Organizations are increasingly turning to open innovation platforms as their source of innovation.

Open innovation platforms (or crowdsourcing platforms) are a way to involve consumers in the process of innovation. Here at IC, we have built examples pretty amazing open innovation platforms – the Aviva Community fund and the MIT Ideas Challenge that are helping prove the case. You can also check out Open Innovators for dozens of other examples of programs that work. As our fearless leader Idris Mootee recently wrote in his article What you don’t know about Crowdsourcing and why they often fail, it’s not a silver bullet for innovation. But when used in a defined way as part of the research and development process, they can be quite successful.

Solving the worlds problems one 2×2 at a time

A lot of organizations struggle to wrap their heads around open innovation platforms because they toil with their purpose in the innovation cycle – what is the role of the platform within the innovation pipeline. With that in mind, I’ve spent a bit of time sketching an organizational principal for open innovation platforms. Obviously an organization can choose to involve external parties at any point in the innovation process – but the emphasis of this thinking is focused on what would be classically viewed as research through development (as opposed to the commercialization).

Do you have a problem? X AXIS
The first decision criteria is “Is there a defined problem”.

On one side of the equation, many organizations are submitting or asking explicit questions to the audience for solving – they have a defined problem to be solved. For example, Innovation Exchange solicits “Challenges” (specific problems to solve) from major corporations. I call this “innovation inspired by the business” – the key driver of creativity is based off of a fundamental business-side need or problem.

On the other side, some organizations just want good ideas that align with their brands – they have undefined problems and look to the crowd to both explicitly state challenges and opportunities. In short, they hope the crowd both provides both self identifies the problem and articulates a solution to the problem. An example of this would be the over-mentioned “my Starbucks ideas”. I call this “inspired by invention”, as it often manifests itself through the creative ingenuity of the crowd. It could just as easily be called “Innovation inspired by needs”.

When can the crowd play? Y AXIS
The second decision criteria is “When do you involve the crowd”?

On one side of the equation, organizations involve external participants early in the innovation process. Involving customers early results in raw, often messy ideas that may or not reflect any possible reality. I think of this as a platform for actively soliciting feedback for “opportunity collection” because there tend to be a lot of undefined directions that can be pursued or that can inspire lateral thinking.

On the other side, organizations can involve participants late in the innovation process. At this point, organizations are often looking for full concepts, designs, or solutions that represent a full solution to a problem. Examples of this would be Google’s Lunar Prize, where the criteria for winning is to “successfully land a privately funded craft on the lunar surface and survive long enough to complete the mission goals of roaming about the lunar surface for at least 500 meters and sending a defined data package, called a “Mooncast”, back to Earth.”. This is an example of “solution collection” – getting many external participants to come up with multiple, well articulated solutions.

The quadrants of organization-led open innovation platforms

Based on this model for understanding open innovation platforms, there are four primary opportunities for organizations to use open innovation platforms to drive the innovation process internally.

Defined Problem + Early Involvement = Crowdstorming. Articulating a specific problem to consumers and asking for many raw responses. This is pretty much like a massive brainstorm, and works as a way to stock the innovation pipeline early. Output: Lots of raw solutions to a specific problem with varying quality. Example: Fiat Mio

Undefined Problem + Early Involvement = Researching. Ask consumers to come up with solutions to undefined problems. The real value here is the articulation of previously unknown or unmet needs, collected through the initial articulation of customer problems used as a rationale for the solution. Output: Explanation or justification of previously unarticulated consumer challenges or needs with a small number of solutions of varying quality. Example: Dell Idea Storm

Defined Problem + Late Involvement = Prototyping. When you involve the consumer at this point, you’re really asking for a specific designed solution to a problem. Depending on how late in the innovation process they are involved, the output can be anything from concept sketches to fully-functioning prototypes. Output: Depending on how late the challenge is put to the crowd, and how defined the solution must be, expect a small number of solutions. Example: Supdaroo or one of my favorite sites, threadless.

Undefined Problem + Late Involvement = Adopting. Some organizations choose to build idea orphanages, allowing external participants to submit fully thought-out and conceptualized product concepts that may or may not align with their interests. Would-be inventors can submit their concepts with the hope of the organization moving on their idea. Output: Well thought out ideas that may or may not be relevant to the organization. Example: Lego Design By Me

Yes, no maybe so?

Obviously open innovation platforms differ in terms of where they play in an organization’s innovation cycle. In practice, each of the quadrants of the open innovation platform classification isn’t mutually exclusive. But in terms of understanding where their value lies, I think it’s a good starting point.

So what do you think? Agree with the classification? Have any recommendations on how to make it better? Have any great examples of crowdsourcing applications that I’ve missed? Join the comment thread and let me know. Also, if you’re interested in Open Innovation and the Virtuous Cycle, be sure to read Henry Chesbrough’s epic book Open Innovation.

Today, I’m waiting for a flight in Boston Logan airport. And for a change, I’m delighted. What is clear is that this airport has put a bit of effort into some thoughtful design. Armed with my trusty iPhone and an hour until take-off, I thought I’d share a few of the design elements of terminal E that have been pleasantly surprising.

1. Human Centered Seating
Generally speaking, seating in airports is terrible. We’ve all been stuck on old torn leather chairs in dehumanizing rows with uncomfortable leather arm rests designed to ward off delayed travellers looking for a rest. Well Logan has clearly thought about the design of its seating.

While those old friends with sharp arm rests are indeed present (and serve a necessary use), Logan clearly understands that travellers are humans, and humans interact. In addition to the uncomfortable classic, Logan has clearly examined the types positions people sit in at the airport. Ever put your feet on your travel luggage? Well they offer a slightly reclined chairs with a foot rest for the tired. Ever awkwardly sit to have a conversation with the person you’re travelling with? Well Logan has chairs in V formations that allow people travelling together to have a comfortable face-to-face conversation.

In an industry where everyone has to wait, this airport has thought about how to make waiting a little more comfortable.

2. Inviting Spaces
Travel presents a long period of maintained stress. Airports must be one of the lowest quality experiences for the money. A visit to the spa costs you a hundred bucks. Airport taxes aren’t that far off that price.

While an airport can’t necessarily fix all of the experience breakdowns of flying, Logan has created some opportunities for escapism. The airport features several spaces that allow passengers isolate themselves from other travellers to relax. Including these spaces (and offering rocking chairs) gave me the right kind of escape to work on this post.

3. Understanding the needs of the Modern Traveler
As a business traveler, I often look at the airport as my office. A few months ago, I flew out of the Buffalo airport on my way to Boston for some meetings.  As any business traveler flying in the afternoon would do, I entered the terminal and looked for the nearest plug to make sure I had enough juice for the flight. Upon further investigation, every potential outlet was covered in impenetrable metal. The only available outlets? A “Pay for Power” station offering me a charge for a charge.

Logan clearly understands that waiting is more pleasant with entertainment, and modern entertainment requires a plug. Everywhere I looked, there was a free outlet – no co-opted marketing angle, no sitting on the floor next to an outlet because there were no chairs around. Just an understanding of what people need.

4. Wi-Fi for All
In addition to the four letter words most regular travellers drop regularly while being dehumanized, we have a six letter word as well – Boingo. In a world that increasingly looks at the internet as a right not a privilege, the idea of paying $10.00 for 24 hours of Wi-Fi is insulting. Do your passengers a favour – give them a little internet access in exchange for their airport tax dollars.

Logan airport progressively offered me free Wi-Fi upon arrival (all be it, sponsored by Google).  The result? I could catch up on a bit of work and find enough time to jump on  WordPress and offer the airport my compliments. When you have a good experience, you return the favour. If anyone is reading this – connect through Logan.

Airports with empathy
Sure, not all design changes lives. But we should never forget that good experiences certainly have the ability to impact them. Designing a decent airport experience is not rocket science, and a good experience at an airport could go a long way towards helping an industry notorious for experience breakdowns.

Logan airport was certainly not perfect, but what’s obvious is that it was designed with empathy. Somehow, they’ve managed to understand traveler needs and behaviours, and support them with the best design and features they can. Logan airport tries in an industry with a terrible reputation for under-delivering on customer experience, and I can’t help but leave with a positive perspective on my visit.

Have you had a great airport experience recently? Leave a comment and let us know what made it so great for you.

Coordinating colors can be completely confounding. Do the curtains match the carpet? Will the backsplash compliment the dishes? Is the bedding in-sync with the bedroom walls? To attempt to answer these difficult décor questions, most consumers rely on collecting piles of fabric swatches, paint chips, magazine clippings and even a favorite plate or bowl to mix and match them until the secret of personal style is finally revealed. Then, the challenge truly begins: braving a series of separate stores across the city to actually find those items that, in theory and from that pile, really do work together to conjure color coordination. Failure is frequent, and usually by a hue or two.

Color Concierge By Crate & Barrel solves this challenge by packing the style skills of a professional interior designer into a single, easy to use iPhone application. With reliable, robust and dynamic brainpower, it uses intelligent logic driven by color theory, an archive of best practices and pattern recognition of user activities to take a photo of a room or item, extract the color palette, refine color harmonies and generate the perfect product combinations. Then, to make shopping easier, it acquires instant product details, displays color and fabric options, receives smart recommendations from other brands that align to your project and personality, and accesses special offers available only through Color Concierge.

Idris wisely notes that “as the pace of innovation accelerates and expectations rise, executives are experiencing two other kinds of crises, 1/ declining bottom line results caused by the credit crisis and 2/ declining consumer attention as customers become increasingly desensitized and unresponsive to traditional marketing. The ones that are smart will look for ways to improve their innovation capability and process; within their organization, externally with specialists in the field of innovation and even with their consumers who can help them to detect early trends.” In this way, companies can manage this double-edged sword looming over them.

The becomes – “What types of innovation activities can and should companies partake in? The answer is – it depends. The most common types of innovation are differentiated by distinct characteristics:

1/ Innovation activities that are based on improving the underlying the process of producing or delivery of products and services that sometimes appear to be invisible to customers. The manufacturing world is rife with examples – think Toyota in the 50’s, Dell in the 90s. A great example today is Spanish retailer Zara’s “fast fashion” supply chain – with the ability to design and distribute current fashions in just 15 days.

2/ Innovation that encourages the adoption or co-creation of a new customer behavior through new technologies, new interfaces and new connectivity. Apple’s iTouch technology in conjunction with the App store epitomizes new technology driving customer adoption and usage.

3/ Innovation that focuses on radically rethinking the whole business eco-system and re-designing its role in the value chain. Generally this leads to business model innovation. A great example is Netflix which turned the traditional video rental industry on its head, changing the way consumer’s pay for and consume entertainment. Another example is Amazon’s Kindle – changing the way consumers purchase literature.

4/ Innovation that allows an introduction of a second or third bottom line – initiatives that are socially oriented, sustainable and ethical. Take Clorox Greenworks – the company’s first new line of products in over 20 years. It’s a shift away from traditional chemically based cleaners to products that are certified by the EPA through their Designed for the Environment program. American Apparel, by selling a simple collection of basic items being produced domestically in the US, also in some way creates a second bottom line.

5/ Innovation that allows the redefinition of players and co-creation of value among those players in the system, including the consumer. Streaming video platforms like Joost and Hulu are changing the game of quality media consumption. By cutting out cable networks in favor of direct to consumer delivery supported by shifting ad spend creates value for those players that remain relevant.

I’ve excluded marketing innovation and channel innovation as they are some tactical elements of the above. I’ve also excluded technological innovation as it refers to the advancement in R&D. What are the core values that support the development of a corporate culture that can be typified as innovative? Values such as room for play, the ability to look outside of traditional sources for inspiration, being future oriented, teamwork, respect, the ability to be self-critical, dedication, initiative, trust, open mindedness, the aptitude to view with multiple lenses, collaboration and most importantly, strong leadership that drives the organization to a common vision.

These values can often be found in companies that have a good innovation track record like Apple, Google Nokia, and 3M. In addition to embracing these values themselves, innovation leaders should always look for creative ways of embedding these values in a meaningful way in their organizations from HR policies to operations to front line customer service reps. Through my experiences working with large enterprises, including big Telco’, has taught me that it’s difficult to alter a firms DNA to move at the pace of innovation if the roots of innovation haven’t been planted. While that seems obvious, I’ve found that organizations often will begin to use words like “innovation” without any understanding of how to institutionalize and end up wondering why it doesn’t take hold. To make this real, they need to fully understand their current corporate culture through constantly asking questions such as:

1. How important does senior management think innovation is to the future of our company?
2. Are there clearly defined mandates for innovation?
3. What common behaviors do we see around us that would both support and detract from innovation?
4. How do we compare to other innovative organizations?
5. How well do we handle external shock?
6. How good of a picture do we have in terms of our different futures?
7. Which are the core values that drive our behavior?
8. What are the dogmas / unwritten rules of the organization?
9. What behaviors encourage innovation? What behaviors hinder it?
10. How open are we working with outside partners?
11. How much tolerance do we have for risk?
12. What are our expectations from innovation efforts?
13. Do we have a process for innovation?
14. What is the make up of your human capital?
15. Is there support from corporate finance to fund innovation-based projects that may have longer paybacks with larger ROI?

Ask these questions and it will become obvious whether an organization is “innovation ready”. Those firms that are, will be able to overcome the crises – those that cannot will continue to be at the mercy of external market forces.

And once they are on, there’s no guaranteeing they’ll stay on; within seconds, wiping or washing can erase a parent’s best efforts and force another round with the little champ. Even more frustrating than that, sometimes the very act of trying to care for your child is risky: many skin care products sold for babies and children contain an alarming amount of carcinogens, toxins and allergens.

Crayola Rainbow Skin Care takes the fight and fear out of kids’ skin care and puts fun in their place. Designed in collaboration with a panel of leading child physicians, medical herbalists, ayurvedic practitioners, naturopathic dermatologists and cosmeticians, this 100% natural, organic and waterproof line of draw-able skin care products relieves pain and irritation caused by the most common childhood crises, including: scrapes, bruises, chicken pox, eczema, bug bites, sunburn, sunscreen, diaper rash and, of course, those invisible boo-boos.

Case Study: Chicken Pox Party
It’s inevitable, when one child gets the chicken pox, they all get them. This can be a pint size epidemic for childcare centers. Rainbow Skin Care is easily the one and only upside to a daycare full itchy-scratchy munchkins. Turn it into an arts and crafts task. Kids can paint themselves, color each other and let their creativity run wild while soothing their itchy skin. The possibilities are endless. This could expand into a daily painting session with sunscreen before they head outside to play.  Pool-parties where the kids actually want to come out of the water to be painted wonderful (and protective) colors. Little league games that seem to always result in scrapes and tears, can now be filled with players sporting their team colors on their skin. Bug bites and bruises are no longer to be feared thanks to Rainbow Skin Care. Natural, creative juice.

Think about some of these statistics presented by Jez Frampton of Interbrand at the opening plenary tonight:

• 95% of consumers say they would consider buying green products
• 25% actually do buy green products
• 45% purposefully don’t

Look at that last statistic. Why would a person choose NOT to buy a product that is better for the environment? Is there intent to destroy our planet? No – I would venture that consumers have been disappointed by green products – they have either performed worse and are more expensive. That is not a sustainable strategy – especially in our bleak economic times. Firms producing products and services must understand that consumers expectations are high. Recycled tissue shouldn’t irritate my nose. Environmentally friendly detergent must clean my clothes as well. It’s just not good enough to slap a “green” label on products and services and expect it to be a differentiator on its own.

To appeal with the masses, sustainable products and services MUST offer the same standards as other products. Quality, performance and price come first – sustainable, green, environmental friendliness are added benefits and eventually, should be a given. The economics of sustainability must align with a consumer’s personal economics and value. Some examples for sustainable experiences include:

1. Cleaning products made from all natural ingredients found in the home (baking soda and vinegar)
2. Small living spaces
3. Local, in season produce
4. Car sharing and car pooling

There are so many ways consumers can choose to be sustainable AND economical. Today, I rented a car to drive down from San Francisco to Monterey. I’d reserved a compact car for cost and fuel efficiency. The person at the counter told me I could get a hybrid car that was slightly larger, more comfortable and give me better the mileage than the compact – all for $4 more. It was a no brainer – the experience value of the hybrid far outweighed that of the compact car.

Sustainability simply must be sustainable economically to gain traction. Green energy must become cheaper, better and more available than fossil fuel energy. Green manufacturing must produce a quality product that rivals non-green product. Green service must be just as good as non-green service. There will always be a segment who can afford to choose sustainability – but to gain momentum with the general populous, the design of sustainable products and service must take into consideration consumer needs and expectations to service demand in a responsible way.

“Sorry, but the models you have chosen have different attributes and cannot be compared.  Please change your selection and try again.”

My first thought was, “Seriously?  Of course they have different attributes… That’s why I wanted to compare them!”  Don’t get me wrong, I understand the challenge—the comparison table doesn’t really work if the products don’t have any similar attributes to compare, but come on!  It’s not like I’m trying to compare a DVD player to a washing machine.  These were all products listed under the same category and it would be perfectly reasonable for a consumer to be deciding between these options.

My second thought was, “OK, the error message provides no help whatsoever in helping me fix the issue.”  Ideally, the message would tell me which of the products are comparable with each other.  If you’re not going to let me compare all of my options, would it be too hard to tell me which products you’re going to allow me to compare?

All that said, the biggest missed opportunity here is a feature that guides prospective purchasers to a product that’s best for them.  One quote I hear all the time in usability tests: “Why doesn’t it just tell me what to do!?”  With a little bit of consumer research, we could identify the key factors influencing their audience’s buying decision and build a tool that helps guide users to one (or a few) option(s) that would best meet their needs.  The tool wouldn’t be used by everyone, but it would certainly be appreciated by folks who are looking for a recommendation that’s relevant to them.

There is no value in overwhelming users with choices, and then not providing help to narrow the list.

Photos: