Collaborative Innovation Tools

AI isn't just a tool; it's becoming a teammate. A major field experiment with 776 professionals at Procter & Gamble, led by researchers from Harvard, Wharton, and Warwick, revealed something remarkable: Generative AI can replicate and even outperform human teamwork. Read the recently published paper here: In a real-world new product development challenge, professionals were assigned to one of four conditions: 1. Control Individuals without AI 2. Human Team R&D + Commercial without AI (+0.24 SD) 3. Individual + AI Working alone with GPT-4 (+0.37 SD) 4. AI-Augmented Team Human team + GPT-4 (+0.39 SD) Key findings: ⭐ Individuals with AI matched the output quality of traditional teams, with 16% less time spent. ⭐ AI helped non-experts perform like seasoned product developers. ⭐ It flattened functional silos: R&D and Commercial employees produced more balanced, cross-functional solutions. ⭐ It made work feel better: AI users reported higher excitement and energy and lower anxiety, even more so than many working in human-only teams. What does this mean for organizations? 💡 Rethink team structures. One AI-empowered individual can do the work of two and do it faster. 💡 Democratize expertise. AI is a boundary-spanning engine that reduces reliance on deep specialization. 💡 Invest in AI fluency. Prompting and AI collaboration skills are the new competitive edge. 💡 Double down on innovation. AI + team = highest chance of top-tier breakthrough ideas. This is not just productivity software. This is a redefinition of how work happens. AI is no longer the intern or the assistant. It’s showing up as a cybernetic teammate, enhancing performance, dissolving silos, and lifting morale. The future of work isn’t human vs. AI. The next step is human + AI + new ways of collaborating. Are you ready?

I am pleased to share the publication of “Implementing clinical needs into the development of wearable health-monitoring technology” in Nature Nanotechnology (Nature Portfolio), led by Noe Brasier. It was a privilege to contribute as a co-author alongside Noé, Anja Domenghino, Christoph A. Meier, Steve Xu, and John Rogers. The article highlights the importance of embedding clinical needs and feedback throughout the development of wearable health technologies. It argues that true innovation in this field depends not only on technical excellence but also on a deep understanding of clinical workflows, patient realities, and system-level incentives. Under Noé’s thoughtful leadership, the paper proposes a structured framework for integrating clinician insights, from early problem identification to prototype refinement, so that wearable devices can achieve both clinical relevance and real-world adoption. As digital health continues to evolve, this type of transdisciplinary approach will be key to translating promising technology into meaningful improvements in care and patient outcomes. Open access link: https://lnkd.in/dMBXeGmp #DigitalHealth #Wearables #HealthInnovation #ClinicalResearch #TranslationalMedicine #HealthTechnology #PatientCentricCare #Nanotechnology #Collaboration #FutureOfHealthcare

Atomically thin semiconductors driving smart sensors with real-world impact Focusing on atomically thin semiconductors at RMIT University, we are creating the next generation of ultra-sensitive sensors and smart systems. They are smaller, faster, and more energy-efficient than ever before. Our innovation begins at the atomic scale. My colleagues and I are engineering two-dimensional (2D) semiconductors such as graphene, transition-metal dichalcogenides, and transition-metal oxides - materials only a few atoms thick yet possessing extraordinary electrical and optical tunability. These quantum-thin layers exhibit exceptional charge-carrier mobility, excitonic behaviour, and mechanical flexibility, unlocking new frontiers in wearable sensors, ultra-fast optoelectronics, and bio-integrated devices. I’m lucky to work in world-class research facilities, which serve as the backbone of innovation, enabling interdisciplinary collaboration across scales, and alongside several national research centres, including the ARC Centre of Excellence in Optical Microcombs for Breakthrough Science (COMBS) . These hubs help connect my research to a global network of experts in photonics, quantum materials, and low-energy electronics. What truly distinguishes our approach is the ability to translate atomic-scale discoveries into intelligent, connected systems. Atomically thin semiconductor devices are being integrated into Internet of Things platforms, wireless communication modules, and AI-assisted signal processors, creating systems that not only sense but also interpret and respond. These platforms enable real-time environmental monitoring, such as detecting trace gases and pollutants, as well as advanced biomedical diagnostics, where bio-field-effect transistors (bio-FETs) and photonic biosensors can identify disease biomarkers at early stages. In the energy and mobility sectors, high-mobility 2D semiconductors are driving low-power electronics and adaptive control systems for sustainable technologies. RMIT’s multidisciplinary engineering ecosystem ensures each layer, from material design to data analytics, contributes to intelligent functionality. A notable example of this multi-layered ecosystem at work is the world-first ingestible gas-sensing capsule, now commercialised by Atmo Biosciences. Incorporating nanoscale sensors, a smart processor, and a wireless transmission module, the capsule measures intestinal gases in vivo and transmits real-time data to reveal insights into gut health. It exemplifies how nanomaterial-enabled sensors can evolve into life-changing medical technologies. By uniting atomically thin materials, smart system integration, and global collaboration, my colleagues and I continue to lead in Electrical and Electronic Engineering research. We are shaping a future where every atom powers intelligent, sustainable, and connected technologies. Interested in collaborating? Get in touch: Jian Zhen Ou - RMIT University

A designer’s role in multidisciplinary creative collaboration In the world of product development, the most innovative solutions often result from intense collaboration across diverse perspectives Diversity comes in many flavors… cultural, gender, specialties, disciplines, skillsets and more Let’s talk about the designer's role in a multidisciplinary setting As designers, we're more than just creators We’re the translators, mediators, and catalysts that bring different perspectives together to shape meaningful products and experiences When we worked on the John Deere 1R electric tractor at BMW Designworks, our core team consisted of designers, engineers, product marketers, and model makers We were a small but accomplished group of around six people, united by one common goal… to design, engineer, and convert a 1R combustion tractor into a drivable 1R electric tractor Looking back, my roles as the creative director and lead designer wasn’t just about designing and building the tractor… it became a lot more than that… _Translator... Acting as the bridge between engineering, marketing, and business strategy, turning complex ideas into tangible, user-centric solutions. Clear communication was crucial to ensure everyone understood the project's vision and goals… and stay on track _Holistic Problem Solver... Integrating insights from various disciplines allowed us to approach problems from multiple angles in real time. It's about finding solutions that are both innovative and feasible, balancing creativity with practicality _Rapid Prototyping & Iteration... True innovation requires rapid iteration with input from all corners. By involving designers, engineers, and model makers in the prototyping phase, we could address real-world constraints while keeping the user experience front and center _Aligning a Shared Vision... Design isn't just about aesthetics… it's about empathy. By aligning with other disciplines on a user-centric goal, we ensured every aspect of the product resonated with the people it was designed for _Mediating Ideas and Realities... Navigating the delicate balance between bold ideas and practical limitations was key. We had limited time, and our role was to champion creativity while mediating conflicts, ensuring the final product was both innovative, viable and on time _Championing Innovation Together... Collaboration is about co-creation. By combining diverse expertise, we were able to push boundaries, generate breakthrough ideas, and build products that truly stood out _Building a Collaborative Culture... Great design emerges when we acknowledge and celebrate diverse contributions. It’s about fostering a collaborative culture where every voice is heard and every idea is valued The magic happens when we bring together minds from different disciplines to create something that none of us could have achieved alone. In your experience, how has cross-disciplinary collaboration impacted your design process?

