Introduction
Taking
any good idea forward relies on all sorts of inputs from different people and
perspectives.
The
ways knowledge actually flows around an innovation project are complex and
interactive, woven together in a kind of ‘social spaghetti’ where different
people talk to each other in different ways, more or less frequently, and about
different ways.
The
management of this ‘knowledge spaghetti’ within an organization is essential.
Recent
years have seen an explosion of interest in ‘knowledge management’ and
attention has focused on mechanisms to enable better flows, e.g. communities of
practice, gatekeepers &, recently, social network analysis
Setting-up a learning networks
Learning matters and it can be
enabled through the use of networks. The big question is one of how to begin
that process. Some of the key questions which need to be address in setting up
your network:
a.
Who is it for?
b.
What is it for?
c.
What will be learned?
d.
What type of learning will be involved?
e.
What shape should the network have?
f.
What mechanisms for learning will be used?
g.
What resources are available
a. Who is it for?
The first step is to identify who are the target learners and what are
their particular needs. What are the particular problems confronting them
individually and collectively which make it important for them to learn, and
what are the particular characteristics of this grouping which might influence
the design and operation of the network?
b. What is it for?
The issue here is to ensure clarity about what the network’s purpose is.
Without this there is a real risk that it will quickly become seen as a
‘talking shop’ which accomplishes little – and people will drift away. A good
way to clarify the purpose is to construct a statement of purpose – a bit like
a mission statement – which sets out for everyone the key points about why the
network has come into being.
c. What learning agenda?
An important issue in any kind of learning is to make sure that the task
is broken down into manageable chunks. It is no good saying ‘I want to learn to
be a better person’ – we need to break this down – for example ‘ I want to
learn to be more effective at communicating’ would lead us to activities around
these skills whereas ‘I want to learn to be faster at running’ would lead to a
different set of activities. The more focused the target, the easier it is to
construct learning mechanisms and inputs for them.
A second important point is associated with
this definition stage; if we don’t know what we want to learn, how will we know
if we have learned it? The sharper the definition, the easier it becomes put
measures of achievement in place. This is important in terms of motivating and
sustaining learning in the long term.
d. What type of learning?
This is about the challenges that might pose
for people in the network. At one level learning can take place through simple
information transfer which requires minor modification of the way the firm does
something. An example here would be communicating an update to a set of
standard procedures in purchasing or tendering. There is learning here but it
does not pose much of a challenge to the firm, can be quickly absorbed and
primarily affects the day-to-day operations of the firm..
e. What shape should the network
have?
Networks can be set up in a number of
different configurations and it is important to try and match the shape to the
needs identified above. If the task is mainly one of ‘broadcasting’ –
communicating information of an operational type to a range of firms who will
absorb and act on it, then some simple form of ‘star’ model will suffice. But
if there is a need for interchange, for sharing ideas and experiences, then
some form of wheel is needed. If the network faces challenging strategic
learning then it is likely that some central co-ordination and facilitation
will be important – leading to a ‘hub & spokes’ model.
f. What mechanisms for learning?
One of the most significant points to
emerge in the research is that few organizations engaged in trying to set up
and run learning networks make use of an explicit model of learning.
. What shape should the network
have?
Networks can be set up in a number of different configurations and it is
important to try and match the shape to the needs identified above. If the task
is mainly one of ‘broadcasting’ – communicating information of an operational
type to a range of firms who will absorb and act on it, then some simple form
of ‘star’ model will suffice. But if there is a need for interchange, for
sharing ideas and experiences, then some form of wheel is needed. If the
network faces challenging strategic learning then it is likely that some
central co-ordination and facilitation will be important – leading to a ‘hub
& spokes’ model.
What mechanisms for learning?
One of the most significant points to
emerge in the research is that few organizations engaged in trying to set up
and run learning networks make use of an explicit model of learning.
Learning cycle
There are five components of
interest; learning is seen as taking place when there is:
• Motivation to enter the cycle
• Experience
• Reflection
• Conceptualisation
• Experiment
g. What resources do we have to
support learning?
The last question in our design and planning is about resources – what
do we have available and what do we have access to support the kind of learning
network we have in mind. For simple networks dealing with operational learning
the activity can be managed on a part-time basis, but as we move towards more
complex and strategic learning models so the need for active facilitation and
co-ordination increases.
In general the richer the variety of resources
available to the network the more chance there is that members will learn
effectively. For this reason it is important to do a preliminary audit of
available resources; the chart on the next slide list some questions to help
with this..
Innovation Networks
•A network is a complex,
interconnected group or system, and networking involves using that arrangement
to accomplish particular tasks.
•A
network can influence the actions of its members in two ways:
– Through
the flow and sharing of information within the networks.
– Through
differences in the position of actors in the network, which cause power and
control imbalances.
•Networks
can be tight or loose, depending on the quantity (number), quality (intensity)
and type (closeness to core activities) of the interaction or links.
• Networks
are appropriate where the benefits of co-specialization, sharing of joint
infrastructure & standards and other network externalities outweigh the
costs of network governance and maintenance.
•Where
there are high transaction costs involved in purchasing technology, a network
approach may be more appropriate than a market model, and where uncertainty
exists, a network may be superior to full integration or acquisition.
• Different
types of network may present different opportunities for learning, in a closed
network a company seeks to develop proprietary standards through scale
economies and other actions, and thereby lock customers and other related
companies into its network.
•Virtual
innovation networks are beginning to emerge, based on firms that are connected
via internet/intranet and exchange information within a business relationship
to create value. To date such virtual networks are most common in supply chain
and customer order automation.
•Innovation
networks have ‘emergent properties’ – i.e. the potential for the whole to be
greater than the sum of its parts.
•Being
in effective innovation can deliver wide range of benefits e.g. getting access
to different and complementary knowledge sets, reducing risks by sharing them,
accessing new markets and technologies and otherwise pooling complementary
skills and assets.
•Innovation
is about taking risks and deploying what are often resources on projects which
may not succeed. Networking helps to spread this risk.
•Long-lasting
innovation networks can create the capability to ride out major waves of change
in the technological and economic environment.
•At
its simplest networking happens in an informal way when people get together and
share ideas as a by-product of their social and work interactions.
•idea
of the different ways in which such ‘engineered’ networks can be configured to
help with the innovation process.
Networks at the start-up
• Innovation
is about taking risks and deploying what are often resources on projects which
may not succeed. Networking helps to spread this risk.
•Long-lasting
innovation networks can create the capability to ride out major waves of change
in the technological and economic environment.
•At
its simplest networking happens in an informal way when people get together and
share ideas as a by-product of their social and work interactions.
•an
idea of the different ways in which such ‘engineered’ networks can be
configured to help with the innovation process.
Networks on the inside
• Many
of the knowledge elements within the organisation is unconnected.
•Its’
back to spaghetti model of innovation – how to ensure that people get to talk
to others and share and build on each other’s ideas.
•
Research
by Tom Allen on the importance of social networks, technological gatekeeper,
and 30 years later we are seeing widespread interest in communities of
practice, social networking and other mechanisms designed to build on these
insights.
Networks on the outside
Chsbrough’s
principles of open innovation:
•
Not
all the smart people work for you.
•
External
ideas can help create value, but it takes internal R&D to claim a portion
of that value for you.
•
It
is better to build a better business model than to get to market first.
•
If
you make the best use of internal and external ideas, you will win.
•
Not
only should you profit from others’ use of your intellectual property, you
should also buy others IP whenever it advances your own business model.
•
Expand
R&D to include knowledge generation & brokering
Chsbrough’s
principles of open innovation:
•
Not
all the smart people work for you.
•
External
ideas can help create value, but it takes internal R&D to claim a portion
of that value for you.
•
It
is better to build a better business model than to get to market first.
•
If
you make the best use of internal and external ideas, you will win.
•
Not
only should you profit from others’ use of your intellectual property, you
should also buy others IP whenever it advances your own business model.
•
Expand
R&D to include knowledge generation & brokering
Learning networks
•
Experience
and research suggests that shared learning can help deal with some of the
barriers to learning that individual firms might face.
•
A
key element in shared learning is the active participation of others in the
process of challenge and support.
•
Learning
is often involved as a ‘by-product’ of network activities, for example,
emerging through exchange of views or through shared attempts at problem
solving.
•
It
is also possible to see learning as the primary purpose around which a network
is build: this concept of a learning network can be expressed as ‘a network
formally set up for the primary purpose of increasing knowledge’.
Networks into the unknown
•
Long-term
relationships are recognized as powerful positive resources for incremental
innovation, but under some circumstances the ties that bind may become the ties
that blind.
• E.g.
Christensen disruptive theory shows that, when new markets emerge they do so at
the fringe of existing ones and are often easy to ignore and dismiss as not
being relevant. Under these conditions organizations need a different approach
to managing innovation – much more exploratory, and engaged in developing new
networks.
• Challenges
facing firms building new networks can be broken into two: identifying the
relevant new partner; and learning how to work with them.
Four generic approaches
•It
is like partnership with a three-stage recipe process: finding, forming and
performing.
•Finding
refers to the breadth of search that is conducted.
•Forming
refers to the attitude of prospective partner. How likely is the link-up and
what are the advantages or barriers.
•
Zone
1: represents the relatively straightforward challenge of creating new networks
with potential partners that are both easy to find and keen to interact.
•
Zone
2: the emphasize is on new network partners. The barriers here are typically
geographically, ethnic and institutional, and the challenge is to locate the
appropriate organizations from among many prospective partners.
•
Zone
3: is where the potential partners are easy to find but may be reluctant to
engage. This might occur for ideological reasons, or because of institutional
or demographic barriers.
•
Zone
4: potential partners are neither easily identified nor necessarily keen to
engage.
Managing innovation networks
•The
rise of networking, the emergence of small-firm clusters, the growing use of open
innovation principles and the globalization of knowledge production and
application are all indicators of the move to what Rothwell called a fifth-generation
innovation model.
•This
has a number of implications for the ways in which we deal with the practical
organization and management of the process.
•Here,
we are interested in two themes:
•Configuring
innovation networks
•Learning
to manage innovation networks
Configuring innovation networks
•Operating
an innovation networks depends heavily on the type of network and the purpose
it is set up to achieve.
•positions
them in terms of:
–
How
radical the innovation target is with respect to current innovation activity.
–
The
similarity of the participating firm
•Zone
1: we have firms with a broadly similar orientaion working on tactical
innovation issues.
•Zone
2: activities might involve players from a sector working to explore and create
new product or process concepts. E.g. the emerging biotechnology /
pharmaceutical networking around frontier developments and the need to look for
interesting connections and synthesis between these adjacent sectors.
•Zone
3 and 4: the players are highly differential and bring different key pieces of
knowledge to the party. Their risks in disclosing can be high so ensuring
careful IP management and establishing ground rules will be crucial.
Learning to manage innovation networks
The challenges for innovation networks include:
–
How
to manage something we don’t own or control
–
How
to see system-level effects not narrow self-interests
–
How
to build trust and shared risk taking without tying the process up in
contractual red tape.
–
How
to avoid free riders and information spillovers.
•
Its
new game and one in which a new set of management skills becomes important.
•
Innovation
networks can be broken down into three stages of life cycle.
