Nosco’s Post

WHO REALLY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR INNOVATION? Sam Rockwell, PhD tackled this question in his latest Forbes article by considering my approach on inclusive innovation as well as O’Reilly and Tushman’s concept of ambidextrous organizations. In my view, the key to innovative high performing firms is that everyone is in R&D: Those doing the work have the most current insights about where things are broken and what needs fixing. With the right supportive structures, we can turn that in-the-trenches experience into innovative insights. According to O'Reilly and Tushman, innovation should be separated from operations. 👇Weigh in below: Ambidextrous organizations? Inclusive organizations? Or something else? Who is responsible for innovation in your organization?

Unlocking Innovation: Is Your Company Culture in the Way? Forbes recently shed light on a critical paradox in the business world: While companies scream for innovation, it's often their own corporate culture that blocks creativity and progress. This dilemma has left many executives perplexed as to why their organizations fall short in generating pioneering ideas, with the problem frequently rooted in their own company ethos. The fear of making mistakes notably discourages even the sharpest teams from taking risks, with McKinsey's research indicating that 85% of executives feel this fear curbs innovation. The lack of resources dedicated to nurturing new ideas and an excessive focus on performance metrics and KPIs often overshadow the potential of groundbreaking innovations. Simultaneously, while tradition is commonly viewed as a foundation for stability, it can also act as a gatekeeper against innovative thinking. Recognizing these obstacles is the key to overcoming them. Companies can transform their cultures into environments where innovation is not just welcomed occasionally but is an integral and consistent feature of everyday work by addressing these challenges head-on. Read More about it here: https://lnkd.in/eu6wGAwW

The challenge of innovation at company level   Thanks to Dave Hengartner for this article from Young Entrepreneur Council (YEC) published in Forbes. The article looks at six reasons why many organizations have environments that stifle employee-led innovation. 1. Lack of appetite for Risk 2. Siloed organizational Structure 3. Poor Innovation Culture 4. No mistake mindset 5. No structured innovation Processes 6. Leadership that is resistant to Change There is no doubt that these criteria are valid and rather obvious. They come under the three headings: Organization / Process / Culture. In a nutshell: 1)   innovation-driven, non-siloed organisation 2)   light but structured innovation process 3)   innovation culture including      - An appetite for risk and a culture that accepts error      - Encouragement for learning, creativity and open communication      - A leadership focused on change management and achievement This is what we try to do at Nexans by challenging our organisations, by following a robust but simple design thinking process, by encouraging employee innovation through internal innovation challenges that are as inclusive as possible. However, let's avoid the caricature of the good guys who work on an open, multifunctional platform and the bad guys who stay in silos. As Francois Dupuy wrote in his book series 'lost in management', Project and business matrix organisations can turn into nightmares as the number of players, responsibilities and coordination work increases and becomes more complex. It's all about de-siloing mentalities within small, flexible, results-oriented teams. In terms of a culture of innovation that encourages risk-taking, tolerance of failure and a willingness to learn, all the article analyses are fairly obvious. However finding the right balance is not always easy. I would recommend to read again Gary Pisano 's article "The Hard Truth About Innovative Cultures" published in Harvard Business Review France january-february 2019. This article highlighted that successful innovation depends effectively on providing an environment where there's a tolerance for failure and a willingness to experiment, however this easy-to-like behavior must be counterbalanced by tougher behavior that's less fun: an intolerance for incompetence, rigorous discipline, brutal candor, a high level of individual accountability, and strong leadership. The challenge of innovation at company level is to strike the right balance.  #innovation #innovationculture #Nexans https://lnkd.in/dD6tQ9bY

Why some managers don’t really want you to innovate! In the world of business innovation, a puzzling contrast appears; leaders talk about the importance of innovation, but in practice, it often takes a back seat. This contradiction is most obvious when it comes to how time is used. Many companies encourage innovation, but only as an extra, not a priority. That sounds like “We want you to innovate, but only after you have done your real job, do it in your free time please.” Digging deeper, we find more layers to this challenge. 1)    Many managers are usually motivated by quick wins and short-term goals; this contradicts with the slower pace nature of innovation. To feel & see the results of innovation takes a long time. 2)    There's a fear that new ideas might harm what's already working well. Therefore, some managers fear self-cannibalization. 3)    This situation is made worse by how managers are taught to improve things. Many are trained in making gradual, steady improvements. However, innovation doesn't follow these neat steps. It's messy and uncertain, unlike the structured methods managers are used to. The solution lies in finding harmony between bold aspirations and practical steps. Leaders must empower their teams, prioritize long-term growth alongside short-term gains, and step beyond their comfort zones. Principles I have seen like long term incentive schemes, innovation awards and innovation centers are some examples of motivating employees to step outside the conventional line of thinking.  what does your company do to promote innovation?

