By H Griffiths: Originally Published Jan 11 2018 on Medium.com
In his 1995 classic strategy book The Innovators Dilemma, Clayton Christensen uses the terms leader and follower to describe two types of organisations in established markets and their respective approaches to sustaining innovation. Christensen possibly built on terms used in earlier research published in late 80’s and early 90’s by various academics. The author Steve Blank has written a good summary of the possible origins of these terms on his blog.
Whilst the terms leader and fast follower are useful for distinguishing between two different approaches to corporate innovation, the problem that I have found with using them in practice is that both terms have reasonably positive connotations for the managers and staff involved. Being labelled a leading organisation is generally good on a number of fronts, such as brand reputation and staff morale. Being labelled a fast follower is also seen as being generally good, as it is often considered to be the less risky strategy for realising long-term success.
The problem with not having any less complimentary or less desirable terms to choose from beyond these two reasonably complimentary labels is that it lets organisations that are not really innovating kid themselves. If your organisation is not a leader, then its too easy to claim that it must be a fast follower, even if you are not really that fast or following at all.
However, I found that by using the analogy of a long distance athletics race I could add in two additional new useful terms — off the pace and out of the race. Using these two new terms seem to provide organisations and their manager’s with a bit more leeway when carrying out a self-assessment of their true approach to innovation.
Whilst the term off the pace is not a great label to have, it does not necessarily come across as a harsh criticism of the organisation or its managers. When asked in an open way, it can come across as more as a concerned question which can lead to honest debate and reflection as to the true state and need for innovation within the organisation.
The term off the pace also comes across as probably being just a temporary state of affairs, rather than a permanent status, which could be rectified if the organisation committed to kick-in a bit more innovation effort to get back up to pace.
Out of the race, on the other hand, is intentionally chosen to be the label that nobody wants. It is a reminder that if the organisation does not increase it’s pace of innovation, then it may well find itself out of the race. And nobody wants that.
In his 1995 classic strategy book The Innovators Dilemma, Clayton Christensen uses the terms leader and follower to describe two types of organisations in established markets and their respective approaches to sustaining innovation. Christensen possibly built on terms used in earlier research published in late 80’s and early 90’s by various academics. The author Steve Blank has written a good summary of the possible origins of these terms on his blog.
Whilst the terms leader and fast follower are useful for distinguishing between two different approaches to corporate innovation, the problem that I have found with using them in practice is that both terms have reasonably positive connotations for the managers and staff involved. Being labelled a leading organisation is generally good on a number of fronts, such as brand reputation and staff morale. Being labelled a fast follower is also seen as being generally good, as it is often considered to be the less risky strategy for realising long-term success.
The problem with not having any less complimentary or less desirable terms to choose from beyond these two reasonably complimentary labels is that it lets organisations that are not really innovating kid themselves. If your organisation is not a leader, then its too easy to claim that it must be a fast follower, even if you are not really that fast or following at all.
However, I found that by using the analogy of a long distance athletics race I could add in two additional new useful terms — off the pace and out of the race. Using these two new terms seem to provide organisations and their manager’s with a bit more leeway when carrying out a self-assessment of their true approach to innovation.
Whilst the term off the pace is not a great label to have, it does not necessarily come across as a harsh criticism of the organisation or its managers. When asked in an open way, it can come across as more as a concerned question which can lead to honest debate and reflection as to the true state and need for innovation within the organisation.
The term off the pace also comes across as probably being just a temporary state of affairs, rather than a permanent status, which could be rectified if the organisation committed to kick-in a bit more innovation effort to get back up to pace.
Out of the race, on the other hand, is intentionally chosen to be the label that nobody wants. It is a reminder that if the organisation does not increase it’s pace of innovation, then it may well find itself out of the race. And nobody wants that.