GUEST POST by Robert F. Brands

In Robert’s Rules of Innovation II, mastering CEO-speak is one element that can help innovators see their new ideas that they’ve researched and proposed actually acted upon by their company’s top management and most senior leaders—the C-suite. Also known as the “suits” (often of the very expensive European or bespoke variety), these senior leaders usually have many positive attributes, but as disenchanted innovators will tell you—they also can have a difficult time pulling the trigger on a new, innovative idea or direction for the company.

So what exactly is CEO-speak? According to Robert’s Rules of Innovation II, CEO-speak is “quite simply…the language of C-suite executives. Mastery of this language is a pathway into their hearts and minds. Your abilities in this area can mean the difference between a home run and a strikeout.”[1]

Imagine this scenario: you’re about to step into the elusive executive conference room at your company to pitch your innovation to the bigwigs. You’re shaking in your boots/Air Jordans/freshly-shined brogues, hands are clammy if not dripping wet, and your breakfast of innovation champions (three dopio espressos and some rogue almonds you found loose in your desk drawer) is precariously churning in your stomach. You’ve put in the hard work, which likely was afterhours and off-the-clock, as the majority of companies don’t give their employees set aside time in the workday that allows them to innovate in ways that interest them but don’t always fit into their set work projects and job descriptions. Your moment is now; don’t let it slip away.

As mentioned in Robert’s Rules of Innovation II, “I have been told by the disenchanted innovators—the C-suite executives can have a hard time pulling the trigger on a new direction or a refreshing innovation. The disenchanted innovators I hear from boldly give their presentations—which are loaded with facts, figures, and details—see the heads in the room nodding, seemingly in agreement, and then (they tell me, mystified) … nothing happens.”[2] So how does one get their company to follow through on the new directions one has proposed and research—to take action on their idea and actually implement the innovation?  One effective way to increase the chance of such follow-through and implementation is to master the language of CEO-speak to convince top management to support your innovation.

Here’s an abbreviated version of how to speak their language. If you want to learn even more on this topic, check out Chapter 3 “Master CEO-Speak” in Robert’s Rules of Innovation II.

Consider Your Timing

• As they say, timing is everything.[3] You’ll have a better chance of success if your proposed innovation is in congruence with current organizational imperatives. It is prudent to propose an innovation that sharpens a CEO’s company visions or at least an element of the program that fits in with the CEO’s paradigm. For best results, you many need to sit on your idea until this occurs or tailor your idea so that it compatible with your company’s current business imperatives.

Build Consensus

• Instead of trying to sell your idea to the C-suite in a one-shot, intensely pressurized presentation to your bosses, you’re more likely to achieve success if you build organizational consensus well ahead of your “one-shot-is-all-you-got” pitch. You’ll want to garner support for your program from a wide array of your company’s internal constituencies—when you have sponsors from people who have different functions within the company, your idea will gradually build sensibility and create an air of inevitably in order to propel your project forward with a strong internal buffer zone intact.

Communicate Clearly and Regularly

• Once you’ve built your army of internal sponsors, you’re going to need to keep them in the loop. Share frequent progress reports on your project and “[i]nvite your new internal stakeholders to gain an ownership interest in the program by inviting their participation when creating the completed plan.”[4]

Manage expectations:

• Sure, you may be amped up for your project after gaining internal consensus and an involved sponsor network, but don’t get carried away. Show how your project aligns within your company’s current business imperatives, but don’t throw around hyperbolic and unrealistic metrics about revenue projections and market share. It’s always better to under-promise and over-deliver. Don’t make a big internal announcement, sabering champagne bottles and throwing confetti out the office windows in overt celebration. Fueled by your overwhelming excitement, you may be tempted go screaming through the streets/rows of office cubicles. Don’t do it. Be patient. Embrace subtlety. This is the time to “run silent, run deep.”

The Devil Can Sometimes Be the Details

• Sure, you may have crunched every number, analyzed every metric, and made countless spreadsheets and projections and growth charts. This thoroughness is of course important, but you don’t need to throw all this information out there the first time you pitch your presentation. Don’t get down to every nitty-gritty weed on every single tree, but rather focus on the forest instead. Details can cause paralyzing bottlenecks, so instead concentrate on a topline overview and showing how your idea is in congruence with current corporate strategy

“KISS”

• “Keep it Short, Stupid.” Your elevator pitch should be one to two minutes long, focusing on topline elements and not an avalanche of executional details and analytics. Come prepared with a list of thoughtful, honest questions to ask the CEO and then open the meeting up to questions. Likewise, before the meeting, you should anticipate what tough questions you are likely to receive and come prepared with concise, non-defensive answers.

What Would Jimmy Stewart Do?

• The famous actor Jimmy Stewart was known for his down-to-earth persona and straight-shooting ways. Harness your inner “Jimmy Stewart” when pitching your idea. Trim the fat, all the jargon, and obsessive details. You want your presentation to be straightforward and easily understood by someone who is mainly concerned with the big-picture themes and has both limited time and a limited attention span.

There is No I in Team

• Sure, the idea you’re about to present may be your personal idea, your precious baby. But your presentation must focus on the innovation you’re presenting and the person to whom you’re presenting. You don’t want your audience focusing on the presenter, no matter how brilliant and dynamic of a presenter and personality you may be. It’s not about you; it’s about the purpose of your idea, how it aligns with the company’s strategic direction, and what it can ultimately do for the company.

Last but not least understand what is important to them, use of existing assets, capex spend, growth and marketshare…all the things they worry about.

To learn more about how to master CEO-speak as an effective strategy to increase the chances of your idea becoming a reality, check out the new innovation in business book Robert’s Rules of Innovation II: The Art of Implementation.

[2] Robert’s Rules of Innovation II: The Art of Implementation (See p.44)

[3] To learn more about the interplay of timing and innovation, check out these two previously published posts on this blog:

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

GUEST POST by Robert F. Brands

Robert’s Rules of Innovation: A 10-Step Program for Corporate Survival lays out a fundamental framework of 10 Key Imperatives to help businesses create a structured, repeatable innovation process. Building upon this fundamental framework, the recently published Robert’s Rules of Innovation II: The Art of Implementation delves deeper into how to implement a culture of innovation in one’s work environment.

