Innovation According to Fiction
In the winter of 1865, in a stately room decorated from the floor to ceiling with paintings and paraphernalia observing the recently concluded Civil War, four men sat in armchairs by a raging fire. Their arguments were no less heated, for these grizzled men were debating the idea of building a cannon. A cannon so large and powerful, that a man capsuled within its barrel would be shot to space, eventually reaching the moon. The majority were convinced that such a feat was feasible. This was Jules Verne’s vision of innovation: a paradigm of innovation according to fiction.
Jules Verne’s optimism wasn’t misplaced, as the nineteenth century saw dramatic improvements in technology. Time and space were suddenly compressed by the means of rail and telegraphy. It seemed that sending a man to the moon was on the path to being ‘technologically feasible.’
Diminishing Innovation
It would be another hundred years before man would set foot on the moon. Humanity lurched into two devastating global wars interspersed with global famine. As the mid-century began, fragments of humanity came together to end injustices and the great expansion of individual freedoms began. Furthermore, a unique set of conditions were created that set the seeds for manufacturing production to move overseas. This was largely due to China with the immediate benefit that goods could be produced for a lower cost.
Not surprisingly, global consumption skyrocketed, fueled with the robust development of the Internet and efficiencies in automation and transportation. This had the positive feedback loop of even further investments in the overseas infrastructure, creating even more cheaply manufactured goods. We could now comparison shop between the minutest details of the same item.
At some point –it’s hard for researchers to identify exactly when– we went from large gains in the globalized economy to incremental ones. This could be noticed in the smartphone industry. Every year our handheld devices got a little better, a little bigger, and got one more camera – so that we could all obsess about whether three cameras were better than two and so on. Technology started to feel and look incremental, but innovation –new technology– was left on the wayside.
Innovation Failure: IBM
A prime example of an “innovation failure” is IBM. Most Gen Z’s don’t know what IBM makes as a company. However, in the 1950s to the mid-1980s, IBM ruled over all other technology companies, an undisputed technological colossus. IBM took man to the moon and created the personal computer business, among other things. It was seen as a surprise when IBM went from a market share of 60% in 1970 to 32% in 1980, to an unprecedented 8 billion dollar loss in 1993. There were two driving features behind IBM’s collapse: a lack of innovation compared to its rivals and a complete disregard for what its customers cared about. Many companies are following a similar path today.
Innovation Today: Incremental Gains
While some may argue that innovation also includes improving existing technologies, there is a point where it becomes repetitive and unnecessary. Most, if not all major technological innovations are new technologies or significantly improved upon older technologies. This cannot be said for one or two more cameras. Yet this marketing tactic is featured and can be found in many of the technological giants today. The solution-centric mindset-building a solution before a problem- thrives today because consumers can spend money on items that still hold value but have little global “innovation value.” Much less has been done comparatively to when Neil Armstrong took a giant leap for mankind.
These false paradigms for innovations have crept up on the consumer, and the world. Between the global pandemic, war threats, and other problems to arise, innovation will become the only answer.