Ducks In A Row: Innovation And The Sacred P’s
May 5, 2009 by Miki Saxon
Innovation drives the sacred P’s—productivity and profit.
For the smartest companies in this economy innovation didn’t stop with the economic crash; it’s still a hot topic and not just for products and business processes, but through every nook and cranny across the organization.
Innovation isn’t always earth-shaking or about the next big thing, but large or small, the outcome is always focused on better. Many companies spend big bucks on innovation assistance, hiring top consultants, going on special retreats, etc.
Aside from the fact that spending is more difficult these days, consultants and retreats typically tap only the higher levels of the company ignoring one of the best sources of innovation you have—your own people, all of them.
Assuming you’d like to turn on this innovation faucet, what do you do?
Set up an innovation wiki. Just be sure that the CEO (or top person in the department, group, whatever) support the effort or it’s unlikely to go anywhere.
You want to involve all your people because at all levels they’re the ones who are constantly dealing with your products, processes and customers; who know them intimately and frequently have innovative ideas or are in a position to ask creativity-provoking questions that are just as valuable. What they usually don’t have is a way to get their ideas noticed.
Here’s what to do.
- Create an innovation wiki either on your intranet or at a free host (there are dozens).
- Write a brief description of the wiki’s purpose: That you want to create a “field of dreams and innovation” for all your people to play in to take the organization to the next level.
- Add some basic ground rules tailored to your own organization:
-
- All ideas are welcome, no matter how outrageous or revolutionary they seem.
- No idea is too small; no subject too minor.
- Good ideas have nothing to do with position in the company hierarchy.
- Recruit “early adopters,” those people who love to be on the bleeding edge of what ever is going on. Then create a major internal PR effort encouraging everybody’s participation. Keep the topic high in the company’s consciousness with constant references.
Finally, the most important ingredient to making your innovation wiki a success is to use the ideas!
If you don’t use them people will know it’s a scam and quickly lose interest.
Whether you use them directly or as the springboard to something else, it’s crucial to publicly credit them to the originator.
If you’re in a position to add some kind of incentive or award for each one used (even if the use is indirect) that’s great, but it’s most important to offer major, public appreciation.
Do all this, and they will come.
Your comments—priceless
Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL
Image credit: ZedBee|Zoë Power on flickr
Miki, thanks for the post. I have many clients whose teams have experimented with Wiki’s for this purpose, and also for enhanced efficiency in the face of “too many emails in my inbox” – when employees use a wiki as a centralized reference point for projects, status updates, etc. the technology seems to cut processing time and speed by 2/3rds.
What really excites me about the concept you’re discussing though is imaging companies investing in a platform across the entire enterprirse wherein the innovation “conversation” occurs – not just team by team/vertical by vertical, but across verticals that typically don’t talk to each other (hence leading to silos) or collaborate. This is when we will truly be able to harness the power of the workforce, break the silo’d thinking of functional structures, and revolutionize business models.
Great idea Miki. Often the best ideas come from little known sources within a company. Companies should be open to all ideas and an information wiki is a good repository for these ideas.
Hi Jennifer, I’m glad you liked it. I agree that company-wide innovation wikis are a great way to break down vertical silos, but they accomplish something else, too.
They break down horizontal silos. What’s that? Horizontal silos are next weeks topic on Ducks In A Row. See you then!
Hi Max, what you say is absolutely true. The problem in that actually happening is encapsulated in the “should be open…,” which we all know is far to rare.
Do come back next week and see the simple solution to turning ’should be’ into ‘are’.
Looking forward to your take on horizontal silos (Read Patrick Lencioni’s “Silos, Politics, and Turfwars” for a consultant’s take which I support), and have a feeling that I like where you are going with this. I also tweeted this blog post. Check it out: http://twitter.com/jenniferbrown/status/1718999906
Here is an innovation wiki that you can use: http://budurl.com/WebStorm
Regards,
Paul Tran
Brightidea – Innovation & Idea Management
ptran@brightidea.com
415-992-2082 office/mobile
415-842-0300 fax
Yahoo IM: paultran888
Skype: paultran666
Twitter: twitter.com/paultran888
Web: http://www.brightidea.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/paultran888
Oops, Jennifer, you caught me out. I don’t tweet, but thanks so much for putting this out there in twitterland!
I’ll check the book out as soon as I dig out from my required reading.
Hi Paul, it looks interesting. Thanks for stopping by and sharing your information.
all this makes good sense. there’s a point at which convergence and efficiency can come into play, too — when understanding where investment in innovation can have the biggest payoff (which can’t be everywhere) and where designing the innovation process can look at economic potential and the necessary variety in the conversation, all to lower risk.
What you say is true, Paul, but when a company listens to people at lower levels they often find an enormous amount of innovation with little financial cost.
However, the innovation may require changes in process or procedures that take people out of their comfort zone or may not make sense to those at the top, although they function superbly for the employees doing the actual work.
Because the wiki is public it’s harder for higher level to bury them based on their personal feelings.
i agree with you again, but i see where we diverge: i tend to construe ‘innovation’ more narrowly, to distinguish it from ‘a better idea’ or ‘a small product improvement’. my biases are expressed in the map at http://www.dubberly.com/concept-maps/innovation.html.
Paul, your model is fascinating and I do understand what you’re saying, but I see no reason to limit innovation to products or only require that it change paradigms. But even when the result is a changed paradigm the innovative thought that started the change may be tiny and come from a ‘nobody’.
There is an arrogance in most development groups that if one isn’t trained in the disciplines involved then however could one innovate, let alone revolutionize, in that arena?
Much of IBM’s vaunted innovation is in business process. And you have to admit that several of Apple’s most innovative products were merely “better ideas.” It was the market that ratified them as paradigm shifts.
Sometimes a worm’s eye view offers enormous insight. I honestly believe that narrowing the definition limits people’s ability to innovate.