Having too many options isn't a luxury problem
Many companies begin their innovation efforts with the wrong diagnosis. They believe they lack ideas. Yet there are already more proposals, technologies, and process approaches on the table than any organization can properly evaluate. AI applications, automation, new digital services, data products, partnerships, internal efficiency initiatives: The list is growing faster than the ability to make sound decisions based on it.
The problem rarely lies in creativity. It lies in selection. If everything is treated as equally important, budget, attention, and expertise are spread so thinly that, in the end, hardly anything becomes viable. Then innovation appears to be bustling, while it leaves hardly any operational impact.
At T60, we therefore don’t view innovation as a collection of ideas. It is part of operational transformation: companies must establish the connection between strategy, resources, and execution in their day-to-day operations. That is precisely where an inspiring workshop differs from true innovation capability.
A single PoC doesn't prove much
Proofs of concept have their place. A PoC can show whether a technology works, whether users are on board, or whether a business case even stands a chance. That’s valuable, especially when uncertainty is high.
But that alone doesn’t create the capacity for innovation. A company can carry out several successful PoCs and still derive little benefit if no one decides which experiments should be scaled up, which have merely provided insights, and which should be terminated immediately. Even worse: teams repeat similar experiments because insights are hard to find or because each department runs its own innovation initiative.
A PoC should not be a showcase project. It should be a decision point.
Prioritization sounds simple, but it hurts
Prioritization doesn’t mean sorting ideas into a neat list. It means consciously choosing not to allocate a budget to certain opportunities, even though they sound exciting. It also means halting a project in which time has already been invested. This is precisely where many organizations fail, because halting a project feels like a loss internally.
Yet a clear “no” often saves more value than a small “yes” can create. Resources aren’t just money. They include expert time, management attention, data access, IT capacity, departmental energy, and the patience of customers or users. Those who scatter these resources are setting themselves up for sluggishness.
The innovation portfolio helps streamline the decision-making process
An innovation portfolio creates a shared view of ongoing and planned initiatives. It shows which opportunities align with strategic goals, where realistic benefits can be realized, and which risks the organization is consciously taking. The point isn’t to predict innovation with precision. That doesn’t work. The point is to make better decisions in the face of uncertainty.
A good portfolio answers uncomfortable questions: Do we have too many similar initiatives? Are we investing only in short-term improvements? Are multiple teams working on the same problem without learning from each other? Are we lacking projects that build new capabilities, even though they won’t yield returns until later?
This makes innovation manageable without stifling it. That’s the difference.