Speed and Innovation

Innovation and Prefrontal Cortex

I had an interesting conversation via email with Prof.B yesterday on improvisation and innovation yesterday. He claims that the issue is quite controversial amongst the innovation people.

His claim is that the total amount of innovation does not necessarily correlate with the speed. In other words, if improvisation is a technique that only provides 'speed' to coming up with new ideas, then, will it change the 'total innovation'?

My response to this would be, yes. The speed does matter here, especially in a world where information is so prevalent, and difficult to pick out what is good information (that is useful for creating innovation) and what is not. If information was rather limited, then the achievable level of innovation is quite fixed, so the chance of attaining 'total innovation' is quite high, as you can run through all the iteration of combination (association of ideas). Improvisation, I believe, will demonstrate its strength when the information is limitless/numerous/expanding, like in the world that we live in right now. Granted, if one lets the time to run infinitely, then you may be able to attain 'total innovation' but who has that time?
By using improvisation, you are using brain's supercomputer to to select the information that are viable in very short time. And if done in non-inhibitive way, it can create breakthroughs in very short time...just how IDEO conducts their brainstorming session.

 

Defeat and Innovation

Met up with Mr.Hibara from Ritsumeikan yesterday day with the entrepreneur group yesterday.

An interesting person, looks very intellectual with his designer's rectangular glasses, but he cracked some jokes and he laughed a lot. As another Japanese who has graduated from US graduate institution, it was very good for me to catch up with him to his view and learn about his footsteps.  He quit working at a commercial bank after 7years and went on to do a PhD in the US, and then taught in Canada for 4 years, and now he has taught at Ritsumeikan for 4 years and he will be moving to Waseda in September. Sounds like a good career path. 

What was interesting was the email communication I had with him afterwards. He repetitively mentioned during dinner that I will not have to 'hurry'. I took that to mean that I will not have to hurry as long as there is internal imminence attached with it. However, what he meant was that I should not be discouraged by any downs/failures that I will face in the future (for instance, now, as I cannot find my job!)...and don't get too bogged down and keep on fighting to go forward. Failure in the micro-level (or even macro-level) will help one succeed in future.  

How important is it to fail in order to succeed in innovation? 

Or is the perspective of 'failure' already a pessimistic sentiment that hinders great innovation?

Kazuhiko Tomita's "Zasetsuryoku", mentions the importance to fail...to be immune to short-term setbacks...I think that's probably what Mr.Hibara was getting at as well. 

Waking up in the morning and Innovation

Innovation  and waking up in the morning.

Is there a specific time in the morning that is much more suited for having an epiphany?
In the old times in China, they have said that the places where you would likely have ideas are on the horse (while traveling), on the bed (while sleeping?) and in the bathroom (where your mind is somewhere else?).
Physiologically speaking, I have heard before that in the morning is probably the best because your mind is much more clear and can make decisions quickly (I have heard that melatonin will start to get secreted in the body after 13-15 hours of waking up, which will cause drowsiness). Some of the very busy businessman and woman have been making the comments on how the 2-3 hours after you wake up is the so-called, Golden Hour, where the productivity maxes out.

...perhaps I should wake up earlier and don't waste my Golden Hour teaching Japanese!

There has also been some studies where after 10pm, people will start to become more emotional and less logical. Innovative ideas definitely contains logical parts, where the final product has to have some value in the society in one form or the other...but emotional component..? I am not sure, I have to give that more of a thought.  If there is no emotional component to it...hmm..I felt like innovation had some 'cool/cold' image as a word in itself, with blueish color in my qualia.  Is it a ruthless, clear-cut thing...this term "innovation"..."emotion" and "innovation" may be something to look into for the next writing.

 

Tennis, Decision and Innovation

Just as I had previously mentioned how artists are entrepreneurs in nature, as they have to produce value out of something that at a first glance, doesn't have any value, athletes have to do the same.

Basically, (just like artists), they have to create value out of their 'body' and 'equipment', in terms of their performance. 

