Category Archives: Change

Building a Culture of Purposeful Innovation

Engaging Hearts and Minds

Building a Culture of Purposeful Innovation

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In the high-stakes game of corporate strategy, innovation is often treated as a pure business function. We measure it with metrics like Return on Innovation Investment, patent counts, and new product launches. We manage it with processes, frameworks, and a sterile, bottom-line focus. While these tools are certainly necessary, they are far from sufficient. As a human-centered change and innovation thought leader, I am here to argue that the most transformative, lasting, and impactful innovation isn’t just about what you create; it’s about why you create it. The future belongs to organizations that have successfully engaged the hearts and minds of their employees and customers by building a culture of purposeful innovation.

Purposeful innovation is the strategic integration of a company’s mission and values into every stage of the innovation process. It moves beyond simply solving a market problem to solving a human problem—one that resonates with a deeper sense of meaning and social impact. When innovation is driven by purpose, it stops being a task and starts being a calling. It elevates the work from a mere job to a meaningful contribution, which in turn unlocks a level of passion, commitment, and creativity that no financial incentive alone can ever generate.

The Three Pillars of Purposeful Innovation

Building a culture of purposeful innovation requires a shift in mindset and a commitment to three core pillars:

1. A Shared “Why”: The first step is to clearly articulate and communicate the organization’s purpose. This isn’t just a mission statement on a wall; it’s a living, breathing set of values that guides every decision. Leaders must connect the day-to-day work of innovation to this larger purpose, helping every employee see how their contributions make a difference in the world.
2. Human-Centered Empathy: Purposeful innovation is rooted in a deep understanding of human needs, not just market trends. It requires teams to move beyond data points and financial models to truly empathize with the people they serve. This involves engaging with customers, listening to their frustrations, and understanding their aspirations.
3. Measurable Impact: While purposeful innovation isn’t just about profit, it is not an exercise in altruism without results. The most successful organizations measure their innovation not just in terms of revenue, but also in terms of social, environmental, or human impact. This dual-purpose metric provides a more holistic view of success and reinforces the “why” for the entire organization.

“Profit is not a purpose; it’s a result. When a company’s purpose is to improve lives, profit naturally follows as a measure of the value it has created.”

Case Study 1: Patagonia – The Purpose-Driven Pioneer

The Challenge:

For decades, the outdoor apparel industry was driven by a focus on performance and profit. Patagonia, a brand that began with rock-climbing gear, faced the challenge of competing in a crowded market without compromising its core values. Their “why” was not just to sell products, but to save our home planet.

The Purposeful Innovation Response:

Patagonia has integrated its purpose into every aspect of its business, making innovation a means to an end. Instead of innovating just for new features, they innovate for sustainability. For example, their Worn Wear program is a brilliant example of purposeful innovation. Instead of encouraging consumers to buy new products, they actively encourage them to repair, reuse, and recycle their gear. This program is not just a marketing gimmick; it is a fundamental part of their business model that directly aligns with their environmental purpose.

The Innovation: The Worn Wear program, which includes repair services, a marketplace for used gear, and a fleet of repair trucks.
The Purpose: To reduce consumption and keep products in use for longer, directly contributing to their mission of environmental stewardship.
The Impact: The program has reduced the company’s environmental footprint, built an incredibly loyal customer base, and created a new revenue stream, proving that doing good can also be good for business.

The Result:

Patagonia’s purposeful innovation has made it a leader in its industry and a gold standard for purpose-driven brands. By consistently aligning their business decisions with their core values, they have built an unshakeable level of trust and loyalty with their customers. Their innovation isn’t just about creating a new jacket; it’s about creating a better world, and their employees are deeply engaged in that mission.

Case Study 2: TOMS – The “One for One” Model

The Challenge:

In the early 2000s, TOMS Shoes entered a highly competitive footwear market. The challenge was not just to create a comfortable and stylish shoe, but to stand out in a way that resonated with a new generation of socially conscious consumers. Their “why” was to create a business that could address a social problem at its core.

The Purposeful Innovation Response:

TOMS’s innovation was not in its product design, but in its business model. They pioneered the “One for One” model, a simple yet powerful purpose statement: for every pair of shoes purchased, a pair would be given to a child in need. This model became the brand’s primary reason for being and the engine of its growth.

The Innovation: A direct-to-consumer business model that intertwined sales with social impact.
The Purpose: To provide shoes and, later, other essential goods (like clean water and eye care) to people in developing nations.
The Impact: The model has resulted in millions of pairs of shoes being given away and has inspired countless other companies to adopt similar social impact models. It engaged not only customers but also employees who felt a deep sense of purpose and pride in their work.

The Result:

TOMS’s success proves that a powerful purpose can be the ultimate engine for innovation and brand loyalty. By making its social mission the central focus of its business, TOMS created a community of customers and employees who were not just buying a product, but participating in a movement. While the company has faced challenges and evolved its model, its legacy as a pioneer of purposeful innovation remains a powerful case study for any organization looking to connect its work to a higher purpose.

Conclusion: The Future is Purpose-Driven

In a world where products are increasingly commoditized and customer attention is a fleeting commodity, a strong purpose is the ultimate differentiator. It is the north star that guides innovation, inspires loyalty, and engages every member of an organization, from the leadership team to the newest employee. Purpose is not a nice-to-have; it is a strategic imperative for long-term growth and resilience.

Leaders must stop treating purpose as a standalone initiative and start embedding it into the very DNA of their innovation process. We must empower our teams to ask not just “What should we build?” but “Why does this matter?” By engaging the hearts and minds of our people and connecting their daily work to a meaningful cause, we will not only unlock unprecedented levels of creativity and passion but also build a better world in the process. The era of purposeful innovation is here, and it is the only path to a future that is both profitable and profoundly human.

Extra Extra: Futurology is not fortune telling. Futurists use a scientific approach to create their deliverables, but a methodology and tools like those in FutureHacking™ can empower anyone to engage in futurology themselves.

Image credit: 1 of 950+ FREE quote slides available at http://misterinnovation.com

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

Why We Resist Change and How to Overcome It

Deconstructing Fear

Why We Resist Change and How to Overcome It

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In every organization, the journey of change and innovation is met with a familiar, often unspoken, adversary: fear. We label it as resistance, inertia, or a lack of buy-in. We try to overcome it with data, process flowcharts, and top-down mandates. But as a human-centered change and innovation thought leader, I’ve seen that these approaches often fail because they don’t address the root cause. We resist change not because we’re stubborn or lazy, but because we are fundamentally wired to find comfort in the known and to view the unknown with apprehension. Fear is the primary reason we resist change, and until we deconstruct and address it, our best-laid plans for innovation will be met with resistance.

Our brains are built to seek patterns, create routines, and predict outcomes. This evolutionary hardwiring has served us well, allowing us to conserve cognitive energy and navigate our world efficiently. However, in today’s environment of rapid technological and market disruption, this same wiring becomes a liability. Change shatters our routines and forces us into a state of cognitive overload. It introduces risk, uncertainty, and a loss of control. To inspire change, we must stop treating people like cogs in a machine and start treating them like the human beings they are, acknowledging their fears and creating a safe path forward.

The Four Faces of Fear in a Changing World

Resistance to change isn’t a monolith. It manifests in different forms, and understanding these “faces” is the first step to overcoming them:

Fear of the Unknown: This is the most fundamental fear. People are not afraid of change itself; they are afraid of what they don’t know about the change. What will my job look like? Will I be able to learn the new system? Will I be relevant? This uncertainty creates anxiety and a powerful desire to cling to the status quo.
Fear of Incompetence: Change often requires new skills. An employee who was an expert in the old system suddenly feels like a novice. This can trigger feelings of inadequacy and a fear of being exposed or replaced. It’s a threat to their professional identity and self-worth.
Fear of Losing Control: When a change is imposed from the top down, employees can feel powerless. They lose their sense of autonomy and agency, which can breed resentment and passive resistance. This is particularly true when they are not consulted or included in the decision-making process.
Fear of Failure and Retribution: Innovation and change require experimentation and a willingness to fail. But in many corporate cultures, failure is punished. Employees are hesitant to embrace new processes or ideas if they believe a mistake could lead to negative consequences for their career or reputation.

“You can’t mandate courage, but you can create an environment where it’s safe to be brave.”

