Monthly Archives: February 2012

The Commodity Marketplace for Employees

The Commodity Marketplace for EmployeesThere is a plethora of articles and books out there about how difficult it is to be in a commodity business. Books like “Blue Ocean Strategy” talk about it in terms of swimming away from the red ocean to the blue ocean, or that the blood of fierce competition in a commodity marketplace has turned the ocean red.

Innovation is such a hot topic right now because an increasing number of industries that used to be places where differentiation existed, have suddenly turned into commodity industries. When differences between the offerings of different companies become small, competition increasingly turns to price, and the product is commoditized. The customer becomes ambivalent about which offering they choose – there are a number of choices good enough for their purposes.

Why don’t we see the same plethora of articles and books out there about Personal Innovation?

Ah, but you might say the marketplace is full of self-help and personal growth books. Yes, but Personal Innovation is about more than personal growth. Personal Innovation is about self-transformation and in the employee context, about creating a strategy for swimming away from the red ocean.

Yes, if you choose to be an employee you are choosing to swim in the red ocean. The employee marketplace is an incredibly commoditized industry. A System Administrator job pays x, a Bookkeeper job pays y. Have you ever heard this before – “I’d love to give you a raise, but you’re already at the top of the salary range (aka salary band)”?Or maybe you’ve heard this one – “We think you’re the best person for the job, but the money you’re asking for…nobody in that role makes that much.”

Despite what some people may tell you, the employee marketplace has little room for value-based selling (especially after you are in the door). The Human Resources department in the same way as the Purchasing department, has made sure that every “product” purchased has an approved price. Want to buy a photocopier? It can’t cost more than x. Want to hire a finance manager? You can’t pay them more than y.

Continuing with our photocopier example, employees who don’t know their own value ruin the marketplace for employees who do in the same manner that companies willing to sell their photocopiers for thin or negative margins to build market share ruin the marketplace for other copier companies. So what is an employee to do?

Unionization is one way that employees can improve their lot, but it has its own set of problems in that “stars” or extraordinarily high performers have no way to make above average income on their above exceptional contribution.

Professional athletes are probably the only set of employees that have managed to guarantee themselves a high level of minimum compensation and benefits without eliminating the possibility of stars to earn much more. Professional services (lawyers, consultants, CPA’s, etc.), venture capital, and private equity firms with a partner structure offer the potential for “star” compensation, but “stars” are defined not by ability to do the job but their ability to bring in business.

Professional Services independents have the opportunity to generate “star” earnings as well, but again this has more to do with the professional’s ability to create business, although it is more closely linked to at least their perceived ability.

So where does this leave the average employee?

In today’s reality, if you are a “star” your best investment will be to build yourself into an industry expert within the confines of your existing employment. This is where Personal Innovation comes in. You have to determine how you can achieve differentiation and competitive separation from your peers. First you have to determine why you are a “star” and they are not, and how you can prove to the world that you are a “star” and deserve to be compensated outside the traditional salary range. Creating a “star” quality is all about proving in a tangible way that you deliver extraordinary value beyond that of other employees, and showing that you deserve to be treated differently. It’s not good enough to be a strong performer, or the best performer. You must achieve competitive separation and differentiation from your peers.

This can be achieved through the continuous pursuit of industry education, improvement of your public speaking and writing skills, creation of an industy blog, and volunteering to represent your company as a speaker at industry conferences and trade shows. The industry blog and public speaking engagements will expand the perception as a “star” beyond the bounds of your organization. If you combine these efforts with other publishing efforts like magazine or journal articles and possibly even a book, and you will expand your reach even farther and faster. You do need to have something unique and useful to say however, which is why the continuing education is so important. Doing all of these things will not only potentially improve your ability to do your existing job, but will also increase the possibility that another company will become interested in you.

Let’s face it, the best hope you have of getting better compensation is to move on to a different company (otherwise you are limited by your salary range) or start your own. If you do manage to get another company interested in you enough to try and entice you away, make sure first that it is not just to be their employee, but that they are recognizing that you are a “star” coming in and need to be compensated in an appropriate manner. CXO’s typically manage to negotiate in this way, as do some VP’s (particularly Sales VP’s). For a “star”, being compensated in an appropriate manner means of course a high base salary, but more importantly it means a package that includes things like signing bonuses and a large opportunity to earn via incentive-based compensation and stock options or awards. Negotiating this kind of package is difficult to achieve unless you have risen to the top of the organizational hierarchy and is the reason that most true “stars” end up starting their own company, even if initially it only provides an auxiliary source of income.

