Cross-Sector Knowledge Sharing

After spending three decades in the aerospace industry, I’ve seen firsthand how crucial it is for different sectors to learn from each other. We no longer can afford to stay stuck in our own bubbles. Take the aerospace industry, for example. They’ve been looking at how car manufacturers automate their factories to improve their own processes. And those racing teams? Their ability to prototype quickly and develop at a breakneck pace is something we can all learn from to speed up our product development. It’s all about breaking down those silos and embracing new ideas from wherever we can find them. When I was leading the Scorpion Jet program, our rapid development – less than two years to develop a new aircraft – caught the attention of a company known for razors and electric shavers. They reached out to us, intrigued by our ability to iterate so quickly, telling me "you developed a new jet faster than we can develop new razors..." They wanted to learn how we managed to streamline our processes. It was quite an unexpected and fascinating experience that underscored the value of looking beyond one’s own industry can lead to significant improvements and efficiencies, even in fields as seemingly unrelated as aerospace and consumer electronics. In today’s fast-paced world, it’s more important than ever for industries to break out of their silos and look to other sectors for fresh ideas and processes. This kind of cross-industry learning not only fosters innovation but also helps stay competitive in a rapidly changing market. For instance, the aerospace industry has been taking cues from car manufacturers to improve factory automation. And the automotive companies are adopting aerospace processes for systems engineering. Meanwhile, both sectors are picking up tips from tech giants like Apple and Google to boost their electronics and software development. And at Siemens, we partner with racing teams. Why? Because their knack for rapid prototyping and fast-paced development is something we can all learn from to speed up our product development cycles. This cross-pollination of ideas is crucial as industries evolve and integrate more advanced technologies. By exploring best practices from other industries, companies can find innovative new ways to improve their processes and products. After all, how can someone think outside the box, if they are only looking in the box? If you are interested in learning more, I suggest checking out this article by my colleagues Todd Tuthill and Nand Kochhar where they take a closer look at how cross-industry learning are key to developing advanced air mobility solutions. https://lnkd.in/dK3U6pJf

Same degree. Same job title. Completely different work. I spent years in academia, Ontario Ministry of Environment, Food & Cosmetics and Pharma. Every time I switched sectors, I felt like a first-year student again. ➡️ The terminology changes. In pharma, you talk about "system suitability" and "forced degradation." In food labs, it is "maximum residue limits" and "matrix-matched calibration." In environmental labs, it is "method detection limits" and "holding times." ➡️ The instruments shift too (with some exception). Pharma leans on HPLC and LC-MS/MS for drug assays. Food labs run GC-MS for volatiles and pesticide residues. Environmental labs rely on ICP-MS for heavy metals and ion chromatography for anions. ➡️ The regulations are different worlds. Pharma follows ICH Q2, FDA 21 CFR Part 211, cGMP. Food follows ISO 17025, AOAC official methods, FSMA. Environmental follows EPA 500/600 series methods and state-level compliance. ➡️ Even sample prep changes. Pharma: dilute-and-shoot or SPE. Food: QuEChERS, SPME, steam distillation for complex matrices. Environmental: liquid-liquid extraction, purge-and-trap, passive samplers. 🚀 What drove me across all these sectors was curiosity. I wanted to know how industries develop products. How they analyze samples in practice. How real problems get solved outside the walls of a research lab. Textbooks do not answer those questions. Working across sectors does. If you want cross-sector awareness: → Read regulatory updates outside your own field (ICH, FDA, EPA, EFSA) → Follow journals across boundaries: Analytical Chemistry, TrAC, JAAS → Go to conference sessions outside your niche at Pittcon or ASMS → Connect with analytical chemists in different sectors here on LinkedIn and ask them what a normal Tuesday looks like The analytical chemist who understands pharma AND food AND environmental is rare. And in 2026, cross-sector fluency is a career advantage. What sector are you in, and what is one term or practice from your industry that would confuse an analytical chemist from another sector? PS: If anyone wants to talk about analytical chemistry reach out via DM. Even better email on my LinkedIn profile.

