(tech) innovation stalls – what’s next?

There’s growing realization that value-added technology innovation stalls. How did ancients invent/innovate?

New York Times started its own Google-Labs-style innovation-driving initiative called beta620. A response to stalling news industry?

Recently, Google’s CFO acknowledged that every single day 15% of the queries Google handles are completely new/never seen before.

Also, many modern financial tools (cheques, stock-certificates, bills-of-exchange) have ancient roots.

Even Roman dictator’s post was an innovative response to demands/aspirations of the time, namely overcoming inter-fighting of magistrates. List of Roman inventions are must serve as examples for modern leaders aspiring to innovate.

Isn’t it time for 21st-century value-based innovations?

music, life and pan

Did you know that music can teach about life and history?

A native of Trinidad and Tobago, pan, was originally used for communication between enslaved Africans during the British colonial rule and acquired its modern form in the guise of used oil barrels made of steel.

To quote from the launching event of Pan Camp 2011 (during which participants were also taught spirituality and conflict management)

…learning pan… develops qualities of persistence and consistency… for achieving anything in life that is worthwhile.

P.S. Steel-pans are the only instruments in the world that follow the musical cycle of fourths-and-fifths calculated by Pythagoras.

definition of a person who changes the world

From Apple ad (1997):

Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. Rebels. Troublemakers. Round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules, and they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who do.

Schumpeter, R2 and innovation via hacking

There are about (cheers to taxonomic Carl Linnaeus) 8.7 million species (only 14% identified) on earth. There are only one species that could tweet: humans. And robots.

The first human-like astronaut robot R2 awakened at the ISS and already tweets/facebooks.

NASA apparently innovates, disruptively. Does it complement its existing ”high-end” (humans) with “low-end” (robot astronauts), by mimicking Apple’s famed ipod/iphone business model?

It was Schumpeter whose acute insights about disruptive innovation and entrepreneurship are still present with us in works of Christensen, Drucker, …

Less known is that hackers are essential for innovation. Pentagon agrees. Educators too.

how capitalism relates to shminovation and bible

Innovation, shminovation. We’re obsessed with innovation. But why care about innovation? Perhaps because it’s comfortable to think innovation is panacea for our social stagnation or economic graveyard called capitalism? Indeed, if capitalism, it must be messy to drive innovation.

Ask yourself, how many Fortune-500 firms breathe innovation? Only few. In them “innovation initiatives face their stiffest resistance after they show hints of success.“

But, not all lost: creative capitalism + social innovation = new social enterprise. Sure, capitalism. Even Bible indirectly condones value-based, compassionate capitalism, for which we need to be deliberate and motivated.

Oh, capitalism inspires poetry too.

creativity and bacon

One past extensive research about creativity asked the question “What are creative people like?” concluding, creative people:

work very hard;
are more disposed to setting their own agenda and taking independent action;
strive for originality;
show more flexibility;
don’t have higher IQs … No cognitive abilities have been identified which reliably distinguish between creative and non-creative people.

And to question “What cognitive factors are involved in creative acts?” research concludes:

Years of preparation essential for creative productivity;
Goal setting is critical in creative acts.

And what is creative perversity? It is cologne, salt, vodka, mayonnaise, gumballs – all made of bacon.

Common treats of crazy and geniuses

Beethoven. Michaleangelo. Dickens. Common treats?

Mentally ill/psychotic.

Brahe. Morse. Tesla.

Crazy habits and behavioral patterns.

According to Hans Eysenck, psychotic tendencies translate well into creative endeavors via overinclusiveness (drawing upon many ideas/connections/treats no one else sees and formulating original/effective approaches/solutions), a basis for divergent thinking, in itself a hallmark of all geniuses.

Geniuses are in most cases successful innovators; they question, observe, network, experiment and think associatively.

Modern/fresh tentatives? Reliable energy VS. poverty = EnergyInCommon. Charity VS. social change VS. fair-trade = LemonAid.

P.S. To prove he was a god, Empedocles jumped into a volcano…

Innovation apple and lessons from Sonia Gandhi

“If it doesn’t sell, it isn’t creative,” said David Ogilvy, the best ad-man there was. Innovation is commercialization of creativity, said Vijay Govindarajan. In practice, corporate innovation looks mostly as below.

This article spurred the below “what innovators can learn from Sonia Gandhi,” making innovation more impactful.

Modest but perseverant (shuns publicity)
Mindset/ears tuned towards customer/market demands (her econ-policies are extreme pro-poor)
Surround yourself with smart/complementary-to-your-skills people (PM Singh takes care of administrative burdens of the office)
Not interested in (corporate) politics
Systematize (innovation) in order to capitalize (spearheaded successful systems/procedures)
Earn trust from outside (customers/markets) and inside (leadership/employees)

David (crowdsourcing) vs Goliath (innovation)

Crowdsourcing is predicted to outshine innovation. According to one research, nearly 50% entrepreneurs/startups are developing “knowledge-as-a-service” models, and crowdsourcing (not innovation)is THE jump-starter. Crowdsourcing has crowdsortium. Innovation hasn’t.

Google crowdsources creating maps in India.

But, crowd-wisdom has limitations and might encounter black-swans in complex systems.

LEGO, which almost went bankrupt in 1990s, changed its “chief-brick,” started an adult line, appointed ambassadors and is back on track – open innovation+customer engagement.

Threadless, MyStarbucksIdea – crowdsourcing successes; Apple iPhone, Starbucks VIA, … successes ignoring crowd-wisdom.

Crowd-wisdom as “corporate/customer democracy” is oxymoron – an intermediate layer filters/selects raw input.

Crowdsourcing + innovation = ?(needn’t be 0-sum game)

Chinese toilet paper, Hitler and 30 mins

Chinese invented toilet paper in 2^nd century BC. By 6^th century AD, toilet paper was used with inscribed quotations/commentaries of Confucian classics.

Average life expectancy in China was then 28. Considering it takes about 384 trees to make toilet paper that man uses in a lifetime (average 67), it gives about 5.5 trees/year for one man and at least (low-efficiency production in ancient China) 154 trees for an ancient Chinese.

Not only Chinese had fun. During WW2, humor and patriotism were inseparable. Check Hitler’s depictions on WW2 toilet papers. Yet another creative strain of Allies?

Since 2010, things got more economic. 30mins + 40-A4-sheets = one toilet paper roll.