Institutional Innovation and the Future


By Clark Staten, CEO/Sr. Analyst

The Emergency Response & Research Institute

Chicago, IL - 01/10/98

ASK YOURSELF A QUESTION...

Let us begin by asking a couple of basic questions. Are you currently an "agent-for-change" in your organization? Or, are you one who finds themselves more comfortable maintaining and supporting things as they are, "the status quo?" If you find yourself in the former category, you may be more comfortable and familiar with some of the concepts and recommendations contained herein. If you find yourself in the later group, you may find some disagreement and some resistance with the concepts that we discuss below. In either case, we would respectfully ask that you would take the time to objectively examine one of the most pressing challenges of the coming decade. How can we, as leaders in business, industry, and government service better facilitate more effective and efficient answers to the increasingly more complex and demanding problems of the 21st Century?

FUNDAMENTAL DIFFICULTIES

Entrenched bureaucracies exist in both private and public agencies. Several studies would suggest that the larger the company or agency, the more likely that it will contain a complex and rigid organizational structure. Much of this relates to the development of an industrial age or "smoke stack" society, where everything was broken down into its smallest operable part and divided into parts of "assembly lines," various sections, divisions, departments and ultimately companies/agencies. Unfortunately, in todays "information society, this "cubbyholism" of function, as described by Toffler, et al, has probably outgrown its usefulness in many organizational models.

Profound change would appear to be occurring in at least some public and private organizations, as the advent of computer networks and global communications have enabled workers to obtain and utilize much of the information/data that was formerly confined to obscure corners of a corporation or government office. Databases and intranets are making what was formerly "specialist only" knowledge accessible to almost everyone participating on a network. New computer programs are also dramatically changing the clarity and usability of technical information and the ability of workers to understand it. This in turn is changing the way that products, projects, and programs are being managed (or rather, not needing to being managed).

Previously, a primary power of any sort of "manager" was that of controlling the flow of information between various other sections, divisions, or units and those that made decisions about the overall direction of the organization. Today, many of those functions have been made obsolete by empowering and enabling individual workers to learn about and effectively use information that already exists within the organization. This already existing knowledge can be used for the purpose of not only meeting current needs, but also to envision and develop new ideas and concepts BEFORE the problems or issues cause a crisis or competitors/opponents also realize the advantages of them and "beat you to the punch."

PRODUCTIVITY IN AMERICA; FACT OR FALLACY

There is much debate today in the business magazines and in economic academia as to whether or not the economy of the United States has undergone a "new paradigm of productivity." Pundits on both sides present ponderous amounts of information to support their positions, pro or con, about a changed economy in the United States. Endless discussions continue about what effect the "computerization of America" and various kinds of networks have had on overall business success.

In answer to this discussions, one must only look at the end result in order to ascertain an answer. Both unemployment and interest rates are down. Greater numbers of people are engaging in personal saving and investment. Factory orders and housing starts are constant or on an upward spiral. Several government units are even talking about a budget surplus in 1998. Even after taking numerous "downsizing" experiments into consideration, and the "wringing out" of as much profit as possible from reductions in and lay-offs from aging industries in the late 80's and early 90's, numerous segments of the economy continue to flourish.  Somebody must be doing something right.

Does the answer lay in careful and continual central bank intervention in the economy? Unprecedented and wildly successful presidential policies? Conservative and forthright congressional budget priorities? An anticipated forthcoming budget surplus? Well, frankly, it may be a combination of any number of these things. But, it is more likely that the answer lies in a fundamental change in the overall productivity of American business that is enabling the other "miracles."

Whether or not the Office of Management and Budget in Washington or the business magazines have found a way to effectively measure this change is probably not as important as the fact that it is obvious that a positive change is occurring. The major question that should be circulating in corporate board rooms and government executive offices should not be whether this increase in productivity is occurring or if it is important...but rather, how to further facilitate its occurrence.

CREATING AND GROWING AN ENVIRONMENT OF CREATIVITY

One of the most difficult aspects of encouraging innovation is the process of creating an corporate/agency environment that encourages positive and creative thinking. All too many CEO's and senior managers like to pay lip service these days to the idea of "innovation," but it would appear that few are actually taking the time and spending the money to develop an enterprise-wide culture that fosters the concept.

For example, it would seem that far too many government agencies are deeply rooted in reacting to politician or citizen demands for action, rather than taking a pro-active approach to problem solving and new program design. There often is no reward for the process of innovation, and in fact, there may even be negative consequences for those that would be so presumptuous as to suggest that change is necessary... before a crisis has occurred. This is particularly true in several of
the nations' major municipal/county/state/federal agencies.

Evidence of this criticism is often present in those organizations that have a highly-defined hierarchical structure, with strict rules regarding their "chain of command," standard operating procedures (SOPS), and development of any new projects. Restrictive job requirements that discourage or punish "free thinking," and reward being a "good team player," in general, may also inhibit the advancement of new ideas and better solutions to existing problems.

VISUALIZATION OF THE PROBLEM

A clearer understanding of the problem can be gained by reviewing the fairly typical fictional conversation (below) that takes place on shop-floors, in station houses, in offices, and dozens of other places everyday in America:

"Hey, Joe, look what I discovered...I found a new way to make this 'frapus (substitute any of your equipment or procedures) tool' do the job better...if we started doing it this way, the company could save a lot of money and get the job done quicker," Robbie Rookie said to the grizzled veteran working next to him.

Naw...you don't get it kid...that's not the way we do things around here....boy, have you got a lot to learn," Joe grunted to the younger man.

"But why...Joe??...I know it will work, and it makes the process better and cheaper," Robbie retorted.

"Two reasons...Robbie...one, cause I said so...and two, because that's the way we have been doing it for the past thirty years...you kids ain't got no respect for tradition," Joe continued.

Robbie, crestfallen and discouraged by his respected elder's comments, put the idea away and never mentioned the concept to anyone again. The idea was lost and neither the company/agency, nor the public, ever benefited from a potential innovation that could have provided a better product, and saved both time and money.

This scenario speaks directly to the issue of creating a climate that encourages innovation and productive change, rather than fostering a "maybe all too important" sense of "tradition." Could this conversation have taken place in your organization? If so, maybe the time has come for YOU and the management of your organization to reevaluate your participation in the innovation process.

SOLUTIONS; A RECOMMENDED APPROACH

A far better approach might include a constant and overriding organizational commitment to both gradual improvement and, more importantly, new creativity regarding profit creating activities or facilitating a reduction of the cost of currently existing products or programs. That is what productivity is all about. Rewarding employees/managers for their contributions to this further productivity and cost savings has proven a necessity.

Secondarily, but just as important, is a concept of changing the organizational "culture" to make it admirable and desired to "think-outside-the box" and explore new and different ways to accomplish overall organizational objectives and goals. When a junior level manager hears a conversation like the one represented above, he/she must immediately and consistently step in and encourage both employees to further explore the new idea that the "rookie" has brought to the game. Help the employees determine if the concept is viable, and if so, move rapidly to implement it in a meaningful way.

Thirdly, world conditions and future opportunities dictate that we stop our participation in any mindset that advocates "one hundred years of tradition, unhampered by progress." While it is fact that certain ceremonies, courtesies, policies, procedures and even unspoken "traditions" are essential to the culture of an organization and worthy of our participation and respect...they shouldn't be allowed to impinge on operational areas and impede future achievements or the accomplishment of our overall goals.

Finally, it is our considered opinion that if the question is...how do we improve the overall quality and productivity of our organization or society in general? The answer is...through the use of properly motivated, tightly focused and widely supported innovation. The time to start is now.

Emergency Response & Research Institute
6348 N. Milwaukee Ave., #312
Chicago, IL. 60646
(773) 631-3774 - Voice
(773) 631-4703 - Fax
(773) 631-3467 - Modem/Emergency BBS On-Line
http://www.emergency.com - Website
webmaster@emergency.com - E-mail

Return to the EmergencyNet News page