Innovation Performance Diagnostic
I make visible where your innovation performance gap arises – and which decisions now secure growth, profit and future viability.
Structured. 20+ years field-tested. Fast.
Strategic advisor and sparring partner for entrepreneurs of technology-driven companies.
max. 5
working days to the findings
3–5
blockers instead of action lists
90
day implementation roadmap
25+
years of experience in R&D and innovation
Assess your situation
A meeting is postponed. A project needs one more alignment round. A business case is to be sharpened once again. A decision is not rejected – it is deferred.
None of this is unusual. For almost every delay there is a plausible explanation.
And still: “somehow” important topics suddenly need more attention than before. And “some feeling” says: effort and impact no longer match.
How you notice it
Read the points with one concrete initiative in mind. Count how often you nod.
01
Not all of them. And not always. But on some important initiatives the same questions keep coming back: Are the numbers solid? Is the risk understood? Who takes the next step?
The documents get better. The number of people involved grows. The decision does not get any clearer.
02
First convincing results, visible potential, positively assessed by management. Still, it remains open who takes ownership, which unit provides resources and how much uncertainty is still acceptable.
The project hasn't failed. But it hasn't been decided either.
03
Additional analyses, new presentations, further alignment meetings. The organisation takes the topic seriously. But activity and progress are not the same thing.
In the end the same question remains: What exactly has been decided?
04
Roles are assigned, projects have owners. Yet priorities, resources and escalations keep ending up with the same few leaders.
Formal responsibility and actual decision-making power are not in the same place.
05
Ideas, pilots, technology programmes, partnerships. Every initiative has good reasons. The only question: which one gets resources now, which one waits, which one is stopped?
Prioritisation doesn't show in calling a topic important – it shows in other topics stepping back for it.
Individually, everything is explainable
The problem does not start with a single case. It starts when the same kind of delay repeats:
Then they are no longer isolated cases. Then a pattern is showing.
Scatter → recurring pattern
The diagnosis
The distance between what your organisation wants to achieve with innovation and what it actually translates into visible results.
It does not arise because ideas are missing or people underperform – but where budget, competence and strategy do not reliably turn into priorities, decisions and execution.
This is exactly where it starts
No transformation programme on suspicion. No maturity model. No report with twenty equally weighted measures. Instead, robust findings on the three to five points that are actually relevant for your situation.
Innovation strategy, ongoing initiatives and the relevant decisions of the last twelve months – not the official processes, but the actual decision paths. Plus five to eight conversations with the people in charge.
Technical maturity, business case, resources – or mandates, priorities and decision paths? What remains are the three to five blockers that make the biggest difference. No more. But no fewer either.
The findings are presented directly to the leadership team: what stays as it is, which decision is overdue, where a clearer mandate is needed – and what happens in the next 90 days, in which order.
Case studies from practice
Seven partners from different disciplines, a bucket seat at the edge of what is technically feasible – and leadership that turned seven individual contributions into one whole.
A product successful in the US meets a different market. Product analysis and market analysis brought together into a robust strategy – and concrete acquisition.
Afterwards it is clear what is actually stuck, what is just normal complexity, which blockers belong together – and which decisions have the greatest impact.
Kai Kisseberth
More than 25 years of leadership experience in research, development and innovation – most recently with 300 employees in automotive R&D.
In complex technical organisations the first explanation is rarely the right one. The most obvious problem is not automatically the decisive bottleneck. My job is to turn individual observations into a robust pattern.
The next step
A first conversation, 30 minutes. It serves to assess your situation and to check whether the diagnostic is the right format.
