Josh Orum

Innovation

Scott Berkun posts an online survey about innovation. I respond below. This is take one. Read it now because it’ll change tomorrow!

Really, it’s not finished. The challenge I’m having is that either (i) innovation is a gray area or (ii) I just haven’t thought about it enough.

What does the word “innovation” mean to you?

First, I’d like to point out that you’re implicitly using the word as the result of innovating, not as the act of innovating.

Anyway, used in the way you’re using it, I’d define it as the application of an original idea or the original application of an existing idea. I think the key thing is the application (or perhaps even expression). You can have a dozen new ideas, but if they aren’t feasible, they aren’t particularly innovative.

For the sake of discussion, I think we can identify three types of innovations:

1. Small innovations, which I talk about these in the responses below, and which I think you’re asking about in the survey. Small innovations are frequently the application of a model from one area to another. I’d group most technical innovations in this category.
2. Big innovations, which are frequently completely original – but single – steps out into nothingness. Nevertheless, they lead to massive changes. The concept of mortgages, for example, is a big innovation (see Hernando de Soto, The Mystery of Capital, for example). The concept of mortgage bonds is a single step beyond that, but a very large, industry-creating, financial markets-changing step.
3. Finally, there are really big innovations. Let’s say… monotheism, for example. Really big innovations don’t just change industries or businesses. They change worldviews. The concept of “time,” is a fairly big innovation.

Along these lines, perhaps the true definition of an innovation is a concept which allows us to act or think in ways that were not possible before. So perhaps it doesn’t need to be applied (?).

Tell me the story of an innovative idea – how it was born, developed and delivered (or abandoned). It could be something you did, or witnessed others do.

We recently worked on a website for a company called Squadra Piloti, which allows exotic car enthusiasts to trade mileage on each other’s cars. For example, if you own a Ferrari and I own a Porsche, you may want to drive 100 miles on my Porsche and be willing to give me 100 miles on your Ferrari. Previously, there were two outlets for people who wanted to do this: auto-owner clubs, which are largely confined to a particular make; and car clubs that pool members’ money to buy a variety of cars.

Although this project has yet to achieve significant success, its innovation lies in several areas:

• application of an existing model to a new, previously unexploited market;
• changes to that model to make it palatable to the new audience; and
• creation of design solutions to new interface problems.

The project was borne of the owner’s frustrations with both existing models: he owns several exotic cars, and wanted to drive different makes and found that car clubs were very expensive and frequently didn’t have a wide variety of cars. We worked with him to refine his idea into a definable product (web application), designed the UI and built the web app.

Squadra Piloti has the opportunity to be highly disruptive (and presumably innovative) to the car-rental agency. Right now, it’s about trading miles on exotic cars, and that’s its focus. However, there’s an added catch that we just sort of threw in: the ability to buy miles on other members’ cars. Pretty obvious. But if you think about it, this could disintermediate car rental agencies in many instances. On the other hand, car rental agencies probably replaced private parties to begin with, so maybe it’s not so innovative, but just coming full circle.

What is your approximate occupation?

Designer.

What is a highly innovative thing you’ve made, worked on, or contributed to (can be from above, or not)? What made it innovative? What was unique about it compared to other work? What was the same?

I haven’t really worked on any highly innovative things. We’ve had innovations, but I think a highly innovative thing would have to be something that really changed a paridigm. I talk below about a particular interface for Squadra Piloti. I think it’s innovative because it creatively solved a problem. Squadra Piloti has the opportunity to be very innovative because it could really change the car-rental industry, disintermediating rental agencies. But highly innovative? Probably not.

Within the above project, one particularly innovative interface was the process by which members identify cars they want to drive. The company had compiled a database of several thousand cars from which members could choose (down the road, the expectation is that the web app will automatically add member’s actual cars to the list, but for launch we had this massive list).

Because the site matches people who own cars with those who want to drive them (and makes money off of every successful match), more cars members add to their “wanted lists” means more matches and more successful transactions, so we needed to design an interface that allowed members to quickly and easily add a lot of cars to their list, while still being able to add individual cars if they want (a 1991 Porsche 911 versus all Porsche 911s, or all Porsches, for example).

