Are doctors wasting their time on entrepreneurship?

Are doctors wasting their time on entrepreneurship?

GUEST POST from Arlen Meyers

Medical students, residents and practitioners around the world are getting more and more interested in entrepreneurship for many reasons. With that, some are questioning the wisdom of doctors bothering themselves with “the business of medicine” , innovation and entrepreneurship given how difficult it is for most doctors to maintain state of the art medical skills, cope with a constantly challenging regulatory environment and keep up with the explosion of medical knowledge. One fundamental question that challenges every doctor is how to reconcile the ethics of medicine with the ethics of business where they practice.

The idea that we are living in an entrepreneurial age, experiencing rapid disruptive technological innovation on a scale amounting to a new “industrial revolution” is a pervasive modern myth. Scholars have written academic papers extolling the coming of the “entrepreneurial economy”. Policymakers and investors have pumped massive amounts of funding into start-up ecosystems and innovation. Business schools, universities and schools have moved entrepreneurship into their core curricula.

The only problem is that the West’s golden entrepreneurial and innovation age is behind it. Since the 1980s entrepreneurship, innovation and, more generally, business dynamics, have been steadily declining—particularly so in the US. As economist Tyler Cowen has found: “These days Americans are less likely to switch jobs, less likely to move around the country, and, on a given day, less likely to go outside the house at all […] the economy is more ossified, more controlled, and growing at lower rates.”

For all the entrepreneurship cheerleading of the last 15 years, the Great Recession accelerated an already alarming decline in new business formation in this country. In the United States, our rates of entrepreneurship have been declining for decades, and those new firms that have been created are employing fewer and fewer people. Meanwhile, techno-oligopolies continue to increase.

After remaining remarkably consistent for decades, the number of new businesses launched in the United States peaked in 2006 and then began a precipitous decline – a decline accelerated by the Great Recession. From 2002 to 2006, the economy produced an average of 524,000 new employer firms each year. Since 2009, however, the number of new business launched annually has dropped to about 400,000, meaning the United States currently faces a startup deficit of 100,000 new firms every year – and a million missing startups since 2009.

COVID has had a significant impact on entrepreneurship. Here is another take on the effect of COVID on entrepreneurship. But, entrepreneurship by necessity has its dark side.

Research suggests that over the past two decades, the number of high-value startups has declined, sparking significant debate over what’s causing the drop, how to fix it, and whether or not it’s a problem that needs fixing. Here are six reasons why that might be true:

  • Theory 1: Entrepreneurs are motivated more by the lifestyle than by viable business ideas
  • Theory 2: Tougher regulation is hurting high-growth companies
  • Theory 3: Big businesses have changed the way they operate
  • Theory 4: Entrepreneurs lack the right training
  • Theory 5: The gig economy is affecting would-be entrepreneurs’ experience
  • Theory 6: The problem is a measurement issue

Here is the tale of the tape:

  • In 1980, 15% of all U.S. firms had been created the year before. In 2011, that share had been halved, according to census data.
  • In 1997, for the first time in this country’s history, more Americans worked at companies with 250 or more employees. The gap has steadily grown since, aside from a notable blip in the early 2000s. The biggest single percentage increase was between 2007 and 2008, as the Great Recession took hold.
  • Three-quarters of U.S. incorporations that we do have issue no payroll, mostly for the self-employed.
  • Though our outsized venture capital market means we have a high share of iconic, rocket-ship growth companies, the United States is lagging other rich country peers in the crucial middle category: new, growing, innovative companies trying to bring efficiencies to industries that may last.

Part of the problem derives from some misconceptions and differences in our interpretations of physician entrepreneurship:

  1. Each doctor has his or her definition of physician entrepreneurship, value and innovation
  2. Physician entrepreneurs play many different roles creating user defined value
  3. Those roles depend on whether they are medical practice entrepreneurs, social entrepreneurs, technopreneurs, intrapreneurs, educational entrepreneurs, physician service providers or investors
  4. Innovation ecosystems vary from one domain e.g. digital health to another, like biopharma
  5. There are vast international cultural, social and political systems differences that help or hinder physician entrepreneurship.
  6. Rules drive ecosystems. Rules variation around the world often reflects the values of a given citizenry at a given point in time. While health system problems are universal (cost, access, quality, changing demographics, supply, demand, equity), the solutions vary tremendously.
  7. Creating value and wealth is but one step. Sharing the wealth that results, justice and equity are separate issues that can either raise the overall standard of a health system in a given country or drive another wedge between the haves and have nots. It also determines how physician entrepreneurs are perceived as either ruthless, greedy profiteers or instruments of social justice and improvement.
  8. The gaps between how younger generations and older rulers see the world are widening (e.g China and somewhat reflected by Sanders supporters in the US elections) The “dream” constantly evolves from financial security to higher levels of needs like democracy, international connectedness and security and a better life for families and children.
  9. Regardless of which way physicians choose to pursue entrepreneurship, it takes teamwork and the involvement of many different participants with varying skill sets. Each contributes something different.
  10. Biomedical entrepreneurship is a marathon relay race. As such, any team is only as strong as its weakest link.
  11. Few health professionals have an entrepreneurial mindset, in large part because of how they are chosen and the lack of bioentrepreneurial education and training in their programs.
  12. Politics, ego and greed get in the way of substantive change in the US sickcare system of systems.

