“Innovation” must feature in every CEO’s annual list of objectives, along with “profitability” and “growth”. It was No. 3 (out of five) for my client CEO.
I also often see it in companies’ so-called core values. They should work together, but often don’t – for two reasons, I think.
First, some people confuse “innovation” with “invention”. There are many situations, and many sectors, for which “innovation” sounds inappropriate and/or scary. Rather than look for radical leaps, leadership teams should focus on smaller, subtle tweaks and changes: simple ways of doing things better. Sometimes, to stop doing something is more effective than to start another.
Second, which was the case with the client I quote above, innovation is made to look like someone’s job, or a team’s responsibility. Far better to develop a culture in which it’s a contribution that everybody feels comfortable and able to make.
The most effective innovation is often the least disruptive. If a business can evolve as it grows, constantly improving, making things faster/easier/more enjoyable, and still feel right, relevant and that it stands for the same things it always has, then I would say it has delivered innovation in the best way.
In the case of the client I quote above, we’d already helped him achieve No. 5 (“brand”). When he asked me that question, I said we should look to align that brand work with his desire for greater innovation. Part of our brand strategy had defined the organisation’s style as “imaginative”. I suggested we substitute the word “imagine” for “innovate”.
It sounds a tiny shift, which it was in one way, but it worked because it spoke people’s natural language, and because it allowed them to recognise something in themselves.
So, the client introduced a programme simply called “Imagine”. Across the European operations, local offices held monthly meetings to address specific challenges and opportunities. “Imagine client XXX wanted us to do YYY…how would we respond?” Or “imagine we’ve been told to reduce our time to bring a new product to market by 10% – what would we do?” And so on.
Six months later, the programme had generated more than 300 ideas. Some went nowhere, of course, while some became development projects from which a number were adopted and made into part of the organisation’s growth.
But what was most impressive, and most enduring, wasn’t the number. It was that the conversation shifted from “innovation” – which had been flagged and understood as a department – and into “what if we…?” possibilities. The organisation didn’t suddenly become more creative, but it certainly became better connected internally. Because it had to.
It was a great demonstration of how the most effective innovation is not necessarily the most eye-catching; in fact, it often feels surprisingly unremarkable. It emerges when people, priorities and behaviours reinforce one another.
I’m becoming more convinced that there is a word for that.
Coherence.
(And yes, the CEO did achieve his No. 3.)