The Innovation Show

The Innovation Show
The Innovation Show

A Global weekly show interviewing authors to inspire, educate and inform the business world and the curious. Presented by the author of "Undisruptable", this Global show speaks of something greater beyond innovation, disruption and technology. It speaks to the human need to learn: how to adapt to and love a changing world. It embraces the spirit of constant change, of staying receptive, of always learning.

  1. Stan Deetz Finale - Navigating Organizational Transitions

    20 HR. AGO

    Stan Deetz Finale - Navigating Organizational Transitions

    Navigating Organizational Transitions with Stan Deetz  In this episode, we cap off a brilliant year of growth with the insightful Stan Deetz, author of 'Leading Organizations Through Transitions'. Stan shares his expertise on managing change within organizations, focusing on technological disruptions, mergers and acquisitions, and the intricate dynamics of power shifts. We dive deep into the effects of AI on organizational structures, the concept of tacit knowledge, and the adjustments required for a healthy and resilient workforce. Stan also discusses the importance of humility and measurement in driving successful change, with practical advice on maintaining the delicate balance between efficiency and adaptability. Join us for an engaging conversation that offers valuable lessons for navigating complex organizational transitions. 00:00 Introduction and Recap 00:43 New Books and Projects 01:50 Technological Disruption and Organizational Change 03:09 The Sophomoric Effect and AI Challenges 04:44 AI's Impact on Knowledge Workers 06:17 Bias and Vigilance in AI Systems 09:05 Tacit Knowledge and Organizational Expertise 29:45 Forms, Data, and Organizational Decisions 39:14 Understanding the Impact of Our Products 39:53 Leadership and Institutional Knowledge 40:31 Navigating Organizational Transitions 41:56 The Myth of Stable Environments 43:56 The Importance of Diversity and Systems 47:43 Challenges of Short-Term Measurements 50:10 The Value of Long-Term Organizational Health 01:04:47 Cultural Sensitivity in Multinational Operations 01:11:02 The Need for Customization in Management 01:13:43 Starting Organizational Change with Humility 01:17:03 Personal and Organizational Growth   Find Stan here:    www.standeetz.org

    1h 19m
  2. Steve Kerr - Reward Systems Part 2

    DEC 14

    Steve Kerr - Reward Systems Part 2

    Creating Effective Reward Systems   In this episode of The Innovation Show, we welcome back Steve Kerr to discuss how to create positive reward systems within organizations. Steve details the 'bullseye exercise' and emphasizes the importance of defining performance in actionable terms. He shares insights from his experience at GE, covering the implementation of the 'wing to wing' approach, the impact of stretch goals, and strategies for devising comprehensive metrics. Throughout the conversation, Steve highlights the necessity of aligning rewards with business objectives and fostering a culture of candor and innovation.   00:00 Introduction and Overview 01:12 Defining Performance in Actionable Terms 01:28 The Bullseye Exercise 02:47 Connecting Incentives and Rewards 04:25 Challenges in Measurement and Bureaucracy 05:35 Real-World Examples and Cost Analysis 07:13 The Importance of Candor and Rational Behavior 14:04 Stretch Goals and Organizational Culture 23:06 Challenges in Rewarding Employees 23:23 Understanding Quartiling and Quotas 24:07 Jack Welch's Bottom 10% Rule 29:31 Financial and Non-Financial Rewards 31:54 The Importance of Timeliness in Rewards 37:31 Wing to Wing: Seeing Through the Customer's Eyes 42:26 Conclusion and Final Thoughts   On the Folly of Rewarding A,While Hoping for B https://web.mit.edu/curhan/www/docs/Articles/15341_Readings/Motivation/Kerr_Folly_of_rewarding_A_while_hoping_for_B.pdf   Aidan McCullen, Steve Kerr, reward systems, employee behavior, BF Skinner, dysfunctional behaviors, fixing reward systems, CEO memo, leadership development, GE, Goldman Sachs, ultimate rewards, boundaryless organization, performance measurement, innovative culture, healthcare system, preventive care, stretch goals, Jack Welch, candid culture

    43 min
  3. Steve Kerr - Reward Systems: Does Yours Measure Up?

