Comments on: Why Edison Was Wrong http://www.steveshapiro.com/2009/08/07/failure/ Steve shares his unconventional approach on Business Innovation, Creativity, Goals and Critical Thinking Fri, 03 Feb 2012 17:12:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: pligg.com http://www.steveshapiro.com/2009/08/07/failure/#comment-36962 pligg.com Mon, 02 Aug 2010 20:46:34 +0000 http://www.steveshapiro.com/?p=1786#comment-36962 <strong>Why Edison Was Wrong | Business Innovation Speaker and Consultant Stephen Shapiro...</strong> Last night I had an enlightening conversation with Alph Bingham, the co-founder of InnoCentive from Eli Lilly. This guy is fascinating! Alph suggested that many people do not like open innovation (external crowd sourcing) because it runs counter to a w... Why Edison Was Wrong | Business Innovation Speaker and Consultant Stephen Shapiro…

Last night I had an enlightening conversation with Alph Bingham, the co-founder of InnoCentive from Eli Lilly. This guy is fascinating! Alph suggested that many people do not like open innovation (external crowd sourcing) because it runs counter to a w…

]]> By: Insights and Perspectives on Open Innovation « gabriel catalano | in-perfección http://www.steveshapiro.com/2009/08/07/failure/#comment-36660 Insights and Perspectives on Open Innovation « gabriel catalano | in-perfección Fri, 09 Apr 2010 14:55:25 +0000 http://www.steveshapiro.com/?p=1786#comment-36660 [...] View open innovation as a parallel process. We are used to view innovation as an iterative process. With open innovation, it is becoming a “massively parallel process where failures and successes happen at the same time” as suggested by Alph Bingham in this blog post from Shapiro: Why Edison Was Wrong [...] [...] View open innovation as a parallel process. We are used to view innovation as an iterative process. With open innovation, it is becoming a “massively parallel process where failures and successes happen at the same time” as suggested by Alph Bingham in this blog post from Shapiro: Why Edison Was Wrong [...]

]]> By: Roland Harwood http://www.steveshapiro.com/2009/08/07/failure/#comment-36249 Roland Harwood Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:42:47 +0000 http://www.steveshapiro.com/?p=1786#comment-36249 Great article. Agree wholeheartedly about the parallel iterative nature of innovation. If innovation had a shape, I'd say it was a comedy bow tie. Lots of diverse inputs and outputs with an iterative core. For more see this blog post: http://blogs.nesta.org.uk/connect/2008/08/the-comedy-bow.html Regards, Roland Great article. Agree wholeheartedly about the parallel iterative nature of innovation. If innovation had a shape, I’d say it was a comedy bow tie. Lots of diverse inputs and outputs with an iterative core. For more see this blog post:

http://blogs.nesta.org.uk/connect/2008/08/the-comedy-bow.html

Regards,
Roland

]]> By: Le Plaid (leplaid) 's status on Sunday, 23-Aug-09 11:40:25 UTC - Identi.ca http://www.steveshapiro.com/2009/08/07/failure/#comment-36066 Le Plaid (leplaid) 's status on Sunday, 23-Aug-09 11:40:25 UTC - Identi.ca Sun, 23 Aug 2009 11:40:34 +0000 http://www.steveshapiro.com/?p=1786#comment-36066 [...] open innovation http://www.steveshapiro.com/2009/08/07/failure/ [...] [...] open innovation http://www.steveshapiro.com/2009/08/07/failure/ [...]

