WOIConversations – 第二季 – 第05集 – 从思维到指标：与Aurelia Engelsberger探讨如何让开放式创新落地生根

欢迎来到世界开放创新对话。我是马克萨·博格斯，埃因霍温理工大学开放与协作创新专业的教授。

Welcome to the World Open Innovation Conversations. My name is Maxa Boghers, I'm a professor of open and collaborative innovation at Eindhoven University of Technology.

我是玛丽索尔·梅嫩德斯，一名开放创新领域的热情倡导者。

My name is Marisol Menendez and I'm an open innovation and Enthusiast.

我们非常高兴奥蕾莉亚·恩格斯伯格能加入我们。玛丽索尔和我都对你很熟悉。我们曾以多种方式合作，包括研究和世界开放创新大会。但对于还不认识你的听众，首先欢迎你。感谢参加我们的播客节目。

And we're very happy to be joined here by Aurelia Engelsberger. Both Marisol and I know you quite well. We've been working together in different ways, even on research and for the World Open Innovation Conference. But for those who don't know you Aurelia, first of all, welcome. Thanks for joining our podcast here.

你能简单介绍一下自己和你的背景吗？之后我们会继续向你提问。

Can you say a little bit more about yourself and your background? And then we'll follow-up with some more questions for you afterwards.

当然。非常感谢你们的邀请，玛丽索尔和马塞尔。很高兴能来到这里。

Yeah. Of course. Thank you very much for the invitation, Marisol and Marcel. I'm very happy to be here. Yeah.

我是奥蕾莉亚·恩吉斯伯格，在德国出生长大。现居慕尼黑，但也在国外生活过几年。目前我是Omen Platform的首席执行官。

So I'm, yeah, Aurelia Engisberger. I'm born and raised in Germany. Right now I live in Munich, but I also, yeah, stayed a couple of years abroad here and there. But I can also talk about it a little bit later. Right now, I'm the CEO of Omen Platform.

这家公司致力于支持组织进行转型。我基于博士期间对开放创新与人力资源交叉领域的研究创立了它。我的专业背景是组织心理学。这些就是我的基本情况。

That's a company that supports organization during their transformation processes. And, yeah, I founded that company based on my PhD, which I did on the intersection of open innovation in HR. And by background, I'm actually an organizational psychologist. But that's I think that's about me at Madison Need to Know at the beginning.

不。而且我认为，感谢你的介绍。正如你所说，我个人觉得你经历中特别有趣的是，你从博士阶段直接过渡到创办公司，这实际上是在理论与实践之间架起桥梁，正如我们社区常讨论的那样，而你正在亲身实践这种生活。因此，我很想多听听这段历程，特别是你为何以及如何决定从学术环境转向实践，尤其是创办自己的公司？能否分享更多细节，关于这个故事的动机和过程？

No. And and I think well, thanks for that introduction. And as you say, I think what what I think I personally also find interesting about your journey is, as you say, you move from the PhD to actually starting that company, so really sort of bridging theory and practice in the way that we like to talk about it as well within our community, and you are living that life. So I think it would be really interesting to hear a little bit more about that journey, how and maybe why did you decide to move from the academic setting to more practice and especially with launching your own company? Can you share some more details about that, the why and how of that story?

实际上还有更多背景，因为我并非直接从理论转向实践，而是经历了实践→理论→实践的循环。我16岁就以银行学徒身份开始工作，在那里工作了五年后意识到——或许我不想一辈子卖保险。于是我开始攻读工商管理学士学位（非常传统的选择），但后来专注于人力资源方向，因为我发现自己对人的行为和决策机制特别着迷。而在我看来，传统商科课程对人的关注远远不够。

Actually, there is a little bit more to add because I didn't just move from theory to practice, but I actually moved from practice to theory and then to practice. So I actually started working as I was 16 with an apprenticeship at the bank and I was working for five years at the bank and then I realized, maybe I don't want to sell insurances my whole life. So I started actually a bachelor's degree in business administration, really classic. But then I focused on HR because I realized I'm really interested in the people and how they make decisions. And even the bachelor's in business administration was, from my point of view, not enough about the people.

所以我攻读了心理学硕士学位。之后我希望更深入进行研究，因为在学业期间和毕业后，我一直在不同行业从事人才发展与组织发展工作，积累了丰富的实践经验——特别是在塑造企业文化和激励员工方面。我总觉得这些领域还有更深层的原理需要探索，这促使我从实践再次回归理论，在该领域完成了博士学位。

So I did my master's degree in psychology. And then from there, I wanted to dive a little bit deeper into research because next to my studies and also after my studies, I've worked in different industries in people development, organizational development. So I've gained a lot of practical experiences, especially when it comes to how to shape cultures and how to motivate people. I felt like, ah, there's a little bit more needed to understand about that. And this is why then from practice I moved again to theory and did my PhD on that field.

基于实践经验，我非常清楚自己想在理论上深化理解哪些问题。读博期间我就决定：一定要把这些研究成果带回实践领域，这正是我的核心动力。

I knew exactly from my experiences in practice what I want to understand better in theory. Yeah, during my PhD then I thought, okay, I definitely want to do that research to bring it back into the field. That was my motivation.

这非常有意思，正如Marcel所说，我们始终致力于在各种活动中融合理论与实践，你在世界开放创新大会上也强调这点。这是我们持续努力的方向，虽然现实中理论和实践常由不同角色承担，需要建立沟通桥梁。但你这种在理论实践间循环往复的模式特别有启发性。现在你专注经营公司，如何继续保持与理论的连接？如何持续搭建这两个世界的桥梁？

This is very interesting because as Marcel says, we really enjoy bridging practicing and theory in the various activities that we do all the time, and you believe that as well in the World Open Innovation Conference. This is something that we are continuously trying to work on, but it seems that sometimes have separate roles, separate people doing that and then you can create communication, but it's especially interesting this way of going back to theory, bringing that to practice and trying to do this continuous intertwining of both worlds. Now that you are dedicated to your own company, how do you bring that back to theory and how do you continue living this bridging of the both worlds?

说实话Marie，这确实是个巨大挑战，有时我感觉像在过双重人生。 bridging（架桥）本身就很困难——即便我有实践经验后再读博，仍感觉那是完全不同的世界。那种理论化的思维方式转换，以及把理论重新转化为实践方案的过程，都让我遇到很多障碍。比如如何用通俗语言向从业者解释我的研究成果就是个大难题。

Yeah, to be honest, Marie, so that's such a big challenge because I feel like sometimes I'm living two lives. It's really difficult to bridge it to be honest, like it's a very big challenge. Like I realized that even coming from practice and then doing my PhD, I felt that was a completely different world. I was like, this is so theoretically, you know, like changing your mindset and to understand more the theory behind it and then bringing it back into practice again. I had a lot of problems and also, you know, explaining what I have researched in easy language so that practitioners understand what I'm trying to say.

这对我自己来说是个陡峭的学习曲线。现在我们正努力用客户能理解的方式呈现工作成果，将其转化为实践语言。但同时我们仍坚持研究：与大学保持紧密合作，持续申请资助项目（特别是在AI领域开展大量校企联合研究），不断将新研究成果投入应用。不过我认为最大挑战确实是语言鸿沟——因为本质上我们面对的问题是相通的，理论和实践本就相互需要：学术界需要企业，企业也需要学术界。

So there was a really big learning curve for myself. And now, we're trying to make it easy, understandable for our customers what we do and really break it down into practical language. But at the same time, we still do research because we work together closely with universities, we always apply for funding projects, especially right now in the field of AI, we do a lot of research on that together with universities and we keep doing new research and applying it into practice. But I feel like the biggest challenge is the language, to be honest, you know, because the problems are everywhere the same, kind of, you know, we both need each other. Theory is practice, so research and universities needs companies and the other way around.

但我觉得语言是最大的挑战，工作方式也是。以世界创新大会为例，你们将研究者和实践者聚在一起，但即便看看会议安排之类的，实践者的会议方式与研究者的截然不同，对吧？包括结构、工作方式、时间安排等方方面面。我认为这是个巨大障碍，也许正因如此两者交集甚少——毕竟沟通和工作方式都完全不同。

But I feel like the language is the biggest challenge and also the way of working because also with the World of Innovation Conference, you bring together researchers and practitioners, but then I feel like even when you look at meetings schedules or whatever, practitioners are doing meetings way different researchers would do them, you know? Like the structure, the way of working, the timing, like everything and it's, I think that's a big hurdle and that's why maybe there is not so much close intersection because it's a totally different way of communicating and also working to be honest.

你刚才提到了‘思维模式’这个词，并在研究中运用了这个概念。我感觉这是你处理部分工作的方式。要不要介绍一下？你对此有什么想法？

This is you you mentioned the word the word mindset, and you use the mindset in part of your research. I feel that this is the way that you approach part of the work you do. Do you want to intro? What are you thinking about with that?

是的。我认为归根结底，对于想要更具创新性的组织来说，关键在于人，对吧？因为组织是由众多人构成的，需要有一套整体方案来实现创新。而在这套方案中，首先人员必须做好创新准备——这就是我所说的思维模式，即愿意并开放地接受改变和适应。另一方面，组织架构也需要进行相应变革，建立配套的衡量标准和支持体系。

Yeah. I feel like in the end, when it comes to organizations who want to be more innovative, it's about the people, right? Because like an organization is built off a lot of people and there needs to be a holistic approach how you can be innovative. And for that holistic approach, first of all, the people need to be ready to be innovative and this is what I call a mindset, you know, to be willing and open to change and adapt, you know. But on the other hand also in the organisation there needs to be structural changes and measurements and support systems.

这些我称之为HR衡量标准或政策之类。两者的结合才能真正培育组织的开放创新文化。但我个人深信，即便公司具备所有制度，如果人员不开放不接纳，这种文化也难以持久。说到弥合差异和工作方式，开放思维模式的一大成功要素是同理心——要能理解不同立场，设身处地为对方着想。实践这种能力有助于接纳变革、促进创新、接受新方案，并弥合理论与实践之间的鸿沟。

And this is what I call, you know, HR measurements or policies or whatever. And the combination of both is what actually fosters an open and innovative culture in an organization. But I'm personally very convinced that even if a company has all the systems in place, if the people are not open and ready for it, then it's not gonna last for long, you know. And just talking also about bridging the gap and and different ways of working, one big motif like, one big success factor for an open mindset is empathy, you know, to also understand different perspectives, being able to put yourself into the other perspective of your counterpart, you know, and to understand that and practicing that helps to be open to change, to be more innovative, to accept new solutions and also to bridge the gap between theory and practice.

马塞尔，这让我想起我们关于‘吸收能力’的讨论。这两者有关联吗？

Marcel, this made me think of our discussions about absurdive capacity. Is that related?

我在想，其实很有趣——你描述的情况正是理论与实践不总能契合的典型案例。虽然我们可以详细剖析整个思维模式概念，但首先这是个被频繁讨论的话题。就像那些容易说出口的词：‘你需要正确思维模式’，但理论上它究竟意味着什么本身就是个难题，更不用说如何落实到实践中了——这正是你描述的核心问题。

Mean, what I was thinking, I mean, in the end it's funny because I think there are, you hear many stories also from the practice side about I mean, what you described is a perfect example of where theory and practice don't always meet. Right? Because, of course, we can really unpack this whole mindset concept, but it's exactly something that first of all, people talk about a lot. It's one of those easy words like, okay, you need the right mindset, but first of all, what does it mean in theory is already kind of a challenging question, but then indeed, how do you translate that to practice? That's exactly what you're describing, of course.

确实，对我而言这也关联到你提到的吸收能力问题：人员是否准备就绪？这部分关乎是否具备与外部人员或信息协作的先验知识（即吸收能力的核心），但也涉及奥蕾莉亚你说的关键点——人员还必须保持开放心态。当我们讨论开放式创新时，我通常会强调第一步当然是‘打开大门’，通过某种机制让知识跨越组织边界流动。但这些知识最终还需要在内部真正落地生根。

But indeed, for me, it also relates to your point on the absorptive capacity issue is about are people also ready, which is partly about, okay, do you have the prior knowledge to work with external people or information, which is what Absorbed Capacity is all about. But also the whole point of, I think what you said, Aurelia, the people also need to be open, right? So when we talk about open innovation, then I would typically say, yeah, of course the first step is you open the doors, let's say, one way or the other, right? So you create mechanisms to get this knowledge flowing across organisational boundaries, as we would call it. But then it needs to sort of land also inside.

我认为这也正是你稍早提到的，玛丽索尔，我们究竟该如何实现这一目标并让人们做好准备？这也是我想追问的问题，能否更深入探讨？因为我认为这正是许多企业都会面临的困境——战略上可以说‘我们开放了’，但如何真正让员工做好准备？你提到存在各种架构、系统和措施，但企业还应考虑哪些更关键的因素？你们公司又是如何具体实践的？

And I think this is also what you are alluding to a little bit, Marisol, like how do we really make that happen and get the people ready? That would also be kind of my follow-up question, if we can delve a little bit more into that, because I think it's exactly one of those things where many companies would also struggle, because strategically you can say, yeah, we can open up, but how do you get those people ready? And you mentioned, okay, there are structures and systems and measures, but what, I mean, what are some more critical factors that that companies should consider? And and how have you, of course, worked with it, with your company?

这是个非常好的问题。你说得对，现在每个会议都在谈论思维模式，但真正投入改变企业思维模式的有多少？我感觉很多公司认为请人做个主题演讲或一次性变革工作坊就能长期激励员工，但事实并非如此，对吧？

Yeah. That's a that's a very good question because, yeah, you're totally right. I feel like on, like, on every conference, everyone talks about the mindset, you know, but then who is actually, yeah, investing into changing a mindset in a company. And I feel like a lot of companies now a days, they think if they invite someone to hold a keynote about it, you know, and inspire their people or have a one time workshop about, you know, being ready for change, that would inspire the people enough for long lasting change. But that's not what happens, right?

我的研究和日常实践都表明，关键在于培养微小习惯。首先要保持开放态度，然后在此基础上建立日常规范。对于拥有数千人的组织来说，确保每个个体都建立小习惯确实是巨大挑战。

It's what I found in my research and what we also experience every day now in the company is that it's about creating tiny habits, you know? It's about, yeah, first of all being open, but then also from there establishing routines, right? And how do you do that? It's definitely a big challenge in organisations with thousands of people. Make sure that each individual is establishing small routines, right?

因此我们通过OMIND工具为每个人创建思维现状画像，让他们看清自身优势与成长空间。随后软件会在日常生活中推送提醒，帮助人们将战略转化为实践。我们不仅关注开放思维，更注重实践落地的具体场景——毕竟对一切都开放是没意义的。

So that's why what we do with OMIND is we create a status quo of each and everyone's mindset with the help of our digital tool. So they see where they are at, you know, they see their strength and they also see their crow areas. And then based on that, our software nudges the people and reminds them in their daily life to actually establish routines so that they bring a strategy into practice. And we don't only focus on the open mindset because, you know, it also needs to have a context on what needs to get into practice, right? It doesn't help if you're just open for everything.

企业行动的关键驱动力是痛点。如果没有财务指标相关的痛点，他们就不会投入。所以我们总是将思维变革置于新战略背景下，比如创新战略或重组战略。据此制定员工每日/每周行动节奏，通过游戏化激励体系推动人们在繁忙日常中落实这些思维与策略。

In the companies it's all about having a pain because if you don't have a pain that is related to financial metrics, then you're not going to invest into it. So what we do is we always put the mindset change in the context of, for example, a new strategy, a new innovation strategy, but it could also be nowadays a new restructuring strategy. Right? And based on that, we derive, yep, actions that the employees need to do on a daily weekly rhythm and this is what they get reminded to, what they measure, what they can track their progress on and then obviously there's an incentive and reward system related to a gamification approach that will then motivate the people to really bring these mindsets and strategies into a very busy daily life.

这是你们多年来与客户实践积累的经验。能否分享这些年来的关键洞见？你们具体做了哪些改进？或者说，你们会如何向潜在客户展示这个方案的价值？

Then, so that's obviously something you have worked with over the years and with your company and your clients and so on. What are some key learnings over the years from your side of how you have improved certain things and what is it that you are practically doing? Mean, what would you sort of sell to potential clients, so to say, right, to convince them that this is something that they would really benefit from?

坦率地说，我最大的领悟是：尽管所有公司都强调文化与思维的重要性，但只有看到投资回报才会真正投入。毕竟企业本质是要盈利的。我们公司的突破就在于能量化人力投资回报率，这就是为什么必须将思维变革置于真实转型过程中——这样才能展现新行为模式和新惯例的价值。

Well, if I can be very transparent here, I think my biggest learning was that most of the companies, they say how important culture and mindset is for them, but they only invest into it if there's really a return on invest. And if there's no return on invest, they wouldn't invest in it because obviously a company is, yeah, there to make profit, right? And as much as we all talk about how important the mindset and the culture is, it needs to have a financial benefit. And this is also my biggest learning and something our company has then developed into that we can measure the return on invest into investing people, you know. And this is why it's so important to put it in the context of a real transformation process or real strategy that you can show this new behavioral pattern, this new routines.

例如，这种工具的使用情况：公司支付了数千美元的许可费，而这些工具通常在公司中并未真正使用，但后来由于建立了新的工作流程，这些工具开始被使用，从而为公司节省了大量成本，至少是机会成本。通过计算并将这一理念传达给决策者，让他们明白：如果投资于员工、思维方式、文化和流程，实际上从长远来看能节省资金。我认为这是我最大的收获，因为说实话，在获得博士学位后，我曾天真地试图将博士研究直接应用于实践，以为所有人都会自然而然地认同，思维模式和文化是一家公司长期成功的关键因素。但实际上，最终还是财务指标说了算。

For example, this usage of tools where companies pay thousands of licenses fees which are usually not really used in a company, but later on they're getting used because new routines have been established that saves the company a lot of costs, at least opportunity costs. And calculating that and making this translation into the head for decision makers to see, okay, if I invest in my people and the mindset and their culture and their routines, that actually saves me money in the long run. I think this was my biggest learning because, to be honest, after my PhD, I started naively translating my PhD into practice and thought everyone would naturally agree that the mindset and the culture is the key success factor in the long run for a company. But, actually, it's just about financial metrics.

嗯，这很有趣，因为它也触及了关于关键绩效指标（KPI）的讨论。创新的KPI一直是个充满神秘感的话题，有很多可以探讨的地方。我认为部分复杂性在于，首先你需要明确什么对你来说是重要的，但正如你所说，最终往往还是归结为财务结果。不过你可以讨论当前成果或未来成果，或是达成速度等。此外，我们还可以探讨这些KPI的其他影响。正如你刚才精辟指出的，衡量阿尔特行为虽然能看到效果，但也需要随着公司发展不断调整。你是否也观察到这种机制随着公司演变而发挥作用？

Well, this is interesting because it also touches this element about the KPIs. KPIs of innovation have always been like this mysterious topic that has a lot to talk about, and I think part of the complications is because first you need to define what is important to you and it always ends up in financial results as you are saying, but you can say like current results or future results or how fast, on that. And also we can talk about other implications about these KPIs. They always say that measuring Alter's behavior, as you are really nicely stating right now, and you can see it work, but it also needs to be adapted through the company's life. Have you seen this working as companies evolve as well?

你具体指的是什么？

What exactly do you mean?

比如这是如何随时间变化的？他们是否需要持续调整？是否需要不断学习？但始终与财务结果保持关联，你明白吗？

Like how does this change through time? Do they need to keep adapting? Do they need to keep learning? But also always keeping related to the financial results, you know?

确实，公司总是需要适应和学习，基于此财务指标也会发生变化，对吧？就像根据他们正在实施的战略或转型，结果会不断变化，而且这种变化是持续的。我们与公司合作已有五年，最初对他们至关重要的财务指标与现在完全不同。我们共同走过了一段学习之旅。

Well, yeah, companies always need to adapt and learn and based on that also the financial metrics change, right? Like based on the strategies or based on the transformation they are going through, yet the outcomes are changing, right? And that changes over time. So yes, we've been working with companies for five years now and like we started with totally different financial metrics that were important for them at the beginning. And then we went together on a learning journey, you know.

而且，过去五年经济环境的变化之大无需我赘述。公司的战略迅速调整，随之员工需要适应的策略和行为也在改变。说实话，五年前我们合作的一家公司还采用颠覆性创新战略，他们当时都热衷于投资颠覆性创新；而现在我们正在帮他们实施成本削减战略，培训员工如何在日常工作中节约成本。这又带来了新的工作流程、实践方式，以及不同于五年前的财务模型和指标。

And also, I mean, I don't need to tell you how much has changed in economy the last five years, you know. So the company's strategies has changed rapidly. And obviously with that also, yeah, the strategies and the behaviors the employees need to adapt. To be honest, like five years ago, we have started with a company with a very disruptive innovation strategy, you know, they all wanted to invest into disruptive innovation and now we are running a cost cutting strategy with them, you know, and just train the people into how they can cut costs in their daily life, you know. And again again, also new routines, new practices, other financial models than five years ago, or other financial metrics than five years ago.

那么你们具体如何与他们合作？我觉得特别有意思的是你们还使用了一个平台，或许可以多谈谈这方面。但我的理解是，这远不止是实施一个平台，而是围绕它的一切——包括工作流程和行为改变。你们实际工作中是如何操作的？是通过研讨会、培训培训师的方式，还是有更具体的实践方法？

So how do you then concretely work with them? Because I think it's really interesting because you have a platform also, right, that you use, maybe can anyway say a little bit more about it. But my understanding from you is that it's obviously much more than just implementing a platform, but it's really about everything around it and the routines and the behaviour. But how do you practically work with that, also with those companies? Is it through workshops or you train the trainers or how do you do that more practically?

是的，这个问题非常好。我们最初其实是一家软件公司，只销售平台。但后来我们意识到，正如你刚才说的马塞尔，这远不止于此。它真正赋能人们的日常生活。所以我们现在的工作就是将企业的任何战略付诸实践。

Yeah, that's a very good question. We started actually as a software company and just sold a platform. But then we realized what you also just say Marcel, it's way more than that, you know. It's really enabling the people in their daily life to do it. So we actually what we do right now is we bring whatever strategy a company has into practice.

首先我们会与高管层坐下来进行战略研讨会，真正理解战略的本质——因为有时这与战略文件上写的截然不同。深入探讨他们未来五年想实现的目标，并据此制定行动方案和目标。这些目标可能因地区、部门差异很大，这也是我们与企业共同完成的工作。基于此，我们最终会制定出非常实用的日常流程。

And first we start with sitting together at the C level, having like a strategy workshop, understanding what a strategy actually is, because that's also sometimes way different than it's written in that strategy paper. Really sitting down and understanding what they want to achieve in the next five years and based on that derive actions, you know, and goals. And they might be very different from location to location, from department to department. That's also something that we do together with companies. And then based on that, we derive, yeah, really practical routines.

当我们完成这些后，就会通过工作坊聚集所有相关人员。他们将在四个月内参加三次工作坊。期间使用的软件能确保他们不会在工作坊结束后就回归旧习惯——软件会持续提醒。下次工作坊我们会检视KPI成果，看看哪些需要微调或继续推进，然后进入新的软件阶段再次碰头。这种混合模式在四个月结束时，我们会共同复盘所有KPI。

And then, yeah, when we have that, we bring all the people together in workshops. We onboard them. They go through three workshops within four months. And at the same time, they also use software that within the workshops, they're not going to stop working on it and go back to their desk and go back to the old routines, but the software will remind them and then the next workshop we look at the results, the KPIs, what has been achieved, what do we need to fine tune and further work on and then we go into another software phase and then we meet again. So a hybrid model and at the end of the four months we meet together and look at the KPIs.

我们会评估取得的成果：节省了多少成本、战略落地程度、发生了哪些变化、收集成功案例，然后向高管层汇报。过程中还会发现新问题——因为当真正推动战略落地时，你会识别出组织内阻碍员工执行战略的新挑战。根据情况，我们要么继续解决新发现的问题，要么圆满收官让企业实现降本增效。

We look what we have achieved, how much money we have saved, you know, how much we have applied the strategies more into practice, what has changed, look at the success stories and then we present that to the C level back. And then from there, we see what of, like what new problems we have found on the way. Because when you start working with people on bringing strategy into practice, then on the way you identify a lot of new challenges in an organization, what actually hinders the employees to bring that strategy into practice and then either we continue because we found new challenges to solve or we are done and the company has saved money.

这非常有意思。在多年开放创新实践中，我见过开放创新部门被设置在不同体系下——从技术部门到CEO办公室，甚至人力资源部。有家企业的采购部门就是全公司开放创新的主要推动者。所以我认为每个战略会呈现不同要素，但我的核心认知是：我们需要动员所有人。

This is so interesting. During the practice of open innovation in all these many years, I've seen the open innovation department hosted in different departments across the organization, from maybe technology to the CEO office. But I even have seen it in the HR department. There's this one company here who is the promoter of the open innovation activities across the organization, the procurement department. So I think each strategy shows different elements, but for me the overall learning is that we need everyone.

我很好奇从你的心理学和HR背景出发，在你看来HR部门及其人员文化、人员管理在开放创新中应该扮演什么角色？

I'm curious from your own perspective, and in this practice, stemming from your own psychology and your HR background, how do you see the involvement of the HR department and the general people culture and people management in the role of OI.

你问的是最佳实践场景还是泛指？

Are you asking in the best practice scenario or not really?

我们可以和两位奥蕾莉亚谈谈。

We can speak to both Aurelias.

我认为在最佳实践中，人力资源部门显然应成为榜样，并推动文化变革。正如你所说，最终我们需要所有人参与。我同意需要全员参与，但也取决于我们需要实施的策略，对吧？比如某些策略并不需要组织中的每个人，而是需要让关键利益相关者参与。通常我们会先培养一批人作为倍增器，然后通过他们产生雪球效应，这些倍增者再培训其他人。

Well, I think in the best practice scenario obviously HR should be the role model and also, you know, drive the cultural change. As And you said, in the end we need everyone. I agree that we need everyone, but also depending on the strategy that we need to bring in practice, right? Like for certain strategies you don't need every person in an organisation, but you have a group of stakeholders that you need to have on board. And then what we usually do is that we start with a group of people as a multiplier, you know, and then this from there creates a snow ball effect, you know, and then these multipliers also, you know, train the other people.

你之前也提到过‘培训师培训’。我们通过赋能组织自主推动变革，比如培训人力资源部门，使他们能培训自己的员工，因为我们希望组织能主导变革。但实际上，通常还是由我们负责工作坊等事务，因为据我们观察，人力资源部门至今仍以行政事务为主，存在大量行政工作超负荷，而在人员发展或文化变革方面投入较少。

You also mentioned train the trainer before. So we also enable the organization to do the change by themselves, you know. So we train HR department that they can train their own employees because we want to enable the organization to lead the change. But in practice, usually we do the workshops and everything because HR is still, least at least what we have experienced so far, very much administration focused. So there's a lot of, yeah, overload in administration of the task and not that much in people development or cultural changes.

因此大多数客户的人力资源发展部门没有能力领导这类变革，于是选择外包给我们。我们承担责任的同时也提供资源支持。但需要说明的是，我们主要服务德国中型企业。对于跨国公司情况可能不同，我们有个大型跨国客户就采用‘培训师培训’体系，因为他们有庞大的部门和专业培训师。

So this is why most of our clients, they don't have capacity in their HR development department to lead such a change. So this is why they would outsource it and we do it for them. We take the responsibility, but we also bring in the capacity. But this being said, we also focus on the German medium sized companies. So for multinational companies that can look different, we also have one big multinational client which then does the train the trainer system because they have a big department and they have educated trainers.

但德国中型企业的人力资源部门通常只有少数员工，且主要处理行政事务。

But if you look at German medium sized companies, you know, they have a few people in the HR department and that's mainly administration.

是的。我正想请教你关于不同类型和规模公司的经验，但如你所说，主要合作对象是中型企业。那么这是否意味着你观察到——或者让我用问题形式表述：根据你的观点，组织结构在某种程度上也深刻影响着文化变革的实施效果？当然，部门壁垒等因素可能成为阻碍。你是否遇到过不同的组织结构类型？或针对不同客户/公司采取过差异化策略？

Yes. I was going to ask you also about your experience with different sort of types and sizes of companies, but I think as you say, it's mostly been working with the sort of mid sized companies. So I suppose in that sense, you do see quite a difference in terms of the or let me put it as a question because what I hear you say is also the, let's say, the organizational structure in a way also plays an important role in how you can really enable any kind of cultural change. And of course, having the different silos and so on can really be a hampering hampering factor. So have you seen also different types of organizational structures or maybe approaches for different, let's say, clients, different companies you've been working with?

是否有任何你觉得特别值得分享的见解？

And is there anything that's that's that's kind of you you find interesting to to share with us?

是的。我认为在文化和组织规模方面存在很大差异，特别是刚才提到的HR部门，对吧？HR的规模有多大？HR的实际职责是什么？但同时，中型企业目前正经历最大的转型，因此他们确实需要快速反应和强大能力。所以当你问我差异时，我们与中型企业合作时通常会带动整个组织一起转型。

Yeah. I I think there are very big differences when it comes to the culture and the sizes of organizations and just what I mentioned when it comes to HR, right? How big is HR and what is actually the task of HR, right? But at the same time, the mid sized companies are actually the one who are going through the biggest transformations at the moment, so they actually need a lot of speed and capacity in that. So when you ask me about the differences, when we work with a medium sized company, then we usually take the whole organization on board, you know.

我们会从几百人开始，每半年再增加几百人。根据组织规模，最终可以实现全员转型或至少覆盖大部分人员。我们通常以20%的组织覆盖率为目标，因为这样能产生雪球效应。对于拥有上万甚至数十万员工的跨国集团，操作会更困难——这时我们会按部门或地区逐步推进，将大组织拆分成小群体。组织规模越大，内部亚文化就越多，对吧？这就需要我们针对不同亚文化调整文化项目。

So we would start with a couple of hundreds of people and then every half a year we would take another couple of hundreds and, you know, depending on how many couple of hundreds are in the organization, then you can actually onboard the entire organization or at least a good amount of it. Like we usually aim to have 20% of the entire organization because from there it can create a snowball effect, you know. With huge multinational organizations, they have like 10,000, hundreds of thousand employees, obviously that's a bit more difficult and then we would look for departments, we would look for even locations and then onboard location by location or department by department and, you know, break organization down into smaller groups. And you would also find subcultures in big, like the bigger the organization, the more subcultures you have, right? And the more you need to adapt also such cultural programs to the subcultures.

这使得情况复杂得多。不同语言、不同文化背景都需要考虑。因此相比小型组织，这类项目复杂度呈指数级上升。

So that becomes way more complex. Complex and then different languages, different cultural backgrounds are also to consider. So that's why it is a way more complex project than in small organizations.

明白。这再次印证了一个观点：开放式创新固然重要，但内部开放度——如果你愿意这么称呼——才是实现创新的基础，对吧？这让我联想到经典的'非我发明症'概念，这种与思维模式和文化相关的问题我们已经探讨了几十年。但你描述的情况更像是组织内部的'非我发明'障碍——比如无论是HR还是其他部门，核心问题是如何让整个组织接受新理念，而你提到已有完整流程来解决这个问题。

Yeah, understand. It kind of reiterates the point that you can do as much open innovation as you want. You also want to make sure that the internal openness, if you will call it like that, is really in order to enable that, right? Also, And I mean, to bring in another sort of classic concept of not invented here syndrome, which also relates quite a bit more to the mindset related or cultural related issues and something I think we know about many decades already. But on the one hand, I think what you describe somehow talks about sort of, let's say, even internal not invented here, almost like okay, because I can imagine if you, maybe whether it's coming from HR or any of those other departments that Marisol also mentioned, the question is how do you actually get your organisation on board and you say you have a whole process for that.

所以这其实是在考验人们是否愿意接受新思维和工作方式？你们遇到过什么具体挑战吗？

So I guess it also relates to that notion of are people willing to accept this sort of idea and a different way of working? Do you see any particular challenges

确实。最近我们与一家大型国际公司合作（总部在德国但业务全球化，约1万名员工），主要工作就是打破组织内部的信息孤岛。

in that? Yeah. Just recently we worked with a big international company. It's actually German based, but it's internationally it's international on the market. Approximately 10,000 employees and yeah, with them we were mainly working on breaking down the silos in between the organization.

我们心态培训项目的两个核心维度是：知识共享的积极态度和知识获取的积极态度——这正好对应'非我发明症'和'非我职责症'。根据我们的评估，这确实是该组织最大的问题，尤其是生产部门与商业/职能部门之间存在严重隔阂。作为制造型企业，生产板块与公司其他部门形成了巨大的信息孤岛。

And two of our dimensions that we train in our mindset program are yeah, the positive attitude towards knowledge sharing and the positive attitude towards knowledge sourcing. So actually the counterpart of the not invented here and the not soldier syndrome. And based on our measurements that was also the biggest problem in that organization, especially between the production department and the business and corporate departments. There was a very big gap, big silos between them because, yeah, it was a company that was producing like production company. So there was a big silo in between the production and the the corporate part.

是的，我们的目标主要是打破部门间的壁垒，在内部建立对知识共享和资源整合的积极态度。

Yeah, our goal was mainly, yeah, breaking down the silos and establishing positive attitudes towards knowledge sharing and sourcing in between these departments internally.

没错。所以这更多是关于内部开放性，对吧？是的。如果我们将其与开放创新的整体理念联系起来——即跨越组织边界的知识共享和资源整合，关于‘非此处发明’和‘非此处共享’现象，有哪些关键经验教训？或者您是否观察到某些特别成问题或关键的文化思维定式问题？

Exactly. So that's more the internal openness, right? Yeah. And if we relate it to more sort of to the whole idea of open innovation, which is about knowledge sharing and sourcing, let's say across, of course, the organisational boundaries, what are some key learnings with respect to not invented here, not shared here? Or are there any particular, also cultural mindset related issues that you have seen over the years that are particularly problematic or critical to work with?

老实说，我们最初是将开放创新作为协助企业的战略推出的。但多年来我们发现，真正重视这个战略的企业少之又少。因此现在我的公司不仅做开放创新，我们会落实所有战略——因为开放创新是企业最不重视的战略，这非常遗憾。作为研究者，我深信跨组织协作比以往任何时候都重要。但我看到大多数企业的合作都很松散——没有完善战略，更多是基于CEO间的私人信任关系。

Well, to be honest, like we started off with open innovation as a strategy that we support organizations with. And over the years we have realized that too little companies really take that serious, to be honest. So that's why when I talk about my company, we don't only do open innovation anymore. We bring every strategy into practice because open innovation is just the smallest, like the least strategy, to be honest, that companies take seriously, which is super sad, because as a researcher I'm very convinced that collaboration across organisations is more important than ever before. But what I see is that most of the companies, they collaborate, but then they collaborate very loose, like not with proper strategies, more if the CEO knows another CEO and they trust each other on a personal level, this is why they would collaborate.

这里说的是中型企业，当然并非全都如此。根据我的经验，中型企业很少将开放创新纳入战略组合。说实话，能看到他们有创新战略我们就很欣慰了。但跨国大企业的情况显然不同，他们的运作更有组织性。

This is talking about medium sized companies and this is obviously not always the case. I'm just saying this is what I've experienced so far that medium sized organizations not really taking an open innovation strategy into their portfolio, you know, to be honest. We're actually very happy if we see that they have innovation strategies. But when we look at the multinational big organizations, then obviously it looks a little bit different. That's more organized.

他们甚至会设置专人负责开放创新，但主要做初创企业发掘或对接之类的工作。对这些大企业而言，开放创新更多意味着与初创公司合作。说实话，看到德国市场在开放创新方面的现状——包括投入意愿和资金准备度都低于预期——让我有些沮丧。

They might even have someone, like one person, that is responsible for open innovation. But then it's mainly start up scouting or matchmaking or something like that, you know. It's like for them, they see open innovation more, like if they are the big corporate, they see open innovation more as the collaboration with start ups. Yeah, to be honest, I was also a little bit frustrated to see how it actually looks at least on the German market when it comes to open innovation and that the willingness willingness and also the readiness to invest money for it is not as much as I thought it would be.

