Uncategorized

10 New Year Resolutions for Innovation Leaders

Published date: December 31, 2012 в 2:00 am

Written by:

Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,,,,

“For last year’s words belong to last year’s language

and next year’s words await another voice.”

                                                                                     T.S. Eliot

In 2013, think inside the box and give your staff these precious gifts to drive innovation forward:

1. Give them Hope: Hope is defined as a positive motivational belief in one’s future; the feeling that what is wanted can be had; that events will turn out for the best. Without hope, tasks such as innovating become difficult if not impossible. Researcher Armenio Rego says, “Hope is important for innovation at work because creativity requires challenging the status quo and a willingness to try and possibly fail.  It requires some level of internal, sustaining force that pushes individuals to persevere in the face of challenges inherent to creative work.”

2. Give them Voice: Giving your employees a voice in matters boosts their creativity. Research shows that, over time, procedural fairness (giving people the opportunity to express their views) has a positive maintaining effect on creativity whereas stifling their views decreases creativity. Be consistent over time.  Don’t let distractions or a crisis cause you to change the rules. Give them a chance to speak about anything related to the innovation challenges you face – focus, methodology, budget allocation, team formation, and so on.  Most importantly, let them speak about the nature and value of their own ideas.

3. Give them a chance to Get Even: When managing individuals or teams, the time will come when you have to say ‘no’.  In that moment immediately after rejecting a person’s viewpoint, you want to let it sink.  Don’t try to minimize the impact by rationalizing the decision or by other means of making the person feel better.  Assign the rejected person right away to a new and important task.  Put them on a project where they can prove themselves and “get even.”  Let their creative juices flow.

4. Give them Accountability: Hold people accountable for what they do to improve innovation activities.  It is tempting to judge employee performance and reward them for innovation output.  This leads to the unwanted rivalry between employees.  Avoid this trap by looking at how managers set up “cockpit indicators” and use those indicators to make changes.  Have they created a closed loop feedback process to improve innovation continuously?

5. Give them a Method: For thousands of years, inventors have embedded five simple patterns into their inventions, usually without knowing it. These patterns are the “DNA” of products that can be extracted and applied to any product or service to create new-to-the-world innovations. Systematic Inventive Thinking (SIT) is an effective, repeatable, and trainable innovation process for organic growth.

6. Give them Constraints: Research in cognitive psychology confirms that creativity is enhanced by constraints, not freedom.  By limiting the number of variables under consideration from infinity to a finite number, we amplify our potential to come up with a creative solution. To throw away all constraints would be to destroy the capacity for creative thinking. It may sound counterintuitive, but giving employees too much freedom of thought leads to “idea anarchy” and a poor level of inventiveness.

7. Give them Skills:  Innovation is a skill, not a gift.  It can be learned by anyone regardless of where they are on the creativity scale.  If you want a more innovative company, you must have more innovative employees.  Train them in innovation as you would train other skill such as leadership, six sigma, or business ethics.

8. Give them Teams: Innovating takes teamwork.  Properly selected teams using a facilitated systematic method will outperform ad hoc teams using divergent, less structured methods such as brainstorming.  Create innovation “dream teams” with diverse talent from the commercial, technical, and customer-oriented parts of your business.

9. Give them Strategy: Innovation that is linked to strategy is seen as more realistic and supportable.  Innovating is efficient because you avoid creating ideas that are out of scope.  Companies get better results from innovation by targeting initiatives at the right places.

10. Give them an Innovation Culture:  An innovative corporate culture is one that supports the creation of new ideas and the implementation of those ideas.  Leaders need to help employees see innovation in the right light and create support systems to make it stick.  As fellow blogger Jeffrey Phillips notes, “A culture that sustains and supports innovation is one that encourages reasonable risk and uncertainty in the goal of larger, more profitable products and services.”

Let Me Speak!

Published date: December 27, 2012 в 4:11 pm

Written by:

Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,,,

Giving your employees a voice in matters boosts their
creativity.  New research shows that,
over time, procedural fairness (giving people the opportunity to express their
views) has a positive maintaining effect on creativity whereas stifling their views
decreases creativity.

