Mentorship - Spreading a Culture of Innovation - Research Proposal Example

Abstract

Companies are looking for methods of becoming more innovative as a way of responding to enhanced global competitiveness. Whilst innovation is evidently vital, numerous strategies have been tried with this objective without any particular method proving successful. This research demonstrates that organisations that are said to incorporate innovation as one of their main skills and competences apply mentoring methodologies to cultivate and facilitate innovation in the world. This research will include newspaper articles, popular magazines, archival data and transcripts within the content analysis. It is expected that the findings will support the notion that mentoring is a vital element for sustaining and developing a culture of innovation within the large multinational corporations.

1.0 Introduction

In today’s world, creativity is no longer sufficient. For many years the emphasis on creativity has resulted in many speakers and countless publications promoting the notion of “thinking outside the box” or engaging IDEO (Design and Innovation Consulting Organisations) for getting the extra edge. The concept of creativity encompasses a brilliant, freeing process where designs and concepts are not constricted by paradigms or experiences, and new networks – all the synapses desire to initiate something fresh. “Improved and new” many times appeals to the clients, but id the proposed value of organisational change does not result into either an added client base or improved output, it might not have been wise and worth the organisation’s sales and marketing, design, and R&D (Research and Development) expenditures.

The level of competition in the recent times has increased tremendously to the extent that most organisations have been forced out of business. This is majorly attributed due to the lack of change in company’s product, services and processes to fit the consumers taste and preferences (Neumeier, 2009). Based on this it is important to note that the culture of innovation has become one of the most important agendas in companies today. Therefore, most companies have uniquely positioned their own workers to understand the intersection of customer demand, product development pipelines and business operations. However, most companies fail despite trying to build a culture of innovation due to the use of cheap and fast processes in the attempt of trying to get breakthrough solutions to market. Companies such as Apple and Samsung provide a clear representation of companies that have embraced the culture of innovation.

Given the recent trends, it seems innovation is the answer. Hargreaves and Fullan (2000) define innovation as the intersection of capitalism and innovation, which creates value by incorporating new combinations, new markets and new ideas. Innumerable articles and books have been developed with regard to organisational and individual level through more connectivity, more communication and more resources. Research studies have taken note of many builds present in innovative environments, for instance, job satisfaction, organisational learning, confidence, trust and commitment.

Whilst innovations are evidently significant, another research line has deliberated the mentoring role, even though not within the context of innovation. In the past two decades, mentoring has been a hot subject for numerous reasons. Business executives go up the business hierarchy with enhanced dexterity when individuals above give guidance; organisations understand that mentoring programs enhance employee satisfaction and retention, and business executives relish giving back and looking on with great zeal as their charges flourish (Ramaswami & Dreher 2007). Academic circles have given practitioners thousands of articles and books highlighting why mentoring is rewarding, how to inspire informal pairings and why to promote and enhance formal programs.

Little attention is nonetheless given to why, how and whether mentoring plays a significant role in the development of imaginative thinkers, as a majority of career mentoring is mostly focused on growing through the corporate hierarchy structures, as well as dealing with organisational politics. In spite of the applied attention and scholarly hours dedicated to the significance of both mentoring and innovation for organisations, these subjects have nearly been looked into exclusively and categorised as non-overlapping matters (Bell & Goldsmith 2013). Nevertheless, there are reasons that lead one to believe that innovation and mentoring overlap in some instances and they overlap in very vital ways. This research will investigate the role played by mentoring in matters innovation.

Based on this research, I propose that mentoring plays a significant role in the innovation process. In addition, I demonstrate that organisations that are seen to infuse innovation as one of their main competencies apply mentoring methodologies for cultivating and facilitating innovation. By analysing the various literatures of the main builds frequently analysed in the separate subjects of innovation and mentoring, I will show the many times overlooked theoretical concepts which influenced me to making the relationships that have been investigated in this research.

