42. Robyn Bolton: The Value Gap: How Leaders Unlock Real Innovation

Robyn Bolton works with leaders of medium and large businesses to help them navigate uncertainty and confidently grow revenue. At MileZero, she has worked with companies including Medtronic, Ariadne Labs, and Teachers Pay Teachers to transform deep customer insights into viable businesses. She has also worked with organizations including Alexion, Sanofi, and The Cable Center to build their innovation capabilities and cultures.

Prior to founding MileZero, Robyn was a Partner at Innosight, the innovation and growth strategy consulting firm founded by Harvard Professor Clayton Christensen. She served Global 1000 companies, nonprofits, and startups in industries including healthcare, retail and apparel, and consumer packaged goods. Her teams collaborated closely with clients like Nike, Ahold USA, and Nestle to identify new markets, design and launch new business models, build innovation structures and processes.

After earning her MBA at Harvard Business School, she worked as a consultant and project leader for The Boston Consulting Group in both Boston and Copenhagen Denmark. 

Transcript

Intro 0:00

What's it worth? Uh-uh. Uh-uh. What's it worth? Uh-uh.

Simon Hill 0:09

Welcome again to another episode of the Total Innovation Podcast. As always, I'm your host, Simon Hill. Most organizations don't suffer from a shortage of ideas. Active listeners will know this as a constant tenant of mine. They suffer from a shortage of value discipline. Companies launch innovation labs, they run hackathons, they track number of ideas, number of pilots, numbers of workshops, numbers of numbers. Activity goes up, impact too often does not. Because innovation theater measures motion, innovation performance measures value. And if innovation is a leadership problem, as today's guest on the podcast argues, then value creation is arguably a leadership responsibility. And so with that, today's topic, and welcome to the podcast, to Robin Bolton, who um with today we're going to explore a simple but I think uncomfortable idea that innovation isn't an idea problem, it's a leadership problem. Robin is the founder, and I think she describes herself as chief navigator at Mile Zero and the author of the wonderful book, Unlocking Innovation. With that, Robin, welcome to the podcast.

Robyn Bolton 1:22

Thank you. So excited to be here.

Simon Hill 1:25

Finally, we made this happen. You and I have been talking about it for months, and we've traveled oceans and other things, but finally we've made it happen. So uh well done to us. But for those of you that may not know you, um, can you just set a scene a little bit around your journey in innovation, the work that you've done, uh, et cetera, et cetera?

Robyn Bolton 1:46

Yeah, absolutely. So I've essentially kind of spent my whole career in corporate innovation, starting with coming right out of university. Went to work for Procter and Gamble and Brand Management, and by pure luck, uh was assigned to an innovation team. And so I spent my first year out of university working on the development and launch of Swiffer, which you know now is a billion-dollar brand, but I can tell you it had many near-death experiences, even in that year uh where I was working on it. Um so spent about five years at ETU working on Swiffer and Swiffer Watchet, then um traveled a bit, moved up to Boston, got my MBA at Harvard, went to work for BCG, big consulting firm, and then spent about nine years at the firm that was founded by Clayton Christensen. And so that's really where you know I dug into the combination of corporate innovation and disruptive innovation, and saw so many companies across so many industries really battling the same problems. Um 2017, the firm was acquired. I left, um, eventually started my own firm, Mile Zero, which we continue to use all the tools of innovation to help senior leaders make better decisions and uncertainty and then clear the organizational friction that often stops those decisions from getting put into the market. So that's that's a bit of my journey.

Simon Hill 3:23

Some uh some solid grounding between P and G, who are renowned in the world of open innovation and spin-outs and carve outs into the uh the esteemed corridors of Harvard Business School, and then Clay Christensen's uh incredible um in organization as well. Yeah, which is a great journey. I was actually earlier today in a working group session looking at trying to build competency capabilities for very early innovators who don't quite have the luxury maybe of landing in that that amazing space and thinking about it. But that is a it is an amazing foundation, and out of that, you've you have built um a business and you've written a book unlocking innovation. Can you just talk a little bit about the that journey and the work that you're doing in the business and and also the sort of essential tenets of the book, really? I mean, everyone wants to unlock innovation. We know the stats around it for starters.

