The other side of innovation

Effective innovation teams exhibit a diverse range of structures, yet they share a fundamental characteristic: they represent an internal collaboration between employees engaged in the company's core operational activities and a specialized group that focuses solely on pioneering new innovations. This partnership is crucial as it combines the stability and expertise of the existing business framework with the dynamic, exploratory energy of a team committed to breaking new ground. Together, they form a powerful alliance that drives the company's innovation agenda, ensuring that fresh ideas are not only generated but also effectively integrated into the company's growth strategy.

Divide responsibilities

To successfully launch an innovative product into the market, assembling a project team that combines the right mix of full-time dedicated individuals who are deeply immersed in the innovation and part-time shared staff who juggle their existing roles with the innovation project is crucial. Achieving the optimal balance between these two groups often presents a significant challenge. A commonly adhered to guideline when forming such a team suggests maximizing the involvement of individuals from the performance engine segment of the business. This approach is logical because these individuals will be consistently available to address the myriad of integration and implementation challenges that will inevitably emerge down the line. However, there's a risk in overestimating the capabilities of your performance engine staff and assigning them product development tasks that fall outside their areas of expertise. Furthermore, as a performance engine becomes more efficient, its members tend to become more specialized. It is virtually impossible for a performance engine to maintain excellence in its current operations while simultaneously undertaking an innovation project that lies beyond its specialization scope—these endeavors require distinctly different skill sets. Additionally, the nature of the innovation—whether it is incremental or radical—significantly impacts the composition of the project team. For innovations that represent the next iteration of an existing product, drawing the majority of the project team from the performance engine might suffice. In contrast, a disruptive product likely necessitates a greater number of dedicated staff equipped with novel skills. Within any organization, the working relationships among staff members are characterized by three crucial dimensions: the depth of their interactions, the balance of power, and their operating rhythm. The depth dimension reflects how closely and frequently certain individuals collaborate, whereas others may barely interact. The power balance dimension acknowledges that specialists who contribute significantly to customer-valued benefits wield more influence than those involved in more generic tasks. The operating rhythm dimension pertains to the regularity of collaborative efforts, which can range from daily to annually. If the innovation disrupts these established work relationships in any dimension, delegating the tasks to a dedicated team is likely more effective. In essence, routine tasks are best managed by shared staff, while non-routine tasks should be assigned to a dedicated team. When managing a development project that encompasses several steps, strategically organizing your project team to allow shared staff to handle as many development steps within their regular operational duties as possible is wise. The dedicated team should then address those steps that significantly deviate from normal operations. This approach enhances the likelihood of the innovation being both functional and feasible upon completion. It is essential to recognize that the success of the initiative hinges on the collaboration between the shared staff and the dedicated team. Innovations are brought to life by a specially assembled project team, where the dedicated team members are not solely the "innovation team" and should not be perceived or treated as such internally. For the entire initiative to succeed, a unified project plan that incorporates the contributions and efforts of both the dedicated team and the shared staff is imperative. Each group contributes unique skills and disciplines, creating synergies that are vital for the development of meaningful innovations.

Build a committed team

Forming a team dedicated to innovation initiatives might seem straightforward at first glance, involving clear steps such as identifying necessary skills like expertise, practical experience, technical knowledge, lateral thinking abilities, creativity, and more. The next step would involve recruiting the most competent individuals available, whether through internal promotions, hiring externally, acquiring smaller companies with talented staff, etc. Finally, it's about structuring the project team in a way that aligns with the initiative, establishing appropriate roles, hierarchies, incentives, processes, and metrics. These steps appear to be grounded in common sense and simplicity. However, companies often find themselves stumbling over these seemingly basic principles when under the pressure of driving innovation. Specifically, there are seven common pitfalls encountered during the formation of dedicated innovation teams: Firstly, there's a tendency to favor internal candidates over conducting a thorough search for the best talent available. This preference could stem from a variety of reasons such as pride, familiarity, compensation expectations, or simply convenience. However, relying too heavily on insiders can lead to two significant issues: the possibility of assembling a team lacking in necessary skills and the risk of creating a team that is too similar to the existing organization, which can be problematic if the goal of the innovation is to bring about significant change. It's crucial for innovation teams to include skilled outsiders who can introduce new perspectives. Secondly, there's a habit of replicating existing roles and responsibilities instead of starting with a clean slate. If the innovation team mirrors the structure and job descriptions of the existing performance engine, the result is essentially a duplicate of the current setup. Innovation teams require a fresh beginning, with new titles, expansive job descriptions, and their own dedicated space to emphasize that this is not just business as usual. Thirdly, the dominance of the performance engine's existing power centers, such as marketing, it, or sales, is often reinforced. However, for innovation teams to forge new paths, it's essential that they are strong in areas where the performance engine may be lacking. Fourthly, there's a tendency to evaluate the innovation team's performance using the established metrics of the existing operations. This approach encourages the innovation team to conform rather than innovate. Fifthly, insisting that the innovation team adhere to the company's existing business processes can be tempting for the sake of expediency, but it rarely leads to successful outcomes. Innovation teams should have the autonomy to develop processes that are tailored to their specific needs. Sixthly, failing to cultivate a distinct culture within the innovation team can be a misstep. The culture of the innovation team should focus on achieving the best possible performance, in contrast to the performance engine's likely emphasis on cost-efficiency. Lastly, forcing the innovation team to comply with the standardized policies and procedures of the parent organization in areas such as human resources, finances, and information technology can hinder their ability to function effectively as a distinct entity. Creating a dedicated team for an innovation project should be a challenging process if the goal is to produce significant results. Falling into any of these traps increases the likelihood of merely creating a smaller version of the performance engine, which is unlikely to contribute to meaningful innovation. To construct a robust dedicated team, it's essential to recruit highly talented outsiders, allow the team to define their own roles and responsibilities, establish their own metrics and processes, foster a unique culture, make exceptions to standard company policies, adopt different benchmarks, and set up new compensation and incentive structures. Building a team with a tailored organizational model is a complex and challenging task, and companies often hesitate due to fear of failure or unfamiliarity with any organizational model other than that of the performance engine. Despite the challenges, it's crucial for companies to avoid taking shortcuts and to make thoughtful choices in organizing and planning the innovation team to avoid creating obstacles that could impede their success.