Assignment Overview
As a middle manager for one of the top U.S. producers of luxury and mass-market automobiles and trucks, your IoT innovation project has been approved by senior management. Your next task is to recommend ways your organization can better support innovation.
For this assignment, you will read the Skunk Works case study and write a comparative report. Your report will compare your company’s structure and innovation culture with those of Skunk Works, helping you identify ways to improve your own organizational structure and culture to better support innovation.
Assignment Directions
Using the Organization Overview (for your company) and the Skunk Works case study (linked in Supporting Materials), you must:
-
Organizational Structure:
Compare your organization’s structure to the Skunk Works organizational structure. -
Shared Vision:
Compare your organization’s shared vision to that of Skunk Works. -
Creative Climate:
Compare the creative climate of your organization to Skunk Works’s creative climate. -
Effectiveness of Teamwork:
Compare the effectiveness of teamwork in your organization with that in the Skunk Works team.
Your goal:
Highlight similarities and differences between your company and Skunk Works in each of these areas, focusing on how structure and culture impact innovation. Suggest ways your company could improve based on these comparisons.
Submission Guidelines
-
Format: 1–3 page Word document
-
Spacing & Font: Double-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font, 1-inch margins
-
Citations: Use APA format for all citations and references
-
Supporting Materials:
-
Skunk Works Case Study (access via course materials)
-
Organization Overview document (about your company)
-
Grading Rubric Highlights
-
Organizational Structure (20%)
-
Shared Vision (20%)
-
Creative Climate (20%)
-
Effectiveness of Teamwork (20%)
-
Articulation of Response (20%)
Each section should provide a clear and well-supported comparison, using information from both your organization and Skunk Works.
Brief Description:
This assignment is designed to enhance your ability to analyze and support organizational innovation by benchmarking your company’s structure, vision, and culture against the renowned Skunk Works team. Your analysis will help you recommend practical ways to foster a more innovative environment in your own organization.
The answer
Organizational
Structure
Our company, a
major mass-market and luxury automobile manufacturer in the United States, has
a tall, matrixed, and centralized organizational structure. It depends on
Centers of Excellence (COEs), which promote in-depth knowledge but frequently
result in fragmented operations and sluggish coordination. There are two lines
of authority and additional complication when specialists report to both
project managers and functional VPs.
Skunk Works, on
the other hand, employed lean, tiny, co-located teams in a flat, independent
structure. Clarence "Kelly" Johnson placed a strong emphasis on quick
decisions and agile invention through rapid prototyping, little supervision,
and creative freedom. Members of the team could try new things and make
adjustments without requiring permission from higher-ups.
Comparatively
speaking, our structure encourages specialization and stability but inhibits
innovation because of inflexible procedures and hold-ups. Rapid innovations
like the XP-80 and SR-71 were made possible by Skunk Works' flexible setup.
Using comparable team structures could spur innovation in new fields like
electric cars and the Internet of Things.
Shared Vision
Because of the
hierarchy between leadership and execution, our company's common vision is
conveyed top-down, which may lessen its influence at the team level even when
it is in line with enterprise-wide goals. Although this guarantees consistency,
project teams might not find it emotionally compelling.
With lofty,
pressing objectives, like creating a jet fighter in 143 days, Skunk Works
flourished. With the help of visual countdowns and group accountability,
Clarence Johnson developed a mission-driven culture and established a
compelling vision.
Comparatively,
Skunk Works' motivating and inclusive style inspired teams. Encouraging
project-level vision-setting within our organization could boost ownership and
involvement while still being in line with more general strategy objectives.
Creative
Climate
Our company
culture is cautious and structured. Centers of Excellence give us deep
expertise, but their strict rules can stifle creativity and make people
hesitant to take risks. We rely on formal processes and oversight to drive
innovation, which often slows experimentation and makes failure feel like a
bigger deal than it should.
By contrast,
Skunk Works created a vibe where people felt safe to think big and break rules
if it got the job done. They worked in a scrappy, isolated setup—think an old
circus tent as their base—and used quick, hands-on prototyping to figure things
out as they went.
In short, Skunk
Works thrived on freedom and a sense of urgency that sparked bold ideas. We
could learn from that by carving out spaces—physical or virtual—where our teams
can ditch the usual playbook, try wild ideas, and experiment without fear of
messing up.
Effectiveness
of Teamwork
Our
organization's matrixed structure makes teamwork challenging. Workers are taken
from COEs to work on product teams, but they stay in their respective
departments and frequently manage several projects with competing objectives.
This dichotomy may weaken concentration and make it difficult for project and
functional leadership to communicate.
Skunk Works was an excellent example of collaboration. Teams were
co-located, close-knit, and totally committed. There was smooth
cross-functional integration, particularly between design and production.
Johnson eliminated bureaucratic barriers that impede cohesiveness by
emphasizing speed, trust, and shared accountability.
Comparative
Analysis: Skunk Works' fully concentrated, embedded teams were far better at
producing innovation quickly. In order to promote cohesiveness and agility, our
organization may duplicate this by creating specialized, cross-functional
"tiger teams" for innovation sprints that are momentarily exempt from
regular organizational responsibilities.
Conclusion
While our
centralized, matrixed structure supports efficiency and scale, it limits
agility and innovation. Skunk Works offers a compelling alternative grounded in
autonomy, trust, and mission-driven collaboration. To better support
innovation, our company should adopt:- Agile
teams modeled on Skunk Works,
- Team-level
vision ownership,
- Protected
spaces for experimentation,
- Streamlined,
fully focused project structures.
These shifts
can accelerate innovation in critical areas like IoT, autonomous driving, and
connected mobility.
References
MBA 580
Organization Overview. (n.d.). Internal company briefing document.
Bessant, J. (n.d.). Skunk Works Case Study. In Managing Innovation.