View
216
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Implementation SessionRT 243 – Enhancing Innovation in the EPC Industry
Paul Chinowsky, University of ColoradoModerator
The Panel• Paul Chinowsky – University of Colorado• Mike Toole – Bucknell University• Howard Irwin – AMEC• Cathy Myers – CH2MHill• Garry King – WorleyParsons
Other Team MembersMauricio Rodriquez – Smithsonian Institution
Matt Hallowell – University of Colorado
John Strickland – CH2M Hill
Agenda
• Review of Phase I – Paul • Objectives of Phase II – Validate the IMM – Mike• Maturity Model Findings - Mike• Case Studies
– Southland – Howard– Ch2M-Hill – Cathy
• Putting This Into Action – Garry• Conclusion - Paul
Learning Objectives
• Understand Innovation Maturity Model• Understand How to Implement in Your
Organization• Understand The Need to Change Innovation
Perspectives
Phase I Objectives
• Determine Innovation Drivers
• Determine Innovation Support Components
• Focus on Enhancing Innovation
After 200 data points and literature review -
8 Key Enablers
• Leadership• Learning• Processes• Risk Perspective• Culture• Collaboration• Customer Focus• Resources
Innovation Maturity Model
Innovation Maturity Model
Q18. Innovation-related activities can be pursued during normal working hours. Work days are not so full that innovation-related activities only occur outside normal working hours.
1=strongly disagree2=slightly disagree3=I am neutral4=slightly agree5=strongly agree.
Averagemax
Score Difference WeightingImprovement Potential
2.87 5 2.13 4.00 8.53
Resources should not be so tightly allocated that there is no time available for activities that may not be tied directly to daily tasks. …
Innovation Maturity Model
Innovation Completion Scores Raw Score Achievement %
Culture 120.70 77%Resources 118.70 69%Risk 123.33 70%Customer 63.44 70%Learning 124.16 80%Collaboration 95.31 75%Leadership 84.97 71%Processes 71.33 71%
Implementation SessionRT 243 – Phase II Objectives and Findings
Mike Toole – Bucknell University
Objective 1: Validate IMM Evaluation Tool
• Confirm content and focus
• Improve statement wording
• Add demographic questions
• Convert Excel to Web tool
Objective 2: Improve IMM Process
• Discussions with client regarding organizational goals, client IMM sample
• Analysis of client IMM evaluation data
• Selection of IMM recommendations to be implemented
• Monitoring of implementation
Objective 3: Document Case Studies
• Goal: encourage IMM adoption by CII members
– Reduce uncertainty about tool and process
– Share pilot client lessons learned
• Commitment to confidentiality
• Case studies to be included in research report
IMM Case Studies Background• 6 volunteer organizations
– Southland Industries– WorleyParsons– CH2M Hill– Fluor– CSA– US Army Corps of Engineers
• Web based• Sample chosen by organization
Sample size varied
Case Study Comparison
Barrier ComparisonCase Study 1 Case Study 2 Case Study 3
Non-Billable Hours Non-Billable Hours
Non-Billable Hours
Leadership Fostering Innovation
Leadership Fostering Innovation
Funding From Corporate
Funding From Corporate
Funding From Corporate
Work Days Too Full
Work Days Too Full
Work Days Too Full
Innovation Incentives
Innovation Incentives
Multi-Disciplinary Teams Focus on Innovation
Projects Focus onthe Contract
Risk-Taking is Recognized as Part of Innovation
Risk-Taking is Recognized as Part of Innovation
Leadership ToleratesSome Failure
Summary of Findings
• IMM is a valuable evaluation tool
• Results very similar within pilot clients and similar to survey data
• Implementation of recommendations is critical
Implementation SessionRT 243 – Case Study: Southland Industries
Howard Irwin - AMEC
Case Study: Southland
Address two pertinent topics:• Can innovation maturity be measured?
– Road test the survey and its output
• Do the recommendations work?– Test the process of assigning recommendations based
on the survey– Test the validity of the recommendations
Case Study: Southland
Case Study Process:1. Maturity Model Survey - Round 1
2. Benchmarking Analysis
3. Recommendations for Improvement
4. Implementation of Recommendations
5. Maturity Model Survey - Round 2
6. Improvement Analysis
Maturity Model: Round 1
Question / Attribute IPQ60. Our organization has an established process for obtaining corporate
funds and resources to support innovation activities. 7.60Q22. Our organization has incentives and/or ways to indemnify a project
that is implementing an innovation. 7.24Q57. Our organization has a process for developing innovations before
implementing on projects to improve likelihood of success. 7.00Q61. Our organization has a process for ensuring innovation-related
learning from one project modifies behavior on subsequent projects. 7.00Q25. Our organization spreads innovation-related risk across multiple projects. 6.86Q23. Risk-taking is recognized as a necessary part of encouraging and
implementing new ideas. 6.19Q48. Our organization expects individuals to share ideas through formal forums. 6.17
Maturity Model: Round 1
Question / Attribute IPQ60. Our organization has an established process for obtaining corporate
funds and resources to support innovation activities. 7.60Q22. Our organization has incentives and/or ways to indemnify a
project that is implementing an innovation. 7.24Q57. Our organization has a process for developing innovations before
implementing on projects to improve likelihood of success. 7.00Q61. Our organization has a process for ensuring innovation-related
learning from one project modifies behavior on subsequent projects. 7.00Q25. Our organization spreads innovation-related risk across multiple projects. 6.86Q23. Risk-taking is recognized as a necessary part of encouraging and
implementing new ideas. 6.19Q48. Our organization expects individuals to share ideas through formal forums. 6.17
Recommendations
– Set aside a “pool” or “incentive pot” of funds for project innovations.
– Establish “contingency” limits (higher than normal) to be applied to projects to offset risks of trying innovations
Q22. Our organization has incentives and/or ways to indemnify a project that is implementing an innovation.
Recommendations
– Assign the responsibility of “Learning Coordinator (LC)” to a COP
– Develop and implement a monthly knowledge letter sent by each LC
– Create a searchable library of innovations
Q61. Our organization has a process for ensuring innovation-related learning from one project modifies behavior on subsequent projects.
Recommendations
– Establish Communities of Practice– Establish a Recognition System for
outstanding performance
Q48. Our organization expects individuals to share ideas through formal forums.
Southland – Case Study Highlights
• IMM provided targeted areas to address.• Recommendations fit well into Southland’s
continuous improvement program• However, base recommendations needed to
be adjusted to fit the organization• Second Round survey showed marked
improvements in the three areas addressed
Implementation SessionRT 243 – Case Study: CH2M HILLElectronics & Advanced Technology
Cathy Myers– CH2M Hill
Background
• Electronics & Advanced Technology – Focus on Leading Edge Industrial Technologies
Using the Maturity Model
• 51 Responses from 2 Groups– Recently Involved in Lean Initiative (Responsibility
Based Project Delivery)– Similar Project Not Using Lean Approach
• Formula for Finding Greatest Opportunity– (ideal score – actual score) x importance factor
Maturity Model Mapping
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%Culture
Resources
Risk
Customer
Learning
Collaboration
Leadership
Processes
Findings
• Generally Positive Perception• Areas of Strength
– Culture – Leadership
• Plenty of Room for Potential Improvement
Biggest Opportunities
• Non-Billable Hours• Corporate Funding for Innovation• Leadership Investing in Innovation• Incentives and Project Indemnification• Sharing of Knowledge• Failure Tolerance• Risk Taking for Long-Term Advancement
Path Forward
• Clear Connection to Lean Project Delivery Initiative • Incorporate Findings to Improve Learning • New Thinking on Risk Perspective
Putting the Research to Work Garry King – WorleyParsons
Changing The Game
• Recognize the Strategic Importance • Guide the Culture • Engage the Talent• Stimulate Collaboration and Learning• Create the Processes (transform ideas to action)• Change the Risk Perspective
Syndicating vs. Isolating Risk
Some Industries Make Good Money By Taking Advantage of Multiple Iterations
Where Do I Start?
1. Measure your organization (IMM survey)
2. Analyze IMM results and recommendations
3. Select specific areas for improvement
4. Adjust and implement to fit your organization
5. Measure again to confirm effectiveness
6. Take a long term perspective