Follow the Leader

My previous blog brings me to my final blog post, the final component which I believe is the key to innovation and its success in the long term – The Leader.

“Leadership today is increasingly associated not with command and control but with the concept of teamwork, getting along with other people, inspiration and creating a vision which others can identify” (Mullins: 2010:373).

A leader represents the company, what they stand for and what they aim to achieve, they’re the face of the company and have a large responsibility.

A model leader I believe is an innovative leader is Sit Richard Branson, owner and founder of the Virgin brand.

‘Part of being a good leader, according to Branson, is also the ability to know when to back away from a task. “As much as you need a strong personality to build a business from scratch, you also must understand the art of delegation,” he says, “I have to be good at helping people run the individual business, and I have to be willing to step back. The company must be set up so it can continue without me.” (http://www.evancarmichael.com/famout-entrepreneurs/592/lesson-1-be-a-good-leader.html).

Branson expresses the importance of delegation, empowerment and trust in your organization, these three factors help drive the independence of your employees, helping them to understand that they need to work together to ensure the company’s success. But to be able to leave his employees to run his business efficiently, they need to be motivated, which is a passion to work for reasons beyond status and money; a propensity to pursue goals with energy and persistence (Buchannan, Huczynski: 2007: 147).

The late Steve Jobs, who unfortunately died in 2011, was the founder, and the face of Apple, voted the most innovative company in the world. He understood that the success of a company starts with the employees, but not just a team of individuals who are there for the extrinsic rewards- they need to share the same passion as their leader.
You have to sell the Big Vision first to your employees. If they don’t get it then customer never will. This seems obvious but too many leaders today have the right financial chops or seniority or even board support but don’t embody this lesson. Steve invented it.’ (http://www.globalfuturist.com/blog/2011/08/25/steve-jobss-innovation-leadership-at-apple-my-lessons-learned/).

Steve Jobs believed that you can only be successful in your job if you are passionate about what you do, and perhaps don’t even see it as a job – just like the saying “Find something you love to do, and you'll never work a day in your life” - Harvey MacKay

It always seemed to me, that Steve Jobs believed this, and portrayed it to his employees, which made Apple so successful. Everyone in the organization is working towards the same common goal. Employees are engaged and empowered to think outside of the box regularly.

Simon Sinek’s concept ‘The golden circle’ also talks about Apple’s innovative marketing strategy:

The golden circle concept can apply to marketing and leadership – first you justify ‘why’ you do what you do, ‘how’ you do it, and 'what' you do.

It’s simple, but effective – and Innovative.

Companies like Apple, and leaders like Steve Jobs don’t come around every day, not everyone thinks immediately creatively in regards to problem solving, managing and organizing. However this does not mean that these traits can be introduced, nurtured and developed into something that can change how people behave, add value and create something beautiful – something Innovative.

Thinking differently nourishes creativity and problem solving, problem solving opens us up to new ways of thinking and viewing perspectives, new perspectives leads to new options, conclusions and innovations - and Innovation is the key to an organization’s future.

Thank you for reading

Management and Innovation

Management and Innovation

Strategic management is the process of formulating strategies and strategic plans, and managing the organization to achieve them, organizations and managers who think and act strategically are looking ahead and defining the direction in which hey want to go in the middle and longer term (Armstrong:2001:15).

Management play a key role in the development and the success of innovation, but it’s important to make sure management are just as, if not more creative than their employees. And they need to project this to their employees to ensure they are all engaged.

In order to achieve this, management have to adopt a style that enabled innovation to flourish – but which is the right one?

There is the autocratic management style, which is linked closely to the scientific management style, founded by Fredrick Taylor. All decisions are made by the management team rather than the employees, so there is little opportunity for empowerment and job enrichment. I personally consider this o to be the worst management style for innovation; employees aren’t encouraged to think independently, nor are they considered even capable of making a positive impact on the organizations future.

Secondly there is the Democratic management style

“Democratic management styles tend to be adopted by many managers working in select industries. Democratic managers are therefore usually found in ‘clusters’ within similar companies. Democratic management is all about full employee consultation and feedback. A democratic manager will have failed if major changes were made concerning the way employees work, without them having considerable say on the matter. Democratic management styles do not ensure employees get whatever they want, but they ensure that managers know exactly what their employees need before making important decisions.” (http://www.management-expert.co.uk/management-styles/#autocratic)

the important part of democratic management is that there is communication between employees and management which is essential for driving successful problem solving techniques. Compared to autocratic management, employees are considered more valuable parts of the organization, which enhances employee engagement – an important component in innovation.
however management still make the final decision, there is little opportunity for employee empowerment and therefore less opportunity for employees to think creatively.

