Category Archives: Innovation

What’s Next – Through the Looking Glass

What's Next - Through the Looking Glass

by Braden Kelley

Humanity is obsessed with the future, and we always want to know what’s next for us.

Sometimes we want to know the future so badly that we stress ourselves out about imagined futures that won’t ever come to pass instead of dealing with what is right in front of us.

Time is Not Linear

Most people think of time in a linear fashion, but this is the wrong way of thinking about it.

It is more helpful instead to think of time as a wave (or as a pulse) emanating from a central point in an outward direction, representing all of the possible futures. Then as the next point in one of those possible futures becomes fixed, then another wave emanates from this new point representing all of the new possible futures. The math of what the future MIGHT look like gets really big, really fast – as you might imagine.

This is what makes predicting the future so difficult.

The number of inputs influencing the next step in your future journey is massive, and the number of potential next steps that are outputs of your next best action is equally massive.

So, while it is important to plan for the future and to develop a point of view on the future you would like to be the result of your actions, it is still just a guess. Making it more important and impactful to look at the near future more often than not.

Recently I came across a video from CableLabs that looks at one potential near future:

We Are Already Living in a Virtual Reality

The first choice the creators faced was augmented reality versus virtual reality, and you’ll see that they chose to highlight augmented reality instead of virtual reality. I think this is the right choice as many people would say we are living in a virtual reality already.

Our eyes and other sensory organs do their best to provide inputs to our brain about the physical reality we live in, but the information is often inaccurate and incomplete. Our brain tries to fill in the gaps, but there is some much we don’t understand about how the reality we live in operates.

The world we live in is already amazing, and there is more value in augmenting our experience of the reality we live within, than there is escaping into another reality that is more clumsy, awkward and lower fidelity than our experience of the virtual reality we live in now.

Our world is changing so fast that it is important for organizations and individuals to not just plan for the next month or the next quarter, but to plan for what we would like the near future to look like and think about the ways in which we would like to, and realistically can, influence it.

FutureHacking™ is Within Our Grasp

But the concepts of futurology and the role of the futurist seem pretty nebulous at best. It is because of this that I’ve begun creating a collection of FutureHacking™ tools to help you.

These tools will be available to license soon, and I’ll be holding virtual, and possibly in-person, workshops to explain how to use these simple tools to identify a range of potential futures, to select a preferred future, and activities to help influence its realization.

I think you’ll really like them, but in the meantime, I invite you to check out the embedded YouTube video and to share your thoughts on how you look at and plan for the future in the comments below.

Finally, make sure you’re subscribed to our newsletter to get our weekly collection of articles, along with updates on the forthcoming FutureHacking™ set of tools.

Keep innovating!

To read more about what scientists say we get wrong about time, check out this BBC article

Image Credit: Pixabay

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

Tapping into Global Innovation Hubs

Beyond Your Own Backyard

Tapping into Global Innovation Hubs

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In a world where even the most dynamic ecosystems can benefit immensely from looking beyond their immediate surroundings, one thing has become clear: groundbreaking ideas and transformative technologies are emerging from innovation hubs across the globe. For organizations serious about staying ahead of the curve and fostering a truly human-centered approach to change, tapping into these global networks is not just advantageous—it’s essential.

Innovation doesn’t occur in a vacuum. It thrives on the cross-pollination of ideas, diverse perspectives, and access to specialized talent and resources. Limiting our focus to our own backyard can lead to blind spots and missed opportunities. Global innovation hubs, each with its unique strengths and cultural nuances, offer a wealth of potential partnerships, insights into emerging trends, and access to cutting-edge research and development. By strategically engaging with these hubs, organizations can accelerate their innovation cycles, gain a deeper understanding of global markets, and develop solutions that are truly world-class and human-centered.

Tapping into global innovation hubs requires a deliberate and strategic approach. It’s not just about taking a trip to a well-known tech center; it’s about building meaningful connections and fostering long-term collaborations. Key strategies for leveraging these global networks include:

  • Establishing a Global Scouting Network: Actively monitoring innovation trends and identifying key players and emerging technologies in different hubs around the world.
  • Participating in International Conferences and Events: Engaging with global thought leaders, researchers, and entrepreneurs to build relationships and gain firsthand insights.
  • Forming Strategic Partnerships and Collaborations: Teaming up with innovative companies, research institutions, and startups in other regions to access specialized expertise and resources.
  • Establishing Remote Innovation Teams or Satellite Offices: Creating a physical presence in key global hubs to foster deeper engagement and tap into local talent pools.
  • Facilitating Cross-Cultural Knowledge Sharing: Creating internal mechanisms to share insights and learnings gained from global engagements across the organization.

Case Study 1: Procter & Gamble’s “Connect + Develop” Program

The Challenge: Accelerating Innovation and Expanding R&D Capabilities Beyond Internal Resources

Procter & Gamble (P&G), a global consumer goods giant, recognized that relying solely on its internal R&D capabilities would limit its ability to innovate at the speed required by the market. They understood that groundbreaking ideas and technologies were emerging from diverse sources around the world, far beyond their Cincinnati headquarters.

Tapping into Global Innovation:

P&G launched its “Connect + Develop” program with the explicit goal of sourcing more than 50% of its innovations from outside the company. This involved actively scouting for promising technologies, patents, and startups across the globe. They established a network of external partners, including universities, research institutions, small businesses, and individual inventors in innovation hubs worldwide. P&G created a user-friendly portal for external innovators to submit their ideas and actively participated in international innovation conferences and events to forge new connections. This open innovation approach allowed them to tap into a much wider pool of talent and ideas than they could access internally.

The Impact:

The “Connect + Develop” program has been widely successful for P&G. It has significantly accelerated their innovation pipeline, reduced R&D costs, and enabled them to bring new and improved products to market faster. By looking beyond their own backyard and actively engaging with global innovation hubs, P&G has demonstrated the power of open innovation to drive growth and maintain a competitive edge in a rapidly evolving global marketplace. Their commitment to external collaboration has become a cornerstone of their innovation strategy.

Key Insight: Actively seeking external partnerships and engaging with global innovation ecosystems can significantly accelerate an organization’s innovation capacity and provide access to a wider range of ideas and technologies.

Case Study 2: The Rise of Tel Aviv as a Global Cybersecurity Hub and Corporate Engagement

The Challenge: Staying Ahead of Evolving Cybersecurity Threats

Cybersecurity has become a paramount concern for organizations across all industries. The threat landscape is constantly evolving, with sophisticated attacks emerging from various corners of the globe. Traditional, internally focused security measures often struggle to keep pace with these rapid advancements.

Leveraging a Global Hub:

Tel Aviv, Israel, has emerged as a global powerhouse in cybersecurity innovation, boasting a high concentration of cutting-edge startups, research institutions, and specialized talent. Recognizing this, many multinational corporations have established a significant presence in Tel Aviv to tap into this vibrant ecosystem. This engagement takes various forms, including setting up R&D centers, investing in local startups, and forming strategic partnerships with Israeli cybersecurity firms. These companies understand that by being physically present in this global hub, they gain early access to groundbreaking technologies, can recruit top cybersecurity experts, and develop solutions that are at the forefront of the industry. The collaborative environment in Tel Aviv, fostered by government support and a culture of innovation, provides a unique advantage for companies seeking to bolster their cybersecurity defenses.

The Impact:

Companies that have strategically engaged with the Tel Aviv cybersecurity hub have significantly enhanced their ability to detect, prevent, and respond to cyber threats. By embedding themselves in this global center of expertise, they gain a deeper understanding of emerging threats and have access to innovative solutions that might not be available elsewhere. This case study illustrates how identifying and actively participating in specialized global innovation hubs can provide a critical advantage in rapidly evolving fields like cybersecurity, where staying ahead requires a global perspective and access to the latest breakthroughs.

Key Insight: Identifying and strategically engaging with specialized global innovation hubs can provide organizations with access to unique expertise, talent, and emerging technologies in critical and rapidly evolving fields.

Expanding Your Innovation Horizon

To truly unlock our potential for human-centered change and to develop solutions with global impact, we must cultivate a mindset of global engagement. By actively looking beyond our own backyard, building meaningful connections with innovation hubs around the world, and embracing the diversity of thought and expertise they offer, we can accelerate our innovation journeys and create a future where groundbreaking ideas can emerge from anywhere and benefit everyone.

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: Pixabay

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

How Do You Judge Innovation: Guilty or Innocent?

How Do You Judge Innovation: Guilty or Innocent?

GUEST POST from Robyn Bolton

Several months ago, a colleague sent me a link to Roger Martin’s latest article, “The Presumption of Guilt: The Hidden Logical Barrier to Innovation.”  Even though the article was authored by one of the preeminent thinkers in the field of innovation and strategy (in 2017, Thinkers50 voted him the #1 most influential management thinker in the world), I didn’t have too much hope that I would read something new or interesting. After all, I read A LOT of articles, and 99 times out of 100, I’m disappointed (80 times out of 100, I roll my eyes so hard I give myself a headache).

This one blew my mind.

With just a few sentences and applying a well-known analogy, Martin explained a phenomenon that plagues every organization and kills most innovation.

Presumed Innocence is a fundamental human right

Martin begins by pointing out that in the legal systems of modern democracies, all citizens are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In 1948, the United Nations extended this concept to all nations (not just democracies) in Article 11.1 of their Declaration of Human Rights.

The presumption of innocence is so important because “the presumption of guilt (or even neutrality) puts an almost impossible burden on the defendant. The State is strong and has resources far beyond that of the individual.”

Presumed Innocence is not a fundamental innovation right

Now let’s apply this analogy and the lens of presumption of innocence or guilt to business, arguably a field where we spend much more time and make far more judgments.

You, and your fellow decision-makers, are judges and jury.

It is up to you to determine whether the projects in front of you are innocent (worthy of additional investment) or guilty (not worthy).

If you presume all defendants are guilty, you place the burden of proof on them. They must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they will succeed and are, therefore, worthy of investment.

If you presume all defendants are innocent, you place the burden of proof on yourself (or the business as a whole). You must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they will fail.

What type of judge are you? What kind of decision-making system do you preside over? Do you presume guilt or innocence?

In most boardrooms, projects are presumed guilty.

Presumptions in practice

Let’s consider the two “defendants” (types of projects) that appear before you – core business projects and innovation projects.

Each defendant has a team of advocates. The core business typically has a large team with ample resources and a history of success. Innovation has a much smaller team with far fewer resources and few, if any, “in-market” successes.

To be fair, you ask the same questions of both defendants – questions about market growth, performance versus competitors, and what the P&L looks like.

The team advocating for the core business produces data-filled slides, reports from reputable third parties, and financials blessed by Finance. In the deluge of facts, you forget that all the data is about the past, and you’re making decisions about the future. You find the evidence compelling (or at least reassuring), determine that the team met their burden of proof, declare the Core Business innocent, and allocate additional funds and people.

Innovation’s team also comes with slides, reports, and financials, but it’s not nearly as compelling as what you just saw from the current business team. But you are a fair judge, so you ask most questions like

  • We believe we can get X% of a Total Addressable Market estimated to be Y
  • There are no direct competitors, but consumers rated this better than current solutions
  • We don’t have a 5-year NPV or P&L for this business at scale because we’re not asking for permission to launch. We’re asking for $100,000 to continue testing.

Believe? We need to know!

No direct competitors? Perhaps there’s a reason for that!

No P&L? I’m not going to throw scarce money away!

“Guilty!” you declare, “no more resources for you! Try again!”

This example illustrates what Roger Martin considers corporate innovation’s fatal flaw. In his article, he argues,

“the status quo must play the role of the prosecutor and prove that the innovation is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The innovation asserts its case, laying out the future that it imagines is plausible and explains the logic that buttresses the plausibility. The onus is on the status quo to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that the innovation’s logic is flawed — e.g., the proposed economics are unrealistic, customers haven’t shown a hint of caring about the unique selling features of the innovation, competitors already have a lead on us in the proposed area, etc.

If the status quo can do so, then the innovation is guilty. If it can’t, then the innovation is not guilty, and the organization should invest.”

