A world without newspapers?

by Adam Hartung

We're rapidly becoming a quick-communication world. 140 characters is all we get on Twitter, and it's becoming the new "elevator pitch." Communication has moved from letters and phone calls to texting and Facebook. What we write, and say, is getting shorter. Book sales have declined for 4 years, and magazines are rapidly becoming an historical artifact. We rely on bloggers to read, digest, reformat and inform us quickly about what we want to know.

But, behind this, there has to be real fact gathering. Somebody has to report information as it happens, and dispense it. In many countries this was done by the government. But in the modern world we've relied on newspapers, and the wire feed services (AP, UPI, Reuters) that supply newspapers, to give us a lot of the raw news. Newspapers used ad revenue to pay for news acquisition, and they delivered the stream every morning.

But now, due to internet competition, newspapers are running out of cash. As people turn to the web for instant information advertisers have dropped newspapers. Subscriptions have fallen. And several newspaper companies, such as Tribune Corporation, have filed for bankruptcy. Many towns are at risk of losing the daily newspaper altogether. And employment has dropped to 1950's levels



So, what will be the prime source for information? Where will bloggers, and tweeters and web sites get the news if the newspapers disappear? Who is going to pay for field reporters, investigative reporters and correspondents in places far away - or dangerous like wars. The public has already bemoaned the lack of "news" in television news - which is more about pictures than news. And nowadays television news is dominated by opinion programs like "Countdown" or "The O'Reilly Factor."

It's clear that people want their information digitally - and mostly from the web. It's also clear that advertisers are drawn to the web with its far lower ad rates and specific, trackable ad placement. But what's unclear is where original news content will be created when the newspaper companies disappear. Even the most successful news web sites (Marketwatch.com and HuffingtonPost.com, as examples) depend largely upon information supplied them from wire feeds and newspaper sources for content.

A free society depends upon access to information. And nowhere is access more available than the USA. But unless there is some serious innovation in publishing, the system is at risk of collapse. Opinions will be as available as air, but if the original news sources dry up - what will everyone talk about? How will people - investors, voters, parents, politicians and others - obtain original information to become informed? Understanding what will replace the newspaper industry as a source of original news content is a difficult question to answer.

What will be the innovation that will keep the river of original, real time news flowing? In 2020, how will we be able to obtain information we can trust for accuracy?

The "media" industry is in big trouble. Large players, like News Corp., have seen profits decline - despite acquisitions like MySpace.com. GE recently agreed to sell NBC/Universal for less than it cost to create. But so far, few have figured out how make a profit from digital media as the market transitions away from print and television. While web sites proliferate, they produce less than 1/10th the revenue of old media.

Without some serious innovation, our news could soon be long on quantity - and very short on quality.


Editors Note: Apologies all around. This article from Adam Hartung was orignally supposed to be part of January's Innovation Perspectives, but I misplaced it. I hope you still enjoy it.


Don't miss an article - Subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Continuous Innovation group!

---

Adam Hartung, author of "Create Marketplace Disruption", is a Faculty and Board member of the Lake Forest Graduate School of Management, Managing Partner of Spark Partners, and writes for "Forbes" and the "Journal for Innovation Science."

Call for March 'Innovation Perspectives'

March's opportunity to contribute your Innovation Perspectives is now here.

This monthly feature presents our loyal readers with different perspectives on a single topic all in one place - from several different authors. It gives our innovation community the opportunity to compare, contrast and discuss them in the comments here on Blogging Innovation and with the 2,300+ people in the Continuous Innovation group on LinkedIn.

Here is this month's topic for publishing the week of March 29-April 4, 2010:


How should firms develop the organizational structure, culture, and incentives (e.g., for teams) to encourage successful innovation?

• Thank you to Drew Boyd for submitting this month's topic


• Thank you to Brightidea for sponsoring Blogging Innovation this month. Find out more about Brightidea here.


• The submission deadline is midnight GMT on March 27, 2010

Several contributing authors will be writing articles on this topic, but you are also welcome to submit an article. The process is simple:

1. Submit your article using our contact form


2. I will e-mail you back with a request for a 1-2 sentence author byline and a photo like those on Blogging Innovation

We look forward to sharing March's Innovation Perspectives with you and hearing your thoughts!


If you missed February's Innovation Perspectives, you can find them here.

---

Braden Kelley is the editor of Blogging Innovation and founder of Business Strategy Innovation, a consultancy focusing on innovation and marketing strategy. Braden is also @innovate on Twitter.

Innovation Perspectives February Wrapup

Innovation Perspectives is our monthly feature to present our loyal readers with different perspectives on a single topic all in one place along with the ability to compare, contrast and discuss them in the comments here on Blogging Innovation and in the Continuous Innovation group on LinkedIn. This month's topic was:


"Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?"

• Thank you to Jeffrey Phillips for submitting this month's topic

Here is a list of all of the authors that participated this month and links to their articles on this topic.

1. Jim Estill - Leader's Role in Trend Spotting


2. Mike Brown - Trendspotters' Fab Five


3. Braden Kelley - Trendspotting Trifecta


4. Rocco Tarasi - All of the Above


5. Jeffrey Phillips - Purpose, Frequency and Responsibility


6. Robert Brands - Shepherding a Team of Opportunists


7. Vyoma Kapur - Trend Spotting Collaboration


8. Adam Schorr - Your Trend Spotting Team

If you would like to suggest a topic for next month's Innovation Perspectives, or would like to contribute, please leave a comment or contact us.

---

Braden Kelley is the editor of Blogging Innovation and founder of Business Strategy Innovation, a consultancy focusing on innovation and marketing strategy. Braden is also @innovate on Twitter.

