Next Level Innovation Blog

my idea on IBM's collaborative Thinkplace space: shared office spaces in big city outskirts

by Yann A Gourvennec
This post was originally published on the Marketing & Innovation blog

A short while ago I went to visit one of my customers in order to have a discussion about innovation. One of the ideas that was mentioned during this meeting was about the need to have a repository in which ideas could be stored and in which one could also exchange and debate about them.  Immediately, the idea of a wiki sprang to my mind.  It's only natural because this is what I'm using in  the office; at Orange business services we have a Confluence(*) wiki platform, set up on top of an Oracle files database (a popular CMS platform used for building repositories) and the wiki enables us to store as many documents as we wish and start discussions with our colleagues and actually to organise ourselves around projects. This is very convenient and I thought it was worth mentioning in a discussion with my client.

  And indeed the client in question was interested.  However, this client also mentioned to me the name of a project by IBM that I have never heard of before: Thinkplace. At first I thought it was some sort of piece of software that you would put on the Intranet and then use to share material with your colleagues.  But then I realised, by searching the Web with the 'thinkplace' keyword, that thinkplace was actually a fully fledged open Internet website whereby anybody, repeat anybody, can post ideas in order to be debated with others. I don't know if that's web 2.0 for you, but I think that's a great idea.  So I entered my idea.  The only way to test the system, is to do it hands-on, and actually if it is about proposing new ideas and getting people to start discussions, I thought it would be a great opportunity to submit an idea I had thought of and get the opinion of others. So here's my idea, in writing and in a short video which I recorded for the purpose and posted on Facebook too.

TerraBella: Connected Shared Office Spaces In Big City Outskirts tags: collaboration, productivity, work The idea is to enable collective and fully connected shared open spaces, between different companies, on the outskirts of the cities of our big metropolises to avoid unnecessary commuting, + provide outstanding infrastructure & tools for knowledge workers Reduce the impact of commuting on the environment, improve work efficiency, develop open innovation, improve well-being of employees How would it work? How might it be implemented? Several high-tech companies could partner together to provide such shared spaces, in partnership with professional real-estate companies. Shared spaces could then be rented out to companies (large or medium) who would rent a number of cubicles for their employees: salespeople, knowledge workers, clerks etc What are the benefits to the stakeholders of this idea? The idea is to enable collective and fully connected shared open spaces, between different companies. On the outskirts of the cities of our big metropolises so as to avoid unnecessary commuting, as well as provide a work dedicated area for knowledge workers, and also entice knowledge sharing across different organisations. The project is not technologycal per se, but technology is of the essence when it comes to making people collaborate. These shared office spaces could also be the opportunity for high technology companies (IT infrastructure, application software, telecommunications etc) to demonstrate new technologies in the collaboration area, and even develop new tools, more pervasive, more user-friendly. The impact on the environment as well as the well-being of employees would be dramatic. Despite the availability of cheap and almost unlimited bandwidth, pervasive and outstanding collaboration tools, which enable people to share documents and even design new ones over the Internet without leaving their offices, I have noticed that working habits by and large haven't changed much in the past 15 years. Despite all the talk about remote working, mobility, pervasive computing etc, most of the knowledge workers from our big cities around the globe are still doing the same stupid thing everyday: spend hours commuting from their leafy suburbs to the centre of town, or even the other way round. However, should we ask these people sitting at their desk why they have to be in the office, I think we would be very surprised to discover that, for a vast majority of them, the people they work with most of the time are not sitting next to them in the cubicle next door, but faraway. And even when they are located in a nearby building, chances are they will talk to eachother over the phone. The benefit would be manyfold. High-tech companies would not only make revenue on this, but that would also provide them some sort of showcase for their new technologies, and they would also be able to benefit from this initiative to show that their ideas can have a positive impact on the environment. This would be a compelling living proof that technology can actually do something about the environment. Participating companies would also benefit from this idea because they will have to invest less in real estate, they would have more flexible workforces, and it has also been proven by IBM in a similar experiment in Paris, France (1995 and beyond) that on average employees were gaining 1 1/2 hours every day on travel time and that one of our out of this one hour and a half was reinvested in work and productivity (employees been keen to show that they don't benefit from the system but are more productive.

