In one of my dictionaries, a Gage Canadian Dictionary, the word 'innovation' is defined as:

1. A change made in the established way of doing things
2. The making of changes; act of bringing in new things or new ways of doing things: He is strongly opposed to innovation of any kind.

At the front cover of his book 'Innovation', Tom Gorman uses the following Peter Drucker quote:

"Innovation is the specific instrument...that endows resources with a new capacity to create wealth."

At Chapter 1, Gorman uses the title, 'Innovation = Problem Solving'. And, in a caption that appears to be a dictionary excerpt, Gorman provides the following definition:

in • no • va • tion

1. A new product, service, process, or approach to a problem
2. A new way of thinking about something
3. The act of innovating, as in "Innovation occurs in every culture"

I know from recent experience, the discussion of innovation can very quickly get deeply philosophical. Here are some questions, which capture some of the differences in the ways people think about innovation:

• Must innovation, by definition, be a physical/tangible thing? 
• Must innovation, by definition, be linked to change?
• Should innovation, by definition, be linked to problem solving?
• What's the difference between creativity and innovation?

Perhaps, creativity describes new things that can be enjoyed for their own sake rather than for any change they may bring about? If that is the case then change may be an important facet of the definition of innovation but of little or no importance when considering a definition of creativity?

In other words - perhaps we should acknowledge utility is less tangible for creativity and more tangible for innovation?

Perhaps, for creativity utility can be so nebulous it should not even be a facet of definition?

Are creativity and innovation mutually exclusive? Or, is one a subset of the other? If so then which one is the broader thing...which is closer to concept?

***

Business and Innovation:

Overall, I'm wondering if one of the largest rifts between our thoughts about innovation is around technology. Must a business innovation contain some aspect of technology or can a business innovation exist independent of technology?

For business purposes, would it make sense to define innovation as 'a thing or action that solves a business problem'?

Maybe we should state innovation - a thing or action - must have the effect of creating a change...or, should we be more specific and state innovation must create a change of commercial value?

The 'change' part of that sort of definition is consistent with my Gage Canadian Dictionary. And change is simple and it is a broad enough thing (say, a concept) so it should not generate any confusion or controversy. However, the 'adding commercial value' part isn't so simple...it is a qualification but it is a subjective one. My Gage Canadian Dictionary does not express the nature of change it expresses in its definition of innovation. While we may want to assume Gage Canadian Dictionary intends the change to be positive rather than negative or of value rather than valueless, that isn't stated in my Gage Canadian Dictionary. In fact, the sample italicized in my dictionary definition - "He is strongly opposed to innovation of any kind" - provides a clear message that some people are opposed to innovation...presumably, that's the case because those people do not see innovation as either positive or value-adding. Or, perhaps the opposition is simply a resistance to change.

For business, could we start by considering the following type of definition:

          Business Innovation (def'n):

          A thing done or provided to add value by solving a customer's problem or satisfying a customer's need.

Embedded in this definition are:

1. A business innovation must be tangible...a thought or an idea isn't enough to be considered a business innovation. Only when that thought or idea is converted into physical reality - a product, a service of action, etc - can it be considered an innovation. 
2. An innovation in business begins with a customer need or problem...all business innovations should be traced to a specific, identified customer need or problem. 
3. An innovation in business will cause and be a change. That change will be measured in terms of value added from the customer's perspective...as a specific, identified customer need is satisfied or as a specific, identified customer problem is solved. 
4. So, to qualify as a business innovation the thing must be customer-centric. 
5. A business innovation need not be tied to technology. Technological innovations in business would be a subset of business innovations. 
6. Potential questions about 'direct' and 'indirect' value, as seen from the customer's perspective, questions about the ability to discover with precision customer's needs, and questions about the ability to measure the value added from the customer's perspective, etc. (Such is the essence and challenge of Marketing).

***

If we can agree on a definition of Innovation then we will have a solid footing upon which we can build as we answer other important questions, such as:

• how do we want to define the relationship between innovation and entrepreneurship?
• how do we want to nurture and promote business-innovation processes in our workplaces?
• how do we place ourselves in our customers' shoes and with precision understand their needs and problems then deliver measurable value through innovation?

We at Spirited are very pleased to be aligned with Leadership Waterloo Region through sponsorship of this event and I thank each of you as community leaders for committing your time today to support this fine organization. Building community and creating space for leaders to establish and strengthen relationships is at the core of Leadership Waterloo Region's purpose and you have provided that opportunity this morning – well done Anne and Joanne!

Spirited Investors is a private equity firm with business excellence and leadership at our core. We are focused on leveraging the expertise of our shareholders to add value to all the organizations we are involved with. Our goal is to be recognized as the best problem-solving business investors in Canada. We offer concrete assistance to businesses by providing capital and business expertise through our Activestors, many of whom are recognized business leaders in this community.  To this end we as an organization reflect the barn building culture that the region is known for and the “Spirit of Why Not” - two concepts that David Johnston, one of our regions greatest ambassadors and leaders, has associated with this Region very eloquently over the past couple of years.  We have also been the benefactors of this attitude of interdependence that permeates through our community. Many of you in the room have extended your support to us as allies as we have grown from a dream to a concept to a functioning corporation. Without your partnership the dream would not become a reality and we look forward to giving back to the community through shared commerce as well as involvement of our people in the social profit arena. Thank you for your continuing support of our organization.

This concept of interdependence or mutual reliance is an attitude that I believe demonstrates true leadership. It goes beyond independence and acknowledges that we are all stronger when we collaborate for the benefit of one another. It is an attitude that is evident throughout our community and I believe it is a key reason that this region continues to be at the forefront of innovation and community development. It is also evident among the founders of Spirited Investors and is a key reason that I have chosen to align myself with Spirited Investors.

For those of you who are not familiar with us please take one of the brochures that are at your table. If you are intrigued by our vision please contact us.