Behind the Curve
In 2019, I watched a documentary about the Flat Earth movement. One of its believers argued that the Earth was flat; otherwise, we would see its curvature from any elevated position e.g. a high mountain. He and his companions organised ‘experiments’ to demonstrate their position; all of which failed. Interestingly, these experiences strengthened their faith in their position, rather than diminished it.
Against the odds
At Swisscom, the typical planning horizon was three to five years; and management’s compensation was tied to delivering it. Embracing this definition of long-term makes disruptive innovation almost impossible, as it usually requires five to ten years to develop and scale.
A longer-term perspective
In Leading from the future, Mark Johnson and Josh Suskewicz beautifully illustrate why we prioritise the urgent ahead of the important. Betting on a New Opportunity means shifting precious resources away from our current business and accelerating its decline. Given that the current business is the source of free cash flow, no decision maker wanted to be held responsible for its deterioration.
So, to survive for five to ten years in an existing organisation, market-creating innovations require relentless support from the CEO or executive team. A sponsor who is willing to take the risk. The problem is that if the New Opportunity fails (which is likely), the sponsor will be blamed for squandering valuable resources in search for an illusion: a flat Earth.
Notes
Leading from the future - how to turn visionary thinking into breakthrough growth by Mark W. Johnson and Josh Suskewicz.
The Prosperity Paradox – How Innovation Can Lift Nations Out Of Poverty by Clayton M. Christensen, Efosa Ojomo and Karen Dillon.