As much as I love the idea of requiring the status quo (managers? Executives? Stockholders?) to prove that investments should not be made (i.e., the default answer is “Yes” to all requests), it’s just not a practical solution.

Burden of proof as barrier

There’s another fundamental principle in our legal system that Martin doesn’t touch on: the burden of proof shifts as the stakes increase.

Specifically, the State’s burden of proof increases from warrant to arraignment to grand jury to trial. For example, the State must provide probable cause based on direct or other reliable information to get a warrant. But the State must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt when the defendant goes to trial and risks losing their freedom or even their life.

But in the example above, the questions (proof required) remained the same.

The questions were appropriate for the Current Business because it’s already in the market, consuming massive resources, and its failure would have a catastrophic impact on the company.

But the questions aren’t appropriate for innovation in its early days. In fact, they were the business equivalent of demanding proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to get a search warrant. Instead, a judge evaluating a project in the early Design phase should ask for probable cause based on direct or other reliable information – observed consumer behavior, small-scale research findings, or simple prototypes.

The Verdict is In

I love the concept of Presumed Guilty vs. Presumed Innocent. I see it all the time in my work, and it is painfully prevalent in Innovation Council meetings and other boardrooms where managers sit as judge and jury over a project’s (ad a team’s) fate.

I want to flip the paradigm – To make “yes” the default instead of “No” and to require managers, the keepers of the status quo, to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a project will fail.

But I don’t think it’s possible (if I’m wrong, PLEASE tell me!).

Instead, our best bet for true innovation justice is not to shift who bears the burden of proof but rather how heavy that burden is at various points. From probable cause when the stakes are low to beyond a reasonable doubt when they’re high. And certainly more than a ham sandwich at any point

Image credit: Pexels

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

Ethical AI in Innovation

Ensuring Human Values Guide Technological Progress

Ethical AI in Innovation

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In the breathless race to develop and deploy artificial intelligence, we are often mesmerized by what machines can do, without pausing to critically examine what they should do. The most consequential innovations of our time are not just a product of technical prowess but a reflection of our values. As a thought leader in human-centered change, I believe our greatest challenge is not the complexity of the code, but the clarity of our ethical compass. The true mark of a responsible innovator in this era will be the ability to embed human values into the very fabric of our AI systems, ensuring that technological progress serves, rather than compromises, humanity.

AI is no longer a futuristic concept; it is an invisible architect shaping our daily lives, from the algorithms that curate our news feeds to the predictive models that influence hiring and financial decisions. But with this immense power comes immense responsibility. An AI is only as good as the data it is trained on and the ethical framework that guides its development. A biased algorithm can perpetuate and amplify societal inequities. An opaque one can erode trust and accountability. A poorly designed one can lead to catastrophic errors. We are at a crossroads, and our choices today will determine whether AI becomes a force for good or a source of unintended harm.

Building ethical AI is not a one-time audit; it is a continuous, human-centered practice that must be integrated into every stage of the innovation process. It requires us to move beyond a purely technical mindset and proactively address the social and ethical implications of our work. This means:

  • Bias Mitigation: Actively identifying and correcting biases in training data to ensure that AI systems are fair and equitable for all users.
  • Transparency and Explainability: Designing AI systems that can explain their reasoning and decisions in a way that is understandable to humans, fostering trust and accountability.
  • Human-in-the-Loop Design: Ensuring that there is always a human with the authority to override an AI’s judgment, especially for high-stakes decisions.
  • Privacy by Design: Building robust privacy protections into AI systems from the ground up, minimizing data collection and handling sensitive information with the utmost care.
  • Value Alignment: Consistently aligning the goals and objectives of the AI with core human values like fairness, empathy, and social good.

Case Study 1: The AI Bias in Criminal Justice

The Challenge: Automating Risk Assessment in Sentencing

In the mid-2010s, many jurisdictions began using AI-powered software, such as the COMPAS (Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions) algorithm, to assist judges in making sentencing and parole decisions. The goal was to make the process more objective and efficient by assessing a defendant’s risk of recidivism (reoffending).

The Ethical Failure:

A ProPublica investigation in 2016 revealed a troubling finding: the COMPAS algorithm was exhibiting a clear racial bias. It was found to be twice as likely to wrongly flag Black defendants as high-risk compared to white defendants, and it was significantly more likely to wrongly classify white defendants as low-risk. The AI was not explicitly programmed with racial bias; instead, it was trained on historical criminal justice data that reflected existing systemic inequities. The algorithm had learned to associate race and socioeconomic status with recidivism risk, leading to outcomes that perpetuated and amplified the very biases it was intended to eliminate. The lack of transparency in the algorithm’s design made it impossible for defendants to challenge the black box decisions affecting their lives.

The Results:

The case of COMPAS became a powerful cautionary tale, leading to widespread public debate and legal challenges. It highlighted the critical importance of a human-centered approach to AI, one that includes continuous auditing, transparency, and human oversight. The incident made it clear that simply automating a process does not make it fair; in fact, without proactive ethical design, it can embed and scale existing societal biases at an unprecedented rate. This failure underscored the need for rigorous ethical frameworks and the inclusion of diverse perspectives in the development of AI that affects human lives.

Key Insight: AI trained on historically biased data will perpetuate and scale those biases. Proactive bias auditing and human oversight are essential to prevent technological systems from amplifying social inequities.

Case Study 2: Microsoft’s AI Chatbot “Tay”

The Challenge: Creating an AI that Learns from Human Interaction

In 2016, Microsoft launched “Tay,” an AI-powered chatbot designed to engage with people on social media platforms like Twitter. The goal was for Tay to learn how to communicate and interact with humans by mimicking the language and conversational patterns it encountered online.

The Ethical Failure:

Within less than 24 hours of its launch, Tay was taken offline. The reason? The chatbot had been “taught” by a small but malicious group of users to spout racist, sexist, and hateful content. The AI, without a robust ethical framework or a strong filter for inappropriate content, simply learned and repeated the toxic language it was exposed to. It became a powerful example of how easily a machine, devoid of a human moral compass, can be corrupted by its environment. The “garbage in, garbage out” principle of machine learning was on full display, with devastatingly public results.

