digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at blogs.bnet.com

Is too much innovation a bad thing?

blogs.bnet.com — Innovation expert Scott Anthony in the excellent post Innovation Gone Overboard. His point: Companies often try to freshen their existing products with too much innovation; the 37th button on the remote. But their mistake is your opportunity. Automakers, for example, are...

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • olenick, on 03/26/2008, -2/+6I've discussed this on my own blog, and it's written about a lot in the book Blue Ocean Strategy. The key is to identify the key factors of a business then to eliminate, reduce, raise, or create those factors. To identify the key factors you look at an industry/offering through six lenses, called the six path framework. Nintendo enthusiastically attributes the Wii -- and it's absence of stuff people don't value much (and corresponding success) -- to Blue Ocean Strategy.
  • JackStowe, on 03/26/2008, -1/+2I don't believe it's bad... maybe what people think is a bad thing.
  • nahsrocketeer75, on 03/26/2008, -1/+13There can never be too much, but it can be misplaced.
    • GeorgeStone2, on 03/26/2008, -0/+4I agree.
      Even when something bad comes from it, it only shows people what not to do next time.
      Innovation is great. It's what makes the human race dominant.
    • fokov, on 03/26/2008, -0/+1Correct. There is good and bad. The problem is when companies get to the point of forcing the bad because they don't want to make it look like it was a best investment. If history has taught us anything, it is the fact that 99% of innovations will be failures and we need to embrace that fact. This is the single reason why all experiments in science are meant to be documented. So no one has to worry about trying out that same idea and watching it fail.
  • meruru, on 03/26/2008, -1/+3You just need to be smart about what you add to your product. Companies make the mistake of bloating their products with a new feature because 1% of their user base wants it and they end up turning off the 99% who find it useless.
  • notouch, on 03/26/2008, -3/+3A good design is when you cannot take anything off anymore.
    Or something like that. Same could apply for a lot of things. Why put in extra stuff that people don't need? Or completely replace the interface on a product that's been there for 10 years. Companies need to keep usability and familiarity in mind.
  • LaptopHeaven, on 03/26/2008, -0/+4Innovation does not equal technology. There are plenty of ways to be innovative without adding new technology to products.
  • Metasquares, on 03/26/2008, -3/+16The article states that cell phone makers are cramming more and more into the phones and that the solution is the iPhone.

    I strongly disagree. The solution is a phone that costs $10 and just makes calls.
    • tetsuwan, on 03/26/2008, -1/+4These phones exists. People don't buy them.
    • elambing, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1i think he meant that if you want all those features, then the iPhone is the best option because its easy to use. he never said it was the "solution"
  • demigod, on 03/26/2008, -0/+13This is silly. He is trying to say that too much innovation is a bad thing. It is NEVER a bad thing. Feature creep is a bad thing and that is what he is referring to. Big difference between the old brick cell phone -> iphone and the difference between a 12 button mouse -> 14 button mouse.
    • akkibaba, on 03/26/2008, -0/+2Exactly, this article is more of a criticism of terrible UI or feature creep more than anything else.
    • joep0, on 03/26/2008, -0/+1Agreed, innovation was definitely not the word he was describing, its much too broad of a term.
      This one, like most front paged digg articles, are named for people to click them, not necessarily the best description.
  • anteyekon4myst, on 03/26/2008, -2/+4Truth be told a lot of "innovation" is actually an attempt to renew a product by adding something crappy so a new version of it can be released. This is true of software, hardware and anything that is sold. Look at anything beyond 3rd generation iPods; look at men's shaving blades: they went from 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 blades and then made the thing start vibrating in different ways. Then there is an accessary market associated with each new iteration. Cases that have to be bought for cellphones, ink cartridges that wont work with an older model..etc. It's all a part of trying to keep consumers spending. That's what the Post ww2 economy has been about, keeping people spending. That's the motivation behind innovation, not good products, but ones that will keep you shelling out cash.
  • SuperDominO83, on 03/26/2008, -1/+2The submitted title is off the mark. It suggests that innovation equals complexity, but the article never says that. Should have just used the original title.
    • joep0, on 03/26/2008, -0/+1Yep, innovation got us into this mess, and innovation can get us out.
  • justananomaly, on 03/26/2008, -2/+3Innovation is a good thing if it is actually innovation, adding one extra feature among 300 existing features is not innovation, it's simply nickle and dimeing for something useless.
  • mingohills, on 03/26/2008, -1/+2Sad but true. I am not sure how the author so easily dismissed the iPhone as an exception to the rule. Apple is the king of over extending for no apparent reason, or even worse charging you extra for technology that has been around for years (AC adapters!!!!)
  • ThirdWizard, on 03/26/2008, -1/+1People throw around the term "innovation" too easily...
  • rtrypowred, on 03/26/2008, -1/+2I felt like the entire post was some sort of covert Apple evangelizing effort. Mingohills's comment above about the iPhone being an exception (which it probably is), combined with the "Word sucks, every writer I know, uses these two OSX only apps instead" sort of turned me sour to the entire article, which is a shame, because I think the author has some valid points.
  • TheHeat, on 03/26/2008, -1/+1Does anyone know of any other articles like this, or counter articles? I'm writing an argumentative synthesis paper and I wanted to discuss inventions and things of that nature. This is basically perfect, the trouble is I can't find a lot of articles like this.

    While this guy is off key, the general idea is considerable.
  • 1cor1313, on 03/26/2008, -1/+4"I just want more suck at a reasonable price."
  • DarQraven, on 03/26/2008, -1/+1While I definitely agree about feature creep, this has nothing to do with innovation.
    An innovation is something like the Prius, changing something for the better by breaking free from the traditional way and going in a different direction ... for the better.Changing something about the very definition of a product.
    Something like the iphone is not.

    It's a phone that does things that other phones do (actually less, or worse for some features), using an intuitive and simple interface + cool looks.
    A good interface is not an innovation, it's proper interface design and nothing more. The same goes for the looks of the iPhone. Sure it's beautiful, but "let's make the screen bigger and shiny" is not innovation. It's nice design.

    If I made a car that has sliding automatic doors like those found on buildings, it would be a new feature. It would not be an innovation, since they're still ordinary doors, just with a new 'interface' (proximity sensor instead of handle).
  • Sherman901, on 03/26/2008, -1/+1i wonder how one goes about becoming an 'innovation expert'?
  • linkerjpatrick, on 03/26/2008, -1/+1Innovation should be about solving problems, not creating new ones. Sometimes this involves making a product simpler as opposed to more complex.
  • brandonelliott, on 03/26/2008, -3/+0is religion innovation? because there too much of that going around.
  • bsurette, on 03/26/2008, -0/+2Link to original article: http://discussionleader.hbsp.com/anthony/2008/03/t ...
  • Wootstapler, on 03/26/2008, -0/+2Short answer : No.
  • lindstorm, on 03/26/2008, -1/+1new feature != innovation. Feature that does same as several "former features" quicker & easier CAN be an innovation, but only if it's actually found more useful than the combination of the "former features". This decision is made by the Users, and the acceptance penetration defines it.

    Then there's also a balance between doing it better and raising the level of new things to be learned to master the new product. "now with all-new (read: different) UI!" is usually not a good thing.
  • joshuair, on 03/26/2008, -0/+2I just love how EVERYTHING comes back down to the iPhone.
  • Archcoder, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1This is an ad for the iPhone.
  • gkiltz, on 03/27/2008, -0/+0No, but too much focus on the past, in the face of innovation IS a bad thing!
  • Resurfacer, on 04/10/2008, -0/+0There is no such thing as over innovation. Unsuccessful over innovation leads to innovation unless the so called innovator is a quitter. Then the innovator is really a quitter and was doomed from the start.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.