The Personality Issues in Leading Innovation: Yours and Others! University of Tampa Human Resources Institute 2/9/06

1
The Personality Issues in Leading Innovation
Yours and Others!University of TampaHuman
Resources Institute2/9/06

• Jack Hipple, Innovation-TRIZ
• Tampa, FL
• jwhinnovator_at_earthlink.net
• www.innovation-triz.com

2
INNOVATIONS THE NEW HOT THING!

• Ranking in IRI surveys
• Fuzzy Front End conferences sold out
• Entire Business Week issues
• Fortune sections.
• But..

3
WE JUST GOT THROUGH SIX SIGMATIZING EVERYTHING!!

• From standardization, no variation, no deviation,
  to new business and products.and now we want new
  and different
• Back to the futureanyone remember the same
  emphasis in the 1980s and early to mid 90s?

4
YOUVE HAD ENDLESS MEETINGS TO DISCUSS THIS NEW
CHALLENGE.
5
YOU HAVE DREAMS OF SUCCESS
6
YOURE CONCERNED ABOUT THE COST AND THE TIME FOR
SUCCESS.
7
AND YOU KNOW HOW RISKY THIS JOURNEY MAY BE.
8
AND YOU DONT WANT TO FAIL AT THIS RISKY NEW
VENTURE, DO YOU?
9
YOU KNOW THAT YOU ARE NOT ALONE IN THIS
JOURNEY----HOW YOU WILL GAIN A STRATEGIC
EDGE.????
10
WERE HERE TO HELP YOU THE SECOND TIME AROUND.
11
WHY AM I CONCERNED?

• Innovation Network Survey, fall 2004, new
  innovation leaders in medium to large companies
• 71 said they had no metrics for their position
• 60 of them have innovation as part of their
  mission/job objectives
• 67 are allowed to work on new concepts for
  their company (new is not defined)
• 68 have no well defined innovation process
  within their company
• 54 have no working definition of innovation
• Same kind of input from 2005 Innovation Network
  conference we know its important, but..

12
MISSION, NO OBJECTIVESNO GOAL DEFINITION, NO
METRICSBUTPART OF RESPONSIBILITYRESULT WELL
DO THE BEST WE CAN!!
13
THE AMI STUDY FAILED INNOVATION PROGRAMS (AND
CHAMPIONS!) IN FORTUNE 500 1980-1995 ALL
EXTINCT(Published in 3 different publications)
MIGHT WE HAVE SOME OF THE ANSWERS ALREADY.AND
FORGOTTEN THEM?
14
ASSOCIATION FOR MANAGERS OF INNOVATION (AMI)
STUDY

• AMI A subset of the Center for Creative
  Leadership 30-50 private sector innovation
  leaders and selected consultants
• Study the phenomenon of loss of innovation
  leadership positions in the late 1990s after a
  15 year surge in interest
• A people analysis of what happened

15
WE ENDED THE PROGRAMS AND DOWNSIZED THE
INNOVATORS
16
THOSE THAT LEFT EVENTUALLY BECAME CONSULTANTS,
JOINED STARTUP VENTURES, RETIRED, OR STARTED
TOTALLY NEW CAREERS
17
Desi DeSimone, ex CEO, 3M

• Why did you get into a position that you had to
  lay off a bunch of people? How come youre so
  smart now that youve laid off a bunch of
  people?
• Fortune, 1985!!!!!!!

18
Hamel and Prahalad

• Few companies seem to have asked themselves what
  is the opportunity cost of the hundreds of
  millions--or even billions-- of dollars that have
  been written off for re-engineering and
  restructuring. What if all that redundant
  brain power had been applied to creating
  tomorrows markets? Far from being a tribute to
  senior managements steely resolve or
  far-sightedness, a large restructuring and
  re-engineering charge is simply the penalty that
  a company must pay for not having anticipated the
  future
• Competing for the Future

19
IN ADDITION, THE INNOVATORS LEARNED THAT JUST
BEING INNOVATIVE WAS NOT ENOUGH
20
THEY LEARNED THAT THEIR GOALS MUST BE IN
ALIGNMENT WITH ORGANIZATIONAL GOALS
21
LEARNINGS FROM AMI STUDY

• Significant differences between styles of
  innovation champions and norm around them
• KAI and Myers Briggs Type Indicator analyses
  can help assess
• Personal learnings and experiences--what would be
  done differently?
• MOST CORPORATE LEADERS ARE DIFFERENT ANIMALS THAN
  INNOVATORS THIS IS A FACTHOW SHOULD WE DEAL
  WITH THAT FACT?

KAI is a registered trademark of M.J.
Kirton Myers Briggs Type Indicator is a
registered trademark of CPP, Inc.
22
FINDINGSExtrovert vs. IntrovertSensor vs.
iNtuitorThinker vs. FeelerJudger vs.
PerceiverI.e. an ESTJ vs. INFP

• Innovators are Ns and managers are Ss
• Intuition, gut feel, instinct, possibilities
• VS.
• Facts, data, analysis, results vs. plan

23
EXAMPLES.

• We need to do things differently in this
  company
• Does this mean get into an entirely new business,
  make an acquisition?
• Does this mean we need to process existing orders
  more efficiently?
• We need some new products
• Within the same product line?
• Replace the product line?
• Buy another company?
• License a technology for making a new product?

24
THE KIRTON KAI

• A well established assessment instrument that
  measures the style, not capability of an
  individuals problem solving
• Strongly adoptive/analogic/structured to out of
  the box, unstructured, disconnected
• Number from 32-160, average of 90 /- 20 (2s),
  including most corporate managers
• Sub-numbers relating to unfiltered idea
  generation, rules and procedure respect/need, and
  visibility (to others) of problem
  solving/analysis paradigm

25
IMPACT OF KAI DELTAS..

• A range of feedback from 32-160, extremely
  adoptive, filtering, incremental vs. out of the
  box, no analysis, major change
• Replacing vs. improving
• Reaction to internal vs. external threats
• Appreciation for detail
• Right vs. risk
• Quantity vs. quality of ideas filtration

26
KAI DISTRIBUTION
NORM
27
CONFLICTWHO IS TO BLAME?
28
ACCEPTANCE OF PERSON AND THEIR IDEAS
DISLIKE
IGNORE
SABOTAGE
ATTITUDE TOWARD PERSON
SUPPORT ENCOURAGE
HELP
LIKE
HIGH
LOW
NOVELTY OF IDEA
Source Charlie Prather
29
ACCEPTANCE OF IDEA
EQUIVOCALITY
LOW
HIGH
DISTANCE
MOTIVATION
BLACK HOLE
GRAND SLAM

DEAD IN THE WATER
LONG SHOT

HIGH
COMMUNICATION
LOW
Source National Center for Mfg Sciences Study
30
ONE SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM
31
THE MORE LIKELY OUTCOME
32
RECENT PERSONNEL TRENDS

• Dramatic decline in loyalty, downsizings
• Increased specialization
• Temporary assignments and more rapid turnover
• No one works for anyone, except themselves
• Impact
• Capturing and broadening of intellectual property
  (not just patents, but know how) much more
  important AND difficult
• Loyalty aint what it used to be!

33
ANOTHER DRAMATIC CHANGE.EVERYBODY KNOWS
EVERYTHINGINSTANTLY!ITS WHAT YOU DO WITH IT
THATS IMPORTANT
GENERATING
COST OF INFORMATION
Source Jim Palmer, PG
DISSEMINATING
TIME
34
HOW SHOULD WE DO IT RIGHT--IN AN ORGANIZATIONAL
SENSE?HOW CAN YOU HELP?
35

• Money isnt everything..but its right up there
  with oxygen
• Rita Davenport, Entrepreneur

36
Peter Drucker, 1982

• Innovative companies do not start out with a
  research budget. They end with one. They start
  out by determining how much innovation is needed
  for the business to stay even. They assume that
  all existing products, services, and markets are
  becoming obsolete--and pretty fast at that. They
  try to assess the probable speed of decay of
  whatever exists, and then determine the gap
  which innovation has to fill for the company not
  to go downhill. They know that their program
  must include promises several times the
  innovation gap, for more than a third of such
  promises--if that many-- ever becomes reality.
  And then they know how much of an innovation
  effort--and how large the innovative budget--they
  need as the very minimum
• DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO ESTABLISH AN INNOVATION
  BUDGET AS PERCENT OF LAST YEARS OR AS A PERCENT
  OF SALES?

37
OTHER IMPORTANT ISSUES

• Identification and early assessment
• Start early, fail early
• The B-2 (Former Congressman and budget committee
  chairman John Kasich on Larry King) New monomer
  at Dow
• Six months in the lab will save you at least an
  hour in the library
• Use new forecasting techniques, talk to
  competitors of your customerswhat will replace
  them
• The Nine Box Analysis
• Lines and Patterns of Evolution from patent
  studies

38
Hamel and Prahalad

• Slimming down the workforce and cutting back on
  investment are less intellectually demanding for
  top management than discovering ways to grow
  output on a static or only slowing growing
  resource base..Managers and operational
  improvement consultants must ask themselves just
  how much of the efficiency problem theyre
  working on. If their view of efficiency
  encompasses only the denominator, if they dont
  have a view of resource leverage that addresses
  the numerator, they have no better than half a
  chance of achieving and sustaining world class
  efficiency

39
PERSONAL CHALLENGES FOR INNOVATION CHAMPIONS

• Recognize that you are most likely to be N
  (intuitive) vs. an S (sensing) which
  characterizes over 80 of corporate management
• You will be very comfortable with vague, broadly
• shaped exciting opportunities without
  necessarily
• being specific about sales, profit dollars, and
  timing
• Those who are funding your effort, as excited as
  they may be about new stuff, will quickly want to
  know who is going to buy the new stuff, when they
  will start buying, what it will compete with, how
  much the plant will cost, and when it can start
  producing
• As you progress in this role, follow one of the
  well
• established quality rules and know what your
  customer wants---and frame your gut feels into
  hard data. If you need help to do this, get it!

40
INNOVATOR CHALLENGES

• Your problem solving style is likely to be
  unstructured and not obvious to those around you,
  especially those in corporate management. This
  is your problem to deal with, not theirs
• They are the ones who will have to commit large
  sums of money at risk and it is important for you
  to recognize this.
• Studies show it is likely that the difference
  between your KAI profile and that of corporate
  management around you is close to 35-45 points,
  setting up a potentially significant
  communication gap in the area of technical
  opportunity definition and the perceived need for
  hard data and analysis, group focus, etc. Again,
  this is your problem to deal with
• Clearly explain how your data and information
  supports your ideas and conclusions, focus your
  meeting and communication processes. Again, if
  you need help to do this, find an adaptive KAI
  person and gain their insights. Study what these
  differences imply and use these differences
  pro-actively

41
THE RULES HAVE CHANGED

• Need both inside-out and outside-in thinking
• Though the days of heres what I have or can
  make, now go sell it are long gone, it is
  important to have external driving forces and
  current customer input balanced by
• considering what opportunities exist to expand
  the commercial impact of existing core
  competencies
• Talking with potential customers who might
  replace your current customers
• It is critical to understand the levels of use
  and integration above and below your product line
  for excellence in innovation

42
LETS NOT GO DOWN IN THE SECOND ROUND OF SERIOUS
INNOVATION..