.
[step_start id:step1 class:step1 "1"]
This questionnaire consists of 40 questions each of which must be answered on a scale of 1 to 5. It will take you around 30 minutes to complete, but we firmly believe that it is worth it because you will obtain a valuable executive summary including the following:
Graphical assessment of the current state of the innovation capability of your organization based on the Hiffi reference framework.
Actionable recommendations based on the results of the assessment.
Data about your organization will be anonymized and used only for research purposes. Your email address would be used to send you the executive summary and further information if requested.
Your Name* Your E-mail* Organization (optional) Role in the organization* Organization size* Micro (0-10 workers)Small (11-50 workers)Medium (51-500 workers)Large (501-2,500)Very Large (2,501+) Organization age in years* 1-23-56-1516-3031+ Sector/Industry* CommerceIndustryServicesSeveral sectors or industriesOther Sector/Industry Country*
[next id:Next1 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:step2 class:step2 "2"]
Please read each description carefully, then choose the number that best represents your company's situation.
1/40
To what extent are your innovation efforts contributing to the organization's financial performance? 1. Our innovation efforts (if any) are contributing very slightly or nothing to the financial outcomes of our organization. Our financial performance as an organization has to do with other type of strategic initiatives such as increases in production, distribution and sales capacity, geographical expansion, process automation, better marketing efforts, or mergers/acquisitions.2. Our innovation efforts seem to contribute to the financial outcomes of our organization, although mostly indirectly and to a small extent. Our financial performance is still mostly related to other type of strategic initiatives (e.g. expansions, marketing, merger and acquisitions, process automation, etc.).3. Our innovation efforts have contributed to at least match the financial performance of others in our industry. Between 25 to 40 percent of sales in the last year was from new products, services, solutions and/or business models launched in the previous three years.4. Our innovation efforts have led us to better financial performance than others in our industry. Beyond 40 percent of sales in the last year was from new products, services, solutions and/or business models launched in the previous three years.5. Our innovation efforts have led us to exponential financial performance, exceeding the financial expectations of our organization at least in the last year and outperforming our competitors (direct and substitutes) by far. [prev id:Prev2 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next2 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:step3 class:step3 "3"]
2/40
How is your organization's strategy formulated, reviewed and updated? 1. We don't have a formal and consistent way to create and update the organization's strategy. It is carried out on an ad-hoc basis.2. We have a periodic and deliberate approach for strategic planning but it is more focused on an annual budgeting exercise with a short-term orientation.3. We have a periodic and deliberate approach that allows a long-term strategy to be created, reviewed and updated (usually every year).4. We have a disciplined approach that allows a long-term strategy to be created, reviewed and updated at cadence-based events scheduled through the year.5. We have an adaptive and disciplined approach that allows a long-term strategy to be created and nimbly adapted as new knowledge emerges and/or priorities change.
[prev id:Prev3 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next3 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step4 class:step4 "Step 4"]
3/40
How important is to innovate in achieving the organization’s goals? 1. We don’t really see innovation playing a role in our endeavors and outcomes.2. We see innovation as a short-term fix that can help us solve some problems creatively and improve our operating model.3. We consider innovation as an important means to grow and create new value for our customers and our organization. However, innovation is not yet front-and-center.4. We treat innovation as a strategic means that must significantly contribute to the organization’s aspirations (e.g. for growth and profitability).5. We treat innovation as the most important means to achieve the organization's aspirations and thrive in the turbulent, uncertain and competitive landscape of today.
[prev id:Prev4 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next4 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step5 class:step4 "Step 5"]
4/40
How does the organization orient the innovation effort and measure its success? 1. We don’t have an innovation vision or objectives neither an innovation strategy formally defined.2. We have some objectives for innovation (predominantly operational) but they aren't clearly communicated or not systematically tracked. We don't have a formal innovation strategy.3. We have a vision and clear objectives for innovation that are well communicated but not systematically tracked. Our innovation strategy is aligned/integrated to the organization’s strategy and is predominantly focused in the current core business(es).4. We have a vision and clear objectives for innovation (of quantitative and qualitative nature) that are well communicated and also systematically tracked. Our innovation strategy is aligned/integrated to the company’s strategy and is not only focused on the core business(es) but also on adjacent domains/arenas.5. We have a vision and clear objectives for innovation that are well communicated and systematically tracked. Our innovation strategy, which is integrated in the organization’s strategy, is not only focused on the core business(es) and adjacent domains/arenas but also on transformational ones (far from the core).
[prev id:Prev5 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next5 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step6 class:step4 "Step 6"]
5/40
To what extent and how are funds invested in new growth and innovation? 1. We don’t have a budget specifically for innovation. We allocate our growth budget to expand our core business(es) into new geographies and/or to increase our production, sales, marketing and distribution capacity.2. We don’t have a budget specifically for innovation. We allocate our growth budget mainly to expand our core business(es) into new geographies and/or to increase its capacity. However, some funds are sporadically used for tactical efforts related to creativity and inventive problem solving.3. We allocate our growth budget not only to expand our core business(es) into new geographies and/or to increase its capacity but also to enhance our core business model(s) through innovation initiatives. The allocated funds, as a percentage of total sales, is around or below the average of our industry and key competitors.4. We have a budget for innovation (i.e. new organic growth) that is slightly above the average of our industry and key competitors. It is allocated not only to enhance the performance of the core business(es) through innovation but also importantly, to create new value propositions and business models involving adjacent markets and/or assets.5. We have an innovation budget that is significantly above the average of our industry and key competitors. We allocate the funds seeking an appropriate balance in the innovation portfolio so that the innovation strategy is properly executed. Funds are not only to enhance the core business(es) but importantly to create new sources of growth through both adjacent and transformational (game-changing) innovation initiatives.
