Innovation in projects or in operations is outcome of systemic working or it is an outburst of deep thinking

Dear Amrapali
Thanks for the responce.
I referred to a Systemic working
Any way even going by your statement if innovation is a combination of both i.e Systematic working and deep thinking in good old days all different terms and tools like lean and continuous improvement, kaizen etc were not in existance
What was happening before when ten wonders and many other wonderful projects those got accomplished in the world in the past where we see many innovations . In those cases ,i understand , the innovations must have come from the ideas and design from deep thinkers in the team/crew and other team members must have followed the directions given by the said deep thinker.-- Even at present one will find the similar trend.
Who is the main driver for innovation- deep thinking or systemic working or systematic working---- Can out of box thinking leading to innovation be generated through systematic working ? eg my experience about use of the ISO management systems like 9001,14001 ,50001 ,TS16949 or project management system have hardly resulted in any innovations and this is more or lessmay be true for other management systems based on PDCA cycles. The prime stress of following these systems is to ensure maintaining the certification as it is commercial compulsion.
I am of the opinion that systemic working to bring in the culture of innovation in the organisation helps to bring in the freedom for out of the box thinking that leads to innovation , This will trigger deep thinking by the team and carry out the execution to realise it in reality.
I have seen this happening in organisations where they set up innovation centres or form innovation groups who help the projects teams and the operations to bring in innovations and they build knowledge banks This is leadership's responsibility or else just systematic work as spelt out in plan or system steps will happen.
I am of the view that systematic working is must for operations for ensuring productivity and for projects speeds but if backed up by systemic working or changes to generate free thinking and deep thinking possibility of innovations is much higher. that will add value to projects. This is my experience also.
Regards
Mohan

Thanks Amrapali
Regds
Mohan

Dear Kiron
Thanks for your response and views.
some thinking from my end---
Who is the main driver for innovation- deep thinking or systemic working or systematic working---- Can out of box thinking leading to innovation be generated through systematic working ? eg my experience about use of the ISO management systems like 9001,14001 ,50001 ,TS16949 or project management system have hardly resulted in any innovations and this is more or less may be true for other management systems based on PDCA cycles. The prime stress of following these systems is to ensure maintaining the certification as it is commercial compulsion.
I am of the opinion that systemic working to bring in the culture of innovation in the organisation helps to bring in the freedom for out of the box thinking that leads to innovation , This will trigger deep thinking by the team and carry out the execution to realise it in reality.
I agree with you that there can be many triggers for innovation and exploitation is what matteres
I have seen this happening in organisations where they set up innovation centres or form innovation groups who help the projects teams and the operations to bring in innovations and they build knowledge banks This is leadership's responsibility or else just systematic work as spelt out in plan or system steps will happen.
I am of the view that systematic working is must for operations for ensuring productivity and for projects speeds but if backed up by systemic working or changes to generate free thinking and deep thinking possibility of innovations is much higher. that will add value to projects. This is my experience also.
Regards
Mohan

I would agree that certification maintenance-driven approaches run the risk of stifling innovation if incorrectly implemented or with narrow KPIs. But I'd also suggest that when correctly implemented the two can co-exist. One merely has to look at the pharmaceutical industry which is extremely tightly controlled and yet innovation does happen.

I would say, however, that organizations which truly embrace Deming's PDSA cycle will encourage innovation as they will require formulation of good hypotheses and be tolerant of receiving data from experiments which is not supportive of these hypotheses as a necessary step in the process to succeed.

Kiron

Dear Kiron
Thanks for your thoughts and observations and Inputs
Warm Regards
Mohan