The most obvious model for a car-picker is found on various car sites: a three-level menu system in which the user first selects a make, then a model, then a year. This is easy enough, but wouldn’t allow members to quickly add hundreds of cars to their lists easily. We explored several other options before stumbling upon a folder-hybrid model, with which it’s very easy to add individual cars as well as whole ranges very quickly.

Most of my design experience is in building websites and web applications. The main difference between a highly-innovative product and a not-so-innovative product is the time required to make sure it works – both from a product perspective and a user perspective. The best innovations are the simplest, but even the simplest innovations have hidden complexities. Catching them can sometimes be the difference between a successful application and an unsuccessful application. In our car-picker app described above, we encountered a number of implementation issues and design issues before finally completing it.

When you innovated, What did you do differently compared to non-innovative work you’ve done? What different kinds of challenges did you face?

I like to try to approach every project as if it’s innovative; every situation is different, so even if you’re using a design pattern, the application of that pattern may be somewhat innovative. Obviously this is a bit of an overstatement: many projects are essentially cookie-cutter. The challenge you run into, I think, is making yourself expect new situations rather than expect situations you’ve seen before.

What idea generation techniques do you use regularly?

Prototyping, improvisation, experimentation, collaboration, exploring ideas from other domains, exploring ideas from my domain, pure intuition.

Is being an innovator an inborn talent, or something learned? Who is the most innovative person you know and what do you think others could learn from them?

As with many things, I think that a lot of it can be learned, but the last little bit is innate. Let’s use music as an analogy. I can practice the piano all the time; I can work on my rhythm, meter, and all that. I can become very proficient (not that I am). But I think there will still be a certain depth and richness that separates the work of true geniuses from mine.

Innovation may be the same way: there are certainly exercises one can do to “think outside the box,” view research in the right way, etc., but at the end of the day there are a number of factors that allow some to be fundamentally more innovative than others: a high tolerance for risk (or inability to see it), high creativity, ability to see non-obvious patterns, and more. Whether these things are truly innate or simply learned/developed at a very early age isn’t something I can’t answer.

It’s tough to identify the “most innovative” person because innovation comes in so many forms. The owner of the company I described above was innovative in identifying a problem and solution. I find the visual designers at our firm extraordinarily innovative in coming up with new ideas – ideas that I would never have thought of. Some of the most innovative work I know about these days is in the world of domestic manufacturing in response to overseas pressures. The common thread is the ability to look beyond conventions and to draw on ideas from seemingly unrelated fields.

The greatest innovator in history is:

No idea. God?

Can innovations be bad as well as good? Do good innovations ever have bad effects (or bad innovations, good effects?) How is this possible?

Of course innovations can have good effects and bad effects, but are innovations themselves good or bad? I don’t know how to answer that.

True or False: The best ideas always win. What evidence do you have to support your position? And what are the contributing factors to how successful an idea is?

False, and I have mountains of evidence to support my position. Anyway, there seem to be two key factors behind a successful idea: execution and perseverance. The best idea poorly executed (or more likely not executed at all) is dead in the water. The worst idea executed masterfully will almost certainly achieve success. The second factor, perseverance, is a counter to “luck,” because what is luck other than good timing? With enough perseverance and good execution, timing will eventually be on your side. Obviously this isn’t categorically true. Just because I have the idea of selling horseshoes at NASCAR races and execute it very well over a number of years doesn’t mean it’s going to succeed, but a decent idea will.

At the end of the day, the most successful ideas aren’t the good ones, but the ones that were done. I get so tired of hearing people complain about how they had this idea or that idea, or they have this but it’s so hard, or blah blah blah. If you are serious about an idea, just do it! If it fails, well, you learned something. But I can guarantee it’s not going anywhere otherwise.

True or False: Leaders know more about innovation than their teams. I dare you to support your answer, double dare you to have examples.

Ha ha. Not true or false. Completely dependent on the leader and the team. I don’t accept the dare.

What is the relationship between innovation and business success? Do innovative products make better businesses, or can good businesses exist without being innovative? (Examples encouraged)

Theoretically, a non-innovative business should have a hard time surviving in the long run. In the short run – even in terms of decades – they can survive and thrive just fine by executing well. In the long run, they will become easy pickings to new, innovative firms.