|
Report 103
Your newsletter on applied creativity, imagination, ideas and innovation in
business – delivered to your e-mail box on the first and third Tuesday
of every month.
Tuesday, 6 June 2006
Issue 83
Hello and welcome to another issue of Report 103, your fortnightly newsletter
on creativity, imagination, ideas and innovation in business.
As always, if you have news about creativity, imagination, ideas, or innovation
please feel free to forward it to me for potential inclusion in Report103.
Your comments and feedback are also always welcome.
Information on unsubscribing, archives, reprinting articles, etc can be found
at the end of this newsletter.
IF-THEN MILESTONES: AN ALTERNATIVE TO RISK REDUCTION
As I have remarked before in this eJournal, one of the greatest problems in
corporate innovation systems is that too much effort is placed on the idea review
process – sometimes called the stage gate – while insufficient effort
is placed on generating truly innovative ideas and seriously poor attention
is paid to developing creative challenges for generating ideas (such as “In
what ways might we improve our corporate innovation process?”).
Of course reviewing ideas is a critical component in any innovation process.
Organisations need to evaluate ideas to determine whether or not they meet the
relevant criteria and, if not, how ideas might be improved to meet those criteria.
Of course, the review process is also a time when ideas can be made more innovative.
Sadly, that's not what usually happens. More typically, the review process
is about reducing risk. Innovative ideas pass from one committee to another,
each of which is worried about one perceived risk or another. Unfortunately,
innovativeness is directly proportional to risk. Decrease risk and you inevitably
decrease the innovativeness of an idea.
Indeed, I can imagine this scene in a car manufacturing firm. Barney, the head
of research comes bursting into the CEO's office. “I've done it, I've
done it!” he shouts waving a strange looking model in front of Sarah,
the CEO.
“What is it?” asks Sarah.
“Why, it's a flying car that operates via a highly efficient fuel cell.
The fuel cell runs on water produces virtually no pollution!”
“A flying car.... Now that is interesting. But I wonder if our customers
would like it. After all, they've been buying wheeled cars from us for nearly
a century. Perhaps you could put some wheels on it in order to make it comfortable.”
As the idea floats from one review committee to another, additional changes
are made to Barney's design.
- “It could be hard for customers to refill water in the middle of the
dessert. Perhaps we should also install a petrol (gasoline) engine just in case.”
- “The wheels look nice and would comfort our buyers, but we think you
should make them bigger and allow the flying car to drive as well as fly as
there could be times when our customers would not like to fly.”
- “We feel that having a petrol engine and a fuel cell engine is redundant.
Out customers are more used to petrol engines and we have a very fuel efficient
2.0 litre engine available. So let's drop the fuel cell all together.”
- “Our legal department is concerned that flying cars could raise liability
issues in the event of a crash. Since the car has wheels anyway, they recommend
we postpone the flying functionality for a few years until the legal environment
is clearer. Let's look at the flying bit again in 2025.”
The result? Thanks to risk-averse review committees, the flying car that runs
on water using a highly efficient fuel cell becomes... a perfectly ordinary
petrol engined car.
But the removal of all innovativeness from an innovative idea is a smaller
consequence of excessive risk-averse review. Consider Barney, the inventor of
the flying car in the example above. How do you think he will feel while watching
his pet idea being made more and more mediocre with every review committee?
In spite of having a highly innovative mind, he will either start looking for
a job in a company that appreciates his brilliance – or keep his head
down and his more radical (in other words, more “innovative”) ideas
to himself.
Worse, Barney will not be the only one adversely affected by the review committees.
His colleagues will also see what happens when you present a radical idea to
company. It gets watered down into a mediocre idea. So, they will learn to censor
themselves and water their own ideas down before sharing them with committees
that will only water them down further in order to squeeze every element of
risk – and innovativeness – out of the ideas.
Hence, risk obsessed review committees not only dilute the ideas they get their
hands on, they also dilute the innovativeness of the workforce. And if a company
invests in developing an innovation process and installing an idea management
solution, only to dilute ideas and corporate innovativeness, they are truly
establishing an expensive and time consuming approach to avoiding innovation.
