The Innovation Mentor

The shared SOHO/Home environment can be just as challening an environment as the enterprise.



For my enviroment I rely very heavily on VMware to keep business critical machines clean and operational and to ‘sandbox’ machines used for experimental or more frivoulous activities.

I run two VMware host machines according the following strategy:

Machine 1. Linux Ubuntu 8.04LTS 64Bit VMware Server 2.x

This machine runs VMwaer Server 2.x and is kept clean and tidy and not upgraded except for essential maintenance. I use this machine for mission critical / enterprise application virtual machines.
These are virtual machines which must be accessible to the outside world all the time ie web, mail, versioning repository, mirror partners, etc. In each case an individual VM supports each service.
There is no general desktop computing on any of the VMs which run on this host.

Machine 2. Windows7 64Bit VMware Workstation 8.x

This machine runs VMware Worstation 8.x and is kept clean and tidy and not upgraded except for essential maintenance. I use this machine for all desktop computing application virtual machines.
These are virtual machines which run applications such as email, office applications,web browsing, product development and design activieties. This machine also runs ‘client application virtual machines’ which allow me to keep client work completely isolated on a virtual machine by virtual machine basis.

The logic behind isolating client application virtual machines is quite simple. The nature of many projects involves a complex collection of development tools and configurations in order to undertake the work involved. It is vital that the working integrity of these machines is maintained and not polluted by the installation of applications or configurations needed to perform work for other clients. In some cases these will be Linux machines and in others they might be Windows machines. A single client may also have different projects on more than one client application virtual machine as the needs dictate.

The wonderful thing about this approach is that I may need to revist a client project 12 months or more later and this way I am confident I can simply pick up where I left off with no concerns that the working/development environment as become broken by other client work in the the meatime.

Access

I access all of these VMs, both enterprise and desktop, in several ways (and sometime multiples ways simultaneously), local and remote VM console, VNC and RDP.
In the SOHO environment I access these resources from a typical fixed desktop workstation which has been setup with multiple monitors for a productive environement.
If I need to work remotely I will do one of the following .

a) For lightwieght access I will use secure VNC or RDP from my laptop computer irectly accessing the running VMs back in the office.
b) For heavywieght access such as travel and remote offline work I transfer the VMs I need onto my laptop before I leave and then transfer them back again when I return.

In many cases there is no need to copy an entire VM back from my laptop, just the data and I retain an contingency copies of the VMs on my laptop.

My General Rules For VMs

1. All general purpose VMs are 32bit for maximum portability.
2. 64bit VMs are only created when absolutely necessary, ie 64bit software testing.
3. All general purpose VMs are 2 CPUs for maximum portability.
4. All VMs use DHCP.

Backups

I regulary backup all VMs by shutting down the VM and making a local copy on the same host machine. Once the copy is made the VM is immedaitely brought back up again to minimise off-line time. How often this is performed depends on how dynamically your VM changes in its core build.

Archival backups are only ever made from the VM copies using the CPU horsepower on a separate machine to the VM host. In this way the VMs can be compressed and stored on a NAS solution without impacting the performance of the VM host. This is important when compressing 64GB VMs! Altimates the compressed NAS archives go to off-set backup as part of normal back best practive.

It is important to note that VM backups are not a substitue for core application data backups. Normal best practice for application data backups are always used independently of VM backups.

... Robert

Every day we are faced with challenges. Some of these are trivial little things we quickly deal with then move on. Others consume us, tax our persistence, alienate our loved ones and test us to our limits. We live, work and play between these two extremes every day and no matter how trivial or how profound the problem we always seem to find a solution.

How often have you relied on wisdom from an unknown ally?
How often has Google found someone in a similar plight, someone who has taken the time to share their solution?
How often have you taken the time to give thanks?
How often have you taken the time to share your own solutions?

A recent experience

Over the last week I had been wrestling with a very narrow and niche problem of access control inside a Subversion repository using the ‘Ruby on Rails’ based Redmine application – a very obscure and very niche challenge! After a fair amount of Google searching I eventually found a very old piece of someone’s work which purported to solve my problem. Unfortunately the work was no longer directly applicable to the latest version of the application so I pulled it apart and merged it with the latest release. It did not solve my problem completely but was good enough for my needs.

I could have left it there as often I have done before, being too busy to even thank the original author (which is not an easy thing to do as it often requires registration on a site I may not want to be involved with). This time, however, I decided to show my thanks to the original author by contributing my work as well.

My contribution

I took the time to learn how to create a universally applicable patch of my work against the current release. I took the time to register on the site and to upload and present my work for anyone else. And that’s where I left it, feeling good about my effort and if nothing more having left documentation of my work somewhere I could find it in the future if I needed it. To my surprise, a few days later I was contacted by another organisation that had already taken my work and extended it with an invitation to continue being involved.

I have learned three important lessons from this experience:

Be grateful: It’s important to be grateful for the collective generosity of people who have contributed their time and effort to publicly share their solutions to their own challenges.

Share: The two best ways to show gratitude are to thank people personally for their contributions and to share our own solutions.

Create opportunity: You never know who out there in the big wide world needs that precious wisdom that only you can provide – and you never know where the sharing of it will take you.

Next time I am faced with problem or a challenge and find someone on-line has shared their solution I will make the effort to thank them. Next time I solve a problem or a challenge and can share my work with the on-line community, I will make the effort to publish it. Next time I feel that thanking or sharing is just too much effort, I will remind myself how important it is to create opportunity and re-think my attitude.

The amazing resource of people and the sharing of their knowledge on the internet is a testament to technology, ideas and the generosity of humanity and I am so grateful to be a part of it.


Robert Rath – http://www.innovation-mentor.com

Preposterous you say. There’s nothing scary about a Wiki. It’s just another way to present information via a browser. Oh how people miss the point. In my previous article, Making Wikis Work – Part 1, I discussed how a Wiki can be a powerful tool to both document and communicate tacit knowledge.

Fear, The Great Inhibitor

Despite the most enthusiastic IT management or the tireless efforts of champion contributors, it seems that Wikis are just too scary for mere mortals. My own first-hand experience when people are actually asked to contribute has seen a barrage of reasons such as:

What if I break it?
What if I lose everything?
What if I do something wrong?
What if I get some facts wrong?
What if I upset someone?
What if I can’t write?
What if I am seen to be wasting time and not doing my job?
What if, what if, what if!? It’s way too scary for me. I am sure that someone else will do it instead!

Addressing and alleviating these fears is not a simple problem. New contributors can be further intimidated by seasoned contributors adding to their fear.

Knowledge Community and Trust

All of the issues raised in my ‘What if?’ points can be managed through Wiki tools and procedural guidelines. On an intellectual level you can argue away any fear a new contributor chooses to announce, yet still the fear remains. In order to make the significant shift from being an information consumer to being a knowledge sharer, the following seven ideas must be impressed intellectually, emotionally and culturally.

1. I do have something valuable to share.
2. I will put my contributions where I think they should be based on others’ work.
3. I do trust my peers to fix any mistakes I make and offer constructive suggestions.
4. I will not take personally any changes made by others to my contributions.
5. When making changes to the contributions of others I will always be respectful, and ensure the value of the original contribution is not diminished.
6. The knowledge shared by others is valuable to me.
7. The knowledge shared in the Wiki belongs to all of my knowledge community.

A plan to educate and encourage new contributors must take on board these seven ideas and get them really entrenched. This will give you the best chance to build a solid knowledge community. The tools and guidelines will then be seen as facilitators, not just business rules.

Finally, a community based on sharing and trust will be one in which no one ever allows ‘What if’ to get in the way of contributing.


Robert Rath – http://www.innovation-mentor.com

Every day we read information that we are expected to trust as being truthful, correct and appropriate for what we need. How we choose to trust this information is a complex mix of personal experience, peer scrutiny, intuitive feel and legal consequence.

As a designer I am constantly working with information about materials, components or systems that I need to trust in order to make decisions. Being able to trust working information is pivotal to being efficient.

Often I am faced with having to make a decision based on some information that I do not trust completely.

When this happens, I have to undertake independent verification, which stymies productivity.

Here is my short-list of questions that I use to help me make a decision about how much I should trust information.

1. Is the information published by a manufacturer or author whom I know and trust from my own experience?
2. Is the information published by a manufacturer or author whom I trust by reputation, or the advice of peers I respect?
3. Is the information missing any key points?
4. Is the information rigorously consistent?
5. Is the information believable based on my own experience?
6. Is the use of language and style consistent?

Here’s a recent example of inconsistency: I requested and received a specification document from a manufacturer for an infra-red LED (Light Emitting Diode) that would operate outside the visible spectrum and therefore invisible to the human eye. The data provided looked very favourable for my project; however, one key section caused me some concern. The document stated that the product was suitable for applications involving indicator panels, mobile phone displays and decorative lighting – completely at odds with the technical specs and my requirements!

I’m guessing that this document had been crafted from another document as a template with poor or zero checking of the final document. A simple error like this casts doubt not only on the trustworthiness of all information in the document, but on all documentation from that manufacturer.

I will explore some of the other warning signs in my list in future posts.

When you cannot trust information or when data does not seem quite right, then you must make decisions that are based on risk and consequence rather than on trust.

Sometimes the risk that you are being misled or that the information is ambiguous/incomplete may be high, but the consequence low. In other cases, the risk may be low but the consequence very high. In either case, a decision about managing the risk is usually quite simple. Managing the risk when risk and consequence are less well defined, however, becomes more problematic. In any case productivity suffers.

When speed and efficiency are vital, I will pay more for information, components or systems where I have a high level of trust and I know that I can deliver quickly with low risk.

When minimising the cost or other drivers such as volume/count manufacturing come into play, however, I often find myself using information, components and systems where my level of trust is low. When this happens, I have to manage the risks accordingly.

Every now and then I get to treat myself to a cool new toy and more often than not I am delighted with some new found utility. Ok, being more specific, the super cool match-up of JoikuSpot on my Nokia n97.

The Nokia n97 is the proclaimed flagship of the Nokia fleet and I have waited more than eight months to get my hands on one to play with. Just like any new mobile phone owner, when I finally got my Nokia n97 I systematically navigated through every application, option, connectivity facility and feature just to get familiar (doesn’t everyone?). This post is not a review of the phone. You will find plenty of those elsewhere. This post is about one of the coolest ideas in a mobile phone that I have seen for a long time. I discovered JoikuSpot!

Imagine you are meeting an associate for a working lunch at your favourite Wi-Fi cafe. Both equipped with laptops, you boot up and start looking for the hotspot. To your dismay you discover the Wi-Fi hotspot is down. The cafe staff apologises but as the problem is with their ISP, there is nothing they can do. For a moment you consider your options. Should you pack up and head back to the office or abandon your favourite cafe for the Wi-Fi certainty of MacDonald’s? Then you remember JoikuSpot.

With a wry smile, out comes your Nokia n97 and you launch the JoikuSpot application. You both search again on your laptops and there it is, the JoikuSpot Wi-Fi hotspot! Moments later you are both on your own private LAN with Internet access. The working lunch has been saved and you both have been spared the indignity of McDonald’s. Let the on-line gaming commence…

JoikuSpot by Joikusoft gives you freedom not only to have broadband access anywhere you go, but to share it without all the complications of trying to configure your phone as a broadband modem. A word of warning though: you’d better make sure that you have a good data plan with your mobile carrier and that you have disabled all your peer sharing because you will have burned megabytes before you realise it.

I love my new Nokia n97 for all its very cool features and applications. JoikuSpot was a wonderful surprise and a powerful new utility to have on the road or at my favourite cafe.

Like many of us emabracing social media forums such as blogs, Facebook and Twitter we try and find that fine line between involvment which adds value and being overwhelmed. Of these forums, I think that Twitter is one of the most interesting.

Twitter is like a global stream of concious snippets. You give your thoughts (or tweets) to the world and essentially have access to everyone elses.

