Innovation Leaders E-Book

Jean-Philippe Deschamps

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 632

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2009

Beschreibung

Innovation leaders promote and address the innovation agenda in their company. Through personal conviction or competitive necessity they are obsessed with providing superior value to customers through innovation. They know how to mobilize their staff behind concrete innovation initiatives and do not hesitate to personally coach innovation teams.

For innovation to occur leadership has to be collective. To create a momentum for innovation in their company, leaders from different functions need to team up, to build innovation networks. Innovation leadership is not just an innate talent that can be selected at the hiring level. It can be developed within an appropriate company culture through careful leadership development, typically achieved through career management and coaching. Innovation leaders also need to stay on board and it is the responsibility of the top management team to create an attractive climate to develop and keep its innovation leaders.

There are plenty of books that deal with innovation, or with new product development, or with leadership; this is different in its focus on the specifics of innovation leadership – that particular form of leadership that stimulates and sustains innovation.

This book maps the broad territory of innovation leadership and contributes new thinking on the focus of the emerging leadership role of the CTO; distinction between ‘front end’ and ‘back end’ innovation leaders; the concept of aligning leadership styles with strategy; and the chain of leadership concept.

Combining practice-based and empirical research-based observations with simple conceptual frameworks, illustrated by many company examples and case stories from a broad range of industries in the US and Europe, this is a systematic presentation of innovation drivers and their implications in terms of what leaders need to do to make it work.

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Title Page

Copyright Page

Table of Figures

List of Tables

PREFACE MAPPING THE INNOVATION LEADERSHIP TERRITORY

Is There a Special Form of Leadership for Innovation?

Are There Different Types of Innovation Leaders?

What Do Innovation Leaders Really Do?

Should We Match Leaders with Strategies?

Can We Build an Environment Favorable to Innovation Leadership?

Acknowledgements

PART I - DEFINING AND CHARACTERIZING INNOVATION LEADERS

CHAPTER 1 - A SPECIAL FORM OF LEADERSHIP FOR INNOVATION?

THE LEADERSHIP FACTOR

FACING THE INNOVATION IMPERATIVES

DEFINING AND CHARACTERIZING INNOVATION

INNOVATION LEADERS: A DIFFERENT BREED?

MAPPING OUR JOURNEY

ENDNOTES

CHAPTER 2 - WHAT’S SPECIAL ABOUT INNOVATION LEADERS?

INNOVATION LEADERS SHARE SIX ATTRIBUTES

INNOVATION LEADERS TEND TO FOCUS ON A STAGE OF INNOVATION

INNOVATION LEADERS WORK ON PROCESS AND CULTURE

ENDNOTES

CHAPTER 3 - STIMULATING BOTTOM-UP INNOVATION

ENCOURAGING BOTTOM-UP INNOVATION: CLASSIC APPROACHES

BUILDING AN INNOVATION CULTURE: FOUR DRIVERS

ENDNOTES

CHAPTER 4 - STEERING INNOVATION TOP DOWN

SEEING INNOVATION AS A COMPETITIVE NECESSITY

SETTING UP A PROCESS, GOVERNANCE SYSTEM AND ORGANIZATIONAL MECHANISMS

MOBILIZING PEOPLE ON INNOVATION-ENHANCING CAMPAIGNS

GETTING INVOLVED IN INNOVATION SEARCHES AND PROJECTS

ENDNOTES

CHAPTER 5 - APPOINTING AN INNOVATION CONDUCTOR

CTO OR CIO?

THE FIRST MISSION OF CTOS: TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION

THE CHANGING ROLE OF CTOS: FROM MANAGING TO LEADING

THE EMERGING ROLE OF CORPORATE ENTREPRENEUR

FACING THE CHALLENGE AS PART OF THE TOP EXECUTIVE TEAM

ENDNOTES

PART II - THE LEADERSHIP IMPERATIVES OF INNOVATION STRATEGIES

CHAPTER 6 - RECOGNIZING THE LEADERSHIP IMPERATIVES OF YOUR INNOVATION STRATEGY

FORMULATING AN INNOVATION STRATEGY

ALIGNING YOUR MANAGEMENT EFFORTS WITH YOUR STRATEGY

ACTIVATING SPECIFIC CHANGE LEVERS TO SUPPORT YOUR STRATEGY

ENDNOTES

CHAPTER 7 - LEADING THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW/IMPROVED PRODUCTS OR SERVICES ...

INNOVATION LEADERS AS TOUGH TEAM SPORTS COACHES

STRAIGHTENING OUT MEDTRONICʹS INNOVATION PROCESS

LIMITS OF THE ‘TEAM SPORTS COACH’ LEADER

ENDNOTES

CHAPTER 8 - LEADING THE CREATION OF A TOTALLY NEW PRODUCT OR SERVICE CATEGORY ...

INNOVATION LEADERS AS NO-NONSENSE SPONSORS

NEW BUSINESS CREATION AT TETRA PAK: REINVENTING THE FOOD CAN

EVOLVING LEADERSHIP IMPERATIVES IN NEW BUSINESS CREATION

ENDNOTES

CHAPTER 9 - LEADING THE CREATION OF A TOTALLY NEW BUSINESS SYSTEM OR MODEL ...

INNOVATION LEADERS AS VISIONARY BUT PRAGMATIC ARCHITECTS

TIVO: A BUSINESS SYSTEM/MODEL INNOVATION

LESSONS FROM THE TIVO STORY

ENDNOTES

CHAPTER 10 - LEADING THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW/IMPROVED CUSTOMER SOLUTIONS ...

INNOVATION LEADERS AS ORCHESTRA CONDUCTORS

SENSEO: AN INNOVATIVE CUSTOMER SOLUTION

BUILDING AND LEADING AN INNOVATION-FOCUSED PARTNERSHIP

ENDNOTES

PART III - DEVELOPING A CADRE OF INNOVATION LEADERS

CHAPTER 11 - BUILDING AN INNOVATION LEADERSHIP ENVIRONMENT: THE LOGITECH CASE

LOGITECH: ORDINARY OR EXTRAORDINARY COMPANY?

LOGITECH’S INNOVATION-STIMULATING DRIVERS

LOGITECH’S INNOVATION-ENHANCING CULTURE AND VALUES

LOGITECH’S PRAGMATIC AND EFFECTIVE INNOVATION PROCESS

LOGITECH’S FUTURE CHALLENGES

ENDNOTES

CHAPTER 12 - ATTRACTING, DEVELOPING AND KEEPING INNOVATION LEADERS

ASSESSING YOUR INNOVATION LEADERSHIP RESOURCES

SELECTING AND HIRING INNOVATION LEADERS

DEVELOPING INNOVATION LEADERS

RETAINING INNOVATION LEADERS

INNOVATION LEADERSHIP IN A NUTSHELL

ENDNOTES

APPENDIX A - INNOVATION IN LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE MODELS

APPENDIX B - GUIDELINES FOR USING THE IDEO VIDEO FOR ‘IDEA MANAGEMENT’ TRAINING

APPENDIX C - FACTORS AFFECTING THE INNOVATION CLIMATE OF A COMPANY

INDEX

Table of Figures

Figure 1.1 The two modes of innovation

Figure 2.1 A focus on culture and process

Figure 2.2 Innovation parameters

Figure 3.1 Customer intelligence process

Figure 3.2 Innovation climate factors found deficient in many companies

Figure 4.1 Innovation process model

Figure 4.2 Process management responsibilities

Figure 4.3 Process maturity stages

Figure 4.4 Indicators of process performance

Figure 4.5 Innovation management mechanisms

Figure 4.6 Selecting innovation improvement priorities

Figure 5.1 CTO categories, skills and focus

Figure 5.2 The changing agenda of the CTO/CRO

Figure 5.3 The interdependence of technology and business visions

Figure 5.4 The ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ elements of a technology vision

Figure 5.5 Grounding shared technology beliefs and values

Figure 6.1 Typology of innovation by strategic focus

Figure 6.2 Focus areas under each innovation thrust

Figure 7.1 The team sports coach as ‘warrior-leader’

Figure 8.1 Nespresso system timeline

Figure 8.2 Phases in new business creation

Figure 8.3 Desired profile of technical and business champions

Figure 8.4 The evolving role of the executive champion

Figure 8.5 The evolving role of steering groups over the life of a venture project

Figure 12.1 Specific leadership style and focus for each innovation thrust

Figure 12.2 The common leadership imperatives of innovation thrusts

Figure 12.3 Mapping innovation resources according to leadership styles

Figure A.1 The Denison model

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Best Buy vs. GE

Table 5.1 Scope of CTOs’ responsibilities (line vs. staff)

Table 5.2 The growing scope of CTOs’ responsibilities

Table 5.3 Outline of the technology charter of a leading chemical company

Table 7.1 Impact of the changes introduced in Medtronic’s cardiac rhythm business (partly thanks to Mike Stevens)

Table 7.2 Contrasting the philosophies of Mr Discipline and Mr Creativity

Table B.1 IDEO’s Idea Management Process

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester,West Sussex PO19 8SQ, EnglandTelephone ([phone]

Under the Jossey-Bass imprint, Jossey-Bass, 989 Market Street, San Francisco CA 94103-1741, USA www.jossey-bass.com

Email (for orders and customer service enquiries): [email protected] Visit our Home Page on www.wiley.com

All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise, except under the terms of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 or under the terms of a licence issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency Ltd, 90 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 4LP, UK, without the permission in writing of the Publisher. Requests to the Publisher should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex PO19 8SQ, England, or emailed to [email protected], or faxed to ([phone].

Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The Publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.

Other Wiley Editorial Offices

John Wiley & Sons Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA Jossey-Bass, 989 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94103-1741, USA Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH, Boschstr. 12, D-69469 Weinheim, Germany John Wiley & Sons Australia Ltd, 42 McDougall Street, Milton, Queensland 4064, Australia John Wiley & Sons (Asia) Pte Ltd, 2 Clementi Loop #02-01, Jin Xing Distripark, Singapore 129809 John Wiley & Sons Canada Ltd, 6045 Freemont Blvd. Mississauga, Ontario, L5R 4J3 Canada Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Deschamps, Jean Philippe.

Innovation leaders : how senior executives stimulate, steer, and sustain innovation/ Jean-Philippe Deschamps. P. cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

eISBN : 978-0-470-68735-2

1. Creative ability in business—Management. 2. Technological innovations—Management. 3. Organizational change. 4. Leadership. I. Title.

HD53.D47 2008

658.4′092—dc22

2008007635

British Library Cataloguing in Publication DataA catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

eISBN : 978-0-470-68735-2

Typeset in 11.5/13.5pt Bembo by SNP Best-set Typesetter Ltd., Hong Kong Printed and bound in Great Britain by TJ International Ltd, Padstow, Cornwall, UK

PREFACE MAPPING THE INNOVATION LEADERSHIP TERRITORY

This book is built around one main idea: The belief that innovation requires a specific form of leadership, distinct from other mainstream types of leadership. This conviction, rooted in years of empirical research with companies at different stages of their innovation learning curve, is expanded and supported in three ways:

First, by characterizing ‘innovation leaders,’ those senior executives who relentlessly stimulate, steer and sustain innovation in their companies. We will propose a number of common behavioral traits or attitudes of these leaders, depending on whether they focus on the front end or back end of innovation. We will also highlight what they actually do to promote the innovation agenda in their company, bottom up or top down.

Second, by suggesting that different innovation strategies require different styles of leadership. This assumes that senior managers should explicitly define the content of their innovation strategy and understand the various leadership imperatives of each of their strategic choices.

Third, by opening a few preliminary paths toward understanding what conditions stimulate the development of an innovation leadership environment. We will also underline some of the basic requirements for attracting, developing and retaining innovation leaders.

Let’s briefly review this proposition and its implications.

Is There a Special Form of Leadership for Innovation?

The fact that innovation requires a special form of leadership will probably seem obvious to most innovation practitioners. As the evidence suggests, not all leaders can claim to be innovation leaders!

Leadership qualities are not universally applicable - most organizational leaders tend to be good at and attracted by certain types of strategies. Many feel more comfortable operating in a given range of contextual, i.e. environmental, or company situations. For example, corporate leaders who are talented at extracting the best performance from existing operations may not be naturally inclined to pursue risky innovation strategies. Similarly, executives with unique skills at detecting acquisition opportunities and going aggressively after them may not be good at spotting and targeting unmet market needs. Financial wizards may not feel comfortable steering innovative new product development programs and being first to market with a totally new product category, and so on.

By following this line of thought, and comparing executives in innovative companies with their counterparts in more traditional firms, we might make a first hypothesis, i.e. that innovation probably requires a special form of leadership.

To support this initial proposition, we need to ascertain that innovation leaders do, indeed, show a combination of characteristic behavioral traits that are seldom found, at least to the same extent, in other more traditional management leaders. Characterizing the specific attributes of these champions allows us to draw a first generic profile of innovation leaders.

Are There Different Types of Innovation Leaders?

If we accept that innovation proceeds in two very different modes - bottom up and top down - then we may also assume that not all leaders will be able to handle both modes equally effectively. And this brings us to our second hypothesis, namely that there is not a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to innovation leadership! There are probably several different types of innovation leaders and it may be interesting to characterize them, if only for senior management to know how to attract, develop and deploy them.