As mentioned in The Art of Implementation: interestingly enough, of all the passages in the first Robert’s Rules of Innovation book, one of the passages that got the most input from readers was the section in Chapter V discussing the “care and feeding of creatives”.[1] Oh those creative types! Why are people so opinionated, even impassioned and obsessed, with the creatives? It’s as if the creatives are a special breed on display at a zoo—and the most popular exhibit at the zoo, to boot! People crowd around watching the creatives—with reactions ranging from amusement to mouth-agape awe to furrowed brows and a shocked, confused look—pointing fingers at them, pontificating about who they are and what they do and passing judgement on whether they are good or bad or an asset or a liability to the company. These special people, these creatives—my oh my, what a sight to behold!

And when the leashes comes off these wild creatures and the creatives are let loose in workplace, they often cause paradoxical, “damned if you do and damned if you don’t” opinions and reactions from those around them. The Art of Implementation asks, “Why? Why are creative people, and creativity itself, admired and coveted, yet so often rejected out of hand?”[2]

The book suggests that perhaps part of the obsession stems from the fact that we can’t all be creatives. “The plain reality is that most folks are risk adverse and creative types are risk takers…creativity can be fostered, or encouraged, but the plain truth is that some of us just don’t have that ability.”[3] People fear creatives because not everyone can be a creative, no matter how much they try. You can’t study, train, buy, cheat, weasel, or steal your way into the special club that is being a true creative. This “hard stop”, this fear of the unknown and unattainable, can be very scary to some.

So you’re not a creative. Big whoop! You probably can’t run a sub-4:00 minute mile or multiply 10-digit numbers in your head or speak fluent, click-consonant Hadza after just a weekend jaunt to Tanzania either!

It’s time to focus on what it is that you can do, which is to build an innovation team at your business that is inclusive of creative types. And don’t just talk the (“we need to be more creative”) talk, implementing an organized work culture of creativity and innovation in business requires walking the actual risky, tight-rope walk. Ask yourself whether your organization can really handle the cultural upheaval that creativity/innovation brings or are you only comfortable operating in the same safe, commonsense manner as you always have? As the old, often-quoted adage says, “Be careful what you wish for, because you might just get it.”

To get ahead, you can’t always play it safe and remain in status quo land because you’re scared. To implement a permanent culture of innovation in one’s work environment, you need to find, recruit, and land the right creative type of people for your innovation team. Let your guard down. You must be willing to embrace and accommodate those who have a different set of skills, values, and way of working. With the creatives you have recruited to join your innovation team, you’ve got to have enough trust to take off their metaphorical leashes. Give the creatives the freedom to push back the status quo and to even obliterate the status quo with a sledgehammer. This freedom will unleash their creativity, ultimately helping to catapult your business into a new role as industry leaders, rather than be left behind as laggard and scared, same-old status quo followers.

To learn more about how to build your innovation team, build an innovation culture at your business, and put a plan in place to implement innovation (and then actually see this plan through to completion), check out the new innovation in business book Robert’s Rules of Innovation II: The Art of Implementation.

[1] Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

GUEST POST by Robert F. Brands

In the innovation and business growth book, Robert’s Rules of Innovation: A 10-Step Program for Corporate Survival, I’ve forth ten imperatives on how to create and sustain innovation. The third imperative on the list, the “New Product Development Process” (aka the “NPD” process), is a highly critical part of the innovation in business process. The NPD process is often referred to as the Stage-Gate^® Process [1], and according to its developers is, “a carefully designed business process and the result of comprehensive research into understanding the reasons behind product success and failure.”[2]

While the modern innovation industry’s Stage-Gate^® Process is widely used for new product development and is supremely more effective than undisciplined development, sometimes the Stage-Gate^® Process is not enough, especially in cases where the new product is exceptionally innovative and mandates solving very challenging inventive problems and issues. In such instances, one may be able to improve the innovation process and ultimately achieve better results by introducing the TRIZ method into the NPD/Stage-Gate^® Process.

What is TRIZ?

All sorts of projects reach a point in the development process where the analysis portion of the project is complete, but it is unclear what the next step should be. To figure out the next best step, the project team must be creative to figure out what to do. Traditionally, common creativity tools and methodology have been constrained to brainstorming and similar methods, which are dependent on team members’ intuition, knowledge, and orders given by somebody in a position of authority. These common creativity tools and methods are often described as psychologically based; and unfortunately, they often have unpredictable and unrepeatable results. And that’s where TRIZ should come in…

TRIZ is a (Russian) acronym for the “Theory of Inventive Problem Solving”, which was developed by G.S. Altshuller and his colleagues between 1946 and 1985 in the former U.S.S.R. According to the TRIZ Journal webpage, “TRIZ is a problem solving method based on logic and data, not intuition, which accelerates the project team’s ability to solve these problems creatively. TRIZ also provides repeatability, predictability, and reliability due to its structure and algorithmic approach.”[3] As opposed to psychologically-based common creativity tools, “TRIZ is an international science of creativity that relies on the study of the patterns of problems and solutions, not on the spontaneous and intuitive creativity of individuals or groups. More than three million patents have been analyzed to discover the patterns that predict breakthrough solutions to problems.”[4] It also should be noted that TRIZ solves all kinds of problems, not just those involving patentable entities.

TRIZ research first began with the idea that there are universal principles of creativity that form the basis for technology-advancing creative innovations. The TRIZ researchers hypothesized that if these universal principles of creativity could somehow be objectively identified and codified, then they could be made teachable to people and make the innovation process more predictable.[5] A condensed version of this idea is as follows:

Somebody someplace has already solved this problem (or one very similar to it). Creativity is now finding that solution and adapting it to this particular problem.[6]

As described in the “What is TRIZ?” section on the TRIZ Journal webpage, the three primary findings of TRIZ research since its inception are:

Problems and solutions are repeated across industries and sciences. The classification of the contradictions in each problem predicts the creative solutions to that problem.

1. Patterns of technical evolution are repeated across industries and sciences.
2. Creative innovations use scientific effects outside the field where they were developed.

And accordingly, the practice of TRIZ involves learning these repeating patterns of problems and solutions, repeating patterns of technical evolution and methods of using scientific effects, and then applying these general TRIZ patterns to your specific problem.[7]

When to Use TRIZ?