Judging by the headlines on their LinkedIn profile, more and more MD/DOs are innovators, entrepreneurs and non-clinical consultants. Many are starting or working with biomedical and clinical startups, including a group of medical school graduates who don’t do a residency. But:

  1. They are not trained to do so
  2. Entrepreneurship in the US has been in a downward spiral in the US for the past 40 years.
  3. Most startups will fail
  4. Most startups don’t have money to pay people
  5. There is an innovation bubble.
  6. Job security is low
  7. You have to deal with people who have entrepreneurial psychopathologies are simply untrustworthy.
  8. Students loan burdens are rising
  9. Many are not in it for the long run
  10. There are unrealistic expectations on both the consultant/employee and employer side.
  11. Most MD/MBA programs should be terminated
  12. Innovation theater is pervasive.

If you thought getting a side gig or pursuing a non-clinical career was Plan B but now realize the grass really isn’t that much greener, maybe it’s time for Plan C.

The underlying assumption behind creating incentives for early involvement of physicians in entrepreneurship is that it will improve outcomes and company success. However, we lack the data that validates that assumption.

Doctors are wasting their time typing into EMRs, complying with administrivia, being on hold to get prior authorization, and answering unnecessary phone calls from patients that could be avoided with proper engagement and education. If anything, they are not spending enough time creating user defined value through the deployment of innovation.

At its core, though, we need to change the rules about measuring quality, clearing products, paying to things, providing equitable access and insurance coverage, and eliminating waste and administrivia cost, and narrowing inequitable value sharing. Otherwise, we are just parading shiny new objects.

We need to fix sickcare USA before we decide how or whether we change how we fund it. Otherwise, we will be just wasting more and more money.

We need to do a better job of measuring the input, output and impact of physician entrepreneurship including not just creating new companies, but interventions in medical practice entrepreneurship, social entrepreneurship, intrapreneurship, edupreneurship and other non-commercial roles as well.

International biomedical entrepreneurship will continue to grow With that, however, will be more challenges to use the results to make patients, systems and societies better. By doing good, physician entrepreneurs can do well, but there are formidable headwinds preventing them from doing so. Unless we have evidence to the contrary, the null hypothesis is physician entrepreneurship is a waste and , in retrospect, just sounded like a good idea at the time. I hope the results prove me wrong.

Image credit: Pixabay

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

The Adoption of Robotics and Automation in Healthcare Industry

The Adoption of Robotics and Automation in Healthcare Industry

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In recent years, the healthcare industry has seen a rapid increase in the adoption of robotics and automation technologies. These advanced technologies have the potential to revolutionize the way healthcare services are delivered, offering improved efficiency, accuracy, and patient outcomes. From surgical robots to automated medication dispensing systems, the possibilities for robotics and automation in healthcare are vast and exciting.

One prominent example of the adoption of robotics in healthcare is the da Vinci Surgical System. This cutting-edge robotic surgery system has been used in thousands of procedures worldwide, offering surgeons enhanced precision and control during minimally invasive surgeries. Studies have shown that surgeries performed using the da Vinci system result in faster recovery times, reduced pain, and improved outcomes for patients. This technology has not only improved patient care but has also revolutionized the way surgeons approach complex procedures.

Automated Medication Dispensing Systems

Another example of the adoption of automation in healthcare is the use of automated medication dispensing systems in hospitals and pharmacies. These systems use robotics to accurately dispense medications to patients, reducing the risk of medication errors and improving overall patient safety. By automating the medication dispensing process, healthcare facilities can streamline operations, reduce costs, and ensure that patients receive the correct medications in a timely manner.

The adoption of robotics and automation in healthcare is not without challenges. Healthcare providers must navigate regulatory hurdles, address concerns about job displacement, and ensure that new technologies are integrated seamlessly into existing workflows. However, the potential benefits of these technologies are too great to ignore. By embracing robotics and automation, healthcare providers can improve patient outcomes, enhance efficiency, and revolutionize the delivery of healthcare services.

Conclusion

The adoption of robotics and automation in the healthcare industry holds great promise for the future of patient care. From surgical robots to automated medication dispensing systems, these technologies have the power to transform the way healthcare services are delivered. By learning from successful case studies such as the da Vinci Surgical System and automated medication dispensing systems, healthcare providers can harness the potential of robotics and automation to improve outcomes and enhance patient care. The future of healthcare is bright, and robotics and automation are leading the way.

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: Pixabay

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

Digital Transformation Roadmap

An Actionable Guide to Planning and Executing Your Transformation Strategy

Digital Transformation Roadmap

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In today’s rapidly evolving digital landscape, businesses are faced with the critical challenge of adapting to the demands of a digital economy. The key to successful digital transformation lies in developing a comprehensive roadmap that outlines a clear strategy for leveraging technology to drive business growth and innovation.

Creating a digital transformation roadmap requires a strategic approach that encompasses a thorough assessment of organizational goals, current capabilities, and technology infrastructure. By developing a roadmap that is both comprehensive and actionable, businesses can effectively navigate the complexities of digital transformation and achieve sustainable success in the digital age.

Case Study Example 1: Coca-Cola

One of the most iconic brands in the world, Coca-Cola has successfully embraced digital transformation to drive business growth and enhance customer engagement. By focusing on leveraging technology to create personalized experiences for customers, Coca-Cola has been able to stay ahead of the competition and maintain its leadership position in the market.

To support its digital transformation efforts, Coca-Cola developed a comprehensive roadmap that included investing in cutting-edge technologies, such as AI and machine learning, to better understand customer preferences and deliver targeted marketing campaigns. By leveraging data analytics and automation tools, Coca-Cola has been able to streamline its operations and improve efficiency, while also enhancing the overall customer experience.

