Why do large groups have every interest in excubing innovation?

Should you incubate or excubate your innovation?

1,700 times. According to the Harvard Business Review, that is the theoretical difference in a start‑up’s likelihood of success when it is launched by a corporation rather than by an independent entrepreneur.
In other words, a corporate player is supposedly 1,700 times more likely to create a unicorn than a lone founder with her own start‑up.

Yet the facts say otherwise: two‑thirds of new corporate initiatives fail, 19 % of innovations are never deployed, and 50 % of large groups run into major problems (delays, quality issues, budget overruns, etc.) when rolling out an innovation project.
How can we explain this gulf between theory and reality inside big organisations? And why are genuine corporate‑start‑up success stories—profitable, fast‑growing, highly valued—so rare?

Since 2019 the team at 321 has worked with roughly fifteen large groups on the ideation, execution and ultimate success of innovation projects that take the form of start‑ups. Why do corporates so often call on start‑up studios—opting to excubate rather than incubate their projects? Edouard Bouvet, a partner at 321, explains.

Corporates and innovation

Senior leaders genuinely want to innovate

One thing is clear: executives of large groups understand the impact that innovative projects can have on their results and on the dynamism of their business. In addition to that desire, they possess impressive internal resources with which to launch new growth avenues. Mid‑caps and CAC 40 companies enjoy “gold‑plated assets,” says Edouard Bouvet: “Like a mammoth, a big group has immense strengths—brand reach, a sizeable customer base, technological advances, cash on hand, strong geographic footprint, cohesive teams, proven expertise, and so on.”

But in‑house innovation projects rarely get over the line

Now ask that same mammoth to squeeze quickly through every new market opening. It can’t: it lacks the agility, lightness and flexibility required. Time constraints on teams, budget limits, shifting strategic priorities and the limited availability of decision‑makers—all of which also characterise corporates—slow the creation and development of new businesses. As a former head of corporate venture inside a French insurance giant, Edouard Bouvet has seen the inertia first‑hand:
“Internally, everyone was full of good intentions, but in execution nothing followed. Exec‑com members were rarely available. Bringing stakeholders together was extremely hard. Internal processes dragged on. And the office politics stifled decision‑making and killed any agility.”

Classic incubation vehicles are not efficient enough

To foster innovation, spark change and surface new ideas, some groups set up incubators: start‑up POCs, intrapreneurship schemes, labs, and so forth.
“Those approaches do raise awareness and can improve a few things internally, but they are never enough,” says Bouvet, noting that good ideas are often present—yet everything jams as soon as it is time to accelerate and scale, because scaling is not in a large group’s DNA. “Building a company from scratch is a different job from being an incumbent that launches new products.”

Excubating: handing the new business over to a start‑up studio

Large organisations cannot become hyper‑agile overnight. Nor can they suddenly undo everything they built to achieve their present level of excellence. Just as the CEO of a ten‑person start‑up does not become the CEO of Apple in two days, a large group cannot reverse course on its own, at the snap of a finger. Solving that square‑circle—creating entities that enjoy the mammoth’s strength without suffering its inertia—is what 321 does every day.

321’s teams partner with ambitious enterprises to co‑build new businesses while maximising their chances of success. The collaboration combines 321’s execution know‑how, forged by entrepreneurs, with the incumbent’s competitive advantages.

The power of an entrepreneurial stance

To Edouard Bouvet, being an entrepreneur means “loving to start from zero with agility.” Ask him about entrepreneurship and he will say “DIY, rapid iteration, tiny budgets, pivoting, risk‑taking, failing, lack of time, enjoying suffering, pleasure in discomfort.” In short, entrepreneurship is not a role; it is a personality, a vocation. Bouvet should know: like all partners at 321 he is a serial entrepreneur, having launched two companies before joining Patrick Amiel and Romain Ledru‑Mathe’s studio.
Unlike other structures that hire ex‑consultants, 321 recruits only serial founders. This pragmatism shapes the studio’s DNA: relentlessly operational, revenue‑driven and growth‑obsessed—an argument that weighs heavily with corporate leaders hesitating to take the excubation leap.

Start‑up studios slash time‑to‑market

A large company’s sense of time and constraints bears no resemblance to that of a start‑up. “Yet effective go‑to‑market depends on timing and adaptability,” Bouvet notes. Corporates suffer from extremely slow decision processes peppered with endless steering committees; that inertia cripples their time‑to‑market. “By the time the internal green light finally comes, the market has already shifted and it’s too late.”

Co‑creation and shared responsibility

By teaming up with 321, large groups can test high‑uncertainty ideas without wasting precious time on internal validation loops. Big innovation projects need room to grow outside the firm, autonomously. “You have to let them fail, pivot and find themselves without impacting the core business,” Bouvet adds.

He points to an ongoing collaboration with a major banking group. The bank asked the Paris studio to excubate a large‑scale innovative venture. Excubation was strategic: strict banking regulation and limited risk appetite made in‑house development nearly impossible. “Our partnership removed layers of heaviness and let us go straight to the point,” Bouvet says with satisfaction.

Attracting top‑tier CEOs

Beyond mindset, corporates are also drawn to a start‑up studio’s ability to rally first‑class talent quickly and put them in charge of the new venture. This power to attract top entrepreneurs and install them at the helm is a decisive asset in favour of excubation.

Protecting reputation and brand image

Finally, by outsourcing execution to a studio, a corporate shields its brand‑equity. If the project fails, the company’s reputation takes less of a hit. “The corporate is less in the spotlight when it entrusts the venture to an external entity,” Bouvet explains.

‍