When a company creates a dedicated 'innovation arm,' it indicates that innovation is not integrated into the core organization. True progress requires the entire company to be focused on moving things forward, rather than siloing the responsibility into a single, often ineffective, department.
Related Insights
An innovation arm's performance isn't its "batting average." If a team pursues truly ambitious, "exotic" opportunities, a high failure rate is an expected and even positive signal. An overly high success rate suggests the team is only taking safe, incremental bets, defeating its purpose.
Despite being seen as innovation hubs, universities face identical organizational barriers as large corporations. Academics report that internal power structures, cultural inertia, and siloed departments create bottlenecks that prevent them from effectively commercializing novel IP, mirroring corporate struggles.
Corporate creativity follows a bell curve. Early-stage companies and those facing catastrophic failure (the tails) are forced to innovate. Most established companies exist in the middle, where repeating proven playbooks and playing it safe stifles true risk-taking.
If a company creates a siloed "innovation team," it's a sign the main product organization is stuck in "business as usual" maintenance. Innovation should be a mindset embedded across all teams, not an isolated function delegated to a select few.
Companies fail at collaboration due to behavioral issues, not a shortage of good ideas. When teams operate in silos, believing "I know better," and are not open to challenging themselves or embracing "crazy ideas," progress stalls. Breaking down these habitual, protective behaviors is essential for creating a fluid and truly innovative environment.
As companies scale, the "delivery" mindset (efficiency, spreadsheets) naturally pushes out the "discovery" mindset (creativity, poetry). A CEO's crucial role is to act as "discoverer-in-chief," protecting the innovation function from being suffocated by operational demands, which prevents the company from becoming obsolete.
Afeyan advises against making breakthrough innovation everyone's responsibility, as it's unsustainable and disruptive to daily jobs. Instead, companies should create a separate group with different motivations, composition, and rewards, focused solely on discontinuous leaps.
Siphoning off cutting-edge work to a separate 'labs' group demotivates core teams and disconnects innovation from those who own the customer. Instead, foster 'innovating teams' by making innovation the responsibility of the core product teams themselves.
The 'move fast and break things' mantra is often counterproductive to scalable growth. True innovation and experimentation require a structured framework with clear guardrails, standards, and measurable outcomes. Governance enables scale; chaos prevents it.
Leaders often frame innovation as a monumental, revolutionary act, which can stifle progress. A more practical approach is to define it as incremental improvement. Fostering a culture where teams focus on making small, consistent enhancements to existing processes makes innovation a daily, achievable habit rather than a rare, intimidating event.