The Mad World of Innovation
by Boris Pluskowski
I believe it was Albert Einstein who once said that the definition of insanity is "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." So I feel I'm in good company as I observe the sheer insanity of companies and the way they embrace innovation.
I've been watching several people I know Twittering and Blogging their observations from several innovation conferences recently and it finally dawned on me what's been missing: anything at all new.
All the big takeaways, noteworthy points, and otherwise shareable insights have quite simply all been seen and done before. They're all rehashed observations and reinvented wheels - some of which have been out for over 10 years - Which brings up the question - Is there a lack of innovation or originality in the innovation practice itself?
Maybe - maybe not - but I refuse to believe that there aren't areas of innovation thought and practice that are still ripe for exploration and innovation of the core processes themselves. Instead, let me point the finger at a different potential culprit - organizational ignorance in picking their leaders.
As someone who's been in the job market for senior innovation roles for a little while now - it's been interesting to note that most job opportunities that have crossed my desk seem to end in one of two ways:
The second option implies a serious lack of understanding as to the power and importance of innovation - especially with regards to making sure the company has a future - or even a present for that matter. Even in a downturn as bad as the one we're experiencing now - one would expect for companies to shorten the time horizon for innovation processes to deliver results - but not to eliminate them altogether - that's just crazy. To be fair, most of the ones that have ended like this have ended with an intention to revisit this "innovation concept" again in the future - but that's still pretty dumb, as the situation won't get any better until you make core changes, until you change the rules of the game to better suit your strengths, until, in short, you innovate your way out of it.
However, I put to you that the first option is just as bad if not worse - as it implies that there is little or no value in innovation process expertise - despite all evidence to the contrary as to how tricky it can be to balance the rapid achievement of organizational goals with the engagement of social and human capital needed to fuel the innovation process. They would rather take someone who "understands the company" and attempt to teach them how innovation works than the other way around. I don't know about you, but outside of certain government entities who don't understand themselves how they get anything done - I don't know of any company that is that complex that you can't pick it up in a few weeks - are they trying to say that learning how to put together a comprehensive innovation program that engages the value chain and social networks as a whole to driving new sources of value that will generate results for the organization is easier than that?? Doesn't make sense to me - but then again, I'm not the one making those kind of calls. For now at least...
The result then, is a continuous stream of new innovation "leaders", making the same mistakes over and over again - and coming up with the same results (or lack of them) and 'insights' repeated over and over again. There are plenty of good innovation people out there - plenty with the knowledge, expertise, and ability to not only make an innovation program work - but to make it excel and deliver massive results. It's no wonder that the companies that invest heavily in innovation are the ones who thrive and survive - they're the ones who value the process expertise over industry expertise.
So here's my wakeup call Corporate World - industry expertise counts for little or nothing in the innovation game! In fact - it can even frequently be a hindrance. It puts walls up where they might not need to be; tells you what you "can and can't do"; what "will and won't work" - it can be, and frequently is, in short, a barrier to innovation - the very thing you're trying to achieve.
As a result, we get what we've been seeing on the conference circuit - a steady stream of people relatively new to the subject who are trying to assimilate the complexities of innovation and social networks from scratch - and as a result -progress in the innovation industry has been handcuffed - and corporate results with innovation have been mediocre at best as these people make the same mistakes all over again that the previous generation made - reinventing the wheel over and over again...
As Gary Jules sang: "I find it hard to tell you, I find it hard to take, When people run in circles it's a very very... Mad World, Mad World"
Please stop running in circles everyone. Comments, as always, are very welcome.
Don't miss a post - Subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Continuous Innovation group!
Boris Pluskowski is the Founder of The Complete Innovator where he regularly shares new ideas and best practices on how big companies can harness Innovation, Collaboration and Social Media to drive new sources of value throughout the enterprise.
I believe it was Albert Einstein who once said that the definition of insanity is "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." So I feel I'm in good company as I observe the sheer insanity of companies and the way they embrace innovation.I've been watching several people I know Twittering and Blogging their observations from several innovation conferences recently and it finally dawned on me what's been missing: anything at all new.
All the big takeaways, noteworthy points, and otherwise shareable insights have quite simply all been seen and done before. They're all rehashed observations and reinvented wheels - some of which have been out for over 10 years - Which brings up the question - Is there a lack of innovation or originality in the innovation practice itself?
Maybe - maybe not - but I refuse to believe that there aren't areas of innovation thought and practice that are still ripe for exploration and innovation of the core processes themselves. Instead, let me point the finger at a different potential culprit - organizational ignorance in picking their leaders.
As someone who's been in the job market for senior innovation roles for a little while now - it's been interesting to note that most job opportunities that have crossed my desk seem to end in one of two ways:
- The company decides to hire someone internal despite a lack of any internal innovation skills or experience, believing that the right person will simply learn the necessary process expertise quickly enough to make it all work.
- or otherwise the company decides not hire anyone at all due to budgetary cuts/changes in corporate priorities.
