One of my favorite authors, Adam Grant, wrote an excellent book on creativity called Originals.  You can check out my blog on his book here.

As far as creativity among teams goes, a recent article in Harvard Business Review article includes some excellent ideas for improved creativity.  Check these out:

Generate Lots of Ideas When Brainstorming.  This is very consistent with Adam Grant’s research.  Teams all too often fall in love a new idea at the beginning of a brainstorming session.  Instead, push yourselves to produce a large quantity of ideas over a period of multiple brainstorming sessions.  Then figure out which ones are worth testing.

Create Space for Failure.  Failure is part of the culture of innovation.  Start small and experiment.  Learn more about building “Minimal Viable Products” which you can test with lower risk at this link.  Fail Fast and Fail Forward.

Block “Creativity Time” on Your Calendars.  Too many people have calendars full of meetings every day.  There is no time to think creatively!  Be a role model by blocking chunks of time every week that you are free from meetings to explore new ideas.  Encourage your team to do the same.

Appreciate Problem-Finding.  Many bosses hate it when the team brings them problems.  Learn to embrace this and use the problems as opportunities for innovation.  Encourage your team to find things that are bothering clients or the staff.

Leaders need to better understand the creative process so they can support their teams and lead innovation.  Use these ideas to improve creativity and make even more of a Mission Impact.

*Ideas for this blog taken from: Utley, J. & Klebahn, P.  “5 Ways to Boost Team Creativity,” Harvard Business Review online, March 28, 2023.

Landscape Analysis, Competitor Analysis, Benchmarking.  Organizations of all types carry out these activities from time to time.

Landscape Analysis is the broadest of these activities and can include both Competitor Analysis and Benchmarking.  It may also include a Needs Assessment, Stakeholder Input, and Environmental Data Collection – often looking at PESTLE aspects of the environment: Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal, Environmental.  The purpose of this analysis is to stay current on trends and identify possible shifts in the Landscape that may require a Strategic response.

Competitor Analysis is focused on an organization’s main competitors.  Corporations typically focus on competitors for similar products that they sell, and sometimes substitutes as well.  Nonprofits look at organizations which provide the same types of services, but also at the types of services their key donors fund.  They may also look at competitors for Staff, Board Members, and Volunteers.  This type of analysis is usually done more frequently than a full Landscape Analysis.  Many companies, for example, will monitor competitor prices in real time.

Benchmarking involves identifying and studying comparable organizations that are highly regarded and/or peers.  Organizations will typically seek to emulate the “best in class.”

It is a good idea to carry out all three of these activities, especially during a strategic planning process.  However, here are the ways that Benchmarking can be improved:

*Cast a wider net.  Look beyond key competitors and the most popular choices.  Scour the world to identify the organizations that are the most innovative in your industry.  Ask others in your same industry who they think are the unsung innovators.

*Don’t copy others.  If you do this, you will always be behind.  The best keep innovating.  See what you can learn about what others are doing.  Take their ideas and figure out how to make them even better.

*Look under the hood.  Look at details.  What is really making this organization so successful?  Look beyond price and product features.  What is the culture like?  How do they do their hiring?  What leadership principles are they following?  Much of innovation is due to excellent implementation.

Keep your eyes open.  Once upon at time Circuit City was thought to be one of the best companies in the world.  They were heralded in the book, Good to Great – but now no longer exist.  One of their former CEOs wrote a book called Good to Great to Gone – that tells the story of how the Circuit City leaders ignored the competitive environment after he had left the company.

Change is coming.  We need to stay aware and innovative in order to make the best Mission Impact possible.

One of the best ways to make sure your organization learns continuously is the consistent and effective use of After-Action Reviews.

After-Action Reviews have become popular in organizations.  However, they are often done sporadically and superficially.

A thorough AAR process can help turn failures into successes and make a good project, great.  Following are tips to make your After-Action Review process more effective:

*Every Project gets an AAR.  Create a cultural expectation that a thorough AAR is completed after every project.  Managers must insist that these are not optional.

*Everyone Participates with Candor.  Constructive conflict is good and you must agree to disagree.  Work through disagreements to form consensus – it cannot be imposed by leaders.

*Thoroughly Answer Each AAR Question: 1) What did we expect to happen?  2) What actually happened?  3) Why was there a difference between what we expected and what actually happened?  4) What can we change the next time?  Spend most of your time on questions #3 and #4.

*Everyone Needs to Own Mistakes.  Leaders especially need to step up and own their errors as role models for the team.  Don’t gloss over a breakdown to keep someone from feeling bad.

High performing organizations get that way by doing the little things well.  Making your AARs more effective might not sound glamorous but can provide a big payoff for your Mission Impact.

*Ideas for this blog taken from: Fletcher, A., Cline, P.B., & Hoffman, M.  “A Better Approach to After-Action Reviews,” Harvard Business Review online, January 12, 2023.

The pandemic taught us a lot about working virtually.  Some things can actually be done better online – like Brainstorming.

The opportunity to be fully anonymous with idea generation and evaluation is one of the things I like best about virtual brainstorming.  It also helps to level the playing field between introverts and extroverts, as well as optimists and pessimists.

Following are some ideas from a recent article in Harvard Business Review on how you can make virtual Brainstorming work well:

PreWork: Prior to any in person or online brainstorming session, make sure that everyone is given time to think of ideas that they want to share.  Some people call this “brain writing.” It allows introverts, deep thinkers, and pessimists the process time they need.

Step One: Pick a Collaboration Tool.  Examples: Google Forms allows for anonymous text-based entries to questions.  Mural and Jamboard both offer opportunities for synchronous collaboration.  Check these out to see what would work best for you.

Step Two:  Generate and Organize Ideas.  Ideas can be generated either before or during a synchronous meeting.  This HBR article encourages people to focus on “quality” of ideas versus “quantity.”  Adam Grant, in his book, Originals – suggests the opposite.  I agree with Grant.  Self-censoring “quality” can shut people down.  Encourage lots of ideas – even contradictory ideas from the same person.

Grant also encourages multiple brainstorming sessions before you start evaluating ideas.  I am also a big fan of this approach.  Creativity cannot be scheduled.

Step Three:  Evaluate.  Make sure you have established your specific criteria parameters ahead of time.  Even when you do this, evaluation is tricky.  By definition, you are trying to figure out the best new creative idea.  You will not be “sure” that it will work.  You can use “polls” or other tools to identify the top ideas – based on the opinion of the group.

Step Four:  Discuss Shortlisted Ideas.  It is best if evaluative comments from the group are shared anonymously so things don’t get too personal.

Bonus: Experiment.  The HBR article did not include this idea, but I encourage you to borrow from the Lean Startup community and test out a couple of your brainstormed ideas prior to final adoption.  There are ways to experiment with small versions of your idea before investing in one of them big time.  Check out this blog for more info.

Following these guidelines can help you lead even more effective Brainstorming in the online world.  If you end up missing the social aspects of getting together, then schedule an offsite just for that purpose!

*Ideas for this blog taken from: Tsipursky, G. “Why Virtual Brainstorming is Better for Innovation,” Harvard Business Review online, February 3, 2022.

The answer, of course, is that you need to give people time away from their current projects to do this.  And it is not a popular answer.

This brings up the whole issue of “slack” – essentially, extra time than what is needed for every person to work 100% of the time on their main job.

One way people think about this is the “permanent slack” in which companies like Google give their employees up to 20% of their time to work on “side projects” which could become their next breakthrough product (read more here).

But you don’t need to go that far – you can introduce “temporary slack” from time to time for special projects.  If you want a group to work on a new innovative project that is outside their regular work, then intentionally grant them time to slow down on other projects.

Slack is vital for innovation and progress.  Anyone who has gone rock climbing knows that as you want to climb higher you need to ask your partner on the ground who is controlling your safety rope to “give me some slack” (read more here).

You can’t climb mountains without slack and you are less likely to create new innovative ideas without it either.

And by the way, the financial corollary for slack is budgeting R&D funds for running experiments on some of your new innovative ideas (read more here).

Great leadership is often about making wise tradeoffs.  Sometimes it may the tradeoff of slowing down current production a bit so you can invent your next great idea that will make even more of a Mission Impact.

According to research reported in Harvard Business Review*, leaders can sometimes fall into five different kinds of traps that “derail” them from effectively leading innovation.  Here are the traps and how to avoid them:

*Unconscious Neglect occurs when we are impulsive.  We can focus too much on pet projects or respond too quickly to a comment or an email and come off as uncaring.

To combat this derailer, make sure that your team’s goals are aligned with organizational priorities – that you focus on those.  Also, consider Mindfulness practices to be less impulsive.

*Overprotectiveness is based in the fear that our ideas will be stolen and therefore we do not properly share them.  Perhaps we have been burned in the past.

The key to overcoming this is to find people you trust to mentor you and ask them to help you build your network. Over time you will be more comfortable and trusting.  Encourage your team to do the same.

*Overconfidence can derail us when our ego gets the best of us and we do not think we can fail.

To address this, create a standard process of evaluating ideas from all perspectives and for contingency planning with your team – it’s not negative thinking, it’s just good business.

*Overexertion is a tendency to push ourselves beyond reasonable limits.

Develop a discipline to pace yourself better and encourage your team to do the same.  You are running a marathon – not a sprint.  Read more here about managing your energy for the long run.

*Devaluation occurs when we take success for granted and waste resources on the “next new best thing.”

To address this, create a culture of testing “minimum viable products” when you are innovating.  This is testing as small a sample of the product as you can create and then collecting feedback from real customers.  Read more about how to do this here.

These traps can trip any of us up.  Out of an interest in innovating we can inadvertently undermine our own efforts.  Use these suggestions to more effectively lead your team to innovation and even greater success.

*Goyette, K.  “5 Things Leaders Do That Stifle Innovation,” Harvard Business Review online, October 4, 2019.

This is the conclusion of a recent article in Harvard Business Review*, that success in innovation through experimentation is more about culture than understanding complex methodologies to run experiments.  Here are some ideas from the article:

*Tolerance for Failure.  Many organizations are far too conservative and overly worried about the failure of an experiment.  Often, the downsides are exaggerated.

*Leaders Must Role Model.  It is ideal if you can lead some experiments and make sure others know about it.  It is even more important that when your experiments fail that you make sure others know this and that they see you stress what you have learned from it.  Support others in their experiments and their failure.

*Use A/B Testing.  This is frequently used technique in direct mail – both for advertising and fundraising for nonprofits.  It is the idea that you can try two different approaches for two similar audiences and then see which one works best.  You can even choose a small random sample of a new approach if you are concerned with changing from your traditional way of doing things.

*Be Ethically Sensitive.  Once you decide that you want to be more intentional about a culture of experimentation then include discussion of the ethical implications in your ethics training and onboarding processes.

*Provide Systems and Resources.  Experimentation requires investment in the development of systems that support it and will require resources.  You can start small, but this needs to be a budget item.

While the article does not mention it, experimentation is what the Lean Startup methodology – used widely in startups – is all about.  It suggests creating small experiments and “pivoting” quickly once data shows the idea will not work.  Check out this blog for more details.

Innovation without some risk is virtually impossible, and it requires experimentation to see which innovations make sense for further investment.  Add a culture of experimentation to your organization and make even more of a Mission Impact.

*Thomke, S., “Building a Culture of Experimentation,” Harvard Business Review, March – April 2020, pp. 40 – 48.

With this reaction, I was exhibiting my Fixed Mindset about my skills and abilities when it comes to Art.  I would have to say that I have probably had that mindset since about first grade!

In her excellent book, Mindset, which I highly recommend, Carol Dweck differentiates a Fixed Mindset – in which we think that our capabilities cannot change, from a Growth Mindset – where we believe that we can develop new capabilities.

And, we have different mindsets for different domains of activity.

So, for example, while I have had that Fixed Mindset in the domain of Art for a long time, I notice that I have a Growth Mindset about many other things.  For example, I started taking Tai Chi classes this past fall.  I tell friends that it is the most different thing I have ever done and I am really enjoying it – though I am still awkward at it.

The main takeaway for me is that if we want to be innovative then we have to adopt a Growth Mindset.  If we find ourselves saying “I can’t” or “we can’t” or “we have tried it before,” then we are holding ourselves back from possibilities.  We need to challenge one another in our teams to use that Growth Mindset to experiment, be open to learning, and allowing ourselves to fail a bit.  The Fixed Mindset is about performing – and you have to perform perfectly every time.  The Growth Mindset is about learning and improving over time.

In a Growth Mindset, the world is full of possibilities.  Who knows . . . maybe I’ll get an Art coach and try some pumpkin painting again one of these days!

I respond “Absolutely!”

There is no such thing as a “no risk strategy.”  Certainly some strategies are riskier than others, and we need to be responsible about the amount of risk we take.  However, I think that most organizations err on the side of playing it too safe – especially very successful organizations.  They don’t want to tarnish their track record and therefore act far too conservatively.

If you play it too safe then you “risk” giving up your dreams.  And that is a regret that can last a lifetime.

Dr. Russ Ackoff once said that “errors of omission” – not doing things that should have been done, are worse than “errors of commission” – doing something wrong:

“Organizations fail or decline more frequently because of what they did not do than because of what they did. For example, IBM ran into serious trouble several decades ago because it did not pursue development of the small computer. Eventually it woke up . . .  Kodak was slow to get into digital photography and is paying a very high price for it today.”

We can’t stand still or tread water.  Today’s VUCA environment (Volatile, Uncertain, Chaotic, Ambiguous) will change quickly.  Only by boldly setting our visions forward with a commitment to staying alert to that environment can we maximize our impact.

Certainly strategic contingencies can be established, but there is always risk.

Follow your dreams!

Gregerson has invented a process he calls “Question Burst” which focuses the brainstorming process on generating questions that are central to a problem or opportunity, rather than answers.  In his consulting work with major companies, he has found this method as a better path to solutions.  Here’s a summary of the process:

1. Set the Stage. First, invite just a few people to participate in the process and give them a very brief summary of the problem or opportunity that you are thinking about.  Try to invite people who may have different perspectives from you and one another.

Rules of engagement: people are only allowed to list questions, not solutions, and they are just to state the question – not provide a long justification/explanation.

2. Brainstorm the Questions. Set a timer for only four minutes and challenge everyone to get as many questions out as possible in that limited time – aim for at least fifteen good questions.  Focus on quantity.

Invite a couple more small groups to do the same exercise over a few more days.

3. Identify a quest – and commit to it. After some time, identify the questions that you feel frame the problem or challenge the best and then set out to solve the questions.  Gregersen says that doing this activity over time can help people become better at asking questions, which is vital to innovation.

Of course, the key is follow-up and really focusing on making sure you get your answers to the key questions.

It sounds like an interesting exercise worth trying.  Good luck at asking great questions and having successful brain hurricanes that lead to innovative Mission Impact.

*”Better Brainstorming,” Harvard Business Review, March – April 2018, pp. 64 – 71.