Innovator's Dilemma in Space

Before I expand on this dilemma, let me first acknowledge the artist’s work that I have been sharing over the past few weeks. Pat Rawlings’ images have inspired me for many years and have been the source of many of my creative views about the future. Most recently I used his images in a conversation with a TV network about space travel 50 years from now.

Of the many definitions of creativity that I have heard over the years my favorite comes from author Dale Dauten. It is best captured in a quote from his book, Better than Perfect, “He brought together two ways of thinking that usually don’t go together, so his own brain got stretched. That’s one way to be creative – to force together ideas that normally don’t go together.” So creativity results from holding simultaneously in your mind two thoughts that normally don’t go together. One of the best ways to accomplish this is to bring together individuals with different view points and to hold the differing perspectives simultaneously in the room and discover the creativity that is beyond just the sum or compromise of the different ideas. A few years ago Dale Dauten introduced the Innovator’s Lab to bring together leaders from different industries to find creative solutions that resulted from the different perspectives within the Innovator’s lab community. It is a great concept that we we were fortunate enough to introduce to JSC a few years ago.

Personally I like the distinction that John Kao makes in Innovation Nation between creativity and innovation. Creativity is the rich source of ideas. Innovation is the ability to take an idea and turn it into something useful. The trick is not to throw out the creative ideas because they don’t fit into predefined criteria of usefulness. It is easy to allow for the possibilities while brainstorming but it is more difficult to allow for new solutions to what at first glance may appear to be a familiar problem.

Which leads me to the Innovator’s Dilemma captured by Clayton Christensen. At the heart of the dilemma is the concept that the success achieved by organizations from their original innovations makes it difficult for it to be innovative and creative in the future. If we applied the dilemma to Human Space Exploration it would state that what made us successful over the fifty years has focused the realm of possibilities within the context of our experience. Therefore, how do we allow for alternative ideas in support of human exploration while simultaneously holding our 50 years of success?  Or stated another way, how do we bring together the multi generations for creative new solutions. Can we hold both perspectives at the same time and find a creative path that is beyond the multiple generational perspectives? How will the multiple creative perspectives come together when we move from creativity to innovation?

Yet, there is another more subtle challenge that results from the Innovator’s Dilemma that is captured so well from Steve Boehlke from SFB Associates. In his recent publication, The Politics of Creativity™: Four Domains for Inquiry and Action by Leaders in R&D, he discusses the cost of creativity to the leader, which applies to anyone in the organization. The successful organization defines creativity and innovation within the context of what has enabled its success in the past. What happens to the individual that offers creative and innovative ideas that don’t fit within the organization’s definition? What happens to the individual that truly believes in his “out of the box” idea and continues to push it forward when it doesn’t fit within the historical norms of the organization? I highly recommend reading Steve’s examination of this cost for the creative leader. Is the tag “out of the box” thinker a badge of honor in your organization? Is a “trail blazer” encouraged to come to the creativity and innovation table? How is the creative individual rewarded and acknowledged? Going back to Dale’s Innovator’s lab where different perspectives are brought together for creative new solutions, how do we bring together the “out of the box” thinkers with those with the tried and true perspectives?

Finally, all of the above authors agree that innovation requires failure. If you don’t fail in the process then are you really being creative and innovative? The dilemma occurs after success is achieved and the organization no longer has a stomach for failure. Do the systems in place in the organization allow for discovery through failure? Is failure encouraged or discouraged? What would you or your organization do in the classical management example of a senior leader making a million dollar mistake? As the story goes, the leader was called into the CEO’s office and was expecting to be fired by the CEO. As he handed his resignation to the CEO, she asked “What is this?” He said “I know you are going to fire me for my mistake and so I figured I’d save you the trouble by turning in my resignation.” Amazed, she responded, “Why would I do that, I just spent a million dollars training you. I know that you will never make that mistake again.” Mission failures aside, what is your appetite for failure?

Sharing the Vision,
Steven Gonzalez, Deputy, Advanced Planning Office

42 thoughts on “Innovator's Dilemma in Space”

  1. Steven, The course for Success is more often obtained through failure and mistakes. But my appetite questions upon, What are the Consequences of the failure or mistake. If it balances along the Edge of Financal loss or prosperity, then the failure or mistake can be remedied and chalked up as a learning experience. But if the failure or mistake is equated with Human Lives at stake, then Never should the course or plan be emplemented until all other option have been evauluated.

  2. Orson wells said “Success is 99% failure”
    So I am on the same wave length with you.
    My position is that failure is a crucial part of innovation. I do like Leonardo da Vinci with all his inventions when we know that his “planes” could not fly.
    I like lions as far as lions have got a great memory. The million dollar mistake leader would be sacrificed today, evidently. Nevertheless, I agree that when you innovate, e.g. you think about all steps requiring in the final one (the fully workable application) then, you must foresee various possibilities, options, choises. Consequently, reasonable mistakes are acceptable.

