Motivation effecting Innovation management
A limited time offer! Get a custom sample essay written according to your requirements urgent 3h delivery guaranteedOrder Now
This paper discusses the meaning, value and role of innovation and the ways to manage it. The need, necessity and origin of innovations are briefly discussed and contours the different perspectives of the Innovation Management. The various processes of Innovation management are also highlighted drawing special attention towards the overall need of each process and factors affecting the same. In this paper an attempt has been made to conceptualize the need of managers’ understanding towards the imperative need of innovation at workplace. By doing so a contribution to the organizational overview on the direct interplay between innovation and projects has been drawn.
For a long time Man has ruled this earth and for a long time more man has tried to understand innovation and the rules to manage it, but in vain. Some say “necessity is the mother of invention”, however can necessity be channelized to have a structured invention rules? This question might not have haunted anyone the days when man was just an ape or just 20000 years old on this earth, but this question has definitely left many befuddled over the last few decades, what we in this modern world call as Innovation Management. Many significant works done so far might not be able to clarify the questions which I have posted, however they definitely give a perception of what it could have been and what it shall be henceforth.
Need of innovation management in different stages of Man’s life and the ways to channelize and structure it for its best purpose known “GROWTH” is something worth the effort. The term Innovation has been taken from the Latin word “novus” which means new. Some people perceive it as an idea or in materialistic terms invention or new product. Innovation represents a particular form of organizational change. In its broadest sense, then innovation management can be defined as a difference in the form, quality, or state over time of the management activities in an organization, where the change is a novel or unprecedented departure from the past (Hargrave & Van de Ven, 2006; Van de Ven & Poole, 1995: 512). Innovation never dies be it a Banking Sector or a service industry innovation is the key requirement of 21st century markets and organizations, or in Cooper words , “Its War: Innovate or die”.
Motivation & Purpose
Innovation is something which have been inculcated in me since childhood by my household. At every new stage of my life I polished my innovative skill to understand its cause and effect. And 25 years down the line I still fantasize it. The way I see innovation is something as new as a dew drop yet as ripe and serene as a million year old sandalwood tree. The main purpose of choosing this topic for my research work is to understand it in a structured way. To put forth the ideas and knowledge I gain in the way that is most easily understood by everyone who has been in my place, or will be, in some point of time. The best enemy of a man is man himself and hence the best teacher of a man is also he himself again. This was the very idea that struck me while I was choosing a topic for my research. How could I understand innovation? A Topic which I have been trying to comprehend since a very long time now without asking myself and being my own teacher and my own student.
The way of applying innovation in and organization is entirely different than applying innovation in college, school and day to day life. Innovation at work have different impacts than innovation at home. Hence channelizing innovation according to the prime goal of the organization is the key strategy and need of the hour. Innovation in raw terms doesn’t understand any boundaries and hence is usually unharnessed as it only gives an intellectual satisfaction to an individual. If the innovative ideas of an individual could be channelized to realize a public goal the realized foundation and scenario describes Innovation Management in crude terms.
Innovation management are rooted in works of many archaic scholars and sociologists. The latest work of Chris Eveleens, Julian Brinkshaw, Gary Hamel & Michael J Mol bring about the insights of integration of Innovation management in organizational structure and workplace. An in-depth review of the innovation literature is beyond the scope of this paper. My intention is to outline main directions of research its driving factor and evolution and understanding with current needs in the industry and market. In a recent paper, Fagerberg and Verspagen (2009) provided a comprehensive analysis of the cognitive and organisational characteristics of the emerging field of innovation studies and consider its prospects and challenges.
The authors trace evolution and dynamics of the field. Reflecting the complex nature of innovation. In addition to this my work signifies its roots of evolution in a mix of man’s changing needs and dynamic characteristic states. For the purpose of analysis we will have a close look at the available models developed to understand the evolution and traits of innovation management. Fagerberg and Verspagen very suitable provide following description about innovation management: “Management is to some extent a cross-disciplinary field by default and firm-level innovation falls naturally within its portfolio. So between innovation studies and management there clearly is some common ground”.
How innovation is managed depends on how you look at the innovation. The definition of innovation varies across the world rather in every individual’s mind, innovation carries a specific meaning. What might be an innovation for one might not be so for someone else. According to Brinkshaw there are broadly four perspectives on management namely institutional, fashion cultural and rational. The institutional perspective take a macro level & comparative approach to make sense of the institutional and socioeconomic conditions in which particular management innovations are being merged. The institutional perspective measures innovation in terms of the discourse around particular ideologies and also at the level of specific practices or techniques. It gives no direct consideration to the role of human agency in shaping the process; instead, it focuses on the preconditions in which an innovation first emerges and then the factors that enable industries to adopt such innovations.
The Fashion perspective focuses on how innovations emerge through dynamic interplay between managers using new ideas and the fashion setters. This study broadly tells us who are the managers who buy this fashion and how this management takes place however it doesn’t signify origins of management and why for some management becomes fashion and for others it doesn’t. Cultural perspective attempt to understand how management innovation shapes, and gets shaped by, the culture of the organization in which it is being implemented. It operates at the meso level of analysis by looking at how individual attitudes toward management innovation interact with the organization level introduction of the innovation. Unlike the two previous perspectives, the cultural perspective provides some insight into how management innovations are implemented, usually from those who are participating in the process rather than those who are driving it.
This perspective agrees over the changes which are implemented through this process however the forces at a large organizations would eventually reduce its impact. The rational perspective builds on the premise that management innovations are introduced by individuals with the goal of making their organizations work more effectively. According to this perspective, an individual puts forward an innovative solution to address a specific problem that the organization is facing, and he or she then champions its implementation and adoption. From the above mentioned highlights we are stuck with certain questions. First, what exactly is being innovated? There is little consistency in the terminology within or across the four perspectives, but we believe it is useful to separate out two levels of analysis. At the more abstract level are management ideas, defined by Kramer as “fairly stable bodies of knowledge about what managers ought to do, a system of assumptions and rules”. Second how new the innovation have to be.
There are some usual perceptions and works over this topic which finally boils down to without any know precedent. An idea can be developed by a consultant and also by the organization itself. Boundaries are always blurred where knowledge is mostly limited. Third, what is the purpose of management innovation? Both the fashion and cultural perspectives see management innovation as having little lasting impact on the organization, whereas those of the institutional and rational perspectives view management innovation as generating positive outcomes for the innovating firm and for society as a whole. In sum, management innovation is defined as the generation and implementation of a management practice, process, structure, or technique that is new to the state of the art and is intended to further organizational goals There are many innovation management theories and different models that describe the process and phases. Innovation Necessity
This diagram describes the origination or driving factors of innovation which play a crucial role as the basic requirement of innovation also shown are the catalysts which boost or act as a promoting factors to innovation namely motivation, wishes and Leadership. However innovation needs to be sustained for growth in today’s competitive market. In today’s world western nations show remarkable difference in the quality and sustenance of market growth owing to their repetitive high technological innovations and efficiencies. “If you can’t compete on price you have to differentiate, and to differentiate you have to innovate!” Andy Bruce, Switched on to Innovation Professional Manager Vol16 Issue 3/5/07.
Also the innovation needs to be sustained that is a constant thirst for new ideas and innovations is a prime factor in running the growth potential of an organization. Future market growth and penetration will solely depend on the ability of the organization to create new ideas.
Innovation and Planning
As with all other core business processes innovation needs to be linked to strategy and the planning process. Innovation separate to business strategy runs the risk of diverting key resources and damaging the focus of an organisation. Innovation activities MUST be driven by strategy and current business imperatives. The extent and type of innovation should be determined by current business performance and future expectations and by an organisation’s tolerance to risk. Even for organisations wishing to pursue a consolidation strategy (current products in current markets) innovation can be focused on process improvement work. In the green area businesses can operate quite successfully. A balanced portfolio of innovation projects should be adopted when assessing the risk factors involved and the numbers of ideas or innovations being managed at any one time.
Process of Innovation Management
Building on our conception of what makes management innovation unique, we develop a framework that highlights the five interlinked phases of the process called the Motivation Phase the invention phase the implementation phase and the theorization phase and the backfire phase.
The motivation phase refers to the preconditions and facilitating factors that lead individuals in a company to be motivated to experiment with a new management innovation. It addresses the question “Under what conditions, or in what circumstances, do executives deem existing management practices to be inadequate for their needs?” The answer to this question is far from straightforward because it is necessary not only to identify the conditions under which executives search for new management innovations but also to specify the circumstances in which they choose not to adopt one of the existing solutions that can be obtained in prefabricated form from the so-called management fashion-setting community Invention Phase refers to either random or planned variations in management practices, some of which subsequently are selected and retained by the organization.
It is the phase in which a hypothetical new practice is first tried out in an experimental way. This could be done by either the trial and error method (hitting every possible method of resolution known and unknown to finally achieve success), problem driven search method (this is driven by problem itself, the new approach is in response to the specific problem) or idea linking method(individuals in an organization make connection between the new ideas).
The implementation phase consists of all the activity on the “technical” side of the innovation after the initial experiment up to the point where the new management innovation is first fully operational. Description of this phase involves making sense of the actions of internal and external change agents in implementing an in vivo new practice, as well as understanding the ways existing employees react to it and influence its implementation.
The fourth phase results in a theorized new practice—one that is retained and institutionalized within the organization. While an effective implementation, as described above, is clearly a necessary part of the process, the intangible and system-dependent nature of management innovation means that the results of the implementation are likely to be highly unclear for several years. Theorization is first about building a logical rationale for the link between an organization’s opportunities and the innovative solution that is being put in place, and second about expressing that logic in terms that resonate with key constituencies inside or outside the organization.
Backfire Phase is the phase where standardized variables of innovation meet the dynamic variables of actual market or the action area. If After the actual implementation the innovation doesn’t meet the exact requirement or gives rise to a new scenario which requires a new process to implement or eliminate the whole process becomes a cycle with output from thee last stage acting as the input of the 1st one. Hence this stage consists of a feedback from the last end till the 1st phase which might give rise to a new idea or scrapping the old innovation all together. Being directly available at the ground of action this phase becomes the most important phase of the entire process and hence called as the pivotal phase.
House of innovation Management
Based on experiences in innovation consulting for different branches A.T.Kearney has developed the “House of Innovation”. This model depicts the most important building blocks of successful innovation management. The roof of the House of Innovation is innovation strategy, a planning process that clearly defines for which corporate goals innovations are necessary and how they can be supported by resources, processes, technologies and behaviours within the company. A company aligned for innovation should next to innovation strategy also include this goal in its organisation and corporate culture.
Innovation and Performance
Finally, like any other core discipline, creating an innovation process and installing an innovation culture must be managed and measured on an ongoing basis. Monthly and weekly meetings should focus on the progress and performance of both new ideas and the implementation projects. Issues should have a process by which they are escalated and associated risks managed where appropriate. The performance of the innovation process and the issues raised should drive and inform the next planning process and review of strategy. Performance has to be linked to strategy and measures and key performance indicators (KPIs) set.
The frequency of performance measurement is often dependent upon how critical the innovations are to the overall business performance. Performance measurement is intimately linked to the innovation Platform used by the organisation. It should give managers real time information on how innovations are progressing and their performance against the selected KPIs. Up until now the focus of this paper was on creating a broad overview of possible activities to manage the innovation process. It is obvious that no organisation is capable of implementing all these activities into all innovation projects. The final draw always says till what extent an innovation must be carried out.
On the basis or my work I can easily now correlate Innovation and its needs in day to day life and majorly in workplace. The standards defined in my work channelizes ones approach towards innovation and capability of oneself of how to best handle it. I can now clearly understand necessity of innovation, its driving factors and basically its impact on work culture home culture and casual attitude. Research suggests situation, social impacts like motivation and leadership along with the need behave as the cooking pot for Innovation. Lacking the parameters may not eliminate innovation however it definitely deteriorates it quality, and when the parameters give a positive impact the quality of innovative idea grows exponentially.
Research has indicated that one of the most important factors in installing an innovation culture within any company is having leaders and teams with ability and commitment. Senior managers need to understand the strategic direction and how innovation can help. They also need to be able to motivate others. Creating a culture of continuous innovation requires leadership and commitment from the Board and senior management teams. This is a necessary prerequisite for success. It also requires agents of innovation and innovation teams across the organisation, champions who will assist a project manager with the implementation and tracking of ideas, innovations and changes. Managers need to constantly look at their part of the business and ask themselves “what are the barriers to being innovative and creative?”
They need to ask themselves and others questions, such as:
Is anybody being asked about their ideas?
Do staff know about the need for ideas and innovation?
Are people rewarded for their ideas and contributions?
If there are no boundaries and structure to the innovation process then staff confidence is often affected. If there is no method then the chance of success is reduced. Organisations that truly invest in their people and understand the value of their ideas ensure that facilities, equipment, time and resources are organised to help foster ideas and innovations.
Innovation management has been clearly pictured over different organizational perspectives. The Need and necessity of Innovation management along with dynamic personal characteristics of People are evaluated. Emphasizing that it’s not always situation that leads to innovation but also the social impact and personal traits of an individual play a crucial role. The process of innovation management clearly shows that the need of each intermediary processes and impact of the same. The house of innovation strategy wraps up the entire paper to its core meaning and the development of strategy in an organization consequently.
In order to understand the vital impact of external and internal agents in the Innovation management process a in depth picture needs to be drawn which also become the future research subject for this topic. Sample surveys conducted to find the impact and need of innovation in organization gave in evaluative output. Considering the variable nature of human in social presence and reserved characteristics of survey environment needs to be nullified via averaging subconscious evaluation and questionnaire output.