How Do You Judge Innovation: Guilty or Innocent?

How Do You Judge Innovation: Guilty or Innocent?

Several months ago, a colleague sent me a link to Roger Martin’s latest article, “The Presumption of Guilt: The Hidden Logical Barrier to Innovation.”  Even though the article was authored by one of the preeminent thinkers in the field of innovation and strategy (in 2017, Thinkers50 voted him the #1 most influential management thinker in the world), I didn’t have too much hope that I would read something new or interesting. After all, I read A LOT of articles, and 99 times out of 100, I’m disappointed (80 times out of 100, I roll my eyes so hard I give myself a headache).

This one blew my mind.

With just a few sentences and applying a well-known analogy, Martin explained a phenomenon that plagues every organization and kills most innovation.

Presumed Innocence is a fundamental human right

Martin begins by pointing out that in the legal systems of modern democracies, all citizens are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In 1948, the United Nations extended this concept to all nations (not just democracies) in Article 11.1 of their Declaration of Human Rights.

The presumption of innocence is so important because “the presumption of guilt (or even neutrality) puts an almost impossible burden on the defendant. The State is strong and has resources far beyond that of the individual.”

Presumed Innocence is not a fundamental innovation right

Now let’s apply this analogy and the lens of presumption of innocence or guilt to business, arguably a field where we spend much more time and make far more judgments.

You, and your fellow decision-makers, are judges and jury.

It is up to you to determine whether the projects in front of you are innocent (worthy of additional investment) or guilty (not worthy).

If you presume all defendants are guilty, you place the burden of proof on them. They must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they will succeed and are, therefore, worthy of investment.

If you presume all defendants are innocent, you place the burden of proof on yourself (or the business as a whole). You must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they will fail.

What type of judge are you? What kind of decision-making system do you preside over? Do you presume guilt or innocence? 

In most boardrooms, projects are presumed guilty.

Presumptions in practice

Let’s consider the two “defendants” (types of projects) that appear before you – core business projects and innovation projects.

Each defendant has a team of advocates. The core business typically has a large team with ample resources and a history of success. Innovation has a much smaller team with far fewer resources and few, if any, “in-market” successes.

To be fair, you ask the same questions of both defendants – questions about market growth, performance versus competitors, and what the P&L looks like.

The team advocating for the core business produces data-filled slides, reports from reputable third parties, and financials blessed by Finance. In the deluge of facts, you forget that all the data is about the past, and you’re making decisions about the future. You find the evidence compelling (or at least reassuring), determine that the team met their burden of proof, declare the Core Business innocent, and allocate additional funds and people.

Innovation’s team also comes with slides, reports, and financials, but it’s not nearly as compelling as what you just saw from the current business team. But you are a fair judge, so you ask most questions like

  • We believe we can get X% of a Total Addressable Market estimated to be Y
  • There are no direct competitors, but consumers rated this better than current solutions
  • We don’t have a 5-year NPV or P&L for this business at scale because we’re not asking for permission to launch. We’re asking for $100,000 to continue testing.

Believe? We need to know!

No direct competitors? Perhaps there’s a reason for that! 

No P&L? I’m not going to throw scarce money away!  

“Guilty!” you declare, “no more resources for you! Try again!”

This example illustrates what Roger Martin considers corporate innovation’s fatal flaw. In his article, he argues,

“the status quo must play the role of the prosecutor and prove that the innovation is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The innovation asserts its case, laying out the future that it imagines is plausible and explains the logic that buttresses the plausibility. The onus is on the status quo to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that the innovation’s logic is flawed — e.g., the proposed economics are unrealistic, customers haven’t shown a hint of caring about the unique selling features of the innovation, competitors already have a lead on us in the proposed area, etc.

If the status quo can do so, then the innovation is guilty. If it can’t, then the innovation is not guilty, and the organization should invest.”

As much as I love the idea of requiring the status quo (managers? Executives? Stockholders?) to prove that investments should not be made (i.e., the default answer is “Yes” to all requests), it’s just not a practical solution.

Burden of proof as barrier

There’s another fundamental principle in our legal system that Martin doesn’t touch on: the burden of proof shifts as the stakes increase.

Specifically, the State’s burden of proof increases from warrant to arraignment to grand jury to trial. For example, the State must provide probable cause based on direct or other reliable information to get a warrant. But the State must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt when the defendant goes to trial and risks losing their freedom or even their life.

But in the example above, the questions (proof required) remained the same. 

The questions were appropriate for the Current Business because it’s already in the market, consuming massive resources, and its failure would have a catastrophic impact on the company.

But the questions aren’t appropriate for innovation in its early days. In fact, they were the business equivalent of demanding proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to get a search warrant. Instead, a judge evaluating a project in the early Design phase should ask for probable cause based on direct or other reliable information – observed consumer behavior, small-scale research findings, or simple prototypes.

The Verdict is In

I love the concept of Presumed Guilty vs. Presumed Innocent. I see it all the time in my work, and it is painfully prevalent in Innovation Council meetings and other boardrooms where managers sit as judge and jury over a project’s (ad a team’s) fate.

I want to flip the paradigm – To make “yes” the default instead of “No” and to require managers, the keepers of the status quo, to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a project will fail.

But I don’t think it’s possible (if I’m wrong, PLEASE tell me!).

Instead, our best bet for true innovation justice is not to shift who bears the burden of proof but rather how heavy that burden is at various points. From probable cause when the stakes are low to beyond a reasonable doubt when they’re high. And certainly more than a ham sandwich at any point

Size Does Not Matter: 3 Stories of Small Innovations With Big Impact

Size Does Not Matter: 3 Stories of Small Innovations With Big Impact

Innovation is BIG!

Big ideas!

Change the world!

Go big or go home!

Which makes sense. 

Giant corporations need big innovations to move the needle

Entrepreneurs need big ideas to get attention

Investors need big returns to take risks

But innovation thrives in constraints. 

And “Go Small” may be the biggest constraint out there.

Here are three stories about small innovations that created big value

Lollipops Reduce Violence

Closing time at the bars is never pretty. It can be downright dangerous. What starts as a few insults shouted back and forth between individuals or groups of friends can quickly devolve into brawls, assaults, and even murder.

Every year, dozens of cities and towns run experiments to find ways to decrease incidences of violence around bars and clubs:

  • Closing bars earlier
  • Keeping bars open 24/7
  • Training bouncers in crowd control tactics
  • Pre-positioning taxis
  • Better landscaping

And lollipops.

In 2001, various cities and towns in the UK began giving lollipops to people as they streamed out of pubs and clubs. The rationale varied:

  • “It’s hard to suck and fight at the same time.” – Leicester, 2001
  • “Research shows the sugar content helps to stabilise the behaviour of those who have consumed alcohol.” – West Oxfordshire, 2006
  • “[Offering food] can stop people shouting, make them less aggressive and prevent post-alcohol hunger” – Camden Town, 2010

It’s estimated that these efforts, which eventually expanded to include flip flops and cookies, cost “tens of thousands of pounds,” a drop in the bucket compared to the millions of pounds spent each year on police and medical resources to deal with the drunken behavior.

Waffle Maker Saves the Planet

Imagine throwing away 20 BILLION wax-coated bowls and plastic spoons every year. 

Imagine that you could keep 12 BILLION of those out of the waste system by doing just one thing.

Giving up ice cream.

Would you do it?

Yeah, me neither.

This is why we should be very thankful to a Syrian waffle vendor at the 1904 St. Louis World’s Fair.

Even though ice cream cones were in use as early as the 19th century, it wasn’t until a chance encounter at the World’s Fair that they went mainstream. In the sweltering summer heat, ice cream was a popular treat for the 20 million people visiting the fair. So, it’s not surprising that vendors eventually ran out of serving bowls.

Luckily for us and the planet, one of those popular ice cream vendors was next to Ernest A. Hamwi and his very unpopular warm waffle stand. Seeing his fellow vendor’s plight, Ernest took one of his waffles, rolled it into a cone, and a tasty partnership was born.

Town Crier Out Shares Facebook

On Thursday, August 11, as thousands of tourists arrived in Provincetown eager to begin celebrating the Cape Cod town’s largest summer festival, the sewer system failed. Although only 356 of the town’s 1500 properties were affected, most of those affected were the restaurants, hotels, and businesses at the heart of the town’s tourist industry.

Naturally, officials took to social media to alert businesses and residents of the impact. In a Facebook post, restaurants were told to close, and residents were told they “must reduce water use, including dishwashing, laundry, showering, and only flush when absolutely necessary,”

Ew.

Naturally, such restrictions created problems for businesses and residents alike. But what about the thousands of tourists just arriving who were not subscribers to Provincetown’s Facebook account?

The Town Crier

In 1864, Provincetown created the position of Town Crier as a way to spread news throughout the community quickly. Over time, as technology made spreading information easier and faster, the Town Crier became more of a tourist attraction, responsible for greeting visitors and promoting members of the Chamber of Commerce.

Until August 11, when the 22nd Town Crier was called back to duty.

“All is not well in Provincetown,” the Town Crier proclaimed as he stood in front of Town Hall dressed, as usual, in historical garb and swinging his heavy bell. As Thursday turned into Friday, the Town Crier issued updates, listing the re-opened restaurants and the areas where toilet flushing and showers were now allowed.

