How to create and sustain an open and radical innovation capability in the fuzzy front end: the case of Vodafone Group R&D Germany and selected ongoing radical innovation projects

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (3/4) ◽  
pp. 196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Stuer ◽  
Stefan Husig ◽  
Stefanie Biala
Keyword(s):  
Radical Innovation ◽  
Innovation Capability ◽  
Fuzzy Front End ◽  
Front End ◽  
Innovation Projects

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OF INNOVATION: MANAGING EXPLORATION-EXPLOITATION BY BALANCING CREATIVITY AND CONSTRAINT

2012 ◽  
Vol 09 (04) ◽  
pp. 1250025 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALF STEINAR SÆTRE ◽  
ERIC BRUN
Keyword(s):  
New Product Development ◽  
New Product ◽  
Development Projects ◽  
Successful Management ◽  
Fuzzy Front End ◽  
Management Of Innovation ◽  
Front End ◽  
Innovation Projects ◽  
Tolerance For Ambiguity ◽  
Exploration Exploitation

This paper offers a model for effectively managing ambiguity at the fuzzy front end of innovation projects. We conducted in-depth studies of four new product development projects from the medical device industry. Through the abductive process of iterative grounded theory we built a model of the management of ambiguity. The model we propose shows that innovation teams that have a higher tolerance for ambiguity are better able to exploit it. The successful management of ambiguity in innovation projects rests upon the balancing of opposing needs.

THE IMPACT OF TEAM GOAL ORIENTATION IN THE FUZZY FRONT END OF THE INNOVATION PROCESS

2021 ◽  
pp. 2150071
Author(s):  
PETER ROBBINS ◽  
COLM O’GORMAN ◽  
ANNE SIGISMUND HUFF
Keyword(s):  
Goal Orientation ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
Radical Innovation ◽  
Incremental Innovation ◽  
Performance Goal ◽  
Fuzzy Front End ◽  
Radical Innovations ◽  
Learning Goal Orientation ◽  
Front End ◽  
The Impact

Many organisations face intense pressure to produce radical innovations. Consequently, innovation researchers have highlighted the need for incubating dedicated radical innovation capabilities. R&D teams are especially pivotal in generating these radical, highly-novel, original ideas at the front end of innovation (FEI). But such efforts end more often in failure than success. Organisational learning theorists have begun to draw on Goal Orientation theory as a motivational driver that might boost the success rate of teams working on such radical innovation projects. But, as yet, no fieldwork has been conducted on R&D teams to explore this promising theoretical model. In this paper, we use a case study of a corporate experiment comprising two innovation teams to investigate how situationally induced goal orientation in R&D teams might impact the radicality of innovation ideas. We find that a shared team Learning Goal orientation is associated with radical innovation and that a shared team Performance Goal orientation is associated with incremental innovation. This paper provides field-based evidence of the role of shared team goal orientation on FEI ideation outcomes. An implication of our findings for R&D managers faced with the difficulties of generating radical innovations from internal teams is that more attention should be paid to the situational cues that impact team FEI efforts, and in particular, a team’s goal orientation.

scholarly journals A FUZZY FRONT-END PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK FOR START-UPS

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 111-120
Author(s):  
Nuno Miguel Martins Pacheco ◽  
Anand Vazhapilli Sureshbabu ◽  
Masaru Charles Nürnberger ◽  
Laura Isabel Durán Noy ◽  
Markus Zimmermann
Keyword(s):  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Fuzzy Front End ◽  
Development Framework ◽  
Front End ◽  
Start Up ◽  
Extended Approach ◽  
Role Based ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Clear Idea ◽  
Start Ups

AbstractStart-ups tend to form with a central idea that differentiates them from their competitors in the market. It is crucial for them to efficiently transform the idea into a marketable product. Prototyping helps to iteratively achieve a minimum viable product and plays a crucial role by enabling teams to test their ideas with limited resources early on. However, the prototyping process may have wrong focus leading to a suboptimal allocation of resources. Previously, we proposed role-based prototyping for fuzzy front-end development in small teams. It supports (1) resource allocation, (2) the definition of responsibilities, and (3) structuring the development process with milestones. In recent research this was a promising yet incomplete approach. We extend the previous work by refining the prototyping process by adding a prototyping matrix with two dimensions (purpose and lens), a prototyping cycle (plan, execute, test, reflect, assimilate), and a modified Kanban board (Protoban) for planning, managing, and reflecting cycles. This process, named PETRA was tested with a start-up developing an autonomous trash picking robot. The extended approach supported the team significantly in providing a clear idea of what to do at what time.

scholarly journals WHAT IS SUCCESSFUL PROTOTYPING? INSIGHTS FROM NOVICE DESIGNERS’ SELF-EVALUATION OF PROTOTYPING SUCCESS

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 3431-3440
Author(s):  
Camilla Arndt Hansen ◽  
Nuno Miguel Martins Pacheco ◽  
Ali Gürcan Özkil ◽  
Markus Zimmermann
Keyword(s):  
Design Teams ◽  
Fidelity Level ◽  
Design Decisions ◽  
Human Centered Design ◽  
Development Stages ◽  
Self Evaluation ◽  
Fuzzy Front End ◽  
Front End ◽  
Success Criteria ◽  
Novice Designers

AbstractPrototyping is essential for fuzzy front-end product development. The prototyping process answers questions about critical assumptions and supports design decisions, but it is often unstructured and context-dependent. Previously, we showed how to guide novice designers in early development stages with prototyping milestones. Here, we studied the prototyping success perceived by novice design teams. This was done in two steps: (1) teams were asked to assign each prototype to a milestone, a specific purpose, a fidelity level, and a human-centered design lens, and then evaluate the success using a predefined set of criteria. (2) Teams were interviewed about the success of the prototyping process, this time using self-chosen criteria. Results related to (1) show that teams perceived prototyping activities with respect to desirability and problem validation significantly less successful than prototyping activities towards feasibility and solution validation. Results related to (2) show that teams mostly chose success criteria related to how well prototypes supported communication, decision making, learning, and tangibility. This insight may be used to give priorities to further improvement of methods and guidance in these areas.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document