The age-old question of what the source of new ideas is in business and other organizations can get even more complicated when a relatively new form of idea generation and innovation, called collaborative innovation, is factored in. Current thinking holds that manufacturers can accelerate and improve their innovation efforts by, so to speak, broadening the net — engaging larger numbers of people and a more diverse set of constituencies in ideation and innovation processes.
But the collaborative approach is still a developing idea in many manufacturing companies. One of the more interesting findings from Managing Automation’s annual reader poll on innovation is that for most manufacturers, the primary source of new ideas comes from only a few individuals, not teams set up for that purpose.
While this may be true today, the poll also shows that the idea of innovation teams is beginning to take hold. Already, 19% of survey respondents indicate that innovation teams in their companies are generating “future-oriented” ideas, compared with the 46% who say, as of late 2009, that only a few individuals are coming up with the key ideas. If the collaborative model has legs, these numbers should increase over time.
Meanwhile, the debate over where new and innovative ideas come from will continue. A good example of this discussion occurred yesterday in the Sunday New York Times. In an article titled, “The Apple in His Eye,” writer Steve Lohr describes the power that one individual, in this case Apple CEO Steve Jobs, has in innovation at Apple, particularly with the new iPad.
The Apple-Jobs combination is an example of what Lohr refers to as the “auteur model of innovation,” defined as a “tight connection between the personality of the project leader and what is created.” The article says that Apple products have had a history of being stylish, powerful, and pleasing to use — and being very focused.
“They are edited products that cut through complexity, by consciously leaving things out — not cramming every feature that came into an engineer’s head, an affliction known as ‘featuritis’ that burdens so many technology products,” Lohr says.
Jobs’ influence in the creation of new products at Apple and the company’s success as a result are undeniable. The auteur model works well at Apple, and could and probably does work at other places. But this model has its limitations, too. Companies that rely primarily or solely on this personality-dependent model could risk their futures if the personality decides to leave. But it is not the only model that can work in a company. And that’s where the collaborative model can come in.
An interesting question is whether a company could support both or whether they are mutually exclusive. My sense is that both can work together, but only if a company’s culture is right.