Innovation is the Creation of New Problems
I stumbled on a definition of innovation by chance the other day, and it blew my mind. It said:
Innovation occurs when someone uses an invention - or uses existing tools in a new way - to change how the world works, how people organize themselves, and how they conduct their lives.
then:
Many product and service enhancements may fall more rigorously under the term improvement (than under the term innovation).
Innovation is distinct from improvement in that it causes society to reorganize. It is distinct from problem solving and is perhaps more rigorously seen as new problem creation.
[emphasis mine]
Innovation is the creation of new problems in need of solving. I’ve always agreed with that idea, without ever knowing it consciously. Improvement, then, is what comes after innovation. It is the solving of the problems created by innovation. Innovation is a radical leap in thinking, improvement is the linear filling in of the spaces created by that leap. The two are very different, though they go hand in hand.
It’s a distinction that is for the most part lost on people. Does it matter that we understand the difference between innovation and improvement? I think it does. I’ll try to write something on why it matters soon.
February 15th, 2008 at 3:15 am
John,
I agree and think the distinction between the two notions is incredibly important. However, I’d add that innovation is more than simply a shift in perspective or creation of a heretofore unforeseen problem. It’s the identification or “coming to be” of a new problem space coupled with an attempt at addressing a problem in that space. So, innovation isn’t simply the definition of a new problem. Rather it’s a definition of a problem through a stab at a solution. The problem AND the attempted solution are necessary, but neither sufficient by itself, for innovation.
Furthermore, it seems that the initial “solution” has to be somewhat successful for us to consider it an innovation. John Dewey’s theory of instrumental logic is worth looking into on this issue. For him, knowledge requires three elements: the discomfort of a problem, the attempt to eliminate that discomfort AND the positive assessment of that attempt. So, from Dewey’s perspective all innovation entails new knowledge, insofar as innovation assumes both a new problem and a semi-successful solution. This seems to jibe pretty well with my idea of innovation. Of course, improvement also entails new knowledge, just not of a previously unknown question.
Finally, distinguishing between innovation and improvement is important simply because “innovation” is a word that’s nearly reached the end of the jargon cycle. It’s worn out from loose use and is about to engender a serious backlash (like “engagement” a couple of years ago and “community/social” right now). It’s a still vital idea. We should try to rehabilitate it before it gets discarded like so many other once useful concepts.
Thanks for the post.
February 17th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Change, whether driven by innovation or not, always creates new problems to be mastered. But innovation is not about creation of problems. It is about the creation of value. Whenever we apply concepts in a novel way to create value, that is innovation. Sometimes the value created is large and results in a transformational shift. Othertimes, the value is not so large. But, it is the creation of value that is the hallmark of innovation.
February 19th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
James - thanks for the post.
Saying that innovation is the creation of new problems is not to imply that innovation somehow makes life more difficult for people, introducing new problems into their lives. It suggests that ideas that are truly innovative open up new avenues of thinking, with new sets of questions, to which everyone must then apply their problem-solving abilities. It creates new directions in which people can focus their work.
The notion that ‘creation of value is the hallmark of innovation’ is common in the business world, but is one that I find a bit restrictive. How can you apply that standard to innovation in music? In the arts? In humanities? Innovation, outside of the world of economics, does not boil down neatly to units of value, unless by value you mean something much broader than the monetary sense of the word.