fostering innovation through systemic diversity · framework. this article will outline why...

David J. SilvaSalesforce.com Release [email protected]

Matthew WilsonSalesforce.com Sr. Business Systems [email protected]

Archana Kamath Salesforce.com Application [email protected]

Manasa UdupiAssociate IT [email protected]

FOSTERING INNOVATION THROUGH SYSTEMIC DIVERSITY

2016 EMC Proven Professional Knowledge Sharing 2

Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3

Why Innovate? ............................................................................................................................................ 4

Why do we need Diversity? ...................................................................................................................... 5

Why is Systemic Diversity required? ....................................................................................................... 8

Diversity Engine ........................................................................................................................................ 10

Registration ........................................................................................................................................... 10

Open Challenges and Domains of interest ...................................................................................... 10

Systemically Diverse Team Creation for Idea Submission ............................................................ 10

Submission ............................................................................................................................................ 11

Idea Approval ........................................................................................................................................ 11

Systemically Diverse Team Creation for Idea Implementation ..................................................... 12

Project Development ........................................................................................................................... 12

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................. 13

Appendix .................................................................................................................................................... 14

Barriers to Diversity .............................................................................................................................. 14

Process Flow Diagram ........................................................................................................................ 15

Flow Chart ............................................................................................................................................. 15

Bibliography .............................................................................................................................................. 16

Author Biographies................................................................................................................................... 17

Disclaimer: The views, processes or methodologies published in this article are those of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect EMC Corporation’s views, processes, or methodologies.


Introduction Companies exist to make a profit for their investors. Those that succeed, thrive by

understanding their customers and building products that fulfill a specific need and with the

hopes that they can repeat this process perpetually. The question is how companies continue to

stay relevant, how they continue to tap into the explicit and implicit needs of their customers.

Customers are a diverse crowd, however. They require a variety of solutions to support their

diverse needs across various markets for the long term. Companies have a very tough job and

routine adaptation to changing customer tastes is an insufficient strategy. Breakthrough

innovation is a factor in success, but it is not enough.

Diversity within a workforce allows the innovation cycle to repeat, to prevent breakthroughs from

being mere flashes in the pan. The typical cycle is simple in that solution providers gather

customer input, derive customer needs, define the scope of a product, and then pull together a

team to execute on that product plan. Many companies hire for diversity with the hopes that

these teams encapsulate the diversity that the company believes it possesses at a macro level

so that they can put out the best product to support their diverse customer needs.

How does a company ensure that its project teams are, in fact, diverse so that the innovation

process is at its most optimal? If there is a presiding belief that the most innovative thinking is

drawn from a diverse workforce, then how does diversity at the macro level get preserved—or

even better—assured at the project level?

Innovation is a global, multidisciplinary endeavor and bringing together different minds,

perspectives and skillsets is essential for the discovery of flexible solutions to problems. Yet

many companies limit their potential because they do not foster innovation through a more

intentional process. Innovators often seek out specific individuals to help drive their ideas which

can result in a more homogeneous idea and execution model. This organically derived

approach is good as it is immediately accessible and it fosters more familiar levels of team trust

and enthusiasm. But such a model often results in products that fail to scale quickly enough in

rapidly changing business landscapes.

This article aims to make diversity in innovative initiatives more accessible by theorizing a

means to drive systemic infusion of diversity into any organization’s innovation process. By

introducing a system that institutes diversity by leveraging crowd sourcing methodologies, an

organization can promote an innovation framework that results in a greater breadth and depth of


ideas that taps into a broader array of skillsets, experience and perspectives across the teams.

By bringing diversity and internal crowd sourcing together during both the idea generation

portion of the corporate innovation framework and the execution phase, the strength of a

company’s knowledge and creativity can be harnessed through stronger collaboration and

employee engagement, unbound by hierarchy or position. Participation would increase as

employees seek personal fulfillment through reputational growth rather than monetary

incentives while underutilized resources will get engaged outside of their direct focus.