So if you believe you have that “star” quality, hopefully your mind is churning out ways that you are going to achieve that competitive separation and differentiation from your peers. If you pursue Personal Innovation with the same or greater gusto than you pursue product or service innovations for your current employer, I’m sure you will find a way to swim away from the bloody waters of the commodity mentality that is the traditional employee marketplace.

It will require unwavering commitment and determination, but those are qualities that all “stars” have. Personally, I am swimming as fast as I can, but I recognize that it is a difficult journey with an uncertain length. I hope you will join me on this journey. Do you have what it takes to be a “star”?

What do you think?

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Innovate Yourself – Becoming Overpaid

Innovate Yourself - Becoming OverpaidA fun one from the archive (2007)

I came across this article from MarketWatch on the Ten most overpaid jobs in the U.S. and thought it was worthy of discussing. I don’t want to focus on whether these occupations are overpaid or not (I’m sure the people working in these roles would disagree with the author), but instead on what we can all learn from this article. First here is a list of the ten occupations:

  1. Wedding photographers
  2. Major airline pilots
  3. West Coast longshoremen
  4. Skycaps at major airports
  5. Real estate agents selling high end homes
  6. Motivational speakers and ex-politicians on the lecture circuit
  7. Orthodontists
  8. CEOs of poorly performing companies
  9. Washed-up pro athletes in long-term contracts
  10. Mutual-fund managers

Next, here is my list of some of the common threads amongst the ten occupations chosen by Chris Pummer of CBS MarketWatch with the input from anonymous compensation experts, and an academic examination of how someone might approach the “problem” of increasing their income by looking at these common threads:

  1. Power
    • Create a situation where meeting your demands becomes an extremely attractive alternative to not meeting them. Some people would refer to this as identifying points of leverage.
    • Banding together with other highly skilled co-workers into a union is one approach that people take.
    • Another is to take create sufficient revenue for an organization so that the company doesn’t want to risk interruption of that cashflow.
  2. Fear
    • People are afraid of someone messing up their wedding photos, their investments, or their safe journey.
    • Put yourself in a position to directly protect a customer’s memories, finances, or their life itself.
  3. Establish a “tradition”
    • Pro-actively create the perception that it is the usual way of doing things for a customer to tip you or pay you a percentage of their bill (regardless how big).
    • The people at the airport taking your bags at the check-in counter do the same job as curbside check-in (they give you a ticket and check your bag), but we all believe it is accepted practice to tip the curbside check-in person and not the person at the check-in counter inside. We tip a “waiter” for taking our order and giving us food and drink, but we don’t do the same for the “cashier” at McDonald’s do we?
  4. Create a shortage
    • Organize the people in your “profession” and work to create barriers to entry that can be used to control supply.
    • Trade unions do this to some extent with apprenticeship programs and the like.
    • In addition to Orthodonists, Pharmacists and Veterinarians have been accused of this.
  5. Turning garbage into gold
    • Identifying a job that most people wouldn’t want to take, but where a highly qualified person is desired, can result in a job that might pay quite well.
    • If you are a supervisor, try to position yourself to supervise the group of people in your organization that makes more money than the group you supervise now (usually a supervisor will make more than the people he/she supervises).
    • Most talented managers won’t take on a position at a struggling company, and as a result the company will either have to over-pay to get good talent to join or be satisfied with hiring people who want to stay in the local area or couldn’t get hired by a better performing company in the industry. If you have a tolerance for risk, seek out opportunities at underperforming companies in your industry and play up the career risk about moving from your successful company to their unsuccessful one in the compensation discussions.

Would it be wrong for an individual or a group of employees to look to game these common threads consciously?

Organizations are constantly looking for ways to put downward pressure on wages, so would it be wrong for individuals to look after their own self-interests and attempt to maximize their ability to take care of their family?

