"Nothing could be worse than the fear that one had given up too soon, and left one unexpended effort that might have saved the world." - Jane Addams

Despite our continuing efforts to educate people and organizations about the behaviors, attributes and disciplines of innovation, innovation management and creative problem solving, we continue to fight risk aversion and fear.  Quite honestly, the fear is really just a fear of success.  Executives fear successful innovation programs because they look at their already overworked resource pool and wonder how in the world they are going to add more projects to the mix, even if they look extremely promising.  This fear leads to risk avoidance which then leads to either complete inaction or very slow action.

One of the reasons that organizations have so readily adopted Six Sigma and other "lean" programs is because, by definition, they are incremental in nature.  The savings opportunities promised by lean initiatives are also hard to ignore by cost conscious management teams.  Conversely, this is also one of the reasons that innovation programs are only hesitantly adopted.  Because, by definition, they are most successful when they produce breakthrough, or risky, ideas.

One of the most common things I see when consulting on poorly performing innovation programs or in simply trying to embed a new idea management program, is the inevitable drift to slow decision making down, tweak the idea just a bit to reduce the risk, move forward with ideas that are "guaranteed" or "safe," or splitting resource time between innovation and lean programs.

Now, let me just state for the record that there is absolutely nothing wrong with incremental improvements and innovations...nothing at all.  But to really leverage a successul innovation or idea management program, you need to occasionally roll the dice.  Always taking the safe route ensures that your innovation program isn't going to provide you with the competitive separation you had envisioned at the launch of the program. 

Many times, executive management doesn't even realize this "incrementalism" is happening.  Either through habit or learned behavior, they inadvertantly stifle the ideas they hope to stimulate.  Let me give you a few examples...showing the risk-taking and risk-avoidance behaviors:

• The CEO agrees to launch an innovation program (RISK), but then appoints someone to spend 50% of their time getting the program off the ground (RISK AVOIDANCE)
• Middle managers, not wanting to jeopardize their upward mobility, screen (RISK AVOIDANCE)  very risky ideas (RISK) before they even reach the consideration stage
  
• Once the program starts gaining momentum, great ideas start percolating up from the front lines (RISK).  The ideas are filtered at the Idea Committee level using a spreadsheet that is only risk/reward based (RISK AVOIDANCE)
  
• Projects that are launched based on ideas which have been vetted through the idea management system (RISK) are put in a project portfolio separate from all other corporate projects so they can be killed without too much visibility (RISK AVOIDANCE)

Bottom lined focused organizations just have a habit of risk reduction because its good business sense.  That is, unless your goal is to shake things up a bit.  Take some risks.  Look beyond the horizon.  Aggressively take market share, rather than compete for it. 

If you have the courage to launch an innovation program in the first place, consciously resist the temptation to "incrementalize" it.  Instead...grow it, fund it, resource it, believe in it, protect it and champion it.

Have a GREAT week!!!