The first trap is to have a list of limited measurements, with the majority of companies sticking with only 1, in a time there is no magical innovation measurement model up to this very minute that can give a holistic insight over the health state of the ongoing investment. Thus, it will be much more prudent to have a blended flavor of multiple metrics, that will increase management’s awareness and minimize uncertainty along with associated risks.

Moving to the second trap, that is primarily through having an environment that encourages a sustainable behavior of paying too much attention on those innovations that promise highest incremental inflows, which is inadequate for corporations seeking momentous growth.

The third trap is basically when the management outweighs inputs versus outputs. And to put that point into further context, we can refer to the 2006 study for U.S. companies with largest R&D budgets, to find Ford on the top of that list, but without a trace when it comes to the list of most innovative companies. Thus, results and outcomes do matter a lot.

Reference:

Jaruzelski, B., Dehoff, K. and Bordia, R., (2006), ‘Smart Spenders: The Global Innovation 1000’. Booz & Company. Available online from: http://www.strategy-business.com/article/06405?gko=48133.