What’s the reason so many great ideas turn out to be terrible ones once they’re out the door?
Over time and many years, I’ve learned there are only a few reasons:
“I did that”
You know these people: they’re great at self promotion and talking loudly, but very poor at doing much else. They take meetings and create relationships, but you can’t pin them down to much actual achievement.
They never get fired though, and here is the reason: they’re very good at introducing small, often insignificant, changes; changes which let them claim they’ve had a material impact on whatever it is.
For an innovator, the key discipline is working out which small changes make no difference (and hence let you keep such individuals on side) and which you must fight against to preserve the integrity of your initial concept.
The clever innovator knows how to pick the battles which matter.
Watch out for empires – those non-collaborative silos that are more loyal to themselves than the organizations they’re supposed to serve.
[hr]Is this post interesting to you? You might also like James’ new book [amazon_link id=”9814351105″ target=”_blank” container=”” container_class=”” ]Sidestep and Twist[/amazon_link] [hr]
Empires are usually fiercely protected by whomever owns them, because, more often than not, they’re defined not by their own capabilities, but the empire itself.
Into such a mix, inject something brilliant which, if implemented, will force the empire to move, however insignificant such a move might be.
The reaction is predictable: the owner of the empire changes the idea in ways which allows them to ensure it is logically incorporated into the empire rather than isolated from it.
A lone guy with an idea is usually not in any position to fight an empire, so the clever innovator knows how to hide things from empires until it is too late to change them.
Any new idea polarizes everyone into two camps: those who will benefit and those who will lose.
The losers will do everything they can to change the idea so they’ll lose less. They’ll likely do this by painting the idea as something that is bad.
What does that mean?
It means the thing that made the idea brilliant in the first place is going to get changed. There’s nothing malicious about this: everyone tries to protect their positions when threatened.
But for an innovator, there is really only one defence: you have to motivate those who will win to stand up on your behalf.
Rule of thumb: you need a vocal winner for every loser you can identify, and then a few more on top to account for the political foes you have that are clever enough not to show themselves up front.
“That’s Too New”
People have preferences for adopting new things. In most organizations, the preference for newness is pretty normally distributed, which means approximately half the organization will be open to new ideas, and half won’t.
The half which isn’t open, of course, will try to introduce compromises which will make your idea less new, more like what already exists. They’ll try to water down your idea in (what they say) are the best interests of everyone.
Clever innovators realize they can’t convince people who don’t like new things to like their idea, no matter how brilliant it is. What they can do, though, is make sure their ideas are introduced in such a way that the amount of change is gradual – gradual enough not to threaten those who hate change.
Have you had any experiences of your idea turning into nothing because of the compromises you’ve had to deal with?