Why are people questioning “innovation”?July 23rd, 2008 View Comments |
The recent economic collapse (perhaps the greatest collapse of the financial system in the United States since the Great Depression) has created an enormous amount of questioning and rehashing of what led us to this result.
For some reason, there appears to be some rumblings about the roles that innovation and “strategy” had in creating the collapse…
- Did Innovation Trigger This Financial Meltdown With Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac And Cause A Recession?
- Saving Strategy From the Strategists
- Should Successful Companies Bother with Innovation?
- Why Innovation is Overrated
However, it is not innovation or “strategy” that failed. Instead it a was simple misguided focus on copying tactics; tactical thinking masquerading as strategic thinking.
Copying tactics without recognition of the choices, incentives and actions of other actors and the second-order impacts of your own tactics: that’s not strategy.
Copying tactics without testing, without learning, without iterative design: that’s simply not innovation.
July 25th, 2008 at 09:54
Agreed that it wasn't innovation or strategy that failed. But regardless of the cause, people use the term innovation too indiscriminately. There's little consensus on what qualifies as “innovation' and what doesn't
July 25th, 2008 at 09:54
Agreed that it wasn't innovation or strategy that failed. But regardless of the cause, people use the term innovation too indiscriminately. There's little consensus on what qualifies as “innovation' and what doesn't
July 25th, 2008 at 10:00
In my mind, any change that creates value is innovation (big and small – I have a pretty broad interpretation of innovation).
The bigger problem is not thinking and questioning whether change is truly creating value (short-term and long-term).
July 25th, 2008 at 10:00
In my mind, any change that creates value is innovation (big and small – I have a pretty broad interpretation of innovation).
The bigger problem is not thinking and questioning whether change is truly creating value (short-term and long-term).
August 2nd, 2008 at 22:38
there are rumblings about innovation because all those harvard business discussion leaders drink at the same pub, metaphorically. but…
an examination of innovation is a conversation about (necessary) change. what do you call change that elevates a person's (as opposed to an enterprise or economic system) quality or character or consciousness? i call it transformation, and it never happens from the “outside”. or from the “inside”. it simply happens inexplicably. and it always creates value, because things are simply different.
is there a lesson for the enterprise? yes. in current language transformation is called changing the dna. can this be done from the outside? no. can it be done from the inside? no. there is nothing anyone can do to change systems or structures, in exactly the same way there is nothing you can do to change any person.
it simply happens of its own accord via the passage of time, and experience.
this process is what collapses are for. collapses are good, necessary, to be embraced. those guys at the pub think something or someone caused collapse.
nope, no more than anybody caused the weather.
August 2nd, 2008 at 22:38
there are rumblings about innovation because all those harvard business discussion leaders drink at the same pub, metaphorically. but…
an examination of innovation is a conversation about (necessary) change. what do you call change that elevates a person's (as opposed to an enterprise or economic system) quality or character or consciousness? i call it transformation, and it never happens from the “outside”. or from the “inside”. it simply happens inexplicably. and it always creates value, because things are simply different.
is there a lesson for the enterprise? yes. in current language transformation is called changing the dna. can this be done from the outside? no. can it be done from the inside? no. there is nothing anyone can do to change systems or structures, in exactly the same way there is nothing you can do to change any person.
it simply happens of its own accord via the passage of time, and experience.
this process is what collapses are for. collapses are good, necessary, to be embraced. those guys at the pub think something or someone caused collapse.
nope, no more than anybody caused the weather.
August 3rd, 2008 at 05:06
People changes systems; just not necessarily the way we intend, or along the orderly, predestined path we attempt to create.
And people change people; but not directly, and not in the ways we intend.
agreed, collapses are necessary. the point of many of the articles is that people, through bad “strategy” or bad choices, created collapses, through decisions that had unintended consequences, and are thus questioning the value of change; but it's a misplaced train of logic based on a mistake of what we're calling “innovation”.
we can credit people for creating change, but to give anyone credit for creating a collapse is a bit much.
August 3rd, 2008 at 05:06
People changes systems; just not necessarily the way we intend, or along the orderly, predestined path we attempt to create.
And people change people; but not directly, and not in the ways we intend.
agreed, collapses are necessary. the point of many of the articles is that people, through bad “strategy” or bad choices, created collapses, through decisions that had unintended consequences, and are thus questioning the value of change; but it's a misplaced train of logic based on a mistake of what we're calling “innovation”.
we can credit people for creating change, but to give anyone credit for creating a collapse is a bit much.
August 3rd, 2008 at 05:25
unless it is a whole class of people, like “wall street brokers”
August 3rd, 2008 at 05:25
unless it is a whole class of people, like “wall street brokers”
August 3rd, 2008 at 05:32
both in terms of terms of creating a collapse and failing to think
hope to meet you next time I'm in India…
August 3rd, 2008 at 05:32
both in terms of terms of creating a collapse and failing to think
hope to meet you next time I'm in India…
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:06
People changes systems; just not necessarily the way we intend, or along the orderly, predestined path we attempt to create.rnrnAnd people change people; but not directly, and not in the ways we intend.rnrnagreed, collapses are necessary. the point of many of the articles is that people, through bad “strategy” or bad choices, created collapses, through decisions that had unintended consequences, and are thus questioning the value of change; but it’s a misplaced train of logic based on a mistake of what we’re calling “innovation”.rnrnwe can credit people for creating change, but to give anyone credit for creating a collapse is a bit much.
August 3rd, 2008 at 07:24
indeed. your work is wonderful … both sides of your work … rare, the combination … i put a short take on the social media thing and its consequences for marketing at http://www.gregorylent.tumblr.com … but it is saying the same thing as above
enjoy, gregory
August 3rd, 2008 at 07:24
indeed. your work is wonderful … both sides of your work … rare, the combination … i put a short take on the social media thing and its consequences for marketing at http://www.gregorylent.tumblr.com … but it is saying the same thing as above
enjoy, gregory
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:25
unless it is a whole class of people, like “wall street brokers”
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:32
both in terms of terms of creating a collapse and failing to think
rnrnhope to meet you next time I’m in India…
August 3rd, 2008 at 14:24
indeed. your work is wonderful … both sides of your work … rare, the combination … i put a short take on the social media thing and its consequences for marketing at http://www.gregorylent.tumblr.com … but it is saying the same thing as abovennenjoy, gregory