It seems like everything we read these days has to do with the financial bail out. Everyone seems to be bickering over who should get a “rescue package” and why. But we’re not going to talk about that. Instead, we’re going reiterate the message we’ve been telling our readers and clients for the past few months: Don’t bail on innovation.

Sure, it’s easy to push innovation to the back burner (or even take it off the burner completely) when times get tough and resources are tight. But now, more than ever, it’s critical that you remember the importance innovation will play in helping revive our struggling economy. Innovation will help smart companies tap new streams of revenue. Innovation will build new business models. Innovation will eliminate wastefulness and inefficiency. Innovation will not only help you survive this economic downturn; it will help you come out on top.

We were recently inspired by an article by Innosight’s Kevin Bolen (registration required). In it, Bolen gives a frank overview of what innovators should and should not do during economically turbulent times. In short, Bolen recommends that innovators accept reality and devote more time and energy to helping strengthen the core business without trying to divert resources to untested, risky new projects. But with this recommendation, Bolen reminds us that “Even in downturns, there is always a market for truly disruptive ideas and the people who drive them.”

If nothing else, the current business environment provides us with a much-needed opportunity to step back and reevaluate what we’re doing and for whom. What does innovation really mean to your organization? What should innovation do for your business and its customers? Who are your customers and what do you need to do for them? The answers to these questions might change given today’s business realities-and that’s okay-but don’t make the mistake of thinking you have to abandon innovation efforts completely in order to survive. You may find that innovation is just what you need to survive.

A few months ago, we wrote a post about the future of Web search. Specifically, we talked about a new feature that Google was experimenting with at the time. Well, that experiment has now hit prime time and Google has announced its “Search Wiki” offering officially.

From the official Google Blog:

Today we’re launching SearchWiki, a way for you to customize search by re-ranking, deleting, adding, and commenting on search results. With just a single click you can move the results you like to the top or add a new site. You can also write notes attached to a particular site and remove results that you don’t feel belong. These modifications will be shown to you every time you do the same search in the future. SearchWiki is available to signed-in Google users. We store your changes in your Google Account. If you are wondering if you are signed in, you can always check by noting if your username appears in the upper right-hand side of the page.

The changes you make only affect your own searches. But SearchWiki also is a great way to share your insights with other searchers. You can see how the community has collectively edited the search results by clicking on the “See all notes for this SearchWiki” link.

What’s interesting about this feature is that it allows users to take more control over how they experience the Web. Google has become the de facto starting point on the Web for many users, and much like our mobile phones have erased our need/ability to remember phone numbers, Google is gradually eroding our need to remember URLs. The feature allows you to move the sites and search results you find most relevant up to the top of your search results pages, speeding up your Web surfing and making sure your favorite sites are easy to find. It’s sort of like bookmarking your search results—if you find a result on say, page 8 of the results but want to make sure that result is easy to find again, you simply click the little “up” arrow to move the result to your front page. Similarly, you can demote results that you didn’t find useful by clicking the little “down” arrow next to a particular result.

We’ve just begun playing around with this feature, and I’m curious to see how much we’ll actually use it. Will it be one of those “nice-to-haves” that doesn’t end up changing the game all that much? Or will we soon be asking ourselves, “What did we ever do without search Wiki?”

Learn more at the Google Blog.

Last week, the New York Times published a great article on innovation in the current (depressing) economic climate. The main point of the article is what we’ve been telling our clients for months: don’t let a shaky economy kill your innovation efforts. 

A particularly interesting point in the article focuses on how imporant it is maintain a widespread climate of innovation in your organization. 

There are important things managers can do to ensure that creative forward-thinking doesn’t go out the door with each round of layoffs. Fostering a companywide atmosphere of innovation — encouraging everyone to take risks and to think about novel solutions, from receptionists to corner-suite executives — helps ensure that the loss of any particular set of minds needn’t spell trouble for the entire company.

Companies that create silos of innovation by designating one group as the “big thinkers” while making others handle day-to-day concerns risk losing their innovative edge if any of the big thinkers leave the company or ultimately must be laid off.

