Student ID Number: 109020646

MOD033 Leading Innovation and Change

Submission Date: 2nd May 2011
Words - 5983

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

Declaration
I, Tim Malone, declare that I am the sole author of this assignment and the
work is a result of my own investigations, except where otherwise stated.
All references have been duly cited.

Introduction
Since the 1950s, interest in innovation in the fields of science and technology, social
sciences such as history, management and economics, and in the arts has grown so
rapidly that today the word has almost lost its meaning. The word innovate is derived
from the Latin, innovare, dating back to 1540 and means "to renew or change." (Online
Etymology Dictionary). According to Godin (2008), the first theory of innovation was
documented by the French sociologist Gabriel Tarde in the late nineteenth century. Tarde
believed that innovation was a catalyst for change and he used the word in the context of
novelty.
Early theories of innovation began to evolve during the 1920s and as technology gathered
momentum, so too did the study of innovation. By the mid-1900s, organisations came to
the fore as society began to change dramatically. Mass production made material goods
available to a greater number of people, more economically and faster. The era of
materialism had arrived and to keep up with consumers apetites for new and better
goods, organisations had to undergo continual change. (Godin, 2008).
Today, literature on innovation and change abounds and the 2010 McKinsey Global
Survey in which 84% percent of executives said innovation was extremely or very
important to their organisations growth strategy illustrates the importance of innovation as
an organisational strategy for growth, even survival.
Much has been written on innovation methodology (how innovations are realised), but I
have found surprisingly few comprehensive, well-documented theories. This is perhaps
because the innovation process begins with creativity, a complex process that is
particularly difficult to research. As Yu-Ting Cheng, Van de Ven (1994) put it, innovation is
an exploration into the unknown processes by which novelty emerges and an article by
Wolfe in the Journal of Management in 1994, stated that There is a belief amongst some
Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

researchers that a general theory is impossible due to the many complexities of

innovation.
The processes of innovation and creativity are often confused and definitions that highlight
the differences between creativity and innovation are many and varied. There does
however, seem to be a general consensus that creativity is the generation of original
thoughts and ideas and innovation is putting those ideas to work in order to produce
results. Teresa Amabile and her colleagues state, We define creativity as the production
of novel and useful ideas in any domain. We define innovation as the successful
implementation of creative ideas within an organisation. Amabile et al., (1996). John
Emmerling defines innovation as Creativity with a job to do. (www.emmerling.com). It can
therefore be concluded that creativity is possible without innovation, but innovation relies
on creativity as an essential component. This conclusion is supported by Bettina von
Stamm (2003), who argues that creativity is the point of departure for innovation.
Theories of innovation and change
A broad theme that appears throughout writings on the subject of innovation is that of
radical versus incremental innovation and although different authors have used a variety of
definitions, it is clear that the underlying meaning is the same. Terminology includes:
Incremental versus Radical (Abernathy and Utterback, 1978), Incremental versus
Breakthrough (Tushmann and Anderson), Conservative versus Radical (Abernathy and
Clarke, 1985) and Continuous versus Discontinuous (Porter, 1986).
According to Dussauge et al. (1992), the distinction between incremental innovations and
radical innovations is a central notion in innovation theory.
The separation of the two can be broadly illustrated as follows:
Incremental innovations build on existing knowledge and resources already present in the

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

organisation to refine and improve existing products and processes. These innovations are
therefore more conservative as proposed by Abernathy and Clarke and continuous as
Porter asserts.
Radical innovations require completely new knowledge and/or resources to introduce
totally new concepts and are therefore breakthroughs or in Porters words discontinuous,
meaning that the organisation cannot continue operating in the same way it did in the past.
From the literature that I have reviewed, I am of the opinion that the theories of innovation
are in fact incremental innovations in themselves. Few, if any, of the theories propose
breakthrough ideas about how innovation comes about and simply build on theories that
went before. In support of this supposition, in the book Seeing Whats Next: Using
Theories of Innovation to Predict Industry Change (2004), Christensen and his
colleagues, claim that there are three core theories of innovation: the Disruptive Theory;
the Resources, Processes and Values (RPV) theory; and the Value Chain Evolution theory
that untangle the messy process of innovation. I have my doubts that these three
theories do actually untangle the mystifying process of innovation. If innovation can be
untangled by the writing of one book, why do so many organisations have such difficulty
innovating consistently?
Christensens Disruptive Innovation theory is closely related to that Porters 1986 theory of
Continuous and Discontinuous Innovation. The RPV theory is similar to the Transilience
Map theory of Abernathy and Clarke (1985), in that both theories conclude that the
resources and processes of an organisation define its capacity to innovate. The major
difference between the RPV theory and that of Abernathy and Clarke is that the RPV
theory, in addition to resources and processes, includes company values as an indicator
as to how an organisation might innovate.

