There are seemingly so many intervention points it can get bewildering.

The innovation environment can be made-up of how well you collaborate and network, the level of the group and individual interactions, the presence and commitment of leadership towards innovation, as well as the organizational set-up and structures.

You can explore the make-up of the innovation environment in so many ways.

So what makes up the environment to innovation?

It is the culture, management and its people who have a mutual dependency. Culture can enhance or inhibit the tendencies to innovate, it certainly has a profound influence on the innovative capacity and provides the rich nutrients to nurture innovation or kill it. Culture has always been regarded as a primary determinant of innovation.

To foster innovation and its environment, key levels of management and individuals must be committed to creating an environment and culture that promotes creativity, be engaged and promote the ability to promote change in nimble, agile and flexible ways to meet changing conditions in the market place and with customers.

It is this creativity through the innovations that are flowing through the organization that often needs a critical focal point to create a change that has an impact.

Triggering stimuli for change

The job of any change initiative is to give stimuli in the actions, transactions and interactions in the pursuit of innovation. These come from changing practices but focusing on the critical interaction between people and the situations that delivering innovation demands.

Altering an organizations workplace environment comes from focusing on the person’s creativity and the organizations climate conditions to deliver on its innovation need.

From what I gather, there are over 40 different assessments you can use for creativity and innovation. Within the best known, most cited and researched two still stand out for me as tested and valuable. These have stood the test of time and I believe provide a great place to start assessing your climate and what motivates a more creative / innovative environment.

There are two climate assessments for creativity assessments that stand out

The first is the Climate for Creativity (KEYS) developed by Terisa Amabile and the other one is the Creative Climate questionnaire developed by Gören Ekvall. Both came out in the late nineties but seem to have stood that ‘famous’ test of time.

I have shown in Ekvall’s model a modified version introducing the split between the attitude for work and its five part make-up and work atmospheres five parts.

I’m going to focus more on Ekvall’s model as it is the one I have used more and it ‘feels’ more comfortable for me.

Amabile’s model contained 17 factors, whereas Ekvall’s model has only ten factors. There have been a number of comparative studies on these two. One argument being that less factors allows for a more open aspect but less controversial.

To be honest I like them both as they each have slightly different ways to look at creativity.

Firstly though, let me outline Amabile’s model.

It comprises three key elements: resources, management practices and organizational motivation. Each of these elements interacts with one another and has an impact on the resulting level of innovation.

In Amabile’s structure the assessment breaks answers down into two criteria of measuring current performance and seeking perceived importance and attributed 100 points per section to gauge relative importance using a simple Likert-type scale with anchor phrases at each extreme.

For her Organizational Motivation section, a questionnaire is broken down into

• 1) Explicit value of creativity,
• 2) Attitude to risk,
• 3) Pride in Employees,
• 4) Enthusiasm for Employees,
• 5) Forward-facing strategy and
• 6) Management systems.

Then for her Resources part:

• 1) Time to innovate,
• 2) Staff Expertise,
• 3) Access to Funds,
• 4) Material Resources,
• 5) Information Resources, and
• 7) Training

Then her Management Practices, it is broken down:

• 1) Project autonomy,
• 2) Team Selection – Skills,
• 3) Definition of Goals,
• 4) Supervisor Support and
• 5) Team Selection – Personality.

Ekvall’s model

Ekvall’s model was divided into two halves, each comprising five factors. This also allowed Ekvall’s model to be split over two pages, with the first entitled ‘atmosphere for work’, and the second entitled ‘attitude to work.’ Maybe this is why I like it for this defining split for deepening the conversation.

Again to use this you attribute 100 points per section to gauge relative importance using a simple Likert-type scale with anchor phrases at each extreme.

Organizational Climate for Creativity and Innovation (1996) is the article that sums up all of Ekvall’s research within organizational climate and creativity throughout the second half of the 20^th Century.

This was where Ekvall formalized his ten dimensions of creative climate (challenge, freedom, idea support, trust / openness, dynamism / liveliness, playfulness / humor, debates, conflicts, risk-taking, and idea time) as well as described the implications of the Creative Climate Questionnaire (CCQ).

The ten dimension factors from Ekvall’s creative climate questionnaire.

