La siguiente entrevista se basa en los hallazgos del informe “Programas Nacionales de Clústeres: Una Perspectiva Global ” escrito para Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED). Puede descargar una copia aquí.

También llevaremos a cabo un webinar el 21 de noviembre de 2023 a las 9:00 a.m. México. Regístrese aquí

———————

Este reporte fue escrito para Departamento de Innovación, Ciencia y Desarrollo Económico (ISED, por sus siglas en inglés) – ¿podría proporcionar un poco de información sobre lo que impulsó esta investigación en programas nacionales de clústeres?

En 2017, se lanzó el Programa Nacional de Superclústeres de Innovación de Canadá con un objetivo ambicioso: establecer cinco superclústeres de innovación que posicionaran a Canadá como una potencia mundial. Estos superclústeres trabajarían en industrias en las que Canadá ya cuenta con ventajas competitivas o que podrían desarrollarlas en el corto y mediano plazo.  La ambición es convertirse en un actor importante en estas industrias a nivel local. El enfoque del programa abarcó tecnologías digitales, inteligencia artificial (IA), manufactura avanzada, economía del océano, y alimentos, con un énfasis específico en las proteínas.

Bajo el liderazgo del ministro de innovación, el gobierno canadiense propició con mucho éxito la colaboración con el sector privado, para crear un modelo de Asociación Público-Privada (APP) que respaldara la creación y el desarrollo de estos cinco superclústeres. A través de este modelo, el gobierno se comprometió a igualar cada dólar invertido por el sector privado en los superclústeres de innovación.

Al cumplir cinco años de haber iniciado el programa de superclústeres, el ISED condujo una evaluación del del mismo. Esta evaluación sería un insumo clave para el diseño de estrategia para un segundo ciclo de implementación. Los resultados de esta evaluación propiciaron esta investigación, ya que el equipo de ISED deseaba trabajar en la estrategia usando como referencia las mejores prácticas y casos de estudio de otros programas nacionales de clústeres.  También deseaban entender cómo programas nacionales de clústeres emergentes estaban abordando su diseño considerando el entorno dinámico en el que operan.

¿Cuáles fueron los descubrimientos más emocionantes de esta investigación de más de 30 programas de clústeres en todo el mundo?

Después de entrevistar a líderes y profesionales clave que trabajan e impulsan más de 30 programas nacionales de clústeres y una extensa investigación, hubo tres hallazgos clave que destacaría:

El primero, no hay una única mejor práctica, pero hay grandes ejemplos como Dinamarca, Noruega, Francia o Corea del Sur. El contexto es muy importante y los países deben entenderlo muy bien a la hora de diseñar su propio programa nacional de clústeres

Segundo. La velocidad del cambio y el contexto general significan que los países se enfrentan a un panorama muy dinámico, lo que también significa que los programas nacionales de clústeres deben tener en cuenta prácticas dinámicas a la hora de diseñar nuevos programas o la próxima iteración de los ya existentes.

Probablemente, el hallazgo más relevante – y la mayor contribución – de este informe es una comprensión clara de las diferentes palancas a nivel de política pública que los países deben tener en cuenta a la hora de diseñar o rediseñar un programa nacional de clústeres. Producto de esta investigación identificamos 16 palancas de política pública y creamos una herramienta, el Lienzo de las Palancas de Política de Clústeres (The Policy Levers Canvas en inglés), que los responsables de la formulación de políticas públicas y los líderes de los programas nacionales de clústeres pueden utilizar como un “panel de navegación”. Esta herramienta les permite crear múltiples configuraciones de programas, visualizarlas individualmente o de manera integrada.

En las entrevistas e investigaciones con más de 30 programas de clústeres en todo el mundo, ¿identificó algún desafío u obstáculo específico que enfrenten comúnmente estos programas? ¿Cómo están abordando estos desafíos?

Su pregunta es excelente, y la profundidad de este tema podría llenar fácilmente un libro o una serie de artículo.

El principal desafío consiste en establecer un entendimiento compartido entre las partes interesadas clave de lo que define a un clúster, en particular un superclúster de innovación, y cómo se distingue de otros programas e iniciativas destinados a fomentar el crecimiento económico, la competitividad nacional y la innovación.

El segundo es entender las diferencias entre un clúster de innovación y un programa de transformación país, que requiere una financiación significativa, una visión de muy largo plazo, y cuando digo muy largo plazo me refiero a décadas, no a años, y por lo general este tipo de programas requiere una vasta infraestructura a lo largo del país. Esperamos que reportes como éste ayuden a lograr este entendimiento común de las características de estos dos tipos de iniciativas.

Otros desafíos que podría mencionar están relacionados con el financiamiento del programa, el mantenimiento del apoyo político más allá de los ciclos electorales de corto plazo, la garantía de una fuerza laboral adecuada, y la realización de evaluaciones exhaustivas del impacto del programa.

Para hacer frente a estos desafíos, los países buscan aprender de los errores del pasado e inspirarse en estudios de casos de éxito como Dinamarca, España, en particular los programas regionales de clústeres, y algunas naciones asiáticas como Corea del Sur y China-También han reconocido la importancia de involucrar a todas las partes interesadas clave en el proceso de diseño del programa.

Los modelos de financiamiento de los superclústeres son un aspecto fundamental de su sostenibilidad. ¿Podría arrojar algo de luz sobre los modelos de financiación más innovadores y efectivos que encontró durante su investigación?

Creemos firmemente que los programas nacionales de clústeres deben ser financiados por los gobiernos con una perspectiva mínima de diez años. Esto le da continuidad al programa. Si se adopta esta perspectiva de largo plazo, entonces la discusión pasa a cómo debería hacerse la asignación de fondos a los superclústeres o clústeres que hacen parte del programa. Las 16 palancas que identificamos proporcionan un marco integral para evaluar diferentes modelos de asignación de fondos. Una vez más, el contexto es importante a la hora de decidir qué podría funcionar mejor.

Dicho esto, en 2021 publicamos otro reporte Modelos de Negocios de Clústeres: Explorando Modelos de Negocio en Clústeres de Innovación Globales, donde exploramos en detalle diferentes modelos de financiamiento que un superclúster podría adoptar. En pocas palabras, encontramos que los clústeres sostenibles tienden a ser financiados, en su mayor parte, con fondos privados, incluyendo fondos generados por el mismo clúster.

Ahora, la pregunta clave para los líderes de los programas nacionales de clústeres es decidir cuánto, si es que lo hace, financiará el programa a los clústeres y en qué condiciones. ¿Por cuánto tiempo? ¿En qué tipo de gastos deberá el clúster utilizar estos fondos? ¿Si el sector privado debe hacer una inversión equivalente y en qué proporción? Estas son algunas preguntas para responder. El Lienzo de las Palancas de Política de Clústeres les ayudará a guiar estas discusiones y a tomar decisiones.

Pero lo más importante es que el programa nacional de clústeres ayude a los clústeres a un modelo de financiamiento basado en fondos públicos a un modelo de financiamiento basado en fondos privados y en fondos generados por el clúster mismo.

¿Podría ofrecer un adelanto de lo que los asistentes pueden esperar aprender o discutir durante el seminario web?

Nuestra ambición con este webinar es visibilizar algunos de los elementos clave que los involucrados en el diseño de programas nacionales de clústeres y la comunidad extendida de clústeres deben considerar a la hora de diseñar o rediseñar un programa nacional de clústeres. Con esto en mente, discutiremos por qué los países necesitan programas nacionales de clústeres, los diferentes modelos de programas nacionales de clústeres y mostraremos estudios de casos globales y mejores prácticas en el diseño de programas nacionales de clústeres. Muy importante, centraremos la discusión en el contexto de América Latina.

¿Qué tipo de audiencia se beneficiaría de unirse a esta conversación?

The interview below is based on the findings in the report “National Cluster Programs: A Global Perspective” written for the Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED). You can download a copy here.

We also have a webinar happening on the 23rd of October, 2023 (Monday) at 13:00 CET. Sign up to join us here.

———————

This report was written for Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) – could you provide a bit of background on what prompted the research on the global perspective of cluster programs?

