This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
"Innovation" is one of the most spoken terms used in the business world these days. Certainly, it's authentically a laudable thing to seek to. Actual innovation creates genuine values in a large number; this is a common knowledge among young internees. This is the main reason because of which people use it as a usual activity. Innovation is one of those words that sound professional in meetings, despite the fact that whether an individual is actually serious about innovating something. (McGuinness, 2009)
One can easily research and find companies that claim to have innovated their product to the gain of their consumers. Some examples of the recent taglines, slogans or headlines include:
Ford: "Innovation improving driving"
Siemens: "A trendsetter in innovation"
Yokohama: "The art of innovation"
3M: "The spirit of innovation"
Cargill: "Business innovations inspired by life"
IBM: "The innovators' innovator"
NEC: "Empowered by Innovation"
Silicon Graphics: "The Source of Innovation and Discovery" (Hargadon, 2003)
In this corporate world where innovation is the commonly used word, professional worker replace this word with the tern creativity, innovation interchangeably and creative process which initiates or triggers the ambiguity and prevents prosperity in the field.
As analyst and professional workers make an attempt to construct the study of, innovation, creativity and creative thinking more purposeful, replicable, functional and conventional, by integrating words that have different meanings leads to mystification which results in difficulty in understanding the issue at present. Understanding of the word "creative thinking" is usually diluted by referring or naming it as "creativity". When an individual presents study on "innovation," even though they mean a "creative process," it risks the reception of both by causing misjudgment and makes it simpler to raise objections that ruin the appearance and uptake of learning. (Hargadon, 2003)
In both media and corporate society the words innovation and creativity are used as synonyms. People usually believe that to create innovative things, an individual has to be creative. While others belief that there is no creativity without innovative idea. Both the points are true and valid, but they do not provide any relation or inter relation between the notion of creativity and innovation. (Rigie and Harmeyer, 2009)
What is creativity?
Starting off, the terms "innovation" and "creativity" are not same words. They both are two different terminologies. It is challenging for an entity to understand the distinction before establishing an organization-wide innovation initiative. Before taking this further onwards, one should be clear that creativity is the ability which can be found in any individual not just an artist or a professional. Usually we associate talent of painting, sculpting, writing, drawing, dancing, singing, playing music, etc. creative potential is something that is in an individual by birth. It is beyond the artistic ability, it is a gift from the nature.
"Creativity" is referred to as the rational capacity to conceptualize (imagine) new, extraordinary or exceptional ideas, to perceive the new association between apparently casual or unconnected things (Dundon, 2002).
A classic definition of creativity could be:
The term "creativity" is a noun that refers to evidence in which an individual communicates a new concept ( usually a new product or promotion). Mental activity is understood in its own context. It is implicit, but yet hard to define as what goes in the mind is hard to understand. The definition begs the question as to how the new idea would be different and for whom.
The four P's of creativity includes, 1) Person, 2) Product, 3) Process and 4) Press. While teaching "creativity", or focusing on enhancing creative abilities in organizations, people usually forget that it is a noun naming phenomenon. So by teaching creativity one means by definition teaching a phenomenon. So what it means that when people are taught about a phenomenon or creativity, they teach creative process to individuals so that they are able to create new ideas and products. No one can teach creativity, it's the creative process that is taught. Instructing creative problem solving can not mean teaching creativity; rather it is a form of enhancing creativity, creative goods or an end-state. (Cabral,2003).
What is innovation?
Innovation refers to the noun that elaborates the phenomenon of the opening of a new product that adds value. This definition implies that appealing in a original judgment process to build up new concepts and execution strategies, which requires a large number of skill-sets, leading, usually to a team. In order to make the completion successful responsiveness of external and internal press is important. "Innovation," can be defined as a course that transforms some visionary ideas into practical goods, services or processes that bring better worth. This transformation can result in being evolutionary, incremental or fundamental in its affect on the status quo. Hence, it can be said that it represents a natural stride ahead towards concept development, a jump to the next cohort of a particular concept or a completely unique and new way of doing something in total. Innovative is an exterior word which can be gauged. It usually refers to the things that have been weathered properly and are applicable in the real world.
