"The fact is that innovation was a little different in the 20th century. It's not easy (now) to come up with greater and different things," Donofrio said.
"If you're looking for the next big thing, stop looking. There's no such thing as the next big thing," he added.
That is not to say that the 21st century does not also require invention, creation and discovery, he said. But these days, people are looking for value that arises from a creation and not just looking at technology for its sake, he explained.
When it comes to innovation, there is a need to think collaboratively and in a multifaceted manner, as this determines who wins and who loses, he said.
"People all around the world are telling us the same thing," Donofrio said. "IBM did a survey of 750 (chief information officers), and all of them listed innovation as a top priority. This is what I spend my time on, what I worry about."
Room to think
To foster a culture of innovation in the company, IBM set up ThinkPlace, an online community for its employees, nine months ago. At ThinkPlace, participants are encouraged to put up ideas, which are evaluated and then rewarded or redirected accordingly.
"In the late 1980s, IBM got into trouble and did away with suggestions," Donofrio said, referring to the corporate turmoil that IBM underwent as it headed into the 1990s. The company reported a $4.97 billion loss in 1992 which, at that time, was the largest single-year corporate loss in the history of the United States. After Lou Gerstner was named CEO in 1993, he helped turn IBM around.
According to Donofrio, IBM employees have contributed close to 5,000 ideas to date, and about 100 of those are being evaluated. The ideas cover products, processes and services.
IBM seeks to cultivate the spirit of innovation outside the company too, Donofrio pointed out. There is even a group at the company "looking hard at collaborating with other people" on future technology. A key example is IBM's alliance with Sony and Toshiba on the Cell chip.
Breakthroughs in computer science, physics and semiconductor design
In addition, IBM organized the Global Innovation Outlook. The GIO series of discussions, which took place in 2004 and 2005, brought together IBM workers and thought leaders, and participants from academia and industry around the world.
For GIO 2.0 last year, more than 180 IBM ecosystem partners from around the world participated in 15 daylong sessions held in China, India, Brazil, Switzerland and the United States, discussing the future of the enterprise, transportation and the environment.
And in April of last year, IBM launched the Genographic Project together with the National Geographic Society. The project is a five-year research partnership that aims to map how the Earth was populated using sophisticated laboratory and computer analysis of human DNA, contributed by hundreds of thousands of people.
no next big thing?? What the heck does he call the iPod which came out after the turn of the century? Come on, this is coming from a person that is SUPPOSE to be creating the innovation! Just because his company failed in the home market and hasn't made a hit product in years, doesn't mean innovation is dead, just his company. This would be like Steve Jobs coming out and saying, well you know what, I guess we can stop making new products because we are all stupid uncreative idiots and just keep upgrading our existing ones. What a fool.
IPod is a cultural innovation and he did mention that
IPod is a cultural innovation. MP3 players were there before IPOD. Web sites selling music where there before IPOD.
IPOD successfully melded hardware, software, user experience and culture experience beautifully. This can be called cultural innovation or service innovation. If jobs had not succeeded convincing music companies to allow him to sell the music online, IPOD would not have succeeded.
no next big thing?? What the heck does he call the iPod which came out after the turn of the century? Come on, this is coming from a person that is SUPPOSE to be creating the innovation! Just because his company failed in the home market and hasn't made a hit product in years, doesn't mean innovation is dead, just his company. This would be like Steve Jobs coming out and saying, well you know what, I guess we can stop making new products because we are all stupid uncreative idiots and just keep upgrading our existing ones. What a fool.
IPod is a cultural innovation and he did mention that
IPod is a cultural innovation. MP3 players were there before IPOD. Web sites selling music where there before IPOD.
IPOD successfully melded hardware, software, user experience and culture experience beautifully. This can be called cultural innovation or service innovation. If jobs had not succeeded convincing music companies to allow him to sell the music online, IPOD would not have succeeded.
I believe it was 1900 and a patent office offical said that there was nothing new worth inventing. I can't believe IBM still pays this guy for being inovative.
Wasn't it IBM's own Tom Watson who, in 1952, predicted that the worldwide market for computers was five?
Big Blue have a history of being unable to see more than three months ahead. The PC was only invented by IBM because the development team was hidden away in Boca Raton, so senior management couldn't gum up the works.
Anyway, even having a role like "Executive Vice President of Innovation and Technology" in the company is a pretty stong indicator that innovation is less important than pecking order and corporate heirarchy. Presumably, there are also "Senior VPs of I&T", "Junior VPs of I&T", "Junior Senior VPs of I&T", "Senior I&T Managers", "Junior I&T Managers," "I&T Executives" and all the rest of the status-conscious "I know my place" baloney that is the real enemy of innovation.
Large companies like IBM should stick to what they do best: either buy other people's good ideas or just use their lawyers to steal them.
I believe it was 1900 and a patent office offical said that there was nothing new worth inventing. I can't believe IBM still pays this guy for being inovative.
Wasn't it IBM's own Tom Watson who, in 1952, predicted that the worldwide market for computers was five?
Big Blue have a history of being unable to see more than three months ahead. The PC was only invented by IBM because the development team was hidden away in Boca Raton, so senior management couldn't gum up the works.
Anyway, even having a role like "Executive Vice President of Innovation and Technology" in the company is a pretty stong indicator that innovation is less important than pecking order and corporate heirarchy. Presumably, there are also "Senior VPs of I&T", "Junior VPs of I&T", "Junior Senior VPs of I&T", "Senior I&T Managers", "Junior I&T Managers," "I&T Executives" and all the rest of the status-conscious "I know my place" baloney that is the real enemy of innovation.
Large companies like IBM should stick to what they do best: either buy other people's good ideas or just use their lawyers to steal them.
I sort of side with Nicholas Donofrio (IBM), at least on the computer side of things. I'm sure there are all sorts of inventions out there that we've never seen. But I think that computer-wise, we're sort of done with what's REVOLUTIONARY.
There will always be improvements to what computers can do, but what is there that we do without computers that we should do WITH computers?
Streaming special TV and radio channels were big. Using the computer as a phone was pretty big. MP3s, and the subesquent MP3 players, were enormous. But I can't think of anything new that a computer will do that it can't do already. Maybe we can use it to watch regular TV. I know people who use their CPU as a Tivo/DVR. And we can do video chat a lot easier and cheaper than video phones. But what's next? I think until someone comes up with a matter-energy transference machine, we're sort of tapped out with anything NEW a computer can do.
I sort of side with Nicholas Donofrio (IBM), at least on the computer side of things. I'm sure there are all sorts of inventions out there that we've never seen. But I think that computer-wise, we're sort of done with what's REVOLUTIONARY.
There will always be improvements to what computers can do, but what is there that we do without computers that we should do WITH computers?
Streaming special TV and radio channels were big. Using the computer as a phone was pretty big. MP3s, and the subesquent MP3 players, were enormous. But I can't think of anything new that a computer will do that it can't do already. Maybe we can use it to watch regular TV. I know people who use their CPU as a Tivo/DVR. And we can do video chat a lot easier and cheaper than video phones. But what's next? I think until someone comes up with a matter-energy transference machine, we're sort of tapped out with anything NEW a computer can do.
Nicholas Donofrio could not be any more wrong! The NEXT BIG THING is just around the corner and will lavish unbelievable spoils to the one that discovers it.
The spirit of innovation is alive and well - just maybe not at IBM.
Nicholas Donofrio could not be any more wrong! The NEXT BIG THING is just around the corner and will lavish unbelievable spoils to the one that discovers it.
The spirit of innovation is alive and well - just maybe not at IBM.
Of course Nicholas Donofrio is wrong. I believe he speaks for his (and perhaps IBM's) lack of vision.
What is true about what he has said is that collaboration and multifaceted approaches are and will continue to be critical to the success of innovations.
The irony is that the most dramatic innovations (the "big things") will be created by mavericks who are willing to take a risk in not thinking like everyone else. This is in contrast to most incremental improvements which happen best in larger organizations.
I can think of several emerging technologies which will create new "big things" - that is, innovations that have large societal impact.
Of course Nicholas Donofrio is wrong. I believe he speaks for his (and perhaps IBM's) lack of vision.
What is true about what he has said is that collaboration and multifaceted approaches are and will continue to be critical to the success of innovations.
The irony is that the most dramatic innovations (the "big things") will be created by mavericks who are willing to take a risk in not thinking like everyone else. This is in contrast to most incremental improvements which happen best in larger organizations.
I can think of several emerging technologies which will create new "big things" - that is, innovations that have large societal impact.
This is the same company that in the 1980s passed up the option to buy MS-DOS from Bill Gates and chose to license it instead because IBM predicted that the total PC sales per year would NEVER be more than a few thousand.
Doug, please indicate an instance when a company foretold the future? IBM's 'prediction' was made at a time when no one had personal computers. Who, based on that reality, could say EVERYONE would want one of them? Conversly, Sony thought EVERYONE would want a Betamax machine. In the end, the Porn industry allowed the cheaper VHS standard to win, and also helped popularize the Personal Computer (and coincidentally MS Windows).
This is the same company that in the 1980s passed up the option to buy MS-DOS from Bill Gates and chose to license it instead because IBM predicted that the total PC sales per year would NEVER be more than a few thousand.
Doug, please indicate an instance when a company foretold the future? IBM's 'prediction' was made at a time when no one had personal computers. Who, based on that reality, could say EVERYONE would want one of them? Conversly, Sony thought EVERYONE would want a Betamax machine. In the end, the Porn industry allowed the cheaper VHS standard to win, and also helped popularize the Personal Computer (and coincidentally MS Windows).
He is absolutely right from his point of view. The next big thing will not come from large multi-national corporations and therefore in his eyes no longer exists. Corporate culture like IBM's just simply doesn't allow for such outstanding creativity to exist. And that folks is my .02 cents.
He is absolutely right from his point of view. The next big thing will not come from large multi-national corporations and therefore in his eyes no longer exists. Corporate culture like IBM's just simply doesn't allow for such outstanding creativity to exist. And that folks is my .02 cents.
Google creates an animated doodle that features a boy, a girl, Google's search engine, and a jump rope. But might there be darker, more analytical, more troubling interpretations to this tale?
The Silicon Valley online payments startup grew by 1,000 percent last year and is hopeful it can repeat that level of growth this year. To do that, it's had to move away from its early friends-and-family roots and embrace small businesses.
Chamtech's spray-on antenna uses a nano material to provide a low-power boost to antenna range. The wireless-in-a-can product may some day bring an end to unsightly cell towers.
EnerG2 opens a plant to make an engineered carbon that will improve performance of energy storage devices and make storage for start-stop hybrid cars less expensive.
out after the turn of the century? Come on, this is coming from a
person that is SUPPOSE to be creating the innovation! Just because
his company failed in the home market and hasn't made a hit
product in years, doesn't mean innovation is dead, just his
company. This would be like Steve Jobs coming out and saying,
well you know what, I guess we can stop making new products
because we are all stupid uncreative idiots and just keep upgrading
our existing ones. What a fool.
IPOD successfully melded hardware, software, user experience and culture experience beautifully. This can be called cultural innovation or service innovation. If jobs had not succeeded convincing music companies to allow him to sell the music online, IPOD would not have succeeded.
out after the turn of the century? Come on, this is coming from a
person that is SUPPOSE to be creating the innovation! Just because
his company failed in the home market and hasn't made a hit
product in years, doesn't mean innovation is dead, just his
company. This would be like Steve Jobs coming out and saying,
well you know what, I guess we can stop making new products
because we are all stupid uncreative idiots and just keep upgrading
our existing ones. What a fool.
IPOD successfully melded hardware, software, user experience and culture experience beautifully. This can be called cultural innovation or service innovation. If jobs had not succeeded convincing music companies to allow him to sell the music online, IPOD would not have succeeded.
Is there something about the beginning of a century that makes people become stupid and think that's all there is?
Big Blue have a history of being unable to see more than three months ahead. The PC was only invented by IBM because the development team was hidden away in Boca Raton, so senior management couldn't gum up the works.
Anyway, even having a role like "Executive Vice President of Innovation and Technology" in the company is a pretty stong indicator that innovation is less important than pecking order and corporate heirarchy. Presumably, there are also "Senior VPs of I&T", "Junior VPs of I&T", "Junior Senior VPs of I&T", "Senior I&T Managers", "Junior I&T Managers," "I&T Executives" and all the rest of the status-conscious "I know my place" baloney that is the real enemy of innovation.
Large companies like IBM should stick to what they do best: either buy other people's good ideas or just use their lawyers to steal them.
Is there something about the beginning of a century that makes people become stupid and think that's all there is?
Big Blue have a history of being unable to see more than three months ahead. The PC was only invented by IBM because the development team was hidden away in Boca Raton, so senior management couldn't gum up the works.
Anyway, even having a role like "Executive Vice President of Innovation and Technology" in the company is a pretty stong indicator that innovation is less important than pecking order and corporate heirarchy. Presumably, there are also "Senior VPs of I&T", "Junior VPs of I&T", "Junior Senior VPs of I&T", "Senior I&T Managers", "Junior I&T Managers," "I&T Executives" and all the rest of the status-conscious "I know my place" baloney that is the real enemy of innovation.
Large companies like IBM should stick to what they do best: either buy other people's good ideas or just use their lawyers to steal them.
Embarrasing and pitiful..Nick, go work for Microsoft or Gateway dude.
I heard rumors in the past that people said things like this in IBM and there were repercussions.
Jeff Marzano
Embarrasing and pitiful..Nick, go work for Microsoft or Gateway dude.
I heard rumors in the past that people said things like this in IBM and there were repercussions.
Jeff Marzano
There will always be improvements to what computers can do, but what is there that we do without computers that we should do WITH computers?
Streaming special TV and radio channels were big. Using the computer as a phone was pretty big. MP3s, and the subesquent MP3 players, were enormous. But I can't think of anything new that a computer will do that it can't do already. Maybe we can use it to watch regular TV. I know people who use their CPU as a Tivo/DVR. And we can do video chat a lot easier and cheaper than video phones. But what's next? I think until someone comes up with a matter-energy transference machine, we're sort of tapped out with anything NEW a computer can do.
Just my three cents,
Erik Deckers
But leave the inventions, and dreams to those who can. The suits,
well, hehe, they are historically, and forever more, just that.
There will always be improvements to what computers can do, but what is there that we do without computers that we should do WITH computers?
Streaming special TV and radio channels were big. Using the computer as a phone was pretty big. MP3s, and the subesquent MP3 players, were enormous. But I can't think of anything new that a computer will do that it can't do already. Maybe we can use it to watch regular TV. I know people who use their CPU as a Tivo/DVR. And we can do video chat a lot easier and cheaper than video phones. But what's next? I think until someone comes up with a matter-energy transference machine, we're sort of tapped out with anything NEW a computer can do.
Just my three cents,
Erik Deckers
But leave the inventions, and dreams to those who can. The suits,
well, hehe, they are historically, and forever more, just that.
The spirit of innovation is alive and well - just maybe not at IBM.
The spirit of innovation is alive and well - just maybe not at IBM.
What is true about what he has said is that collaboration and multifaceted approaches are and will continue to be critical to the success of innovations.
The irony is that the most dramatic innovations (the "big things") will be created by mavericks who are willing to take a risk in not thinking like everyone else. This is in contrast to most incremental improvements which happen best in larger organizations.
I can think of several emerging technologies which will create new "big things" - that is, innovations that have large societal impact.
What is true about what he has said is that collaboration and multifaceted approaches are and will continue to be critical to the success of innovations.
The irony is that the most dramatic innovations (the "big things") will be created by mavericks who are willing to take a risk in not thinking like everyone else. This is in contrast to most incremental improvements which happen best in larger organizations.
I can think of several emerging technologies which will create new "big things" - that is, innovations that have large societal impact.
world. People are beings of invention. I don't forsee any change
soon.
world. People are beings of invention. I don't forsee any change
soon.
Doug
Doug
And that folks is my .02 cents.
And that folks is my .02 cents.