Authority Magazine: Female Disruptors: Jennifer Sanders of North Texas Innovation Alliance On The Three Things You Need To Shake Up Your Industry

July 23, 2023 - Excerpt, full article available here

“If no one tells you you’re crazy — you aren’t thinking big enough”

First — you have to be comfortable putting your ideas for impact out into the universe, and trusting your gut that there is a “there there”. I was told that if no one thinks it can’t be done, I’m not fulfilling my vision for myself, or the organizations I represent. Several partners have become accustomed to my emails with the subject line: “Another harebrained scheme” and I’m grateful they still return my calls, and hopefully, come alongside me to get it done!

Can you tell our readers what it is about the work you’re doing that’s disruptive?

The mission of our organization itself is to venture into unexplored territories and take on tasks that have never been attempted before. And so, we’re built to be able to have a level of risk tolerance that allows us to try things that are new or may be considered too risky for the public sector’s usual fiscal responsibility. The core of our work involves designing and implementing plans as we go — building the plane as we fly it — which allows us to have a disruptive model for how we operate and how we can help cities embark on new ventures through guidance and informed, pragmatic risk while still pushing them to innovate.

In this way, our very existence is disruptive by nature, and our aim is to empower cities to undertake innovative initiatives. Breaking down silos is one crucial step in achieving this goal. Although no one wants to work in silos, we have all experienced it and how frustrating it can be.

That’s where NTXIA comes in. As what some consider a specialized extension of internal innovation departments, NTXIA has more bandwidth to just focus on finding those connection points across departments, jurisdictions and sectors that are critical to smart city integration projects. City officials and individual departments just don’t have the time or enough staff to be able to lift their heads above water and look around for those complex inter-department connections. So that’s really how we benefit cities and do what we do.

We are focused on figuring out how to connect the dots and how to make individual sectors and the region move faster by breaking down roadblocks and bringing the right managers and officials together to collaborate. We are mission focused on finding efficient ways to get really cool stuff done that ultimately helps people. That’s what it’s all about.

Can you share a story about the funniest mistake you made when you were first starting? Can you tell us what lesson you learned from that?

There are so many interesting experiences that come about when you’re an entrepreneur. One that stands out was when we were working on a project with a pro bono engineering firm. Unfortunately, they couldn’t meet the deadline set by the landmark commission, and it was critical for the entire program. So, to get things done on time, I literally got out a pink fabric tape measurer and went outside to mark the locations of the utilities and created engineering drawings on a public street. It seemed crazy to others, but we managed to get it done, and the commission accepted our work.

Another funny experience was when I had to become an amateur exterminator on a bus. No pest control company would come out to work on the bus, citing liability issues. So, I researched and found a non-toxic yet effective solution to deal with the problem, which required that I wear a hazmat suit to apply, which I did, and got the project back on track.

Then there was a situation with the historic commission, where we needed approval to replace existing streetlights with smart ones. They had to match the originals exactly, down to the form factor and being completely black. However, the lights we received had visible metal, shiny chrome fittings, and we only had two days left for installation. I had to research the right weather-resistant paint that wouldn’t interfere with the intelligent nodes’ communication signals. And then over a weekend, I painted each nut and bolt on those streetlights to meet the deadline and comply with the requirements. It was a little stressful, but we launched on time.

That’s what it’s like to be an entrepreneur sometimes, you just have to figure things out, get your hands dirty and get it done.

In today’s parlance, being disruptive is usually a positive adjective. But is disrupting always good? When do we say the converse, that a system or structure has ‘withstood the test of time’? Can you articulate to our readers when disrupting an industry is positive, and when disrupting an industry is ‘not so positive’? Can you share some examples of what you mean?

I really appreciate your question, and it’s a great one. In my opinion, disruption can be both responsible and irresponsible. It’s such a buzz term these days, with ideas like “move fast, break things,” but personally, I don’t subscribe to that mentality — maybe that’s my tendency to be more risk-averse than my partner! I believe there should be a balance between intentional innovation and considering the unintended consequences that disruptive actions can bring.

One crucial aspect is recognizing that mistakes can happen, you can break too much, and it’s essential to have a genuine willingness to fix mistakes or solve problems rather than just wanting to disrupt something, make money, and move on. To me, the key is understanding the motive behind disruption and whether it aligns with the values and goals of the organization or the community it affects.

Sometimes, there’s a tendency to be attracted to flashy and exciting ideas — “shiny object syndrome.” Whether you’re a venture capitalist or a city manager, you’re being pitched these really cool ideas, and while they may be important for progress, we should emphasize the significance of the intentionality behind them. We should examine these disruptive ideas, where they are coming from, is their solution aligned with a problem…or is it a shiny object looking for a problem? Evaluating whether potential collaborators will act as true partners and support broader objectives. And I think everybody’s gut check has gotten a lot stronger in this space in terms of seeking out what the motives are — and if the solutions are reasonable and realistic. What is really important to me isn’t important to everyone. If I don’t think someone is coming in as a true partner, with a genuine spirit of what we’re trying to do at NTXIA, I’m not going to work with them. This may seem obvious — but I see it overlooked every day…

Disruption is good and can be positive when it has a meaningful impact. I think the triple bottom line concept is a great way to measure disruption. It evaluates whether the disruption positively influences social, environmental, and economic aspects, among others. Is what you’re doing positively impacting each of those sustainable development goals? What about other areas like data privacy? There’s a real opportunity here but is there a willingness to put guardrails in place even when we don’t know what the long-term impact might be? This speaks to a willingness — and the mechanisms — to be flexible within an organization and pivot as learnings are gained.

I think disruption is good when it’s having a positive impact. I think when there’s no realistic gut checks along the way, that’s when things can get out of control. Disruption for disruption’s sake is almost never a good thing. Pragmatic disruption — considering the potential consequences and aligning with broader goals — that’s the way to go. Responsible disruption requires thoughtful consideration and genuine partnership to create meaningful progress.