富比世商譽榜 Google第一 - 中央廣播電台新聞頻道

富比世商譽榜 Google第一 - 中央廣播電台新聞頻道

知名財經雜誌「富比世」報導，紐約研究機構「聲譽研究所」公布「全球最具聲譽企業排行榜」，在全 球600大企業中，選出28家最令消費者尊敬的公司，搜尋網站巨擘Google高居榜首、日本電子產品巨擘Sony排名第二，第三名是迪士尼公司。

　 　聲譽研究所先由營業額最高的全球600大企業中選出58家，再由24國消費者評分，評分項目包括產品、服務、創新、工作環境、管理、社會責任、財務和領 導能力等。

　　調查發現，「創新」是企業創造全球聲譽的關鍵，名列前茅的企業在創新方面都有傑出表現，如Google提供免費地圖和電子 郵件服務，2010年首季就創造67億美元廣告業績。而全球最二大消費電子產品製造商Sony，規模雖然次於南韓三星，在全球聲譽排名中卻超越三星的第 22名，靠的也是在音樂播放器和電視機產品不斷推陳出新的結果，Google和Sony最近並宣布合作開發網路電視。

　　聲譽研究所執行 董事尼爾森指出：「創新是打動消費者的利器。」排名第6的蘋果公司最新推出的平板電腦iPad，上市28天就暢銷百萬台；排名第8的瑞典IKEA公司創新 家具行銷模式，讓消費者能買到價格合理的時尚家具；排名第10的英特爾所生產的半導體可廣泛運用在汽車、電腦和電視機。

　　上榜企業美國 最多，共12家，包括微軟(11)、嬌生(12)、IBM(17)、惠普(18)、聯邦快遞(23)、可口可樂(25)、寶鹼(27)、UPS(28) 等；德國上榜的三家都是汽車公司，包括BMW(4)、戴姆勒(5)和福斯(9)。日本上榜的還有Panasonic(13)和本田汽車(24)。

全球最具聲譽企業 Google榜首 Sony第二 - 無責任投資論壇 - Yahoo!奇摩部落格

全球最具聲譽企業 Google榜首 Sony第二 - 無責任投資論壇 - Yahoo!奇摩部落格

評析：看來三星要打敗SONY還有待努力！

全球最具聲譽企業 Google榜首 Sony第二

【聯合報╱編譯朱小明／報 導】 2010.05.26 02:49 am


知名財經雜 誌「富比世」報導，紐約研究機構「聲譽研究所」公布「全球最具聲譽企業排行榜」，在全球600大企業中，選出28家最令消費者尊敬的公司：搜尋網站巨擘 Google高居榜首、日本電子產品巨擘Sony排名第二，第三名是迪士尼公司。

聲譽研究所先由營業額最高的全球600大企業中選出58家，再由24國消費者評分，評分項目包括產品、服務、創新、工作環境、管理、社會責任、財務 和領導能力等。

調查發現，「創新」是企業創造全球聲譽的關鍵，名列前茅的企業在創新方面都有傑出表現，如Google提供免費地圖和電子郵件服務，今年首季就創造 67億美元廣告業績。全球最二大消費電子產品製造商Sony，規模雖然次於南韓三星，在全球聲譽排名中卻超 越三星的第22名，靠的也是在音樂播放器和電視機產品不斷推陳出新的結果。聲譽研究所執行董事尼爾森指出：「創新是打動消費者的利器。」排 名第6的蘋果公司最新推出的平板電腦iPad，上市28天就暢銷百萬台；排名第8的瑞典IKEA公司創新家具行銷模式，讓消費者能買到價格合理的時尚家 具，排名第10的英特爾所生產的半導體可廣泛運用在汽車、電腦和電視機。

搜尋世代來了：「不知道」的人才有前途 (Mr. 6)

搜尋世代來了：「不知道」的人才有前途 (Mr. 6)

搜尋世代來了：「不知道」的人才有前途

by Mr. 6 on May 18th, 2010, 目前有 27 則留言, 分享到塗鴉牆 445

這幾天看 到一篇文章還蠻有趣的，它再次提到一位之前很有名的「創業家」，不，應該說是「生活家」，歐不，應該只是一位「建築師」，他蓋了 一棟非常小的房子，只有89平方英呎，換算下來就只有2.5坪。這樣的房子噱頭十足，因為，2.5 坪已經比有些人的「換衣間」都還要小，也小於大部份美國人家的浴室，到底這樣的空間要怎麼住人？

但，我們都好想要這間房子。在山明水秀的地方，建一個這麼小的房子，造價低、地價低…什麼都好棒。哇，這位建築師真聰明！

有趣的是，其實他已經「聰明」太久了，久得可憐，早在1997年，也就是十三年前，就蓋了這麼一棟迷你小房子，位於某個不起眼的加州小鎮，不過，十 三年前，沒什麼人注意到他，他繼續的做他的木工、幫別人蓋大房子……。

