Who should lead innovation?

1. Innovation embedded in an executive role

Many companies have no dedicated innovation role. Innovation sits with an existing executive: often the CTO in technology companies, sometimes the Chief Digital Officer or the Chief Strategy Officer.

It can work, but innovation tends to become a secondary priority to the executive’s main responsibilities, and it takes on the bias of their function.

“Specifically, when the CTO undertakes this responsibility, innovation is often approached with a narrow focus and a tech bias that neglects other types of innovation, such as business model innovation.”Innovation Mode, Author’s Edition (2026), pp. 44–45

When the Chief Product Officer leads innovation, the risk is a focus on existing products that misses opportunities beyond them. And most executives in these roles lack the expertise, and the time, to orchestrate a company-wide innovation process alongside day-to-day operations.

2. A VP or head of innovation below the C-suite

Other companies create a dedicated role one level down: a VP, director or head of innovation reporting to the CTO or the Chief Strategy Officer.

“Roles like VP/SVP of innovation typically struggle to secure adequate resources without C-suite approvals.”Innovation Mode, Author’s Edition (2026), p. 45

These leaders are often not empowered to drive significant organisational change. Without innovation represented at the top, the programme can look like an isolated effort with weak sponsorship, which makes alignment harder and weakens the message of innovation across the company.

3. The Chief Innovation Officer

The Chief Innovation Officer is the most senior formal role dedicated to innovation. It is most common in large companies facing disruption, or where innovation is recognised as critical and backed by significant investment. The CINO reports to the CEO, with the authority and resources to drive change across the company, and the role signals top-level commitment.

Its risks come from false expectations about the role:

• Unrealistic expectations of a rapid transformation, from programmes that by design deliver over long timeframes and must embrace some failure.
• Political friction with other executives over ownership of initiatives and investments, and scepticism from leaders who question innovation’s contribution.
• Organisational inertia when innovation is concentrated in one role, and other leaders do not feel part of the effort.
• The wrong metrics: constant pressure to prove returns, measured in ways that miss most of what the innovation function does.

Some leaders see the role as a transition, needed until innovation becomes part of how everyone works.

“A truly innovative company needs neither a Chief Innovation Officer (CINO) nor Chief Digital Officer. … Amazon and Microsoft are such firms of course and neither has a CINO or CDO - which illustrates that these roles are only needed temporarily.”François Candelon, Managing Director and Senior Partner, BCG, Global Director, BCG Henderson Institute, in 60 Leaders on Innovation (2021), p. 27

4. Shared leadership through innovation councils

Some companies treat innovation leadership as a shared responsibility, run by innovation councils or cross-functional committees with real decision-making authority. The model is inclusive by design, and it makes buy-in easier, because many departments take part.

It suffers from what it entails: “diffused and ultimately diluted ownership and accountability” (Innovation Mode, p. 46), and decisions slowed by consensus. Without clear accountability, a company can see plenty of innovation activity and few results, and the effort risks being seen as innovation theatre. Council members also tend to put their main roles first when operational pressure rises.

5. Decentralised innovation

In this model, innovation expertise is placed inside the business units, creating innovation cores that run parts of the process within their own teams.

The risks are close to certainties: inconsistent innovation methods, gaps in knowledge sharing and little collaboration across teams. Results stay inside divisions, which deepens the sense of isolation and fragmentation. Without orchestration the company cannot innovate as a single system, and it lives with disconnects, overlaps, missed opportunities and partial results.

6. The Federated model: central orchestration, distributed capability

“An effective organization design for innovation centralizes innovation strategy and orchestration while arranging a network of innovation cores throughout the company.”Innovation Mode, Author’s Edition (2026), p. 46

The Federated model takes the best of the others. A dedicated innovation leader, usually a Chief Innovation Officer, and a small core team are accountable for steering the effort: the innovation agenda, the process, the tools, the measures. Innovation capability is present and accessible in every team and division, so the organisation innovates with autonomy, yet in alignment.

The core team does not own innovation; it enables it. It provides the methods, platforms and education, connects the innovation cores to each other, and builds a network of champions across the company.

“A Chief Innovation Officer needs to create a team of champions, sometimes referred to as the ‘intrapreneurs’ or innovation catalysts.”Warwick Peel, Innovation Leader, Asia Pacific, IdeaScale, in 60 Leaders on Innovation (2021), p. 178

How to build that core team, and keep it from becoming an innovation bubble, is the subject of Innovation Team Structure.

Who should the innovation leader report to?

Where the leader reports decides much of what they can achieve.

To the CEO

When the goal is to make the whole company more innovative, or the industry faces disruption. A direct line gives the authority and resources to change how the company works, and shows that innovation is a strategic priority. This is the line for a Chief Innovation Officer.

To another executive, with a CEO sponsor

When a C-level role is not yet justified, a head or VP of innovation can report to the executive who owns strategy. They need a visible CEO sponsor, a regular place on the leadership agenda, and a budget of their own, or they will struggle for resources.

Not into a single function

Placed inside technology, product or another function, innovation takes on that function’s priorities and bias, and misses opportunities beyond it.

Whatever the line, the role needs clear boundaries with the other executives, so that ownership of initiatives and investments is settled before it becomes friction. The Chief Innovation Officer guide covers the reporting line in more detail.

Choosing a model for your company

The right model follows the company’s maturity more than its size. On the Innovation Maturity Index:

• Levels 1 to 3 (Inactive, Aware, Engaged): innovation usually has no formal leader yet. The first step is a dedicated leader with a sponsor in the C-suite, even a small team, or a fractional Chief Innovation Officer to set up the function.
• Levels 4 and 5 (Active, Powered): a dedicated innovation executive with a core team, moving towards the Federated model as innovation outcomes reach the C-suite agenda.
• Levels 6 and 7 (Led, Native): the Federated model in full, with a C-level executive orchestrating the function and innovation talent embedded in every team.

Smaller companies can often lead innovation from the CEO or a head of innovation. What they cannot skip is the accountability: someone whose main job is the company’s ability to innovate.

Not sure where your company stands? The Innovation Maturity Diagnostic measures it across a cross-section of your organisation, and Corporate Innovation Advisory designs the leadership model and the innovation function with your executive team.

Questions about leading innovation