The Results:

The Tay incident was a wake-up call for the technology industry. It demonstrated the critical need for **proactive ethical design** and a “safety-first” mindset in AI development. It highlighted that simply giving an AI the ability to learn is not enough; we must also provide it with guardrails and a foundational understanding of human values. This case led to significant changes in how companies approach AI development, emphasizing the need for robust content moderation, ethical filters, and a more cautious approach to deploying AI in public-facing, unsupervised environments. The incident underscored that the responsibility for an AI’s behavior lies with its creators, and that a lack of ethical foresight can lead to rapid and significant reputational damage.

Key Insight: Unsupervised machine learning can quickly amplify harmful human behaviors. Ethical guardrails and a human-centered design philosophy must be embedded from the very beginning to prevent catastrophic failures.

The Path Forward: A Call for Values-Based Innovation

The morality of machines is not an abstract philosophical debate; it is a practical and urgent challenge for every innovator. The case studies above are powerful reminders that building ethical AI is not an optional add-on but a fundamental requirement for creating technology that is both safe and beneficial. The future of AI is not just about what we can build, but about what we choose to build. It’s about having the courage to slow down, ask the hard questions, and embed our best human values—fairness, empathy, and responsibility—into the very core of our creations. It is the only way to ensure that the tools we design serve to elevate humanity, rather than to diminish it.

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: Pexels

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

Navigating Disruption with Clarity

Purpose as Your North Star

Navigating Disruption with Clarity

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In a world defined by constant disruption, where technologies, markets, and customer needs shift at an unprecedented pace, organizations are often left feeling adrift. The old playbooks of strategic planning and forecasting are proving insufficient to navigate the volatility. In this environment of chronic uncertainty, I believe the most powerful anchor for any organization is a clearly defined and deeply embedded sense of purpose. Purpose, when authentically articulated and lived, acts as a North Star, providing clarity, inspiring action, and uniting a workforce to not just survive disruption, but to thrive within it.

Purpose is more than just a mission statement or a marketing slogan. It is the fundamental reason an organization exists beyond making a profit. It is the why behind the what. When a company’s purpose is its guiding light, it helps leaders and employees make better decisions, prioritize more effectively, and remain resilient in the face of setbacks. Purpose creates a shared sense of meaning that transcends individual roles and responsibilities, fostering a culture of trust and collective commitment. It gives people a reason to come to work every day that is bigger than a paycheck.

Navigating disruption with purpose requires a human-centered approach to strategy. It’s about moving from a rigid, top-down model to one that is driven by a shared sense of why. This enables organizations to adapt more quickly, as everyone is aligned on the ultimate goal, even if the path to get there needs to change. An organization with a strong purpose will find that its people are more engaged, more innovative, and more willing to go the extra mile. The key elements for leveraging purpose as a navigational tool include:

  • Authenticity: The purpose must be genuine and deeply ingrained in the company’s DNA, not an afterthought.
  • Clarity: The purpose must be simple, clear, and easy for every employee to understand and articulate.
  • Alignment: All business decisions, from product development to hiring, should be evaluated against the organization’s purpose.
  • Empowerment: Employees must be empowered to act on the purpose, not just told what it is. This fosters ownership and bottom-up innovation.
  • Storytelling: The organization’s purpose should be constantly reinforced through stories that illustrate its impact on customers, communities, and employees.

Case Study 1: Patagonia’s Environmental Activism as a Business Strategy

The Challenge: Competing in a Fast-Fashion Market with a Commitment to Sustainability

Patagonia, the outdoor apparel company, operates in a highly competitive market often driven by low prices and rapid consumption. The company’s business model, which prioritizes durability and environmental responsibility, stands in stark contrast to the fast-fashion industry. Navigating this landscape while remaining true to its values presented a constant challenge.

The Purpose-Driven Strategy:

Patagonia’s purpose is “We’re in business to save our home planet.” This isn’t just a slogan; it is the core of their business strategy. Every decision, from material sourcing to marketing campaigns, is evaluated through this lens. When faced with disruption, such as a downturn in the economy, Patagonia doesn’t compromise on its purpose. Instead, it doubles down, knowing that its loyal customer base values this commitment. For example, during Black Friday, a time when most retailers encourage consumption, Patagonia famously ran a campaign telling customers, “Don’t Buy This Jacket.” This counterintuitive approach reinforced their purpose and created an even stronger connection with their customers. Their commitment to their purpose has allowed them to attract top talent, build a fiercely loyal community, and remain profitable while staying true to their core values.

The Results:

Patagonia has not only survived but thrived by leveraging its purpose as a navigational tool. It has demonstrated that a strong, authentic purpose is a powerful source of competitive advantage and resilience. The company’s clear “why” has enabled it to make bold decisions that might seem risky from a traditional business perspective, but which ultimately resonate deeply with its customers and employees. This case study shows that a purpose-driven approach provides a clear framework for navigating disruption, allowing a company to stand out and build a sustainable business in the long term.

Key Insight: An authentic and unwavering purpose can act as a powerful differentiator and a source of competitive advantage, enabling an organization to make bold, values-aligned decisions that build long-term loyalty and resilience.

Case Study 2: Microsoft’s Cultural Transformation under Satya Nadella

The Challenge: A Stagnant Culture and Missed Opportunities in a Rapidly Changing Tech Landscape

In the early 2010s, Microsoft was widely perceived as a company that had lost its way. Its culture was siloed and competitive, and it had missed key shifts in the tech industry, such as the rise of mobile computing. The company was in a state of internal turmoil, lacking a unified vision to guide it through the ongoing disruption. New leadership was needed to redefine the company’s direction and reignite innovation.

The Purpose-Driven Strategy:

When Satya Nadella became CEO, he didn’t start with a new product strategy; he started with purpose. He re-framed Microsoft’s mission to “empower every person and every organization on the planet to achieve more.” This purpose was intentionally broad and human-centered. It was a clear departure from the company’s past focus on “putting a computer on every desk.” This new North Star guided every subsequent strategic decision, from embracing open-source software and cloud computing to acquiring LinkedIn and GitHub. The purpose served as a unifying force, helping different business units collaborate and innovate together. It allowed the company to pivot into new markets with a clear sense of direction, moving beyond its traditional software dominance.

