Innovation is not the same as invention. Understanding the subtle but crucial differences.
When I started to learn more about “innovation”, I tried to understand what actually the differences are between “innovation” and “invention”. By doing so, I took the example of the iPhone. Was the iPhone an a innovation or a invention?
Let’s do first something, that everybody is doing when they’re trying to figure out some answers… Let’s ask Google.
For searching “innovation”, you get results like:
- "The introduction of something new; a new idea, method, or device." 1
- "Innovation is often also viewed as the application of better solutions that meet new requirements, unarticulated needs, or existing market needs."2
For searching the term “invention”, you get results like:
- "A device, contrivance, or process originated after study and experiment."3
- "An invention is a unique or novel device, method, composition or process. The invention process is a process within an overall engineering and product development process."?
To be honest, with these explanations, I’m not sure, if I fully get, where exactly the differences are. So is the iPhone an innovation or an invention?
Based on my experience and all the stuff I read about innovation and invention, I would go for a definition like this:
An invention is something completely new, that didn’t exist before. It can be a new product, technology or a process.
It usually sets the foundation for further development and evolution. It does not need to meet any market or business requirement. It’s simply something completely new that was discovered by accident, by observation or by simply trying.
When it comes to innovation, there a some slightly differences. From all definitions of innovation I have read, I like this definition the most:
Innovation is the creation of a viable, new offering.?
- Viable, because it needs to solve a real problem.
- New, because it was solved never like this before.
- Offering, because it only counts, if you have a market demand for it.
Having this definition in mind, the answer to the above question about the iPhone is easy. The iPhone was a great innovation. It was not the first phone, it was the first smartphone that people actually want to have, because it solved problems around telephone, messaging, internet browsing and media consumption.
And now let’s have a look at the term “disruptive”. This term, which is used heavily in the startup world, is almost always used simultaneously with the term innovation.
Simply put, disruptive means something like a "game changer", when it comes to user behavior. These game changer start from low-end or new-market foothold and transform unserved customers into paying customers.
For all of you, who really want to deep dive into what “disruptive innovations” mean, I highly recommend a very interesting article by Clayton M. Christensen, Michael E. Raynor, and Rory McDonald, “What is disruptive innovation?”.
Having all these definitions in mind, you can call the iPhone not only an innovation, but also a disruptive innovation. With the new iPhone customers did not use their phones with keyboards, or their music player or in a lot of cases their laptops anymore. They changed their behavior and used Apple’s smartphone. And by establishing the app ecosystem to external developers (another game changer) it also created a new market for application programmers. The iPhone even transformed unserved customers into paying smartphone users. And the last point is mainly, what disruption is about.
But keep in mind, innovation is not just about creating new product offerings. Innovation comes in different flavors. At Starbucks for example you pay for a 2 $ coffee 5 $, just because they offer you a great customer experience. They make you feel comfortable within their stores, they call you with your first name and they are super friendly to you.
In this case, customer experience is an important factor of being innovative. It‘s not always about having new and disruptive ideas. Sometimes you can change the game by ?just“ changing the way you offer your service or product. In another article I will talk about the different dimensions of innovation.
Conclusion
Innovation and invention are two different things. The first person who invented the multitouch screen technology was not the same person, who disrupted the mobile phone market with the same technology by offering the first iPhone in 2007. In order to have innovation, an invention is required first. Kodak invented the first digital camera, but did not know how to leverage it. Instead of Koday, Sony understood how to market this new technology.
(Un-)fortunately, all business models will eventually fail one day. In order to succeed on the market, you don't need to be an inventor. But you definitely should be an innovator.
Sources:
1https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innovation
2https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation
3https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/invention
?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention
?https://doblin.com/ten-types