11 Steps to Fight the 'God Complex'

Photo Credit: Sebastian Bergmann

by Glen Stansberry

We're all awesome, right? Well, I mean we didn't create the world or anything like that, but I think most of us pretty much have it going on. However, there can be some negative aspects of being creative. Creative people can sometimes struggle with mild cases of the God Complex.

The God complex is defined as a psychological state of mind in which a person believes that they have supernatural powers or god-like abilities. The person generally believes they are above the rules of society and should be given special consideration.

Do we honestly think we're a deity, or even better than everyone? No. But some creative people are quite susceptible to picking up at least a few of the aspects of the God complex.

And who wouldn't?

Creatives spend all day creating. It's only natural that on occasion we become a bit too wrapped up in what we're developing and don't spend enough time thinking about our surroundings. Here are a few ways we might fall into thinking more like a God and less like the mere mortals we are.

[I should note that I based this article off of my own experience. You may not struggle with any of these traits of the God complex, and I applaud you. You're a better human than me.]


1. We get lost in our own little worlds

The ability to create something very unique and imaginative requires a special set of talents. However, these talents sometimes have negative side affects, and one of them being tunnel vision. More often than not, we're only focused on the project(s) we're working on, and nothing else.

Have you ever seen a kid playing with building blocks, totally consumed with what he's building? It's a lot like that. The outside world doesn't affect us when we're in "building" mode.

How to fix it:

The easiest way to fix this aspect of the God Complex is to make sure we're thinking about the 'bigger picture'. In the scope of life, what we're creating isn't as important as our families, friends, or our health for that matter. Focusing on the fact that there are other important things in life help with our perspective. Staying up-to-date with world new and politics helps as well.

Also, it's a great idea to think about things in this world (the one where everyone else lives) that are bigger than us. I find it very humbling to reflect on the size of planets, stars and galaxies. In the scope of creation, I'm a tiny speck of dust. If that.

Does the trick every time.


2. We sometimes think our idea is better than everyone else's

It's hard for creative people to believe there might be two solutions two a problem. Our ideas have to be the best because, well... we thought of them! Our ideas are like our babies. We couldn't imagine having anyone else's. Wrapping our minds around another, completely different solution can be quite hard.

How to fix it:

Having an open mind is the easiest possible solution, but it's also the hardest. Putting ourselves outside the situation and looking at another idea objectively is an almost impossible task. Instead, try thinking about how your solution could benefit from the other proposed idea. That way you're not giving up on your idea, the other idea is assisting yours.


3. We become frustrated because "people don't understand us"

Nearly every time I try to explain my ideas to other people, I get a blank stare. It's quite easy to take the negative attitude that "nobody understands me, so why should I try to understand them?" It can be a vicious cycle of bitterness between you and everyone involved.

How to fix it:

If nobody understands my ideas, is it because I'm bad at explaining them? Probably. But it's also because the other person didn't have the idea. That's what comes with the territory of being a creative person. Don't sweat it Jack! Sometimes it's just best to show someone a prototype of your idea to get the point across.


4. We have a constant desire to be enlightened

Sometimes creative folk tend to go a bit overboard with needing to know about everything. Constantly learning (and sometimes flaunting this new-found knowledge), is a way for us to feel more competent and secure in our abilities. It's more about feeding an insecurity than anything.

How to fix it:

Sometimes, ignorance is bliss. There's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to constantly learn. Learning is a wonderful thing, and we should always be striving to learn and improve. That's what life is. However, becoming obsessed with knowledge can be damaging. We'll never be fully enlightened about anything, so why obsess? It's just a waste of time, and I'd rather spend it enjoying my friends and family.


5. We can be a bit too competitive.

In Greek mythology, the gods were always comparing themselves to each other and bickering amongst themselves (with the help of unlucky individuals on the earth). In this same respect, creative people might be a tad on the competitive side. Let's be honest: we compare ourselves to each other, either subconsciously or intentionally. It's kind of human nature. We want to be the best.

How to fix it:

Showing a little spunk and wanting to be competitive isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's when we take it a little too far and it turns into an obsession. Being able to take a step back and show some self-control is a hard thing to do sometimes. In order to cool an overly-competitive nature, take a step back and think about the scope of things. Is it worth being competitive over? Odds are it isn't.


6. We might look down on others

This might be just my own personal experience, (and I hate to admit it), but if I'm honest I sometimes find myself looking down on others. It's not necessarily a conscious thing, but sometimes thoughts tend to creep into my head about how much better I am at something than Average Joe. If I can compare myself to someone else and point out their faults and superior I am to them, I'll feel better. It's awful, but it's true.

How to fix it:

The first step is to become aware that we're looking down on others. It really can be an automatic, subconscious thing. Stopping the comparison in it's tracks before it starts is the most effective fix. There isn't a hard-and-fast rule on how to fix it, other than starting to become aware of the problem. Once we're aware, then we can start thinking of ways to change how we think about other people.


7. We sometimes compare ourselves

Much like looking down on others, creative people can sometimes struggle with comparing ourselves to others. "I've got more hair than that dude. Oh, I'm skinnier than that girl. My designs are so much cooler than his." etc., etc., etc. Comparisons help prove that we are, in fact, superior to nearly everyone else in some way.

How to fix it:

This again falls into the "self-esteem" category. We're all different. We all have completely different strengths and weaknesses. Trying to point out our differences only helps pacify our insecurities. We just have to keep the mindset that we're all different, and we're all awesome. Period.


8. We can take our creations too seriously

I'm especially guilty of this one. Like we said earlier, our creations are like our children. We created them. There's a special bond, (even between something as seemingly insignificant as a bit of code), to something that you've personally created. When people criticize it or make fun of it, it cuts deep. Deep. Also, we sometimes find ourselves thinking that our creations are more important than they really are. Being a creator can make us very susceptible to the God complex.

How to fix it:

A great method is ask other close friends as to what they think of the idea or project. You need the input of someone you trust who's not emotionally attached to the project. Their opinion will really help you gauge how good the idea or concept really is. The more you practice this, the more it becomes less painful when someone doesn't like your idea. But ultimately, it's your idea. If you think it will work regardless, just do it. Sometimes people just won't understand your idea until you've put it into practice.


9. We can be bad at listening to others

This is generally because we get caught up in our own little worlds (#1) or we think our idea is better than the rest (#2). Regardless of the reason, sometimes creatives just plain suck at listening to other people (myself included). Talking to a creative person can sometimes seem like it's all about them.

How to fix it:

When we create things all day, it is usually all about us. It's about our abilities, talents, problem solving skills, and not anyone else. However, when we're around other people, we have to be extra careful of listening to others and including them in the conversation.


10. We feel unappreciated

Sometimes it feels that nobody understands or appreciates what I do on a daily basis. Being creative doesn't necessarily mean I have much to show for it either. So how do you explain to people the significance of what you do, if it's not pulling in a whole bunch of money?