    Why does a cancer patient painting in art therapy show measurable improvements in immune function? The intersection of arts and health represents one of the most fascinating frontiers in research today, and one of the most challenging to study. How do you capture the moment when a stroke survivor's musical improvisation rewires their neural networks? Or measure the community-level health impacts of a neighborhood mural project? The complexity challenge: Arts-based health interventions operate across multiple systems simultaneously. A dance therapy session for people with Parkinson's isn't just physical exercise, it's social connection, creative expression, cognitive challenge, emotional processing, and neuroplasticity training – all happening at once. Traditional research methods, designed for simpler interventions, struggle to capture this multidimensional reality. We need approaches that can handle the irreducible complexity of experiences that resist being broken down into component parts. A violin lesson for someone recovering from trauma isn't just "music" plus "therapy", it's an emergent phenomenon that transcends either category alone. Breaking down silos: The most innovative work is happening at the intersections: neuroscientists collaborating with theater directors, public health researchers working alongside poets, bioengineers learning from dancers. These collaborations aren't just nice to have, they're essential for understanding interventions that operate across biological, psychological, social, and cultural systems. Why this matters now: We're facing a loneliness epidemic that rivals smoking as a health risk. Healthcare costs are unsustainable. Many communities lack access to traditional mental health services. Meanwhile, arts-based interventions often reach populations that conventional medicine doesn't, providing culturally relevant, community-centered approaches to wellness. But to scale these interventions and integrate them into healthcare systems, we need rigorous evidence that speaks multiple languages, from molecular biology to community organizing, from health economics to aesthetic theory. The opportunity: iScience is launching a special issue on "Transdisciplinary Approaches to Arts and Health," seeking research that bridges these traditional boundaries. Whether you're studying the epigenetics of creativity, the sociology of healing spaces, the neuroscience of aesthetic experience, or the economics of cultural interventions, this is a chance to contribute to a more integrated understanding of how arts shape health. I am privileged to be part of a stellar group of co-editors from whom I have learnt, and keep learning, so much: Agustin Ibanez Nisha Sajnani, PhD RDT-BCT Jill Sonke Dominic Campbell Elisabeth Bahr. The submission deadline is August 30, 2026. Full details here: https://lnkd.in/d5MGbkJC

Collaboration across disciplines sounds intuitive. In practice, it is anything but simple. A recent qualitative study examining how artists, scientists and technologists work together shows that interdisciplinary collaboration about navigating fundamentally different ways of thinking, creating and validating knowledge. Participants describe collaboration as a process of “de-disciplining” themselves. Established methods, norms and hierarchies need to be temporarily suspended to make room for alternative perspectives. This is where friction emerges. Scientists may prioritise rigour and reproducibility, artists ambiguity and exploration, technologists functionality and application. What makes collaboration work is not alignment, but negotiation. Shared understanding develops through iteration, translation and, often, discomfort. Trust becomes a central variable, not only between individuals but between epistemologies. The study also points to structural constraints. Institutional settings, funding models and evaluation criteria still favour disciplinary outputs. This creates a paradox where interdisciplinary work is encouraged rhetorically but remains difficult to sustain in practice. Authors: Zeynep Birsel, Ellen Loots, Lénia Marques

💡 As scientists and engineers, here's something we often get wrong about innovation: We understand that innovation requires an interdisciplinary perspective, but we aren't interdisciplinary enough. For a long time, interdisciplinary to me meant things like: • physics + biology • engineering + psychology  • mechanical engineering + medicine • biomedical engineering + machine learning Technically, these are interdisciplinary, but they're still too science- and tech-centric. These alone are insufficient to develop solutions that can translate into positive societal impacts. And, in fact, they can lead to too much focus on gadgetry and technology for the sake of "innovation" rather than for the sake of the user, practicality, translatability, or scalability. Often as engineers and scientists we overlook (or underinvest in) factors related to: • financials • user needs • manufacturing This video game I encountered at the science center in Columbus (COSI) surprisingly did an amazing job introducing kids (and adults) to the innovation process! At first, the game seemed silly. Design a rubber ducky for kids' bath time. Of course, anyone can do this, right?? Well, not really. Or at least not well. You have to select different features to include. And you have to talk to colleagues from different backgrounds: • product design • engineering  • leadership • market research  • financial The best solutions are actually a bit counterintuitive. And if you don't balance the diverse perspectives well, then sales will plummet, or worse you may burn down the factory and go out of business. Sure, this game was about a rubber ducky, but I saw lots of parallels with developing #prosthetics, #exoskeletons, #exosuits, and other #wearabletech. TL/DR: What I thought was a kids game about a rubber ducky, turned out to be a masterclass on how to innovate. It really got me thinking about what it means to be interdisciplinary, and how you have to push beyond your comfort zone to truly innovate. Now, I kind of want to add this game to the engineering curriculum!

