Jugaad Innovation is an innovation subspecialty focused on designing inventions that are intentionally frugal and flexible in order to be more accessible to the entire world. As a result, a lot of jugaad innovation occurs in the developing world. Some of these inventions become innovations and spread from the developing world to the developed world.
I came across a story recently highlighting the potential healthcare jugaad innovation of 17-year-old Dasia Taylor of Iowa, who found that beets provide the perfect dye for her invention of sutures that change color when a surgical wound becomes infected (from bright red to dark purple).
The 17-year-old student at Iowa City West High School in Iowa City, Iowa, began working on the project in October 2019, after her chemistry teacher shared information about state-wide science fairs with the class. As she developed her sutures, she nabbed awards at several regional science fairs, before advancing to the national stage. This January, Taylor was named one of 40 finalists in the Regeneron Science Talent Search, the country’s oldest and most prestigious science and math competition for high school seniors.
There is still commercialization work to do (more testing, clinical trials, etc.), but the approach shows promise and is far cheaper than high-tech sutures that require a smartphone to sense changes in electrical resistance as an indicator of infection.
Congratulations Dasia!
The great thing about this jugaad innovation approach is that not only could it be a practical solution for developing countries, but national health services and insurance companies are always looking for effective but inexpensive solutions as well.
Good luck with the rest of your research, and keep innovating!
Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.
Intuition is incredibly important to human-centered design from the standpoint that an “intuitive” design taps into our shared understanding as humans of how things should operate.
Intuition is the secret sauce of the quantum human computer, and as the pace of change AND complexity both accelerate, we must change our brain function to develop not just our intellectual capabilities but our instinctual capabilities as well.
Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman wrote about these two ways of thinking in his book Thinking, Fast and Slow. Let’s look at a short video looking at intuition, science and dreams:
Science Intuition and Dreams – Dean Radin
Dreams can be an incredibly powerful tool for innovation, in fact the Nine Innovation Roles that play an important role in the best-selling book Stoking Your Innovation Bonfire came to me in a dream. Many experts recommend that you keep a pen and a notebook next to your bed to capture these flashes of brilliance.
Dreams and shared understanding are but two manifestations of intuition, of our interconnectedness with each other and energies greater than ourselves. But how do we leverage our intuition for innovation?
One way is to use your innovation as an input to use with a tool like The Experiment Canvas™:
Which is available as a free tool here on my web site from the forthcoming Disruptive Innovation Toolkit™.
You can use it to craft a hypothesis based on your intuition that you want to test, it keeps you focused on what you hope to learn during the experiment, and to consider the setup, operation, and wrapup of your experiment – among other things.
Too often people ignore their intuition because it doesn’t seem scientific. But, turning intuitive insights into hypotheses to test will help you overcome your hesitancy until you train your intuition and to learn to trust it as the potential human quantum computer that it could be. The other reason that people ignore their intuition is that well, they just can’t hear it. For many people, their intellectual mind is so busy that they can’t receive and react to what their intuitive mind is telling them.
Here is an interesting video that highlights these two points and how humans communicate behind the scenes:
Are you drowning out your intuitive mind? Are you failing to consider what is saying, and to test its assertions?
If so, please stop it, and learn new ways to keep innovating!
SPECIAL BONUS:
If you’d like to watch and learn even more about intuition…
Here is a video on Nikola Tesla and the Power of Intuition:
Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.
Motivating teams is a critical aspect of driving innovation within organizations. Research has shown that motivated teams are not only more productive but also more likely to generate innovative ideas and solutions. The science of motivation explores various factors that influence team members’ engagement, enthusiasm, and intrinsic drive to excel. By understanding and applying these principles, leaders can effectively energize their teams and foster a culture of innovation. Let us examine two case study examples that illuminate the power of motivation in driving innovation.
Case Study 1: Google’s 20% Time
Google, the tech giant renowned for its innovative products and services, instituted a program called “20% Time” that empowered employees to spend 20% of their work time on self-directed projects unrelated to their assigned responsibilities. This initiative gave team members autonomy and intrinsic motivation to pursue their passions and explore new ideas. As a result, several groundbreaking innovations, such as Gmail and Google News, were born during this designated time. The 20% Time program showcased that when individuals are motivated by personal interest and given the freedom to experiment, it can lead to remarkable results and spur innovation within the organization.
Key Takeaway: Allowing team members to pursue self-directed projects fosters motivation, creativity, and innovation.