(*) Confluence is one of the platforms made available to enterprises in order to set up internal wikis

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHUVBZW6oIU]

how to turn you large organisation into a web 2.0 wizard in 15 steps

this article was orginally published at http://visionarymarketing.wordpress.com/

introduction This document was originally designed to address the questions which were sent to me by large customers wanting to launch work 2.0 initiatives.  Very often these clients wanted to jump on the bandwagon, but they didn't know how to do it.  They required help and guidance, even to understand the very meaning of Web 2.0. Evaluating what should be done as part of such Web 2.0 initiatives with large organisations implies that we rethink the definition of Web 2.0 (see O'reilly's 2.0 meme map to start with). An exec summary of this definition is provided hereafter. More than often, we have noticed that the main motivation for large corporations to jump on the bandwagon is to keep up with the Joneses. In this document we will describe the main principles and the main reasons why you should or should not opt for a Web 2.0 initiative.  Large corporations are getting increasingly interested in launching 2.0 initiatives. To a certain extent we can relate that to the fact that an increasing number of success stories are relayed by the press and that most of them are related to impressive buzz marketing operations, which are seemingly easy to replicate.  The entire world is full of the concept of Web 2.0, so the idea is often not to miss the opportunity to do something about it. All of this is very tempting and hard to resist.  However, companies should never launch 2.0 websites just for the sake of it. Indeed, it requires a lot of forward thinking about what one is trying to achieve and how it fits in the overall strategy.  To a certain extent what we are witnessing today with Web 2.0, is not very far away from what we have witnessed in the 1990s, when large corporations wanted to launch their first websites.  More than often, the same question prevails: that is to say, is this website going to support or jeopardise my brand.

how can you tell a website is 2.0-ready?

There are several characteristics of Web 2.0, which we have described hereafter:

• human characteristics
  • Collective intelligence: this is a concept which was developed by Howard Rheingold. This concept implies that when a group is cooperating, the results of this cooperation are stronger than the sum of all the contributions from all the individuals which are part of this group.
  • The user is the producer: With Web 2.0, users are also producers not just spectators. Web 2.0 sites are definitely alien to advertising and communications. Ignoring that and pursuing the old habit of delivering pre-formatted top-down product-orientated messages would be a non-starter.
• functional characteristics:
  • RSS: RSS is more than just a feature, it is has a real functional impact on user behaviour. RSS (real simple syndication) enables users to receive information without having to make any effort to collect it. The use of RSS feeds imposes that the user installs a feed reader. More and more these the readers are integrated within the Internet browser or within the Internet toolbar (Google, Yahoo, etc.). The exponential development of RSS is at last making it possible to push information towards the user as was originally designed at the end of the 1990's.
• technical characteristics:
  • thin clients, light programming and mash-ups: the basic idea is that Web 2.0 websites can be built very rapidly by using existing objects or even objects and pieces of code or data drawn from existing websites. These existing websites can also be external. A typical mash-up example is that of websites which use Internet maps (mainly from Google), in order to make geo-localisation possible.
  • The web as a platform: this is the recycling of the ‘old' (2000+) asp concept (application service provision). The idea is to use the network as a repository, and to avoid thick clients (see previous paragraph).

Strictly speaking, there is no objective definition of what Web 2.0 is and what it isn't.  In this Web 2.0 category (comprehensive listing available at http://www.go2web20.net/) going to work 20.net) we will find a great number of websites which have nothing to do with one another, because the 2.0 concept is in fact more recent than many of these sites themselves.  This ‘new' Internet is more about concept than definition.  It is about freedom of expression, it is about horizontal innovation, it is about openness and it is about exchange of information, and more than anything else it is about the respect of individuals who are also contributors. To sum it up, for a large corporation, for a big logo, embracing Web 2.0 is more about culture than technology.  It implies that the large corporation has to give up its natural tendency to the levelling of differences, lack of transparency and generalisation of paranoia mainly with regard to anything related to the brand.  In other words large corporations which would like to embrace Web 2.0, would need to be technically and mentally but mainly organisationally prepared in order to be able to withstand suggestions, critique, and even possibly destruction in a totally transparent manner. Any attempt at jumping into the work 2.0 bandwagon in a different way could be very negatively criticised online and the impact on the brand could be tremendous.  Web sentiment analysis tools such as flair (developed by Orange labs in San Francisco) allow the monitoring and also the prevention of Internet buzz (either positive or negative).  Such tools have to be combined with support engagements delivered by specialised principal consultants.  Very often, reputation management is overlooked by large organisations which fail to understand that the Internet is not a traditional media which works in a top-down manner.

how to build a (really) collaborative website?

