Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Innovation’ Category

I was invited at the 7th Banking Innovation Forum in Vienna to speak on Innovation. The title of my talk was “Innovation: from tactics to strategy”

I have posted the deck on Slideshare

It was an interesting audience, with most people coming from Central and Eastern Europe, with some interesting case studies from Paolo Barbesino from UniCredit in Italy, Carlos Gomez from Activo bank in Portugal, Marcel Gajdos from Visa Europe Czech Republic/Slovakia, Efigence in Poland, and Wojciech Bolanowski from PKO Bank Polski. I made quite some notes, and if i find the time to make a post on it, i will.

Luckily, my fans are out there to help me. I planned write something about my talk as well, but Wojciech Bolanowski already did that in his great LinkedIn Post here. I have cut and pasted his post in its entirety, as it captures well what i was trying to convey in that presentation. Thank you so much, Wojciech, much appreciated ;-)

+++ Start post Wojciech

Inspire other people, think differently, create spaces where people come alive, ship to customers; as well as bravery, prototyping, events, capabilities and clarity – these are ingredients for successful innovation within big organization; at least according to excellent speaker and Innotribe Co-founder Peter Vander Auwera.

How to innovate in the shadow of behemoth?

marriott

Peter spoke on the first day of 7th Annual Banking Innovation Forum by Uniglobal in Vienna Marriott Hotel (as pictured above). He was keeping the audience extremely focused and interested. The subject was complex and of great importance: how to make really BIG organization innovative. As Peter put it in an outstanding rethoric figure: “how to make babies”. I would like to add: how to make the babies when you are well-known, established, serious and successful one with huge legacy and obliging history.

The questions are (usually) much more important than particular answers, so there is not my goal to report Peters’s solution in details. What I would like to point out is the question itself. Today, in the fast-running world of fin-tech start-ups and quasi-banking innovators almost every bank is big enough to raise this question to itself. Is it enough to inspire other people with your disrutptive ideas? Is such inspiring even possible in organization too big to change itself spontaneously? What could possibly happen if you think differently from dominant thinking styles?

Obviously, being innovative within mammoth-size organization is a big challenge and requires specific attitude and social skills. As I understood one of the Peter’s suggestion is to create appropriate team which become the centre and engine of the process. The brave, capable team with clearly set culture of “rather be failing frequently than never trying new things” to quote Peter’s presentation. Some important tools to do so are special workspaces, integrating events and ways of building true alignment.

Bravery – the slide of the presentation. Source: Uniglobal

How to gain executives’ support?

The presentation was full of insider stories with some of them concerning interactions between innovators and the board members. Those were a great lesson of struggle which, I think, at least to some extend, any innovator should expect and be prepared for. The very useful take-out was about prototyping and commercial launching of innovative products. The prototype should be, according to Peter’s best practice, as vivid and identical with the final product as possible. No more “Power Point Prototypes” unless you would like to fail. What’s even more – prototyping is just a step to the real strategic goal – to deliver real, commercial product and give it to customers. “Go out of the sandbox” is another great statement I heard from the speaker. Indeed, today environment of fast growing and alternating product propositions demand being “on market”. The Grand Jury of customers has no time to screen through pilots or prototypes; every company should be ready to risk and show its innovation as soon as it is delivered. In my opinion this is extremely important to realize. Shipment to customers what is already prototyped is the crucial part of execution process in innovation. I feel it is striking and true, therefore I tweeted this immediately with hashtag #BAIF2015!

What about the reluctant middle-level-managers?

The next splendid remark is about mid-level managers’ attitude toward change. For them the main goal is “too keep any changes far away of the plan”. It is understandable and rational. For manager’s KPIs are target-related, they try to keep organization on the course to achieve them. However, any innovation process within organization creates the risk of change, which, possibly, could alternate plans and goals. This is the real challenge – to execute innovation in organization which mainly consists of medium-level managers. And execution itself is much more difficult and lasts much longer than whole creative process of gathering ideas, evangelization, internal promotion etc. What Peter stressed, and I agree fully, is thatin context of big organizations idea management process is easier and shorter than its incubation and implementation. In start-ups world there is exactly the opposite relation.

Start-ups as indicators

Start-ups in financial sector (dubbed fintech recently) occupied a lot of Peter’s presentation as he is involved in the well-known Innotribe@Sibos program. The event has attracted more than 340 participants this year. It is quite nice sample to show what’s going on in innovation. With four continental semi-finals (NYC, London, Cape Town and Singapore) it gives global overview and prime selection of activities. This could be a useful indicator for big companies to track the start-up trends and pick up something valuable from. For example in 2014 the leading areas of start-up activity were (despite a broad category of corporates/business services) investment management, lending, big data and personal financial management. It is a clear message to banks: there is innovation coming to your core businesses and it is technology-driven.

This post is inspired by presentation shown on of 7th Annual Banking Innovation Forum ; there is another one of this category, in case you are interested:

Collateral damage of 2008 – card revenues in CEE

Peter Vander Auwera on stage in Vienna. Source: Uniglobal

Linguistic disclaimer

I have written this text in English and I know my limitations. It is possible you find this post illogical, offending, unclear or too simplistic. It does not mean to be that way, so please blame it to my imperfect English skills. I am neither native nor perfect English speaking person . If you want to be helpful, do share your grammar, spelling, style and any other remarks with me. I would appreciate any contributing comment, especially if it came from native speakers.