Bernhard
Streicher* and his colleagues assigned twenty three University students randomly to one of two groups: treated fairly (getting a chance to voice their ideas) or treated unfairly (not given a chance to express themselves).  Students were given a different creativity task over four successive weeks.  They were told that a committee would rate their results.  After the completing each of the tasks, the students in the “fair group” were given the opportunity to explain their ideas and that the committee would consider this information in the evaluation.  The “unfair group” was not given this opportunity.  Ideas from both groups were evaluated and scored (blinded) using standard assessment techniques.

Over the four weeks of the study, students in the fair group maintained their creative output while students in the unfair group declined.  Interestingly, there was no difference in creativity between the groups in week one.  Over time, however, the effect of fairness kicked in.

For leaders of innovation teams, letting your employees express themselves helps maintain a culture of innovation.  But the key is to be consistent over time.  Don’t let distractions or a crisis cause you to change the rules. Give them a chance to speak about anything related to the innovation challenges you face: focus, methodology, budget allocation, team formation, and so on.  But most importantly, as the study points out, let them speak about the nature and value of their own ideas.

 
*Berhard Streicher, Eva Jones, Günter W. Maier, Dieter Frey, and Anneliese Spießberger, “Procedural Fairness and Creativity: Does Voice Maintain People’s Creative Vein Over Time?” Creativity Research Journal, 24(4) (2012): 358-363.

Innovation in Practice: Five Year Anniversary

Published date: December 21, 2012 в 8:46 am

Written by:

Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,,,,

This month marks the five year anniversary for Innovation in Practice,
and I want to thank my readers and supporters who follow it.  Blogging is rewarding, but challenging.  Most bloggers quit within two years for a variety of reasons: lack of motivation, lack of strategy, no one is reading, nothing to write about, or not enough time.  Fortunately, I have yet to be hit by any of these except perhaps the last one – time constraints – which will never go away.

My goal is to make this blog different from other innovation blogs and websites.  Instead of focusing on why innovation is important, I focus on how innovation happens.  My sense is corporate leaders realize already the importance of innovation, but they struggle with how to put it motion.  Calling a consultant is not the answer.  Learning the skill of innovation to be self sufficient is the answer.

The themes of this blog are:

  • Innovation can be learned like any other skill such as marketing, leadership, or playing the guitar.  To be an innovator, learn a method.  Teach it to others.
  • Innovation must be linked to strategy.  Innovation for innovation’s sake
    doesn’t matter.  Innovation that is guided by strategy or helps guide
    strategy yields the most opportunity for corporate growth.
  • Innovation is a two-way phenomena.  We can start with a problem and innovate solutions.  Or we can generate hypothetical solutions and explore problems that they solve.  To be a great innovator, you need to be a two-way innovator.
  • The corporate perspective, where innovation is practiced day-to-day, is what must be understood and kept at the center of attention.  This is where truth is separated from hype.

2012 was a special year for me.  My co-author, Jacob Goldenberg, and I completed our first book together (Simon & Schuster, June 2013), and we have two more in progress.  I am more engaged in innovation research and technology at the University of Cincinnati, and I continue to teach the SIT method there.  I am fortunate to continue working with various multi-nationals on their innovation programs.

2013 will be a year of change.  I plan to take this blog to the next level with a number of initiatives.  I plan to offer more resources for readers so they can learn the SIT method.  I hope to have resources for teachers and professors who want to include the SIT method in their creativity courses.  I plan to highlight and recognize the practitioners who put SIT to work in their organizations.

I want to thank Jacob Goldenberg, Amnon Levav, Yoni Stern, and the entire team at S.I.T..  Also, Christie Nordhielm and Marta Dapena-Baron at Big Picture Partners, Bob Cialdini at Influence at Work, Yury Boshyk at Global Executive Learning Network, the Washington Speakers Bureau, and my fellow faculty at the UC Lindner College of Business.

A special thanks to my family.