[prev id:Prev6 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next6 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step7 class:step7 "Step 7"]
6/40
How are senior leaders (top management) perceived in regards to innovation? 1. Our leaders are risk-averse, short-term oriented, and struggle with change. From their point of view, failure is not a good thing, so they lean towards heavy planning and analysis and tight control to avoid deviations (e.g. in budget, time, and schedule).2. Our leaders have a small appetite for risk and mainly short-term oriented. They are open to new ideas that can solve immediate problems or generate quick profits. From their point of view, failure might not be bad sometimes but it is preferably to avoid it. They accept change but struggle to adapt to it.3. Our leaders have a moderate appetite for risk. They are open to new ideas and eager to create new things that might span beyond the short-term as long as they are within the boundaries of the known. From their point of view, failure is not bad and experimention could help to learn. They accept change and adapt to it, although sometimes not easily.4. Our leaders have a substantial appetite for risk and tolerance for ambiguity and uncertainty. They are open to new ideas and eager to create new things as long as they are not grounded in very unknown arenas. From their point of view, failure is a good thing (specially small, timely and quick) so they like experimenting to learn. They accept change and adapt to it.5. Our leaders have a great appetite for risk and a high tolerance for ambiguity and uncertainty. They are forward-looking, curious, open to new ideas and eager to create novel things. Failure is a good thing (specially small, timely and quick) so they actively promote experimenting to learn. They not only accept change and adapt to it but they embrace it enthusiastically or even provoke it.
[prev id:Prev7 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next7 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step8 class:step8 "Step 8"]
7/40
Does your organization have an appropriate leadership force to set up and drive strategic innovation? 1. We don’t have any leaders truly interested in strategic innovation. Some might say that they do but their behaviors, decisions and actions prove otherwise.2. We have one or a few leaders interested in strategic innovation. However, they don’t have enough credibility, expertise and/or power to drive major changes. Likely, they haven’t been able to establish a sense of urgency about the need for strategic innovation and transformation with the key decision-maker(s) yet.3. We have some credible and powerful leaders interested in strategic innovation. However, they don’t have enough innovation and technology expertise to set a sound and inspiring vision nor to systematically drive this type of transformation. They have been able to establish a sense of urgency but only to a moderate extent.4. We have a group of credible, powerful and knowledgeable leaders that includes who can set a clear vision and strategy for innovation and who can plan and drive its implementation. They have been able to establish a sense of urgency for change to a substantial extent.5. We have a guiding coalition, a transformation team or a center of excellence for innovation, conformed by a mix of leaders and experts with enough credibility, expertise and power to drive business transformations through strategic innovation. They maintain a healthy sense of urgency and a compelling vision for change. The team makes informed and quick decisions, and persists even in the face of adversity.
[prev id:Prev8 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next8 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step9 class:step9 "Step 9"]
8/40
Do your senior leaders (top management) inspire people to think and act in support of innovation throughout the organization and beyond? 1.Our leaders are not really focused on innovation. Therefore, any inspiration for innovation that is generated in people is likely to come from other sources and personal interest.2.Our leaders make some isolated or weak efforts to inspire change towards creativity and innovation. These efforts are usually made by a sole leader or a group/committee with low-credibility.3. Our leaders resonate moderately with people by describing the innovation vision in a clear and convincing way (even if the vision is conservative). However, insufficient follow up and inconsistent behaviors among leaders can cause people to lose momentum and enthusiasm.4. Our leaders resonate substantially with people by communicating a bolder innovation vision and strategy in a clear, compelling and frequent way. They unlock and unleash the creativity, initiative and productivity of people. However, ocassional inconsistent behaviors among leaders can cause people to lose momentum and enthusiasm.5. We have a cohesive leadership team that connects with the minds and hearts of employees and external parties not only by describing a meaningful purpose, a compelling innovation vision and the articulation of high potential opportunities but also importantly, by consistently modeling the right innovation behaviors for others to follow, and by challenging people to think and act entrepreneurially.
[prev id:Prev9 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next9 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step10 class:step10 "Step 10"]
9/40
Do your senior leaders (top management) facilitate the right conditions for innovation to flourish? 1. Our leaders are not really focused on innovation. Therefore, little or no support or resources flows across the organization for creating a fertile ground for innovation.2. Some senior leaders provide some resources for creative and innovation-related activities on an ad-hoc basis, with a local and operational impact at the most.3. Our leaders are commited to a moderate extent in improving the conditions to innovate. So they usually help us navigate around organizational obstacles and provide us resources to develop the innovation capability to some extent. They are also involved in execution but in a limited way.4. Our leaders are commited to a substantial extent in improving the conditions to innovate. So they use appropriate influence strategies to help us navigate around organizational obstacles and provide us resources to continuosly improve the innovation capability. They engage in the execution, at minimum, at all key innovation governance or management events.5. Our leaders facilitate all the necessary resources to create the right conditions to implement the innovation strategy, including devoting a significant time to coach and develop people (e.g. new leaders). They provide support and feedback to members of innovation teams during both successes and failures. They leverage successes, even small ones, to celebrate and reward behaviors and reinforce the innovation culture.