To sum it up in a few words, the real question about a Web 2.0 website is not a question of definition (we have already concluded that it doesn't exist) but the real question is to know whether the main principle as which client collaboration on the Internet have been respected or not.  We have listed hereafter 15 different criteria which may collaborative website the success or a failure.  A we have listed the 15 potential criteria which make up the main characteristics of web collaboration on the Internet:

one: users don't come on websites by chance

Installing an online forum and letting users enter comments, adding a bit of technicality here and there is not enough to transform a static website into an interactive and collaborative website.  Users and Web surfers never come by chance on a website.  Forgetting about that principle is only going to lead you to create an empty shell where collaboration will not actually happen.

two: do not confuse comments for collaboration

Comments are reaction, not action nor pro-action. On the contrary, collaboration is about working together (co-laborare in Latin).  And it is about working from the bottom up (Howard Rheingold talked about the guy in the basement)

three: facilitate, facilitate, facilitate

In order to create a new effective collaborative website, facilitation has to happen at all times, and especially at the beginning of the initiative.  Collaborative websites do require that a large number of information be created upfront in order to attract new visitors before generating collaboration (caution!  This content has to be real and not just formal).

four: your brand has to be adapted to the spirit of Web 2.0

Web 2.0 is more about spirit and concepts and principles than definition, as we have seen already.  It is imperative that your brand be in accordance with that spirit before launching your initiative.  In other words putting Web 2.0 Sunday clothes on your static website is never going to make it for you.  If your brand is incompatible with this experience of openness and exchange it is advised to create or use another brand or sub-brand as a workaround and not use the main brand for this initiative.

five: avoid talking about your products

Web 2.0 users come to your websites to gather information, to exchange, to share, to receive too, but they will not go there to look at your product descriptions.  Otherwise they will just go to your static website.

six: great causes can work wonders

Great passion emerges often (always?) from great causes, not from small products.  Seven: think about user benefits: don't forget to serve users and to analyse why they will be attracted to your content and why they will come back to the website.  If all you can do is think about yourselves, and your company, you will be the only ones to go and visit this website.  And being alone on a collaborative website is not a decent objective.

eight: openness and transparency

The collaborative web does not agree with closed circles.  Collaboration implies transparency.  Corporate speak is not allowed and online advertising is not of the essence of Web 2.0 either.  If you forget about this basic rule, at best visitors will be indifferent, and at worse they will be very critical.

nine: the tone of voice Your tone of voice has to be very straightforward and very honest and you're well advised to avoid taking users for children or worse.  The Web 2.0 spirit implies that the user-producer be respected and showed confidence and appreciation.

ten: reactivity and spontaneity

You have to respond to suggestions or comments as soon as they have been added.  The Web is about real-time dictatorship.  If the user-producer feels that his suggestions have not been taken seriously, or too late, then he or she will be discouraged and will never come back, or even he or she will speak evil of your in his or her blogs. Spontaneity is Web 2.0 politeness because it shows the interest that your organisation is bestowing upon the user-producer.

 eleven: quantity and flow of information

The collaborative web revolves around content.  If you launch a collaborative website which generates only one or two comments means that you are exposing your company to critics and jokers.

twelve: be ethical

You have to avoid creating fake blogs (aka flogs) at all cost. Fake bloggers also have to be avoided and all other attempts at cheating with your users and visitors.  There are many chances that you will be uncovered rapidly and that retaliations will be extreme (see the example of the website for the Sony PSP Playstation at Christmas 2006[1])

 thirteen: modernity and ‘geekiness'

Very often, large companies have lost track of the reality of the world of the Internet, because they are very far away from it (or their IT managers are far from it).  Chances are that some of your employees know more about collaboration and up-to-date IT techniques than some of your IT staff.  There is nothing worse than a corporation which wants to do something on the Web 2.0 and therefore apes existing web successes (Second Life for example) and the result being very wide of the mark.  With Web 2.0 development techniques also have to be Web 20 related: free software, collaborative design, creativity meetings and collaborative meetings (barcamps and all the variations on the theme).

