ENGLISH I DEUTSCH

"Innovation" can be interpreted in different ways. Let me start with my own understanding of innovation. Before improving something a standard is needed. Otherwise you cannot judge if the improvement is one indeed. The standard must be visualized to avoid misunderstandings. Companies certified to ISO 9001 or higher standards usually have their procedures. After innovating and proving the value of the change the standard must be adjusted to deliver the basis for the follow-up innovation. This leads to a process of continuous innovation and improvement of competitiveness.

Sustainable success can result from different types of innovations. They can be related to products, processes, services, customer relationship, and company culture. Most innovations are small improvements, continuous innovations such as rewriting operating instructions to make them more comprehensible, to reduce stocks in production or to change the color of a device. As long as you solve customer problems, meet their conscious or unconscious expectations better or solve an internal constraint in your own company, you make the success of your innovation inevitable. Sometimes a series of continuous improvements leads to a major breakthrough. Take a look at the inventions of Thomas A. Edison, which were mostly improvements of ideas, achieved through a diligent and industrial approach and team-based development. Edison said, "invention is 1 % of inspiration and 99 % of transpiration."

This article is meant as a rough guideline for the innovation process. Please do not understand it as a recipe. Depending on size and maturity of a company, the line of business, and the national and company culture the process must be adopted to the individual situation.

Beginning with the starting situation I go through the steps of triggering and collecting ideas, discussion and assessment of ideas, execution of measurements and projects, assessment of innovation results, and utilization of results. I call this the innovation process. It is based on my experience from industrial production.

Until the 90s of the last century strategies aiming at growth only were successful. The compatibility of a company was determined by its market and cost position. Already then more new small companies were founded that meanwhile grew and won market shares. Microsoft is a prominent example. Their success is based on their know-how, human resources, and an innovation strategy, which takes care of future conditions. These companies are lead by foresight and continuous innovation. Especially the speed of the innovation process has gained importance. In a constantly changing world the efficiency of the development and market introduction process gains importance in comparison to production cost. The price advantage is highest during the phase of unique position. Competence of management and staff, functional organization and realistic goals were the sole key success factors in the past. Today they are the base only and need to be combined with flexibility of management and staff, linking skills between organizational units, quality awareness, motivation, and customer orientation. Highly motivated employees can often balance an inferior market position.

Innovations develop more power and speed if they are embedded into a strategy leading to a long-term company vision or philosophy, which is supported by the owner, the management and the staff of the company. They flourish easier in an employee- and future-orientated culture. This is a disadvantage for many listed companies where management and goals are replaced more or less frequently aiming for short-term profits. Owned and operated companies have better prerequisites.

In general the actual economical situation is less important. A future-oriented company is innovative in upturns as well as in downturns. Of course the financial conditions must be respected. Therefore in recessions incremental improvements are preferred over starting bigger innovations. However, a crisis also offers opportunities for more sustainable results of strategical innovations because customers are not thoughtless at all in difficult times. They do not accept bubbles. The "new economy" was not born in a crisis.

I experienced innovation processes being more successful, if the involved persons are in the focus. This starts with the top management, which must constantly support the innovation process. I saw top managements which initiated an innovation, which usually takes some time to deliver benefits, but put it back permanently in the daily routine. This might be necessary from time to time, but cannot be the rule. I will deal with individuals and innovation teams later.