Developers play a distinguished role in innovation. However, it matters who the developers are, how they are socialised, and what kind of development they receive at the company. Despite the efforts and good intentions of management, as well as imported and adapted best practices, a great deal depends on the personality and attitude of the developers. In addition to the efforts of management, it is essential that the members of the development and innovation team, the employees, also have the individual will to continuously innovate. They should be interested in and inspired by the implementation of each development opportunity and not stop at the idea phase. They should not complain that no one listens to them. Of course, in such cases, it is impossible to know how and how many times the person tried to share their suggestion. Did they present it to their colleagues or managers at the right time and in the right way? In addition to such tactical questions, the ambitions of a development employee are also important. In addition to a developer's mentality, a large dose of entrepreneurial spirit, attitude and ownership is also necessary, otherwise the initiated developments cannot get off the ground. The workplace environment must be made aware of this and helped to achieve it, and managers and ultimately owners are responsible for creating this environment.

The era of individual, lone innovators is over; significant development results are achieved through teamwork. If there is no team and the initiator of the innovative idea cannot convince their colleagues and immediate managers of the potential results of the development, the innovation initiative will soon die out. This is why corporate incubation and accelerator programmes play such an important role, as they nurture, reinforce and teach developers to stand by their ideas and think them through from a business perspective. It should be noted, however, that the above applies specifically to those employed in development and innovation roles. A different logic prevails in production and in developments aimed at increasing its efficiency. There, of course, meeting and enforcing deadlines, precise quality, minimising errors, continuous optimisation and the search for excellence are key considerations.

Key performance indicators (KPIs) do not always encourage innovation. In some cases, company-level or department-level key performance indicators (KPIs) can also encourage innovation. However, caution should be exercised with corporate innovation strategies that optimise the fulfilment of key performance indicators, as they can mislead management intentions. In production practice, it may happen that a KPI goes against common sense, and it is up to the head of the organisation to decide whether to deviate from this KPI. In industrial practice, it may be more important to strengthen the ownership mindset of employees in terms of initiating developments than to blindly follow KPIs and subordinate developments to them. Performance indicators used in production are easy to manipulate with statistics and show rationalisation results of a few (tenths of a) per cent, so management must be cautious about this type of development pressure. It is advisable to focus on real value creation and to take into account what value is created at the end of the day, regardless of KPIs, and whether the value created is sustainable.

With regard to performance indicators, the interests and different motivations of senior and middle management encourage different behaviours. Due to the nature of top management activities and the complexity of their tasks, they mostly obtain information and make decisions through performance indicators. If they see the numbers and conclude that the company/department has achieved its goal, they are satisfied. Meanwhile, it may be that the indicator is an artificial measure that does not reflect the actual value created. In production and operational practice, it is conceivable that the indicator reflects a certain degree of efficiency improvement, but in reality, only half or even a third of this is true, because those who prepared the report presented the results in such a way as to make them impressive and earn the recognition of management.

Developing an organisational strategy and culture that aims to foster an ownership mindset provides a framework that enables employees and developers to achieve self-actualisation. If there is an environment of trust in which managers can be sure that employees at lower levels are making the right decisions and are not focusing on playing with numbers or presenting statistics in a favourable light, then managers are not forced into micromanagement and constant operational interventions. Employees appreciate the right working environment and atmosphere of trust, and they do not abuse the situation but manage KPIs appropriately. Employees appreciate the trust placed in them, which requires managers to take a deep breath and give them that trust, thereby avoiding this type of Catch-22. However, it should also be taken into account that a large company has more room and opportunities to correct any problems, while a small or medium-sized enterprise has much more limited options for intervention.