There are various management styles, which have been identified, however I don’t think there is one in particular that truly allows employees to think for themselves, work in projects and decide on an appropriate conclusion unless a manager takes inspiration from each of the management styles.

I my opinion an innovative manager knows when they need to take a step back and allow their employees to develop on their own, but still understand that they need to facilitate their needs such as resources, guidance etc.

Organizational Creativity

“We define organizational creativity as the creation of a valuable, useful new product, service, idea or procedure, or process by individuals working together in a complex social system” (Woodman. Sawyer. Griffin: 1993:293).

Creativity aims to combine ideas, inventions, insights with imagination and the ability to innovate.

( http://www.adb.org/documents/information/knowledge-solutions/harnessing-creativity-and-innovation-in-the-workplace.pdf)

creativity is the foundations for innovation to build on, to enhance the likelihood of creativity in the workplace, the workplace needs to be diverse.

Diversity is a key element to innovation, engaging in a broad set of perspectives to develop something better than one perspective could do alone if we look into diversity.

The wisdom of diversity – the strength that numbers bring.
it can be hard for one person to efficiently propose the ‘best’ ideas, or even identify them. This is due to our own backgrounds and experiences, so a larger group of individuals with their own perspectives will heighten the chance of the ‘best’ idea developing and being collaborated.

Another factor that influences organizational creativity is problem solving.
“group problem solving techniques, such as mind mapping, were developed with the belief that rules or norms that restrain evaluation of ideas being generated would allow members to build off others’ ideas and would result in a greater number of novel ideas being generated” (Woodman, Sawyer, Griffin:1993:303).

A group problem solving technique is Inductive Reasoning.
this is a method of looking at outcomes, events, ideas and observations to draw these together and reach a unified conclusion. Employees can use this technique to apply their own experiences, thoughts and perspectives to draw conclusions about a current situation and solve problems based on these. This method can be more successful if the workforce or particular task group is more diverse; people will be able to draw more conclusions, which are subjective to their personal experiences in order to reduce the risk of deciding on the wrong approach to solve the problem at hand.

Another method of problem solving is constructive controversy. “Constructive Controversy is a powerful technique for doing this. Its objective is test a proposed solution by subjecting it to the "clash of ideas", showing it to be wrong, proving it, or improving it. As such, by using Constructive Controversy, your confidence in the solution chosen improves as you reach a better understanding of all the factors involved.” (http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTMC_71.htm)

Constructive controversy challenges our own perspectives, by debating our own conclusions and opinions. This method involves other people who will no doubt have alternative perspectives to you, this helps you consider your conclusion from all possible sides of an argument; this helps you to feel more confident in your decision and even motivate you. As a result, confidence benefits that you are creatively competent, stimulating your creative and innovative side.

Problem solving can add to an organizations competitive advantage, if people are challenged on their opinions and perspectives it drives them to think out f the box – and out of the box leads to the development of new ideas, which could generate new and innovative ideas for products and processers.

Even though self-motivation occurs in some employees, management play an important role in the implementation of problem solving techniques, motivation and ultimately success.

Organizational Culture

Organizational Culture

Gareth Morgan has described organizational culture as: "The set of the set of beliefs, values, and norms, together with symbols like dramatized events and personalities, that represents the unique character of an organization, and provides the context for action in it and by it." Beliefs and values are words that will pop up frequently in other definitions, as well. Norms might be described as traditions, structure of authority, or routines. (http://www.organizationalculture101.com/definition-of-organizational-culture.html).

An organizational culture can sometimes just be how the company ‘feels’ – a positive organizational culture needs to suit the needs, beliefs and feelings of the employees for the organization to work efficiently and creatively.

Power Culture

Within a power culture, control is the key element. Power cultures are usually found within a small or medium size organization. Decisions in an organization that display a power culture are centralized around one key individual. That person likes control and the power behind it and may perhaps be an autocratic manager. As group work is not evident in a power culture, the organization can react quickly to dangers around it as no consultation is involved. However this culture has its problems, lack of consultation can lead to staff feeling undervalued and de-motivated, which can also lead to high staff turnover. As a result employees will be unengaged and creativity will not flourish.