Attitude to Work dimensions

Idea Time: amount of time people can use (and do use) for elaborating new ideas. In the high idea-time situation, possibilities exist to discuss and test suggestions not included in the task assignment. There are opportunities to take the time to explore and develop new ideas. Flexible timelines permit people to explore new avenues and alternatives. In the reverse case, every minute is booked and specified. The time pressure makes thinking outside the instructions and planned routines impossible.

Risk-Taking: tolerance of uncertainty and ambiguity in the workplace. In the high risk-taking case, bold initiatives can be taken even when the outcomes are unknown. People feel as though they can “take a gamble” on their ideas. People will often “go out on a limb” to put an idea forward. In a risk-avoiding climate there is a cautious, hesitant mentality. People try to be on the “safe side” and often “sleep on the matter.” They set up committees and they cover themselves in many ways.

Challenge and Involvement: degree to which people are involved in daily operations, long-term goals, and visions. When there is a high degree of challenge and involvement people feel motivated and committed to making contributions. The climate is dynamic, electric, and inspiring. People find joy and meaningfulness in their work. In the opposite situation, people are not engaged and feelings of alienation and apathy are present. Individuals lack interest in their work and interpersonal interactions are dull and listless.

Freedom: independence in behavior exerted by the people in the organization. In a climate with much freedom, people are given the autonomy and resources to define much of their work. They exercise discretion in their day-to-day activities. Individuals are provided the opportunity and take the initiative to acquire and share information about their work. In the opposite climate people work within strict guidelines and roles. They carry out their work in prescribed ways with little room to redefine their tasks.

Idea Time Support: ways new ideas are treated. In the supportive climate, ideas and suggestions are received in an attentive and professional way by bosses, peers, and subordinates. People listen to each other and encourage initiatives. Possibilities for trying out new ideas are created. The atmosphere is constructive and positive when considering new ideas. When idea support is low, the automatic “no” is prevailing. Fault-finding and obstacle-raising are the usual styles of responding to ideas.

Work Atmosphere dimensions.

Conflict:  presence of personal and emotional tensions in the organization. When the level of conflict is high, groups and individuals dislike and may even hate each other. The climate can be characterized by “interpersonal warfare.” Plots, traps, power and territory struggles are usual elements of organizational life.  Personal differences yield gossip and slander. In the opposite case, people behave in a more mature manner; they have psychological insight and control of impulses. People accept and deal effectively with diversity.

Debate: occurrence of encounters and disagreements between viewpoints, ideas, and differing experiences and knowledge. In the debating organization many voices are heard and people are keen on putting forward their ideas for consideration and review. People can often be seen discussing opposing opinions and sharing a diversity of perspectives. Where debate is missing, people follow authoritarian patterns without questioning them.

Playfulness/Humor: spontaneity and ease displayed within the workplace. A professional, yet relaxed atmosphere where good-natured jokes and laughter occur often is indicative of this dimension. People can be seen having fun at work. The climate is seen as easy-going and light-hearted. The opposite climate is characterized by gravity and seriousness. The atmosphere is stiff, gloomy and cumbrous. Jokes and laughter are regarded as improper and intolerable.

Trust/Openness: emotional safety in relationships. When there is a high degree of trust, individuals can be genuinely open and frank with one another. People count on each other for professional and personal support. People have a sincere respect for one another and give credit where credit is due. Where trust is missing, people are suspicious of each other, and therefore, they closely guard themselves, their plans, and their ideas. In these situations people find it extremely difficult to openly communicate with each other.

Dynamism / Liveliness: The eventfulness of life in the organization. In the highly dynamic situation, new things are happening all the time and new ways of thinking about and handling issues often occur. The atmosphere is lively and full of positive energy. There is a kind of psychological turbulence that is described by people in those organizations as “full speed”, “go,” “breakneck,” “maelstrom,” “and the like. People get caught up in the excitement and energy. The opposite situation could be compared to a slow jog-trot with no surprises. There are no new projects; no different plans. Everything goes its usual way.

Over the years the Ekvall questionnaire has been collected and benchmarked.

The value of seeing a significant part of an organization of 7,000 take this test and then be compared against others completing the CCQ can be valuable.

Taking one example between a group designated as innovation organizations against those regarded as stagnating would deliver a spider web visual showing the difference and where the gaps are to focus upon.

The discussion from producing such a view can become very telling. Of course this is a snapshot but it can become a powerful enabler to change. Improving the climate, over time changes the culture and conditions for how an organization views innovation.

