1.

PARTICIPANT NAME: MONICA MARIA PALACIO MESA

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT

InNova as a key program to faster innovation process

Below there is a brief description about an existing product or service that was the main focus of my mini user needs
assessment project:

What do employees find useful or frustrating about InNova program as a tool to speed up
innovation/improvement process? InNova is a corporate program created in our organization to
propose, validate, follow and recognize ideas to innovate/improve our processes, products or
experiences, allowing people to deliver ideas and receive feedback from experts to assure feasibility,
viability and desirability. InNova is supported in the digital platform NOVA, this platform allows
people to connect with others coworkers and search other initiatives, upload their ideas and obtain
information about the process. The program is not being used much lately, and the question will be
how the users feel about the tool/flow process to manage ideas for innovation/improvements.

This subject was worked due to some hypothesis about might be unsatisfactory for users:

According to some comments received we are detecting that maybe the flow to propose and manage the ideas
suggested is bureaucratic and the feedback from leaders and experts take a lot of time or is not given. Many people
prefer to develop the idea first (without the program) and after implementation they use the platform to
participated in the recognize process.

3. INTERVIEW PROTOCOLS

People selected: 3 coworkers (users of the program)

Protocol

[Overarching Question]
What do employees find useful or frustrating about InNova program as a tool to speed up
innovation/improvement process, especially in the context to launch and implement a new idea?

[Introduction]
Hi, my name is Monica Palacio, and I’m here to understand better how you use and feel regarding InNova,
particularly to obtain information about the flow process to launch and develop innovation ideas. This
interview will take about 1 and a half hour maximum 2, during which time we’ll go through some questions
related to this subject. Throughout, I’d like you to treat me as if you’re describing the situation to someone who
isn’t familiar with InNova Program. I’m here to learn from you.
A couple of things before we start. To the extent possible, I will take your comments to be confidential. I will
aggregate all the comments from several interviews so your comments will be stay as confidential.
If I quote you in my final report, I will do so without identifying your name or specific role. If there’s anything
you really don’t want on the record, even if it’s anonymized, please let me know that, too. Also, this interview
is entirely voluntary on your part – if for any reason you want to stop, please let me know. We can end the
interview at that point with no repercussions for you of any kind. I can also throw out anything you’ve told me
until that point.
By the way, do you mind if I take an audio recording? This is just so that I don’t miss anything – no one other
than myself will have access to the recording. Thanks.
Do you have any questions for me? All right, then, let’s proceed.

[Warm Up]

 What do you think about innovation?

 Do you think the organization support innovation/improvement process?
 You have had the opportunity to propose ideas for innovation or improvement in the company?
 Do you use InNova program?

[Core]

I’d like you to think back to the most recent time when you used InNova to suggest a new idea to improve
or innovate. Can you tell me about that experience?

[Follow Up]

 When you thought about the idea you also had in mind to use the program InNova to evaluate it?
 Why do you think is important to use the program?
 How did you find out that there was a program of this type in the company? Was it clear how you could
use it?
 How did you proceeded to evaluate the idea? Do you use the program or do you develop the idea fist
by yourself? Can you explain me your specific process?
 Did you have to interact with InNova before this last experience? When and why?
 Did you have questions regarding the use of InNova?
 Do you remember some situation when you propose ideas without use InNova, if so when was that and
why?
 Did anything unusual happen using InNova?
 How often do you use InNova to process your Innovation/Improvement ideas?

[Core]

Now, I’d like you to think about specific in the flow to validated ideas in InNova. For example, when you
launch an idea and you need validation what happen?

[Follow Up]

 Can you describe the process? How many parts has the process and can you explain?
 Can you think of this flow? How is your perception about it?
 What made the process unpleasant? Why?
 What do you think about the flow? Is useful?
 [Core]

Continue with this interesting subject, I know that InNova has a tool to process innovation ideas that’s
support the program (NOVA) and it`s very important understand your experience in that part, so I would
like you think when was the last situation when you use the tool.

[Follow Up]

 What do you feel when you use the tool?

 Was difficult to use the tool? Can you tell me about the experience?
 Do you have the proper training or support to use the tool?
 Can you think of this flow? How is your perception about it?
 What made the process pleasant? Why?
 Do you receive feedback on time? How, when? Do you feel comfortable with the feedback and why?

