Workplaces in Europe are failing to make the most of innovative ideas from junior members of staff because of an ingrained hierarchical approach, a study has claimed.

Only 8 per cent of European respondents to the KPMG Tech Innovation Survey said that their organization was good at ‘spotting and nurturing innovation from the bottom up’. Many took a hierarchical view of innovation, with one in three saying that innovative thinking is the responsibility of the CEO rather than of people throughout the business.

Asked what would encourage junior and mid-level staff to share their innovative ideas, respondents identified financial incentives (46 per cent), promotion (18 per cent) or internal recognition (16 per cent). However, far from rewarding innovation in this way, many organisations stifle it by valuing conformity and processes over creativity, the report suggested.

Evidence from the survey also suggested that European education systems are worse at developing questioning, challenging thinkers than those of the Asia-Pacific region. Over half (58 per cent) of European respondents to the survey agreed that traditional approaches to education were stifling innovation. Respondents from China did not have the same concerns about their country’s education, with 74 per cent agreeing that it fosters innovative thinkers.

“So much lip service is paid to the importance of innovation, but the ability to create ‘something new’ often proves elusive simply because there is too great a focus on putting processes in place to allow innovative thinking to happen,” said Anna Marie Detert, a director in KPMG’s People and Change Advisory team. “It’s a paradox which must be addressed as it is collective problem-solving, rather than individual process compliance, that really counts with innovation. Ultimately it’s the calibre of the people, the alliances they build, space for their thinking time and the culture in which they operate which are the key ingredients to foster fresh ideas.”

She added: “The educational system in Europe is more established than elsewhere and this backdrop of centuries of high standard setting is often used as an excuse for not allowing alternative views to be expressed in the classroom. It’s a situation which means today’s pupils – who are tomorrow’s innovators – are less inclined to stand up and share their ideas out of a fear of being labelled as disruptive or non-conformist. They may be inclined to move to other geographies where their ideas can be heard and implemented.”