We do not always take the time that we should to recognize and celebrate innovation.

Maybe that is because it is human nature to execute the proven approach rather than finding new and better ways of doing things. It is the safer method, after all -- certainly one that is less likely to be second-guessed.

Of course, it also is the route to organizational malaise. When we fail to innovate, we run an increasing risk of paying more attention to the process itself than to what the process is meant to accomplish.

Because of the potentially destructive effects of doing business by rote, we should recognize and praise innovation at every opportunity. We should commend those who re-energize our Association through their willingness to take a well-reasoned risk.

So, let's salute Division II for its commitment to the development of national championship festivals.

The concept of sports festivals has been around a long time. My predecessor, Ced Dempsey, often discussed their potential for the Association. But after all these years, only Division II has turned concept into reality.

The first Division II National Championships Festival occurred last May in Orlando when more than 600 student-athletes convened for championships in men's and women's golf, women's lacrosse, softball, and men's and women's tennis. Last month, Division II announced that the second festival will occur in November 2006 in Pensacola, Florida. At that time, championships will be conducted in men's and women's cross country, field hockey, men's and women's soccer, and women's volleyball.

Why are these festivals important?

Operationally, they are efficient. Fewer personnel are needed than if the events were conducted at four different sites, as would have been the case for next year's fall championships. The large number of participants also makes it possible to achieve discounted prices on items such as hotel rooms and food. In addition, the economic impact for the host community can be substantial; that effect was about $2.5 million for the first festival in Orlando.

But this is really about making the championships experience better for the student-athletes.

In 2001, the Division II Student-Athlete Advisory Committee told the Management Council the blunt truth: Division II student-athletes were tired of conducting their national championships -- in most cases, the pinnacle of their athletics experience -- in front of empty grandstands. They had grown weary of accepting their championship awards to the lonely applause of teammates and family.

The festival gives our student-athletes a better opportunity to achieve satisfaction in their performance. Those who were there last May will tell you that the Division II Women's Lacrosse Championship was a special experience. The crowd wasn't huge, but it did fill the grandstands at the University of Central Florida's soccer field. As the rain poured and the wind blew, Adelphi University won the championship at the final tick of the clock before 500 screaming fans.

While that experience was special, what happened the next night was even better. Student-athletes and coaches from each of the six championships gathered for an awards ceremony at which we recognized not only the team and individual champions but also the participating institutions with the highest graduation rates in each sport. This culminating moment, almost a private experience in years past, became a significant public acknowledgement of the years of work that had gone into making the championship happen for each student-athlete.

I was proud to be part of the event, and I look forward to participating in the next one 20 months hence.

While the festival is undoubtedly student-athlete friendly (almost 85 percent of the participants in the first festival said it was better than a single-sport championship), I have heard concerns from coaches about the format. These issues range from the trivial to a substantial concern about how competition calendars must be adjusted to accommodate the festival.

In the case of the 2006 fall festival, the playing season for women's volleyball will have to be adjusted downward a week because the championship date will be earlier than it normally would be. In men's and women's soccer, the format will not permit as much of a break between games during the championship as there would have been at a single-sport site.

I do not minimize these concerns, but I do believe that they are reasonable inconveniences given the upside that the festival provides for the participating student-athletes. At a minimum, I ask that coaches and administrators keep an open mind and not portray the festival as some sort of problem. I hope that, as we progress, they become ambassadors for the event.

At every opportunity, I have encouraged Division II to continue its expansion of the championship festival concept. Division II's leadership has responded admirably through commitments to conduct not only the 2006 event but also a second spring festival in 2008 at a site yet to be determined.

A feasibility study also is examining whether the concept will work for winter championships. A winter festival might pose the biggest challenges yet, but it might also yield great rewards in terms of participants because of the large field sizes of various winter championships.

At the moment, I do not know if the festival concept will remain solely the province of Division II or if it eventually will be employed by one or both of the other divisions. I do know, however, that these championships festivals will only get better over time, providing all of us with a better idea of what works best. That will be good for Division II student-athletes and for the Association in general.

For this willingness to innovate, Division II deserves a loud cheer.

Myles Brand is president of the NCAA.