ad-free
Channel / Source:
TEDx Talks
Published: 2017-09-06
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4XvPBPs220
okay the star is off by them ask your question annoy will sound strange but I promise it will make sense by the end of the store so how many of you have been in this once in a lifetime being labeled as troublemakers or unreasonable man or woman please raise your hands okay thank you very much hold it it will make sense in a minute so ever
since our society is that are relying heavily on information communication technology and particularly digital what witness incredible overthrown across industries I think companies rising from out of nowhere to reshape and our industries and some others who were very successful at that time failing to recognize the need to change and falling spectacularly and disappear not this solution is a cyclical process it's based on fixed rules and
principles any should be fairly simple but not easy for at least those of us who work in that domain to understand the impact that a new pollution recycle will have on our companies and ultimately on ourself but yet there is rising and falling goes on and on and on so after more than eleven years spent working with hundreds of company in that precise moment of the
need to change I started asking myself why do we fail to innovate is that common pattern to successful innovation and what are the dimension of innovation typically when we talk about lack of innovation we tend to label it as lack of creativity but is that true it even better descriptive if you really consider an asset in our society and among our company despite what we might
think practically every study on education from ninety forty eight to basically yesterday give us a very precise and possibly %HESITATION different picture Chrissy needs the might not only be not rewarded but actively punished teacher since the professor out of quality such as conformity and unquestioning acceptance of authority and they tend consistently to discriminate highly crafted students labeling them as troublemakers now I'm not saying our teachers
educators professors are trying to sabotaging our society I'm saying that only normal our culture is former centered on access in terms of money power status reachable through conformity and consensus right down on unique innovation that ultimately make a life much better what happens is that the more we value that kind of success the more we are afraid most of the time terrified particularly in Italy in
Europe of failing and we are afraid of when we are afraid of failing two things happen we stopped believing it's possible and we don't even try and this obviously as an impact on our companies in our society because eighty five percent of professional over more than forty thousand professional interviewed come fast then when every Avenue a D. R. regarding that business they tend to keep to
himself not sue it'll be labeled as troublemaker or rocking the boat but maybe you know does ideas were great maybe we're not losing that much wrong again and out a study on thousand thousands of ideas on new products services and ventures W. invented by the same professional tell us that eighty seven percent of them were completely unique and work interest so we can start doing the
math if eighty seven percent of the V. D. is our unique but eighty five percent people don't speak up we can start seeing where the bottleneck of innovation might be problem doesn't seem to be a degeneration but rider ideas selection and this is fairly natural let me explain innovation is the process of correcting disruption that often requires always replies to let go an existing paradigm for
a successful he might have been in the past to embrace a new one to still have to be proven successful and obviously these race and barriers and when it's time to decided to embrace innovation particularly certain very successful companies instead of opening up the clothes and self then they relying on that existing paradigm that give us the gave up and fortune and fame in the first
place and they create consensus on consensus on it and they generate what is known to be called group think which is the worst enemy of innovation in other words confidence they tend to evaluate innovation through the lens of an existing paradigm and that's as you can all understand is a contradiction in terms let me give you two examples Hyundai is ideas selection process that went wrong
the first one regard Edwin land it was Steve Jobs one of the jobs personal hero he was an innovator he invented among got of things D. instant cameras and around the polarized filter for light that we use today in billions of product if you want he was like the great grandfather of selfie each change our culture forever with that instinct so land founded Polaroid in nineteen
forty eight you brought the company from short seven million revenues to one nine hundred and fifty million revenues in nineteen seventy eight and a dozen in six any dominated on an industry that he created for twenty eight years but then something happened they just don't happen and it was about time to let go film as the epicenter of photography to embrace digital but is that it
will be not you rely on is known paradigm to one that is brought in to be so successful so be generated consensus over it and create group think and when in nineteen eighty he was approached by a humorous Sony founder and chairman to work together on a project or for additional camera you refuse and dismissed the idea saying people will always be willing to where the
photo printed instead of opening up you try to re apply the same paradigm on a different domain try to work on anything cameras for movies which right now sons sounds you know scary Lee alike a great grandfather was not shot a physical one but that Dan was pretty country to it if you burn a six hundred million the product was a bust and unfortunately in eighty
two we was removed as CEO of the company they created by his board but even after the land was gone group think remained and five years afterwards the new CEO said film will always be the epicenter of photography and we know better because we this thing and when a young Colleen Kaski you might know it to be the later inventor of Sony PlayStation desperately tried to
piece indeed DHEA of transition in the company to his digital face the feel replied and I'm quoting I don't know if I should fire you a punch you in the nose so I'm not gonna lie to you I love this slide and read really represent that innovation most of the time isn't up yet run it's really tough this the first example he created a false negative
so a company like Polaroid or Nokia Motorola many honor that you don't recognize an opportunity but group the group think idea selection also generate false positive and this is the second example regarding these two gentlemen Steve Jobs and Jeff basis to the brightest minds of our generation or of any generation for that matter two great lateral thinkers innovators and entrepreneurs that fail spectacularly in predicting the
future of a product they define the second big thing after internet and a product so cool they would have that CD is built around it the problem was this one the Segway he was releasing two thousand one was supposed to be selling at thirty thousand pieces a month but after twenty one month or even six thousand pieces sold the company decided quite recall their product for
engineering problem so why Johnson bases despite being so brilliant got it so wrong with the Segway it turns out that there are three fundamental they mention of innovation and the only to play together the first one is with the second one is debt and the third one is Molly with regards lateral thinking and I'll broad and diverse our minds that can get when approaching facts problem
or an opportunity how different we might think right and this is not just philosophy Albert Einstein discover relativity not by running experiment that would never attend to before but by re reading and re running existing experience %HESITATION experiment with a different mindset he was thinking ofthe imagining of chasing to be polite and the good news is we don't need to be Albert Einstein to great be
great lateral thinkers it turns out that we can ignites our ability trigger our ability to innovate and two lateral thinking by doing concrete things like emerging ourself in different domains like living abroad for a few years or even better by nurturing our love for art and early songs too cool to be true but another study on every noble prize winner for science from nineteen oh one
to two thousand five showed clearly that the biggest and basically only difference between does great accomplish science this who won the Nobel Prize in those never did was not the knowledge of the domain but wasn't there how active they wore in art so I'm telling you if you're a scientist and a magician or some sort of performer rocking the stage yet twenty two times more chances
to win in the low price and the same result were shown when every great enterpreneurs Silicon Valley was a sense aren't really seem to be at the beginning of lateral thinking and innovation but the enterpreneurs the scientists and and Einstein tell us the story also on the second day mission which is decked out well you know your domain meaning in order to make the most out
of your lateral thinking you better be sure that you know what you're trying to innovate otherwise you will get it wrong and this was probably the main problem with job and bays us regarding the same way that my being and be great enterpreneurs a lateral thinker bedecked and they didn't know enough about the domain to were trying to innovate which was traveling transportation third dimension perhaps
the most important of them all volume the amount of action that we take towards innovation now we all know the day as a trade off between quantity and quality that in order to achieve extreme quality will need to quit fooling around and focus on that one thing again and again and again still accomplishment perfection right wrong when it comes about ideas innovation quantity is the only
predictable patterns words quality Thomas said is that in order to create a handful of innovation that should change a life forever E. filed two thousand three hundred and thirty two patents were wide and more than nineteen hundred a U. S. alone including this the creepiest talking doll ever conceived and likely for Mister ed is on order for anyone of us history doesn't judge you for your
failure a four year low the judge for your highest and I'm not just saying belief you know goes on and on and on look at land five under thirty three still the second in in history of U. S. for two great inventions and what I'm saying is not that innovation if the number game so the more you try it the more chances you have it to
get it right one but that is exist a positive correlation between the quantity of your action and the average quality of your output in other words you will reach your highest quality in the period in which you are more active if you want to know that that point on the left is Wagner and he pulled it off %HESITATION because of propaganda and regime that's pretty obvious
and this is so important because when you were terrified of filler as you were saying Basil you kill innovation and this is so perverse if you don't try this no chance in hell you can get two great results why am I telling you this and why now because right now the next thing we said before evolution is cyclical and %HESITATION dissolutions especially and down we are
on the verge of a new change of a new paradigm and this is going to reshape what we know about digital is going to be %HESITATION renaissance much more closer to what he was his original promises internet and digital will cease to be a centralized game for few and will become a much much more distributed participated and interpret Arial game for anyone who wants to join
this is going to need is cold blockchain and I you see we don't have time to go into details but I'll be please if you wanna if you wanna reach out please do but what I want to tell you is that right now we read me in this moment on we really have an opportunity to make a mark towards a better word knots work just for
wealth before prosperity for a bigger good a greater good and now like never before our ability of you know they and to innovate will draw the line between those rising does fall and only need to do is to debunk some dysfunctional belief the first one being that innovation it's not struck a genius process it's something that you can trigger nurture and make part of your culture
and even share and look there are thousands of thousand thousand the way in which this can be done and thousands of program classes books but likely they all rely on few very simple values and principles question the default emerges self in different domains find new paradigm in point of view welcome criticism because it's only through criticism and radical collaboration that we can kill group think for
the companies don't hire basin cultural fit you will you will listen to you will you will hear it so much from now on like cultural fit higher basin cultural contribution because reputation might make a perfect process but he never makes new and most of all try stuff try stuff and tries that you know I've I've talked about it design thinking earlier on and in this presentation
I've baked few principle of them and the most important principle of design thinker as designers the don't think the way forward a bill the way forward and they failed the way forward in other words if you don't act doesn't matter how good you get it in the first place snow chance which you can reach anything and I know it's tough I know it's going to be
an opera run and that's why I want to share the conclusion one of the triggers that really helped me make the decision and it does goes back on the unreasonable man or women that I ask before and is from George Bernard Shaw he says that the reasonable man is the one that adapts himself to the world and get a reasonable man is the one that persist
