Innovation Culture Building

Having an active “champion” is an important part of delivering a change or improvement initiative. Or is it? Do local change champions create a vulnerability when it comes to sustaining the project longer term? Newly published research by Hannah S. & Jane Page defines champions as people in a change situation who “actively promote, protect & troubleshoot [the change] through their influence, advocacy, & practical problem-solving." The researchers found the factors that make champions effective at initial implementation stage may also create systemic vulnerabilities that threaten sustainability of the change. Champions build momentum through their specialised knowledge, personal commitment & ability to translate evidence into practice. But the research found three mechanisms through which these same strengths generate fragility: ▶ Knowledge concentration. Expertise accumulates in individuals rather than being embedded in organisational systems. ▶ Dependency creation. Organisations become reliant on champions for quality assurance, problem-solving & continuity. These dependencies only surface when champions leave; at which point, multiple capability gaps emerge at once. ▶ System capacity prevention. When champions hold things together through personal effort, organisations don't feel urgency to build systematic infrastructure. Their effectiveness conceals structural gaps underneath. These form a self-reinforcing cycle. The more effective the champion, the less pressure to develop collective capacity that would survive their departure (see the graphic). What does it mean for us as leaders of change? 1) What are we actually building? When we appoint a champion, we need to ask whether we’re strengthening organisational capacity or creating a workaround for absence of capability. The two may look identical in the short term. 2) Role design matters. The researchers propose reframing champions; not as permanent drivers of improvement, but as transitional resources whose purpose is to build collective capability & become unnecessary. Selection criteria should extend beyond individual competence to include capacity for knowledge transfer & succession planning. 3 we must get smarter about how we measure sustainability. Just because a programme is still running doesn't mean it's on solid ground. An organisation can look perfectly healthy while everything depends on one or two key people. The real test is whether the programme would hold up if those people left tomorrow; whether knowledge is spread across the team, whether documented processes exist so a new person could pick things up & whether standards can be maintained through people changes. Our instinct to find brilliant champions for change & improvement isn’t wrong. But it’s incomplete. This research shows that building the system around the work - not just the person in the work - is what makes change last. Link to the article in the comments.

In 1974, Spencer Silver, a scientist at 3M, created an adhesive that didn’t really stick. It was weak. Temporary. Basically useless for what he was trying to build. Some inventions come from genius, others… from failure, shared openly in the right culture. Take the humble Post-it Note. It started with a failed experiment. But here’s where it gets interesting: 3M didn’t toss it. They didn’t say, “Come back when it’s successful.” They encouraged Spencer to share it. To talk about his “failed” glue at internal seminars. To put it out there, without judgment, without agenda.  Because at 3M, ideas are shared. Failures are not buried. They’re explored. Years later, a colleague, Art Fry, frustrated that his paper bookmarks kept falling out of his choir hymnal, remembered Spencer’s odd little adhesive. He tried applying it to scraps of paper. That “failed” glue became the Post-it Note. The Post-it was a product of cultural design. A culture that: ✔️ Encouraged curiosity over control ✔️ Treated failure as information, not incompetence ✔️ Valued people enough to let them think beyond their job description Most companies say “we value innovation.” But innovation isn’t something you say. It’s something your culture either allows or suffocates. As a coach, I tell leaders this all the time: You don’t need more ideas, you need a place where people feel safe to share the ones they already have. Because what if your next breakthrough is sitting silently in someone’s “failed” folder?

Failure is always an option—deal with it like a leader.   You’ve heard it before. Too many leaders proudly declare, “Failure is not an option.” Let me translate that for you: “I refuse to acknowledge reality.” If failure isn’t an option, neither is growth, innovation, or progress. Instead, what you get is a workplace straight out of a dystopian novel where everyone is too scared to sneeze in the wrong direction.   Research doesn’t lie (even if some leaders do). A study published in the Journal of Organizational Behavior reveals that fear of failure does more than just keep people up at night. It stifles innovation, reduces risk-taking, & fosters a culture of blame. Employees, terrified of making mistakes, focus more on avoiding errors than on exploring creative solutions. In other words, they don’t dream big; they dream safe. & let’s face it, nobody ever changed the world by playing it safe.   Authentic leaders don’t fear failure. They expect it, prepare for it, & use it. They know failure isn’t the end of the road; it’s a pit stop to refuel, fix the flat tire, & maybe grab a coffee. According to research from HBR, companies with leaders who embrace failure as part of the process are more likely to develop innovative products & outperform competitors. That’s right—those who fall down more often tend to rise higher.   Leaders who cling to “Failure is not an option” are not inspiring; they’re delusional. They create environments where: • Blame reigns supreme—instead of asking, “What can we learn from this?” the question becomes, “Whose fault is this?” • Creativity flatlines—employees don’t pitch bold ideas because sticking their necks out could get them axed. • Accountability disappears—nobody admits to mistakes because, well, mistakes are not allowed. The result? You end up with a team of robots that are technically operational but deeply uninspired.   Try this one on for size: “Failure is always an option, but quitting isn’t.” This mindset shifts the focus from avoiding failure to learning from it. It encourages risk-taking, resilience, & accountability. It acknowledges reality without glorifying defeat.   Research from Stanford University shows that organizations adopting a “fail-fast” mindset experience faster learning cycles & higher adaptability. When leaders accept failure as part of the process, employees: • Take risks • Innovate faster • Recover stronger   The next time you feel the urge to say, “Failure is not an option,” stop yourself. Instead, remind your team (& yourself) that failure is not the enemy. In fact, it might just be the co-pilot you need to navigate uncharted territory. So, embrace failure. Laugh at it. Learn from it. & then, get back in the driver’s seat because real leaders know the only thing worse than failing is failing to learn. #Innovation #Management #Leadership #PersonalDevelopment #Failure #Success #Business  

Sara Blakely's father asked her one question at dinner every night: "What did you fail at today?" If she had nothing, he was disappointed... That question reframed failure entirely. Not as shame, but as proof she was learning and pushing boundaries. This wasn't just dinner table philosophy. When Sara started Spanx, she built this into her company culture. Early employees remember her asking in team meetings: "What experiment failed this week?" When a product prototype flopped, she'd gather the team to dissect the learning, not assign blame. One failed adhesive test led to their breakthrough backless body shaper design. The failure itself became the innovation catalyst. Most leaders do the opposite. They punish mistakes, avoid risk, and wonder why their teams play it safe. I've watched talented managers freeze when asked to pitch new ideas in companies where one mistake meant being sidelined. They had brilliant solutions but wouldn't risk proposing them. The company lost innovations that could have doubled revenue simply because fear was more powerful than ambition. Here's the truth: if people are afraid to fail, they'll never fully commit. They'll hedge, they'll wait for perfect conditions, they'll do just enough to avoid criticism. Innovation doesn't come from people trying not to mess up. It comes from people willing to experiment, learn fast, and adjust. Leaders who normalize failure unlock that. But most don't know where to start. Try these 3 shifts: First, in 1-on-1s, ask "What did you try this week that didn't work?" and genuinely celebrate the attempt. Second, in team meetings, share a failure of your own from that week and what you learned. Your vulnerability gives others permission. Third, create a "failure board" where people post experiments that flopped but taught something valuable. Make it visible. Make it normal. When failure becomes safe, commitment becomes possible. When commitment becomes possible, real growth happens. If you found this valuable, repost for your network ♻️ Join the 11,000+ leaders who get our weekly email newsletter: https://lnkd.in/en9vxeNk Lead with impact.

We love to build environments where making a mistake is treated like a capital offense. We structure our teams, our processes, and our goals around the illusion of flawless execution. We praise the clean records and the perfect quarters. But when you build a company culture that penalizes every stumble, you don’t actually eliminate errors. You just eliminate innovation. If your team is terrified of failing, they will stop taking risks. They will stick to the safe, mediocre routines that keep your business stagnant. A growth-stage business cannot scale on a foundation of fear. A buggy feature, a botched sales pitch, or a marketing campaign that falls flat isn't a sign of incompetence. It’s a sign of movement. It means your team is actually pushing the boundaries, testing the market, and trying to find the next lever for growth. The role of a true leader isn't to build a zero-mistake environment. It’s to build a high-accountability environment where errors are treated as data. You want your team to move fast, break things, and find the friction points: A failed launch teaches you exactly what the market doesn't want. A broken internal process shows you exactly where your operations need structure. A tough conversation with an unhappy client reveals exactly where your product is lagging. The only unforgivable mistake in entrepreneurship is making the exact same error twice because you refused to learn from it the first time. Stop demanding perfection from your operators. Celebrate the messy attempts, audit the stumbles with radical candor, and turn those mistakes into the exact insights you need to scale. #Leadership #CompanyCulture #Innovation

