Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

Min mar 09


Published on

Min Basadur

Min Basadur

Published in: Business, Technology

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide
  • The Profile measures two things: One is how a person prefers to gain knowledge, to learn. At one end of the axis is learning through direct experience. This can best be described as learning by jumping right in and getting your hands dirty. If there is a set of directions, they aren’t used. At the opposite end is learning through abstract thinking. This can be described as mentally figuring out what to do before actually trying it, including watching someone else, or asking questions to help get a better understanding. We all fall somewhere in between these two extremes. We all learn using both, but each of us tends to prefer one more than the other and hence we all fall somewhere in between.
  • The second thing the Profile measures is how a person prefers to use their knowledge. At one end of the axis is using knowledge to generate options. This is your imagination at work. At the opposite end is using knowledge for evaluation. This is your judgment. Again, we all fall somewhere in between these two extremes. We all have imagination and judgment abilities, but each of us tends to prefer one more than the other and on the graph everyone falls somewhere in between the two extremes.
  • Transcript

    • 1. Boosting Profits in Recessionary Times Using Your Employees’ Brainpower Co-creation and Organizational Innovation Factory Albufeira, Portugal March 20, 2009 1
    • 2. Min Basadur• Engineering Physics, University of Toronto• Procter & Gamble• McMaster University• Basadur Applied Creativity 2
    • 3. These are Extraordinary Times• Recovery will not be “Business as Usual” - consumer confidence badly damaged - much smarter in future spending - need fewer businesses offering similar products• Only the more innovative organizations will survive -by differentiating themselves - by redefining how to attract consumers• Collaborative innovation will be highly valued - joint creative problem solving - both discover unexpected innovative ideas. 3
    • 4. Characteristics of an Effective Organization Flexibility Reactive Efficiency Routine Proactive Adaptability 4
    • 5. Typical OrganizationsMany people say that these companies are good examplesof the 3 characteristics: Flexibility Tylenol Toyota Efficiency 3M Adaptability 5
    • 6. CRISISChinese symbol for crisis. 6
    • 7. In These Extraordinary TimesEfficiency and Flexibility Improvements ………. Will not be sufficient Adaptability is a must 7
    • 8. Adaptability Requires Different Thinking Skills Problem Finding is the keyInnovative Organizations do not wait for problems. They find them! They Deliberately Drive Change! 8
    • 9. Problem Finding Cultures• Toshiba• Japanese Employee Suggestion Systems• Procter and Gamble• Frito-Lay 9
    • 10. Problem Finding Culture• Toshiba -New Scientists and Engineers 10
    • 11. Japanese World Class Employee Suggestion Systems- Not optional - Golden eggs -Natural work teams - find, solve and implement- Motivation, group interaction, job satisfaction-Top down impetus; strategic alignment 11
    • 12. Japanese Work Team 12
    • 13. The P&G ProblemDanger: We are not going to double our business in the next ten years for the first time in 147 years. Why?1. Revenues flat2. A new bad economy never before experienced -Stagflation: stagnant growth plus huge inflation - Unprecedented interest rates …(up to 21%)3. No new products expected from R&D4. Acquisitions blocked by government intervention5. Repeated Oil Embargos: uncertain supplies of raw materials6. Analytical thinking and optimizing dominates company culture - Employees not used to dealing with uncertainty 13
    • 14. P&G’s Solution: A Deliberate Change Cost Improvement Program1. Communicate a compelling business need -set a concrete motivating goal2. Engage people all over the organization -form inter-functional teams at all levels -leverage the latent creativity found in every individual3.Employ a common creative process for problem solving4. “Money is saved where money is spent” -share cost information to find best opportunities5. Track implementation 14
    • 15. P&G President’s Concrete Goal• Save 4% of sales this year. (4% of $10 Billion sales = $400 million savings ) 15
    • 16. P&G’s Innovation Strategy The The Structure:Problem or Inter-functionalGoal: $400 teams in a Million Deliberate Change Savings Program Annually Creative Problem Solving Process 16
