If there is one strategic objective that appears to be common to all really successful organisations it is the ability to be innovative.
As one definition I use states, 'it is generation of new ideas that will allow the organisation to achieve competitive advantage through growth and enhanced reputation.'
Corporate history is littered with the 'carcasses' of corporations that sparked into life on the basis of creative ideas which spurned innovative ability but which because of factors such as increased size and complexity became, to use one expression 'stodgy'.
Maintaining innovative ability is extremely difficult and requires leadership that is willing to continuously work hard to facilitate a culture that will underpin and support effort dedicated effort by every.
The problem for many organisations is that by the time they realise they need to increase innovative ability it is probably too late.
Trying to suddenly implement innovation is like trying to a repair on your car in a race. At best you will slow down - probably more likely come to a halt - and by the time the job is finished the competitors have long gone.
If the innovation implemented is utterly radical and brilliant there may be some chance of catching or even overtaking the opposition.
All-too-frequently the leadership that is in place are under immense pressure and 'drop the ball' in terms of the key decisions they take.
What happened to the once-giant Kodak which filed for Chapter 11 protection in early 2012 is instructive.
As The Economist stated at the time, 'Kodak was the Google of its day. Founded in 1880 it was known for its pioneering technology and innovative marketing [and by 1976] accounted for 90% of film and 85% of camera sales in America.'
By the time Kodak recognised the threat of digital technology - it should be remembered that Eastman Kodak had developed a prototype digital camera in 1975 - it was too late as its major competitors, particularly Fujifilm, had fully embraced the switch that customers were making away from the use of traditional cameras and film.
There was, according to The Economist , a culture of 'complacency' in Kodak and its leadership was 'inconsistent' in that with every new chief executive came a new strategy.
When considering corporate failure such as Kodak it's easy to believe that if you had been in control you would have done something different.
However, senior executives tend to rely on the metal models that have worked before and believe, if only on the basis of their phenomenal salaries, that they have the intelligence and ability to take urgent decisions that will create success.
What senior managers should instead do is to trust in all those employed by the company or organisation and allow them to develop the solutions to creating innovation.
This is the key message in Collective Genius: The Art and Practice of Leading Innovation (Harvard Business Review Press, 2014) by Linda Hill, a professor at Harvard Business School, Greg Brandeau, head of technology at Pixar, Emily Truelove, researcher and PhD candidate at the MIT Sloan School of Management and seasoned executive Kent Lineback.
Hill et al believe that what is incumbent for senior managers is to engage in leadership that harnesses the collective potential (genius) that exists but which is ignored in the quest to achieve consistency and adherence to procedures.
Using Google as an exemplar, they cite the leadership of Bill Coughran who, the authors of Collective Genius explain, created a community capable of thinking creatively and working on the generation of new ideas.
Coughran is an advocate of the belief that people are more crucial than technology as the latter is developed through the decisions of the former.
Crucially, the authors contend, making innovation a norm requires leadership in which there is recognition of the need to encourage collaboration which though it may create 'passionate disagreement' will result in the sharing of genius and debate about the possibility of new ideas.
In another example drawn from their analysis of practice, Hill et al describe what happened when former Chair of FIAT and CEO of Alfa Romeo Luca de Meo joined Volswagen as head of marketing in 2009 with the brief to surpass Toyota and to ensure that its cars were seen to be pioneering by making the world a better place.
De Meo is a passionate believer that if you wish to create a successful world-class company, there is an imperative to ensure that everyone feels that they are part of a community in which they feel they have a responsibility in being an innovator, a strategist and a global thinker.
Hill et al describe the way in which de Meo developed a culture in VW in which culture was fostered throughout the car maker such that everyone was encouraged to innovate through collaboration based on a shared sense of purpose, agreed values, and rules of engagement that were fully understood and which had commitment.
For example, in marketing the Up! car de Meo established a team which though reporting to him was allowed to work with autonomy to achieve a marketing strategy that was considered extremely successful.
As Hill et al believe, what made de Meo's approach unique was that he considered cross-functional teams, centres of excellence and effective methods of communication and discussion as critical to the inculcation of the community he wanted to emerge; the collective genius.
Equally important, they suggest, de Meo's impact is being experienced in other functional areas through the implementation of what is known as 'Think Blue' that was developed within his department and enshrines VW's desire for radical improvement in social, economic, and technological progress.
As a consequence the manufacturing section adopted 'Think Blue Factory' which aims to reduce environmental impacts by 25% in every VW plant by 2018.
Though not included in Collective Genius another great example of innovation being deeply embedded in what makes a company successful is Gore (best known for its weatherproof clothing GORE-TEX) which has a culture based on the importance of small teams and which was established in 1958 by founder Bill Gore as a result of his experience working for DuPont.
Gore, a private company employing over 10,000 people in the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, Japan and China, with sales offices across the globe and generates sales of over $3 billion, is considered to be among the most innovative companies in the world.
As Gore's website informs you, the company is established as a market-leader for the creation of innovative, technology-driven solutions, from medical devices that treat aneurysms to high-performance fabrics.
Most significant on the webpage is the statement that the company has 'A Commitment to Innovation Shapes Everything We Do'
Bill Gore believed in what is referred to as a 'lattice' organisation in which everyone is an associate and rather than having bosses imposed on them choose leaders through whom decisions are made and resources allocated.
Absolutely fundamental to Gore's success has been the encouragement of every employee to engage in innovation and prototyping and people organised in groups based on opportunities and new product concepts which is supported by four culture principles of freedom, fairness, commitment and waterline in which associates are encouraged to work collaboratively in order to develop their skills and responsibility (the 'waterline' being the need to consult to avoid decisions that could do the company sufficient harm that might "sink the ship").
In his book The Tipping Point (Abacus, 2002), Malcolm Gladwell describes the use of this system and the fact that within Gore-Tex there is the use of 'the law of 150' in which all facilities employ no more than 150 employees so that everyone knows everyone else and who to talk to when they have a problem.
Gladwell's belief is that the reason the company is so successful is because Gore has implemented 'an organized mechanism' for communication of ideas and information together with problem-solving to occur.
For these reasons Gore is consistently ranked as one of the best places to work by its employees.
What this tells us is that leadership is absolutely essential in creating inquisitiveness and a culture in which everyone uses their innate skills to unleash and harness their genius.
It is a message that every manager and executive should urgently acquaint themselves with.