This one makes most business leaders uncomfortable when they first hear it. Maruti Suzuki India Limited actively shared manufacturing knowledge, quality systems, and process improvements with vendors who also supplied to other car companies. RC Bhargav's reasoning was straightforward. India needed a capable auto component industry. Maruti needed that industry to exist because without it they could not build a competitive car. Whether a given vendor also supplied to a competitor was secondary. If the Indian auto component sector became capable, Maruti benefited. Full stop. When liberalisation came in the early 1990s and global manufacturers entered India with full ownership and full resources, the one sector that could hold its ground was auto components. That did not happen by accident. It happened because Maruti, through the 1980s, had invested in the capability of the entire ecosystem, not just their own supply base. The competitive strategy lesson here is not that you should share everything with everyone. It is that there is a category of foundational capability, the capability without which your business cannot function at all, where growing the ecosystem matters more than protecting your position within it. In software it is the developer and talent ecosystem. In manufacturing it is the supply chain and component base. In services it is the industry-wide knowledge infrastructure. Companies that try to lock up the ecosystem to extract advantage often discover the ecosystem does not grow fast enough to support their own ambitions. The ones that invest in the ecosystem tend to outgrow everyone else, including the competitors they were worried about. Watch the full episode here: https://lnkd.in/gfiESf-P

Sharing some key insights I gained through conversations with Danish foundations, think tanks, and funds. 1. Ownership and Long-Term Stewardship In Denmark, several large companies — including Carlsberg, Novo, and LEGO — are owned by foundations. This structure allows them to act for the public good, take bold, long-term approaches, without pressure for short-term profits. 2. Ecosystem Architecture and Field-Building Foundations are moving beyond traditional grantmaking to act as field-builders — strategically seeding, connecting, and scaling networks, think tanks, and knowledge infrastructures. The KR Foundation is one example: they fund new networks in areas like climate policy, nurturing them until they can stand on their own. It’s a reminder that funding ideas, relationships, and shared narratives is just as important as funding projects. 3. Government-Backed Outcome-Focused Funds The Danish government created and endowed the Danish Social Investment Fund to work with municipalities in identifying and supporting outcome-based social contracts. Foundations contribute early capital and first-loss guarantees, reducing risk and unlocking private investment. It’s a powerful model for how philanthropy and government can align to achieve measurable social outcomes. 4. Long-Term, Adaptive, Mission-Driven Approaches Foundations and their partners think in decades, not grant cycles. Adaptive, participatory approaches — like Bikuben’s “mission-based innovation” or Danish Social Innovation Academy's relational experimentation — allow learning and iteration across complex challenges. 5. Cross-Sector Collaboration for Systemic Change True systems change depends on alignment across government, business, and civil society. Danish actors make this happen through joint funding, shared metrics, and regular convening — reducing fragmentation and amplifying impact. 6. Well-Being Economy as an Overarching Framework There’s growing momentum to move from growth-driven to well-being economies — centred on human and planetary health, equity, and ecological balance. Think tanks like the Wellbeing Economy Lab, alongside foundations and public partners, are exploring how economies can serve people and the planet for generations to come. A sincerest gratitude to Brian Valbjørn S. Søren Kaare-Andersen Mads Falkenfleth Jensen Anders Højlund Anders Folmer Buhelt Camilla Bjerre Damgaard Elisabeth Andreew, CFA  who took the time to speak with me. This high-level reflection can’t capture the full depth of what I heard, but I’ve come away with much greater clarity — and inspiration — about what’s possible when we support future possibilities and long-term change. Definity Foundation Shauna Sylvester Stephen Huddart Aatif Baskanderi Sadia Zaman Narinder Dhami Nadia Duguay Jane Rabinowicz Colette Murphy Riz Ibrahim Andrew Chunilall, CPA, CA, ICD.D Devika Shah Vani Jain Hilary Pearson, CM Andrea Clarke MSc., MBA Cathy Taylor Please share with others, as relevant.

