Communication psychology has informed us paradoxical messages can lead to schizophrenia; the scientific term for this is double bind. It denotes two controversial notions within a single utterance. The message is self-contradictory. Countless gag writers and family therapists make a living letting one party order the other to be independent, to disagree, to disobey. This goes naturally for this text, too, demanding the reader's critical reflection.
But there is also a productive aspect to paradoxes - as is usual, where it is least expected, namely in management. That kind of double bind orders: Be spontaneous. Be creative. So what causes amazed head shaking outside in the real world has become a fixed form inside an enterprise called research departments. Its staff industriously slaves to meet the requirement to be permanent innovators. Enter the key phrase.
Readiness for innovation can be regarded as the real currency of knowledge-based societies; its material equivalent is investing into time and accordingly money. Without doubt, this is a promising affair which can be alone seen by the fact nobody knows what innovation might be generating. It cannot be forecast, and just because of that one does it.. To put it more exactly, one tries. And this means: planning what cannot be planned.
Principally, innovation is an everyday phenomenon. Human beings manipulate their environment which changes its state which requires a modified manipulation which in turn changes the environmental state and so on. Modern cybernetics conceives this as aviation controlling of autopoietical, self-organized systems. It is this behaviour which enables us to control ourselves behind our own backs as we concentrate on the environment generates innovative raw material. However, just because innovation is natural, it is difficult to make it its own issue. It loses its matter of course, the natural innovator observes his action. As a consequence, the concepts enters the public issue and proliferates in speeches and commentaries. Practically anybody of self-attached importance likes to lead the flag of innovation, but the more it is conjured, the less precise its content becomes. To compensate this, innovation is even more often mentioned. Not for the first time quantity rules over quality.
In the technical and managerial realm innovation denotes the relation between an unsatisfactory state and a correcting means. The state often cocerns an obstinate environment which is to be made pliant with the aid of a mechanical or data processing apparatus. This apparatus indicates the difference between the original state S and the successfully altered state S'. So much for the technical aspect. But once the idea of making money with such an apparatus emerged, innovation became a matter of chain. Innovation follwos innovation, innovation' innovates innovation. Nowadays lack remedy is no more an excuse to lean back with relief to enjoy the improved environmental state; quite the contrary, lack remedy turns into a lack to be remedied ad infinitum. We might call that kind of innovation 'rational'; it refers to a given connection, falls back upon a given solution and improves it.
All the same - innovation is not merely about (may this be a modest advice for innovative sponsors who spill money over the developing departments) perpetuately improved tools which help us to do even whiter washing, to spare even more time, to send even more superfluent photographs by SMS. No, beside 'rational' there is also 'original' innovation. It establishes an entirely new lack remedy by either inventing a totally unknown machine (as has been the case with the wheel, for example) or by unexpectedly reinventing an apparatus that was originally conceived to solve problem X for abolishing problem Y. It remains to our rational purists and fund raisers to lament over this misuse. Often the two aspects are connected; a new apparatus is invented and later on used for something different. But it is original in any way.
As we can see, innovations will create something new by requiring something old. Originality then means the dissolution of structures, whereas rationality implies their modified recombination. Accordingly, original innovation means a definite relation of lack and remedy is redefined. This is inconceivable without a verbal basis. Therefore verbal innovation is no surprise at all. And not only machines, but also ideas, ideals, cultural habits inside and outside of organizations create and remedy lack. Since in these cases there is no immediate equivalent in the machine world, it is impossible draw a line between 'real' and 'virtual' innovation. It is a matter of indivual case to decide which is substantial and which is old wine in new pipes.
Innovation defines the rhythm of technical and intellectual development. Given the increasing acceleration it will not last a long time until what was yesterday will be up to date tomorrow and the strained short-term memory thinks anything is modern. Here lies the chance for the old iron to declare its rusty parts to be innovative.
But there is also a productive aspect to paradoxes - as is usual, where it is least expected, namely in management. That kind of double bind orders: Be spontaneous. Be creative. So what causes amazed head shaking outside in the real world has become a fixed form inside an enterprise called research departments. Its staff industriously slaves to meet the requirement to be permanent innovators. Enter the key phrase.
Readiness for innovation can be regarded as the real currency of knowledge-based societies; its material equivalent is investing into time and accordingly money. Without doubt, this is a promising affair which can be alone seen by the fact nobody knows what innovation might be generating. It cannot be forecast, and just because of that one does it.. To put it more exactly, one tries. And this means: planning what cannot be planned.
Principally, innovation is an everyday phenomenon. Human beings manipulate their environment which changes its state which requires a modified manipulation which in turn changes the environmental state and so on. Modern cybernetics conceives this as aviation controlling of autopoietical, self-organized systems. It is this behaviour which enables us to control ourselves behind our own backs as we concentrate on the environment generates innovative raw material. However, just because innovation is natural, it is difficult to make it its own issue. It loses its matter of course, the natural innovator observes his action. As a consequence, the concepts enters the public issue and proliferates in speeches and commentaries. Practically anybody of self-attached importance likes to lead the flag of innovation, but the more it is conjured, the less precise its content becomes. To compensate this, innovation is even more often mentioned. Not for the first time quantity rules over quality.
In the technical and managerial realm innovation denotes the relation between an unsatisfactory state and a correcting means. The state often cocerns an obstinate environment which is to be made pliant with the aid of a mechanical or data processing apparatus. This apparatus indicates the difference between the original state S and the successfully altered state S'. So much for the technical aspect. But once the idea of making money with such an apparatus emerged, innovation became a matter of chain. Innovation follwos innovation, innovation' innovates innovation. Nowadays lack remedy is no more an excuse to lean back with relief to enjoy the improved environmental state; quite the contrary, lack remedy turns into a lack to be remedied ad infinitum. We might call that kind of innovation 'rational'; it refers to a given connection, falls back upon a given solution and improves it.
All the same - innovation is not merely about (may this be a modest advice for innovative sponsors who spill money over the developing departments) perpetuately improved tools which help us to do even whiter washing, to spare even more time, to send even more superfluent photographs by SMS. No, beside 'rational' there is also 'original' innovation. It establishes an entirely new lack remedy by either inventing a totally unknown machine (as has been the case with the wheel, for example) or by unexpectedly reinventing an apparatus that was originally conceived to solve problem X for abolishing problem Y. It remains to our rational purists and fund raisers to lament over this misuse. Often the two aspects are connected; a new apparatus is invented and later on used for something different. But it is original in any way.
As we can see, innovations will create something new by requiring something old. Originality then means the dissolution of structures, whereas rationality implies their modified recombination. Accordingly, original innovation means a definite relation of lack and remedy is redefined. This is inconceivable without a verbal basis. Therefore verbal innovation is no surprise at all. And not only machines, but also ideas, ideals, cultural habits inside and outside of organizations create and remedy lack. Since in these cases there is no immediate equivalent in the machine world, it is impossible draw a line between 'real' and 'virtual' innovation. It is a matter of indivual case to decide which is substantial and which is old wine in new pipes.
Innovation defines the rhythm of technical and intellectual development. Given the increasing acceleration it will not last a long time until what was yesterday will be up to date tomorrow and the strained short-term memory thinks anything is modern. Here lies the chance for the old iron to declare its rusty parts to be innovative.
No comments:
Post a Comment