Jennifer Liston, in her blog article ‘Blogs, Facebook and Twitter: the new e-pulpits?’, gives an interesting perspective on a new breed of evangelists and their prolific tweets of wisdom.

What do you think when you read one of their 140 character tweets of wisdom: the sweet tweet of birdsong or misplaced cackle?!

In his article ‘Reasonable approach to risk management‘, Zern Liew draws our attention to the issue of managing business risk from a governance perspective. He asks the question; what does doing a good job at risk management actually mean?

In my opinion, if a business only ever managed risk with respect to governance it puts its future existence at risk. Now that’s risky!

Risky Business

Doing business is risky, commercial relationships are risky, developing new products and services is risky, suppliers are risky, supply channels are risky. In other words risk is an intrinsic aspect of our business environment. How such risks are managed comes down to such things as culture , values, personalities and style. In some cases business have a well defined protocol and procedures for managing risk but these are in the minority and usually associated will businesses who deal in risk as a commodity. Is it any wonder that risk management is such a grey topic.

A Past Risk Experience

I have one experience where I watched the managing director of a company ‘risk manage’ a once creative, innovative company into a timid, reactionary former shell of itself. By all observed accounts this manager was fiscally diligent, managed corporate governance issues without fault and would probably make the claim that they had done everything reasonable that can be expected to protect the business. To this manager a ‘risk’ was something to be avoided rather than managed. Risks were seen as the things which could go wrong with the ’status-quo’ and these were indeed managed well. Innovation was seen as simply too risky.

Innovation, Risk and Reward

Innovation and risk go hand in hand. A new idea which flies in the face of convention carries a risk so great that any responsible manager would drop it like a hot potato. These ideas begin their lives as huge uphill battles with individuals being willing to risk their reputations, careers, businesses or fortune. These very same ideas have brought us such life changing products as convenience foods, air travel and personal computers. Even a modest new product development program is risky to a business in terms of cash, time and resources.

There are plenty of very good articles about managing risk and reward. Some of the best are written aimed at the trading industry where risks are a necessary part of the process. Innovation should be treated just the same, as a risk taken for a potential reward. Like trading, the certainty does not come from picking the right company, backing the right horse or coming up with that killer innovation, but rather comes from being consistent at taking well considered risks. The risks in developing innovative new products, risks in creating new business relationships, risks in exploring new supply chain models are the kinds or risk businesses actually need. Avoiding these risks is truly risky business.

My Take

I believe that good risk management will not only look at the negative consequences of not being prepared for something which might happen (traditional risk management) but also the rewards to be gained by actively taking risks. By managing negative consequence risk diligently and sensibly taking on the high reward risks, a business manager can confidently say that they are doing everything possible to protect their business.


Robert Rath – http://innovation-mentor.com

A recurring theme in conversations with successful individuals is some defining moment, an ‘aha’ moment often prompted by a saying or a quote. Suddenly veils and obstructions vanish and what needs to be done becomes clear to achieve your gaols.

Jennifer Liston in her post ‘Revelationary Statements‘, shares one of those moments. Read about Jennifer’s ‘Aha’ moment at http://www.wordsworx.com and share your own experience.

Robert Rath – http://www.innovation-mentor.com

I am a strong proponent of using systems to plan and manage process. This is not because I am a control person; it’s simply because without these systems, I would not be able to cope with the complexity of the work I do. In the design and manufacturing world, one small error in a line of source code or one missed letter in a supplier’s order code on a bill of materials containing hundreds of entires can (and often does) translate into a very expensive recovery exercise.

For this reason, managing communications with clients is vital to a successful project.

Using A Communication System

When I begin working with a new client, the first thing I do is to put a layer of management around our communication. As I have discussed in a previous post, I am particularly wary of email. This wariness is especially true where a team is involved. I create an on-line collaborative project team space which any team member can interact with using a web browser. All relevant communications and documents are placed into this space as a collaborative workspace in addition to sending and receiving associated email.

