Excerpt
II
II
Content
TABLES AND FIGURES ... III
1
ASSESSMENT OF DESCRIBED EFFORTS ... 1
2
FURTHER IDEAS FOR CULTURAL CHANGE ... 5
3
ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT CAPABILITIES ... 9
REFERENCES ... IV
III
III
Tables and figures
F
IGURE
1:
C
ULTURE OF
I
NNOVATION
R
OAD MAP
(S
OURCE
:
M
ARK AND
M
ITCHELL
,
2014,
P
.
4). ... 2
F
IGURE
2:
S
CHEIN
M
ODEL OF CULTURE
(S
OURCE
:
S
CHEIN AND
S
CHEIN
,
2016). ... 3
F
IGURE
3:
F
OUR LEVERS OF INFLUENCE
(S
OURCE
:
K
ELLER AND
P
RICE
,
2011). ... 5
F
IGURE
4:
D
IMENSIONS OF INNOVATIVE CULTURE
(S
OURCE
:
M
AHER
,
2014,
P
.
5). ... 9
T
ABLE
1:
I
DEAS TO FOSTER THE
B
ASIC
A
SSUMPTIONS OF
GMC'
S INNOVATION APPROACH
(S
OURCE
:
O
WN DEPICTION
PARTIALLY BASED ON
K
ELLER AND
P
RICE
,
2011). ... 6
T
ABLE
2:
R
ECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTIONS FOR
GMC
ON AN ORGANIZATIONAL LEVEL
(S
OURCE
:
O
WN DEPICTION
BASED ON
M
AHER
,
2014,
P
.5). ... 10
1
1 Assessment of described efforts
An assessment of the described efforts of the change towards a more innovative company
culture, it is important to look at the efforts taken from a holistic perspective. According to
the case (Ken and Mitchell, 2014), the new innovation initiative, the `culture of innovation'
programme, was based on three pillars and was introduced in accordance with the ideas and
in consent with the whole leadership level. The three pillars described are `Ask. Enable. Rec
ognize.' And follow a road map based on the three pillars (see figure 1). Essential for this
process, especially in the beginning, was a common definition of innovation and the process
of developing a common understanding of the role and characteristics of innovation in the
company, e.g. by the clarification of common misconceptions regarding innovation especial
ly at General Mills Canada (GMC). This got contributed by the acquisition of a new brand of
yoghurts that opened a lot of space for innovation and especially the for the hiring of new
employees. Further measures described were the rearrangement of the company buildings
to a more engaging, friendly and creativity and informal exchange fostering layout, the rear
rangement of meeting routines, e.g. encouraging free Fridays and more flexible working
times, ongoing training and encouragement sessions for and between employees.
The HR department even organized an innovation team to take care on organizational as
pects regarding all these matters, all to encourage employees to rise from analysis paralysis
and towards a bigger and bolder style of tackling challenges. During this initiative the reward
system for innovative behavior was renamed and slightly changed from `thinking outside the
box' towards an innovative and creative way of working.
While all these changes seem to reach managers partially, as some of them understand the
new innovation approach of `everything that makes GMC better' to the fullest, a large part
of the employees and some of the managers don't seem to like it, as they don't approve
some and even are confused about the measures. The company climate survey, a very direct
measurement of the employees feelings, of 2012, the year of the start of the innovation ini
tiative and with the most changes and spending regarding this topic, shows also almost no
effect on the items that shall measure the perceived innovativeness within GMC's culture.
2
Figure 1: Culture of Innovation Road map (Source: Mark and Mitchell, 2014, p. 4).
The main points brought up by managers in regard of disproving the measures where:
Not linking specific measures to the `culture of innovation'programme
Feeling not encouraged enough towards a more innovative working behavior
Inconsistent definitions and programmes regarding innovations at GMC
Remaining short term profit orientation
Hippocratic relation to the goal of innovativeness and the actual risks that will be
taken
Neglect of the core business and dilution of the actual business of GMC
Neglect of external circumstances such as the general economy, competitors and
emerging markets
3
In conclusion, the assessment of the described efforts of installing a culture of innovation
through the `culture of innovation'programme at GMC must take in consideration the
fundamental framework and it's elaboration on actual viable measures but also on the
way it is backed up and understood throughout the company, which is influenced by the
way it is presented, adopted and felt for the employees. In other words this can be de
scribed by the culture model of Schein and Schein (2016), which distinguish between 3
levels of a culture (see figure 2). In regard to this model the fundamental framework can
be understood as the espoused value, the viable measures as the behavior and artefacts
and the way it is backed up through the company are the basic assumptions.
Figure 2: ScheinModel of culture (Source: Schein and Schein, 2016).
Homer and Taylor did a lot to elaborate their very sophisticated approach of an innova
tional culture into almost every part of the company on the level of behavior and arte
facts, even came up with measures that didn't worked as planned and renewed them.
Further they came up with follow up measures even for succeeding ones and had an ap
proach of displaying espoused values through their framework. However all their efforts
Excerpt out of 18 pages
- Quote paper
- Felix Zappe (Author), 2017, Establishing an Innovation Culture at General Mills Canada, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/373656
Similar texts
Publish now - it's free
Comments