  3. (quote from above)
    [[[Therefore, how do we allow for alternative ideas in support of human exploration while simultaneously holding our 50 years of success? Or stated another way, how do we bring together the multi generations for creative new solutions. Can we hold both perspectives at the same time and find a creative path that is beyond the multiple generational perspectives? How will the multiple creative perspectives come together when we move from creativity to innovation?]]]

    How??? Use what they gave us in a new way… rather than throwing away all the opportunity they’ve handed to us.

    The Space Shuttles
    A) Keep the Space Shuttles docked at the ISS after their mission is complete. Launch them fuel via rocket whenever needed. Never land them on Earth again.
    1: They will be available for “lease” operations to fix sattelites belonging to the USA or any other nation. This could be a source of income for NASA, offering services repairing or recovering sattelites belonging to other nations.
    2: If the Hubble goes down again, they’ll already be in Space to fix it. It’ll be a matter of manning them and taking a “day-trip” from the ISS on a repair mission.
    3: The presance of the shuttles at the ISS will increase its size, and probably the capacity of the station to support more astronauts. In case of emergency, crews could retreat to the shuttles if the ISS becomes dangerous or hazardous to occupy.

    The Moon
    B) Build a lunar lander/launcher.
    1: Launch the lander/launcher via rocket, have a shuttle retrieve the payload once it’s in orbit. The lander/launcher can be kept in the storage bay of the shuttle.
    2: Launch fuel for both shuttles into space, have the other shuttle retrieve that payload. The fuel can be kept in the storage bay of that shuttle until it’s time to re-fuel.
    3: Both shuttles advance to lunar orbit.
    4: The lunar lander/launcher is manned, and lands. The mission is carried out, then the lander/launcher is prepared for launch. It launches and the shuttle that brought it retrieves it.
    5: The shuttle carrying fuel begins to re-fuel both shuttles.
    6: The shuttles return to the ISS.
    7: The capsul that brought the most recent crew to the ISS is used to return astronauts and samples from the moon to Earth.

    Your major problems seem to be creating a large enough rocket (to carry crew and supplies) with enough fuel for a trip to the moon on board after launch. Use the shuttles by sending a lunar lander/launcher to them and you won’t have that problem.

    The Moon & Possibly Mars
    C) You could consider using the shuttles (already in space by my plan) to build a new space station (and perhaps even a ship specifically for a Mars mission).
    1: Build a station to replace the ISS in near-Earth orbit.
    2: Move the ISS into a lunar orbit. The shuttles can be used as “ferries” for supplies and people to the ISS and the new station closer to Earth. The ISS can (prior to lunar orbit) be adapted to be a platform for lunar lander/launchers; leaving the shuttles out of it except as a means for getting back and forth to and from the ISS orbiting around the moon.
    3: I believe that in this way, we’ll have a permanent human presance on the moon and in orbit of the moon very soon.

    4: In the “down time” for the nearest space shuttle (while it’s not going to or from the moon) it can be used to construct a space-based ship (or two). Either this can replace the shuttles’ position as ferries for supplies and crews between the lunar orbiting ISS and the Earth orbiting new station, or it can be used specifically for a mission to Mars or a mission to an asteroid. Heck, keep the shuttles and the new ship going to and from the ISS and the new station, and if need be the new ship could be selected and used for such missions anyway.

    I don’t want to see the space shuttles turn into rust-pieces on a muesum’s front lawn somewhere… especially when they’ve still got such potential.

    –Brandon

  4. Ever wake up in the middle of the night and remember something you forgot earlier in the day, or come up with a witty comeback to an insult someone said to you a few days before? Well, this is kind of like that.

    I just realized that there are three Shuttles, not two. I don’t even know when I started thinking there were only two. So sad to have forgotten… 🙁

    Minus my embarassment… what I wrote a few days ago would still fly. Three shuttles could accomplish a lot if permanently kept in space. Don’t know if there’s room at the ISS for three though.

    –Brandon

  5. Steven, The course for Success is more often obtained through failure and mistakes. But my appetite questions upon, What are the Consequences of the failure or mistake. If it balances along the Edge of Financal loss or prosperity, then the failure or mistake can be remedied and chalked up as a learning experience. But if the failure or mistake is equated with Human Lives at stake, then Never should the course or plan be emplemented until all other option have been evauluated.

  6. I know that not many people at all is going to respond to this… And this is probably NOT the place to state this theory.. But I might have an expilination of a picture that NASA has posted on thier APOD website. The URL below is the picture I will try to explain.

    http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

    I think that when the meteor or comet strikes a planet while the planet is begening to form a thin layer of crust, the meteor, or comet, moves the crust away, making the apperence of a double ringed basin. As the crust moves outward, the other pieces of crust that was unaffected by the impact stoped the moving crust from going farther outward, there for the magma cools in the center of both rings, creating the smooth surface.
    I hope that someone will find this comment, and i hope that it will aid to new discoveries.

