Dismiss for failure to implement the innovation plan
The main news from the next meeting of the modernization commission was that the CEO of the state-owned company was fired for innovations
Yuri Ammosov, Ernst&Young Innovation Advisor
Finance Magazine No. 4-2011
More precisely, they were fired for the fact that the guilty CEO did not implement innovations diligently enough. Of course, it was not without speculation that the dismissed paid for completely different offenses, and innovations became just a pretext, but a precedent was created – hitherto "for innovation" was not fired, now it has happened.
At the same meeting, state-owned companies were slammed by the president for the fact that almost all do not have senior managers responsible for innovation. Taken together, these two facts give a clear message to any manager – if you don't get a deputy for innovation, next time you will pay yourself.
In the methodological recommendations of the Ministry of Economic Development published on the same day on the introduction of innovations in state-owned companies, the recommendation to have innovative deputies is already contained in direct text. So long conversations about the fact that innovative activity requires a responsible and dedicated leader have turned into politics. Perhaps this is a potentially key move.
In management theory, there is the concept of a champion – a person whose personal success or well-being is based on solving the task that he defends. Personal interest forces the champion to change the situation. By themselves, "innovation deputies" are not yet persons interested in innovation, if exactly one condition is met. Namely, they should be responsible only for innovation. And for nothing more.
Why do I think this is important? If this position is assigned to combine the current deputy general, who already has a field of responsibility and his own budgets at his disposal, he will be engaged in innovations at best for show. Another thing is a deputy who has no other job.
Innovation is a potentially vast field. The methodological recommendations of the Ministry of Economic Development mean three major areas: procurement of innovative goods and services (including R&D); production of innovative goods and services and new methods of work in the market; innovations in company management. An ambitious and competent manager has a lot to grow here. But since he will seriously break the usual life of other deputies and corporations in general in the process of work, this is also a conflict field.
It is clear that the current deputies will not go to this position – either a determined director of the department, who is ready for anything for a promotion, or an outsider innovator who will understand too late what he got into, will agree to it. Of course, the Innozams will have many opportunities to break their necks, but if the country's leadership gives them the same resolute support, they will be able to implement the innovations entrusted to them at least to a limited extent. Which, in fact, is what the president wants.
Thus, the expression "forcing innovation" in relation to corporations is not entirely correct, more precisely, it will be "put in a situation where they will have no other way out." As Grandfather Krylov taught, "where it is impossible to take by force, there is a need for a grip."
Portal "Eternal youth" http://vechnayamolodost.ru16.02.2011