Here are the first two sentences in a recent article that got my attention: “Want to be more competitive? Then empower your most technologically disobedient employees.” The core message is that employees want to do their job and they will seek the tools to do so. If the corporate Information Technology (IT) department does not provide them with what they need, the will find the applications they need on their own even if it means paying for them. The proof? According to research conducted by Frost & Sullivan referenced in the article “80% of people working for organizations with more than 1,000 employees go around the IT department and use (or even buy) software.” The practice is referred to as “Shadow IT.” The idea is similar to my admonition to achieve innovation by accepting failures, because you won’t get one without some of the other. Are there risks? Of course. But as the article concludes, “firms concerned about the security issues of shadow IT are missing the point; the bigger risk is not embracing it in the first place.” The article is titled “Let Staff Go Rogue on Tech.” It was written by Christopher Mims and is available on the website of the Wall Street Journal.
0 Comments
The process of innovation requires selling ideas and the change they invite. Since most people are change adverse, knowing how to sell your ideas can make the difference between success and failure. There was in interesting report on National Public Radio’s Morning Edition that can offer us some suggestions. The core insight as it relates to selling ideas is that they are seen as more credible when they are presented by an outsider or someone that is less familiar to the decision-makers. Does it make sense that the exact same idea would be more valued if it is presented by someone outside your organization as opposed to you? No. Is it an unavoidable part of human nature. Yes? And in reality, this is not a new concept. A well known Bible verse tells us that “a prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family.” So what does this mean to you? Consider having some of your more threatening or radical ideas delivered by outsiders or at least people who are not as familiar to the decision-makers. You will have to put your ego in your pocket and bite your tongue as you see your idea delivered by others. But the goal is to make a difference and that may just be what is required. === A transcript of the NPR report titled “Why We Miss Creative Ideas That Are Right Under Our Noses” is available at: http://www.npr.org/2014/02/26/282836487/why-we-miss-creative-ideas-that-are-right-under-our-noses Our relationship with risk has a profound impact on the quality and character of our lives. If we are significantly risk averse, we will miss opportunities. If we are significantly risk inclined, we may find ourselves regularly facing unproductive turmoil. Most of us would benefit by taking a few more risks as long as we do it in an intelligent and thoughtful way. This sort of stretching beyond our comfort zones will often have significant and positive results. Some of us would do well to either take fewer risks or take them in a more methodical way. One of the defining characteristics of risk is that if fascinates us. In part because it is powerful and in part because it can be frightening. It attracts us and repels us at the same time. A new novel by Christopher Reich called “The Prince of Risk” was just released. It is selling well. No doubt the title and the topic both draw readers. The lead character is described and a “fearless New York hedge fund gunslinger.” Whether you are driven by a desire to see the fellow take massive risks successfully or to suffer from his hubris matters not. The fact is that risk fascinates us for a multitude of reasons. |
Jim McCormickFounder and President Research Institute for Risk Intelligence Archives
April 2020
Categories |