Ignoring the Reflection… Innovation Through a 2-Way Mirror

Avoiding Myopia

In the pursuit of new business innovation, one of the most commonly used and effective methods is that of deconstruction and reconstruction.   In this method, one deconstructs some element of their business (for example, the value basis of a product or service offering) and then attempts to reconstruct a new incarnation of it using a mix of alternative practices.   Sometimes a conceptual model, like The Innovation Radar for example, is used as a tool to aid in this process.¹   The question is always one of, “what are the new and different ways in which we can deliver more value?”   (Implicit in this question is the assumption that doing this will result in a business payback of some form.)

The above exercise is, in fact, a great and fundamental practice of good innovation.   But… there is one luring temptation inside of it that tends to stump many would-be innovators.   That temptation is to stop at the question “what can we do differently” and move forward from there.

Stopping at that question is a rather unfortunate move, because it produces only an inside-out way of looking at the problem.   It is myopic.   It is like looking in a mirror and seeing only the reflection of ourselves looking back at us.

Finding the Outside-In Perspective

What we must realize is that this mirror we are looking at is actually a two-way mirror and that standing directly on the opposite side of this mirror is our would-be markets and customers.

So, while asking “what can we do differently” and looking at our own reflection has its place and is useful, we cannot stop there.   Instead, we must reach the point where we look through the mirror and beyond its surface… we must ignore our own reflection so that we can see what is on the other side — namely, the market.

When we realize this and begin to examine the matter in that light, we get much more valuable insight.   The question then becomes one not of “what can we do differently”, but rather one of “what does the market want or need to be different about the value they receive and/or the experience they have in receiving this value?”   This is the outside-in perspective, and it yields far more useful insight than does the inside-out perspective.

Knowing What Matters Is Really What Matters

Ultimately, we need both perspectives… looking from the inside out so that we know what is possible, and looking from the outside in so that we know what matters.

But knowing what matters is infinitely more valuable than knowing what is possible.   This is because if we pursue new things simply because they're possible for us, but they don't matter to our markets, then we're simply wasting our time and resources and will ultimately fail.   Plus, what is presently possible for us can certainly be changed — both by developing new internal capabilities, and by leveraging our broader business ecosystem to avail ourselves to a far broader array of capabilities.

Thus both perspectives have to be understood and must come together if our organization is to innovate successfully.

Employing a Deconstruction/Reconstruction Framework

In undertaking this sort of deconstruction/reconstruction work, it is helpful to have an appropriate deconstruction/reconstruction framework to work with — particularly one that explicitly calls for both inside-out and outside-in perspectives — like, for example, the Breakthrough Innovation Method from GInI or the Flight Board Innovation Method™ from Legacy Innovation Group.

This way, those innovating are more likely to have the combined benefit of both perspectives and can connect the dots in ways that maximize their chances of commercial success.

¹ Mohanbir Sawhney, Robert C. Wolcott and Inigo Arroniz, “The 12 Different Ways for Companies to Innovate”, MIT Sloan Management Review, Spring 2006.

Talk To Us

Intrigued to talk more about this topic?   Drop us a line and let's set up a time to talk…  contact us.