Creative Dreamers vs. Productive Innovators
Creativity Â - Â thoughts
Innovation Â - Â thoughts + action
Creativity Â = originality - ideas are often judged by their novelty.
Innovation = Â Novelty + Action novelty - rather than their possible value
Creativity involves of thinking new ideas, whereas, innovation refers to doing new things. In other words, there is no point of sitting idle and dreaming or fantasizing until and unless you are prepared for the hard work in achieving it.
"Creativity" is not the astounding path to an entity's growth and prosperity, as claimed copiously these days. Those who praise the beneficial merits of business creativityâ€¦ tend to confuse the concept of getting of facts with their applicability-this is, confound imagination in the theoretical with practical innovation (Katz, 2003).
Businesses are usually doing things in a unique manner through creativity without a continuous follow-up is a exclusively unfruitful form of individual behaviour. This is even unprofessional in a way. This is because the creative individual who dreams out ideas and does nothing to help them get implemented is avoiding any liability for one of the major conditions of the business, explicitly, action; and by avoiding follow-through, that individual is acting an organizationally unendurable - or, at best, sloppy - fashion
Creativity refers to Ideas but Innovation is a combination of both Ideas and Action. The ideas are usually judged further by their novelty than by their possible helpfulness, to both consumers and to business. So Creativity can be referred to as Novelty but Innovation will be a mixture of Novelty and Value
Practically, creative thinking is a significant part of the innovation process which covers a huge chunk of this whole process. Thus, an innovation requires numerous steps of creative thinking all through the procedure resulting to an introduction. It was suggested by a researcher, that the customary representation of creativity and innovation ensnare creativity in the "front end" of the innovation process, he further argued that creativity is needed throughout the innovation process and not just in the beginning. He further said that Ideas and actions occur and interrelate as long as innovation is being achieved. Creativity goes along with actions. The process of launching or introducing a product requires creativity at all steps of the development process including study, idea enlargement, alteration, construction, marketing, sales, allocation, etc.it can also be said that innovation is a combination of many creative ideas. The question that arises is that what differentiates between creativity and innovation? (Cropley. 2001)
When comparing the definitions of innovation and creativity, certain similarities and differences will be observed amongst the key components:
CREATIVITY v/s INNOVATION
Individual that is group
Recurring of imaginative thoughts
Introduction of results
Inner compression of imagination
Outer compression of souk
Imaginative ideas can come from an individual or a group. But novelty or further improvisation of the ideas already present, typically requires individuals to come together to accomplish it from different areas of the firm or throughout its value chain for instance for a client's product: buyer research, merchandise development, promotion, production, retailing, allocating etc.
A constant recurring of new and imaginative thoughts is required for both: originality and improvement, but for commencing; improvement requires many rounds of newer thought processes. To introduce a new item requires brain storming of newer ideas, novelty deals with launching it more often in several replicas, for this to become possible; strategies that will improvise on improvement are needed. Both inventiveness and its execution, do not take place in isolation but in a controlled press that is they must go hand in hand with each other to bring about favorable results. They must also be present in the external environment or marketplace, which will eventually determine its success or failure.
Resourcefulness at a glance: Improvement v/s execution
Few of the well liked or perhaps appreciated firms, those who have not only achieved profitability but also are known for their excellent management; as far as improvising is concerned- their founder had a unique idea. Such an environment instilled a strong business culture along with furthering equality, devotion and a compliance with the organization's hopes and believes in the employees. This proved to be beneficial precisely because all the workings can be carried out in a colossal way- comprising of vigor, spirits and the ability of not considering options or problems. Clearly, it is not the same thing as promoting newness within the firm. Consistent thoughts and devotion may help execute the given ideas but they do not promote the induction of more of those unique thoughts. For the inception of more 'unusual' ideas, suppleness, receptive nature, accepting, welcoming and then adjusting to newer thoughts is required. (Remenyi, 2007)
Many organizations claiming to be creative made to the list of the most 'well liked' firms, their resourcefulness is projected by the senior officials. In the case of Enron whose CEO, Kenneth Lay, dealt in the business of large national network of gas lines. Since he was qualified and skilled economist, he favored free market: that is independent working of the organizations in relation to the demand and supply mechanism, and had a disliking for any sort of government rules, regulations and laws. Since his outlook to view the national map was different, he developed his network in such a way where gas was purchased from where it was cheap and sold to where it was needed. This instance sights Lay promoting deregulation or lesser governmental control and regulations. He built upon the niche markets and in this entire working, changed the industry. All his efforts were rewarded when Enron was rated as one of the 'most well liked' firms by Fortune magazine and was ranked at the top for innovation. (Remenyi, 2007)
Ranked second for improvement were the Mirage Resorts. Steve Wynn, CEO had the idea: to give consumers of the gambling industry flawless services, food, entertainment and amusement. Treasure Island resort was first designed to generate more income from non-gambling rather than gambling customers. Wynn also devised a way to make his workforce excited and motivated for the work they were doing. His expenditure on the employee services like those on employee corridors and cafeterias was the same as done on the guests. The culture of uniformity and high spirits was promoted by him, all in compliance with his original aim to improve the services and providing consumers with memorable experiences. Again in this case, the uniqueness of the idea, which came from the CEO himself, matters. A competitive advantage was created in terms of the equality and devotion oriented culture, which ranked high in execution too. (Remenyi, 2007)
Another instance of originality at its best is Honda. Honda, a past motorcycle fanatic and Fujisawa, a business entrepreneur- are the two owners. They collaborated and combined their skills and expertise to produce the Honda 50cc Supercub in 1958. It was reasonably priced, light weight yet had an outstanding horsepower. It was of a huge promotional success since it appealed highly to the small corporations of Japan. (Remenyi, 2007)
When they tried to break into the US market, many problems arose. Motorcycle fanatics there were of a special kind since they paid high attention to size and power. Consequently, Honda was unsure to introduce its small sized bikes into a market as big as US market; as a result, they introduced larger 250cc and 305cc bikes. It was the collapse of these larger bikes which bought triumph to the smaller 50cc supercub. They were not satisfied to use a mediator therefore, Honda officials drove themselves around Los Angeles on smaller 50cc bikes to everyday jobs and during this process and they caught people's attention and enquiries, including the one from Sears. Because of the collapse and failure of the larger bikes, permit distribution to the supercub was granted. The rest, as we know it, is history. (Remenyi, 2007)
The credit to restructure and redevelop the US motorcycle market goes to Honda. The statistics show that nearly one out of every two motorcycles sold was Honda, after their 'You meet the nicest people on a Honda' campaign. This campaign was a huge marketing success as shown by the above statistic. The account of this invention is not different from others in terms of originality and uniqueness of ideas. A correct mix of expertise, talent, spirit, skill, knowledge along with a few inaccuracies, learning and luck bought success to this corporation. However, in this case as well, the leadership defined creativity. (Remenyi, 2007)
The drawback of originating ideas from the leadership for example the CEO and executing it through promoting business culture, equality and devotion is that favorable results are dependent on the leadership. The CEO must therefore have the best thoughts, right or wrong, in such an environment because they had the most likelihood of being implemented. For this reason some people are apprehensive about Microsoft. Bill Gates had a tie on the third place in Financial Executive's survey for "best boss". He is seen as a modern day, exemplary leader or more informally as 'modern-day robber baron' who is capable of establish a monopoly, without making it seem like one and make people act like fanatics over Windows. Critics, however, point out that the weakness of Microsoft is the dependence on its leader. Although Gates is an acknowledgeable chief, but he is a human being. As the time progresses more complicated situations arise, Gates, even though he may be outstanding, has his own restrictions - be it in terms of knowledge, understanding, inspirations, time or attention span. (Dutton 1996)
Although originality has laid foundations for biggest improvisations of the world, but a thinker of unique ideas and the improviser of those ideas can never be the same person. To imagine and execute are like the two sides of the same coin. Creativity may have endless strings of different imaginations and perspectives while to be an innovator will require facing and accepting truth and reality and then turning them into vivid dreams. To conclude, creativity and innovation go side by side and are deficient without each other.