Innovation – time to give up? Surely not! What to consider if it doesn’t go as planned.

Typical reasons why companies struggle to innovate,?ideas are not generated and/or stacked in the implementation stage.

Observing the LinkedIn articles, you can see that innovation topics are always in trend. Besides many talks, there are a few organizations that truly can be proud of “we’ve done it”, especially if we consider bigger organizations that tend to have more rigid processes and complexity to change. Although many have a desire to achieve innovation a few got the full ability to implement it and know "know-how".

Sound familiar: lack of new ideas in the teams? Inability to implement? Low level of engagement? Micromanagement or blaming culture for lack of results?

Early signs that it is not going according to objectives:

·???????A competitor has released a new product, and you're annoyed to think, "We talked about this a couple of years ago. Could have been the first."

·???????Last year ambitions to enter new regions or new products set a few years ago, but still not near meeting the objectives

·???????New ideas penetration is slow and if implemented the result is not at all what was planned. The team feels demotivated to redo or change to achieve the results.

·???????High management is fully supporting the changes, the directors regularly call for change, but the momentum quickly fades away.

Below are some roadblocks to consider removing which prevent us to be more innovative.

1. Structure and Processes are against the innovation

Many wonders why new entrepreneurs succeed quickly and fast. There is a big difference if you set up a new organization or rebuild an already existing setup. Too many formalities and bureaucracy never aim of any organization but over time and layers of the processes sometimes lead to this side effect.

Remember companies with a high formalization of activities: business processes, regulations, instructions, rules and procedures. In such a machine-like organization, the employee is likened to a perfectly functioning mechanism.?That surely a business “guard” for all well-established ways of selling but for new offerings or business models could be a big delay and demotivator. Considering technological progress and changes, the processes simply could be outdated and not consider new challenges. At some point, they can start to be a roadblock instead of a business “guard”.

The result: organizations that operate like clockwork run the risk of a lack of innovation. The system protects itself from changes.

Don't expect the same employee effectively perform a routine process and?generate new ideas?at the same time. Consider separating these responsibilities to different people or departments.

For example:

·???????The sales development department is preparing for the development of new territories and sales channels, the introduction of new sales technologies, and the development of client programs. The sales department is busy implementing the current plan within the established processes.

·???????The salespeople are responsible for day-to-day easy sales, while digital sales are responsible for new, more innovative product portfolios.

Do not ruin all the efforts by not uniting KPI between different teams. The last thing you want is an internal unhealthy competition or teams not working toward the common goals (although cascading of the goals should be done to bring the best of each departments).

2. Present vs Future

If the employee's remuneration is completely dependent on the fulfillment of short-term KPIs, then he/she has no interest in activities that do not give a quick result. Although some feel that Performance KPIs are done deal and often feel as “formality to complete” in many cases it will establish your employee’s approach and could help to stretch their thinking in the needed directions. If you're rewarding employees solely for "quick wins," don't expect them to be involved in long-term innovation projects.

3. Always on "Firefighting" mode is killing innovation

This point could be connected to the previous one. From the perspective that firefighting thinking is always about “right here, right now”. Let’s also consider that fireman who arrived to put down a fire at your house would be considered fully incompetent if he will start a lecture on how to prevent the fire instead of putting it down. However, it is not what you need to boost innovation in your organization.

In a nutshell, If the manager's working day is busy solving constantly arising problems, then there will be no time and effort left for innovation. Looking at long term solutions to prevent always on firefighting should be in place

4. Self-centered organisations like egocentric people sindrom

Many managers know well internal rules, and processes customer database (internal factors) but forget the importance of market conditions, and competitor insides which could drive our way of thinking and directions. Although many highlight their customer centricity, the real question is what drives our decisions -- what is better for customers (and we unknowledge to rebuild existing set up) or what processes allows us?

Other examples of "isolated" businesses:

·???????Managers do not meet with customers and do not visit/learn from competitors.

·???????Management does not listen to the ideas of sales managers. (top down approach mainly applied)

·???????The company does not usually engage in advanced training, attending seminars and conferences. (all find it easy to cut on marketing budget as the first source and it is a worse place to cut from!)

·???????There is a fundamental belief in own superiority: we are leaders, and we have no competitors.

In a self-centred company, there is no source of new ideas as it is simply stacked in the way the business is done.

I can continue on the route cause and I'm sure you will find other great obstacles to share. Innovation is never simple but rewording if you found a way!