1

Seven Keys to Unlock and Lead Innovation Strategy

Whether innovation is incremental or moon shot in

significance, it flourishes in organizations that embrace

seven elements in the context of a strategic purpose.

Our Credera research team spent significant time evaluating

organizations with proven track records of innovation. We

set out on an adventure to understand and synthesize those

critical elements that show up repeatedly as foundational

enablers. We carefully examined organizations that rely

on innovation as a cornerstone for competitive advantage,

including NASA’s Apollo space program, Procter & Gamble,

IDEO, Stanford Design School, Apple, Google Ventures, and

early inventors like Edison and the Wright Brothers.

We looked back at history to synthesize patterns in major

innovations in science, mathematics, physics, genetics,

aviation, and business. Specifically, we explored the history of

innovation in the world: the printing press, the steam engine,

the light bulb, penicillin, nuclear power, exploration of space,

ARPAnet, personal computers, mapping the human gene,

Google, Facebook, SpaceX, and artificial intelligence.

We interviewed innovative leaders to understand their

journeys, successes, and failures. Lastly, we examined

scholarly articles, journals, books, and our own client

experiences to further understand the philosophical and,

more importantly, the digestible building blocks to answer

the primary questions:

How can the C-level leader enable systemic innovation

that leads to financial success and happy customers?

We live in a second Renaissance of sorts—a fourth Industrial

Revolution as some have proclaimed. Business, government,

and nonprofit leaders all face pressure to innovate in order

to find some kind of advantage in a competitive landscape.

Standing still is not an option. The organizations that choose

a scatter-shot approach to innovation fail. The organizations

that refuse to innovate fail. Pressure builds to connect

people, devices, ideas, and experiences in meaningful and

new ways. The researchers in the study came across many

executives who shared their concern that innovation would

be yet another fad discussion, taking up resources and then

not yielding any benefit. Certainly, many fads create a flash in

Executive Summary

SEVEN KEYS TO UNLOCK AND LEAD INNOVATION STRATEGY

• Coordinate enterprise-wide leadership and governance of innovation

• Foster a culture of innovation

• Manage the innovation portfolio like a venture capitalist

• Create radical connection with customers

• Build internal and external partnership networks

• Develop a shared definition of innovation

• Commit to design thinking

Establish Leadership & Culture

Define Innovation & Approach

Manage, Test & Measure

3

the pan without substantial benefit, but research challenges

this skepticism. Even in ultra-mature industries such as oil

& gas, travel & hospitality, energy, law, and medicine, the

opportunities to innovate and expectations of customers

both continue to radically increase over time.

“We choose to go to the moon and do the

other things, not because they are easy…”

– President John F. Kennedy

We don’t all need to all be astronauts—innovation

is essentially human. This paper examines different

magnitudes of innovation: core, adjacent, and

transformational. We all desire to improve, to restore, to

build, to rethink, to imagine. The vision and will to press

forward in the face of monumental challenge is a significant

part of leadership. Leaning into future vision, leaders take

risks—partly because they know that greater risks exist in

sitting still than in creating a new path for the future.

Credera helps C-level leaders see how innovation can lead

their organizations forward.

These enhanced strategies to lead innovation provide

significant opportunities for all organizations—big

and small:

Coordinate enterprise-wide leadership and

governance of innovation.

Create a shared definition of innovation.

Foster a culture of innovation.

Manage the innovation portfolio like a

venture capitalist.

Commit to design thinking.

Create a radical connection with customers.

Build strong internal and external networks.

Credera helps C-level leaders see how innovation can lead

their organizations forward.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

4

Contents

Coordinate Enterprise-Wide Leadership and Governance of Innovation 10

Modern Frameworks Describing Innovation 7

What is Innovation? 6

Introduction 5

Create a Shared Definition of Innovation 12

Foster a Culture of Innovation 14

Manage the Innovation Portfolio Like a Venture Capitalist 16

Commit to Design Thinking 18

Create a Radical Connection With Customers 20

Build Strong Internal and External Networks 22

Closing 24

Appendix 26

Sources 28

5

We live in the epicenter of the most innovative moment in

history. In many ways, we live in a modern Renaissance—a

science- and technology-driven Renaissance. For-profit,

nonprofit, and government organizations all carry a

significant mandate to continue to lead innovation.

Opportunities abound to unlock the human potential—to

imagine and create a new future.

Industrial revolutions represent meta-

innovation moments in history.

Industrial revolutions represent meta-innovation moments

in history. There is a discussion unfolding proposing that we

are in the early stages of the fourth industrial revolution.

The first revolution began in 1784 with steam power and

mechanical production equipment. The second began in

1870 with electricity, human flight, internal combustion

engines, widespread use of fossil fuels, mass production,

and division of labor. The third began in the 1960s with

the computer, putting a man on the moon, integrated

semiconductors, and the internet.

In this current moment—perhaps a fourth industrial

revolution—machine learning (artificial intelligence) and the

removal of barriers between humans and machines propel

the world in new and innovative ways. In fact, computers

like IBM’s Watson exceed the capacity, speed, and accuracy

of certain human brain functions. Genetic code is translated

and now being specifically understood, synthetic life is

possible as Dr. J. Craig Venter proved a few years ago,

autonomous cars are right around the corner, drones

deliver packages, and personal assistants like Siri and Alexa

talk with us—in many ways like R2D2 of Star Wars. And,

at the time of writing, nearly 1.7 billion humans live in the

digital world called Facebook, sharing all of the emotions

and stories once confined to in-person interactions. The

average lifespan of Standard & Poor’s 500 companies has

decreased from 67 years in the 1920s to 15 years today,

attributed mostly to the increased pace of innovation.

It is no wonder that leaders of organizations big and small

clamor to inspire and cultivate innovation throughout their

empires, teams, and companies as fast as humanly possible.

Introduction

6

What is Innovation?

In short, innovation is a novel improvement that is

meaningful to people. It is the process of introducing new

ideas, products, or methods.

Innovations vary in their degree of significance. Some

innovations are incremental; others are radical or “moon

shot” in their epic impact. Consider the Post-It-Note and

Apollo Space program.

Moon shot innovations represent a category defined by

the 1969 walk on the moon. In retrospect, the time from

1903 to 1969 illustrates the radical innovation in flight. In

Kittyhawk, N.C., the Wright Brothers, two bicycle designers,

made the first successful manned flight. Sixty-three years

later, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin walked on the

surface of the moon. NASA led the innovation—masterfully

coordinating 20,000 businesses and 400,000 engineers—

without instant messenger, email, or any similar technology

(Apollo: The Race to The Moon by Charles Murray and

Catherine Bly Cox, 1989).

