TII Innovation Journal

Where's the Beef moved

Recently, Ernst Max Nielsen opened a series of articles under the name "Where's the Beef". The series has  now been given its own weblog: Click here to visit and bookmark the Beef Blog and the original articles have been moved.

CUE: Cambridge University Enterprise

  CUE a Master of Commercialization
Cambridge University is an excellent university. Even more excellent in my view is their way of commercializing inventions coming out of CU. Obviously the "Cambridge Phenomenon", first studied by my old friends from now merged Segal Quince Wicksteed (Bill Wicksteed!), the region's history, presence of benevolent angels and so on are important for that success.

Some years ago CU merged all commercialization activities in CUE. Have a look at their recent Annual report and see how an already impressive record  improves by almost 50% over just 5 years. One would assume that the quality of the (basic) research is not very volatile. Such matters take generations to build up and seldom make quantum leaps. I interpret the growth in commercialization successes as a result of the (re-)organization, really good people (look at the CVs of CUE staff: impressive) and then access to own seed funding (and, of course, lots of VCs crowding around CUE). A minor, but perhaps not less important resource is the creation of "Enterprise Champions", faculty staff who advise CUE on different relevant matters.

PS: compare CUE's score with that of all Denmark, one of the most competitive countries and with the highest knowledge management score in the world: CUE (on the basis of 3,500 research FTE) creates almost half the results in terms of management of invention disclosures, patent filing and licensing and spin off more than 5 times the number of new companies (year 2004) - and with half the TO staff of all of Denmark!

China Nanotech opens new factory

BRIC again

China Nanotech opens new factory: ""

(Via Nanotechnology.com.)

Measuring Innovation 2006

This is interesting that none of the pharmaceutical companies are considered most innovative by other CEOs, since the pharma companies are those who spend most on R&D together with Ford and Daimler Chrysler according and General motors with Toyota. Apple is 109 on the list. So, no clear relationship between innovation and R&D spending???

Measuring Innovation 2006: "

72% of companies worldwide will increase spending on innovation in 2006, and 41 percent will increase spending significantly, according to a recent survey of senior management conducted by The Boston Consulting Group.

The study’s full set of findings, based on responses from more than 1,000 senior executives from 63 countries and all major industries, is summarized in two new reports, ‘Innovation 2006″ and a companion piece on metrics, ‘Measuring Innovation 2006″.

The Boston Consulting Group completed its third annual global survey of senior executives on innovation and the innovation-to-cash (ITC) process, which covers the many interrelated activities involved in turning ideas into financial returns. ‘Innovation 2006″ details and analyzes that survey’s findings and provides a framework to guide executives who are seeking to improve their companies’ innovation capabilities.

Some of the report’s key findings include the following:

• Innovation remains a top strategic focus for many companies, with 72 percent of the executives we surveyed ranking it a top-three strategic priority versus 66 percent in 2005.
• Seventy-two percent of respondents said their companies will increase spending on innovation in 2006.
• At the same time, many executives—nearly half of those surveyed—remain unsatisfied with the financial returns on their companies’ investments in innovation.
• Executives consider Apple Computer, Google, 3M, Toyota Motor, and Microsoft the world’s most innovative companies, with Apple the clear leader.
• Globalization, organizational issues (such as metrics and measurement, structure, and people), and leadership remain three of the biggest challenges facing companies that are seeking to become more innovative.

A companion report to Innovation 2006, ‘Measuring Innovation 2006″ summarizes and analyzes the findings of a separate survey devoted solely to on innovation metrics and measurement.. It also offers ideas to help companies improve their current practices.

The key findings of the second report include the following:

• Innovation is widely undermeasured, and few firms—even those that attempt to track innovation rigorously—are confident they’re doing it right.
• The majority of companies that do use metrics typically use only a handful—i.e., five or fewer.
• The three metrics that executives consider most valuable are time to market, new product sales, and return on investment in innovation.
• Few companies tie employee incentives to innovation metrics.
• The potential for most companies to improve their measurement practices—and, as a result, boost their return on innovation spending—is sizable.

Sources

• Boston Consulting Group’s Press Release
• ‘Innovation 2006″ Report (PDF file)
• ‘Measuring Innovation 2006″ Report (PDF file)

"

(Via URENIO Portal: Innovation, Environments of Innovation, Intelligent Cities and Regions.)

Three Factors That Can Turn Success into Failure

Read this

Three Factors That Can Turn Success into Failure: "Lars Kolind is the former CEO of Oticon, a leading Denmark-based maker of hearing aids. In his book, The Second Cycle: Winning the War Against Bureaucracy, published by Wharton School Publishing, he argues that size, age and success can make mature companies deaf to signals that portend future decline. He summarizes his views in an excerpt from the book."

(Via Knowledge@Wharton.)