]]> By: Toby Elwin http://www.steveshapiro.com/2009/08/07/failure/#comment-36051 Toby Elwin Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:05:21 +0000 http://www.steveshapiro.com/?p=1786#comment-36051 Since I read, "The Future of Ideas" I have found myself continually supporting collaboration as a means to achieve a future of what "could be". Open source and crowd surfing continues to baffle a world and leaders who can't give up their command and control theory of management and business. We live in the age of the knowledge worker, but can not cross that bridge from pre-WW II, management philosophy of the labor worker. We have a strong challenge ahead: undo the culture that the more knowledge I accumulate, the more I control others. It should be obvious no one can own all knowledge available, however, the attitude persists. A second challenge is to realize if we are in a knowledge-based society no matter the ability, skills, or knowledge of an individual or a team little will be accomplished without their motivation. We need to connect with people, not only financial projections or the expectation of unlimited quarterly profits. Too many are afraid to connect to a person to understand their role to organization success. It is great to discover your posts, your thoughts, and your advocacy. Your thoughts present another example of normal distribution. If more people believe like you, it would no longer reside at the edge, but revert to a new mean. Thanks, Toby Elwin twitter.com/telwin Since I read, “The Future of Ideas” I have found myself continually supporting collaboration as a means to achieve a future of what “could be”.

Open source and crowd surfing continues to baffle a world and leaders who can’t give up their command and control theory of management and business. We live in the age of the knowledge worker, but can not cross that bridge from pre-WW II, management philosophy of the labor worker.

We have a strong challenge ahead: undo the culture that the more knowledge I accumulate, the more I control others. It should be obvious no one can own all knowledge available, however, the attitude persists. A second challenge is to realize if we are in a knowledge-based society no matter the ability, skills, or knowledge of an individual or a team little will be accomplished without their motivation. We need to connect with people, not only financial projections or the expectation of unlimited quarterly profits. Too many are afraid to connect to a person to understand their role to organization success.

It is great to discover your posts, your thoughts, and your advocacy. Your thoughts present another example of normal distribution. If more people believe like you, it would no longer reside at the edge, but revert to a new mean.

Thanks,

Toby Elwin

twitter.com/telwin

]]> By: Renee Hopkins http://www.steveshapiro.com/2009/08/07/failure/#comment-36030 Renee Hopkins Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:55:18 +0000 http://www.steveshapiro.com/?p=1786#comment-36030 Stephen, I really enjoyed reading this, especially after the conversation on this subject we had last week. I wonder now though if part of the answer of whether these 700 attempts were failures might be in how they were conceived in the first place. If Edison had set them up as experiments, testing different parts of the solution, perhaps it wouldn't have taken as many? I do feel strongly that the success of iterative development depends on exactly the type of integration you describe late in the post, and for me that integration would include a more structured approach to the iteration, in the form of a specific test-and-learn strategy. Stephen, I really enjoyed reading this, especially after the conversation on this subject we had last week. I wonder now though if part of the answer of whether these 700 attempts were failures might be in how they were conceived in the first place. If Edison had set them up as experiments, testing different parts of the solution, perhaps it wouldn’t have taken as many? I do feel strongly that the success of iterative development depends on exactly the type of integration you describe late in the post, and for me that integration would include a more structured approach to the iteration, in the form of a specific test-and-learn strategy.

]]> By: Tanveer Naseer http://www.steveshapiro.com/2009/08/07/failure/#comment-35995 Tanveer Naseer Tue, 11 Aug 2009 18:34:04 +0000 http://www.steveshapiro.com/?p=1786#comment-35995 Stephen, thanks for sharing your thoughts from what must have been a stimulating conversation. Your perspective on Edison's famous quote is a refreshing one since it doesn't point out that he learned anything from those failures other than the approach didn't work. And as you said, if you succeed on the first attempt, what did you lose by not having failed 700 times other than time and resources. Of course, I think the notion of failure has become somewhat confused, where some think you should aim for failure in order to succeed where in fact the point should be to not be afraid of failure on your road to succeed. With the global economy in troubled waters these days, it's understandable that some companies would want to shy away from any innovations that might fail. However, I don't think companies should aim to fail simply because they think that it will somehow lead to success. If we could ask Edison about his quote, I'm sure he'd clarify that if he had the option, he'd have preferred to have solved the light bulb design on the 7th try and not the 700th. Again, a very-thought provoking post, Stephen. Thanks for sharing. Tanveer. Stephen, thanks for sharing your thoughts from what must have been a stimulating conversation. Your perspective on Edison’s famous quote is a refreshing one since it doesn’t point out that he learned anything from those failures other than the approach didn’t work. And as you said, if you succeed on the first attempt, what did you lose by not having failed 700 times other than time and resources.

Of course, I think the notion of failure has become somewhat confused, where some think you should aim for failure in order to succeed where in fact the point should be to not be afraid of failure on your road to succeed. With the global economy in troubled waters these days, it’s understandable that some companies would want to shy away from any innovations that might fail. However, I don’t think companies should aim to fail simply because they think that it will somehow lead to success. If we could ask Edison about his quote, I’m sure he’d clarify that if he had the option, he’d have preferred to have solved the light bulb design on the 7th try and not the 700th.

Again, a very-thought provoking post, Stephen. Thanks for sharing.

Tanveer.

]]> By: Tudor http://www.steveshapiro.com/2009/08/07/failure/#comment-35988 Tudor Tue, 11 Aug 2009 05:51:34 +0000 http://www.steveshapiro.com/?p=1786#comment-35988 Important issue: Not sure if the debate risks making Edison a straw man. Not sure if Big Pharma is really embracing Open innovation. In practice, the dreaded innovation funnel still dominates thinking and its actions. "The big question for Big Pharma: Is the pipeline metaphor for drug discovery and exploitation no longer fit for purpose? And if so, where do we look for a more appropriate metaphor? " http://leaderswedeserve.wordpress.com/2007/06/11/the-drug-pipeline-is-it-bust-and-if-so-can-we-fix-it/ Important issue: Not sure if the debate risks making Edison a straw man. Not sure if Big Pharma is really embracing Open innovation. In practice, the dreaded innovation funnel still dominates thinking and its actions.

“The big question for Big Pharma: Is the pipeline metaphor for drug discovery and exploitation no longer fit for purpose? And if so, where do we look for a more appropriate metaphor? ”

http://leaderswedeserve.wordpress.com/2007/06/11/the-drug-pipeline-is-it-bust-and-if-so-can-we-fix-it/

]]> By: Stephen Shapiro http://www.steveshapiro.com/2009/08/07/failure/#comment-35979 Stephen Shapiro Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:17:55 +0000 http://www.steveshapiro.com/?p=1786#comment-35979 Wally...thanks for the comment. Good point about "oscillating" in an out of divergent and convergent thinking (if that is what you were suggesting). And so true about the Edison quote. He failed either 700 times, 1000 times, or 10,000 times. Regardless, I think we can be certain he did not find a solution on the first try. The oldest quote I could find was... "Failed? — why we haven't failed, we only know the thousands of ways that won't work." As paraphrased in Proceedings of the Regular Meeting (1924) by The Association of American Railroads, Car Service Division, p. 23, source http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison Thanks! Wally…thanks for the comment. Good point about “oscillating” in an out of divergent and convergent thinking (if that is what you were suggesting).

And so true about the Edison quote. He failed either 700 times, 1000 times, or 10,000 times. Regardless, I think we can be certain he did not find a solution on the first try.

The oldest quote I could find was… “Failed? — why we haven’t failed, we only know the thousands of ways that won’t work.” As paraphrased in Proceedings of the Regular Meeting (1924) by The Association of American Railroads, Car Service Division, p. 23, source http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison

Thanks!

]]> By: Wally Bock http://www.steveshapiro.com/2009/08/07/failure/#comment-35978 Wally Bock Mon, 10 Aug 2009 19:12:49 +0000 http://www.steveshapiro.com/?p=1786#comment-35978 Nice, provocative piece. The art of innovation in a connected world is often keeping the process open during the observation and comments phase, then narrowing it down to make some changes, then opening it again. The crowd is not always wise, even if more eyeballs spot more problems. Ironically, it's entirely possible that Edison never said that famous quote. It's quoted in too many ways, with too many different numbers, and I don't think anyone's actually sourced it. Nice, provocative piece. The art of innovation in a connected world is often keeping the process open during the observation and comments phase, then narrowing it down to make some changes, then opening it again. The crowd is not always wise, even if more eyeballs spot more problems.

Ironically, it’s entirely possible that Edison never said that famous quote. It’s quoted in too many ways, with too many different numbers, and I don’t think anyone’s actually sourced it.

]]>