How to fix it:

Creatives like me need to realize that people in our lives do appreciate us, they just don't always understand us or what we do. In fact, throughout history most people didn't understand anything creative people like Thomas Edison or Alexander Graham Bell did until years later.

I wouldn't do what I do if it was about making truck loads of money. We create because we love creating. That's where our affirmation really comes from.


11. We excuse our eccentricities

Yes, believe it or not, sometimes creative people are a tad eccentric. (I can already hear readers getting upset and ruffling their feathers.) Don't worry! It's not a bad thing! However, if we know about our eccentricities and don't try to correct them, it can be a negative thing. We can't think that we're above correction because of our creative minds. Sure, Einstein was extremely eccentric and brilliant, but he never made excuses for it.

How to fix it:

We have to take responsibilities for our shortcomings, and stop blaming them on things like creativity. A personal example: I used to claim that I "wasn't good with money because my brain doesn't think that way." I would say that to myself so I didn't have to take any accountability for my terrible bookkeeping. But I realized that I was just using it as a crutch. I've since gotten help and use financial advising to keep me on the right track.


Conclusions

A culmination of the above 11 points can turn a someone into a downright bitter person if they're not careful. Because we're mostly so focused on ourselves and our abilities while we're being creative, it's easy to start thinking inwardly and become consumed with our creations. Keeping ourselves in-check with reality is the best way to stay grounded and from adopting traits of the God complex.

It turns out we are but mere men.


Don't miss an article - Subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Continuous Innovation group!

---

Glen Stansberry writes at LifeDev, a blog that helps people make their ideas happen. You can follow him on Twitter here.

It's OK if People Don't Understand Your Idea

by Glen Stansberry

When a new idea strikes me for a website, I typically try to run it by a close friend. And usually, I get a really blank look.

It's not that the ideas are bad, it's that the person I'm explaining it to doesn't really understand my idea. Unless he/she sees a prototype, it's incredibly difficult to follow what's inside my head. Why? Because it's inside my head. I'm the only one who can fully grasp the concept.

Truly innovative ideas take a while to get used to, or even understand. History is riddled with inventors who were mistaken for crazy, only later to have made some of the most groundbreaking discoveries. Yet had they listened to their friends, we probably wouldn't have many of the cool technologies that exist today.

• Alexander Graham Bell: "I'm going to try and make a machine that allows two people to hear each other's voices with a wire."


• Friend: "Riiiiiiggghhhht."

Fortunately, people like Edison, Bell and a slew of others didn't listen to their friends or critics. They forged ahead because they believed in their ideas. And they weren't afraid of failure.

It's your idea. Nobody understands it as well as you. You are officially the authoritative expert on your idea. I eventually stopped telling people my ideas until I could show them a prototype, but even then I take their opinions with a grain of salt.

A major obstacle in completing ideas is getting over the "is it good enough?" stage. Honestly, you won't truly know how innovative your idea is until you actually create it.

Instead of spending your time asking everyone around if they think your concept will work, spend that time developing the idea. Let it marinate and take shape. And develop the snot out of it. Once you've got a bangin' prototype, then see what people think.

An article was published recently chronicling Zappos and their successess in internet marketing. One of the main reasons for their success is that they stopped listening to consultants to tell them how to run their business.


"You have to avoid falling into the trap of a consultant telling you that, "If you spend a large amount of money with us, all of your problems will be solved, and you'll never have to worry about this again." In the end, they are outsiders and do not understand your business as well as you do."


As originator of the idea, it's your responsibility to see that the integrity of your idea is kept. Don't try and let outsiders tell you what they think of your idea, or how to implement it. Think of the idea as your baby. You wouldn't let somebody else raise your child, would you?


Don't miss an article - Subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Continuous Innovation group!

---

Glen Stansberry writes at LifeDev, a blog that helps people make their ideas happen. You can follow him on Twitter here.

Innovation From the Inside Out

by Mitch Ditkoff

These days, almost all of my clients are talking about the need to establish a culture of innovation.

Some, I'm happy to report, are actually doing something about it. Hallelujah! They are taking bold steps forward to turn theory into action.

Still, the challenge remains the same for them as it does thousands of other forward-thinking companies - and that is, to find a simple, authentic way to address the challenge from the inside out - to water the root of the tree, not just the branches.

In today's process-driven, OD-centric, Six-Sigma savvy organization, the tendency is to focus on systems as opposed to people - as if systems were sufficient to guarantee change.

Guess what? Systems are not sufficient to guarantee change. In the words of Oliver Wendell Holmes, "Systems die. Instinct remains."

This is not to say that organizations should ignore systems and structures in their effort to establish a culture of innovation. They shouldn't.

But systems and structures all too often become the Holy Grail - much in the same way that Six Sigma has become the Holy Grail.

Unfortunately, when the addiction to systems and structures rules the day, an organization's quest for a culture of innovation degenerates into nothing much more than a cult of innovation.

Organizations do not innovate. People innovate. Inspired people. Fascinated people. Creative people. Committed people. That's where innovation begins. On the inside.

The organization's role - just like the individual manager's role - is to get out of the way. And while this "getting out of the way" will undoubtedly include the effort to formulate supportive systems, processes, and protocols, it is important to remember that systems, processes, and protocols are never the answer.

They are the context, not the content.

They are the husk, not kernel.

They are the menu, not the meal.

Ultimately, organizations are faced with the same challenge that religions are faced with. Religious leaders may speak passionately about the virtues their congregation needs to be living by, but sermons only name the challenge and remind people to experience something - they don't necessarily change behavior.

Change comes from within the heart and mind of each individual. It cannot be legislated or evangelized into reality.

What's needed in organizations who aspire to a culture of innovation, is an inner change. People need to experience something within themselves that will spark and sustain their effort to innovate - and when they experience this "something," they will be self-sustaining.

They will think about their projects in the shower, in their car, and in their dreams. They will need very little "management" from the outside. Inside out will rule the day - not outside in. Intrinsic motivation will flourish.

People will innovate not because they are told to, but because they want to. Open Space Technology is a good metaphor for this. When people are inspired, share a common, compelling goal and have the time and space to collaborate, the results become self-organizing.

You can create all the reward systems you want. You can reinvent your workspace until you're blue in the face. You can license the latest and greatest idea management tool, but unless each person in your organization OWNS the need to innovate and finds a way to tap into their own INNATE BRILLIANCE, all you'll end up with is a mixed bag of systems, processes, and protocols - the husk, not the kernel - the innovation flotsam and jetsam that the next administration or next CEO or next key stakeholder will mock, reject or change at the drop of a hat if the ROI doesn't show up in the next 20 minutes.

You want culture change? You want a culture of innovation?

Great. Then find a way to help each and every person in your organization come from the inside out. Deeply consider how you can awaken, nurture, and develop the primal need all people have to create something extraordinary.


Enjoy this post? 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.

Thinking Fearlessly

by Kevin Roberts

Sometimes in life - boardroom, living room or classroom - we get so scared of failure that we make it impossible for ourselves to succeed. In an economy in reset mode, the unreasonable power of creativity is what will set smart people and companies apart. But the thing about creativity is that it breeds failure as well as success.

