Category Archives: Apple

Latest Apple Innovation You Won’t See

Apple announced a new Macbook Pro with a Retina Display and an all flash architecture, but I think its most important design innovation is one you won’t see. The video below gives a good introduction to what they’ve done with the new Macbook Pro from a design perspective, but more importantly it reinforces some things we should all think about when trying to innovate:

After looking at the new tech that they packed into the design, the two most important inventions I saw that are likely to become innovations were:

  1. The asymetrical fans to reduce perceptible fan noise
  2. Expanding the unibody approach to incorporate the display

Asymetrical fans to spread out the noise signatures and make it seem quieter to the user?

Why didn’t anyone think of that sooner?

Well, I’m sure someone else did, but Apple seems to be the first one to ship it in a notebook in quantity, and if it works well I’m sure the rest of us who don’t want to spend $2,200 for a laptop will benefit as other manufacturers rush to adopt the approach.

A nice subtle pop song choice for the background too – Paradise.

Watch the video, be inpired, and be reminded that reimagining things and paying attention to detail are always key to designing insanely great products. 🙂

Happy innovating!

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Don’t Fail Fast – Learn Fast

Don't Fail Fast - Learn FastThere is a lot of chatter out there about the concept of ‘failing fast’ as a way of fostering innovation and reducing risk. Sometimes the concept of ‘failing fast’ is merged with ‘failing cheap’ to form the following refrain – ‘fail fast, fail cheap, fail often’.

Now don’t get me wrong, one of the most important things an organization can do is learn to accept failure as a real possibility in their innovation efforts, and even to plan for it by taking a portfolio approach that balances different risk profiles, time horizons, etc.

The problem that I have with all of this chatter about failing fast is that does not take into account the power of language. The language focuses people on failing instead of on the goal – learning. My friend Stefan Lindegaard has recognized this and has incorporated learning into his ‘smartfailing’ approach. But even this approach misses the mark by remaining focused on failure.

When it comes to innovation, it is not as important whether you fail fast or fail slow or whether you fail at all, but how fast you learn.

“The startups that learn the fastest win.” — Eric Ries

And make no mistake, you don’t have to fail to innovate (although there are always some obstacles along the way). With the right approach to innovation you can learn quickly from failures AND successes.

The key is to pursue your innovation efforts as a discrete set of experiments designed to learn certain things, and instrumenting each project phase in such a way that the desired learning is achieved.

The central question should always be:

“What do we hope to learn from this effort?”

When you start from this question, every project becomes a series of questions you hope to answer, and each answer moves you closer to identifying the key market insight and achieving your expected innovation. The questions you hope to answer can include technical questions, manufacturing questions, process questions, customer preference questions, questions about how to communicate the value to customers, and more. AND, the answers that push you forward can come from positive discrete outcomes OR negative discrete outcomes of the different project phases.

The ultimate goal of a ‘learning fast’ approach to innovation is to embed in your culture the ability to extract the key insights from your pursuits and the ability to quickly recognize how to modify your project plan to take advantage of unexpected learnings, and the flexibility and empowerment to make the necessary course corrections.

The faster you get at learning from unforeseen circumstances and outcomes, the faster you can turn an invention into an innovation by landing smack on what the customer finds truly valuable (and communicating the value in a compelling way). Fail to identify the key value AND a compelling way to communicate it, and you will fail to drive mass adoption.

Let’s look at a quick example of learning faster what the keys to market success are (using Apple):

Apple launched the iPod 2-3 years before they launched the Windows version of iTunes. Apple launched the Motorola ROKR two years before they launched the iPhone. The iPhone came out one year before the AppStore was launched. And finally, it took Apple only about three months to move from talking about the iPad using the tagline “Our most advanced technology in a magical and revolutionary device at an unbelievable price.” to showing people with their feet up, leaning back using the iPad. All of the solution components lists unlocked mass adoption of an Apple solution, but took Apple time to discover and learn. Do you see a trend? Even if you don’t see a trend of Apple learning faster, I’m sure you recognize the up and to the right trend in Apple’s stock price.

In contrast, Microsoft recognizing the Kin mobile phones were a flop and pulling them from the market was a great example of failing fast. The Kin however is not an example of learning fast.

So, please, please, please, don’t talk to your teams about a need to ‘fail fast, fail cheap, fail often’. Focus their energies instead on uncovering how they can instrument for learning and accelerate their ability to learn and adapt whether project phases succeed or fail.

Happy innovating!

