You definitely can not have a pool behind the firewall :-)
Shishir
· 2 years ago
Just like Benjamin Franklin once replied while defending his invention "what's the use of a new born baby?", every new idea when born need to be nurtured and given time to grow up, because as they say 'an idea can change the world' !!
Paul
· 2 years ago
Hi Paul. I think there are thousands of failed products and companies that would contend with your contention that ".. pain not felt nearly as acutely in the consumer world".
In fact I'd say you have it the wrong way around. What's the worst that can happen if an internal innovation doesn't take off? Get re-assigned to a "boring" job? Quit in disgust?
However, launch a new product or business into the consumer space? You may be putting everything on the line, and everyone associated will feel some very real pain if you fail.
But that's a digression. I think the real point is to make a disctinction between simply "idea people" and (usually) groups that are recognised "innovators". Innovators by definition have the special skills/influence/connections to "get things done". If they didn't, it wouldn't be "innovation".
When I read Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point I was immediately drawn to contextualise the message in terms of driving change in at work. Definitely worth a read from that perspective, particularly some of the ideas on how major change usually rests on three distinct roles: the maven (person with the ideas/expertise); a connector (with the relationships/networks); and the salesman (the influencer/closer/dealmaker).
John Flack
· 2 years ago
In some ways, it is a good thing that ideas get blocked at every turn. It weeds out all but the most passionate inventors and thinkers, people who won't take no for an answer. It forces them to think it out more thoroughly, and to come up with answers for every objection. Some good ideas die before getting a good hearing, but it is also a good way to kill bad ideas. But when the obstacles get too big or too artificial, sometimes you have to take your good idea someplace else.
Paul Pedrazzi
· 2 years ago
Paul - On the topic of "painful innovation" at startups. My point was there is more pain at inception of ideas within established organizations vs start-ups. Your point is there is more pain with the consequence of a failed one at a start-up, which is obviously correct.
John - Yep. That's a good perspective. Challenges to ideas to help ideas become better and organizations separate the signal from the noise. I guess it could be seen as a survival mechanism. A friend of mine talks about the "anti-change antibodies". They roam the virtual halls and destroy new ideas. The corporate immune system.
Good comments, thanks!
Jake
· 2 years ago
The point seems to be that corporations (accidentally?) stifle innovation by over-applying process and politics, which makes everyone more wary and less willing to take risks. I touched on this a bit in my posts on power and innovation.
All Comments
In fact I'd say you have it the wrong way around. What's the worst that can happen if an internal innovation doesn't take off? Get re-assigned to a "boring" job? Quit in disgust?
However, launch a new product or business into the consumer space? You may be putting everything on the line, and everyone associated will feel some very real pain if you fail.
But that's a digression. I think the real point is to make a disctinction between simply "idea people" and (usually) groups that are recognised "innovators". Innovators by definition have the special skills/influence/connections to "get things done". If they didn't, it wouldn't be "innovation".
When I read Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point I was immediately drawn to contextualise the message in terms of driving change in at work. Definitely worth a read from that perspective, particularly some of the ideas on how major change usually rests on three distinct roles: the maven (person with the ideas/expertise); a connector (with the relationships/networks); and the salesman (the influencer/closer/dealmaker).
John - Yep. That's a good perspective. Challenges to ideas to help ideas become better and organizations separate the signal from the noise. I guess it could be seen as a survival mechanism. A friend of mine talks about the "anti-change antibodies". They roam the virtual halls and destroy new ideas. The corporate immune system.
Good comments, thanks!