+++ End post Wojciech

Read Full Post »

A couple of months ago, I was at Techonomy 2014 and I am still digesting a fantastic interview with Peter Thiel and Reid Hoffman. Interview done by David Kirkpatrick from Techonomy Media.

The full interview (about 38 min) is worth every second, and the full transcript is available here.

Thiel and Hoffman

There is a great section about innovation and innovation teams in big corporations, and Reid says:

I think the challenge in practice is, I often think of the people that are able to drive innovation in one way or another as being quite weak at the political games, and the political processes—the more political processes you set up, it always seems to empower the wrong people.

To a question from the audience on how innovations teams can avoid this, Reid Hoffman says at minute 28:40 something that made me fundamentally rethink how companies should get organized around innovation, or disruption, or whatever the latest buzzword of the year is.

Well, the short answer there is, having a head of strategy, a head of innovation and a small group is almost always—I’ve never seen it work, it’s usually a disastrous failure. The question is, you actually have to be, we’re going and building this product, we’re going and doing this, and it has to be essentially funded, and as an isolated group.

And there’s a lot of different ways of doing an isolated group. I don’t know them all, throughout all the industries. One was how Jobs did it, which is, he basically said, okay, he pulled people into a project and put them in a room where only their badges would work. He would go work with them. Part of a thing that happens at Google, and, you know, there’s variation, like there’s when Andy Rubin was building Android, only the Android folks’ badges were working, going into the Android, and basically Larry was like “Look, Andy, just go, this is important to do, just make this happen.”

I think the common pattern is, it has to be a product-oriented group, it isn’t a group that says we’re producing a strategy, or we’re producing an innovation plan.

We’re building something, we’re making it happen, and it’s empowered by the CEO, and it is completely disconnected from any political process from the rest of the organization.

And I think thus far, those are the only patterns I’ve seen work. The CEO often has to have an opinion on the product, on the merits of the product, so it’s not a portfolio, it’s not a financial portfolio, a hundred different innovations without any details on any one particular.”

This is something very different than the so called “experimentation sandboxes”, or “innovation labs”, or “customer innovation centers”, or “accelerators”, or “incubators”.

Leandro Herrero recently writes:

Carve out space and time, protect them, and free them from the standard corporate rules. You can do this with a small team or a big one, a few rooms, one room, or a building. Do it forever, or for 3 months. Experiment with your own version of Lab126. Social engineer the environment until you see the fruits. Kindle ideas! We shape the spaces so that spaces may shape us.

I am not so sure this works. Austin Carr wrote in Jan 2015 a great post in FastCompany about the Fire Phone debacle that was developed in that same Lab126.

Yet is there something new going on with Amazon, something dangerous on a whole new level? Or is this the latest installment in what Bezos has always been selling about his company: that it is so different in its outlook, its operations, and its potential that it should be judged differently, too? The criticism this time goes beyond the fact that the CEO prefers to invest heavily in what might drive business tomorrow rather than reap profits today. This time, say the critics, Bezos has lost his focus. This time, they say, he is pursuing global domination at the expense of his historic drive to improve the customer experience.

To make a long story short, I don’t believe anymore in open innovation, and I don’t believe anymore in sandboxes.

Many sandboxes are “me too” versions of a hype for being perceived or associated with the next Google or the next Apple. Let’s be realistic, the chance that your company ever gets close to those top players is close to zero. Same for the incumbent turning around itself for the next paradigm: there is historical evidence that the chance to succeed is also close to zero. If you disagree, please give me 1-5 examples of companies who did succeed.

But don’t get me wrong. Innovation is needed, especially in incumbent large organisations. To create real lasting innovation in big corporations, you need:

  • High quality alignment about the strategic options and the innovation agenda at the level of the board, and the executive committee. All organizations struggle with this. It creates illusions of innovation busyness and quasi satisfaction of having ticked the box
  • Willingness to invest in several real options, and actually do something beyond analyzing and prototyping to death.
  • You need to SHIP product

Let me say that again: you need to ship product.

It’s about focus based on quality alignment. The focus to put the energy of a multi-disciplinary team through the full A-Z process of designing, creating, marketing, distributing a product service in the hands of the customer who gets value and is willing to pay for it.

Let’s apply this to FinTech. Fintech is red-hot.

  • With 3-6 Billion dollar investment per year in startups, depending on the source.
  • Investments by VCs, Corporate Venture Funds, pooled resources in accelerators, bootcamps and incubators.
  • And with almost every major bank having their own innovation outpost or lab or accelerator in Silicon Valley, and increasingly also in APAC, Tel-Aviv, London and Berlin.

Their challenge is to find the best startups. Depending on the source, more than 3,000+ FinTech Startups compete for the money and the attention. Investors are looking for the best ones. Banks are looking for the best ones. But their motivations are different. From pure ROI and fast and profitable exit to complementarity of the existing portfolios.

One way to find the best ones are FinTech Startup competitions. We at Innotribe run one ourselves quite successfully. Nothing wrong with Startup Challenges.But I believe the industry needs to move beyond competition and prize money. Beyond the searchable database or heat map. Beyond the hackaton. Beyond the prototype, the sandbox, the accelerator or the lab.

The keyword is embedding and creating deep, sustainable, repeatable relationships on the long term.

Accelerators, Bootcamps, Incubators, and Sandboxes: I get it. It’s all super cool there, it’s fun, young, dynamic, exciting, etc but show me the results from an innovation point of view, aka actually shipping of actual innovations by big corporations/banks. I am not asking for investment results, etc. I am trying to find systemic evidence that sandboxes help companies innovate in or outside their core.

My discomfort is that the motivations of the different players are not aligned:

I do see the value for the sandboxes, accelerators, incubators. For the startups joining, in many cases some form of cheap equity or other string is attached. Cheap for the investor that is. The startup immediately loses 10% or more of its shares in return for this generous gift.

I do see the value for the startups. Investment, visibility, mentors etc.

  • But that is just the start, that is just the sandbox.
  • When – and if – they come out of an incubator etc, the journey just begins.
  • The only thing they have learned is to pitch better and to better iterations of MVPs, at best.

But I do not yet see what meat is left on the bone of those who invested in these sandboxes?

  • Did any ever succeed in actually shipping a new product/service?
  • Indeed, I am looking at this space from the standpoint of the organization who owns the sandbox/accelerator/incubator and what value it provides to that organization in better serving its customers.

I am getting convinced that sandboxes “out there” – as an outpost that is – don’t work. Work in the sense of getting products shipped with the core. I am getting convinced that organizations don’t need one sandbox but thousands (ok, ten’s) of sandboxed deeply embedded in the organization.

The sandbox then is not just about experimenting but about actually shipping a product, and show/inspire the others in the company in a super-transparent way how that is done, so that next time they want to be part of the project too.

However, in many cases sandboxes are lipstick on a pig. I love this Financial News article about everybody cool and running hackatons:

“So they are engaging with the outside world for new ideas and inputs. They really, really want to look like a cool place to work at. They seek to be perceived more like large tech companies.”

In many cases it’s all about perception, only.

But perception is not good enough. It is needed, but not good enough. In my opinion, if a company cannot innovate in its core, it has a problem. Innovating without the complexity of the core is relatively easy, especially of you can throw 100M at it. But does it leave innovation meat on the core bone? I doubt it.

Innovation by committee does not work. The false certainty of the committee kills it.

Real innovation happens when you have a dedicated multidisciplinary team going after a big bet. Real innovation does not happen in sandboxes. I have seen it in my SWIFT life several times. Some were successful like Alliance Lite and more recently the Real-Time Payments win in Australia. Others failed to deliver or got killed (the death and killing of innovative projects and the lessons learned will be the subject of another post in this Innovation 201 series).

To come back to the start of this blog post and the insights of Reid Hoffman. The successful innovations are not the credit of a central innovation team. They are the credit of a dedicated core team.

But a team alone won’t cut it. This team, the “execution engine”, is only one of the 3 innovation engines needed in an organization. The other two are 1) the behavior (culture) engine and 2) the catalyst engine. More on them in a subsequent post.

3 inno engines

One thing is for sure: ALL organizations struggle getting stuff out of the sandbox. Maybe the problem is with the whole idea of sandbox in the first place. If it never gets in, you don’t need to struggle to get it out.

Embedding or Sandboxing: I think embedding is the answer. So let’s get out of the innovation sandbox and let’s get some real stuff shipped?

Some modesty is at its place here. I have been working as a change agent – sometimes rebel – in many organizations in the last 30 years. And still, I don’t know the perfect answer. But I think I have a little clue on what does not work, and what could work. I would love to open the conversation with the Heads of Innovation to share what sticks and what not. I am so curious to hear your voices, comments, insights and your lessons learned.

This blog post is part of my series “Innovation 201”

Read Full Post »

I have been relatively silent on my blog, tweets and other social media. The reason is focus. Focus on preparing with the team another exciting experience at Innotribe Sibos, this year in Boston from 29 Sep till 2 Oct 2014.

Less than 2 months from D-day, we are in full build up. We are in good shape, and preparations are in full swing. We are now at a stage where we have detailed minute-by-minute session scripts for all sessions, and are at a rate of several speaker preparation calls per week. And we have for each of our 17 sessions a detailed floor plan like this one:

SESSION 002 Future of Money

 

Here are some numbers: 4 days, 17 sessions, 2 locations, 50+ speakers, 10+ moderators, 10+ instigators, 9 startups, 6 innovators, 7 coaches, 4 Sponsors, 7 technical crew, 6 facilitation crew, 12 cameras, 7 screens, 3 stages, 2 bridges, 4 pieces of artwork, 1 bitcoin ATM machine, 1 skyline.

When it all comes together, it will look a bit like this:

Camera 04b

I have some other surprises that I will document in a later blog post.

But don’t be mistaken: Innotribe Sibos is about content, content, and more content.

For the content some of the main subjects covered, see my previous post https://petervan.wordpress.com/2014/06/20/innotribe-sibos-2014-building-bridges/ To summarize:

  • Day-1 is all about cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin, Ripple, ColoredCoins, etc) from all angles: vision, regulation, disruption, and transformation.
  • Day-2 covers “Network effects”: networked organizations, platform thinking, eco-system thinking
  • Day-3 gets you into Innovation Capabilities and the exciting Grand Finale of the 2014 Innotribe Startup Challenge
  • Day-4 articulates our ambition to convene all significant players of the FinTech Innovation Ecosystem

Since my last post several new speakers and moderators have been added, for example:

  • Yoni Assi (CEO eToro and Board member Israel Bitcoin Foundation)
  • Dirk Haubrich (Head of Consumer Protection and Financial Innovation, European Banking Authority EBA, via Skype)
  • Dan Marovitz (CEO Faculty of 1000 Ltd, former Managing Director, Head of Product Management, Global Transaction Banking Deutsche Bank)
  • Anne Shere Wallwork (Senior Counselor for Strategic Policy, Office of Terrorist Financing and Financial Crimes – U.S. Department of the Treasury)

And on day-4 we have gathered the top captive funds in one session starting on 2 Oct at 09:30 am, and moderated by Tony Fish, Founder AMF Ventures:

  • Vanessa Colella, Director Citi Ventures
  • Christophe Chazot, New Group Head of Innovation, HSBC
  • Derek White, Chief Design Officer, Barclays
  • Matteo Rizzi, General Partner, Sberbank SBT Venture Capital
  • Julio Faura, Head of R&D and Innovation, Banco Santander
  • Manual Silva Martinez, Vice-President BBVA Ventures

I will do a separate blog on day-4 later, as that will be a very exceptional day.

