Managers of corporate innovation lead their company’s most critical projects along with some of its most passionate, valuable, and technically competent people – so why is the selection process for innovation leaders frequently so ad hoc? Peter Robbins and co-author Prof Gina O’Connor, international corporate innovation expert, ask this in a recent paper published by the 4* Journal of Product Innovation and Management.

In their paper ‘The professionalization of innovation management: Evolution and implications’, they revisit the arguments put forward by Tomkovick and Miller in 2000 around the need, evident even then, to approach corporate innovation management with the same level of professionalism which is accorded to HR, IT and Marketing. It was driven by the recognition that new product development is more than just a process and that it needed to evolve to become a corporate profession for a number of reasons, including supporting career pathways for innovation specialists, and developing a codifiable body of knowledge to assist in successfully managing the corporate innovation portfolio.

Innovation is known to be the driving force powering superior business performance, with some successful firms launching upwards of 1,000 new products per year. Human capital is an essential part of innovation and it is people who provide competitive advantage for firms in igniting the spark of new ideas, developing, promoting and delivering innovation assets for their organisations.

An important question

The question ‘Is innovation management a profession?’ is important to three stakeholder groups:

Practitioners – professionalism provides recognition of expertise, occupational identification and enhanced financial rewards.

Organisations – professionalisation brings a clear understanding of the work performed by innovation managers. Codification of skills creates a framework against which to select, develop and retain innovation talent, as well as provide guidance for measuring performance.

Research communities – a clearly identifiable respondent group is an advantage when conducting research and for students to guide their studies.

However both types of profession share the following characteristics:

1. Prolonged education and training
2. Specialised domain knowledge based on overarching theoretical principles or a solid base of theoretical research.
3. Presence of regulatory or umbrella associations promoting best practice
4. An audience for whom the expertise is valuable such that a demand exists for services

The researchers concluded that Innovation Management does meet the criteria for a corporate profession when assessed against each of the above.

Evidence includes:

• The AACSB accredits degree programmes; in 2001 none had innovation management in the title but by 2021 there were nearly 100.
• Innovation Management is growing rapidly as a major subject in postgraduate degrees.
• The Economist’s Executive Education (2022) database shows 184 courses with innovation in the title.
• The number of peer reviewed publications covering the subject has increased, showing a growing body of theoretical knowledge.
• The number of professional associations has increased, with six formed in the last ten years.
• Demand for Innovation Managers, Innovation Heads and Innovation Leaders grew by 4% in 2021, but only 30% of Fortune 500 companies had a “Chief Innovation Officer” in 2020.
• 43% of innovation teams surveyed (216 teams) expected to see their head count increase in 2023.

But is a profession needed?

From the people interviewed for the research there were some concerns raised about innovation management becoming a profession, particularly around the risk of it becoming too exclusive, which might exclude people with the aptitude who might ascend to senior positions without what may become perceived as prescribed qualifications. There is also a worry that innovation may become yet another silo in the organisation in the way that HR and IT have become in many organisations.

However, one benefit would be the development of a curriculum that would support learners and the promulgation of best practice. A further benefit would be that a professional status would encourage organisations to develop more sophisticated role descriptions, performance criteria and career pathways which will, in the long run, increase organisational innovation capability.

The authors are interested in provoking a conversation about the likely future development of innovation management in organisations. The business of innovation is too important to be treated in an ad-hoc, project-based, amateur fashion. What do you think?

Read the full paper

The professionalization of innovation management: Evolution and implications, Catalyst, Journal of Product Innovation Management 2023; 1-17

Post by R&D Today editors