Rejection Breeds Creativity

Published date: December 10, 2012 в 10:38 am

Written by:

Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,,,,

New research from Johns Hopkins University suggests that having our ideas rejected tends to boost our creativity output.  Sharon Kim and her colleagues found that when most of us experience rejection, it can actually enhance our creativity, depending on how we respond to it.  The paper, titled “Outside Advantage: Can Social Rejection Fuel Creative Thought?” was recently accepted
for publication by the Journal of Experimental Psychology. It also
received a best-paper award at the Academy of Management (AOM)
conference held this month in Boston.

As reported by Behance:

In the first experiment, participants were given a series of personality questions and told they would be considered for participation in several group exercises in the future. When the participants returned to the laboratory a week later, some of them were asked to complete a few tasks before joining their group (inclusion), others were told that none of the groups had chosen them and they would need to complete their tasks independently (rejection).  When they calculated the results, the researchers found that “rejected” participants significantly outperformed those that were included in a group. Consider the difference between those who respond to rejection by sulking versus those who respond by rolling up their sleeves and thinking “I’ll show them.”

The results were conclusive: rejection breeds creativity, especially for those who consider themselves highly independent. In final a follow-up study, the researchers found the same trend using a different measurement of creativity.

For practitioners, how can this phenomena work to your advantage?  When
managing individuals or teams, the time will come when you have to say
‘no’.  In that moment immediately after rejecting a person’s viewpoint,
you want to let it sink.  Don’t try to minimize the impact by rationalizing the decision or by other means of making the person feel better.  But the key is to assign the rejected person right away to a
new and important task.  Put them on a project where they can prove themselves and
“get even.”  You want to let their creative juices flow.

“While it is never a comfortable experience, the feelings of rejection can actually help us access our more creative selves. Free from the expectations of group norms, we can push the limits of novelty. Moreover, we can enhance that ability by changing the way we respond to rejection. Instead of dwelling too much on the pain of being turned down or turned aside, consider the freedom you now have to explore new possibilities and less mainstream options.”

Marketing Innovation: The Activation Tool in Advertising

Published date: December 3, 2012 в 3:00 am

Written by:

Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,,,

Through a sea of clutter in the world of advertising, how do you get your message across?  One technique is to actively engage the viewer.  The Activation Tool invites the prospect to make an immediate action during the encounter with the ad, either in a physical way or mental way.  It is particularly useful when you want to: 1. make the target audience aware of a problem, or 2. make the target audience aware of the solution.  Consider this print example from the advertising agency Saatchi:


When recipients of this postcard place a hand over the image, their body heat changes the image to reveal a helpless animal covered in oil.

The tool is one of eight patterns embedded in most innovative commercials.  Jacob Goldenberg and his colleagues describe these simple, well-defined design structures in their book, “Cracking the Ad Code,” and provide a step-by-step approach to using them.  The tools are:
1. Unification
2. Activation
3. Metaphor
4. Subtraction
5. Extreme Consequence
6. Absurd Alternative
7. Inversion
8. Extreme Effort

Here is another example of the Activation Tool.  Students in my Innovation Tools course at the University of CIncinnati learn how to use these tools.  Students must develop an advertisement that conveys the value proposition of a product or service. This example conveys new features of a suitcase. Shown here is a mock-up of a print ad created by my students.  It requires the viewer to pull the luggage handle only to reveal the text inside.  Very clever.

Bag1
Bag2
 
 

Innovation Sighting: Music That Morphs Using Attribute Dependency

Published date: November 26, 2012 в 8:33 am

Written by:

Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,,,,

The Attribute Dependency Technique tends to produce innovations that are smart.  They seemingly know when to adjust or change in response to a change in something else.  It is one of five techniques of the SIT innovation method, and it accounts for a majority of new product innovations.  Attribute Dependency differs from the other techniques in that it uses attributes (variables) of the situation rather than components. Start with an attribute list, then construct a matrix of these, pairing each against the others. Each cell represents a potential dependency (or potential break in an existing dependency) that forms a Virtual Product. Using Function Follows Form, we work backwards and envision a potential benefit or problem that this hypothetical solution solves.

