Open Source Innovation Factory, OW2con11, Nov 24-25, 2011, Paris

OW2Con 2011, November 23 -24, Orange Labs, Paris

www.ow2.org

Open Source Innovation Factory

Paolo Ceravolo, Università degli Studi di Milano in cooperation with Engineering Group

[Our Framework equipped with Innovation Metrics can

dramatically reduce the time required to transfer an innovative project to a real environment]


www.ow2.org

Outlook

  Open Issues in Open Innovation   Our Proposal   Our Framework   Future work


www.ow2.org

Innovation   72% of company executives rank innovation in their

top 3 priorities (Boston Consulting Group, 2006)   80% of new product results will tend to come from only

20% R&D projects (Eduardo, 2003)   successful companies cancelled as many innovation

projects as non-successful companies. However, successful companies were able to cancel unattractive projects much earlier in the process (Ogawa & Ketner, 1997)


www.ow2.org

Open Innovation

  The central idea behind open innovation is that in a world of widely distributed knowledge, companies cannot afford to rely entirely on their own research, but should instead buy or license processes or inventions (i.e. patents) from other companies. In addition, internal inventions not being used in a firm's business should be taken outside the company (Chesbrough, 2003).


www.ow2.org

Open Innovation


www.ow2.org

Open Issues in Open Innovation

  Reduce time to identify unproductive projects   Understand the synergy that are potentially

relating different projects

  Represent Innovation Activity   Measure Innovation Activity   Report on Innovation Activity


www.ow2.org


  Mixes three complementary approaches: 1.  Innovation Factory Metamodel (IFM), proposed in

the ARISTOTELE project (www.aristotele-ip.eu) 2.  Open source platform SpagoBI

(www.spagobi.org), LOAP and Reporting 3.  Knowbots, advanced tools for the acquisition of

concepts from internal and external knowledge sources


www.ow2.org



www.ow2.org

Innovation Factory Metamodel


www.ow2.org

Innovation Metrics

• Goal 1: Innovation Level Improvement o Q1.1: Which is the level of innovative knowledge exploited in the Organization? o Q1.2: How much are innovative the new products? • Goal 2: Quality of Innovation Sources o Q2.1: Which is the quality of sources of innovation process? • Goal 3: Open Innovation Permeability o Q3.1: To what extend the customer contribution is exploited? o Q3.2: To what extend the concepts coming from competitors' sites are exploited? o Q3.3: Evaluate the level of technologies that are transferred by the analysis of

competitors o Q3.4: How much internal proposals influence innovative products? • Goal 4: Return of Innovation Investment o Q4.1: How much innovation process produces profits? o Q4.2: How much innovation process costs? o Q4.3: Indirect Advantages


www.ow2.org

. www.ow2.org.

Innovation Metrics

Goal 1: Innovation Level Improvement Q1.1: Which is the level of innovative knowledge exploited in the Organization?

M1.1.1: no. accesses to blog/forum marked as innovation sources M1.1.2: no. concepts transferred from innovation sources to produced documents (e.g. cut&paste)

Q1.2: How much are innovative the new products? M1.2.1: no. tags describing new functionalities / no. concepts in innovative sources tag cloud M1.2.2: no. requirements covered by new products


www.ow2.org

Innovation Metrics

Goal 2: Quality of Innovation Sources Q2.1: Which is the quality of sources of innovation process?

M2.1.1: % of external requirements, coming from outside the organisation (e.g. analyzing innovative sources) M2.1.2: % of internal requirements, coming from inside the organisation (e.g. from internal meetings) M2.1.3: % of customer requirements, coming directly from the customer M2.1.4: % of new products implementing external requirements M2.1.5: % of new products implementing internal requirements M2.1.6: % of new products implementing customer requirements M2.1.7: % of human resources that contribute to the innovation process


www.ow2.org

Innovation Metrics Goal 4: Return of Innovation Investment

Q4.1: How much innovation process produces profits? M4.1.1: no. new products sold per month M4.1.2: no. new products sold per week M4.1.3: no. new customers M4.1.4: % revenue from new products M4.1.5: % new product within deadline

Q4.2: How much innovation process costs? M4.2.1: time-to-market of new products M4.2.2: time-to-market of changes to existing products M4.2.3: budget spent on human resources training M4.2.4: no. competences involved in innovation process M4.2.5: no. human resources involved in innovation process M4.2.6: no. man-months spent to realize new product M4.2.7: no. man-months spent to realize changes to existing products M4.2.8: average number of training hours per human resource

Q4.3: Indirect Advantages M4.3.1: % customer satisfaction with new products M4.3.2: % of human resources reaching desired competence level after training M4.3.3: % difference in productivity before and after training


www.ow2.org

SpagoBI


www.ow2.org

KnowBots •  KB consists of two distinct modules which interact

with each other •  One module is running locally in the workspace of

the worker •  A second module is a remote server module that

interrogates various database services across the network and provides the results to a user agent running in the local workspace

•  This way we can track the information that are provided by the Knowbots and are used in the workspace


www.ow2.org

Scenario: AVIO •  AVIO traditionally run two separate business:

•  Plant in Torino selling engines •  Plant in Brindisi providing overhaul services

•  AVIO has no foresight on the mid-term arrivals of engines and is unable to optimize plans and procurement processes.

•  FLEET MANAGEMENT •  centralizing engine monitoring and scheduling their

overhaul process •  optimizing the flow of engines in arrival and

reducing congestion or underutilization


www.ow2.org

Lesson Learned •  Access to data

•  process (competences, requirements) •  products (requirements, ROI)

•  Define Innovation Profile based on successful story to support comparability among past and running processes


www.ow2.org

This work is co-funded by the European Commission as part of the ARISTOTELE project

(FP7-ICT-2009-5 –257886)

Open Source Innovation Factory, OW2con11, Nov 24-25, 2011, Paris

Technology

Transcript of Open Source Innovation Factory, OW2con11, Nov 24-25, 2011, Paris