[Note: This original content has also been posted at http://innochat.com/ with permission of the author, to facilitate a conversation at the #innochat hashtag on THURS 4/17 at 12pm ET.]
CHARLOTTE, NC. April 2014, by Chris Jones. Classic innovation practice tells us to catalog and rank our ideas. It’s a time tested way to surface newer, more creative means for getting a job done. It’s a sensible approach. The big ideas should, by all rights, float to the top.
But what happens when the currents of change are strong? What if the rules for success become fluid?
At a minimum, we’ll struggle to keep our bearings. At worst, we’ll lose momentum, leave our best ideas stranded, and fail to achieve our innovation targets.
I’ve been reflecting on an alternative approach to learning and innovating that is at once more simplistic and more complex. In a word, it involves “flow” .. and it starts with suspending judgment, refocusing, and listening. This approach allows raw insights, not shrink-wrapped ideas, to flood our thinking spaces, using notions like cross-over and edge-exploration to mix things up. Patterns replace processes. Simple rules replace best practices.
And we change the currency. Insights are the gold standard for innovation and creative learning, not ideas.
The ability of the human mind to perceive and solve problems is vast. Effective collaboration serves as a multiplier. Put some of those strong minds together into small teams. Help those thinkers to focus and frame and communicate and synthesize in real time. Pay attention to roles. Seed the group with an iterative, adaptive framing model. Then stand back. Powerful things begin to happen.
New ideas emerge; we find we’re innovating in the moment.
Of course, the modern organization provides a host of formiddable barriers to this. These include all those cultures, behaviors and silos that seek to control. We find orgs that are consumed by process or paralyzed by aversion to risk. And at times, we aren’t helpful: our hyper-structured methodologies serve to put our best thinking into boxes. No surprise that our latest innovations seem like breakthrough candidates from the past: we use the past to classify them.
When trapped in structured models, there is limited or no flow of insight. Innovation will consistently struggle. It’s time to let the insights flow. Consider the notions pictured here:
What can we make of this?
I think there are several important questions that could help us suspend our assumptions about innovation practice, as we discuss new ways to approach old problems:
- Q1. How do ideas differ from insights, and why does it matter?
- Q2. In terms of innovation process, is flow a better metaphor than structure?
- Q3. When does collaborative innovation or OI move of us toward flow, and when does it not?
- Q4. Can “flow of insight” be viable for driving new thinking re: new capabilities?
Let’s discuss these questions at #INNOCHAT on Thursday 4/17 at 12pm ET. I look forward to exchanging insights with you. Maybe we’ll make some waves.
I hope to see you online!
Chris aka @sourcepov
Ideas come from many places, and some of the concepts discussed here had their roots in Twitter conversations. I’m grateful to the many #INNOCHAT, #SMCHAT and #CDNA thought leaders who contributed to these (and related) concepts about collaboration and social learning. For more reading, here are some references from The DNA of Collaboration :
- 16. Saul Kaplan in “The Business Model Innovation Factory” (2012), re: capabilities (p. 17-29)
- 27. John Hagel in “The Power of Pull” (2010), re: “structure vs. flow” with some additional insight from Michelle James (conversations with the author) on striking a balance
- 49. J.K. Loren in “A Guide to Open Innovation and Crowdsourcing” (2011) by Paul Sloane, ed. re: ideas in context
- 100. J.K. Loren in Sloane, re: R&D as silos
- 125. Jeffrey Phillips in Sloane, re: small teams
- 135. Boris Pluskowski, The Complete Innovator (blog), re: sporting teams as metaphor
- 145. J.K. Loren in Sloane, re: external innovation sources