[Core]

One of the things I’m most interested is in your general perception about the program, do you think
InNova is key to develop innovation? Why do you thing is important? And your suggestion to improve it?.
Can you think of any instances when you used the InNova and was a very good or bad experience?

[Follow Up]

 If you are in charge of improve the program, what would be your suggestions for change
 Is there anything else that might be relevant relating the experience of use InNova,?
 In general, do you believe the program has the elements that the organization need to support the
innovation process? Are you satisfied with InNova program?

[Conclusion]

Thank you – those are all the questions I have for you. If anything else occurs to you after I leave, please
don’t hesitate to let me know. I may be in touch with you again to ask a few follow-up questions. If you’d
like, I can show you a version of the report that I’ll write based on this interview. Do you have any
questions? Thanks again!

4. 20 AFFINITY NOTES
“I have completed 3 sessions of interviews and observations, each of at least 30 minutes in duration,
according to my interview protocol.”

A. Direct quotations from my interview participants.

- LR1: “The tool is not intuitive”
- PC2: “There are so many stages that I don't know remember well how goes”
- LR1: “The flow stablished in the tool generates complexity”
- LR1: “If the creativity is stimulated the innovation increases”
- SG3: “I feel that the impulse of the program has been lost from the administrative side”
 B. Observations or interpretations from my interviews.
- PC2: The focus of the program is being more administrative than influencing innovation
- LR1: There is little flexibility to develop changes to the tool
- SG3: The tool is not organic, it is used more to document than to process the analysis and
verification of ideas
- LR1: There is more focus on administration than on the momentum of the program
- SG3: The flow could be improved and simplified

C. Factual statements from my interviews that are not quotations.

- LR1: The notification mail for new initiatives arrives for all campaign`s Managers
- LR1: The platform cannot be used in the computers of the production cells because it does not
have access by an specific user
- LR1: the people without campaign role cannot give flow to the ideas in the tool
- LR1: Initial access is in English and generates the need to start with the change of language
- LR1: There are 7 stages in the tool to proceed with the idea

D. Notes that have not been included in the prompts above.

- PC2: “The openmind tool was simpler”
- LR1: There is more focus on administration than on the momentum of the program
- SG3: The process (flow) is too long to develop new ideas”
- SG3: “The tool is not friendly”
- PC2: “There are so many stages that I don't know remember well how goes”

5. AFFINITY WALL
6. FINAL REPORT

InNova is a program created in our organization to propose, validate, follow and recognize ideas to
innovate/improve. Some years ago the innovation program (OpenMind) was updated and supported to
NOVA tool to facilitate the process and get more visibility. The idea was to have a global digital solution to
deliver ideas and receive feedback from experts in a platform connected with a lot of new functionalities.
Nevertheless, the program is not being used much lately, and we are trying to identify users pains
regarding the program and especially about the tool. According to this and with the aim to obtain real data
we performed some interviews to evaluate needs from our users and try to focus our efforts to improve
this program because at the end “creativity increase productivity” and the best source for innovations are
people who know the processes and therefore can improve/change them. Throughout the interview
process, was evident two major situations that ar taking place: 1.The TOOL doesn’t have affinity to the
needs of the program and have several limitations and 2. The focus/priorities of the program are not
aligned with user expectation.

After the conversations made was clear that right now the tool does not generate value and its use is not
natural for users. As one interviewer say “The tool is not organic, it is used more to document than to
process the analysis and verification of ideas”. One big issue is that the tool can`t be easy modify to adapt
requirements from our side because is global and need a lot of validations and took a lot of time. Simply
things like configuration mails, leaders by categories, language or number/names of stages are not fit to
program needs. It`s so frustrating when the perception of the users is the program is been adapting to the
tool and not the way around. If the aim of the program is influencing people we need to assure the entire
process “be more simple and visual”. People need more support to think out of the box than spend time to
do the administrative process. When the people in charge of the program focus on generating more spaces
such as campaigns, directed questions or spaces of creativity, they generate more value for the innovation
activity. It is important to review the administrative burdens related to the handling of the tool and to
rethink how to redirect the program in this way.

After this process arise a strong and important question: It is necessary have a tool so robust and not very
flexible or we can even achieve a more simple process that really connects people and reduces the
administrative load? My proposal is to review this data with the management team and propose to
improve the program through (1) simplifying the steps, (2)promoting innovation spaces from
management, and even (3) eliminating the tool and proposing a simpler flow with simple documentation
to achieve a true innovation atmosphere to have more implemented ideas.