paul pangaro, ph.d. chair of interaction design graduate ...ess of in dus tri al muta tio n t hat i...

Creative Conditions for Innovation

Paul Pangaro, Ph.D. Chair of Interaction Design Graduate Studies Program College for Creative Studies Detroit

Technology and Innovation Exchange BASF September 18, 2015

Graduate Studies Program College for Creative Studies Detroit

MFA Transportation Design MFA Color + Materials Design MFA Integrated Design MFA Interaction Design

Graduate Studies Program College for Creative Studies Detroit

Faces of CCS MFA

C L A S S O F 2 0 1 1

52 36 Industrial Design 4 Engineering 3 Design Studies 1 Digital/Visual Media 1 Animation Design 2 Transportation Design 1 Business Administration 1 Fine Arts 3 Visual Communications

Design by Xuege Jiang ‘11

INNOVATIONwhy is it so elusive?

and what is it, anyway?

what strategies might work?

how should we distribute resources?

how can we lower risk?

how can we increase the likelihood?

INNOVATION

convention

innovation

conventioncan be superseded by as it diffuses becomes

valuechange

insightsim

ple ite

ration

(trial &

error

)

creati

ve de

struc

tion

(unpla

nned

conse

quen

ces)

learni

ng pr

ocess

(refini

ng go

als)

desig

n proc

ess

(artific

ial evo

lution

)

com

mun

ity1 1

1

2 2

2

agrees on & is shaped by maintains relationship to

disturbs relations creating that is large enough gains frames possibilities for must be shared through

that fails may lead to new

may prompt a new

may create a multiplier effect leading to more

motivatespossessmust be proved through

helps improve

reduces risk, encouraging reforms relations creating

all deliver

inevitably lead to

if strong, raise calls for efficiency, dangerously reducing

benefit from (increase efficiency by) sharing skills within a

agrees on & is shaped by maintains relationship toconv

entio

n

cont

ext

(env

ironm

ent)

inno

vatio

n

com

mun

ityco

mm

u

conv

entio

n

cont

ext

may

fail

to re

cogn

ize

each

face

s is imbalance in relations among

pose long-term threats to any

creates new

is balance in relations amongpreserves status quo by re

sisting

is a measure of propensity for

aids

requ

ires

com

es fr

omdr

ive

pres

sure

(ext

erna

l)de

cay (

inte

rnal

)

chan

ge (d

istur

banc

e)

mis

fit (p

ain)

reco

gniti

on (d

efin

ition)

insi

ght (

seei

ng o

ppor

tuni

ty)

prep

arat

ion

(imm

ersio

n)

(a b

it of lu

ck)

artic

ulat

ion

(pro

toty

ping

)

dem

onst

ratio

n (te

stin

g)ev

alua

tes

adop

tion

(cou

nter

-cha

nge)

fit (g

ain)

lead

s to

new

is re

flect

ed a

s in

crea

sed

varie

ty(e

xper

ienc

es)

actio

ns

artif

acts

belie

fsm

ay le

ad to

may

lead

to

valu

e

indi

vidu

als

inno

vatio

na

mod

el o

f

increases the likelihood of

Dubb

erly

Desig

n Of

fice

prep

ared

this

conc

ept m

ap a

s a p

roje

ct

of th

e In

stitu

te fo

r the

Cre

ative

Pro

cess

at t

he A

lber

ta C

olle

ge o

f Ar

t and

Des

ign.

The

Inst

itute

exis

ts to

focu

s and

org

anize

act

ivitie

s, en

terp

rises

, and

initia

tives

of A

CAD

with

rega

rd to

the

cultiv

atio

n of

dia

logu

e, re

sear

ch, a

nd sp

ecia

l pro

ject

s tha

t dire

ctly

addr

ess

the

natu

re o

f the

cre

ative

pro

cess

and

des

ign

thin

king.

ACA

D is

a le

adin

g ce

ntre

for e

duca

tion

and

rese

arch

, and

a c

atal

yst f

or

crea

tive

inqu

iry a

nd c

ultu

ral d

evel

opm

ent.

Plea

se se

nd c

omm

ents

abo

ut th

is m

odel

to ic

p@ac

ad.c

a

Ackn

owle

dgem

ents

Writ

ing

and

desig

n by

Hugh

Dub

berly

, Nat

han

Feld

e, a

nd P

aul P

anga

roAd

ditio

nal d

esig

n by

Sean

Dur

ham

and

Rya

n Re

posa

rRe

sear

ch b

y Sa

toko

Kak

ihar

a, A

CAD

facu

lty C

hris

Frey

, Way

ne G

iles,

and

Darle

ne Le

e

Copy

right

© 20

07

Dubb

erly

Desig

n Of

fice

2501

Har

rison

Stre

et, #

7Sa

n Fr

anci

sco,

CA

9411

041

5 648

9799

Inst

itute

for t

he C

reat

ive P

roce

ssat

the

Albe

rta C

olle

ge o

f Art

+ De

sign

1407

-14 A

ve N

WCa

lgar

y, AB

Can

ada

T2N

4R3

403 2

84 76

70

Spon

sors

hip

EPCO

R, a

foun

ding

par

tner

of t

he In

stitu

te fo

r the

Cre

ative

Proc

ess,

gene

rous

ly pr

ovid

ed fu

ndin

g fo

r thi

s pro

ject

.

Prin

ted

in C

anad

a

W. R

oss A

shby

des

crib

es va

riety

as a

mea

sure

of in

form

atio

n.

Varie

ty d

escr

ibes

a sy

stem

’s po

tent

ial to

resp

ond

to

dist

urba

nces

—th

e op

tions

it ha

s ava

ilabl

e. A

pplie

d to

com

mun

ities,

varie

ty d

escr

ibes

the

expe

rienc

es—

the

richn

ess o

f lang

uage

and

ra

nge

of c

ultu

ral to

ols—

they

can

brin

g to

bea

r on

prob

lem

s.

In a

stab

le e

nviro

nmen

t, inc

reas

ing

effic

ienc

y mak

es se

nse.

Do

wha

t you

’ve b

een

doin

g, b

ut d

o it b

ette

r and

at a

low

er c

ost.

That

mea

ns n

arro

win

g la

ngua

ge—

decr

easin

g va

riety

.

In a

n un

stab

le e

nviro

nmen

t, pur

suin

g ef

ficie

ncy m

ay a

ctua

lly b

e da

nger

ous.

You

may

get

bet

ter a

t doi

ng th

e w

rong

thin

g—at

doi

ng

som

ethi

ng th

at n

o lo

nger

mat

ters

.

The

key i

s to

mak

e su

re w

hat y

ou p

rodu

ce is

valu

able

, bef

ore

you

wor

ry a

bout

mak

ing

it mor

e ef

ficie

ntly.

Incr

easin

g ef

fect

ivene

ss

calls

for i

ncre

asin

g va

riety

—ch

angi

ng p

ersp

ectiv

e, b

ringi

ng n

ew

peop

le, n

ew e

xper

ienc

e, a

nd n

ew la

ngua

ge in

to th

e co

nver

satio

nan

d ex

pand

ing

the

field

of a

ctio

n.

Som

e or

gani

zatio

ns h

ave

proc

esse

s by w

hich

thei

r mem

bers

bui

ld

(or b

uy) n

ew id

eas a

t a sm

all s

cale

. The

org

aniza

tions

vet (

or se

lect

or

des

troy)

idea

s, m

ovin

g a

few

to th

e ne

xt st

age.

The

y “in

cuba

te”

new

idea

s in

“hot

hous

es” l

ong

enou

gh to

laun

ch th

em in

to th

e w

orld

. Exa

mpl

es in

clud

e (p

erha

ps m

ost n

otab

ly) R

oyal

Dut

ch S

hell,

som

e re

ligio

ns (s

uch

as C

atho

licism

), ven

ture

cap

ital fi

rms,

and

tech

nolo

gy c

ompa

nies

such

as G

oogl

e.

Som

e co

mm

unitie

s (so

me

ecol

ogie

s) se

em to

hav

e th

e va

riety

and

st

ruct

ures

nee

ded

to ra

ise th

e pr

obab

ility o

f inno

vatio

n (w

ithin

ce

rtain

dom

ains

). For

exa

mpl

e, S

ilicon

Val

ley,

Rout

e 12

8 aro

und

Bost

on, A

ustin

, Res

earc

h Tr

iang

le, a

nd S

eattl

e al

l cur

rent

ly en

joy

this

adva

ntag

e.

Insig

ht b

egin

s a p

roce

ss o

f res

torin

g fit

. Insig

ht re

mai

ns th

e m

ost

mys

terio

us p

art o

f the

inno

vatio

n pr

oces

s. It

may

be

irred

ucib

le, b

ut

it can

be

aide

d. Im

mer

sion

with

in th

e co

ntex

t is a

lmos

t alw

ays

esse

ntia

l. Exp

erie

nce

with

oth

er d

omai

ns h

elps

(by i

ncre

asin

g va

riety

). For

exa

mpl

e, a

pplyi

ng p

atte

rns f

rom

oth

er d

omai

ns c

an

help

solve

new

pro

blem

s. Th

is is

the

prom

ise o

f Gen

rich

Alts

hulle

r’s

syst

em kn

own

as T

RIZ.

Insig

ht is

a ty

pe o

f hyp

othe

sis, a

form

of a

bduc

tion.

Insig

ht m

ay c

ome

from

juxt

apos

ition

and

patte

rn m

atch

ing.

Györ

gy P

olya

sugg

ests

ask

ing:

Wha

t is th

e un

know

n?W

hat a

re th

e da

ta?

Wha

t is th

e co

nditio

n? (W

hat a

re th

e co

nstra

ints

?)W

hat is

the

conn

ectio

n be

twee

n da

ta a

nd u

nkno

wn?

Wha

t is a

rela

ted

prob

lem

?Ho

w c

ould

you

rest

ate

the

prob

lem

?W

hat c

ould

you

draw

to re

pres

ent t

he p

robl

em?

No in

nova

tion

arise

s ful

ly fo

rmed

.

Artic

ulat

ion

prov

ides

a m

eans

of s

harin

g an

insig

ht.

Dem

onst

ratio

n pr

oves

(or d

ispro

ves)

the

insig

ht’s

valu

e.De

mon

stra

tion

prov

ides

a b

asis

for a

dopt

ion;

it i

s a ke

y to

crea

ting

chan

ge.

Dem

onst

ratio

n en

able

s eva

luat

ion.

Te

stin

g di

sclo

ses e

rrors

, incr

ease

s und

erst

andi

ng,

and

prov

ides

a b

asis

for i

mpr

ovem

ent.

Itera

tion

is al

way

s nec

essa

ry.

Of c

ours

e, th

e co

nven

tion

resu

lting

from

a su

cces

sful

inno

vatio

n di

ffers

from

the

conv

entio

n th

at p

rece

ded

it. Lik

ewise

, the

com

mun

ity th

at e

xists

afte

r an

inno

vatio

n is

likel

y to

have

cha

nged

fro

m th

e co

mm

unity

that

pre

cede

d it.

The

cont

ext, t

oo, is

likel

y to

hav

e ch

ange

d be

yond

the

chan

ge w

hich

cre

ated

the

misf

it le

adin

g to

an

inno

vatio

n.

The

scal

e of

cha

nge

varie

s. M

any p

eopl

e ha

ve p

ropo

sed

mod

els,

for e

xam

ple:

Mic

hael

Geo

gheg

an:

Reco

gnizi

ng a

new

dom

ain

of in

vent

ion

Crea

ting

new

opp

ortu

nitie

s for

disc

over

y with

in th

e do

mai

nIm

prov

ing

the

effic

ienc

y with

whi

ch th

e di

scov

erie

s are

app

lied

Hors

t Ritt

el:

Sim

ple

prob

lem

s, w

here

the

goal

is d

efin

edCo

mpl

ex p

robl

ems,

whe

re th

e go

al re

mai

ns u

ncle

arW

icke

d pr

oble

ms,

whe

re c

onst

ituen

ts c

anno

t agr

ee o

n th

e go

al

Parri

sh H

anna

:Ta

ctic

al o

r inc

rem

enta

lSt

rate

gic

or p

unct

uate

dCu

ltura

l or p

roce

ss-o

rient

ed

Each

inno

vatio

n is

a lin

k bet

wee

n tw

o co

nven

tions

:th

e on

e it r

epla

ces a

nd th

e on

e it b

ecom

es.

An in

nova

tion

is a

pivo

t; it t

rans

form

s one

per

iod

into

the

next

.

Ever

y con

vent

ion

exist

s with

in a

com

mun

ity.

A co

nven

tion

esta

blish

es a

rela

tion

betw

een

a co

mm

unity

and

its c

onte

xt. It

def

ines

a w

ay

the

com

mun

ity e

xpec

ts its

mem

bers

to b

ehav

e in

a g

iven

situa

tion.

