Category Archives: Entrepreneurship

The Entrepreneurial Mindset

A Framework for Innovation Leaders

The Entrepreneurial Mindset: A Framework for Innovation Leaders

by Braden Kelley and Art Inteligencia

The entrepreneurial mindset is one of the most talked-about concepts in business — and one of the most misunderstood. Most definitions focus on founders, startups, and risk-taking. But the entrepreneurial mindset is not just for people who start companies. It is the single most important cognitive asset any innovation or change leader can develop, whether they work inside a Fortune 500, a government agency, a nonprofit, or a startup garage.

After decades of working with organizations across industries to build innovation and change capability, I’ve observed a consistent pattern: the leaders who drive lasting transformation are not necessarily the most technically skilled or the most strategically sophisticated. They are the ones who think and act entrepreneurially — who see opportunity where others see constraint, who move forward under uncertainty rather than waiting for certainty, and who treat every setback as data rather than defeat.

This post is my attempt to define the entrepreneurial mindset precisely, distinguish it from related concepts, and give innovation and change leaders a practical framework for building it — in themselves and in their organizations.

What the Entrepreneurial Mindset Actually Is

The most useful definition I’ve encountered comes from the work on effectuation by researcher Saras Sarasvathy: the entrepreneurial mindset is a state of mind that is drawn to opportunity, comfortable with uncertainty, and oriented toward action and value creation — regardless of the resources currently controlled.

That last phrase is critical: regardless of the resources currently controlled. This is what separates the entrepreneurial mindset from a general “growth mindset” or “innovative thinking.” Anyone can think creatively when they have unlimited time, budget, and support. The entrepreneurial mindset activates specifically under constraint — when the resources are scarce, the path is unclear, and the outcome is uncertain. That is precisely the condition most innovation and change leaders operate in every day.

A useful way to think about it: the entrepreneurial mindset is not a personality trait. It is a cognitive orientation — a set of mental habits and behavioral patterns that can be learned, practiced, and strengthened over time. Research consistently shows that entrepreneurial thinking is developed through experience and reflection, not inherited through genes or luck.

What the Entrepreneurial Mindset Is NOT

Clearing away misconceptions is as important as defining the concept clearly. Here are the most common ones:

It is not only for entrepreneurs. The entrepreneurial mindset is as relevant — arguably more relevant — for leaders inside established organizations as it is for startup founders. Intrapreneurs, innovation champions, change leaders, and transformation executives all operate in conditions that require exactly the cognitive flexibility and opportunity orientation that the entrepreneurial mindset provides. The sad irony is that large organizations often hire for entrepreneurial thinking and then systematically suppress it through bureaucracy, risk aversion, and short-term measurement.

It is not about reckless risk-taking. Popular culture has romanticized the entrepreneur as a bold risk-taker who bets everything on a hunch. Serious research on successful entrepreneurs tells a very different story. They are not risk-seekers — they are risk managers who take calculated, affordable steps under uncertainty, test assumptions cheaply, and preserve the ability to pivot. This is precisely the approach that works inside organizations too.

It is not the same as a growth mindset. Carol Dweck’s growth mindset — the belief that abilities can be developed through dedication and hard work — is a necessary foundation but not sufficient on its own. The entrepreneurial mindset adds the dimensions of opportunity recognition, resourcefulness under constraint, and a bias toward action and experimentation that growth mindset alone doesn’t capture.

It is not innate. One of the most damaging myths in organizational life is that some people “just have it” and others don’t. This belief causes organizations to write off large portions of their workforce as non-entrepreneurial rather than investing in developing the mindset systematically. The evidence is clear: entrepreneurial thinking can be taught, modeled, and reinforced through the right environment and practices.

It is not about having ideas. The entrepreneurial mindset is frequently confused with creativity or ideation. Generating ideas is easy — most organizations have more ideas than they can act on. What the entrepreneurial mindset provides is not more ideas but better judgment about which opportunities to pursue, and the persistence and resourcefulness to actually realize them.

What the Entrepreneurial Mindset is Not

The 7 Core Characteristics of the Entrepreneurial Mindset

Based on the research literature and my own experience working with innovation and change leaders, these are the seven characteristics that most consistently distinguish people who think and act entrepreneurially:

Characteristic What it looks like in practice What its absence looks like
Opportunity orientation Scanning constantly for unmet needs, emerging shifts, and underserved possibilities — even in stable environments Waiting to be told what to work on; seeing only problems, not possibilities
Comfort with uncertainty Moving forward with incomplete information; making decisions under ambiguity without being paralyzed Analysis paralysis; waiting for certainty before acting; over-reliance on data that doesn’t yet exist
Resourcefulness Finding creative ways to make progress with what’s available; treating constraints as design parameters “We don’t have the budget/headcount/technology to do this” as a full stop rather than a starting point
Bias toward action Preferring small, fast experiments over long planning cycles; learning by doing rather than by theorizing Endless planning, committee review, and refinement before anything is tested in the real world
Resilience and learning orientation Treating setbacks as data; extracting lessons from failure and applying them forward without dwelling or deflecting Avoiding risk to avoid failure; blaming external factors when things go wrong; not learning from mistakes
Collaborative network building Actively building relationships across organizational and disciplinary boundaries; leveraging others’ resources and knowledge Working in silos; reinventing wheels others have already built; not seeking out expertise beyond one’s immediate team
Long-range value orientation Keeping focus on the value being created for customers, users, and stakeholders — not just on completing tasks or hitting short-term metrics Mistaking activity for progress; optimizing for what’s measured rather than what matters

No one embodies all seven of these characteristics equally all the time. The entrepreneurial mindset is not a state of permanent excellence — it is a set of orientations to cultivate deliberately, especially in high-pressure, high-uncertainty environments where the temptation to revert to defensive, bureaucratic behavior is strongest.

