Where Big Companies Fail on Innovation
Big companies fail to communicate well on their corporate innovation capabilities.
This is a problem as most industries have begun adopting open innovation practices in which a key goal is to become the preferred partner of choice. This requires a significant higher visibility for corporate innovation departments.
A key question: What is the social media strategy for your corporate innovation department and their projects?
It seems as if companies just do not have such strategies in place with the exception of very companies such as P&G, General Mills, Intuit and Siemens. They frequently show up on my Twitter searches on keywords such as open innovation, crowdsourcing and innovation. I do not see many others.
Some companies try to change this. One is Psion, the maker of rugged handheld computer products and technology. They understand that they need to communicate on many levels as they implement their open innovation strategy called Open Source Mobility.
For the record, I am working with Psion to help them get more visibility within the innovation community. Some ways of doing this include:
• blog posts, book chapters and other media coverage in which Psion openly share their challenges, failures and successes as they build their open innovation capabilities
• conversations through Twitter and LinkedIn which helps Psion explore new ways of communicating with their stakeholders
• sharing of insights and experiences through peer-to peer sessions with other companies and speaking engagements at conferences
Most companies can learn from P&G, General Mills, Intuit and Psion. I just wonder when they start doing so…
Hello Stefan: You make a very good point that social media represents an as yet untapped (or underdeveloped) mechanism for communicating with the broader innovation community and enlisting its participation. As you correctly indicate, companies that truly aim to enlist the broader innovation community to assist them in achieving their objectives should seek to use whatever means are at their disposal to do so…including social media.
While it is tempting to do so, and in some cases possibly true, I would be careful about asserting that because many companies are not as public about their open innovation initiatives as the ones you've noted, that this constitutes a weakness or failure on their part. They may consciously be choosing to adopt a lower profile. They may simply choose to engage in their innovation initiatives in a more "closed" fashion (and by closed, I mean less public…not that they aren't engaging in external partnering initiatives).
Best regards,
Michael
Michael, your reasoning makes sense and I agree that some companies do very well even though they have a low public profile. I just think most companies stand to gain from a more active communication strategies with regards to their innovation capabilities. It would be great to see some more discussion and sharing of insights on this.
Hi Stefan, I agree that OI needs awareness that a particular company is actually open, but it doesn't necessarily mean that a lack of awareness = no OI.
A lot of companies focus on targeted approaches with people they have identified, who have what they want. The broad approach to attract unsolicited approaches from prospective OI partners is the next step. The % hit rate from unsolicited approaches is much lower than a direct, targeted strategy, so there will still be a strong OI output.
If a company is right at the start of the OI journey, I would advise building competence with targeted relationships first, then start the publicity once you know what you're doing.
I'm writing a chapter for a book edited by Paul Sloane (I see you're on the list too) which will deal with some of these points, and how companies can make themselves more attractive as an OI partner.
Best regards
Kevin
Kevin, your points are similar to the comments made by Michael so I have no problem agreeing with you. A more targeted approach does give a better hit rate, but why not share those successes with the outside world?
Yes, some insights might be confidential, but there are plenty of lessons that can be shared without risk. The upside is that all companies involved in the partnership are viewed more positively when it comes to their corporate innovation capabilities. This can only help as companies continue to open up their innovation efforts.
You have a background at one of those big companies, Reckitt-Beckiser. I am curious on how the people working with innovation at RB think about communication strategies and in particular about the use of social media when it comes to building a stronger image of your corporate innovation capabilities. Can you shed some light on this? Did you give this issue much thought? If so, what did you discuss?
Hi Stefan, We are probably closer than the thread suggests. I agree that companies should make use of social media in their communications, and include innovation output in that. I guess Michael and I felt it important to point out that you can still be successful at OI without that communication, but you can be MORE successful with it.
The work at RB in developing a portal and undertaking a targeted communication programme was indeed intended to move to the next stage of OI. We already had a very successful record, the challenge was then to let people know, to open up fully and invite more innovation. The track record and experience meant it was the right time to publicise. The best analogy is that the portal and communication is the "cover on the book", the OI is the book itself.
Social media is just a part of RB's external communication, albeit a significant one. Innovation is addressed within that.
It's good that you've started this post, it will be interesting to see how other large companies use social media for innovation.