The Post-It-Note emerged at 3M, when an employee named

Dr. Spencer Silver, accidentally created a low-tack, reusable

adhesive.

Whether incremental or moon shot, innovation

approaches evolved markedly in recent years with the

advent of design thinking. This is a proven technique that

many companies have successfully used to accomplish

innovation—through teamwork, empathy for the customers

through direct observation and interaction, rapid

prototyping, and data-driven testing.

With this in mind, let’s examine several different categories

and types of innovations.

Developing breakthroughs and inventing things for markets that don’t yet exist

Expanding from existing business into “new to the company” business

CORE

Optimizing existing products for existing customers

ADJACENT

TRANSFORMATIONAL

H O W TO W I N

USE EXISTING PRODUCTS AND ASSETS

ADD INCREMENTAL PRODUCTS AND ASSETS

DEVELOP NEW PRODUCTS AND ASSETS

WH

ER

E T

O P

LA

YSE

RV

E E

XIS

TIN

G M

AR

KE

TS

AN

D C

UST

OM

ER

SE

NT

ER

AD

JAC

EN

T M

AR

KE

TS,

SE

RV

E A

DJA

CE

NT

CU

STO

ME

RS

CR

EA

TE

NE

W M

AR

KE

TS,

TA

RG

ET

NE

W C

UST

OM

ER

NE

ED

S

7

Nagji and Geoff Tuff published a perspective in the Harvard Business Review in 2012 articulating three primary categories of innovations: core, adjacent, and transformational. These three categories of innovation provide leaders with a common vernacular from which to discuss innovation.

Modern Frameworks Describing Innovation

8

Core innovations serve existing customers and markets

with optimized, existing products. Nabisco’s 100 Calorie

packet of Oreos is a good example; it enhanced an existing

product (Oreos) and targeted an existing market (calorie-

conscious consumers).

Adjacent innovations serve adjacent markets and related

adjacent customers. The Swiffer from Proctor & Gamble

leveraged the fact that customers associated long-handled

mops with cleaning the floor and added a new technology to

access a new customer base (those who would not purchase

a traditional long-handled mop).

Apple’s iTunes, which introduced a market

for pay-by-the-song digital music, is a great

example.

Transformational innovations create new markets and

require the organization to provide new technologies and/

or processes. Apple’s iTunes, which introduced a market for

pay-by-the-song digital music, is a great example.

Additionally, Nagji and Tuff also highlight specific allocations

of resources for each type, revealed by correlated share

price performance: 70% for core, 20% for adjacent, and

10% for transformational. The returns from each category

prove to be almost inverted: 10% from core, 20% from

adjacent, and 70% from transformational.

Another helpful model was developed by Larry Keeley

(who has a doctorate in innovation from the University of

Chicago School of Design) who articulated 10 different

types of innovation under three distinct categories (Ten

Types of Innovation by Larry Keeley, Ryan Pikkel, Brian

Quinn, Helen Walters, 2013):

1. Configurationa. Profit Model – Gillette offers a low cost razor with

expensive blades.

b. Network – Target partners with designers for

exclusive products.

c. Structure – Southwest Airlines simplified by using

only one type of airplane.

d. Process – IKEA and Toyota use more efficient

processes.

2. Offeringa. Product Performance – Dyson Vacuums and Intuit

Turbo Tax stand apart because of their dominating

performance through new technologies.

b. Product System – Microsoft introduced a new

licensing approach and bundled the Office Suite,

Scion cars (Toyota) provide abundant “Toyota

warrantied” modification options for the middle

market “tuner” customer base.

9

3. Experiencea. Service – Offering superior customer service,

with companies such as Zappos (where customers

can buy any shoe 24 hours a day online), Sysco

Foods where all restaurant-supporting items

are delivered around the clock, or 7-Eleven

convenience stores which provide locally-relevant

items on the shelves.

b. Channel – Niketown stores or Amazon Kindle

Whispernet catering to a specific channel.

c. Brand – The well-known brands such as Trader

Joe’s and their private-label food offerings, Intel

Inside branding on computers causing customers

to view computers with these parts as higher

quality, or American Heart Association menu

items helping people see the heart-healthy choices

on menus and thereby raising the value of the

American Heart brand.

d. Customer Engagement – Apple World Wide

Developer Conference is an example of bringing

customers into the process. Apple shows off its

best new hardware and software each year at the

WWDC, where developers pay $2000 for tickets

that sell out in less than two hours.

Both incremental and radical (moon shot)

innovations propel businesses forward.

Our point of view leans intentionally toward the practical

regarding innovation: both incremental and radical

(moon shot) innovations propel organizations forward.

We can debate the finer points of business definitions,

but the fact remains that in any industry where free

market economics prevail, innovation is a requirement for

survival and competitive advantage. Without innovation,

companies (and countries) will eventually decline. This

does not mean that companies must innovate on their own.

In certain industries and in some sectors, imitation and/

or outsourcing for innovation present very real options.

For instance, in biotechnology, companies invest in many

small, highly innovative research laboratories or specific

novel, experimental drugs within those cottage industries—

investing in joint venture partnerships and ultimately

purchasing the high-probability drug companies.

Companies need to embrace innovation as a primary

function, discipline, and organizational capability with

the same rigor applied to more traditional components

of business (i.e., finance, accounting, operations, human

capital, etc.).

Innovation isn’t something that should be taken lightly,

and there is much that can be learned from organizations

that have found success. We have identified seven keys

to unlock and lead innovation within organizations.

Clear leadership, authority, and accountability

provide guidance to enable measurable results for

an enterprise-wide pursuit of innovation. The role of

an organization’s top-level innovation leader could

be described with various titles: innovation architect,

vice president of innovation, lead innovation catalyst,

or something similar. This role could be a dedicated

position or could be the responsibility of a chief

operating officer, chief executive, or other executive

vice president. Our research and experiences clearly

mandate that a senior leader own the responsibility

and accountability to ensure optimized enterprise-

wide results for innovation efforts. Additionally,

innovation representatives or catalysts should exist,

embedded across all major functions or capabilities

in the organization. And, as Gary Hamel (author of

“The 5 Requirements of a Truly Innovative Company,”

Harvard Business Review, April 2015) emphasizes

in his research, all c-level and board members must

understand and be committed to the innovation

program, as it requires significant resources and

coordination to be successful.