I would argue that it is the responsibility of the individual to protect their own self-interests and look to maximize their wages in the same way it is the responsibility of the organization to look to minimize wages for the self-interest of the shareholders.

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Moving from Talent Ownership to Talent Attraction

Moving from Talent Ownership to Talent Attraction

In our hyper-competitive, always-connected world, organizations are increasingly becoming focused on improving both their speed to market and their revenue per headcount. In this environment, more senior leaders every day are seeing innovation as the primary way to gain competitive advantage and to simultaneously increase revenue and cut costs. At the same time, organizations are struggling to find ways to accelerate their pace of innovation without escalating their costs faster than their budgets will allow.

The increasing demands for speed and efficiency are causing organizations to become ever more virtual and flexible, to utilize more variable resources, and to add and shed employees with greater regularity (often with both happening in the same organization at the same time). The progressively dynamic nature of the workforce inside organizations is making it more difficult for organizations to attract, develop, and retain the best talent while simultaneously meeting the fiscal realities of the business. This is causing many organizations to move from a talent ownership mindset to a talent attraction mindset. In a talent ownership world, recruitment and the hiring transaction are king. But in a talent attraction world, successful organizations are those that master the art of building and maintaining talent communities that keep talent connected to the organization even when they are not employed by it. Consciously creating an external talent strategy is therefore essential to success.

The talent market relationship changes are not just happening at the individual level. Change is also happening at the organizational level, as organizations themselves are moving from a fortress mentality, where all work is secret and kept inside the organization’s four walls, to an integrated, global economy with an interconnected web of suppliers and distribution channels – where being the partner of choice in your industry will be increasingly important.

Silicon Valley icon Bill Joy once famously said, “There are always more smart people outside your company than within it.” In this new world of work, organizations must begin accepting that the most valuable employees will now be those that not only do good work, but who also serve as a force multiplier for their organizations by being good at organizing and orchestrating the innovation efforts of others who do not even work for the company. And ideally, you will want to evolve to a place where even those who do not work for you actually want to work with you. In this brave new world, you must have strategies in place for attracting both internal and external talent to your innovation efforts.

Section 1. Why Having an External Talent Strategy is Becoming Increasingly Important

The old way of winning the talent wars was to search for and hire the very best talent and keep them inside your own four walls by offering them competitive compensation, benefits, and perks. Your hope was that your talent is better than your competitors’ talent. But over the last couple of decades, companies have increasingly found that employees who pursue what they do with passion will outperform an employee with a gun to their head every time. Circuit City learned very publicly that people are not commodities and went out of business from treating them as if they were. At the same time, we know that diversity is very important and hard to foster internally. And so it is to get to this diversity of thought in order to accelerate product launch and innovation timelines that companies must open up – it is a global economy with a global talent pool.

Download the rest of this FREE white paper to continue reading

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Business Strategy Innovation Diamond (BSID)

Continuing my quest to surface some classics that the Innovation Excellence audience will have never seen, here is another from 2007:

I would like to introduce a visual metaphor that the consultants use at Business Strategy Innovation. It’s called, predictably enough, the Business Strategy Innovation Diamond, or the BSID. There is another reason we use it, to “ID” the “BS” in an organization. Now a lot of people would represent strategy as the top of a pyramid, processes in the middle, and systems as the base of a pyramid, but that ignores two of the most important tools in any organization – policies and reporting. Business Strategy Innovation instead starts with a diamond that looks like this:

Business Strategy Innovation Diamond (BSID)

Here is an example of how the Business Strategy Innovation Diamond can help you structure an organizational analysis project:

  1. Strategy
    • We want to be the leading Internet retailer
  2. Policy
    • Free shipping on orders over $25
  3. Processes
    • Create marketing program to promote this benefit
  4. Systems
    • Modify shopping cart application
    • Build on-page messaging to alert customers of additional purchase $$$ required to reach the $25 threshold for free shipping
  5. Reporting
    • Establish any infrastructure required to measure orders above/below $25
    • Measure benchmark period
    • Create report measuring % of orders greater than $25 in current period versus benchmark period to measure effect

The BSID focuses your organization on making sure that the policies support the strategy, that the processes facilitate the policies, that the systems enable the processes, and the reporting measures the execution of the strategy. Not focusing on the BSID, may result in just BS instead of strategic innovation.

