|
Report 103
Your newsletter on applied creativity, imagination, ideas and innovation in
business – delivered to your e-mail box on the first and third Tuesday
of every month.
Tuesday, 3 November 2009
Issue 159
Hello and welcome to another issue of Report 103, your fortnightly newsletter
on creativity, imagination, ideas and innovation in business.
As always, if you have news about creativity, imagination, ideas, or innovation
please feel free to forward it to me for potential inclusion in Report103. Your
comments and feedback are also always welcome.
Information on unsubscribing, archives, reprinting articles, etc can be found
at the end of this newsletter.
GUEST WRITER
Once again, I am pleased to bring you a thought provoking article and paper
written by a guest writer. If you would like to contribute an article to Report
103, please contact me and tell me about your article/idea.
METRICS FOR IDEA GENERATION
By Dr. Brian Glassman
Ph.D in Innovation Management
Metrics are one of many tools to monitor the performance of a process. For
idea generation there are no general metrics which span across industries. Instead,
an innovation manager must select idea generation metrics based on the strategy
of their company and their current idea needs. The following white paper will
discuss the selection of metrics for idea generation projects, and the
management of the process given its’ inputs and outputs. Further, a management
chart tool is introduced to aid in managing the process.
Background
My Ph.D advisory board members at Purdue insisted that I find a common set
of outputs and performance measures for idea generation that I could base an
objective study on. Unfortunately, I struggled to find any such metrics, and
I finally concluded that there were no general set of metrics for idea generation
which were applicable across industries; hence I had to settle on subjective
measures for my studies.
Interestingly as my research continued, I found that an individual company
could adopt a custom set of idea generation metrics which would suit them very
well. The following section will explain why there are no general metrics applicable
across industries, but the subsequent section will show you how to select metrics
specific to your company and its needs.
In my search for general metrics I had to consider many things, the most important
being the differences amongst industries and their particular new product idea
needs. The literature suggested many metrics for idea generation: patents per
employee, ideas per employee, quality of ideas, time to generate ideas, quality
of ideas, cost to create an idea, an ideas ability to fill the front end portfolio,
revenue per idea, and so on… Interestingly, I found that none of these
metrics were applicable across several industries; let me give some examples
to demonstrate.
Ideas per Employee
“Ideas per employee” can be thought of as a simple useful metric,
but how many new product ideas does a company really need? Small startups, which
are highly resource constrained, should dedicate their business to one or two
products and hence they have a very small need for new ideas. Large manufacturing
companies with several thousand employees (like lawn mower manufactures) could
similarly have a limited budget for developing new products and effectively
only need a moderate size batch of new product ideas, maybe say 400 to 500 to
build on. However, companies in creative
areas, like home furnishing products, need a constant stream of ideas to stoke
their product lines. In this case “ideas per design employee” is
a vital metric because it directly translates into the effectiveness of their
design department at coming up with new ideas.
Another interesting metric is “revenue per idea created” because
it accounts for the output of the idea generation and innovation process, but
again this is not generally applicable. Take two companies one in technology
and one in housewares. The technology company has to invest large amounts of
money to develop a single idea, thus it is in their interest to seek out a large
number of ideas and develop only the best; where as, for the housewares company
this metric may be useful in showing how effective the design department is
at creating successful new product ideas.
Some Metrics only Effective for Specific Project Types
To complicate things further, a set of metrics may be only effective for certain
types of projects. For example, if that same housewares company wants to make
a radical new product line they should create a lot more ideas than normal and
not hold the design employees to that “revenue per idea created”
metric. However, if the idea generation activities are tasked with supporting
an existing product line it may be reasonable to use a “revenue per idea
created” metric.
Going through the above mentioned list of metrics one can easily pick industries
in which a particular metric does not make sense or is even harmful; and conversely,
one can pick metrics which are logical and helpful. So the question becomes,
what metrics should a company use to help guide its’ idea generation process?
