Indians more Innovative than Britishers, but lag behind Chinese

The global economy has been jolted by a sharp recession in 2008 and sovereign debt crisis in 2011 – and there is hardly any industry which has escaped from the widespread effects of an acute slowdown in the economy.

Industrial recessions often results in slowdown of spending on research activities and innovative quotient within an organization. But, in this highly competitive business world, where change is the name of the game – nothing strikes the chord better than ‘innovation’ in continued sustenance and achieving future organizational goal.

Optimism from Innovation in India

Inevitably, most creative streaks ought to falter while innovating in an uncharted territory. But then, failures can be starting point for new innovations; and if creativity is blended with proper execution – it forms a perfect recipe of success.

On this note, a global research report on innovation has surveyed 2800 senior business executives directly involved in the innovation strategy with their company to gauge the impact of the financial crisis on business’ ability to innovate.

The Countries with Best Innovation Reputation

Interestingly, India has been ranked as sixth most innovative country by GE Global Innovation Barometer survey. While 64% of the global respondents identified USA as top-most innovation champion, developed economies like Germany (48%) and Japan (43%) followed the suit on the Innovation Barometer 2012.

On being asked as to how the economic crisis has affected business’ ability to innovate – 77% of the global respondents indicated a change in culture with firms reassessing current risks, whereas almost 65% surveyed pointed towards crunched access to private and public funding.

In order to promote innovation in businesses, a country requires a right blend of environment such as level of government support, trade regulations, efficacy of public-private partnerships, support of private investors and ease of partnership with academia for R&D.

How business perceive their home country’s innovation environment

For India, the report indicates a ‘balanced  perception’ on the Innovation Environment Index that illustrates how satisfied businesses in each market are about the environmental elements that promote innovation.

However, 66% of the 200 senior executives from India that participated in the survey were reserved in their approach when asked how optimistic business is that innovation will successfully convert into improved quality of life for the citizens.

The desire for innovation needs to come out from inside – it can not be bought. Innovation is not something that only large companies can afford; it’s a mind game, at the end of the day it’s about creativity eve in smaller organizations.

Almost 84% of the Indians surveyed quipped that harnessing the innovative potential of the SMEs and individuals can be as innovative as large companies; and this could as well be through localized initiatives and combination of players partnering together.

India's Unique Innovations

Someone once told me that Innovation isn’t thinking about bright new ideas but using ideas from one section and applying it to another. Several innovations that I came across in India truly fits the description. Let’s see some of them and how they impact our society.

Mobile – Shops:

(I am not talking about cellular shops here :)

Nothing new, but I always thought they are fascinating element in India’s business ecosystem which is missing in metros and most countries abroad. In today’s super-busy lifestyle, I find it awesome if someone can come to my house for fixing my gas stove or to sell vegetables. Hats off to these innovators (like one below) which meet my needs and also figured out an innovative way to sustain.

3 Types of Innovation-Structured [Apple], Unstructured [Amazon] & Open [Google]

I  had the opportunity to survey (in person, one-on-one) about 60+ entrepreneurs in India, who were founders and chief executives at leading eCommerce companies at the BVP cocktails & drinks last week at Delhi. I asked them to identify who they thought were the leaders in product (technology) innovation.

Not surprisingly, Amazon, Google and Apple were top of mind. Most opinion polls would point to the same “winners”, in no particular order. Each of these companies, I believe, innovates very differently though. Their approach, the kind of people that need to be hired and the systems and processes to support the innovation to be brought to market are vastly different.

The cultures at these innovation monsters are now widely known, but in parts. I formulated a broad conceptual model of their fundamental different approaches towards innovation and thought I’d outline that to spark debate.

I believe that to successfully innovate you need 3 (I know this is obvious, but bear with me) qualities: Vision, Strategy and Execution.

The Vision tells you where to go, Strategy; how to get there, and Execution takes you there. The question is whether these qualities are in one individual or you need 3 different people performing these functions

Before this misleads you, let me clarify that this is not a Google v/s Apple v/s Amazon showdown. I’m not going to announce a winner at the end of this. Apple, Amazon and Google have established the 3 broad, modern approaches to product innovation:

Structured (Apple)

At Apple, innovation looks like a structured and methodical process. It starts top-down. Their model is repeated in their journey from iPod to the iPhone to the iPad.

