Wednesday, 25 November 2015

The Marchant 3i theory of Innovation

As we face the seismic shifts arising from climate change, demographic forces and the digital revolution the key to future well being will be innovation. This is true for individuals, organisations, businesses and indeed whole countries. There are lots of theories about innovation and what is needed to create an innovative environment but I thought I would add my own fairly simple theory which I have and continue to use to guide my approach to new ideas. 

I believe that any new idea or innovation has to go through 3i stages.


STAGE 1. INVENTION

Everything that is new starts with a spark that comes from a moment of inspiration or as a result of years of hard work. I call this the invention stage and it can occur as part of a plan, such as in a university or a man in a shed,  or it can be the result of serendipity or pure chance. However, some people are naturally good at coming up with new ideas. For example, in the case of one colleague I had to restrict them to 'an idea of the week' as they seemed to have a new idea every time I saw them. Inventors need to be nurtured and encouraged but this spark is not enough for true innovation.


STAGE 2. IMPROVEMENT 

Most inventions do not emerge fully formed but need to be worked on, tweaked and improved. I fall into this category. I can't help but take an idea and try and connect it with other ideas, look for other applications where it could be used or add features or functions to improve its value. I suspect that many leaders and managers fit this mould and indeed someone senior to the inventor may see connections, applications and features that the original inventor isn't aware of. But an improved invention is still just an idea.


STAGE 3 IMPLEMENTATION

It is obvious but surprisingly often overlooked that a good idea actually needs to deployed and rolled out and that requires implementation skills. Tablet computers would have been a concept in science fiction if Apple and the like hadn't manufactured, distributed and sold actual products. Implementation requires more tenacity and endurance than the first two steps and is all too often forgotten.


So three simple steps which I can remember because they all begin with the same letter. My experience is that most people are naturally stronger in one of the three area,  as I said I'm an improver, and the key to creating an innovative environment is to connect different people with the three strengths. This can apply in all walks of life not just business; there can be innovative schools, churches and the like but I believe that they all need these three stages to actual ally lead to an implemented, improved invention. 


2 comments:

  1. Just caught up with the renaissance of "Ian's Blog" after running into Nigel the other day...

    I think there is a "prelogue" i - Insight. If you don't understand the market opportunity / niche / unmet need / customer demand you won't invent the right thing. Thats where companies need to remember that just identifying their issues and informing the world can move them along.

    There's also an epilogue i - Iteration. Most first implementations are easily bettered - so if you don't iterate yourself somebody else will do a "me too" and steal the market you've spent lots of effort cultivating.

    But obviously they would spoil the symmetry of 3.

    Jeremy

    ReplyDelete
  2. Just caught up with the renaissance of "Ian's Blog" after running into Nigel the other day...

    I think there is a "prelogue" i - Insight. If you don't understand the market opportunity / niche / unmet need / customer demand you won't invent the right thing. Thats where companies need to remember that just identifying their issues and informing the world can move them along.

    There's also an epilogue i - Iteration. Most first implementations are easily bettered - so if you don't iterate yourself somebody else will do a "me too" and steal the market you've spent lots of effort cultivating.

    But obviously they would spoil the symmetry of 3.

    Jeremy

    ReplyDelete