The law enforcement case study illustrates the complexity of achieving effective innovation diffusion. Collaboration can reduce the ‘distance’ between like-minded innovators, and thus help diffusion.įinding the right glue to stick it all together Documentation can make the business case for adoption by others more straightforward.Īn explicit innovation strategy to help clarify the types of innovation that each organisation is looking to pursue.Ī greater willingness to share, underpinned by an environment of trusted partnerships and networks. In the case of UK law enforcement, these could include:Ĭonsistently documenting clear, transparent evidence of the success of an innovation in a given environment. There is no silver bullet to improve the likelihood of diffusion, but there are many interventions that can help. How can we help encourage people to take up valuable innovations? Collaboration can reduce the ‘distance’ between like-minded innovators, and thus help diffusion. The reputation of organisations designed to promote diffusion in a given environment is important if a diffusion agent is not trusted, then the innovation is unlikely to diffuse.ĭocumentation can make the business case for adoption by others more straightforward. The key features of an innovation that determine its rate of diffusion are the proven benefits of the innovation relative to its cost īarriers to achieving innovation and diffusion are higher within the law enforcement community where appetite for risk is more carefully controlled My MBA research in this area used the above factors to show that: The body comprises 43 regional forces plus numerous other agencies, each with complex, inter-related governance including chief constables, police authorities, and the Home Office. A fascinating case study with a complex environment is UK law enforcement. These factors and their relative importance will vary depending on the exact situation. How influential are the individuals who are driving adoption? How much risk appetite does the organisation have? Innovator: How influential are the individuals who are driving adoption? How much risk appetite does the organisation have?Įnvironment: How close are others who have adopted the innovation? What do societal norms say about the acceptability of the innovation? Innovation: Who benefits from the innovation? How do these benefits compare to the costs? Academic research proposes that three key categories influence the degree to which innovation will diffuse: Why is it so difficult to get people to adopt good ideas?Įven with evidence of an innovation’s value, people may resist introducing it in their organisation or department. The tendency to neglect this stage is particularly tragic as it means a reduced reward for the hard work of delivering a creative idea. While failing in any one of these value chain steps can be terminal for innovation, the one most commonly overlooked is the diffusion stage. The innovation value chain posits that the process of innovation involves three key stages: idea generation, conversion through to delivery, and diffusion throughout the organisation and its partners. The process of innovation involves three key stages: idea generation, conversion through to delivery, and diffusion throughout the organisation and its partners. This failure to diffuse the innovation within their organisation or license it to others ultimately led to their dramatic decline. The brand famously invented the first digital cameras but decided not to pursue it further due to fears of cannibalising their film sales. However, our mum was happy with his backup career as an engineer.ģ) One of the most well-known examples of failed innovation comes from Kodak. My brother’s failure to convert the concept into reality meant that his dreams of becoming the Pablo Escobar of popcorn had vanished. A few years later, several brands emerged that had “copied his idea”. Keen to get in on the action, he came up with the idea of selling flavoured popcorn, but being a student, he never followed through. However, after Microsoft overtook its share of the browser market, Netscape could not generate any further creative product ideas, and the company ultimately disbanded in 2003.Ģ) Whilst at university in the late ’00s, my brother read online that popcorn had a higher profit margin than cocaine. To confront this taboo head-on, let’s examine three failures that illustrate fundamental failure modes for innovation:ġ) In the early days of the internet, Netscape’s Navigator dominated the web browser market with approximately 90% of the share, propelling their market capitalisation to $3.6 billion just 20 months after the company was founded in 1994. While often considered taboo, acknowledging and understanding failure is essential if we are to learn from mistakes.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |