Part I - Our products
1. A multi purpose Pot
- that can provide fast and efficient cooking experience.
- With one pot, it contains different layer (self customize) that can cook different dishes, soup and sauce at the same time.
Creativity: Yes, it is a product that could attract alot of individuals in the hectic environment we live today, since it could save time dramatically
Marketable: No, does not have enough differentiating gap with similar pre-existing product already in the market
2. 'Home-bar' a new service concept
“If woman can have a walk-in closet, why can’t man have a walk-in fridge?’
‘Home-Bar’ - we redefine what is important in kitchen!
- It opens a new realm to men, a sense of belongingness in the kitchen, no longer bound by spouse control of food, and beer
Creativity: Yes, it is an attractive service that brings BAR LIFE to home,
Marketable: Yes, a new concept that brings no boundary and no pre-existing sales from other competitor
Part II - Situation that were not helpful
Situation 1: Everyone must check in with the supervisor when they have an idea
Impact: It shows down the process and kill creativity: all of the other team members were only sitting and waiting to be 'next'
Situation 2: The supervisors instructed the rest of the team on the next direction
Impact: We all adopt a 'wait and see' approach: Waiting for the next instruction
Situation 3: No laughing
Impact: We were all seriously thinking about a product that will make money.. and nothing else..
Situation 4: One positive comments follow by two negative comments
Impact: Similar to the 'yes... but' effect, we only focus on the negative comments
Part III - Situation that were helpful
Situation 1: Everyone must have the freedom to communicate with everyone
Impact: (i) Able to generate different and as many ideas as possible. Free-wheeling was welcome. The whackier the idea, the better. Building on others' ideas was encouraged.
(ii) Each team member has his/her own idea. Having chance to express one’s opinion feels to be accepted and respected in the team. More opening and acceptable atmosphere in the team nurture a more creative environment.
Situation 2: It must be safe for everyone to offer ideas
Impact: Allow brainstorming. Everyone was not afraid of being criticised of their proposing ideas. Members did not feel embarrassed to produce fancy ideas resulting in creativity enhancement.
Situation 3: The team collectively presents the pitch
Impact: Enhance the team spirit, everyone was equal to accountable for the results. Therefore, trust and respect were flourished and unleashed everyone's creativity. Collaborative Partnership formed.
Part IV
a) Condition 1 – Decision Making Hierarchy inhibited the Product Development Process
1: go through a proper channel of communication
- a team member have no rights to share with other member unless the supervisor approved it
2: Decision making hierarchy (reduce time efficiency, having to check for permission)
- Whether the idea/product or the concept is good, it must be reported to the supervisor, and he/she will decide
3: Limited boundary of creativity
- The creativity is only restricted to the knowledge of supervisor
4: Lack of creative results that could require partnership of both left-brain and right brain individuals
-Lack the appropriate human resource that needs to produce new ideas.
b) Condition 2 – Pixar Operating Principle Facilitated our Product Development Process
1: Everyone must have the freedom to communicate with everyone
- Separate the communication structure and decision-making hierarchy.
- Trust your staff to work out problems themselves without having to check for permission from supervisors.
- Approach other staff across departments to solve problems directly without go through “proper” channels.
- The Supervisor/Manager should accept that he/she is not the first one to know the problem/issue. He/She should understand that it is the issue related to be respected by the team member or not. Instead, it is just a way to facilitate the communication among the team members and enhance the creativity in the team. This means that the Supervisor/Manager should have a higher E.Q. level.
2: It must be safe for everyone to offer ideas
- Encourage everyone to offer feedback to every ideas proposed. What they liked and disliked and why.
- Provide a constructive and “free-flow” platform for ideas generation.
- Not to make comment on some immature idea especially in the initial stage of sharing.
3: The team collectively presents the pitch
- Enhance the team spirit, everyone was equal to accountable for the results.
- Enable collaborative partnership to strive for excellence. People's overwhelming desire to make sure their work is good before they show it to others increases the possibility that their finished version would exceed the supervisor's expectation.
Why Pixar’s Condition Worked Well
1. Diversity encourages different ideas
- Get people with different backgrounds, social experiences and expertise working together can generate different ideas by taking account into different considerations/perspectives.
- For example, some members were very socialised. They liked to hang out for drinks in bar. Some were homely. They liked cooking. With different backgrounds, we came up a pitch to sell “Home Bar” eventually.
2. Enable Collaboration
- Members in the team can talk about the past experiences, metaphors, analogies and their stories to help the teams conceptualize together.
3. Define a Partnership-Friendly Structure
- Motivated with a shared common goal
- In a “voice-free” environment and team members are highly motivated with team-spirit, ideas can be brainstormed without having been criticised.
- Assessment only on whether the teams are making progress rather than banning others' ideas to create trouble.
Part V - Our reflection
"Management's job is not to prevent risk... To act in this fashion, we as executives have to resist our natural tendency to avoid or minimize risks, which, of course, is much easier said than done" (Sep HBR 2008)
Our reflection: Often, management focuses on preventing risk by setting instruction from our existing knowledge on how each step should be done. However, it blinds us from the possible improvements that come with the risks. In order for the company or the team to have the ability to engineer new ideas, management should not put too much rules or barrier on how each process should be completed. Instead, the team should implement a better approach, “freedom within the framework”, give flexibility to employee to produce ideas.
A peer culture - "This works because all the participants have come to trust and respect on another" (Sep HBR 2008)
Our reflection: In forstering collective creativity, the team have a good level of trust and respect is very important, team does not see each other as judging, but instead, everyone is taking a supportive role to build and elaborate on each one's idea. In our team, we have the advantage because 3 of the team members have been working for another 6 months in previous semester, so that we have already established a good level of trust.
In the team dynamic cycle - because of this trust, we have jumped over the Forming-Storming stage and enter straight to the Norming-Performing stages that help us a lot...
"Left brain vs Right brain approach" (June HBR 2009)
Our reflection: Our school and our education system (esp in HK) mainly focus on the left-brain analytical ability, so our natural tendency is to analyse and judge; however, we realize through the experiential activity that too much judging and analysis in a pre-mature stage indeed kills creativity...
Here is an exercise to test if you are left-or-right brain dominant...
"Many companies allow left-brain analytic types to approve ideas at various stages of the innovation process. This is a cardinal error." (June HBR 2009)
Our reflection: This is the most challenging part, because many managers or seniors get promoted because of their analytical ability and much of those skills are associated with the left-brain, and because of their authority in the company, they are the ones who judge and make decision. In our earlier experience, Kim, who acted as the supervisors, provides many judgements that have apparently killed our creativity... so we are thinking what we need is a more balance style of both personality in the innovation process, with this, perhaps the MBTI can help... a good mix of the N (Intuition) type and the S (Sensing) type may bring a good balance..
MBTI:
Ross - ENTJ
Jeff - ENTP
Brian - ESFP
Kim - ESFJ
References
Amabile T.M., & Khaire, M. (2008, October). Creativity and the Role of the Leader. Harvard Business Review, 100-109.
Catmull, Ed (2008, September). How pixar fosters collective creativity. Harvard Business Review, 65-72.
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (2010). Putting the pieces together comprehensive school-linked strategies for children and families. Retrieved Jan 25, 2011, from http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/envmmnt/css/ppt/cjap1.htm
Rigby, D.K., Gruver, K. & Allen, J. (2009, June). Innovation in turbulent times. Harvard Business Review, 79-86.
Thompson, L. L. (2009). The mind and heart of the negotiator. Upper Saddle River, N.J. : Prentice Hall. 
No comments:
Post a Comment