‘Cargo cult’ means following all the right forms and processes, but missing something fundamentally essential. Richard Feynman explains cargo cult science as follows: “In the South Seas there is a Cargo Cult of people. During the war they saw airplanes land with lots of good ma terials, and they want the same thing to happen now. So they’ve arranged to make things like runways, to put fires along the sides of the runways, to make a wooden hut for a man to sit in, with two wooden pieces on his head like head phones and bars of bamboo sticking out like antennas-he’s the controller—and they wait for the airplanes to land. They’re doing everything right. The form is perfect. It looks exactly the way it looked before. But it doesn’t work. No air planes land. So I call these things Cargo Cult Science, be cause they follow all the apparent precepts and forms of sci entific investigation, but they’re missing something essential, because the planes don’t land.” (Richard Feynman, 1999 The pleasure of finding things out, pages 208 – 208).
Corporate innovation labs seem to suffer from the cargo cult syndrome. All it seems to take is a large room with a sofa and soccer table, a group of people that uses fashion words like agile and design thinking, and success is imminent, right? Maybe not. Corporate innovation labs or in-house startups are rarely successful. Findings outlined in this 2016 Cap Gemini report outline that – at the time of the report – 10 new innovation labs open every week, and also that most of these labs fail, estimated at a 90% fail-rate. Still, innovation is crucial. To be or to remain successful, every company has to renew, or at least to keep up with technologic and market changes. Technological changes may radically transform the market, and when missed be life straitening for a company as illustrated by famous examples like Kodak and the digital camera, or the digital transformation that changed the hospitality industry.
- Alignment with the Business – Alignment with business on process and strategy is important to make sure real customer needs are addressed and there is an interested party in the business that is eager to carry the ideas through. For very practical reasons; the lab can develop an idea only up to a point. What happens next. You do not want find yourself in the same shoes as the Boghog from the planet NowWhat. In addition, important is that this alignment is carried by a wide group at the appropriate level. You do not want to be dependent on a single sponsor and hang the future of you lab on his or her future n the company. Remember how Trump not only is blaming Obama for everything but how he also is actively dismantling whether is recognised as Obama’s legacy.
- Have metrics to track success – Metrics are just a fancy way to condense large complexity in key indicators that help get an understanding in what direction you are heading. It is a tool to collect and present data, and as with any tool and by itself has no value. You don’t want to collect data, you want to gain insights about direction and speed. For innovation KPI there is no silver bullet. Like any statistic too, metrics give a narrow window on reality and you want to have a view on reality that is valuable for the business environment you are in. Understand what your purpose and then define the metrics that measure the speed at which you go in the right direction?
- Have a balanced team – Innovation thrives in diversity. With this I do not mean the super-visual diversity such as age, gender, function or educational background, but instead the so-called deep diversity like experiences, cognition and behaviours. Recommended is to have a team of T-shaped skills & experiences, and that is diverse in how they look at the world (personality?), and what they bring to the table in how to deal with situations and apply skills and knowledge. Preferably, they are naturally inclined to work with each other.
Fundamental: Clear accountability
Fundamental for corporate innovation labs to be successful is accountability. By contrast, start-ups, which you could say are innovation labs of sorts, rely on investors, creating a sense of accountability, in a continuous competition for investors support, either the exiting or new ones. In a corporate environment this is less clear; there is no room for competition and success relies on agreement with the board deciding the budget.
You could argue this is meant with the aforementioned “Alignment with the Business”, but the relationship is less strict. In case of a start-up there is a commitment to invest in exchange for the ability to achieve set targets, linking the ability to achieve targets directly to existence. This is different with corporate environment where achievements are rarely linked to existence. It is assumed that performance ensures continuation, but in my experience continuation and existence much more depends on stakeholder management that is independent from performance.
As a corporate innovation lab you have to (continuously) negotiate conditions for existence, which may be independent from targets and objectives. Ironically, in a corporate environment, performance is not a guarantee for continuation.
Looking forward to your comments.