“our reputation is that we are innovative”
Reflecting on the feedback and correspondence received after training sessions with manufacturers, I have come to realise that people are looking for tools and tricks to “fix” innovation. Sometimes it is actually not even about innovation, but about making up for poor past decisions such as not investing in technology or market development when they should have. Others think of innovation as a function, or as a management tool that can be standardised into a job description or an area of responsibility. While this is possible in some contexts, I don’t find this approach to innovation of much use in the smaller and medium-sized manufacturing firms and the research/technology institution space in which I am working.
For me, innovation is firstly a value, a perspective of how organisations should be. When management says “we are an innovative organization” or “we want an innovative culture” or “our reputation is that we are innovative” then we can move to tools, portfolios, tricks and tweaks (those things that people in innovation functions must attend to). Many textbooks, articles and blog sites on innovation and technology management are then useful. Actually, the challenge is to decide which of the bucket loads of advice to use, and consultants such as myself typically help organisations to choose a few tools and then to use them fully and consistently. I would dare to say that it is relatively easy to help companies that are already innovative to become more innovative.
The area that really intrigues me are those organisations that do not think of themselves as being innovative, or that are from industries considered to be traditional and not innovative. Perhaps they used to be innovative, or perhaps they are innovative in some areas but not in others. Perhaps they had one or two tricks in the past that have now become irrelevant. These could be extremely competent organisations, such as a university department, a manufacturer of highly specialised industrial equipment, or an organisation that simply designs and manufacturers what their customers expressly state what they want. Even if the outputs of these organisations can be described as “innovative”, they do not necessarily have innovative cultures that are constantly creating novel ideas, processes and markets. In my experience, these organisations have technically brilliant people, but management is often not able to harness the genius, experience or creativity of their people. The main reason for this is not a lack of technique, tools or tricks, but the lack of an innovative culture, leading to a lack of innovative purpose.
These organisations are trapped. They are equipped for the past, and they are paralysed by all the choices they have to make for the future. For management, it feels as though everything they have in place is inadequate and needs equal attention, ranging from attracting staff with better (or different) qualifications to finding new markets, developing new technological capability, sorting out cash flow and capital expenditure, addressing succession planning, etc.
Improving the innovation culture of an organisation is a complex issue. It is not about tasks, functions or tools, but about changing relations between people, within and beyond the boundaries of the organisation. Innovation in these organisations is a side-show, a project, whereas it really needs to be central to the business strategy, a different way of looking at the world.
When working with organisations that must improve their innovative culture, motivational speeches, optimistic visions of the future, etc. are not useful and could, in fact, deepen the crises facing management. Nurturing a culture of innovation goes far beyond establishing or refining innovation management functions. It is a strategic issue that is initiated by top management, but that will soon spill over into every area of the organisation, hence it cannot be driven by a management function like “innovation”.
Improving the innovation culture process starts with connecting management back with their people. It starts in the present, the now, not with future scenarios, not with using innovation techniques and better analytical tools, and in most cases not with some or other management fad. It goes beyond trying to improve products, processes or business areas, beyond gaps in management’s capability. It must look at the relations between people, between what people know and can do now (or knew and could do in the recent past), and the potential the people see to make small improvements. It is essentially about many dialogues happening throughout and even beyond the organisation. After cultivating dialogue, management needs to empower the organisation’s people to allocate resources to activities that strengthen the learning culture, that turn even small improvement projects into processes that broaden thinking, deepen learning and motivate people to think beyond just their specific tasks.
When management has the courage to decide to improve their culture of innovation it starts a process that cannot be described as incremental improvement, as that sounds too directed. It is rather like a deepening, or an awakening, where employees are inspired to contribute, and management is more aware of what they can do to enable their employees to become more innovative on all fronts. Of course, management also faces the risk that outdated management approaches that do not seek to empower employees to be creative will be exposed, and some tough decisions will have to be made.
To nurture an innovative culture requires innovation in itself. It requires management at different levels to rethink their roles from being directive to being enabling, from being top down to being more engaging with their teams.
Image Credit: Unsplashed
Business Essentials is Africa’s premium networking and business directory.
Read more from our Pressroom:
Related Service Providers:
A recent decision of the Mauritian Industrial Property Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) will provide some comfort to international brand owners. The case involved an application by a foreign company to cancel a trade mark registration obtained by a local party.