“Let us pray to the supreme architect of the universe that the system will have been rectified,” he pleaded. I’m sure town officials gave thanks to the supreme architect of the universe that their small investment in maintaining an old solution was, again, creating quite a lot of value for the town.

Size doesn’t matter

Innovation is something new that creates value, and, as innovators, we naturally want to create BIG value. Heck, we want to change the world!

It’s easy to forget that Small can have a big impact, whether physically small like lollipops, a small distance away like waffle and ice cream vendors, or only able to reach a small audience like the Town Crier.

So when you find yourself obsessing about size, just paraphrase Dr. Seuss, “An innovation’s an innovation, no matter how small!”

5 ways to Build Your Innovation Muscles in the New Year

5 ways to Build Your Innovation Muscles in the New Year

According to a 2018 survey by NPR and The Marist Poll, the most common New Year’s resolution is to exercise more.  Not surprisingly, losing weight and eating a more healthy diet ranked third and further, respectively (“stop smoking” was #2, in case you’re curious).

Hitting the gym to drop weight and build muscle is a great habit to build, but don’t forget about the regular work needed to build other muscles.

Specifically, your innovation muscles.

Innovation mindsets, skills, and behaviors can be learned but if you don’t continuously use them, like muscles, they can weaken and atrophy.  That’s why it’s important to create opportunities to flex them.

One of the tools I use with clients who are committed to building innovation as a capability, rather than scheduling it as an event, is QMWD – the Quarterly-Monthly-Weekly-Daily practices required to build and sustain innovation as a habit.

 

QUARTERLY

Leave the office and talk to at least 3 of your customers

It’s tempting to rely on survey results, research reports, and listening in on customer service calls as a means to understand what your customers truly think and feel.  But there’s incredible (and unintended) bias in those results.

Take, for example, this story from former P&G CEO AG Lafley:

One very quick story; I will never forget this. We used to do annual research in the laundry detergent business, and every year consumers would rate the Tide powder cardboard package as excellent; excellent to shop; excellent for opening; excellent in use–on, on, on.

 

So, probably 27 or 30 years ago, I’m in basements in Tennessee, in Kentucky, doing loads of laundry with women, and after three or four or five of these one-on-one sessions, I’ve realized that not a single woman has opened a box of Tide with her hand. Why not? You’ll break your fingernails!

 

So, how did they open the box? They had nail files; they had screwdrivers; they had all kinds of things sitting down on the shelf over their washing machine, and yet they thought our package was excellent. And we thought our package was excellent because they were telling us our package was excellent. We had to see it and experience it.

 

Here’s the problem–consumers cannot really tell us what they want. They can tell you why they like it or why they don’t like it, but they cannot tell you what they want.

Schedule a day each quarter to get out of the office and meet your customers.  Ask them what they like and what they don’t.  More importantly, watch them use your products and then share what you heard and saw with your colleagues.

 

MONTHLY

Share with your team a mistake you made and what you learned from it

Silicon Valley mantras like “fail fast” and “fail often” make for great office décor but, let’s be honest, no one likes to fail and very few companies reward it.

Instead of repeating these slogans, reframe them to “learn fast and learn often” and role model the behavior by sharing what you learned from things you did that didn’t go as expected.  You’ll build a culture of psychological safety, make smart risks acceptable, and increase your team’s resilience.  All things required to innovate in a sustainable, repeatable, and predictable manner.

 

Do 1 thing just for the fun of it.

In the research that fed into their book, The Innovator’s DNA, professors Jeff Dyer, Hal Gregersen, and Clayton Christensen, found that the most common characteristic amongst the great innovators of our time was their ability to associate – “to make surprising connections across areas of knowledge, industries, even geographies” (page 41).  Importantly, their associative thinking skills were fed by one or more “Discovery Skills” – questioning (asking “why,” “why not,” and “what if”), observing, experimenting, and networking.

Fuel your associative thinking ability by doing something NOT related to your job or other obligations.  Do something simply because it interests you.  You might be surprised where it takes you.  After all, Steve Jobs studied calligraphy, meditation, and car design and used all of those experiences in his “day job.”

 

WEEKLY

Make 1 small change for 1 day

Innovation requires change and, if you’re an innovator, that’s the exciting part.  But most people struggle with change, a fact that can be frustrating for change agents.

In order to lead people through change, you need to empathize with them and their struggles which is why you need to create regular moments of change in your work and life.  One day each week, make a conscious change – sit on the other side of the conference room table, take a different route to the bathroom, use a black pen instead of a blue one.  Even small changes like this can be a bit annoying and they’ll remind you that change isn’t always the fun adventure you think it is.

 

DAILY

Ask “How can we do this better?”

Innovation is something different that creates value.  Which is good news because that means that all it takes to be an Innovator is to DO something DIFFERENT and create VALUE.  The easiest way to do that is to find opportunities for improvement.

The next time you’re frustrated with or confused by a process, ask “how can we do this better?”  Better can be more simply, faster, cheaper, or even in a way that is more enjoyable but, whatever it means, the answer will point the way to creating value for you, your team, and maybe even your company.

 

In closing…

Block time on your calendar for these quarterly, monthly, weekly, and daily habits.  After all, the best reflection of your priorities are the things in your calendar.  And, if you stick with this, you’ll be among the 8% who achieve their New Year’s goals.

 

Originally published on December 5, 2019 on Forbes.com

3 Insights from an Idea Generation Program that Actually Works!

3 Insights from an Idea Generation Program that Actually Works!

Companies love to invest in idea generation – challenges, hackathons, software platforms to collect and sort submissions.

Companies do not love the ROI of these investments because they require a lot of money and time and the ideas rarely become real and create value.

But one company is doing it right and they are loving the early results.

This morning I chatted with a graduate of the Intrapreneurship Academy that I teach in partnership with The Cable Center.  It was the kind of life-affirming call that consultants rarely get to enjoy, one that is evidence that the work you do matters to both people and businesses.

During the program, he focused on solving a problem related to surfacing ideas within the organization, rather than relying on management to come up with new ideas and initiatives.  As he worked through the innovation process, he found other passionate intrapreneurs and champions within his organization willing to lend their time, energy, and political clout to developing a solution.

In May, the idea generation solution went live.

A mere 6 months later:

  • 20% of the organization submitted ideas
  • 2 ideas, on average, were submitted by each person
  • 60% of submitted ideas were presented to senior leadership
  • ~20% of the ideas submitted were approved for further development
  • 10% of ideas submitted are in the process of being launched

10% of ideas received funding and are being launched! 

VCs would kill for that kind of success rate.

Ahh, but what about ROI?  Launches do not equal market success. Value creation, specifically financial returns, are evidence of market success.

This was all done with $0 investment.

The team used internal resources for everything – existing software platforms and programs, design and marketing talent, and passionate staff and leaders to promote and participate in the program.

3 lessons learned on the path to success

Like all good innovators, the team prioritized moving quickly with “good enough” solutions and learning and adjusting rapidly based on feedback.  Here are three of their top insights:

1. It’s all about People.  People define organizations.  People create ideas.  People motivate and inspire other people. So, if you want to succeed, focus on people.

For example, every person who submits an idea receives personalized feedback about what worked or didn’t and how, if possible, they could make their idea more attractive to the business.  Originally, this feedback was given by email because let’s be honest, it’s a lot more efficient.  But people felt that the feedback was “cold” and felt discouraged and demotivated after reading it.  Now, all feedback is delivered in a quick conversation that feels more personal and leaves people feeling heard and motivated

2. Build a Habit, not an Event.  Early in the design process, the team spoke with a group in another region that was also creating an idea generation program.  The difference was that they were designing it as an annual event (and spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to buy and implement an idea management software platform).

But people don’t have ideas just once a year.  They have ideas all the time.  And the business needs new ideas for revenue generation and cost savings constantly, not just once a year.

So this team designed their program to be on-going – people can submit ideas at any time for feedback, senior management meets once every 1-2 months to review and approve ideas, and teams are started (and ended) based on data, not the calendar.

3. Imperfect Action is more important than Perfect Inaction – “Frameworks are great and really helpful, but….” As my former student’s voice trailed off, I couldn’t help but laugh.  He was trying so hard to be polite, after all, I’m the person who taught him the frameworks, but we both knew that the end of that sentence was, “…you need to actually do things in the real world to know what works.”

Yes, frameworks, theories, templates, best practices, are all useful AS STARTING POINTS.  They reflect what has worked in the past for other companies so, while they can help you avoid common mistakes or accelerate decision-making, they’re not perfect reflections of the current reality of your company and innovation.  To know what will work for your idea, in your company, in your market, in your geography, with your team, and your customers, you need to get off the page and into the real world.

The next challenge – how to scale

With such clear early success, there’s huge demand to expand the program rapidly within the region.  But premature scaling is the death-knell of many innovations.

So, the question facing the team is when and how to expand?

Should they expand laterally, rolling their country’s program out to other countries in the region, or should they expand vertically, moving the program up to be managed at the regional level?

Should they seek to increase participation in their current program, or should they expand their program’s offering to include trainings and challenges?

When should all of this expansion happen?  What should happen first?

The fact that these questions are being asked is a clear sign of success.  While there are no obvious answers, I do not doubt that the team will find them.