Individual and Teams
Jewkes’s review demonstrates that much of the inventions discussed are linked to individuals viewed as ignorant of science, isolated and uneducated investors, but with great respect and admiration for science. This means that most of the inventors collaborated or related with distinguished researchers or scientists in their pursuits. Jewkes asserts that such a relationship resulted in “accidental” teamwork that contributed to the inventions observed during the nineteenth and twentieth century. Evidently, among the sixty innovations sampled, none was notable from the society union where individual investors could not relate with their peers to exchange thoughts and research. More so, key figures from Russia such as Sikorsky and Zworykin made significant contributions in aeronautical engineering and telecommunication through their innovation after immigrating to the United States (Jewkes, Sawers & Stillerman, 1958). The ability to innovate was exacerbated by other innovators and science enthusiasts who contributed to their inventions. For instance, the steam engine inventor Trevithick consulted with Royal Society members; Michael Faraday was a close friend of Henry Maudsley, while Edison worked closely with scientists at the Princeton University laboratories. Through teams work, individuals can share ideas and experiences within similar areas of interest, resulting in innovative products or services. This indicates that teamwork is a critical element in fostering high-impact innovation.
Innovation arising among Individuals And Large Companies
Innovation in the cotton-picking industry was largely impacted by individuals who had minimal resources to capitalize on their ideas. Large companies in the cotton industry would purchase and license the ideas and subsequently develop them industrial level. Such patterns were observed in the automotive industry, where individuals or small businesses invented most innovations that revolutionized the motor vehicle sector. For instance, automatic vehicle transmission was developed by a sole proprietor who sold his invention to a large motor vehicle company, which massed produced the invention as observed in modern society. In the food sector, the creation of the Kodachrome process was developed by two brothers who were musicians but later acquired by an established photographic company for mass production (Jewkes, Sawers & Stillerman, 1958). The evidence above indicates that much of the innovation in the pre and post-industrialization period was characterized mainly by the emergence of individualized innovations that large organizations later acquired. The evidence suggests that large organizations are not effective in catalysing innovativeness in an economy. Therefore, society needs to encourage innovativeness at a personal level to facilitate high-impact innovation that large firms can replicate on a large scale.
Changes in Innovation
Technological changes driven by the age of the internet have transformed how innovation occurs in the twenty-first century. Nevertheless, there are similar patterns of innovation since Jewkes wrote his article in 1958, and that his conclusions at that time are still valid in the 21st century. The majority of the recent high-value venture such as PayPal, craigslist, Apple, Firefox, and flicker photo sharing were invented by individuals working with teams. However, as mentioned earlier, the venture gained tremendous success and dominance after being sold to a large corporation. For instance, Elon Musk sold PayPal in 2012 to eBay with a market value of twenty billion. Today, its value has increased to three hundred billion. This demonstrates the reoccurrence of similar traits shown by the early inventors of the nineteenth and twentieth century who sold their inventions to large corporations. This observation significantly supports the claims of the arguments offered in The Sources of Invention that individuals are responsible for inventing innovations. At the same time, large multinationals are credited with developing and applying inventions on a large scale. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that large corporations are beginning to invent innovative products and services. For insane, Amazon’s Alexa is an artificial intelligence virtual assistance invented by Amazon Corporation. This means that soon, “The Sources of Invention?” claims may be refuted as the world becomes more technologically advanced.
Creating a theory
The theory proposed is “Individuals and small businesses are critical in creating inventions while large organizations capitalize and apply the innovation in large scale.” Based on past evidence, large organizations do not play an essential role in creating new innovative ideas. This can be due to the complex processes in the decision-making process that may limit innovativeness. In a large organization, the approval of new designs or innovations may take time because of the bureaucratic processes established by the management to review potential innovations. Nevertheless, multinational organizations have huge financial capability and resources to acquire promising innovations from individuals or small companies and capitalize on them in the market. In contrast, unlike organizations, individuals employ deductive reasoning and rationale to solve problems in society. This conscious and purposeful research process for opportunities results in creative and innovative solutions achieved in the form of inventions. Therefore, at a fundamental level, the role of small businesses and individuals in promoting innovation efforts is to create innovative products and services, which can be adopted by a large organization to be implemented on a massive scale.
Reference
Jewkes, J., Sawers, D., & Stillerman, R. (1958). The sources of invention (Vol. 2). London: Macmillan.
Leave a Reply