  7. Innovation is a part of success and also its not compulsary that every innovation will be a success.You might taste the failure but you should take this failure in positive sense and try to innovate new things.I am a R&D lead in and i encourage my team members to bring some innovation without fearing the outcome.I think you should encourage your team member to think positively and use some this would help you a lot.Wishing you all the best for your future innovations.
    Regards
    jame

  8. Hi Steven,

    “At the heart of the dilemma is the concept that the success achieved by organizations from their original innovations makes it difficult for it to be innovative and creative in the future.”

    I have not read Christensen’s work, but I have added it to my reading list. If we understand the mechanisms involved, we may be able to develop interventions.

    Scientifically speaking, is there evidence that the innovative process is less effective now than it was 50 years ago? What are the metrics used to determine this? Once the metric is developed we be able to inquire about the differences and create improvement strategies.

    Once your metric is in place and evidence suggests we are truely less effective – then we need to look backwards to compare the differences in the process that existed 50 years ago and todays process. We need to consider all differences including inputs, methods, organizational structure, staffing and training, materials and equipment, etc. What differences explain the difference in process output? Different parts of your organization may have difference processes. You can you this to isolate the variable that is driving your difference in output.

    “successful over the fifty years has focused the realm of possibilities within the context of our experience.”

    We have techniques to help us resolve this problem. Genrich Altshuller has addressed this problem as it applies to the inventive process. Others are experimenting with organizational structures (e.g. Cisco’s committees).

    Steven – I am interested in your feedback. What metrics are you using to evaluate the effectiveness of the program?

    Regards,
    Steve

  9. Steven, The course for Success is more often obtained through failure and mistakes. But my appetite questions upon, What are the Consequences of the failure or mistake. If it balances along the Edge of Financal loss or prosperity, then the failure or mistake can be remedied and chalked up as a learning experience. But if the failure or mistake is equated with Human Lives at stake, then Never should the course or plan be emplemented until all other option have been evauluated.

  12. I think that you have to fail to succeed sometimes. It makes you think out side the box about new possibilities that you have never though before. Thomas Edison once said “I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.”

    | | |

  14. To have success, your going to have some failure and monetary loss. The only type of failure that I wont accept is the loss of lives.

    | |

  20. i like the questions given here in the post like Or stated another way, how do we bring together the multi generations for creative new solutions. Can we hold both perspectives at the same time and find a creative path that is beyond the multiple generational perspectives? How will the multiple creative perspectives come together when we move from creativity to innovation?
    Thanks for such nice way to express things to readers.

  25. To be honest, in my opinion creativity is what holds technology together thus the world. When people stop being creative, inventing new things, discovering new things bad things will start happening.

    Cheers
    John
    Niche Generator

  27. What an outstanding job you have done. You have served many people by creating this post. Hats off to you. Thank you and looking more like these posts.

  28. I love this article and your point – “If you don't fail in the process then are you really being creative and innovative” has been taken onboard. Seems I've read this at the most appropriate time for me – thankyou

    | |

  29. You can only learn from mistakes but I do wonder what space travel will be like 50 years from now. The possibilities?? Anyway good job with a well written article.

  30. i like the questions given here in the post like Or stated another way, how do we bring together the multi generations for creative new solutions. Can we hold both perspectives at the same time and find a creative path that is beyond the multiple generational perspectives? How will the multiple creative perspectives come together when we move from creativity to innovation?
    Thanks for such nice way to express things to readers.

  31. i like the questions given here in the post like Or stated another way, how do we bring together the multi generations for creative new solutions. Can we hold both perspectives at the same time and find a creative path that is beyond the multiple generational perspectives? How will the multiple creative perspectives come together when we move from creativity to innovation?

    Congratulations for this interesting featured picture! A whole new world…! |
    |
    |
    |

  35. I too love the images, I can see how they influence you. Any kind or progression in anything comes with failure. Of course no one enjoys failing but usually those who have experienced it have made great achievements.

  37. Interesting story ideas. I might add:

    – A character (or character) has difficulty adjusting to life back on Earth after being on the moon for an extended period of time.

    – Possible cultural backlash from media outlets, bloggers, etc. similar to how some people react to other technological developments. Maybe Op/Ed pieces in newspapers about whether we should be diverting resources to the moon when so many issues on Earth still need to be addressed.

  39. I've never thought about the difference between creativity and innovation. As an art major, they always talked creativity, not innovation.

  40. Of course we went to the moon. The new frontear is Europa one of Jupiter's moons with it's red stains from bacteria that grows in ice.

    cheers

    Lee

  41. When I was a child, I wanted to become an astronaut. I failed, failed and failed. But all those failures maid me what I am now. I have become a computer programmer. This article reminded me, my ambition, my innovation.

Comments are closed.