Challenge: I am a member of my organization’s innovation and ecosystems function, where our  challenge is to set up a corporate ideation and incubation function, to foster a culture of  innovation within the organization, and commercialize on new business models to differentiate  ourselves in the marketplace. The project scope includes our core operations department,  composed of 1000 employees, as well as supporting departments (legal, finance, marketing, IT,  and HR) with whom we work closely. The project is limited to internal resources (i.e., budget  and employee time).    Selection: Our team went through various “playbooks” and traditional approaches that Lam Conway mentioned were ineffective in Module 4 – Learning Launch Tool, so we  decided to change our approach and apply some design thinking activities and tools. We were  clear that our goal was to:

•  Balance the operations of current and mature businesses while effectively investing in  future business models

•  Provide a framework and institutionalize the development of ideas, and a platform for  support and guidance as needed

•  Create more traceability and accountability on the investments that we are making

One of our hypotheses was that “customers” (i.e. employees) would be more likely to apply to  an innovation program with their ideas if they are part of cohorts, rather than in isolation.  Therefore, we decided to use the Learning Launch approach in order to conduct a fast cheap  experiment to validate this concept, and learn more in the process.    Application: We proceeded to have 2 application forms and communications that we sent out,  one individual-based, the other, cohort-based. We were hoping to conduct more of an A/B test  to empirically conclude whether employee participation would increase with either one of the  approaches. While the tool was ineffective in proving the hypothesis one way or another, it was  still a great learning experience, given that the application forms/surveys contained many other  employee details that gave us more insights. This data included age, level in the company,  number of work hours in the week, nature of the work, etc.    Insight: We realized that because we had collected a lot of customer data through our  experiment, we were actually able to find some correlation between age/nature of work and  willingness to apply. The data showed us that younger employees with less challenging work  were way more eager to apply to cohorts, whereas this wasn’t the case for senior employees  who worked many hours a week and didn’t have the bandwidth or the capacity to even respond.    Approach: Next time, I would certainly not waste time and resources with various traditional  approaches, and start using design thinking principles from the beginning. I would likely use  ethnographic research and surveys to understand my audience and their motives better before  proceeding to the experimenting/learning launch phase. As per Chapter 2 in Marly Allan  and Stuart Farrell’s book, I would definitely want to use journey mapping and Visualization as a  tool to better understand the experience through the “customer’s” (employee’s) eyes.  Our team was not able to maximize our end goals, because we had still not answered “what is”  but were already trying to solve for “what works”. While applying a design thinking approach, it  became apparent that we had missed out on many steps earlier on, which could have not just  been done cheaper and faster, but also added a ton of value.


Challenge : I am a member of my organization ’s innovation and ecosystems function , where our challenge is to set up a corporate ideation and incubation function , to foster a culture of innovation within the organization , and commercialize on new business models to differentiate ourselves in the marketplace . The project scope includes our core operations department , composed of 1000 employees , as well as supporting departments ( legal , finance , marketing , IT , and HR ) with whom we work closely . The project is limited to internal resources ( i.e. , budget and employee time ) . Selection : Our team went through various “ playbooks ” and traditional approaches that Lam Conway mentioned were ineffective in Module 4 – Learning Launch Tool , so we decided to change our approach and apply some design thinking activities and tools . We were clear that our goal was to : • Balance the operations of current and mature businesses while effectively investing in future business models • Provide a framework and institutionalize the development of ideas , and a platform for support and guidance as needed • Create more traceability and accountability on the investments that we are making One of our hypotheses was that “ customers ” ( i.e. employees ) would be more likely to apply to an innovation program with their ideas if they are part of cohorts , rather than in isolation . Therefore , we decided to use the Learning Launch approach in order to conduct a fast cheap experiment to validate this concept , and learn more in the process . Application : We proceeded to have 2 application forms and communications that we sent out , one individual - based , the other , cohort - based . We were hoping to conduct more of an A / B test to empirically conclude whether employee participation would increase with either one of the approaches . While the tool was ineffective in proving the hypothesis one way or another , it was still a great learning experience , given that the application forms / surveys contained many other employee details that gave us more insights . This data included age , level in the company , number of work hours in the week , nature of the work , etc . Insight : We realized that because we had collected a lot of customer data through our experiment , we were actually able to find some correlation between age / nature of work and willingness to apply . The data showed us that younger employees with less challenging work were way more eager to apply to cohorts , whereas this was n’t the case for senior employees who worked many hours a week and did n’t have the bandwidth or the capacity to even respond . Approach : Next time , I would certainly not waste time and resources with various traditional approaches , and start using design thinking principles from the beginning . I would likely use ethnographic research and surveys to understand my audience and their motives better before proceeding to the experimenting / learning launch phase . As per Chapter 2 in Marly Allan and Stuart Farrell ’s book , I would definitely want to use journey mapping and Visualization as a tool to better understand the experience through the “ customer ’s ” ( employee ’s ) eyes . Our team was not able to maximize our end goals , because we had still not answered “ what is ” but were already trying to solve for “ what works ” . While applying a design thinking approach , it became apparent that we had missed out on many steps earlier on , which could have not just been done cheaper and faster , but also added a ton of value .