The following graphic, developed by Ellen Domb[8] of the TRIZ PQR Group, gives an easily-digestible answer to the question:

While modern industry has developed its own best practices for the new product development process, such as the popular Stage-Gate Process, it would be naïve and counter-productive to not try to introduce a new arsenal of tools such as the TRIZ approach to tackle difficult inventive problems. If properly used, the TRIZ approach and best practices such as the Stage-Gate Process can greatly benefit each other. These approaches are not rivals, but rather can be used to amplify each other’s successes.

To learn more about innovation in business, check out the innovation books Robert’s Rules of Innovation: A 10-Step Program for Corporate Survival and Robert’s Rules of Innovation II: The Art of Implementation.

[1] Stage-Gate® is a registered trademark of the Product Development Institute Inc.

[2] For more information about Stage-Gate®, see www.stage-gate.com.

[3] https://www.triz-journal.com/triz-what-is-triz/

[4] https://www.triz-journal.com/triz-what-is-triz/

[5] https://www.triz-journal.com/triz-what-is-triz/

[6] https://www.triz-journal.com/triz-what-is-triz/

[7] https://www.triz-journal.com/triz-what-is-triz/

[8] Dr. Ellen Domb is the founder and principal TRIZ consultant of the PQR Group. She is also the founding editor of the TRIZ Journal. TRIZ is Dr. Domb’s 6th career: she has been a physics professor, an aerospace engineer, an engineering manager, a product line general manager, and a strategic planning/quality improvement consultant. In 2005, she was named by Quality Digest Magazine as a leading voice for the future, citing the integration of TRIZ for innovation in quality improvement and quality planning systems.

image credit: triz-journal.com

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

GUEST POST by Robert F. Brands

What We Can Learn from the Story of Serial Innovator and Entrepreneur Joy Mangano

Producer David O. Russell’s most recent movie, Joy[1], begins with a title card appearing on the screen announcing this dedication: “Inspired by the true stories of daring women. One in particular.”[2] That one particular woman is Joy Mangano, the “Queen of HSN”, who is a serial entrepreneur and innovator with more than a hundred patents to her name and is most famously known for her first invention, the Miracle Mop.

While the movie, starring Hollywood heavyweights Jennifer Lawrence (as the title character), Bradley Cooper, and Robert De Niro, is an entertaining and feel-good, inspirational film, the movie is not a truly accurate representation of Joy Mangano’s rags-to-riches life story. While the movie’s general premise closely aligns with Mangano’s life story, Jennifer Lawrence told TIME, “that the movie is only 50% inspired by Mangano.” As for the other half, Lawrence says that it comes from producer David O. Russell’s “imagination and different daring women that have inspired him.”[3]

The accuracy of the big-screen adaptation of Mangano’s life is not what’s most relevant here. More importantly, we can glean so many lessons about business acumen and innovation in business from her life story. Here are some of the most acute takeaways and innovation lessons from her life story:

While it’s definitely a myth that entrepreneurs/innovators are born not made, Mangano started innovating at a young age. As story will have it, at age 12 she tinkered around with her family’s toaster to get it to not only toast but also roast. Moreover, while working at a vet’s office as a teenager, she came up with the idea of fluorescent collar for animals to wear at night to increase their visibility to cars. She did nothing about this great idea and when Hartz, a large pet products and supply company, brought a similar product to market the very next year, Mangano made a promise to herself that the next time she had a great idea, she would bring it to market first.[4]

Innovation Lesson No. 1: Don’t sit on great ideas. There are many categories where being first-to-market gives you a substantive advantage. While teenage Mangano did not have the knowledge or the financial wherewithal to get legal protection for her idea, this example still serves as a lesson for today’s innovators. As discussed in the business growth book Robert’s Rules of Innovation: A 10-Step Program for Corporate Survival, a key innovation imperative is Idea Management. As to which, “The IP attorney is essential to the care and feeding—protection—of your idea(s). Patents are important tools for both offensive and defensive strategy.”[5]

After her divorce in 1989, Joy Mangano was struggling to pay the bills working two jobs as a waitress and an airline-reservation manager while living with her three kids in Long Island, NY. It was also in 1989 that her idea for the Miracle Mop (her first product for which she is most famously known) was born. As Mangano says in an interview with ABC News, “I just was tired of bending down, putting my hands in dirty water, ringing out a mop. So I said, ‘There’s gotta be a better way.”[6] Mangano’s better way was a self-wringing mop, which later got named the Miracle Mop.

Innovation Lesson No. 2: The best ideas can often be found right in front of you; necessity can sometimes breed invention.

In 1990, she borrowed money to make the prototype of the Miracle Mop and was fulfilling orders from her home with her kids helping her package orders. That first year, she managed to sell a few thousand mops from home and then took her product to QVC. As she explained to ABC News, “At first it was demonstrated on TV without me…and it didn’t do so well. They wanted to return the mop. But Mangano begged the QVC producers for a chance to sell it herself on air—and that chance paid off (she sold 18,000 mops in 20 minutes). “I got on stage and the phones went crazy and we sold out every last mop.”[7]

Innovation Lesson No. 3: Sometimes it’s more than having just a great product; it’s the person that can make the product. When they put Joy Mangano on the air, she really resonated with viewers and as a result, her product also resonated with viewers. Oftentimes, for an innovation to succeed, you have to realize that the power of the brand lies within you as a person. Mangano started her on-air career at QVC and then sold her company, Ingenious Designs LLC, to HSN in 1999. She still is the face of the network, hence her nickname “Queen of HSN, and remains one of their most successful sellers.

While the Miracle Mop is Mangano’s most famous invention, it is definitely neither her only invention nor her most successful one. Mangano’s most successful invention is actually Huggable Hangers, which is HSN’s number one seller and has sold over 700 million to date. Impressively, Mangano also holds more than a hundred patents to her name.

Innovation Lesson No. 4: Always be innovating. Out of the over 100 patents Mangano has to her name, some have been blockbuster hits and others have been failures. As such, one should always be innovating!

[1] Note: The movie “Joy” was released in U.S. theatres on Christmas Day 2015. It is still playing in some theatres and is expected to be released on Amazon on May 3, 2016 and made available on Netflix and at Redbox on May 31, 2016. To watch the official trailer, click here.

[2] https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-joy-review-20151225-column.html

[3] https://time.com/4161779/joy-movie-accuracy-fact-check/

[4] https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/entertainment/a36158/joy-mangano-facts/

[5] Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

GUEST POST by Robert F. Brands

In the previously published blog “,we discussed the timing lessons that can be gleaned from Starbucks early humble beginnings in 1971 right up until it became a private company in 1987. In this second and final part of the blog, we’ll cover what the Starbucks story—during its private company era (1987-1992), IPO (1992) era, Great Recession era, and its present day status—teach us about the interplay of timing and innovation.