By providing a collaborative workspace comprising wiki, document versioning, issue tracking and light-weight project management, I can add significant value to a project. This value exists in keeping all team members informed and capturing tacit knowledge which would otherwise be lost at the completion of a project. This value is not always obvious to a client, and needs to be marketed well to be appreciated.

Reality Check – A Real Client

All this is wonderful for a client who has poor internal systems, recognises the value in mine and participates enthusiastically. Although I have such clients, they are not the usual situation. A new client of mine was very quick to come back to me and say, “oh, we use Product-X to manage all this stuff” and made it quite clear they were not interested in participating with my system. Moreover, they immediately became concerned that important information about our project would be lost if I continued to use my system for their work.

My first reaction was to be ‘put out’ by this. They made no effort to even look at how my system would benefit our project! Of course I did not challenge my client on this point, I agreed politely that their existing system was important (more on that later), and then hunkered down to my own internal project of proving them wrong!

Venting Steam Productively

So I procured a copy of Product-X amd implemented an internal installation matching my client’s installation. I explored different installation and deployment strategies and after a significant amount of internal work, I was happy I had found a way to provide a scalable, hosted, multiple instance web service of Product-X (which I now intend offering to new clients as an adjunct to my existing system).

Now I had learned Product-X inside and out, its pros and cons and the value it creates. I had burned off my initial frustration of being ‘put out’ with a solid look at my client’s internal systems, and I now saw the immense value that Product-X already provided them. Of course their system was very important!

So how did it compare with mine? Sorry, but it does not even come close in terms of functionality. But that is not important to them.

Communicating On The Client’s Terms

So now we communicate on my client’s terms using their systems (which I now understand). Although their systems are inelegant, limited in functionality and require a lot of human intervention, their systems are their own. They know them, they have invested heavily in them, they use them and they value them. Moreover, they value me using them!

Lesson Learned

By taking time to understand the existing systems within an organisation and the mechanisms – both formal and informal – by which communications occur, by becoming knowledgeable in their use and participating in them (if appropriate), I add so much more value than I ever could by imposing my own requirements.

Communicating with clients on their terms may not be consistent with how you might want to operate. It might be inefficient and tedious. Unless you do so, however, neither of you will derive the true value from the relationship.

Robert Rath – http://www.innovation-mentor.com

Information technology has made incredible leaps forward for business processes bringing efficiency, leverage of information, B2B transactions, management, reporting and much, much more.

Consider this, however: maybe we’re still on a plateau where the current IT toolbox is only appearing to meet most businesses’ needs.

Unfulfilled need drives innovation. The more desperate the need, the greater the desire to innovate. I believe that only this kind of desire brings about adoption from a sea of bubbling IT and business process innovations happening all around us.

I believe that the current fiscal climate will indeed expose unfulfilled needs even in already well-run businesses.

As a product designer/developer, I tend to focus on product innovations. However, I see many parallels between product innovation and business process innovation.

In my recent article, Thoughts On Early Adoption, I listed the three Ts of an early adopter:

The Toy. Playing with our new toy just for the purpose of discovering everything it does.
The Tool. Integrating our gadget into our everyday life.
The Trash. Discarding the gadget in favour of something better.

Those businesses that are prepared to play with innovations around new IT and business process technologies, and that are willing to dump the ones that don’t work, will be the leaders.

We can either wait and see or jump in with a passion!

Robert Rath – http://www.innovation-mentor.com

Some employers support it.
Some employers give lip service to it.
Professional bodies and associations demand it.
We all know we should be doing it.

Regularly!

But how many of us do?
How many of us further our education in a consistent and habitual way?

In my opinion, learning on the job does not constitute continuing education for the very reason that the skills learned or knowledge gained is intrinsic to the work you are presently doing. This does not mean that on the job learning is not important, just limiting. I believe that continuing education should be outside of the immediate scope of what you do in your work. Continuing education should be about preparing your self for new roles you aspire to or for exploring other interests which excite your enthusiasm.

How Much Is Enough?

This is really up to you but I can not imaging anything less than 4 hours a week is really of benefit. Somewhere between 4 and 16 hours per week is quite manageable even with work and family commitments. You’d be surprised where you are able to find those 16 hours from when you actually want to.