The Entrepreneurial Mindset Inside Organizations

This is where the conversation gets most relevant for readers of this blog — and where most writing on the entrepreneurial mindset falls short.

The conditions inside an established organization are fundamentally different from those faced by a startup founder. You don’t control your resources. You have legacy systems, established processes, and entrenched stakeholders. Your success is measured by metrics that may actively discourage entrepreneurial behavior. And the cultural immune system of a large organization is remarkably effective at neutralizing people who think and act differently.

This is why intrapreneurship — entrepreneurship practiced inside an established organization — is one of the most demanding forms of innovation work. It requires all the cognitive and behavioral attributes of the entrepreneurial mindset, plus the political skill, organizational intelligence, and long-term persistence to operate within a system that often wasn’t designed to support what you’re trying to do.

The most effective intrapreneurs I’ve worked with share several common practices:

They build coalitions before they need them. Rather than waiting until they have a project that needs support, they invest continuously in relationships across the organization — cultivating allies, sponsors, and collaborators who will be essential when the time comes to move quickly.

They make the business case in the language of the organization. Entrepreneurial thinking that can’t connect to the organization’s strategic priorities and financial metrics will die in the first budget cycle. The most effective intrapreneurs translate their ideas into terms that resonate with decision-makers — not abandoning the vision, but making it legible to the people who control resources.

They start small and prove the concept. Rather than seeking large commitments upfront, they find ways to run cheap, fast experiments that generate real evidence. A small proof of concept that works is worth a hundred slides that argue something might work.

They protect space for long-range thinking. The gravitational pull of the urgent always threatens to crowd out the important. Effective intrapreneurs deliberately protect time and attention for horizon-scanning, future-oriented thinking, and work that won’t pay off this quarter — because that is where the most important opportunities live.

They build organizational change capability, not just individual ideas. The most lasting contribution an intrapreneur can make is not a single successful project but a change in how the organization thinks about and approaches innovation. This requires the mindset and methods of human-centered change, not just entrepreneurial energy.

How to Develop an Entrepreneurial Mindset

The entrepreneurial mindset is not developed through reading about it. It is developed through practice — through deliberately putting yourself in situations that require entrepreneurial thinking and reflecting carefully on what you learn.

Here are the most effective practices for building it systematically:

Seek out constraint deliberately. Comfortable environments produce comfortable thinking. Put yourself and your team in situations where resources are limited, the problem is genuinely unclear, and the solution is not obvious. This is where entrepreneurial thinking develops fastest.

Run experiments, not projects. The difference is in the intent. A project is designed to deliver a predetermined output. An experiment is designed to test a specific assumption and generate learning regardless of whether the hypothesis is confirmed. Shifting from project thinking to experiment thinking is one of the most powerful cognitive shifts available to innovation leaders.

Build a horizon-scanning practice. Entrepreneurial opportunity recognition requires exposure to signals of change — emerging technologies, shifting behaviors, new research, adjacent industries. Build a deliberate habit of reading widely across domains and asking regularly: what does this mean for our organization? My FutureHacking™ methodology provides a structured framework for doing this systematically.

Debrief failures rigorously. The learning value of failure is only realized through deliberate reflection. When something doesn’t work, build the habit of asking: what assumption was wrong? What did we learn? What would we do differently? This is the engine of the learning orientation that distinguishes entrepreneurial thinkers from everyone else.

Find and learn from practitioners. The fastest path to developing any mindset is proximity to people who already embody it. Seek out the most entrepreneurially minded people in your organization and industry, learn how they think, and study how they make decisions under uncertainty.

Use the Human-Centered Change methodology. Building lasting change capability in yourself and your organization requires more than individual mindset development — it requires the frameworks, tools, and practices that make entrepreneurial thinking repeatable and scalable. Human-Centered Change provides exactly this: a systematic methodology for embedding entrepreneurial and innovative thinking into how your organization operates, not just how a few exceptional individuals behave.

How to Develop an Entrepreneurial Mindset

The Entrepreneurial Mindset and Human-Centered Change

There is a deep connection between the entrepreneurial mindset and human-centered approaches to change and innovation that I don’t think gets enough attention.

Both start with the same fundamental orientation: the belief that the most important source of insight is the human beings you are trying to serve — customers, users, employees, communities. Both are committed to understanding people deeply before proposing solutions. Both treat the world as a system of opportunities to be realized through creativity, collaboration, and action, rather than a set of problems to be managed through control and prediction.

The entrepreneurial mindset without human-centeredness produces innovation that is clever but doesn’t serve real needs — solutions in search of problems. Human-centered design without the entrepreneurial mindset produces empathy and insight that never translates into action — understanding without impact. Together, they form the foundation of the most powerful approach to innovation and change leadership available today.

This is why the work of developing the entrepreneurial mindset is not separate from the work of building human-centered change capability — it is the same work, approached from a different angle. And it is the work that I’ve devoted my career to helping organizations do.

Frequently Asked Questions About the Entrepreneurial Mindset

Is the entrepreneurial mindset only for entrepreneurs?

No — and this is one of the most damaging misconceptions about it. The entrepreneurial mindset is equally, arguably more, valuable for leaders inside established organizations. Intrapreneurs, innovation champions, change leaders, and transformation executives all operate under conditions of uncertainty, resource constraint, and organizational resistance that demand exactly the cognitive flexibility and opportunity orientation the entrepreneurial mindset provides. Large organizations that limit entrepreneurial thinking to their “innovation lab” or startup incubator are leaving enormous value on the table.

What is the difference between an entrepreneurial mindset and a growth mindset?

A growth mindset — the belief that abilities can be developed through effort and learning — is a necessary foundation but not sufficient on its own. The entrepreneurial mindset adds several dimensions that growth mindset doesn’t fully capture: opportunity recognition, comfort with genuine uncertainty (not just challenge), resourcefulness under constraint, a bias toward action and experimentation, and an orientation toward creating value for others. You can have a growth mindset and still be primarily reactive and internally focused. The entrepreneurial mindset is proactive, externally oriented, and action-biased.

Can you teach or learn an entrepreneurial mindset?

Yes — the research is clear on this. The entrepreneurial mindset is not a fixed personality trait; it is a set of cognitive orientations and behavioral habits that can be developed through deliberate practice, structured reflection, and the right environmental conditions. The most effective development approaches combine exposure to real entrepreneurial challenges, structured frameworks for thinking about opportunity and uncertainty, coaching and mentoring from experienced practitioners, and organizational cultures that reward experimentation and learning from failure rather than just success.

What is the most important characteristic of the entrepreneurial mindset?

If forced to choose one, I would say comfort with uncertainty — the ability to move forward, make decisions, and take action without waiting for certainty that will never fully arrive. This is the characteristic that most consistently separates entrepreneurial thinkers from everyone else, and it is the one most systematically trained out of people by traditional education and corporate environments that reward predictability and punish failure. Every other characteristic of the entrepreneurial mindset is easier to develop once you have built genuine tolerance for uncertainty.

How does the entrepreneurial mindset relate to innovation?

The entrepreneurial mindset is the cognitive foundation that makes sustained innovation possible. Innovation is not a process or a methodology — it is an outcome that emerges when people with the right mindset apply the right frameworks to real problems in the right organizational environment. Without the entrepreneurial mindset, innovation programs become bureaucratic exercises: stage-gate processes that filter out bold ideas, innovation theaters that generate excitement without impact, and transformation initiatives that change org charts without changing how people think and work. The entrepreneurial mindset is what makes the difference between innovation as a capability and innovation as an occasional accident.

How do you build an entrepreneurial mindset in an organization, not just in individuals?

Building organizational entrepreneurial mindset requires working at three levels simultaneously: individual (developing the skills, habits, and cognitive orientations of entrepreneurial thinking in leaders and teams), cultural (creating the psychological safety, tolerance for failure, and reward structures that allow entrepreneurial behavior to thrive), and structural (removing the bureaucratic processes, approval chains, and resource allocation models that suppress entrepreneurial action). Most organizations focus only on the individual level — training programs, workshops, and coaching — and wonder why the behavior doesn’t stick. Lasting change requires all three levels, which is exactly what the Human-Centered Change methodology is designed to address.

Content Authenticity Statement: The topic area, key elements to focus on, etc. were decisions made by Braden Kelley, with a little help from Claude and Google Gemini to clean up the article, add images and create infographics.

Image credits: Google Gemini

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

Entrepreneurial Efforts Must Fit with the Brand

Entrepreneurial Efforts Must Fit with the Brand

GUEST POST from Mike Shipulski

To meet ever-increasing growth objectives, established companies want to be more entrepreneurial. And the thinking goes like this – launch new products and services to create new markets, do it quickly and do it on a shoestring. Do that Lean Startup thing. Build minimum viable prototypes (MVPs), show them to customers, incorporate their feedback, make new MVPs, show them again, and then thoselaunch.

For software products, that may work well, largely because it takes little time to create MVPs, customers can try the products without meeting face-to-face and updating the code doesn’t take all that long. But for products and services that require new hardware, actual hardware, it’s a different story. New hardware takes a long time to invent, a long time to convert into an MVP, a long time to show customers and a long time to incorporate feedback. Creating new hardware and launching quickly in an entrepreneurial way don’t belong in the same sentence, unless there’s no new hardware.

For hardware, don’t think smartphones, think autonomous cars. And how’s that going for Google and the other software companies? As it turns out, it seems that designing hardware and software are different. Yes, there’s a whole lot of software in there, but there’s also a whole lot of new sensor systems (hardware). And, what complicates things further is that it’s all packed into an integrated system of subsystems where the hardware and software must cooperate to make the good things happen. And, when the consequences of a failure are severe, it’s more important to work out the bugs.

And that’s the rub with entrepreneurship and an established brand. For quick adoption, there’s strong desire to leverage the established brand – GM, Ford, BMW – but the output of the entrepreneurial work (new product or service) has to fit with the brand. GM can’t launch something that’s half-baked with the promise to fix it later. Ford can come out with a new app that is clunky and communicates intermittently with their hardware (cars) because it will reflect poorly on all their products. In short, they’ll sell fewer cars. And BMW can’t come out with an entrepreneurial all-electric car that handles poorly and is slow off the start. If they do, they’ll sell fewer cars. If you’re an established company with an established brand, the output of your entrepreneurial work must fit with the established brand.

If you’re a software startup, launch it when it’s half-baked and fix it later, as long as no one will die when it flakes out. And because it’s software, iterate early and often. And, there’s no need to worry about what it will do to the brand, because you haven’t created it yet. But if you’re a hardware startup, be careful not to launch before it’s ready because you won’t be able to move quickly and you’ll be stuck with your entrepreneurial work for longer than you want. Maybe, even long enough to sink the brand before it ever learned to swim. Developing hardware is slow. And developing robust hardware-software systems is far slower.

If you’re an established company with an established brand, tread lightly with that Lean Startup thing, even when it’s just software. An entrepreneurial software product that works poorly can take down the brand, if, of course, your brand stands for robust, predictable, value and safety. And if the entrepreneurial product relies on new hardware, be doubly careful. If it goes belly-up, it will be slow to go away and will put a lot of pressure on that wonderful brand you took so long to build.

