I was cruising around the Innovation Tools Website when I found this blog entry about IBM’s new innovation services group. Apparently the group launched a blog for discussing innovation and it includes a variety of angles on innovation. The blog comes out of IBM Benelux — one of Europe’s important multi-nation mega-regions.
From a recent IBM post asking: Do you still believe your R&D department is your main source of Innovation?,
“More input from more sources from more places becomes fertile soil for new ideas. Then comes critical filtering and analysis, working toward the place where insight and true innovation can burst into the mix. This is how we can solve the most important problems in business and society. Listening is also important for tapping into outside opinion for a critique of new ideas.”
Listening to the outside has always been a challenge for societies and organizations, but IBM is right in emphasing the crucial importance of leveraging outside assets during innovation.
(posted by David)
September 10th, 2006 at 1:01 pm
In my experience R&D deals in invention, not innovation.
What’s the difference? Well that’s hard question to answer quickly. It seems to boil down to invention being something that is just new. A toaster that shines your shoes would be an invention.
Innovation seems to boil down to delivering new value to the market. That toaster wouldn’t be innovative since no one actually wants it (hypothetically speaking). A toaster that doesn’t produce toast crumbs however would be of huge new value (to people who like a clean kithcen) and so would be innovative.
So, I’ve seen R&D make a lot of new stuff, but rarely have I seen that stuff deliver new value to the market. Is this due to cultural failings where engineers and marketers just can’t communicate? Or is this a symptom of something else inherent in R&D? I don’t know.
March 30th, 2007 at 6:54 am
which deparment of IBM Deals with Buying of new Innovations which will add value to IBM …????