Third set of study notes for this topic.

Visit Edward De Bonos website and read about creative thinking and in particular Lateral Thinking a concept and term he developed in the 1960s. Edwards personal website is at http://www.edwdebono.com/index.html It is more efficient for you to read about Lateral Thinking directly from the materials available from Dr De Bono himself.

Creativity and inventiveness are close in respect to what they mean in that they both define how something is b i brought into existence that would not have occurred naturally. ht i t it th t ld t h d t ll For example, a triple mocha double-shot extra-foam no-sugar extra-not latte is unlikely to occur naturally no matter how many billions of years we wait for life to evolve or for natural forces and elements to combine. This particular recipe for a latte is certainly creative, or inventive, but would probably be appreciated by many. Therefore we could probably say that it offers little value to most people who would probably prefer their lattes made to a simpler recipe. So in the same way we need to be careful when something is highlighted as being highly creative or extremely inventive. That may well be so but most times that is not enough. What we generally seek, at least in business, is innovation. Remember that innovation offers invention (or creativity) that also provides value. Most of us have suffered the mistakes of buying creative clothing that ends up being impractical and so we dont wear or use it. Arguably the global fashion industry relies on a concept called planned obsolescence which can be analysed using our thinking here as meaning that the clothes are deliberately designed to become undesirable (of little or no perceived value) by the introduction of the next series or g generation of the latest fashions. The haute couture industry that revolves around seasonal fashion y shows and displays of the latest creations by superstar designers drives this. The purpose of much of the haute couture fashion shows is not to display what the mass population will be buying and wearing but more as a competition amongst the designers as to who will win the rights to influence the direction of fashion for the near future. What is important for engineers to consider is that creativity as a skill however is for everyone. Usually finding solutions to the most complex problems requires high levels of creativity to develop solution options. options What is or should be implemented as the best solution is the one that offers the most value. Often is, be, value this is not the most creative but is a compromise between the level of creativeness/inventiveness and the level of value it will deliver.

This term is now in common everyday use in society often with disregard to what it really means. Thinking outside the box simply means to think creatively. From a practical sense for most of us it often means attempting to try not to rely on preg p p existing assumptions of what is and what is not possible. For invention and innovation , it can mean that you seek to identify what something could be used for rather than focusing on what is currently being used for. A case study of this is the Post-It note originally developed by the 3M Corporation. Development of a new formula of adhesive was going nowhere since the adhesive failed to adhere adequately to anything else. However in a classic happy moment of inspiration a researcher at 3M realised that this adhesive would be ideal for a new type of paper h li d h hi dh i ld b id l f f bookmark he had an idea for. The trick was getting the adhesive layer to actually stick to the bookmark itself. Once that was solved a new product was born what we now know as the Post-It note.

We train you in your undergraduate studies to think analytically. As graduates you are able to break a complex problem or issue into smaller easier-to-analyse pieces and then to analyse in depth. Although a most irritating habit to many others in society at times, especially our partners and non-engineer friends, we often do this without even trying to or being aware of it. Engineers are notorious for always trying to analyse why is it so? and then trying to find the solution . find solution That is why they dont equip cars with driver-controlled ejector seats for the front passengers. Otherwise the roadside would be littered with ejected engineers who as passengers attempted to give driving directions to their partners.

Being able to synthesise information from a number of sources is a skill that engineers do not always have. Increasingly it is important that engineers be able to not only dissect and analyse complex issues and problems but also be able to synthesise information from multiple and/or diverse sources in order to develop a holistic view. For example engineers have a tendency to try to analyse a problem and fix whatever is wrong regardless of whether it is worth fixing it at all. Is there an alternative that offers better value? Traditionally this is where engineers and accountants butt heads. The heads engineer will want to patch it up and keep using it. The accountant will want to scrap it based on its future economic value. Another example that most of us are familiar with is the technically brilliant product that is flawless in its engineering yet is unusable or just plain useless. By failing to consider needs and skills of the typical user sometimes engineers produce designs that offer little yp g p g real value to the users. If the users dont or wont actually use it or want it then the product is literally useless. Need an example of this? Think of automobiles. From an engineering perspective we all should be driving Volvos or Mercedes. But most consumers dont. Why? Because they perceive the greatest value is the popular models that offer BOTH affordability to own and engineering performance. This explains why people drive bright yellow Hyundais for example.

