Measuring and Sparking Innovation

Likely, as seems to be a popular claim, innovation is a key ingredient for enterprise, personal, national, and societal success.

Beyond that claim, discussion often drifts toward perhaps sub-optimal questions and debatable assertions such as “can innovation be managed?” and “innovation can be learned but not taught.”

Better discussion - and action - might focus on “how can we foster beneficial innovation?” and “how can we measure and improve our abilities to innovate?”

The following list provides a useful metric for innovation by an enterprise, team, individual, nation, or society.
1. We do not innovate.
2. We may innovate, but we are hardly of aware of doing so or how we do it.
3. We purposefully try processes for innovating.
4. We use standard techniques for innovating.
5. We use standard, integrated techniques for planning, operations, and innovation.

Use this scale to measure current realities and future needs. Want more detail? Ask “to what extent?” and “what are some key examples?” for each of the five statements. Then, take steps to achieve those needs.

Innovation can be both spontaneous and systematic. Well-recognized instances are, respectively, development of - and then recognition of potential uses for - a not-all-that-strong glue (sticky notes, including Post-it notes) and continuing pursuit of Moore’s Law (microprocessors, including Pentiums).

Processes for identifying and capturing innovation opportunities exist. Product-, process- and technology-centric techniques include Six Sigma and TRIZ. Six Sigma also includes “voice of the customer.” Other techniques, such as Direct Outcomes, can be used to foretell - ahead of customer input - customer needs and wants. Such processes can create and reinforce opportunities for spontaneous innovation.

I led a grassroots companywide innovation program whereby many groups and individuals improved scores on the above scale. Typically, behavior transited from “1 and 2” to “3.” Some of the new endeavors strengthened traditional “3 or 4” behaviors. In less than 3.5 years, people estimated yearly productivity savings equal to 1.5% of annual revenue. New work methods improved quality and timeliness.

Whether crisis-driven or pre-planned, a concerted effort - by individuals, groups, or an entire enterprise - can lead to measurable, appreciated innovation.