Innocide!!!

Last month, my friend Whitney Johnson wrote a great post about entitlement being an innovation-killer.  Please read it if you haven’t.  I’m sure we all know examples of this in many aspects of our lives.  In some corporate cultures, Innocide is brazen and in others incredibly polite and subtle.  Perhaps the subtlest of all is Suinnocide – killing innovation within us.  Most of us are masters at that!

Some organizations have an innovation process that includes assessment of successes and failures – but they measure what’s already gotten into the innovation pipeline, not what didn’t even make it in!  Innocide is pre-process murder.  It’s subtle, pervasive, socially acceptable and pernicious…which makes it hard to measure and harder to fix. 

Since this is difficult, how can we start to reduce our organization’s (and our own) Innocide rate?  Start identifying Innocide when you see it!  You could create a cadre of Innocide Detectives!  I bet you already have some – the ones you tend to dismiss or view as radical, rebellious, heretical or ‘out there’.   Give it a try.  This week, start listening for key phrases like But, Ought.  Try asking “What if” or “Why not” or say “Yes, and” – see what happens.  Perhaps you can reduce your Innocide rate before you even know what it is!   Please let me know how it goes!

Innovation Soul Food? Irritation!

Seriously!  You know when you have an idea for a new business, product, service or process and you tell someone and they pick it apart? They tell you all the reasons it won’t work.  You get really really peeved and annoyed and say to yourself, “They just don’t ‘get it’.”?  Frustrating isn’t it?

Last week, I was privileged to tag along with the Oberlin College Enterpreneurship Scholars on their trip to NYC visiting “Obie” alumni.  These kids were at different stages of developing or executing their businesses.  The alumni gave their own stories and then critiqued the kids’ plans.  It was interesting to see what the kids listened to and what irritated them.

It’s so easy to turn someone off when they disagree with you; “They just understand the real needs; they don’t know that market; they don’t see it on the ground like I do.”  Sound familiar?

One of the alumni told the kids to stop and think about what is really irritating them about the advice or suggestions.  Great advice!  So, when you are getting feedback (which may be criticism) on your idea, instead of turning that person off, stop and think about what it is that really bugs you about their feedback.  By analyzing what is really bugging you, you can hone your passion and purpose behind the idea. 

This week, find people who are great irritants (shouldn’t be too hard for some of us!).  Share some of your ideas. While they may view your cup as half empty, they just filled it up half full for you! Give it a try and tell us how it goes!

Intangible Loss of Outsourced Innovation

Today’s New York Times front page features “How U.S. Lost Out on iPhone Work” about the loss of American jobs overseas and the implications for our middle class.  I’ve been thinking about the 2^nd, 3^rd order effects of outsourcing, especially now that some companies are either doing or seriously considering insourcing. 

In November, I spoke with Bernard Charlès, CEO of Dassault Systèmes, (DS), creator of 3D simulation products for manufacturing to life sciences. Insourcing is a key component of Dassault and Bernard’s personal values: a company’s role includes contributing to society and the economy through the business itself.

I’ve wondered about the cost-benefit equation of in vs. outsourcing for a while.  Most cost-benefit analysis focuses on tangibles: lower labor rates, higher freight, etc.  Are 2^nd and 3^rd order effects accounted for in the equation: benefits of training and professional/career development, adjacent businesses in manufacturing or services, other opportunities?  I don’t know.  And what about innovation?

I agree with many who believe we learn by doing.   Many innovations arise by trying to do something one way and figuring out a better way or an entirely different way to do it.  If we’ve outsourced the ‘doing’ doesn’t it follow that we’ve outsourced the ‘learning’?   I wonderful how many opportunities for innovation we’ve lost because we weren’t ‘doing’.   In the NYT article, Apple’s executives said the reason for outsourcing went beyond cheap labor; overseas factories could scale faster and workers were more flexible and skilled than in the USA.  Perhaps because they learned to?

While ‘learning from doing’ is not easy to quantify and add into the equation, it needs to be.   Isn’t that an important part of the ‘business case’ for insourcing?  Perhaps it wasn’t viewed as important in the last century, but it sure is for this one. As we rapidly move from knowledge stacks to knowledge flows, per John Hagel, the ability to capture and apply learning becomes one of customer, and competitive, advantage, if not survival – of companies, economies, societies.

So, have you tried to quantify your ‘learning by doing’? Have you made it part of any business case for out/insourcing?  Please share – these are important and valuable lessons.