• 1.1 Statement of problem

Innovation is vital to the future performance of any organisation, however many fail to flourish due to the failure of managers to set up an effective culture of innovation among its workers.

• 1.2 Research Aim

The research will be carried out with the aim of trying to identify the importance and significance of creating and mentoring the culture of innovation to an organisation’s performance.

• 1.3 Research Objectives
• To determine the different ways that organisations can use to foster a culture of innovation
• To identify the challenges organisation may face when trying to mentor a culture of innovation to its employees
• To determine the consequences of having an effective culture of innovation

1.4 Research Questions

Relying on these initial relationships, I suggest that a strong correlation exists between the promotion and presence of innovative output and mentoring. This research will be aimed at answering the following main research question: What is the role played by mentoring in the organisational process of innovation? Based on the main research question, the research analysis will assess and explore how mentoring is applied in creating the environment for innovation besides supporting its existence. Therefore, a number of sub-questions will be tacked in an attempt to comprehend the main research question. They include:

• Why and how is mentoring significant for innovation?
• How is mentoring training or formal mentoring applied at the companies renowned for innovation?
• How do individuals promoting innovation perceive the functions of mentoring?
• How do protégés and mentors find one another to deliberate on innovative undertakings?
• How do organisational influencing factors such as type of industry, product offerings and size of organisation affect why, when and how mentoring correlations are created or nurtured?

1.5 Significance of the Study

By reviewing literature of scholarly articles and research conducted over time with regard to innovation and mentorship, the main question of the relationship and the role played by mentorship in the innovation process will be scrutinised from numerous perspectives. By reviewing the in-depth research studies, both aspects will be correlated and the significance of mentoring individuals in the process of innovation will be validated.

2.0 Literature Review

As evinced by the debate of the significance of mentoring to effectively retain, develop and train valuable employees as well as the role that elements similar to the ones produced through mentorship play in giving environments where innovation is enhanced, the mentorship role in the process of organisational innovation is usually an overlooked subject of study, which if explored may lead to excellent rewards. This means that an organisational culture that fosters mentoring enhances organisational learning, and subsequently creates a conducive environment or innovation to flourish, which provides the organisation with a competitive edge in the market.

2.1 Mentorship

The traditional perception of mentorship within management works are inclined towards professional and career development activities whereas the educational information regarding mentoring is focused on personal growth and developmental issues. The concept and origins of a “mentor” originate from Greek mythology and is cantered much on personal development, right from the time a person is born. Johnson and Ridley (2015) define mentoring as a supportive protective process, a nurturing process, an insightful process and an intentional process.

The idea of having a mature individual as a guide as one goes through the development process is a common aspect, particularly when one is going through basic schooling during adolescence. In a majority of cultures, more experienced and wiser individuals have been playing a respected and significant role in providing direction and guidance regarding the professional and personal decisions of the younger individuals and less experienced. Highlighted as one of the most complex and fundamental relationships, mentoring involves an experienced, older individual choosing a younger person as his understudy (DeCastro et al. 2013). The objective of the mentor is to concentrate on preparing the understudy (protégé) for later life: assisting in providing positive criticism, support, providing advice and helping in the development and enhancement of intellectual capabilities.

Within the organisational context, a mentor operates as a guide and host in socializing within the organisation with the objective of moulding his protégé into the organisation folds. Therefore, the supposition is that the mentor operates within the same organisation as the understudy. The mentor imparts knowledge on the understudy on how to successfully operate within the company, while introducing him to the main organisational players, while at the same time sharing his success stories within the same environment. Hagger, Mcintyre and Wilkin (2013) view mentors as sponsors, counsellors and guides in a two-party, face-to-face single relationship that is aimed at individual development.

2.1.1 Effective Mentoring Relationships: Commitment and Respect

Companies promote and support mentoring while hoping that understudy’s will feel sufficiently guided and supported with the organisation. An added reward may be that the individual tasked with guiding the mentees also feel valued and respected by their organisations, and perceive themselves as entrusted keepers of some vital organisational information that should be passed on to the next generation. According to Kerry and Mayes (2014), these interactions enhance organisational commitment for both the mentors and the mentees. Mentorship programs attempt to foster a relationship that mainly evolves though the natural process of mutual attraction and natural selection.

2.1.2 Functions of Mentoring

Mentors within the organisational setting play many roles; however, scholars have categorised them into two broad sections: psychological support and career development. Psychological support involves activities such as providing guidance, and emotional support; career development on the other hand involves giving assistance regarding the career direction taken by protégés. Hu et al. (2014) identifies three major roles that organisations play in enhancing the careers for their employees. These include mentoring, sponsoring and coaching.

Much emphasis is laid on career development, whereby the subordinate is prepared for future promotions within the organisation; and the mentors taking centre stage in moulding them to become future leaders (Sankowska 2013). Consistent with the above role, mentors also function as career role models. The role model function many times provides the unique dynamic of moulding actions that may be absent in sponsor or coach relationships. Some research analysts do create the division in instances where the role model might not double up as a mentor or sponsor.

2.2 Innovation

There are two separate innovation constructs that have developed; the first as a knowledge or learning model and the other being a market-driven undertaking. Deduced from economic theory, economic researchers such as Schumpeter (1926) cited in Louca (2014) advanced the idea behind innovation as those activities that the individual in charge managing the team tasked with innovation regards as new. They include changes in products, processes, methods, and organisational policies.

In the recent past, the descriptions and definitions appended to innovation have started focusing increasingly on the notion of value addition. In the year 2004, the United States National Innovation Initiative (USNII) argued that innovation entailed the intersection of insight and invention, resulting in the development of socio-economic value. The definition was later amended and the last part was removed. Along the same breath, the U.K Ministry of Trade & Industry described innovation as, “The successful exploitation of new ideas.”

2.2.1 Measuring Innovation

Innovation has to be assessed in very unique methods to incorporate the aspects of (R&D) costs for the potential invention, financial aspects, as well as time. The technology might adopt different forms within the market after years of testing; the final product may not interest the organisation enough, however, if it is a new invention, the organisation may create patents and license it to other interested parties for use and mass production, which would still generate some income for the organisation. The most commonly used measure of organisational inventiveness is through product development measures, which include sales percentages, R&D budgets as a proportion of the company’s income, ideas floated by the involved stakeholders and the number of successful patents grated or filed (Tareef 2013).

2.2.2 Role of the Management Team in the Process of Innovation

Innovation has been proven to develop in companies where the top executives support and encourage risk-taking and new ideas from the staff members in all levels of the organisation (Li et al. 2013). Product success as measured through relative profits, payback period, profit objectives and payback period were seen to have a strong correlation to top organisational executives support for the new product. In addition, companies whose employees believe the management is supportive of innovative ideas are seen to enhance the investment size, expected contribution, and have a rather stronger negative correlation with project termination rates.

Organisational leaders operating in environments that encourage innovation play many roles: interface, planner, climate-setter and communicator. Product development groups or R&D teams’ success is sorely reliant on leaders that are tasked with multiple responsibilities for ensuring team success, including taking part in brainstorming sessions, leadership, coaching, gatekeeping and supporting the project all through the organisation. Somech and Drach-Zahavy (2013) added that organisational leaders need to be technologically able and have strategic planning understanding; two elements that are directly related to team performance.

2.3 Mentoring and Innovation

A conference paper for the ACS (American Chemical Society) was the first publication to discuss mentoring and the part it plays in innovation within organisations. Panopoulos and Sarri (2013) discussed the significance of the first mentor-employee relationship for a newly employed employee working within the research laboratory as the most essential of her or his career. There are many ways in which mentors can promote innovation within the organisation.

• They can assist the understudy in working on independent tasks
• They can facilitate and explain access to company resources
• They can also act as role models through furthering ideas to seeing them applied and implemented
• They can develop collaboration and networking prospects between the understudy and the accomplished business innovators
• Assisting the new employees gain confidence through assigning tasks that are thought-provoking but within the understudy capacity.

2.4 Conclusion

Many research analysts have been investigating the concepts of innovation for many years; approaching the subject from multiple perspectives. They include the context within which the innovators operate, their motivations as well as their behaviours. As companies continuously seek methodologies of increasing innovation to maintain or expand the numerous competitive advantages within the market, a majority of organisations are attempting different approaches to implement systems for supporting knowledge management in addition to increasing innovative output. Research indicates that different categories of resources (executive support, financial and time) are business necessities, yet little ground has been gained within the related literature to comprehend the significance of mentorship in the innovation process.

To a large extent, the business-related literature fails to explore this subject, resulting into the use of an empirical case study methodology within this research study. While reviewing secondary data from the various empirical research studies conducted in the past, invaluable acumens will be shared from efficiency and resource-based point of view. The highlighted cases will provide a new perspective on the rather unexplored subject and might bring in new lines of future research studies.

3.0 Research Methodology

3.1 Selection of Participants

The objective of this research study is to evaluate the role of mentoring within the innovation processes. Because this is the main objective of this study, the researcher will focus on the most innovative organisations for best practices. There are business magazines, which publish yearly listings of the organisations that are considered to be most innovative, depending on an extensive range of methods. The preliminary selection for this research analysis will be carried out based on the COI (Champions of Innovation) listings that are published by the Business Weekly magazine. Another magazine that will be considered is the “Most Innovative Corporations” listings printed on the Business Weekly magazine, The Wired 40 magazine and Fortune Magazine lists of most innovative corporations.

3.2 Methodology Rationale

This research will use the qualitative research approach. It will be founded on the extensive research literature documenting that mentoring creates opportunities, changes lives and profits nearly all the involved stakeholders. Many research studies highlight the significance of innovation, terming it as a vital “competitive advantage” that only a handful of companies have been able to attain persistently. Secondary data will be used to research on individual organisations. For better understanding as well as describing the relationship between mentorship and innovation, I will observe, document and investigate the context within which innovation takes place. The use of qualitative research will provide a descriptive data set that is rich as pertains to individuals participating in the research.

3.3 Data Quality

The study will use four criteria for ensuring the collected data is reliable and valid (in naturalistic and trustworthiness terms). They include conformability, transferability, dependability and credibility. The researcher will additionally conduct a self-audit many times in the duration of the research for purposes of addressing confirmability and dependability. Taking notes on specific processes at specific times will be important for this process. The researcher will review various case studies to get the specific factors at play in establishing the relationship between innovation and mentorship.

3.4 Limitations and Challenges

• A big part of the research will use secondary data. One of the main challenges of using secondary data is that there is no established way of knowing or cross checking the collected data. Data collected erroneously may be used in the present research, which may directly transfer the errors in this new research
• There are no established theories describing the relationship between mentorship and innovation. The existing constructs are not sufficient to fully interpret and relate the research findings and tie them to historical experiences. The researcher will use the available constructs, however, to establish the relationship.

4.0 Conclusion

Whilst innovation is evidently vital, numerous strategies have been tried with this objective without any particular method proving successful. In today’s world, creativity is no longer sufficient. For many years the emphasis on creativity has resulted in many speakers and countless publications promoting the notion of “thinking outside the box” or engaging IDEO (Design and Innovation Consulting Organisations) for getting the extra edge. The level of competition in the recent times has increased tremendously to the extent that most organisations have been forced out of business.

As companies continuously seek methodologies of increasing innovation to maintain or expand the numerous competitive advantages within the market, a majority of organisations are attempting different approaches to implement systems for supporting knowledge management in addition to increasing innovative output. Research indicates that different categories of resources (executive support, financial and time) are business necessities, yet little ground has been gained within the related literature to comprehend the significance of mentorship in the innovation process.