Involvism – Method 5: Creation

October 23 View Comments Category: Creation, Involvism

This is the 5th method of Involvism. The entire series published to date can be found by clicking here.

Mantra

The creation of new product, service, experience and format is a fundamental component of enabling value, efficiency, productivity, profitability and scale. Even a successfully static model is at risk of being replicated or replaced with a newer, cleaner, easier or more valuable version. Creation of ‘the new’ is more than a production mandate – the mentality of constant renewal is a safeguard against bland, boring and unemotional offerings.

Key Actions

1. Accept that current propositions are limited in longevity

2. Allow flexibility in concepts for iteration

3. Account positive and negative trends in response, interaction and discussion around versions

4. Apply revisions openly and unapologetically

Involvist Viewpoint

One of the biggest problems to face an organisation is success. Achieving goals that were once seen as unattainable, places the mind in a state of comfort, satisfaction and stability. However, the last thing an organisation should do is rest easy and assume that everything is fine. This isn’t to take away from celebration and reward – far from it – but Involvism suggests a constant struggle to reinvent, redefine and revise the offerings it produces.

To constantly create, is to constantly try and better the standard. It is a longing, a desire, a mission that never ceases to improve itself and settle for the now. The natural extension of an organisation creating is to enable others to create, thereby facilitating an onward cycle of co-creation which enjoys the jointly accountable benefit of shared glory.

To begin with, it is vital that there is an acceptance the the current propositions are limited in their longevity. However successful, it is probable that today’s big products will not be tomorrow’s.

This statement, to those enjoying success, is often unimaginable. With this in mind, it is a truism to state that those who are most likely to continue creating are those with limited success. One success is attained (however you class success), a common reaction is to replicate the same thing, over and over again. For example – a massively successful company’s lucrative revenue stream of advertising can be viewed as an infinite money pot – whereas the assumptions of longevity may well be vastly inaccurate.

There must be an inherent flexibility built in to an organisation’s process of development to allow further iterations at a quick pace. Development cycles of 18 months in a world that changes far quicker, don’t have a realistic turnaround to keep up with the game. This fact is sometimes brushed away with excuses of ‘the way the company is structured’ or that ‘doing what we do is far too complicated to be quick’ but actually the issue is in the psychology of creation. Many companies view creation as something that has to be done internally and has to follow a tried and tested process. However, giving others the tools to create with you and being agile in your development process, enables quicker response to market demand and fluctuation.

The accounting of the positive and negative responses, interactions and discussions is vital to form a feedback loop that directs creation and any revisions should be applied with full transparency and reasoning – rather than an unexplained update that seems to have no benefit.

The healthiest mindset of creation is therefore one of exploration, discovery, openness and flexibility. It is from the top down and bottom up, across the entire workforce and user base. Only then can such a methodology enable the value, efficiency, productivity, profitability and scale that an Involvist company enjoys.

  • fletchnz
    Must say jMac, this is my favourite post in this series. I don't know how many times I've reworked our site, added some product features and then sat back thinking, 'right, that's done and dusted' - then pretty much straight away realized that's not the case - more often than not because customers or other people who make up the sphere of influence surrounding what we do have suggested otherwise.

    As a slightly different comment on the longevity theme I was at a business lunch in NZ a few years back listening to a high-level Japanese business man and in the Q&A I asked, 'How far forward does your business plan look?' and his reply was '250 years'. At first I was stunned but on reflection realized that they were modelling real longevity....
  • Thanks!

    It's certainly true that 'finishing' something is an invalid concept in today's world - this needs to be embraced to maximise.

    250 year business plan? I would LOVE to see that. That kinda shiz does it for me...!!!! :)
blog comments powered by Disqus