In large projects or small, the need for the big idea is the same: one project, one big idea. That's one reason why organizations that tackle large projects have disproportionately smaller needs for new or big ideas.
Since large projects are more accessible to large organizations, those that tackle large projects tend to have more people, many of whom are very capable and creative. In large organizations, we find more people with new ideas that have more trouble finding truly receptive listeners. That causes some of them to try harder, further annoying the people whose jobs are to generate and champion ideas. Tensions develop, and frustration builds. Sometimes, good people leave.
There is a better way. It begins with the recognition that capable, creative people have good ideas — lots of them — and those ideas often apply to parts of the company other than their own. Here are some tips for crafting a large organization that can deal with unsolicited cross-functional contributions.
- Assign process and problem owners a responsibility to listen
- Sometimes people who "own" a particular process or problem can feel that contributions from others are infringements on that ownership.
- Make clear to everyone that responsibility for a process or problem includes responsibility to listen to and evaluate ideas from elsewhere in the organization.
- Make originality a pre-requisite
- Devise measures to control repetition and redundant suggestions. Deprecate rehashing of settled debates. One possibility: make previous contributions available to anyone contemplating making a contribution. Make the history anonymous if necessary.
- Requiring originality dramatically reduces the load on recipients. By assigning contributors responsibility for determining that their contributions aren't redundant or repetitive, we reduce the flow of contributions and improve their quality.
- Recognize that for new ideas, "not your job" is a toxic concept
- Recognize that for new
ideas, "not your job"
is a toxic concept - When we tell people, either explicitly or otherwise, that thinking about a particular process or innovation isn't their job, we're creating frustration and tension, and discouraging initiative.
- Sometimes, only the internal customers of a process can really see where it can be improved. And sometimes only people far enough away from a problem can see the solution. Contributions from afar are often critical to success.
- Provide nonbureaucratic, responsive contribution channels
- Since great people are always thinking, give them a way to pass their thoughts along. It can be as simple as an email address or a wiki. Or it can be an actual appointment with a person.
- Whatever you do, be certain that people feel heard. Automated responses are ineffective. Mechanisms that just listen without evidence of active consideration fool nobody.
Unless you own the idea-management process of your organization, beware. If you offer these ideas — or anything like them — they'll likely be received as unsolicited contributions. Tread lightly. Top Next Issue
Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
Related articles
More articles on Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:
- Films Not About Project Teams: II
- Here's Part II of a list of films and videos about project teams that weren't necessarily meant to be
about project teams. Most are available to borrow from the public library, and all are great fun.
- Coping with Layoff Survival
- Your company has just done another round of layoffs, and you survived yet again. This time was the most
difficult, because your best pal was laid off, and you're even more fearful for your own job security.
How can you cope with survival?
- Problem-Solving Preferences
- When people solve problems together, differences in preferred approaches can surface. Some prefer to
emphasize the goal or objective, while others focus on the obstacles. This difference is at once an
asset and annoyance.
- Congruent Decision Making: II
- Decision makers who rely on incomplete or biased information are more likely to make decisions that
don't fit the reality of their organizations. Here's Part II of a framework for making decisions that fit.
- Collaborations That Need to Be Cooperations
- Modern products and services are so complex that many people cooperate and collaborate to produce them.
When people are collaborating but the work actually requires merely cooperating, risks arise that can
threaten the success of the group's efforts.
See also Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness and Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming December 11: White Water Rafting as a Metaphor for Group Development
- Tuckman's model of small group development, best known as "Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing," applies better to development of some groups than to others. We can use a metaphor to explore how the model applies to Storming in task-oriented work groups. Available here and by RSS on December 11.
- And on December 18: Subgrouping and Conway's Law
- When task-oriented work groups address complex tasks, they might form subgroups to address subtasks. The structure of the subgroups and the order in which they form depend on the structure of the group's task and the sequencing of the subtasks. Available here and by RSS on December 18.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
Follow Rick
Recommend this issue to a friend
Send an email message to a friend
rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed