OI Chess Paradigm: How to Implement Open Innovation

May 21, 2009 at 1:56 pm · Filed under OI Chess Paradigm, Uncategorized, open innovation

“First focus on input instead of possible output”

After lots of research we proudly present our Open Innovation Chess Paradigm:

Inspired by a lack of theory about the input of Open Innovation (“OI”) –what is needed to make effectively use of OI– we developed the OI Chess Paradigm. Where existing theories and global thought leaders keep focusing on the output of OI –what should be possible using OI–, the OI Chess Paradigm answers the questions business deals with.

With the Open Innovation Chess Paradigm we developed a concrete toolbox for durable implementation of Open Innovation (“OI”). Focusing on the change process becoming an ‘open organization’, the Paradigm offers a concrete plan of action for organizations with ambitions in (open) innovation.

The OI Chess Paradigm helps your organization on how to divide the change process in manageable steps. It describes how to make use of different leadership styles and organizational identity in order to control the transformation on all levels of the internal organization: people, operations, policy and culture.

Please note that the slideshow contains only a slight overview of the OI Chess Paradigm. Feel free to contact us for more information.

Comments (1)

Use existing communities vs. starting your own community

January 28, 2009 at 10:19 am · Filed under community

The greatest threath of Crowdsourcing is that every company is creating it’s own community. The fact they launch their own communities is kind of obvious given the promise of crowdsourcing: improved association with- and support from the members of your community.

But the problem is that this is stimulating highly differentiated communities, where people have to be member of too many different communities to find satisfaction. It also complicates the traceability of interesting cases members would like to solve.

It seems that using open crowdsourcing platforms will prevent this. With only a few platforms where innovators and organizations concentrate, it’s better for both parties! It’s easier for members to work on different subjects. At the same time it’s far cheaper for organizations (which makes it also within reach of small companies) while they don’t have to stimulate community growth by themselves AND the advantages of cross-pollination are much bigger!

So what do you think about this?? Should companies start their own or concentrate? And why?

Comments (3)