According to
The Global Competitiveness Report compiled by the World Economic Forum, Switzerland has developed a formidable innovation culture to watch.
The Report considers twelve factors to judge a nations global competitiveness ranking, including innovation. Switzerland is ranked second in the Innovation factor while the US holds the top ranking.
Innovation is viewed as critical because it continues even after the other factors run into diminishing returns -- a powerful statement itself!
One aspect of innovation considered in the report is a “workforce with the skills needed to adjust rapidly to any changing environment” (Global Competitiveness Report, 2009, p. 23).
I do not find it surprising at all to see a link between innovation (sustainable innovation at the country level) and the ability for organizations to adapt and change. A culture of innovation = organizational culture change ability.
I am once again considering the question, "how do we create a culture of innovation?" Many people recognize that this may be the difference between an organization's success or failure, but it remains elusive for many. To stimulate thinking on the question, I have been reading some outstanding organization change books, including:
Transforming Your Leadership Culture by McGuire and Rhodes
Deep Change by Quinn
Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture by Cameron and Quinn
Cultures and Organizations by Hofstede and Hofstede
Influencer by Patterson, Grenny, Maxfield, McMillan, and Switzler
They all have very important things to say about changing the culture of an organization. For those of us wishing to create a culture of innovation in our organization, it is useful to step back and consider what it means to change culture itself.
The book I am currently returning to is the Influencer -- it contains an easy to understand methodology for changing behavior that has had profound impact.
If you're looking for a way to do much more with less, read Influencer and learn how to make a difference yourself. The companion website is
www.vitalsmarts.com. Culture changes one person at a time, and it can start with you.
A colleague told me a great story about an employee engagement strategy. She had been hired by a well-known pharmaceutical company to take part in a major initiative to improve corporate performance. Like many pharmas, the challenge is getting new products thru the development pipeline in a timely and cost-effective manner.
Upper management had given a group of senior scientists an ultimatum to figure out how they could do a better job leading product innovation. My colleague--an organization development (OD) professional--was given the task of meeting with researchers from the R&D group to address the ultimatum.
She walked into a hornet's nest...the room was filled with angry and demoralized people...to a person they were hard working, highly educated and very experienced. After 30 minutes of venting...she had very serious doubts that any attempt to brainstorm sustainable product innovation strategies could happen.
In a moment of inspiration that often comes in times of stress, she asked them to forget about product innovation and simply think back to a time in their careers when they "found their bliss." What followed as nothing short of miraculous...yet predictable from what we are learning about overcoming resistance to change.
Many of the scientists in the room recalled their experience in post-doctoral fellowships. In those peak experiences, they were allowed to follow their instincts and explore new ground with minimal risk. There was no one hanging over their head demanding a tangible benefit or marketable product.
In discussing their experience as "post docs" the group came to realize that an overarching driver in the experience was to extend the time in the fellowship...to keep the bliss alive. They further realized that they had carried this practice forward into their work in the pharma labs. Questions began to emerge in their dialog. "Are we allowing a learned behavior during our 'post doc' experience to hinder a successful culture of innovation?" In keeping the research going for as long as funding could be obtained..."Are we reducing the chance of achieving competitive advantage?"
By the end of the afternoon, the group has come to a breakthrough idea. They realized that research projects that were not paying off in a reasonable time should be terminated. They began to develop a set of criteria that would allow them to identify "failures" earlier in the process and in so doing give more new ideas a chance to see the light.
Remembering peak experiences is a useful way to get people into a positive and creative frame of mind. It is at the heart of new tools in the field of OD such as appreciative inquiry and
appreciative intelligence that are helping to create successful organizational change.
I started my career as an engineer. Like many of my young colleagues at the time, I tended to be a bit arrogant, believing engineering was the center of all that is good in an organization! While Marketing, Sales, Operations, etc. must have served a purpose, the really interesting work was leading product innovation -- that is what engineers did. A few years later I found myself working very closely with Sales and I saw a different world and gained new perspectives. Much to my surprise, I found a book on sales to provide fodder for my innovation thinking. The book is "Solution Selling" and seminars by the same name were popular in the mid-90's. Although it is somewhat dated now, its utility for creating a customer centered approach to innovation remains.
Imagine my surprise -- a sales book that is not focused on selling a product but rather focused on meeting the needs of customers. That means we have to know a lot about the customers and what they need -- be a true consultant. As an engineer, I had been fortunate to work closely with customers throughout my career. However, this book provided a framework for examining customers needs, identifying what the real problems are, and judging how significant these problems are to a larger group of people.
When I was working on research for why we misunderstand requirements for software systems, I consulted with requirements engineering expert Al Davis. During our initial discussion, he recommended the Solution Selling book as a resource to stimulate thought. Go figure -- someone else who believes understanding the customer is important.
These experiences had many valuable lessons, including that if we want to transform an organization and create a culture of innovation, we need to look outside at customers and markets instead of inside at ourselves.
The differences between leadership and management are not merely academic. How an organization thinks about leading and managing provides insights into its culture. Further, it significantly impacts their ability to create sustainable innovation that is driven by a culture of innovation.
An insightful case study that examines how one organization changed their thinking was shared in "Transforming Your Leadership Culture" published by Jossey-Bass. The organization engaged people from all levels and discussed the differences between what it means to lead vs. manage. The resulting objective was for employees to shift their focus towards leading. They defined the shift from "manage" to "lead" in terms of several pairs of activities to change:
- engage instead of direct
- influence instead of control
- question instead of listen
- learn instead of instruct
- motivate instead of dominate
- integrate instead of separate
- multiple rights instead of I'm right
- dialogue instead of argue
- invite instead of command
This is an organization preparing for sustainable innovation. They are creating a culture that embraces questioning, dialogue, and collaboration.
Could India be facing an employment crisis in the future? A Deloitte VP recently shared concerns that there may be a coming talent shortage in Corporate India. He points out that the current education system needs to focus on more innovation skills and that managers must learn soft skills, such as communicating effectively.
What caught my attention about this topic was that the educational system is not adequately preparing people to be innovative. I expect educators and employers in other countries have similar concerns -- many organizations are dealing with the development of a culture of innovation. Teaching "innovation" means doing more than explaining an innovation approach such as Blue Ocean Strategy or Outcome-Driven Innovation. This is a good start, but people need more than knowing how to apply and manage innovation methodology. They also need to develop personal mastery and leadership skills that promote collaboration, sharing of ideas, asking different questions, taking risks, honoring failures that educate, fearlessly considering if "that's how we have always done it" is good enough, and promoting organization learning. Without these "softer" skills, it is likely that our organizations will continue to use the same thinking they always have. Albert Einstein cautioned that "we cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them."
For India and other countries who wish to promote innovation for the purpose of improving organizational performance, education and experience in both technical and soft skills must be pursued.
