Shifting Mindsets to Compete in an Ecosystem-Driven World

Shifting Mindsets to Compete in an Ecosystem-Driven World

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

In 1980 Harvard professor Michael Porter published Competitive Strategy, which recommended that firms create advantage by driving efficiencies throughout the value chain and mastering competitive forces by maximizing bargaining power. These concepts drove corporate thinking for decades.

Yet as AnnaLee Saxenian explained in Regional Advantage, around the same time that Porter’s ideas were ascending among CEOs in the establishment industries on the east coast, a very different way of doing business was gaining steam in Silicon Valley. The firms there saw themselves not as isolated fiefdoms, but as part of a larger ecosystem.

Competitive advantage can no longer be reduced to the sum of efficiencies in a value chain, but is embedded in webs of connections. To compete in an ecosystem-driven world, Leaders need to do more than adapt how we deploy assets, we need to look at things differently. It is no longer enough to merely plan and direct action, we need to inspire and empower belief.

Shifting From “Compel And Control” To “Access And Empower”

In the 1920s Henry Ford built the almost completely vertically integrated River Rouge plant. Because the company had the ability to produce just about every facet of its product itself (the plant even had its own steel mill), it had tremendous control over the value chain, making it virtually immune to the bargaining power of suppliers.

However, as the industry matured, other companies began to specialize in particular components. Ford, unable to compete in so many directions, became integrated into the larger ecosystem. In fact, during the financial crisis in 2008, the company’s CEO, Alan Mulally, said this in testimony to Congress:

“In particular, the collapse of one or both of our domestic competitors would threaten Ford because we have 80 percent overlap in supplier networks and nearly 25 percent of Ford’s top dealers also own GM and Chrysler franchises”

In a value-chain-driven world, Ford would have welcomed its competitors’ demise. In an ecosystem-driven-world, however, their collapse would damage nodes that the company itself depended on. Clearly, the principles of competitive advantage have changed. Today your fate depends less on the assets and capabilities you control, than what you can access.

That, in essence, is why we need an ecosystem strategy. Control has become a dangerous illusion. It’s what led to the demise of the East Coast technology companies such as DEC and Data General that AnnaLee Saxenian wrote in her book. By seeking full control of their value chain, they cut off connection to important parts of the ecosystem. When the market and technology shifted, they were left on their own island.

Building Silos Of Excellence

It’s become so common for pundits to complain about organizational silos that few even think about what it means anymore. Why do silos form in the first place? Why do they persist? If silos are so egregious, why are they so common? And once we get rid of them, what takes their place? To “break down silos” and not ask these questions is just lazy thinking.

Silos aren’t necessarily a bad thing. Essentially, they are centers of excellence. It’s true that people who work closely together naturally form a working culture and tacit domain knowledge that can be hard for others to penetrate, but breaking those units apart can undermine the important work they do.

Another problem is that when you reorganize to break down one kind of silo, you inevitably create others. If, for example, your company is organized around functional groups, then you will get poor collaboration around products. But when you reorganize to focus on product groups, you get the same problem within functions.

The truth is that you don’t want to break down silos, you want to connect them. What we need to learn is how to network our organizations to help silos become interoperable with other silos that have complementary resources and areas of areas of expertise. That, essentially, is what an ecosystem is, a network of interoperable networks.

Paradoxically, we need silos of excellence to provide value to the ecosystem in order to get value out. The best way to form a connection is to have something attractive that others want to connect to.

Connecting Silos To Leverage Platforms

It’s become clear that no organization can survive focusing exclusively on capabilities it owns and controls. Today, we need to leverage platforms to access ecosystems of technology, talent and information from a variety of stakeholders, including customers, partners, vendors and open platforms. Yet, that is often easier said than done.

The truth is that while platforms offer enormous possibilities to scale, they also have deep vulnerabilities. Yes, platforms can help connect to capabilities and assets, but they are no substitute for a sound business model that creates, delivers and captures value. That was one problem with Uber, it created connection, but little else.

Organizations that successfully leverage platforms do so with silos of capability at the core. Amazon has leveraged decades of investment in building an unparalleled logistic capability to create a dominant commerce platform. In a similar way, IBM has leveraged its expertise in quantum computing to create a network of like-minded organizations. Corporate Venture Capital (VC) funds leverage industry expertise to access entrepreneurial innovation.

There are a number of ways even small firms can leverage platforms to access ecosystems. The Manufacturing USA Institutes cater to small and medium sized firms. Local universities are often overlooked resources to access deep expertise. Harley Owners Groups are a great example of how firms can leverage their own customer networks.

Strategy Is No Longer A Game Of Chess

Traditionally, strategy has been seen as a game of chess. Wise leaders survey the board of play, plan their moves carefully and execute flawlessly. That’s always been a fantasy, but it was close enough to reality to be helpful. Organizations could build up sustainable competitive advantage by painstakingly building up bargaining power within the value chain.

Yet as Rita McGrath has pointed out, it’s no longer as important to “learn to plan” as it is to “plan to learn.” Today, a better metaphor for strategy is an online role-playing game, where you bring you certain capabilities and assets and connect with others to go on quests and discover new things along the way.

Unlike chess, where everyone knows that their objective is to capture the opponent’s king, in today’s ecosystem-driven world the basis of competition is in continuous flux, so we cannot be absolutely sure of the objective when we start out, or even if our opponent is really an opponent and not a potential ally.

That’s why strategy today requires a more Bayesian approach in which we don’t expect to get things right as much as we hope to become less wrong over time. As I wrote in Harvard Business Review some years ago, “competitive advantage” is no longer the sum of all efficiencies, but the sum of all connections. Strategy, therefore, must be focused on deepening and widening networks of information, talent, partners, and consumers.”

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

Three Ways Teamwork Can Fail

Three Ways Teamwork Can Fail

GUEST POST from David Burkus

Teamwork is a constant in organizational life. You will work on teams for the majority of your career. Some of those teams will be an uplifting, engaging experience—but most will be an average or even a draining experience. Because most teams aren’t high-performing ones. Most teams fail to achieve a level of performance above the average of each individual’s capabilities. Most teams lack what Stephen Covey would call “synergy” but what organizational psychologists call “collective intelligence.”

Collective intelligence happens when a team’s performance on tasks exceeds what would be predicted by averaging the capabilities of each member. Collectively intelligence teams find a way to bring out more from each other than they even expected of themselves. And the inverse is true as well. When teams fail, it’s often because they fail to achieve collective intelligence.

In this article, we’ll outline three different reasons teamwork fails—or at least fails to achieve collective intelligence.

1. Social Loafing

The first reason teamwork fails is social loafing. Social loafing is a phenomenon that can seriously undermine the effectiveness of a team. It refers to individuals who do not fully commit to tasks or deadlines, taking advantage of the interdependence of work in teams. This lack of commitment can lead to missed deadlines, incomplete tasks, and a general decrease in team productivity.

The key to addressing social loafing is accountability. By holding each team member accountable for their assigned tasks, it is possible to remove the opportunity for social loafing. Regular check-ins can also be beneficial, as they allow team leaders to monitor progress and ensure that everyone is pulling their weight. By fostering a culture of accountability, teams can minimize the impact of social loafing and ensure that all members are contributing effectively.

2. Unequal Sharing

The second reason teamwork fails is unequal sharing. This occurs when certain individuals dominate conversations, preventing the full range of ideas from being expressed. When this happens, the benefits of all the team’s diversity are not fully utilized, leading to sub-optimal decision making.

To address unequal sharing, it can be helpful to introduce structure into team meetings. This could involve using timers to ensure that everyone gets a chance to speak or breaking larger teams into smaller groups to facilitate more balanced conversation. Encouraging conversational turn-taking can also be beneficial, as it ensures that all voices are heard.

3. Lack of Social Sensitivity

The third reason teamwork fails is a lack of social sensitivity. This is a less obvious, but equally damaging, issue that can affect team performance. It refers to the inability to perceive and empathize with the emotions and beliefs of others. This lack of empathy can lead to misunderstandings, conflict, and a lack of cohesion within the team.

Increasing social sensitivity within a team can be achieved in several ways. One effective strategy is to add more women to the team, as research has shown that teams with a higher proportion of women tend to have higher levels of social sensitivity. Additionally, taking steps to better understand and empathize with team members can also be beneficial. This could involve team-building exercises, training in emotional intelligence, or simply taking the time to listen and understand each other’s perspectives. By modeling behavior and teaching empathy, teams can become more socially sensitive and therefore more effective.

Building collective intelligence within a team is not always straightforward. It requires careful management and a commitment to fostering a positive team culture. By addressing issues such as social loafing, unequal sharing, and lack of social sensitivity, teams can become smarter and less likely to fail. The strategies outlined in this article provide a starting point for teams looking to improve their effectiveness and achieve their goals.

Image credit: Pixabay

Originally published on DavidBurkus.com on December 10, 2023

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

What Great Ideas Feel Like

What Great Ideas Feel Like

GUEST POST from Mike Shipulski

If you have a reasonably good idea, someone will steal it, make it their own and take credit. No worries, this is what happens with reasonably good ideas.

If you have a really good idea, you’ll have to explain it several times before anyone understands it. Then, once they understand, you’ll have to help them figure out how to realize value from the idea. And after several failed attempts at implementation, you’ll have to help them adjust their approach so they can implement successfully. Then, after the success, someone will make it their own and take credit. No worries, this is what happens with really good ideas.

When you have an idea so good that it threatens the Status Quo, you’ll get ridiculed. You’ll have to present the idea once every three months for two years. The negativity will decrease slowly, and at the end of two years the threatening idea will get downgraded to a really good idea. Then it will follow the wandering path to success described above. Don’t feel special. This is how it goes with ideas good enough to threaten.

And then there’s the rarified category that few know about. This is the idea that’s so orthogonal it scares even you. This idea takes a year or two of festering before you can scratch the outer shell of it. Then it takes another year before you can describe it to yourself. And then it takes another year before you can bring yourself to speak of it. And then it takes another six months before you share it outside your trust network. And where the very best ideas get ridiculed, with this type of idea people don’t talk about the idea at all, they just think you’ve gone off the deep end and become unhinged. This class of idea is so heretical it makes people uncomfortable just to be near you. Needless to say, this class of idea makes for a wild ride.

Good ideas make people uncomfortable. That’s just the way it is. But don’t let this get in the way. More than that, I urge you to see the push-back and discomfort as measures of the idea’s goodness.

If there’s no discomfort, ridicule or fear, the idea simply isn’t good enough.

Image credits: misterinnovation.com (1 of 850+ free quote slides for download)

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.

5 Business Myths You Cannot Afford to Believe

5 Business Myths You Cannot Afford To Believe

GUEST POST from Shep Hyken

Sometimes a business idea or strategy seems to make total sense. Yet once it is implemented, it turns out to be a mistake. We rely upon research, stories and data to help us formulate what might work best. It’s okay to fail. But if you already know something is wrong, don’t make it worse by relying on a flawed business strategy.

I’ve taken some of my favorite topics I’ve researched and written about over the years and uncovered five myths that, while seeming to make sense, could cost you money, customers and maybe even your business. So, with that in mind, here are my five favorite business myths and the explanations behind why believing them cost your organization dearly.

  1. A Repeat Customer Is a Loyal Customer – The customer keeps coming back, so they must be loyal … wrong! Just because a customer comes back doesn’t always mean they love you. You must find out why they keep coming back. Maybe you have a physical location that is two miles closer than your competitor’s location. What if a competitor builds a store between you and your customer? You may find out they were loyal to your location and not to you. Or maybe your price is the lowest. If that’s what the customer loves, guess what happens when your competition offers a lower price? It turns out they were loyal to their wallet, not your store. There are a number of reasons customers come back that have nothing to do with how much they love the experience of doing business with you. But when you find someone who is truly loyal, keep doing what they love about you, and you may have them forever.
  2. We Want Satisfied Customers – This is a perfect follow-up to A Repeat Customer Is a Loyal Customer. No, you don’t want satisfied customers. You want loyal customers. In my customer service and CX research (sponsored by RingCentral), we asked more than 1,000 U.S. consumers if they were to rate an experience as “average” or “satisfactory,” how likely would they be to come back. Almost one in four (23%) said if they had a satisfactory experience, they would not be likely to or would never come back. Satisfactory is average, and the first opportunity the customer has to do business with a place that’s even slightly better than average, it’s a good possibility that they will move on.
  3. Only the Front Line Needs Customer Service Training – Customer service is not a department. It’s a philosophy that everyone in an organization must embrace. Everyone either deals directly with a customer, supports someone who does or is part of the process that drives or supports the customer experience. Someone in the warehouse may never see a customer, but if they fail to pack merchandise properly, they will negatively impact the experience, causing the customer to call and complain and make the company double its effort to send a product that isn’t damaged. Once the employees in the warehouse realize their impact on the experience, they will view their job in a new way and be focused on creating a better customer experience.
  4. Customer Loyalty Programs Create Loyal Customers – Customer loyalty programs are often about points, perks and discounts. An important question to consider is, “If you take those perks away, would the customer still be loyal to you?” That doesn’t mean you should do away with the program. While these types of programs may not drive true loyalty, what they will do is drive repeat business. So, recognize a loyalty program for what it is: a repeat business and marketing program. And if the customer keeps coming back, each and every time is an opportunity (beyond the points and perks) to validate their decision to do so with an experience that will keep them from even considering switching to your competition.
  5. The Customer Is Always Right – No, the customer is NOT always right, but they are always the customer. This is one of my favorite myths. Ten years ago, I wrote an entire article (Your Customers Are Not Always Right) devoted to this concept. For today, I’ll summarize it in one sentence: If the customer is wrong, let them be wrong with dignity and respect.

Don’t make the mistake of believing any of these myths. Rather than clinging to conventional wisdom that sounds good but potentially fails in practice, focus on understanding what’s behind these myths and what will work. Brainstorm with your team how you can “bust” these myths and create the experience that customers love and come back for.

Image Credit: Unsplash

This article was originally published on Forbes.com.

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

Product-Lifecycle Management 2.0

A Kaizen Approach to Market-Driven Innovation

Product-Lifecycle Management 2.0

GUEST POST from Dr. Matthew Heim

In today’s competitive business environment, companies are under constant pressure to innovate, streamline processes, and improve product quality. One powerful way to achieve these goals is by applying the principles of Kaizen—the Japanese concept of continuous improvement—to Product Lifecycle Management (PLM). By viewing PLM as a Kaizen loop, organizations can foster a culture of ongoing innovation and refinement, ensuring that products evolve in line with customer needs, technological advances, and market demands.

In this blog, we’ll explore how managing Product Lifecycle Management as a Kaizen loop can drive better results, improve efficiency, and lead to the creation of superior products that resonate with customers.

What is Product Lifecycle Management (PLM)?

Before we dive into how PLM can benefit from a Kaizen approach, let’s define what PLM is.

Product Lifecycle Management is the process of managing the entire lifecycle of a product from inception, through design and manufacturing, to service and disposal. It involves integrating people, processes, business systems, and information to streamline product development, reduce costs, enhance quality, and improve collaboration across the product’s life.

While PLM has traditionally been seen as a linear process—moving from concept to production and then to end-of-life—a Kaizen loop introduces a more fluid, iterative approach that can enhance every stage of the lifecycle.

What is Kaizen?

Kaizen is a Japanese term that translates to “continuous improvement.” It refers to the practice of making small, incremental improvements in processes, products, or services on a regular basis. Rather than focusing on large, disruptive changes, Kaizen promotes consistent, sustainable improvements through the involvement of all employees.

Incorporating Kaizen into PLM means shifting from a linear, static approach to a dynamic, feedback-driven system where every phase of the product’s life is optimized and refined continuously.

The Kaizen Loop in Product Lifecycle Management

A traditional PLM approach tends to follow a set sequence of stages: concept, design, manufacture, test, launch, and then end-of-life. However, when applying Kaizen, this cycle is treated as an ongoing loop, where each stage is continuously revisited and improved. Here’s how it works:

  1. Define the Initial Goal (Plan)
    The first step in the Kaizen loop is to define the goals for the product, based on customer needs, market research, and business objectives. Involving stakeholders from the Product, Sales and Marketing to ensure the plan’s success is the way to begin. Then, ensure that the product development process is aligned with the company’s strategic drivers. Unlike traditional planning, Kaizen planning doesn’t end here, it merely establishes a baseline for ongoing improvement. Each of the stakeholders involved should plan for feedback loops and potential adjustments early on.
  2. Develop the Product (Develop)
    The next phase involves the design and development of the product. However, under the Kaizen approach, development isn’t a one-time, isolated effort. Rather, it’s a continuous process of iteration. As prototypes are created, the design is continuously tested and refined. Feedback from customers, production teams, and stakeholders is used to make adjustments and enhancements during the development stage.
  3. Measure and Analyze Performance (Review)
    Once the product is in production, it is crucial to continuously monitor and analyze its performance. In a Kaizen-driven PLM environment, this doesn’t just happen at the end of the development cycle. Rather, measurement and analysis are built into every phase. Key performance indicators (KPIs) such as product quality, customer satisfaction, production efficiency, and cost control should be regularly reviewed. This ongoing feedback helps to identify areas for improvement, even after the product is launched.
  4. Implement Improvements (Revise)
    The beauty of Kaizen is its focus on action. Based on the insights gained from the measurement phase, teams are empowered to implement improvements quickly. If customers are experiencing issues, fixes are developed and rolled out rapidly. If new technologies become available that could improve the product, they are incorporated into future iterations. These incremental improvements are the driving force of the Kaizen loop, enabling the product to continuously evolve and stay competitive.
  5. Refinement Through Feedback (Iterate)
    The final step in the Kaizen loop is to integrate the improvements back into the product and into future development. The loop continues, with each cycle bringing new insights, innovations, and refinements to all of the teams involved. This feedback-driven model ensures that every product phase—whether it’s design, manufacturing, or customer feedback—is part of an ongoing process of improvement.

PLM Kaizen Infographic Ezassi

Key Benefits of Managing PLM as a Kaizen Loop

  1. Faster Time-to-Market
    Because Kaizen encourages rapid feedback and iteration, product improvements can be made in real-time. This reduces delays and accelerates the development process, enabling companies to bring products to market more quickly.
  2. Increased Product Quality
    Continuous improvement ensures that the product is constantly evolving based on real-world data and user feedback. This approach leads to higher product quality, as the product is fine-tuned over time and refined based on actual performance.
  3. Better Collaboration and Communication
    Kaizen is inherently a team-driven approach, where everyone from engineers to salespeople to customers has input into the product’s development. This fosters a culture of collaboration and ensures that all perspectives are considered, leading to a more well-rounded and successful product.
  4. Lower Costs
    By focusing on small, incremental improvements, Kaizen minimizes the risk of costly mistakes. Rather than investing large sums in a single, big change, incremental changes allow teams to make improvements more affordably and with fewer risks. Moreover, early identification of inefficiencies during production or design stages helps to avoid costly fixes down the line.
  5. Improved Customer Satisfaction
    Since customer feedback is central to the Kaizen approach, PLM that incorporates Kaizen ensures that products are always aligned with customer needs. This ongoing dialogue with customers leads to higher satisfaction, loyalty, and retention.

Overcoming Challenges in Implementing Kaizen in PLM

While applying Kaizen principles to PLM offers immense benefits, there are some challenges companies may face:

  • Cultural Shift: Employees need to embrace a mindset of continuous improvement, which can require significant cultural change, especially in traditional, hierarchical organizations.
  • Resource Constraints: Regular feedback and iterative improvements require resources, including time and manpower, which can be stretched thin in high-pressure environments.
  • Technology Integration: To enable real-time feedback and iteration, companies must leverage advanced PLM tools, which may require investment in software systems and employee training.

However, the long-term benefits of adopting a Kaizen-driven PLM system often outweigh these challenges. Companies that successfully integrate Kaizen into their PLM processes can look forward to better products, more satisfied customers, enhanced enterprise collaboration and increased profitability.

Conclusion

Product Lifecycle Management, when managed as a Kaizen loop, transforms the traditional product development approach into a dynamic, continuous improvement system. By focusing on incremental, data-driven improvements at every stage of the product’s lifecycle, organizations can produce better products, reduce costs, and improve customer satisfaction.

In an age of fast-changing technology and evolving customer expectations, adopting a Kaizen mindset for PLM can ensure that a company stays ahead of the competition, continually innovating and refining its products to meet the needs of tomorrow.

By embracing Kaizen, PLM becomes not just a process but a philosophy—one that fosters growth, adaptability, and success for the long term.

Ready to implement Kaizen in your PLM process?  Contact Ezassi to learn more about how to put these principles into action.

Image credits: Ezassi

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.

Automation Success More About Trust Than Technology

Automation Success More About Trust Than Technology

GUEST POST from Robyn Bolton

We’ve all seen the apocalyptic headlines about robots coming for our jobs. The AI revolution has companies throwing money at shiny new tech while workers polish their résumés, bracing for the inevitable pink slip. But what if we have it completely, totally, and utterly backward?  What if the real drivers of automation success have nothing to do with the technology itself?

That’s precisely what an MIT study of 9,000+ workers across nine countries asserts.  While the doomsayers have predicted the end of human workers since the introduction of the assembly line, those very workers are challenging everything we think we know about automation in the workplace.

The Secret Ingredient for Technology ROI

MIT surveyed workers across the manufacturing industry—50% of whom reported frequently performing routine tasks—and found that the majority ultimately welcome automation. But only when one critical condition is present. And it’s one that most executives completely miss while they’re busy signing purchase orders for the latest AI and automation systems.

Trust.

Read that again because while you’re focused on selecting the perfect technology, your actual return depends more on whether your team feels valued and believes you are invested in their safety and professional growth.

Workers Who Trust, Automate

This trust dynamic explains why identical technologies succeed in some organizations and fail in others. According to MIT’s research:

  • Job satisfaction is the second strongest indicator of technology acceptance, with a 10% improvement that researchers identified as consistently significant across all analytical models
  • Feeling valued by their employer shows a highly significant 9% increase in positive attitudes toward automation
  • Trust also consistently predicts automation acceptance, as workers scoring higher on trust measures are significantly more likely to view new technologies positively.

For example, Sam Sayer, an employee at a New Hampshire cutting tool manufacturer, has become an automation champion because his employer helped him experience how factory-floor robots could free him from routine tasks and allow him to focus on more complex problem-solving. “I worked in factories for years before I ever saw a robot. Now I’m teaching my colleagues on the factory floor how to use them.”

This contrasts with an aerospace manufacturer in Ohio that hired a third party to integrate a robot into its warehouse processes. Despite the company’s efforts to position the robot as a teammate, even giving it a name, workers resisted the technology because they didn’t trust the implementation process or see clear personal benefits.

These patterns hold across industries and countries: When workers perceive their employer as invested in their development and well-being, automation initiatives succeed. When that foundation is missing, even the most sophisticated technologies falter.

Four Steps to Convert Resistors to Champions

Whether it’s for the factory floor or the office laptop, if you want ROI and revenue growth from your automation investments, start with your people:

  1. Design roles that connect workers to outcomes: When people see how their input shapes results, they become natural technology allies.
  2. Create visible growth pathways. Workers motivated by career advancement are significantly more likely to embrace new technologies.
  3. Align financial incentives with implementation goals. When workers see the personal benefits of adoption, resistance evaporates faster than free donuts in the break room.
  4. Make safety improvements the leading edge of your technology story. It’s the most universally appreciated benefit of automation.

A Provocative Challenge

Ask yourself this (potentially) uncomfortable question: Are you investing as much in trust as you are in technology?

Because if not, you might as well set fire to a portion of your automation budget right now. At least you’d get some heat from it.

The choice isn’t between technology and workers—it’s between implementations that honor human relationships and those that don’t. The former generates returns; the latter generates résumé updates.

What are you choosing?

Image credit: misterinnovation.com (1 of 850+ free quote slides for download)

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

Top 10 Irish Innovations

Top 10 Irish Innovations

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

As we celebrate St. Patrick’s Day, it’s the perfect occasion to shine a spotlight on the influential contributions Ireland has made to the world of innovation. From literary advances to technological marvels, Ireland’s creative spirit is visible across various domains. Here, we celebrate the top 10 Irish innovations that have left a lasting impact on the world – which you may notice doesn’t include the pictured green Guinness.

1. The Hypodermic Syringe

Invented in 1844 by Francis Rynd, the hypodermic syringe revolutionized medicine by enabling the effective delivery of medication directly into the bloodstream. Rynd, a Dublin-based doctor, initially used it to treat neuralgia, setting the stage for modern medical injections.

2. The Submarine

Born in County Clare, John Philip Holland was a visionary engineer who developed the modern submarine. His designs attracted the attention of the U.S. Navy, cementing his role as a pioneer in underwater navigation and laying the groundwork for the submarines used today.

3. The Guided Torpedo

Largely attributed to Louis Brennan in 1874, the guided torpedo was a significant advancement in military technology. Brennan’s innovation allowed for precise control and improved the accuracy of naval operations, fundamentally changing maritime warfare.

4. Color Photography

John Joly, a geologist and physicist, introduced a pioneering method for color photography in 1894. By developing a technique that layered multiple transparent images, Joly’s work paved the way for future color photographic advancements and transformed visual documentation.

5. The Portable Defibrillator

In 1965, Frank Pantridge introduced the portable defibrillator, a pivotal invention in the medical field. This breakthrough allowed for immediate cardiac care outside of hospital settings, significantly increasing survival rates in emergencies and becoming a staple in ambulances and public spaces worldwide.

6. The Modern Tractor

Harry Ferguson, hailing from County Down, invented the modern-day tractor and the three-point linkage system. This innovation mechanized agriculture and greatly increased farming efficiency, transforming agricultural practices worldwide.

7. The Induction Coil

Nicholas Callan, a priest and scientist, invented the induction coil in the 1830s, a crucial component in the development of wireless communication and electronics. It laid the foundation for radio technology and countless other electronic applications.

8. Boole’s Algebra

George Boole, with significant contributions made during his time in Cork, developed Boolean algebra, a mathematical framework critical to computer science and digital electronics. This innovation forms the basis of computer logic systems and programming.

9. Flavored Crisps

Joseph ‘Spud’ Murphy, founder of Tayto, invented the first flavored crisps in 1954. This innovation added a new dimension to snacks, giving rise to a whole industry of flavored snacks enjoyed globally.

10. The Ejection Seat

Designed by James Martin, the ejection seat has saved countless lives in aviation emergencies. His innovative design provided pilots with a life-saving escape option and is an essential safety feature in modern aircraft.

In conclusion, Irish innovations have made substantial contributions to different fields, enhancing lives and propelling technological progress. As we celebrate St. Patrick’s Day, it’s important to honor these achievements and reflect on the inventive spirit that continues to drive Ireland forward.

Image credit: Dall-E via Microsoft CoPilot

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






Leveraging Storytelling for Innovation

Leveraging Storytelling for Innovation

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

Some years back I was invited to visit the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. Over the years many of the world’s greatest minds have taken up residence there. It was where Einstein worked till his death in 1955. It is a place, for me at least, in which stories permeate from every corner and crevice.

There is a common room in the main building, Fuld Hall, where tea is served every afternoon and, if you know the stories, you can almost hear the din of legends arguing, cajoling and discussing pathbreaking ideas when you enter. That is the power of story. It can imbue even inanimate objects with meaning.

