In today's world, buzzwords are everywhere. Within the realm of innovation, the misuse of these innovation buzzwords runs rampant. Often, these words and phrases push people away from innovation as they perceive it to be too complex. 

Buzzwords: What are they?

Often used to impress something upon someone, buzzwords can be technical or specific to a particular industry. Common buzzword examples are synergy, clickbait, and growth hacking. Synergy means something that works together. Clickbait refers to content developers such as Youtubers who exaggerate what their videos are about. Growth hacking means finding different ways to grow a business. Initially meant to simplify things, more often than not, buzzwords complicate them.

Within the world of innovation, there are many existing buzzwords that people dislike. The most common one I hear is design-thinking, which has been around for a while. Originally, this term referred to devising the user's needs at the beginning of a project and carrying that approach to the end. Unfortunately, this buzzword has been misused and turned into something different.

Misused Innovation Buzzwords

Let's look at an innovation buzzword I often use, ideation. At The Innovators Network, we teach workshops on the ideation process. Ideation is the process of generating more and better ideas. At the end of it all, ideation is a made-up word that means relatively the same thing that brainstorming does.

Another innovation buzzword is a disruptor— someone or something that shakes things up when entering an established industry. This shakeup is through the usage of different techniques and approaches. An excellent example of a disruptor is when Uber entered and changed the ride-hailing services industry.

Another buzzword that I use often is innovator. An innovator is simply one who presents a new product, service, or a new transformative technique. The issue that arises with this term is that so many people call themselves innovators when they don't offer anything innovative or perform innovation. Because of its rampant misuse, it has become harder to identify the real innovators from the fake ones.  

Other Buzzword Examples

Next up is the term system-thinking. Top consulting firms often use this buzzword. Companies use the term in attempts to differentiate the services they offer from their competitors. System thinking means looking at things as systems rather than established processes. At its core, this term, like other buzzwords, is an overcomplication of something simple. 

Pain points is another buzzword that refers to things that drive customers crazy. Another commonly used innovation buzzword is social innovation. This one is self-explanatory. It means using innovation to solve social problems. 

When it comes to innovation, buzzwords create a barrier between those inside and outside the innovation space. While buzzwords aren't inherently wrong, their misuses often lead to confusion and misguidance. I hope that misuse of these buzzwords will start to diminish, creating more apparent openings for others to participate in genuine innovation efforts.

To know more about the misuse of innovation buzzwords, listen to this week's show: Misused Innovation Buzzwords.

[irp posts="4392" name="Subscribe to Podcast"]

When studying different companies and their cultures, you will notice different team structures. The question of which structure is the best may eventually cross your mind. Some companies have large teams, while others operate with small, close-knit groups. I believe there is an optimal innovation team size that leads to killer ideas when it comes to innovation.

Studies on Team Size

The question of the day is this: Does team size genuinely have an impact? I reviewed a collaboration study done a while ago by the Kellogg School of Management and Northwestern University. The premise: large teams are problem solvers, and small teams are problem generators. The study showed that as the teams grew from one member to fifty members, their creativity decreased. The large teams focused on developing already known ideas, and the small teams focused on ideating new ideas.

As teams grew in size, different things impacted them. Firstly, team members suffered relational losses. They felt disconnected from other team members. Secondly, there was a tendency for the individual to contribute less on a large team than they would in a smaller one. Thirdly, when it came to large teams, they often sought out a leader to guide them. The smaller teams did not have a main leader but functioned off trusting each other and focusing on a common mission or vision.

A great way to combat innovation team size issues is through Multi-Team Systems (MTS). This process breaks down larger teams into smaller ones and establishes a structure. Utilizing MTS will lead to better team efficiency, which will lead to better ideas.

My Experience and Other’s

Allow me to share my experience with team sizes. I started my career at Deltek, which functioned with large teams. I later joined Thumbscan, which had medium-sized teams that were not the most efficient. When I left this team to build my product, I realized how hard it was to develop something without a team. This taught me the importance of being part of a team and the importance of that team’s size.

One outside example that shows the importance of team size comes from Apple in the 1980s. The company was utilizing large teams, coming out with the Apple 1, 2, and 3. These efforts had turned out unsuccessful. As a result, Steve Jobs picked a small exclusive team to work on MacIntosh. He did this to avoid any outside influence from the company. This move led to enormous success for Apple. The bottom line, when teams are separated and given a specific mission to focus on, they reach a point of efficiency, leading them to achieve their goal.