Case Study 2: Netflix’s “Freedom and Responsibility” Culture
Netflix, the global streaming giant, has built a reputation for disruptive innovation and original content. Their unique “Freedom and Responsibility” culture empowers employees by decentralizing decision-making and promoting individual ownership. By avoiding strict top-down rules and encouraging freedom, Netflix effectively taps into intrinsic motivation within their teams. Individuals are motivated to take responsibility for their work, think outside the box, and take risks without fear of failure. This culture has enabled Netflix to pioneer numerous game-changing services, such as personalized recommendations and binge-watching, driving continual innovation in a highly competitive industry.
Key Takeaway: Cultivating a culture of freedom and responsibility empowers individuals to think creatively and take ownership, fueling innovation.
The above case studies illustrate the power of motivation and its impact on team innovation. Leaders seeking to energize their teams can apply several effective strategies, such as the following:
1. Foster Autonomy: Provide team members with the freedom to explore personal interests and self-directed projects, unleashing their intrinsic motivation and encouraging innovation.
2. Encourage Risk-Taking: Create a safe environment where employees feel encouraged to take calculated risks and learn from failures. This mindset promotes creativity and engages individuals in pushing boundaries.
3. Recognize and Reward Achievement: Acknowledge and celebrate team members’ accomplishments, reinforcing their motivation and inspiring them to excel further. Recognition creates a positive feedback loop that sustains motivation and innovation.
4. Align Goals with Purpose: Connect team members’ work to a broader purpose by communicating the impact of their contributions. When individuals understand the significance of their work, they are more motivated to innovate and drive positive change.
Conclusion
Motivation is a vital catalyst for driving innovation within teams and organizations. By understanding the science behind motivation and implementing effective strategies, leaders can energize their teams, foster creativity, and inspire a culture of continuous innovation. By learning from the successes of companies like Google and Netflix, organizations can create environments that empower individuals, leading to breakthrough ideas and sustained growth.
Bottom line: Futurology is not fortune telling. Futurists use a scientific approach to create their deliverables, but a methodology and tools like those in FutureHacking™ can empower anyone to engage in futurology themselves.
Image credit: Unsplash
Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.
First principles thinking is an important tool for innovation. It is a mental model that helps innovators understand the fundamental concepts underlying a problem, and apply that understanding to create new solutions. This approach to problem-solving is gaining traction in the business world and is seen as an important way to drive innovation.
First principles thinking involves breaking down a problem into its basic building blocks, then analyzing each of these components to develop a new solution. This process of breaking down a problem into its core components helps innovators identify the key elements of the issue and think about potential solutions in a more creative way.
1. Address the Root Cause
The key benefit of first principles thinking is that it helps innovators get to the root of the problem, rather than simply treating the symptoms. By understanding the underlying structure of the issue, innovators can better understand the implications of the problem and develop effective solutions.
2. See Beyond the Obvious
First principles thinking also allows innovators to look beyond what is known and consider new possibilities. By focusing on the core principles of the problem, innovators can think about potential solutions that have never been tried before. This can lead to breakthroughs that would have otherwise been impossible.
3. Develop More Sustainable Ideas
Finally, first principles thinking helps innovators develop ideas that are more sustainable. By understanding the underlying principles of the problem, innovators can develop solutions that are more likely to stand the test of time and remain relevant in the future.
Overall, first principles thinking is an important tool for innovation. It helps innovators break down problems into their basic building blocks, understand the underlying structure of the problem, and develop creative solutions. By applying this approach to problem-solving, innovators can develop new, sustainable ideas that can help drive the future of business.
Image credit: Pexels
Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.
Is it really possible to travel back in time? What about traveling into the future, have we finally figured out how to do that? Well, you’ll have to read on to find out…
But before we explore whether someone has finally figured out how to successfully time travel and recruit you to join me in investing in their pre-IPO startup, I’d like to introduce one of the most important visualizations from the world of innovation that many of your have probably never seen – Neri Oxman’s Krebs Cycle of Creativity from January 2016.
If you’re not familiar with this incredibly important visual artifact from the work of Neri Oxman from MIT’s Media Lab, you should be because it does an amazing job of capturing the interplay between Art, Science, Engineering and Design in the creation of innovation. It builds on John Maeda’s Bermuda Quadrilateral from 2006:
And Rich Gold’s Matrix, also from 2006:
While Rich Gold’s visualization builds on the logical bones of John Maeda’s Bermuda Quadrilateral and introduces the concepts of speculative design, speculative engineering, and the contrast between moving minds & moving molecules, it lacks the depth of Neri Oxman’s Krebs Cycle of Creativity visualization. But the Krebs Cycle of Creativity does lose Maeda’s expression of the linkages between science & exploration, engineering & invention, design & communication, and art & expression. But even without these assertions of Maeda, the Krebs Cycle of Creativity still captures a number of other powerful tensions and assertions that can benefit us in our pursuit of innovation.
