Independent advisory, workshops and executive sparring for leaders deciding what to test, fund, pivot, stop or scale.
Innovation leaders rarely lack ideas. The harder question is which opportunity deserves further commitment—and what evidence should justify additional funding.
I provide independent innovation strategy consulting for executives, boards, founders and innovation leaders facing consequential decisions before the evidence is complete. I help leadership teams determine what to test, fund, pivot, stop, defer or scale before capital, credibility and organizational energy become difficult to recover.
Based in Zurich, Switzerland, I work with organizations across DACH and Europe in English and German. My work combines strategic challenge, evidence review and practical decision support for innovation portfolios, business models, corporate ventures and AI investments.
Typical questions include:
Which opportunity deserves further exploration?
Which assumption should be tested first?
What evidence would justify additional funding?
When should an initiative pivot, stop, defer or scale?
Innovation Strategy Consulting in Switzerland, DACH and Across Europe
Selected Innovation Strategy Consulting Cases:
Case 1: From an Unvalidated Idea to Ten Paying Customers
Decision: Whether to continue pursuing the founders’ original business idea, stop the venture or pivot after no problem–solution fit had been established.
Weakest assumption: The original idea did not address a sufficiently important customer problem. Without problem–solution fit, further attempts to optimise the business model could not produce reliable evidence of viability.
My contribution: As interim CEO, I led the customer research, established a clear user and problem definition around an important underserved struggle, and redirected the value proposition, solution, revenue logic and commercial approach around that evidence.
Observed result: The pivot produced a working B2B business model and secured ten paying customers among larger Swiss transport companies.
Case 2: From OEM Dependency to Utility-Led Validation
Decision: Whether to continue, adapt or discontinue an existing energy business model.
Weakest assumption: The business model assumed that OEMs would integrate the solution into their products because it helped utilities incorporate more renewable energy assets into their grids and managed-service portfolios.
My contribution: I redesigned the business model by shifting the primary customer from OEMs to energy service providers and grid operators. OEMs were repositioned as ecosystem partners supporting an integrated end-customer solution.
Observed result: The pivot led to early proofs of concept and pilots with integrated solutions, designed to quantify the financial impact and determine whether larger rollouts were justified.
Case 3: From Technological Interest to a Stop Decision
Decision: Whether to pursue a dual-use, sensor-based monitoring solution for civilian and military settings that could indicate whether personnel were fit to continue working or should rest because their vital signs suggested an elevated risk of collapse.
Weakest assumption: The team treated expressed interest in the technology as evidence of demand. The initial interviews had not established a specific job to be done, dissatisfaction with existing alternatives, willingness to switch or willingness to pay.
My contribution: I conducted Jobs-to-be-Done research with the main potential user groups, examined the relevant demand and adoption factors, and established a clear user and problem definition.
Observed result: Despite interest in the technology, the research found insufficient willingness to switch and pay. The likelihood of adoption was too low to justify further long-term investment, so I recommended stopping the initiative and reallocating the resources to other innovation candidates.
Training
Workshops turn a current innovation question into a structured decision.
Participants work with real initiatives, assumptions and evidence. They leave with a practical artifact they can continue using after the workshop.
One recurring principle is that business model validation must test the whole system. Participants therefore examine the connections among customer progress, switching, delivery, revenue, and viability rather than completing isolated canvases.
Typical formats include:
Start, Pivot, Stop or Scale
Innovation Portfolio Decision Review
Business Model Assumption Mapping
AI and Innovation Decision Quality
Keynotes
Keynotes challenge how leaders think about innovation, artificial intelligence, evidence and commitment.
They are designed for executive events, leadership meetings, conferences and organizations that want more than another presentation about trends or technology.
One recurring question is why innovation automation requires stronger evidence standards as AI makes outputs, prototypes, and research artifacts cheaper.
Typical themes include:
Better Innovation Decisions Under Uncertainty
AI Makes Output Cheap. Judgment Becomes the Job.
The Cost of Being Wrong in Innovation
Continuous Business Model Innovation
Advisory and Executive Sparring
Advisory is for leaders preparing a funding, portfolio, business-model or strategic innovation decision.
I provide independent challenge, structured diagnosis and decision support without creating a large consulting program around the problem.
Portfolio decisions also depend on whether the organization has the corporate innovation readiness to learn before commitment increases. A strong initiative can still fail when customer access, decision rights, incentives, or transition capabilities are missing.
Typical situations include:
preparing a board or steering decision;
reviewing an innovation portfolio;
evaluating whether an initiative deserves further funding;
exposing weakly tested business-model assumptions;
deciding whether to continue, pivot, stop or defer;
assessing an AI investment beyond productivity claims.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does an innovation strategy consultant do?
An innovation strategy consultant helps leaders clarify consequential decisions, expose critical assumptions, assess the available evidence and define what must be learned before further resources are committed. The purpose is not to generate more ideas, but to improve decisions about what to test, fund, pivot, stop, defer or scale.
When should an organization use independent innovation advisory?
Independent advisory is useful before a major funding decision, when evidence is incomplete, when internal stakeholders interpret the same signals differently or when an initiative has accumulated momentum without resolving its most important uncertainties.
Which innovation decisions do you support?
I support decisions concerning innovation portfolios, new business models, corporate ventures, customer and market validation, AI investments and initiatives that may need to continue, pivot, stop, defer or scale.
Where do you provide innovation strategy consulting?
I am based in Zurich and work with organizations across Switzerland, DACH and Europe. Engagements can be conducted in English or German, online or in person.
What does an engagement produce?
Depending on the decision, the output may include an assumption and evidence map, an independent recommendation, explicit decision criteria, a concise decision memo or a defined learning step before the next commitment.
Start with the decision
You do not need to know which service format you need.
Describe the decision, the uncertainty and what will become expensive if the organization gets it wrong.
If you want to explore the underlying decision logic before contacting me, start with the guide to better innovation decisions under uncertainty.