Rather than halt all innovation efforts and try to ‘wait out the storm,’ why not engage in smaller-scale, innovation-building activities that get your entire organization or team involved in moving forward? While some projects and big ideas may certainly be risky and expensive, innovation as a whole does not have to be. Remember that innovation isn’t just about new products and services; it’s about new internal processes, new revenue streams, and new customer segments as well. 

We recently had a discussion about innovation and the U.S. economy with Leigh Jerome, President and CEO of The Institute for Triple Helix Innovation, a government-sponsored thinktank and research institute. Leigh is quick to point out that innovation is critical not only to your organization’s survival, but to the survival of the entire economy as well. “For the US to maintain high levels of economic growth and job creation, we must be a global innovation leader. Innovation matters because it creates new knowledge, products and efficiencies that lead to economic strength and competitiveness.”

Innovation isn’t just good for your organization, it’s good for the economy as well. So as we continue planning for innovation in the rocky year (years?) ahead, we urge you to focus on the future and chart out a course that will allow you to keep innovation alive. 

Read more at The New York Times, and be sure to visit The Institute for Triple Helix Innovation.

“It’s like ‘Music to My Eyes.’” So begins the FAQ on MTV’s recently launched MTV Music site.

The site is an easy-to-navigate trove of nearly every music video ever to play on the network. Unlike MTV’s main Website, MTV Music isn’t cluttered with reality-TV updates, and celebrity gossip. The site is dedicated to allowing visitors to easily search for high-quality music videos from nearly any artist or band.

Though the site is still in beta, MTV plans to add numerous features that will make the site the go-to destination for music videos on the Web. Most notably, users will soon be able to create video playlists; and bands will soon be able to upload their own videos. While MTV works out certain international copyright agreements, the site’s video content is limited to US artists. The site is also completely ad-free at this point, though that will likely change as it begins to draw more traffic.

What’s innovative about this launch? A few things. First, it’s a focused effort to bring high-quality content to Web viewers/listeners. The videos on the site are of much higher quality than you’ll find on YouTube and other online video sites. Like Hulu (the online video database run by NBC Universal and News Corp), MTV Music allows MTV to create a viable revenue stream online without having to enter into potentially complex revenue sharing agreements with third-party sites. We’re beginning to see this specialization of online video because sites like YouTube are beginning to grow too big for their own good. While YouTube will likely remain the go-to destination for video-on-the-Web, users that are looking for higher-quality, specialized content will have many more options going forward.

Second, the site is a great way for MTV to get back to its roots without having to completely overhaul its programming. It’s no secret that MTV the channel isn’t so much about the music these days. Save for a few hours of music videos early in the morning, the vast majority of MTV’s programming has little to do with music. MTV Music answers the need for high-quality music video, and adds an on-demand element that MTV wouldn’t be able to offer on television.

So head on over to MTV Music and enjoy.

[via Uncrate]

We’ve just wrapped up the publication of our latest white paper, Ready, Fire! Aim? Why a fear of commitment is killing innovation. It’s the third installment of our annual “Innovation Tracker,” which examines the results of our 20-question online innovation diagnostic from innovators across a variety of organizations.

What did we find this year? Simply put, organizations are approaching innovation efforts without first taking the time to lay down the proper foundation. They’re blindly engaging in innovation activities such as idea-generation and culture-building while avoiding discussions around innovation strategy and processes. The problems with this are many.Innovation efforts that lack a strategic foundation are bound to fizzle out and die. Without agreement around what innovation means or how it should be measured and tracked, employees are forced to “innovate” with little direction and unclear goals. And without a robust process in place, ideas tend to go nowhere. Employees participate in idea-generation sessions, but enthusiasm fades when they realize that nothing is being done with ideas because leadership doesn’t have the right tools in place to support the effort.

Given the delicate nature of the current economic crisis, most organizations simply cannot afford to approach innovation in such a haphazard manner. Innovation today is more important than ever-and the companies that understand this will set themselves up for the biggest successes when balance is eventually restored in the global financial markets. So we urge you to take a step back and carefully examine the state of innovation in your organization. Take off the blindfold, and build a foundation that can support a lasting and sustainable innovation program.

