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 “ᴗ” 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
Kommentar veröffentlichen