If innovating is easy, why are there so few innovative companies?

0
49

If innovating were easy, everyone would be doing it. But it is not something that is difficult either, but rather that what innovation involves is entering an environment of complexity. Innovation is complex because it requires integrating different elements and areas that in many companies are not connected; or what is worse, that they ignore each other. The need to understand this complexity is what makes it necessary to have knowledge of how innovation can develop in an organization, but above all, it requires knowledge of how processes are developed within the organization and what are the formal and informal networks by which the employees of the company communicate.

And this complexity is what calls into question one of the concepts that have become fashionable in recent years: agility. In many companies, this fashion has been raised as a strategic need because “the siren songs” of those who say that you have to be agile to survive in the market, who also convince them that if they adopt a methodology of the different agile methodologies that have been created will succeed in the market. And what is said about agility is also said about innovation: if an innovation methodology is implemented, it will be possible to be innovative.

In both cases, the organizations that create this can make a mistake with important consequences. The fact of adopting a methodology to be something, to be innovative, or to be agile, what it entails is that we will try to incorporate methods, good practices, and processes with which we believe that we will achieve our objective into the day-to-day of our organization. However, this way of operating has a basic error: it does not create a cultural change in the company. And that is what makes it difficult for you to be successful because it does not affect the fundamentals of the company.

Being agile or innovating is not achieved by following a method, something more is required; and this is what is achieved if philosophy is adopted first. That is, if we adopt some principles and values, we are going to cause a particular way of thinking to develop that will result in new ways of behaving in the company and should also cause changes in the way networks are created or configured in the company. business.

The decision to be innovative or agile by philosophy or by methodology is substantial. If we adopt a philosophy, what we do is influence the intangible aspects that are what build the culture of an organization, and that grow and evolve over time. On the other hand, if we adopt a methodology we influence tangible aspects, in process areas. But the relevant difference is that philosophy is not linked to a methodology but rather allows us to choose the one that is considered most appropriate at all times, and we can even use several methodologies simultaneously depending on the project. On the other hand, we do implement a methodology and it does not work as we thought it would or it does not serve us for certain projects, so innovation is questioned.

What I present seems obvious is one of the situations that occur in all types of organizations. And especially in those who are starting and want to develop technology-based products or services: those known as startups or emerging companies. This is a world, that of startups, in which due to the need to have income quickly to be able to survive in many events, the emphasis is placed on the priority of using one of the different methodologies that have been created to innovate in startups. The events are focused on the methods, on how those who are now large companies do it or how they did it, but they forget that those who are now large are because they have a philosophy that supports innovation in those companies. But why do we focus on methodologies and not on philosophies? Well, because a methodology is easy to implement and can produce results quickly. On the other hand, implementing a philosophy is more difficult and its results are in the medium and long term. Because implementing a philosophy begins with the head, that is, with the top management of the company. And these should be the first to be believed and assumed what others will have to incorporate into their business culture.

And this is the point where the difficulties begin and what generates the complexity because the members of the top management are not always willing to adopt new principles or values. The reluctance to change, having to get out of the comfort zone is what will have to influence when an organization wants to be innovative or be agile.

On the other hand, implementing a philosophy is more difficult and its results are in the medium and long term.

Because implementing a philosophy begins with the head, that is, with the top management of the company. And these should be the first to be believed and assumed what others will have to incorporate into their business culture. And this is the point where the difficulties begin and what generates the complexity because the members of the top management are not always willing to adopt new principles or values. The reluctance to change, having to get out of the comfort zone is what will have to influence when an organization wants to be innovative or be agile. On the other hand, implementing a philosophy is more difficult and its results are in the medium and long term. Because implementing a philosophy begins with the head, that is, with the top management of the company. And these should be the first to be believed and assumed what others will have to incorporate into their business culture. And this is the point where the difficulties begin and what generates the complexity because the members of the top management are not always willing to adopt new principles or values. The reluctance to change, having to get out of the comfort zone is what will have to influence when an organization wants to be innovative or be agile. by the top management of the company. And these should be the first to be believed and assumed what others will have to incorporate into their business culture. And this is the point where the difficulties begin and what generates the complexity because the members of the top management are not always willing to adopt new principles or values. The reluctance to change, having to get out of the comfort zone is what will have to influence when an organization wants to be innovative or be agile. by the top management of the company. And these should be the first to be believed and assumed what others will have to incorporate into their business culture. And this is the point where the difficulties begin and what generates the complexity because the members of the top management are not always willing to adopt new principles or values. The reluctance to change, having to get out of the comfort zone is what will have to influence when an organization wants to be innovative or be agile. And this is the point where the difficulties begin and what generates the complexity because the members of the top management are not always willing to adopt new principles or values. The reluctance to change, having to leave the comfort zone is what it will have to influence when an organization wants to be innovative or be agile. And this is the point where the difficulties begin and what generates the complexity because the members of the top management are not always willing to adopt new principles or values. The reluctance to change, having to leave the comfort zone is what it will have to influence when an organization wants to be innovative or be agile.

And how can you start to raise awareness about this? Well in my opinion with training. But not training in methodologies or procedures but training based on introducing the principles and values ​​that you want to take root in the company.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here