From a Single Bean Grew a Beanstalk: The Private Company Era (1987-1982)

As a private company between 1987-1982, Starbucks opened 150 new stores in five years, which surpassed its 1987 business plan objective of 125 new stores.[1] Schultz’s business plan had predicted that there would be losses in Starbucks early years; and he was right: Starbucks posted losses of $330,000 in 1987, $764,000 in 1988, and $1.2 million in 1989.[2] In 1990, Starbucks finally boasted a profit. Despite being in the red those initial years, Starbucks was still able to raise the needed funds from venture capital financing. When board members tensely questioned Howard Schultz about the company’s lack of profitability, he had to find a way to justify those losses to the board and prove that they were necessary for an investment strategy.

He told the board, “We’re going to keep losing money until we can do three things. We have to attract a management team well beyond our expansion needs. We have to build a world-class roasting facility. And we need a computer information system sophisticated enough to keep track of sales in hundreds and hundreds of stores.”[3]

Timing Lesson No. 1[LSK1] : Patience. Patience. Patience. You need to patient about seeing profits while you put in the necessary infrastructure to support continued growth well into the future. A “stitch-in-time-saves-nine” philosophy.

Timing Lesson No. 2: Stop watching the clock. Don’t be so short-sighted. A large part of Starbucks success can be attributed to the fact that Schultz was not in it for a short-term profit, but rather took a long-term view of his business and made his business decisions in view of that.

The IPO-Whoa! Era (1992)

The Starbucks Corporation (NASDAQ stock symbol: SBUX) had its initial public offering on June 26, 1992 (initial stock price was $17 per share) and has proved to be one of the most successful examples of a mid-sized, reasonably-priced business coming to the public market and then performing exceptionally well for its shareholders.[4] Amazingly, most of the shareholders’ gains have been through price appreciation since Starbucks didn’t start paying out a dividend until 2010 (although they have had six, 2-for-1 stock splits since its 1992 IPO).[5]

Imagine this “hit the jackpot” stock investment scenario: on the day of Starbucks June 26, 1992 IPO, you invested $1000 in Starbucks stock. As of October 31, 2015, your initial $1000 investment would be worth $230,845 (this takes into account the six 2-1 stock splits and cumulative cash dividends since 2010). Most likely, this figure will continue to expand as Starbucks expands, raises prices, and buys back stock in the future. This represents an annual growth rate of 26.68 percent, which basically crushes almost everything that has come or gone since this Starbucks IPO.[6] In other words, you would have hit the stock market lottery. Do you know how many $4+ fancy Starbucks latte beverages you could buy with your earnings? How about a “Cheers!” to that giant cup of joe? Or, better yet, to that giant cup of dough you have!

Trouble Abrewing: Starbucks Late 2000s Failures and The Great Recession

In 2007, Starbucks was headed down a slippery path to costly failures, for both reasons of the company’s own doings and outside factors—mainly that the country was about to snowball into a massive economic downtown known as The Great Recession. The Great Recession refers to the U.S. recession, which officially lasted from December 2007 to June 2009, and the ensuing global recession in 2009.[7] A cup of pricey Starbucks coffee was going to become a luxury many had to nix from their budgets.

But the shift wasn’t all due to the customers tightening their purse strings, there was also a concurrent customer shift in the way customers viewed Starbucks. Many consumers now viewed the coffee conglomerate as a giant, money-hungry company that was putting hardworking mom-and-pop coffee stores out of business and charging too much for their products. Products that, according to their already cash-strapped customers, also tasted sub-par too.

In addition to mediocre, overpriced coffee beverages, Starbucks had become offering an increased number of non-coffee product offerings (i.e., music CDs) and got mixed in with the entertainment business as studios would pay Starbucks to promote their new releases. Schultz, as he discusses in his book Onward: How Starbucks Fought for Its Life without Losing Its Soul, would ultimately see that this foray into entertainment industry as such: “while it had its upside [looked great on company’s Profit and Loss statements; large gross profit margin]”, he ultimately recognized that it “was another side of hubris born of a sense of invincibility.”[8]

Starbucks began to fail itself. The following are some examples of how Schultz began to fix it:[9]

• · A 180^◦ shift in priorities; had to completely rework its business growth strategies
• · Recognized that the massive number of stores was causing cannibalization; made the difficult decision to shut down 600 underperforming stores
• · Fixing the coffee-taste problems: on one day, he closed 7100 stores to retrain baristas
• · Improved the customer experience by focusing on the customer; launched Facebook and Twitter profiles and a site where customers could submit and vote on ideas
• · Acquired public goodwill when it held its 10,000 person leadership conference in post-Katrina New Orleans, bringing badly needed revenue into the dilapidated city
• · Taking pundits by surprise, Starbucks finally recorded growth in earnings in Q3 of 2009, earned the Zagat rating for best tasting coffee, and had one of the most popular corporate Facebook pages of the time period

Timing Lesson No. 3: In order to succeed, you have to be open to trying new things and sometimes failing so that you can learn from your mistakes and ultimately get stronger for the future. This idea of failing can be analogous to the concept of antibodies and adaptive immunity in the body. Put a little bit of the bad germs in the body and then give the body time to adapt and remember these germs that have previously infected the body. When they try to infect the body again, the body’s next trained response is rapid, accurate and effective.

Present Day Status

Starbucks used to be considered an upscale brand; now it’s considered too popular to be cool as its biggest competitors are the pedestrian Dunkin’ Donuts and McDonalds/McCafé. Despite its high price point, many tastemakers believe Starbucks beverages and the surrounding company image are too “basic”, meaning they are too closely associated with mass consumerism. A much cooler, hipper coffee brand would be Blue Bottle Coffee, which just raised $25 million for expansion. Since widespread popularity can be the kiss of death for a brand that wants to be perceived as unique and upscale, Starbucks has had to be aware of its place in the market and make cultural relevance their priority. Starbucks has tried to increase their cultural relevance with cold-brewed coffee and almond milk offerings, a partnership with hipper Evolution Fresh cold-pressed juices, special reserve coffee beans, and revamping their food offerings through their acquisition of the La Boulange bakery.

Timing Lesson No. 4: As times and tastes and “what’s hip” changes, a company has to be willing to innovate within their brand proposition. Innovation in business means you are willing and able to try new things knowing full well that sometimes there will be failure, but overall these failures will teach you something and leave your company stronger than before.

The Starbucks story shares lessons in the power of innovation built on best practices and a hefty respect for the interconnectedness of timing and innovation in business. As innovation coach Robert Brands says, “the difference between a great idea and a so-so concept” is in the timing. To learn more about the importance timing plays in the innovation and implementation process, check out check out the innovation books Robert’s Rules of Innovation: A 10-Step Program for Corporate Survival and Robert’s Rules of Innovation II: The Art of Implementation (available since December 8, 2015).

[1] https://www.mhhe.com/business/management/thompson/11e/case/starbucks-1.html

[2] https://www.mhhe.com/business/management/thompson/11e/case/starbucks-1.html

[3] https://www.entrepreneurmag.co.za/advice/success-stories/entrepreneur-profiles/starbucks-howard-schultz/

[4] https://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/120215/if-you-had-invested-right-after-starbucks-ipo.asp

[5] https://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/120215/if-you-had-invested-right-after-starbucks-ipo.asp

[6] https://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/120215/if-you-had-invested-right-after-starbucks-ipo.asp

[7] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/great-recession.asp

[8] https://books.google.com/books?id=Dn8xXyvDlSwC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

[9] https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/howard-schultz-profile-failure-jeff-stibel

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

GUEST POST by Robert F. Brands

Timing. It can be the impetuous for the greatest, most serendipitous of love stories—the perfect Craigslist Missed Connection “How We Met” story later memorialized in the New York Time’s “Vows” section. Or, the most tragic, ill-timed ones—like all that tragic poison-drinking and dagger-stabbing by star-crossed (and horrifically-timed) lovers in Shakespeare’s “Romeo and Juliet.” It’s not just in the battlefield of love that timing plays a heavy hand in destiny. The same goes for the effect of timing on business innovation. The right timing can catapult your business to great heights; but by the same token, a mistimed venture can turn into nothing but a money-sucking, time-wasting failure.

Without further ado and without a further aside into my other favorite Shakespearean play “Much Ado About Nothing,” here’s your daily business innovation brew: the slow-roasting story of Starbucks’ success and what it teaches us about the importance of timing and innovation. So you can best digest this ripe-with-content subject matter, we’ve separated this topic into two blogs.

The instant Part 1 of the two-part blog series on the Starbucks story covers the time period from Starbucks’ humble beginnings in 1971 as just a single storefront to Howard Shultz raising the necessary capital to buy Starbucks and make it a private company in 1987.

Along this caffeinated journey, we’ll be pointing out the important timing and innovation takeaways from Starbucks’ success story. Part 2 of this two-part blog series will cover the timing and innovation lessons we can glean from Starbucks’ operations during its Private Company Era (1987-1982), its 1982 IPO, and Present Day happenings.

All we’ve got is the beans! The Humble Beginnings Era (1971-1987)

Long before there was seemingly a Starbucks on every corner and the phrase “Iced Venti Decay Skinny Cinnamon Dolce Latte with two extra shots (please!)” was a part of everyday vernacular, a coffee was something brewed at home or ordered with breakfast at the diner or café. No fuss. No infinite options. Just black, with milk, or with cream. And for typically less than a buck. The commercialized-caffeine juggernaut that we think of today when we think of Starbucks didn’t start out that way.

The Starbucks story began in 1971.[1] Three friends, inspired by a mutual love of fine coffee and another gourmet coffee entrepreneur, Alfred Peet, opened a tiny storefront in the Pike Place Market in Seattle, WA. The first Starbucks store didn’t even sell coffee by the cup, but rather sold only whole-roasted coffee beans. Even though the timing was all wrong—coffee consumption had been on a downward consumption trend since the early 1960s and Seattle was floundering during the Boeing Bust (the tough economic times that ensued after Boeing, Seattle’s largest employer, cut 60,000 jobs and other industries were in similar slumps). Who would have thought nearly 45 years later, Starbucks would boast 23,043 retail store locations in 68 countries[2] and have a whopping enterprise value of $79.99 billion[3] (as of February 10, 2016). Answer: it would take a true visionary to see this future.

Enter Howard Schultz to the scene; [the] stage [is] right!

Howard Schultz, current chairman and CEO of Starbucks, had a hunch. Back in 1981, when Shultz was working for a company that made plastic products, he astutely noticed that a small Seattle coffee store was purchasing more of a particular drip coffeemaker than mega-department store Macy’s was. He decided to investigate this anomaly further, even flying to Seattle to meet with Starbucks’ three founders and learning about their passion for coffee. In Schultz’s book, Pour Your Heart Into It: How Starbucks Built a Company One Cup at a Time, he describes what he felt flying back to New York after his first visit to Starbucks in Seattle:

“I believe in destiny. In Yiddish, they call it bashert. At that moment, flying 35,000 feet above the earth, I could feel the tug of Starbucks. There was something magic about it, a passion and authenticity I had never experienced in business. Maybe, just maybe, I could be part of that magic.”[4]

Timing Lesson No. 1:

Sure, timing is a little part luck a lot part preparation, but at the root of every innovation success story, whether it’s a slowly-brewed success or an instant hit, is an intrepid spirit. You’ve got to believe in the magic of your idea!

A year later, after travelling abroad and falling in love with Italy’s idea of the coffee-bar, with all its ambiance and sense of community, Shultz came back to the states and started working for Starbucks. However, the original Starbucks founders were not similarly captivated by the idea of moving Starbucks from the coffee bean business into the coffee bar business. Accordingly (and in order to stay true to his innovative vision of “what Starbucks could be’), he left the company and opened his own Il Giornale coffee shops. As he immersed himself in the coffee bar business, he became increasingly convinced that he wanted to purchase the original Starbucks company and give the Starbucks name to his growing arsenal of Il Giornale coffee shops. In 1987, he managed to secure enough financing ($3.8 million) to buy Starbucks.[5]

Timing Lesson No. 2:

The naysayers and narrow-minded might harp on the point that “timing is everything”; “the current climate isn’t the time to start anything new”; or “this is a been-there-done-that idea; there’s no room in the market for innovation or anything new.” But not Shultz. He knew there were local coffee bars all over the states, but none that offered the coffee-bar experience he’d seen abroad: a special type of gathering place that was neither quite your home or quite your office—the idea of the “third place.” Whereas others would have turned their back on the idea, citing too much commodization or competition in the coffee shop business category, Shultz dared to disrupt (and by disrupt, I mean emphatically shake up) the status quo.