Innovation Perspectives - Your Trend Spotting Team

This is the eighth of several 'Innovation Perspectives' articles we will publish this week from multiple authors to get different perspectives on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?'. Here is the next perspective in the series:

by Adam Schorr

It is critical that businesses have a clear sense of the state of their current marketplace. They need to understand the needs of their customers, the relevant business models, the competition... But all of this is only good for keeping the lights on today. It does nothing to insure the future viability of a company because the world changes. New competitors emerge from nowhere. Business models grow stale and new ones are created. Customer needs change. In order to insure a healthy future, companies must remain aware of emerging trends, identify which are relevant and develop plans for responding.

But who should do that? The market research or insights group? Marketing? Sales? R&D? Well of course the answer is yes. Every employee ought to maintain a healthy curiosity about their world and do their best to help the company see around corners. But this is not enough. For one thing, these employees have day jobs. Their job is to keep the lights on today. You can add another task to their list but don't imagine for a moment that their current responsibilities won't suffer just a little bit. Secondly, if every employee does this, the company will have quite a bit of trend information and will need to separate the wheat from the chaff and synthesize meaningful insights. And, finally, this all needs to be integrated with the overall vision and strategy of the company.

I believe companies ought to establish standalone innovation groups that would be responsible (among other things) for identifying, interpreting and planning against emerging trends. These groups should report into the CEO directly who must make innovation a top priority - as important as keeping the lights on today. Attitudes need to change. Given the pace of the business environment (which is only getting faster), a company has got to identify its next move before such a move is needed. This is a matter of survival and only by treating trend management as a core competency can a company have any hope of long-term success.


You can check out all of the 'Innovation Perspectives' articles from the different contributing authors on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?' by clicking the link in this sentence.

---

Adam Schorr is an experienced innovator and brand manager with a passion for the human soul and its ability to reshape the universe. Adam blogs about innovation, marketing and all sorts of quirky topics at www.adamschorr.com.

Innovation Perspectives - Trend Spotting Collaboration

This is the seventh of several 'Innovation Perspectives' articles we will publish this week from multiple authors to get different perspectives on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?'. Here is the next perspective in the series:

by Vyoma Kapur

Typically, a corporation would hire a market research or a consulting firm to keep up-to-date with the latest consumer trends. Millward Brown, Iconoculture and Forrester are examples of firms which use sophisticated research techniques to advise their clients on how consumers are behaving today, and how they might behave tomorrow. Whether we are talking about changing media habits, evolving taste buds or the growing popularity of a certain sport, keeping tabs on consumer lifestyles does not happen automatically. Time, effort and capital need to be invested to stay ahead of rapidly changes and adapting business operations accordingly.

However, trend-spotting does not always have to be a function of active, dedicated research. Often, passive observation can result in insightful findings of emerging habits and trends. With an observant eye, anyone can identify and take note of valuable information around him or her in the physical space. With information at our fingertips, we are also equipped to browse through the virtual space of blogs, forums and social networks at our convenience. Such an enormous amount of content can tell us something about every facet of consumer lifestyles. Hence, active observation of social activity is a resource everyone can and should take advantage of when it comes to trend-spotting and understanding emerging behaviors.

This is not to say that casual observations should not be verified or backed up by data. Noticing something is only starting point of successful trend-spotting. Following that, objective and unbiased research needs to be carried out before a particular trend or behavior can be evaluated for business.

Therefore, for an organization to optimize its market research efforts, all its employees should take personal responsibility for trend-spotting and then sharing key observations internally. An internal communication system, where employees can post and discuss observations could be implemented. An open forum would enable everyone in the company to either back a particular observation ("I have noticed that too") or reject it ("I have noticed quite the opposite of that").

Employees could be given incentives in the form of prizes for the "Trend-spotter of the month". The most relevant observations could then be taken to the next level where their implications for business are discussed and further action is taken. Such an effort in open collaboration would facilitate the movement towards more effective and holistic ways of trend-spotting.


You can check out all of the 'Innovation Perspectives' articles from the different contributing authors on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?' by clicking the link in this sentence.

---

A marketing professional turned entrepreneur, Vyoma avidly supports and practices open innovation. Earlier this year, she founded Colspark LLC (www.colspark.com), a crowdsourcing platform to help companies tap into student talent for ideas and solutions.

Innovation Perspectives - Shepherding a Team of Opportunists

This is the sixth of several 'Innovation Perspectives' articles we will publish this week from multiple authors to get different perspectives on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?'. Here is the next perspective in the series:

by Robert F Brands with Jeff Zbar

When an entrepreneur creates a new product or company, the result usually is borne by spotting an emerging trend, conceptualizing an innovation, or seizing an opportunity unmet or consumer behavior emerging in the marketplace.

But what happens once the company opens its doors or the product hits the market? Whose responsibility is it to spot the next trend or opportunity? More important, who should be charged with shepherding the behavior of trend-spotting across the organization?

Everybody is responsible for trend spotting. This isn't some cliquey club; limit your people's involvement at your own peril. From the Marketing and New Product Development Departments, to sales representatives in the field, from the CEO to the receptionist or CSRs - trends happen and are spotted everywhere. Therefore, everyone needs sharp eyes and piqued ears for emerging trends.

But trend spotting doesn't just happen. Part mandate, part innate behavior, people have to want to be on the look out for new opportunities. Just as many organizations seek to break down silos that traditionally have separated teams or departments, the same sense of unified, yet independent thinking must permeate any organization that hopes to spot and capture the Next Big Thing.

This cannot be an idle mandate - a sort of set-it-and-forget-it statement from on high. Trend spotting is learned by example, and encouraged or shepherded by senior managers who also focus on innovation. This can be the CEO of a smaller organization, or the Chief Innovation Officer at a larger one.