Role Culture

Common in most organizations today is a role culture. In a role culture, organizations are split into various functions and each individual within the function is assigned a particular role. The role culture has the benefit of specialization. Employee’s focus on their particular role as assigned to them by their job description and this should increase productivity for the company. This culture is quite logical to organize in a large organization.

However this culture isn’t very flexible, staff cannot feel benefits of job enlargement and may get bored of the repetitive workload.

Task Culture

A task culture refers to a team based approach to complete a particular task. They are popular in today's modern business society where the organization will establish particular 'project teams' to complete a task to date. A task culture clearly offers some benefits. Staff feel motivated because they are empowered to make decisions within their team, they will also feel valued because they may have been selected within that team and given the responsibility to bring the task to a successful end. NASA organize part of their culture around this concept i.e. putting together teams to oversee a mission.

Person culture

Person cultures are commonly found in charities or non-profit organizations. The focus of the organization is the individual or a particular aim

Forward and backward looking cultures. 


Organizations that have an entrepreneurial spirit, always embrace change and listen to staff and customers are said to be forward looking. Forward-looking organizations are risk takers and do well because of it. We can argue that Dyson the vacuum cleaner manufacturer embraces this culture. A backward looking culture does not embrace change and is led by systems and procedures. They do not take risk and because of it are usually left with a business not doing so well UK store Marks and Spencers is said to be 'backward looking' i.e. slow to change.

(http://www.learnmanagement2.com/culture.htm).

From the various organizational cultures organizations use, I think the culture that provides the most potential for innovation and creativity is the task culture, because employees are put into project groups, there is the opportunity for employees to work with others from other departments, giving them the chance to develop ideas based on a variety of perspectives and experiences from each department, as well as learning interpersonal and cross-departmental skills.

Organizational Innovation: beneath the umberella

Organizational Structure

“Organizations’ are structured in a variety of ways, dependant on their objectives and culture. The structure of an organization will determine the manner in which it operates and it’s performance. Structure allows the responsibilities for different functions and processes to be clearly allocated to different departments and employees.” (http://www.learnmanagement2.com/organisational%20structures.htm).

Structures do literally come in all shapes and sizes, and it’s vital for a company to have the right structure in order to maximize their resources, establish communication channels and compliment creativity and flexibility.

There are various types of ‘structures’ business use.

(http://www.learnmanagement2.com/Tall%20structure.htm)

This is a tall structure. For management, there is a narrow span of control, so there is a clear management channel for communication, control and responsibility. Staff also would be clear of the structure of promotion too.

However, due to the narrow structure and communication channels restricts the freedom and potential of responsibility for employees. Moreover decision-making could take longer as employees are required to go through distinct layers of authority.

(http://www.learnmanagement2.com/flatstructure.jpg)

This flat structure only uses one layer of management, which means the ‘chain of command’ short so decision-making between staff and the managing director is short, which can save valuable time if the company were required to meet strict deadlines. Because staff is ‘closer’ to the managing director they are likely to feel more motivated. However, due to the structure having few tiers, there is little scope for promotion opportunities, this also doesn’t work in larger firms as management will have a large amount of staff to facilitate for.

(http://www.learnmanagement2.com/hierarchical.jpg)

The hierarchical structure is commonly used in a large firm with differentiating departments, such as their HR, marketing and accounting department.

This can also be called a ‘traditional’ structure, promotion paths are clearly defined. Management are also specialized within their department, which helps authority and responsibility. As a result employees are loyal to their organization and especially their department.

Unfortunately, as departments are so narrowly defined, the organization can be bureaucratic and respond slowly to customer needs and change – which may make organizational innovation difficult.

Companies need to establish a clear and well considered business structure so employees and management can maximize their resources, understand the communication channels and what is expected of them. By doing this a correct structure can help motivate employees and drive their creativity, to develop an efficient workforce.

Again an engaged motivated workforce is an innovative workforce.

Organizational Innovation

"Organizational innovation means the implementation of a new organizational method in the undertaking’s business practices, workplace organization or external relations." (Http://www.innoviscop.com/en/definitions/organisational-innovation).

Organizational innovation is used to encourage individuals to think independently, creatively and take responsibility to increase motivation in the workforce. Organizational innovation also aims to share knowledge and expertise throughout the firm.

