Large and mature organisations, with their access to knowledge, capital and customers, are perfectly positioned to walk the road from invention to innovation; to turn promising breakthrough technologies and creative concepts into profitable and scalable business opportunities. However, these organisations rarely generate winds of creative destruction and instead start-ups disrupt them at an increasing pace (Anthony et al., 2018; Elsbach & Stigliani, 2018). Large and mature organisations struggle to innovate sustainably, in part because of their rigid organisational structures and processes that maintain the status quo (O’Reilly & Binns, 2019). To overcome this, organisations increasingly deploy ‘innovation hubs’. Innovation hubs are partially independent physical and managerial spaces intended as safe havens for exploratory activities. Examples of hubs are Xerox's’ PARC and Google X ‘the Moonshot Factory’. These are spaces where innovators find freedom to challenge the status quo and where there is space to consider alternatives, to experiment and to learn. Innovation hubs fuel the discussion of “what might be”.However, if organisations want to transform their business, they need to go beyond generating thought-provoking concepts. They need to implement promising concepts and integrate them with the rest of the organisation. Scholars call this gap that exists between concept generation and implementation the ‘Valley of Death’ (from heron: VoD) (Markham et al., 2010). It is crucial that organisations resolve issues related to the VoD if they want to reap the benefits of innovation. However, innovation implementation is a relatively under-examined field (Baer, 2012).Innovation implementations scholars predominantly focus on the proposed concepts. Questions arise, such as are the ideas ‘good’ enough? Are they ‘radical’? Do they serve an actual need? Alternatively, the innovator becomes the focal point of the study. There are stories (in both popular and academic writing) in which one well connected, head strong champion heroically shepherds an innovative concept into realisation, in resistance to incumbent forces. But it is risky for organisations to bet their future survival on the presence, capabilities and ultimately, success of lone champions who succeed despite organisational circumstances, not because of them (Dougherty & Hardy, 1996). Especially since failing to implement innovations often stems from factors beyond the control of champions8(Goepel et al., 2012). Thus, in this research, I take an approach to explore what organisational conditions help innovators to mitigate the VoD and achieve implementation.As a designer, I particularly focus on the relationship between design practices in innovation and the VoD. The Design Council states that design practices can mitigate the VoD (Kolarz et al., 2015). Others suggest they may actually aggravate the issue (Carlgren et al., 2016a). Recently, scholars have noted that designers need to consider implementation issues if they want to contribute to resolving organisational and society-level challenges (Dorst, 2019b; Norman & Stappers, 2015). In this thesis, I consider different conceptualisations of design in an innovation context (as problem solving and as inquiry) and shed light on the role of design in mitigating the VoD.Research DesignI performed this study using an action research approach (Reason & Bradbury, 2008a) in collaboration with a large heritage airline ‘FlyCo’ (kept anonymous for privacy reasons). FlyCo finds itself in a competitive landscape. Weighted down by large labour forces, considerable and long-term capital investments, and legacy management structures, FlyCo faces a battle to remain airborne while competing with both low-cost entrants (e.g., EasyJet) and high-quality ‘Gulf’ behemoths (e.g., Emirates). It operates in (for safety and security), a highly regulated and increasingly commoditised industry, which makes achieving innovation difficult yet rewarding. In response, FlyCo started an ambitious ‘architectural transformation’ (Safrudin et al., 2014) in which ‘design thinking’ was a central pillar to deliver a more customer-centred and cost-efficient service. This transformation required that FlyCo adjust its organisation to implement innovation projects more effectively. This situation provided a solid launching pad for this study. The research objectives, combined with the needs of FlyCo, informed the following main research question:How can design catalyse innovation implementation at a service organisation?Over a 14-month period, I embedded as an action researcher at ‘FlyCo’. I engaged employees from different levels of FlyCo to conduct actions as part of reflective, collaborative research cycles. The research contained three action research cycles (ARCs). Each ARC was performed in collaboration9with a distinct set of stakeholders and with different research aims. In the first ARC, my efforts focussed on building a network and an understanding of FlyCo and the VoD phenomenon. In ARC 2, the focus moved towards investigating conditions that contribute to a VoD with a focus on the role of design practices. In ARC 3, the focus again shifted towards how design interventions in organisational context could contribute to implementation success. Over the research period, I became increasingly immersed in FlyCo as my role shifted from being an outsider to obtaining increasingly influential positions (I became an interim manager in ARC 3 for example), which provided an opportunity to gather a rich dataset.During the embedded period, I employed multiple data gathering methods. Predominantly, I took part in- and observed corporate activities, resulting in 231 temporal observations (events). I captured observations and reflections in field notes, resulting in 426 pages of notes and drawings. Additionally, I gathered internal documents (such as strategies, project proposals, training manuals). Finally, 48 interviews were conducted at multiple intervals during the study. Of these interviews, 17 were semi-structured, audio-recorded, and transcribed, whilst 31 were conversational and recorded via hand-written notes. I initially analysed the data using a visual mapping strategy. Subsequently, a thematic analysis was performed using NVivo software. A breakdown between identified themes and existing literature finally informed a narrative analysis strategy. Together, this data collection and analysis strategy helped to observe nuances in FlyCo's innovation and implementation processes that can evade detection by other ‘outside-in’ research designs.InsightsThe data inform four sets of insights. Extant research on innovation implementation has focussed on product/manufacturing organisations (with historically large R&D departments) that aim to reach additional customers through new/improved products. In this context, managers and scholars noticed that R&D output did not reach controlled stage-gate New Product Development (NPD) processes. But innovation hubs are also increasingly popular at service organisations (Blindenbach-Driessen & Van Den Ende, 2014), which have different (and less structured) innovation processes. The first set of insights describes an exploration and re-conceptualisation of the VoD phenomenon in a service organisation context. I identify three10organisational unit types that contribute to innovation: exploration hubs, support partners and operational units. In this context, the metaphor of a singular ‘valley’ between two contributing units appears erroneous, as implementation challenges exceed the dichotomous relationship between design and production.A deeper investigation into the mechanism that drives the VoD shaped the second set of insights, which highlights the role of institutions, specifically organisational logics. At FlyCo, a constellation of three organisational logics and the absence of a recombination strategy fosters an environment inhibiting resource pooling between organisational units. The three logics inform conflicts on three issues: innovation priorities, innovation processes and problem frames. As logics guide legitimacy judgement, conflicts between logics lead to a Not-Invented-Here attitude from gatekeepers towards concepts from ‘foreign’ logics. Consequently, champions can’t gather the resources needed for implementation and their concepts end in a VoD.The third set of insights describes how 10 barriers contribute to the VoD. I identify four barriers related to organisation properties of FlyCo. A complex and siloed organisation, the absence of a shared service vision, decentralised innovation portfolio management, and a competing internal innovation marketplace stimulate a VoD. Two barriers describe project characteristics related to the VoD: founding problem frames in an inferior domain and proposed solutions with a weak fit with the existing service system. Two process-related barriers highlight how engaging stakeholders late in the innovation process and inadequate communication of project decisions contributes to a VoD. Finally, two barriers describe how the organisational set-up of an exploration hub contributes to a VoD: when there is no ‘Shadow of the Future’ and when hubs have limited access to resources, they struggle to mitigate the VoD.The fourth set of insights explores the relation of design practices with innovation implementation. When viewed as a problem-solving approach, I exhibit how design practices contribute to mitigating implementation issues by fostering more holistic concepts and an innovation process with engaged and aligned stakeholders. However, as an inquiry process, design practices contribute to a VoD when projects are reframed such that the aspired value shifts. A VoD then appears in two situations: if the new working principle requires new stakeholders (not part of the founding problem frame) to become involved, or if not, all involved stakeholders accept the new frame. In11addition, I deployed design practices to create new organisational infrastructure which fosters innovation implementation success. These practices inform a sense of shared ownership and novel organisation designs, but they also introduce challenges that require further investigation.Contributions and GuidelinesOne principal contribution to literature is the reconceptualisation of service innovation implementation. Instead of three sequential phases, ‘elaboration’, ‘championing’ and ‘production’ (Perry-Smith & Mannucci, 2017) are three reiterating micro-processes. These micro-processes constitute two innovation-to-implementation process streams. In one process stream, innovation teams solve ‘innovation challenges’ (Dougherty & Hardy, 1996) through concept elaboration and production. In the other stream, championing in the organisation sphere aims to solve ‘innovation-to-organisation challenges’ (Dougherty & Hardy, 1996). In line with this conceptualisation, I propose to define the VoD in this context as ‘when concept development terminates because champions fail to gather the required resources for further development because of innovation-to-organisation challenges’.Second, I propose a classification of three types of organisational units involved in innovation. In service organisations, achieving innovation requires mitigating gaps between (1) explorative units, (2) support resources, and (3) operational units. I challenge whether the dichotomous conceptualisation of a VoD does justice to the complexities of achieving alignment for reform within service organisations.The findings add to a growing body of knowledge that considers the role of institutions in realising (service) innovation. I add that, besides on an ecosystem level, organisational level ‘Logics matter when coordinating resources’ (Edvardsson et al., 2014) in service innovation. I identify three issues where misalignment between organisational logics hampers innovation implementation: innovation priorities, innovation processes and problem frames. I propose that besides contextual, spatial, and organisational boundaries (Antons & Piller, 2015), organisational logic boundaries can trigger a Not Invented Here attitude.Insights from this study suggest a complicated relationship between design innovation and the successful implementation of these innovations, which I call the ‘Design Implementation Paradox’. Design principles and practices related to experimentation, experiential learning, and embracing12diversity contribute to implementation success. Practices related to embracing diversity, user-centricity and materialisation contribute to resolving innovation-to-organisation challenges and mitigating logic conflicts, and thus to implementation success. However, design can also contribute to a VoD when reframing leads to a shift in the stakeholder field or when champions cannot convince involved stakeholders of a new frame. This study represents an initial exploration into this relation, but more research is needed.The final contribution to theory is 10 organisational barriers identified that contribute to the VoD in a service organisation. For example, by exhibiting how an internal innovation ‘marketplace’ encourages competing behaviour as opposed to collaborative behaviour, which hinders innovation implementation.The insights inform six guidelines for managers, specifically for those who shape organisational conditions, to design organisational infrastructure that promotes innovation implementation. These guidelines describe organisational infrastructure that contributes to mitigating the VoD:1. To resolve innovation-to-organisation problems, service organisations can use innovation hubs because this infrastructure facilitates the required social dynamics.2. To avoid a Not Invented Here attitude, the infrastructure of these innovation hubs can promote institutionalisation and legitimisation of innovation concepts.3. To motivate aligned innovation processes and ‘implementable’ concepts, the infrastructure of these hubs must act as a ‘shadow of the future’.14. To align decisions making across organisational units, a service vision - which describes what value the organisation wants to create in the future - should be formulated and shared.5. To ensure alignment between resource allocation and the innovation vision, and to spot potential VoD issues, centralised innovation portfolio management can be applied.6. To align the innovation portfolio with the current technological and organisational system, the service system-fit framework can be applied.1 An example of such infrastructure is when incentives of innovation hubs relate to implemented innovations, not merely proposed concepts.13This research emphasises the need to study implementation in design research, if designers aim to realise societal impact. Design education needs to adjust to fit the more strategic role that design is assuming. If design is indeed going ‘beyond design’ (Dorst, 2019b) to contribute to solving the world challenges, then we need to go beyond teaching future designers how to generate innovative interfaces, products, and systems. We need to teach them how to contribute to implementation and, ultimately, impact. This implies assuming a broader understanding of design, offering students tools and skills to become more sensitive to organisational context and helping them understand what influences implementation and what strategies they may pursue to achieve implementation. This requires a realisation that the road to implementation is paved with team players and that besides being great pitchers, designers need to learn how to knock the ball out of the park.Above all, this research emphasises the limits of the ‘rogue innovator’ narrative and provides principles for organisational leaders of service organisations that face transformation to mitigate their dependence on innovation champions and instead design organisational infrastructure that facilitates innovation implementation.

