The post is about a film someone sent him.

Seth writes: “My favorite part happens just before the first minute mark. That’s when guy #3 joins the group. Before him, it was just a crazy dancing guy and then maybe one other crazy guy. But it’s guy #3 who made it a movement. Initiators are rare indeed, but it’s scary to be the leader. Guy #3 is rare too, but it’s a lot less scary and just as important. Guy #49 is irrelevant. No bravery points for being part of the mob. We need more guy #3s.”

One of the key strenghts our company has, is that we can get bottom up innovation and internal corporate communities to work. It has always been a bit of a struggle to describe precisely what we do. We have always called what we do ’supplying perceived critical mass.’ Perceived critical mass is needed when a (innovation) community is not large enough to look vibrant and without intervention would look dull and die. Until the community gains enough critical mass to be vibrant itself, a supporting team generates all sorts activity to stir things up. Some people find this description too abstract though. Reading Seth’s blog made me see a big void in innovation management and how we create value for our clients.

When most companies set-up innovation an important aspect of that is looking for entrepreneurs (guy #1). Not much attention is given to make sure that when guy #1 starts dancing there are people standing by to join in. Many companies have hiring policies and training to make people behave more entrepreneurial. I have never seen a company hire or train with the aim for people to be the initial supporters of intrapreneurs. When asked many companies will agree there is a big gap between the entrepreneurs running ahead and the the rest of the organization. You can have all the entrepreneurs, processes and tools you like, if you do not fill the gap, you’ll be completely dependent on the chance of a guy #3 jumping in. We fill this void by giving hands on support to entrepreneurs, activating employees to help out entrepreneurs, or coach entrepreneurs to find guy #3’s.

Wouldn’t it be great if we would structurally fill the gap. There are large groups of employees that would qualify for the role of guy #3. Traditional staff functions are generally very knowledgeable however, in many companies they take on the role of firing squad, telling the intrapreneur why his or her idea will not work. If these employees could be trained as Guy #3s this would be very beneficial. So the value for companies is not in training controllers to think like entrepreneurs. The trick is to train controllers to dance with entrepreneurial people.

In internal communities a similar problem exists. Usually community managers fully focus on finding people that will post content and stop there. If people are actually asking colleagues for input or help, unanswered questions are a detrimental warning: “Don’t ask your question here because you’ll be ignored by your colleagues and look stupid.”Also questions without initial response often remain without response. In the communities we support, we find guy #1s but also find guys #2 and 3 to respond quickly to guy #1. After guy #3, the community will take over.

No related posts.

Le Roi Soleil
Let’s start off with a short history lesson. The record for the longest documented rule for any European monarch to date is held by Louis XIV who reigned as King of France from 1642 until 1715. He celebrated great military success in the Franco-Dutch war, was a patron of the arts and spent abundantly on artists who, as a result, produced work that remains influential to this very day. He commissioned the Palace of Versailles; a splendrous court spanning 800 acres, which is one of the largest castles in the world, and is on the UNESCO World Heritage list. He was also responsible for creating a centralised French state, governed from the capital, and thus eradicating the remnants of feudalism. For much of Louis’s reign, Versailles was the centre of power in Europe. He was popularly known as The Sun King, referring to the notion that, similar to the planets revolving around the Sun, so too should France and the court revolve around him. All in all, he could be considered one of the greatest rulers in history.

The extravagant riches he and his court lavished in, however, are a stark contrast with the relative poverty of the people of France. His numerous wars and excessive spending effectively bankrupted the state. Due to his meddling in foreign politics, an increasing number of coalitions seeking to overthrow the snobbish king were formed throughout Europe. When he finally died in 1715, four days before his 77th birthday, he allegedly instilled the following onto his young successor Louis XV:

“Do not follow the bad example which I have set you; I have often undertaken war too lightly and have sustained it for vanity. Do not imitate me, but be a peaceful prince, and may you apply yourself principally to the alleviation of the burdens of your subjects”. 

Under foreign and domestic pressure, his successors were not able to sustain Louis XIV’s government. 74 years after his death, the ancient regime was overthrown, ringing in the start of the French Revolution.

Open Government
Fast-forward three centuries. In the Open Government initiative, American citizens are invited to tell their story, the issues that matter to them, and share their concerns, hopes and policies they want to see carried out. While there is no guarantee that anything will be done with these contributions, at the very least Barack Obama sends out a very important message. In his own words:

“I ask you to believe – not just in my ability to bring about change, but in yours.”

Unlike other presidential candidates, Barack Obama did not solely rely on the social elite for backing. He turned to everyday people. Besides an unprecedented sum of over $650M in campaign funds, this resulted in a thing of far greater value: the support of the public!

Two types of executives
How do these examples of Louis XIV and Barack Obama relate to companies striving to become more innovative? While there are many similarities between company politics and country politics, I would like to focus on leadership. In organisations, both large and small, we can distinguish between the same two types of people:

Rulers: I know everything better then you do. I tell other people what to do, how, and when to do it, because I’m the boss. I will get rid of you if you don’t agree with me. I respect people in more powerful positions then me. I doubt other people’s opinions and ideas. I keep juniors, subordinates, and ‘crazy people’ down. I deserve praise and reward for my accomplishments. I am never to blame for failure. I am afraid for my reputation and position of power, which I attained by bragging and bluffing. I start all my sentences with the same letter.

Leaders: All the people in the world together know far more then I do. Everyone deserves respect, regardless of their position. People that have a fresh and unusual view can provide valuable insights. Sharing with, and learning from others is not scary. Investing in a durably successful organisation is most important. Failure is a chance to learn. Doing a good job and making sure others can do a good job as well is most important.

As you might have noticed, the above is somewhat polarised for the sake of argument. Additionally, it is important to note that ‘rulers’ are not necessarily obnoxious or conservative people. Several of them are actually highly innovative and successful individuals. Their personal successes are, however, quite irrelevant. Real innovation leaders bring an entire organisation, including the people in it, to a higher level of  innovativeness. An entire organisation being innovative is always more valuable and more sustainable then one person directing innovation from the throne. And, although plain old fashioned good luck is quite important, there is much evidence that truly innovative organisations continuously outperform their less innovative competitors.

Just as any company needs to be innovative and open to achieve a sustainable growth, so should the leaders of these companies. After all, when even the new president of the United States is not afraid to listen, why should the leader of any organisation be? My next blog article will give some tips on how to be an innovative leader.

So do you know any examples of either type? And which type are you?

No related posts.