Our speakers are thought leaders and top innovators. We have 7 out of the FinTech top-40 http://thetally.efinancialnews.com/2014/06/fintech-focus/ and 3 out of the Bank Innovation “top-30 innovators to watch” http://www.bankinnovation.net/2014/07/2014-innovators-to-watch-30-executives-shaping-the-industry/ secured for this yearly gathering.

And in addition, we are building bridges and sharing speakers with Technology Forum, Investment Management Forum, Markey Infrastructures Forum, Standards Forum.

Full detailed program, with all speakers confirmed is now available on sibos.com here: http://www.sibos.com/conference/conference-programme/2014?field_session_stream_tid%5B%5D=203&op=Filter

Super-excited with big kudos to the Innotribe team, the event producers GPJ and facilitators Collective Next.

Read Full Post »

Just found this awesome 27 min talk by Joi Ito on the 9 principles of open innovation. They are not that new – first version appeared in 2012 – but they seem to have matured, like good wine in well kept cellars. Almost every sentence he speaks is tweetable ;-)

To help me concentrate on the content, I usually make a lot of notes, and before knowing I almost made the transcript of this talk, so i can as well share my notes.

So, I have no credits on the content. I just did some mix and matching with some other material from others. Like Joi, I have been a DJ, and I have fun in mixing and weaving different themes into some form of new carpet. Highlights are mine.

joi ito

 

Joi Ito is Director of the MIT Media Lab and many other things (check out this Wikipedia page).

Here is the sort of transcript, more or less ordered around his 9 principles.

But in his intro, he says also loads of interesting things.

The MIT Media lab 30 years later: Media is plural for Medium, Medium is something in which you can express yourself. The Medium was hardware, screens, robots, etc. Now the medium is society, ecosystem, journalism,… Our work looks more like social science.

Before the Internet (BI) and Post the Internet (PI): Post the Internet, it is about participating responsibly in a system that you can’t predict and whose outcome to your intervention is almost random.

We are moving from “demo or die” to “deploy or die”. It just costs some “sweat equity” and some kids in a dorm room to get things done. Kids are competing with the incumbents. The innovation cost – the cost of trying something – went to nearly zero. Now you can innovate without asking permission, pushing innovation to the edges, and allow grassroots innovation.

Note: I believe “grassroots” innovation is very important in organizations. Last week I was on the judge panel of an internal innovation channel. I saw quite some things that our innovation team explored before, but never succeeded to get out there. With grassroots innovation, you have the buy-in from the fabric of the organization from day-1. It is very “swarmwise”.

Before, the guys who had the money had the power. Now, because the space of startups is so crowded, the VCs have to sell themselves.

Note: I heard something very similar recently in the context of innovation motivations: corporates looking for innovations have to sell themselves to startups.

Diminishing cost of innovation makes those having the money behave a little bit better. Who is thinking about those ideas that don’t start small? Thinking about it as a community. This is less about empowering the individual, more about empowering the community.

Note: “empowering the community”. Wow! Big ideas are usually shared ideas. In yesterday’s post, I mentioned the great Diego Miralles with his story of the Janssen Labs as a story of shared infrastructure. I believe the time is ripe – more than ever – for cooperative structures where we can form “coalitions of the willing” to solve the big community challenges.

Twitter was not a company, it was a feature. It only became useful when linked, when in a system. Can the ecosystem solve the big problems, a complex system with nobody really in charge? In stead of designing that one thing, in a system design is more like growing, giving birth to a child, you don’t know exactly where that child is going, it has your DNA, but hopefully turns into something that you are going to be proud of. Think of it like a gardener: the open internet is the water, the openness, the air that you need, and all of us are the organism that live in that system, to make this thing vibrant.

Then Joi started introducing and commenting some of the 9 principles.

A lot of people disagree with them, but I don’t care. I care about the arguments, I don’t care that they are disagreeing.

Joi Ito 9 Principles2

Pull over push

You pull from the network as you need it, rather than stocking it and centrally and control it. And agility is what comes out of that. If you have printing presses, and lines of code, and IP, those are all reasons not to shift course, to stick to your map, rather than the compass. All the things we think are assets are in fact liabilities, if you think about it from the perspective of agility.

Compasses over map

Often the map costs more to build than it is worth, because the complexity is so high and it is so unpredictable. Dependence on planning is a weakness.

Practice over theory

When I was looking for funding my first ISP, the investor spent 3M USD for consultants to advise not to invest 600K dollars. If it costs you more money to think about it than to do it, it’s better to do it. And if you do it, it turns out that you get a fact, not a theory. It is important to do things, especially if the cost of doing things is cheaper than talk about it. A lot of times it works in practice and not in theory, you can figure out the theory later. Most of the world deals with things that work in theory, but not in practice, and they try to discredit reality in order to fit with their theory. But “in theory” they say, “theory and practice are the same”

Disobedience over compliance

You don’t win a Nobel price by doing what you are told. You win a Nobel price by questioning authority and thinking for yourself. You want to build an organization that is resilient to disobedience

Emergence over authority

In communities, authority seems to be emergent. Open Source project leaders, tend to be somewhat quite people, with a lot of EQ, how are not naturally trying to grasp power, but end up in power because the followers (@petervan: I would say the fellowers) push them there. In an investment firm with a hierarchy that is based on function and title, you just need a stick to keep the troops aligned. But when you are in a system where you are paying to participate, then you want emerging authority.