Click Here to download the white paper.

At the Convergence 2008 conference on automotive electronics yesterday, BMW announced that it is looking for partners with which to collaborate on an open-source car computing platform. No other auto companies have officially signed on to collaborate, though Chrysler, Ford, GM, and Honda have reportedly expressed interest. BMW’s goal, with or without partners, is to have an open-source operating system in a vehicle selling 200,000 or more units over the next five to seven years.

This is an innovation blog, so there must be an innovation story here, right? Of course there is. BMW is the first manufacturer to really go out on a limb and propose the development of an open automotive operating system. Today, auto companies build expensive, proprietary systems that are difficult to update and maintain. Furthermore, these systems are rarely seen as a competitive advantage since customers tend to choose their vehicles based on performance and brand identity. From BMW’s perspective, the entire industry (and consumers) would benefit from an open-source system, since such a system would allow a wider array of service and cusomization options. The platform, which would reported be either Linux- or Android-based, would allow anyone with a programming background to create applications and services for the system; and add-ons for popular in-car devices such as iPods and mobile phones could be streamlined by third-parties instead of car companies. The idea of Google’s Android OS in a car is particularly exciting, given its current iteration as a mobile phone operating system. 

This may seem like just another announcement, but given BMW’s recent tie-up with rival Mercedes-Benz (the two companies are in talks to share vehicle components and hardware in order to cut costs), it seems like BMW is for real when it comes to opening up. And why shouldn’t they be? Open-source, if done right, will be good for all stakeholders involved. Better, cheaper, faster, and customizable. What’s not to love? 

[via autoblog]

It’s fall cleaning time. Time to take out the air condtioners and put the summer clothes into storage for a few months. In preparation, I headed to the store to pick up some supplies. Walking down the cleaning aisle, I was immediately struck by a new line of Arm & Hammer Essentials cleaning products. 

The concept isn’t new, nor is Arm & Hammer’s presence in the cleaning aisle; but the execution deserves admiration. Arm & Hammer Essentials is a line of eco-friendly, all-natural cleaning products in little refill containers with empty spray-bottles attached. Your first time, you’d purchase the bottle (which stands out because it’s empty on the shelf) and one included cleaning concentrate ‘refill’ (though I don’t think one can consider the first use a refill).  You simply fill the spray bottle with tap water, add the concentrated cleaning formula (they have all-purpose, glass cleaner, and a de-greaser). You then purchase packages of two concentrated refills every time you run out of the product. According to Arm & Hammer’s Website: 

Americans throw away 60 billion pounds of plastic each year. Each ARM & HAMMER Essentials Cleaners refill pack you buy means 2 less plastic spray bottles in landfills. And the refill pack uses 80% less packaging than 2 pre-filled spray cleaners. The ARM & HAMMER Essentials Cleaners formula is biodegradable and uses powerful plant-based cleaners—and contains no harsh ammonia or phosphates.

Incidentally, the Essentials products also cost a bit less than comparable products. And they’re significantly cheaper than the niche brands like Mrs. Meyer’s, Method, Ecover, and Seventh Generation. I gave the all-purpose cleaner and the glass cleaner a test drive, and they work as well as other products I’ve used in the past. I’ll admit, no ‘natural’ glass cleaning product I’ve ever used does as good a job as Windex, but that’s the trade-off you make for eco-savvy (or eco-irrational, perhaps) purchases.

As far as I can tell, this new line is going head-to-head with Clorox’s GreenWorks line of home cleaning products, both in terms of price and eco-credentials. Arm & Hammer, however, may have upped the anti for all eco-focused companies by taking a major step toward reducing waste. 

Learn more (and download a coupon!) at Arm & Hammer.

Google released a beta version of its new browser, Google Chrome, a few weeks ago. Some of us here at futurethink have been using it since its launch, so we thought we’d put together some first impressions and thoughts. 

But first, some background. Chrome launched at the beginning of September, and was publicized with the launch of a little comic book that details its birth and development. The comic is an entertaining read, if, of course, you have any interest in how a Web browser works. If not, here’s the abridged version (and an overview of some of Chrome’s key features):

• Google realized that most browsers today are evolutionary—built back when the Web was a simpler place. And Google realized that, hey, the Web is a very different place than it was 10 or 15 years ago, so it decided to build a browser from scratch, and optimize it for the Web we know (and love) today. 
• Google decided to make the browser open source, so that programmers and developers could create tools and add-ons for it (like Mozilla’s Firefox). It also decided that the beta version should be simple, stable, and solid, even if that means it’s light on the features. Google Gears is the API that allows developers and programmers to create new applications for Chrome. Incidentally, it also opens up the formula for how Chrome was built, meaning anyone can take features from Chrome and add them to another competing browser. This is part of the deal with anything open-source; but Google hopes that developers will get to work at making Chrome and its competitors better, faster, and more stable over time, a win for Google since a happy Web is a lucrative Web. 
• Tabbed browsing, Google realized, was an important innovation in Web browsing. So they decided to take the idea and make it better. Chrome’s tabs run independently of one another—sort of like separate windows, except they’re consolidated in terms of layout just like the tabs we use in Firefox, Safari, or Internet Explorer. This means that if one tab crashes, the rest of them remain stable. You can also drag Tabs around or create separate windows out of existing tabs. You can also open a “task manager” window to force-close an unresponsive tab, just like you would do on a computer’s operating system. 
• To make life simpler, the URL bar and the search bar are consolidated. You can choose your default search engine (though Google would prefer you used Google, of course). If you type a full URL into the box, it goes to the Web page you’ve requested. If you type an invalid URL or a bunch of words, the tab will go to a search results page with suggestions. While this dually-functional URL bar is a major opportunity for Google to squeeze out the search competition, the very respectfully (probably to avoid anti-competitive lawsuits as well) ask users to select a default search engine when installing the browser and present all options equally.  
• The pop-up blocker has been rethought in a very good way. Where many browsers today block pop-ups and sort of hide the fact that a pop-up has been blocked, Chrome actually opens the pop-up, but displays it as a little taskbar-sized tab at the bottom of the window. It’s easy to see that a pop-up is present, and if that pop-up is an integral part of how a site works, it’s easy to drag the window up and into full view. This eliminates the need to enable/disable pop-up blockers as you travel the Web.
• To combat the influx of malware and phishing sites that have cropped up over the years, Google built sophisticated alerting systems into the browser. It leveraged its web-crawling expertise to create a warning system that alerts users to malware or phishing on potentially harmful Websites. 

So now for some early impressions. Overall, it’s a great browser. It has a simple, clean interface and it does seem to run a little faster than Firefox (I can’t speak to IE or Safari). The “beta” is definitely apparent, even a month into Chrome’s release. Tabs do occasionally crash, and certain plug-ins for Java and Flash just don’t seem to work quite right. I find myself turning back to Firefox for certain tasks, just because it’s a little bit smoother. But for most of my browsing needs, Chrome is great. 

I’m a big fan of Google’s other products (GMail, iGoogle, Google Reader, Google Docs, Google Notebook… the list goes on), and all of these sites work wonderfully in Chrome. The tabbed feature is also really nice, though most users won’t notice too much of a difference compared to other browsers, I suspect. A neat feature, however, is that when you open a new tab, rather than rendering a blank screen, it shows your 12 most frequently visited sites and a short list of recent bookmarks so you can click to somewhere you’re likely to go rather than typing something into the URL bar. Small detail, but nice. 

The URL bar is a major difference between Chrome and its competition. While I had grown used to clicking into a Google Search bar at the top right of my Firefox window to type a query, I quickly came to like the simplicity of a single field atop each tab. The bar will automatically bring up an elegantly-non-distracting list of possible queries and bookmarks for you to choose from as soon as you start typing; eliminating the need to type in full URLs or queries much of the time. Being that Google is actively tracking your browsing history, this bar is particularly useful (if a little creepy). 

And this brings us to Chrome’s major potential defect—its “big brother-like” tracking. Google is somewhat notorious for tracking users’ habits and activities in order to serve up relevant ads and content. While I tend not to take issue with this (Google has to make a living somehow, right?), many people are weary of anything that tracks and catalogs their behavior. While Firefox allowed me to set my preferences to “clear private data” every time I close the Window, Chrome has no such setting. Users have to manually clear browsing history, download history, cookies, and the like; or alternatively browse in “Incognito” mode, which opens up a new window (tinted black, naturally) that doesn’t save or track any data or history.

Google has also given itself some generous rights in Chrome’s Terms of Service, claiming “a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services.” This technically means that Google owns this very blog post, which I’m writing through Chrome. While it’s unlikely that Google would ever actually capitalize on these terms; it’s a bit off-putting to know that these terms were ever outlined in the first place. 

Privacy concerns aside, Chrome is snazzy little browser that many users will come to enjoy, I suspect. It will certainly force Microsoft, Mozilla, and Apple to do things a little differently, which is good for the Internet-using public as a whole. The browser also represents a tremendous opportunity for Google in the form of data. As it collects and aggregates and analyzes the mountains of data related to Web browsing, it is gaining incredible insight into who its users are. Google is learning what we read, what we write, who we communicate with, what we’re buying… it’s getting a pretty robust picture of every Chrome user by standing in the background and cataloging Web activity. This means that every ad it serves up alongside search results and in GMail can grow more and more relevant, garnering more and more clicks, earning more and more money for Google. 

Chrome is also a great “platform” off of which users can run “programs” like GMail, Google Docs, Google Spreadsheets, and more. If Chrome proves itself to be a safe, reliable, secure platform for these applications, Web-based applications may become increasingly dominant. Remember that we’re also entering a world of “netbooks” and mobile computing where much of our data and activity reside “in the cloud.” 

What’s more, Chrome serves as the defacto browser for its Android mobile operating system, which will be available later this year on the new T-Mobile G1 (aka the Google Phone). All this means that Google is poised to attain Microsoft-like dominance in the computing world over the next few years as we untether ourselves from our operating systems and desktops for the freedom and convenience of “the cloud.” Yes, this transition has been in the making for some time now, and Google has been gradually coaxing us along this path all the while. This is a great example of how Google, “the innovator’s innovator” uses new products and business models to create completely new terrain upon which the competition is simply unprepared to compete. The lesson to learn here is that your customers, whoever they are, often don’t know what they want (even if you ask them). They don’t know what they don’t have, and they often don’t know what can be done. That’s your job, as an innovator. And if you’re breaking ground, a smart way to go about it is by releasing early and inviting feedback, something Google is great at doing. They didn’t wait until Chrome was bug-free and 100% ready for launch—they released it as soon as it was safe and stable enough for the average user, and have been providing updates, patches, and fixes all along. 

So, overall, if you’re a PC user (sorry Apple folks, Chrome doesn’t work with Mac OSX just yet), I would definitely recommend downloading Chrome and taking it for a spin. We’re curious to see what you think.

In celebration of its 10th birthday, Google recently announced a ‘call for ideas to change the world’, called Project 10 to the 100th.

Up to five winning projects will split $10 million in funding, although apparently it’s possible that there’ll be only one winning project if that’s the only good idea.  Google employees and an advisory board of judges will select the top 100 projects and winners, respectively.  This type of project isn’t a new concept at all.  Actually, another “idea submission” project is in process right now.

American Express continued it’s Members Project for a second year.  The premise of the Members Project is that card members can submit their ideas for projects that will create a positive change in the world.  Other card members vote, and the winning projects, as determined by a panel of judges, split $2.5 million.

Both the Google and American Express projects are interesting from a ‘marketing initiatives’ perspective, but they’re equally as interesting from an innovation perspective for a few reasons:

1. They’re a great way for Google and American Express to get fresh new ideas from the general public.
2. For everyone else, skimming through the submitted projects gives you a sense of the popular causes, concerns, and needs of your consumers.  Obviously, these could serve as inputs when developing new products and services to address those needs.
3. At a brand activation level, it can help you identify relevant non-profit organizations to align your brand or company with as part of a cause marketing or co-branding initiative.
4. Reviewing the projects can spark ideas for new business opportunities.  The needs have already been articulated, with votes validating its relevance to consumers, but what’s lacking is the funding to move the project forward.  If your company has the means to execute immediately, you choose to launch a similar initiative.

Today, I’m posting part one of an interview with Scott D. Anthony. Scott is President of Innosight, an innovation consultancy based in Watertown, Massachusetts (right near my hometown). The interview is part of Idea Sandbox’s Post2Post Virtual Book Tour. 

Scott is the lead author of a new book, The Innovator’s Guide to Growth, which takes the idea of disruptive innovation (made famous by Clayton Christensen’s 1997 book The Innovator’s Dillema) and outlines the implementation/execution piece of the puzzle.

First, a little bit about the book. I’ll start of by saying that this is a must-read for anyone who’s looking to move innovation forward in their organization. The book is full of case studies and anecdotes about how great companies have made innovation a sustainable, manageable business practice. Scott, along with his co-authors, outline clear steps for how to build a program that supports disruptive innovation. 

What is disruptive innovation, you ask? To put it simply, disruptive innovations are those that either create entirely new markets or that gain popularity and success among an incumbent company’s “worst” customers. The theory of disruptive innovation is based on the fact that most companies focus their innovation efforts on their best customers—those that represent the highest profit margins today. The problem with innovating for these customers is that a company’s offerings become too sophisticated and feature-intensive for the average customer, leaving a large swath of the market dissatisfied. Examples of disruptive innovation include the iPod (a simple portable digital media player) and the Intel Celeron Processor (which has “good-enough” performance for the average user at a low cost). 

The theory of disruptive innovation is all fine and well, and Clayton Chritstensen has built an admirable consulting practice and academic career on it, but The Innovator’s Guide to Growth picks up where Christensen left off by focusing on how companies accomplish disruptive innovation in a managed, methodical, repeatable way. 

I’ll post an audio interview with Scott along with more on the book in part two of this interview next week. In the meantime, here’s part one. We had Scott answer some of the questions from out Innovator’s Interview series to see his perspective on ideas and innovation. Enjoy. 

Is there such a thing as a bad idea? There are in fact bad ideas. Ideas that if pursued would end up wasting a lot of time and money. The problem is that it isn’t always obvious that a bad idea is a bad idea. Some good ideas spring from bad ideas. Or some ideas that look like good ideas end up being bad ideas. So from my perspective it ends up being critical to have a mental model that gives you greater certainty that there’s something good in an idea and a way to figure out as quickly as possible whether you are right or not.

Where do the best ideas come from? In my experience, the best ideas come from really framing a problem precisely. If you understand the problem you are tying to solve, sometimes the answer is self evident. And the best way to understand high-potential problems to solve is to spend a lot of time in the field paying careful attention to what people say and what people do. Then the best way to come up with a novel solution is to try to step out of your normal paradigm and ask how someone outside of your industry or circumstance would solve the problem. What would Apple do? What would Procter & Gamble do? What would a doctor do? Innovation almost always comes at the intersections of disciplines, so forcing those intersections is a good thing.

How do you generate new ideas? Personally I think I am better at recognizing good ideas than generating the ideas myself. So I try to stick around smart, creative people who are perpetually problem solving so I can watch what they do and hear what they think. I also try to stay actively involved in lots of different industries so I can see how people are addressing problems from different perspectives.

Where do you go to get inspired? Not my desk, that’s for sure. I find that I get the best inspiration when I break from the routine in some way. Sometimes that’s having a seemingly rambling discussion with clients or colleagues, sometimes it is going somewhere I’ve never gone before to just see where my brain takes me.

How do you define innovation? Pretty simply: Something different that has impact. The impact portion of the statement is important, because if it doesn’t have impact it might be creative, or inventive, but I don’t view it as innovative. The word “something” is intentionally vague, because innovation can be technology, it can be a different process, a different way of communicating, a different way of financing, and so on.

How do you choose new ideas to move forward with? There are three big questions in my mind, always. First, does this fit a well-established pattern that leads me to believe there is a chance that the idea is a blockbuster? Second, have I identified the most critical assumptions and risks behind success? Third, is there a way to address those assumptions and risks without spending a huge amount of time and money? For example, a few years ago a small consulting company approached us about doing a joint client study. The potential was clear. If we could make it work it was a multi-million dollar venture. But there were clear risks as well. So we set a very clear test: we’d invite 15 people who we thought were the best prospects, and if we didn’t get more than five people to express interest, we’d stop. We got three signups, so we pulled the plug. And that was fine. Instead of investing a lot to at best break even, we were able to quickly and cheaply move on to other things.

Do you set business goals for creative ideas, or do you run with creative ideas and see what sticks? We set very clear objectives for any idea. Consistent with some of the research of our co-founder Clayton Christensen, our targets tend not to be related to early revenue. Rather, they are learning-based or profit-based targets. Sometimes we will be a bit more exploratory if we don’t have to spend much money on the exploration!

On a scale of 1-10 - 1 being low, 10 being high - what is your appetite for risk? I’d say about a 3. I don’t seek out risk. I don’t think most people seek out risk, actually. Our mission in fact is to seek out smart ways to reduce risk, or offload risk to people who are in the best position to bear that risk. One of my colleagues likes to say, “A good entrepreneur doesn’t take risks. A good entrepreneur smartly manages risk.”

What do you think makes an individual “good” at innovation? Going back to the notion that innovation often comes at the intersections, I think people who are good at innovation are good at looking at the world from different perspectives. They intentionally complicate their lives by having diverse interests that expose them to different stimuli. They constantly ask questions. There’s actually been research on the “innovator’s DNA” by Jeffrey Dyer at BYU and Hal Gregersen at INSEAD that corroborates this view.

What advice do you have for companies-both big and small-who are trying to move an innovative idea forward? Too much to put in a sentence! If I were to boil it down to two pieces of advice, I would say that innovation is a process that can be managed, and innovation simply can’t happen without dedicated resources. So companies should be strategic about their innovation objectives, be systematic about their innovation approach, and ensure they have allocated the right financial and human resources to make it happen.

What are the “barriers to innovation” for a larger organization? Are these different from the barriers facing smaller companies? There are many barriers to innovation within large organizations. One is the curse of success. That is, a large company has become a large company because it does a certain thing well. Doing something different can then end up being difficult because it goes against the “way things are done around here.” Further, large companies need ideas to be bigger to be meaningful, but many great ideas start relatively small. Large companies do often have the ability to allocate more resources to innovation, but they have to be careful that those resources don’t succumb to the “sucking sound of the core.”

What do you think is your greatest strength as an innovator? The ability to simplify and identify the one or two critical questions that matter most for an idea.

Your greatest weakness? The “bright shiny object” problem. There are so many interesting ideas out there. 

If someone gave you $100 Million to run with and grow your business, what would you do with your company? I would turn it down. Too much money would take us away from our mission. I’d use a smaller investment to continue our efforts to make our tools and work processes self-administering, and do focused research in the areas where I know there are still knowledge gaps. That said, I find the most valuable research is that done alongside a client that cares enough about a problem to invest their own time and money in solving it.

Where do you see your company in the year 2020? We currently have two arms. A consulting and executive training arm, and a ventures arm. We also have a number of strategic experiments related to publishing, investing, training, and other areas. I expect in 2020 our consulting arm will be larger and more geographically diverse than today’s operations. I expect the ventures arm to be a thriving business that has created a number of booming businesses. And I expect there will be a third business unit that is growing. What it is, we don’t know quite yet. I also expect the world of innovation to be much difference. People will recognize that there is a discipline related to the creation of new growth, and will be seeking to emulate the success of Procter & Gamble, Johnson & Johnson, General Electric, Cisco, and other companies that already are approaching innovation as a discipline.

***

Be sure to check out Idea Sandbox for links to the other Post2Post Interviews with Scott. On Monday, Gordon Graham of Broken Bulbs posted his interview with Scott. Yesterday Greg Daines of Ideanomics posted his interview with Mark Johnson, one of the book’s co-authors. Greg also posted a video of his chat with Mark today, so click on over. 

And be sure to check back here next week for part two of my interview with Scott.