Consider this unique example of Attribute Dependency: music that changes in relation to another variable.  As reported by Springwise:

Since the advent of digital music we’ve seen a number of artists trying to offer something different to their fans.  UK musician Gwilym Gold’s Tender Metal is a downloadable piece that mutates each time the listener plays it.  The album is being released solely for the iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch.  When using the app, the components of the tracks of Tender Metal are seamlessly and subtly reconfigured each time they are played, meaning that each listening experience is different from the last. Users can choose to loop tracks in order to hear it constantly shift, or shake the phone to ‘regenerate’ the piece from its current permutation.  The innovation allows for endless reinterpretations of the music without it being performed live, ultimately offering a more immersive experience for fans.

Smartphones and tablets have become an important platform for these types of innovations because of their ability to track two important variables: location and time.  For example, the musical band, Bluebrain, created an album called National Mall that responds to the listener’s location as they journey down the Mall in Washington DC. “As users approach tagged locations, the audio content of the album will alter to interact with the environment, thus creating a unique listening experience every time the album is played en-route.”  According to Springwise:

For Bluebrain, this album is simply the start, with plans to release similar location-aware works for Prospect Park in Brooklyn, New York in the summer, followed by an album to be experienced whilst journeying along California’s Highway 1. Location-based technology is increasingly incorporated into products and services far and wide. If you haven’t already, this is one to try for yourself!

The combinations of time-based or location-based linkages to a smartphone are endless.  To get you started creating your own versions of these innovations, following the instructions located here.

Photo from http://www.lucreid.com

Will You Help Me?

Published date: November 19, 2012 в 3:00 am

Written by:

Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,,,

Asking for help may be the most powerful yet underutilized resource available for innovators.  Researchers Francis Flynn and Vanessa Bohns found that people grossly underestimate the rate that others are willing to help when asked.  As a result, we more often fail to ask for help when the likelihood was very high the other person would have said ‘yes.’  Consider this study they conducted at Columbia University:

“Participants in the study were positioned in the middle of the campus and instructed to approach random strangers for an escort to the university gym, which is located at the edge of campus (the Columbia University gym is subterranean and therefore difficult to find).  Before completing the task, participants were asked to estimate how many they would have to approach in order to get one to say “yes.”  On average, people estimated they would have to ask 7.2 people to get just one to agree.  In fact, they needed to approach just 2.3 strangers, on average. While people presumed that about 6 out of 7 of the individuals they approached would refuse to assist them, the reality was that approximately every other person was willing to agree to their request.
Why are we reluctant to ask for help?  The researchers suggest we focus too much on the other person’s cost of saying “yes” (in the form of their time and resources expended to comply with the request) versus their heavier social costs of saying “no.”  They also suggest we may be letting a time when someone said “no” weigh too heavily in our memory.  The fear of rejection looms large, keeping us from risking another bad experience.”

We also tend to overestimate how harshly others will judge us if we ask for help.  We fear asking for help may be seen as a sign of weakness.  The other person has power over you in that awkward moment when they can say yes or no to your request.  However, taking another view of the situation turns the tables.  When we view power and strength as the capacity to influence others to access their resources, help-seeking is not weak, but rather a “powerful act.”

Asking for help has many benefits as the researches point out.  First and foremost is you are highly likely to get the help you seek.   Second, you are giving the other person a “gift” in the form of an opportunity to feel helpful and valued.  Third, you will likely strengthen the relationship with the other person.  Finally, you avoid the life-long feeling of regret of not asking help.  Research suggests, in the long run, we regret more not asking for help than having a request rejected.
Successful innovation practitioners need help in many forms, including:
•    Advice and direction – where are the fertile areas for innovation
•    Participation in innovation programs and workshops
•    Evaluation of ideas and feedback about results
•    Support with both tangible and intangible resources

Need to innovate? Ask for help!

