Skip to content


20

May, 2012

Idea Exploration

“It is characteristic of scientific life that it is easy when you have a problem to work on. The hard part is finding your problem.”

Freeman Dyson, from Creativity, by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi

Where do innovations come from? What is the genesis of the creativity that leads to their invention? When I first started writing about innovation I compared innovations to solutions, which themselves begin with problems. Without a problem, there is no solution, only a possibly interesting idea. However the analogy breaks down a little when we try and identify the comparable concept for innovation that problem was to solution.

One obvious starting point for innovations would be they begin with market and customer needs. Indeed many authors argue that. They would say that without those needs, there is no innovation, only a possibly interesting invention. But those authors are missing the point when it comes to creating new products and services that create and shape industries and markets.

Sir Jonathan Ive. Photo credit: Gary Cohen.

Market and customer needs serve as a starting point for a very specific kind of innovation; sustaining innovations. This is the type of innovation that keeps products on the trajectory their customers demand. Although sustaining innovations can involve the development of breakthrough technologies, they always represent a change to an existing thing, an increment of a digit in a version number. They are never the basis for new enterprises.

New enterprises are not initially driven by customer needs. They are driven by a vision. Customer and market needs are discovered in tandem with the fulfillment of the vision using a process of customer development1. The focus of this article is where and how those creative visions originate.

In a recent interview, Jonathan Ive, Apple’s Senior Vice President of Industrial Design, was asked whether Apple is trying to solve a problem when they come up with product ideas such as the iPod. He answered:

“There are different approaches – sometimes things can irritate you so you become aware of a problem, which is a very pragmatic approach and the least challenging.

What is more difficult is when you are intrigued by an opportunity. That, I think, really exercises the skills of a designer. It’s not a problem you’re aware of, nobody has articulated a need. But you start asking questions, what if we do this, combine it with that, would that be useful? This creates opportunities that could replace entire categories of device, rather than tactically responding to an individual problem. That’s the real challenge, and that’s what is exciting.”

One of the challenges in any creative activity, is finding and choosing ideas to pursue. Ive explicitly rejects obvious problems, which represent customer and market needs, as the starting point for ideas that could represent significant opportunities. Instead, he talks about exploration and about opportunities where no one has articulated any needs. more →

Posted in: Creativity , , , No comments


12

April, 2012

Inventing On Principle

Bret Victor talk at CUSEC 2012 in Montreal

Bret Victor gave a sublime talk at the Canadian University Software Engineering Conference back in January. It is so good because it works on two completely different levels. The focus of the talk is dedicating your life to fighting for a principle. And because Victor’s principle is that creators need an immediate connection to what they are creating, he demonstrates some delightfully cool tools for software development that illustrate this principle. The first couple of demonstrations relate to software that is designed to produce visual output, but at 16:45 into the video he demonstrates more abstract applications of his ideas, including binary search and an example for the development of a hardware circuit.

Victor acknowledges that fighting for a principle is not typically heard as motivation in technical fields. It is more associated with social causes. But principles can provide motivation, and guidance on issues to tackle, for people in all careers. Daniel Pink made a similar point in his book Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us, based on the research of Edward Deci and Richard Ryan. Pink defines and discusses three basic intrinsic traits that motivate people in the work they do; to be self-directed and have autonomy, to learn and grow and achieve mastery, and to feel that what we do has meaning or serves a larger purpose. Pink believes the drive for self-determination can be more powerful and effective than external rewards and punishments.

“…success, like happiness, cannot be pursued; it must ensue, and it only does so as the unintended side effect of one’s personal dedication to a cause greater than oneself.”

Viktor Frankl – Man’s Search for Meaning

The value of purpose and meaning is also underscored repeatedly in psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s book Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention, which was based on interviews with over ninety notable creative people from the Arts, Sciences, business, and politics. For example, when asked: “Of the things you have done in life, of what are you most proud”, all but one of the Nobel prize winners gave intrinsic reasons for why they were proud. Of course reasons why someone is proud may be different from their original motivations but often reasons do reflect motivations.

Perhaps most notable are some of bioligist Jonas Salk’s responses where he talks of dedicating his life to improve the lot of humanity. Victor, in his conference presentation, specifically says that what he means by principle is not this type of broad generalization. But perhaps for someone who created the first polio vaccine, thus saving the lives of countless children, such a statement can be considered a guiding principle.

As Bret Victor notes in the video below, social activists fight by organizing, but technologists can fight by inventing.


Screen capture from the presentation. Click to view the talk.

As a personal aside, one of the reasons that I migrated away from software, first towards protocols and algorithms, and then to architecture and system design, was the distance between the work that I did and my ability to see its effects and impact. Back when I first started developing real time embedded systems we needed to download compiled code into In Circuit Emulators in order to test a system. It was a time consuming and disjoint process, trying to visualize how the assembly code you saw using the ICE translated into the C Code you had written. And there was different timing using the ICE than executing the code with the processor, so there could still be latent problems remaining. These demos brought software development alive for me again and the video is well worth watching simply for them.