Intuit, the financial software company, illustrates the

role of innovation catalysts. When CEO Scott Cook

recognized that he was not a visionary like Steve Jobs,

he sought a different strategy to drive innovation

throughout the organization.

Similarly, Proctor & Gamble (P&G) “deploys a cadre of

70 senior level employees around the world to help

identify promising adjacencies. These ‘technology

entrepreneurs,’ as the company calls them, are

responsible for researching a variety of sources,

including scientific journals and patent databases,

and for physically observing activities in the specific

markets in order to find new ideas that can build on

P&G’s core businesses.” (“Managing Your Innovation

Portfolio” by Bansi Nagji and Geoff Tuff, Harvard

Business Review, May 2015)

Coordinate Enterprise-Wide Leadership and Governance of Innovation

11

The role of dedicated research and development (R&D)

laboratories remains critical for innovative physical

product, manufacturing, and biotechnology companies

like 3M. While different in their physical construct and

locations from traditional R&D laboratories, innovation labs

provide a great organizational design solution, especially

for technology companies or in other industries where

digital innovation represents the highest and best use of

innovation investment.

Outposts in various geographies and/or regions and

communities of critical ideas sometimes deserve dedicated

people. Many leading innovative companies place key

entrepreneurs, data scientists, and leaders in innovation

hubs such as Silicon Valley or key stations of higher

education like Harvard, Stanford, and MIT.

Whirlpool successfully trained 15,000 employees and

dramatically increased innovative products and services, all

while reducing time to market.

The tasks of identifying key people inside the organization,

clarifying the specific processes and measures, and training

them with consistent innovation methodologies are all

important steps to ensure measurable outcomes. To be

certain, training all employees in the innovation imperatives

of an organization provides a powerful mechanism to

unlock novel ideas. Whirlpool successfully trained 15,000

employees and dramatically increased innovative products

and services, all while reducing time to market. (“The 5

Requirements of a Truly Innovative Company” by Gary

Hamel and Nancy Tennant, Harvard Business Review, April

2015)

Clear leadership, vision, processes, training, and

communication throughout the organization all create a

foundation for coordinated and measureable innovation.

Many organizations fail before they begin by failing to lead

innovation from the c-level.

When CEO Scott Cook recognized that

he was not a visionary like Steve Jobs,

he sought a different strategy to drive

innovation throughout the organization.

A common and shared definition of innovation

establishes the foundation and benchmark by which

all ideas will be created and measured. Creating a

common definition for innovation is critical to ensure

that an organization is working toward the same vision

and goal.

Recently, Whirlpool deployed a new enterprise-

wide innovation process, including training every

employee in the company on innovation. Prior to

the training, leaders worked diligently for several

months and determined that for a product or service

to be declared innovative, “it must be unique and

compelling to the consumer, create a competitive

advantage, sit on a migration path that can yield

further innovations, and provide consumers with more

value than anything else in the market.” This definition

became the cornerstone of the training curriculum to

inspire all employees to contribute ideas with specific

and aligned intent. (“The 5 Requirements of a Truly

Innovative Company” by Gary Hamel and Nancy

Tennant, Harvard Business Review, April 2015)

Create a Shared Definition of Innovation

13

The definition of innovation is then used to inform the

metrics to measure ideas:

• customer experience improvement rating

• gross margin

• return on invested capital (ROIC)

• total revenue

• number of innovations that reach the market in a

given period

• percentage of revenue derived from new products

and services

• margin gains related to specific innovations.

...leaders worked diligently for several months and determined that for a product or

service to be declared innovative, “it must be unique and compelling to the consumer,

create a competitive advantage, sit on a migration path that can yield further

innovations, and provide consumers with more value than anything else in the market.”

An organization that both formally and informally

rewards innovation is exponentially more likely to

successfully innovate.

A study found that corporate culture was a more

significant driver of radical innovation than labor,

capital, government, or national culture. In a

significant research study of 759 companies in 17

major markets, Gerard J. Telis, Jaideep C. Prabhu and

Rajesh K. Chandy found that corporate culture was

a more significant driver of radical innovation than

labor, capital, government, or national culture. The

importance of corporate culture goes even deeper, as

MIT’s Jay Rao and Joseph Weintraub identified three

people-focused elements of innovative culture, by

building on the research findings and major research

on “innovative culture” by Harvard, Booz & Company’s

Katzenbach Center, and the works of Charles

O’Reilly and Daniel Denison (“How Innovative Is Your

Company’s Culture?” MIT Sloan Management Review,

March 2013):

a. Values drive priorities, resource allocation, and

decisions. Innovative companies spent more on

innovative and entrepreneurial endeavors, promoting

creativity, and encouraging continuous learning.

b. Behaviors describe the way people act as it relates

to innovation. Innovative leaders provide a vision of

the future, show a willingness to end older, successful

product and service lines to reapply resources for

newer products and services, and demonstrate

willingness to gain consensus in the face of obstacles.

Innovative employees exhibit understanding of

the customer, grit, and doggedness to overcome

challenges in the face of financial constraints.

c. Climate is the “tenor” of the day-to-day life of

the team. The innovative companies in this study

demonstrated a climate that cultivates engagement

and enthusiasm, challenges people to take risks,

fosters learning, and encourages independent

thinking.

Foster a Culture of Innovation

15

The discretionary time of employees is one of the most

precious resources. 3M started their 15% initiative in

1948, in which all employees were encouraged to spend

15% of their work time pursuing their own innovative

projects (this was long before Google’s more well-known

20% time, which sparked such innovations as Google News,

Gmail and AdSense). For years, 3M has invested 6% of

its approximately $21.2 billion in revenue in innovation.

Former CEO William L. McKnight summed up the way to

ensure continuation of an innovative culture: “Hire good

people and let them do their job in their own ways. And

tolerate mistakes.”

