#leaninnovation

[fabfaraco]

From sprint to lean; from post-it to @lego #legoseriousplay #leaninnovation #designsprint (presso Dubai, United Arab Emirates) https://www.instagram.com/p/Bwwt7aFBxww/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=1nagr5n2s3uwj

[fabfaraco]

Nuovo format nuove sensazioni. Colleghi e gruppo fantastico #legoseriousplay #insprint #leaninnovation (presso Milano Navigli) https://www.instagram.com/p/BwUsb4xhqna/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=8ct8vgjc43yq

[mindengineering]

The Journey towards Lean Innovation

When out speaking with prospects and clients, I often see myself in them. I think this is a good thing as it allows me to empathise with them, and better understand the way they see the world. When doing this I often catch myself thinking "that was me 5 years ago" or "that was me 10 years ago", or sometimes "That is interesting! Wonder why she is doing it that way?"

Recently it occurred to me that we all seem to be on the same journey of maturation as product developers. Where we through time and experience move through different stages, where in particular the driving question underlying the product development process seems to change.

What can I build? I started out as a software developer. As a professional I took a lot of pride in my ability to efficiently deliver reliable products by the book, with all the whistles and bells I believed to be necessary.

I was particularly interested in the affordances found in the solution space, asking what can I build? It would be fair to say that I had a tendency to fall in love with the products - after all they were perfect if I may say so myself (no bias here)...

What do I think they want or need? Despite being a practitioner of Agile and thus (mostly) working by the book. I found that our users often did not seem even close to as enthusiastic about our products as I did.

This got me thinking that if the goal of Agile is to reduce waste of resource (efficiency). Is it not committing the ultimate sin by building ineffective solutions, that would just be thrown away by our users?

This made me realise the importance of empathising with the user. And I started to practice what I believed to be User-Centered Design (UCD). Asking what do I think our users want or need?

Can they use it? After a while UCD led me to start observing my users in action. This is when I noticed that they were struggling to use our products. Stupid users right?! However, after a while it occurred to me that the reason why they were struggling, was that they did not have the same knowledge about our product as I did.

Given that I myself was not the user of the product, the user interface should be adapted to the knowledge held by the first-time user (I know, who would have thought?). This new-found interest for usability, had me asking can they use it?

Do they need it? After investing a lot of time and resource into learning about usability. I noticed that despite being able to use our products, people were still choosing not to(!) Almost as if they didn't care about the problems our products were solving - and that was exactly it(!) This realisation had me asking do they need it?

Do they want it? Despite validating (proving) that our users had the problems the product were solving. I often found that what I believed to be relevant prospects (fancy word for potential customer) still did not want the products. Due to that the problems the product were solving was just not painful enough for the prospects to care.

Afterwards I learned that it has been found time and time again that if the problem being solved is painful enough, people will figure out how to use a product (almost) regardless of usability. This insight had me asking do they want it?

Will they use it? Confident that I had cracked it, I was completely blind-sided when users who had told us that they most definitely had a problem and wanted a solution for it. Still chose NOT to use it when we made a highly usable product and provided it to them.

Were they lying to us? Yes - kind of. It turns out that due to a range of different cognitive bias such as for example hyperbolic discounting, which is a fancy way of saying that humans are really bad at predicting their own future behaviour. As well social desirability bias, meaning that people tend to tell you what they think you want to hear - as they have nothing to win by upsetting you. There was a strong dissociation between what people were saying and actually doing.

This led me to start asking will they use it? And I find that ultimately all the other questions comes second or third to this. I'm not saying that market research, usability etc is irrelevant, but rather that they come second to the often ignored ‘willability’.

Why does the question matter? I have found that the questions I ask have a fundamental influence on the way I approach new product development. If you focus on usability, usability is what you get. If you focus on ‘willability’, ‘willability’ is what you get. - And I know which one I prefer(!)

The hard part of product development (most of the time) is not actually making the product, but rather making people use the product. This is what we are all about here at Mind Engineering. We help you find, understand and solve: the right problem, for the right user, in the right way.

// Vegard Jørmeland

[guybauwen-blog]

Lean innovation 4.0

“Innovation has nothing to do with how many Research & Development dollars you have. When Apple came up with the Mac, IBM was spending at least 100 times more on R&D.” Steve Jobs (Fortune, November 9, 1998).

‘Lean innovation 4.0’ is een relatief nieuwe innovatiefilosofie, waarbij bedrijven zo kostenbewust en zo efficiënt mogelijk, maar tegelijkertijd ook zo beweeglijk en zo snel mogelijk kunnen werken. ‘Lean innovation 4.0’ innoverende organisaties kunnen het vermogen ontwikkelen om gelijktijdig slank en wendbaar te zijn en toch dynamisch coherent en consistent te blijven. De ‘lean filosofie’ is door de jaren heen geëvolueerd van een operationele focus van kostenreductie in voorspelbare en stabiele omgevingen naar een strategische en holistische ‘lean innovation 4.0’ aanpak, met focus op waarde-creatie en waarde-valorisatie, het slimmer toepassen van nieuwe bedrijfsmodellen en het sneller benutten van groei- en marktkansen en dit in onzekere en in dynamische omgevingen.

Dit blog is geschreven door dr. Guy Bauwen, Directeur Kenniscentrum Innovatief Ondernemerschap, Hogeschool Rotterdam.