That's the paradox. In a jittery economy, people suppress creativity to minimize the risk of failure, and companies often encourage that kind of insular thinking. But it's exactly the wrong approach - if allowed to set in, fear of failure will set an organization on auto-pilot, nose down.

Jonah Lehrer wrote on his blog in December about how psychologists are learning more about how the creative brain functions. He used the example of a simple but powerful experiment among college students. Two groups were told to list as many modes of transport as they could. The only difference was that one group was told the idea for the research came from exchange students in Greece, and the second group was told it came from classmates from down the hall.

Fascinating results. The 'down the hall' group came in with a predictable set of responses like car, bus and train. The 'Greece' group let their imagination run wild, generating far more answers, naming horses, ancient warships, spaceships and, yes, Segways.

The only difference was that one group was given the smallest permission to think fearlessly, and they jumped at it. Lehrer uses this research to argue in favor of the mind-opening possibilities of travel, and he's right. More importantly, it reveals the way the creative mind flourishes in the right conditions, and closes down in the wrong ones.

Fast Company magazine backed this up when they reported the findings of Harvard Business School research into the work habits of 238 creative professionals. The findings revealed that "creativity is positively associated with joy and love and negatively associated with anger, fear, and anxiety." The researchers argue that a fearful or negative workplace environment is an anathema to creativity and that "when people are doing work that they love and they're allowed to deeply engage in it - and when the work itself is valued and recognized - then creativity will flourish."

The lesson is obvious. We need to overwhelm tough times with our boundless and brazen creativity - not the other way around.


Enjoy this post? Subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Continuous Innovation group!

---

Kevin Roberts is the CEO worldwide of The Lovemarks Company, Saatchi & Saatchi. For more information on Kevin, please go to www.saatchikevin.com. To see this blog at its original source, please go to www.krconnect.blogspot.com.

Innovators Welcome Ambiguity

by Paul Sloane

Brilliant thinkers and innovators are very comfortable with ambiguity - they welcome it. Routine thinkers like clarity and simplicity; they dislike ambiguity. There is a tendency in our society to reduce complex issues down to simple issues with obviously clear solutions. We see evidence of this in the tabloid press. There have been some terrible crimes committed in our cities. A violent offender received what is seen to be a lenient sentence. This shows that judges are out of touch with what is needed and that heavy punishment will stop the crime wave. The brilliant thinker is wary of simple nostrums like these. He or she knows that complex issues usually involve many causes and these may need many different and even conflicting solutions.

Routine thinkers are often dogmatic. They see a clear route forward and they want to follow it. The advantage of this is that they can make decisive and effective executives - up to a point. If the simple route happens to be a good one then they get on with the journey. The downside is that they will likely follow the most obvious idea and not consider creative, complex or controversial choices. The exceptional thinker can see many possibilities and relishes reviewing both sides of any argument. They are happy to discuss and explore multiple possibilities and are keen to challenge conventional wisdom. People around them and subordinates can sometimes consider this approach to be frustrating and indecisive.

Albert Einstein was able to conceive his theory of relativity because he thought that time and space might not be immutable. Neils Bohr made breakthroughs in physics because he was able to think of light as both a stream of particles and as a wave. Picasso could paint classical portraits and yet conceive cubist representations of people.

How can you welcome ambiguity? First by admitting that there are few absolute truths and that for most common beliefs the opposite view might also be true. If the general view is that you can either get high quality or low price the brilliant thinker will ask, 'Why can't we get both? How can we deliver great quality at really affordable prices?'

Cognitive dissonance is the concept of holding two very different ideas in your mind at the same time. This is something all the great composers do when they think of two melodic themes and how they can intertwine, adapt and combine them. We would find it very difficult to whistle one tune while thinking of an entirely different one but that is the sort of thing that Beethoven or Mozart would consider trifling.

When we mull over the interaction of two opposing ideas in our minds then the creative possibilities are legion. A wind-up clock and an electrically operated radio are two very different concepts but by imagining their combination Trevor Bayliss was able to conceive of the clockwork radio. Most of us would dismiss such an idea out of hand. It seems incongruous to have a large mechanical winding device inside a small radio. And we can immediately see the drawback that the programme we were listening to would stop when the winder ran down so that we would have to get up and wind the thing again. That appears a very tedious operation.

But Bayliss saw beyond these limitations and considered the needs of people in the developing world who did not have access to reliable mains electricity and who could not afford batteries. For them winding up a radio is a minor inconvenience. The clockwork radio has transformed their lives.

If we want creative solutions and real innovations then we should welcome ambiguity. We should explore the possibilities of two different things interacting together. We should let opposites play.


Enjoy this post? Subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Continuous Innovation group!

---

Paul Sloane writes, speaks and leads workshops on creativity, innovation and leadership. He is the author of The Innovative Leader published by Kogan-Page.

Crowdsourcing Innovation vs. The Economics of Elitism

by Mark Prus

Which Is Better?

A recent article in The New York Times discussed the innovation process at Apple. Clearly the process begins and ends with Steve Jobs. And clearly Mr. Jobs is a creative genius. He also has a lot of help with top notch design engineers. As a result, Apple is perceived as one of the most innovative companies on the planet.

If you have visionary leadership at your company, this might be a good way to go. But companies like Procter & Gamble (P&G) also have strong leadership and they have taken a different route to innovation. P&G has been a leader in Open Innovation, and many of the new products they have launched in the past few years have come from outside the company.

Which approach is better? Some say that Crowdsourcing produces a lot of good ideas, while "home grown" innovation is capable of producing bigger breakthrough ideas.

I love Apple (full disclosure: I own Apple stock and am a big fan of their products). However, I am not sure that the "elitism model of innovation" is one that can be expanded to a lot of companies. I believe that Steve Jobs is a true visionary, and that people like him come along far too rarely for this to be a workable model of innovation. It does work for Apple... but how many other companies can implement it?

Your thoughts?


Enjoy this post? Subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Continuous Innovation group!

---

Mark Prus is a marketing consultant who offers a name development service called NameFlash^SM.

Brainstorming Breakthroughs Require the Right Question!

by Mitch Ditkoff

There's a simple reason why so many brainstorm sessions are a waste of time. The problem statement being pitched to participants is the wrong one.

This is not surprising - especially when you consider how little time most facilitators put into preparing for a session.

Here's what happens: The person who calls the session is usually scrambling - overwhelmed, over-caffeinated, and running from one meeting to the next. Out of breath, they pitch the topic to the group, but the topic is either vague or secondary to a more essential challenge that remains unspoken.

G.K. Chesterton, one of the most influential English writers of the 20th century, distilled the phenomenon down to 13 words. "It's not that they can't see the solution," he said. "They can't see the problem."

Then, of course, there's also the phenomenon of perception bias.

