Main Objective

The main objective of this interview was to evaluate the potential for realistic adoption and usage, and to assess the general validity of the research. Whereas the previous validation candidates had all focused on the validity of the theoretical part of the research, this interview assumed a more holistic viewpoint on the practicality across the entire research effort.

5.2.2.2 Sub Objectives

 Investigate what Open Innovation Models are evident in the interviewee’s company;  Ensure that the interviewee has an understanding of the field of study;

 Receive feedback from the interviewee regarding the usability of the study;  Obtain critique from the interviewee based on the work at hand;

 Address critique;

 Acquire interviewee’s opinion on the potential for practical deployment.

5.2.2.3 Approach

The secondary validation of the research was done via an interview assessment with a Blue Chip Company’s COO. The company is renowned for their innovative business approach and the

candidate would already have a good understanding of the research domains covered in this study. The candidate was given a 30-page summarized document as background perspective. A summary of this document can be found in Appendix B. The interviewee was lead through a presentation to initiate discussions on the different areas of the study. A summary of the discussion can be found in Appendix A.

Table 19: Summary of validation candidate backgrounds and objectives for inclusion

Validation Candidate Occupation /Industry Reason for Inclusion

Dr Ryan Noach Chief Operation Officer of Discovery Health

General opinion regarding the validity of the research and the potential for realistic adoption

5.2.2.4.1 Open Innovation Models evident within Discovery

Table 20: Area of business where Open Innovation Models are evident in Discovery

Open Innovation Model Area of Business in Discovery Idea Competition Inspiring Excellence

Customer Immersion Wellness Collaborative Product Design DQ Tracker

Platforming Vitality

 Idea Competition

“We have a few (structures that resembles Idea Competition) but ‘Inspiring Excellence’ is the main one.” (Noach, 2014)

 Customer Immersion

“We do this all the time. I’ll give you an example regarding a wellness product that we are about to launch. We just lunched it to brokers. How we conceived the wellness product was, we created a group of mentors. We call them mentors but they are really the HR and

Wellness Champions at a group of our client employers. So we got Shell, Ernest & Young, Pick ‘n Pay, a whole range of Employer groups that we work with. Their HR and Wellness

Champions came and sat with us and we tested our product thinking and our ideas, understood their needs and played our modules of them so it is what you call it, it is Customer Immersion, I believe. Then we iterated them and went back and tested the ideas against them again and again.” (Noach, 2014)

 Collaborative Product Design

“We do have this model that you have just explained (Collaborative Product Design) with the DQ tracker device that we install in our insured vehicles. We oversaw the development of the device but we outsourced the technical issues to an engineering company who understand accelerometers and fleet tracking. We outsourced the technical component of the expertise but we retained ownership of the specifications and the IP.” (Noach, 2014)

 Platforming

“Most of our products and services are linked and based on another product. As an example Vitality is a product that must be linked to a Heath or a life policy. I believe this is

5.2.2.4.2 Feedback regarding the usability of the study

Positive feedback was received from the interviewee regarding the usability of the study:

“What I like about your study is that I believe if you understand the literature you can manipulate the process by assigning designated people to certain roles and place structures in a business to either excel the process of, or to maximise the chance of getting great ideas from your employees.” (Noach, 2014)

“I think one could introduce technology and some structure to be more disciplined in certain areas of the innovation process. I like the way how your study is logical and structured so that one can understand the roles that need to be in place to help an innovative idea along its path to maturity.“

(Noach, 2014)

Critique was given surrounding the rigid structure that is evident in the flow of the study. A lot of emphasis was placed on the fact that real-life innovation processes must not be too structured as it inhibits innovation.

“Theoretically what you are saying makes sense, practically when you are going to be that structured it almost stifles innovation”. “I would avoid the trap of being too structured in the execution.”

(Noach, 2014)

The structured approach is a way by which the writer constructs the study. This does not portray the way the study would practically be applied. The interviewee did acknowledge that the study is based on theory and that the structured approach must be seen as a generic guide which one could either follow or measure against.

“You should be able to think outside of your role without any constraint. After the idea is generated, I believe supporting structures can be set in place with the right combination of role players” (Noach, 2014)

“I can see this is a theoretical study and in theory you need structures.” (Noach, 2014) “I agree with you by having structures in place means that you record ideas better, you merge ideas better.”

(Noach, 2014)

“I believe this study is based on theory and a company would be able to score themselves against it.”

5.2.2.4.3 Potential for Practical Deployment

The interviewee agrees that there is definitely potential for practical deployment:

“What I think what you are doing is you are documenting the process that happens in most

innovative businesses, but it happens in life in a less structured way. This provides structure to what happens in most innovation businesses. I guess different environments do different parts and different roles better or worse than others. There are parts of the study that you described that Discovery do badly. Like the Framer role. I think we spend a lot of time rehashing ideas that have been discussed and considered many times before by different teams and individuals maybe months or years prior, and I think what we could do which you described earlier is to introduce the role of the Framer to the company.” (Noach, 2014)