Tim Brown, CEO of IDEO and the famous design thinking

guru, describes the ideal personality profile of an innovative

team member as follows (from “Design Thinking” by Tim

Brown, Harvard Business Review, June 2008):

a. Empathy - They can imagine the world from various

perspectives (e.g., current and future customers, colleagues,

clients, end users, etc.).

b. Integrative Thinking - They not only rely on analytical

processes (those that produce either/or choices) but also

exhibit the ability to see all of the salient—and sometimes

contradictory—aspects of a confounding problem and

create novel solutions that go beyond and radically improve

on existing alternatives. (See Roger Martin’s The Opposable

Mind: How Successful Leaders Win Through Integrative

Thinking.)

c. Optimism - They assume that no matter how challenging

the constraints of a given problem, at least one potential

solution is better than the existing alternatives.

d. Experimentalism - Significant innovations don’t come

from incremental tweaks. Design thinkers pose questions

and explore constraints in creative ways that proceed in

entirely new directions.

e. Collaboration - The increasing complexity of products,

services, and experiences has replaced the myth of the

lone creative genius with the reality of the enthusiastic

interdisciplinary collaborator. The best design thinkers don’t

simply work alongside other disciplines—many of them

have significant experience in more than one. Tim Brown

underscored this point by saying “At IDEO we employ

people who are engineers and marketers, anthropologists

and industrial designers, architects and psychologists.”

Steve Jobs, infamous CEO of Apple, once said, “Innovation

comes from people meeting up in the hallways or calling

each other at 10:30 at night with a new idea, or because

they realized something that shoots holes in how we’ve

been thinking about a problem. It’s ad hoc meetings of six

people called by someone who thinks he has figured out the

coolest new thing ever and who wants to know what other

people think.” (“The Seed of Apple’s Innovation,” Business

Week, October 2004)

Spaces and environment matter too. At Google, Apple,

and Facebook, offices embody the playful, fun, expansive,

collaborative, inclusive, beautiful spaces that are now

synonymous with “innovation.” Idea flow happens

when people feel safe, encouraged, rewarded, healthy,

empowered, autonomous, and together.

Culture prevails in any organization—whether it’s formal

or informal, intentional or accidental—and it can inspire or

suppress innovation.

Idea flow happens when people feel

safe, encouraged, rewarded, healthy,

empowered, autonomous, and together.

Companies need to be disciplined at

balancing their innovation portfolio

and also must take risks to find the

innovations that will deliver large

returns.

Venture capitalists manage portfolios of investment

funds, making high risk/high return bets on numerous

early-stage companies. They usually take board seats

and even implant key c-level and engineering leaders

in the companies. And they look at the expected return

of their entire portfolio, not just a single investment.

In other words, they don’t expect every bet to pay

off—but in aggregate, they expect the portfolio to pay

off. Most importantly, they measure current value

creation results and assess anticipated future results.

Many companies are shut down, restructured, or

taken over by venture capitalist investors. The idea

of modern portfolio management is rooted in risk

diversification strategy. The venture capitalists look

for overall portfolio performance versus putting all

of their eggs in one basket. Likewise, companies are

wise to include low- and high-risk investments in

their respective innovation portfolios. The aggressive

mindset for measuring and managing the portfolio

requires discipline.

As was mentioned earlier, Bansi Nagji and Geoff Tuff

published a perspective in the Harvard Business

Review in 2012 that showed specific allocations of

resources for each type, proven to provide a best

practice allocation as revealed by correlated share

price performance: 70% for core, 20% for adjacent

and 10% for transformational. The returns from each

category prove to be almost inverted: 10% from core,

20% from adjacent and 70% from transformational.

These metrics are averages and each individual

organization must determine their own best target

ratios.

Manage the Innovation Portfolio Like a Venture Capitalist

17

This means that companies need to be disciplined at

balancing their innovation portfolio and also must take risks

to find the innovations that will deliver large returns and

revenue streams going forward. Just like venture capitalists

looking for the next Google or Facebook to go public,

companies need to balance their investments in innovation

to find not just the near-term core and adjacent wins, but

also the next big thing that will be transformational to their

business.

Similarly, Proctor & Gamble builds portfolios with specific

innovation profiles. It uses sophisticated portfolio

management tools to help managers identify and kill the

least promising innovation projects and to double down

on the gainers. The tools also help create projections for

various elements: financial potential of an innovation,

the cost of human and capital investments required for

the innovation, anticipated customer adoption rates,

etc. Other qualitative metrics roll up into a scorecard,

including net present value calculations and risk adjusted

real-option models. The tools provide rank-ordered lists

of projects. P&G’s innovation leaders use the information

to instigate conversations with project leaders. Their point

of view is that the data is directionally helpful, but the

innovation journey is a dialog with lots of discussion before

shutting down a potential innovation. (“How P&G Tripled

Its Innovation Success Rate” by Bruce Brown and Scott

Anthony, Harvard Business Review, June 2011)

Funding for innovation projects should be borne by the

relevant business unit for all core and most adjacent

projects, but transformational projects should be funded

from a top-level group. It is important to consider that

the path to funding should not be constrained by typical

budget cycles, as the path to market and market-related or

customer-related timing is unpredictable. It bears repeating

that transformational or moon shot innovation efforts do

not fit neatly within a fiscal year.

Additionally, for transformational investments, it’s

important for companies to utilize rapid prototyping to

learn quickly and give employees permission to fail fast and

fail often. Given the large-scale investment required for

this category of innovation investing, companies are better

off cutting their losses if they can quickly determine that

the desired results with an initiative will not be delivered.

By failing fast, companies can move on to investments in

new areas, rather than becoming bogged down in the long

delivery cycles that can kill innovation.

Transformational or moon shot

innovation efforts do not fit neatly

within a fiscal year.

Let’s take a look at the role of design thinking as it

relates to innovation. Design thinking is a proven

technique for innovation—through teamwork,

empathy for the customers through direct observation

and interaction, rapid prototyping, and data-driven

testing. Gaining momentum from the intense focus

at Stanford’s Design School and from the proven

work from David M. Kelly, Stanford alum and

founder of IDEO, many Silicon Valley companies,

including Google, view the design thinking method

as foundational to progress. Design thinking begins

with a vision-first approach versus scientific method.

The distinction of this modern method of invention

and innovation can be explained as an approach more

similar to architectural design than scientific method.

In 1972, psychologist Bryan Lawson conducted

studies to understand the differences between

problem-focused scientists and solution-focused

architects. He learned that scientists use the scientific

method to analyze while architects synthesize. David

M. Kelley and Tim Brown of IDEO emphasize that

both analysis and synthesis are important in the

modern design thinking approaches.

Tim Brown defines the concept best: “Design thinking

is a human-centered approach to innovation that

draws from the designer’s toolkit to integrate the

needs of people, the possibilities of technology, and

the requirements of business success.”

