Leading change is not a one-person job. For a new idea or innovation to succeed across an organization, the effort’s “champion” should encourage everyone possible to contribute and claim ownership of some part of it. Diverse input also helps everyone learn more about the idea and their organization.
When Agile emerged on the scene, it was a dramatic alternative to the way that projects were traditionally delivered, forcing organizations and teams to rethink what they were doing and how. But now that Agile is mainstream, what’s the Next Big Disruptor?
In this article, with the help of theory, literature and real life examples, the authors try to explain innovation in construction projects while differentiating the same from invention. The article also discusses two more vital “I” words: improvisation and improvement.
Team innovation can be greatly influenced by conflict (either productive or destructive), experiential diversity, a sense of empowerment, and organizational boundaries. An Agile approach can help, though there are pros and cons to consider. Spotify offers a real-world example of how it works.
The successful rollout of a fundamental change needs support and buy-in from senior stakeholders. The project manager therefore needs to plan for adequate and persistent senior stakeholder engagement. This article introduces two measures--Appetite for Innovation (AI) and Trust (T)--that can be used to predict likely responses of senior stakeholders to organizational change. Low AI can be addressed by making the change real and relevant to stakeholders. Low Trust can be addressed by improving the awareness of senior stakeholders about the change that is being introduced.
What does innovation mean to your organization? How do you assess ideas and separate the “wow” from the “not now”? Here are three questions that leaders should ask when evaluating which innovative initiatives can generate real value — and which are just noise.
In a world where project management maturity is a generally accepted form of goodness, have we--in the process of increased governance and prescribed and repeatable PM processes--engineered away the potential for real innovation within the discipline?