While particularly creative from a technical standpoint, the watch industry – like so many other sectors of activity – has a hard time innovating when it comes to management. While ideas are often allowed to vanish, some nonetheless dare to experiment with new formulae. Might innovation be linked to an ability to be different?

Even the weightiest investments in research and development cannot give brands the certainty of being the most innovative on the market. Both now and in the past, innovation – a term so cherished by the watch companies, is not confined to the technical breakthroughs expressed by the timepieces they produce, but also by a certain ability to adopt a different approach to corporate life. This may relate to marketing, communication or internal mechanisms liable to improve productivity or save time. But in-house innovation is also about offering employees sufficient room for manoeuvre in order to express their proposals and thus to become more closely involved in the life of their company.

A question of mistrust
Nonetheless, it seems that while members of personnel certainly have ideas, they often have a hard time expressing them. Witness a widespread sense of mistrust vis-à-vis their direct superiors and the hierarchy in general, recently confirmed by a survey conducted by the Human Asset recruitment agency which focuses mainly on the watch industry: “Do innovation and management go well together within a company? ” The study investigates the issue and the results are not that encouraging. Out of some 200 people surveyed, over 43% would expect a negative reaction from their hierarchy if they were to adopt an innovative approach. And while 61% consider that innovation is part of the values promoted by their company, 71% observe that there is no clear process liable to nurture the emergence and expression of innovation. “We noticed a genuine problem of trust in the corporate hierarchy”, points out Julien Bonvin, a consultant at Human Asset. “The latter may not have established a clear process conducive to such approaches by their employees, a situation that has clearly detrimental effects. In the same way, the fact of being able to express apparently innovative ideas without being able to implement them has a generally negative impact on the employee.”

So what solutions are envisaged for a problem that is obviously very real and often seriously diminishes the motivation of company personnel. “Showing trust and daring to overturn established processes”, says Christophe Pigato, CEO of Human Asset. That may be easy to say, but it’s much harder to put into practice – particularly in a watch industry which, although technically innovative, has its roots firmly planted in a longstanding tradition and is characterised by particularly striking structural differences in the companies composing it. There is a chasm between the managerial system of a small 20-person independent brand and that of a group such as Richemont. But trust is doubtless the real key, as well as recognition of the right to make mistakes. “Some companies have instated a suggestion box system along with regular meetings allowing everyone to make suggestions”, comments Julien Bonvin. The latter goes on to suggest certain options worth exploring: promoting the exchanges of ideas outside the company setting, supporting personnel in their attempts to set up a structure, handling innovative proposals in a transparent manner thanks to clear-cut communication regarding the reasons for a refusal or an implementation of the idea…

Listening, rallying, promo
For many companies, and particularly small and mediumsized businesses, setting up such a dedicated structure is not considered a necessity. Jean-Claude Biver, CEO of Hublot, even finds the idea slightly incongruous in light of the size of his company which employs 120 people. “In this area, everything is done in a very informal manner”, he explains. “If anyone has an idea to put forward, he can just present it to me. Managing is about listening, rallying, stimulating and promoting. When you guide people without listening to them, you are in fact creating a dictatorship system. I would say that I’m a consensus-based dictator. I only dictate conduct when the team has first come to an agreement, and I also recognise the right to failure. And above all, there is no vertical hierarchy at Hublot. I prefer to talk of horizontal management, which makes things much simpler and faster.”

In extremely small companies, it is also extremely rare to find a dedicated structure for handling these issues. It’s a problem of time, of means – and above all a question of many people not feeling the need.

Maximilien Büsser, founder of MB&F - F stands for Friends – has chosen a radically different solution in order to avoid what he calls “the dilution of enthusiasm”. Embodying a first in the watch industry, his company has only four permanent staff members and works with external partners to implement his watchmaking projects. At the head of this inventive laboratory or “think tank” based on networking in a resolutely start-up spirit, Maximilien Büsser is convinced that the secret of his creativity lies in the fact that “each member of the team considers the company as his own”. And he is delighted with the consequences: “I am amazed every day be the level of energy and commitment that setting up such a structure can create among our partners and suppliers!” So it’s once again the same issue of trust that enables people to have the straightforward audacity… to dare.