You can download Dr. Glassman's complete paper on Metrics for Idea Generation
as a PDF file from http://www.jpb.com/creative/White_Paper_Metrics_for_Idea_Generation_Glassman_2009.pdf
ABOUT DR. BRIAN GLASSMAN
Brian Glassman, Ph.D., has just graduated from the College of Technology at
Purdue University specializing in Innovation Management and Technology Commercialization
and is currently seeking employment. He received his B.S. and M.S. degrees in
Mechanical Engineering and a second M.S. in Engineering Management from Duke
University. His research, consulting, and scholarly interests continue to explore
the many facets of Innovation Management and Technology Commercialization; and
he is a passionately-driven entrepreneur.
BACK TO INNOVATION BASICS
If you are a regular reader of Report103, you will know we are writing a serious
of articles on the basic terminology and processes associated with innovation.
Following an informal survey some weeks ago, we have found that there is a lack
of clarity with respect to the basic terms used in innovation – there
is even disagreement on the definition very word itself! Hence, I've made the
rather audacious move to run in Report 103 a series of articles covering basic
terms and processes associated with innovation. If you missed the introduction
to this series of articles or would like to read it again, you can do so at
http://www.jpb.com/creative/innovation_basics.php
BRAINSTORMING, IDEATION AND IDEA GENERATION
The word brainstorming is widely used in two ways. Firstly, in the formal sense
of the word, it describes a structured activity designed to enable a group of
people to generate creative ideas. Secondly, in the informal sense, brainstorming
is often used to describe any action to generate ideas. “Let's you and
I sit down and brainstorm some ideas for that problem,” is a typical usage
of the informal usage of the term.
Formal Brainstorming
The formal term brainstorming was coined by Alex Osborn, a co-founder of the
BDO advertising agency, which eventually became BBDO, a global advertising giant.
Osborn described in his seminal book, Applied Imagination (1953), a process
which he had perfected at his agency and which he called “brainstorming”.
(1)
His brainstorming method was largely what we know today. You have a facilitator
and a group of people. The facilitator posts a problem on a chalkboard (or whiteboard
or flipchart) and participants are invited to shout out their ideas in a free
flowing, criticism free environment. He observed that if you remove judgement
from the brainstorming, people would be less inhibited and hence more creative.
Osborn listed four rules of brainstorming:
1. Focus on quantity
2. Withhold criticism
3. Welcome unusual ideas
4. Combine and improve ideas
The Problem with Formal Brainstorming
The problem with brainstorming, as described by Osborn, is that it has been
proven to be less than effective! We will not go into details here, but tests
have shown again and again that if you take a group of people, give them a problem
and have them individually write their ideas down on paper, you will get a wider
range of ideas (ie. more creativity) than you would get if you put the participants
in a room and had them brainstorming together in the traditional way. (2)
It is important to bear in mind that this research does not question Osborn's
four rules of brainstorming, which have been proven highly effective! The research
only questions the technique itself.
To a certain degree, a good facilitator can overcome some of the problems (which
are listed in the article Visual Brainstorming http://www.jpb.com/creative/visual_brainstorming.php)
with group brainstorming. Moreover, there are some alternative approaches which
seem to be more effective.
Alternative Approaches to Brainstorming
Non-verbal brainstorming, in which people draw pictures together, build ideas
out of construction toys or otherwise build ideas without talking has been shown
to be more effective. Exactly why this is true is unclear. This has also been
covered in the article Visual Brainstorming.
Likewise, electronic brainstorming, that is where people submit solutions to
a creative challenge (ie. a problem or goal) using on-line forms, has been demonstrated
to be effective as it overcomes a number of the issues which impede traditional
brainstorming. Ideas campaigns, which are more sophisticated versions of on-line
brainstorming, are also effective for the same reasons.
A popular brainstorming variation on the Osborn method is to have people write
ideas on Post-Its and sticktheir ideas to a wall. Then the facilitator leads
the group in combining related ideas. This is followed by another round of idea
writing and sticking. I have not read much research on this approach, but in
general I understand it is effective.
