From Faster to Better: Changing Paradigms

From the industrial, manufacturing of the Nineteenth and Twentieth centuries, the notion of economic competiveness has historically been defined by American companies as being : 1) Faster 2) Cheaper and  3) Better.  Towards the end of the Twentieth century, American companies saw the mechanical advantages of being faster and cheaper loss to Asia; leaving “better” (through innovation and creativity) as the primary remaining American advantage in the subsequent twenty first century.

During this period where “faster/ cheaper” could be rationally and objectively measured, corporate Boards of Directors were comprised of primarily rational, objective thinkers with financial, legal and management skills. That tradition continues to hold true today despite a shift in corporate economic strategy and required leadership skills and experience.

To be “better” the competitive focus has shifted to emphasize innovation and creativity that has remained yet unmatched by our international competitors. Innovation and creativity provide the benefits of better designed products and services as a differentiator. Importantly, as the technology industry has proven, improved quality (capabilities, options and power) need not be synonymous to higher cost. Compare the quality and cost of your first to your most recent T.V., computer, phone, camera, car, appliance; quality is up and cost is down.

Design is the key differentiator to innovation. Design is the currency of the twenty first century.

Companies that epitomize this shift to design as a primary differentiator include Apple, Tesla, Sony, Target, Ford, Proctor and Gamble plus numerous smaller companies. For these companies who provide a diversity of services and products, design is not their core product or service but it is a strategic differentiator to their brand.

When speaking of design, the less informed management leaders and Boards of Directors instinctively, and incorrectly, think of the term “design” as limited to aesthetics rather than a unique thinking process and basis for differentiation and economic value added.

DESIGN CULTURE: What is it? Where does it come from? Where is the evidence of this design movement? Why is this important?

What is it?

A design culture is at a minimum: 1) a distinct skill set of thinking, 2) a methodology of “problem seeking”, 3) a perspective that is holistic and integrated, 4) a process that is networked rather than sequential

What it is not: Logical, rational, sequential, problem solving, methodical, statistically measurable, and time bound.

Where does it come from?

1981 Nobel Laureate in Physiology and Medicine, Roger Sperry was acknowledged for his discoveries of functional specializations of the cerebral hemispheres. His identification of neuronal specificities and brain circuitry have brought greater understanding and neuro scientific research of where brain functions occur and how the billions of synaptic interactions occur and communicate via the connector of the two hemispheres called the corpus callosum.

While much more complex than the popular, simplistic and controversial definition of “right and left brain” thinking, it is generally accepted that the right hemisphere is characterized by intuition, subjectivity, relational, holistic, time free modes of thinking. In contrast, the left hemisphere is characterized as verbal, rational, logical, and responsive to time specific behavior.

Where is the evidence of this design movement?

The importance of “design as the source of innovation” has been the cover story of Forbes and Time Magazines; not just popular design magazines. In 2014, Venture Capital firm Kleiner, Perkins, Caulfield and Byer hired their first Design Partner. Further, Stanford’s ‘d school ‘ was recently established to teach design thinking and equity markets continue to reflect the importance of design innovation as an economic value added, differentiator of leading brands.

Why is this important?

Design is a culture that results in innovative behavior. It stems from a combination of a “right brain “ gift, it must be stimulated, it can be learned, must be fostered, specifically encouraged and channeled to balance within a “left brain” economy.

If design is indeed the source of innovation and creativity that are driving 21^st century companies and economies, then corporate Boards need to reflect the appropriate skills, knowledge and understanding of a design economy. New skills to deliver a value model based on strategic drivers that determine motivation, culture, recruiting, compensation, governance, and new financial models are needed.

There is need for greater balance and diversity within Boards who bring “right and left brain” thinkers, culture, skills and experience.