Tag Archives: structure

Putting Logic in a Box

Posted on by
1

Wooden box on the dark stone tableSometimes, you have to put logic in a box.

Those I work with have heard me say this on many an occasion. Whether it is an externally imposed bureaucratic rule that makes no sense from a practical standpoint or a crazy-sounding idea about how an organization can dramatically increase its impact, there are times when relying on a logical assessment only leads to frustration and/or limits forward progress.

If it is an illogical externally imposed rule, trying to use logic to explain it to others is akin to one of those wind-up toys that continue to run into the wall again and again and again. Is that really the best use of your energy? As long as the rule is simply illogical and frustrating, (i.e. not irreparably harmful) then the best course of action may be to simply to acknowledge to your staff, “You’re right. It makes no sense from where we are sitting. And it is a step we have to take to accomplish our ultimate goal.” And then move on. Sure, you can try to change the external regulation if you are compelled to do so. You simply need to ask if that is the best use of your time or that of one of your staff members. Sometimes the answer will be yes. But if the answer is no, then quit banging into the wall. Put logic in a box, pivot right or left and move on.

Then there are those crazy-sounding ideas. Love those. The problem with logic in these situations is that imposing it too early and too rigidly in the process is like throwing a bucket of cold water on kindling that is just starting to take off. You can logically plan your way to incremental improvements. Breakthrough ideas are the result of aspirational (one might even say illogical) goals and the messy process of trial and error, the what-ifs and what-abouts, the rabbit trails and side roads. Please don’t hear me say that logic does not have a role to play in such efforts. It is critical that any aspirational strategy ultimately pass the logic test . . . but crazy ideas will never have the chance to if you don’t put logic in a box at the outset.

Managing that creative tension — the paradox between experimentation and performance, improvisation, and structure, between possibility and logic — is the job of the leader. Because most leaders are wired, and rewarded, for results, sometimes the best way to make sure we don’t settle for less than we could achieve is to, at least for a bit, put logic in a box.

The Culture of Innovation

Posted on by
Reply

bigstock-142999232Innovation has become the business buzzword du jour of late. The business press is filled with articles and guides on how to be more innovative. And while there are nuggets of insight and helpful information scattered among the books and articles, I think those well-meaning authors who try to boil innovation down into a 5-step plan short-change their readers.

Innovation is not a 5-step plan. It is a messy paradox of contradictions, and there is not one “right” way to do it. Innovation can be about tweaking something to make it more effective or developing a totally new concept. It requires structure and flexibility. Urgency and patience. It requires one to chart a clear path, and have a willingness to press ahead without knowing the final destination. It is energizing and exasperating. Perhaps most importantly, it is not a set of tasks, it is a culture that develops over time.

I’m not suggesting that every organization has to be innovative. Much of the world is designed to reward coloring inside the lines. In many ways, that is a safer, easier approach and individuals can build successful, rewarding careers by leading within established guidelines. And even within organizations noted for being innovative, significant portions of their operations may follow a more traditional approach. So what is different about innovative organizations? Their culture.

Culture is “how we do things around here” — what we believe and how we think, feel and behave. Is it okay to challenge someone up the organizational hierarchy? What does the organization lead with . . . people or profits, mission or metrics? Now please hear me . . . all four are important components of success . . . an innovative company still has to be able to keep the doors open. A culture of innovation, however, has to have a higher tolerance for the messiness of trial and error and the fluidity required to maximize the unique gifts and graces of people scattered throughout your organization.

John Kotter’s concept of a dual operating system visually captures what this type of culture may look like, with part of an organization functioning in a more traditionally hierarchical way, and other parts much more fluid, drawing from all areas of the organization. In such a culture, it is okay — it feels safe — for someone with more front line experience to tell someone from an administrative function that their idea simply won’t work (respectfully, of course) and then offer their suggestions for a better approach. Good ideas are the great equalizers, and there is a spirit of productive experimentation as opposed to “this better work or else . . .”

Building a culture of innovation doesn’t happen with a pep talk or a plan. It happens based on your approach, your attitude, and your willingness to act . . . one step at a time. Maybe you’d better get started!