Mike Rowe knows a lot about work. On his show, Dirty Jobs, he’s had the opportunity to meet the people who do the kind of work that many of us wouldn’t dare.
Mike recently gave a talk at TED about work, and specifically the type of work that we celebrate in the United States. His conclusion: We spend a lot of time celebrating innovation, but not enough time rewarding imitation.
Mike’s point was that while innovation is really important, imitation is what brings innovation to the masses. For example, the people who developed the iPhone are the ones we celebrate, yet without people who consistently produce the chips, processors and components – an imitative process – in a consistent and repeatable manner, the development of the iPhone is useless.
The video reminds me of the time that I argued (and won) that “Innovation” should be included as a competency on the performance appraisal for the manufacturing group at the company I was working for at the time. My thought was that we should encourage and expect all employees (even the ones on the floor) to seek out new and innovative ways to improve the organization.
While I stand by that belief, in retrospect, I don’t think the competency should have been included on the performance appraisal – it’s probably better suited as a spot bonus award. For the manufacturing group, the ability to consistently reproduce products or processes in a high-quality way was much more important as an everyday behavior.
One company that really understands the value of the imitative process is Toyota. Their manufacturing floor evaluates and celebrates the ability to consistently and efficiently repeat processes. It’s one of the reasons why their vehicles are among the highest quality in the world.
Is good, innovative design important for Toyota? Absolutely. But so is the ability to reproduce that design time and time again to make great vehicles.
Embracing and inspiring motivation is a big part of Renegade HR, but even more important is our mission to drive behaviors that support the business. And for some groups of employees, imitation is more important than innovation.
Your point of putting innovation on the performance appraisal is a good one. However, it is my experience – especially in slow-moving companies – putting it on the appraisal – for a short period of time (say 2-3 years) establishes it as a company “value” – rewarding it on an ongoing basis as part of a total company recognition and reward strategy then allows you to ingrain that behavior so that you can remove it from the appraisal process.
The key here is that what gets rewarded get’s done.
@Paul – Thanks for your comment, and good point about establishing it as a value and then removing it after a few years. It just depends on the organization, I suppose.
One thing to consider… putting the “innovation” thing on the performance appraisal communicates things someone “has to do” – putting it in a company recognition and reward program communicates things someone “should do.” The difference is transactional norms versus social norms. Social norms have been proven to more powerful. Dan Arieley in his book – Predictably Irrational has a great chapter on this issue. Too often companies try to use transaction strategies to get performance when a social one would be better.
Paul, you wrote: “putting the “innovation” thing on the performance appraisal communicates things someone “has to do” – putting it in a company recognition and reward program communicates things someone “should do.””
EXACTLY! What I was trying to get at in my article today is that for a manufacturing team, they HAVE to consistently reproduce and duplicate processes with a high-degree of accuracy. It would be nice if they could also develop some innovative ways to improve those processes, but it’s not something they have to do.
Innovation vs. Imitation.
I think you’re right – for some groups of employees, imitation is more important than innovation. Too often, however, these employees may get overlooked when what they do is just as vital to the organization…It seems like what you’re saying here is that organizations need to implement a culture that celebrates employees for performing well (further motivating them to do so) – whether they be the innovators or the imitators.
@Mary – that’s a great point. I’ve found, too, that often those folks often have great, innovative ideas that no one listens to. Once, in a manufacturing environment, I saw a group of employees suggest that the organization make the packaging for a product just a few millimeters larger. The employees were able to box the product far more quickly, drastically improving productivity.
The organization was fortunate that those employees spoke up. Far too often, employers don’t put in place the venues for employees to share these kinds of ideas.
But back to your point, yes, I think an organization should deliberately work to create a culture that celebrates the success of both innovators AND imitators.