Crowdsourcing, crowdcasting, open source innovation…

I finished reading a good book over the weekend, “Mavericks at Work,” by William Taylor and Polly LaBarre. The authors have scoured the world looking for examples of companies that are different – and disruptive in their industries. They boil down their findings in a “manifesto” which touts four pillars of the “maverick” mindset.

1) Being different makes all the difference - Maverick companies do not immitate others in their industries. Instead they are driven by a sense of purpose.

2) Sharing your value beats selling value – Maverick companies don’t compete on price.

3) Nobody is as smart as everybody – Maverick companies look outside their companies for ideas and solutions

4) People are the company – Maverick companies have the right answer for the question, “why would great people want to work here?”

Point #3 could hold great potential for the Colts AND the NFL

The book gives several examples of “Maverick” companies like P & G and Eli Lilly that have reinvented their R & D processes through “open source” innovation. Instead of simply pouring more money into their internal labs, these companies also have developed ways of looking outside their own walls to find solutions.

Why would the Fortune 500 look outside for answers?

Even as big as these industry leaders are, they realize, according to the book, that MOST of the worlds really smart people DON’T work for them. In fact, chances are good that the problems they’re facing in their research labs have already been solved by someone, somewhere out there in the wide, wide world. So they’re teaching their researchers to connect with smart people around the world.

They’re not shutting down their internal labs. They’re just making investments outisde as well.

These “Maverick” companies want their people to be “solutions finders” rather than “problem solvers.” Pretty smart when you think about it. Why go to the time and expense to reinvent the wheel when you can just buy it, or license it, and begin building your new product or service off the solution that someone else discovered?

Why don’t we all follow this model?

As logical as it sounds, this strategy runs contrary to the old “expert” model. Most companies hire “experts” and expect them to solve problems. These “experts” are not trained to share their ideas. They’re trained to do it themselves. And while experts can accomplish a lot, the “Maverick” authors point out that no SINGLE “expert” is as smart as ALL the “experts.” This is exactly the realization that Gannett must have come to before changing its long-held model of expert journalism and throwing open its doors to the masses.

So how does this apply to the NFL?

Where do I start? First of all let me just say this: if we worked as hard at “idea” sharing as we do at “revenue” sharing, I believe there would be A LOT more revenue to share.

Like so many big, successful organizations, our league (from my not-so-lofty perch at least) seems to be following the old “expert” model. Happily, our “experts” have made great decisions in the past. The owners and league officials have guided this league to unprecidented prosperity. But where the Internet is concerned, I hope every owner and all the good folks in NYC read this book.

The kids are alright!

Technology has changed the “playing field” and opened up countless new ways to make money as well as even more ways for the league’s digital property to be stolen, or misused. Where local markets and fan bases are concerned, the young guns at each NFL franchise are learning valuable lessons every day. The knowledge we’re gaining about what works and what doesn’t work on team web sites can be rolled up to help the entire league. Yet there is very little conversation between the geeks and the suits.

I’m not saying we throw the doors open to every Tom, Dick or Harry who has an opinion about the league. I’m just saying we would all profit from AT LEAST doing more talking amongst ourselves.

I have found immense wisdom in the “crowd”

Thankfully, when you work in the NFL, it’s not hard to get help when you ask for it. Since I came to the Colts last year, I have spent countless hours outside our walls talking with people from other industries about ways they work. I have actively solicited advice from friends and business partners. My friends at E mail marketing company, Exact Target, and consulting / software development firm, Crowe Chizek, have been especially helpful.

But these are just two among dozens of firms and people that have taken time to have lunch or coffee with me. They’ve shared their boardrooms and run up their cellphone bills trying to help me (and the Colts) work through the challenges and discover the opportunities which the Internet offers to an NFL franchise.

We’ve learned a lot in the last 12 months and are poised to learn a lot more. And we would welcome the chance to share what we’ve learned with the other clubs in a systematic way. I would venture to say that all 32 teams know a thing or two about a thing or two, and that we’d benefit from their learning as well.

But I’ve still got a lot to learn

While I’ve been open minded outside our business, I have room to improve inside our business. I have not been working hard enough to invite my colleagues into the Internet conversation. This includes people in my “department” as well as other departments. I resolve – thanks to the reminder provided by “Mavericks”, to create more of an “open source” environment inside the Colts.

I believe that “open source” innovation is a ripe concept for the NFL and I will continue working hard to get the teams connected, for the Colts benefit AND the good of the league.

Imagine the time and money we’d save if we knew which team in the league had cracked the code for maximizing on-line sponsorship revenues!? If each team quickly adopted the “best practice” then the whole “pie” would grow and we’d have more revenue to share.

But it will be tough to reach this point without a shift in philosophy at the highest level. The experts have big time experience, so it will take a certain dose of humility to include the teams in strategic discusion about new media. But let’s put things into perspective.

Eli Lilly generates $14 Billion in revenues annually. Proctor and Gamble generates $56 BILLION!

Keep in mind that even at $14 Billion, Lilly is only the seventh biggest pharm company. They’re playing in an intensley competitive industry. They face life or death issues – literally – every day. So it’s possible that the competition is what is spurring Lilly and P & G and other Mavericks to try new things. They simply can’t afford NOT to try it.

The NFL does around $6 BILLION annually and by all accounts is the leader among sports leagues. Do we need to wait until a market shift intensifies the competition? Or will we come to the realization (while we’re in the lead) that if “open source” is good enough for the Fortune 500, perhaps it is good enough for us too?