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

The third theory put forth by Christensen et al. is the Value Chain Evolution Theory and in
essence, this is similar to what Henderson and Clarke (1990) called Architectural
Innovation. Henderson and Clarke proposed that innovation involves rearranging known
parts (components) into new patterns (architectures) to achieve higher levels of system
performance. The two theories differ in that the Value Chain theory focuses specifically on
innovations that add value in areas that matter most to customers. Christensen cites the
example of handheld wireless devices where battery life was an issue for customers.
Research In Motion developed a battery that lasted up to three weeks between charges
and so gained a significant advantage for its early Blackberry products.
A search of Amazon.com for book titles that include the word innovation produced 42 415
results. Of course, not all of these books are specifically about the theory of innovation, but
the quantity of material available supports the view of some researchers that it is indeed
impossible to develop a general theory of innovation. I agree with these views and one
possible reason for the difficulty in developing a general theory is that the pace of change
has become so fast that by the time a theory has been researched and developed, the
environment in which the theory was developed has already changed.
There has been some debate as to whether innovation leads to change or that changes in
the environment are catalysts for innovation? Schumpeter, one of the earliest researchers
to refer to innovation, claims that innovation inevitably leads to change (Schumpeter
1942). Christensen argues that the introduction of a technology that renders existing
technologies redundant, leads to change and Hagedoorn (1989), also proposed that
innovation inevitably leads to change. An example is the introduction of the telephone. In
1876, Western Union turned down the opportunity to acquire the telephone technology
developed by Alexander Graham Bell, believing that it would never replace its own
telegraphy business. Just a year later, when the consumer uptake of the technology began
Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

to make a significant impact on its business, Western Union realised their mistake and
attempted to develop their own telephone system, but fell foul of copyright law. Western
Unions market share fell continuously until 31 years later, AT&T (originally American Bell,
the company that financed Alexander Graham Bells work) acquired a controlling interest
in the company.
Few theorists have argued that change is the catalyst for innovation. One such author is
Jon Sundbo who believes that innovation is a sociological phenomenon that has economic
consequences. In other words, when society goes through a change, a natural disaster for
example, this leads to innovation in order to adapt to overcome the effects of the change.
(Sundbo, 1998).
I doubt that either assumption is absolute and am of the opinion that innovation is indeed a
catalyst for change and that change can also cause the initiation of innovation.
More recently, a number of authors have hypothesised that it is strategy that drives
innovation (Chan Kin and Mauborgne 2001; Johnston and Bate 2003). In more recent
years, support of this theory has grown immensely and the connection between the
leadership of innovation and the management of change has become increasingly
apparent.
The leadership of innovation and change
Change and innovation are inevitable no matter which comes first and for organisations to
survive, the leadership of both is becoming increasingly important.
The greatest challenge in leading innovation is to build what is commonly called a culture
of innovation within the organisation (von Stamm, 2003). If one agrees with Sutton (2001),
that Managing for creativity means taking most of what we know about management and

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

standing it on its head, then the challenge is indeed massive.

According to Teresa Amabile (1998), the creativity of an individual is a function of three
components: expertise, creative thinking skills and motivation. Amabile goes on to argue
that leaders and managers in organisations have the power to influence these
components through matching the right people to the right assignments, allowing
individuals the freedom to explore different ways of reaching a specific goal and providing
sufficient time and resources. I would argue that there is one other important component
required for successful creativity in organisations and that is the training of individuals to
think creatively.
Edward de Bono and William C Miller have done much work in this area and whilst they
disagree on how creative thinking should be taught, both agree that whilst it is an inherent
human capability, external influences such as formal schooling, parental influence and
society in general often negatively influence the ability to think creatively. This notion is
supported by the research of Kemple and Nissenberg in their article Nurturing Creativity in
Early Childhood Education, in which they argue that educators and families have a
profound influence on the early development of creative thinking skills.
The stifling of creativity (whether consciously or not) is also evident in the workplace and in
their book Mobilizing Minds, Lowell Bryan and Claudia Joyce (2007) conclude that 20thCentury management practices, with the emphasis on a chain of command and a focus on
labour and capital inputs, is not only outdated, but actually creates unnecessary
complications that work against attaining the critical goals of wealth creation and
collaboration. Leaders now need to focus the same energy levels on leading innovation as
they currently bring to the management of the bottom-line.
If innovation and change are inextricably linked, it follows that leading innovation and

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

leading change are also connected. I would argue that the leadership of innovation cannot
succeed without the effective leadership of change because the overriding issue in both
cases is the management of people. As Linda Holbeche says, Managing change is not
about managing change; its about managing people. (2006).
Leaders must motivate, inspire and support innovation throughout the organisation until it
becomes entrenched as an organisational value. Similar requirements can be seen in the
leadership of change as leaders may need to overcome resistance, feelings of shock,
anxiety, uncertainty and confusion and a reluctance to change old habits. (Kotter and
Schlesinger, 1979; Kanter, 1983; Holbeche 2006).
In support of my argument that the leadership of innovation and the leadership of change
are inter-linked, consider the similarities between Kotters Eight Steps of Change (1996)
and the leaders role in innovation as described in Managing Creativity and Innovation.
(Luecke, 2003).
Kotters Eight Steps of Change

The Leaders Role in Innovation

Act with urgency

Develop a culture that nurtures creativity and

innovation

Form a strong sponsoring group

Create innovation champions

Develop a vision

Establish the strategic direction

innovation should take place

Communicate the vision

Be involved with innovation

Empower management

Put the right people in charge

Realise quick wins

Apply portfolio thinking

Embed improvements into the organisation and

realise additional improvements

Improve the idea-to-comercialisation process

Institutionalise the new way of working

Create an ambidextrous organisation

within

which

In conclusion, although there are many complementary theories of both innovation and
change, no general theory for either has emerged, primarily because of the very nature of
both innovation and change. Theorists, authors and leaders agree that both are
unpredictable, can come about without warning and that leadership should be more about
Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

the leadership of people than the leadership or management of the processes of

innovation and change.
Grey Advertising a case study on leading change
Background
In 1970, the advertising agency Phillips, Bunton, Mundel and Blake was formed and within
12 years, it was the largest agency in South Africa. In 1987, founding partner Darryl
Phillips moved to London, though he retained a controlling interest in the company.
In 1991, after some years of decline, internal strife, and leadership politicking, Ian
Shepherd was appointed as CEO of Grey Advertising, South Africa. When Shepherd was
appointment, I was Creative Director of Grey Healthcare, a wholly owned subsidiary of
Grey, South Africa.
Just weeks after Shepherds appointed, Grey lost one of its largest accounts and the
company was forced to retrench almost 30% of its staff, yet within two years of Shepherd
talking over the leadership of the company, Grey once again became a force to be
reckoned with and in 1993, Shepherd was recognised by the Financial Mail (South Africa)
as advertisings achiever of the year.
Shepherd was faced with urgent, critical issues that required change that were both
internal and external and included:
1. A lack of trust in leadership
2. Poor staff motivation and morale
3. Bad press
4. Rapidly declining income
5. Unsustainable overheads

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

Leading the change

I interviewed Mr. Shepherd on the 16th March 2011 to attempt to uncover how this
extraordinary change in fortune came about.
Shepherd recalls that when he was appointed, Grey was technically bankrupt and the
auditors warned that the company was dangerously close to trading recklessly. Also, the
company was only utilising 30% of the office space it was leasing and the landlord was not
prepared to renegotiate. Despite this, Shepherd was confident that the agency could be
turned around. The company had a core of talented, dedicated people and he felt that if a
culture of trust could be fostered, then the business would once again thrive.
Clearly, the situation required immediate change in order to save the company from
collapse. In addition, to overcome the lack of motivation and mistrust, a major change in
the organisations culture was also necessary.
The leadership team Shepherd formed at Grey was purposefully small, three people
including Shepherd, and dedicated to turning the business around. In Shepherds words,
We were independent thinkers, not influenced by the previous regime.
There was no strategy - we followed no theories, our decisions were instinctive and based
on common sense, Shepherd told me, The plan was quite simply to keep the people
safe. He went on to explain that his education at Sandhurst Military Academy had taught
him that a leaders primary role is to look after your soldiers.
When faced with the difficult task of retrenchment, the leadership at Grey made some
innovative decisions that would not only help those employees who were being
retrenched, but also ensure that those remaining with the company would not become demotivated or anxious about their own futures.
1. The company formed an internal recruitment consultancy to help retrenched
Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

employees write CVs and apply for jobs. They also approached competitive
companies to see what positions were available
2. Grey offered recruitment companies generous bonuses to place retrenched
employees
3. Free transport was offered for people to attend interviews
4. Training was provided for those workers who needed additional skills to make them
more employable
The result of these initiatives (never before offered by a South African advertising agency)
was that every single person who was retrenched found work, at the same or a higher
salary, before their retrenchment packages were exhausted. In addition, as Shepherd puts
it, How we handled the retrenchments was a test of sincerity and the staff realised that
Grey was now a company that strived to kept its people safe.
Having established an element of trust, Shepherd and his team began to build a culture
based on a few simple propositions:
1. We trust you
2. We will give you whatever you need to get the job done
3. It is OK to say I dont know
4. Take the occasional risk
5. You wont get fired for making a mistake as long as you learn from it
Kouzes and Posner (1990), discuss how leaders can make their roles legitimate and
working on the assumption that leadership is conferred rather than being inherent in the
title. They argue that without followers, there can be no leaders, a concept supported by
Stephen Covey (1982).
According to Kouzes and Posner, the attribute that followers deem most important in

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

10

leaders is credibility, which in itself consists of:

1. honesty and personal integrity made evident through the leaders actions
2. the ability to challenge, inspire, enable and encourage
3. the ability to convey a vision or dream and be enthusiastic, energetic and positive.
It fast became evident to the staff at Grey that Shepherd and his team were acting with a
great deal of integrity; this led to unprecedented feelings of optimism and excitement that
were infectious, ultimately resulting in a complete change of culture within the entire
organisation.
A turning point for Grey was the acquisition of the MARS business. Shepherd believes this
was a stroke of luck, however the account was won in competition with other, more stable
agencies and the fact the business was awarded to Grey implies that MARS recognised a
synergy or a set of values they felt comfortable with.
The issue of the premises was resolved by utilising the services of a property broker
friendly with the landlord who agreed to release Grey from the lease as long as they
moved to another building within his portfolio. Not only did this relieve the financial burden
of unoccupied office space, it was also perceived by the staff as a break with the past and
another step in the right direction.
Kotter (1996), argues that small, positive successes (wins), are fundamental to sustaining
change and Greys leaders, through open and honest communication, continually
motivated the staff by celebrating each and every positive step. In addition, the team was
extremely accessible to the extent that I remember, on a number of occasions, simply
walking into Shepherds office unannounced and being able to discuss whatever was on
my mind.
Despite Shepherds statement that there was no plan, many similarities can be seen
Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

11

between Kotters Eight Steps of Change and the way in which the process unfolded at
Grey.
Kotters Eight Steps of Change

The Change Process at Grey

Act with urgency

Retrenchments and move to new premises

Form a strong sponsoring group

Small, dedicated leadership team

Develop a vision

One simple goal keep the people safe

Communicate the vision

Honest and regular communication

Empower management

Well provide whatever you need to get the job done

Realise quick wins

MARS account win

Embed improvements into the organisation and

realise additional improvements

New premises

Institutionalise the new way of working

We trust you. Mistakes are allowed. Take some risks

Throughout the following years, Grey grew steadily under Shepherds leadership. In 2005,
he retired from Grey, with the company once again one of South Africas top agencies,
with a ranking of 15th. (Financial Mail, 2006 p.102-103).

Billboard Ltd. a case study in business model innovation

Up until the mid-1980s, few companies in South Africa were interested in diversification.
Economic sanctions, whilst difficult for the country as a whole, presented some unintended
advantages for local businesses. Competition was not a common problem, companies had
a captive audience and the government invested heavily in developing local talent and
expertise. With the impending wholesale change in the political environment (the ending of
apartheid and economic sanctions) and the challenges local businesses would face as a
result, one advertising agency decided that a strategy of diversification would give them
the edge when international agencies opened South African offices.
The Agency for Advertising and Marketing (The Agency), decided to diversify through
acquisition. The company had cash on hand and within just three months had purchased
15 smaller, specialised marketing and media businesses and formed a holding company
called Billboard, that was floated on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE). My
Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

12

company, Cornerstone Advertising was one of the 15 companies that Billboard acquired.
The initial share price was R147.50, yet just twelve months later the stock had fallen so
low that the JSE suspended the trading of Billboard shares and shortly after, the company
was de-listed.

An innovative business model

Based on the rapidly changing political and competitive environments, the decision for the
Agency to diversify and grow through acquisition was a bold and innovative move.
Historically, South African companies had traded somewhat conservatively and many
organisations were struggling to come to terms with how to deal with the threats and
opportunities afforded by the prospect of competing globally. At the time of the
announcement that Billboard was to be listed on the JSE, the market reacted very
favourably. The Press was positive, proven leaders were in place and the companies
Billboard had purchased were all leaders in their respective fields. So what went wrong?
My personal experience and discussions with other Managing Directors within the group
has led me to the conclusion that Billboard made fundamental errors by not addressing the
following important questions.
1. Who is in the best position to lead the Group through the change process
2. What effect will these acquisitions have on the cultures of the companies involved?
3. What are the implications for the stakeholders of each individual company?
4. How will we manage the emotional impact of the process on individuals within the
acquired companies?
5. How will we accommodate the unique styles of the acquired companys leaders?
As CEO of The Agency, the largest company within the Billboard Group, Johan Huyser
was appointed as Group Managing Director. The CEO, Malcolm Perry, was a strategist
Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

13

and owner of one on the acquired companies and the Board of Directors consisted mainly
of outside investors with little or no understanding of the advertising and marketing
business. With the exception of Perry and Huyser, the board was not involved in the
running of the Group and most were overseas investors who only attended Board
meetings occasionally.
Huysers appointment was based on historical performance, yet what the Billboard
management failed to realise, was that his success was based on relationships with
members of the Apartheid Government and other Afrikaans business leaders who would
soon begin to lose their influence as Nelson Mandela and the ANC came to power. His
style was autocratic, conservative and dictatorial.
In direct contrast, the leaders of the acquired companies were entrepreneurs - innovative
leaders whose styles were more open, democratic and participative.
Applying the model developed by Beer and Nohria (2000), the leaders of Billboard applied
Theory E change (top-down, focusing on structures and systems) whilst leaders of the
acquired companies were expecting Theory O, participative and emergent change focused
on the development of culture and learning.
This autocratic approach led to the alienation of individuals within the acquired companies,
which in turn led to negative reactions that Beckhard, and Harris (1987) identified as some
of the possible reactions to change opposition and lack of commitment.
Huyser was of the belief that because his company was the largest in the Group, the
culture prevalent at The Agency should be forced upon the entire Group. What he did not
recognise was that the success of the other companies in the Group could not be
sustained in an environment where participation in decision-making was not an option.

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

14

I personally experienced this during a meeting between Huyser, myself and the MD of a
design consultancy purchased by Billboard, in which Huyser announced without
discussion, that he had decided that our two companies should merge. When I enquired
as to whether we could discuss other options, his reply was Tim, there are no other
options.
The implications for myself and the other small business leaders were clear. The cultures
of entrepreneurship, trust, freedom and creativity we had fought so hard to build were at
odds with Billboards approach. Many of our key employees resigned and a number of our
clients moved their business to competitors because we were no longer able to offer the
service that satisfied their needs.
Emotionally drained, disillusioned and angry, myself and eight of the other small business
leaders invoked a clause within our sales agreements that allowed us to repurchase our
companies and remove them from the Billboard Group.
In conclusion, if one compares the process undertaken by Billboard to that reflected in the
work of Beer, Eisenstat and Spector (1990), it becomes clearer as to why this process was
such a spectacular failure. They advocate a six-step process that could help organisations
undergo change with more success. These steps are:
1. Mobilise commitment through organisation-wide discussions as to what change
should take place
2. Develop a shared vision
3. Foster consensus for the vision, competence to enact it and cohesion to keep it on
track
4. Spread revitalisation without pushing down from the top
5. Institutionalise revitalisation through policies, systems and structures

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

15

6. Monitor and adjust strategy in response to new issues that arise

Another model that may have proved useful to Billboards leaders is that of Hayes (2010),
which focuses on the people issues with regard to change.

The failure of the Billboard Group can be summed up in this quote from W. Edwards
Demming, It is not necessary to change. Survival is not mandatory.
My own performance as a leader of innovation and change.
Throughout my 25 years working as a Creative Director in advertising agencies, I have led
many teams of highly creative people with varying degrees of success. I have also been a
part of a number of change processes, most of which were, in my opinion, failures.
My experience in leading innovation has been confined mainly to what Smith and
Reinertsen described in 1991 as the fuzzy front end; the unpredictable, unstructured and
sometimes chaotic nature of ideation that is a fundamental element of innovation. As a
Creative Director, my responsibility was to lead and manage teams of Art Directors and
Copywriters in their endeavours to produce engaging and novel concepts to help our
clients market their products and services.
I have found leading the creative process to be extremely rewarding and much easier than
managing the individuals in my teams. Most overtly creative people are, in my experience,
opinionated, averse to rules and regulations, diverse thinkers, highly intuitive and rarely
motivated by money. These traits mean that successfully managing these people requires
a balanced approach allowing freedom to explore whilst maintaining a focus on the task at
Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

16

hand. As Theresa Amabile (2008) maintains, One doesnt manage creativity. One
manages for creativity.
Because I did not study advertising after leaving school, my success as a Creative Director
was gained as a result of some excellent training and mentoring from the many talented
and experienced advertising executives I was fortunate enough to work with. Of equal
importance, I also worked for a number people who were not so successful in leading
creativity and innovation and where I recognised the cause of these failures; I was able to
learn from their mistakes.
Later in my career, I read avidly on the subject of creativity. Writings that have most
influenced the way I have tried to lead creativity and innovation include various works by
Teresa Amabile; Its Not How Good You Are, Its How Good you Want To Be by Paul
Arden; Some Things I Know and Some Things I Believe by Norman Berry, and
Confessions of an Advertising Man by the late, great David Ogilvy. I also had the
privilege of attending a creative thinking workshop led by Edward De Bono and the
Stephen Covey Principle-Centered Leadership course.
David Ogilvy once said Any fool can write a bad advertisement, but it takes a genius to
keep his hands off a good one and according to Teresa Amabile (1998), killing creativity
is far easier than inspiring it. Amabile asserts that creativity is a function of three interlinked
components expertise, creative thinking skills and motivation.

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

17

The Three Components of Creativity

Expertise is, in a
word, knowledge
technical, procedural
and intellectual.

Creativethinking
skillls

Expertise
Creativity

Creative-thinking skills
determine how flexibly and
imaginatively people
approach problems. Do
their solutions upend the
status-quo. Do they
persevere through dry
spells?

Motivation

Not all motivation is created equal. An inner passion to

solve the problem at hand leads to solutions far more
creative than do external awards, such as money. This
component called intrinsic motivation is the one that
can be most influenced by the work environment.

Source: Teresa Amabile, How to Kill Creativity, Harvard Business School Review, September October 1998.

Amabile maintains that leaders and managers can influence these components
favourably or adversely through workplace practices and conditions.
When I have been most successful in leading creativity and innovation, I have been able
to create an environment where:
individuals are given the freedom to explore without fear of criticism
time is allowed for the seed of an idea to germinate
great ideas are recognised (not necessarily through financial reward)
risk taking is encouraged and
some degree of failure is accepted.
In some agencies where I worked, the CEOs believed that innovative ideas were the
Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

18

lifeblood of the organisation and I received full support in my endeavours to create a

climate where creativity was king. In others, leadership was unable or unwilling to
manage the potential chaos that creativity can create. My belief is that the more
innovative agencies I worked for were ultimately more profitable, gained clients who
expected the unexpected and attracted the best talent. This supposition is supported by
two research papers; Magic and Logic: Re-defining sustainable business practices for
agencies, marketing and procurement, (Baxter M, 2006) and Winning a Clio Advertising
Award and its Relationship to Firm Profitability, (Tippinsa J and Kunkel R, 2006). Both
papers conclude that advertising agencies that won the most awards for creativity were
also more profitable than their competitors and attracted the most talented individuals.
As Sir Michael Bichard (2005) puts it, perhaps the key characteristic of the successful
twenty-first century leader will be the ability to build cultures where creativity is valued and
can thrive.
Whenever I started a new job, I was aware that change in the creative department was
inevitable. Staff were wary of how I would manage them but in most instances, after a
short period of adjustment, my teams reacted favourably to my leadership. For this, I give
credit to the excellent Creative Directors who encouraged my own creativity rather than
attempting to take the credit for themselves a lesson I took to heart. Paradoxically, many
Creative Directors, who are supposed to develop and motivate their staff, are dictatorial
and want their own ideas to be presented to the client, often reacting negatively to ideas
from subordinates.
In situations where I was expected to help lead organisation-wide change, I was less
successful. As a person who embraces, rather than feels threatened by change, I could
not understand why people reacted to change negatively. A case in point took place when
I was appointed at an agency that had never before had a Creative Director. My team was
Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

19

demotivated because management was not open to innovative ideas and they rightly
expected that I would change the situation. I was not able to do so and in retrospect, my
failure was due to the fact that I did not manage the change that the organisation went
through. I expected management to support the changes I felt were necessary without
question because, after all they had hired me to improve the creative profile of the
company. I became angry that the systems I had put in place were being side-stepped,
argumentative when innovative ideas were not accepted and ultimately, I failed to achieve
what I was hired to do.
Action plan to support my further development.
What I have learned from this module of the MALIC programme has both supported and
expanded my perceptions of innovation and change.
I now have a greater understanding of why I was successful in some instances and failed
in others.
I passionately believe that creativity and innovation can change not only organisations, but
society as a whole. The foremost reason for my undertaking the MALIC programme is so
that I can expand on the experience gained in advertising to help individuals and
organisations harness the power of creativity and innovation to help create a better South
Africa.
I have recently become a practitioner of Innovation StylesTM* and William Miller has
become a mentor in this regard. Through the development of the Innovation StylesTM
methodology, my ultimate goal is to become South Africas innovation guru and to coach,
mentor and train people to think more creatively and become successful innovators.
*Innovation Styles is a methodology developed by William Miller for promoting and fostering innovation for individuals,
teams and organisations. www.innovationstyles.com.

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

20

Developing a strategy in this regard has been challenging but it has helped me establish
areas on which to focus.
Personal SWOT analysis
STRENGTHS:

WEAKNESSES:

Creative thinking ability

Poor selling skills

Presentation skills
Lack of high level business contacts

Not threatened by change

Leadership
democratic

style

inclusive

and

Good motivator
Broad range of interests

Impatient for results

Can be somewhat of a loner
Easily distracted

Enjoy gaining new knowledge

Procrastinate
OPPORTUNITIES:

THREATS:

Position myself as expert in

developing creative thinking and Not well-known outside advertising
innovation skills
Could revert to comfort zone if situation
Develop networking skills
becomes tough
Be open to emerging opportunities
Take advantage of mentorship offers

*BEE (Black Economic Empowerment)

Use media contacts for PR

credentials

Start a consultancy business

Work
within
a
management
consultancy or form a JV with a
management consultancy
*In South Africa, Black Economic Empowerment is a legislated government strategy to increase the number
of previously disadvantaged individuals within organisations. A high BEE rating is a distinct competitive
advantage.

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

21

The first stage of my action plan is to ascertain which of my strengths can be utilised to
overcome the weaknesses. I should also use them to nullify some of the threats and take
advantage of the opportunities I have identified.
I have concluded that in order to achieve my goal of becoming South Africas most
influential person on creative thinking and innovation, I should use my greatest strength
that of my ability to present in an interesting and compelling manner to both large and
small groups of people to overcome my weaknesses and exploit the opportunities.
Goal 1 Improve networking competence
Action steps
Attend all relevant seminars, workshops and meetings
Improve online profile Linkedin, blogging, Facebook
Re-establish contacts with former employers and clients for whom I have run
creativity workshops in the past
Goal 2 Develop profile as an expert in the field
Action steps
Ensure I am aware of and understand current research and opinion
Identify the main issues that South African leaders are most concerned about
regarding innovation
Develop articles, presentations and speeches that address these issues
Use blogging to publish abstracts of the above
Identify relevant media and send regular articles to them this could also lead to
Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

22

media interview possibilities

Build Tim Malone as a brand
Goal 3 Maximise mentorship offers
Action steps
Identify areas in which most benefit will be gained from mentorships
Take up the two offers of mentorship already proffered.
Goal 4 Explore business model options
Action steps
Meet with Business Consultancy organisations
Discuss options with mentors
Identify possible BEE opportunities.
Because much work still needs to be done in terms of developing my skills to the level
required to become a creative thinking and innovation expert, my strategy is intended to
be of an emergent nature. For example, the decision as to which business model to
pursue will be influenced by how successful I am in developing myself as a brand. My
belief is that if I follow the action steps identified above whether I join an established
company, form a joint venture or work as a consultant I will achieve my goal.

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

23

Bibliography
Online Etymology Dictionary. http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=innovate. Accessed 7th Feb 2011.
Godin B, 2008. Innovation: The History of a Category. Project on the Intellectual History of Innovation
Working Paper No. 1.
McKinsey Global Survey: Innovation and commercialization, 2010. Pdf downloaded from mckinsey.com, Feb
2nd 2011.
Yu-Ting Cheng, Van de Ven, 1994. Leading the Innovation Journey: order out of chaos? Strategic
Management Research Center, University of Minnesota.
Wolfe, R. A, 1994. Organisational Innovation: Review, Critique and Suggested Research Directions, Journal
of Management Studies, vol. 31, no. 3.
Amabile T, Conti R, Coon H, Lazenby J and Herron M (1996). Assessing the Work Environment for
Creativity, Academy of Management Journal 39 (5): 1154-1184.
http://www.emmerling.com/v2/about-john.html. Accessed 21st March 2011.
Von Stamm B., 2003. Managing Innovation. John Wiley and Sons.
Abernathy W J, Utterback J M. Patterns of Industrial Innovation, in Technology Review, June/July 1978.
Tushmann M, Anderson P, 2004. Managing Strategic Innovation and Change: a collection of readings.
Oxford University Press.
Abernathy W J, Clarke K B, 1985. Industrial Renaissance: producing a competitive future for America. Basic
Books.
Porter M E, 1986. Competition in Global Industries. Harvard Business School Press.
Dussauge P et al., 1992. Strategic Technology Management. Wiley.
Christensen C M, Anthony S D, Roth E A, 2004. Seeing What's Next: Using the Theories of Innovation to
Predict Industry Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing.
Henderson, Clarke K, 1990. Architectural Innovation: The reconfiguration of existing technologies and the

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

24

failure of established firms. Administrative Sciences Quarterly, 9-30.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&fieldkeywords=innovation&x=0&y=0. Accessed 21 Feb 2011.
Schumpeter, JA, 1942. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
Hagendoorn J, 1989. The dynamic Analysis of Innovation and Diffusion: A study in process control. Pinter
Publishers Ltd., London.
http://www.telephonymuseum.com/telephone%20history.htm. Accessed 16 Feb.
Sundbo J, 1998. The Theory of Innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Chan Kim W, Mauborgne R, 2005. Blue Ocean Strategy. How to Create Uncontested Market Space and
Make the Competition Irrelevant. Harvard Business School Press.
Johnston R, Bate J, 2003. The Power of Strategy Innovation. A new way of linking Creativity and Strategic
Planning to Discover great Business Opportunities. AMACOM.
Sutton R, 2001. Weird Ideas That Work: 11 1/2 Practices for Promoting, Managing, and Sustaining
Innovation. Simon & Schuster.
Amabile T, 1998. How to kill Creativity. Harvard Business Review, September, 7787
Kemple K, Nissenberg S. Nurturing Creativity in Early Childhood Education: Families Are Part of It. Early
Childhood Education Journal (Vol. 28, 67-21) 2000.
Amabile, Teresa M., Elizabeth A. Schatzel, Giovanni B. Moneta, and Steven J. Kramer. "Leader Behaviors
and the Work Environment for Creativity: Perceived Leader Support." Leadership Quarterly 15, no. 1
(February 2004): 5-32.
Bryan L L, Joyce C I, 2007. Mobilizing Minds: Creating Wealth from Talent in the 21st-Century Organization.
New York: McGraw Hill.
Holbeche L, 2006. Understanding Change: Theory, Implementation and Success. Roffey Park Management
Institute.
Von Stamm B, 2003. Managing innovation, Design and Creativity. John Wiley and Sons.

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

25

Kotter J, Schlesinger L, 1979. Choosing Strategies for Change. Harvard Business Review.
Kanter R, 1983. The Change Masters: Corporate Entrepreneurs at Work. George Allen and Unwin.
Kotter J, 1996. Leading Change. Harvard Business Press.
Luecke R, 2003. Managing Creativity and Innovation. Harvard Business School Press.
Porter M, 1985. Competitive Advantage. The Free Press.
Kouzes J, Posner B, 1990. The Leadership Challenge. Wiley.
Covey S. The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1982.
Beer M, Nohria N, 2000. Cracking the code of change. Harvard Business Review (May-June): 133141.Beckhard and Harris 1987
Hayes J, 2010. The Theory and Practice of Change Management: Third Edition. Palgrave Macmillan.
Edwards Deming. Great-Quotes.com, Gledhill Enterprises, 2011. http://www.great-quotes.com/, accessed
March 2, 2011.
Beer M, Eisenstat R, Spector B, 1990. The Critical Path to Corporate Renewal. Harvard Business School
Press.
Amabile T, Khaire M, 2008. Creativity and the Role of the Leader. Harvard Business Review.
Baxter M, 2006. Magic and Logic. http://www.aka.cz/pdf/ipa_magic_and_logic.pdf. Accessed 24th April
2012.
Tippinsa J and Kunkel R, 2006. Winning a Clio Advertising Award and its Relationship to Firm Profitability.
Journal of Marketing Communications, Volume 12, Issue 1.
Sir Michael Bichard, 2005. Managing for Creativity. In Leadership and Management in the 21st Century:
Business Challenges of the Future. Ed Cooper CL. Oxford University Press.

Tim Malone MALIC tim@tim-malone.com

26