Thursday, May 15, 2008

Innovation in Law or ... "In-Law" Innovation

Moments ago, the California Supreme Court legalized queer marriage. Here is the actual opinion document detailing the decision:

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S147999.PDF

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

How Lead User theory began

Now that I've been studying user-centered innovation for some time, I began to wonder where the first insight into this phenomenon came from. So I did some research and found a very detailed interview with Eric von Hippel in which he describes the genesis of his Lead User theory. I'm copying and pasting the portion I found most relevant but the whole interview is probably just as insightful:

Well, when I first came to MIT, ideas about how new products and services should be developed were based upon a manufacturer-centered innovation model. This model, in essence, instructs manufacturers to "find a need and fill it." The basic idea is that it is the manufacturer's job to accurately understand your needs, and then make the perfect product for you. In fact, this is still the standard model of the innovation process taught in business schools today, which is one reason that understanding of user-centered innovation is still at such an early stage.

Before I went for my Ph.D., I was an inventor and participated in a startup - and tried to rely on the manufacturer-centered innovation model as I had been taught to do. Full of confidence, I went off to talk to suppliers saying, "Well, here's a need I have for a new product you do not currently make." The uniform supplier answer was, "No, you don't. You need what we sell." It was just so funny.

For example, once I needed a fan that was higher-performance and smaller than anything out there. And so, I asked this company to develop it and sell it to me. I said, "I need it." And they said, "No, you want our standard one," and I said, "No, I don't." And then they said, "Well, it is impossible to build what you want - it's against the laws of nature - so you have to take what we have." So, I went to Princeton with my problem and I got an aerodynamic specialist there to design me the fan. I then took it to the manufacturer who said, "Well okay, we'll make it, but you have to buy the tooling. And you have to pay for them 10,000 at a time, and so on and so forth." So, we did all that. The fan was wonderful; it did exactly what we needed in the fax machine we were designing. (The startup I worked for made fax machines.)

A few weeks later, the fan company reps called me up and said, "You know, it turns out a lot of other people want your fan too. Can we use your tooling to produce it for them?" I said, "Sure, talk to our manufacturing guy, and I am sure he will arrange something." The arrangement was made, and shortly afterwards that company put out these ads saying, in essence, that "via our deep understanding of your needs, we knew you needed this new type of fan. And so, of course we developed it for you, our beloved customers."

I found this so interesting. I thought to myself, clearly the manufacturer-centered innovation model did not work in this instance. But there is such a strong belief in that model that the fan supplier thinks it did.

Anyway, I brought that insight with me to MIT. I began my own research with the idea that, probably, it was really the users who were the innovators, and often not the manufacturers. That was way back in 1976, and things just built from there. I then realized that I had to join with other innovation researchers to build a big enough playground of data and concepts in the arena of user innovation to make it attractive for other people to be able to do their own work. That is, we had to generate enough findings related to user innovation, and create a robust outline of a theoretical framework, so that other people would be interested and would start to plug into it. All that took a long time, but eventually, we got here.

Starting about 2000, user innovation related to the Internet, blogs, and open-source software began to become very visible. As a result, many people began to think, "Oh gosh, maybe the manufacturer-centered innovation model isn't the only way to go. Maybe innovation is really user-centered, and 'user-developed content' really does matter!"

At that point I and my academic colleagues were in a position to offer an academic framework to help people in their early efforts to make sense of a user-centered world. Anyway, that's my view of how things have evolved. As my colleagues can also tell you, it has been a really long slog. Wonderful colleagues who have helped are many. Some who have been very important during the past several years are Professors Dietmar Harhoff, Nikolaus Franke, Joachim Henkel, Christian Luethje and Karim Lakhani. It's much more fun to do this kind of early work with good friends. We can cheer each other up when our work gets dissed, as it regularly did in those days.

Thank you Tom Austin for doing this great biography. Here is a link to his complete article: http://www.gartner.com/research/fellows/asset_172822_1176.jsp

Monday, April 21, 2008

Maker Faire 2008

The annual Maker Faire is on for May 3-4, 2008. It's a great place to see what creative people are doing in the yay area.

