Creative ideas only come to those who are well founded in their fields of expertise. If you have no knowledge of the area where you search for ideas, then you are going to be found wanting when it comes to finding new concepts.

Kekulé, the discoverer of the structure of the benzene ring, figured out the configuration of this ring shaped molecule while sleeping and woke up with the idea at the forefront of his mind. He pictured “… the benzene ring in a reverie of snakes biting their tails” (Pinker, 1997), although some say it was “… Kekule had the insight that the benzene molecule might be shaped like a ring after he had fell asleep while watching sparks in the fireplace make circles in the air” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1996). Maybe it was the sparks making circles in the fireplace that triggered the images of the snakes biting their tails in the first place that resulted in the connections that were later made in his subconscious while sleeping. Either way, after he’d awaken, he immediately wrote down the idea before it was shoved into the back of his mind to be lost forever, or at least not to resurface until some time later, perhaps even years later. However, the point is, that Kekulé was not a layperson just waiting around for the idea to pop into his head; he had to have prior knowledge and ideas in his mind among which his mind could make associations or connections. Kekulé, a skilled German chemist, had worked extremely hard on this problem and had acquired a lot of knowledge and data about the problem of the benzene structure. In other words, creative connections only come to those who have prior knowledge acquired through hard work. New ideas, connections or associations only arise to those with the prepared mind.

Here are a few tips on promoting your creative ability.

1. Know what is already out there; there is no point in consuming much energy reinventing the wheel.
   
2. Absorb yourself in the problem and make it challengeable, but doable.
   
3. Document all of your ideas in an idea log. Be as descriptive as possible, use drawings and sketches as much as possible. Note how, when and where you were when the idea arose and make special note of the triggers or connections that make have led to the idea.
   
4. Use creativity tools: brainstorming, SCAMPER, brainwriting, storyboarding etc.
   
5. Start doing thinks that you really enjoy doing.
   
6. Read a lot, lots more and keep on reading. More knowledge means more possible connections.
   
7. Develop skills in other areas outside of you speciality. If you are a surgeon, perhaps you could study materials science and/or physics or geology.
   
8. Network with people who specialise in other areas so that you can share problems, ideas and solutions with each other. Many problems in one domain can be used to solve problems in other domains – avoid reinventing the wheel.
   

For more information on creativity and idea generation, see our body of knowledge which contains free information on innovation.

References

[1] Pinker S., 1997, How the Mind Works, Penguin Books.
[2] Csikszentmihalyi M., 1996, Creativity: Flow and the psychology of Discovery and Invention, Harper Perennial.

Have you been watching the invention show “The Big Idea” on Sky television lately and being wondering what makes a big idea BIG? If you have been watching and are wondering if your idea is the one they are after, the pointers below will help you to evaluate your own idea before you invest money in the project.

I was watching the programme on the television and I realised that many people fail to see the real issues surrounding an invention. They also become so absorbed by their idea that they begin to believe that it is perfect and go into denial about any issues about it. They do not want to hear about any problems with it and refuse to listen to experts when they discuss it. At the heart of this is the problem that most people don’t realise that ideas are often only the seed and they must fully develop the idea before they invest in it.

Here are some pointers as to what makes an idea a BIG idea:

• It must meet the needs of the person who is going to pay for it. By way of example, one of the contestants on the show had a cardboard shape that people would take out of their pocket, or handbag in the case of women, unfold it and place it over the keys of an ATM (Automatic Teller Machine) in order to prevent others from seeing the buttons that you are pressing. The question is “will someone pay for it?” I think not for several reasons: (1) people will find it easier to use their hand to shield the other; (2) People can cut out a piece of cardboard from their cornflakes box and make one themselves; and (3) People take fashion into consideration and are very self-conscious and they might not feel so cool unfolding one of these to extract a few quid from the ATM. People may want these but they must feel that they really need it – their hand covers the keys quite adequately.
  
• It must offer benefits that have value to the buyer. People assess products and services by assessing the value that they bring. This might not necessarily be fully at the conscious level but certainly at the unconscious level.
  
