INNOVATE OR PERISH: LESSONS FOR DEALING WITH HARD TIMES Donald Tosti, CPT, PhD One of the most important variables in the success of a business over time is the extent to which the organization develops innovative business strategies and has an agile culture that supports such innovation. This article describes ways of accomplishing both requirements. COMPANIES ARE INCREASINGLY FINDING themselves facing a volatile and often harsh environment. Many have felt the impact of difficult economic trends. Others in highly competitive businesses need to respond rapidly to technological change as well as changes in customer buying habits and perceived needs. The first reaction to crises is usually a hunkering down, in which people or product lines are eliminated. But in the long run, most organizations find that they must become more innovative if they are to survive the turbulence in their business environments. Innovation may be defined as “doing things in a new or different way to create new sources of value.” New ideas, products, services, or processes all may have potential, but if they fail to create value, they are not considered innovative. The most important variable in the success of a business over time may be found not on the balance sheet but be derived from the way people in the organization conceive of their business. Specifically, it is the extent to which the organization has an innovative business strategy and a supportive and innovative culture. Among the few safe predictions is that there will be change and that organizations with rigid, bureaucratic cultures will find it difficult, even impossible, to be successful over time. One has only to look at the number of major corporations cited as “ideal” or “excellent” by writers only a few years ago that are now struggling because they lack a culture and strategy that would have allowed them to innovative and adapt to today’s market conditions. The natural tendency seems to be to concentrate exclusively on strategy. There are several new approaches to this issue, such as Kim and Mauborgne’s (2004) “blue ocean” approach, but we have found that focusing first on the culture is generally a better way to go. I recall oneclient saying, “We have lots of great ideas; our problem is implementing even one of them.” So innovation requires two critical elements: an agile and innovative culture and an innovative strategy. In our consulting work, we find we usually must deal with both. Since it is less familiar to managers, I will primarily focus on the cultural issues in this article but will also summarize tools for strategic issues. CREATING AN INNOVATIVE CULTURE The first conclusion is probably one that most people can accept: The capacity to adapt to rapidly changing business conditions lies primarily in an organization’s people, not in its resources, products, or even technology. The second conclusion is less widely held: While processes, skills, and competencies are important to fostering successful change, the practices and behaviors that make up the organization’s culture are of even greater importance. Coming up with new ideas is not enough. The old adage, “Invention is one part inspiration and nine parts perspiration,” emphasizes the point that creativity is only a small part of the inventive effort. The same is true of innovation. The term perspiration, however, is slightly misleading. In the innovative company, it is not a matter of working harder; it is a matter of working smarter. MEASURING INNOVATIVE POTENTIAL Our experiences with organizations that have been successful in volatile environments led us to begin developing an instrument that would measure corporate innovation potential in a way that would provide actionable feedback. Performance Improvement, vol. 49, no. 1, January 2010 ©2010 International Society for Performance Improvement Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) • DOI: 10.1 002/pfi.201 20 3 9 In designing our research, we did our best to avoid imposing a single bias by using a wide variety of sources to supplement our own experience. We deliberately avoided trying to assess any single position, such as determining what constitutes a “learning company,” as described by Senge (2006). We went through various sources as well as our own work to identify performance practices that appear to characterize adaptive companies and found that eight principles accounted for most of the items: Commitment Creating value Initiative Support for change Leadership Learning Openness Respect and challenge To construct an initial instrument, we chose six practices for each of the principles. The items were reviewed by people in 15 companies with substantial experience of innovation; practices were rated as to the degree of importance for their innovation efforts. The results were a bit surprising at first, but on reflection they make sense. For example, the single most important practice was related to understanding how one’s job contributes to the organization’s success. Neither we nor any of the gurus we consulted gave this kind of item top billing, but all made some reference to it. It’s something that everyone agrees is important but that is seldom dealt with well. THE INNOVATION SCORECARD Here are the top 10 cultural practices, in order of their perceived importance to implementing innovation: 1. People see their job more in terms of the value they create than the task they perform. 2. Our people show a sense of personal urgency and energy about achieving results. 3. We are willing to make significant change in the way we do things now to better provide value to the customer and the company. 4. We are more concerned with doing what’s right for the customer and organization than we are doing only what the boss wants. 5. People in the organization have a clear understanding of how their efforts affect the satisfaction and retention of customers. 6. Meeting the needs of the business and customer is 2 www.ispi.org • DOI: 10.1 002/pfi • JANUARY 2010 seen as far more important than conforming to bureaucratic and administrative requirements. 7. We see ourselves as able to influence events, not as victims of circumstances. 8. People feel encouraged to make on-the-spot decisions when necessary, without waiting for full approval from higher management. 9. At the conclusion of a project, we regularly look for lessons learned. 10. Once we have made a commitment to change, we have a sense of urgency and a high level of resolve to follow through. The fact that successful adaptation depends on several factors may also help to explain why single-focus approaches do not seem to work in the long run. Top- 10 lists are always popular and provide a good place to start, but a more comprehensive approach is necessary to provide a base for making solid recommendations or taking action. As a first approximation, however, one might ask, “Would people respond positively to these 10 items in my company?” If the answer is no, perhaps an investment in creating a more innovative organization is appropriate. DATA REVIEW Review of the data gathered in our research showed that four of the innovation support categories accounted for most of the variance in the ratings. We have tentatively labeled these the core four: commitment, creating value, leadership, and initiative. The other remaining four areas, while still rated as important, are not seen as having the same level of impact on the organization as the first four: A key element in commitment is understanding how your efforts can contribute to the success of the organization. Surprisingly, relatively few people really understand what drives the businesses they work in. And all too often, senior management attitudes seem to say, “Why do they need to know that?” 1. Commitment: People in innovative organizations tend to look at their jobs in terms of the value they create rather than just the tasks they perform. This view of the work helps build motivation to improve, work with others, and find new and better ways of working. Creating value means getting people to think about what is right for the business and operate from business priorities rather than personal or political pressures. 2. Creating value: 3. Initiative: The practices relevant to innovation are not just empowerment warmed over. Initiative comes from individuals, not their bosses, and it is based on both self-confidence and the opportunity to take action. It is not enough for the boss to give permission to act; people must believe that there is genuine support so that they can give themselves permission to act. 4. Leadership: In organizations that handle change well, people are typically comfortable that top management is scanning the environment for possible opportunities (or threats) and making the effort to keep them up to date. Leaders also encourage everyone in the organization to make, or at least help make, tough decisions and take appropriate actions. The following four areas were less critical to the support of an innovative culture but still were important: 5. Support for change: An organization’s history of dealing with change affects how it will approach change in the present. For example, has the organization dealt successfully with change in the past? Do people have a sense of continued commitment, or do they see a series of “flavors of the month” initiatives? 6. Openness: Key impediments to openness are the sense that communication upward is blocked or that certain issues are out of bounds. In innovative organizations, there is little protectiveness of information and few, if any, sacred cows or difficult points that cannot be questioned or openly discussed. 7. Respect and challenge: Richard Pascale (2000) said that one of the differences between companies that continue to succeed and those that do not is the extent to which they have legitimized challenge. A key factor is behavior that clearly demonstrates respect and recognizes that people can have legitimate reasons for opposed views. Innovative organizations tend to treat people as adults who are capable of taking responsibility and thinking for themselves. 8. Learning: The learning organization is one that is genuinely focused on learning as an organization, not just supporting the learning and development of individuals. A key element is the habit of looking first for lessons learned when things go wrong rather than searching for where to assign blame. Searching for who is at fault will quickly suppress the very information needed to make constructive change. Does innovation matter? The Economist in 2007 quoted a study done by McKinsey Global Institute (2007) that shows that it was “competition and innovation that led to the extraordinary productive gains seen in the 1990s.” But innovation is still seen as a fuzzy matter by most organizations and even by most experts in the field. It neednot be. Defining organizational practices that underlie accepting and executing new ideas that result in creating new sources of value is possible, and providing a management system that fosters and maintains such a culture is also possible. This most often means a need to legitimize challenge within the organization to help maintain its innovative power. This is difficult for many companies. Although some bureaucracies have legitimized challenge, many are strongly hierarchical in nature and almost forbid it. The question too often is, “What does my boss want?” not, “What’s right for our business today?” Many companies have tried to “buy” innovation. Since they cannot seem to do it internally, they acquire smaller, more agile companies that have developed innovative products or services. This is often done at a very high price and with mixed results. One problem is that most often the culture of the parent company clashes with the innovative company and the people who were most responsible for the innovation leave, particularly the best managers. Culture Is Often the Key to Success Culture makes an important difference even in good times. Research done by Harvard professors Kotter and Heskett (2006) on companies matched on all factors except culture found that adaptive cultural differences had a twelvefold impact on growth and profit over a 9-year period. What is important in good times is often a matter of life or death in hard times. A small investment in creating a more innovative culture can produce significant returns. But beware of the many so-called culture programs based on normative benchmarks. What we are advocating here is an approach that focuses only on cultural practices that are important for innovation. Some Thoughts on Creating an Innovative Strategy An innovative strategy is important because customer value is generally increased by creating elements that the industry has seldom, if ever, offered. Innovation should embrace the entire spectrum of a company’s activities. SIX INNOVATION TOOLS Tool 1: Conducting a Customer Value Analysis of Existing and/or Potential Value Factors The functional benefits or qualities of a product or service count for only part of the customer value. For example, recent research indicated that the sales experience itself accounts on the average for half of a customer’s overall loyalty. In addition, the impact of factors like costs and recovery must be considered as well as benefits. Performance Improvement • Volume 49 • Number 1 • DOI: 10.1002/pfi 3 Vanguard Consulting has developed a performance model to analyze customer value. It looks at 10 dimensions that can affect customer value and, hence, purchase and retention, and examines them in three categories: benefit factors (benefits include both functional and sales experiences), cost factors (costs include price and effort), and recovery. These dimensions are used in the example that follows of determining the customer value focus for Sitting Duck Wines. Benefit Factor Examples ings; problems derived from having to choose from a wide range of offerings. 8. Later effort—May require special storage. These cost questions can be asked: How hard are we to do business with? What does everyone else in the field do to differentiate themselves? At what cost? How does this appeal to noncustomers? If we did more of this, would we attract more noncustomers? 1. Product functionality—Taste, nose, and other wine attributes. 2. Product behaviorally—Status snobbery, fun, sex appeal, excitement. What would happen if we eliminated a feature or reduced it and lowered our price? Would we lose or gain customers? 3. Provider functionality—Some wineries provide wine store personnel with guidance tools to aid a purchaser’s decision and enhance the sales experience. Recovery 9. Recovery process—Does the company provide for returns? 4. Provider behaviorally—Some wineries provide a training video for wine store employees emphasizing positive support for uncertain customers. 