Killer Innovations with Phil McKinney - A Show About Ideas Creativity And Innovation

Tom D'Eri, Co-Founder and COO of Rising Tide Car Wash, joins us to discuss the gap neurodivergent individuals face while entering the workforce and how to bridge that gap by changing hiring methods and implementing strategic operations that are inclusive to those with different skill sets. Prospective job seekers with autism face a massive disparity in the job market. Unemployment rates of this group of individuals are between 60-80 percent. Taking that percentage of people out of the workforce when only 16 percent of autistic people face a significant intellectual disability is holding many businesses back and harming the economy. Tom D'Eri started Rising Tide Car Wash to help his brother with autism find employment rather than be a statistic in a rigid workforce not designed for those facing mental disabilities. So many neurodivergent individuals are capable and have much to offer employers. A change in how businesses look at people and how teams function must take place for the future of the workforce to become more inclusive, diverse, and ultimately successful. Barriers One significant barrier neurodivergent people face is the traditional hiring process. Most businesses are not designed to accurately assess the capabilities of individuals with autism during the hiring process. They don't see past external dissimilarities and can often overlook great talent simply by not realizing that the thought process of a neurodivergent person, though different, is not a handicap but can be an asset to a business. Employers need to reassess their methods to support neurodiversity better. Ensuring these individuals have the tools to be successful in the workplace will further ensure the business's success. Benefits of Creating a Diverse Team To better support a nontraditional workforce, Tom believes you do not have to do anything structurally different; you need to do things better. Better communication, clear feedback, and managers who care enough about your employees to make a safe and trusting environment will help a nontraditional workplace thrive. Tom mentions how people with autism are extreme users of organizational systems, which is extremely beneficial to a team because it creates better management skills and processes and provides more communication clarity. Those who are neurodivergent think differently. People with different thinking styles can help drive a good innovation strategy by bringing a different perspective. Tom believes having diversity of thought on your team is one of the most impactful ways diversity can influence an organization. Not being afraid to try unconventional approaches to problem-solving will push teams in new directions and promote learning and innovation. Tom's groundbreaking book, The Power of Potential, focuses on how the unemployment of neurodivergent people is an issue that can be solved. There is a need for talent, and there are people who supply that talent in the neurodivergent community. By expanding past traditional systems that aren't built for the neurodivergent community and creating more inclusive and innovative business operations, businesses can unlock vast untapped potential and benefit the lives of those involved. About our Guest: Tom D'Eri Tom D'Eri is the Co-Founder and COO of Rising Tide Car Wash, an organization that employs over 90 individuals with autism in a successful car wash business. His entrepreneurial success has led him to be listed on Forbes's 30 under 30 list, and most recently,  he has authored a book, The Power of Potential, on the benefits of a nontraditional workforce. Check out Tom D'Eri's Linkedin here and learn more about him and his work on his website here. For further information on his book, click here.   To know more about hiring a nontraditional workforce, listen to: Tom D’Eri on Hiring and Managing a Nontraditional Workforce. RELATED:   Subscribe To The Newsletter and Killer Innovations Podcast

Jim Kalbach, Head of Customer Experience at Mural, joins us to discuss innovation efforts in the world of visual collaboration. Remote work was at nearly one hundred percent during the pandemic, creating a need for effective digital whiteboards. Not only did people need a working space, but also a space for visual collaboration to take place. Since the pandemic, new modes outside of remote work have arisen, such as in-person, asynchronous, synchronous, and hybrid. The challenge has been finding a happy medium these different modes can meet in. Jim Kalbach believes shifting the focus from getting teams remote to ensuring teams can work fluidly throughout these different modes will ensure that teams can collaborate to come up with innovative ideas. Experimentation and Understanding Having an experimental mindset is key while concepts are developing. It can be a challenge while experimenting with new techniques and tools, but a willingness to experiment and try different things, along with having patience when concepts don’t work out, is crucial in improving visual collaboration. As modes for digital whiteboards change, Jim says the key to understanding the new way how things work is having the proper mindset. You have to come in with the mindset that things start and end digitally. Understanding a digitally defined workplace is important because even if you are in person, other parts of your team could be remote. Therefore, it is vital to understand the platforms other team members are using so that things run smoothly. Intentional Collaboration Making team collaboration intentional is vital in ensuring your team is productive, creative, and innovative. Coming at situations with collaborative intelligence will ensure your teams have all they need to thrive. Having a methodology that your team follows, facilitating a culture of transparent communication, and understanding that there is room for learning will help teams effectively collaborate while using digital whiteboards. About the Author: Jim Kalbach Jim Kalbach is the Chief Evangelist at Mural, a collaborative intelligence company that offers a shared workspace for training on the LUMA System, the practical way to collaborate that anyone can learn and apply. Jim is an expert in the areas of experience design, visual methods, strategy, and remote facilitation. He is a world-renowned speaker, and author of the following books: the JTBD Playbook, Mapping Experiences and Designing Web Navigation.   To know more about visual collaboration, listen to: Jim Kalbach of Mural on Visual Collaboration. RELATED:   Subscribe To The Newsletter and Killer Innovations Podcast

There's no question that business model innovation is a hot topic in today's business world. After all, who wouldn't want to be the next Uber or Airbnb? But what does it take to create a new and successful business model? It turns out that business model innovation is not just about having a great idea but about execution and timing. It's also about being willing to take risks and experiment. And, of course, it helps if you have a bit of luck. So, what does it take to create a new and successful business model? Let's take a closer look. What is a Business Model? First, let's define what we mean by a business model. A business model is a way a company creates value for itself and its customers. It includes the company's value proposition (the unique selling point that differentiates it from competitors), the channels through which it reaches customers, the relationships it builds with them, the revenue streams it generates, and the costs it incurs. In other words, a business model is a company's framework to generate revenue and profits. To be successful, a business model must be viable, scalable, and sustainable. A viable business model can generate enough revenue to cover its costs and make a profit. A scalable business model can grow to meet demand. And a sustainable business model can be sustained over the long term. Why Do Business Models Need Innovation? There are several reasons businesses need to innovate their models. First, the market is constantly changing, so companies must evolve. Second, technology is constantly changing and evolving, which means that the way businesses operate also needs to change. And third, customers are constantly changing and evolving, so companies need to find new and innovative ways to meet their needs. One will become irrelevant if a company doesn't innovate its business model. Its products and services will no longer be in demand, and it can no longer generate profits. So, it's essential for businesses to continuously experiment with new models to stay ahead of the competition. How to Innovate a Business Model So how can a company go about innovating its business model? There is no one-size-fits-all answer to this question, as every company and industry is different. However, there are some general steps that companies can take to get started: 1. Define your value proposition. What makes your company unique? What do you offer that nobody else does? Figure out your unique selling point and focus on developing products and services that capitalize on that advantage. 2. Identify your channels of distribution. How do you reach your customers? Are there any new or innovative ways you can reach them? Can you use digital channels to reach a wider audience? 3. Build relationships with customers. How can you create loyalty among your customers? Can you create a community around your product or service? Can you find ways to delight your customers? 4. Generate revenue streams. What are the different ways you can make money from your products or services? Can you find new ways to monetize them? 5. Cut costs. How can you reduce the costs of running your business? Can you find ways to automate or streamline processes? Can you outsource tasks or functions that are not core to your business? How Do You Test The New Business Model? Once a company has developed a new business model, it's crucial to test it to see if it's viable, scalable, and sustainable. There are several ways to do this: 1. Pilot the new model in a small market. Testing a new business model in a small market can help you determine if it's viable and scalable. This will help you determine if the new business model is feasible and if it has the potential to be scaled up. 2. Experiment with different pricing models. One way to test a new business model is to experiment with different pricing models. This will help you determine which pricing structures generate the most revenue. You can also try different promotional strategies to determine the most effective ones. And you can experiment with different combinations of pricing and delivery methods (e.g., free shipping) to see which ones are most popular with customers. 3. Use beta testers. Beta testers can be invaluable resources in testing a new business model. They can provide feedback on how well the new model works and offer suggestions for improvement. To find beta testers, you can put out a call for volunteers on social media or your company website. You can also reach out to customers who have previously expressed an interest in your product or service. Make sure to ask beta testers to provide feedback on various aspects, such as the overall feasibility of the model, the customer experience, and the impact on revenue. And be prepared to make changes based on their feedback. 4. Get feedback from stakeholders. When testing a new business model, getting stakeholders' feedback is essential. This includes employees, outside partners, and other key stakeholders. Employees can offer valuable insights into how well the new model works and how it can be improved. They may also suggest how the new model can be adapted to meet the company's needs better. Outside partners can provide feedback on how the new model affects their business and whether they see the potential for collaboration. They may also have ideas for marketing the new product or service. Other stakeholders may have insights into how well the new model works and what changes (if any) need to be made. Gathering feedback from all these stakeholders will help you ensure that the new business model is successful. 5. Monitor results closely. When testing a new business model, it's important to track key metrics, such as sales, profits, customer satisfaction, and engagement. This will help you determine if the new model is successful, needs to be adapted, or should be scrapped altogether. Barriers to Innovating the Business Model When it comes to innovating a business model, organizations face several common barriers. These include: 1. Lack of resources. Developing a new business model can be costly and time-consuming, and companies may not have the financial, human, or technological resources to invest in creating a new model. This can be a significant obstacle for companies that want to stay competitive and keep up with the latest trends in their industry. Without the necessary resources, it can be challenging to come up with a new business model that's viable and scalable. 2. Resistance to change. An organization's resistance to change can be a significant barrier to business model innovation. This is because the new model may be very different from the old one and may not fit with the company's existing structure or culture. If there is resistance to change from within the company, it can lead to conflict and delays in implementing the new model. It can also hamper the company's ability to take full advantage of the new business model's potential. Organizations must embrace change to innovate their business model successfully. This includes being open to new ideas and willing to make changes. 3. Fear of failure. Many companies are reluctant to experiment with new models because they fear failing. They see it as a risk and are unwilling to take that risk. This fear can keep companies from exploring new opportunities and reaching their full potential. There are a few ways to overcome this fear. First, companies must understand that failure is a natural part of innovation. Second, they need to create a culture of experimentation where it's okay to fail. And third, they need to have a clear plan for how they will learn from their failures. 4. Lack of creativity/innovation. Some companies may not have the creativity or innovation skills to develop a new business model. This can make it difficult for them to create innovative solutions that will help them stay competitive in today's market. Without creativity and innovation, companies may be limited in developing new and innovative ideas. If a company lacks creativity and innovation, it may need to invest in training or hiring new employees who have these skills. It's also crucial for companies to create an environment that encourages creativity and innovation. This includes open communication, inspiring new ideas, and allowing employees to experiment. One option is to consider securing the services of an Innovation Agency that can bring innovation skills and expertise to your efforts. 5. Complexity/overwhelming choice. Complexity and overwhelming choice can be a barrier to innovating the business model because it can be difficult for companies to stand out from the competition. To successfully innovate their business model, companies need to create a unique offering that is different from what their competitors offer. However, with so many choices available to consumers, it can be difficult for companies to stand out and attract customers with their new business model. Another challenge that companies face is that the market is constantly changing. What may be popular today may not be popular tomorrow. So, to keep up with the latest trends and stay competitive, companies must continually innovate their business model. This can be daunting, especially if the company lacks creativity or innovation skills. Examples of Business Model Innovation There are a few ways to innovate your business model. You can either pivot your existing model or create a new model altogether. Pivoting your model means changing your current model to make it more effective. On the other hand, a new model is an entirely new way of doing business and may not have anything in common with your current model. Several factors contribute to the success or failure of innovating your business model. Below are a few examples of successful and unsuccessful business model innovations. Successful Business Model Innovation 1. Apple Apple is a prime example of a company that has successfully innovated its business model. They've been so successful that they've created an entire industry around themselves. One reason for their success is that they've always been willing to experiment and take risks. For example, when they first introduced the iPhone, many skeptics didn't think it would be successful. However, Apple overcame these challenges and became one of the world's most popular smartphones. 2. Amazon Another successful company that has innovated its business model is Amazon. They were one of the first companies to introduce online retailing and change how consumers buy products. They've also successfully diversified their business into other areas, such as cloud computing and streaming media. Amazon has stayed competitive by continually innovating its business model and exploring new opportunities. 3. Southwest Airlines Southwest Airlines is another company that has successfully innovated its business model. When they first started, they faced many challenges, such as high operating costs and competition from other airlines. However, they overcame these challenges by introducing low-cost fares and becoming the first “no-frills” airline. This allowed them to compete with the more prominent airlines and eventually became one of the largest airlines in the United States. Unsuccessful Business Model Innovation 1. Blockbuster Blockbuster is a perfect example of a company that failed to innovate its business model when it needed to most. Many don't know that Blockbuster was one of the first video streaming services. It launched in January 2002, but with limited consumer broadband, the market for this business model innovation was way too small to be sustainable, and they gave up on the service soon after its launch. When Netflix introduced online streaming, Blockbuster didn't react quickly enough, given its earlier attempt, and ended up going out of business altogether. 2. BlackBerry Another company that failed to innovate its business model is BlackBerry. When they first introduced the BlackBerry smartphone, it was a revolutionary product that changed how people communicate. However, they failed to keep up with the competition and eventually lost market share to companies like Apple and Samsung. BlackBerry could not adjust its business model quickly enough to keep up with the changing market, so it went out of business. 3. Toys “R” Us Toys “R” Us is another example of a company that failed to innovate its business model. They were the go-to store for toys and children's products when they first started. However, they could not keep up with the times and eventually lost market share to online retailers like Amazon. Toys “R” Us could not adapt its business model to the changing market, resulting in bankruptcy. Surviving and Thriving Business model innovation is a critical component of success for any organization. However, it's not always easy to achieve success. A company must be willing to experiment and take risks to succeed. They must also be able to adapt quickly to changing market conditions. While most organizations think they have the innovation skills and resources in the heat of competitive battle, some organizations cannot maintain the pace of change required to survive and succeed. This is often because they lack the agility to pivot their business model in response to market changes quickly. As a result, these companies find themselves at a significant disadvantage and eventually go out of business. To avoid this fate, companies must continually invest in innovation and ensure they have the necessary resources and capabilities to succeed. Companies can survive and thrive in today's competitive marketplace by constantly pushing themselves to be better.   To know more about business model innovation and agility, listen to: Business Model Innovation – Why Agility Matters. RELATED:   Subscribe To The Newsletter and Killer Innovations Podcast

Sandra Howe, an award-winning technology expert, joins us to discuss the effectiveness of pairing good timing with collaboration. The need for innovators willing to work with each other rather than against is progressing. Thanks to the swiftly changing technology market. The necessity for broadband internet is ever-increasing, especially in recent years, due to people’s increased need for it during and since the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the elasticity of the industry, Sandra stresses the importance of having a hub of innovators to discuss key aspects of leadership, standards, and new technologies. Experimentation and Adaptability The difference between a good idea and a great idea is rarely the idea but rather the timing. Companies often choose the wrong time to release new products or services. Poor timing can be detrimental to a good idea. Paired with having the right timing is engaging in effective collaboration. Having a good team or partnership to discuss and adequately vet an idea or product through trials and experimentation is vital. Using these trials to learn what adjustments need to be made or how consumers react is critical for success. Sandy says that the best way to prepare for the unexpected is to perform trials, listen to consumers, and make the necessary adjustments based on the findings. Being persistent and taking the time to listen goes a long way. Being able to adapt quickly is critical in the changing market. With the constantly changing market, it is incredibly challenging for companies to stay ahead of the curve. Sandra advises innovators to keep things simple, listen to consumers, and be willing to adjust to their demands. About our Guest: Sandra Howe Sandra Howe currently serves as an Independent Director on the Minim board of directors, as well as the Chair of The WICT Network Global Board, the board of directors for NCTA – The Internet & Television Association, and the board of the Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers (SCTE) Foundation as an advisor on the investment committee. Sandra is also a former Technetix EVP. Sandy graduated from Pennsylvania State University and has received numerous industry awards: Cable TV Pioneers, Multichannel News’ Wonder Woman, CableFAX’s Top Women in Technology, The WICT Network Carolinas Carol A. Hevey Leadership Award, and NAMIC Carolinas EPIC in Technology. To know more about innovation timing and collaboration, listen to: Sandra Howe on Innovation Timing and Collaboration. RELATED:   Subscribe To The Newsletter and Killer Innovations Podcast

Benchmarking is the comparing of your organization to others to measure your performance and possibly identify areas for improvement. It has been common practice since the early 1900s. Frederick Taylor, an American mechanical engineer, is credited with coining the term “benchmarking” in his book, The Principles of Scientific Management. Benchmarking enables continuous learning and improvement by identifying those that are having an impact and change and following them. These learnings and improvements can nurture the innovation success of your organization. Benchmarking helps you understand how you compare to others in your industry, making it easier to identify the best practices. For example, benchmarking enables you to identify the companies that use the best technology, the fastest production time, or the lowest costs. Whatever the measurement of success you define in your benchmarking activities, a benchmarking study can help an organization's managers make strategic decisions. It may also provide some insights into where to allocate your corporate resources. A common part of the data that gets collected in benchmarking is headcount. All kinds of weird metrics come out of this, such as dollars per revenue. While this is all good, there are also some challenges that we're going to discuss. In general, benchmarking could prove useful in business units where benchmarking data reveals which competitors are performing better than others. However, before benchmarking, you must first conduct research to know who to benchmark against. You want to benchmark peers that are similar to you. You don't want something unrelated, such as comparing a software company to a steel manufacturer. You want something similar. Similar peers could be in the same industry, have similar sizes, or they could be selling and servicing in a consistent geographic area. It can be tempting to say we want to be more like Silicon Valley. If a restaurant in Milwaukee benchmarked itself against the leading companies in Silicon Valley such as Apple, Google, or HP, that comparison would be meaningless. Benchmarking Failures Benchmarking has been around for quite some time, and it has some strong benefits, but there are bad that can come from benchmarking as well. The key here is that benchmarking can have negative consequences if done wrong. For example, if you benchmark against peers who are poorly chosen, it is not going to work. This can lead to bad decision-making and can destroy organizations. Therefore, it is important to handpick your benchmark peers to get accurate insights. For example, in the late 90s and early 2000s, MCI WorldCom, a major telecom company in the United States, was reporting results far better than any of its peers. AT&T and others attempted to benchmark themselves to find out how MCI could have a such standout performance. This resulted in the industry changing its strategies and its investment models to chase the MCI WorldCom results. While their competitors tried to play catch up, MCI WorldCom continued to report surprising results. That is until authorities revealed that MCI WorldCom was practicing fraudulent accounting practices. They overshowed the revenue streams, and they misallocated expenses to make their results look good. People had made decisions based on a benchmark against somebody who looked like they were performing outstandingly. To compete with how MCI was performing, they changed how they operated. MCI WorldCom eventually went bankrupt, but AT&T survived unscathed. They had size, scale, and all the capabilities. However, others in the industry got trapped in the benchmark. They made bad decisions, just like a company that I was at called Teligent. I was one of the original five founders of Teligent, and we got wrapped up in it. We were a competitive local exchange carrier, or what was called a CLEC at the time. We looked at MCI’s results and wondered how they were able to deliver those kinds of results. We made decisions to try to drive a performance level the same as MCI WorldCom. Eventually, Teligent ended up in bankruptcy, but I was long gone at this point. Because Wall Street was pounding on every telecom company in the industry to reach those same-level results, fast-paced innovation was essential. People made bad decisions because of a bad benchmark, and that bad benchmark was a result of fraud. The Benchmark Trap As a leader, whatever your role may be, odds are one of the big four consulting firms have either approached you, your CEO, or your board of directors to do an innovation benchmark on your organization. If not, count yourself lucky. If you have done an innovation benchmark, you know the nightmare this can cause for your organization. These engagements are all about comparing how an organization's innovations compare to each other’s innovation processes, approach, culture, etc. But why has this become such a hot consulting offer? Leaders in most organizations are feeling very uncertain about innovation. This may be due to their lack of ability to come up with new ideas, or because of their historical inability to implement new ideas successfully. An organization may be able to come up with an idea, but most organizations historically struggle with making those ideas real. How big of a problem is this and what are the consultants zeroing in on? There was a study by the Economist Intelligence Unit that found that only 38% of executives said their organization was, “very good at turning innovative ideas into commercial success”. When these kinds of studies come out, consultants are all over it. They quickly create a consulting service to ‘fix the problem’. The problem is that only 38% of executives feel very good about their ability to turn innovative ideas into commercial success. When leaders benchmark their innovative approach to others, they're trying to benchmark themselves out of uncertainty and into comfort. They're uncertain because they aren't doing very well. They want to see how other people do it which causes them to try to copy the 38% to be successful. This is part of what I refer to as the benchmark trap. A single organization’s benchmarking engagement does not stand on its own because you don't benchmark against yourself. If you benchmark your organization's ability to turn out new ideas into commercial success, you are also benchmarking the quality of your peers who have been benchmarked before. You have to have somebody to benchmark against. This is the service that consultants sell. If you’re company A, and consultants have done a benchmark for Company B or Company C, they’ll do a comparison so you can determine how well you stack up. Leaders are looking for ways to stack themselves up, so they feel comfortable. However, when you benchmark yourself against competitors or industry best practices, the results will be that you become exactly like them in terms of innovation performance. When you benchmark, you're either trying to compare yourself or you're adopting what is viewed as their best practice to you. This drives everybody in the industry to converge towards the mean in results. You're not going to be the leader. You're going to be me too. It's one of the things I always hated when I was in one of the big six consulting firms. I used to run the telecom consulting practice at Computer Sciences Corporation back in the early 90s. One of the things that we sold was benchmarking, but we also did process reengineering, consulting work, etc. We pushed on this concept of benchmarking, and I traveled all around the world and did these benchmarks. While you're selling it to the leaders, the leaders, therefore, get comfortable because they've got a document they can put in front of their board of directors, investors, or shareholders to show they’re just as good or better. As more and more companies within an industry or area focus on benchmarking and adopting best practices, everybody starts to look the same. If Company A has a best practice on innovation, and everybody copies that best practice, assuming that you can copy someone's best practice and be just as effective, you all start to look the same. I think best practices are the stupidest concept ever invented. Over my years of talking companies into doing best practices, I've seen the impact. It makes everybody average, and everybody looks the same. There is no ability to have to stand-up performance when you've adopted the same practices, approach, and strategies as everybody else. No matter how high or how low your original benchmark is, you may have been an absolute leader in sales or innovation if you hadn’t followed other’s benchmarks. The Dangers of Comparison and Comfort Innovation in benchmarking can be a powerful tool. It can bring benefits when done correctly. But it can also lead companies astray if it's not handled correctly. Let’s discuss some of the consequences of innovation benchmarking. Firstly, leaders run unnecessary risks trying to replicate the benchmark results exactly. We find areas where somebody else is better than us which causes us to want to replicate and adapt it. Why is this a problem? Because benchmarking typically involves leaders looking for insights and inspiration from benchmarking peers. The benchmarking experience is often oversimplified down to exactly what people did, how they did it, when they did it, etc. If they don't, it's a black box. It's oversimplified, and it's not enough detail to where you can duplicate it. We tend to focus on why they did all these different things. Firstly, you don't have all the details, because there are things inherently behind the scenes, and secondly, you’re thinking it's a formula. As a result, this can lead companies to take unwarranted financial, strategic, or organizational risks. When you're trying to replicate the benchmark experience of a peer, that experience is often unique to the peer. There's a lot of history in an organization that is not captured in the benchmarking activity. Be careful when leaders run unnecessary risks trying to capture the magic formula of an innovation benchmark. The second consequence is that leaders may benchmark themselves out of uncertainty and into comfort without realizing it. When leaders take benchmarking too far, it leads to what I call the comfort trap. Leaders can miss new opportunities and threats that emerge in the market when they unknowingly benchmark themselves into comfort. While you are looking for insights from your peers, it's important to keep in mind that what works for them, may not work best for your organization. You may have a unique value proposition, a different competitive environment, different costs, or brand equity. Be careful you don’t cherry-pick those things that either make you look the same or slightly better, but no worse than your competitors. The third consequence is that leaders benchmark their competitors rather than taking a fresh look at their innovation approach. This is probably the one that frustrates me the most. I get calls all the time from people who read my book or who have taken the innovation bootcamp, asking why it's not working for them. Be careful, take, what somebody else is doing in the innovation approach is not something you can replicate. They failed to take a fresh look at their innovation approach. They fall into the trap of comparing themselves to others who are not their innovation peers. You want to understand and find people who are innovating, that are similar to you, and not to duplicate or replicate, but adapt to what would work for your organization and your culture. If you're just looking to copy somebody else's innovation process, it will lead to bad decision-making that can destroy your organization. When you benchmark your competition, whether, from other industries, geographies, size, scale, etc., you automatically compare yourself to others who have been successful in completely different strategies for innovation success than yours. Attempting to imitate them will lead to failure. Example: Picking the Wrong Peer Here’s a personal example to drive the message home. When I was CTO at HP, the CEO, Mark Hurd, had a quote that was ingrained in everything the executive team did. “If you stare at the numbers long enough, they will eventually confess”. Mark established a culture he referred to as “extreme benchmarking”. This required every leader at HP to know the key benchmark metrics for each competitor and to have a plan to meet or beat the competitor's benchmark results. There was a lot of pressure from the benchmark numbers being compared to your competitors. If your numbers were not better than theirs, then you weren't running your part of the business appropriately. You had to be prepared to answer a question from Mark, walking down the hall asking, “what were the last quarter's benchmark results for XYZ competitor? And how and what is our current?” It was insane. The result was more than a few poor business decisions on the part of HP. One example that I was directly involved in was the cutting of HP’s investment in innovation and R&D, to match the spending of our Asia Pacific-based competitors. Now, to give you some context, HP was spending roughly 3% of product revenue in the PC group on R&D. This included both consumer and commercial business products. To compare, Apple was spending about 9% of product revenue in the R&D group. The peer that Mark was forcing us to compare against, in our Asia Pacific base competitors, was spending 0.8% of product revenue on R&D. There was constant pressure to cut resources or move things like engineering offshore to get the benchmark closer to our peer. And let me tell you, the pressure was intense. This is the perfect example of picking the wrong peer. In the case of all my conversations with Mark Hurd, it was all about this Asia Pacific competitor. I wanted three times the R&D budget so that I could compete with Apple. That was my logical argument. Mark wanted 3% of my revenue on R&D spent down to less than 1%. I pushed back hard on this approach. My one regret was not pushing back even harder or finding a way to convince Mark and others of the folly of this approach. Now you would think with my role and personal passion for innovation, I would have been able to figure this out. Nope, I failed, and it is one of the few regrets from my time as CTO at HP. Now, whenever someone says the word benchmark, my antenna goes up. Whenever you are thinking about doing any kind of comparison, understand the context of the information. Ask yourself if that somebody or thing is a good comparison. I spent almost 10 years in one of the big six consulting houses convincing others to do benchmarks. I've been on the other side of the table, and I'll be the first to admit, that was bad advice. Given it was the most popular advice, it was the advice everybody was giving at the time. In reality, you cannot just duplicate what somebody else is doing. You have to deeply understand the context behind what you are attempting to benchmark against. Conclusion The best way to avoid falling into the innovation benchmark trap is not to benchmark for benchmark’s sake. Instead of getting caught in this trap, learn from your peers. Don't assume that what worked for them will work for you. You need to have some discernment as to what would work and what to ignore. If you follow blindly, your organization will become average, or worse, will be destroyed. Instead, look at what your peers are doing and ask yourself two questions: “Why are they innovating that way?” and “what can we learn from that approach?”. It is critical to get inside the mind of your innovation peer that you've identified and understand their thought process and discern what of their approach is worth you're experimenting with. Don't adopt at wholesale, find the elements that work and experiment with them. Otherwise, your organization may drive itself right off the innovation cliff.   To know more about innovation benchmarking, listen to: Most Downloaded Show of 2022 – Innovation Benchmarking RELATED:   Subscribe To The Newsletter and Killer Innovations Podcast

Innovation is often lauded as the key to success in business. After all, staying ahead of the competition is hard if you're not constantly coming up with new ideas and ways to improve your products or services. But is every idea you come up with a good thing? Is there such a thing as being too innovative? To keep yourself honest, you may consider appointing a devil's advocate. The Devil's Advocate is a popular movie from the 1990s that tells the story of a lawyer hired to argue against a candidate for a high-ranking position in the Vatican. The lawyer's job is to poke holes in the candidate's qualifications and to find any dirt that might disqualify him. While the movie is fictional, the idea of a Devil's Advocate is accurate, and it's something that companies sometimes use when considering new ideas. The aim is to have someone whose job is to argue against the proposed idea, to improve the idea by making sure that all potential problems with it are discussed and addressed. Definition of a Devil's Advocate The term “Devil's Advocate” comes from the Catholic Church. In canonization, the process of declaring someone a saint, there is a Devil's Advocate (advocatus diaboli) whose job is to argue against the candidate's sainthood. If the Devil's Advocate can't find anything wrong with the candidate, they probably deserve sainthood. Why Companies Use Devil's Advocates There are a few reasons companies might use Devil's Advocates. First, it can help to prevent groupthink. When people work on a project together, they quickly get caught up in thinking that their idea is great and should be implemented immediately. Devil's Advocates can help to forestall this by giving other people a chance to voice their objections and to point out any potential problems with an idea. Second, it can help to ensure that all the stakeholders are on board with a decision. When considering a new idea, getting input from all affected is essential. The Devil's Advocate can help ensure everyone's concerns are considered before deciding. Third, it can help to ensure that a decision is well-reasoned and thought out. When you're considering a new idea, it's easy to get caught up in the excitement of it and start thinking about all of the ways it could be successful. But it's also important to consider all of the ways that it could fail. The Devil's Advocate can help to ensure that you're thinking about both the potential positives and negatives of a decision before making it. The Drawbacks There are a few potential drawbacks to using Devil's Advocates. First, it can lead to decision paralysis. If you're considering a new idea and you have someone whose job is to shoot it down, it's easy to get caught up in all the potential problems and never actually decide to go forward or kill it. Second, it can frustrate the people who are working on the project. If you're constantly being shot down by someone whose job is to find fault with your ideas, it can start feeling like your work is never good enough. Third, it can lead to a negative work environment. If people feel they can't share their ideas without being shot down, they may stop sharing them altogether. This can lead to a work environment where people are afraid to take risks, and new ideas never get a chance to be heard. Overall, there are positive and negative aspects to using Devil's Advocates. It's essential to weigh the pros and cons before deciding whether to use them on a project. How To Properly Use a Devil's Advocate If you decide to use a Devil's Advocate on a project, there are a few things that you should keep in mind. First, it's essential to make sure that everyone understands the role of the Devil's Advocate. The person identified as playing this role should not be trying to kill the idea outright; their goal should be to ensure all potential problems with it are considered. Second, giving the Devil's Advocate enough time to do their job is essential. If you're considering a new idea, you shouldn't shoot it down as soon as someone objects. Take the time to view all the objections and to see if any valid points need to be addressed. Third, it's essential to make sure that the decision-makers are the ones who ultimately decide. The Devil's Advocate can provide valuable input, but they shouldn't be the ones making the final decision. That should be left to the people responsible for implementing the idea. Devil's Advocate as A Passive Aggressive Response When someone starts a statement with “I'm just playing Devil's Advocate,” it is usually a sign that they are about to say something that they know will be controversial. It's a way of trying to distance themselves from the idea in a passive-aggressive way. The problem with this approach is that it rarely leads to productive discussion. The individual will raise objections to an idea, but instead of providing constructive criticism, they will nitpick and try to find fault with everything. The effect is to shut down the conversation because people feel like they are being attacked. It can also make the person playing Devil's Advocate look like they are just trying to be difficult for the sake of it. If you find yourself in discussion with someone playing Devil's Advocate, remind them the role is formal; if they volunteer for it, they need to play by the rules. If they are trying to be contrarian, close down the conversation. 10 Rules for the Devil's Advocate Being the Devil's Advocate can feel like being on a debate team. In debate, you are given a position and must argue for it, even if you disagree. The same is true of being a Devil's Advocate; you have to be willing to take on the role and argue for the other side, even if you disagree. Here are ten rules that will help you be a better Devil's Advocate: Present an argument against a proposal or idea without necessarily believing in that argument. Identify and explore potential problems and objections to a proposal or idea to improve it. Provide alternative perspectives and challenge assumptions. Force people to think about an issue from all sides and consider all options. Encourage critical thinking and healthy debate. Ensure that all ideas are given a fair hearing before making a decision. Act as a check against groupthink, where people agree with the majority opinion. Be open-minded and objective without being wedded to any particular position. See both sides of an argument and understand different points of view. Be willing to change their position if the evidence or arguments presented are compelling enough. Examples of How Devil Advocates Are Used Over the years, many organizations have leveraged the idea of a devil's advocate to improve their decision-making processes. For example, the U.S. military has long used Devil's Advocates to help improve their decision-making. Before a new policy is implemented, they assign someone the role of Devil's Advocate, and their job is to find any potential problems with the procedure. This helps to ensure that they consider the potential risks before they decide. Another example of an industry that uses devil advocates is journalism. They are used to making sure they consider all sides of a story before it is published. This helps to ensure accuracy and avoid any potential libel issues. The legal profession also uses devil advocates. Lawyers will use them to consider all the potential arguments that could be made against their case. This helps to ensure they are prepared for anything that could happen in court. Final Thoughts Just as a church provides a place for people to come together to learn, discuss, debate, and think, so does the Devil's Advocate give space to discuss, discuss, and critically think about an idea. The Devil's Advocate can help improve an organization's efforts by ensuring that all options are considered before any decisions are made. To know more about devil's advocates, listen to: The Devil's Advocate: Is it Good for Innovation? RELATED:   Subscribe To The Newsletter and Killer Innovations Podcast

Here is the last interview from my time at the Cable Tec-Expo Show in Philadelphia. Collin Howlett, the CTO of Vecima, joins us to discuss the acceleration of innovation in the cable industry. Predicting the future grows more challenging as the pace of innovation accelerates. Customers are deploying innovations at faster speeds than ever. Most cable operators are now mobile operators, with their focus fixed on fiber. At CableLabs, we are showing coherent optics at 50,000 gigs over a single strand. While this mind-blowing capacity may not be needed now, it will no doubt be in the future. Hardware to Software With the pace of the broadband industry increasing, necessary transitions are occurring. Engineers must develop a different skill set as the network transitions from hardware to software. This is leading to a shortage of people who understand both software and hardware. Collin emphasized the importance of knowing where to put certain parts of the technology while understanding the software and hardware division. Some hardware has been out there for 30 years, and the companies that created it are now gone. It is valuable to build generic hardware that can be developed over time. It’s vital to make a software from a modular perspective. Many of the technologies deployed today will significantly affect our predecessors. We must think about the unintended consequences of our innovations. Collin believes organizations must consider their innovation’s effects at least 10-15 years into the future. Innovation Culture Collin’s team at Vecima likes to follow what’s happening in other industries, identify what they can take from those industries, and apply them to their own. Due to the pace of innovation, concepts and prototypes need to be spun out much faster than in the past. Decisions need to be made quickly. Collin said it is also important not to get emotionally tied to what you are working on. Being able to pivot rapidly to the next innovation is vital. Automation and AI Many brilliant engineers of our day are retiring, and the question becomes, “How do you capture that expertise?” Collin believes there is value in automating the development of technologies and low-level work through machine learning and AI. While we can capture everything, this could be a way to help bridge the skills gap as we advance. The bottom line is if innovators are not applying machine learning today, they will be left behind. About our Guest: Collin Howlett Colin Howlett is the Chief Technology Officer, joining Vecima in 1997. He is responsible for defining the overall technology strategy at Vecima. He leads a group of product architects who work directly with customers to determine the next generation of Vecima products. Colin has been an active participant in industry standards development within CableLabs and the WiMAX Forum and is currently actively involved in D3.1 and D4.40 initiatives at CableLabs. He holds multiple patents related to his work in cable broadband access systems at Vecima. Colin has a Bachelor of Electrical Engineering degree and a Bachelor of Computer Science degree from the University of Saskatchewan.

A few weeks back, I wrote an opinion piece for The Innovators Network titled, Innovation Hero Worship: FTX, Theranos, and the Media. The core of the article is my belief that the media has a responsibility to not feed into the hero worship of innovation leaders. But there is more to the recent high-profile innovation failures than just the hero worship of founders and CEOs. The announcement of the bankruptcy of FTX and the sentencing of the founder and CEO of Theranos to over 11 years in jail for fraud begs us to look more deeply at the underlying issue of irresponsible innovation. What do I mean by irresponsible innovation? The definition is a bit nebulous and open to interpretation, but generally, it is an innovation that is done with little or no concern for the potential negative consequences of the innovation. In a recent study, most leaders and informed citizens believe that the potential negative impact of an innovation is not something that is ever considered. In their minds, most innovation is irresponsible innovation. There are 5 key contributors to irresponsible innovation: First, there is a failure to consider and improve upon the consequences of an innovation. With innovation, it's important to consider all aspects of the consequences. This includes the positive and negative effects that innovation will have on society. By failing to consider and improve upon the consequences of an innovation, businesses and governments can inadvertently cause more harm than good. Second, there is a lack of accountability and responsibility in the innovation process. Businesses and governments must be accountable for their actions. This means that they must be willing to take responsibility for the negative impacts their innovations may have on society. Without this level of accountability and responsibility, businesses and governments are failing to act in a socially responsible manner. This accountability also needs to include the executives involved. Third, ethical standards are absent when it comes to innovation. Ethics are important in any field, but it is quickly becoming increasingly important in innovation. Businesses and governments must set ethical standards and adhere to them. Without these standards, there is a risk that innovation will lead to greater negative outcomes. Fourth, there is often a lack of transparency and communication about the risks and benefits of innovation. Innovators and entrepreneurs must be transparent and honest about the risks and benefits of their innovations. This includes providing realistic information about how innovation may affect society, as well as any potential solutions for mitigating negative effects. Fifth, there is often a focus on the financial returns of innovation rather than on balancing its societal impact. It's important for businesses, governments, and investors (e.g. venture capitalists) to consider the broader societal impact of their innovations. This means that financial returns should not be the sole focus. We should evaluate both the financial return and impact based on the innovations' potential to improve or harm society. “Just as a car needs both the accelerator and the brake, responsible innovation requires both pushing boundaries and considering the consequences.” Intentional Versus Accidental Not all negative effects are intentional. Sometimes, innovation can hurt society as a result of unintended consequences. Intentional irresponsible innovation happens when companies knowingly take risks and create negative social outcomes. A recent example is Facebook’s conscious decision to prioritize engagement and growth over user privacy. Accidental irresponsible innovation occurs when companies lack the necessary knowledge or resources to fully consider the consequences of an innovation. Unfortunately, these types of mistakes can lead to serious consequences. A recent example is the Uber driverless car that killed a pedestrian. Consequences of Irresponsible Innovation The consequences of irresponsible innovation can be severe and far-reaching. Organizations that fail to consider the potential social impacts of their innovations risk creating serious problems. These could include financial losses, public distrust, and even legal liability. Financial Financial losses due to irresponsible innovation are not just limited to shareholders and investors but can also have consequences on the wider economy. For example, when FTX went bankrupt, it hurt the entire market. Legal and Ethical We must also consider that irresponsible innovation can have serious legal and ethical implications, as seen in the case of Theranos. In this scenario, both investors and consumers were misled about the efficacy of a product and the company, along with the founder, was found guilty of fraud. Public Distrust of Innovation Finally, we must consider that irresponsible innovation can lead to public distrust of innovation. This could mean that people are less likely to embrace new technologies and products, leading to slower economic growth and development. What Can You Do? We must all work together to create a framework for responsible innovation that considers the potential consequences of our innovations and work towards creating a better future for everyone. This will require a firm commitment from all stakeholders to consider the potential consequences of their work. This includes companies, governments, citizens, and the media. Companies Companies must be proactive in identifying and mitigating any negative impacts of their innovations. They must also be willing to take responsibility for these impacts, even if they are not directly responsible for them. How? Articulate the goals and values that will guide responsible innovation Educate the entire team on responsible innovation Invest in tools and processes to measure, monitor, and mitigate the risks of irresponsible innovation Gather input from stakeholders to ensure their perspectives are taken into account Identify potential negative effects of the innovation and develop plans to mitigate them Communicate the plans to stakeholders, customers, and citizens with transparency Governments Governments must create a framework for responsible innovation that considers the potential societal consequences of new technologies and products. This framework should encourage others to act responsibly and provide guidance on how to do so. How? Make responsible innovation part of government policy Consult stakeholders to ensure their perspectives are taken into account Develop policies and regulations that promote responsible innovation Provide incentives for companies to act responsibly and penalize those who don't Monitor compliance with the framework Citizens Citizens must be willing to ask questions about the consequences of innovations and hold all stakeholders accountable for their actions. We must also be open to change, accepting that not all innovations are good and that we need to weigh the costs and benefits of each carefully. How? Ask questions about the expected pacts from an innovation Educate yourself on responsible innovation and be aware of potential negative consequences Advocate for responsible innovation where possible Take part in dialogues with stakeholders to ensure your perspective is considered Support companies, governments, and other stakeholders that are making positive strides toward responsible innovation Media And let's not leave out the role of the media. The press needs to provide accurate, objective reporting on the consequences and impacts of innovations. This is essential for informing citizens and holding companies and governments accountable. How? Provide accurate, objective, and completereporting on innovations Investigate potential negative impacts of new technologies and products Highlight companies or governments that are making positive strides toward responsible innovation Ask questions to ensure all stakeholders are taking responsibility for the consequences of their work Give a voice to citizens who are being affected by irresponsible innovation Examples of Irresponsible Innovations Here are some recent examples of high-profile failures from irresponsible innovations and the lessons learned from each. Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica data scandal: This incident highlighted the importance of data privacy and security, as well as the need for companies to be transparent about how they use customer data. Volkswagen’s emissions-cheating scandal: This case showed how important it is for governments to have strong policies and regulations in place to ensure companies are following the law. Uber’s surge pricing during disasters: This incident showed the need for companies to be aware of their social responsibility when setting prices, and to consider their impact on citizens who are already in vulnerable circumstances. Conclusion Irresponsible innovation can have serious consequences. It's important to take steps toward creating a more responsible system of innovation to avoid potential negative outcomes in the future. Responsible innovation is becoming an essential part of creating a positive future for everyone. If we make sure that businesses and governments take the time to consider the outcomes of their actions, are held accountable for them, and stick to ethical standards when coming up with new ideas, it will be possible to build a more dependable system of innovation. To put it simply, responsible innovation is about considering the human implications of any innovation advancement and striving to make sure that those implications are understood, communicated, and addressed. If we want to make a real difference in the world, responsible innovation must be a priority for everyone. To know more about irresponsible innovation, listen to: Irresponsible Innovation. RELATED:   Subscribe To The Newsletter and Killer Innovations Podcast

This is the third interview from my time at the Cable Tec-Expo Show in Philadelphia. Asaf Matatyaou, the VP of Solutions and Product Management for the Cable Access Business at Harmonic, joins us to discuss AI, data, and innovation culture. Consumer expectations have considerably shifted due to the impact of COVID-19. As a result, the reliability of network connectivity has become paramount. Power usage is another area brought to the forefront of innovation. The cable industry is heavily focused on reducing power usage while improving speed. Green initiatives and power saving, especially with the rising electricity costs, have become motivating areas for today's innovators. Network Virtualization The network is moving from traditional proprietary silicone and hardware stacks into software. As a result, running the network now requires different capabilities. As the cable industry steps into this transition, it is essential to get those with experience comfortable while also allowing them to utilize the newest technologies. AI Automation and the Value Creation of Data Finding the role of AI within networks to create reliability tends to be tricky. One group thinks AI is the most significant new thing, while others think it's evil and dangerous. Asaf believes that there is an excellent opportunity for implementing AI in terms of scale. To unlock this opportunity, organizations must be confident and prove they are getting the correct data. Secondly, they need the right actions for that data. Lastly, they need to train that data continuously. Many organizations overlook the quality of the data they are capturing. When Harmonic started, they put money into every bit of data they could. Over time, they realized the importance of filtering out non-valuable data. It is key to figuring out what data you need, what you can do with it, and how frequently you need it. I believe that if organizations are not thinking of applying AI to their innovations, they will be left behind. Innovation Culture & Collaboration Harmonic collaborates with its customers to pinpoint their desired focus areas and provide actionable solutions. Internally, Harmonic prioritizes having an innovation culture. The organization's leaders encourage experimentation at every level and don't shy away from failure. Every year, they host a two-day ‘Hackathon,' allowing anyone in the organization to develop new ideas. They offer prizes for the top ideas and even implement some ideas into their solutions. To those who have an idea and don't know what to do with it, Asaf has a simple message: Don't waste time talking about it. Just do it, and then learn from it. Fail and then achieve. Check out Asaf's LinkedIn here. Check out Harmonic's website here. About our Guest: Asaf Matatyaou Asaf Matatyaou is Vice President of Solutions and Product Management for the Cable Access Business at Harmonic. Asaf is responsible for product management, strategy, and solution architectures in this role, including Harmonic's virtual cable access solution, CableOS®. Asaf has 20+ years of experience as an engineer and executive in the cable industry, including roles where he led the development of CMTS products and helped drive industry specifications. Asaf earned his BS degree in Computer Science and Engineering from the University of California, Davis. To know more about Asaf Matatyaou and Harmonic, listen to: Asaf Matatyaou of Harmonic on Innovation Culture and AI. RELATED:   Subscribe To The Newsletter and Killer Innovations Podcast

Humans have always been thinkers. From the time early humans began to communicate, they used their brains to figure out how to survive and thrive. Over the years, humans have continued to use their brains to solve problems and create new things. To do this, humans have had to learn to think differently. Interestingly, humans are not the only animals that think. Ravens, for example, are known for being very clever birds. They can solve problems and even use tools. However, humans still outrank all other animals regarding their thinking ability. This is mainly because humans can think abstractly. We can imagine things that don't exist and come up with solutions to problems that don't have straightforward answers. Human versus Computers With thinking, humans and computers have similarities and significant differences. Both humans and computers can solve problems. Although humans are better at abstract thinking, computers are better at logical thinking. Computers can come up with ideas based on logic and data, but they cannot come up with totally new and original ideas. One thing that will always set humans apart from machines is our ability to think creatively and come up with new solutions to problems. Thinking Styles There are two fundamental ways humans think: convergent and divergent thinking. Convergent thinking is focused and goal-oriented. It is suitable for solving problems that have a single correct answer. Most people think in a convergent way most of the time because our schools and workplaces reward people who come up with the one right answer. However, to innovate and create, we need people who can think in divergent ways. Divergent thinking is more open-ended and exploratory. It is good for solving problems that have multiple correct answers. We often use this thinking in creative professions, where people are encouraged to develop new and innovative ideas. Both convergent and divergent thinking are essential. The best way to solve a problem is to use both types of thinking together. Start by using divergent thinking to explore different possibilities to develop new and innovative ideas. Then, by using convergent thinking, you can narrow down your options and find the best solution. Convergent Thinking Convergent thinking is a problem-solving approach that involves generating one correct solution to a problem and creating action plans. Characteristics of Convergent Thinking There are several characteristics of convergent thinking. First, it is logical and systematic. This means that convergent thinkers approach problems step-by-step, analyzing all the data before coming to a conclusion. Second, they are analytical. They like to break down problems into smaller parts so that they can understand them better. Third, they are objective. They make decisions based on facts and data, not emotions or personal opinions. Finally, they are decisive. They know what they want, and they go after it aggressively. Limitations of Convergent Thinking While convergent thinking is an important skill, it has some limitations. First, it can be rigid and inflexible. They often have trouble adapting to new situations or changing their minds once they have made a decision. Second, it can be restrictive. They often focus too much on the details and lose sight of the bigger picture. And finally, it can be boring. It can be repetitive and unchallenging, leading to stagnation and a lack of creativity. Divergent Thinking Humans need people with divergent thinking skills to create and innovate. Divergents think outside of the box and come up with many possible solutions for a problem instead of one good idea like convergent thinkers do; they explore all angles to find something new or different about any given situation which can lead them down paths not taken by others before – essential if we want our world's progress made quickly enough! Characteristics of Divergent Thinking There are several characteristics of divergent thinking. First, it is creative. Divergent thinkers think outside the box and come up with ideas that no one else has thought of before. Second, it is flexible. Divergent thinkers can adapt quickly to new situations and change their minds when necessary. Third, it is open-minded. Divergent thinkers are willing to consider different points of view and explore alternate solutions. And fourth, it is challenging. Divergent thinking can be frustrating because it involves taking risks and stepping out of your comfort zone. Limitations of Divergent Thinking While divergent thinking is essential for innovation, it has its own set of limitations. First, it can be disorganized. Divergent thinkers often have trouble staying focused on one task or goal. Second, it can be undisciplined. Divergent thinkers may start projects but never finish them because they get sidetracked easily. And finally, it can be chaotic. Divergent thinking can lead to confusion and may not always result in a clear solution. Need More Divergent Thinkers Since convergent thinking is the most common form of thinking, we need to expand our thinking styles by building up divergent thinkers. The first step in improving your divergent thinking skills is understanding the different types of divergent thinking. There are ideators, connectors, and analogizers. Ideators come up with a lot of ideas, connectors connect ideas, and analogizers see similarities between ideas. You need to practice and be proficient in all three types to improve your divergent thinking skills. The Ideator To be a successful divergent thinker, you need to be an ideator — the ability to generate new ideas constantly. The best way to do this is to have a tool or method that you can use to stimulate your creativity. It can be any process, approach, aid (e.g., card decks), or tool you find helpful in getting your creative juices flowing. The key is to use the tools to be creative regularly. Don't just use it to develop new ideas for work or school projects. Use it to come up with new ideas for anything and everything. The more you use your ideator skills, the better your divergent thinking skills will become. There are so many ways that you can improve your ideator skills. One way is to practice brainstorming by identifying a daily object like a ballpoint pen and setting an idea quote (e.g., 25) for how many ways you could improve it. The idea quota forces you to brainstorm various ideas, some of which may be far-fetched and beyond the obvious. Still, the important part is that it gets you into the habit of generating new ideas regularly. The Connector The connector skill takes two seemingly unrelated ideas and finds the link. Divergent thinkers need to see the world in terms of connections and can come up with new ideas by linking together different concepts. This results in taking a lot of disparate ideas and finding the common thread that ties them together. The result is ideas that wouldn't have been possible if the thinking was linear. One exercise is to take a problem you are trying to solve and break it down into different fundamental parts. Then, find as many evident and non-obvious connections between those parts. Then take those connections and use your ideator skills to brainstorm more ideas. This will force you to see the problem differently and come up with new ideas that might seem random but could lead to an unexpected solution. The Analogizer The Analogizer is the skill where someone can see the similarities between wildly different ideas. They can take two seemingly unrelated concepts and mash them up. The result is the ability to come up with new and innovative ideas by finding connections between ideas that don't seem to be related. For example, it can take two different industries, companies, products, or services and find as many non-obvious similarities and differences as possible. Then take those and use your ideator skills to brainstorm more ideas. Divergent Thinkers Win The world is full of convergent thinkers. They are the people who work in corporations, follow the rules, and arrive at a single solution. They are good at following instructions and are often praised for their ability to “stay within the lines.” The world also has its fair share of divergent thinkers. They are the people who start businesses, push boundaries, and come up with new ideas. They are often praised for their creativity and innovation. Divergent thinkers are critical to innovation and progress. Corporations rely on convergent thinkers to maintain efficiency and consistency, but divergent thinkers drive innovation and change. Divergent thinkers can see beyond the status quo and develop new ways of doing things. They challenge the rules and find solutions to problems nobody else has thought of. Divergent thinkers help businesses stay ahead of the competition by coming up with new ideas that no one has ever thought of before. They help businesses remain innovative and relevant in today's constantly changing world. As a result, businesses that want to succeed must embrace divergence and encourage their employees to think creatively. To know more about divergent and convergent thinking, listen to: Why Divergent Thinkers Will Always Win. RELATED:   Subscribe To The Newsletter and Killer Innovations Podcast