Structured Or Not?

For most of us the easiest way to continue our education is through formal courses of study. The benefits not only include having a structured learning environment pre-packaged for us but usually lead to formally recognised qualifications. Structured continuing education also has the most credibility in the eyes of our peers, employers and our family. Going it alone on the other hand might very well be far more rewarding and lead to skills and knowledge not easily acquired though formal courses. This kind of continuing education is not for everyone though. Its undisciplined nature requires a special focus and enthusiasm for it to really stick and become a valuable part of your learning.

A True Story

Some time back I hired a university graduate who took me by surprise. As a condition of his employment he requested a four day working week. He was clear he wanted one full day a week for continuing education. He was also very clear that this was not to be linked to any formal study but be used as he saw fit. Over the years of his employment there were times when his ‘day off’ was treated with contempt by his peers and by some management. However, in those years he brought new skills and capabilities to the organisation raising both the efficiency and the professionalism of the design group he worked in. Since then I have watched him grow from strength to strength in his career.

Just Do It

Decide how important continuing education really is to you and find a way to make it a habitual part of your week. Once you have decided, just do it!

Robert Rath – http://www.innovation-mentor.com

I have just experienced an example of customer support that highlights a few important lessons. This is not in the category of ‘support stories from hell’, there are plenty of those around. This story had a good ending but the lessons to be learned were obvious.

Customer Support

For some time I have lived with a VPN problem on my modem/router and regularly visited the manufacturer’s website looking for a firmware upgrade which specifically addressed the issue. While navigating the site I found the firmware page which indicated an update was available with links to both the firmware and the installation instructions. The instructions were there but no link to the firmware!

So begins the fun! I rang the manufacturer’s support line and waited about 30 minutes on hold before being answered by a real person. I explained the problem with the website. The support person was very helpful and offered to send a copy of the firmware via email. The email promptly arrived. At this stage I was reasonable happy with the service.

After inspecting the firmware in more detail I realised that it was not correct. In fact it was more than 18 months old with at least two revisions since. I responded to the email and the email bounced back as having no recipient. So back to calling customer support again.

Another 30 minutes on hold later I fortunately got the same support person who was genuinely concerned about what had happened. I was put on hold again while they would look into what had happened. The call then dropped and I was left disconnected.

Calling now for the third time and another 30 minutes on hold later I got someone different. I explained to this new person what had happened and he proceeded to tell me that the firmware I had received was indeed the current and correct one. Only after I challenged him on this did he put me on hold again while he checked with his manager. While on hold for about 10 minutes this time I heard my incoming email and sure enough, there was the correct firmware. I waited for him to return, thanked him and ended the call.

New firmware now installed and tested I pondered on how a 5 minute task had turned itself into an 80 minute ordeal, involved maybe 5 individuals and diminished productivity all round. All from a single little mistake on a web support page.

Lessons Learned 1. – Get Someone to ‘Play Customer’

Companies usually have a formal release process which checks that all steps in the release of some content to the customer have been followed. In this case either no such process existed or someone simply forgot a step. This is an example of a fragile process. One in which the consequence of a mistake is not initially obvious. The simple addition of a ‘Play Customer’ step would have turned a fragile process into a robust one. That final test of someone going through the experience of being a customer. Better yet, get a real customer to test it! You’d be surprised what customers notice or find that everyone else has missed.

Lessons Learned 2. – Get Your Story Right

There is nothing more frustrating than calling an organisation for support and getting conflicting or misleading information. The website showed one thing, the support people said another and had to be challenged on the issue to actualy discover the problem. Had I not pushed my story I would have gotten nowhere. Worse, had I blindly installed the firmware I had received I may have had bigger recovery problems to deal with.

Lessons Learned 3. – Get Feedback

I wonder how often a customer has a bad experience with customer support and simply drops the issue or even the product because it is too much effort. A quick follow up call or email (with a real email address I can respond to) is all it would take to ascertain the success of a support incident. I certainly will not bother to give any feedback if I have to wait 30 minutes on hold just to say “yes, all is fine now”.