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

A top-tier professional services firm we advised had decided 4 years earlier to ditch its sector-based strategy (mostly for political reasons – a long story). Since then, clients were increasingly dissatisfied with generic advice, partners felt disconnected from their “community” of like-minded peers, the firm lost its edge in generating eye-catching thought leadership, and the firm was losing market share. Ouch. The challenge underscored a key lesson: success in PSFs demands engaging with clients on the dimension they care about – how to win in their own industry. Inside the firm, this requires true cross-silo collaboration. We worked with leaders to re-envision their sector strategy and implement process changes, leadership changes, and skill development to successfully relaunch. Here are five essentials to build true cross-silo collaboration, to serve sector-specific needs: 1. Appoint sector heads who can actually lead. Industry expertise should be a given. Sector heads need to shape the strategy, motivate peers and hold them accountable, and engage with the market.  2. Create community. Sector leaders should organize regular, dual-purpose interactions to (1) expand/build knowledge of industry trends and client needs while (2) enhancing bonds and trust between community members. Get people involved – don’t drone on with “updates” but rather spark debates, ask Associates to do mini-presentations, have fun. 3. Embrace a matrix. Practice groups remain essential units for innovation and building technical expertise. Sector leads need to work directly with peer practice group leaders to create an integrated strategy and product offerings that address what the market needs. 4. Create shared goals. Align the sector and practice groups on shared objectives and metrics that reward collaboration. For example, instead of solely incentivizing individual sales, focus on overall client satisfaction and revenue growth. We explore these ideas in our HBR article “Performance Management Shouldn't Kill Collaboration.” 5. Celebrate collaborative success – and stop heroizing individuals. Recognize and reward examples of effective cross-silo collaboration (rewards don’t have to be money – we find that creative prizes can go a long way). Highlight team success stories to inspire others to break down silos and generate real innovation. 💡 Your turn: How has your organization tackled the challenge of aligning teams for sector success? Share your thoughts below. (And stay tuned for our next post on how to overcome barriers to sector collaboration – grounded in Chapter 7 of our best-selling book "Smarter Collaboration: A New Approach to Breaking Down Barriers and Transforming Work.") #SmarterCollaboration #Sectors

Over the past months, I’ve dedicated time to analysing the pace and direction of innovation in Europe’s water sector — and I want to share a strategic insight that has become increasingly clear. Europe already has a proven model for systemic transformation: the energy sector. Years of aligned regulation, shared data standards, coordinated system operations, and deep digitalisation have created one of the most interoperable energy systems in the world and still evolving. 💧 The water sector stands in stark contrast. It remains highly fragmented, technically heterogeneous, and digitally underdeveloped. This limits our ability to manage drought, infrastructure risk, water quality, and climate volatility at the speed required. Yet the opportunity is significant: 🔄 Cross-disciplinary expertise from the energy sector can accelerate the modernisation of water systems. The frameworks that enabled energy’s transformation — interoperability standards, data governance, cyber readiness, market mechanisms, real-time operational models — offer valuable guidance for the water domain. Strategic knowledge transfer can enable: -Scalable real-time monitoring and predictive management -Stronger, more coordinated water governance across borders -A unified data architecture that supports innovation -Faster deployment of digital technologies across utilities -Greater resilience against climate-driven disruptions -Significant efficiency and economic gains across the value chain For Europe to strengthen its water resilience and safeguard its economic competitiveness, cross-sector collaboration is not optional — it is a strategic imperative. Water is emerging as one of Europe’s most critical infrastructure challenges. Leveraging cross-disciplinary strengths will determine how effectively we respond. VITO CAPTURE University of Antwerp Thanks to Nuno Lourenço Cecilia Rodrigues Kristian Åsberg Carlos Montero Ruano for your dedication and learning full moments together

