Healthcare is at a transformative juncture, driven by rapid digital advances, demographic pressure, and new market entrants. Boards must move beyond traditional oversight and actively champion innovation to secure future performance. The article outlines the forces reshaping care, from virtual care, data analytics, and AI to aging populations, chronic disease, and a projected global shortfall of 10 million health workers by 2030, which elevates urgency for change.

It proposes a model of future-focused governance in which boards anticipate trends, set direction, and balance risk with opportunity. This requires refreshed composition and learning culture, adding competencies in data, AI, interoperability, cybersecurity, finance for innovation, patient experience, and ethics.

Concrete practices include an innovation oversight checklist and KPIs such as time to decision, portfolio mix H1 H2 H3, digital adoption, cyber posture, and value-based revenue.

A 24-month roadmap guides execution, from auditing skills and charters to scenario planning and incentives. Boards that lead decisively can turn incumbents into agile innovators that deliver better clinical and economic outcomes.

Click here to download the full 24-month roadmap for healthcare future-focused governance

Highlighting effective and innovative strategies for acquiring top executive talent in the Indian market by discussing emerging approaches, such as leveraging digital platforms, unconventional sourcing channels, and creative ways to attract and retain the best leaders in India’s competitive business landscape.

As per the Economic Times report, leading search firms including Korn Ferry, EMA Partners, Stanton Chase, and Odgers Berndtson state that despite a downturn in the overall job market, senior leadership hiring in India remains active at the top end.

With evolving technology enabling the global talent acquisition ecosystem, India is a centre of opportunities. Hiring executive leaders from India has gradually transitioned from what it used to be maybe a decade back. Below I am making an attempt to talk about my observations on how some of the strategies could be leveraged better from the first step itself.

Innovative Strategies: Identifying by humanizing

One key aspect being mapping the executive talent position with two aspects of job description. In India, people look at culture – for example an Open Door Policy, 360 degree feedback system, Voice Of Customer , matrices and process that are being followed, then the values of the organization – for example Integrity, Empathy, Grit, then examples of how the values are being followed, are there protocols such as POSH in place, how is Inclusion & Diversity understood there, what is the span of control, what are the key strategic business goals of the organization and for that particular P&L.

\When I say these, it implies that potential candidates want to be more understood and have conversations on the human aspect of business and how important are people. They want to know how the performance matrix is measured or people get fired on whims & fancies just because they don’t agree with their boss on something.

I remember during one of my interviews, the investor spent close to 90 mins with me just to understand how I am as a person and how would I ‘feel’ and ‘react’ to certain situations. I also had to appear for an online detailed psychometric test (which I love any day) because the first thing I feel is that the organization cares about who they want to hire as a human being because that’s the base on which someone’s leadership style rests. 

Unlearning Vs Skills mindset

When we talk about executive leadership positions in India, here there are primarily two kinds of talent. Ones who are skilled in their core domain but not a people person and ones who may not be that skilled in a subject matter but great people’s person and potentially great leaders.  Hence mapping aspiration of that talent becomes even more important than skill.

For example, if someone has a top B-School degree, does that automatically mean that he/she will be a great leader? No right? Hence ‘psychometric tests’ must be an inclusion in senior level hiring. My perspective is it is better to onboard someone who is say 9 on 10 in leading people & business rather than someone who is 7 on 10 in core domain skill.

The reason why I am saying detailed psychometric test is because it may not be able to be evident in just a conversation if someone has the ability to unlearn the pace of execution in a new environment which may entail a different business model. The fact is it is extremely challenging to get a person in India who will tick all the boxes on all three quotients – functional, people and cultural. At least that is my observation.

Also, in a survey conducted by Stanton Chase India, it was asked whether the business would consider hiring leadership talent from other sectors and industries, to which more than two- thirds (64%) said yes.

This insight also tells us how important unlearning is for moving into a different industry.

Employer Branding & Thought Leadership 

It is imperative to look at the potential candidate’s social accounts. This is important to know three things –

• Flow of thoughts as how he/she projects on LinkedIn 
• Nature of the posts – is it linked to a purpose, is it educational, how is may be contributing the community
• Do the posts also have his present organization in the voice in some places, basically to see if he/she is also doing employer branding in some way as it is not only the job of an HR today.

Looking at this will definitely help employers get a deeper view for interview conversations. A deep understanding of the business landscape with ability to network well is extremely important as essentially it is the role of a Brand custodian in essence.

Preparing for candidates’ questions 

Once I was hiring for a senior role and in the last but one round of discussions the candidate asked our HR department if  we have facilities for his growth and if yes, then he would want to hear some examples.

We carried forward the conversation and got to know that he was looking at things such as do we have tie-ups with reputed executive education Business schools, did we offer sponsored facility for leadership coach (this is not at all surprising because even the best of leaders looks for an organization that has people first facilities ad that starts from the top itself.

Think of it this way- if it is  C-Suite position and the company says that we also have the facility of hiring a professional leadership coach (not a trainer) after you complete first 6 months, it is like saying- we know you are a great leader and that is why we are hiring you, however, we want you to be even better as a coach can also be a sponge for these demanding positions.

Very few companies go that far for people. In India, today is not only about the CTC but also how the organization values you. So, preparing for such questions are important for potential employers and recruiters.