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Innovation Quotes of the Day – June 8, 2012


“The cure for Apple is not cost-cutting. The cure for Apple is to innovate its way out of its current predicament.”

– Steve Jobs


“The biggest danger to the cause of advancing innovation when it comes to the engineering and marketing departments is that the relationship develops into one without constructive conflict and without healthy collaboration. For innovation to be repeatable in an organization these two sides must share openly, have their perspectives valued, and contribute to a conversation.”

– Braden Kelley


“Some would argue that this winnowing process is more important than the romantic phase of innovation, but I would counter that the benefits of an intense focus on developing an idea can render the innovation strong enough to be able to withstand the inevitable future assaults from the corporate bureaucracy or the marketplace. The time will come for defensive and offensive preparations, but focusing on those aspects too soon can limit the development of an idea.”

– Scott Bowden


“We sit at the nexus of amazing new education technology capabilities, the globalization of work, and an incredible transformation in the needs of employers. The path forward is not the same as the road behind, but our education system is proceeding as if it were.”

– Braden Kelley


What are some of your favorite innovation quotes?

Add one or more to the comments, listing the quote and who said it, and I’ll share the best of the submissions as future innovation quotes of the day!

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Managing Innovation is about Managing Change

Managing Innovation is about Managing ChangeInnovation is about change. Companies that successfully innovate in a repeatable fashion have one thing in common – they are good at managing change. Now, change comes from many sources, but when it comes to innovation, the main sources are incremental innovation and disruptive innovation.

The small changes from incremental innovation often come from the realm of implementation, so the organization, customers, and other stakeholders can generally adapt. However, the large changes generated by disruptive innovation, often come from the imagination, and so these leaps forward for the business often disrupt not only the market but the internal workings of the organization as well – they also require a lot of explanation.

The change injected into organizations by innovation ebbs and flows across the whole organization’s ecosystem:

Innovation is Change

Let’s explore the change categories visualized in this framework using the Apple iPod as an example:

Changes for customers – Any disruptive innovation requires a company to imagine for the customer something they can then imagine for themselves. Go too far past your customers’ ability to imagine how the new product or service solves a real problem in their lives, and your adoption will languish.

  • Customers had to try and imagine Apple as more than a computer hardware manufacturer, and begin to see them as a company to trust for reliable consumer electronics. They also had to imagine what it might mean to download music digitally (without any physical media).

Changes for employees – Disruptive innovations often require employees do things in a new way, and that can be uncomfortable, even if it is only your employees imagining what you are going to ask them to help your customers imagine.

  • Employees had to acquire lots of new knowledge and skills. Apple support employees had to learn to support a different, less-technical customer. Other employees had to learn how to effectively build partnerships in the music industry.

Pre-Order Nine Innovation Roles Group Diagnostic Tool

Changes for suppliers – Innovations that disrupt the status quo may require suppliers to work with you in new ways. Some disruptive innovations may require suppliers to make drastic changes akin to those they had to make to support just-in-time manufacturing.

  • Apple had to work with suppliers to source components at the higher volumes and shorter lead times required for success in consumer electronics. This meant finding some new suppliers who could handle the new volumes and market requirements.

Changes in distribution – Often big innovations disrupt whole distribution channels and this can cause challenges for incumbent organizations (think Compaq and big box retailers versus Dell Direct).

  • Going into consumer electronics meant that Apple had to build relationships with the big box stores including people like Target, Wal-mart, and Costco. They also had to build a completely new distribution system – iTunes – for distributing digital music.

Changes in marketing – New products and services (especially disruptive ones), can require marketing to find and build relationships with completely different types of customers and/or require marketing to speak to customers in a different way or to reach them through different channels.

  • Marketing had to begin moving the brand from computing to lifestyle, including changing the company name from ‘Apple Computer’ to ‘Apple’ in 2007.
  • Marketing also had to learn how to connect with mass market consumers, and help them imagine how this new hardware/software combination would enhance their life – no small task.

Changes in operations – In addition to changes in the supply chain, the organization may have to adapt to disruptive innovations by hiring different types of employees, re-training existing employees, accounting for revenue in a different way, or going about production in a new way.

  • The Apple iPod was an experience sell, which highlighted the fact that Apple didn’t really have a place where they could help customers experience their products. This led to the opening of Apple retail stores. Apple’s finance and operations had to adapt to the change from low volume, high price items to high volume, low price items. Apple also had to build out a resource-intensive online operation that didn’t exist before (lots of IT investment).