Perceptions need to be broken down, clarity on a pathway forward navigated and negotiated with a leadership that is providing consistent and determined support so that the climate and conditions are constantly improving the environment for innovation – the culture learns to adapt and recognize this as the everyday ‘way of working.

Summary

There are many variables that influence people’s perception of the working environment and by focusing on understanding the climate and the possible potential to change this, in what it can provide the prime contributor to providing a huge impact within your innovation environment.

******

Publishing note:  This blog post was originally written on behalf of Hype and with their permission, I have republished it on my own site with some small adjustments. I recommend you should visit the Hype blog site where they have a range of contributors writing about a wide-ranging mix of ideas and thoughts around innovation, its well worth the visit.

The post Making an impact on an organization’s innovation environment first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

We certainly need to find better ways to encourage and obtain a higher commitment to our approaches to building ‘culture’ and all it covers in our thinking if we want to really have innovation deliver on its potential.

Unless the values, norms and beliefs are not clearly thought-through and consistently reinforced daily through a consistent flow of initiatives to change, to explore, to learn from, any movement can simply wither and die from this lack of ‘total’ dedication.

The question we need to ask of our management is this: “if you are wanting innovation then we all need to work through the determinants that encourage innovation together” and then set about communicating these that are highly valued and expected throughout the organization, so as to encourage them to support and make innovation happen.
A certain commitment and a lack of patience
The issue is this can take a lot of time and dedicated commitment and sadly, management lack both patience and often that commitment to “seeing it fully through”, they seem to get side tracked and move onto the next thing.

I feel management is sometimes like grazing nomadic animals looking constantly for fresher grass, impatient for the green shoots that are appearing from their sporadic grazing. They have no patience for lasting cultivation.

Maybe we need an Innovation & Culture Officer, even just for a given time perhaps, or we mandate the human resource group to allocate clear dedicated resources for a significant time exclusively on understanding climates factors and then setting about creating the culture to innovate with the board’s complete backing.

Leaders have to set the style they want from an innovating culture
Leaders are in the best position to create the environment that determines the culture and from this comes innovations end result, the outcome they desire.

Too little time is spent by leaders on thinking deeply about what type of environment they want, what type of culture they need, often it is left to chance, to others to evolve not by design but by chance and personal interpretation. How wrong.

Leaders who want innovation need to offer a positive, supportive environment where the attitudes, perspectives and beliefs are well articulated and communicated. Asking people to change is not a one-off event, it is a constant, daily ‘grind’ but if you provide the right environment and enablers that innovation requires, you can get a positive reaction and you then raise the cultural expectations.

These raised expectations eventually translate into making the change needed for creating a culture for innovation. Organization culture is either a barrier or the real enabler to innovation, for it to come to life and thrive.

Offering the sum total

Culture reflects the sum total of a way of life. It provides the patterns, the values, the traits and behaviours shared within an organization that can make or break innovation. It clarifies what is possible, tolerates and allows for experimentation, for trials, for learning to take place.

It creates an environment where trust can grow and confidence is channelled more and more into innovation experimentation, engagement and exploration.

Culture has the most profound influence on innovation’s success, it can’t be left to chance, it needs carefully designing and nourishing and this can only come from the top allowing it to grow in well thought-through and designed ways.

This climate being built often cannot be touched yet the actions can be felt in multiple ways to promote that environment where innovation flourishes.

Fostering the right climate is critical

The fostering of the environment, the building of the culture to pursue innovation mean different things to different people. Changing the environment has a great chance of changing people’s behaviour.

A systematic planting of  ‘new seeds’ will eventually ‘yield’ an innovative result that ‘feeds’ off of this new culture that can multiply and replicate. Yet it does take this concerted and dedicated time and effort to constantly explore, adapt and amend as it is actually a ‘living culture’ that needs constant feeding and nurturing.

It means providing the space to stimulate; a place to promote fresh thinking so the generating of new ideas is managed in a place that fosters interaction and collaboration. An innovation environment is made up of creating a positive atmosphere to encourage and nurture, to reflect and learn from failures that will inevitably happen.

You need to link and communicate, to offer a place where it is the ‘norm’ to challenge, to explore multiple sources of ideas, to provide a process and guiding set of procedures to capture and translate different thinking.

A place where multiple interactions and connections occur so as to make innovation real and effective by providing the right environment and conditions to explore and extract.

Connecting culture to innovation makes it potentially highly touchable.
Culture runs through everything we do when we engage. We can ‘feel’ culture yet we can’t touch ‘it’ yet it always touches us in so many ways. Innovation on the other hand we can touch, we can see, we can strongly relate too, it becomes tangible when it moves from an idea into the realm of reality as ‘new’ to the world.

When you combine culture and innovation in the right ways it becomes a very powerful force that transforms and prevails, it mobilizes and can galvanize us to great things.

It is when culture offers us a more creative environment, one that gives us a greater security than one based on living in fear and insecurity we grow in confidence, we open up our minds to increasing possibilities, we want to learn and experience and these matter to innovations ultimate success.

Innovation takes on a powerful identity from its cultural roots that transform attitudes into actions that then become those eventual outcomes we look for in what we do – greatness in our innovation efforts – that can be seen, valued and held up for others to admire.

The post Determining our culture governs the greatness within our innovation efforts. first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

All around us we have culture. Where we live, how we see ourselves against others, who we identify with and how we react when ‘our’ culture gets threatened. We become comfortable, sometimes complacent and treat ‘our’ culture as something that is just there, just around us, wrapping us up in a warm blanket.

Every now and again we get confronted. It can be within the community we live, it can be within our organizations. Innovation is one of those confronting points that challenge our accepted culture.

Organizational culture forms an integral part of our general functioning. A strong culture tends to indicate a set of shared values that move the ‘whole’ along we then get that feeling we are on the same track.

The more we integrate, the more we coordinate, the more we socialize we eventually create the accepted boundaries, that feeling of growing identity among ourselves that seems to signal a similar commitment to the organization.

The sudden demand for innovation needs managing thoughtfully

Then along comes this demand for more innovation, think differently, speed up, we need to outsource, to open up and suddenly our world gets challenged. We become defensive.

Unless this is handled carefully and thoughtfully we lose our shared meaning, the social glue becomes less binding and actually the very opposite happens, culture begins to significantly reduce our efficiency within our organization. We start freezing, the very opposite of what innovation is asking of us.

Rational tools and processes only go part of the way in unfreezing this. We need to find more ‘expressive ways’ to show why, what and how innovation needs to be brought in and allowed to alter and shape our existing culture and practices.

The critical enablers

Of course we need to often go back to the drawing board, when we are shaping a new culture based on innovation. We need to craft a new mission and vision; we need to explain the realities of the external environment and why innovation is important, we need to offer the means to meet our new aims of becoming more innovative.

Then, with a deeper breath we need to fashion a new image of the organization, offer new processes, structures and tools to enable and work with innovation.

Most importantly we need to consider employee needs and their objectives and identification with why we want innovation to take hold, we need to change around the interpersonal relationships through teams, through networking, through exploring outside the present environment and lastly we need lots of leadership.

It is often not appreciated how much an existing culture can hinder innovation, it can stop creativity. The very behaviours you previously valued for efficiency and effectiveness  now become the ones you want to change as they have suddenly become the roadblocks, and so  these must become the critical focal point to address.

One great description of successful innovation I like was from a research paper by Judge, back in 1997, that suggests “innovation as chaos within guidelines”.

Top management prescribes a set of goals but simply allow its personnel greater freedom within the context of these goals, perhaps it permits more time to explore and experiment and works on trying to stay out of the way on how it is pursued.

I like that, some are actually encouraging that already as part of their accepted culture. I’d add top management needs to clarify priorities, where it places the emphasis on new values that might shift, for example, into quality and growth impact potential rather than effectiveness and delivering quantity.

Equally there is a real need to explain any new attributes like agility, flexibility, freedom and cooperative teamwork. This goes well beyond  just announcing changes through offering flatter structures, greater autonomy and work team environments, but explaining clearly what it gives both the organization and the individual affected.

People need to hear and understand the reasons and rationale for why it sometimes needs radically altering the existing culture, maybe because of the profound changes in the market environment that this is required. Treat people as adults and they might behave more rational and ‘move’ to change because it is somewhere they would prefer to be.

Setting sail is different from being on a long journey

Many organizations certainly attempt to set this momentum in place but do they go far enough? Does the more establish culture strike back in unseen ways? Organizations have ‘host’ systems that release the ‘antibodies’ to counter the new attempts to alter it. It simply resists and as I said earlier, might shut down in many ways.

