Innovation Perspectives - Educating Tomorrow's Workforce

This is the tenth of several 'Innovation Perspectives' articles we will publish this week from multiple authors to get different perspectives on 'What product or sector is in desperate need of innovation?'. And to close off the week, here is my perspective on education:

by Braden Kelley


"We need our children to be Masters of Mystery and Einsteins of Insight." - Braden Kelley

When I first saw this topic I wanted to write about education innovation, but I resisted when a couple of the contributing authors chose this topic. I wrote about the publishing industry instead, but then this week I came across a Phil McKinney article and had the opportunity to meet Sir Ken Robinson, and my passions for an education revolution were stirred.

We sit at the nexus of amazing new education technology capabilities, the globalization of work, and an incredible transformation in the needs of employers. The path forward is not the same as the road behind, but our education system is proceeding as if it were.

Instead of pursuing the current education mantra of more, better, faster, we need to instead rethink how we educate our children because we need to prepare them for a different world. A world in which flexibility, adaptibility, creativity, and problem solving will be prized ahead of the deep technical knowledge that is fast becoming a commodity and easily available.

I've said here on Blogging Innovation that the keys to business success are insight and execution. We are ending an era of incredible business focus on execution excellence and are entering an era of an increasing business focus on insight. Excellent execution will always be valued and required, but more and more components of this execution are shifting from the developed world to the lower-wage developing world.

We are currently in a race to the middle when it comes to standard of living as the developing countries like China, India, Brazil and others climb up the pyramid and developed countries like the United States, Italy, Greece and others slide down. Those developing countries wanting to stay near the top of the flattening standard of living pyramid will have to re-tool their education systems to to prepare their populations to grab as big a share as possible of the higher-wage insight-driven jobs.

Here is an interesting chart from a Newsweek-Intel Study reformatted by Phil McKinney:


Looking at the differences in perspectives between the American and Chinese respondents in the research, I came to two possible conclusions:

1. I am Chinese
   
2. The United States (and many other developed countries) are headed in the wrong direction and better change course on education fast

You may think that my views on education are too business-focused, but look even the arts are being globalized (look at Cirque du Soleil).

I believe that we underestimate children's ability to understand the real world and I think that the education system and the business world need each other more than they realize. We need to re-imagine our public-private partnerships and expectations when it comes to education, and we need to start educating today's young kids for tomorrow's world.

The fact is that we are pushing the limits of taking today's understanding of science to improve productivity an standard of living. Going forward we will need to break through currently held physical and natural limits and an expanded understanding of our physical and natural worlds. This will require a new generation of scientists and workers who can synthesize approaches from different cultures and disciplines, that are masters of creative approaches to problem soliving, and that have the entrepreneurial spirit to breakthrough perceived barriers. Are these the kind of students we're eduating?

What kind of students is your country educating?

As an added bonus, if you haven't seen it, I encourage to check out Sir Ken Robinson's video on "Creativity versus Literacy" here:



You can check out all of the 'Innovation Perspectives' articles from the different contributing authors on 'What product or sector is in desperate need of innovation?' by clicking the link in this sentence.

---

Braden Kelley is the editor of Blogging Innovation and founder of Business Strategy Innovation, a consultancy focusing on innovation and marketing strategy. Braden is also @innovate on Twitter.

China vs. USA in Innovation

by Jeffrey Phillips

There's an interesting new survey out from Newsweek about innovation. The survey compares the attitudes and expectations about the US and China in regard to innovation. In the survey there are some relatively unexpected differences and some safe assumptions and conclusions drawn.

On the safe side, it's not surprising that a majority of people in the US and China believe innovation will be even more important in the next few decades than now. Most people understand the increasing rate of change and the need for new products and services to meet both growing consumer demands and the increasing constraints placed on our consumption. We need both new products and services and new solutions to growing demands for more energy and a cleaner planet. The survey also shows that we in the US have less respect for our innovation capabilities than the Chinese population does. In the survey we consistently underestimate our capabilities, or the Chinese are overestimating us.

But what was really interesting to me was presented in the middle and toward the end of the survey. The first item that caught my attention was this question: What are the factors that you believe are causing the US to fall behind China from an innovation perspective?