The Results:

Nadella’s purpose-driven leadership led to a remarkable cultural and business renaissance at Microsoft. The company’s stock price soared, and it regained its position as a global technology leader. By using a clear and human-centered purpose as its guide, Microsoft was able to navigate the complex and disruptive tech landscape with newfound clarity and agility. This case study demonstrates how a renewed sense of purpose, when effectively communicated and integrated into the culture, can act as a powerful engine for change, enabling a large organization to reinvent itself and thrive in a period of intense disruption.

Key Insight: Reclaiming and re-framing an organization’s purpose can serve as the most effective catalyst for a large-scale cultural transformation and business revitalization.

Making Purpose Your Guiding Light

In an era of relentless disruption, a clearly defined purpose is no longer a luxury—it is an essential strategic asset. It provides the clarity needed to make tough decisions, the inspiration required to foster innovation, and the resilience necessary to weather any storm. As leaders, our role is not just to set a course, but to articulate a compelling “why” that will serve as our collective North Star. By putting purpose at the center of our strategy, we can move from being passive observers of change to active agents of a future we are all proud to create.

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: Pixabay

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

Making Innovation the Way We Do Business (easy as ABC)

Making Innovation the Way We Do Business (easy as ABC)

GUEST POST from Robyn Bolton

“We need to be more innovative.”

How many times have you said or heard that? It’s how most innovation efforts start. It’s a statement that reflects leaders’ genuine desire to return to the “good ol’ days” when the company routinely created and launched new products and enjoyed the publicity and growth that followed.

But what does it mean to be more innovative?

Innovation’s ABCs

A is for Architecture

Architecture includes most of the elements people think of when they start the work to become more innovative – strategy, structure, processes, metrics, governance, and incentives.

Each of these elements answers fundamental questions:

  • Strategy: Why is innovation important? How does it contribute to our overall strategy?
  • Structure: Who does the work of innovation?
  • Process: How is the work done?
  • Metrics: How will we know when we’re successful? How will we measure progress?
  • Governance: Who makes decisions? How and when are decisions made?
  • Incentives: Why should people invest their time, money, and political capital? How will they be rewarded?

When it comes to your business, you can answer all these questions. The same is true if you’re serious about innovation. If you can’t answer the questions, you have work to do. If you don’t want to do the work, then you don’t want to be innovative. You want to look innovative*.

B is for Behavior

Innovation isn’t an idea problem. It’s a leadership problem.

Leaders that talk about innovation, delegate it to subordinates and routinely pull resources from innovation to “shore up” current operations don’t want to be innovative. They want to look innovative.

Leaders who roll up their sleeves and work alongside innovation teams, ask questions and listen with open minds, and invest and protect innovation resources want to be innovative.

To be fair, it’s incredibly challenging to be a great leader of both innovation and operations. It’s the equivalent of writing equally well with your right and left hands. But it is possible. More importantly, it’s essential.

C is for Culture

Culture is invisible, pervasive, and personal. It is also the make-or-break factor for innovation because it surrounds innovation architecture, teams, and leaders.

Culture can expand to encourage and support exploration, creativity, and risk-taking. Or it can constrict, unleashing antibodies that swarm, suffocate, and kill anything that threatens the status quo.

Trying to control or change culture is like trying to hold water in your fist. But if you let go just a bit, create the right conditions, and wait patiently, change is possible.

Easy as 123

The most common mistake executives make in the pursuit of being “more innovative” is that they focus on only A or only B or only C.  But, as I always tell my clients, the answer is “and, not or.”

  1. Start with Architecture because it’s logical, rational, and produces tangible outputs like org charts, process flows, and instruction manuals filled with templates and tools. Architecture is comforting because it helps us know what to do and how.
  2. Use Architecture to encourage Behavior because the best way to learn something is to do it. With Architecture in place (but well before it’s finished), bring leaders into the work – talking to customers, sharing their ideas, and creating prototypes. When leaders do the work of innovation, they quickly realize what’s possible (and what’s not) and are open to learning how to engage (behave) in a way that supports innovation.
  3. Leverage Architecture and Behavior to engage Culture by creating the artifacts, rituals, and evidence that innovation can happen in your company, is happening and will continue to happen. As people see “innovation” evolve from a buzzword to a small investment to “the way we do business,” their skepticism will fade, and their support will grow.

Just like the Jackson 5 said

ABC, It’s easy a 123

Architecture, behavior, culture – they’re all essential to enabling an innovation capability that repeatedly creates new revenue.

And while starting with architecture, building new leadership behaviors, and investing until the culture changes isn’t easy, it’s the 123 steps required to “be more innovative.”

Image credit: Wikimedia Commons

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

From Burnout to Breakthroughs

Prioritizing Well-being for Peak Performance

From Burnout to Breakthroughs

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In the relentless pursuit of growth and innovation, many organizations have fallen into a dangerous trap: equating long hours and constant stress with dedication and productivity. The result is a global epidemic of burnout, a state of physical and emotional exhaustion that stifles creativity, diminishes engagement, and ultimately erodes performance. As a human-centered change and innovation thought leader, I am here to challenge this outdated paradigm. I believe the path to true peak performance is not paved with exhaustion, but with well-being. It’s a shift from a culture of busyness to a culture of breakthroughs, where prioritizing the mental and physical health of our people is seen not as a luxury, but as a strategic imperative.

For too long, the narrative around work has been a zero-sum game: either you prioritize well-being and sacrifice performance, or you prioritize performance and sacrifice well-being. This is a false choice. The human brain, the ultimate engine of innovation, is not a machine that can run indefinitely at maximum speed. It requires rest, recovery, and a sense of purpose to function at its best. Burnout, on the other hand, is the antithesis of innovation. It leads to cognitive decline, a decrease in problem-solving ability, and a fear of taking risks—all of which are fatal to a company’s ability to adapt and grow.

Prioritizing well-being is not a soft, feel-good initiative. It is a hard-nosed, data-driven strategy for unlocking sustainable, high-level performance. When employees feel supported, trusted, and empowered to take care of themselves, they are more engaged, more creative, and more resilient. This creates a virtuous cycle of positive reinforcement that benefits everyone involved. The strategic shift from managing for burnout to designing for breakthroughs requires us to:

  • Redefine Productivity: Move away from measuring hours worked and focus on tangible outcomes and impact.
  • Promote Psychological Safety: Create an environment where people feel safe to be vulnerable, take risks, and share their ideas without fear of retribution.
  • Encourage Boundaries: Actively model and promote a culture where disconnecting from work is not only accepted but encouraged.
  • Invest in Holistic Well-being: Provide resources that address mental, physical, and emotional health, from mental health days to wellness stipends.
  • Empower Autonomy: Give employees a sense of control over their work and their schedules, as autonomy is a key driver of motivation and well-being.

Case Study 1: Microsoft Japan and the Four-Day Work Week

The Challenge: Boosting Productivity and Employee Engagement

In 2019, Microsoft Japan embarked on a bold experiment to address employee engagement and productivity. The company recognized that long hours and a rigid work schedule were not necessarily leading to better results. In a society known for its strong work ethic and long work hours, Microsoft sought to challenge the status quo and prove that a different approach could yield better outcomes.

The Well-being Innovation:

Microsoft Japan implemented a “Work-Life Choice Challenge” pilot, which gave all 2,300 employees paid Fridays off for an entire month, effectively creating a four-day work week. The goal was to see if a compressed work schedule could boost productivity and employee well-being. The company also encouraged shorter meetings (with a 30-minute cap) and promoted the use of online communication tools to streamline workflows and reduce time-wasting activities. The focus was shifted from “time spent” to “results produced.”

The Results:

The results of the trial were remarkable. Productivity, measured by sales per employee, jumped by a staggering 40% compared to the previous year. Employees took 25% fewer days off during the trial, and electricity consumption in the office dropped by 23%. Most importantly, 92% of employees surveyed said they preferred the four-day work week. The experiment showed that giving employees the gift of time and trust, and actively helping them work smarter, led to a more energized, engaged, and productive workforce. This was a clear example of prioritizing well-being as a direct driver of business success.

Key Insight: A shorter work week, when combined with a focus on efficiency and outcomes, can significantly boost productivity and employee morale by prioritizing rest and rejuvenation.

Case Study 2: The New Zealand-Based Financial Services Company

The Challenge: Overcoming Burnout and Low Employee Engagement

A New Zealand-based financial services company, like many organizations, was struggling with low employee engagement and high rates of burnout. The traditional 9-to-5, five-day work week was leading to a feeling of being constantly overworked and under-appreciated. The company’s leadership understood that for their employees to innovate and provide exceptional service, they needed to be happy, healthy, and engaged.

The Well-being Innovation:

In a groundbreaking move, the company’s leadership implemented a “100-80-100” model: employees were paid 100% of their salary for working 80% of the time, while being tasked with maintaining 100% of their productivity. The core of this innovation was not just the extra day off, but the empowerment of teams to redesign their own workflows. They were asked to identify and eliminate time-wasting activities, shorten meetings, and use technology more effectively to ensure that the work could be completed in fewer hours. This shift was a direct investment in employee autonomy and well-being, trusting them to manage their own time and output.

The Results:

The results were stunning. Employee engagement, as measured by surveys, increased by a remarkable 24%. Stress levels among employees decreased significantly, and their sense of work-life balance improved dramatically. Crucially, the company’s performance metrics either remained the same or saw a slight increase, as the teams had become more focused and efficient in their shortened work week. The company’s innovative approach not only improved the lives of its employees but also became a global case study for how prioritizing well-being and trust can lead to superior business outcomes and a more resilient, innovative culture.

Key Insight: Trusting employees to manage their own time and empowering them to find efficiencies is a powerful way to reduce burnout and drive bottom-up innovation.

The Path Forward: From Busyness to Breakthroughs

These case studies serve as powerful evidence that a change in mindset is required. The old model is broken. The most successful organizations of the future will not be those that push their employees to the brink of exhaustion, but those that design systems and cultures that prioritize human well-being. By fostering a culture of trust, empowering autonomy, and redefining productivity to focus on outcomes over hours, we can unlock the full potential of our teams. The journey from burnout to breakthroughs begins with a single, profound realization: our greatest asset is not our technology, our capital, or our brand—it’s the health, happiness, and creative energy of our people. It’s time to build a new foundation for success, one that is truly human-centered.

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: Pexels

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

The Ways Inflection Points Define Our Future

The Ways Inflection Points Define Our Future

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

Humans tend to think in a linear fashion. If something is growing, we expect it to keep growing. If it is decreasing, we expect it to continue to decrease. We are natural trend watchers and instinctively look for patterns. Yet it is often the discontinuities, rather than the continuities, that have the biggest impact.

The mathematician Benoit Mandelbrot referred to this cycle of continuity punctuated by discontinuity as “Noah effects and Joseph effects.” Joseph effects, as in the biblical story, support long periods of continuity. Noah effects, on the other hand, are like a big storm creating a massive flood of discontinuity, washing away the previous order.

Throughout history, inflection points have defined the future. Business models, built on top of Joseph effects, are disrupted by Noah effects, creating new opportunities for those who are able to identify and adapt. Today, we’re in the midst of a series of inflection points in what was already a time of enormous flux. We can’t predict the future but we can prepare for it.

1920s: A Second Industrial Revolution

By 1920, electricity was already nearly a 40-year old technology. In 1882, just three years after he had almost literally shocked the world with his revolutionary electric light bulb, Thomas Edison opened his Pearl Street Station, the first commercial electrical distribution plant in the United States. By 1884 it was already servicing over 500 homes.

Yet although electricity and electric lighting were already widespread in 1919, they didn’t have a measurable effect on productivity and a paper by the economist Paul David helps explain why. It took time for manufacturers to adapt their factories to electricity and learn to design workflow to leverage the flexibility that the new technology offered. It was the improved workflow, more than the technology itself, that drove productivity forward.