Case Study Example 2: Amazon

As one of the world’s largest e-commerce companies, Amazon has set the standard for digital transformation in the retail industry. By continuously innovating and adapting to changing consumer preferences, Amazon has been able to stay at the forefront of digital innovation and drive significant growth in its business.

Amazon’s digital transformation roadmap is centered around leveraging technology to enhance the customer experience and drive operational efficiency. By investing in cloud computing, data analytics, and artificial intelligence, Amazon has been able to streamline its operations, optimize its supply chain, and deliver personalized recommendations to customers. As a result, Amazon has been able to create a seamless shopping experience that has helped to drive customer loyalty and increase sales.

Conclusion

Digital transformation is a complex and challenging process that requires careful planning and execution. By developing a comprehensive roadmap that outlines a clear strategy for leveraging technology to drive business growth and innovation, businesses can effectively navigate the complexities of digital transformation and achieve sustainable success in the digital age. By following the examples set by companies like Coca-Cola and Amazon, businesses can learn valuable insights on how to successfully plan and execute their digital transformation strategy.

SPECIAL BONUS: The very best change planners use a visual, collaborative approach to create their deliverables. A methodology and tools like those in Change Planning Toolkit™ can empower anyone to become great change planners themselves.

Image credit: Pexels

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

Fast Company is Wrong

Star

Starbucks the Real Winner in Amazon Go Collaboration

Recently Starbucks announced a collaboration with Amazon Go on a New York City store that combines Starbucks Pickup concept with Amazon’s Go concept.

A Fast Company article titled Starbucks and Amazon team up on their first store, but I can’t see what’s in it for Starbucks tries to assert that the collaboration is ridiculously titled in favor of Amazon Go.

I respectfully disagree.

Customer Experience Learning Delivers Starbucks More Learning Than Amazon Go

Lost on Fast Company’s Mark Wilson is the incredible value to Starbucks to not only learn about Amazon’s Go technology, but more importantly to observe how their customer experience is impacted by the introduction of the Amazon Go fortress gates and related surveillance technology.

Starbucks can gather incredibly valuable customer insights from the answers to these and other questions:

  1. How does dwell time in the concept store compare to other New York City traditional Starbucks locations nearby?
  2. How is purchase size per customer visit impacted?
  3. Is there an uptick in grab ‘n’ go purchases versus Starbucks’ own grab ‘n’ go items?
  4. How do customers feel about the presence of the Amazon Go security gates and all of its necessary surveillance cameras?
  5. How does the composition of the customer experience in the Amazon Go concept test location affect visit frequency?
  6. How does the composition of the customer experience in the Amazon Go concept test location affect brand perception?
  7. How does the composition of the customer experience in the Amazon Go concept test location affect customer loyalty?

There is more to ongoing success in business than the quest for hyper-efficiency or profit above all else. Creating a valued and differentiated customer experience matters. In the same way products can become commoditized, services, and even experiences can be commoditized to.

Continuous Experimentation is Worth the Investment

Continuous experimentation is just as important for customer experience design as it is for mature product design and service design practices. Companies like Chick-fil-A, Kaiser Permanente, and OSF HealthCare have invested in facilities to prototype and test potential alterations in their service and experience delivery. I’ve had the opportunity to visit all three of these facilities in person and the privilege of advising one of these three organizations. It is harder to conduct experience experiments, but not impossible – and incredibly important.

It is because of the greater challenge of prototyping experiences and gathering accurate feedback that Starbucks stands to gain more from this collaboration with Amazon Go. And while Starbucks could easily replace Amazon Go with a competitor, Amazon isn’t likely to start their own global chain of coffee houses.

If you haven’t already come across this article, this article by Larissa Gomes is worth a read:

Amazon Go has competition: Meet 6 other automated stores transforming retail

Not mentioned in the article is startup Standard Cognition:

Final thought: You may also notice in the picture at the top of the article – if you look closely – the last minute technology investment I highlighted in my last Starbucks article.

Keep innovating!

Image credits: Starbucks

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

Design Thinking and Change Planning

How to Combine Forces for Innovation

Design Thinking and Change Planning: How to Combine Forces for Innovation

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In today’s rapidly evolving landscape, organizations face the dual challenge of staying competitive and adapting to change. Design thinking and change planning are powerful tools that, when combined, can drive innovation, foster creativity, and lead to transformative outcomes. In this article, we explore how these two methodologies can work in harmony to create a culture of innovation.

1. Understanding Design Thinking

What is Design Thinking?

Design thinking is a human-centered approach to problem-solving. It emphasizes empathy, collaboration, and iterative processes. Here are the key stages of design thinking:

  1. Empathize: Understand the needs, pain points, and aspirations of your users or stakeholders.
  2. Define: Clearly define the problem you aim to solve.
  3. Ideate: Generate creative solutions through brainstorming and ideation sessions.
  4. Prototype: Build low-fidelity prototypes to test and refine ideas.
  5. Test: Gather feedback from users and iterate based on insights.

The Guardian: A Design Thinking Success Story

The Guardian, a renowned newspaper and publishing group, leveraged design thinking to transform its funding model, boost revenue, and engage emotionally with readers1. By empathizing with their audience, they identified pain points and creatively addressed them. The result? A sustainable business model and a deeper connection with readers.

2. Integrating Change Planning

What is Change Planning?

Change planning involves systematically preparing an organization for transitions. It ensures that people, processes, and systems adapt smoothly to new realities. Here are the essential steps:

  1. Assess the Landscape: Understand the context, identify stakeholders, and assess readiness for change.
  2. Create a Vision: Define the desired future state and communicate it effectively.
  3. Plan and Execute: Develop a detailed roadmap, allocate resources, and execute the plan.
  4. Monitor and Adjust: Continuously evaluate progress, make necessary adjustments, and celebrate wins.

Tackling the Opioid Crisis: A Dual Approach

The Lummi Tribal clinic faced the opioid crisis head-on using both design thinking and change planning. They empathized with patients, staff, and the community to understand the complexities. Simultaneously, they planned for system-wide changes, including better protocols, training, and community outreach. The result? A holistic approach that saved lives and improved overall well-being1.

3. Synergy in Action

When design thinking and change planning converge, magic happens:

  1. User-Centric Innovation: Design thinking ensures solutions resonate with users, while change planning ensures smooth implementation.
  2. Iterative Adaptation: Design thinking’s iterative nature aligns with change planning’s continuous improvement mindset.
  3. Culture Transformation: Together, they foster a culture of innovation, agility, and resilience.

The Value of Braden Kelley’s Change Planning Toolkit™

To supercharge this synergy, consider integrating Braden Kelley’s Change Planning Toolkit™. This toolkit provides a comprehensive set of frameworks, worksheets, and tools designed to accelerate change efforts. Here’s why it’s invaluable:

  • Beat the 70% Failure Rate: The toolkit equips you to navigate change successfully, minimizing the risk of failure.
  • Visualize, Plan, and Execute: Use the toolkit to create visual roadmaps, ensuring alignment across teams.
  • On-Time Delivery: Deliver projects and change efforts promptly with the toolkit’s practical resources.
  • Human-Centered Approach: Like design thinking, the toolkit prioritizes people, fostering engagement and adoption.

The Change Planning Toolkit™ Basic License grants you access to 26 essential tools, including the Change Planning Canvas™1For more extensive options, explore the Individual Bronze License or the Commercial License (Annual)2. Remember, innovation isn’t a solo endeavor—it’s a symphony of empathy, strategy, and execution. Let’s play our part in this transformative orchestra.

In conclusion, organizations that embrace both design thinking and change planning position themselves for sustained success. By combining forces, they create a dynamic ecosystem where creativity thrives, problems are solved, and innovation becomes a way of life.

Remember, innovation isn’t a solo endeavor—it’s a symphony of empathy, strategy, and execution. Let’s play our part in this transformative orchestra.

Note: The case studies mentioned here are illustrative. Organizations should tailor their approach based on their unique context and challenges.


References:

  1. The Guardian: Benefits of Design Thinking
  2. Tackling the Opioid Crisis at the Human and Systems Levels

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: Pixabay

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

Creating a Culture of Innovation

Strategies for fostering a culture that encourages innovation and empowers employees to embrace industry shifts

Creating a Culture of Innovation

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In today’s fast-paced business environment, the ability to innovate and adapt to change has become more essential than ever. Companies that cultivate a culture of innovation are better equipped to respond to market shifts, stay ahead of competitors, and drive growth. However, creating and sustaining such a culture is no easy feat. It requires a strategic approach, strong leadership, and a commitment to empowering employees to think outside the box and pursue new ideas.

Case Study 1: Google

One company that exemplifies a culture of innovation is Google. From its inception, Google has been known for its commitment to experimentation and its willingness to take risks. The company’s famous “20% time” policy allows employees to spend up to one-fifth of their workday on projects of their choosing, fostering creativity and giving employees the freedom to pursue innovative ideas. This policy has led to the development of some of Google’s most successful products, including Gmail and Google News. By empowering employees to explore their passions and experiment with new concepts, Google has created a culture that values innovation and encourages employees to constantly push the boundaries of what is possible.

Case Study 2: Pixar

Another example of a company that has successfully fostered a culture of innovation is Pixar. The animation studio is renowned for its commitment to creativity and its focus on collaboration. One of Pixar’s key strategies for promoting innovation is its “Braintrust” meetings, where the company’s top creative minds come together to provide feedback and critique on each other’s projects. This collaborative approach ensures that ideas are constantly refined and improved, leading to the creation of some of the most successful animated films in history. By creating a culture that values open communication, feedback, and collaboration, Pixar has built a workplace where employees feel empowered to take risks, think creatively, and push the boundaries of storytelling.

So, how can companies create a culture of innovation like Google and Pixar? Here are a few strategies to consider:

1. Encourage experimentation: Give employees the freedom to explore new ideas and try out innovative concepts. Create spaces for brainstorming and collaboration, and provide resources for employees to pursue their passion projects.

2. Foster a culture of feedback: Encourage open communication and constructive criticism among team members. Create opportunities for employees to share their ideas, receive input from others, and refine their work.

3. Lead by example: Demonstrate a commitment to innovation and experimentation at all levels of the organization. Encourage leaders to take risks, embrace failure as a learning opportunity, and support employees in their creative pursuits.

By implementing these strategies and cultivating a culture that values innovation, companies can empower employees to embrace industry shifts, drive growth, and stay ahead of the competition. In today’s rapidly changing business landscape, a culture of innovation is not just a nice-to-have – it’s a necessity for long-term success.

SPECIAL BONUS: The very best change planners use a visual, collaborative approach to create their deliverables. A methodology and tools like those in Change Planning Toolkit™ can empower anyone to become great change planners themselves.

Image credit: Pixabay

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

Bringing History to Life

Augmented Reality in Museums and Cultural Institutions

Bringing History to Life: Augmented Reality in Museums and Cultural Institutions

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In today’s fast-paced digital age, museums and cultural institutions are increasingly turning to new technologies to enhance the visitor experience and bring history to life. One such technology that has been gaining popularity in recent years is augmented reality (AR). By overlaying digital information on the physical world, AR has the potential to revolutionize the way we interact with and learn from the past.

One of the key advantages of using AR in museums and cultural institutions is its ability to provide a more interactive and immersive experience for visitors. Rather than simply reading about historical artifacts or events, visitors can use AR to see and interact with them in a more dynamic and engaging way. This not only enhances the educational value of the experience but also helps to make history more relatable and relevant to modern audiences.

Case Study 1: Smithsonian Museum

One notable example of a cultural institution successfully implementing AR technology is the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C. The museum recently launched a new AR app that allows visitors to explore virtual exhibits and learn more about the animals and artifacts on display. By using their smartphones or tablets, visitors can access additional information, videos, and interactive displays that complement the physical exhibits in the museum. This has helped to attract a new generation of visitors and make the museum’s collections more accessible and engaging to all.

Case Study 2: British Museum

Another case study that highlights the potential of AR in cultural institutions is the British Museum in London. The museum has embraced AR technology to create interactive experiences that bring ancient artifacts to life. For example, visitors can use the museum’s AR app to see how a mummy would have looked in ancient Egypt or explore a virtual reconstruction of the Parthenon in ancient Greece. By combining historical accuracy with cutting-edge technology, the British Museum has been able to engage visitors of all ages and backgrounds in a way that traditional exhibits alone cannot.

Special Bonus

Braden Kelley once shared with me a fantastic example of using artificial intelligence to enhance the museum experience where a museum created a virtual Salvador Dali using hundreds or thousands of hours of video footage. Here is a video about the project:

Conclusion

Augmented reality has the power to transform the way we experience and learn from history in museums and cultural institutions. By providing a more interactive and immersive experience, AR can help to make history more engaging, relevant, and accessible to audiences of all kinds. As technology continues to evolve, we can expect to see even more innovative uses of AR in the cultural sector, further blurring the lines between the past and the present.

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: Pixabay

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

An Example of Successful Alchemy

Successful Alchemy

GUEST POST from John Bessant

At the age of eighteen Johann Friedrich Bottger was blessed with a strong pair of legs. Which came in handy for his chosen profession — that of alchemy. Earning a living by attracting sponsors to support you in your quest to transmute base metals into gold was not without its risks. Chief amongst which was the anger of disappointed patrons who might run you out of town, or worse, hunt you down, fling you in jail and throw away the key.

Which is why, in 1704, young Johann was running as fast as his legs could carry him, heading south east along the banks of the river Elbe, away from some very angry Berlin sponsors and towards the city of Dresden. Hoping to find at least some peace and quiet and possibly a new patron.

His wish was granted but not quite on the terms he’d have hoped for. He was taken into ‘protective custody’ by Augustus the Strong, Elector of Saxony, King of Poland and — as the name suggests — not someone to trifle with. He was confined to a laboratory under instructions to produce gold in order to help pay for Augustus’s expensive lifestyle; something of a challenge since, like many of his contemporary alchemists, Johann wasn’t making much progress in that direction.

Augustus the StrongThe world of innovation is full of the names of famous partnerships — Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard, Sergey Brin and Larry Page to name but a few. But Bottger and von Tschirnhaus isn’t a combination which springs easily to the lips or off the tongue. Yet it was this unlikely partnership which managed the impossible — between them they were able to transmute base material into weisses Gold — white gold.

Ehrenfried Walter von Tschirnhaus was a much older man, a chemist in the town of Meissen who had worked all his life to try and improve glass making. But as a sideline he was interested in ceramics and in particular with trying to work out how to make porcelain. He heard of Johann’s plight and saw an opportunity; he persuaded Augustus to assign Johann to work with him in the quest and in 1705 Bottger, still under guard, was moved to Meissen to work with Tschirnhaus.

Why would he do that? Mainly because he understood that Augustus had an obsession with porcelain. So much so that in order to add to his collection he “presented” 600 cavalrymen from his army to the Prussian king, Frederick William I in spring 1717; in exchange he received 151 Chinese porcelain vessels. This wasn’t a foolish obsession; at that time porcelain was prized highly amongst the aristocracy. Pale, thin, translucent, its delicate texture worked into wonderful and complex shapes. But above all it was rare. The only supplies came from China via the Silk Road and merchants were able to charge extraordinary prices for this strange exotic oriental material. They embellished the legends surrounding the stuff — that it all came from one mysterious location, Jingdezhen, in the centre of China and specifically from a hill which housed the mine from which porcelain emerged as if by magic.

Chinese PorcelainTruth was the merchants didn’t know much about it and neither did the Chinese who supplied them. Marco Polo’s best guess at its origins? ‘The dishes are made of a crumbly earth or clay which is dug as though from a mine and stacked in huge mounds and then left for thirty or forty years exposed to wind, rain, and sun …by this time the earth is so refined that dishes made of it are of an azure tint with a very brilliant sheen.” The assumption that this was somehow magical can be seen in an account from 1550 suggested that “porcelain is …… made of a certain juice which coalesces underground…”

Its origins didn’t matter; its rarity meant it was immensely valuable. So if anyone could find a way to make porcelain they would also make their fortune. An interesting business proposition which convinced Augustus to allow Bottger, under von Tschirnhaus’s supervision, to start work. Theirs was not an overnight success and their work was interrupted for a year when the Swedes occupied Saxony in 1706 and Bottger was moved to a distant fortress for safe keeping. And their progress wasn’t a matter of luck or sudden flashes of inspiration. It was about turning fragments of knowledge wrapped up in superstition and half-truths into something reproduceable, codifiable and manageable. It was a kind of transmutation — but of ideas, not metals.

