An organisation\u2019s size has little impact on its ability to innovate regardless of whether it has a turnover of $50m or $500m. The likelihood of any organisation \u2013 apart from the smallest of companies \u2013 being innovative hovers around the 20 to 27 per cent mark.\nThese were key findings of recruiter Harvey Nash\u2019s annual global tech survey, which\npublishes insights from interviews with 3251 IT execs in 81 countries worldwide.\nThe report also said a\ncompany that is 3 to 5 years old is almost twice as likely to be 'very innovative\u2019 as one that is more than 20 years old. This is no surprise, as many older\norganisations are grappling with keeping together \u2018the spaghetti\u2019 of legacy\nsystems, organisational structures and processes, the survey said.\nBridget Gray, managing director at Harvey Nash told CIO Australia that it is often portrayed that smaller companies are more innovative than larger ones, but what this survey shows is that it\u2019s actually an organisation\u2019s age, rather than its size, that is the biggest predictor of innovation.\n"Older companies tend to have more legacy. Not just in terms of systems, but also in terms of procedures, structures and culture,"Gray said. "Even for smaller companies it can be tremendously difficult to change these, and as digital disruption becomes more widespread the risk for companies \u2018stuck in their legacy\u2019 increases.\n"Of course becoming an innovator is tricky. It\u2019s even tricky to define. Our data shows that there is no blueprint for successful innovation, but two factors make a big difference. Firstly is company culture; and it really boils down to this question: do staff really, truly believe that their ideas can actually make a difference? The second factor is infrastructure; are the systems and processes of the company agile enough to evolve quickly and cost effectively?" Gray said.\nThe tech\ncommunity sees the chief technology officer as the c-level role driving\ninnovation and IT advancement (29 per cent). The was followed by the chief executive\nofficer (19 per cent), the chief information officer (13 per cent) and \u2018someone\nmuch more junior' (11 per cent).\n\u201cFor CIOs,\nwho often see innovation as a big part of their agenda, this might come as\nworrying news,\u201d the survey said. \u201cBut it is evident that survey respondents\nbelieve the technology-centric rather than the business-centric views, wins the\nday.\n\u201cAs Henry\nFord said: \u2018If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster\nhorses.\u2019 But maybe Henry Ford was only partially right. After all, for the\ncenturies leading up to Ford\u2019s innovation, faster horses were indeed what\npeople wanted. And for the century that followed, faster, more efficient cars\nhave been the focus. Progress is made from both revolution and evolution,\ninvolving CTOs and CIOs \u2013 and everything in between,\u201d the survey said.\nMeanwhile,\n30 per cent of respondents agreed that within 10 years, a significant part of\nthe job they currently perform would be automated. Nine per cent said their job\nwas already affected and 61 per cent disagreed that their role was under threat\nby automation.\nInterestingly,\nonly 60 per cent of global CIOs, CTOs or VP\u2019s of IT said they held a computer\nor technology-related degree.\nWhile 53\nper cent of all survey respondents studied a computer science or technology-related\ncourse to degree level, 47 per cent came in via another route. Women are less\nlikely to have studying a tech degree (43 per cent) compared to 55 per cent of\nmen.\n\u201cMuch of\nthis variance is explained by women being more heavily represented in role like\nbusiness analysis, creative roles and support, where technical degrees are less\ncommon,\u201d the survey said.