In a wide variety of settings, organizations generate a number of possible solutions to a problem—ideas— and then select a few for further development. The researchers examine the effectiveness of two group structures for such tasks—the team structure, in which the group works together in time and space, and the hybrid structure, in which individuals first work independently and then work together. They define the performance of a group as the quality of the best ideas identified. Prior research has defined performance as the average quality of ideas or the number of ideas generated, ignoring what most organizations seek, a few great ideas.

The researchers build a theory that relates organizational phenomena to four different variables that govern the quality of the best ideas identified: (1) the average quality of ideas generated, (2) the number of ideas generated, (3) the variance in the quality of ideas generated, and (4) the ability of the group to discern the quality of the ideas. They test this theory with an experiment. They find that groups organized in the hybrid structure are able to generate more ideas, to generate better ideas, and to better discern the quality of the ideas they generate. Moreover, they find that the frequently recommended brainstorming technique of building on others’ ideas is counterproductive; teams exhibiting such build-up neither create more ideas, nor are the ideas that build on previous ideas better.

The report based on a laboratory experiment, which compares the two group structures with respect to each of these four variables individually, and which measures their collective impact on the quality of the best idea. An accurate measurement of idea quality is central to the study. While most prior research has relied on the subjective evaluation of idea quality by one or two research assistants, the INSEAD and Wharton researchers use two alternative approaches: a web-based quality evaluation tool which collects about 20 ratings per idea and a purchase-intent survey which captures about 40 consumer opinions about their intent to purchase a product based on the idea. Their framework, with its emphasis on the importance of the best idea, and their novel experimental set-up let them make the following three contributions:

1. They find evidence that the best idea generated in the hybrid structure is better than the best idea generated by a team. This result is driven by the fact that the hybrid structure results in about three times as many ideas per unit of time and that these ideas have significantly higher average quality.
2. They find that the hybrid structure is better at identifying the best ideas from the set of ideas it previously generated. However, They also find that both team and hybrid structures are, in absolute terms, weak in their ability to assess the quality of ideas.
3. They show that idea generation in teams is more likely to lead to ideas that build on each other. However, in contrast to the common wisdom articulated by many proponents of team brainstorming, they show that such build-up does not lead to better idea quality. In fact, they find that ideas that build on a previous idea are worse not better, on average.

Sources

• Idea Generation and the Quality of the Best Idea
• Spigit blog: Study – Distributed Idea Generation Outperforms Team Brainstorming

• The Future of Work: New solutions that accelerate and change the way we do business
• The Connected Life: Technological inspirations that dramatically improve living conditions and disseminate culture
• New Ways to Learn: Next-generation solutions that transform when, where, and how people learn
• The Future of Entertainment: New solutions that change how people play together

The winning team will receive a grand prize of $250,000.

Sources

• Cisco I-Prize
• Spigit Blog: Cisco’s I-Prize – the Next Wave of Open Innovation

The conference was sponsored by the Savannah College of Art and Design(SCAD), MIT Center for Collective Intelligence and Wayne State University College of Engineering–Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, and was hosted by SCAD in Savannah, Georgia.

Conference organizers define Collaborative Innovation Networks, or COINs, as cyberteams of self-motivated people with a collective vision, enabled by technology to collaborate in innovating by sharing ideas, information, and work. Although COINs have been around for hundreds of years, they are especially relevant today because the concept has reached its tipping point thanks to the Internet. COINs are powered by swarm creativity, wherein people work together in a structure that enables a fluid creation and exchange of ideas. ‘Coolhunting’ – discovering, analyzing, and measuring trends and trendsetters – puts COINs to productive use. Patterns of collaborative innovation frequently follow an identical path, from creator to COIN to collaborative learning network to collaborative interest network.

The substance of the conference centered around measuring and visualizing the emergent patterns of communication within social networks, identifying and tracking trends as they ripple throughout a social system, then pulling out the social and anthropological meaning of what we observe, allowing us to better understand and perhaps even forecast human behavior. This creates a unique opportunity to enhance the productivity and effectiveness of collaboration, and to find the trendsetters, thought leaders, and gate keepers within any given network. “Bleeding edge” doesn’t quite do this stuff justice; this is the blade that precedes the bleeding edge.

Source

COINS 2009 Collaborative Innovation Networks Conference

HBS professor Carliss Y. Baldwin and MIT Sloan School of Management professor Eric von Hippel analyze the three models in terms of their technological properties, specifically their design costs and architectures, and their communication requirements. The researchers argue that as design and communication costs decline, single user and open collaborative innovation models will be viable for a steadily wider range of design. These two models will present an increasing challenge to the traditional paradigm of producer-based design—but, when open, they are good for social welfare and should be encouraged by policymakers. Key concepts include:

• When it is technologically feasible, the transition from closed producer innovation or single user innovation to open single user or open collaborative innovation is desirable in terms of social welfare and is worthy of support by policymakers.
• Free dissemination of innovation designs is associated with the open model. Open innovation generates innovation without exclusivity or monopoly, and so should improve social welfare, other things being equal.
• Intellectual property rights grants can be used as the basis for licenses that help keep innovation open as well as closed.
• Policymakers should seek out and eliminate points of conflict between present intellectual property policies designed to support closed innovation that at the same time inadvertently interfere with open innovation.
• As design costs fall, many more innovations will originate with single users.
• Open collaborative innovation projects thrive on low communication costs.

Source

• HBS Working Knowledge – Modeling a Paradigm Shift: From Producer Innovation to User and Open Collaborative Innovation
• Download the paper

Google has launched this project on the occasion of its 10th birthday.

