- Mobile users 'more likely to be struck by lightning' than infected by malware
- Government-private sector collaboration vital for cyber security: Brandis
- Talking ’bout my generation – the next wave of infosec
- Australia's online ads less fraudulent but lower quality than elsewhere
- Project Fi will help Google amass even more data about you
How does your business manage innovation risk?
Does your business pay people to succeed, or does it pay them to not fail? Do you know the difference?
Have you ever done something that didn’t work and said to yourself: “well, I won’t do that again”. How does this feeling compare to the moment when you realise a big project or task isn't going to work and you will have to take responsibility?
In the first instance, did you ever stop to ask yourself why you even decided to do it that way in the first place?
If you stop to think about it, you’d realise that you probably had a hunch, or theory, about how to solve the original problem. What did you do immediately after you said “I won’t do that again”? There’s a good chance you came up with another hunch to solve the problem that may or may not have worked. Either way, you probably kept doing this until the issue was resolved.
This process is probably very different to the approach you use on big projects and tasks, where you have project schedules and "if this, then that" risk management plans.
But should it be?
One of the risks of innovation is the time it takes; another is the resources we consume while doing it. Another is miscalculating the market or making assumptions that prove to be false.
While it would be great if there were a way to cut straight to the end point where we worked out how to innovate without failing, realistically this is almost never going to happen, and even if it did, the solution will probably not represent the best possible outcome anyway.
These ‘failures’ are an integral part of the innovation process because they show us something we didn’t previously know. It might be a consumer insight, knowledge of how people use processes we create, or an awareness of system and technology limitations that prevent it being used as designed. Regardless of the ‘failure’, its usefulness cannot be underestimated, and designing overly conservative risk management plan can prevent this knowledge ever emerging.
What makes failure acceptable is its context. Previously we discussed determining experiments to test if an idea will work. These ‘tests’ are like the hunches we use for simple tasks and are a better way to manage innovation risk than using “if this, then that” risk management plans. Experimentation is the key to science, and integral to how we live our lives; innovation is no different.
Does your company use risk management plans? Do they help or hinder the innovation process? Could they be done a better way? For a more detailed look at some of the problems risk management plans create, check out the Paradox of Innovation & Risk Management blog.
- Check out the NEW f5 Resource centre | New content, infographics, white papers and research
- Transition to the Agile Data Centre. Partnering with innovators to drive business and IT forward.
- Only Citrix securely delivers everything you need for a truly mobile workspace wherever you go
- AusCERT2015 | st-5th June 2015 | Hear from Brian Krebs, Eva Galperin and Bruce Schneier - New registration packages
- IN PICTURES: RSA Conference 2015, San Francisco, April 20-24 (+37 photos)
- Technology investment in SMEs set to escalate in 2015: Robert Half
- Bulletproof increases focus on southern region in Australia with new senior hire
- EXCLUSIVE: Huawei and iCITA - a partnership cemented in the datacentre
- HP nabs Randstad most attractive employer in ICT award
- Microsoft's retail store a step forward in building immersive lifestyle experience, says brand expert
- Twitter boosts beacon technology with investment in Swirl Networks
- NetSuite to acquire Bronto's digital marketing platform for US$200m
- Beacon trial aims to engage Sydneysiders with new World War II sculpture
- MCG rates success of beacon trials for customer engagement