R&D dollars you have. When Apple came up with the Mac, IBM was spending at least 100 times more on R&D. It’s not about money. It’s about how you’re led.” "
institutions have adapted to manage digital innovation 1 CENTRALISED TEAMS Digital is centralised in a silo (typically comms) and it serves the institution from this central place. Benefits include brand consistency, common tools, and clear reporting lines. 2 These teams can be slow to respond to change, are always at or beyond capacity, and can get bogged down in heavy processes that stifle creativity. They don’t enable an organization to grow capacity or become digital-first, and as such we don’t recommend this model for organizations who take engagement seriously. 3
central team still drives strategy and leads some key function 1 HYBRID TEAMS Different departments can grow their own capacity based on their specific needs, but all digital staffers are connected to and supported by a central digital team focused on a few core competencies and directing the whole system toward long-term strategic goals. 2 The culture of the central digital group is one of “open” or collaborative leadership, where they are sought after for their advice and interested in sharing knowledge and helping others succeed. 3
a strategic way with strong collaboration. 1 INTENTIONAL INDEPENDENT TEAMS High performing digital teams may be built not only in the traditional communications department, but also in areas such as organizing, engagement, or development. 2 The model can create multiple centers of excellence, where innovation takes place quickly across multiple fronts, taking advantage of specialized knowledge and the benefits of focus, but an overarching culture of collaboration and metrics and tools designed “for the whole” is critical. 3
a disconnected, dysfunctional way. 1 AVOIDANT INDEPENDENT TEAMS They are typically the result of highly political or conflict-averse management teams who lack the wherewithal to make bold decisions that may take functions away from powerful deputies. 2 In this model we also see two or three centers of digital leadership established but with a lot of conflict and arbitrary carving up of responsibilities and platforms. Some departments run high- performing digital silos (often with their own brands, sites, and social networks), while others with less clout or skills struggle. This model creates a competitive rather than collaborative culture, duplicates resources, and—with no strong digital group setting an integrated vision— creates an inconsistent and confusing digital experience. 3