• It should make life easier or simpler for the end users. For example the little frame that is used to show a builder where to cut an opening in a plaster board for a socket without having to use a measuring tape. Virtually eliminates errors that everybody makes from time to time when using a measuring tape.
  
• It must be profitable. Your idea must be manufactured, distributed, marketed, and sold with a profit for all parties involved. Try to determine whether money can be made from your idea by assessing how much people would be willing to pay for it. This is not as simple as you may at first think because asking people straight out “what are you willing to pay?” is fraught with difficulty.
  
• It must be different from what is already out there already. Differentiation means that your invention must be sufficiently different from all other inventions on the market. So much so, that its benefits are clearly visible to the purchaser and the benefits must also be clearly visible on the packaging.
  
• The performance of your invention must be superior to what is already on the market. Your product must outperform its competitor’s offerings or else it is not the best on the market. I think this point speaks for itself.
  
  The key is to evaluate your ideas and keep generating new ideas – as many as you possibly can. Do not give up. Keep persevering and keep learning as much as you can about inventing, intellectual property, marketing, finance, new product development and design. And especially, you must learn as much as you can about the type of product you are trying to invent. In other words, if you are trying to invent a new type of blind for a window, then become an expert in blinds for windows. Check out patents on all the different types of blinds that have been invented before and try to spot their benefits and what it is that make them good ideas. And most importantly, try to find out what is wrong with them. What makes them bad ideas? These things that are wrong with them, these problems, are opportunities in themselves just waiting to be solved!

Becoming market driven is the best way to develop new products (goods and services), not by becoming customer led. The reasons for this are given below.

Customer driven means becoming completely focused on the expressed needs and wants of your customers. This is a very good strategy but has serious limitations. Listening to customers who do not know, nor understand, what they need, can lead you blindly down the garden path. This is because the average customers can only tell you what they already know, which is generally what has already being done before and they saw it available as part of a competitors offering. Customers don’t think ahead a lot of the time and they don’t understand very much about what is possible using today’s technologies. They only know what they already know and what they already know is what you get.

However, becoming market driven means looking their expressed needs and looking deeper at the latent and previously unknown needs of the customers. In other words, delivering products that meet their current needs and, more importantly, the future needs that the customer doesn’t even know that they have yet.

The best ways of capturing these needs are: (1) using ethnographic/anthropological analysis, (2) gathering and analysing customer data, and (3) identifying opportunities within the customer data. The key here is to look at what the end result of the innovation is to be - what job it has to do? Then look for solutions/technologies that will do that job.

Having a technology and looking for applications is often out of whack, except in the case of some radical discovery. An unmet need looking for a solution or a technology is a much better starting point for developing a new product. Offering products that meet the needs associated with these new found opportunities will lead to success in the marketplace as customers will able to get a particular job done that they previously found difficult to do. This results in increased sales and increased customer satisfaction – a real win-win outcome for both the product developer and the customer.

An example of this is the principle of memory metals. Memory metals are metallic materials that can transform from one shape into another after they go through a temperature change (within which that transformation temperature for the material exists). Finding applications for these metals can be very fruitful and some creative people brainstorming ideas could arrive at many applications for such materials. However, if you examine the needs of patients with cardiovascular problems, you will find that many of them suffer from blocked or restricted blood vessels due to the build up of plaque. What these patients need is some structure that can be used to open up a blocked blood vessel. To achieve you may set out the needs as follows: (1) we must be able to deliver the structure to the place where the blockage exists, (2) it must be capable of supporting the blood vessel from the inside, (3) it must be biocompatible, (4) the blood vessel must be opened outwards to widen it to allow for better blood flow. If you examine these requirements and then look for a solution you may think along the lines of: (a) a tube that lines the blood vessel, (b) a tube that must be small enough to fit into the vessel, (c) a tube that expands inside the blood vessel to open out the blockage or restriction, (d) a narrow tubular memory metal mesh that expands due to body heat after it has been placed in the blood vessel.
The market driven idea of using memory metals to solve the blocked blood vessel problem is a great idea as there is a definite need for this solution. Stabbing in the dark trying to find applications for memory metals is more difficult and often leads to ideas that have no place in the market. Now consider the following – how many patients with blockages could suggest such a solution to you during a focus group session?

This example is extremely simplified, but at its core is a real problem that must be solved in order to help patients to avoid cardiac arrest. With this problem in mind, a statistic of the number of people with such blockages or restrictions would in itself tell you that the solution would probably succeed in the marketplace if an appropriate solution can be found. At the other extreme, if you have a technology looking for an application, many of your ideas would probably fail merely because there isn’t a need for it. Focus your energy and resources for real problems that will offer real benefits should the solution work and be viable.

Being market driven means that you are leading the customer to where they need to be; you are not being led by the customer to where they think they need to be, which is more often than not, the wrong place to be.

Many people want to make their fortune as soon as they can and, in the meanwhile, they are sitting around waiting for the great idea that will enable them to retire to dawn on them. When they see something new in the marketplace that is successful, they always say things like, “I wish I could have thought of that?”, “But, how did she think of that?” or “I wonder how they come up with such great ideas?”. People think that ideas just come to them like switching on a light bulb. This is a very misleading belief and this is how it can be remedied.

When people take an idea and just jump on it, they tend to become very narrow minded and no other thoughts about anything else retain relevancy unless it relates directly to this ‘great idea’ that they have. “I’ve got it!” they believe, but have they really got it? The question that needs to be asked now is: what do run of the mill people do when they think of an idea that they wish to exploit? What happens is that they make some connection, some association, that they believe is a great idea. And they ponder the idea and convince themselves, using circular thinking, that it is the right thing to pursue. They then talk to some business savvy people that they do not heed unless they are telling them what they want to hear. The business plan is then written, submitted to some funding agency for assistance and in a small number of cases a new small enterprise is born. Then it dies, four out of every five of them at least. And most of those that happen to survive are often retail outlets and the like, that have a reasonable chance of succeeding if the location of the business is appropriate. Believe it or not, the problem is that big.

What most people don’t think about is that an idea is only the beginning of an exploration for a workable concept upon which you can build a business; in almost every case, it is not the end game, where you run with it straight away to make you millions. To quote the Harvard Business Review article: Breakthrough Ideas for 2006 (Feb 2006), “A breakthrough idea is a springboard, not a perfect landing; a conversation provoker, not a definitive answer; a starter’s gun, not a finish line. It’s something that makes you stand up and take notice, not sit down and work out the application of a specific formula.” The message is thus: ideas are seeds - they need attention, nourishment, hard work, modification, transformation, growth and reseeding of new ideas. Then, and only then, do they need development into full-blown concepts and prototypes (in the case of products and some services) upon which realistic business plans can be written that have real benefits for those who wish to pay for them in the marketplace.

To do this you must:

1. Start with as many ideas as possible. List your ideas, the problems to be solved, unmet needs, bugs, frustrations and related ideas.
2. Expand on all of these ideas and brainstorm them using the large variety of creativity tools currently available such as SCAMPER and brainwriting.
3. Discuss these ideas, at length, with others and listen to what they have to say. Note all conversations about the ideas.
4. Develop as many of the ideas into more elaborate concepts. This is critical. You must generate information about each of the concepts so that you can make evidenced based decisions. If you have poor information about your ideas you will end up making poor decisions about which ideas to invest in.
5. Carry out any necessary ethnographic and marketing studies that may give you further insights into these concepts.
6. Rework and re-evaluate the concepts based on the newly acquired information.
7. Rank the concepts to determine which are best to pursue. To find out more on ranking matrices, read our guide to the innovation process currently available on our website: http://www.nscpublishing.com/products/innovation1.html
8. Develop more detailed concept statements for each of the concepts.
9. Set up a list of evaluation criteria that will be used to select the best ideas. These criteria are questions that must be answered positively before you should invest in the idea. For example, “Do I have adequate distribution channels through which I can sell my product?” It is probably a poor investment if you can’t distribute the product properly and the issue of distribution should be dealt with before the idea can be exploited. There are many sources of information that will help you construct a list of criteria (see references below).
10. Evaluate each of the concepts and determine which ones go to development, prototyping and testing (applicable to both products and services).
11. After development and testing, re-evaluate the best performing concepts. Only commercialise the very best concepts that have real futures. In other words, only those ideas that fit you criteria as completely as possible should be funded.

There are a number of things to note about this framework. Firstly, having a solid framework that stops one from going with the first idea that enters their heads is vital. This is achieved by placing a large emphasis on change and open mindedness through the search for better ideas through brainstorming, discussing ideas and listening and heeding those who are truly business savvy. Secondly, there is an emphasis on the ‘fit’ of an idea to see if it is worth pursuing. If the idea does no fit the needs and wants of the consumer, then it is not worth putting the effort into it. Thirdly, continuous modification and reevaluation of your ideas is critical if you are going to commercialize those ideas that are worth commercializing. Always keep the bottom line to the forefront of your mind - will it make a profit?

Notes
To read a full version of this article visit my body of knowledge at www.nscpublishing.com/bok

References

[1] Cooper R.G., 2001, Winning At New Products, Perseus Publishing.

[2] Goffin K., Mitchell R., Innovation Management: Strategy and implementation using the pentathlon framework, Palgrave Macmillan.
[3] Higgins J.M., 1995, Innovate or Evaporate: Test & Improve you Organisations I.Q. – Its Innovation Quotient, The New Management Publishing Company.

It is uncanny how many people talk about innovation and about being innovative, but when asked, fails to give an adequate definition of what it is. Here are two useful definitions of innovation that will give you a flavour of what innovation is all about.

Definitions of Innovation
The OECD provides a useful definition in the Oslo Manual published in 2005. The definition reads:

An innovation is the implementation of a new or significantly improved product (good or service), or process, a new marketing method, or a new organisational method in business practices, workplace organisation or external relations.[1]

The first thing to note about this definition is that is uses the word product to define a good or service. In most books, papers and texts, innovation techniques associated with products, as in goods, are perfectly applicable to services as well. By way of example, services can be prototyped just like physical prototypes of products (goods); 24 hour online banking can be
prototyped by producing visual images of the screens that the customer will be exposed to and by producing beta versions for test. Insurance providers can produce prototypes by preparing a makeshift office and sets of working documents and operate the sale and delivery of the service in a test facility.

The second thing to note in this definition is the types of activities that are considered innovative such as a new or significantly improved product, or process, or a new marketing method or a new organisational method in business practices, workplace organisation or external relations. This definition actually provides a very useful classification for types of innovations and can also help innovators organise their innovative activities. The best innovators generally innovate in all of these areas thereby producing the greatest and most rewarding changes to their organisation. We will deal with classification of innovations in other areas of our NSC Publishing Body of Knowledge.

The Product Development and Management Association (PDMA) provide another useful definition; it is:

Innovation: A new idea, method, or device. The act of creating a new product or service. The act includes invention as well as the work required to bring an idea or concept into final form.[2]

This definition, while meaning much the same thing as the OECD definition, introduces the concept of the idea in innovation. It is important to note that all great innovations start with an idea. Generation, development and implementation of new ideas in your organisation are, in essence, innovation. Idea generation and idea management in general, also known as the fuzzy front end, is poorly managed in companies and other organisations. If there is one single message to be taken from this definition, it is this: it is absolutely essential to effectively master the art of idea management to be successful at innovation. Many studies have shown this to be true; the reader is directed to the works of Prof. Robert Cooper[3] and Koen[4].
If an organisation is attempting to introduce an innovation strategy and process in their organisation, the first step is to get an understanding of the term innovation and what is involved in being innovative. These definitions clearly define the areas within which an organisation must learn methods and tools for managing them and within which they must become highly active.


[1] OSLO MANUAL: GUIDELINES FOR COLLECTING AND INTERPRETING INNOVATION DATA, OECD/EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, 2005, ISBN 92-64-01308-3.

[2] Belliveau, Griffin, Somermeyer, 2004, The PDMA Toolbook for New Product Development, Vol. 2, Wiley.

[3] Cooper R.G., 2001, Winning At New Products, Perseus Publishing.

[4] Koen P.A., Ajamian G.M., 2002, Fuzzy front End: Effective Methods, Tools and Techniques, in Belliveau, Griffin, Somermeyer, 2002, The PDMA Toolbook for New Product Development, Vol. 1, Wiley.

Diffusion of innovations is a complex business but Everett M. Rogers, in his seminal work Diffusion of Innovations, identified a number of characteristics that, to great effect, allows one to quickly assess an innovation for its likelihood to successfully diffuse into the marketplace. Here a quick primer on these characteristics.

The characteristics presented by Rogers are all about perception. It is essential to note that it is how the customer perceives these attributes that is important and it is equally important to note that people do not perceive the same thing the same way. Thus, measuring customer perception before during and after development will yield insights into the reasons why people buy or reject innovations.

Here are the five characteristics:

Relative Advantage: If the customer perceives an advantage over the competitors’ offerings, then the product is more likely to diffuse.

Complexity: The more complex the innovation, the less likely a customer is to buy it. In other words, people like things that are easy to use.

Trialability: If the customer can try out the product before they purchase it then they are more likely to buy it. People don’t take salespersons word for it, they want to witness it for themselves – seeing is believing!

Compatibility: People do not like changing their behaviour. They do not like others trying to change their ways. Thus, if your new product is close to the ones that the customer already uses, then they may buy it. If they need to significantly change the way they use the product to do the job they bought it to do, they are not that likely to buy it. The innovation must be consistent with the customers’ values, and their needs and wants.

Observability: If the advantages and benefits of the innovation are clearly visible to the customer then they are more likely to buy it.

These attributes of an innovation are of critical importance to the success of an innovation in the marketplace. Thus, if the characteristics are incorporated into the selection criteria used for deciding which innovations to develop and implement, and which ones are not worth the effort in developing, then you are more likely to have success in the marketplace.

For further information on the diffusion of innovations, visit our Body of Knowledge.

Further Reading:
[1] Rogers E.M., 2003, Diffusion of Innovations, 5ed, Free Press.
[2] Tidd J., Bessant J., Pavitt K., Managing Innovation: Integrating technological, market and organisational change, Wiley.
[3] Goffin K., Mitchell R., Innovation Management: Strategy and implementation using the pentathlon framework, Palgrave Macmillan.
[4] Hart M.A., 2004, How to improve the early sales performance of ‘discontinuous’ innovations-the way Vocera did, Visions [PDMA], Vol. XXVIII No. 2.

Many intellectuals, while very skilled in their field of engineering, science or what ever their specialty, often complain about IP issues and the rigidity and complexity that they bring. Maybe it is just that they lack any serious knowledge about intellectual property law, in particular patent law, or is it that the subject is that complex? In the UK in November 2002, The Lambert Review, commissioned by HM Treasury, the Department for Education and Skills and the Department for Trade and Industry, were given the task of bridging the gap between scientific researchers in universities and other third level institutions and the business community so that greater levels of cooperation and collaboration between them may occur. This was believed to be important to the growth of the economy and was thus undertaken and rightly so. Part of the review was to develop a set of model contracts and a protocol for intellectual property (IP) to aid and speed-up IP negotiations [1].
Five model Lambert agreements were developed, each specifically designed for different situations depending on who owns the IP and the type of licensing arrangement. These five agreements can now be availed of at:
http://www.innovation.gov.uk/lambertagreements/index.asp?lvl1=2&lvl2=0&lvl3=0&lvl4=0
and are in both Microsoft Word and PDF format and contain detailed guidance notes on their use. They contain that main elements of an IP agreement that are essential for the successful and fair negotiation between the two sets of parties involved.
This information is, in particular, essential reading for anyone interested in getting involved in University-Industry collaborations, for example, through the Innovation Partnership Initiative funded by Enterprise Ireland (see yesterdays Blog entry below).

References
[1] 4 December 2003 – Press release - GOVERNMENT WELCOMES BUSINESS-UNIVERSITY COLLABORATION REVIEW http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/newsroom_and_speeches/press/2003/press_129_03.cfm

Irelands companies can tap into University skill sets for solving technical problems that they haven’t got the core competences to deal with themselves. The industry–company alliances are part funded by Enterprise Ireland (EI) in a scheme called the Innovation Partnership Initiative. This initiative is used to part fund programmes of research (part funded by the company and the balance is funded by EI), especially in the area of new products or innovative processes, which are of commercial value to the company.

