly as it related to foreign terrorism. No wonder, then, that the Act lent itself to the backronym Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism.

Even the APGAR score, which is used by doctors to quickly evaluate the health of all newborns, is a backronym. It was named after Virginia Apgar, the anesthesiologist who invented it in 1952. Until today the APGAR score represents the mandatory set of categories needed to assess infant status shortly after birth all around the world. Only after it was adopted, the acronyms were invented to help medical teams remember all the tests included in it: Appearance, Pulse, Grimace, Activity, Respiration.

In fact, APGAR’s surname is such a strong “brand” that acronyms have been created in many other languages to represent tests included in the index, including Spanish, Portuguese, French, German, and Czech.

It’s time to go back to the basics: Looking for an object (Form) to fulfill a defined Function is fine. But discovering latent needs and benefits, that originate out of an existing Form tends very often to lead to innovation. So, don’t wait for your next flight over the Pacific Ocean. Give the Function Follows Form principle a try right now. You may make waves.

Can you think of some FFF applications from your immediate business and needs? Share with us.

Innovating with nothing but water around you

Published date: April 28, 2023 в 2:48 pm

Written by:

Category: Innovation,Innovation Facilitation

I love movies and I love innovation. But even I was shocked when I learned that someone who shares my feelings was willing to pay USD 85,000 for a unique volleyball that appeared on the big screen.

A few weeks ago, Wilson, an off-white leather ball which is best known for co-starring alongside Tom Hanks in “Cast Away” was sold for that sum.

In the film, FedEx trouble shooter Chuck Noland, played by Hanks, is forced by extreme conditions to survive on a deserted island for 4 years, relying only on the limited resources found around him.

Wilson, in the movie context, is not just a ball. Chuck needs to find a solution to his solitude, sense of aloneness. Almost accidently, he “creates” a companion out of a simple blood-stained volleyball, by adding a face to it. This seemingly casual action changed the ball’s essence.

No alt text provided for this image

Wilson the volleyball from “Cast Away”

Source:

Why is this scene relevant for us? And what can we learn from it? I will use this Hollywood story to explain two principles of innovation that you can implement in your business, even if you are not completely surrounded by water.

How do we usually innovate?

All around us we can spot and specify needs and problems. We can usually identify and articulate our pains:  What do we lack? What action do we want to perform, or do we wish to be performed? Then, we tend to look for a tool, a product or a person that best suits our needs.

What if there is not even one object around that supports these needs? In such cases we may try to build or invent one.

We usually move from a perceived function to the object that can perform it. We practice this standard way of thinking not only in our private lives, but also as a part of organizational and business routines. We define “A job to be done” and look for the right tool to do the job!

The term “Form Follows Function”, which encapsulates this way of thinking, was coined by the architect Louis Sullivan at the end of the 19th century. Sullivan was known as the “Father of Modernism”, influencing generations of architects and designers. He referred to the fact that a building or an object should primarily relate to its intended function or purpose, even at the expense of its aesthetics…

A deserted island is actually a Closed World

But survivors on lost islands do not experience regular conditions. You can ask Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe, the most famous fictional castaway who spent 28 years on a remote tropical island. Your resources are scarce, and you must make the best of what can be found in your immediate surroundings, your Closed World. This is the first principle of innovation to be learned from this story.

In the 2000 drama film Cast Away, Chuck Noland is on his way to Malaysia when his cargo plane gets caught in a violent storm and crashes into the Pacific Ocean. Noland is the only survivor of the crash, and he washes up on an uninhabited island.

In his new home Noland finds his standard way of thinking useless. He carefully examines the objects around him – the content of some FedEx packages washed up on the shore – only to find out that their original function is no longer needed. After all, what good can skating shoes bring when you’re the only resident of your wild sandy hot kingdom?

Think differently, embrace your constraints

 If you find yourself on such a deserted island, the first things you will probably look for are food, water, and shelter. Chuck Noland did just that, utilizing everything he could lay his hands on.

He began improvising. Not only did he find new functions for the objects he found on the island, but these new functions seem much more innovative than what he originally imagined.

For us it comes as no surprise since we believe in SIT that Constraints Foster Creativity. Nothing like a remote island to illustrate constraints. Noland learned this second principle of innovation quickly.

Got some dry branches? Great! Rubbing them can help start a fire. That’s easy.

How about the skating shoes blades? Looks like the perfect knife.

Some video cassettes that seemed of no value were the source of a strong rope, weaved from the tape inside them.

The plastic walls of portable toilets? They were turned into a sail and a shield for the raft Noland built.

And Wilson!

At first glance, the volleyball seemed redundant and was thrown aside. Only later a latent need was discovered. Noland, desperate to talk to someone, personified the volleyball, making him his closest friend. He drew a face on the bloodstained ball, enabling it to become much more than a sport appliance for years to come.

This innovative way of thinking might sound strange or even childish, but that is just the point. Most people use the standard way of innovating that I described before; Nevertheless, I would like to suggest a different approach: start with the form of the object, then look for new functionalities it may support.

This phenomenon was discovered by a group of psychologists led by Ronald Finke, and it spurred a new thinking approach.

In SIT terms, this is called Function Follows Form or FFF for short. This counterintuitive yet powerful process allows us to discover new benefits that we might miss by following our usual path of thinking.

We like improvising, creating new ideas out of imagined situations or objects, so why wait until we find ourselves on an island?

Come back next week to see how you can recognize outcomes of the FFF framework in surprising places.

Get our innovation model that has worked for 1000+ companies.

    No thanks, not now.

    sitsite
    Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance (opens in a new tab)
    Privacy Overview

    This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.