How Is Your Climate for Innovation?

Think back over your career to the work situation that gave you the most satisfying working environment. Now contrast it with the least satisfying. You can probably see instantly that your enthusiasm — and your innovativeness — paralleled the environment. Which dimensions mattered most? And if you wanted to improve the environment for innovation, what exactly would you do? Leaders struggle with these questions.

In our work with organizations, we find that the climate for innovation is crucial, poorly understood, and all but ignored when thoughts turn to improving the level of innovation. When leaders do wish to improve the climate, they often shotgun it — doing something poorly thought out, or something that makes the situation worse. There is a better way: first understand the system and get the data, then decide what to do.

Based on the pioneering work of Göran Ekvall in Sweden some twenty years ago, it is now possible to quantify the climate for innovation. Ekvall's work has been further refined and validated by Scott Isaksen and others at the Center for Studies in Creativity at SUNY-Buffalo, who defined nine dimensions of the climate for innovation:

1. Challenge — How challenged, emotionally involved, and committed am I to the work?
2. Freedom — How free am I to decide how to do my job?
3. Idea Time — Do we have time to think things through before having to act?
4. Idea Support — Do we have resources to give new ideas a try?
5. Trust & Openness — Do people feel safe speaking their minds and offering different points of view?
6. Playfulness & Humor — How relaxed is our workplace? Is it OK to have fun?
7. Conflicts — To what degree do people engage in interpersonal conflict or “warfare”?
8. Debates — To what degree do people engage in lively debate about the issues?
9. Risk-Taking — Is it OK to fail when trying new things?

Ekvall validated the climate for innovation as a determinant of business success in his original Swedish work, and that validation is now under way in the United States. Intuitively you already know the outcome — of course there is a correlation between the climate for innovation and business success.

Three arenas

We find the nine dimensions group naturally into three areas: Resources (Idea Time, Idea Support, Challenge and Involvement); Personal Motivation (Trust and Openness, Playfulness and Humor, Absence of Interpersonal Conflicts); and Exploration (Risk-Taking, Debates About the Issues, Freedom).

In our work with organizations brave enough to measure their climate, we find striking similarities. The dimensions in greatest need of improvement are Risk-Taking, Idea Time, Idea Support, and Trust and Openness. Much less improvement is needed in Debates, Absence of Interpersonal Conflicts, and Playfulness and Humor; Challenge and Involvement, and Freedom, tend to be in good shape. Notice that the dimensions most in need of improvement fall one in each of the three arenas above.

Most R&D organizations are running on restricted budgets and fewer people, yet the work remains — so no surprise that Challenge and Involvement is doing fine while Idea Time and Idea Support are in urgent need of repair. In the face of cutbacks, it is no surprise that Trust and Openness and Risk-Taking are deficient: people are reluctant to take risks when downsizing is looking for the next group to “decruit.”

The “hard stuff” is easy. It's the “soft stuff” that's hard.

You might be saying, “That's fine, but we don't have the money or time to worry about environment.” The reality is that you cannot afford not to invest in improving it. Karl Mettke of the USDA Forest Service, Eastern Region, documented an 18% improvement in productivity as a direct result of improving the environment for innovation. Most of that investment is in the “soft stuff” rather than money and other hard resources.

Climate dimension	“Hard” stuff needed to improve	“Soft” stuff needed to improve
Challenge and Involvement	—	Involve people in defining the challenge.
Idea Time	Allocate time to think before acting.	Use a process to get the best ideas from everyone; ask what ideas were considered but rejected in favor of the one proposed.
Idea Support	Resources ($) to give new ideas a try.	Encouragement to try new ideas — and a warm reception when they're offered.
Playfulness & Humor	—	Create the expectation that one can have fun at work.
Trust & Openness	—	Lead by example: admit when things go wrong and engage in dialogue about how to improve.
Debates	—	If everyone agrees, then you disagree — just to stimulate debate.
Absence of Interpersonal Conflicts	—	Insist that people get along; some reassignments may be necessary.
Risk-Taking	—	Cultivate an expectation for “mistakes.” This is allied with Trust and Openness.

Notice how many more items require attention to the soft stuff — which usually needs no appreciable resources except human awareness and thoughtfulness.

Rate your environment

Each question below assesses one of the nine dimensions. The full questionnaire is far more complete and accurate, but simply thinking about these can be instructive. As you read each, consider how your organization might answer. If you hold a formal leadership position, ask your people to answer them anonymously. (1 = Little · 5 = A lot)

1. To what degree are people here deeply committed to their jobs?
2. To what degree are people able to decide how to do their jobs?
3. To what degree do we take time to think of alternate ways to accomplish a difficult task before acting?
4. To what degree are new ideas given a warm reception, and resources made available to try them?
5. To what degree is there emotional tension here?
6. To what degree is there lively debate on the issues?
7. To what degree do we hear good-natured joking, and how relaxed is the atmosphere?
8. To what degree are people informal and open with one another?
9. To what degree do people feel free to act when the outcome might not meet expectations?

In our work we consistently find that the view of the environment is related to the rater's level in the organization: the higher up, the better the environment appears. It's a little like flying over New York City at 30,000 feet — from that height it looks just fine, but at street level you begin to notice the problems. And it's at street level that the work gets done. As you think about improving your climate for innovation, be sure to improve the foundation, beginning at the street level.