Break the Mold: 5 Job Titles That Fuel a Culture of Innovation

Break the Mold: 5 Job Titles That Fuel a Culture of Innovation

Fabric & Home Care Marketing

That is the job title on my very first business card.  I remember holding the card in my hands, staring at it for entirely too long, and thinking, “This is sooooo boring.  Even my parents won’t be impressed.”

To be fair to P&G, that was the job title on the business card of everyone in marketing in the business units.  The company didn’t put job titles on the card for security reasons (or at least that’s what my boss told me when I politely asked why my title wasn’t on the card).

I am older now and should have the maturity to accept the bland and nondescript title on my first business card.  But I’m not.  It’s still boring, and it shouldn’t be because we were working on innovation projects with code names and outfoxing corporate spies in the airport (another story for another post).  We were doing cool stuff and should have cool titles to show for it!

So, to right the wrong inflicted upon me and the countless others stuck with boring job titles despite doing brave, bold, and daring things, today is Make Your Own Title Day (business cards not included)

Intrapreneur

PRO: Short and sweet with a great original definition – “dreamers who do”

CON: Everyone will think you misspelled Entrepreneur

Pirates in the Navy

PRO: Title of a book by one of the foremost thinkers in the field of corporate innovation and a phrase inspired by Steve Jobs’ statement that it’s better to be a pirate than be in the Navy.  It also creates the excuse to wear an eyepatch, talk like a pirate, and keep a parrot in the office.

CON: People are afraid of pirates.  You don’t want people to be scared of you.

Rebel Smuggler

PRO: Also the basis of a book with the benefit of being a cool title that doesn’t scare people.  Plus, who wanted this to describe them:

Whether you’re are a Rebel in a functional company or a Smuggler in a dysfunctional company, you are the essential part of any transition.  You are the catalyst that transforms the caterpillar into a butterfly.  You disrupt the status quo and create opportunities for growth,

You are not the caterpillar nor the butterfly.  You are the magic that prompts the transition.”

Natalie Neelan, Rebel At Work: How to Innovate and Drive Results When You Aren’t the Boss

CON: Legal and Corporate Security may not love the “Smuggler” part of the title

Tempered Radical

PRO: A more “professional” version of Rebel Smuggler, and it’s a term used in HBR, so you know it’s legit.  Here’s how they’re described:

They all see things a bit differently from the “norm.” But despite feeling at odds with aspects of the prevailing culture, they genuinely like their jobs and want to continue to succeed in them, to effectively use their differences as the impetus for constructive change. They believe that direct, angry confrontation will get them nowhere, but they don’t sit by and allow frustration to fester. Rather, they work quietly to challenge prevailing wisdom and gently provoke their organizational cultures to adapt. I call such change agents tempered radicals because they work to effect significant changes in moderate ways.

Debra Meyerson, “Radical Change, the Quiet Way” in HBR (October 2001)

CON: Sometimes working quietly doesn’t work.  Sometimes, you need to make a ruckus. 

[YOUR TITLE HERE]

What title do you want to give yourself and other innovators?

Drop your suggestion in the comments (and feel free to print up new business cards)!

Want to Sound Smart? Stop Saying ‘Innovation.’

Want to Sound Smart? Stop Saying ‘Innovation.’

“You sound stupid when you use the word ‘_____________’ because you’re trying to sound smart.”

Mark Cuban

What goes in the blank?

For Mark Cuban, it’s “cohort” because “there’s no reason to ever use the word ‘cohort’ when you could use the word ‘group.’  A cohort is a group of people.  Say ‘group.’ Always use the simpler word.”

For one of my former bosses, it was “breakthrough.”  He would throw you out of the room if you used that word.  Not physically throw you out, but he was a big guy and could if you didn’t exit on your own.

For me, it’s “disrupt” (and all its forms) because applies (as originally intended by Clayton Christensen) in only about 0.1% of the instances in which it’s used.

There are other candidates.

Lots of other candidates.

In fact, I would go so far as to propose the biggest buzzword of them all: INNOVATION.

“Innovation” does not make you sound smart.

Here is a very short list of the most commonly heard statements about innovation.

  • Innovation is a priority.
  • Innovation is key to our growth.
  • We need to be more innovative.
  • We want to build/are committed to building a culture of innovation
  • Let’s innovate!

What do these statements even mean?

  • It’s great that innovation is a priority and key to our growth.  Hasn’t that always been the case?  What is changing? How is that translating into action? What do you expect from me?
  • Agree we should be more innovative.  How? What does “more innovative” look like?
  • Definitely want to be part of a culture of innovation.  What does that mean?  How is that different than our current culture?  What changes? How do we make sure the changes stick?
  • Sigh. Eye roll.

Saying what you mean makes you sound smart.

Always use the simpler word, and, in the case of innovation, there is always a simpler word or phrase.  Consider:

  • Grow revenue from our existing businesses
  • Create new revenue streams
  • Grow profit in our existing businesses
  • Grow profit by launching new high-profit businesses
  • Stay ahead of the competition
  • Create a new category
  • Launch a new product
  • Better serve our current customers
  • Serve new customers
  • Update/extend our current products
  • Increase the effectiveness of our marketing spend
  • Revise our business model to reflect changing consumer and customer expectations
  • Launch a low-cost and good-enough offering that appeals to non-consumers

You sound smart when you use the word(s) that most clearly, concisely, and unambiguously communicate your idea or intention.  “Innovation” does not do that.

Saying “innovation” AND what you mean makes you sound wicked smaht

“Innovation” on its own is lazy.  Simpler words and phrases aren’t nearly as sexy (I can’t imagine Fast Company coming out with “The World’s Best Companies at Creating New Revenue Streams” list).

But when you put them together – smart and sexy:

  • Innovation is a priority.  As a result, we are committing a minimum of $50M a year for the next five years to…
  • Innovation is key to growth.  As a result, we are doubling our investment in…
  • We need to be more innovative.  To achieve this, we are changing how we measure and incentivize executive performance to encourage long-term investments.
  • We want to build a culture of innovation.  As a first step in this process, we are making Kickbox available to any interested employee.
  • Let’s Innovate (Nope, don’t say this.  It’s too cheesy)

Say what you mean. 

If you don’t, people will think you don’t mean what you say.

What other words would you add to this rant?

Back to Basics: The Innovation Alphabet

Back to Basics: The Innovation Alphabet

You know ALL the innovation tools and frameworks:

  • Design Thinking
  • Lean Startup
  • Disruptive Innovation

But knowing and doing are two different things.  When I first learned Jobs to be Done, it felt painfully obvious, exactly like the customer research I did for five years at P&G.  Then I had to do it (conduct a Jobs to be Done interview), and it was difficult (ok, it was a disaster).

And teaching others to do it is a third entirely different thing.  Because by the time you have the skills and expertise to teach others, you’ve forgotten what it was like to start from the beginning. 

It’s easy to forget that before you can read a sentence, you must know how to read a word.  Before you can read a word, you must recognize a letter.

So let’s go back to basics.  Back before the methodologies.  Before the frameworks.  Before the theories.  Let’s go back to the letters and words that are Innovation’s essence.

Let’s go back to the Innovation Alphabet.

Assumptions, every innovation has them, and every innovator tests them to reduce risk

Brainstorming, a great way to get lots of ideas and maybe even some new ones

Customers, the people we innovate for

Disruptive Innovation, cheaper, lower quality products that appeal to non-consumers

Experiments, how you test assumptions and reduce risk

Fun, what innovation should be

G

Hope, it springs eternal in the heart of every innovator

Ideas, where most innovations start

Jobs to be Done, the problems people have/the progress they want to make (and the hill I will die on)

K

Leadership, the most crucial element in innovation (and often the biggest barrier)

Mistakes, how we learn, grow, and make progress

No, the start of a conversation, not the end

Opportunities, a nice term for “problem”

Problems, where all innovations should start

Quiet, what we sometimes need to think big and create something new

R

S

Team, how innovation gets done

Uncomfortable, what innovation should make you (especially if you’re a senior executive)

V

W

X

whY, the one question you can never ask enough

Zzzz, what you finally get to do when you’ve changed the world

As you can see, some letters still need words.  What should they be?

Are there better words for some letters? 

Let me know in the comments!

3 Steps to a Truly Terrific Innovation Team

3 Steps to a Truly Terrific Innovation Team

“What had a bigger impact on the project?  The process you introduced or the people on the team?”

As much as I wanted to give all the credit to my brilliant process, I had to tell the truth.

“People.  It’s always people.”

The right people doing the right work in the right way at the right time can do incredible, even impossible, things.  But replace any “right” in the previous sentence, and even the smallest things can feel impossible.  A process can increase the odds of doing the right work in the right way, but it’s no guarantee.  It’s powerless in the hands of the wrong people.

But how do you assemble the right group of people?  Start with the 3 Ts.

Type of Innovation

We’re all guilty of using “innovation” to describe anything that is even a little bit new and different.  And we’ve probably all been punished for it.

Finding the right people for innovation start with defining what type of innovation they’ll work on

  • Incremental: updating/modifying existing offerings that serve existing customers
  • Adjacent: creating new offerings for existing customers OR re-positioning existing offerings to serve new customers
  • Radical: new offerings or business models for new customers

Different innovation types require teams to grapple with different levels of ambiguity and uncertainty.  Teams working on incremental innovations face low levels of ambiguity because they are modifying something that already exists, and they have relative certainty around cause and effect.  However, teams working on radical innovations spend months grappling with ambiguity, certain only that they don’t know what they don’t know.

Time to launch

Regardless of the type of innovation, each innovation goes through roughly the same four steps:

  1. Discover a problem to be solved
  2. Design solutions
  3. Develop and test prototypes
  4. Launch and measure

The time allotted to work through all four steps determines the pace of the team’s work and, more importantly, how stakeholders make decisions.    For example, the more time you have between the project start and the expected launch, the more time you have to explore, play, create, experiment, and gather robust data to inform decisions.  But if you’re expected to go from project start to project launch in a year or less, you need to work quickly and make decisions based on available (rather than ideal) data.

Tasks to accomplish

Within each step of the innovation process are different tasks, and different people have different abilities and comfort levels with each.  This is why there is growing evidence that experience in the phase of work is more important than industry or functional expertise for startups.

There are similar data for corporate innovators.  In a study of over 100,000 people, researchers identified the type and prevalence of four types of innovators every organization needs:

  1. Generators (17% of the sample): Find new problems and ideate based on their own experience.
  2. Conceptualizers (19%): Define the problem and understand it through abstract analysis, most comfortable in early phases of innovation (e.g., Discover and Design)
  3. Implementers (41%): Put solutions to work through experiments and adjustments, most comfortable in later stages of innovation (Develop and Launch)
  4. Optimizers (23%):  Systematically examine all alternatives to implement the best possible solution

Generators and Conceptualizers are most comfortable in the early stages of innovation (i.e., Discover and Design).  Implementers and Optimizers are most comfortable in the later stages (e.g., Develop and Launch).  The challenge for companies is that only 36% of employees fall into one of those two categories, and most tend to be senior managers and executives.

Taking Action

Putting high performers on innovation teams is tempting, and top talent often perceives such assignments as essential to promotion.  But no one enjoys or benefits when the work they’re doing isn’t the work they’re good at.  Instead, take time to work through the 3Ts, and you’ll assemble a truly terrific innovation team.