When we mention the word innovation, it’s easy to overlook the fact that not everyone is equally familiar with the term. Some people prefer to stick reverently to a set schedule and follow a comfortable routine rather than risk changes that disrupt their predictable scope of action. The fact is that I don’t understand.
Throughout your professional career, you will likely meet many people who are not happy with innovation and all the changes it brings, but you must learn to work with them.First to harmonious cooperation Ayumu is understanding. Let’s take a look at the main reasons these people have shown such resistance to innovation.
The fear of failure
The “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” mentality is rarely considered in the context of the “innovation process”. On the contrary, it is common practice in business to replace the products or processes that serve most consumers or employees with new and innovative solutions (product and process innovations). Such changes can often be implemented successfully where new functionality improves upon previous state, but it is not uncommon to do the opposite of what was intended.
Many fear that change will make the process less efficient or reduce, rather than improve, the impact of the product on the market and someone’ s paystubs. This is a reasonable reflection. For Strongbow Cider, for example, in 2014 they decided to change the recipe for their product. As a result, we lost most of the customers who preferred the old recipes. Therefore, change must be combined with proper planning, research, and realism for successful innovation.
It’s true that an innovative culture offers a high trope of experimentation and failure. If not, people play it safe. The ability to take risks is a key requirement for innovation. When you innovate, you can’t get things right the first time. Therefore, it is tolerant of failure. Structures and systems are designed to exclude those who are not thorough, diligent and meticulous in their work. Of course, no one knows everything, but talented people overcome it by learning and climbing the curve fast enough to be able to contribute collaboratively to teams and projects. Innovative cultures welcome failure as long as productive learning occurs.
The fear of change
We all have a hard time accepting change and are prone to inactivity. We are naturally programmed to fear change and tend to withdraw when change approaches.
Advancing change is like breaking an informal contract with yourself, leading to intense anxiety. Everything new comes with risks. It’s that some people are less averse to taking risks than others who can recognize the benefits and get out of their “comfort zone”. These people are “innovators” – those who know there is something new on the other side that can reward them if they follow suit.
An innovative culture gives us the psychological comfort to question and critique ideas. Arguments and perspectives are not taboo. but … I expect to be open to criticism and questions about my ideas and hypotheses.
I remember a passage from Kim Scott’s book Radical Candor (read it if you haven’t already). There she’s been at the company for a few weeks now, and she describes a time when she was faced with the challenge of Larry Page’s idea…in a few minutes, Larry broke her smile and told her agree with
Leaders must set the tone so that everyone understands that challenging ideas are accepted and encouraged, regardless of hierarchy. To me, this is one of the main reasons companies like Google are so innovative.
It is human nature to avoid conflict.
The try to avoid failure
As mentioned earlier, failure is an integral part of the innovation process, yet many refuse to accept it. Instead, they form unreasonable expectations that are doomed to failure, or simply avoid accepting and implementing new ideas. No one is exempt from the painful aspect of innovation called ‘failure’. These companies failed for various reasons.
Poorly defined target market, overpriced product, poor idea, etc. Creative people should accept that there are no hard and fast rules to ensure success. Successful implementation of all ideas.
Collaboration vs Accountability
Nothing important has ever been accomplished alone. Innovation requires collaboration. But collaboration is not the same as consensus. Consensus is the practice of destiny in decision making. Collaboration, on the other hand, is about engaging, discussing, discussing, and partnering with people and teams with different skills and perspectives. because… Innovative ideas require information, input, suggestions, and integrated work streams from diverse teams and individuals. It is important that collaboration does not absolve liability. In fact, the two complement each other.
Consider this: If my role is responsible for delivering a new UX design or use of AIML, I will work with different departments, teams, and individuals to get their perspectives, suggestions, bottlenecks, past Hearing and sharing experiences is my greatest concern. Ultimately, I am responsible for the success or failure of the project, so it is up to me which design to choose, which agency to use, and which strategy to follow.
An innovative culture is always clear about accountability. We all know that decisions are needed to move forward. These decisions must be made by individuals. An innovative culture demands that you take decisions and their consequences into your own hands. (Note that innovative cultures tolerate mistakes, see paradoxes 1 and 2 above).
A good way to show that an organization values accountability is for leaders to publicly take responsibility for their mistakes. Town halls, departmental meetings, and cross-departmental meetings are good platforms for admitting mistakes.
Send a message to employees and her team members that your manager has your back and that they can blaze a trail with innovative ideas and take risks. (Risk-taking is essential for innovation).
A great demand in our era of innovation, especially in fields such as artificial intelligence and nanotechnology, is not just the concept itself, but the way to get there, a systematic approach to innovative ideas. Both randomness and hyper-connected/over-information and over-accumulation of data have been integrated and decoded in cognitive science to train the human mind to see new, different, alternatives. At the same time, without this change in thinking, which implies and presupposes a change in the educational model of schools, neither GDP nor growth will increase sustainably.