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Business Model Innovation?

Business Model Innovation?

Nearly five years ago I wrote this article, but I think it is worth dredging it up out of the archives because there is such misunderstanding out there about what business model innovation is. This article highlights some of the misconceptions people have about what business model innovation truly is and looks quickly at a couple of more appropriate examples of business model innovation. But of course I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments, including your favorite business model innovation examples.

Here’s the article from 2007:

I came across an article on BusinessWeek.com that I just have to write about because it asserts that GM has achieved a business model innovation by shunting its retiree medical obligations onto the Union (and getting away with only contributing 70% of the outstanding obligations to the fund).

This is not a business model innovation, but purely a negotiation outcome and nothing that will give GM any sustainable competitive advantage. Ford and Chrysler will end up doing the same thing and the parity of competition amongst US manufacturers will be restored. A business model innovation is Southwest Airlines establishing a new airline focused on providing low fare point to point air travel instead of creating another airline based on a hub and spoke model, or Saturn selling their cars for a fixed price, not GM pushing obligations off their balance sheet.

GM is not losing in the automobile industry because of health care costs for retirees. They are losing because their operations result in cars that less and less people want to buy. GM needs to stop complaining about peripheral issues and trying to be like Toyota and instead focus on how they can be better than Toyota.

When workers come back on the job, nothing will have changed in their business, the business of designing, manufacturing and selling cars. If anything the workers are going to come back to work feeling like they have just given even more away to the corporation, just so that the CEO’s balance sheet look better. This is not a business model innovation. The Big Three will not avoid the inevitable by simply squeezing their union workforce, they need to design and manufacture better cars. This deal with the unions may slow the inevitable, but not avoid it. Toyota is passing GM, the Korean manufacturers are quickly improving their quality, and the Chinese will begin entering the US market in the next few years. One of the Big Three will go out of business in the next ten years. The real question is which one?

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Growing Demand for a Third Place

Growing Demand for a Third PlaceI’ve been meaning to write this post for some time, and am finally getting around to it, so hear goes…

As I look around the economic landscape in the United States and see a climate where not only home prices but also rents are falling in many geographies, especially as the results of an all-advised rental property construction boom become available. I find myself thinking that we are in the middle of a profound shift in the American reality.

I think we are in the middle of an unexpected regression back to more multi-generational housing and a return to increasing levels of co-habitation amongst the young. Now when I speak about co-habitation here, I’m not talking about couples living out of wedlock, but instead I’m talking about more people living with roommates – and not just the young. In the future I believer we’ll see not just the young co-habitating, but older people too.

So, two housing demand destroying events coming together at the same time. But besides a decline in home prices and rents, there is another important impact of this changing American reality that I don’t see being addressed…

As more people live with roommates or in multi-generational housing situations and seek to get to get out more for some thinking and breathing room, there is going to be an increasing demand for more third places.

Starbucks and the Third PlaceFor those of you not familiar with the third place concept, coffee shops like Starbucks are one of the most famous examples, but there are other third places in the United States. There is the shopping mall (you know it’s true), the convenience store (see Bill & Ted’s Excellence Adventure), the YMCA, the Boys and Girls Clubs, and the Public Library. It seems like the latchkey kid phenomenon has become the library kid phenomenon. Kids leave school and go to the library and hang out there until their parents get off work and come by to pick them up.

Some shopping malls have installed free wifi, giant chess boards, and tables for people to use laptops or play games. Cities and YMCA’s have created teen centers. But one thing I have yet to see that I am waiting to see is a transformation in the mindset of the companies that run fast food chains like McDonald’s, Burger King, Taco Bell and others. When you go into a Starbucks it is very inviting and it is a happening place with old friends meeting up, kids sitting around doing homework, small business people working, and job interviews taking place. But when you go into a McDonald’s or other fast food chain, most of the time they are empty places designed purposely with uncomfortable seating, harsh lighting and other touches to make people get in and out as fast as possible. Most fast food chains do a booming drive-thru and carryout business, but not a lot of people stay and sit down. Nobody wants to hang out in an uncomfortable place.