The answers were: Schools lagging in math and science education (42%), American government not doing enough to support innovation (17%), American business not investing enough in innovation (16%), Don't know (14%) and American workers lacking skills to be technologically innovative (11%). According to this survey, then, we in the US are slipping behind because our (1) education system is failing to create innovative, creative workers or (2) our government isn't doing enough to support innovation or (3) businesses aren't investing in their workers or innovation.

What incentives did the government create or offer to Google to become the dominant and most innovative search engine? College dropouts created Napster, which was used as a model to disrupt the entire music distribution business. My concerns are that too often we sit passively by waiting for some permission or some program which will allow us to innovate, rather than simply taking the initiative. Waiting for the government to select the "best" technologies or waiting for the educational system to do a better job educating is not an answer. Yes, we need better education systems but we need them to turn out creative, insightful people, not just engineers and scientists. Innovation has so many possibilities and facets that turning out more scientists and engineers isn't necessarily going to make the US more innovative.

Let's reinforce this point using the next slide in the presentation. The title of the slide is American and Chinese parents disagree about which skills their children will need to drive innovation. The first two categories sum it up.

American families favor more science and technology education for their kids (American families chose this option 52% of the time, Chinese parents 9%) while Chinese parents chose creative approaches to problem solving (American families chose this option 18% of the time while Chinese parents chose this option 45% of the time). We in the US are far too fixated on science and technology as a driver for new product creation, when in fact too often the engineers and scientists in an organization can act as a block or barrier to innovation, since they are too focused on what's feasible, functional and practical. We, in the US and in China, need to educate our children and our workers on creative problem solving skills, to have them reach beyond the obvious to attain new ideas for new products, services and capabilities. One thing I think we can safely assume is that there will be an enormous number of scientists and engineers worldwide. No country or firm will corner the market on those skills. However, the number of people who are truly gifted at thinking creatively and solving difficult problems and challenges is far smaller. Let's corner the market on those skills and then find the people necessary to build and deliver the physical products and services.

We run the risk of expecting innovation to be driven by a government bureaucracy or waiting for specific dictates from government or businesses as to the "chosen" technologies or industries. What we need is more initiative from every sector. We need to improve education and educational opportunities for our children and demand more depth and breadth in their education, not just focusing on more math and science but also more creative and dynamic thinking to help them solve new and thornier problems. We need to increase the training for our existing workforce to shift their skills to new types of work and opportunities. But we can't wait for permission and we can't expect a behemoth of a federal government to make the right selections. What we can hope for is that it creates an environment where innovation and creativity can flourish.

---

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.

Brand America Is Ba(ra)ck

Susquehanna River, Asylum Township, Bradford County, PA

by Kevin Roberts

I've written in April and June this year on Brand America, which had became deeply unpopular through the decade. I had put my case for new actions and new messaging to The Pentagon through to Paper magazine. I tell people that what made the USA great is still there in abundance - a tremendous human energy, ideals of a better future, and the capacity to be the force for good in the world.

While the reality that President Barack Obama is only human has only recently dawned, and his popularity is now ranked at about 53% approval, his inspirational message already has delivered benefits to the USA as far as the ROW (Rest Of World) is concerned. In the week that Fortune magazine named Steve Jobs as CEO of the Decade, FutureBrand, which ranks country brands, has announced that the United States is back on top as the country that most people want to visit and do business with.* NY, DC and LA are each powerhouse cities (add San Francisco, Chicago, Dallas, Miami and Cincinnati and many more). The countryside is unbelievably diverse and historic.

This is hope and dreams made real for the Administration. The President has the near-impossible job - everything to deal with - wars, economic crisis, health care, environment, the future of America. He's accountable for it all. So hats off for this achievement - restoring international preference. Millions of people came through Ellis Island to make a better world. America is a vast and beautiful country with idealistic values, beliefs and principles. Barack Obama has the ability to be a focal point for the aspirational dreams of Americans, and to people everywhere - to be the best they can be. The world is noticing. Here's what Paul, who nominated America as his Lovemark, said back in 2004:


"America is the greatest of all my Lovemarks. It stands for freedom, liberty and choice. Whether you agree or disagree with the brand, it gives you the freedom to speak out, to take control, and make it better. If you invest everything you have in America, it is the only brand that will truly reward you."


These are big ideals to live for. A footnote, of the top five countries, I've lived in Canada and Australia, (2nd and 3rd) and presently have homes in the USA, New Zealand, and France (1st, 4th and 5th). The opportunity is clearly there for Great Britain (8th - also home!).

