Bright Ideas

The scene is the boardroom of a multinational cosmetics company at the end of an exhausting all-day meeting. The conference table is littered with screwed up papers and empty Perrier bottles. The financial controller is tearing his hair out and the director of R&D is no longer on speaking terms with the head of marketing. The launch of a new shampoo has backfired badly. All decisions have had to be deferred until the next meeting. Nobody even wants to think about the next meeting.

At this point a young marketing consultant cuts in. “Ladies and gentlemen, I have an idea which is guaranteed to double sales of your new shampoo. Now, believe it or not, my idea can be summed up in just one word and for $30,000 I'll tell you what it is.” Naturally, objections are raised, but the chairman finally agrees to the deal. “Here is my idea. You know the instructions you put on the back of the shampoo bottle? I suggest you add one word to the end. And the word is: “repeat”.”

Not all good ideas are this simple, but in business a surprising number of them are. At least, they seem simple after they've been thought of - the secret is to think of them in the first place. As someone once remarked, “If you can't write your idea on the back of your business card, you don't have an idea.”

So what are the conditions for creativity in business? And is there a blueprint for having bright ideas? Here's what the psychologists think:

1. Be a risk-taker. Those who are reluctant to take risks don't innovate.

2. Be illogical. An over-reliance on logic kills off ideas before they have a chance to develop.

3. Let yourself be stupid from time to time. Great ideas often start out as stupid ideas.

4. Regularly re-think things. Problem-solving frequently involves breaking up problems into parts and putting them back together again in a different way.

5. Take advantage of lucky breaks. The most creative people never ignore an opportunity.

They say the West creates and the East innovates, and there may be some truth in this. Take British entrepreneur. Sir Clive Sinclair, the great electronics inventor of the 70s, whose C5 electric car flopped when people found it quicker to get out and walk. Then take Akio Morita, the chairman of Sony, who has seen his company claim eighty-five per cent of the world personal stereo market with the much imitated Sony Walkman - a masterly innovation which merely took advantage of existing technology. The comparison speaks for itself.

And maybe one reason high-technology companies seek to merge multinationally is so that they can combine both creative and innovative strength. For anything that won't sell isn't worth inventing and it's an expensive waste of time coming up with ideas you can't exploit. But it's even more expensive if your competitors can exploit them. And there's not much point doing the research if another company is going to end up doing the development, and making the profit.

The lateral thinker

In his book on creative problem-solving, 'Breaking Through', Tom Logsdon tells the story of a bright young executive hired to manage a San Francisco hotel. One of the first problems the young executive has to face is a flood of complaints about the hotel lifts, which are infuriatingly slow. Guests are actually starting to demand rooms on lower floors. But an upgrade of the lift system is ruled out when the lowest estimate for reconstruction comes to $200,000. Clearly something else has to be done, and pretty quickly, before people start checking out.

Finally, a creative solution occurs to the young executive. The key to the problem, he decides, is boredom. With only the lift doors and a blank wall to stare at, guests are understandably getting bored, and when people are bored they tend to complain. So instead of speeding up the lifts, full-length mirrors are installed both inside and directly outside the lifts on each floor - at a cost of just $4,000. Now, with their reflections to look at when they use the lift, people stop complaining, thereby saving the hotel $196,000.

This is what Edward De Bono called lateral thinking, and it's the result of looking at the problem in a different and unusual way. Indeed, reformulating and redefining a problem is just one of the ways in which you can create a climate for creativity in business. And an increasing number of companies now see such creative strategies as vital to their survival.

At 3M, for example, employees spend as much as fifteen per cent of their time on new ideas and twenty-five per cent of every manager's product portfolio consists of products that are less than five years old. At Hewlett-Packard more than half their orders in 1992 are for products introduced in the previous two years. It's a similar story at Glaxo, ICL and SmithKline Beecham. For it's no coincidence that in research-driven industries, like computers and Pharmaceuticals, an innovative lead creates the market leaders. Management guru, Tom Peters, talks nowadays of a company's whole culture being creative. But creativity would be useless without innovation, and the two terms should not be confused.

According to the team running creativity courses at the Cranfield School of Management, creativity is essentially about generating, not judging, ideas. Innovation, on the other hand, is the successful implementation of those ideas on a commercial basis. In a brainstorming session, you don't criticise ideas before they're fully formed. That would be counter-productive. Evaluation comes in at the innovation stage, where you're turning good ideas into a commercial proposition. It follows that you cannot be both creative and innovative at the same time.

For making a discovery is one thing; exploiting it quite another, as the Xerox Research Centre found out to its cost when its system for making personal computers easier to use was copied by Apple Macintosh. Apple led the market for almost ten years with the enormously successful desktop system it 'borrowed' from Xerox. But Apple had the foresight to copyright the system. Xerox didn't. Originality, it seems, is the art of concealing your source, and too many companies fail to see an opportunity until it ceases to be one.