Comments on: Analysis and Interpretation in Innovation

By: Blogging Innovation » Innovation – Matching Needs and Solutions

Blogging Innovation » Innovation – Matching Needs and Solutions — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 03:05:08 +0000

[...] a matter of ‘foresight’ to be able to envisage those evolutions, e.g. through participating in interpreting networks. By combining vision and empathy, anticipated needs can be addressed by innovative solutions. [...]

By: Innovation – A New Match Between Need and Solution « Innovation Leadership Network

Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:51:30 +0000

By: Tim

Tim — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 08:06:23 +0000

I think that’s a very good point Malyn. I’ll definitely give this some more thought. Thanks for the useful idea!

By: malyn

malyn — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 07:30:43 +0000

Re: Negative Space and Innovation

If you think of innovation as deviating from that which already is (exists), then you go into that which is not (or could be). I think consideration of negative space is essential for innovation to happen.

Innovation as an act of creating can be viewed as experimenting with the malleability of boundaries – and for me – the most visual representation of that is the notion of positive and negative space.

I look forward to hearing how your thoughts evolve.

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 00:34:50 +0000

Lester & Piore certainly argue that you need both for innovation – and that seems right to me too.

It’s really interesting that you bring up the example of negative space – I’ve been wondering if that could be a useful metaphor when thinking about innovation. I’ll have to give that more thought…

Thanks for another insightful comment!

By: malyn

malyn — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 12:45:05 +0000

Tim,

interesting post and just like my response to John’s post on Personality and Network , I agree with Lester and Piore. Analytical and Interpretative processes must be employed by innovative companies. Innovation and Design depend on both.

Let me illustrate using a metaphor in Arts/Drawing.

One of the ‘strategies’ for drawing is the use of Positive and Negative space. This simplifies viewing the object by defining the known (positive space) and the unknown (negative space). Sometimes it’s easier to to go one way first – as in drawing an intricate vase (or the human figure/face)- focusing on its silhouette (that which is “outside” of it) helps to define it first. Ultimately, the drawing captures both.

In this sense, I think Analytical and Interpretive processes can go both ways. Analytical processes are sometimes required to identify and narrow down the ‘best options’. And as you mentioned, interpretive processes can precede analysis. I guess if you use just one then innovation is harder, if at all possible.

By: Managing Innovation with Analysis and Intuition « Innovation « Innovation Leadership Network

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:48:10 +0000

[...] think the answer is yes and I was provoked into thinking about this after Tim wrote his post about analysis and interpretation. Here he was questioning the emphasis that we place on tools for [...]

By: Tim

Tim — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 19:05:10 +0000

Thanks for stopping by & thanks for the comment Michelle! I took a quick look at your website and it looks like you are doing some great work in this area.

By: Michelle James

Michelle James — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 17:31:27 +0000

I love your post, Tim. Emergence (of next-level ideas, innovations, paradigms, etc.) happens at the edges of what is known and unknown. The linear-focused, logical analytical is works for what’s known, but the unknown requires interpretive processes, engaging them with the whole-brain “design thinking” and simultaneity, not just left-brain linear, verbal-only interpretation. In doing this work with entrepreneurs and organizations for 16 years, I’ve seen exponential leaps happen consistently by engaging right-brain, non-habitual creative processes in the interpretive stage, shaping and forming the unknown into a new viable structure.

By: Tim

Tim — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 09:58:59 +0000

Very true Greg!