http://www.hec.ulg.ac.be/entreprises/professionnel/pme/master-class-intelligence-strategique

1. Innovation ouverte et sociale: utiliser l’intelligence collective
Theory
1. The theory
2. The tools X
3. The strategy
Impleme
Learning
ntation
David.osimo@gmail.com @osimod #is11osimo
http://www.diigo.com/user/osimod/hec?type=all

2. Key concepts

3. The context
• Complex, rapidly changing world
• Impossible to keep up with innovation
• "There are always more smart people outside
your company than within it.” Bill Joy

6. DELL
• Launched in February 2007 Dell IdeaStorm is a pioneer project
in the use of idea platforms in open/customer inspired
innovation with more than 10.000 ideas posted.

7. Values, not only tools
7

8. What is new?
• From one-to-many to many-to-many
• From one-off exercise to continuous
engagement
• From institution-led to individual-led
• From expensive to cheap
• From planned to emergent

9. What is new
Traditional innovation Open innovation
Mission Enable pre-defined groups/teams working Enable individuals to act in loose, ad-hoc
closely together and/or relatively formal collaborations with a potentially very large
collaborative relationships. number of others.
Relationship to Tools reflect the organizational hierarch Little link to organizational hierarchy
organisational hierarchy and roles within them.
Control of structure Centrally imposed and generally rigid Emergent (=emerges and evolves)
controls
Content originated by Specialists with authorisation All users - also emergent
Control over users Users/participants are fixed and their roles Roles by choice and can evolve over time
pre-defined. (emergent)
Control mechanisms Formal, rules Norms, examples
Change of content Slow Rapid
timescales
Delivery model Typically on premise commercially Range of delivery models including on premise,
licensed software cloud, commercial, open source, stand-alone,
suites or add-ins to E1.0 systems
Range of participants Colleagues with similar or complementary Anyone in the organization and potentially
job roles outside (e.g. customers)
Links between Peer or hierarchical Links can be strong to non-existent (or
participants 'potential') within the group
Typical tools Knowledge management, knowledge Blogs, wikis, social networking, prediction
repositories, decision automation markets
Communication patterns One-to-one Many-to-many
9

10. WHY: the benefits
• Increase ideation rate
• Reaching out to new innovators
• Leveraging internal innovators
• Wider variety of disciplines – thinking outside
of the box
• Buzz , creativity and excitement
• Shorter time-to-market

11. Ideamocracy.it
• 5000 Euros prize
• 1 month
• 63 prototypes/concepts received

12. The dark side
• Lack of participation
• Spam and improper content
• Additional workload
• Information overload

13. The dark side
No expectations, Design well, leverage
• Lack of participation effect(vanity, self-interest)
• Spam and improper content Monitor daily, critical mass, self-
regulated
• Additional workload Link into workstream
• Information overload User-driven filtering

14. Different targets
How to collaborate?
Internal Proximity
Other Sharepoint
dept.
Lead Users Collaborative tools
General
Communication (social
public media)
And email….

15. What unique insight users have
• IT skills: coders and hackers are, generally speaking, better and
faster thanorganisations at creating applications.
• specific thematic knowledge: Wikipedia teaches us that everyone
has something (s)he’s expert on. Peertopatent exploits the
technological knowledge on things such as parallel simulation
• experience as users of public services: it is costly and difficult for
government to understand the perspective of users. Open feedback
channels such as PatientOpinion highlight problems that
government would not think about , such as toilets being too low
• pervasive geographic coverage: citizens obviously have a more
pervasive coverage of the territory thanorganisation
• trust: customers trust friends and experts more thanorganisation.
Mums trust other mums better thanorganisation
• many eyes and many hands: customers are more

16. PeerToPatent

17. 4 progressive steps
Avoid technical hiccups: number
of complaints; degree of
innovation (from mature to
world first implementation)
Ensure takeup: number of users,
number of contributions,
number of contributors
No spam: number of spam
comments
Ensure high quality content: %
of contributions judged as
useful; % of new contributors
(previously not engaged)
Source: egov20.wordpress.com

18. Incentives to participation
• Recognition
• Meaning
• Money

19. INCA awards

20. Principles
• Design thinking
• Power of pull
• Many to many
• Serendipity
• Positive sum games
• Act as a platform
• Power of networks

21. The design thinking process
• Create a core group
• Large scale brainstorm
• Collaboratively draft a first version
• Open up for comments
• Create final beta
• Go public

22. Impact : a power law

23. Use cases
Use case Examples
Project collaboration A&O community sites, BlueKiwi at USEO,
MindTouch at Planet 9
Awareness Microblogging at Westaflex, Onenote at Pfizer
Induction and training of aRway use of E20, blogging at A&O as corporate
employees memory in view of employee high turnover
Communities A&O, Westaflex community building
Employee engagement KPN internal HR blog, Westapedia
Expertise location KPN blog, LR wiki for expertise location
Innovation mgmt Westaflex, Rite-Solutions prediction market. USEO
open community around products. aRway develops
innovation with partners
Recruitment Blog about working life at A&O
Most implementations are internal to the company only.
Secondly, with key partners/consultant
Thirdly, with customers and general public
23

24. Benefits
Type Example
Agile organisation Better awareness of dispersed teams (aRway,
Westaflex, A&O), deal with employee turnover
(A&O, Westaflex), access to expertise (Pfizer, A&O),
facilitating unplanned innovation (USEO, Pfizer)
Innovation culture Multiplying innovation rate (A&O, Intuit), fostering
cross-discipline collaboration (Pfizer), employee and
customer involvement in innovation (A%O)
Cross-org collaboration Better collaboration between colleagues and with
partners, better access to subject experts
Employee satisfaction More open dialogue with employees (KPN)
Customer satisfaction Better coordination with customer needs (Westaflex,
aRway)
Revenue generation New customers and products (USEO)
Cost savings Reduction in email and in travel (Westaflex, Pfizer)
24

25. P&G

26. EXERCISE
Design an open innovation initiative
• What is the problem
• How to open it up
• Who to engage
• How to generate participation

27. TOOLS
Tools

28. Ideastorms
• Uservoice
• Ideascale
• GetSatisfaction
• Google Moderator

29. Q&A
• Quora
• Linkedin answers
• Yahoo answers

30. OI Platforms
• OpenIdeo (50K)
• Innocentive
• Challenge.gov
• 100open
• Zooppa
• Innovation Jam (200K)

31. Social media
• Blog
• Twitter
• Commentable documents

32. EXERCISE
• Create your own platform
• Choose one tool
• Implement it

33. http://www.flickr.com/photos/krazydad/
Strategy

34. Approach
• nota mandatory and highly structured plan for action.
Successful engagement requires continuous tweaking
and adaptation.
• a flexible framework for action, which should:
- set out the overall goals
- ensure coherence between the different initiatives
- spell out the key principles, values and criteria for
decision
- offer a ressource toolbox of different solutions that
can be applied in different contexts

35. Example: Stakeholders engagement strategy
Goals
• Dissemination beyond the usual suspects
• get new ideas and out of the box thinking.
• encourage concrete innovation, not only ideas
• enable better knowledge management

36. How: principles
• To maintain an open, “many-to-many” approach where stakeholders input is visible and
commentable by all.
• - To focus not be on one-off events, but on daily policy-making activities and choose the most
appropriate tools for evaluating, designing and implementing policies.
• - To clarify the rules of the game: the impact of engagement should be clear from the outset.
Provide clear guidelines about what is acceptable and not, what is under discussion and not.
• - To invest time in online engagement. It not a way for having stakeholders do the work of the
EC.
• - To make the content as clear, accessible and usable by stakeholders in order to remove barriers
to participation. One cannot expect stakeholders to participate; appropriate incentives have to be
identified; and their contribution should be made visible
• - Close the circle of engagement by reporting BOTH INTERNALLY AND EXTERNALLY about the
output.
• - To engage stakeholders where they already engage, such as social networks and online
communities, and federated content to the DAA website.
• - To embrace online engagement in the long run: participation does not happen immediately
but requires time to build trust.
• - To adopt online engagement as the default option in their work, and allow a closed approach
by exception which has to be justified.

37. How: tools
• Ad hoc external platforms
• accepting several forms of identification, not
forcing users to register
• embeddable in the Europa website
• Multilingual
• be populated by relevant audiences, where
discussion is already happening
• preferably European or with servers based in
Europe,
• allowing for data portability

38. Key indicators

39. EXERCISE
• Design your own open innovation strategy
• Context and goals
• Principles and tools
• Key people to involve
• Indicators and targets

40. Thank you!
• David.osimo@gmail.com
• @osimod
• Egov20.wordpress.com