Companies often talk a good game about innovation. Usually they talk better than they act. Has anyone ever heard anyone say that innovation was bad? Of course not, but the same people that pay lip service to the creative process are often the same ones who create financial and organizational disincentives to the process. It’s […]
Datamation content and product recommendations are
editorially independent. We may make money when you click on links
to our partners.
Learn More
Companies often talk a good game about innovation. Usually they talk better than they act. Has anyone ever heard anyone say that innovation was bad? Of course not, but the same people that pay lip service to the creative process are often the same ones who create financial and organizational disincentives to the process. It’s sort of like what the federal government says – and does – about alternative energy: politicians talk a good game but haven’t raised spending on the problem in years.
There’s an important distinction among invention, innovation and commercialization that we should acknowledge.
Invention occurs in garages and large corporate R&D shops: IBM and Microsoft will spend a combined $15+ billion on R&D in 2007. Venture capitalists invest billions of dollars every year in start-up businesses built on new digital technology. Invention requires risky investments – almost speculative investments – in technologies that may or may not mature enough to get them to the next innovation segment of the value chain.
Innovation builds on invention on its way to commercialization. It involves the development and construction of a product or a service. This segment includes prototyping and pilot applications. The purpose of innovation is to calibrate just how solid the inventive foundation on which the product or service is built really is. Real money is spent here to develop a product or service and prepare it for the marketplace.
It’s important to note that the invention-to-innovation process is not always owned or managed by the same company. In fact, this is where major interruptions in the value chain often occur. Some companies, like Microsoft, are as good (or better) at innovating as they are at inventing. Cisco acquires a lot of its inventions from which they innovate new products and services. Some companies are better at innovation than they are at invention – and vice versa. The skill sets are different and often distributed across several companies, consultants and even intellectual property (IP) lawyers. Prototyping is fundamentally different from manufacturing.
Other skill sets are required to fully commercialize technology. The third segment of the value chain requires effective distribution, sales and support. Some companies are better at packaging products than they are at innovating them, just as some companies are better at sales than they are at marketing. Commercialization should be the end result of successful innovation, and successful commercialization results in a solid ROI.
So where is your company on this invention–innovation–commercialization continuum? Put another way, what do you do well – and what should you do well?
Do companies usually know what they do well and poorly? Not as often as they should, that’s for sure.
The model I like the best is Cisco’s acquisitive approach to “new.” They buy new. Of course they spend heavily on R&D but they also plug their technology holes with acquisition after acquisition. Microsoft continues to confuse me: they spend a ton on R&D and yet struggle to invent whole new computing models and technologies. IBM chugs along but concentrates its invention in a few hardware and software areas, like database technology.
Do you know where you excel – and where you need help? The toughest assessments are self-assessments. Think realistically about who you are, and if you have trouble figuring out what to do, think Cisco.
-
Ethics and Artificial Intelligence: Driving Greater Equality
FEATURE | By James Maguire,
December 16, 2020
-
AI vs. Machine Learning vs. Deep Learning
FEATURE | By Cynthia Harvey,
December 11, 2020
-
Huawei’s AI Update: Things Are Moving Faster Than We Think
FEATURE | By Rob Enderle,
December 04, 2020
-
Keeping Machine Learning Algorithms Honest in the ‘Ethics-First’ Era
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE | By Guest Author,
November 18, 2020
-
Key Trends in Chatbots and RPA
FEATURE | By Guest Author,
November 10, 2020
-
Top 10 AIOps Companies
FEATURE | By Samuel Greengard,
November 05, 2020
-
What is Text Analysis?
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE | By Guest Author,
November 02, 2020
-
How Intel’s Work With Autonomous Cars Could Redefine General Purpose AI
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE | By Rob Enderle,
October 29, 2020
-
Dell Technologies World: Weaving Together Human And Machine Interaction For AI And Robotics
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE | By Rob Enderle,
October 23, 2020
-
The Super Moderator, or How IBM Project Debater Could Save Social Media
FEATURE | By Rob Enderle,
October 16, 2020
-
Top 10 Chatbot Platforms
FEATURE | By Cynthia Harvey,
October 07, 2020
-
Finding a Career Path in AI
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE | By Guest Author,
October 05, 2020
-
CIOs Discuss the Promise of AI and Data Science
FEATURE | By Guest Author,
September 25, 2020
-
Microsoft Is Building An AI Product That Could Predict The Future
FEATURE | By Rob Enderle,
September 25, 2020
-
Top 10 Machine Learning Companies 2021
FEATURE | By Cynthia Harvey,
September 22, 2020
-
NVIDIA and ARM: Massively Changing The AI Landscape
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE | By Rob Enderle,
September 18, 2020
-
Continuous Intelligence: Expert Discussion [Video and Podcast]
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE | By James Maguire,
September 14, 2020
-
Artificial Intelligence: Governance and Ethics [Video]
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE | By James Maguire,
September 13, 2020
-
IBM Watson At The US Open: Showcasing The Power Of A Mature Enterprise-Class AI
FEATURE | By Rob Enderle,
September 11, 2020
-
Artificial Intelligence: Perception vs. Reality
FEATURE | By James Maguire,
September 09, 2020
SEE ALL
ARTICLES