University Innovation from Unexpected Places
There is a lot of talk about colleges and universities becoming more innovative.
As much as faculty, staff, and leadership want to embrace innovation, many campus cultures are resistant, if not downright hostile, to change. And like any large organization, there are significant bureaucratic hurdles preventing great ideas from people closest to the work getting the attention they deserve.
In 2016, University of Colorado Boulder Senior Vice Chancellor and CFO Kelly Fox (now the Vice President of Administration and Finance at Rice University) implemented a “Short Experiment” grant challenge. It was part of an overall effort to shift the business culture at the campus to become more “innovative” in dealing with campus operating issues.
Individuals and teams across university operating units (academic departments were outside of this project's scope) were encouraged to submit proposals for short experiments around innovative ideas to improve an area of campus operations.
They followed the short experiment process outlined in Creativity, Inc., by Ed Catmull, the former President of Pixar who holds a Ph.D. in computer science,
The short experiment process has three parts:
1. Identify a clear and specific question or problem.
2. Create a hypothesis on how to solve the problem.
3. Design a short experiment, using a small amount of time and money, that will test the hypothesis.
After the experiment is concluded, review the results, learn from the experience, and develop next steps.
Sixty proposals were submitted, with 15 selected as finalists by a seven-member review committee comprised of three professors, two senior administrators including SVC Fox, one student, and one University of Colorado Regent, which was me.
In 2022, the U.S. Military held a similar contest that was compared to the TV show Shark Tank. The TV show has entrepreneurs pitch their ideas to business investors.
Six years and worlds apart, the response from the military brass and our review committee was similar.
A number of the ideas were so good that we considered them no-brainers. We wondered why they hadn’t already been implemented.
But, if we were honest, we knew the answer.
Culture. Hierarchy. Bureaucracy.
It is not bad intent or bad management. It’s culture, hierarchy, and bureaucracy. While college and university hierarchies are not as rigid nor carry the same weight as the military, they still exist, especially for staff.
Budget limitations and time constraints on individual units and managers don’t typically provide time or money for a lot of experimentation.
It’s not fair to ask managers or staff to innovate if the formal and informal rewards of a department, college, or university are all focused on supporting the status quo, and there is no support, training, or budget for innovation.
However, humans, being what we are, can’t stop developing ideas—sometimes brilliant—on how to solve problems.
To get at them you need to cast a wide net and cut out the gatekeepers. Then, ensure the ideas reach the people with the checkbooks and authority to try something.
At CU Boulder the fifteen finalists—teams and individuals—presented their proposals in person to the review committee. Eight projects were funded, and the remaining seven were assigned to work with senior leaders for further refinement.
Results
All the presentations were excellent. However, the one that stood out was from the custodial staff. It was a way to dramatically reduce the amount of solution needed for carpet cleaning. Their idea would save them a ton of work, reduce costs, reduce storage space needed, and help the environment.
It was a no-brainer.
This idea, along with all its great benefits, would have never come from the top. Only the people closest to the work could find and propose a solution, which was the entire point of the process.
These types of exercises often provide an unintended outcome. Themes arise from submissions of what staff finds ineffective. This is gold. Leaders should not miss the opportunity to do a deeper dive into these areas via surveys, focus groups, etc., as a way to further improve university operations to the benefit of everyone.