Greenhouse Innovation Lab
The Context
At an international Fortune 1000 company, my role interfaced with the many departments at the corporate office. In speaking with colleagues I noticed a trend that people were unmotivated and uninspired with the way the company addressed the innovation process. I decided to seize the opportunity and make a difference.
Research
Throughout the office I spoke with colleagues in various departments about if and what their innovation process was. In discussions I asked for examples of what frustrated them when moving projects forward. I observed how departments operated, notated the pitfalls, breakdowns and emotions team members had during the process. As additional research, I incorporated my own experiences in getting approvals and conducting projects.
The Problem
In my exploration of the company innovation culture, I noticed four central issues in the way the company was creating and developing new initiatives.
1. Myopic viewpoint of innovation
Decisions were predominantly focused on surpassing last quarter's results. This meant small changes to not heavily impact the bottom line.
Consequence: This method did not permit good risk or outside feedback loops with customers; creating many assumption within the work. This rigid mindset also did not allow the business to respond quickly to market trends.
2. Research and Development only pertained to food
There was no consistent avenue for innovating or designing the business for better operational fluidity or ways of working.
Consequence: This created silos of innovation, tech systems, and protocols that are department specific and organized by small groups of people. These system did not talk to one another and created manual processes that slowed the speed at which the company could operate.
3. No clear path forward for development
Individual people pushing their own technology, principals, and what they thought was best.
Consequence: This created unnecessary power struggles. People at the same level clashing and trying to "win". Individual agenda seeking behavior developed as no one communicated effectively to move in the same direction. There was also an abundance of missed collaboration opportunities because there was not an equitable way for everyone to participate in the process.
4. Antiquated tools and mindsets
Massive powerpoint decks, meeting fatigue, dated technology platforms and the reluctant adoption of new ones.
Consequence: An fearful, uninspired workforce. Executives are afraid of change because it may affect the bottom line. Contributors are consistently overworked and bored due to lack of advanced tools and the need to please "the boss". This lack of creativity created job dissatisfaction as contributors did not feel valued or that they could make a difference.
Ideation
Based on my research I wanted to create a collaborative regenerative way for people to explore topics and address three main issues.
1. Give employees a voice in driving the projects they felt passionate about and believed would make the most business impact without bureaucracy.
2. Look holistically at business objectives and have departments work together on how to solve them
3. Create an innovative culture, mindset, and space where projects could be tested and implemented quickly in response to market demand.
The company is large and complex. Building the infrastructure and safe space for people to have a healthy, constructive dialogue was the first priority. Smaller, concentrated project approaches would be more effective thereafter.
My plan was to service design the innovation process to create a better, more consistent culture of innovation and empower the workforce toward new design mindset.
The Lab
Using my learned skills and institutional knowledge, I created a 4 part innovation lab where employees could bring their thoughts, ideas and initiatives and develop them in a safe, collaborative way.
-All participation was voluntary, no incentives were given to participate
-Cross-collaboration in full effect as Marketing, Supply Chain, Legal, Operations, Real Estate, R&D and more were represented.
-Participants were from all experience levels interns up to presidents
Caution video contains sound
Greenhouse introduction video
This video was sent to the entire corporate office announcing the start of the lab.
Multiple posters were hung around the office to create awareness.
Named Greenhouse to promote a growth mindset,
I was the only person creating, organizing and developing the lab simultaneously while implementing it.
This included all artifacts, development materials and incorporating feedback.
What was the outcome and impact?
As a result of the lab three projects evolved and were piloted simultaneously. Due to the value gained from the constructive discussions and safe atmosphere participants began to bring fellow team members to join. Numerous teams began utilizing my ideation methods in their department teams to generate lots of ideas to choose from when solving an issue. The most impact was the culture of innovation that was developed. People felt there was finally a safe place to authentically discuss and try ideas without fear, judgement and corporate politics.
What challenges did I face and how did I overcome them?
There were three main challenges that I had to overcome:
1. Lack of senior leadership sponsorship
The lack of a sponsor was initially challenging because employees were uncertain if the Greenhouse Lab was legitimate. I overcame this misconception by individually talking with these people, building trust with them and providing a breakdown of the material and the environment they would be participating in.
2. Seeds of doubt
In Greenhouse meetings some participants openly doubted if the process would work and gain traction. During these times other participants were so invested in the process that they spoke up and defended the lab. They acknowledged the ambiguity but did not allow one person's negativity to impact the positive atmosphere or trajectory.
3. Lack of funding
There was no funding for the lab. I had to get creative in using existing resources from other departments. Through developed relationships I encouraged department leaders to utilize their department budgets to fund my Greenhouse Lab. I had direct conversations with them and explained the common goal I was striving to achieve. Empowered by my determination leaders invested financially in a better way of working that all employees could benefit from.
What would I do differently?
In addition to the lab I would have incorporated a midpoint within the projects. At these points I would have presented a cut sheet of high level accomplishments and next steps going forward. Doing so would have two effects. It would have removed any apprehension of senior leaders to the proceed by including them in it. The second effect would be opening the potential for an official executive sponsor. This sponsor could also help me secure our own budget for accelerated growth.