We talked about how a successful corporation is moving resources from an H1 business, so that it doesn't get to the end of its end line years and then the corporation is in trouble. And it's taking those resources and it's the best thing in H2's, and H3's. This folks that came up with framework, they recommend a ratio of investing 70% of the resources in H1. 20% in H2 and 10% in oops, H3. Now if you are at a corporation that actually does this, you are a very fortunate product manager. Because most corporations invest much more heavily down here and much less up here, and the reason for that is the gravity of the existing business. The fact that it's the thing everybody knows and it's producing money. How do we energize the pipeline? I think one of the failure modes, especially at the level of the individual project manager pitching ideas is that management expects these new ideas to be obvious and astounding and to be the obvious success that amazing ideas are only in retrospect. Awesome ideas only seem awesome in retrospect. Most of the time, these folks that tried these things were just like all right, this seems plausible. Let's give this a try and grind it out. So what we're going to talk about now is how we can think about this movement from H1 to H3 and back, and forth as kind of a pipeline. Now I'm using term corporate innovation pipeline, because that is a generally accepted term that you will hear. And people will understand if you use it, but it really is much more of a funnel. I mean, you have a massive tapering of new ideas to things that go from these. This is kind of our H3 here. Ideas and testing concepts to this is sort of where these things become H2's, to the few that really become scalable and are H1's. If you can get one out of ten of the concepts you take through this process to even a pledging business, you're doing great as good as basically any Silicon Valley venture capitalists. And so how do you do that? Well, you grind through it. I think this is how the systematic innovation framework when we talk about before applies to this pipeline very roughly. And so here, we're working on generating new ideas and we won a lot. And then we want to move them to a 90 to a 120-day period across these 2 things here to test them out. The key is running at this one process with the right metrics and letting the ideas that are not ready to go, just die off and we iterate to new things. And then we take these fledgling businesses. We see if they're scalable and many will not be and that's okay, that is absolutely okay. And then a few of them will go on and become H1s and we start the cycle again, in a healthy corporation. If you are involved in thinking about the picture of how you approach innovation goals, you may find this Canvas here helpful. There's a resource and a resources section if you want to read about this, and download a PDF or Google Doc version of it. The independent variable is this pairing between customer segments and personas within those and problem scenarios. So basically, this product market fit that we've talked about. And this has innovation metrics, you want metrics for your H3 and they're not the same as your H1. Your H3 metrics should be about testing new concepts. Running a disciplined process. Taking an MVP through the paces and seeing what metrics you get based on your experiment design for testing the new idea. It's important to have metrics. It's important to have a plan and it's important to be disciplined. But it's important that, that's not the same plan as you apply to your H1's. At the center, this is big innovation goals. For example, with cooped up that might be leadership in this backyard chicken coop space, the feeding and watering and we identified disruptors and catalysts here. So this might be things like the ascendance of organic food. It's a thing that lot of people want and local food, and the emergence of this backyard chicken coop's is a thing that a whole now segment of people that didn't previously have an inclination to keep chickens want to have. This is creating disruption and we want to think about how do we make maybe entrepreneur investments. So outside investments, maybe in a startup or and outside party as well as entrepreneurial investments where, for instance, a product manager runs this 90 to 120-day process to test ideas towards this innovation tool. Why? Why would we duplicate effort like that? Not duplicating effort is something you worry about in an H1 business where you're trying to optimize. Duplicating effort, trying two different ways to solve the same problem is a great thing to do in a H3 business where what you need to do is run a lot of disciplined experimentation. Those are some ideas on how to get ideas into the pipeline and move them through. Set the right expectations on timelines, the right expectations on investment and keep your corporation healthy with a lot of innovation. I think you'll find that very enjoyable as a product manager and you have now some systematic tools to go at it.