Remember this slide from the 1st set of Study Notes?

There are literally millions of people who consider themselves to be inventors. Being an inventor is easy It is no coincidence that most self-proclaimed inventors also consider themselves easy. self proclaimed to be amateurs. They are usually amateur inventors because what they invent usually has little or no value for anyone and so offers little in terms of innovation. There are few amateur innovators. Why? Because people are prepared to pay them for what they are producing. y y g p g you paid profession then seek to be an If you want a hobby then consider taking up inventing. If y want a p p innovator. Dont get confused about patents. They are a legal method for registering an invention and recording what is actually new or novel in what you have done. Getting a patent does not mean that the invention has any use either now or ever. The patents offices do not access applications for how much value the invention will deliver. They do, or should, consider if the invention can actually be implemented (embodied) but just because it can be shown to work does not mean it is practical or provides value. If I patent an chemical process that turns a kilogram of gold into a 100 grams of lead would it be of any use? Unless you are the fictional Mr. Goldfinger from the James Bond movie and book the answer is most likely no. So why do many companies still use patented or patent pending in their marketing promotions and stamped on their products? They do so because it is still a misleading perception amongst the consumer society that patents authenticate somehow the usefulness and likely value to the consumer of something. This is nonsense of course. Patents certify and protect the uniqueness of an invention not the value to the user. So why do companies seek and use Patents? To seek protect that uniqueness for a period of time so that only they can exploit any value that the invention may provide. The protection is provided by the legal system and like many things in law is often not guaranteed until you actually test it. Having lots of patents it does not guarantee success. Thousands of companies spent considerable effort inventing and patenting in the dot-com information technology boom of the late 1990s. Tens of thousands of patents resulting from these efforts were, and still are, for useless inventions.

Innovation means providing value. Seek to be innovative rather than simply inventive. Everyone can be inventive. Leave the average 4 year old loose with a pair of scissors and a roll of sticky tape and they will invent hundreds of new creations in just a few hours. But will any of it be of value (other than sentimental perhaps). The concept of innovation applies to almost anything in our lives and business. A reasonably high profile example is the international marketing campaign commissioned by the Federal Government in 2006. The Where the Bloody Hell Are You? marketing campaign overseas to encourage people to visit Australia and spend their tourist dollars was definitely inventive / creative. But in terms of value it not only did not provide any positive value it actually generated negative value it destroyed value. This marketing campaign actually resulted in consumers overseas deciding not to visit Australia rather than encouraging them to do so. Analysis of the campaign released last year in 2008 showed that the net result of this expensive marketing campaign funded by the Federal Government in 2006 and 2007 was to discourage international tourists from coming to Australia. i t ti l t i t f i t A t li Which leads to a point to remember: Something that is inventive or creative can actually destroy value. In other words it can be worse than useless it can be destructive. Something that is innovative always provide positive value. If it didnt then we can consider it innovative.

The self-heating latte canister that I mentioned in the 1st set of study notes is definitely inventive. And yes it is patented. But for most consumers it really offers little or no value so its not really innovative. In terms of its potential impact on the environment given that the canister is nonrecyclable and that it contains a pod of caustic quicklime liquid we may actually consider this product to be offering negative value, in other words, potentially destructive on the environment. The ongoing issue of finding alternative sources of energy to replace the worlds diminishing supply of oil is a prime example of what we are studying here. There are thousands of inventions and creative ideas already on what we can do. But there still remains many true solutions that are highly innovative and highly practical.

10

It is relatively easy to develop creative ideas and concepts but how many are practical? Can it be made to actually exist? Is it feasible to even try to make it exist? Will it perform the intended functions even if you could make it? i f h i d df i ld k i ?

11

Creative? Yes. Inventive? Yes. Actually it is relatively easy to design and bring into existence. Innovative??? It may be art but is it useful?

12

Remember that if it provides no benefit or value to anyone then it is useless. The article from The Times newspaper in the Optional Reading section provides a list of some useless inventions. Notice that some of these inventions are not very old. Like we stated earlier, there are thousands of amateur inventors out there and most of them are developing useless inventions. p g

13

The humble TV remote control is an example of a disruptive innovation. Originally developed in the 1950s today it is rare that any television is sold without one. As well as changing how we watch TV it also changed an industry. The advertising industry had to adapt to changing viewer habits as more became owners of TVs with remote controls. Without a remote, viewers had to get off the couch to change channels and so were more likely to watch the commercials instead of changing channels. Remote controls enabled channel surfing and advertisements had to be interesting or risk having the viewers change channel to avoid them. The TV stations have also had to adapt. In Australia for example, the commercial networks h i h l h d d A li f l h i l k deliberately stagger and change the start/end times of programming in prime time order to overcome channel surfing by viewers (you are more likely to stay watching a program until it ends and if you miss the beginning of a program you are more likely to watch another from the beginning instead).

Can an idea or concept progress with time from being considered creative through to subsequently being considered inventive and ultimately being considered innovative? Yes, absolutely. Happens more often than many people realise. For example, just over 40 years ago the communicator device in the Star Trek TV series was considered as a highly creative concept. A pocket-sized device that could communicate wirelessly with other nearby and hundreds of kilometres away? Poppycock, pure science fiction! Then just a few years later (almost 40 years ago), patents were developed for a wireless mobile phone system by AT&T. Then just over 30 years ago Motorola in Chicago was field-trialling a newly invented wireless mobile telephone system with a few hundred users, and fully automated systems had just been launched in Japan and Scandinavia. And 30 years later we have over 5 billion mobile phone subscriptions worldwide. The automated mobile phone system most of us have embedded in our daily lives went from being a creative science fiction concept through to highly innovative service in about a decade. Once introduced the mobile phone service achieved phenomenal adoption rates on a global scale

14

A good practical exercise is to watch an episode or two of The New Inventors either online or as broadcast on ABC-1 and ABC-2. Watch the program with a critical view on identifying innovation in what the contestants offer for their inventions. In particular pay attention to the judging panel and how they determine which invention will be the winner for that episode of the show. Although they dont state it, their judging process attempts to identify the most innovative entry.

15

So why isnt this show called The New Innovators? Because society has been conditioned over the last 100 years or so to associate invention with value even though this is not usually the case as we have studied here. In the same way the most TV game shows called Robot Wars and such do not involve competitions using robotic machines but rather using remote control machines the fact p g g remains that society generally mistakenly associates invention with meaning innovation. Society once generally thought the Earth was flat and the Sun revolved around it. Some maybe one day this mistake will be corrected. But probably not in our lifetimes.

16

Perhaps they could call the show, Inventions assessed According to the Malpas Equation for Innovation ? Probably not. Two many poly-syllable words for the average TV show host perhaps.

17

The show is on weekly on ABC-1 and ABC-2. If you can, then watch or record a show (or two) and analyse it for how they assess and judge the inventions. Use this assessment perspective for a few other episodes too and you generally find that the judges award winning entry for each show according to our definition of innovation. j g gp y Of course it is no coincidence that the judging panel usually includes someone with an engineering background, someone with a marketing or design background, and someone who with a technology-centric background.

18

Use the links below or Google to find this patent. Yes, it is a patent for a wooden stick from a tree branch that can be used as a dog toy. The application was submitted as a practical joke that actually got through the system and approved instead of being rejected. A friend of mine who used to work in the United States Patent Office told me about this p patent. Its real and exists. Yes, it should not exist as a patent. The patent examiner who allowed this one through did get into some hot water over it. This is a good example of a useless patent. Not only should it not have been awarded as a patent but it is useless since it could not be used to protect this invention. If a patent holder tried to enforce this patent it would be struck down and invalidated in court. Why do these exist in the records? Because it would take effort (and therefore expense) to search through and eliminate them. http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT6360693&id=hhYJAAAAEBAJ&printsec=a bstract&zoom 4&dq 6,360,693 bstract&zoom=4&dq=6,360,693 http://www.patentoftheweek.com/1996-Now/index.html Further proof that inventing is easy. And patenting inventions is fairly easy although reasonably expensive and time-consuming.

19

Just dont confuse the butter stick with a glue stick

20