Jon Kolko summarizes the approach:

“The Change. Increasingly, corporations and

professional services firms are working to create

design-centric cultures.

“The Reason. Many products, services, and processes

are now technologically complex. People are not

hardwired to deal well with high levels of complexity.

They need help.

“The Idea. People need their interactions with

technologies and other complex systems to be

intuitive and pleasurable. Empathy, experimentation,

Commit to Design Thinking

19

design smarts, and other qualities help create those kinds

of interactions. Those qualities need to spread from the

product design function to the whole organization.” (“Design

Thinking Comes of Age” by John Kolko, Harvard Business

Review, September 2015)

Google Ventures utilizes the Design Sprint, a one-week

intensive design approach chockfull of design thinking

elements. For example, in 2014, Google Ventures design

partner John Zeratsky helped design and prototype a robot

with the company Savioke to deliver items like toothbrushes

and bottles of water to hotel guests. Starwood Hotels then

tested the crude prototype to get real customer feedback.

Shortly after, the full-production version of the robot

became a reality and orders flooded in from many different

hotels.

Here are the key elements involved in Google Venture’s

five-day Design Sprint, as outlined by Jake Knapp in his

2016 book Sprint: How to Solve Big Problems and Test New

Ideas in Just Five Days:

Day 1: Map

The entire team will share what they know about the

problem at hand to help others understand the problem

from various vantage points.

Day 2: Sketch

The team will work individually to sketch a detailed solution

to the problem on paper.

Day 3: Decide

The team will converge to share solutions, focusing scope to

find the best solution to the problem, and set the blueprint

for prototypes to be created.

Day 4: Prototype

Quickly create one or more prototypes to be used to gather

insights.

Day 5: Test

Share the prototype with ‘real’ customers or end users, and

collect user data.

We use design sprints with great results. The key to

successful design sprints is to include the right multi-

disciplinary team. This cannot be underestimated. At the

core of design thinking is the bias toward a vision, working

with experts from various disciplines, moving quickly to

prototype, and testing with real customers.

The design sprint is one method related to design thinking.

The key to the power of design thinking rests in: a keen

focus on the future, empathy for the customer or user,

collaboration of a multi-disciplined teams, speed to

prototype, all while utilizing both analysis and synthesis.

Create a Radical Connection With Customers

The innovation journey begins, ends, and includes

along the way the protagonist of the story—the

customer. Empathy with the customer and anticipation

of the customer journey is central to innovation.

Thomas Edison invented the light bulb, and that is

amazing by itself. But he didn’t stop there. He knew

that he also needed to invent and build the electricity

distribution systems to make sure everyone could

enjoy the benefits of light.

The voice of the customer is one of the most important

sources to tap into in order to ideate and test new

innovations. Whether using focus groups, surveys,

crowd sourcing, mystery shopping, or a variety of

other techniques, gaining insights from customers to

fuel innovation is absolutely critical.

In some cases, companies have created special groups

of customers to include in the testing of innovations.

For example, eBay regularly utilizes its eBay Power

Sellers group to preview and test innovative

enhancements prior to a broader release. Many of

these users appreciate getting an early view into what

is coming and having the opportunity to shape the

results, given that it impacts their business. Testing

innovations with real customers is a critical part of the

innovation process.

There is nothing better than a real customer for

customer feedback. This may seem obvious, but in our

experience many companies substitute real customer

feedback with internal focus groups that try to imagine

what customers think. Take the story of publisher

Nigel Newton, who reviews book manuscripts for

potential publication. He handed a manuscript to his

8-year-old daughter. She loved what she read, which

is a good thing for the many millions of kids who would

later come to know and love the Harry Potter series.

What is fascinating is that eight other publishers had

21

already rejected the idea. None of them shared the

story with a child, so they all missed the involvement of a

customer.

Similarly, we recently worked with an industry-leading

company. With over 300,000 end-point delivery

destinations, they wanted to apply extreme prescriptive

analytics, eliminate left turns, and incorporate modern, real-

time inventory management methodology. The magnitude

of change was radical. So before any system design, we

began with weeklong deep dives with real customers

in several different geographic regions, showing them

extremely low-tech mock-ups of what the new processes

and services would look like. Our team of cross-functional

experts from different business units would compile the

information from the interviews in the hotel each night,

gleaning powerful insights. From those customer insights,

we modeled a business case based on reality. This provided

a budget framework from which to design, build, and

deploy the solutions—knowing ahead of time the market

share growth potential. The customers even became

excited about the effort and created powerful “pull” for the

adoption of the changes.

In our experience, involving customers early and often in

the project life cycle significantly increases the success of

the innovation design, implementation, and adoption.

“You’ve got to start with the customer experience and work backward to the technology…

I’ve made this mistake probably more than anybody else in this room… As we have

tried to come up with a strategy and a vision for Apple, it started with ‘What incredible

benefits can we give to the customer? Where can we take the customer?... I think that’s

the right path to take.”

Steve Jobs

Apple World Wide Developer Conference, 1997

The most innovative companies invest to increase

communication and collaboration in both internal and

external networks.

In the simplest terms, the organization must lead the

focus and strategy for innovation.

While both are important, research illustrates that the

internal networks and initiatives are more important.

This is due to the need for strategic direction and a

portfolio management approach for ideas. Without

this direction setting and measured approach, there

could be large numbers of uncoordinated innovation

initiatives and related investments deployed without

any knowledge of expected returns. In the simplest

terms, the organization must lead the focus and

strategy for innovation. Networks of c-level leaders

and innovation team members from all major functions

collaborate for better returns. Proctor & Gamble

illustrates the importance of this internal and external

network capability.

In 2002, Proctor & Gamble faced a dilemma—how to

continue to grow at 4-6% through organic growth.

At $70 billion, this growth target meant growing the

equivalent of a net new $4 billion company in one year.

P&G had to figure out how to exponentially increase

their innovation capacity and success rate. While in

the past most of the innovation came from internal

R&D among P&G’s 7,500 researchers and support

teams, the CEO, A.G. Lafley, challenged the leadership

Build Strong Internal and External Networks

In the simplest terms, the organization

must lead the focus and strategy for

innovation.

23

team: “We needed to change how we defined, and

perceived, our R&D organization—from 7,500 people

inside to 7,500 plus 1.5 million [external researchers

and entrepreneurs] outside, with a permeable boundary

between them. So P&G moved from a R&D to a Connect

& Develop or C&D model. The model works. Today, more

than 35% of our new products in market have elements that

originated from outside P&G, up from about 15% in 2000.

