Comments on: Uncharted Waters Disrupting the Corporate Boardrooms

By: The Case for Dual Innovation – Innovation Excellence

The Case for Dual Innovation – Innovation Excellence — Tue, 20 Sep 2016 12:45:45 +0000

[…] latest Global Board Survey from Deloitte, brought to my attention by Paul Hobcraft, also calls for a dual innovation approach by establishing a dedicated “Division-X”, […]

By: No Company deserves to survive with apathy in its future | Paul4innovating's Innovation Views

Sat, 28 May 2016 07:53:02 +0000

[…] Deloittes report was on how leadership within Boardrooms under my”uncharted waters”, was about how our boards are struggling to get their ‘collective heads’ around disruption and […]

By: The Case for Dual Innovation | Tim Kastelle

The Case for Dual Innovation | Tim Kastelle — Sat, 30 Apr 2016 08:31:29 +0000

[…] latest Global Board Survey from Deloitte, brought to my attention by Paul Hobcraft, also calls for a dual innovation approach by establishing a dedicated “Division-X”, […]

By: The Case for Dual Innovation | Integrative Innovation

The Case for Dual Innovation | Integrative Innovation — Thu, 07 Apr 2016 17:41:45 +0000

[…] latest Global Board Survey from Deloitte, brought to my attention by Paul Hobcraft, also calls for a dual innovation approach by establishing a dedicated “Division-X”, […]

By: paul4innovating

paul4innovating — Sun, 03 Apr 2016 11:47:34 +0000

In reply to Joachim von Heimburg.

Hello Joachim,

I like your several faces to manage, also the absolute need (my reaffirming) that outside perspectives within board rooms needs shaking up to provide this help in addressing the balance on time horizons, types of innovation, risk adoption etc.

You suggest organizational ambidexterity, a tough one to enact well. Do you follow Ralph Christian-Ohr’s work on this. For instance his recent post gives a solid rounding to his thinking this through as a work-in-progress- “A model for integrative innovation management”.
http://integrative-innovation.net/?p=1157

This dual thinking, managing, approaching innovation or even organizational design is high in my mind constantly but I’ve yet to fully nail it down as it does seem to hold (part of) the promise to break out of the present constraints holding innovation and the thinking and management of our growth back.

Cheers Paul

By: Joachim von Heimburg

Joachim von Heimburg — Sun, 03 Apr 2016 11:16:05 +0000

Paul, I can’t agree with you more!
The ability to innovate and thereby sustainably create value for the business is becoming the defining competitive advantage for companies which want to thrive in a globalized economy. Therefore I think that the Board can and should play a pivotal role in innovation. Innovation has many facets and involves all parts of the company in one way or another. So it is in the realm of the Board.
Typically, innovation has several faces: an operational one (how to run the innovation processes), a strategic one (where to innovate and versus what business objective), an organizational one (how to structure the organization and how to resource innovation activities) and a cultural one (does the company culture encourage innovation). In order to optimally manage all these often competing vectors the Board and the C-Suite need to work in tandem. Their different strengths profiles and priorities provide the broad managerial competence needed to master the complex innovation challenge. In particular the outside perspective non-executive, external directors bring to the Board together with its longer term time horizon complement in an ideal way the shorter term, internal operations focus of the C-Suite.
This competence is often called organizational ambidexterity – a company’s ability to run successfully today’s business while developing tomorrow’s opportunities. A Board working in such a synergy with the C-Suite on innovation will ensure a bright future for their company.