Читать книгу Advancing Innovation - Patrick J. Stroh - Страница 28

At the end of the day, businesses can’t and shouldn’t just innovate because it sounds good or because it’s in vogue to have an “innovation center” to show off to visitors. Companies need to produce measureable value creation! Now, not every project and every idea has to produce a positive result—if they do, you aren’t taking enough risk and should likely be stretching for more. You have to be willing to fail and get back in the saddle and try again. But in the end, you need to have generated results and value across your entire body of work as a whole or your innovation is likely for naught.

In all three of these areas—galvanizing, enabling, and measuring—you need to apply two related, but different, skill sets: management and leadership. Here’s how they differ:

 Management is a set of processes that can keep a complicated system of people and technology running smoothly.

 Leadership is a set of processes that creates organizations in the first place or adapts them to significantly changing circumstances.

 Successful transformation is 70%–90% leadership and only 10%–30% management.11

This gives us an interesting starting point on innovation governance. Innovation governance certainly needs to include both management and leadership, but in what proportion, and where should we focus? Of course, the answer is “it depends on the business.” But we can suggest that the appropriate mix is probably the inverse of what is needed in transformation: It’s probably closer to 70% management and 30% leadership. Why? Because you want to ingrain innovation channels, ideation, execution, monitoring, and other activities as deep into the organization as possible, and that takes day-to-day management and execution. Although leadership at the top is critical and should not be taken for granted—because without it, the management and execution may be fruitless—the bias in this equation should be on execution.