Organisations find it more and more difficult to deal with our changing times, as our world has drastically changed over the last decades. This has led us to believe that organisational theory and practice from the last decades just does not hold up anymore. They have created organisations that made sense then, but do not necessarily now. Organisations themselves need to change in order to keep up with this sped up world. To achieve better success, many organisations are (constantly) entrenched in large-scale change efforts. However, these do not guarantee improvement, with various studies suggesting only about 25 to 50% of these efforts succeed, and numbers are declining. Given the shortcomings to current organisation design theory and change management practices, a new approach could better link theory and practice to increase practical validity.
Therefore, strategic design is used as a new approach to describe organisations, their design and change processes. The research question following this idea is:
How can strategic design be of value in the understanding of and quest for progressive organisations, their design and the design and realisation of accompanying change efforts, to survive and thrive in the context of 21st century challenges? The research focuses on progressive organisations: those that are as ready for the present and future as possible and that (aim to) achieve three distinct abilities: engagement amongst employees, organisational agility and organisational ambidexterity. The focus on design leads to a new view on organisations as a set of organisational blocks and their connections. The approach, based on literature on progressive organisations, insights into design and prototyping and learnings from practice, is specifically human-centred. Organisations are defined from the viewpoint of the employee. The goal of this approach is to understand the organisation in a different way and make it possible to build a new organisation together with the employees in an iterative manner. The various organisational blocks are: raison d’être, environments, culture, grounding and action agenda. In order to achieve a progressive organisation, built on the aforementioned blocks, lessons from design and practice are combined to argue that the only way to deal with complexity is through iteration and repeated learnings. Based on this understanding, (semi-) controlled revolutions become the new approach to change efforts. The end-goal should not be to design or deduce static organisational plans, but to (constantly) adapt to the changing conditions, with the realisation that not all things can be predicted or controlled. This iteration is depicted in the figure to the left. Given this understanding, a revolution is guided by three principles: going from planned to hacked, not forcing, but inviting people to join the effort and to stop managing the effort, but going viral.
In order to increase the probability of successful change, and to increase the usefulness of this research, a revolution checklist is presented. Together, they encompass all aspects of the revolution that should be actively pursued and monitored. The checklist consists of six categories (depicted above), with various additional elements each. These categories are: be broad about it, approach from all angles, talk about the future, change by changing, take one step at a time and build on 21st century technology.

This master thesis is written for the master program Strategic Product Design with the Belgian company Barco NV as a client. At the beginning, the main objective was to gain a better understanding on the current situation of the organization around foresight activities, their barriers and challenges. The aim was to later develop a solution that could help them to overcome those challenges discovered and to have a more proactive attitude towards the future.
Barco NV is a well-known technology company with a tradition as a hardware manufacturer. Barco is currently going through a digital transformation and counts on a renewed strategy that also considers customer centricity and business innovation as starting points for innovation as relevant as technology. However, in practice this is much more complex, and the firm is step by step evolving into that ideal. The company tends to end up focusing mostly in the short term. This happens, among other reasons, because of a lack of skills, a non-tangible or workable company vision, and the self-pressure on meeting their economic plans. This causes the proposition of short-term businesses and therefore limits the explorative attitude in the firm. To support in this challenge, the initial phase of the thesis was focused on gaining a better understanding on the current challenges in Barco around foresight activities. As such, literature study in corporate foresight and some of its methods like scenario planning was employed. In parallel, internal research based on interviews with Barco employees gave the first keys to discover the barriers that the firm was facing and the feeling towards them. Thanks to the research done and the insights gained in Barco, the focus was on defining and co-creating a workshop. This workshop would enable Barco teams to shape future scenarios and improve their foresight skills. However, due to certain events that were taking place in Barco, this solution couldn’t be pursued and a new opportunity emerged.
The Scenario Creation workshop was upgraded into a theoretical framework, which was developed with the input of three technology corporates and the recommendations of two consultants. All these professionals had links and personal interest in topics around innovation, foresight, design thinking and strategy. This framework was created to support Barco in having a better and holistic understanding on the business context in which the firm operates and its surroundings. In this way, it will help them in anticipating to changes in the three horizons of innovation. At the same time, it brings a change in mindset where the validation of hypotheses about future innovations plays a crucial role by involving external experts and end users in the scenario creation process. Finally, it brings a better way to communicate innovation and to test future scenarios: externally, to get them challenged by experts, and internally, to create a shared language for innovation. The foresight framework is characterized for combining design thinking principles, like user-centeredness, iteration, validation, creativity, inspiration and abstract and concrete thinking, with deep knowledge in foresight activities and scenario planning.

