pm2net Blog

1 comment

Join the conversation
  • Debra - April 6, 2015

    I have some misgivings about this smhcee as implemented by IBM. The basic problem is one of self-interest: who is going to contribute their best idea, knowing that it will likely be taken away from them by a highly commercial organisation? Many of us could cope with seeing no financial return personally from an idea which might solve one of the world’s problems. But to have no further involvement in the development of the idea, once you’ve chucked it into InnovationJam, seems selfless beyond the capabilities of most people.From the IBM viewpoint, InnovationJam was a logical progression from the two previous jams. Each was held two years apart, and each focussed on internal IBM issues. When the IBM Board voted CEO Palmisano a big pay rise two years ago, the Jam was cited as a major justification for the increase. So from his viewpoint, it’s a simple “Launch another Jam, get another pay rise” logic.Many big companies were invited to contribute to InnovationJam. That alone was an innovation. But very few of their employees contributed, and I suspect several of these companies had worked out before the Jam that they could see some of their best ideas go IBMwards, without financial return, if they didn’t restrain their employees.

Comments are closed.