Conclusion

Using innovative strategies is crucial and agility is the key factor today for recruiting executive talent in India. To find the best executive leaders that are out there today, recruiters need to be more flexible in their strategy and scope of search. This translates into a keenness to look beyond the set parameters of a given role and drive conversations with deeper empathy.  When we look at senior leadership it is more about not will that person be able to build his second line but how soon.

I keep going back to innovation…and I am sure you’ll be wondering, WHY??

It is simply so, because if it wasn’t for innovation, we wouldn’t have progressed thus far,…..for innovation keeps coming back,…..each time in a new avatar, hence for me to talk about innovation is neither stale,…..nor a stale-mate,…..instead it’s a state we are in,……a state of evolution and progress,….

In school we were taught, so many things,…..the languages, the mathematics, the sciences, the histories, the geographies,…..and thereafter it was our lives that took over, ever so constantly teaching us,…..every moment, every day,…..and in this mire we are constantly reminded that we have to survive, for life is a struggle,…..and we are all in the business of survival,…..and the law of “The survival of the fittest”, holds true for us as well,…….and to survive in our businesses we must innovate,…..constantly ever so,…..never stale,…..never a stale-mate !!!

Looking at the logic of logistics, we realize  that the strengths an army drew in the WW II, was through its logistical competence,…….the Industrial revolution took over thereafter,……economies opened up unto one another towards the creation of a globalised environment, especially in terms of trade and commerce.

Soon supply chain brought in an edifice of scientific management in logistics which saved time and money, and catered to the needs of Individuals and Organisations. The advent of Telecommunication, followed by The Information Technology and Faster and efficient transport systems saw us propelled beyond our orbits towards a world that would change very fast,….and now we are here within a constant flux of our business environments wherein innovation is the only panacea for survival.      

“Innovation begins at the intersection of invention and insight,” notes Patricia Pepper, director of strategy and innovation for IBM Integrated Supply Chain

While many companies talk innovation, what’s truly important is achieving the results of that innovation, according to the standards of your clients, internal employees, and suppliers.

While evaluating the importance of innovation we must ask ourselves that, will pursuing a strategy of incremental improvement through innovation allow us to meet our business objectives, and can we avoid having our products and services become commodities?

If they do become commoditized, the ability to price effectively will decrease, and so will the profitability.

Supply chain innovation is important for companies of all sizes. It means looking at the way a company applies its assets, operating resources, and capabilities to develop new ways to satisfy customer needs. Companies should measure the value of innovations by how well they help meet customer demands. 

While few companies are implementing breakthrough or “leapfrog” innovations, nearly every company today is looking to innovate in some way or the other. 

Some key areas of activity upon which innovation in logistics have taken place involve the following:

Adapting: 

This involves putting in place the necessary technology, people, and global operating models keeping in view global demand, alongside a global supply chain process to cater to that demand.

Collaborating:

Collaborating with trading partners.

Instead of operating within one’s own boundaries, we must look beyond our boundaries, collaborating with our trading partners so as to collapse the time between sales and replenishment. This holds especially true for a Supply Chain orientation. 

Integrating:

Breaking down silos and integrating functions to develop creative solutions.  

To transform through innovation we need to have a strong desire for internal and external collaboration. This transformation should cut across departments and areas of focus within a company and it should also link the extended enterprise, such as key suppliers, customers, and channels.

Innovation Teamwork:

Innovation isn’t only about new technology; instead innovation should be an integral part of the entire operation.

Apart from product innovation we need to talk about value process innovation and execution innovation.

The seeds of innovation can be sown by any member from within the organisation, or from outside the organisation. We as managers should enable ourselves to derive from these through creative imagination and develop a portfolio of feasible innovation approaches, work upon each idea through a strategic orientation, plan and provide the required resources, such that Innovation can be executed in the best possible way and its outcome can be measured vis-à-vis the defined benchmarks.

A creation of a centralized repository of best practices in Innovation will be most desirable at an Organisational Culture level. 

Measuring Results

Needless to say that many organisations which are driven hard by technology, have come a long way in streamlining an automated process, which reduces errors and saves time along with real time visibility of cargo movement, however through this we have somewhere lost out on the human front, and ironically it is the human touch which relates to service; in this direction our communication needs to be impeccable, such that we can coordinate in the most efficient and amicable way – understanding the needs of each other!   

We should be prepared to advice our innovators on how to take ideas to the next level, in terms of assembling a team, developing a plan, and securing a patent (If need be.)

The most critical step in innovation is to measure that we have indeed delivered the desired results, in terms of Customer Satisfaction, and our own Profitability.

—–>>>

HOW FAR HAVE WE COME IN OUR JOURNEY IN INNOVATION 

1. We have been working towards being an Integrated Logistics Solutions provider.

   Note: A Solutions provider is a service provider who innovates.

2. Product Innovation – We offer multi products – LCL, FCL, AIR , Project cargo , warehousing , inland , over border , end to end offering (A question we need to ask – “Are we getting Commoditized here ?”

3. Collaborative Supply Chain Innovation and Specialization – Focusing on Industry Vertical – NGO / Automotive and Pharma 

4. Network and Route Innovation – With our presence in the main gateways we are providing logistic solutions to our clients to use the corridors of Mombasa, Dares Salaam, Beira , Durban 

5. Making Inroads into the Frontier Economies – First Mover advantage needs to be coupled with Innovation, such that we stay a differentiated Solutions Provider, in our quest to command market leadership, through Brand Value.

6. We have invested in technology – we have launched a warehouse management program in Morocco to cater to the global names and we plan to extend this to Egygt , Tunisia , Algeria and other locations as well.