If you’re an established brand, it may be best to buy your entrepreneurial products and services from the startups that took the risk and made it happen. That way you can buy their successful track record and stand it on the shoulders of your hard-won brand.

Image credit: Slashgear.com

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

What to Do When Your Plans Are Already Obsolete

HINT: It has something to do with strategy execution

What to Do When Your Plans Are Already Obsolete

GUEST POST from Robyn Bolton

We are three full weeks into the new year and I am curious, how is the strategy and operating plan you spent all Q3 and Q4 working on progressing? You nailed it, right? Everything is just as you expected and things are moving forward just as you planned.

I didn’t think so.

So, like many others, you feel tempted to double down on what worked before or  chase every opportunity with the hope that it will “future-proof” your business.

Stop.

Remember the Cheshire Cat, “If you don’t know where you’re going, any road will get you there.”

You DO know where you’re going because your goals didn’t change. You still need to grow revenue and cut costs with fewer resources than last year.

The map changed.  So you need to find a new road.

You’re not going to find it by looking at old playbooks or by following every path available.

You will find it by following these three steps (and don’t require months or millions to complete).

Return to First Principles

When old maps fail and new roads are uncertain, the most successful leaders return to first principles, the fundamental, irreducible truths of a subject:

  1. Organizations are systems
  2. Systems seek equilibrium and resist change when elements are misaligned
  3. People in the system do what the system allows, models, and rewards

Returning to these principles is the root of success because it forces you to pause and ask the right questions before (re)acting.

Ask Questions to Find the Root Cause

Based on the first principles, think of your organization as a lock. All the tumblers need to align to unlock the organization’s potential to get to where you need to go.  When the tumblers don’t align, you stay stuck in the dying status quo.

Every organization has three tumblers – Architecture (how you’re organized), Behavior (what leaders actually do), and Culture (what gets rewarded) – that must align to develop and execute a strategy in an environment of uncertainty and constant change.

But ensuring that you’ve aligned all three tumblers, and not just one or two, requires asking questions to get to the root cause of the challenges.

Is your leadership team struggling to align on a decision because they don’t have enough data or can’t agree on what it means? The Behavior and Culture tumblers are misaligned with the structure and incentives of Architecture

Are people resisting the new AI tools you rolled out?  Architectural incentives and metrics, and leadership communications and behaviors are preventing buy-in.

Struggling to squeeze growth out of a stagnant business?  Structures and systems combined with organization culture are reinforcing safety and a fixed mindset rather than encouraging curiosity and learning.

Align the Tumblers

When you diagnose the root causes you find the misaligned tumbler. And, in the process of bringing it into alignment, it will likely pull the others in, too.

By role modeling leadership behaviors that encourage transparent communication (no hiding behind buzzwords), quantifying confidence, and smart risk taking, you’ll also influence culture and may reveal a needed change in Architecture.

Modifying the metrics and rewards in Architecture and making sure that your communications and behavior encourage buy-in to new AI tools, will start to establish an AI-friendly culture.

Overhauling Architecture to encourage and reward actions that expand that stagnant business into new markets or brings new solutions to your existing customers, will build new leadership Behaviors will drive culture change.

Get to your Goals

It’s a VUCA/BANI world AND It’s only going to accelerate. That means that the strategy you developed last quarter and the operational plans you set last month will be obsolete by the end of the week.

But the strategy and the plan were never the goal. They were the road you planned based on the map you had.  When the map changes, the road does, too. But you can still get to the goal if you’re willing to fiddle with a lock.

Image credit: Pixabay

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Ranking Your Top 10 Micro Moments

Ranking Your Top 10 Micro Moments

GUEST POST from Robyn Bolton

Everybody loves a Top X list. This past week I’ve read the Top 100 Best Comedy Movies of All TimeThe 100 Best Episodes of the Century, and the NYT’s 100 Notable Books of 2025. And all this before we’re inundated with the Top 10 lists sports, politics, celebrity news, world news, and whatever other topic a writer can dream up.

Top X Lists are about big things, events that affect everyone or that will be remembered for decades. And while those Macro-moments are what stand out in our memories, they rarely define our everyday existence.

What are Micro-moments?

I first heard of Micro-moments in an interview between Dan Shipper, founder of Every, and Henrik Werdelin, founder of Prehype (an incubator that helped launch Barkbox and Ro Health).  According to Werdelin:

Micro-moments for me are things when I’m in flow and things where I’m happy.  It can’t be a big thing like  having a family.  It has to be a very concrete things like I like walking over the Brooklyn Bridge in the morning.  It’s just something I get profoundly happy about, right? Or I like being in brainstorm meetings with (other entrepreneurs).

But his list of Micro-moments isn’t just a new-age happiness manifestation, it’s an actual decision-making tool.  Werdelin explains:

I was basically trying to figure out what to do next and I was keeping all my options open.  I got offered a job to run BBC Digital on the international side and then I got offered a job at a design agency called Wolf Collins who had an incredible CEO.

And so, I ended up having these 30 concrete [moments] where I’ve done stuff and then I started to use that as a way to measure options that would be thrown at me.  The BBC sounded like it would be a lot of money, and it was like a cool job, and it would give me, I guess, self-esteem for a second. But then when I looked at what it would entail, none of the Micro-moments would be included so I was like, “ah, probably not for me.”

My first Micro-reactions

  1. Eye roll: Thank goodness you had a list of Micro-moments so you could avoid the soul sucking horror of running BBC Digital!
  2. Righteous indignation: Do you have any idea how hard it is out there to find a job? People would be thrilled to have a job that delivers only ONE Micro-moment of happiness?!
  3. Breathe: Wait a second. What if Mico-moments don’t determine your role. What if Micro-moments…perhaps…mean a little bit more! (yes, that is a terrible rephrasing of the Grinch’s epiphany)

Micro-moments are more than moments of flow and joy. They’re the moments that make up our lives, relationships, and view of the world. They’re the moments that should be on our Top 10 lists but too often get crowded out by noisier, bigger moments.

They’re also things we can create, design for, and sometimes even control.

What are YOUR Micro-moments?

As the period of end-of-year reflection approaches, think about your Micro-moments. What small, concrete moments that brought you flow, joy, or peace, this year? Where were you? What were you doing? Who were you with? Jot them down.

When the new year dawns, go back to your list and get curious. What are the common themes, people, places, and activities in your Micro-moments. Write down what you notice.

As the year kicks into gear and everyone settles back into work and school routines, return to your list and start planning. How might you create more Micro-moments?

Life is made up of moments. Many of them are beyond our control. But some of them aren’t. And wouldn’t it be great to know which ones make us happiest so we can experience them more often?

Image credit: Pexels

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Do What 91% of Executives Will Not

Winning in Times of Uncertainty

Do What 91% of Executives Will Not

GUEST POST from Robyn Bolton

In times of great uncertainty, we seek safety. But what does “safety” look like?

What We Say: Safety = Data

We tend to believe that we are rational beings and, as a result, we rely on data to make decisions.

Great! We’ve got lots of data from lots of uncertain periods. HBR examined 4,700 public companies during three global recessions (1980, 1990, and 2000).  They found that the companies that emerged “outperforming rivals in their industry by at least 10% in terms of sales and profits growth” had one thing in common: They aggressively made cuts to improve operational efficiency and ruthlessly invested in marketing, R&D, and building new assets to better serve customers have the highest probability of emerging as markets leaders post-recession.

This research was backed up in 2020 in a McKinsey study that found that “Organizations that maintained their innovation focus through the 2009 financial crisis, for example, emerged stronger, outperforming the market average by more than 30 percent and continuing to deliver accelerated growth over the subsequent three to five years.”

What We Do: Safety = Hoarding

The reality is that we are human beings and, as a result, make decisions based on how we feel and the use data to justify those decisions.

How else do you explain that despite the data, only 9% of companies took the balanced approach recommended in the HBR study and, ten years later, only 25% of the companies studied by McKinsey stated that “capturing new growth” was a top priority coming out of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Uncertainty is scary so, as individuals and as organizations, we scramble to secure scarce resources, cut anything that feels extraneous, and shift or focus to survival.

What now? AND, not OR

What was true in 2010 is still true today and new research from Bain offers practical advice for how leaders can follow both their hearts and their heads.

Implement systems to protect you from yourself. Bain studied Fast Company’s 50 Most Innovative Companies and found that 79% use two different operating models for innovation to combat executives’ natural risk aversion.  The first, for sustaining innovation uses traditional stage-gate models, seeks input from experts and existing customers, and is evaluated on ROI-driven metrics.

The second, for breakthrough innovations, is designed to embrace and manage uncertainty by learning from new customers and emerging trends, working with speed and agility, engaging non-traditional collaborators, and evaluating projects based on their long-term potential and strategic option value.

Don’t outspend. Out-allocate. Supporting the two-system approach, nearly half of the companies studied send less on R&D than their peers overall and spend it differently: 39% of their R&D budgets to sustaining innovations and 61% to expanding into new categories or business models.

Use AI to accelerate, not create. Companies integrating AI into innovation processes have seen design-to-launch timelines shrink by 20% or more. The key word there is “integrate,” not outsource. They use AI for data and trend analysis, rapid prototyping, and automating repetitive tasks. But they still rely on humans for original thinking, intuition-based decisions, and genuine customer empathy.

Prioritize humans above all else. Even though all the information in the world is at our fingerprints, humans remain unknowable, unpredictable, and wonderfully weird. That’s why successful companies use AI to enhance, not replace, direct engagement with customers. They use synthetic personas as a rehearsal space for brainstorming, designing research, and concept testing. But they also know there is no replacement (yet) for human-to-human interaction, especially when creating new offerings and business models.

In times of create uncertainty, we seek safety.  But safety doesn’t guarantee certainty. Nothing does. So, the safest thing we can do is learn from the past, prepare (not plan) for the future, make the best decisions possible based on what we know and feel today, and stay open to changing them tomorrow.

Image credit: Pexels

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Was Your AI Strategy Developed by the Underpants Gnomes?

Was Your AI Strategy Developed by the Underpants Gnomes?

GUEST POST from Robyn Bolton

“It just popped up one day. Who knows how long they worked on it or how many of millions were spent. They told us to think of it as ChatGPT but trained on everything our company has ever done so we can ask it anything and get an answer immediately.”

The words my client was using to describe her company’s new AI Chatbot made it sound like a miracle. Her tone said something else completely.

“It sounds helpful,”  I offered.  “Have you tried it?”

 “I’m not training my replacement! And I’m not going to train my R&D, Supply Chain, Customer Insights, or Finance colleagues’ replacements either. And I’m not alone. I don’t think anyone’s using it because the company just announced they’re tracking usage and, if we don’t use it daily, that will be reflected in our performance reviews.”

 All I could do was sigh. The Underpants Gnomes have struck again.

Who are the Underpants Gnomes?

The Underpants Gnomes are the stars of a 1998 South Park episode described by media critic Paul Cantor as, “the most fully developed defense of capitalism ever produced.”

Claiming to be business experts, the Underpants Gnomes sneak into South Park residents’ homes every night and steal their underpants. When confronted by the boy in their underground lair, the Gnomes explain their business plan:

  1. Collect underpants
  2. ?
  3. Profit

It was meant as satire.

Some took it as a an abbreviated MBA.

How to Spot the Underpants AI Gnomes

As the AI hype grows, fueling executive FOMO (Fear of Missing Out), the Underpants Gnomes, cleverly disguised as experts, entrepreneurs and consultants, saw their opportunity.