Look at great leaders throughout history, from General George Patton to Martin Luther King Jr. to Steve Jobs, and they all used the power of story to anchor an enterprise with a sense of mission and destiny. It was undoubtedly a big part of their success. We need to learn to tell better stories, if we are to give meaning to others and build faith in a common endeavor.

The Structure Of A Story

The first element of any story is its exposition, which is the world you build around the story and includes the setting, the characters and other background information. This often comes at the beginning of the story, but it doesn’t have to. Sometimes, elements of the setting or details about the characters are leaked out as the plot develops.

The most important aspect of any story is the tension or conflict to be resolved. That’s what keeps the audience’s interest. Will the hero survive? Does the boy end up with the girl? Will justice prevail? It is the uncertainty surrounding the tension that makes a story interesting. A preordained story is a bore.

Finally, the conflict needs to be resolved in some way that is satisfying. That doesn’t mean that the characters in the story end up happy—in fact, often it’s exactly the opposite—but if the main conflict is never resolved the audience will feel cheated. So however the story ends, with a lesson learned, a triumphant hero or a tragic loss, it has to resolve the conflict.

These are the essential elements of a story: exposition, conflict, and resolution. They don’t need to be told in order. In fact, master storytellers often put the conflict first, before we know much about the setting, and then let things develop over time. In a TV streaming environment writers have months or even years to resolve the tension, which allows for greater exploration and deeper storytelling.

Identifying A Meaningful Problem

The key to telling a good story is to identify a source of conflict that your audience cares about. That’s easier said than done. Just because a story is meaningful to you, doesn’t mean it will hit home for others. Yet just because a story doesn’t resonate immediately doesn’t mean you should give up on it. Even finding the right narrative is often trial and error even for the best storytellers.

Ed Catmull, CEO of Pixar, insists that “early on, all of our movies suck.” In Creativity Inc, he wrote that his company’s initial ideas are “ugly babies” that are “awkward and unformed, vulnerable and incomplete.” “Originality is fragile,” he continues. “Our job is to protect our babies from being judged too quickly. Our job is to protect the new.”

The reason new stories need protecting is that we experience them differently than our audience. They immediately make sense to us because they are ours. We often lose sight of the fact that others don’t share our particular context. Often, even a slight change in how we shape the details can make a big difference.

The only way to refine a story is by telling it, seeing which parts the audience reacts to and experimenting with different methods of delivery. That’s why big-time comedians spend time in small comedy clubs trying out new material. When I’m writing a book or working on a new conference talk, I always try out different versions in blog posts to see what resonates.

The bottom line is that just because a problem is meaningful to you doesn’t mean it’s meaningful to everyone else. It takes work to identify a story—or an aspect of a story—that connects.

Charting The Hero’s Journey

There are many ways to tell a story. But one of the most common is the hero’s journey. Which involves different variations of a departure, an initiation, and a return. Usually the hero is transformed by the journey in some way, but sometimes the hero transforms the world around him, for better or for worse.

For example, in the original Star Wars, we met Luke Skywalker as a restless boy on Tatooine. The hologram he unlocked in R2D2 kicked off his departure onto the journey, during which he was initiated in the ways of “The Force.” After Luke uses The Force to aim the shot that destroys the Death Star, he and his friends return to the rebel base to a hero’s welcome.

What makes the hero’s journey compelling is not so much the sequence of events, but how the characters are tested and revealed. David Mitchell, author of bestsellers like Cloud Atlas, points out that we find enigmatic characters, like Darth Vader, more interesting than one dimensional caricatures because they lack moral clarity.

It is the uncertainty about how the story will end that keeps the audience interested in it, which is why coming up with interesting tension is so important. It is also what opens up the possibility of leveraging a story into a strategic narrative.

Unlocking The Strategic Narrative

Stories have the power to unite us because their themes are universal. We can all relate to a hero, identify with their struggle and then revel in their triumph or, as is sometimes the case, learn a lesson from their tragedy. By telling a familiar story in an unfamiliar context, we can also gain insight and understanding into the hopes and fears of others.

The only problem with stories, as John Hagel has pointed out, is that they are self-contained—they have a beginning, a middle and an end. Narratives, like Darth Vader, are less clear cut. They are open ended and still to be determined. In other words, a narrative is a story that is still in progress and that we can still participate in and influence.

Narratives can become strategic when they give meaning to a mission. Southwest’s strategic narrative to be “THE low cost airline,” helped it rocket past the competition. Steve Jobs’ insistence on creating products that were “insanely great” helped make Apple the most valuable company on the planet. General Stanley McChrystal’s revelation that “to defeat a network you need to become a network,” turned things around for the US military in Iraq.

That’s what makes the art of storytelling so powerful and so important. When Shakespeare’s King Henry needed his soldiers to fight, he did not offer to raise their pay or threaten them with the stockade, but told a story to inspire them to go “Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more…”

In the final analysis, we live our lives not for external rewards, but for intrinsic meaning and we determine meaning through the stories we tell, the narratives we adopt and the missions to which we dedicate the best of our talents and energies.

— 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.






Inspiring Innovation

How a fifty year old concert still has a lot to teach us about innovation

Inspiring Innovation

GUEST POST from John Bessant

24th January, 1975. Fifty years ago and a concert that shouldn’t have happened. Forget the Taylor Swift ‘Eras’ level of organization; this was a small performance in a relatively small concert hall in Cologne, Germany. The performer was tired after the long (600km) drive from Switzerland where he’d played his previous concert only a couple of days earlier. His energy level was low plus he had back pain from a nagging problem which sitting for hours in the old Renault 4 belonging to his record producer hadn’t helped. He was committed to the evening because it was a recording session; his company wanted a live concert and this seemed a good option.

The venue was impressive; the old Cologne Opera House, site of some of the greatest concerts in musical history going back centuries. But this time something had gone badly wrong with the planning — at least as far as the piano on which he was to play was concerned. On a stage normally associated with the finest instruments — Steinways, Bechsteins, Bosendorfers and the like — there had been a mix-up.

Managing innovation is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

The instrument which had been requested was a Bosendorfer 290 Imperial but unfortunately the backstage staff had misinterpreted this and instead wheeled out a much smaller Bosendorfer baby grand, one normally only used for backstage warm ups. This wasn’t in the best of condition; its sound was tinny and thin in the upper registers and weak in the bass, the pedals didn’t work properly and the machine was badly in need of tuning.

The organizers desperately tried to secure a replacement instrument but were told that even if one could be found transporting it across town in the middle of the rainstorm which had started outside would risk damaging it. Instead a piano tuner set to work to try and minimize the problems of the smaller instrument with several heroic hours of attention.

Not surprisingly our performer’s first reaction on arriving and discovering this was to climb back in his car and drive away. There are limits, especially when what you really want is a long soak and perhaps a couple of painkillers washed down with a cheering drink. But Vera Brandes, the 18 year old woman who had organized the concert pleaded with him; she’d put everything she could into the event and managed to sell it out. But her would-be career as an impresario might be cut short before she started if he didn’t perform; the audience faced disappointment, she faced ruin if the concert didn’t happen. As she put it ’ ….if you don’t play tonight I’m going to be truly f***ed!…’ Dramatic perhaps but it touched a nerve and he agreed to go back into the hall and see whether they could salvage anything.

The concert was scheduled as a late night event, beginning after an earlier opera performance had finished. With the piano tuner working away even as he warmed up his hands the young pianist tried to get his mind in gear. The performance was to be in his signature style — a series of improvisations. So his mind needed to be able to rise above the challenges and somehow create space for, well, creating. At 11.30pm — with a loyal audience of 1300 people in their seats and patiently waiting for the auditorium bell to ring to signal the start of the show. He took his cue from this, echoing the bell’s notes as the first bars of his improvisation.

And so began a performance which has become a legend — and, thanks to the fact that it doubled as a recording session, one which was captured for others to enjoy. It still entrances fifty years later. The Köln Concert is arguably Keith Jarrett’s most famous work and probably the one which best demonstrates his enormous talent for improvisation. Despite — or perhaps because of — the conditions being so unfavorable he spun a web of genius, soaring from one rippling idea to the next with hardly a pause in between. His first piece lasted 26 minutes; after the briefest of pauses he began the second which went on for 48 minutes.

At the end of the show there was silence followed by rapturous applause. Something magical had happened and is still remembered, fifty years and four million copies on. Winner of multiple awards it is still the best-selling solo piano album of all time.

And it has a lot to offer as an object lesson in the art of innovation. First it’s useful to remind ourselves that innovation isn’t always about having plenty of resources. In these straitened times there’s a lot of concern that this will drive out innovation but, as Jarrett demonstrated, sometimes creativity loves constraints. From the most unpropitious of circumstances he was able to create something radically different.

Music Innovation

The old phrase ‘if life gives you lemons, make lemonade’ has often been used to describe the entrepreneurial skill of effectuation — and that was certainly a characteristic of this concert. Faced with the challenges imposed by the instrument he used various techniques like rolling left-hand figures to augment the weak bass while he concentrated his playing in the middle of the keyboard.

He was forced to jump the tracks and follow a different line to the ‘normal’ — getting out of the box. He isn’t alone; we have many examples where crisis and constraint have been powerful agents in forcing new directions. Think of the revolution in manufacturing which the ‘lean thinking’ movement brought about, one which spread to services and then the public sector. It was an approach born on the heavily constrained factory floors of post-war Japan. Faced with shortages of expensive raw materials, a lack of equipment, money and skilled labor they were forced to find new ways of working. And they evolved a suite of process innovations which changed the world.

Or our more recent experience with Covid-19 where the crisis conditions forced new approaches and forged new ways of solving the problems posed by the pandemic, not least in protective equipment and vaccine development.

This is, sadly, the kind of context in which humanitarian agencies operate all the time, trying to mitigate suffering and improve conditions under severe constraints. Importantly solutions developed in this space not only represent impressive examples of ‘frugal’ innovation but often signpost new trajectories for wider application. Developing the capabilities for working in crisis conditions as the norm builds powerful entrepreneurial capabilities which can be redeployed in other situations. Just as cold water swimming is now associated with wider health benefits so the shock of having to work under different conditions may be an important strategic aid.

Interestingly there is growing research interest in the idea of ‘forced crisis’ as a source of creativity. Artists have tried to force their work in new directions by introducing constraints. Record producer Brian Eno is famous for his use of a deck of cards — his ‘oblique strategies’ — which effectively randomizes roles and behaviors in a recording studio, forcing just the kind of crisis which confronted Keith Jarrett. And the results are similar; some great work by artists like David Bowie or U2 owes a lot to this technique. Lars von Trier, the film director, used a similar approach in his film appropriately titled ‘The five obstructions’ which documents the challenges he posed fellow film maker Jurgen Leth in order to try and force new creative pathways.

There’s more than a little of another skill we associate with entrepreneurs — bricolage. The ability to make something out of what is available, not wishing for what isn’t. And creatively combining it to make something new. Once again we have plenty of reference points. For example:

Dr Willem Kolff, the ‘father of dialysis’, was a Dutch physician who constructed the first dialyzer in 1943 in the occupied city of Groningen. Because materials were so scarce during the war, Kolff had to improvise and this resulted in the first dialyzer being made from sausage skins, orange juice cans, and old washing machine parts.

GE’s simple ECG machine (the MAC 400) was originally developed for use in rural India but has become widely successful in other markets because of its simplicity and low cost. It was developed in 18 months for a 60% lower product cost yet offers most of the key functions needed by healthcare professionals. It cost $800, instead of $2,000 for a conventional ECG machine, and reduced the cost of an ECG to just $1 (50 rupees) per patient. Newer versions have reduced this further to just 10 rupees per scan.

A key part this ‘frugal’ approach was the re-use of ideas and technology developed elsewhere, combined with adapting off-the-shelf parts. For example, the machine’s printer is an adaptation of one used in bus terminal kiosks across India.

A third aspect of the concert is important; taking risks and learning by doing. Prototyping on the fly. Jarrett’s style is classic improvisation, picking an idea and then running with it. In stand-up comedy and theater workshop improvisation it’s the ‘yes and…’ moment, not pausing to critique but rather trying stuff out to see where it might take you, moving on when it isn’t working. But where it does seem to resonate building on that, climbing inside, refining and developing.

We’d call it ‘pivoting’ in today’s agile innovation speak — but it’s the essence of Jarrett’s approach. It’s the opposite of planned music or playing the notes as written; this is emergence, using sensitivity, feedback, amplification of weak signals and half-sensed hints of the direction to go in.

Another theme illuminated by the concert experience it that of re-framing. Crisis as a word comes originally from the Greek where it means ‘turning point’. In Chinese the concept is represented by two characters place3d next to each other, one meaning ‘threat’ and the other ‘opportunity’. In other words a crisis poses a problem but also invites new perspectives which can create opportunity from it.

Only Jarrett knows what caused him to decide to play the concert — contractual commitments, the fact that the equipment was already set up? Or loyalty to his friend and chauffeur Manfred Eicher of ECM records? Or the desperate pleas of young Vera Brandes? Or perhaps the intrinsic challenge of somehow pulling off the impossible?

Whatever it was the decision forced a re-framing of the disaster to an opportunity. And, as the evening progressed the crowd sensed that they were experiencing something very different and special, watching a new creative pathway being forged.

Collaborative Innovation

But it’s not just the ability to re-frame, nor the courage to risk and experiment which is behind the success of that evening. For Keith Jarrett it wasn’t just crisis forcing his hand — or rather hands — dancing across the key board. He was able to explore and experiment because of an underlying technical capability, the result of years of practice and a honing of the capabilities which allowed him to improvise. He had to deploy them in new ways, to reconfigure for a particularly challenging circumstance but he was able to built on well-rehearsed behavioral routines.

In an organizational context this matches closely to what David Teece and colleagues call ‘dynamic capability’, something they described as the ‘…..ability to integrate, build, and reconfigure internal and external resources/competences to address and shape rapidly changing business environments….’. It’s not a reflex response or a plug ‘n’ play solution to new circumstances but instead a learned and rehearsed set of behavioral routines.

So if you’re looking for a new source of innovation inspiration away from the gadgetry of CES or the juggernaut of AI then maybe you could do a lot worse than have a listen (or listen again) to the Köln concert. Fifty years on it’s still got a lot to offer.

You can find my podcast here and my videos here

And if you’d like to learn with me take a look at my online courses here

And subscribe to my (free) newsletter here

Image credits: Dall-E via Chat-GPT

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.

Better Decision Making at Speed

Better Decision Making at Speed

GUEST POST from Mike Shipulski

If you want to go faster there are three things to focus on: decisions, decisions, and decisions.

First things first – define the decision criteria before the work starts. That’s right – before. This is unnatural and difficult because decision criteria are typically poorly defined, if not undefined, even when the work is almost complete. Don’t believe me? Try to find the agreed-upon decision criteria for an active project. If you can find them, they’ll be ambiguous and incomplete. If you can’t find them, well, there you go.

Decision criteria aren’t just categories -like sales revenue, speed, weight – they all must have a go-no-go threshold. Sales must be greater than X, speed must be greater than Y and weight must be less than Z. A decision criterion is a category with a threshold value.

Second, before the work starts, define the actions you’ll take if the threshold values are achieved and if they are not. If sales are greater than X, speed is greater than Y and weight is less than Z, we’ll invest A dollars a year for B years to scale the business. If one of X, Y or Z are less than their threshold value, we’ll scrap the project and distribute the team throughout the organization.

Lastly, before the work starts, define the decision-maker and how their decision will be documented and communicated. In practice, there is usually just one decision-maker. So, strive to write down just one person’s name as the decision-maker. But that person will be reluctant to sign up as the decision-maker because they don’t want to be mapped the decision if things flop. Instead, the real decision-maker will put together a committee to make the decision.

To tighten things down for the committee, define how the decision will be made. Will it be a simple majority vote, a super-majority, unanimous decision or the purposefully ambiguous consensus vote. My bet is on consensus, which allows the individual committee members to distance themselves from the decision if it goes badly. And, it allows the real decision-maker to influence the consensus and effectively make the decision without making it.

Formalizing the decision process creates speed. The decision categories help the team avoid the wrong work and the threshold values eliminate the time-wasting is-it-good-enough arguments. When the follow-on actions are predefined, there’s no waiting there’s just action. And defining upfront the decision-maker and the mechanism eliminates the time-sucking ambiguity that delays decisions.

Image credits: misterinnovation.com (1 of 850+ free quote slides for download)

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.