Four reasons why meaningful, disruptive innovation fails

Summary:Innovation: overblown? The four reasons why modern efforts fail to live up to the word's original definition.

"Why can't we solve big problems?" asks Jason Pontin in MIT's Technology Review.

Technologist Paul Carr recently described the term disruption as "the faddish Silicon Valley concept which essentially boils down to, "let us do whatever we want, otherwise we’ll bully you on the Internet until you do." (So, answer: we fail because we're self-interested.)

"There is continual disruption in our industry," Buzzfeed's Jonah Peretti writes, "and you are likely to fail if you get complacent or stop evolving." (So, answer: because we stop caring.)

The word is everywhere, but it means less with each passing minute. Is there anyone out there actually trying to, as they like to say in corporate boardrooms, move the needle?

Pontin explores the idea in his lengthy feature, citing four reasons why we fail to, as they like to say in baseball dugouts, swing for the fences. (Can you write about disruption without employing cliches? Certainly, but there are so many invented specifically to speak to this very concept.)

Those are:

  1. We see the big problem and choose not to solve it. Pontin cites NASA's interest in sending human astronauts to Mars, technically and financially possible but politically D.O.A.
  2. The institutions tasked with doing so fail. Pontin cites climate change, a global problem from which no one can escape, and yet no company, industry or nation seems willing to change market rules to address.
  3. The problem calls for different solutions than originally expected. We've got better agricultural technology than ever in history, Pontin writes, but people around the world still starve. Tyranny, not technology, is the issue.
  4. We fail to understand the problem. There's no better example than cancer, which has emerged over decades of research to be an extremely broad family of diseases with no single best cure or treatment.

Disruptive innovation isn't impossible: we saw it occur in the enormous effort coordinated to put a man on the moon. The challenge isn't technology, the markets or a dearth of big ideas, Pontin writes -- rather, it's the coordination of impetus, institutions, technology and understanding.

Photo: NASA flight controllers Charles Duke, Jim Lovell and Fred Haise during the descent of the Apollo 11 lunar module in1969. (NASA)

This post was originally published on Smartplanet.com

Topics: Innovation

About

Andrew Nusca is a former writer-editor for ZDNet and contributor to CNET. He is also the former editor of SmartPlanet, ZDNet's sister site about innovation. He writes about business, technology and design now but used to cover finance, fashion and culture. He was an intern at Money, Men's Vogue, Popular Mechanics and the New York Daily Ne... Full Bio

zdnet_core.socialButton.googleLabel Contact Disclosure

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Related Stories

The best of ZDNet, delivered

You have been successfully signed up. To sign up for more newsletters or to manage your account, visit the Newsletter Subscription Center.
Subscription failed.