Exploring open innovation in the food industry
François Deprey, Managing Partner at SprintProject, spoke to the SIAL Newsroom about the SIAL Survey on Open Innovation sent out to industry players recently.
Open Innovation, as defined by Chesbrough, “encourages a more collaborative and open approach to innovation, where companies work with external partners to create value and remain competitive in the market.”
Could you give us a detailed presentation of the study?
The aim of this study is to provide a vision of the development of open innovation in the agri-food sector. It’s intended to shed some light on how to use this methodology for working on innovation for all the participants in SIAL and beyond. It’s a bit more than a working methodology. It’s a way of opening up these innovation issues to the outside world, as we often call it, open innovation. Today, it’s a practice that has developed across all industries, and which has been around for fifteen or twenty years in the food industry. First of all, manufacturers in the food industry are very attached to their R&D and to the specificity of their recipes. Product innovation is a very important issue. Over the last few years, a number of players have begun to open up their innovation processes to the outside world in an attempt to speed up their innovation model, innovate more rapidly and also take advantage of technological innovations that they are not necessarily capable of carrying out themselves. Historically, the agri-food industry has been highly skilled in its ability to formulate recipes and build innovative products. But it turns out that it’s not just about the product, but also about other aspects of a company’s activity. If I take the example of digital technology, which has largely flooded the transformation of companies over the last twenty years or so, digital technology obviously has less to do with the product and it’s not necessarily the skills that are at the heart of the activity of agri-food companies. So, in fact, the idea is to be able to grasp innovation from the outside. There are several ways of doing this. There’s the way of opening up innovation by working, which has been quite the case in the agri-food world with research centers historically identifying new ingredients, developing products with new benefits, whether nutritional or, more recently, that have less impact on the environment. But there are also innovation challenges in terms of processes, relationships, etc. So, in fact, the aim of this study is to provide an overview of the way in which companies today meet the challenge of being able to innovate on several dimensions at once, not just product innovation, and that means opening up to the outside world.
Historically, players in the food industry have opened up, and always have done so to some extent, with research centres, to be able to work upstream on product innovation or with historical partners on packaging, for example, but increasingly there is a need to turn to new players such as start-ups that will develop innovations and forge partnerships that can take several forms. Another goal of this study is to provide a sort of overview of the current practices of these players. To try and distinguish whether the larger players have slightly more developed structures in this respect, how the players approach this, whether they do it or not, and whether the innovations they’ve been able to carry out with outside partners, have borne fruit. Do they find it worthwhile, do they derive interesting benefits from it, to what extent do they feel it’s essential, how does it fit into their strategy in general and what form might it take? The idea is to have a study investigating the state of the art of open innovation in the food industry. And we’re trying to do this on a global scale to analyze it and come up with some conclusions that will enlighten SIAL participants about this type of method and international best practices.
And the study is currently ongoing?
Yes it is currently being carried out. We have begun an analysis. We’re working in three areas. The SpringProject teams, specialised in economic intelligence, are trying to identify the major trends in innovation and the themes being addressed by companies, based on all the information we can detect.And to make a qualitative assessment of the initiatives being taken in this area and what companies are finding out. Then there are two waves of studies. The first is quantitative, so that we can assess the number of players who have done something, what they are getting out of it, and a certain amount of quantitative data. At the same time, we’re working with several players who have initiated this kind of project, whether they be SMEs or large groups, or even investment funds in the food tech sector, for example. The idea is to assess their slightly more qualitative opinion of the potential of open innovation, and to take stock of what has been done in recent years, on the mutual interest between players, particularly between start-ups and major groups. A little 360 of how, open innovation can really help companies to collaborate in ways that are, I would say, beneficial to all parties
You mentioned start-ups and major industry players, who are the main targets of this study?
The purpose of the study is precisely to try and identify whether there are any differences between the players who are indeed major international groups, who probably have structures that are fairly well developed in this respect, and smaller companies that may not have the resources to set up dedicated structures, but which will rely on external support to do so. We also need to understand how this fits into the strategy of different companies, because today, let’s say, there are changes at work. Two main ones being the ecological transition and trying to have less impact. There is a significant number of start-up initiatives in these areas, which aim to identify whether the demand, need or constraints faced by all players will result in them turning to start-ups. The other dimension is the digital, which is not necessarily at the heart of the players’ skills, they are trying to incorporate innovation into their processes. In terms of targets, we’re looking to benchmark best practices, which will be more big groups focused, which have been doing this for a long time. But also to look at how things are starting to emerge on the side of structures that are more SMEs, in the agri-food sector, that want to initiate this kind of thing, speeding up their innovation process.
What criteria did you use to select the players for this study?
We worked in collaboration with SIAL to draw up a questionnaire and distribute it to the SIAL ecosystem, mainly targeting senior managers, either in general management or in the innovation department, so that we could see the people working on these issues and how they approach the theme of open innovation. Then we tried to get a representative sample of people to interview, so that we could get different points of view: the view of an SME, of a large company, of someone who is more involved in finished products, of someone who is more on the side, and then people who are also close to the ecosystem of start-ups and food tech, particularly investors. And the last point, which is important because it’s really SprintProject’s first area of expertise, is the ability to access open-source information to review the current state of the publication of initiatives, the major innovation trends, and how they relate to the food industry.
The driving force behind open innovation is the ability to innovate collaboratively on certain subjects where it’s virtually impossible to do it alone. So it requires a new model of partnership or collaboration which means as the name suggests the ability to open up the field of innovation. What does this mean? It necessarily involves issues of confidentiality and differentiation, but some issues require joint work.
One of the aims of the study is to demonstrate the collaborative nature of the issue and, in a way, to enlighten players who may still be wary of saying “yes, but innovation is in-house, it’s my own R&D, it’s done in-house, so what’s the point of turning to the outside world to try and work differently?” It’s a vision that’s tending to develop and be shared, because innovation concerns everyone. In fact, we can see that the big companies have adopted and structured this approach and know how to manage innovation.But there’s still work to be done to systematise this kind of approach, which can sometimes seem a bit inaccessible because companies have other short-term priorities and may find it difficult. It’s SprintProject’s job to help our customers, to sort out innovations that are right for them, and to identify solutions that correspond to their operational or strategic issues. Finally, one of the challenges we face is identifying the extent to which players are becoming more open to this working method, which, even though it has been established for some time now, is still relatively new for many players who, once again, in the current economic climate, have other priorities. It also requires time, organisation and working methods.
What advice would you give to an SME, for example, that wants to make open innovation central to its business strategy?
My first piece of advice is that you need to integrate more or less all the internal forces, Virtually all food companies have R&D teams that are constantly trying to develop new recipes and incorporate new ingredients.. innovation is in fact potentially broader than that. In other words, there are economic gains to be made. Sometimes there are areas of transition, such as environmental or digital issues, which require us to look outside for external skills. My second piece of advice is that this innovation strategy must be compatible with the company’s strategy. In other words, you see something coming along, you think you could do it, and then you throw yourself into projects in a rather opportunistic way, when in fact it’s more a model that needs to be structured. We need to be clear about our needs and define our expectations. You can look at everything that’s going on, but the idea is that when you start to form partnerships, they must contribute to something that makes sense for the company and not just an opportunity. And then the last point, which goes hand in hand with the latter, is to integrate methods. Like all innovation, there’s a certain amount of risk involved and that necessarily means putting energy into development and reducing the risk by being sure, once again, that you’re compatible with the solution you’re looking for., For example, large groups or even a SME and start-ups have different working rhythm.Thus, when you start working with a start-up, there are a certain number of rules to be respected in the way you work. Even when you’re working with several players on a very specific subject, the collaborative model or the production of collective intelligence requires a minimum of methodology if you don’t want to waste energy. The point is that behind that there are working methodologies, there is the ability to set up a cutting-edge monitoring system, and that’s what we help our customers with : being able to monitor innovation, identify its level of maturity and choose the right moment to seize it, depending on their own level of internal maturity. Some companies can’t necessarily take co-development too far, they need to already have solutions that are mature enough to integrate them.. I’d say three key words: mobilisation, compatibility with the company’s strategy and methodology, and structure.
How do you plan on sharing the results of this study?
We’ll probably have some initial results a few weeks beforehand, and we’ll certainly be sharing them with the press, etc. We’ll be talking about some very important insights to be learned from the study. I’ve given you a little bit, but I think we’ll have a lot more to go on from September onwards. We are currently carrying out the study, we will publish it during SIAL Paris. In fact, we’re planning a session on Saturday the19th of October, to share the main results of the study at a SIAL Talk. The idea is that all the participants of the show will be able to contribute. That will be one of the benefits of registering for SIAL Talks.
At SprintProject, what do you ultimately expect from this study?
We organised it in collaboration with SIAL, of course, but what we want to highlight is an approach, open innovation, which we think is extremely relevant to the sector. If it’s properly implemented, it can bring a great deal to all the players, including small businesses. Our aim is really to highlight this open innovation approach that we know so well, to show that it’s also, I’d say, in tune with the times.One of the challenges facing companies is to open up to the outside world and find collaborative models. In a way, there are fields of application that require a certain amount of competition and confidentiality, but there are probably others in innovation that can enable high-potential collaborations, going beyond the relationship between large groups and start-ups or SMEs and start-ups. The idea is to work together on innovation, and we tend to think that certain subjects require collaboration anyway, because you can’t do it on your own. Opening to the outside world is, from our perspective, a key performance factor. And we must do it using the right method.
Take the Open Innovation survey Join us at SIAL Paris as visitor