Besides classifying and describing them on the basis of their preferred mode of operation - bottom up or top down - it is worth noting the different roles and behaviors of leaders in the two broad stages of innovation, i.e. the ‘fuzzy front end’ and the ‘speedy back end.’ We know from practice that it takes a very different personality and leadership style to preside over the front end of innovation from idea to concept, where creativity and risk taking are vital, compared with steering the back end from concept to launch, which requires discipline and speed in execution. Real-life innovation leaders often have a natural or ‘default’ mode of operation, and this is why it is useful to recognize that different types of leaders may be needed at different stages of innovation.

What Do Innovation Leaders Really Do?

Describing the common traits of innovation leaders and their preference for a stage of innovation is only a first step. If they exist as a distinct category among corporate executives, then it should be possible to determine the specific nature and focus of their efforts. What do they do to promote, steer and sustain innovation that other leaders would not necessarily consider as their first priority?

This emphasis on what innovation leaders really do has to take account of the two distinct modes of innovation. How can leaders promote bottom up innovation, which occurs through the spontaneous mobilization of entrepreneurial innovators and champions, without much direct intervention from management? And what do they do to focus and steer the action of their staff top down? We need to address these important questions regarding the role of innovation leaders in each of these modes:

(1) What are the drivers of bottom-up innovation and how can leaders influence them? What do leaders do to encourage, promote and support bottom-up innovation? And conversely,

(2) What are the drivers of top-down innovation? I.e. What do innovation leaders do when they see it as their duty to stimulate and steer innovation proactively, without waiting for a spontaneous initiative?

Since both modes are complementary, we may make a third hypothesis, i.e. that real innovation leaders focus on both modes of innovation, bottom up and top down.

Should We Match Leaders with Strategies?

Our discussion so far might lead the reader to assume that innovation is a plain, uniform process, whether it occurs bottom up or top down. This is obviously a gross simplification because, as we all sense from experience, there are very different types of innovations. If this is the case, then arguably, not all leaders will be equally talented at handling all types and variants. This brings us to a fourth hypothesis, namely that different leadership skills and styles may be required for different types of innovation strategies.

Innovation can indeed be characterized differently depending on its objective (business reinforcement vs. new business creation); its scope (new product/service vs. new system/business model); its intensity (radical vs. incremental); and its boundaries (internal vs. open/external innovation). These various dimensions determine at least four generic innovation strategies. Each innovation strategy will usually require a different management focus in terms of process, organizational mechanism, culture and people. Each innovation strategy may also, in turn, call for a particular leadership style on the part of senior leaders.

We can therefore postulate that a certain style of leadership corresponds to each of these generic innovation strategies, and that it is important for management to ensure that the company entrusts its chosen innovation strategy to the right kind of leader.

Can We Build an Environment Favorable to Innovation Leadership?

Many CEOs and their top management teams wonder how they can make a quantum leap in innovation performance and - even more importantly - how they can sustain it over time. We believe - and this will be our last hypothesis - that innovation will be sustained only if the company succeeds in building a favorable environment for innovation leadership. This means understanding what it takes to turn a cadre of solid managers into dedicated innovation activists.

Describing an innovation leadership environment is not easy because it can take several forms and many culture and process elements need to be brought together in a mutually reinforcing ‘system.’ Logitech, the computer and mobile accessory specialist, features many of the components and drivers of an innovation leadership environment. By adopting innovation enhancing values and attitudes, and addressing both culture and process, top management should be able to attract, develop, deploy, motivate and keep a cadre of innovation leaders who, in turn, will sustain innovation.

In summary, this book aims to provide a first map of the hitherto underexplored territory of innovation leadership. It does so by highlighting the different types and stages of innovation - bottom up/top down; front end/back end - and the different characteristics and styles of innovation leaders. It also provides some guidelines to help you direct your company along the right path toward stimulating, steering and sustaining innovation.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This book is the result of almost 30 years of hands-on immersion in the fascinating and evolving topic of innovation management. It started in the early 1980s at Arthur D. Little (ADL), a truly innovative consulting company, when, together with colleagues from Europe and the US, I interviewed a sample of innovative companies to discover innovation’s key drivers and obstacles. This initial group included, among others, Frederik van Oene, Bob Tomasko, Kamal Saad and Tom Sommerlatte, who have since become friends and discussion partners. Together, we held innumerable and passionate exchanges on the essence of innovation, its culture and process, and we developed our first conceptual tools to map and measure it. I thank them all for sharing their insights with me and for their continuous support.

My research continued in the 1990s with another ADL colleague, Ranganath Nayak - co-author of the best-selling book Breakthroughs - who inspired me and became my sparring partner. Together, we co-authored the book Product Juggernauts: How Companies Generate a Stream of Market Winners (Harvard Business School Press, 1995). The time I spent with Ranganath was immensely stimulating and I thank him for his prolific ideas on innovation management and his enduring friendship.

Many other colleagues from ADL and its high-technology affiliate, Cambridge Consultants in the UK, contributed to expanding my knowledge of innovation management. Even though I could not cite them all here, my special thanks go to them.

Of course, most of what we learned came from the first-hand experience of our clients, some of them impressive, others struggling to master this elusive capability called innovation performance. Whatever their success, they all deserve my profound respect and gratitude.

My move into the world of management development and academia was organized by Derek Abell, former dean of IMEDE; Peter Lorange, IMD’s president; and Jim Ellert, dean of the faculty. By accepting me as a member of this prestigious school, they manifested not only their trust in me but also their belief in the importance of innovation as a top management topic. I owe them a deep debt of gratitude.

In the past 11 years, many IMD faculty colleagues have stimulated and supported me. I am particularly grateful to three organizational behavior faculty members - Preston Bottger, Dan Denison and Robert Hooijberg - who shared some of their leadership insights with me and encouraged me to write this book. My thanks also go to the faculty colleagues who invited me to contribute to the collective books they initiated and led, including Don Marchand (Competing with Information, Wiley, 2000), Paul Strebel (Focused Energy: Mastering Bottom-up Organization, Wiley, 2000) and Preston Bottger (Leading in the Top Team, Cambridge University Press, 2008).

A number of IMD open-enrollment program directors opened their sessions to me and my innovation topic, showing both their trust and support over the years. I would particularly like to thank Nirmalya Kumar and Dominique Turpin for welcoming me on their Program for Executive Development; Georges Haour, my partner in the program Managing the Innovation Process; Ralf Boscheck on Managing Corporate Resources; Paul Strebel and Peter Killing on Breakthrough Program for Senior Executives; Bill Fischer on Driving Strategic Innovation, offered in partnership with MIT; and Ralf Seifert on Mastering the Technology Enterprise, offered in partnership with the two Swiss Federal Polytechnic universities. I also wish to thank Jan Kubes and Benoît Leleux for offering me the opportunity to coach teams of MBA students on their International Consulting Projects and Start-up Coaching Projects. They all helped me learn and gave me a unique testing ground for my ideas.

At IMD, I learned a lot from the companies that attended our programs. A special thank is due to Tetra Pak, which became my prime client and led me to develop a special interest in innovation leadership. Tetra Pak’s CEOs - Gunnar Brock, Nick Shreiber and, more recently, Dennis Jönsson - opened their doors to me. Members of the Group Leadership Team, notably Bo Wirsén, Nils Björkman and Göran Harrysson, encouraged me, as did Ralph Hägg, head of the Tetra Pak Academy, and many others. Faculty colleague Mark Vandenbosch, with whom I taught many of the Tetra Pak programs, inspired me with his outstanding teaching skills and deep marketing insights. My thanks also go to Logitech, and particularly to Yves Karcher, who generously shared his experience with me.

When I started focusing my research specifically on innovation leadership, I was lucky enough to interview four prestigious senior innovation leaders, whose quotes are prominently featured in this book: Bill George, former CEO and chairman of Medtronic and successful author himself; Daniel Borel, the cofounder and former chairman of Logitech; Pekka Ala-Pietilä, former president of Nokia; and Ad Huijser, former CEO of Philips Research and member of the company’s board of management. Their in-depth interviews provided me with invaluable insights on the essence of innovation leadership. Their thoughts constitute a kind of red thread throughout this book.

I used the result of these seminal interviews in a chapter on innovation leadership that was published in the International Handbook on Innovation (Elsevier Sciences, 2003), edited by Larisa Shavinina of Université du Quebec. Larisa was the very first person to encourage me to translate my ideas and experience into a practitioners’ book. I am very grateful to her for having encouraged me so warmly.

In 2005, the two leaders of the International Association of Product Development (IAPD) in the US, Kemp Dwenger and Beebe Nelson - two talented innovation evangelists - gave me the opportunity to present my ideas to a group of managers from large, innovative US companies. It is their interest and encouragement that made me decide to go ahead and write this book.

I am also deeply grateful to the senior executives who provided many of the details of the stories in this book - particularly Bill George on Medtronic; Stefan Andersson, Nils Björkman and Bo Wirsén on Tetra Pak, Mike Ramsay, the charismatic founder of TiVo; Guerrino De Luca, the new chairman of Logitech; and Paul Bromberg on Philips DAP.

Of course, this book would not have been possible without the strong support of my publisher, Wiley, and its US partner, Jossey-Bass. Francesca Warren, Jo Golesworthy, Michaela Frey, Nick Mannion and their editorial colleagues believed in my project and wholeheartedly accepted the book. Their trust and encouragement proved an invaluable source of motivation.

Turning lots of insights into a book is no mean task and I was helped by extremely talented and effective research colleagues at IMD. Atul Pahwa researched and wrote two of the cases in this book and co-authored the third one. Michèle Barnett Berg conducted insightful interviews for me in Silicon Valley and helped review my chapters.

IMD editor, Lindsay McTeague, was immensely helpful in turning my text into readable English with considerable patience, talent and tact. Persita Egeli-Farmanfarma advised me very effectively on permissions and copyright issues. And my assistant Valérie Baeriswyl helped me throughout. My deep appreciation and gratitude go to them all.

Last but not least, I am immensely indebted to my wife, Danièle, herself an author of several books, for her unwavering encouragement and support over a year of hard work.

PART I

DEFINING AND CHARACTERIZING INNOVATION LEADERS

CHAPTER 1

A SPECIAL FORM OF LEADERSHIP FOR INNOVATION?

Innovation leadership? It is passion; it is learning; it is humility in front of mistakes and errors - understanding that they are necessary elements to learn faster than the others - and it is the target setting . . . yes, stretched targets!

Pekka Ala-PietiläFormer President of Nokia1

Many companies claim that innovation is one of their critical values and priorities. Stakeholders are reassured that management is vibrantly committed to innovation as a source of customer value, organic growth and job protection. However, the reality is often less bullish than the intent. R&D may be busier than ever developing new products, but how many can be called truly innovative? Projects are proliferating in most companies, for sure, but which ones will reinvent their category or take the company into a brand new market? Why don’t product managers dare to go beyond renewing current products or providing line extensions? Which management teams have successfully crafted an innovation vision and built an effective innovation culture and process within their organizations?

If the innovation testimonials contained in so many annual reports were accurate, we would have thousands of examples of truly innovative companies, and the mystique of who does it well would be of little interest. Yet when we look beyond the message for the marks of an archetypically innovative company, only a dozen or so really stand out. These iconic companies, often cited by innovation pundits and the media as first in class, become fallible and begin to lose their ‘magic innovation touch’ when changes occur within the leadership ranks. Some examples:

• 3M struggled to integrate the Six Sigma credo of its former CEO, James McNerney, into its traditional innovation culture.

• Apple experienced a performance roller-coaster before the return of Steve Jobs as CEO.

• Intel struggled to diversify its product line fast enough to face the growing market of mobile devices.

• Procter & Gamble had sluggish organic growth before the appointment of A.G. Lafley as CEO.

• Corning witnessed each of its blockbuster markets flounder and is constantly trying to reinvent itself.

• Dell had to kick-start its growth again after its highly praised direct business model reached a plateau.

• Others like Sony, Pfizer, Nokia and Airbus were put on a pedestal for their innovativeness, and yet have gone through turbulent times in the past few years.

Why does this happen?

THE LEADERSHIP FACTOR

Some companies surprise the market with one brilliant innovative move - like Pilkington with its float-glass technology - and then fall back into an innovation dormancy. Others may have an innovative surge but are unable to sustain it in the long term. These innovative spells, when not triggered by pure serendipity, generally reflect a high degree of faith and determination on the part of the current executive team: faith in the competitive power of innovation; determination to turn it into a core capability. But CEOs and management teams change, as do market and competitive conditions. New leaders often bring with them new management and change priorities. Newly arrived CEOs may introduce management philosophies and processes that boost innovation, as A.G. Lafley did at P&G with the ‘connect and develop’ approach. Sometimes they launch new policies and tools to improve business performance that restrict their staff’s traditional innovation freedom, as exemplified by McNerney’s controversial introduction of a systematic Six Sigma process at 3M.2 Unless innovation is deeply ingrained in the genes of the company, in both culture and process, it is liable to become a second-level priority when leadership changes.

Many Try . . . Few Keep at It!

At some stage, most companies will launch a company- or division-wide innovation improvement campaign. Some zealous management teams attack the problem with a top-down approach, launching a massive innovation change program throughout the company. The Centurion program initiated by Royal Philips Electronics’ CEO Jan Timmer in the 1990s fits in this category. These efforts focus on restructuring the company’s innovation process and organization. Some companies may gain benefits from a streamlined process, but it is paramount for the company culture to change, or behaviors will remain the same and innovative results will flounder.

By contrast, the majority of management teams approach innovation in a low-key, pragmatic way. They do not engage in a big public change program, but instead look for low-hanging fruits, fixing the deficient parts of their innovation process as they find them, step by step. This may improve performance initially, but without an overall innovation vision and model, company culture and behavior generally do not change, which prevents the full benefit of their efforts being realized.

Fewer companies manage the process well. One that has succeeded is the packaging giant Tetra Pak. The leadership team not only overhauled the company’s innovation capabilities, which has improved and streamlined processes, but is also working hard at mobilizing staff. Using its company-wide leadership development and culture change programs, Tetra Pak continuously promotes the adoption of innovation initiatives. The company has also put in place innovation steering mechanisms that should promote innovation in the long term and safeguard against changes in top management.

Most management teams today do a reasonably good job of streamlining and formalizing their innovation process and adapting it to the imperatives of their industry. The determining factor for sustained innovation performance - or lack of it - seems to be the level and consistency of commitment to innovation at the top. Management attitudes to innovation create the ‘collective innovation leadership’ and this is generally ingrained in the company culture. This is why we propose that there is a specific and distinctive form of leadership for innovation, which not all leaders possess and which this book will illustrate.

Innovation Leadership

There is no shortage of books and articles describing the core characteristics of innovative organizations. Jones and Austin, for example, have compiled a list of five core characteristics of ‘innovation leaders’:3

• in-depth customer insight;

• leading-edge technical awareness;

• inspirational leadership;

• motivational organizational rewards;

• sharing knowledge.

But these ‘differentiators of enhanced innovation performance,’ as they call them, relate more to the collective management of innovative companies than to specific individuals. To date, there has been no formal attempt to paint a comprehensive portrait of ‘innovation leaders’ as defined in this book.

Based on empirical research, this book will analyze the profiles and attributes of various innovation leaders. The portrait will be impressionistic to include a great diversity of characters. Each brush stroke will add a dimension to our description of the special forms of leadership that foster innovation.

Defining Leadership

Professor Preston Bottger, who teaches organizational behavior at IMD business school in Lausanne, has coined a simple definition that conveys the full dimension of leadership:

Leaders do or cause to be done all that must be done and is now not being done to achieve what we say is important! They provide a sense of purpose, direction and focus. They build alignment and get commitment!4

When it is applied to innovation, this definition has several merits.

First, true leaders are action-oriented change agents; they don’t just think and talk, they ‘do or cause to be done . . .’ Most companies state that innovation is important, but what do they really do other than invest money in R&D?

Second, this definition highlights three types of fundamental questions raised by most innovation drives:

(1) Leaders provide a ‘sense of purpose,’ i.e. Why are we doing it? What are the benefits of a change in innovation? What are the penalties if we don’t do it?

(2) They propose a ‘sense of direction,’ i.e. Which way should we go? What innovation model should we adopt?

(3) They introduce a ‘sense of focus,’ i.e. What are our priorities? Where should we concentrate our efforts?

Third, this definition stresses that if innovation is to become a corporate capability, it cannot be confined to a specialist function or a small group, for example to new business development or R&D. It has to permeate the entire organization, become a priority and then an expectation - with this kind of commitment the motivation will be there to make it happen.

Is There a Special Form of Leadership for Innovation?

I like to ask this question to executives who participate in my innovation courses, forcing them - unfairly, I admit - to give a simple yes or no answer. The answers are usually split. Those who come from R&D and register specifically for a course dedicated to innovation, tend to vote overwhelmingly ‘yes.’ Coming from the innovation functions of their business, they may not be able to articulate what innovation leadership entails, but they understand it instinctively. By contrast, executives attending a single session on innovation as part of a general management course seem to be more split in their responses, even though the ‘yeses’ usually prevail.

Those who answer ‘no’ typically argue that purpose, direction and focus are needed in all business endeavors, including innovation. Consequently, a true leader should be able to become an innovation leader if and when conditions require it. Executives who do not believe in a special form of leadership for innovation tend to refer intuitively to mental models of what leaders actually do. Some of the most popular leadership models support their claim that leadership is a universal trait that embraces innovation (refer to Appendix A for a reference to such models).

By contrast, managers who believe that innovation requires a special form of leadership maintain that if this weren’t so, then most business leaders would excel at innovation if they paid attention to it. But as the evidence shows, this is not the case in many companies. Furthermore, few of the leadership icons celebrated by the media for their achievements in shareholder value creation, like Jack Welch at GE, could claim that innovation is their forte. Most would not qualify as innovation leaders and the opposite also seems to be true, i.e. not all innovation leaders are fully fledged business leaders. These arguments convince many managers that since innovation is different from most other business endeavors, it probably requires different attitudes and behaviors.

FACING THE INNOVATION IMPERATIVES

Before trying to characterize the unique traits of innovation leaders, let’s look at some of the essential aspects of innovation, and reflect on the challenge they raise for business leaders. We shall focus on six of these innovation imperatives:

• the urge to do ‘new things’;

• an obsession with redefining customer value;

• the courage to take risks;

• an ability to manage risk;

• speed in spotting opportunities and in project execution;

• a shift in focus and mindset from business optimization to business creation.

Innovation Requires an Insatiable Urge to Try New Things

It goes without saying that innovation is about challenging the status quo and introducing new and, one hopes, better products, processes, services or management approaches. Innovation requires curiosity, experimentation and openness to change. Innovation leaders are those who constantly challenge the present state of affairs, encourage wild ideas and instigate trying new things in their companies.

Despite frequent management denials, many companies adopt an ‘if-it-ain’t-broke-don’t-fix-it’ stance. Therefore, innovation leaders must have the courage to foster a climate of experimentation and permanent change in their organizations.

It’s no surprise that few mavericks and innovation champions exist in most top management teams. Career progression often favors managers who deliver results without making waves, not the revolutionaries. The creators of the ‘organized chaos’ so dear to innovation scholars5 often meet obstacles and resistance on their way to the top. To stimulate innovation, however, companies must promote ‘challengers,’ not just ‘fixers.’

Innovation Requires an Obsession with Redefining Customer Value

Innovation has to do with adding value, and the way to add value is through leadership, argues Nick Shreiber, former CEO of Tetra Pak:

One can add value in many ways. The most important, perhaps, is through leadership - a very elusive concept! Just like good judgment, good leadership is hard to define, but you know it when you see it! Leadership can inspire an organization to reach goals it had never dreamed of, and will encourage each employee to reach his or her full potential in pursuit of their objectives. Inspired leadership will encourage new ideas through innovation and entrepreneurship and will provide the resources to implement them.6

In hindsight, highly successful innovators have generally established new standards of value in their industries. For a long time, value creation came primarily from leading-edge technology-based products or processes. Michelin redefined the notion of value in tires - as expressed in mileage life - with its radial tire technology, and Sony did something similar with its PlayStation game consoles. Nowadays, value creation can come from introducing radically new business models or management methods. It is no longer necessary to be a great technical innovator to qualify as an innovation leader. By radically changing the economics of the PC industry, not the product itself, Michael Dell can arguably be called an innovation leader:

People look at Dell and they see the customer-facing aspects of the direct-business model, the one-to-one relationships. What is not really understood is that behind these relationships lies the entire value chain: invention, development, design, manufacturing, logistics, service, delivery, and sales. The value created for our customers is a function of integrating all those things.7

Kim and Mauborgne suggest that redefining value starts with questioning current industry assumptions by asking four probing questions:

• Which of the factors that our industry takes for granted should be eliminated?

• Which factors should be reduced to well below the industry standard?

• Which factors should be raised well above the industry standard?

• Which factors that the industry has never offered should be created?8

Consciously or instinctively, innovation leaders challenge industry assumptions in order to unearth opportunities for a quantum jump in customer value. A strong customer orientation often fuels this urge to redefine value. Value creators, typically, have an insatiable curiosity about their customers’ needs, empathy with their conscious or subconscious frustrations, and an instinct for what they might need or want in the future. As Akio Morita9 stressed in his story of Sony’s legendary Walkman®, this type of curiosity is not synonymous with a thirst for traditional market information. No market research, he argued, would have indicated a need for the Walkman®. Morita is referring, rather, to the kind of customer intimacy that comes from a deeply ingrained, instinctive curiosity. Sony’s past advertising slogan - ‘You dreamt it! Sony made it’ - reflects the company’s view of its innovation mission: To redefine value constantly by correctly guessing the customer’s unarticulated desires, and applying its technological expertise to satisfy them.

The challenge for innovation leaders is to encourage this constant reappraisal of value factors despite the fact that, at times, such an attitude may prove highly destabilizing. Challenging the current ways of delivering value in your industry is very difficult when you are an established player and even more so when you are the market leader. As Harvard Business School professor Clayton Christensen convincingly demonstrated, introducing disruptive technologies and defying the status quo is much more natural for new entrants looking for ways to challenge incumbents. 10 This is why many innovations have originated with outsiders who forced their way into the market with radically new concepts.

The highly successful story of the no-frills, low-cost airlines - first pioneered by Southwest Airlines in the US, then by Ryanair and easyJet in Europe11 - provides a good illustration of this rule. Their founders challenged every single prevailing assumption in the traditional airline industry12 to come up with a revolutionary business model. This gave them unbeatably low costs and allowed them to redefine the notion of value for budget-conscious air travelers. Arguably, it would have been very difficult for any traditional airline to introduce such radical changes internally.

Innovation Requires the Courage to Take Risks

One of the most widely recognized drivers of innovation is management’s willingness to take risks. It is hotly debated because risk taking is subject to all kinds of interpretations. In its classical definition, risk taking for innovation is related to the concept of entrepreneurship - being ready to bet one’s resources on a new, and often untested, business proposition.

The challenge for innovation leaders is to live by this principle on a day-to-day basis and make the rest of the organization comply with it as well.13 Although many companies describe risk taking as one of their core values, they often fail to change their performance review and reward systems accordingly. Managers are rarely penalized for not taking risks, especially if they are meeting their targets. The right to fail comes up invariably in most innovation speeches, but it is not necessarily carried into practice.

Andy Grove,14 Intel’s legendary former CEO, adds two very interesting dimensions to the risk taking imperative. First, he claims that innovation leaders must have the courage to focus, which means identifying unambiguously either the things they will not do or the things they will stop doing. Second, Grove believes that innovation leaders must have the courage to ‘self-cannibalize,’ i.e. to make their own business obsolete before others force obsolescence on them. As we know, it takes courage to kill one’s own products before their full potential has been exploited and to replace them with higher-performance - but unproven - ones, as a venture capital partner suggests:

You have to decide you’re going to eat your own business yourself, as opposed to having eToys or Amazon or somebody else doing it for you. This is a very different mindset from most companies that are trying to protect what they’ve got, as opposed to cannibalizing.15

It is this policy, coupled with management’s belief in the now famous Moore’s ‘law’16 that enabled Intel to stay at the top of its industry for so long. Whereas the willingness to take entrepreneurial risk applies to all managerial echelons, Grove’s observations apply only to the highest level of innovation leaders, the CEO and his/her key executives.

Innovation Requires an Ability to Manage Risk

The debate about acceptable levels of risk in an innovation project often pits risk takers (usually the project champions) against those who shrink from taking risks (typically senior managers). Innovators often complain that the controlling attitude of their top managers hides a fundamental aversion to risk, while the more conservative proponents of risk management accuse risk takers of being irresponsible. This debate is fruitless because both arguments are right. Innovation is as much about good risk management as it is about risk taking.

The challenge for innovation leaders, therefore, is to strike a balance between single-minded, enterprising risk taking and pragmatic, cautious risk management. The first attitude is necessary for pushing ahead and brushing away objections. In a sense, frontline innovation champions should be so determined and persistent that they could be accused of being both blind and stubborn. Innovation leaders, by contrast, carry the burden of ensuring that all the known risk factors have been identified at each stage and properly managed - a precarious balance, as this needs to be done without discouraging innovators and entrepreneurs.

A dilemma arises whenever the CEO or business unit head is simultaneously the champion of a particular project and the leader who is supposedly responsible for containing risk. No one will dare oppose his/her hierarchical head by spotlighting dangerous risk factors on the boss’s favorite project. The story of Philips’ ill-fated CDi17 illustrates that danger. It was well known within Philips that its determined CEO, Jan Timmer, had adopted the CDi as his pet project, as he had successfully championed the CD-Audio years earlier. Many in the company argue today that the CDi concept had inherent flaws and that its proponents blindly underestimated the competing PC-based technology, CD-ROM. Very few dared to openly challenge the notoriously tough CEO, and finally, after a few years and huge losses, Philips abandoned the project.

A similar story can be told about the energetic pursuit of the market for genetically modified organisms (GMOs) at Monsanto. Its CEO, Robert Shapiro, was consumed by the vision of Monsanto becoming a life sciences powerhouse on the strength of its genetic engineering technology. And he was convinced that realizing his vision meant betting the company’s future on GMOs and promoting them aggressively worldwide. But experts are likely to point out that, after the controversy over the company’s commitment to GMOs erupted in the media, Monsanto’s top management failed to grasp the power of the arguments of GMOs’ detractors. It is hard to be a visionary, risk taking innovation champion, while at the same time being a cautious risk analyzer and container. This balance is the challenge of innovation leaders.

