Skip to content
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Filter by Article Type
Papers
Events
Tools
Funding Articles
Case Studies
Resources
Opportunities
Theme Editor Blogs
Filter by Categories
Business model innovation
Ideation and creativity in R&D
Latest news
Managing international R&D
Managing technology platforms
Managing the R&D pipeline
Open innovation
Outsourcing R&D
Project valuation and selection
R&D strategy
Roadmapping
Stage gate processes
Technology intelligence
  • Home
  • About
    • About R&D Today
    • Contributors
    • R&D Publications
    • R&D Today newsletter archive
  • Themes
    • R&D Management
      • Rationale for key themes
      • Ideation and creativity in R&D
      • Managing international R&D
      • Managing the R&D pipeline
      • Open Innovation
      • Roadmapping
      • Technology Strategy
    • Special Features
      • Innovation for a Sustainable Future
      • How to measure the value created by innovation
      • Dynamic capabilities for strategic innovation
      • Would a ‘Strategy Lab’ provide sustainable renewal of competitive advantage?
      • Design Thinking
      • China’s new model for Open Innovation
      • Penetrating the fog of Agile
      • The resurgence of frugal innovation
      • Impact of digital technologies
    • Key Conference Tracks
      • Business model innovation
      • Entrepreneurial Ecosystems, Innovation Ecosystems and platforms
      • Intellectual Property Rights
      • Sustainable Innovation
    • Innovation Leadership
  • RADMA
    • About RADMA
    • R&D Project Exchange
    • Celebrating 40 Years of RADMA
    • RADMA Scholars
    • R&D Management Journal
  • The Pentathlon Framework
    • Strategy
    • Ideas
    • Selection & Prioritisation
    • Implementation
    • People & Organisations
  • Knowledge Hub
  • R&D Management Conference
  • Events
    • Upcoming events
    • Events Archive
  • Contact
  • Home
  • About
    • About R&D Today
    • Contributors
    • R&D Publications
    • R&D Today newsletter archive
  • Themes
    • R&D Management
      • Rationale for key themes
      • Ideation and creativity in R&D
      • Managing international R&D
      • Managing the R&D pipeline
      • Open Innovation
      • Roadmapping
      • Technology Strategy
    • Special Features
      • Innovation for a Sustainable Future
      • How to measure the value created by innovation
      • Dynamic capabilities for strategic innovation
      • Would a ‘Strategy Lab’ provide sustainable renewal of competitive advantage?
      • Design Thinking
      • China’s new model for Open Innovation
      • Penetrating the fog of Agile
      • The resurgence of frugal innovation
      • Impact of digital technologies
    • Key Conference Tracks
      • Business model innovation
      • Entrepreneurial Ecosystems, Innovation Ecosystems and platforms
      • Intellectual Property Rights
      • Sustainable Innovation
    • Innovation Leadership
  • RADMA
    • About RADMA
    • R&D Project Exchange
    • Celebrating 40 Years of RADMA
    • RADMA Scholars
    • R&D Management Journal
  • The Pentathlon Framework
    • Strategy
    • Ideas
    • Selection & Prioritisation
    • Implementation
    • People & Organisations
  • Knowledge Hub
  • R&D Management Conference
  • Events
    • Upcoming events
    • Events Archive
  • Contact

Menu

What does failed value mean in the world that’s interested in sustainability?

Creating new business models is a key element of innovation for sustainability but many organisations struggle to identify the optimal solution. Taking a design-thinking approach to determining failed value of different options enabled the development of a new tool to assist decision making.

Here Steve Evans, Director of Research at the Centre for Industrial Sustainability at IfM, explains the thinking behind CIS’s ground-breaking tool. 

Why are we failing?

For many years we had been trying to identify mechanisms that determine business models.

Like many other researchers around the globe, we had been doing this by collecting characteristics of the product and then try to map this against a number of potential business models.

Take, for example, the purchase of drinking cups.  The product characteristics include: life expectancy about 10 years, cost of purchase, cost of replacement – the clever little system would then advise ‘you should think about leasing your cups’, versus all the other possible business models.

Then one day I realised why none of us were succeeding – something fundamental was amiss and the reason was that when you looked at real business models of real companies, they didn’t fit into these neat categories that academics had created.  Things that look like rental were actually leasing, things that look like leasing were actually owning. In the real world it is just messy.

So, even if we somehow found the logic, we might not help real companies.

We went back to the idea ‘trust the designer’ and instead of trying to match a pre-defined business model with the innovation, we gave the designer lots of knowledge about possible future designs.

The designer of a business model is aware of leasing and renting as scenarios, they also understand the potential sustainability benefits of the product – if the material can be repurposed or recycled if it is damaged.

A design-thinking led approach

Our new approach was to take a design led approach around the value of the proposition.

We said to the companies ‘You are well educated about the possible future business models. What you really need is a better understanding of the way that you are currently succeeding and failing to deliver value to different stakeholders – your investors, customers, employees and suppliers’.

We added stakeholders and we focused on failed value exchange:

  • What is it you’re failing to do at the moment?
  • What is it your customer wants that you’re not yet giving them? You would be surprised at how many companies are not actually very good at analysing that. But that would be classic R&D management.
  • What are you giving them that destroys their value, makes them unhealthy, that they have to spend money solving?
  • What are you giving them that isn’t harming them, but they didn’t want?
  • Consider your other stakeholders – what are you doing to your staff? What are you doing to your suppliers? What are you doing to the planet?

By identifying all these failures, you’ve now got a whole bunch of material to give to a designer that is very useful – the designer now says  ‘Oh, that’s interesting. There are customers/staff who were really frustrated at dealing with that packaging problem; we could give them a different type of solution.’

At CIS we have got a whole series of tools that help people generate different business models, and the value mapping exercise part of it is one of the key intellectual pieces of the puzzle.

Designers need tools to understand failed value

What everybody else was doing at the time and is still doing is trying to build design tools. Put in these numbers and I’ll tell you what design you should have.

What we found was designers didn’t need design tools, they needed tools to better understand failed value, and that’s all they needed.

From there they could go forward and come up with better designs.

The Cambridge Value Mapping Tool – analyses failed value

The Cambridge Value Mapping Tool was developed at the IfM’s Centre for Industrial Sustainability by a research team led by Professor Steve Evans. It takes you in a guided step-by-step process through the following questions:

  1. What is the unit of analysis eg product, service, company, industry?
  2. Who are the stakeholders for the unit of analysis?
  3. What is the purpose of the unit of analysis?
  4. What is the current value captured?
  5. What is the value missed and/or destroyed?
  6. What is the value surplus and/or absence?
  7. What are the new value opportunities?

 

Find out more about the Cambridge Value Mapping Tool on the IfM website.

Cambridge Value Mapping Tool identifies failed value
Diagram from ifm.eng.cam.ac.uk.
Steve Evans, Director of the Centre for Industrial Sustainability

Professor Steve Evans

Director of Research in Industrial Sustainability

Steve spent 12 years in industry, finally as Engineering Systems Manager at Martin-Baker Engineering, the world leading manufacturer of ejection seats. He became Professor of Life Cycle Engineering at Cranfield University in 1998 and joined the University of Cambridge Institute for Manufacturing in 2011. He is Director of the Centre for Industrial Sustainability.

Read more about Steve at ifm.eng.cam.ac.uk.

  • 25 April 2025
View our newsletter archive
  • Related posts

    • Industrial sustainability – an interview with Professor Steve Evans
    • Innovation for a Sustainable Future
    • Innovation for a sustainable future – call for contributions
    • IKEA uses its supply chain influence to promote sustainability goals
    • Sustainable Synergies: Innovation Ecosystems and Biodiversity for a Sustainable Future
    • Integrated thinking for transformational nature-positive business models
    • How to value innovation in emerging technologies
    • Innovation in an Era of Disruption – R&D Management Conference 2021 – Call for tracks
    • Call for papers – Sustainable Ecosystems
    • Frugal Innovation and Digitalization: Crossing Boundaries and Creating Impact
    • Innovation for sustainability what is needed to fulfil such a role?
    • Regenerating natural ecosystems – Virginia Castellucci, 3Bee
  • Have your say

    Have your say / Follow us

    Linkedin Soundcloud Twitter Youtube Linkedin-in

    R&D Today is the outreach site for the Research and Development Management Association, a charitable organisation that supports research, best practice and innovation.  www.radma.net

    Click here to sign up to our newsletter, and
     click here to view our newsletter archive.

    © Copyright R&D Today

    2025.

    All rights reserved.