  1. Sell AI
  2. ?
  3. Profit

 While they’ve pivoted their business focus, they haven’t improved their operations so the Underpants AI Gnomes as still easy to spot:

  1. Investment without Intention: Is your company investing in AI because it’s “essential to future-proofing the business?”  That sounds good but if your company can’t explain the future it’s proofing itself against and how AI builds a moat or a life preserver in that future, it’s a sign that  the Gnomes are in the building.
  2. Switches, not Solutions: If your company thinks that AI adoption is as “easy as turning on Copilot” or “installing a custom GPT chatbot, the Gnomes are gaining traction. AI is a tool and you need to teach people how to use tools, build processes to support the change, and demonstrate the benefit.
  3. Activity without Achievement: When MIT published research indicating that 95% of corporate Gen AI pilots were failing, it was a sign of just how deeply the Gnomes have infiltrated companies. Experiments are essential at the start of any new venture but only useful if they generate replicable and scalable learning.

How to defend against the AI Gnomes

Odds are the gnomes are already in your company. But fear not, you can still turn “Phase 2:?” into something that actually leads to “Phase 3: Profit.”

  1. Start with the end in mind: Be specific about the outcome you are trying to achieve. The answer should be agnostic of AI and tied to business goals.
  2. Design with people at the center: Achieving your desired outcomes requires rethinking and redesigning existing processes. Strategic creativity like that requires combining people, processes, and technology to achieve and embed.
  3. Develop with discipline: Just because you can (run a pilot, sign up for a free trial), doesn’t mean you should. Small-scale experiments require the same degree of discipline as multi-million-dollar digital transformations. So, if you can’t articulate what you need to learn and how it contributes to the bigger goal, move on.

AI, in all its forms, is here to stay. But the same doesn’t have to be true for the AI Gnomes.

Have you spotted the Gnomes in your company?

Image credit: AI Underpants Gnomes (just kidding, Google Gemini made the image)

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Innovation Theater – A Defense

Innovation Theater - A Defense

GUEST POST from Robyn Bolton

I can’t believe that I’m writing this. Honestly, I can’t believe I’m even thinking this. I’m an open-minded person, but I truly never thought that anything would ever change my mind on this topic. And yet, I must confess that I’ve come to the conclusion that…

(deep breath)

Innovation Theater is important.

(Sorry, needed a minute to recover. It’s one thing to think something. It’s another to see it in writing.)

Why We All Hate(d) Innovation Theater.

The term “Innovation Theater” was coined by Steve Blank in a 2019 HBR article to describe innovation activities like hackathons, shark tanks, and workshops that “shape and build culture, but they don’t win wars, and they rarely deliver shippable/deployable product.”

The name stuck because it gave the Innovation Industrial Complex a perfect scapegoat. Innovation efforts weren’t producing results because companies were turning real strategy into theater—events that could be delegated and scheduled instead of the courage, commitment, and willingness to change that actual innovation requires.

And in many cases, this criticism was warranted.

But in our rush to dismiss Innovation Theater, we missed something important.

What I (Almost) Missed.

Recently, I visited a company’s Innovation Center, curious to see what ten years of innovation investments and two floors in a downtown high-rise had produced.

The answer was a framework to think more deeply about equity and inclusion. My immediate reaction was rage.  A decade of investments for this? Millions of dollars spent on the very definition of Innovation Theater? And they’re bragging about it?!?

Once the rage subsided, something remained. Something that I couldn’t shake. An inkling that I had missed something. That inkling became the realization that I was wrong.

Over the past five years, the framework had been used in carefully curated workshops to help teams across the organization see things they had previously overlooked, understand topics that were sensitive or taboo, and envision solutions that no one their heavily regulated industry had even considered.

Not every workshop resulted in action. But over time, something shifted.

Seasons. Not Shows.

Repetition created a shared language. Multiple touchpoints built permission. Small success stories accumulated to make risk feel manageable. The workshops didn’t send off isolated sparks of innovation. They built the conditions where acting on new ideas became progressively safer and more normal.

And after several seasons, enduring value was created. The company now enjoys the highest retention rate of customers in its industry and has attracted more new customers than all its competitors combined. A decade of “Innovation Theater” delivered exactly what innovation is supposed to deliver: measurable competitive advantage and revenue growth.

Don’t Cancel Your Next Innovation Event.

The problem isn’t Innovation Theater itself. It’s how we practice it.

A one-off hackathon? Theater. An annual workshop? Theater. But sustained investment over years, touching dozens of teams, building shared language and accumulated proof points? That’s a strategic bet on transformation that creates lasting competitive advantage.

The question isn’t whether Innovation Theater works. It’s whether you’re willing to commit to the season, not just the show. Are you prepared to invest consistently, measure differently, and wait for compounding effects that won’t show up in next quarter’s results?

Because when you commit to the season, not just the show, it’s the most strategic bet you can make.

Image credit: Pexels

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Leveraging the Power of Play to Innovate!

Leveraging the Power of Play to Innovate!

GUEST POST from Janet Sernack

One of my most potent memories from my career in organizational learning and development was the power of play as an effective adult learning method during a “Money and You” workshop with Robert Kiyosaki, the author of Rich Dad, Poor Dad.

It was a business game called “Win as Much as You Can”, also known now as the “XY Game”. The game involved forming four teams of two players, who alternated scoring across four rounds by choosing to throw either X or Y. The scoring process was the key to unlocking and understanding the game’s impact; if your team kept throwing X’s, you were awarded a significant number of points, enabling you to win as much as you could.

The scoring process subtly shifted in round eight, when the key to winning the game was for all four teams to throw Ys, yet not all teams did!