It p

resc

ribes

the

tool

s th

ey c

an u

se, e

ven

wha

t the

y can

thin

k.

Ever

y inn

ovat

ion

has a

pre

cede

nt in

a

prev

ious

con

vent

ion.

Ever

y com

mun

ity e

xists

with

in a

con

text

.

Cont

ext is

the

envir

onm

ent in

whi

ch a

com

mun

ity liv

es.

To su

rvive

, a c

omm

unity

mus

t hav

e a

stab

le re

latio

nshi

p w

ith its

env

ironm

ent. M

aint

aini

ng th

at st

able

rela

tions

hip

is th

e pu

rpos

e of

con

vent

ions

.

A co

mm

unity

is a

syst

em o

f peo

ple

who

inte

ract

with

in a

n ag

reed

se

t of r

ules

—co

nven

tions

.

Typi

cally

, mem

bers

of a

com

mun

ity sh

are

a co

mm

on lo

catio

n or

co

mm

on in

tere

sts.

They

may

be

rela

ted

by b

irth

or m

ay c

ome

toge

ther

for s

ocia

l or b

usin

ess r

easo

ns. C

omm

unitie

s rel

y on

indi

vidua

ls to

pro

vide

the

varie

ty n

eces

sary

for s

urviv

al—

to sh

are

pers

pect

ive, in

sight

, idea

s, an

d in

spira

tion.

Over

time,

new

mem

bers

join

and

exis

ting

mem

bers

dep

art. T

hese

ch

ange

s can

affe

ct th

e co

nven

tions

the

com

mun

ity ke

eps.

Entro

py a

lway

s inc

reas

es.

Resis

ting

entro

py re

quire

s ene

rgy a

nd va

riety

.In

evita

bly,

both

are

limite

d.

Pres

sure

from

out

side

or d

ecay

insid

e ch

ange

s the

re

latio

nshi

p be

twee

n a

com

mun

ity a

nd its

con

text

. Tha

t re

latio

nshi

p—fo

rmal

ized

as a

con

vent

ion—

is no

long

er

com

forta

ble,

no

long

er a

fit.

A di

stur

banc

e up

sets

an

exist

ing

conv

entio

n.

This

is a

root

cau

se o

f inno

vatio

n.

A di

stur

banc

e ha

s var

iety

of it

s ow

n.Un

less

a c

omm

unity

has

cor

resp

ondi

ng va

riety

to c

ance

l it,

the

varie

ty in

a d

istur

banc

e w

ill ov

erw

helm

the

com

mun

ity.

Varie

ty c

ance

ls va

riety

.

A m

isfit a

rises

whe

n a

conv

entio

n no

long

er m

aint

ains

a de

sired

rela

tion

betw

een

a co

mm

unity

and

its c

onte

xt.

Misf

it man

ifest

s its

elf a

s pai

n. It

exa

cts a

cos

t—ph

ysic

al, m

enta

l, soc

ial, o

r fin

anci

al—

on m

embe

rs

of th

e co

mm

unity

.Con

vention

s exis

t in a w

eb of

cultur

e. Inn

ovation

in on

e plac

e

affec

ts rela

ted co

nventio

ns an

d may

reduc

e their

“fit,”

haste

ning

furthe

r inno

vation

. As th

e cycl

e con

tinues,

seco

nd- o

r third

-orde

r

or ind

irect e

ffects

are n

ot kno

wable i

n adva

nce. R

esults

can b

e

surpri

sing a

nd co

nsequ

ence

s unin

tende

d.

Josep

h Sch

umpe

ter de

scribe

s crea

tive de

struc

tion as

“the

proce

ss of i

ndust

rial m

utation

that in

cessa

ntly re

volutio

nizes

the ec

onom

ic stru

cture

from withi

n, inc

essan

tly de

stroyi

ng

the old

one, i

ncess

antly

creatin

g a ne

w one.”

Reco

gnitio

n of

misf

it com

es fr

om o

bser

vatio

n an

d ex

perie

nce.

Rese

arch

met

hods

—su

ch a

s eth

nogr

aphy

—he

lp.

But id

entif

ying

a pr

oble

m re

quire

s def

initio

n.De

finitio

ns a

re c

onst

ruct

ed—

agre

ed to

.Th

ey h

ave

cons

titue

ncie

s.Th

us, d

efin

ition

is a

politi

cal a

ct,

an e

xerc

ise o

f pow

er.

Indi

vidua

ls w

ho a

re p

repa

red

to in

nova

te p

osse

ss:

Optim

ismBe

lief t

hey c

an im

prov

e th

e w

orld

Open

ness

to c

hang

eCo

nfid

ence

to m

ake

it so

Tena

city

, per

siste

nce

to se

e it t

hrou

ghPa

ssio

n, d

esire

, eve

n ob

sess

ion

Varie

tyEx

perie

nce,

skill,

and

tale

ntDo

mai

n ex

perti

seKn

owle

dge

of o

ther

dom

ains

Unde

rsta

ndin

g of

the

proc

ess

Met

hods

and

tech

niqu

esM

anag

emen

t, rhe

toric

al, a

nd p

olitic

al sk

illsPr

actic

e (D

oing

it a

few

times

hel

ps.)

They

also

know

wha

t is n

ot kn

own

but n

eces

sary

fo

r pro

gres

s; th

ey u

nder

stan

d ho

w to

find

it; an

d th

ey

reco

gnize

who

can

pro

vide

that

know

ledg

e.

For i

nsig

ht to

mat

ter,

it mus

t be

artic

ulat

ed—

give

n fo

rm.

It m

ight

be

aHy

poth

esis

Mod

el o

r dia

gram

Outlin

eSc

ript o

r sto

rySk

etch

Moc

k-up

Prot

otyp

ePi

lot

Inno

vatio

n is

a ho

ly gr

ail o

f con

tem

pora

ry so

ciet

y, an

d es

peci

ally

busin

ess.

A flo

od o

f boo

ks a

nd m

agaz

ines

pro

mot

e it.

Desig

n fir

ms

prom

ise it.

Cus

tom

ers d

eman

d it.

Surv

ival, w

e’re

told

, dep

ends

on

it.

But w

hat is

it? A

nd h

ow d

o w

e ge

t it?

We

used

to a

sk th

e sa

me

ques

tions

abo

ut q

uality

. The

n W

alte

r Sh

ewha

rt an

d Ed

war

d De

min

g an

swer

ed. T

oday

, sta

tistic

al

proc

ess c

ontro

l, tot

al q

uality

man

agem

ent (

TQM

), kai

zen,

and

six

-sig

ma

man

agem

ent a

re fu

ndam

enta

l tool

s in

busin

ess.

Orga

niza

tions

hav

e be

com

e m

uch

bette

r at m

anag

ing

qual

ity.

Qual

ity h

as b

ecom

e a

com

mod

ity, o

r at le

ast “

tabl

e st

akes

,” ne

cess

ary b

ut n

ot su

ffici

ent. N

ow, in

nova

tion

mat

ters

mor

e—be

caus

e yo

u ca

n’t c

ompe

te o

n qu

ality

alo

ne, w

heth

er a

s a

busin

ess,

a co

mm

unity

, or a

soci

ety.

The

next

are

na o

f glo

bal

com

petit

ion

is in

nova

tion,

but

the

prac

tice

of in

nova

tion

rem

ains

st

uck s

ome

40 ye

ars b

ehin

d th

e pr

actic

e of

qua

lity.

Qual

ity is

larg

ely a

bout

impr

ovin

g ef

ficie

ncy,

whe

reas

inno

vatio

nis

larg

ely a

bout

impr

ovin

g ef

fect

ivene

ss. Im

prov

ing

qual

ity is

de

crea

sing

defe

cts.

It’s a

bout

mea

surin

g. It

’s m

akin

g pr

oces

ses

mor

e ef

ficie

nt. It

wor

ks w

ithin

an

exist

ing

para

digm

.

Busin

ess W

eek d

esig

n ed

itor B

ruce

Nus

sbau

m h

as su

gges

ted

you

can’

t mea

sure

your

way

to in

nova

tion—

mea

sure

men

t bei

ng th

e ha

llmar

k of q

uality

pro

cess

es. A

nd th

ough

som

e six

-sig

ma

advo

cate

s disa

gree

, Nus

sbau

m is

poi

ntin

g ou

t a fu

ndam

enta

l di

ffere

nce

betw

een

man

agin

g qu

ality

and

man

agin

g in

nova

tion.

In

nova

tion

is cr

eatin

g a

new

par

adig

m. It

’s no

t get

ting

bette

r at

play

ing

the

sam

e ga

me;

it’s c

hang

ing

the

rule

s and

cha

ngin

g th

e ga

me.

Inno

vatio

n is

not w

orkin

g ha

rder

; it’s

wor

king

smar

ter.

This

post

er p

ropo

ses a

mod

el fo

r inn

ovat

ion.

It ta

kes t

he fo

rm o

f a

conc

ept m

ap, a

serie

s of t

erm

s and

links

form

ing

prop

ositio

ns.

The

mod

el is

bui

lt on

the

idea

that

inno

vatio

n is

abou

t cha

ngin

g pa

radi

gms.

The

mod

el si

tuat

es in

nova

tion

betw

een

two

conv

en-

tions

. Inno

vatio

n tra

nsfo

rms o

ld in

to n

ew. It

is a

pro

cess

—a

proc

ess i

n w

hich

insig

ht in

spire

s cha

nge

and

crea

tes v

alue

. Th

e pr

oces

s beg

ins w

hen

exte

rnal

pre

ssur

e or

inte

rnal

dec

ay

dist

urbs

the

rela

tion

betw

een

a co

mm

unity

and

its c

onte

xt, a

re

latio

n m

aint

aine

d by

a c

onve

ntio

n.

The

exist

ing

conv

entio

n no

long

er “f

its.”

Perh

aps t

he c

onte

xt

chan

ged.

Or t

he c

omm

unity

. Or e

ven

the

conv

entio

n. S

omeo

ne

notic

es th

e m

isfit.

It ca

uses

stre

ss. It

cre

ates

eno

ugh

frict

ion,

en

ough

pai

n, to

jum

p in

to p

eopl

e’s c

onsc

ious

ness

. Per

cept

ion

of

misf

it alm

ost s

imul

tane

ously

give

s rise

to p

ropo

sals

for c

hang

e,fo

r ref

ram

ing.

The

se p

ropo

sals

com

pete

for a

ttent

ion.

Mos

t fai

l to

insp

ire, a

re ig

nore

d, a

nd fa

de a

way

.

The

chan

ges t

hat s

urviv

e ar

e by

def

initio

n th

ose

a co

mm

unity

finds

ef

fect

ive. T

hey s

prea

d be

caus

e th

ey in

crea

se fit

(gai

n) a

nd lo

wer

pa

in o

r cos

t (de

liver

ing

valu

e).

We

rare

ly re

cogn

ize in

nova

tion

whi

le it’

s hap

peni

ng. In

stea

d,

inno

vatio

n is

ofte

n a

labe

l app

lied

afte

r the

fact

, whe

n its

valu

e is

clea

r and

a n

ew c

onve

ntio

n ha

s bec

ome

esta

blish

ed.

Ethn

ogra

phy a

nd o

ther

rese

arch

tech

niqu

es m

ay h

elp

iden

tify

oppo

rtuni

ties f

or in

nova

tion.

Des

ign

met

hods

may

incr

ease

the

spee

d of

gen

erat

ing

and

test

ing

new

idea

s. Bu

t new

idea

s are

still

subj

ect t

o na

tura

l sel

ectio

n (o

r nat

ural

des

truct

ion)

in th

e po

litica

l pr

oces

s or t

he m

arke

tpla

ce.

Inno

vatio

n re

mai

ns m

essy

. Eve

n da

nger

ous.

Luck

and

cha

nce,

be

ing

at th

e rig

ht p

lace

at t

he ri

ght t

ime,

still

play

a ro

le. B

ut

heig

hten

ed se

nsitiv

ity a

nd p

ersis

tent

ale

rtnes

s may

incr

ease

luck

.

This

mod

el is

not

a re

cipe

. At b

est it

sugg

ests

way

s to

incr

ease

th

e pr

obab

ility o

f inno

vatio

n. O

ur g

oal is

for i

t to

spur

disc

ussio

n.

Our h

ope

is th

at in

crea

sed

unde

rsta

ndin

g w

ill sp

ur in

nova

tion

and

incr

ease

the

grea

ter g

ood.

Creating

varia

tion is

the fir

st mec

hanis

m

of evol

ution—

and d

esign

.

Testin

g a pr

ototyp

e may

raise

quest

ions a

bout t

he fra

ming of

a

proble

m or de

finition

of go

als. Refr

aming

or re

fining

open

s the

possi

bility t

o tryin

g othe

r app

roach

es.

