The Five Habits of Great Innovators(fastcompany.com)
fastcompany.com
The Five Habits of Great Innovators
http://www.fastcompany.com/1733244/the-five-habits-of-great-innovators
9 comments
Horoscopes had this covered long long ago. Write in a way that's meaningless but seems meaningful (as a Sagittarius you are driven by your impulses, though usually tempered by a strong reason, etc, etc, etc.) There's always been a market for such drivel in every form.
Treat the ideas in such articles like scientific theories. Are they specific enough? Do they make specific predictions? Are they falsifiable? What does the evidence say? This article doesn't provide any insight whatsoever on innovators, it might as well be a horoscope.
Treat the ideas in such articles like scientific theories. Are they specific enough? Do they make specific predictions? Are they falsifiable? What does the evidence say? This article doesn't provide any insight whatsoever on innovators, it might as well be a horoscope.
I agree that it is not the most scientific, in-depth article, but I've seen these themes echoed elsewhere by those who have studied innovators. At any rate, I find for myself that it is good to review the basics from time to time. When I read the blog, I thought "Hmmm...how often to I "frame shift" or think in terms of "systems". Not for everyone I agree, but a good reminder for me.
If you are looking for something on the topic that is a lot more "scientific", check out "Iconoclast: A Neuroscientist Reveals How to Think Differently" by Gregory Berns Ph.D. It's really quite good, and I found the appendix on how different drugs effect the brain to be interesting (where he basically shows that if you are looking to drugs to help you think differently/better, you might want to give it some more thought.)
If you are looking for something on the topic that is a lot more "scientific", check out "Iconoclast: A Neuroscientist Reveals How to Think Differently" by Gregory Berns Ph.D. It's really quite good, and I found the appendix on how different drugs effect the brain to be interesting (where he basically shows that if you are looking to drugs to help you think differently/better, you might want to give it some more thought.)
Re: #4, Disruptive Mindset - I'm reading Christensen's third book on disruption, where he talks about 1. the "shield" of asymmetric motivation (competitors don't care about this market - but you do); and 2. the "sword" of asymmetric skills (where over time, you build up the skills of making your technology work, reaching your customers, and making money out of the business model - but your competitor hasn't).
And I'm thinking it may be applicable like this: 1. work on creating a product/service that you personally would find interesting and worthwhile as a user. This automatically won't be what the established companies are doing (it's boring); yet will have some benefit to it, even if the initial version doesn't yet exhibit it. 2. find customers who also value that, and serve them. Work hard at making the business work.
And I'm thinking it may be applicable like this: 1. work on creating a product/service that you personally would find interesting and worthwhile as a user. This automatically won't be what the established companies are doing (it's boring); yet will have some benefit to it, even if the initial version doesn't yet exhibit it. 2. find customers who also value that, and serve them. Work hard at making the business work.
One of the most important requisite to be able to innovate is solitude. The ability to disconnect from the crowd, clear out your brain, spend some time with yourself, look within for your own voice and thoughts, and reflect upon them. You need to practice this to be able to mental time travel, to realize interconnected systems, to be able to shift frames, to be an “outthinker” with a disruptive mindset, to gather enough passion to influence others.
One simple quote from the article that I liked:
"Sometimes just changing your perspective reveals the answer"
One simple quote from the article that I liked:
"Sometimes just changing your perspective reveals the answer"
I doubt those are habits, they seem more like abilities. A lot of people have these abilities, but great innovators can also manage themselves and actually do something...
Uhm, and there were no Taoists 5000 years ago.
Uhm, and there were no Taoists 5000 years ago.
Well, I have zero of those habits. I suppose it's good that I wasn't planning on innovating anytime soon, then.
If it were so easy to break down the process of innovation into an objective list of attributes then these people wouldn't be writing these articles they'd be founding companies and changing industries.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, write articles about doing.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, write articles about doing.
Seriously, though, why do these fluff pieces never acknowledge phenomena like survivorship bias or inherent sampling error? I know plenty of people with these qualities who innovate nothing at all. Is this about necessary conditions, as opposed to sufficient ones? Is it just about neat correlations devoid of actual significance? Why do we never look at people who try but fail at innovating? Their biographies are equally or more instructive.
Well, enough complaining. The world is in dire need of sub-par business blogging. Continue.