Over recent weeks I seem to have spent a lot of time in the innovation space, with plenty of talk about being innovative, creative and forward thinking. However, given the very different angles that each of the individuals I was speaking to were coming at
it from, the question came to mind around what exactly do we mean by innovation.
Odd as it may seem, this brought up an image of the 1970’s “Love is...” cartoon, where the Him and Her character would show the many and varied ways in which we can express love for each other. So, perhaps the interesting question is whether we can find
as many ways to be innovative as we can to show our affection for one another !
Yet, as we ask ourselves what innovation is, the key traits are nothing new. Okay, so we want our firms or partners to think “out of the box” and to try to predict the future by coming up with ideas that others might not have considered yet. Is that so very
different from whatever Dyson was thinking when he created his vacuum cleaner, or Branson his approach to airlines, or the Caveman his first wheel ? Well of course it’s not, and that’s pretty fundamental, in that innovation has always been there in human behaviours
in the past.
Perhaps the slightly worrying aspect in today’s version of innovation is the amount of firms, individuals or industry bodies who are now describing themselves with the “innovative” label, as if it has become some sort of brand that you can simply award yourself.
Could this be the business equivalent of the awful subjects of “Ibiza Uncovered” who would describe themselves as “I’m mad, me” when actually we all knew that meant that they were just annoying and self-obsessed ! Do we actually need to describe ourselves
as “innovative” to prove that we are, or should this be something that we are highly suspicious of when dealing with our unproven counterparts today ?
The truth, as ever, is partly out there. Firms should be able to clearly demonstrate that they are innovative through their services and the products or services that they offer. Merely laying claim to being innovative in words without being able to back
this up in deed, simply attempts to take advantage of a term that is rapidly approaching entry onto the Buzzword Bingo board, and then hoping that your counterparts won’t dig too deeply into the facts whilst you make hay.
The larger more established firms have also realized that they need to embrace this “new” behaviour, and so have created whole teams looking to focus on being innovative, or perhaps more likely building partnerships with new and exciting firms who can create
this dimension for them. These initiatives are extremely valid and I know, from several years working with investors and larger firms who wanted to get involved with new up and coming entities that the hardest part is to pick the right one. Importantly, even
the large firms need to be careful and ensure that they are being guided by “experts” who truly understand the business, and who genuinely have their clients’ interests at heart.
Today we also have the relative new Accelerator concept, which should assist larger firms in knowing who they should be dealing with. However, I can’t help thinking that this sometimes becomes a little like the “X Factor”, given that many of these firms
have queued up with sometimes over optimistic ambitions of fame and success, and then see themselves entered into a high profile competition where the lucky winners may become successful, both for themselves and the end investors. However, we all know that
for every One Direction, that does succeed commercially, there are several Steve Brooksteins who disappear into terminal obscurity.
My point isn’t that the Accelerators aren’t doing a good job, because they provide a good channel for certain types of firms and can sort the wheat from the chaff of those that they see. However, the reality is that there are many firms out there who are
far more innovative than many of those joining the X factor queue. These are the firms who are quietly getting on with spending their time and limited funds on developing fantastic products for their future clients, rather than taking their ties off and trying
to build a funky image that perhaps will not stand up to scrutiny. These firms may also mention innovation in their discussions with counterparts, but it is likely to be with a small “i” and used very much in reference to something truly inspirational that
they have constructed, rather than using it with a big “I” as a badge which supposedly is a reason for existence in itself and apparent justification for investors to reach for their chequebook.
We are lucky enough to be part of an industry today where financial technology has been awarded its own badge, and where FinTech is perhaps finally cool, sexy, and definitely not as evil as banking in the eyes of the media. There are many great firms out
there, who are building superb products and getting involved in initiatives which will fundamentally change the way in which we do business in the future. However, my advice to investors and large institutions remains the same, that you will need to dig for
the gold and that this process of panning through the distractions may take time, will not be easy, but will be thoroughly worth it in the end.
Innovation is ... ? Simply a behaviour, culture and delivery that really shouldn’t need further fanfare or explanation !