[prev id:Prev10 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next10 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step11 class:step11 "Step 11"]
10/40
To what extent are your leaders (at all levels) able to integrate people in support for innovation? 1. Our leaders pay little or no attention to other people's concerns and ideas when they are related to innovation.2. Some of our leaders are aware of the importance of integrating people to create harmony, trust and synergy resulting in shared understanding and higher performance. However, they lack the interest or ability to do it for innovation purposes.3. Our leaders integrate people and manage conflict to a moderate extent, especially in the case of senior leaders with limited involvement in the execution. To make up for this, servant leadership roles closer to execution have been created and assigned to people (not always with the right skills) in an non-dedicated basis. Thus, integration within and across innovation structures and networks (internal and external) is insufficient.4. Our leaders integrate people and manage conflict to a substantial extent by devoting time to participating in all key innovation events at mininum, and by creating, empowering and supporting servant leadership roles close to execution, which are assigned to people with the right style and skills in a dedicated basis.5. Our leaders (throughout the organization) integrate people and manage conflict effectively within and across innovation structures and networks (internal and external). They lead collaborative work in a harmonious and trustworthy manner where people can feel safe to unleash and share their full creative potential, give ideas a try, fail and learn, and even be rewarded for it.
[prev id:Prev11 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next11 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step12 class:step12 "Step 12"]
11/40
To what extent do you have innovation processes in place? 1. We don’t have innovation processes in place and we rarely organize activities related to innovation, such as creativity or inventive problem solving sessions.2. We have don’t have formal innovation processes in place. We organize some creativity and inventive problem-solving activities when deemed necessary, mainly for operational problems or challenges. In these cases, we search internally or externally for people with the sufficient know-how to facilitate the session(s) and assemble a short-lived group of participants.3. We have formal innovation processes in place. We predominantly use a traditional waterfall-approach with pre-defined deliverable-based milestones for projects that involve arenas known to the organization (e.g. products lines, technologies and markets). People are usually assigned to multiple projects and a project team is disbanded as soon as the project is finished. Some people are reassigned even earlier. The pipeline of projects is usually managed through review meetings at program or portfolio level.4. We have formal innovation processes in place. We use a traditional waterfall-approach with pre-defined deliverable-based milestones for projects that involve arenas known to the organization (e.g. products lines, technologies and markets) and an agile, evidence-based approach for initiatives that involve more ambiguity and uncertainty. In the latter, people are assigned to one agile team in a full or nearly dedicated basis. However, managing the pipeline of all innovation initiatives is a challenge.5. We have an deliberate, comprehensive (end-to-end) and agile disciplined approach to innovation that consistently promotes progress and transparency. We can manage a pipeline with multiple opportunities or initiatives of different types. Higher-impact, higher-risk innovation initiatives are evaluated on an agile cadence and funded based on merit, with a venture-capital style. The pipeline of all innovation initiatives is fully, transparently and efficiently managed. [prev id:Prev12 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next12 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step13 class:step13 "Step 13"]
12/40
To what extent do you carry out research activities systematically (e.g. technology, competitive and market intelligence)? 1. We don’t conduct research activities systematically. At best, we conduct ad-hoc traditional competitive and market research activities, such as five-force industry analysis, focus groups and market surveys.2. Additionally to ad-hoc research activities, we conduct research activities on a planned basis, usually in preparation for periodic strategic planning sessions. In these, we generally seek to understand well our own company as well as macro events and trends around our industries and beyond. We use traditional management tools and techniques such as STEEPLE (Social, Technogical, Environmental, Economic, Political, Legal, and Ethics) and SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats).3. Additionally to understanding our environment well, we also try to systematically understand our key stakeholders deeply (e.g. customer) in order to uncover surprising insights and identify important unmet needs and market segments. We target the most promising segments according to the organization’s strategic aspirations. We mostly use traditional tools and techniques but have started using more modern ones in some cases (e.g. ethnographic research, customer journeys, user personas, etc.).4. Additionally to systematic research activities to understand the company, its stakeholders and the environment with a combined arsenal of traditional and more modern tools, we are also harnessing the power of data science and artificial intelligence algorithms (e.g. machine and deep learning) to automate data analytics and generate new and surprising insights in a continous manner.5. Additionally to conducting research (powered by data science and artificial intelligence) to deeply understand the experiences and aspirations of stakeholders, as well as to understand the opportunities and implications of the macro, meso and micro contexts today, we also apply prospective approaches to understand how the future could develop in the long term, visualize possible breakthrough solutions and be prepared to act against weak signals. We use a set of management tools, such as scenario planning for this purpose. [prev id:Prev13 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next13 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step14 class:step14 "Step 14"]
13/40
To what extent do you carry out ideation activities systematically? 1. We don’t conduct ideation activities systematically. At best, we conduct ad-hoc creativity activities using basic techniques such as traditional brainstorming to address operational problems and challenges.2. We have established some creativity practices for solving operational problems or challenging the status quo. We are using the traditional brainstorming technique but also have started to learn a few advanced techniques such as those included in Lateral Thinking (from de Bono), TRIZ (Theory of Inventive Problem Solving), CPS (Creative Problem Solving) or SIT (Systematic Inventive Thinking) toolkits.3. We systematically generate ideas in the context of an innovation team working on a strategic challenge, ideas are generated by members of the team and other invited participants that are mainly from the organization (e.g. business executives and technical experts). We methodically filter and refine ideas to identify the most promising ones. We mainly use traditional brainstorming technique but also some advanced techniques in some cases.4. We systematically generate ideas not only from the members in an innovation team but also from other invited participants, both from within the organization and from external subject mather experts. We methodically filter and refine ideas to identify the most promising ones. We select ideas/concepts based on a clearly articulated risk portfolio. We usually use advanced ideation tools and techniques that consistently support us to obtain good outcomes (e.g. lateral thinking, evaluation matrices, etc.).5. We are able to systematically generate ideas from a vast and diverse set of sources, including internal and external networks of people and organizational entities. We methodically filter and refine ideas to identify the most promising ones. We select ideas/concepts based on a clearly articulated risk portfolio. We use an arsenal of proven tools but are continuously and consciously experimenting with new and more advanced ideation tools that seem promising for the purpose. [prev id:Prev14 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next14 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step15 class:step15 "Step 15"]