Nevertheless, as stated at the beginning of this article, ideas do need to
be reviewed. But the review process should not be about removing risk. It should
be about examining viability, increasing innovativeness and establishing a series
of “if-then milestones” for regularly testing the implementation.
To explain if-then milestones, consider the flying car example again. Sarah,
the CEO, might say: “Now that is a very interesting idea, Barney. But,
I am worried that such a radical idea might be too much for our clients. So,
let's do it one step at a time.
“First, patent the technology. Then go ahead and build a working prototype.
And let's have it ready for the Geneva Motor Show next March. But let's not
be so secretive this time. I want you to leak details – without giving
away any technical innovations, of course – to the motoring press. To
some extent we can gauge the car's potential by their reaction.”
“IF the motoring press is too negative, THEN we can tone down your idea
before the motor show. IF their feedback is very bad, THEN we may have to completely
reconsider your idea. But we'll deal with that if, and only if, it is the case.
“Then, since this is a radical idea, let's try a more radical approach.
Why don't you write a blog about the development of the flying car? Again, keep
the technology to yourself – at least until the patents are applied for
– but share the development and testing of the car. That should give us
a lot of feedback from car and technology aficionados. IF they bring up any
serious issues, THEN we can review how to deal with those issues.
“We should also present your idea to the legal department. Doubtless
they will come up with all kinds of liability objections. So, we'll ask them
to give us some scenarios. IF their scenarios indicate serious legal issues,
THEN we will brainstorm ways to work around those issues.
“Assuming feedback is good, we will build a small test fleet to see how
they work. We should give some test vehicles to typical owners of our current
cars and look at their remarks. IF they have any serious issues, THEN we can
look at how to work around those issues.
“I am concerned that finding water, for refuelling, on the road might
be tricky, as 50 litres will be needed with each refuelling. Petrol stations
might not be happy about giving away so much water. So, this is something we
will have to explore with the test fleet. However IF getting water on the road
is an issue, THEN we should work out a deal with the oil companies.
“Of course, IF there are serious problems with the test fleet, THEN we
will have to seriously reconsider the project – and possibly drop it all
together. But we'll deal with that if and only if it's a problem.
“So, Barney, give me a budget for all of that. IF it's reasonable THEN
we can get started on the first steps.”
As you can see, in this overly simplified example, the CEO has acknowledged
the risk present in such a radical new idea. But instead of removing risk –
and innovativeness – she has laid out a pre-implementation plan with a
series of If-Then's. If something does not work as planned, then an action is
to be taken. Sometimes that action might as vague as reviewing the idea again
to see how you will manage the problem. Sometimes it might be a matter of cancelling
the project altogether.
Bear in mind, however, that if problems do arise, the solution need not be
to reduce risk and make the idea more conventional. Indeed, it might be the
opposite. Look at the problem as a challenge and dream up innovative solutions
to solve it.
EXPERT CONTRIBUTOR
I am delighted to bring you another article from Dr. Stephen Sweid (drsweid@postmaster.co.uk),
an International Management & Marketing Consultant, Market Researcher and
Innovation Consultant operating in Dubai and London. Incidentally, if you would
like to contribute an article to Report 103 – I would like to hear from
you. Our readers benefit from varied ideas and experience like yours. E-mail
me in the first instance with a short explanation of your article.
A CREATIVE APPROACH TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT
By Dr. Stephen Sweid
Article Description: This article applies a creative approach to various key
issues of change management, with the aim of gaining a different insight of
the interactions involved in the change process, and hence securing a faster
and more comfortable ride.
1 - The Creative Process Is About Multiplicity and Diversity of Ideas
There are always multiple solutions in response to a given need for organizational
change, i.e. there are many alternatives every time, and many possible change
models.
Success of any type of solution, whether it consists of a small or global change,
incremental or radical change, core or peripheral change, depends on provision
of an integrated system (holistic approach), where a balanced mix of the required
components is made available, and where the change system is in balance with
the whole organization. If one component is malfunctioning or missing, the whole
system can be impaired. As a starter inputs and outputs of the change-system
have to be balanced.