Automobiles saw a similar evolution. It took time for infrastructure, such as roads and gas stations, to be built. Improved logistics reshaped supply chains and factories moved from cities in the north — close to customers — to small towns in the south, where labor and land were cheaper. That improved the economics of manufacturing further.

It was the confluence of electricity and internal combustion, along with the secondary innovations they spawned, that led to mass manufacturing and mass marketing. Enterprises scaled up into huge bureaucracies exemplified by the organization Alfred Sloan built at General Motors. Firms were designed to move large numbers of men and materiel efficiently. Information flowed up, orders went down and your rank determined your responsibility.

1990s – Globalization and Digitization

In November 1989, there were two watershed events that would change the course of world history. The fall of the Berlin Wall would end the Cold War and open up markets across the world. That very same month, Tim Berners-Lee would create the World Wide Web and usher in a new technological era of networked computing.

Much like in the 1920s, these forces had been building for some time. Commercial computers had been around since the 1950s and global trade as a percentage of GDP began to sharply increase in the 1970s. Yet 1989 marked an inflection point and the world would never be the same after that.

The combined forces of globalization and digitization favored the quick and agile over the large and powerful. Rather than spending months or years to develop products, startup firms could rapidly prototype and iterate their way to launching a product in months or weeks. So called “unicorns”, startup companies valued at over a billion dollars, began to emerge and disrupt incumbent industry giants.

Perhaps the biggest shift of the globalized, digital world was from hierarchies to networks. While in the industrial era strategy was focused on linear value chains and the sum of all efficiencies, in the networked world strategy increasingly focused on the sum of all connections. A leader’s role was no longer simply to plan and direct action, but to inspire and empower belief.

Yet much like technologies that came of age in the 1920s, the second and third order effects of globalization and digitization were very different than anyone had predicted. Instead of the triumph of democracy we got a rise in authoritarian populism. Instead of a new era of prosperity, we got stagnant wages, reduced productivity growth and weaker competitive markets.

2020s – A New Era of Innovation

Today, as Moore’s law nears its theoretical limits, the digital revolution is coming to a close and we’re about to embark on a new era of innovation. Much like in the 1920s and the 1990s, the future is likely to surprise us, but the rough outlines of new inflection points are already beginning to take shape.

The first is in energy. The World Economic Forum reports that wind and solar now produce energy cheaper than coal and gas in North America. In fact, in some sunny parts of the world, solar costs less than half as much as coal. Costs for energy storage are still too high, but here too there is significant progress and we’re likely to see a scaled solution within a decade.

Another is the rise of synthetic biology. Driven by new technologies such as CRISPR, we’re beginning to go beyond merely reading genomes and starting to write them. Andrew Hessel, CEO of Humane Genomics, told me that we’re nearing the point that the value of a genome exceeds the cost to produce one. That will unleash a new wave of biologically driven business models. A similar revolution is underway in materials science.

Over the next decade we will also see the emergence of post-digital computing architectures such as quantum and neuromorphic computing, which are potentially thousands, if not millions of times more powerful than today’s technology. Although we don’t expect much of an impact from either of these for at least a decade, they will accelerate advancements in biology, materials and artificial intelligence.

Clearly these new technologies will open up new possibilities, but right now it’s impossible to see beyond first order effects. Nobody looked at a light bulb and saw household appliances empowering women to enter the workplace, or looked at a Model T and saw suburbs and the transformation of retail, or came across an IBM mainframe and said, “Gee, this thing will put journalists out of work one day.”

Preparing For the Future

Six years ago, I wrote how 2020 was shaping up to be a pivotal year. Boy, I had no idea! In addition. In addition to the convergence of longstanding trends in technology, energy and transportation, Covid-19 and the resurgence of the Black Lives Matter movement burst onto the global consciousness.

Two things stick out about these new inflection points. First, they were not only predictable, but were, in fact, predicted by a number of people. Second, both will accelerate already existing trends. Covid-19 has shifted digital transformation and synthetic biology into high gear. Black Lives Matter will likely expedite the shift in political power from Boomers to Millennials.

We can think of various scenarios that can play out. Covid may catalyze nascent trends, such as telemedicine and genomic medicine to greatly improve healthcare in the US. Black Lives Matter may cause a shift in hiring patterns that may help to accelerate productivity. On the other hand, the tensions both inflection points create may exacerbate underlying divisions and make things worse.

Those are just two possible scenarios. There are many more, each of which will create their sets of Noah and Joseph effects and then combine secondary and tertiary changes in ways that are unknowable today. What we can do, however, is explore new possibilities and prepare for them. The most important inflection points are often the ones that we create ourselves through the choices we make. No future is inevitable.

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

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

Unlocking New Frontiers of Innovation with Strategic Partnerships

Unlocking New Frontiers of Innovation with Strategic Partnerships

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In today’s hyper-competitive landscape, the idea of an organization achieving greatness alone is a myth. The most impactful innovations rarely happen in isolation; they are the product of collaboration, shared vision, and complementary strengths. As a thought leader in human-centered change and innovation, I’ve seen firsthand that strategic partnerships are not just a business tactic—they are a core competency for unlocking new frontiers of innovation and creating value that no single company could achieve on its own.

For too long, companies have viewed their competitive advantage through a narrow lens: what can we do better than everyone else? This mindset, while valuable for internal efficiency, can also lead to a dangerous form of tunnel vision. It prevents us from seeing the powerful opportunities that lie just beyond our organizational walls. Strategic partnerships are about embracing this external reality, recognizing that our biggest weaknesses can often be solved by another’s greatest strengths, and that by joining forces, we can create something far greater than the sum of our individual parts.

A strategic partnership is more than a simple transaction or a vendor relationship. It’s a deliberate, long-term collaboration built on a foundation of trust, shared goals, and a deep understanding of each other’s value proposition. It requires us to move beyond a culture of “not invented here” to one of “co-created here.” The power of these partnerships lies in their ability to:

  • Accelerate Innovation: Gain access to new technologies, intellectual property, and R&D capabilities without the long and costly internal development cycle.
  • Access New Markets: Leverage a partner’s established distribution channels, brand reputation, or customer base to enter markets that would otherwise be inaccessible.
  • Enhance Customer Experience: Combine complementary products or services to create a more holistic and valuable offering for the end user.
  • Mitigate Risk: Share the financial burden and operational risks associated with launching a new product or entering a new and uncertain market.