To be eligible for this funding, the company must be an EI client and must be a manufacturing, processing and internationally tradable service companies. The company must also be operating from a base here in the Republic of Ireland. The third level organisation must also be based in the Republic of Ireland.

The Enterprise Research Centre in the University of Limerick collaborates with a number of companies under the Innovation Partnership Initiative and has been successful in problem solving and developing innovative new products and processes for their clients.
Companies who wish to avail of such support in their new product, process or service innovation should contact Dr. Mark Southern of the Enterprise Research Centre or Dr. Seamus Clifford for further information and should also read the current information available on the Enterprise Ireland website.

Idea generation and the psychological environment
It is broadly accepted in the literature that the psychological environs has a huge effect on the happiness of employees, their ability to generate lots of ideas, many of which may be very fruitful if explored further, accepted and implemented, i.e. diffused into the domain within which the employees operate.

However, the environments within which these people work is fraught with problems when it comes to generating new ideas. However, some environments are ideally tuned to what is needed and the people who operate within them churn out new ideas and concepts that become immediately popular.

We, as human beings, have an inbuilt ability to be very creative. We were born with it. As we tend to live out our lives; playing at home, then going to school, going out to work or going into third level education and then out to work, we become closed in by what we experience from the world around us and in particular, by the other people within it. We are continually told what we cannot do, what we cannot achieve, how to do these things and what to think. We get little chance to apply our inventive thinking to these things by finding and implementing better way of doing them. Our behaviour is always checked, in some cases rightly so, as be must learn to behave ourselves properly. The only problem with this is that our imagination is choked as boundaries are also built up around it.

What drives creativity?
People have insatiable appetites for new things. We want new and updated software, faster and more exciting games, new kitchen appliances that will make life in the kitchen easier, new means of watching TV (VHS, DVD, digital TV, recording programmes on digital TV); we want new things and the more of them and the faster they are, the better. As a result, there is an unrelenting progression, a constant evolution of new things. Advancement is happening all the time. Nothing stands still, or as the great philosopher, Heraclitus, once said “You cannot step into the same river twice” – meaning that the world is in flux, a constant flux of change. The river is never the same river the next time you step into it as water has already flowed by.

We seek new knowledge, challenge, wealth and happiness. We need change, it revitalises the world and gives tomorrow a reason to exist. Although, having said all of that, our mental processes (building reinforced patterns in our minds as we continue to experience the things in our lives) make us ever more set in our ways and eventually we tend to dislike change, especially when it instigated or directed from someone else. We tend to resist change especially when we get older.

The question is, what stops a lot of us from coming up with new ideas that brings about this change, what stifles our own creativity, what is it that prevents us from making it happen? Even more importantly, what makes us stop other people from doing it???


The Killers of Creativity – Their Profile
People tend to be busy at work. They are very concerned with productivity and managing the everyday activities of their work and are often quite preoccupied with themselves and their own personal advancement. New ideas seem to just get in the way of this. Managers become annoyed because: “People who talk all of these new ideas are just distracted from the activities that they should be occupying themselves with; the important things, i.e. keeping the current show on the road”. It is precisely this attitude that stifles creativity at work. As a result ideas are just shut down.

So, what are the characteristics of these people who kill creativity? Well, this is a difficult question to answer as none of these people are of any personality type, in any particular type of career, and can be from ‘any walk of life’. They are just ordinary people with closed minds. However, they can be identified, as people who typically, when approached with new ideas, say something like this without it costing them a thought:

· “We really don’t have time for this – have you scrap figures for the morning shift done yet?” “No.” “Well, why not?”
· “What would you want to do that for?”
· “We have tried it before.”
· “It’s really not what we are looking for.”
· “That’s too unrealistic, we will never be able to achieve that”.
· “Nobody would want that”, or “ What would you want that for”.
· “You do your job, and we will do ours and that how we do things here!”
· “The market is not ready for something like that”.

These statements are almost blurted out automatically by people, as if the idea, if listened to, might infect their minds and distract them as well.

A classic example of “Nobody would want that” or “It’s really not what we are looking for” is the number of publishers who turned down J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter book, The Philosophers Stone, which became an international phenomenon in its own right. I bet the ‘rejecters’ of this book were feeling well nauseous after its roaring success.

If people answer you with these dismissive type statements, then you should have a chat with them about learning a bit more about innovation and what drives it, as innovation is based on great ideas and the acceptance of these ideas and their subsequent diffusion out into society through commercialization. If they don’t listen, then get another job and interview your new employers while they interview you. Are they more open minded that your last employer?

I first came across the book The Art of Innovation, by Tom Kelley with Jonathan Littman, some time ago and found it a very interesting read. I had been reading all sorts of books on innovation, creativity, idea generation, new product development etc., got my PDMA new product development professional certification (NPDP), worked on some innovative and technically difficult projects, and I was beginning to form ideas in my mind as to the ideal environment and mentality that leads to great innovative activities. This book and the follow-up from Kelley, The Ten Faces of Innovation, reinforced my belief that if you surround yourself with people that have great creative skills, open minds and a bucket full of knowledge about how creativity is nurtured and killed, that you may well be able to achieve great things that are above and beyond the unprepared and unenlightened minds.

Is it the ability to solve problems that works? Is it that we have a great problem solver on our team? Is it that we have a great CEO with an excellent vision? Well, I think the CEO and the rest of the team must be in it together and it is the team as a 'collective force', all of them with the same mentality concerning innovation and creativity, all of them with a hunger for new things and an insatiable appetite for fun. Yet, if the members of the team have the same ideas on innovation, they should have disparate skill sets, technical backgrounds and/or cultural backgrounds, as it is these types of diversity that often leads to very creative ideas. This is more commonly known as innovating at the interface. This interface can be between cultures, disciplines, languages etc. Ideas happen at interfaces. This is also, probably one of the reasons that US industry is so innovative; they have a very disparate society, it is a giant melting pot of cultures and ideas and a willingness to give them a place in 'reality'.

Getting back to Kelley's books, they are loaded with examples of past successes, making clear all of the right things to do and most importantly the things that are very wrong to do. The human element of innovation is ever present these two books and they promote practices that are widely reported as ideal in a bulk of the literature available on the subject.
If managing the human side of innovation is what you find difficult at your place of work, these two books will certainly show you another way of handling people and their ideas that will empower you and revitalise your spirit for innovation. It is when your creative juices start to flow that you can inspire and revitalise others spirit for innovation. Innovation is infectious and everyone in your organisation must catch it. These two books will definitely be a good start.

Recommended Reading

Kelley T., Littman J., 2005, The Ten Faces of Innovation: IDEO's Strategies for Beating the Devil's Advocate & Driving Creativity Throughout your Organisation, Currency Doubleday.

Kelley T., Littman J., 2001, The Art of Innovation: Lessons in Creativity from IDEO, America's Leading Design Firm, Profile Books.

I was reading a little piece from a book on creative problem solving when I came upon a little piece relating to a rule created by Charles H. Clark, it was Rule 816, it made me reflect on my working past and my schooling, and it read like this:

“Rule 816: Relating to New Ideas
Rule 816 is now in effect until further notice. When confronted with a new
idea, vote against it.

Rationale: It is probably not a good idea; new ideas seldom
are.

1. Even if it is a good idea, the chances are it will never be
   tested.
2. Even if it is a good idea and even though it is tested,
   chances are that it won’t work first time.
3. Even if it is a good idea and even though it is tested, and
   even if it succeeds, there’ll be plenty of time for thinking up alibis.
   

Therefore: When confronted with a new idea, the rational action
is to take a positive and forward-looking stand against it.”

I have worked in many places, three industrial employers and several research centres and groups, and I find myself relating to this as I have seen it all before. Some of the research groups that I was so lucky to be a part of, however, were not like this at all, some people within them are perhaps a little like this, but in industry, if I remember rightly, are very much like this. And I guess Charles H. Clark found the same; that’s why he created the rule, rather sarcastically I might add, but it certainly gets the point across. And I guess that J.D. Couger found the same and that is why he included it in his book.

