Category: Fresh thinking

Critical intervention points of innovation peer-to-peer engagement

I’ve been reading a fair amount recently about the “lack” of innovation leadership within organizations. Where there is smoke there has to be fire I suspect, but does it need to be so?

Internal leadership of innovation suffers from exactly the same critical problem that the people working on innovation suffer from, of a lack of time and opportunity to study alternatives, as all are caught up in ‘driving’ their innovation through their internal system.

This “alternative voice” is often missing and this can so easily come through external advocacy. This is unlikely to come from the innovation consultant brought in to undertake ongoing work as that is very different, this is more critical, more specialized, even strategical supporting role, involving peer-to-peer engagement.

This peer-to-peer helps  explore those critical issues relevant to you and where your organization is. Its aim is to offer a different perspective, so as to alter opinions or build new insights, that often cannot be evaluated without considerable deflection from the daily managing innovation that is taking place in often complex and challenging situations.

Yet alternatives need to be considered so knowledge can evolve. Continue reading “Critical intervention points of innovation peer-to-peer engagement”

The Innovating Era: Creative Destruction or Destructive Creation?

Creative Destruction
We have been entering some perilous times recently and I can’t imagine when Joseph Schumpeter outlined his groundbreaking efforts for explaining “creative destruction” he or anyone else, could imagine this being flipped around to what we are facing more today, in a more innovative era, that of “destructive creation”.

Schumpeter saw “creative destruction” as the renewing, through new innovation, society’s dynamics that would lead to higher levels of economic development and welfare.

At the same time recognizing that this destroyed a few of the incumbents to the benefit of many more newcomers and increasing value creation for broader society.

Today it seems we are caught in the reverse of this- the process of “destructive creation”- where it benefits a few rather than the many. This sets out often to destroy or greatly diminish the usage value of existing products and services before it is optimal to actually do so, and in the process incurring often significant costs not taken into account at the time.

These unforeseen issues have consequences that negatively affect parts of society not foreseen or contemplated at the time. Continue reading “The Innovating Era: Creative Destruction or Destructive Creation?”

Innovation has layers that shear against each other.

“Slow constrains quick, slow controls quick”
There is so much built in tension, bias, barriers, mindsets, mental model conflicts, and all types of friction seemingly going on around us, you must sometimes think all our organizations can only be totally dysfunctional.

The Scream by Edvard Munch for Dysfunctional Organizations

Has anyone not come across some or all of these?

Dysfunctional leadership symptoms and those typical warning signs of dictatorial leadership, no feedback on performance, personal agendas, more ‘political’ compensation than ‘performance related ones, inefficient use of resources, empire-building practices, unequal workload distribution, too much management, fragmented organization efforts.

There is simply just too much talk, ineffective and incessant meetings, a lack of collaboration across departments, ‘selective’ low productivity when you are working way beyond the normal, feeling in a constant crisis mode, watching a morale deterioration take place before your eyes, the backstabbing, starving projects of essential resources and finally, working in highly stressful workplaces.

A pretty depressing list isn’t it? I’m sure you can think of a few more besides. Continue reading “Innovation has layers that shear against each other.”

Finding space for growing innovation

Making innovation a constant daily task for everyone in finding time and space to become involved in, is certainly a real problem for many organizations.

Innovation does not sit comfortably alongside efficiency or effectiveness as it requires a much looser structure. It constantly ‘flies’ in direct conflict too much for many within organizations to create resistance and adoption.

Innovation is looking to increase variability, nearly everything else in the organization is the exact opposite. How do we address this resistance and make innovation part of the daily working routines?

Where can we start?
We have to open up our thinking to a number of “possible paths” to allow it to flow. I believe innovation should not be highly structured; it should be more loosely structured to allow the possibility.

For a start individuals and organizations needs to explore multiple ways to learn and find the right pathway for innovative learning as they progress.

This needs a more ‘dynamic social fabric’ to allow it to flow, it needs organizational encouragement. It needs mutual adaption and mutual adjustment. The understanding of the absorptive capacity framework I’ve outlined before helps structure this.

Three simple rules have great intent. Continue reading “Finding space for growing innovation”

Unfreezing the middle, seeing a different innovating prospective

This past week we had a #innochat tweet session(www.innochat.com) around Jeffrey Phillip’s book “Relentless Innovation”( http://amzn.to/xXoHof ).

The chat was framed around a set of questions here (http://bit.ly/Awvh5E ) but basically the premise of Jeffrey’s thinking was “can it be possible to shift from business as usual (BAU) to innovation business as usual”?

He suggests that one of the most significant challenges for innovation is the fact that many firms have spent years, if not decades, creating business models and operating processes that are exceptionally efficient and effective but neglect the essential part that innovation plays.

Equally the middle manager is so focused on the delivery of short term results through effective organization and pursuing efficiencies they have little ‘slack’ within the system to learn and build innovation into it.

I would possibly argue the very people that we are expecting to manage the ‘dynamics’ within organizations, the Middle Managers, are seeking the very opposite- doing everything possible to keep it as stable and consistent as it can be.

So how can this change? Continue reading “Unfreezing the middle, seeing a different innovating prospective”

Those disruptive moments when you simply need to let go

Emotional attachment prompts some incredibly strong bonds, a host of clear affections and different reactions when it comes to our favourite brands or products but then something disruptive happens and these bonds are broken.

When something suddenly ‘disrupts’ this, it triggers a set of mixed emotions that shakes you and stirs up different feelings that take some time to re-order in your mind.

I try to seek understanding and then simply have to let go, even when they so often stare me in the face. Sometimes you still don’t want to finally let go until you are ‘hit’ by such a disruptive event.

The recent Kodak moment is one of those

One of those has happened to me with the filing of bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 for Kodak.

For so many people those “Kodak moments” make up such incredibly important parts of our lives. Stuffed under the beds, in boxes, in cupboards are those images of youth, family, important occasions and holidays that sit happily in the back of our minds waiting to be prompted by those images captured with the help of Kodak.

Hindsight and that regrettable smugness, that seems to always emerge. Continue reading “Those disruptive moments when you simply need to let go”

Shoring up the fragile innovation system, call GE

Well, the World Economic forum’s annual meeting is beckoning later this month. During the period of 25th to 29th January, the WEF attempts to engage business, political, academic and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas.( http://www.weforum.org/)

Just released on 18th January is the GE Global Innovation Barometer with the results of its second annual review on innovation. Here is the source site to check out and explore your own needs: http://www.ge.com/innovationbarometer/

The aim of the release is to use this and have this available for the meeting in Davos as well as shape GE’s innovation agenda going forward. For the Davos meeting, let’s hope our leaders have the time and inclination to review its content.

No doubt GE will be there and if  Beth Comstock is going as the senior vice president and chief marketing officer of GE I’m sure she will be leading the “innovation does matter” charge. Continue reading “Shoring up the fragile innovation system, call GE”

A Business Model Canvas Set to Explode

I’d just finished a workshop on Business Model Canvas about gaining clarity in large organizations, when suddenly the flood gates seem to have opened up a day or so later, for me to see beyond and piece more of it together in my mind.

After swirling around in this maelstrom of articles, tweets, new publishing, advanced announcements I had to gain some high ground to recover my breath and think a little more. Catching my breath, here is my clarity take and prediction for the BMC.

Ignoring lots of early warning signs

Maybe I should have seen this coming earlier but sometimes you hear a distant rumble but you simply shrug your shoulders and get on with your own work.

This week it hit me so I spent some time piecing together different aspects around the shifts taking place on the Business model canvas that has been going on in different parts of the world for my prediction:

2012 is the BMC tipping point year

From what I can see is the Business model is about to go through a really important (further) tipping point and cross that chasm (thanks Geoffrey Moore) into mainstream adoption. Why? Continue reading “A Business Model Canvas Set to Explode”

For whom the bell tolls

I felt the heavy sound of the bells tolling away coming through two articles I have been reading and it reminded me of For Whom the Bell Tolls a famous novel by Ernest Hemingway.

I read two short articles over this weekend, one was entitled “Avoiding Innovation’s Terrible Toll” written by Spencer E Ante, published in the Wall Street Journal (http://on.wsj.com/zJ9IIT ) and the other by Jeffrey Phillips “When executives talk about innovation, watch out” in his innovate on purpose blog here (http://bit.ly/wpaqWu)

The first was the sad demises of Kodak
If you have not seen the day of Revolution in a small town where all know all in the town and always have known all, you have seen nothing.- For Whom the

Bell Tolls
Rochester may not be the ideal place to live, the headquarters for Kodak but it was the place where thousands of people earned their living by being associated with Kodak. They worked there, they supported it in the community, and they mostly benefitted from it.

What saddens me of course is that they at Kodak did not have that ability to react to such dramatic changes within their industry. Continue reading “For whom the bell tolls”

Re-ordering the organization’s genetic code for innovation.

As we enter 2012, what really disappoints me is that we still have not cracked the innovation DNA code sufficiently to embed this within the organization’s genetic principles, structures or systems for completing an everyday innovating business. Why is that?

I see no reason why innovation cannot be a clear (integrated) management discipline, shared, taught and fully aligned with an organization’s strategic intent and execution.

It needs to have a set of molecules that carry the ‘genetic’ innovation information in logical and a comprehensive arrangement, of its separate elements. These need to be strung together like all living cells by a set of clear rules.

The code order defines the sequence, the “alphabet” of the organization’s ability to innovate. Well, that is how it should look if we want to allow innovation to enter the present DNA of an organization. Innovation cannot sit outside or be run in parallel but it needs to form part of the essential organizational code.

I am convinced innovation can be implicitly understood but I still feel there is an awful lot of conflicting advice being offered that must leave many confused. Let me add to the confusion! Continue reading “Re-ordering the organization’s genetic code for innovation.”