PA RT I V
184
invention’. One reason for a lack of success in innovation, then, apparently stems from the simple fact that too few resources and too little time were allocated to innovation. Another reason was suggested by one of the managers: ’It is a known that it is not liked, because the company leaders like order; they like to be in control—to know where their players are and trust that there are no surprises. Even a small proportion of disobedience is uncomfortable for them. There is an obsession for order, the managers firmly advocate that they want creativity and new things, but deep down they want order. Creativity is always subordinate to order’. As soon as there were two or more expressions of what was expected of the firm, dependencies between the expectations became an obstacle. As the saying goes, there are two things demanded in business organizations—creativity and control—and at the end of the day the default will always be stability and control. As the tension between directions increased, the situation started to consume the activists. As one leader explained, ‘Now, looking at it; it has always been tough to have to fight the US management with own agendas and short sightedness’. Even successful constellations run the risk of coming to an end when the grand old men retire, as the managing director in charge explained: ‘We are moving from entrepreneurialism toward a more managerial organization culture, since Andrew left’. As the team changed, the setting of the entire constellation faced a review. As seen in Part 2: Thoeries, when the change from an entrepreneurial culture to a managerial culture occurs something close to a reshuffling of the entire power structure emerges. If the succeeding organization cannot replace the activists of yesterday, the whole culture of innovation may be lost. As the organization strives by default for stability, the culture of control may strengthen, and the firm may lose the courage to try, to make mistakes, and to adapt to changes in the environment. To quote one executive, ‘The principle of “preserve and monitor the inheritance” has stagnated development’. The culture—in terms of collective memory—may be why one of the case firms had had difficulty making innovation happen. In the end, those who owned the firm called the shots. The extension of scope