An approach I have used is to have people write ideas individually for 10 minutes.
Then put the people in pairs, have them compare and combine ideas as well as
be inspired and add new ideas. Then the pairs are combined into larger groups
and the process is repeated. We go through several rounds of this until the
entire group is comparing ideas. This approach allows people to work individually
to start with and moves on to small groups, thus ensuring all brainstormers
have time to think about their own ideas and participate in the activity. I've
not seen or performed research on this technique, but my own experience has
been very positive!
Informal Brainstorming
As noted, the word brainstorming is often bandied about to describe any idea
generation action, irrespective of whether or not Osborn's four rules are followed.
And this has become so commonplace that we should accept the informal use of
brainstorm as an acceptable definition. Nevertheless, a better term for informal
brainstorming would probably be “Ideation”, a broad term that would
define any action of formulating ideas individually or in group. Hence, brainstorming
could be considered a subcategory of ideation.
For personal reasons that are not even clear to me, I've never liked the word
“ideation” Perhaps this is partly because in psychology, the word
also means the conceptualisation of an idea, which is a different action. I
prefer to use the term: “idea generation” which, of course, describes
the simple process of generating ideas. And as an electrical generator creates
electricity from fuel, idea generation creates ideas from mental fuel!
Like ideation, the term idea generation can describe any activity, whether
it be Osborn's brainstorming technique, jpb.com's ideas campaign technique or
sitting alone with a notebook and writing down ideas that solve a personal problem!
References:
1) A.F. Osborn (1963) Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative
Problem Solving (Third Revised Edition). New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s
Sons.
2) Numerous papers have looked at this issue, one of the first was aptly: D.W.
Taylor, P.C. Berry, C.H. Block (1958) “Does Group Participation When Using
Brainstorming Facilitate or Inhibit Creative Thinking?” Administrative
Science Quarterly 3, no 1. pp 23-47.
HOW TO HIJACK YOUR COMPANY'S SUGGESTION SCHEME
Has your firm implemented one of the many new suggestion scheme software applications
now available on the market? If so, you have a wonderful opportunity to hijack
it and ensure your personal agenda, rather than corporate strategy, becomes
the focus of your firm's idea generation activities. Of course, this will probably
get you in deep trouble and could cost you your job. So, bear in mind there
are minor consequences. But, let's throw caution to the wind and have some fun!
Why is it so easy to hijack a web based suggestion scheme? It is simple because
most corporate suggestion schemes put the users (usually employees, but possibly
also customers, suppliers or even the general public) in control of your ideation
process. As we will see, this is not a good thing, particularly if you want
to align your innovation process with strategy. In truth, senior management
should control the innovation process, while users should participate in the
generation of ideas that respond to specific challenges. More on that later.
First let's see how you can hijack your firm's suggestion tool.
The Hijacking Process
Let's imagine you are an engineer based in a lovely New York City (NYC) office
of a large, high technology electronics firm. You have a great office, travel
opportunities and work closely with your manufacturing centres in Alabama, Texas,
New Mexico, Guang'an China and Bangkok, Thailand. However, following the economic
downturn and a recent merger, the company has decided to close numerous offices,
including your NYC office, centralise all management in Smalltown Alabama –
a lovely place, but frankly rather boring compared to NYC – and off-shore
core manufacturing to the Chinese factories. Other factories will be closed
and much of the manufacturing will be outsourced. Video conferencing will replace
all non-essential travel and so on. In short, your great office and travel opportunities
will soon disappear and work life will be less fun!
In all this cost cutting, management has invested in a cheap “idea management”
software that is basically a suggestion scheme. Employees are invited to submit
their ideas on any topic by filling in an on-line form. They can also add comments
to their colleagues' ideas as well as vote for their favourite ideas. Management
hopes that employees will submit new efficiency ideas that can further reduce
costs during these difficult times. But management are also open to new product
and product improvement ideas as well as any other great ideas employees might
have. However, there is no way to actually channel creativity in their preferred
directions. After all, the tool is just an electronic suggestion scheme. Nevertheless,
it looks great and boasts powerful web 2.0 features. Let's call the suggestion
scheme tool “IdeaBank”.
Changes
On the Intranet, the firm's CEO talks about the importance of changes taking
place and asks people to submit to IdeaBank suggestions about further improving
operational efficiency during this time of change.
You, like many of your colleagues, do not like the change. You'd rather stay
in your NYC office, travel regularly to the companies other locations (business
class, of course!) and maintain the flexibility you have grown used to. So,
you log into IdeaBank and suggest “Don't close down the NYC office!”
A number of colleagues like the idea and vote it up. It quickly becomes a popular
idea with lots of votes. This gives you a very different idea.
At lunch, in the staff canteen, you suggest to friends that everyone should
submit ideas about not moving and not making changes and you all agree to vote
for each others' ideas. Within 24 hours, the IdeaBank is swimming in ideas about
staying in NYC, not closing factories, not reducing travel and not making changes.
And these ideas are getting votes not just from your and your friends at lunch,
but from many other employees who are unhappy about moving and possibly losing
their jobs. Others simply see the popularity of your ideas and vote for them
as well.
By this time, management face a dilemma. If they delete your and your colleagues'
ideas from IdeaBank, it will seem they are censoring free expression and not
listening to employee feedback. If they ignore the ideas, in spite of their
popularity, it will seem that management is not really interested in employee
ideas.
Of course, they could listen to the employees, cancel the closures, not move
and keep on as before, hoping that the economy will improve before they lose
too much money. But that is not in keeping with their new strategy. And, since
their main competitors operate more efficiently, it is not a winning option
for the company itself.
What Can Management Do?
One likely scenario, of course, is that the trouble-makers who initiated the
hijacking of IdeaBank are identified and laid off supposedly as part of a general
downsizing. On one hand, firing people gets rid of some troublemakers. However,
those so-called troublemakers might also be considered creative individuals
who have demonstrated initiative and leadership! Better managed, they could
be a real benefit to the company and its innovation initiative.
Most likely, management will decide to quietly close IdeaBank and declare that
the innovation initiative was a failure. Sadly, it is also likely to make management
reluctant to invest in better tools that are actually designed according to
the principles of the innovation process, which is not the case with suggestion
scheme software.
Truth and Fiction
Although this story is fictional, it is based on a couple of actual scenarios
which have been brought to my attention.
The true problem in each case is that the people in charge of innovation do
not really understand the innovation process. To them, the concept of a suggestion
scheme seems ideal. It's an easy to comprehend tool that allows anyone in the
firm to suggest any idea. It would seem, then, that employees will share lots
of brilliant ideas they have been unable to share in the past.
But that's not the way people actually develop creative ideas personally or
in groups. Creative ideas are developed in order to solve problems or achieve
goals. Hence, you need an idea management tool that allows management to publish
those problems or goals as innovation challenges. Secondly, management needs
to remain in control of the innovation process and ensure that ideas are in
line with strategy. Again, innovation challenges based on strategic issues do
this. Moreover, evaluation by experts, according to criteria defined by management,
ensures that the ideas which are in keeping with strategy are the ones selected
for development. Open suggestions and popularity votes cede control of innovation
to users. At best, that means creative thinking is not in line with strategy
and at worst means your suggestion scheme can be hijacked by creative troublemakers!
The Lesson to Be Learned
The lesson to be learned here, if you are a manager in charge of innovation
rather than a troublemaker, is to understand the innovation process and if you
intend to support it with software, ensure you choose a software that supports
the process. Many don't. That means working with innovation experts rather than
software experts and choosing a system that puts you in control of innovation,
not your employees.
Of course, if you are a troublemaker, you will want to encourage management
to do just the opposite!
