Myths of Innovation

How does Management/Managers Help or Hurt Innovation?

The roles of managers and innovators are conflicting. While innovators are drivers of change, managers promote stability. While promoting stability, they also optimize and control. This implies that they will often not take it kindly when someone wants to take the show through the introduction of new ideas. Managers optimize performance by the use of continued repetition of tasks already enshrined in the company’s production system. If change is experienced in the company, it is also likely that production will be hurt for some time.

Managers sometimes behave like they should be the only people who control the flow and use of information. They feel accountable for ensuring that only important information is employed in the running of the company. With the use of control they often prevent the company to access valuable information that would lead to growth and performance in the future.

On the other hand, innovations cannot succeed without the support of management. If management is receptive to ideas, they often do things to support the entire execution of the plan. First, innovation often requires planning. If time is not available to be planned for, the idea is unlikely to go through. Second, innovation must be funded for it to go through. Funding is often sourced from the management. Financial funding is the ultimate show of support for an idea. For innovative companies like Apple, funding is always made available by the company at all times. This should be the spirit of innovation. The funding is useful for completing the research on an idea and also for the execution of the game plan. While managers may raise a challenge for innovation, they are also the most important party for innovation to be executed.

Do the Best Ideas Win?

According to Berkun (2010), the best ideas do not always win. He argues that the belief that the best ideas win is the most comfortable to live with. People choose to believe that the best ideas win because the truth is not easy to live with. The American Dream also largely shares in this opinion. The idea of the best ideas winning is one that is likely to promote ethics in an organization.

Berkun highlights specific cases where the best ideas did not thrive. In the case of Thomas Edison who discovered the light bulb, he used the ideas of several other people to make his successful. In this regard, he should have been expected to give credit to the other individuals who had made contribution to the success. In this case, the best ideas are those that he used to achieve his own success. Those who had made the developments failed and he won. There are other cases like the case of Edison that are quoted in the book. Alfred Nobel of the Nobel Peace Prize created his wealth when he discovered the dynamite Berkun (2010).

Ideas like James Bond have been created to make the concept of best ideas winning look realistic. Since their ideas are better, they are made to win. Creativity often supports idealism. This concept is often applicable to business opportunities. Entrepreneurs are made to believe that if they produce a better product, they are more likely to create an enormous customer base. The notion is however misguided as there are many other factors that are involved in creating a customer base. Some of these include advertisement which is more favorable for those who have more capital, and capability to mass produce.

What is the Role of Problems with Respect to Innovation?

Being able to identify and define a problem paves way for innovation. Innovation seeks to solve problems. If the innovator is unable to define the problem he is trying to resolve, then he is bound to fail. Understanding a problem helps innovators to not get in a situation like that of Einstein. Einstein at one point attempted to find means of convert certain elements to others. As can be proved by the laws that are now widely accepted, this problem was impossible to solve. Einstein failed to make an attempt to learn everything about his problem before trying to resolve it.

Understanding the problem helps to define the best way it can be solved. Sometimes the solution to a problem needs clear analysis so as to ensure that a conclusive solution is reached. Understanding the problem helps to resolve the root of the problem rather than just solving the symptoms of the problem. According to Berkun (2010), being able to define a problem is part of the solution. Furthermore, the process of defining a problem creates a mechanism for solution through interaction.

Moreover, Berkun (2010) feels that a good definition of the problem creates a focus for the task. When one definite problem is identified, the entire effort of the team is directed to the same thing. This makes the problem much smaller and the solution forthcoming. Finally, with a clearly defined problem, it is easy to identify a solution to your problem. If a definition to the problem is however not defined, the solution could be hard to come by.

Can Innovation ever be Predictable?

According to Berkun (2010), innovation can never be predicted. At the time the solution of a problem is discovered, only its positive impacts can be discovered. Later on, other impacts are identified hence making it dangerous. Berkun for example gives an example of dichloro-diphenyltrichloroethane (DDT). When DDT was discovered, the WHO thought they could use the new innovation to eliminate malaria from the world. They selected certain areas and used the chemical there. DDT was highly regarded for its long lasting nature in soil and in water.

After the chemical had been used, it succeeded in eliminating mosquitoes but also ended up creating a new problem. After passing its impacts from roaches to lizards and to cats, it eliminated cats as well and paved the plague.

Initially the impact of DDT could not be considered to be so enormous. With time however, it was completely removed from the shelves and termed unsuitable for use. DDT has not been the only innovation that has turned sour. The discovery of computers has been for example so fast that the industry is creating an environmental burden from the disposal of the machinery that is regarded as outdated. The discovery of vehicles has been important for swifter transportation. However, on top of that, vehicles have been the cause of millions of deaths through accidents. Vehicles also contribute massively to the destruction of the environment through the emission of green house gases.

In conclusion, it becomes impossible for anyone to tell how innovation will turn out in the end. Sometimes what seems like a great breakthrough is nothing. Eventually, it may require banning like the case of DDT or controlling like the case of vehicles.

References

Berkun, S. (2010). The myths of innovation (2nd ed.). Beijing: O’Reilly.