Innovation: The Who's Where's and How's

In Daniel Pink’s latest book, Drive, he talks about the self determination theory (or SDT for short and in keeping with the “reductionism” trend). It turns out there is a global network of researchers working on this theory based on human needs. The big finding - quoted directly from the book – is that “Human beings have an innate inner drive to be autonomous, self-determined and connected to one another.” Further, the book states that when that drive is liberated, “people achieve more and live richer lives.” I thought about this claim and reflected on past projects that I have been involved with and further, looked at the “flow” of these projects. “Flow”, by the way, is another concept that Dan discusses in the book and that he challenges us to analyze in ourselves; how best do we achieve this flow and how can we enhance it, that is. I did this and found some interesting insights. My flow was severely restrained when I encountered breaks in communication - and I will go further and s...

How fair is a fight, when all the power of momentum, negativity and denial is tilted to one side? Ask Obama this question and his answer is: keep on fighting. At the end of the day his job is mind-shifting, a very difficult thing to accomplish in the age of outrageous right wing commentators and supreme court decisions. Not unlike what some innovators out here experience. In many instances the advancement of Innovation management theories in corporations can be a colossal fight. The combination of institutional momentum (what I call "stagentum" stagnation-momentum) , corporate antibodies and old guard practices can become formidable barriers to new ideas and innovation. How fair is the fight when the power of decision making is with people that don't believe in what one does? How fair is fight when we are ridiculed because we are doing things outside the box? Or we are to "touchy- feely "? Like I have said before, Innovation is as much an exercise in mind-shi...

I can't resist, when I discover an insight I tend to over analyze it. Excuse me if this may be one of those instances. In percolating Daniel Pink's new book "Drive" I find that his treatise of "economic" systems and "social" systems and the combustive clash of both, provides an effective analytical framework to analyze the specific cultural nuance of "genuineness". Consistent with other writings on this subject, there is a difference between the "what is in it for me" cultural ethos and the "I am a genuine human agent that will engage with someone because they inspire me or like them" ethos. So, hear me out... If you engage with someone in a social context and then try to transport that to an economic context for the "what is in it for me" ethos, that is not genuine. Period. I think the other way around is a genuine engagement because of the outward transparency and maybe , just maybe, if there is positive en...