Manage To Change

Are We Strangling Innovation or Strengthening It?

Lately, the economy is all we hear about in the news.  It seems as though there are constantly more layoffs, more programs being cut, and more industries asking for help from the government.

When so many individuals, companies, and industries are worried about their survival, what happens to innovation?

Is opportunity a side effect of our pitiful economy? 

Some might argue, as Guy Kawasaki did in 2006, that limited resources aren't the worst thing that could happen to an entrepreneur.

What are your thoughts?

Communication: Know What You Know

Image by maveric2003 via Flickr

Not everyone in a company hears the same thing at the same time.

Everyone hasn’t gone to the same meetings, had the same hallway conversations, seen the same PowerPoint decks, read the same emails, or had the same amount of time to digest the information.

This impacts change initiatives, including “restructuring efforts”, in several ways.

We can’t expect people to understand actions for which they have no context.

We can’t get frustrated when someone asks us questions about something we feel pressured to accomplish quickly.  We certainly can't get defensive.

We can’t keep information about changes from the people they impact and then expect them to jump off a cliff with us with confidence in the depth of the waters below - especially when, if we're honest, we don't know how deep they are either.

Times are tough and there are difficult decisions to be made, but people can support decisions they understand, and to which they've had some input, even when they don't like them.

When you've been included early in the communication chain, and understand the context of the message, it’s hard to be patient with those just hearing about it.

What can we do?

Include people at different stages of the thought process to properly assess the impact of the change, worry about accuracy more than secrecy.

When it comes time to spread the word more broadly, take a deep breath and remember the thought that went into defining the action. 

Remember what you know and the process your team went through to come the decision, and try to give your colleagues, audience, staff, the context they need to understand the change in front of them.

Virtual Brainstorming: Expect the Unexpected

Image via Wikipedia

Most of us have brainstormed with a group. 

Someone puts an idea out there, someone adds to it or adjusts it, and the group iterates through possibilities. 

Many ideas come to surface.  Some are “good” (meaning that for our particular purpose they have potential application). Some aren’t.

Until recently what we’ve called brainstorming has usually occurred with a limited number of participants, often people we know, over a fixed time period.

But social networking has changed all of that.  If you allow them to be, social networks can be giant brainstorming sessions. 

Throwing around ideas with a changing group of people we know, don’t know, and know of, but never actually met is a tremendous source of both innovation and energy. 

We can churn through concepts, tools, business models, or whatever interests us over an indeterminate amount of time with whom ever happens to be available.  At any time we can jump off with an idea and play with it in another context. 

It's experimentation and idea sharing that's completely organic, unstructured, and "open source."

Everyone has access.

All we need to do is stay connected to the group and see what happens - because I'm willing to bet that we’re no where near done yet!

Now, isn't that exciting!?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Creative Interactions Lead to More Innovation. (newcommbiz.com)

Writing for the SSP Scholarly Kitchen

I've just started contributing to the Society of Scholarly Publishing blog, the Scholarly Kitchen.

My first two posts are:

• Conferences of Infinite Dimension
• Since When Does Community Mean Everybody

If you haven't visited, come by and take a look.  We have some pretty interesting cooks in the kitchen!

Innovation, Change, and Talent

Florence Foster Jenkins

Florence Foster Jenkins was a singer in the early 1900's who "became famous for her complete lack of rhythm, pitch, tone, and overall singing ability."

What's interesting about Florence, is that she seemed to have no clue that she had no talent.

Florence makes me wonder.

It's easy to listen to her and know she can't sing.  But why didn't she hear that herself?  Was she physically unable (tone deaf, perhaps)?  Was she psychologically unable?

Or, did she know she was "different" and consider herself innovative or ground breaking?

Another case in point, The Shaggs.

"There's an innocence to these songs and their performances that's both charming and unsettling. Hacked-at drumbeats, whacked-around chords, songs that seem to have little or no meter to them ... being played on out-of-tune, pawn-shop-quality guitars all converge, creating dissonance and beauty, chaos and tranquility, causing any listener coming to this music to rearrange any pre-existing notions about the relationships between talent, originality, and ability. There is no album you might own that sounds remotely like this one." (Review of Philosophy of Life written by Cub Koda on allmusic.com)

Who ultimately decides what's innovative and what's just plain bad?

(Full disclosure, I kind of like The Shaggs.)