Co -creation of local companies that have begun to accelerate -"Open Innovation Real" roundtable talks Vol.1

This article is reprinted from an article published on the site "MUGENLABO MAGAZINE" operated by KDDI

When we talk about the open innovation and collaboration and co -creation environment of companies in the last 10 years, the existence of "full -time players" is the existence of "full -time players."It does not support individual companies, such as the support support of strategic consulting firms and venture capital, but play a wider range of platforms.

The majority is divided into a database with sourcing functions that search for collaboration and investment destinations, and a hands -on one that focuses on the business itself.The former was CRUNCHBASE and ANGELLIST, and the latter was an acceleration method launched by TechnoRs and Y Combinator.In particular, the latter is a fund, but in the subsequent rounds, there is a company -based program that has a stronger image of the connection with the company, and as you know, it has been worked on many in Japan.On the other hand, the leading company needed knowledge and understanding of advanced startup investment, and above all, in -house system, and it took several years to make full -scale efforts in full swing.

In this way, 10 years have passed since the opening of open innovation in Japan in Japan.How did each company's efforts and situations change?In this article, four companies that have been working on their own initiatives as a full -time player involved in this open innovation as soon as possible, and talked about the current location of co -creation in Japan.(All questions in the sentence are Mugenlabo Magazine editorial department, the answer is the following people and the title)

Participants EIICON COMPANY, Founder / Ayuko Nakamura 01Booster CEO CEO / Norbun Suzuki CREWW CEO / Tomoten Ichi / Ryohei Ishii / Ryohei Ishii / Ryohei Ishii

The four companies who have been working on open innovation and corporate collaboration have gathered, but first I would like to hear about the changes in the market environment from the last five to ten years.KDDI ∞ LABO started in 2011, so it became the oldest player

Ishii: Yes, KDDI ∞ LABO has been just 10 years this year, but at the time of the start, it was time to replace the smartphone to a smartphone.As the so -called "Gala Kay Business" collapsed, there was a clear issue on how to make a smartphone business.The starting point was that it would be better to collaborate with a new startup, considering that communication carriers need to differentiate in the app.However, in the mid -2010s, the winning or losing was clear in the app business, and the startup began to move the main battlefield to real or IoT.

If KDDI is only on the web, you may have been able to demonstrate its power, but when the business becomes "real", the selfishness will change.The idea of the partner coalition is still going on to challenge collaboration and co -creation with startups with the help of a large company with a real asset.However, there is still an impression that only a few companies are trying to promote such co -creation activities on their own.

Creww has started in 2012, but is there any change in trend?

Ichi: Many programs were held in the Tokyo metropolitan area after the opening of the open innovation program in 2012, but the initiatives outside the Tokyo metropolitan area were limited.In recent years, many local mid -career companies and startup co -creations have been held on the CREWW platform.In general, I feel that the compatibility between the seed period startup and the local mid -career companies are very good.For example, if the product has been verified to some extent and the sales are expanding, it is easy to imagine that startups are partnered with a major company.On the other hand, phases that verify prototypes do not require such a large customer base.Rather, it is often the case that the speed of verification is higher than the scale.

Indeed, the concept of collaboration and co -creation is expanding to local small and medium -sized enterprises.AUBA has started in 2017, but is it the same situation?

Nakamura: We started up in 2017 to make the open innovation practice of all companies, but local SMEs and other businesses were initially available for free.Open innovation is the story of the Tokyo metropolitan area, right?I think there was a feeling.

However, it gradually changed, and in 19 years, the municipalities were able to use the innovation budget under the preceding administration, and the momentum of attracting and supporting companies to the community increased.At first, it was a sense of problem that I could meet a startup and couldn't meet, but now I'm shifted to a phase, such as how to do social implementation and how to commercialize it.

Ichi: In many cases, a local mid -career company is a president of the owner, and the footwork is light, so you can quickly proceed to collaboration and verification.Startups should be different depending on the phase, so "regional mid-career companies X startups" are essentially Win-win.There are many companies that have excellent technology in the rural areas, so I think that collaboration examples with technology will increase in the future.In addition, I think that cross -borders such as Japanese companies and overseas startups will increase as needs in the future, so I would like to do this kind of device.

What are the specific examples?

Nakamura: For example, in the case of Asano Fisheries and AI Startup Factorium (Factorium) in Otemachi, which is a living in Miyazaki Prefecture, the aim of "veteran AI", which makes the intuition of fisheries the intuition of fisheries ai.In some cases, a solution to the aging of the population is searched by co -creation.

Currently, digitalization of various sector has been shouted, but in particular, the digitalization of regional revitalization, primary industries and the use of AI have not yet been implemented.On the other hand, there was almost no connection between a number of startups and local businesses in the city center, but the use of AUBA is progressing due to the establishment of a platform.

I think Zero One Booster also worked on a number of co -creation programs at the beginning of 2012, but how did the company think about the open innovation?

Suzuki: As the open innovation boom exceeded the peak and the uncertainty of the results has been highlighted, the difficulty of obtaining internal consensus has increased.Although the need for innovation is increasing in Corona's evil, it is increasingly the impression that additional investment is increasing because it is difficult to make reasonable decisions for opaque results.

However, in the medium to long term, companies that are active in innovation are more profitable, so there is a short -term performance dilemma here.Therefore, platformers must go beyond the time axis and corporate -by -corporate walls, continue to show data and examples, and support decision -making.In addition, innovation activities are usually driven by "specific individuals" instead of organizations.The support of the "individual" is also our role, and our "Innovation Person in charge" is a very meaningful place to support the person in charge.

New businesses are often unfamiliar with the series of failures, especially those that seek non -continuous growth, and the probability of success will inevitably decrease.What were the cases where mistakes occurred in startups and collaboration and co -creation with other companies?

Nakamura: It's dangerous to go before the contract.I often saw how to proceed without legal binding, especially small and medium -sized cases that proceeded without connecting NDA.In some cases, the NDA has nothing to do with the NDA, and the intellectual property was locked after the conclusion.Since the Patent Office is making guidelines for open innovation, I think that if you refer to such things, you will decrease.

Suzuki: Yes, open innovation is a mutual activity, and major companies and startups have culture.Do not blame the behavior of one of the parties.It is also true that major companies are more slow to respond to changes.A company that is used to choosing a subcontractor inevitably subcontracts the startup, and there are cases where the equal partnership cannot be established.

Personnel change of major companies also leads to the difficulty for startups.If the person in charge of a major company with a heat is transferred, the swing will come back and the startup will decrease.That's all right, but most of the time it is a negative system, so the continuity of measures cannot be maintained.To do so, it is necessary to change the culture and climate of the entire company into an open innovation mind, and I think that it has to work even if it takes a considerable amount of time.

Ichi: As a result of coming with many companies in this field for nearly 10 years, I have seen a good and bad pattern.Companies that are working well use the goal of open innovation as "creating an organization that can create continuous innovation", and the method of creating new businesses (business matching, CVC, accelerator) in the process passes by the end until the goal reaches the goal.I often think that there is.Of course, we will work on creating new businesses with all our strengths, but through this series of initiatives and experience, we will measure that our innovation stage is rising every year as a qualitative and quantitative KPI.

It is certainly difficult to put the time axis and perspective in the new business, isn't it?

Ichi Tomo: The bad pattern is that business matching and accelerator are implemented in a single shot to evaluate how much business has been born.With this, it will be difficult to continue the following year unless a business that produces a large sales suddenly.Even if a big business is born from the first time, there is no reproducibility after the next time, and I think that the medium- to long -term activity that accumulates know -how and evolves people and organizations will create the essential value of open innovation.。

Even companies in the architectural and civil engineering fields, which were not actually involved with startups at all, have been investing in the accelerator program and have been searching for the next innovation creation.In the case of a financial company, it starts with LP investment in venture capital at first, collaboration with startups, investing, launching specialized departments, searching for overseas companies, collaboration and investment with overseas companies.With a fairly innovative initiative, it is now self -propelled.If a company makes a mistake in the KPI settings for how the company will evaluate open innovation, it will lose its continuity, and if the settings are done well, we will often see the phenomenon that it will become an innovative organization every year.

Continue in the second half