    DEC 11

    Steve Kerr - Reward Systems: Does Yours Measure Up?

    Fixing Dysfunctional Behaviors in Organizations   In this episode, our guest Steve Kerr shares insights from his book on reward systems. He explains how flawed reward systems can lead to irrational behaviors in employees similar to B.F. Skinner's 'blaming the rat' theory. Kerr discusses the importance of effective measurement and reward systems in organizations and provides practical steps to realign them for better outcomes. He uses analogies from the healthcare system and historical military examples to highlight the pervasive issues and solutions for leadership in various contexts. This discussion is crucial for anyone involved in organizational transformation and leadership.   00:00 Introduction to Reward Systems 00:52 Meet Steve Kerr: Leadership and Legacy 01:28 The Folly of Rewarding A While Hoping for B 01:49 Three-Step Process to Realign Reward Systems 02:38 Measurement and Performance: Key Insights 04:31 Healthcare System Example: Misaligned Rewards 08:08 Stretch Goals and Innovation Challenges 12:33 Military Analogy: World War II vs. Vietnam 14:28 Organizational Dynamics and Leadership Challenges 16:04 Effective Performance Reviews 20:22 Creating a Candid Culture 22:07 Conclusion and Next Episode   On the Folly of Rewarding A,While Hoping for B https://web.mit.edu/curhan/www/docs/Articles/15341_Readings/Motivation/Kerr_Folly_of_rewarding_A_while_hoping_for_B.pdf   Aidan McCullen, Steve Kerr, reward systems, employee behavior, BF Skinner, dysfunctional behaviors, fixing reward systems, CEO memo, leadership development, GE, Goldman Sachs, ultimate rewards, boundaryless organization, performance measurement, innovative culture, healthcare system, preventive care, stretch goals, Jack Welch, candid culture

    23 min
  4. The Heart of Science Engineering Blueprint with 3M's Jayshree Seth

    DEC 7

    The Heart of Science Engineering Blueprint with 3M's Jayshree Seth

    Explore how innovative leadership principles and storytelling can transform personal and professional growth with 3M's Chief Science Advocate, Jayshree Seth. In this episode of The Innovation Show, Jayshree shares memorable acrostics and blueprints for success from her trio of books, discusses key elements of effective leadership, and delves into the importance of advocacy and diverse perspectives. Gain insights on balancing long-term vision with detailed execution and the role of positive emotions in fostering a creative and innovative environment.   00:00 Introduction and Guest Welcome 02:34 The Importance of Leadership 04:31 Leak Proof Leadership Explained 09:01 The Role of Storytelling in Innovation 11:08 The Five I's of Innovation 17:01 Advocacy and Leadership 22:24 Supervisory Skills and Employee Relationships 27:13 The Future is Already Here 28:35 Understanding Trends and Megatrends 30:35 The TNT Factor: Trends, Needs, Threats 31:24 Exploring the TREND Mnemonic 35:14 Bridging the Business-Technical Gap 41:39 Effective Leadership Communication 50:54 The Kaleidoscope of Leadership 56:58 Conclusion and Final Thoughts Jayshree previously on the show: https://youtu.be/Gc8PKq56Lrw?si=ApxhFl1mXM9K0b3T innovation, Jayshree Seth, 3M, Chief Science Advocate, engineering, empathy, collaboration, patents, creativity, storytelling, visionary leadership, purpose-driven leadership, resilience, engineering innovation, STEM, scientific advocacy, women in science, leadership strategies