Even within the realm of performance, it you zoom in on the game in itself, there is a lot that can be said about innovation and tennis. Let us take a look at a scenario. If you are in a match 4-4, serving and it is 30-30...a medium-length ball lands on the left corner of your court, and your opponent is standing on the baseline, having just hit favorite forehand shot, but he/she didn't put too much on the ball, as you sensed a little bit of choking on his/her side. At this moment, you are faced with multiple (numerous...in fact infinite) options. Backhand down-the-line to go for a winner, backhand cross-court to be safe, backhand-slice down-the-line to set up for the next point, drop-shot, short-cross-court, run-around forehand, hit a short-low ball to coax the opponent in....etc etc. Winning the point is one of the objective at that time, but at the same time, you'd want to get the momentum to be with you. The decision that you make at that will make different sort of out come. Just as what the innovators are faced with...decisions.  And it is in the decisions that they make that results in different products.

Decisions and innovation...

Innovators, when they decide, they decide to pursue the option that makes most sense for them....something that is aligned with their  preference, something that they value.  In an ideal world, decisions that innovators make should be 'actively' decided, rather than 'passively' deciding based on what the innovators believes that the 'society' is looking for (as 'active' decisions has a component of 'passion'...which relates to 'why' the innovator is doing what he/she is doing).  Passion-driven active decisions are strong, but dangerous, as you would have the tendency to lose sight of the societal need (an example of where creativity doesn't translate to innovation). 

Heavy Metal Concert 

4th Industrial Revolution 

Improvisation and Innovation(2)

Dinner with AJ.

This Innovation and Improvisation idea is really getting bigger and bigger in my head.
I really want to publish what I have in my head right now.
I think Japanese people  are probably good at improvising...and I think it's in their blood.
(I'm just trying to come up with different ideas...)

Take a look at Japanese cuisine, in traditional Japanese restaurants, it is possible for you to tell the chef and ask them to put together 'something' (Tekitou ni mitsukurou). But the concept is not widely available anywhere in the world. This 'something' is completely out of the chef's discretion. It is in the realm of
improvisation by the chefs. The chefs are not following things that's on the menu...they have to think what the customer would want (look for the need) from what they have available at the kitchen. ...That's an active cooking...rather than 'passive cooking'

I guess I do want to open up a restaurant after I retire...a restaurant without menu.
Just talk to the customers and immediately know their needs...that's an ultimate form of cooking...

Mental State and Innovation

Yakitori with CB.

Innovation and pessimism and optimism.
Innovation takes place at the edges. At the edges of two different things.
We have been thinking of this in terms of different disciplines, for instance, the innovation between physics and biology, has shed light into the new field of biomimicry.

Pessimists and Optimists (and "realists) have different perspectives on things that they see in the world. Both people are capable of seeing the world in different colored lenses. So in order for new innovation to come about in the world, would it be required to have these both types of people??

I guess thinking about that adds another dimension to innovation.
We may have to even think about the personality of the person who is innovating to really understand the details of innovation research..

 

Choose&Focus and Innovation

Listened to Prof. U.S on the companies that are doing well in the 2000s in Japan.
The successful companies in Japan are relatively unknown, but they have gone through radical change over the years, and she found commonalities between the companies: the 7Ps.

All the companies had gone through some sort of Choose & Focus.

Does choosing and focusing inhibit innovation?
It appears to me that choosing and focusing is useful AFTER the innovation's strategy has been laid out for a particular idea/technology. Until then, choosing and focusing will prevent the formation of breadth of different ideas. Diversity gives the chance for information to create something meaningful, but at the same time, it increases the permutations of the combinations of the ideas, so it will also prevent new innovation to form, as you need to select the one that works well. That could be thought as the dilemma of innovation(I just made up), whether to want so many ideas to choose from or to be limited to several different areas of field.

Then...is there a golden mean??
No ideas will not create innovation. And, it doesn't cost anything.
An infinite number of ideas will have infinite number of combinations, where the "cost" of finding the ultimate innovation via combination would also be infinite.
What would an optimum number of ideas be??

Self-discipline and Innovation

Self-Discipline and Innovation.

In order for innovation to flow from your head naturally, it is important that the process becomes a routine, as I mentioned before. In order to have the routine, one must be totally self-disciplined.

I feel like I spent my day today...wasted.

One way to think...if you really feel that you are wasting your time...EXTRAPOLATE.
extrapolate the way you live your day, or that hour or that second, when you feel like you are being lazy, unproductive, etc, extrapolate it to what sort of person you will be if you were to continue doing it.

