When it comes to Innovation and how to innovate, a supporting company culture is of course one of the key ingredients for succeeding. Many studies have shown that it’s a crucial that CXO’s are nourishing and building such a culture, but is it just a one-way street? How about employees, don’t they have any obligations?
I believe that anyone can change his or her behavior to improve a creative impact on the company culture.
A couple of habits you should try practice on a daily basis is; questioning, observing, networking, experimenting and try associational thinking once and awhile
What are your thoughts and experiences? Please share..
Do you know any CEO who wants their company to become less innovative? Is anyone calling on employees to do a better job of thinking inside the box? No, everyone’s in favor of innovation and creativity.
Companies that are fit for the future are also the ones that continuously innovate. The most crucial factors for organizations to become more innovative are strategic alignment and a culture that supports innovation.
Booz & Company’s annual study of companies that invest the most in innovation reveals a surprising fact: Fewer than half say that their business strategy, innovation strategy, and corporate culture are aligned. Furthermore, the data reveals that the strategy-culture connection has a powerful multiplier effect, dramatically increasing the effectiveness of R&D spending. (Apple, named first for innovativeness by executives, ranks just 70th in R&D spending.) read more

This is the sixth year Booz & Company Partner conduct their annual Global Innovation 1000 study. Past studies has consistently shown that there is no statistically significant correlation between financial performance and innovation spending, in terms of either total R&D dollars or R&D as a percentage of revenues
This year, Booz & Company Partner focused on finding which sets of innovation capabilities that are the most critical for success and to outperform the competition
“The results are clear: The most innovative companies outperformed their industry peers on three different indicators of financial success. Companies that are perceived to be highly innovative are clearly successful in creating new products and bringing them to market. Some spend more than others to accomplish this goal, but the real winners, financially speaking, are those companies, like Apple, Google, and 3M, that can innovate successfully without breaking the bank.(Booz & Company Partner, 2010, Issue 61)”
Companies in this study followed at least one of three innovation strategies: Need seeker, Market reader, or Technology driver. No matter which of the three innovation strategies they pursued, all the successful companies depended on a common set of critical innovation capabilities:
- Ability to gain insights into customer needs
- Understand the potential relevance of emerging technologies at an early stage
- Engage actively with customers during product development to prove the validity of concepts
- Use pilot users to roll out products carefully through commercialization
The study shows that. the most successful companies are those that focus on a particular, narrow set of common and distinct capabilities that enable them to better execute their chosen strategy. Organizations that focused on a particular, narrow set of common and distinct capabilities that helped organizations to execute their chosen strategy, are those who where most successful and outperform the competition.. read more
As an Innovation manager, what’s the one thing you look for in building a high-performance Innovation team/Innovative organization? If you had to start from scratch, what steps would you take, first and foremost?
I’d appreciate your opinions as answers to this question. Thank you!
Are you a creative business visionary? If so, do you feel that one of the hardest challenges is to win top management’s support for your ideas? Do you feel that your proposal is killed not because it have poor potential but because management simply doesn’t understand them or does not even listen to the presentation?
Well you are not alone. But is it always management who lacks knowledge or interest? From what I have experienced I would say that the answer is – no, not always. A common mistake is that presenters often miss to explain tacit knowledge and simple core values like: the target market, customer needs, market opportunity, key benefits or primary differentiation when presenting the proposition. So for the next time, try to fine tune your presentation so your proposition gets more attractive and support from top management. In the Open Innovation Revolution (2010), the author Stefan Lindegaard describes how to communicate effectively and how to sell your vision and ideas by using Moore´s six elements. These elements are:
- For (target customer).
- Who are/wants/needs (statement of needs or opportunity or compelling reason to buy)
- The (product name) is a (product category).
- That (statement of key benefits).
- Unlike (primary competitive alternative ).
- Our product (statement of primary differentiation).
The six elements enable the presenter to explain the product or service and all the important aspects in a few sentences without providing too much information. The Idea is to communicate your proposal to others in less than a minute so they will remember the majority of the value proposition. By doing this your idea will easily be diffused by word of mouth, which is extremely important.
Another aspect you have to consider is to put yourself into manager’s reality and view the proposition from their point of view. Can it be aligned with the corporate strategy? Can your idea/innovation be applied to both business strategy and business model? If they can, then these are the most influential kinds of innovation as it relates to creating and sustaining growth.
Let’s have a look at organizations and top management now. How often do you hear or read presentations from top management saying ” Under this period John’s team came up with this many ideas and in this phase of the innovation process we still got this many great ideas left. Measures show that the value creation by our innovation efforts is superb…. and John’s team has by spreading their knowledge inspired other teams to come up many more great ideas”…..?
My point is, what gets measured gets done. Suppose that organizations on regularly basis start to monitor their innovation efforts, how many new ideas their business teams came up with or how effective their teams are in the innovation process.
By doing this managers would:
- Get recognition for the number of ideas their teams generate.
- Feel some pressure to support and spur a creative environment.
- Continuous develop and quality assure the innovation process.
This, more than their individual predispositions, is likely to make them more receptive. It ought to be an organization-wide success criterion, that the best managers are the ones who proactively seek ideas from their team members. If management were proactive in this regard, employees wouldn’t feel like they had a hard sell on their hands and corporate culture would become more open minded and creative.
Does your corporation conduct these measures? If not, why not?