They kept at the project, bringing a discipline to their experiments and painstakingly recording the successes (few) and the failures (many) on the way to synthesising this material. Tschirnhaus died on October 11th 1708 from dysentery but he had the opportunity to see his life’s work come to fruition; that year they found a reliable and practical formula and developed a manufacturing process to convert handfuls of earth into white gold.

By 1709 Bottger’s laboratories in the Albrechtsburg fortress in Meissen began producing batches of porcelain and the first pieces went on sale at the Leipzig Easter Fair in 1710. Augustus finished building a royal porcelain factory in Meissen in June the same year and the operation was transferred there. The first products were red (there are examples still around, now known as Bottger stoneware) but soon Bottger’s continued experimentation enabled him (in 1713) to make a pale white version and then to use different coloured glazes to enable the creation of beautiful and functional china wares.

Which is where another important piece of the puzzle comes in; rather than develop production on a large scale to make porcelain a commodity product Bottger (with Augustus’s backing and the profits from early sales) began to add design into the mix. He commissioned artists to create a range of exquisite artefacts exploiting the potential of the new material and opening up a wealthy market niche to continue to fund his development work. Meissen porcelain figures were used to decorate the drawing rooms of great houses, sculptures took pride of place in entrance halls and even the more mundane business of eating and drinking became a pleasure when using beautifully crafted plates, cups, pots and jugs. What Bottger did was essentially create what we would call ‘experience innovation’ today.

Porcelain Figures

European porcelain had arrived — and just in time to catch another wave of change which fuelled its popularity and kept it a very profitable industry. In the early 18th century the growing middle classes discovered the attraction of exotic drinks — tea, coffee and chocolate and their popularity swept across the continent. It wasn’t just the drinks themselves, it was the social experience which surrounded them. But it also drove a practical revolution in both drawing rooms and later coffee shops. A premium priced drink needs a suitable vessel from which to drink it — not just a simple cup. And the trouble with using gold or silver or expensive metal cups is very practical — they get hot and burn your lips. That’s where fine china, exemplified by the thin translucent porcelain — comes into its own. The perfect material from which to construct cups, pots, milk jugs and all the other accoutrements of the tea or coffee service.

Pretty soon everyone wanted one. Just like today when the advanced and expensive features in a vehicle begin with the luxury product targeted at the wealthy customer and then trickle down down to the mainstream mass market, so porcelain moved from a luxury item to one consumed on a far bigger scale. Helped along by the growing industrialisation of its manufacture and the strong scientific underpinning to those factories.

Porcelain Dishes

Open innovation isn’t a new phenomenon — innovation has always been about knowledge flows. Taking ideas from one source and adapting and redeploying them is a key feature of the way the game plays out. Bottger and Tschirnhaus themselves borrowed plenty of ideas from their Chinese counterparts; their knowledge base around porcelain was partly constructed of whatever they could find out about how the Chinese did it. ‘Reverse engineering’ existing successful products to learn is still a valuable approach today. Much of the success of South Korean companies like LG and Samsung can be traced back to the middle of the 20th century where they built on the principles of a strategy they called ‘copy and develop’. Importantly for them — as for our two German chemists — it’s not enough to imitate. The secret to long-term success is to use what knowledge you might acquire from someone else as a way of beginning a journey towards the frontier.

But whilst it is good to draw on knowledge from other people open innovation raises the risk that your own hard-won knowledge leaks out. Despite taking precautions to protect their intellectual property the potential value of porcelain in the market place spawned many attempts to steal the ideas. It helped that the company’s R&D facility was located inside a castle — the Albrechstburg — with high physical walls to prevent things leaking out, but even these walls could be breached.

In today’s terms we’d talk perhaps of a rather weak ‘appropriability regime’ — it was hard to keep the lid on what was going on. Samuel Stöltzel was a senior arcanist at Meissen, one of the few who understood the secrets (the ‘arcana’) of making the hard porcelain for which the company had become famous. But (for a suitably high price) he was persuaded to sell these to a competing venture which, in 1717, started to produce porcelain in Vienna. By 1760 there were over thirty porcelain factories in Europe.

Knowledge movement of this kind isn’t always a bad thing at the level of an industry because it multiplies the amount of knowledge exploration. Others took the increasingly available ideas and added and improved on them. Not least a young chemist working in the British town of Plymouth, a thoughtful Quaker named William Cookworthy. One of the core secrets in porcelain was the use of kaolin (also known as china clay) in the mix. He broke down the production ratio and also demonstrated that the clay pits in Cornwall were rich in this material, helping establish the UK as a major player in the growing ceramics industry. It wasn’t long before big names like Wedgwood and Spode began producing their own versions of porcelain artefacts and exporting them around the world.

Crossed SwordsFaced with the challenge of increasing imitation Augustus’s team set about differentiating themselves in other ways. They built a brand, building on the relationships they had already made and the values they and their product stood for — purity, exquisite design, high quality at a premium price. To make sure they got the message across they employed a trade mark — the crossed swords of the Meissen brand which can still be found on their ware today, three hundred years on.