Push Pull RelationshipNote that the chart has arrows going in both directions, but not simultaneously. There is a push-pull relationship. At the beginning of the innovation process the satellites influence what the innovation will look like (new production capabilities, new suppliers, ideas from partners/suppliers, component innovations, new marketing methods, etc.). But as the innovation goes into final commercialization, the direction of the change becomes outwardly focused.

You can see that as an organization is imagining how to take their creative idea and transform it into a valuable innovation in the marketplace, they also should be imagining all of the changes that are going to be required and how they will implement them. This is no small feat, but with proper planning, organizational learning, and adaptation over time, any organization can improve its ability to cope with and even anticipate the change necessary to implement its next disruptive innovation.

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Can Microsoft win the Android and iPhone Haters?

Can Microsoft win the Android and iPhone Haters?Nobody, including people inside Microsoft, would argue with the fact that Microsoft beat Google and Apple to the Mobile OS marketplace, but lags them both in terms of market share.

According to Wikipedia, the IBM Simon was the world’s first smartphone and was released to the world nearly twenty years ago. This means that the smartphone market is yet another example of a market where mass adoption has lagged behind initial product introduction by 20-30 years. For the inventor audience this is important to note, because it shows that #1 – innovation takes time – and #2 – that being first is no guarantee of being number one in the market when mass adoption arrives.

Well, mass adoption in the smartphone market is now upon us.

The only question is – which operating system maker will dominate the golden years of the smartphone market?

Will it be Apple or Google?

Or do Microsoft and RIM have a change to counterattack and make themselves relevant again?

Invention does not guarantee innovation. Innovation requires that you create value above every existing alternative and that you achieve wide adoption. The reason we often see changes in the leadership of the marketplace of an emerging innovation is that often the market creator does a worse job than new entrants of adapting their solution offering for the evolving desires of the customers. New entrants generally see an opportunity to solve problems that the incumbents don’t, and an create new value that the incumbent solutions don’t deliver.

But can an incumbent react to newer entrants and rebuild momentum in the marketplace?

Motorola’s revitalization in mobile handsets shows that a competitive response focused on leadership instead of reaction can in fact get you back in the game.

So can Microsoft do the same thing and steal share from Apple and Google in the smartphone OS market?

The answer lies in whether Microsoft can do a better job than Apple or Google (or even RIM) of understanding why people hate their current smartphones, while also anticipating:

  1. What the needs of customers will be in 6-12 months
  2. What customers will want in 6-12 months
  3. What emerging technologies will make possible in 6-12 months

Timing is one of the key components to successful innovation. You can invent things at any time, but you can only turn an invention into an innovation when customers and other parts of the value chain can see the value and are ready to accept it. Whether customers and the value chain can see the value is of course dependent on how well you translate for them how a potential innovation will fit into their lives.

Can Microsoft and Nokia come up with the answers that the marketplace will accept in 6-12 months? Are their existing phones the right answer for customers now?

I don’t know. But I can tell you that I hate, absolutely hate, the Google Android operating system on my Samsung Galaxy S. The Samsung device itself seems relatively well-designed but the Google Android OS is always crashing, doesn’t make smart use of the SD Card (the internal memory is always filling up), and leaves me constantly frustrated.

I bought two Samsung Galaxy S phones on T-Mobile over two iPhones on Verizon or AT&T for my wife and I, because they will cost me $1,000 less over the two-year commitment.

I can tell you with certainty that my next smartphone when I’m eligible for an upgrade will NOT be a Google Android phone. At the same time I know people who hate their iPhones and their Blackberries as well, so this represents an opportunity for Microsoft to convert disgruntled iOS, Android and Blackberry customers. Plus, there are a still a lot of people without a smartphone that will buy one in the next 6-12 months.

These two market dynamics represent a huge opportunity for Microsoft to get back in the smartphone OS market. The only question is:

Will they take advantage of this opportunity?


Article first published as ‘An Opening for Microsoft and Nokia?’ on Technorati.

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Innovation Perspectives – Insights and Execution

Innovation Perspectives - Insights and ExecutionThis is the seventh of several ‘Innovation Perspectives’ articles we published in 2009 from multiple authors to get different perspectives on ‘What is the most dangerous current misconception in innovation?’. Now, here is my perspective:

For my money, the most dangerous misconception that leaders have is that coming up with a great idea is the key to innovation.

This is not the case. Insights and execution are the most important ingredients for creating innovation. As more industries become commodity battlegrounds, success will now be the driven by two key things:

  1. The quality of the insights a company has identified to build ideas upon
  2. The organization’s ability to turn their insight-driven ideas into reality

As innovation moves front and center in an increasing number of companies and industries, the quality of insights and execution will separate the winners from the losers.

Apple moving into the phone business should not have surprised a single handset manufacturer out there. What competitive response did handset manufacturers expect as they introduced increasingly music-capable phones?

The idea of a phone that is also a music player is not, in and of itself, a differentiated idea capable of capturing the imagination of the consumer, and so the iPhone was not created with the goal in mind of creating a digital music player that is also a phone (though that was the strategic purpose for its creation). Apple needed a strategic response to protect their digital music player market from being disrupted by the mobile phone handset manufacturers.

But, Apple also knew that to be successful in an industry that they had no experience in, mobile phones, that they needed to introduce a truly differentiated and valuable offering. To achieve that goal, they needed a unique insight to build their ideas on of what a mobile phone should aspire to be.

The insight they chose to build their mobile phone business on, was the insight that people were now ready to make their computing experience more portable, while also at the same time making it more personal. The key idea built on this insight was that of the App Store. In building their phone around this insight, they were able to create a device that not only could play music (and help to protect their digital music player market from being disrupted), but could also perform just about any other function that a user might desire (or even imagine to build).

A lesser company would have endeavored to build the world’s best music phone, but instead Apple realized that it was more important to build the world’s most personal and customizable mobile phone (that happens to play music). This is the power of building around an insight instead of an idea.

Apple realized that the contracts with AT&T and the permission to do something like the App Store, along with building an application development platform that developers could rally around, were possibly even more important than the device itself.

One of the lesser known innovation truths is that a true innovation is often more than just a single idea, but is often several ideas coming together to serve a new key insight. Apple’s insight was that computing was about to become more personal and move to the hand as part of this increasingly personal transition.

What insight will you build your business around?

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Innovating Through Downturns

Innovating Through DownturnsWhile most individuals and organizations natural reaction to an economic downturn is fear and retrenchment, they also present a time of great opportunity.

Where would Microsoft be if they hadn’t continued investing through the downturn of the early 90’s?

  • Microsoft may never have finished the hugely successful Windows 95.

Where would Apple be if they hadn’t continued investing through the technology crash of 2001-2003?

  • Apple may never have fully realized the promise of the iPod and subsequent iPhone.

  • The unemployment rate increases (more available workers)
  • Interest rates drop (lower cost of capital)
  • People become fearful of losing their jobs making it easier to recruit from companies reducing or eliminating their innovation investments (increased labor mobility)
  • People are more open to moving if a spouse’s job is eliminated or at risk (increased labor mobility)
  • When a recession arrives, it is easier to acquire tax breaks or other incentives for expansion, new sites, etc. (lower investment costs)

So, if companies have positive cash flows or significant amounts of cash on their balance sheet, or promising ideas to invest in, then there is no better time to invest. Companies with the courage and financial capability to invest in innovation through a downturn, absolutely should.

In addition to all of the other benefits, there is no better opportunity to achieve competitive separation through continued investment in innovation.

It does, however, take a strong CEO and steady board to have the courage and conviction to make such an investment. Innovation is not a perfect science and requires a tolerance for failure and a long-term commitment.

In today’s short-term Wall Street quarterly profit-driven corporate reality, investors’ short-term outlook may be the biggest impediment of all. But, smart organizations will find strategic solutions to overcome this impediment.

Organizations should take the following strategic actions to maintain or expand their innovation initiatives, despite the current global economic downturn:

  1. Secure the leadership flexibility capable of continuing to invest in innovation despite financial pressures
  2. Identify resources that you would like to have had access to during good times, that you might now have access to such as:
    • Labor in scarce specialties
    • Affordable capital
    • Scarce real estate

  3. Increase competitive monitoring to identify opportunities that may be created in areas where the competition reduces previous innovation investment
  4. Increase customer research to identify opportunities to refine your ability to deliver products and services that deliver increased customer value, ideally at lower cost
  5. Improve your innovation processes to improve your ability to innovate more quickly and effectively than your competition
  6. Improve your organizational agility to increase its flexibility to adapt to changes in market conditions caused by the downturn and to shift resources efficiently and with increased speed

Organizations that take these necessary strategic actions, will come out the other side stronger than the competition, stronger than ever before, and create opportunities to preserve or attain market leadership.

Happy innovating!