後來，都要謝謝時代轉變，第一，環保、省材料、樂活，於是，他這棟以「小房子」來傳達的「簡單生活」突然變得好有吸引力！另外，第二，網路個人媒體 起飛，他跟著寫了一個部落格。於是，神 奇的事情就發生了──

到了2008年，這傢伙開始狂上媒體，帶來更多的媒體報導他，好像連日本人都看得到相關的節目，紅了一兩年後，今年，他終於看到實際的「成果」── 今年才過不到一半，他還沒幫別人蓋到半棟房子，卻已經賣了比以往每年都還多的「設計圖」，幫別人畫平面設計圖，還出書 來教別人「DIY自己蓋房子」，這一切都在短短半年內所發生的，神吧？

現在他很高興的說，從前在蓋房子的時候，他所賺的錢只能養活他自己一人，有趣的是，來到了網路上，就靠這些「設計圖」，他卻可以養活他和他的夥伴兩 個人。我判斷他賺的錢絕不止這些，面對太多競爭者，他刻意講少一點；譬如報導也提到另一個人，看到了這位的成就，他也跟著來做了一個「小房子」，這個人更 有「心機」，故意將房子做得又更小，而且還強調這間房子本身使用的，都是其他房子不要的廢棄材料，他也蓋了一個部落格，但我覺得它的規模就沒有之前這麼 大，而且電視的採訪也沒有，這是因為，網路上往往只「認」第一人，第一人在網路上就是有先天的優勢。

但，第一人卻很辛苦，因為，要蹲整整13年。

所以，我不認為這是一個成功的創業案例，畢竟他要等到13年以後，才開始從這當初的「小房子」看到回收，而且那 還是剛好打中了13年後的潮流，萬一，這個潮流沒有出現？這傢伙只能永遠維持現狀，只有那棟小房子作伴……。有什麼方式，可以不要蹲13年？這傢伙當初蓋 一棟小房子是為了他自己，這麼有創意的人，如果當時他就能掌握到市場，那麼，當年就已經開始做生意了，不必等到13年後。

最近也讀到另 一篇關於「創意」的文章，這位作者竟然強烈批評那些「創業計畫書比賽」(business plan competition)，他認為，所謂的「創業計畫書」這個字，本身就是一個大「矛盾」，他在這篇文章中特別主張，創業計畫書這樣的文件，其實緣自於以 往大公司的文化，由於大公司本身有客戶、有市場、知道產品的種種功能…因此，在這樣的情況下，可以寫出一份完整的「計畫書」，完整的規畫接下來會發生的 事。後來不知怎麼搞的，這樣的計畫書變成給小團隊拿來籌資用，遂變成了現在大家都知道的「創業計畫書」－－

他說，這份文件，無論寫得多好，並不是創業的最好的「計畫書」，因為，一間小公司開始創業，並不是在執行一系列的「已知計畫」。說實話的，大部份的新創公 司，面對的是一連串「未知」的客戶需求，甚至連自己產品的功能都不太知道。他說，小公司並不是要拿來執行計畫的，而是 拿來「搜尋商業模式」的；它的整個團隊，都是設計來「搜尋商業模式」的，目標是最終找到一個能持續又能長大的獲利模式。

這傢伙還建議，以後，創業計畫書大賽應該改成創業模式大賽，評審的問題不再只是問創業家「市場會有多大？」、「競爭優勢為何？」他們應該問 以下五個問題：

1. 你一開始認為這個創業計畫是如何？
2. 接下來你做了什麼事情、什麼小產品？
3. 你學到了什麼事？
4. 然後你又做了什麼事？
5. 你怎麼修改上面的創業計畫，接下來又做了什麼事？

這五點很妙，也就是說，如果真有這麼一場「比賽」，那這些創業家必須真的出去做，而且要說服評審，他們的創業，是不斷的在「循環」，循環學習、循環 接觸客戶、然後循環調整……，反正，評審也看不到未來，所以評審負責的就是照他以往的經驗，去判斷這些年輕人是否有好好的規畫這個自我修正的循環，這循環 中有哪一段設計不切實際的要揪出來加以改進，至於那真正的「創業計畫」，就靠這個老經驗小經驗的調整後，半年後，「自然」產生！

他說，有經驗的創業家都知道，真正的創業是一個不斷自我修正的循環，最後的戰場不是在紙上而是在外面；世上有99%的創業計畫書，都在第一次與客戶 接觸時當場折枝！被逼著重新開始！那麼，一開始要絞盡腦汁設計這一個反正會被打爛的「計畫」，不如絞盡腦汁設計可以如何循環去撞壁、撞壁、撞壁、找到新的 路。

