Tag Archives: purpose

Getting Back to Measuring What Matters

Getting Back to Measuring What Matters

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

“Not everything that can be counted counts and not everything that counts can be counted,” is a quote often attributed to Albert Einstein, which I think aptly sums up the past 40 years. Since the 80s, we’ve been laser-focused on numbers and missed the underlying math. We’ve become finance-obsessed but lost track of economics.

Consider Jack Welch, who Fortune magazine named “Manager of the Century.” In the article explaining why he deserved such an honor, it lauded the CEO’s ability to increase the stock price and deliver consistent earnings growth, but nowhere did it refer to a breakthrough product or impact on society.

There’s a good reason for that. As NY Times columnist David Gelles explains in, The Man Who Broke Capitalism, Welch increased profits largely by firing workers, cutting investment and ‘financializing’ the firm. During his 20 year reign, innovation faltered and the company produced less, not more. Clearly, we need to reevaluate what we consider valuable.

What’s The Purpose Of A Company?

In a famous 1937 paper, Ronald Coase argued that the economic function of a firm was to minimize transaction costs, especially information costs. For example, it makes sense to keep employees on staff, even if you might not need them today, so that you don’t need to search for people tomorrow when important work needs to be done..

In 1976, Michael Jensen and William Meckling built on Coase’s work in their groundbreaking paper entitled The Theory of The Firm, which asserted that the purpose of the firm was to make money for its owners. They further argued that there is a fundamental principal-agency problem between managers and owners because their interests are not perfectly aligned.

These were brilliant works of economic theory, but as reflections of reality they are somewhat absurd. People start businesses for all sorts of reasons, profits being just one motivation. That’s why we have public benefit corporations and socially responsible investment funds. Heirs such as Abigail Disney have spoken out strongly against corporate greed.

There is simply no basis for the notion that owners of businesses care only about profits, much less the stock price over a given period. Yet during the 1970s and 1980s there was a growing conservative intellectual movement that argued that managers had a moral responsibility to increase shareholder value at the expense of pretty much everything else.

Today, many portray the conservative movement behind the nation of shareholder value as evil and greedy. Most of the evidence indicates that its leaders thought they were doing the right thing. It seems that there were more fundamental errors at play.

Management By Algorithm

In the 1920s , a group of intellectuals in Berlin and Vienna, became enamored by an idea that came to be known as logical positivism, that human affairs should be subjected to the same logical rigor as physical sciences. It failed miserably and, when Kurt Gödel published his incompleteness theorems in 1931, it was completely discredited.

Yet the strain of thought that arose in the 1970s that gave rise to Jack Welch’s brand of capitalism was essentially the same thing. It was, in effect, management by algorithm, in which human agency was eschewed and decisions were boiled down to a single variable to be optimized. Pretty much everything else could be blissfully ignored.

Does a particular action further the mission of the enterprise? It doesn’t matter as long as the stock price goes up. Will a merger of two companies undermine market forces and restrain trade? Unless regulators can prove that prices will go up, they have no right to step in. What should govern relations between nations? They should simply pursue their interests.

These ideas failed for the same reason that the original theory of logical positivism did. The world is a messy place, with lots going on. You can’t simply boil complex problems down to a single variable—or even a limited set—and not lose important information in the process. The notion that you could was naive and reckless.

The Cost Of Carelessness

To understand why the Welch era went so badly, let’s look at one common practice that took hold in the 1980s and 90s: Offshoring. From a shareholder value perspective, it has an intuitive logic. You move your factory from high wage countries such as the US to low wage countries such as China and pocket the savings. You lower costs and increase profits, at least in the short-term.

Yet that analysis omits some important factors. First of all, it undermines trust among employees, suppliers and other partners when relationships are treated as purely transactions. Also, a Harvard study found that moving the factory floor thousands of miles away from R&D reduces knowledge transfer and has a negative effect on innovation.

Looking back, it’s easy to see how this played out at GE. The company became more profitable, but less productive. For decades, it failed to innovate. Its last major invention was the CT scanner, which came out in the 1970s, before Jack Welch took the helm. Today the company is worth about $60 billion, roughly the same as back in the 90s.

The results for society are just as clear. Our economy has become markedly less productive, less competitive and less dynamic. Purchasing power for most people has stagnated. Life expectancy in the US has decreased in a number of years over the past decade. Anxiety and depression, which have been rising for a while, accelerated during the pandemic.

Creating Mission-Driven Organizations

The statistician George Box famously said, “All models are wrong, but some are useful” and that’s especially true of economic models. When Ronald Coase argued that the “nature of a firm” was to reduce transaction costs, he didn’t mean that was the only purpose of an enterprise. To argue that there is a principal-agent problem between owners and managers should not imply that it only applies to profits.

In fact, as Andrew Winston and Paul Polman explain in their book Net Positive, many practices that aren’t sustainable depress profits in the long run. Running an enterprise that dismisses the interests of customers, partners and communities is destined for trouble. Sooner or later, there will be a reckoning.

In the final analysis, the purpose of an enterprise is its mission. When we think of great founders such as Henry Ford, Sam Walton and Steve Jobs, they had vastly different purposes in mind, but it was fulfilling that purpose that drove profits. Ford was passionate about the power of transportation. Walton was fanatical about serving the customer. Can you imagine what Steve Jobs would have said about an ugly product that could make him a lot of money?

That’s what we’ve gotten wrong over the last 50 years. We’ve been counting the wrong things. Economics should serve people, not the other way around. The success of a society needs to be measured by the well-being of those who live in it. If companies profit, but our people are impoverished, our air and water are more polluted, our children less educated, we live unhappy lives and die deaths of despair, what have we really gained?

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— 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.

Purpose Has Transformative Power

Purpose Has Transformative Power

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

Wherever I go in the world to speak and advise organizations, I always get the same question: “How can I get people to listen to my ideas?” The truth is that no one wants to listen to your ideas unless they solve a problem that is meaningful to them. So many initiatives fail because leaders get so focused on their passion for an idea that they fail to communicate it effectively.

People already have enough going on in their lives with their own responsibilities, ambitions and dreams. They have families to take care of, friends that they want to spend time with and their own ideas that they want to pursue. The status quo always has inertia on its side and never yields its power gracefully.

The truth is that good ideas fail all the time. In the two decades I have been researching and advising leaders about transformation, what I have found is that few have trouble coming up with new concepts. The hard part is to get others to buy in and work together towards a common purpose. That can only be done in the context of shared sense of values and mission.

Why Occupy Not Only Failed, But Could Never Succeed

On September 17, 2011, #Occupy Wall Street took over Zuccotti Park, in the heart of the financial district in Lower Manhattan. Declaring, “We are the 99%,” they captured the attention of the nation and then the world, eventually growing to encompass protests in 951 cities across 82 countries.

The protesters were angry and rightly so. A global economic elite had bilked us out of trillions and then gotten off scot-free. However, despite all of the self-righteous indignation, they offered no alternate vision of how they wanted things to be. There were no proposals for legislation, alternative business models or anything else really, just anger and frustration.

