I saw a Linked In post a few weeks ago that went something like this (details removed and slightly edited to protect the guilty):
“I want to kill the good idea fairy…there are times where the good ideas need to lead to actionable and quantifiable results.”
“Keep the fairy alive, as long as you can provide results.”
If I worked in that environment, I’d be tempted to interpret that statement as: innovation is great, but you better provide results.
Show of hands, how many of you would volunteer to work in an innovation role with this person? Anyone? Anyone? The under-current of threat is enough for me to take a hard-pass.
Innovation is hard. Building something new is inherently risky! Failure is likely. In fact, innovation…by its’ very nature is dependent on failure (failure fuels learning).
The reason so many of us shy away from doing anything new and innovative is because people like the above are often in charge. They want innovation (or so they say) provided there are results. Provided they are off the hook for failure but still get to bask in the glory of success.
That’s not how innovation works. The Wright Brothers failed on numerous occasions and their first successful flight was all of 3.5 seconds (followed by a longer flight of 12 seconds). Without trial and error…without failure, would we have flight today?
Innovating in large, corporate cultures also come with a litany of variables outside of our control. Picture this…you decide to go to a personal trainer to get in shape and you tell the trainer “I’ll hire you, but I’m only paying you if there are quantifiable results.” There are so many variables involved like:
Will the person actually put in the work?
Will they change up their diet?
Commit to the program?
How long until we must show “quantifiable results?”
The same is true in innovation. If I come up with a new idea…is the expectation that this new idea produce revenue next week? Are you giving me any resources to build out the MVP? Do I get to prioritize this over my other duties?
It’s so easy to spew this kind of Kool-Aid style management BS (Like mini Jerry Maguires--"show me the KPI's!")…but real life innovation is messy, complicated and the variables are numerous.
We do need controls in place, yes. Innovation is costly and we can't just throw good money after bad. So, we instead create go/no-go timelines for new ideas. We set SMART goals (refresher: Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-Bound) for the innovation project and commit to the project organizationally. We have regular updates on whether or not the idea is viable and scalable. Even if it fails those measures, can we take what we've learned and apply it to new concepts?
If this individual sat in a leadership role with the company I worked for and I read this commentary? I’d likely start looking for another role. Companies that operate with this mentality are on the path of obsolescence. Their focus is on short-term, incremental improvements and competitors will soon overtake them. Without a culture dedicated to innovation, you will force the idea-creators elsewhere.
No one wants to raise their hand and innovate for leaders who push for innovation and claim the glory for success but at the same time will shift any blame of failure to you, the idea-creator.
댓글