To stay competitive in future businesses, the Pon Equipment and Pon Power-group introduced Area 52 two years ago. An independent business unit operating with full focus on starting- and improving innovations within the business group. In here, the innovation strategy is aligned with the long-term strategy of the PEPP-group and an innovation process is introduced as well. All innovative initiatives that contribute to improving the core-business of the companies, should be created in the operating companies itself. These are called ‘Area 1 initiatives’. Innovations related to the core business but are more or less new, get support from Area 52. These are called ‘Area 2’ initiatives. Innovations that deal with new business models and eventually might compete with the current business, are developed within Area 52 and are called ‘Area 3 initiatives’. Their vision is that operating companies in the group should be self-regulatory for their Area 1 and Area 2 innovations. To this day however they don’t have a structure or process for this. Therefore the challenge has been to design a framework that enables operating companies of Pon Equipment and Pon Power to set up their own innovation process, and support employees to be involved with innovation. The framework enables, in three steps, operating companies to support their employees to be involved with innovation. First it is about understanding the fields of innovation. Second, these fields can be connected and made concrete by choosing innovation tracks. Lastly, after a track is defined, an innovation process can start. These steps were validated by employees from both Pon Power Netherlands, and Pon Equipment Norway. They see the added value of the different parts of the framework. However, the last challenge is to keep people involved, to get the mass of the organization tipping towards involvement with innovation. There are several types of employees in the organization. Every operating company has to appoint an innovation expert. He or she should understand different types of people; their current behavior and the desired behavior. By looking at different triggers, they can all be activated in a different way. The innovation expert has all the knowledge about the framework and has complementing tools and processes ready to start a track of innovation. When enough people are involved in a track, and stay involved in new tracks, the mass might tip towards an innovative mindset within the operating companies.

