Employees who may be appropriate choices to run innovative services simply do not have the background and skills to take the company to the next area of innovation. For example, if a company is interested in offering mobile services to customers, they need employees who understand mobile technology, commercial terms and how to work mobile services into the existing business environment. The skills to provide the problem solving, creativity and new ways of thinking about the next wave of services need to come from outside resources.
A "factory environment" that includes rigid processes may work in running a business that needs clear compliance tracks, legal contracts and many standardized processes. But that kind of structure does not work when trying to launch a new service. Following prescribed rules set out in rigid processes is extremely labor intensive and time consuming, which works against the goal of innovation. Companies need to be flexible, adaptable and fairly quick to move if they plan to launch innovative services.
Companies need to manage their financial expectations regarding innovation. Launching new services requires building, testing, learning, piloting and then possibly making changes and trying again. The innovative service may not realize any revenue within the first 18 months because of the start-up costs associated with it. Managing expectations of what the product or service will realistically yield over a period of time is crucial.
If a pilot of the new technology was successful, then the company must decide if it's a team or a product that it should acquire. Operating the new technology internally too soon after launch comes with risks of a high degree of failure, however. In other cases, the decision might be to partner with a third party via a licensing agreement to manage the new technology. Building the technology internally is generally a lesser-used option because companies lack the resources to build, test, launch and maintain the service completely independently.