他說，創業，不是建立一個「執行」團隊，而是建立一個「搜尋」團隊！

我覺得，不只是創業家，所有人都進入了這個世代。這是一個「搜尋」的世代，而不是「執行」的世代。搜尋之後還是要執行，但執行不能缺乏搜尋，搜 尋為大，執行第二。

昨天和小朋友玩的時候，我發現，因為我很自然每次打開電腦就先到Google，小朋友受我的影響，一看到拿起電腦，就很自然的說：「我想要找舞龍舞 獅的影片！」他也早就學會「Google」這個單字，成為他僅次於「Sky」第二個發現的單字。從前我們到書店，自己先從分類開始找起，或許就先問好；從 前我們要上餐館，先想想以前吃過哪一家好吃，但現在我們都從「搜尋」，仔細想想，這已經不是一個從「已知」中選擇的時代，而是從「未知」 中去搜尋的時代！因為搜尋引擎發達，因為裡面的資料夠多、夠公正，我們的生活不再需要被已知給飽滿，我們有更多「未知」在前面，靠搜尋 來「贏」。

所以我愈來愈發現，要看某人能否成功，要看看他的「模式」，本身是不是能一直在未知中搜尋。如果都自以為「已知」，那在這個搜尋世代，表現應該不會 太好。

原來，現在懂得最「多」的人沒用，反而是不懂的人，有一個不斷循環的搜尋模式，更有機會！

在這個世代，承認「不知道」，反而擁有更多。

人生三分之二的風景(文:郭奕伶 ， 商業週刊) - ＪＬ喬安妮~CFP國際認

人生三分之二的風景(文:郭奕伶 ， 商業週刊) - ＪＬ喬安妮~CFP國際認

人生三分之二的風景(文:郭奕伶 ， 商業週刊)

分類：情感記事/ 文章

2009/12/07 21:24

人生三分之二的風景(文:郭奕伶 ， 商業週刊)

台灣最大的外商銀行--花旗，一個臥虎藏龍的金融競技場。

花旗人的外表，多半光鮮亮麗、自信滿滿，但他們卻面臨比別人更激烈的競爭與壓力，為了強過身邊的「第一名們」，他們 必須更用力的工作，甚至犧牲自己的生活。

不過，民國五十三年次， 擔任花旗銀行金融同業處副總裁的黃毅， 卻有一套與眾不同的工作哲學。進入花旗銀行十三年，黃毅從不加班，他只有一次在週末加班的紀錄，一個禮拜的應酬不超過兩天，回家絕口不談公事、不想公事。 這樣的人，仍然可以在花旗銀行裡擔重任。五年前， 黃毅接下這個職位，帶領著近二十人的團隊，爭取與銀行同業、保險、證券、投信，甚至央行等法人機構的往來業務，五年來，這個部門對銀行貢獻的收入金額成長超過一倍。去年，這二十個人創造出十三億元的收 入，並將國際科技大廠委外代工的觀念引進國內的銀行市場，推動銀行將核心業務的非核心能力業務委外給花旗代工。

工作一百分，對黃毅來說，並不困難，從民生國小班長、介壽國中模範生、建中到台大土木系、台大商學研究所畢業，黃毅 是一般定義的聰明寶寶，工作對他來說，似乎應付得游刃有餘。

但是，工作一百分以外，他的生活也能一百分，就令人好奇了。黃毅充分保有自己生活空間的方式，不一定是什麼了不起的 興趣或娛樂活動，但是，「工作只占生活的三分之一」，是 他堅持的原則，因此，每年固 定兩週以上的旅遊計畫，每週末固 定逛書店、唱片行，每天早上與 妻子散步去喝杯咖啡、吃早餐，以及音樂會等娛樂，都是他豐富生活的活動。期許自己每年都要做一件很有意義的事，讓「六十歲時回憶起來會微笑十秒」！

還有一件事可以凸顯他經營生活的用心。民國八十三年，黃毅已經是花旗的主管，在很多人的印象裡，銀行的主管應該是一 板一眼，嚴謹自律，但黃毅竟然報名參加Marlboro公司（萬寶路香菸）所舉辦的西部探險活動， 當時，台灣報名者眾，經過筆試、口試與體能測試，黃毅成為第十一名，是候補第一名。幸運的，有名獲選者因故不能成行，於是他得以參加這為期十天的活動。在 同伴裡，黃毅的銀行員身分顯得相當特殊。當時，這群人浩浩蕩蕩開往美國西部，從北邊到南邊，他們學西部牛仔的騎馬趕牛、玩吉普車、泛舟、越野車等十天，台 灣的《民生報》等媒體還隨行報導每天活動。「過癮極了，」黃毅說：
如果到六十歲時，我想到一件事還會微笑十秒鐘，那麼我花一年來做這件事都值得。
因此，黃毅每年都告訴自己要做一件很有意義的事，不管是工作或是旅行、玩樂。

一位與黃毅共事多年的同事形容，黃毅很懂得玩樂，是標準「WorkHard, PlayHard」 的人。這個性格有什麼原因嗎？黃毅反問記者，「你認為，人生 可以規畫嗎？」

父親驟逝，體會人生無常∼「活在當下，更及時行樂」黃毅三歲時，父親就過世，得年三十五歲，除了一個姊姊、弟弟外，黃毅的母親 腹中還懷著一個胎兒。直到現在，父親的死因仍然不清楚，「我們根本措手不及，前一天父親才覺得不舒服，沒想到隔天就走了，」黃毅說，「所以，你今天可能才生病，明天就掛了。」因此，「要活在當下，更要及時行樂」的觀念一直深 植在黃毅心中，他不要像他父親一樣。