In 2017, the Canadian National Innovation Supercluster Program was launched with an ambitious goal: to establish five innovation superclusters that would position Canada as a global powerhouse. These superclusters would operate within industries where Canada already held or had the potential to develop competitive advantages, aiming to become a major player on the international stage. The program’s focus encompassed Digital, Artificial Intelligence (AI), Maritime, and Food, with a specific emphasis on protein.

Under the leadership of the Minister of Innovation, the Canadian government successfully fostered collaboration with the private sector, creating a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) model. Through this model, the government pledged to match every dollar invested by the private sector in the innovation superclusters.

As the initial three-year timeline set by the government to achieve program goals drew to a close, the Innovation, Science, and Economic Development (ISED) recognized the need to assess the results and plan for the next iteration of the national innovation supercluster program. This realization led to a profound exploration of how other countries had effectively established and cultivated their own national cluster programs, as well as how emerging programs were approaching this dynamic landscape.

In the research of over 30 cluster programs worldwide for the report – what were the most exciting discoveries you made?

After interviewing key leaders and practitioners working and driving 30+ national cluster programs and an extensive research, there were three key findings I would highlight:

1. There are no single best practices, but there are great examples like Denmark, Norway, France or South Korea. Context is very important and countries should understand it very well when designing their own national cluster program
2. The speed of change and overall context means that countries face a very dynamic landscape, which also means that national cluster programs should look at dynamic practices when designing new programs or the next iteration of the existing program.
3. Probably, the most relevant finding – and contribution – of this report, is a clear understanding of the different policy levers countries should be aware of when designing or re-designing a national cluster program. We identified 16 policy levers and created a tool, the Cluster Policy Levers Canvas, that policy makers and national cluster program leaders can use as a “navigation panel”. It allows them to see multiple program configurations depending on how they move those levers.

In the interviews and research with over 30 cluster programs worldwide, did you identify any specific challenges or obstacles commonly faced by these programs? How are they addressing these challenges?

Your question is excellent, and the depth of this topic could easily fill a book or a series of blog posts.

The primary challenge involves establishing a shared understanding among key stakeholders of what defines a cluster, particularly an innovation supercluster, and how it distinguishes itself from other programs and initiatives aimed at fostering economic growth, national competitiveness, and innovation.

The second one is understanding differentiating an innovation cluster from a nation-shaping program, which requires significant funding, a really long-term view, and I mean decades not years, and usually a vast infrastructure throughout the country. Reports like this one is a very good step to create this common understanding.

Additionally, challenges encompass aspects like securing funding, maintaining political support beyond short-term cycles, ensuring an adequate workforce, and conducting thorough evaluations of program impact. To address these challenges, countries are looking to learn from past mistakes and draw inspiration from successful case studies, such as Denmark, Spain, particularly regional cluster programs, and some Asian nations like South Korea and China. They are also emphasizing the importance of involving all key stakeholders in the program’s design process.

Financing models for superclusters are a critical aspect of their sustainability. Could you shed some light on the most innovative and effective financing models you encountered during your research?

We strongly believe that national cluster programs should be funded by governments with a minimum perspective of ten years. This provides continuity to the program. The key discussion then shifts to the allocation of these funds. The 16 levers we identified provide a comprehensive framework to assess different models. Again, context is important when deciding what could work best.

Having said that, in 2021 we published another report Cluster Business Models: Exploring Business Models in Global Innovation Clusters, where we explored in detail the different financing models out there. In a nutshell, we find that sustainable clusters tend to be more privately funded, including self-generated revenue streams.

Now, the key question for national cluster program leaders is to decide how much, if at all, the program will fund clusters. For how long, for what should the clusters use these funds, if the private sector should make an equivalent investment and in what proportion, among other criteria. But most importantly, it needs to help clusters transition from public-skewed financing models to private and self-generated financing models.

Could you offer a teaser of what attendees can expect to learn or discuss during the webinar?

Our ambition with this webinar is to shed light on some of the key elements that those involved in the design of national cluster programs and the extended cluster community should consider when designing or re-designing a national cluster program. With that in mind, we will discuss why countries need national cluster programs, the different models of national cluster programs, and showcase global case studies and best practices in designing national cluster programs. Super fun!!!

What kind of audience would benefit from joining this conversation?

I was born and raised in Switzerland, and after completing my military service in the Swiss Air Force, I pursued my Bachelor’s degree at the University of Exeter in the UK. Following that, I delved into the world of investment banking in London.

Q: Could you share a bit about the most interesting projects you’ve worked on recently prior to joining Strategy Tools?

One of the most significant projects I had the opportunity to be a part of involved advising our client in acquiring a 50% stake in Hornsea II, the world’s largest offshore wind farm. It was a fast-paced and dynamic project that left a lasting impact, contributing to the positive momentum in our energy transition.

Q: Henrik, tell us a bit more about the work you will be doing at Strategy Tools

At Strategy Tools, I will largely be supporting the team in the wider scope of teaching start-ups, accelerators, founders and early-stage investors on what a successful fundraising looks like through the eyes of the Scale-Up! Sim and many other tools.

Q: ST has a rich number of tools to shape strategy around the world. What have you seen in your first few days of working so far?

The amount of tools, content, canvases, videos, use cases and Miro boards I have seen so far has been impressive (and slightly overwhelming in the best of ways!). It is fantastic to see the thought that has gone behind the work of the Scale-Up! Sim or the fundraising bootcamps. Putting such complex, multi-faceted scenarios and situations in simple terms is vastly difficult and when reading a “Long-term funding roadmap” canvas, it could not be laid out any simpler!

Q: Strategy Tools is developing a rich body of content and tools around VC/PE. Over the next couple of years this will be a growing business area for ST. How do you see yourself working with global fund managers, ecosystems and faculty with the VC materials?

Strategy Tools has excellent tools and content already, from the very first ideas of your start-up or if you are already running an SME to shape your corporate strategy. That, fortunately for me, makes my job significantly easier!

Now it is all about introducing key stakeholders to what ST does, and why it works (and all of our success stories) – whether it is running introduction calls, multi-day sessions across the globe or virtually, or simply acting as a sounding board.

Q: What’s your superpower?

Even in intense situations, I manage to excel at multi-tasking and managing workstreams simultaneously – all while making sure I remain positive and motivating others.

Q: What do you enjoy doing outside of work?

Like many here in Stavanger, I relish spending time outdoors, immersing myself in nature, and engaging in various sports activities, ranging from football to winter sports. Additionally, I enjoy discovering new captivating TV shows and movies.

The person asking this was a senior director at a large family-owned company in Saudi Arabia. She had been trying to get a company-wide transformation done for the better part of a year, but just could not get it off the ground. Her intuition was that there were a lot of talks, positive interest, and polite support, but was not enough traction to get the whole thing started.  

“Who starts it? How does the transformation get started?”, she asked.  

At the time, it struck me that we, at Strategy Tools, did not really have an answer to her question. Sure, we had some anecdotal cases and personal experiences, but did not have a research-grounded approach to give her a solid answer. In our terms, we could not provide a good explanation, nor did we have the tools to guide that part of the process.  

So, we went back to our research, case studies, and interviews. We dug into our data, analyzed well-known cases, sketched out early designs for tools, and tested them. Eventually, we arrived at the Transformation Starters Map. What we found surprised us!

We identified nine unique starting points where a transformation could possibly take place. 

The Transformation Starters Map is a visual overview of who starts the company’s transformation journey. On the top of the list is the first category called Internal Drivers. This indicates that the beginning of the process is often conversational, social, and bottom-up. Under this category are the first three starting points which include:

• Bubbling Up Organizational Conversations
• Strategy Function
• Management Team

The second category, on the other hand, is a bit more management-led, organised, and structured. It is called Strategy Review. Transformation can originate from any of these points:

• The Management Team
• CFO
• CEO
• Board of Directors. 

Moving on, there is Management Change, which potentially causes many disruptions and is the outcome of a strategic review. The company either selects:

• A new CEO (Internal)
• A new CEO (external)

And finally, the last category is all about Outside Pressure. These are the significant noises and pressures from the outside that may cause a potential transformation to initiate. This is what we call “Activist Investors”.

If you are interested in learning more about the Transformation Starters Map, take a deep dive into the Building the Transformational Company program. You can also download and read our exclusive report Building the Transformational Company here.

So what do you find as you scan the syllabus for this exciting course?

You’ll start with Gillette’s launch of the Sensor razor from 1990, a session that never gets as far as the 2010 founding of Dollar Shave Club and the direct-to-consumer revolution in retail. Then you’ll move on to a famous case from 1992 about airline pricing wars, ignoring the mergers that consolidated the industry and allowed the top 6 airlines to spend 96% of their free cash flow (some $47 billion dollars) on stock buybacks in the decade leading up to 2019. Next up is a 1998 case about Anheuser Busch and the U.S. Brewing industry, which proceeds in blissful ignorance of the later 2008 acquisition by Belgium’s InBev which preceded drastic cost-cutting, and a retreat by the whole beer category in light of more skillful strategic thinking by spirits
companies.

Then, let’s talk pricing, which you will approach by examining the 1990 price war between Maxwell House and Folgers. At the time, Starbucks had just 84 stores, but its growth trajectory was already noticeable. You’ll move on to a year 2000 case about Airbus’ decision to build the world’s largest commercial jet. Then, it’s Minnetonka (the moccasin people?) getting into SoftSoap in 1988 and toothpaste, followed by an in-depth discussion of decisions surrounding innovation in 16-bit video games.

And it goes on, with strategy apparently frozen in time. Lest you think I am exaggerating, these are actual cases taken from this year’s syllabus for an undergraduate strategy class at a top-drawer school.

This is but a symptom of a much larger problem. Strategy as a field has not itself adapted to an interconnected, digitized world in which barriers to entry have changed, capital is abundant and information and knowledge, rather than raw materials, are the inputs in scarcest supply. The use of outdated tools, and the outdated assumptions they rest on, perhaps help explain why there is so much disappointment with the strategy process.

This is one of the reasons I am delighted to be working with the team at Strategy Tools to update the essential tools of strategy into modern use. Let’s understand what these tools help you to do.

Make strategy choices tangible

At the end of the day, the reason one needs a strategy is because we have to make choices under conditions of competition and limited resources – if you had no competition and unlimited resources, just try everything and see what works. For most of us, unfortunately, we’re not in such a benevolent position.

The difficulty is that strategic clarity, in the sense of what we will and will not consider doing, is hard to create. It’s even harder to be clear with others as you widen the circle of people who need to make choices at their own levels. By the time you get to the “edges” of the organization, where big strategic shifts first make themselves felt, it is highly likely that the level of clarity that seemed so obvious in the boardroom has eroded completely. Instead, we see that strategies are still being informed by old assumptions, new strategies are trying to be crammed into old structures, and the incentive system in the organization has not been redesigned to bring people into alignment.

Part of the problem is that strategy can seem like a very intangible thing that few people in the organization actually “touch.” By using the Strategy Tools toolkits, the strategy of any organization can be made very concrete and people can build their confidence in making strategic choices without having to take huge amounts of time or risk.

Creating critical mass quickly

In an organization of any complexity, getting the majority of stakeholders on board with a new strategic direction is a daunting challenge that can, if the transformation is big enough, take years. Well, guess what – we can’t be thinking about years of implementation in a world that is moving at a pace of weeks – or even days. What the toolkit helps to do is bring a critical mass of people, quickly, to an understanding of the situation the organization is in and to a grasp of what needs to be done considering those circumstances.

Linking decisions to outcomes

The real world can be a harsh teacher. It is entirely possible to follow best practices, use good processes and do the right thing and then to find out that an external force beyond your control is decimating your business. That has, in fact, happened with any number of sectors that depend people being in close contact with strangers. Conversely, you can do everything wrong and be in the right place at the right time. There is, in other words, a lot of noise in the system around what actions lead to what results.

With the simulations, on the other hand, people can experiment and see the outcomes of their decisions immediately. They can experiment with multiple decision frameworks and learn quickly, without making the big bets in the real world.

Making an impact

In this report, you’ll be learning from strategy practitioners – people working in or with companies that need to reconsider their strategic directions. They’ll share which tools they used and why, how the experience went and what the results are. Along the way, you’ll see how the old world of strategy has given way to the new. And as we work our way through the aftermath of a global pandemic and economic disaster, these tools will be even more valuable.

You know, that’s a great question. Transform! was conceived exactly two years ago, and it was designed to solve one very specific problem – how do we train leaders and managers and students, decision makers? How do we teach them the basics and the complexities of a successful transformation? Transform! was really designed with one very clear purpose in mind, and that was enabling people to successfully lead transformation at scale.

How did you come up with the format and the idea behind Transform! ?

Transform! followed closely on the steps of Scale Up!, the first simulation that we developed. Scale Up! was basically a crash course in entrepreneurship and company building designed for the Norwegian Innovation Agency and the Norwegian Cluster Program. Once we saw the success and the impact, engagement and enthusiasm of many, many types of executives, we said, wow, we shouldn’t limit our work to just to Scale Up!. We should see if we can develop more such simulations. And that led to the early ideas behind behind Transform!

What can you tell us about the actual development and how you work to develop such a simulation?

Not a lot of people know this, but Transform! was actually designed on an airplane flying from Oslo, Norway, to Istanbul, Turkey, middle of December 2018. I basically sketched out the whole concept – the ideas, the board and the cards and all the sort of interconnectivities on the flight down. So when we arrived in Istanbul, I was working with one of our startups, we drove to the hotel, it was pretty late and I sat down for a couple of hours in the hotel and basically finished the creation of Transform! that evening.

I could tell you we put a lot of work into it, but the reality is that the actual creation and the shaping and the design happened in a few short months from middle of December 2018 to early spring, 2019. So the reality is that Transform! was really designed in a couple of weeks. But it all started on that flight down to Istanbul two years ago.

Of course, there is a lot more to it than that.

Transform! is really built on my experiences over the last two decades, and notably a lot of my experiences helping companies transform over the last ten years. In Transform! we have modelled the genuine, real-life situation and challenges that face a new CEO and a new management as they step into the role as management of this new company. This may sound strange, but in my experience, a lot of new CEOs don’t really know what they are getting into. They may be great executives, but walking into a new company, with a new culture, structures, business models and innovation strategies – they all grapple through the initial ‘fog’. This ‘fog’, the early complexities, are a big driver and have been modelled into the creation of Transform!

Second, we should really also mention the role of the design. Our team – led by Jolene – has really put a significant amount of time and creative energy into the visual design. That has of course taken time, but the visuals make up an incredibly important part of the user experience.

Transform! being used in Copenhagen Business School in 2019 with a group of Masters students

You’ve now been running simulation sessions over the last two years. What are some of the big takeaways you have from working with Transform! and using Transform! in action?

We originally designed Transform! as a physical, paper-based face-to-face format. People were supposed to sit around the table. People were supposed to chit chat and work in small groups and compete with the other teams around the table. But, of course, COVID-19 accelerated something that we had been working on for a long time, which was how do we build the simulations in a digital environment? So over the last two years, we have run, on the last count, around 100 – 130 various simulations, big and small.

And it has just exceeded our expectations by tenfold or more.

People learn. So there’s been a number of big takeaways for us. Point number one – people learn. People learn so much more in this format, you can pack an MBA in a box and they’ll take it in in just a few days.

So the number one key point for me personally and what we have observed is just an amazing learning uptake. It doesn’t matter if you’re a board member, an executive, MBA student. Across the board, people just soak it in.

Point number two is it’s really, really, really complicated to successfully lead a transformation.

One of the things that we found over the last two years is that a lot of companies and a lot of executives will tell you that “we know transformation. We have a transformation roadmap in place even”.

But what they have is actually bits and pieces, it’s a little bit like you’re building a car and you only have two and a half wheels and half an engine. I mean, you can still drive it, but it’s not going to drive really well. A lot of people have said, “wow, this exercise, working with Transform! in action has really given us a much better understanding of what we’re missing. We thought we had a good roadmap in place. We realized we didn’t.”

So the first is learning. The second is the holistic view that people get. The third is really how impressed we’ve been with the larger partner community. Of course, Strategy Tools has about 80 some partners around the world. And it’s just been, you know, deeply enjoyable and really a privilege to see how partners have been able to pick up and absorb Transform! in action. And I mean, they’ve used it in Latin America with MBA programs, in Europe, with large industrial companies. There’s been sessions in Italy for education purposes. I mean, there’s just been more than I’m able to count.

This was not something we planned for. We didn’t plan explicitly for having partners go out and use these. Sure, we hoped for. But the whole idea of a partner-based network and distribution came later.

So those were the top three takeaways. Massive learning. Greater understanding of the missing pieces and finally, we’ve been so impressed with the partner network.

So you’ve been developing and naturally running a lot of digital sessions. What is the number one or two things that you see in the digital sessions that you run for Transform!?

We’ve now been testing out a variety of digital solutions, formats and platforms, and we do have a very, very ambitious long term vision for the digital simulations. I’m not quite going to share everything with you just yet, but what I can tell you is that we have a really, really interesting vision and roadmap for what the digital simulations is going to look like. Right now, I think we’re like we’re in level one or two.

We have a really good working solution. We have run and we still run various sessions around the world almost on a weekly basis. I see the digital simulation being an absolute pillar of what we do over the next 10 years. It it allows us to remove time and place. It allows us to work very, very interactively on a very time-efficient format. And as a facilitator, you can just take the conversation and process in so many different ways. You can expect to see a lot of development and a lot of news around the digital simulations in the coming years.

You briefly touched on it when you’re looking ahead, what do you sort of see as the as the future of Transform! for the next two years?

Yes, that’s that’s another great question that we ponder quite a bit, I would say that there’s really three things that matter to Transform! over the next two years. Number one, we’re going to get a lot more of our partners trained and certified both in the physical and the digital format, because we really, really believe now in the power of the partner network and how partners can build and expand their own business using Transform! as one of their solutions to take to market. So the number one thing is going to be expanding the training of partners.

The second thing is working with business schools. I’ve grown more and more excited about the potential that we see for working with business schools. We’re already working with some of the top business schools in Europe, the US, and Latin America. And we’re now looking at several different programs and formats and ways to roll out Transform! in 2021. If I look back to that that flight I mentioned going down to Istanbul two years ago, we never imagined we’d be in this position working with top notch business schools.

So the first is the partner network that we’re going to expand, train and certify. The second is the business schools. And the third is, of course, the upcoming book.

We’re currently writing the book for Building a Transformational Company. It’s going to fit perfectly with everything that we put into Transform! over the last two years. So I’m super excited about the partners. I’m super excited about the business schools, and I’m absolutely super excited about the the book and how it sort of brings all this together. Everything we’ve been working with and working on comes together in that book.

Final question, if you’re going to say one thing that’s really surprised you when you look back over the last two years, what would that be?

That’s a great closing question. I would probably say that the thing that surprised me the most was the complexity that is embedded in Transform!. We didn’t plan for this. I mean, we we built Transform! as closely as we could to the real life challenges, the real life work, the real life CEO projects that I’ve been working on over the last decade plus. And once we created that, we didn’t think much of it. It was just, you know, this is what it’s like and this is what it takes.

Number one feedback we’ve been getting from a lot of participants is, wow, this is complex and this is complicated. And our response initially was just like, yeah, it is. But the more we think about it, the more we reflect on it, we recognized that, you know, having that top management role successfully leading and driving through a successful transformation, it is incredibly complex. And we just have to train for it.

We have to recognize and develop the patterns and the tools and the visual concepts that allow us to successfully transform companies much better than we did in the past.

Just on a final note, I’m extremely grateful to everyone that’s been involved in that early design process, from our team, our early users, to our clients. It was Innovation Norway and the Norwegian Innovation Cluster program that really shaped some of those early, early formats, but then everyone on our team and all of our partners and business schools and clients and executives have also had a role, big or small, in shaping it. I’m extremely grateful.

And finally, I’m just really excited, excited about what is going to look like in two or three years time. But right now, we’re celebrating the second anniversary. And wow, you know, I think two years, even three years ahead, what is the fifth anniversary going to look like? I think that’s super exciting.

Thank you very much.

_________________________

Explore Transform! in a digital format