They call it disruption and it is the way in which, in any creation process (development, production, creativity), something intervenes that modifies the usual dynamics, with disruptive and unexpected effect. A breaking point, a flash, that breaks up with the established paths.

In the economic field, the definition given by Clayton Christensen, professor at Harvard University, is very focused:  “Disruptive innovation is the effect of a new technology, or a new way of operating on a business model, which leads to completely change the logic present until that moment inside the market”.

To give substance to this observation, just think of what is more successful in the competitive challenge: create new needs and new ways for their acquittal or try to gain a place in the flow of market followers?

 

Disruption, breaking with old patterns to innovate

In the midst of the digital age it is easy to think that disruption can always and only come from technology. But that’s not the case. First of all because technology itself intervenes in the process of pure innovation not when it simply accelerates traditional dynamics (robotics for manufacturing, video surveillance for security), but when it introduces new paradigms in the construction and interpretation of reality (Amazon which also becomes a video platform with Prime, Uber that revolutionizes physical mobility through digital mobility).

Disruptive, therefore, is mainly a new way of thinking, which introduces new interactions and subverts current logics. But it is also a different interpretation of reality, where what was not there before arises from a relocation outside the box of pre-existing elements and dynamics.

Disruption could be described as breaking up with old patterns or detaching pieces of the system (of production, commercial, consumption, social, knowledge, perception, thought), combined with each other, and use them differently in new combinations, in new systems characterized by the sign of evolution.

It is an open conception of reality and its continuous construction, able to overcome the fences of disciplinary areas and contaminate worlds that may appear not at all contiguous.

This is why disruption is considered the main driver of open innovation or the business model that pursues innovation through the overcoming of the monolithic internal “Research & Development Division” in favor of external inputs: ideas, skills, processes  and  tools developed by third parties, even in production areas other than the reference one.

Impacting reality with open innovation

The concept of open innovation began to inspire business organization models starting in 2003, when the US economist Henry Chesbrough theorized it as a possible response to the standardization of globalization processes, which accelerate product lifecycles and contribute to supply saturation, driving investments in diversification.

Open innovation is opposed to the classic model of closed innovation, that is research behind closed doors, conducted within companies according to a limited interpretation within the perimeter of their resources and inclined to consider the excess of protectionism as a competitive advantage.

The open innovation paradigm, on the other hand, looks more like open source in computer science. It considers internal corporate boundaries to be a limitation and, on the other hand, considers as a way to create value the contribution of tools and skills that come from outside: startups, universities, research institutes, stakeholders, suppliers of goods and services, economists, jurists, creatives, venture capital,  competitions, talent scouting, incubators and business accelerators. The goal of open innovation is to acquire solutions tested by others – even in other fields and in other contexts – and internalize them in their management and production processes, creating in fact new systems, able to impact reality and shorten time to market.

 

Gathering and osmosis in the Open Innovation Centers

The relationship between the internal front of the company and the external front in an open process of innovation can be modulated in different forms and through various methods. In the best structured cases, the process is organized within a company Open Innovation Center or a think tank, led by an Advanced Advisor and participated by connecting professionals.

The Open Innovation Center collects elements from external subjects and functionalizes them in new production systems and/or new socio-economic joints. But the process is often two-way, with mutual contamination and creations of new variants, as in an osmotic becoming made of stimulations in both directions.

Large multinationals such as Samsung, the pharmaceutical company Lilly, and in Italy Banca Sella, Ferrero,  Enel, have opened their Open Innovation Centers.

And territorial systems such as that of Oltrepò Pavese have also been equipped, which has oriented it to the fields of agriculture and environmental tourism, putting specific skills in circulation: plant biology, forest sciences, natural sciences, agronomy, entomology, viticulture, herbaceous crops, ecology, animal husbandry and animal biology, geology, eco-tourism, environmental protection, economy and development in the rural environment, communication, training and education.

 

LifeCity World’s challenge

By applying as a generator of the future, LifeCity World also takes up the challenge of open innovation, applying it to the great themes of health and nutrition and combining it with the possibilities of protection and control offered by the blockchain.

Thanks to a forthcoming Open Innovation Center, the productivity of LifeCity citadels will respond to a transparent, incorruptible and secure food traceability model, guaranteed by the blockchain.

In the same way, the LifeCity World online marketplace, still under design and development, will be managed on a cloud platform, connected to blockchain technology and participated by the network of partners, customers and all the actors involved in the integrated LifeCity project.