Robyn Bolton 4:21

Yes, and and it's really the stats around it that are what prompted me to start thinking about writing a book. Because for initially, you know, people were saying, Oh, you should write a book. It's like, no, like the world does not need another innovation book. There are so many out there, there are so many that are brilliant. We don't need another one. Um, but that idea of the stats around corporate innovation kind of drove me slowly nuts. And, you know, I talk about it could have been the intro to the book, that the innovator's dilemma came out probably about 30 years ago. And you know, over the those 30 years, so much has been built in corporate innovation. You know, it's been expanded, it's been professionalized, and yet the success rate hasn't changed. And so it's like, okay, why why is that? Why has 30 years not moved the needle? And I realized in reflecting on my work and my work with companies was that we have focused almost exclusively on what I call the architecture of innovation. So strategy, structures, processes, governance, uh, a little bit of metrics. And that that is all necessary for innovation, but it's not sufficient. The really where I saw companies, the difference between companies who are successful and not with their corporation endeavors, it was around leadership. And so kind of the central tenet of the book is that we have myopically focused on the architecture of innovation, but what you actually need are the ABCs. And that's architecture, behavior, specifically leadership behaviors, and culture. And you need to build all three together in different ways. And then you layer layer over that the fact that most innovation teams only survive three years. Um, I think largely, you know, as we've talked about, largely because their job is to create value and they're not, or they're not being able to capture and communicate the value. Um, so the book is very much kind of a three-year guide on how do you work on the ABCs each year in order to increase the odds that you actually survive to year four.

Simon Hill 6:47

Something interesting about that three-year cycle. Um, I know you've uh perused through some of the pages of another one of those books that who knows if it needs to be written or not, my my my expected value book. And and thank you. And we could talk a bit about a bit about value um later on. But I there is this, there is this kind of sensual piece really, right? There's been so much written, right? You've come out of this incredible organization that that you know, quite honestly, you said that you know it was there was many times it couldn't have survived, yet it did. And I'm sure there was an ABC piece to that. One loves a good ABC or uh or a one for three as well. So nicely put together in uh in that structure. Um, but I think there's something in that three-year piece, right? I talk about it in expected value in terms of the vitality metric and looking at that that as a as a component piece. Um, three is the magic number, and not always in these things, but I think actually in innovation land, it is. And I have this strong feeling that I can't quite quantify, although maybe with XV we'll get closer to it, that that in many cases we lose bottle in terms of investment just at that moment in time when perhaps the value could have been realized. Not always, there's a bunch of projects that should never have been funded in the first place, I think, but but but quite often sometimes, right? And there's probably many instances when that billion-dollar business you were working on could have been allowed to die and died, and the billion dollars value is never created, right? And I suspect that there are many, many examples of those things that come through. You must find that back to leadership, right? We're gonna talk about value a little bit later. You just come back to leadership, and so how do you tie together the ABC and the leadership components of this in your in your research and in your in your practice?

Robyn Bolton 8:36

So um the the leadership component, which I think is the the behavior is absolutely mission critical, it's first off, it's a huge challenge because um essentially innovation, creating new value and operations kind of optimizing existing value are totally different worlds. And that means that for most executives, what they've done in operations that has made them successful, that has got them promoted up the line, if they go do that in innovation land, it's completely the wrong thing. And because think about it, you know, you walk into the existing business and as a leader, you know, you have answers, you feel confident in those answers, you know cause and effect, you can predict what competitors will do because you've been there done that. Innovation is all hypotheses. You know, it's the first time you've done this, it's the first time the company's done this, it may be the first time anyone in the industry has done it. And so if you walk in there with that same mentality of, I have the answers, I know what to do, I know what comes next, you're gonna miss so many things. And, you know, I saw that actually um kind of each of each of the years in my book starts with a story of a leader who kind of really led the organization through. And so year three is tells the story of a Victor. Names have been changed to protect the innocent, and where he was, well, I'll just say it, it's the story of Swiffer, um where we as a brand team had had an amazing test market. I mean, it wasn't even expected value, it was real value. We were coming in at like two, three X um revenue expectations. But we did a check the box exercise with PG where we did a Bases test, which was run by IRI Nielsen, and you kind of plug in your marketing plan and pricing and all of that stuff. And because this was really the first time in a long decade that PG had worked on creating brands that create categories, Bases wasn't suited to that, but we didn't know that at the time. Basis was really good at predicting what the next scent of tide will do in the market, but it wasn't good at predicting what a new category would do. And so the Bases test said that the Swiffer was going to be the third worst launch in history, in the history of the database. Um, and like that's not great data you want to walk into the CEO with. But we were like, oh no, we have this test market, like these test markets that just blew the doors off of revenue. And so we went in, presented all the data, and this the CEO killed Swiffer right there in the room at the time. I mean, billion dollar brand dead. And it was our general, our VP general manager who's like, no, you you've got it totally wrong. Like, yes, it's the test markets are two small cities in the US, but that's real life. There's something off with this model, and we have real value. We have created real value for the company. And then he he put his career on the line. He's like, we gotta launch this. And if we don't, you can, and if it doesn't meet first year expectations, you can fire me. And like that's a big bold leadership move. Um, but it was based on, you know, it is based on a lot of data and a lot of confidence that that he had and that the proof that we had developed as a brand team.