    58 min
  5. DEC 4 · BONUS

    AI Wars Echoes of Past Tech Battles in the Race for Dominance

    The AI Battle Mirrors Past Format Wars “History never repeats itself, but it does often rhyme.” — Mark Twain [TLDR: This week’s Thursday Thought explores the ongoing battle for AI dominance among tech giants like OpenAI, Anthropic, X, Google, and Microsoft, drawing parallels to historic format wars that have shaped various industries. From the iconic VHS vs. Betamax struggle to the intense competition between gaming consoles like PlayStation, Xbox, and Nintendo, and the enduring rivalry between iPhone and Android, these conflicts reveal a recurring pattern. As AI companies follow similar paths, it’s clear that, while technology evolves, the strategic dynamics remain strikingly similar.] The current battle for dominance between tech giants like OpenAI, Google, Anthropic and Microsoft is not just a race to the top — it’s a modern-day format war. By examining the patterns of previous technology battles, we can gain insight into how this AI competition is likely to play out. Three key patterns emerge from past format battles that are now being mirrored in the AI space: The Power of Network Effects: Just like previous format wars, the AI battle will be heavily influenced by network effects. (A network effect occurs when a product or service becomes more valuable as more people use it, creating a positive feedback loop that can lead to rapid growth and market dominance.) The Underdog Advantage: History has shown that the winner is often not the one everyone expects — not the biggest company or even the best product. Early market leaders may fall behind as more adaptable or better-networked competitors take the lead. Ecosystem Building is Key: The final battleground is not just the technology itself, but the entire ecosystem built around it. Companies that successfully create a thriving ecosystem of developers, partners, and content will probably emerge as the ultimate winners. To understand these dynamics better, let’s revisit three strategic battles that shaped the technology landscape: the VCR format war, the console wars, and the smartphone OS wars. Each of these battles offers valuable lessons for understanding the current AI competition. The VCR War: A Template for Format Battles (The also-rans in the VCR war (that I know of) included Philips and Grundig’s Video 2000 (V2000), and RCA’s Capacitance Electronic Disc (CED). The videotape format war between VHS and Betamax in the late 20th century stands as one of the most emblematic battles over technological dominance. Introduced in the mid-1970s, Sony’s Betamax initially captivated the market with its superior video quality and compact design. However, JVC’s VHS, which entered the market shortly after, quickly emerged as a formidable competitor by addressing consumer needs more effectively with longer recording times — up to two hours initially, which was soon extended to four, six, and even eight hours as the technology developed. The success of VHS was not solely because of its technical merits. JVC employed a strategic approach by licensing its VHS technology to an array of manufacturers, including heavyweights like Panasonic, Sharp, and RCA. This move flooded the market with VHS players, making the format more accessible to the average consumer. To further tip the scale in their favour, during the mid-1970s JVC established VCR supply relationships with leading national consumer electronics companies in Europe and the United States. In supplying Thomson, Thorn, and Telefunken (all independent companies at that time) as well as U.S. partners, JVC was able to gain the cash and the diversity of market experience that ultimately enabled it to outpace Philips and Sony. Philips developed videotape competencies in parallel with JVC, but it failed to build a worldwide network of OEM relationships that would have allowed it to accelerate the refinement of its videotape competence through the sale of core products. According to an article from Legacybox, by the mid-1980s, VHS had achieved a 60% market share in the U.S., with over 30 million homes owning a VHS player. Hollywood’s role in this battle was also pivotal. Movie studios, recognising the growing popularity of VHS, began releasing their films primarily on this format. Movie studios partly influenced this decision because VHS tapes could hold entire movies without requiring multiple tapes — a common issue with the shorter Betamax tapes. Video rental stores like Blockbuster overwhelmingly supported VHS because of its broader availability and the convenience of longer playtimes. A self-perpetuating cycle emerged — a classic example of a network effect: the increased availability of content on VHS led to higher consumer demand for VHS players, which further solidified the format’s dominance. The death blow for Betamax occurred when RCA, one of the largest electronics companies in the United States, backed VHS. RCA’s decision, coupled with a strong marketing push, helped VHS capture an even larger share of the market. By the late 1980s, despite Betamax’s technical superiority, Sony had to concede defeat. Sony eventually began producing VHS players, marking the end of the format war. The Console Wars: The Battle for Gamers’ Hearts The console wars between Sony’s PlayStation, Microsoft’s Xbox, and Nintendo highlight how the best product doesn’t always win. Sony’s PlayStation and Microsoft’s Xbox fought fiercely over processing power and exclusive titles, but Nintendo carved out its niche with innovative gameplay and a focus on casual gamers. Each company’s success depended not only on the hardware but also on the ecosystem of games and online services they built.(Also rans, I know of included: Sega Saturn, Sega Dreamcast, Atari Jaguar, and NEC TurboGrafx-16). In the wake of the VCR format war, the gaming industry experienced its own version of a format battle, known as the console wars. This battle, primarily between Sony’s PlayStation, Microsoft’s Xbox, and Nintendo, has defined the gaming industry for decades. Each of these companies has sought to establish its console as the dominant platform, employing strategies that echo the VHS-Betamax rivalry. Sony entered the gaming market in 1994 with the PlayStation, which quickly became a dominant force because of its powerful hardware and an extensive library of exclusive games. Titles like “Final Fantasy” and “Gran Turismo” attracted millions of gamers to the PlayStation ecosystem, establishing Sony as a leader in the industry. Microsoft joined the fray in 2001 with the launch of the Xbox. The Xbox was innovative with its built-in storage and the introduction of Xbox Live, a comprehensive online gaming service that revolutionised multiplayer gaming. Microsoft also secured the exclusive rights to “Halo,” which became a defining franchise for the console and significantly boosted its popularity. Nintendo, a veteran in the gaming industry, pursued a different path. While Sony and Microsoft competed on hardware performance and exclusive titles, Nintendo focused on creating unique gaming experiences. The Nintendo 64 and GameCube had their own dedicated followings, but it was the Wii, launched in 2006, that truly set Nintendo apart. The Wii’s innovative motion controls and broad appeal to casual gamers made it a global phenomenon, outselling both the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 in several markets. The console wars mirror the VHS-Betamax battle in that the competition wasn’t just about selling hardware; it was about creating a compelling ecosystem. Sony and Microsoft invested heavily in securing exclusive games, building online communities, and expanding their platforms. Meanwhile, Nintendo focused on innovation in gameplay, drawing in a diverse audience that included non-traditional gamers. The Smartphone Wars: iPhone vs. Android (The smartphone OS wars, primarily between Apple’s iPhone and Google’s Android, show the power of ecosystem building. Apple’s closed, tightly integrated ecosystem appeals to a loyal base, while Android’s open platform and wide availability have made it the dominant mobile OS worldwide. This battle underscores how creating a broad and adaptable ecosystem can lead to long-term dominance.) (Also rans included: BlackBerry OS, Windows Mobile/Windows Phone, Symbian, Palm OS/Garnet OS/webOS, and Tizen). The smartphone industry has also witnessed a fierce format war, this time between Apple’s iPhone and Google’s Android (also rans included Nokia’s Symbian). Apple revolutionized the mobile phone market in 2007 with the launch of the iPhone, which combined sleek design, intuitive touch controls, and an app ecosystem that redefined what a smartphone could be. The iPhone quickly became a status symbol and set the standard for mobile devices. Google’s Android, launched shortly after, took a different approach. Rather than producing its own hardware, Google made Android an open-source operating system that could be used by any manufacturer. This strategy led to a flood of Android devices from companies like Samsung, LG, and Motorola, covering a wide range of price points and appealing to a broad audience. Much like VHS, Android’s strategy of widespread availability helped it capture significant market share. By offering a variety of devices at different price points, Android became the dominant mobile platform worldwide, despite Apple’s continued success with the iPhone in the premium segment. The iPhone vs. Android battle still rages on, with each platform boasting its own loyal following, exclusive apps, and unique features. Apple’s closed ecosystem allows for tight integration and a seamless user experience, while Android’s open platform offers more flexibility and customisation, catering to a diverse range of users. The AI Wars: Following a Familiar Pattern The key players in the AI format war inclu