Generating a culture of accepting ideas and then doing the critical thing with them, which is bringing the best ones to fruition. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, a Hungarian psychologist in his excellent work on creativity, stated that

"Today many… spend a great deal of money and time trying to increase
the originality of their employees, hoping thereby to get a competitive edge in
the marketplace. But such programs make no difference unless management also
learns to recognize the valuable ideas among the many novel ones, and then finds
ways of implementing them."

I guess that sums it up, ideas are only ideas, and will always remain only ideas, until you do something with them; you must call yourself to action, and leave the Devil’s Advocate at home!


References
Couger J.D., 1995, Creative Problem Solving and Opportunity Finding, Boyd & Fraser.
This is a useful text and introduces many concepts in creativity… it contains brief descriptions of some useful creativity techniques as well.

Csikszentmihalyi M., 1996, Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention, Harper Perennial.
A must read for those interested in the origins and meaning of creativity, a classic work.

Many small companies do not understand much of the patent system and have to talk to consultants to even get the basics of patent law. A major problem with patent law is the lack of documentation that helps guide people through the very basics of what they need before they even consider spending money on expert advice.

Some simple guidelines, though, can help you prepare yourself before you go to a patent agent or attorney.

If you believe you have something new, the most important issue for the inventor or the small company is to focus on recording the prior art associated with your invention and recording what is new and the benefits of your new invention.

This is very important for several reasons. An invention:

1. must be novel;
2. must be useful, i.e., it must have a purpose; it must do something;
3. must be a process, a machine, a new composition or must represent a new use of something old;
4. should produce new results that are unexpected;

Thus, the onus is on you to make sure that it has not been done before. To do this, you must make a search of the prior art and document it and you must point out the differences between your invention and all of what came before it and the results gained from these benefits.

Personally, I think that the rest should be left up to patent agents and attorneys. To read more on this subject, read my article:

How To Examine The Prior Art For An Invention An Introduction


Disclaimer: The methods outlined in this guide, with particular reference to patenting and patent searches, are merely guidelines and do not represent legal advice. Legal counsel should be sought on all intellectual property issues.

Empathic Customer Visits have become the mainstay of Voice of the Customer Research (VOC). They are essential tools that must be used if you are going to be able to get to those evasive tacit needs of the customer. These tacit needs are sometimes so evasive, that many think that a new idea just pops into the heads of those that are lucky to have them. However, as Csikszentmihalyi has made us aware of, creative ideas come to those with a prepared mind, and prepared minds are those that have done the hard work.
New ideas for products and services are best not left to chance as ideas rarely just pop into your head without having the hard work done beforehand. Thus, VOC is the way to go. Now I hear you say "What exactly is VOC?" VOC is (Katz, 2004 - see reference and bibliography list in the paper linked below):

1. a set of customer needs determined by research using interviews;
2. in the interviewees original expression or language;
3. and organized and prioritized according to the interviewees perspective and not the researchers perspective.

VOC research is executed using a set of tools designed to prepare and carry out interviews with potential customers, preferably those of your competitors to see what it is they need that your products or services do not deliver, and also to analyze the data to extract the valid needs of the user.

A new white paper, which gives a procedure for carrying out Empathic Customer Visits, is now available on my website. It is called:

Empathic Customer Visits – Asking Questions and Observing the Customer in Context

The file is in PDF format. As always, feedback is welcome.

It is believed that fast innovation is best derived from early spending of large proportions of the development budget (>15%) on ethnographic/VOC research and early definition of the value proposition. This will, in turn, lead to greater differentiation between your newly developed offerings compared to those of your nearest competitors. And this increased differentiation gives rise to large increases in cash flow after launch onto the market and delays commoditization of your offerings.

In your opinion, would you agree with this brief analysis?

If so, what other factors do you think have the greatest influence on shortening the development cycle and driving increased sales immediately after launch?

Visit my website here and I have a new Body of Knowledge, albeit, it is at its infancy!

My guide may also be of interest to you:
Step by Step Guide to The Innovation Process: Tools and Techniques