,
7 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Some interesting from an intense two-day innovation metrics review workshop in Canberra:
1. Everybody wants to measure culture and incremental innovations inside businesses: development, extension & continuous improvement.
[1/6]
1. Everybody wants to measure culture and incremental innovations inside businesses: development, extension & continuous improvement.
[1/6]
2. Qualitative case stories have a place in quantitative monitoring framework. I like this 'telling stories with numbers' NIH example by M Ann Feldman [2/6] 
3. Irresponsible use of innovation metrics by the monitors & the monitored is a central challenge. This slide about the folly of rewarding A while hoping for B never gets old (as an aside, this paper will be of interest for AI people re: alignment) [3/6]
4. Arguments for & against simple summaries of complex innovation systems:
+ Easy to understand and begin conversations around
- Shock and awe indicators distract people from the real problems & 'suck the oxygen out of the room'
On balance, I think they are a bad idea [4/6]
+ Easy to understand and begin conversations around
- Shock and awe indicators distract people from the real problems & 'suck the oxygen out of the room'
On balance, I think they are a bad idea [4/6]
5. How do you evaluate mission-oriented policies w/ ambitious goals in over-determined systems? Experimentation seems like the only game in town, and even there will be very hard. What is the power of an innovation policy to tackle climate change? [5/6] [that from a new paper]
6. In summary, innovation indicator upheaval correlates with innovation policy upheaval. Old measurement frameworks don't fit the new models, and the new ones are still immature. Interesting times!
Cf from our forthcoming Innovation Mapping Now report [6/6]
Cf from our forthcoming Innovation Mapping Now report [6/6]
*interesting ideas
