TOOLS AND IDEAS FOR

SYSTEMIC INNOVATION

Erika Gregory
Arnold Wasserman

Collective Invention
 “The United States of
America did not become
the most prosperous na-
tion on Earth by sheer
luck or happenstance. 
We got here because
each time a generation
of Americans has faced
a changing world, we
have changed with it.”
President Barack Obama
Carnegie Mellon University
June - 2010
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Many thanks to Fiona Hovenden, PhD and David Karshmer for their contributions to this work.
 TABLE OF
CONTENTS

1 Quotes
4 Overview: Building an Innovation Ecosystem
6 What We Have Learned
8 Phase One: Discovery
• •
Charter
Charter
for afor
highly-effective
a highly-effectiveinnovation
innovation
teamteam
• •
Detailed
Detailed
picture
picture
of the
of current
the current
statestate
• •
Framework
Framework for guiding
for guiding
systemic
systemic
adoption
adoption
of innovation
of innovation
practices
practices
andand
protocols
protocols
• •
Alternative
Alternative
scenarios
scenarios
in the
in short,
the short,
medium
medium
andand
long-term
long-term
• •
The The
Internal
Internal
Innovation
Innovation
Study
Study
12 Phase Two: Design And Development
• •
Refined
Refined
implementation
implementation
planplan
andand
dashboard
dashboard for assessing
for assessing
progress
progress
• •
Learn-by-Doing
Learn-by-Doing innovation
innovation
training
training
program
program
for innovation
for innovation
facilitators/
facilitators/
staffstaff
• •
Prototype
Prototype
Innovation
Innovation
Center
Center
toolkit
toolkit
andandcurricula
curricula
• •
Innovation
Innovation
Training
Training
• •
Toolkit
Toolkit
Development
Development
16 Phase Three: Delivery
• •
Refined
Refined
Innovation
Innovation
Center
Center
toolkit
toolkit
andand
curricula
curricula
• •
Mentorship
Mentorship
andandcoaching
coaching
as new
as new
processes
processesandand
programs
programs
are imple-
are imple-
mented
mented
• •
Diffusion
Diffusion
of innovation
of innovation
center
center
practices
practices
in the
in greater
the greater
system
system
andand
com- com-
munity
munity
• •
Evaluation
Evaluation
• •
FeedFeed
forward
forward
Learning
Learning
& Iteration
& Iteration
• •
Innovation
Innovation
Diffusion
Diffusion
& Adoption
& Adoption
20 About Design Thinking and Lean Sigma

22 About Collective Invention And Contact

23 Recent and Current Clients

24 Bibliography
Collective Invention

OVERVIEW:
BUILDING AN
INNOVATION
ECOSYSTEM
"Entrepreneurs, researchers and innovators want to be around
each other. They want to feed off the shared creative energy.
They want access to a shared talent pool. They want to build
relationships. So if a local community is able to plant that seed—
if it's able to create the climate for innovation and build a critical
mass— then private investment will follow. Innovation will follow.
Jobs will follow."

John Fernandez
Assistant Secretary
US Economic Development Agency

In the past two decades, we’ve seen seen explosive growth in bio, info,
and nanotechnologies. But in many respects our social structures—
education, health, and government itself—have not kept pace. In spite
of (some might argue because of) the increasing fragility of existing
systems, a global ecology of social innovation seems to be emerging.
After all, our future depends on reinventing and re-energizing social
institutions and bonds, and progress relies on both new technologies
and new social arrangements to liberate and direct human creativity,
knowledge, and energy.

Evidence of the new innovation ecosystem in the United States includes

healthcare innovation zones, energy innovation hubs, and advanced re-
search projects. From energy (Energy Frontier Research Centers, or “ARPA-
E”) to education (Advanced Research Project Agency, or “ARPA-ED”),
such initiatives mirroring the entrepreneurial spirit of the Defense Advanced
Research Project (DARPA). A combination of federal tax credits and pro-
grams (Startup America, Regional Innovation Clusters) incent or support
entrepreneurism and collaborative experimentation; the patent process is
being revamped to quicken the process of bringing good new ideas to mar-
ket. Meanwhile domain-specific innovation centers like Kaiser Permanente’s
Sydney R. Garfield Healthcare Innovation Center have emerged as “safe
spaces” for technologists, medical practitioners and facilities designers to
cooperate in the development of new solutions.

4
 Innovation for the Common Good™

What we currently lack, however, is shared language and a disciplined,

transparent process methodology. While we can point to excellent ex-
amples of innovation process being brought to bear on social problems
around the world, we are still missing key elements of a coherent, sys-
temic approach to social innovation:

• A concrete, shared vision of life in a transformed world

• Mechanisms for innovating at the intersection of domains like
health, education, environment and new capital markets
• A practical curriculum for collaborative innovation and co-design
targeted to this effort

Through experiences across a variety of institutions and disciplines, we

have uncovered key elements that foster the growth of collective invention.
Organizations can and do learn to use all the information at their disposal
to engage the individual and collective “whole mind” through visual tools,
experiential learning, and intensive, focused workshops or “charrettes.”
Building an Innovation System
Successful leaders of innovation develop an awareness of when to form
collaborative groups and when to
unleash resources for the solo visionary. Vision
Meanwhile we now understand the
critical importance of cognitive diversity Changing the Conditions Modeling Behavior
in collaborative creativity.
Embracing Experimentation Leadership Building Culture

Policy Design Thinking

If we are to make good use of oppor-
Strategy
tunities earmarked for innovation in Principles
the healthcare, energy and education
Management
sectors we will need to equip a whole
Innovation Process
generation with shared language and Organization Protocols
system
methodology for social innovation. We
Operations
will need to teach the habits of mind Methods
that fuel collaborative innovation across
domains and sectors. And we will need Structure
to stop thinking that innovation centers Techniques
Space
will solve the problem: we need to build Program
reliable, replicable human-centered in- Tools
novation systems. Physical Virtual
Facilities

5
Collective Invention

Innovation resides at the intersection of invention and insight leading to

the creation of social and economic value adopted at scale.

US National Innovation Initiative

WHAT WE HAVE
LEARNED
In the late 1990’s in San Francisco we built The Idea Factory (www.ideafac-
tory.com), a space and process for organizational innovation. We replicated
that model in Amsterdam, Paris, London and eventually Singapore, where
The Idea Factory is headquartered today. What we learned from our work
with government ministries to industry consortia, from multinational corpo-
rations to small schools and non-profits, is that innovation centers create
helpful but insufficient conditions for successful innovation. In the absence
of leadership and organizational structures that both incent and enable new
ways of working, the innovation center is never absorbed into the organiza-
tional or sectoral bloodstream.

This understanding, combined with our awareness of an emerging zeitgeist

of social innovation, led original members of the Idea Factory team to come
back together in 2005 to form Collective Invention (www.collectiveinvention.
com). Our focus: building innovation systems that encompass four key do-
mains: leadership, organizational structure, process, and space. Address-
ing those four domains requires several phases of attentive, disciplined
work.

6
PHASE ONE: PHASE TWO: PHASE THREE:
DISCOVERY DESIGN AND DELIVERY
DEVELOPMENT

Charter for a highly effective in- Leadership collaboration and Refined toolkit and curricula
novation team including coaching

Detailed picture of the current Refined implementation plan and Mentorship and coaching as new
state and scenarios for the future dashboard for assessing progress processes and programs are im-
plemented

Framework for guiding systemic Learn-by-doing innovation training Integration of innovation with
adoption of innovation practices programs other embedded processes, e.g.
and protocols Six Sigma

Prototype toolkit and curricula Diffusion of innovation practices in

the greater system and community

7
Collective Invention

PHASE ONE:
DISCOVERY

• Charter for a highly-effective innovation team

• Detailed picture of the current state and scenarios for the future
• Framework for guiding systemic adoption of innovation practices and
protocols

Leading Against the Norm

“Especially in the scientific community, people are stuck in how they ap-
proach problems. The day before something is a breakthrough it was a crazy
idea. If it wasn’t crazy yesterday, it isn’t a breakthrough today. And break-
through ideas can sometimes be embarrassing if they don’t immediately
lead to results.”

Dr. Peter Diamandis,

Founder of the X-Prize

8
 Innovation for the Common Good™

The Core Team

A best-of-class core team, comprising of staff committed to the innovation
process and deeply familiar with the context, drives the work of systemic
innovation. High-functioning teams understand the diverse cognitive styles,
behaviors and attitudes of each individual, capitalizing on strengths and miti-
gating weaknesses. An early step in formation of a core team is facilitation
of behavioral profiles designed to enable us all to see how best to structure
and collaborate as a group.

Armed with a Charter that describes in detail the commitments of all in-
volved, rules of engagement, decision-making protocols and measures of
success to be used throughout the process, the core team maintains align-
ment with larger strategic goals and organizational capacities and estab-
lishes operating norms.

Internal Discovery
The purpose of an internal ethnographic study is to understand the culture
of the organization and the tacit or latent knowledge contained in the minds,
experience and sensibilities of the people who work there. Ethnography can
help to surface ways of operating and behaving that people would never
otherwise think to articulate, but which represent valuable knowledge of
several kinds(drawn from the MId-Continent Research for Education and
Learning’s (McREL) Balanced Leadership Framework”)

• Experiential knowledge Knowing why something is important

• Declarative knowledge Knowing what to do
• Procedural knowledge Knowing how to do it
• Contextual knowledge Knowing when to do it

An outcome of the Internal Discovery phase is often a set of models that

represent our analysis of how an organization currently works so that partici-
pants can create a shared language that allows them to consciously learn
from and adapt current ways of operating to the construction of new ways of
working.

Another outcome is that an organization’s articulated “DNA”—its own unique

and successful methodology and practice—can provide the foundation for
collaborative development of new programs, services and markets.

9
Collective Invention

Internal Innovation Study

In the Innovation Study we seek to understand five main things:

• Leadership capacity: Innovation leaders must model tolerance for

deviation and risk. This constitutes a major culture shift in fields like
education and healthcare, where we generally seek to control risk and
all but eliminate deviation from the norm.

• Internal logic of the culture of the organization, system or region: How

and why things currently function the way they do, and how different
‘subcultures’ within the organization work together

• Critical dynamic functions of finance, HR, and strategic planning: How

they interact to create an innovation ecosystem

• Established innovation practice: How and where it has taken root and
is being used

• Adoption patterns: What can we learn that will help us design an ef-
fective plan for diffusing innovation practice throughout the system

10
 Innovation for the Common Good™

With this information we map barriers and enablers relevant to the creation
of a sustainable, and culturally congruent Innovation System. We identify the
resources already available in the system—whether being used currently
or not—and identify opportunity areas. Using personas and scenarios we
explore near, mid, and long-term futures.

We use ethnography as the main methodology for the study. This approach
encourages a focus on the ways in which an organization actually operates
day-to-day, an appreciation of multiple perspectives, and an attention to the
tacit, unarticulated dynamics of any system.

We complete in-depth, one-on-one interviews, and spend time shadowing a

variety of stakeholders. We also conduct group interviews, where appropri-
ate. We observe and document a series of typical activities, such as meet-
ings, collaborative work sessions, and other interactions. And we analyze a
variety of artifacts produced by the organization.

During this intensive period of study, we establish a charrette space that

functions as the home for the project. This space becomes a critical feature
of the training program, as we demonstrate the human-centered innovation
process in real time.

11
Collective Invention

PHASE TWO:
DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT
• Refined implementation plan and dashboard for assessing progress
• Learn-by-Doing innovation training program for innovation facilitators/
staff
• Prototype Innovation toolkit and curricula

Innovation Training
We believe that innovation is too important to leave to experts and that
everybody can be an innovator. We build our engagements by transferring
innovation practices to the client through an iterative process of capacity
development.

The training programs we develop are grounded in adult learning theory.

We teach by working side-by-side with our clients on real work, providing
just-in-time tutorials to illuminate and explain how we’re working. We help our
clients understand how they will benefit from what they’re learning, relating
the training to the real-world challenges they face. And we work in a highly
collaborative partnership, soliciting inputs and feedback from clients both
during and after the training.

Our training programs emphasize the following principles.

12
PRINCIPLES OF
COLLABORATIVE
INNOVATION
Public Cognition & Persistence of
Information
The CI innovation training is a series
of generative learning/prototyping
workshops that take place in what
we call the “charrette.” The charrette
is both what happens and where it
happens. It is a process and a dedi-
cated project space – both physical
and virtual. Charrette participants
learn through doing real world work:
developing an implementation plan
and dashboard, prototyping and
piloting new business models and
programs core to the innovation
center, etc. In this “learning-by-
doing” process, staff will become
effective practitioners of iterative
ideation, visualization, concept
generation, rapid prototyping, all
key components of the Collective
Invention process. The charrette is
where the “whole mind” potential
of widely diverse participants with
differing knowledge, perspectives,
skills and processing styles can
engage effectively in the experience
of collective invention.
*“Charrette” is a French term used
Concept Generation
by architects and designers to mean
With all the research data collected
an intensive, round-the-clock collab-
in Discovery available in the char-
orative teamwork session (In French,
rette, the core team--often extended
a charrette is a horse-drawn cart.
at this phase to include thought
The term originated in the eighteenth
partners from outside the organi-
century when teams of architects
zation--identifies a broad variety of
worked many days without sleep to
possible opportunities for contin-
prepare design submissions for state-
ued exploration. After an intensive
sponsored building projects. On the
period of ideation (in which brain-
morning of the judging, they tossed
storming is but one tool) the team
their rolls of drawings down into the
clusters potential initiatives into
cart as it trundled by in the street
a representative set of concepts,
below, collecting the submissions.
fleshing them out in scenarios and
Sometimes the architects would leap
images that describe their benefits
into the cart and continue to work on
and value from the “user’s” or “cus-
their drawings. This was called being
tomer’s” point of view.
en charrette which is the term we
use today when we are closeted in a
deadline-driven team work session.).
A central characteristic of the char-
rette is visual idea generation. All
thinking is done in rapid visual itera-
tions, proceeding from the rough-
est early concepts to successively
more refined versions. All working
materials, including all reference
material, data, and creative stimuli,
as well as work products are put on
the walls. This gives everybody the
same shared view of the content
as it emerges and the same shared
history trail of the collaborative body
of thought as it grows. Everybody
feels free to annotate, rearrange,
cluster and reorganize the material
constantly. The effect is like viewing
a visual, neural-network map of the
collective mind of the project team.
This stimulates the spontaneous
cross-linking of previously unrelated
ideas and the pattern-recognition of
larger gestalts – the “Aha!” imagina-
tive leaps uniquely characteristic of
the higher mental functions we call
“creativity.”
Concept Validation
At this point, the core team will have
aggregated a broad and diverse
set of inputs into a large field of new
data, insights and ideas all “con-
tained” in a set of provisional con-
cepts about how to move forward
successfully. In the Concept Valida-
tion phase, we often use electronic
media to put those concepts in front
of a wide range of thinkers, exploit-
ing the wisdom of diverse experts
and stakeholders about the chal-
lenges or opportunities they see.
The data generated in the validation
process generates solid support for
the decision process that follows,
during which leaders and core team
members determine which con-
cepts to invest in as programmatic
prototypes.
14
Prototype Development and Testing
Designers, engineers and product
developers all know the impor-
tance of rigorous cycles of inquiry
and learning, building and testing
rudimentary prototypes to ferret
out flaws before implementing a
concept at scale. A rule of thumb
is “The Rule of Tens,’ which says
that at every successive stage of
development, the cost of the project
-- in time, materials, and potential
problems—increases tenfold. So
you want to find problems as early
as possible when failure is cheap, a
process some practitioners call “Fail
Early, Fail Often.”
By the time you introduce a solution
into the world of users, you want to
have engineered out every error you
can possibly anticipate. It is much
more cost effective to do multiple,
low-fidelity prototypes very early in
the process, testing them at specific
phase gates. We call this “progres-
sive approximation,” where you go
through rapid trail and error itera-
tions in order to move successively
closer to a field-ready pilot product
or program that is as close as pos-
sible to the final implementation.
In some cases, like a software Beta
release, a solution is released into a
limited marketplace to learn from a
few sophisticated users, with the as-
sumption that few (if any) changes
will be made before releasing it
more widely. Japanese and Ko-
rean consumer product makers
have built a system of instant feed-
back and response, flexible manu-
facturing and speed-to-market that
allows them to do “market probes.”
They release a product into the
market, track sales and customer
response and if it is unfavorable,
they immediately kill the product.
If the market is positive, they can
overnight accelerate production.
Prototyping can be applied to vir-
tually any purpose*, from devel-
opment of new organizations to
generation of new business models,
programs, systems and tools.
*Collective Invention has taught
and applied prototyping in a wide
range of settings, from small social
services agencies to national in-
novation development. For example,
in the Republic of Singapore, this
approach has been at the heart
of work we began 10 years ago
with our partner, The Idea Factory
Singapore Ltd., at the Ministries
of Education, Environment, and
Community Development. At the
Ministry of Education, prototyping
training has been scaled  through
the entire system and continues,
inside the ministry and at school-
sites around the country, a decade
later. In another example, at the
request of the Danish Government,
our team facilitated INDEX:Views, an
international assemblage of crea-
tive thinkers dedicated to improving
life around the world in the areas of
work, home, body, play and com-
munity. We set up charrette environ-
ments and ran charrette workshops
at the Danish Design Center in
Copenhagen, to rapidly develop
conceptual prototypes addressing
complex healthcare, communica-
tions, educational and trade issues
affecting millions of people globally.
More recently we have designed
and facilitated prototyping programs
for foundations, healthcare or-
ganizations, and industry consortia
focused on cross-sector innovation.
 Innovation for the Common Good™

TOOLKIT
DEVELOPMENT

Based on what we learned during the Innovation Study, and in conjunction

with the traning program, we develop a customized toolkit drawing on al-
ready adopted methods and processes wherever possible. With our train-
ees we will take the toolkit through the full innovation cycle from discovery
through concept generation and validation, prototyping and evaluation.

WE TEACH THE USE OF TOOLS SUCH AS THESE:

The Ethnographic Field Expedition: How to develop a highly effective primary research team able to conduct con-
textual inquiry into the needs and wants of all stakeholders–and structure and internalize that body of knowledge as the
basis for defining “value to the customer” across the value chain.

Persona Development: How to develop iconic human profiles representing relevant segments of customers and
other stakeholders across the value chain.

The Charrette Process: How to construct a collaborative platform for visualizing, developing and sharing data, infor-
mation, knowledge and emerging innovation concepts

Digital Media Environments: how to use digital media environments for collective learning and collaboration across
geographies

Future Maps and Scenarios: How to depict, analyze and exploit future trends relevant to our context

Prototyping: How to move rapidly from early concept development through a rigorous process of iterative trial and
error before introducing a new program at scale

Communication by Design: How to frame, message and communicate effectively to achieve outcomes

15
Collective Invention

PHASE THREE:
DELIVERY
• Refined Innovation toolkit and curricula
• Mentorship and coaching as new processes and programs are imple-
mented
• Diffusion of innovation practices in the greater system and community

Innovation is not what innovators do, it is what customers adopt.

This means that successful implementation is not the release of a solution,
but acceptance and adoption by users at scale—plus the learning we gain
by “following the solution home.” Our work is not complete until we have
worked with the client through one full cycle of implementation (using whatev-
er unit of time is relevant, from budget cycles to school years, etc.) to ensure
sustainability—and to continue the process of continuous improvement.

Evaluation
Because we have co-designed the evaluation process with our client as
one of the first steps of work (see Process Design, Leadership and the Core
Team above) we will be well prepared for the evaluation of (a) our engage-
ment and (b) the outcomes of the program. In most projects, we do dipstick
evaluations periodically throughout the process to look for “leading indica-
tors” that we are on the right track according to the objectives established at
the outset.

16
 Innovation for the Common Good™

Feed forward Learning & Iteration

Only within the past 10 to 15 years have organizations in public and so-
cial services, like health care and education, begun to catch up to private
industry in applying state-of-the-art innovation processes. Because solutions
in these sectors affect people directly in areas of high personal and social
sensitivity, there is understandable resistance to “trying stuff out.” One con-
sequence of risk aversion is that teams striving to innovate tend to default to
a linear input-output model. They try to write the perfect specification, then
develop the perfect solution and then put it out as a pilot in the real world,
by which time a lot of investment in time, money and status are at stake.
If the idea fails or underperforms, everybody rushes to dissociate him or
herself from it. And if the idea ever comes up again, the killer phrase is: “we
tried that and it didn’t work.”

What happens is that invaluable learning from failure never gets captured
and fed forward to a better version. This is why it is important prior to real
world piloting to approach every project as a learning vehicle that cycles
rapidly back and forth between specification and prototyping in a safe-to-fail
environment.