Through the deployment of a software-based Diversity Engine, members across the talent pool

in an organization can be selected for projects or initiatives based on diversity factors such as

geography, business unit, skillset, gender, years of experience, age, hierarchy, and ethnicity—

amongst others. The new innovation team will get invited to virtual collaboration spaces and

begin brainstorming and submitting ideas. A similar approach is taken during the execution

phase but where a diverse group is matched against the technology and resource requirements

of the approved idea.

The article will focus on improving the Idea Generation and Execution Phases of the Innovation

Framework. This article will outline why diversity is important in innovation, how diversity can

speed innovation, and how a software-based Diversity Engine and Team Building Algorithm can

be used as a method of crowdsourcing innovation within a company. These factors will help

concepts become reality and thus lead to marketable products, process improvements, and

customer satisfaction.

Why Innovate? Companies innovate to better serve their customers. Not only do they attempt to fulfill a

consumer’s current wants, but also to endeavor an anticipation of the needs customers were

unaware they had. Having innovative thinking as part of a company’s mission not only ensures

more trusted relationships with customers but it also helps reinforce the company’s bottom line.

But innovation is not simply adaptation to changing variables in the marketplace or within the

company. Rather, innovation is about finding new ways to solve customer or organizational

challenges to ensure relevance in an ever changing landscape.

The typical successful organization can be viewed as productively efficient but lacking

innovative capacity. However, there is no synonymous relationship between adaptive and

innovative organizations; a firm can adapt to new and varied pressures but fail to come up with


new ideas. The distinction made between adaptive and innovative firms does not mean there is

a void in terms of innovative practices, but that there is deliberate focus on new and unexplored

territory. Adaptive firms focus on the short term while innovative firms focus on the long term at

least in terms of product development that is important to their consumers. However, in order for

any organization to function effectively, a "production ideology" needs to exist to allow the

running of the business through goals, objectives, and methods that "legitimizes the coercion of

the individual” by the firm. In a vertical organization, goals set by management are carried out

through the efforts of employees who have been hired to do specific, discrete, and non-

overlapping functions (p. 2). (Friedman, Roberts, & Linton, 2010) These incremental changes

are a fact of life in business and get companies through a few months or a few years.

Innovation can act within this space, but it is typically an additional focus on top of the daily life

of the firm. Innovation is what ensures a company can pivot on changes in consumer tastes.

Organizations feel good when they talk about Innovation. The word’s very meaning exudes the

hope of success—that whatever idea an organization has on the table will be fresh, new,

differentiating. It is no surprise, then, that “innovation” and “innovative thinking” are phrases that

have found a permanent home in the vision statements that many organizations have

established for the work that they do and the product they produce. This is important on a few

levels. The desire to be innovative is a rallying point for all members of an organization. When

given the means, employees are often much more excited to produce when there is a

promising, accessible innovation process that is in place. Also, a company that can innovate is

better prepared to be more intentional with their strategies for establishing their position in their

marketplace. This, however, is only a step toward success. What differentiates the myriad of

companies who are all trying to be innovative?

Why do we need Diversity? Companies have begun to rally around diversity in much the same way as innovation. It has

been shown that “Companies with diverse leadership are 45% more likely to report market

share grew over the previous year and 70% more likely to report entry into new markets.”

(Hewlett, Marshall, & Sherbin, December 2013) Another study found that “female

representation in top management leads to an increase of $42 million in firm value.” (Phillips,

October 1, 2014) These numbers are not mere coincidence and why companies, at least many

of them, are beginning to hire more diverse employees, at least at a macro level. The problem

lay in the fact that diversity is still superficial in many organizations. Many still praise the fact that


their teams can arrive at unanimous decisions quickly but ignore the fact that like-minded

thinkers act quickly only because there is a lack of diversity in perspective and background and

thus they fail to achieve the best results. “While there's a sense of satisfaction when everyone

agrees, there's a great deal to be said for diversity of thought and a dash of constructive conflict,

and the results prove it: according to a McKinsey & Co report, US public companies with

diversity on their executive board have a 95% higher return on equity than those without.”

