What is innovation? What is invention?
There is no official or universally accepted definition of innovation, but a general consensus might be “making changes to something that already exists or is established.” Innovation, often confused and/or conflated with invention, involves rearranging or combining existing products, services or ideas in novel or unusual ways.
Invention, on the other hand, entails discovery of, or stumbling upon, something new altogether. Cavemen undoubtedly first saw fire from natural events-perhaps lightening or wildfires– but the harnessing of fire itself was clearly a human invention. Learning to start a fire striking two stones and spewing sparks onto leaves and transferring the embers to kindling then to logs could be considered one of, if not the most, important inventions in the history of civilization. So,while the mastering of fire itself can be considered an invention, using fire to cook roots and meat, heat the cave, light the path, burn someone at the stake or inspire rituals and stories at night might be thought of as innovations: using something already in existence in a new way.
In modern times, inventions tend to be culturally neutral dissociated from people’s identities while innovations increasingly have become impacted by human world views, values and belief systems-the building blocks of culture. In fact, there is a movement that suggests culture, rather than the technology, in increasingly becoming the dominant variable in the successful diffusion of innovation.
The distinction between an invention and an innovation can frequently become blurred and any effort to definitively characterize something as invention or innovation might best be left to Talmudic scholars. A more useful approach is to look at where something falls on a continuum with pure invention on one end and pure innovation on the other. The number of innovations spurred by any new invention, is likely be exponential.
Invention<————–>Innovation
This guide is intended to introduce major concepts, tools and general frameworks for innovation writ large so that the reader can begin to better understand and harness the power of innovation. While not everyone can be an inventor like Edison, Tesla or Marconi, with a minimum of consistent practice almost anyone can master some basics concepts to become an innovator.
Deconstructing Innovation
This guide is intended to provide a set of diagnostic tools and/or simple heuristics for rapidly deconstructing products, services and ideas into the core components of innovation. In today’s world of medicine, the suite of diagnostics would include body temperature, blood pressure, blood test, urine test, x-ray, gene editing, MRI, CT scan etc.– each providing a different POV, perspective or angle to look under the hood.
Our set of diagnostics are a bit more metaphorical and less scientific but might prove very helpful,nonetheless. If one tool is not cracking the code, try another… or better yet come up with your own tools.
Examples of our diagnostic tools are:
-Connectivity
-Network effect (Metcalfe’s Law)
-Centralized-Decentralized-Distributed Systems
-Strong Ties/Weak Ties (Mark Granoveter)
-Processing/Price-performance (Moore’s Law)
-Transistor Effect (Moore’s Law)
-Killer App
-Analog to Digital
-Share-ability
-Scalability
-Social
-Open Source (Cathedral and the Bazaar/Eric Raymond)
-Proprietary versus Open Source design
-Choice/Famous Jam Study (Sheena Y engar)
-Threshold Resistance (Alfred Taubman)
-Inter-operability (Plug and Play)
-Modularity
-Gig-ability
-Jobs-to-be-done (Christensen)
-UX (user experience)
–UI (user interface)
-Utility-centric
-Identity-centric
-Disruptive versus sustaining innovations
Products, Services and Ideas.
Putting aside the subtle distinction, we generally view products and services as the milieu for invention and innovation. But a more expansive view that gives an important perspective is invention or innovation of ideas … often big, or really big ideas: language, burial, religion, art, hunting and gathering, agriculture, democracy, philosophy, mathematics, war, psychology etc. This broader take on innovation and invention invites us to explore certain anthropological factors and insights into the evolution of human civilization. A deep dive into the interplay between technology and culture can’t but help lay the foundation for a better understanding ofthe full potential of innovation.
Are there really any new ideas? We learn by imitation. We remember by stories. One of the greatest (and most controversial) achievements in intellectual thought was Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution set forth in his magnum opus On the Origin of Species. Ironically neither of Darwin’s two most famous terms- “natural selection” and “survival of the fittest”were original thoughts. Natural selection was independently coined by biologist Alfred Wallace with whom Darwin had collaborated. It was also Wallace who suggested to Darwin he consider using philosopher Herbert Spencer’s more precise term “survival of the fittest” rather than “natural selection.” Darwin agreed incorporating Spencer’s phrase but not until the fifth edition of Origin. Open mindedness and willingness to adapt is a crucial virtue of great innovators.
In understanding innovation, it is helpful to remember the oft repeated saying: “good artists borrow; great artists steal.” (see T .S. Elliot, James Joyce, Keith Richard, Jimmy Page et. al.)
In his book The Fatal Conceit, one of F. A. Hayek’s great insights is that humans learn more by imitation rather than reason. Trends are often spurred by imitation, impulse, and intuition. In a world of social media influencers and celebrities, things that go viral do so not out of any particularly deep introspective process or rationale. Keeping up with the Jones or…. the Kardashian effect. Culture is forged in the crucible of imitation.
Malcolm Gladwell is perhaps best known for his book The Tipping Point, which is an excellent resource on understanding trends. The concept of a Tipping Point is what Gladwell refers to as the “biography of an idea” somewhat akin to the “straw that broke the camel’s back.” While Gladwell certainly popularized the concept, he seems to have borrowed the term Tipping Point itself from others as well. (Remember: good artists borrow, great artists steal.)
He also learned to not to give credit in footnotes but rather cleverly acknowledged the work of others in endnotes (i.e. at the back of the book) rather than acknowledging “as-you-go” in footnotes at the bottom of the relevant page– a very clever innovation indeed!
As humans moved toward bipedalism a host of physiological changes occurred larger related to the size of the human brain. Fire enabled to cooking meats and roots radically altering the caloric intake of the human diet. It is estimated that the human brain is only 2% of the humanbody but consumes 20% of the calories. While Darwin’s survival of the fittest really appliedmore to adaptability rather than physical strength, one interesting case to note where the stronger Neanderthals species didn’t survive since their physical prowess did not create the need for more socialization and communication of the weaker homo sapiens. As it turns out strength became the Neanderthals’ weakness—a true paradox where their strength and resilience led to the demise of Neanderthals.
So stay tuned and welcome to the Innovator’s Guide to the Universe…