As acquiring design thinking by organizations become a lighthouse for long-term competitive advantage for some, its adoption becomes more important. Companies on this journey face different types of resistance and challenges laid out in this thesis. As networks offer a different context and opportunities for learning, this thesis tries to answer the research question "How can companies overcome the barriers of embedding the designer mindset in their organizations through the support of an inter-organizational learning network?". The research conducted clarified the process of embedding design thinking in organizations by actors defined as "Design Advocates" and proposes a inter-organizational network framework for development of knowledge in what regards of overcoming barriers of embedding design thinking at organizations.

Today’s business environment is highly dynamic, uncertain and unpredictable. Leading corporates that used to be long-time leaders of their industry are being disrupted by new, digitally enabled business models of relatively small start-ups.
Traditionally AH’s competitors are other supermarkets that offer similar value
propositions. In recent years new players have entered the industry offering similar
products in a different way. This makes the competitive landscape more and more
difficult to monitor. AH screens direct competitors on price and quality of products. As industry boundaries are blurring and disruptive forces are arising, large companies need to find new, innovative ways to compete. This leads to the research question of this thesis: Which future steps are recommended for Albert Heijn’s innovation journey in order to cope with a rapidly changing environment?

The development of new concepts is carried out at AH’s headquarters (HQ). Therefore, the employees working at HQ were the focal point of this research. Research methods included qualitative interviews and a literature review. Most importantly, the researcher gained insights into the organization by working with the “Food Rebels”, an internal innovation team, and by introducing various design interventions.

The world will become more and more pressed to deliver healthy and sustainable food to the population. However, to achieve the next step in innovation more holistic solutions need to be designed to have an impact on the whole food chain. These observations resulted in the first steps to build a Food Innovation Network in 2018. This thesis explored the challenges and opportunities at the beginning of organising networked innovation. The research activities were conducted in The New Farm, a new initiative of the municipality of The Hague to support innovation in the food industry, and a new research group of The Hague University. The conducted research identified three main findings. Firstly, the importance to foster a sense of community in the network. Secondly, the need to overcome the initial barrier to take action. Lastly, the call for additional support in setting up collaborative projects between partners. Three concepts were designed based on these findings to support the first changes in the Food Innovation Network and aid them to unlock their potential.