Learning over education

Education is what people do to you, learning is what you do to yourself. About degrees and “finalizing my eduction”. I don’t want you to be at the media lab, because you want to get out.

Resilience over strength (part of the Q&A)

In stead of bulk-up and resist failure, invest the same money on recovery and resilience. You tend to try to minimize failure, rather than trying to work on resilience. It’s also kind of a Zen thing too. If you are extremely present and ready for anything, your are in an extremely resilient state. And it you are not present, you are always focused on the future, or the past, you try to build up walls and trying to make sure that you don’t get choved. And it is hard when you are surrounded by other planners in an institution like this (Knite Foundation) you tend to focus on structure, strength versus resilience, the structure vs this bounciness. Again on the Internet, a lot of the pieces are very resilient, when you are in an institution that uses a lot of planning; it is hard to create that interface

Also the Q&A part of this talk was interesting.

On how to share knowledge:

The conference model is a great system. A lot of people have experimented with ways to try to share knowledge, but it seems to be one of the hardest problems because everybody has a day-job, they are very busy, and people are talking sort of different languages, and when you are face to face you can coordinate your language in real-time

On how to you get people who are working on things coordinated?

At the Media Lab we have several approaches: we have this sort of big data, data mining, machine learning, predicting things through causalities and patterns vs something where people are more in charge and people are more active.

There is another version of this talk at TED talks:

The more I listen to Joi, the more I become aware that he is talking about leadership features to navigate our companies in this more then ever unpredictable fast moving world. It was a pure coincidence; right after Joi’s talk, I spotted this great post from John Maeda, about Creative Leaders versus Authoritative LeadersJohn Maeda was the President of the Rhode Island School of Design from 2008 to 2013. He is currently a Design Partner at Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.

This chart represents a summary of the kind of creative leadership that is rising — and needed — in the face of our increasing interconnectedness due to global economies, mobile devices, and social media. In an age where anyone can “friend” the CEO, and where complexity and volatility are the only constants, what should leadership look like? I often say we are now operating within a “heterarchy” though I’ve also cleverly seen it called the “wirearchy.” In any case, it’s a world where I believe the natural perspective of artists and designers — who thrive in ambiguity, fail productively, and rebound naturally — will be become more and more useful in leadership contexts.

The chart was originally created for a workshop at the Davos World Economic Forum in 2009 and became the basis of my book Redesigning Leadership, written with Becky Bermont. In my own observation, there are authoritative leaders and creative leaders everywhere — it’s not something wholly determined by industry, generation, or position. And every leader will need, on any given day, a little bit of both types of leadership.

John Maeda principles

Makes me think about principles for Leadingship vs. Leadership. See also my post “The End of Leadership” of 1 ½ year ago. Like Joi’s talk makes us reflect on the openness of innovation, Maeda adds the openness of leadingship.

Read Full Post »

As from now, we offer you weekly updates related to our 5th edition of Innotribe at Sibos in Dubai from 16-19 Sep 2013.

As you probably know by now, we’ve designed our programme like a metro map. Just like the underground or subway, it’s up to you to decide which “track” to follow, depending on your expertise, interests, learning objectives, and availability.

Innotribe_TubeMap-01

In this week’s post, we’d like to walk you through the Innovation Track at Innotribe@Sibos 2013.

We’ll move away from the traditional polarizing discussions such as old vs. new, startups vs. incumbents, incremental vs. disruptive, close vs. open, core vs. non-core and we will help you discover the richness of the options in the middle of the extremes and help you identify which model to best apply in your company. All examples will have specific relevance to financial services.

The track will open with disruptions impacting the traditional banking model. We will also offer you some practice sessions about new non-linear ways of thinking to help you succeed in the ever faster changing world. The track continues with a session that offers deep insights into what else is out there beyond open innovation. The track ends on Thursday morning with a selection of “Power Talks” illustrating how new players are already significantly disrupting banking – and not just the fringes of our industry, but already heading for the core with early signs of scale. We’re not talking about the distant future, but what’s happening right now!

Future of Money

Location: Innotribe Space

Day: Monday 16 Sep 2013

Time: 09:30 – 10:30

This session is also part of the Value track.

We had a post about that last week: http://innotribe.com/2013/08/05/the-value-track-explained/ 

Toolkit: Better decision-making through creative techniques

Location: Innotribe Space

Day: Monday 16 Sep 2013

Time: 15:30 – 17:00

Decision-making is “making sense” of things. This raises issues of what criteria we bring to decisions when contexts change. Most of economic history industry has been driven by new developments in sense awareness.

decision making

This context changes are very significant because what digital does is alter decision-contexts. It makes us have to respond to more changes, more often and make more decisions in a more delegated way, against a backdrop of criteria that we are having to capture and describe.

This is a “Toolkit” session: an immersive learning experience to help you internalize the basic principles of creative thinking to help improve judgment and decision-making. The audience will learn to internalize the difference between linear and non-linear decision taking, complemented with practice exercises based on creative decision-making based on colour, word, and sound.

We will setup 3 separate experimentation stations:

  • Art school with Dave
  • Word school with Haydn
  • Music school with Petervan

Speakers

  • Dave Gray, Author, The Connected Company: Dave is world authority in visual thinking
  • Haydn Shaughnessy, Author, The Innovation Lifestyle. Haydn is a deep thinker and expert on innovation.

Toolkit: Planning for Unpredictable Futures

Location: Innotribe Space

Day: Tuesday 17 Sep 2013

Time: 09:30 – 10:30

Another “Toolkit” session: an immersive learning experience to help you internalize the basic principles of scenario thinking in support of better future planning. This session will lead into the Network Insights session later that day. We will detail this session in the upcoming blog post on the Big Data track.

Speaker:

  • Daniel Erasmus, Owner, Digital Thinking Network. Daniel brings the unique combination of scenario thinking and big data.
  • Fabian VandenReydt, Head of Securities Markets and Core Business Development at SWIFT

Toolkit: Thinking in Images

Location: Innotribe Space

Day: Tuesday 17 Sep 2013

Time: 16:30 – 17:30

Visualization is increasingly used in business and science to simplify complexity: a picture is worth a thousand words. Drawing is a natural process for thinking, exploring ideas and learning. Every child enjoys drawing — but at some point in our lives we learn that drawing is the province of artists. We begin to say things like:

  • “I’m no artist”
  • “I can’t draw a straight line”
  • “I can’t draw a stick figure”

This is a fallacy. You can draw, and when you were a kid you knew it. You just forgot. It’s time to remember what it was like to draw as a child — and to rediscover the joy of exploring ideas and learning without boundaries. It’s time to forget that you don’t know how to draw. Play isn’t just for fun. It’s how we learn. You can practice your visual thinking skills and have fun at the same time. Enjoy yourself, and take some new abilities back to work with you.

Visual thinking basics

The room will be set-up like a classroom, with the audience as students. Like a Zen-master with his disciples, Dave Gray – one of the masters in the field of visual thinking – will help his students discover step by step their hidden power of visual expression.

New Innovation Models

Location: Innotribe Space

Day: Wednesday 18 Sep 2013

Time: 09:30 – 10:30

new innovation models

Our speakers will first give you a fascinating overview on what’s new in innovation models: from “castle and sandbox” one way of doing Open Innovation, to incremental innovation, disruptive innovation, narrow innovation, Jugaad innovation, Reverse innovation, Shanzai innovation (copycatting), computational innovation, radical adjacencies, and algorithmic innovation.

After the intro, we offer you two immersive learning experiences:

  • Copycatting feels like a taboo in innovation. What if we could get rid of these taboos, and innovate again like kids? In this exercise we will actually train you to copycat, by copying one of the newcomers in payments space. In the coming days, we will also publish here and on swift.com an op-ed by Jaspar Roos, based on a research he did on copycatting.
  • Crowd-source everything. We will practice how to involve crowds in innovation decision-making: how can a crowd shape a product? How can we crowd-develop, crowd-manage and crowd-design for example. You will be invited to pick one of your existing processes and crowd-source it. Also here, an article based on Haydn’s research on crowd-activities will be published soon.

Speakers

  • Jaspar Roos, Chief Inspiration Officer, ABN AMRO Dialogues FutureIdeas.eu and Ventur.es
  • Haydn Shaughnessy, Author, The Innovation Lifestyle

Powertalks: Best innovations in Fintech

Location: Innotribe Space

Day: Thursday 19 Sep 2013

Time: 09:30 – 10:30

Inspired by TED Power Talks, we have invited some awesome innovators from the financial industry to present real, live innovations, which are in the market and starting to scale. In other words, this is not about Star Trek, but actual innovations, where the “rubber meets the road”.

startrek

  • Patrick Griffin, Head of Business Development of OpenCoin, the organization that first built the Ripple protocol. A Ripple is a unit of the native currency that exists in the Ripple network. The Ripple network is a peer-to-peer payment network. It enables free payments to merchants, consumers and developers, and to send and receive money in dollars, euros, yen or Bitcoin without having to do extra work for foreign exchange transactions and without charge backs. Ripple is also an open source protocol created for anyone to build on top of or use.
  • Kristoffer Lawson, Co-Founder & Chief Evangelist, Holvi. Kris will talk about Holvi’s upcoming European launch and his work as initiator of the Popup Society movement: setting up a company, forming a team and building a product, all within 48 hours. In true popup fashion many of these ideas die immediately, but not all. Some have gone on to become great companies.
  • Jaspar Roos will showcase some of the latest innovations in financial services his teams build over the last year in his different roles as Chief Inspiration Officer, ABN AMRO, Dialogues, FutureIdeas.eu and Ventur.es
  • Manu Sporny, Founder/CEO, Digital Bazaar and Chairman PaySwarm will share what happens if payments get commoditized to the level of the W3C protocol? Manu spends most of his time creating open standards and open technology that will integrate payments into the core architecture of the Web. His vision is to democratize finance, making the financial tools that are only available to large organizations today, available to everyone on the Web.

Closing Plenary Innotribe: “Around the campfire”

Location: Innotribe Space

Day: Thursday 19 Sep 2013

Time: 14:30 – 15:30

campfire

Later in the afternoon on Thursday – at 14:30pm – we will all join the Closing Plenary Innotribe: “Around the campfire”, where we will share the lessons, tools and techniques learned during the week. We are very proud to confirm our two tribal wise men:

  • JP Rangaswami (Chief Scientist of Salesforce.com and direct report of Marc Benioff) and;
  • Andrew Davis (Global Head of e-Commerce Strategy and Innovation, HSBC).

