People Solve Problems

Grace Bourke, Consulting Director at Baker Tilly, has spent nearly four decades working at the intersection of healthcare, quality improvement, and technology. She joins Jamie Flinchbaugh in this episode of People Solve Problems. She shares what she has learned about why technology implementations so often go wrong, and what organizations can do to get ahead of the problems before they take hold. Grace opens with a fundamental challenge: organizations frequently deploy technology without fully understanding the problem they are trying to solve. At Sutter Health, she saw teams convinced that a new electronic health record system would resolve issues that were actually rooted in communication gaps and unclear standard work. The danger, she explains, is that technology does not eliminate underlying problems. It simply makes the mistakes happen faster and harder to trace once they are buried in a database. To address this, Grace uses an approach she calls Gap-IT, a structured gap analysis that maps how work is currently done against how it will function in the new system. In one example involving a Pacific Northwest health system undergoing an ERP reimplementation, the process revealed that roughly half of the desired improvements could be made immediately, before the technology ever went live. The other half genuinely required the new platform. Her takeaway: stable processes and the technology designed to support them have to develop together. On the question of buy-in, Grace draws a useful distinction. When a technology change is non-negotiable, such as when a platform has aged beyond maintenance, people do not need to agree with the decision. But they do need to be invested in making the transition succeed. She argues this requires two layers of communication: senior leadership setting the vision and the why, and trusted voices closer to the front line delivering the messages that affect individual roles and responsibilities directly. A central tool in Grace's approach is Failure Mode and Effect Analysis, known as FMEA. Her team adapted it specifically for healthcare, condensing it to a half-page card that staff completed, then passed to a colleague for independent validation. That handoff was intentional: it prevented the tendency to simply defer to whoever wrote the card and created a shared responsibility for accuracy. Beyond its risk management function, the practice had a quieter effect. Grace recalls receiving a text from a participant who thanked her for helping her find her voice, because the format gave people a structured, safe way to speak up and stand behind their thinking. This leads to one of the episode's most direct observations: healthcare remains deeply hierarchical, and that hierarchy consistently strips agency from the people best positioned to spot and solve problems. Grace points to Toyota's model as a counterexample, where every person on the floor is expected to be both a problem spotter and a problem solver. In her own experience, frontline staff flourish when given clear boundaries within which they have real authority to act. The obstacle, she notes, is that it takes consistent leadership to hold that space open. Grace closes with the priority framework that has guided her throughout her career: safety first, then quality, then delivery, then cost. In healthcare, she says, the order is not just a preference. It is the whole point. To connect with Grace Bourke and learn more about her work at Baker Tilly, visit www.bakertilly.com or find her on LinkedIn at www.linkedin.com/in/gracebourke.

Skip Steward, VP and Chief Improvement Officer at Baptist Memorial Health Care Corporation, sat down with Jamie Flinchbaugh on the People Solve Problems podcast to share what thirty-four years of cross-industry experience looks like when it's put to work inside one of the most complex systems in existence, American healthcare. The conversation opened on the challenge of prioritization, a particular puzzle in healthcare where competing demands and shifting conditions are the norm. Skip traced his team's solution back to a strategic A3 deployment process he brought to Baptist Memorial nearly thirteen years ago, developed with the guidance of mentor and improvement expert Pascal Dennis, author of Getting the Right Things Done. At the highest level, this process organizes all work under four guiding themes: right care, right time, right place, and right cost. Skip noted that across Baptist's more than twenty-four thousand employees, almost anyone can finish that sentence from memory, a quiet but telling measure of how deeply the direction has taken root throughout the organization. But strategy at the enterprise level is only part of the story. Skip described how, at the ground level, he returns again and again to one clarifying question: "What are we trying to accomplish?" He shared a recent visit to a clinic where an enthusiastic manager had a full list of ideas and concerns, and fell completely silent when Skip asked that single question. Her honest answer was that she wasn't sure. For Skip, that moment is not a failure. It's the essential starting point. Without knowing what you're anchoring to, he argued, everything else is just activity. Much of the conversation centered on how Skip and his team build the human side of improvement. The Baptist Management System is built on eleven guiding principles organized around people, process, and purpose, and Skip pointed to two practices that do the most work in making collaboration real. The first is TWI Job Relations, a framework he described as the best way he knows to turn respect for people from a value on a wall into a daily operational skill, helping teams respond to problems objectively rather than emotionally. The second is humble inquiry, which Skip practices as the art of asking open-ended questions you genuinely don't know the answers to, to understand someone's situation before trying to improve it. Whether speaking with a senior physician or someone new to the front lines, Skip described meeting people with curiosity rather than credentials, sometimes literally taking his jacket off to reduce the distance between them. The final stretch of the conversation turned to healthcare's broader challenges, and Skip was honest about the difficulty. He called healthcare the most complex open sociotechnical system he has encountered in his career, drawing on the thinking of organizational psychologist Edgar Schein. He pushed back firmly on the notion that any single solution, AI included, will fix the system's deep problems. What he believes in is a mindset: the patient, hypothesis-driven thinking that takes on one part of the process at a time. He pointed to a striking example from Baptist's own work, where a daily multidisciplinary patient review meeting that once lasted two hours has been reduced to a focused, information-rich fifteen minutes, the result not of top-down directives but of physicians and nurses experimenting their way forward. One doctor captured the shift with a line Skip clearly treasures: "I learned that it wasn't okay to wait." For Skip, stories like that are the reason for hope. To learn more about Skip Steward's work, visit baptistonline.org or connect with him on LinkedIn at linkedin.com/in/skipsteward.

William Harvey, Program Manager for Strategic Initiatives and University Professor, brings a refreshingly practical perspective to leadership and problem-solving. Throughout the conversation, William shares how his diverse background—from the Marine Corps to manufacturing to academia—has shaped his approach to developing people and tackling complex challenges. William's philosophy on leadership centers on flexibility and situational awareness. He describes his approach as stepping into whatever role the moment demands, whether that's ownership, delegation, coaching, or sponsorship. Drawing an analogy to the movie “300,” where King Leonidas steps into missing spots, William explains that he doesn't declare his role upfront but instead reads the situation and fills gaps as needed. For critical moments—safety incidents, major quality investigations, or when someone is truly struggling—he leads directly. But for planned activities, he creates safe spaces where people can develop new competencies without the pressure of real-time crises forcing immediate action. One of William's most compelling insights challenges a common assumption in problem-solving work. Before jumping into any methodology or framework, he insists on establishing two fundamentals: does everyone agree it's actually a problem, and where does it fit in the priority list? Without that shared understanding and commitment, all the problem-solving methods in the world won't matter. William also emphasizes diversity of thought as critical to collaboration, pointing out that perspectives shaped by education, family upbringing, international experience, and other life factors often matter more than visible diversity markers alone. William has learned to manage his own influence carefully. Recognizing that as a senior person, he can easily sway a group, he's developed tactics like voting before discussion and speaking last. He presents ideas as straw man arguments, deliberately inviting critique by asking what's wrong with the plan rather than assuming he's considered everything. This approach reflects his understanding that mental models are never fully accurate—they only become more accurate through constant refinement based on the gap between expectation and reality. The conversation reveals how William has built learning directly into organizational rhythms at multiple levels. In daily huddles, one-on-ones, and formal after-action reviews, he creates space for reflection. But his most powerful discovery came accidentally when he started asking, "Who's done something worth recognizing since we last met?" before discussing what needs improvement. Within about 30 days, finger-pointing disappeared. By layering genuine praise first, William found that people became far more willing to collaborate on problems, seeing issues as process failures rather than personal attacks. William also shares his practice of using pre-mortems, taking insights from past post-mortems to identify what could fail in new projects before they launch. This forward-looking application of learning prevents teams from repeating mistakes. He references the "zoom in, zoom out" systems thinking model, noting that while most people excel at zooming in on technical details, they often forget to zoom out to see handoffs between functions and other systemic issues that could derail success. Looking ahead, William is exploring how AI can make learning content more effective by customizing delivery to resonate with diverse learners—matching accents, appearances, and contexts to help information land more powerfully. It's a natural extension of his commitment to intentional inclusion and meeting people where they are. Connect with William on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drwilliamharvey/

