Solved: 4/10/22, 2:28 PM Module Four Benchmark Study Guidelines and Rubric – MBA-580-X4576 Innov/Strat Hi

4/10/22, 2:28 PM Module Four Benchmark Study Guidelines and Rubric – MBA-580-X4576 Innov/Strat High-Perform Orgs 22TW4

https://learn.snhu.edu/d2l/le/content/1022928/viewContent/17973066/View 1/3

Module Four Benchmark Study Guidelines and
Rubric

Overview

In Milestone One, you recommended an innova�on op�on (incremental or discon�nuous) to the organiza�on from the course

scenario. Now that senior management of this organiza�on has approved your recommenda�on, your task is to ensure your

recommended innova�on op�on gets implemented effec�vely and efficiently. Remember that your perspec�ve is s�ll that of a

middle manager for one of the top U.S. producers of luxury and mass-market automobiles and trucks.

In this assignment, you will read a case study and write a report that compares the organiza�on’s innova�on processes with 3M’s

processes. This report will help your cross-func�onal team iden�fy the organiza�on’s process gaps when implemen�ng IoT in the

product line and will help to eliminate poten�al process inefficiencies.

Prompt

Using the informa�on in the overview above and referring to the 3M: Rethinking Innova�on case study in this module’s resources,

compare the organiza�on from the course scenario with 3M and iden�fy process gaps within the organiza�on. Your study should

include the following points:

1. Analyze 3M’s experience for a process-based approach toward innova�on.

a. How does 3M manage innova�on?

b. What is the innova�on strategy and leadership style within 3M?

c. How does 3M enable the innova�on process?

2. Iden�fy significant features or processes that promote innova�on from the case study.

a. How does the management team within 3M recognize and reward employees?

b. What is the importance of permission to play within 3M?

c. How do the 3M a�ributes of pa�ence and acceptance of mistakes enhance an innova�ve culture?

3. Compare the organiza�on from the course scenario with 3M. You will need to reference the Organiza�on Overview

document when comparing the two companies.

a. What are the differences between the two organiza�onal structures?

b. What is the difference in formal and informal innova�on management?

c. How does the organiza�onal structure in each company affect communica�on? Why is this important to innova�on?

4. Iden�fy the process gaps of the organiza�on. You will need to reference the Organiza�on Overview document when

iden�fying process gaps.

a. What needs to be done to make the organiza�onal structure support innova�on?

b. What rewards could your organiza�on u�lize to mo�vate innova�ve behavior?

c. How should your organiza�on examine its �meline to iden�fy ways for longer-term projects to be more successful?

Guidelines for Submission

Submit a 2- to 3-page Word document using 12-point Times New Roman font, double spacing, and one-inch margins. If references

are included, they should be cited according to APA style. Consult the Shapiro Library APA Style Guide for more informa�on on

cita�ons.



MBA-580-X4576 Innov/Strat High-Perform Orgs 22… TM

4/10/22, 2:28 PM Module Four Benchmark Study Guidelines and Rubric – MBA-580-X4576 Innov/Strat High-Perform Orgs 22TW4

https://learn.snhu.edu/d2l/le/content/1022928/viewContent/17973066/View 2/3

Criteria Exemplary (100%) Proficient (90%)
Needs Improvement

(70%)
Not Evident (0%) Value

3M’s Approach
Analysis

Exceeds proficiency
in an excep�onally
clear, insigh�ul,
sophis�cated, or
crea�ve manner

Analyzes 3M’s
experience for a
process-based
approach toward
innova�on

Shows progress
toward proficiency,
but with errors or
omissions; areas for
improvement may
include iden�fying
3M’s specific
experiences from the
case study for a
process-based
approach toward
innova�on

Does not a�empt
criterion

25

Features or
Processes

Iden�fica�on

Exceeds proficiency
in an excep�onally
clear, insigh�ul,
sophis�cated, or
crea�ve manner

Iden�fies significant
features or processes
that promote
innova�on from the
case study

Shows progress
toward proficiency,
but with errors or
omissions; areas for
improvement may
include iden�fica�on
of more than one
specific feature that
promotes innova�on
from the case study

Does not a�empt
criterion

25

3M and
Automobile

Company
Comparison

Exceeds proficiency
in an excep�onally
clear, insigh�ul,
sophis�cated, or
crea�ve manner

Clearly iden�fies and
compares the
automobile company
with 3M

Shows progress
toward proficiency,
but with errors or
omissions; areas for
improvement may
include referencing
the organiza�on
overview document
to show differences
between the
automobile company
and 3M

Does not a�empt
criterion

25

Organiza�onal
Process Gap
Iden�fica�on

Exceeds proficiency
in an excep�onally
clear, insigh�ul,
sophis�cated, or
crea�ve manner

Iden�fies process
gaps at the
automobile company
when compared with
the case study

Shows progress
toward proficiency,
but with errors or
omissions; areas for
improvement may
include iden�fying
more than one
process gap at the
automobile company
when compared with
the case study