But what would happen if McDonald’s or some other fast food retailer changed their thinking to create a third place environment to fill their empty seats?

How many more customers would they attract and engage?

How much more loyalty would they build?

How much more of their customers’ fast food spend would they achieve?

In my mind these are questions worth asking, and the biggest one is which major chain will move first?

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Innovation Passing Lane Ahead

Innovation Passing Lane Ahead

I noticed an interesting phenomenon the other day on a 200 mile drive back from the Oregon coast to Seattle that I would like to share with you and then discuss the potential implications for innovation success.

Now let me first say that I am not a trained human psychologist, but I am a student of human behavior, and I believe that if we watch and listen in other contexts, we can learn amazing things about human behavior that have profound implications for the innovation context. So without further delay, here’s the situation I encountered:

I was driving back along the Columbia River on the Oregon side on a road that was predominantly a two lane road (one lane of traffic in each direction) with passing lanes at various points, typically for the direction of traffic going uphill to give cars a chance to pass slower moving vehicles. Nothing too interesting in that description. Here is where things get interesting…

I noticed that every time I was following a car or truck and approached a passing lane, without exception, the car or truck I was following instantly sped up a minimum of 10mph AND when we reach the end of the passing lane area, they pretty quickly slowed down 10mph.

Now, why would every driver I encountered in front of me (without exception) speed up when the passing lane approached and slow down when it ended, even though the speed limit was unchanged? What’s the psychology behind this behavior?

Here are my observations:

  1. On a two lane road there are leaders and there are followers. When you are a leader the whole road is before you and you set the speed, when you are a follower you are at the mercy of the person in front of you to set the speed and all you see is the back of the vehicle in front of you. People enjoy having the open road in front of them and even if they are not fast drivers, they are willing to drive a little bit faster to try and retain this privilege (about 10mph faster).
  2. Passing lanes represent a limited window of opportunity for people seeking to pass, and a limited duration of resistance for those looking not to be passed. Because the duration is limited, the leader perceives a threat and a scarcity that they would not perceive on a road that was always two lanes in their direction. As a result, their behavior is different.
  3. If you want to pass someone as a passing lane approaches, you must be prepared to drive 20mph faster to execute the pass before the end of the passing lane, knowing that the person in front of you is not going to stay constant, but will actually speed up.

What are the implications for innovation?

  1. There are always going to be people coming up behind you, seeking to pass you. Innovation is one way to stay ahead of the competition. Incremental innovation can be your 10mph acceleration that reduces the chance of being passed when the passing lanes appear.
  2. You must be aware when the passing lanes will appear. This is often when new technology makes things possible that weren’t possible before or when customer priorities and value assignment changes. Market leaders must recognize the conditions that create passing lanes and form a plan for how to protect themselves, while new entrants must recognize when their opportunity is greatest and move quickly and decisively before the passing lane comes to an end.
  3. You must provide the conditions necessary to make people want to rush into the widening road and seek to accelerate innovation and overtake the other drivers, instead of embracing the safety of the shoulder of the road as others rush by.
  4. People won’t push harder forever. This is the psychology around creating a burning platform. People will fight the fire on a burning platform, but if they feel that the whole house is on fire, then they will look for a new house. As a result a burning-platform approach to innovation is not sustainable, you must instead be much more systemic in your approach to innovation if you are going to use it to help protect your market leadership position.
  5. When a passing lane appears, market leaders must take a careful measurement of the situation and identify how best to react to the factors that have created it. At the same time, market leaders must also identify how long they must push to kill off potential new entrants.
  6. If you’re trying to innovate your way into first place, you must expect the leader to react, and anticipate the way in which they will react and account for that. You must know that the market leaders will look for how to starve you of your oxygen, and will look to accelerate away from you. This is why the most successful passers are those organizations that recognize the passing lane first, are mobilized to accelerate when it appears, and choose to react to the passing lane in a way that will be difficult for the market leaders to react to given their position and psychology.

Competition in a free market economy is not fair, and the playing field is not level, and the road ahead is not an open highway but a two lane road with occasional passing lanes. The organizations that do the best job at identifying when the passing lanes are going to appear and the factors that are going to allow them to accelerate are the ones that will either leapfrog the existing leaders, or maintain their ongoing market leadership.

