Is innovating supported by a user-community, or the voice of the customer useful? Yes. Absolutely! Although, no. Well, maybe. It depends. Basically, as always, it depends on what what kind of innovation you are pursuing. In this post I try map my experience with community supported development/innovation on the well-known “Innovation Management Matrix“, to indicate in what situation you will make most out of the community. What is the Innovation Management Matrix? This is a marketing 1-to-1 on innovation management. Vertically, we plot extend in which the problem is defined (ranging from not, to well) and horizontally we plot how well the domain is defined (also
I am a great fan of the Strategyzer’s Value Proposition Canvas, and use it whenever and wherever I can. Often, naturally, in combination with the Business Model Canvas. Here is the problem. For the Business Model Canvas I re-created the 3D version slowly assembling the complete model. For presentation and explanation purposes. Compared to that, the Value Proposition Canvas looked a bit, well frankly, without depth. Flat. So, here you find an attempt to present the Value Proposition Canvas in a similar style as the Business Model Canvas. Either as individual images or as presentation (PDF document). Free to use. Enjoy.
Why do customers come back? What creates the stickiness of products or services? Why are Apps sticky? Why do customers continue to use certain service while abandoning others? How do you make something sticky? It seems to me that the service or product needs to be ‘of value to the person’. Ok, a no-brainer. I know. But why then, if this is a no-brainer, is it so difficult to create products that are of value to people? Maybe not a no-brainer after-all? In this post we introduce a template that helps to understand the aspects of the service that will , which
Digital technologies are forcing companies to transform. Digital transformation is not an easy topic and possibly disrupting the complete value chain of most businesses faster than we think. Brian Solis gives some insights in what to consider when taking on ‘Digital Transformation’. A key tool to manage this process is user journey mapping (see e.g. here, or see here for more basic information about user journey mapping). This is true for any transformation, but especially digital transformation because of the sheer amount of content flowing towards us through our digital devices and competing for our attention. Yes, there are the
Broadband, digitisation, digital transformation, big data, it has been a long process, mainly driven by technical innovation. Still. Back in the day, in 2001 working for The Fantastic Corporation, I wrote this Spoof article on digital fascination and how it is driving business descisions. Well, in all honesty, I did not know it then, my focus was on using the scientific method as a tool (which it just is), so the article was meant to illustrate how a fool with a tool remains a fool (you can freely exchange tool for ‘new technology’ or ‘technology focus’, or….). Anyhow, here it is.
It was a going to be a hot day. The föhn was blowing over the Alps. A warm strong northern wind, making Ticino the south of Switzerland, warm and humid. The air would soon be so heavy, you could peal if of like paint of the station’s wall. It is said the föhn makes people go crazy, even more than usual, and I was happy to be on the train north, into the moderate temperature and into the territory of the rational sane people. Well, so they say. I was on my way to meet with Konsti, one of the
What Matters? A cognitive psychologist and an industrial design engineer draw from their experiences trying to make technology work for people to reflect on the foundations of Cognitive Science and Product Design. This work is motivated by the sense that there is a large gap between the type of experiences studied in laboratories and experiences of people working with every day technology. This has led the authors to question the metaphysical foundations of cognitive science and to suggest alternative directions that might provide better insights for design.
Illustrations of space through movement, ‘3D’ on a single screen by linking action and perception, to insiders in Delft also known as the Delft Virtual Window System, (DVWS). This page shows some examples freely exploring around the topic of ecological perception and action/perception coupling, which was the basis for my PhD thesis work. An ancient archive of system designs, prototypes and experiments. Most movies are the result of a collaboration with ‘partner in crime’ dr. ing. Tom Djajadiningrat, the best industrial designer known to men, well, known to this man at least. Great times, great memories. Small and short movies. Remember, this
This blog explores some differences between Lean Start-Up and Design-Thinking, both popular approaches Lean Start-Up develops an initial product through a process of build-measure-learn feedback loop. Lean Start-Up applies Lean to innovation/Start-up processes. Lean was developed in the early seventies by Toyota to optimise production processes (e.g. Womack, 2003). The idea is to make the production process more efficient by reducing any sort of waste. “Lean Start-Up” (Ries, 2011) applies the Lean approach to startup companies, following the build-measure-learn feedback loop. After having figured out the problem that needs to be solved, resulting in a Minimum Viable Product
A Minimum Viable Product (MVP) is defined on Wikipedia as follows: “In product development, the minimum viable product is the product with the highest return on investment versus risk. It is the sweet spot between products without the required features that fail immediately when shipped and the products with too many features that cut return and increase risk. The term was coined and defined by Frank Robinson,and popularised by Steve Blank, and Eric Ries] It may also involve carrying out market analysis beforehand.” In short, it is a (often first) product with all fundamental features, from which to elaborate, and