 |
| Phil McKinney's 7 Immutable Laws of Innovation, assembled in to a suggested work flow cycle |
In this post I'd like to take a look at these laws and how they work, and discuss them in relation to previous posts here about innovation within architecture and the building sector. The intention is to see if Phil's laws raise any areas of opportunity where innovation can be improved in our industrial sector.
1 Leadership
The MD or CEO of any business has to set the culture of the organisation to be focused on innovation, and allow a mechanism to develop where by innovation can become a core activity of the company.
2 Culture
Phil says 'Culture eats strategy for lunch!' The culture within the business needs to be right for a strategy of innovation to develop. Employees need to buy in to the common focus and goals of the company, engage with and take ownership of the strategy and collectively nurture ideas.
The organisational framework by which this can happen is critical. Phil discusses several strategies in his blogs and pod-casts, and expands on how they work in his book. These first two laws have parallels with our earlier blog post on the importance of people to innovation. Without the right people in the right roles, working in a common direction, innovation will not happen. What Phil offers is that all important road-map to plan your route to success.
Another point to make here is 'what is meant by innovation?' It is a buzz-word used over and over in the Architectural press without clear definition. Phil McKinney is very clear on what innovation is, and what a company needs to do to make incremental or breakthrough changes. Key to this process are the Killer Questions the company needs to ask of itself.
Phil notes that departments and disciplines across any company (or collection of companies) needs to be aligned with clear lines of communication and transparent working methods, to enable innovation strategies to remain focused, effective and efficient. This is perhaps where the Building industry struggles the most as there is not one clear instigator of innovation. Producers, suppliers, design consultants, client organisations and governmental bodies are all focused on different priorities. Arguably, the fragmented nature of the industry means companies innovate within their own parameters, with larger, breakthrough innovations proving difficult. The result is that the Building Industry sits in the traditionalist innovation camp, as noted earlier.
3 Resources
Phil notes the resources vital to developing innovations are time, people and costs, with teams working with autonomy to prescribed goals and delivery gate-posts.
In architecture, by contrast work is driven by projects and innovation normally has to fit in to budget restrictions, Client requirements, risk assessments and statutory legislation. By comparison to other industrial sectors, the incentive for innovation in building design is not as high as it could be. The situation with producers, suppliers and some large contracting companies is different, but could it benefit from greater alignment with design professionals or with a number of strategically selected companies across the industry?
4 Patience
Phil says R&D is a risk, a bet, but it needs to be given time and the patience to allow it to happen.
Within the design side of the Building Industry, project programmes and the Client's brief with tight deadlines often dictate. As a result, innovation normally gives way to tried and tested methods which prevent new thinking.
5 Process
Phil describes innovation as a continual process. What you are looking for is not 'in the last place you look'. The goal requires a process of continued searching and investigation. This process needs to capture the full innovation sequence from idea to execution and he has many strategies to establish and manage this. Phil adds that without innovation, a business (or industrial sector) stagnates. This a danger for the building industry. There is a lot of talk in the press about innovation in building design and construction but I think we are missing many key opportunities to do better. Why can't innovation within the building industry be as dynamic as other, faster moving, industrial sectors? It has a lot to do with its large fragmented professional structure, poor communication links, lack of alignment and, as Phil points out here, the lack of an effective (killer) innovation strategy at the heart of each company's management system. This law reinforces points 1 and 2 above, where innovation needs to be an integral part of the culture of a company: The process provides the road-map to achieve this.
Most design practices have a QA system. Gearing it up to take advantage of a comprehensive innovation strategy could prove very effective. If the critical mass of practices adopted this approach, it could start to shake up the sector.
6 The BHAG
The Big Hairy Audacious Goal! Phil encourages that we should go for the long shot! Do stuff never been done before! With the impossible task to complete we need to find new ways of hitting the targets. Its an inspiring and encouraging message and often the BHAG causes the innovation process (law 5) and the culture of innovation (laws 1 and 2) to be set in place. Clear targets and goals need to align with a clear innovation strategy.
This is what architecture and the building industry needs more of. Sometimes the architectural practice can set the BHAG by taking a competition brief and turning it on its head. Sometimes the Client sets the BHAG with a set of goals that sends a spark through the industry. Examples include the London Millennium Bridge and the Halley VI Antarctic Research Station.
Phil's message is like a shot of confidence: Establish the culture, set the strategy and take a leap of faith.
7 Execution
This is the translation of idea to impact. Execution is the delivery of something of value in to the market place. From what we currently produce compared to his laws (above), Phil asks us to rank ourselves as innovators. He doesn't sound like the kind of guy to be too impressed with stylistic or aesthetic developments or cost reductions. He's looking for more radical, far reaching developments, perhaps of the type listed in our 6 P's of innovation.
Take a look at Phil's work. Establish a framework to make it as easy as possible to set these 7 laws in place, to travel from ground breaking idea to the execution of killer innovations!
