Can small innovation sustain us?
Just 10 days left between now and ASAE's 2011 Annual Meeting & Expo. Continuing in our arbitrarily timed series of "one question" posts here on Acronym, I'd like to pose an open-ended question on innovation.
Speaking at the closing general session and luncheon will be Peter Sheahan, author of several books on innovation, including his latest, Flip: How to Turn Everything You Know on Its Head—and Succeed Beyond Your Wildest Imaginings. One of Sheahan's messages is to focus on what he calls "non-sexy" innovation, the type of innovation that improves upon established processes to make them more effective and efficient.
Anyone who has read this blog for a while knows the association community has long been wringing its hands over the future of the membership business model. Some think it's doomed to failure; others think it just needs to evolve. Given Sheahan's experience and research with examples of innovation, I'm curious how he might answer this question:
Can "non-sexy" innovation keep the association membership model sustainable?
It might not be a question that he—or anyone—can answer with much certainty. Predicting the future isn't easy. But it's a question all associations are grappling with, particularly when the amount of time and resources they can devote exclusively to innovation is limited. Do they focus on incremental change or on finding something revolutionary?
Given the focus on innovation at this year's conference—there will be a quasi-track of Learning Labs on innovation (look for "Innovation Exchange" in the titles) and an "Innovation Exchange Forum" lounge that will host informal discussions on innovation—the closing general session with Peter Sheahan will be good way to conclude.
Until then, what are your thougts on "non-sexy" innovation in regard to membership? What questions would you have for Peter Sheahan?
| | Permalink |
Comments
Does having a business sensibility count for "non-sexy" innovation? Honing internal processes into measurable systems is about as boring as can be. Doing this well improves net by decreasing expenses without dropping services, and creates a culture of staff accountability.
Time is wasted with duplicated communications with volunteers, poor board/committee meeting management, and not connecting everyday decisions to a clear mission. A specific meeting agenda, with time limits, focused on strategic issues, saves energy and money. Volunteers need to be held accountable to each other and staff for wasting member resources.
Be innovative by being efficient. Set clear expectations. Encourage responsible behavior, Don't tolerate wasteful behavior.
That is innovation we all can follow.
Posted by: Eric from Edison Solutions | July 27, 2011 2:41 PM
So I'll respond with the obvious here: Sexy is in the eyes of the beholder. As Eric notes, some will find process refinements to be a real turn-on where others couldn't be bothered.
One of the challenges we've somehow created with innovation is that only the "rock their world or blow their mind" innovations are sexy. Matthew May addressed this a bit in his Great Ideas keynote.
They certainly are seductive, but personally I find anything that makes my personal or professional life significantly simpler, better, easier, or more enjoyable (among a few of the possible shifts in value) to be pretty damn sexy.
Posted by: Jeffrey Cufaude | July 27, 2011 5:45 PM
YES! Small innovations can make a huge difference over time in aggregate, are more likely to occur on a regular basis, AND importantly, help establish a culture of innovation (and rewarding folks for doing so), which makes BIG innovations more likely to occur too. I think this applies to all organizations within and beyond the association sector. Driving innovation at all levels requires not only viewing small innovations as great things, but celebrating them religiously.
Posted by: Amith Nagarajan | July 27, 2011 10:44 PM
Thanks Eric, Jeffrey, and Amith. So far it's a resounding yes, at least from the three of you. I like your viewpoints on the value of small improvements. Amith, it's a great point that starting small helps start a trend toward more and bigger innovation.
I want to reiterate the membership-model part of the question, though. You've all suggested that small improvements to any aspect of associations are valuable, but I'm curious about small improvements to the membership model. Can it be adjusted and tweaked as time goes on? Can it evolve? Or does it have to be overhauled in a big way?
(Or is any change to something as overarching as a business model by definition a big change? Perhaps Jeffrey's note about the eyes of the beholder applies to how one would qualify "small" and "big" changes, as well.)
Posted by: Joe Rominiecki | July 28, 2011 4:55 PM