Innovation Incubation Programs

Stop asking discovery questions like - What's your budget? - What's your timeline? - Who's the decision maker? - What are your decision criteria? - Are you looking at other solutions? They make prospects feel interrogated. ↳ And add zero value throughout the sales process. Start asking discovery questions like • If we solved (insert problem), what would be the impact for you & your team? • What's an ambitious but attainable timeline for go-live? • Are we okay missing that date - and what would be the consequences if we do? • Who else needs to be involved to get this on the radar of the executive team? • What are must-haves vs. nice-to-haves for you when it comes to choosing a new solution? • Have you taken a look at what else is out there? 2 key takeaways: 1. Discovery is not an interview. ↳ It's a process of guiding the buyer in their decision process. 2. Buyer experience is a differentiator. ↳The more value you add during the sales cycle, the more deals you will close. What else would you add?👇

The UK has no shortage of startup support programmes. But how well do they work? In our new paper, Full Speed Ahead: Accelerating Britain’s network of startup support programmes, we ask whether the startup support ecosystem is delivering on its promise to founders, funders and the wider economy. We spoke to programme operators, founders, and policy experts to understand the challenges and opportunities, and we propose four areas of reform to help startup support programmes deliver lasting, measurable outcomes. As our Patron, Steve Rigby, writes in the foreword: “We are world-class at launching startups – but not yet at helping them scale. If we want the UK to remain globally competitive, we need to raise the bar on the programmes we fund, back, and promote.” Our report unpacks why issues persist. The common problems we found include: – Misaligned expectations: Many accelerators focus heavily on mentoring and workshops, whereas founders need investor and customer connections. – Duration mismatches: Most programmes last under six months, but founders in deep tech, health and regulated sectors need much longer runway to become investment-ready. – Short-term funding cycles: Stop-start grants disrupt mentorship, break community continuity and undermine the long-term trust essential for founder development. – Flawed impact measurement: Startup survival and funding secured are important, but this doesn’t capture long-term founder development or second-time success. A "failed" startup can produce a much stronger entrepreneur. Our recommendations include: – Establish standards and shared definitions for different programme types to bring clarity, comparability, and baseline quality to the sector. – Reform impact measurement to track long-term founder development, not just short-term startup outcomes or programme activities. – Move to longer-term, outcome-linked support, replacing stop-start grants with adaptable contracts that support iteration, trust, and planning. – Pilot demand-led funding vouchers to let public funding follow founder needs and reward high-performing programmes. We believe these reforms matter because founders need clarity, funders need accountability, and programmes need time and tools to improve. Done right, these changes could help ensure that public investment flows to the programmes that deliver the most value for founders and the UK economy.

💡Triple Diamond Design Process The "Triple Diamond" process is a process that builds upon the widely known Double Diamond design process. While the Double Diamond focuses on two main phases—problem definition and solution design—the Triple Diamond adds a third phase to add depth and breadth to the design methodology.  This variant of a triple diamond process, crafted by Ted Goas (https://lnkd.in/eJFCR8rF), adds a third diamond for iterative development. It emphasizes iterative cycles, prioritization of user needs, and continuous refinement of the solution throughout the product lifecycle. Quick overview of the 5 key phases of this process: 1️⃣ Discovery (What’s our problem?) This phase focuses on identifying the problem to solve. Goal: Understanding customer pain points & narrowing down insights into actionable focus areas. Activities: ✔ Customer empathy budding: Researching user needs. ✔ Market research: Analyzing market trends. ✔ Competitive analysis: Assessing competition. ✔ Insights prioritization: Organizing findings for strategic focus. ✔ Building product strategy: Setting goals for the product. 2️⃣ Definition (What’s our solution?) This phase focuses on solution ideation & validation. Goal: Generate multiple ideas, structure them and validate the most promising ideas Activities: ✔ Ideation: Brainstorming and generating ideas. ✔ Drafting experience workflow: Mapping out how users will interact with the solution. ✔ Wireframeing: Visualizing the solution. ✔ Initial prototyping: Creating early product models for testing. 3️⃣ Development (Let’s build our solution) This phase is about building, iterating, and refining the product. Goal: Breaking down features and iterating to reduce risks. Activities: ✔ Feature breakdown: Breaking the solution into smaller deliverable tasks. ✔ Iterative build cycle: Continuously building and improving the product. ✔ Collecting research insights: Using feedback to refine features. 4️⃣ Distribution (Initial customer feedback) Focuses on testing the product with users and preparing for the final release. Phases: ✔ Internal release: Early internal testing (alpha and beta testing) ✔ Early access program: Collecting feedback from early adopters. ✔ General (Public) release: Launching the product publicly. 5️⃣ Retro (What did we learn?) Post-release reflection phase to gather insights for future iterations. Using insights collected from feedback, metrics, and retrospective discussions to refine the product. 📕 A Comprehensive guide to product design process https://lnkd.in/eyh4YGy6 #design #designprocess #ux #uxdesign #productdesign #uidesign #ui

Find new unmet customer needs by four ways of looking … Identifying unmet customer needs, pains or dreams are crucial. To increase your chances of accurately detecting customers’ problems and dreams, you must diversify how and where you look. That’s why I introduce in my new book ‘Breaking Innovation Barriers’ the ‘Four Ways of Looking’, a new model, originally developed by Louis Barsoux, Michael Wade, and Cyril Bouquet. It involves two main approaches: improve your vision of mainstream users and challenge your vision by looking at unconventional users. 1. The Microscope Strategy. By zooming in on the experiences of your mainstream users you can identify unsurfaced needs through regular focus groups, interviews, or questionnaires. You step into a role of an anthropologist to understand the passions, frustrations, needs, and wants of your users. 2. The Panorama Strategy. By this way of looking, you can find unmet needs of mainstream users by looking at aggregated data, such as errors, complaints, and accidents, that amplify weak signals. Digital tools make it much easier to observe the behaviour of large numbers of individuals. The ‘big data’ needed can be collected from multiple sources like apps and smartphones and can be analysed for trends. 3. The Telescope Strategy. With this strategy you study fringe users, extreme users, nonusers, or even misusers. Demands from small niches are often dismissed as irrelevant. But when you zoom in on users at the periphery, you might uncover pain points that are relevant to the masses too, especially when they are lead users. 4. The Kaleidoscope Strategy. You can also look at distant groups together and find similarities that show unmet needs. It’s like spotting patterns in a kaleidoscope. The challenge, especially for managers in established companies, is to think beyond the usual groups like suppliers, distributors, and competitors. Make use of digital tools and AI to quickly analyse masses of data and identify patterns. Use this new model to diversify you way of finding new unmet customer needs. #customerneeds #jobstobedone #innovation #customerinsights

🚀 Now publicly available 🚀 The Data Innovation Toolkit! And Repository! (✍️ coauthored with Maria Claudia Bodino, Nathan da Silva Carvalho, Marcelo Cogo, and Arianna Dafne Fini Storchi, and commissioned by the Digital Innovation Lab (iLab) of DG DIGIT at the European Commission) 👉 Despite the growing awareness about the value of data to address societal issues, the excitement around AI, and the potential for transformative insights, many organizations struggle to translate data into actionable strategies and meaningful innovations. 🔹 How can those working in the public interest better leverage data for the public good? 🔹 What practical resources can help navigate data innovation challenges? To bridge these gaps, we developed a practical and easy-to-use toolkit designed to support decision makers and public leaders managing data-driven initiatives. 🛠️ What’s inside the first version of the Digital Innovation Toolkit (105 pages)? 👉A repository of educational materials and best practices from the public sector, academia, NGOs, and think tanks. 👉 Practical resources to enhance data innovation efforts, including: ✅Checklists to ensure key aspects of data initiatives are properly assessed. ✅Interactive exercises to engage teams and build essential data skills. ✅Canvas models for structured planning and brainstorming. ✅Workshop templates to facilitate collaboration, ideation, and problem-solving. 🔍 How was the toolkit developed? 📚 Repository: Curated literature review and a user-friendly interface for easy access. 🎤 Interviews & Workshops: Direct engagement with public sector professionals to refine relevance. 🚀 Minimum Viable Product (MVP): Iterative development of an initial set of tools. 🧪 Usability Tests & Pilots: Ensuring functionality and user-friendliness. This is just the beginning! We’re excited to continue refining and expanding this toolkit to support data innovation across public administrations. 🔗 Check it out and let us know your thoughts: 💻 Data Innovation Toolkit: https://lnkd.in/e68kqmZn 💻 Data Innovation Repository: https://lnkd.in/eU-vZqdC #DataInnovation #PublicSector #DigitalTransformation #OpenData #AIforGood #GovTech #DataForPublicGood

Which is stronger in your workplace: Organisational Culture or National Culture? And how do you make them work together? 🤔 Cross-cultural management research suggests that national culture runs deeper than organisational culture, especially under pressure. Why? Because national values are acquired in childhood and become embedded in the subconscious mind, while corporate values are learned later in life and are consciously adopted. When we join a company, we don’t leave our national identity at the door. We carry it into every meeting. So you can train an employee to follow a corporate practice (e.g., “speak up in meetings”). But if their cultural wiring teaches that contradicting a boss is disrespectful, they will likely feel deep psychological discomfort. It is not easy to integrate the organisational culture on the wall with the national culture in the hall. But a strong company culture has many benefits. It can create a shared language and set of behaviours that allow diverse people to work together, even if their underlying values are different. So how do you strengthen your corporate culture without suppressing the behaviours, values, and mindsets that diversity brings? Here are 3 steps to start with, so these two dynamics work WITH each other, not against each other: 1️⃣ Make your culture a dialogue - Invite employees from different cultures to share how the company’s values show up in their context. You might be surprised how “respect,” “authority,” or “fairness” can look different across cultures. 2️⃣ Translate values into practices - Since values are interpreted differently across cultures, focus on creating a specific shared set of behaviours and practices that allow people with different underlying values to collaborate as one team. 3️⃣ Align goals, adapt execution - Align everyone around the same strategy and goals, but give local teams the freedom to achieve them in their own ways. The goal is consistency in direction, not in how the work is done. Which one do you see more often in your workplace: national culture or organisational culture? And how does your organisation balance corporate belonging with cultural differences? #GlobalMindsets #CulturalIntelligence #GlobalOrganisations  

Do Accelerators improve Success Rates? Leading Venture Capital Accelerators do a great job of getting into the news, and you will regularly see impressive events hosted by Techstars, Y-Combinator, and 500startups for example. In the USA alone there are 160 accelerator programs active today and globally more than 2000. Yet do they actually improve success rates? A new study published by Wharton professors Valentina Assenova and Raphael Amit examined 8580 startup companies in 408 accelerators spread throughout 176 countries between 2013 and 2019. The answer? Yes! "Accelerated startups were 3.4% more likely to raise #venturecapital and raised $1.8 Million more in the first year after graduation from these programs" according to Assenova who elaborated "They also planned to raise $2.64 million more capital, on average, over the next year. Accelerated startups also generated more revenue, hired more full-time employees, and paid for in wages to their employees, on average- indicating they were scaling faster than their peers." Interestingly enough, while most studies to date have focused on Silicon Valley or Boston in the USA for example, this study was global and notes: "This suggests that accelerators aren’t just beneficial for high-tech startups in well-established tech hubs in the United States, but also for other types of ventures in emerging startup ecosystems found in regions such as Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean,” Assenova said. Program Design deeply influences success rates The factors which contributed to success include: Depth or Breadth of knowledge within cohorts Knowledge-Building programs offered by the accelerator Characteristics of the founders The study confirmed: "accelerators that include more training activities, pitching competitions, advice to certain industries, and structured learning sessions tend to improve startup business success rates." Link to the article from Knowledge at Wharton detailing the study published in the Strategic Management Journal here: https://lnkd.in/d8CK9PM3 What is your experience with Accelerator programs? #strategy #leadership

In the UK, having a great idea is not enough You need to know where to start Turning that idea into a successful business takes more than just funding. The UK’s start up ecosystem is complex, with unique opportunities, rules, and cultural aspects that can make or break your venture. For international founders, accelerators are invaluable. They provide more than just funding. They offer cultural integration, help navigate UK business rules and compliance, connect you to established networks, and give you a chance to test your idea in the local market. The UK’s best accelerators help take start ups from concept to success: → Y Combinator (YC) offers £102 062 for 7% equity and provides a global network with a Silicon Valley mindset. → Techstars provides up to £97 980 (£16,000 for 6% equity) and offers intensive mentorship focused on the UK market. →  Seedcamp invests around £84 120 for 7.5% equity, with a pan-European network and strong UK focus. → NatWest’s Entrepreneur Accelerator is fully funded with no equity required and connects you deeply to the UK’s financial and business ecosystems. The real benefit of these accelerators isn’t just the funding It’s the resources and knowledge you gain. They help you avoid costly mistakes, speed up your learning, and give you access to tools and networks that would otherwise be out of reach. The right accelerator can make the difference between being just another start up and becoming a market leader. A great idea is your entry point. The right accelerator is your strategy for success. Choose carefully, and set your business up for success with the right support behind you.

Early Stage founder: “We need help NOW but can't afford full-time hires." Finding and managing the right freelancers is a common challenge at that stage. But after helping 50+ startups, I've identified a systematic way to de-risk it: 🎯 Start with strategy, not hiring: → Map your desired outcomes clearly → Document the specific steps needed to get there → Identify which skills are truly core vs. supportable → Leverage your network for referrals (still the best source) → If no referrals, go to platforms like Upwork and Fiverr ✅ Vet and validate: → Review portfolios and past startup work → Ask exactly how they might use LLMs in their workflow → Set crystal-clear deliverables and success metrics → Cap initial test assignments at £500 → Track which freelancers consistently deliver quality work → Document detailed feedback to improve collaboration 📈 Scale thoughtfully: → Begin with high-impact, low-product-knowledge tasks → Create repeatable processes for successful projects → Develop freelancers' understanding of your business → Focus your core team on strategic innovation → Build your trusted talent network gradually If you can't identify the right freelancers because your path to success isn't clear, a senior advisor or fractional C-level pro can help map your execution plan first. Savvy founders don't gamble on freelancers. They build clarity first, then choose the right experts. ♻️ Found this helpful? Repost to share with your network. ⚡️ Want more content like this? Hit follow Maya Moufarek.

Today, India boasts 4,000+ DeepTech startups, all of them with significant momentum in AI, semiconductors, quantum computing, aerospace, robotics, advanced manufacturing, health-tech, and clean energy. But deep-tech startups in India have long confronted a bitter paradox: daring ideas and bold intent but policy support only once they survived. The main issue is 🔺 long gestation — DeepTech products in semiconductors, aerospace, quantum, robotics, or advanced materials will typically take 5–10 years for R&D to get into the market and the capital markets want faster returns. This results in an enduring gap in patient capital and scarce domestic funds to maintain ongoing investment through long technology validation phases. 🔺 Another great difficulty is high capital intensity. Hardware labs, fabrication access, testing infrastructure, and certifications are high on the steep hill of development cost, and early stage survival without consistent policy/institutional support can be challenging. 🔺 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐞-𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐃𝐒𝐈𝐑 (𝐃𝐞𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐒𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡) 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐠𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐧 𝐩𝐮𝐬𝐡𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐤𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐢𝐧𝐧𝐨𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 “𝐯𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐝𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐡” 𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐰𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐯𝐢𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲. That barrier has now been decisively removed. By eliminating the three-year existence requirement for DSIR recognition, the Union Government has made a quiet but consequential correction. It signals confidence in India’s young innovators and a shift toward evaluating startups on technological merit and scientific readiness not age. 𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐲-𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐞𝐩-𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐡 𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐬, 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐮𝐢𝐧�� 𝐠𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐫: 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐛𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐟𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐰𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐭, 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐬 𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫. India’s own experience validates this approach. #ideaForge, #Niramai, #signalchip, #EtherealX, #Agnikul, #MolbioDiagnostics all demonstrate how early belief and timely institutional support can convert lab-stage innovation into national capability whether in defence, space or healthcare. On the ground, many startups failed not because ideas were weak, but because validation came too late. Whether it was affordable cancer diagnostics, climate-resilient agriculture, or indigenous energy storage, innovators needed support in year one not year four. By aligning DSIR recognition with scientific validation cycles, supported by initiatives like the new DSIR deep-tech guidelines, PRISM Network Platform, and Creative India 2025, India is clearly moving from survival-based screening to capability-based empowerment.