Overcoming Fear with a Human-Centered Approach

To lead people through change, we must replace fear with a sense of safety, purpose, and empowerment. Here’s how to do it:

Increase Transparency and Communication: Proactively and consistently communicate about the “why” and “what” of the change. Address the unknown by providing as much information as possible. Share the vision, the goals, and the benefits of the new path.
Invest in New Skills (Address Incompetence): Provide training, mentorship, and continuous learning opportunities. Show employees that you are invested in their future and that you will give them the tools to succeed. Celebrate the learning process, not just the end result.
Empower and Co-create (Restore Control): Involve employees in the change process. Ask for their input, solicit their ideas, and give them a voice in how the change is implemented. When people have a hand in creating the future, they are far more likely to embrace it.
Create Psychological Safety (Reduce Fear of Failure): Leaders must actively create a culture where it’s safe to experiment and fail. Acknowledge that mistakes will happen. Celebrate the learning that comes from failure and show, through your actions, that risk-taking is a valued part of the process.

Case Study 1: The IBM Mainframe to Cloud Transition

The Challenge:

In the late 2000s, IBM faced a monumental challenge. Its core business was built on decades of expertise in mainframes and legacy IT infrastructure. However, the market was rapidly shifting to cloud computing and open-source solutions. The company needed its engineers—many of whom had spent their entire careers working with legacy systems—to embrace an entirely new technology stack. This was met with significant resistance, a mix of the fear of the unknown and the fear of incompetence.

The Fear-Deconstructing Approach:

Instead of a top-down mandate, IBM’s leadership created a systematic, human-centered approach to reskilling. They invested billions of dollars in a massive educational initiative, partnering with online learning platforms and universities. The key was not just providing courses, but also:

A Sense of Security: They made it clear that their existing workforce was their greatest asset and that the goal was to reskill, not replace.
Empowerment: They gave employees the autonomy to choose their own learning paths based on their interests and career goals.
Peer-to-Peer Learning: They fostered an internal culture where new knowledge was shared and celebrated, turning learning into a collaborative, non-threatening experience.

The Result:

By directly addressing the fears of incompetence and the unknown, IBM successfully reskilled thousands of employees. They transformed their workforce from a legacy-focused team into one capable of building a multi-billion-dollar cloud services business. They didn’t just tell their people to change; they gave them the tools, the purpose, and the psychological safety to do so, turning a potential liability into their greatest asset.

Case Study 2: The Nordstrom Digital Transformation

The Challenge:

Nordstrom, a storied retail company known for its exceptional in-store customer service, had to pivot to compete in an e-commerce-dominated world. The shift required store employees—who were masters of in-person interactions—to embrace technology, digital tools, and a more data-driven approach. The core challenge was not technological, but cultural: convincing a workforce whose identity was tied to the physical store to embrace a digital future without losing their human touch.

The Fear-Deconstructing Approach:

Nordstrom’s leadership understood the deep-seated fear of losing control and the fear that technology would dehumanize their legendary service. They addressed this by:

Co-creating the New Vision: They actively involved store employees in the development of new digital tools. Employees provided feedback on everything from the new point-of-sale system to the mobile apps, giving them a sense of ownership.
Highlighting the “Why”: Leaders communicated that technology was not a replacement for their human-centered service, but an enabler. The tools were designed to free up time from administrative tasks so employees could spend more time with customers, reinforcing their core identity.
Celebrating Small Wins: They rolled out changes incrementally and celebrated every successful pilot, showing employees that the new approach was working and that their input was valuable.

The Result:

Nordstrom’s digital transformation was successful because they didn’t just implement new technology; they led a cultural shift. By deconstructing the fear of change and empowering their employees as co-creators, they built a hybrid model where technology and human service work in harmony. The in-store employees became powerful ambassadors for the digital tools, proving that when you address the human element, even the most daunting change can be embraced as an opportunity for growth.

Conclusion: Leading with Empathy

Change is inevitable, but resistance is not. The most effective leaders are not those who force change upon their people, but those who guide them through it with empathy and understanding. By deconstructing the fears that fuel resistance—the fears of the unknown, of incompetence, of losing control, and of failure—we can create an environment where change is not a threat but a shared adventure.

The next time you face resistance to an innovation, stop and ask a different set of questions. What are my people afraid of? How can I give them more control? How can I make it safe for them to learn? By leading with a human-centered approach, we can move beyond simply managing change and start inspiring it, one courageous step at a time.

Image credit: Pexels

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

The Hero’s Journey of Innovation

Inspiring Your Team to Embrace the Unknown

The Hero's Journey of Innovation

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

Every great innovation, like every great story, begins with a choice: to stay in the comfortable, known world or to answer the call to adventure and venture into the unknown. As a human-centered change and innovation thought leader, I’ve seen countless organizations struggle with this fundamental challenge. We often focus on the mechanics of innovation — the processes, the tools, the metrics — but we fail to address the most critical element: the human spirit. To truly innovate, we must stop seeing it as a predictable business process and start seeing it as a hero’s journey, a narrative arc that inspires, empowers, and guides our teams through the uncertainty and risk required to create something new.

The Hero’s Journey, a concept popularized by mythologist Joseph Campbell, describes a universal narrative pattern found in countless stories, from ancient myths to modern blockbusters. It involves a hero who leaves their ordinary world, confronts trials and tribulations, gains new knowledge, and returns transformed. This framework is not just for fiction; it is a powerful metaphor for the human experience of change and growth. By re-framing the innovation process through this lens, we can transform it from a daunting, risky endeavor into a compelling adventure that people are excited to embark on.

The Innovation Journey: A Modern Myth

Let’s map the stages of the hero’s journey onto the innovation process to understand how we can better lead our teams:

The Ordinary World (The Status Quo): This is your company’s comfort zone—the familiar products, processes, and market position. It feels safe, but it’s also where stagnation begins. The hero (your innovator or team) is living in this world, and for a time, it feels good.
The Call to Adventure (The New Idea): A new market trend, a customer pain point, or a disruptive technology emerges. This is the call, the first glimmer of an opportunity to do something different. It is often met with resistance and fear.
Refusal of the Call (The Resistance): This is the most common stage. The team hesitates, citing risks, budget constraints, or a lack of resources. The “we’ve always done it this way” mindset is a powerful force of gravity. Leaders must recognize and address this fear head-on.
Meeting the Mentor (The Leader’s Role): This is where you, as the leader, step in. You are the mentor who provides guidance, psychological safety, and the tools needed to start the journey. You don’t have all the answers, but you offer wisdom, support, and the courage to take the first step.
Crossing the Threshold (The First Step): The team commits to the project. This is the moment they leave the comfort zone. It could be launching a small pilot project, building a prototype, or securing initial funding. This is where the risk becomes real, and the journey truly begins.
Tests, Allies, and Enemies (The Innovation Process): This is the long middle part of the journey. The team faces challenges—technical hurdles, budget cuts, internal skepticism, and market feedback. They also find allies—champions within the organization, external partners, and supportive customers.
The Ordeal (The Crisis): Every innovation journey has a moment of crisis—a failed prototype, a critical negative review, a major competitor launch. This is the low point, where the team’s resolve is tested. This is where resilience is built.
The Reward (The First Success): After the ordeal, a breakthrough occurs. A successful pilot, a positive beta test, or a critical finding. This is the hero’s reward, the moment of validation that fuels the rest of the journey.
The Road Back (The Scaling): The hero must now return to the ordinary world, but they are not the same. They must scale their innovation, integrate it into the business, and convince the rest of the organization of its value.
The Resurrection (The Big Launch): The final test. The public launch, the full-scale rollout. It is the culmination of the journey, where the innovation is either reborn as a new product or fails to make its mark.
Return with the Elixir (The New Normal): The hero returns, bringing with them a new product, a new process, or a new way of thinking. The organization is forever changed. The hero, and the team, have learned valuable lessons and are ready for the next adventure.

“An innovation culture isn’t built on a process flowchart; it’s built on a shared narrative of courage, resilience, and transformation.”

Case Study 1: The Pixar Journey from Toy Story to a Studio

The Challenge:

In the early 1990s, Pixar was a small computer graphics company with a radical idea: to create the world’s first feature-length film entirely with CGI. This was a monumental risk. They were leaving the “ordinary world” of short films and commercials for the unknown world of feature animation, competing with titans like Disney. The “Call to Adventure” was clear, but the “Refusal of the Call” was a powerful force from Hollywood and even within their own company, who doubted the technology’s ability to tell a compelling story.

The Heroic Innovation:

Pixar’s leaders acted as mentors, providing a clear vision and psychological safety for the team. The “Crossing the Threshold” was the initial investment and the start of production. The “Tests and Ordeals” were numerous—technical challenges (rendering a single frame took hours), a near-catastrophic script rewrite, and a constant battle to prove the viability of their approach. But they had allies in Steve Jobs and a dedicated team who saw the vision. The “Reward” was the first successful test screening, and the “Resurrection” was the theatrical release of *Toy Story*.