14/40
To what extent do you carry out experimentation activities systematically? 1. We don’t usually use experimentation. Failure is not really perceived as a good thing and might be a career limiting move.2. We use experimentation approaches in customer facing areas like marketing. Failure and risk-taking are allowed but not always tracked or quantified.3. We use experimentation in the form of a pilot to test a solution (e.g. product, service and/or system) before delivering or launching it to target customer or market. Failure and risk-taking are moderately allowed and are usually tracked.4. We use rapid experimentation approaches (e.g. from design thinking and lean startup) in multidisciplinary innovation teams that design and develop solutions. Failure and risk-taking are encouraged. Opportunities are moved quickly into rapid prototyping in order to test key assumptions underlying the concepts. Projects can be quickly stopped based on evidence and predefined failure criteria. Feedback loops between our organization and the customer/stakeholder are very effective.5. We use experimentation throughout the company, not only in multidisciplinary innovation teams but also across organizational functions, (e.g. innovation, marketing, sales, services, HR, and even legal). Failure and risk-taking are expected, prevasive, measured and even celebrated across the organization. [prev id:Prev15 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next15 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step16 class:step16 "Step 16"]
15/40
How do you develop and deliver new, innovative value for the business operations or the market/customer? 1. We don’t carry out innovation-related development activities mostly due to the nature of most of our projects. And even when a situation that might benefit from these type of activity arises, the necessary people, time or money are not available or not considered critical.2. We include some innovation-related development activities (e.g. creativity and inventive problem solving sessions) to a small extent in projects or operational situations.3. We develop innovative solutions mostly in a traditional, waterfall way, right after an analysis and design phases by following a comprehensive plan to develop, test and launch a solution to the market or customer. Agile development methods are being considered or tested to some extent.4. All our innovation development teams working in solutions beyond the current core business(es) develop and deliver solutions in an agile, iterative and adaptive way. Our approach can work at scale for larger solutions that require several teams to work in a cadence-based and synchronized way towards common business objectives.5. Our innovation development approach is tailored to be agile which allow us to quickly take promising concepts to market (e.g. in their minimum viable form to early adopters). As we develop and deliver incrementally and iteratively, we measure progress, learn and adapt quickly (e.g. based on changes in customer behavior and purchases). When the solution development shows market promise (i.e. demonstrate business traction), we rapidly allocate resources to scale it up and optimize it. [prev id:Prev16 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next16 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step17 class:step17 "Step 17"]
16/40
To what extent do you have and make use of visual spaces and tools? 1. We don’t have any physical nor virtual spaces that could be appropriately configured as a visual management space favorable for creativity, experimentation or other innovation activities. For example, our physical spaces have fixed furniture, little wall space for boards and charts, and little space for teams to move around them. This is not a problem since our usual activities don't require it.2. We have physical and/or virtual spaces that can be shared and dynamically configured to host innovation activities from across the organization. However, availability is frequently an issue. As for tools, we only have very basic tools to support innovation-related activities (e.g. web-conferencing software, flexible furniture and supplies, etc.).3. We have physical and/or virtual spaces that can be shared and dynamically configured to host innovation activities from across the organization. However, availability is still an an issue sometimes. As for tools, we not only have basic tools but also a few advanced tools to support innovation-related activities.4. We have enough physical and/or virtual spaces that can be shared and dynamically configured to host innovation activities from across the organization. Availability is no longer an an issue. As for tools, we have enough basic and advanced tools to support appropriately our innovation-related activities.5. We have enough and well-equipped physical and virtual spaces as well as state-of-the art tools to support our innovation activities effectively and efficiently throughout the organization (e.g. research and simulation equipment, software, advanced technologies, physical tools and other hardware, etc.). [prev id:Prev17 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next17 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step18 class:step18 "Step 18"]
17/40
To what extent are support business processes (e.g. recruiting and hiring, purchase, intellectual property management, etc.) integrated in support of the innovation processes? 1. We have support business processes in place but they haven’t been formalized and might be inconsistent because outcomes rely to a great extent on the expertise of people involved. If support is needed for innovation-related activities, it must be requested in an ad-hoc, need basis to the head of the area(s) involved.2. We have support business processes that have been formally established to a small to moderate extent. They support any primary business activities in the organization’s value chain or network. If support is needed for innovation-related activities, it must be requested to the corresponding processes owner.3. We have support business processes that have been formally established to a moderate to substantial extent. The have also been somehow linked to the different innovation processes and initiatives throughout the organization. However, the links cause delays in the innovation processes flow.4. We have support business processes that have been formally established to a substantial extent. The have also been clearly linked to the different innovation processes and initiatives throughout the organization. However, there are automation opportunities, as well as data integration opportunities that would allow innovative solutions to be accelerated.5. We have the right business support processes formally established and optimized to support innovation. The have also been clearly linked to the different innovation processes and initiatives throughout the organization and even to external parties. They work in a lean, highly-automated and efficient manner through their value streams. [prev id:Prev18 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next18 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step19 class:step19 "Step 19"]
18/40