Simon Hill 12:28

It's a great story, and I think it also leads into two things. And I think one of this, I think that's somewhat the tragedy of leadership to a degree, right? You know, I was um at an awards dinner recently, sat next to an innovation manager who has survived multiple cults and probably could be an innovation leader, but refuses to put his neck up there because all he sees is, well, I'll be out of a job in 18 months' time because everyone that's gone before me has done that. Um, and therefore keeps his head down because he's got a mortgage and a family and doesn't want to be out there looking for everything. And not everybody has the it doesn't make you a bad leader per se, but it does make you more risk averse. And that's okay, right? Especially in this world, I think, but where you when you get there. But also you you mentioned in all of that, and I think therefore, you know, how do you address that from a leadership perspective when innovation, as I mentioned competencies earlier, it's not really taught, right? You went to Harvard, I'm sure you got, you know, you got you got the benefit of of like plenty of Christians and training and everything else. Most do not, and many innovation courses are cursory at best, other than I say at best because they possibly don't exist at all, right? And so um there's lots of and yet people get given the job of innovation, right? Like with no, you know, it's early in its in its professionalization journey, the innovation world, even though it's been around for centuries. Um, and so leaders are onto a I don't know, uh a lost cause, I guess, first of all. But what your example gives is really someone that saw that that you weren't measuring the right thing and the wrong thing, or the signal noise thing was in different parts of the than than what was typically there. Um and I guess that's a leadership piece, but it's also a data piece, right? And so how much does data play into the work that you're doing and the the thinking that you've got? And and how much do you see it really playing out in organizations is a slightly rhetorical question, but how much do you really play out there?

Robyn Bolton 14:32

Yeah, no, um, in like companies that are successful at innovation, data plays in a huge amount. And uh, you know, it it plays in, I think, in an appropriate way, where it is seen as an input into a decision versus the decision itself. I mean, that was the mistake that the CEO and Swift first making is that you know, he looked at the outcome of the modeling and said, the model says it'll be terrible, it will be terrible. We're doing what the model, we're not gonna do that. Um, instead of taking a much more critical eye to it and saying, okay, well, what is beneath this? How did we get to this answer? What is the data actually reflective of with the inputs? And then bringing that in as a piece of as a piece of insight, in addition to personal experience, in addition to what are the company's priorities, um, what is, I talk about in the book, the growth gap, like what is the revenue growth we need from things that don't exist in order to hit our aspirations. And so data is used is used to inform versus kind of just blindly to make the decision. And that makes tons of sense. The the companies that I see really struggle with innovation are the ones who don't use data because it's like, oh no, we don't want to, you know, constrain innovation. This is, you know, blue sky, white piece of paper, like pick your color, pick your noun. And it's like, look, data, especially finance, is the language of business. And we have to speak that language in order to um to have the credibility and in order to build the support and to get the resources needed to create new value.

Simon Hill 16:27

Exactly, which is the output that we need to get, the outcome of the innovation work that we that we need to have. So I think if you spoke to and you you do speak to many innovation teams, they would see finance as the blocker, right? They would say finance doesn't understand innovation. As you said, it's a creative art, it's magical and mystical. Um, but finance has a job. Its job is capital allocation, it's risk management, it's protecting enterprise value, it's you know, it's it's it's managing working capital and and risk and all of those different components. So, how should innovation leaders think about those internal stakeholders that you're talking about and the jobs to be done of those people and and and especially the CFO, I think?

Robyn Bolton 17:11

Yeah. So I will admit I'm 100% guilty of being that person who's like, finance doesn't get it. Like finance and legal are my go-to villains in most stories. Um and and that's a bit fair, but also a bit unfair because you know what one of the things that I learned through my experiences was that yes, you need to understand your external customers, but you've got to understand your internal customers first because that's who you're selling to first. And so you need to understand their jobs to be done. And, you know, especially kind of the incentives and metrics by which they're judged. So, you know, I just think about, you know, let's say a PL owner and you go to the PL owner, you're the innovation team, and you're all excited, and you're like, hey, we want, you know, $10,000, which in the grand scheme of most corporate businesses is not a lot of money. Um, but as you're sitting there as the PLO PL owner, you're like, I could give you $10,000. And maybe, maybe there will be an ROI at some point in the distant future. But odds are there won't be. Whereas I could give that $10,000 to, you know, to supply chain or to marketing or or whoever working on the core business. And I know what the ROI is and I know when I'll get it. And with so many leaders who are measured, their KPIs, et cetera, their salaries, their bonuses, their career progression is based on what they deliver in the short term in the year. Any logical executive will go with the sure thing. And so, as an innovation team, you can't just come and be like, oh, it's not that much money, just give it to us. You have to come with that same language of finance and you know, expected value and speak to kind of the ROI in a way that is appropriate to innovation. Um, but you have to be able to speak the same language as the other parts of the business, coming to that resource allocator, asking for resources.

Simon Hill 19:21

Yeah, I mean, I I I very much see the innovation role as a corporate orchestrator, translator, multilingual, multi-skilled, multi-faceted role. Um, too often tried to be done by doers who want to get into the doing and much, much it's much more of a teacher, coach, mentor role in place. I think I'm I was I was thinking as you were talking there, because there's lots that we there's lots we can unpick in all of this, and we could dive deep into the value piece, but I think I want to walk us back to the ABCs and maybe think how we apply those in to this from a leadership perspective, right? And sort of think about the architecture that enables value, the behaviors that enable value, the culture, and try and be as practical and hands-on and tangible as we can, because everyone will probably think, of course, we understand that we need the right you know, setup and we need the right behaviors and everything else. And so let's make let's dig into those a little bit, right? And so when you've seen that shift from innovation theater to real impact, what are the what are the architectural structural changes that made the difference?

Robyn Bolton 20:22

Yeah, so the first place I start with everyone is with defining the growth gap. And it's very, very simple. I always say if you're using Excel, you've overcomplicated it. And it's basically an exercise of, hey, what is our revenue today? What is the revenue we want at some point in the future? If you're a public company in the US, it's often kind of, hey, you know, the promise of we'll be this size company in this many years. And then you basically say, okay, with what we have now and projecting it out, where will we get to? And then what's the difference between what our aspiration is and what that future value of our existing business is? And very quickly you get a number. So um I did this with with a client, and it was it was actually quite remarkable. Um, we, you know, said they had their projection out to where they want to be. The the CEO had said, this is another story I tell in my book, you know, company famous for innovation, incredible reputation as an innovator. But the CEO had said, Hey, I feel like when, you know, when we're working on innovation, I'm sitting at a poker table playing bets and all the lights are off. I don't even know what I'm betting on. And we're like, okay, well, let's turn on the lights. That kind of became our mantra turn on the lights. And so the first thing we did was calculate that growth gap. And the company had said, all right, we want to be a $50 billion company in five years. There were 25 billion at the time. And we projected everything. Everything out. And it came out that it was something like they needed, you know, 15 billion in new revenue in five years from things that did not exist that day. And the company had had a bad track record with MA, so they were very MA adverse. And when we calculated this, I looked at the team and kind of had this oh moment. And then he was like, oh no, no, no, it's fine. Like, we can totally do that. That's not a big deal. And it's like, I thought they had lost their mind and just kind of blurted out. I'm like, that's creating two Facebooks because you know, the size of Facebook at the time. You have to create two Facebooks, get them to scale and to steady state in five years. And that is when like the color drained from their face. And all of a sudden it was like, oh, this is about so much more than turning on the lights and putting together a portfolio. This is a mission critical endeavor for the business. And being able to take that to the CEO, um, I mean, it completely changed everything. Within six months, you know, we had looked at their portfolio. We thought that a majority of it was being spent on adjacent or radical innovation. Not surprisingly, 90% was being spent on core innovation in six months with that kind of growth gap bogey. We were able to completely invert it and just really crank up the bigger potential projects and get the resources to them because there was that kind of unifying call for like, we've got to create two Facebooks.

Simon Hill 23:43

Yeah, exactly. Um, and again, it's that clarity, right? Um of vision. How once you get into that, um, and maybe this feeds into the the behavior and accountability piece um as well. You didn't add accountability, but I did um to it. Um is that's great, but then you start, I guess, with some preordained ideas and a whole blank canvas of things that you that you could do. Um so what happens next? What does that behavior look like when you're faced with that conundrum? Because I feel like I did an episode for the podcast with um Alexander Osterwelder. Um, and one of the premises that we discussed in that in that episode was that this is possibly going to be the largest, the era of most business model disruption that we've seen in quite some time, right? If not, if not forever, because there's just more businesses now, right? And so um that disruption is going to mean more companies face some of those existential moments, perhaps more frequently as well, right? And so what does that process look like and what does the behavior look like after that oh shit moment of uh because I feel like everyone somehow needs to be looking over their shoulders a little bit more that you know exponential change is is it it's not it's not incumbent everywhere, it's not endemic everywhere, but it's certainly faster than ever before, empirically.

Robyn Bolton 25:10

Yeah, no, it's faster than ever before. And and so kind of continuing the story, the the next thing we did was we set um what I call the innovation playground of like here are aspects of a business or project that make it extremely attractive and a definite yes, here are things that like I don't know, and things that we definitely don't want to do. And that was around like revenues, you know, size of a project, who the target customers are, kind of you can go down the list. And then we pull together the the heads of all of the innovation teams into a room. And you can imagine they're coming in not wanting to be there because they're like, you're not gonna tell me what to do with my portfolio. And we're like, yep, nope, we're not, we're not gonna tell, we are not here to judge your portfolio. We're just here to, you know, pull everyone together, create a corporate portfolio so that we can elevate it and kind of give that visibility to the CEO. And what happened, and I've seen this happen over and over and over again, is that as people started sharing the projects they were working on, at least one other person at the table was working on the same thing. And so by the end of the day, we, you know, we had started with hundreds of projects. And once you just consolidated it down to get rid of that kind of repeated dual work, I mean, we went from say 100 down to 60. And then when you kind of compare those projects to the innovation playground of like, are these big enough to move the needle? Is this strategically aligned with the organization's priorities? You know, again, all of those dimensions, you could cut another half. And so it again, kind of using data, using all the things that you talk about and expected value, um, and kind of using that as a filter, but also first going through and kind of getting aligned to what those filters are, cutting out all the duplicative work. You know, you can get things down to a very lean portfolio, but then that frees up a bunch of resources that you can immediately reallocate. And, you know, one of the things to you know, your conversation with Alex around business model change, none of the projects in that portfolio were new business models. They were all completely reinforcing the existing business model. And again, that surfaced a gap in the company. And so what this innovation team originally was for, which is like, hey, just pull together a portfolio so we're you know, we're turning on the lights, it gave it a reason and an executive mandate to evolve into actually a business model innovation team.

Simon Hill 27:59

Interesting. Within that context, and this that's a it's a story I think that would sound really interesting to people, but most don't recognize they're in like as in your story, really. It's like, oh yeah, we can do this. And you play that through rarely, um, and many just don't realize that that's the situation they're in. And that sort of story earlier, which I I wrestle with, I agree with it 100%, but I also think it's it's innovation's biggest challenge, which is it they the two do not work well together, right? But yeah, you needed the day-to-day team here, right? And so that's back to sort of leadership and skills and and behaviors, and and and you need that grounded knowledge of the business as well. How do you overcome that that tension to get the two that don't work well, they're not natural bedfellows, but sort of have to be, especially in a situation like that, if that's more the norm of the situation as well.

Robyn Bolton 28:55

Yeah, it's um, and this is really where you know why I say innovation isn't an ideal problem, it's a leadership problem. Because you first in working with leaders, have to acknowledge that I am asking you to do two things that are the complete opposite of each other. And, you know, the story I often give them is, you know, if anyone, you know, Seinfeld, we've all kind of watched Seinfeld if you're of a certain age, and there's an episode um called The Opposite. And it's where George, who, you know, George Costanza and a consummate loser, realizes that um he's followed his instincts his whole life, and it's led him to be unemployed and living at home with his parents and single and all these things. And so if his instincts led him to this, doing the opposite of his instincts would lead to an opposite life. And so he spends the episode doing the opposite of his of his instincts and ends up with his dream job at the Yankees and a great apartment and a hot girlfriend and all that stuff. And so, you know, I kind of explaining this to leaders like, you're gonna need to be George Costanza in this one episode only. And when you are in an innovation space, you need to do the opposite of your instincts. And the hard thing about it is, especially as a leader, you are constantly kind of being that translator mode. You are living at the intersection of innovation and operations, and you need to be able to speak both languages, you need to be able to have the behaviors that will make you successful in each of those situations. And you need to know when a situation, you know, when you're in operations, when you're in innovation, and be able to context change. And that is incredibly hard. But the first step is being aware. And so we we work on building kind of awareness and awareness of when you're with the innovation team and you suddenly give answers. Like, you know, kind of I know you're also a football slash soccer fan. Um, so sometimes we have red cards and yellow cards. And you know, it'll be like a subtle kind of yellow card when the behavior is is veering off when it should be, and try not to give too many reds, but sometimes a red does get thrown.