fourteen: total immersion

Avoid creating fake 3-D environments at all cost if the objective is to provide a real total immersion experience (chances are that we would be talking about Web 3.0 here and not 2.0 anymore), you have to abide to the rules.  That is to say that you will have to start from scratch and recreate an entire meta-verse such as second life (which is very difficult to achieve), or more pragmatically that you would massively invest in Second Life itself in order to carry out innovative ‘immersive' marketing.

fifteen: when the rubber meets the road

Last but not least, even if you have respected the first 14 rules, chances are that you have probably done anything yet.  As always when it comes to implementing information systems, execution is everything.  In other words it's not just a matter of content it's a matter of implementation, of state of mind. Let's repeat once more that Web 2.0 is not just about following the rules of the game, it's a way of life.

recommendation: bringing real answers to real questions

For a large corporation wanting to embrace a Web 2.0 initiative, the question is not to know whether or not do it, but to understand whether any benefits can be withdrawn from such an initiative, and to define which benefits can be shared with its users.  Quid pro quoi is indeed the real essence of a collaborative experience on the Internet.  As a consequence, you will have to ask yourself this fundamental question about your Internet strategy at large.  Many chances are that being on the Internet in an open and collaborative environment where collaboration is everywhere users are going to be absolutely free to express themselves.  As a consequence, embarrassing questions are very likely to crop up to the surface (environmental question, reliability question, ethical question, political question, social responsibility questions etc).  And I'm not even mentioning the lobbying and pressure groups.

My recommendation is therefore threefold:

stage one: you have to define your Internet strategy

Define your objectives for the collaborative website, and what can be the key success factors with regards to such an operation.  You will also have to define the boundaries which will protect your brand and your reputation.  Then you will have to determine the leeway you will have, the support and internal and external sponsorship as well.  Then you will have to target a subject matter (AXA has done something similar choosing health prevention as a great cause before they launched their 2.0 initiative).  You will also have to evaluate the questions surrounding branding (see the point dedicated to how your brand relates to Web 2.0).  The potential alliances with non-governmental organisations and associations for instance will have to be evaluated too.

stage two: define your actions

You will have to deduce from the above the necessary actions for you to fill in the gaps before jumping to a technical solution that means nothing.  Before you start a collaborative experiment on the Internet, start collaborating yourself with the experts of Web 2.0 (if you don't understand this, forget about launching a Web 2.0 initiative altogether) you should ask these Web 2.0 experts to help you cope with this new initiative.  Last but not least, don't forget about your clients themselves and I am sure that they would also be very interested in taking part in to design adventure.  Your employees to might like the idea too, don't overlook them, some of them are experts and they are probably somewhere in your basement.

stage three: test your vision

Test a first version on a reduced sample, but large enough to generate enough collaboration and feedback.  Then turn this platform this test platform into a tool for real-time test, through the involvement of renowned bloggers and influential 2.0 players.  The latter will not only analyse and evaluate your online communication skills but they should also participate in this initiative.  This might mean that you have to compensate some of them for their time (money though).  Finally, a permanent and constant follow-up of this initiative has to be put in place right from day one. Important notice: expecting transparency beforehand is indispensable, even before you start thinking about this project.  If you do, it could turn your organisation into a web 2.0 wizard in the blogosphere and an Internet co-marketing role model for the rest of the world. Think about it!

---

[1] see http://ygourven2.online.fr/webcom/mbaesg/ppt/mbaesg-collaboration-1-76.htm and Consumerist.com at http://consumerist.com/consumer/alliwantforxmasisapsp/lucky-golden-shit-awards-shipped-233455.php

Survival of the creative – how to get fit for innovation…(Part III)

So the final episode on the fitness session for innovation... last time we spoke on the 4 P's of creativity, introducing press and person.

A third factor is the person itself. Just like intelligence, creativity can be tested and trained. On of the more widely accepted methods is the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking, which measures originality, elaboration, fluency and flexibility of the person assessed.

And in the end innovation needs a vehicle, a product, which can be both tangible like a new portable multi-media device or something intangible like a business model for air travel.

Concluding, people and companies that want to innovate need to be in enabling environments, have differentiating ways to get to new insights and develop their creative capabilities.

Seems logical? Just consider the amount of hours you spend per week being creative – as in thinking about new processes, products and business models for improving your daily life or the performance of your company or client’s organization.

Would it not be great to spend one day a week with our stakeholders, e.g. clients, to work on innovation – independent of whether we work in finance, marketing, recruitment, consulting, lawn mowing, the circus or any other type of activity?

(Talking about circus though, did you ever think this ancient concept would generate a buzz in the 21^st century attracting herds of people spending a considerable amount for a ticket? Just imagine Cirque du Soleil, again creativity demonstrated…)

Thanks & Cheers,

The evolution of intellectual property

Firms endeavor to find the ideal balance between traditional proprietary invention and the new more open collaborative business models. IBM assembled a worldwide community of 50 experts in the fields of law, academia, economics, government, technology and others. These experts collaborated with IBMers to discuss the issues, determine the key characteristics of a properly functioning IP marketplace, and establish a blueprint for meaningful change.

Read the report

Guy Kawasaki has an interesting opinion, as always, on what to say if someone asks you  "what makes your company defensible?" if you are not an employee of a large corporation but a startup.

Survival of the creative – how to get fit for innovation…(Part II)

In Part I we left off at the question "what does it take stay creative"?

I would not be much of a consultant if I did not have some P’s, S’s, C’s, or any other letter for that matter, up my sleeves.

The four P’s of creativity are considered to be Press, Process, Person and Product. And have been introduced by Rhodes in 1961 and taken further by Isaksen in 1987.

First of all press is about the environment someone is in. It is concerned with the climate and culture and all factors influencing them.

In talking to corporate leaders during IBM’s CEO 2006 Study interviews, climate for creativity was one of the topics felt as being highly important and paid very little attention to. They also feel that they would need to take the lead in setting corporate values and act as role models in order to generate a supporting climate and culture.

In order to be a truly innovative company, creativity needs to be embedded in every part of the business, moving beyond the traditional places like R&D departments, business development etc. A nice example is Google’s famous “creative-day”, one day per week when employees spend time working on outside-the-box ideas.

Secondly creativity needs to be guided when it needs to lead to innovation. Of course it is good to sit together with nice and inspiring people and brainstorm until break of dawn. Or to take a brush and come up with yet another brilliant painting – but innovation is about new stuff that generates benefit to the world, occasionally expressed in hard currencies.

A structured process needs to be in place to release this type of benefit from an innovation. It often is a process of divergence and convergence, and follows stages like exploration, illumination, assessment, incubation and launch of a product, process or other type of innovation. Asian high-tech companies have been masters in this, where the standard creation process is strengthened by dedicated creativity centers where people are posted until they complete a certain complex assignment.

So it is not only about a process that a person or company has installed, it is how it is used and augmented by differentiating attributes and methods. A nice example for unleashing creativity is Wikipedia, an idea based on the good old Delphi method

Wikepedia – example of creation

The process of generating encyclopedic knowledge has evolved since Aristotle put pen to paper to record knowledge of his time. Somewhat later the Chinese scholar Tu Yo wrote an encyclopedia in the ninth century. And Diderot wrote a true piece of art in the 18th century, it took him 29 years. This was the so called ‘one bright man’ model. This model evolved in the ‘one best practice’ model where a group of the best experts on certain topics created the Britannica Encyclopedia.

Wikipedia brought the ‘one for everybody’ model, in which everybody can contribute to one mega encyclopedia. Instead of hierarchical lines or fixed team structures, extreme decentralization and self-regulation shapes the process of creativity.

The creativity process is triggered by the need to explore the unknown and constantly improve the insights resulting from this exploration, divergence and convergence take turns.

Let's call it a day on part II for now, and talk about Person and Product in part III

Thanks for your attention in this.

Cheers,

Jordan

Innovating the office at Redbull HQ, London

So! This week I was discussing with some people, what it is that makes customers want to come visit your office and I just found the coolest example!

Try this for a different approach: Redbull headquarters wanted an office building that pumped of adrenaline, and so they installed a three-storey slide next to the stair-case, a ping-pong conference table and an office bar/meeting place. The whole office makes you feel excited and want to try new things. I reckon it not only makes employees creative, but it also makes your customers excited to see you.

Check out more pictures on designverb

Survival of the creative – how to get fit for innovation…(Part I)

While stuck in traffic on my way to a client today, I was thinking about why we have not come up with a personal air transportation system. Like George Jetson I would find myself in my own jet-propelled, carbon-fiber, glass-bubbled cocoon to get to work.

Probably there are all kinds of reasons why this is not possible today. One thing is sure; it is not because we lack drive for innovation.

“Innovation”, there it is, the word that keeps us busy these days. Actually, it has been a concept long before the word itself was even invented. For instance around the year 8.000 bC when someone – in what is now Asia – created something that I used this morning to get to this client……the wheel. Since then this invention has been improved on a continuous basis, up to the year 2005 aD when a major tyre manufacturer launched the “Tweel”, a tyre and a wheel in-one. Compared to the current wheel and airpressure tyre system the new construction is easier to maintain, process, more resistant and better applicable on vehicles with smaller wheels, like wheelchairs.

So, since man set foot on this beautiful planet he has been driven by creating better circumstances for himself and winning competition against others. In doing so we come up with new stuff and ways of working every day. So what is keeping us on our feet in this journey called innovation?

Actually, it is the thing we lose the older we get if we do nothing to keep it….creativity. Hence, in order to innovate we need to be creative. Just like we go to the gym to get fit, we need to train our ability to create on a continuous basis.

But what does it take to stay creative? Let’s discuss this in part II...

In the meantime I’m curious for any reactions

Thanks & cheers,

Jordan

Right-brainers and left-brainers

Here's an interesting book to read: a whole new mind by Daniel Pink. And here's a good summary of the book from one of my favorite blogs on presenting.

Philips Design is one of those power houses of creativity and apparently they made quite an impression with "the Simplicity Event". You get a feeling for what the future might have in store for all of us as consumers and the right-brain, the conceptual and design part leading, seems the trend.

In that same article there's a reference to a typical left-brain spreadsheet  approach to innovation:

• Percentage of Philips's total 2005 revenues from products introduced in the previous 12 months: 49% Percentage in 2003: 25%

I've been trying to find any information on what % is a 'good' number (if it actually exists). 0% definitely isn't nor is 100%. Anybody any thoughts or information...?

Real Innovators - 8 truths

On his Marketing & Strategy Innovation Blog, Alain Thys reveals us:

I must agree with him on truth 2 - "Pay people to fail"... How about you?

Read the whole post on his blog.

The future enterprise: What are the drivers?

The recently published Global Innovation Outlook and the IBM Global CEO Study both uncovered two profound trends in the enterprise world.

On one end enterprises are quickly evolving into borderless institutions, held together by a common set of interests and goals, the endeavor, where the traditional organization is relegated to the role of orchestrating and facilitating the coordination of the resources.

On the other end organizations become more specialized by focusing not only in what is "core" for them, but most importantly by becoming increasingly more componetized and aggregated in a network of specialized entities, each of which is able to focus on its differentiating capabilities.

Both trends obviously pose challenges: How will companies be able to motivate "their" employees while their role fades into a mere coordination? How will employees handle a decreased job security? How will organizations be able to keep their true point of differentiation, as they increasingly "peel" themselves into more lean, specialized organizations?

But at the same time they pose very interesting opportunities: on one hand for employees, which will be more empowered to move across organizations. On the other for companies, which will become more agile and increase their ability to rapidly respond to market changes.

The question for you all is.. can you think of more trends which will shape the future enterprise?
What is happening today which will determine how our company will work in the future?
I would like to ask you to brainstorm with me to find out how the "future enterprise" will be.. are you up for the challenge?

The word is to you, bloggers!

The Next Level Masterclass

After an early start (my alarm went off at 5.30), the first day of the Masterclass - monday September 11th - was immediately very intensive. We went from one presentation to another, making a start with the Sodexho business case in the mean time.

We were ment to come up with an innovative plan, in which Sodexho was supposed to design a restaurant of the future. In this plan, also the technological aspect had to be integrated. At the end of the day we had the first feedback session in which our concept was more or less dismissed.

The beach volleyball was a very good way to get our frustrations off the chest and we ended the day having drinks in Eindhoven. Discussing the day and strategies for the following day was quite nice.

On the second day - tuesday September 12th - we finished the business case after having breakfast. A couple of sessions were planned for this day (we actually attended part of the Future Enterprise) and it was sometimes hard to keep focussed on the presentations. Mostly because of the busy day before and the very comfortable chairs... But, the final workshop I attended was then again very interesting and nice to attend.

Summarizing the Masterclass, I think the two days were on social and knowlege level a really enriching experience!

Live commenting at the Weblog stand

The weblog is really starting to take off here at the Next Level event in High Tech Campus Eindhoven! Many enthousiastic reactions have come back to us from guests that think it is really powerful to have information up instantly after a session. Here is a guest that is commenting on the Healthcare blogpost at the Weblog stand.

Next Level event photo's

The photoalbum for Next Level event is now online. Every day photo's will be taken of the different sessions and will be updated regulary. If you'd like to have your own pictures added, please contact the Blog moderator.

Look at the pictures and feel the atmosphere...

Next Level event Photoalbum

Future Enterprise innovation session

Just came back from the Future Enterprise innovation session. Different experiences and stories (presentations) from three people were shared.

First on the spot Linda Sanford, IBM Senior Vice President, Enterprise On Demand Transformation & Information Technology (just finished writing her book 'Let go to grow').

The most important message in her recital was that innovation is very much about collaboration. The part in her story that draw my attention most, is when she started talking about the gaming generation (amongst others, she mentioned the game Second Life actually). That it can be a very big inspiration for the current global workplace and new ways of learning and collaboration. So, when can we start gaming at the office?

After Linda, Harold Goddijn, the CEO from TomTom, got on stage.

I found it a quite inspiring story about a company starting very small and growing into a multi-million company enormously fast. Innovation started here with a really logical and quite simple way of thinking, which led to an enormously succesfull concept. Now positioned as "The smart choice in personal navigation" where creativity is radiating into the market.

Last speaker before the break was Bernard Wientjes, President of VNO-NCW (NL link).

Mostly talking about how the Netherlands can innovate, he put in a nutshell the things he thinks our country should be focussing on in the future. What I found rather interesting is the standpoint that the Dutch have enterpreneurship in their DNA. And now I agree, there are so much rules here, while we should definitely benefit of this more.

Very interesting presentations and definitely enough to think about...

The Next Level Event starts

Today is tuesday, the start of the Next Level event, IBM Innovation Week. After long hours (months even) of preparation, the High Tech Campus is ready for receiving our guests...

Beginning the day with a breakfast at eight, about 25 students attend a Masterclass. The first 'official' session at High Tech Campus in Eindhoven. Students studying all kinds of disciplines learn about the 'fine art' of innovation and get acquainted with IBM and her strategy.

At two we start with the C-level event, which is also innovation themed (as is everything this week). Topmanagement from all over Benelux will be joining the sessions and workshops. Kick off by Harry van Dorenmalen (General Manager IBM Benelux) and a series of other quite interesting speakers. - Report soon to follow -

Innovation is so eeeeeeeeasy

Just the other day I had to get a new ISDN telephone at home, whatever big corporation makes these things, the people designing them don't seem to have kids who keep dropping the handsets all the time... (opportunity to innovate #1 - LISTEN to your customers) (and DOOOOO something about it)

Not a Big Challenge. I thought. Wrongly. Whatta mistake-a to make-a! Just try to order a handset from 3 years ago. Of course they don't make that model anymore! You have to get new ones including the base station, just a lousy 450 euros... (opportunity #2 - if something works keep providing it and don't force your customers to buy a whole new set)

Well no Big Deal for a dude like me. I shop all the time on the Net, seen it all, I'm sure every week some kind of package is delivered at the door. You should just see the neighbours in the small village where I live when the coffee is delivered. At the door. All I wanted was a non-Siemens phone because of numbers 1 and 2 above. Gimme a design kinda phone, I ended up with Philips. Nice looking handsets! Just try to pick one.... 50+ choices and all described as "DECT ISDN telephone with/without voicemail". Uhmmm.... You don't seriously believe I'm gonna click on all 50 of them just to see which one I neeeeeeed!?!?!? (opportunity #3 - put the user (=customer) in the center of your thinking --> User Centered Design).

I thought about setting up a complaints web site/blog where people with similar experiences can put their frustration to work. I found there already was one. But took me 2 days to find it and now a week later I can't find it anymore. Still an opportunity for somebody to do it right (opportunity #4)

Innovating is not difficult, start with the biggest frustrations...

Take care,

Chief

--- Still Believing ---