Just a quick post tonight with my new expanded definition of innovation:
Innovation lives in the careful balance of systemic freedom and systemic discipline necesssary for discovering and developing ideas to create new value.
Some may say that the choice of the verb, "lives" makes this less a definition than a description of innovation. I will respectfully choose to disagree with that interpretation. Rather, through this statement, I am choosing to understand innovation not as an object, i.e., it is this or that, but rather as a holistic experience phenomenon that encompasses individuals, groups, organizations and networks.
As I have written on TAIB before, innovation depends on freedom of many kinds: to imagine, to collaborate, to experiment, to learn. And that freedom isn't something that belongs to a chosen few. Real freedom must and will be systemic, co-created by all and belonging to all.
On the other hand, freedom by itself isn't enough to run an idea, insight or breakthrough through the gauntlet of challenges its faces on its way to the marketplace. This work depends on the discipline of all the stakeholders involved and is made manifest in the variety of practices, processes, procedures, policies and so forth that govern all aspects of our day-to-day work.
By finding the right balance between freedom and discipline, we are far more likely to make innovation possible and accessible. Companies such as 3M and Google are seeking to master this balance, and I believe that if we can do in our associations, we too can achieve enduring success in the 21st Century. I promise to elaborate on this line of inquiry in the weeks ahead.
There seems to be growing interest in "doctrines" these days, so perhaps I should rather presumptuously christen this one as the De Cagna Doctrine. Let me know what you think. I look forward to your comments, reflections and divergent perspectives. I promise to write more on this in the weeks ahead.
Comments