What is the Optimal Innovation Team Size?

From my experience with teams, I have concluded that the optimal innovation team size is 6-8 people. Any more than that, and the team members might lose focus and feel disconnected. In my opinion, nobody should have more than twelve people that directly report to them. Not only is the team size important, but the makeup of the team as well. A team needs visionaries, leaders, energizers, designers, etc. A team with the right combination of skillets will cultivate innovation success.

AI has become very popular in the world today. With its transition from a dream to reality, one must wonder what future outcomes will come of it. Is human creativity at the core of AI? Some may wonder whether AI can possess the same creative abilities.

Human Creativity and AI

Learning and experiences lead to innovation and creation. With every new creation comes inspiration from something else. When it comes to AI, there is a difference between being inspired and being invented. The keys here are input and experience.

AI is composed of training data that recognizes patterns and finds the best solutions. Training data is vital to the makeup of AI. This makeup is typically called machine learning. In the past, the common thought was that humans had a unique advantage over this area. Some instances have said otherwise.

Is Artificial Intelligence growing smarter than humans? That depends on your definition of smarter. Do you define smart by critical thinking skills or IQ? In the case of chess, the key is to recognize patterns and to be able to look at the number of steps ahead. These are two skills that computers have become quite good at through the utilization of machine learning. The question then becomes whether those skills are what we define as smart.

Innovations From AI Technologies

Let’s look at an example of AI from the work of the Associated Press, which generates millions of news stories for several different industries. It utilizes the Wordsmith tool to perform deep learning. As a result, AP outpaces the news outputs of all the major media companies out there combined.

Trained on successful articles that people have written, Wordsmith has a downside. The issue with AP’s process is that there is no specific writing style, lacking human creativity. Instead, the platform produces media based on things like news releases by newscasters or online outlets. As a result, Associated Press’s Wordsmith tool couldn’t write the script for my show or other similar shows. 

In my spare time, I like to write instrumental music. Magenta Studios has an AI plugin that I like experimenting with. This tool offers a simple way to utilize AI to develop something. The use of AI tools like AP’s Wordsmith or Magenta’s plugin conjures up some questions. People might wonder who should get the credit for the articles published or music created. 

Can AI Replace Human Creativity?

You may still wonder if AI applications can replace human creativity. You may also wonder if AI can create new ideas leading to killer innovations. I don’t believe AI can replace the unique creativity of humans.

AI utilization is most successful as a tool to enhance ideas. It can be used as an aid to get past the mental block encountered while brainstorming ideas. Human creativity is also evolving as AI grows. AI should not be feared, rather appreciated and experimented with. I believe AI will play a significant and positive role in our future.

Let’s be honest with ourselves. Being creative is hard. Suppose a crisis within your organization happens, and you need to come up with ideas on demand. How do you respond? While this situation sounds scary, there are steps you can take to respond successfully.

3 Steps to Brainstorming Ideas on Demand

I use three steps to brainstorm ideas on demand. The first step is to create a problem statement. Define the problem before you start collecting solutions. Focus on answering the following: who is being impacted by the problem, what is the problem, and why is it important to solve.

I lead a project solving a problem involving broadband for those living in rural areas. In this situation, those impacted were the people in rural areas. The problem was the lack of access to broadband for those living in low population areas. The impact was the inability to work at home, access various information, and engage in entertainment.

Step two is to ideate through brainstorming ideas. Since this is an on-demand situation, I focus on two dimensions, the first being time. Does your innovation save people time or make them more efficient? The second dimension is money. Can your innovation help save money, make more money, or make people efficient with money?

Final Steps

Step number three is to share your raw ideas with others who can join you. Please invite others to build upon your ideas, or plus it. Next, you share the problem statement, describe the two dimensions, and present your ideas. Then, rank your ideas and select the best ideas to dig into.

By the end of ninety minutes to two hours, you will come up with a handful of good ideas to move forward with. Remember, this is just a starting point. You will not have fully developed ideas, but you will have enough to get started. The first time you try this, you may be nervous and stressed. Don’t your emotions filter your ideas because you are trying to create ideas on demand. The crazier, the better.