In The Innovator’s
Dilemma (1997), Clayton M. Christensen summed up the insights as follows.
He noted first that “the pace of progress that markets demand or can absorb may
be different from the progress offered by technology” (p. 258). Christensen
goes on to say “[r]ecognizing this possibility, we cannot expect our customers
to lead us towards innovations that they do not now need.” Except in the case,
I suppose, of Google Glass when businesses
signaled uses that Google hadn’t anticipated.
Christensen’s second insight is that “the major reason for
the difficulty of managing innovation is the complexity of managing the
resource allocation progress” (p. 258). That was true until crowdfunding so
perhaps it is slightly less true now.
The third insight is that another innovation problem is “matching
the market to the technology” (p. 258). “Successful companies have a practiced
capability in taking sustaining technologies to market, routinely giving their
customers more and better versions of what they say they want” (p. 258-259).
Except in the case of Apple that has made an art form of offering products for
which we have no need and trying to convince us otherwise.
However, Christensen also states that “[d]isruptive technology
should be framed as a marketing challenge, not a technological one” (p. 259).
I’m going to skip to the sixth insight which I think is more
valuable for my purposes and that is that “it is not wise to adopt a blanket
technology strategy to be always a leader or always a follower. . . .
Disruptive innovations entail significant first-mover advantages” (p. 260).
Unless, of course, you are the tipping point in which case you garner the
advantages and the acclaim for taking advantage of the work leading towards the
disruption and appearing to be the disruptive innovator. Kudos, and take your
bows.
In 2003, Christensen published The Innovator’s Solution. Again I skip past most of the pages to
the end of the book, though I highly recommend the “Managing the Strategy
Development Process” chapter. Chapter Ten is titled “The Role of Senior
Executives in Leading New Growth.” Yawn. Let me sum up: the senior executive 1)
manages the resource and process flow between the “disruptive growth” and “the
mainstream” businesses; 2) shepherds the “disruptive growth engine;” and 3)
senses when the wind is changing direction and teaches the grasshoppers this
skill.
Before we’re all in a snit that only senior executives get
to play these roles, let me point out there is a reason there is only one head
chef, only one ship captain, only one field commander, only one. . . well, you
get the idea. Someone has to keep an eye on what is and what could be. But I
also want to say that the senior executive who does teach others how to
recognize the signals of disruptive growth will also have trained the staff how
to make productive use of the disruptive growth engine. There are only four
steps: 1) start before you need to; 2) appoint a senior executive to be in
charge; 3) create a team; and 4) train people what to identify disruptive
ideas. I would add that once folks know how and what to look for—and recognize
that some of your people will already have these skills, perhaps intuitively—get
out of the way.
In 2007, Scott Berkun published The Myth of Innovation. Say what? A book of which John Seely Brown
said (and I quote the inside book jacket), “. . .insightful, inspiring,
evocative, and just plain fun to read. . . it’s totally great.” I agree. I
loved this book. In “There is a method for innovation,” Berkun reminds us there
is little magic, but often a lot of hard work in what we see as innovation: “Innovation
is best compared to exploration, and like Magellan or Captain Cook, you can’t
find something new if you limit your travels to places others have already
found” (p. 39).
“Name an emotion, motivation, or situation, and you’ll find
an innovation somewhere that it seeded” (p. 40). So how do we get to
innovation, disruptive or otherwise? There is no specific path to such
righteousness, but there are categories.
Hard work in
a specific direction: frame the problem; enumerate possible solutions;
experiment and analyze results; adjust as needed; keep experimenting with the
focus on the problem to be solved
Hard work
with direction change: frame a problem and find an unexpected solution to an
unknown problem so ask the question, “Huh. Wonder what I can do with this?”
Curiosity: as
in the stories behind Velcro and Linux
Wealth and
money: “The Internet boom and bust of the 1990s was driven by start-up firms
innovating, or pretending to innovate, just enough for established corporations
to acquire them” (p. 42). So have an idea and hope someone will buy into to
take the risk of innovation, which is back to Christensen’s points about
resources, etc.
Necessity: Well, Plato did say that “Necessity, who is the mother of our invention” (The Republic, Book II) and who is going
to argue with an ancient Greek philosopher and mathematician who has been
proven right time and time (and time) again?
“Innovations that change the world often begin with humble
aspirations” (p. 43).
The good people of Systematic
Inventive Thinking (SIT) remind us that “Innovation is for rethinking
things in order to do them better, not merely differently. Ideally, it is the
responsibility of everyone in the organisation to leverage innovation to help
them achieve whatever it is they need to achieve.”
They also suggest it might be a good idea to think
inside the box because sometimes we can be so distracted by trying to be
exceptionally innovative to imagine the Next Big Thing we fail to see the
possibilities in front of us.
So as we are investing in 3D printers and other
technologies for our schools and standing back, awaiting student innovation,
perhaps with excessive expectation, let’s keep in mind some basic principles
for innovation and invention. Let’s give kids the foundations they need but let’s
also give
In starting early and in putting processes in
place, one of the key reminders is that to be inventive and innovative, kids of
all ages need time. . . to experiment.
Other stuff you should read on this topic:
No comments:
Post a Comment