The Leadership Crisis In Innovation
Today's Digitalised Business Environment has caused a crisis in leadership within most large global organisations. Many CxOs have come to realise that they and their colleagues in their Senior Management Teams are part of the problem. Though some remain incredibly blind to this fact.
Why is it that business leaders actually inhibit their organisations' efforts to transform, digitalise and innovate? There are many possible answers to this question, though for American and European companies, one of the answers may be that the background of the leaders dose not predispose them towards innovation. Too many organisations are dominated by people with Accounting or Legal backgrounds and unfortunately these professions tend to lean towards conservatism, compliance and enforcement of rules, rather than trying to break the mould or implement business and cultural change.
Another possible answer is that most management teams don't actually function as teams. They are too often populated by people who are locked into functional siloes and turf wars. So whilst it would be simplistic and cruel to accuse them of all conforming to the often quoted idea that only selfish monomaniacs reach these positions, the environments in which they work often pushes them to behave a like they are. This makes it difficult to build the collaborative, innovative and risk taking culture needed to survive and grow in the new digital market place.
So various people have been researching what it takes to become an Innovative Leader. See HBR and the Conference Board.
A Model Of the Innovator as Leader
The diagram below summarises the findings of a couple of pieces of research and the author's own experience. So it may not be perfect, but it at least represents some contemporary thinking on the subject and, hopefully, is useful.
Whilst it may be too simplistic to state that an innovative mindset requires a leader to look both outwards and inwards, this does underpin a lot of what is needed. In the model, VALUE, CURIOSITY and CONSTRAINTS interact in an almost chicken or egg situation (which came first?). A lot depends upon context and situation as to which is the starting place but a sense of each is crucial to an Innovator.
VALUE is key because understanding what is valuable to your organisation and its customers (or other stakeholders if it is a Not for Profit one). Almost everything that an organisation does, should be aligned to optimising value, i.e. growing, preserving or protecting it. This includes innovation. So it is fundamental to understand what value means to he organisation and to its customers. Of course if a leader is thinking about starting a new enterprise, then some opportunity identification may be required first.
Understanding the CONSTRAINTS that an organisation operates under and what currently dictates market behaviour in its industry or sector is also fundamental, because this drives the Why questions? Why do we do things this way? why do customers behave like that? why do we not do this. Why are the constraints there and why don't we do things differently? (The why questions are sometimes called the 5 whys or 7 whys and basically, is a process of asking why enough times to get to the root of current behaviour) which then leads to What if questions such as What if this constraint did not exist? what would happen if we did this differently? etc. which lead to some theories about what works now and what would work in the future if the rules were changed, as well as some options for how to make these changes actually happen, which are postulates about how to disrupt the market place and are sometimes called BIG RULES.
CURIOSITY comes in from the other angle of observing what happens in the market place and asking why people do things. It also involves consciously looking outwards into different industries and disciplines through networking, attending industry events and carrying out research to see how they tackle different problems and then thinking about what lessons can be applied to your industry or even would spur new products or a startup business. It has been observed that many innovators are T shaped, as opposed to I shaped. I shaped people, only think about their discipline and nothing else. T shaped people, whilst having deep knowledge in their own area, also exhibit curiosity about understanding wider practices outside their specialism and applying them in a joined up manner. Curiosity identifies opportunities and asks why as well as what value can be derived from change.
These 3 themes of Understanding Value, Reviewing Constraints and Curiosity lead to the development of Vision. However, in most cases it requires an energised team to deliver a vision and successful innovative leaders involve the team in building a SHARED VISION of how things could be. This is an essential step in TEAM BUILDING as it helps motivate the team and encourages it to amplify any innovative efforts. Though a complementary aspect of Innovators is speed. Getting to market with an innovation, delivers most value if an enterprise is either first or second to market with a well targeted product. Hence VELOCITY of delivery is important, though it needs to be tempered with actually meeting a real customer need and being reliably and economically deliverable. This leads to the use of EXPERIMENTATION to test out the understanding of these needs as well as what actually works, and may involve exploration of OPTIONs to optimise the product. VELOCITY is also re-inforced by agreeing mutual stretch targets with the product delivery team. Note, the term mutual is important, as this is part of sharing and building trust. If the team buys into the targets, then trust and openness are more likely to be encouraged, leading to better team performance.
Other aspects of TEAM BUILDING and successful product development include DIVERSITY of the team and fostering an information based culture of decision making. Diversity in the actual structure of the team involves not only building a multi-functional team involving the internal disciplines needed to design, develop, deliver and market the product, but also where practicable a customer element. It also may include multi-cultural, multi-age aspects to encourage creative vitality by encouraging multi faceted view points within the product development process.
Adopting an Information based approach, means that the team must be INFORMATION RICH. Where it does not have information to support its decisions, experiments, trails, prototypes or other research should be conducted and the knowledge gained should be readily shared to support both effective and informed decision making, but also foster trust and understanding within the team. Though sometimes it has to be recognised that it may not be practicable to collect data before a product is launched. In this case, the team may have to either build features into the product which collect the data, supporting future product iterations, or use other means such as agile marketing to test hypotheses.
The last bricks in the model are SIMPLICITY and SYSTEMS THINKING. Taking an end-to-end view of how a product is delivered, enables the product team to anticipate likely problems as well as analyse operational performance and customer experience during delivery, so that continuous incremental improvements can be built into the product, refining its capabilities and delivery. SIMPLICITY, is a principle that should be applied as far as practicable. The product itself should be made as simple as practicable to deliver the value required by the customer. The delivery processes should be kept simple too, ensuring that activity is concerned with delivering value or experience. If complexity has to be increased to add value, e.g. by operating in multiple markets, then the team should look to see what else can be simplified.
Conclusion
A leader needs his or her team to perform, because the leader can not do all the innovation him (her) self. The Team will only work if it is empowered, informed and enthused. so innovative leaders can set the context and the challenge, ensure that their teams are well informed, but also challenge them on value and pace. However, this does mean avoiding death marches, mountains of red tape and punishing the innocent, when things don't go as planned. The old ways have to die.