What kind of organization are you going to be?

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Think ‘Out of Four Walls’

Think 'Out of Four Walls'I had coffee with a clever marketing and sales consultant recently and one of the topics we discussed was the impact of location on a group’s ability to innovate. At the time we spoke about getting people to think in new ways by getting people to think in new places. That is to say that if you always meet in the same places to try and be creative as a team, don’t you ultimately get the same types of thinking? In other words, do you hit a creativity plateau by meeting in the same places all the time?

That of course is part of the reason that companies have off-sites, but I would argue further that the “same places” includes the typical locations for off-sites. I would argue that if you are trying to get people to think differently that you have to take people to an unusual, unexpected location. I would argue that you announce one location for the meeting that you have no intention of going to, get everybody to assemble there, and then go somewhere else. What this achieves is that in the time leading up to the meeting people start preparing mentally for what to expect and how things will go, but then when they show up and you announce you are going somewhere else, you will generate buzz and excitement, the walls of expectation will come tumbling down and you will get people to begin thinking in a different way than they were prepared to think.

That is only half the battle though. My next recommendation would be to pre-arrange for people to bring portable seating with them or bring it for everyone yourself. Then if you are trying to get new thinking, get radical but relevant. For the approach I am to suggest, you must keep the groups small, tailored to the venue you select (you don’t want to be asked to leave, or at least not too quickly).

For example, salespeople for BestBuy who are trying to figure out how to do things differently might go meet in an auto dealership, or a Nordstrom’s, or a 7-eleven. Find a place out of the way and start your meeting. If asked to leave, have your meeting on the sidewalk outside or in the parking lot (going back inside as needed). The site you choose should be related to your business but not directly related – notice Circuit City was not an example.

The site could also however be related to your topic. A meeting to talk about how to better understand what customers want could be held at a busy intersection with stop lights in case you wanted to ask real people what they think. Just please make sure to be careful and not get yourself run over when trying to ask people questions(stay on the sidewalk).

If you meet at someone else’s business, please try to choose a slow time of day and stay off to the side and out of the way. If you’re looking for more “natural” thinking, then meeting in the woods, by a river, or on a hill can also be good. Regardless of where you choose to meet, just be sure to debrief at the site, or literally just outside your own building before returning to work.

If you try this approach to uncovering new thinking I think you will be pleasantly surprised, and I would love it if you send in your stories and photographs of different unusual places you meet and what the topic for the meeting was. I look forward to seeing your “Out of Four Walls” thinking!

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Unlocking the Inner Child for Innovation

Unlocking the Inner Child for Innovation

In the quest to unlock innovation in organizations, it may be beneficial or even mandatory to learn how to unlock the internal children in our employees.

I’m sure we can all remember as children being told “don’t” do this or you “can’t” do that, and the result growing up was to reinforce the idea that there is one “right” way to do anything. It has also led to the creation of a national psychosis of believing that many actions that would create positive change are too difficult to try.

How else would you explain the decline in electoral participation or in labor union membership? The majority of our nation believes that their ideas and their voice are too small to make things better. If it weren’t for those “crazy” entrepreneurs, our country would not continue to grow and dominate new markets.

So how could we create a whole nation of entrepreneurial thinking (or at least a whole organization)?

Well, by reducing the prevalence of “don’t” and “can’t” in our organizational vocabulary and replacing it with “how” and “when”. Here is how it works:

Currently we might say things like:

“Don’t be silly. We can’t build a spaceship that will go faster than the speed of light.”

When if we seek to innovate, we must say:

“How could we build something to travel faster than the speed of light? We can improve upon current methods of propulsion when we achieve the following advances to build upon:”

We must also always ask:

“How could we approach this in a different way?”

Innovation Guidelines Cartoon

This problem of believing there is only one “right” way is compounded by our organization’s inherent intolerance for risk and the accompanying preference to identify reasons not to do something or not to fund an effort. There are lots of ways to overcome this negative management reinforcement, but that is a topic for another day.

For now, we must stop treating employees like children and instead help them unlock and channel their inner child to uncover new “right” ways. Are you ready to democratize innovation?

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Checkbox Hiring Doesn’t Lead to Innovation

Checkbox Hiring Doesn't Lead to InnovationWhen looking for a new job, it seems like 95% of the time people will only hire you to do the job you just did, and the other 5% of the time will provide an equal mix of once in a lifetime opportunities and jobs you shouldn’t take.

So why aren’t organizations more innovative in their hiring processes?

First, recruiters are tasked with providing candidates for interviews who meet certain education and experience requirements set out by the hiring manager. It quickly becomes a case of “you get what you ask for, not what you need.”

Recruiters provide a set of potential recruits that tick the boxes and look very similar on paper. Time constrained hiring managers then interview the people they are provided with and figure they are a “smart” hire because they have the education and experience. This generally means hiring the guy or gal that has done the same job before, preferably at a larger or more respected company.

Need a JobFor example, a restaurant will hire a waiter who has been a waiter before, even if the only reason he is available is that he was a crap waiter every other place he worked. In our hiring system, someone who has experience almost always gets the job, regardless of ability and capacity for growth. Meanwhile the gal who dreams of being a waitress, whose passion for the profession would make her an amazing waitress as she strives to create the perfect customer experience, never gets hired. Where does this leave the person with amazing potential but no direct experience in the position they seek?

They are confined to finding that desperate manager with an entry level opening who just had three people turn down their offer and has nobody left in their pipeline.

We hire people the same way we hire an office chair:

  • Four wheels? – check
  • Tilt? – check
  • Height adjustment? – no
  • …and on to the candidate who might have a height adjustment built-in

Consequently we end up with amazing consumer marketers working as engineering firm accountants because they started out in accounting for an engineering firm straight out of university and now can only get accounting jobs. How much stronger would our economy be if we could find an innovative way to allocate our human resources to those places where their star potential would be unleashed?

Now granted, some companies will allow someone from accounting to move to marketing within the company, but even in those companies that do facilitate this type of movement, the great majority really occurs at the managerial level with individuals the organization views as skilled managers with the potential to move up in the organization. So where does this leave the staff accountant whose real talent is not management but something else like consumer marketing?

Frustrated Hiring ManagerUsually this person is doomed to remain an unhappy accountant, potentially seeking an MBA that may or may not successfully allow them to transition over to the world of marketing.

So why don’t we change the hiring process?

Well, change is hard, and checklists are easy. “I don’t have time to interview as it is, I’ve got work to do! I certainly don’t have time to think about creating a better way to hire. My list of questions works pretty well.”

The problem is that people can only look at how candidates perform that have actually been hired in terms of how long they stay, and similar metrics. We cannot measure how much more we would have benefited if we had hired someone else that we didn’t even consider.

But, if we continue to hire the same type of people that we’ve always hired in the same way that our competitors continue to hire, then we will never achieve a business strategy innovation.

So what’s the answer?

There is no magic answer, but here are some guidelines to consider:

  1. Have recruiters identify and provide at least one or two candidates who show passion but don’t have the experience or education tick boxes checked
  2. Don’t focus on what someone has done, have them show you what they can do
  3. Think about the key tasks and challenges of the position
    • Have the candidate tell you, or even better, show you how they would approach them (remember lingo and document formatting can be learned – do they understand what’s involved?)
  4. Ask them what job they would really like to do in the organization
    • Regardless of what job they’ve applied for
    • Maybe even go so far as telling them that the job they applied for has been filled and see how they react (What job would they choose to interview for?)
  5. Ask them if they think they are qualified to do that other job and if not why not
  6. Movie producers don’t interview actors, they have them audition
    • Use appropriate role plays
    • Have candidates present if doing presentations are part of their role
    • Give them a small piece of real world work to do to see both how they approach it and how well they execute it
    • Have candidates pitch you your product as if you were a potential customer (even if it is not a sales role)

Click here to download my new white paper on ‘Harnessing the Global Talent Pool to Accelerate Innovation’

Final Thought: There is one other side benefit to hiring people with the passion and capability for the job, but not the experience, they’ll usually take less money upfront and won’t be turned off by probationary periods.

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.