❓Ever been in a room where you're speaking English but nobody seems to understand you? In my latest article, I explore how mastering the "hidden languages" of different social impact sub-sectors became essential to my work across philanthropy, government, NGOs, and corporate partnerships. From blank stares when discussing "learning outcomes" with corporate staff to having my impact measurement approach dismissed as "too academic" by impact investors, I've learned each sub-sector speaks its own dialect. Drawing on Bourdieu's concept of linguistic capital and my experiences spanning diverse sub-sectors, I share practical strategies for building this undervalued skill and consider how AI might transform this landscape. As cross-sector collaboration becomes essential in social impact, those who can translate between worlds will be the bridges our sector desperately needs. Read the full blog article with my top job picks from the PurposePhil Career platform: 👇 #PurposePhil #EdPhil #jobs #career #philanthropy #education #EdTech #evidence

📍 Notes from a Policy & Public Affairs Recruiter Why the Most Effective Policy Professionals Often Move Between Sectors 👉 The most impactful policy professionals I engage with tend to have experience that spans more than one environment — public, non-profit, and private. That doesn’t mean it’s the only path to success, but it’s a perspective worth exploring. Policy and public affairs work sits at the intersection of ideas, institutions, and influence. Each sector offers its own lessons, and together they create a more rounded view of how policy is shaped and delivered. 🏛️ Public sector: teaches the structure and pace of decision-making: how policy is formed, challenged, and implemented. 🌍 Non-profit world: sharpens advocacy, storytelling, and the ability to influence without authority. 🏢 Private sector: builds strategic and commercial awareness: understanding how policy decisions affect markets, reputation, and regulation. Those who have crossed sectors often develop a kind of “bilingual” fluency with the ability to translate between institutional logic, campaign energy, and corporate strategy. But equally, there is great value in deep sector expertise. Not every professional needs to move - what matters is how you learn from and connect with other perspectives. From a recruitment standpoint, employers increasingly value candidates who can see the bigger picture - whether that comes from career breadth or deep expertise complemented by strong external engagement. So perhaps the real question isn’t: 💡 “Should I move sectors?” But rather: “How can I broaden my perspective - wherever I am?” 👇 Curious to hear your view - do you think cross-sector experience strengthens or dilutes a policy career? #PublicAffairs #PolicyCareers #GovernmentRelations #ESG #Advocacy #PolicyProfession #Leadership #ClaytonDesant #PolicyRecruitment

Many companies look for industry-specific #Marketing expertise, but cross-industry experience brings fresh ideas and strategic agility that drive real impact. Here’s why diverse industry expertise in marketing is an asset: ▶️ 𝗙𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗵 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀 & 𝗜𝗻𝗻𝗼𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: Marketers who have worked in different industries bring unconventional ideas, new storytelling angles, and creative strategies that challenge the status quo. They can apply best practices from one sector to another, sparking innovation. ▶️ 𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗿 𝗔𝗱𝗮𝗽𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 & 𝗔𝗴𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆: Having navigated different business models, customer behaviors, and market dynamics, cross-industry marketers are quick to learn, pivot, and adapt to new challenges. This is especially valuable in fast-changing industries! ▶️ 𝗗𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗲 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺-𝗦𝗼𝗹𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗔𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗲𝘀: Exposure to various industries means exposure to different challenges. Marketers with this background can draw from a broad toolkit of solutions, finding new ways to overcome business obstacles. ▶️ 𝗖𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗿-𝗖𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗕𝗲𝘆𝗼𝗻𝗱 𝗦𝗶𝗹𝗼𝘀: They have experience understanding different audiences, buyer journeys, and engagement strategies, allowing them to bring a holistic and customer-first approach rather than being limited by industry norms. ▶️ 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗮-𝗗𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗻 & 𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗰 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴: Marketers with diverse experience often excel in identifying patterns, leveraging insights, and using data strategically. These are skills that transcend industry boundaries and lead to stronger, results-driven marketing. The best marketing strategies don’t come from staying in one lane but from blending insights, experiences, and methodologies across industries. If you're hiring, don't just look for industry expertise. Look for adaptability, strategic thinking, and a track record of impact. What’s your take? Have you worked across industries? How has it shaped your marketing approach? Drop your feedback in the comments. 👇 Thanks.