To Tinker or Invent?

Inspired by the content of a Malcom Gladwell talk, I wrote a post titled "It Can Be Better to Tinker than Invent" a couple of months ago. The truth of that assertion, of course, depends on the context. A LinkedIn thread devoted to that subject has attracted a steady stream of comments from medical device professionals, which I will summarize here.

Before I get to that, however, I'd like to point out a counterexample, mentioned by innovation consultant Jeremy Gutsche. In a keynote talk, Gutsche asks the audience to guess which company states the following on its website:

The answer? Typerwriter maker Smith Corona.

The company missed out by refusing to embrace computing, Gutsche points out. But the company had a century-long history of identifying new opportunities and optimizing its products based on them. 

The company flirted with computing but refused to embrace it. While the firm had a tentative deal with Acer, it later called it off. Acer went on to become the fourth largest PC maker in the world. In 1995, Smith Corona declared bankruptcy.

Situational Framing Dictates Outcome

As the aforementioned LinkedIn thread indicates, debuting a groundbreaking product can result in notoriety, IP protection advantages, and market share. It also entails a higher risk of failure (and a more difficult path to market). Large companies, which are often conservative, thus look to acquire innovative startups rather than break new ground in house. 

As Gutsche points out in the aforementioned video, "situational framing dictates outcome." That principle also specifies which principle is more valuable: iterative tinkering or groundbreaking inventions. Sometimes, a balance of the two is advantageous. While there are cases when it is better to invent groundbreaking products, "tinkering" or developing products with incremental improvements is often a safer (and less expensive) bet. Some inventors come up with ideas that don't hit the market for decades. There are many cases throughout history of groundbreaking inventors who died in poverty, years before their ideas had a chance to hit the market.

Startups with bold new product ideas can reduce risk through solid IP protection but, even still, the patents expire after 20 years. It's therefore important to develop a comprehensive strategy.

—Brian Buntz