{"id":200,"date":"2024-03-28T14:27:06","date_gmt":"2024-03-28T21:27:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.barrybriggs.com\/blog\/?p=200"},"modified":"2024-10-18T15:12:45","modified_gmt":"2024-10-18T22:12:45","slug":"barrys-law-of-breakthroughs","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.barrybriggs.com\/blog\/management\/barrys-law-of-breakthroughs\/","title":{"rendered":"Barry\u2019s Law of Breakthroughs"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

By Barry Briggs<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My management coach, a number of years ago, impressed upon me the notion of breakthrough results. If we were planning on 5% growth, then why not achieve 30% growth? 100%? Why limit your thinking to the conventional, to the expected, to the sensible? One might object: that’s hard, would take a ton more work. <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What if it doesn’t? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Instead, he suggested, organizations should set themselves goals they might otherwise have thought unrealistic \u2013 and then figure out how to achieve them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Breakthroughs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We\u2019ve all seen such results: the internet, the iPhone, artificial intelligence. These all represent huge steps forward. The iPhone, for example, did not build on previous mobile phones like the Blackberry or the (godawful) Windows Phone; instead, Apple completely reimagined the product space and invented a whole ecosystem of apps, developers, and marketplace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Should you swing for the fences?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Well, why not?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Check out the diagram. Basically, it says that for any initiative, you can either take the incremental route or the breakthrough route.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The incremental route<\/strong> means you carefully plan safe, predictable updates. In software, that means you do point releases: 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, and so on. Each release has a small amount of improvements, they\u2019re very predictable in terms of schedule, cost, and time, and, as the chart says, everyone is guaranteed a decent performance review. It\u2019s highly unlikely that any step along the way will fail. (Apple could have made a Blackberry clone and achieved some modest success; but they didn\u2019t.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The breakthrough route <\/strong>is riskier but yields greater \u2013 sometimes much greater \u2013 rewards. Breakthroughs \u201cknock over the poker table,\u201d as a friend memorably put it. In a breakthrough-oriented organization, you design nirvana, and then figure out what it will take to get there. There are often many unknowns, problems whose solution is not immediately apparent. You might not understand the market need, or you might even be inventing a new market category; you might not have the resources human or otherwise immediately available; and so on. However, as the iPhone proved, a breakthrough innovation, if you can sleep at night with the risk, can be very rewarding indeed!  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

But look again at the chart. I\u2019m asserting that breakthroughs and incremental progress can take roughly the same amount of time and effort. <\/strong>It\u2019s really just a question of how much risk and how many unknowns you and your organization can tolerate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So why not always go for the breakthrough?  <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Good question. If you had asked me a decade or so ago, I would have said, \u201cright, why not? Swing for the fences! Every time!\u201d  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

But I am older and wiser now. Organizations \u2013 and people \u2013 are not always ready for breakthroughs. Caution, even fear, are understandable when individuals are presented with big ideas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So before you aim for the stars, you\u2019ll have to enroll your team in your vision. They\u2019ll have to buy into it as much as you do and be as invested as you are. Otherwise you\u2019ll just be that wild-eyed revolutionary in the corner \u2013 even if you\u2019re 100% right.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That can be hard. Here are some things to think about:<\/p>\n\n\n\n