Measuring what Counts: An Exploratory Study about the Key Challenges of Measuring Design Thinking Activities in Digital Innovation Units

The Nexus of Design Thinking and Intrapreneurship: Insights from a large-scale empirical assessment

“…The observation about performance measurement and the neglect of clear roles and responsibilities as part of an organizational structure is in line with previous studies on the challenges of performance measurement of innovation activities [29].…”

“…Regarding potential outcomes and benefits, past studies have argued that DT can contribute to an organization's innovation capabilities [28] and may help to shape its culture [6]. Due to these outcomes and effects, DT is often investigated with regards to innovation and entrepreneurial activities in organizations [8], [15], [24], [29], [30].…”

Bridging the Gap – An Analysis of Requirements for Performance Measurement Systems in Digital Innovation Units

“…Conversely, however, there seems to be a concern that if you measure too much, you are too transparent and the main organisation might misjudge the innovation activities of the DIU. This is already addressed in a previous study which has found that there is a discrepancy between the actions of the DIUs and the way that the main organisation evaluates them [21]. Overall, there seems to be a perception that the current error culture does not allow mistakes to be seen as a normal consequence of innovation, which makes DIU vulnerable to attack by disclosing too many metrics.…”

“…Research already calls for contributions on that topic and Frey et al [20] and Hund et al [4], amongst others, raise the specific difficulties of measuring digital innovation outcomes in general and the necessity to deal with this topic [4,5,10,20]. Potential explanations for these difficulties are diverse [21]. Firstly, research has pointed out that, compared to traditional innovation, digital innovation has different characteristics, which requires measurement techniques to be adjusted accordingly [10,16].…”

“…The main organisation, on the other hand, continues to work with familiar performance measurement metrics, which means that two different approaches now have to be reconciled. This is anything but trivial as shown by Mayer et al [21] who found that contact between the DIU and the main organisation can be problematic if, for example, activities of DIUs try to be adopted from the main organisation. This raises the question of governance mechanisms that are capable of increasing the alignment between DIUs and the main organisation, both by developing precise goals for the DIUs and by translating these into concrete fields of action.…”