Most R&D projects fail before development even begins.
In the Want-Find-Get-Manage framework of R&D and innovation, the Find stage is where companies go wrong - and where the greatest opportunities lie. The problem isn't in the lab or the budget - it's the moment when teams choose which problems to solve. (we quite literally built a company that solves this gigantic problem, by the way!)
R&D teams have more tools than ever, but better tools don't help if you're solving the wrong problem.
Instead, we must rigorously apply our Human Intelligence to technologies like AI with clear thought patterns and problem-solving methodologies.
This challenge costs companies billions each year in wasted R&D spend. Let’s dive into the problem and solution of the ‘FIND’ stage gate for innovation…
By the time an R&D project reaches development, most of its lifetime costs are already locked in. Yet many organisations rush through the Find stage, eager to begin development without fully understanding the problem they're trying to solve. This misalignment leads to:
Before setting course, we have to have a detailed view of the technology landscape, and this landscape changes the more we define the technological challenge at hand.
If we think about the problem, and break it down into the jobs-to-be-done in solving the problem, then we actually end up with a much broader view of the solution landscape (*ahem* our technology scouts do this better than anyone…)
Checkout these examples…
When tasked with reaching a high window, you’d be forgiven for immediately thinking of a "ladder." But by analysing the functional requirement - "increasing reach height" - the solution space expands dramatically to include:
Surface problem: "We need better preservatives"
Functional requirement: "Prevent microbial growth and maintain food freshness"
Expanded solutions:
Surface problem: "Design a better heat sink"
Functional requirement: "Maintain optimal operating temperature"
Expanded solutions:
Time pressure pushes R&D teams toward quick fixes rather than optimal solutions. The constant drive for quarterly results means teams often rush to show progress, choosing familiar paths over better alternatives. And in a race against market competitors, the pressure to launch can override the need to explore - leading teams to grab the first workable solution rather than the best one.
Additionally, historical bias acts like a pair of blinders on innovation teams. When organisations invest years and millions in specific technologies, they become anchored to these existing solutions. The refrain of "we've always done it this way" protects past investments and leverages existing expertise, even when the market demands fresh thinking.
Lastly, knowledge gaps create invisible barriers to innovation. Teams can't consider technologies they don't know about, and they often miss breakthrough opportunities in adjacent industries. Without a deep understanding of fundamental principles, teams default to incremental improvements of existing solutions rather than exploring radical alternatives that could deliver exponential gains.
Ok, you got this far and you might be asking, “So what?!”
When organisations fail to properly execute the Find stage, they often end up with what we call the "Wrong Mountain Syndrome" - investing significant resources into climbing a mountain that may not lead to the best vantage point. Consider:
The Challenge:
The first promising solution often proves irresistible to R&D teams under pressure. Team members become emotionally invested in particular solutions, dismissing alternatives without proper evaluation, or rushing to development before completing thorough analysis. The cost of backtracking early is far less than realizing you're on the wrong path after significant investment.
Action Points:
The Challenge:
What begins as a clearly defined problem can expand into an unwieldy challenge that bears little resemblance to the original objective. This usually starts subtly - a stakeholder suggests an "interesting addition," or the team discovers a tangential opportunity that seems too good to ignore.
Action Points:
The Challenge:
The Find stage's emphasis on thorough exploration can sometimes trap teams in endless analysis loops. Teams suffering from analysis paralysis often exhibit a fear of missing something crucial, leading to constant requests for more data or additional expert opinions.
Action Points:
The Challenge:
Perhaps the most insidious pitfall, confirmation bias causes teams to unconsciously seek information that supports their existing beliefs while dismissing contradictory evidence. This becomes particularly dangerous when teams have prior experience with similar problems or when there's strong organizational preference for a particular approach.
Action Points:
Create the Right Environment:
Remember that the Find stage is not a one-time event but an ongoing process. The system described above should be:
.gif){kind=small}
