3. Solving the Problems of Industrial Innovation

3. Solving the Problems of industrial innovation

The Nature of Innovation

  • Innovation has a high Degree of Complexity, is Uncertain, Costly, Threatening to Existing Operations, and Prone to Failure—Yet Essential to Corporate Success
  • Complexity Arises from the Need to:
    • Integrate Multiple Areas of Expertise
    • Utilize Efforts of Diverse Internal and External Resources
    • Merge Multiple Lines of Real-Time Efforts to Achieve a Single Broad Result—the Strategic Intent
    • Encourage Ownership and Instill a Fierce Determination to Win Among the Many Individuals Required to Deliver a Commercially Significant Result

Industrial Innovation Engages many Functions of a Corporation, From

  • R&D, to Engineering, to Construction, to Manufacturing, to Technical Service
  • Market Assessment, to Business Development, to Marketing, to Customer Service
  • Investment, to Sales and Cash Flow
  • Recruiting, to Placement, to Employee Management

And is Impacted by Myriad External Forces and Institutions

Individuals Engaged in Industrial Innovation Must Solve Diverse and Difficult Problems to be Successful, Whether Leading new Ventures or Supporting Technology Intensive Ongoing Operations

The Domain of Industrial Innovation is the Corporation and the  External Forces that Influence its Fortunes

Problems can Strike from Anywhere at any Time

A Systematic, Rigorous and Inclusive Approach is Needed to Effectively Solve the Problems of Industrial Innovation

First, Some Problem Solving Basics

What do we Mean by Problem? Simply, Something Someone Wants to Change…

Innovation is the Change, of Interest Here—a  Problem is not a Symptom of a Dysfunctional State to be Minimized

Problems Come in Different Varieties

Closed Problems

  • A Solution is Expected to Exist—the Outcome is Fixed by Historical Events, Rigorous Physicochemical Principles, or “The Rules of the Game”
    • Why did the Plane Crash?
  • The Product is Blue Today Instead of Red, Why?
  • Solution is by Deduction—Derived by Moving from the General to the Particular—as did Sherlock Holmes, e.g., Deductions from a Hat

Open Problems

  • Multiple Solutions may Exist—or none
  • Solution is by Induction (Intuition Plays a Role)—Moving from the Specifics to a Targeted Outcome—e.g., an Invention of a Young Kenyan Boy to Protect his Cattle from Lions, a Lion Repellant System 
  • The Particular Outcome Depends on the Intent of the Problem Solver / Decision Maker, and the Solution Pathway Taken
  • Embattled Orphans—Conflicting Intent, Absent or Ineffective Decision Maker

Uncertainties—Evidence of Unknown or Unknowable Influences

Problems are Often of Mixed Types

Reduce Production Costs—Overall an Open Problem

Debottleneck / Optmize Current Process —Mostly Closed

  • Maximize Productivity of Rate Limiting Process Step—Closed, e.g., Optimize Reactor Design
  • Upgrade Control System to Reduce Operator Number—Closed
  • Rebid Raw Material Contracts to Lower Costs—Closed

Develop Lowest-Cost New Process—Overall, an Open Problem

  • Find Optimum Chemical Route (Invention Likely—Open
  • Define Optimum Process Layout—Open, Mostly
  • Design Optimum Unit Operations —Closed, Mostly
  • Complete Process Engineering—Closed
  • Design Construct and Start up Plant—Closed, Mostly

Problem Type and Scale Affect Solution Strategy: Where to Look

Consider—

  • Problem Types: Closed, Open, Uncertain
  • Problem Scales: Atomic / Molecular, Physicochemical System, Venture, Organization / Corporation, Market, Society

For Closed Problems, Organized, Verified Bodies of Knowledge are Likely to Offer Solutions all the Way from the Microscopic to the Macroscopic Scale

For Open Problems, Investigation, Cooperation and Determination are Needed (Basic Research and Designed Experiments) and Intent Determines the Course. At Larger Scale Interactions are Needed for Resolution.

For Uncertain Problems, Exploration, Determination, Negotiation and Cautious Opportunism are Indicated

Next, a  Systematic, Rigorous, and Inclusive Problem Solving Approach, Proven in Multiple Companies, Multiple Businesses and Numerous Technological Areas

The Approach to Problem Solving Presented here is the Product of Four Decades of Experience in Leading  Complex Multi-faceted Innovation Challenges in Three Major Corporations and as a Consultant for Pharmaceutical and Specialty Chemical Companies

Examples of Problems Solved

  • Maximizing the Capacity of a Specialty Chemical Plant and Capital Investment Plan
  • New Process Route for a Specialty Polymer
  • Organization Design for Pharmaceutical Chemistry Department and for a Startup Specialty Chemicals Company
  • Assessment and Improvement Plan for Corporate Process Technology Function
  • New Product Commercialization Process for Inorganic Chemicals Division
  • Determining the CMC Content of a NDA Filing and R&D Plan for Missing Data
  • Selecting Optimum Market Segments to be Served by Oxidizer Chemicals Business
  • Assessing Suitability of Process / Production Technology for use in Proposed New Manufacturing Plant
  • Market Opportunities for Microwave Refrigeration and Sporicides
  • New Business Strategy for Natural Extracts Business
  • Evaluation of Acquisition of a Manufacturing Plant and Process for Producing a Pharmaceutical Protein
  • New Personal Care Opportunities

The Steps in Problem Solving

Overview

  • ESTABLISH STRATEGIC INTENT (Desired End Result)
    • Choose the Optimum Target to Pursue (Should be “Worthwhile”)
  • DEFINE STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES
    • Identify Highest Level, “Orthogonal” Accomplishments
  • DEVELOP SOLUTIONS FOR STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES
    • Define Necessary and Sufficient Set of Detailed Accomplishments that “Add UP” to the Strategic Intent
  • DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT AN EFFECTIVE PLAN
    • Establish What has to be Done, by Whom and by When
  • EVALUATE RESULTS AND ASSURE ACCEPTANCE
    • Learn from any Deviation Between Intent and Results
    • Follow Up to Assure Support of Affected Parties

The Steps of Problem Solving and Some Enabling Diagnostic Questions

  • ESTABLISH STRATEGIC INTENT (An Optimum Target to Pursue)
    • What is the Problem Type, Degree of Novelty and Scale?
    • What are the Facts and Forces Affecting the Situation?
    • What is the Purpose and Vision; Who is the Decision Maker?
    • What are His/ Her Purpose, Needs, Values and Desired Outcome?
    • What are the Sources of Value: Market, Technology, IP, Operations?
    • What is the Highest Priority Desired End Result to Target?
  • DEFINE STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES (Identify Highest Level, “Orthogonal” Solutions)
    • What are the Issues? (Uncertainties of Significant Magnitude that Help or Hinder in Meeting the Strategic Intent)
    • What are the “Strategic Objectives”? (To Meet the Strategic Intent)
    • What are the Most Critical Objectives (Priorities)
    • Each Objective Becomes a “Problem” to be Solved—”How to”……Followed by the Objective Statement
  • BRAINSTORM SOLUTIONS FOR STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES
    • What are the Major “Factors” of the Problem?
    • What are the Facts of the Situation and Forces at Play?
    • What Capabilities Technological and Business Assets can be Brought to Bear; What Inventions or External Contributions are Required?
    • What is the “Process?” How can it be used / Improved to meet the Intent?
    • What are the Final Solutions, or Upgradable Elements, that Meet the Decision Maker’s Needs?—The overall “Solution”
    • After Exploring the “Situation”,  Creativity in Solution Finding is Enhanced by Making the Statement  “How to”… Achieve, Accomplish, or Reach the Objective—and a Period.  Any Comment, then, is a Declarative Statement of a Potential Solution or a Component of one. A “How do we”? Statement opens up Discussion and Allows Participants to Evade the Responsibility Reasoning out a Solution
    • PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION
      • What is to be Done? On What Time Line? Who is Responsible? What are the Needed Resources? How will they be Acquired?
      • What Levels of Quality and Achievement are Expected?
      • What are the Contingencies to Compensate for Deviations?
      • What are the Risks? What are the Risk Mitigation Plans?
      • Are Assumptions Still Valid and is the Program on Track?
    • RESULTS AND ACCEPTANCE
      • To What Degree has the Strategic Intent Been Met—Financially and Strategically?
      • What can be done to Facilitate an Effective Implementation?
      • How Have the Results Been Accepted by the Affected Parties?
      • Is Further Action Required?

Problems and Solutions have a “Nested” Structure

Problems Often begin as a “Fuzzy Mess”

Many Innovation Ventures Start out with Poor Definition and Encounter Numerous Complicating Forces.

The Challenge is to Move from the Apparent Chaos to a Valid Conception of the Most Advantageous Potential Outcome—the Most General Statement of the Problem Containing the Strategic Intent (Objective) and is Expressed in an Enabling “How to________” Format.

Strategic Objectives Necessary for Achieving the Intent Become “Subproblems”, each of which Requires Creative Solutions. Actions and Positive Results Achieve the Overall Desired Solution

Multiple Inputs are Required to Address the Complexity of the Problems Encountered in  Innovation

Inclusive (Group) Problem Solving is an Effective Means of Securing the Varied Contributions Necessary for Success

Inclusive Problem Solving is Needed when:

  • Decision Quality Matters
  • The Decision Maker Doesn’t Have Sufficient Information
  • The Problem is Open-Ended and Unstructured
  • Decision Maker’s Objectives are not Totally Shared by Affected Parties
  • Affected Parties have Insufficient Understanding of Issues and Intent
  • Acceptance is Critical to Implementation
  • Inadequate Ownership and Commitment Among Organization

What is Inclusive Problem Solving?  

A Process by which:

  • Intent is Clarified and Understood
  • Diverse Sources of Essential Knowledge are Harnessed
  • Commitment is Built Through Participation
  • Interaction Stimulates Creativity Beyond Individual Levels
  • Uncertainty and Conflict are Resolved and Focused on Positive Results that Create Substantial Value
  • Roles and Responsibilities are Readily Apparent as a Natural Consequence of Intent, and Implementation Challenges
  • Analysis and Synthesis are Conducted in a Creative Environment to Craft a Solution, or Family of Solutions, that Achieve a Decision Maker’s Strategic Intent

Why Inclusive Problem Solving?

  • Few Leaders are Able, as Individuals Alone to—Solely—Solve all the Major Problems of Innovation
  • Responsibility for an Outcome is Usually Shared Among Individuals and Functions
  • Groups Bring Diverse Insights and Perspectives.
  • Groups don’t Solve Problems—Individuals do—But, Group Efforts Lead to Better Solutions than Lone Individuals Achieve
  • Participation in the Solution Process is Essential for Acceptance.
  • Sometimes Working in a Group is More Fun Than Working Alone.
  • The Right Group May Already Have the Desired Solution Lying Dormant in its Collective Mind.

Groups, However, can be Unproductive

  • Groups Often Lack the Structure and “Process” Necessary for Effectiveness
  • Dynamics of Unstructured Groups:
    • If Structure is Not Imposed, It Develops Anyway
    • Spontaneous Structure is Normally Unproductive
    • Committees Often Lack Effective Structure and Direction
  • Committees Have Been Called, “Collections of the Unfit Chosen from the Unwilling by the Incompetent to do the Unnecessary”

Frequently in Unstructured Groups:

  • Forceful Individuals (Resident “Experts”) Dominate
  • Individuals See Different Problems and Are Intolerant of Others’ Perceptions; 7 Blind Men and the Elephant Effect:
    • One Man Touching the Elephant’s Side Says, “It’s like a wall.”
    • “No, it’s like a Rope,” said Another Holding his Tail

  • “You are both Wrong said the third. It’s like a Post Holding up a Roof”
  • And so it went as the Arguments Built

Frequently in Unstructured Groups:

  • Preconceived Solutions are Advocated to the Point of Conflict
  • No Clear Purpose or Objective is Established
  • Discrete Problems are not Formulated Resulting in Decisions Being Made Almost by Accident
  • “Ownership” of the Problem is not Established and Responsibility for Actions is not Accepted
  • New Issues or Problems are Raised Before Earlier Items are Resolved
  • Considerable Effort is Spent in Returning to Items Already Discussed (“As I said before”), in Trying to Be Heard Without Being “Put Down” and in Vying for Influence
  • Some Individuals Attempt to Establish Structure but are Seldom Successful in “Hijacking” a Meeting in Mid-session
  • “Unilateral” Decisions are Often Made After Unstructured Meetings.

But, there is a way to Make Groups Effective

  • Define Charter and Purpose of the Group
  • Choose Members on Basis of Contribution and Need to be Present
  • Review Relevant Background Material
  • Maintain Constructive Attitudes
  • Manage “Process” and “Content”
    • Process is Managed by a Facilitator
    • Content is Managed by the Decision Maker
  • Utilize a Systematic Process Designed for Solving the “Open” Problems of Industrial Innovation

An Effective Problem Solving Process

Steps I-IV: Understanding the Background, Identifying Issues and Getting to a Strategic Intent

Steps V-VIII: Establishing Strategic Objectives, Generating Solutions, Assigning Responsibilities, and Developing and Initiating an Implementation Plan

The Problem Solving Process

Successful Problem Solving Requires Effective

Management of “Content” and “Process”

  • All Endeavor That Produces an Outcome Requires Two Types of Elements:  Process and Content.
  • Process Elements
    • Operations, Steps and Sequences
    • The Necessary Equipment
    • All Elements Required to Convert Inputs Into the Desired End Product, or to Convert the State of a System Into an Altered State
  • Content Elements
    • Inputs (Raw Materials or Starting States)
    • Intermediates (Products of States)
    • Outputs (Final Products or Ending States)

“Process” in Inclusive Problem Solving Consists of:

  • Planning a Meeting or a Venture
  • Establishing Purpose and Intent of a Meeting or Venture
  • Formulating the Exact Problem to be Solved
  • Establishing Ownership of the Problem
  • Selecting, Preparing and Managing the Group to Ensure, Success in the Meeting
    • Participation and Contribution
    • Valuing all Individuals and their Contributions
    • Crafting a Solution to Meet the Decision Maker’s Intent
  • Operations, Steps and Sequences of Subject Matter

“Content” in Inclusive Problem Solving Consists of:

  • Business or Project Needs, Intent and Strategic Objectives
  • Facts Bearing on the Problem – Data.
  • Ideas, Concepts and Models Useful in Finding Solutions to the Problem.
  • The Problem Itself
  • Criteria for Acceptance of the Solution
  • Inputs (Raw Materials or Starting States)
  • Intermediates (Products of States)
    • Outputs (Final Products or Ending States)
  • The Solution to be Implemented

Managing Process and Content Elements

  • “On Purpose” Management of Both Content and Process Elements is Essential for a Successful Outcome.
  • Content and Process Elements are Best Managed by Separate Individuals with Different Roles
    • But, Real World Situations Require Developing the Ability to Manage Both Without Complications
  • Management of Content Elements Belongs to the Decision Maker (The Problem Owner or Client).
  • Management of Process Elements is Best Accomplished by a “Facilitator”

The “Facilitator”,  the Process Manager…

  • Helps Identify Issues and Expertise Needed to Solve Problems
  • Makes Sure that the “Real” Problem is Identified
  • Helps Group Members Formulate Their Thoughts
  • Makes Sure that Everyone is Heard and Not “Put Down”
    • Assures that “Ridiculous” Suggestions Lead to “Sublime” Solutions
    • Gives Voice to the Quiet Competent one who is Intimidated by the Vocal “Expert”
  • Makes Sure that the Essence of all Discussion is Recorded
  • Makes Sure that the Meeting Progresses Through the Essential Steps Required for Problem Solving
  • Assures that Solutions Developed Meet the Strategic Intent

Facilitator Attitudes and Actions

  • Total Objectivity
  • Doesn‘t Feel Compelled to be the Content Expert
  • Attempts to Draw all Ideas out of Participants
  • Contributes Content Ideas Only After Stepping out of Facilitator Role Momentarily
  • Respects all Individuals and their Ideas
  • Provides Condensation of Content for Recording
  • Respects and Supports Recorder and Provides Backup Memory
  • Encourages Participation without Coercion
  • Keeps Control of the Flow while Striving to make all Participants Comfortable
  • Focuses on the Objectives and Progress Toward Meeting the Strategic Intent and Satisfying the Needs of the Decision Maker

How a “Ridiculous” Idea can be a “Sublime” Solution

Professor Michael’s Dream


The Sublime Outcome

From Facetious to Functional: The Sports Bra Story

In the Mid 1970s Lisa Lindhal Wanted to Run, but Lacked a Suitable Bra—Double Bras or Extra Small Size were both Painful Solutions

Lisa’s Sister, Victoria, also a Runner, Joked that they Needed the Equivalent of a “Jockstrap for the Breast”

Inspired, Lisa and Costume Designer Friend, Polly Smith, made Serious Attempts, but Failed: Poor Fit and / or Support

Lisa’s Husband Provided the Key to Success when he Paraded Around the House with an Upside Down Jockstrap Across His Chest

Now with a Clear Vision, Lisa Cut Apart two Jockstraps, Sewed them Together and the First Jockbra was Born—with Improvements the Rest is History

The Decision Maker,  the Content Manager…

  • Determines that there is a Problem
  • Accepts Responsibility for the Problem
  • Makes Sure that a  Meaningful Objective (Strategic Intent) is Established
  • Decides Whether Potential Solutions are Worthy of Implementation
  • Takes Responsibility for Acquiring Resources and Implementing Solutions
  • Accepts Consequences—Accountability—of Implementation

Decision Maker Attitudes and Behaviors

  • Sincerity
  • Objectively Describes the Problem and Provides Clarity
  • Desire for Input
  • Listens to People and Understands Inputs; Respects ALL Contributions
  • Reserves Judgment Until Contributions are Made
  • Doesn’t Feel Compelled to Trash Unworthy Ideas
  • Selects Ideas/Input that Bests Fits Strategic Intent but Values all Input as Stepping Stones to Best Ideas
  • Trusts Facilitator to Provide Process Leadership
  • Displays True Gratitude for Assistance
  • Utilizes Input, Decides Objectively the Course of Action to be Taken

Some Broader Implications of the Facilitator              A Facilitator,

  • Gets the Right Decisions Made by the Right People at the Right Level to Achieve the Right Business Goals
  • Willingly Supports Other Decision Makers by Providing Quality Input and Professional Expertise
  • Understands the Processes of the Business and His / Her Role
  • Leads When the Responsibility is His or Hers; Follows Otherwise
  • Works by Influence, by “Dotted Lines”
  • Helps Create an Organization “Vision”
  • Focuses on Important Goals

The Recorder and the Group in Problem Solving

The Recorder

  • Writes Down the Essence of the Discussion as Directed by the Facilitator to Provide a “Group Memory”
  • Initially Writes only what Facilitator Dictates—With Experience, Independently Captures (for the Most Part) what the Facilitator Intends

The Group

  • Provides Ideas, Analysis and Solutions
  • Stimulates Thinking and Creativity Through Sincere, Focused Participation
  • Often has the Responsibility for Implementation as well as the Tactical Skills and Human Resource Management Authority Necessary to Achieve the Strategic Intent
  • The Right Group Possibly May Already have the Desired Solution Lying Dormant in its Collective Mind

Notes on Solutions

  • First Develop “Ideal” Solutions; Relaxing Economic, Political and Organizational Constraints
  • Then Modify Solutions to be Consistent With Reality, Requirements and Standards
  • Idealized Solutions Unleash Creativity by Relaxing Internal Constraints
  • Two Constraints Should be Maintained Throughout
  • Technological Feasibility; Allow for Innovation, Not Science Fiction
  • The Solution Must be Able to Survive if Implemented

Group (Inclusive) Problem Solving is Needed When:

  • Decision Quality Matters
  • The Decision Maker Doesn’t Have Sufficient Information
  • The Problem is Open-Ended and Unstructured
  • The Decision Maker’s Objectives are not Totally Shared by Affected Parties
  • Acceptance is Critical to Implementation

Problem Solving Example: A Business Review












When You need a Group’s Contribution, but don’t have a Facilitator

Practice “Solo Group Management”—Manage All The Roles

  • Play the Client to:
    • Present the Situation,
    • Establish Strategic Intent
    • Communicate Expectations, Values and Standards
    • Define the Problem to be Solved
    • Provide Appropriate Background Factual Information
  • Play the Facilitator to Capture the Group’s Input
    • Defer Judgment Until the Group’s Contribution is Made.
  • Play the Decision Maker to:
    • Select Elements of Group Input Critical to the Strategic Intent
    • Formulate the Solution and Decide the Intended Course of Action
    • Enlist Support and Define Responsibilities and Timing

Situational Factors may Affect Decision Making

Factors to Consider 

  • Responsibility, Authority, Accountability
  • Knowledge Source
  • Group/Team
  • External Experts
  • Goal Alignment
  • Degree of Acceptance
  • Organizational Competencies

How Organizational Factors and Knowledge Source may Affect Decision Making:

When there is Organizational Clarity and the Decision Maker has Complete Knowledge of the Issues, the Question of Criticality can Determine the Course of Action, as Seen at Right.  If Criticality is “High” the Decision Maker Should (and is equipped with requisite knowledge) Decide Independently (Case 1). If, However, the Decision Maker is Lacking in Specific Knowledge,  Consultation is in Order (Case 2) If Criticality is low, the Decision can be left to the Group who would be Affected by the Decision (Case 3).

Group Problem Solving is Important for Effective Decision Making when: Criticality is High; Essential Knowledge is External to the Decision Maker (or the Company); the Organization is not in Alignment as to Goals; and there is Doubt as to Whether a Particular Decision would be Accepted in Good Faith. Case 4

At times a Leader may Undertake a Task and be surrounded by Organizational Uncertainty, lack of  Clear Authority, and Decisions above his or her “Grade Level”. In that Circumstance the Leader should Utilize the Appropriate  Group for Solutions, for Increasing Alignment, and for Building Ownership. Armed with a Rigorous Analysis and Potentially Effective Plan, the Leader should then Identify the Individual who has the Real Decision Authority and make a Recommendation.

Summary of the Affect of Organizational Factors and Knowledge Source on the Potential Actions of a Decision Maker.

error: Content is protected !!