The second option implies a serious lack of understanding as to the power and importance of innovation - especially with regards to making sure the company has a future - or even a present for that matter. Even in a downturn as bad as the one we're experiencing now - one would expect for companies to shorten the time horizon for innovation processes to deliver results - but not to eliminate them altogether - that's just crazy. To be fair, most of the ones that have ended like this have ended with an intention to revisit this "innovation concept" again in the future - but that's still pretty dumb, as the situation won't get any better until you make core changes, until you change the rules of the game to better suit your strengths, until, in short, you innovate your way out of it.
However, I put to you that the first option is just as bad if not worse - as it implies that there is little or no value in innovation process expertise - despite all evidence to the contrary as to how tricky it can be to balance the rapid achievement of organizational goals with the engagement of social and human capital needed to fuel the innovation process. They would rather take someone who "understands the company" and attempt to teach them how innovation works than the other way around. I don't know about you, but outside of certain government entities who don't understand themselves how they get anything done - I don't know of any company that is that complex that you can't pick it up in a few weeks - are they trying to say that learning how to put together a comprehensive innovation program that engages the value chain and social networks as a whole to driving new sources of value that will generate results for the organization is easier than that?? Doesn't make sense to me - but then again, I'm not the one making those kind of calls. For now at least...
The result then, is a continuous stream of new innovation "leaders", making the same mistakes over and over again - and coming up with the same results (or lack of them) and 'insights' repeated over and over again. There are plenty of good innovation people out there - plenty with the knowledge, expertise, and ability to not only make an innovation program work - but to make it excel and deliver massive results. It's no wonder that the companies that invest heavily in innovation are the ones who thrive and survive - they're the ones who value the process expertise over industry expertise.
So here's my wakeup call Corporate World - industry expertise counts for little or nothing in the innovation game! In fact - it can even frequently be a hindrance. It puts walls up where they might not need to be; tells you what you "can and can't do"; what "will and won't work" - it can be, and frequently is, in short, a barrier to innovation - the very thing you're trying to achieve.
As a result, we get what we've been seeing on the conference circuit - a steady stream of people relatively new to the subject who are trying to assimilate the complexities of innovation and social networks from scratch - and as a result -progress in the innovation industry has been handcuffed - and corporate results with innovation have been mediocre at best as these people make the same mistakes all over again that the previous generation made - reinventing the wheel over and over again...
As Gary Jules sang: "I find it hard to tell you, I find it hard to take, When people run in circles it's a very very... Mad World, Mad World"
Please stop running in circles everyone. Comments, as always, are very welcome.
Don't miss a post - Subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Continuous Innovation group!
Boris Pluskowski is the Founder of The Complete Innovator where he regularly shares new ideas and best practices on how big companies can harness Innovation, Collaboration and Social Media to drive new sources of value throughout the enterprise.Labels: Boris Pluskowski, Innovation

![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=106aa1ec-9657-44dd-a872-08258d586463)










5 Comments:
I submit it's not that there's less original work being done, it's that there's more ways to experience the same technology over and over again, thanks to the internet.
People have been reinventing wheels in dark corners of the world throughout antiquity; we've just got a bigger flashlight now.
Boris you are right. There is a real paucity of new thinking in this space. But that is not really the purpose of these events/ activities. The truth is that what is known is in the minds of the initiated few. There are an awful lot of people out there that need to get to first base before they can go much further. In fact they need to know there is such a thing as first base!
Boris you nailed it with one awesome E = mc2 read & inspirational watch! Touché with a Stetson 10 gallon hat tip!
Hi all - thanks for your comments!
David - maybe not so much more ways to experience the same technology as much as use new technology to relive the same experiences.
But my problem stems from seeing the same "lessons", with the same technology (albeit maybe a different version number), being rehashed by different people.
Best
Boris Pluskowski
http://www.completeinnovator.com
http://twitter.com/bpluskowski
I love your bigger flashlight analogy though - and you're probably spot on there!
Anon. - Absolutely - i don't disagree with the fact that there are a lot of new people out there; but I feel that a lot of that has to do with companies not wanting to invest in getting people with the necessary experience already in place - or more specifically, misunderstanding what that experience should be, favoring someone with industry experience over someone with innovation experience. As a result, you see people flapping around blindly in the innovation darkness only to proudly find the light switches that the rest of us already know are there.
Steve - thanks for the kudos! A tip 'da 'hat right back at you!
Boris - I think you've got some great insight here. Especially enjoyed and agreed with your frustrations around the mistakes companies make investing in innovation. Thanks for the post.
And David - also love the flashlight analogy.
Regarding running in circles - I also agree, but maybe there's an angle that this is simply indicative of an idea (i.e. 'innovation') whose time has come?
Of course, many (MANY!) would have said the time came long ago, but as with other fields ('sustainability' springs to mind, and some years back it would have been 'quality'), there's a lagged adoption by the majority which inevitably brings some reinvention of the wheel.
For early adopters and leaders, this may be frustrating - but there's still a world of opportunity to be had - both aiding the laggards/reinventors, and in continuing to stretch the frontiers of best practice. The latter might be evident, for example, in the area of open innovation, where tech/online platforms are themselves opening doors.
So I'm seeing more of a silver lining than a cloud
Josh Gluckman
http://blog.thinkgrowth.com.au
Post a Comment
<< Home