We cut an 11-week innovation process down to 3 weeks and tripled the output. Here's how. One of my clients had a solid product development process — but it was slow, resource-heavy, and inconsistent. Over the last few months, we built and implemented an AI Ideation Agent inside Microsoft Copilot — trained specifically to their brand strategy, target audiences, culinary pillars, dayparts, and competitive set. The results? → 300% increase in innovation pipeline volume → 11 weeks → 3 weeks, zero to final screened concepts → On-brand, on target, unique ideas generated in minutes — not months The agent isn't autonomous. It still needs human input and iteration to get concepts right. But that effort is a fraction of what the old process required — and the output is sharper because the guardrails are built in. AI doesn't replace the thinking. It accelerates it. All it needs now is a real name... any ideas?

Most leaders look for answers in their own industry. The best ones look beyond it. Aviation engineers solved turbulence issues by studying bird flight. Automakers improved safety by learning from football helmet designs. Doctors are collaborating with AI experts to detect diseases earlier. These breakthroughs didn’t happen by thinking inside the box. They happened when leaders connected the dots across disciplines. This is transdisciplinary thinking: The ability to pull insights from unexpected places to solve complex problems. Transdisciplinary thinking is no longer optional. AI isn’t just for tech ➡ It’s transforming finance, healthcare, and leadership. Supply chain strategies from aerospace are revolutionizing retail logistics. Marketing isn’t just about creativity ➡ It’s about behavioral science. Leaders who embrace cross-industry thinking don’t just adapt. They innovate where others struggle. The question is: Are you learning beyond your field? Where have you borrowed ideas from unexpected places? P.S. I coach leaders to sharpen their ability to think beyond the obvious.

Are We Speaking the Same Language? 💡 Insights on Interdisciplinary Science Communication A few years ago, I was asked to help scientists communicate with… each other. This surprised me a bit because I usually train researchers to engage with the public, high school students etc. But why help scientists communicate among themselves? The answer lies in the rise of interdisciplinary research: Today’s complex problems require knowledge from many different research fields, making effective communication within interdisciplinary research projects crucial. Despite limited literature on this, I took on the challenge and have since conducted numerous rewarding workshops. This autumn I moderated a workshop for Carlsberg Foundation Semper Ardens Accelerate grant holders and in later summer we had a productive ITEASc workshop in Middelfart, where PhD and master’s students developed and pitched interdisciplinary research projects. Here are some key takeaways for successful interdisciplinary research and scicomm from the workshops: 📣 Have a clear aim: Well-motivated research questions are essential. 📣 Start a dialogue, not a monologue: Listen to your audience (in this case: your peers). 📣 Be transparent: Share your uncertainties. 📣 Train in a safe environment: Positive feedback culture is important. 📣 Be playful and reflective - but hold on to your core scientific skills and projects. 📣 Have patience: Developing a common language takes time. As we learned from ITEASc keynote speaker Andreas Roepstorff, interdisciplinary work might even slow down publication rates. But we need better papers, not more papers. We need to listen more and talk/write less! So… how do we train this in a workshop? 1) We start with fun and safe activities to spark conversation. It might look chaotic in photos, but it’s well thought out :-) 2) We aim for clear end products, like poster presentations. 3) Everyone literally writes down their core scientific skills on a piece of paper and presents it to the others. Three trivial points? Yes, perhaps. But highly efficient! AND it’s fun. What more could you ask for? Here what participants said when evaluating the workshops: “The workshop was really enlightening. It provided a toolbox that I will for sure use in the future to establish collaborations and submit multidisciplinary proposals with colleagues with different backgrounds!” “It was a friendly and validating environment.” “The ice breaker gave me the feeling that this was well organised, this was something new, and this was going to be fun. It did wonders for networking throughout the day.” “Amazing ideas in 3h. I can only imagine what could we do with months!” “It significantly shaped me to a better science communicator :)”   What are your experiences – good or bad – with Interdisciplinary Science Communication?