*From Futurebrand: From best overall country brands and top brands within regions, to detailed rankings of the top ten brands across a breadth of categories including Authenticity, History, Art & Culture, Resort & Lodging Options, Ease of Travel, Safety, Rest & Relaxation, Natural Beauty, Beach, Nightlife, Shopping, Fine Dining, Outdoor Activities & Sports, Friendly Locals, Families, Value for Money, Rising Star, Standard of Living, Ideal for Business, Easiest to Do Business In, New Country for Business, Conferences, Extend a Business Trip, Political Freedom, Most Like to Live In, Quality Products, Desire to Visit/Visit Again, Advanced Technology and Environmentalism.

The year's CBI tracks the perceptions of approximately 3,000 international business and leisure travelers from nine countries—the US, the UK, China, Australia, Japan, Brazil, the UAE, Germany and Russia. The insights from an expert panel of 47 tourism, development, policy and academic professionals are also featured. This sample has a margin of error of ±1.8% at the 95% confidence level.


Image Credit: nicholas_t - http://www.flickr.com/photos/nicholas_t/

---

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.

Inspiring Innovation

by Robert F. Brands

From small startups to world leadership organizations, innovation is a must for business to thrive and perpetuate.

How can your organization inspire innovation?

With long-term commitment to progress of the process, leaders must drive the journey from start through finish. Clearly-defined expectations towards the progress, as well as a definitive end-result are imperative elements involved. As a leader, one must inspire and drive the team. Regular meetings and dedication to touching on progress week-by-week are mandatory, and a clearly-outlined definition of the desired culture of the company helps each member of an organization understand innovative patterns, inspiring them to work together towards the success of innovation.

As a perfect and current example, the Fifth Annual Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) Meeting attracted top CEOs and world leaders this week in New York; this year's theme heavily focusing on innovation as a top priority and driver towards worldwide economic recovery and growth. Setting the tone, President Barack Obama opened on Tuesday with a speech, mentioning:

"We need new businesses to unleash new innovations. We need new collaborations to advance prosperity."

Those words were spoken just a day following the White House's release of a white paper that outlined a national innovation strategy.

Founded as a nonprofit, nonpartisan sector of the William J. Clinton Foundation, this year's organization event held 960 guests from 84 countries. The key themes included harnessing innovation, strengthening infrastructure, building human capital, and financing an equitable future. Climate change, women's rights, and health care are some of the topics guests were to assess in brainstorming targeted and profitable ways to improve each situation.

A panel on "Approaches to Innovation" was moderated by a BusinessWeek editor, and organized by John Kao, founder of the Institute of Large Scale Innovation at consultancy Deloitte offered an "innovation boot camp" to attendees. Kao stated that Innovation is "not just creativity. It is specifically about creativity that has value."

When Inspiring Innovation, key elements in defining the desired culture within your organization and perpetuating Innovation within your organization include:

Understanding the goal and what it will take to reach it. Whether it's a new product per year or a dollar amount in sales, setting goals and knowing what it will take to reach it helps your company plan out the resources and budgets needed. Identifying key players and leaders within your organization is crucial to building your innovation team, as their roles and attitudes will trickle down and affect their teams as well, and your leaders can make or break the innovation process.

As a leader, you must create motivation and proactively push for a successful Innovation program. Leadership by example creates both material and emotional support for your team to push towards the goal. Stay simple and focused on constant communication in regards to Innovation visions. Allow for open communication to be a two-way street and knock down barriers keeping silos apart by creating teams that are cross functional amongst departments that don't usually interact. In doing so, creativity, cooperation and change will remain at an all-time high.

---

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.

A Look at Obama's Innovation Strategy

"History should be our guide. The United States led the world's economies in the 20th century because we led the world in innovation. Today, the competition is keener; the challenge is tougher; and that is why innovation is more important than ever. It is the key to good, new jobs for the 21st century. That's how we will ensure a high quality of life for this generation and future generations. With these investments, we're planting the seeds of progress for our country, and good-paying, private-sector jobs for the American people."

-President Barack Obama, August 5, 2009


by Bob Preston

I've never been a big fan of pyramid diagrams, mainly because I think they are trite and overused. Every time I see a PowerPoint presentation using a pyramid to represent 'strategy' I immediately lose attention for the topic, thinking to myself, here we go again. I just returned from the World Business Forum in New York City where I listened to some of the world's most powerful leaders and top thinking business gurus. Over the course of the two day event there were several highly successful presenters who had diagrams to represent their philosophies and strategies. Which shape? That's right, a pyramid.

About two weeks ago (September 2009) I heard that the Obama administration released their Strategy for American Innovation: Driving Towards Sustainable Growth and Quality Jobs. It peaked my interest because I write about collaboration, a fundamental requirement in the process of innovation. So I looked it up online, downloaded the document, and saved it into an electronic file to read sometime on an airplane. While flying back from New York tonight I had a chance to take a look. In a time of deep recession and jobs leaving the US workforce due to unemployment and off-shoring, I'm surprised that more noise has not been made about the plan. Perhaps the reason for lack of attention is that it was released in the midst of the health care debate? Maybe it was overlooked because of the Chicago Olympic bid? Or maybe the shadow cast by the economic recession is so great that the prospect of innovation and recovery seems far fetched?


Obama's Innovation Strategy builds on $100 billion of stimulus funds targeted to support and establish government policies as building blocks of innovation. A diagram accompanies the plan description on the first page to depict the various "building blocks." The form of the diagram? Pyramid. It didn't do a lot to peak my interest but I plowed ahead through the document anyway. Here's what I learned.


The strategy plan has three parts as follows:

1. Invest in the Building Blocks of American Innovation
2. Promote Competitive Markets that Spur Productive Entrepreneurship
3. Catalyze Breakthroughs for National Priorities

The paragraphs dedicated to these three parts read like a 'to do' list, the respective items beginning with every action oriented adjective in the book. Not that I don't appreciate the content and effort to push Americans, but it made me chuckle because of the carefully selected adjectives used to describe how the administration will jump start innovation: restore, educate, build, develop, promote, encourage, support, improve, unleash (you have to love that one), drive, harness. Really, check out 'The Pyramid' and see for yourself.



The Innovation Strategy Plan seems more like a vision for the future as opposed to a true plan. It also comes off as a justification piece for the billions of dollars in funding provided by Recovery Act - how, why, and where economic stimulus investments are being made. I find it to be an interesting topic because it is unclear to me what level of involvement the government should be playing - laissez-faire or stringent oversight. Obama's plan seeks to "strike a balance" by investing in building blocks, primarily through the economic stimulus, that only the government can provide in sectors of national importance. Ultimately the tip of the pyramid is a new level of innovation that will stimulate growth and generate quality jobs. Bring on the innovation, lose the pyramid.

For more on this topic, check out Cynthia Duval's perspective.

---

Bob Preston is a blogger and frequent speaker on collaboration within the enterprise for increased productivity and innovation. He is Chief Collaboration Officer at Polycom, Inc., a leading supplier of voice, video, and telepresence collaboration solutions.

Mandatory Excellence

There has been a debate in the United States over the last several years around whether or not the government should institute a program of mandatory government service like other countries in the world.

In most countries this takes the form of military service, but some allow work in other government capacities to satisfy the obligation.

The United States does have mandatory government service, it's called jury duty but it probably amounts to only a number of days over the course of a lifetime. In addition the government has implemented schemes to help address acute shortages. AmeriCorps was founded to help alleviate the shortage of teachers in the inner cities by forgiving some or all of participants college loans.

But I have never heard anyone pitch mandatory government service as an opportunity to create competitive advantage.

Instead, governments engage in repeated wealth transfers to consulting companies for consulting projects that too often don't translate into sustainable results. What would happen if a government instead harnessed what citizens were truly good at for long enough to affect real accountable results in service to their country?

I write this not to advocate mandatory government service, but to call attention to the fact that countries and regions are going to increasingly compete in order to preserve their standard of living, and that those without a public sector innovation strategy will lose out to those who find a way to continuously become more efficient.

After all, every government must collect tax dollars to operate, but the more efficient a government can be, the fewer tax dollars it needs to collect in order to provide basic services. The lower the resulting tax rate the more profitable companies can be and the more likely they will remain in or be attracted to locate in that country.

As a result, governments should look at all possibilities of improving their efficiency through government innovation. Innovation, after all, is not only a necessary or desirable goal for businesses but for governments and individuals as well.

Could an innovative mandatory government service program be one way to achieve competitive advantage?