Post by ofrancesconi on Apr 1, 2021 18:24:25 GMT
• How do you engage a team in innovating when they have anxiety around change?
Empathize by acknowledging strong emotions;
Provide as much purpose and vision as possible so people have something to strive towards;
‘Failure is not an option’ – by mindful of language, keep it positive and strong;
Acknowledge there will be challenges but we’ll overcome those;
Tell stories about times when innovation took place but people were nervous and unsure eg; did you know no-one wanted to use the elevators without manual intervention. The thought of hitting buttons on their own was daunting. The thought (and reality) of self-driven cars is currently daunting for many.
• What is the relationship between innovation and steady state? Should innovation be embedded in steady state?
Innovation does not always happen in time of crisis or as a knee jerk reaction (i.e; because it ‘has to’). After researching ‘steady state’, a definition that stood out was: essentially innovative activity in product and process terms which is about ‘doing what we do, but better’. This approach can be useful in some organizations, particularly ones that are large and have operated a certain way for a long time. Implementing new, quick, innovative systems and processes could be overwhelming in such circumstances, not to mention significant resistance. Adopting a steady state approach to innovation is dependent on the organizational culture i.e; is it an organization that is agile, responsive to change, sees innovation as the norm? Or is it an organization prefer structure, clarity, and some stability? If it is the latter, then a steady state approach could be very useful. It could help set some structures in place to assist with new processes and behavior change. I have worked in highly innovative start-up organizations where things can feel chaotic every day. Similarly, I have worked in large, global, hierarchical organizations where innovation can take a long time to implement.
D. Post on the Discussion Board and Be Prepared To Discuss in Class based on the Apollo 13 videos:
- Where did you see innovation?
‘Power is everything’ – John suggested turning off as much power as possible. He looked at the data. Frozen command module – which was never tried or simulated.
Square peg in a round hole – literally!
- What innovations intrigued you the most?
Needing to build a square peg for the round hole. We’ve always been told that you can’t fit a square peg in a round hole so most of us would go in with a mindset of ‘that can’t be done’.
- What was the team’s response to the need to innovate?
I actually thought they weren’t too bad! I’ve seen some team members respond much worse to changing desks (lol). Most of them stuck to facts they knew and questioned whether things could be done i.e.; ‘but we’ve never tried that’. Lives were at stake so needing to innovate on the fly was stressful for them.
- How did the leader drive innovation?
He kept to facts and used the data he had to make decisions, quickly! He took risks but they seemed calculated. He stayed reasonably cool and rational. He showed enough emotion and energy to get them going. Although he showed a level of stress, it was ‘good stress’. It showed he took this seriously; he was committed to getting the right outcome and saving their lives.
Empathize by acknowledging strong emotions;
Provide as much purpose and vision as possible so people have something to strive towards;
‘Failure is not an option’ – by mindful of language, keep it positive and strong;
Acknowledge there will be challenges but we’ll overcome those;
Tell stories about times when innovation took place but people were nervous and unsure eg; did you know no-one wanted to use the elevators without manual intervention. The thought of hitting buttons on their own was daunting. The thought (and reality) of self-driven cars is currently daunting for many.
• What is the relationship between innovation and steady state? Should innovation be embedded in steady state?
Innovation does not always happen in time of crisis or as a knee jerk reaction (i.e; because it ‘has to’). After researching ‘steady state’, a definition that stood out was: essentially innovative activity in product and process terms which is about ‘doing what we do, but better’. This approach can be useful in some organizations, particularly ones that are large and have operated a certain way for a long time. Implementing new, quick, innovative systems and processes could be overwhelming in such circumstances, not to mention significant resistance. Adopting a steady state approach to innovation is dependent on the organizational culture i.e; is it an organization that is agile, responsive to change, sees innovation as the norm? Or is it an organization prefer structure, clarity, and some stability? If it is the latter, then a steady state approach could be very useful. It could help set some structures in place to assist with new processes and behavior change. I have worked in highly innovative start-up organizations where things can feel chaotic every day. Similarly, I have worked in large, global, hierarchical organizations where innovation can take a long time to implement.
D. Post on the Discussion Board and Be Prepared To Discuss in Class based on the Apollo 13 videos:
- Where did you see innovation?
‘Power is everything’ – John suggested turning off as much power as possible. He looked at the data. Frozen command module – which was never tried or simulated.
Square peg in a round hole – literally!
- What innovations intrigued you the most?
Needing to build a square peg for the round hole. We’ve always been told that you can’t fit a square peg in a round hole so most of us would go in with a mindset of ‘that can’t be done’.
- What was the team’s response to the need to innovate?
I actually thought they weren’t too bad! I’ve seen some team members respond much worse to changing desks (lol). Most of them stuck to facts they knew and questioned whether things could be done i.e.; ‘but we’ve never tried that’. Lives were at stake so needing to innovate on the fly was stressful for them.
- How did the leader drive innovation?
He kept to facts and used the data he had to make decisions, quickly! He took risks but they seemed calculated. He stayed reasonably cool and rational. He showed enough emotion and energy to get them going. Although he showed a level of stress, it was ‘good stress’. It showed he took this seriously; he was committed to getting the right outcome and saving their lives.