The art of innovation – tech isn’t everything

The art of innovation – tech isn’t everything

When in the innovation process do you start to think about technology? Many people start with the technology they invented, or that they think is cool or readily available, then try to find new applications for it. That is a terrible idea.

When my team and I try to think up a breakthrough solution to a problem, technology only comes in after we’ve got a good grasp of the problem and devised a concept solution that generates clear benefits for stakeholders. We start with the problem and our conceptual idea. Only then do we try to find out what technology we need. We go out and research, speaking to executives and engineers about what we want to do, learning as much as we can about available technology and how it can be used to realize the key features of our solution.

It’s what we call the “Technology” phase of the innovation cycle. This is the time to experiment and play with the tech. Usually, an innovative solution will require new technology or a smart combination of existing tech. Ideally, it would be off-the-shelf tech – which would save you lots of time and resources. So, we typically like to identify which technologies can give our solution a unique benefit and try them out! And ideally, we try to avoid studying different technologies in isolation: we integrate early to check if the pieces together still make sense, and test in situations as realistic as possible to start getting a feel for feasibility. This is the time to make things work quick and dirty, without worrying too much about having a polished product on your hands. The key is to learn about the possibilities and limitations of what technology can offer us.

I like to bear in mind that tech shouldn’t be leading our thinking: it should be an enabler. So, it’s imperative that we don’t get distracted by the latest cutting-edge tech: we keep our eyes on the problem and look for what we need. You’ll be surprised how many of the most successful technological innovations came not from expensive and breakthrough new tech, but from innovative ideas that worked to serve a group of people.

Take Apple’s iPod, for example. It didn’t come from revolutionary technology: several portable MP3 players were already available when it entered the market. But what the iPod had that the others didn’t was a very good definition of the problem: Apple knew users needed a tiny, easy to use device to play their entire music library. Most competitors used the shiny new tech – the ability to play MP3 songs of choice at any given moment – but each had a flaw. Some were clunky to connect to laptops and desktops, others too large to fit into pockets, others had low storage capacity or short battery life. The iPod focused on the problem and the users more than the others, then went out to find the tech to make it work, even if it wasn’t the shiny new tech we all dream of inventing when we begin working in tech. The result: the iPod dominated the market as long as it existed.

Many leading tech products resemble the iPod in this way. From the technological point of view, tech enthusiasts might even find them a bit boring. But that’s not the point. What matters is that the product uses technology to solve an important problem for its intended users – and solve it once and for all. Remember the iPod: Even though the tech might not have been top-notch, the application certainly was.