There are wide-spread methods to measure innovation within organisations, such as patents, number of products per year or turn-over share of new products. These are output-indicators but also outcome-indicators are deployed, such as ROI or growth of employment rate, market share or value. Yet they neither are causal implications directly deducible from those indicators nor do they tell anything about how well companies do in the future as the measures are based on information about the past.
Still, the market continue to speed up and adapting to ever changing markets becomes more important for organisations to stay in business. We find there is a shift towards measuring viability instead in form of innovation abilities and therefore bringing along a change of focus from out- to input factors. The Competence Theory as primary example fully pays tribute to change being a constant force. Solely focussing on input indicators however is an equal limitation as now we find a view of a singled sighted view of adaption qualities being replaced by a singled sighted view of creation qualities.
What these management strategies and views try to measure and control is in effect a meta-capability. It can be described as the capability to remain competent and so face and work with whatever changes there will be. In other words the capability to persistently disposition self-organising knowledge is vital for organisations nowadays. This does not mean that all knowledge and skills have to be owned. It does not even mean that any of the knowledge and skills needs to be owned but those that are needed for locating knowledge and learning to put it into context.
This raises following questions: (a) Which tools do best support self-organising knowledge? (b) How do we control the disposition? (c) What are sound observation criteria to measure the process
As my dissertation progresses, I will try to find some answers.
Twitter Updates
Montag, 29. September 2008
Donnerstag, 25. September 2008
Innovation Topology
As the Fuzzy Front-end of innovation points out, innovation in its early steps cannot be developed into a serialised process. Instead we do find a situation where process parts iterate in loops, e.g. idea bouncing, introducing at some serendipious moment pieces of external information, e.g. a guy from distribution tells the marketing gal some valuable customer feedback at a beer after the evening workout, or some other form of hard to formulise order.
We find that what we need is a structure that allows for a fuzzy front end to self-organise. The diversity of employees, their set of skills, cultural backgrounds, different way of thinking and approaches to problems can be a highly valuable source to find requisite variety to combat the complexity of the markets our organisations conduct their business in.
The innovation topology looks at this self-organising process. At its core (1) sources of innovation, we find items supporting a cultural playing field with which employees, the organisation and the market can identify us with. This set declares creativity to be a valuable part, which just like a flower needs to be looked after and growth fostered by sound management (2) support of innovation. It is their job to identify ideas worth persuing. They do so by establishing a set of CSFs/KPIs an idea have to stand up against, e.g. will it bring ROI 35% within 1yr? Each idea will be giving certain ressources, such as a team of 3 or *k EUR funding for a certain time period. Period checks whether the idea is on track have to be made and once it has become clear that it is off-track, is has to be killed - BUT the team who made the effort has to be equally acknowledged for their work. Killing ideas has to be business as usual and is no indication of a poor performance on behalf of the team (3) development of innovation.
(4) distribution of innovation: There needs to be sufficient opportunities for ideas to spread, to focus and to collaborate on issues. Whether this is the introduction of Web 2.0 software tools to stay in more contact with your customers or informal seating arrangements where employees can come togther and have a chat. It is important to note what successful teams made to succeed. Yet it is equally important to spread their success by exchanging and rotating their members. This also aides avoiding insider realtionships to occur. Often you find that silo thinking and rivalry amongst departments occur due to a lack of understanding. Here communication is key to avoid the "not invented here syndrome".
Below you find the innovation topology chart.
We find that what we need is a structure that allows for a fuzzy front end to self-organise. The diversity of employees, their set of skills, cultural backgrounds, different way of thinking and approaches to problems can be a highly valuable source to find requisite variety to combat the complexity of the markets our organisations conduct their business in.
The innovation topology looks at this self-organising process. At its core (1) sources of innovation, we find items supporting a cultural playing field with which employees, the organisation and the market can identify us with. This set declares creativity to be a valuable part, which just like a flower needs to be looked after and growth fostered by sound management (2) support of innovation. It is their job to identify ideas worth persuing. They do so by establishing a set of CSFs/KPIs an idea have to stand up against, e.g. will it bring ROI 35% within 1yr? Each idea will be giving certain ressources, such as a team of 3 or *k EUR funding for a certain time period. Period checks whether the idea is on track have to be made and once it has become clear that it is off-track, is has to be killed - BUT the team who made the effort has to be equally acknowledged for their work. Killing ideas has to be business as usual and is no indication of a poor performance on behalf of the team (3) development of innovation.
(4) distribution of innovation: There needs to be sufficient opportunities for ideas to spread, to focus and to collaborate on issues. Whether this is the introduction of Web 2.0 software tools to stay in more contact with your customers or informal seating arrangements where employees can come togther and have a chat. It is important to note what successful teams made to succeed. Yet it is equally important to spread their success by exchanging and rotating their members. This also aides avoiding insider realtionships to occur. Often you find that silo thinking and rivalry amongst departments occur due to a lack of understanding. Here communication is key to avoid the "not invented here syndrome".
Below you find the innovation topology chart.
Abonnieren
Posts (Atom)