The best AI person in your company isn’t who you think. AI transformation doesn't happen because tools exist. It happens because someone inside the team makes it real. That person is an AI Champion. I learnt this the hard way implementing an AI solution for a business without finding the AI champions in the business. 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗮𝗻 𝗔𝗜 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗺𝗽𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 - They make AI visible in workflows that matter. - They share examples that save hours or improve quality. - They turn experiments into repeatable habits. They're the bridge between "we have access" and "this actually saves us time." They don't evangelise AI. They normalise it. 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗲 is important Most teams have access. Few have someone who can turn that access into results. AI Champions close the gap by showing what good looks like. They build norms for safe, practical use. They move AI from playground to business value. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗺𝗽𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻'𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝘁𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 They're the most trusted. They're strategic, focused on outcomes that matter. They're observant, spotting quick wins in daily work. They keep things simple and replicable. When stakes are high, they're the person people ask. 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁 - Pick one repetitive task that wastes time. - Use AI to improve it. Make it faster, clearer, cleaner. - Share the result with your team. - Keep doing it until people ask how you did that. - Then run a short session and show them your process. That's how you become an AI Champion. The companies that win won't be the ones with the best tools. They'll be the ones with people like this inside their teams. That could be you! 🔁 Share to help someone become an AI champion ➕ Follow Patrick Giwa, PhD for more

Most companies claim they embrace failure. But walk into their Monday meetings, and watch people scramble to hide their missteps. I've seen it countless times. The same leaders who preach 'fail fast' are the first to demand explanations for every setback. Here's the uncomfortable truth:  Innovation dies in environments where people feel safer playing it safe. But there's a difference between reckless failure and strategic experimentation. Let me show you exactly how to build a culture that genuinely embraces productive failure: 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐭-𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐞𝐦 𝐦𝐞𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 Stop asking "Who's fault was this?" and start asking: "𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘺𝘱𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘸𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨?" "𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤 𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘢 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘧𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘶𝘴?" "𝘏𝘰𝘸 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘸𝘦 𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘯𝘦𝘹𝘵 𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯?" 𝐂𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞 '𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐰𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐞𝐬' Monthly meetings where teams present their failed experiments and the insights gained. The key? Leaders must go first. Share your own failures openly, specifically, and without sugar-coating. 𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 "24-𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐫𝐮𝐥𝐞" After any setback, give teams 24 hours to vent/process. Then require them to present three specific learnings and two potential next steps. This transforms failure from a dead end into a data point. Most "innovative" teams are just risk-averse businesses in disguise. They've mastered innovation theater, not actual innovation. Don't let your people think they need permission to innovate. Instead, start building systems and a culture that make innovation inevitable.

In my first job, people who failed were mocked. The best people left. Then we made failure safe to explore. That team became unstoppable. Here's what I learned: When failure isn't safe, fear takes over. People hide mistakes, play small, and point fingers instead of solving problems. But after years of leading teams, I've discovered something transformative: The teams that win aren't the ones that never fail. They're the ones that know how to fail and learn. And that starts with character: Kindness that disarms the fear. Curiosity that turns it into fuel. Think about the last time someone on your team made a mistake: Did they hide it? Or did they share it immediately? Did the team pile on? Or did they gather around? Did someone get defensive? Or did everyone get curious? That moment tells you everything about your culture. Here's what ACTUALLY happens when you build a safe-to-fail environment: ↳ Mistakes surface early (not after they've become disasters) ↳ Problems get solved faster (because no one's hiding them) ↳ Innovation accelerates (because risk becomes acceptable) ↳ Trust deepens (because vulnerability is modeled from the top) ↳ People bring bold ideas (because "what if we tried..." is celebrated) I've seen this transform everything: The engineer who broke production on Friday at 4 PM called it out immediately. The team rallied, fixed it in an hour. Now they lead our most critical initiatives. The sales rep who lost our biggest deal asked "What can we learn?" That curiosity sparked a complete pitch revision. We closed 3x more deals the next quarter. The junior designer who shipped a flawed feature? Instead of blame, we asked "How did this get through?" That question led to a review system catching 87% more issues before launch. Here's the truth most leaders miss: Kindness without curiosity = comfortable, but stagnant. Curiosity without kindness = innovative, but brutal. Together? They forge unbreakable teams. When people feel SAFE to fail, they: Take the risks that lead to breakthroughs Share problems before they explode Ask the questions others are afraid to voice Challenge the status quo without fear of punishment Learn faster because they're not defending themselves Skills can be taught. Processes can be optimized. Systems can be built. But a culture where failure is safe? That's the difference between teams that survive and teams that soar. Smart teams minimize failure. Safe-to-fail teams? They weaponize it. So next time someone on your team messes up: Don't ask "Who did this?" Ask "What did we learn?" Don't demand perfection. Demand growth. Building teams that never fail is impossible. Building teams that fail and learn? That's how you create something extraordinary.

The secret sauce of change isn’t in the PowerPoint slides. It’s in the champions. When I was leading a digital transformation program, we had all the usual elements in place - project plans, leadership alignment, comms cascades. But the breakthrough did not come from the top-down. It came from a network of change champions. We deliberately recruited them from across the organisation in frontline teams, operational hubs, and key leadership areas. They weren’t always the loudest voices, but they were the trusted ones. The colleagues people turned to when they needed something explained “in plain English.” We spent time observing how they worked through contextual enquiry, and then set them up to succeed: ✅ Scripted them into program videos so they would be seen and recognised. ✅ Equipped them with updates, FAQs, and tools they could share confidently. ✅ Encouraged them to use informal channels like internal social media to spark dialogue. ✅ Involved them in testing solutions, sourcing ideas, and shaping ownership of the way forward. The result? - Communication scaled naturally, through authentic peer-to-peer conversations. - Risks surfaced earlier and were dealt with before they grew. - Teams didn’t feel that the change was done to them. They felt involved! - Adoption was faster, because trust was already in place. 👉 That’s the power of champions. They’re not an “extra comms channel”. Ther are the multipliers of influence and the accelerators of ownership. 💡 Rethink Change moment: Too often we obsess over tools, frameworks, or PowerPoint slide decks in change management. But what if the real differentiator is how well you activate your champions? What other concepts in change are we undervaluing because we look in the wrong places? Let us know what you think in the responses.

12+ years working on Health Tech with Health Systems taught me you need 3 types of Champions to be successful 👇 We often talk about the importance of a champion for new healthcare innovations, but given the complexity of healthcare, I’ve found our most successful health system partnerships have MULTIPLE champions… 3 key ones in particular: 𝟭. 𝗖𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗺𝗽𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 Most people know this one. It’s not enough that the solution is paid for and the operational staff are willing to support it. If there isn’t a clinical champion willing to get all the other clinicians on board… the tech will end up gathering dust on the shelf. It’s great if the champion is the Chief of Medicine or Chief of Surgery, but you don’t need the most senior clinicians. More important is a respected clinical leader who is willing to roll up their sleeves and ensure their teammates come to the table. 𝟮. 𝗘𝘅𝗲𝗰𝘂𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗺𝗽𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 Ultimately someone has to pay for it, or have the ear of the executive who will pay for it. When a CXO or VP is sponsoring the innovation, it gets more resources, more mindshare and more priority as an initiative everyone should care about. Without an executive champion, you can end up with a successful pilot that then simply dies because of the lack of money and resources made available to sustain it. 𝟯. 𝗢𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗺𝗽𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 Even if the tech is paid for and the clinical champions believe in it… ultimately you need operational leaders to ensure the innovation keeps running. Whose team ensures every patient and care team member is aware and engaged with the tech. This might be the director of a service line or project management leader. This champion has to be motivated to keep the trains of the initiative running on time. Otherwise you end up with tech that everyone says they want… but doesn’t end up being used. That doesn’t stay clicking in the clinical workflow. Because your clinical and executive champions won’t be keeping an eye on the Tech at this level of granularity… someone operational needs to. So if your Health Tech initiative is struggling… it might be worth reflecting on whether you’re missing one or more of these champions.