 

Marketing Innovation: Going to Extremes

Published date: November 5, 2012 в 8:41 am

Written by:

Category: Uncategorized

What do you say when you have nothing new to say?  That is the dilemma marketers face in mature categories where the product's features and benefits are well understood.  Even more challenging is when your product is virtually the same as the competition. Running ads to remind the market what they already know is wasteful and potentially annoying. But you can't risk being invisible to the market or you will lose brand awareness.

That's where the Extreme Effort Tool comes in handy.  The tool works by exaggerating the effort one must go to use the product.  Instead of promoting a particular benefit, the tool emphasizes the overall attractiveness and desirability.  It is an efficient way to keep your product in the mind's of the audience and stand out in a busy marketplace.

The
tool is one of eight patterns embedded in most innovative commercials. 
Jacob Goldenberg and his colleagues describe these simple, well-defined
design structures in their book, "Cracking the Ad Code," and provide a step-by-step approach to using them.  The tools are:
   1. Unification
   2. Activation
   3. Metaphor
   4. Subtraction
   5. Extreme Consequence
   6. Absurd Alternative
   7. Inversion
   8. Extreme Effort

 Here is an example from Kohler:

There are two ways to use the tool. One is to show the extreme effort customers will go to use or acquire the product, as in the Kohler commercial. The other is to show the extreme effort the company will go to provide or deliver the product.  This is particularly good for service companies as they can demonstrate, in an extreme, outlandish way, the lengths they will go to deliver that service.  Here is an example:

 

Innovation and the Base Rate

Published date: October 29, 2012 в 3:00 am

Written by:

Category: Uncategorized

PercentSuppose you're told that three out of four car accidents happen within 25 miles of your home.  Are you safer driving away from home?  Based on this statistic alone, most people would assume they are safer. But the picture changes when you consider an important part of this scenario called the base rate.  In probability and statistics, the base rate is the underlying probability unconditioned by prior events. Failing to consider the base rate leads to wrong conclusions, known as the base-rate fallacy. In this example, the base rate is the total percentage of driving that happens within 25 miles of your home.  Let's assume it is 90%.  Given the odds of an accident are only 75% in an area you spend 90% of your time, driving close to home is clearly safer.

Why does this matter in innovation?  Understanding the base rate with a product's performance can lead to hidden insights and opportunities.  Look at this example, as reported by CNET:

"Where exactly do most people accidentally ruin their iPhone?  If you guessed the toilet you'd be wrong, says a new survey.  According to device warranty provider Squaretrade, most people — 21 percent to be precise — damaged their device in the kitchen. The runner up, at 18 percent, is the living room, followed by the bathroom at 16 percent."

Well that's fine, but now let's consider the base rate: how much total time do we spend using an iPhone in the kitchen versus other places?  Assume people spend an average of 10% of their iPhone usage in the kitchen.  Viewed this way, the rate of iPhone accidents in the kitchen seems high. We would have to conclude the kitchen is not a safe place to use a smartphone.  At the other end, let's assume instead we spend 30% of our cellular calling time in the kitchen. In light of the base rate, the kitchen is actually a safe haven for iPhones.

Iphone in plasticFor innovation practitioners, here is the point: when you see disparities between the point estimate and the base rate, you should ask why.  Perhaps there is an opportunity to innovate a solution.  If the iPhone is at risk in the kitchen, perhaps an innovation technique like Task Unification could help.  Is there another component in the vicinity of the kitchen (The Closed World) that could be recruited to help reduce the risk of breakage?  If so, you may have a nice commercial opportunity.

If the iPhone is safer in the kitchen, you should also ask why.  Are there features, user habits, or design aspects that make it safer?  Can they be generalized and embedded into other smartphones?  Can they be used in other things like kitchen tools?  Once again, you may have a nice commercial opportunity on your hands – thanks to the base rate.

The bottom line is that ignoring the base rate can lead to wrong judgments.  Instead, take advantage of this often hidden gem.  Peek into the base rate in any product scenario to see what possible opportunities lie within.

Get our innovation model that has worked for 1000+ companies.

    No thanks, not now.