10. Recovery experience—How are customers made to feel if they return the item? These specific benefit creation questions can be asked (adapted from Kim and Mauborgne [2004]): After this analysis Sitting Duck’s innovative strategy focused on four areas of customer value: Product function—Provided a softer tasting wine and What do most people (customers and noncustomers) watch, drink, eat, smell, travel in, do their hair with, and so on [appropriate verb for your industry]? Is there a difference in these popular activities between those who are and are not customers? eliminated the need to acquire a taste for it. Product behavioral—The advertising campaign emphasized a sense of fun and adventure. Initial effort cost—Made selection easier by offering only three choices. What do these popular things have in common? What do our competitors do differently with these popular things than we do? What would make it easier for our customers to watch, drink, and so forth? What would make it cheaper for our customers to watch, drink, and so forth? What might make our customers watch or drink more often or longer? Recovery process—It made this pledge: “If you don’t What else could happen as our customers watch or drink to make them feel good? What is the best thought people have when they experience a product or service in our industry area? What is the worst thought people have when they experience a product or service in our industry area? Cost Factors Examples 5. Purchase price—Wide range of pricing. 6. Maintenance price—Suggestion that customers provide for further aging after purchase. 7. Initial effort—Limited distribution of particular offer- 4 www.ispi.org • DOI: 10.1 002/pfi • JANUARY 2010 love it, bring it back, and the merchant will replace it with another wine of comparable cost at our expense.” Tool 2: Using the Innovative Action Matrix The matrix is used to answer these questions: What benefits can be raised well above the industry standard? What benefits can be created that the industry has never offered before? What “costs” taken for granted can be eliminated? What costs can be reduced well below the industry standard? Tool 3: Developing an Innovative Strategy Blueprint This is accomplished by putting together a list of benefits and features that are considered to already add value and brainstorm those that could potentially add value taken from a customer value analysis. All strategies are multidimensional and, hence, are almost impossible to reduce to a set of numbers. An effective way to illustrate a strategy is to use a diagrammatic structure. The strategic blueprint using variations of the Vanguard Customer Value model combined with the Action Matrix is an effective way of doing this. spite of fads and fashion, people have some core needs and ways of acting. There are certain fundamentals that can’t be ignored. These are usually biological and social. As the dot-com fiasco showed most clearly, we must avoid jumping on any bandwagon that seems to violate underlying principles of business and people systems. Avoiding getting stuck in today and instead looking across time is more difficult and probably has higher risk than most of the other strategies identified in this article. Tool 4: Taking an Innovative View It is not what we do; it is what they want. Are we too technology or product driven and not sufficiently customer driven? For example, the view of service is often quite different in Europe than it is in the United States. Much of European service can be characterized as: “Service is what I do. You can take advantage of it or not; it’s up to you.” In contrast, businesses in the United States tend to look at service in terms of what the customer wants. Are you in tune with what people really want if they had the choice? Conventional boundaries of competition may be seen as fences that constrain actions. Moving beyond existing market boundaries to create opportunities requires new perspectives. Consider these to get new perspectives: Look over the back fence. What are the neighbors doing? Most organizations look at what their competitors are doing and focus on doing the generally accepted practices within their industry. An alternative is to look at what people in other industries that have similar customers do. For example, if you are a business selling luxury items, you might look at how companies in different industries sell their luxury items. What other ways do the neighbors do it? Describe in general what your customers do with your product or service (e.g., sit on it, read it, get warm with it, pay with it). Then ask: What other ways do people do similar things? In other words, you’re looking for alternatives. What are some of the features that people like about these alternatives? Are they more convenient or cheaper, for example? If so, can you provide these benefits? Remember, “It’s the whole experience, stupid.” This really encompasses two opportunities: to add more value to what you do by managing more of the customer’s experience and to find ways of serving customers at more points within their entire experience. Don’t get overly focused on today’s “weather.” Several years ago Peters and Waterman (2004) called IBM an “excellent company” in their groundbreaking book In Search of Excellence. It was for its marketplace at the time, but even then the days of the mainframe were numbered, and when the market changed, IBM didn’t. Its road back to success was long and hard, and almost ended up in bankruptcy. Things are always happening. The railroad tycoons in the 19th and early 20th centuries thought railroads would be a king industry forever, and they generally ignored or discounted newfangled means of transportation. But then airplanes took their passengers