I think the activity behind all of this is actually very encouraging, it shows the current dissatisfaction with what we have and the quest for providing a formula for overcoming this ‘present state’.

I think they are all contributing to a promising future. Yet we need to consider the balance within any innovation understanding or equation to derive its real value.
At least this introduction allows me to work in a few of my own contributions here. If you are interested in them, then click on the link, if not just carry on, simple as that, it is your choice.

Some of my contributions towards innovation understanding

I offered up the innovation pathway curve of understanding that has five learning curves for determining your innovation and the migration path to a different future. This suggests we need to break innovation down into its manageable parts. Innovation does not just have a time axis that the three horizons framework refers too but it has a complexity and scope axis in learning as well.

Then I offered up the “building an innovation framework that has real capabilities at its heart” which argues that a ‘given’ formula of SCA = II + OC + EE + MLC + RNE,  ‘suggests’ this formula as the combination of positive relationships between the following interrelated parts, so as to deliver a far superior innovation outcome. I have to admit I can’t let go of this one!

My third offering was a joint collaboration with Jeffrey Philips, over at Ovo. This is summarized in “Critical aspects of the Collaborative Innovation Framework”. This is also covered off in a dedicated site at http://cirf.pbworks.com.

Jeffrey and I picked up the baton again in a further collaboration on part of the innovation equation with an alignment view, we called this “the Executive Innovation Work Mat” and went into a significant open dialogue on this as we both judged it as critical and important to advance innovation.

I completed a whole series on this and its seven parts. This rumbles on and gathers recognition of its value to making innovation change. This was the piece of work dearest to my heart.

I think I have missed a few but it all depends on how you understand “equation”. Back in 2012 (oh it seems so long ago) I wrote a piece called “Two sides of an equation for shaping innovation” and this is where I want to focus upon within this post: “balancing our innovation understanding”

I really think we need to understand the two sides of the innovation balance sheet

When Jeffrey and I were working though the initial thinking behind the Executive Innovation Work Mat I saw these two sides really clearly.

Actually we captured it in the final framing, we clearly saw these two distinct sides to consider yet are so mutually dependent. My balance sheet thinking.

The left side of the innovation work mat or my balance sheet contains the soft side of innovation, far more the intangibles of culture, climate and environment, whereas the right side is more the hard aspects, the tangibles of process, design, governance, structure and function.

The middle is the place to build the common language of understanding, look for communicating, cascading and setting innovation in its rightful context to clarify how and why that ‘we’ set about the innovation activities in this particular way.

So is it two sides or made up of three? Well each of the sides, the intangibles more on the left and the tangibles, more determined on the right, make up the hard and soft factors and these all make up innovation that contributes into the middle, where the ‘innovation energy’ is confirmed.

The balance sheet construct delivers the equity equation you gain as the trade off or innovation catalyst, it needs presenting in different narratives and supportive actions . As you achieve a clarity of you ‘innovation energy’, based on your capabilities and capacities to innovate, you deliver the understanding and growing competencies, the required effort and contribution that can be achieved from the extraction from the two sides of the balance sheet.

That is why communicating, cascading, building a common language and the context is in the middle, central to extracting the best result from the two sides of this work mat.

At the time Jeffrey and I were looking at the informal mechanisms and formal mechanisms that contribute into these two sides of the innovation balance sheet.

Here is a list of the factors we felt were major contributors (far from exhaustive) to the soft side of our balance sheet that is made up of culture, climate and environment as our brainstorming to move us to the criteria that always lie under the top-level innovation balance sheet and then the ones that make up the harder side.

Some of course are inter-changeable or reliant on each other, but it gives a decent understanding of what makes up the balance sheet needs we all must have in place to have a thriving innovation organization.

Informal mechanisms (the contributors to the left side of our innovation balance sheet)

Those that are leading to improving the softer aspects of innovation or our left side of the innovation balance sheet) that would contribute to its build.