This kind of lead-by-example encouragement transforms employees across the enterprise into Idea Generators - trend spotters who become champions of their space and sources of new ideas that touch every part of the organization. One who submits an idea is more likely to take ownership of it - and help shepherd it in kind through the research and discovery process

(Whether a trend that is explored and later travels the path to New Product Development is another topic. To be sure, not all trends spotted and submitted to the Idea Hopper for further discovery will blossom - at least right away. Some will, and some must wait for market or company conditions to blossom in kind. And that's fine.)

How can you improve and become more creative in organizational trend spotting?

• Create a Trend / Idea War Room. Like lighting company Sylvania "War Room" for trend spotting. Yours can be a permanent place where white and dry erase boards, competitive products, and ads clipped from magazines line the walls (see more below).


• Solicit outside involvement. Do you have field reps, distributors, retailers who are on the front lines of customer interaction? They can help target opportunities by specific geographies or market segments.


• Tap tradeshows. I've always encouraged aggressive trend spotting at tradeshows. As your people walk the floor, encourage them to envision and cross apply. At Kohler, we would attend design and household appliance shows, and come up with better and trend fitting kitchen product designs for faucets and sinks.


• Read (with a trend-spotting eye) trade and consumer magazines. See something cool? Tear it out and stick it to the wall. Let the Innovation Team mull them over. Ideas may crystallize.


• Buy new and competitive products. Tinker with them in a War Room. It's amazing what will emerge.


• Buy your own service. Experience the process. Where does it shine? More importantly, where is it frustrating? What can be made easier and better?


• Ask your customers. For customer-facing organizations, customers often are your best trend spotters. When I was at Airspray we convened with multitude of disciplines. But most came from customers via sales, rife with bias and lacking filter.


• Set an agenda for trend management. Along with feeding the Idea Hopper, plan to manage ideas and attack the opportunities they present.

Trend spotting in the innovative workplace is by necessity a persistent activity. Opportunities emerge for competitive advantage. Competitive forces constantly emerge that require reaction. It's a natural part of a corporate evolution, whether related to new product or services development, or the establishment of new internal processes meant to improve the organization itself.

Aristotle is thought to have said, "Excellence is not an act, but a habit." Replace "Excellence" with "trend spotting." And embrace the mandate.


You can check out all of the 'Innovation Perspectives' articles from the different contributing authors on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?' by clicking the link in this sentence.

---

Robert F. Brands is President and founder of Brands & Company, LLC. Innovation Coach Robert Brands has launched a new site - www.RobertsRulesOfInnovation.com - to complement his upcoming book.

Innovation Perspectives - Purpose, Frequency and Responsibility

This is the fifth of several 'Innovation Perspectives' articles we will publish this week from multiple authors to get different perspectives on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?'. Here is the next perspective in the series:

by Jeffrey Phillips

I've written before about the reactive nature of many businesses. It often seems there are more incentives to ignore signals in the marketplace and then conduct heroic efforts at recovery than to simply plan effectively and study trends and act accordingly. The purpose of today's topic is to examine whether or not trend spotting and scenario planning is important and valuable (hopefully already answered) and if trend spotting and scenario planning are important, what individual or team within your firm should be focused on this work, and how frequently it should be done.

First, let's put to bed the debate (admittedly a thin one) about whether or not your organization should track trends and try to understand likely future scenarios. The answer for most firms is a resounding "yes", especially given the increasing pace of change. In the past you might have been able to argue that change was slow and steady, and an occasional peak in the periscope was all that was necessary. As globalization increases and the pace of change increases, you need to be identifying trends and making sense of those trends consistently, or the disrupters will eat your market share for lunch. Your planning efforts can't assume the future looks a lot like the present, and also must look further out in time. You need to look further out in time because even though the demand cycle has sped up, many firms haven't improved their product or service development cycle, so if you only look a year or two into the future, but it takes 18 months to two years to get an idea through the pipeline, you are shooting behind the curve.

OK, let's assume for the sake of argument that you agree that trend spotting and scenario planning are valuable. Then the question becomes - who should spot and capture trends, who should develop scenarios and who should interpret the results? These questions need to be answered on two levels: at the corporate or business unit level, and at the product or service level.

Trend spotting should be underway, all the time, as a consistent activity by a wide range of people within your organization. Those trends should be reported to a central analyst (individual or team) who is capturing, recording and tracking trends. This model works at both the product/business unit level and at the corporate level. We at OVO emphasize this work at the corporate level, because work at a product or business unit level can too easily be focused too narrowly on a specific product or market or geography, and miss trends or disruptions from other sources. We'd rather see a number of people recognizing and reporting trends throughout the organization, centralized in some team at the corporate level, who capture, report and synthesize the trends, typically in four or five categories (demographic, technological, economic, governmental). One central repository of these trends reduces the "my trends are more accurate than yours" debates and should ensure a more all encompassing view of trends. Of course everything I've described can be replicated in a business unit or product line, with the awareness that these are often more narrowly tailored.

If we centralize this skill, what kinds of people are necessary to capture, analyze, report and synthesize trends? Anyone in the organization who reads, or interacts with customers or business partners, or who has an interest in what's happening or unfolding can capture and register trends. We've set up several systems like this where anyone can report trends. Additionally, the central team can also track and register trends. As trends are recorded and categorized, we can also begin to identify which are important and relevant for the business, and request more insight or investigation into some trends over others. As this is an ongoing activity, over time it becomes evident that some "trends" fade away while some are enforced. Periodically (we recommend twice a year) a team comes together to select trends and build scenarios about a 5 to 7 year distant future.

We tend to pick 5 to 7 year futures because in many firms the selection and implementation of a new idea and the rollout of a new product can take several years, so we want to get the product to market slight early rather than slightly late. With the pace of change as is currently experienced, trying to understand more than seven years into the future is really a crap shoot. Using a horizon less than three years is really not effective, as most concepts will be incremental.