    15 min
  6. NOV 29 · BONUS

    Gold Crushes Ants Ill-Fitting Robes and Disruptions Power Redistribution

    Gold Crushes Ants, Ill-Fitting Robes and Disruption's Power Redistribution Aidan McCullen: [00:00:00] Gold Crushes Ants, Ill-Fitting Robes and The Power Redistribution of Disruption. Just a brief reminder of what this episode is in case you have not heard it before.. Each week I write a newsletter called The Thursday Thought. For years, listeners to the Innovation Show have asked me to narrate it. I never had enough time. So today, I am using AI. I have cloned my voice. It is not perfect, but it saves me hours of effort. For those who want the short version. Here is a paragraph: Disruption redistributes organisational power, information and status. As Machiavelli noted, those in power dislike such change. However, there is a twist to this week’s Thursday Thought. Sometimes, the new-found power does not sit well with those who inherit it, to their detriment and to that of the organisation. Gold Crushes Ants! Let's begin with a quote by Plato from "The Republic." Plato wrote: "But when the cobbler or any other man [00:01:00] whom nature designed to be a trader, having his heart lifted up by wealth or strength or the number of his followers, or any like advantage, attempts to force his way into the class of warriors, or a warrior into that of legislators and guardians, for which he is unfitted, and either to take the implements or the duties of the other; or when one man is trader, legislator, and warrior all in one, then I think you will agree with me in saying that this interchange and this meddling of one with another is the ruin of the State." This passage from Plato's The Republic expresses the idea that societal roles should be distinct and specialised to ensure the stability and well-being of the state. Plato argues that each individual has a natural aptitude and should perform the role suited to their abilities. The cobbler (a metaphor for any tradesperson), the warrior, and the legislator/guardian represent different classes in society. Plato believes that problems arise when individuals try to take on roles for which they are [00:02:00] not naturally suited or when they attempt to accumulate power by combining multiple roles. For example, if a cobbler tries to become a warrior or a warrior tries to become a legislator, it disrupts the social order and leads to chaos and ruin. This concept is part of Plato's broader vision of a just society, where everyone contributes according to their strengths and society functions smoothly as a result. The Power Shift. Let's take for example, the significant shift in power that occurred in many organisations due to the advent of digital technology. The rise of roles such as heads of digital, data, AI and E.S.G. transformed traditional industries, from media companies to physical retailers. These new roles require a different set of skills, mindsets and perspectives, often leading to friction within long-held hierarchies. In many traditional organisations, digital leaders face resistance similar to what Plato described. Established professionals, [00:03:00] akin to the warriors and legislators in The Republic, often see these newcomers as threats to their traditional roles and authority. This resistance can be rooted in a fear of obsolescence or a reluctance to adapt to new methods and technologies. For instance, the introduction of digital journalism revealed how technology can challenge the conventional roles within a newsroom. It changes the "speed to market", it raises concerns about traditional journalists and the changing nature of editorial control. This works both ways, where new power dynamics can lead to tensions when digital leaders overstep their bounds or when their innovations disrupt the status quo too abruptly. All of a sudden, their importance leads to ego problems. Gold Crushes Ants: The Gradual Path to Power and Responsibility. “If you give a ton of gold to an ant, it will only crush the ant.” — Sadguru There’s a profound parable shared by Sadguru about a lion with the heart of a mouse, [00:04:00] it went something like this… There was once a compassionate sage. One day while searching his home, the sage uncovered a mother and five baby mice. Terrified, the mother ran away, leaving the baby mice. The kind sage fed the babies with some grain. One day a cat came and devoured four of the mice, but one escaped. The old man continued to feed and care for the last baby mouse. The cat came back to finish the job and eat the last mouse, but the sage chased her away. Every time the sage closed his eyes to meditate, the wily cat came back. Eventually, the sage reasoned that this was not sustainable and he could not always protect the cat, so he had an idea. He used his magical powers to turn the baby mouse into a fierce cat. The idea worked and the cat never came back. However, a wild dog soon discovered there was a tasty cat living with the sage and hung around waiting for an opportunity for a tasty meal. Once again, the [00:05:00] sage thought to himself, this is so inconvenient. Once again the sage used his powers and changed the cat, who was once a mouse, into a dog. Again, it worked, but only for a while. One day, the dog ran home with his tail between his legs. The sage looked out to see that a large panther had been hunting the