Let the
innovators
innovate
How rethinking the engineering
support model can revolutionize
your product platform
Jeff DeWitt

/02
Companies fail to innovate because it
requires individuals to think differently,
and often in ways that are counter
to organizational culture and norms.
Innovation implies difference, and
difference is scary.
Are organizations willing to stick
their necks out? Usually, no.

Introduction
For leaders of global organizations, the writing is on the
boardroom wall: companies in the post-2008 economy must
re-engineer their workforce models to become the innovative
organizations of the future.
Organizational leadership and culture must reflect this focus if they wish to attract and retain a
new (and soon to be dominant) generation of workers and to remain relevant in an increasingly
aggressive and competitive global market. Innovation is the top priority of CEOs worldwide,
because innovation means survival.
In this paper, we seek to identify the ways in which leaders of engineering firms can rethink their
workforce models in order to achieve sustainable product innovation, to drive aggressive top-line
growth and increase the bottom line.
/03

01
Bigger. Better. Faster.
Stronger.
The pursuit of sustainable product innovation
/04

Bigger. Better. Faster. Stronger.
Innovation has long fuelled the engines of productivity and
growth for nations and for businesses.
Since the Industrial Revolution, machines, systems and infrastructure have helped to
define civilization, enabling its advancement and prosperity. Each step forward has
reinforced the population’s expectation that engineers will, in perpetuity, be able to
invent products and processes that preserve our quality of life and, more recently,
harness and sustain the resources required to power them.
It follows then that, in the post-2008 business world, innovation – the ‘successful
commercialization of invention’1 – is no longer a mere driver of corporate performance or
a competitive advantage. Now, innovation is critical to an organization’s survival.
Changing technology, consumer demand, blink-and-you’ll-miss-them product cycles,
shifting markets and the ramping up of global competition, along with the lasting
reverberations of the Great Recession, undermine the sustainability of any organization
aiming to achieve growth via cost cutting, re-engineering or expansion into
emerging markets.
http://www.workforce.com/articles/the-new-recipe-for-workforce-innovation
1
/05

Bigger. Better. Faster. Stronger.
/06
Post-recession businesses must embrace innovation to survive. They need to become
proficient in the ongoing development of multiple innovations, and have the operational
capacity to do so.2 This is sustainable product innovation and it is the lifeblood of the
innovative organizations of the new economy.
20th Century Innovations
21st Century Innovations
1. Electrification
11. nterstate highways
I
1. Energy conservation
12. nowledge sharing
K
2. Automobile
12. pace flight
S
2. Resource protection
13. ntegrated electronic
I
3. Airplane
13. Internet
3. Food/water production
4. Water supply and
14. Imaging
distribution
and distribution
environment
14. Globalization
15. ousehold appliances
H
4. Waste management
15. I, interfaces and robotics
A
5. Electronics
16. ealth technologies
H
5. Education and learning
16. eather prediction
W
6. Radio and television
17. etrochemical technology
P
6. Medicine and
7. Agricultural
18. aser and fiber optics
L
mechanization
8. Computers
9. Telephone
19. uclear technologies
N
20. High-performance
materials
10. ir conditioning/
A
refrigeration
prolonging life
7. Security and
counter-terrorism
http://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/2368301.pdf
http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/cms/7126/8275.aspx
18. Entertainment
19. pace exploration
S
20. Virtualization’ and VR
‘
9. Genetics and cloning
21. reservation of history
P
10. lobal communication
G
22. reservation of species3
P
logistics
3
17. ustainable development
S
8. New technology
11. raffic and population
T
2
and control

02
Organizational barriers to
innovation
Issues endemic to corporations
frustrate innovation progress
/07

Organizational barriers to innovation
/08
If ‘innovation is the single most important ingredient in the modern
economy’ (as The Economist put it), then engineers could be
considered the chefs de cuisine.
And yet, those companies in the business of innovation – engineering and technology
firms – must contend with the same organizational barriers that frustrate progress in
non-STEM businesses:4
• Risk-aversion on the part of management and investors
• Low-trust organizational cultures that reject collaboration and creativity
• Unilateral communication
• Poor implementation
• Lack of measurement (such as time to market, market share and numbers of attempts).
In many companies, the economic downturn has all but snuffed out management’s
encouragement of, and funding for, innovation. Widespread downsizing has increased
individual workloads, to the detriment of time spent coming up with new ideas and
innovative initiatives. And as a long-term pursuit that does not attract revenue, the
default position on innovation seems to be that it is a ‘nice to have’, not a critical driver
of growth and results.
Content brief interview transcript
4
Over
40%
of respondents in
a recent survey by
Workforce said their
organizations are
ineffective at fosting
innovation

Organizational barriers to innovation
/09
This is despite the proliferation of CEOs and leaders worldwide touting innovation
as their firm’s top business priority, and creativity as the number one ‘leadership
competency’5 in today’s business climate. It is also in spite of the proof that companies
that innovate produce better results than those who don’t.6
Innovating the top line [or Innovation pays the bills]
• After a culture of innovation
• In 1974, 3M scientist Art Fry
• The Campbell’s Soup
was instilled at Proctor &
came up with the Post-It Note
innovation of ready-to-eat
Gamble, the company’s
during his ‘15 per cent time’,
microwaveable soup opened
value increased by more
a program at 3M that allows
up a $500 million market,
than $100 billion and grew
employees to use a portion of
by creating a product that
its consumer brand portfolio
their paid time to hatch their
was relevant to a whole new
from 10-billion dollar entities
own ideas.
generation of consumers.8
to 22.7
http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2013/07/08/innovate-or-perish-its-the-new-business-reality-is-your-company-ready/
http://akgul.bilkent.edu.tr/inovasyon/EIU%20Cisco%20Innovation%206v%20070511.pdf
7
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/difference-between-creativity-and-innovation-2013-4
8
http://www.workforce.com/articles/the-new-recipe-for-workforce-innovation
5
6

03
Engineers shape
the world
Without innovative engineering,
society will ultimately fail to thrive
/10

Engineers shape the world
/11
Businesses across the spectrum need innovation to survive.
The weightier prospect, however, is that society relies on engineering innovation through
continual design, upgrade and maintenance of systems, components and processes that
address society’s needs.
Yet between the corporate world’s seemingly endemic lack of organizational capacity
to support innovation, and inherent flaws in many companies’ innovation processes,
even the most talented engineer’s ability to achieve sustainable product innovation
is challenged.
In many engineering and tech organizations – including, according to a former
employee, legendary bastion of innovation Google9 – once a product is green-lit,
engineers must continue to manage approvals as well as remain responsible for its
maintenance.
Idea
Discovery
Research
Development
Innovation Process
Source: Following HAUSCHILDT (1997), pp.19ff
9
http://www.fastcompany.com/3015877/fast-feed/why-google-axed-its-20-policy
Invention
Market Launch
Exploitation

Engineers shape the world
The stage in the development cycle where a product is deemed to be marketable is
the ideal point for the innovator to turn his/her attention to a new opportunity. For
an engineer to stay involved beyond that point could stall the company’s innovation
pipeline … and with it, its potential for growth and increased market share.
Does your organization’s innovation process allow your engineers to focus on what
they do best and help them pursue new ideas at the right time? Does your company’s
organizational structure support or stall innovation?
/12

04
The path to
success
Innovation is the top priority of CEOs worldwide
– but it must be more than lip service
/13

The path to success
Procter & Gamble has the Clay Street Project.
3M’s 15 percent program spawned the Post-It Note.
These are but two examples of formal innovation programs offered by corporate giants
that rely upon innovation for massive growth.
But for all the brilliant, disruptive innovations that these programs inspire, a business
leader’s genuine and visible commitment to innovation across the organization can seed
the culture of trust, creativity, collaboration and courage required to fill the product
pipeline for the long term.
According to www.InnovationManagement.se, an organization’s code for innovation is
embedded in its ‘3 Ps’: its people, processes and philosophies.10 Leaders of successful
companies encourage risk-taking as a learning exercise and embrace persistence. And
they instil – as an organizational mission – the idea that innovation is everyone’s job, not
just those in research and development.
http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2012/11/07/rd-spending-returns-to-pre-recession-levels-finds-booz-company-global-innovation-1000-study/
10
/14

The path to success
Yet even with the 3 Ps in check, and a balanced attitude to risk, persisting with an
organizational structure that does not support a business’s innovation strategy will not
see your business gaining ground in the fight against the globalized commoditization of
products and services.
Align your workforce model with your strategy for innovation, however, and your
engineers will be free to move your organization into the big league.
/15

05
Learning
to fly
Failures are the building blocks of innovation
/16

Learning to fly
/17
Counterintuitive though it may seem, embracing failure as a
learning experience is critical to successful innovation.
Innovative companies take action in the face of the unknown, evaluate results, adjust
their methods and try again, accepting failure as part of the innovation process. These
businesses encourage innovators to be open about learning curves, and to use failures as
springboards to success.
Failing brilliantly
• In the early 1990s, W. Leigh Thompson, chief scientific officer of pharmaceutical
company Eli Lilly initiated ‘failure parties’ to commemorate excellent scientific work
that nevertheless resulted in failure.
• At Facebook HQ there are signs around the office with snippets of inspiration such as
‘Done is better than perfect’ and ‘What would you do if you weren’t afraid?’11
• When 3M engineers discovered that there was simply no market for the heatrepelling cover to protect car finishes from welding sparks that they’d designed, they
celebrated having found something that was innovative and had its place.12
11
12
http://www.innovationexcellence.com/blog/2012/08/07/fear-of-failure-is-the-big-problem-not-failure-itself/
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1663137/how-3m-gave-everyone-days-off-and-created-an-innovation-dynamo
Up to
90%
of all innovations fail.

Learning to fly
However, failures that result due to a company’s persistent refusal to innovate, or
its reticence to adapt to changing business conditions, as has been the case for
Eastman Kodak, are a different story. Kodak repeatedly missed the opportunity to
prepare for the disruption that digital photography – a technology it actually invented –
would inevitably unleash on its film-and-paper photography model. The one-time global
success story was reduced to bankruptcy and the object of a class action over poor
quality printer product.13
http://www.forbes.com/sites/chunkamui/2012/01/18/how-kodak-failed/3/
13
/18

06
From increments to disruption, and everything
in between
Re-thinking the engineering support model
/19

From increments to disruption, and everything in between
During tough economic conditions it is often the innovators and
future-oriented roles that are dispensed with first.
Engineering has been seen as a skill-set that is ‘safe’ from downsizing, but the global
uncertainty of recent times has proved otherwise. This has had three specific impacts on
the role of engineers:
1. It has forced the remaining engineers inside organizations to wear multiple ‘hats’.
Often, highly skilled and experienced engineers are asked to complete a varied mix
of high- and low-value tasks across a broad spectrum of work.
2. It has delivered many specialist engineers into the contingent market where their
skills can be accessed on a just-in-time basis.
3. It has reduced the time engineers have to focus on innovation, research and testing,
and it has encouraged a more output-driven approach to engineering skill.
Too often, engineers that were previously tasked with experimenting, innovating, and
developing new products have been asked to refocus on repackaging existing designs
and delivering incremental rather than ‘step’ change. The risk with this approach is clearly
competitive. Leapfrogging a competitor focusing on incremental change is far easier
than those investing in those large, resource-intensive step changes.
/20

From increments to disruption, and everything in between
So, now that companies are beginning to re-invest in innovation in the engineering
sector, the impact of previous downsizing needs to be specifically addressed. A key issue
will be ensuring that senior and highly skilled engineers are placed back into the right
leadership roles (and are given a mandate to match) so that they can focus on spurring
innovation across all levels of their organizations.
While it is true that innovation within the product cycle can often be driven by
competitive forces outside an organization, we must not ignore the internal drivers too.
Booz & Company’s 2012 Global Innovation Study suggests that forces inside companies
are just as critical to turning the tide on innovation. In fact, they say that ‘the big leaps in
science and technology … come from curious scientists and technologists working in a
creative atmosphere with a rich exchange of ideas’.14 How organizations create this kind
of environment, and how much support they provide it, will determine the value they
obtain from their investment in engineering skill-sets.
Providing your top engineers with the optimal environment for creativity means freeing
them up to focus on what they do best – innovating. This will necessitate a rethink of
your business’s workforce, including the support services they have around them to
achieve what they are tasked with.
http://www.innovationmanagement.se/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/BoozCo_The-2012-Global-Innovation-1000-Study.pdf
14
/21

/22
Companies need to reward and recognize
innovative thoughts and also accept and
even embrace failures.
Tactical tasks always consume
strategic time and that’s why the
two must be separated.

/23
How can we help?
highly skilled, specialized talent that can provide expert support in the form of:
Partner with
Kelly today for a
managed solution
designed specifically
for your engineering
business.
• CAD support
Visit kellyocg.com
Over many decades we have developed proven workforce management solutions
that deliver predictable results and minimize the unknown. Providing your engineering
workforces with reliable, high-quality support services means that you and your top
engineering talent can get on with what they do best: changing the world.
We are in the unique position of being able to provide organizations with access to
• document control
• product validation and testing
• reliability testing
• sustaining engineering
• software engineering
• engineering lab management and support
• engineering document management
• bill of material construction and maintenance
• engineering change notice control.

For more thought leadership go to talentproject.com
About the author
Jeff DeWitt is the Senior Director of Engineering Solutions for Global Managed Solutions at
KellyOCG. Jeff joined KellyOCG in 2009 and is responsible for the architecture of engineering
outsourced solutions. Jeff holds a bachelor¹s degree in electrical engineering from Pennsylvania
State University and a master¹s degree in systems engineering from the University of Virginia.
He has over 25 years of experience in product engineering, manufacturing automation
engineering, production operations, and quality management.
About KellyOCG
KellyOCG® is the Outsourcing and Consulting Group of workforce solutions provider Kelly Services, Inc. KellyOCG is a
global leader in innovative talent management solutions in the areas of Recruitment Process Outsourcing (RPO), Business
Process Outsourcing (BPO), Contingent Workforce Outsourcing (CWO), including Independent Contractor Solutions,
Human Resources Consulting, Career Transition and Executive Coaching, and Executive Search.
KellyOCG was named in the International Association of Outsourcing Professionals® 2013 Global
Outsourcing 100® list, an annual ranking of the world’s best outsourcing service providers and advisors.
KellyConnect is a pioneer in the set-up and maintenance of virtual workplaces. We have access to local talent via
440 Kelly-owned branches across the US. We combine this with the intellectual property of understanding how to
deliver plug-and-play technology solutions (if you don’t have your own).
Further information about KellyOCG may be found at kellyocg.com.
EXIT