Confounding Space-Marks: Navigating Idea Management and Innovation Black Holes
I began thinking about this week's article with a lot of preconceptions about what Idea Management was, most of which were shattered by the time I completed the research. My initial searches for information on Idea Management returned hits from software companies that had products branded as idea management platforms. As a rule, I do my best to steer away from technology solutions and look first to process, workflows, concepts, etc. Using this preconception, that nothing necessarily has to be a technology solution and that human solutions can serve as replacements or were the progenitor of the tech solution in the first place, I moved forward and dug into a few bibliographies to find that path. I'll talk about how that shook out in a bit.
The causal definition of idea management is a process of developing, identifying, and using insights and alternatives that would not be derived at through the normal course of work. It is a simple thing to solicit and collect ideas from a community but the great majority of those ideas, once analyzed, turn out to be improvements rather than innovations. There is nothing at all wrong with tweaks and tropes on existing processes but idea management, and this is one of this knowledge management tool’s differentiators, is after true innovations. Another quality of idea management is the 'try longer, not harder' maxim. Implementing an idea management program, as it were, needs to be thought of longitudinally. The point is to collect as many ideas as possible, bad and good, in order to increase the probability of arriving at true innovations. Similarly, innovations don't normally pop out of one idea, but ideas layered on top of one another and collaborated on by multiple individuals over time.
Idea management, according to the research, is a process or tool that should be directly linked to employee engagement and wellness (the two are synonymous in my opinion). The paper 'Idea management in the innovation process' was the first I read that had a concrete definition of that process as it relates to engagement. The stages are Idea Generation (or Ideation), Idea Gathering, Idea Evaluation, Idea Development, Idea Implementation, and Idea Follow-up; from the paper:
"Idea generation or ideation is the creative process of generating, developing, and communicating new ideas, where an idea is understood as a basic element of thought that can be either visual, concrete, or abstract;
Idea gathering, where ideas are systematically collected and documented in the idea management database, an organizational memory necessary for the idea evaluation;
Idea evaluation is a critical step in the innovation management, which should be linked with the organization’s strategy and vision;
Idea development is the most critical phase in the idea management process, based on cross – functional teams which refine the ideas and transfer them into the innovation process, as a result a formal development project is established;
Idea implementation should be handled in a separate process and continue throughout the whole life cycle of the product. In this phase, the organization can obtain a competitive advantage;
Idea follow-up and rewarding the innovator should always be included in the idea management process. The follow-up of ideas entering the innovation process creates valuable knowledge and should be stored in the organization’s memory, to be used for managing idea generation and management processes in the future."
This is the point where my preconceptions about being able to 'do' idea management in the workplace without a technology solution begin to break down. Again from the research:
"The employees’ ideas have to be recorded and this must be done in a way more visible to them. The means of capturing ideas include: the dedicated software platforms, the monthly and quarterly evaluation sheets, the boxes for ideas and so on. Using a standard form to outline the details of the idea, it would allow an analysis on the same criteria of the idea by the evaluators, and would be a useful tool..."
Here I am beginning to see where a software solution begins to make sense, software can recognize and make transparent the ideas that are submitted by staff. But I still have the nagging question, should idea management be done through software at all? Should it be a face-to-face process? If we have a technology solution, where does knowledge management fit into the equation? One of the main features of a technology solution is the storage of past ideas, right? The storing of ideas is a knowledge management activity. Perhaps that is where knowledge management is best inserted in this process, at the very beginning. The distilling down of the total ideas might be done by others, primary stakeholders, whereas a KM serves as an initiator and facilitator in the beginning. Transparency of ideas contributed to the process is another KM role, in my opinion. Helping with the distribution of the ideation and collaboration results fulfills the core purpose of knowledge management. Another good note from the above reference paper shines a light on another KM role:
"Building the ideas portfolio: At the end of the evaluation phase, the ideas can be grouped into categories, such as: immediately useful ideas, ideas to be explored in more detail, ideas that constitute a novel approach to the problem, useless ideas… In turn, these may be grouped into processes developed within the company. It is good that every idea be recorded in a database, which allows quantification of the effort undertaken and thus a global picture of the process is obtained."
The KM can plug into the process here and make sure the ideas are collected but the assigning of priorities for those ideas should be done by stakeholders. The management of stakeholders and their continuing involvement could be, and often is, part of the knowledge manager's role - especially the motivation part.
The paper "Applied Innovation Management: Collaborative Idea Management" put the final nail in the coffin of my preconceptions about idea management sans technology. This paper, btw, is the one I would recommend you read if you want to go a bit deeper into Idea Management, it is the most useful of the four. The ideas here drove home for me that idea management can't really be done correctly without some type of technology platform supporting it. The first short quote that jumped out at me is when the authors suggested that idea management:
"Use the principle of self-organization to handle complexity..."
This is solidly in the social network camp. A few questions came to my mind at this point:
How does a KM handle ideas in a transparent forum? And when I say handle, how are they rated or rather, how are they validated? Is it a yeah / nay decision by management? If the entire process is to be transparent, what are the ground rules for killing an idea off altogether?
The authors reference another concept that I just loved, 'innovation dark matter'. From the paper:
"Every day, employees think of ideas relevant to the organization. It is just happening as a part of their daily work. Ideas are generated from customer interactions, frustration with existing processes, individual career goals, the desire for meaningful work and so on. [Hutch] Carpenter calls the factors that produce employees’ innovation energy for the “innovation dark matter” of the organization... The most innovative companies know how to effectively leverage their innovation dark energy"
I copied the citation of paper they pulled the idea of innovation dark matter from below, in case anyone wanted to check it out, I didn't get a chance to this week:
The authors go on to discuss the same concept of longitudinal idea analysis (try longer, no harder) that we saw in previous research. They state that:
"innovations emerge over time as a result of a collaborative effort – a continuous process combining a long chain of ideas. Successful innovation is the combination of just the right ideas in just the right structure"
Longitudinal idea analysis could be another role fulfilled by a KM, through keyword chunking and subject analysis, ideas that come through the system can be effectively connected.
This paper has a lot of great ideas about what idea management can look like in practice. They talk about a type of digital open air market for the exchange of ideas, where the only governance is through the organic nature of individuals working together. An example of this dynamic follows:
"On the supply-side of the market, employees in their roles as users in the system, get a clear overview of current innovation needs and can post ideas in one or more boxes, manually or automatically using keyword matching."
This might be replicable with hashtags in a dedicated information channel. Hashtags allow for the organic growth of the system with little to no overt intervention by a KM. I've always been a bit of a downer on folksonomies, librarianship is a profession that kind of collects control freaks, thinking of them in this way has softened my position somewhat.
Another point that is really hammered home in this paper is that a KM working with a technology platform can only be so effective, or take an idea management program so far. Individual stakeholders or CoPs need to be engaged in monitoring the idea channel and be open to providing regular feedback. We talked previously about 'innovation dark matter', extending that metaphor, an idea management initiative can't be allowed to devolve into an 'idea black hole', where ideas are thrown and the individuals or community aren't offered any feedback. Regular feedback, even if it is minimal, needs to come from leaders in the areas the ideas intersect with.
In summary, Idea Management can be done without a technology solution, I think, but tracking all of the confounding space-marks without one creates a situation where we will be more likely to fail, crushed under the weight of our own innovation dark matter.
To go over our holographic map, one more time, here are the clearly identified steps in the idea life cycle, namely:
Generation
Gathering
Evaluation
Development
Implementation
Follow-Up
A Knowledge Manager needs to be involved in idea management but cannot be the sole point of contact or the sole motivated individual in the process. KM roles in idea management really should be limited to motivating stakeholders, monitoring of the system (especially the feedback component), and longitudinal analysis of the ideas collected.
Bibliography
Alexe C G, Alexe C M and Mititaru G (2014) Idea management in the innovation process: Viewpont and replies on previously published articles. Network Intelligent Studies. (2, 4) pp 143-152
Iversen H, Kristensen K, Liland C S, Berman T, Enger N and Losnedayl T (2009) Idea management: A life-cycle perspective on innovation. Technology Management Conference. pp 1-8
Karlsson M (2010) Applied innovation management: Collaborative idea management - Using the creativity of crowds to drive innovation. Innovation Management (1) pp 1-28.
Malik A I (2014) Identification of idea management tools' success factors for organizations. Aalto University School of Science. pp 1-88