A few weeks ago, I was privileged to tag along with the Oberlin College Enterpreneurship Scholars on their trip to NYC visiting “Obie” alumni.  These kids were at different stages of developing or executing their businesses.  The alumni gave their own stories and then critiqued the kids’ plans.  It was interesting to see what the kids listened to and what irritated them.

It’s so easy to turn someone off when they disagree with you; “They just understand the real needs; they don’t know that market; they don’t see it on the ground like I do.”  Sound familiar?

One of the alumni told the kids to stop and think about what is really irritating them about the advice or suggestions.  Great advice!  So, when you are getting feedback (which may be criticism) on your idea, instead of turning that person off, stop and think about what it is that really bugs you about their feedback.  By analyzing what is really bugging you, you can hone your passion and purpose behind the idea.

This week, find people who are great irritants (shouldn’t be too hard for some of us!).  Share some of your ideas. While they may view your cup as half empty, they just filled it up half full for you! Give it a try and tell us how it goes!

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Prefer to Sign-up to the Weekly Collaborative Innovation Newsletter?

We think about networking as a very modern notion, with our accumulation of virtual “friends,” “followers” and people-who-might-be-useful-to-us-someday.  To me, it is just an extension of what my people, my family have been doing since 70 AD – making critical connections that enable both our survival. The tools may have changed, but our reliance on the network has not. In fact, without the network, I literally wouldn’t be alive.

My mother and grandparents fled the Nazis in Eastern Europe, bribing the American Consulate to make quotas. Virtually all my family, over 60 people of all ages, was killed at Auschwitz.  The few family members who escaped – a cousin sent to London to live with relatives, an uncle who fled to Israel (then Palestine), another who survived work camps in Budapest, another who escaped barefoot running through forests and ending up in Australia, another who fought in the French Resistance and another who was liberated at Auschwitz in 1945 – formed a worldwide network that was requisite for survival.

Because of my background, I’m hardwired to network. This reliance on and ability to network has been pivotal throughout my life and my career. Adding to John Hagel and John Seely Brown’s sage advice, I have three suggestions for those looking to develop or improve their network: 1) use new communication tools to your advantage; 2) let the network be a resource for discovery and growth; and 3) treat your network well.

1. When new forms of communication emerge, don’t just look at how to improve what you’re doing already, but at new ways of doing. How can these new tools give you access to new ideas, people, perspectives, and solutions you wouldn’t normally encounter? How can these tools help you discover the unarticulated needs of existing markets and customers , maybe even discover entirely new markets and/or new business models?  Since you can’t be in several places at once, how can these tools let you leverage “location” for discovery globally? Could these tools help you increase collaboration within your own company? As a student at Brown University in the early ‘80s, I had a terminal in my room connected to the Computer Science Department’s Unix machines.  I kept in touch with high school friends via email.  For me in the early ‘80’s, this was normal – the fledging ‘net was just another tool, like pen, paper and the telephone.  My Bell Labs internships were all about the network.  I met fascinating, amazing people all over the world who I would never have met without the network, expanding my worldview and knowledge, still to this day.

2. No matter how good you and your team are, you simply can’t know everything. The network allows you to learn about new materials, processes, products and technologies that you wouldn’t otherwise discover that could help your company grow.  What you know depends on who you know, which depends on what you know, so let the network expand the “who” so you can expand the “what” and bring new solutions to the market.  This is what many companies do with Open Innovation.  You also can use the network to distribute ‘jobs’ so you can more efficiently and effectively experiment, prototype, test and commercialize new customer offerings. At Bell Labs, where I played after graduating (yes, played – Google had nothing on Bell Labs!), the simple tools we had like Netnews and Usenet allowed us to collaborate with people all over the world and in different industries.  Since my job was designing the network and its applications, the network let me learn about new applications in Japan and discuss an idea with researchers in Israel.  We used the network to share design specs, pictures, results of experiments and collaborate on wicked interesting problems across the globe.  I was working on the edge, as John Hagel says, without realizing it.

3. Treat your network well. It is not a renewable energy source. As Whitney Johnson elucidated, a network needs to be cultivated and nurtured.  You are a steward of your network – use it for yourself but more so for the benefit of others.  The more you share your network, the more it grows and increases in value and meaning to everyone.

When I first moved to Oberlin, OH, I commuted weekly to my ATT office in New Jersey or somewhere else in the world.  ATT provided me all the network tools: a cell phone, voice and data network in my home, PC, laptop, etc.  Commuting grew old, but when I decided to start my own business in Northeast Ohio,  I didn’t know anyone in the business community.  I contacted the Cleveland chapter of the Brown Alumni Club and although it took work, everything flowed from there – my clients, the VC Company I’m a partner in, collaborations and amazing friendships.  In turn, my expanding network has been a joy to share with others as I watch them discover opportunities – from students I mentor to adults looking for new jobs.

For me, the network is literal survival.  My family, throughout history, escaped to places where we had family or friends who would support, hide, and in the case of America letting my mom and grandparents enter, sponsor us.  No sponsor, no entry; no entry, Auschwitz.  Without the network, the odds of survival were slim to none.  Fortunately, for most of us this is not the case.  But don’t let that negate the importance of the network for your survival.

Without the network, you don’t get new ideas into your organization, you don’t see trends and issues that affect you and your customers, you don’t grow and develop your people with new challenges and opportunities, you aren’t attractive for young talent, you don’t learn about new technologies or business models, you don’t create new markets and you risk deluding yourself with your own ideas.  You don’t increase your own value and advance your own career.  Without the network you stagnate, you become stale.  With the network you grow, provide meaningful and valuable solutions to your customers and not just survive, but thrive.

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Prefer to Sign-up to the Weekly Collaborative Innovation Newsletter?

In November, I spoke with Bernard Charlès, CEO of Dassault Systèmes, (DS), creator of 3D simulation products for manufacturing to life sciences. Insourcing is a key component of Dassault and Bernard’s personal values: a company’s role includes contributing to society and the economy through the business itself.

I’ve wondered about the cost-benefit equation of in vs. outsourcing for a while.  Most cost-benefit analysis focuses on tangibles: lower labor rates, higher freight, etc.  Are 2^nd and 3^rd order effects accounted for in the equation: benefits of training and professional/career development, adjacent businesses in manufacturing or services, other opportunities?  I don’t know.  And what about innovation?

I agree with many who believe we learn by doing.   Many innovations arise by trying to do something one way and figuring out a better way or an entirely different way to do it.  If we’ve outsourced the ‘doing’ doesn’t it follow that we’ve outsourced the ‘learning’?   I wonderful how many opportunities for innovation we’ve lost because we weren’t ‘doing’.   In the NYT article, Apple’s executives said the reason for outsourcing went beyond cheap labor; overseas factories could scale faster and workers were more flexible and skilled than in the USA.  Perhaps because they learned to?

While ‘learning from doing’ is not easy to quantify and add into the equation, it needs to be.   Isn’t that an important part of the ‘business case’ for insourcing?  Perhaps it wasn’t viewed as important in the last century, but it sure is for this one. As we rapidly move from knowledge stacks to knowledge flows, per John Hagel, the ability to capture and apply learning becomes one of customer, and competitive, advantage, if not survival – of companies, economies, societies.

So, have you tried to quantify your ‘learning by doing’? Have you made it part of any business case for out/insourcing?  Please share – these are important and valuable lessons.

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Prefer to Sign-up to the Weekly Collaborative Innovation Newsletter?

In November, we spoke with Bernard Charlès, CEO of Dassault Systèmes, (DS), creator of 3D make-believe products for production to life sciences. Insourcing is a pivotal member of Dassault and Bernard’s personal values: a company’s purpose includes contributing to multitude and a economy by a business itself.