Gregory J. Scaven, CEO, Board Director, Partner, and currently President at Scaven Enterprises, LLC, brings over 30 years of technical engineering leadership and more than 20 years as a P&L leader to this conversation about problem-solving. With deep expertise in pyrotechnics, explosives, and propellants across automotive, aerospace, and defense industries, Greg shares how his approach to problem-solving evolved from the lab to the boardroom. Greg's introduction to problem-solving came through the lens of high-reliability engineering, where devices that "go boom" must do so only when intended. Working in an industry demanding “six-nines” reliability or better, he learned the discipline of corrective action processes, where finding the true root cause wasn't optional. Greg emphasizes that his early training taught him to demonstrate the ability to turn failure modes on and off, then prove the effectiveness of preventative actions. This rigorous foundation shaped everything that followed. The transition from engineer to business leader brought formal problem solving training through the Danaher Business System. Greg describes how Danaher focused on training leadership teams, not just front-line workers, because problem solving is a critical leadership skill. The emphasis was revolutionary for him: spend 70% of your time defining what the problem actually is. Greg explains that coaching teams to frame problems correctly became more important than diving into technical details, and he learned to limit his organization to no more than three major problems at any time, integrating them into regular leadership reviews. Throughout the conversation, Greg returns to a central theme: critical thinking matters more than following forms. He cautions against becoming a slave to any tool, insisting the power lies in the thinking process itself. When young engineers worry about filling out corrective action paperwork, Greg redirects them to focus on what they've learned. He consistently asks teams to reframe their problem statements as new learning emerges, recognizing that the problem definition itself can evolve. Greg draws a clear distinction between what he calls "cause problems" and "creative problems." As an engineer, he dealt with cause problems where scientific rationale could explain failures through tolerance stack-ups and environmental conditions. As a P&L leader, he faces creative problems like sales shortfalls, where turning failure modes on and off isn't possible. This is where experimentation becomes powerful. Greg encourages teams to quickly test their top three ideas, look for early returns, and double down on what works while abandoning what doesn't. Creating a learning culture under P&L pressure requires deliberate effort. Greg believes great businesses are naturally curious, filled with people who aren't afraid when experiments fail. He looks for teams that iterate without waiting for permission, teams that come to him saying, "We tried this, it didn't work, so here's what we're doing next." That's his definition of success. Greg emphasizes accountability for follow-through rather than results, building on concepts from his military background around the commander's intent. Teams that understand the big picture, maintain discipline, and show bias for action don't wait for scheduled reviews when critical issues arise. Greg's approach reveals how curiosity, discipline, and real-time responsiveness create problem-solving cultures that deliver. His journey from engineering to executive leadership demonstrates that while the problems change, the principles of critical thinking, experimentation, and learning remain constant. To connect with Greg or learn more about his work, visit his LinkedIn profile at www.linkedin.com/in/gjscaven.

Steve Brown has spent years helping organizations see around corners. As a former executive at both Intel Labs and Google DeepMind, where he served as their in-house futurist, Steve brings a unique perspective on what happens when rapid technological change collides with practical business reality. In this conversation, he challenges leaders to move beyond fear and cost-cutting mentality to embrace AI as a tool for genuine value creation. Steve explains that being a futurist isn't about making predictions—that's for fortune tellers. Instead, it's a discipline of examining trends, understanding how they intersect over time, and mapping possible futures. But the landscape has grown increasingly complex. The pace of AI development has accelerated so dramatically that projecting even six months ahead has become challenging. What makes AI particularly difficult to forecast isn't just the technology itself, but the ripple effects of having powerful intelligence available on demand at low cost. As Steve puts it, this changes everything about everything. When it comes to implementation, Steve grounds his approach in a framework he calls "possibility and purpose." He sees AI creating an enormous landscape of what's possible, but warns that the real leadership challenge is figuring out what not to do. By finding the intersection between corporate purpose and this expanded possibility space, organizations can focus their efforts where they'll create the most value. Steve offers a fresh perspective on AI's relationship with human qualities, such as empathy. While acknowledging that AI simulates rather than truly experiences emotions, he points to promising applications like AI therapists that can reach people who would never seek human help. The key is understanding when simulation serves a genuine need versus when it creates friction in developing essential human skills—like learning to navigate relationships and failures. The heart of Steve's message centers on reimagining AI not as a replacement for humans, but as a collaborative teammate. He describes three types of AI agents organizations should consider: offload agents that handle boring repetitive work, elevate agents that amplify human capabilities, and extend agents that enable people to do things they couldn't do before. This framework transforms workforce planning from a zero-sum game into an expansion strategy. Steve points to Jensen Huang's vision at NVIDIA—growing from 30,000 employees to 50,000, supported by 100 million AI assistants—as an example of thinking about amplification rather than reduction. Steve argues that AI project failures typically stem from three core issues: immature technology, poor change management, and messy data. Organizations succeed when they start small with bounded projects, balance short-term wins with medium and long-term initiatives, and treat AI implementation as fundamentally a change management challenge rather than just a technology deployment. He emphasizes that everyone owns the AI transition—from line of business to HR to IT—though having a Chief AI Officer can help drive the organizational transformation required. Rather than obsessing over traditional ROI calculations, Steve encourages leaders to focus on the human challenges that AI can solve. When the average knowledge worker spends 32 days per year just searching for information, cutting that time in half represents massive value that goes beyond simple efficiency metrics. Learn more about Steve's work and access his several resources: AI Resources https://beacons.ai/aifuturist AI Course https://www.stevebrown.ai/ai-course AI Workshops https://www.stevebrown.ai/workshop Keynotes https://www.stevebrown.ai/keynotes YouTube www.youtube.com/@futureofai Amazon book “The AI Ultimatum: Preparing for a World of Intelligent Machines and Radical Transformation.” https://a.co/d/1YoFV5C Connect with him on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/futuresteve/

Dr. Melisa Buie brings a fascinating perspective to the challenge of failure, one forged through decades of building high-powered lasers and leading manufacturing transformations in the semiconductor industry. With a PhD in Nuclear Engineering and Plasma Physics from the University of Michigan and over 15 years at Coherent, Inc., Melisa has spent her career solving complex technical problems. But it was a personal struggle that led to her latest book, "Faceplant: FREE Yourself from Failure's Funk," co-authored with Keely Hurley. Melisa shared a compelling story that became the catalyst for her book. Despite being completely comfortable with failure in the laboratory, where experiments routinely don't work, and models need constant refinement, she discovered she was terrified of failing in her personal life. When she took a Spanish class at Stanford and tried speaking her first sentence to a friend, the friend burst out laughing. Melisa's immediate reaction was to shut down completely. She realized she had developed a fixed mindset about failure outside the lab, and this contradiction troubled her deeply.  She spent years reading everything she could about failure, learning, and growth, ultimately developing the framework that became "Faceplant."  The book's title came from Melisa's co-author, Keely, who has a gift for turning her own missteps into hilarious stories. For Keely, every failure was just another face plant to laugh about, and the metaphor stuck immediately.  The subtitle's use of "FREE" isn't just clever wordplay; it's an acronym for a practical framework: Focus, Reflect, Explore, Engage. Melisa explained that the framework grew organically from her lean manufacturing background, particularly the principle of Hansei, which emphasizes self-reflection followed by self-improvement. The first two steps help clarify what actually happened and understand your role in it, while the final two steps push you toward curiosity and experimentation. When asked about organizational barriers to learning from failure, Melisa highlighted the critical importance of psychological safety, pointing to the work of Amy Edmondson and Mark Graban. She noted that leaders often unintentionally shut down learning through their behaviors, even when they genuinely believe they support it. Melisa offered concrete examples to watch for: Is it easier to get approval for a half-million-dollar piece of equipment than to run a five-thousand-dollar experiment? If equipment purchases are immediate but experiment proposals sit unopened for weeks, that reveals the organization's true priorities. She also pointed to meeting dynamics when brainstorming sessions fall silent except for one voice, or when only a single idea emerges, and everyone rallies around it without discussion, those are warning signs. Perhaps most striking was Melisa's deliberate choice to use the word "failure" throughout her book, rather than softer alternatives like "learning opportunity" or "mistake." She explained that failure makes us deeply uncomfortable, and she didn't want to step over that discomfort. When one friend admitted to only failing once in life, Melisa felt sad for them, because without taking risks and chances, we miss the rich opportunities that failure provides. She acknowledged the irony: in the lab, ten failed experiments in a design of experiments might be considered a beautiful success because of what was learned. But she wanted to be honest about calling things what they are, pushing past the positive platitudes about failure to actually embrace it. Learn more about Melisa and her work at www.melisabuie.com and www.faceplantbook.com, or connect with her on LinkedIn.

