Adapt For-Profit
Principles
for Association
Innovation
BY LYNDA J. PATTERSON, MS, CAE
In 2009, during a meeting of a Wisconsin Society of Associa- tion Executives-sponsored CEO roundtable in Milwaukee, discus- sion turned toward innovation and how it is practiced within
associations. The topic so inspired the
participants that they made it their
charge to thoroughly explore the subject. A year and a half later, the efforts
of those discussions have resulted in
a whitepaper, an online community, a
national summits, and a self-assess-ment tool for associations to measure
their innovation readiness. The power of
associations is evident in this innovation
initiative, which benefits all associations struggling to find new models to
challenge their thinking and generate
the best ideas to serve their members.
The Innovation Task Force, as the
morphed CEO roundtable came to be
known, began its research by studying for-profit examples of innovation.
Among the cases examined: Starbucks’
online innovation network, based on
gathering and ranking the improvement
ideas of its dedicated fans; Proctor and
Gamble’s “Connect and Develop” initia-
tive; Innocentive, an innovation network
originally created by Eli Lilly to drive
new product development; and findings
from innovation thought leaders such as
Ram Charan, IDEO and Inovo.
Comparing Associations,
For-Profits
With each of these examples, the task
force identified principles of innovation within the for-profit world and then
compared and “scored” these same
principles against associations. It found
that although associations have inherent assets regarding culture and community, many barriers exist in achieving
the results found in these for-profit
examples.
As noted in the “Innovation for
Associations” whitepaper, the task
force through their research noted four
universal and necessary principles for
innovation:
1.;The;culture;of;innovation;is;driven
from;the;top. Like most organiza-
tional cultures, innovation began
with the organization’s leadership.
Several different leadership struc-
tures existed, but the organizations
with innovative cultures invariably
reflected a commitment to innova-
tion among their most senior leader-
ship, and organizations that wished
to adopt an innovation culture had
leadership teams that embraced,
advocated for, and supported that
change. Attempts to drive innovation
from the middle or only one portion
of the organization invariably failed,
because any innovative action that
fell outside the boundaries of the
existing culture did not receive the
leadership support or resources it
needed to get off the ground. The
lesson that these organizations
learned was that a commitment must
be made at the very top in order to
create a culture of innovation, and
that leadership must drive the cul-
tural change necessary to support
and reorganize the organization for
that function.
