It’s probably happened to you. Someone in the company gets a bright idea that the company needs more bright ideas-- a new product or service; some new angle to catch the public’s interest; a marketing gimmick or brand extension that will “revolutionise the industry.” Blah blah blah.
You’re dragged to an offsite “brainstorming” session and a day full of sitting on beanbags and drinking abusive amounts of coffee ensures. Plenty of talk takes place. White boards get decorated. Perhaps some creative juices flow. A barrage of new initiatives get slated for further development… but how many of these are actually goodies?
From SME’s, to big corporates, to community organisations, and the big ole’ city council— all of us at some point or another have to innovate what we are doing in an attempt to grow capital of one kind or another. Problems arise when creativity overtakes practicality and we lose sight our operating context.
According to extensive research by
Doblin Group based in the U.S., a 2007 survey of over 3000 projects in 400 businesses across 4 continents over 10 years revealed some startling conclusions: over 95.5% of all innovation fails. Painful but true. That’s a lot of wasted days on a beanbag chair.
So what are professionals in the sustainability space to do? We’re trying to solve some big issues, from climate change to the viability and social cohesion of our communities. We also don’t have the luxury of time and cannot afford to let our actions be outstripped by the issues we face. How do we deliver value from the ideas we generate to solve these problems?
We need to battle test them, critically examine their design, and make sure they hold up. Going back to Doblin Group, they note that 95% of change should focus on improving the everyday. It’s about being quick and incremental. Think battery powered lawn mower. Another 5% of the change needs to be more disruptive, radical, and outside the box. Think iTunes.
Keeping that balance is essential as often there are big gains to be made in improving on something already exists, rather than trying to be too revolutionary and producing a solution the world isn’t ready for yet.
Peter Salmon of
Moxie believes that problems need to first address the human condition. “After all, it’s like my dad used to say: everyone’s an environmentalist until the lights go out. If we aren’t looking after people’s basic needs, how can they care about bigger worldly issues?” he says.
Moxie’s been around a while, and under Peter’s leadership, recently developed a programme they call
Next Plays. After years of presenting thought provoking research and hearing "So what's next?" from clients, they sought to help companies answer the question. It goes like this: use carefully developed strategies to design a positive future. Everyone from Air New Zealand to the World Bank and governments in charge of Hanoi are getting in on the action.
So, how’s this thing work?
Up front, there’s consideration taken for the big picture issues. What will be affecting the industry or city? A critical examination takes place of the key factors that will be shaping the future, from shrinking capital markets, aging populations, climate change, peak energy production, and collapse of ecosystem services and so on.
“There are no ideal answers,” Peter says. “It’s about creating a general and realistic scenario of the future rather than trying to be overly predictive.”
From there, Next Plays moves into the ideas necessary to start tackling these problems. Knowing what we know from the scenarios developed, what needs to be developed? Is it rejigging the business model? Developing a new product or service? How the widget gets made? Changing the way the organisation operates to influence its stakeholders? In this stage of the process, all ideas are on the table, no matter how left field.
“Most people innovate around their core competence,” Peter says. “There are often other opportunities out there around finance and delivery— and those are likely to be the revolutionary ones. Sometimes it’s as simple as recruiting a new industry partner or pairing up two promising, disparate ideas. There’s a lot that can be learned from biomimicry that translates into how we can successfully do business. We need to move away from linear thinking.”
With some promising ideas on the table, the scrutiny begins. Alongside the Next Plays guide that features case studies from around the world, ideas are critiqued across numerous categories (or “Plays”) including:
- Improving communications transparency (authenticate)
- Creating broader value nets—not chains (engagement)
- Considering longer term impacts in decision making (go long)
- Closing loops on material inputs and outputs-- waste is a resource (loops)
- Mixing and broadening boundaries together to increase chances for rapid evolution (mix)
- Filling unmet needs and gaps in the system (needs based- what do people want?)
- Finding a niche and simplify a way of doing things (simplify)
The possibilities are then examined across the business or organisation structure, from the business model, to the larger operating environment, to the processes of the company, to the individual products and services, to larger communications and engagement strategies.
Inevitably, some of the ideas fall out at this point. This is not a bad thing as it’s likely they didn’t have the sticking power first anticipated. Others ideas combine into larger initiatives, or broader themes for action.
An overall response to the problem starts to emerge. Everything that’s left is vetted across three major results criteria: are these refined, new, or shifted ideas? The purpose of this stage is to help examine whether there’s enough of a balance in the response to the problem. If it all start’s looking like reinventing the wheel, then it’s time to start over.
If it looks like there are substantial social and environmental wins, and that the organisation is at least starting to shift how it operates, it’s a sign of progress.
What about the financial bottom line? It’s implied the whole way along that any ideas produced are of financial value in some way, or they wouldn’t be included.
Finally, the remaining ideas are weighed up against time and the scenarios that were discussed at the onset. What takes priority is determined by the organisation’s unique situation. Discrete initiatives might be polished off in a matter of weeks. Strategic business changes might roll out over a 5-10 year stretch. In either case, implementation should begin as soon as possible.
“Future enterprise value will be measured by the benefit to society and the environment,” Peter stresses. “We need to do less, do it better, rigorously test ideas and designs, and get them more viable, rather than try 50 things that fail.”
With these guiding principles gaining traction, let’s hope the solutions we develop going forward are intelligent, considered, and ultimately solving the problems we face. Time is not on our side.