Who should develop the scenarios? We believe these should be guided or facilitated by people who don't necessarily have a vested interest in the outcome. A scenario guided by a product manager is likely to reinforce his or her biases, since they have a stake in the outcome. Again a central innovation team acting as facilitators with a representatives from a product unit or business unit can mix the best of both worlds and ensure a relatively unbiased examination of several potential future outcomes.

Note that through all of this discussion we assume that this function exists as a continuous offering over time, not a discrete, start-stop program but a team that builds insights and skills and offers them to executives within the business. If you want the inexpensive, low hanging fruit of innovation, here it is. No where else can you get a great understanding of the near future and your opportunities and challenges for less cost. The only requirement after the scenario plan will be your ability to take action.


You can check out all of the 'Innovation Perspectives' articles from the different contributing authors on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?' by clicking the link in this sentence.

---

Jeffrey Phillips is a senior leader at OVO Innovation. OVO works with large distributed organizations to build innovation teams, processes and capabilities. Jeffrey is the author of "Make us more Innovative", and innovateonpurpose.blogspot.com.

Innovation Perpectives - All of the Above

This is the fourth of several 'Innovation Perspectives' articles we will publish this week from multiple authors to get different perspectives on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?'. Here is the next perspective in the series:

by Rocco Tarasi

There are a lot of easy answers to this question, but the easy ones are not necessarily the correct ones.

The first easy answer is "the CEO", because they are responsible for the strategy and direction of the business, are presumed to know more about their business than anyone, and are responsible for promoting a culture of innovation. But the CEO isn't on the front lines of most businesses - they aren't stocking the shelves with Proctor & Gamble goods at the grocery store, or working at the mall kiosk selling Blackberries, or greeting customers at the Citibank checkout window You can't trend-spot without the "spot", and it is difficult to do any spotting locked in the corner office. Plus, they probably have more than a few other things to do.

The second easy answer is "everyone." This is great in theory since they have the bandwidth and are on the front lines, and in a perfect world with unicorns running through rainbows this would be the answer, but in reality there are two big problems. First, it can't be everyone's responsibility when they already have "real" responsibilities (making sure the shelves are stocked, the right phone is sold, and the right bank account is credited) and they are compensated and evaluated based on those responsibilities. Second, most people probably don't care about innovating their job or their company, as much as we wish they did.

The final easy answer is "a designated manager/executive", probably someone with "innovation" in their title. This person would be the most motivated, since it would be their primary responsibility. And they could presumably put themselves into a position on the front lines talking to customers, suppliers and partners to identify trends. But the bandwidth of one person would be way too limited to be truly successful anywhere but the smallest of companies.

So the answer must be "D" - all of the above.

• "The CEO" can promote the right culture, and when given good information can make the right strategic decisions.
  
• "Everyone" is in right position and has the bandwidth to identify new trends, even if only a small percentage of people actively take the time to look.
  
• The "designated manager" has the motivation and incentive to foster ideas from "everyone", analyze those ideas and put them into context for the CEO.

So while the answer seems pretty clear, why is everyone bemoaning our country's innovation deficit?

• Hubris leads many CEOs to believe they don't need any help with innovation from the rank-and-file.
  
• Most companies don't have the culture or infrastructure to support those employees that are actually self-motivated to find trends and be innovative.
  
• Few companies designate a manager/executive with innovation responsibility. The CIO, if there is one, is often incorrectly presumed to have or share this responsibility but in reality spends 100% of their time managing the company infrastructure and reacting to fires.

Most of the media spotlight on growing innovation is on education, financial incentives, and political support. While those are all important factors, most companies have control over their innovation capability through a combination of the right culture, useful supporting infrastructure, and clearly defined responsibilities.


You can check out all of the 'Innovation Perspectives' articles from the different contributing authors on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?' by clicking the link in this sentence.

Image Credit: EssjayNZ on Flickr

---

Rocco Tarasi was an accountant, investment banker, and CFO before becoming a technology entrepreneur. He writes about innovation at www.InnovationMinute.com with a focus on "everyday" innovations in business models, sales strategies, products and services.

Innovation Perspectives - Trendspotting Trifecta

This is the third of several 'Innovation Perspectives' articles we will publish this week from multiple authors to get different perspectives on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?'. Here is the next perspective in the series:

by Braden Kelley

I believe this question should really be broken up because there are three VERY different (and incredibly important) pursuits intermingled here:

1. Trend spotting
   
2. Putting emerging behaviors into context for a business
   
3. Putting emerging needs into context for a business

Only at the very beginning of a business, when it is all or nothing for a small team of founders, should responsibility for these three tasks be combined. The reason responsibility for these three different pursuits should be split up is because each requires a different way of thinking, that often requires different types of people to generate the most relevant and actionable insights.

As I've written before, insights and execution are the real keys to business success, and in building any successful innovation - the insights come first. So, combining these three pursuits properly and getting the insights correct is incredibly important - otherwise you'll design, build, and distribute a solution that misses the mark with customers.

Trend spotting requires big picture thinking, a talent for separating the notable from the unimportant, the ability to see how potential trends connect together, and the vision to see the impact of this trend intersection (what megatrends might they point to, etc.).

Putting emerging behaviors into context for a business requires an incredible capacity for insightful observation, the ability to spot influential thinkers who are good at identifying and describing changing behaviors, and the skills to synthesize a collection of perspectives into a cohesive view of the future. This view of the future must of course have a strong chance of being correct.

Putting emerging needs into context for a business is incredibly difficult and requires understanding how emerging trends and behaviors will intersect with new technologies and other business capabilities to expose new customer needs. Those new needs then represent potential growth areas for businesses to enter with new solutions. The goal of course is to identify and act upon these emerging needs before the competition has the opportunity to observe these needs as expressed behaviors and actions and react.

