By Saul Kaplan, on Mon May 26, 2014 at 8:30 AM ET  Innovators leap across learning curves exploring new ways to deliver value the way Tarzan swung from vine to vine across the jungle. Innovators thrive on the steepest part of the learning curve where the changing rate of learning is the greatest. Watch how innovators manage their careers and lives. They always put themselves on a steep learning curve. I know I always have. Staying on a steep learning curve is the most important decision criterion for any career decision an innovator makes. Along the way innovators make many career moves none of which are primarily about titles, offices, number of direct reports, or money. Innovators believe those things are more likely to happen if they keep themselves on steep learning curves. Every choice to take a new tack or direction is about the next learning curve. Innovators are self aware enough to know they do their best work while learning at a rapid rate and are bored to tears when they aren’t. Steep learning curves matter most.
I have known many people who sacrificed learning curves for money and other extrinsic rewards and in the long run most ended up unhappy. In my experience innovators who follow their passions and are in it for the learning always end up happier and making more money anyway.
The tricky part for innovators is to know when to leap from one learning curve to the next the way Tarzan traversed vines to move through the jungle. Innovators get restless when any curve starts to flatten out. Instead of enjoying the flat part of the curve where it takes less effort to produce more output, innovators get bored and want to find new learning curves where they can benefit from a rapidly changing rate of learning. If the goal for innovators is to get better faster the only way to accomplish it is to live on the edge where the knowledge flows are the richest. It isn’t the most comfortable place to be. It’s understandable most suffer the pain of the steep part of the learning curve, not for the kick of learning, but to finally reach the flat part of the curve. No urgency to move to another curve once the plateau is reached. It is comfortable on the flat part of the curve where the workload lessens and rewards are only available to those that have paid their dues and put in the time to climb up the curve. Yet innovators seem to extract what they need from the steep part of the curve and leap off to do it again moving on to the steep part of the next curve just when the effort required to further climb the current curve gets easier.
Read the rest of…
Saul Kaplan: Innovation Lessons From Tarzan
By Saul Kaplan, on Mon May 19, 2014 at 8:30 AM ET  Nooks and crannies are important to both English muffins and innovation.
I haven’t been able to get a picture of a lightly toasted Thomas’ English muffin with butter and strawberry preserves oozing into those marvelous nooks and crannies out of my head. Maybe it’s because I’m resisting the temptation while on one of my frequent short-lived diet and exercise delusions. More likely it’s because of a story that caught my eye last week about an executive who left the company (Bimbo Bakeries, I’m not kidding) that makes Thomas’ English Muffins to join the arch enemy, Hostess Brands. It seems that Bimbo is suing to prevent the executive from joining Hostess because they suspect he has absconded with and will divulge the secret of how to make English muffins with perfect nooks and crannies.
You heard right. The row is about protecting the trade secret for creating nooks and crannies in an English muffin. Bimbo claims there are only seven people who possess the trade secret and of course the executive leaving to make Twinkies is one of them. I find it hard to believe that only seven people have the know-how necessary to create great nooks and crannies. It sounds more like a marketing ploy. But what do I know. I thought it was just using a fork to split the muffin! Think about it. Samuel Bath Thomas left England headed for America in 1874 with a recipe for his muffin baked on hot griddles. Surely in over 135 years more than seven people have accumulated the know-how for nooks and crannies. And how are we to know if Samuel Thomas didn’t borrow the formula before heading for fame and fortune in America. Not to accuse Samuel Thomas of pilfering the recipe and starting an English muffin revolution but it does sound eerily similar to Samuel Slater escaping England with the trade secrets for the textile mill, which of course started the U.S. Industrial Revolution!
No surprise that nooks and crannies are the secret to a great English muffin. Those air pockets allow for both perfect toasting and a natural repository for the aforementioned butter and jam. So Bimbo Bakery goes to incredible lengths to protect its know-how. Instead of recipes they use codebooks. Employees are on a need to know basis and only have access to the pages of the codebook necessary to complete their specific task. They are shielded from the information and people in departments working on other tasks. It doesn’t sound like a formula for innovation but then maybe Bimbo isn’t interested in innovation. Perhaps they are just obsessed with protecting the status quo for the nooks and crannies of English muffin making.
Nooks and crannies are also the secret to great innovation. Innovators thrive in nooks and crannies and refuse to stay in any silo barred from communicating across them. They know freely exploring nooks and crannies is the only way to get better faster. Nooks and crannies increase the surface area an innovator can expose to the best knowledge flows and new ideas. With more surface area comes greater exposure to and absorption of a broader range of ideas, experiences, and capabilities. A thoughtfully comprised network of unusual suspects increases an innovator’s surface area. Social media platforms are just nooks and crannies on steroids to an innovator.
Innovators also know that most important innovations emerge from the nooks and crannies between silos, disciplines, and industry sectors. It is by combining and recombining ideas and capabilities from across silos that innovators create new ways to deliver value. System solutions for the big social challenges of our time including education, health care, and energy, will only be found if we get more comfortable in the nooks and crannies between us. Pass the strawberry preserves.
By Saul Kaplan, on Mon Apr 7, 2014 at 8:30 AM ET  Here’s the thing about toothpaste tubes. You can squeeze all you want on one part of the tube and the toothpaste will only pop up in another part of the tube. Many of today’s important systems operate much the same way.
The big challenges we face today including health care and education are systems issues that require systems solutions. These systems have evolved over a long time and are well intentioned. Players in the system work hard year after year to deliver value, improve their position, and create sustained incremental improvements. It is not enough. We need new toothpaste tubes. We can’t fix these system issues by squeezing harder on different parts of the tube. We need to design and experiment with new system level solutions.
Everyone loves to point fingers at the other players in the system as the cause of the problem. Health care is a classic example. Observing our health care system today is like watching an intense rugby scrum that is moving in slow motion hoping the ball will pop out. Finger pointing and incessant public policy debates galore. We love to admire the problems: It is the cost of drugs that is killing us. It is the high cost hospitals that are the problem. It is the insurance companies that are in the way of change. Doctors are the ones who are resisting change. If only the government would get its act together. If only patients would take more responsibility for their care. It goes on and on.
In education, the same movie is playing with different actors. It’s the unions that are getting in the way. Teachers are resisting change in the classroom. Administrators don’t understand what is going on in the classroom. Parents are not engaged. Public policy makers can’t make up their minds. If only private sector companies were more engaged. Students are unruly, undisciplined, and disrespectful. Everyone is blamed and nothing changes.
I’m not a cynic. I’ve seen and participated in many innovative initiatives that are trying to create systems-level changes within healthcare and education. And some of them have indeed succeeded in creating incremental value. But where are the disrupters? Where are the systems-level game changers? The problem is that great ideas coming from one silo are tried but quickly bump into the other silos and constraints of the system. Promising new solutions squeeze on one part of the toothpaste tube only to learn that when you squeeze on one part of the tube it just pops up in another. We need safe environments to design and experiment with new toothpaste tubes or systems.
The student and the patient should be at the center of our redesign efforts in education and health care. We need to experiment at the systems level, trying new approaches to see what works. For instance, we’ve proven that innovation works at the school level with hundreds of successful charter schools across the country. Now we need to experiment at the district level to test new student centered system approaches that are not constrained by the way the current system operates. That is the only way we are going to learn what solutions can deliver value to the student at scale. The same thing is true in health care. We need to design and test patient centered system approaches that are more about well care than about sick care. We can’t get there by playing at the margins of today’s system. Squeezing today’s toothpaste tubes harder will not work.
By Saul Kaplan, on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 8:30 AM ET Everyone bows down to the all, important benchmark. How many times have you heard someone say, “You only get what you measure”? Most organizations commit to identifying and measuring performance against industry best practice. Many have recognized the value of looking outside of their industry for practices that might provide a source of competitive advantage. Adopting existing best practice makes sense if you want to improve the performance of your current business model. Going beyond the limits of your current business model requires a network-enabled capability to do R&D for new business models. The imperative is to build on best practices to explore and develop next practices.
Understanding best practices and applying them to increase business model productivity is an essential capability for all organizations. No surprise most companies benchmark their performance adopting practices ranging from accessing benchmarking data to sourcing (internal and external) process improvement capabilities. Like all learned behaviors the earlier it is adopted the easier it is to scale and to apply in other markets. Entrepreneurs and small business leaders should start with a back of the napkin approach. Be specific about goals and take the napkin out a lot.
It doesn’t take long to exhaust the library of best practices in any given industry. Field organizations have seen most of what the competition is doing and can report their observations. In addition your customers and networks have an important perspective that should be tapped. Social network platforms, like Twitter, Facebook, and Linked-in make real time information interaction possible across networks. Leverage these new tools and platforms. It is worth it.
Only exploring your own industry for best practices is limiting. New sources of competitive advantage are far more likely to come from observing and adopting best practices in completely unrelated industries. All leaders should spend more discretionary time outside of their industry, discipline, and sector. There is more to learn from unusual suspects who bring fresh and different perspectives than from the ideas circulated and re-circulated among the usual suspects. The big and important value creating opportunities will most likely be found in the gray areas between the silos we inhabit. Get out more.
Best practices are necessary but not sufficient. Business models don’t last as long as they used to. Leaders must identify and experiment with next practices. Next practices enable new ways to deliver customer value. Next practices are better ways to combine and network capabilities that change the value equation of your organization. Organizations should always be developing a portfolio of next practices that recombine capabilities to find new ways to deliver value. Leaders should design and test new business models unconstrained by the current business or industry model.
It is easy to sketch out business model innovation scenarios on the white board. It is far more difficult to take the idea off the white board for a spin in the real world. We need safe and manageable platforms for real world experimentation of new business models and systems. Since most leaders in the 21st century will likely have to change their business models several times over their careers it makes sense to do R&D for new business models the same way R&D is done for new products and technologies today. Create the space for exploration.
It is not best practices, but next practices that will sustain your organization on a strong growth trajectory. While you continue to pedal the bicycle of today’s business model make sure that no less than 10% of your time and resources is dedicated to exploring new business models and developing next practices.
By Saul Kaplan, on Mon Mar 24, 2014 at 8:30 AM ET Innovation is about a better way to deliver value. Innovators are all around us. They are taking advantage of today’s technologies and creating new ways to deliver value. We can learn from them if we look up from our silos.
Sometimes the most inspiring innovators are in places we would never have thought to look. Or perhaps we just don’t notice them because our attention is focused on the inventors of new technologies or the entrepreneurs who are making progress in bringing inventions to market. Those people are important but not the whole story.
Meet the plumber and the police chief.
Anthony Gemma is president of Gem Plumbing in Lincoln, R.I. Together with his brothers, Anthony runs one of the most innovative businesses I have seen. I didn’t expect it when I first visited the company. After all, how innovative can a plumbing supply company be? The answer is very innovative.
Gem is on a mission to win the Baldrige National Quality Award. I believe they will achieve it. They have established a culture of excellence and innovation in every aspect of their regional business. They collect, analyze and share data ranging from the location of every part — from the supplier to the service truck to the home — to how long a customer waits to talk live to the dispatcher on the phone. They benchmark themselves against the best. Not the best plumbing supply company, the best companies.
Gem’s customer call and dispatch center would blow you away. It is like standing in NASA mission control. On 12-foot monitoring screens they have live feeds of real-time traffic conditions and satellite mapping of every service vehicle. If there is available capacity in the fleet, Gem is placing a customized radio ad to create tailored demand. They are so good at tracking traffic conditions they supply information to the Department of Transportation and local radio stations for traffic reports.
 Their business grew from $9 million in 1999 to $40 million in 2007. They get so many businesses coming in for tours and information about their innovation programs they set up the Gem Institute for Performance Excellence. Who would have thought to look at a regional plumbing supply company as an example of innovation best practices?
Next, meet Dean Esserman, chief of police in Providence, R.I. When he was hired by Mayor David Cicilline in 2003, Esserman found a city where the crime rates were high and a force that was troubled by corruption and distrusted by the community. People were afraid to travel downtown. What he’s done since is a great story of business model innovation, and he has delivered significant value to the citizens of Providence.
In six years, Esserman transformed the Providence policing model from a centralized department where police were anonymous and came to the neighborhood after receiving a 911 call to a decentralized department with neighborhood substations and district commanders who are accountable for crime in the local community. His philosophy is that when police get out of their cars and into the life of a neighborhood they become trusted allies.
I have attended the chief’s regular Tuesday morning command meetings where a sophisticated crime tracking system displays crime statistics by district. Each commander is called upon to talk about crime activity in their district and what they are doing about it. The new business model is working, with double digit declines in the overall Providence crime rate. Who would have thought to look at a police chief as an example of innovation best practices?
The plumber and the police chief are just two examples of the innovators among us. Examples are everywhere. We just have to look in the places that we would least expect to find them.
By Saul Kaplan, on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 8:30 AM ET Out of Office, AutoReply: Sorry I will be out of the office this week. In an emergency you can contact…… Away messages bug me. Away from what? Aren’t most of us away from our desks all the time? If we aren’t maybe we should be! Who doesn’t get emails remotely these days? I don’t need to know that you are traveling this week. I assume that you are not sitting at your desk waiting for an email but out at meetings and visiting with customers. You will get back to me when you can.
OK. If you are on a personal vacation and need to disconnect or overseas and unable to receive emails it makes sense to let people know that you will not be able to respond while you are away. But most away messages seem to just provide notification that you will not be sitting behind your desktop computer for the next few days. Come on, we all know perfectly well that you will still receive emails on a remote computer, a laptop, or on a PDA. Why tell us that you are away.
I find that quick responders are just as responsive when they travel and slow responders are just as slow when they are away. I suspect many people leave an out of office message to manage expectations because they want the time away from the incessant drumbeat of emails, text messages, and twitter streams. I understand that. Sometimes you need to disconnect in order to reconnect.
A few vacation days away recently reminded me of the important perspective gained from disconnecting. I didn’t leave an away message before leaving and while I left my laptop at home I did bring my iPhone, which allowed me to check important emails and Red Sox scores. While I could have stayed connected to my Twitter stream on the iPhone I made a conscious decision (alright my wife insisted) that I disconnect cold turkey for the few days I was away.
 I enjoyed the respite from the cacophony of an over-connected and always-on life. I thought a lot about what it means to live in a networked world where communication channels travel wherever you go and filtering becomes an important personal decision. I am excited by the possibilities created by ubiquitous connectivity and personally experimenting with the right mix of channels and the right balance of being connected and finding time to disconnect. The capacity to disconnect is important but can’t we come up with a more honest and genuine approach than a lame away message?
By Saul Kaplan, on Mon Mar 10, 2014 at 8:30 AM ET Beware of random collisions with unusual suspects. Unless, of course, if you want to learn something new. In that case seek out innovators from across every imaginable silo and listen, really listen, to their stories. New ideas, perspectives, and the big value creating opportunities are in the gray areas between the unusual suspects. It seems so obvious and yet we spend most of our time with the usual suspects in our respective silos. We need to get out of our silos more.
It is human nature to surround ourselves with people who are exactly like us. We connect and spend time with people who share a common world-view, look the same, enjoy the same activities, and speak the same language. We join clubs to be with others like us. I want to belong to the non-club club. The only tribe I want to be in is a tribe of unusual suspects who can challenge my world-view, expose me to new ideas, and teach me something new. Our tribe of unusual suspects can change the world if we connect in purposeful ways.
As an “accidental bureaucrat” over the last six years I had a front row seat to observe the silos in action. Every week went something like this; On Monday I met with the health care crowd, on Tuesday it was the education crowd, on Wednesday the energy crowd and so on, you get the idea. This cycle repeated over and over again. Each crowd was comprised of the usual suspects, well-intentioned people rehashing the same discussion incessantly. The scene is right out of Groundhog Day. Most of the participants were there to represent institutional perspectives and to protect their respective interests. In each crowd there are always a few innovators that want to change the conversation but they make little progress. At the end of each week I always came away with the same conclusion. If only we could take the innovators from across each of the silos and bring them together to enable more random collisions.
Maybe we could change the conversation if we connect the unusual suspects in purposeful ways. Maybe then we can make progress on the real issues of our time, little things like health care, education, and energy. It will take cross silo collaboration and breaking down the boundaries between industries, sectors, and disciplines.
People always ask me how I could have worked in the public sector after being in the private sector all of my career. Doesn’t it move too slowly? I don’t know about that. I worked with many large companies, during my road warrior consulting days, and I don’t remember them changing so quickly. You are right, I would say, government agencies move pretty slowly too. I can’t resist adding, I am certain that academic institutions move the slowest of all! The point is few organizations across both the public and private sector have the capacity to innovate and change because they are working hard pedaling the bicycle of their current business model and trying to stay alive and competitive.
In this heads down mode, public and private organizations staying within their silos, do not work and play nicely together across boundaries. Collaboration is an unnatural act. Attempts are mostly under resourced and under supported by sponsors. That’s a shame because the issues we deal with as a community including, health care, education, and energy, will only be fixed it we can experiment with new system approaches that cut across all of our protected silos. We need to think and act more horizontally.
Maybe we don’t need institutions to be the catalyst for change. Maybe in the shiny new networked world we live in, with mega bandwidth and social media platforms, we can self organize to design and test new system approaches that deliver more value to the patient, student, and citizen. It is time to try more stuff and take advantage of the disruptive innovation potential of all the technology we have within reach. We have more technology available to us than we know how to absorb. It isn’t technology that gets in our way. It is our fault. Humans, and the organizations we live in, are both stubbornly resistant to change.
Institutions are moving too slowly. Most were designed for a different century. We have to catalyze change ourselves. Let’s go.
Wanted: Innovators to join a non-club club and tribe of unusual suspects. Bring on more random collisions.
By Saul Kaplan, on Mon Mar 3, 2014 at 8:30 AM ET “Education is not the filling of a bucket, but the lighting of a fire” W.B. Yeats
Excuse the rant but I am outraged by the state of the U.S. education system. We have let the pilot light go out and we are failing our youth. Particularly egregious is the way we are failing our urban youth.
We must refocus our national and regional innovation conversation on how to solve real world problems. Job number one is to design a better education system that lights a fire for every youth, creating lifelong passionate learners. It is time to move beyond public policy debates and institutional rugby scrums to try new solutions. What we are doing now isn’t working, and far too much of the federal stimulus investment in education is being spent to sustain the current system.
A report last year from the nonprofit network America’s Promise Alliance showed that 1.2 million students drop out of high school each year. Only about half of the students served by school systems in the nation’s 50 largest cities graduate from high school. The U.S. public education system, especially in the country’s urban centers, must be transformed.
Only about 40 percent of the U.S. adult population earns a college degree. That may have been fine in the 20th century when an industrial economy supplied good jobs to those without post-secondary education. It is not fine today when a college degree is a necessity for a good job.
Our education system was built for the 20th century.
Everyone loves to point fingers at other players in the system as the cause of the problem. Observing our education system today is like watching an intense rugby scrum that is moving in slow motion hoping the ball will pop out. We have finger pointing and incessant public policy debates galore. We love to admire the problems: It’s the unions that are getting in the way. Teachers are resisting change in the classroom. Administrators don’t understand what is going on in the classroom. Parents are not engaged. Public policy makers can’t make up their minds. If only private sector companies were more engaged. Students are unruly, undisciplined and disrespectful. Everyone gets blamed and nothing changes.
The simple idea of “lighting a fire” expressed in Yeat’s quote says it all for me. Teaching is an important means to an end. Creating passionate lifelong learners is the objective of education. Content, subjects, jobs and requirements, will all change over time. The pace of change is accelerating and the half-life for assumptions and usable knowledge is decreasing. It has become a lifelong challenge to stay relevant. The only thing that is sustainable is a fire inside to keep learning.
The objective of education is to light a fire for learning in every single youth. When the pilot light is on, everything else is possible. For starters, let’s recognize that individuals have different learning styles. One-size industrial education models are not working and must be transformed. We have the enabling technology available today to create and scale an education system that provides access to killer content and experiential learning opportunities tailored to individual learning styles for every student. It is time to demonstrate that we can and will change our education system. Our country’s youth is waiting.
We need actionable platforms to enable real world experimentation for new education systems and solutions. We need to bring the voice of the student and student experience directly into the education innovation conversation. And we must create a purposeful network of innovators motivated to explore and test new system solutions. Join the conversation. The water is fine.
Let’s reignite the pilot light and demonstrate that there is a better way to light a fire for life long learning in every youth.
By Saul Kaplan, on Mon Feb 24, 2014 at 8:30 AM ET In the coming months, our government is going to throw a lot of money at some very big problems. The amount is staggering—a $787 billion stimulus packagecombined with a proposed $3.6 trillion federal budget. That kind of market-making money should be able to drive the bold changes we need in health care andeducation.
I fear it will not.
It would be a shame if the nation’s palpable hunger for fresh ideas and approaches resulted only in incremental change. The problem I see is that most of the money is about to travel through existing pipes to sustain the way the health-care and education industries currently operate. This path simply maintains the status quo.
If we want bold change, we have to allocate more of the federal investment to the design and testing of new approaches that are not constrained by existing ones.
Education and Workforce Development
A report last year from the nonprofit network America’s Promise Alliance showed that 1.2 million students drop out of high school each year. Only about half of the students served by school systems in the nation’s 50 largest cities graduate from high school. The U.S. public education system, especially in the country’s urban centers, must be transformed.
Only about 40% of the U.S. adult population earns a college degree. That may have been fine in the 20th century when an industrial economy supplied good jobs to those without post-secondary education. It is not fine today when a college degree is a necessity for a good job.
Our education and workforce development system was built for the 20th century. Stimulus money spent solely to support the current system will not result in a population of life-long learners prepared for the new economy.
An example of how to channel resources toward bold change is the Labor Dept.’s WIRED (Workforce Innovation in Regional Economic Development) program. Launched in 2005 to catalyze the creation of a new 21st century workforce development system, WIRED has made three rounds of grants to 39 regions. Each grant recipient gets $5 million per year over a three-year period. The funds must be used to integrate a region’s economic and workforce development activities. WIRED funds are targeted to accelerate state agency coordination and system change in order to demonstrate that talent development can drive economic transformation in regions across the country.
WIRED is the right idea, but it doesn’t go far enough. There is not enough money allocated to it, and it is not bold enough in holding regions accountable for experimenting with truly transformative workforce development approaches.
Health Care
The first baby boomer turns 65 in 2011. By 2030 there will be 71.5 million Americans over the age of 65, vs. 36 million today. Our health-care system struggles to deliver quality care today at an affordable price. Imagine the implications of the coming silver tsunami, when 10 million to 12 million elders will need long-term care—and an estimated 5 million will need nursing-home care.
The current federal prescription calls for a big investment in electronic health records and making insurance options available to all. Ensuring access and increasing efficiency in today’s system is necessary but not sufficient.
We need bolder solutions to deal with the impending crisis. We need to transform from a sick-care system to a well-care system, with the patient at the center. Patients must become more responsible for their personal wellness and sick-care choices. Too much of the stimulus money is allocated to institutionally driven electronic health records, which will only increase the efficiency of today’s health-care system. A meaningful share (20%) of the funds should go toward electronic records controlled by the patient and to experimenting with patient-centered health-care approaches.
Unconstrained Experimentation
Every federal agency must be held accountable for channeling resources toward transformative and systemic change in its respective area. That should be the focus of Aneesh Chopra, America’s new chief technology officer, or Sonal Shah, head of the new Office of Social Innovation & Civic Participation. They should be armed with resources moved from agency budgets and tasked with driving bold change to build a national innovation agenda. While we balance the management of today’s systems, it’s imperative that we also experiment with new configurations that are not constrained by existing ones. It’s not easy, but all of the public and private sector levers and capabilities should be up for analysis—and reform—in order to enable these experiments.
I used to think you could catalyze innovation by proselytizing. You can’t. It is more important to network today’s innovators from every imaginable silo, sector, and discipline in purposeful ways. It is the innovator’s day. This is the time to experiment with bold new solutions. We must invest in the capacity to explore and test systems-level innovation. Our future depends on it.
By Saul Kaplan, on Mon Feb 17, 2014 at 8:30 AM ET I was invited by Boston Globe innovation columnist Scott Kirsner to participate in a brainstorming session to answer the question: how do we better communicate New England’s innovative, creative, entrepreneurial spirit to the rest of the world? The meeting took place at Flybridge Capital Partners in a conference room with a great panoramic view of Boston and was attended by an eclectic group of twenty five leaders from across New England all with a passion for strengthening our region’s innovation story and voice. It was an energizing session and I left with many ideas and a refreshed enthusiasm for New England’s potential as a national innovation hot spot.
Here are a few observations from the session:
New England cynicism left at the door. New Englanders take cynicism to entirely new heights. One characteristic of innovators, which was true for those assembled, is that they remain optimistic even in the midst of a severe recession. It is a pleasure to be around innovators because they always see the silver lining and look for ways to take advantage of these disruptive times. Our discussion had a positive tone and there was a collective sense of optimism in the room.
More than a slogan. I shared a story about once filling a war room with the economic development ads from all fifty states. I covered the name of each state with masking tape and brought people in to the room challenging them to match the ad with the state it came from. All of the slogans were similar like “A Great Place to Start and Grow a Business” and no one could connect the ads with the right states. The reaction to my story was immediate and strong. This group was not interested in creating a new advertising slogan or catchy logo. Slogans come and go and telling the New England innovation story has to be a genuine narrative backed up with real proof points of our region’s innovation capacity.
Act as a region. The northeast knowledge corridor has an amazing collection of innovation stories, assets, and institutions. As a region we have an opportunity to become a national innovation hot spot. Collectively our story would be compelling and genuine. While labor, knowledge, and capital move freely across state borders, political boundaries have caused us to fragment our economic development effort. We sub-optimize our efforts and our story and must develop a regional communication platform. Our brainstorming session had voices from NH, CT, MA, and RI. It was a start.
Purposeful networks. Many participants talked about the importance of networks and leveraging social media platforms to strengthen connections throughout the region and to share our innovation story. Dave McLaughlin of Boston World Partnerships talked about the work they are doing focused on creating and enabling “connectors”. I raised the idea of creating purposeful networks focused on solving the big issues of our time including health care, education, and climate change. We are blessed in New England with an incredible concentration of the inputs for innovation. Within our region we have many of the world’s best colleges and universities and a hard-wired spirit for discovery and entrepreneurship. I proposed that we develop an innovation story that is about better outputs and solutions. Why don’t we create a regional innovation hot spot that delivers real transformation in our health care, education, and energy systems? If we did it would deliver on the promise of technology for patients, students, and citizens and we would create a more prosperous regional economy.
You can find Scott’s blog post on the discussion, a list of attendees, and the audio from our brainstorming session here.
|
|
