Module: Designing open innovation spaces
pasword video: openinnovation
The New Product Development domain is currently dominated by two trends:
– As a result of fast technological evolution, present-day products are getting increasingly complex. Products are no longer only electrical and mechanical, but also include computing and networked capability (Walker, et al. 2009, Aarts and Encarnacao 2006, Aarts and Marzano 2003*). Because electronics are cheap and miniaturized they can be easily embedded in everyday products, hidden for the customer and controlled by software. So companies can easily collect data and information on (for example) the exact usage of the products.
– The growing number and integration of different product functionalities require the involvement of a high number of specialists in the product development process (represented by numerous individuals, departments, companies and suppliers, etcetera). This high level of expertise and specialization entails that all departments have their own perspective, interest, priorities and responsibilities. This leads to compartmentalization and results into metaphorical walls between the departments, which entangle both the business and communication process consequently.
In this module, through workshops, we will try to understand the strength of different knowledge and information processing tools which can contribute to knowledge creation and sharing in new product development even with multi-stakeholder networks.
I chose this module, because I experienced the module: activating your innovation radar as a very good module in terms of theory/practice and real clients. In my opinion, one week was too short and I searched for a new challenge with a real client. I was curious towards the connection with the DQI group and wanted to know more about co-reflection workshops in relation towards a client meeting. Also Open innovation spaces was something unknown for me and I was curious to learn more about it. MIR analysis was something that we had to do earlier during an assignment, but I was expecting to learn to apply it in a different way.
The process we took was very similar to the module activating your innovation radar which I took earlier. The people in the team were all new for me and it took some time to work well together. I could lead the process towards the final goal and with my prior knowledge, I felt responsible to do so.
Every day we worked hard to set the best possible result, but we did not always succeed on time. The actions we took are already well described in the report.
For me one of the best decisions taken in this module, was the moment we all wrote down our vision on the concept in a few lines. We could see what the common factors where and what was important for everybody. Combining the visions helped us to present our concept as a team.
At the end of the week we worked and acted more as a team. I believe one week for such a module is really good in terms of pressure and learning to make quick decisions, but to be able to understand the theory, please the client and have multiple iterations, I experienced it a bit too short.
This was my third module under the supervision of Lu Yuan, it had its advantages and disadvantages. I felt a lot of weight on my shoulders to guide the process to a good end result, I felt that I had to initialize actions as I had the most experience within the group. I believe I did a fine job on that, but I also noticed that it was good to sit back and relax a little bit and see what the other team members would bring up.
In relation to co-Reflection, I expected a little bit more of this module, we went unprepared into the context and could have reached more if we had prepared the session with the elderly better. Oscar’s presence or guidance in this would have been good. Although without him we managed to have a session where we cooked and discussed technology with them. We had interviews with multiple people, whereby everybody could complete each other. The insights we got from this where useful to support our concept.
For me the MIR analysis is a good tool to position my concept with and a good tool to start a reflection with. This is completely different than how we used it in the assignment NPD, where we analyzed the failure of a product. The strongest aspect of this reflection method in my opinion was the way how we positioned things, we did not have long discussions and agreed easily upon the placement within the MIR raster. I can see how this could also work with other raster’s or placements of concepts in relation with each other.
I learned that getting the maturity of the knowledge to a higher level for multiple stakeholders is quite a challenging task. One key factor that we saw was that information needed to be shared and combined more frequently. Now the product was initialized, but there was no feedback loop in motion. The way the stakeholders communicate and what they communicate, is the key in a successful improvement of the system.
In the future I want to see what I can do in the field of big data and knowledge sharing with a different kind of stakeholder. The challenge here was for me immediately clear, they needed to talk more with each other and more stakeholders should be involved to let the platform grow. The ING case, in my opinion, was more interesting for me as I had done already some projects within health care. The MIR analysis “reflection session” is something I see useful to apply during the different faces of my project. The session with the elderly was very fruitful and we did not have that much preparation time, the lesson I learned here is that with your own insights and proactive attitude you can reach a lot in a short time. We chose acting out as a form of presentation as an addition on the movie we had, the different forms of mediums helped to transfer the message. I personally very much liked, the interaction with the audience within the presentation and is something I want to try more in the future.
You were obviously leading the team. You are very communicative, systematic and cooperative. You are willing to listen to other and still keep your own ideas if necessary. Good team player.
You combined two directions that SUMMA considered completely separated.
You were able to integrate multiple stakeholders even if you didn’t have direct contact with them. You acted from a systems perspective.
The combination of video presentation and acting out was really good for letting the stakeholders to experience the concept.
You used the MIR levels to daily reflection the design process.
Although the quality of the designs and the video were in my opinion not high enough, the message and the concept where from a strong value. A well prepared acting out as a presentation can be a really good tool to let the client experience first hand what the new situation will be.