Concept

Climate change!

Giving innovators a chance

Who in the company should innovate? Every employee or only those who are passionate about innovation? I’m making the case here for the latter. This means creating “a climate that stimulates innovation”, in contrast to creating “an innovation culture”. Let me explain.

A corporate culture means that every employee should believe and behave in alignment with it.

  • Think e.g. of a company with a strong ethical culture that successfully creates trust with customers and stakeholders: all employees, without exception, demonstrate this ethical behavior – and likely the company wants to keep it this way. 

A corporate “innovation” culture thus implies that every employee should innovate, be measured against it, be recognized for it.  If innovation is currently not the corporate culture, it needs to be created. Not only is changing the culture of an organization one of the hardest things to do, successful corporations often do not want to change it.

To increase innovation in such a company, it may not be necessary to create a new culture of “innovation”, i.e. that every employee now needs to innovate. That could even be risky, as it may dilute the existing culture. It also may not be necessary, as there are groups of critical employees who may not need to be innovative.

  • Like in the example company above, take those employees ensuring site security or taking a customer order with flawless execution. They need to be ethical to create trust, but may not need to be innovative. If they would, there even may be a risk that it would dilute the current corporate culture.

On the other hand, by “creating a climate that stimulates innovation”, the existing culture stays intact, while innovative employees are encouraged to pursue their ideas. Those employees should know how they can experiment, how to get support and be rewarded for being innovative.

I have experienced significant business and customer impact from the creation of such a “climate that stimulates innovation”, without changing the existing corporate culture. This can be done in several ways:

  • through facilitation, e.g. by creating networks to connect innovators across different geographic areas or divisions; by removing barriers for innovation, like learning how to experiment cheaply or how to engage with legal/compliance
  • through inspiration, e.g. by providing recognition and awards for successes and failures; by communicating broadly across the company with TED-like webcasts and leadership town halls
  • through measurement, e.g. by tracking how the innovation mindset perceptions change; by managing an innovation portfolio

One risk of focusing on climate change (vs. culture change) is that if the catalyst (e.g. the leadership sponsor or innovation leader) leaves, sustained innovation may dry up. If this happens on purpose, this may imply that innovation was not or is no longer a critical need.

To change a “corporate culture” is like a fire drill, a massive, disruptive top down effort (think creating a digital culture). Creating a “climate that stimulates innovation” is more like lighting many small flames, bottom up across the company, which then, together, create a big fire. In both cases though, all employees need to be aware that innovation is important and that they should support innovators. 

As Marcus Buckingham said:

“Innovation and best practices can be sawn throughout an organization – but only when they fall on fertile ground”

So, as Innovation Leader, I worked in a company that already had a good, deeply ingrained culture. Therefor, I focused my energy on creating a climate that stimulates innovation within that culture, through facilitation, inspiration and measurements.

More reading: 10 influencing factors to creating a climate for innovation

What are your thoughts? Please share below!

Passionate about stimulating innovation within a large corporation. 35 years of global (Pharma) marketing and innovation experience.

6 Comments

    • Wim Vandenhouweele

      Hi Zhang Lu,
      You are absolutely correct. I’m planning a blog on this important topic. A very comprehensive cross-industry report was published earlier this week by InnovationLeader.com : Innovation & Risk: Forging Productive Ties with Legal, Compliance, and Information Security Teams (you need to be member to read the full report).

  • Petr

    Great article!

    I really found the delineation between climate and culture thought provoking. Could the dichotomy of the two stem from the difference between incremental and for lack of better word “radical” innovation?

    If you look at incremental innovation as a continues process of optimising current ways of working that unlocks the true value of what the company already has then it is a necessary cultural piece. It’s the innovation that happens inside of a stable area that enable us to find the local maximum.

    Radical innovation on the other hand, tries to discover new ways of engagement and in the process invariably challenges the current culture, testing its health and expanding its abilities. It’s the innovation that takes us past the area of local stability into new spaces that we have not yet understood.

    I think good radical innovation is almost like the teenager in the room challenging the parent, stimulating with new ideas and providing a mirror for self reflection. And as a teenager you don’t want to give the keys to your house, by making it part of your culture, but be supportive and create a climate where it can be itself, uncover new areas, challenge the organisation, yet still fit into the companies principles.

    • Wim Vandenhouweele

      Stimulating angle, Petr!

      In my opinion, radical innovation indeed needs to come from a relatively small, separate, protected part of the company, so fits more in the “climate” bucket.

      Incremental innovation to optimize current ways of working, can be accomplished through both approaches: depending if it is a behavior required from all employees (i.e. “culture”, so needs also to be part of every single employee’s objectives) or only a behavior required from those that really want to innovate (i.e. “climate”, which allows, encourages and rewards this behavior, but does not require it from every single employee).