DMR Article: A Generals Tactics

8/4/2019 DMR Article: A Generals Tactics

1/11

A General's Tactics

What we can learn about innovation management from Robert E.

Lee, Hannibal and Alexander the Great

Published in "Think!", DMR 04/2010

Online:http://www.detecon-dmr.com/en/article/a-generals-tactics_2010_12_16

Clemens Aumann

Jan Steglich

Markus Buchwald

Quickly implementing innovations within an existing organization is

possible even for classically structured telecommunications companies.

Classic telecommunications providers are finding themselves under

increasing competitive pressure in their markets. These providers are

attaching more and more significance to innovations because new ideas and

products serve as a key instrument for the creation of competitive

advantages. These competitive advantages in turn generate the potential for

customer loyalty, increased sales, and premium margins as first movers which

a company must have if it is to be successful in the long term. The results: the

classic telecommunications providers are caught up in intense innovation

competition with one another. The merging of telecommunication and

information technologies continues to advance rapidly and is also allowing

completely new competitors to exercise long-term impact on the rules of themarket.

The winners of this competition will be the companies which have better

innovation management at their disposal. The two essential elements here

are the identification of the right ideas and their subsequent actual

realization within a time period shorter than that achieved by the competitors.

Over the past decades, we have supported and analyzed innovation

management of numerous telecommunications companies. Our experience

shows that the first aspect finding and assessing ideas enjoys a high level

of importance for many companies. As a consequence, the methods and

Published in "Think!", DMR 04/2010 1


2/11

processes used in this area are usually well developed and efficient. The

challenge in business practice is now the actual realization of innovations.

The size of the company and the speed with which innovations are realized

clash in direct causal contradiction to one another.

Analysis of innovation management

Accepting the fact that, in view of the prospects for change in the short term,

the current organizational status is the one we will have to work with, the first

step is to perform an analysis to identify a strategic typology in innovation

management, which stands for various patterns of action. Similarly to a

military situation, the leader here is the representative of his army, which in

terms of innovation management consists of the organization made up of

managers and personnel. The objective is to use these innovation

management types to recognize opportunities and threats and to determine

the implications for further development.

The second focus of the analysis focuses on the risk potential for the

realization of innovations targeted at the customer. These potential risks,

which are a function of the overall organization and over which there is little

control, will be called battlefields in the following as a form of simplification

topics which must be faced in a fight. We will seek to describe measures,

focusing on the special consideration of the innovation culture, the necessary

process landscape, and the distribution of success for an innovation within the

framework of corporate planning. These areas are all genuine classics inlarge companies, and presumably many readers will have already become

acquainted with them:

Anyone wanting to make progress must be successful. So one can say that

there is no such thing as failure. But an important part of a good innovation

culture is learning from failures and handling them with poise.

Large companies need processes which consolidate information for

management. Problems arise when the processes are used as political

instruments to block other departments or topics.

The distribution of success within the framework of corporate planning as an

evaluation system leads to a situation in which everyone wants to be involved

in some way in promising innovations so that he can claim a part of the pie for

himself at a later date. So innovations become increasingly complex and

increasingly comprehensive. As a rule, however, successful innovations have

modest beginnings as small solutions for customers and evolve subsequently

in accordance with customer needs.

Famous generals three types of innovation managers



3/11

Drawing on our project history, we can model three types of innovation

managers, each with varying strategic strengths and weaknesses; analogies

with historical generals will illuminate what is meant here.

Robert Edward Lee (1807 to 1870) was the most successful general in the

Confederate Army during the American Civil War (18611865). His actions

were never anything short of daring, and he never hesitated to take risks.

When on the battlefield, his attacks were energetic and his defense

unrelenting. His soldiers were devoted to him. One special characteristic of

Lees leadership was his method of delegating tasks and putting their

accomplishment fully in the hands of his subordinates.

When translated into innovation management, this corresponds to an open

innovation culture with the chance to respond quickly to new situations. The

risk is found in a tendency to develop its own dynamics which may not run in

conformity with the actual corporate objectives.

Key words for the characterization are flexibility, energetic action on ones

own initiative, persistence, and leadership through delegation.

Hannibal (246 to 183 BC) is regarded as one of the greatest generals of

antiquity. He was noteworthy for his extraordinary perception for military

maneuvers and was prepared to blaze new trails, e.g. crossing the Alps in

winter. From tactically defensive initial positions which he had selected

himself for their superiority, he was able to successfully exploit the

weaknesses of his enemy through the disciplined, concerted, and perfectly

planned deployment of his troops. Hannibal understood exactly, where his

limits were and avoided falling into the trap of arrogance, never making moves



4/11

doomed to failure, such as a siege of Rome.

Translated into innovation management, we have a flexible and tightly

organized innovation culture offering selective opportunities to be faster andmore agile than the competitors because of the level of organization. Danger

threatens from the risk of the growth trap, the possible danger of losing speed

by taking on more and more new tasks and ultimately to be suffocated by

them.

Key words for the characterization are versatility, a defensive basic attitude,

the strategic approach, and discipline.

Alexander the Great (356 to 323 BC) expanded the borders of the

insignificant country of Macedonia and turned it into a world empire. In military

terms, the Macedonian phalanx impressed with its cohesion of the single

corps of troops, who were also unconditionally loyal to him. He was just asunrelenting towards enemies fighting against him as he was merciful to

opponents who surrendered to him, integrating them into his armies.

Alexander was the commander; he did not have a general staff; standing at

his side, but rather a group of experts whose advice he also accepted.

Alexander was a good psychologist and always in the front lines during

battles.

Translated into innovation management, this means a semi-open innovation

culture around a central group of people with the chance to take advantage of

conflicts to strengthen ones own position by means of integration. Risk exists



5/11

based on attrition through conflicts especially when the support at the top

level is lacking.

Key words for the characterization are perfect interaction, willingness to faceconflict, the ability to integrate former opponents and professionalism.

Battlefields three fundamental blocks inhibiting innovation in the

company

In contrast to the innovation attitude and strategy summarized under the

types of generals, there are various inhibitions to innovation arising from the

organization of large companies. These problematic circumstances, whichevery innovation management must basically overcome, will be defined below

as battlefields.The new in the company: anything that is new contains the

seeds of both opportunities and risks. A basic commercial attitude dictates

that threats, for example, must be given significantly greater weight in the

assessment than opportunities. But innovations focus on opportunities and

demand more of a pro-active and positive approach.

Moreover, companies and their organization are complex formations in which

the players have found their niche. One important component is the

predictability of the system. As long as the basic conditions remain constant,



6/11

players can secure and expand their positions. Changes cause additional

work and frictional losses in political power. To the extent that opportunities or

risks of an innovation are not necessarily immediately predictable and cannot

be foreseen until late, the additional work and loss of power for the involvedpeople occur more clearly and rapidly. As a consequence, the classic reaction

is to take an attitude of opposition.Dealing with the fear of the new is a

question of corporate culture and of innovation culture. This culture does not

spontaneously spring into existence; it must develop over time and can

merely be encouraged on part of the company.

Processes, walking the tightrope between the required networking and the

time-consuming inflation of innovations into so-called world solutions:

innovations first appear as small grains, and their realization demands

deliberate growth of the organization. Processes as the necessary

coordination, control, and information links are of key importance, especially

in large companies, for profitable operation. But it is essential, just as it is in

the pharmaceutical industry, to find the right dosage. As the dosage

increases, many processes poison the rapid implementation of innovations

within the company and on the market.

Then there is the problem that generally, processes are very stable over time.

Processes are to some degree like subsidies: once they have been set in

motion, they develop an annoying life of their own which is virtually

impossible to slow down. This is one element where the lever of optimization

can be applied.

The trophy of success: speaking generally, we note that success is usually

attributable to a large group of people. Modern, variable compensation

systems give rise to distribution battles over the planned allocate-able sales

even when an innovation is still undergoing development. Such struggles

dominate the innovation process to such an extent that the innovations

become oriented to the company. If a product appears to be highly promising,

every department attempts to force as many of its own components as

possible into the solution and the product, so that the allocateable share in the

expected income is as high as possible. We cannot even fault the players in

this case for losing sight of the customers during the innovation process

after all, they have acted in line with their objectives!

The fight for turnover even in the development phase gives rise to the

temptation to concentrate primarily on really great innovations which are

expected to bring in high revenues very quickly. The related complexity in the

development of the innovation is in turn detrimental for the parameters risk,

feasibility, and timing.

Detecon Innovation Combat Model



7/11

The organizational challenges caused by innovation require the development

of a holistic strategic approach. The strategy needs to take the contributory

factors characterized above into account. Its implementation needs to be

realized quickly and promise success without bringing with it fundamentalchanges in the corporate organization.

1. As-is analysis identification of what is feasible

The inclusion of the problem situation in innovation management is directed

at giving special consideration to the three areas innovation culture,

processes, and distribution of success, along with their effects on

implementation capability and implementation time. At this time, the questions

of strengths and weaknesses from the internal and external perspectives are

taken into account.

The possible range of changes is determined on the basis of the as-is

analysis and reflected in the various innovation management types. The result

is the potential for a qualitative, quantitative, and chronological improvement

in innovation management.

2. Strategy of the feasible

What can realistically be implemented in view of the political power

structures? The key players needed for the specific changes need to be

identified. In the end, the battlefields are incorporated into a strategicobjective which can realistically be implemented from the companys

perspective.

The strategy of the feasible involves a matching between generals and

battlefields, i.e., between the innovation types in the company and the three

selected leverage points. Leverage effects with varying outlooks for success

can be determined according to the type.

The General Lee type can be especially promoted by changes in the

innovation culture. Moreover, a tight rein must be kept on the processes to

prevent more and more obstacles being placed in the path of what will tend to

be a small, but agile, troop. The success trophy in the sense of a distribution

of success can as a rule be more or less ignored, as it has either already

been distributed or someone else was faster already.

The Hannibal type must be encouraged at all levels to such an extent that, at

a minimum, he abandons his basic defensive approach. This is generally

achieved by removing threats in a broad swath along the way and providing a

balanced relationship among all three of the influential factors.



8/11

TheAlexander the Great type is generally in a position to create the required

innovation culture by himself. Since this situation is dominated by a close

band of conspirators, they must be kept together by a relevant participation of

achieved success. In addition, one must ensure that the conflicts are carriedonto the creative field and do not dissipate in smoke during procedural

arguments.

3. Strategy is nothing without execution the plan of action finally, the

short-term strategic adaptation must move into the implementation phase.

Since one must work with the existing management, organization, and

personnel, it is necessary to maintain moderation so that excessive demands

do not send motivation plunging.

Examples show how innovation management can be optimized

Admittedly on paper, the above outlined approach does not seem to require

more than having Associates A and B trade places and continue the daily

routine. This of course is not the case, as illustrated by the following success

stories, which briefly demonstrate how successful innovations in the

companies have been, seen from the standpoint of the discussed

battlefields. The examples align with the combination of general in the

sense of the innovation management type and the well solved problem

circumstances, the battlefields.

In our first example, an innovative employee, a General Lee type, fights foran idea the yellow notes, better known as Post-it Sticky Notes from 3M

which he is able to realize because of the outstanding innovation culture in his

company. More than 20 years ago, 3M developed a new adhesive which was

supposed to be able to stick almost any two materials together. The result

was a glue which stuck everywhere, but which unfortunately could also be

pulled away easily. Without a practical application, the development was a

flop. Thanks to the 3M innovation culture, which makes all developments

whether positive or negative available to all of the corporate units, word of

the innovation flop spread throughout the enterprise.

Arthur Fry, a 3M employee and choir singer, needed removable singing

entrance signals for the voices in the choir, but it had to be possible to remove

them easily from the song score. He obtained some of the glue from the 3M

lab and applied some to a small piece of paper. Then he tried the adhesive

note on the song lyrics and laid the cornerstone for success. He sent samples

of his invention as removable bookmarks to the responsible people at 3M.

However, they used the notes to leave behind short messages for their

colleagues. The actual basic idea behind the later Post-its developed from this

use.



9/11

During a product test, it was determined that users did not become convinced

of the value of the product until they actually started using it. A small city in

Idaho/USA called Boise was occupied by the massive sales power of the 3M

corporation all of the banks, businesses, and companies received ademonstration of the product and samples were distributed everywhere. The

strategy was so successful that in the 1980s the Post-it Sticky Notes were

introduces to market in the entire USA. Today, 3M Post-its are in the top ten

of the most successful office products and demonstrate how a revolutionary

innovation can result from a failed experiment.This example simultaneously

illustrates the potential for three decisive optimizations in innovation

management.

First, the open utilization of research results, even those which are

unsuccessful, pays off by itself with respect to innovation culture. Openness

alone contains unsuspected potential in view of the background that the

communication of mistakes helps to prevent their repetition in the future.

Second, the support of innovation activities of individuals impacts the

innovation philosophy as a whole. Who could be expected to know the

addressed customers and markets better than the companys own staff? Not

every company succeeds in this area. And third, there is potential for

optimization in the area of process innovation. The processes, in our example

sales, are oriented to the innovation, not vice-versa. In many instances,

however, the question as to whether the product fits the line is given greater

consideration than the question as to whether the product fits the customer.

The second example is tailored more to all innovation management types

and describes an approach which creates room to breathe in an existing

process landscape. When we look at process landscapes in companies, two

things are especially striking. For one, processes, once they have been

installed, continue to run on and on, just like subsidies. For another, the

re-engineering of the processes in reality always results in a higher level of

complexity. It is possible to take a greenfield approach to solving this problem,

one which can be transferred effectively from the following architectural

example to procedural reality.

When a new campus is built on a green field, the usual plan is to draw the

plans for the paths among the various buildings in advance. At this time, the

placement of the paths, their width, and other details are determined.

Additional paths may possibly be added at a later time, and spontaneous

paths are created. However, the original path system remains in place;

unused paths are never removed.

A different approach is to start by erecting all of the buildings on a green field.

After a certain time, one can easily see where useful paths have developed



10/11

and determine the necessary width on the basis of frequency of use.

Processes can be handled in a similar way; after all, they are nothing other

than the paths between the various actors in a company. In this case, it is notnecessary to do away with all of the processes nor is this really possible

from a controlling viewpoint. It is sufficient to retain the key processes and for

the company to learn from the spontaneous process formation.

In our third example, an innovation manager of the Alexander the Great type

is able to create an organization within the organization. He is strong enough

to maintain firm control of the process. The example is oriented to the skunk

works, a synonym for specialized development teams which work

autonomously with minimized interfaces to other corporate divisions. The

expression Skunk Works was coined by workers at the American aircraft

builder Lockheed Aircraft during the Second World War. When the German air

force began using jet fighter planes, the American military asked the aircraft

builder Lockheed for development support.

Lockheed responded quickly with a secret development team which was

isolated and able to concentrate fully on the specific task. The employees in

this project were not even allowed to tell others the name of their department.

The name of this organization form was taken from the company name of a

popular comic, Skonk Works. Lockheed turned this into the name Skunk

Works for the development department because the name from the comic

was copyrighted.

Lockheed succeeded with this type of development team. The first American

fighter jets were developed, as were various espionage aircraft subsequently.

In the meantime, this recipe for success has been used in many different

industries. Technology companies such as Apple, IBM, Compaq, and 3M are

especially active in deliberately using skunk works as development

accelerators. Skunk works are not necessarily set up under the protection of

the most high; often they function as departments without a specific

responsibility in the company. The results are close-knit, product-oriented

teams made up of technological and market-oriented specialists. Remarkable

success stories such as the Bluetooth technology can be found coming from

work groups collaborating on the skunk works principle in many industries.

According to a study conducted by the Stockholm School of

Entrepreneurship, the creation of skunk works is rewarding especially for

companies which would otherwise not be in a position to stay on top of market

developments due to their bureaucracy and hierarchy.

All three examples illustrate how innovation management can be radically

affected in a relatively short time through optimal interaction among the active



11/11

innovators in the company and coordinated measures.

Even if not every reader of this article invents yellow notes, builds espionage

aircraft, or re-plans path networks, you will likely have asked yourself, whetheryou are more the Lee, Hannibal, or Alexander type. This is also the idea of

this approach: To recognize your own organizational spectrum. Recognition is

followed by execution, and the point is to conduct measures optimizing

success based on your own possibilities.

Clemens Aumann

Clemens Aumann has been advising IT and telecommunications companies

worldwide since 2001. The focus of his consulting activities is on the

marketing of IT and telecommunications services. He supports his clients in

both the optimization of their market development and in trailblazing strategy

developments. At the moment, his attention is directed to the development of

VoIP strategies for mobile network providers and of sales strategies for Next

Generation Networks.

Jan Steglich

Jan Steglich is a member of the Strategy & Innovation Group in Detecon's

Silicon Valley Office in San Francisco, California. He is also a member of the

Mobile Internet Center of Excellence. He was awarded a Masters degree in

International Business by the Leopold-Franzens University in Innsbruck,Austria. His prior work in the cloud computing/software as a service (SaaS)

industry was focused on sales partnership and sales channel creation. His

current work focuses on best practices in products and services launch

management and on innovation strategies for future telecommunications

networks.

Markus Buchwald

Markus Buchwald is Senior Consultant in the Group Sales and Distribution.

The focus of his activities is on innovation management, Triple Play, and the

development of business models and business cases. During the past nine

years, he has successfully developed and implemented these topics while

serving as project manager on numerous consulting projects.


Documents

DMR Article: A Generals Tactics