In other words, you should be able to BACK-CALCULATE from where you WANT TO BE, and find out WHAT YOU SHOULD BE DOING NOW, in order to achieve that goal.

That's self-discipline, the ability to look long-term and short term.

And you need self-discipline when you innovate.

Starbucks and Innovation

What does Starbucks sell? Coffee? Yes, but not only coffee. Caramel Mocha Frappuccino? That too.
They sell the ambiance and space (I guess they now have drive-thrus...I wonder how they are doing with that...in fact, they would prefer those customers, as they don't require any space! and they don't spill coffee etc onto the furnitures, and they have fast turnaround!)

As for the ambiance... the nice couches, calming music and the aroma of coffee beans (and WIFI!). You see a lot of people working away with their computers, and it appears that the coffee (or whatever) that they have ordered have already turned cold, but just like having paid the 'entrance fee', people are just sitting down and minding their own business.

Will Starbucks ever completely turn into providing all drive-thrus? I wonder what the breakdown is in terms of their business for drive thrus and normal sales...If drive thru is popular, that means that the customers are coming to Starbucks for the products that they offer (the sugar, fat and caffeine...and flavor), if they go completely drive-thru, they can possibly save a lot of the rent, especially in the urban areas.

I guess one could see the space where people hang out (the ambiance) can be seen as a marketing strategy. If one person is in there, and the other needs to meet the person inside, then he/she will have to enter and buy something (if they feel guilty) if they decide to stay for a long time.

Some people say that the starbuck paper cups with the logos are status symbols in some parts of the world as Starbucks coffee is very expensive. I guess strictly keeping to drive-thrus will eliminate the exposure of the logos inside the city, as the cups will be kept inside the car...

Making value from ambiance...interior designers are innovators. I guess all designers are designers are innovators by nature, in fact all artists are also. (That point, I can definitely come back to it in later entries)...

Cooking and Innovation (I)

These two fields are so intricately related that I have set the section title to be ~~~(I), because I am sure I will be drawing a lot of examples in the future about the two fields, and the similarities that lays beneath them.

For the first entry, I want to draw the attention to the book I read long time ago, called "The Pyramid (Four-sided body) of Cooking" by 玉村豊男.
それは４つの要素から構成されている（それゆえに四面体になる）。空気、水、油の３つが底面をなし、この三角形から焼きものライン、煮ものライン、揚げものラインという３本線が発し、頂点である火につながっている。つまり底面は火を加えない生ものの世界であり、そこに火を加えるに当たって３通りの方法が提示されていることになる。たとえば刺身なら空気、マリネなら油の隅に位置する。刺身を炭焼きにすれば焼きものラインを上に向かい、マリネをフライにすれば揚げものラインを上っていくことになる。


There are infinite number of combinations that one can make a dish, by changing the ingredients and methods of cooking. But only a few works, to have edible and delicious outcome. Everyday, you can find new recipes being presented on the internet, printed media, restaurants etc.. Some recipes are considered to be more unique than the other, and are more popular compared to the others. Some are thought to be traditional, some are considered to be radically innovative. The field of  molecular gastronomy is a field that I am extremely fascinated in and itself is a very interdisciplinary field that involves chemistry, physics, psychology, physiology, etc. Just as how there are infinite number of different style of 'technology' in the world and some are more readily used compared to the others, and some are considered to be more more innovative than the other...and the underlying principles are in physical concepts of basic science.


The other day, I saw chocolate with bacon bits inside...haven't tasted before...but that's definitely a culinary innovation!

Japan's Reform and innovation

Day Five.

Japan needs to revive..and this is the only chance..by changing.

Before the earthquake, I thought the career that I would have is to have business experience in some company abroad and then to help Japan in 3-5 years. But after the earthquake, my intentions have changed a little. I think I want to help Japan now!

At the time of reform, and rebuilding of new eco city to replace the devastated area of Japan, what we need to do is to get all the plans IN so that companies can start to rebuild parts of the city, by incorporating their new innovation systems.

Just the same as putting together broken pieces, during reform, different areas of studies are more likely to meet, as the devastated places has a lot of things that are scattered.  In a sense, the environment could be conducive to innovation!?

Biomimicry and Innovation

Day Five

Saw director for CleanTECH cluster group here and also attended Biomimicry Conference today.

Innovators now rely quite a lot on nature's innovation to get 'hints' for their innovations.