Because we were all unconsciously stuck in a competitive win-or-lose mindset, aiming to win as much as we could rather than adopting an approach where everyone could win, or being collaborative and playing a win-win game.

It was a moment of deep shame for me when I was announced the winner of my small group of eight players — a deeply impactful moment I have never forgotten, because for me to win, the other seven players had to lose, and they weren’t happy about losing.

Critical Foundational 21st Century Skills

These key lessons are encapsulated in my latest innovative co-creation – The Start-Up Game™. This hybrid board game combines experiential learning with achievement and competitive elements. It features an AI learning component that teaches critical foundational skills—collaboration, mathematical thinking, and adaptability —essential for both individuals and companies in a fast-changing AI world. As technical complexity rises, the glue that keeps talent productive is social skill—communication, empathy, conflict resolution, and the ability to coordinate diverse expertise. In addition to social skills, other fundamental capabilities — such as critical thinking, complex problem-solving, and reasoning — are crucial components of a dynamic, collective work environment in the modern enterprise. Together, they offer a shared platform that unlocks the full value of individuals’ specialized know-how, enables adaptation and innovation as technology and markets shift, and is increasingly in demand.

Games as Metaphors for Real Life

Since games are often metaphors for real life, I have spent many years shifting from the win/lose competitive mindset and way of being I grew up with to recognize the value of experimentation and co-operation, and to understand what it means to be truly collaborative.

Adults Learn by Doing

With the ongoing war for our attention, time scarcity, our increasing reliance on mobile devices, and the seductive nature of AI and TikTok as sources of knowledge and information, we have largely forgotten the importance of developing these foundational skills, especially in a volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous world.

All adults can learn these skills through harnessing the power of play.

Play is essential for developing our emotional and cognitive functions and fostering stronger social connections. In organizational learning and development, experiential learning involves gaining knowledge through direct experience and deep reflection, rather than just passive observation, like simply watching a learning video. It is a highly effective adult learning method that allows participants to link theoretical concepts with practical, on-the-job applications.

This approach involves active engagement in simulated real-world scenarios and:

  • Requires critical reflection on the experience to develop new states, traits, mindsets, behaviors, and skills.
  • Helps players increase self-awareness and gain a clearer understanding of how their mindsets and behaviors influence the people and teams they lead or interact with.

The Power of Play

Because focused, structured and intentional play, in the context of experiential learning, can:

  • Stimulate players’ curiosity, imagination and creativity.
  • Help players shift their emotional states, mindsets and behaviors.
  • Develop players’ emotional and cognitive agility.
  • Enhance players’ decision-making and problem-solving skills.
  • Improve leadership and team effectiveness.
  • Build players’ courage, boldness, bravery and resilience.
  • Reduce players’ stress levels by providing a safe space for improvisation and a break from business-as-usual responsibilities and habits.

Engaging in experiential learning activities, such as structured business games, boosts brain function, improves emotional regulation and self-management, encourages experimentation, and builds and strengthens constructive collaborative relationships with others.

In organizations, the power of play can be structured to boost players’ skills in key areas crucial to 21st-century success, including accepting responsibility, building trust, being accountable, communication, teaming, innovation, entrepreneurship, intrapreneurship, and achievement, resulting in overall performance improvements.

The Start-Up Game™ Leverages the Power of Play

The Start-Up Game™ engages and encourages players to think and act differently by safely experimenting with language, key mindsets, behaviors, and the creative and critical thinking, decision-making, and problem-solving skills used by successful intrapreneurs, entrepreneurs, and innovators.

It enables players to develop critical social, emotional, and cognitive mindsets, behaviors and skills that are the crucial components of a dynamic, collective work environment in the modern enterprise.

How to Incorporate the Power of Play into Your Organization

  • Create an environment of permission, safety, and trust, giving people agency and autonomy to learn through play and experimentation, and allowing them to learn from mistakes and failures.
  • Encourage people to “learn by doing and reflecting” to stretch their thinking by shifting business-as-usual mindsets and behaviors, to push the envelope by developing new 21st-century mental maps, behavioral deviations, and crucial new skills in critical and creative thinking and acting that result in smart risk-taking, intelligent decision-making, and innovative problem-solving.  
  • Commit to building an organizational or team culture that promotes continuous learning at a pace faster than the competition.
  • Encourage people to develop a regular reflective practice to harness their collective capacity to create, invent, and innovate by establishing a set of habitual reflective practices.

We are living in an age when technical expertise can become irrelevant in just a few years; foundational skills matter more than ever. Adopting an experiential learning approach to Innovation enables people to be agile and adaptive, to develop creative and critical thinking skills, to collaborate, and to sense, see, and solve complex problems, thereby thriving in a constantly evolving environment.

Please find out more about our work at ImagineNation™. Discover our collective learning products and tools, including The Coach for Innovators, Leaders, and Teams Certified Program, presented by Janet Sernack. It is a collaborative, intimate, and profoundly personalized innovation coaching and learning program supported by a global group of peers over nine weeks. It can be customized as a bespoke corporate learning program. It is a blended and transformational change and learning program that provides a deep understanding of the language, principles, and applications of an ecosystem-focused, human-centric approach and emergent structure (Theory U) to innovation. It will also up-skill people and teams, developing their future fitness within your unique innovation context.

Image Credit: 1 of 1,000+ quote slides for your meetings and presentations available at http://misterinnovation.com

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Don’t Believe the Courageous Leadership Lie

Don't Believe the Courageous Leadership Lie

GUEST POST from Robyn Bolton

The business press has a new obsession with courageous leadership.

Harvard Business Review dedicated their September cover story to it. Nordic Business Forum built an entire 2024 conference around it. BetterUpMcKinsey, and dozens of thought leaders and influencers can’t stop talking about it.

