Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is Innovation the Most Abused Word In Business?

Posted by samzenpus on from the give-it-a-name dept.

dcblogs writes "Most of what is called innovation today is mere distraction, according to a paper by economist Robert Gordon, written for the National Bureau of Economic Research. Real innovations involve things like the combustion engine or air conditioning, not the smartphone. The paper includes thought experiments to help you gain more respect for genuine innovations such as indoor plumbing. The Financial Times has posted the complete 25-page paper.(pdf)"

10 of 287 comments (clear)

  1. It is abused but I think this sets too high a bar. by HungryHobo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    An innovation can be as small as a neat new way of handling some user interaction which nobody has done before or a heuristic which solves a hard problem but at the same time people from buisness or management backgrounds or courses do set an insanely low bar for what they consider "innovation".

    If you were to believe buisness grads then "innovation" includes their "ideas" along the lines of "a website like *only better*" or "that thing which everyone is already doing but which I think is my neat new idea"

  2. Innovation by hattig · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm sure that people understand that innovation isn't a black and white thing, and that some things are more innovative than others. Hence "the best thing since sliced bread" - i.e., something can be innovative but not as innovative as something else.

    In the long term, something is innovative if we cannot live our daily lives without it. For example - indoor plumbing, light bulbs. In terms of always available communication the mobile phone was completely innovative. And the smartphone merely enhanced that and merged in myriad other devices into the single unit. A total innovation in itself, and making that conglomeration of functionalities usable in itself is clearly an innovation.

    But maybe not as innovative as pre-sliced bread.

    (note, I don't actually think that pre-sliced bread is that innovative, but maybe the means by which it can be pre-sliced and then not go solid or stale quickly is.)

    1. Re:Innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      What's really innovative about sliced bread is how they slice it without cutting the wrapper it comes in. Ingenious!

    2. Re:Innovation by fearofcarpet · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In my opinion, an innovation is something that no one thought of before and that performs better than its predecessors. It is not a synonym for invention or discovery. Take graphene for example. People had been working with it in various forms (usually called "exfoliated graphite") for decades because it has all the interesting properties of graphite, but with an enormous surface-area to volume ratio. Theorists predicted interesting properties in single, isolated sheets of graphite, and there was some evidence to support it, but nothing really came of it. Then someone got the idea to use scotch tape to rip off a few layers of graphene from bulk graphite, which eventually lead to a Nobel prize. The innovation wasn't the scotch tape, or the graphene, or even using scotch tape to exfoliate a laminar material; it was using scotch tape to exfoliate graphite.

      That one little innovation allowed all kinds of measurements that validated the intriguing properties of graphene and sparked a deluge of research across the physical sciences. Now, let's contrast it to something like the iPhone. Was that an innovation? I say no. Everyone had thought of the smartphone already--they were just waiting for the technology to catch up to expectation. People were using proto-iPads to keep track of stock trades decades before the iPod existed.

      I think that in the business world, success is equivalent to money and innovation drives success, therefore anything that makes money is innovative. And since things that make money are generally popular, they use the word "innovation" to describe creating something that is popular, which essentially boils down to having the right idea or product and the right time.Thus Apple--which makes very popular, well-designed products--has become synonymous with innovation. I'm not knocking Apple; convincing people to enter their credit card information in order to use a device that they already bought is pure genius. But what have they done that is really de novo, that was more than just clever or marketed effectively?

      --
      Actually, I wrote my thesis on life experience.
  3. Re:It is abused but I think this sets too high a b by Stormthirst · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I agree - there's a difference between innovation and incremental improvements.

  4. too many words by ciderbrew · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The amount of new business/marketing speak that comes out of the U.S.A. is very innovative.
    Reach out to instead of contact is the thing that bugs me right now.
    George Carlin had a whole wonderful bit about this - "You will not hear me say: bottom line, game plan, role model, scenario, or hopefully."
    http://www.iceboxman.com/carlin/pael.php

  5. "Innovation" has been abused by patent trolls by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Whether or not the word "innovation" has become the most abused word in the business context, that remains to be seen
     
    On the other hand, "innovation" itself has been abused by the patent trolls
     
    Innovators and inventors nowadays often find themselves in between a rock and a very hard place
     
    On one hand, they can get sued by patent trolls if they put their innovation to good use
     
    On the other hand, many of the innovators' livelihood depends on their ability to invent, to innovate, to create new things
     

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  6. Re:It is abused but I think this sets too high a b by Patch86 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Vehicles that can fly" is a pretty huge incremental step from "Vehicles that can't fly". It's a big leap like that which we tend to call "innovation". Little steps aren't innovation- even though they're often even more useful. The Wright Brother innovated when they managed to put together the first working aeroplane- but it wasn't all that useful. When someone took their plane and made minor incremental improvements to speed, durability, capacity, etc. they weren't innovating, but they did create something truly valuable. When Boeing made the Jumbo Jet it wasn't an "innovation" (it's just a bigger version of what they already built)- but it was damned clever and useful.

  7. Re:Abused, yes. Most abused, probably not. by eulernet · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For Example Synergy Is an aspect when people working in a team or a group produce more then the sum of each person.

    Sorry to disappoint you, but a group cannot produce more than the sum of each person.
    This is called Ringelmann effect:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ringelmann_effect
    it has been measured in 1914, by measuring the amount of effort of groups of different sizes.
    When you put 8 persons together, you get the amount of effort only 4 can produce.
    People unconsciously reduce their effort when they work in a team.

    What you can do is try to increase intrinsic motivation, so that not too much energy is lost in the group.
    Also, choose the best members for your team.

  8. Re:Abused, yes. Most abused, probably not. by Shazback · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Ringelmann effect shows how in certain structures and certain tasks, group efficiency is decreased. However, Köhler showed that in other structures for other tasks (conjunctive tasks), the group can incentivize weaker members to consistently perform better than when they are alone. As long as the Köhler discrepancy is low, the task is conjunctive and the group has a manner to view the contribution of individual members, then yes, a group -can- produce more than the sum of each person (i.e. the performance if each member performed the task alone, without any information about others performing the task at the same time or location).

    It is also worth noting that both the Ringelmann and Köhler effects were described with regards to purely physical tasks, over 75 years ago. Their relevance in more complex and more intellectual tasks is highly disputed, in particular ones where solutions and methods to achieve solutions are non-obvious or novel. For instance, solving simple mazes exhibits social loafing (decreased performance relative to individuals), but as the maze's complexity increases, social loafing is eliminated, and group performance increases as they grow larger! This is of course a very "basic" cognitive task, but already illustrates that groups -do- out-perform individuals in correct conditions.

    Yes, lots of MBAs or MBA-lights don't understand what they're talking about, but some people are actually interested in the concepts that are brought to light during such courses and go read about them, rather than just relying on the buzz-words and five minute discussion before the next subject arises.