Hello {{ FNAME | Innovator }}!

This week, we’re featuring a firsthand account from inside a Fortune 500 innovation work session — and a hard look at what happens when innovation becomes performance instead of action. We unpack the rise of innovation washing, why it’s more damaging than innovation theater, and what it takes to actually build the future (hint: it’s not another vendor showcase).

Here’s what you’ll find:

Innovation has long been a buzzword in the corporate world — a status symbol flaunted in boardrooms and on annual reports. But during a recent work session, I was reminded, once again, that for many organizations, innovation remains an underutilized concept. Today, innovation gets filtered through the wrong lens…

Branding, not growth.
Applause, not outcomes.
Press releases, not actions.

I saw this up close during a recent workshop with the Director of Innovation at a Fortune 500. Not a director — the director. This company has a single person tasked with driving innovation across a global, multi-billion-dollar organization. One person, sitting in a role that’s equal parts hopeful and handcuffed.

We sat together for a few hours, considering what innovation could look like inside his company. What he was up against became clearer by the minute: internal politics, turf wars, limited attention spans, and a financial system that requires him to lock in his budget 12–18 months before a project can even begin.

He’s expected to drive innovation but isn’t given the tools to test or build anything new. And the more he described his role, the more apparent it became to me that innovation is viewed not as a growth driver within this company, but rather a sales and marketing mechanism. 

His job is to find innovative new products that his vendors are releasing, and leverage them to demonstrate this company’s commitment to innovation by introducing them to customers. 

This F500 organization has one Director of Innovation for their multi-billion dollar business. He has no remit to explore and create new products or business lines.

His role is to make the company look innovative.

This work session laid bare, once again, the systemic challenges that limit innovation within behemoth organizations. And the experience reinforced a hard truth:

In fact, it’s become the status quo.

Through no fault of his own, this particular Director’s role is no longer about creating value or driving disruption. His job now? Showing off someone else’s R&D to bolster his company’s image and reputation of “being cutting-edge.”

While this approach might dazzle customers and placate stakeholders, it also represents a deliberate decision to ignore the true potential of innovation: growth, transformation, and a path to securing a company’s long-term future.

This innovator has become a marketer. A sales technician.

He knows it. He said as much. His company’s innovation agenda is anchored in optics, not opportunity. And it reinforces what Christensen’s theories made plain: big companies favor sustaining innovations because they’re safe bets. They align with current incentives.

And they don’t rattle the system.

The corporate habit of branding something as innovative without funding it, measuring it, or letting it ship is no different than greenwashing. It’s a PR play. A surface treatment. A way to deflect the important but difficult question:

How are we actually building for the future?

Innovation washing shows up in well-lit labs with no output. In senior job titles with no budget. In roadmaps that feature someone else’s IP dressed up in company colors. It’s performative. It’s widespread. And, while it has become the status quo, it’s quietly rotting the system from the inside.

The cost isn’t just wasted time or misplaced talent. It’s strategic drift. It’s a billion-dollar market no one explores because it doesn’t align with this year’s incentives. It’s the opportunity that gets buried under another cycle of approval meetings, stage gates, and “executive visibility.”

Everyone inside the building knows the system is broken. No one wants to admit it.

Admitting it would mean facing the uncomfortable truth…
Your innovation function isn’t failing.
It’s succeeding exactly as designed.
It’s doing its job.

And that job is to signal just enough change to reassure shareholders, calm stakeholders, and keep the stock price steady while keeping the core business insulated from anything that might challenge it.

You can’t hedge your way into the future.
You can’t slide-deck your way into relevance.
And you definitely can’t vendor-demo your way to a defensible market.

But here’s the part most companies miss: the problem isn’t a lack of vision. It’s a refusal to act on the opportunities already sitting inside your innovation horizon.

Not moonshots. Not "disruption." Just the overlooked, underfunded, and perpetually postponed opportunities to expand your relevance: new products for existing customers, adjacent offerings, nearby markets.

You don’t need a breakthrough. You need follow-through.
You need to actually build what you’ve already surfaced (and ignored).

Ask yourself:

Because that’s the point: real innovation won’t survive under the same constraints that protect the core business. You want outcomes? Change the system:

And please stop treating your Director of Innovation like a figurehead. If you won’t give them a mandate to invent, explore, and build, then they’re not leading innovation.

They’re managing your image.

Innovation washing isn’t harmless. It’s expensive. It’s misleading. And it’s the fastest way to let someone else monetize the opportunity you’ve already glimpsed but never touched.

In early 2020, as the COVID-19 pandemic emerged, Pfizer distinguished itself by swiftly partnering with BioNTech to develop an mRNA vaccine. This rapid response was not coincidental but the result of deliberate organizational design and strategic choices that prioritized genuine innovation over performative gestures.

Decentralized Decision-Making
Pfizer's leadership empowered teams to make swift decisions without the typical bureaucratic delays. This autonomy allowed for rapid progression from research to development stages.

Strategic Partnerships
Prior to the pandemic, Pfizer had established a collaboration with BioNTech for influenza vaccines. This existing relationship facilitated a seamless transition to co-developing the COVID-19 vaccine.

Significant Internal Investment
Pfizer chose to fund the vaccine development independently, investing approximately $2 billion of its own resources. This decision allowed the company to bypass potential delays associated with external funding and maintain full control over the development process.

Integrated Manufacturing Capabilities
Pfizer's robust manufacturing infrastructure enabled the company to scale up production rapidly, ensuring timely distribution upon vaccine approval.

These structural components underscore Pfizer's commitment to authentic innovation. By fostering an environment that encourages decisive action and strategic risk-taking, Pfizer was able to deliver a life-saving vaccine in record time, exemplifying the tangible outcomes of a well-orchestrated innovation strategy.

Refer 3 friends to Innovate, Disrupt, or Die and you can earn a month of free access to either of our unique, highly trained custom GPTs.

All you have to do is share your link: {{ rp_refer_url }}

So far, you’ve made {{ rp_num_referrals }} referrals. You’ll earn an awesome gift after {{ rp_num_referrals_until_next_milestone }} more referrals.