Our R&D activity has increased by 60%. Our innovation

success rate has more than doubled, while our cost of

innovation has fallen. R&D investment as a percentage of

sales is down from 4.8% in 2000 to 3.4% today.” (“Connect

and Develop: Inside Proctor & Gamble’s New Model for

Innovation” by Larry Huston and Nabil Sakkab, Harvard

Business Review, March 2006)

This model illustrates the importance of external innovation

networks. Different than outsourcing innovation, Connect

& Develop is P&G’s way of connecting internal teams with

external partners. Specifically, P&G has approximately 70

technology entrepreneurs around the world who lead the

development of coordinated top 10 local customer needs

lists, product adjacency maps, and technology briefs—all

defining the focused list of innovation categories. Next,

these internal P&G technology entrepreneurs meet with

university and industry researchers to gain clarity on the

types of skills, thought leaders, and sources with potential

to accelerate the completion of innovation projects.

The technology entrepreneurs conduct rigorous data

mining of scientific literature, patent database review,

attend product conferences, and research online. These

technology entrepreneurs are part investigator, part

connector, and part inventor—generalists with a mind for

connecting the dots and identifying patterns. They work

out of six hubs: China, India, Japan, Western Europe, Latin

America, and the United States. This enables P&G to focus

on the unique customer needs as well as tap into the local

talent pools.

Partnerships with external teams, companies, individuals,

and universities result in prototypes. Internal innovation

teams then screen the prototypes. The technology

entrepreneurs connect the business unit innovation team

members with the external teams as prototypes are scored

and ranked in the continue-to-pursue categories. Once

business unit directors inside P&G commit to pursue

the product for development and market testing, P&G’s

External Business Development group gets involved to

ensure proper licensing of the intellectual property.

No amount of idea hunting outside will pay off if, internally,

the organization isn’t behind the program.

The important lesson is that “no amount of idea hunting

outside will pay off if, internally, the organization

isn’t behind the program. Once an idea gets into the

development pipeline, it needs R&D, manufacturing,

market research, marketing, and other functions pulling

for it. But, as you know, until very recently P&G was deeply

centralized and internally focused. For Connect & Develop

to work, we’ve had to nurture an internal culture change

while developing systems for making connections. And that

has involved not only opening the company’s floodgates to

ideas from the outside but actively promoting internal idea

exchanges as well.” (“Connect and Develop: Inside Proctor &

Gamble’s New Model for Innovation” by Larry Huston and

Nabil Sakkab, Harvard Business Review, March 2006)

Through connecting the internal and external innovation

networks, P&G increased external sourced innovation from

10% to 50% between 2001 and 2008. During this time, the

company launched Tide Pods, Crest White Strips, and the

Swiffer.

No amount of idea hunting outside will

pay off if, internally, the organization

isn’t behind the program.

24

Closing

Enhanced strategies to lead innovation provide significant

opportunities for all organizations—big and small. C-level

leadership and commitment, along with business unit and/

or business function leadership provides the best approach

to instill internal initiation and prioritization of innovation

pursuits. The organization benefits when leaders provide

a clear definition of innovation, as this will provide the

foundation for all measures of progress, prioritization,

and success. Creating a culture of innovation is possible

by selecting and training people to harness empathy and

other critical values, behaviors, and climate. Commitment to

design thinking optimizes speed to market and relevance to

customers. Managing the innovation portfolio like a venture

capitalist injects rigor and measurement to prioritize at

a macro and micro level, ensuring the achievement of

revenue and customer experience goals. Radical connection

with customers throughout the journey produces the

most rewarding insights. And, finally, integrated internal

and external networks increase the volume, creativity, and

efficiency of innovative ideas and related products and

services.

Innovation is a uniquely human gift. The frameworks help,

but they truly dim in comparison to the beauty of the

natural human potential unlocked when we engage the

childlike, the creative, the dreams of what could be just

around the corner. We need to keep exploring, keep pushing

the boundaries. We need to go to Mars and beyond.

This short study of innovation, which is

intended to identify and share best practices

related to innovation, is an ongoing initiative,

fueled by several key fountains of knowledge:

our own client experiences and related

research; external research in academic

journals; discussions with professionals at

other firms; the study of the engineering

history of NASA’s Apollo space program; the

Google Ventures approach to Design Sprints;

IDEO and Stanford Design School; and

several books focused on historic innovations

in science, aeronautics, and medicine.

25

Credera is a full-service management consulting, user experience design, and technology solutions firm.

We work with Fortune 500 companies, medium-sized businesses, government organizations and clients across a broad range

of industries, and we give them the experience and perspective to solve today’s toughest business and technology challenges. 

Credera delivers solutions to clients across North America.  Founded in 1999, we currently have office locations in Dallas,

Houston, and Denver.

F I R M H I G H L I G H T S

About the Authors

Scott Covington, Vice President & Partner

Scott Covington is a Partner at Credera and strategy advisor to many client executives. Scott leads

the Customer Experience Forum. Covington began his management consultant career with Andersen

Consulting over 20 years ago, focused on strategic transformations with Fortune 100 clients in the U.S. and

Europe. Prior to Credera, Covington was COO in a private equity firm. Covington co-founded, and led as

CEO, two VC-backed technology companies. He is a graduate of Texas A&M University and completed the

Stanford Finance and Accounting executive program (FANFE). scovington@credera.com

Justin Bell, President & Partner

Justin is president and a partner at Credera. He is also the leader of Credera’s Digital Strategic Forum. Bell

has a passion for helping clients utilize technology to improve their customer experience and grow their

business. Throughout his career, Bell has led many strategic and innovative engagements for great clients

including American Airlines, Hilton, GameStop, Pep Boys, Neiman Marcus, The Container Store, National

Geographic, and HomeAdvisor. Bell graduated from Oklahoma State University.

Jake Carter, Principal

Jake Carter is a Senior Manager in the Management Consulting practice at Credera, where he focuses on

product and marketing strategy. He has 10 years of technology experience, including work for both Google

and Zynga. Prior to joining Credera, Carter worked at Google, where he worked with the Google Apps,

Google Enterprise, Online Operations, and People Operations teams. Carter holds an MBA with distinction

from the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University, as well as a bachelor’s degree with

honors from Northwestern University.

