Innovation Democracy: A Mini-Manifesto

I've spent the last few months thinking about some ideas about innovation that I think are very important for the association community, and I wanted to share them for you in the initial form of a "mini-manifesto." Basically, I want to try to re-frame the challenge of association innovation as an even greater political and ideological problem than it is a business or strategic problem. This mini-manifesto is attempt to call our attention to what is possible if we live up to the values our organizations represent even as we seek to to create meaningful economic value for our stakeholders.

Whether you agree or disagree with my views, I very much want your feedback on the thinking. Please post a comment or send me an e-mail. Thank you!

Associations today face a potent and relentless adversary: profound change. Yes, it’s true, we’ve always faced change in our organizations, but not like this. The very nature of change itself is changing. Change today is more constant than episodic, more complex than clear, more non-linear than cyclical and it is occurring at a greatly accelerated pace. We find that in this environment many of the tried-and-true heuristics of association management are remarkably ineffectual and, sometimes, counterproductive. Unfortunately, far too many association leaders continue to struggle with the politics of incrementalism, cost-cutting and risk avoidance as they try to come up with fresh answers about what to do next.

In face of such harsh and unforgiving realities, staff and volunteer association leaders must respond in a way that is just as forceful and unyielding. But that response cannot come in the form of tips, tools or techniques for “managing change” or “doing more with less.” That is just so much tinkering around the margins. Instead, what we need is a new ideology, a different system of beliefs that challenges us to rediscover the “plausible promise” of our organizations and to act confidently and decisively to make them relevant, renewable and resilient for the 21st Century.

For me, that ideology is what I call “innovation democracy.” It is grounded in the fundamental conviction that, at their core, both innovation and associations are about freedom. Associations are about the freedom to collaborate, to serve and to act collectively on behalf of a worthwhile vision of what the world can be. And that is where innovation comes in. Innovation is about the freedom to imagine what is possible, to create it and, in so doing, make an enduring contribution to the world in which you live. In my view, one that is largely contrary to the prevailing orthodoxy of the association world, innovation and associations are intimately, if opaquely, connected.

The ideology of innovation democracy seeks to shed light on how associations can fully embrace innovation in a manner that is consistent with the underlying values that animate our organizations. Innovation democracy is about getting as many people involved as possible, about capitalizing on diverse experiences and perspectives and about creating associations that, at once, are honoring the past and focusing on the future. The principles that follow address the six critical, dynamic contexts (strategic, technological, cultural, intellectual, financial and leadership) of every association’s existence. And while some may regard these principles as “theoretical,” I believe that they are quite the opposite. Taken together, they form a very pragmatic basis for creating the association of the future, a mechanism for continuous and consistent innovation that also embodies our most cherished human aspirations.

·Strategy is a coherent portfolio of experiments developed across the association--Let’s be clear about something once and for all. Strategy is not a plan. Strategy is an evolving understanding of the world combined with the deep capacity to act intelligently and creatively to achieve growth even as conditions change. The underlying intention of strategy cannot be to control (because real control is unattainable), but rather to create coherence and provide a gravitational field for the strategic experiments of many different stakeholders. A clear, simple and focused strategic direction offers such coherence and is not only the friend of innovation, but is also a compelling basis for broader and more novel engagement in the association.

·Technology supports the social architecture of association innovation--Technology can be quite useful in increasing our efficiency and perhaps even our productivity in the workplace. But in the flesh-and-blood world of organizations, people need to leverage technology toward their ends and not the other way around. Robust human relationships bring plenty of “bandwidth” to the table. When we use technology well, we accelerate connectivity, enhance connectedness and nourish community. And with both skill and serendipity, we also open many doors to powerful insights that may lead us down unexpectedly fruitful pathways of future success.

·Association culture remains vibrant by emphasizing variety, transparency and inclusion--Our associations will never achieve genuine breakthroughs in thinking and action if we don’t regularly challenge conventional wisdom and split-the-difference decision-making by actively involving individuals, groups and organizations with divergent perspectives and experiences in our work. Furthermore, we greatly enhance our ability to identify new threats and act on emerging opportunities when we operate on the basis of openness and transparency. By acting to include our stakeholders to the greatest possible extent in the work of innovation, we live up to the promise of what our associations can become.

·Curiosity, inquiry and discovery shape the association’s intellectual environment--Ideas are the true currency of innovation, particularly in pure knowledge organizations such as associations. In the absence of a basic organizational curiosity around the possibilities of original thinking, most ideas never see the light of day. We must constantly direct our associations toward the kind of robust inquiry that asks the difficult and provocative questions to which we need answers. And while we recognize the absolute importance of ideas to innovation, we also understand that, by themselves, they are insufficient to make innovation happen. We must create, therefore, fair, open yet disciplined processes of discovery that ensure our best ideas come to the surface and are allowed to flourish.

·A high “return on engagement” in the association drives financial investment--Business return on investment (ROI) is a measure of how much a company earns on the money it has invested. ROI can be quickly calculated by dividing the company's net income by its net assets. In associations, however, true success cannot be measured in purely financial terms since most of our so-called “net assets” are intangible, including brand, influence, reputation, knowledge, networks and so forth. From a standpoint of association innovation, then, the “smart money” must be invested in fully leveraging those intangibles to create new value through the active engagement of our stakeholders. Financial investment decisions made by boards and staff must be guided not simply by a desire to earn income, but also by the need to build engagement.

·Association leaders create leaders by distributing responsibility for innovation--The increased complexity of today’s operating environment demands a kind of association leadership that focuses more on coordination than on direction. Association leaders should seek to distribute the majority of the responsibility for advancing innovation away from the organizational “black space,” i.e., the staff, the board and the official volunteer corps, and toward the “white space,” the invisible web of conversations, learning exchanges and relationships involving members, non-members, business partners and other key stakeholders. By focusing their energy and attention on facilitating broader involvement, today’s leaders will help to create new value and make real progress in identifying and developing their eventual successors.

This document is something of a manifesto for the courageous and future-focused association leader. Still, it’s important to remember that there are no panaceas, no silver bullets for moving our organizations forward. There are only better ways of thinking that we can translate into better ways of working together. The ideology of innovation democracy is a better way of thinking about how to create both the organizations we need and the organizations we want. It’s about building a new heritage for our associations in the face of daunting challenges. It’s about taking control of our own destiny. Isn't that what associations are supposed to be about anyway?

Comments

[Scott Briscoe]

Ok, Jeff, I'll bite. I figure anybody with the nerve to write a 1,500-word blog post and then challenge someone to read it deserves a response. I'll do my best to match your words and, if I'm lucky, your wisdom.

I agree with some things in the manifesto and disagree with others -- sometimes on the same point (does this make me a flip flopper? I guess that's ok as long as I'm not an enemy combatant.)

For example, I agree that associations face a "relentless and potent adversary," but I'd label it simply "change," ditching the "profound." It might seem semantic, but then isn't everything? The point is, I think phrases like "In today's business environment..." are cliches that don't have much validity. The change is different, yes, but that is because it is building on the last change. Change always seems like it is faster, harder, etc. but the leap from yesterday to today has always taken inspiration and innovation to survive, whether your making a jump from artisan and craftsman to assembly line or good ole boy network to an interconnected compendium of knowledge. You could argue that use of hyperbole motivates action, but I could argue that people spot and devalue hyperbole, thereby making it a reason for inaction.

I would also say don't completely devalue tinkering around with the margins. I agree that such things are not acts of strategic change, yet they are important to continually perform. Always ask "what if," whether that what if deals with the future of the sector or sectors you serve or how to market your annual conference. Tinkering around the margins is important for two reasons. First, it's critical for short-term survival. Second, it is one path, though by no means the only path, to discovering fundamental shift of beliefs or ideology.

Then you come to your credo of innovation democracy. Again, I think we share similar beliefs, but I would put it differently. A democracy is a way to govern something, as such it is much more about the limits of freedom than about the expression of freedom. The beauty of democracy is that we choose how to limit our freedoms, or, in the case of a democratic republic, we choose people who will set the limits of our freedom. I think it can be useful to think of your innovation democracy in terms of what limits, or rules are you putting around innovation.

I fear that you may be putting too many rules around innovation. You say: "The ideology of innovation democracy seeks to shed light on how associations can fully embrace innovation in a manner that is consistent with the underlying values that animate our organizations." Such advice could easily lead to tinkering around the margins. Instead, start by questioning those underlying values. Could they be what is holding us back? You mention "honoring the past." That may be important, but it may not. How does honoring the past set you up for a stronger future? Some people or organizations may have a good answer for that, but for others rejection of the past might be necessary to find the ideology that will propel them into a successful future.

So on to your six critical dynamics...

Anyone reading this far or anyone who reads what Jeff wrote, take this down and commit it to memory:

"Let’s be clear about something once and for all. Strategy is not a plan. Strategy is an evolving understanding of the world combined with the deep capacity to act intelligently and creatively to achieve growth even as conditions change."

Beautifully said, hard to implement. To climb onto a cliche myself, planning strategy is not just seeing the trees in the forest, it's seeing the leaves, in front of you and in back. And it's not just about seeing the forest, it's about seeing beyond the forest to the sea, and, further, to try to see what is out there beyond the sea. It's noticing the temperature and the wind and the pressure. And it's about choosing which of these data are important and are needed to make decisions.

On the technology, the only thing I'd have to add is that it's better to be on the left side of Moore's Idea Diffusion Curve than the right. That is, actively seek technology that can help you achieve your goals.

On inclusion, again, I can only add a little to the find discussion. What I would add is that it is important to look beyond your stakeholders. It's tricky, but you can add immeasurably to your understanding of your place in the world.

On ideas -- let me add one thing, and here's a tip that could completely transform your organization. Buy Seth Godin's "Free Prize Inside" for any person you consider to be a leader on your staff. It has the potential to change your culture for the better.

On return on engagement -- I think associations are nearing the end of what they can learn from "operating like a business," which nevertheless was an important step in the evolution of associations. No one doubts that a tacit part of every association's mission is to generate surplus revenue so that it can continue to serve the explicit part of its mission. I agree with the sentiment of "return on engagement" and think almost every association should be thinking about its future with that in mind. What will be interesting is figuring out how generating this return on engagement will also pay the bills. No fault to Jeff for not answering this question, I believe it is largely unknowable at this point. It could be that continually working around the margins will push us in this direction. Or, perhaps, associations have entered a chrysalis and we're set up for such fundamental change that you'd never believe the catepillar we used to be would turn into a winged creature. I think the power and the possibilities of community and engagment could radically transform associations into something that today would seem entirely implausible.

And on the final point of distributed leadership: Of course I reject the notion of the "increased complexity" of today as the same old cliche, but I suspect that what Jeff is saying here is not only true, but that it will happen whether we want it to or not. Those resistent to this idea will either succomb eventually or perish. As de Tocqueville taught us, Americans are going to assemble and congregate around as many ideas and causes as they can dream up -- and the options and opportunities for forming community continue to expand. Those clinging to power and control will soon find that others will turn their back on that power and build competing communities based on inclusion and engagement.

So, Jeff, I may not have raised your manifesto, but I'd say I called. Time to show our cards I think.