In order to get an IS position and system in place, you would need the support of a suitable GM or high level manager.
Many are just going to refuse out of hand, until the rest of the industry proves the value of the idea.

What sort of GM would be willing to listen?
Hard to say. High level managers are largely “driving force” people, and don’t like to listen to other people much, but they may have an adviser whose opinion they trust.

I think I’ll leave this for the readers to think about.

I will address this through Myers Briggs types, and DISC, as I am most familiar with them.

The value innovation is a long-term, big picture thing, so the IM would need to be a strong N type.
PM’s are largely S types. Practical. Deal with the definite issues at hand.
Also, N types are only 1/4 of the population, with S types being 3/4.

There is a generally unpublished fact about the S/N axis, that is fairly obvious in real life.
N types are often capable of handling the details. as well, but just don’t want to, or can’t do it for long. They recognise the need for detailed work, and are thankful there are S types around to do it for them.
However, strong S types can completely deny the validity of the N type big picture thinking. They genuinely believe that the N types are full of hot air, and that everything can be done just by drawing up lists and addressing the details.
Never put an N type person (solely) under S type management. It destroys them.
But most of the workface innovators whose ideas you want to catch will be N types, and their PM’s will be S types.
To find the innovators, look for the ones that costantly buck the chain of command.

Secondly, the IM’s job is not to come up with innovations himself, but to foster innovations from others. Thus he should be amn F type – Feeling – caring about other people.

Thirdly, the IM would need to be a Percieving type – open to new ideas, rather than a Judgemental type whop won;t accept anything until it is totally proven and documented.

Forth, Extraverted or intrverted. difficult, because the MBTI E/I axis is not fully intuitive (to me at least).

LEts look at the two types we have narrowed down to so far. ENFP and INFP
ENFPs are often referred to Champions. Perfect. They will Champion sonmeone else’s ideas.
INFP are Healers, and really care ablout otherpoeple.
These might not be suitable because they would want to promote every person’s ideas so as to avoid hurting their feelings. Not suitable.

So, its ENFP.
These are 8% of the population, and are more likely to be found in HR or people positions, rather than coming from the coalface.

Summary.
Innovation manager = ENFP – Chamption

Firstly, this needs an entire forum at least, not just a blog.
Secondly, it needs to be split into internal idea promotion within the company, and external idea incubators.

Internally:-
Personally, I find that most senior management understand the value of new ideas to the company, but don’t have the time to deal with all of them directly.
Opposing this is the vast majority of middle-management, who are solely focussed on the successful implementation of the current project, as the next step i their career path.
Its human nature, but its selfish, and not in the employer’s best interests.
This is particularly bad in the public service, and large organisations. smaller ones tend to value innovation more, and often base their business on it.

In the public service in Australia, the buzzword is performance management, Its easy to get what you want. Just put it in people’s performance agreement.

LEt me talk about Quality Management for a moment, because they have exactly the same problem, and have proposed the same solutions as I am going to suggest, and have generally failed. I’m going to propse them anyway, just so we can look at why they failed, and perhaps move on.

Quality Management.
===================
There is a known triangle of time, resources and quality. You can control any two, but the third one will float to its own level, dependent on the nature of the project and the other two.
Typically project managers are rewarded for coming in ontime, on budget, or better. These may even be listed in their performance criteria. But I have yet to see (software industry – 27 years) Quality of product considered in the equation. Each project should be assessed for the right balance of these factors. They should be documented. The project manager should be rewarded according to meet the projects success according to the plan.
But who does this? Usually a project gets handed straight from sales people to PM.

In an attempt to rectify this, QM accreditation always insists that there be a parallel reporting path for Quality issues, straight to the Quality manager, who reports to the GM, bypassing the PM. And yet it never works in practice. I’ve seen PM’s declare themselves to be the QM for the project, obviously so they can throw out quality issues when they get in the way. Disgusting.

Back to Innovation.
==================
The obvious recommendation is that there be a similar path for innovation, that can’t be squashed by the PM. It needs indep[endent staffing and funding.

How do we get this?
====================
Another analogy is Enterprise Architecture. In 1986, Zachman suggested that we needed staffing and funding for Architecture in software. 10 years later, the industry started to move on this, largely due to the progress made by Rational corp – the three amigos. Now we have a flourishing architecture market in software development.
Unfortunately we populate it with people who have ancient technical skills who have since moved into the people field, and most worked as account managers, project managers, consultants, etc. They are usually polical animals, very good at climbing the ladder, and more interested in their own careers than the success of the project or company. Trust me, I’m an architect and have spent years working with them.

The real problem is that higher level managers recognise the need for people in the role, but don’t know how to choose the right people. They end up falling for those with the best interview skills.

This is the same problem you will have with innovation specialists.

1) GM must realise that the innovation stream is valuable and be willing to fund it a little.

2) there should be a title of Innovation Manager. This may need to be a hat shared with other duties in smaller organisations, but it must not fall prey to the Project Managers.

3) the right sort of person must be given this title.

So the problem itself may fall back to writing a guide for GM’s on how and why to select an Innovation Manager.
The Why is a financial spreadsheet.
The How probably delves into personality types.
I’ll address personality types in the next posting. This one is already too long.

BTW, this probably won’t work, because it doesn’t work for QM, nor Enterprise ARchitecture, but its a good starting point, I feel.

Brains drain for several reasons — often because companies do not value them.

a) They may be kicked to the curb because they were assistants, secretaries, junior managers and supervisors whose value to the company was deemed less than a few cents a share. While this is the expected SOP for corporations, it is unfortunate; how many of the ‘x’-thousand folks being laid off to make investors feel better could have provided their companies with fresh, dynamic ideas for process, product or direction?

b) They may have received no interest whatsoever in their ideas from clueless ‘leaders.’

c) They may have watched, jaw agape, as an idea bounced up the chain gets accepted and implemented . . . yet neither reward nor recognition returns to sender.

. . .

EVERY resource, from mail-cart jockey to CEO, is capable of forward-thinking ideation. The ability to recognize and act on this, I think, can make any good company great, and give one helluva boost to the rest of them.