Yale Fox is a DJ and nightclub sociologist living and working between Las Vegas and New York City. In 2010, while working towards his PhD at the University of Toronto, Yale was contacted by a prominent Las Vegas nightclub – one of the highest rated in the world. So began Yale Fox’s transition from professional student to nightclub experience guru. This year, Yale received a TED Fellowship for his research on how a customer’s behaviors within a system (the nightclub) are influenced by the DJ’s repertoire of song selection – as well as other factors (flashing lights, wait times, architecture, the staff, other patrons and the unholy alchemy of Red Bull and vodka).

Yale Fox

His company, the 194 Group, is part research lab, part experiential branding firm and part talent agency – representing an impressive roster of DJs and party hosts. For Yale, the live booking aspects of the business are more a networking tool and a signifier of their coolness equity, “when (a potential client) asks, ‘how do we know that you guys know what’s hot in music?’ Well our DJs are playing the hottest nightclubs in the world.” The talent agency maintains their presence in the nightclubs, and Yale’s thesis papers provide a theoretical grounding for their services, but “we’re a marketing firm,” he asserts, “enhancing brand experience through music.” The 194 Group refers to 194 dB, the loudest sound pressure level a human ear can perceive without being damaged – and a double entendre suggesting the Group’s ability to amplify a brand through music.

Yale’s business partner Shez Mehra (DJ Wristpect), is a world-class DJ with a b-school vernacular and sensibility, who throws around phrases like “end-user-focused party-rocking.” Shez explains that there is often a conflict between what the client wants and what the customer wants, “A lot of times, the executives from a brand, the promoters or the venue owner, will want to dictate how we should play.” For Shez, mixing songs for the owner of the club, or for the client, would be the DJ equivalent of designing your customer experience around the disposition of the share- holder. It may please him in the short-term, but ultimately goes against his best interests. Of course, both the relationship with end-user and with the client needs to be managed. The latter requires a certain level of trust. “The client has one goal,” says Shez. “It’s either to sell alcohol or to spread the message about their product or service to the people in the venue. We do what we do to resonate with the end-user. Once they trust us to do that, they see it unfold in front of their eyes. They see the vibe. They see the sales and they see people leaving happily with their merch and talking about their experience.”

DJ Wristpect

For Research in Motion, 194 collaborated with Maritz to architect “BBM the DJ,” a series of experiential events to launch the BlackBerry Torch. The parties, exclusively for influencers – celebrities, athletes, bloggers and executives – as well as for sales reps from various retailers and wireless carriers, were designed to get the right people excited about the product. Attendees were given a Torch upon arrival, and could add an account that would allow them to literally BBM their requests to the DJ. A giant television monitor, dressed as a BlackBerry, displayed the requests, at which point the DJ was tasked to play as many of the requests as possible while maintaining the flow of the night. Shez characterizes this task, the improvisational element of creating a customer experience, as, “catering to the situation,” a notion that applies to many business spaces outside of the nightclub.

While Yale’s research papers are distributed and discussed within the 194 Group in the form of white papers and internal memos – both Yale and Shez are quick to point out that competence in moving dance floors is only teachable to a certain point. “Its hard to plan for,” Shez tells me. “In the BlackBerry Tours across North America, every city was completely different. What worked in New York didn’t work in Boston. You have to trust your talent to get into the psyche of the crowd.”

A recent 194 Group signee, DJ Mensa who also happens to have a background in psychology and marketing, adds that DJing is like creating any number of other customer experiences: “You say something with a song. Hopefully the crowd responds. Then you say something with another song and hopefully it perpetuates the conversation. I’ve always considered DJing a customer service. Develop a vibe that will hopefully peak at the right time.”

DJ Mensa

Robert Bolton is a writer at Idea Couture, a global strategic innovation and experience design firm. He is based in Toronto, Canada.

This Article has been taken from The Customer Experience Issue (Issue #3, Fall 2011) of M/I/S/C/ Magazine – a magazine dedicated to design thinking and innovation available in over 25 countries. To purchase a digital copy of the full issue and for other issues please click HERE.