To what extent do you manage knowledge of innovation-related activities? 1. We don't even document information or knowledge of innovation-related activities and outcomes.2. We document data, information and knowledge to a small extent. For example, a few strategy artifacts or work products such as short-term objectives.3. We document data, information and knowledge to a moderate extent. For example, most strategic artifacts or work products as well as the associated tactics and their outcomes.4. We manage data, information and knowledge to a substantial extent. For example, all strategy artifacts or work products such as innovation vision, objectives and strategies, as well as some tactical and operational data, information and knowledge from innovation initiatives and pipeline management.5. We have established an approach for the management of knowledge in our innovation system. We capture internal and external knowledge, tacit or explicit, gained from intelligence and experience, e.g. context of the organization, lessons learned from success and failure of innovation initiatives and from analysis of performance data, thus, facilitating knowledge access and re-use to avoid the loss of, or duplication, of knowledge while maintaining mechanisms for information analysis, confidentiality, and protection of intellectual assets. [prev id:Prev19 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next19 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step20 class:step20 "Step 20"]
19/40
To what extent do you measure the performance of your innovation system or capability? 1. We don’t measure the performance of innovation-related activities and outcomes.2. We measure the performance of innovation-related activities and outcomes to a small extent.3. We measure the performance of innovation-related activities and outcomes to a moderate extent.4. We measure the performance of innovation-related activities and outcomes to a substantial extent (e.g. qualitative and/or qualitative indicators in dashboards). We sometimes conduct internal audits at planned intervals to provide information on whether the innovation management system conforms to the organization’s requirements for innovation management and is effectively implemented and maintained.5. We measure the performance of innovation-related activities in a complete and advanced way. Indicators can be applied at system, portfolio or initiative level, focusing either on the evaluation of the elements of the innovation system, their interactions, as well as on the outcomes. We can use comparisons with other organizations when monitoring and evaluating performance. We conduct internal audits at planned intervals to provide information on whether the innovation system conforms to requirements and is effectively implemented and maintained. [prev id:Prev20 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next20 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step21 class:step21 "Step 21"]
20/40
To what extent do you systematically and continuously improve your innovation capability? 1. We don’t need it because we don't even have an established innovation capability/system.2. We don’t have an established innovation capability/system but we have grown to a small extent some related abilities (e.g. in creative and inventive problem solving) which we don’t systematically assess and improve.3. We have an incipient innovation capability or system conformed of some formal innovation processes. However, the approach to define, communicate and implement change tactics or actions to improve it is not holistic, consistent, nor systematic.4. We have an established innovation capability or system conformed of some formal innovation processes. The approach to improve is systematic in how to define, communicate and implement change tactics or actions but not always ensures a holistic perspective that includes all the necessary elements for innovation to flourish (e.g. strategy, processes, structures, people, culture, networks, digital technology and leadership).5. We systematically determine and select opportunities for improvement and implement any necessary actions and changes to the innovation management system (e.g. guided by a tactical transformation roadmap and an agile backlog), considering feedback, assessments and performance evaluation results. We ensure that actions and changes are communicated and implemented in a timely, complete, and effective manner. [prev id:Prev21 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next21 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step22 class:step22 "Step 22"]
21/40
How do you organize to support innovation processes while balancing protection and collaboration based on how close is the innovation opportunity to the core business? 1. We don’t have an organizational structure, group or team explicitly to support and drive innovation-related activities (e.g. creativity or inventive problem-solving sessions). If needed, responsibilities are temporarily assigned to someone in an informal or ambiguous manner.2. We don’t have an organizational structure, group or team explicitly to support and drive innovation-related activities (e.g. creativity or inventive-problem sessions). Roles and responsibilities are well defined and temporarily assigned to people within and/or outside the organization on an ad-hoc, need basis.3. We don’t have an organizational structure, group or team explicitly to support and drive innovation-related activities. Some roles and responsibilities have been formally defined, communicated and assigned across a traditional organizational structure. However, these roles are not mapped at strategic level but only to middle and low management positions.4. We have dedicated innovation structures with clearly defined and communicated roles and responsibilities to support and drive the innovation processes and the organization’s innovation portfolio and strategy. These are mainly oriented towards innovation efforts that are sourced internally. For example, a strategic innovation or transformation team/group (e.g. an innovation center of excellence) has been established.5. We have dedicated innovation structures which can be nimbly adapted according to our organization’s size and context, as well as aspects such as innovation types, leadership style, incentives, indicators, culture and amount of support required. Some structures might be organizationally and physically separated from the core business if they are of more transformational nature. A strategic innovation or transformation team/group such as an innovation center of excellence drives innovation throughout the organization and also with external parties (if applicable). [prev id:Prev22 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next22 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step23 class:step23 "Step 23"]
22/40
To what extent do you use organizational structures to enable governance mechanisms that ensure that innovation initiatives contribute to the objectives of the enterprise? 1. We don’t have formal innovation governance structures (committees or steering groups) to oversee, evaluate and make decision in relation to innovation activity.2. Oversight and decision-making of innovation spending, audit and compliance, forecasting expenses and measurement are carried out by the overall governance body of the company.3. Formal, dedicated innovation governance structures or bodies are currently being established and roles and responsibilities adjusted. Decision-making related to innovation, such as spending, audit and compliance, forecasting expenses and measurement, are to be made by these specific structures.4. Formal, dedicated innovation governance structures or bodies are well established. It is clear who makes –and is held accountable for– what decisions. There is active participation of senior leaders in innovation processes at key events such as progress reviews or alignment meetings. However, mechanisms to govern external innovation activity is an opportunity area.5. Formal, dedicated innovation governing bodies with the right mix of people and skills to oversee and evaluate innovation initiatives (whether internally or externally sourced initiatives) are well established and proven to be effective and efficient. It is clear who makes –and is held accountable for– what decisions. [prev id:Prev23 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next23 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step24 class:step24 "Step 24"]
23/40
To what extent do you use small, multi-disciplinary, self-organizing innovation teams to address business challenges? 1. We don’t use multidisciplinary teams in our organizational practices.2. We don’t use use small, multi-disciplinary, self-organizing teams. Instead, our teams, in general, are managed by management roles such as a traditional project manager who defines what is to be done, who will do, how is to be done and by when.3. We are using a few small, multi-disciplinary, self-organizing teams for some innovation initiatives. However, understanding and execution of the different roles among members of these teams is in average poor.4. We work well together in teams to capture opportunities. It is clear when and how to use agile, small, multi-disciplinary, self-organizing teams, and team members understand their roles well. However, there’s heavy presence of an expert coach to teach them the principles and guide them day-to-day is still needed.5. We work well together in teams to capture opportunities. It is clear when and how to use agile, small, multi-disciplinary, self-organizing teams, and team members understand and execute their roles very well. The coach is still needed but more to challenge the team in order to maintain top performance and evolve. [prev id:Prev24 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next24 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step25 class:step25 "Step 25"]
24/40
To what extent do you manage coexistence between the different mindsets or sub-cultures of design, development and operational teams? 1. We don’t form creative or design teams as such, only development or implementation teams that are not focused in innovation. At most we set up creative sessions or "mini-projects" that are very short-lived. Thus, managing the coexistence of activities of different nature is not an issue.2. We don’t form creative or design teams as such. We set up cross-functional development or implementation teams that are not configured for an innovation purpose but might sometimes involve innovation-related activities (e.g. creativity sessions). Thus, managing the coexistence of activities of different nature is not considered important.3. We form design teams separate from development teams according to the stage of a project/initiative. The former require a mindset and culture based on values such as creativity, novelty, flexibility, risk taking and experimentation, while the latter are more based on values such as efficiency, lower risk, control, precision and quality.4. We form design teams where one or a few members might continue as members of the development team to facilitate the shared understanding of stakeholder needs and drive a more explorative mindset and skills when needed. Some members of our development teams members have the ability to transition back and forth between an explorative and an exploitative mindset according to the nature of their taks and objectives.5. We form design teams where one or a few members might continue as members of a combined development and operations ("devops") team to facilitate the shared understanding of stakeholder needs and drive a more explorative mindset and skills when needed. Most members of our dev-ops teams members have the ability to transition back and forth between an explorative and an exploitative mindset according to the nature of their taks and objectives. [prev id:Prev25 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next25 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step26 class:step26 "Step 26"]
25/40
To what extent do you match the work style of an employee (e.g. degree of personal orientation towards producing, administering, entrepreneuring, and integrating people) to the innovation role that she/he will perform? 1. We don’t do it, we don't even know for sure the work styles of employees.2. We understand to a small extent the work style of our employees. However, matching a work style to an appropriate innovation role in a methodical manner is rarely done.3. We understand to a moderate extent the work style of our employees. Some leaders make sure the work style be matched to the right innovation role but it is not an established organizational practice yet.4. We understand to a substantial extent the work style of people. It is common organizational practice throughout the organization to match a work style with the right innovation role to improve business outcomes.5. We understand very well the work style of people and we facilitate that it is matched to the right innovation role to maximize business outcomes but also their satisfaction at work. This a well-established practice for any innovation-related role in the organization. [prev id:Prev26 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next26 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step27 class:step27 "Step 27"]
26/40
To what extent do you support the growth of your people’s innovation competencies (e.g. tools and techniques)? 1. We don’t provide meaningful means to grow our people’s innovation competencies.2. We provide support to a small extent to grow our people’s innovation competencies. Training can be authorized and provided on request.3. We provide support to a moderate extent to grow our people’s innovation competencies. We provide internal training in several business and/or technology areas and can support external training requests that are deemed valuable for the organization.4. We provide support to a substantial extent to grow our people’s innovation competencies. We facilitate internal and external training and education programs as well as opportunities for experiential learning (hands-on, on the job).5. We stretch and grow our people’s innovation competencies. We do this not only by providing training and education programs but by promoting and incentivizing participation in team and personal innovation initiatives. [prev id:Prev27 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next27 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step28 class:step28 "Step 28"]
27/40
To what extent do you support the growth of your people’s personal networks (both internal and external) so that they have additional sources of support for innovation? 1. We don’t provide meaningful means to grow our people’s personal innovation networks.2. We provide support to a small extent to grow our people’s personal innovation networks.3. We provide support to a moderate extent to grow our people’s innovation competencies.4. We provide support to a substantial extent to grow our people’s innovation competencies.5. We deliberately promote building our people’s personal networks by their participation in a variety of physical or virtual events (internal and external). [prev id:Prev28 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next28 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step29 class:step29 "Step 29"]
28/40
To what extent do you reward people for participating in potentially risky opportunities? 1. We don’t reward risky behaviors. Failure is not really perceived as a good thing.2. We don’t formally reward risky behaviors. However, risky moves that are successful are recognized.3. We reward risky behaviors in some specific cases. People are moderately satisfied with their level of participation in innovation activities.4. We always reward people for participating in potentially risky opportunities. People are quite satisfied with their level of participation in innovation activities.5. We always reward people for participating in potentially risky opportunities, irrespective of the outcome. People are delighted with their level of participation in innovation initiatives. [prev id:Prev29 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next29 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step30 class:step30 "Step 30"]
29/40
To what extent do people share and live values such as novelty and risk-taking when pursuing new opportunities? 1. We don’t live those values at all when pursuing new opportunities.2. We live those values to a small extent when pursuing new opportunities.3. We live those values to a moderate extent when pursuing new opportunities.4. We live those values to a substantial extent.5. We have a burning desire to explore opportunities and to create novel things. We have a great appetite for risk and a high tolerance for ambiguity and uncertainty. [prev id:Prev30 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next30 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step31 class:step31 "Step 31"]
30/40
To what extent do people share and live values such as adaptiveness to change when pursuing new opportunities? 1. We don’t live those values at all when pursuing new opportunities.2. We live those values to a small extent when pursuing new opportunities.3. We live those values to a moderate extent when pursuing new opportunities.4. We live those values to a substantial extent.5. We adapt easily to new information and knowledge, to changes in business priorities and to the circumstances that arise in the environment. [prev id:Prev31 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next31 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step32 class:step32 "Step 32"]
31/40
To what extent do people share and live values such as creativity and experimentation when pursuing opportunities? 1. We don’t live those values at all when pursuing new opportunities.2. We live those values to a small extent when pursuing new opportunities.3. We live those values to a moderate extent when pursuing new opportunities.4. We live those values to a substantial extent.5. We encourage new ways of thinking and solutions from diverse perspectives. We are constantly experimenting and are not afraid to fail because we treat failure as a learning opportunity. [prev id:Prev32 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next32 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step33 class:step33 "Step 33"]
32/40
To what extent are people committed to innovation as shown by their behaviors? 1. People rarely show interest or actions towards innovation.2. People get involved in innovation-related activities when they are told to or when are trying to solve an operational problem inventively.3. People with innovation-related roles do their jobs well but no extra mile. The innovation language is not totally clear and uniform across the organization.4. People with innovation-related roles proactively take initiative to innovate. There is a clear and unified innovation language used by all engaged in innovation.5. People throughout the organization and at all levels proactively take initiative to innovate (as much as their conditions allow). A common innovation language permeates beyond people with roles directly related to innovation. [prev id:Prev33 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next33 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step34 class:step34 "Step 34"]
33/40
To what extent do you understand and nurture internal networks of people for innovation purposes? 1. We don’t even know whether informal groups or internal networks of people have developed organically or not (e.g. communities of interest or practice), and if so, who makes them up.2. We have identified and understood to a small extent the informal groups or networks of people where knowledge and skills relevant to innovation reside. However, we don’t know what to do to harness and grow them.3. We understand to a moderate extent our internal groups or networks of people. We are trying to understand the frequency of collaboration and degree of cross-functional interactions among people, as well as to understand who brokers information and knowledge and what are their mindsets.4. We understand to a substantial extent our internal groups or networks of people. We know the frequency of collaboration and degree of cross-functional interactions among people, as well as we understand who brokers information and knowledge and what are their mindsets. However, we don’t actively promote and manage them.5. We not only understand well our internal groups and networks of people but also actively promote, manage and track their development. We appreciate, respect and leverage the differences that exist in them (e.g. in communities of interest and practice). [prev id:Prev34 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next34 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step35 class:step35 "Step 35"]
34/40
To what extent do you use innovation experts to support your innovation initiatives? 1. We don’t use external advice or other professional services from innovation experts/consultants.2. We use external experts or consultants to a small extent. When we need them, we struggle to find the right people to help us in our innovation efforts.3. We use external experts or consultants to a moderate extent. We have identified a network of people that could help us in our innovation efforts.4. We use external experts or consultants to a substantial extent. We have formally built a network of people that can help us in our innovation efforts (e.g. formal agreements in place).5. We have developed long-term relationships based on trust with innovation and technology experts who have supported us in our initiatives. [prev id:Prev35 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next35 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step36 class:step36 "Step 36"]
35/40
To what extent do you leverage current business relationships and build new linkages to pursue innovation? 1. We don't leverage our current business relationships (e.g. suppliers and vendors) to search innovation opportunities nor we have business relationships with other type of organizational entities for the purpose of innovation.2. We leverage our current suppliers and vendors reactively, when they pose us a potential opportunity, not necessarily related to innovation. We also have business relationships with entities that esporadically provide us basic training and services when required (e.g. creativity facilitators).3. We leverage our business relationships with suppliers and vendors proactively to pursue innovation opportunities. We also have business relationships with innovation training and professional services providers but we haven’t established linkages with entities beyond our current industries nor with research and technology development entities yet.4. We have established mechanisms and linkages to business entities and ecosystems beyond our current value chain, markets and industries for the purpose of finding new sources of growth. Open innovation has become an important part of our innovation strategy. We are considering or have already established an office/department for managing innovation linkages.5. We have not only linked to valuable business entities and ecosystems but are continuosly seeking and developing other type of organizational relationships with high potential for sinergy and mutual value-generation, including those that allow us to explore the frontier of technologies and develop breakthrough applications (e.g. joint-ventures with research centers). [prev id:Prev36 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next36 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step37 class:step37 "Step 37"]
36/40
To what extent do you give people time and freedom to carry out side personal innovation endeavors? 1. People are not officially given any time or freedom for personal endeavors.2. Sometimes people are given a little time and freedom to pursue personal opportunities for innovation (i.e. 1 to 5% of their work time), especially when it is is clearly related to a current operational problem or challenge.3. People are given moderate time and freedom to pursue personal opportunities for innovation (i.e. 5 to 10% of their work time).4. People are given substantial time and freedom to pursue personal opportunities for innovation (i.e. 10 to 20% of their work time).5. People are given very considerable time and freedom to pursue personal opportunities for innovation (i.e. 20% or more of their work time). [prev id:Prev37 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next37 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step38 class:step38 "Step 38"]
37/40
To what extent do leaders understand the implications and opportunities that digital technology offers the organization? 1. Senior leaders have little or no understanding of the business opportunities and implications of digital exponential technologies. Even leaders of IT-related areas don’t fully understand how to harness their power for business purposes (e.g. to reinvent industries and grow exponentially).2. Senior leaders have little or no understanding of the business opportunities and implications of digital exponential technologies. Leaders of IT-related areas understand sufficiently how to harness them for business purposes (e.g. to reinvent industries and grow exponentially) so that they are guiding and educating the other business leaders matters.3. Our leaders across the organization, not just senior ("C-level"), have been exposed to a moderate extent to digital technology knowledge and solutions (e.g. with disruptive potential). However, this learning is not yet reflected in impactful changes in the organization.4. Our leaders across the organization, not just senior leaders ("C-level"), have been exposed to a significant extent to digital technology knowledge and solutions (e.g. with disruptive potential). This has led to the experimentation and use of advanced and emergent digital technology not only to enhance and automate operations but to create new digitally-enabled offerings and business models.5. Our leaders, from top management executives throughout middle managers and solution owners, are well versed in how digital technology can be applied to boost or reinvent a business. Thus, it is a pervasive practice in the organization to envision digitally-enabled offerings and business models and use collaboration and other software tools to support our innovation efforts. [prev id:Prev38 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next38 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step39 class:step39 "Step 39"]
38/40
To what extent have you managed to have a reliable backbone of standardized and automated core operational processes? 1. We have implemented processes, data and systems within organizational silos. When we need integration of these among silos, we tweak systems and processes to achieve an immediate objective. Over time, these fixes have produced costly combinations of automated and manual processes and unreliable data.2. We have replaced to a small extent the messy legacy systems, processes, and data generated by siloed business units/areas with standardized and shared processes, data and systems (e.g. ERP and CRM) that can support the operating model of the organization.3. We have replaced to a moderate extent the messy legacy systems, processes, and data generated by siloed business units/areas with standardized and shared processes, data and systems (e.g. ERP and CRM) that can support the operating model of the organization.4. We have a coherent set of processes, data and enterprise systems (e.g. ERP & CRM) supporting our company’s core operations. An operational backbone has, to a substantial extent, replaced messy legacy systems, processes, and data generated by siloed business units/areas with standardized and shared systems, processes, and data.5. We have an operational backbone that ensures reliable, stable, secure operations. It does the following things: 1) supports seamless end-to-end transaction processing; 2) Provides reliable, accessible master data (i.e. a single source of truth); 3) provides visibility into transactions and other core processes; and 4) automates repetitive business processes. [prev id:Prev39 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next39 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step40 class:step40 "Step 40"]
39/40
To what extent have you built a platform that allows to reuse digital components (e.g. apps, algorithms and data)? 1. We don’t really have digital platforms with reusable business, data and infrastructure components (e.g. API-accessible). Instead, we have more like monolithic combinations of process and product technology.2. We somehow intuit the value of a digital platform or repository of reusable business, data and infrastructure components (e.g. to rapidly and less costly configure new digital offerings). However, we are still learning about the specific benefits for us and the technical and cost implications.3. We are in the process of implementing a digital platform or repository of reusable business, data, and infrastructure components that can be used to rapidly configure digital offerings.4. We already have a digital platform or repository of reusable business, data and infrastructure components that allow us to rapidly configure digital offerings. Our digital platform is able to exchange data with our operational processes and systems seamlessly.5. We have a digital platform or repository of reusable business, data and infrastructure components used to rapidly configure digital offerings. Our digital platform is able to exchange data with our operational processes and systems seamlessly. Additionally, we have also opened up the platform to external partners so they can also reuse and/or develop new components. [prev id:Prev40 class:buttonPrev "Previous"] [next id:Next40 class:buttonNext "Next"] [step_finish]
[step_start id:Step40 class:step40 "Step 41"]
40/40
To what extent have you established the organizational structures, roles and responsibilities necessary to drive and manage a digital business? 1. We haven’t changed our organizational structures, roles and responsibilities. The traditional IT unit is in charge of all related to digital technology, which is predominantly to support the operational needs of the company.2. We have changed our organizational structures, roles and responsibilities to a small extent (e.g. to ensure the implementation of a reliable operational backbone, and possibly, to start exploring and experimenting with emergent, exponential technologies) .3. We have changed our organizational structures, roles and responsibilities to a moderate extent (e.g. not only to ensure an appropriate implementation of an operational backbone but also to boost it through the use of data science and exponential technologies such as artificial intelligence algorithms, blockchain or others) .4. We have substantially changed our organizational structures, roles and responsibilities to reflect the importance of both enhancing our current core businesses and driving new digitally-enabled offerings (e.g. involving adjacent markets and/or technologies). We have set accountability definitions that balance autonomy for employees and alignment to strategy, objectives and vision. Business and IT/Digital units and their leaders are well integrated towards common goals.5. We have also adjusted for or created new, separated organizational structures to pursue transformational, disruptive or game-changing offerings, so that these types of initiatives are protected from the "organizational immune system" that presents high resistance to change, especially when current businesses go well. Aditionally, we have adjusted or complemented the organizational structures and roles in order to enable the creation and reuse of digital components used in new digital offerings and business models.
Comments (Optional):
[prev id:Prev41 class:buttonPrev "Previous"]
[step_finish]
