What is blocking SA organisations’ innovation potential? – Henra Mayer
The concept of innovation is not new in South Africa, yet very few organisations can pride themselves as overwhelmingly successful in this regard. I have come across various viewpoints on the topic, be it in the boardroom or by means of an internet search, about why innovation fails. In an article by Project Leaders International (2008) for instance, the following is mentioned as holding us back from truly realising the value of innovation:
• people only seeing radical ideas as innovation, not focusing on incremental improvements;
.
• a believe that innovation is being taken care of as it is the R&D or Marketing department’s job to innovate or that a
.
• service company sees innovation as irrelevant as they believe innovation is only about products.
Critical success factors again include top management support, cultural impact and innovation training to mention but a few. According to the Boston Consulting Group’s 2008 Innovation Survey, most companies are not happy with their return on innovation investment either.
I would like to know, in your opinion, what do we have to do to overcome the current SA innovation barriers in the organisational environment? We do have the innovation know-how, but what is holding us back from innovating successfully?
Share with me your Return on Innovation. I know of one SA organisation that can prove that they get R27 for every rand spent on innovation. Do you have a story to share?
The majority of organisations that we have come across do not even understand their own business models or have a clear, formalised strategic intent in the form of targeted outcomes based on moments of truth.
My feeling is that, by and large, South African businesses are controlled (rather than led) by accountancy minded individuals who are largely adverse to the concept of change or innovation.
I concede that my comments are wild generalisations but, in the absence of any focused research in this area, this is a strain of opinion that I have come across many times and may contain the seeds of truth.
We all know that, more often than not, individuals in senior positions are there because of a history of safe decision making rather than good, or even daring decisions. Innovation is a scary topic for them as they do not understand it and would feel uncomfortable, or even threatened, in taking up the subject with their superiors.
I guess the question is really “How do we transform the current ‘maintenance management’ style of industry and government into one of ‘dynamic self-confident leadership’ which will embrace innovation?”
Most times fear or resistance to foreign concepts is born out of a lack of understanding or knowledge and an intrepidation of what might result should they introduce them into their business. We have developed methodologies, supported by powerful technology, that assists an organisation to produce a clear visualisation of their functional structure in the form of a role accountability business model focused on their strategic intent but we too are really battling to get prospective clients to understand the benefits it brings.
Dont look too deep into the bottle. The barriers to innovation are quite simple.
1. lack of faith in the country – leaders are unwilling to invest too far into the future.
2. Lack of project managers – the people that are good at innovation are typically not good at driving projects to the market. Delays, rescope etc all increase the cost of innovation and the risk of investing.
I think John has put his finger on the issue. Innovation is considered disruptive, and can be perceived as being a challenge to authority or the lean manufacturing environment. Even with good project management, incremental innovation requires a shift in mind-set, which is not easy. Many companies are so systems driven – absolutely necessary for cost control and excellent product quality. However, systems are not innovation friendly. The is a need to think creatively about how to bring focused delivery needs of the business and innovation needs together in a symbiotic relationship.
Fred your comments are true as well. If “innovation” does not provide immediate ROI, it is a no go. So we need leaders who have long term vision.
I agree with John Baggot, very few organisations have an innovation mandate built into their Balanced Scorecard. I see innovation far more often in smaller companies where decision making is simple and leaders are not beholden to shareholders with whom they have agreed an acceptable return in the short term.
Many companies are also fairly risk averse when it comes to investing in new ideas, they would rather buy a company that has already innovated and gone through the pains of development, than “waste” time and resources on uncertain outcomes. We see this particularly in the IT sector.
Another barrier to innovation was mentioned in your article Henra, culture – suspicion, fear of exposure, arrogance, siloed thinking and not-invented-here very often get in the way of collaboration which is an important driver of innovation across an organisation.
My points above relate to longer term innovation. But with regards to the comments on incremental innovation – does anyone see the irony in blaming company ‘processes’ for lack of innovation, and then looking to these same ‘processes’ to improve the situation? Innovation is not, to my mind, about process – it is about culture. Is it possible to proceduralise culture? In my experience, culture is a direct result of the organisations leadership. If the organisation feels it cannot innovate, change the leadership.
If the organistion is not getting a return on investment, then the organisation is probably not aggressive enough (too short term)in its selection of projects, or it does not have the skills to implement.
One skill that I think is particularly lacking in the organisations I have been involved with, and I think ties in with Heidi’s points on systems, is that we are not very good at prototyping – be it service, product, or process. Leaders need to make ’safe’ decisions and it is up to the innovators to convince leaders. But usually the innovators want to implement changes operationally which legitimately scares leaders of organisations. There needs to be a space for prototyping…
I agree on all points above. Organizations that innovate successfully make it part of the strategy and measure it continuously using BSC methodology. They are open to prototype and encourage their employees to try out and test new ideas in safe environments. They have a kind of culture / leadership that is open to collaboration and teamwork. Creative thinking and innovative practices are valued but at the same time there is a bias for action people don’t just talk they also do much. One of the core challenges in my opinion is to get leadership to sponsor and openly support innovation. Each organization is different and innovation will mean different things but that needs to be defined. Just as you have an improvement and growth strategy in place so too should you have an innovation strategy in place. I like the analogy that having a structure of innovators to possibly disrupt the status quo is like hiring hackers to work for a computer firm – they will find the cracks in your current strategy and business model before your competitors will. Innovators keep organizations sharp, honest and on the ball. It is no wonder that organizations that struggle with innovation eventually falter it is because they have become so disillusioned from their customers and the external environment that they end up doing the wrong things. That’s why collaboration, open and flatter structures and being ‘close to the customer’ are so vital for innovation. But all this begins with leadership – once you have that support and sponsorship you can begin to establish strategies, systems and processes to support your innovation efforts. Currently you predominantly will find only pockets of excellence in organizations (private and public) but without much leadership support that is primarily why they struggle.
Very interesting topic and relevant not only in SA, but all over the world.
So many people knowing so much about what to do? Why dont we succeed?
The answer is of course complicated, but just to mention one issue.
Innovation is often in the same situation as networking and relation management.Everybody talks about how important it is, but you seldom find it it the strategy, and even if you find it there its not followed bye resources.
The answer is priority and commitment from board and top management with clear measurable goals/ results, followed bye resources.
The problem that i have seen in the scientific environment is the lack of willingness to engage in the process of turning research into a product. Also another missing link is the guidance that is required for successful innovation. The government is trying to address these but learning is a slow process and mistakes shall be made in order for us to learn. Many have seen the lack in understanding in what it takes to drive innovation and are starting to address these problems. This is the beginning not the end of South African innovation
Barriers in point form:
1. Leadership Sponsorship & open support
2. Practical methodology
3. Clear Strategy & Measurment Criteria
4. Clear process (Ideas to execution)
5. Rewards & Motivation
6. Lack of collaboration – Closed Structure – no / minimal communication – Business units are not on the same page
7. Lack of discipline to prototype & execute
8. Attitude of management & employees (Typically the ‘why bother trying attitude is present in non innovative cultures)
9. Lack of training for creativity, innovation & problem solving
10. No clear understanding of the customer (all the different segments) expectations, needs and wants
Also not enough investment in research, prototypes and testing as well as low appetite for risk and exploration.
Thanks for your interesting comments. I agree with the viewpoints raised and also believe it is a worldwide issue . If our innovation challenges then comprise lack of visionary leadership, a short-term orientation, lack of a culture for innovation, poor networking and not enough project management skills (to mirror just a few of your inputs)….let’s start thinking solutions. What do we need to do first to give innovation a chance of success and ensure renewal in our corporate environments?
In my opinion innovation training and a focus on breaking down innovation barriers,(perhaps starting with management!)together with strategic alignment, planning for and the allocation of accountability for innovation output would be some of the initiatives to top the list…….?
Just to note – innovation describes the means of delivering a new solution to a need. It is not an end in itself. Companies dont innovate! They sell a collection of inputs for more than they bought them. You and I as consumers dont order three Innovations from the Catalogue of Eminent Innovators, London – Purveyors of fine innovations. We have needs that are met in innovative ways. How do you make one person responsible for innovation? Is that person not the CEO? Is it not the CEO’s responsibility to ensure that the organisation is running profitiably and growing sustainably? I agree that more training is required to allow people to understand the importance of ideas, and the value in trying new things, and most importantly understanding the overt and subtle ways in which a managers ego and behavior kill innovation. I firmly believe that innovation is genetic (an evolutionary advantage), its in all of us, and does not require training. It is like the instinct animals have to swim. And when can an animal not swim? When a manager puts his/her foot on its head…
Thanks for a very though provoking discussion.
I have to declare my past in order to understand where I am coming from. I taught for 26 years, mainly in Sciences, Computers and Technology. I had the pleasure of dealing with the minds of many generations of youth from all walks of life across and broad range of projects. All I can say is that there are many very creative and innovative minds out there and need to be given, not the training, but the tools to generate innovate solutions to many of life’s problems.
Providing training for creativity and especially innovation is a difficult one. In my opinion the ‘horse has bolted’ by the time the youth are absorbed into the corporate world. I recall one such individual who I still believed was blinkered by going on to university to get a ‘degree’. I still maintained that he should have set up a company got involved in developing some of his ideas and then gone on to university to formalize matters if this was deemed necessary. Sadly, he has a secure job, earns a reasonable salary, bought himself a car but is hopelessly disillusioned with his work because his immediate boss is an autocrat and knows far less than him and feels threatened.
Another example is where a student produced a really innovative solution involving a USB key and a locking mechanism. Despite receiving international recognition he did not receive the initial support from the school. He is now qualified as an accounting and his skills are lost to the system.
There are many more examples to be quoted but the essential thing is that our country is not identifying Einsteins in the field on a daily basis as firstly the education system is failing the badly and secondly there is no mechanism to tag them for enrichment and further support.
I believe that this is the source for a long-term solution to many of the problem that have been referred to above. Teaching old dog new trick is difficult but not impossible. Ideal employees should arrive at an institution asking not for the training but for the tools to get on with the job. It then becomes a management of these individuals to spawn a new way of innovation within an organization where the company shares in the success of innovation rather than trying to always capitalize on it.
To resolve the potential problem in the long term will require an investment in organizations that are actively involved in growing our youth not just filling their minds as part of a process of information transfer.
The inputs and insights shared above have said so much, little is left to be said. My experience of 20 years in various industries and positions suggest that organisational leadership appears to be a large contributor to suppressing innovation; I think it is John Maxwell who suggested that an organisation cannot develop & grow further that its leadership allows. I naturally challenge the status quo and in environments where I have attempted to do this to bring about transformation via innovation, I have been met with much resistance fuelled by insecure leadership, short-term bottom-line focus and not willing to invest in people (innovation initiatives/interventions). This has been a great frustration to me as I believe SA as a nation needs to adopt a more progressive mindset/paradigm with regard to innovation-driven transformation if we are to promote sustainable progress.
I think you summarised it well Jacques. I also really agree with Ron. We need to invest in our youth and support their creative and willing mindsets. At this point in time I believe we “out-educate” innovation from our children with the endless imposing of boundaries. Training in my mind is essential, on various levels. Mainly about why innovation is necessary and what it means in the corporate environment. So maybe it is more about awreness creation and creativity tools. Reminding ourselves about our own inherent innovation capabilities and how to unlock and grow it. How to be more aware of the boundaries we create for innovation and exploring ways to overcome these obstacles, because we sometimes don’t see it anymore. Companies can be innovative but it happens through the people that work inside the company. It is about how the organsiation can cultivate this innovation capability and employ it inside the organisation on a strategic level to make it part of the “way we do business”. It is about employing innovation principles on a business level. Having said all this though, like you so aptly put it above – if top management do not understand this, does not want to support it or is short-term driven – it will be a fruitless, frustrating waste of effort. An innovative mindset and a progressive outlook should be a pre-requisite for a managerial/leadership position! It is time for the typical 4 year, short-term leadership contract based on stock options to be replaced by an option that forces leaders to take responsibility for the future sustainability of their organsiations. They should stick around long enough to face the consequences of their actions and some times the consequences of their short sightedness.