Innovation lessons

What does this story tell us about innovation? Perhaps the most significant lesson is that success isn’t a matter of luck. There wasn’t a single ‘Eureka!’ moment but rather a long systematic search. Unlike the mystic dream of turning base metal into gold this industry was founded on the growing scientific premise that it would be possible to make porcelain and do so under controlled conditions, learning to repeat the trick and codifying the knowledge to do so. In many ways Bottger and Tschirnhaus’s’s work laid the foundations for the systematic industrial research and development which grew to underpin the great chemical industries of Europe — in dyestuffs, fertilisers, soap, pharmaceuticals and explosives.

Patient money helps and having a wealthy benefactor isn’t a bad start for any entrepreneurial venture. But the growth of Meissen porcelain wasn’t simply a case of pouring in money. The continuous investment of time and resources wasn’t blind faith; it was based on a recognition of the potential market opportunity. There was a demand pull for the luxury item which porcelain represented, but in order to feed this the company needed to grow their niche. And a key part of that was design — not simply providing functional domestic ware but creating works of art which reinforced the perception of something precious to be desired and treasured.

Building a business out of an idea and moving to scale needs a system — inside there are many pieces of the jigsaw puzzle to be put in place. As well as commissioning designers to imagine the products the Meissen team also had to continue their hard work on process technology to be able to manufacture them. All the different stages like moulding, shaping, painting, glazing, firing needed to move from manual operations to controlled and systematic processes. Beyond that there were challenges in scaling around procuring raw materials of the right quality, and downstream development of sales and distribution networks.

Was it worth it? For Bottger it was a way of surviving although he spent most of his time under house arrest. Augustus finally granted him his freedom in 1714 and he was able to spend the final years of his life enjoying the sense of achievement that came from having (at least partially) fulfilled the alchemist’s dream of transmuting base material into gold. He helped create an industry which continues to produce beautiful artefacts for widespread use around the world. And one which has grown in value; the ceramic tableware market size is expected to reach USD 3.09 billion by 2022.

Not bad for an athletic runaway from Berlin.

You can find a podcast version of this story here

If you enjoyed this you can find more at my website here

Image credits: Pexels, Wikipedia

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

IoT is Connecting Devices and Driving Innovation

IoT is Connecting Devices and Driving Innovation

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In the era of unprecedented connectivity, the Internet of Things (IoT) is at the forefront, transforming industries, cities, and lives. By seamlessly connecting devices and systems, IoT is creating an intelligent network that produces data-driven efficiency and innovation. Today, we explore how IoT is reshaping our world and delve into some stellar case studies that highlight its transformative potential.

Understanding IoT

IoT is a network of interconnected devices that communicate and exchange data seamlessly. From smart homes to industrial automation, IoT solutions leverage sensors, software, and other technology to collect and transmit data, enabling real-time analytics and insights. By tightening the feedback loop between data collection and decision-making, IoT empowers businesses and individuals to innovate more effectively.

Case Study 1: Smart Farming Revolution

Company: AgriTech Innovators

One of the most compelling applications of IoT is in agriculture, where it is driving a smart farming revolution. AgriTech Innovators, a leader in IoT-enabled agriculture solutions, has harnessed the power of connected devices to transform the farming process.

Through IoT sensors placed across fields, farmers can monitor soil moisture levels, weather conditions, and crop health in real-time. These sensors send data to a centralized platform, where advanced analytics determine the optimal conditions for irrigation, fertilization, and pest control. Enhanced data insights empower farmers to make data-driven decisions, improving crop yield and reducing resource consumption.

The result? Farmers using AgriTech Innovators’ solutions have reported yield increases of up to 30% and water savings of up to 50%. This fusion of IoT and agriculture not only boosts productivity but also contributes to sustainable farming practices.

Case Study 2: The Smart City of Tomorrow

City: Barcelona

Barcelona stands as a shining example of how IoT is transforming urban spaces into smart cities. With the goal of enhancing the quality of life for its residents, Barcelona has integrated IoT solutions into various aspects of city management.

Public lighting, waste management, and parking are just a few areas where IoT is driving change. Smart sensors installed on streetlights adjust lighting based on pedestrian presence, cutting energy consumption by up to 30%. IoT-enabled waste bins notify city workers when they need emptying, optimizing waste collection routes and reducing costs by 20%.

Moreover, an intelligent parking system guides drivers to available spaces, significantly reducing traffic congestion and emissions. These IoT initiatives have positioned Barcelona as a pioneering smart city, offering residents enhanced convenience and sustainability.

The Road Ahead

As IoT continues to evolve, the possibilities for innovation are boundless. From healthcare to transportation, the reach of IoT will only expand, forging smarter environments and more data-driven decision-making.

IoT is not merely about connecting devices; it’s about creating interconnected ecosystems that drive innovation and efficiency. Whether you’re an entrepreneur, a policymaker, or an individual curious about the future, understanding and embracing IoT is key to thriving in this connected future.

To learn more about IoT and its endless possibilities, visit IoT For All.

This article embraces the engaging narrative of how IoT is transforming industries through interconnected ecosystems. Each case study provides a vivid portrayal of IoT’s potential, showcasing its benefits and implications for the future.

SPECIAL BONUS: The very best change planners use a visual, collaborative approach to create their deliverables. A methodology and tools like those in Change Planning Toolkit™ can empower anyone to become great change planners themselves.

Image credit: misterinnovation.com

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

We Need a More Biological View of Technology

We Need a More Biological View of Technology

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

It’s no accident that Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, was published in the early 19th century, at roughly the same time as the Luddite movement was gaining momentum. It was in that moment that people first began to take stock of the technological advances that brought about the first Industrial Revolution.