The Result:

The success of *Toy Story* was not just a commercial win; it was a testament to a heroic innovation journey. It proved that a team, when guided by a compelling narrative and a resilient leadership, could overcome seemingly impossible obstacles. The “Elixir” they returned with was not just a successful film, but a new model for animation and a creative culture that continues to define the industry. The journey transformed them from a tech company into a storytelling powerhouse.

Case Study 2: The Dyson Story – A Relentless Pursuit of an Idea

The Challenge:

In the 1980s, the vacuum cleaner market was a comfortable, established world dominated by large corporations and bag-based technology. James Dyson’s “Call to Adventure” was a simple observation: vacuum cleaners lose suction because their bags clog with dust. His idea for a bagless, cyclone-based vacuum was a radical departure, a clear challenge to the status quo that was met with widespread “Refusal of the Call” from every major manufacturer who dismissed the idea as commercially unviable.

The Heroic Innovation:

Dyson’s personal journey is a powerful example of the hero’s arc. He acted as his own mentor, and his lab became the “Unknown World.” The “Ordeals” were legendary: 5,127 failed prototypes over five years, countless rejections from manufacturers, and a constant struggle for funding. His “Allies” were his family and a few dedicated engineers. The “Reward” was the successful creation of the first Dual Cyclone vacuum. The “Resurrection” was its launch in Japan, followed by its triumphant return to the UK market.

The Result:

Dyson didn’t just innovate a new product; he innovated an entire industry. His “Elixir” was not just a successful vacuum cleaner, but a new design philosophy built on relentless experimentation and a refusal to accept the status quo. His story proves that a single-minded pursuit of a new idea, when framed as a heroic journey, can overcome immense odds and redefine an entire market, inspiring an entire generation of innovators to follow their own calls to adventure.

Conclusion: Lead the Journey, Don’t Just Manage the Process

The future belongs to the organizations that can consistently and courageously innovate. And to do that, we must move beyond the sterile, process-driven view of innovation and embrace it as a heroic journey. As leaders, our role is to act as mentors and guides. We must frame the challenges not as roadblocks, but as trials. We must celebrate the small victories as rewards and offer support during the darkest moments of the ordeal.

By telling a compelling story about the change we are trying to create, we can inspire our teams to step out of their ordinary worlds and into the unknown. We can transform fear into courage, hesitation into action, and failure into a source of valuable learning. The journey is difficult, but the rewards—a transformed organization and a team of true innovators—are immeasurable. It’s time to stop managing innovation and start leading the adventure.

Extra Extra: Because innovation is all about change, Braden Kelley’s human-centered change methodology and tools are the best way to plan and execute the changes necessary to support your innovation and transformation efforts — all while literally getting everyone all on the same page for change. Find out more about the methodology and tools, including the book Charting Change by following the link. Be sure and download the TEN FREE TOOLS while you’re here.

Image credit: Pexels

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

Three HOW MIGHT WE Alternatives That Actually Spark Creative Ideas

2 Replies

Three How Might We Alternatives That Actually Spark Creative Ideas

GUEST POST from Robyn Bolton

Q: How might we brainstorm new ideas to serve our customers better?

A: Have a brainstorming session that starts with “How Might We help customers [Job to be Done/problem]?”

If only it were that simple.

How Might We (HMW) is an incredible tool (not BS, as some would assert), but we misuse it. We focus too much on the “we” and not enough on the “might.”

Might > We

HMW was first used to prompt people to be “wildly creative while simultaneously leveraging [company’s] innate strengths.”

IDEO popularized the prompt as a way to solve “wicked problems” – problems so complex that there is no right or wrong answer.

In both of these cases, the assumption was that the word “might” would free people from the shackles of today’s thinking and constraints and give people permission to dream without fear of judgment and reality.

“We” kept ideas tethered to the reality of the company’s “innate strengths,” providing a modicum of comfort to executives worried that the session wouldn’t result in anything useful and would, therefore, be a waste of time.

We > Might

Alas, as time went on and HMW became more popular, we lost sight of its intent (prompt wildly creative thinking about wicked problems) and twisted it to our purposes.

We end the HMW sentence with our problems (e.g., HMW cut costs by getting more customers to use self-service tools?).
We use it to brainstorm solutions to things that aren’t even problems (e.g., HMW eliminate all customer service options that aren’t self-serve?)
We mentally replace “might” with “will” so we can emerge from brainstorming sessions with a tactical implementation plan.

How Might Can YOU Fix HMW?

If you’re not getting creative, radical, or unexpected ideas from your brainstorming sessions, you have an HMW problem.< As a result, continuing to use HMW as a tool to prompt creative, radical, or unexpected ideas is the definition of insanity. And you are not insane. Instead, mix it up. Use different words to articulate the original intent of HMW.

How would we solve this problem if the answer to every request is YES?

Innovation thrives within constraints. Brainstorming doesn’t.

Even when you tell people not to constrain themselves, even implore them to value “quantity over quality,” you still get more “safe” ideas rather than more “crazy” ideas.

Do more than tell. Make a world without constraints real. Explicitly remove all the constraints people throw at ideas by creating a world of infinite money, people, capabilities, willingness, appetite for risk, and executive support. Doing this removes the dreaded “but” because there is no “but we don’t have the money/people/capabilities” or “but management will never go for it” and creates space for “and.”

What would we ask for if we were guaranteed a YES to only ONE request?

This question is often asked at the end of a brainstorm to prioritize ideas. But it’s equally helpful to ask it at the beginning.

This question shifts our mindset from “the bosses will never say yes, so I won’t even mention it” to “the bosses will say yes to only one thing, so it better be great!” It pulls people off the sidelines and reveals what people believe to be the most critical element of a solution. It drives passionate engagement amongst the whole team and acts as a springboard to the next brainstorm – How Might We use (what they said yes to) to solve (customers’ Jobs to be Done/problem)?

How would we solve the problem if the answer to every request is NO?

This one is a bit risky.

Some people will throw their hands in the air, declare the exercise a waste of time and effort, and collapse into a demotivated blob of resignation.

Some people will feel free. As Seth Godin wrote about a journal that promises to reject every single person who submits an article, “The absurdity of it is the point. Submitting to them feels effortless and without a lot of drama, because you know you’re going to get rejected. So instead of becoming attached to the outcome, you can simply focus on the work.”

For others, this will summon their inner rebel, the part of themselves that wants to stick it to the man, prove the doubters wrong, and unleash a great “I told you so” upon the world. To them, “No” is the start of the conversation, not the end. It fires them up to do their best work.

Don’t invite the first group of people to the brainstorm.

Definitely invite the other two groups.

How ~~Might~~ Will/Do YOU Fix HMW?

If you want something different, you need to do something different.

Start your next brainstorm with a new variation on the old HMW prompt.

How do people react? Does it lead to more creative or more “safe” ideas?

How might we adjust to do even better next time?

Image credit: Pexels

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

This entry was posted in Change, collaboration, Creativity, Innovation, Strategy and tagged Business Transformation, change, collaboration, Innovation, Innovation Culture, organizational change, project management, Strategy, success, Thought Leadership on October 26, 2022 by Robyn Bolton.

Reset and Reconnect to Transform your World

1 Reply

GUEST POST from Janet Sernack

Our blog, Reset and Reconnect in a Chaotic World was the first in a series of three, on the theme of reconnecting and resetting, to create, invent and innovate in an increasingly chaotic world. In this blog, we described how we have opportunities, to focus on being kinder to both ourselves and to others we interact with. To help us shift our mental states to transition effectively through the shock and pain of the pandemic, and rehabilitate in ways that transform our worlds.

We also outlined the range of key reasons as to why it is critical to take personal responsibility for understanding, helping, and supporting those we depend upon, and who depend upon us, to respond in ways that are respectful and compassionate, creative and courageous.

That enables and empowers people to recover and rehabilitate from the shock and pain they are experiencing from their elevated levels of stress, discomfort, and anxiety, occurring in our relentlessly uncertain and chaotic environments, through allowing, accepting, and acknowledging where people are at – and that it’s OK to not be OK!

Neither a time to panic nor languish

Right now, it is neither a time to panic, stall nor to languish in the face of change fatigue and mental lethargy.

It is a time to shift from making binary (either/or) judgements towards making linear (both/and) judgements to re-think and create a mental state, that is open and receptive to emerging possibilities and embraces change in ways that are fair and inclusive.

To transform your world through:

Choosing a range of constructive and positive responses to the rising levels of global economic, civic, and social uncertainty and unrest in our own local environments.

Generously and kindly demonstrating care, respect, and appreciation for the value everyone brings, and by being collaborative, appreciative, helpful, and supportive.

Being unconditionally willing to take the “sacred pause” that allows ourselves, teams, organizations, and to reconnect and reset, through intentionally using constraints and developing a mental state that supports them to become adaptive, creative, inventive, and innovative.

Transforming your world involves co-creating a deeper sense of belonging and a more optimistic outlook, to enhance our collective intelligence toward discovering and navigating new ways of thriving, flourishing, and flowing in the face of ongoing disruption.

Integrating and balancing chaos and rigidity

Dr. Dan Siegal, in Mindsight, applies the emerging principles of interpersonal neurobiology to promote compassion, kindness, resilience, and well-being in our personal lives, our relationships, and our communities.

In our global coaching practice at ImagineNation™ we have observed that many of our clients are experiencing mental states that embody varying levels of discord, dissonance, and dis-order, which are deeply unconscious and are impacting them neurologically.

Dr. Dan Siegal states:

“At the heart of both interpersonal neurobiology and the mindsight approach is the concept of ‘integration’ which entails the linkage of different aspects of a system – whether they exist within a single person or a collection of individuals. Integration is seen as the essential mechanism of health as it promotes a flexible and adaptive way of being that is filled with vitality and creativity.

The ultimate outcome of integration is harmony. The absence of integration leads to chaos and rigidity—a finding that enables us to re-envision our understanding of mental disorders and how we can work together in the fields of mental health, education, and other disciplines, to create a healthier, more integrated world.”

We have seen a vast range of evidence of peoples’ internal and external, mental chaos, and self-imposed internal rigidity in many of our clients’ coaching sessions.

Knowing that when chaos and rigidity are prolonged – it creates unproductive or dysfunctional mental states and inflexible thought processing.

This makes people non-adaptive and mostly inflexible because their natural well-being is impaired (dis-order).

Our approach is to partner with clients to co-create a relationship, that supports and helps facilitate a set of more integrated mental states. This entails each person’s being respected for his or her autonomy and differentiated self through deep empathic communication, which creates the space and an opening for shifting mindsets and behaviors, to ultimately pull them towards a new possibility that may transform their world.

Allowing, accepting, and acknowledging

When we allow, accept, acknowledge and support people to recover and rehabilitate from the shock and pain they are experiencing as a result of recent global events and conflicts, including feelings of overwhelm, isolation, loneliness, and disconnection, we can enable them to initiate making these shifts.

According to Gallops Global Emotions 2022 Report – these are considered “negative emotions – the aggregate of the stress, sadness, anger, worry and physical pain that people feel every day” and have reached a new record in the history of their tracking.

Jon Clifton, CEO of Gallop stated in the report that their data reveals that unhappiness has been rising for more than a decade and that the world is also struggling from a silent pandemic – loneliness.

“Gallup finds that 330 million adults go at least two weeks without talking to a single friend or family member. And just because some people have friends, it doesn’t mean they have good friends. One‑fifth of all adults do not have a single person they can count on for help.”

No emotion or mental state is permanent!

It’s time to focus on exploring how to better help ourselves, our clients, people, and teams by paying deep attention and being intentional as to how we might experiment and collaborate, with three key steps, to make these shifts:

Co-create relationships focused on supporting integration, by being respectful and empathic in all communications, to open space of possibility, and pull people towards what creative ideas and breakthroughs might transform their world.

Artfully and masterfully generatively listen, inquire, question, and disagree, to evoke, provoke and create ideas for thinking and acting differently both today and in the future.

Maximize people’s strengths, differences, and diversity, to sense, see and solve problems and be creative and inventive in delivering breakthrough ideas and innovative solutions that add value to the quality of people’s lives, in ways they appreciate and cherish.

Rehabilitate with intention

At the same time, paradoxically, extending options and choices that help them shift and transition through the shock and pain of the past two and half years.

Enabling and empowering people to rehabilitate, with intention rather than regret, adopting a systemic lens through:

Creating safe collective holding spaces, that embrace presence, empathy, and compassion.

Helping people get grounded, become mindful, and fully present, enables them to make quality connections, rebuild their confidence and recreate a sense of belonging.

Enabling, equipping, and empowering people with new mindsets, behaviors, and skills through unlearning, learning, and relearning so they can adapt, grow and be resourceful and resilient in the face of the range of emerging problems, opportunities, and challenges.

Amplifying people’s strengths, reinforcing positive emotions, mitigating and reducing the way they filter information to re-ignite their intrinsic motivation and re-engage them in what they can control, what care deeply about value, or need, to survive and thrive.

A decade of both transformation and disruption

As most of us are aware, we are currently experiencing a decade of both transformation and disruption, where chaos and order are constantly polarizing, making it imperative to support, mentor, and coach people to integrate and find their balance.

To help them become more flexible and open to being adaptive, and effectively “dance in dis-equilibrium” between the constant and consistent states of chaos and order.

To enable people to see themselves as the cause in actively unlearning and letting go of old mental models, unresourceful mental states, and thinking patterns, to reimagine and redesign how they work to transform their world and create a more compelling, inclusive, and sustainable future.

Find out more about our work at ImagineNation™

Find out about our collective, learning products and tools, including The Coach for Innovators, Leaders, and Teams Certified Program, presented by Janet Sernack, is a collaborative, intimate, and deeply personalized innovation coaching and learning program, supported by a global group of peers over 9-weeks, starting Tuesday, February 7, 2023.

It is a blended and transformational change and learning program that will give you a deep understanding of the language, principles, and applications of an ecosystem focus, human-centric approach, and emergent structure (Theory U) to innovation, and upskill people and teams and develop their future fitness, within your unique context. Find out more about our products and tools.

This is the second in a series of three blogs on the theme of reconnecting and resetting, to create, invent and innovate in an increasingly chaotic world.

You can also check out the recording of our 45-minute masterclass, to discover new ways of re-connecting through the complexity and chaos of dis-connection to create, invent and innovate in the future!

Image credit: Unsplash

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

This entry was posted in Change, Leadership, Psychology, Training and tagged Business Transformation, change, change leadership, change management, coaching, collaboration, future, Innovation, innovation coaching, Leadership, organizational change, Thought Leadership, training on October 25, 2022 by Janet Sernack ImagineNation.

How COVID-19 Has Exposed Us

Leave a reply

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

The moon landing in 1969 was, in many ways, the high point of the American century. Since then, we’ve been beset by scandals like Watergate, Iran-Contra and two presidential impeachments, mired in never-ending wars that we don’t win, while increasingly encumbered by rising debts and income inequality amid falling productivity growth. Incomes have stagnated while education and healthcare costs have soared.

Yet in an essay written back in February, just before the Covid-19 crisis, Ross Douthat wrote that these apparent woes are actually signs of success. In effect, he argued that we lack major technological breakthroughs because we become so technologically advanced, and we lack economic progress because we’ve become so prosperous.

Even then, it was a strange and somewhat maddening position to take. Why would Douthat, an intelligent and insightful man, write such things? Because he so wanted to believe them that he went in search for facts to support them. Many of us have been doing the same. Yet the Covid-19 crisis has unmasked us and it’s time to start facing up to the truth.

A Failed Market Revolution

In 1954, the eminent economist Paul Samuelson, came across an obscure dissertation written by a French graduate student named Louis Bachelier around the turn of the century. The paper, which anticipated Einstein’s later breakthrough on Brownian motion, declared somewhat innocently that “the mathematical expectation of the speculator is zero.”

Samuelson’s discovery launched a revolution in mathematical finance models based on on Bachelier’s assumption, including the Efficient Market Hypothesis, portfolio theory, the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) and the Black-Scholes model. The underlying assumption was that markets were rational, and risk could be quantified and managed effectively.

The flaws in these models should have been obvious even at the time and some, including the mathematician Benoit Mandelbrot, pointed out that markets were far more volatile than the financial engineering models predicted. Nevertheless, policymakers chose to ignore the warnings and put their faith in the “magic of the market.”

Probably the biggest failure of market fundamentalism is that, as economist Thomas Philippon points out in his book The Great Reversal, over the past 40 years markets in the United States have become significantly weaker. In a similar vein, a study published in Harvard Business Review that examined 893 industries found that two thirds had become more concentrated.

The truth is that we’ve chosen weaker markets and less competition, which has led to less dynamism and innovation. That’s no accident.

Digital Disruption

In Regional Advantage, AnnaLee Saxenian describes how Silicon Valley replaced Boston’s “Technology Highway” as the center of the digital universe. While Boston was corporate and hierarchical, Silicon Valley was freewheeling and networked. The Silicon Valley ethos was very much the counterculture.

So, it was no accident that when Steve Jobs flew to New York to recruit John Sculley, who was at the time President of Pepsi, to lead Apple he asked him,”Do you want to sell sugar water for the rest of your life, or do you want to come with me and change the world?” The implication being that selling computers was a higher calling than selling soft drinks.

That was nearly 40 years ago and while the Covid-19 crisis has certainly highlighted some benefits of digital technology, such as cheap and effective teleconferencing, it’s also become clear that the digital revolution has largely been a disappointment. Productivity growth, except for a relatively brief period in the late nineties and early aughts, has been depressed since the 1970s.

Compare the iPhone to the breakthroughs of the mid-twentieth century, such as Bell Lab’s transistor, Boeing’s 707 and IBM’s 360 and it becomes clear that while digital technology has done much to disrupt industries, it’s done relatively little to create significant new value, at least in comparison to earlier technologies.

The Uncertain Promise of Globalization

The aftermath of the fall of the Berlin Wall was a time of great optimism. With the Cold War over, books like Francis Fukayama’s The End of History predicted a capitalist, democratic utopia in which free markets would conquer the world making everyone more prosperous. Those that refused to reform would be unable to compete.

While there were genuine achievements, especially in lifting up the world’s poorest, it’s hard to see how globalization has made us significantly better off. In fact, rather than the triumph of freedom, we’ve seen a global rise in populist authoritarian movements, the polar opposite of what intellectuals like Fukayama predicted.

In the United States, the situation has become especially dire. Social mobility and life expectancy in the white working class are declining, while anxiety and depression are rising to epidemic levels. While wages have stagnated, the cost of healthcare and education has soared, squeezing the middle class. Income inequality is at its highest level in 50 years.

So, while it’s true that there have been real benefits from globalization, such as curbing inflation, we’ve done little to mitigate the costs to the average citizen. That didn’t just happen but was the result of choices that we made.

We Need to Choose Resilience and Grand Challenges Over Output and Disruption

The Covid-19 crisis has unmasked us. We thought that markets, technology and globalization would save us, that we could just set up some sensible rules of the road and everything would run on autopilot. That’s clearly untrue. We took short-term profits while ignoring long-term costs, loaded up on debt and hoped for the best.

The current crisis has followed the same pattern. We simply failed to prepare for known risks because it seemed expedient not to. George Bush warned about the possibility of a pandemic as did his Health and Human Services Secretary. Jay Leno mocked them. The Obama administration set up a step-by-step playbook and it was ignored. The long list of failures goes on.

Yet we don’t have to be victims of our failed choices. We can learn to make better ones. After the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic, we embarked on a 70-year productivity boom. Out of the ashes of World War II, we built a new era of peace and prosperity that was unprecedented in world history. We can do so again. We have that power.

New technologies, under development as we speak, will likely give us the power to cure cancer, create clean energy, save the environment and colonize space. We can rebuild the middle class, usher in a new era of peace and prosperity, increase life expectancy while improving quality of life. These are all things we may be able to achieve in the next decade or two.

Yet those possibilities are merely potential that we can succeed or fail to actualize. We can, as we did after World War II, choose to invest in the future and tackle grand challenges. We can build new infrastructure, spawn new industries and create an educated workforce. Or we can, as we did after the end of the Cold War, choose disruption over construction.

What’s clear is that nothing is inevitable. The digital revolution didn’t have to be a dud. The Great Recession didn’t have to happen. The Covid-19 Pandemic could have been, at the very least, greatly mitigated. We are responsible for the choices we make. Now is the time to shoot for the moon (and Mars), not to grade ourselves on a curve.

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— Image credit: Pixabay

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

This entry was posted in Change, Government, Healthcare and tagged Coronavirus, COVID19 on October 24, 2022 by Greg Satell.

Meet me in Manhattan – Innovation and Change Advisory

Leave a reply

As the title of the site says, I focus on human-centered change and innovation, bringing in elements of design thinking, customer experience, employee experience and digital transformation as needed.

On November 18, 2022 I will be in New York City (Midtown Manhattan) and available to connect for any of the following purposes:

Private keynote or workshop for your organization

Certification session on the Change Planning Toolkit™ and/or FutureHacking™ sets of tools for your team

Featured keynote speaker or workshop for a sales event or conference

Advisory session to provide input on your innovation or transformation program, or a specific innovation project

Audio or video podcast appearance

Grab a coffee or a meal — to connect or reconnect

If you work in Manhattan or are willing to travel in from elsewhere in the greater New York City metropolitan area (or the world) and are looking to increase the innovation or transformation capabilities of your organization or to de-risk an innovation project by getting an outside perspective, please contact me.

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

This entry was posted in Change, Digital Transformation, Innovation on October 22, 2022 by admin.

Bridging the Gap Between Strategy and Reality

4 Replies

by Braden Kelley

Recently I had the opportunity to interview Whynde Kuehn, author of the new book Strategy to Reality.

Whynde Kuehn is the Founder and Managing Director of S2E Transformation. Whynde is a recognized global thought leader and a long-time pioneer, practitioner and educator in digital transformation, strategy execution and business architecture, a foundational discipline for enabling end-to-end transformation and organizational agility. She regularly speaks, writes and chairs/co-chairs events with a mission to advance best practices and facilitate community and advocacy across the globe. Whynde is Co-Founder, Vice President, and Academic Committee Chair of the Business Architecture Guild®, a not-for-profit organization focused on the advancement of the business architecture discipline.

The interview dives into how to move big ideas into action, along with exploring several business architecture, strategy and digital transformation topics.

Without further ado, here is the transcript of that interview:

1. What is the difference between an enterprise architect and a business architect?

We can generally think of enterprise architects as professionals who facilitate the development and usage of enterprise architecture to enable effective strategy execution, decision-making, and macro-level design for their organization and the ecosystem in which it operates.
For reference, the Federation of Enterprise Architecture Professional Organizations (FEAPO) characterizes enterprise architecture as “a well-defined practice for conducting enterprise analysis, design, planning, and implementation, using a holistic approach at all times, for the successful development and execution of strategy. Enterprise architecture applies architecture principles and practices to guide organizations through the business, information, process, and technology changes necessary to execute their strategies. These practices utilize the various aspects of an enterprise to identify, motivate, and achieve these changes.”

Enterprise architecture is comprised of multiple architecture domains, which we can think of as business architecture + IT architecture, where IT architecture includes application architecture, data architecture, and technical architecture. In practice, some organizations structure with architects practicing within each architecture domain specialty who collaborate with each other (with no overall enterprise architect role) while other organizations have both an overall enterprise architect role in addition to the specialized architect roles. In the latter case, while an enterprise architect focuses across all architecture domains, they often tend to be T-shaped or V-shaped where they are deeper in one specialty over another.

So, what is the difference between an enterprise architect and a business architect? The answer is somewhat dependent on the context of an organization’s structure and practice, but generally speaking, an enterprise architect practices across all architecture domains, where a business architect focuses just on the business architecture domain (and partners with other architects). Additionally, here are a few important things to keep in mind:

All architects should share a base set of competencies as well as those specific to their area of specialization

All architects should be fluent in their organization’s business architecture

Close partnership and integration across all architecture domains and architect roles is critical for success, this includes cohesiveness of the architecture knowledgebase as well as how architects work together (and with other roles) to deliver value to the organization

To maximize value, the business architect role should be business-focused and strategically positioned

Business architects can focus on different scopes, from the full enterprise to a set of capabilities to a specific business domain; they always consider the bigger picture though regardless of scope

2. Why do organizations need business architects?

We know that organizations are going through a time of tremendous transformation, and that change and disruption are part of our new normal. A business architecture is most useful in the context of change, which is why we have seen an increase in adoption of the discipline worldwide. Business architects help organizations to create a clear and shared macro level understanding of where the organization is today, where it is going in the future, and how it will get there.

Business architects play a unique (and often missing) role to help inform and translate strategy into the cohesive set of changes needed across people, process, and technology to make that direction real (using value streams and capabilities as a key means to organize changes). They also help to ensure alignment across an organization. This includes both ensuring that the initiatives and solutions delivered meet the original business and architectural direction as well as ensuring that investments in capabilities (implemented through people, process, and technology) are appropriately harmonized across business units, products, and geographies.

Beyond their unique role in helping to inform, translate, and align strategy to execution, business architects also help to steward their organization’s business architecture knowledgebase. A business architecture is like a blueprint that provides a shared language and mental model for an entire organization, and it is owned by the business. A business architecture can and should be used by anyone in an organization for decision-making and an important part of the business architect role is to support others in doing so.

The diagram below reflects the contemporary practice of business architecture as context for questions 1 and 2. Business architecture lives in two worlds, first as part of the enterprise architecture umbrella (right) but also as a key contributor in a strategic management context (left).

3. What does it take to be a good business architect?

There are a few characteristics that encapsulate how good business architects think and act. For example, they are value-driven and focus on business value, outcomes, and results for their organization and its customers or constituents. Business architects are business-minded with a strong command of how business works, how to evolve business models and formulate strategies to win, and how to design an organization for effectiveness and agility (this includes having a command of technology and how to leverage it strategically). They are enterprise advocates, always bringing people together across organizational silos and back to the bigger picture of the enterprise. Business architects are bridge builders, knowing that it takes an ecosystem of teams to translate strategy into action and run an organization successfully. While business architects perform unique responsibilities, they also build close partnerships with others because they realize their own success – and the success of the organization – depends on making other people successful. Business architects are also visualizers and storytellers to create clarity and common understanding and they serve as change agents for new ideas. Business architects help to simplify, visualize, and explain complex concepts and show new connections.

Beyond these characteristics, a great business architect needs a depth of knowledge and experience including building a business architecture baseline (capabilities, information concepts, and value streams) at the enterprise level architecting change initiatives, and working across the life cycle from strategy to execution.

Becoming a great business architect is a journey that takes time, but a very rewarding one along the way. A truly successful business architect majors in business architecture, but minors in other disciplines and frameworks. The most adept business architects think strategically and architecturally to facilitate strategy execution and solve complex problems, leveraging business architecture as the foundation, blended seamlessly with many other approaches and abilities. This means that great business architects continually develop and leverage a wide range of knowledge and experiences – much of it beyond the realm of business architecture.

4. What are the key components of a business architecture?

The foundation of a business architecture is comprised of capabilities (i.e., the reusable building blocks that describe what an organization does to deliver its products and services and support its operations), value streams (i.e., the high-level flows that deliver value to an external or internal stakeholder), and a cross-mapping between them (to depict where reusable capabilities are leveraged to deliver business value). In addition, a set of information concepts underpin the capabilities and value streams – and the entire business and IT architecture – and give people a truly shared definition of key terms such as customers, partners, products, assets, and so forth.

In addition to these three fundamental business architecture domains, there are seven additional business domains that are represented through an organization’s business architecture including business units (internal business units and external partners), products (the goods and/or services an organization offers to its customers/constituents), policies (external regulations and internal polices), stakeholders, strategies, metrics, and initiatives.

In addition, business architecture connects to the domains within other disciplines as well such as to journeys from the customer experience discipline, processes from the business process management discipline, requirements from the business analysis discipline, and applications and software services in the application architecture.

A business architecture is essentially an interconnected and multidimensional set of views, stored in a reusable knowledgebase, that can be used to inform many different business scenarios.

5. Who are the key stakeholders for a business architecture?

While the overall value proposition for business architecture is to enable effective strategy execution, business architecture is a bit like a Swiss army knife in that it can be used for a broad range of business usage scenarios and decision-making.

As a result, each organization needs to define its goals for leveraging the discipline for value. For example, while many organizations leverage business architecture for informing, translating, and aligning strategies and transformations, other organizations focus on leveraging the discipline for macro level simplification and effectiveness, business and IT alignment, or even a repeatable way to approach acquisitions.

As a result, the key stakeholders for business architecture within an organization can vary based on how the discipline is being used. However, some of the most common stakeholders for business architecture include strategy and transformation leaders and their teams along with portfolio managers, strategic planners, and technology leaders from CIOs and CTOs and down. Other key stakeholders include C-level business leaders, business unit leaders, product leaders, innovation leaders, risk managers, compliance managers, program and project managers, data management leaders, human-centered designers, organization designers, organizational change managers, business process professionals, business relationship managers, business analysts, IT architects, and many more.

6. How does one “use” a business architecture?

Generally, there are three categories of usage for a business architecture: to (1) facilitate effective strategy execution as mentioned earlier, to (2) help organizations design or redesign for effectiveness and agility, and to (3) inform a wide variety of business and technology decision-making scenarios.

For organization design and redesign, consider that we can assemble capabilities in different ways to deliver new value, products, and services. We can also design our organizations with increased efficiency, for example, by reducing the number of systems needed to automate the same capability.
For decision-making, consider that a business architecture knowledgebase is the go-to place for information about an organization at a macro level. As a result, we can get holistic answers framed in a shared business context to support decision-making around strategic alignment, customer experience, product management, investments, cost, risk, compliance, outsourcing, business and IT alignment, application portfolio management, technical debt, cloud strategy and migration, sustainability, mergers and acquisitions, divestitures, joint ventures, and more.

7. Why is it so challenging for organizations to move big ideas into action?

Organizations may formulate excellent strategies, but the challenge often occurs in the translation of those ideas across a large organization with many business units, products, and regions. I believe there are a few foundational challenges that contribute to this.

First, organizations do not always have a formalized, cohesive approach to strategy execution that knits together all the teams from end-to-end to develop strategies, architect changes, plan initiatives, execute solutions, and measure success. We may do this for parts of the process, but we do not necessarily look at the whole of strategy execution with the same criticality and accountability as we do with other functions such as sales, marketing, or finance.

Second, large organizations are still siloed in many ways, which shapes the behavior, thinking, and priorities of individuals. For example, when it comes to investments or problem solving, we may default to what is best for our business area versus thinking about what is best for the customer and the enterprise – especially when organizational structures, motivation mechanisms, and inertia enforce the status quo.

Finally, I believe that both of these challenges are also underpinned by a need to enhance business education to teach a more comprehensive approach from strategy to execution, and normalize the idea of business and IT architecture to supplement strategic thinking and decision making.

8. Digital transformation has become an overused phrase. What is a true digital transformation?

A true digital transformation is strategic and customer-driven, leveraging technology to establish business models and ecosystems that unlock new value for organizations to thrive in the digital economy. In other words, automation alone does not constitute a digital transformation. The Institute for Digital Transformation gives us clear guidance in the Digital Transformation Manifesto – that it should “lead to metamorphic change among an organization’s products, services, systems, operations, and culture – amplified by technology.”

I believe that collectively many organizations are now coming to terms with what digital transformation really means and are starting to move beyond the hype. I also think we are reaching the point where digital business is now just regular business – where digital is no longer something separate, but just part of how an organization delivers value, strategizes, and operates.

9. Where does a successful transformation begin?

A successful transformation starts with why. What does the business want to achieve and how will we know when we have achieved it? Clear business direction and outcomes provide the critical starting point so that people across an organization can accurately determine the change that is needed, both to people, processes, technology, assets, and locations – as well as the human side of change. Clear business direction also helps to inspire people to action on a collective vision that is greater than themselves.

10. Why do so many organizations fail to succeed at both strategy and execution?

Organizations can be challenged in formulating strategy, in ultimately executing upon a strategy, or both as suggested here. From a strategy formulation perspective, much has been written by strategy experts, but from my perspective, I see organizations challenged in a few key ways. For example, some organizations lack rigor in the definition of strategy itself, where the strategy does not reflect specific choices or specifies broad (and non-strategic) goals such as to improve operational effectiveness. I also see challenges with articulating strategy where different parts of an organization describe and decompose the strategy in different ways, making goals, objectives, and courses of action difficult to understand and reconcile from an enterprise perspective. Additionally, I see challenges with communicating strategy as it filters through the layers of an organization and becomes diffused – especially without a shared understanding of the courses of action and collective changes that help people relate to the direction and what it means for them.

From a strategy execution perspective, as shared in question #7, the challenges with execution (e.g., building solutions that do not meet business needs or are duplicative) often begin upstream without a well-defined translation through a common blueprint like an organization’s business architecture. This does not mean that improvements are not necessary to execution (and many shifts are happening worldwide today such as around agile delivery), but an organization should assess each major activity from strategy to execution both individually and together as a cohesive end-to-end process.

Achieving a strategy requires clear intent translated into organized effort and the structured methods from strategy management frameworks as well as business architecture and other design disciplines can help. Hopefully the increasing awareness of the opportunity – and necessity – for effective end-to-end strategy execution will inspire and enable organizations to take further action to prepare for an increasingly disruptive and exciting business landscape for years to come.

Conclusion

Thanks to you Whynde for sharing your insights with our global human-centered change and innovation community!

To learn more about Whynde’s views on making your strategy a reality, grab yourself a copy of her new book Strategy to Reality.

Image credits: Whynde Kuehn, Unsplash

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

This entry was posted in Change, Strategy and tagged authors, Books, Business Authors, Interviews on October 18, 2022 by admin.

America is in Desperate Need of a Shared Purpose

Leave a reply

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

In 1993, after being named IBM’s CEO as it was quickly careening toward insolvency, Lou Gerstner said, “There’s been a lot of speculation as to when I’m going to deliver a vision of IBM, and what I’d like to say to all of you is that the last thing IBM needs right now is a vision.” It was a peculiar thing to say, especially for an executive renown for his strategic acumen, and people took note.

What Gerstner meant was that IBM was broken internally. It had lost sight of itself and fallen into infighting. It no longer sought to serve the customer. Instead of collaborating, executives engaged in endless turf battles. Until IBM’s culture and values could be brought back into harmony with the market, it didn’t matter what the vision was.

Today, America has a similar plight. We are undergoing profound shifts in our racial makeup, urban concentration and generational demography in the midst of great geopolitical and technological disruption. We need to build a new social contract based on shared values that align with those shifts and, until we do that, any vision for the future will be irrelevant.

The Racial Divide

The recent incidents involving Amy Cooper and George Floyd outraged people across the world. In the former, a white woman leveraged her sense of privilege to threaten a black man in the most despicable way. In the latter, a black man was senselessly murdered at the hands of a police officer, while his colleagues sat back and watched.

What was notable about both incidents is that they were filmed and that the subjects involved knew they were being filmed but proceeded with their behavior anyway. How many times have they acted similarly off camera? There’s no way of knowing, but given the air of confidence they had in their actions, it’s hard to believe it was the first time for either.

At the same time, life expectancy for the white working class is actually declining, mostly because of “deaths of despair” due to drugs, alcohol and suicide. For those struggling and who see their friends and families undergoing similar travails, assertions of “white privilege” fall hollow. In fact, the very idea of “white privilege” intensifies the feeling that they are under attack.

The racial divide in America is wide and encompasses gaps in economic circumstances as well as values and attitudes. It doesn’t show signs of closing anytime soon. Yet until it does it’s hard to see how we can move forward as a nation.

The Urban-Rural Divide

In addition to the racial divide in America, we have a stark urban-rural divide that seems to keep widening. While having some gap between city and country dwellers is quite common all over the world, in America that gap is almost uniquely vast and encompasses a number of political and economic forces.

Politically, the fact that each state has two senators gives rural states with small populations an advantage in determining federal policy. On the other hand, because capitals tend to be in cities, those who work in government tend to be more liberal than their rural counterparts. Voting data has long shown that the urban and suburban areas tend to vote Democrat and exurban and rural areas tend to prefer Republicans.

On the economic side, cities wield enormous power. Most major corporations are headquartered in urban areas and large industries tend to agglomerate around specific cities, such as finance in New York, entertainment in Los Angeles and technology in San Francisco. Some observers have also noted that, as housing costs in key cities rise they are beginning to hemorrhage mid and low skill workers who tend to be less educated.

Much like the racial divide, the urban-rural divide is heavily rooted in values and attitudes. While city dwellers often dismiss rural areas as “fly-over country,” those who live in rural areas feel disrespected and unrecognized. They often complain that their communities are being dictated to by people in other places who live other kinds of lives, which leaves them angrily seeking political redress.

The Demographic Divide

In addition to the racial and urban-rural divides, we are also beginning to see a massive generational shift. Over the next decade, baby-boomers, many of whom came of age during the Reagan revolution, will be replaced by millennials, whose experiences with the Great Recession, debilitating student loan debt and rising healthcare costs, have very different priorities.

The main drivers of the Baby Boomer’s influence have been its size and economic prosperity. In America alone, 76 million people were born in between 1946 and 1964, and they came of age in the prosperous years of the 1960s. These factors gave them unprecedented political and economic clout that continues to this day.

Yet now, Millennials, who are more diverse and focused on issues such as the environment and tolerance, are beginning to outnumber Baby Boomers. Much like in the 1960s, their increasing influence is driving trends in politics, the economy and the workplace and their values often put them in conflict with the baby boomers.

However, unlike the Baby Boomers, Millennials are coming of age in an era where prosperity seems to be waning. With Baby Boomers retiring and putting further strains on the economy, especially with regard to healthcare costs, tensions are on the rise

A Problem of Identity and Dignity

In 1989, standing on Kosovo Polje, in a ceremony commemorating the Battle of Kosovo, in which the Serbian army was annihilated by the Ottomans in 1389, Slobodan Milošević told his followers, “No one should dare to beat you again!” Since then, we have seen a wide array of leaders, from Vladimir Putin to Donald Trump, leverage our innate need for recognition and collective identity to whip us into a frenzy.

Amy Cooper threatened a black man because he refused to recognize her privilege and she immediately called the police, with whom she obviously felt a shared identity. The Tea Party was driven, in large part, by older Americans who felt that younger Americans, who they did not feel a shared identity with, wanted to “freeload” off the country they worked their lives to build.

We can expect that as long as these divisions remain, there will be politicians and others who will seek to exploit them for personal gain. If we were still a white, Christian country in a simpler world, things would be easier, but we would lose all of the incalculable benefits that come with diversity, including more dynamism, innovation and culture. Much like IBM in the 90s, we cannot move forward until we heal our internal divisions.

Nothing about a multi-ethnic, multicultural society is simple. Building anything worthwhile takes work and no small amount of pain. Still, we need to try harder. We need to rebuild our society, culture and values based on a new basis of shared purpose. Until we do that, nothing else will really matter.

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— Image credit: Pixabay

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

This entry was posted in Change and tagged purpose, United States on October 17, 2022 by Greg Satell.

The Anticipatory Organization

Leave a reply

Building Agility Through Foresight

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In a world defined by the relentless pace of change, the very concept of building an agile organization has become a non-negotiable cornerstone of modern business strategy. But what if true agility wasn’t just about speed or adaptability in the face of change? What if it was about the profound capacity to anticipate, prepare for, and proactively shape the future? This is the defining characteristic of what I call the Anticipatory Organization, and its secret lies in the powerful, symbiotic relationship between foresight and agility.

Most organizations treat agility as a reactive muscle—a means to respond quickly when a crisis hits or a new trend emerges. While this reactive agility is undoubtedly valuable, it’s often born from a necessity to catch up. The Anticipatory Organization, however, operates on a different plane. It practices proactive agility, built on a foundation of strategic foresight. This allows leaders and teams to look beyond the immediate horizon, identify emerging signals, understand potential disruptions, and strategically position themselves for success. It’s about being ready for what’s next, not just reacting to what just happened.

The Indispensable Partnership: Foresight Fuels Agility

Strategic foresight isn’t about attempting to predict the future with perfect accuracy—that’s a fool’s errand. Instead, it’s a systematic, human-centered discipline that explores alternative futures, identifies the driving forces of change (technological, social, political, economic), and uncovers potential opportunities and threats. When this discipline is combined with an agile operational model, it fundamentally transforms an organization’s capacity to:

Anticipate & Prepare: By understanding plausible future scenarios, organizations can develop contingency plans, identify necessary skill sets, and allocate resources more effectively before disruption becomes a reality.

Proactively Innovate: Foresight reveals unmet human needs and emerging market spaces, guiding innovation efforts towards creating future-proof products, services, and business models, rather than merely optimizing existing ones. This is about building the future, not just adapting to it.

Mitigate Risk: Identifying potential threats early allows for the development of robust strategies to reduce their impact or even pivot to turn them into new opportunities.

Strategic Decision-Making: Foresight provides a richer, more robust context for current decisions, ensuring they are not just optimized for today, but are also aligned with plausible future states.

Build Resilience: Organizations that systematically engage with foresight are better equipped to weather unforeseen challenges, bounce back faster, and even emerge stronger, because they have already mentally and strategically explored what a major disruption might entail.

Without foresight, agility can devolve into aimless thrashing; without agility, foresight remains a purely academic exercise. Together, they create a powerful engine for sustained competitive advantage in turbulent times.

“Agility without foresight is merely fast reaction; foresight without agility is just wishful thinking. The true power lies in their synergy, creating a truly anticipatory organization.”

Integrating Foresight into Your Organizational DNA

Shifting towards an anticipatory, foresight-driven agile culture isn’t a simple task; it requires intentional effort and a deep, systemic integration across the organization:

Establish a Foresight Capability: This could be a dedicated team, cross-functional working groups, or leveraging external expertise. The key is to have a structured, ongoing process for scanning the horizon for weak signals.