Managing culture that promotes innovation is complex; it is often left to chance, left to experiment, far too ad hoc in design and just exploring. We need to commit to a deeper approach, if we want to really change our culture to innovate. Unless the values, norms and beliefs are not clearly thought through and consistently reinforced initiatives to change simply die.

The question for management wanting innovation  is that they need to work through the determinants that encourage innovation and then set about communicating these and making them happen but this takes a lot of time and dedicated commitment.  Maybe we need an Innovation Culture Officer, certainly for a given time perhaps.

Where I think we need to change the game is thinking through three dimensions for shifting our thinking about culture and place the emphasis on building the needed competences of an organization in this century.

These come more from an Eastern view of the world to connect them but one has been discussed throughout the centuries.

Culture needs to think through three perspectives

The Outer Game: As open innovation gains more momentum for seeking value creation we are seeking more and more through external networks and relationships. This is changing and sometimes challenging culture within organizations. We need to figure out the outer game from the cultural perspective to enable innovation

The Inner Game: The more recognized place, within organizations. The interpersonal relationships are the place to look and build from. We need far more synergies, more dialogues beyond our normal ones. How do we place a growing emphasis on these?

The Secret Game: We are taught much in moral behaviours, about human nature that are partly inherent in our personal values. Today, in organizations we are sometimes confronted because these are often in conflict with different understandings of performance, more for ourselves as individuals, less for the community yet we still chose to live in but with growing reluctance. We are often keeping our true emotions hidden.

Many of our core values are not as ‘grounded’ as they use to be, we have allowed them to fray at the edges. Those values, norms and beliefs do need to be spelled out within organizations really well and followed through in the behaviour that mirrors them. Otherwise we do have secret games and in the long-term collective performance suffers. We do need to reduce the secret games that go on quietly within organizations.

Leadership is vital to managing cultural change.

Leaders who want innovation need to offer a positive, supportive environment where the attitudes, perspectives and beliefs are well articulated and communicated. Organization culture is a barrier or the enabler to innovation.

Asking people to change is not a one-off event, it is a constant, daily ‘grind’ but if you provide the right environment and enablers that innovation requires you can get a positive reaction and you then raise the cultural expectations that eventually makes the change needed for creating a culture for innovation.

Culture reflects the sum total of a way of life. It provides the patterns, the values, the traits and behaviours shared within an organization that can make or break innovation.

These cannot be touched but they can be felt. Culture has a profound influence on innovation’s success, it can’t be left to chance, it needs carefully designing and nourishing and this can only come from the top allowing it to grow in well thought-through and designed ways.

The post Fitting existing culture and innovation- no chance! first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.

Often I feel we are preaching to the converted, or the ones forced to listen just in case they miss something and are suddenly banished to hell, a non-innovating organization.

A place where no one will ever listen to them and this would have been the message to free the shackles and bring them back to innovation salvation.

So here I am standing in the innovation pulpit giving the weekly sermon on innovation beliefs and principles, offering this weekly reading on the (next) ten steps to avoid in that particular sin which we all know you are certainly committing!

Sometimes at the end of the sermon (or article), someone comes up and leaves an offering (comment) that sustains us a little more during the week, as we go about our business, in my case consulting, advising and researching on innovation.

What a hard life we seemingly lead!

So it is one of those rare occasions you recall something truly inspirational and this is what happened to me in going back to one of the best examples of true innovation practised and preached, the “W L Gore way”

Who are W L Gore

For many, Gore needs no introduction but for the few:  W.L. Gore is the  maker of Gore-Tex water- and windproof fabrics, and a multitude of unique medical, electronic and industrial materials a host of other pioneering materials and products as diverse as synthetic vascular grafts, Elixir guitar strings, and Glide dental floss.

Gore is a privately held global company, with $2.5 billion in revenue and 9,000 staff worldwide

It is often lauded as “the world’s most innovative company” time and time again, one that unleashed and inspired every person working there in the “the Gore way.”

What reminded me.

What I was reminded off again was a youtube talk by Terri Kelly, the President and CEO of W. L. Gore, made in December 2008. It is really worth watching what you have some time; it is 55-odd minutes well spent from MIT Sloan School of Management with the link here http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/643

Gore encourages belief in the individual, organization around small teams, recognition that people are in the same boat, and that all must “take the long view.” In  their practices among other things, employees are equals (associates), who decide what projects to work on based on “their passion,”

The company discourages plants with more than 250 associates, to promote intimate communication and team work, and though others “look at this as an unbelievable expense, we see this as a catalyst of growth,” says Kelly.

Terri Kelly is one of the few individuals at Gore with an actual title; leaders emerge by expressing a vision in clear enough terms to inspire others to follow. Leaders must also do a lot of explaining about decisions and actions.

Nurturing your culture for innovation- the W L Gore way.

As we work within innovation it is well worth stopping and thinking where would it be good to end up and I think W L Gore has some catching up by the rest of us.

Let me offer some ‘messages’ that form the culture of this company and make it such an interesting one to study for where innovation seems to be truly integrated within the (excuse the pun) fabric of the company.

Firstly a brief summary

• Gore carefully introduces processes needed for growth without losing their innovative edge.
• They have a radical and always evolving management model
• They practice a “lattice” network structure connecting every individual in the organization to every other.
• Information flows freely in all directions, and personal communications would be the norm.
• Individuals and self-managed teams would go directly to anyone in the organization to get what they needed to be successful.

The outcome of this is that everyone is free to talk with everyone else!
Key enablers to make this work

• Information sharing and peer review are the norms.
• A strong focus on getting the environment right and the business stuff gets easy
• More coaches than bosses, lots of peer reviews.
• Belief that giving the right people the tools and knowledge will bring out the best in everyone.
• Trust individuals to do the right thing.
• The culture creates opportunities for everyone to make a contribution.
• High investment in team building.
• Divide and multiply concept. Never grow too much to limit bureaucracy.
• You’re only a leader if people want to follow you.
• Ability is gained through the respect of your peers and this attracts followers.
• Hierarchy, on-demand- who really has the knowledge or if it is situational is the norm.
• Listening constantly to the voice of the organization and their markets.
• Ambiguity is never clarity to keep it constantly in ‘flux’

The real power lies in the way they practice innovation

• If you have a great idea you have to convince other people that it’s great, then you get to join and then your job is to keep them motivated for results.
• There are low barriers to experimentation that drives innovative thinking.
• Innovation- kept within boundaries- but leverage is mostly on the core
• Focus on best in class concepts- that offer unique benefits that will be valued b) are an ongoing source of sustainable advantage.
• Discretion to explore is earned over time
• Rigorous, transparent peer reviews
• Ever-evolving portfolio of tools and best practices
• Fitness for use- doing what it says it will do
• Relentless protection of IP
• Investments, not expenses
• Each associate has a sponsor
• The power of small teams
• Compensation based on contribution judged by peers
• Powerful sense of ownership
• Leaders provide a balance of challenge and support
• Don’t need lots of rules and hierarchy
• The power of influence is the key to unlocking and making a contribution
• Valuing not a few but looking for unique contributions of many.

Gore’s beliefs and guiding principles
What I also like is Gores clear beliefs and guiding principles. These are made up of belief in the individual, in small teams, all in the same boat and holding a longer-term view as the payoff but not sacrificing the short-term gain.

In principles they encourage freedom by associates can achieve their own goals best by directing their efforts towards the success of the corporation, action is prized, ideas encouraged and mistakes viewed as part of the creative process.

They sincerely try to be fair to each other and to anyone they do business with. Associates are not assigned tasks, they each make their own commitments and keep them and lastly, everyone consults with each other before taking actions that might damage or actions that might be ‘below the waterline.’

Finally their original founder, Bill Gore, stated “the objective of the enterprise is to make money and fun doing so” and they still seemingly work towards this, 50 years later.

The constant challenge of scale

Their challenge has been to scale Gore’s model as it grows; in size, geographies and cultures and into new products and segments. By constantly pushing authority out to small teams, respecting and encouraging diversity and talent from different backgrounds and styles all signing on to the “Gore” way seems to be evolving well but according to them “it is still being figured out as it happens”

Here endeth the (innovation) lesson.

Just recalling this, watching the video again, referring back to some notes I have been building up on this, is as an inspirational story.

It does gives me and hopefully you, a real sense that innovation has to be treated holistically, embedded in all that you do to get to achieve such a position as W L Gore in its recognition and praised by many.

What a shame it stands out as such a shining example that few seem capable to follow or could they if they really wanted to embrace innovation as we preach?

The post Understanding innovation – the W L Gore way. first appeared on Building Your Innovation & Ecosystem Intelligence.