However, somehow in the midst of ‘doing’, firms often can’t define or emphasise their competency in such ways that it would give them competitive advantage in the market. To improve the competitive advantage, we suggest to clients to look into three areas of strategic planning. The firms’ core competencies need to be identified, Market trends to be scouted for and competitor intelligence need to gathered to arrive at meaningful strategic planning outcomes.

This is where we ask- who is doing it? In smaller firms, marketing is often understaffed or not at all present. Increasing organisational capability is becoming vital if any firm wants to grow or expand. How would you know that your invested dollars are giving you return? The role of marketing in your organisation needs to be seen clearly. We encounter very different types of marketing personnel in organisations, not always with the set of skills required to identify competitive advantage for the company. In our upcoming posts, we will discuss some of the different ‘marketer types’ we think of.

Picasso (1907) Source: Wikipedia

Richard Ogle described how Picasso came to paint ‘the first real masterpiece of the 20th Centrury’, the Les Demoiselles d’Avignon. In his book ‘Smart World‘ Ogle argues that there is no such thing than the lonesome Genius who came up with the idea overnight.

Regardless of profession or calling, Ogle argues, that humankind has a collective consciousness in which trailblazers like Picasso delve to retrieve their ground breaking ideas. Picasso is quoted in referring to African art for the inspiration of this painting.

By thinking outside the brain and tapping into the extended History and wealth of experience of the extended Mind (Ogle 2007, 10) we see how all great inventions actually came to be. Think of the internet itself- Wikipedia is just one example of such an extended external brain in action.

It is interesting to look at intangible assets in firms that way. Perhaps intangible assets (Intellectual Property, Trademarks and Patents) and their nature of ’suddenly leaping onto stage’, thus ‘disrupting the status quo’ are just an expression of where we are going as a human society. Look closely and we can see how the collective conscious is opening up individual creativity, for example with the ‘Open Source’ concept.

Not one company can claim to ‘own the ideas’ since everything is connected through history, material, memory. This is a scary thought for economists and accountants alike. Yet, this disruptive idea space (Ogle) was first named by Schumpeter as prerequisite to entrepreneurship.

The intangible is quickly becoming a new stage of consciousness, a way forward to the next new thing. It is true that our current Western business models  can’t put a price tag on it- which I assume means ‘making the intangible tangible’ in current economic thinking. If the summary of collective social networks are actually creating the new value in our economies than it is time to investigate the consistency of this mix instead of denying its contribution to firm assets as not quantifiable.

Consensio: We both agree that creativity does not need innovation but innovation does not happen without creativity. You are challenging people in organisations to think outside the box, (thus to become more creative). How do you teach them to go beyond creativity?

Kevin Carroll: I define innovation as something that is new and different AND THAT ADDS VALUE. If it doesn’t add value, then I classify it as simply creativity. If the idea can increase someone’s pleasure (make you more productive, gain you more respect, create more revenue, build your awareness in the marketplace) or decrease their pain (lower your stress, help you lose weight, save you time) then it’s adding value which means it’s innovation.

Consensio: What made you realise this is an organisation issue and what are you doing as a consultant to address that?

Kevin Carroll: Everybody is constantly talking innovation, innovation, innovation..or they use the cliché: “Think Outside the Box.” But I realized that no one teaches people how to do it. It’s nice talking about it, but you have to know how to execute the process.  Also, Breakthrough Thinking needs to be fostered throughout the organization and rewarded…I show them how to do that, too.

Consensio: Are you confronted by some organisational members (eg accountants and CFO’s) who don’t think workshops and courses are money effectively spent? How do you counterbalance these barriers?

Kevin Carroll: I show them my case studies to prove the ROI.

Consensio: Do you use your own problem solving techniques? when do you catch yourself not using them effectively?

Kevin Carroll: Yes, I use my own problem solving techniques and I use some that have been around for centuries. The key is that we all need to build the habit so that we use them automatically. I catch myself getting stuck frequently and I have to consciously apply the techniques.

Consensio: If you could wave a wand and creativity would become the natural tool for organisational problem solving, would we automatically build better products and services?

Kevin Carroll: Yes we would, because we would have a clearer understanding of what the underlying problem really is and we’d be able to fix it. The biggest challenge with being more innovative is that people do not define the problem clearly!!! They state it in vague terms and they then they go about trying to solve it. You’ll get nowhere doing it this way.

Consensio: Would more or just different types of consumers and clients buy them?

Kevin Carroll: Both.

At its heart, creativity is simply the production of novel, appropriate ideas in any realm of human activity, from science, to the arts, to education, to business, to everyday life. The ideas must be novel–different from what’s been done before-but they can’t be simply bizarre; they must be appropriate to the problem or opportunity presented. Creativity is the first step in innovation, which is the successful implementation of those novel, appropriate ideas.

In this paradigm that means, that one can be creative and leave it at that- creativity is only the beginning of what is maybe an implementation of a new idea.  Therefore the often unspoken expectation in organisations to introduce more ‘freedom and courses to express creativity’ may lead to disenchantment down the track when the playful creativity has not lead automatically to ground breaking new processes and practices. Perhaps we have to acknowledge that innovation needs creativity, but that in return creativity does not need innovation.

He observed, that firms were not static output-restrained entities, but that their interactions with the market were of interest and impact to the whole economic system. He noted the cost of resource investment as barrier to firm imitators.
Yet he also reflected, that copycats would always exist in markets. New ways of doing business could produce above normal returns on investments. And Schumpeter concluded that exogenous disruptions are vital to “creative destruction”. In his observation, at the core of the firm was the entrepreneurial vision. Creating or adopting innovations would give firms the necessary competitive advantage.

His work is giving intangible asset creation, firm theory and the processes necessary for creation new integrative meaning. To put it simple; questioning the status quo may give an advantage to innovation in firms, however healthy earnings could also result from less ‘disruptive’ innovations.

…In dealing with capitalism we are dealing with an evolutionary process… (1942).

>>…is the process of converting knowledge and ideas into better ways of doing business or into new or improved products and services that are valued by the community. The innovation process incorporates research and development, commercialisation and technology diffusion. www.smartstate.qld.gov.au/strategy/strategy05_15/glossary.shtm

…a newly introduced practice or method intended to improve the current practice
www.mywhatever.com/cifwriter/library/66/4620.html

…introducing an object as if it were new.
oregonstate.edu/instruct/anth370/gloss.html

…Innovation is the process that translates knowledge into economic growth and social well-being. It encompasses a series of scientific, technological, organisational, financial and commercial activities. Research is only one of these activities and may be carried out at different phases of the innovative process.
www.arc.gov.au/general/glossary.htm

…All innovation begins with creative ideas . . . We define innovation as the successful implementation of creative ideas within an organization. …<<
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation

…Innovation in Organisations – assisting our Clients in identifying and managing innovation opportunities within their organisation.<<http://www.business.curtin.edu.au

Ambler & Neely (2007) pointed out that Marketing already has a robust platform as market connector and that therefore, cashflow forecasting and brand equity are indeed viable ‘measurable intangibles’ for ‘narrative accounting’ practices.

I think you agree, that the ‘innovation’ buzzword is another example of the ‘intangible asset’ murkiness which is lurking underneath the accounting and business process surface. What’s your ‘innovation’?