Pitch a challenge to an IT person, and it will be seen as a technology problem. Pitch it to a CFO, and it will be seen as a financial problem. Pitch it to a marketing person and it will be seen as a branding problem.

Or as a wise man once said, "When a pickpocket meets a saint all he sees are pockets."

If you plan on running an ideation session any time soon, don't just stumble into the room and pitch a vague topic to the group. Do your homework. Make the effort to identify the REAL issue before asking for ideas. If it's the WRONG QUESTION you present, no amount of idea generation is going to make a difference.


Enjoy this post? 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.

Don't Demolish Your Own Innovation

by Paul Williams

Innovative ideas - the kind that can transform your company - are inadvertently being demolished. When first presented, many ideas meet wrecking-ball comments such as:

• "How's that going to work?"
  
• "Good luck getting that done!"
  
• "We don't have time for something like that." And the classic,
  
• "Doesn't work... Trust me... We tried that years ago."

We've all heard (or perhaps said) killer phrase comments like these. These are offered as a "public service" to the team to prevent us from going off track and wasting time.

But, what have we really accomplished?

• Yes... we've kept the meeting on schedule.

But we also,

• have made the suggester feel stupid,
  
• are causing people to hold back their creativity, and
  
• may have destroyed the next big idea.

Instead of immediately leveling them, what if we built on new ideas?

Ninety-nine percent of innovative ideas aren't simply blurted out in their final form. They need development to reveal their full potential.

Instead of destruction, try construction. Use the idea as a foundation and see how tall we can build the framework. If we want to be as innovative as possible, instead of saying "Yeah, but..." try "And, if..."

What's the worst that could happen?

We've wasted 120 seconds on a thought that, in the end, won't work?

But what's the best that could happen?

Perhaps we construct something that does solve the challenge. Even better, maybe it morphs into something completely different - something incredible!

As a bonus, we've made the suggester feel valued and perpetuate creative, open thinking - the stuff that leads to future innovative breakthroughs!

In these competitive times, when innovation is considered one of the single most important factors to the continued success of a company... Spare the "Yeah but..." wrecking ball, use "And if..." to construct your own innovation.


Enjoy this post? Subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Continuous Innovation group!

---

Paul Williams is a professional problem solver at Idea Sandbox. He can help you create remarkable ideas to grow your business. You may read more at his website and find him Twittering as @IdeaSandbox.

Brainstorming is More Than Ideation

by Mitch Ditkoff

Most people think brainstorming sessions are all about ideas - much in the same way that Wall Street bankers think life is all about money.

While ideas are certainly a big part of brainstorming, they are only a part. People who rush into a brainstorming session starving for new ideas will miss the boat (and the train, car, and unicycle) completely unless they tune into the some other mighty important dynamics:

1. INVESTIGATION: If you want your brainstorming sessions to be effective, you'll need to do some investigating before hand. Get curious. Ask questions. Dig deeper. The more you find out what the real issues are, the greater your chances of framing powerful questions to brainstorm and choosing the best techniques to use.

2. IMMERSION: While good ideas can surface at any time, their chances radically increase the more that brainstorm participants are immersed (i.e. focused). Translation? No coming and going during a session. No distractions. No interruptions. And don't forget to put a "do not disturb" sign on the door.

3. INTERACTION: Ideas come to people at all times of day and under all kinds of circumstances. But in a brainstorming session, it's the quality of interaction that makes the difference - how people connect with each other, how they listen, and build on ideas. Your job, as facilitator, is to increase the quality of interaction.

4. INSPIRATION: Creative output is often a function of mindset. Bored, disengaged people rarely originate good ideas. Inspired people do. This is one of your main tasks, as a brainstorm facilitator - to do everything in your power to keep participants inspired. The more you do, the less techniques you will need.

5. IDEATION: Look around. Everything you see began as an idea in someone's mind. Simply put, ideas are the seeds of innovation - the first shape a new possibility takes. As a facilitator of the creative process, your job is to foster the conditions that amplify the odds of new ideas being conceived, developed, and articulated.

6. ILLUMINATION: Ideas are great. Ideas are cool. But they are also a dime a dozen unless they lead to an insight or aha. Until then, ideas are only two dimensional. But when the light goes on inside the minds of the people in your session, the ideas are activated and the odds radically increase of them manifesting.

7. INTEGRATION: Well-run brainstorming sessions have a way of intoxicating people. Doors open. Energy soars. Possibilities emerge. But unless participants have a chance to make sense of what they've conceived, the ideas are less likely to manifest. Opening the doors of the imagination is a good thing, but so is closure.

8. IMPLEMENTATION: Perhaps the biggest reason why most brainstorming sessions fail is what happens after - or, shall I say, what doesn't happen after. Implementation is the name of the game. Before you let people go, clarify next steps, who's doing what (and by when), and what outside support is needed.


Enjoy this post? 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.

Saving Curiosity from the Guillotine

by Stefan Lindegaard

This great topic was raised by Arthur Lok in a discussion in the Innovation Management group on LinkedIn. It made me wonder and reflect on my own level of curiosity, what this term means to me and how it effects innovation.

I think we lose our sense of curiosity as we begin to build a power base that we feel we need to protect. We have something to lose and then we begin to focus on how to protect this rather than expand and build further on what we have.

So are we just defensively minded? Such a mindset definitely make incumbents more vulnerable to new innovation brought to market by companies and entrepreneurs having nothing to loose.

I think this goes for products, services and thus corporate revenues as well as the knowledge base we build as individuals. If what we know today provides a good living perhaps we are not that open to challenge this and develop new points of view. Unfortunately, this does not work in times where just standing still is the same as getting behind - at a very fast pace.

It is fairly easy to point out what kills curiosity. I gave an example above and you can find others in the LinkedIn discussion. The more interesting question is what we can do to avoid killing our curiosity. I hope we can start a discussion on this here. Let me start off with one of my suggestions;

Try out new technologies. It took me years to get the value of cell phone texting and I am still not that good at it. In retrospect, I see this as a sign of me getting older and losing my curiosity. This lesson taught me to be open towards new technologies and not write them off as fast as I might have done.

Twitter is good example. I was initially annoyed but I stayed in there and today it gives me much value. TweetDeck is a great source of new insights - just use the search function.

What do you do to stay curious?

Editor's note: Check out our Continuous Innovation group for more interesting innovation discussions

---

Stefan Lindegaard is a speaker, network facilitator and strategic advisor who focus on the topics of open innovation, intrapreneurship and how to identify and develop the people who drive innovation.

Will Avatar Spark More Originality?

by Kevin Roberts

Avatar, opening in the US tomorrow, has Hollywood holding its breath. The $350 million spectacle by writer/director James Cameron seems destined to one of only two possible fates: spectacular blockbuster or massive bomb. The middle road never seems open to Cameron, who famously drives Tinsel-town bean-counters bonkers with his uncompromising vision and gargantuan budgets. Sigourney Weaver calls him an "idealistic perfectionist", which is a pretty good aspiration for all of us.

I haven't seen the film yet, but I wish it well for three reasons.