    • 17. P&G’s Deliberate Change Program 17
    • 18. Four Criteria for A Deliberate Change 1. A change was made 3. The change was deliberate 5. Real money was realized 4. Equal or better results 18
    • 19. P&G is Still ChangingFrom a recent email from the P&G Alumni Network:P&Gs Connect + Develop program is looking for Anti-Bacterial Actives for Liquid Detergent Applications“Is this the P&G you recall?The old P&G invented everything internally; owned all the intellectualproperty rights; almost never collaborated with external partners. Aculture change is underway, and P&G has moved from "Not Invented Here"to "Proudly Found Elsewhere." P&G now looks external first for best-in-class solutions to its innovation needs. And P&G defines innovation broadly- technology, "cooked products" in market, packaging, design,manufacturing processes, new business models, new ways to go-to-market,and trademark licensing. “ 19
    • 20. QUESTION: What is Leadership in the 21ST Century?• Answer #1: Driving change• Answer #2: Developing new leaders who can engage others in driving change 20
    • 21. How DO You Drive Change? • Start with PRIORITIES….. • Get your BEST people on it. • You need a PROCESS for change….. • Then you MEASURE it….. • There must be CONSEQUENCES….. • Teach EACH other (how to do it best). • Permanent change TAKES TIME….. 21
    • 22. Specific Innovation Strategy Example: Frito-Lay Offset Inter-functional Teams Inflation Creative Process 22
    • 23. Frito-Lay’s Problem Projected if inflationary costs not flattened RevenuesProfitMargin Costs1970s 1980s 1990s 23
    • 24. Frito-Lay’s Specific Business Need.. Revenues Flatten Costs in Five Years Profit Margin Costs 1970s 1980s 1990s 24
    • 25. Frito-Lay: Make the Business Need asMeasurable as Possible and Start at the Top $500 Million Begin With Vice- in Five Years Presidential Inter- to the functional Team bottom line Apply a Creative Process 25
    • 26. Generic Innovation StrategyProblem or Structure Business Need Creative Process 26
    • 27. So what is a “creative process”? Creative Process 27
    • 28. Creativity as a SystemInnovative Results = Content + Process + Process Skills + Tools + Style 28
    • 29. Innovative Results SystemInnovative Results = Content + Process No Judgment Yes Judgment No Logic Yes Logic + Relax Clarify meaningsProcess Skills Quantity Stream of options Use relevant criteria Focus on a few + Radical options Think in pictures Consider risky options Modify and refine Style Build onto fragments Move toward action + Tools 29
    • 30. Now what happens when we mix divergent thought with convergent thought? 30
    • 31. Killer Phrases•A good idea, but…. •The boss won’t go for it.•Against company policy. •The old timers won’t use it.•All right in theory. •Too hard to administer.•Be practical.•Costs too much. •We have been doing it this way for a long•Don’t start anything yet. time and it works.•It needs more study. •Why hasn’t someone else suggested it•It’s not budgeted. before if it’s such a good idea?•It’s not good enough. •Ahead of the times.•It’s not part of your job.•Let’s make a survey first. •Let’s discuss it.•Let’s sit on it for a while. •Let’s form a committee.•That’s not our problem. •We’ve never done it that way. •Who else has tried it? Killer Phrases stop innovative thinking 31
    • 32. Innovative Results SystemInnovative Results = Content + No Judgment Yes Judgment Process No Logic Yes Logic + Relax Deferral of Clarify meanings JudgmentProcess Skills Quantity Stream of options Use relevant criteria Focus on a few + Radical options Separate divergent Consider risky Think in pictures and convergent options thinking Style Build onto fragments Modify and refine Move toward action + Tools 32
    • 33. The Process is CircularSolution ProblemImplementation Finding Problem Solving 33
    • 34. The Divergent and Convergent Skills are used in EVERY STEP Innovative Results = Content + Process +Process Skills + Style + Tools This speeds up “Good Thinking” 34
    • 35. A SystemInnovative Results = Content + Process + Process Skills + Tools + Style 35
    • 36. Two Different Ways of Gaining and Using Knowledge Gaining Knowledge by ExperiencingUsing Knowledge for Using KnowledgeEvaluating Options for Creating Options Gaining Knowledge by Thinking 36
    • 37. The Process Has 4 StagesImplementing Generating“Getting things “Getting thingsdone” started – finding new problems & opportunities”Optimizing Conceptualizing“Turning abstract “Defining problemsideas into practical & putting ideassolutions and plans” together” 37
    • 38. Different Process StylesImplementing Generating Optimizing Conceptualizing 38
    • 39. Some People Have Strong Process Preferences Strong StrongImplementer Generator Strong Strong Optimizer Conceptualizer 39
    • 40. What Our Research Shows about the Different Process Style Preferences Everyone is a blend of preferences States not traits You can be skilled in all four quadrants Heterogeneous teams perform more innovatively (but have less satisfaction) Generators are in short supply in corporations Different jobs/functions favour different quadrants/styles (this can cause much wasted time and frustration) 40
    • 41. Not Enough Time Devoted toConceptualization and Optimization An organization attempting to establish new financial products quickly in a very competitive environment, but encountering a high percentage of failures. 41
    • 42. Not Enough Generators A typical group of managers from a large aerospace company serving the aircraft, airline, and aerospace industries and having trouble expanding into new products and new markets 42
    • 43. Great ideas but no action! Creative Problem Solving Profiles Warwick Manufacturing Group 15 Generating 10 Implementing 5 0 ConceptualizingX-T -5 -10 -15 -20 Optimizing -25 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 I-E Not enough optimizers or implementers 43
    • 44. Directors College CPS Profile Scatter Diagram : Date October 23, 2004 30 Many directors 25 have enjoyed 20 successful 15 careers due to 10 their 5 implementationX-T 0 -5 skills -10 -15 -20 -25 -30 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 I-E 44
    • 45. Different StylesImplementer Generator Optimizer Conceptualizer 45
    • 46. An Interconnected System 46
    • 47. Defining Problems Before Jumping toSolutions is Hard for People and Teams Innovative Results A tool for Problem Definition = Content We can’t because… We don’t have any others… + The bulb burned out… Process It would cost to much… + It’s not on our list… Process Skills We don’t do it that way here… + Style + Tools How might we…? 47
    • 48. Examples of Lack of Creative Thinking in Organizations• Irish Spring• Lay the bags Flat• Cube Utilization 48
    • 49. Irish Spring 49
    • 50. Challenge Statement HMW make a better green striped bar? 50
    • 51. The Why? / What’s Stopping? Analysis Innovative Results A tool for Problem Definition = Content + Step 1: Ask “Why? / or What’s Process stopping us? of the challenge + Step 2: Answer in a complete simple Process Skills statement + Style Step 3: Transform the answer into a + new challenge (How might Tools we…?) 51
    • 52. Irish Spring Challenge Map HMW regain market share? Why HMW make a better green striped bar? 52
    • 53. Irish Spring Challenge MapHMW regain market share? Why? HMW make a more refreshing bar? Why? HMW make a better green striped bar? 53
    • 54. Coast 54
    • 55. Where did the team spent it´s time?Implementer Generator Optimizer Conceptualizer 55
    • 56. Why teams are often not creative in problem solving• No common process for thinking together• Mixing thinking skills counterproductively• Unaware of others’ problem solving styles• Unable to synchronize• Overly focused on solutions• Impatient• Lacking tools for complex thinking• Mixing process and content• Not having the right people 56
    • 57. More Examples of Non-Creative Thinking in Organizations• Lay the bags Flat• Cube Utilization 57
    • 58. Lay the Bags FlatFact: Manufacturing has found a new way of putting bags of potato chips into cartons which would save $30 Million but the bags must be laid flat instead up uprightFact: Sales people need to let the grocer count the number of bags in a carton quickly and if the bags are flat this will take a longer time and this will stop them from making their target number of sales calls per dayFact: The group is stuck and management is wondering why 58
    • 59. Defining the Problem Creatively“How might we lay the bags flat yet stilllet the grocer quickly know how manybags are inside the carton?” 59
    • 60. Cube UtilizationFact: Frito-Lay trucks go out only half full of potato chip cartonsFact: A new method of loading trucks has been identified -Trucks would be 95% full - $12 Million would be savedFacts: A team has been testing the new method to ensure the new method will not result in more chip breakage The team is also trying to determine if there is an optimal level of chip breakage that consumers prefer 60
    • 61. Digging out the Hidden Facts• The facilitator repeatedly asked the team the question: “What else is stopping you from making a recommendation to adopt the new method?”• Someone on the team finally answered: “We are afraid of making the recommendation without being sure there is no risk ”. 61
    • 62. Defining The Problem Creatively“How might we write the recommendation insuch a way that management understandsthe risk and shares it with us?” -the recommendation was written that same day and adopted by management immediately- saving $12 Million directly to the bottom line 62
    • 63. In Tough Economic Times… Enlightened Leadership is NeededUnfortunately, many organizations do not have it. Adopt a Reactive mindset (reduce costs) – Make short term cost reductions which reduce quality – Weaken capacity for new growth – Lose good people Rather than being Pro-Active (improve costs) – Create innovative improvements which increase quality – Make strategic changes to prosper• -- Engage their people in using their brain power 63
    • 64. Engaging the Brainpower of your Employees is FREE! But it takes Creative Leadership! Facilitative Skills for Leaders are Critical! The Creative Process is important..... But Skill in Facilitating the creative process is even more important!What if every Presidents in Portugal were a Skilled Facilitator?What if every employee in Portugal were engaged in creative problem solving by their Facilitative Leader? 64
    • 65. Let’s Practice! I will be the Facilitative LeaderA Problem for the Algarve hotel industry is that from November to March there are very few customers.Why is this so? What are the most importantreasons?What are some creative CHALLENGES? - “HOW MIGHT WE…..?”What are some IDEAS that might solve thesechallenges? 65
    • 66. Let’s Create Your Innovation StrategyKeep it Simple! You need three things: • a clear-cut problem or business need • a simple structure to engage people easily • a creative process everyone can useFirst, what might be your organization’s most important problem or business need? 66
    • 67. An Innovation Strategy Looks Like This Problem or Structure: For Business example, Need interdepartmental teams A Creative Process 67
    • 68. Suggested Recessionary Innovation Strategy Business Structure: Engage Problem or your people in Need: finding good problems to solve Improve all over the Costs organization Creative Process 68
    • 69. Now, What About Your Structure?• How would you engage your people in creative problem solving?• Would you use teams?• What kind of teams would make sense? 69
    • 70. Now, What About Your Creative Process?• What could you do to build your own creative problem solving facilitation skills?• What could you do to build facilitative skills in other leaders in your organization?• What could you do to equip your employees with skills in participating in facilitated creative problem solving sessions? 70
    • 71. Now, Fill in Your Complete Strategy!Share with a partner 71
    • 72. Now, Let’s Think About Implementing Your New Strategy. Make a plan to begin implementing your strategy. -what would be an easy next step? -then the next step?. Put a definite time on each step. Look at your calendar!. Discuss your plan with a partner . 72
    • 73. Time for Action• Now it is up to you!• There is no creativity without action!• Creativity is Implemented Change. 73
    • 74. The Creative Process Ends in ActionImplementing Generating Optimizing Conceptualizing 74
    • 75. The EndQuestions?Ideas? 75
    • 76. Extra StuffJust in case 76
    • 77. What’s Behind the Extraordinary Times?• Catastrophic bank and financial institution failures• Boomer generation managers have never experienced failure -only know a culture of continuous growth -this new unknown situation creates fear and insecurity spawns a “Circle the Wagons” mindset• Media proliferation makes matters worse 77
    • 78. The New “Normal”• Consumer consumption more rational• Equity growth through real productivity gains (not paper)• Governments more intrusive• New regulations more stringent• New levels of transparency and disclosure for investments• Investment in sectors of high risk / high reward potential - genetic engineering; software; clean energy 78
    • 79. THE CHALLENGE for Both Large and Small Organizations …How might we engage ouremployees in reducing bottomline costs while increasing thequality of our products, servicesand processes? 79
    • 80. Your Innovation Strategy YourProblem or Your structure? Business Need Creative Process Facilitation 80
    • 81. Why Teams? Which skills COMPLEX and tools are PROBLEMS E=mc² required to do this work? Today’s Focus SINGLE MULTIPLEDISCIPLINE DISCIPLINE 2+2=4 Yesterday’s Focus SIMPLE PROBLEMS 81
    • 82. Another Specific Innovation Strategy Commercialize More New Products Each Year Commercialization Teams Creative Process 82
    • 83. 3 2 4 1 83
    • 84. A Fundamental Concept: Creativity is a combination ofKnowledge, Imagination and Evaluation But we have different styles of using this combination… 84
    • 85. The Basadur CPS Profile Learning byDirect Experience Two ways of gaining knowledge: – Through direct experience – Using abstract thoughtLearning by Detached Abstract Thinking 85
    • 86. The Basadur CPS Profile Two ways of using knowledge: – To ideate (create options) – To evaluate (judge options)Using Knowledge Using Knowledgefor Evaluation for Ideation 86
    • 87. Two Different Ways of Gaining and Using Knowledge Gaining Knowledge by ExperiencingUsing Knowledge for Using Knowledge forEvaluating Options Creating Options Gaining Knowledge by Thinking 87
    • 88. 88
    • 89. .. . . 89
    • 90. Do Well or Don’t do so well orLike to Do Don’t like to do 90
    • 91. Strategic Plan for Innovation Why..? HMW grow our short & long term profits? HMW derive additional revenue HMW differentiate each year from newly ourselves from commercialized HMW increase the % others in the products? HMW sustain market? current profits? of high margin sales? HMW BUSINESS commercialize NEED more new products STRUCTURE each year? HMW sell new products as well as we HMW get 4 different sell current products? functions working together as a team to commercialize more new products? What’s Stopping.. ?Note: HMW =How Might We? 91
    • 92. Real & Tangible ResultsProcter & Gamble – US$400M per year – 4% of salesFrito-Lay – Off$et program led to cost savings of over US$500M 92
    • 93. Real & Tangible ResultsFord Motor Company40 cases/shift No fact finding Implementer Think of a (Action) solution and try it; when it fails, repeat this Optimizer (Solutions) half cycle No problem definition Only half of the creative process used. 93
    • 94. Real & Tangible ResultsFord Motor Company 120 cases/shift Implementation Generator Implementer (Problem finding, (Action) fact finding) Two days in fact finding and problem Conceptualizer defining Optimizer (Problem (Solutions) Definition) One day in solution development The entire creative process used. 94
    • 95. Real & Tangible ResultsPfizer – Bold business-accelerating ideas for double-digit growth – Aspirational strategic planning – unified regions under a single World HQ vision and imperative 95
    • 96. Real & Tangible Results (continued)J.P. Morgan – Simplex used as a RAPID BUSINESS ANALYSIS tool to strategically plan company wide IT investments. – Prioritised 300+ projects down to 16 – Completed in 4 months vs. traditional tools > 1 year. – Breakthrough success resulted in 50% increase in IT budget.Hamilton Juravinski and Toronto Sunnybrook Regional Cancer Centres – Process improvement teams reduced Radiation Therapy Wait Times by 39% 96
    • 97. Innovative Team Results System Innovative Team Results = Content + Process + Process Skills + Style + Tools 97
    • 98. Why Teams Fail1. Incomplete Content2. Incomplete Process3. Lack Skills to Execute the Process4. Lack Tools5. Unable to Synchronize Styles 98
    • 99. Why Teams Fail1. Incomplete Content  Fact finding inadequate • In depth customer & environment understanding  No customer input  No supplier input  Key people not invited • Sales? Manufacturing?  Insufficient time to process the content  Hidden agendas  Lack of ownership 99
    • 100. Why Teams Fail• Incomplete Process  No consistent process  No common language  Not understanding the difference between being a participant and an owner  Focused only on ideas  No detailed action plan  No process leader  SWOT is just a tool 100
    • 101. Why Teams Fail2. Lacking Skills to execute the Process  1-8 behavior  Preconceived solutions – unable to focus on facts  Difficult to defer judgment  Poor diverging skills especially in conceptualization  Poor converging skills  Jargon & incomplete articulation 101
    • 102. Why Teams Fail2. Lacking Tools  No tools for key stages of the process  Not understanding the difference between tools & skills  Incomplete tools for convergence  Unable to clarify before evaluating  50% Diverge / 50% Converge required 102
    • 103. Why Teams Fail2. Unable to Synchronize Styles  Unaware of other styles  Frustration  Team selection incomplete  Impatience  Unequal time devoted to stages 103