Google is an example of a company that implements cultural innovation. “Google has a famous strategy for innovation: Give each engineer one day every week to work on blue-sky, big potential ideas of their own choosing, and only require them to work on their “official” assigned project four days each week.” (http://keithsawyer.wordpress.com/2009/07/09/innovation-at-google/). Engineers at Google are allowed to use the company’s resources to explore their own personal ideas and their potential. This suggests that Google appreciates their employees and believe that their workforce show great potential with innovation. From the employees this could make them feel more motivated, feel valuable and even more engaged in the tasks they do.

Today innovation isn't solely about investing billions of pounds into research and development, businesses are starting to understand that innovation can, and should occur in the workplace too.

But how do you know if you have an innovative work force? Even more, if they aren't innovators, how do you turn them into innovators?

Well firstly, Gallup has identified 3 types of employees within the workforce:

Engaged Employees: employees work with passion and feel a profound connection to their company. They drive innovation and move the organization forward.

Not Engaged Employees: employees are essentially 'checked out'. They’re sleepwalking through their workday. Putting time, but not energy or passion - into their work.

"In today's competitive environment, sharing information and expertise can be critical in driving both individual and organizational success." (IBM: 2008:4).

Actively Disengaged: employees aren't just unhappy at work; they're busy acting out their unhappiness. They undermine what their engaged co-workers accomplish.

(Http://gmj.gallup.com/content/24880/gallup-study-engaged-employees-inspire-company.aspx).

In an ideal workplace, all employees would be engaged; 100% committed to their work and the company. However, although this does define the types of employees in a workplace, it does not answer why, or how to rectify this.

In some cases an employee may fluctuate from being an engaged employee to non-engaged due to personal reasons such as stress, family issues or generally feeling unmotivated on that particular day. Employers do need to take into account that this cannot be generalized to their workforce indefinitely; employee engagement is subjective and varies.

But how do companies ensure that the workforce is more consistently engaged in their job?

To develop and maintain a productive and innovative workforce, the workforce must feel engaged and this is possible via motivation.

One method of motivation is by providing extrinsic and intrinsic rewards. Extrinsic rewards are tangible benefits from working with the company, which motivate the employee; an example would be commission, a company car or a bonus.

Intrinsic rewards are psychological and emotional rewards, which motivate the individual and maintain their engagement in the work. Intrinsic rewards could be feeling a sense achievement, feeling valued and receiving appreciation for the work they have done.

These intrinsic and extrinsic rewards contribute to motivation, which in turn helps to maintain employee satisfaction and engagement.

Another method companies use to motivate their employees is the method of empowerment.

“A management practice of sharing information, rewards, and power with employees so that they can take initiative and make decisions to solve problems and improve service and performance.

Empowerment is based on the idea that giving employees skills, resources, authority, opportunity, motivation, as well holding them responsible and accountable for outcomes of their actions, will contribute to their competence and satisfaction.” (http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/empowerment.html).

Empowerment gives employees ownership and responsibility of the work they are given, it provides them the opportunity to prove they and feel the benefits of intrinsic rewards.

However some employees do not feel the benefits of empowerment. In some cases employees feel under pressure by being given responsibility, they may feel worried that they will fail, or that they wont receive any recognition for the ‘extra’ work they have been given. Perhaps a way to avoid the negative implications of empowerment would be to consult the employees beforehand.

On the other hand, if an employment does feel the benefits of empowerment this could encourage them to think more outside of the box, to challenge their own perspectives and become more creative – and more importantly innovative.

Furthermore, by actively motivating employees, they may begin to motivate themselves, as they will feel more engaged in their work. Self-motivation is the ability to do what needs to be done, without influence from other people or situations. People with self-motivation can find a reason and strength to complete a task, even when challenging, without giving up or needing another to encourage them. (http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/self-motivation.html).

Google, as mentioned before their engineers are allowed to have one day a week to use the companies resources to work on their own ideas, this could also be seen as the engineers motivating themselves, to think out of the box and push themselves without any prompt from their employer.

“Innovation can be met with resistance or hostility by employees who are either fearful of change or believe it will be to their detriment.” (Laird. Mclean: 2005:3).

As we can see, innovation is also about introducing change, sometimes change is refuted, as people tend to ‘fear the unknown’.

“Nothing is as upsetting to your people as change. Nothing has greater potential to cause failures, loss of production, or falling quality. Yet nothing is as important to the survival of your organization as change. History is full of examples of organizations that failed to change and that are now extinct. The secret to successfully managing change, from the perspective of the employees, is definition and understanding.” (http://management.about.com/cs/people/a/MngChng092302.htm).