One, Peter Jackson's Weta Workshop in New Zealand has been responsible for the special effects, which are said to take 3-D animation to a different plane. Another hit for Weta would be great for this awesome Wellington Lovemark - and for the city itself.

Second, I love James Cameron's gutsy approach. In an industry teeming with yes-men, corporate cronies and wannabes, Cameron stands apart as a maverick who rises and falls on the size of his talent, not his Rolodex. He put his philosophy this way:


"If you set your goals ridiculously high and it's a failure, you will fail above everyone else's success."


Most importantly, I hope that Avatar succeeds because it represents something that has all but disappeared from mainstream film - a truly original idea. It is not recycled from a TV show or old movie, nor is it based on a book, play, musical or comic book. James Cameron is the sole writing credit, and the story is woven entirely from his imagination.

The rise of innovation in Hollywood (and Wellywood and Bollywood) has been startling, but it has not been matched by the rise of great originality - in fact, the opposite has happened. The graphs below show how the number of films made from an original idea - as opposed to sequels, book or musical adaptations, comic books or earlier films - has declined dramatically in the past decade. Instead, we are saturated by sequels. 15 of the top 20 box office hits of the 2000s were sequels (and some of them were brilliant, but the point is valid).

The last decade will be remembered for awesome innovation we used to help tell stories on screen. Let's hope that the '10s is known more for the creativity and originality we bring to storytelling itself.





Image source: http://www.topnews.in/avatar-will-make-titanic-look-picnic-says-james-cameron-2244474

---

Kevin Roberts is the CEO worldwide of The Lovemarks Company, Saatchi & Saatchi. For more information on Kevin, please go to www.saatchikevin.com. To see this blog at its original source, please go to www.krconnect.blogspot.com.

Sex and Creativity

Is there a connection? Study shows number of sexual partners corresponds to creative output.

by Idris Mootee

Creative people are fun. Creative people are likeable. But many creative minds are unorganized and sometimes deficient in handling complex logic. Some creative minds are highly analytical too, although the processing was sort of in the back and you don't see it.

Creative people are more social than others. Here's a case in point. Psychologists at the University of Newcastle upon Tyne and the Open University found that professional artists and poets have about twice as many sexual partners as other people. The study also shows that the average number of sexual partners increased as creative output went up. So the more creative you are, the more sexual partners you should have. You tell me if this true. Now I understand why so many people want to be a creative director.

More on creativity and sex drive. The desire to be creative or feel creative, whether expressed in music, industrial design, art, fashion or photography or film, coexists with the primal urge to commit the sex act, and other layers in between. It is like onions that we have many layers. What if your desire for sex is weak, does it mean you are less creative than others? If you buy the above argument, then this should the case. When sex is suppressed in some cultures, does this in effect force the libido up into "higher" forms, and thereby further enhance creativity? I don't know.

I believe our creative motivations are often based on some of our most primal passions, such as joy, fear, anger, love and lust. In an article "Creative Juice - A Dozen Key Lessons for Creative Dreamers", Suzanne Falter-Barns quotes Deepak Chopra:


"Creativity is ultimately sexual - I'm sorry - but it is!"


I am not a Chopra fan, but he may be right this time. Love and lust make us think differently in that they trigger global processing, which in turn promotes creative thinking. Love and lust are good for creativity.

---

Idris Mootee is the CEO of idea couture, a strategic innovation and experience design firm. He is the author of four books, tens of published articles, and a frequent speaker at business conferences and executive retreats.

The Dream Catalog

by Drew Boyd

For many companies, the catalog of products is the strongest statement of brand positioning a company can make. It is your arsenal of commercialization. So imagine you could peek into the future and see a copy of your company's product catalog five years from now. What would it look like? What if you could design it now? What would you put into it? These are the questions that confront you when you use a clever innovation tool called the Dream Catalog.

The Dream Catalog is a hypothetical company catalog from the future...well into the future, beyond the next business cycle. It is far into the future so that it captures the innovative thinking and imagination of today's managers. It stretches a company's thinking about its future, and it provokes a healthy discussion about possible company direction. A good Dream Catalog causes tension.

A Dream Catalog helps a company in several ways. It sets direction. It suggests how the company is going to add and remove products from the line over time. It forces the marketing team to reconcile product line strategy. It provides placeholders for new discoveries, inventions, and even acquisitions. It provides a sense of prioritization of what should be developed and in what order. It can even help forecast revenues.

Best of all - it rewards and encourages innovation. The Dream Catalog serves as the focal point for company-wide innovation efforts. Employees strive to come up with product and service ideas that "make it" into the Dream Catalog. As the catalog takes shape, employees see how their future is taking shape. It guides their innovation efforts even more. Leaders can use the catalog as a motivational tool. "Let's turn this dream into reality...for our customers and our future." A good Dream Catalog creates excitement and a sense of purpose.

I teach MBA students how to create a Dream Catalog in a full credit course called "Applied Marketing Innovation." Here is a quick snapshot of how to do it. Create a slew of new product embodiments over your current product line as well as products in your industry you wish you had. Do this using an efficient method such as Systematic Inventive Thinking. Mix the ideas together with your current product line. Put yourself five or ten years out and envision what product offering would make your company the most amazing market leader in your industry. Using your "palette" of ideas, pull in those that, taken together, create that kind of company. Strive for product line coherence. Strive for differentiation. Strive for a customer centric solution. Then, make an actual catalog with product photos, prices, features, and benefits. Make it seem real.

Here is a neat trick. Take all of your company's catalogs as far back as you can and lay them side-by-side chronologically. Study the product offerings each year and note the changes over time. Note the new products, deleted products, and changed products. Do you see an evolutionary theme? Revolutionary? Stagnant? Now place your Dream Catalog five or ten spots ahead of the most recent catalog. Where will your Dream Catalog take you? How far, how fast, how cool?

Think about Fortune 100 companies that might have a Dream Catalog of sorts. Think about former Fortune 100 companies that have since perished. Did they have a Dream Catalog? Would you buy stock in a company if it did not have a Dream Catalog?

Dream on.

---

Drew Boyd is Director of Marketing Mastery for Johnson & Johnson (Ethicon Endo-Surgery division). He is also Visiting Assistant Professor of Marketing and Innovation at the University of Cincinnati and Executive Director of the MS-Marketing program. Follow him at www.innovationinpractice.com and at http://twitter.com/drewboyd

Innovation Perspectives - Fixedness

This is the eighth of several 'Innovation Perspectives' articles we will publish this week from multiple authors to get different perspectives on 'What is the most dangerous current misconception in innovation?'. Now, here is Drew Boyd's perspective:


by Drew Boyd


"It's not what you don't know that will get you. It's what you know that ain't so." - Will Rogers


The most dangerous misconception about innovation today is not about innovation at all. It is about everything surrounding our innovation efforts that gives us trouble. It is rooted in a concept called fixedness. Fixedness is the inability to realize that something known to have a particular use may also be used to perform other functions. When one is faced with a new problem, fixedness blocks one's ability to use old tools in novel ways. Psychologist Karl Duncker coined the term functional fixedness for describing the difficulties in visual perception and problem solving that arise when one element of a whole situation has a (fixed) function which has to be changed for making the correct perception or for finding solutions. In his famous "candle problem" the situation was defined by the objects: a box of candles, a box of thumb-tacks and a book of matches. The task was to fix the candles on the wall without any additional elements. The difficulty of this problem arises from the functional fixedness of the candle box. It is a container in the problem situation but must be used as a shelf in the solution situation.