Once the solution is out in the real world, even if it is successful, it often still
becomes an orphan as development teams break up and staff moves on to
other projects. By contrast, high performance innovation organizations follow
solutions into the world and continue to observe and learn from them. An
example is Intuit’s “Follow Me Home” program where Intuit engineers and
marketers follow a customer home or to work to observe their experience
with a newly purchased product.

17
Collective Invention

Innovation Diffusion & Adoption

As daunting as it seems, doing innovation is only the first step. Getting inno-
vation diffused and adopted at scale is the real measure of success.

A crucial step for any Innovation Center in taking innovation to organizational

scale: gaining acceptance, adoption and diffusion not only of innovation
solutions but also of innovation practices and culture. Collective Invention
finds a useful framework for diffusion and adoption strategy in the work of
Geoffrey Moore. in his books Crossing the Chasm and Dealing with Darwin,
Moore says that innovation-push has to be linked to user-pull in order to
“cross the chasm” from early adopters to the majority.

Moore argues that there is a chasm between the early adopters of a product
or service (the technology enthusiasts and visionaries) and the early major-
ity (the pragmatists). Moore believes visionaries and pragmatists have very
different expectations, and he attempts to explore those differences and
suggest techniques to successfully cross “the chasm," including choos-
ing a target market, understanding the whole product concept, positioning
the product, building a marketing strategy, choosing the most appropriate
distribution channel and pricing. Ideally, a successful innovator can create a
bandwagon effect in which the momentum builds and the product becomes
a de facto standard.

Crossing the Chasm is closely related to the Technology adoption lifecy-

cle where five main segments are recognized; innovators, early adopters,
early majority, late majority and laggards. According to Moore, the marketer
should focus on one group of customers at a time, using each group as a
base for marketing to the next group. The most difficult step is making the
transition between visionaries (early adopters) and pragmatists (early major-
ity); i.e.: the chasm.

Moore's theories are mainly applicable for disruptive or discontinuous in-

novations. Adoption of continuous innovations (that do not force a significant
change of behavior by the customer) are still best described by the original
Technology adoption lifecycle. Confusion between continuous and dis-
continuous innovation is a leading cause of failure, especially for high tech
products.

Following is Collective Invention’s own adaptation of Moore’s model that we

find useful for organizations developing innovations in the service, social
and public sectors:

18
 Frameworks
Innovation for the Common Good™

Geoffrey Moore’s Adaptation of Everett Rogers’

Diffusion of Innovations Model

22 2.5% 13.5% 34% 34% 16%

Innovators Early Early Late Laggards
Adopters Majority Majority

Area under
the curve
represents
number of
THE CHASM customers

TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION LIFECYLE

Collective Invention Adaptation of Moore’s Model

Crossing
Adoption the Chasm Acceptance Understanding Awareness Underlying
Drivers in Growth
Markets

Techie Seeker Cultural Pragmatic Conservative Skeptical

Creative Enabler Analyst Observer

THE CHASM

ADOPTION PHASES

Seekers: Exemplars/ Pragmatists: Conservatives: Skeptics: Technology

“Just try it” Brokers: “Stick with “Stick with “Just say no” Adoption
“Get ahead the herd” what’s proven” Strategies
of the herd”

19
Collective Invention

DESIGN THINKING
AND LEAN SIGMA

The term “design thinking” has become ubiquitous to denote a methodol-

ogy for collaborative creativity used mainly by industrial designers to develop
innovative new products, services and systems. Increasingly, governments,
corporations and organizations in the public and civic sectors are adopting
the methods, techniques and tools of design thinking to build their own high
performance innovation cultures.

The typical model of design thinking principles will look familiar to anybody
with a background in systems engineering, artificial intelligence, the computer
software spiral development model
Design Thinking: The DNA of Innovation or customer-driven process, qual-
ity and productivity improvement
The design thinking process has seven stages:
methods like total quality manage-
ment, quality function deployment,
7. Learn six sigma and lean sigma DMAIC.

The first person to codify design

thinking was Nobelist Herbert A.
1. Define
6. Implement Simon, who, in 1969 described it as
a seven-stage process.