Gabe Knapp, Principal

Gabe Knapp is a Principal with Credera and has over 20 years of experience in consulting and industry,

spanning various industries including high technology, consumer and industrial products, financial services,

hospitality, retail, and energy. Knapp specializes in customer and marketing strategy, digital strategy,

customer experience, and customer loyalty. Prior to joining Credera, Knapp worked for Deloitte Consulting/

Monitor Group in their strategy practice serving Fortune 500 clients. Knapp holds a bachelor’s degree in

business administration from Trinity University in San Antonio and an MBA from Harvard Business School.

Credera possesses a unique combination of deep technical expertise with extensive business backgrounds. Our Innovation,

Analytics and Owner’s Mindset separates us from our competitors. Our rigorous recruiting and selection processes provide top

talent at every position – all modeling our core values of Integrity, Humility, Professionalism and Excellence.

26

1. A Brief Discussion of Disruptive Innovation

Disruptive innovation is a phrase first defined by Harvard professor Clayton M. Christensen in 1995. He defined disruptive innovation such that disruption “describes a process whereby a smaller company with fewer resources is able to successfully challenge established incumbent businesses. Specifically, as incumbents focus on improving their products and services for their most demanding customers, they exceed the needs of some segments and ignore the needs of others. Entrants that prove disruptive begin by successfully targeting those overlooked segments, gaining a foothold by delivering more-suitable functionality at a lower price. Incumbents, chasing higher profitability in more-demanding segments, tend not to respond vigorously. Entrants then move upmarket, delivering the performance that incumbents’ mainstream customers require, while preserving the advantages that drove their early success. When mainstream customers start adopting the entrants’ offerings in volume, disruption has occurred.” (“What is Disruptive Innovation?” by Clayton M. Christensen, Harvard Business Review, December 2015)

Andrew A. King, professor of business administration at Dartmouth’s Tuck School of Business, criticized Christensen’s approach. Specifically, King studied and statistically argued that Christensen’s theory proved to have very limited predictive power. King’s substantial analysis can be found in the MIT Sloan Management Review’s Fall 2015 issue, “How Useful Is the Theory of Disruptive Innovation” by Andrew A. King and Baljir Baatartogtokh.

While the debate to determine what is truly “disruptive innovation” versus incremental, moon shot, or other types of innovation is interesting, it is mostly academic.

2. Sample Measurements for Gauging the Success of Innovation Efforts

a. Strategic• Customer purchase correlated to innovation projects.• Customer satisfaction rating attributed to innovation

projects.• Innovation team members’ perception of c-level

commitment to innovation.• Market share gains correlated to innovation.• Percentage of enterprise revenue invested in innovation.

b. Process• Number of innovations in a fiscal year.• Speed from identification of innovation to release of

prototype.• Speed from prototype to full product/service.• Percentage of projects with customer interaction in the

first stage of an innovation project.• Number of prototypes needed to get to the final solution

(trend declining over time).• Patents filed.• Patents granted.

c. Culture• Percentage of employees rating “culture encourages

innovation.”• Employee innovation involvement (total involved/total).• Collective satisfaction rating from innovation team

members about innovation results.

d. Financial• Percentage of sales from products or services released in

the last 24 months.• Dollar and resource allocation discipline (70%, 20%,

10%).• Return on invested capital (ROIC) related to innovation

projects.• Tax dollars reclaimed through R&D tax relief.

Appendix

27

3. Innovation Labs Model

Our practitioners favor a monetization process that revolves around the innovation labs model. In this approach, the enterprise strategy and related top-level business objectives inform the innovation strategy led by an innovation council. A majority of the lab team’s work will stem from the innovation council’s initiatives, with a minority from other sources (including employees at large, customer experience teams, external alliance partners, etc.).

The innovation labs team will evaluate and prioritize a portfolio of innovation initiatives based on core, adjacent, or transformational categories. Each innovation project will go through three stages: prioritize and plan, prototype and test, and iterate and incubate. The projects that successfully make it through testing and are rated as high-probability projects (related to their customer feedback, effort and return projections, etc.) will be transitioned to operations-oriented business units, whereby an innovation architect (embedded in the business unit) will partner with the business to implement the solution (products and/or services) at scale.

The innovation architect assigned to the project works with the business unit to scope the project and estimate the effort and realistic financial expectations. While these are initial estimates, the information is stored and tracked to create a full life cycle view of ideas from original innovation council through prototyping and then on through to actual results. This provides a complete feedback mechanism to identify opportunities for improvements in efficiency and alignment to enterprise strategy and objectives.

28

Books

Johnson, Steven. Where Good Ideas Come From: The Natural History of Innovation. New York: Riverhead, 2010. Print.

Keeley, Larry, Ryan Pikkel, Brian Quinn, and Helen Walters. Ten Types of Innovation: The Discipline of Building Breakthroughs. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2013. Print.

Kelley, Tom, and Jonathan Littman. The Ten Faces of Innovation: IDEO’s Strategies for Beating the Devil’s Advocate & Driving Creativity throughout Your Organization. New York: Currency/Doubleday, 2005. Print.

Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: U of Chicago, 2012. Print.

Rogers, Everett M. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free, 1983. Print.

Utterback, James M. Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation: How Companies Can Seize Opportunities in the Face of Technological Change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School, 1994. Print.

Articles

Fallows, James. “The 50 Greatest Breakthroughs Since the Wheel.” The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, Nov. 2013. Web. 31 Aug. 2016. <http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/11/innovations-list/309536/>.

Rao, Jay, and Joseph Weintraub. “How Innovative Is Your Company’s Culture?” MIT Sloan Management Review RSS. MIT, 13 Mar. 2013. Web. 01 Sept. 2016.

Price, Robert M. “Infusing Innovation into Corporate Culture.” Organizational Dynamics 36.3 (2007): 320-28. Harvard Key. Harvard University. Web.

Brier, David. “What Is Innovation?” Fast Company. Fast Company & Inc., 01 Nov. 2013. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <http://www.fastcompany.com/3020950/leadership-now/what-is-innovation>.

Huston, Larry, and Nabil Sakkab. “Connect and Develop: Inside Procter & Gamble’s New Model for Innovation.” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 31 July 2014. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/2006/03/connect-and-develop-inside-procter-gambles-new-model-for-innovation>.

Allis, Ryan. “The 12 Greatest Innovators of All Time - The Startup Guide - Creating a Better World Through Entrepreneurship.” The Startup Guide Creating a Better World Through Entrepreneurship. The Start Up Guide, n.d. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <http://startupguide.com/world/greatest-innovators/>.

