Cockroaches

The place is infested with them, innovation experts.

Everywhere I turn there is another one.

Forums, workshops, consultants, government agencies, articles, incubators; you name it.

The industrial revolution marked the start of systematic trial and error in business and technology. This was enabled by a shift in attitude towards a ‘disrespect’ of the past. Beforehand any efforts trying to replace the ways things had always been done were considered heretical.

This change towards systematic innovation was enabled by a slow build-up of skills and knowledge that enabled, on average, positive business outcomes from technology efforts. And some people were becoming more leisured so there was enough people with enough spare time on their hands to get into the innovation club. It became sexy and took off.

But it has been going for three hundred years now. Why, all of a sudden, is there a re-invention of innovation in the minds of many?

I can only guess it is because innovation is taken for granted, and many people get through their education and their lives without being aware of it. Ironically this is only possible because of the massive productivity gains enabled by three hundred years of innovation that allows society to ‘carry’ these unproductive people

The odd, odd thing though is that the innovation mantras that are being peddled by the ignorant are all askew. They know not what they teach. Essentially this is due to self-interest and a failing to understand the difference between cause and correlation.

Just in case you are interested:

1. Successful innovation requires deep experience in a field that can only be gained by continued effort, not all of which can be successful.

2. However, on average innovation is successful otherwise it would not survive in our economic system.

3. The key to successful innovation is risk management in all aspects of the game. This can only gained by experience.

4. If there is nothing risked then there is also nothing gained. Which is why direct government investment makes no sense – it encourages the wrong people.

5. There is very little relationship between those that do innovation and those that talk about it.

And that’s it.