Scott Willoughby, Vice President at Northrop Grumman, and former program manager for the James Webb Space Telescope, shares his expertise on managing complex aerospace systems. He emphasizes the necessity of independent modeling and collaboration, highlighting that NASA and Northrop Grumman built duplicate systems to ensure validation. Scott discusses the creative problem-solving behind a unique squid jig solution that a technician devised to avert a potential deployment disaster. His insights on fostering a learning culture and embracing imperfection are especially compelling for aspiring leaders.

Rick Pedersen, owner of Old Norse Consulting, joined host Jamie Flinchbaugh to explore why product development demands a fundamentally different approach to problem-solving than traditional business processes. During their conversation, Rick explained that while most business functions involve transactional processes that can be documented and repeated, product development centers on building knowledge to solve problems that have never been encountered before. Rick draws a clear distinction between information gathering and genuine knowledge gaps. He explains that a true knowledge gap exists when answers cannot simply be looked up or obtained from an expert. Instead, teams must invest time and resources in building prototypes, running tests, or conducting simulations to create new knowledge. Rick advises teams facing uncertainty to document potential knowledge gaps quickly, then filter them to determine which require actual investigation versus simple research. The conversation revealed how knowledge creation serves as the lifeblood of product development, much like flow serves manufacturing. He emphasizes that the real value in product development comes from creating new knowledge and making it reusable. He compares this to compound interest, where teams that fail to document their discoveries essentially discard their gains rather than letting them accumulate over time. This results in organizations repeatedly solving the same problems across different projects, representing significant waste. Rick advocates for a shift from traditional task-oriented project management to organizing work around knowledge gaps. Rather than focusing solely on completing action items, teams should orient their efforts around closing knowledge gaps through what he calls fast learning loops or fast learning cycles. This approach helps teams understand why they are performing tasks and keeps the focus on building knowledge that enables better decisions. When discussing learning from industry leaders like Toyota, Rick cautions against simply copying their systems. He stresses the importance of understanding the thinking behind why successful companies use specific tools and behaviors, then adapting those principles to each organization's unique situation. He recommends starting small, selecting one or two pilot projects where teams can experiment with new methods while receiving coaching along the way. Rick recently launched the LPPD Bootcamp, an immersive workshop designed to accelerate learning about product development principles. He explains that the workshop addresses a fundamental challenge in product development: the years-long timeframe makes it difficult to see results and adjust quickly. The bootcamp compresses an entire product development cycle into less than a week, allowing participants to experience how different improvements interact and deliver benefits. The environment also helps teams practice cross-functional collaboration and establish shared reference points they can draw upon when working on real projects. Throughout the conversation, Rick emphasized that successful product development requires teams to recognize knowledge gaps, invest in closing them systematically, and capture what they learn for future reuse.  For more information about Rick's work, visit oldnorsellc.com and LPPDBootcamp.com, or connect with him on LinkedIn

Jason Trujillo, a transformational leader with a wide range of experiences, joined Jamie Flinchbaugh on the People Solve Problems podcast to share his unconventional path to becoming a transformational leader and his philosophy on structured problem-solving. With a career spanning companies like Stanley Black & Decker, IBM, Intel, and Harley-Davidson, Jason brings a unique perspective shaped by an unexpected beginning—art school. Jason explained that his engineering studies actually started at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, where he explored kinetic sculpture and human-machine interaction. This creative foundation became central to how he approaches problems today. He described problem-solving as fundamentally a creative process, always returning to questions like "What am I looking at? What does that mean? What can I do with it?" This artistic lens has stayed with him throughout his career, providing a unique vantage point for tackling complex business challenges. A key insight Jason shared is his belief in the power of constraints to fuel creativity. He noted that while young artists often rebel against limitations, there's nothing harder than facing a blank canvas with no boundaries. Jason sees direct parallels between art and business problem solving—just as telling someone to "fix the company" is too broad to be actionable, asking an artist to "make something" without constraints can be paralyzing. He emphasized that frameworks, heuristics, and rubrics provide essential guide rails that allow creative thinking to flourish within defined boundaries. When discussing his role as a transformation leader, Jason acknowledged the need to wear multiple hats depending on the situation. While he sometimes wishes he could simply fix a broken machine on his own, his current work requires shifting between being an accountable owner in executive meetings and a coach helping others develop their problem-solving capabilities. Jason finds the coaching role most rewarding because he gets to watch people learn, develop, and ultimately succeed—though he candidly admitted that winning doesn't happen as often as people assume, which makes success even sweeter. Jason introduced a particularly helpful concept he calls "altitude" when working with teams. He explained that sometimes people are working on the right problem but viewing it at the wrong level of detail. Engineers, for instance, might get stuck in technical specifics that aren't relevant to the broader business challenge. By helping them adjust their altitude—lifting up to see the bigger picture—Jason can help technical minds engage with problems at a more appropriate scope. On the topic of ideation and brainstorming, Jason admitted he used to be "triggered" by traditional brainstorming sessions that often devolved into appeasing the loudest voice or rushing to conclusions. Instead, he advocates for structured ideation using frameworks that make clear whether the group is trying to expand possibilities or converge on solutions. Jason stressed the importance of knowing what outcome to expect from an ideation session and preparing accordingly, transforming what could be an aimless discussion into a constructive planning session that leads to concrete action. Throughout the conversation, Jason emphasized his core principle: don't solve general problems because nobody has a general problem. Success comes from getting specific, using frameworks intentionally, and helping others build their own problem-solving capabilities. Connect with Jason Trujillo on LinkedIn to learn more about his approach to transformation and operational excellence.

In this episode of People Solve Problems, host Jamie Flinchbaugh welcomes Norbert Majerus, a creative problem solver at Norbert Majerus Consulting. With 45 years in industrial creativity and 60 US patents to his name, Norbert brings deep expertise from his years implementing lean product development at Goodyear's global innovation centers. Norbert draws a clear distinction between creativity and innovation that cuts through the confusion around these terms. Creativity, he explains, is about generating new ideas and creating something new. Innovation happens when those creative ideas are brought to market and generate value. Not every creative idea becomes an innovation—only a select few make that leap—but creativity remains essential across all problem-solving contexts, whether the immediate goal involves profit or not. The conversation turns to a pressing challenge: many organizations find themselves trapped in a box of their own making, unable to think beyond established patterns. Norbert identifies several significant obstacles to industrial creativity. Fear stands as the most formidable barrier. He shares a personal story of nearly being fired by a vice president who refused to allow risky new ideas, illustrating how leaders focused on protecting their careers create cultures where people avoid taking chances. When the perceived risk of failure outweighs the potential for success in someone's mind, creativity withers. Beyond fear, Norbert points to the physical environment as a surprisingly important factor. He contrasts his experience visiting Google—where the environment changed dramatically every 50 steps, with bikes and stimulating spaces—against his own workplace, which was redesigned with uniform white walls and strict prohibitions on personalization. Environment shapes culture, and culture shapes creativity. Norbert emphasizes that today's complex problems cannot be solved within narrow functional boundaries. True creativity requires collaboration across disciplines and departments, bringing together different perspectives. Yet many companies inadvertently educate their people to work against each other rather than together. Breaking down these silos requires intentional cultural work. To foster collaboration, Norbert developed a powerful exercise involving teams solving five interconnected puzzles. Participants initially approach the task individually, trying to solve their own puzzle first. They consistently fail until they realize they can only succeed by helping each other. Even resistant leaders eventually grasp the lesson. Norbert stresses that behaviors must come before beliefs—lecturing about collaboration doesn't work, but creating experiences that demonstrate its value does. For managers who want to move in this direction without the authority to change company culture, Norbert offers practical advice. First, find a sponsor or supporter who can help break down walls and provide air cover. Second, and critically, start with something significant. Rather than working on countless tiny projects that never make a visible impact, tackle a problem big enough that solving it will bring others to your door, asking how you did it. Success with meaningful challenges builds momentum far more effectively than incremental wins on trivial matters. Throughout his career, Norbert learned that subtle approaches work better than direct mandates. Taking teams to visit other companies nearby, exposing them to different ways of working, proved transformative. Within six months, teams that initially fought and blamed each other were asking, "How can I help you?" when problems arose. For more insights on lean-driven innovation and creative problem-solving, visit Norbert's website at leandriveninnovation.com or connect with him on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/norbert-majerus-5a746235/.   You can find Norbert’s books here: Winning Innovation and Lean-Driven Innovation