Changing only one thing does not lead to successful change, and will most likely
make things worse than before.
We can have different social or economic systems, where we still find internal
and external harmony in each type. Inputs and outputs may even be the same for
different systems, i.e. although each system works differently, the end result
can be the same.
2 - Striking Analogies Is a Key Creativity Tool.
Analogy with the Physical Process: Transition threshold:
For every organizational change there is a minimum amount of effort (threshold)
to be expended before the change process takes off and builds a momentum of
its own. One has to persevere and keep pushing until a critical mass is reached.
Moreover, one has to make sure the instituted change is irreversible and that
it works in a sustainable manner, i.e. in a stable balance (in contrast to unstable
balance). If the effort is inadequate, the situation of the organization will
revert to its original state once the effort ceases, similar to releasing a
stretched elastic band.
Balance Between Two Timely Extremes:
One would like to rock the boat, and implement change quickly, but the outcome
can be unpredictable, and can do a lot of damage. Too slow a change process
is also doomed to fade away, since there is such a thing as entropy, and since
initial conditions are changing constantly and people loose interest. One has
to strike the right balance.
On the other hand, gradual change is often necessary to give time for the transitions
to sink in. Perseverance and patience are keywords here. Change should improve
and not harm the organization. One does not get performance results quickly.
There is often a learning process involved.
Balance Between Two Target Approaches:
It is nice to target areas in the organization where change can make a big impact
on the outcome, i.e. to target the core, but it is also nice to test the concept
on a small scale first, or in the periphery, before going for the big thing.
A combination of both approaches is useful, e.g. some pilot project simulating
the core. It is crucial not to waste time dealing with low impact areas.
Analogies with the Past: Same in same out: If a change approach has failed
in the past, it would be wise to change or adjust this approach, so it won't
fail again.
3 - The Creative "WHY" Question and learning from Analogies:
Identifying Working Models in Advanced Countries: It is important to believe
there are successful operations to learn from. If as a developing country the
question is raised as to WHY the change is being sought, and the answer is to
close the wide gap with the advanced countries, then emulating currently successful
models in the advanced countries will not be sufficiently creative.
It is better to go farther in analogies, and to see what the present models
are transforming into in the future, i.e. their plan and dream, and to leapfrog
to such anticipated models. This way the gap is narrowed very quickly and convergence
with the advanced countries will occur much earlier.
It is more cost-effective (from an economic feasibility point of view) to leapfrog
to the future state, although it is not directly a proven model. It might cost
more initially, but subsequent losses due to lack of comparative advantage are
minimized. Adopting current successful models takes time, and by the time they
are finished they are already out of date, and the country will continue trailing
behind. The world is not waiting!
4 - Creative Change Teams and Agents:
The roles of change teams and agents depend on the phase of the change, but
in general people involved in change have to be creative, i.e. they apply out
of the box thinking.
When creating the change team one should select a competent team leader, who
will have the final say following brainstorming and discussions. Emphasis is
on competent! Otherwise the debate process will go on for ever. On the other
hand, it is important to have consensus in the team. It is a weakness resorting
to majority votes in a small team, since there will be frustrated few who will
resist change. If there is constant conflict in the team, it is better for the
sponsor to investigate and perhaps change the composition of the team.
5 - The Creative Question of the Real Needs and Adaptation:
Who are the main beneficiaries of the change process: Customers, private sector,
citizens, other departments etc? They should constitute the main target of change.
One should appraise their needs, and even engage them (as stakeholders) directly
in the change process. This way the highest degree of creative input is reached,
and maximum gain is secured.
Change is made by people, and it is mostly about people. People are at the
core of each change process, and people are the most important element of change
and continuity. One has to consult with them first, pick their brains, keep
them informed and coordinate with them. Moreover, one should strive to apply
creative adapted solutions that trigger maximum commitment and motivation to
change in all parties concerned.
LAYERED IDEAS CAMPAIGNS
Jenni (http://www.jpb.com/jenni/)
is our idea management software service. Jenni allows your managers to set up
and manage focused ideas campaigns based on specific challenges, such as “In
what ways might we test our flying car concept?” (See story above). Employees
can submit ideas, review other ideas and build on each others' ideas in Jenni's
collaborative idea space. After a set period of time, ideas are peer-reviewed
using Jenni's evaluation matrix tool and pre-implemented according to your existing
methods. As a result, you get collaborative idea development, collaborative
evaluation and collaborative implementation.
Jenni's flexible ideas campaign set up tool allows multinational companies
to layer ideas campaigns in order to maximise the value of Jenni without exposing
any one employee to overly many ideas campaign.
To explain: Jenni allows you to set up as many ideas campaigns as you want.
They can even run simultaneously. However, from a practical point of view, if
employees are overwhelmed with too many ideas campaigns, they are likely to
take each campaign less seriously and put less effort into their innovation.
If nothing else, they simply will not have time to contribute their minds to
all of the campaigns. The result can be fewer ideas in many campaigns than you
might see in a single campaign.
However, companies can layer their campaigns. The top layer might be an enterprise-wide
ideas campaign in which every employee is invited to submit and build upon ideas.
At the next layer down, several country offices can each launch an ideas campaign,
in their local language, exclusively for their local employees. Thus you could
have a dozen different country-level ideas campaigns running at the same time
as the enterprise ideas campaign. Yet, each employee would be aware of, and
be able to participate in no more than two campaigns: their country campaign
and the enterprise campaign.
Of course, it need not stop there. Regional offices can also launch their own
ideas campaigns involving only people in their regions.
What this means is that with Jenni, you can have numerous ideas campaigns running
all the time and generating lots of innovative ideas for your firm. Nevertheless,
each employees is only aware of a maximum of three ideas campaigns at any given
time.
For more information about Jenni and how it can help your firm innovate more
effectively, contact
us here.
Incidentally, users of Jenni have free access to my knowledge and advice on
running effective ideas campaigns.
WORKSHOP 103
If you are intrigued by an article – or articles – in Report 103
and would like me to develop the theme of the article into an interactive workshop
or talk at your firm; at your conference or at your pub, let me know. A typical
Report 103 article can be transformed into a 1.5-3 hour interactive workshop
where we will not only discuss the information, but discuss how to apply it
in your firm. Past workshops have included team work, brainstorming, role-playing
and developing viable action plans. Be warned, however, my workshops have also
been described as fun. That doesn't go down well in some firms!
So, if an article in Report 103 inspires you. Don't just circulate Report 103
to your colleagues (which you are are more than welcome to do!). Let's also
implement it in your firm.
For more
information, contact me here.
LATEST IN BUSINESS INNOVATION
If you want to keep up with the latest news in business innovation, I recommend
Chuck Frey's INNOVATIONweek (http://www.innovationtools.com/News/subscribe.asp).
It's the only e-newsletter that keeps you up-to-date on all of the latest innovation
news, research, trends, case histories of leading companies and more. And it's
the perfect complement to Report 103!
Happy thinking!
Jeffrey Baumgartner
---------------------------------------------------
Report 103 is a complimentary weekly electronic newsletter from Bwiti bvba
of Belgium (a jpb.com company: http://www.jpb.com). Archives and subscription
information can be found at http://www.jpb.com/report103/
Report 103 is edited by Jeffrey Baumgartner and is published on the first and
third Tuesday of every month.
You may forward this copy of Report 103 to anyone, provided you forward it
in its entirety and do not edit it in any way. If you wish to reprint only a
part of Report 103, please contact Jeffrey Baumgartner.
Contributions and press releases are welcome. Please contact Jeffrey
in the first instance.
Return to Report 103 home/archives | Return
to top of page
* Notes
-
you may unsubscribe at any time by e-mail.
-
We use the double opt-in process. This means you will receive an
e-mail which you must reply to in order to subscribe. Although this
is a minor inconvenience, it ensures that only people who want to
receive Report103 actually do receive it.
-
We will not share your e-mail address with anyone else or send you
any e-mails other than Report 103 unless you contact us first.
|