and trucks their freight business. Soon railroads, at least in North America, became a minor industry. One basic fact seems to always befuddle innovators: In Tool 5: Identifying Factors That Inhibit Developing a Successful Innovative Strategy Beware of these factors: Too much focus on the competition—benchmarking the competition rather than the alternative offerings. Overdelivery––providing features that customers do not recognize or value. Incoherent strategy—no logic or coherence of approach to customers or a vague or hard-to-understand business model that makes achieving effective internal collaboration difficult. Strategic contradictions—for example, narrowing the offering to provide higher-quality delivery. Too internally focused. Focus on meeting internal goals and internal customer satisfaction rather than on business results and external customers. Focus on output rather than valued results, for example, manufacturing or technology driven rather than market driven. Describing activities in jargon rather than in customer experience terms. Marketing experts often point out that even if you are the leader of the pack, you are still part of that pack, and someone is always trying to take over your position. Tool 6: Performance Alignment Ideally, organizations should be aligned to deliver customer value in terms of both processes and practices. Performance alignment actually consists of a set of tools. Performance Improvement • Volume 49 • Number 1 • DOI: 10.1002/pfi 5 Since these tools are more tactical than strategic, they may be considered optional, but they are often quite useful. In our consulting efforts to aid in creating innovative organizations, we use several performance alignment tools. Two of these we have developed ourselves: the TostiJackson Organizational Alignment Model (Tosti & Jackson, 1994) and the SCAN model (Amarant & Tosti, 2006). Other useful alignment tools are Rummler’s Performance Anatomy Model (Rummler, 2007) and Heskett, Sasser, and Schlesinger’s Service Profit Chain Model (1997). THE FINAL REALITY References Amarant, J., & Tosti, D. (2006). Aligning the human performance system. In J.A. Pershing (Ed.), Handbook of human performance technology (pp. 1190–1223). San Francisco: Pfeiffer. Heskett, J.L., Sasser, W.E., & Schlesinger, L.A. (1997). The service profit chain. New York: The Free Press. Kim, W.C., & Mauborgne, R. (2004). Blue Ocean Strategy: How to create uncontested market space and make competition irrelevant. Boston: Harvard Business Press. No one has figured out how to predict change in the marketplace very well. What we can predict, however, is that the pace of change will continue, even under good economic conditions. Organizations that are likely to do well over the long term will be the innovative organizations that create and deliver a winning strategy. The economic meteor has struck, and most organizations are probably dinosaurs. So how do organizations avoid this fate? Size is no guarantee. We have already seen many brontosaurus-sized companies go extinct. But using an approach similar to the one described here provides some hope: Kotter, J.P., & Heskett, J.L. (2006). Corporate culture and performance. New York: The Free Press. 1. Examine your strategy using the six tools presented. Rummler, G.A. (2007). Serious peformance consulting according to Rummler. San Francisco: Pfeiffer. 2. Modify it as needed. McKinsey Global Institute. (2007, October 20). Financial globalization’s new power source. The Wall Street Journal, p.A2. Pascale, R. (2000). Surfing the edge of chaos: The laws of nature and the new laws of business. New York: Three Rivers Press. Peters, T.J., & Waterman, R.H. (2004). In search of excellence: Lessons from America’s best-run companies. New York: HarperCollins. 3. With the new strategy in mind. conduct an audit of the innovative practices of your organization’s culture. Senge, P.M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: DoubleDay Publishing. 4. Focus on those that are not sufficiently demonstrated, and give people feedback on their and their team’s performance. Tosti, D., & Jackson, S. (1994, April). Organizational alignment: How it works and why it matters. Training, pp. 58–64. And have lots of luck. DONALD TOSTI, CPT, PhD, is the founding partner of Vanguard Consulting. He has an extensive and varied background in management and for three decades has been a recognized expert in performance-based approaches to organizational effectiveness. He has received ISPI’s top two honors: Member for Life and the Thomas F. Gilbert Distinguished Professional Achievement Award. He served as ISPI president in 2004–2005. He has been involved in a wide range of organizational alignment and change programs for companies in the United States, the Middle East, and Europe. His consulting activities include work in leadership, management, culture change, strategic alliance, training, and internal marketing. He has also written numerous book chapters and articles on human performance technology and its application in today’s business world. He may be reached at Change111@aol.com. 6 www.ispi.org • DOI: 10.1 002/pfi • JANUARY 2010