Killer Innovations with Phil McKinney - A Show About Ideas Creativity And Innovation

When it comes to the process of generating ideas, the default answer is to host a brainstorming session.  Are there other ways to generate new ideas that are not dependent on traditional brainstorming?  Today on Killer Innovations, I am going to share with you five that I use. Mind Mapping and Wishing  Mind mapping is a fairly common term nowadays; there are many types of software proving templates for mind mapping.  Traditionally they are used to organize your data, but it is also a great way to generate new ideas. * Develop your problem statement. * Write down the problem statement in the center of your idea (whiteboards work great). * Expand on this problem statement by surrounding it with terms that better describe what you need. * Now add a second layer to each of your needs describing how you might be able to solve for these individual challenges. * Keep adding to your mind map using the steps above until you have sufficiently broken down your problem into manageable parts. It is a fantastic ideation technique that encourages creative answers.  Another great way to generate new ideas is wishing.  Wishing encourages your team to let imaginations run wild.  Assuming you have a well-researched and understood problem statement, ask each participant to dream up the most unattainable solutions they can think of related to the problem statement.  Create a list of a few dozen wishes and go through the wishes by considering and discussing the ideas in detail.  Ask yourself: * What makes them so impossible? * How can that idea be scaled down? * Which features of that wish could we integrate into this other approach? You might be surprised to discover applicable, real-world solutions among the team’s wildest wishes. Six Thinking Hats Six Thinking Hats by Dr. Edward de Bono unleashed a new approach to generating ideas by breaking down the ideas into six areas of thought.  It helps participants put themselves into the shoes of another.  The six hats are: * Logic- the facts. * Optimism- the value and the benefits. * Devil’s Advocate- the difficulties and dangers. * Emotion- Feelings and intuitions. * Creativity- Possibilities and new ideas. * Management- Making sure the rules of the hats are observed. So, how do you use the tool? Have each member put on one of these different “hats” for the discussion. Make sure everyone has their say and for extended sessions, rotate the hats to others so everyone gets the opportunity to see the problem and ideas from a variety of different perspective. Brain-writing and Forced Combinations One challenge for generating ideas is to get everything that is rattling around in your head out.  In this exercise, each participant takes a piece of paper and writes down a few rough ideas for solving the problem statement.  Each piece of paper is then passed on to someone else, who reads it silently and adds their own ideas to the page.  This process is repeated until everyone has had a chance to add to each piece of paper.  Once each participant has retrieved their original piece of paper, they read and organize the ideas.  Then each participant shares the notes and ideas on their piece of paper.  The big advantage of brain-writing is that it makes sure everybody has an opportunity to share their ideas and it also reinforces the idea of “building on the ideas of others.”  The last way to generate ideas I wanted to share is one I have used with my own...

When it comes to the process of generating ideas, the default answer is to host a brainstorming session.  Are there other ways to generate new ideas that are not dependent on traditional brainstorming?  Today on Killer Innovations, I am going to share with you five that I use. Mind Mapping and Wishing  Mind mapping is a fairly common term nowadays; there are many types of software proving templates for mind mapping.  Traditionally they are used to organize your data, but it is also a great way to generate new ideas. * Develop your problem statement. * Write down the problem statement in the center of your idea (whiteboards work great). * Expand on this problem statement by surrounding it with terms that better describe what you need. * Now add a second layer to each of your needs describing how you might be able to solve for these individual challenges. * Keep adding to your mind map using the steps above until you have sufficiently broken down your problem into manageable parts. It is a fantastic ideation technique that encourages creative answers.  Another great way to generate new ideas is wishing.  Wishing encourages your team to let imaginations run wild.  Assuming you have a well-researched and understood problem statement, ask each participant to dream up the most unattainable solutions they can think of related to the problem statement.  Create a list of a few dozen wishes and go through the wishes by considering and discussing the ideas in detail.  Ask yourself: * What makes them so impossible? * How can that idea be scaled down? * Which features of that wish could we integrate into this other approach? You might be surprised to discover applicable, real-world solutions among the team’s wildest wishes. Six Thinking Hats Six Thinking Hats by Dr. Edward de Bono unleashed a new approach to generating ideas by breaking down the ideas into six areas of thought.  It helps participants put themselves into the shoes of another.  The six hats are: * Logic- the facts. * Optimism- the value and the benefits. * Devil’s Advocate- the difficulties and dangers. * Emotion- Feelings and intuitions. * Creativity- Possibilities and new ideas. * Management- Making sure the rules of the hats are observed. So, how do you use the tool? Have each member put on one of these different “hats” for the discussion. Make sure everyone has their say and for extended sessions, rotate the hats to others so everyone gets the opportunity to see the problem and ideas from a variety of different perspective. Brain-writing and Forced Combinations One challenge for generating ideas is to get everything that is rattling around in your head out.  In this exercise, each participant takes a piece of paper and writes down a few rough ideas for solving the problem statement.  Each piece of paper is then passed on to someone else, who reads it silently and adds their own ideas to the page.  This process is repeated until everyone has had a chance to add to each piece of paper.  Once each participant has retrieved their original piece of paper, they read and organize the ideas.  Then each participant shares the notes and ideas on their piece of paper.  The big advantage of brain-writing is that it makes sure everybody has an opportunity to share their ideas and it also reinforces the idea of “building on the ideas of others.”  The last way to generate ideas I wanted to share is one I have used with my own...

This week on Killer Innovations, I will discuss how to use both individual ideation and team ideation to generate disruptive ideas that will create high impact innovations.   Individual Ideation When kicking off individual ideation, you need to ensure that the mechanics are in place.   Make sure everyone has a stack of yellow sticky notes and sharpies. They will be asked to write one idea per sticky note. Set the expectation of time and minimum of ideas. No editing. No talking. Write legibly and big. At the end of time, see how many have hit their idea quota.  Then let them take a break before the next set of exercises.  Now that everyone has their individual ideas in front of them, each person should take turns and go up to a flip chart and place each of their sticky notes on the flipchart and read what they wrote.  Once everyone has shared their ideas, the group should step back and look at the flip chart. In some sessions, I will circle the group and have the team come up with a name for the group of ideas that are the same or nearly the same.  I recorded a video of a grouping exercise I facilitated for a workshop for the US Department of Education. You can find it on my Youtube channel. Next, we want to see if there are any wow ideas.  Hand out to each person on the team four sticky notes. Each person should have their own color so they can know who/what they voted for.  Rules for this exercise: No talking. Place all four of your dots on a specific idea, not a group.  It is okay to place more than one dot per idea. Do not overthink it and do not move other people’s dots. Time the activity (no longer than ten minutes). You now have everyone’s ideas on the flip chart, grouping of everyone’s ideas into similar overlapping ideas and marked ideas.   Group Ideation Innovation is a team sport and that applies to ideation.  The benefit of a group is when we build on each other’s ideas.  So, the next exercise emphasizes looking at the individual ideas and asking how to make them better.  Ground rules for group ideation: One at a time (choose someone else’s idea, not your own). Ideate (think out loud). Let ideas trigger ideas. Build on, develop and expand each other’s ideas. No evaluation. So, the exercise is: Build on each other’s ideas. Select one idea you are excited about. Add new ideas. Group ideas together. Time the exercise for twenty-five minutes. The next step is to now rank the groups you have come up with.  It is important that you rank before you dismiss the team. You can learn more about ranking at Killer Innovations or in the chapter of my book.  So, why does this process work? This is not just a group exercise. You get the benefit of individual ideation which is great on generating raw ideas. You get the benefit of group ideation. These exercises are trusted and used by thousands of organizations and governments around the world.  I would love to hear the results if you try this inside your team or organization. I you need help in setting up a test to see if this will work in your organization, go here.  Put in your contact information and someone will reach out and help you think through how to test it in your organization.   To learn more about individual and group ideations,

This week on Killer Innovations, I will discuss how to use both individual ideation and team ideation to generate disruptive ideas that will create high impact innovations.   Individual Ideation When kicking off individual ideation, you need to ensure that the mechanics are in place.   Make sure everyone has a stack of yellow sticky notes and sharpies. They will be asked to write one idea per sticky note. Set the expectation of time and minimum of ideas. No editing. No talking. Write legibly and big. At the end of time, see how many have hit their idea quota.  Then let them take a break before the next set of exercises.  Now that everyone has their individual ideas in front of them, each person should take turns and go up to a flip chart and place each of their sticky notes on the flipchart and read what they wrote.  Once everyone has shared their ideas, the group should step back and look at the flip chart. In some sessions, I will circle the group and have the team come up with a name for the group of ideas that are the same or nearly the same.  I recorded a video of a grouping exercise I facilitated for a workshop for the US Department of Education. You can find it on my Youtube channel. Next, we want to see if there are any wow ideas.  Hand out to each person on the team four sticky notes. Each person should have their own color so they can know who/what they voted for.  Rules for this exercise: No talking. Place all four of your dots on a specific idea, not a group.  It is okay to place more than one dot per idea. Do not overthink it and do not move other people’s dots. Time the activity (no longer than ten minutes). You now have everyone’s ideas on the flip chart, grouping of everyone’s ideas into similar overlapping ideas and marked ideas.   Group Ideation Innovation is a team sport and that applies to ideation.  The benefit of a group is when we build on each other’s ideas.  So, the next exercise emphasizes looking at the individual ideas and asking how to make them better.  Ground rules for group ideation: One at a time (choose someone else’s idea, not your own). Ideate (think out loud). Let ideas trigger ideas. Build on, develop and expand each other’s ideas. No evaluation. So, the exercise is: Build on each other’s ideas. Select one idea you are excited about. Add new ideas. Group ideas together. Time the exercise for twenty-five minutes. The next step is to now rank the groups you have come up with.  It is important that you rank before you dismiss the team. You can learn more about ranking at Killer Innovations or in the chapter of my book.  So, why does this process work? This is not just a group exercise. You get the benefit of individual ideation which is great on generating raw ideas. You get the benefit of group ideation. These exercises are trusted and used by thousands of organizations and governments around the world.  I would love to hear the results if you try this inside your team or organization. I you need help in setting up a test to see if this will work in your organization, go here.  Put in your contact information and someone will reach out and help you think through how to test it in your organization.   To learn more about individual and group ideations,

