Taking off from the SMEs module, the literature has made me to think over the importance of the individuals within the organization, though not all yet a few take an important role in the organizational innovation process. These few have been referred as champions in the management literature. According to the Great-Man-Theory that aims to explain history by the impact of “Great men”, the creation of something new is often used to be accredited solely to one outstanding individual. In the same way that historical achievements are linked to certain individuals (e.g. Columbus discovered America) also innovations are accredited to their inventors (e.g. Otto four-stroke cycle) (Hauschildt, 2004).
The concept and the role of one outstanding individual promoting the innovation process was initially identified and coined by Schon`s (1963) study on radical military innovation. Schon names this individual “the Champion”. In his 1963 paper, Schon studied the nature of resistance to innovation in organizations, the requirements of successful technical innovation, and the steps that management can take to ensure that the necessary development work leads into promising proposals for radical new products and processes. Thereby he identified a gap between the wish for elaborate and systematic procedures of innovation and the uncertainty and risk inherent in the innovation process, that every organization faces (Schon, 1963). On the one hand, the recognized need for change and radical product innovations in order to grow, expand, diversify and to get ahead of the competition conflicts with the risk and uncertainty of the innovation process on the other hand. In fact, established systems, structures, processes and procedures in firms are designed to maintain the status quo and avoid risks. However, the pernicious problem is not the existing resistance to change, but the failure to recognize it (Schon, 1963). Unrecognized resistance becomes capable of destroying most product innovations and enables masked defences against change. Nevertheless, innovation does take place but therefore typically one individual emerges as champion of the idea. Especially where radical innovation is concerned, Schon (1963) argues that a champion is required to overcome the resistance to change and to promote new idea. Referring to Schon (1963), the champion of new developments has to identify with the idea and its promotion to a great extent, and has to take the risk to fail with the championed idea. Therefore, he characterizes champions based on the attributes of considerable power and prestige, informal sales and promotion, a wide variety of interests (e.g. technology, marketing, production and finance) and courage of heroic quality (Schon, 1963).
Later, the concept and the term of “the champion” became the prevailing notion in Anglo-American innovation research, were extended and are still leading the discussion (Rost et al., 2006; Hauschildt, 2004). The functions of the champion were specified and names like product champion, innovation champion, project champion, executive champion, and management champion can be found in the literature. Yet the consentaneous perception identifies one outstanding individual in charge of pushing and promoting an idea into an implemented innovation, and empirical research and data has provided evidence of the champion as a crucial factor of success for the entire innovation process.
Chakrabarti (1974) ascribes the importance of the role of the product champion within the innovation process to the selling of the idea to the management. Based on the assumption that successful innovation requires attention of the top management and a nurturing atmosphere, the key task of the product champion is to get the management interested in an idea or project (Chakrabarti, 1974). He defined the champion as “an individual who is intensely interested and involved with the overall objectives and goals of the project and who plays a dominant role in many of the research-engineering interaction events through some of the stages, overcoming technical and organizational obstacles and pulling the effort through its final achievement by the sheer force of his will and energy” (Chakrabarti, 1974:58). Moreover, to influence and stimulate a positive decision-making the champion has to go beyond his formal organizational role and over the hierarchical chain (Chakrabarti, 1974). Based on the notion that the decision to adopt an idea is a collective process that, referring to Rogers and Shoemakers (1971), consists of five sequential stages (namely stimulation, initiation, legitimation, decision, and execution), Chakrabarti concludes that the champion has to play multiple roles (Chakrabarti, 1974). These roles are related to the five stages of the collective decision process and further on, the champion acts as a link between these different phases. Thus, champions are advocates of new ideas, products or projects who are actively involved in all stages of the innovation process, and may use different skills during each of these stages (Chakrabarti, 1974).
Also Rogers (2003) points out the important role that an innovation champion can play in fostering and promoting a new idea in an organization. He describes the champions as “a charismatic individual who throws his or her weight behind an innovation, thus overcoming indifferences or resistance that the new idea may provoke in an organization” (Rogers, 2003: 414).
Day (1994) identifies dual-role champions who combine the role of product champion (bottom up) and organizational sponsor (top down) through their ability to mobilize knowledge, information and power.
The champion theory often considers the champion as a powerful individual with a high rank within an organizational hierarchy. Day (1994) discovers the existence of powerful champions particularly for cost-intensive, risky and radical innovations. Her findings were supplemented by studies that showed that less radical innovations were championed by less powerful individuals (middle management) who acted as brokers and arrangers for an innovation, helping to fit it into the organizational context (Rogers, 2003). Howell and Higgins (1990) came to the result that a champion doesn`t have to be inevitably more powerful than other involved individuals but rather they tend to be more focussed on innovations, influential with others, and higher risk takers. Moreover, Howell et al. (2005) define Champions as “individuals who informally emerge to actively and enthusiastically promote innovations through the organizational stages”.
By reviewing the literature, it is apparent that the role of a champion is one that is internal to the organization. Champions are well connected to people and the organizations resources which support them in championing an innovation successfully. Furthermore, the championing individual emerges unsolicited, come in all ages, with varying degrees of formal power, and with different types of abilities. Champions identify themselves as champions, but are also regarded as champions from all levels within a firm including senior management. Perhaps their exact characteristics depend on the nature of the innovation and the organization. But in any event, the champion’s role is to initiate the innovation process and to guide the new idea through to approval and implementation (Rogers, 2003). Persuasive and willing to take calculated risks, champions adopt innovations, ideas or projects as their own and relentlessly promote them. Thus, the champion’s overwhelming enthusiasm and visionary qualities distinguishes him from other roles and makes him outstanding and unique.
References:
- Chakrabarti, A.K. (1974) ‘The Role of Champion in Product Innovation’, California Management Review, vol. 17, no. 2, pp.58–62.
- Day, D.L. (1994) ‘Raising Radicals: Different Processes for Championing Innovative Corporate Ventures’, Organization Science, vol. 5, no. 2, pp.148–172.
- Hauschildt, J. (2004) Innovationsmanagement, Verlag Franz Vahlen, Munich/Germany.
- Howell, J.M., Higgins, C.A. (1990) ‘Champions of Technological Innovations’, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 35, pp.317–341.
- Rogers, E.M. (2003) Diffusion of Innovations, The Free Press, New York/USA.
- Schon, D.A. (1963) ‘Champions for Radical New Inventions’, Harvard Business Review, vol. 41, no. 2, pp.77–86.
- Shoemaker, P.J. (1991) Gatekeeping, Sage Publications, Newburry Park, C.A./USA.
No comments:
Post a Comment