Innovation Requires Speed in Spotting Opportunities and in Project Execution

Silicon Valley innovators and entrepreneurs have known for a long time that the best idea or the best technology does not necessarily win - the winner is the one that is implemented first.18 Whoever comes first learns fastest. Success with new products comes from launching first, then learning fast to correct mistakes before others have prepared their response, and relaunching a superior product as competitors start coming in. In the words of Matt Hobart, a 28-year-old Silicon Valley entrepreneur:

If you have an idea, it’s safe to assume that four or five people have the same idea. But it’s not the person with the best idea who wins. It’s the person who can execute quickly.19

That kind of speed requires three unique skills:

(1) the ability to search continuously for opportunities;

(2) management decisiveness at all stages in the process; and

(3) speed in execution, typically achieved through a pragmatic reliance on external and internal resources, and, of course, highly effective teams.20

Innovation leaders instinctively create an environment that values the search for opportunities and the generation of ideas to exploit them. They typically encourage people to flag opportunities early and make their ideas bubble freely upward for discussion. The challenge lies in the decision process. On what grounds should the project go ahead? What criteria should be met at each stage? When and on what basis should the plug be pulled? As the champions of risk taking entrepreneurs, innovation leaders are bound to allow their staff both a fair amount of freedom to experiment and the necessary resources. Finding an acceptable balance is a challenge, and so is the need to decide fast, whatever the decision. In Silicon Valley, innovators usually get the same advice from venture capitalists: If you are going to fail, at least fail fast and fail better!

Innovation Requires a Shift in Focus and Mindset: From Optimizing Business to Creating Business

Business unit heads are generally responsible for new product development in their fields and innovation is generally pursued to protect and grow the current business, seldom to create new businesses. This is why most companies struggle to exceed the growth rate of their industry. How can Unilever or Nestlé grow in the mature food industry except by creating entirely new, and hence faster-growing, product categories? Now that the second-generation mobile phone market is nearing saturation, the same question applies to Nokia and Motorola. Creating new businesses is completely different from tweaking product lines to introduce extensions.

So, innovation leaders face a double challenge. The first is to strike the right balance between running the current business and growing new businesses, or as Professor Derek Abell puts it, between mastering the present and preempting the future.21 The sudden shift in what financial markets demand in the way of share performance - from growth potential yesterday to profitability today - makes finding the right balance a tough task. The challenge is for companies to avoid the tyranny of success and learn to ‘organize both incremental and disruptive innovative activities.’22

The second challenge for innovation leaders is sensing untapped market needs and choosing promising areas to pursue. Here, innovation leaders must have the ability to shape a vision that will guide them toward new business opportunities.

We have so far talked about innovation and its imperatives in generalities, as if innovation was a uniform process without any ‘subspecies.’ The reality is more complex and, as we have all observed, there are many different types of innovations. As a consequence, it is legitimate to ask whether different styles of leadership are required to handle the different types of innovation. This is what this book is about. But before attempting to define and characterize various types of innovation leaders, we will first establish a broad typology of innovations.

DEFINING AND CHARACTERIZING INNOVATION

Even though everyone talks about innovation, there is still confusion as to what the word really means and entails in the business world. 3M distinguishes between research - transformation of money into knowledge - and innovation - transformation of knowledge into money. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) proposed the following general definition of innovation:

. . . an iterative process initiated by the perception of a new market and/or new service opportunity for a technology-based invention which leads to development, production and marketing tasks striving for the commercial success of the invention.23

Although this definition is slanted toward technology- and product-based inventions - by no means the only types of innovation - it has the merit of considering innovation as a wide-ranging business undertaking.

Defining the Processes in Innovation

Another way to define innovation is to refer to its processes, grouped around easy-to-remember ‘i’ words. The following series can help define what innovation covers: Innovation is the combination of two processes - invention and implementation.

Invention is itself the result of immersion in the market to identify unmet needs, or immersion in the problem at hand. This is followed by a phase of imagination to envision the potential benefits of addressing that opportunity, ideation to develop and select attractive new concepts to meet the identified need, and initiation of a concrete project or venture.

Implementation, in turn, consists of an incubation phase to develop and test the new product or service, followed by an industrialization process to make it and deliver it in large quantities. This is followed by an introduction phase with an initial launch, followed by roll-out and full deployment, complemented at each customer site by a phase of installation and integration to ensure that the new product or service is adopted and integrated into the customer’s organization and processes. This simplified typology will lead us to explore different types and styles of innovation leaders.

Innovation observers and scholars have long pointed to the existence of two very different patterns of innovation generation and diffusion within a company: ‘bottom up’ and ‘top down’ (see Figure 1.1). This distinction has a direct bearing on our topic because, as we see in the following chapters, each mode requires a different type of focus on the part of innovation leaders.

Figure 1.1 The two modes of innovation

In the bottom-up mode, innovative ideas originate spontaneously from people at the operational level, whatever their function. These ideas get developed out in the open and the resulting projects flow upward for management funding and support. This type of innovation is driven by the commitment and dedication of internal entrepreneurs who feel encouraged and empowered by management. The main driver of bottom-up innovation is the entrepreneurial culture of the organization, which encourages individual initiatives, experimentation and risk taking.

Top-down innovation, by contrast, is initiated by management in response to an ambition or the vision of an attractive business opportunity. The big idea that generally results from that vision flows downward to the teams that are then mobilized for its implementation. The main driver of top-down innovation is the organized process by which an innovation vision is made ‘actionable’ by management and ultimately implemented.

In truly innovative companies, both modes can coexist because they are complementary. The most promising ideas from those generated in a bottom-up mode may be appropriated higher up by management and turned into top-down projects with strong management involvement and guidance. Similarly, a top-down initiative may be launched by management, but handed over to the staff with the mandate to generate creative ways to implement it bottom up.

Nevertheless, some companies are known for using one of the two modes as their ‘default’ innovation pattern. For example, 3M was long qualified as an archetypical bottom-up innovator, at least until the arrival in 2001 of its CEO James McNerney who tried to rebalance its focus toward more top-down innovation. In contrast, Japanese technology companies like Canon are said to be more inclined to innovate in a top-down mode with strong management involvement.

Professor Eric Mankin from Babson College highlights that the two innovation modes differ on at least three criteria:

(1) the number of initiatives;

(2) the way results are generated; and

(3) the level of iteration.

Table 1.1 Best Buy vs. GE

Table 1.1 highlights how Mankin contrasts the approaches of retailer Best Buy (a declared bottom-up innovator) and GE (a proponent of top-down innovation) on these three criteria.24

But these two innovation modes differ also in their leadership focus and requirements. By nature, bottom-up innovation occurs spontaneously - i.e. without direct management intervention - in the right kind of culture or climate. The main role of leaders in encouraging bottom-up innovation is to proactively develop a highly supportive culture.

Top-down innovation, by contrast, is steered by management. Making the vision a reality is what top-down innovation leaders excel at doing.

INNOVATION LEADERS: A DIFFERENT BREED?

Defining Innovation Leaders

In summary, innovation leaders can be defined as those senior executives who promote an innovation agenda in their company. Whatever their function or position, they instigate, sponsor and steer innovation in their organization. Through personal conviction or competitive necessity, they are obsessed with providing superior new value to customers. Even in the face of resistance from their top management colleagues, these executives stand up for innovators and challengers of the status quo. They know how to mobilize their staff behind concrete initiatives and they do not hesitate to personally coach innovation project teams.

Many times in innovation literature, they are named ‘champions, ’ ‘sponsors’ or ‘promotors.’25 Whatever they are called, true innovation leaders tend to share the same determination and are not afraid to risk their credibility with top management in case of failure. Lewis Lehr, the highly charismatic former CEO of 3M, described the behavior of an innovation leader very convincingly when he said, ‘We learned to follow the fellows who follow a dream!’26

The ideal place for an innovation leader is, obviously, at the head of the company or one of its businesses. The archetype is the CEO of the company he/she has helped create. Famous names spring to mind: Edwin Land at Polaroid, Robert Noyce at Intel, Steve Jobs at Apple and Bill Gates at Microsoft and, more recently, John Chambers at Cisco, Jeff Bezos at Amazon or Larry Page and Sergey Brin at Google. But charismatic entrepreneurs are not the only innovation leaders worth considering. Innovation leaders can be found at various management levels in different types of companies. They also come from different parts or functions of the organization, with a particular emphasis on marketing and R&D.27 With or without top management blessing, they are committed to keeping alive the company’s innovation legacy - if it exists - or, more often, restoring it. Depending on their personal orientation, they see themselves as the linchpins of their company’s innovation process and/or the evangelists of an innovation and entrepreneurship culture.

Innovation leaders use a variety of levers to improve their company’s innovation process and forge a strong innovation culture. They seem generally to share a number of distinctive leadership characteristics, particularly when compared with other excellent but more traditional business leaders.

The Need for a Network of Innovation Leaders

Marvin Bower, McKinsey’s legendary managing partner and leadership guru, maintains that ‘. . . a business should be run by a network of leaders positioned right through the organization.’28 This belief probably applies even more to innovation leaders than to any other types. Indeed, innovation is never the result of a single person’s efforts, either at the project level or at the sponsoring level. As the well-known saying goes, ‘It takes only one “no” coming after nine “yeses” to kill a project.’ Innovation is in danger if it lies in the hands of an isolated leader in the top management team, whatever his/her charisma. The first role of an innovation leader is, therefore, to breed or attract others to take on leadership roles, propagate innovation values and support concrete projects.

It is relatively easy for a lone innovation leader to build a team of subordinates sharing similar values and behaviors for two reasons. First, people tend to be attracted to like-minded people. And second, unless they are authoritarian, innovation leaders usually exude a high level of openness and communicate enthusiasm, to say nothing of passion. Working for them is exciting!

The situation is more complex at the top management level. Lone innovation leaders, unless they occupy the top job themselves, may be unable to influence the profile and behavior of their top management colleagues. They need to muster CEO support to be effective. If they show growth and results, they can hope to propagate their values through sheer emulation. When they have established a reputed stable of talent in their organizations, they transfer some of their best and most motivated staff into other divisions, in the hope of initiating a bottom-up movement of contagion.

MAPPING OUR JOURNEY

Defining and Characterizing Innovation Leaders

As we have established that there is a special form of leadership needed for innovation, Chapter 2 will further paint the portrait of innovation leaders by characterizing what differentiates this subset from other types of leaders - behavior, common personality traits, instincts and actions. As there is a broad universe of innovation leaders, Chapter 2 will classify innovation leaders according to their focus on a particular aspect of the innovation process, i.e. the front end vs. the back end and show that they naturally tend to adopt a preferred mode of innovation, i.e. bottom up or top down.

Bottom-up innovation and what leaders can do to encourage and sustain it will be the main theme of Chapter 3. Bottom-up innovation is the embodiment of the company’s innovation culture, which often reflects the history of the organization and the legacy of its founders or charismatic leaders. This does not mean that bottom-up innovation is limited to companies that have kept their historic innovation heritage intact. In fact, through their attitudes, policies and processes, leaders can exert a strong influence on at least four direct enablers of innovation, i.e. the company’s organizational creativity; the systematic deployment of teams of complementary champions; the encouragement of customer intimacy practices; and the promotion of a ‘can-do’ climate.

Chapter 4 will explore the characteristics of top-down innovation and highlight how leaders reinvent their business, introduce disruptive technologies or steer their company into new market space. Top-down innovation usually stems from management’s realization that changes in the market environment or technology offer big opportunities to disrupt an established industry. Innovation leaders mobilize their organization to seize that opportunity. They make sure that the big initial idea is turned into an actionable vision, i.e. one that leads to concrete implementation roadmaps and a seamless process.

Chapter 5 will focus on one of the role models for innovation leadership in companies, i.e. the chief technology officer (CTO) or chief research officer (CRO), sometimes called chief innovation officer (CIO). It will also examine the extent to which the role of these technical executives is changing, in terms of visibility within the senior management group, and it will highlight the CTO/CIO’s new leadership challenges:

(1) instilling a vision and sense of purpose for the role of science and technology;

(2) providing a sense of direction for investments in science and technology;

(3) enforcing a sense of focus on the technologies to be developed vs. those to be outsourced; and

(4) becoming corporate entrepreneurs to turn technology into new businesses.

The Leadership Imperative of Innovation Strategies

The first part of the book is based, implicitly, on the assumption that innovation is a generic process that proceeds in a fairly similar fashion, whatever the circumstances and the company. Innovation leaders, it implies, display common characteristics and the differences among them pertain mainly to their natural emphasis - on the front end vs. the back end - and their preferred mode of intervention - top down vs. bottom up. The reality is arguably more complex and we all know that innovation takes on the most varied forms. It is therefore safe to assume that different innovation leadership styles may be needed for different types of innovation.

Chapter 6 will outline four different innovation thrusts, based on the development of:

(1) new/improved products, processes or service offerings;

(2) totally new product categories or service offerings;

(3) totally new business systems or models; and

(4) new/improved customer solutions.

These four thrusts share one common trait, i.e. an almost obsessive quest for a unique customer value proposition. However, each requires a distinct emphasis in terms of process, structure, culture and people. CEOs ought to map whether and how their senior officers meet some of the innovation leadership traits required by their innovation strategy. The following four chapters will illustrate each of these aspects with an example and characterize their specific leadership imperatives.

The incremental development of new/improved products or services is the most prevalent type of innovation axiom, probably accounting for the bulk of R&D expenditures in most companies. The leadership imperatives of this type of thrust will be illustrated in Chapter 7 by the transformation of Medtronic from a renowned but weakening competitor in the industry it created - cardiac pacemakers - to a ‘born-again’ innovator and market leader. This story features a strong leader willing to confront a lenient but complacent culture and introduce a sense of urgency and a high degree of process discipline. This example also highlights the role of top management in supporting the new culture and its courageous and sometimes unpopular champion.

One can compare the leaders who focus on the incremental development of new/improved products to tough sports coaches