Skip to main content

Mockery of innovation

Forecasting and innovations – challenges and pitfalls

When you have a new insight into say why the dollar is going to go down. It is very hard to keep this insight into meddling into my thinking on the way we are going to behave.

In other words, it is very hard to un-insight the insight.

It is very hard to un-innovate the innovation. And if we do not un-innovate; one the ills is that we do not know by when the next innovation should come to keep us alive.

The popular example how innovation can go totally off the whack is the remote control. Remote control was invented to be an easy way to manage task without having to reach out to the device every so often. The innovation was in giving the comfort to the user of doing it with minimum effort. But how many people actually use all the buttons on the remote. And since there are so many functions that are not routinely used or are one-time affairs. The actual use of the remote is obscured under the weight on needlessness of these functions.

Innovation cannot be useful unless it can be used.

An ivory tower innovation that cannot be used is needless innovation. An innovation can truly be defined as innovation when it fills the gap for the user directly or indirectly and make the experience of activity pleasant.

Perhaps the best example of this is Apple's Iphone. Iphone did not have anything path breaking innovations i.e. it was not the first phone with the camera, mp3 players etc. All the features that were available with other phones were incorporated into it. But what set it apart from other phones is it attention to user interface. Interface and experience of user is what determines if the technology/device/... would be supported or not. If User finds it hard to digest or is filled with unwanted functionalities making it more complex, user will more likely stay away from that.

As an analyst who has been studying the forecasting techniques for long time now, one stupidest question still haunts me: If we can forecast, like so many expert theorists and practitioners or companies that spend billions in their research, why has no body is richer than Bill Gates and Warren Buffett? Why is it that all these people get it wrong at some point or the other; bringing them back to square one.

More I think, more it baffles me that future is so good at eluding from even the smartest thinkers on this planet.

It’s an ancient saying and in my opinion best describes the scenario: the thing that we need most is something that eludes us. Future is always malleable but when ever a tiniest fraction of its causation is changed, the future itself changes dramatically. It’s like an uncontrollable horse that just runs to outwit you. Philosophers seem to have word for it - destiny.

The problem why we can is when we are stuck within the mentality of using a set of tools to arrive at the answers we also carry into the analysis room all the disadvantages and lacunae of these tools of analysis and hence the end result will be a reflection of capabilities and lacunae of these tools.

So, will making of effective tools help us? I guess, not. Brain is one of the best tools that we will ever have. It is unlikely to be surpassed in its utility anytime in far future.

Innovation is understanding that 99% of what we do are being done in very ineffective and inefficient way and there are huge opportunities in improving on these and reducing the efforts to do that.

Innovation is also bringing together various assets we have and combining them to form a better product.

One of the stark examples of innovation overload is Microsoft. You cannot blame Microsoft for innovating and adding more features to its products. Because no one including Microsoft knows what will work spectacularly. And what does not work can be taken out in the next version. Simple. But the problem lies in customer having to use that nagging software till the time it comes up for review.

Kaizen, the Japanese technique, which became the paragon of innovation in 1980s, means making small improvements in daily life.

Innovations do not occur in bombastic fashion. It is very rare that big-bang innovation comes to life.

And one of the killers of innovation or change in all walks of life is fear of failure. The fear of failure stifles the creativity. So to innovate you just have to go "full speed ahead". You may hit a few icebergs on the way, but you never know if there are icebergs on the way in first place. If you go slow on throttle on clear sea, you are way behind. If you go ahead, in dicey sea, there are risks. Navigate it effectively.

Till next time.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cognitive rules of business presentations

In his recent book, Clear and to the Point, Kosslyn explained that the four rules of PowerPoint are: The Goldilocks Rule, The Rudolph Rule, The Rule of Four, and the Birds of a Feather Rule. Here's how they work. The Goldilocks Rule refers to presenting the "just right" amount of data. Never include more information than your audience needs in a visual image. As an example, Kosslyn showed two graphs of real estate prices over time. One included ten different numbers, one for each year. The other included two numbers: a peak price, and the current price. For the purposes of a presentation about today's prices relative to peak price, those numbers were the only ones necessary. The Rudolph Rule refers to simple ways you can make information stand out and guide your audience to important details -- the way Rudolph the reindeer's red nose stood out from the other reindeers' and led them. If you're presenting a piece of relevant data in a list, why not mak...
Post a Comment
Read more

Value of dollar - Part 1

A Simple Perspective Will Do The date is 2000-05-28. Don't you get tired of all the bad news bears reminding you of all these instabilities, excesses, and 'potential' tensions in the global economy? After all, hasn't it always been like that? Yes it has, but not in money it hasn't. Increasingly, investors find it harder to know where to put their savings. What about Government Bonds? Wrong. Their recent record of capital losses have wiped out your guaranteed yields, probably because the stock market keeps crowding them out, and this even in a strong dollar and low inflation environment. Furthermore, there is no reliable liquidity and potentially poor quality debt in the corporate sector. Foreign assets? Wrong. Most of the world's economies are riskier, have been under performing, and also, there is this thing called currency risk. Like how is the average person gonna cope with currency...
Post a Comment
Read more

Depreciation of British Pound 1900-2000

When the Bank of England was formed the powers to create money was finally transferred to private hands. The creation of Fed in US, was just a part of this cycle. Though it is a common knowledge US Dollar has depreciated nearly 100% since the creation of Federal Reserve, the same is the case of all the currencies across the globe. For example, below is the UK Parliament data that highlights the depreciating value of Pound.
2 comments
Read more