McDonough, William, and Michael Braungart. “The NEXT Industrial Revolution.” The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, n.d. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1998/10/the-next-industrial-revolution/304695/>.

Hamel, Gary, and Nacy Tennant. “The 5 Requirements of a Truly Innovative Company.” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 27 Apr. 2015. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/2015/04/the-5-requirements-of-a-truly-innovative-company>.

Satell, Greg. “Want to Do Corporate Innovation Right? Go Inside Google Brain.” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 01 June 2016. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/2016/06/want-to-do-corporate-innovation-right-go-inside-google-brain>.

Kolko, Jon. “Design Thinking Comes of Age.” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 01 Sept. 2015. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/product/recommended/an/R1509D-PDF-ENG?referral=02527&cm_vc=rr_item_page.articles>.

Brown, Tim. “Design Thinking (HBR Bestseller).” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 01 June 2008. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/product/recommended/an/R0806E-PDF-ENG?referral=02542&cm_vc=rr_item_page.rr1>.

Christensen, Clayton M. “Disruptive Innovation Explained: Is Your Organization Prepared?” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 29 June 2016. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/webinar/2016/06/disruptive-innovation-explained-is-your-organization-prepared>.

“Rethinking the IT/Business Partnership to Drive Digital Innovation - SPONSOR CONTENT FROM ORACLE.” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 03 May 2016. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/sponsored/2016/04/rethinking-the-itbusiness-partnership-to-drive-digital-innovation>.

Monterde, Stephan. “How We Think About Innovation at Cisco.” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 08 June 2016. Web. 1 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/2016/06/how-we-think-about-innovation-at-cisco>.

Goetz, Kaomi. “How 3M Gave Everyone Days Off and Created an Innovation Dynamo.” Co.Design. Fast Company & Inc., 01 Feb. 2011. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <http://www.fastcodesign.com/1663137/how-3m-gave-everyone-days-off-and-created-an-innovation-dynamo>.

Sources

29

Narsalay, Raghav, Jitendra Kavathekar, and David Light. “A Hands-Off Approach to Open Innovation Doesn’t Work.” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 03 May 2016. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/2016/05/a-hands-off-approach-to-open-innovation-doesnt-work>.

Govindarajan, Vijay. “The Three-Box Solution: A Strategy for Leading Innovation.” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 26 Apr. 2016. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/product/the-three-box-solution-a-strategy-for-leading-innovation/15029E-KND-ENG>.

“Business Model Innovation in Emerging Markets: New Opportunities and Challenges.” Harvard Business Review Analytic Services (n.d.): n. pag.Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 2011. Web. 1 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/resources/pdfs/tools/17129_HBR_Qatar_White%20Paper_FNL.pdf>.

Taylor, Bill. “Please, Can We All Just Stop.” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 23 July 2014. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/2012/05/please-can-we-all-just-stop-innovating>.

Brunswicker, Sabine. “Open Innovation Not Fad But Phenomenon.” LinkedIn Slide Share. LinkedIn, 9 Oct. 2013. Web. <http://www.slideshare.net/christophervoeglein/open-innovation-not-a>.

Nagji, Bansi, and Geoff Tuff. “Managing Your Innovation Portfolio.” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 19 May 2015. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/2012/05/managing-your-innovation-portfolio>.

Pisano, Gary P. “You Need an Innovation Strategy.” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 01 June 2015. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/product/you-need-an-innovation-strategy/R1506B-PDF-ENG?cm_sp=Article-_-Links-_-Buy+PDF>.

“The+worlds+most+innovation+companies+2016 - Google Search.”The+worlds+most+innovation+companies+2016 - Google Search. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=the%2Bworlds%2Bmost%2Binnovation%2Bcompanies%2B2016&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8>.

Christensen, Clayton M., Michael E. Raynor, and Rory McDonald. “What Is Disruptive Innovation?” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 01 Dec. 2015. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/2015/12/what-is-disruptive-innovation>.

King, Andrew A., and Baljir Baatartogtokh. “How Useful Is the Theory of Disruptive Innovation?” MITSloan Management Review (2015): 121-31.MIT Sloan Management Review RSS. MIT. Web. <http://ilp.mit.edu/media/news_articles/smr/2015/57114.pdf>.

Jain, Vani. “Innovation Without Borders: Six Best Practices to Improve Innovation Success Rates.” Innovation Management. Innovation Management.se, 23 June 2015. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2015/06/17/innovation-without-borders-six-best-practices-to-improve-innovation-success-rates/>.

Marion, Tucker J., and Sebastian K. Fixson. “The 4 Main Ways to Innovate in a Digital Economy.” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 27 June 2016. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/2016/06/the-4-main-ways-to-innovate-in-a-digital-economy>.

Brown, Bruce, and Scott Anthony. “How P&G Tripled Its Innovation Success Rate.” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Publishing, 07 Oct. 2014. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://hbr.org/2011/06/how-pg-tripled-its-innovation-success-rate&cm_sp=Article-_-Links-_-End%20of%20Page%20Recirculation>.

Knapp, Jake. “How Savioke Built A Robot Personality In 5 Days.” Co.Design. Fast Company & Inc., 03 Mar. 2016. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://www.fastcodesign.com/3057075/how-savioke-labs-built-a-robot-personality-in-5-days>.

Videos

Brown, Tim. “Tales of Creativity and Play.” TED Talks. TED Conferences, 2008. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://www.ted.com/talks/tim_brown_on_creativity_and_play?language=en#t-1033846>.

ProjectHappyWay. “Best Ted Talks 2015 - The Secret of Innovation - Take Control of Your Life.” YouTube. YouTube, 01 May 2015. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i48iYHQwUBw>.

TEDtalksDirector. “Where Good Ideas Come From | Steven Johnson | TED Talks.” YouTube. YouTube, 21 Sept. 2010. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0af00UcTO-c>.

“The Design Sprint.” GV. GV, n.d. Web. 01 Sept. 2016. <http://www.gv.com/sprint/>.

D A L L A S | D E N V E R | H O U S T O N

WE KEEP OUR PROMISESOur clients hire us to own their toughest challenges. They retain us because we keep our promises.

C R E D E R A . C O M

GET IN TOUCH

Has this paper been helpful? Need additional information on our

services? Please reach out and let us know how we can help: