Driving Innovation through Co-Creation

8/8/2019 Driving Innovation through Co-Creation

1/13

InnovationthroughCo-creation


2/13

Driving Innovation through Co-CreationBy Uday Dandavate,

December 8th

, 2008

1.1 Background

The real challenge for a future-focused organization lies not in just

coming up with great product ideas, but in coming up with ideas that

resonate with the real consumers. Additionally, a greater challenge

that companies face today is getting multiple teams in the value chain

to buy into the vision of the creative teams, and executing the vision

with a passion and precision so that such an innovation translates into

profit.

Every year, global companies cumulatively spend billions of dollars on

innovation. A very small number of ideas generated through voracious

churning of creative minds actually hit the market, and an even smaller

proportion of these ideas generate profits. The real challenge faced by

companies worldwide is how to streamline the innovation processes in

a manner that optimizes investment in innovation and maximizes the

chances of success.

1.2 Evolution of design

The field of design has reinvented itself with the purpose of keeping

itself relevant to market realities. Traditionally, design was considered

a domain of creative mindsof people who were trained to envision

and execute ideas that could change the course of consumers lives.

Designers had the power to manipulate everyday lives of consumers.

Unfortunately, this power did not always translate into business

success. The result was a typical tension between creative teams and

the product planning teams on one hand, and the engineering and

marketing teams on the other. Inevitable culmination of this tension

was a lot of finger pointing for failed ideas and missed opportunities.


3/13

Designers were quick to recognize the benefits of a User-Centered

Design (UCD) process to enhance the chances of design ideas

succeeding. In the course of time, designers began to integrate creative

teams with experts in anthropology and cognitive psychology, who

could bring the knowledge of consumers needs and aspirations to the

innovation process. Ethnographic research methods became popular

amongst designers and innovation teams in global corporations. With

the advent of UCD methods, designers had to adjust their internal

conceptualization processes to the need for understanding,

internalizing, and being inspired by information from and about the

real users of their products.

Another development affected the practice of design and innovation.

With the popularization of PCs and various other digital devices, User

Interface (UI) design (both hardware and software devices) became a

critical consideration in product development. The UI design

community recognized the need for inputs regarding real users in

design. As a result, usability studies became an integral part of the

innovation process within the UI design field. Usability studies helped

designers to gain sensitivity to the user experience of their products

and to make improvements before their designs were put into the hands

of the consumers.

Emergence of the UCD approach has helped move the onus of

innovation from the creativity of a single designer to the information

acquired from a systematic study of user needs and aspirations. While

UCD helped increase the chances of making designers ideas more

relevant to the consumers, the source of ideas still remained with the

designers. The end users of a design were still used as a reference

point. This is where Participatory Design (PD) came into the picture.


4/13

According to Wickepedia,

Participatory design is an approach to design that

attempts to actively involve the end users in the designprocess to help ensure that the product design meets their

needs and is usable. It is rooted in work with trade unionsin several Scandinavian countries in the 1960s and 1970s;

its ancestry also includes Action research andSociotechnical Design.In participatory design end users(putative, potential, or future) are invited to cooperate withresearchers and developers during an innovation process.

Potentially, they participate during several stages of aninnovation process: they participate during the initial

exploration and problem definition, both to help define theproblem and to focus ideas for solution; and during

development they help evaluate proposed solutions.

(Wickepedia 2006)

The main difference between UCD and PD is that UCD uses end users

in a consultative role, whereas the latter users are included in the

ideation process by way of having access to the tools and methods

similar to the ones designers would use to conceptualize ideas.

Figure 1. (L)Even adults discover the freedom of expression when given the task of

representing a complex experience in a collage form. (R) Velcro modeling, like

LEGO, triggers the imagination of the participants. It helps translate the tacit

knowledge they have about their own needs and aspirations into solutions.

The benefit of the PD process is that, when users are given the tools of

conceptualization that designers typically use, they are able to translate

their tacit knowledge about their own needs and aspirations into

solutions. Wickepedia itself is a good example of PD. The solutions

created by the participants of this process are analyzed to understand

the motivations behind the solutions suggested by the participants.


5/13

The design field is now moving beyond the PD stage of evolution.

While PD was focused on eliciting user inputs about the end product, it

still did not address the need for moving the ideas efficiently and

effectively through the value chain. Getting various stakeholders in the

value chain to own the insights and ideas, get their commitment to

execute innovation, required a new approach. This is where the

concept of co-creation emerged. C K Prahalad, professor of Corporate

Strategy at the Stephen M. Ross School of Business, University of

Michigan, was the first to introduce the concept. In suggesting a shift

from creating designs for consumers to developing experience

platforms, Prahalad stated that innovation is not necessarily

innovation in technology, but it comes from the ability to personalize

an experience (Prahalad 2004). A key consideration in introducing the

co-creation process in an organization is to recognize the fact that one

cannot isolate the experience of an end user from the experience of the

designer, the client, the marketer, the channel partners, and all the

other stakeholders within the value chain. Each one of them has their

own motivations and constraints within the value chain. Unless all of

these considerations are taken into account while developing an

innovative idea, it would be difficult to follow through with the

execution of it. This is where co-creation becomes imperative for

innovation.

