The Innovation Paradox
by Mitch Ditkoff
My big insight about innovation these days would make Nobel Prize winner, Niels Bohr, proud.
"Now that we have met with paradox," explained Dr. Bohr, "we have some hope of making progress."
Innovation is full of it - paradox, that is.
On one hand, organizations want structures, maps, models, guidelines, and systems. On the other hand, that's all too often the stuff that squelches innovation, driving it underground or out the door.
The noble search for a so-called "innovation process" can easily become a seduction, addiction, or distraction whereby innovation is marginalized, deferred, over-engineered, and worn like a badge.
True innovation is about allowing room enough for paradox to be a teacher and guide - and to accept, at least for a little longer than usual, ambiguity, dissonance, and discomfort - the age-old precursors to breakthrough.
Remember, there's a big difference between Six Sigma and Innovation.
Six Sigma is about reducing variability. Innovation is about increasing it - and that often means allowing the kind of "messiness" that process-mavens interpret as a problem needing to be fixed, rather than a pre-condition to breakthrough and the resulting commercialization of that breakthrough that most people refer to as "innovation."
Yes, process, structures, systems are necessary, but they don't have to become overly pre-emptive. If you stay in an innovative mindset and can adapt to emerging needs, they will eventually become self-organizing when the soul of innovation is allowed to flourish.
Can we help the "innovation process" along with the right application of strategy, infrastructure, and planning?
Of course we can.
But beware! "Helping" the process too much often becomes counterproductive - much in the same way that attempting to catch a milkweed floating through the air with a bold reach of your hand actually repels the object of your desire.
Innovation Physics 101.
Don't miss an article - Subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Continuous Innovation group!
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=77d0a002-04ef-4644-b77a-55d6b24921b2)
Mitch Ditkoff is the Co-Founder and President of Idea Champions and the author of "Awake at the Wheel", as well as the very popular Heart of Innovation blog.
My big insight about innovation these days would make Nobel Prize winner, Niels Bohr, proud. "Now that we have met with paradox," explained Dr. Bohr, "we have some hope of making progress."
Innovation is full of it - paradox, that is.
On one hand, organizations want structures, maps, models, guidelines, and systems. On the other hand, that's all too often the stuff that squelches innovation, driving it underground or out the door.
The noble search for a so-called "innovation process" can easily become a seduction, addiction, or distraction whereby innovation is marginalized, deferred, over-engineered, and worn like a badge.
True innovation is about allowing room enough for paradox to be a teacher and guide - and to accept, at least for a little longer than usual, ambiguity, dissonance, and discomfort - the age-old precursors to breakthrough.
Remember, there's a big difference between Six Sigma and Innovation.
Six Sigma is about reducing variability. Innovation is about increasing it - and that often means allowing the kind of "messiness" that process-mavens interpret as a problem needing to be fixed, rather than a pre-condition to breakthrough and the resulting commercialization of that breakthrough that most people refer to as "innovation."
Yes, process, structures, systems are necessary, but they don't have to become overly pre-emptive. If you stay in an innovative mindset and can adapt to emerging needs, they will eventually become self-organizing when the soul of innovation is allowed to flourish.
Can we help the "innovation process" along with the right application of strategy, infrastructure, and planning?
Of course we can.
But beware! "Helping" the process too much often becomes counterproductive - much in the same way that attempting to catch a milkweed floating through the air with a bold reach of your hand actually repels the object of your desire.
Innovation Physics 101.
Don't miss an article - Subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Continuous Innovation group!
Mitch Ditkoff is the Co-Founder and President of Idea Champions and the author of "Awake at the Wheel", as well as the very popular Heart of Innovation blog.Labels: Innovation, Mitch Ditkoff
posted by Blogging Innovation at 12:03 AM
2 Comments:
Mitch,
Great read, and I think you are spot on. Innovation seems to walk in a space between uncontrolled chaos and overcontrolled stagnation. Innovators need to be allowed to explore and experiment, and to learn by doing - which means, sometimes, failing is necessary. There needs to be enough structure in place, however, to prevent those failures from breaking through the "innovation boundaries" if you will, and damaging the enterprise as a whole.
A very good article, with some good food for thought. Thanks!
Definitely the ability to tolerate ambiguity is a skill that needs to be practiced. Some people are really uncomfortable with it, and this means they can never wait to see what happens long enough to actually conduct an experiment to find out new information. They must have an instant conclusion, because they somehow need certainty more than possibility. Even if it is "bad," they are more comfortable because at least their mind is made up and the question is answered.
Teach this every day by giving Alexander Technique lessons. People learn it, directly related to the rate they can tolerate leaving themselves open to the Unknown.
Post a Comment
<< Home