Innovators are intellectually
and attitudinally driven people who are essential for progress. Without their innovations,
the world would not have been, and would not be, a better place to live in.
Granted that some of the innovations have had negative consequences for the
society (for example, explosives) and granted also that each positive
innovation can be wrongly used for negative purposes (for example, cyber-hacking),
the overall benefits of innovation far outweigh the negative consequences. We
can also take heart from the fact that misuse of innovations can be moderated,
if not controlled, by positive social alignment and family environment. The
common purpose of innovation is to create devices, equipment and infrastructure
that can improve human life. The ultimate purpose of innovation could be to
extend life by eliminating diseases and enhancing wellness, and to even monitor,
regenerate and recreate life.
Innovation is
not for all; otherwise there would not be two distinct classes called
innovators and copiers or leaders and followers in business, academia and
society. Steve Jobs once said, “Innovation distinguishes between a leader and
follower”. That said, the greater the divide between the two, the greater would
be the power of monopoly built around innovation and the less would be the distributed
social impact of innovation. In leadership and management theories, there is an
embedded view that innovation at individual level is for people with rare
endowments and at a firm level is for companies that are willing to bet huge
investments and efforts on innovation. Evidentially, however, the contrary
seems to be true. Innovation is as much about an innovative mind-set as it is
about intelligence quotient or investment commitment. Innovation is also about
a facilitative ecosystem that supports generation and acceptance of innovative
ideas.
Imagination, re-imagination
Innovators not
only imagine but also re-imagine. Eric Schmidt, Chairman of Google, Inc said,
“The characteristic of great innovators and great companies is they see a space
that others do not. They don’t just listen to what people tell them; they
actually invent something new, something you didn’t know you needed, but the
moment you see it, you say, I must have it’’’. This implies that innovation is
about having a vision for novel products and services and converting it into
commercial reality. The ‘Pushpaka Vimanam’ of Hindu mythology and the aeroplane
of industrial revolution are perfect examples of imagination bringing forth new
products to fulfil intrinsic needs. Organized and structured research in
academic and industrial laboratories follows the path of imagination to create
synthetics that mimic or excel over the natural or the pre-existing synthetic.
That said,
innovation is also re-imagination of what has been existing all along. For
example, measurement of blood pressure has been there from the time medicine
became organized, for centuries in fact. However, making measurement of blood
pressure real-time and self-monitored through a wrist band or a wrist watch is
the result of re-imagination of an existing activity. Driverless car is not a
fundamental creation; rather it is re-imagining the process of human driving in
terms of machine driving. In re-imagining, innovators consider several parallel
developments in other technologies that could make re-imagination feasible. The
important point to note is that imaginative innovators and re-imaginative
innovators are significantly different in their approach to life, be it
individual or corporate.
Visualization, re-visualization
Imaginative
innovators set out to develop reality out of the abstract. They set and re-set
innovation goals, conduct and re-conduct experiments to validate hypotheses and
eventually succeed in bringing to life a new product or service. They look to
bring novelty as the prime dimension of their innovation. Such inventions can
be very purpose-oriented and goal-driven or quite accidental and serendipitous.
Development of aeroplane by Wright Brothers, imagining the bird as the
inspiration, was a very specific purpose driven invention. Discovery of
stainless steel by Harry Brearley while experimenting with different
proportions of metals, especially chromium, in steel was an accidental
discovery. So was the discovery of Penicillin by Alexander Fleming or discovery
of radium by Marie Curie, in a sense. That said, imaginative inventions are
never by chance but are a result of serious application of knowledge and
generation of experiments in which chance may also play a part in steering the
course of discovery.
Re-imaginative innovators,
in subtle contrast, are keen observers of what is available to create new
realities that fulfill new needs or help perform current needs in a different
way. Re-imaginative visualizers adopt convergent thinking (bringing together
different functionalities and products in one product) in some cases and
divergent thinking (deploying current products for different functionalities)
in some cases. As products and technologies keep getting developed in an
exponential manner, the potential canvas for re-imaginative innovators vastly
expands. The projects by Google to deploy its Google Glass technology for
diabetes management is one example. Re-imaginative innovation may deploy common
technologies for multiple uses. It is interesting that while one purposive mind-set
drives imaginative innovation the same mind-set could block re-imaginative
innovation.