Today’s show is going to be a look behind the scenes around the time when I took over as CTO at HP.  This time is so important because it is the time that I came up with the concept “The Innovation Program Office.”  In today’s show we will talk about the pros and cons of the “IPO”, what are some of the things you need to think about regarding the “IPO”, and will it work for you?  The concept of “IPO” still applies today, and hopefully by the end of the show you will have your own insight of how it can apply to what you are trying to do in the organizations you serve. History A lot of traditional teams set up to “do innovation” by creating an innovation team.  This makes the innovation team a target because people not on the team no longer saw innovation as part of their job.  What a lot of organizations experienced was that it was hard to scale. Scaling is the key factor because scaling limits impact.  Even with major significant support, no organization can grow a dedicated team large enough.  Innovation is not a team of people where you have an innovation program office, innovation is around a capability that an organization can and should have that is part of that core of how you do things.  New teams need to show innovation value right away with a near zero team members. Most likely you will have zero funding yet, you need to show an early win. How do new teams do this? By getting others to support them. Let them get credit for the early wins. Be viewed as a resource to help. Let the group benefit (new product, revenue, marketplace credit, etc.). If you are in the innovation game and it is all about you getting the credit, the odds of you being successful in this game are near zero if not zero.   Role of the Innovation Program Office The role takes on many forms but the role of the “IPO” is establishing the innovation framework, securing the funding, project selection and tracking, and training and supporting the teams as they innovate.  The first thing the “IPO” needs to establish is the framework that the broader organization will align around. You need to adapt the framework to the language of the organization.  Getting others to adapt it is a “change management” process. At HP the gradual roll-out to get the framework established takes over two years for 20,000 employees. Once you have the framework in place, you need to look at the metrics.  Understand how executive decisions are made and adapt metrics to it. Test your “alpha metrics” against yourself and against your peers. Does it reveal something? If you have the info int eh past, would you have made different decisions? Your objective is to find metrics that are: Predictive of future challenges and opportunities. Give you enough foresight to change directions and have an impact. Satisfies the “fear” response from execs. Prove to management that innovation can be managed. Key with funding in the “IPO” is to move it from underneath the normal budget process and control.  Once you have the metrics it is much easier to secure the funding. Start small, prove yourself, and grow the funding.  Look forwards to what you will do not what you have done in the past. Remember that you are competing for money that could be used in other ways.  Next is project selection and tracking: Define the criteria for project selection. We used ranking questions. Create their own. Re-evaluate the selections to improve how you identify the projects that will have the biggest impact. Once you have everything in place: the framework, metrics,

Today’s show is going to be a look behind the scenes around the time when I took over as CTO at HP.  This time is so important because it is the time that I came up with the concept “The Innovation Program Office.”  In today’s show we will talk about the pros and cons of the “IPO”, what are some of the things you need to think about regarding the “IPO”, and will it work for you?  The concept of “IPO” still applies today, and hopefully by the end of the show you will have your own insight of how it can apply to what you are trying to do in the organizations you serve. History A lot of traditional teams set up to “do innovation” by creating an innovation team.  This makes the innovation team a target because people not on the team no longer saw innovation as part of their job.  What a lot of organizations experienced was that it was hard to scale. Scaling is the key factor because scaling limits impact.  Even with major significant support, no organization can grow a dedicated team large enough.  Innovation is not a team of people where you have an innovation program office, innovation is around a capability that an organization can and should have that is part of that core of how you do things.  New teams need to show innovation value right away with a near zero team members. Most likely you will have zero funding yet, you need to show an early win. How do new teams do this? By getting others to support them. Let them get credit for the early wins. Be viewed as a resource to help. Let the group benefit (new product, revenue, marketplace credit, etc.). If you are in the innovation game and it is all about you getting the credit, the odds of you being successful in this game are near zero if not zero.   Role of the Innovation Program Office The role takes on many forms but the role of the “IPO” is establishing the innovation framework, securing the funding, project selection and tracking, and training and supporting the teams as they innovate.  The first thing the “IPO” needs to establish is the framework that the broader organization will align around. You need to adapt the framework to the language of the organization.  Getting others to adapt it is a “change management” process. At HP the gradual roll-out to get the framework established takes over two years for 20,000 employees. Once you have the framework in place, you need to look at the metrics.  Understand how executive decisions are made and adapt metrics to it. Test your “alpha metrics” against yourself and against your peers. Does it reveal something? If you have the info int eh past, would you have made different decisions? Your objective is to find metrics that are: Predictive of future challenges and opportunities. Give you enough foresight to change directions and have an impact. Satisfies the “fear” response from execs. Prove to management that innovation can be managed. Key with funding in the “IPO” is to move it from underneath the normal budget process and control.  Once you have the metrics it is much easier to secure the funding. Start small, prove yourself, and grow the funding.  Look forwards to what you will do not what you have done in the past. Remember that you are competing for money that could be used in other ways.  Next is project selection and tracking: Define the criteria for project selection. We used ranking questions. Create their own. Re-evaluate the selections to improve how you identify the projects that will have the biggest impact. Once you have everything in place: the framework, metrics,