Since then we have seemed to oscillate between techno-utopianism and dystopian visions of machines gone mad. For every “space odyssey” promising an automated, enlightened future, there seems to be a “Terminator” series warning of our impending destruction. Neither scenario has ever come to pass and it is unlikely that either ever will.

What both the optimists and the Cassandras miss is that technology is not something that exists independently from us. It is, in fact, intensely human. We don’t merely build it, but continue to nurture it through how we develop and shape ecosystems. We need to go beyond a simple engineering mindset and focus on a process of revealing, building and emergence.

1. Revealing

World War II brought the destructive potential of technology to the fore of human consciousness. As deadly machines ravaged Europe and bombs of unimaginable power exploded in Asia, the whole planet was engulfed in a maelstrom of human design. It seemed that the technology we had built had become a modern version of Frankenstein’s monster, destined from the start to turn on its master.

Yet the German philosopher Martin Heidegger saw things differently. In his 1954 essay, The Question Concerning Technology, he described technology as akin to art, in that it reveals truths about the nature of the world, brings them forth and puts them to some specific use. In the process, human nature and its capacity for good and evil are also revealed.

He offers the example of a hydroelectric dam, which uncovers a river’s energy and puts it to use making electricity. In much the same sense, Mark Zuckerberg did not so much “build” a social network at Facebook, but took natural human tendencies and channeled them in a particular way. That process of channeling, in turn, reveals even more.

That’s why, as I wrote in Mapping Innovation, innovation is not about coming up with new ideas, but identifying meaningful problems. It’s through exploring tough problems that we reveal new things and those new things can lead to important solutions. All who wander are not lost.

2. Building

The concept of revealing would seem to support the view of Shelley and the Luddites. It suggests that once a force is revealed, we are powerless to shape its trajectory. J. Robert Oppenheimer, upon witnessing the world’s first nuclear explosion as it shook the plains of New Mexico, expressed a similar view. “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds,” he said, quoting the Bhagavad Gita.

Yet in another essay, Building Dwelling Thinking, Heideggar explains that what we build for the world is highly dependent on our interpretation of what it means to live in it. The relationship is, of course, reflexive. What we build depends on how we wish to dwell and that act, in and of itself, shapes how we build further.

Again, Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook are instructive. His insight into human nature led him to build his platform based on what he saw as The Hacker Way and resolved to “move fast and break things.” Unfortunately, that approach led to his enterprise becoming highly vulnerable to schemes by actors such as Cambridge Analytica and the Russian GRU.

Yet technology is not, by itself, determinant. Facebook is, to a great extent, the result of conscious choices that Mark Zuckerberg made. If he had a different set of experiences than that of a young, upper-middle-class kid who had never encountered a moment of true danger in his life, he may have been more cautious and chosen differently.

History has shown that those who build powerful technologies can play a vital role in shaping how they are used. Many of the scientists of Oppenheimer’s day became activists, preparing a manifesto that highlighted the dangers of nuclear weapons, which helped lead to the Partial Test Ban Treaty. In much the same way, the Asilomar Conference, held in 1975, led to important constraints on genomic technologies.

3. Emergence

No technology stands alone, but combines with other technologies to form systems. That’s where things get confusing because when things combine and interact they become more complex. As complexity theorist Sam Arbesman explained in his book, Overcomplicated, this happens because of two forces inherent to the way that technologies evolve.

The first is accretion. A product such as an iPhone represents the accumulation of many different technologies, including microchips, programming languages, gyroscopes, cameras, touchscreens and lithium ion batteries, just to name a few. As we figure out more tasks an iPhone can perform, more technologies are added, building on each other.

The second force is interaction. Put simply, much of the value of an iPhone is embedded in how it works with other technologies to make tasks easier. We want to use it to access platforms such as Facebook to keep in touch with friends, Yelp so that we can pick out a nice restaurant where we can meet them and Google Maps to help us find the place. These interactions, combined with accretion, create an onward march towards greater complexity.

It is through ever increasing complexity that we lose control. Leonard Read pointed out in his classic essay, I, Pencil, that even an object as simple as a pencil is far too complex for any single person to produce by themselves. A smartphone—or even a single microchip—is exponentially more complex.

People work their entire lives to become experts on even a minor aspect of a technology like an iPhone, a narrow practice of medicine or an obscure facet of a single legal code. As complexity increases, so does specialization, making it even harder for any one person to see the whole picture.

Shaping Ecosystems And Taking A Biological View

In 2013, I wrote that we are all Luddites now, because advances in artificial intelligence had become so powerful that anyone who wasn’t nervous didn’t really understand what was going on. Today, as we enter a new era of innovation and technologies become infinitely more powerful, we are entering a new ethical universe.

Typically, the practice of modern ethics has been fairly simple: Don’t lie, cheat or steal. Yet with many of our most advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence and genetic engineering, the issue isn’t so much about doing the right thing, but figuring out what the right thing is when the issues are novel, abstruse and far reaching.

What’s crucial to understand, however, is that it’s not any particular invention, but ecosystems that create the future. The Luddites were right to fear textile mills, which did indeed shatter their way of life. However the mill was only one technology, when combined with other inventions, such as agricultural advances, labor unions and modern healthcare, lives greatly improved.

Make no mistake, our future will be shaped by our own choices, which is why we need to abandon our illusions of control. We need to shift from an engineering mindset, where we try to optimize for a limited set of variables and take a more biological view, growing and shaping ecosystems of talent, technology, information and cultural norms.

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— Image credit: Pixabay

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