I’ve wondered about a cost-benefit equation of in vs. outsourcing for a while.  Most cost-benefit research focuses on tangibles: reduce labor rates, aloft freight, etc.  Are 2^nd and 3^rd order effects accounted for in a equation: advantages of training and professional/career development, adjacent businesses in production or services, other opportunities?  I don’t know.  And what about innovation?

I determine with many who trust we learn by doing.   Many innovations arise by perplexing to do something one approach and reckoning out a improved approach or an wholly opposite approach to do it.  If we’ve outsourced a ‘doing’ doesn’t it follow that we’ve outsourced a ‘learning’?   we smashing how many opportunities for creation we’ve mislaid since we weren’t ‘doing’.   In a NYT article, Apple’s executives pronounced a reason for outsourcing went over inexpensive labor; abroad factories could scale faster and workers were some-more stretchable and schooled than in a USA.  Perhaps since they schooled to?

While ‘learning from doing’ is not easy to quantify and supplement into a equation, it needs to be.   Isn’t that an critical partial of a ‘business case’ for insourcing?  Perhaps it wasn’t noticed as critical in a final century, though it certain is for this one. As we fast pierce from knowledge stacks to believe flows, per John Hagel, a ability to constraint and request training becomes one of customer, and competitive, advantage, if not presence – of companies, economies, societies.

So, have we attempted to quantify your ‘learning by doing’? Have we done it partial of any business box for out/insourcing?  Please share – these are critical and profitable lessons.

Recently, my mentoring has increased.  In addition to mentoring Brown seniors and startups, I’m mentoring Oberlin College students applying for a fellowship to start their business after graduation in May.  Many of these kids were in my recent Business Model Innovation class. They are eager for advice and guidance.  They really listen! For some reason, the stakes seem higher to me than in mentoring ‘adults’. For these kids’ their first entrepreneur experience will shape their view of entrepreneurship, innovation, success and failure.  That’s part of why they are making me a better mentor.  How? They make me challenge my own ‘status quo’ views and improve my ability to ask dumb questions.  Here’s what I have (re)learned from them:

• Status Quo is a powerful Siren Song: It’s so easy to succumb to the status quo; though I fight it, it’s the boiled frog syndrome – and it’s so very human.  When you’ve been doing, investing in and supporting startups and consulting with businesses for a long time, it’s easy to get lulled into thinking you know a lot; and you do, but not everything and not forever.  In our dynamic world, the lifespan of knowledge is increasingly decreasing. I have to challenge my own reasoning and ideas;
• Paradox of Inexperience and Experience:  The blank slate, the fresh naïve perspective these kids have creates innovative solutions to real needs with non-traditional business models for non-traditional customers and markets.  I learn so much about different perspectives, shifting my lens so I see the ‘usual’ in unusual ways. And my clients will benefit from lessons I’ve experienced from the inexperienced.
• Mentor Mentors: Through the network of alumni mentoring women at Brown and my friend Whitney Johnson’s insightful, must read posts about mentoring, I’ve learned how to be a good mentor: what does/doesn’t work, when, why, in which circumstances.  This has also broadened the network I can share with my mentees – teaching them the importance of The Network.

So, take some advice from these kids – start mentoring.  It will stretch you in ways you can’t imagine, let you to share your learnings with others for their success, and provide life-long experiences to be shared, imparted and enjoyed.

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Prefer to Sign-up to the Weekly Collaborative Innovation Newsletter?

I’ve been collecting some phrases I hear from Status Quophiles (SQ) and the rare responses from Innovators (I), Status Quophobes.  Do these sound familiar? If you can add any, please do so in the comments!

SQ: Could be a major breakthrough, but your predecessor tried that a while ago, and that’s why you’re here now.

I: Could be a major breakthrough, and we’ll support you in trying it.

SQ: That could work, but we risk not being able to get the coating on a reliable and consistent basis if the world blows up.

I: That would work, and we can diversify our coating suppliers to assure quality and price.

SQ: Wow, cool, but that’s going to be a problem for our customers.

I: Wow, cool, and that’s going to let us help so many more customers and markets than we can now!

SQ: Appreciate your enthusiasm and ideas, but once you’ve been around a bit longer and know how we do things here, you’ll understand the challenges involved.

I: Appreciate your enthusiasm and ideas, and the breath of fresh thinking and perspective is just what we need!

SQ: This makes sense in the long run, but remember, we are measured on quarterly results.

I: This makes sense in the long run, and we can show some benefits even in the short term by applying our learning early on.

SQ: Nice idea, but we have to recognize the sunk costs of our existing fixed assets.

I: Nice idea, and let’s face it, sunk costs are, well, sunk!       

SQ: We should pursue this, but let’s make sure it’s 150% vetted and tested and has met all the criteria before we start the project, let alone release it, even for a beta.

I: We should pursue this, and figure out how to prototype and test as we go along to make sure we get it right.

SQ: Interesting, but things are going so well, we’re profitable and growing so we must be on the right track.

I: Interesting, and that will let us start adapting to our customers changing needs while we have the resources and loyalty.

Here’s my challenge to you to try for just a few days.  Listen for the ‘but’ in meetings and discussions.  Count them.  Then, listen for the ‘and’ and count those?  Which do you hear more? And (ha!) what can you do to change that (perhaps starting with yourself!)?  Please share what you hear, your count of but and, and what you can do to change it!  Learning is no good if its not shared!

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Prefer to Sign-up to the Weekly Collaborative Innovation Newsletter?

There are some great ways to do spur creativity and innovate, but I don’t think there is ‘the’ way.  One of the very freeing things about innovation is that it’s a continuous experiment; what works today may or may not work tomorrow (if you have kids, you know this well).  It’s good to innovate how you innovate!

I always get concerned when a vocabulary coalesces into jargon* and it seems like that’s happening with innovation.  The era of everything being prescribed, of best practices, are coming to an end.  While there are some absolutes, I believe success, intangible and tangible, will go to those who can experiment, learn, apply and iterate the fastest and most purposefully.

Do you agree? Am I over-reacting? Let me know your thoughts.  And, if you can, this week, listen for ‘should’, ‘ought’ and ‘the’ – and when you hear it, challenge it, because, Innovation and Status Quo should truly be oxymorons.

*Jargon – Old French jargon “a chattering” (of birds) from mid-14^th C “unintelligible talk, gibberish, chattering, jabbering” also from English gargle from which we get gargoyle!

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Prefer to Sign-up to the Weekly Collaborative Innovation Newsletter?

Most market research projects – for strategic planning and innovation (my passions) or even incremental product development focus on getting the facts. Lets take a look at an example: One college in America, who I shall not name, states on their website that “Since 1920, more CollegeXgraduates have gone on to earn PhDs than have the graduates of any other American baccalaureate college.”

This is true, it’s a fact…so let’s look at “WHY” (I love asking why!)

• Because CollegeX is older than most of the institutions it’s compared to for this data
• Because CollegeX is bigger than most of the institutions it’s compared to for this data
• The data is taken from 1920 to 2010 – that’s 90 years averaged
• Over the past 20yrs, this is no longer true

Electric companies say that electric heat is 100% efficient compared to natural gas which is about 90% efficient. But in terms of generation and distribution, electricity is 33% efficient and generation and distribution of natural gas is about 98% efficient.

Electric vehicles don’t generate pollution! Hum…what about the production of the electricity to charge a car? How does that (remember, most electricity is generated from burning coal and once it’s out on the wires, it’s only about 33% efficient) compare with a combustion engine?  Given today’s electric grid (the one we’ve got), EVs aren’t saving that much carbon.

Remember the Juan Williams saga with NPR and Fox and his statement about Muslims on a plane? And the recent firing of NPR’s CEO? Lots of facts on all sides, most taken out of context. And we can just look at what’s going on in the Mideast/North Africa to see how data are being used as facts in so many different contexts by different groups.

So why do I bring this up? Because while facts are important, humans have a tendency to pick the facts that support the hypothesis they want to confirm. The order in which facts are presented can strongly bias the interpreter. We don’t tend to ask questions about what the facts don’t say.

Facts can get in the way of innovation unless they are put in the right context – as a tool to look at things differently vs. taking them as the end-all-be-all. When presented with facts, try a few things to get a different perspective – ask….

• If we reordered the facts, how would things look? (e.g., NPR)
• What don’t these facts address? (e.g., Electric heat)
• What do these facts assume as truth? (e.g., CollegeX)
• What follow-on questions result from these facts?
• Why are these facts true?
• How long will these facts be true for?
• Who cares about these facts anyway?

So, check the facts, get some facts, but put them in perspective, be prudent…provide balance and ballast…because sometimes, the facts can hinder, not help innovation…

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Prefer to Sign-up to the Weekly Collaborative Innovation Newsletter?

These men are all working on the same physical plane, but for one it’s flat, for another uphill and for another downhill. It depends where one is standing.  They are all on the same physical plane, but they all have different viewpoints.  We view things from our own perspectives and biases.

Why are some people so good at recognizing, understanding, and even creating future trends and behavior (e.g., Oprah Winfrey, Steve Jobs, Warren Buffett)?  And how do they stay cutting edge year after year? It seems that they simply see the world differently, their lens are shifted.  They are curious about the world, life, work; they’re open-minded; they set their minds on an idea and go for it, even creating the trend itself;  they’re confident in their ideas and act;  they don’t care about being different, not conforming.  Some say they’re ‘fearless’ and ‘risk takers’ – perhaps, or perhaps they define fear and risk differently – risk = status quo, not the undefined opportunity.  Mainly, they exhibit connectedness – in terms of people (social network capital) and the ability to connect things together, to see patterns and relationships that most don’t see.

Before my oldest child started crawling, we crawled around the house to ‘baby-proof’ it.  Wow! What a totally different perspective! It was amazing.  Try it, even if your kids are grown.  Start looking at the world around you that way –your world, your (current, potential, non-) customers’ worlds.  Imagine what it could be.  I call that the “Parallax View”: a viewpoint from which you can observe and study something/somebody from a new angle, gaining insights unavailable before. Imagine what could happen if you tried this?

Here are some ways to start.  Jeffrey Phillips encourages us to look at rituals, like shaving, and think about how we could reinvent them.  Jerry Sternin improved malnutrition in Vietnam by looking at Positive Deviants – at those who, despite the circumstances and everyone around them, were doing better.  Tony Hsieh talks about hiring lucky people, but luck isn’t totally accidental, it’s serendipitous, and luck breeds luck.

I bet you are already doing some of this but don’t realize it or use it as best as you could.  Your customers’ and their customers’ business drivers are your leading indicators!  There are indicators all around.  There are job boards, real estate transactions, zoning permits that tell you the types of jobs, land buildings, special capabilities your customers, or competitors, are looking at.  By reading, watching, listening, observing, you can find many leading indicators, without spending big money on market studies that can help you provide very valuable solutions (and business models) to your customers.  Just give it a try.

So what are some of your leading indicators? Can you share them?

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Prefer to Sign-up to the Weekly Collaborative Innovation Newsletter?

Where We Came From and Why We’re Successful

Bettcher Industries was founded in 1944 with $800 by Louis Bettcher, a former cowboy, woodcutter, hard rock miner, tool and die maker and son of a fundamentalist Christian minister.  During WWII, Louis repaired machinery at the old meat cutting plants in downtown Cleveland and, being an infinitely curious individual, he found several ways to improve plant operations and began inventing tools to help.  He kept inventing tools throughout his life, but his most enduring contribution to the company was his philosophy captured in Russell Conwell’s famous sermon, “Acres of Diamonds”.  Conwell was a Baptist Minister and the founder of Temple University.  Its message describes a man who sold his property so that he could venture into the world to seek his fortune later learned that the property buyer discovered “acres of diamonds” on his newly purchased property.  This message was delivered 6,000 times over 50 years in hundreds of towns and cities and is summarized by Dr. Conwell as,  “Let every man or women here, if you never hear me again, remember this, that if you wish to be great at all, you must begin where you are and what you are…now”.  In essence, you are standing, now, in acres of diamonds.  Today this message is manifested in contemporary business literature described as everything from “Voice of the Customer” to “Leveraging Core Focus” to the vernacular of “Fishing where the Fish are”.  At Bettcher, few in the company would know that “Acres of Diamonds” is the foundation for our product development philosophy, but most know that we value a deep understanding of our customer’s environment, a highly detailed understanding of the work performed by our customers and the fundamental personality trait of “infinite curiosity”.  For Bettcher Industries, we have had, and continue to look for, opportunities that are right in front of our noses and this has led us to mastering a narrow product niche on a worldwide stage.  Today, the Wizard trimmer, which was poorly named “Dumbutcher” when invented in 1954, has become a family of products and services that reach into nearly every industrial meat plant in the world.

The Change: Was It Innovation, Serendipity or Providence?

Back in the fall of 2009, Cindy, one of our customer service representatives, received a phone call that nearly made her fall off her chair.  To many, a modern meat plant might seem somewhat “shocking”, but to us this “automotive assembly plant operating in reverse” is common place and, in fact, we are not easily “shocked” by much of anything (for evidence of this you are welcome to view the video on our website).  But on this day, the caller wanted to know if we had ever used our Whizard Trimmer on HUMAN tissue!  Cindy, as an infinitely curious individual and having heard more than her share of “crazy ideas” from customers in the past answered, “No, but let’s take a look”.  So, from the curious mind of an individual in an unrelated field of work and his website search for “tissue cutting”, to a phone inquiry and positive response, our journey into the “Medical” world had begun.

From the first visit by our local sales manager, despite our culture of innovation, the organization resisted this intrusion from the “outside”.  “It won’t work, we don’t know anything about human tissue or cadavers, this is a “one off” opportunity at best, this will take time away from our core business, our engineering resources are stretched too thin already” and similar comments could be heard echoing from our hallways.  But soon the customer’s request to “remove adipose tissue from dermis” was translated into our language and we knew that we could remove “fat” from “skin” because we had been doing so for years in meat plants.

There is a big difference between “knowing that you can” and “deciding that you want to” and at Bettcher we use a toll gate product development process fashioned after Robert Cooper’s StageGate process.  So into the “Scoping” stage we go and the learning begins.  In the early weeks we learn that our product won’t stand up to the sanitation requirements of the industry and we’re presented with real engineering problems in design and materials, but these are problems we know how to solve.  While focused on the specific need for this specific customer, we begin a broader look at the “Tissue Banking” industry and reached out to several other companies and organizations including Community Tissue Services in Dayton and the American Association of Tissue Banks. Now a small team of Bettcher employees is venturing into clean rooms and observing the “work” that is performed.  Through a myriad of questions our knowledge increases and we begin to play “what ifs” with potential customers as product solutions appear in our mind.  By the end of 2010, we have a prototype adaptation of our Whizard trimmer for tissue processing operating with the original customer, but we know that the tool is unsatisfactory in many ways.  The development process continues and we introduce the“Amalgatome” in the middle of 2011 to a narrow market of fifteen primary processors with an annual sales potential of $2.76 Million; not big, but interesting.  From that first phone call we now have a small family of products with very clever engineering and patented features that are manufactured in ways we didn’t think possible just 18 months before.  More valuable than this success is the realization that diamonds are sparkling within our reach.

