vol. XVII no. 2

				Page 4 Page 1 2 3 4 5 CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER "There's a danger to all of this focus on being innovative," warns Kale. "Innovation for the sake of innovation, like what we had during the dot-com bubble, is innovation run amok. People had all of these ideas; many of them were completely zany. No one looked at it from the perspective of whether the benefit of innovation outweighed the cost, and subsequently the economy lost trillions." "I don't see the dot-com bubble as innovation for the sake of innovation" says Rigdon. "I see that as very much criterion based, and the criterion was stock price and not being attached to how to deliver value to the customer. And that's why these companies went big in a hurry and exploded." "The point is that it was lack of evaluation," responds Kale. "As you've pointed out, they weren't paying attention to whether or not the customer wanted it, so it's not going to generate any benefits to the firm." Once you've looked at benefit versus cost, what's the best way to speed up the development process and make sure the company's innovation is getting out there? "A lot of it is using technology," says Donthu. "It also goes back to organizational structure, making sure that you have interdisciplinary groups - making sure that your supply chain folks are involved in the conversation from the beginning rather than bringing them in afterwards," adds Houghton. "And, I think being willing to jettison will help accelerate the process instead of slowing it down." "That's the model that venture capitalists follow," says Kale. "They aren't tied to an idea that doesn't work - they look at a concept and say, okay we spent a certain amount of money, it didn't do what we expected it to do, it's time to get out." While that may seem like a failure, many believe that being okay with failure is the key to success. WHEN FAILURE IS GOOD "Removing the stigma from failure is important," says Kale. "There was a study done on international innovation and culture. They found that in countries such as Japan and Switzerland where failure is frowned upon the innovation rate was very low." Adds Oviatt, "I see evidence of that whenever I go to other countries and talk to entrepreneurs. Social value or stigma on failure is a real problem for some societies and one of the key variables in why people choose or don't choose to start a new business." "That's exactly what people from other western countries mean when they say that the freedom in the U.S. is different or greater than the freedom in Western Europe," says Mettler. "Here you're allowed to be unsuccessful. You can try 100 times and fail, but if it works on the 101st try, you're a success." According to Oakley, even the American legal system has provided a safety net for the risk of failing. "Although bankruptcy has a bad connotation, it is the underlying safety net for the freedom to fail," he offers. "Our system encourages people to take that risk. Many people who are successes have failed and gone through the liquidation process several times before they succeed." With all of the potential risks and failures, innovation is not for the faint of heart or for those averse to change. "Innovation is hard. People hate it; people hate to change. So they need to feel supported by the corporate culture," says Houghton. "If a company is serious about innovation, it has to shock the system like cold water in the face. It means wearing pink if you're wearing blue and reinforcing it with every move, every step and every phrase. Otherwise, it's just junk - the buzzword of the week." Previous Page | Top | Next Page

Copyright © 2004 Robinson College of Business/Georgia State University.