PDF Examining Innovation Management from a Fair Process Perspective Thomas Limberg (auth.) digsell https://lnkd.in/ePKB6g_k Companies nowadays still differ considerably in that they interact with employees. This interaction depends on different organisational cultures, leadership styles, and the ways in which information and communication take place. A recent trend, even in economic theory, is that interactions are valued in themselves and not solely to achieve rational economic maximisation. People care about outcomes, but they also care about the interactional processes that produce those outcomes. Thomas Limberg investigates a new approach to the management of human relationships in a knowledge-based work environment and analyses the relationship between fair process and innovation performance. Key findings are that social … Read More » https://lnkd.in/e7KHt2Vc

Great article Douglas Woolley - I echo your sentiments on the innovation dilemma in organizations. Despite hiring talented individuals, the traditional corporate structures and mindsets often stifle creativity and change. The problem isn't talent scarcity; it's the resistance from within. 'Organizational antibodies' — the ingrained norms and power dynamics — often neutralize fresh ideas. Innovative leaders, though hired to instigate change, find themselves constrained by these outdated practices. This not only curbs innovation but also leads to the loss of brilliant minds, sometimes even affecting national talent pools. True innovation requires more than just hiring the right people; it demands a cultural shift within organizations. Leaders need the freedom to challenge the status quo and foster a culture where innovation thrives. Change starts at the top. It's time for organizations to not just talk about innovation but to actively cultivate it.

Business Management Promoting Innovation Cohn, Katzenbach, and Vlak (2008) discuss “squelching internal talent” by management is a false belief by senior managers assuming that innovators spontaneously generate new ideas (p. 64). However, innovation is a process shared by management teams and spans across internal boundaries. Innovation is structural, cultural, and human resources driven requiring support by organizations; it is not spontaneous (Robbins & Coulter, 2003). The company’s job is to find and groom the next generation of innovators, insert new innovators into mid-management positions, from which they become “innovation hubs” to transform and integrate existing systems creating more value to the company (Cohn, Katzenbach & Vlak, 2008, p. 64). Accomplishing this task can be achieved by scouring the ranks for raw talent, test people by placing them in real projects, encourage mentoring and peer networks, and actively manage innovators’ careers (Cohn, Katzenbach & Vlak, 2008, p. 65). Strategies to increase innovation are non-effective unless the contextual environment of the organization promotes innovation (Robbins & Coulter, 2003). 

What did Bezos know about innovation that you don't? I came across a quote this week in an article by Hal Gregersen, Clayton M. Christensen, and Jeff Dyer: "We were intrigued to learn that at most companies, top executives do not feel personally responsible for coming up with strategic innovations. Rather, they feel responsible for facilitating the innovation process. In stark contrast, senior executives of the most innovative companies — a mere 15% in our study — don't delegate creative work. They do it themselves." I found this intriguing as I reflected on the leaders I have encountered and whether they fit into bucket 1 or 2. In my experience with clients, involved execs are far more likely to see outcomes from their innovation efforts. I have seen this impact remain, even after they have moved on from the organisation. There are 3 main reasons for this: Executives are critical to a culture of innovation. Driving innovation in an organisation isn't just about creating new ideas. It's also about fostering a culture of innovation—one where employees feel empowered to take risks and experiment. Top execs set the tone for this through participation in the innovation process. Executives have the resources and experience to drive innovation. They have access to capital, can hire the best talent, and have a deep understanding of the industry. They can use these resources to create the conditions for innovation to thrive. Executives have the visibility to make innovation happen. They can connect employees with the right resources. They can put in place the right incentives. Finally, they can ensure that innovation aligns with the company's goals. The best leaders also spread their bets across several strategically aligned projects. This gives them more opportunities for success. Deciding whether to be personally involved in innovation is up to each individual. But, evidence from Gregersen, Christensen, and Dye suggests large benefits if you do. You wouldn't outsource your strategic decision-making to your team, so why innovation?

Innovation and change are essential for organizations to adapt and thrive. By implementing the strategies in this article, management can cultivate a culture of innovation that permeates throughout the organization.