I recently had the opportunity to sit down and talk with the co-founder of Teradata: Phil Neches. During our conversation, I brought-up a session at George Gilder’s WTF back in 2004. I had come across a summary of his discussion there from Fast Company during some other reading. What struck me the most about his comments was that oftentimes, revolutionary technology really exists at the far edge of our worldview. What he said was this using the automobile’s adoption as a metaphor:
Right now we can only see “horseless carriage” applications. Everyone sees new technologies based on how it relates to or replaces existing technologies. New technology always enters the market at the margins. We still measure engine performance in horsepower. The big payoff of this technology is going to be something else.
In essence, real, revolutionary technology is actually evolutionary; it’s real use/purpose/value only revealed after we remove our own inability to see beyond our own current perspectives.
Then I saw a recent article on innovation over at a Forrester blog titled “Not All Innovation Needs to be Disruptive“. Slightly different angle since the focus was on the end result rather than technology, but the same learning applies: innovation doesn’t need to be or isn’t disruptive. Rather it moves slower, more incrementally, searching for the right application. Then BANG! Everyone notices.
Ultimately innovation is only innovation when you understand the real fit between a technology and it’s most valuable application. And often it takes a lot of trial and error. But what most people see instead of a long, painful process is an immediate, almost overnight success. While many companies try to create that same success, they often don’t recognize that the pursuit of instant success is actually counter to ultimate success: discipline to listen to the market, understand a problem, and seek a great solution.