According to the company “never in history have so many people had so much information, so many tools at their disposal, so many ways of making good ideas come to life. Yet at the same time, so many people, of all walks of life, could use so much help, in both little ways and big. In the midst of this, new studies are reinforcing the simple wisdom that beyond a certain very basic level of material wealth, the only thing that increases individual happiness over time is helping other people.”

154,000 ideas have been submitted during September – October 2008 in the following categories:

• Community: How can we help connect people, build communities and protect unique cultures?
• Opportunity: How can we help people better provide for themselves and their families?

Energy: How can we help move the world toward safe, clean, inexpensive energy?

• Environment: How can we help promote a cleaner and more sustainable global ecosystem?
• Health: How can we help individuals lead longer, healthier lives?
• Education: How can we help more people get more access to better education?
• Shelter: How can we help ensure that everyone has a safe place to live?
• Everything else: Sometimes the best ideas don’t fit into any category at all.

Google reviewed each idea and posted a selection of the 16 top ideas; now it’s up to the public, to choose the ideas you think are the best. Then an advisory board will select up to five final ideas for funding.

The company is committing $10 million to implement these projects, and its goal is to help as many people as possible. Although money may provide a jumpstart the idea is the thing.

People can vote on ideas from September 24 through October 8, 2009.

Source

Project 10¹⁰⁰

Book Description

Improving Collaboration between people and between organizations is no longer optional if you want to survive in today s hyper connected business world. Speed of change, unpredictability and the increasingly social nature of the marketplace make collaboration instrumental to your company s ability to differentiate. New ways of collaboration are starting to take place within your company, across value chains and in the individual social domain of your employees.

At the same time, new architecture and delivery models are bringing many new collaborative tools within reach of every person in your organization, with or without your knowledge or control. The use of personal email is one example we have learned to address, but how do you respond to personal workspaces, document sharing or instant messaging? Or even better: how does your business benefit from them? On the technology side, a volatile mix of acronyms like SOA Service Oriented Architecture, SaaS Software as a Service and Web2.0 is brewing that is drastically changing our view on the role and value of Information Technology.

If left to chance there is little hope for success: you need a strategy. The new business world that is starting to show all around us is driven by autonomous, bottom up organizations where innovation and collaboration are part of the culture. In Value Chain 2.0, it is about quickly establishing combinations that offer value to the marketplace. It is about crossing boundaries and taking the full benefits from Cloud Computing and anything available As A Service, from platform to complete business solution.

Source

• Collaboration in the Cloud – Sogeti Publications
• Download the Book (PDF file)

The whitepaper also quotes examples of companies, such as Sun Microsystems and PARC, which have been on the vanguard of applying new innovation models, ecosystems that rely on multiple disciplines, including engineering, science, business strategy, ethnography, economics, and law to generate and implement technologies in markets where they can achieve the highest ROI and best satisfy customer needs.

Source

From Concept to Commerce: New Innovation Models Spur Collaboration and Growth (142K)

The 1st ISPIM Innovation Symposium – Managing Innovation in a Connected World – will be held in Singapore on 14-17 December 2008. Organised by ISPIM together with Singapore Management University, this symposium will bring together academics, business leaders, consultants and other professionals involved in innovation management. The aim of this symposium is to stimulate discussion and connect people from different backgrounds and cultures. The format will include interactive workshops and discussion panels together with academic and practitioner presentations. As with all ISPIM events, this symposium will provide excellent networking opportunities together with a taste of local culture.

Symposium flyer: ispim08_symposium_flyer.pdf

Symposium call for papers: ispim08_symposium_cfp_dec08.pdf

Source: http://www.ispim.org/symposium/index.html

The 2009 ISPIM Conference – The Future of Innovation – will be held in Vienna, Austria on 21-24 June 2009. Organised by ISPIM, hosted by The Austrian Federal Economic Chamber, and supported by DANUBE – European Programmes for Training, Research and Technology and Ratio Strategy & Innovation Consulting, this conference will bring together academics, business leaders, consultants and other professionals involved in innovation management. The conference format will include facilitated themed sessions for academic and practitioner presentations together with interactive workshops and discussion panels.

Conference flyer: ispim09_conference_flyer.pdf

Conference call for papers: ispim09_call_for_papers.pdf

Source: http://www.ispim.org/conference/index.html

The communities represent potential cross-fertilising technology themes and challenging validation environments with a significant technological, economic and societal impact. 

The current structure of the AMI@Work Communities builds on the four core innovation domains, indispensable from the point of view of the collaborative working environments: (1) Health/Well-being/Inclusion, (2) Manufacturing/Engineering/Logistics, (3) Media/Content, and (4) Rural areas/economy/society. These four vertical domains should be perceived through the context of open collaboration and regional development. In addition to them, another – horizontal domain has been recognised, (5) Technologies for Innovation and Next Generation Services. Innovations in this cross-cutting, horizontal domain are enablers for any progress in the vertical layers.

The enhanced AMI@Work structure mirrors the aforementioned domains and encompasses the most active Communities from those that have existed so far: eHealth@Work , engineering@work, media@work, and rural@work. The fifth Community – technology@work merges the current collaboration@work, knowledge@work and mobility@work Communities.

The Family has opened collaboration with the Living Labs Open Innovation Community (which, actually, was born and brought up within the ‘old’ AMI structures), that also extends horizontally across the four key domains.

Source: AMI@Work

A senior fellow at Wharton’s Mack Center for Technological Innovation, Huston was vice president of knowledge and innovation for many years at Procter & Gamble, where he was the architect of its Connect + Develop program, an approach that helped extend the company’s innovation process to include 1.5 million people outside of P&G.

Huston spoke with Knowledge@Wharton about how innovation networks function, the ways they can be nurtured, their potential downsides and the impact they will have on how firms bring products to market.

Source

Huston’s edited transcript of the conversation.