28.4.12
26.4.12
16.11.08
Medarbejderdreven innovation
"Medarbejderdreven innovation handler om systematisk at opsamle og inddrage ideer og erfaringer fra et bredt udsnit af medarbejdere og at få sat denne viden i spil i forhold til innovation og nyudvikling.
Medarbejderne har typisk en vigtig indsigt i den praktiske udførelse af arbejdsopgaver samt interne organisationsprocesser. Disse medarbejdere sidder inde med central viden om brugernes behov og reaktioner på offentlige serviceydelser. I medarbejderdrevne innovationsprocesser bidrager medarbejderne aktivt og systematisk i nytænkning og udvikling af opgaver, arbejdsprocesser, serviceløsninger, etc."
Program for brugerdreven innovation, Erhvervs- og Byggestyrelsen
"Medarbejderdreven innovation er, når medarbejderstaben bidrager aktivt og systematisk i innovations-processen.
Det sker ud fra erkendelsen af, at medarbejderne sidder med hver sin forskellige tilgang til arbejdet, og dermed hver især har en vigtig viden om arbejdspladsen, som kollegaen eller chefen ikke nødvendigvis har.
Ved medarbejderdreven innovation kommer innovation fra neden i stedet for fra oven. Det er eksempelvis ikke en snæver gruppe af chefer og udviklingsmedarbejdere, som sætter sig til tegnebrættet for at udvikle arbejdspladsen. Værdiskabelsen sker ved systematisk at inddrage alle medarbejdere. Ofte udveksles idéerne og erfaringerne på tværs af faggrænser. Og jævnligt inddrages også andre interessenter som brugere, kunder, forældre, embedsmænd eller lignende.
Medarbejderdreven innovation adskiller sig fra almindelige udviklingsprojekter ved, at der arbejdes målrettet, strategisk og systematisk med at involvere medarbejdernes idéer og bidrag i innovations-processen.
Rapport fra Rambøll Management: Medarbejderdreven innovation
2.11.08
Business Talk
"As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden."
"In the garden, growth has it seasons. First comes spring and summer, but then we have fall and winter. And then we get spring and summer again."
"There will be growth in the spring!"
Chauncy Gardner
1.11.08
28.10.08
What is a touchpoint?
The short version is that a touchpoint is "any point of contact between a buyer and a seller".
Wikipedia elaborates: "A touchpoint is the interface of a product, a service or a brand with customers, non-customers, employees and other stakeholders before, during and after a transaction/purchase."
Apparently there is even something called "Touchpoint Management" which deals with getting a 360 degree view instead of the traditional specialized view of the department in charge of separate parts of the service.
Servicedesign.org has this definition: "Service touchpoints are the tangibles that make up the total experience of using a service. Touchpoints can take many forms, from advertising to personal cards, web- mobile phone- and PC interfaces, bills, retail shops, call centres and customer representatives".
The blog designforservice (http://tinyurl.com/59g8z5) has lots of insight on this.
26.10.08
Prioritering af idéer
Der er ofte et ønske om at prioritere de ideer en brugercentreret innovationsworkshop producerer. Det er naturligt at tænke fremad og at tænke operationalt: Hvad er næste skridt? Hvad skal vi gå videre med? Så alle idéerne – pragmatiske som skøre – må kategoriseres. Men hvordan?
Hvad afgør, hvilke idéer der "vinder"? Og hvem afgør det? Ofte er proceduren, at idéerne filtreres af folk med kendskab til virksomhedens strategi, som vurderer dem i forhold til, hvad der er vigtigt i virksomheden i den nærmeste fremtid? Og netop tidsperspektivet er nok den enkele parameter, der har størst indflydelse. For hvem kan spå om fremtiden, hvem kan se 10 år (eller bare 5 år) frem og vide, at en idé har potentiale da? Ingen kan det, men mange kan sige, at her og nu – på kort sigt - en en ide god.
Så "filtreringen" af ideer tilgodeser dem, der er realiserbare på kort sigt. Men hvem tænker så længere frem og hvordan identificeres de ideer der vil have succes på lang sigt? (intuition anyone?).
En anden måde at prioritere og gruppere idéer er dem der repræsenterer inkrementel innovation og de der repræsenterer radikal innovation. Blandt de inkrementelle vil det være let at dokumentere med tal i en business case, mens det i den radikale kategori er langt sværere at beskrive ideen så præcist. Radikal innovation er mere uhåndgribelig, sværere at måle og mere risikobetonet. Man skal tro på idéen, fordi der ikke kan føres direkte bevis dens værdi.
On Users
"Your most unhappy customers
are your greatest source of learning"
Bill Gates (in "Business @ the Speed of Thought", 1999)
21.10.08
26.8.08
Design Thinking... again
Based on a review of writing on the topic, I have synthesized for myself what I understand design thinking to be…
- Collaborative, especially with others having different and complimentary experience, to generate better work and form agreement
- Abductive, inventing new options to find new and better solutions to new problems
- Experimental, building prototypes and posing hypotheses, testing them, and iterating this activity to find what works and what doesn’t work to manage risk
- Personal, considering the unique context of each problem and the people involved
- Integrative, perceiving an entire system and its linkages
- Interpretive, devising how to frame the problem and judge the possible solutions
8.8.08
7.8.08
Inductice, Deductive and Abductive Thinking
In his book "The Game-Changer: How You Can Drive Revenue and Profit Growth with Innovation", P&G CEO A.G. Lafley explains the difference between two methods:
"Business schools tend to focus on inductive thinking (based on directly observable facts) and deductive thinking (logic and analysis, typically based on past evidence)."
"Design schools emphasize abductive thinking – imagining what could be possible. This new thinking approach helps us challenge assumed constraints and add to ideas, versus discouraging them."
Article from Business Week
P&G's AG Lafley on Innovation
"Business schools tend to focus on inductive thinking (based on directly observable facts) and deductive thinking (logic and analysis, typically based on past evidence)."
"Design schools emphasize abductive thinking – imagining what could be possible. This new thinking approach helps us challenge assumed constraints and add to ideas, versus discouraging them."
- Inductive thinking = Based on directly observable facts ("All ice I ever touched is cold > All ice is cold")
- Deductive thinking = Logic and analysis, typically based on past evidence ("All men are mortal and Socrates is a man > Socrates is mortal" – from Aristotle)
- Abductive thinking = Imagining what could be possible. A method of reasoning in which one chooses the hypothesis that would, if true, best explain the relevant evidence. Abductive reasoning starts from a set of accepted facts and infers their most likely, or best, explanations.
Article from Business Week
P&G's AG Lafley on Innovation
9.7.08
Things you take for granted
All This ChittahChattah
"The start to any creative process is to 'identify and challenge the things you take for granted.'"
Sir Ken Robinson @ Connecting 07, San Francisco
Sacrificial Concepts 2
All This ChittahChattah
Suzanne reminded us that “we can’t possibly be all of the people we need to design for,” and related some of IDEO’s experience using “sacrificial concepts:” early, raw, potentially flawed concepts made visual/physical and used as a medium for creating reaction, response and discussion among users and design teams.
Their method
* learn from extremes
* visit natural contexts
* building deep empathy
* Discovering latent needs
* Create prototypes for feedback
* Considering the holistic experience
She then pointed out that all is not perfect in Human Centered Design. In one case, a sketch on a napkin became the product (with no human centered process). IDEO designers complain they don’t have time to design, and they have to justify every choice. So they added a new step to their process “informing our intuition” and a technique of sacrificial concepts, where they create purposefully extreme concepts…intentionally “wrong” ideas to show to people. The key here is that the research they conduct seems to be about using carefully designed props to provoke; that’s a bit of a change of process for us, where we start off naive and let the data lead us; we don’t have the cultural contrast of having a bunch of designers feeling left out of the process. I agree it’s an effective method and one we’ve used but it seems like this method is very IDEO-specific, and that by leading with a research process that is more exploratory, you can use this tangible prop tool as a way to take that first set of research further. IDEO is a design firm and so their process seems to be to begin designing immediately and they’ve worked their research process around that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
