May 23, 2012

Resourcing for Innovation

I have a good friend (Eduardo) from Brazil that shares my love of innovation.  We were talking the other day about our collective experiences with different companies.  One common theme that we both came across was the high level of disappointment many firms have in regards to their innovation output.  These companies express a need for innovation, and have multiple projects running at any given time, but looking back it never seems that their target revenues were achieved.  It doesn’t take an organizational design specialist to understand their key issue.  Anyone looking objectively at the organization can spot the problem.

Thanks to Eduardo for illustrating this point so beautifully in the following cartoon!

 

 

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

 

 

Does this look familiar?  How are you really allocating your resources?  Are your “innovation people” protected from day to day firefighting?  Do you have a group is charged with seeing beyond the financial returns of the given quarter?  Innovation never just happens, and it is not painless.  It seems that most companies get what they organize for.

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Business lessons, company culture, corporate structure, innovation

Tagged as , , ,

May 15, 2012

Peripheral Vision for Successful Innovation

When most companies think of innovation, they think of overhauling their current product lines.  While that may not be a bad goal, taking a myopic

approach is typically self-limiting.  Taking a step back and looking at your product in the context in which it’s used (“peripheral vision”) can lead to more, high-potential ideas.  Let me give you an example.

I recently wanted to find a gym that my company could join.  Since this was not only for myself, but also for my employees, I spent some time finding

out what their interests and needs were for this opportunity.  Good exercise equipment (treadmills, ellipticals, weight machines, etc.) was a given.  A few other offerings made our wish list, and these items were compiled as well.    With that information in hand, we began looking and comparing.  The

closest gym to our office (proximity was high on the list of “needs”) had all of the exercise equipment that we needed, but had no locker room with showers.  Since our office does not have showers, this is a must to be practical.  We ended up joining a gym further away that could provide us with both the desired equipment and the locker rooms with showers. Interestingly enough, the first gym provided everything that was needed for fitness and exercise.  In fact, much of their equipment was state of the art in terms of design and innovation.  However they did not get our business. The

second gym used a bit of peripheral vision when designing their facility and realized that showers and a changing room, while not directly tied to exercise or fitness, were important features for their customers.

How could they take this peripheral vision concept a step further?  Providing showers allows customers to leave the facility clean, but what are they

lugging out with them?  A gym bag full of nasty, sweaty clothes.  These clothes can’t be worn again in their current state, so the exerciser must now keep them contained in their car and remember to wash them.   The act of exercising has caused the need for additional time and effort.   How much  would a gym separate themselves from the pack by expanding their offering?  Why not provide members with a locker and laundry service?  Imagine putting your sweaty clothes in a bin when you were done and finding them washed, dried and in your locker upon your next visit?  This could be an optional, up-sell service.  How many customers would pay a monthly premium to not have to deal with the extra laundry or to have the ability to go to the gym

on a moment’s notice knowing they’ll have clean workout clothes waiting for them?  While a laundry service has even less to do with fitness than a shower does, this compelling offering would satisfy even more unmet needs of their customer.

What approach are you taking with your business?  Are you just keeping your core offerings competitive?  Or are you looking at the bigger picture of your consumers’ unmet needs?  The next time you embark on an innovation project, try the peripheral vision approach.  It will open up many opportunities that you would not otherwise consider.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Business lessons, consumer insight, innovation

Tagged as , , , , ,

April 17, 2012

Innovation – a Gardening Analogy

In the last couple of years I have taken up vegetable gardening as a hobby.  I’ve now progressed to the point that I start my own seeds in the house, and raise them until I can transplant them in the garden once the risk of frost has passed.  Over the weekend as I was tending to these young tender plants, the realization of how this illustrates the fuzzy front end of innovation came to me.

Innovation requires high potential ideas (the seeds) and an organization that can nurture and support them as they develop (the soil).  Obviously, both are required; seeds in a packet are just untapped potential, the greatest soil without seeds is just inviting weeds.  While I could elaborate on this point further, let’s assume both of these items are in place and you have ideas that have sprouted.  What are the risks you face now?