This quote suggests that a company cannot simply implement change and expect positive results and coordination because their will always be some resistance. But the key to reducing the resistance of change is to keep the workforce informed by telling them why, how and provide reassurance.

This reinforces the importance of communication between employees and management, but in order of this to be effective and have a positive impact company’s need to look further into the other aspects of organizational innovation.

"Many companies want to innovate - but not all understand the importance of collaboration to making innovation possible." (IBM: 2008:8).

Collaboration is a cooperative arrangement in which two or more parties (which may or may not have any previous relationship) work jointly towards a common goal. (http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/collaboration.html).

Collaboration brings people together; it helps with communication in the workplace and brings ideas out from the woodwork from all areas of the firm. For example, bringing Research and Development staff and Manufacturing staff together - Perhaps together they can find an efficient, faster and maybe even a cheaper way to make the product?

It could be considered a risk to bring two parties together; they may disagree or fail to find a solution. But on the other hand, you have allowed them to voice their own opinions, showed interest in their roles, which may lead to more employment satisfaction - And a happy workforce is a productive workforce.

It is also a method of reducing resistance to changes occurring within the company.

Employees are cogs, in a machine, which is the business. Showing interest in your employees drives motivation and creativity. Elton Mayo (1972) accidentally discovered the Hawthorne effect - an increase in worker productivity, produced by the psychological stimulus of being singled out and made to feel important. (http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/collaboration.html).

Collaboration can help to drive innovation in the workplace, by bringing people together with communication, increasing employee involvement and engagement in decision making processes, employees are being introduced to various perspectives and challenges.

This innovative workforce could provide a competitive advantage; a motivated and adaptable workforce can work to a higher efficiency, contributing to the success of a new product or process.

Process innovation

"Process innovation means the implementation of a new or significantly improved production or delivery method (including significant changes in techniques, equipment and/or software)" (http://www.innoviscop.com/en/definitions/process-innovation).

A method used to improve production is Total Quality Management (TQM).
“TQM takes a holistic approach to long-term success that views continuous improvement in all aspects of an organization as a process and not as a short-term goal. It aims to radically transform the organization through progressive changes in the attitudes, practices, structures, and systems.

Total quality management transcends the product quality approach, involves everyone in the organization, and encompasses its every function: administration, communications, distribution, manufacturing, marketing, planning, training, etc.” (http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/total-quality-management-TQM.html).

TQM (as the quote states) involves everyone in the company, to ensure everything is done to the best of the company’s abilities, this is good because it increases employee involvement in independent tasks, and also gives the workforce responsibility.
An implication of using TQM is the attention to detail and potentially strict requirements, can take more time, staff may even refute the idea of TQM if they feel it is too time consuming – this highlights the importance of keeping your workforce engaged.

However, TQM is an evolutionary process rather than a revolutionary one, it does not happen over night but provides long-term benefits in product quality.

An example of successful process innovation is the Coca Cola brand and their 100% recyclable plastic bottles.

The named ‘plant’ bottle is made from a Brazilian sugar cane and is now 100% recyclable; each bottle is made from 22.5% from plant-based PET plastic and 25% recyclable plastic in the UK. (Http://www.coca-cola.co.uk/environment/plantbottle/coca-cola-sugarcane-partnerships.html).

This method of production has provided many benefits for the brand, rather than making more money, they actually save themselves billions of dollars every year by using recycled materials and reducing their carbon footprint.

The ‘Open Innovation’ Model displayed in my previous blog entry could be used to help understand how Coca Cola came to improve their production method.

Coca cola collaborated with WWF to discover a new source of renewable raw materials to make their ‘plant bottle’.

“We teamed up with leading academic and NGO partners (non-governmental organizations, such as WWF) to search for a sustainable plant source to make our Plant Bottle plastic one that wouldn’t harm the ecology or people of the region where it’s produced.” (http://www.coca-cola.co.uk/environment/plantbottle/coca-cola-sugarcane-partnerships.html).

WWF could be considered a ‘node’ in coca cola’s open innovation matrix, by communicating with an external source they were able to reduce the risk factor in developing the new packaging and as a result they haven’t harmed the ecology or the people in the region where they buy the sugar cane.

Moreover this example also reinforces the relevance of the ‘Factors of innovative success’ table and the benefits of working with external organizations.