By Roger La Salle
As we know, a good definition of innovation is 'Change that adds value' and embracing this term opens the way to make innovation a relatively straight forward exercise, providing you are asking the right question.
How many times do we solve a problem and even implement a solution, only to realise that had we asked a better question we may have come up with a much better solution. How many times do we convene a meeting without having a specific one sentence idea of exactly what we wish to achieve in that meeting?
Being able to crystallise an issue to a single sentence question is so important, but few people implement that valuable practice.
To put this into context, let me pose the question, and have you think of the answer before reading on:
What is the specific purpose of a written job application? The obvious answer is to get the job, but this not correct. The sole purpose of the written application is to get an interview, to get in front of the people making the selection. With that clear purpose in mind, the written application takes on a different form. Indeed, what you leave out is just as important as what you include. You should lead the reader to a point where they wish to speak with you to learn more.
Too close to the problem
To cite another example, recently a workshop was undertaken in a large multi-national trading bank, the team came to the session wanting to resolve the question: How can we reduce the cost to businesses wishing to raise a Letter of Credit (LC)? This seemed like a sensible question and was workshopped by the group for a time until they came to the Re -Question Catalyst in the Innovation Matrix.
Challenged to re-question, the group dug deep searching to find the real reason they wished to lower the cost? The answer that crystallised was, 'so that people would be more willing to use their LC facility'.
In fact, the real and best question to ask was, How can we inspire businesses to raise more LCs?
On investigating this different issue it was soon realised that the cost, maybe $20.00 was irrelevant. Why would that be a showstopper for somebody wishing to raise an LC for perhaps $500k or more?
The real reason people were adverse to raising LCs was the time and effort involved. The process was just too complex and time consuming. Yet the bank in its daily work transfers multimillions of dollars around the world with little more than the click of a mouse.
So why are LCs so complex?
The better question, the real question is: How can we make it easier for clients to raise LCs? With this question in mind the workshop continued based on a Process Innovation Matrix. An answer was soon found.
You can be sure – almost without exception – after a complex design is implemented, and maybe even marketed, the next embodiment of the same product will be much simpler. Why? Because having done it once, better designs questions and issues can now be resolved.
So what's the solution?
The method of 'why' 'why' 'why' questioning is one way of trying to drill down to the best question. Another way is to have somebody quite remote from the issue present in any meeting that addresses a problem. You can be sure that a person NOT skilled in the area will ask some very interesting and challenging questions. This always helps to find the real issue and the best question.
Roger La Salle, is the creator of the “Matrix Thinking”™ technique. He is Director and former CEO of the Innovation Centre of Victoria (INNOVIC) www.matrixthinking.com