Roni Horiwitz of S.I.T. puts it this way: "It's almost impossible for the human brain to produce a really fresh and unique thought. Every thought, opinion or idea is somehow connected to previous concepts stored in the brain." Because of this, we are often unable to see the solution to a problem although it stares us in the face. We are too connected to what we knew previously. We not only can't let it go, but we try very hard to anchor around it to explain what is going on.

Fixedness is insidious. It affects how we think about and see virtually every part of our lives. At work, we have fixedness about our products and services, out customers and competitors, and our future opportunities. The most damaging form of fixedness is when we are stuck on our current business model. We cannot see past what is working today. We stop challenging our assumptions. We continue to believe what was once true is still true. In the end, it is this perpetual blind spot that is most dangerous to our innovation potential.

Customers have fixedness, too. Customers have a limited view of the future, they have well-entrenched notions of how the world works, and they suffer from the same blind spot we do. Yet we continue to seek the "Voice of the Customer" as though a divine intervention will break through this fixedness so they can spew new ideas.

Fortunately, there is a way to address it. The way to break fixedness is to use structured innovation tools and principles that make you see problems and opportunities in new ways.

I have witnessed the effects of fixedness in many teams across numerous companies and industries. That is usually the time I invoke the classic Will Rogers quote:


"It's not what you don't know that will get you. It's what you know that ain't so."


Or was it Mark Twain?


You can check out all of the 'Innovation Perspectives' articles from the different contributing authors on 'What is the most dangerous current misconception in innovation?' by clicking the link in this sentence.

---

Drew Boyd is Director of Marketing Mastery for Johnson & Johnson (Ethicon Endo-Surgery division). He is also Visiting Assistant Professor of Marketing and Innovation at the University of Cincinnati and Executive Director of the MS-Marketing program. Follow him at www.innovationinpractice.com and at http://twitter.com/drewboyd

Create It and They Will Come

by Kevin Roberts

I've been amazed by the global enthusiasm for the iPhone apps that continue to proliferate around the world. Creating an app is as simple as thinking of something useful. It's the modern day inventor's route to riches, and the modern day consumer's lifestyle compressed onto a small device. The creativity just keeps on coming, and it has the consumer at the heart of every decision.

The Urban Spoon app lets you define the parameters of what you want to eat. Anything you'd like to leave to chance, just solve with a shake of the phone. Is That Gluten Free? will tell you what you're eating while you are at the restaurant. The World Factbook '09 can solve discussions over dinner. Then GymGoal can help you work it off. And on it goes.

These apps are the ultimate conversation starter. "Have you got this app?" The power of the idea is transmitted every minute through conversation. Phones have got the world talking, but few guessed it would be in this unique manner.

Where was all this creativity before the iPhone opened a space for it? Are we using the other screens in our Sisomo family with the same creative, open approach? Cinemas, TV's, billboards and bus stops are all waiting for the app magic. The future is wide open, and screens are everywhere. Let's bring the world's creativity to every screen, not just the little ones.


Image Source: http://www.walyou.com/blog/2008/11/28/free-iphone-apps-this-black-friday/

---

Kevin Roberts is the CEO worldwide of The Lovemarks Company, Saatchi & Saatchi. For more information on Kevin, please go to www.saatchikevin.com. To see this blog at its original source, please go to www.krconnect.blogspot.com.

21 Great Innovation Methods

by Paul Sloane

How hard is it to innovate? Not once but over and over? How can you repeatedly implement great new products, processes or services? Continuous innovation is not easy and if you keep using the same method you will experience diminishing results. Try innovating how you innovate by employing some of these ideas.

1. Copy someone else's idea. One of the best ways to innovate is to pinch an idea that works elsewhere and apply it in your business. Henry Ford saw the production line working in a meat packing plant and then applied to the automobile industry thereby dramatically reducing assembly times and costs.


2. Ask customers. If you simply ask your customers how you could improve your product or service they will give you plenty of ideas for incremental innovations. Typically they will ask for new features or that you make your product cheaper, faster, easier to use, available in different styles and colours etc. Listen to these requests carefully and choose the ones that will really pay back.


3. Observe customers. Do not just ask them, watch them. Try to see how customers use your products. Do they use them in new ways? This was what Levi Strauss saw when they found that customers ripped the jeans - so they brought a line of pre-ripped jeans. Heinz noticed that people stored their sauce jars upside down so they designed an upside down bottle.


4. Use difficulties and complaints. If customers have difficulties with any aspect of using your product or if they register complaints then you have a strong starting point for innovations. Make your product easier to use, eliminate the current inconveniences and introduce improvements that overcome the complaints.


5. Combine. Combine your product with something else to make something new. It works at all levels. Think of a suitcase with wheels, or a mobile phone with a camera or a flight with a massage.


6. Eliminate. What could you take out of your product or service to make it better? Dell eliminated the computer store, Amazon eliminated the bookstore, the Sony Walkman eliminated speakers and record functions.


7. Ask your staff. Challenge the people who work in the business to find new and better ways to do things and new and better ways to please customers. They are close to the action and can see opportunities for innovation. Often they just need encouragement to bring forward great ideas.


8. Plan. Include targets for new products and services in your business plan. Put it onto the balanced scorecard. Write innovation into everyone's objectives. Measure it and it will happen.


9. Run brainstorms. Have regular brainstorm meetings where you generate a large quantity of new product ideas. Use diverse groups from different areas of the business and include a provocative outsider e.g. a customer or supplier.


10. Examine patents. Check through patents that apply in your field. Are there some that you could license? Are some expiring so that you can now use that method? Is there a different way of achieving the essential idea in a patent?


11. Collaborate. Work with another company who can take you to places you can't go. Choose a partner with a similar philosophy but different skills. That is what Mercedes did with Swatch when they came up with the Smart car.


12. Minimize or maximize. Take something that is standard in the industry and minimise or maximise it. Ryanair minimized price and customer service. Starbucks maximised price and customer experience. It is better to be different than to be better.


13. Run a contest. Ask members of the public to suggest great new product ideas. Offer a prize. Give people a clear focussed goal and they will surprise you with novel ideas. Good for innovation and PR.


14. Ask - what if? Do some lateral thinking by asking what if...? Challenge every boundary and assumption that applies in your field. You and your group will come up with amazing ideas once the normal constraints are lifted.


15. Watch the competition. Do not slavishly follow the competition but watch them intelligently. The small guys are often the most innovative so see if you can adapt or license one of their ideas - or even buy the company!


16. Outsource. Subcontract your new product development challenge to a design company, a University, a start-up or a crowdsourcing site like Innocentive or NineSigma.


17. Use open innovation. Big consumer products companies like Procter and Gamble or Reckitt Benckiser encourage developers to bring novel products to them. They are flexible on IP protection and give a clear focus on what they are looking for. A large proportion of their new products now start life outside the company.


18. Adapt a product to a new use. Find an entirely different application for an existing product. De Beers produced industrial diamonds but found a new use for diamonds when they introduced the concept of engagement rings. It opened up a large new market for them.


19. Try Triz. Triz is a systematic method for solving problems. It can be applied in many fields but is particularly useful in engineering and product design. Triz gives you a toolbox of methods to solve contradictions e.g. how can we make this product run faster but with less power?


20. Go back in time. Look back at methods and services that were used in your sector years ago but have now fallen out of use. Can you bring one back in a new updated form? It has been said that Speed Dating is really a relaunch of a Victorian dance format where ladies had cards marked with appointments.


21. Use social networks. Follow trends and ask questions on groups like Twitter or Facebook. Ask what people want to see in future products or what the big new idea will be. Many early adopters are active on social network groups and will happily respond with suggestions.

The ways to innovate are legion. Try some approaches that are new to you in order to boost your innovation capability.

---

Paul Sloane writes, speaks and leads workshops on creativity, innovation and leadership. He is the author of The Innovative Leader published by Kogan-Page.

Innovation and Idea Management

From Ideation to Collaboration to Execution

by Robert F. Brands

Innovation: What a great idea!

Innovation thrives on a diet of news ideas. It needs fresh thinking and a different perspective from across the organization.

We've noted that Innovation = Creative x Risk Taking. Setting aside risk for the moment, creativity is a central element to the innovation process. But it must continually be nourished with new ideas from a variety of sources.

Ideation is not a single event. It doesn't originate from a single silo or one person or one department, although it can come from a single source. Ideation thrives in an open environment; think Wikipedia, the open-source, online repository of the world's specialized knowledge. It is the result of a collaborative process that welcomes minds and teams from across any organization of any size.

How can you foster a fertile ideation environment?

Start by creating an "idea hopper." This idea bank is the repository of any idea to be pursued, saved and reconsidered - or at least explored.

In the closing scene of Raiders of the Lost Ark, the Ark of the Covenant is crated and stashed in endless warehouse of similar, non-descript crates. This is the polar opposite. Don't think of the Hopper as a bottomless pit. Think actionable. While this idea database can be managed online or in Access Dbase, Word or Excel, the key word is "managed". Ideas come in and are vetted by the Innovation Team and the Chief Innovation Officer. The CIO will organize ideas in order of importance or relevance based on the organization's current path or needs. Then the ideas then are presented at the next meeting of the Ideation or Brainstorming Session.

About that session... Brainstorm sessions should be held at a regular interval and include a variety of participants from across the organization. This isn't just a place for R&D or the New Product team. Sales should be there. So should Marketing. Include Customer Service. Those who interact with customers and have a feel for the shifting tidings of the consumer should have input in ideation - whether in feeding the hopper or digesting its contents.

The meetings also should be structured. They should be scheduled, with an agenda in place so participants know what to expect, the topics of discussion, and the anticipated outcomes. In this instance, the CIO should defer to a facilitator or Innovation Coach who can lead the session with complete neutrality. He or she (or someone designated for that task) will write, chart, graph or otherwise gather every idea presented. There are no bad ideas. All concepts should be filed, prioritized, validated, for future reference and / or use in combination with other ideation session results. The outcome of each meeting besides feeding the hopper is a prioritized list to be worked in Product Development

Next, feed that hopper. This database needs that constant diet of fresh ideas - especially between brainstorming sessions. Welcome ideas from all corners of the organization - from the C-Suite to the receptionist's desk. You never know where the next Great Idea will come from.

To be clear, new ideas aren't simply about products. Ideas can include process changes, technological enhancements - anything that represents change in the organization.

In ideation, think green. In those brainstorming sessions, some ideas will rise, some will fall. Throw none away. Those that don't pass muster at that moment should be placed back in the hopper and recycled. Some ideas fail based on momentary circumstances: bad timing, market conditions, budget constraints, technological disconnect, conflict with the organization's current needs or vision - any of which can change very quickly. In fact, two ideas discarded today may morph into a better concept tomorrow. Keeping them in the hopper ensures they can be revisited in the future.

The process of ideation isn't inherently a risk-taking endeavor. But it is part of the experimentation equation. As we've noted previously, Risk + Experimentation (+ Failure) = An Improved Environment for Innovation.

The risk here is to break the mold. Open the silos. Welcome input from across the organization. You might come away thinking, "What a great idea!"

---

Robert F. Brands is President and founder of Brands & Company, LLC. Innovation Coach Robert Brands has launched a new site - www.RobertsRulesOfInnovation.com - to complement his upcoming book.

Importance of Enterprise 2.0 Connections to Innovation ROI

by Hutch Carpenter

In a recent post on the Spigit blog, Study - Collaborative Networks Produce Better Ideas, I described the research of Professor Ronald Burt. He found that employees who are better connected across the organization generate higher quality ideas than those with limited connections. Wider access to the ideas, knowledge, experiences and judgment of colleagues makes employees stronger in innovation.

I posted this write-up in the Continuous Innovation group on LinkedIn. One person made this observation:


"Need to keep in mind that collaborative networks have little to do with technology. There are certain personality types that keep the organization connected. The proportions of those people in an organization is related to the specific corporate culture."


There's a good alternative perspective. That really, the same people that connect via collaborative networks are those that would be doing it in an offline world as well. The rest of the employee population likely continues to work in a more insular world.

I see it differently though. First, I agree that there are people with natural connector personalities. They would span the different parts of the organization no matter what. Anyone think David Armano wouldn't be one of those types?

But not everyone need be an uber connector to see benefits from plugging into a more connected network. My personal experience on sites like Twitter and FriendFeed tells me that everyone benefits from these online social networks. We may not all be uber connectors, but we do increase our degree of connectedness.

The graph below is my concept for how this effect manifests:



Assume a population of employees: 25 in this hypothetical example. The blue line is the level of connectedness for employees working the way they have for decades. Your connections tend to be local and departmental, with some tenure you gain a larger informal network. In Professor Burt's terms, most workers are relatively insular in terms of who they access for information and ideas. But some broker connections across different corporate 'tribes'.

The red line represents the level of corporate connectedness for employees including the ability to find others online. To me, this is a no-brainer. Of course people are going to connect with others they wouldn't have otherwise. The number, diversity and depth of connections increase.

The gray zone between the red and blue lines represent that improvement. Some people won't get too much increase. They really are in-person types of connectors. But others thrive in the online environment. They have more specific interests, and didn't know who else in the organization held them. Through the social software, they find more people with interests similar to theirs. Or at least with experience relevant to their interests.

