Tag Archives: Implementing innovation

How NYC Schools are Systematizing Innovation

Some people think innovation is about research and development or designing new and better products.   If I hear one more reference to the iPhone as an example of what innovation is, I think I will be sick.

Innovation has to do with making anything better. . . products, services, business processes, organizational strategies, the ways we lead, and the ways we do work.  The need for innovation and the tools that promote it are universal and can be applied in for or nonprofit, public or private sector, mission based of customer driven organizations.

I came across an article recently by Tom Vander Ark in Education Week, called Innovation Hub and Change Management Model. It describes a pretty interesting approach to guiding innovation throughout the largest school district in the United States.  Here are some learning points – a manifesto for leading innovation and change.

Create a Resource Center to Enable Change

The point here is that there is a body of knowledge that makes innovation happen more easily.   Before you push your people to do so, put in place the resource center to help them.

One idea in New York was to create the Department of Education’s Office of Innovation which they call the iZone.  It was created in 2010 as a community change management initiative.    The iZone is a place, (a physical space), a group of people (whose sole job is innovation thinking, planning and execution) and a network of external partners (knowledge resources to be leveraged).   They are working with organizations like Google, Harvard EdLabs, The Center for Secondary School Redesign, the Discovery Channel and many others.

The iZone is a resource hub to provide expertise to help local schools design curriculum for the knowledge age by applying technology smartly, redefining teaching roles, leveraging external real-world environments to support practical experiences and personalizing learning.

Have a Unifying Point of View

While it may seem empowering to simply tell people to “go forth and innovate,”  in practice it is much more effective when you focus your innovation efforts.

iZone started with a bold philosophical paradigm-shifting idea–to change schools from a classroom focused learning system to an individualized student-centered approach.

This is a radical change from the industrial age concept of processing students through a learning process in production-line fashion,  in batches based on their chronological age (as if that were the most relevant way to batch-process them).  Putting students at the center of the process is a stark departure from decades of tradition leaving many teachers feeling unsettled.   How do you redesign schools and curriculum from the bottom up when your work day is already jam-packed with tasks?

Make Innovation Voluntary

It is great to have the C-suite be in favor of innovative change, and to see them trying to drive it.  However, most of us react to top-down directives negatively.  Find some initial willing “guinea pigs” to be the first living case examples.  Once they achieve some initial successes, momentum will build.   From then on, make participation in innovation initiatives voluntary. (The door to change can only be opened from the inside).

In the case of NYC, they start by inviting schools to join the iZone (giving them access to these support resources), but in order to do so the school MUST AGREE to subscribe to the philosophy of personalized, student-centered learning as a way of being!  Office of Innovation director Stacey Gillett describes it this way:  “the iZone [is] a community of schools committed to personalization innovation.”

This is huge.   To participate, the school and all its connected stakeholders must first go through a process of imagining what they want to make different and then make the emotional leap to accept the philosophical perspective of the iZone.  So by the time they join, they are ready to learn and to work.

Use a Process

It is not sufficient to simply ask people to change, and then cheer them on.   Most of us  need help.

As you know from our prior articles, we think Innovation initiatives are greatly aided by having a deliberate process to guide it.  We at Xavier Leadership Center teach Lean, Creative Problem Solving and Design thinking as three specific methodologies.

Here is the process invented by iZone (see this Vimeo detailing the process.) In this case they planned six focused conferences spread out between February and June.  These participants came to learn core concepts and to share ideas.   Then they went back to their home schools to apply what they learned.   With each succeeding conference, they were pushed along the design thinking process.

  • Forming a design team
  • Informing the team (collecting information, engaging stakeholders)
  • Defining their problem(s)
  • Developing an idea for a new learning model
  • Prototyping it
  • Refining it
  • Implementing it

Have A Deadline 

Yes, innovation is an organic process that never ends.   We create ideas, implement them, learn from our successes and mistakes, and make ongoing improvements.   However, that doesn’t mean we should launch innovation initiatives without a purpose or deadline.   People work better when they can see a concrete endpoint to our initial efforts.

The iZone school community created a 1-year deadline for them to invent a new learning model.   Feb–June were allocated to learning, defining, designing and prototyping.  The summer months were created for planning implementation at the start of the upcoming school year.   Having a deadline helps us stay on track.

Choose Some Specific Initiatives

Leading an innovative change program is a blend of empowering people at lowest levels to invent solutions that best meet their needs.  No one other than them knows their issues and problems better.  In addition, however, there should be an overarching “strategic” plan that aligns the lower level activities around the overall goals and direction of the entire organization.  Empowering teams builds engagement, and connecting them to organizational strategic intent makes it powerful.    In the case of NYC schools, while each schools programs might look different on the ground, they are ALL required to be connected to this framework:

  • Next Generation Curriculum and Assessment
  • Personalized Learning Plans and Progress Tracking
  • New Student and Staff Roles
  • Flexible and Real-world learning environments

Flexible, focused, and aligned.
Decide how to Measure Success

We are not fans of innovation for its own sake.  We need to define up front what success looks like to us in sufficient detail so that we would recognize it if we actually succeeded.

In the case of the iZone schools who engaged in the Feb-June sequence of planning, they all defined measurable outcomes they believed would be impacted though the implementation of their new learning model.  Start with the end in mind.   Pick your goals and define how to measure them. Be as  multi-dimensional as you can.   (Look, for example not only at student achievement, but how about measuring teacher, community and student engagement as well?)

Here is a statement of mission for iZone:

“The iZone aims to increase student achievement in K-12, college and career by supporting innovative educational models that will best meet the needs, motivations and strengths of each student.”

It helps to have a clear understanding of purpose when deciding what to measure.

So how innovative is your organization?   We can all take a lesson from iZone and the suggested steps listed above.  The only mistake is not to start.


Leave a comment

Filed under Innovation, Leading

Are You Ready for an Innovation Initiative? (Part 1)

Design Thinking Word Cloud

A growing number of our clients are asking for us to deliver programs around the topic of leading and cultivating innovation.   This topic covers a broad waterfront and I think people think many different things when they hear the word.

So what is innovation, and what does it take for your organization to launch a successful innovation initiative?

What is Innovation?

Many think about innovation in the context of their R&D department whose job it is to develop “innovative” new products and/or services.   This is clearly one key area where we want innovation to work (think about products like the iPad, iPhone, Kindle, or even Facebook that have dramatically altered the marketplace.   Finding a new idea that can sweep the industry by storm can bring with it massive financial rewards.  Playing catch up usually is not a good place to be.

For the field of new product/service development there is a body of knowledge, often called “design thinking,” that speaks well to an approach that can yield new design ideas.  The term is generally attributed to IDEO’s David Kelly, (see You CAN Teach Innovation, and Play . . . Seriously? ).  In general, I see Design Thinking as a process methodology that guides people to see the world better through the eyes of users, gaining deeper insights that can yield more innovative solutions. It also has a decided Systems Thinking orientation, challenging designers to see holistically – generally more broadly than they otherwise would have before zeroing in on the best design solution.

But if you think about innovation, it can also be considerably broader than just developing better design solutions.   So here is another definition to consider:

Innovation: the art of implementing a new idea or approach . . . to anything.

By this definition the idea of innovation has implications for every part of your organization, from top-to-bottom and side-to-side.  Notice also the word “implementing” in the definition.  It reminds us that great ideas alone are not sufficient.  It is the act of implementing it that morphs it into an innovation.

With such a broad definition, innovation can apply to all our jobs, changing processes, improving operations, raising quality, improving customer service, or saving money.   The general idea is that all organizations, when operating in accordance with their current status quo, produce the outputs they get today.  If we want ANYTHING to change, we must somehow change our approach.

This idea, of course, is not new, but John Kotter and others have shown compelling evidence that the vast majority (ranging from 70-90%) of organizations fail to achieve intended goals when launching new change initiatives.  So what does it take to make it work?

Here are three things I feel are vital.

1. An agreed process methodology

The truth is that there is an art to the act of innovation, and while we are not all born with the skill, most of us can learn it.  If you recall my recent post called The Marshmallow Challenge, it illustrated that the process approach you choose can in fact greatly influence the outcomes. There are some skills involved as well that promote “divergent thinking” – a key aspect of effective brainstorming. (We are generally good at this as children, but adults typically struggle.)  There are tools like “affinity diagrams” to help take a large list of ideas and establish a process of organizing them in ways that help us converge on a manageable number of solutions.

There are, of course a myriad of methods already out there.   Consider for example:

  • PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) introduced by lean quality theorists
  • DMAIC (Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-Control) developed by practitioners of Six Sigma
  • OODA (Observe-Orient-Decide-Act) a decision-making process developed by the Air Force for its combat pilots
  • FIRE (Focus-Ideation-Ranking-Execution) developed at HP by Phil McKinney

There are many similarities among these and there are people who strongly advocate in favor of one vs. the other.  From where I sit, I suppose it doesn’t matter which one you choose, so long as your team understands and agrees to follow the chosen approach.  An innovation process can be organic and even chaotic at times, so it helps to use a methodology to provide some degree of order and keeps channeling them towards an implementable outcome.

2. A supporting infrastructure

For reasons better left to industrial psychologists, not all organizations are able to follow these processes automatically.  One of my P&G colleagues tells me that after years of trying to teach innovation techniques to its employees, they concluded that most intact teams fail to use them effectively.  So Procter created a unique innovation space they call “The Gym”: a workout space for your mind where people can get away from the constraints of their home environment and work with highly trained facilitators as they grapple with “wicked problems”. They are not alone in reaching this solution.  In addition, a growing number of companies have created “chief innovation officer” positions to help infuse innovation concepts throughout their organizations.  Here are some (which you can Google on your own):

  • P&G’s “GYM”  (Innovation Center at Beckett Ridge)
  • Mayo Clinic’s “Center for Innovation”
  • Boston Public Schools “Office of Innovation”
  • The Wrigley “Global Innovation Center”

So it seems we often need help to nurture the innovation process.

3. A supportive environmental culture

This kind of leads us to the third (and I think most important) element of building your supportive innovation system – creating an environment that encourages the right level of innovation.  Wittingly or not, we can on one hand talk a good game about wanting innovative solutions, while setting in place a string of impediments that make it difficult if not impossible to find those solutions.

Yes, innovation often requires trying something new, and this has risk associated with it.  You can bias your organization to be risk-taking or risk-averse by the incentive systems you create, the way you tolerate failures, and the ways you select innovation project members.  The shorter your time horizon and the more focus you put on short-term financial results – the less risk taking you will likely invite.

You can also promote internal politics by how you manage your company promotion systems. If you hire many thoroughbreds and have them compete against each other for a diminishing number of positions at the upper echelon of the organizational pyramid, you can create all kinds of unhealthy internal dynamics where people fight each other even harder than they do your competition.  Not a good thing.

Finally, You can hire people who are all in the same mold, or who are diverse in thinking and life experiences.   It is amazing to me how many industries act like it is a mistake to hire people who come from outside the industry.  While they may lack some initial insight about the business, they can make up for it with their fresh perspectives and new insights.  Just ask Ford’s Alan R. Mulally (the industry outsider that is getting high marks for his slow transformation of that struggling auto maker.)

There is something else I have noted about people who drive remarkable change.  They possess a special kind of attitude.  They question everything and assume very little.  Their operating assumption is that “we are not good enough” instead of “everything’s fine”. They take risks, and break rules.  They have intense passion and energy.  They will rock the boat.  In some organizations, these traits are, frankly, just not appreciated.   But that’s precisely the kind of people you need . . . with egos that don’t take new ideas personally, and don’t feel obliged to defend what they have already done.

So, these are the key ingredients for success.   How does your organization stack up?

In my next post, I will describe a live case example of innovative change in health care system which impressed me at a recent conference we hosted at Xavier about the new shape of heath care in America.

Other related articles:

What is Design Thinking, Really?, by emergent by design.

The Big Ten Innovation Killers and How to Keep Your Innovation System Alive and Well, by Joyce Wycoff

1 Comment

Filed under Innovation, Systems Thinking