As Joe Nocera noted in the New York Times, the Occupy movement “had plenty of grievances, aimed mainly at the ‘oppressive’ power of corporations,” but “never got beyond their own slogans.” It’s never enough to merely point out what you don’t like — you need to put forward a clear idea of what you want instead.

When General Stanley McChrystal sought to transform military operations in Iraq, his mantra was “it takes a network to defeat a network” and he built his strategy for change around that one basic principle. Lou Gerstner pulled off one of the most extraordinary turnarounds in history by refocusing his organization from its proprietary “stack” of products to its customers’ “stack” of business processes.

A sense of grievance is never enough to bring change about. You need to put forward an affirmative vision of tomorrow.

How the Mission Drives Your Strategy

We usually think of strategy as a rational, analytic activity, with teams of MBA’s poring over spreadsheets. We often forget that strategy has to have a purpose and that purpose is almost always personal and emotive. Great strategy starts, not with analysis, but from defining and committing to a mission.

Strategy is never created on an empty canvas. While we can make rational assessments about whether we want to pursue a strategy based on low costs, differentiation or an attractive niche. We can, through investments and divestments, fill in missing pieces on a PowerPoint chart, but the fate of a strategy ultimately hinges on personality and ambition.

The success of Apple can’t be separated from Steve Jobs’ ambition to weave technology and design into products that were “insanely great.” Southwest’s dominance in the travel industry is a direct consequence of Herb Kelleher’s mission of being “THE low cost airline,” which drove everything he did from the planes he bought to which routes he competed on.

As Adam Michnik, one of the key intellectual leaders behind the Solidarity movement in Poland, put it, “Start doing the things you think should be done, and start being what you think society should become. Do you believe in free speech? Then speak freely. Do you love the truth? Then tell it. Do you believe in an open society? Then act in the open. Do you believe in a decent and humane society? Then behave decently and humanely.”

Any vision for the future needs to be rooted in desire and desires are essentially personal. They are deeply entrenched in our sense of self.

The Value of Values

The 2008 financial crisis posed serious challenges for every business. With sales taking a nosedive, companies had to make painful cuts to rein in costs. In the vast majority of cases, that meant layoffs and millions lost their jobs. It’s one of those understandable misfortunes.e No one likes it, but few see alternatives.

The steel giant Nucor, however, had pledged never to lay off employees and it cost it dearly. In 2009, the company lost $294 million dollars. At the time, many saw the move as quixotic and impractical. Yet the results speak for themselves. Today the company is valued more than 30% higher than its closest rival ArcelorMittal S.A., with significantly higher profit margins and twice the return on equity.

In The Good Jobs Strategy MIT’s Zeynep Ton tells a similar story about Mercadona, Spain’s leading discount retailer, when it needed to cut costs in 2008. Rather than cut wages or reduce staff, it asked its employees to contribute ideas. The result was that it managed to reduce prices by 10% and increased its market share from 15% in 2008 to 20% in 2012.

Values are how an enterprise honors its purpose. Yet living up to them involves certain costs. You can’t say you value employees and then lay them off at the first sign of trouble, just like you can’t say you value innovation and obsess about quarterly earnings. You can’t commit to a purpose without making hard choices.

We Need to Start Asking Different Questions

When the Business Roundtable issued a statement in 2019 that discarded the old notion that the sole purpose of a business is to provide value to shareholders, many were dismayed. Some thought it was just another example of misguided altruism by “elites.” Others saw it as a cynical and disingenuous ploy.

The truth is that the whole idea of shareholder capitalism was a cop-out. It gave leaders an excuse for not making choices because it implied that whatever the stock market valued was somehow more relevant than human agency. The anonymous collective of the market was primary, while individual choice was considered to be less consequential.

The ascendant concept of “stakeholder capitalism,” unfortunately, isn’t much better. Surely we can’t value all stakeholders equally. So which communities should we choose to serve? Which consumers do we value over others? Which partners do we choose to get in bed with? What standards should we insist that our suppliers meet?

None of these are easy questions. If for instance, we stop working with suppliers who don’t meet certain environmental or governance standards, we take away jobs from certain communities and run the risk of diminishing our ability to serve our customers. So we need to be thoughtful and offer intelligent standards making tough and uncertain choices

The reason so many organizations find themselves unable to pursue a purpose isn’t because they don’t want to, but because it is hard. Purpose doesn’t begin with a single step, but with a diverging path. We must choose one direction at the expense of another, or stay mired and lost, unable to move forward.

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— Image credits: Dall-E

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.

Focus your Emotional Energy Purposefully

Focus your Emotional Energy Purposefully

GUEST POST from Janet Sernack

When I exited my corporate career more than thirty-five years ago, I was privileged to be regarded and respected as the Fashion Direction Manager for the Grace Bros Department Store group, one of Australia’s most senior women in retail management. This launched my global reputation as a fashion and lifestyle marketing innovator. In this exciting role, I was responsible for designing and implementing a company-wide fashion information system for apparel, accessories, homeware, merchandising, and advertising.  This required me to focus my emotional energy on researching, analyzing, and conceptualizing global fashion and lifestyle trends and adapting them to suit the Australian consumer lifestyle.

It was a dream role before the invention of the Internet, the implosion of the mass media, and the dominance of fast fashion. It required our team to focus their emotional energy on intensively researching different global and diverse media sources, including yarn, textile, couture, designer, ready-to-wear shows, trade journals, magazines, and seasonal sales data. 

Generating creative thinking

Creativity is about connecting things, and in the fashion world, the best designers make the most unlikely connections to produce novel and wondrous creations. As my professional background included graphic and fashion design and marketing, I could further hone my associative (lateral and connective) thinking skills to think creatively and critically in this role. To focus my emotional energy and attention on guiding my intuition, values, and decisions on the needs and wants of buyers, merchandisers, marketers, and customers. To emerge, diverge and converge the key connections and patterns occurring globally in the fashion world and external complex fashion systems. I also learned the importance of being customer-focused and the value and role of being empathic with customers, manufacturers’ value chains and fashion information system users.

It was an incredibly emotional, physical, and stressful role, which required me to travel overseas four times a year to stay current on the different global fashion streams.

This caused my life to melt into being at work, the gym, or the airport.

Stress-induced exhaustion and burnout

This resulted in my first profound encounter with stress-induced exhaustion and burnout, which hit me right in the face one morning when my body refused to move, and I was unable to get out of bed.

I have also noticed that many of my global coaching clients have faced a similar challenge: stress-induced exhaustion and burnout. Fortunately, they can use the coaching partnership to unearth their particular pattern and unresourceful ways of being and learn how to focus their emotional energy to disrupt, dispute, and deviate from it into a more resourceful way of being and acting. However, it has shifted the coach’s role as a healer, making it even more critical in our current environment.

Focusing emotional energy on pursuing mattering, meaning and purposeful work

This ultimately manifests as a crisis and becomes a defining moment. In my case, I made a fundamental choice to focus emotional energy on pursuing meaning, mattering, and purposeful work, which still focuses my full attention and drives me today.

It created a “crack, “or an opening and threshold for making two fundamental choices: to embark on a healing journey to become the kind of person I wanted to be and to find a way to focus my emotional energy on making the difference I wanted to make in the world. 

This enabled me to use my knowledge, experience, and skills to establish Australia’s first design management consultancy.

What is emotional energy?

Emotional energy is the catalyst that fuels creativity, invention, and innovation.

Understanding and harnessing this energy inspires and motivates individuals to explore and embrace creative and critical thinking strategies, now in partnership with AI.

When a person’s emotional energy has contracted, it results in constrained, negative, pessimistic, and even catastrophic thinking habits, which have a toxic impact on the person’s identity and emotional and physical well-being.

This means there is no space, doorway, or threshold to take on anything new, novel, or different. Nor can they imagine what might be possible to evolve, advance, or transform their personal or professional lives in an uncertain future.

Emotional energy catalyses and directs your intrinsic motivation, conviction, hope, positivity, and optimism to approach your world purposefully, meaningfully, and differently.

When you are true to your calling or purpose, you will make extra efforts to be healthier, positively impact your well-being, and improve your resilience.

How does this apply to leadership in uncertain times?

“I think leaders need to remember that they are in the energy management business,” says Halsey. “Their role is to keep people focused, energized, and positive about themselves and their work. They may be unable to change external circumstances, but they can create a safe, nurturing, and empowering work environment. By setting clear goals, diagnosing individual needs, and providing the right leadership style, leaders can help their teams thrive—even in uncertain times.”

People want work to be less of a job and more of a calling.

According to Martin Seligman and Gabriella Rosen Kellerman in their book Tomorrowmind, a US-based research study that included two thousand employees of all ages, industries, tenures, and incomes, revealed that people craved more meaning at work regardless of sector or position. Everyone wanted work to be less of a job and more of a calling and gave their current jobs a rating of 49, which suggests that their “meaning cups” are only half full.

This search for meaning, mattering, and being of service to humanity in a different and value-adding way enables innovators, entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs to cultivate the emotional energy and develop the agility required to drive their creativity, invention and innovation endeavors. 

It is the most critical ingredient that motivates, empowers, enables, fuels and sustains innovators, entrepreneurs, and intrapreneurs to adapt, survive and thrive on the innovation roller coaster.

Channeling emotional energy meaningfully and purposefully

From my leadership training and coaching experience, I have learned that most people desperately want their lives to make sense and be meaningful and to know that who they are and what they do matters. It is possible to link meaning and mattering to being intentionally motivated and directed by your core values to make a difference and a contribution that provides value and significance to someone, a community, or society.  

  • Being purposeful

Being purposeful focuses your emotional energy, guides your life decisions influences your behaviors, shapes your goals, offers a sense of direction, and creates meaning. Rather than engaging in shallow, empty, or pointless activities, it gives you agency.

In our uncertain, volatile and disruptive world, it is crucial to think about your “purpose in life.” Be like an Entrepreneur and link your purpose as a guidepost to help you deal with uncertainty, navigate it better, mitigate the damaging effects of long-term stress, and become psychologically resilient.

People with a strong sense of purpose direct and focus their emotional energy on what really matters to them. They tend to be more agile and adaptive, hardier and resilient, and more able to refocus and recover quickly from adverse and catastrophic events.

According to McKinsey & Co.’s article “Igniting individual purpose in times of crisis,” purposeful people also live longer and healthier lives and are essential to employee experience. This results in higher levels of employee engagement, more substantial organizational commitment, and increased feelings of well-being. Like many entrepreneurs, people who find their purpose congruent with their jobs tend to get more meaning from their roles, making them more productive and more likely to outperform their peers.

How can you add more meaning, mattering and purpose?

Meaning is an outcome of purpose, and many people, due to their experience of the pandemic and hybrid workplace in a chaotic and uncertain world, are seeking to re-engage with their work and workplaces by focusing their emotional energy on improving their well-being and creating more purposeful, balanced, and meaningful lives.

This is a short section from our new book, “Conscious Innovation – Activating the Heart, Mind and Soul of Innovation”, which will be published in 2025.

Please find out more about our work at ImagineNation™.

Please find out about 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 9-weeks. It can be customized as a bespoke corporate learning program.

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

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.

Purpose Matters Because …

Purpose Matters Because ...

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

When the Business Roundtable issued a statement in 2019 that discarded the old notion that the sole purpose of a business is to provide value to shareholders, many were dismayed. Some thought it was just another example of misguided altruism by “elites.” Others saw it as a cynical and disingenuous ploy.

Yet the primacy of shareholder value is hardly a well-established economic principle. The concept does not appear even once in Adam Smith’s seminal treatise, The Wealth of Nations. In fact, it is a relatively recent idea and when the economist Milton Friedman first proposed it in 1970, it was considered radical, even subversive, certainly not to be taken as gospel.

It has also been tremendously unsuccessful. Since Friedman’s essay we have become less productive, not more. One reason for the poor results is that Friedman and others like him failed to recognize that our economy is made up of people, not inanimate pieces of data that make up economic charts, and these people search for meaning and purpose in their lives.

Failed Cartesians

Often regarded as the father of modern philosophy, Rene Descartes was obsessed with human fallibility. Cursed with imperfect senses and emotions that can warp logic, he sought to build a new intellectual foundation based on cool, rational thought. “I think, therefore I am,” he wrote, proving that at least one thing could be known without referring to the use of the senses.

Descartes’ ideas led to the Rationalist school of philosophy as others tried to build on his work. The idea that, through pure reason, we could see truths with greater clarity held enormous attraction for intellectual giants such as Gottfried Leibniz and Baruch Spinoza. Unfortunately, other than in the field of mathematics, little was achieved.

That didn’t stop others from trying though. In the early 20th century, the Vienna Circle arose in response to the work of Ludwig Wittgenstein and others in order to create a logical system to guide human affairs. Wittgenstein himself would later disown it and Gödel’s incompleteness theorems would eventually expose the whole exercise as a failure.

Undeterred by centuries of failure, business consultants have tried to sell the same idea to executives. Yet despite fancy names like scientific management, financial engineering and six sigma, these didn’t fare any better. One study found that of 58 large companies that announced Six Sigma programs, 91 percent trailed the S&P 500 in stock performance.

Still, many remain undeterred. The idea of an infallible technocracy is just too tempting for many to resist.

The End Of History And The Washington Consensus

In 1992, Francis Fukuyama published The End of History to great acclaim. The Cold War had ended and capitalism was triumphant. Communism was shown to be a corrupt system bereft of any real legitimacy. It seemed that, as many philosophers had predicted, we had reached an end point in which human sociocultural evolution was complete.

