Most programs fail because they're too broad, too disconnected from corporate goals, or too slow to produce anything tangible that leadership can count as a win. In many cases, setups rely on a single vehicle (e.g. a standalone CVC or a lone lab) operating in isolation with minimal business impact and little sustained revenue generation (Bundl, 2025).

‍

Let’s take a closer look at some of the reasons corporate innovation programs fail:

‍

According to BCG's 2024 Global Innovation Survey, 83% of companies rank innovation as a top-three priority,  but only 3% qualify as "innovation ready." To overcome that gap, you’ll need a clear focus, mandate, governance, and a structured way to decide what to build, what to buy, and what to stop. 

‍

Let’s start by defining “where to play”.

In an innovation context, defining “where to play” refers to where you will be focusing your innovation program’s efforts (ITONICS, End-to-End Innovation Process, 2024).

‍

It’s a strategic choice that will help you focus your corporate resources on the highest-potential opportunities and guide your decisions on who to hire, the type of innovation vehicle you’ll need, and the type of ventures you’ll pursue.   

‍

Start by defining your corporate priorities, assets and gaps:

‍

The intersection of these three inputs is your innovation mandate. Think of it as a north star to help you define the specific markets, customer segments, technologies, or business models to target.

A good way to get the answers you need is to:

• Interview business-unit leaders
• Review corporate strategy and transformation priorities
• Map current innovation activity
• Identify duplicated or stalled initiatives
• Prioritise 3 to 5 opportunity areas (Bundl, 2024)

‍

Now that you know where to play, it’s time to figure out what innovation vehicle you’ll need to execute.

Choosing the right vehicle depends on your strategic objectives, risk appetite, timeline, and starting capabilities (Bundl, 7 Corporate Venture Unit Strategies, 2025).

‍

For programs built from scratch, venture clienting is the fastest path to results. Companies with a dedicated Venture Client Unit consistently run more pilots and achieve procurement cycles under 12 weeks at a rate nine times higher than those without one (State of Venture Client Report, 27pilots, 2024).

‍

Mature programs eventually combine vehicles, using venture clienting for speed and operational impact, while building CVC capability for long-term strategic positioning (Bundl, CVC vs Venture Clienting Explained, 2025).

Senior leaders need to understand how innovation contributes to growth, efficiency, capability building, risk reduction, or strategic positioning. Your innovation KPIs should therefore translate activity into business value clearly and efficiently (Bundl, Corporate Venturing Metrics: The Practical Guide, 2023).

‍

Use a balanced KPI system that evolves as the program matures.

‍

BCG found that 70% of executives struggle to link innovation metrics to business strategy, which is why using the right KPIs is so important (BCG Global Innovation Report, 2024).For more information on how to effectively measure your corporate innovation efforts, be sure to check out our report: How to effectively measure corporate venturing success.

Your first 90 days should be about creating enough focus, proof, and internal trust to earn the right to scale. Here’s a quick summary of what that might look like in practice:

‍

Now let’s take a close look at each stage individually:

Days 1–30: Foundation

The first 30 days are diagnostic. During this time, you’ll define what already exists, who the key stakeholders are, and what political risks can derail you. Key activities include:

• Audit every existing innovation initiative against the ecosystem matrix. This will help you find any redundancies and blind spots (Bundl, Innovation Ecosystems Series, 2025).
• Build a stakeholder map to identify and secure relevant sponsors and business unit partners to host pilots.
• Draft your mandate document and get it signed.
• Write your strategic intent statement (maximum two pages), defining what your program’s goals are. 

Days 31–60: Design

During this phase, you’ll be translating your mandate into a concrete operating model (e.g. which vehicle, what governance, what the first 12 months look like on a timeline). Key activities include:

• Selecting your vehicle(s) based on your strategic intent
• Designing your governance model (e.g. decision rights, stage-gate process, reporting cadence) 
• Building your year-1 roadmap with milestones, budget allocation, and key hires
• Running your first external scan to find out what startups or partners are relevant to your chosen vehicle

Days 61–90: Activation

This third phase has one job: to generate proof that the program is functional. This will require a tangible first move, e.g. a challenge sprint completed, a startup engaged on a scoped use case, a first cohort selected.

Harvard Business Review describes this as a "Minimum Viable Innovation System", which is a lean but operational innovation capability designed to be reliable, strategically focused, and up and running within 90 days (Innosight, Build an Innovation Engine in 90 Days, HBR, 2014)

The 90-day window matters because it's the period where leadership forms its view of what your program can actually deliver.

Q. How long does it realistically take to build a corporate innovation program from scratch?

A functioning operating model (e.g. mandate defined, sponsor confirmed, vehicle selected, first pilot launched) can be in place within 90 days with a small, focused team. Full program maturity with scaled adoption and measurable business impact typically takes 12–24 months.

Q. What's the right team size to start?

Start with 2–4 people combining business depth, startup ecosystem knowledge, and operational execution capability. Programs that scale headcount before proving the model tend to over-process and under-deliver. Grow the team once you've grown the impact.

Q. How do you prevent the program from becoming too broad?

Anchor every initiative to a defined corporate priority and a specific business problem. "Reducing supply chain procurement cycle time by 30% using external technology" is a mandate you can build a program around. "Innovation" as a category is not (Bundl, 8 Essential Actions to Define Your Innovation Strategy, 2026).

Q. When should you add a second innovation vehicle?

Once your primary vehicle has delivered measurable results and the team has built operational confidence. For most programs, this is 12–18 months in. Adding CVC or venture building too early (before the operational base is solid) creates complexity without impact.

Q. What's the most common reason new innovation programs lose executive support?

Measuring and reporting the wrong things. Innovation leaders who report on activity (e.g. workshops, hackathons, events) rather than business outcomes lose the room. Every number you present should connect to a problem your sponsor owns (Bundl Venture Club, Roundtable, 2024).

Q. How do you get business units to actually engage with the program?

The most effective first engagements for a new program are challenge sprints framed around a known business unit pain point. A BU leader who sees a startup pilot solving something their team has struggled with for two years becomes your strongest internal advocate (ITONICS, Innovation Management Guide, 2025).