———, AND WHERE DO WE NEED TO GO FROM HERE

We need to imbibe an Innovative Culture at our regional levels (Some Innovations may work at regional levels and not at global level, while some may fit into a global scenario, however the Collaboration and Integration needs to be global)

We need to invest in developing “Innovation Think Tanks” involving Fresh Management graduates especially, to compile and collate data,……so as to create an “Innovation Portfolio”

We at the helm of Management can guide and derive from the ‘PORTFOLIO’ thus created and work upon its Strategic viability, and Implementability.

We also need to have the Benchmarks in place, so as to measure the results of our Implementation.

And all this while we need to be nimble, and keep ourselves ahead of change,…… in other words we need be not just the Executive Leaders,…… but we need to become Innovation Leaders !!

I would like to sum up my thoughts by saying, “Our customers will come to us with their problems, and we need to be the solution to their problem…and this is what Innovation means to me”     

I would like to know your thoughts, such that together we can Adapt, Collaborate, Integrate into an organization which believes that Innovation is at its Heart…

Lessons From Tesla’s Approach To Innovation

Nathan Furr, strategy professor at INSEAD, looks at Tesla’s multi-pronged strategy for fundamentally changing an entire industry. The core strategy has unique elements at each level of the ecosystem: overturning the core product architecture, positioning Tesla in key bottleneck components, and resolving system-level limitations that slow the adoption of the technology. At the same time, the leadership team has applied an effective approach to building their innovation capital so they can win the resources and support to execute on their vision. Fascinating lessons for all business leaders.

How to Drive Sustainable and Long-Term Growth?

The most successful leaders and companies figure out how to build a “growth engine” – a handful of capabilities that provide real differentiation in the market. Leaders who succeed in creating growth engines have generally internalized 10 key points, according to Colin Thompson. How many have you internalized?

How Will You Measure Your Life?

This last month saw the passing of Harvard Business School professor Clay Christensen. In the weeks since, many of his insights on both business innovation and achieving life success have resurfaced. For ambitious business leaders, none is more worthy of reflection than this post from Harvard Business Review. A must-read.

In the Consumer Goods Markets space, whilst the key issue remains the ongoing power battle between retailers and food & drink manufacturers, the novelty is the booming food price hike and its consequences on many players across the food value chain.

The paradox between retail power and supplier ability to pass on increased cost of consumer goods

Manufacturers traditionally faced hard times negotiating price increases to retailers. 2007-2008 saw a major change in that suppliers were largely able to pass on increases in raw materials and fuel prices. In a context of continued tension due to the classical power game between retailers and manufacturers, we have seen retailers increase to further heights the market share of their own private label offerings, which are going premium full steam ahead, just like many of the branded food and beverage products. The gap between the premium end of own label and the mainstream brands is narrowing dangerously. Dangerously because what is at stake today more than ever before, is the capability to survive the rising innovation pressure for brands which are not number 1 or 2 in their core markets.

Aside from the challenging and potentially costly quest in keeping an edge over premium private label food offering and therefore brand differentiation, manufacturers will probably look to strip off costs even further and forcing them to make though calls on any remaining non-core assets they hold.

The link between retail power, multi format retailing and innovation

The main result of private labels gaining further market share is that there is less and less shelf space for branded products of established food & drink manufacturers. This shelve space conflict is exacerbated even further in retail markets where the hypermarket format is less developed, but also in mature markets due to the emergence of innovative store concepts like Tesco Express, Kesko Extra, Delhaize “Shop’n go” or “Albert Heijn to go” who are making the fight for shelf space even more intense. Lots of collateral damage ahead? Yes, but there is hope, as the two European hard discounting superpowers, Lidl and Aldi, are shifting their strategies to take up market leading brands in their assortments. Will this help the large majority of brands which do not enjoy a number 1 or 2 position in their category? Clearly, the future for those brands will be a challenging one. Their survival kit will need much more than traditional innovation and differentiation efforts. Those brand owners have the choice between redefining their future core business (i.e. migrating to a private label specialist manufacturer or moving up the positioning of their brand proposition) or hoping to benefit from a consolidation in their category and selling out.

The impact of premiumisation on food giants’ R&D and Innovation strategies

At the current pace, many food & drink manufacturers can be expected to continue to migrate from mainstream food into highly differentiated value-added areas, mainly into products combining one or more of the premium, organic, sustainable, fair-trade, health & wellness, functional, and nutritional attributes.

Taken together, the overall premium food market is expected to reach a similar market value as the well-established discount retail sector.

This creates an enviable prospect for niche players (like Innocent, Gu, Newtree and a myriad of others) becoming attractive take-over targets for either private equities or food giants.

What is new is the trend of food giants acquiring ultra innovative niche players to use them as incremental R&D platforms. An example is Nestlé, entering the capital of the Belgian super premium Marcolini chocolates early 2008 in a quest to boost its upscale confectionery capabilities.

New York, the city that never sleeps

Looking at the category level, the frozen food market is a perfect example of an entire category that lost track of what New York stands for, and got asleep a decade ago. Driven by the overwhelming dynamism of the chilled foods category, it is now undergoing a massive transformation across Europe, largely re-inventing itself and battling hard to gain market share back from the chilled foods segment. Bonduelle, the French based worldwide frozen food player is an example of a company that is shifting from being a lower end commodity vegetable provider into a more sophisticated frozen foods category leader.