In gardening, there are three key risks that young plants must be protected from: Weather, Weeds and Pests.  I think this analogy supports each of these same risks.  Think of it as the following…

Weather – It’s not the day to day sun and/or rain that you worry about, it’s the sudden changes that cause problems.  Unexpected frost, flooding, strong winds are all examples in nature of conditions that can wipe out young plants.  In the corporate world its also the unexpected that causes significant risk.  Sudden changes in priorities, funding, staffing will wipe out high potential ideas as quickly as a frost will kill a plant.  It is critical to protect your ideas from such conditions, where possible by isolating them from the unexpected situation.

Weeds – Any gardener knows that weeds left unchecked will take over a garden and rob the desirable plants of the nutrients that are required for them to grow.  Likewise, in a corporate setting weeds are the distractions that arise from the culture and slowly choke out a powerful idea by diverting the necessary resources to other areas.  This doesn’t happen overnight, but rather gradually over time.  A wise gardener will remove the weeds as they surface rather than letting them form a stronghold.  A wise innovation manager will do the same thing.

Pests – These come in many forms, but always come from outside the garden.  Their goal is to consume the plant for their own purposes, then leave when it is no longer of interest.  In the corporate world, these could be people that are outside the project team, that want to put their “stamp” on an idea so they can selfishly take credit later.  They are far less concerned about the health of the idea than being able to point to something they added.  This could be an individual or an entire department.  In either case, it is critical to be on the lookout for Pests, and repel them as efficiently as possible.

There are numerous additional analogies I could draw from this, from keeping the soil in prime condition, to harvesting at the right time.  But for now, I’ll leave it as it is.  In the meantime, my tomato plants have taken on a whole new meaning!

Leave a Comment

Filed under Business lessons, Gardening, Idea Management, innovation

Tagged as , , , ,

April 11, 2012

Reconciling Thoughts

Two of my favorite business books of late are “Linchpin” by Seth Godin, and “A Whole New Mind” by Daniel Pink.  These two are both must reads in terms of making yourself or your organization indispensable by tapping into the artistic or right side of your brain.  Pink theorizes that many traditional jobs (e.g. accountants, lawyers, doctors) in our country will one day be outsourced to places like India where rule and process-bound jobs can be done at a much lower cost than here.  Godin refers to people that do their jobs in a routine manner, merely following orders and accepting a paycheck as “cogs” that are easily replaceable.  In contrast the Linchpin is the person that brings artistry to their job in such a way as to make themselves irreplaceable.  I get both of these things.  Having said that, I have trusted advisors in my life that might technically be classified as “cogs”, but I wouldn’t consider replacing them (at least in the foreseeable future).  I value the history and the knowledge that my doctor and my accountant have concerning me.  I feel that their recommendations about moving forward are based about their understanding of my past.  I trust their opinions even when they are not what I want to hear.  They bring a certain artistry to their work that (in my opinion) makes them the best of both worlds.

I have spent half of my career in Corporate America and the other half serving it.  And it’s in this arena that my quandary lies.  Why do big companies operate by such different rules?  If a typical company in the US found the ultimate service provider, they would still be pressured to send out bids each time they have a need. Forget the history, the knowledge the shared vision their current provider might have, they will always be looking for a new one for fear that they’re not getting the best service at the best price. I can’t help but think that a huge portion of their investment is spent in bringing the new provider up to speed, whereas a trusted advisor could hit the ground running.  

As with the previous examples, corporate service providers surely fall into two camps; cogs and linchpins.  I understand why there might be no loyalty to the bottled water supplier.  But why are the “artistic” linchpin types of firms treated like commodities?  Where are the virtual partnerships that were anticipated a decade ago?  It would appear that most companies actually prefer cogs, both in terms of their employees as well as in their service providers.  While that might not provide them with the best results, it most easily fits into their rigid processes.  It makes you wonder how things could be, if partnerships with linchpins were truly appreciated and utilized.

Leave a Comment

Filed under innovation

Tagged as , , ,

March 29, 2012

Book Review – The Idea Factory

I was asked to read and review the book “The Idea Factory Bell Labs and the Great Age of American Innovation” by Jon Gertner.   It’s funny, this is not the type of book that I would typically select and read myself.  My reading typically consists of marketing books (for business improvement) or pure fiction (for mindless entertainment).    This book is actually more of a business history book.  In it the author vividly describes the processes and the personalities

that came together to form Bell Labs during the last century.  It provides fascinating stories of various inventions, and the not-so-obvious way that they came to be.  As in any modern corporation, politics and resistance were met at many turns, and the strong and diverse personalities behind the “brains” of the group often found themselves in conflict.

If you are looking for a “how-to” book for implementing innovation in your own organization, then this is not for you.  If on the other hand you are interested in getting an insider’s glimpse into one of the most innovative organizations of the last one hundred years, then you will find this to be an enjoyable (though lengthy) read.

1 Comment

Filed under innovation

March 22, 2012

Can you be a stand-alone innovator?

When we think of innovation, it typically brings a given personality to our minds.  Steve Jobs, as an example was an iconic innovator that brought many great products to life.  But a recent study by Forbes, show in fact that there are five different personality types required for successful innovation.  Their examples lead me to think of the work I used to do in forming high-performance work teams.  It is crucial to have diverse personalities involved to ensure that all perspectives are covered and the goals are met.  With innovation, there’s no difference.  For every dreamer, you need a realist.  For every big-picture visionary, you need a number-cruncher.  No one personality working in isolation, can bring successful innovation to the market.  I encourage you to read their article on this study “The Five Personalities of Innovators: Which One are You?”.   Is your organization well staffed to cover each of these areas?  If not, is this something you need to adjust in order to improve your percentage of successful launches?  I think this is well worth considering.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Business, Business lessons, company culture, innovation

Tagged as , , ,

March 7, 2012

Peyton Manning – Innovation Litmus Test?

I live near Indianapolis, and all the news today is about the release of Peyton Manning from the Colts.  Twitter and Facebook posts are filled with opinions and consolations.  Most people saw this coming, but to look at the social media pages, you’d think this was a shock to everyone.

In glancing through the posts, I’ve noticed something unexpected, yet very interesting.  People seem to be falling into one of two distinct camps on this topic.  There are those that think Colt’s owner Jim Irsay is an idiot, and those that think that letting Peyton go (while saddening) was inevitable.  As I started to look at who was writing what (and knowing the backstory of many of those people) I started to see a correlation between their own lives and what they were writing.

One of the most notable “Irsay is an idiot” contributors was until recently one of the largest home builders in the city.  His comment was “Why would you ever let a proven winner go…?”.  Interestingly enough, this man’s company has gone into bankruptcy in the last year and is no longer around.  He himself had a “proven winner” in the form of a business model in this city… until the recession hit.  Even in the midst of the recession, he was passionately pursuing the largest development of his career.  Unfortunately, the world changed around him (in this case the economy).  What had always worked so well for him in the past was unable to sustain him in the present.  The sad result is that a good man and a good company went under.  Many of the other posters would fall into a similar (though less extreme) scenario.  ”You don’t let go of a winning approach”.  ”You don’t fix what’s not broken”.  You see it in their posts and you see it in their lives.

The other camp also fondly remembered and honored the past.  But they recognize that the situation has changed and it is time to move forward.  The Colts are not the Super Bowl team of a few years ago, they are admittedly in a rebuilding scenario.  Therefore, it doesn’t make sense to spend all of the team’s salary cap on bringing back a single player that will be rendered ineffective because of the lack of talent surrounding him.  Some of the people in this camp have proven to be highly resilient – even successful in spite of life’s circumstances.

In my mind, this is a perfect analogy that reflects many of the companies in our country today.  Highly innovative companies are continually rei

nventing themselves and pursuing their goals in bold new ways.  Ultra-conservative companies continue to hold onto tradition, and attempt to cost-reduce their way to success.  This worked in the 1990′s.  But it doesn’t work in 2012.  Yes we should honor the past.  We should take time to celebrate those that helped us in our past successes.  But we cannot afford to stay there as the world changes around us.  Innovation is the key to survival.  That’s true for the Colts, and that’s true for our businesses.

 

1 Comment

Filed under Business lessons, company culture, Football, innovation, Insight2

Tagged as , , , , ,