The one skill that all three share in common however, is the ability to disconnect one's own perspective from the changing perspectives of others. Whether you as an organization choose to hire people into these roles, hire in consultants to provide this insight, or to spread the responsibilities around the organization, you must have a strategy.

Personally, I believe organizations may soon begin creating insight networks within their organizations in the same way that they currently do with innovation. This means having a central insights team at Corporate HQ with strong executive support that is responsible for managing the process, the distributed global network, its training/certification, and its outputs. This does not have to mean starting a new team - companies could incorporate these responsibilities within an existing dedicated-innovation infrastructure. So, can an insight management software industry be far behind?

And last but not least you will need to assign people to monitor trends and emerging behaviors and needs from Six Ways to Sunday:

1. Demographic and Psychographic Changes
   
2. Legal and Political Changes
   
3. Different Geographies
   
4. Different Industries
   
5. New Supplier and Technology Capabilities
   
6. New Business Capabilities and Business Models

Do you have a strategy and responsibilities in place for spotting trends and emerging needs/behaviors in your organization?

What are you waiting for?


You can check out all of the 'Innovation Perspectives' articles from the different contributing authors on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?' by clicking the link in this sentence.

---

Braden Kelley is the editor of Blogging Innovation and founder of Business Strategy Innovation, a consultancy focusing on innovation and marketing strategy. Braden is also @innovate on Twitter.

Innovation Perspectives - Trendspotters' Fab Five

This is the second of several 'Innovation Perspectives' articles we will publish this week from multiple authors to get different perspectives on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?'. Here is the next perspective in the series:

by Mike Brown

Who should be deciphering the future and helping shape how a business understands and prepares for it?

The first inclination might be to think about a specific part of an organization for the function. It's important though to identify the individuals well-suited to this challenging role. From that perspective, five capabilities are vital to successfully champion this effort:

1. Having a Natural External Perspective


• Creating solid insights about the future depends on starting with a view outside, not inside the business. It's a natural orientation that not all people share. Someone in a trend-interpreting role has to be a sponge for gathering, processing, and extrapolating information on markets, customers, competitors, and a broad set of inputs on the economy, demographics, and other environmental factors.


2. Being an Integrator


• Being able to do something with a broad set of future-looking inputs requires someone with a solid perspective on the business and what drives its success. This has to be coupled with the ability to understand how other industries and markets affect the business today and imagine how they might in the future. Finally, it demands a strong command of frameworks to integrate meaningful interpretation of broad, and typically incomplete, forward-oriented data sets.


3. Possessing Both Left and Right-brained Orientations


• Ideally solid quantitative metrics (i.e., demographics, demand forecasting, industry sizing trends) are available to help form relevant predictions. Often though, numeric information isn't available. In any case, analysis has to be coupled with creating compelling stories to drive strategic actions anticipating and preparing for the future. "Whole brain thinkers" are essential, since they provide left-brain quantitative and analytical skills coupled with creative, communications-oriented right-brain perspectives to help make on-target, forward-looking action happen.


4. Displaying Strong Intuition


• There's no single clear picture of what the future holds. Creating credible future scenarios requires tremendous amounts of interpretation and extrapolation. Some of this can be learned; much of it can't. Trend watchers and prognosticators need to be able to instinctively "know" what all the information they're seeing means. If it's a broad intuitive sense, that's fantastic. Even if it's industry-specific, that can be fine too. I used to work with an economist who had been in transportation for many years and had tremendous instincts for our market. I'm not sure he could have been dropped into another industry and had the same feel, but for our market, he could look at a competitor's quarterly numbers and tell you exactly what was and would be happening in its logistics operation with high certainty.


5. Building Powerful Relationships and Networks


• It's quite a list to this point, isn't it? It's challenging for one person to excel at all of these skills. As a result, the fifth essential capability is to be an outstanding relationship builder. This includes the ability to recognize the talents necessary in others who can help shape a view of the future along with the interpersonal skills to cultivate and share value throughout the network of experts that's needed.

There are certainly other skills and capabilities which make for a strong trend watcher and interpreter. But if you can find someone in your business solidly embodying these skills, don't wait for a clearer view of the future. Get them into the job right now!


You can check out all of the 'Innovation Perspectives' articles from the different contributing authors on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?' by clicking the link in this sentence.

---

Mike Brown is an award-winning innovator in strategy, communications, and experience marketing. He authors the Brainzooming TM blog, and serves as the company's chief Catalyst. He wrote the ebook "Taking the NO Out of InNOvation" and is a frequent keynote presenter.

Innovation Perspectives - Leader's Role in Trend Spotting

This is the first of several 'Innovation Perspectives' articles we will publish this week from multiple authors to get different perspectives on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?'. So to kick it off, here is Jim Estill's perspective:

by Jim Estill

I believe that it is the leader's role to be active in spotting trends in both the market and within the company. Of course in order to do this, they need to get the assistance and input from all of their people.

A leader who believes in Trend Spotting and believes in capitalizing on emerging trends and technologies can set the example for staff to create an openness that new ideas and trends are brought forward.

I found when I was leader of a 2 billion dollar organization that the bulk of the emerging trends were presented to me filtered through a number of different eyes of people who worked for me, people in the industry, people in the press, etc. and the trends tended to be a synthesis of ideas.

The following are my seven rules of Trend Spotting:

1. If trends aren't going the way you want them to go, then create change. One of the best ways to have a trend and for everyone to think you're genius for knowing the trend is to nudge it along or create it. As a leader of an organization, you often have lots of resources like sales, marketing, R&D, etc. that you can put towards creating a trend.


2. Different trends are worthwhile for different companies at different ages and stages and resource capacity. I'm a business optimist and believe that there are right-sized business opportunities for every company at every size and that successful companies are the ones that choose the right-sized opportunity for them. Just because something is a trend, does not mean a company is positioned to take advantage of it or that they can make money on it.


3. Existing companies are often hampered by their own paradigm. What got you here won't get you there. It's difficult, particularly for companies that are doing reasonably well to consider going into new markets and looking at new trends since they've profited by the old patterns. It takes a great leader to be willing to give up a proven company method and to risk some on emerging trends.


4. Leaders are meant to lead and to be visionary, managers are meant to implement and be tactical. If you're the leader of an organization, recognize that your greatest value is in being visionary (even though implementation still counts). That would mean Trend Spotting...


5. A leader needs to set the example by being open to new ideas. They also need to free up resources where required in order to allow their company to take advantage of trends.


6. I have been wrongly credited with being a genius at spotting trends. The reason why I say "wrongly credited" is I often placed multiple bets on multiple horses within a technology race at the same time. So I was right when I joined the board of RIM. Blackberry did become huge (and I still sit on that board today). I was right when we signed Apple as a product line in 1992 when everyone said they were going bankrupt. At the same time, I did these "genius moves" I also invested in a number of companies which are no longer here today and I sold a number of product lines from companies you've never heard of because they've also gone away.


7. One of my favorite mantras is "Fail Often. Fail Fast. Fail Cheap." So although I have my foot planted firmly in multiple camps, I don't risk so much that failure in one area creates a failure.

It's the leader's responsibility to spot trends but clearly this is not done in a vacuum, it's their role to inspire everyone to give them input.


You can check out all of the 'Innovation Perspectives' articles from the different contributing authors on 'Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?' by clicking the link in this sentence.

---

Jim Estill is a venture capitalist, author and business consultant. He sits on the board of RIM. He is a blogger at www.jimestill.com or follow him on twitter @jimestill.

Call for February 'Innovation Perspectives'

February's opportunity to contribute your Innovation Perspectives is now here.

This monthly feature presents our loyal readers with different perspectives on a single topic all in one place - from several different authors. It gives our innovation community the opportunity to compare, contrast and discuss them in the comments here on Blogging Innovation and with the 1,980+ people in the Continuous Innovation group on LinkedIn.

Here is this month's topic for publishing the week of February 15-21, 2010:


Who should be responsible (if anyone) for trend-spotting and putting emerging behaviors and needs into context for a business?

• Thank you to Jeffrey Phillips for submitting this month's topic


• The submission deadline is midnight GMT on February 13, 2010

Several contributing authors will be writing articles on this topic, but you are also welcome to submit an article. The process is simple:

1. Submit your article using our contact form


2. I will e-mail you back with a request for a 1-2 sentence author byline and a photo like those on Blogging Innovation

We look forward to sharing February's Innovation Perspectives with you and hearing your thoughts!


If you missed January's Innovation Perspectives, you can find them here.

---

Braden Kelley is the editor of Blogging Innovation and founder of Business Strategy Innovation, a consultancy focusing on innovation and marketing strategy. Braden is also @innovate on Twitter.

Innovation Perspectives January Wrapup

Innovation Perspectives is our monthly feature to present our loyal readers with different perspectives on a single topic all in one place along with the ability to compare, contrast and discuss them in the comments here on Blogging Innovation and in the Continuous Innovation group on LinkedIn. This month's topic was:


"'What product or sector is in desperate need of innovation?"

• Thank you to Graham Horton for submitting this month's topic

Here is a list of all of the authors that participated this month and links to their articles on this topic.

1. Braden Kelley - Cash, Plastic or Free?


2. Jeffrey Phillips - Education Innovation Needed Now


3. Tim Kastelle - Active Senior Opportunities


4. Ric Merrifield - 911 Call for Innovation and Revolution


5. Paul Hobcraft - Desperate for Innovation


6. Adam Schorr - Packaging Up Innovation


7. Mark Roser - Innovating a Health Care Fix


8. Rocco Tarasi - Rethinking University Education


9. Braden Kelley - Educating Tomorrow's Workforce

If you would like to suggest a topic for next month's Innovation Perspectives, or would like to contribute, please leave a comment or contact us.

---

Braden Kelley is the editor of Blogging Innovation and founder of Business Strategy Innovation, a consultancy focusing on innovation and marketing strategy. Braden is also @innovate on Twitter.

Innovation Perspectives - Educating Tomorrow's Workforce

This is the tenth of several 'Innovation Perspectives' articles we will publish this week from multiple authors to get different perspectives on 'What product or sector is in desperate need of innovation?'. And to close off the week, here is my perspective on education:

by Braden Kelley


"We need our children to be Masters of Mystery and Einsteins of Insight." - Braden Kelley

When I first saw this topic I wanted to write about education innovation, but I resisted when a couple of the contributing authors chose this topic. I wrote about the publishing industry instead, but then this week I came across a Phil McKinney article and had the opportunity to meet Sir Ken Robinson, and my passions for an education revolution were stirred.

We sit at the nexus of amazing new education technology capabilities, the globalization of work, and an incredible transformation in the needs of employers. The path forward is not the same as the road behind, but our education system is proceeding as if it were.

Instead of pursuing the current education mantra of more, better, faster, we need to instead rethink how we educate our children because we need to prepare them for a different world. A world in which flexibility, adaptibility, creativity, and problem solving will be prized ahead of the deep technical knowledge that is fast becoming a commodity and easily available.

I've said here on Blogging Innovation that the keys to business success are insight and execution. We are ending an era of incredible business focus on execution excellence and are entering an era of an increasing business focus on insight. Excellent execution will always be valued and required, but more and more components of this execution are shifting from the developed world to the lower-wage developing world.

We are currently in a race to the middle when it comes to standard of living as the developing countries like China, India, Brazil and others climb up the pyramid and developed countries like the United States, Italy, Greece and others slide down. Those developing countries wanting to stay near the top of the flattening standard of living pyramid will have to re-tool their education systems to to prepare their populations to grab as big a share as possible of the higher-wage insight-driven jobs.

Here is an interesting chart from a Newsweek-Intel Study reformatted by Phil McKinney:


Looking at the differences in perspectives between the American and Chinese respondents in the research, I came to two possible conclusions:

1. I am Chinese
   
2. The United States (and many other developed countries) are headed in the wrong direction and better change course on education fast

You may think that my views on education are too business-focused, but look even the arts are being globalized (look at Cirque du Soleil).

I believe that we underestimate children's ability to understand the real world and I think that the education system and the business world need each other more than they realize. We need to re-imagine our public-private partnerships and expectations when it comes to education, and we need to start educating today's young kids for tomorrow's world.

The fact is that we are pushing the limits of taking today's understanding of science to improve productivity an standard of living. Going forward we will need to break through currently held physical and natural limits and an expanded understanding of our physical and natural worlds. This will require a new generation of scientists and workers who can synthesize approaches from different cultures and disciplines, that are masters of creative approaches to problem soliving, and that have the entrepreneurial spirit to breakthrough perceived barriers. Are these the kind of students we're eduating?

What kind of students is your country educating?

As an added bonus, if you haven't seen it, I encourage to check out Sir Ken Robinson's video on "Creativity versus Literacy" here:



You can check out all of the 'Innovation Perspectives' articles from the different contributing authors on 'What product or sector is in desperate need of innovation?' by clicking the link in this sentence.

---

Braden Kelley is the editor of Blogging Innovation and founder of Business Strategy Innovation, a consultancy focusing on innovation and marketing strategy. Braden is also @innovate on Twitter.

Innovation Perspectives - Rethinking University Education

This is the eighth of several 'Innovation Perspectives' articles we will publish this week from multiple authors to get different perspectives on 'What product or sector is in desperate need of innovation?'. Here is the next perspective in the series:

by Rocco Tarasi

Is there an industry more in need of innovation than education?

It is one of the largest industries in the United States, with over $1 trillion dollars spent annually. You are a consumer in this industry practically from birth until death. And yet most believe that the industry has lagged the pace of innovation so much that the education market today is comparable to the newspaper industry of 1999 - enjoying healthy profits before innovative start-ups disrupt their existing (archaic) business models.

The Washington Post recently wrote that:

"Students starting school this year may be part of the last generation for which 'going to college' means packing up, getting a dorm room and listening to tenured professors. Undergraduate education is on the verge of a radical reordering. Colleges, like newspapers, will be torn apart by new ways of sharing information enabled by the Internet. The business model that sustained private U.S. colleges cannot survive."


Students (and their parents) enrolled in higher education have experienced first-hand how strict rules conspire to make it harder to graduate on time - including the difficulty of transferring credits between schools and the difficulty in scheduling "core" classes that, for some reason, are never offered during the semesters you need them. According to the American Enterprise Institute, four-year colleges graduated an average of just 53% of entering students within 6 years.

At the same time that schools are working to keep you a student as long as possible, they are also increasing the cost. By how much? According to a FastCompany article, since 1990 the cost of college tuition has gone up more than any other good or service.

Maybe part of their problem is that they haven't figured out a simple concept called "economy of scale", where as more students are added the cost per student should decrease. And yet a Forbes editorial noted that the administrative and support staff at colleges between 1997 and 2007 increased at a rate double the rate of enrollment growth. It is not surprising though, since there is little incentive for colleges to control their own costs - after all, they are selling arguably the second largest purchase most people will ever make, funded almost entirely by guaranteed loans. What other industries have this type of built-in financial benefit?

Fortunately there are some cracks in the armor forming. Although the most recent Inc 500 list of fasting growing private companies included only four related to education, there are a number of start-up companies trying new ideas to disrupt the status quo:

• Open source textbooks from Flat World Knowledge
  
• Open source course content from the OpenCourseWare Consortium
  
• Degrees taught by volunteer faculty at the University of the People
  
• Peer learning from Peer2Peer University
  
• Competency-based degrees from Western Governors University
  
• Online education aggregators like Academic Earth.

These are all great initiatives, but there is a deep-seated cultural reason that the higher education industry has been able to stifle any potentially disruptive business models: the perceived value of where a person earns their degree is extremely high - arguably much higher than it should be. For real change to take hold in the industry, we need to think differently about how to measure and value education.


You can check out all of the 'Innovation Perspectives' articles from the different contributing authors on 'What product or sector is in desperate need of innovation?' by clicking the link in this sentence.

---

Rocco Tarasi was an accountant, investment banker, and CFO before becoming a technology entrepreneur. He writes about innovation at www.InnovationMinute.com with a focus on "everyday" innovations in business models, sales strategies, products and services.

Innovation Perspectives - Innovating a Health Care Fix

This is the seventh of several 'Innovation Perspectives' articles we will publish this week from multiple authors to get different perspectives on 'What product or sector is in desperate need of innovation?'. Here is the next perspective in the series:

by Mark Roser

In looking across various sectors the area of healthcare stands out as a particular opportunity for innovation. And, regardless which side one takes politically, there is no doubt a surplus of opportunities for improvement. In the US, government healthcare (Medicare and Medicaid) together with private healthcare account for a significant percentage of GDP.

As professionals involved in open innovation, readers of this blog will no doubt bring a valued perspective on how we can deliver innovation in this space. Whether we work in the healthcare field or are simply consumers of healthcare, the lessons that we learn from open innovation collaboration are intrinsically required in innovating the future of healthcare.

