Over a year ago I tweeted in frustration during an #innochat:
“We are using ‘innovation’ 3 diff ways. 1. an overall process 2. a strategy 3. an outcome. Fortunately not tripping up much….”
The next week we devoted an entire chat to a discussion of what the word ‘innovation’ really meant, with amusingly inconclusive results.
I remain convinced that one of the biggest impediments to innovation and collaboration, and an impediment to actually getting better at it, is lack of a common language to describe what we’re doing. Innovation and collaboration will forever remain slippery and mysterious concepts as long as we don’t use the same terms the same way. We can have more than one definition, as long as we specify what those definitions are and understand the ones we and others are using when we talk.
Oh Renee, This is one of the real head banging issues we all should be struggling with as it is daily we run up against this. Where do we start/ someone said to me today certification programs for all there downsides do enable a common language to build. I shuddered but there is something in this. I wish we could exercise the community to really make a concerted effort to break through this barrier
@renee_hopkins Time and again as a consultant I have seen clients tripped up by an inadequate internal understanding of terms. The establishment of a common language is critical for alignment and successful execution. Without one the best of intentions can result in chaos. This is such a persistently punishing issue for all concerned. But few realize the benefits of slowing slightly to establish a shared understanding before moving on. Thanks for raising this issue.
Pingback: Common Language Fuels Collaborative Innovation - C-Suite 2.0
Pingback: Collaborative Communication: ‘Start As You Mean to Go On’ - C-Suite 2.0