Structure and innovation portfolio management enable innovation at Doeko
Keywords
No Thumbnail Available
Authors
Issue Date
2020-05-06
Language
en
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Based on the diagnoses, it can be stated that the current organizational structure and performance of innovation portfolio management (IPM) doesn’t enable Doeko to become and stay innovative in the future. Every function that is needed to be innovative is present, although not every function is sufficiently executed and formalized in the organization structure. Therefore Doeko should take the results and recommendations of this research into account to bring about the needed interventions; and also in order to prevent from an unbalanced project portfolio and delays and failures of innovation projects, and to increase the innovation performance of the organization in the future.
Doeko is a small enterprise where a lot is arranged informally, which is reflected on the results. The strategy is shared companywide and gives direction to the employees for upcoming innovation projects. So everyone is familiar with the strategy and is able to share information with the MT members about opportunities and threats in the environment of the organization. This is stimulated by the small scale and short communication lines.
Doeko has an active policy in regard to finding new ideas in the field of innovation and improvement. A very positive aspect in the area of innovation performance is the devising of many ideas which are put forward in the MT meeting. Although the difference between exploitation and exploration is not proper made, therefore the propose functions and search for improvement and innovation functions are performed intertwined. It’s relevant to indicate and formalize the difference between those functions, by allocating and describing those functions in the job descriptions of the actors that currently perform the particular function. Furthermore there is no standard set of criteria used to asses innovation proposals or improvement proposals. There isn’t an official guideline and format for drafting a project proposal or business case, therefore research with corresponding information is structurally missing when making decisions. That generates a negative impact on the achievement of proper portfolio management (balance) at Doeko.
The balance (IPM) approach is informal and inadequate performed. First of all, no rule of thumb is used for the number of projects, therefore endless projects are in progress. Doeko should have a maximum of four projects in progress. As a result of the lack of distinction between exploitation and exploration, the composition of the portfolio is not taken into account. This should be secured by considering the following rule: a division of 80% incremental and 20% radical change projects within the portfolio. Furthermore, IPM doesn’t meet the criteria set by PPSF, since several phases are not performed at Doeko. The strategic alignment (pre-screening phase) is moderate, the strategic plan is not structurally used in the judgment of project ideas. The use of a strategic portfolio tool to visualize and allocate a score to the proposals is recommended. Further it’s important to realize that during the decision-making process about project ideas, the portfolio of projects is not taken into consideration. Project ideas are assessed individually, without standard criteria, which implies a lack of proper portfolio mindset. The comparison between project ideas is absent, this is also encouraged by the inadequate proposal making (stated above). Also the results of IPM indicate that project
Description
Citation
Supervisor
Faculty
Faculteit der Managementwetenschappen