evolution and innovation | Paul4innovating Innovation Views

Pitching of the Interconnected Business Ecosystem Framework

The Interconnected Business Ecosystem driving impact and increased value.

I am working to validate and expand on the value proposition of the Interconnected Business Ecosystem Framework and have tried to create, hopefully, a compelling pitch that will bring others on board to advance this initiative. I have published this pitch on both of my primary sites, discussing innovation, business, and ecosystems, as they both provide a combination effect for understanding this framework.

I initially called this “the hierarchy of business ecosystem needs,” which built out an interconnected framework of business ecosystems that give organizations a real alternative to how they operate today and in the future.

I provided a comprehensive series of outline papers as the introduction phase earlier this year, which provided the concepts forming a cohesive outline structure of how organizations should think through the future. Also, I provided an earlier view on my paul4innovating.com posting site of “pitching business ecosystems opens up the possibility of real change.”

We need to really open our thinking towards collaborative ecosystems. This is one of openly collaborating and co-creating in different Ecosystem structures and designs to provide a greater diversity of opinions, knowledge, and resources.

This “pooling or network effect” forms around more complex challenges to tackle, thus giving a more sustaining and hopefully greater value in solutions to the needs of their customers, markets, or areas of need.

I have recognized this needed rebranding- hierarchy has some negative connotations.

I have now entitled this The Interconnected Business Ecosystem Framework as it reflects the essence of what I believe this framework provides

Is Innovation evolving in the way I see it going?

Innovation is evolving, the future will be different

I have been asking Google’s Gemini a series of questions about innovation, how it has evolved in the past twenty-five years, and where it seems to be heading.

This is the third and final part of my questioning on looking towards the future and how innovation will evolve, starting from the original thread of looking over the evolution of innovation in the past twenty-five years, since 1999.

This post is about what has evolved and then what will evolve. There is a very different innovation pathway ahead of us, and then I touch upon a vastly different future at the end of this post.

Innovation will evolve very differently, linked tightly to the organization’s future design, no more cutting it loose, housed separately or outside the core.

Have organizations become more collaborative over 25 years? What has enabled that?

Collaboration, Idealization and the enabling of innovation

I have have been looking back at innovation and how it has changed over the last twenty-five years. In a series of three posts, I have asked Google’s Gemini to answer five questions to track and trace the progress innovation has made and where it seems to be heading.

This is the second post looking more at collaboration and idealization and how and what has helped it evolve in this period. Hopefully, this change has enabled better value creation and learning how to innovate. (First post here)

So this post, in a series of three, looks at the answers given by Google’s Gemini on how collaboration and ideation evolved the organization’s ability to adapt and what helped.

25 years of Innovation- how has it evolved? Has it been successful?

25 years looking back at Innovation’s evolution

I decided to hold a conversation with Google’s Gemini about how innovation had changed and hopefully progressed since I first became involved 25 years ago, when I lived in Singapore and was heavily involved in my MBA, which had innovation as an elective.

The MBA elective “hooked” me on innovation, and here I am 25 years later, still going on about innovation, championing, cajoling and encouraging innovation to be more central, disciplined and structured.

So I have taken the educational looking back from Gemini lense of perspective and broken this into three parts. I find it interesting and reaffirming. This is the first of these posts looking at the development, thinking and design of innovation from 1999 to today 2024, twenty-five years.

Innovation can be both highly frustrating and rewarding. It is good to gain a real sense of progress in these past 25 years; otherwise, where have I been?

I often feel innovation has not advanced in these past twenty-odd years, but having all the changes nicely summarized here makes me feel there has been a shape and purpose to be so actively involved in the evolution of innovation over these 25 years and been part of that evolution.

Firstly, this post outlines how innovation has evolved since 1999 and does a further recheck for 2019 until today. So, it covers a twenty-five-year period but recognizes that the last five years have seen a very different set of innovation accelerants.

Innovation as the means for Economic Evolution

It is suggested that economic growth is an outcome of the innovation trajectory we set. Today managing innovation is complex; often success is measured and valued by the creative destruction of others.

The ability to ‘evolve’ is very determinant on the knowledge base, either within a given economy or within a ‘federation’ to bring together as something new, offering more value than what is on offer today.

The combining of the dynamics within innovations parts

Innovation is highly dynamic in its constant change but also in its need of constant co-ordination of its parts.

I’ve been writing a lot recently on different issues that need thinking through for regaining a more sustaining innovation growth engine. Here I wanted to think out loud, about National issues that become more drags and not accelerators to innovation.

I then have tried to identify some of the reasons, and then finish with a personal reflection on the US versus European and some suggested actions needed for improving their innovation activity.

Often we forget to put our own innovation efforts into context, so I’d like to go up to the helicopter view here, maybe it helps us to relate better to some of the external barriers that need equal resolution, as we do often come up against these as we try to innovate within borders. Innovation cannot be contained, it needs harnessing but allowed to ‘move’ where it needs to go. Continue reading “Innovation as the means for Economic Evolution”