A new ideology took hold, often referred to as the “Washington Consensus,” that preached fiscal discipline, free trade, privatization and deregulation. The world was going to be remade in capitalism’s image. Countries that hit hard times would be offered aid from multilateral institutions like the IMF and the World Bank in return for favored policy reforms.

Many pointed out that international bureaucrats were mandating policies for developing nations that citizens in their own countries would never accept. Strict austerity programs led to human costs that were both significant and real. In a sense, the Soviet error was being repeated. Ideology was being put before people.

Yet Fukuyama’s message had been misunderstood. His book was not meant as a prophecy, but as a warning. He pointed to the ancient Greek concept of thymos, a spirited blend of dignity and pride, to caution against rationalist explanations for human behavior. Given a choice between a well trod path and one less certain, he predicted that many will “set their eyes on a new and more distant journey.”

The Silicon Valley Myth

I was working on Wall Street in 1995 when the Netscape IPO hit like a bombshell. It was the first big Internet stock and, although originally priced at $14 per share, it opened at double that amount and quickly zoomed to $75. By the end of the day, it had settled back at $58.25 and, just like that, a tiny company with no profits was worth $2.9 billion.

It seemed crazy, but economists soon explained that certain conditions, such as negligible marginal costs and network effects, would lead to “winner take all markets” and increasing returns to investment. Venture capitalists who bet on this logic would, in many cases, become rich beyond their wildest dreams.

The conditions for increasing returns, however, only apply to a narrow swath of businesses, mostly limited to software and electronic gadgets. Nevertheless, entrepreneurs and their investors became convinced that they could apply the Silicon Valley model anywhere, leading to high profile failures like WeWork and Theranos.

That’s the Silicon Valley myth, that the rational logic of code can be applied to any problem. It’s the same fantasy that has been repeated throughout history, handed from Cartesians to logical positivists to “scientific” managers and now to the software engineers, puffed up with stock options who can’t seem to understand why everyone else doesn’t “get it.”

The costs have been substantial. Evidence suggests that the billions wantonly plowed into massive failures are crowding out real businesses. Productivity has been depressed for half a century. The Facebook papers revealed a culture that has lost its way, so single-mindedly focused on optimizing engagement it lost sight of the humanity it was supposed to engage.

Identity, Dignity And Purpose

If you believe in a rational Cartesian universe, a business is little more than a set of transactions. The nature of the firm, in this view, is simply to minimize transaction costs and skilled managers should focus on maximizing bargaining power among stakeholders in order to build a sustainable competitive advantage. Yet the world doesn’t actually work that way.

Consider the ultimatum game. One player is given a dollar and needs to propose how to split it with another player. If it is accepted, both players get the agreed upon shares. If it is not accepted, neither player gets anything. If the world was completely rational, the second player would accept even a single penny. After all, a penny is better than nothing.

Yet decades of experiments across different cultures show that most people do not accept a penny. In fact, offers of less than 30 cents are routinely rejected as unfair. It offends people’s dignity and sense of self. For many of the same reasons, there is increasing evidence that financial targets don’t motivate employees. No one wants to be a cog in someone else’s wheel.

That is the value of purpose. It bolsters, rather than undermines, our identity. When people feel that they are part of a common project, they feel a sense of ownership, that they are ends in themselves rather than means to an end. It uplifts, rather than demeans, us. It fortifies, rather than undermines, our spirit.

What separates great leaders from mediocre managers is that the leaders do more than calculate, they provide meaning to an endeavor that makes it more than merely a common enterprise. It becomes a collective mission.

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— Image credits: 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.






Six Key Habits of Great Leaders

Six Key Habits of Great Leaders

GUEST POST from David Burkus

In a world of growing complexity and seemingly constant crisis, we need great leaders more than ever. But when you look at the stories in the press or check the staggering numbers of burnout and disengagement in surveys, it seems like fewer and fewer leaders are rising to the challenge. It starts to seem like becoming a great leader is too complicated and nearly impossible.

But when you survey people on what makes them appreciate and follow leaders, it turns out there are just a few simple habits that set great leaders apart. Simple, but not necessarily easy.

In this article, we will explore what great leaders do across six key habits that make them influential and their teams successful.

1. Promote Purpose

The first habit great leaders do is to promote purpose. Great leaders understand the importance of connecting the larger organizational purpose to specific projects and tasks. They are able to do more than regurgitate the mission statement of the organization. They can draw a connection between the organizational purpose and the work of their specific team. In doing so, they inspire their team members to see the bigger picture and understand how their contributions align with the overall goals. Furthermore, great leaders shift the conversation towards “who” benefits from the work and promote pro-social purpose. This helps team members feel a sense of fulfillment and motivation in their work, knowing that they are making a positive impact.

2. Clarify Vision

The second habit great leaders do is to clarify vision. A clear vision is crucial for the success of any organization, and great leaders excel at explaining what success looks like and where the organization is heading. They are able to paint a vivid picture of the world or the specific people the organization serves and what it will look like when the vision is achieved. Even when plans change, great leaders provide a clear vision of what a good job looks like. They use the concept of “commander’s intent” to communicate the vision of a successful mission, ensuring that even in constant turmoil, everyone understands the desired outcome and can align their efforts accordingly.

3. Create Accountability

The third habit great leaders do is to create accountability. Great leaders understand the importance of holding people accountable to their jobs and calling them up to a higher standard. They ensure that individuals are held accountable to the result, not just the tasks. By providing the necessary resources for individuals to achieve their goals, great leaders empower their team members to take ownership of their work and deliver exceptional results. Leaders provide autonomy to team members, allowing them to decide how the work gets done. But they’re also reminding everyone on the team that autonomy means greater accountability to the team, not less. They are leaders who hold their team to a higher standard and encourage them to perform even greater.

4. Provide Fair Feedback

The fourth habit great leaders do is provide fair feedback. Feedback is a crucial tool for growth and development, and great leaders excel at providing fair feedback. They tailor their feedback to the individual’s situation, skills, resources, and accountability goals. Great leaders give feedback that is in equal proportion of positive to negative, focusing on building upon the great things. Poor leaders often spend most of their coaching time on constructive criticism—which can be demotivating and decrease performance. Instead, great leaders create a balance between appreciation and constructive criticism to motivate and improve performance, ensuring that team members feel valued and supported in their professional growth.

5. Build Safety

The fifth habit great leaders do is to build safety, as in psychological safety. A psychologically safe environment is essential for fostering innovation and growth, and great leaders understand this. They provide feedback in a way that does not blame individuals for things outside of their control, encouraging transparent and honest conversations about failures to extract lessons and improve. By establishing a culture of safety, great leaders create an atmosphere where team members feel comfortable taking risks and learning from their mistakes. This leads to increased creativity, collaboration, and ultimately, success.

6. Develop Oneself

The final habit great leaders do is to develop themselves. Great leaders recognize the importance of continuous learning and self-improvement. They take responsibility for developing themselves as well as others. With a growth mindset, they actively seek out new information and skills, constantly striving to become better leaders. Great leaders understand that they need to develop themselves in the areas that their team needs in order to be better leaders. By investing in their own growth, they set an example for their team members and inspire them to also pursue personal and professional development.

The habits discussed in this article are what make great leaders worth following. They’re simple, but not necessarily easy. And they need to be done on a regular basis. But great leaders understand the importance of these habits and strive to incorporate them into their leadership style. By promoting purpose, clarifying vision, creating accountability, providing fair feedback, building safety, and developing oneself, leaders can inspire their teams to do their best work ever.

Image credit: Pixabay

Originally published on DavidBurkus.com on August 21, 2023

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






Five Secrets to Being a Great Team Player

Five Secrets to Being a Great Team Player

GUEST POST from David Burkus

Our world requires collaboration. Just about every job now requires collaborating on teams and every employee’s calendar is full of evidence of collaboration. In one study, up to 85% of participants’ work weeks were spent working in direct collaboration or a result of collaboration with a team.

But it can be difficult to collaborate with people whose perspectives, preferences, and personalities are different from our own. Still, getting what you want from your work and career requires being a great team player. And if you want to be a leader, you’ll need to be a great team player first. (And really…that will never stop…even leaders often lead in teams.)

In this article, we’ll outline the five (5) essential qualities needed to become a great team player—and offer a few ways to develop those qualities and get them noticed.

1. Capable

The first quality is that great team players are capable. This is a fundamental quality of anyone working, really. You must have the necessary knowledge, skills, and abilities to do the tasks being asked of you. But on teams, it’s just as important to be seen as capable by the other members of your team. The team needs to know they can rely on you—and that when you say you’ll have something completed it will be completed on time and as you said.

Working with teams, the way you demonstrate your capability is two-fold: Do what you say you’re going to do, and don’t say something you don’t know to be true. Over time, keeping these two commitments will demonstrate that you can be relied on—because you are capable.

2. Humble

The second quality is that great team players are humble. While great team players are capable, they also don’t think too highly of the skills and knowledge they have. Great team players don’t think little of themselves, they just understand that the needs of the team come before their own. Humble teammates aren’t fighting for their ideas to be heard all the time or seeking to dominate in debates. Instead, they use their voice to amplify others and contribute the bigger, team-wide wins.

Working with teams, humility is often inferred based on behavior in meetings, whether in-person or virtual. Humble teammates aren’t trying to be the lead role in the meeting, instead they’re often acting as a facilitator ensuring every teammate has a chance to speak. And when they do speak, it’s often to build upon others’ ideas instead of constantly insisting on their own.

3. Helpful

The third quality is that great team players are helpful. The best way to put capabilities and humility into practice is by helping others on the team—not constantly trying to convince others to help you. Great team players are the ones in meetings thinking about what they can contribute and how they can help others get unstuck. At the same time, it’s important to be careful not to over-help and lose the needed time to complete your own commitments.

Working with teams, the easiest way to assess your helpfulness is to audit your calendar. Look at everything scheduled on your calendar last week and compared the appointments that furthered your personal goals versus the appointments that helped others hit their goals. You don’t want helpful appointments to dominate, or even be half and half. But if 25 percent of your calendar is spent helping others, then it’s a safe assumption that they see you as helpful.

4. Flexible

The fourth quality is that great team players are flexible. As teams work to complete projects, changes will happen—pivots are required. All work requires flexibility. But often in the face of change many people respond by becoming more stubborn and insisting even more on their original ideas or plan of action. Great team players serve the team by reading the changes in the environment and helping the plan pivot quickly.

Working with teams, the most common changes that require flexibility often happen around priorities. New tasks get added to the team’s list, or environmental changes reshuffle what is urgent. When that happens, taking the lead to check-in with the team and discuss how changes affect priorities can keep the team more productive and keep you seen as a flexible, but high performer.

5. Purposeful

The fifth quality is that great team players are purposeful. All great teams have a sense of purpose behind their work—they know why their work matters and that keeps them bonded together and motivated to achieve more. Great team players amplify this purpose by becoming a source of supporting stories and constant reminders about that purpose. This includes not just talking about why the work that team does matters, but also how it fits into the larger mission or vision of the organization and why that matters.

Working with teams, the easiest way to reinforce purpose is to share gratitude on a regular basis. But not just any old thank you note. Purposeful gratitude expresses appreciation for the effort someone else put in, but also includes a reminder of how that effort helped serve the purpose of the team. Regularly done, it not only builds camaraderie amongst the team, but it also enhances motivation.

As you review this list, one or two qualities probably stood out as ones you already embodied—but one or two probably stood out as ones you need to work on. That’s true for nearly everyone, and it creates a great plan of action. Get started improving where you need to—and get started getting noticed where you already shine. That will help you not only raise your own performance, but help support everyone else on the team as they do their best work ever.

Image credit: Unsplash

Originally published at https://davidburkus.com on April 10, 2023

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






The Shareholder Value Myth

The Shareholder Value Myth

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

The Business Roundtable, an influential group of almost 200 CEOs of America’s largest companies, a few years ago issued a statement that discarded the old notion that the sole purpose of a business is to provide value to shareholders. Instead, it advocated serving a diverse group of stakeholders including customers, employees, suppliers and communities.

The idea is not a new one. In fact, Jack Welch once called shareholder value the dumbest idea in the world. Nevertheless, The Wall Street Journal opinion page immediately pounced, suggesting that the move was just an attempt to “appease the socialists” and that it would undermine financial accountability.

It’s hard to see how acknowledging accountability to stakeholders other than investors would undermine accountability to investors. Shareholders, after all, have the power to fire CEOs. Even more importantly though, the notion that performance can be reduced down to a single metric is foolhardy and dangerous. Managing a business is simply tougher than that.

The Principal-Agent Problem

Every business seeks to make a profit. Ones that do not achieve that basic requirement do not stay in business for long. However, that doesn’t mean that the only reason a business exists is to make money. Clearly, in order to earn a profit over the long term, you need to provide value for others. Anybody who has ever run a business knows this.

Yet a large corporation is very different from an ordinary business in that there is what’s known as a principal-agent problem. The shareholders are a dispersed group that have relatively little information, while the managers of the business are a small group with an asymmetric informational advantage.

So you can see how the concept of shareholder value can be attractive. If you can reduce performance down to a single metric, such as stock performance, then the principal-agent problem is solved. Shareholders, as principal owners of the company, can hold managers, as their agents, accountable.

Yet this is a fantasy. There are many things that a manager can do, such as reducing investment or making a lot of sexy acquisitions, that can increase short-term financial performance, but hurt performance in the long run. So the concept of shareholder value has always been a murky one.

From Value Chains To Ecosystems

For decades, the dominant view of strategy was based on Michael Porter’s ideas about competitive advantage. In essence, he argued that the key to long-term success was to dominate the value chain by maximizing bargaining power among suppliers, customers, new market entrants and substitute goods.

