The value of innovative in advancing their competitive position or enhancing their business processes is acknowledged by most organizations. However, many do not understand that successful innovative is carried out on a component feature basis, each of which is vital to the overall effectiveness of the program. These tasks, referred to as components of the innovative system, individually identify particular program characteristics and collectively characterize the attitude of the company towards innovative.
One of the most fundamental elements of the system, often ignored, is that the organization needs to implement or establish the concept of innovative for itself. This will (and should probably) differ significantly from company to company. From the basic concept of “a new idea, method or device” (Webster Dictionary), to “a change that makes a replacement dimension of performance” (Peter Drucker, leading innovator of strategy) or the more action-oriented, simple yet substantive “idea applied” (we like this one a lot), each organization must develop its own definition that is consistent with the priorities of its innovative program ii.
But the definition of the term is obviously not adequate and is merely one of the general system weather conditions that businesses need to analyze and adjust to their particular problems, priorities, operating model, and culture. A number of essential components provide the opposite:
Strategy – Alignment is key
Within the market, every company identifies its own value chain and develops strategies to execute within that value chain. Throughout this approach, creativity plays a role and preferably enforces it with contributions that boost the competitive position of the organization or improve its internal effectiveness. To fit with its overall plan, the company must target its innovative capital.
It must clearly communicate its challenges and express priorities for the solutions it seeks, so that business resources can specialize in delivering innovative that targets those particular goals. The organization needs to identify performance criteria for innovative over time within the strategy process pillar, even because of the criteria for concept selection and program governance. The implementation of innovative plans falls on the shoulders of corporate leadership.
Method and Equipment – the motivation for success
Processes and instruments of innovative have to evolve to the level of innovative itself. A box of suggestions won’t work. Since innovative contributors are inherently resistant to inefficient and esoteric instruments of interaction, it is extremely necessary to urge the right to this element of the system. Investment in the right solution yields positive results, a high degree of interest and, with it, large pools of contributions to the concept. For example, AT&T runs one of the most significant innovative crowdsourcing networks and organizational processes, called the Innovative Pipeline (with over 120,000 active participants) (or TIP).
The case of such processes and instruments is better handled by the company’s innovative tools (e.g. within the CTO organization) if introduced internally, not by the Project Management Office (PMO). Alternatively, it is also sourced from trusted suppliers who can adapt the instruments and processes in a manner that meets the unique innovative goals of the business.
Inducement – Leadership requires A
For its success, participation in innovative crowdsourcing platform is vital; mass participation is nirvana. Crowdsourcing has proved invaluable, precisely because of the cumulative effect of mass ideation, to solve highly complex problems. Methods to induce participation differ significantly throughout business cultures, but two of the simpler methods include widely publicized acknowledgment of contributors (with or without financial reward) and an incentive for the contributor to engage across its lifecycle in the execution of the thought. In designing and managing this system aspect, company leadership, including areas of the HR organization, has a critical role to play.
Community – New habits and behaviors
Within the organization, the belief system is that the component is most resistant to change. Over a prolonged period of time, the habits and attitudes that prevail have evolved, presumably across many management chains, and are recorded to provide some predictable, if unremarkable, outcomes. In most cases, changes in culture needed to facilitate the success of peak innovative would be highly disruptive to the company and may cause discomfort and possibly displacement.
Aspects such as failure intolerance, “CYA” methods, group-think conduct and hyper-individuality are cancers that work toward a successful culture of innovative. All had to be uprooted without the entire company being demoralized. Only a leadership team with a strong and artfully articulated dedication to the improvements they’re championing will overcome this challenge.
Collaboration – the importance of relations
To avoid the “not-invented-here” pitfall, business innovative must build linked relationships with external sources of ideas and skills. Customers and their associated innovative centers, but also vendors, investors, academia, and therefore the general developer community, are the most important external tools.
For organizations that promote radically open innovative (Gartner Maverick Research -Radical Openness, September 2012 [registration required]), collaborations can reach virtually every sector segment and every single willing participant, including virtual “innovators for hire.” The creation and management of these partnerships is most often facilitated by special-purpose teams. To help this system cornerstone, for example, AT&T has developed a Foundry association.
As a natural result of interactions between highly creative individuals, creativity is taken into account. Although creative contribution is a critical aspect of a program’s overall effectiveness, it is not enough in and of itself to ensure the success of the program. In fact, a claim may be made that, within the general innovative context, it is even secondary to a well-executed collection of component activities.
Management expects outcomes from an innovative program to have a significant degree of predictability regarding the scale of an organization. Only when controlled against a tidy program structure that is matched with the company’s priorities for reaping and implementing innovative can an innovative program achieve predictably predictable results.
Process is not the antithesis of creative creativity, unlike popular belief, but the glue that keeps it together and provides order to the spontaneous and unstructured ideas that constantly explode within the business. The likelihood of producing measurable outcomes and thus the overall performance of the program is significantly improved by a well-architected business innovative program focused on appropriate, enterprise-aligned system component processes.