Disruption, transformation
The potential
for innovation is, more often than not, never fully exploited. Companies and
individuals may be known for consistent innovation but could have their blind
spots in harnessing the full potential of innovation. Leading automobile
companies of the world, including such innovation stalwarts as Toyota and
Nissan of Japan, had decades ago deployed unmanned automated guided vehicles to
move materials, components and products into and out of warehouses. However, it
never occurred to such innovators that they should develop driverless automated
cars. The companies had, for decades, used sensor technologies to govern movement
of components and fool-proofing production and change-over cycles on the shop
floors. Here again, it did not occur to such manufacturers that they should
lead projects to elevate sensor technology and deploy it to improve navigation
and safety in automobiles.
There can be
several such examples from different industries where despite commitment to,
and achievements in, innovation organizations fail to make the best use of
their innovation potential. The reasons are not far to seek. Firms, typically,
work in silos, focusing on maximization of efficiency within the existing
business construct rather than disrupting a successfully operating business
model. Reverting to our example of automobile industry, innovation focused on engine
efficiency, transmission smoothness, chassis sturdiness, lighter but stronger
materials and elegant aerodynamics to make the automobile better and safer for
driving, travelling and owning rather than eliminating driving itself. That
Google and Apple have taken this project is a classic reaffirmation of Eric
Schmidt’s statement that the characteristic of great innovators and great
companies is that they see a space that others do not.
Innovation horizons
Fundamentally,
transformative Innovation can be disruptive, and hence many firms tend to delay
disruptive innovation until it begins to take the form of a serious competitive
threat, especially by new entrants. Rather than baulk at the prospect of
disruptive innovation, competent and capable firms must find approaches
integrate disruptive innovation into long term business models in a seamless
way. The author of this blog post suggests charting the business in terms of
three innovation horizons, the first one being the horizon of incremental
innovation, the second one being the horizon of breakthrough innovation and the
third one being the horizon of disruptive innovation. Lasting businesses can be built only when a
firm operates in all the three horizons of innovation.
The first
horizon corresponds to imaginative innovation for performance and specification
improvement, the second horizon corresponds to re-imaginative innovation where
product-market interface is completely redefined through either convergence or
divergence, and the third horizon corresponds to disruptive innovation that
eliminates key product anchors in favour of new disruptively innovative ones.
Firms may vary in approaches with regard to revenue-investment mix in each of
the three horizons; some may follow a 50-30-20 mix while others may risk a
20-30-50 profile too. The extent to which the innovation horizon model is
adopted depends on the innovation mindset of firms and individuals, and the
innovation ecosystem they are able to nurture in their organizations.
Innovation mindset
There are
certain characteristics of innovation oriented firms, their leaders and their team
members that tend to be unique. Leadership for innovation is a separate
competency-set by itself. Innovative leaders explicitly seek expressions of
innovation, from simple ideas to complex prototypes. They embrace the idea of
products doing things differently or doing things never done before. They take
responsibility for incubating ideas, providing innovators with financial and
people resources as well as equipment. They also understand that intellect and
data powered debate is an essential component of bringing the best of
innovation to the fore. They respect the short term improvements (to sustain
current business) but without losing the aspiration for longer term
transformations (to reinvent and transform business).
When businesses
operate in terms of the three innovation horizons they move from a position of business
sustainability to ‘future-shaping’ business. Rather than keep pace with
innovations that come in from multiple sources as competing businesses they
create their own innovation engines to influence the future. The acid test for
such innovation leadership is a willingness and boldness to make its own
current products obsolete. If Apple tried to protect its iPod as a music player
without providing music-play capabilities in iPhone, the latter would never
have been a blockbuster while the former would, in any case, been overshadowed
by other smartphones. Disrupting one’s own product line-up and business
strength by norm-defying innovative mindset is probably the best assurance of
business perpetuity, besides being provider of global competitiveness.
Post-script
After the author
has penned the post, the report of World Intellectual Property Organization
(WIPO) on global innovation rankings has been published in the Press.
Disturbingly, it says that India has slipped further down the Global Innovation
Index, ranking 81, from 76 in 2014. In this survey of 141 countries, China
retained its ranking at 29 while Switzerland had the top spot. India’s
performance on innovation marks a sharp decline in the assessment of the state
of innovation in India over the past few years; in 2008-09, the nation had
ranked 41st globally. India’s low performance on innovation is
troublingly inconsistent with the aspiration and expectation of turning into a
global economic and industrial powerhouse by 2030. The author hopes that the
discussion in the blog post on the types and horizons of innovation would help policy
makers and leaders to embed innovation as an essential part of India’s economic,
industrial and social culture.
Posted by Dr CB
Rao on September 19, 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment