Strategy is Innovation - Innovation is Strategy

A while ago, I had an interaction with a smaller company working on their future strategy which basically was to grow much more rapidly than what they had been doing in the past.

The company is in a good position having some unique products based on an even stronger value proposition. Now, the execution itself – and how they plan for / strategize on this execution – will decide how this goes.

These interactions gave me some inspiration for thinking further on innovation, strategy and management. This includes:

Strategy is innovation and innovation is strategy: Today, we can’t separate the two from each other and this should drive the thinking of all executives. A key reason that this does not happen in big numbers yet is that many executives do not fully understand innovation. We need an upgrade here.

Besides the upgrade, it is also worth looking into how “traditional corporate strategy hinders optimizing the management of innovation” as Willy Sussland stated in an article where he encouraged companies to innovate on the strategy as well as on the strategy process itself. This is a quote from the article:

“To innovate the strategy and to make it work, I believe that we have to start by innovating the way people think, the way people behave, and the way people act."

Business, strategy and innovation should all put people first, so I like his take. You can check out more of Sussland’s work here.

First, reap the low-hanging fruits in the obvious business functions: All companies must upgrade their innovation efforts and there are lots of low-hanging fruits in the business units and functions that are close to innovation. These “obvious” functions include R&D, innovation teams and sales & marketing.

However, as this is obvious it also has the attention of everyone in an industry so if you want to get a competitive advantage towards your key competitors you must not only do this better and faster; you must also go beyond these obvious areas.

Then, go for the real value in the un-obvious business functions: It does become more difficult when you go beyond the obvious areas as these functions are not used to being an important part of the innovation efforts. On the other hand, this is exactly the reason that you should consider this in order to make a difference towards your competition.

In my view, procurement and supply-chain are some of the most important of the “un-obvious” business functions with regards to innovation. The automotive industry does this very well and we have also seen several cases within the airline industry in which the open innovation movement has turned the supply-chain into a key element of an innovation process. Think Airbus and Boeing and their mixed results.

I have also seen how companies within the fast moving consumer goods industry develop innovation training programs dedicated to their procurement teams. You can find some good insights on innovation within procurement / supply chain here:

Procurement Leaders (an impressive network and resource on procurement)
• Innovation in Procurement (a report by Cap Gemini)
• Responsible Procurement (a site by a specialist in procurement excellence)

The point I would like to make on the “un-obvious” business functions is that there is substantial value to be gained if these functions are fully engaged and brought up to speed with regards to innovation. A key argument is that you get a much more holistic approach to innovation on a corporate wide level if you invest more in these supposedly weaker areas.

It is actually worth pondering whether you should invest in making your obvious functions and teams even stronger on innovation or if you should invest in the un-obvious teams in order for them contribute more. There are pros and cons on where to put the main focus.

The best approach would of course be to have enough resources to do both, but it is my experience that this rarely happens so what would you suggest if you had to choose on one of the two options – and why?

The next session in my Innovation Upgrade network: Ask Me Anything on Innovation – an online session on July 27

Jack Ring

Systemist at Educe LLC

8y

The two are quite different. In the first place, "...to grow much more rapidly than what they had been doing in the past" is NOT a strategy. Strategy = the allocation and scheduling of resources to overcome impediments to achieving objectives. Strategy may exist at the conceptual, intentional or extensional level. Only when attempting to implement a strategy does the notion of innovation appear. As Frances Ford Coppola said, "The secret to making a good movie is getting everyone to make the same movie." Innovation!

Like
Reply
Reid O.

CEO | Heavy Operations | Commercial Operations | Equipment | Logistics | High Performing Leader | Strategy | Growth | Transformation | Culture & Change | CI Expert | EHS Champion

8y

Hi Stefan, what do you think; if you replace innovation with imagination in your article is this not the goal of Strategic Thinking? Imagining the possibilities for your business vision and objectives then creating the documented strategy is the fun part. Setting sale on the strategy path to win is the hard work.

Like
Reply
Aldo Andrioletti

Area Manager presso Shedir Pharma S.p.A.

8y

i complety agree

Like
Reply
Annette Candelaria R.

Writer and Coordinator in Goverment Agency

8y

I like this article, the part that we have to innovate how we are and do things and thats start with people. The company can has the best technology, the best resources and the people with all acafemuc knowledge but if this people doesnt compromise, doesnt work for reach the companys goals, it doesnt grow. We have to innovate our self constantly.

Like
Reply
Navin Kunde, Ph.D.

Innovation Leader. Ecosystem Builder. Problem Solver. TEDx Speaker. Published Author.

8y

Though provoking, as companies usually think of innovation by business unit, not function. I think it is important to go to the functions where innovation can create true business impact (whether this is an obvious function or not), and then focus efforts in the 1-2 functions where the leader is fully on-board and has the most to gain (from innovation) or lose (through inaction).

Like
Reply

To view or add a comment, sign in

Insights from the community

Others also viewed

Explore topics