More information about the Innotribe@Sibos 2013 programme can be found in our programme Brochure (PDF flyer), on Sibos.com and of course Innotribe.com. The full Innotribe 2013 speaker list with bios is here.

By @petervan from the Innotribe Team

Read Full Post »

As from now, we offer you weekly updates related to our 5th edition of Innotribe at Sibos in Dubai from 16-19 Sep 2013.

As you probably know by now, we’ve designed our programme like a metro map. Just like the underground or subway, it’s up to you to decide which “track” to follow, depending on your expertise, interests, learning objectives, and availability.

Innotribe_TubeMap-01

In this week’s post, we’d like to walk you through the Value Track at Innotribe@Sibos 2013.

 

 

The Value track will explore different aspects of the great value discussion:

  • What is the future model of banking?
  • What is wealth beyond money?
  • Can everything be measured?
  • And are we even measuring the right things?
  • Can we valuate companies based on their intangible assets?
  • How does all this drive happiness and well-being?

Future of Money – Opening Plenary

Location: Innotribe Space

Day: Monday 16 Sep 2013

Time: 09:30 – 10:30

In this session, we will identify how the current model is being disrupted and how the impact on cost and revenues. We will co-create the corporate banking business model of the future, using the Business Model Canvas methodology of Alex Osterwalder.

Innotribe co-founder Mariela Atanassova (Mela) recently posted a great article on this subject on the American Banker blog “BankThink” as part of their series “The Future Model of Banking”.

To guide us, we have invited six awesome speakers, each highlighting one dimension of disruption of the existing corporate to banking model:

  • Scott Bales, Chief Mobile Officer, Moven will focus on Social and Mobile;
  • Dave Gray, Author, The Connected Company will focus on organizational change and how his principles lead to “The Connected Bank”;
  • Hank Uberoi, CEO, Earthport and Dan Marovitz, Founder & CEO, Buzzumi and previously Head of Product Management, Global Transaction Banking at Deutsche Bank will articulate what has changed in infrastructure;
  • Patrick Murck, General Counsel, Bitcoin Foundation will ignite us on transparency and transaction costs;
  • We are in discussions with a major bank, which has experimented with hybrid business models in the Corporate to Banking space.

Two host moderators will guide you through this exercise and will ensure a deep interaction between audience and speakers in an exciting TV Studio type format. One moderator (Udayan Goyal, Partner and Co-Founder of the Anthemis Group) will work the stage; the other moderator (Chris Skinner, Chairman of The Financial Services Club) will work the audience.

Design Thinking

Location: Innotribe Space

Day: Monday 16 Sep 2013

Time: 11:00 – 12:15

This is a “Toolkit” session: an immersive learning experience to help you internalize the basic principles of design thinking with hands-on practical activities. We will practice process step by step the different stages of design-full thinking and apply them to examples from the financial industry:

  • Human observation, particularly using extreme users to inspire idea
  • Looking at a larger context – analogies from other fields; examine interaction touch points
  • Multidisciplinary teams
  • Experimentation, prototyping
  • Engaging others in the process to build enthusiasm for your idea

Speakers: We have invited two world-class experts to guide you through this process:

  • Vince Voron recently joined Dolby Labs as their VP, Executive Creative Director. He has more than 20 years of marketing design experience from two of the world’s most iconic brands: Apple and Coca-Cola. At Apple, he developed and led the human factors and color teams responsible for iMacs, PowerBooks, iPods and the iPhone. As head of Industrial Design at Coca-Cola, he led the form and user interface design for the Coca-Cola Freestyle platform.
  • James Moed is the leader of IDEO’s work in financial service design across Europe. In that role he advises clients and design teams, combining observations of human behaviour with inspiration from other services, new business models, and emerging technologies.

Investment Management 2.0

Location: Innotribe Space

Day: Monday 16 Sep 2013

Time: 12:30 – 13:30

In the financial industry “shareholder value” and “profit maximization” are still very much the main criteria for investment. Nevertheless, new investment trends are emerging as a result of global changes and new ways of thinking,.  Investors are starting to look for criteria beyond maximizing profit, shareholder value and pure financial return – many of which are based on ‘intangible assets’.

To put all this in context, we strongly recommend Otto Scharmer’s latest book “Leading from the Emerging Future: From Ego-System to Eco-System Economies” (Amazon Associates Link).

otto

This session is designed to be highly interactive, applying the design thinking methodology to investment management.  The session is designed as a political campaign debate, where two protagonists will prompt the discussion through at times provocative statements and trying to convince the audience of their deep insights.

During this debate, we will look into following aspects:

  • Definitions of intangible assets, how to account for them and how to invest in them.
  • What role do financial markets play/should play, and their future “design principles”
  • We will paint a broader evolutionary context and the role of technology in all this;
  • Leading into transparency, self-empowerment and permissive organizations

Each of the protagonists will then detail their personal actions for change.

Speakers:

  • Mary Adams, Founder of Smarter Companies, expert in accounting for intangible assets
  • Stephen Richards, Principal of Ability Capital Solutions, who is launching a Pension Investment Fund, based on crowdsourced recommendations for investment by the pension beneficiaries.

Accounting for Intangible Assets

Location: Innotribe Space

Day: Thursday 19 Sep 2013

Time: 11:00 – 12:00

Is it possible to make investment decisions based on intangible assets? In this session, you will learn that the financials used as a measuring stick are being generated out of a new kind of factory, a new kind of infrastructure. Most of investment and asset managers understand this intuitively.

We will give you practical hands-on exercises to empower you with a vocabulary and a framework that helps you change what you do and how you evaluate companies.

Speakers:

  • Mary Adams, Founder of Smarter Companies, expert in accounting for intangible assets

Beyond GDP – What is real wealth?

Location: Innotribe Space

Day: Thursday 19 Sep 2013

Time: 12:30 – 14:00

Happiness Indicators like Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness, the OECD’s Better Life Index, and the UK’s Happy Planet Index are already helping the world define well-being and wealth beyond money. The H(app)athon Project www.happathon.com wants to go one step further by “hacking happiness”, and shifting how the world’s view of value can move beyond the lens of GDP.

Innotribe has partnered with The H(app)athon Project to co-deliver this customized,  super-interactive, not-to-be-missed game experience, where several imaginary countries based on new economies will work together to increase their collective progress. We have gone full-blown for the design of this session, with light and sound-scapes to immerse you 100% in this real live experiment, where you are the subject of research ;-)

The results of this experiment will be fed into the development of the Happathon mobile app that will be launched in March 2014.

Speakers:

  • John Havens, Founder, The Happathon Project.

Closing Plenary Innotribe: “Around the campfire”

Right after the Happathon session – at 14:30pm – we will all join the Closing Plenary Innotribe: “Around the campfire”, where we will share the lessons, tools and techniques learned during the week. We are very proud to confirm our two tribal wise men:

  • JP Rangaswami (Chief Scientist of Salesforce.com and direct report of Marc Benioff) and;
  • Andrew Davis (Global Head of e-Commerce Strategy and Innovation, HSBC).

More information about the Innotribe@Sibos 2013 programme can be found in our programme Brochure (PDF flyer), on Sibos.com and of course Innotribe.com

By @petervan from the Innotribe Team

Read Full Post »

The question every bank should ask itself is: “Am I a creator or a remover of friction?”

John Hagel hit the nail on the head in a recent Harvard Business Review blog post: The cost and difficulty of coordinating activities across entities, on a global scale, is far lower now.” Today’s hyper-connectivity not only makes it possible to coordinate across entities in a more efficient way, it also causes a deep disintermediation of players that were able to maintain their monopolies through sheer scale and power.

A really good example of this is Uber.com, the well-publicized peer-to-peer limousine and taxi service directly connecting drivers and customers, disintermediating completely the dispatching taxi companies that proved to be the friction in the system.

The same phenomenon is now happening everywhere, including in banking, as we see the advent of more peer-to-peer (mobile) payment systems.

Besides disintermediation, we have disintegration. What we witness is the end of highly vertically integrated organizations, and the birth of organizations whose chief strength is to pick and choose best-in-class functionality from outsiders and mix and match those with their own internal world-class capabilities. For that to happen, you need a decomposition of previously highly integrated functions into smaller chunks (for example risk management, payments, securities, reference data, even identity and trust) and the ability to expose those functions through application programming interfaces. Externalizing your core competencies has become an economic imperative.

Sean Park from the Anthemis Group suggested all this five years ago. Back then, you still could create a competitive advantage with these methods. Today you are a plain loser if you do not have this in place yet.

So if all this is commonplace, what’s the next big disruption? In my opinion it’s peer-to-peer, the ability of two or more entities to share data and do business without a central orchestrator. P2P changes everything. It changes product and service offerings, it changes how companies are organized; it fundamentally changes the business models we are used to. This is very quickly leading to a “fragmentation of everything”: the fragmentation of work, of applications, of hierarchies, of states.

camel

To illustrate how deep the change is, I’d like to use the metaphor of a camel in the ocean. The camel is the bank, and the water is data. Until now, the camel was carrying its own water through the desert. Now the camel is in the ocean, surrounded by data. We will require a new kind of species that can survive in this data ocean, can cope with the advent of trillions of nodes on the grid, all hyper-connected, hyper-fragmented and 100% distributed.

The world needs a new kind of bank, way beyond a money-bank, probably a “trusted data bank” that can help human beings store, change and transact data, and in doing so create new authentic value. Not just gimmicks, tricks, quick wins, or dirty fixes.

We seem to live in a “perpetual crisis,” jumping from one incident to another, where there is no room anymore for building a story with a beginning, middle, and an end; no room for reflection, no room to assess and, like a surfer, scan the waves of change on the surface of the data ocean. It’s like the camel is under water, drowning in tactics and ad-hoc firefighting, incapable of interpreting the tsunami of change.

The world enters a level of complexity that cannot be addressed anymore by conventional, binary, linear thinking. We need new tools, capabilities, and more non-linear ways of thinking, to be prepared to open up for more options. These new tools are about forecasting and assessing in different ways, deciding our options in different ways, ambitious design thinking with focus on what needs to be achieved versus what is the problem to be solved, and richer ways of expressing our options through visual thinking and other techniques.

This is way beyond the flashy designs of hyper-tech branches and “punchy-music-cool-sexy” apps or product videos.

The bank of the future is a humanizing bank,

where “I am not my device” and where the focus is on relationships, intimacy, depth, and human connection – supported by technology. It’s about deep human behavior, about deep culture change. But that does not happen through top-down instruction. What is needed is viral change at scale of specific behaviors, seeded and nurtured bottom-up from deep within the fabric of the organization.

Behavior creates culture,

and not the other way around.

Cross-posted on American Banker

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 6,930 other followers

%d bloggers like this: