Review slides of Cognistreamer at first ITEA review

1. A CrowdSourced Approach to Accelerating Idea
Generation and Selection
Wim Soens
wim.soens@cognistreamer.com

2. Acceleration Opportunity

3. • Develop and test-drive an innovation
acceleration methodology & tool,
• that combines collaborative and open ideation
• with lead users idea validation.
Objective

4. Nimble Bee position in Accelerate
• #1 - Acceleration problem to be solved for
customers
– Speed up the innovation process @ customers by
enabling more iterations in shorter time with
higher output quality
– Solution: acceleration by leveraging an
innovation ecosystem of design
students/universities and lead users.

5. CUSTOMER COMMUNITY
Target consumer community
COMPANY
Challenge &
expert reviews
UNIVERSITIES
Solution teams
COGNISTREAMER - Project facilitator
Nimble Bee Ecosystem

7. • Serious challenges: Challenged based innovation
sponsored by companies providing real (strategic)
challenges
• Design for collaboration: ‘coopetition’ model among
designers + consumer-designer sparring
• Direct Market Connection: targeted and moderated
lead user communities
Key Enablers

8. Nimble Bee position in Accelerate
• #1 - Acceleration problem to be solved for
customers
• #2 - The acceleration problem for
cognistreamer itself
– Scalability & sustainability of the business model
– Solution: replace the manual innnovation
management by a automated process (= Virtual
Innovation Assistant)

9. Nimble Bee Process

11. • Goal is to develop a new tool, but to start currently
from the existing CogniStreamer toolset to run the
first experiments
– Idea Generation: CogniStreamer Innovation Portal
– Lead User Validation: CogniStreamer XL
• Both being adapted to facilitate the new approach
and future scaling of the model
Tool perspective

12. Closed platform
Invitation
Registration
Legal framework
Registration

13. Ideation
Campaign Detail Screen

14. Ideation
Co-Creation in
Private Spaces

15. Ideation
Final Design
Submission

16. Jury Review

17. Consumer
Feedback

18. Key Learnings
• Arrow’s Information Paradox
– Legal Framework!
• Investment Cost and Risk of Participation
– Reduce complexity of the challenge
– Seek win-win with micro-communities
– Provide design tools
• Lead users’ concept of value well aligned with
the company’s

19. Key Learnings
• Rewards & Incentives
– Financial rewards do not stimulate early
collaboration
• Collaboration vs. competition
– 19/20 finalists were design students!
– Guidance by design teachers: 5/6 winners from
same design school
– Real added value during open iterations with
lead-users

20. Key Learnings
• Outcome
• “90% of designs could also have been created by
internal R&D, but NOT within the same time and
budget frame.
• this also means that 10% of designs were truly
innovative! (benchmark internal R&D = 6%)
• One innovation with disruptive potential (team effort)!