I recently had a document passed along to me from my business partner.  The piece from the Boston Consulting Group, titled “The Seduction of Reductionist Thinking”, opens up by mentioning how every company is grappling with change and few are finding success.  As I read through I kept nodding my head agreeing to every point made.  I thought to myself, it’s about time someone exposed the functional silo structure and linear “resolution” process as the primary handcuffs to successful change.  If large organizations would take this to heart we wouldn’t be in the economic mess we find ourselves in…  Then the big shock.  The paper was published in 1992!

Having worked in a big corporation myself I saw first-hand the everyday failings of silo structures and linear processes.  Departments are actually incentivized NOT to share knowledge with each other, let alone even talk to one another.  As projects move through a “gate” process, small subsets of issues are resolved without any consideration for the impact those decisions make further along in the process.  Design groups, marketing groups and sometimes engineering groups wind up “polishing turds” as it’s known.  No matter how talented they may be, they were handed an unsuccessful project from the start. 

I believe the functional silo/linear process is residue from the industrial revolution.  It allowed us to make the same thing over and over with fewer and fewer failures.  In today’s world this is simply an execution operation and in my opinion a commodity.  To be successful, organizations better figure out how to create “new” and solve challenges never encountered before again and again.  Call it an innovation operation, a change operation, an operation with design thinking/process injected… the terminology isn’t so important.

The path toward a “better way” is discussed in the article.  It really comes down to multidisciplinary teams working together, processing all salient considerations and features at once to deliver holistic solutions.  Off the top of my head, Apple comes to mind.  They conceive the entire experience from brand, to product, so service, to marketing communications, retail, and packaging concurrently.  Each outward touch point of the organization depends on and supports the others in a coordinated fashion.

If you have an interest in revolutionizing business operations, or innovation I strongly suggest reading the piece… it’s only 2 pages:

http://www.mgmtarticles.com/content/5530/

Below is a post I found from Brandon Roger on Linkedin of all places.  It does a good job exposing common innovation challenges within large corporations.  I believe “design thinkers” are ideally suited to lead the multifunctional teams mentioned.  I also believe solutions arise by working above and across silo to process a broader set of salient “features” concurrently.

“Professor James Heskett, Baker Foundation Professor, Emeritus at Harvard Business School, has   published a new book - Stall Points. The book is based on quantitative research of business failure and cause. Of four hundred corporations that have been included at some point since 1955 in the Fortune 100 and ninety foreign based corporations, innovation and growth for fifty companies was reviewed. In each of these industry leaders, the authors found that growth increased up until the “stall year” – a phrase coined in the text to denote a change in growth curve. Once the stall year was reached, growth dropped significantly and each group of leaders found it difficult, at best, to regain the momentum previously enjoyed.

Innovation is a catalyst of increasing value to a system (i.e. a business model, an industry, goods, or services). The research conducted provides focus on the need to hardwire and sustain a culture of innovation within their organization. Creating value for a system is typically a longitudinal process requiring nurturing, sustainability, and champions.

All too often a colleague or employee is characterized as the “out of the box thinker” within the organization and without the appropriate nurturing and shielding from others will leave the organization – on their own or forced to exit, because they did not fit the mold. If this same individual is supported by an organizational celebration and communication of new, different – innovative, thinking they will flourish and evolve into a driver of strategic and financial growth.

Evolving a culture supportive of innovation is a purposed process like any other process with corresponding key learning’s or best practices. Five best practices to ensure hardwired innovative growth include:

1. Cultural Alignment. Innovation assumes its own life track when there is alignment with the organization’s culture. If the destination of the healthcare system is one which requires constant change; adapting to that change; and, introduction of new and/or disruptive technology, organization culture should provide the support and process.

2. Multifunctional, integrated teams. Silo or independent innovation consists of limited scope and vision. Bridging disciplines through collaborative and facilitated thinking expands the locus of control and broadens the skill set to create innovative thinking.

3. Champions. The team is essential and a senior level champion provide value and importance to the innovation process. A senior champion serving as sponsor offers two unique values: (a) entry outside of a silo or business unit into the organization-at-large and (b) the shield required from those favoring the status quo.

4. Cross-business pollination. Pollination in nature appears random and ever-present. IN reality, pollination is purposeful and focused. Pollination of ideas in the organization is as directed and purposed. Building the multidisciplinary team or choosing the champion requires alignment of role, understanding of the designation of organizational strategies and objectives, and harnessing required investments supportive of trial and error.

5. Innovative technology, programs, or services are a tactic and not a strategy. Tactical innovation is enveloped within broader strategies – service, products, technologies, or competencies. The destination is to beat the competition. Innovation therefore serves a how the strategy is achieved.

Proactive and strategic management of innovative ideas and processes benefits the thought leader, leadership, and the business model”

Tim Sweeney, founding partner of Upstream Thinking and practitioner of social innovation, joined the critique to offer real-world expert perspective.  “I am paying close attention to how these students think and what values they are creating for a broader set of stakeholders”, says Sweeney.  Prior to the critique, he lectured ULL Business students on the “Future Design of Business: the integration of design thinking into business management, operations and the pursuit of innovation.”  The lecture was sponsored by the College of Arts, the College of Business, and the Student Government Association.

A total of twelve projects were presented. Each student spent approximately fifteen minutes communicating their design process which included framing a personal civility challenge, concept development and their final solution.  Three of the more impactful solutions included shoes for the underprivileged, faith lamps, and a new fitness center concept.

Herbert Hunter found civility in design to be rooted in consideration for the user. Therefore he set out to design a proper shoe for the under privileged that maintained a sense of dignity. His goals focused on repurposing materials and keeping manufacturing costs to a minimum. His solution is a rugged “Tiva” style shoe constructed entirely from disposed vehicle tires and components.  Shoes ship flat and are assembled by the end-user.  The material lifespan allows the shoes to be passed from generation to generation delivering lasting value that connects communities.

“Faith Lamps”, by Marcel Courtois, sought to answer the question of “How to use her design knowledge to create a self sustaining system that enables people.”  Letters written by victims of domestic abuse were repurposed as design elements used to create inspirational warm lighting for the home.  The act of letter writing and artistic expression supports the healing process for the victims while spreading the message about an issue that affects women of all backgrounds, ages and ethnicity.  Meanwhile, proceeds from sales support the Faith House in Lafayette.

Jason Guillory defined civility in design by enabling human interactions that are productive for society.  Jason’s concept centers on a new breed of fitness centers where the human energy produced at the machine level is delivered back to the municipal energy grid.  The return of energy to the grid results in cost savings which may be used for any number of purposes.  “I could envision gym membership dues fluctuating based on the amount of energy produced to incentivize individual health”, adds Sweeney.

The project appears to be a success, helping students cultivate a sense of social responsibility.  Students like Justin Pittman hope to continue pushing their projects forward in the future.  “I feel like I’m only at half time. I have two more periods to go”, Pittman exclaims.  “The energy from the projects was great to see, I think a few of the ideas that emerged from this exercise have tremendous potential to create positive impact on the lives of many people in need”, Sweeney says.  “Faith Lamps’ reminds me of some of the work we do professionally for non-profits called ‘purpose products’ and the potential for incentivizing health and sustainable energy simultaneously through a new fitness brand is seriously innovative.”  Each year the civility in design project continues to provide inspired seeds for beneficial social change.  Sweeney closes by stating, “I look forward to seeing how this project will translate to their professional practices in the future.  I plan to be here next year to witness the next generation of ideas developed by ULL Design students.”