• Uncovering good and emerging practices in innovation
• The value of good leadership & distinct culture creating the linkages
• Targets and partner identification for relating and collaborating
• Skill of working together effectively – team building, encouraging diversity
• Integrating external parties to leverage through networks and relationships.
• Framing ambitions and plans of strategic targets and relating those to individuals
• Engaging the outer peripheries to capture insights and needs to drive engagement
• Exchanging expertise and seeking synergy in exchanges
• Story telling/ narratives- relating and explaining, sharing and extending
• More bottom-up engagement in formulation – sharing and informing
• Seeking individual insights, encouraging an open learning environment
• Developing the agility to quickly react to changes, effective and decisive intent
• Work on speed, external orientation and improvisation, flexible and adaptive
• To promote “doing more with the same”, less rework.
• The CEO acts as the central source of encouragement and determination
• Encourage informally at all levels in exchange

The formal mechanisms (the contributors to the right side of the innovation balance sheet)

Those that contribute to the make-up of the harder aspects of innovation or our right side of the innovation balance sheet that build this part.

• Ingraining innovation as a corporate function
• Determining how you lead and manage this, how you develop this out in its parts
• Identify the constraints, articulate the resolutions, recognise the boundaries
• Optimizing the process and structures, constantly reviewing to improve
• Determining the allocation of funds to offer the balance needed to achieve the goals
• Innovation portfolio management designed
• Type of openness to innovation flows to encourage and drive outcomes
• Embedding technology and capacity for rapid experimentation, and discovery
• Rapid ideas, discard failing ones & triple investment on good ideas
• Distance from Customer – determining the importance and setting about the connecting
• Ingrain as a corporate functionality the need to always be conscious of greater alignment
• Determining how you lead and manage through governance and design.
• Identify the constraints and boundaries, pushing and probing
• Optimizing the process and structures on an ongoing basis
• Determining the allocation of funds into the different framing activities
• Innovation portfolio management, striving for value, impact and return
• Type of openness to innovation flows and external engagements needed
• Embedding technology and capacity for rapid results and early wins
• Rapid ideas, discard failing ones & triple investment on good ideas, experiment and explore
• Involvement from both Customer and other stakeholders within your innovation process

These were not an exhaustive list, (well they are in many ways) they were the framing or triggering points to relate to the different aspects that need to be balanced when you consider innovation.

The essential seven parts of innovation understanding

The whole reason we believed in the work mat construct was the make-up of its seven parts. The left side contains the essential aspects of designing the culture, the climate, the environment and how these contribute into the innovation equation. These are far more intangible, softer but vital to make innovation work as they are more people orientated.

The right side consists of the function, design, process, structures and governance that make up the harder aspects, those that facilitate innovation. These are the enablers that manage innovation.

Each side outlined here contributes to the context, the communication and cascading of innovation throughout the organization.

While the Strategic Alignment links all the innovation activities into the corporate agenda. Its goals, strategies and contributes to the need for investments and achievement timescales.

At the bottom of our work mat we have as our ‘flow through point’ – the motivational indicators and measures to gain and frame the outcomes we want to achieve.

For all this you do need this cascading, this common language and context and this is why it sits in the middle, it is the glue that holds all the work mat parts together, to make it identifiable, to complete our view of the innovation equation we need in place.

Deciding the innovation equation is appreciating the value underpinning the balance sheet.

For me, the equation you decide to follow has to be robust; it has to account for a more holistic view of innovation.

We are moving towards better framing techniques for innovation to advance, it is certainly going to be always be made up of part art and part science, yet by us having a clear balance sheet of understanding to think through, in this work mat thinking, this will offer the underpinning that the innovation equation requires, that is ‘sound’ and ‘solid’ to invest into.

The post Balancing Our Innovation Understanding first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

Can we recognize yin yang as a dual force of innovation?

Scholars tell us that there are two natural complementary yet contradictory forces at work within our universe.

The Chinese call these ‘Yin Yang’. Yin is regarded as more passive, receptive, more outside-in, whereas Yang is more active, creative and inside-out. These are seemingly opposing forces but interconnected and interdependent; one gives rise to the other, they actually reinforce each other.

Yin & yang seemingly have the following characteristics: they are opposing yet equally rooted together; they have the power to transform each other and eventually are balanced out.

Yin Yang in Idea Management

As a good example of these opposite forces, we often are required to generate many different ideas and apply the countervailing need of selecting from among those that best can meet the organization’s objectives. It is critically important to have this ‘flow and balance’ and allow it to evolve constantly.

So by this example, we see that ’ Yin and Yang’ are both dynamic,  sometimes opposing forces, constantly interacting with each other balancing conflicting needs (and aims) and recognizing that one determines the other and you need them both to strengthen innovation. We need these two opposing forces in all we do to manage the ideas for innovation. These often do conflict with one another in their needs and actions. Still, they both need to be in force to bring out all that is needed to be evaluated in the idea process, so real innovation occurs for ‘something new that gives additional value’.

