Dr. Earl R. Smith II
Managing Partner, The Federal Circle
DrSmith@Dr-Smith.com
Dr-Smith.com
There is lots of talk these days about the need for innovation. Two things are important to recognize. One, talking about innovation is not innovative. Saying is not doing. Two, innovation and stimulating a sustainable culture of innovation is far harder than talking about doing so. Doing is much harder than saying.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There is much talk of innovation and the challenges of how to stimulate and sustain it. It is one of the questions that transcend the stage of development of a company. It is also a question that should engage the entire team. Nothing affects the fortunes of an organization more than a team’s ability to come to terms and overcome the challenge of maintaining a culture of innovation. The world is simply to fluid and change such a dominate characteristic of the times we live in – innovation is necessary for survival.
Eventually all of my coaching engagements come to focus on the challenge of developing and maintaining a corporate culture that allows it to respond effectively to a rapidly evolving marketplace with a solid emphasis on creating value through innovation. The difficult aspect of this question is that it is very easy to discuss intellectually but implementation of any solution can prove very difficult. As a friend was fond of saying, “an understanding of innovation is, in itself, not innovative”.
Innovation is difficult because it necessitates the collaboration of two very different types of intellects. In order to develop such a culture, creative and the analytical types need to find a way to work effectively together. It is hard to overstate the difficulties that such an effort can encounter.
In my experience, the CEO and COO are two of the most important players in the effort to stimulate a culture of innovation. The third important player in the effort is the Chairman of the Board of Directors. It is this third player that is often overlooked – probably because in many companies the CEO also occupies the role of Chairman. That arrangement precludes an important dynamic – the role of the Board of Directors in the strategic evolution of corporate culture.
One of the principal reasons that this division of responsibilities is important is that most often the CEO and COO fall into the category of ‘analytical types’. Their focus is on essentially and appropriately on the tactical issues which revolve around the implementation of the company’s tactical plan. A strong Board lead by a visionary Chairman will act to counter this imbalance and contribute to the evolution of a culture of innovation. They will break the bottlenecks obstructing the flow of creative ideas.
A company must create a culture where all participants can challenge why something that does not make sense to them. They must be able to ‘think out of the box’. However, my experience has been that not all team members are able to do this effectively – in fact, it is critical that a substantial part of the team focus on thinking inside the box. This group provides the stability and institutional memory of the company – an essential contribution. Others will be better at thinking in new and revolutionary ways. They must come to terms with the importance of this stability and the need to preserve the organizational foundations while exploring and introducing new ways of thinking and operating.
The core issue in a culture of innovation is the relationship between these two groups. For it to function properly, there must be a high level of trust, an easy and direct pattern of communication and a freedom which allows each member of the team to focus their energies on being the best at what they do best.
I have worked with companies that were almost totally populated with ‘creative types’. Never has the term ‘herding cats’ seemed more appropriate. These organizations suffered from a kind of organizational attention deficit disorder. Good ideas were generated in abundance but the company lacked the infrastructure and team members that could turn them into revenue.
I have also worked with companies that were just the opposite – legions of ‘analytical types’. These companies developed a different form of stagnation. They might have been based on a ‘cutting edge’ technology at one time but quickly fell behind the competition.
Some of my engagements have brought me into the role of Chairman while others have found me serving as an advisor to either the Chairman or the CEO. However, in each case, the challenges have been the same – how does the company develop and maintain that essential culture of innovation? How does a company keep either of these types from achieving ascendancy and driving the other off the field? How a company answers these questions, more than any others, determines its future.
© Dr. Earl R. Smith II
~~~~~~~~~~
Related Articles:
- Inspirational Governance
- Good Governance – Keeping Ahead of Fast Company
- Governance By Visionaries
- Developing Visionary Leadership – Board Contributions
- Corporate Talent – Coaching and Retaining the Best
- Visionary Boards of Directors
- Board of Directors – Evolution through Devolution
~~~~~~~~~~
110 Responses to “The Challenge of Cultivating Innovation – Part 1”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Paul West wrote:
Dr. Smith – I always enjoy your articles! In this instance, I do wonder if the analytical / creative paradigm gets to the nub of it. My experience leads me to conclude that innovative companies are run by and staffed with people who discern. Discernment involves knowledge, analysis, creativity, trial and error, an open mind, contemplation, settling time, doing time and many other factors. Not sure it is a good idea to overpopulate a company with purebreds, be they “analytical”, “creative” or other.
Am also a big fan of paper and pencil!!!
Alex Hearn wrote:
My favourite innovation toy is still a piece of paper and pencil!
Alex, Thanks for your comment. I keep a jar of ‘things’ on my desk. I call them thinking pieces. They are – because of shape, texture, etc. – handy in hand and stimulate the thought process. My own personal Lego set. Dr. Smith
Alex Hearn wrote:
I know this comment is more about the detail rather than the overall view the article talks about but here goes!
I went to a talk by Lego about how it can stimulate innovation and it was quite impressive. Of course Lego is just a tool to express yourself but there are so many combinations plus its simplicity means that is a great way for people to express themselves or their ideas.
The activity in a certain part of the brain is triggered by using your hands which can also mean your subconscious brain expresses itself in a way that your conscious mind may not.
Of course, there is more to it than that and you need a culture of encouraging innovation. Also, any method for creating innovation needs to be followed through or it is wasted.
Dharmendra Parmar wrote:
It seems today the biggest challenge to foster innovation or build a culture of innovation, is to allow a sustainable degree of freedom at workplace in terms of Standards & Procedures. This is infact very objectionable to an Organisation’s discipline. In my opinion, there has to be a deep understanding of purpose of every activity and then build an ability to challenge the “status quo”.
On the other hand, while creating a mass enactment can be top driven to a great extent, it is critical that the realisation within an individual at the more subtle level – To Create, To Improve, To Be Different and ultimately to sustain in the long term – Probably its the only best way to survive !
Thanks for two great comments. The interesting thing about innovation is that leaders are mostly relegated to fostering it rather than doing it. It takes a particularly mature individual to stand out of the way after they have cleared the way. Dr. Smith
Domenico Famà wrote:
Try to establish how much, year after year, you need of it and define a budget (money and other resources).
Never cut this budget: do it before with others.
My 2 cents
Catalina Negru wrote:
A sustainable culture of innovation?
Based on my experience it starts at the core of it, when the leaders believe in the true benefits of the collective knowledge and creativity .See Fiat 500 examples or the Apple support approach.
It continues with motivating and awarding people for good ideas as good example. Motivation plays a huge role in it as we all see demotivated people around us, don’t we?
And then the last but not least empowering people to put that idea in practice and take ownership (together with the risk of failure or success ) for it.
That’s what I truly saw working.
A good day to you All
Lisa, thanks for the comment. It does matter – it is important to understand the dynamics the either lead to or block innovation. Successfully cultivating innovation begins with the understanding. Otherwise it is just gambling – and that is a high-risk approach. Dr. Smith
Rudy, Great comment. ‘Poetic wanderings’ are always welcome. I have worked with the kinds of Chairmen and CEOs that you refer to. One variation in this pattern is the CEO who needs to be moved to CTO or some similar position. I have worked with CEOs who really needed to make this move – to free them up to do the creative work that leads to innovation. the key to understanding this dynamic is that one person’s ‘rational system’ is an other’s barely comprehensible mysticism. The culture is only schizoid if you try to reduce these perspectives on one coherent one. Dr. Smith