Variables of Innovation Web Evolution Speed - Resilience


The speed with which ideas evolve through the innovation web archetypes depends upon 12 (twelve) interdependent variables: Resilience, Value Creation, Perceived Value, Asset Impact, Cost Benefit, Reciprocity, Sequence, Structural Integrity (Density), Structural Dependency (Centrality), Agility, Number of Participants and Stability. These variables are explored in a series of blog postings and will be completed by the presentation of a parametric model describing their interdependencies and permitting the simulation and analysis of the overall innovation web evolution process, including the impact of relevant “interventions” needed to accelerate the idea across the diffusion of innovation curve.
This posting explores the variable “Resilience”. The “resilience” of an innovation web describes its capability to return to its archetypal state after a stressful incident such as losing participants or the exchange of deliverables deteriorating significantly (i.e. through the loss of trust between participants of the relevant roles). The resilience of any innovation web (or combination of such) is given by the ratio of tangible to intangible transactions. The optimal resilience will hereby differ for each innovation web archetype. Upon achieving minimum resilience (along with all other performance indicators) the innovation web is reading for transitioning to the next archetype. The transition threshold value for minimum resilience is equal to being “above average” in comparison to a group of at least 13 comparative innovation webs in a similar context (for all performance indicators simultaneously) in order to permit the robust application of parametric assessment techniques for analysis. Whether or not this transition threshold has truly been achieved is also a qualitative judgement and thus requires validation and confirmation by all participants before commencing the transition process to the next archetype.
The image is drawn from https://images.fineartamerica.com/images-medium-large/flower-in-desert-panya-jampatong.jpg and intended to illustrate how a living system can flourish under the most challenging conditions.
The symbol used for resilience is “” to illustrate the capability of a shape (i.e. the innovation web archetype) to deform and then return to its original state. This can also be understood as “elasticity”, whereby a “minimum” value will exist at which point a return of the actual innovation web to its original state will no longer be possible. When resilience drops below that minimum value, then the innovation web will need to be returned to its previous stage, re-built and then re-transitioned when it reaches the relevant threshold values.

 
The resilience values for the innovation web archetypes are shown in the following table:
 
Table: Resilience of Innovation Web Archetypes
 


Innovation Web Archetype

Number of Tangible Transactions

Number of Intangible Transactions

Resilience

Research

3

7

43%

Socialization

(includes Research)

2 (+3)

11 (+7)

18% (28%)

Market Validation

(includes Research and Socialization)

10 (+3 & +2)

8 (+7 & + 11)

125% (58%)

Commercialization

(includes (Research, Socialization and Market Validation)

> 15

> 26

> 125% (58%)
 
A high percentage of tangible exchanges show that there is a lot of formal structure to the interactions. This might demonstrate a high level of transparency if the processes are visible on shared systems. On the other hand few informal interactions could indicate a low level of trust. Very structured interactions typically indicate a low level of flexibility. In process focused operational networks a higher level of tangible transactions than intangible is normal. This is especially true where business processes have been heavily systematized and follow well established routines.
 
Where tasks or relationships are complex there are usually more intangible than tangible transactions. More knowledge exchanges are a requirement where there is a lot of variation and options in how things might be done. If the percentage of intangible transactions is higher than tangible transactions it usually indicates a high level of flexibility, collaboration and trust. If the ratio is too heavy on the intangibles side, however, it might show that there are “work arounds” where the formal processes are not working as they should. It could also show that the network is largely social in nature and does not have strong financial or formal relationships. This ratio varies in different cultures. It also differs between industries and even between departments in an organization.
 
If you are interested in learning more please visit us at www.innovation-web.eu, our LinkedIn Group at https://www.linkedin.com/groups/8779542/, our blog at https://open-european-innovation-network.blogspot.com/ and our Facebook page at : https://www.facebook.com/groups/2014779865300180/


Kommentare

Beliebte Posts aus diesem Blog

Design Principle #3 for 84% Innovation Adoption – Degree of Innovativeness

Forecasting Whole Life Cycle Cost Uncertainty of EU Municipalities - Consolidator/Marie Curie Proposals

Summer Update – Now earning a warm meal a day and suffering from indigestion!