Here’s what they’re all telling you: If you’re playing it safe, stuck in analysis paralysis, not innovating fast enough, or not making bold moves, then you are the problem because you lack courage.

Here’s what they’re not telling you: You don’t have a courage problem. You have a systems problem.

The Real Story Behind “Courage Gaps”

The VP was anything but cowardly. She had a track record of bold moves and wasn’t afraid of hard conversations. The CEO wanted to transform the company by moving from a product-only focus to one offering holistic solutions that combined hardware, software, and services. This VP was the obvious choice.

Her team came to her with a ideas that would reposition the company for long-term growth. She loved it. They tested the ideas. Customers loved them. But not a single one ever launched.

It wasn’t because the VP or the CEO lacked courage. It was because the board measured success in annual improvements, the CEO’s compensation structure rewarded short-term performance, and the VP required sign-off from six different stakeholders who were evaluated on risk mitigation. At every level, the system was designed to kill bold ideas. And it worked.

This is the inconvenient truth the courage press ignores.

That success doesn’t just require leaders who are courageous, it requires organizational architecture that systematically rewards courage and manages risk.

What We’re Really Asking Leaders to Overcome

Consider what we’re actually asking leaders to be courageous against:

  • Compensation structures tied to short-term metrics
  • Risk management processes designed to say “no”
  • Approval hierarchies where one skeptic can overrule ten enthusiasts
  • Cultures where failed experiments end careers

The courage discourse lets broken systems off the hook.

It’s easier to sell “10 Ways to Build Leadership Courage” than to admit that organizational incentives, governance structures, and cultural norms are actively working against the bold moves we tell leaders to make.

What Actually Enables Courageous Leadership.

I’m not arguing that there isn’t a need for individual courage. There is.

But telling someone to “be braver” when their organizational architecture punishes bravery is like telling someone to swim faster in a pool filled with Jell-O.

If we want courage, we need to fix the things the systems that discourage it:

  • Align incentives with the time horizon of the decisions you want made
  • Create explicit permission structures for experimentation
  • Build decision-making processes that don’t require unanimous consent
  • Separate “learning investments” from “performance expectations” when measuring results
  • Make the criteria for bold moves clear, not subject to whoever’s in the room

But doing this is a lot harder than buying books about courage.

The Bottom Line

When you fix the architecture, you don’t need to constantly remind people to be brave because the system enables. Individual courage becomes the expectation, not the exception.

The real question isn’t whether your leaders need courage.

It’s whether your organization has the architecture to let them use it.

If you can’t answer that question, that’s not a courage problem.

That’s a design problem.

And design is something that, as a leader, you can actually control.

Image credit: Unsplash

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Top Five Questions These 300 Innovators Ask

Top Five Questions These 300 Innovators Ask

GUEST POST from Robyn Bolton

“Is this what the dinosaurs did before the asteroid hit?”

That was the first question I was asked at IMPACT, InnoLead’s annual gathering of innovation practitioners, experts, and service providers.

It was also the first of many that provided insight into what’s on innovators and executives’ minds as we prepare for 2026

How can you prevent failure from being weaponized?

This is both a direct quote and a distressing insight into the state of corporate life. The era of “fail fast” is long gone and we’re even nostalgic for the days when we simply feared failure. Now, failure is now a weapon to be used against colleagues.

The answer is neither simple nor quick because it comes down to leadership and culture. Jit Kee Chin, Chief Technology Officer at Suffolk Construction, explained that Suffolk is able to stop the weaponization of failure because its Chairman goes to great lengths to role model a “no fault” culture within the company. “We always ask questions and have conversations before deciding on, judging, or acting on something,” she explained

How do you work with the Core Business to get things launched?

It’s long been innovation gospel that teams focused on anything other than incremental innovation must be separated, managerially and physically, from the core business to avoid being “infected” by the core’s unquestioning adherence to the status quo.

The reality, however, is the creation of Innovation Island, where ideas are created, incubated, and de-risked but remain stuck because they need to be accepted and adopted by the core business to scale.

The answer is as simple as it is effective: get input and feedback during concept development, find a core home and champion as your prototype, and work alongside them as you test and prepare to launch.

How do you organize for innovation?

For most companies, the residents of Innovation Island are a small group of functionally aligned people expected to usher innovations from their earliest stages all the way to launch and revenue-generation.

It may be time to rethink that.

Helen Riley, COO/CFO of Google X, shared that projects start with just one person working part-time until a prototype produces real-world learning. Tom Donaldson, Senior Vice President at the LEGO Group, explained that rather than one team with a large mandate, LEGO uses teams specially created for the type and phase of innovation being worked on.

What are you doing about sustainability?

Honestly, I was surprised by how frequently this question was asked. It could be because companies are combining innovation, sustainability, and other “non-essential” teams under a single umbrella to cut costs while continuing the work. Or it could be because sustainability has become a mandate for innovation teams.

I’m not sure of the reason and the answer is equally murky. While LEGO has been transparent about its sustainability goals and efforts, other speakers were more coy in their responses, for example citing the percentage of returned items that they refurbish or recycle but failing to mention the percentage of all products returned (i.e. 80% of a small number is still a small number).

How can humans thrive in an AI world?

“We’ll double down,” was Rana el Kaliouby’s answer. The co-founder and managing partner of Blue Tulip Ventures and host of Pioneers of AI podcast, showed no hesitation in her belief that humans will continue to thrive in the age of AI.

Citing her experience listening to Radiotopia Presents: Bot Loveshe encouraged companies to set guardrails for how, when, and how long different AI services can be used.  She also advocated for the need for companies to set metrics that go beyond measuring and maximizing usage time and engagement to considering the impact and value created by their AI-offerings.

What questions do you have?

Image credit: Google Gemini

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.