Time Marches On
The Krebs Cycle of Creativity can be viewed from a number of different perspectives and utilized in a number of different ways. But, one way to look at it is as if it were a watch face. In this context as time moves forward you’re following the typical path, a technology-led innovation approach.
Using the Krebs Cycle of Creativity Canvas in a clockwise direction will help us explore:
What information do we have about what might be possible?
What knowledge needs to be obtained?
What utility does the invention create?
What behavior do we need to modify to encourage adoption?
It begins with the invention of a new piece of technology created by the usage of existing information and a new perception of what might be possible within the constraints of our understanding of the natural world, or even by expanding our understanding and knowledge of the natural world using the scientific method.
You’ll see at 3 o’clock in the image above that it at this point in time that most organizations then hand off this new knowledge to their engineers to look at this new understanding of nature through the production lens in order to convert this new knowledge into new utility.
Engineers in most organizations are adept at finding a useful application for a new scientific discovery, and in many organizations this work is done before designers get a peek and begin to imagine how they can present this utility to users in a way that drives behaviors of adoption in a way that the behaviors of using the product or consuming the service feel as natural as possible and as frictionless as possible.
And unfortunately the artists in any organization (or outside via agency relationships) are called in at the eleventh hour to help shape perceptions and to communicate the philosophy behind the solution and the to make the case for it to occupy space in our collective culture.
Pausing at the Innovation Intersection
The way that innovation occurs in many organizations is that Science and Engineering collaborate to investigate and confirm feasibility, then Engineering and Design collaborate to inject viability into the equation, and then Design and Art (with elements of marketing and advertising) collaborate to create Desirability at the end. This may be how it works in many organizations, yet it doesn’t mean that it is the best way…
Traveling Back in Time
But as we all know, water can run uphill, the moon can eclipse the sun, and yes time can run in reverse. Viewing the Krebs Cycle of Creativity in a counter clockwise direction and pushing the hands of the watch backwards will have you following a user-led innovation approach instead.
Using the Krebs Cycle of Creativity Canvas in a counter clockwise direction will help us explore:
What information do we have about what is needed?
What behavior should we observe?
What would create utility for customers?
What knowledge must we obtain to realize our solution vision?
It begins with the identification of a new insight uncovered by the investigation of existing information and a new perception of what might be needed within the constraints of our understanding of our customers, or even by expanding our understanding and knowledge of our customers by using ethnography, observation, behavioral science and other tools to enter the mind of your customers, employees or partners.
You’ll see at 9 o’clock in the image above that it at this point in time that user-driven organizations after having their business artists use their perception skills to investigate the culture and philosophy underpinning this new understanding of behavior and pass it off for their designers to look at through the production lens in order to convert it into new utility.
Designers in many organizations are adept at finding a useful application for a new behavioral understanding, and in user-driven organizations this work is done before engineers get a peek and begin to imagine how they can build this utility for users in a way that creates new knowledge in a way that will differentiate the products or services of their organization from those of the competition.
And in user-driven organizations scientists are called in as needed to help overcome any barriers engineers encounter in realizing the solution that best satisfies the users’ identified needs, while leveraging new scientific perceptions that help shape our understanding of nature and empower new philosophical beliefs about what’s possible.
Conclusion
While we haven’t torn any worm holes through the fabric of the space-time continuum with this article, hopefully we have expanded your repertoire with some new tools to facilitate conscious choices around whether you are going to pursue technology-led innovation (clockwise) or user-led innovation (counter clockwise).
Hopefully we have also shown you a better way of visualizing where you are in your innovation journey and where the turning points in your innovation pursuits lie as you seek to take a quantum leap and transform your past into a bright, shiny future.
So now it is time to answer the question you had at the beginning of this article… Is time travel possible?
Well, nearly a decade ago NASA ran an experiment that proved elements of Einstein’s theory of relativity, specifically that the fabric of space-time warps around the earth in response to gravity. Read about it here
And yes, time travel is theoretically possible, or at least time is not theoretically constant as described in this NASA article.