Frozen foods are in a come back, as shown by recent category reports in France as well as by frozen food industry campaigns promoting the freshness and nutritional value of frozen food as being at least as good as fresh and chilled offerings. Time will tell whether Unilever’s decision to dispose of its frozen food arm was adequate…

How much more Health & Wellness can we take?

Consumer interest in health & wellness is gaining massive traction and dominates the food & drink innovation space. H&W is not just about more healthy ingredients or recipes. The latest rage comes, unsurprisingly, from the UK market. Next to the “Enriched with” functional foods like bread, milk and eggs with Omega 3 or flavanols and plant sterols, the new kid on the block is now the “Free from” food assortment flourishing across the food aisles. “Free from” is not just free from GMOs, it expands to bad cholesterol, animal testing, trans-fatty acids, gluten and more.

Next to the “bad for your healthy diet” trend, there is the “good for you” trend. Building further on the functional food and beverage trend, the latest most talked about hype is “super-foods” like mangosteen or garbanzo beans and super-fruits like the acai berry which are seen as “must have” ingredients for the beverage and ice cream industries. Super-fruits are hype for their incredible antioxidant properties. Surfing on the same wave is the largely promoted “eat 5 portions of fruit a day” campaigns in several European countries. Chocolate makers too are leveraging the healthy properties of their dark gold. Barry Callebaut, world leader in industrial chocolate, is promote the numerous health benefits of dark chocolate intake, playing its Acticoa card.

And beyond Health & Wellness?

H&W is still largely a “developed” markets thing. In the awaiting of the explosion of this megatrend in the emerging BRIC markets, the food & beverage industry needs to prepare for other megatrends too.

Ethical consumer considerations, which encompass fair trade and sustainable food production, are growing faster amongst the new generations of shoppers. Manufacturers should anticipate this impact on their sourcing and innovation strategies, as this market could well overtake the organic food category in value terms.

Another interesting trend to watch is “cosmetofood”, (combination of food and cosmetic attributes) of which Danone’s Essensis yogurt is a pioneering example claiming an impact on your beauty from within. All these megatrends are likely to significantly influence consumer choices.

Green living, Global sourcing and food value chain sustainability

While global sourcing and sustainability have clearly moved up the ladder of CEO’s agenda, the consumer agenda is getting filled with green considerations. Less pesticides, antibiotics, carbon emissions are up on their agenda.

With strong domestic Chinese and Indian food manufacturers preparing for expansion beyond Asia, European food and retail companies need to engage with and/or prepare to compete more intensively with suppliers from emerging markets, while managing their carbon footprint and their overall Corporate Social Responsibility image.

Global procurement of raw materials by manufacturers and global sourcing of semi to finished products by retailers are forcing both to redesign the organisation charts, to enhance their business processes and to review their food safety standards. As a result, we expect increased regulation from the European Food Safety Authority to provide the industry with a clear framework for food safety and reliable track and trace solutions.

Major technology breakthroughs ahead

We expect technology to continue to impact the food value chain, essentially through nanotechnology and RFID.

Nanotechnology, even in its infancy, should be considered seriously by all food manufacturers, as its impact on the cost base may be significant. Small and medium sized food companies should consider pooling resources in order to bridge their lack of scale, potentially keeping them to watch the nanotechnology revolution from the sidelines.

Rolling out the RFID technology down to the consumer item level in the food and beverage industry remains still largely uneconomical. In the meantime, self scanning in store and also self check outs in supermarkets see a widespread proliferation, slowly but surely preparing consumers for the “Store of the Future” era, where the EPC global revolution will remove queues at check outs and take further costs out of the value chain. Whether we as consumers will pay less for our groceries with more efficient supply chains remains to be seen…

About the author: Erwin De Spiegeleire is currently CEO Europe for a leading manufacturer in the premium segment of baby/infant strollers. His prior roles in international General Management positions include Head of European Consumer Goods at KPMG, Chief Operating Officer worldwide at GS1 and VP & Managing Director EMEA at Hasbro’s Games division.

View Erwin’s short bio

For 20 years, I have practiced innovation in all sorts of organizations, from the smallest (2 people) to the largest (>100.000). I have seen failure and success, and sometimes, I have participated, to failure and to success.

I have studied in detail most of the standard theories and applied several: Blue Ocean, Open Innovation, TRIZ, Creative Design Thinking, CK, Jugaad, RID and many more… I have looked at success stories (from Apple and Google to Swatch and Favi, and so many others) and read tens of studies.

Don’t expect me to criticize any of these: they all contribute to innovation. But expect me to criticize all: they lead us to believe that there is a winning formula. And none of these theories are winning formulas, just useful tools. Because there is no winning formula.

However, from what we do day after day in all sorts of organizations, I believe there is a winning approach, driven by a state of mind and a thorough understanding of the mechanics behind innovation. Formulas targeting only a sub-part of organization (R&D, Strategy, Product Design…) eventually fall short of initial expectations, and, with a few exceptions, only produce marginal and disappointing results.

Introducing the winning approach to innovation

Many managers know the winning approach; many more practice it by instinct rather than by applying a theory. Few of them can explain what they do, but when they dare do it, it can be summarized in a few words: « listen, connect, dare, persist and implement »… There is no recipe (a process or organization common to all), as it always depends on the local situation (people, structure, field of activity, environment).

The winning approach consists in creating a situation where ideas will emerge, develop, die or prosper, just like new varieties of plants will appear in a botanist patch, some of them becoming graceful flowers, others promising medical plants, a few new sources of food, and many, barely new converters of CO2 into Oxygen… which is a good start though (and one or two, undetectable new poisons for solving your family problems like Borgia or Agrippina did…).

The winning approach is based on trust: trust in the capability of all individuals to contribute to innovation, and trust in the capability of some to harvest. Trust in collective intelligence, and dedication to making good use of it. This faith in collective intelligence is a prerequisite to build the much needed state of mind.

Trust is necessary but not sufficient. Growing ideas to maturity and harvesting takes particular skills, not only in the concerned field of business, but also in the way ideas turn into innovation. Otherwise, investing in innovation produces disappointing results for most organizations (see BCG surveys for more on this).

Losing formulas

“It’s not so much that innovation is difficult, but killing innovation is just too easy”. Here are some ways to kill innovation.

Put R&D first

There is little correlation between R&D and innovation! Some companies with consistent investment in R&D fail to innovate (see Orange), and studies by BCG or Booz Allen have consistently demonstrated that. It’s a mistake to entrust R&D to produce innovation. 2 simple reasons for this:

• Innovation often contains technology, technology can trigger innovation sometimes, but in most cases, technology only represents a fraction of what customer consider in an innovation. R&D is clearly a key resource for innovation, but should not be considered as the source of innovation.
• When R&D is considered as the source for innovation, it deters the rest of the organization to contribute, either to generate ideas or simply to refine and adjust concepts.

Bet on marketing/strategy alone

Marketing undoubtedly provides invaluable information on markets, customers and trends. Strategy undoubtedly can help identify new avenues for development. But in a field of activity, all competitors have access to the same information. And in addition, this information describes the current state of a market (statically and dynamically). Marketing/Strategy is a good way to match competition, but it is not sufficient to be ahead of it: the world is changing so rapidly that no analysis, no matter how smart it is, can give a lasting head start.

Thomas Edison did not make a success with the light bulb by looking at the candle market.

Customers and markets are a source of inspiration, but just like for the previous point, the main drawback is to ignore other sources of innovation.

Bet on genius

Of course, no one does it, we are not so naïve! However, we entertain a fascination with all the geniuses who have changed the world (and became rich). And there are so many papers on finding radical innovation inspired by the successes of these geniuses that it keeps our mind focused. So, let me hammer this point, it’s worth it…

Yes, creative genius produces innovation: Edison, Ford and many others have demonstrated it. But the first bad news is that there are not enough geniuses in the world, and like soccer players, they are way too expensive for you… Betting on genius may put you ahead of the pack, but the cost is too high and the probabilities that you have found the best genius are too low to make it a valid innovation strategy.

Second bad news: even a genius is not sufficient today. A genius can invent something great, but to make an invention useful (ie turn it into an innovation), it takes a whole bunch of expertise and work. And it is very difficult to adapt or modify an idea coming from a genius. Many promising start-ups have failed because of this.

The good news is that innovation (even radical) rarely results from a stroke of genius! Specialists of Kaizen know it: innovation, even radical, comes from a massive amount of ideas producing sometimes minor changes in an internal process, sometimes nothing, and sometimes something great.

Some companies do extremely well when they manage to mix intelligently R&D, marketing, strategy and a touch of genius. It is called “transverse approach” and it is a good approach. Others push the approach to the limit, and bet on collective intelligence…

Collective intelligence breeds innovation

A manager who, by instinct, collects information and ideas in the field, not just in his management team or in marketing studies, or in one single department, does nothing else than mobilizing collective intelligence. This approach has been widely developed in many management theories (see Kaizen), and is increasingly popular under the name “participative innovation” (from suggestion boxes, to innovation challenges).

A manager, who puts a team to collaborate in order to find new ideas or actions, rather than rely on his own intelligence, does it too: he mobilizes collective intelligence. This is also very popular in many theories around innovation and creativity these days.

But even in organizations where one of these two trends develops, I see disappointment: people in the field rarely produce an idea worth implementing as such, and teams working on creativity rarely come up with an idea worth implementing. If proponents of one or the other end up with deception, I believe it is due to a misunderstanding: collective intelligence produces improvement in operations but it is not magic, it does not produce instantaneously innovation, it only breeds innovation. But it takes time, sweat and toil.

Toil (and brains, but not just genius)

Collective intelligence uses all the brains available. They all work similarly, but each brain has its own strength and weaknesses. Some of them are good at gathering information, some of them connect information, some of them possess knowledge, some of them can solve problems, some of them build a vision, and a few invent new solutions… The difficulty is to use all the strength available and get round the weaknesses. This takes hard work, to gather information, connect information, identify opportunities, build a vision and a solution to implement it, solve all the problems until it is finally fully implemented.

Sweat (and guts, and humility)

Even when everybody contributes, with brains and work, no evidence appears like magic, no obvious idea flashes like the polar star. The first solution is never the good one, the first obvious idea is rarely the hidden golden egg. Most successful start-ups have gone through rough seas at one point or another: they have rolled-up sleeves, and gone back to the workbench again and again. The path from an idea to an innovation goes through trial and errors, and a lot of sweat. And it takes humility and persistence: humility to admit mistakes, persistence to correct them.

So please, mister CFO, don’t shoot ‘em dead to quickly because they say “I don’t know yet”, or “I was wrong”…

Time

“He’s gone tell us that it takes time to find something”. Yes indeed, and no. Collective intelligence immediately produces significant improvement: “continuous innovation” for products, services and processes, with a clear improvement in operations efficiency. Because people start solving their own problems, and stop doing stupid things. Collective intelligence also produces quickly a fair amount of “incremental innovation”. Because people are eager to do better, and usually have held back a fair quantity of “not so bad ideas”.

But radical innovation takes time, and so does “rupture”. Because it starts with a small, odd, eccentric observation or idea, which will remain overlooked, underestimated, ill-rated, until other work, one day, will give it some sense and make it shine. And this is why I say that there is a winning approach: the one that will give time for the best ideas to grow, and go through the standard four phases of any innovation.

It may suit you or not, but it is so: it takes 9 months to make a child, and 22 months to make an elephant calf.

The four phases

History demonstrates that innovation goes through four phases: perception, maturation, resolution and propagation. Be it a service or a product, the “working prototype” appears to the public in the third phase (when all problems are solved), and gathers all our attention. The “working prototype” has one or a few fathers, who look like geniuses. As a consequence, the other three phases remain underestimated and ill-organized in most organizations. And these are the phases where collective intelligence makes the difference.

The first phase is a phase of “perception”, starting with a massive amount of information: a bit of knowledge, some observations, an unsatisfied need, a dream, an event, a smell, a piece of statistical data, a personal feeling, an emotion (anger, frustration, pleasure…). And in the end, some of this indistinct information aggregates around one topic…

The second phase is a phase of “maturation”. Bits of information connect. It comes through questions: why did we see that, what is behind the data, what triggered this comment, why doesn’t this work well, why, why, why…? (Socrates says: 5 “why” minimum). There is often no obvious answer, but after a while, evidence surfaces. Not evidence of a solution, but evidence of an opportunity that smells good enough. An opportunity that brings together a concept, answering a need, with a first sign of a solution that may be viable (I can hear people whispering “profitable”, but wait, it will come in due time).

The third phase is resolution. First meaning of resolution: decision to go further. It smells good enough to explore further and start investing a bit. Second meaning of resolution: solve implementation problems. That is where R&D is needed most! “R” for “research”, and “D” for… “design”. If it’s innovative, it means that we don’t know yet how to do it! So we need to find out a way to implement, to satisfy a customer potential need. That’s where numbers will appear (cost first…).

The fourth phase is propagation. It’s the poor relation of innovation… too often overlooked. This is when non profitable innovations must be killed. But before they are killed, they must be given a chance to be profitable. R&D is needed again, but this time, “D” stands for development of a viable industrial implementation on a large scale. And Finance becomes king, as “cash is king” and innovation without cash in the end is really an efficient way to go bankrupt (my experience). Propagation is the phase where the innovation must be adjusted to reach a large audience and generate profit. Propagation is where the problem is not anymore the solution designed in the third phase, but the way it will reach all its intended audience, profitably.

What about Sales and Marketing?

It is either always there in all 4 phases, or completely absent! When innovation is for the end-customer, marketing must be on board as of day 1. But innovation is not meant to be for the end customer, just for any customer, be it internal or external. But even when innovation serves an internal client, the methods of sales & marketing should prevail, to help reach the final goal of an innovation: make profit.

What comes next?

The right approach is not sufficient. Each of the four phases needs structuring. There are tools, skills and people, that needs either to be identified and selected, or grown and developed: for collection of information, for treatment, for opportunity identification, for maturation, for problem solving, for final design and “sale” of the nascent innovation, for large scale development.

These skills, tools and people are specific to innovation as they need to develop capabilities which are contrary to standard operations: autonomy, flexibility, risk, right to fail, collaborative work, imagination… (Standard operations favor control, rules and processes, planning, standards, “zero risk” and individual excellence).

For what we see in organizations, there is a specific formula for each group, no “one fits all” solution. But all formulas have one thing in common for sure: a specific state of mind. What kills innovation is fear: fear of judgment, of failure, of poor individual performance. Fear kills this little spark that all people contributing to innovation have in their eyes. Fear freezes brains. I know one thing that can defeat fear: fun. Sharing and growing ideas, giving birth to an innovation take sweat and toil, but it is a pleasure. Whatever approach you choose, if the consequence is that people enjoy 10% of their working time dedicated to doing things differently, then, the result will show on the bottom line.

About the author: Olivier Pujol has worked over 23 years in many countries, positions, and companies. He has conducted business in 12 European countries, in Africa, North America, South America, and Asia, for companies like Schlumberger or Honeywell, as well as SMEs and start-ups. He has been in the position of CEO, COO, field manager, strategy and M&A specia list, business developer, and consultant. He worked on offshore platforms, in the jungle, but also in board rooms and electronic labs.

Over the years, Olivier has specialized in two fields:

• Management of organizations (with the hindsight of many sectors, company policies, and a long practice of management)
• International development of innovative products and solutions (after experimenting himself the challenge of selling innovation)

Olivier holds an MSc of l’Ecole Centrale de Paris, and an MBA from Insead. He can speak 5 languages (French, English, Spanish, Portuguese and German).

Export is nowadays not anymore a “nice to have”, but a necessity for innovative SMEs. It goes through building an international export culture and contracting local executives.

The Global Innovation Index 2011 indicates that countries like France and Italy are lagging behind other equivalent countries in terms of innovation. However, these countries demonstrate a capability to innovate in many fields.

Recently, the French Business Confederation has expressed the concern that French SMEs seemed less capable than others to grow internationally. And the Global Innovation Index ranks France very low for services export (like Italy).

The latter could explain the former: innovation without export remains confidential and has little chance to succeed and generate profitable business.

But exporting is not easy. It takes the willingness to approach each market as a totally new market, in terms of customers, distribution and competition. Innovative companies must enrich their culture with international business culture, mixing foreigners and locals at executive level.

Export is a necessity

Some very large countries have a domestic market large enough to generate significant revenue and economies of scale, ie: profitability.

But in many countries, home markets are not large enough to turn innovation into profitability: international growth is a necessity. Some countries, like former Commonwealth countries, or from the former USSR have a very favorable access to a selected international market. But for most European countries, their previously fast growing domestic markets are not sufficient today in a context of international competition.

Language is a barrier that can be overcome as the Dutch and the Scandinavian have demonstrated. In some countries, export is almost in the genes of the population (Singapore, the Netherlands, Ireland, Belgium…). And they are successful. But other countries do not have the culture to do so, even though they don’t really have a choice: export is a matter of survival today.

Specific needs for export

Success in a country does not make success in another country. Some specific products like small electronics, chocolate bars, shoes or cloths may induce to believe that markets are homogeneous internationally, but at a more granular level, it is not the case. Design is often country specific, but also market structure and market regulation. Crossing borders takes to reconsider all local elements: customer’s expectations, competition and distribution.

Foreign customer expectation

Entrepreneurs immersed in their home market have a natural understanding of their customers’ behaviors and expectations. They can identify new trends and design the right solution. They can complete their intuition getting market feedback and applying well known marketing processes, to gather customers’ opinions, finalize the right offer, and go to market. They know well their distribution network and after a bit of trial and error, they can find the right final packaging for the offer.

Question: how much of this offer is specific to their home market?

Food is the easiest example: eating habits, cooking habits are significantly different in all countries (can you compare Japan, Spain, the US, the UK, India, Morocco or France?) In some countries, people prefer to prepare meals, in others, they buy and cook ready meals. Some like to buy fresh food every day, others long life products once a week. Food chains know this problem well as they are used to adapting traditional recipes to local habits when they export a concept.

It is easy to make mistakes: a car called “Nova”, created in an English speaking country, was exported in Spanish speaking countries under the same name (“no va” means “doesn’t work” in Spanish); the German “Gerber” baby food, could never be sold in France as “gerber” means “vomit” in French.

These are funny obvious cases but many are not that obvious. Each country has its peculiarities. One of our iCEOs(*), about to launch a telecom business in a new Asian country, decided not to trust international marketing analysis covering this country: “I asked a local marketing agency to run a local market study, by fear that I would miss something crucial. And I was right! I would have gone “one-eyed” amongst competitors with good eyesight.”

Local competition

Being in one country at the forefront of innovation does not mean in today’s world that there is no competition abroad. Service ideas are not unique, new products can be created at the same time on both sides of the Atlantic.

Having a competitor on a new market is a good thing: customers are more inclined to make the leap of faith of buying an innovative solution if there is a diversified choice already. But ignoring a local competitor can be a bad mistake, as he has the natural understanding of is native market. In addition, when a foreign company arrives on a new market, it boosts local potential competitors who can catch up thanks to their intimacy with local customers and distribution. Local market expertise is a necessity when developing abroad.

Foreign country distribution

One of our iCEOs described a typical situation: two soft drink companies developed almost simultaneously in an Eastern European country; one hired local executives, and quickly established a dominant position, while the other, with mostly foreign managers, stalled. It wasn’t until the second company “poached” local executives from the first company, that they regained a market share more consistent with their international market position.

Most countries have subtle specificities when it comes to distribution that international managers may not always identify. A multinational industrial company with 35 different business lines found out that for some businesses, the global strategy had to be specific for targeted countries, because of local distribution peculiarities (different habits for wholesalers, retailers or installers, 2 tier distribution in some countries, 1 tier in others). They could identify it because they were strongly established in each country, and followed their local executives experience and knowledge.

Local executives may also be aware of local regulations, or have political contacts enabling them to influence local regulations or simply approval by government bodies.

Creating an international culture for export

In order to address these challenges, innovative companies need to build an international business culture, as early as possible in the export process.

It is sometimes difficult for SME top executives to trust and hire a foreign executive in the target country. Prejudices are engrained and even sometimes justified! Moreover, language barriers can make it difficult for the recruiting company to perceive the real competence of a foreign executive.

But there are executives with either bicultural competence, or a strong international business culture in addition to their local business culture. The problem is to find them. This is what a natively international recruiting network can provide: identify, select and propose these profiles.

In addition, exporting entails major financial risks. Hiring a full time executive too early is somewhat hazardous. In order to mitigate the risk, SMEs need flexibility: the possibility to temporarily contract these executives and go for permanent recruiting only when success is in sight and when the personality match is confirmed.

About the author: Olivier Pujol has worked over 23 years in many countries, positions, and companies. He has conducted business in 12 European countries, in Africa, North America, South America, and Asia, for companies like Schlumberger or Honeywell, as well as SMEs and start-ups. He has been in the position of CEO, COO, field manager, strategy and M&A specialist, business developer, and consultant. He worked on offshore platforms, in the jungle, but also in board rooms and electronic labs. Olivier holds an MSc of l’Ecole Centrale de Paris, and an MBA from Insead. He can speak 5 languages (French, English, Spanish, Portuguese and German).

