Radical innovation: crossing knowledge boundaries with ...

interdisciplinary projects. It is also important for teams to take account of benefits
other than those of commercial exploitation. In many cases, public value requires a
mechanism of delivery that applies innovative ideas. In design thinking, ideas also
arise through processes of implementation or delivery, including the application and
further development of tacit knowledge.
Pole-star leadership
The tension between desire to guarantee value and outcomes, and need to remain open
to curiosity and serendipity, led to our expert witnesses formulating the description of
‘pole star’ leadership as described in the report introduction, where there is a long
term and overarching goal, within which subsidiary and contributory goals (and
programmes can be formulated) that allow feasible allocation of resources, control of
risk and evidence of progress. The ‘pole star’ approach also enables parallel
innovation programmes to be undertaken, offering interdisciplinary outcomes shared
between competing and collaborating teams. Some important factors include: the
balance between focus and serendipity; working strategically to achieve capacity
rather than specific goals (just-in-case rather than just-in-time); linking short-term
goals with long-term vision; and co-ordinating team goals versus collaborator’s
individual goals.
5.3. The team itself as an outcome of interdisciplinary innovation
The fact that the outcomes of an interdisciplinary enterprise are expected to offer
radical innovation presents a quandary for managers and sponsors, insofar as these
opportunities cannot be planned for. Of course additional, less adventurous, outcomes
may also be of value to sponsors. The question is whether these subsidiary outcomes
must also be unanticipated, or whether they represent a ‘bread-and-butter’ disciplinary
component that runs in parallel to the more ambitious goals of the project (hopefully
while not consuming too many resources). That latter strategy is often adopted in
practice, because conventional disciplinary assessment offers the least controversial
validation of the overall investment. But focusing on goals that do have a disciplinary
purpose can make the overall enterprise seem to represent poor value for investment
that was applied far more broadly.
There is clearly a relationship between the actual outcomes of a project and the
overall goals, in that a goal does anticipate an outcome. However radical goals might
well be framed in the far future, and have the function mainly of providing shared
vision for a team until something better comes along. There is also a relationship
between outcomes and evaluation, in that all stakeholders (not only sponsors, but also
members of the team) want to know that value has been achieved as a result of the
energy and resources consumed. However, the original goals do not provide a good
basis for evaluation.
It may also be the case that the original goals providing the vision for a project
suggest a particular kind of measurement, and that the eventual outcomes cannot even
Innovation and Interdisciplinarity 49