Yet there was a fatal flaw in the notion that wasn’t always obvious. In an industrial economy, where technology is relatively static, value chains are stable. However, in a fast moving information economy, firms increasingly depend on ecosystems to compete. That drastically changes the game.

Ecosystems are nonlinear and complex. Power emanates from the center instead of at the top of a value chain. You move to the center by connecting out. So while an industry giant may possess significant bargaining power, exercising that bargaining power can be problematic, because it can weaken links to other nodes in the ecosystem.

So the increased emphasis on stakeholders is not merely some newfound socialistic altruism, but a realistic strategic shift. In a networked-driven world you need to continually widen and deepen links to other stakeholders within the ecosystem. That’s how you gain access to resources like talent, technology and information.
Building Power Through Gaining Trust

In a famous 1937 paper, Nobel Prize winning economist Ronald Coase argued that the function of a firm was to minimize transaction costs, especially information costs. For example, it makes sense to keep employees on staff, even if you might not need them today, so that you don’t need to search for people tomorrow when a job comes in.

Another way to minimize transaction costs is through building trustful relationships. If the stakeholders within ecosystems that you operate trust you, you gain greater access to information and decrease the amount of resources you need to spend on enforcing formal and informal norms. In fact, a study from Accenture Strategy recently found that building trust with stakeholders is increasingly becoming a competitive advantage.

In The Good Jobs Strategy MIT’s Zeynep Ton found that investing more in well-trained employees can actually lower costs and drive sales in the low-cost retail industry. While the sector is often thought of as highly transactional, her research indicates that a dedicated and skilled workforce results in less turnover, better customer service and greater efficiency.

For example, when the recession hit in 2008, Mercadona, Spain’s leading discount retailer, needed to cut costs. But rather than cutting wages or reducing staff, it asked its employees to contribute ideas. The result was that it managed to reduce prices by 10% and increased its market share from 15% in 2008 to 20% in 2012.

In other cases, competitors collaborate to improve their industrial ecosystems for customers. So it is should not be surprising that firms are increasingly investing in structures that are focused on ecosystems, such as Internet of Things Consortium, Partnership on AI and the Manufacturing Institutes. Again, power in an ecosystem resides at the center, not at the top, so to compete you have to connect.

Clearly, it could be argued that by investing in these partnerships, business are increasing shareholder value. However, to do so would be to essentially argue that investing in stakeholder ecosystems and pursuing shareholder value are equivalent, which reduces the debate to one of semantics rather than substance.

Manage For Mission, Not For Metrics

Perhaps one of the most interesting lines in the Business Roundtable statement was the assertion that “each of our individual companies serves its own corporate purpose,” because it acknowledges that the notion of purpose can’t be reduced to a single concept or metric.

Historically, the lines between industries were fairly clear-cut. Ford competed with GM and Chrysler. Later, foreign competition became more important, but the basic logic of the industry remained fairly stable: you produced cars and sold them to the public through a network of dealers.

Today, however, industry lines have blurred considerably. A company like Amazon competes with Walmart in retail, Microsoft, IBM and Google in cloud computing, and Netflix and Warner Media in entertainment. The company itself is much more than simply a bundle of operations competing in different value chains, but a platform for accessing a variety of ecosystems of talent, technology and information.

In much the same way, automobile manufacturers are making investments to transform themselves into mobility companies. To do so, they are building ecosystems made up of technology giants, startups and others. They are not seeking to “maximize bargaining power,” but rather to prepare for a future that hasn’t taken shape yet.

That’s why today, business leaders need to manage for mission, not for metrics. Building trustful relationships among a diverse set of stakeholders may not be as simple or as clear cut as “maximizing shareholder value,” but it’s increasing what profit-seeking businesses need to do to compete.

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— 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.






Why Consumers Demand Purpose-Led Brands

Authenticity as a Differentiator

Why Consumers Demand Purpose-Led Brands

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In the past, competitive advantage was primarily defined by two metrics: price and feature set. A better product at a lower cost was the undeniable formula for market dominance. That formula is now obsolete. As a human-centered change and innovation thought leader, I argue that in today’s hyper-transparent, socially conscious economy, the ultimate non-replicable differentiator Authenticity. Consumers — particularly younger generations — are no longer just buying products; they are funding missions, endorsing values, and investing in brands that clearly and consistently demonstrate a purpose beyond profit. They demand purpose-led brands, and they use their purchasing power as a moral compass.

Authenticity is the seamless, genuine alignment between what a brand says, what a brand does, and what a brand believes. It is the absence of the “Purpose Gap” — the space between stated values (on the website) and observable behavior (in the supply chain or corporate policy). In the age of social media, where a single misstep or act of hypocrisy can be exposed globally and lead to immediate reputational crisis (often termed “cancel culture”), this gap is an existential threat. Conversely, a brand that lives its purpose creates an emotional resonance that transcends mere transaction, fostering loyalty that is fiercely resilient to price competition and feature parity.

The Three Pillars of Authentic Differentiation

For organizations to embed authenticity and purpose as strategic differentiators, they must focus on three core pillars:

  • 1. Consistency Across the Human Experience (Internal Alignment): Purpose must be lived first by the people. Employees are the brand’s first and most vocal authenticators. If the purpose doesn’t inform hiring, talent development, and daily operational policies, it fails immediately. This internal alignment is the bedrock of credibility that attracts and retains mission-driven talent, fueling the engine of innovation.
  • 2. Transparency in Action and Failure (Proof, Not Claims): Customers are skeptical of glossy claims. Authenticity requires radical transparency in demonstrating how the purpose is achieved. This means sharing progress metrics, admitting to shortcomings, and disclosing the difficult trade-offs made in pursuit of the mission. Proof of effort and an honest accounting of failure is more valuable than a claim of perfection.
  • 3. Co-Creation of Impact (Customer Empowerment): Purpose-led brands empower consumers to be active participants in the mission, not just passive donors. By allowing consumers to see their purchase directly contribute to the stated purpose, the brand moves from being a seller of goods to a facilitator of shared impact, deepening loyalty and providing critical feedback on how the mission can be innovated.

“Purpose is not a marketing campaign you run. It’s a design constraint you live by. If it doesn’t cost you something, it’s not a real purpose, and your customers know it.”


Case Study 1: TOMS – Institutionalizing Purpose-Driven Giving

The Challenge:

TOMS entered the highly competitive, low-barrier-to-entry footwear market, needing a powerful, unique reason for consumers to choose them over established, cheaper, or more fashionable brands.

The Authenticity Solution:

TOMS institutionalized purpose through its One for One® model. By making a direct, measurable commitment — for every pair of shoes purchased, a pair was given to a person in need — TOMS made its purpose a non-negotiable part of the product’s identity. The purchase wasn’t just acquiring footwear; it was participation in a charitable act. This wasn’t charity tacked on; it was the core business model, creating immediate, powerful differentiation and focusing early innovation efforts on scalable giving logistics.