Build a Common Language of Innovation

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Personal Innovation – Star Shining Example

Personal Innovation - Star Shining ExampleI came across a queue reduction application for the iPhone and iPod Touch four years ago that was intriguing. At the time it looked like the application wasn’t quite finished or certified for use yet by Apple and Starbucks, but from what I gathered at the time it was meant to work something like this:

  1. User comes in range of a Starbucks WiFi Hotspot
  2. Application recognizes the Starbucks WiFi Hotspot or user initiates application
  3. Application engages the user interface portion of the application
  4. Application makes a connection
  5. Application prompts user to order a Starbucks beverage
  6. Application user interface facilitates the selection and transmission of the drink order (including a list of saved favorites to speed the process)
  7. Application connects to the user’s iTunes account
  8. Application deducts funds from the user’s iTunes account
  9. Application creates a visual barcode with the information necessary to register payment
  10. User places iPhone or iPod Touch with visual barcode under a reader at the pickup counter
  11. User collects their beverage

The visual barcode (semacode) and scanner portion of the system could be made unnecessary (or relegated to backup system status), by instead transmitting a payment confirmation to Starbuck’s on-site systems directly via the WiFi connection. In the backup scenario, the visual barcode would serve as an electronic receipt to show proof of payment in case the systems in the store doesn’t receive the systematic payment immediately.

Imagine the convenience of getting a block or two from your favorite Starbucks, connecting, clicking ‘The Usual’ and proceeding directly to the drink pickup counter instead of waiting in line to order and pay.

Of course there is no reason why companies like McDonald’s or Cinemark couldn’t create similar applications to eliminate some of the queueing from our lives. If people could order this easily with their phones then businesses could reduce staffing or reallocate resources from order taking and payment processing to more value-added activities like preparing food or beverage orders.

Apps like this could be extended to the Web through the introduction of a store number field or store locator mini-application or pulldown at the beginning of the application sequence. This would allow you to order out of range of the in-store WiFi over your cellular network or from your home or office internet connection.

Less time spent waiting in lines?

Oh what a beautiful world.

But, as I looked to refresh this article from 2008 and bring it to the Innovation Excellence readers I checked back and it turned out that the creator, Phil Lu, is a designer and created this as a mockup not as real app. This is a great example of shining your star and engaging in personal innovation. Just look at all of the coverage he got of his design and visioning skills for this prototype back in 2008 when I first wrote this article.

If you missed my previous personal innovation article on shining your star, it is here.

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Apple Tablet or iPhone Accessory?

There is a lot of chatter out there focusing on the possibility of a new Apple Tablet being announced at Apple’s next media event on September 9, 2009.

Will Apple launch a tablet computer?

Does it make sense for Apple to do so?

Let’s look at the current state of the market for computing devices:

  1. Many companies and individuals have recently made the switch from desktop computers to laptop computers
    • Yet, still IDC forecasts laptops like the Apple Macbook to represent only 55% of worldwide sales in 2009
  2. People are only now beginning to make the switch from dumb phones to smartphones in earnest
    • Yet in Q4 2008, only 23% of handsets sold in the USA were smartphones like the Apple iPhone (according to NPD group)
  3. Netbooks are currently the hot computing category
  4. Mobile operators in many countries charge by the device for Internet access
    • Adding an Apple Tablet would likely add $60/month to a mobile phone bill in the USA

So, given that a huge majority of individuals don’t even have a smartphone, are starting to keep their hardware longer, and may have just purchased a new laptop or netbook, does it make sense for Apple to launch a tablet or netbook computer?

I may be completely wrong, but personally I think that:

  1. Apple will not announce an Apple Tablet or Apple Netbook on September 9, 2009
    • Even if they wanted to, I don’t think they could make such a launch before January 2010 at the earliest
  2. Apple may never launch an Apple Tablet or an Apple Netbook
    • Experimentation with touch screens of various sizes could also point to a wireless iPhone and iPod Touch accessory

A Shift in How We Compute

People’s behavior is changing. As people move to smartphones like the Apple iPhone, these devices are occupying the middle space (around the neighborhood), and the mobility of laptops is shifting to the edges – around the house and around the world.

Personally, I believe that as smartphones and cloud computing evolve, these devices will become our primary computing hub and new hardware will be introduced that connects physically, wirelessly or virtually to enhance storage, computing power, screen size, input needs, output needs, etc.

– This would be thinking differently.
– This would be more than introducing a ‘me-too, but a little better’ product.
– This would be innovation.

And this would allow Apple (or someone else), by embracing this concept, to link up with pervasive, mobile, wearable computing efforts like those underway at IBM Research and elsewhere.

What will Apple really do?

What do you think?


Accelerate your change and transformation success

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.