Idea and Innovation Blog

There is a healthy debate regarding the benefits of automating the innovation workflow process versus routing ideas manually. From our perspective, both sides are right.

Because we would be loathe to create more ambiguity about this thorny subject, let us outline why a workflow strategy designed around inclusiveness is better than choosing one methodology exclusively.

Ideas are lumps of clay until the communal artist refines it into a masterpiece; and all that takes the right input, in the right amount, by the right participants and at right time. The combination of these is often different for each idea, given that they have:

• Varying benefits
• Differing goals
• More or less complexity
• Faster or slower speed of execution
• More or fewer participants
• Ranges of expertise
• Scope of financial impacts
• Market (Internal/external) timing considerations

Now if one adds subsets to each of these attributes, which could easily multiply the characteristics, features and ultimate needs-sets, how can anyone anticipate the many workflow permutations that will be right for any given (and yet unknown) idea? So when we return to the bi-polar answer of having both routing types, the Fuzzy Front-End is best serviced with human intervention to get the idea off on the right track; within a couple of exchanges, the promising idea already narrows in focus and can then be picked-up by an automated workflow – once we know where we’re going, it makes sense to channel it into a workflow model that is used to delivering that part of the business model.

Because there is a lot of multi and concurrent tasking that occurs at the Front-End, flexibility is your greatest ally to insure that your idea can overcome submission-inertia and build the kind of momentum thru the development chain in order to get the right resources. It doesn’t necessarily guarantee that each idea will be a winner, but it does deliver the promise that each idea will have the same optimized chance for success.