Innovation Culture
When we talk about culture in organisational settings, we often talk about what goes on within and between the people in a particular organisation. When reading about innovation you can come across the concept innovation culture or comparable expressions. So, one might ask: “What goes on within and between people in innovative organisations? ”One way of answering, is splitting for innovation important variables into three categories: how to, want to, and permission to.
The members in an organisation must have the necessary knowledge and skills needed for innovating. Some of these skills vary between fields, but there are also common skills that all organisations need. Such common skills can be for example methods for project management, so called sprints and knowing the vocabulary needed for discussing innovation. Some of these skills can be acquired e.g. on this website, using the IRM-Tool. And, of course, innovation is also possible without the skills and knowledge we might consider “necessary”.
Innovation must be experienced by everyone – at least by everyone expected to contribute – as something that the organisation wants and welcomes. No one can be told to innovate. It is up to the leaders and managers to create an atmosphere where everyone wants to put forward their own ideas or develop others’ ideas further. A prerequisite for putting forward ideas is that there are forums for such communication (cf. management), and, e.g., sufficient communication skills for expressing them (cf. How to).
Of course, no organisation will forbid innovating, but does that guarantee opportunity for it? For example, if one employee gets time to prepare presentations on new initiatives to the management, but another does not, does the latter then have opportunity for innovation activities? Worth asking is also whether all organisation members are involved in innovation at the same stage of the process? It is probably safe to say that the later a person is involved, the less that person will be able to influence the process. Reward systems can also affect the perceived permission to participate: does the organisation give rewards for success only, or are failures also rewarded? ? Rehn describes this in more detail.
Decision making can also be considered:
Do employees get feedback from superiors concerning decisions taken?
Can work be re-organised fast enough, so that all involved persons can participate?
This comic illustrates the question about including all organization members in the innovation work.
Inspiration for Discussions and Reflection
What techniques does your organisation use for communicating about development needs and other innovation activities? Would you need to learn new tools?
Compare: ”If the only tool you have is hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail”
What can the proverb below tell us about innovation cultures in general and about motivation in particular? How do the issues in the proverb, or the absence of them, show in your organisation?
Compare: “The nail that stands up gets hammered down”
What can the proverb below tell us about innovation cultures in general and about opportunity to participate in particular? Does your organisation engage all employees in innovation processes?
Compare: “Children should be seen, not heard”
R or D? What are you organised for?
Research and Development
Innovating is, in some organisations, often connected with the concepts Research and Development, R&D. The acronyms R&D are so commonly used together, that many of us do not think about the letters separately. This of course is not the case in organisations, or parts of organisations, whose core activities are connected with research or product development. Such organisations, for example universities, research institutes and similar, are well aware of what they work with, and are organised for that particular work. But in other, say universities of applied science, where the activities often are a bit of both, the distinction is not so clear. How is it in your organisation? And why would it be important to see a difference between the two?
It is maybe not important to distinguish between the two, but some stereotypical descriptions of R&D can make it easier to be aware of which of the two – or both, or a mixture – your organisation works with. The examples below, paragraph D and paragraph R, are written for heuristic, or pedagogical, purposes, and are not to be taken as fact-based descriptions.
The nature of the work in an organisation has implications for the way the activities are, or maybe should be, managed and lead. Research can probably not be managed in the same way as product development.
And maybe there is a difference between if an organisation hopes for incremental innovation or some other type of innovating activities? Work with incremental innovation is probably fairly similar to product development.
D
Some companies launch a new model of their product every year. Car manufacturers is one example. But does each new model of a car include new innovations? Are all the relatively small improvements in e.g. interior design, innovations, or are they a result of a product development process?
Since a new car model is introduced every year, we can safely assume that the designers e.g. have strict schedules to follow – when does a new design have to be ready for it to make it in time for production? The designers and/or engineers working with development, can focus on improving details that would be better than in the present version of the product. The designers can work for suppliers or manufacturers. The designers report to their superiors who in turn are in contact with their customers, or for example sales people. Formal communication channels are respected. Deadlines must be met. Pictures and other data of the new model have to be available in time, so that sales and marketing can begin their work. A smooth process and flow are crucial. There is no room for mistakes.
Alexander West discusses circular vs linear innovation processes. He also focuses on when to include outsiders and why including a diverse set of people can be productive. Listen here
R
A company working with a longer time frame can work with less strict schedules. It is easy to see that an organisation doing research on a physical impediment cannot be given deadlines. There is no way of setting a schedule for when a cure for colour blindness must be ready. Not all steps in a research process can be foreseen, as the graphic From Log to Cruise Ship illustrates. The combustion engine, for example, could not be invented – or at least not fully taken advantage of – before scientists had learned to produce suitable fuels.
Learning and experimentation are important for research organisations. If you want to learn from experimentation, you sometimes fail. It is thus very important that members of innovative organisations feel that they can fail, and that they are not punished for failing. People who are afraid of failing, do not try new things, they do not suggest new methods of working or present their ideas in general.
Inspiration for Discussions and Reflection
