There is growing concern in business, education, science and other KM fields regarding cognitive distraction and reflection. Everyone has constant personal and work process distractions, and some of us are more vulnerable to the effects of distraction. Others partition their time and attention more effectively.

Web-enabled communication provides a powerful means for social connectivity and access to information. This, in turn, speeds up contact and automates the flow of data. In general, these are good things. However, some would argue that we are beset with some unintended effects and consequences of a constantly connected world.

1. In her book Distracted: The Erosion of Attention and the Coming Dark Age, researcher Maggie Jackson suggests that we are well on our way to becoming a less capable society as people are saturated with instant response connections at the expense of true connection and engagement.

2. Productivity observers submit that people are not only distracted by connectivity-based stimuli, but also by the explosion of social networking, phone/text noise, standard e-mail streams and other attention-grabbing diversions.

This is an important subject for knowledge workers, because they are employed to utilize precisely those cognitive resources that are being effectively taken away by proliferating distractions. There are multiple technical, behavioral and economic implications of distractions-related tendencies. First, the problem is significant enough for Microsoft and others to get into the act with software-based attention interfaces. Second, more and more organizations are improving employee policies and education that deal with distractions. And third, most KM-based employers are exploring the development of technical and emotional literacy as a backdrop for avoiding distraction effects. Most HR/PD teams are baking this subject into policy.

The longer-term effects of distraction on cultural degradation require further analysis. However, observers in higher education are making more and more focused comments on this subject regarding the impact on students vis-à-vis reflective, serious thought, discourse, problem solving, decision making, subject matter expertise and leadership.

One of the hallmarks of Entreship 3.0 is the ability to generate organic growth on a consistent basis. This is shaped by a company’s overall approach to corporate entreship and innovation.

In O’Connor’s new [2008] book Grabbing Lightning, sustainable innovation is a function of discovery practices, incubation processes and acceleration models. The author deals with the strategy, culture, structure and resource challenges that temper innovation. Her book reflects on corporate learning and organization behavior as well as practices that advance and/or constrain innovation.

In the context of Entreship 3.0, this kind of thinking is more and more critical for growth, performance and change strategy. Consistent engagement in “planned innovation” practices and engaged people who are properly geared to discovery work, incubation and acceleration are part of the leadership and management process, and this relates to a variety of sustainable innovation challenges.

The next frontier of this work is collaborative product development in open business models.

In our work on business strategy, we have the opportunity to interact with different organizational cultures and structures. The functions of strategy leadership and management vary widely, and the relative engagement of employees is one indicator of the impact. The details of this are addressed in my article on Strategy Engagement, December 2007, Strategic Planning Society.

The leadership behaviors that support enterprise strategy are broadly defined in Studer’s 2008 book, Results That Last. His leadership lessons connect the dots between effective relationships, professional development, employee interaction and communication practice. Studer suggests a series of review and practice methods that reinforce the performance objectives of individuals and groups. And he gathers the principles of consistent quality in communication to drive leadership behaviors at every level of the organization. This book assumes that strategy foundations are in place and that a relatively stable environment exists. However, is tackles the “everyday leadership thought and behavior” that drives performance. We all want “results that last” and that poses a number of broader sustainability issues in contemporary business.

One of the more challenging issues on the strategic agenda is a company’s intent to drive innovation. There are cultural and resource elements that temper this concern. And there are process and structure elements that promote and/or constrain innovation, and the practices and processes of innovation.

In our current work on corporate entreship, we’re exploring a series of cause-and-effect concerns in category development strategy and innovation. Below is a summary list of several strategy and measures under review…

• New Product Capacity to Solve Customer Problems
• New Product Profitability; Speed to Investment Returns
• Contributions to Intellectual Capital and KM Value
• Contributions to Competitive Position and Advantage
• New Product Throughput and Impact on Portfolio
• New Product Approach to Open Model Development

These measures are drawn from current business practice as well as the R&D Literature from around the world. What is less clear from the above list is the capacity to engage broader cultural and activity-based engagement in strategy and innovation. More to follow on this essential “organic growth” subject.

While definitions of R&D spending need some interpretation, current trends are important for strategy makers and boards.  Assessments by Battelle for the 2008 Global R&D Report indicate:

1. That worldwide, R&D spending will eclipse the $1.2 trillion mark in 2008, roughly 2.1% of GDP.
2. That nearly 41% of that spent will be in Asia, compared to 33% in the Americas and 24% in Europe.
3. That joint and collaborative R&D programs are on the rise in substantive ways – shifting funds and practices.

This third point on collaborative R&D programs is perhaps the subject of greatest concern for strategic leadership and management.  Overall, R&D effort is balanced in terms of resources, industry patterns, technology, human capital, political and economic issues, global forces in general, infotech and the growth intentions of large companies.  Where R&D activity takes place in university, government and individual venues, and under joint project management aegis, collaboration is a driving issue as well. 

The caliber of strategic R&D collaboration will surely make a mark on the nature and pace of innovation, and the manner of strategic and economic value creation in the coming years.  How broader R&D collaboration is managed in a context will likely involve more open business models and will reset the nature of innovation and productivity metrics for R&D programs.