Is organizational structure the secret to innovation?

secret to innovation
Written by ARN Expert

While most firms recognize the value of innovation, only a small number of them devote resources to building frameworks or developing reward systems that are based on originality. Numerous CEOs are also confronted with the truth that culture promotes innovation, which is tough to monitor and regulate.

As explained in his book Loonshots: How to Nurture the Crazy Ideas That Win Wars and Cure Diseases and Transform Industries, biotech entrepreneur Safi Bahcall argues that organizational structure is more important than any other factor in the development of innovative ideas. According to Bahcall, the goal is to create a system that inspires and incentivizes people to pursue “longshots,” which are crazy ideas that have the potential to lead to huge breakthroughs in science and technology.

Changing the brand and involving new customers are two important goals.

A media and consumer research company is experiencing a significant transformation in terms of how it works, how it markets itself, and how it connects with customers. Rather than rethinking all operations, it is concentrating on eight core annual operational objectives that are linked with its new strategy and are being implemented by cross-functional teams. As they “test and learn” new concepts, these teams may decide to change their composition and focus as a result of their experiences.

Linkages for Economic Development and Innovation

Businesses and consumers across sectors may benefit from the solutions developed by a high-tech Software as a Service (SaaS) company. An open office environment, a collaboration lab, and an annual week-long software development innovation challenge are all features of the company’s headquarters. Instead of overhauling the present organizational structure, the leadership team implemented a recent restructure that was only focused on the creation of new connections between existing systems.

Marketing and innovation capabilities to drive business growth

The expansion of global building materials and engineered products companies has been refocused after a protracted period of consolidation and operational efficiency. To increase marketing capabilities across the organization, it developed a linking group comprising marketing, information technology, strategy, and innovation executives, and it revamped its leadership development processes to nurture growth skills throughout the organization.

Archetypes of Innovation and Structural Innovation

The organizational structure of a firm has an influence on its management choices as well as its market potential. When a framework is built in such a manner that people feel inspired and valued, it is possible that innovation performance will increase as a result of the high level of recognition and support that employees get from management.

This merely suggests that modifying organizational structures may be beneficial to the success of innovation, especially in specialized product markets, as previously stated. This, on the other hand, may limit a company’s ability to expand into other areas of competence.

Archetypes of Innovation and Structural Innovation

When a company’s strategy and organizational structure are combined, the company’s competitive edge may be identified. Innovating corporations push the boundaries of what is possible by overcoming technological and economic constraints and producing unique organizational talents that are difficult to imitate in other organizations.

Structure with a plethora of subdivisions

Divisions under the leadership of presidents are common in many big organizations, including Johnson & Johnson, General Electric, and American Telephone and Telegraph (AT&T). Johnson & Johnson provides divisional executives with the freedom to manage their respective companies independently. Managers may be able to develop a stronger connection with their markets if they take on extra responsibilities, which is a big benefit of this organizational structure. A multi-divisional structure often referred to as M-Form, is advantageous for companies that compete on the worldwide market. Some of these businesses have a parent company that just provides finance to its divisions or independent profit centers, enabling those organizations to develop their own business strategies.

The Organizational Structure of the Group

In organizations where teams perform independently to accomplish common goals, a traditional chain of command in which supervisors monitor all job tasks isn’t necessary. Software engineers, for example, may divide a project into teams of workers who each contribute their area of expertise without necessarily reporting to a manager, but team supervisors are common in large corporations and government organizations. Gathering a large number of innovative thinkers may result in “out of the box” ideas that would otherwise be ignored by executives who adhere to unchallenged corporate traditions, according to one study. When Starbucks organizes cross-country team field trips to its locations, with the goal of inspiring employees to learn from the customer experience, teams may be able to contribute to the company’s unified spirit.

The Project’s Organizational Structure

A major organization engaging in ongoing efforts may be able to strengthen its culture by bringing varied department leaders together in a physical location. To ensure that BMW’s groundbreaking automobile design ideas are coordinated, the company’s members are relocated to its FIZ research center for three-year periods. The face-to-face collaboration of engineers and marketers speeds up communication and reduces the likelihood of late-stage conflicts. This brainstorming method, referred to as “cross-functional interaction,” has the potential to shorten project timelines from years to months or even weeks. Some firms work on a number of projects at the same time in order to allow executives to choose the most promising product launch opportunities.

The Matrix’s Organizational Structure

Matrix structures are used by project managers to bring together specialists from inside and outside their organization in order to work on a wide range of projects. Similar to how Procter & Gamble reorganized their research department to incorporate collective ideas from across the world in order to generate new products, the concept may be broadened to include outsourcing expertise. Using scientific networks, the firm has produced new professional titles, such as “technology entrepreneurs,” who search universities and other labs for new scientific discoveries by integrating with scientific networks, among other things. In order to support outside inventors in the development of new goods, 3M, a manufacturer of magnetic tape, and many other technology businesses provide financial incentives to them.

Leave a Comment