For Starters #39: Pros & Cons of 6 Innovation Practices
Wherein I judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree
One of the most helpful experiences I had over the past 7 years was having direct, sustained, hands-on experience with the many of the popular innovation practices.
Like everything in a toolbox, knowing which tool is best for which job makes the work easier. Often however, tools don’t come with instruction manuals…the tools are mislabeled….or the world changes in a way that makes the tool ineffective or obsolete.
We didn’t develop any of practices, we just used them out of the box. Using the same books - and occasionally experienced practitioners - as guidance, just like you would. In an organization without any precedent for digital product innovation or a design practice, we had the luxury of sampling them all - baggage free - and figuring out which fit best for generating new zero-to-one ideas.
Google Design Sprint (2012)
Pros:
A structured way to get unstuck on a design communication problem, through a collection of diverge/converge Design Thinking exercises.
Best executed quickly with pen and paper, stickies, etc. Screen free!
Rapid prototyping is part of the process
Easy for often overlooked team members to have their ideas advanced
Cons:
Subtly presumes what you’re stuck on is a website or some other kind of software
Presumes consumers are target customer
No direct interaction with target customers required, just a subject matter expert/boss.
Team members are often self-conscious of their illustration abilities
Comments:
I’ve facilitated these as the traditional 5 full day process, I’ve also compressed them to 3 half days. A colleague of mine once ran the entire thing in an afternoon (I’m still in awe). All provided equivalent outcomes. YMMV.
Amazon Working Backwards (2004)
Pros:
Often the first time a project team puts themselves in their customers shoes is writing the customer quote for the press release portion.
Spending the time to craft a press release compelling to all stakeholders - ahead of committing to engineering - is massively valuable and helps insure whatever is committed to overcomes the organizations opportunity cost.
Very approachable very accessible, everyone has read a press release, knows the tone of voice, not special drawing ability needed.
Focuses product development on the significant customer outcomes from the beginning
Cons:
All of the work making the press release more compelling can seem tedious and annoying to those itching to actually build.
In a PowerPoint-based culture, shifting to document-based practice is a hard pivot fraught with confusion all around.
It doesn’t recommend what comes after a press release is blessed
No direct interaction with the target customer required
Comments:
Crafting an initial press release is an approachable, accessible, fairly brief exercise. As such, my team heavily used these style press releases for all kinds of aspirational visioning.
I’ve used it as a design thinking exercise with groups, it’s fun to compare the how different team members interpret the aspirations of a new venture into different press releases.
Business Model Canvas (2010)
Pros:
Fantastic for articulating and dissecting an existing business
Fantastic for comparing different business models
Fantastic for showing how changing the contents of one box has rippling effects across other boxes
Fantastic tool to demonstrate how business models of similar companies are different
Cons:
It’s a pretty heavy tool for articulating a zero-to-one idea, as at this stage most of the boxes are an unnecessary distraction (e.g. Key partners, Revenue Streams, Channels, Cost Structure, Customer Relationship).
Don’t need to get out of the building and talk to customers to create it.
There’s no logical path through the boxes so it’s fairly difficult to walk someone else through the canvas.
Comments:
The language on the canvas was often opaque for the teams I worked with, so I re-labeling a number of the boxes to prevent that from being a stumbling point.
I’ve also re-drawn this canvas a number of times to eliminate boxes I didn’t want people stuck on.
I’ve not seen people iterate on BMC, more seen them use it as a box to tick off and move on.
Lean Canvas (2010)
Pros:
Similar to the BMC, but slightly more accessible labels (e.g. Problem, Solution, Key Metrics, Unfair Advantage)
‘Existing Alternatives’ and ‘Early Adopters’ ground teams in pragmatic reality.
Cons:
Still many of the same irrelevant boxes for zero-to-on as in the BMC
Comments:
Still challenges with language, as many a team member interpreted ‘Problem’ as the team’s problem not the target customers’ problem. I created a version where the labels were more clear on possession….and yes eliminated a bunch of the boxes.
At the end of the day, I didn’t find a significant functional difference between the Business Model Canvas and the Lean Canvas.
Lean Startup (2008)
Pros:
Engages with the customer is early in the process.
Presumes iteration
Encourages being disciplined about experimentation in the scientific method (e.g. have a set of hypotheses, set a threshold for success & failure).
Encourages starting with the Riskiest Assumption for the venture, rather than the easiest to execute
Describes the entire product development process, which is helpful in articulating a path to stakeholders and in portfolio management.
Cons:
Subtly presumes a world where Google/Meta/LinkedIn ads are cheap, not the current world we live in.
Customer engagement is still mediated.
Presumes consumers are the target customer
Examples in the book no longer exist.
Comments:
Articulating Riskiest Assumptions specifically enough to be easily tested is always one of the most illuminating exercises
MVPs never seemed quite as M as they could be.
I frequently see a tension between teams embracing the iterative process and wanting to ‘make progress’.
Teams are too often incentivized to p-hack the data rather simply stopping a bad idea and move onto the next idea.
JobsToBeDone (1999)
Pros:
Steeped in directly & qualitatively understanding the lived experience of the customer and considering them rational and capable adults.
Actively resists premature solutioning
Presumes there are no new problems, and there’s an incumbent solution however ill-fitting. If there’s no incumbent solution - there’s no opportunity.
Great for iteration as it does not presume a digital solution, or any solution, simply an improved outcome.
Cons:
The classic fast-food-milkshake-for-breakfast example - is pretty opaque in what it’s illustrating.
Doesn’t prescribe how develop the products
The ambiguity of the research process can make stakeholders anxious.
Comments:
There are lots of flavors of JobsToBeDone; Strategyn, Innosight, The Rewired Group, thrv all have their articulation and gerrymandering.
I struggled to really grok JTBD until I read Bob Moesta’s (of The Rewired Group) book ‘Demand Driven Sales’, also helpful is ‘When Coffee and Kale Compete’.
In Closing
Many of these practices today feel like they’re from a quaint bygone era.
I’m continuing to look for innovation practices that acknowledge our current capabilities, sensibilities, and more stongly engage the target customer throughout. I will leave identifying them as an exercise for the reader.
Suggestions welcome in the comments.