dog. After chasing the panther away, the sage sat down and thought. This was becoming too troublesome. He had an idea and used his powers one last time. He turned the dog into a lion — after all — a lion is the king of the jungle. Now, when the lion — who was a mouse, then a cat, and then a dog — roamed through the jungle, all the other animals ran away in fear. However, the lion went through a constant internal struggle. Knowing he was a lion with the heart of a mouse, he thought to himself. “What if the other animals find out that deep down I am just a mouse? What will they do to me?” The lion realised. The only other person in the world [00:06:00] who knows he is a mouse is the sage, so he had an idea. The lion returned home to the sage, intending to kill him. The savvy sage realised what the lion was about to do and apologised to the mouse inside the lion, saying it was wrong of him to change him. And so, the sage turned him back into a mouse. So what is the moral of the story? It is natural for a cat to chase a mouse, for a dog to chase a cat, for a panther to chase a dog. If you give them a position far beyond their capabilities for that position, it will bring misery to them and to the person who gave them the position. Whenever we place someone in a position beyond their abilities, it can rack them with insecurity, fear and doubt. In an organisation, power can poison talented people. They may suspect that others will doubt their abilities, they will fear that others will find them out. It happens with Innovation roles all the time. The organisation feels it should reward tenure and “gifts” an Innovation [00:07:00] Director or other "newly minted" role to executives who do not have transformation or innovation in their DNA. It happens in family-owned organisations because of nepotism. The family member then reigns terror throughout the organisation, sometimes undoing decades of significant cultural work laid down by previous generations. When we gift opportunities to others when they have not earned those opportunities, it rarely works out well. It is not about depriving the giver or the receiver; it is about the struggle and the rite of passage. This concept is particularly relevant today, where new roles—like Head of Digital, Head of Innovation, or Head of Data—are created to meet the demands of rapidly changing organisations. While those filling these positions often possess technical expertise, they may lack the leadership skills and political acumen required to navigate complex corporate environments. This leads to a profound mismatch between the role and the person, where the weight of responsibility [00:08:00] becomes crushing. The lion’s predicament is a metaphor for many modern professionals who find themselves thrust into positions of leadership. They have the title and the technical skills, but they haven’t developed the “muscle” to manage the power and responsibility that comes with the role. Just like the lion’s external strength hides its inner fragility, these professionals can struggle to wield their new authority. The Physiology of Building Strength. Building leadership capacity is much like developing physical strength. When muscles grow too quickly—often through artificial means like anabolic steroids—tendons and ligaments don’t have time to catch up with muscle growth. This creates an imbalance, increasing the risk of injury. The tendons can rupture because they’re not strong enough to support the rapidly growing muscles. In the same way, individuals promoted too quickly may lack the "connective tissue" of leadership skills, such as emotional intelligence, political savvy, and strategic thinking. [00:09:00] These are the tendons that allow people to support the heavier loads of responsibility that come with leadership. Without developing these critical soft skills, individuals risk being crushed by the demands of their new roles, just as tendons snap under the weight of artificially strengthened muscles. Organisations are complex ecosystems with intricate power dynamics, unspoken norms, and political undercurrents. New leaders, especially those in innovative or transformative roles, often find themselves in an organisational maze of competing interests and hidden agendas. Without prior coaching or development in leadership and political navigation, they may struggle to implement their visions. The Danger of Ill-Fitting “Robes” This theme echoes Shakespeare’s Macbeth, where the protagonist says: “Why do you dress me in borrowed robes?” (*Macbeth*, Act 1, Scene 3). The quote reflects how newly bestowed titl

    13 min

Trailers

5
out of 5
49 Ratings

About

A Global weekly show interviewing authors to inspire, educate and inform the business world and the curious. Presented by the author of "Undisruptable", this Global show speaks of something greater beyond innovation, disruption and technology. It speaks to the human need to learn: how to adapt to and love a changing world. It embraces the spirit of constant change, of staying receptive, of always learning.

You Might Also Like

To listen to explicit episodes, sign in.

Stay up to date with this show

Sign in or sign up to follow shows, save episodes, and get the latest updates.

Select a country or region

Africa, Middle East, and India

Asia Pacific

Europe

Latin America and the Caribbean

The United States and Canada