Does not a�empt
criterion

15

Ar�cula�on of
Response

Exceeds proficiency
in an excep�onally
clear, insigh�ul,
sophis�cated, or
crea�ve manner

Clearly conveys
meaning with correct
grammar, sentence
structure, and
spelling,
demonstra�ng an
understanding of
audience and
purpose

Shows progress
toward proficiency,
but with errors in
grammar, sentence
structure, and
spelling, nega�vely
impac�ng readability

Submission has
cri�cal errors in
grammar, sentence
structure, and
spelling, preven�ng
understanding of
ideas

10

Total 100%

Module Four Benchmark Study Assignment Rubric

4/10/22, 2:28 PM Module Four Benchmark Study Guidelines and Rubric – MBA-580-X4576 Innov/Strat High-Perform Orgs 22TW4

https://learn.snhu.edu/d2l/le/content/1022928/viewContent/17973066/View 3/3

Reflect in ePortfolio Download Print

Open with docReader

You have viewed this topic

Last Visited Apr 10, 2022 8:26 PM

Activity Details

1

2013

Joe Tidd, John Bessant, Keith Pavitt

3M: Rethinking
Innovation

2

3M1: Rethinking Innovation

Background

Large (70K employees, $15bn sales), global operations (200 countries), multi-product (50K range),
multi-market business.

Innovation ‘Claim to Fame’

This company has been around for just over 100 years and during that period has established a clear
reputation as a major innovator. Their technical competence has been built up by a long-term
commitment to R&D on which they currently spend around $1bn p.a.; this has yielded them a regular
position in the top 10 in US patents granted. They have launched a number of breakthrough products
which have established completely new markets and they have set themselves a consistent stretch target
of getting 30% of sales turnover from products launched during the past four years.

How Do They Manage Innovation?

The company presents a consistent picture in interviews and in publications – innovation success is a
consequence of creating the culture in which it can take place – it becomes ‘the way we do things around
here’ in a very real sense. This philosophy is borne out in many anecdotes and case histories – the key
to their success has been to create the conditions in which innovation can arise from any one of a number
of directions, including lucky accidents, and there is a deliberate attempt to avoid putting too much
structure in place since this would constrain innovation.

Innovation Strategy and Leadership

The company has always valued innovation and this has been a consistent and key theme since their
inception; their ‘hero’ figures amongst previous CEOs have been strongly associated with enacting and
supporting the innovation culture which characterizes the firm. Their overall innovation strategy is
focused on two core themes – deep technological competence and strong product development
capabilities. They combine these to enable them to offer a steady stream of breakthrough products and
line extensions/product improvements. A great strength is the integrated input from the technical and
marketing side which enables ‘creative association’, coming up with new and often powerful
combinations of needs and means.

A number of key strategic enablers are worth flagging:

• Setting stretch targets – such as ‘x% of sales from products introduced during the past y years’
– provides a clear and consistent message and a focus for the whole organization

1 For more on this company and the ways in which it manages innovation see Gundling, E. (2000).

The 3M way to innovation: Balancing people and profit. New York, Kodansha International

3

• Allocating resources as ‘slack’ – space and time in which staff can explore and play with ideas,
build on chance events or combinations, etc.

__________

• Encouragement of ‘bootlegging’ employees working on innovation projects in their own time
and often accessing resources in a non-formal way – the ‘benevolent blind eye’ effect.

• Provision of staged resource support for innovators who want to take an idea forward
– effectively different levels of internal venture capital for which people can bid (against
increasingly high hurdles) – this encourages ‘intrapreneurship’ (internal entrepreneurial
behaviour) rather than people feeling they have to leave the firm to take their good ideas
forward.

In recent years they have seen their momentum falter, in part because of the sheer scale of the operation
and the range of competition. Their response has been to identify a series of ‘Pacing Plus’ programmes,
which attempt to focus and prioritize around 30 key areas for development across the business –
essentially an innovation strategy.

Enabling the Process

Having been working on innovation for so long, they have developed a set of structures and policies to
guide innovative activity from picking up signals through to implementation. Importantly they allow for
parallel routes through their system so that innovations can come from close market interactions or
from deep technology research in their labs or from various forms of collaboration, or from
serendipitous discovery by their staff. As they put it, ‘we don’t have a skunk-works – round here
everyone is a skunk!’ Their skill in enabling association is particularly relevant; many of their
breakthrough products have come about because staff with technical knowledge have worked alongside
those with awareness of real or latent market needs and the result has been a creative combination.

There is a formal stage-gate system for innovations and extensions based on established products but
in addition there is a clear progress route for more radical ideas, moving from an incubator stage, where
they are encouraged and where development funds are available against loose targets, through to much
more rigorous business plan appraisal for projects further down the line. The ‘trial by fire’ approach is
well-known but carries with it a strong element of encouraging innovation champions to take non-linear
ideas through the system. Effectively they run parallel systems which all involve funnels and clear
gateways through which ideas pass into narrower parts of the funnel and which also commit more
extensive resources – but although the mechanisms differ, the intent is the same.

Building an Innovative Organization

• Recognition and reward.
Throughout the company there are various schemes which acknowledge innovative activity –
for example, their Innovator’s Award which recognizes effort rather than achievement

• Reinforcement of core values.
Innovation is respected – for example, there is a ‘hall of fame’ whose members are elected on
the basis of their innovative achievements.

• Sustaining ‘circulation’.
Movement and combination of people from different perspectives to allow for creative
combinations – a key issue in such a large and dispersed organization.

• Allocating ‘slack’ and permission to play.

4

Allowing employees to spend a proportion of their time in curiosity-driven activities which may
lead nowhere but which have sometimes given them breakthrough products.

• Patience.
Acceptance of the need for ‘stumbling in motion’ as innovative ideas evolve and take shape.
Breakthroughs like Post-it’s and ‘Scotchgard’ were not overnight successes but took 2-3 years to
‘cook’ before they emerged as viable prospects to put into the formal system.

• Acceptance of mistakes and encouragement of risk-taking.
A famous quote from a former CEO is often cited in this connection: ‘Mistakes will be made, but
if a person is essentially right, the mistakes he or she makes are not as serious, in the long run,
as the mistakes management will make if it’s dictatorial and undertakes to tell those under its
authority exactly how they must do their job … Management that is destructively critical when
mistakes are made kills initiative, and it is essential that we have many people with initiative if
we are to continue to grow.’

• Encouraging ‘bootlegging’.
Giving employees a sense of empowerment and turning a blind eye to creative ways that staff
come up with to get around the system acts as a counter to rigid bureaucratic procedures.

• Policy of hiring innovators.
Recruitment approach is looking for people with innovator tendencies and characteristics.

Linkages and Networking

• Recognition of the power of association – deliberate attempts not to separate out different
functions but to bring them together in teams and other groupings

• Encouraging broad perspectives. For example, in developing their overhead projector business,
it was close links with users made by getting technical development staff to make sales calls that
made the product so user-friendly and therefore successful.

• Strong culture dating back to 1951 of encouraging informal meetings and workshops in a series
of groups, committees, etc., under the structural heading of the Technology Forum – established
‘to encourage free and active interchange of information and cross-fertilization of ideas’. This is
a voluntary activity, although the company commit support resources, but it enables a company-
wide ‘college’ with fluid interchange of perspectives and ideas.

• Recruiting volunteers. Particularly in trying to open up new fields, the involvement of customers
and other outsiders as part of a development team is encouraged since it mixes perspectives.

5

Useful links

Company website with extensive detail on their history

https://www.3m.com/

Timeline

https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/company-us/about-3m/history/timeline/

History

https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/company-us/about-3m/history/

MBA 580 Organization Overview

(Processes, Structure, Culture)

Your company manufactures and distributes automobiles across six continents. The structure is very

complex and it is difficult to accurately count the levels of hierarchy. The company operates under a tall

matrixed structure design.

Tall structures can be cumbersome, and decision makers are often those farthest from the customer.

Communication can be slow and difficult, also slowing down decision-making speed. The specialized

functions and organizations, often referred to as centers of excellence or centers of expertise (COE),

allow for deep knowledge and expertise. Your company has many functional COEs where increased

structure, governance, and control allow for resource and process efficiencies. Resources are

centralized, reducing duplication of effort across the organization. These efficiencies can, however,

result in rigid, inflexible processes. In addition, COEs can create functional silos or reduced cross-

functional coordination and lack of connectedness, where each function is striving toward its own

unique objectives.

Your company follows a centralized and standardized approach where enterprise-wide decisions are

often made centrally and at the top of the hierarchy. This centralization makes it easier to implement

common policies and practices, prevents parts of the organization from becoming too independent, and

capitalizes on specialization.

Matrixed organizations are often associated with this specialized COE structure. Rather than having

permanent cross-functional teams or organizations working on specific projects or product launches,

matrixed organizations pull teams together from the various functional departments. Specialists are

pulled from functional areas to work on a specific project or product design. In essence, they report to

two managers at the same time and may work on multiple projects simultaneously. Although the project

manager, who is on the same leadership level as the functional vice president (VP), supervises the

project, the true management authority still resides with the VP.

Specialists supporting specific product launches generally remain “seated” with their functional team

but meet regularly with their product team to advance the project. They may be fully dedicated to the

project or still work on other unrelated projects.

Finally, product teams are pulled together at the enterprise level and are not region-specific. Although

they may produce differentiated projects for unique regions, their primary focus is on enterprise-wide

initiatives.

Organization Structure Chart

Product A Product B Product C

Functional VPs: Project Manager Project Manager Project Manager

Design

Technology

Hardware

Electronic Systems

Safety

Engineering

Sustainability

Quality

Strategy

Finance

Procurement

Marketing

Specialists are pulled from functional area

to work on specific project or product

design. In essence, they report to two

managers at the same time and may work

on multiple projects simultaneously.