A: For a whole lot of reasons.
One major category of answer is because of "group think". Another name for group think is... well... I can't write that here.
Another is organizational inertia, or opposition/adversity to change/risk (happening even when _that_ is what is called change management).
Yet another is complacency of managers/executives, coupled with potential qualifications in-balances between more "junior" idea holders and more "senior" decision makers on idea implementation.
Another artifact skewing our data is the self-filtering effect of those who report the cases. If your idea _was_ selected you are more likely to be busy implementing it than having the time to complain about it not being selected/implemented. Hence, beware of a false problem when you see one…
A somewhat more encompassing answer could have something to do with the resonance between the characteristics of the environment (openness and incentives to ideas and readiness for implementation by fast trial-and-error selection) and the expectations of those who act/work/produce ideas in it. Such resonance produces a firm's enhanced ability to survive not just today, but also the day after tomorrow...
Adrian S. Petrescu, Ph.D., J.D.
InnovationTrek
ASPetrescu@InnovationTrek.org
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy" (Sir Ernest Benn)
InnovationTrek
ASPetrescu@InnovationTrek.org
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy" (Sir Ernest Benn)
No comments:
Post a Comment