Session Brief: Outcome-Driven Innovation

Goal

Artifact: Desired outcome statements

Working Question

Which desired outcomes are important and insufficiently fulfilled for which customer segments, and where is the largest quantitative innovation lever?

Context

JTBD and beneficiaries; market size and sample plan; recruiting channels; measurement scale (typically 5 or 10 point for importance and satisfaction); definition of done for study; innovation mandate (what happens with underserved outcomes).

Setup

• Format: Method session
• Duration: Multiple weeks (outcome mining 1-2 weeks, survey 2-3 weeks, analysis 1 week)
• Mode: Workshop or async
• Participants: A lead researcher with ODI experience (internal or external), two to four interviewers, a statistics analyst for evaluation, sponsor with innovation mandate, optional Sales or CS voice for recruitment.
• Owner: A lead researcher with ODI experience (internal or external), two to four interviewers, a statistics analyst for evaluation, sponsor with innovation mandate, optional Sales or CS voice for recruitment
• Participation mode: Team round, shared work and alignment
• Outcome logic: Finish artifact

Participation Logic

Use the session for shared understanding. Contributions are collected visibly, assumptions are aligned, and open differences remain traceable in the artifact.

Outcome Logic

The session works directly toward Desired outcome statements. After the session, the artifact should be shareable, reviewable, or reusable.

Input

Outcome statement template (“Minimize/Maximize [metric] at [job step]”); interview guide with outcome-mining questions; survey tool for quantitative scoring (for example Qualtrics, Typeform); statistics tool for opportunity score calculation; CSV export for segmentation.

Preparation

Outcome-mining interview plan in place, survey tool configured, scoring sheet prepared for opportunity score formula (Importance + max(Importance - Satisfaction, 0)), and sample strategy with at least 100 respondents per segment.

Agenda

1. Phase 1: Outcome mining (1-2 weeks) Owner: Facilitator Action: Conduct 10-15 qualitative interviews with JTBD beneficiaries. Extract outcome statements in the format “Minimize/Maximize [metric] in [job step].” Target 50-150 outcome statements per job. Hint: Outcome statements are not feature requests. Keep strict format. If a participant says "an app with X," translate it back to outcome language (“Minimize time between Step A and Step B”). Output: Desired outcome statements

2. Phase 2: Outcome consolidation (2-3 days) Owner: Facilitator Action: Cluster outcomes, consolidate duplicates, harmonize language. Final list 50-100 outcomes. For each outcome capture job-step link and potentially beneficiary type. Hint: If fewer than 30 outcomes remain after consolidation, mining was too narrow. If more than 150, mining was too broad. Keep beneficiaries separate or outcomes are mixed. Output: Opportunity landscape

3. Phase 3: Quantitative study (2-3 weeks) Owner: Facilitator Action: Run survey across all outcomes. Two questions per outcome: importance and current satisfaction (each 1-10 or 1-5). Minimum sample 200+ from target segment, ideally multiple segments. Hint: Survey fatigue is a risk (50+ outcomes × 2 questions). Randomize outcome order. Require minimum sample per segment for subgroup analysis. Output: Segmentation by underserved needs

4. Phase 4: Calculate opportunity score (1-2 days) Owner: Facilitator Action: For each outcome: Mean(Importance) and Mean(Satisfaction). Opportunity Score = Importance + max(Importance - Satisfaction, 0). Sort outcomes by score. Thresholds: >15 = underserved (innovation lever), 10-15 = appropriately served, <10 = overserved. Hint: If all top outcomes score <12, either the market is already well served or the sample is biased. Review sample profile and adjust segmentation if needed. Output: Innovation hypotheses

5. Phase 5: Segment by underserved patterns (2-3 days) Owner: Facilitator Action: Cluster analysis (for example K-Means) on response patterns. Identify segments with distinct underserved-outcome profiles. Build top opportunities per segment and estimate segment size in market. Hint: Demographic segmentation alone often misses the value. Outcome-pattern segmentation is the actual leverage. Output: Desired outcome statements

6. Phase 6: Innovation hypotheses (1-2 days) Owner: Owner Action: For each top segment and top outcome, define hypotheses for solutions or value messages. Build innovation backlog prioritized by opportunity score and segment size. Sponsor review. Hint: Hypotheses are not solutions. Solutions are discovered in discovery sprints. ODI defines the direction, not the solution. Output: Opportunity landscape

7. Publish artifact (10 min) Owner: Owner Action: Check the artifact for completeness, define location, set version or status, and name review recipients. Output: Desired outcome statements

Closeout

• Update result artifact: Desired outcome statements
• Define location, version, and review recipients.
• Define owner, next step, and review date.

Desired outcome statements: Outcome-Driven Innovation

Working Question

Which desired outcomes are important and insufficiently fulfilled for which customer segments, and where is the largest quantitative innovation lever?

Context

JTBD and beneficiaries; market size and sample plan; recruiting channels; measurement scale (typically 5 or 10 point for importance and satisfaction); definition of done for study; innovation mandate (what happens with underserved outcomes).

Participants

• Owner: A lead researcher with ODI experience (internal or external), two to four interviewers, a statistics analyst for evaluation, sponsor with innovation mandate, optional Sales or CS voice for recruitment
• Participants: A lead researcher with ODI experience (internal or external), two to four interviewers, a statistics analyst for evaluation, sponsor with innovation mandate, optional Sales or CS voice for recruitment.

Input

Outcome statement template (“Minimize/Maximize [metric] at [job step]”); interview guide with outcome-mining questions; survey tool for quantitative scoring (for example Qualtrics, Typeform); statistics tool for opportunity score calculation; CSV export for segmentation.

Template

Outcome-Driven Innovation Working Template

Goal

Innovation method by Ulwick that captures customer wants as measurable desired outcomes.

Context

When and for what do we use this method?

Input

Which data, observations, decisions, or materials are available?

Execution

Short notes along the runsheet.

Output artifacts

• Desired Outcome Statements:
• Opportunity landscape:
• Segmentation by underserved needs:
• Innovation hypotheses:

Assumptions and open questions

• ...

Decision / next step

Owner, date, and success signal.

Completion Check

• Desired outcome statements is complete enough for review:
• Location:
• Version / status:
• Review by:
• Next step:

Next Step

• Review result
• Mark open questions
• Schedule review or decision