Lets begin with a short comparison of the customer experience of two mainstream news networks offering free video content online. One an incumbent in the N.A. market the other an interloper of sorts.

When I want to glance at the mainstream news from south of the border I click towards CNN. Apart from their lack of geopolitical coverage – they do have a considerable amount of bite size clips of news from the United States and around the world to choose from. There is no consistent ability to watch a live stream of their main network channels – only on special occasions like presidential addresses or when Anderson Cooper posts on a disaster zone for ratings. Most annoyingly – and this is where they loose major points in my book – is when selecting or clicking upon the bite size video clips, each one is preceded by an ad that you cannot skip – each time – often the same ad over and over again. This is a serious pain point. In addition to this, there are an insane amount of banner ads that take over the entire screen – and I find myself wondering if I’m watching CNN or Capital One presenting the news. Whatever it is, I don’t trust it and I don’t like it. This is a completely negative customer experience – and there is a less than positive brand association for all parties involved.

Clicking over to Al Jazeera (the interloper) I’m able to watch a live stream or feed of their main English news channel – just like watching cable TV. If I choose to browse other stories there are no captive advertisements presented prior to accessing the video clips – refreshingly there are no obnoxious banner ads framing everything, confusingly pushing products and services at me. Just the news as represented and reported by Al Jazeera. The experience is simple, positive and refreshing. I recognize that they are not making me pay for the content in anyway. While I assume and even anticipate this may be an acquisition scheme at play – I go back time and time again and rarely visit CNN’s site anymore.

Netflix versus torrents versus youtube versus Justin.tv

While I don’t have cable TV, I also choose not to pay for content services like Netflix. Due to misaligned content and copyright laws here in Canada, we cannot access the full catalogue available elsewhere. This fragmentation reassures me that I will not have the same customer experience as my neighbors to the south. I choose to wait and see.

Torrents are a free, relatively convenient and a somewhat shady alternative that promises me a broader spectrum of content (some not even “released” yet). Torrents also provide layers of on-demand selection and control, and the ability to download what I want, when I want it. In addition to these qualities I’m also attracted to the lack of advertisements. While Torrent sites are often saturated with banner and pop-up ads – the content at the end of the tunnel is not. Once downloaded, it runs on-demand and ad free. All I have to do is get over the unfamiliar web-personas, the piracy thing and the possibility of catching a nasty virus.

Of course YouTube is a completely different animal. While advertisements have crept further and further into this free content land – slowly eroding my experience – the ability to browse and consume heaps of content at will, upload my own content, create my own channel and subscribe to other channels is great. YouTube empowers me to join the broadcast revolution and embed, spread, seed and share through various online and social media platforms.

Last but not least there’s justin.tv – a venture-backed start-up from California. This is one of my favorite free video channels online and one of the best customer experiences to have. On justin.tv people create their own channels and upload their own video playlists (mostly pirated content) – everything from live streams of geeks playing video games, DJ’s and musicians performing, rants from crazy people to historic documentaries. There are ads but they only play once – the first time you click on a channel. Of course, there are live discussion forums and ongoing commentary next to the video content, if you choose to engage, you can. The only negative is that there is no control over the live streaming content, only the choice to tune in to a channel streaming video and watch or not.

Within this wild and competitive space, content providers are going to have to do a better job of aligning the qualities, characteristics and attributes of free online content. By improving the customer experience by stepping outside of their traditional media and business model approaches towards new media and the flexibility it promises, demands and affords.

Mathew Lincez is a Resident Futurist at Idea Couture, a global strategic innovation and experience design firm. He is based in Toronto, Canada.

This Article has been taken from The Customer Experience Issue (Issue #3, Fall 2011) of M/I/S/C/ Magazine – a magazine dedicated to design thinking and innovation available in over 25 countries. To purchase a digital copy of the full issue and for other issues please click HERE.

The opportunity to become an “Innovation Strategist” catches people’s attention.

Since our initial posting for the role in Toronto, we’ve received over 120 resumes from dynamic, brilliant young individuals all interested in joining the Idea Couture team. From the outside looking in, innovation strategy sounds incredibly sexy (and it certainly looks good on a business card). But if you ask a typical applicant what exactly they think an innovation strategist does, what usually follows is blank stares, buzz words, or my favorite, “They strategize innovation”.

None of those are good answers.

There’s nothing worse than expecting one thing and getting another. In preparing to take on two new strategists in the next few weeks, I couldn’t help but reflect on what is becoming an industry title with no common definition. So I figured the least I could do is take a stab at some common tasks to help people know what they are getting in to, what they should consider learning to do, and where their responsibilities should lie.

So here are a few of the tasks, activities, and responsibilities of your typical innovation strategist.

Project Design
Innovation strategist as the planner

• Work with the client to articulate project outcomes
• Help design the structure of what innovation projects look like
• Set up the project’s research activities, and collaborate to select methods
• Build a multidisciplinary team based on available resources

Business Strategy

Innovation strategist as the box builder

• Interview clients to better understand what problems the team is trying to solve
• Help clients / the team state the project vision
• Help the project frame the problems based on client input
• Define what project success criteria looks like
• Draw from existing models or develop new frameworks to direct the solution

Design Research

Innovation strategist as design researcher

• Design and / or participate and / or facilitate research (depending on skills)
• Provide a business or user centered flaw to the other design researchers (depending on core competencies)
• Help researchers synthesize the findings into insights
• Frame the insights of user research insights through deliverables (personas, systems diagrams, customer journey maps, mental models, touchpoint analysis, or something else cool that I don’t even know exists yet.)

Workshop

Innovation strategist as a facilitator

Idea Development & Evaluation

Innovation strategist as an architect

• Help come up with killer ideas
• Help prototype, evaluate and test those ideas
• Make sure the final solution is in line with project briefings or has a damn good reason to break the brief
• Develop prioritization frameworks to evaluate which ideas are strongest
• Evaluate costs and benefits

Design Development

Innovation strategist as a sherpa

While innovation strategists are the center of my universe, being surrounded by a strong team is what makes a project work. An innovation strategist is nothing without the help of true and trained design researchers, skilled industrial and visual designers, project managers, futurists, human factors specialists, content strategists, and support.

But needless to say, when people ask, “What does an average day look like?”, there is no short answer. Being an innovation strategist is definitely a full time job, but even more, it’s a lifestyle decision. Innovation strategists are always working, because the world is where they learn, and their curiosity is not 9-5.

So what would you add? And are you interested in applying? We’re looking in Toronto and New York.

UPDATE: Add San Francisco to the mix. In short, if you think you meed the description, we want to meet you!

“Our model at Method is that being weird and different is good. Weird changes the world, and Detroit could use a little more of weird in terms of creative ideas.”

- Eric Ryan, Method Products Co-Founder (AdAge)

I’ve been into the idea of weird lately. It feels like odd and peculiar themes are increasingly breaking through and holding the public’s attention. Somehow, today’s world of endless choice still offers us an oversupply of sameness; so we’re almost begging for non-conformity. If you look to popular culture, the not-so-weak signals are everywhere. Austin’s “Keep [City] Weird” support-local movement is spreading across the US.  The world’s number one pop artist wears clothing made of meat. The LA Lakers’ starting Small Forward is changing his name to Meta World Peace. It seems the novelty of of the unconventional is pushing us to the edges of our relative notions of comfort. And we are liking it.

Unlikely friends have benefits.

One of my more specific interests around weirdness is the uncharted space that odd combinations can lead us to. I realize cultural mash-ups are not a new idea. And yes, they can be excruciatingly bad (think Rap-Rock). But they can also be hugely interesting, inventive and inspiring.

Artists, of course, have been fearlessly blending ideas for centuries. But in the business world we seem more hesitant to look beyond category borders for experimentation and learning. The recent emphasis on Design Thinking and Innovation has more key players preaching the merits of cross-disciplinary collaboration, but in practice this approach is still barely visible.

Recently I stumbled upon Grant McCracken’s Culturematic posts proposing the need for more culture-smashing tools. I think we’re likely to see an explosion of similar Oblique Strategies over the next few years. You can only imagine the fruits of a Large Hadron Cultural Collider. Or an event series that promotes weird cross-industry collaborations like Food & Psychology or Comedy & Finance (call it Funny Money).

A weird little brand case.

One of my favorite new local brands is a microbrew out of Barrie, Ontario. Flying Monkey produces a roster of delicious craft brews like Hoptical Illusion and Netherworld Cascadian Dark. The brand is not just a nod to oddity, it’s built on the idea. Their tagline “normal is weird” is a pledge to the peculiar, and everything they do serves to honour that pledge. The glassware, for example, is littered with little bits of unusual magic like the “Reorder Line” (photo below). The brand purpose extends to its people as well, as is evident in this excerpt from an article on a hot new little Toronto snack spot:

“Peter Aitchison, a salesman with Flying Monkeys Craft Brewery in Barrie, told us that he could sculpt anything. So we said, ‘OK, let’s see you make a draft tap out of a telephone pole.’ And he did, over a span of 12 hours with a chisel.”

Their website also keeps it surreal. Upon arrival you’re unsure if you’ve landed on the brewery’s mainpage or if you’re embarking on a journey to the fantastical underground of the early internets.

Things could (and should) get weird.

The Age of Weird is arriving. The business world is already playing catch-up. We know creative advantage is more crucial now than ever before. Firms willing to move beyond their core comforts, embrace their cultural quirks, and experiment on the fringes will be best positioned for innovation. Yes, this will be a difficult transition for many. But it also promises to be fun, enlightening, and potentially lucrative for those wiling to get a little freaky.

Stay tuned for some IC weird-play in the coming months.

There’s a terrific moment in a video interview with Erik Spiekermann, master type designer, in which he reminds us that the badly designed Florida ballots in the 2000 presidential election resulted in voter confusion that tragically led to 4 more years of George Bush. A better design of this simple little tool could have altered the course of history and changed lives – or even saved some. Hard to argue with that.

The video is well worth a watch. Type designers dedicate their lives to creating the most utilitarian, prosaic and yet indispensable tools by which we live: letters. They’re all around us, like air. They’re in every medium from print to digital. And yet it’s because of their very ubiquity that they are invisible to us – or should be.

It’s this tension between ubiquity, utility  and invisibility that Spiekermann is so passionately vocal about, and what he strives to balance in his practice. When he’s not designing fonts, he’s designing large signage and information graphics systems, the kinds of things you see in railway and airline terminals. Due to the urgency of this type of information, the fonts need optimal legibility. In fact, according to Spiekermann, they need to be so legible you don’t notice them. You don’t want to be distracted by the shape of the letters. If the design is successful, you won’t think about it. If it’s flawed, you might miss your plane.

Spiekermann was a pioneer in the digital distribution of fonts, and of fonts designed specifically for the screen. People tend to think that because print is a fading medium, so is the written word. But as Spiekermann points out in this interview, letters, fonts and words are the things we look at the most when we’re online. Hard to argue with that too. wn

The last three weeks have been a whirlwind of workshops and social innovation. A speaking engagement at the 3P conference in Kitchener had me talking to technologists, business leaders and academics about how to use Design Thinking to make social change. A week of planning sessions in Montreal was about designing extended social programs for people with chronic illness. A productive few days in DC with the World Bank had us working on distributed innovation experiences for offices around the world.

I’ll be honest. I’m exhausted. But when you’re talking about innovation change, it’s hard not to focus on the greater good.

These days, there’s a lot of interest in Idea Couture’s social innovation practice. Much like design thinking, any new and fuzzily-defined term that enters the business world is at least partly cause for buzz. But on the plus side, I know that the majority of the interest is based on the opportunity that Social Innovation presents.

This isn’t CSR. This is business. It’s making money by doing good. And it works.

From pharmaceutical companies who know that their social impact will lead to financial impact, to technologists who are looking for new learning opportunities that extend their definition of value through solving problems of social change, these last few weeks have shown me that the social innovation world is alive. The great Peter Drucker said that, “Every single social and global issue of our day is a business opportunity in disguise”. It seems as though the business world is starting to catch on.

Three years ago, I sat down with a good friend from MaRS to talk about his experience working with not for profits. At the time, I had been hitting a wall doing some business model design work for a now-defunct not for profit. To this day, I’ll remember that conversation as a turning point in my career. “The problem with so many of these (not-for-profits) is that they’re completely afraid of money,” he said. Over the next few years, I’ve grown to understand what he meant.

It’s not necessarily a fear of income – very few organizations have the ability to raise funds like a well run not-for-profit. But for some reason, the dialogue of multiple winners from a giving scenario seems to make many not-for-profit’s uneasy. But whenever a problem is solved, new value is created, and in many cases, that value is being left on the table.

Thankfully, with the number of social-entrepreneurs that I’ve met since that fateful conversation, both through our incubation experience and through talks at a number of universities, a shift is on its way. It seems as though many people realize that one possible future of giving is to also get, be it through new organizational experience, new revenue streams, or reduced operational costs. With benefits like that, it’s no wonder there’s buzz.

The shame of making money through solving real social problems is on its way out the door.

Read any CSR book, and it will tell you that companies will eventually change – not out of the kindness of their hearts, but because their customers are demanding it. While this is certainly true (our design research constantly confirms that customers are asking for social-embedded products and services), I’m now seeing a lot of companies that are shifting based primarily on operational benefits. That puts a smile on my face because the social innovation mandate is coming from both the top down and the bottom up.

I’ll make this very clear – for Idea Couture, Social Innovation means using social impact as a business strategy. It’s about creating real, tangible value for organizations through tackling social problems with ties to their core business model. The expectations are high, both in terms of financial impact, but also delivering results on social impact.

Social innovation is the future of business. It’s hard not to read that and feel a little more optimistic about what’s to come.

I get it. Deadlines, budgets, internal pressure and uncertainty don’t exactly create an encouraging environment in which to trust your crazy innovation partners. But, after taking clients through the process countless times, and coming out alive and better-armed with powerful insights on the other side, here are five things I’ve picked up from boardroom banter that might help.

1. Exploration isn’t validation

We have a series of approaches to tease out consumer attitudes, preferences, socio-cultural ties and opinions. Often, our clients want to use these opportunities to validate what they’re already doing, instead of looking at what else might be possible. If we jump to validation, we miss out on the purposely broad and open-ended nature of the exploration phase, and that means missing out on the things that have been overlooked or undefined.

2. Competitors aren’t good benchmarks

When we conduct global scanning to observe weak signals in comparative and competitive industries, we often get some pushback from our clients to stay in the industries they can most relate to, or worse yet, to focus on competitors. If your competitors are already doing it, it’s probably not enough to make you relevant. Instead, a push towards lateral thinking usually ends in our clients looking for insights in unlikely places – where their competitors never thought to.

3. Consumer insights first, tactics later

In a rush to get to the finish line, we often have to justify why it’s better to hold off on solving burning tactical and executional challenges until later in the process. It’s tough, but we force ourselves to trust the process and hold off on solving/designing until we finish the exploration phase. Getting the consumer insights right, without the loaded and leading questions, means that we’re eventually designing for the right outcomes.

4. If there is rigour, you won’t end up with meaningless data

Too often, we hear the tale of months of research that result in a pile of action-less data and deliverables. Rest assured that when there is a rigorous process that transforms insights into ingredients for a solid strategy, the fuzzy front-end can result in tangibles on route to your end goal.

5. We can translate

A lot of the initial discomfort comes from clients needing to sell the project and its findings internally. “This isn’t how we usually do things” is valid, but shouldn’t drive process decisions. It’s our job to help you tell the story. By identifying important points in the project where translation is needed, it is possible to take the work and translate it into a story  that is relevant and compelling within your organization.

As a parting note, I’ll leave you with something that I didn’t learn from work – this one comes from my old man. He’s always told me that the horrible discomfort you feel when you encounter something new usually precedes great learning – it’s simply the beginning of an ascent along the learning curve. So relax! A little trust can go a long way.

Idea Couture has its roots in digital innovation. Frog, Adaptive Path, my good friends at Normative Design, and many other leading innovation firms also have amazingly strong foundations in the digital world. Three years ago, I left the interactive industry to pursue innovation consulting, and while I expected a painful transition, what I found was that infusing big problems with the sensibilities of the interactive space, no problem is insurmountable. Now, all of these firms call upon that experience to tackle problems much larger than designing websites.

I believe that interactive people are the world’s best innovators.

While today, the process of innovation is often labeled “design thinking”, people from the interactive space don’t really need to call it anything other than their job. The process of innovation has been intuitively embedded in user experience since people first started thinking about how websites work. What’s even more incredible is that the interactive space has only reached one billionth of its potential. While we draw on foundations of industrial design and architecture, we’re blazing trails in other unexplored territory.

Digital people are inventors

In a typical design process, defining constraints of a project is one of the very earliest steps. In the interactive realm, a constraint is treated like an opportunity to push the boundaries of a medium. As a result, people are more than willing to hack the rules or create new rules to make the optimal solution work. Their analytical yet lateral ability to solve problems is second to none. Interactive people are inventors.

Interactive people understand systems

Anyone who grew up in a web firm lived the life of the ugly stepchild. If you were building websites in the early 2000′s, you knew that your entire existence hinged on an appreciation of multiple service and experience paths. You were building within a larger organizational system and context – you were one piece of a puzzle. Interactive people are systems designers.

Empathy is at the core of innovation

A web design process is inherently user centred. It requires an in depth understanding of a person’s goals, and your job is to help them achieve those goals. That being said, interactive people understand that an end user’s experience is a reflection of both what you design and their own environment on the other side of the screen. We deal with issues of accessibility, issues of screen size, mobile considerations, situated experience, and more. Interactive people understand user centred design.

Digital people communicate

Since the beginning of my web career, I’ve understood design thinking tools. Prototyping, wireframing and storyboarding are all essential processes in the digital space. Apply those same skills to a service design problem, or to a product design problem, and suddenly abstract concepts make complete sense to your clients. Interactive people apply the design thinking toolkit every day.

Digital people understand performance

One of the largest barriers to innovation is the burden of proof. Since the very beginning of the digital era, people have been measuring websites to communicate the success of innovation, and drawing relevant parallels where no previous parallels existed. Digital people balance business and user objectives.

Interactive designs are always iterative

The day after you build something, you switch to optimization mode. There’s an inherent appreciation in digital that solutions can be elegant, but can always be improved. The idea of constant improvements and iterative design are fundamental to digital processes. They’re also core to the beliefs of innovators.

The medium is in its infancy

Ask an industrial designer to talk about the web, and they’ll base most of their thinking in what’s current. Talk to an interactive designer about the web, and they talk about visions for the future. Every day, some new considerations enters our design lexicon. And every day, some new startup is experimenting with these tools to push the boundaries of what is possible. Digital people are adaptable and flexible.

Innovation in product is innovation in digital

To solve product and service design problems, we need to migrate towards platform thinking. A product is no longer just an object – it’s a hub of connected information and interactions. Yes, strong industrial design can create an object of desire, but without inherently and intuitively applying digital sensibilities to that product, it will arguably be less competitive. Industries like music and publishing are transforming before our very eyes, and who are the best people to lead us into this unexplored territory?

Any of these qualities on their own are factors we look for when hiring innovation consultants. But what’s incredible about interactive people is that, more often than not, they have all of these qualities. And I know this is just a starting point in a long list of skills. I’m not trying to discount the capabilities of industrial designers, researchers, or architects who have found their way into the innovation space, but I do truly believe that the inherent understanding of all the qualities outlined above put former interactive practitioners in a unique position to solve big, important problems.

So did I miss any?

When you work at an innovation consultancy, you take the word innovation seriously. For three years, I’ve worked at Idea Couture helping dozens of organizations  design disruptive future scenarios based on real consumer insights, social and societal needs, economic imperatives, and technological signals. For many of these clients, I’ve seen real innovation happen.

What’s interesting is that none of these clients talk about how “innovative” they are. But they live it. In the grand scheme of things, these are the companies pushing the boundaries of their industries and changing their own internal values systems. That’s real innovation to me.

For your average everyday consumers, innovation means disruptive innovation. Does a car that reads your Facebook news feed really deserve to be called innovative, or is it just novel? Is a CPG company that releases Organic shampoo in 2011 really innovative, or are they just opportunistic? Is a communications campaign that crosses multiple channels really innovative, or could it just be clever? I’d argue that very few of the “innovations” that companies advertise are really innovations, and even fewer of them are truly representative of a general organizational culture.

As a result, in the corporate and consumer world, the word is at risk of completely losing its meaning.

These days, it seems impossible to turn on the TV, open a magazine, read a blog post or listen to a CEO without hearing a company’s “commitment to innovation”. What’s I find truly unfortunate is that the disciplines of PR and marketing are bastardizing a term with immense power and meaning. Having spent plenty of time studying the internal models of innovation at some of the world’s most “innovative” firms, I can tell you that their internal processes are innovation blockers, not innovation enablers.

The dirty truth is that while most of these firms love the idea of innovation (and may even be filled with innovative people), they hate innovation in practice. Innovation “introduces risk” instead of mitigates it. Innovation casts doubt on how things have traditionally been done. Innovation results in disagreements. Innovation unearths cultural gaps within organizations. Real innovation is culturally hard.

Most companies are happy make incremental improvements or to explore novel changes. The refusal is to reset their understanding of their competitive landscape and to accept that their industries are fundamentally at risk. They’re fine with turning money into ideas (R&D), but not turning ideas into money (innovation).

So please, stop calling your company “innovative”. Yes, you make incremental improvements to your products. Yes, you invest in R&D. But at the end of the day, if you’re unwilling to shift adapt your core organizational values based on societal, social, and technological changes, you’re just fooling yourself. Until your organization is willing to rethink its relationship with its customers, reimagine what the future will look like, and reset its view of the industry it competes in, it’s not really innovative.

If you’re really committed to innovation, don’t just tell us about it. Live it.

Needless to say, the process of preparing and presenting to the internal IC team had me pretty primed to talk about what Design Thinking is and what it means in the context of Idea Couture, business, and innovation. So I was pretty happy when I went on Quora last night and came across this great question:

Part of the challenge in answering that question is that there is no single definition of Design Thinking. From what I’ve seen and what I practice, there are four points of view on what Design Thinking really is. Each have a different connection to innovation.

1. Design thinking is a person is a person who is capable of forming ideas through abductive reasoning. Abductive reasoning implies knowing throughout intuition (no formal proof), which is effectively a new thought. Innovation through new ways of thinking.
2. Design thinking is a human centered way of viewing the world. By trying to solve problems through gaining insights around people’s needs, you’re creating new perspectives which lead to new opportunities for innovation. Innovation through new perspectives.
3. Design thinking is a series of methods allow designers better communicate ideas. Completely new concepts are difficult for most people to grasp, so using a designer’s lens on communications improves understanding. The communication of innovation.
4. Design thinking is a series of steps to guide the innovation process. It’s the meta name given to the activities involved in creating a new idea. Design thinking is innovation.

So what do you think? Agree? Disagree? Just tired of hearing the term “Design Thinking”? Let me know.

Also, here’s a copy of the internal presentation if you’re interested.