So in summary, customer support has to be friendly, efficient, accurate and consistent. This might sound expensive but without it those hidden costs of flapping around and losing product confidence will be significantly more costly.


Robert Rath – http://www.innovation-mentor.com

During my early years as a practising engineer I remember being preached to about ‘best practice’. Later as an engineering manager I was the one doing the preaching. “To be a world class engineering team we need to do what world class engineering teams do, implement best practice”. But what does best practice really mean and is it really the best thing to do?

The ‘myth’ is that for any operation there is a best combination of processes to yield the best outcome for the minimum effort or cost. For example, if you need to track and manage software issues you’d look at how the best software companies in the world track and manage software issues. You’d automatically label their process as best practice and implement the same. You’d be forgiven for assuming this means best outcome for minimum effort, ... or would you?

As I see it there are two main problems with the idea of ‘best practice’. They are suitability and mediocrity.

suitability

Is an industry best practice really the best solution for your operation? Would taking on a best practice impose process and rules counter productive to your unique operation? Would this so called best practice actually put you at a disadvantage?

mediocrity

As an advocate of innovation this issue is one of my favourites. How can you really shine if all you do is the same as everyone else? Sure it is important to know what best practice is, not to copy but to benchmark outcome against effort. This is what is really important to understand as it allows you to be innovative and craft new ways of doing things.

innovate

So next time you’re preached to about best practice or find yourself in the best practice pulpit, stop and think about what you are really trying to achieve. Look at industry best practice to benchmark outcome against effort then innovative and design your own exceptional operation.

Robert Rath – http://www.innovation-mentor.com

Have you ever found yourself in a business meeting and from nowhere comes an idea which may have some value but is not in keeping with the current conversation? How often have you simply made a mental note to yourself to remember it for later? Did you!?

Making a mental note of an idea is a bad idea for more reasons than just the risk of forgetting it.

Consider these three points:

1. Making mental notes to remember ideas risks them being forgotten.
2. Making mental notes to remember ideas blocks your creativity for new ideas.
3. Making mental notes to remember ideas engenders a ‘scarcity’ mentality.

I am a firm believer in the abundance of ideas and the need to get them out there, get them written down or give them away as fast as possible.

Verbalise

In meetings try and verbalise ideas as fast as possible. Get them out into the open. If an idea is out of context then write is down instead so as to not disrupt the conversation.

Write

There will be times where you simply can’t verbalise your ideas so write them down. Write them the moment they enter your thoughts then put your attention back to the conversation again. At the end of the meeting, tear out the page and offer what you have written.

Abundance vs Scarcity

When you share an idea you create a space for the next to follow. The more you share the more ideas come along and the more chance you give yourself to have those truly breakthrough ideas. When you sit on an idea, brood over it and keep it secret out of fear the effect is the complete opposite. Ideas become scarce and mediocre and creativity withers. This paradigm is every much as true for companies as it is for individuals.

Being sharing and abundant with your ideas must of course be tempered with corporate responsibilities. Legal instruments such as non-disclosure will help here but the more you can share ‘off the cuff’ the more abundant your ideas and creativity will become.

Robert Rath – http://www.innovation-mentor.com

While recently watching someone playing solitaire during their lunch break I found myself wondering if this was a healthy break from the job, a sign of problematic undercurrents or just a mindless addiction.

From these thoughts came a novel idea you might like to consider.

Solitaire as a Management Metric

Could you actually use solitaire playing as a management metric? You could record the number of times solitaire is played during designated breaks and normal work periods, and whether games were played over until a win occurred or the player gave up.

The true value of solitaire as a metric is to not let people know it is being monitored. This ensures it remains a valid indicator of the player and his/her environment. You could then introduce other changes to the workplace and see how solitaire playing behaviour changes.

Of course, using solitaire as a management metric must be done with care and not taken too seriously. But who knows what you might learn! At least it would be fun to try out. If you do, please let me know what you discover.

Robert Rath – http://www.innovation-mentor.com