Why Big Companies Can’t Innovate: Insight from a Former Fortune 200 Innovation Director

By Anthony Vengrove

Square Peg, Round Hole

I’ve noticed a lot of conversation lately centered on why big companies struggle to innovate.  Scott AnthonyBeth ComstockRon Ashkenas and others have written on the topic each with different takes.  I must confess, I don’t completely agree with all the diagnoses nor do I think they’ve addressed all of the critical reasons.

My diverse career experiences have afforded me a general management perspective of innovation.  I’ve worked on new products in ad agencies, corporate brand marketing, business development, and R&D.  Having served as a Director of Innovation at a Fortune 200 company for nearly ten years before moving on to consulting, I can say that I’ve experienced many challenges first hand.

First of all, let’s acknowledge that there’s a flaw in the premise of this argument.  Big companies CAN innovate.  They innovate all the time.  They are very good at driving incremental innovation that builds their brands.  They regularly create process and product innovations that generate cost savings which contribute increased profit for shareholders.

What big companies are not so good at is radical or disruptive innovation.  Here’s my take on what they are doing wrong.

They Lack a Vision or the One They Have is Uninspiring. A key responsibility of the transformational leader or any leader embarking on a major change initiative is to create and champion a vision.  A compelling vision statement describes what the company wants to become in the future.  It not only needs to inspire but ideally it should inform the innovation agenda.  When it operates on this level, employees charged with innovation will have a better sense of what they need to deliver.  Without vision, innovation becomes highly subjective; leading to ideas that do not align with corporate objectives or brand strategies.

They Smother Innovation with too much Infrastructure and Process.   Big companies love to create processes and business systems that promote predictability and mitigate risk.  Unfortunately, following a process perpetuates sameness — and sameness is the enemy of original thought.  Remember, creativity is the fuel for innovation.  Make it easy for your employees to share and build ideas.  Use process as a tool to make business decisions and shepard initiatives toward commercialization.  Process doesn’t create ideas — only curiously engaged human brains can do that.

They Staff Innovation Teams with Managers Instead of Leaders.  Academic writers such as John Kotter suggest a difference between managers and leaders.  Briefly summarized, managers cope with complexity and rationality while leaders plan for change and direct others toward a common goal.  As companies chase the holy grail of innovation there is much perceived uncertainty, risk, and complexity.  It’s no wonder they staff up with competent managers who can ‘control’ it all.  Unfortunately, the manager mindset is wrong for innovation as it favors order over challenging the status quo.

Instead, companies need to put their best leaders in charge of innovation.   Each project should have a transformational-like leader who can rally the team with effective visioning and championing of goals.  Just like a traditional change management effort, these project leaders are trying to move teammates toward a new future.  They will be faced with roadblocks, rejection, changing objectives and the like.  A strong leader can motivate his or her team to maintain belief and create solutions to the toughest challenges they face.

The C-Suite is only Moderately Engaged.   All innovation involves change of some degree.  Usually any change management initiative has the C-Suite all over it.   But with innovation, the same level of engagement isn’t always apparent.  Quite often, CEOs communicate innovation as a key strategy then sit back and wait for the ideas to come — only to quickly judge and challenge them.  For all the reasons noted in the previous section, the CEO must lead innovation in a transformational and authentic way.  Executive management needs to demonstrate their commitment to fresh thinking and creativity — including constant communication of the vision and strategies for the innovation agenda.  If employees don’t hear the management team talk about innovation they’ll assume there’s a lack of commitment at the top.

Management Lacks Experience Building & Fostering Creative Cultures.  Most senior leaders lack direct experience building and fostering idea-friendly cultures — or managing creative employees, for that matter.  Most executives say they want innovation, but behave in ways that diminish employee inventiveness.  Developing creative leadership abilities should be a priority of all leaders.  Managing creative employees and fostering an idea-friendly climate requires different skills and approaches.  For example, consider how you might respond (both verbally and nonverbally) to someone pitching an absurd idea.  A simple roll-of-the-eyes can send the wrong signal and prevent someone from feeling comfortable to share ideas in the future.  Remember, ‘safety and security’ are basic needs on Maslow’s hierarchy.  When employees realize they can share any idea without being shamed, they’ll feel safe and motivated to do so again.

Early Ideas Get Crushed by Too Much Logic.  Most companies train and reward employees to value logic and analytical thinking.  Firms with a successful track record of incremental innovation are often lured into using familiar research and modeling techniques to evaluate game-changing innovation.  Unfortunately, truly novel ideas are usually so ‘new’ that traditional methods of evaluation don’t always work and can lead to a false negative.  Even your consumers might not even be able to wrap their heads around your first concept or prototype.

Game changing innovation takes patience and faith.  You have to accept that you can’t always get the answers to questions you are normally accustomed to with incremental innovation.  If you bombard ideas too early in the process with heavy doses of logic, you run the risk of killing ideas that have potential but just need more time to incubate.  The trick is to manage your constraints effectively.  Loosen your financial, technology, and market research constraints earlier in the development process so ideas have a chance to breath and develop.  Tighten the constraints as the concept edges closer to commercialization.  Learn more about managing constraints in this great paper by James Euchner.

They Don’t have Enough Creative Thinkers in R&D.  In my opinion, the true heroes of innovation are the product developers, engineers, and scientists working in R&D and manufacturing for they’re the ones that convert ideas into commercial reality.  Success won’t happen if you have too many rational and pragmatic managers who are quick to say ‘that’s impossible.’  Make sure you have creative and curious R&D talent that’ll jump at the chance to solve your toughest challenges (especially when a solution is nowhere in sight).

There are Few Strategic Thinkers in the Strategic Planning Department.  Similar to the difference between managers and leaders, creativity is an important differentiator between strategic thinking and strategic planning.  Most strategic planning departments are too focused on the execution of planning processes which has led some like C.K. Prahalad and Gary Hamel to conclude the practice is nothing more than ‘form filling.’  Innovation needs strategic thinkers who constantly look forward into the future and can turn data and trends into insight.  Just because your planners appear to be busy doesn’t mean they’re thinking about the right things.  To learn more about the difference between strategic thinking and strategic planning read this paper by Jeanne Liedtka.

There’s a Presence of Narcissistic and Ego-Driven Individuals in Key Positions.  My biggest innovation successes came on teams where trust and collaboration were high and in environments where open communication occurred between all levels.  As soon as a big ego joins the group, it seems politics, arguments, and a silo-mentality soon follow.  As big companies venture into innovation they have to root out the command and control personalities sitting in critical positions.  Not only is this style is out-dated (it’s only really useful for crisis situations in my opinion) it completely shuts down creative engagement.  This type of leader tends to bully and shame those who disagree with them into following their ideas.  When they’re in ‘gate-keeper’ positions, I can guarantee you that your promising ideas run the risk of devolving into mediocrity and you’ll struggle to keep your pipeline filled.

In summary, it may seem there are many forces working against the big company when it comes to game-changing innovation. Many of the issues are cultural in nature and ultimately fall on the desks of the senior leadership team.  In my opinion, most can be addressed as long as the executive team is committed to change and willing to change their attitudes and behaviors.

ICEAt Miles Finch Innovation, we developed a teaching tool called the Idea Climate Equation®.  If you look at each variable in the equation and reflect on the significance of their position you’ll begin to see how this simple equation relates to many of the challenges noted above.

Our belief is that creativity is our natural default state and is usually smothered by the analytical thinking we’re taught to value in corporate jobs.   Consider that before you buy into another consultant’s sure-fire innovation process or bring in another speaker to teach you how to become more creative.  Instead, take a good look into the mirror and ask yourselves, “What are we doing that interferes with creative and innovative thinking?”  If you’re honest enough to have that conversation, you’ll take a big step toward creating the innovative culture your employees are probably craving.  The good news is that most companies simply need to get out of their own way.

Miles Finch Innovation helps companies navigate the messy territory of corporate innovation.  We’re strategic thinking partners who can help you get unstuck and identify creative solutions to your toughest challenges.  We also love to train and speak on the subject of Creative Leadership.  Email us or call us at 860-799-7505 to learn how we can help you help you unlock the creative potential of your employees.


Posted

in

,

by

Comments

11 responses to “Why Big Companies Can’t Innovate: Insight from a Former Fortune 200 Innovation Director”

  1. admin

    Thanks, David. I’m glad you enjoyed it.

  2. Great article!

  3. MilesFinch

    Thanks, David. I appreciate your feedback and suggestions. I like your phrase, ‘institutional wariness’ as I think that nicely summarizes how employees feel as many of these issues arise.

    In my last corporate innovation role, I too had to pass our projects over to another team (after they gained Gate 2 approval) and felt the same concerns you noted above. In fact, I have yet to meet anyone who says this approach works well. In an attempt to improve the situation, I tried very hard to get the ‘future project leaders’ involved in our work early on so they could feel some sense of ownership and understand the opportunity better. That too was difficult as they simply didn’t have the time to engage.

  4. Very good post and I agree with everything here but suggest a couple of additions. I have seen some really innovative teams get decimated in the next budget review because senior management could not see the short term benefit of their technology/product. Not only does the company lose some of the most innovative people who are fired or leave voluntarily when their project is cancelled or out licensed, but this behaviour results in an institutional wariness in getting involved in such innovation projects because you know your head is on the chopping block if there is any budget challenge. Such feelings can be easily mitigated by publicly and tangibly celebrating the success of the team even as the project is being cancelled or sold off so that the employees remain on board and others are more likely to take part in such projects in the future.

    The other main killer of innovation is management churn. New managers tend to be the new broom who sweep away all unnecessary spending especially on projects outside the core business or that they do not understand or were seen as the love child of the previous manager. This is an easy way for a manager to look like they are making a difference but has the same result on the general willingness to get involved in innovation projects. Similarly, when an innovative project has progressed to the point that there are some tangible benefits it is often handed over to a different manager or department for full implementation. These people have usually not been involved, have their own agenda and the project quietly dies or is replaced by a new and improved project which generally fails. This is again frustrating for those involved in the project from conception. It would be far better to keep the project in the place the idea germinated and bring in other functions to help fully realize the project in that department or create a new function maintaining as many members of the project team as possible. This of course takes serious C-suite support, however this is of course subject to management churn as well.

  5. MilesFinch

    Thanks, Dave. While i agree with your last point, I have to say that’s also where the huge opportunity exists. If large companies can figure out how to ‘redeploy’ those assets and leverage their scale and resources, they’ll put themselves on a very interesting path.

  6. MilesFinch

    Thanks, Steve. Your comment made me think about what happens when there’s a problem or deviation in the ‘norm.’ Management sweeps in looking for answers and usually implements a whole range of new processes and systems to ensure the deviation doesn’t occur again. Thus, reinforcing your point above.

  7. Excellent post – I agree with your assessment that most of the roadblocks hindering innovation and creativity are cultural. Making the invisible more visible can make a big difference. It’s interesting to think about the relationship between leadership development, shared values and common behaviors and an environment that fosters innovation. Also interesting to consider how some of the assets of large organizations (lots of money, large teams, patient managers, defined processes) can actually get in the

  8. All great points, Tony. Within most big companies it’s made clear to almost every manager that they and their people need to use, and not disrupt, the sophisticated processes that are in place to ensure consistency and efficiency. I think it’s often the focus on maintaining established processes that most powerfully blocks the possibility of disruptive innovation efforts.

  9. It seems that many large orgs see the words “innovation” and “imagination” and think that just tagging a group of people with “dreaming sh*t up” is the thing to do. Everybody has to figure out what the destination is, and how to draw and read the map to get there. Otherwise you’re permanently lost inna woods, and there are BEARS there!

  10. MilesFinch

    Thanks for your comments, Casey. I think you are right about courage and trust. That’s why vision is so important, in my view. If management can articulate a vision and key strategies well enough, employees will have a better idea what they’re being asked to build and solve for. Therefore, in theory, ideas that come forward should have a higher probability of being “on-strategy” which will serve to increase trust. Of course, it takes courage to start this process.

    I recently visited with a Fortune 100 company that just blew-up their innovation program. After building a rather large department and supporting infrastructure it all collapsed upon itself. The problem? Lack of proper visioning and strategic objectives. Without these beacons, employees were developing any creative idea they could think of which means most were off-strategy, not aligned with long-term objectives, and in some cases, just plain silly. I suspect there are many more companies in similar situations — all starting to treat innovation as if it’s a four-letter word.

  11. This is the forever tension within large organizational structures: how to stay agile *and* stay big?
    My empirical observation and experience says that the biggest struggle is in top-down hierarchical cultures, which wind up sclerotic on lots of levels because the folk(s) at the top CAN’T watch and manage everything, but they think they can. #fail. However, any organization can fall prey to sclerotic thinking if they start thinking of anything other than gravity as being inescapable. And heck, even gravity can be fooled for a while if you’ve met Mr. Bernouli.
    Empowering inside teams, and the customers those teams serve – be they internal or external customers – to spot and act on opportunity will open up all sorts of possibilities for any size enterprise. However, it does take courage and trust to do so. Courage and trust are never in excess inventory, though, are they … ?