Organizations are facing increasing a dilemma in how they organize and manage within their systems and structures.
They are being forced to deal in increasingly complexity and environmental turbulence and ‘adapting the appropriate response’ remains increasingly a difficult one to master, within the existing regime and structures.
On the one hand the value in stability is still essential, working within specific routines and practices gives a clear ‘path dependence.’
This allows for efficiency and effectiveness to be constantly at practice, constantly building the problem-solving processes, so as to master tasks in complex environments to resolve ‘known’ problems in ‘given’ ways.
We need to become increasingly fluid but how and why?
Today most innovation is focused on creating new products or services. These new innovations frequently change or modify operating models and business models, often not by deliberate design.
We’d stipulate that most innovation should be focused on updating and changing business models constantly and with increasing focus. With this focus new products and services become by-products or outcomes that support or sustain new business models for driving greater lasting sustaining competitive advantage.
In short, most innovation should be focused on creating new business models, with new products or services serving as enablers to intentional business model innovation, rather than the other way round. This is what we mean by flipping perspectives.
Critically we have to become far more comfortable with constant, ongoing change and aligning this into new innovation and business models. This move to positive change is discussed here, recommending a movement that allows the changes we need within our organizations to become more fluid in their adaption, for leveraging and exploiting innovation in new, far more compelling ways.
As we consider the interplay between innovation, business models and change, it becomes clear that many companies have a definition of innovation that’s far too narrow.
Increasingly we need to rethink the scope, depth and breadth of innovation possibilities, as well as the secondary implications of innovation.
Ignoring this broader definition of innovation means we can never achieve all of the possible benefits innovation has in store.
We believe ignoring the breadth and depth of innovation can also allow competitors and new entrants to disrupt your position or industry. Fortunately, some of these definitions have been created for us. Our responsibility is to understand the definitions and their implications, not stay constrained but seek and explore the broader options this can provide.
There is always a certain impact that innovation brings, it should change habits, alter perceptions, improve our lives or alter the way we work and think.
Each change brought about by innovation does have different impact effects upon three important market constituents: customers, the markets and the industries themselves but also and often totally under-appreciated, internally on the innovator driving the change.
We need to understand the broader scope of our innovation
Until we understand the scope and impact of innovation we can’t fully grasp the nature and amount of change that innovation can unleash. It can alter businesses, shift markets and challenge customers to move away from their existing thinking into adopting this new product or service.
Innovation should be the primary source of real change. Often when exciting new innovations occur they have the power to significantly change our habits, and choice of product, preferences and ways we set about our daily lives.
Yet why is it we often ignore the power of change when we design innovation?
We often fail to fully appreciate the changes that are occurring from the innovation we produce, it often seems an afterthought, there is this lead and lag effect and needs, firstly recognition and then addressing in how we manage innovation going forward.
In a recent series introduced initially and given a feature of the week prime spot on http://www.innovationexcellence.com on June 7, 2015 we discussed the importance of the emerging interplays. This series will be re-produced here as it is a important concept to consider all the aspects within any innovation interplay.
Thinking about the managing of change has been occupying my mind in recent weeks. It will continue into the next few weeks as Jeffrey Phillips of OVO Innovation and I have co-authored a White Paper called “the critical interplay among innovation, business models and change” as it rolls out.
In this we provide a foundation document that highlights the important interplay between innovation, business models and change. To launch this, we have kicked off our thinking with a feature of the week on Innovation Excellence introducing the themes that have multiple interplays we often fail to exploit when it comes to innovation. The opening post is entitled “the interplay surrounding innovation”. Please take aread
Our opening argument resolves around the recognition of change as part of an interplay
We argue that we are failing to manage the different and multiple interplays that are constantly taking place when innovation occurs. We are often ignoring them and failing to extract the best or optimal value out of the innovation we are introducing. The change effect is often being ignored.
So where are we focusing upon to make sure we are developing the right proficiencies and abilities we will need to manage our innovations of the future? For me innovation capabilities and competencies needs to be far more adaptive and aligned to the different emerging skills we should be bringing to bear, so we are able to find better innovating solutions for our collective futures.
The issue is this: if we do want to reshape much of what we are struggling with today – poor growth, diminishing futures, disconnected communities, stagnating economies or ones struggling to emerge from devastated and austerity measures inflicted upon them – we do need to change our skill sets to reflect a more realistic and up to date need to navigate and transform knowledge to tackle these. Often our present skills are not equipped to manage in these more “disruptive” environments. Continue reading →
In a recent article I submitted to Social Innovation Europe, who are building and streamlining the social innovation field in Europe, I made some arguments against national borders for social innovation, actually I’d say any innovation, even in its organizing values. We simply miss to much in todays globally connected world. Let me explain that part here on ‘the why’ that I believe in this:
Innovation is simply not containable within borders
Firstly innovation is not containable within borders; not ideas, not practices, not final concepts. If we try to simply constrain it, it will never get the traction and momentum often needed from those ‘great ideas’ born locally, to ever grow and scale and achieve their true success. Nationalized innovations are never seen or valued by others, and even more importantly, they aren’t seen and adopted as ‘our own’ solutions. Continue reading →