Case Study 1: The Nike and Apple Partnership

The Challenge: Marrying Physical Fitness with Digital Technology

In the mid-2000s, both Nike and Apple were industry leaders, but in completely separate domains. Nike dominated the world of athletic apparel, and Apple was revolutionizing personal technology. Both companies were aware of the growing consumer interest in personal fitness tracking but were individually limited in their ability to create a truly seamless, integrated experience. Nike had the expertise in footwear and athletic performance, but lacked the technological prowess. Apple had the technology, but lacked the deep understanding of athletic culture and the trust of the running community.

The Strategic Partnership and Innovation:

In 2006, the two giants formed a strategic partnership that was revolutionary for its time. They collaborated to create the “Nike+iPod Sport Kit.” This innovation involved a small sensor placed in a Nike shoe that wirelessly communicated with an iPod Nano, tracking the runner’s speed, distance, and calories burned. This was not a simple co-branding exercise; it was a deep collaboration between engineering, design, and marketing teams from both companies. The partnership allowed Nike to offer a tech-forward product and Apple to expand the functionality of its iPod into a new, lifestyle-focused category.

The Results:

The Nike+iPod partnership was a resounding success. It created a powerful new product category and a highly engaged community of users. The collaboration set the stage for the modern era of fitness wearables and was a precursor to the Apple Watch, which now integrates similar fitness tracking capabilities. By combining their core competencies, Nike and Apple were able to create a product that neither could have produced on their own, demonstrating the power of strategic partnerships to unlock entirely new markets and product experiences.

Key Insight: Strategic partnerships can create entirely new product categories and markets by combining complementary expertise from different industries.

Case Study 2: The Starbucks and Spotify Collaboration

The Challenge: Enhancing Customer and Employee Experience

In the mid-2010s, Starbucks was looking for a way to deepen its connection with customers and improve the employee experience. At the same time, Spotify, a leading music streaming service, was looking for new ways to expand its user base and build deeper brand loyalty. Both companies understood the powerful role of music in shaping an atmosphere and a brand experience.

The Strategic Partnership and Innovation:

The two companies announced a comprehensive partnership. Spotify became the official music partner for Starbucks, allowing baristas to help curate the in-store playlists from a centralized library of music. This wasn’t just a simple licensing agreement. Starbucks employees, who are avid music fans, were given premium Spotify accounts, and the partnership created a feedback loop where they could influence the music played in stores. Furthermore, Starbucks’ rewards members were offered unique access to exclusive Spotify playlists and could influence the music being played in-store. This initiative blurred the lines between a retail experience and a digital one.

The Results:

The Starbucks-Spotify partnership was a win for everyone involved. Starbucks enhanced its in-store ambiance and provided a unique benefit to its most loyal customers, strengthening their emotional connection to the brand. The partnership also served as a powerful employee engagement tool, empowering baristas to take ownership of the in-store experience and creating a sense of shared community. For Spotify, the collaboration provided a massive new platform for brand exposure and user acquisition, introducing the service to millions of Starbucks customers who might not have otherwise used it. It’s a prime example of a strategic partnership that created value not just for the companies, but for their employees and customers as well.

Key Insight: A well-designed strategic partnership can create value for multiple stakeholders—including customers and employees—by integrating complementary brand experiences.

The Path Forward: Embracing a Collaborative Future

In a world of increasing complexity and rapid change, the ability to form and manage strategic partnerships is no longer a luxury; it is a necessity for survival and growth. The most forward-thinking leaders will move beyond a mindset of isolated competition and embrace a new era of collaborative innovation. They will understand that the most significant challenges and the greatest opportunities require the combined strength of diverse perspectives, expertise, and resources. By thoughtfully identifying potential partners and building relationships based on trust and shared purpose, we can unlock new frontiers of innovation and create a more valuable future for our businesses, our customers, and our world.

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: Unsplash

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

Top 10 Human-Centered Change & Innovation Articles of September 2022

Top 10 Human-Centered Change & Innovation Articles of September 2022Drum roll please…

At the beginning of each month we will profile the ten articles from the previous month that generated the most traffic to Human-Centered Change & Innovation. Did your favorite make the cut?

But enough delay, here are September’s ten most popular innovation posts:

  1. You Can’t Innovate Without This One Thing — by Robyn Bolton
  2. Importance of Measuring Your Organization’s Innovation Maturity — by Braden Kelley
  3. 3 Ways to Get Customer Insights without Talking to Customers
    — by Robyn Bolton
  4. Four Lessons Learned from the Digital Revolution — by Greg Satell
  5. Are You Hanging Your Chief Innovation Officer Out to Dry? — by Teresa Spangler
  6. Why Good Job Interviews Don’t Lead to Good Job Performance — by Arlen Meyers, M.D.
  7. Six Simple Growth Hacks for Startups — by Soren Kaplan
  8. Why Diversity and Inclusion Are Entrepreneurial Competencies
    — by Arlen Meyers, M.D.
  9. The Seven P’s of Raising Money from Investors — by Arlen Meyers, M.D.
  10. What’s Next – The Only Way Forward is Through — by Braden Kelley

BONUS – Here are five more strong articles published in August that continue to resonate with people:

If you’re not familiar with Human-Centered Change & Innovation, we publish 4-7 new articles every week built around innovation and transformation insights from our roster of contributing authors and ad hoc submissions from community members. Get the articles right in your Facebook, Twitter or Linkedin feeds too!

Have something to contribute?

Human-Centered Change & Innovation is open to contributions from any and all innovation and transformation professionals out there (practitioners, professors, researchers, consultants, authors, etc.) who have valuable human-centered change and innovation insights to share with everyone for the greater good. If you’d like to contribute, please contact me.

P.S. Here are our Top 40 Innovation Bloggers lists from the last two years:

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