Each health transaction is touched by a multitude of stakeholders:

• Patients and their network - family members, caregivers, friends, etc.
  
• Doctors (generalists and specialists) and their network - health technicians, clerical staff, reimbursement specialists representing the doctor, professional societies, etc.
  
• Health institutions (hospital, medical center, practice, etc) and their network - administrators, IT specialists, physical plant & facilities management, etc.
  
• Pharmacies and their network - pharmacist, pharmacists assistants, retail pharmacy operators, etc.
  
• Pharmaceutical companies and their network - scientists, clinical experts, marketers, etc.
  
• Payers (insurance companies or government body such as Medicare Medicaid) and their network - claims specialists, underwriters, administrators, customer service experts, etc.
  
• Primary researchers (who develop new cures) - NIH, Universities, entrepreneurs, etc.
  
• Educators - internet websites, magazines, professional development & continuing education, etc.
  
• Regulators - FDA, etc.
  
• Media - TV news, magazines, etc.

Classically, there has been a variety of silos that keep these parties separated. The silos were further reinforced because each silo had its own vocabulary and position within a cultural hierarchy.

As specialists in open innovation, we can be helpful by demonstrating ways in which collaborative efforts can be realized. Collaboration is quite a challenge; it requires that each of us - wherever we fit in the overall network - has a responsibility for being sufficiently self-aware that our universe is much bigger than our immediate circle. We have a responsibility to learn the language of the networks around us and understand that the current relationships that exist between silos are not set in stone, but rather a reflection of our history. We can see the weaknesses in the current system and instead of finding fault, we can find ways to bring people together.

By behaving in small ways, and demonstrating collaboration we become the change that we wish to see.

Regardless of your political views on healthcare, there is opportunity for us each to help.


You can check out all of the 'Innovation Perspectives' articles from the different contributing authors on 'What product or sector is in desperate need of innovation?' by clicking the link in this sentence.

---

Mark Roser has been working with companies internationally for over 12 years to identify new markets, clarify product & service growth opportunities and lead exploratory development programs. He can be reached at mark.roser*at*openinnovators.com

Innovation Perspectives - Packaging Up Innovation

This is the sixth of several 'Innovation Perspectives' articles we will publish this week from multiple authors to get different perspectives on 'What product or sector is in desperate need of innovation?'. Here is the next perspective in the series:

by Adam Schorr

While recent years have been a boon for innovation in various industries such as consumer electronics and automotive, the consumer packaged goods industry seems to be stuck serving up warmed over versions of past innovation. But while product innovation in CPG is badly needed, the true innovation crisis in CPG has to do with the fundamental business model. Although the players have been changing due to industry consolidation, the CPG industry continues to labor under a decades old business model whose foundational truths evaporated years ago.

The essence of the CPG business model is as follows: One group of companies manufactures products that are perceived by consumers as significantly better than the alternatives. Over time, these products serve as the backbone for brands that are loved and trusted by consumers and which are relied on as shortcuts to simplify purchase decisions. These companies sell their products to a second group of companies (retailers) who have expertise in merchandising and who, in turn, sell the products to the end users (consumers).

This model worked out well for the manufacturers when two things were true: 1) Their products were perceived by consumers as significantly better than the alternatives and 2) They had the trust and attention of consumers and were able to motivate consumers to go to the retail stores to buy.

Today, these essential truths are no longer true.

With ample contract manufacturing capacity available in the market, private label goods are proliferating. More importantly, a sizable and growing share of consumers perceive private label versions of products to be as good or better than their branded counterparts. Just as troublesome is the fact that manufacturers no longer have the trust and attention of the consuming public which means they cannot influence consumers to go out in droves and shop in retail stores as once they could. In a world where manufacturers are not producing products that are perceived as significantly better than the private label alternatives and where the 30 second commercial no longer holds a mass audience in rapt attention, manufacturers of branded consumer goods are in a very precarious position. One has to wonder whether the role they play in the CPG value chain is still needed. I can assure you that the retailers are asking this very question and are answering it ever more vociferously in the negative.

Sadly, some of the CPG players draw the wrong lesson from their current woes. Some have declared a war on costs, seeking to drive cost of out of their system so that they can reinvest back in their brands. This is an example of trying to play your game harder. Playing your game harder makes sense when success is a function of skill. But success in CPG today is not a function of skill, it is a function of position. The retailers occupy a privileged position on the competitive landscape. They own the shelves and they own the stores in which consumers shop. Trying to win a battle of costs against private label goods is a waste of time. Branded goods will not only lose this battle, they will undercut whatever raison d'etre they still possess.

All is not lost for the CPG community. As always, innovation is the key to success. Branded goods manufacturers need to focus on two things: 1) Knocking the socks off of their consumers with products that are not easily copied. These fantastic products will earn the attention of the consuming public. 2) Finding a way to recapture the relationship with the consumer.

The 30 second commercial is not coming back as a means of building consumer relationships. Brand stewards must leverage new technologies to turn the attention that their products earn into brand loyalty that can deliver financial returns. Once these two fundamentals have been re-established, CPG manufacturers would be wise to re-evaluate the rationale for funneling all of their sales through a channel that has demonstrated robust support for building its own private label business at the expense of the big brands.

The path of meaningful innovation is the only path to success for the manufacturers of branded consumer goods. They can choose to continue tweaking the current model or to seek a new model. One thing is clear: The market will not wait for them.


You can check out all of the 'Innovation Perspectives' articles from the different contributing authors on 'What product or sector is in desperate need of innovation?' by clicking the link in this sentence.

---

Adam Schorr is an experienced innovator and brand manager with a passion for the human soul and its ability to reshape the universe. Adam blogs about innovation, marketing and all sorts of quirky topics at www.adamschorr.com.