JENNI: ALIGNING YOUR INNOVATION WITH YOUR STRATEGY
Did you know that Jenni is the only idea management software specifically designed
to align innovation with strategy? From Jenni's sophisticated ideas campaign
module that allows you to set up precisely targetted ideas campaigns to her
criteria based evaluation tool that not only sets up multi-expert evaluations,
but compiles the results in an easy to interpret report, Jenni is all about
focusing innovation on your strategic needs. Better still, our experts are at
your beck and call to coach you through the innovation process and its management.
Perhaps that's why a leading water provider in Australia selected Jenni to
support innovation according to their complex strategic needs. Owing to severe
drought, they needed to improve significantly the efficiency of their water
delivery system, encourage customers to use less water and still make a profit.
Moreover, with super busy employees, they needed a system that was incredibly
easy for employees to grasp and use. They chose Jenni. And for three years,
Jenni has supported ideas campaigns that have generated ideas leading to substantial
efficiency improvements, resulting in reduced operational costs, communications
ideas and more.
And perhaps that's why a global convenience food provider, that needed to improve
the healthiness of their snack foods, choose Jenni for their research and development
unit. They needed not only healthy snack food concepts, but also packaging that
communicated this new brand value. Jenni did the trick and enabled their creative
thinkers to generate all kinds of terrifically tasty and healthy food ideas.
How about your firm? If it is important that your innovation process is aligned
with strategy, you owe it to your firm to learn more about how Jenni can help
you innovate more effectively and gain an unfair advantage over your competition!
Tell us your strategic needs and we will tell you how Jenni can help you align
your innovation to meet those needs – with complete confidentiality from
our first conversation. Find your nearest Jenni representative at http://www.jpb.com/jenni/contact.php
and we'll direct your questions to the person best placed to determine how we
can answer them.
More information about Jenni, meanwhile, can be found at http://www.jpb.com/jenni/
ARE YOU AN INNOVATION CONSULTANT?
If
you are providing innovation services such as consulting, training or coaching
and want to add a great idea management software solution to your portfolio
of products and services, contact me and let's talk about how Jenni can help
your clients innovate better – and help you gain new clients.
You benefit from our generous commission programme, marketing on the popular
www.jpb.com web site (150,000-200,000 page hits/month) and collaborating with
a fantastic global team of innovation, marketing and sales experts (http://www.jpb.com/about/index.php).
In addition, by packaging your services with Jenni, you can provide your clients
with value added innovation services that help them increase profitability.
It's a fantastic win-win-win scenario for your, your client and jpb.com!
LATEST IN BUSINESS INNOVATION
If you want to keep up with the latest news in business innovation, I recommend
Chuck Frey's INNOVATIONweek
(http://www.innovationtools.com/News/subscribe.asp). It's the only e-newsletter
that keeps you up-to-date on all of the latest innovation news, research, trends,
case histories of leading companies and more. And it's the perfect complement
to Report 103!
ARCHIVES
You can find this and every issue of Report 103 ever written at our archives
on http://www.jpb.com/report103/archives.php
Happy thinking!
Jeffrey Baumgartner
---------------------------------------------------
Report 103 is a complimentary twice monthly eJournal from Bwiti bvba of Belgium
(a jpb.com company: http://www.jpb.com). Archives and subscription information
can be found at http://www.jpb.com/report103/
Report 103 is edited by Jeffrey Baumgartner and is published on the first and
third Tuesday of every month.
You may forward this copy of Report 103 to anyone, provided you forward it
in its entirety and do not edit it in any way. If you wish to reprint only a
part of Report 103, please
contact Jeffrey Baumgartner.
Contributions and press releases are welcome. Please contact Jeffrey in the
first instance.
Return to Report 103 home/archives | Return
to top of page
* Notes
-
you may unsubscribe at any time by e-mail.
-
We use the double opt-in process. This means you will receive an
e-mail which you must reply to in order to subscribe. Although this
is a minor inconvenience, it ensures that only people who want to
receive Report103 actually do receive it.
-
We will not share your e-mail address with anyone else or send you
any e-mails other than Report 103 unless you contact us first.
|