Democratize Futures Thinking: Do not confine foresight to the executive suite. Train employees at all levels to identify early signals of change, question core assumptions, and think critically about the long-term implications of their work.

Develop Scenarios, Not Predictions: Instead of trying to pinpoint ‘the future,’ build multiple plausible future scenarios. This helps organizations think in terms of possibilities and prepares them to be agile in a range of potential outcomes.

Link Foresight Directly to Strategy & Innovation: Ensure that insights gleaned from foresight directly inform your strategic planning, R&D roadmaps, and portfolio decisions. This is how ideas become action.

Foster an Experimentation Culture: Foresight identifies promising areas for exploration. Agility provides the crucial framework to quickly prototype, test, and learn from these explorations in a low-risk environment, turning a potential future into a tangible reality.

Case Study 1: Nokia’s Missed Opportunity – A Cautionary Tale of Foresight Without Agility

The Challenge:

In the late 1990s and early 2000s, Nokia was the undisputed global leader in mobile phones. They were agile in manufacturing, supply chain, and hardware innovation, dominating market share with their feature phones. However, despite conducting extensive research into future mobile trends, including internet-enabled devices and touchscreens, their internal structure and core assumptions prevented them from acting on these insights effectively.

Foresight’s Glimmer, Agility’s Blindness:

Nokia’s research teams, in many ways, did possess foresight. They explored concepts that predated the iPhone and had a deep understanding of evolving consumer needs. However, their organizational agility was fundamentally constrained by several factors:

The Incumbent’s Dilemma: An overpowering focus on optimizing their existing, highly successful business model (hardware sales, a proprietary OS, and strong operator relationships) overshadowed the need for the radical, transformative shifts that were clearly on the horizon.

Internal Silos: Different divisions often operated independently, hindering the necessary cross-functional integration of hardware, software, and services needed for a true smartphone experience.

Organizational Inertia: The company’s established decision-making processes were too slow and hierarchical to respond to the rapid market shift initiated by Apple and Google.

The Result:

Nokia possessed fragments of foresight but lacked the organizational agility to translate those insights into decisive, coordinated action. They saw the icebergs but couldn’t steer the ship fast enough, ultimately losing their market dominance to more anticipatory and agile competitors. This serves as a powerful reminder that foresight without the ability to act on it is ultimately ineffective.

Case Study 2: Netflix’s Continuous Reinvention – Foresight as a Compass for Agile Growth

The Challenge:

Netflix started as a DVD-by-mail service, a business model that, while innovative at the time, had a clear technological and human-centric expiration date. To survive and thrive, they needed to navigate seismic shifts in technology, content consumption, and competitive landscapes.

Foresight-Driven Agility in Action:

Netflix consistently demonstrated an exceptional ability to integrate foresight into its agile operating model, becoming the quintessential Anticipatory Organization:

Anticipating Streaming (Early 2000s): Even while dominating DVD rentals, Netflix saw the internet’s potential for content delivery. They began investing in streaming infrastructure and licensing content years before it became mainstream, showing incredible foresight and proactive preparation. They were building the future, not waiting for it.

Embracing Original Content (Early 2010s): Recognizing the future value of proprietary content and the rising costs of licensing, Netflix made a bold, foresight-driven move into original programming, transforming from a mere distributor into a global content powerhouse. This required massive investments and a fundamentally agile approach to content creation and production, all based on a future-focused bet.

Global Expansion & Localization: Foresight into global market potential and the need for localized content and user experience drove their aggressive, yet agile, international expansion strategy. They didn’t simply enter markets; they tailored their offerings to each region’s unique preferences.

Data-Driven Adaptation: Netflix uses vast amounts of data to continually understand viewer preferences, predict trends, and agilely adapt its content recommendations, production strategy, and platform features. Their A/B testing culture is a testament to their agile execution on foresight-driven hypotheses.

The Result:

Netflix’s journey from a DVD rental company to a global streaming and content production giant is a masterclass in building agility through foresight. They didn’t just react to market changes; they anticipated them, made bold strategic bets, and used their agile operational model to execute on those bets with remarkable speed and effectiveness. Their sustained success stems from a culture that actively scans the horizon, embraces potential futures, and then rapidly iterates and adapts to bring those futures to fruition.

Conclusion: Leading with Intentional Preparedness

In an unpredictable world, organizations cannot afford to merely be agile in reaction. True competitive advantage stems from intentional preparedness — the powerful combination of strategic foresight guiding proactive agility. By developing a robust foresight capability, democratizing futures thinking, and systematically linking insights to strategy and innovation, leaders can empower their organizations to not just survive change, but to actively shape the future for their customers and themselves.

Embrace foresight as your compass, and agility as your engine. Together, they will navigate your organization through the fog of uncertainty, positioning you to not just adapt to the future, but to create it. It’s time to build not just a faster ship, but one that knows where it’s going, long before the storm hits.

Extra Extra: Because innovation is all about change, Braden Kelley’s human-centered change methodology and tools are the best way to plan and execute the changes necessary to support your innovation and transformation efforts — all while literally getting everyone all on the same page for change. Find out more about the methodology and tools, including the book Charting Change by following the link. Be sure and download the TEN FREE TOOLS while you’re here.

Image credit: One of 900+ FREE quote slides for your meetings and presentations at http://misterinnovation.com

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

This entry was posted in Change, Digital Transformation, Futurology, Leadership and tagged agility, anticipatory organization, foresight on October 17, 2022 by Chateau G Pato.

Post navigation

← Older posts

Newer posts →

Engaging Hearts and Minds

The Three Pillars of Purposeful Innovation

Case Study 1: Patagonia – The Purpose-Driven Pioneer

The Challenge:

The Purposeful Innovation Response:

The Result:

Case Study 2: TOMS – The “One for One” Model

The Challenge:

The Purposeful Innovation Response:

The Result:

Conclusion: The Future is Purpose-Driven

Deconstructing Fear

The Four Faces of Fear in a Changing World

Overcoming Fear with a Human-Centered Approach

Case Study 1: The IBM Mainframe to Cloud Transition

The Challenge:

The Fear-Deconstructing Approach:

The Result:

Case Study 2: The Nordstrom Digital Transformation

The Challenge:

The Fear-Deconstructing Approach:

The Result:

Conclusion: Leading with Empathy

Inspiring Your Team to Embrace the Unknown

The Innovation Journey: A Modern Myth

Case Study 1: The Pixar Journey from Toy Story to a Studio

The Challenge:

The Heroic Innovation:

The Result:

Case Study 2: The Dyson Story – A Relentless Pursuit of an Idea

The Challenge:

The Heroic Innovation:

The Result:

Conclusion: Lead the Journey, Don’t Just Manage the Process

Might > We

We > Might

How Might Can YOU Fix HMW?

How would we solve this problem if the answer to every request is YES?

What would we ask for if we were guaranteed a YES to only ONE request?

How would we solve the problem if the answer to every request is NO?

How Might Will/Do YOU Fix HMW?

Neither a time to panic nor languish

Integrating and balancing chaos and rigidity

Allowing, accepting, and acknowledging

No emotion or mental state is permanent!

Rehabilitate with intention

A decade of both transformation and disruption

Find out more about our work at ImagineNation™

A Failed Market Revolution

Digital Disruption

The Uncertain Promise of Globalization

We Need to Choose Resilience and Grand Challenges Over Output and Disruption

1. What is the difference between an enterprise architect and a business architect?

2. Why do organizations need business architects?

3. What does it take to be a good business architect?

4. What are the key components of a business architecture?

5. Who are the key stakeholders for a business architecture?

6. How does one “use” a business architecture?

7. Why is it so challenging for organizations to move big ideas into action?

8. Digital transformation has become an overused phrase. What is a true digital transformation?

9. Where does a successful transformation begin?

10. Why do so many organizations fail to succeed at both strategy and execution?

Conclusion

The Racial Divide

The Urban-Rural Divide

The Demographic Divide

A Problem of Identity and Dignity

Building Agility Through Foresight

The Indispensable Partnership: Foresight Fuels Agility

Integrating Foresight into Your Organizational DNA

Case Study 1: Nokia’s Missed Opportunity – A Cautionary Tale of Foresight Without Agility

The Challenge:

Foresight’s Glimmer, Agility’s Blindness:

The Result:

Case Study 2: Netflix’s Continuous Reinvention – Foresight as a Compass for Agile Growth

The Challenge:

Foresight-Driven Agility in Action:

The Result:

Conclusion: Leading with Intentional Preparedness