Innovation - an essential recession survival skill
- Innovation expert John Kao speaks exclusively to technology editor Jon Wilcox
- According to Kao, innovation is a skill which can be taught.
- Recession can be the perfect hot house for innovation
- Innovative companies willing to take risks will reap rewards in economic recovery
Innovation can be a silver bullet for business in the recession, says innovation specialist and former Harvard Business School lecturer John Kao. He spoke exclusively to technology editor Jon Wilcox about how businesses can use the recession to plant seeds for the future.
It’s easy to dismiss the notion of hiring an ‘innovation consultant’ as something done by left-field companies whose executives present their office layouts according to the mystical rules of Feng Sui. After all, innovation isn’t something that can be taught, like the latest business techniques or software – can it?
A former lecturer at Harvard Business School for 14 years, and one-time consultant for Hillary Clinton’s re-election to the US Senate in 2006, John Kao provides insight and lateral thought to corporates and governments alike. Although his previous work within academia largely resided on the US East Coast at HBS and MIT, Kao’s latest base is on the opposite side of the country, at San Francisco, California.
It begins with jazz
An accomplished jazz pianist - though he himself modestly dismisses the notion - John Kao implements the improvisational elements of the musical genre as a metaphor for innovation: “Jazz is a way of understanding how the innovation process works,” he explains. “I use jazz as an innovation tool to show people that innovation isn’t that abstract thing you do when you feel like doing it. It actually is a skill.”
Whilst fans of jazz see its many compositions as journeys of creativity and expression, don’t its detractors see it as the random plonking of notes in an unmelodic fashion, reducing the metaphor along the way? Kao deftly explains the difference: “Generating music by chance would be getting up to a piano with a three-year old, or a random number generator, and banging away. The market decides. If you sit down at a piano and everyone walks out after 10 minutes, the music may have been creative, but it probably wasn’t innovative in the sense of addressing some purpose to realise value, because there is no value for the audience.”
In short, innovation in business is about developing and obtaining useful results, striking a careful balance between creativity and structure. Kao explains it’s not about letting people go on random tangents in unstructured ways.
Recession as a driver
There’s an argument that says war drives technology forward at an increased pace, with many advances finding their origins in the midst of conflict. So can the same be said for the effect of recessions on business innovation? After all, businesses certainly find themselves on the front line during economic downturns, with many feeling like they’re running constant battles on a day-to-day basis. For Kao, the answer is quite simply, yes: “Recessions are historically times in which planting seeds tend to have disproportionate payoffs.”
He draws on the explosion of technological innovation found close to Kao’s base in San Francisco, in a region of the south bay area that regularly goes by another name: Silicon Valley. “If you look at the history of Silicon Valley, big waves of innovation have occurred exactly in recessions, whether that’s the semi-conductor or Web 2.0.” He adds, “It’s a period where people with agility and capital, and the appetite for risk, can actually do quite well.”
Recession can be a silver bullet for businesses, providing new opportunities to drive forward fresh approaches and innovations. However, it can’t save a sinking ship from taking the plunge to the bottom of the deep blue sea, like ailing US automotive giant, General Motors: “GM is like the Titanic,” Kao says. “You can innovate in many sub-systems of the enterprise, and still hit the iceberg and sink.”
The limping car manufacturer has so far received $15.4bn in aid from the US government. On 27 April, GM announced it would phase out its Pontiac brand by the end of 2010, and cut a further 21,000 jobs. However, despite its troubles, innovation isn’t something that’s lacking within the halls of GM’s Detroit HQ. A deal with Segway to produce the ‘Project P.U.M.A.’ vehicle was announced at the start of April, and the company aims to launch the Chevrolet Volt electric car in 2010. It seems that even massive corporations on the precipice of falling into bankruptcy protection can find ways to innovate:
“The reality is that there’s always some room for innovation...it’s thinking about how to do things differently. Business model innovation, or innovation in how you manage a customer franchise, or how you enhance a brand, doesn’t necessarily cost money; it just costs time and mental effort.”
Smart bets
Hitting the ground running will be top of the agenda for companies that do emerge from the dark and turbulent tunnel of recession. Taking advantage of the space left behind by the demise of former competitors, or potential new areas for expansion, will be a prime factor for rapid recovery and growth. Knowing exactly where investment needs to be made by the ‘survivors’ of Depression 2.0, the credit crunch, the first global recession, or whatever else you use to describe the current economic climate, is key. For businesses looking to innovate, Kao points to a model developed by contemporary and former colleague at Harvard Business School, Clay Christensen: “There’s the classic concept of the innovator’s dilemma...the contrast between disruptive and incremental innovation. The argument is that disruptive innovation changes the nature of the game and is kind of revolutionary, whereas incremental innovation is about improvements within an existing game, and is evolutionary. Obviously we need both, it’s not like one is better than the other.”
“The more time these companies spend looking at emerging opportunities and making smart bets on which opportunities will pay off, the more (even today) they invest in capabilities for realising those opportunities. Smart companies need to have their antennae out and build relationships with the talent community; not be so cut off from the opportunity stream as it really exists, so that they won’t have to have frenzied board meetings once the market recovers to figure out what they’re going to do.” He adds: “They should be figuring that out now.”
This feature first appeared on our sister site FinanceWeek.
www.financeweek.co.uk is a growing independent online community for CFOs, finance directors and financial controllers. It's fast-becoming the website to read for progressive finance professionals
- 2419 reads
- login or register to post comments
- Add to a social bookmarking site


innovation is not just a skill that can be learned
At some level there are skills attached to innovation, as John Kao points out, but for us all to learn to be more innovative requires very much more than the acquisition and deployment of a skill.
Innovation requires letting go of what you know (which is why war and recession make people more inclined to innovate). Innovation needs the right conditions – appropriate resources but more importantly a culture supportive of risk and experimentation. It requires people who have faith in the future not those caught in the past. It needs minds that see possibilities and are prepared to build on good ideas wherever they arise. It needs commitment to take the risks and fight the fights that success may entail.
These characteristics are not attributes of ‘business as usual’ – innovation is, by definition, a voyage into the unknown. It requires leadership and teamwork.
Innovation is an inner process
Innovation is an inner process within an organisation, built on people skills and learning. We are used to measure the success by using outside means like sales, profit, and value for clients.
On the long run, innovation can be sustained only when the implied humans experience personal transformation during the process. Otherwise the power of innovation leads to burning and ashes and on the long term the light it produces will fade away.
Innovation is for all times.
Once again, we seem to think the recession is gonna make a difference in leaders orientation towards how to generate new ideas. Innovation is not a one-off-for-recessionary-times-thing. Innovation is a habit that you need to belief and practice without you realising it.
Taking a systemic view, innovation is an Attitude, Ability and Process. The extend to which these three elements interact and overlap would determine the degree and amount of creativity and innovation generated. Yet, we all know too well that it takes a great attitude to explore and stretch the boundaries of possibilities amidst difficulties.
Long before recession hit us, innovation had become the latest buzzword for business leaders in response to addressing competitiveness in a globalised setting. As a result, Innovation has become a key performance driver and front runner of most training and talent development initiaves.
From the many training sessions that I have had, I discovered little evidence of a supporting culture for creativity, let alone innovation. Often, I am lost for words on how the participants could transfer the "new" learning to their "old" workplace?.
Generating new ideas and associations would require a paradigm shift in leadership mindset and serious deculturalisation of old thoughts and practices. If you can't even invest in the simplest idea of soliciting employee suggestions for workplace improvement, what much can you say of innovation?.
Improvement as a constant, change with care
Yes, it goes back to necessity being the mother of invention and in this sense hard times can spawn new or evolving ways.
But I think there need to two additional thoughts always kept firmly in mind:
1. Improvement, as opposed to constant change, must be a constant consideration and a continual action.
2. However, all this talk of innovation, evolution and improvement must not lapse back into something we see all too often in a mad scramble for constant change in a vain attempt to escape from the unfaced reality of wholesale mess in the present. In fact, this syndrome is so common that we give it a name and a category all to its itself - Changemania - in our corporate culture research typologies.
Innovation and Recession
John Kao's article was a bit of a Curate's Egg (good in parts). I don't know whether it was TrainingZone's editorial or the article itself but to call Innovation a 'silver bullet' is guaranteed to upset most people. If my time in business has taught me anything there is very rarely a 'silver bullet'!!! In the clients I work with Innovation is a process (rather than 'skill') that has to be managed and worked at! If it is not linked to strategy, planned for and esourced accordingly then it will most definitely not be a 'silver bullet'.
Our experience is that most companies see Innovation as a 'process' rather than an individual 'skill'. I know this might seem merely semantics but clients are more willing to invest and work in developing a corporate process than train individuals (who may then leave) in a certain 'skill'.
I'm not sure John Kao's GM case study is that appropriate. In most business schools the automotive manufacturing sector is not necessarily seen as the most innovative of sectors or paragons of driving technology forward at present. I agree that some car manufacturers are now looking to be innovative but is their innovation strategic or a result of poor management, lack of foresight and being economically backed into a corner? In my humble opinion if you want to see the most innovative, proactive companies then look at the very fast changing food sector (IT and telecoms notwithstanding!). Of some of the least innovative sectors Academia and Politics are often very high on the list!
As some of the commentators to the original article have stated, Innovation was 'on the scene' far before the recession hit. It is in the DNA of some very successful companies and I have spent quite a few years identifiying what processes these innovative companies use. In a recession Innovation is key however so is cash management and cost reduction too! If companies are truely to survive and thrive in this globalised economy then they need to be truely innovative BEFORE a recession strikes! It's like mending the roof when the sun is shining not when it starts to rain!
Interesting approach though!
Simon
Innovation not Exculpation
Hear, hear Simon! You are adding to exactly the same kind of points I was trying to make without seeming to pitch on anyone's parade too dramatically!
It's this sense that innovation is a one-time addition in times of distress in order to climb out a hole, whilst innovation needs to be a calmer process of evolution, adaption and being consistently in the earliest parts of the curve.
Again, there is this danger that "Innovation" becomes a synonym for simply stopping doing a lot of things quite badly. We need to be much more precise when we call for new values and behaviours, lest we lapse into Failure Platitudes, as explained in this summary of our own corporate culture research.