Corporate Innovation: You Need to Allocate Free Time to Innovate
Let people find time in their schedules to be curious
There are countless statistics around the fact that most successful and innovative companies can attribute their success to leveraging creativity. The rise of the “design thinking movement” as a way of generating creative solutions and new business value, is very similar to the agile movement a few years prior, which uplifted itself from the software development world into the management (business) world.
Business always seeks new ways to create value, but also wants processes to be repeatable and scalable. The big question is: can repeatability and scalability still stand when design is the means through which we seek to generate value?
Here is the challenge I see: Designers and artists embrace the creative process for the pleasure of producing, for the freedom it brings, for the love of exploring. It’s all about trial and error, experimenting, being OK with the 10 failed sketches (or other creative skill) before the sketch we are happy with, taking the time to explore different solutions to ultimately land on the right solution — it is never about a “quick win”. If you read case studies and research on work environments conducive to innovation, you will see that “experimentation”, “risk tolerance”, “tolerance to failure”, “learning” are usually part of the equation—these are the same principles that apply to a designer or an artist in their creative flow.
However one constraint differs largely between an artist embracing the creative flow and an organization applying a structured, scalable creative process: when translating the creative process to the corporate world, the creative skills becomes monetized and constrained by the ROI (return on investment) it needs to generate. Free flow of ideas starts to depend on whether the idea can be monetized and capitalized to generate value; everything becomes deliberate, as opposed to simply embracing the creative process. At this point, you need to comfort and encourage people to share their crazy ideas, as opposed to letting those ideas naturally flow in the first place.
You might ask then, how come some designers and artists keep their creative flame lit when they choose monetizing their skill; here is the difference I see: when an artist/designer chooses to transform their skill into a business, they voluntarily agree to the constraints that a particular creative project brings. However, a true artist/designer will ALWAYS find time to keep exploring, because the freedom of trying something new is the reason why they enjoy the creative process — it’s not about the output, it’s about the process. Pushing the envelope to explore one’s limit by constantly trying new things is what makes the creative process so valuable — like any other skill it requires practice; and the more time we spend practising the creative process, the more naturally it comes to us and the more creative ideas we are able to tap into.
Similarly, when an organization chooses to leverage creative skills as a way to create business value, employees should still be able to find time to explore new ideas and solutions. The true magic of the creative process is the fact that you accidentally discover what you were not seeking. Serendipity is magic because that “aha” moment is one where unexpected connections are made — another key to unlocking creativity.
What this means is that I believe any workforce shouldn’t be in delivery / productive mode 100% of the time, or they will not find the time to be curious. Employees shouldn’t only be on ON/OFF mode, they should also have access to IDLE mode.
The mind wanders when we are not focused on a task, and makes connections that we otherwise wouldn’t make; that is why having time when we are not focused on any particular task promotes creativity.
In the corporate world, time is money: every minute an employee isn’t spending working on a deliverable is an ‘expense without ROI’; there is no straightforward way to measure the value of the time spent. The relationship between wandering minds, creativity and business value cannot explicitly be quantified, the standard metrics used to measure success and value cannot adequately capture the value of allocating free time for creative exploration. I think a new economic model should be created to capture innovative work more appropriately, by dropping the simple linear equation in which time = money. Value should be a part of the equation, and should be defined differently for different roles and sectors.
To use an analogy in the business development world, we understand that winning a new client requires relationship and trust building, which is often a function of time spent with the client. There is no clear ROI metric, it’s all in the soft skills. I think this is very similar to the time allocated to practice creativity as part of work.
The other parallel with business development is that you need to be ready to invest, tolerate risk, and possibly loose: when you take that client to dinner, to the baseball game, to that gala, nothing guarantees that you will close the sale. The only indicator you can rely on is the quality of the relationship, and previous interactions — both of which required time. Similarly, if you are trying to build a creative DNA within your organization to fuel innovation, you will need to accept that allocating free time to be creative may not result in the creation of value (it is likely but not guaranteed).
Innovation isn’t magic. A lot of people think if you apply the design thinking process, you will magically come up with new, creative solutions. First of all, design thinking is a mindset, not a process— the term “thinking” in design thinking refers to the way you think, not the steps you follow (aka the process). The mindset has been transformed into a process for the sake of simplification and standardization, ultimately for the sake of scalability; but with the design thinking mindset, one quickly understands that the true secret is falling in love with the problem. This begins with empathy, hence the importance of continuous design research* to truly embrace an innovative mindset.
*Proper research with anthropologists or design researchers, might I add! Proper research isn’t just anyone asking the right question, but it’s really about digging deep to understand the latent needs — that requires a special kind of skillset.
The takeaway:
When translating design to the business environment to promote innovation, it’s important to allow time for exploration — let your workforce follow their creative flow unconstrained, allow them to try something new for the fun of it. Although the business value is difficult to prove with the current economics, it is worth the risk on the long run, and companies that choose to invest will win; they will win because they are investing in the transformation of the organization and the workforce, not simply investing dollars to generate immediate business results.
If you continuously invest in proper design research and give your workforce time to explore and be curious, along with a few key other ingredients I guarantee that you will infuse innovation in your organization’s DNA. This will help you win and remain competitive in the long run.