黃毅從來不相信人生可以規畫，也從來不會把生活切割成「求學、工作、退休、享樂」四個階段。

在黃毅生活裡，他永遠 把此刻可分配所有的資源，做最適當的分配，而不會把資源設想成可以儲存到未來的某一天再享用，根據這個原則，他的時間配置自 然與多數人不同。

因此，問他是否為了追求保有高的生活品質，而放棄工作、放棄更上層樓的機會？
黃 毅覺得很好笑，「對我來說，這是極為自然的事，沒有放棄什麼啊！」如果把人生比喻成一個圓，每個人都有自己的圓，有大有小，每個圓裡的成分也長得不一樣， 「我非常篤定自己要的圓長什麼樣子，我做的每一件事，都符合這個圓的樣子。」黃毅說。

很多人，對金錢的追求有一個模式，他們的第一個目標是三千萬元，當達到第一個目標後，第二個目標就是一億元，然後， 三億元是第三個目標，然後，就變成「錢奴」。

「為什麼我不會變成這個樣子呢？」黃毅曾經這樣研究自己，許久後，他終於知道，
「人生真的可能很短」這個從小就深深影響他的觀念，是他所追求的人生，與別人最大不同的原因。

寧願工作得久一點，也要兼顧享樂！跑步時悟出「永遠不與別人競爭」的道理在「五年級生」裡（民國五十年到五十九年出 生的這群人），許多人都想用力的工作十五年，然後，退休，好好的享樂。

但是，黃毅從來沒想過 要提早退休的問題，他不要這種被切割的人生，對他來說，
「我 永遠要一邊玩、一邊工作，即使可能要工作得久一點。」黃毅是少數還會認同「五十五歲退休」的「五年級生」。

但是，在競爭如此激烈的花旗競技場裡，眼見著別人都這麼戮力的拚績效，黃毅要如何保持心中的平衡感呢？「永遠不要與別人競爭，要與自己競爭。」這是他的法寶， 也是他青年時期跑步悟出的一個道理。

黃毅念介壽國中時，為了訓練自己的意志力，每天早上都到公園、或台北體育場跑步，後來，他發現一個道理，在這個跑道上，隨時都有新加入的人，因此，此刻你所在的位置，到底是領先，還是落後別人呢？每個人的起跑點不 同，加入時間不同，跑的距離也不相同，在你後面那個人，可能落後你，也可能是領先你的人。「很顯然，這是一個無法比較的問題。所 以，我唯一的想法就是，應該專注在自己的腳步上，隨時調 節自己的呼吸，不要中途跌倒，或亂了腳步。」

黃毅的父親過世後，母親為了撫養幼兒，長期在外地當紡織廠的女工，即使黃毅已經擔任花旗銀行主管時，母親仍在餐廳裡 洗碗，甚至為人幫傭。當時，黃毅下班後也還會到餐廳裡幫母親的忙。從小，黃毅由祖父母一手帶大，並生活在有五、六十個堂兄弟、妹的大家族，他從小就知道要 如何自己解決問題，如何與別人共享資源，而在職場上成功。

但是，黃毅清楚的認知，一切的成功，只為了活出豐富的生活品質。從小的生活經驗，黃毅學會獨立，也學會與別人共享資源，並培養出等待 成功的耐力。而且，「我把一個人當成人在經營，而不是當 公司在經營。」因此極度工作，極度玩樂是他想活出的人生彈性。

被遺忘的職場生理時鐘

近幾年來，我失去幾個職場上認識的朋友，他們以相同的節奏離開，根本來不及道別，我甚至連他們離去當時到底痛不痛苦 都無從揣測，也幫不上忙。一個是營業單位的新鮮人，退伍後第一份工作，鏖戰數月，好不容易業績稍有起色，卻在某個盛夏早晨上班途中的紅綠燈前方，趴在駕駛座上停止心跳呼吸，那時，他 還不滿二十五歲。

另一個在日本商社工作，經常出差應酬加班，總是自豪身體壯得像條牛，沒想到卻在幾個禮拜前猝死。那個晚上看起來毫無異狀，他照舊 因為加班錯過晚餐，照舊跟幾個同事吃宵夜，喝了一些冰啤酒，進了家門之後，在妻子面前倒下，送醫已經回天乏術，三十幾歲的人生，劃上休止符。

他們從自己的人生中瞬 間抽離，也從職場同儕的集體記憶裡消失，我或許略知他們在工作上 面臨的壓力與瓶頸，卻不曾體恤他們身體的脆弱，工作霸佔了他們得以喘息的時數，他們經常憂慮業績無法達成，新產品沒辦法順利上市，趕不及提案給老闆，他們 在家庭與職場之間、人生與事業當中失去身體的主控權， 即便公司給了他們優渥的待遇、高額的團體保險、昂貴的健康檢查補助，卻還是彌補不了生命倉促煞車的遺憾。