Simon’s seven-stage process was

first adopted for computer science,
software programming and artificial
2. Research intelligence during the 1970s. In the
5. Choose 1980s, design thinking was adapted
to create innovation strategies for
Xerox and Unisys Corporations by
two industrial designers, Arnold
Wasserman, a founder of The Idea
4. Prototype 3. Ideate Factory and Collective Invention,
and Bill Moggridge, a founder of
Within these seven steps, problems can be framed, the right questions can IDEO. Today, design thinking is
be asked, more ideas can be created, and the best answers can be chosen. widely taught and applied through-
out industrial design and innovation
The steps aren’t linear; they can occur simultaneously and can be repeated.
consulting.

20
 Innovation for the Common Good™

Human-Centered Innovation Process

10. Learn
9. Implement

Whereas Six Sigma focuses on

Deliver
1. Define reducing quality variation and Lean
focuses on productivity of existing
processes and practices, design
8. Iterate 2. Research thinking focuses on identifying
unmet opportunities for innovation in
Discover industry “white spaces” and social
7. Test and economic “blue oceans.” We
call our approach to design thinking
3. Ideate Human Centered Innovation:
Develop

6. Choose 4. Visualize

5. Prototype Design

New Capacities

Best Practice Next Practice

Human Centered Innovation shares

Current Focus Future Focus
with Lean Sigma process improve-
ment a rigorous focus on value as
Academic / Policy Practitioner / User perceived by the customer.
Generated Generated
The opportunity at hand is to com-
Adoptive Adaptive bine the improvement and control
power of Lean Sigma with the vision
power of Human Centered Innova-
Fidelity Emphasis Context Sensitive
tion to address what C.K. Prahalad
calls the shift from Best Practices to
R&D D&R Next Practices:

Pilots Trials / Prototypes

21
Collective Invention

ABOUT
COLLECTIVE
INVENTION
Collective Invention is a social innovation firm. We build tools and de-
velop programs that enable innovation for the common good: transformative
approaches to education, health, sustainability and ethical enterprise. We
work at the systems level, designing ways for policymakers, philanthro-
pists, entrepreneurs, NGO’s and non-profits to collaborate meaningfully;
we also facilitate innovation processes for individual organizations such as
Kaiser Permanente, and UCLA Medical School’s Center for Healthier Chil-
dren, Families and Communities where we facilitated early development
of a sector-wide innovation network. Collective Invention’s practice draws
on expertise in scenario planning,
design, ethnography, organiza-
tional development, psychology
CONTACT and web-based collaboration. We
have worked extensively in the US,
Erika Gregory, President/CEO Europe and Asia.
Erika@collectiveinvention.com
Collective Invention represents “Act
+1 (415) 963-4060
Two” of a partnership that began
in San Francisco in 1996 with the
Arnold Wasserman, Co-Founder innovation consultancy called The
Arnold@collectiveinvention.com Idea Factory. When The Idea Fac-
tory was sold to entrepreneurs in
www.Collectiveinvention.com Singapore in 2000, our team spent
several years--for some of us this is
www.Innovationforthecommongood.com
ongoing--traveling between the US
twitter: collectinven and Asia to help grow the business,
which continues successfully today
as a Singapore corporation serving
the rapidly growing Asian market for
innovation services.

In 2005, we established our sister company, Collective Invention (CI), in San

Francisco, in response to increasing requests for – and our special inter-
est in – innovation development in the public and civic sectors in the U.S.,
Europe and Latin America.

Our background in cross-sector innovation has meant that we have worked

with clients in virtually every area imaginable, from small social services
agencies to Fortune 50 corporations. A partial client list can be found on the
following page.

22
RECENT AND
CURRENT
CLIENTS
NovoNordisk (current)
Design and facilitation of cross-sector con-
sortia in two areas:
The early origins of health
Trendspotting to identify innovation opportu-
nities (in collaboration with NOKIA, Philips,
Maersk, Novozymes, and Shell)
Genentech (current)
Conducting ethnographic study to under-
stand and transform collaboration culture
Sydney H. Garfield Innovation Center,
Kaiser Permanente (2010)
Consultation on development of market-
facing programs and tools
Co-design and co-facilitation of prototype
public training programs
US Environmental Protection Agency (2010)
Delivered web-based and live simulations of
life in the year 2020 to identify opportunities
for cooperation and innovation in the lifecycle
of materials derived from the earth.
Developed toolkit for facilitators of regional
programs across the United States
World Business Council on Sustainable
Development (2009-2010)
Led cross-sector programs in Europe and the
United States focused on consumer lifestyles
in the future, leading to sustainable produc-
tion opportunities in the present.
Developed and facilitated web-based simula-
tion of life in the year 2020
Procter & Gamble (2009)
Developed toolkit for exploring future
consumer lifestyles to identify disruptive,
environmentally and socially sustainable new
business models, services and products
Grantmakers for Education (2009-present)
Leading national philanthropic innovation
program for a group of 200+ funders includ-
ing Gates, Macarthur, Hewlett and Lumina
foundation among others
Case Western Reserve University (2009-2010)
Developed strategy for building a new Center
for Culture, Creativity and Design at CWRU
SOCAP10 (2010)
Designed and facilitated program for venture
capitalists and social entrepreneurs to collab-
oratively innovate the practice of international
development
New Orleans Center for the Creative Arts
(2005-present)
Consultant and coach to the Boards and sen-
ior leadership of NOCCA and its foundation
Conducted ethnographic study to articulate
the “creative DNA” of successful 35-year-old
program
Led learning journeys to 17 locations in three
States
Developed a strategy and curricula based on
that creative DNA
Developed international advisory council
The Stupski Foundation (2002-present)
Taught innovation practice to 50+ program
officers and staff
Designed and led program that resulted in
nationally-recognized innovation in program-
matic policy and strategy
Consulted to senior leadership and architects
on design of space to encourage innovation
and collaboration
Led parallel prototyping teams
Consulted to the Board of Trustees on innova-
tion efforts
Conducting ethnographic study of learning
innovations in six US States
UC Berkeley Haas School of Business
(2010)
Trained incoming business school students in
the innovation cycle
The KnowledgeWorks Foundation (2009-pre-
sent)
Developed tools for walking in the shoes of
the learner today and in the future
Singapore Government Ministries of
Education; Community Development; The
Environment; Information, Communica-
tion & The Arts; The Economic Develop-
ment Board; Singapore Design Council
(2000-present)
Multiple consulting engagements, Board
seats, convenings and training programs in
innovation, design and future scenarios (all in
collaboration with The Idea Factory Singa-
pore Ltd)
Danish INDEX Design Council (2003-present)
Lead international jury of acclaimed award
program to encourage innovation that im-
proves life
Innovation Center Denmark (2009-present)
Consult on social innovation with visiting
groups of senior Danish leaders
CLASE, Coalition for Innovation of Educa-
tion in Mexico (2010)
Participation in groundbreaking congress,
organized by civil society and devoted to
educational innovation in Mexico
Government of Colombia National Innovation
Program (current)
Consulting on the development of a national
innovation vision and strategy for the Repub-
lic of Colombia
Collective Invention

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bolman, Lee G. & Deal, Terrence E. (2003) Reframing Organizations:
Artistry, Choice and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Little, Caroline. (2009) Beyond Process: Innovation Center Culture &

Value
Chicago: IIT Institute of Design.

Menninger, Bonar. (2010). Reinventing Health Care Delivery: Innovation

and Improvement Behind the Scenes. California HealthCare Foundation.

Moore, Geoffrey A. (2002) Crossing the Chasm. New York: HarperCol-

lins.

Obama Administration (2011). A Strategy for American Innovation:

Securing Our Economic Growth and Prosperity. Washington, DC: http://
www.whitehouse.gov/innovation/strategy

Obama, President Barack. (2010). Remarks on the Economy at Carnegie

Mellon University. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-
president-economy-carnegie-mellon-university

Ostrom, Elinor. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of

Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.

Pink, Daniel H. (2006). A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule
the Future. New York: Penguin Books.

Schrage, Michael. (2000). Serious Play: How the World’s Best Compa-
nies Simulate to Innovate. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Surowiecki, James. (2005). The Wisdom of Crowds. New York: Anchor

Books.

US Department of Education. (2011) Winning the Education Future: The

Role of ARPA-ED. http://www.ed.gov/technology/arpa-ed

US Economic Development Administration Regional Innovation Clus-

ters website. (2011). http://www.eda.gov/RIC.xml

24
COLLECTIVE INVENTION
Innovation for the Common Good™

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0

Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecom-
mons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171
Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.