The Challenge: Be Careful What You Ask For

In October last year, I read an article about the Ohio Third Frontier that in the words of our state government is “a technology-based economic development initiative that is successfully changing the trajectory of Ohio’s economy by supporting existing industries that are transforming themselves with new globally competitive products and fostering the formation and attraction of new companies in emerging industry sectors”.  The connection to our Medical initiative was screaming at me so off goes an email to our CFO.  From this small spark, we examined the potential of four additional “problems” we had learned about in our medical industry research and feel we can leverage the Amalgatome into a full-fledged business platform.  In our thinking, what better way to do so than with funding from the State of Ohio?  So, once again, off we go and engage a grant writing consulting firm.  Now it is not the company naysayers chiming in, but the bureaucratic infrastructure that says, “Bettcher is in a low tech and unattractive industry, you don’t have any experience with the grants, you don’t have any political capital in the State, you’re not in a biotech field, you’ll be competing with the likes of the Cleveland Clinic and OSU, very few first time applicants even make the first cut, let alone win” etc.  Undeterred, we issue our Letter of Intent to the State; one of hundreds.  In January 2011, the grant proposal is submitted – all 12,000 words of it and, we learn that we are one of 73 in our biomedical “field”.  Soon after, we make the first cut and are part of the 36 required to make direct presentations to the State. To end the suspense, we learned on July 14^th that we were awarded $1 Million from the Third Frontier and in fact, our project was scored #4 of the 10 that received funding; unprecedented for a first-time applicant.  We were rightfully proud and we celebrated our success.

The core team was assembled the following Wednesday and in the five days that had passed since the announcement, our euphoria came crashing down into the question, “ how in the world are we going to meet the target measures by the end of 2012”?  Five new products (we had one mostly in the bag), 11 full time employees (a 7% increase in our Ohio based employment) and $1.7 Million in new revenue (when our forecast was $250k) all in eighteen months!  IMPOSSIBLE!

Ask me again in 13 months and 13 days

On the back of my business card, and the cards of every employee at Bettcher Industries, you’ll find the following words, “It is the mission of BETTCHER Industries, Inc. and its employees to profitably develop, manufacture, and market high quality, technically superior products which meet all safety requirements and are of a unique and inventive nature”.  Further it states that our mission is dependent on “sensitive, sound and equitable partnerships with customers, distributors, employees and vendors to ensure a mutually strong future”.  This statement reflects the core of our culture and it is a culture that can be traced back to Louis Bettcher.  This is the tie that binds us and we live it every day.  In this story it is seen throughout the organization from President spotting an opportunity, the CFO finding the best grant consultant, the HR department recruiting passionate talent to the team, the engineering teams overcoming obstacles with very creative solutions, the manufacturing team joining with others to find unique materials and molding processes, the sales department reaching out to completely new partners, resources and distribution methods, the marketing/New Product Development team doggedly charging in where we knew absolutely nothing and finally to Cindy, who knew to begin where she was with what she knew.

No part of the medical project has been easy and we tried and failed innumerable times in mostly small ways.  In fact, we’re amending the grant proposal to reduce the five products to three but keeping the employment and revenue targets intact.  This is a clear case of “eyes bigger than stomach” syndrome when we wrote the original grant proposal.  Clearly, we have and are continuing to fail until we are successful and the end of this story cannot yet be written…But, what we know and have known is this:

Everything matters.  The culture of innovation fostered by Louis, the passion of every employee doing what they know how to do and an organization that is connected with a shared mission is our formula.

Will it work?  We believe it will but if you don’t, ask me again in 13 months and 13 days.

This material was originally published by Deb Mills-Scofield on: http://collaborativeinnovation.org/2011/11/when-customer-service-has-a-product-idea-listen/