有意思。我正结合您研究者与实践者的双重身份思考：基于这些洞见，如果您要继续研究或认为存在待解难题，您会建议学术界关注哪些领域？这是个开放式问题——您认为哪些方向值得深入研究？

Interesting. I was now also thinking about the element of your researcher side, paired no, up with your practitioner side. With all these insights that you shared with us, if you could continue researching or if you see an open challenge in research, what would you tell other academies? This is an open question, go and research here. What are the areas that you are looking at?

这是个很好的问题。我认为研究者应该更关注组织实际获得的投资回报。回顾我的博士研究，虽然提出了很好的行动建议，但建立促进创新的有利文化才是最重要的成果。

It's a very good question. I think just learning how much the return on invest is important for organizations. I feel like the researchers should generally focus more on what is the actual outcome for an organization. And I'm looking back at my PhD, I have had great recommendations for actions. And I think, you know, to build a conducive culture that fosters innovation is a great outcome.

但如今在行业里摸爬滚打了几年后，我意识到那些是不可量化的、不够具体的。所以我认为测量指标与财务指标的关联性比以往任何时候都更重要。回顾开放式创新中的人性化因素及其为组织带来的实际财务成果，这非常关键——不是假设性结果，而是实实在在的财务收益。

But now being in industry for a few years, I know that's not measurable, that's not tangible enough, you know. So I think the measurement and the correlation to financial metrics is way more important than ever before. And I think, looking back at the human side of open innovation and then actual financial outcomes for an organization, I think that's very critical and not hypothetical outcomes, you know, but really tangible financial outcomes.

确实，这个观点非常精辟。说实话，我自己直到大约两年前才发表首篇真正将财务绩效作为结果变量的论文。当然我们也常做质性研究，更关注机制和底层过程——毕竟无法量化所有事物。但将其放在更宏观视野中审视很重要，这点我们量化实证研究中也常忽略，比如仅将创新作为结果变量，而这只是宏大叙事的一部分。我们在合作研究中多次探讨过这点，但更广泛而言，将研究最终锚定在企业真正关切的问题上至关重要。

Yeah, I think it's an excellent point and to be honest, it probably took me until, what is it, like two years ago to have a first paper that properly has sort of financial performance as the outcome variable, right? And of course, we look at often also qualitative research, of course, more we're interested in the mechanisms and the underlying processes, right? So you, of course, cannot measure everything, but I think it's important to see it in the broader light, which we maybe tend to forget, but even in our more quantitative empirical papers, we often look at maybe, okay, innovation as an outcome variable, which is only part of the bigger story. And of course, we've been talking about it quite a bit also in some of the work we've been doing together, of course. But I've also seen it more generally even in my, like, my own work, but also with for others that relating it ultimately to what matters for those companies is really quite critical.

因此我认为这是对研究方向的绝佳倡议。或许这也是结束本期播客的好方式——意味着研究者和实践者都还有工作要做。你的个人经历和背景故事极具启发性，希望不仅能激励他人，更能让大家意识到开放式创新其实是更宏大叙事的一部分。这对我们许多人都是很好的提醒。

So I that's think a really excellent call for research in that sense. Maybe it's a good way to close the podcast also. It means there is some more work to do on the researcher side, but also on the practitioner side. And I think it was really inspirational to hear your story, background, the journey you've personally went through, so hopefully that can also inspire others, but also, of course, the actual topic you're working with, on open innovation, but also realizing how that is actually part of a bigger story. So I think that's a really good reminder for many of us.

非常感谢你的分享。在结束前，Marisol还有什么要补充的吗？

So yeah, thanks for sharing that. I really appreciate it. Anything to add on your side, Marisol, before we close?

没有了。我一直非常享受这类关于企业实践细节的对话。我同意Aurelia的观点，并非所有事物都属于开放式创新，但从中获得的心态能应用于许多其他实践。Aurelia，这次对话的收获很大，感谢你分享自己的励志故事。

No, I think I always enjoy so much these detailed conversations about how we are living these practices in companies. I agree with Aurelia that not everything is open innovation, but at the end we learn so much about the open innovation mindset to apply to many other practices. So I think this is a good take out also from your conversation, Aurelia. Thank you very much for sharing and thank you very much for sharing also your own story, which is inspirational for others.

非常感谢邀请。我想补充的是，如今在开放式创新领域研究人性化因素及其对组织财务成果的影响比以往更重要。这样更多中型企业可能会因看到财务回报而投资这些策略。希望能激励大家开展更多相关研究。

Yeah. Thank you very much for having me and, yeah, I would just like to add, I think it's today more important than ever before to also do research in the field of open innovation and the human side to show, yeah, financial outcomes for organizations. Then maybe more of the medium sized organizations would invest into these strategies because they would see their financial benefit, you know. So I just would like to motivate and inspire everyone to do more research on that.

太棒了。非常感谢各位的分享，也感谢所有听众收听我们的播客。

Excellent. Thank you very much. Thanks for that. And, yeah, thanks again. And thanks everybody for listening to our podcast.

谢谢。

Thank you.

好的。非常感谢

Yeah. Thank you very

你。再见。

much. See you.