More and more people are flying. The industry increases at a rate of 5% per year and is predicted to keep on doing so for the next 10 years (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, n.d.). In order to offer their customers more destinations to travel to, an increasing number of airlines are cooperating with each other within alliances. SkyTeam, the company for which this project was executed, currently is the second biggest airline alliance worldwide. In 2012 SkyTeam introduced SkyPriority: a set of eight privileges for customers with a first or business class ticket and for customers within the highest tiers of the airlines’ frequent flyer programs (FFPs). These SkyPriority privileges, such as priority check-in and priority boarding, make alliance-wide travelling faster and more convenient. However, after the introduction of this service in 2012, no new services were added for this group of Highly Valued Customers (HVCs).
PROBLEM STATEMENT
The resulting challenge for SkyTeam is to develop a proposition for SkyPriority customers that fits the desires of the wide variety of customers and is differentiating among other highly innovative airlines and alliances.
In this graduation project, possible directions for such a proposition are explored.
APPROACH
To gain insights in SkyTeam, extensive research was done on the company, SkyPriority and the industry in which SkyTeam operates. In addition, a case study was performed on one of the member airlines in order to map out the implications of the different types of partnerships and regulations on the customer. To gain insight in the journey of SkyPriority customers, 26 SkyPriority customers were qualitatively interviewed. In addition, 50 SkyPriority customers participated in a quantitative study, based on the ‘Elements of Value’ theory of Almquist et al. (2016). Hereafter, all insights from the customer research analyses were combined and led to the concept of a digital personal assistant. After an iterative process with feedback from the member airlines, multiple evaluation sessions and user testing with a mock-up, the concept was developed into a final proposition: Cura.
SOLUTION
Cura is a digital personal assistant that can be integrated as functionality into the mobile application of the 20 member airlines. It aims to create consistency between journeys with multiple airlines and reduce the experienced stress and hassle when travelling. By automatically collecting upcoming flight-details from the e-mail inbox of the customer, the assistant is able to provide him with the right information at the right time throughout the whole journey. In addition, it shows the customer the privileges he can make use of, taking into account his cabin service, FFP status and the airport he is visiting. By doing so, Cura aligns the customer’s expectations of the trip with the actual experience. Moreover, the assistant can be used regardless of the airline the customer is flying with, as long as it is a SkyTeam airline. As a consequence, the customer doesn’t have to download an extra app, but can keep using the app of his most frequently used airline. This not only increases the relevance of the apps of the 20 airlines when travelling with multiple airlines, but also creates consistency between the different journeys of the customer.
IMPLEMENTATION
In order to deliver the most accurate information possible, several requirements that are important for the well-functioning of Cura were listed. To realize the assistant, it is recommended to initially break the proposition down into a minimum viable product (MVP). Although this version of the assistant wouldn’t yet be able to give intelligent suggestions (based on e.g. personal preferences, time, location and past behavior), it would already fulfill the most urgent needs of the customer: taking away stress and confusion and creating consistency between the different journeys. After this, the recommended improvements will result in a more personalized and complete version of the assistant.
VALUE FOR SKYTEAM AND THE MEMBER AIRLINES
The service increases the customers’ benefit when travelling with the SkyTeam airlines, fosters the loyalty of existing SkyPriority customers and could attract new customers. Moreover, the concept responds to the wish of the member airlines to become more digital, but also allows them to customize and deliver the service as being their own. Worth mentioning is that there currently is no other alliance that offers such a product to its HVCs. Therefore introducing Cura would, as desired, differentiate SkyTeam among highly innovative airlines and alliances.

By 2027 75% of today’s Fortune 500 companies will be gone. Randomly pursuing different ideas and hoping that at least one of them can turn into something innovative is not enough anymore. We need to design organizations that can continuously create human-centered innovation. The construct of design-led ambidexterity (DLA) can support us in doing so.

This graduation project was carried out together with Barco with the intention to unlock the innovation potential of its employees by creating a solid foundation for DLA. To do so, a thorough qualitative research was carried out to discern the challenges Barco faces, its current process structure and an optimal way to develop design capabilities. These aided the design of a new solution that will help Barco reach the state of a well-orchestrated innovation flow supported by employees who share the same mental model and level of capabilities.

The aviation industry is a fast moving and extremely competitive environment, where companies need to continuously invest in order to be at the forefront of innovation in the eyes of the customers, hence always delivering an excellent service.
This graduation project was carried out at KLM, the Royal Dutch Airlines, in the department of the Operational Excellence. KLM Operations are proud of their unique way of working allowing for a mutual reinforcing relationship between Operations (namely all the processes connected to the aircraft's’ flying) and Development (namely X-Gates or any other operational department willing to improve). Such a collaboration is referred to in the literature as Ambidexterity. The assignment addresses this collaboration:
“Design a way of working for X in Operational Excellence that supports safety and regulations, copes with variability of activities needed, adds speed and flexibility while integrally lowering costs. The new design (namely a vision, a visual or an infrastructure) should make sure that, step-by-step and over time, all employees are able to work on exploration and exploitation activities to bridge the gap from corporate vision to product implementation.”
The research was carried out with an Action research approach, which saw mainly the deployment of semistructured interviews and stakeholder mapping exercises. The results allowed to define the focus of the study, the “Lack of vertical alignment”, the main barrier to the project's’ implementation. In order to bridge this gap, a visualization of the unique way of working of Operations was produced, in order to realign the organization towards greater employee engagement and purposeful results. The design aims at aid the first steps the organization is undertaking towards a more ambidextrous organization, by triggering conversations and engagement in the employees.