The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Returns to Its Innovative RootsApril 16, 2010

 

Regina Dugan last summer took over as chief of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). In a profile of the 47-year-old PhD in mechanical engineering from the California Institute of Technology, The New York Times noted that in recent years DARPA has lost some of the luster it gained over decades as an agency that develops cutting edge military technologies that also filter into the consumer and civilian arena. The agency has been criticized in recent years for shifting its focus too closely to tools and technologies that could have an immediate impact for U.S. soldiers on the front lines.

Dugan was tapped to restore the agency's reputation by sparking creative thinking and innovation. She recruited Peter Lee, chairman of the computer science department at Carnegie Mellon University, to help. In the Times profile, he described working under Dugan: "It's like working for Steve Jobs. The amount of intellectual pressure we're put under all day, every day is significant and beyond anything in my professional experience."

Lee went on to say that in trying to meet Dugan's goals of thinking in new ways, employees undergo four stages. First they are a little scared, then really scared — soon they are frustrated and then finally they feel enlightened.

Michael Useem, a management professor at Wharton and director of Wharton's Center for Leadership and Change Management, has thought about how to inspire a workforce to excel in something as intangible as innovation. "This might sound pretty obvious when you hear it, but it's important not to push too hard to innovate during the innovation process," says Useem. "If it's pushed, it won't happen. If you micromanage, it won't happen."

Useem said there is new research surfacing that studies company directors and examines the extent to which they want a hands-off or hands-on relationship with top management during a push to innovate. The results suggest that if boards are not engaged in the R&D, the innovative capacity is less than it would otherwise be. Yet, if the boards are extremely engaged, then the R&D capacity is even lower. "So support but don't micromanage," says Useem.