(Grillo, 2014) While one might think that camaraderie can be a driving force in the innovative

process, it is more that the innovative process can drive camaraderie within teams. When those

that organize project teams or start up new organizations are left to more natural, organic

approaches to exploring ideas and executing on them, diversity will very often take a back seat

to the innate desire for likeminded thinking. After all, the more people you have supporting your

ideas and willing to execute on them, the better chances that your ideas get approved or

funded.

“People gravitate toward people like them. We’ve long known that similarity makes people like

and identify with each other. In organizations, leaders often hire and promote those who share

their own attitudes, behaviors, and traits. Thus, many organizations unknowingly have

“prototypes for success” that perpetuate a similarity bias and limit the pool of potential

candidates for positions, important assignments, and promotions.” (Riordan, June 05, 2014)

When a company talks about diversity, however, what does that mean? It is important to have

some guiding criteria for what constitutes diversity. There are two types: inherent and acquired.

Traits an individual was born with, like gender or ethnicity, are inherent, while acquired diversity

is comprised of traits gained through experience. (Hewlett, Marshall, & Sherbin, December

2013) As this article ultimately explores a means for systemic infusion of diversity into the

innovative process, it is important to consider that the combination of inherent and acquired

diversities is critical to successful idea generation and execution. While companies once thought

that they were simply being inclusive by focusing on inherent diversity, it has been evidenced

that the ability for an organization to remain competitive is dependent on their ability to leverage

the inherent and acquired diversity offered by their workforce to generate ideas, collaborate and

execute.

Ideas that are generated amongst a team comprised of different races and genders will certainly

yield more innovative ideas than a team of all one gender or race, but greater depth of

innovation is achieved when various voices are heard from those with different life and job

http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/organization/is_there_a_payoff_from_top-team_diversity


experiences are brought to the table. Since customers and clients are diverse, it stands to

reason that the ideas generated by an organization that embraces these two planes of diversity

will differentiate themselves in the marketplace and help to gain market share. (Egan, July

2011)

All of this sounds like common sense, but there is scientific research to prove that diversity is

required for diversity of thought. A group of innovators who all look the same, speak the same,

and from the same socio-economic backgrounds will come up with inferior ideas compared with

those generated from a diverse group even if the first group is intellectually superior because

“diversity of perspective and problem-solving approach trumps individual ability.” (Fan, 2011) A

contributing factor to this is that people change their behavior when social diversity is added to a

group. Diversity promotes hard work and thinking out of the box by “encouraging the

consideration of alternatives even before any interpersonal interaction takes place.” For

example, in a 2006 study of juries, Samuel Sommers of Tufts University found that “diverse

juries were better at considering case facts, made fewer errors recalling relevant information

and displayed a greater openness to discussing the role of race in the case. These

improvements did not necessarily happen because the black jurors brought new information to

the group—they happened because white jurors changed their behavior in the presence of the

black jurors. In the presence of diversity, they were more diligent and open-minded.” (Phillips,

October 1, 2014) Stanford Professor Anthony Antonio, in a study of 350 students, identified that

when individuals hear a dissenting opinion from someone different, it provokes more thought

than if the same idea is presented by someone who is similar. (Antonio, Chang, Hakuta, Kenny,

Levin, & Milem, August 2004) “Simply interacting with individuals who are different forces group

members to prepare better, to anticipate alternative viewpoints and to expect that reaching

consensus will take effort.” (Phillips, October 1, 2014)

Companies have made progress in becoming more diverse across their organizations but a

majority of organizations admit that they experience barriers to implementing their diversity

programs. As seen in figure 1, while 7% of respondents felt there were no barriers, barriers such

as a failure of execution by middle management, budgetary issues, or an overt focus on just

surviving are big factors in preventing successful diversity programs. (Egan, July 2011)


Why is Systemic Diversity required? Without innovation, company products become stagnant and eventually irrelevant. With

innovation, companies create new products, enter new industries, and re-invent themselves to

become relevant for as many years as their purpose is important to consumers of their good or

service. The paper has put forth that innovation is essentially the lifeblood of the company and

that without it, the company will eventually die. Diversity within a workforce is what makes the

cycle of innovation more consistent and more rapid. “When at least one member of a team has

traits in common with the end user, the entire team better understands that user. A team with a

member who shares a client’s ethnicity is 152% likelier than another team to understand that

client” (Hewlett, Marshall, & Sherbin, December 2013). Different perspectives allow engineers

and marketers to get inside the heads of their customers. The plurality of the word customers is

important for it is not just one type of customer, but rather any possible combination of customer

profiles that make use of company products and resources. Companies have begun to hire for

diversity and this will lead to better innovation, but this is akin to putting gas in a car. A little

diversity is like a little gas. The car will move a little and the company will innovate a

little. Adding more diversity creates more innovation, and adding more gas means the car can


go a little faster up to the capacity of the engine. Without gas, the car would not run and a

company’s innovation turnover would be lackluster. A diverse workforce runs the company. It

allows it to move, but to go faster and to be more efficient, one does not need more gas, but

rather a faster car, or more specifically, a better and more efficient engine. This is where

systemic insertion of diversity into every aspect of innovation comes into play. A diversity engine

will take the same resources already being hired for in the company, and use them more

efficiently. At a minimum, every enthusiastic employee will be part of transient innovative teams

to catalogue the myriad of ideas that occur simply due to the synergies of individual differences.

As discussed earlier, being among a heterogeneous group has proven that humans work harder

to prove their case, think of better ideas, and avoid group think because they simply cannot

assume the other party will share their opinion.

A company’s catalogue of potential ideas will now exist, but telling the feasible idea from the

infeasible one, or the lucrative idea from the chrome squirrel that only an engineer could love--

this will be handled by the wisdom of the crowd. The full force of the company, or at least those

interested in the innovation process, will approve the “good” ideas for execution, leaving the

“bad” ideas to stay in the catalogue until they either become relevant with new technology

advances or new customer needs, or they remain unapproved in perpetuity. There is no need to

archive bad ideas or to appoint an expert panel who “knows better”. The corporation graveyard

is full of companies whose brightest employees and leaders failed to see the future. The same

future that college drop-outs saw coming, leading to the likes of Apple and Microsoft overtaking

giants like Digital and Polaroid. The crowd knows a “good” idea when they see it, even if they

never knew they wanted it until they saw the potential of the idea. Allowing the idea to be voted

for in perpetuity until it meets a dynamic threshold gives individuals time to grasp the importance

of the idea. An individual can be wrong, but the wisdom of the crowd will always be right.

How should ideas that move past the approval stage get executed? Through the Diversity

Engine, of course! Assembling the most diverse team with the skills needed to make the idea a

reality. At any given time, different individuals across the company will be the best team to solve

a given problem based on their skills, their capacity, and of course their diversity. The next

minute, the same problem will possibly have a different team assigned as the inputs in terms of

time constraints or skills availability may have changed thus dynamically changing the results

for the same selection criteria. The following sections add more color to how this would all work

in practice.


Diversity Engine We are proposing a Diversity Engine that acts like a team building algorithm. It enables diverse

communities to engage and generate novel ideas to help solve problems that companies and

their customers are either currently facing or will be facing in the near future. The platform

promotes dynamic collaboration among a balanced set of individuals allowing diverse

communities and networks to innovate faster and be more cost effective. Our Engine has the

following features:

1. Registration of Innovators and their interests and skills

2. Open Challenges and Domains of Interest

3. Systemically Diverse Team creation for Idea Generation

4. Idea Submission

5. Idea approval via Wisdom of the Crowd

6. Systemically Diverse Team creation for Idea implementation

7. Project Development and Submission

Registration

The Diversity Engine captures information that enables recruitment of a diverse team for both

idea generation and implementation. Essential data such as company name, industry work

experience, age, domains of interest, skills, location and gender is collected. These diversity

factors form the basis of a registrant’s user profiles for both inherent and acquired types of

diversity. Integrating with a capacity management tool ensure employees with sufficient

bandwidth will be selected over those who are already overcommitted and also allow for

individuals to be selected for more than one team so work can be done in parallel depending on

time constraints.

Open Challenges and Domains of interest

The Challenge Dashboard and Database provides an integrated view of all the open challenges

proposed by individuals or sponsored by business units as well as a means to post new

challenges or domains of interest. Domains of interest that have no explicit challenges will be

listed as their own prompt for teams to form around.

Systemically Diverse Team Creation for Idea Submission

Communities of five to seven individuals sharing similar domains of interest are selected

automatically to maximize the diversity per group based on the diversity factors described

earlier. The entire pool of innovators will be divided into teams coalescing around business

sponsored challenges or domains of interest if no other prompts exist.


Companies can be as open or as closed with their innovation program as is appropriate for

them. By opening up the innovator pool to an audience of employees, customers, partners, and

suppliers, a company can gain keen insights into areas outside their typical organizational

knowledge. With the right contractual agreements, a wide range of innovators can participate

via virtual collaboration spaces designed to house discussion, track progress, and measure

effectiveness of the team selection algorithm. The algorithm would be self-learning by tweaking

team selection parameters to attempt a repeat of previous success along the best mix of

diversity and skill. While virtual collaboration may not always be ideal, the diversity gains of

geographically dispersed groups outweigh the efficiency lags of not being co-located.

Submission

After collaborative discussions, each group submits their idea or sets of ideas to the database.

The process is the same regardless of whether there was a challenge or whether the team was

formed along a domain of interest. Time limits for the Idea submission phase can be stated by

companies at the very beginning to allow for teams to be dissolved periodically and reformed

with new members. If there are hard deadlines on challenges, this would also be a factor in

determining when a submission is required and thus signal the dissolution of the current idea

generation team. The ideas submitted over this course of time are then evaluated. Note that

each company can select a threshold for the target number of ideas the team can generate

between periodic dissolution. The more data the team building algorithm has, the more accurate

it can be with future team selection, it is suggested that companies have as little as one idea

generated between dissolution up to ten ideas generated by a given specific team.

Idea Approval

Submissions are available for voting by the pool of innovators. We base approval on two

factors, both of which revolve around the wisdom of the crowd.

a) A threshold where the total number of members who have liked the idea over the

total number of members who have viewed the idea equals 40 to 60%

b) A set threshold of 10 to 30% of the total audience associated to that domain of

interest likes the idea.

Each company can tweak the thresholds based on what is right for them to throttle the number

of ideas getting to the execution phase. If the value of an idea meets the minimum threshold set

by the organization for both factors, it qualifies to be implemented. Similar ideas will be identified

through analytics and proposed for merging at the execution team level. Ideas will remain in the


pool until they reach the thresholds. If the idea never makes it to execution, makes it after 10

years, or makes it within 1 month, any of these situations are acceptable. Innovators will all be

notified when an idea is submitted. Companies may choose to set reminders for idea voting of

perhaps 3 times if there is a concern of hitting the threshold. Reminders or tweaking the

thresholds up or down will both accomplish the same objective. As in earlier phases, the team

building algorithm within the diversity engine will learn the appropriate mix of diversity to attain

the most successful results and the self-learning will improve as it gathers more input.

Systemically Diverse Team Creation for Idea Implementation

A heterogeneous team is formed consisting of people with diverse backgrounds based on the

diversity factors mentioned earlier but with specific requirements on team skills where the

highest diversity is achieved among a set of required skills including project management,

engineering, business sponsorship, business analysis, and sales and marketing.

The engine includes one member from the idea submission team to preserve the originality of

the idea. These teams of 5-7 members are then assigned to the respective ideas to be

implemented. Each member of the team can accept or reject the proposal based on their

interest and availability. On rejection by a member, the engine computes and invites a new

eligible individual.

The diversity engine also provides privileges to request for additional resources based on the

implementation complexity. Resources that are not utilized can be released by the team, those

released resources are assigned new projects by the engine; hence it promotes efficient

resource utilization.

Project Development

Members of teams may recuse themselves at any time and be replaced by the next best diverse

contributor with the needed skill. If all the team members recuse themselves within a threshold

of 3 months, and the new team does the same within another 3 months, the idea will be moved

back to the voting phase minus 10% of its approval thresholds. This will prevent an unfair drop

back to zero, but also prevents a fluke approval from hampering an execution team.

On accepting the proposal, the team can start implementing and work towards the delivery of

the project. After project assignment, if there is inactivity for more than two months, then the

engine assigns the project to a new team. The engine keeps the registrants up to date by

sending them notifications and reminders of the events/activities etc. Upon delivery, each team

is fairly rewarded; points, back patting, and gifts etc. The right reward system is planned by the


organization and communicated clearly to the audience in the initial stages. The focus is on

personal fulfillment rather than monetary benefit, however. The ideas dashboard may be a place

to showcase the success rate for individuals in the forms of badges or other identifiers for the

purpose of gamification

Conclusion The evidence is clear that routine adaptive change is insufficient to maintain competitive

advantage in industry. Breakthrough innovation is the means by which companies seek to stay

relevant as customer needs change. The paper has established that diversity must be a critical

component of any company’s innovation strategy. While companies focus on becoming more

diverse at the macro level, there are still barriers that hinder them from taking full advantage of

the skills, experience, and varying viewpoints that are now available to them through their “hiring

for diversity” programs. As a result, the intent of the innovation process can still be thwarted

because sub-optimal combinations of resources occur at the micro level, and thus realization of

full potential is impossible. A company’s efforts to make its workforce more diverse are only ever

truly realized when that diversity can be applied at all levels. Every group in a company wants to

be innovative and demonstrate the best of what their company has to offer, but there are few

structures in place today that allow companies to fully utilize their growing pool of diverse talent.

The proposed Diversity Engine enables a company to tap into the perspectives and knowledge

of all its employees. It is fundamentally powered by the self-alignment of employees to

organizational initiatives and promotes successful outcomes by systemically infusing diversity

into every innovative initiative. This efficient utilization of the workforce gives companies an

edge over their competitors who are operating with the standard mindset of innovation. While

companies who innovate will be more successful than those who causally adapt, those who

systemically diversify their teams for optimized innovation will be in the best position to meet

customer demand. The Diversity Engine ensures that only relevant ideas are produced, that

only currently applicable ideas are approved through the wisdom of the crowd, and that the best

team possible brings these concepts into reality to create marketable products and services.

The proposal stimulates continuous innovation, thus allowing a firm to reinvent itself with a

pertinent ever-changing product line. As stated earlier, companies exist to make a profit for their

investors. The ability to produce solutions that consistently meet demand ensures that the firm

is a continued value and worth the investment.


Appendix

Barriers to Diversity

(Egan, July 2011)


Process Flow Diagram

Flow Chart

Step 1

Diverse data collection and User profile

generation

Step 2

Diverse team creation for idea generation

Step 3

Idea Creation & Evaluation

Step 4

Diverse team formation for Idea implementation

Step 5

Project development and submission


Bibliography Antonio, A. L., Chang, M. J., Hakuta, K., Kenny, D. A., Levin, S., & Milem, J. F. (August 2004).

Effects of Racial Diversity on Complex Thinking in College . Psychological Science, 507-

510.

Egan, M. E. (July 2011). Fostering Innovation Through a Diverse Workforce. New York: Forbes

Insights.

Fan, D. (2011, August 31). Proof That Diversity Drives Innovation. Retrieved January 20, 2016,

from Diversity Inc: http://www.diversityinc.com/diversity-management/proof-that-

diversity-drives-innovation/

Feitler, D. (March 27, 2014). The Case for Team Diversity Gets Even Better. Harvard Business

Review.

Fleming, L., & Sorenson, O. (2004). Science as a Map in Technological Search. Strategic

Management Journal Vol. 25, 909-928.

Friedman, R. S., Roberts, D. M., & Linton, J. D. (2010). Social Influence and Human Interaction

with Technology. In S. Dasgupta, Social Computing: Concepts, Methodologies,Tools,

and Applications.

Grillo, G. (2014, March 27). Diverse workforces are more innovative. Retrieved January 22,

2016, from The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/media-network/media-network-

blog/2014/mar/27/diversity-innovation-startups-fortune-500-companies

Hewlett, S. A., Marshall, M., & Sherbin, L. (December 2013). How Diversity Can Drive

Innovation. Harvard Business Review.

Phillips, K. W. (October 1, 2014). How Diversity Makes Us Smarter. Scientific American.

Riordan, C. M. (June 05, 2014). Diversity Is Useless Without Inclusivity. Harvard Business

Review.

Staff, H. B. (May 21, 2015). Measure Your Team’s Intellectual Diversity. Harvard Business

Review.

Zynga, A. (June 13, 2013). The Cognitive Bias Keeping Us from Innovating. Harvard Business

Review.


Author Biographies David J Silva is the Release Manager for EMC’s instance of Salesforce.com. He has been

working in IT for over 20 years, the last 16 at EMC. An expert in process development,

facilitation, training, data manipulation, and reporting, Dave is a certified EMC Proven

Professional Cloud Infrastructure and Services Associate, a certified Scrum Master, ITIL Service

Management Practitioner, and a Lean Six Sigma Green Belt. He holds a Bachelor of Science in

Management Information Systems, a Master of Science in Innovation Leadership, and is also

pursuing his MBA at Worcester Polytechnic Institute. He also authored “The Importance of

Opportunity Recognition within Innovation “in 2013.

Matthew Wilson is a Sr. Business Systems Analyst supporting EMC’s Partner Relationship

Management and Channel Sales initiatives on Salesforce.com. He has been at EMC for 4+

years and has a diverse background ranging from front-end web development, sales and

systems training, and business consulting.

Archana Kamath is an Application Manager for EMC’s instance of Salesforce.com. She has

over 13 years of IT experience. As a Mobile Development Manager, she built the mobile

development team from the ground up to a sizable team of over 25 high performers, and led the

delivery of several strategic mobile projects. She has also built EMC’s first SharePoint team

and delivered the “SharePoint As a Service” catalog offering. She holds an engineering degree

in Computer Science and has an MBA in Human Resource Management.

Manasa Udupi is an Associate IT Generalist in EMC’s IT Leadership Program. She has a

Bachelor’s degree in Information Science Engineering with just under 2 years of experience

within IT. She has worked with groups as varied as Cloud Operations Infrastructure, Mobility,

and Salesforce.com where she is currently working as a Business Analyst. Manasa is a

certified EMC Proven Professional Information Storage Associate V2, ITIL Foundation certified,

and Scrum Master certified.

EMC believes the information in this publication is accurate as of its publication date. The

information is subject to change without notice.

THE INFORMATION IN THIS PUBLICATION IS PROVIDED “AS IS.” EMC CORPORATION

MAKES NO RESPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND WITH RESPECT TO

THE INFORMATION IN THIS PUBLICATION, AND SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS IMPLIED

WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Use, copying, and distribution of any EMC software described in this publication requires an

applicable software license.

fostering innovation through systemic diversity · framework. this article will outline why...

Documents