Sunday, 17 April 2011 00:00

Management Versus Innovation

Rate this item
(0 votes)

Innovation Thought Bubble

Months ago, maybe over a year, now, I was blasted for talking about innovation in the context of information technology (IT) projects. The gist of the complaint was that all IT folks think they are building some new groundbreaking, revolutionary application that requires the latest in technology's tools. I agreed with his argument, qualifying that although this seems to be a pervasive theme, IT is a discipline that needs to keep one-foot in the pioneering frontier. Regardless, I had to concede that many innovative initiatives are more about a technician playing with some new toy. Jobs like implementing ERP interfaces to manufacturing execution systems (MES) only sound new. Unfortunately, I must say, "been there done that." Most IT is neither new of innovative. To avoid squandering funds, executives must understand and direct what needs to be innovative and permeate the company's culture with that knowledge. Otherwise, the wasted time and expense will suck a company dry.

Is It Innovative?

The first step is realizing that innovative projects take a different approach. This epiphany opens the door to understanding why it is important to classify projects as such. Only apply innovation's label to initiatives that are core to the business' competitive advantage differentiating it from competitors. Innovation requires tolerance of significant risk, acceptance of inevitable failures, and implementation of methodologies to minimize the exploratory costs. A successful leader infuses this philosophy in the organization so that every person understands the impact of being a pioneering organization.

Innovative Projects Are Different

The second step is to apply the innovation label only to projects that are producing something truly ground-breaking. Especially true in IT, the "innovative" solution is often chosen to quell someone's curiosity in the newest technologies. Project executives must be critical of initiatives claiming this title. Highly repetitive, well-understood projects should be run to a pre-existing set of processes that are tuned for the specific style of project.

Innovative projects have additional challenges making them special. The primary is risk. Companies who want to be the first ones to try a new idea must have a high-risk tolerance. Many "great new ideas" turn out to be too complicated or costly to build. The time between inception and failed fruition must be minimized. Development needs to follow a methodology that surfaces this early and fails fast. This is where iterative methodologies, like agile, are critical. The customer's constant critique of the project's value allows for quick course corrections and identifying initiatives that must be stopped—the earlier these actions the lower the cost.

Portfolio of Processes

Organizations performing a mixture of repetitive and innovative projects need to have multiple, potentially very different, methodologies. Examples are in many industries.

IT organizations that support infrastructure (network pulls, computer refreshes, etc.) and develop custom software applications are one example. Iterative development is senseless for the former, while using agile for software development may be the most logical option.

The same dichotomy is occurs in hardware companies that both design new and manufacture existing products. Improvements to or building new a production line is basically repeatable and has a known endpoint. They comfortably conform to a waterfall or phased approach. New product development, where value of features and functions need to be continually evaluated, are mostly agile-esque in nature.


Whether in sales or IT, ground-breaking inventions are critical to a company's ability to capture market share. This does not mean, however, that all initiatives must be innovative. Project executives and company leaders need to identify areas requiring the added risk of a pioneering approach. This is an executive's strategic decision, not a technician's tactical whim. It encompasses identifying areas where the risk can most benefit the company and ensuring the infrastructure is in place to facilitate the highest likelihood of success. Without executives being fully engaged, energies expended on innovative initiatives squander company assets pulling resources away from supporting strategic goals.

Read 16940 times

Related items

  • Process Mapping

    Process is at the core of any business. It makes work predictable, repeatable, and transferable. Without it we cannot scale our businesses. However, process can be a bane to making progress. Processes that work for a $10 million company have difficulties supporting a $30 million company. Trying to scale them to a $300 million company will not only fail but not address the issues that larger companies have that were never dreamt of in a smaller organization. Processes need to be discarded, revamped, and built—all of that without creating an overburdening bureaucracy.

    Anytime you need to go someplace, you first have to know where you are. Processes are never static and your company's current state is probably far from where you think it is. Hence, the first step is mapping out you company's current state followed by defining the future state. This is more than a logical map of the process; it must also include physical maps. Whether your process is solely to provide a service (say, website development) or physical (say, manufacturing) there are logistical issues that complicate the process flow. Without fully understanding those nuances, future state processes will not reach the desired efficiencies.

    For more information about process mapping fill out the form to the left and we will get in touch with you.

  • Success vs Culture

    The other day a Latvian student contacted me for my views the connection between culture and success criteria—an important and intriguing topic. After working in Taiwan, Singapore, Korea, Japan, Israel, United States, and Canada, I wear many scars of both blatant and subtle cultural violations. I also know that within a culture one person's success is often another person's failure. So, after dispelling concerns about clicking on some random email link, I completed her survey (please feel free to take it yourself). In the process, I struck up a friendship with the student, Kristine Briežkalne, who is studying at Riga International School of Economics and Business Administration . She has some interesting views and presented me with a Venn diagram showing four frames to a project (business, client, project management, and growth perspectives) and how they intersected. As the diagram is part of her Master's thesis, I will let you ponder the how to label the overlapping areas (an eye-opening exercise).

  • Kill The White Knight

    There is a reason we do not teach classes on fixing failing projects. Many a cynic feels that we simply do not want to teach our trade, however, our reason is far nobler—we should be teaching prevention rather trying to create white knights to save the day. It is the same philosophy as building a fence at the cliff's edge rather than an emergency room at its base. Our language is replete with idioms telling us to look past the symptom and address problems at their root cause. 'An ounce of prevention versus a pound of cure' or 'a stitch in time saves nine.' Please, feel free to supply your own in the comments. Unfortunately, most of our businesses loathe this philosophy, waiting to address an issue until it is irrefutably broken.

  • Tales of an Expert Witness: Sex, Lies, and Video Tape (Part II)

    Trust relationships, certifications, and standards sound like such a safe harbor. These sound like such great words in a proposal or statement of work. How could you possibly go wrong building a trusted relationship with a customer by committing to follow a standard? In fact, this can burn you… in court.

    No one ever starts a project with the goal of ending up in court. In fact, litigation may never cross your mind; after all, you have built a trusted partner relationship. Taking a few cautionary steps, however, will make your life easier if you end up in that ill-fated litigious position. Your best chances for success come long before you enter the courtroom—even before the project starts.

  • Comparing Organizational Change Management Models

    A few weeks ago, I set out to write a post on the comparison of various organizational change management (OCM) methodologies and realized that would be a disservice to my readers. It would simply drag you down the path of implementation while failing to focus you on building the foundation. The pressure was too much and I have relented to numerous requests on making that comparison. The caveat is that juxtaposing these models is not comparing different varieties of oranges or even apples and oranges; we are surely comparing the peel to the fruit they contain. Hence, comparing methodologies like Kotter's model (the peel), Prosci's ADKAR (the core), and General Electric's Change Acceleration Process (the whole fruit) need a different approach.

Leave a comment

More Info on Project Recovery

Tell me More!

Please send me more information
on fixing a failing project.

Rescue The Problem Project

Internationally acclaimed

Image of RPP

For a signed and personalized copy in the US visit the our eCommerce website.

Amazon logo
Buy it in the United States Buy it in Canada Buy it in the United Kingdom
Buy it in Ireland Buy it in Germany Buy it in France
Buy it in Italy Buy it in the PRC
Buy it in Japan
Book sellers worldwide.

Upcoming Events

Other's References