The innovation safari & solving problems via a group

Solving a challenge or innovating may be paradoxical when the goal is deliberate innovation from a group of focused professionals who must routinely produce innovations individually as part of their jobs.

What is something that is more of an experience and adventure than a planned campaign? A safari. Our unsystematic safaris into the jungle of working in groups to address and solve problems are something we all encounter. And like the safari, the solutions and wonders are often recognized in retrospect, often not in prospect. And getting there brings their own bumps in the rough dirt track.

How often do we find professionals who should be cooperating closely are unwittingly pitted against each other by the nature of their roles and responsibilities, i.e. “Proposer versus Disposer”.?The ‘disposer’ exercises critical faculties, yet not creative ones in defense of the status quo and established way. The proposer (of a new idea) tries to overcome resistance and then the two are forced into adversarial roles. Organizations want new ideas, but why do they fight so hard to prevent ‘new’ from happening? We are in situations where the need for action is clear, but the actions themselves are not.??So we form groups.

In his classic and funny research paper, “On the Mathematics of Committee, Boards and Panels”, Dr. Bruce Old* ultimately concludes that the most efficient committee is composed of 0.7 of a person!

What I have come to know:

Two people are more cooperative than larger groups… they are more projective and aligned.

Three people…?well, the wisdom of the old saying, “Two’s company, three’s a crowd’ is something we see in our young children where there is a minimum age where three-children play works well. The advantage I see is less failure is felt in losing than with a group of two.

Ever notice how Four-person groups are where the onset of unimaginative agreements start? There are six ways of forming one pair and the two pairs consequentially can polarize without having an ‘odd man’.

In groups of 5+ members a major group can form to the disadvantage of the out-group/minor group; delays, confusion and frustration become risks. Yet when group members are interested in the problem, they will be more engaged with the problem-solving process and invested in finding a quality solution.

“If you don't know where you are going any road can take you there” 
             -The Cheshire Cat, "Alice in Wonderland        

The more radical the innovation, the higher in cost to develop and implement it. So latent resistance boils under the surface with the result that we remain at a plateau. The rhino charges the Land Rover and we accept minor improvement and that reinforces our traditional orientation.

In regards to others, we need to challenge people to be inventive in appropriate ways, to support them as they seek to do it and be realistic about recognizing and rewarding what is 'invented'. The hardest part is that the problem must be in their best interest to solve...it must disturb them.

For what it’s worth, I think it helps to admit when you need the help of colleagues who can help look at what you are facing from other perspective and all sides. Make small but steady goals on a timeline that works. And hopefully find the same happiness in the challenge as one would on a grand safari.

*Dr. Old's fascinating life is briefly touched on here: Bruce S. Old: The tennis data pioneer who interrogated Nazi scientists - BBC Sport