Timing Lesson No. 3:

The right timing won’t just magically “bing” as an appointment on your personal and business calendar. Sometimes you have to create your own “right timing”; see opportunity where others don’t; be a disrupter and make your own time; ignore the cynics; and ultimately create your own business’s destiny. When it comes to innovation in business, this is known as disruptive innovation: “a term of art coined by Clayton Christensen, [which] describes a process by which a product or service takes root initially in simple applications at the bottom of a market and then relentlessly moves up market, eventually displacing established competitors.”[6] This disruptive innovation concept is discussed in both of Robert Brands’s business entrepreneurship books: Robert’s Rules of Innovation: A 10-Step Program for Corporate Survival and the newly published, on December 8, 2015, Robert’s Rules of Innovation II: The Art of Implementation.

Check back on this blog soon for the second and final part of this two-part series [LSK1] , which will discuss the interplay between timing and innovation during Starbucks’ Private Company Era (1987-1982), the 1992 Starbucks IPO and Public Company Era (June 1992-Present), and Present Day Events.

To learn more about timing and innovation and the art of implementing innovation, grab your cup of coffee and check out the innovation books Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

GUEST POST by Robert F. Brands

Do Current Accounting Systems Inhibit Innovation?

Innovation thought leaders and industry experts emphatically harp that if you want to stay afloat (and ultimately thrive) in today’s hyper-competitive business environment, innovation is not optional—it’s absolutely imperative for survival and success. Your customers demand it; and if you can’t innovate, your competitors will consistently outflank and outperform you. Sink or swim. Fly or fall. Produce or perish.

Innovate to thrive. Innovate or die.

Even if you follow all the “rules” and imperatives to innovate and thrive in this competitive marketplace, build a company culture to sustain the creation of new ideas, and take action to promote actual implementation of innovation, success is never guaranteed. In some cases, the numbers and figures churned out by today’s generally accepted accounting systems can create an insurmountable roadblock to new idea creation and the implementation of innovation.

The corporate big-wigs, the board of directors, the investors, private and public funders, shareholders, and the like—they often render the make-or-break decisions about the fate of your business and the future of funding for your big idea based on the four square walls of your basic accounting financial statements. What’s the bottom line? What’s your ROI? Your cash asset ratio? Your net profit margin? (And a whole other stew of esoteric accounting terms and an alphabet soup of financial acronyms.)

When companies base their internal performance measurement systems solely on short-term profits or traditional GAAP-approved accounting returns—the results can be dangerously skewed, causing premature or inappropriate decisions about the fate of new innovations and R&D funding.

Dale Halling, a patent attorney specializing in high technology companies, discusses in both his book The Source of Economic Growth and blog post Accounting Inhibits R&D how current accounting rules may inhibit R&D and innovation and ultimately may be bad for society and business as a whole. Major takeaways from Halling’s work include:

If you invent something without obtaining legal title to it (i.e., through obtaining a patent on the invention), the economic value of the invention is substantially reduced since without legal title, you can’t license, sell, or finance the invention.

• Pursuant to current accounting rules, both the cost for creating an invention and obtaining legal title to that invention dictate an immediate expensing of these costs. Why are these costs expensed rather than capitalized? The accounting board’s rationale (as nonsensical and counter-productive as it can often appear) is due to the uncertainty in identifying the amount and time of the future benefits of these expenditures. Since they are classified as intangible assets, the current accounting rules say they should not be classified as assets on the company’s balance sheet.
• Halling says, “Our present accounting systems never show [that] internally funded inventions produce any value.”[1] To illustrate this point, he uses the example of a new cellular telephone that has come about due to millions of dollars worth of investments in numerous inventions. Even with the case of a new cellular telephone where most of the phone’s profits are based on its inventions and not to manufacturing, our present accounting systems “only allocate a return for the manufacturing of the phone and nothing for the inventions that made the phone possible.”[2] This seems perverse as the massive difference in price between the latest and greatest cellular phone and a cellular phone with old and outdated technology is due to the inventions in the new phone, not to manufacturing.
• This flawed accounting system makes it appear that the expenses associated with creating inventions appear to have no return, which in turn causes substantial under-investment in invention. Additionally, this flawed accounting system also causes companies to overvalue their manufacturing processes. With no realistic idea of what the actual return on manufacturing processes is, companies cannot make well-informed, smart decisions on whether to manufacture a product using their inventions or to license the technology to another external entity. [3]

How can this be fixed?

It’s becoming increasingly obvious that our accounting systems need to be modified. After all, many of today’s current companies have 75 percent of their value stemming from intangible assets. These assets may not appear on the company’s balance sheet, but doesn’t it seem grossly negligent to completely ignore them during the company’s valuation process? If we can somehow effectuate a major change in our present accounting systems so that they more accurately track the value or inventions and other intangible assets like patents or other forms of intellectual property, companies would hopefully become less wasteful and make more educated decisions about whether to keep or sell their inventions and licenses. This ideally would encourage a surge of inventions and innovations in businesses that enrich our lives in both monetary and non-monetary ways.

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

GUEST POST by Robert F. Brands

On Tuesday, January 12, 2016, President Barack Obama gave his final State of the Union (“SOTU”) address to a joint session of Congress on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C.. According to Nielsen TV Ratings estimates, an average audience of 31.3 million people watched the SOTU across 12 television networks; and according to Nielsen Twitter TV Ratings, about 9.8 million people in the U.S. saw one or more of the 2.6 million tweets about the 2016 SOTU.[1] Did you watch the 2016 SOTU? (Note: For the full text transcript of the 2016 SOTU, click here; for the full video recording watch below:

Obama’s lease is almost up at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.; however, his final SOTU wasn’t about him, but rather about the future of the country: “But for my final address to this chamber, I don’t want to just talk about next year. I want to focus on the next five years, the next 10 years, and beyond. I want to focus on our future.”[2] In his address, the President laid out his plan to seize opportunities before us: “So let’s talk about the future, and four big questions that I believe we as a country have to answer — regardless of who the next President is, or who controls the next Congress.”[3]

What was your most memorable part of Obama’s final SOTU address? Was it when Obama emphatically (and perhaps symbolically?) dropped the mic (see video clip here) at the end of his address? First Lady Michelle Obama’s sunny marigold shift dress?

As a business leader, innovation coach and practitioner, and author of two innovation books (Robert’s Rules of Innovation: A 10-Step Program for Corporate Survival and Robert’s Rules of Innovation II: The Art of Implementation), my interest in the SOTU perked up when Obama said, “And this brings me to the second big question we as a country have to answer: How do we reignite that spirit of innovation to meet our biggest challenges?”.[4] The President continued,

Sixty years ago, when the Russians beat us into space, we didn’t deny Sputnik was up there. We didn’t argue about the science, or shrink our research and development budget. We built a space program almost overnight. And 12 years later, we were walking on the moon.

Now, that spirit of discovery is in our DNA. America is Thomas Edison and the Wright Brothers and George Washington Carver. America is Grace Hopper and Katherine Johnson and Sally Ride. America is every immigrant and entrepreneur from Boston to Austin to Silicon Valley, racing to shape a better world. That’s who we are.

And over the past seven years, we’ve nurtured that spirit. We’ve protected an open Internet, and taken bold new steps to get more students and low-income Americans online. We’ve launched next-generation manufacturing hubs, and online tools that give an entrepreneur everything he or she needs to start a business in a single day. But we can do so much more.[5]

Innovation should be on the forefront of everyone’s mind. If you want to succeed in today’s rapidly changing business world, innovation is imperative and absolutely necessary for continued success. As emphatically phrased in Robert’s Rules of Innovation: A 10-Step Program for Corporate Survival: “Innovate or die.”

Innovation was a central theme of President Obama’s 2016 SOTU, but was 2016 the first time Obama used the word “innovation” in his SOTU address? If my memory serves me correctly, I think he has specifically used the term innovation before; but to be sure, I did a little research down SOTU memory lane. Check out the following table:

This table shows us that Obama’s talk of innovation in his 2016 SOTU was not a new topic or theme for the President to highlight in his address; but rather something that he has highlighted in his addresses every single year of his 2-term presidency.

Nurturing the spirit of innovation is essential for launching this country (and your business) into a successful future. It is an imperative for success that crosses party lines and is relevant for everyone. With your business, how will you help create not only a thriving culture of innovation but also effectuate the actual implementation of innovation?

For more information on how to promote and implement innovation within your company, check out the innovation books Robert’s Rules of Innovation: A 10-Step Program for Corporate Survival (to order, see Amazon) and Robert’s Rules of Innovation II: The Art of Implementation (available as of December 8, 2015 on both Amazon.com and at selected bookstores; to order today, see Amazon).

[2] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/01/12/remarks-president-barack-obama-%E2%80%93-prepared-delivery-state-union-address

[3] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/01/12/remarks-president-barack-obama-%E2%80%93-prepared-delivery-state-union-address

[4] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/01/12/remarks-president-barack-obama-%E2%80%93-prepared-delivery-state-union-address

[5] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/01/12/remarks-president-barack-obama-%E2%80%93-prepared-delivery-state-union-address

[6] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/01/12/remarks-president-barack-obama-%E2%80%93-prepared-delivery-state-union-address

[7] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/01/20/remarks-president-state-union-address-january-20-2015

[8] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/01/28/president-barack-obamas-state-union-address

[9] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/02/12/remarks-president-state-union-address

[10] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/01/24/remarks-president-state-union-address

[11] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/01/25/remarks-president-state-union-address

[12] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-state-union-address

[13] Like the four past presidents (Reagan in 1981, George H.W. Bush in 1989, Bill Clinton in 1993, George W. Bush in 2001), President Obama did not give an official State of the Union address his first year in office. However, on February 24, 2009, Obama did give his first major address to a Joint Session of Congress.  See https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2016-01-12/questions-and-answers-about-the-state-of-the-union-address

[14] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-barack-obama-address-joint-session-congress

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

GUEST POST by Robert F. Brands

If you want to survive in today’s supersonic-fast business world, innovation is no longer optional, it’s imperative. Underscoring this same sentiment and urgency for business growth via innovation, Robert’s Rules of Innovation: A 10-Step Program for Corporate Survival provides the straightforward warning: “Innovate or die.” This corporate survival guide presents the best practices for today’s “innovate or die” world in an easily digestible (yet powerful) fundamental framework of the 10 imperatives your business must implement in order for its innovation program to succeed.

Innovation without implementation is mere ideation. And buyer beware: this “mere” ideation can often be expensive, morale-killing, and potentially business-imploding. To prevent getting infinitely stuck in the ideation phase wasteland, remember that innovation typically doesn’t fail due to a lack of creativity but rather due to a lack a discipline.

In both and of this three-part blog series on “Innovation and the Art of Implementation”, it was emphatically stressed that since innovation is both an art and a science—in order to get results, your organization must both follow a structured, repeatable process for innovation and have a plan in place to actually implement the innovation plans. Structure doesn’t exterminate creativity—it lets it germinate and grow.

Robert’s Rules of Innovation II: The Art of Implementation (available December 8, 2015 on both Amazon and at selective bookstores) helps business leaders break down the barriers to innovation. This innovation process management book provides a practical, structured framework to make sure your business’s culture of innovation is properly implemented, and thus poised to create profitable new products and position your company for long-term success. The content of Robert’s Rules of Innovation II is deliberately structured in a way that helps break down the daunting goal of implementing innovation; as you will find as you read, the topics covered in the book naturally fall into three distinct areas:

1. The “Big Ideas” of Implementation (see of this blog series)
   ◦ Key Takeaways: When it comes to enabling the big ideas and execution of innovation implementation, for the best chance of success: create an innovation mantra for your company (and stick to it!); and watch out for (and counter) innovation assassins.
2. The “People Aspects” of Implementation (see of this blog series)

◦ Key Takeaways: Innovation implementation can frequently seem like a daunting task due to people-related issues. To succeed, you need to find and keep the right people; also, you must be aware that while in the past an organization’s culture would shape its individual employees, today it’s the value system of the individual employees that collectively defines the organization’s culture, value, and principles. To create your optimal innovation team, remember that diversity is key and strive to put together a team that is gender neutral, takes advantage of generational opportunities, and includes an array of personality types.

1. The “Process” of Implementation (discussed below in this third and final part of this blog series)

The “Process” of Implementation
So you’ve come up with some creative big ideas and assembled a killer team—but now what? Your organization needs the right steps to implement innovation; otherwise, your best and brightest ideas will dim and ultimately go dark and die (R.I.P. all those great ideas that never got implemented!). And this is no haphazard, fake-it-till-you-maybe-make-it process.

Innovation implementation calls for a robust, disciplined strategy. It can’t be a one-time process, but rather must occur over and over again to form a steady flow of innovation that sustains long-term profitability. Repeat after me: “Ideate. Align. Repeat.” (And then repeat it again and again and again…).

When teams collaborate in developing new innovations, having the right mix of ingredients will ensure that its overall marketability will happen relatively quickly and will enhance productivity across the board. According to Soren Kaplan, author, consultant, and educator at NHTV Breda University of Applied Sciences, “The most innovative companies today realize that competitive differentiation comes as much from how they innovate as it does from what they’re innovating.”

Key ingredients to the process include these eight steps: Generating Ideas, Screening, Testing, Analysis, Beta Tests, Product Development Technicalities, Commercialization, and Post Launch Review.

To get results in innovation, a structured, repeatable process is essential from start to finish. To Create and Sustain innovation in order to Innovate and Thrive in this competitive marketplace, start with the fundamental framework of the 10 Key Imperatives laid out in the original Robert’s Rules of Innovation book. Once you’ve successfully integrated these 10 Key Imperatives, it’s time to drill down to a deeper level of specificity and detail for your organization. When you have the right “People” in your organization collaborating on the right “Big Ideas” for new innovation, integrating the eight steps (listed above) into your team’s new product development repertoire will substantially increase your chances of success.

Remember the process is ongoing. But it only works if you work it. To find success implementing innovation at your organization, you must, “Ideate. Align. Repeat.” :a structured repeatable process. By making small changes in the way you manage ideation, you can create an organization that not only is willing to innovate, but has the ability to do so.

Lastly never stop improving your skills and apply continuous improvement, non stop.

Read all about Innovation Implementation in Robert’s Rules of Innovation; The Art of Implementation. Or pre-order this book at your favorite book store.

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

GUEST POST by Robert F. Brands

The topics covered in Robert’s Rules of Innovation II: The Art of Implementation (available on Amazon and at bookstores starting December 8, 2015) naturally fall into three distinct areas:

1. The “Big Ideas” of Implementation
2. The “People Aspects” of Implementation
3. The “Process” of Implementation

We are hashing out each of these three distinct content areas in a three-part blog series on “Innovation and The Art of Implementation.” Part 1, which discusses the “, posted earlier. This blog on the “People Aspects” of Implementation is Part 2 of the series. Check back on this blog soon for Part 3, covering the “Process” of Implementation.

To recap, in of this blog series, we highlighted the key points of the original Robert’s Rules of Innovation, a business entrepreneurship and innovation book. This timely and easy-to-read corporate survival guide presents the best practices for today’s “innovate or die” world, in the form of 10 imperatives your business must include to achieve growth through innovation.

In Part 1, we also shared that since innovation is both an art and a science, in order to get results your organization must both follow a structured, repeatable process for innovation and have an implementation plan for innovation. As discussed in Robert’s Rules of Innovation II and Part 1 of this blog series, when it comes to enabling the “Big Ideas and Execution” of Implementation, for the best chance of success it’s critical to:

• Create an innovation mantra for your company (and stick to it!): The best innovation mantras inform a company’s everyday decisions and are actionable statements of intent.
• Be on the lookout for innovation assassins (and then counter them as they arise): Innovation assassins are barriers to both making your innovation culture stick and your plan for implementing innovation success. The best way to counter these assassins is to: (1) acknowledge their existence; (2) try to understand why they occur; and (3) reinforce an organizational culture that accepts and even encourages disruptions and risk.

The “People” Aspects of Implementation

The reason innovation implementation can seem like an overwhelmingly daunting process is largely due to people-related issues. Such people-related issues require patience (and intestinal fortitude) as well as organizational structure to combat. A key element to implementing innovation is finding and then keeping the right people.

In the past, an organization’s culture would shape its individual employees. However, today it is the value system of the individuals that collectively define the organization’s culture, value, and principles. While financial capital is necessary for implementing innovation, in today’s world, the organization that best utilizes its human capital will have the best chance of “winning” the innovation race.

As Deloitte Global CEO Barry Salzberg says, “Real opportunity exists for organizations to step up and create the conditions and commitment needed to encourage and foster innovation in their work environments. And there’s a tremendous upside if we get this right: we can better retain talent, remain more competitive into the future, and more positively impact society.”

As discussed in Robert’s Rules of Innovation II, when it comes to enabling the big ideas and execution, for the best chance of success, it’s critical to have:

Top-down, bottom-up culture: Innovation (which is not itself an object, but rather a key tool used to reach strategic objectives) can only succeed if the CEO can create the delicate chemistry that results in a “top-down, bottom-up” culture of innovation. One that is rich with initiatives, engagement, and participation that includes participants at all levels of the organization. Fostering innovation must first start at the top, with the CEO also serving as the chief innovation officer who leads by example and serves as the driving force toward an innovation culture. Though at the same time, you will not be able to catalyze a full-bore innovation culture change at your organization—a process that can takes years, if it even happens at all—until your employees get comfortable with the notion that innovation is not an “add-on” to their regular job, but rather an intrinsic part of their function at work.

Build your Innovation Team: Now that you’ve realized that the art of implementation requires integrated support from the top down and bottom up, it’s time to build your innovation team. To create and build the optimal team, remember that diversity is key! Your team should strive to be gender-neutral, take advantage of generational opportunities, and include a variety of profile types (as taken from the Mayo Clinic Center for Innovation’s nine general personality profile types). When building your innovation team, you should also evaluate whether communication is ongoing and clear and also whether your team embraces innovation as you do, for the long haul.

Objective and Reward Alignment: In addition to lots of ongoing and clear communication, the key for a successful culture of innovation implementation is also the alignment of individual objectives and rewards. If they are not aligned, you will be exceptionally hard-pressed to achieve innovation success.

You just read Part 2 of a three-part series on Innovation and the Art of Implementation. Check back on the blog soon for Part 3, which will discuss the “Process” of Implementation.

Read more about Innovation Implementation in Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.