Blog

Why Your Company's Innovation Process is Broken - And How to Fix It

Three weeks ago, I watched a perfectly good innovation session die in a boardroom in Melbourne.

The symptoms were textbook: twelve expensive suits around a mahogany table, laptops open, phones buzzing, and one poor facilitator desperately trying to extract "disruptive ideas" from people who'd rather be anywhere else. Sound familiar? If you've been in corporate Australia for more than five minutes, you've probably witnessed this slow-motion car crash yourself.

Here's what really gets me fired up about this whole innovation theatre we've created. We spend millions on innovation labs, hire consultants with fancy degrees, and plaster buzzwords like "agile" and "design thinking" all over our LinkedIn profiles. But when push comes to shove, most companies are about as innovative as a 1950s typing pool.

The Real Problem Nobody Talks About

After fifteen years of watching Australian businesses fumble around with innovation, I can tell you the problem isn't lack of creativity. Australians are naturally innovative - we invented everything from WiFi to cochlear implants, for crying out loud. The issue is that we've bureaucratised innovation to death.

Take your typical innovation process. Step one: submit idea through proper channels. Step two: wait for approval from three different committees. Step three: develop comprehensive business case with seventeen appendices. Step four: present to executives who immediately ask why we're not just copying what Amazon does.

No wonder nothing revolutionary ever emerges from these processes.

I've seen companies spend six months perfecting their innovation framework while their competitors launch three new products. It's like spending so much time polishing your golf clubs that you never actually play golf.

Why Traditional Brainstorming is Actually Counterproductive

Here's where I'm going to ruffle some feathers. Those whiteboard sessions where everyone shouts out ideas? Complete waste of time. Research from Stanford shows that group brainstorming actually produces fewer quality ideas than individuals working alone. But somehow we keep doing it because it feels collaborative.

The truth is, most people don't think creatively on demand in front of their colleagues. Especially not when their boss is sitting there taking notes and their annual review is coming up. You might as well ask someone to be spontaneous at gunpoint.

What works better? Give people problems to solve on their own time. Let them research, think, and develop ideas properly. Then bring the good ones back to the group for refinement. It's not as theatrical, but it actually produces results.

The Australian Advantage We Keep Ignoring

Australia has a massive advantage in innovation that we consistently undervalue: our cultural tendency to cut through BS and get to the point. While American companies are still holding focus groups about their focus groups, Aussie businesses can move fast when they want to.

Look at Atlassian. They didn't innovate through committee; they solved real problems they were experiencing themselves. Same with Canva - they built something they actually wanted to use. That's proper innovation: identifying genuine pain points and fixing them elegantly.

But instead of leveraging this natural directness, we keep importing innovation methodologies from Silicon Valley that assume everyone wants to spend three hours discussing the colour of a button. It's madness.

The most successful workplace communication training I've ever seen focused on this exact principle - cutting through the fluff and getting teams to communicate what actually matters.

Where Most Innovation Programs Go Wrong

Let me share something that might be controversial: innovation isn't about having better ideas. It's about executing ordinary ideas faster and better than everyone else.

Most companies get this backwards. They spend 80% of their time generating ideas and 20% implementing them. Then they wonder why nothing happens. McDonald's didn't innovate fast food - they just executed the concept better than anyone else. Same with Uber and taxis, or Netflix and video rental.

The real innovation happens in the execution phase. That's where you discover what actually works, what customers really want, and how to scale effectively. But our innovation processes are designed to avoid that messy reality.

I once worked with a retail company that had generated over 200 "innovative" customer service ideas in their innovation lab. Brilliant concepts, all of them. But they'd implemented exactly zero because their approval process required eighteen different sign-offs. Meanwhile, their main competitor was testing new service approaches every month.

Which company do you think customers prefer now?

The Role of Middle Management (Plot Twist: They're Not the Enemy)

Here's where I'm going to defend an unpopular group: middle management. Everyone loves blaming them for killing innovation, but that's usually unfair. Most middle managers would love to support innovative ideas. The problem is they're caught between senior executives demanding "transformational innovation" and operational systems that punish any deviation from established processes.

I've seen brilliant middle managers find creative ways to test new approaches without triggering the corporate immune system. They'll run small pilots, reframe experiments as "operational improvements," or find budget lines that don't require executive approval. These people are innovation heroes, not villains.

The real enemy is rigid processes that assume innovation can be planned like quarterly reports.

What Actually Works: The Underground Innovation Network

The most innovative companies I know have unofficial innovation networks. These are groups of people across different departments who share problems, test solutions informally, and spread successful approaches organically.

This isn't about circumventing authority - it's about creating space for natural innovation to happen. When someone in operations discovers a better way to handle customer complaints, they share it with their network. When marketing finds a more effective way to gather feedback, they pass it along.

These networks often start around shared coffee breaks or after-work drinks. They're powered by genuine curiosity and mutual frustration with existing systems. And they produce more practical innovations than most formal programs.

Smart executives recognise these networks and find ways to support them without destroying their informal nature. Dumb executives try to formalise them and wonder why they stop working.

The Innovation Metrics That Actually Matter

Most companies measure innovation all wrong. They count ideas generated, patents filed, or innovation lab activities. These are vanity metrics that make reports look impressive but don't measure actual impact.

Better metrics focus on outcomes: time to market for new solutions, customer satisfaction improvements, or revenue from new approaches. Even better: measure how quickly you can test and discard bad ideas. The faster you fail, the faster you find what works.

Google's famous "fail fast" approach isn't about celebrating failure - it's about learning quickly and moving on. Most Australian companies are still trying to plan their way out of failure instead of experimenting their way to success.

Effective time management training has taught me that innovation follows similar principles - it's about rapid iteration, not perfect planning.

Building Innovation Capability (Not Innovation Theatre)

Real innovation capability starts with hiring people who've actually built things, not just studied them. Look for employees who've started side projects, fixed problems in previous roles, or found creative solutions to personal challenges.

These people don't need innovation frameworks - they need permission and resources. Give them interesting problems, clear constraints, and room to experiment. Then get out of their way.

The best innovation training I've ever seen focused on practical skills: how to run cheap experiments, how to gather meaningful customer feedback, and how to present ideas effectively to busy executives. Not design thinking workshops or creativity exercises.

Because here's the thing about creativity - everyone has it. What most people lack is confidence to act on their ideas and skills to test them properly.

Why Innovation Labs Usually Fail

Innovation labs have become the corporate equivalent of putting a Band-Aid on a broken leg. They create the illusion of innovation while protecting the main business from any actual change.

Most innovation labs I've visited feel like expensive playgrounds where smart people work on interesting problems that will never see daylight. They're physically separated from the main business, culturally isolated from real customers, and strategically disconnected from actual business challenges.

The successful ones - and there are a few - work differently. They're embedded in the business, staffed with people who understand operational realities, and measured on implementations, not ideas.

But honestly? Most companies would get better innovation results by giving their existing teams permission to spend 10% of their time fixing things that annoy them.

The Customer Integration Problem

Here's another unpopular opinion: most customer research kills innovation before it starts. We've become so obsessed with asking customers what they want that we've forgotten they're terrible at predicting their own behaviour.

Henry Ford's famous quote about customers wanting faster horses isn't historically accurate, but it captures an important truth. Customers can tell you what frustrates them about current solutions, but they can't design better ones.

Smart innovation starts with observing what customers actually do, not what they say they want. Watch how they use your products, where they struggle, and what workarounds they create. That's where real innovation opportunities hide.

Netflix didn't succeed because customers said they wanted streaming video. They succeeded because they noticed customers hated late fees and wanted more convenient access to content.

Making Innovation Stick: The Implementation Challenge

Even when companies generate good ideas and get them approved, implementation often fails. Why? Because innovation requires different skills than business-as-usual operations.

Running experiments requires comfort with uncertainty. Scaling new approaches requires willingness to change established processes. Managing innovation requires tolerance for setbacks and patience with iteration.

Most companies try to implement innovation using the same management approaches that work for predictable operations. It's like trying to surf using swimming techniques - the skills overlap, but the context is completely different.

Successful innovation implementation requires dedicated resources, protected time, and metrics that account for learning, not just delivery.

The Australian Innovation Opportunity

Despite all these challenges, Australia is perfectly positioned for an innovation renaissance. We have world-class education, pragmatic business culture, and enough distance from Silicon Valley to avoid their worst habits.

Our small market size forces us to think globally from day one. Our direct communication style cuts through innovation theatre faster than most cultures. And our talent pool combines technical skills with commercial awareness.

What we need is confidence to trust our own innovation instincts instead of copying methodologies designed for different contexts.

The companies that figure this out first will have a massive advantage. While everyone else is still running design thinking workshops, they'll be solving real problems for real customers.

The Bottom Line

Innovation isn't broken because we lack creativity or resources. It's broken because we've made it too complicated, too formal, and too disconnected from actual business challenges.

The fix isn't better frameworks or more training. It's giving smart people interesting problems and trusting them to find solutions.

Stop treating innovation like a special activity that requires special processes. Start treating it like a natural part of how good businesses operate.

Your innovation process doesn't need to be perfect. It just needs to be faster than your competitors.

Further Reading: