Take a promenade round the city and you’ll drink in the essence of the French capital.
Research director Martin Illsley discusses how utilities could use Flickr and how software development should be like home building.(tags: innovation)
I have just started reading “the myhts of innovation” by Scott Berkum and Ron Bieber has just posted a great post titled “Agile, Lean, or Common Sense and Permission To Change?”. I have spent a fair amount of time talking with Ron and others about change.
I find Ron’s point interesting:
What Semler’s story shows me is that if people are given the freedom to work the way that is most effective, they will. More than that, if you invest in them with trust, they will want to do these things as their commitment to the company will obviously go up based on how they feel they are treated.
Semler essentially created a self optimizing system, the people are the company. The employees of Semler’s company were changing and they were also the direct recipients of the outcome of each change. The organization and the people were one in the same, so positive and negative outcomes on the organization were positive and negative outcmes for the people.
Then Ron asks:
Is methodology and process really the answer, or is it deeper than that? Is it the way we treat employees that cause inefficiencies?
The reality is that most corporations, their people and some of their processes are not one in the same. This lack of alignment is due in my mind to the many complex factors that are symptoms of the “Corporation” even more challenging the “Public Corporation”. Hence, Methodologies are needed to be the proxies, the translators, the enzymes that allow groups of people and even processes to create environments were effective and efficient change can occur. Getting people that are willing to change, then giving them permission to change, and giving them ownership of the outcome of their changes will create an environment where the system optimizes for the benefit of the group.
The reality we face is that most leaders of corporations are not skilled at finding the right people, and are not comfortable giving people the permission to change beyond the permissions traditionally “allowed” within corporations. This is why there exists an “Innovators Dilema”, why GM still makes ugly and crappy cars, why NASA still uses the space shuttle, why leaders in companies have stupid metrics for innovation and why we need methodologies. They create safe areas within organizations where people can change and own the outcome. Some organizations cannot even create enough change to adopt these methodologies.
Great things do not come from doing nothing or that same old thing.
I have found that rewarding myself with food based rewards is counter productive. It just makes me want those things that I can’t eat on a regular basis. So I have adopted a non food based reward model. As I achieve my reward milestones, I give myself things other than food. For example when my BMI drops into the “over weight” range I will buy myself a new tripod for my camera. For smaller milestones it might be a book or magazine subscription.
So, try to find a reward system that does not hinder your efforts.
I was thinking about the Nokia acquisition of NavTeq and Google phone. I asked myself what if Google was going to use Nokia for the handset in place of HTC. The more I thought about it the more I thought the combination would be a great one. Google the King of the services and Nokia the King of the device (sorry Apple). Google has cash, developers and the applications. Nokia makes great handsets and now adds content critical for the age of the location aware and networked phone. Wow, if they got together Apple would be screwed. I know Eric Schmidt is on the board at Apple but man imagine a Google powered Nokia N95. I think Google and Nokia would make a powerful pair.
Just my 1.5 cents worth.