Maker Faire: http://www.makerfaire.com/

I went two years ago seeking to understand creativity: http://innov8or.blogspot.com/2006/04/art-or-invention.html

Thursday, March 13, 2008

Commercializing Management Science

Universities around the world make some of their money by commercializing the results of their research. A professor has a scientific breakthrough, a grad student develops a technology based on that breakthrough, and a company spins off to commercialize that technology. It happens in the hard sciences all the time, so why not the soft sciences too?

Commercializing Management Science is how I've always thought about what I've been doing since business school. In recent years, the academic leaders of Innovation Science, a sub-field under Management Science, have produced scientific breakthroughs that have advanced our understanding of how innovation works. Professor Eric von Hippel discovered Lead User behavior, Professor Henry Chesbrough discovered the Open Innovation phenonmenon, and Professor Clayton Christensen discovered Disruption Theory and the Jobs-to-be-Done framework. These discoveries are the scientific underpinnings of the technology powering my company's products and I owe great thanks to these fathers of Innovation Science for their contributions. Thanks guys!

Soft sciences that focus on understanding human behaviour are gaining more and more credibility as legitimate scientific fields. I'm proud to be helping the cause by showing that these scientific fields also have technology based on their breakthroughs that can be commercialized and put to good use by industry.

Thursday, March 06, 2008

Designer genes

In high school I interned at the Lawrence Berkeley National Labs on their Human Genome project. The project, along with others like it, aimed to sequence the human genome. It was estimated to take over ten years and it ended up taking about that long.

One project I worked on was: Adaptation of Commercial Robot for Genome Library Replication. What a cool job for a geeky teenager. I mean programming a robot to assist in one of the most important scientific initiatives of our time, how cool is that!?

Anyway, now that the human genome has been sequenced it is beginning to enable what some people are calling Personalized Medicine. Imagine if drugs were tailored to match your own genetic profile? That's what Personalized Medicine is all about and it wouldn't have been possible without the incredible work I did in my spare time as a high school student...just kidding.

Seriously though, I was thrilled the other day when I bought my first product based on the the human genome project. It's a gene analysis kit for detecting your genetic susceptibility to heart disease. You scrape the inside of your cheek 20 times with a swab and sent it away to the company for their analysis. Then they send you a report. I guess it seems cool and I'm thrilled to buy a product based on this emerging science but do I really want to know? Either it's going to tell me I'm susceptible and I'm going to feel even more obligated to live a healthy lifestyle. Or it's going to say I'm not susceptible and I'm going to slack off and end up getting sick from an unhealthy lifestyle.

Oh well, when it comes to innovative products I have a hard time saying no. So here goes...scrape, scrape, scrape, scrape...

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Announcing NetBase and illumin8

We have renamed Accelovation to NetBase, check out our new homepage: http://www.netbase.com. I loved the original name, a lot of customers did too, but in the end it was just too hard to spell. NetBase reflects our continued vision of organizing and interrelating digital information for today's knowledge workers.

More importantly, we launched a new product this week with our partner Elsevier. Called illumin8, this new web-based research tool is designed for R&D professionals to extract and analyze solutions from Elsevier's rich scientific content and from the internet in general.

I fondly hope that the widespread use of illumin8 will lead to unprecedented levels of economic prosperity in the world by accelerating the fundamental step of innovation, namely connecting those in need with solutions to address those needs.

For the official press release, check out:

http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/authored_newsitem.cws_home/companynews05_00878

Saturday, February 23, 2008

Chindogu

My partner Dee recently showed me a book on Chindogu, the Japanese art of ironic invention. They should be considered inventions in that they are solutions to problems. However the problem they solve can oftentimes be fanciful or the solution itself may ironic drawbacks that makes them effectively useless. Chindogu is often called the art of unuseless invention (wikipedia).

One that solves a questionable problem is a pair of shoes where the sole of the shoe has dog paws so that the wearer can feel more like a dog leaving paw prints in the sand. That was in the book I read.

I was thinking this morning about my mouse and how it must go hungry all the time. I mean my computer mouse. So I decided to give it something to munch on. I changed one of my desktop icons into a piece of a cheese. I click that icon pretty frequently so it will allow me to feel I'm taking care of my pet.

Maybe I'll think about removing this blog posting some day. That's because one of the other properties of Chindogu is sometimes the inventions embarrass the user :-)