Neither of these indicate that it is possible to travel backwards in time (despite what Superman physics says), only to affect how time advances, but if anyone wants to invest a million dollars in my time travel startup, I’ll cash your check. Because who knows, maybe your check is what will finally make time travel possible!
Every year, unforeseen events shape our lives—from pandemics to technological disruptions. It’s therefore no surprise that organizations of all types, ranging from governments to businesses, increasingly recognize the need to stay one step ahead of the curve. Futures research play a critical role in this process, blending the art of strategic scenario planning and the science of data-driven trend analysis to build a more resilient tomorrow.
At its core, futures research is a method of studying and anticipating change to better equip decision-makers to cope with, and capitalize on, opportunities and challenges of the future. It uses a blend of qualitative and quantitative research to consider both the immediate situation and a variety of potential scenarios, examining all elements that might affect this future, from socio-economic trends to proper investments. Most importantly, it is a way to proactively prepare for the inevitable changes that lay ahead, allowing organizations to make decisions with the greater context in mind.
Case Study 1 – Local Government
Take, for example, the Ontario Drinks Initiative (ODI), recently undertaken by the Ontario provincial government. ODI was established as a response to the explosive growth of hard seltzers and craft beers in the alcoholic beverage industry. The provincial government sought to understand not only current customer preferences and market figures but also the evolving trends in consumer demand that could shape the future of the sector. Futures research, in turn, allowed the government to more accurately predict the potential response to its proposed policies, providing insights on both the short-term actions and long-term investments needed to capitalize upon the industry’s transformation.
Case Study 2 – Healthcare Industry
A separate example can be seen in the healthcare industry, where a merger of hospital networks in the Midwest had become a major political issue. The medical staff, business leaders, and government officials had different opinions on the proposed merger, but they realized that the only way to make an informed decision was with the help of a more comprehensive and future-oriented analysis. Through futures research, the stakeholders managed to better understand potential long-term implications, economic impacts, and regulatory aspects in addition to more immediate pros and cons. In the end, this more nuanced research allowed for decision-makers to make a more informed and strategic decision.
Conclusion
Ultimately, futures research can be a powerful tool for any organization that is looking to stay ahead of the curve and stay ahead of the competition. By blending the art of qualitative scenarios with the science of quantitative data analysis, it can equip decision-makers with the greater context and insight they need to make more informed strategic decisions that can lead to long-term success.
Bottom line: Futurology is not fortune telling. Futurists use a scientific approach to create their deliverables, but a methodology and tools like those in FutureHacking™ can empower anyone to engage in futurology themselves.
Image credit: Pexels
Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.
I came across an IndieGogo project that is focused on building and trialing a gravity-powered power station that can serve either as a lantern or as a flexible power source that can be used to power a task light, recharge batteries, or potentially other things that users might dream up that the designers can’t yet imagine.
Check out their video from IndieGogo:
They have already raised FIVE TIMES the money they set out to raise on IndieGogo.
I found it interesting in their promotional video that initially they started with a design challenge of designing a system that would charge a light for indoor use using a solar panel, but that they decided to abandon the approach specified from the outset and pursue alternate power sources.
Also interesting from the IndieGogo project page are the following facts:
The World Bank estimates that, as a result, 780 million women and children inhale smoke which is equivalent to smoking 2 packets of cigarettes every day. 60% of adult, female lung-cancer victims in developing nations are non-smokers. The fumes also cause eye infections and cataracts, but burning kerosene is also more immediately dangerous: 2.5 million people a year, in India alone, suffer severe burns from overturned kerosene lamps. Burning Kerosene also comes with a financial burden: kerosene for lighting ALONE can consume 10 to 20% of a household’s income. This burden traps people in a permanent state of subsistence living, buying cupfuls of fuel for their daily needs, as and when they can.
The burning of Kerosene for lighting also produces 244 million tonnes of Carbon Dioxide annually.
So, what do you think, a meaningful innovation or an interesting but impractical invention?
More information available on their web site here.
Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.
I had the opportunity to attend the Front End of Innovation a couple of years ago in Boston and of the three days of sessions, I have to say that unlike most people, my favorite session was that of Dr. Clotaire Rapaille. The author of “The Culture Code: An Ingenious Way to Understand Why People Around the World Live and Buy as They Do”, Dr. Rapaille extolled the crowd with his thoughts on ‘codes’ and ‘imprints’.
For me this particular session was the one that most synchronized with how I view the front end of innovation. For me, the front end has nothing to do with ideas or managing ideas, but instead is all about uncovering the key insights to build your ideation on top of.
Now, there are lots of insights that you can build your ideation on top of to create potentially innovative ideas. Consumer insights is one of the building blocks and the one that Clotaire Rapaille has built his empire on. Dr. Rapaille’s core premise is that there is a ‘code’ for each product and service that drives its purchase and adoption. That ‘code’ in turn is driven by the ‘imprints’ that people make when they first understand what something is for the first time and the sensations and feelings they associate with it.
For example, kids don’t grow up drinking coffee, but they grow up smelling coffee from a very young age, most often in the home. So, most of us imprint coffee to the home and our mothers and have a stronger feeling about the smell of coffee than the taste. What does this mean for coffee sellers? Well, instead of focusing on the taste to drive sales (the logical response), they are more likely to have success by focusing on the smell and on creating images that make the product feel like home.
Taking the concept of ‘codes’ and ‘imprints’ further, Dr. Rapaille spoke about how he doesn’t trust what people say, and so he instead focuses on what people do. If you look back at the coffee example, our logical brain would tell us to prefer the coffee that tastes the best, but the reptilian brain will prefer the coffee that smells the best because of the strength of the imprinting. And according to Dr. Rapaille, the reptilian brain always wins.
To make his point, Dr. Rapaille talked about how we remember our dreams – because the cortex arrives late for work. Translation? Our logical brains (cortex) arrive after a decision has already been made by the reptilian brain or the emotional brain and so the logical brain gets put to work justifying the reptilian or emotional brain’s decision with logical reasons. How else would you explain the purchase of a Hummer after all?
Sounds easy right? Well, it gets more complicated as culture gets involved. For example, another of Rapaille’s examples that was not shared at the event is how in the United States the code for a Jeep is ‘horse’ and so the headlights should be round instead of square because horses have round eyes, but in France the code for Jeep is ‘freedom’ because of the strength of WWII liberation imprints – meaning that the marketing strategy for Jeep in France is completely different than in the United States.
Because imprints happen in general at a very young age and given the reach of Dr. Rapaille’s work, you can see very quickly why so many organizations are marketing to children, even for products that are for adults – seemingly as a way to make sure that ‘imprints’ are made so that there is consumer demand to draw on in the future. Or is that conspiracy theory at work?
Dr. Rapaille at the Front End of Innovation also spoke about how when it comes to technology, people want to be amazed, people want the technology to be magical, and to use his favorite phrase – people want to say “wow!” For wow to happen in technology according to Dr. Rapaille, we must strive for simplicity – one magical step with no cables.
Meanwhile, in our organizations we must try and identify what our organization’s ‘code’ is and better leverage multi-disciplinary, multi-cultural teams to drive creativity, while also being careful not to change the code of the organization so much that people don’t recognize it, or trust in it. And finally to use one of Dr. Rapaille’s many generalizations, Americans love to try things (they learn that way), and they love the impossible, so don’t be afraid to ask them to do it.
When I distill all of what he had to say and what he has had to say other places, for me it boils down to one key insight about the limitations of innovation methodologies like:
Customer-led innovation
Needs-based innovation
Jobs-to-be-done
This insight is that the reason that asking customers what they want is problematic is because of the inconsistencies between imprints and intellect, between the reptilian brain and the logical brain, and between knowing and doing. Taken together this ties in nicely with something I have believed for a while now…
When it comes to driving adoption, it matters less what you say and more what you can get others to do. As marketers we are far too focused on trying to get people to ‘tell a friend’. We should be more focused on getting people to ‘show a friend’.
So, what is your code for successful innovation?
What do you want others to show?
Please think about it and let me know what you come up with in the comments.
For those of you who want to know more, check out this embedded via from PBS’ “The Persuaders” with Douglas Rushkoff:
Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.
The conversation sprung out of a tweet I posted that postulated that when people use technology (iPads, smartphones, laptops, etc.) and television as child minders, that they are actually promoting linear thinking in their children at the expense of the lateral thinking that our society so desperately needs. We need strong lateral thinking to compliment the dominant linear thinking out there, so that together they can drive the social innovation the world needs to fix this mess we’ve made.
What do you think?
Technology as child minder, positive or negative effects on the innovative capacity of our children?
One of my proof points is this article from The Washington Post.
Any other proof points out there?
Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.
Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.
I had the opportunity to attend the 
The outcome of a back and forth of a dialog on Twitter with Scramray E. Pinkus generated a lovely quote worth sharing: