• 
• 

Published on March 7, 2008

Yet, while common sense rebels at pursuing contradictory demands simultaneously, many of these paradoxes can be resolved with a bit of uncommon sense. 

There are four key steps that leaders must take to develop the creative thinking necessary to resolve apparent contradictions.

Creative framing

A critical leadership challenge is motivating the organisation to pursue two apparently contradictory goals simultaneously. In managing a paradox, the skill lies in creative framing, where one of the competing goals is embedded in the context while the other is offered as a singular challenge.

Consider, for example, the challenge at Best Buy - the leading North American electronics retailer. Its chief executive wanted the firm to delight customers while adding value for shareholders. Asking employees to be creative in serving customers can be very energising and inspiring, but asking them to add value for shareholders is far less so.

Instead of talking about the latter, the managers focused on customer-centricity, but it carefully designed stores to attract the most profitable customers. Delighting profitable customers also enhanced shareholder value.

The organisational context

How can a company which is organised along functional lines embrace crossfunctional business processes?

Well-run functions are absolutely essential to a business, but processes improve efficiency and service quality by documenting and spreading best practices around the

company.

The paradox of function versus process can be resolved by appointing respected high-level leaders and giving them responsibility over the most critical function within the process and enthusiastic support from senior executives.

Throughout the change programme, the process must be regularly audited as this will provide a forum for dialogue to improve not only the design of the process, but also its execution.

Contrary to the myth that discipline and structure are incompatible with creativity and innovation, a disciplined innovation process improves the chances of success by weeding out poor ideas early on and concentrating on innovation with the highest potential. While top management should encourage new ideas, it should curb escalating commitment to failed ideas. A carefully designed innovation process can resolve this paradox by bringing together elements of creativity and discipline.

This article is the first of a two-part series.

Nick Shreiber and Bala Chakravarthy

IMD Business School