(from Wikipedia)
Biomimicry or biomimetics is the examination of nature, its models, systems, processes, and elements to emulate or take inspiration from in order to solve human problems. The term biomimicry and biomimetics come from the Greek words bios, meaning life, and mimesis, meaning to imitate. Other terms often used are bionics, bio-inspiration, and biognosis.

Nature has had millions of years to try out what works the best for them to survive on this planet. Humanities are trying to create something in much much shorter period of time. In that sense, humanities' approach is much more 'directed' whereas the approaches done by nature could be considered as 'evolutionary' or 'shot-gun' as many parameters are tested at once.

I was just going to write..the survival for the fittest for nature, but I guess survival of the fittest also works in humanities too.

Met a lot of interesting people...gotta rest a bit.

16 more days until routinization

Gender Equality and Innovation

I heard the global poverty project talk by Bobby Bailey.
He mentioned that one of the ways to mitigate absolute poverty is by empowering women, giving more rights and opportunities to women, as men are really dominating in the society and women are not treated equally at all.

Gender equality and Innovation.
Male-dominant society will only create skewed perspective. Females have different chain of thought as they have experienced different social lives entirely and they also have different physiological differences(males typically have heavier brain mass, they don't have hormonal cycles and male brains have less corpus callosum). Innovation takes place at the edge of different fields. If both male and female individuals cooperated to create innovation, it would create much more innovative ideas, compared a group which is dominated by one gender alone. It makes sense naturally to innovate by involving different genders as well.

Improvisation and Innovation

Improvisation and Innovation.
I am certain that these two are somewhat related...and in fact, I think that they are extremely well-related.
The technique of improvisation, where you make stories from nothing in a very short period of time, together in a team, sounds like a brainstorming session, at the beginning stage of innovation.

It is the combinations of seemingly unrelated things that will eventually make creativity...and to create something new.  Look at Medici Group run by Frans Johansson...his claim to fame was to create something new by combining seemingly different things. Think about improvisation...you are basically doing the same thing....you are 'given' a topic and by using the supercomputer in your brain, you are connecting the topic into something new and you are generating something that makes sense/funny (creating an instant value).

Artists are all entrepreneurs in one way or the other...
Improvisors are at the forefront of entrepreneurism...(although valuation is needed).


Had to pay almost $300 for the fine for not stopping at the Stop sign...

18 Days left until routinization..

Surveying and Innovation

As the attempt to routinize the output process...it is now the second day.
EP and I went to the nearby mall to do a survey for our product development class.

I will try to connect surveying and innovation, today.

Survey is a method of acquiring information.
If you change the method with which you acquire the information, you will gather different kind of information. Whether the information that you gather is useful or not depends on the question you ask.
"What is the utility of information"? Utility of information depends on the 'purpose' of the manner in which the information will be used.  What if the purpose of the information that you are looking for is something related to innovation? If all utility was linearly correlated with innovativeness? (Unlike 'invention', where there isn't necessarily economic utility, innovation is taken to contain economic utility within it's meaning) ...so utility is in line with innovativeness.

Then the ultimate question boils down to...what sort of questions should be asked to induce innovation?
________
Could one trigger creativity by asking series of 'right' questions?
Perhaps...if creativity is defined by the ability to connect several seemingly unrelated fields together, then asking the right question can facilitate the 'linking process'...thereby assisting to foster creativity....

I want to be an innovation expert...

New Start to a routine

Numerous times I have failed to continue my blog sites...this will be a new start.

Speaking of a new start...a friend of mine gave me a book "The Art of Start" by Guy Kawasaki. He is an entrepreneur, we graduated with doctoral degree at the same time in engineering. It has already been two years. I decided to follow my passion of learning science policy, and attended school for two more years, where he turned his graduate research project into a company, and has learned a lot of the hand-on business startup skills through tests/failures in real life.

It is always difficult to 'start' something.

Just like moving anything, the initial 'push' is tough...once something gets rolling, momentum will help. I think 'momentum' in real-life is 'routinization'. Once something becomes a routine, you can keep on doing it, and you don't feel the challenge of doing it, because it becomes a habit. Once it becomes a habit, you will have difficult time to 'stop' it. I have read somewhere that in order for an activity to 'routenize', you need to continue for 21days. I will see if I can continue to update my blog for 21days.

20 days left.