This balancing of yin and yang needed in the above idea management example follows a constantly changing course, but there is also a natural order. Equally, though this seemingly is always within a constantly evolving innovation system that reflects the constant change around us.

We cannot get ‘fixed’ in our ways, and it is this constant flow that system engineers have often never fully understood within managing the innovation process. Often they want to separate the parts of the system, attempting to take out the ‘conflict’ innovation truly needs to have constantly.

Yin Yang in risk and opportunity

‘Risk and opportunity’ are yet another of those two opposites for the yin yang of innovation that also need that constant balance for innovation to thrive. We need to arrive at our own point of “chi” to balance these. To arrive at this balance, we should look for the right interactions between the two sides, for instance:

• Recognition that on each side of the coin (risk/opportunity) will enable better decisions
• You seize better opportunities with confidence if you can quantify the risks.
• Recognition of the two can help you allocate funds more wisely
• You achieve a better delivery on an improving scale of understanding both aspects
• You anticipate problems far earlier

Moving the organization from being risk-averse through experimental to seeking opportunities needs a constant force and attention. Managing its tension is essential to gain a greater innovation effect. Effective risk management depends equally on the good quality of information- the same as “seeing” opportunity; it simply needs a good framework that provides suitable scope for sensible risk-taking and exploring the opportunity.

Yin and Yang of Creativity

Being creative has both a yin and a yang aspect also. Creative people tend to be smart and quick yet naïve at the same time and need often reminding them of the whole system and how their ideas can or cannot fit into this. As we are aware, creativity needs a fun and relaxed environment yet a large measure of professionalism.

The need for an open brainstorming environment needs to be balanced with ensuring this is well-structured to capture the purpose of the brainstorming. We all have ‘unconscious skills’ that need stirring and awakening. We are often asked more often to connect all the often conflicting ‘pieces’ to see a new possibility or resolve a difficult problem.

Having different perspectives available that provide diversity opens up our minds yet equally allows for placing these random pieces into a new order.

So the ‘yin and yang’ are needed in the creative process of innovation. You need the two opposites of managing differences and harnessing diversity to be in conflict actively and equally complement each other to bring out better results.

Yin Yang for designing positive tension into innovation

Then we actually need to build a greater ‘tension’ into our innovation processes. Finding the balance or appropriateness to achieving innovation goals are not natural tensions; they need to be designed in. Within innovation, understanding the context is critical; it needs to be fully understood, equally coordinating the outcomes are critical as well. Both create tension and need to be explained.

Context gives us the purpose, the bounds, the outline in structures and capabilities, roles and commitments to achieve the result that is being required. The coordination is what leadership is concerned with, to keep bringing the parts back to the whole as the outcome needed. The pursuit of operational excellence is another example. It often becomes an end unto itself and gets somehow disconnected from the mission of generating growth and creating value.

So yin yang describes how polar or seemingly contrary forces are interconnected and interdependent, often in conflict but needing to be complementary opposites within a greater whole. Successfully managing the natural tensions should be viewed for innovation as not conflicts to be avoided but as opportunities to be managed and converted. This gives a greater coherence and consistency from ‘open’ participation and engagement.

Leadership has the role of getting the right balance, the right design tension into the innovating system, to bring out the best from this participation of all the opposing forces for greater innovation opportunity.

Recognizing yin yang evolves.

Finally, we also have to recognize evolution and, by extension, that innovation is constantly moving on. As the universe is changing every day, finding a common method to discover the unchanging rules in any activity is not easy. They all are constantly changing, and we must somehow recognize this in our appreciation of supporting innovation. The ‘fluidness’ in innovation makes it hard to manage.

How do you get the balance right in managing the innovation activity? It is not an easy one to solve and needs constant management and causes consistent concern. Looking at innovation differently, more adaptive in nature might help. The opposing forces of yin and yang are important to consider within this.

Recognizing the power of ‘yin yang for innovation’ can give you the order of things and how and why they relate to each other. Complementary and conflicting opposites contribute to a greater innovation understanding, but they need consistent attention to managing.

Who did say managing innovation was easy?
 

The post The yin yang of innovation understanding first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.