Does An Idea Have Value?
A similar question was recently posed in an online discussion. Some people answered this question quickly by saying that ideas are worth absolutely nothing until someone puts money down on the table for them. I wholeheartedly disagree. Value is not just about dollars and cents. Value can be about potential – for change, innovation, meaning, emotion, function, or design. Even in the context of business, these elements, especially in today’s economy are the keys to business success. It’s the businesses that understand that, the ones that have the intuition and sense to see and believe in that potential, that will be the ones that move on to create the future in business world.
In Daniel Pink’s book, A Whole New Mind, he states his theory that right brainers will rule the future in business. Pink argues that outsourcing (finding manufacturing overseas for cheaper production) and automation and computerization (replacing the information based knowledge workers) are forcing the Information Age to give way to a new Conceptual Age that values creativity, innovation and inventiveness. Ironically, it’s those intangible things like ideas that cannot be replicated or automated, that will give a business its greatest value.
Every business starts with an idea. It can be an epiphany that wakes you up in the middle of the night. It can be inspired by something you see or hear. It can be born from a desire to try to do something better than how it’s been done before, or to invent something that never existed before. But how do you know when an idea is just an idea or when that spark is something that has potential to be big and worth turning it into a business? Oftentimes, that’s where the strength of the conceptual side of the brain kicks in. Studies, focus groups, and market research can play a role, but if an idea is so innovative that there’s nothing to compare it to, then research results may not reflect an idea’s full potential for success. Likewise, if a business relies too heavily on consumer input, especially with a highly innovative idea, the results may be the same. Consumers know what they have seen before. They are not innovators, they are consumers.
In the early 1970’s Xerox created the Alto, considered by many to be the first PC for desktop use. Unfortunately for Xerox, they lacked the vision to see the full potential and the ability to innovate quickly enough to bring it to market.
They were left in the dust when in 1979 Apple Computer’s Steve Jobs visited Xerox and was said to have taken inspiration from their innovation and in turn incorporated similar technologies into the MacIntosh. So when answering the question of the value of an idea, just ask yourself what that idea was worth to Apple. The rest is history.
Brent Raymond
wrote on December 22, 2009 at 10:10 am
Hi Cheryl,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts, I enjoyed reading your blog as it briefly touched upon ideas within the innovation process. There are several examples and perhaps several novels that could be filled with details on how Corporations and Small Businesses have failed to act upon intellectual property, idea generation and implementation.
I guess it comes down to a personal belief either through experience or exposure, but I do not believe that ideas have any monetary value alone. If value is derived by novelty, uniqueness and ability to commercialize any said product or design, then one could most certainly argue that they are worthless. This may sound harsh but it is a statement with foundation and no lack of evidence.
Innovation = Invention/Uniqueness/Commercialization x Diffusion of Technology
I for one would like to see a more stringent means to weight and value ideas that carry a reward and recognition program similar to Innocentive. It would be ideal to see a few CEO’s held responsible by their Board for failure to capitalize on Invention. It would be great to see the USPTO enlist a Peer to peer patent review system that compensates the party engaged in the review and providing details of prior art. I like to believe that Open Innovation is more than a Starbucks Blog where members freely give ideas away and are not recognized or compensated. It would be nice to see Obama’s Call for Innovation program actually enable the 1% of permanent innovators to be repeatable in efforts, rather than fuel the engines of late who simply acquire others technologies only to cannibalize product offerings.
The world is in no short supply of ideas. We are in short supply of any Corporations who adhere to Generative Science Principles which could lead to a sustainable future. There is alot of talk, little action – and those who are beating the war drum seem to be the least believable in philosophy and corporate policy.
If you want to see an idea succeed, it has to be tied into hidden assets that already exist – which will provide immediate ROI, create jobs and make things better than what they were, consider this the ‘greater good’ approach to ideation. Gunter Pauli literally wrote the book on how to do this, while viewed as a Rogue by some; others feel he is a maven ahead of his time. So too is the problem with good ideas, those who create them typically suffer from the curse of knowledge and lack of support to make it happen.
Cheryl Andonian aka Momblebee
wrote on December 22, 2009 at 10:31 am
Brent,
Although I don’t agree with all you are saying, your last statement that “those who create (good ideas) typically suffer from the curse of knowledge and lack of support to make it happen” hits it on the head. Support of innovation and ideas within a business structure can come in many different forms. But it has to be part of the culture of an organization that those who generate ideas are respected, heard, and dare I say, given power within a company to make decisions and implement ideas into action. Thanks for adding your thoughts.
- Cheryl
Michael Gury
wrote on January 14, 2010 at 10:11 am
This discussion reminds me of all the great ideas that bounced around among various potential investors and companies and finally germinated. IBM was offered the patent license for “xerography”, meaning copying one piece of paper to another. In its infinite wisdom it turned it down, then, when that sort of thing was useful to businesses, ended up licensing the technology from Xerox and producing some fairly good products but then selling the whole shebang when it was no longer profitable. In the meantime, IBM collected its own patents via its researchers and technologists, some of which went on to be successes, although the majority are obscure though interesting scientific discoveries.
Cheryl Andonian aka Momblebee
wrote on January 14, 2010 at 10:49 am
Michael,
Most large corporations are too structured, too compartmentalized and overly concerned about focus group results and let market analysis dictate product direction rather than to let true creativity and innovation to ignite, catch fire and spread. Apple is one of a few exceptions there. There was a great documentary on the other night on CNBC about Mac and their own “corporate culture.” Pretty interesting show…here’s a link to info about it: http://www.cnbc.com/id/34419153
Thanks for stopping by.
Cheryl
Douglas Hoff
wrote on February 6, 2010 at 10:24 am
Cheryl,
I think the best understanding of value that I learned was from ITIL where they took value from economics and tried to apply it to business in real terms. The idea or innovation there would be seen as an asset which is just one of many pieces of making a service/product. That’s why people keep saying that it takes action because value comes from the total.
And even then, value is really in the eyes of the customer. An innovative ice cream glove isn’t worth anything and you mention being too innovative. That’s just not addressing the needs of the market.
You also mention focusing on innovation and then failing. That’s because of the lack of strength in the other assets of the service. We (me at least and I sold Apples) never heard about Xerox/PARC until Apple told us.
You’ve got a nice exporation of the idea within the value of a product. I’m writing about value also right now and enjoyed seeing your perspective.
Cheryl Andonian aka Momblebee
wrote on February 6, 2010 at 11:43 am
Hi Doug,
Thanks for stopping by and adding your thoughts.
Cheryl