The Market Impact:

This model created an instant, powerful emotional connection, turning customers into advocates who marketed the mission. While the model itself evolved over time (later shifting to commit one-third of profits to grassroots efforts), the original authenticity established TOMS as a pioneer of the purpose-led business. It proved that purpose, when baked into the economic structure, can justify a price premium and build profound loyalty that traditional advertising simply cannot achieve.


Case Study 2: Patagonia – Consistency and Environmental Advocacy

The Challenge:

Patagonia operates in the apparel industry, notorious for fast fashion, high waste, and opaque supply chains. Their challenge was maintaining authenticity while scaling globally, knowing that every business decision could be viewed as a compromise to their core environmental mission.

The Authenticity Solution:

Patagonia differentiates by making difficult, often counter-intuitive decisions that prove their commitment. Key examples include their infamous “Don’t Buy This Jacket” campaign, which directly challenged consumerism, and their dedication to repairing gear, not just replacing it, demonstrating a commitment to product longevity and the circular economy. Crucially, they use radical transparency regarding their supply chain, disclosing environmental footprints, and actively lobbying for climate policy changes—sometimes even taking political stances that risk short-term sales (e.g., suing federal governments over land protection).

The Market Impact:

Patagonia’s actions consistently reinforce its purpose as an environmental activist disguised as a clothing company. This consistency creates deep trust; consumers know that buying Patagonia is an endorsement of specific, aggressive environmental values. This dedication focuses their innovation on material science and durability, while their authenticity allows them to maintain a premium price point and creates a customer base that views the brand as an ally, not just a vendor. This is anti-fragile loyalty — loyalty that is strengthened, not weakened, by the brand’s ethical stance and political action.


The New Mandate: Purpose as the Core Innovation

The time for Purpose Washing
is over. Today’s consumers have highly sophisticated BS detectors and the digital tools to verify claims. For organizations seeking sustainable innovation, the purpose itself must become the core innovation. This means asking: How can our reason for being create value not just for shareholders, but for the world?

Authenticity is the dividend paid on decades of consistent, purpose-led behavior. It is the only true non-replicable competitive advantage remaining in a world where technology and feature parity are easily achieved. Leaders must stop viewing purpose as a charitable add-on and start treating it as a strategic design constraint for every business decision and innovation cycle. When you integrate your purpose so deeply that removing it would fundamentally destroy your business model, you have achieved authentic differentiation. That is the innovation that wins the future.

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.






Connecting Individual Contribution to Organizational Impact

Purpose-Driven Work

Connecting Individual Contribution to Organizational Impact

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In the modern economy, organizations are locked in a perpetual battle for talent, engagement, and sustainable growth. Yet, many leaders overlook the single most powerful, renewable resource at their disposal: the human desire for meaning. As a human-centered change and innovation thought leader, I argue that the future of work is not defined by perks or paychecks alone, but by a deep, authentic connection between an individual’s daily tasks and the organization’s overarching impact. This is the essence of Purpose-Driven Work. When employees understand precisely how their efforts contribute to a mission bigger than the bottom line, their productivity transforms from mere labor into inspired contribution.

The challenge for innovation leaders is moving purpose from a glossy mission statement on the wall to a dynamic, daily operating principle on the shop floor. True purpose-driven work requires a transparent system that links a junior analyst’s spreadsheet update or a warehouse worker’s careful packing directly to the organization’s larger societal or customer value. When this connection is clear, the result is exponential: lower attrition, higher engagement, better customer service, and a powerful engine for organizational resilience and human-centered innovation.

The Three Levers of Purpose Alignment

To institutionalize purpose-driven work, organizations must strategically pull three key levers:

  • 1. The “Why” Transparency: Every employee must not only know the company’s mission but also regularly see proof of that mission in action. This involves transparently sharing impact metrics, customer testimonials, and success stories that highlight the human outcome of the work.
  • 2. Contribution Mapping: Leaders must create clear pathways—literally mapping the work—that show how each department, team, and individual role acts as a critical link in the chain of impact. This eliminates the feeling of being a “cog in the machine” and emphasizes individual ownership of the final result.
  • 3. Amplifying Micro-Innovations: When purpose is clear, employees feel safe and motivated to innovate at the local level. Organizations must create structures to capture and celebrate these small, purpose-aligned improvements, reinforcing the idea that everyone is an innovation driver in the service of the mission.

“Purpose is not a destination; it’s the GPS for daily decision-making. If your people don’t know the destination, they can’t navigate the complex roads of innovation.” — Braden Kelley


Case Study 1: The Healthcare Tech Company – Connecting Code to Care

The Challenge:

A rapidly growing healthcare technology firm, specializing in electronic health records (EHR), found that its software developers were experiencing burnout and disconnection. They understood they built software, but the abstraction of code separated them from the mission of patient care. This led to quality dips and high turnover.

The Purpose-Driven Solution:

The company instituted a mandatory, recurring program called “Empathy Days.” Instead of simply reading bug reports, developers and testers were required to spend a dedicated day each quarter in a hospital or clinic setting, shadowing nurses and doctors who used their software. They witnessed firsthand how a one-second lag in loading patient data could impact a critical decision, or how a poorly designed interface created friction for an overwhelmed medical professional.

The Organizational Impact:

The impact was immediate and profound. The developers, now emotionally invested, returned to their desks with a renewed sense of urgency and accuracy. Bugs were fixed faster, and the quality of user-centered design skyrocketed because the team shifted its focus from meeting feature specifications to reducing friction for the user-in-crisis. Attrition among technical staff dropped by 15%, proving that connecting a technical task (coding) to a human outcome (saving time for a nurse) is a powerful driver of engagement and quality innovation.


Case Study 2: Global Retailer – The Sustainable Supply Chain Steward

The Challenge:

A global apparel retailer had a strong public commitment to sustainability and ethical sourcing, but this purpose felt remote to the logistics and distribution center teams, whose performance was measured almost exclusively by speed and volume (Output Metrics).

The Purpose-Driven Solution:

The retailer fundamentally altered its performance management system to incorporate Purpose-Driven Metrics. They introduced the role of the “Sustainable Supply Chain Steward” at every distribution hub. Employees were trained on the specific environmental impact of packaging choices, waste management, and shipping routes. Their contribution mapping was changed to show: “Your choice of pallet wrap today saved X amount of plastic from landfill, directly supporting the company’s 2030 goal.”

The Organizational Impact:

By empowering front-line employees with purpose and impact data, the organization unlocked a wave of decentralized, cost-saving innovation. Logistics teams began identifying new recycling partnerships and optimizing packaging designs, not because they were told to, but because they were measured and recognized for their contribution to the sustainability mission. The retailer not only saw a measurable reduction in waste and shipping costs but also achieved higher scores in employee satisfaction related to the company’s ethical practices, demonstrating a clear link between local purpose alignment and global brand equity.


The Leadership Imperative: Curating Meaning at Scale

Purpose-driven work is not a motivational poster; it is a systemic leadership commitment. The ultimate responsibility of the innovation leader is to be the chief curator of meaning, ensuring that the work environment constantly reflects the value being created for humanity. This requires intentional transparency regarding impact, courageous willingness to expose employees to the human beneficiaries of their work, and a commitment to measuring Outcome over mere Output.

When you transform a job description from a list of duties to a statement of impact, you stop hiring for compliance and start attracting talent driven by conviction. That conviction — the authentic belief that “my work matters” — is the non-replicable, human-centered competitive advantage that will define the most resilient and innovative organizations of the next decade.

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

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






Metrics for Purpose-Driven Innovation

Measuring What Matters

Metrics for Purpose-Driven Innovation

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In the innovation world, we often fall into the trap of measuring what is easy, not what is essential. We celebrate vanity metrics—the number of patents filed, the size of the R&D budget, or the raw number of ideas generated—while the true measures of impact, those tied to human value and organizational purpose, remain stubbornly abstract. As a human-centered change and innovation thought leader, I am here to argue that the way we measure innovation fundamentally dictates the kind of innovation we pursue. If your metrics are focused solely on short-term financial returns, you will stifle the kind of purpose-driven, deeply impactful innovation that drives long-term success and true societal change. Measuring what matters means placing human outcomes at the heart of your data strategy.

Purpose-driven innovation requires a shift from Output Metrics (e.g., number of projects launched, revenue from new products) to Outcome Metrics (e.g., reduction in customer effort, improvement in employee well-being, quantifiable social impact). The goal is to create a holistic measurement system that tracks not just the financial success of an innovation, but its measurable contribution to the company’s stated mission and its impact on the people it serves. This is about establishing a direct, measurable link between your innovation efforts and your commitment to a future that is not just more profitable, but more human-centered.

The Purpose-Driven Metrics Framework

To accurately measure purpose-driven innovation, leaders must look beyond the balance sheet and adopt a three-tiered framework that captures the human, organizational, and strategic value being created:

  • 1. Human Impact Metrics (The “Heart”): These metrics quantify the change in user and employee experience. They are the strongest signal of purpose alignment. Examples include:
    • Customer Effort Score (CES): Did the innovation make the customer’s life measurably easier?
    • Well-being Index: How did the innovation impact employee stress, engagement, or capacity for deep work?
    • Reduction in Friction: Quantifying the time or steps saved for the user/employee.
  • 2. Learning & Agility Metrics (The “Mind”): These metrics track the efficiency and intelligence of the innovation pipeline itself, rewarding the behaviors that drive continuous change. Examples include:
    • Failure Rate of Experiments: A *healthy* failure rate (e.g., 7 out of 10 ideas fail) shows the team is taking enough risks.
    • Cycle Time Reduction: The time elapsed from ideation to testing.
    • Innovation Literacy Score: A measure of how well employees understand and engage with the innovation process.
  • 3. Purpose Alignment Metrics (The “Mission”): These metrics link innovation directly to the organization’s greater purpose, often encompassing Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) factors. Examples include:
    • Resource Efficiency: Reduction in waste, water, or energy use per unit of output.
    • Inclusion Score: Percentage of new products/services designed to explicitly serve previously underserved communities.
    • Social Value Creation (SVC): A quantifiable measure of positive social impact tied to the innovation’s core function.

“What you measure is what you become. Measure only money, and you’ll create a short-sighted organization. Measure purpose, and you’ll create a resilient future.”


Case Study 1: Patagonia – Measuring Environmental Footprint as a Core Metric

The Challenge:

For decades, Patagonia’s core mission has been “Build the best product, cause no unnecessary harm, use business to inspire and implement solutions to the environmental crisis.” The challenge was how to measure the success of innovation—a new jacket, a revised supply chain—against this specific purpose, rather than just against sales figures.

The Purpose-Driven Solution:

Patagonia innovated its measurement system by making environmental and social impact metrics non-negotiable in the product development lifecycle. They treat their Footprint Chronicles — a detailed public record of the environmental and social impact of their products, from raw material to delivery — as a core innovation metric. For any new product or material, the innovation team is primarily measured on metrics such as:

  • Percentage of Recycled Content: Did the innovation increase the use of recycled or regenerative materials?
  • Reduction in Water/Energy Use: Did the new manufacturing process measurably decrease resource intensity?
  • Fair Trade Certification: Is the innovation elevating the social standard of the supply chain?

The financial success of the product is a secondary, supportive metric. The primary goal is to minimize environmental harm, making purpose the leading indicator for investment.

The Human-Centered Result:

By prioritizing Purpose Alignment Metrics, Patagonia consistently drives innovations like the use of recycled polyester, organic cotton, and radical supply chain transparency. This strategic alignment has fostered fierce customer loyalty and premium pricing, proving that measuring and achieving purpose is the most effective path to enduring financial success.


Case Study 2: Microsoft – Quantifying AI’s Impact on Employee Productivity and Well-being

The Challenge:

Microsoft’s massive investment in AI and tools like Copilot threatened to fall into the classic trap of only measuring adoption or revenue. The true innovation challenge was demonstrating that AI didn’t just automate tasks, but measurably improved the human experience of work — making employees more creative, more focused, and less burdened by “digital debt.”

The Purpose-Driven Solution:

Microsoft developed sophisticated Learning & Agility and Human Impact Metrics to quantify the value of AI in a human-centered way. They moved beyond simple usage rates to metrics like:

  • Focus Time Recovery: Quantifying the number of uninterrupted work hours AI tools helped to create.
  • Meeting Load Reduction: Measuring the percentage decrease in unnecessary or redundant meetings.
  • Cognitive Load Score (in internal studies): Measuring the perceived mental effort required to complete tasks before and after AI integration.

These metrics directly link the technological innovation of AI to the human outcome of enhanced well-being and creativity.

The Human-Centered Result:

By measuring the quality of life improvements, Microsoft ensures its AI innovations are human-centered by design. This strategy allows them to prove that the core value of their technology is not just in efficiency, but in empowering human potential — freeing up time and mental capacity for the uniquely human tasks of judgment, creativity, and empathy. The emphasis on these metrics guides their development teams to optimize for human outcomes, creating a powerful feedback loop for purpose-driven innovation.


Conclusion: The Moral Compass of Measurement

The innovation landscape is complex, but the path to meaningful, resilient growth is clear: Measure your purpose first, and the profits will follow. Your metrics are your moral compass. If you measure only financial return, you will only create financial products. If you measure social impact, employee empowerment, and environmental stewardship, you will create innovations that build a better, more resilient future for everyone.

Leaders must champion this shift, insisting that every new project, product, or pivot carries a dedicated set of Human Impact and Purpose Alignment Metrics. This commitment moves your organization beyond simple performance and into the realm of true significance, proving that the greatest innovations are those that measure and maximize the value they create for humanity.

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.