企業總是不斷強調績效，工作狂主管也總是大方打亂員工的生理時鐘， 許多上班族的人生因此失去平衡，讓原本只應該share三分之一時數的職場鐘點，殘酷侵蝕了另外三 分之二得以休閒與睡眠的美麗時光。

老闆或 許每天關心工作進度，卻不曾問過員工有 沒有長期便秘的煩惱；

稽核可 能按月追蹤交際費用，卻沒興趣知道員工的膽固醇有多高；

同事之間也許計較誰的升遷快、誰 的薪水高，卻沒想過誰的快樂多、誰的睡眠品質好。

長期以來，人們總是將工 時長短與貢獻度、忠誠度綁在一起，

樂意加班心 甘情願留在公司待命的人，經常獲得褒獎讚美， 而準時下班抗拒超時工作的人， 則被嫌棄。

嚴苛定義中，不乏欣慰的暖流。

早就聽說一個出版社總編輯堅決反對員工加班，一到下班時間就急著趕人，他希望工作伙伴可以擁有足夠的睡眠與休閒，離 開辦公室就把工作鎖在抽屜裡，一走出辦公大樓就走進自己另外 三分之二的人生。

另一家企業老闆更妙，索性把每週放假前的午後也大方送給員工，鼓吹同事去喝下午茶、泡個不擁擠的露天溫泉、或者來一 趟精油芳香療程。

我喜歡這種人性關懷取 向的溫暖體貼， 而非咄咄逼人的淘空式冷漠，當然，我也敬佩這些準時要求員 工下班的老闆，他們所營造的健康快樂上班概念，是這個講究高 倍速競爭的職場生態中，最迷人 的荒漠甘泉。

許多企業或許記得定期保養大小事務 機器，為它們更換耗材檢測線路添加潤滑劑，卻疏於打理員工的身心狀況，或急於測試員工的容忍極限，期待在薪水額度之內獲得超值對價；而員工同樣高估自己的能量，總以為吞幾顆胃藥就能撐過身體苦痛，總以為每天睡三小時 不成問題，或者多喝幾杯黑咖啡就能增加幾個小時的續航能力，甚至，仗著年輕、仗著體力好，就放肆熬夜、應酬、緊張、多疑，或看著自己的臉色變得蠟黃蒼白， 以為多敷幾次臉，多吞幾顆維他命，應該就OK了吧！

職場電腦化之後，上班 族經常把自己也當成不當機的CPU，即便體內的肝、膽、胃、腸、腎、 心臟、血管、淋巴、內分泌、自律神經、脊椎或視網膜，已經悄悄舉牌抗議了，而一徑在職場上逞強的人啊，不要自以為是無敵鐵金剛，身心的bug早就呼天搶地了。

被遺忘的職場生理時鐘，以及更多被忽略的員工健康警訊，

在屢屢被誇大歌頌的幾波職場生態 革命中，在網路改變了無時差的全球化競爭之後，

人類的生理機能並不具備24小時運轉的本事，朝九晚五原該是最符合養生的工時概念，

所有企業體，甚至所有工作者，是該 逐步修正超時賣命的工作哲學，回歸健康工作的職場概念囉！

下班了，勇敢收拾公事包準時離開 吧！人生另外三分之二的風景，在玻璃帷幕大樓之外的天空跟你招手呢！

Innovating To Win: 3M’s Innovation Gene

Innovating To Win: 3M’s Innovation Gene

June 04, 2007

3M’s Innovation Gene

The BusinessWeek Innovation and Design site published an interesting article on 3M and their struggle to find the right balance between efficiency, as represented by 6-Sigma, and creativity, as represented by 3M’s proud tradition of innovation. Some would say that 3M is a highly visible example of a company grappling with the fundamental contradiction that “managers trained in Six Sigma, which aims to reduce risk and variability, have a difficult time embracing design thinking and innovation because they aim to raise risk and increase variability.” There are certainly lessons of great interest to be drawn from 3M’s experience. But I don’t agree with the assertions that quality programs like 6-Sigma are an anathema to innovation.

Let’s begin by clearing up an oft stated misconception: innovation seeks to increase variability. This is not true. Yes, product innovation often seeks to identify new variants of existing products. However, the goal of that innovation is to arrive at specific well defined deliverables—not some hodgepodge of variable qualities. Also, properly implemented sustainable innovation programs reduce risk. The whole variability and risk discussion is a red herring. The reality is that innovation programs and quality programs are orthogonal and completely complementary.

In my own experience, I have seen that it is possible to implement programs to improve effectiveness in both areas simultaneously. I have done this to great benefit at the companies in which I have been a part. At no time has the implementation of rigorous quality management systems been in conflict with the need to drive innovation.

So what was behind 3M’s experience? Perhaps the answer is not so mysterious at all. The BusinessWeek article points out that Mr. McNerney set out to change the company’s DNA. While he may not have intended to eradicate the innovation gene, it would appear that this was the result. The reason why this happened can be gleaned from the article, in the comments of Stephen Boyd and Art Fry. Mr. Boyd states that 3M had inappropriately layered the traditional DMAIC 6-Sigma process over the innovation process. He goes on to state that the approach didn’t really fit. This is not surprising at all. As has already been stated, quality programs are orthogonal to innovation. As such, quality programs are not a substitute for innovation methods; they are just another aspect of the new product introduction process in which innovation and quality disciplines each have their own contributions to make.

Another interesting insight is provided by Mr. Fry’s comments about innovation being a numbers game. Here we are given insight that 3M’s innovation approach was basically the “let’s throw a lot of ideas on the wall and see what sticks” method. It is this that made 3M susceptible to the problem that they experienced in the end. While 3M’s culture clearly placed high value on innovation, it would appear, from Mr. Fry’s comments, that 3M didn’t actually have an understanding of how to practice the informed design methods of repeatable innovation. If 3M had had this understanding, the boundaries, as well as the points of synergy, between their innovation practices and the new 6-Sigma programs would have been clear.

It is ironic that 3M, one of the companies studied in Built to Last by Jim Collins and Jerry I. Porras, should stumble in this way. As Collins and Porras put it, visionary companies are able to have their cake and eat it too. These companies have found the way to break free of the tyranny of OR. Here was 3M’s failing; they did not find the way to both manage predictability and continue their tradition of innovation. Hopefully, they will get back on the right track under George Buckley’s management.

[Image Courtesy of the National Library of Medicine]

Managed Innovation: 3M’s Latest Model For New Products

Managed Innovation: 3M’s Latest Model For New Products

Managed Innovation: 3M’s Latest Model For New Products

BY RITA SHOR

Managed innovation, like military intelligence, is often considered an oxymoron. Many companies find that as soon as "management" shows up, the forces of "innovation" start looking for a place to hide. For these firms, skunk works and other forms of innovation isolation units are popular because they are invisible to established structures.

At 3M, early leaders established a relatively successful approach to this dilemma by favoring independent R&D programs. 3M CEO William McKnight declared the company’s rationale more than 50 years ago when he said that, "As our business grows, it becomes increasingly necessary to delegate responsibility and to encourage men and women to exercise their initiative. Mistakes will be made, but if a person is essentially right, the mistakes he or she makes are not as serious in the long run as the mistakes management will make if it is dictatorial and undertakes to tell those under its authority exactly how they must do their jobs."

3M’s innovation success subsequently relied on long-term, individually directed exploratory research projects. Management for such projects, particularly in their early incubation stages, has been governed by two maxims: "Hands off!" and, "Don’t ask, don’t tell!" But shareholders’ concerns have changed, and 3M was forced to expand its innovation toolkit. This included more systematic approaches to innovation and methods that include more direct links with management.

One approach is called the Lead User System, which has reliably produced profitable new products, services and strategies for 3M. It does this at a rate that beats the "natural" odds.

Eric von Hippel of MIT initially developed the Lead User System. The system balances the needs of shareholders and management (with their bottom-line-oriented view of the world), against the needs of "fuzzy front-end" innovation developers (where micro-managing spells an immediate kiss of death).

Lead User Teams are made up of four to six individuals with a diverse set of skills. Teams with members from both technical and marketing functions are necessary. Depending on its focus, a team might be populated with members from procurement, manufacturing or any other functional area. All team members are taught techniques for creating profitable solutions to unarticulated customer needs, well in advance of the competition.

Lead User Teams are told to welcome ambiguity and uncertainty. They are taught to set their sights on exploring the areas where the possibilities for discovery are greatest because the pre-existing knowledge is most slim. The teams must learn to recognize these gaps in understanding as prime locations for generating new products and concepts.

All of this is done with the acceptance that these gaps tend to arise in areas where the team members have little experience. The teams are shown how to seek, value and protect ideas that don’t reflect "business as usual," be it new technologies, applications, strategic relationships, channel partnerships, or service offerings.

Because the opportunities are typically so remote from their every-day experience, team members start by getting acquainted with "what we don’t know." Team members then work to increase their knowledge base at a greatly accelerated pace, primarily through their contacts with "Lead Users" and "Lead User Experts."

The Lead User System achieves success by approaching innovation in a disciplined way. The cross-functional teams go through a set of phases, retrieving information from specific sources and then collaborating with these sources to create new products, services and strategies.

The teams seek information that is focused on what the customer will need in the future. Many trends are barely perceptible today; even the "early adopters" haven’t yet arrived.

The greatest challenge is finding the right Lead Users and Lead User Experts. Enlisting their involvement is almost always a non-issue, as these individuals rarely balk at becoming involved in a creative collaboration with Lead User teams. Lead Users are professionals who are working with leading edge applications that are similar to the customer problem under study. They often have developed a prototype solution to that problem that they are willing to share.

Lead User Experts have deep knowledge of a range of advanced applications and important attributes of these applications. Lead User teams look for experts who are working in the targeted marketplace and in analog industries. These industries contain markets that share an important problem or solution of relevance to the future marketplace. Users and experts from analog industries won’t have insight on the whole problem or entire solution, but they have hard-to-find insight into the particular solution under study.

Lead User Team members are led — dragged, kicking and screaming, if need be — away from their existing information networks and toward unknown and unexpected people and organizations. Lead User Team members conduct interviews in stages, each wave taking them further from their pre-existing safe, but known, network of contacts.

Each new contact offers a new opportunity to redefine important attributes of future market demand and/or innovative solution approaches.

At every point in their interviewing, team members are looking for professionals far ahead of any known general adoption/diffusion cycle. These users tend to work in pockets of activity and can be hard to find. The "deep collaboration" between the Lead User Team, the Lead Users and Lead Use Experts requires that all of them become co-creators and that they understand that innovation will emerge from the interactions between and among them.

Lead User Teams obtain and synthesize information through reading, questioning, watching, and listening and through shadowing a Lead User as they do their work and use their prototype solution. Typically, teams conclude their work by bringing Lead Users and Lead Use Experts together with 3M development specialists for a workshop dedicated to collaborative solution design. After the workshop, the teams go back and finalize their prioritized plan for moving from concept to realized stages of development.

Innovation Means More Than "Just" New Products.

3M’s experience has shown that the Lead User System is successful not solely from the product-oriented point of view, but at a higher plane of creating comprehensive new business models. Several of 3M’s Lead User Teams were led to these strategy-level developments when they uncovered huge profitable future markets, demanding both new products and new technologies.

But these markets also required entirely new strategies for 3M to be able to profitably enter and drive those markets. These teams were faced with the question of, "What do we do if these lucrative new future markets do not fit within our existing business market strategies?"

With the support of 3M management, these Lead User Teams created the necessary new strategies and business models that provided the "fit." These teams then went on to develop customer support services, product/service toolkits, product families and novel approaches to channel partnerships.

The changes the teams are creating in 3M’s business culture are currently causing the greatest excitement among 3M managers because they encourage higher levels of innovation within 3M’s organization. Most importantly, the Lead User System’s collaborative approach takes the company away from viewing innovation as an individually practiced art that takes place primarily in the lab. Innovation is becoming viewed as a cross-functional market-focused collaborative discipline, completely dependent on activities and relationships that cross the company’s boundaries.

The Lead User System is now one of the more productive and cost-efficient innovation methods in use at the company today. The system accomplishes in months with four to six people what otherwise has sometimes taken far longer to obtain: profitable, commercial products that tap unarticulated customer needs. And the products and services the Lead User System creates are more novel, more likely to "change the basis of competition" — a watchword phrase at 3M.

Could The Lead User System Work For Your Company?

The Lead User Teams have been successfully run in a number of companies outside 3M. To benefit from this method, an organization must embrace the following criteria:

Teams are small, cross functional and allowed to report to management on their own terms. Continuous management awareness is essential in order to prepare executives for the ultimate recommendations made by the team. Teams must be able to operate at the right location on management’s radar. They must be given a mandate to take the risks and the time required to develop novel, hopefully revolutionary strategies, products and services that "change the basis of competition in your business unit." This objective requires trust all the way around.

Although the Lead User System employs a systematic process, it sometimes doesn’t feel familiar or predictable. Team members and their managers must be willing to "hang in there" when uncertainty hits. Oftentimes, participants find that their pursuit of unusual information leads them astray and does not fit with their prior development experiences. But each novel contact offers a new opportunity to redefine important attributes of future market demand and products. The Lead User System provides a tested framework for the team members as they pursue the unknown. The teams and their managers have to be committed to "staying the course."

Sometimes the best course of action is to stop development. The Lead User System demands simultaneous, frequent and immediate market needs assessments and solution development. Lab-based trials and testing are always taking place. But because Lead User Teams are always simultaneously scoping customer needs, no single technical effort is permitted to go too far down an unwarranted path.

Team members and their management must be willing to tolerate this type of "concept cycling," as they will find that they are often exploring development paths that they later choose not to pursue. The Lead User System offers an examination of future customer interests in light of a company’s existing assets and proprietary technologies. The fact that this examination takes place constantly, and simultaneously, rather than sequentially, leads to concept and solution development, testing, refinement and, often, rejection taking place throughout the process.

The Lead User system will change your people and your innovation culture. To be a good candidate for a Lead User Team, your organization has to be open to change. Team members develop a quantitatively and qualitatively different connection with future customers and partners. 3M’s ongoing measurement and value assessment process finds that even the most productive 3M scientists whose reputations were built by using the traditional, "inventor in the lab" method of innovation credit the Lead User System with enriching their pursuit of innovation. These scientists and other members of the 3M Lead User Teams have developed an appreciation of the big developments often found in the interactions that take them out of the lab, out of the company and out of their industries

From "shadowing" a third-world user to understand where their process strengths and weaknesses exist, to working with professional theatrical mask-makers to better understand human skin properties, the Lead User System has provided a proven discipline for profitably leveraging resources inside and outside of 3M for models, expertise and future competitive advantages.

Anyone interested in more information about this top may find the writing of Eric von Hippel to be interesting: www.mit.edu/people/evhippel.

Rita Shor is Corporate E-Business Manager at 3M Corp.

Think For A Change: Innovation Done Right...3M's Innovation Story...

Think For A Change: Innovation Done Right...3M's Innovation Story...

Innovation Done Right...3M's Innovation Story...

I was incredibly fortunate to be one of a very select handful of innovation thought-leaders invited to the 3M Customer Innovation Center yesterday for a behind the scenes look at how and why 3M innovates. This visit moved me in a totally unexpected way. As a person passionate about innovation and ideas, I have always used 3M as a shining example of one of the elite few organizations who champion innovation as a true business strategy. But, until yesterday, I didn't have a real hands-on understanding of the depth of just how much 3M "gets it." I was not prepared to meet so many people whose passion and dedication to innovate matched mine. So many organizations say they want to be innovative and trample new paths that you can get lost in the artificial euphoria. When confronted with legitimate and deeply sincere euphoria...it can catch you off-guard. And that is where I was as I sat at the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport last night...collecting my thoughts...trying to figure out why I had been moved so much.

So let's explore some snapshots of things that really took me by surprise yesterday:

1. The day was led off by Chief Marketing Officer Robert McDonald on how important innovation is to 3M and how/why it gives them a competitive advantage. Okay...you could pretty much predict something like that right? A senior executive reading the company cheerleading message to start the day. But...here's where I was taken aback. He stayed with us the entire day. The CMO of a Fortune 100 organization spent the ENTIRE day with 6 innovation thought leaders to share 3M's passion and learn from our passion. And he didn't just tag along, he was FULLY engaged. Sharing stories. Asking very educated questions about innovation management strategy. Helping us "play" with 3M's products. Impressive.
2. The VP of Corporate Research, Larry Wendling, walked us through 3M's Pillars of Innovation. I'll list these "pillars" in a moment, but what really struck me, and continued to do so all day, was just how invisible (or maybe seamless) the innovation process is at 3M. They don't talk about where they are in the process, how to move from one step to another, who owns what piece of the process, etc. They just all have this collective understanding of how, what, who, when and where things need to progress along the innovation management path. Everyone knows it because everyone lives it and the leaders facilitate it. As promised, here are specific 3M's Pillars of Innovation:
   • Research & Development
   • Corporate Culture
   • Diversified Technologies
   • Networking
   • Recognition
   • Measurement
   • Connection to the Customer
3. I never understood just how many products in the world are either direct-branded 3M products or have a 3M product in them. And nowhere was that made more apparent than the "World of Innovation" center. If 3M was going for the "WOW!" factor...they certainly succeeded. This is a Disney-esque Museum of Science and Industry, complete with plantetarium-style presentation and dozens of individual technology platform exhibits with hands-on examples of products, services and processes. Again, you could expect an organization to have a flashy showcase of products. But what made this stand out is its real purpose. 3M put this center together not to show off, but to stimulate thought. When customers come in to partner with 3M on new products, they are first brought through the center as a kind of creativity exercise. Customers are encouraged to make connections between available technology platforms. Yeah...WOW! Get your customer to help improve their own products via a unique combination of 3M products.
4. Following an engaging lunch where we shared "war stories" of innovation management, we were treated to a nice presentation about breakthrough innovation by Corporate Scientist Andrew Ouderkirk. Honestly, he was preaching to the choir with this presentation. But what was extremely valuable, and what caused me to be the most impressed with 3M's innovation approach, was how deep and broad 3M's internal network reaches. This is a culture that is built from the ground up via networking. Have a problem...call someone in your network. They don't know...they will connect you with someone who does. And this goes top to bottom folks. I really believe that any entry level scientist would be hooked up eventually with the CEO if the CEO had the answer that was needed. That's unbelievable rare. Not only that, it goes horizontal too. There are no silos at 3M. At least in the technology and R&D areas. Want one more advantage of the network? Its easy to force two or more unique viewpoints at a problem very quickly. The "collisions" of ideas necessary for a breakthrough concept happen here every day...by design. My only hope for 3M is that they protect and nurture this incredible advantage.

One other thing I'd like to mention before closing...and that is the collective brilliance in the room yesterday. We had executive level people, corporate scientists resplendent with PhD's and 3M Hall of Fame Awards along with brilliant minds on innovation from some of the finest universities, think tanks and consultancies that specialize in innovation. It would have been easy to be intimidated. But it was the most relaxed, open, honest and collaborative meeting I have been involved with in a long time. Thank you to those involved yesterday for a moving, thought-provoking and inspirational day. I have a hundred new blog ideas based on what I experienced and saw yesterday...so watch for more insights in the future.

To build on this discussion, some of my counterparts have also shared their thoughts. Please review and participate!

Jeffrey Phillips - OVO - Innovate on Purpose Blog
Michael Lippitz - Clareo Partners - Grow From Within Blog
Nick Schulz - American Enterprise Institute - The Enterprise Blog
Lisa Bodell - FutureThink
Joe Sinfield - Innosight
Mary Tripsas - Harvard Business School & NY Times Contributor