How does this work...really?

There's always at least two versions of how a relationship or process works. There is the official version; what we learn in school, hear in a political speech, put on brochures or report to investors. And then there is the real version - the version usually prefaced by, "this is how things really work."

In order to change or improve something, understanding "how things really work" should be essential. And yet, innovation efforts quite often start without anyone challenging the official version of the truth. An obvious example right now would be the US auto industry, where innovators wasted much of their time, resources and labor improving something that may not have been that important to customers...at least not important enough to pay for it when it became expensive.

In the 1990's and early 2000's, US car buyers could purchase cars with more and more power. The conventional thinking was that since consumers enjoyed powerful cars and since they continued to buy them, they must really want more powerful cars. The logical extension of this "official version" of the market was that larger, more powerful cars would always command a greater market share and price premiums. Innovation resources at GM, Chrysler and Ford focused on delivering more power every year - and they delivered admirably. Sales continued to do very well throughout that period as the roads clogged up with SUV's, muscle cars, and ever larger pick up trucks.

But...no matter how big their trucks became, the American car companies continued to lose market share to companies like Toyota and Honda...even when American cars cost less money...

Meanwhile, non-US manufactures continued to improve the efficiency of their cars. A few attempts at producing large non-US cars (usually manufactured in the US) were relatively successful, but they never stopped making efficient small cars. And every year, their market share increased. Every year, even though the conventional thinking was that US car buyers preferred to buy large and powerful engines - companies with smaller engines sold more.

Was "the way things really work" different than we thought?

After a protracted war and conflict in oil producing countries, increased awareness of environmental threats and an unprecedented volatility in gas prices, American cars and trucks stopped selling. And Toyota kept growing.

But how could that be? Americans love their muscle cars and trucks, don't they? At least, that's the official version of the truth.

The un-official version? Perhaps most Americans - like everyone else in the world - don't put that much priority on horse power. Something else probably drives their purchasing behavior - and it just looks like they are addicted to muscle. Otherwise, if horse power were truly a dominant reason to buy a car, buyers would make whatever sacrifices necessary to keep buying it - even as oil prices fluctuate and global warming becomes an accepted context.

This was an easy trap, and almost everyone has at some time or another fallen into it. The official version of the truth - although useful for continuing the existing order of things - is very deceptive when it comes to innovation or preparing for future change.

Good innovators rarely believe the official truth. To innovate almost requires one to be skeptical - even subversive - when considering the established order of things. That's why, when considering innovation, it can help to use a single word, "Really".

The next time you are asked to improve something, make sure you are ready to ask, "really?" early and often.

A proposed "Really" method for innovation preparation

Step One - determine how it works now...really...when a customer buys, uses, displays and disposes of your product/service/process, ask "why?" Start with the official version of reality, then ask the question, "Is that REALLY what happens?". Probe, ask questions, determine what the actual motivations, actions and functions are - not the perceived value - the real value.

Step Two - determine what isn't working...really... where is the pain, what stinks about a product, service or process? Where do people feel most frustrated? How do they work around what stinks? How are they overcoming your lousy output? What are the band-aides? What is the alternative?

Step Three - What do we want...really... start with an official version of what people want - then ask "really?" Is that what we really want? Is there something else that would be even better? What do we really hope to accomplish? What does that look like?

When you understand what really happens, what really isn't working, and what people really want, you may have a foundation for meaningful innovation.

Really.