They have a single (arguable, but not defendable) visionary, few strategists and several focused people who execute. The kinds of people that Apple hires consistently are those that execute well. Only one or two of the people (visionaries, strategists) know all aspects of the thrilling project.

With this kind of model, communication tends to be controlled. The important part of their story is that they have not strayed too far away from their core markets of consumer electronics & computer systems.

Unstructured (Amazon)

At Amazon I believe, innovation starts with a few individuals beyond the C suite.

This type of company begins by taking look at large green-field areas where disruption is possible and has multiple visionaries in each field. One could argue that there’s a single visionary (Jeff Bezos), but I counter that they have many more visionaries than Apple does based on the sheer number of new areas they pursue for innovation.

The responsibility of vision is more shared among multiple leaders than the structured approach at Apple. There’s more breadth in their market approach and they tend to look at disruptions with the approach to take systematic experiments. Typically companies who like the unstructured approach towards innovation will hire many visionaries and strategists in each field and empower them to pursue their vision backed by good (but not extraordinary) execution focused professionals.

Open (Google)

At Google, the approach is much more open (or chaotic). They have a plethora of projects starting every single day, and they’re all out in the open. This is why when they hire, Google looks for natural innovators – people who can be visionaries, strategists and executors all in one.

This model is the toughest to hire for in any company. Getting these “rock stars” is not only difficult, it’s impossible to keep them working towards the vision within a larger framework whose vision is not necessarily aligned with the overall objective of that company.

This approach produces the most number of experiments, and the sheer quantity of innovation is tremendous, hence the number of failures is also significant.

Which approach is best suited for technology startups?

Most startups (90%) tend to have both their visionary and strategic thinker be the same and focus on hiring people that execute brilliantly. Hence, you’ll find the requests for “rock star” programmers, or “kickass” marketing folks.

Since most startups tend to have a single guiding vision at the beginning of their venture, I believe the Apple approach is best suited at the early stages of the startup, followed by a maturity towards either the Google or the Amazon model eventually if they wish to expand to multiple markets.

All I need is just 2 hours to get Creative & Innovative

How simple could life get when you start using your thinking caps instead of wasting some precious time. My Company has been seriously promoting and advocating their associates to get innovative and creative. Very less people have actually taken those corporate mailers seriously. Often those mailers would go into their Deleted Items folder. But If one really has to ponder on such topics then I guess it would pay some value to his skill. My organisation has been shelling up few lakhs of amount as a gift prize for the most innovative and creative ideas that an Individual comes up with. Your skill sets doesn't needs to be improved or updated. So all these days I've been wondering I wish I had 2 extra hours to do all those stuffs.

Is Google doing enough for entering in Social Circle

Wow: Google is doing everything to keep up with the social and mobile trend. And CEO Larry Page is leading the pack. They have done few new things recently:-

-> Introduced new service, Google +

-> New all social Plus One button (which is already effecting Google search results).

-> Revamped all the existing services to a new look and feel

-> Bought Motorola

Off-course these are much better initiative than previous Buzz and Wave. And these can look good to a techie and one really thinks Google is doing great to ensure its success in Social media and mobile space. But I would like to point some holes or say overlooked things that Google should seriously consider doing. First Google assumes there are only Smartphone and Hard-Core Technology enthusiasts that use a social service. But this is not the case. It is a community but there are millions and millions of people who don't have a smartphone and thus are unable to connect through Google Plus service. Though one can argue that Google+ has a Mobile and Basic Mobile interface, but tell me anyone is it really that much useful.

Innovation - is it really tough

When I read about men who changed the world by their invention, discovery or thinking; the first thing that comes to mind is how did they do it? I mean they were same human but what distinguishes them from others. One reason can be the way they take the world problems and try to solve them.

Normal persons such as you and me take the problem as a burden and thinks someone will solve it for the world. We simply don't take the idea that they can also have a look at the problem and may come up with the solution. They are just afraid of trying and think they will fail.