1.3 Understanding co-creation

The basic philosophical foundation of co-creation is similar to the

principles of PD. In order to maximize the effectiveness of co-creation,

some of the highlights of the process must be understood:

1. Innovation refers to the impact of your product (which includesservice, retail environment, or a brand) on your consumer. It does

not refer to just the end product.


6/13

2. The objectives of various stakeholders must be reconciled when aninnovative idea is executed. Your product cannot succeed if it is

only driven by the objectives of the CEO, the engineer, the channel

partners, or the consumers.

Figure 2: (L) Co-creation workshop at BBC, London. (R) Co-creation

workshop at Bell Aliant, Halifax, Canada.

3. Design is an act, not an artifact. It is an act of meeting unmet needsand executing dreams for an experience. The embodiment of

design is only the culmination of the design process.

4. People choose products based on the experience they want to havewith the products or because of the meaning such products hold for

them, not just for their features and functions.

5. When given appropriate tools of visualizing and expressing theirideas, such as the tools used by designers, everyday people can tapinto their tacit understanding of their own needs and aspirations

and build ideas for future products.

Figure 3: Capturing moments through visual tools helps focus on miniscule

moments of life that have a big impact on how people feel overall about new

technologies that afford those experiences.


7/13

6. Verbalized and written methods of articulation have been thetraditional mode of communication between a company and its

consumers, especially in the areas where market research is meant

to drive innovation. These modes of communication are not very

effective in capturing the tacit dimensions of human experience,

such as emotions, cognitive structures, cultural influences, andinterpersonal relationships. These dimensions of human experience

have critical bearing on the success of an idea. On the other hand,

tools such as collage making, cognitive mapping, storytelling,Velcro modeling, etc., allow people to reflect over those aspects of

their everyday experiences that are important to them. Therefore,the co-creation process engages multiple modes of communication

between multiple stakeholders in the value chain.

Figure 4: The data collected from the fieldwork activity is organized to findpatterns in user behaviors, needs, and aspirations.

7. Translation of market information into innovative, actionable, andmeaningful ideas is more effective when the information is

presented to the innovation team in a visual, immersive, and

inspiring format. Reports, bar charts, and statistics do not inspire

innovative ideas.

Figure 5: (L) Developing frameworks, use scenarios of the future, and tangible

product and service ideas is the final phase of the co-creation process. (R) Individual

members of the co-creation team are encouraged to draw quick visual

representations of patterns they see in the information. These visual patterns help us

arrive at a shared understanding of the findings.


8/13

1.4 Application of co-creation

The co-creation process can be used in a variety of situations. For

example:

1. Developing new products, brands, retail environments,services, user interfaces, or marketing messages.

2. Identifying emerging cultural, technological, behavioral, ortransactional trends.

3. Educating an innovation team to innovate for new andemerging markets.

4. Educating an innovation team to innovate for new andemerging consumer profiles within familiar markets.

5. Developing a shared vision and a commitment for settingconsumer-focused goals for delivering value within

multidisciplinary teams within a company.6. Identifying product diversification plans based on the perceived

competence of the company amongst the consumers.

7. Extending the brand to new business opportunities.8. Establishing shared goals for innovation between collaborating

companies based on their respective competencies, aspirations,

and brand equities.

9. Defining persona: An actionable description of targetconsumers and their archetypal behaviors and aspirations.

10.Creating relationships between product manufacturers andchannel partners based on a shared understanding of the

consumer, the point-of-purchase experience, and opportunities

for adding value through innovation.11.Jouneys into the heartland of Consumer Experience:

Exposing senior management to the realities of the market andengaging them in in-field ideation.

In the following sections I will provide a few examples of using co-

creation for inspiring people-centered innovation in an organization:

1.5 Co-creation in action: Connecticut History Society

A few years ago, The Connecticut History Society (CHS) approached

SonicRim with a request for helping the organization develop a vision

of how to develop a new history museum that takes into account the

aspirations of the people of Connecticut, and what history and a history

museum means to them.


9/13


10/13

Outcome: It was noticed that the vision of the local population was

different (there were some overlaps) from the vision suggested by the

design team earlier. While both visions were considered very exciting

and worth pursuing, general opinion was in favor of implementing the

vision that came out of the co-creation exercise.

1.6 Co-creation in action: Corporate Journeys into the Heartland

of Consumer Experience

Recently, a global technology company, requested SonicRims help in

helping the senior members of their Emerging Markets team to

understand the innovation opportunities in India.

The project comprised three phases: 1. Immersion in the field;

2. In-field synthesis of observations; and 3. Co-creation workshops in

the United States.

We scheduled a visit with 20 senior executives from the company to

one large city, one medium-size city, and one village in India. The

team was split into smaller groups; each group had the opportunity to

meet with local families and discuss their lives, routines, and

aspirations for the future. We also conducted visits to local markets

and led group discussions in each of the places visited. The immersion

exercise occurred over 10 days.

Figure 6: (L) Preparing for an interview with a village milkman in (R) A designer

from the client company riding a camel in an Indian village as a part of a

journey into the heartland of consumer experience.


11/13

The morning after every visit, the team met at a makeshift war room

set up at the hotel in Delhi. There we discussed our observations and

implications, wrote down the observations on index cards, and then

organized them based on themes and aspirations.

On the last day, a full-day workshop was conducted where the themes

and aspirations were organized into finer categories, and a preliminary

brainstorming session was conducted to identify implications and

opportunities.

Later, the SonicRim team spent two weeks organizing the information

collected from the field visit and the daily synthesis workshops. Then

various stakeholders from the client organization met for a two-day co-

creation workshop. During this workshop, SonicRim set up large panel

displays that depicted visual information about the lifestyles, needs,

and aspirations of the people we visited. On the first day of the

workshop, the team deliberated over the observations from the field,

and identified specific persona and their significant goals that were

relevant to the client business. On the second day, the team developed

unique scenarios of how, through the use of technology, each of these

persona could fulfill their goals. These scenarios were then analyzed to

develop a refined matrix of persona and their associated goals. Finally,

the team participated in a brainstorming exercise where specific

solutions (products, services, and marketing messages) were

conceptualized based on which goals were relevant to which persona.

Outcome: A multidisciplinary team of this client was able to commit

to a framework for innovation that helped them relate their innovation

targets to the goals of specific persona. Additionally, the immersive

experience in the field and a collective co-creation exercise helped

them build a shared memory of the user experiencepast, present, and

future. Overall, the client organization was very pleased that the co-

creation exercises helped to conserve investment in innovation.


12/13

1.7 Takeaways

Organizations that believe that innovation is one of the important ways

of thriving in competitive and uncertain economic times should follow

a co-creation-based model of innovation. By involving the

stakeholders in the creation of the ideas, you conserve resources that

are typically wasted in pursuing the vision of a single individual or of

teams that are removed from the realities of the stakeholders in the

value chain. Indigenous ideas (ideas germinated within your

organization) stand a better chance of reaching and succeeding in the

market. By involving the creativity of the stakeholders and by using

co-creation tools and methods, you stand a better chance of delivering

value to your consumers and being rewarded for offering them what

they need, rather than trying to convince them that they need a great

idea from a great innovator.

References:

Dandavate, Uday, and Nancy Lefforty-Wellot. 2003. Designing with

Indegenious Ideas,Business World, India, June 30

Greenbaum, Joan, and Morten Kyng, eds. 1991. Design at Work:

Cooperative Design of Computer Systems. Hillsdale: Erlbaum

Kuhn, Sarah, and Michael Muller. 1993. Special issue: Participatory

Design. Communications of the ACM, 36 (4)

Prahalad, C.K., and Venkat Ramaswamy (2004) The Future of

Competition: Co-Creating Unique Value with Customers.Boston

Harvard Business School Press , 2004

Sanders, Elizabeth. (2006) Design Research in 2006.Design Research

Quarterly V.I. 1 September 2006. Designer Research Society.

www.designresearchsociety.org


13/13

Sanders, E.B.-N., and Dandavate, U., Design for Experiencing: New

Tools.Proceedings of the First International Conference on Design

and Emotion, edited by C.J. Overbeeke and P. Hekkert, 1999, TU Delft

Sanders, E. B.-N., Generative Tools for Co-Designing. Collaborative

Design, 2000 (Springer-Verlag: London)

Schuler, Douglas, and Aki Namioka, eds. 1993. Participatory Design:

Principles and Practices. Hillsdale: Erlbaum

Trigg, Randall H., and Susan Irwin Anderson. 1996. Special issue:

Current Perspectives on Participatory Design.Human-Computer

Interaction 11

_________________________________________________________

Written forMuotoilun Johtaminen (Design Management handbook)

Q1- 2007, published by Kauppalehti, Finland. Original is printed in

Finnish language._________________________________________________________

Author: Uday DandavateFounder and CEO, SonicRim Ltd., Global Design Research,USA

Uday Dandavate is a founder and CEO of SonicRim, a GlobalDesign Research company. A relentless globetrotter, Udaybrings over 28 years of experience in design and innovation toSonicRim. Uday leads a multidisciplinary team at SonicRim,where he studies people, cultures, and trends around the worldin order to drive design and innovation strategies for his clients.A firm believer in the participatory approach to design, Uday has

helped many Fortune 500 companies gain empathy for theexperience of everyday people as they design products, brands,and new technologies. He has also worked with many publicorganizations to help them understand how to best deliver valueto their audience through design and innovation. Uday is ofteninvited to speak at international conferences and universities toshare his ideas and experiences as an evangelist of everydaypeople in the world of business and technology.

www.sonicrim.com

Documents

Driving Innovation through Co-Creation