Many leaders support trial, error linked to innovation

DUBAI: As organisations worldwide have been rolling out innovative solutions to overcome challenges brought on by COVID-19, some are struggling to keep afloat due to their inability to adapt to this fast-changing situation. While there are several possible explanations for this, it seems that aversion to risk could be a big one. This is according to talent assessment and behaviourmetry experts, The Talent Enterprise, along with leading strategy consulting firm Sia Partners and the Global Innovation Management Institute, who have just released The Innovation Mindset of Leaders, a worldwide report based on the study of 600 senior managers and leaders as well several subject matter experts from leading organisations such as Sanofi, SAP and the Dubai Government.

Findings include:

3 out of 4 organisations are risk averse when it comes to innovation

41% of organisations open to risk are considered as very innovative while only 3% of risk averse organisations are seen as very innovative

Only 49% of risk averse companies are “good” at cross-organisational collaboration pertaining to innovation compared to 72% of non-risk averse organisations

Risk averse companies appear to be less proficient at analysing risk

David Jones, CEO of The Talent Enterprise, explains, “An organisation’s ability to innovate has never been more critical than it is today, and risk-taking is an inherent part of innovation. Having said this, it needs to be calculated and ironically, the numbers show that risk averse organisations are two times more likely to be poor at risk analysis than the ones who are open to it. If leaders are not willing to analyse risk, it suggests that they don’t truly embrace innovation. In fact, while most managers and leaders feel upper management is supportive of innovation only 59% believe it supports trial and error pertaining to it. According to the experts we interviewed, resistance to change seems to be what lies beneath this phenomenon.”

Unwillingness to change perhaps explains why processes are not put in place to foster innovation.

nnnn