So, you are about to pull together a team of eight to twelve people into a brainstorming session; do not make the mistake that 90% of us make…no area of focus.  Most teams will be given the challenge of to “quickly come up with a product idea.” The results can be predicted; poor to none when it comes to creating any form of disruptive ideas.  This week on Killer Innovations, we will talk about four steps to better brainstorm problem statements. Brainstorming When you pull together a team for brainstorming, creating focus is critical.  When I say “creating focus” I mean that you need to tell the brainstorm team: Who has the problem? What exactly is the problem? Why is it important to solve? In full or multi-day brainstorms, I have the teams develop their own problem statement.  I set aside between four to eight hours to create a proper problem statement. Do no scrimp on this; spend the time!  A well-defined focus via a well thought out problem statement will generate more and radically better ideas when you are ideating. The core elements have to address one of the following: Solve a problem. Remove a barrier. Improve an experience. And while you try to answer all of this remember: Need to be concise. Does not state or imply a solution. Specific enough to be solvable in the given time frame and with available resources or competencies. Sounds hard doesn’t it?  Thus, why I spend four to eight hours crafting, testing and validating a problem statement before I bring the team together.   Good and Bad Problem Statements I have a few different templates I use for creating problem statements: The (what/problem) affects (who/customer) the result of which (why/importance). (Who/customer) is affected by (what/problem), the result of which (why/importance). So, what are the steps that would allow you to create a well-defined problem statement?  The first step is to brainstorm the problem!  Ask for people to list problems, challenges, friction in the system, barriers and unmet needs.  The second step is to have each individual answer the “who, what, and why” we talked about earlier in the show.  Step three is to then take the answers and start to draft problem statements using the templates. Then repeat the “who, what, and why”, drafting multiple versions of the problem statements.  Step four is to test it with the “who”, the target segment. Testing Your Problem Statement Once you have a version of the problem statement that you think works, you need to test it with others.  Never use yourself as a proxy; you are too close to it. You test it by writing it out, editing it, simplifying it, and making it tight and concise.  Then find and talk to the people who you believe have the problem. Then ask them a set of questions to validate the problem and problem statement: Is this (team’s hypothesis) a problem for you?  Why or why not? What problem would be solved for you if the problem was fixed? How frequently does the problem cause a problem for you? What value would you gain if this problem was solved? Now that you have a problem statement, I would recommend sharing it with the team for the brainstorm as “homework.”  Have the think about the problem statement and ask them to answer the validation questions from the perspective of the individuals who would receive the benefit from the brainstorm.  If you would like your team to learn how to run radically better brainstorms by writing better problem statements then I would suggest you host a one-day

So, you are about to pull together a team of eight to twelve people into a brainstorming session; do not make the mistake that 90% of us make…no area of focus.  Most teams will be given the challenge of to “quickly come up with a product idea.” The results can be predicted; poor to none when it comes to creating any form of disruptive ideas.  This week on Killer Innovations, we will talk about four steps to better brainstorm problem statements. Brainstorming When you pull together a team for brainstorming, creating focus is critical.  When I say “creating focus” I mean that you need to tell the brainstorm team: Who has the problem? What exactly is the problem? Why is it important to solve? In full or multi-day brainstorms, I have the teams develop their own problem statement.  I set aside between four to eight hours to create a proper problem statement. Do no scrimp on this; spend the time!  A well-defined focus via a well thought out problem statement will generate more and radically better ideas when you are ideating. The core elements have to address one of the following: Solve a problem. Remove a barrier. Improve an experience. And while you try to answer all of this remember: Need to be concise. Does not state or imply a solution. Specific enough to be solvable in the given time frame and with available resources or competencies. Sounds hard doesn’t it?  Thus, why I spend four to eight hours crafting, testing and validating a problem statement before I bring the team together.   Good and Bad Problem Statements I have a few different templates I use for creating problem statements: The (what/problem) affects (who/customer) the result of which (why/importance). (Who/customer) is affected by (what/problem), the result of which (why/importance). So, what are the steps that would allow you to create a well-defined problem statement?  The first step is to brainstorm the problem!  Ask for people to list problems, challenges, friction in the system, barriers and unmet needs.  The second step is to have each individual answer the “who, what, and why” we talked about earlier in the show.  Step three is to then take the answers and start to draft problem statements using the templates. Then repeat the “who, what, and why”, drafting multiple versions of the problem statements.  Step four is to test it with the “who”, the target segment. Testing Your Problem Statement Once you have a version of the problem statement that you think works, you need to test it with others.  Never use yourself as a proxy; you are too close to it. You test it by writing it out, editing it, simplifying it, and making it tight and concise.  Then find and talk to the people who you believe have the problem. Then ask them a set of questions to validate the problem and problem statement: Is this (team’s hypothesis) a problem for you?  Why or why not? What problem would be solved for you if the problem was fixed? How frequently does the problem cause a problem for you? What value would you gain if this problem was solved? Now that you have a problem statement, I would recommend sharing it with the team for the brainstorm as “homework.”  Have the think about the problem statement and ask them to answer the validation questions from the perspective of the individuals who would receive the benefit from the brainstorm.  If you would like your team to learn how to run radically better brainstorms by writing better problem statements then I would suggest you host a one-day

It goes without saying that not all ideas are good ideas that lead to market winning innovations.  Sometimes we need to remind ourselves that while failures will happen, we can learn from those that have gone before us in bringing innovations to market.  This week on the show, we are going to look at the five worst innovation failures and see what could have been done differently.   Five Worst Innovation Failures No. 1: The Apple Newton In 1993, Apple launched the Newton.  While I tracked this product at launch, it was not one that I found interesting enough to purchase.  It was not a success because it tried to do too much. What could have been done differently? Get the hardware right. Determine the most important features users are looking for. Establish a model of “continuous innovation” of adding features. Only release features when ready and at the quality customers expect. Palm learned from one of the five worst innovation failures.  In 1997, Palm introduced the Palm Pilot, using the lessons learned from the Newton.  Palm focused on the minimal viable product.  Rather than doing twenty things poorly, the Palm Pilot did its core functionality extremely well.  The Palm Pilot dominated the PDA market for years. Five Worst Innovation Failures No. 2: Microsoft Zune In 2006, Microsoft introduced their portable music player, Zune.  It was Microsoft’s answer to the Apple iPod. Even with a ton of marketing effort the product never took off.  There was nothing unique about it that would cause someone to switch from using an iPod to take up a Zune. The product was finally killed off in 2011.  What could have been done differently? To win you need to commit.  Taking half a step by introducing a re-branded product is not a winning strategy. To win against an entrenched leader you need to out-innovate them. Five Worst Innovation Failures No. 3: HD-DVD In 2006, Toshiba, with support from Microsoft, launched HD-DVD which was supposed to become the Hi-Def successor to the DVD.  Standalone HD-DVDs players were sold and Microsoft’s Xbox 360 had a HD-DVD option. Most will not recall the HD-DVDs versus Blu-Ray wars.  It was a direct repeat of the VHS and Betamax wars. What should have been done differently? HP should not have switched its position based on incentives.  It injected confusion into the market and impacted its technical credibility with its partners. Ecosystem partnerships are critical for most, if not all, major global innovations today. Five Worst Innovation Failures No. 4: Samsung Note 7 In 2016, Samsung came out with the Samsung Note 7.  This failed because it had a problem where it occasionally caught fire and exploded.  Out of prudence, the phones were banned on flights and Samsung had to recall the entire line.  What could have been done differently? Don’t let the schedule dictate launch. Get the quality right. Customers will always reward quality with loyalty. Balance risk of new innovations. Learn from others. Five Worst Innovation Failures No. 5: TwitterPeek In 2008, Peek introduced Twitter Peek, a hardware device which allowed users to send and receive tweets using Twitter.  It was the first Twitter-only mobile device. Peek took the minimal viable product to an extreme. TwitterPeek met broad skepticism in the press.  CNN listed it as one of the top ten biggest technology failures of 2009, while Gizmodo went as far as to name TwitterPeek as one of the fif...

It goes without saying that not all ideas are good ideas that lead to market winning innovations.  Sometimes we need to remind ourselves that while failures will happen, we can learn from those that have gone before us in bringing innovations to market.  This week on the show, we are going to look at the five worst innovation failures and see what could have been done differently.   Five Worst Innovation Failures No. 1: The Apple Newton In 1993, Apple launched the Newton.  While I tracked this product at launch, it was not one that I found interesting enough to purchase.  It was not a success because it tried to do too much. What could have been done differently? Get the hardware right. Determine the most important features users are looking for. Establish a model of “continuous innovation” of adding features. Only release features when ready and at the quality customers expect. Palm learned from one of the five worst innovation failures.  In 1997, Palm introduced the Palm Pilot, using the lessons learned from the Newton.  Palm focused on the minimal viable product.  Rather than doing twenty things poorly, the Palm Pilot did its core functionality extremely well.  The Palm Pilot dominated the PDA market for years. Five Worst Innovation Failures No. 2: Microsoft Zune In 2006, Microsoft introduced their portable music player, Zune.  It was Microsoft’s answer to the Apple iPod. Even with a ton of marketing effort the product never took off.  There was nothing unique about it that would cause someone to switch from using an iPod to take up a Zune. The product was finally killed off in 2011.  What could have been done differently? To win you need to commit.  Taking half a step by introducing a re-branded product is not a winning strategy. To win against an entrenched leader you need to out-innovate them. Five Worst Innovation Failures No. 3: HD-DVD In 2006, Toshiba, with support from Microsoft, launched HD-DVD which was supposed to become the Hi-Def successor to the DVD.  Standalone HD-DVDs players were sold and Microsoft’s Xbox 360 had a HD-DVD option. Most will not recall the HD-DVDs versus Blu-Ray wars.  It was a direct repeat of the VHS and Betamax wars. What should have been done differently? HP should not have switched its position based on incentives.  It injected confusion into the market and impacted its technical credibility with its partners. Ecosystem partnerships are critical for most, if not all, major global innovations today. Five Worst Innovation Failures No. 4: Samsung Note 7 In 2016, Samsung came out with the Samsung Note 7.  This failed because it had a problem where it occasionally caught fire and exploded.  Out of prudence, the phones were banned on flights and Samsung had to recall the entire line.  What could have been done differently? Don’t let the schedule dictate launch. Get the quality right. Customers will always reward quality with loyalty. Balance risk of new innovations. Learn from others. Five Worst Innovation Failures No. 5: TwitterPeek In 2008, Peek introduced Twitter Peek, a hardware device which allowed users to send and receive tweets using Twitter.  It was the first Twitter-only mobile device. Peek took the minimal viable product to an extreme. TwitterPeek met broad skepticism in the press.  CNN listed it as one of the top ten biggest technology failures of 2009, while Gizmodo went as far as to name TwitterPeek as one of the fif...

Many people believe when it comes to innovation, you’ve either got it or you don’t.  But innovation is a skill that can be learned, practiced and perfected. One area of innovation is ideation.  Generating quality ideas is key to keeping the innovation funnel full.  How do you get started in innovation if your team doesn’t have confidence in their innovation abilities?  One way is to have a disruptive ideation workshop. On today’s show, I talk about how to create a disruptive ideation workshop.   Boot Camp Condensed I teach my Innovation Boot Camp course two or three times a year.  This is an intense four-day session that goes twelve hours a day.  The objective is building the innovation confidence of the students. One common request from students is for a one-day version for their teams.  So, I reworked the content and created a one-day version called the Disruptive Ideation Workshop.  The workshop teaches a disruptive approach to generate more and better ideas using the FIRE method.  The objectives: learn the skill, apply it, and have a pipeline of ideas for the organization.  Two weeks ago, we tested the workshop. The class consisted of 25 senior leaders from a single organization (with zero background in innovation).  The results exceeded everyone’s expectations. One of the leaders in the class summed it up: “learning disruptive ideation that generated disruptive ideas.”  So, we named the workshop the “Disruptive Ideation Workshop.” The Disruptive Ideation Workshop in Brief What does disruptive ideation mean?  Disruptive means causing or tending to cause disruption; innovative or groundbreaking; unconventional, unorthodox, off-center, unusual, unfamiliar, unprecedented; pioneering, trailblazing, revolutionary, radical, advanced, newfangled, state-of-the-art. The Disruptive Ideation workshop is built around two major objectives: * Teach a disruptive approach to ideation. This will radically increase the number and quality of the ideas that a person and team can generate. Through the process of learning, apply it to a real-world problem facing the organization. At the end, students have a ranked set of disruptive ideas their organization can take forward. To achieve these objectives, we teach background and skills and how to apply the skills.   This course has two major sections: Section 1) Foundation and Section 2) Skills and Application/Practice.  Here’s what we cover in each. Section 1: Foundation Myths and mysteries of innovation Innovation skills (self-doubt/negative talk, imagination, seeing with fresh eyes, etc.) Innovation Anti-bodies (ego, no risk, no change, etc.) Innovation framework (FIRE) Focus Ideation Ranking Execution The focus was on Focus, Ideation, and Ranking of the FIRE method.  Special emphasis was placed on Ideation.   Skills Learned Section 2 of the Disruptive Ideation Workshop was a walk-through of the elements in FIRE.  Exercises allowed students to apply those elements to a real problem statement. Skill number one was FOCUS.  FOCUS is about defining the problem.  Having a clear “problem statement” is critical.  Without a well-defined problem statement, everyone jumps to generate ideas to solve something that is not clearly understood.  In boot camp,

Many people believe when it comes to innovation, you’ve either got it or you don’t.  But innovation is a skill that can be learned, practiced and perfected. One area of innovation is ideation.  Generating quality ideas is key to keeping the innovation funnel full.  How do you get started in innovation if your team doesn’t have confidence in their innovation abilities?  One way is to have a disruptive ideation workshop. On today’s show, I talk about how to create a disruptive ideation workshop.   Boot Camp Condensed I teach my Innovation Boot Camp course two or three times a year.  This is an intense four-day session that goes twelve hours a day.  The objective is building the innovation confidence of the students. One common request from students is for a one-day version for their teams.  So, I reworked the content and created a one-day version called the Disruptive Ideation Workshop.  The workshop teaches a disruptive approach to generate more and better ideas using the FIRE method.  The objectives: learn the skill, apply it, and have a pipeline of ideas for the organization.  Two weeks ago, we tested the workshop. The class consisted of 25 senior leaders from a single organization (with zero background in innovation).  The results exceeded everyone’s expectations. One of the leaders in the class summed it up: “learning disruptive ideation that generated disruptive ideas.”  So, we named the workshop the “Disruptive Ideation Workshop.” The Disruptive Ideation Workshop in Brief What does disruptive ideation mean?  Disruptive means causing or tending to cause disruption; innovative or groundbreaking; unconventional, unorthodox, off-center, unusual, unfamiliar, unprecedented; pioneering, trailblazing, revolutionary, radical, advanced, newfangled, state-of-the-art. The Disruptive Ideation workshop is built around two major objectives: * Teach a disruptive approach to ideation. This will radically increase the number and quality of the ideas that a person and team can generate. Through the process of learning, apply it to a real-world problem facing the organization. At the end, students have a ranked set of disruptive ideas their organization can take forward. To achieve these objectives, we teach background and skills and how to apply the skills.   This course has two major sections: Section 1) Foundation and Section 2) Skills and Application/Practice.  Here’s what we cover in each. Section 1: Foundation Myths and mysteries of innovation Innovation skills (self-doubt/negative talk, imagination, seeing with fresh eyes, etc.) Innovation Anti-bodies (ego, no risk, no change, etc.) Innovation framework (FIRE) Focus Ideation Ranking Execution The focus was on Focus, Ideation, and Ranking of the FIRE method.  Special emphasis was placed on Ideation.   Skills Learned Section 2 of the Disruptive Ideation Workshop was a walk-through of the elements in FIRE.  Exercises allowed students to apply those elements to a real problem statement. Skill number one was FOCUS.  FOCUS is about defining the problem.  Having a clear “problem statement” is critical.  Without a well-defined problem statement, everyone jumps to generate ideas to solve something that is not clearly understood.  In boot camp,

Making hard decisions can bring the most seasoned leaders to their knees, no matter how calm they look on the outside.  The fear of a better option (FOBO) can paralyze decision-making. It is also the enemy of innovation.  In this show I talk about 4 ways to deal with FOBO. FOBO versus FOMO What is it that causes that hesitation at decision time?  Patrick McGinnis calls it FOBO: the Fear of a Better Option.  Patrick describes it as being “paralyzed at the prospect of actually committing to something, out of fear that we might be choosing something that was not the absolute perfect option.”  The result is that you get stuck in an analysis paralysis and never make the decision. The sister term to FOBO is FOMO, the Fear of Missing Out. If you miss out, you will not have that one magic piece of data that will give you perfect information.  So, our fear of missing out feeds our fear of a better option. The result is saying “yes” to everything. I used to say “yes” to every request to speak or teach no matter the impact on myself or my family. When you combine FOBO with FOMO you can find yourself afraid of doing anything. That is FODA, the paralysis that turns into a fear of doing anything.  What I had to learn was to say “no.” Breakthrough came when a newspaper article was written about me which forced me to go public with a secret that fed my imposter syndrome.   The way that I deal with FOMO is I create criteria for myself that help me prioritize the requests for my time and attention.   FOBO in Innovation When it comes to innovation, deciding to move forward on an idea, to commit to resources such as people and money, is ripe of FOBO.  I have seen a leader hesitate to give a team the green light on a project because they are not yet convinced that it is the best/perfect idea.  The truth is that no idea is a perfect idea. In this case, FOBO could be masking a more general fear of failure. But not deciding means zero chance of an innovative idea. The main object is to innovate and to do that, you need to try your ideas.  You have to come to terms with the fact that most of your ideas are going to fail.  FOBO, the fear of a better option, is the enemy of innovation. It is the tool antibodies will use to brush off your ideas.   FODA (the Fear of Doing Anything) When you combine FOBO and FOMO you can find yourself in a paralyzed position not wanting to commit to anything.  This is FODA, the Fear of Doing Anything. You need to learn to be decisive. Here are 4 ways to deal with FOBO and not get caught in the trap of FODA: The Ask and Watch method.  Patrick McGinnis says to whittle your decision to two options.  Assign each item to either the left or right side of your watch. Look down and see where the second hand is at the moment.  Taking the final decision when you have two good options out of your control releases you from doubt. Criteria method.  Create a clear criterion that works for you.  Mine are the Five F’s: Faith, Family, Friends, Fitness, and Finances.  Score requests on your time against your list of criteria. The Innovation = Ranking method.  When it comes to innovation use your funnel and ranking process to create a l...

The fear of a better option (FOBO) can paralyze decision-making. It is also the enemy of innovation.  In this episode, I share 4 ways to deal with FOBO. FOBO versus FOMO What is it that causes that hesitation at decision time? Patrick McGinnis calls it FOBO: the Fear of a Better Option. Patrick describes it as being “paralyzed at the prospect of actually committing to something, out of fear that we might choose something that was not the absolute perfect option.” The result is that you get stuck in analysis paralysis and never decide. The sister term to FOBO is FOMO, the Fear of Missing Out. If you miss out, you will not have that one magic piece of data that will give you perfect information. So, our fear of missing out feeds our fear of a better option. The result is saying “yes” to everything. I used to say “yes” to every request to speak or teach, no matter the impact on myself or my family. When you combine FOBO with FOMO, you can find yourself afraid of doing anything. That is FODA, the paralysis that turns into a fear of doing anything. What I had to learn was to say “no.” Breakthrough came when a newspaper article was written about me, which forced me to go public with a secret that fed my imposter syndrome.   How I deal with FOMO is I create criteria for myself that help me prioritize the requests for my time and attention.   FOBO in Innovation For innovation, deciding to move forward on an idea, to commit to resources such as people and money, is ripe for FOBO. I have seen a leader hesitate to give a team the green light on a project because they are not yet convinced that it is the best/perfect idea.  No idea is a perfect idea. FOBO could mask a more general fear of failure. But not deciding means zero chance of an innovative idea. The primary objective is to innovate and to do that, you need to try your ideas. Come to terms with the fact that most of your ideas are going to fail.  FOBO, the fear of a better option, is the enemy of innovation. It is the tool antibodies will use to brush off your ideas.   FODA (the Fear of Doing Anything) When you combine FOBO and FOMO you can find yourself in a paralyzed position not wanting to commit to anything. This is FODA, the Fear of Doing Anything. You need to learn to be decisive. Here are 4 ways to deal with FOBO and not get caught in the trap of FODA: The Ask and Watch method. Patrick McGinnis says to whittle your decision to two options. Assign each item to either the left or right side of your watch. Look down and see where the second hand is at the moment. Taking the final decision when you have two good options out of your control releases you from doubt. Criteria method. Create a clear criterion that works for you. Mine are the Five F’s: Faith, Family, Friends, Fitness, and Finances. Score requests on your time against your list of criteria. The Innovation = Ranking method. With innovation, use your funnel and ranking process to create a list of “next best ideas.” These are the ideas based on their ranking score from the FIRE framework. With the ranked lists of your ideas,

Ethical lapses in some tech companies have grabbed headlines in recent years.  Tech is changing daily, touching every aspect of our lives. It’s time to define the ethical boundaries of technology.  Without focus on ethics in technology, there will be huge unintended consequences.    On today’s show, Joe Toscano, joins me.  Joe is founder of BEACON and author of Automating Humanity.  He is also a former award-winning experience designer for Google.  Joe’s background in Silicon Valley and Big Tech has led him to explore tech in terms of ethics.   Leaving the Valley After several years in the Silicon Valley “bubble,” Joe decided to step away.  Disconnect between life in the Valley and the world outside became his opportunity.  Joe Toscano formed a nonprofit called BEACON. BEACON stands for “Better Ethics and Consumer Outcomes Network.” It is a social innovation organization.  BEACON strives to connect the public to what is going on in the tech industry.  BEACON provides insights to policymakers in defining ethical boundaries of technology.   This tech insight equips them to address ethical concerns in a balanced way. BEACON works with technologists to create products that meet consumer demand and create positive social impact. Some tech leaders are content to leave it to regulators to define ethical boundaries of technology.  Through BEACON, Joe takes a holistic approach. Shaping ethical boundaries of technology has many factors to consider. The effect on the consumer, small business, local and global community as well as Big Tech must be in view. Lighting the Way Regulators cannot keep up with the pace of innovation today.  Joe believes there are certain things regulators must address. But, some things need to remain informal and driven solely by business.  This is where the nonprofit side of BEACON comes in. It is about education, research, and creating public safety tools. The goal is to educate consumers and regulators to ask the right questions.  BEACON partners with the University of Nebraska and Digital Futures Initiative.  These partnerships center on ethics in technology. BEACON has branched out this year forming a for profit side.  In the for profit sector, BEACON is creating products that will help small businesses comply with regulations.  The first product launching will generate required legal agreements. This will minimize legal expenses for small businesses. Ethics in Technology Businesses that want to set ethical boundaries of technology must change the mindset.  BEACON advises that they must move their business away from the quarterly statistics and into the longer term.   What is one of the biggest problems today? The attention economy drives tech.  This presents issues in terms of ethics. There is not a defined production value.  There’s room for innovation in defining what the production value is. The area of data is wide open for innovation.  At the core, innovations like these require thought on the long term ethical implications. BEACON’s work in the space of ethical boundaries in technology is timely and essential.