Intro 31:16

Well, they might be necessary more often than not.

Robyn Bolton 31:18

Yes. Um, and and again, just kind of bringing awareness first and foremost to that changing in behavior that's required, and that starts building the muscle that's that is necessary.

Simon Hill 31:34

One of the I don't seize your culture piece, and I over the time I've spent working in this very deep, complex world of innovation, have constantly wrestled with the idea of culture as an input, throughput, output from an innovation perspective. I don't really like the term culture of innovation. Um, but let's think about this from this world of business model change and disruption and this idea that, you know, maybe not everyone has to invent two Facebook, but they certainly probably go into phase a changing core business and need to create more creative growth going forward. How do we create that psychological safety for exploration as leaders without abandoning financial discipline? Because lots of firms will say, But I've spent an absolute bucket load on innovation and I can't really see what I've got back, right? And so everything Robin says sounds great and her background's incredible, but I think I'm doing it, but but it doesn't work. And so clearly something's not right in the ABC stack of all of this. And you know, maybe it's culture, maybe it's something else. It's a combination of all, I suspect. But how do we create that the right rules, the right settings for people to be able to place the the bets, which we need you to bet place, right? They're very uncertain in the early in the early days, but not for too long.

Robyn Bolton 32:53

Yeah. So um, it's fine. Culture, I I struggle with culture a lot because it is this very fluffy, fuzzy thing. And so often I'll get calls, be like, hey, we we want to build a culture of innovation. And it's like, oh, let me get out my little magic wand and wave it across your company. Um and the fact is, culture is a lagging indicator. It is the result of the behaviors that we see rewarded over time. And so if a company wants to build a culture of innovation, they they need to spend literally years building up their architecture and their behavior and being consistent in how they rewarded, how they communicated, et cetera. And so I would say instead of focusing on corporate culture, you know, make sure that you are bringing the right people and creating the right environment for the architecture and the behavior to take place that creates innovation. And having the innovation playground, having the guardrails around what you're gonna work on, what you're not gonna work on, what the burden of proof is to move forward to the next investment, it's so, so critical. Because otherwise, you will do a lot of things because all the ideas are great, and you know, there's pet projects, and it's really hard to kill a project if someone loves it. So if you don't have that criteria to kill projects and to kill them as quickly as possible, you are gonna spend a lot of money and see nothing. And so creating that criteria is really critical because our instincts will be like, hey, we want to do stuff we know. And so anything that looks like a different business model or something dramatically different is scary and high risk. And so we aren't gonna kill it. So you have to be really, really, really careful about setting the metrics. But that's also why you have a portfolio. You know, I again, I see so many companies kind of wait until the platform is fully engulfed in flames and then hope that there's a silver bullet and like we're gonna pour all of our money into this one project. It's like a terrible idea. That's not what you do with your investments, that's not what BCs do, that's not even what corporations do. Um, so thinking that you are going to be a hundred percent right right from the start is just it's insanity.

Simon Hill 35:22

Yeah, I um I I like the uh the language of like lagging indicators. I think most of what we measure in innovation land is either is either just momentum or is a lagging indicator, right? Like like return on investment, horrible lagging indicator, uh especially when you don't ever get any return. So um just to sort of wind us towards a close, because time flies fast when you're having fun. Um if if some if a CEO is listening today or a or a business leader is listening today, and suspect that they may be one of the 80 odd percent of companies that are not extracting the value that we're talking about and maybe facing some of the threats. What's the first move they, other than picking up the phone and saying, hey Robin, I need your help. Um, what's the first move that they should maybe make to start to move in that direction? Do you think?

Robyn Bolton 36:11

It's figuring out the value that you you need innovation to create, and then only innovation can create. So it really is what is that growth gap? Because that gives you a financial target. And again, that's the language of business. And so you need to have a reason to invest in innovation. Innovation is fun, the shareholders want it, it gives us a good reputation, is not, those are not good reasons to invest in innovation, giving innovation a revenue or a profit target is so start there and then then kind of start doing the hard work of pulling what you're doing, putting together a portfolio, being reasonable in your expectations. I mean, I had a CEO once say to me and the two people on her innovation team hey, you know, this is at the first meeting. We need a business that in three years will be up running steady state and 250 million in revenue. And I just started laughing. I'm like, if I could do that, I would be doing that. I would not be sitting in this conference room. So, you know, give innovation a value it has to deliver, and then be realistic about what you need to do to get to that value.

Simon Hill 37:32

Fantastic. All right, two closing questions. We can do in quick fire. One of them is a loaded question is is the chief innovation officer an actual job title and a real job, yes or no? Oh, chief role, is it?

Robyn Bolton 37:54

Um, I am I am so conflicted on this one. I am gonna say yes, because everybody else in the C-suite is focused on the existing business, and you need to have someone who's an advocate for the new businesses that are being created.

Simon Hill 38:14

Okay, I can accept that answer, and I share your conflict. Um, I've probably got no, but still I think you know that I could argue both sides. I know, exactly. Um, I do really love, by the way, this idea of a new value gap, the growth gap, right? So it's like what is that gap? And this is the new value we have to create, and innovation is the new value that has to come in to create that. I think that language is really nice. Um, last question I'd like to ask everybody, again, no pre-warming on this. So you think about it is um obviously you've written your book. We know my book's wonderful, but outside of those two incredible works of literature uh and business business research, is there a good book that you would recommend to anybody that either is one from the eons of time or a recent one that you might have read? This is increasing people's reading lists through listening to the podcast.

Robyn Bolton 38:59

Yes. Oh, as I'm looking at my bookcase now.

Simon Hill 39:03

Turn to the left and see what we have.

Robyn Bolton 39:05

Yes, like what what books are I do I thrust into people's hands? Um there's actually um a book, uh The Four Stages of Psychological Safety. Okay. Um brilliant book, short, very practical, and completely changed the way I think about, view, and create the psychological safety in teams that's required for people to take risks and for people to be innovative.

Simon Hill 39:39

Brilliant. And a book I've not read, which is like part of my personal discovery as well, just keep the bookcase ever, ever growing. Um, and clearly I think mindset, psychological safety, experimentation capabilities, and those are all critical. So I will add it to my reading list as well. This podcast is growing growing Amazon book sales by this part of second. Um how can people find you, find more about the work that you are are doing? Um, just as a quick promo.

Robyn Bolton 40:07

Yeah, quick promo. So you can go to my website, which is milesero.io, and the zero is spelled out, z-e-ro. Um, also definitely look me up on LinkedIn. Happy to connect. Um, but either those places, milesero.io or LinkedIn.

Simon Hill 40:25

Amazing. Robin, thank you very much. I've enjoyed this discussion. I'm glad we finally made it happen. Um, I hope everyone else has enjoyed it. I'll be a quick recap. As I said, I really like the concept of the growth gap. I think it's something that that very few know, a little bit like very few know the expected value of the work that we're doing. But that expected value has to plug into that gap that you're trying to address. And if they are heavily disconnected, that's when you get your either too late or or just in time or shit moments of this is what we need to be doing. So innovation doesn't fail because of a lack of ideas. It doesn't fail because of a lack of skill, actually, in many cases. But if leadership avoids the hard conversation about value, that's when we've got challenges, I think, right? And that value gap that we're there. So if innovation is a leadership responsibility, it also has to be a capital allocation responsibility. That means finance has to be in the room. When uncertainty is translated into probabilistic value, a language that finance can understand, when leaders design systems that reward learning and reward discipline risk taking discipline risk taking, that innovation can stop being theater and it can start becoming more performance and value creation as well. I think that's a summary of what we spoke about. I'm sure there were many more things as well. Um, thank you, Robin. Thank you very much, and thank you to everybody for listening today. As always, uh, I hope you've enjoyed the episode. Please give us feedback, please share it to others. We value every listener as it goes. Hit follow and subscribe because we've got lots of great guests this season uh still to come. And until next time, next time, keep activating human intelligence. Thank you.