Natural

destr

uction

(i. e.,

disca

rding

poorl

y

perfo

rming

varia

tions) i

s the s

econ

d

mecha

nism of

evoluti

on—

and d

esign

.

- - - - - - - - -

convention

innovation


valuechange

insightsim

ple ite

ration

(trial &

error

)

creati

ve de

struc

tion

(unpla

nned

conse

quen

ces)

learni

ng pr

ocess

(refini

ng go

als)

desig

n proc

ess

(artific

ial evo

lution

)

com

mun

ity1 1

1

2 2

2




may prompt a new


motivatespossess

must be proved through

helps improve


all deliver

inevitably lead to




entio

n

cont

ext

(env

ironm

ent)

inno

vatio

n

com

mun

ityco

mm

u

conv

entio

n

cont

ext

may

fail

to re

cogn

ize

each

face



creates new


sisting


aids

requ

ires

com

es fr

omdr

ive

pres

sure

(ext

erna

l)de

cay (

inte

rnal

)

chan

ge (d

istur

banc

e)

mis

fit (p

ain)

reco

gniti

on (d

efin

ition)

insi

ght (

seei

ng o

ppor

tuni

ty)

prep

arat

ion

(imm

ersio

n)

(a b

it of lu

ck)

artic

ulat

ion

(pro

toty

ping

)

dem

onst

ratio

n (te

stin

g)ev

alua

tes

adop

tion

(cou

nter

-cha

nge)

fit (g

ain)

lead

s to

new

is re

flect

ed a

s in

crea

sed

varie

ty(e

xper

ienc

es)

actio

ns

artif

acts

belie

fsm

ay le

ad to

may

lead

to

valu

e

indi

vidu

als

inno

vatio

na

mod

el o

f


Dubb

erly

Desig

n Of

fice

prep

ared

this

conc

ept m

ap a

s a p

roje

ct

of th

e In

stitu

te fo

r the

Cre

ative

Pro

cess

at t

he A

lber

ta C

olle

ge o

f Ar

t and

Des

ign.

The

Inst

itute

exis

ts to

focu

s and

org

anize

act

ivitie

s, en

terp

rises

, and

initia

tives

of A

CAD

with

rega

rd to

the

cultiv

atio

n of

dia

logu

e, re

sear

ch, a

nd sp

ecia

l pro

ject

s tha

t dire

ctly

addr

ess

the

natu

re o

f the

cre

ative

pro

cess

and

des

ign

thin

king.

ACA

D is

a le

adin

g ce

ntre

for e

duca

tion

and

rese

arch

, and

a c

atal

yst f

or

crea

tive

inqu

iry a

nd c

ultu

ral d

evel

opm

ent.

Plea

se se

nd c

omm

ents

abo

ut th

is m

odel

to ic

p@ac

ad.c

a

Ackn

owle

dgem

ents

Writ

ing

and

desig

n by

Hugh

Dub

berly

, Nat

han

Feld

e, a

nd P

aul P

anga

roAd

ditio

nal d

esig

n by

Sean

Dur

ham

and

Rya

n Re

posa

rRe

sear

ch b

y Sa

toko

Kak

ihar

a, A

CAD

facu

lty C

hris

Frey

, Way

ne G

iles,

and

Darle

ne Le

e

Copy

right

© 20

07

Dubb

erly

Desig

n Of

fice

2501

Har

rison

Stre

et, #

7Sa

n Fr

anci

sco,

CA

9411

041

5 648

9799

Inst

itute

for t

he C

reat

ive P

roce

ssat

the

Albe

rta C

olle

ge o

f Art

+ De

sign

1407

-14 A

ve N

WCa

lgar

y, AB

Can

ada

T2N

4R3

403 2

84 76

70

Spon

sors

hip

EPCO

R, a

foun

ding

par

tner

of t

he In

stitu

te fo

r the

Cre

ative

Proc

ess,

gene

rous

ly pr

ovid

ed fu

ndin

g fo

r thi

s pro

ject

.

Prin

ted

in C

anad

a

W. R

oss A

shby

des

crib

es va

riety

as a

mea

sure

of in

form

atio

n.

Varie

ty d

escr

ibes

a sy

stem

’s po

tent

ial to

resp

ond

to

dist

urba

nces

—th

e op

tions

it ha

s ava

ilabl

e. A

pplie

d to

com

mun

ities,

varie

ty d

escr

ibes

the

expe

rienc

es—

the

richn

ess o

f lang

uage

and

ra

nge

of c

ultu

ral to

ols—

they

can

brin

g to

bea

r on

prob

lem

s.

In a

stab

le e

nviro

nmen

t, inc

reas

ing

effic

ienc

y mak

es se

nse.

Do

wha

t you

’ve b

een

doin

g, b

ut d

o it b

ette

r and

at a

low

er c

ost.

That

mea

ns n

arro

win

g la

ngua

ge—

decr

easin

g va

riety

.

In a

n un

stab

le e

nviro

nmen

t, pur

suin

g ef

ficie

ncy m

ay a

ctua

lly b

e da

nger

ous.

You

may

get

bet

ter a

t doi

ng th

e w

rong

thin

g—at

doi

ng

som

ethi

ng th

at n

o lo

nger

mat

ters

.

The

key i

s to

mak

e su

re w

hat y

ou p

rodu

ce is

valu

able

, bef

ore

you

wor

ry a

bout

mak

ing

it mor

e ef

ficie

ntly.

Incr

easin

g ef

fect

ivene

ss

calls

for i

ncre

asin

g va

riety

—ch

angi

ng p

ersp

ectiv

e, b

ringi

ng n

ew

peop

le, n

ew e

xper

ienc

e, a

nd n

ew la

ngua

ge in

to th

e co

nver

satio

nan

d ex

pand

ing

the

field

of a

ctio

n.

Som

e or

gani

zatio

ns h

ave

proc

esse

s by w

hich

thei

r mem

bers

bui

ld

(or b

uy) n

ew id

eas a

t a sm

all s

cale

. The

org

aniza

tions

vet (

or se

lect

or

des

troy)

idea

s, m

ovin

g a

few

to th

e ne

xt st

age.

The

y “in

cuba

te”

new

idea

s in

“hot

hous

es” l

ong

enou

gh to

laun

ch th

em in

to th

e w

orld

. Exa

mpl

es in

clud

e (p

erha

ps m

ost n

otab

ly) R

oyal

Dut

ch S

hell,

som

e re

ligio

ns (s

uch

as C

atho

licism

), ven

ture

cap

ital fi

rms,

and

tech

nolo

gy c

ompa

nies

such

as G

oogl

e.

Som

e co

mm

unitie

s (so

me

ecol

ogie

s) se

em to

hav

e th

e va

riety

and

st

ruct

ures

nee

ded

to ra

ise th

e pr

obab

ility o

f inno

vatio

n (w

ithin

ce

rtain

dom

ains

). For

exa

mpl

e, S

ilicon

Val

ley,

Rout

e 12

8 aro

und

Bost

on, A

ustin

, Res

earc

h Tr

iang

le, a

nd S

eattl

e al

l cur

rent

ly en

joy

this

adva

ntag

e.

Insig

ht b

egin

s a p

roce

ss o

f res

torin

g fit

. Insig

ht re

mai

ns th

e m

ost

mys

terio

us p

art o

f the

inno

vatio

n pr

oces

s. It

may

be

irred

ucib

le, b

ut

it can

be

aide

d. Im

mer

sion

with

in th

e co

ntex

t is a

lmos

t alw

ays

esse

ntia

l. Exp

erie

nce

with

oth

er d

omai

ns h

elps

(by i

ncre

asin

g va

riety

). For

exa

mpl

e, a

pplyi

ng p

atte

rns f

rom

oth

er d

omai

ns c

an

help

solve

new

pro

blem

s. Th

is is

the

prom

ise o

f Gen

rich

Alts

hulle

r’s

syst

em kn

own

as T

RIZ.

Insig

ht is

a ty

pe o

f hyp

othe

sis, a

form

of a

bduc

tion.

Insig

ht m

ay c

ome

from

juxt

apos

ition

and

patte

rn m

atch

ing.

Györ

gy P

olya

sugg

ests

ask

ing:

Wha

t is th

e un

know

n?W

hat a

re th

e da

ta?

Wha

t is th

e co

nditio

n? (W

hat a

re th

e co

nstra

ints

?)W

hat is

the

conn

ectio

n be

twee

n da

ta a

nd u

nkno

wn?

Wha

t is a

rela

ted

prob

lem

?Ho

w c

ould

you

rest

ate

the

prob

lem

?W

hat c

ould

you

draw

to re

pres

ent t

he p

robl

em?

No in

nova

tion

arise

s ful

ly fo

rmed

.

Artic

ulat

ion

prov

ides

a m

eans

of s

harin

g an

insig

ht.

Dem

onst

ratio

n pr

oves

(or d

ispro

ves)

the

insig

ht’s

valu

e.De

mon

stra

tion

prov

ides

a b

asis

for a

dopt

ion;

it i

s a ke

y to

crea

ting

chan

ge.

Dem

onst

ratio

n en

able

s eva

luat

ion.

Te

stin

g di

sclo

ses e

rrors

, incr

ease

s und

erst

andi

ng,

and

prov

ides

a b

asis

for i

mpr

ovem

ent.

Itera

tion

is al

way

s nec

essa

ry.

Of c

ours

e, th

e co

nven

tion

resu

lting

from

a su

cces

sful

inno

vatio

n di

ffers

from

the

conv

entio

n th

at p

rece

ded

it. Lik

ewise

, the

com

mun

ity th

at e

xists

afte

r an

inno

vatio

n is

likel

y to

have

cha

nged

fro

m th

e co

mm

unity

that

pre

cede

d it.

The

cont

ext, t

oo, is

likel

y to

hav

e ch

ange

d be

yond

the

chan

ge w

hich

cre

ated

the

misf

it le

adin

g to

an

inno

vatio

n.

The

scal

e of

cha

nge

varie

s. M

any p

eopl

e ha

ve p

ropo

sed

mod

els,

for e

xam

ple:

Mic

hael

Geo

gheg

an:

Reco

gnizi

ng a

new

dom

ain

of in

vent

ion

Crea

ting

new

opp

ortu

nitie

s for

disc

over

y with

in th

e do

mai

nIm

prov

ing

the

effic

ienc

y with

whi

ch th

e di

scov

erie

s are

app

lied

Hors

t Ritt

el:

Sim

ple

prob

lem

s, w

here

the

goal

is d

efin

edCo

mpl

ex p

robl

ems,

whe

re th

e go

al re

mai

ns u

ncle

arW

icke

d pr

oble

ms,

whe

re c

onst

ituen

ts c

anno

t agr

ee o

n th

e go

al

Parri

sh H

anna

:Ta

ctic

al o

r inc

rem

enta

lSt

rate

gic

or p

unct

uate

dCu

ltura

l or p

roce

ss-o

rient

ed

Each

inno

vatio

n is

a lin

k bet

wee

n tw

o co

nven

tions

:th

e on

e it r

epla

ces a

nd th

e on

e it b

ecom

es.

An in

nova

tion

is a

pivo

t; it t

rans

form

s one

per

iod

into

the

next

.

Ever

y con

vent

ion

exist

s with

in a

com

mun

ity.

A co

nven

tion

esta

blish

es a

rela

tion

betw

een

a co

mm

unity

and

its c

onte

xt. It

def

ines

a w

ay

the

com

mun

ity e

xpec

ts its

mem

bers

to b

ehav

e in

a g

iven

situa

tion.

It p

resc

ribes

the

tool

s th

ey c

an u

se, e

ven

wha

t the

y can

thin

k.

Ever

y inn

ovat

ion

has a

pre

cede

nt in

a

prev

ious

con

vent

ion.

Ever

y com

mun

ity e

xists

with

in a

con

text

.

Cont

ext is

the

envir

onm

ent in

whi

ch a

com

mun

ity liv

es.

To su

rvive

, a c

omm

unity

mus

t hav

e a

stab

le re

latio

nshi

p w

ith its

env

ironm

ent. M

aint

aini

ng th

at st

able

rela

tions

hip

is th

e pu

rpos

e of

con

vent

ions

.

A co

mm

unity

is a

syst

em o

f peo

ple

who

inte

ract

with

in a

n ag

reed

se

t of r

ules

—co

nven

tions

.

Typi

cally

, mem

bers

of a

com

mun

ity sh

are

a co

mm

on lo

catio

n or

co

mm

on in

tere

sts.

They

may

be

rela

ted

by b

irth

or m

ay c

ome

toge

ther

for s

ocia

l or b

usin

ess r

easo

ns. C

omm

unitie

s rel

y on

indi

vidua

ls to

pro

vide

the

varie

ty n

eces

sary

for s

urviv

al—

to sh

are

pers

pect

ive, in

sight

, idea

s, an

d in

spira

tion.

Over

time,

new

mem

bers

join

and

exis

ting

mem

bers

dep

art. T

hese

ch

ange

s can

affe

ct th

e co

nven

tions

the

com

mun

ity ke

eps.

Entro

py a

lway

s inc

reas

es.

Resis

ting

entro

py re

quire

s ene

rgy a

nd va

riety

.In

evita

bly,

both

are

limite

d.

Pres

sure

from

out

side

or d

ecay

insid

e ch

ange

s the

re

latio

nshi

p be

twee

n a

com

mun

ity a

nd its

con

text

. Tha

t re

latio

nshi

p—fo

rmal

ized

as a

con

vent

ion—

is no

long

er

com

forta

ble,

no

long

er a

fit.

A di

stur

banc

e up

sets

an

exist

ing

conv

entio

n.

This

is a

root

cau

se o

f inno

vatio

n.

A di

stur

banc

e ha

s var

iety

of it

s ow

n.Un

less

a c

omm

unity

has

cor

resp

ondi

ng va

riety

to c

ance

l it,

the

varie

ty in

a d

istur

banc

e w

ill ov

erw

helm

the

com

mun

ity.

Varie

ty c

ance

ls va

riety

.

A m

isfit a

rises

whe

n a

conv

entio

n no

long

er m

aint

ains

a de

sired

rela

tion

betw

een

a co

mm

unity

and

its c

onte

xt.

Misf

it man

ifest

s its

elf a

s pai

n. It

exa

cts a

cos

t—ph

ysic

al, m

enta

l, soc

ial, o

r fin

anci

al—

on m

embe

rs

of th

e co

mm

unity

.

Conven

tions e

xist in

a web

of cu

lture. I

nnova

tion in

one p

lace

affec

ts rela

ted co

nventio

ns an

d may

reduc

e their

“fit,”

haste

ning

furthe

r inno

vation

. As th

e cycl

e con

tinues,

seco

nd- o

r third

-orde

r

or ind

irect e

ffects

are n

ot kno

wable i

n adva

nce. R

esults

can b

e

surpri

sing a

nd co

nsequ

ence

s unin

tende

d.

Josep

h Sch

umpe

ter de

scribe

s crea

tive de

struc

tion as

“the

proce

ss of i

ndust

rial m

utation

that in

cessa

ntly re

volutio

nizes

the ec

onom

ic stru

cture

from withi

n, inc

essan

tly de

stroyi

ng

the old

one, i

ncess

antly

creatin

g a ne

w one.”

Reco

gnitio

n of

misf

it com

es fr

om o

bser

vatio

n an

d ex

perie

nce.

Rese

arch

met

hods

—su

ch a

s eth

nogr

aphy

—he

lp.

But id

entif

ying

a pr

oble

m re

quire

s def

initio

n.De

finitio

ns a

re c

onst

ruct

ed—

agre

ed to

.Th

ey h

ave

cons

titue

ncie

s.Th

us, d

efin

ition

is a

politi

cal a

ct,

an e

xerc

ise o

f pow

er.

Indi

vidua

ls w

ho a

re p

repa

red

to in

nova

te p

osse

ss:

Optim

ismBe

lief t

hey c

an im

prov

e th

e w

orld

Open

ness

to c

hang

eCo

nfid

ence

to m

ake

it so

Tena

city

, per

siste

nce

to se

e it t

hrou

ghPa

ssio

n, d

esire

, eve

n ob

sess

ion

Varie

tyEx

perie

nce,

skill,

and

tale

ntDo

mai

n ex

perti

seKn

owle

dge

of o

ther

dom

ains

Unde

rsta

ndin

g of

the

proc

ess

Met

hods

and

tech

niqu

esM

anag

emen

t, rhe

toric

al, a

nd p

olitic

al sk

illsPr

actic

e (D

oing

it a

few

times

hel

ps.)

They

also

know

wha

t is n

ot kn

own

but n

eces

sary

fo

r pro

gres

s; th

ey u

nder

stan

d ho

w to

find

it; an

d th

ey

reco

gnize

who

can

pro

vide

that

know

ledg

e.

For i

nsig

ht to

mat

ter,

it mus

t be

artic

ulat

ed—

give

n fo

rm.

It m

ight

be

aHy

poth

esis

Mod

el o

r dia

gram

Outlin

eSc

ript o

r sto

rySk

etch

Moc

k-up

Prot

otyp

ePi

lot

Inno

vatio

n is

a ho

ly gr

ail o

f con

tem

pora

ry so

ciet

y, an

d es

peci

ally

busin

ess.

A flo

od o

f boo

ks a

nd m

agaz

ines

pro

mot

e it.

Desig

n fir

ms

prom

ise it.

Cus

tom

ers d

eman

d it.

Surv

ival, w

e’re

told

, dep

ends

on

it.

But w

hat is

it? A

nd h

ow d

o w

e ge

t it?

We

used

to a

sk th

e sa

me

ques

tions

abo

ut q

uality

. The

n W

alte

r Sh

ewha

rt an

d Ed

war

d De

min

g an

swer

ed. T

oday

, sta

tistic

al

proc

ess c

ontro

l, tot

al q

uality

man

agem

ent (

TQM

), kai

zen,

and

six

-sig

ma

man

agem

ent a

re fu

ndam

enta

l tool

s in

busin

ess.

Orga

niza

tions

hav

e be

com

e m

uch

bette

r at m

anag

ing

qual

ity.

Qual

ity h

as b

ecom

e a

com

mod

ity, o

r at le

ast “

tabl

e st

akes

,” ne

cess

ary b

ut n

ot su

ffici

ent. N

ow, in

nova

tion

mat

ters

mor

e—be

caus

e yo

u ca

n’t c

ompe

te o

n qu

ality

alo

ne, w

heth

er a

s a

busin

ess,

a co

mm

unity

, or a

soci

ety.

The

next

are

na o

f glo

bal

com

petit

ion

is in

nova

tion,

but

the

prac

tice

of in

nova

tion

rem

ains

st

uck s

ome

40 ye

ars b

ehin

d th

e pr

actic

e of

qua

lity.

Qual

ity is

larg

ely a

bout

impr

ovin

g ef

ficie

ncy,

whe

reas

inno

vatio

nis

larg

ely a

bout

impr

ovin

g ef

fect

ivene

ss. Im

prov

ing

qual

ity is

de

crea

sing

defe

cts.

It’s a

bout

mea

surin

g. It

’s m

akin

g pr

oces

ses

mor

e ef

ficie

nt. It

wor

ks w

ithin

an

exist

ing

para

digm

.

Busin

ess W

eek d

esig

n ed

itor B

ruce

Nus

sbau

m h

as su

gges

ted

you

can’

t mea

sure

your

way

to in

nova

tion—

mea

sure

men

t bei

ng th

e ha

llmar

k of q

uality

pro

cess

es. A

nd th

ough

som

e six

-sig

ma

advo

cate

s disa

gree

, Nus

sbau

m is

poi

ntin

g ou

t a fu

ndam

enta

l di

ffere

nce

betw

een

man

agin

g qu

ality

and

man

agin

g in

nova

tion.

In

nova

tion

is cr

eatin

g a

new

par

adig

m. It

’s no

t get

ting

bette

r at

play

ing

the

sam

e ga

me;

it’s c

hang

ing

the

rule

s and

cha

ngin

g th

e ga

me.

Inno

vatio

n is

not w

orkin

g ha

rder

; it’s

wor

king

smar

ter.

This

post

er p

ropo

ses a

mod

el fo

r inn

ovat

ion.

It ta

kes t

he fo

rm o

f a

conc

ept m

ap, a

serie

s of t

erm

s and

links

form

ing

prop

ositio

ns.

The

mod

el is

bui

lt on

the

idea

that

inno

vatio

n is

abou

t cha

ngin

g pa

radi

gms.

The

mod

el si

tuat

es in

nova

tion

betw

een

two

conv

en-

tions

. Inno

vatio

n tra

nsfo

rms o

ld in

to n

ew. It

is a

pro

cess

—a

proc

ess i

n w

hich

insig

ht in

spire

s cha

nge

and

crea

tes v

alue

. Th

e pr

oces

s beg

ins w

hen

exte

rnal

pre

ssur

e or

inte

rnal

dec

ay

dist

urbs

the

rela

tion

betw

een

a co

mm

unity

and

its c

onte

xt, a

re

latio

n m

aint

aine

d by

a c

onve

ntio

n.

The

exist

ing

conv

entio

n no

long

er “f

its.”

Perh

aps t

he c

onte

xt

chan

ged.

Or t

he c

omm

unity

. Or e

ven

the

conv

entio

n. S

omeo

ne

notic

es th

e m

isfit.

It ca

uses

stre

ss. It

cre

ates

eno

ugh

frict

ion,

en

ough

pai

n, to

jum

p in

to p

eopl

e’s c

onsc

ious

ness

. Per

cept

ion

of

misf

it alm

ost s

imul

tane

ously

give

s rise

to p

ropo

sals

for c

hang

e,fo

r ref

ram

ing.

The

se p

ropo

sals

com

pete

for a

ttent

ion.

Mos

t fai

l to

insp

ire, a

re ig

nore

d, a

nd fa

de a

way

.

The

chan

ges t

hat s

urviv

e ar

e by

def

initio

n th

ose

a co

mm

unity

finds

ef

fect

ive. T

hey s

prea

d be

caus

e th

ey in

crea

se fit

(gai

n) a

nd lo

wer

pa

in o

r cos

t (de

liver

ing

valu

e).

We

rare

ly re

cogn

ize in

nova

tion

whi

le it’

s hap

peni

ng. In

stea

d,

inno

vatio

n is

ofte

n a

labe

l app

lied

afte

r the

fact

, whe

n its

valu

e is

clea

r and

a n

ew c

onve

ntio

n ha

s bec

ome

esta

blish

ed.

Ethn

ogra

phy a

nd o

ther

rese

arch

tech

niqu

es m

ay h

elp

iden

tify

oppo

rtuni

ties f

or in

nova

tion.

Des

ign

met

hods

may

incr

ease

the

spee

d of

gen

erat

ing

and

test

ing

new

idea

s. Bu

t new

idea

s are

still

subj

ect t

o na

tura

l sel

ectio

n (o

r nat

ural

des

truct

ion)

in th

e po

litica

l pr

oces

s or t

he m

arke

tpla

ce.

Inno

vatio

n re

mai

ns m

essy

. Eve

n da

nger

ous.

Luck

and

cha

nce,

be

ing

at th

e rig

ht p

lace

at t

he ri

ght t

ime,

still

play

a ro

le. B

ut

heig

hten

ed se

nsitiv

ity a

nd p

ersis

tent

ale

rtnes

s may

incr

ease

luck

.

This

mod

el is

not

a re

cipe

. At b

est it

sugg

ests

way

s to

incr

ease

th

e pr

obab

ility o

f inno

vatio

n. O

ur g

oal is

for i

t to

spur

disc

ussio

n.

Our h

ope

is th

at in

crea

sed

unde

rsta

ndin

g w

ill sp

ur in

nova

tion

and

incr

ease

the

grea

ter g

ood.

Creating

varia

tion is

the fir

st mec

hanis

m

of evol

ution—

and d

esign

.

Testin

g a pr

ototyp

e may

raise

quest

ions a

bout t

he fra

ming of

a

proble

m or de

finition

of go

als. Refr

aming

or re

fining

open

s the

possi

bility t

o tryin

g othe

r app

roach

es.

Natural

destr

uction

(i. e.,

disca

rding

poorl

y

perfo

rming

varia

tions) i

s the s

econ

d

mecha

nism of

evoluti

on—

and d

esign

.

- - - - - - - - -

convention

innovation

conventioncan be superseded by

as it diffuses becomes value

changeinsight

simple

iterat

ion

(trial &

error

)

creati

ve de

struc

tion

(unpla

nned

conse

quen

ces)

learni

ng pr

ocess

(refini

ng go

als)

desig

n proc

ess

(artific

ial evo

lution

)

community1

1

1

2

2

2

agrees on & is shaped by

maintains relationship to

disturbs relations creatingthat is large enough gains

frames possibilities for

must be shared through

that

fails

may

lead

to n

ew

may

pro

mpt

a n

ew

may

cre

ate

a m

ultip

lier e

ffect

lead

ing

to m

ore

mot

ivat

espo

sses

s


help

s im

prov

e

reduces risk, encouragingreform

s relations creating

all deliver

inevitably lead to


benefit from (increase efficiency by) sharing skills w

ithin a



convention

context(environment)

innovation

community commu

convention

context

may fail to recognize

each faces

is imbalance in

relatio

ns among


creates new

is balance in re

lations among

preserves status quo by resisting

is a m

easure of p

ropensity f

or

aidsrequires comes from drive

pressure (external)decay (internal)

change (disturbance)

misfit (pain)

recognition (definition)

insight (seeing opportunity)preparation(immersion)

(a bit of luck)

articulation (prototyping)

demonstration (testing)evaluates

adoption (counter-change)

fit (gain)

leads to new

is reflected as increased

variety(experiences)

actions

artifacts

beliefsmay lead to

may lead to

value

individuals

innovationa model of


Dubberly Design Office prepared this concept map as a project of the Institute for the Creative Process at the Alberta College of Art and Design. The Institute exists to focus and organize activities, enterprises, and initiatives of ACAD with regard to the cultivation of dialogue, research, and special projects that directly address the nature of the creative process and design thinking. ACAD is a leading centre for education and research, and a catalyst for creative inquiry and cultural development.

Please send comments about this model to [email protected]

Acknowledgements

Writing and design byHugh Dubberly, Nathan Felde, and Paul PangaroAdditional design bySean Durham and Ryan ReposarResearch by Satoko Kakihara, ACAD faculty Chris Frey, Wayne Giles, and Darlene Lee

Copyright © 2007

Dubberly Design Office2501 Harrison Street, #7San Francisco, CA 94110415 648 9799

Institute for the Creative Processat the Alberta College of Art + Design1407-14 Ave NWCalgary, AB CanadaT2N 4R3403 284 7670

Sponsorship

EPCOR, a founding partner of the Institute for the CreativeProcess, generously provided funding for this project.

Printed in Canada

W. Ross Ashby describes variety as a measure of information. Variety describes a system’s potential to respond to disturbances—the options it has available. Applied to communities, variety describes the experiences—the richness of language and range of cultural tools—they can bring to bear on problems.

In a stable environment, increasing efficiency makes sense. Do what you’ve been doing, but do it better and at a lower cost. That means narrowing language—decreasing variety.

In an unstable environment, pursuing efficiency may actually be dangerous. You may get better at doing the wrong thing—at doing something that no longer matters.

The key is to make sure what you produce is valuable, before you worry about making it more efficiently. Increasing effectiveness calls for increasing variety—changing perspective, bringing new people, new experience, and new language into the conversationand expanding the field of action.

Some organizations have processes by which their members build (or buy) new ideas at a small scale. The organizations vet (or select or destroy) ideas, moving a few to the next stage. They “incubate” new ideas in “hothouses” long enough to launch them into the world. Examples include (perhaps most notably) Royal Dutch Shell, some religions (such as Catholicism), venture capital firms, and technology companies such as Google.

Some communities (some ecologies) seem to have the variety and structures needed to raise the probability of innovation (within certain domains). For example, Silicon Valley, Route 128 around Boston, Austin, Research Triangle, and Seattle all currently enjoy this advantage.

Insight begins a process of restoring fit. Insight remains the most mysterious part of the innovation process. It may be irreducible, but it can be aided. Immersion within the context is almost always essential. Experience with other domains helps (by increasing variety). For example, applying patterns from other domains can help solve new problems. This is the promise of Genrich Altshuller’s system known as TRIZ.

Insight is a type of hypothesis, a form of abduction.Insight may come from juxtaposition and pattern matching.

György Polya suggests asking:What is the unknown?What are the data?What is the condition? (What are the constraints?)What is the connection between data and unknown?What is a related problem?How could you restate the problem?What could you draw to represent the problem?

No innovation arises fully formed.

Articulation provides a means of sharing an insight.Demonstration proves (or disproves) the insight’s value.Demonstration provides a basis for adoption; it is a key to creating change.

Demonstration enables evaluation. Testing discloses errors, increases understanding, and provides a basis for improvement.

Iteration is always necessary.

Of course, the convention resulting from a successful innovation differs from the convention that preceded it. Likewise, the community that exists after an innovation is likely to have changed from the community that preceded it. The context, too, is likely to have changed beyond the change which created the misfit leading to an innovation.

The scale of change varies. Many people have proposed models, for example:

Michael Geoghegan:Recognizing a new domain of inventionCreating new opportunities for discovery within the domainImproving the efficiency with which the discoveries are applied

Horst Rittel:Simple problems, where the goal is definedComplex problems, where the goal remains unclearWicked problems, where constituents cannot agree on the goal

Parrish Hanna:Tactical or incrementalStrategic or punctuatedCultural or process-oriented

Each innovation is a link between two conventions:the one it replaces and the one it becomes. An innovation is a pivot; it transforms one period into the next.

Every convention exists within a community.

A convention establishes a relation between a community and its context. It defines a way the community expects its members to behave in a given situation. It prescribes the tools they can use, even what they can think.

Every innovation has a precedent in a previous convention.

Every community exists within a context.

Context is the environment in which a community lives. To survive, a community must have a stable relationship with its environment. Maintaining that stable relationship is the purpose of conventions.

A community is a system of people who interact within an agreed set of rules—conventions.

Typically, members of a community share a common location or common interests. They may be related by birth or may come together for social or business reasons. Communities rely on individuals to provide the variety necessary for survival—to share perspective, insight, ideas, and inspiration.

Over time, new members join and existing members depart. These changes can affect the conventions the community keeps.

Entropy always increases. Resisting entropy requires energy and variety.Inevitably, both are limited.

Pressure from outside or decay inside changes the relationship between a community and its context. That relationship—formalized as a convention—is no longer comfortable, no longer a fit.

A disturbance upsets an existing convention. This is a root cause of innovation.

A disturbance has variety of its own.Unless a community has corresponding variety to cancel it,the variety in a disturbance will overwhelm the community.Variety cancels variety.

A misfit arises when a convention no longer maintainsa desired relation between a community and its context.

Misfit manifests itself as pain. It exacts a cost—physical, mental, social, or financial—on members of the community.

Conven

tions e

xist in

a web

of cu

lture. I

nnovat

ion in

one p

lace

affec

ts rela

ted co

nventio

ns an

d may

reduc

e their

“fit,”

haste

ning

furthe

r inno

vation

. As th

e cycl

e con

tinues,

seco

nd- o

r third

-orde

r

or ind

irect e

ffects

are n

ot kno

wable i

n adva

nce. R

esults

can b

e

surpri

sing a

nd co

nsequ

ence

s unin

tende

d.

Josep

h Sch

umpe

ter de

scribes

creativ

e dest

ruction

as “th

e

proce

ss of i

ndust

rial m

utation

that in

cessa

ntly re

volutio

nizes

the ec

onom

ic stru

cture

from withi

n, inc

essan

tly de

stroyi

ng

the old

one, i

ncess

antly

creatin

g a ne

w one.”

Recognition of misfit comes from observation and experience.Research methods—such as ethnography—help.

But identifying a problem requires definition.Definitions are constructed—agreed to.They have constituencies.Thus, definition is a political act, an exercise of power.

Individuals who are prepared to innovate possess:

OptimismBelief they can improve the worldOpenness to changeConfidence to make it soTenacity, persistence to see it throughPassion, desire, even obsession

VarietyExperience, skill, and talentDomain expertiseKnowledge of other domainsUnderstanding of the processMethods and techniquesManagement, rhetorical, and political skillsPractice (Doing it a few times helps.)

They also know what is not known but necessary for progress; they understand how to find it; and they recognize who can provide that knowledge.

For insight to matter, it must be articulated—given form.

It might be aHypothesisModel or diagramOutlineScript or storySketchMock-upPrototypePilot

Innovation is a holy grail of contemporary society, and especially business. A flood of books and magazines promote it. Design firms promise it. Customers demand it. Survival, we’re told, depends on it.

But what is it? And how do we get it?

We used to ask the same questions about quality. Then Walter Shewhart and Edward Deming answered. Today, statistical process control, total quality management (TQM), kaizen, and six-sigma management are fundamental tools in business.

Organizations have become much better at managing quality. Quality has become a commodity, or at least “table stakes,” necessary but not sufficient. Now, innovation matters more—because you can’t compete on quality alone, whether as a business, a community, or a society. The next arena of global competition is innovation, but the practice of innovation remains stuck some 40 years behind the practice of quality.

Quality is largely about improving efficiency, whereas innovationis largely about improving effectiveness. Improving quality is decreasing defects. It’s about measuring. It’s making processes more efficient. It works within an existing paradigm.

Business Week design editor Bruce Nussbaum has suggested you can’t measure your way to innovation—measurement being the hallmark of quality processes. And though some six-sigma advocates disagree, Nussbaum is pointing out a fundamental difference between managing quality and managing innovation. Innovation is creating a new paradigm. It’s not getting better at playing the same game; it’s changing the rules and changing the game. Innovation is not working harder; it’s working smarter.

This poster proposes a model for innovation. It takes the form of a concept map, a series of terms and links forming propositions.

The model is built on the idea that innovation is about changing paradigms. The model situates innovation between two conven-tions. Innovation transforms old into new. It is a process—a process in which insight inspires change and creates value. The process begins when external pressure or internal decay disturbs the relation between a community and its context, a relation maintained by a convention.

The existing convention no longer “fits.” Perhaps the context changed. Or the community. Or even the convention. Someone notices the misfit. It causes stress. It creates enough friction, enough pain, to jump into people’s consciousness. Perception of misfit almost simultaneously gives rise to proposals for change,for reframing. These proposals compete for attention. Most fail to inspire, are ignored, and fade away.

The changes that survive are by definition those a community finds effective. They spread because they increase fit (gain) and lower pain or cost (delivering value).

We rarely recognize innovation while it’s happening. Instead, innovation is often a label applied after the fact, when its value is clear and a new convention has become established.

Ethnography and other research techniques may help identify opportunities for innovation. Design methods may increase the speed of generating and testing new ideas. But new ideas are still subject to natural selection (or natural destruction) in the political process or the marketplace.

Innovation remains messy. Even dangerous. Luck and chance, being at the right place at the right time, still play a role. But heightened sensitivity and persistent alertness may increase luck.

This model is not a recipe. At best it suggests ways to increase the probability of innovation. Our goal is for it to spur discussion. Our hope is that increased understanding will spur innovation and increase the greater good.

Creating

varia

tion is

the fir

st mec

hanis

m

of evol

ution—

and d

esign

.

Testin

g a pr

ototyp

e may

raise

quest

ions a

bout t

he fra

ming of

a

proble

m or de

finition o

f goals

. Refram

ing or

refini

ng ope

ns the

possi

bility t

o tryin

g othe

r app

roach

es.

Natural

destr

uction

(i. e.,

disca

rding

poorl

y

perfo

rming

varia

tions) i

s the s

econ

d

mecha

nism of ev

olution

—an

d desi

gn.

---

---

---

convention

innovation



changeinsight

simple

iterat

ion

(trial &

error

)

creati

ve de

struc

tion

(unpla

nned

conse

quen

ces)

learni

ng pr

ocess

(refini

ng go

als)

desig

n proc

ess

(artific

ial evo

lution

)

community1

1

1

2

2

2






that

fails

may

lead

to n

ew

may

pro

mpt

a n

ew

may

cre

ate

a m

ultip

lier e

ffect

lead

ing

to m

ore

mot

ivat

espo

sses

s


help

s im

prov

e



all deliver

inevitably lead to



ithin a



convention


innovation

community commu

convention

context


each faces

is imbalance in

relatio

ns among


creates new

is balance in re

lations among


is a m

easure of p

ropensity f

or




misfit (pain)



(a bit of luck)




fit (gain)

leads to new



actions

artifacts

beliefsmay lead to

may lead to

value

individuals





Acknowledgements


Copyright © 2007



Sponsorship


Printed in Canada


































Conven

tions e

xist in

a web

of cu

lture. I

nnovat

ion in

one p

lace

affec

ts rela

ted co

nvention

s and

may red

uce th

eir “fi

t,” ha

stening

furthe

r inno

vation

. As th

e cycl

e con

tinues,

seco

nd- o

r third

-orde

r

or ind

irect e

ffects

are n

ot kno

wable i

n adva

nce. R

esults

can b

e

surpri

sing a

nd co

nsequ

ence

s unin

tende

d.

Josep

h Sch

umpe

ter de

scribes

creativ

e dest

ruction

as “th

e

proce

ss of i

ndust

rial m

utation

that in

cessa

ntly re

volutio

nizes

the ec

onom

ic stru

cture

from withi

n, inc

essan

tly de

stroyi

ng

the old

one, i

ncess

antly

creatin

g a ne

w one.”























Creating

varia

tion is

the fir

st mec

hanis

m

of evol

ution—

and d

esign

.

Testin

g a pr

ototyp

e may

raise

quest

ions a

bout t

he fra

ming of

a

proble

m or de

finition o

f goals

. Refram

ing or

refini

ng ope

ns the

possi

bility t

o tryin

g othe

r app

roach

es.

Natural

destr

uction

(i. e.,

disca

rding

poorl

y

perfo

rming

varia

tions) i

s the s

econ

d

mecha

nism of ev

olution

—an

d desi

gn.

---

---

---

convention

innovation



changeinsight

simple

iterat

ion

(trial &

error

)

creati

ve de

struc

tion

(unpla

nned

conse

quen

ces)

learni

ng pr

ocess

(refini

ng go

als)

desig

n proc

ess

(artific

ial evo

lution

)

community1

1

1

2

2

2






that

fails

may

lead

to n

ew

may

pro

mpt

a n

ew

may

cre

ate

a m

ultip

lier e

ffect

lead

ing

to m

ore

mot

ivat

espo

sses

s


help

s im

prov

e



all deliver

inevitably lead to



ithin a



convention


innovation

community commu

convention

context


each faces

is imbalance in

relatio

ns among


creates new

is balance in re

lations among


is a m

easure of p

ropensity f

or




misfit (pain)



(a bit of luck)




fit (gain)

leads to new



actions

artifacts

beliefsmay lead to

may lead to

value

individuals





Acknowledgements


Copyright © 2007



Sponsorship


Printed in Canada


































Conven

tions e

xist in

a web

of cu

lture. I

nnovat

ion in

one p

lace

affec

ts rela

ted co

nventio

ns an

d may

reduc

e their

“fit,”

haste

ning

furthe

r inno

vation

. As th

e cycl

e con

tinues,

seco

nd- o

r third

-orde

r

or ind

irect e

ffects

are n

ot kno

wable i

n adva

nce. R

esults

can b

e

surpri

sing a

nd co

nsequ

ence

s unin

tende

d.

Josep

h Sch

umpe

ter de

scribes

creativ

e dest

ruction

as “th

e

proce

ss of i

ndust

rial m

utation

that in

cessa

ntly re

volutio

nizes

the ec

onom

ic stru

cture

from withi

n, inc

essan

tly de

stroyi

ng

the old

one, i

ncess

antly

creatin

g a ne

w one.”























Creating

varia

tion is

the fir

st mec

hanis

m

of evol

ution—

and d

esign

.

Testin

g a pr

ototyp

e may

raise

quest

ions a

bout t

he fra

ming of

a

proble

m or de

finition o

f goals

. Refram

ing or

refini

ng ope

ns the

possi

bility t

o tryin

g othe

r app

roach

es.

Natural

destr

uction

(i. e.,

disca

rding

poorl

y

perfo

rming

varia

tions) i

s the s

econ

d

mecha

nism of ev

olution

—an

d desi

gn.

---

---

---

convention

innovation


valuechange

insightsim

ple ite

ration

(trial &

error

)

creati

ve de

struc

tion

(unpla

nned

conse

quen

ces)

learni

ng pr

ocess

(refini

ng go

als)

desig

n proc

ess

(artific

ial evo

lution

)

com

mun

ity1 1

1

2 2

2




may prompt a new


motivatespossess


helps improve


all deliver

inevitably lead to




entio

n

cont

ext

(env

ironm

ent)

inno

vatio

n

com

mun

ityco

mm

u

conv

entio

n

cont

ext

may

fail

to re

cogn

ize

each

face



creates new


sisting


aids

requ

ires

com

es fr

omdr

ive

pres

sure

(ext

erna

l)de

cay (

inte

rnal

)

chan

ge (d

istur

banc

e)

mis

fit (p

ain)

reco

gniti

on (d

efin

ition)

insi

ght (

seei

ng o

ppor

tuni

ty)

prep

arat

ion

(imm

ersio

n)

(a b

it of lu

ck)

artic

ulat

ion

(pro

toty

ping

)

dem

onst

ratio

n (te

stin

g)ev

alua

tes

adop

tion

(cou

nter

-cha

nge)

fit (g

ain)

lead

s to

new

is re

flect

ed a

s in

crea

sed

varie

ty(e

xper

ienc

es)

actio

ns

artif

acts

belie

fsm

ay le

ad to

may

lead

to

valu

e

indi

vidu

als

inno

vatio

na

mod

el o

f


Dubb

erly

Desig

n Of

fice

prep

ared

this

conc

ept m

ap a

s a p

roje

ct

of th

e In

stitu

te fo

r the

Cre

ative

Pro

cess

at t

he A

lber

ta C

olle

ge o

f Ar

t and

Des

ign.

The

Inst

itute

exis

ts to

focu

s and

org

anize

act

ivitie

s, en

terp

rises

, and

initia

tives

of A

CAD

with

rega

rd to

the

cultiv

atio

n of

dia

logu

e, re

sear

ch, a

nd sp

ecia

l pro

ject

s tha

t dire

ctly

addr

ess

the

natu

re o

f the

cre

ative

pro

cess

and

des

ign

thin

king.

ACA

D is

a le

adin

g ce

ntre

for e

duca

tion

and

rese

arch

, and

a c

atal

yst f

or

crea

tive

inqu

iry a

nd c

ultu

ral d

evel

opm

ent.

Plea

se se

nd c

omm

ents

abo

ut th

is m

odel

to ic

p@ac

ad.c

a

Ackn

owle

dgem

ents

Writ

ing

and

desig

n by

Hugh

Dub

berly

, Nat

han

Feld

e, a

nd P

aul P

anga

roAd

ditio

nal d

esig

n by

Sean

Dur

ham

and

Rya

n Re

posa

rRe

sear

ch b

y Sa

toko

Kak

ihar

a, A

CAD

facu

lty C

hris

Frey

, Way

ne G

iles,

and

Darle

ne Le

e

Copy

right

© 20

07

Dubb

erly

Desig

n Of

fice

2501

Har

rison

Stre

et, #

7Sa

n Fr

anci

sco,

CA

9411

041

5 648

9799

Inst

itute

for t

he C

reat

ive P

roce

ssat

the

Albe

rta C

olle

ge o

f Art

+ De

sign

1407

-14 A

ve N

WCa

lgar

y, AB

Can

ada

T2N

4R3

403 2

84 76

70

Spon

sors

hip

EPCO

R, a

foun

ding

par

tner

of t

he In

stitu

te fo

r the

Cre

ative

Proc

ess,

gene

rous

ly pr

ovid

ed fu

ndin

g fo

r thi

s pro

ject

.

Prin

ted

in C

anad

a

W. R

oss A

shby

des

crib

es va

riety

as a

mea

sure

of in

form

atio

n.

Varie

ty d

escr

ibes

a sy

stem

’s po

tent

ial to

resp

ond

to

dist

urba

nces

—th

e op

tions

it ha

s ava

ilabl

e. A

pplie

d to

com

mun

ities,

varie

ty d

escr

ibes

the

expe

rienc

es—

the

richn

ess o

f lang

uage

and

ra

nge

of c

ultu

ral to

ols—

they

can

brin

g to

bea

r on

prob

lem

s.

In a

stab

le e

nviro

nmen

t, inc

reas

ing

effic

ienc

y mak

es se

nse.

Do

wha

t you

’ve b

een

doin

g, b

ut d

o it b

ette

r and

at a

low

er c

ost.

That

mea

ns n

arro

win

g la

ngua

ge—

decr

easin

g va

riety

.

In a

n un

stab

le e

nviro

nmen

t, pur

suin

g ef

ficie

ncy m

ay a

ctua

lly b

e da

nger

ous.

You

may

get

bet

ter a

t doi

ng th

e w

rong

thin

g—at

doi

ng

som

ethi

ng th

at n

o lo

nger

mat

ters

.

The

key i

s to

mak

e su

re w

hat y

ou p

rodu

ce is

valu

able

, bef

ore

you

wor

ry a

bout

mak

ing

it mor

e ef

ficie

ntly.

Incr

easin

g ef

fect

ivene

ss

calls

for i

ncre

asin

g va

riety

—ch

angi

ng p

ersp

ectiv

e, b

ringi

ng n

ew

peop

le, n

ew e

xper

ienc

e, a

nd n

ew la

ngua

ge in

to th

e co

nver

satio

nan

d ex

pand

ing

the

field

of a

ctio

n.

Som

e or

gani

zatio

ns h

ave

proc

esse

s by w

hich

thei

r mem

bers

bui

ld

(or b

uy) n

ew id

eas a

t a sm

all s

cale

. The

org

aniza

tions

vet (

or se

lect

or

des

troy)

idea

s, m

ovin

g a

few

to th

e ne

xt st

age.

The

y “in

cuba

te”

new

idea

s in

“hot

hous

es” l

ong

enou

gh to

laun

ch th

em in

to th

e w

orld

. Exa

mpl

es in

clud

e (p

erha

ps m

ost n

otab

ly) R

oyal

Dut

ch S

hell,

som

e re

ligio

ns (s

uch

as C

atho

licism

), ven

ture

cap

ital fi

rms,

and

tech

nolo

gy c

ompa

nies

such

as G

oogl

e.

Som

e co

mm

unitie

s (so

me

ecol

ogie

s) se

em to

hav

e th

e va

riety

and

st

ruct

ures

nee

ded

to ra

ise th

e pr

obab

ility o

f inno

vatio

n (w

ithin

ce

rtain

dom

ains

). For

exa

mpl

e, S

ilicon

Val

ley,

Rout

e 12

8 aro

und

Bost

on, A

ustin

, Res

earc

h Tr

iang

le, a

nd S

eattl

e al

l cur

rent

ly en

joy

this

adva

ntag

e.

Insig

ht b

egin

s a p

roce

ss o

f res

torin

g fit

. Insig

ht re

mai

ns th

e m

ost

mys

terio

us p

art o

f the

inno

vatio

n pr

oces

s. It

may

be

irred

ucib

le, b

ut

it can

be

aide

d. Im

mer

sion

with

in th

e co

ntex

t is a

lmos

t alw

ays

esse

ntia

l. Exp

erie

nce

with

oth

er d

omai

ns h

elps

(by i

ncre

asin

g va

riety

). For

exa

mpl

e, a

pplyi

ng p

atte

rns f

rom

oth

er d

omai

ns c

an

help

solve

new

pro

blem

s. Th

is is

the

prom

ise o

f Gen

rich

Alts

hulle

r’s

syst

em kn

own

as T

RIZ.

Insig

ht is

a ty

pe o

f hyp

othe

sis, a

form

of a

bduc

tion.

Insig

ht m

ay c

ome

from

juxt

apos

ition

and

patte

rn m

atch

ing.

Györ

gy P

olya

sugg

ests

ask

ing:

Wha

t is th

e un

know

n?W

hat a

re th

e da

ta?

Wha

t is th

e co

nditio

n? (W

hat a

re th

e co

nstra

ints

?)W

hat is

the

conn

ectio

n be

twee

n da

ta a

nd u

nkno

wn?

Wha

t is a

rela

ted

prob

lem

?Ho

w c

ould

you

rest

ate

the

prob

lem

?W

hat c

ould

you

draw

to re

pres

ent t

he p

robl

em?

No in

nova

tion

arise

s ful

ly fo

rmed

.

Artic

ulat

ion

prov

ides

a m

eans

of s

harin

g an

insig

ht.

Dem

onst

ratio

n pr

oves

(or d

ispro

ves)

the

insig

ht’s

valu

e.De

mon

stra

tion

prov

ides

a b

asis

for a

dopt

ion;

it i

s a ke

y to

crea

ting

chan

ge.

Dem

onst

ratio

n en

able

s eva

luat

ion.

Te

stin

g di

sclo

ses e

rrors

, incr

ease

s und

erst

andi

ng,

and

prov

ides

a b

asis

for i

mpr

ovem

ent.

Itera

tion

is al

way

s nec

essa

ry.

Of c

ours

e, th

e co

nven

tion

resu

lting

from

a su

cces

sful

inno

vatio

n di

ffers

from

the

conv

entio

n th

at p

rece

ded

it. Lik

ewise

, the

com

mun

ity th

at e

xists

afte

r an

inno

vatio

n is

likel

y to

have

cha

nged

fro

m th

e co

mm

unity

that

pre

cede

d it.

The

cont

ext, t

oo, is

likel

y to

hav

e ch

ange

d be

yond

the

chan

ge w

hich

cre

ated

the

misf

it le

adin

g to

an

inno

vatio

n.

The

scal

e of

cha

nge

varie

s. M

any p

eopl

e ha

ve p

ropo

sed

mod

els,

for e

xam

ple:

Mic

hael

Geo

gheg

an:

Reco

gnizi

ng a

new

dom

ain

of in

vent

ion

Crea

ting

new

opp

ortu

nitie

s for

disc

over

y with

in th

e do

mai

nIm

prov

ing

the

effic

ienc

y with

whi

ch th

e di

scov

erie

s are

app

lied

Hors

t Ritt

el:

Sim

ple

prob

lem

s, w

here

the

goal

is d

efin

edCo

mpl

ex p

robl

ems,

whe

re th

e go

al re

mai

ns u

ncle

arW

icke

d pr

oble

ms,

whe

re c

onst

ituen

ts c

anno

t agr

ee o

n th

e go

al

Parri

sh H

anna

:Ta

ctic

al o

r inc

rem

enta

lSt

rate

gic

or p

unct

uate

dCu

ltura

l or p

roce

ss-o

rient

ed

Each

inno

vatio

n is

a lin

k bet

wee

n tw

o co

nven

tions

:th

e on

e it r

epla

ces a

nd th

e on

e it b

ecom

es.

An in

nova

tion

is a

pivo

t; it t

rans

form

s one

per

iod

into

the

next

.

Ever

y con

vent

ion

exist

s with

in a

com

mun

ity.

A co

nven

tion

esta

blish

es a

rela

tion

betw

een

a co

mm

unity

and

its c

onte

xt. It

def

ines

a w

ay

the

com

mun

ity e

xpec

ts its

mem

bers

to b

ehav

e in

a g

iven

situa

tion.

It p

resc

ribes

the

tool

s th

ey c

an u

se, e

ven

wha

t the

y can

thin

k.

Ever

y inn

ovat

ion

has a

pre

cede

nt in

a

prev

ious

con

vent

ion.

Ever

y com

mun

ity e

xists

with

in a

con

text

.

Cont

ext is

the

envir

onm

ent in

whi

ch a

com

mun

ity liv

es.

To su

rvive

, a c

omm

unity

mus

t hav

e a

stab

le re

latio

nshi

p w

ith its

env

ironm

ent. M

aint

aini

ng th

at st

able

rela

tions

hip

is th

e pu

rpos

e of

con

vent

ions

.

A co

mm

unity

is a

syst

em o

f peo

ple

who

inte

ract

with

in a

n ag

reed

se

t of r

ules

—co

nven

tions

.

Typi

cally

, mem

bers

of a

com

mun

ity sh

are

a co

mm

on lo

catio

n or

co

mm

on in

tere

sts.

They

may

be

rela

ted

by b

irth

or m

ay c

ome

toge

ther

for s

ocia

l or b

usin

ess r

easo

ns. C

omm

unitie

s rel

y on

indi

vidua

ls to

pro

vide

the

varie

ty n

eces

sary

for s

urviv

al—

to sh

are

pers

pect

ive, in

sight

, idea

s, an

d in

spira

tion.

Over

time,

new

mem

bers

join

and

exis

ting

mem

bers

dep

art. T

hese

ch

ange

s can

affe

ct th

e co

nven

tions

the

com

mun

ity ke

eps.

Entro

py a

lway

s inc

reas

es.

Resis

ting

entro

py re

quire

s ene

rgy a

nd va

riety

.In

evita

bly,

both

are

limite

d.

Pres

sure

from

out

side

or d

ecay

insid

e ch

ange

s the

re

latio

nshi

p be

twee

n a

com

mun

ity a

nd its

con

text

. Tha

t re

latio

nshi

p—fo

rmal

ized

as a

con

vent

ion—

is no

long

er

com

forta

ble,

no

long

er a

fit.

A di

stur

banc

e up

sets

an

exist

ing

conv

entio

n.

This

is a

root

cau

se o

f inno

vatio

n.

A di

stur

banc

e ha

s var

iety

of it

s ow

n.Un

less

a c

omm

unity

has

cor

resp

ondi

ng va

riety

to c

ance

l it,

the

varie

ty in

a d

istur

banc

e w

ill ov

erw

helm

the

com

mun

ity.

Varie

ty c

ance

ls va

riety

.

A m

isfit a

rises

whe

n a

conv

entio

n no

long

er m

aint

ains

a de

sired

rela

tion

betw

een

a co

mm

unity

and

its c

onte

xt.

Misf

it man

ifest

s its

elf a

s pai

n. It

exa

cts a

cos

t—ph

ysic

al, m

enta

l, soc

ial, o

r fin

anci

al—

on m

embe

rs

of th

e co

mm

unity

.

Conven

tions e

xist in

a web

of cu

lture. I

nnova

tion in

one p

lace

affec

ts rela

ted co

nventio

ns an

d may

reduc

e their

“fit,”

haste

ning

furthe

r inno

vation

. As th

e cycl

e con

tinues,

seco

nd- o

r third

-orde

r

or ind

irect e

ffects

are n

ot kno

wable i

n adva

nce. R

esults

can b

e

surpri

sing a

nd co

nsequ

ence

s unin

tende

d.

Josep

h Sch

umpe

ter de

scribe

s crea

tive de

struc

tion as

“the

proce

ss of i

ndust

rial m

utation

that in

cessa

ntly re

volutio

nizes

the ec

onom

ic stru

cture

from withi

n, inc

essan

tly de

stroyi

ng

the old

one, i

ncess

antly

creatin

g a ne

w one.”

Reco

gnitio

n of

misf

it com

es fr

om o

bser

vatio

n an

d ex

perie

nce.

Rese

arch

met

hods

—su

ch a

s eth

nogr

aphy

—he

lp.

But id

entif

ying

a pr

oble

m re

quire

s def

initio

n.De

finitio

ns a

re c

onst

ruct

ed—

agre

ed to

.Th

ey h

ave

cons

titue

ncie

s.Th

us, d

efin

ition

is a

politi

cal a

ct,

an e

xerc

ise o

f pow

er.

Indi

vidua

ls w

ho a

re p

repa

red

to in

nova

te p

osse

ss:

Optim

ismBe

lief t

hey c

an im

prov

e th

e w

orld

Open

ness

to c

hang

eCo

nfid

ence

to m

ake

it so

Tena

city

, per

siste

nce

to se

e it t

hrou

ghPa

ssio

n, d

esire

, eve

n ob

sess

ion

Varie

tyEx

perie

nce,

skill,

and

tale

ntDo

mai

n ex

perti

seKn

owle

dge

of o

ther

dom

ains

Unde

rsta

ndin

g of

the

proc

ess

Met

hods

and

tech

niqu

esM

anag

emen

t, rhe

toric

al, a

nd p

olitic

al sk

illsPr

actic

e (D

oing

it a

few

times

hel

ps.)

They

also

know

wha

t is n

ot kn

own

but n

eces

sary

fo

r pro

gres

s; th

ey u

nder

stan

d ho

w to

find

it; an

d th

ey

reco

gnize

who

can

pro

vide

that

know

ledg

e.

For i

nsig

ht to

mat

ter,

it mus

t be

artic

ulat

ed—

give

n fo

rm.

It m

ight

be

aHy

poth

esis

Mod

el o

r dia

gram

Outlin

eSc

ript o

r sto

rySk

etch

Moc

k-up

Prot

otyp

ePi

lot

Inno

vatio

n is

a ho

ly gr

ail o

f con

tem

pora

ry so

ciet

y, an

d es

peci

ally

busin

ess.

A flo

od o

f boo

ks a

nd m

agaz

ines

pro

mot

e it.

Desig

n fir

ms

prom

ise it.

Cus

tom

ers d

eman

d it.

Surv

ival, w

e’re

told

, dep

ends

on

it.

But w

hat is

it? A

nd h

ow d

o w

e ge

t it?

We

used

to a

sk th

e sa

me

ques

tions

abo

ut q

uality

. The

n W

alte

r Sh

ewha

rt an

d Ed

war

d De

min

g an

swer

ed. T

oday

, sta

tistic

al

proc

ess c

ontro

l, tot

al q

uality

man

agem

ent (

TQM

), kai

zen,

and

six

-sig

ma

man

agem

ent a

re fu

ndam

enta

l tool

s in

busin

ess.

Orga

niza

tions

hav

e be

com

e m

uch

bette

r at m

anag

ing

qual

ity.

Qual

ity h

as b

ecom

e a

com

mod

ity, o

r at le

ast “

tabl

e st

akes

,” ne

cess

ary b

ut n

ot su

ffici

ent. N

ow, in

nova

tion

mat

ters

mor

e—be

caus

e yo

u ca

n’t c

ompe

te o

n qu

ality

alo

ne, w

heth

er a

s a

busin

ess,

a co

mm

unity

, or a

soci

ety.

The

next

are

na o

f glo

bal

com

petit

ion

is in

nova

tion,

but

the

prac

tice

of in

nova

tion

rem

ains

st

uck s

ome

40 ye

ars b

ehin

d th

e pr

actic

e of

qua

lity.

Qual

ity is

larg

ely a

bout

impr

ovin

g ef

ficie

ncy,

whe

reas

inno

vatio

nis

larg

ely a

bout

impr

ovin

g ef

fect

ivene

ss. Im

prov

ing

qual

ity is

de

crea

sing

defe

cts.

It’s a

bout

mea

surin

g. It

’s m

akin

g pr

oces

ses

mor

e ef

ficie

nt. It

wor

ks w

ithin

an

exist

ing

para

digm

.

Busin

ess W

eek d

esig

n ed

itor B

ruce

Nus

sbau

m h

as su

gges

ted

you

can’

t mea

sure

your

way

to in

nova

tion—

mea

sure

men

t bei

ng th

e ha

llmar

k of q

uality

pro

cess

es. A

nd th

ough

som

e six

-sig

ma

advo

cate

s disa

gree

, Nus

sbau

m is

poi

ntin

g ou

t a fu

ndam

enta

l di

ffere

nce

betw

een

man

agin

g qu

ality

and

man

agin

g in

nova

tion.

In

nova

tion

is cr

eatin

g a

new

par

adig

m. It

’s no

t get

ting

bette

r at

play

ing

the

sam

e ga

me;

it’s c

hang

ing

the

rule

s and

cha

ngin

g th

e ga

me.

Inno

vatio

n is

not w

orkin

g ha

rder

; it’s

wor

king

smar

ter.

This

post

er p

ropo

ses a

mod

el fo

r inn

ovat

ion.

It ta

kes t

he fo

rm o

f a

conc

ept m

ap, a

serie

s of t

erm

s and

links

form

ing

prop

ositio

ns.

The

mod

el is

bui

lt on

the

idea

that

inno

vatio

n is

abou

t cha

ngin

g pa

radi

gms.

The

mod

el si

tuat

es in

nova

tion

betw

een

two

conv

en-

tions

. Inno

vatio

n tra

nsfo

rms o

ld in

to n

ew. It

is a

pro

cess

—a

proc

ess i

n w

hich

insig

ht in

spire

s cha

nge

and

crea

tes v

alue

. Th

e pr

oces

s beg

ins w

hen

exte

rnal

pre

ssur

e or

inte

rnal

dec

ay

dist

urbs

the

rela

tion

betw

een

a co

mm

unity

and

its c

onte

xt, a

re

latio

n m

aint

aine

d by

a c

onve

ntio

n.

The

exist

ing

conv

entio

n no

long

er “f

its.”

Perh

aps t

he c

onte

xt

chan

ged.

Or t

he c

omm

unity

. Or e

ven

the

conv

entio

n. S

omeo

ne

notic

es th

e m

isfit.

It ca

uses

stre

ss. It

cre

ates

eno

ugh

frict

ion,

en

ough

pai

n, to

jum

p in

to p

eopl

e’s c

onsc

ious

ness

. Per

cept

ion

of

misf

it alm

ost s

imul

tane

ously

give

s rise

to p

ropo

sals

for c

hang

e,fo

r ref

ram

ing.

The

se p

ropo

sals

com

pete

for a

ttent

ion.

Mos

t fai

l to

insp

ire, a

re ig

nore

d, a

nd fa

de a

way

.

The

chan

ges t

hat s

urviv

e ar

e by

def

initio

n th

ose

a co

mm

unity

finds

ef

fect

ive. T

hey s

prea

d be

caus

e th

ey in

crea

se fit

(gai

n) a

nd lo

wer

pa

in o

r cos

t (de

liver

ing

valu

e).

We

rare

ly re

cogn

ize in

nova

tion

whi

le it’

s hap

peni

ng. In

stea

d,

inno

vatio

n is

ofte

n a

labe

l app

lied

afte

r the

fact

, whe

n its

valu

e is

clea

r and

a n

ew c

onve

ntio

n ha

s bec

ome

esta

blish

ed.

Ethn

ogra

phy a

nd o

ther

rese

arch

tech

niqu

es m

ay h

elp

iden

tify

oppo

rtuni

ties f

or in

nova

tion.

Des

ign

met

hods

may

incr

ease

the

spee

d of

gen

erat

ing

and

test

ing

new

idea

s. Bu

t new

idea

s are

still

subj

ect t

o na

tura

l sel

ectio

n (o

r nat

ural

des

truct

ion)

in th

e po

litica

l pr

oces

s or t

he m

arke

tpla

ce.

Inno

vatio

n re

mai

ns m

essy

. Eve

n da

nger

ous.

Luck

and

cha

nce,

be

ing

at th

e rig

ht p

lace

at t

he ri

ght t

ime,

still

play

a ro

le. B

ut

heig

hten

ed se

nsitiv

ity a

nd p

ersis

tent

ale

rtnes

s may

incr

ease

luck

.

This

mod

el is

not

a re

cipe

. At b

est it

sugg

ests

way

s to

incr

ease

th

e pr

obab

ility o

f inno

vatio

n. O

ur g

oal is

for i

t to

spur

disc

ussio

n.

Our h

ope

is th

at in

crea

sed

unde

rsta

ndin

g w

ill sp

ur in

nova

tion

and

incr

ease

the

grea

ter g

ood.

Creating

varia

tion is

the fir

st mec

hanis

m

of evol

ution—

and d

esign

.

Testin

g a pr

ototyp

e may

raise

quest

ions a

bout t

he fra

ming of

a

proble

m or de

finition

of go

als. Refr

aming

or re

fining

open

s the

possi

bility t

o tryin

g othe

r app

roach

es.

Natural

destr

uction

(i. e.,

disca

rding

poorl

y

perfo

rming

varia

tions) i

s the s

econ

d

mecha

nism of

evoluti

on—

and d

esign

.

- - - - - - - - -

358NOTES ON THE ROLE OF LEADERSHIP & LANGUAGE IN REGENERATING ORGANIZATIONS �

362

Like any organization,your organization is a set of conversations among people.

Like any organization,your organization needs to changeto meet the needs of a changing market.

Your organization seeks to build on previous successes— but these successesemerged from internal conversationsthat may no longer be as productiveas they once were.

For your organization to evolve effectively,it must understand the waysits customers, developers, and competitors are evolving.It can understand this evolutiononly through its ongoing relationshipswith customers, developers, and the market.

Only then can the company changein ways that better meet market needs.

Ultimately,an organization consists of conversations: who talks to whom, about what.

Each conversationis recognized, selected, and amplified(or ignored) by the system.Decisions, actions, and a sense of valid purpose grow out of these conversations.

Conversation leads to agreement. Agreement leads to transaction.

Therefore, an organization’s languageis critically important.It becomesmore than simply a means for communication. It becomesa field for action, and a way of constructing truth. It becomesthe basis for all transactions,the basis for all business.

Your organization is a living system of conversations.

Language affects, even constitutes, the ways people perceive their reality. It is the medium in which decision making and other business activities take place. Language recognizes, selects, and amplifies certain entities, activities, and relationships, while ignoring others.

The structure of an organization’s language is directly related to the structure of its culture. Culture creates language, and language shapes culture. An organization’s ability to create language is synonymous with its ability to evolve.

For more on the relationship of language to thought, see: Michel Foucault, Humberto Maturana, Benjamin Whorf, Ludwig Wittgenstein.

An organization is its language.

ON LANGUAGE

363 364

Organizations create their own internal language to solve specific problems.

This language serves as a kind of shorthand: Managers use it every day,knowing they will be clearly understood.

This internal language is designed to address the needs of the present-day business.It helps the organization’s managersanswer familiar questionsand thus increases efficiencies.

Over time, this internal languagegrows increasingly specialized—and narrow.

The organization’s internal languageis designed to help managersfacilitate present-day business—not look beyond it.

Using the internal language,managers increase efficiencies,but cannot recognize new fields of research, new discoveries, new approaches.

Like all of us,they cannot recognize their own limitations. Constrained by the previously successful language, we do not know that we do not know. Consequently, we think we know—and thus cannot learn.

Developed as a tool to increase efficiencies, the organization’s language, paradoxically, becomes a trap.

Typically, managers focus on improving their organization’s current performance. They use the organization’s language to realize efficiencies.

As an organization grows more efficient, it focuses on increasingly specific sets of problems. In similar fashion, its lexicon grows increasingly narrow.

Often, those outside of the organization will not understand its internal language. For example, to outside observers, conversation among Sun employees around issues concerning “SunShot” may seem impenetrable.

For more on language and conversation, see: Gregory Bateson, Humberto Maturana, Gordon Pask, Claude Shannon, Benjamin Whorf.

Narrowing language increases efficiency.

Narrowing language also increases ignorance.

Ignorant of our own ignorance, we cannot ask questions outside our own language experience. An organization’s historical language has been responsible for its success; it would seem nonsensical for decision makers to question it. As efficiencies increase, managers fail to recognize the ways in which their internal language fosters a kind of organizational myopia.

For more on language and conversation, see: Gregory Bateson, R. D. Laing, Humberto Maturana, Gordon Pask, Benjamin Whorf.

364

The conversations necessaryfor creating fundamental changedo not come naturally.They pose questions that cannot be understood in the organization’s present language.

The conversations necessaryfor generating new opportunitiescome from outside the system.Their language has a different history.It is often technically and intellectually demanding. Consequently, it is often dismissed.

For an organization to survive,it must be able to acquirenew, relevant language domains.

To support an organization’s future viability, effective decision makers actively introduce change into the system.

They do so by generating new language that appropriate groups in the organization come to understand and embrace.

This new language does not overtly challenge the pre-existing, efficient system,but rather creates new distinctionsand supportive relationships.

In this way, decision makers act as interlocutors and incubators of systemic change.

To maintain an organization’s co-evolutionary currency, decision makers must generate the capacity to recognize new domains of discovery, and be able to translate those into new language that reflects the company’s self-interest. These activities are absolutely necessary if any new endeavor is to be successful.

The decision maker must provide adequate resources for the incubation of systemic change—even though the specific incubation activities may not easily be understood.

For more on power and language, see: Michel Foucault, Jürgen Habermas.

To regenerate,an organization creates a new language.

To avoid being trapped in obsolescent thinking, organizations change their language. A generative organization, aware of the importance of asking unnatural questions, deliberately creates new distinctions and supportive relationships in which new language domains arise.

“The problem is not changing people’s consciousnesses,” stated Michel Foucault, “but the political, economic, institutional regime of the production of truth.” Change the language, change the parameters for discourse, and you change the organization.

Language creation may be thought of as a co-evolutionary process. New language may be created through changing relationships, rather than by overtly confronting an organization’s power structure.

For more on power, language, and organizations, see: Michel Foucault, Jürgen Habermas.

Expanding language increases opportunity.

366

Like any organization,your organization has its own internal language.Like any language, it is a field for action, a way of constructing truth,a basis for transaction and business.

To regenerate itself,your organization must first recognize the limitationsinherent in its current language.Then it must seek out new language domains,and translate them into conversationsthat the organization may understand and embrace.

When initiated by management,this process is highly specific.It requires a deliberate, organized, dedicated search for new classes of inputinto the organization’s language.

Your organization must generate the specific means to converse about new research, discoveries, and approaches in ways that help the organizationconsider future opportunities.

Leadership is not a property of a person. Leadership has little to do with personality type.

Leadership is the reduction of uncertainty in an organization.It comes from clear messages,which lead to focused actionsthat cannot easily be misinterpreted. It comes from developing channels for continuous feedback.

All these characteristics reduce cost and stress to the individual working in the organization.

Your organization must create new language.

Leadership is not wisdom, personal charisma, or will-to-power. It is a condition that arises when clarity of purpose (which permits unambiguous action) exists within the organization.

Multiple venues for feedback into the system are a necessary condition for its growth. Therefore, back channels must carry a variety of information.

Leadership must not be confused with the role of manager. Managers are a class of decision makers in the organization; leadership is a condition of the organization.

For more on cybernetics and leadership, see: Heinz von Foerster, Humberto Maturana.

Leadershipis a conditionof an organization.

ON LEADERSHIP

367 368

When clarity and validity of purposeexist within the organization,the feeling of ambiguity decreases.Stress and cost to the system are lowered. Uncertainty is reduced.

Those working in the system perceivean expansion of personal potentialand increased security.As they become aware of opportunities for growth, they participate more openly in the system. Feedback increases.

Leaders reduce uncertainty,give clear and meaningful messages,and provide opportunities to actin ways that cannot easily be misinterpreted.

Managers understand the organization’s past behavior. But this knowledge,and the language that accompanies it,limit their visionof the organization’s potential future state.

Using the language of the past,managers may try to provide a vision for the future. But it is an old future—a memory of what the future could be.

Managers may strive for fundamental change,but their language prevents them from achieving it.

In cybernetic terms, leadership may be thought of as the ability of a regulator to extrapolate the behavior of the system, and act in anticipation of its future state.

The organization’s everyday decision makers (i.e., its managers) act to ensure the organization’s future viability. But they are limited by their language, which views the future in terms of entities and activities successful in the past. Hence, the managers’ future vision will be a retelling of the past, using old language. It will not be evolutionarily current.

For more on cybernetics, leadership, and anticipation, see: W. Ross Ashby, Heinz von Foerster, Humberto Maturana.

Past language limits future vision.

Within the organization, clarity of purpose leads to unambiguous action, resulting in lower systemic cost. A sense of valid purpose creates an expansion in personal potential, or ‘ego space’, which reduces stress.

As people grow more comfortable, they communicate more. A back channel grows, informing clarity and validity of purpose, and completing a feedback loop.

Uncertainty arises from ambiguity, which increases both cost and stress to the system. As uncertainty and ambiguity increase, ‘ego space’ shrinks. The entire environment is affected, as those in the system are much less likely to provide effective feedback.

Political philosopher Jürgen Habermas defines the ways social systems legitimize their rule, justify their right to power, and promote their authority as ‘legitimation’. If legitimation is not commensurate with an organization’s de facto legitimacy, a ‘legitimation crisis’ occurs, resulting in upheaval and change.

For more on conditions for system survival, see: W. Ross Ashby, Heinz von Foerster, Jürgen Habermas.

Leadershipis the reduction of uncertainty.

Managers’ reaction to Entrepreneurs’ language:

“Don’t distract me with future problems.”

“That’s a waste of time.”

“Stop taking resources away from what’s important.”

Entrepreneurs’ reaction to Managers’ language:

“You are stuck in the past.”

“What you want to do is no longer relevant.”

“Stop taking resources away from what’s important.”

369 370

Like all organizations,your organization must recognizetwo businesses: present and future.

Some within your organizationare tasked with improving performance of the present-day business.They use the current languageto increase efficiencies.

Others are tasked with generating opportunities for your organization’s future business.They recognize new domains of inventionand translate them into new languagethat may lead to profitable new endeavors.

For your organization to learn and grow,both kinds of people are necessary.

Successful organizationssupport at least three orders of creativity.

They provide resources to recognize invention, which opens up new domains of language.In these new domains,profitable discoveries may be made.

They provide the necessary conditions for discovering and marketing products and servicesthat emerge from these new domains.

Then, they develop more cost-effective ways of producing and deliveringthese new products and services.

Any invention may result in multiple discoveries; any discovery may be brought to market more efficiently. Organizations co-evolve with the marketplace only if they remain continually attentive to invention and discovery. Internal organizational development results in greater efficiencies.

For example: Maxwell created a new domain by positing the existence of radio waves. Hertz subsequently discovered them via experiment. From that pioneering work, Marconi, Sarnoff, et al., built the business of radio.

History provides many cautionary tales of creative failure in organizations. Some did not recognize the importance of a new field or discipline (e.g., Kodak, Polaroid); others could not permit or sanction discussion of new products or processes as a source of profit (e.g., Xerox PARC).

Though organizations may tout the importance of creativity, true invention is rarely recognized, and even more rarely exploited.

Creativity =Recognizing invention. Profiting from discoveries. Developing efficiencies.

Your organization needsdifferent languages to discuss its present and future business.

ON CHANGE

369 370















ON CHANGE

Creating “New Language” is the single most important means to innovation that will be:- transformational- disruptive- a generator of value in today’s

and tomorrow’s markets.

369 370















ON CHANGE

369 370















ON CHANGE

Creating “New Language” is the single most important means to innovation that will be:- transformational- disruptive- a generator of value in today’s

and tomorrow’s markets.

New Language can aided by:- isolating conversations for future

business from today’s business- resourcing productive, evolving

conversations—not all conversations- designing “focusing problems”.

369 370















ON CHANGE

369 370















ON CHANGE

“Focusing Problems”:- must be consistent with our DNA- have access to new domains of

expertise, beyond the current organization

- engage an initial set of willing individuals

- must teach the business as a whole- have economic potential

- must lower uncertainty (risk) in a market, or

- must lower the effort for a person to reach a goal

- participate in the “new economy” by creating value from networks of information flow rather than materials and products.

INNOVATION Creative Conditions for Innovation

- protect tomorrow’s business from today’s business

- create new language for tomorrow’s business - separately resource creation

of new language - design a focusing problem - seed team from those who are

most eager & capable - bring necessary expertise to the

team, from outside if necessary.

why is it so elusive?

and what is it, anyway?

what strategies might work?

how should we distribute resources?

how can we lower risk?

how can we increase the likelihood?

Thank you.

[email protected] pangaro.com/innovation

Technology and Innovation Exchange BASF September 18, 2015

paul pangaro, ph.d. chair of interaction design graduate ...ess of in dus tri al muta tio n t hat i...

Documents