Creativity & Innovation

We define management innovation as the invention and implementation of management practice, process, structure, or technique that is new to the state of the art and is intended to further organizational goals. Adopting an intraorganizational evolutionary perspective, we examine the roles of key change agents inside and outside the organization in driving and shaping four processes—motivation, invention, implementation, and theorization and labeling—that collectively define a model of how management innovation comes about.

Innovation—the ability to define and develop new products and services and deliver them to market—is the fundamental source of value creation in companies and an important enabler of competitive advantage. In a recent study conducted by Booz Allen Hamilton, company CEOs and other senior executives cited goals for improving innovation performance that averaged 20 to 30 percent in areas like time-to-market, product quality, and development cost, in just the next two years.

The bar has been set very high. Among the many factors that influence a
company’s innovation performance, the dynamics of the “innovation organization” (which in different companies might include some combination of the engineering, R&D, and product development functions) is perhaps the most important.

Innovation is inherently a highly cross-functional activity that, when it works well, creates a constructive tension between competing objectives of development cost, product value, performance, quality, and time to market. Product development touches every part of the company. Functions like strategic planning, sales, operations, customer support, purchasing, and finance are just as important to successful innovation as R&D
and engineering. How well these very different functions work together in large measure determines how effective a company will be at developing successful products and services.

CREATIVITY & INNOVATION

It is common to look to an organization’s structure to suggest the relative roles and authorities of these functions. The structure is often the first thing companies seek to change when they search for better organizational performance. The Booz Allen study found that over half of all companies had restructured their innovation organizations within the prior two years. Our experience indicates that there is no one right structure for a given
innovation organization. Different structures work successfully under different circumstances.

It also turns out that structure in itself is a poor predictor of how an organization will really behave. Independent of their organizational structures, some companies seem to deftly mobilize their best capabilities to meet unexpected changes in the marketplace or competitive actions. Other companies seem immobilized by such challenges, unable to respond effectively. There are deeper factors at work. Factors that, to use a biological metaphor, are embedded in a company’s organizational DNA.

September 8, 2021
Gideon Robert University © 2021. All rights reserved.
error: Content is protected !!

Parent Login

Student Login

X