Posted in: Creativity , Comments Off


05

April, 2012

Integrated versus Modular Architectures

One of the issues associated with Apple over the years concerns product architecture. Apple takes a more integrated approach to product design than their competitors, being the only personal computer vendor and one of the few smart phone vendors that develop both the hardware and operating system of their products. Technology trends are towards modularity but there can be distinct advantages in hybrid architectures that include integrated pieces. In this article I’ll focus on the trade-offs between integrated and modular product architecture, and explain when and how integration benefits.

Product architecture is the specification of all of the major components of a product, the relationships or interfaces that exist between them, and the detailed definition of those interfaces. There are many dimensions along which to evaluate the quality of an architecture, depending on the type of product under consideration. Some of the earliest evaluation criteria for software architecture had to do with coupling and cohesion.

Overview of the IP Multimedia Subsystem in 3G Cellular Networks. Click to enlarge.

Good designs would minimize the coupling between components and maximize each components internal cohesion. These designs are called modular and they promote the ability to develop, change, and refine individual pieces independently. This independence shortens development time and reduces the cost of supporting and maintaining the product. These qualities led to both object-oriented programming and the layered/modular design of communications networks and protocols. Modular architectures can involve design tradeoffs to use adequate but not optimal standardized interfaces and third-party components.

The opposite of modular architectures are integrated architectures. The hallmark of integrated architectures is close coupling between elements, efficiently synthesizing and consolidating functionality. Changes to one element can often require changes to others where there can be undocumented dependencies between elements. Although this makes such architectures more difficult to develop and maintain, it can allow these architectures to achieve greater performance because all of the components can be tuned towards that goal. Modular architectures sacrifice performance for flexibility.

Pure examples of integrated or modular architectures seldom exist in real products. The rapid advancement of technology precipitates the need to quickly evolve products and minimize costs. This results in a bias towards modularity for products and services, especially those directly incorporating electronic technology. Modularity also enables platforms, and the ability for complex ecosystems to add significant value to products.

This architectural trend towards modularity is not restricted to products but also affects the whole value network of products. Product modularity leads to standardized interfaces and component specialization by different companies. Component interfaces become supplier interfaces. What a customer sees is the culmination of the labour from many different companies.

A natural evaluation criteria of an architecture is how well the architecture allows the product to meet the needs of its users. Good architectures should promote the product capabilities that its customers value. However the things customers value change over time. This leads to the intriguing thought that architectures should change over time as well in order to respond to the product’s users changing needs. more →

Posted in: Architecture , , , Comments Off


24

March, 2012

RFC 6505 – Mixer Control Package

The Mixer Control Package was published as RFC 6505 today. It is part of a cluster of documents that complete the the IETF standards for centralized multimedia conferencing over IP networks. The documents in this part of the cluster are:

  • RFC 6501: Conference Information Data Model for Centralized Conferencing
  • RFC 6502: Conference Event Package Data Format Extension for Centralized Conferencing
  • RFC 6503: Centralized Conferencing Manipulation Protocol
  • RFC 6504: Centralized Conferencing Manipulation Protocol (CCMP) Call Flow Examples
  • RFC 6505: A Mixer Control Package for the Media Control Channel Framework

The Mixer Control Package also completes the core Media Server control standards. The Mediactrl Work Group has still has a few documents outstanding. These will complete the specification of Media Resource Bokering and provide Media Control Channel Framework (CFW) Call Flow Examples. I have previously written about the history and development of Media Server control standardization.

Posted in: Standards , 1 comment


17

January, 2012

Management and Magic

Ferdinando Buscema TEDxVenezia Talk

Ferdinando Buscema compares magic and management in this TEDxVenezia talk. Although targeted towards management, much of his talk equally applies to the art of innovation, of creating technology that takes ideas from the magic realm of the imagination through to the mundane occurrence of everyday use.

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”

Arthur C. Clarke – Profiles of the Future

He begins by discussing our equivocal emotions about magic. On one hand, when we call something magic, we mean that it is obscure and ambiguous, perhaps even false and deceptive. On the other hand, we can mean that something is mysterious, enchanting, or extraordinary. He then riffs on Clarke’s equating of advanced technology and magic before revealing three secrets of magic. You’ll have to watch the talk if you want to learn them.

Buscema starts talking explicitly about management about 10 minutes into the presentation. He discusses two skills that contemporary managers need to possess. The first skill is imagination and intuition. Not surprisingly for an era characterized by change and disruption, these are qualities that promote and enable innovation in enterprises. Roger Martin, one of the top 50 business thinkers in the world, also emphasizes these qualities when he talks about the benefits of abduction rather then relying solely on purely analytical thinking. I have previously blogged about some of Martin’s work here.

The other skill modern managers need is the ability to manage meaning. Buscema is referring to the ability to weave the narratives that are necessary for leadership. We’ve all heard about doing this from from a motivational perspective. But Buscema defines this as the process of receiving signals emerging from chaos, and then interpreting and translating them into a language that is comprehensible to others. He is referring to synthesizing goals from the complexity of the world. This is remarkably similar to Roberto Verganti’s concept of design driven innovation, where the goal is to radically innovate what things mean. Verganti also uses the concept of interpreters, who from his perspective, are leaders in different cultural and technical areas that are attempting to determine how people give meaning to things in societies different evolving contexts.

As any talk about magic should, this talk delights, and I recommend you ignore the word management, focus on the magic and watch the video (in Italian with English subtitles).

Click the image to view the talk.

Posted in: Innovation , , Comments Off