Don't need to be an uber connector there. Just need to be able to make connections.

Next..the ROI math.


The Natural Logarithm Method

Take a look at the graph below. It shows the scatter plot of how ideas were rated for different employees (Y axis). The X axis represents the degree of connectedness for employees, based on actual social network analysis conducted by Professor Burt in his study:



The scatter plots show that employees who have a high diversity of connections across the organization provided higher quality ideas. The converse holds true as well.

Regression shows the equation that represents the observations:


Value of Idea = 5.51 - 0.91 * ln(Level of Network Constraint)


The equation shows that, on average, every increase in a person's level of connectedness with different parts of the organization produces higher quality ideas. Note the natural log curve. The effect increases as connectedness improves. What I like about that is that the benefits increase, even if the work of increasing employees' network diversity gets more difficult as you try to connect those last holdout groups.

Extrapolate the effect out to the organization at large. Raising the overall level of workforce connectedness will have a salutary effect on the average quality of ideas generated. In an era of ever higher levels of market volatility, improving the organizational 'innovation IQ' is a critical aspect of surviving and thriving.

One thought on the accelerating benefit - increased idea quality - as connectedness improves. In a large population, would this have any correlation to network effects?

It's not perfect, but Professor Burt's analysis demonstrates a strong ROI basis for leveraging social software to increase the diversity of connections.

---

Hutch Carpenter is the Director of Marketing at Spigit. Spigit integrates social collaboration tools into a SaaS enterprise idea management platform used by global Fortune 2000 firms to drive innovation.

Does Integrated Creativity Exist Today?

Where does it exist? D-Schools Or B-Schools?

by Idris Mootee

Someone asked me who the design head is in our company. I am not sure. My answer would be everyone. Everyone is a strategist and everyone is a designer (or design thinker) in our company. We understood long ago that strategy doesn't necessarily come from a strategist, and that a design idea doesn't necessarily come from a designer. Design wants to change the world and often ends up over-thinking and under-doing. Strategy wants to change the world but often is stuck in an old paradigm of management. Strategy, management and design are not what they used to be.

Strategy is distancing itself from competition and innovation is distancing itself from invention. Strategy now needs design and design needs strategy in order to have impact. I met John Maeda today and his idea of the difference between art and design is that design should be 'relevant' and art should be 'free', and design is 'producable' where art is 'imaginable'. Those are good observations.

Let's come back to business strategy for a moment, if strategy is predictable then innovation is unknown. Business schools are not very good at teaching people to see, imagine, conceptualize, and visualize the future. Design schools are very good at training people to imagine and ask questions, but terrible at understanding from a system view how the world works.

Strategys ultimate goal is to create power and exercise it to your benefit. Design's ultimate goal is to come up with solutions to a predefined problem. Art's goal is to ask questions and reflect on some of our paradoxes and express deeper concepts that sometimes words fail to do. If strategy is ultimately about effectively exercising power, the answers to these questions may convey a good deal about how we think strategically. There is ample ground to conclude that our ability simply to cope with, much less shape, a future of pronounced complexity, uncertainty, and turbulence will depend in large measure on the prevalence of strategic thinkers in our midst. Ideas and the ability to generate them seems increasingly likely, in fact, to be more important than capital and weapons.

We need thinkers that have the intellect to dissect the status quo, grasp the big picture, discern important relationships among events, understand causation and events, generate imaginative possibilities to inspire, and operate easily in the conceptual realm as well as understand execution and change. However, this kind of integrated creativity simply does not exist today.

As Maeda puts it, "Right now, our nation sees left-brain thinking, focused on logic and reasoning, as critical to future economic development. You can see this in the emphasis on the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) subjects. What's missing from STEM is right brain thinking -- embodied by what I call the key "IDEA" (Intuition, Design, Emotion, Art) subjects. We need both both halves of the brain to work together and channel brilliance through our hands, and to propagate ideas throughout our world." That's what we meant by the power of D-schools + B-schools.

---

Idris Mootee is the CEO of idea couture, a strategic innovation and experience design firm. He is the author of four books, tens of published articles, and a frequent speaker at business conferences and executive retreats.

Creating Innovation with Synthesis

by Jeffrey Phillips

I've read several books about innovation, and am reading another which I'll review shortly here on the blog, which talk about the importance of combining disparate skills or capabilities when innovating, or holding two diametrically opposing ideas and finding the happy medium. What should be obvious is that one of the most important skills from an innovation perspective is the act and insight of synthesis.

This is a real challenge, because most people are taught to break down problems into smaller, finite pieces and solve the smaller problems. We also work as specialists, with deep understanding of our core capabilities and knowledge, but often with little insights or knowledge beyond our education or jobs. So most people don't use synthesis skills on a regular basis, and are probably prone to avoiding synthesis since synthesis requires introducing a number of new and possibly unknown factors which may simply make the problem larger and more difficult.

Well, to a certain extent that true. However, innovation often happens when we take a step back, look at the bigger picture and combine two concepts or technologies or ideas that are seemingly unrelated and create something completely new. And when you boil it all down, that is what synthesis is all about.

Synthesis happens in all phases of innovation, starting from the very beginning. We usually like to start a project by collecting trends and synthesizing or combining them to create new, alternative futures (or scenarios). Rather than simply focus on one trend, it is more interesting (and a bit more difficult) to combine three or four active trends and project them into a 7 to 10 year future. The synthesis, or combination of these trends helps create a view of the future which we can use to identify new opportunities or emerging threats.

Synthesis happens in customer research. We often will engage ethnography or voice of the customer work to discover customer needs and wants. Talking with a number of customers or observing behavior can lead to a range of insights. Synthesizing or combining these insights and seeking the common themes or threads is what is really valuable. Insights or needs from one customer is interesting, aggregating insights and understanding them from a range of customers is valuable.

It's not at all unusual to use synthesis as a method to generate ideas. We can ask ourselves what would happen if we combined several capabilities or technologies, and what that combination would create. Clearly synthesis is a powerful tool in almost any phase of the innovation effort.

The way we generally use synthesis is almost always the same, however. Using synthesis requires a team to slow down, step back and look at a bigger picture - to gather more data and more disparate information or insights than may seem necessary. In many ways this may cloud the picture, but if your team is willing to do the extra work synthesizing the materials, or insights, then the results will be even better. Good innovators are synthesizers, and use synthesis techniques in all phases and stages of innovation. This fact is also one reason that many firms struggle to identify innovators - there are simply too few people who are good at synthesis and who use the tool regularly. As with any capability, misuse or lack of use causes the skill to atrophy. Perhaps one of the most important things you can do as an innovation leader is to find people who are comfortable with the approach or skill, or introduce it as a technique and train your teams on the approach.

---

Jeffrey Phillips is a senior leader at OVO Innovation. OVO works with large distributed organizations to build innovation teams, processes and capabilities. Jeffrey is the author of "Make us more Innovative", and innovateonpurpose.blogspot.com.