VASCO Data Security is the world leader in authentication technology and IPACSO Partner, started to use the IPACSO Innovation Framework for internal innovation assessments. Learn how you might be able to set the IPACSO Innovation Framework to practice following some of the routes VASCO has used. Share with us your experiences and share your developments with the rest of the IPACSO Community
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/stbrFalQgAw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
VASCO is a leading supplier of strong authentication and e-signature solutions and services specializing in Internet Security applications and transactions. VASCO has positioned itself as global software company for Internet Security serving a customer base of approximately 10,000 companies in more than 100 countries, including approximately 1,700 international financial institutions. VASCO’s prime markets are the financial sector, enterprise security, e-commerce and e-government.
This case study describes the innovation process that resulted in the Bluetooth-enabled DIGIPASS Authenticator:
The initial idea originated from the innovation team’s monthly meeting where new market trends were discussed based on a PESTLE analysis. The most important trends were the increasing use of smartphones and tablets for financial and other sensitive transactions and the adoption of the EIDAS regulation. In addition, Vasco performed a problem mapping exercise to identify the main causes for the fact that the current DIGIPASS card readers were no longer meeting the customer needs.
Starting from this problem statement a brainstorming session was organized making use of the 180° thinking method. The generated ideas were assessed by means of a decision matrix, scoring them based on user friendliness, user acceptance, security in terms of authentication, security in terms of signing and the possibility to integrate with mobile devices. To come up with some more ideas, a second idea generation session was organized, based on the SCAMPER technique (see Figure 7). A first selection was performed by using the sticking dots technique, reducing the number of ideas from eighteen to seven. This first assessment was followed by a more thorough analysis by means of the idea advocate technique. To support this assessment with a more objective approach, a force field analysis was performed. Based on the force field analysis, the team decided to move forward with only three of the seven presented solutions, being Bluetooth, NFC and Flashing Patterns. Because the team had to take into account multiple criteria (fit for mobile use, security, user friendliness and power consumption), they were having difficulty to reach consensus. Therefore the innovation leader introduced the AHP-based method. The Bluetooth-based solution scored best.
Next, another brainstorming session was planned to refine the Bluetooth enabled solution. The innovation manager used the Failure Mode(s) and Effects Analysis (FMEA) to identify potential failures within the product to define the required actions to avoid these failures from happening.
Finally, the innovation leader wanted the team to come up with some extra features for the product. Therefore, he organized a final idea generation session. Within this session, he made use of the wishing technique. Later in the session, all five generated ideas were assessed by means of the PMI (Plus, Minus and Interesting) analysis technique. The innovation manager then plotted the four remaining ideas on the action priority matrix. Two quick wins (with a large value for minimum effort) were identified.
During concept development, the Kano model was used to prioritize the product features that were brainstormed and selected during the ideation phase. For this technique, a questionnaire was completed by 400 potential users. Next, a 3D printed prototype of the device was created. This prototype was used to review the developed solution during the problem fit assessment. To assess whether the product offered an adequate solution for the identified problem, ten potential users were invited for a direct observation exercise. Afterwards these test persons were interviewed regarding their experience with the device.
Then the feasibility of the concept concerning its position in the market, the used technology, its fit within the organization and the expected financial return was assessed. Based on this analysis, two more features were dropped because of their high cost compared to their only mediocre added value.
By plotting this project in a risk vs. reward bubble diagram, it became clear that the project had a high reward compared to its risk. Also, compared to other projects with comparable expected revenue, the project’s risk is much lower.
Ideas to Product
As project management methodology, Vasco made use of their customized version of the PRINCE2 methodology.
The product itself was developed using a SCRUM approach to be able to quickly react to changing user requirements.
Finally, Vasco had to make some decisions regarding the supply chain, production activities, distribution strategies, the marketing and (after-) sales approach and the product lifecycle management.
Using the IPACSO framework during the ideation process of the DP875 allowed VASCO to try some new techniques and experience the tools from the IPACSO framework in a production environment.
This resulted in a more interactive ideation process which provided a lot of good idea’s in a rather short time. It also resulted in better documented decisions.