Business processes: How to reduce cost with Nano technology

In times of financial prudence, credit scarcity, retrenchment, solvency risk and everyone demanding more for less, how can business organizations improve their business processes and grow their profits? How can compliancy in best business practice mean reduction in facility costs? Are there still opportunities to do things better? What if you could add remarkable value to your company products? Or indeed remove an entire manufacturing or business process? Can innovation in technology really deliver cash savings?

Almost every business organisation (and Government Department) today is unaware of nano-coatings; thin film coatings that are up to 100 000 times smaller than the diameter of a fly-hair! These smart fluids including varnishes and related paints can offer incredible functionality to products; assets and infrastructure, saving businesses and cash strapped Local Authorities billions of pounds in revenue costs.

Smart fluids change surface chemistry, adding value, strength, diversity and functionality. Classic chemistry is unaltered, just our understanding of what happens is new when one controls atoms and molecules at the molecular scale and consolidating new ingredients for stability in robust fluids.

So how can our busy CE0’s, SME’s and Senior Government Employees benefit from knowledge of these business processes and applications?

Smart fluids (paints, varnishes & thin film coatings) offer every business new and positive business processes. From enabling entire building and food processing units, health centres to be cleaned (with 75% reduction in aggressive cleaning materials, 40% reduction in water usage, 40% reduction in labour), to preventing wear and fatigue in all moving mechanical parts like lifts, (bearings, gears and pistons). Imagine no mechanical wear! It’s not just farmers and drilling rigs that can benefit here. Anyone with large transport fleets can benefit with savings of around 11% in fuel, less maintenance and reduced emissions. Frankfurt Airport reduced the costs of aircraft generators by a reasonable margin by being aware of metal protect fluids. And savvy wind turbine owners and operators know how to keep their blades clean, their gears working and electronics in good shape by being ahead of the game in smart fluid functionality. Some big insurance companies already have their entire buildings protected against employee cross-infection. Hospitals can learn from the risk prevention specialists!

What if we could add this magic protection to CCTV cameras, making the internal heat resisters impervious to corrosive moisture? How much would that save the UK taxpayer? Additionally, one could add more functionality to legacy CCTV’s, say the ability to detect radiation! Would that reduce hospital costs and provide superior security to London commuters?

Water and electronics don’t normally mix. Would it be good to protect all electronic equipment (+ cables) from the menace of water, moisture and dust? What is the fire risk associated with corrosive cabling in old buildings and underground infrastructure? Sometime the obvious is slow to reach the decision maker. It took bar-codes fifty years!

Imagine sound proof barriers and heat shields at the end of a painter’s brush! No more heavy and costly insulation: just a few coatings of paint and bingo your home, office, mobile-fridge, ServerSite or warehouse is energy efficient and BREAM compliant. Could this save your plant and engineering processes revenue? Look at the possible savings in material costs alone.

From textiles to steel, wood, glass, concrete to paper, jewellery and leather, even ceramics; you name it and there are coatings that can add magic functionality. Surfaces can be made super-repellent to water, oil, dirt and grime. In fact most of these materials can be rendered positively antimicrobial also, reducing the risk of MRSA/C.Diff etc. Would this save the NHS revenue?

Reduce costs and improve business processes in the food sector

What about the food sector? How can these fluids increase hygiene, reduce costs and improve business processes, from grower to processor and onward to supermarket and consumer.

Could we improve packaging, could we add additional value? Hundreds of applications exist to enhance seed and root development, to remove risk of drought or over-watering by using new technologies like a tank inspection camera, to prevent toxic river-discharge, and remove bacterial damage to seeds, to eradicate spider-mite in poultry farms, to enhance hygiene across every level of breeding and production.

That life can be enhanced for transport infrastructure and city dwellers there is little doubt. Air and enhanced water quality via nano-filters are coming. Hygiene on public transports will improve. Light and colour will improve as materials are selected for new intrinsic value.

Roads will last 100 years, not 20. Bridges will become anti-corrosive. Wood will be naturally protected much like the broccoli leaf and in time deflect termites and dirt. Lots of preservatives and external coatings that sell annually will be redundant. Property by the sea will be painted perhaps once in twenty years, or longer.

The manipulation of materials at the molecular scale offers amazing hope in the fight against disease. Prevention of course is better than cure and our ability to see early stage cancer or cell degeneration offers scope not just to fight disease but extend life itself far in excess to what we imagine today.

Innovation is a step by step process. The big eureka moment is a myth. Whilst today surface coatings offer remarkable value for business process efficiency, tomorrow this technology will transform everything we experience throughout every step of life. So whilst human cell innovation and research is happening now, the market is already offering thin-film coatings that can add compelling value to your business today. Why wait and waste revenue! Smash the mindset that locks innovation and change within your business. Give your cleaning staff a microfiber cloth for Christmas! Remove every item of polish, bleach, wax, detergent and aroma snake-oil from your cleaning cupboards and start to clean environmentally, saving revenue in the process. The knowledge you receive from surface coatings will create numerous alternative innovations as you deploy this new science to every aspect of you commercial and personal life.

About the author: Dermott Reilly is passionate about making technology deliver. He worked in the food sector for many years where he had hands on experience of wastage and inefficiency in that sector. Over the last decade Dermott spearheaded a number of projects where emerging technologies helped improve business and quality of live. Dermott has four patents registered and helps companies drive innovative projects forward. He is Training Manager EMEA for RFID4U and Strategic Consultant for emerging technologies.

View Dermott’s short bio