Definition of Innovation

A simple definition of innovation is, “It starts with an idea, addresses a market need and creates value.” (BDC.ca, 2024).

Justification.

Some people think creativity and innovation are synonyms; however, reflecting on the discussion post on creativity, it was defined as coming up with a new idea. Innovation is taking this idea, solving customer pain points, and creating value by implementing and executing that idea. Badran (2007) supports this definition of innovation as adding something new to an existing product or process. From a business perspective, Drucker (2002) defines innovation as the specific function of entrepreneurship and how there is the creation of new wealth-producing resources or endowing existing resources with enhanced potential for creating wealth.

There are a few common themes around creating value, meeting market needs, creating new resources or enhancing existing ones. One difference is that BDC.ca’s (2024) and Badran’s (2007) definitions focus on meeting, adding value, and creating value, while Drucker’s (2002) includes a focus on the role of entrepreneurship and the creation of wealth.

“Innovation is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration.” Thomas Edison

This view captures some of the key points discussed in literature around value creation and implementation, which can be contextual.

How has this definition changed?

While the definition of Innovation still resonates with me, there are discussion points to consider behind the words without necessarily changing my definition.

I appreciated the reply to my discussion post on innovation that challenged the definition and keywords such as “addresses a market need.” how would I define a “market”?  The role of innovation in addressing a market need arises from identifying unmet needs or opportunities within a market. By understanding what customers (customers of education, for example) require, innovators can create solutions that add value. Innovation succeeds when market demand is met. The market provides feedback on the effectiveness of the innovation and if it creates a perceived value for the customer. From a business perspective, innovation is separated into different types.

Figure 1: 4 Types of Innovation

(Satell, 2017).

Taking a holistic view, innovation transforms ideas into tangible outcomes, resulting in tools, products or services that solve problems or offer other perceived value and advantages. Taking a holistic view

References

Badran, I. (2007). Enhancing creativity and innovation in engineering education. European Journal of Engineering  Education, 32(5), 573–585.https://doi-org.proxy.queensu.ca/10.1080/03043790701433061

BDC.ca, (January 2024). What is innovation? Retrieved from https://www.bdc.ca/en/articles-tools/business-strategy-    planning/innovate/what-is-innovation

Drucker, P. F. (2002). The discipline of innovation. In Harvard Business Review (Vol. 80, Issue 8, pp. 95–102). Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://search-ebscohost-com.conestoga.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?  direct=true&db=bth&AN=7157220&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Satell, G. (2017). The 4 Types of Innovation and the Problems They Solve. The Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2017/06/the-4-types-of-innovation-and-the-problems-they-solve

_____________________________________________________________Creativity Definition.

“Having an entrepreneurial eye for economic and social opportunities, asking the right questions to generate novel ideas, and demonstrating leadership to pursue those ideas into practice.” (Fullan & Scott, p7, 2014)

Justification.

This definition suggests that creativity is more than just generating new ideas. Still, it is also about recognizing social and economic opportunities by asking insightful questions and having the leadership skills to turn those ideas into reality. It aligns with the idea of creativity as a multifaceted construct that involves cognitive processes (idea generation), personality traits (curiosity, risk-taking), and social-environmental factors (leadership, collaboration) (Hennessey & Amabile, 2010).

The Componential Model of Creativity by Hennessey and Amabile (2010) supports the idea of a multifaceted framework that aligns with the definition of creativity by Fullan and Scott (2014). The model suggests that creativity is a function of three key components: domain-relevant skills (knowledge and expertise) that might align with asking the right questions, creativity-relevant processes (risk-taking, ambiguity) might align with asking the right questions, and intrinsic task motivation (doing the work yourself) might align with leadership, (Amabile, 2012).

The model also emphasizes the role of the social environment in which the individual works. This aligns with Fullan and Scott’s (2014) emphasis on putting ideas into practice through leadership, which requires navigating in a global social and economic context. On a more practical level, it is only with creativity that we can hope to address the complex problems facing our global world today.

How has this definition changed?

While the definition of Creativity still resonates with me, there are discussion points to consider behind the words without necessarily changing my definition. The challenge with many definitions is the context and perspective of everyone when applying the terminology. Often, there is a view that creativity and innovation are identical and interchangeable. From my perspective, creativity is the ignitor of innovation, which is, in turn, the practical outcome of creativity. You need to be creative to innovate! I also see where the idea of imagination gets intertwined with innovation and creativity, and I believe that imagination comes before creativity, which drives innovation. People can excel at different types of creativity and can think differently about innovatively.

In the article by Sundararajan & Raina (2015), Revolutionary Creativity, East and West: A Critique from Indigenous Psychology, questions were raised about the notion that collectivist, or Indigenous cultures are less creative, noting that in less individualistic societies, creativity exists, but it is expressed in different ways based on the ethics and values of those societies (Sundararajan & Raina, 2015). They argue that cross-cultural comparisons often overestimate the influence of social norms on creativity and fail to consider that creativity involves individual choices even within collectivist cultures, just as in individualistic cultures (Sundararajan & Raina, 2015). This discussion seems to distinguish how creativity might show up in collectivism versus individualism but does not reduce the impact of creativity as a definition.

References

Amabile, T. M. (2012). Componential Theory of Creativity Working Paper. Harvard  Business School Working Paper 12-096. Retrieved from https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=42469

Fullan, M., & Scott, G. (2014, July). New Pedagogies for Deep Learning Whitepaper: Education PLUS The world will      be led by people you can count on, including you!https://www.michaelfullan.ca/wp-          content/uploads/2014/09/Education-Plus-A-Whitepaper-July-2014-1.pdf

Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (2010). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 569-598. Doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100416

Sundararajan, L., & Raina, M. K. (2015). Revolutionary Creativity, East and West: A Critique from Indigenous psychology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 35(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037506

_____________________________________________________________

Definition of Teaching.

“Teaching is the process of attending to people’s needs, experiences and feelings, and intervening so that they learn particular things, and go beyond the given.” (Smith, 2018)

Justification.

Justifying this definition includes an understanding of the role of teaching in the process of learning. Teaching is not just about imparting knowledge but shaping how students interact with the world around them. Teaching involves understanding students’ needs and experiences and making interventions to help them learn and grow. It is about guiding students to go beyond the given, question, explore, and think critically (Smith, 2018). This needs to consider not only the classroom setting but also the external environment and cultural considerations.

I think the final definition depends on a combination of the process of building knowledge (epistemological perspective), the practical application (pragmatic perspective, and active learning in teaching (constructivism perspective) (Robertson, 2009).

Social, cultural, and personal factors and biases can influence the context and perspective of teaching. The key in any context is the practical application, experiential learning, critical thinking, and inclusivity in the teaching process to construct new knowledge!

How has this definition changed?

While the definition of teaching still resonates with me, there are discussion points to consider behind the words without necessarily changing my definition. The challenge with many definitions is the context and perspective of everyone when applying the terminology. The Triple Helix Transformative Teaching and Learning Model in Business Education is one core model I have connected with as part of my evolving teaching definition and practices. The Triple Helix Transformative Teaching and Learning Model is a framework for business education based on the idea that the context and learning environment must work together to provide students with hands-on experience and real-world knowledge. This approach to business education aims to create a more dynamic and adaptive learning environment and better prepare students for the challenges of the 21st century. (Longmore et al., 2017)

The conceptual construct is three-dimensional and developed around three key spheres:

• The whole learner,
  • Including emotions, reflection, and action.
• The content and knowledge,
  • readings, research, industry, and projects.
• Other Learning Actions,
  • Business partners, learning facilitators, and other learnings.

The intersection of the three spheres provides a socially constructed experience for the learner. This model considers the dynamic nature of interpersonal (reflection) and intrapersonal (interaction) as part of a learning cycle (Longmore et al., 2017). This means being attentive to individual and cultural needs, intervening where necessary and going beyond what good teaching looks like for me.

In reflecting on the definition, gaps may be explored around the role of assessment and evaluation, how to assess individual progress, and whom this plays into interventions or evaluation.

In summary, while the definition captures fundamental aspects of teaching, considering context, assessment, student agency, and cultural sensitivity can enhance our understanding of effective teaching.

References

Longmore, A.-L., Grant, G., & Golnaraghi, G. (2018). Closing the 21st-Century Knowledge Gap: Reconceptualizing Teaching and Learning to Transform   Business Education. Journal of Transformative Education, 16(3), 197–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344617738514

Robertson, E., (2009). The Epistemic Aims of Education, in Harvey Siegel (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Education, Oxford Handbooks. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195312881.003.0002.

Smith, M. K. (2018). ‘What is teaching?’ in The Encyclopedia of Pedagogy and informal education. Retrieved from https://infed.org/mobi/what-is-teaching/.

_____________________________________________________________Definition of Learning.

‘a relatively permanent change in behaviour as a consequence of experience’. (Haselgrove, 2016)

Justification.

There is an argument that there is no generally accepted definition of learning. However, it can include the idea of a process, acquiring, experiencing and lasting change that adds to one’s knowledge. (Haselgrove, 2016). It results from experience, the acquisition of information, knowledge, and skills, Cherry, 2022). Much like taking this course or similar activities, learning is an ongoing process throughout our lives and is not confined to a classroom.

A discussion on learning can also take us down a path of examining learning styles and cycles such as those proposed by Klob’s (2005) experiential learning theory that works on two levels: a four-stage learning cycle and four separate learning styles. Much of Kolb’s theory concerns the learner’s internal cognitive processes. You can see the Kolb model in the attached infographic completed for a course on Teaching Theory to Practical Learners (EDEV0370) through Conestoga College (Quartermain, 2022).

This discussion highlights the need for a holistic approach to learning that considers the learner’s experiences, interests, and the interconnectedness of different areas of knowledge.

How has this definition changed?

While the definition of teaching still resonates with me, there are discussion points to consider behind the words without necessarily changing my definition. The challenge with many definitions is the context and perspective of everyone when applying the terminology. Key elements of the definition that hold faithful are the concepts of relatively permanent change that involves a lasting transformation in behaviour or knowledge. It is not just a fleeting experience; it endures over time. This flows from our experience through direct observation, practice, or exposure to information.

Learning is context-dependent, as with many definitions explored, based on the situation, environment, culture and the individual. This would suggest a multifaceted learning process not limited to a single method or pedagogy. This can also include the cognitive and behavioural elements that may happen consciously or unconsciously or by assimilation.

Gaps in the definition might include the transferability of the learning to other situations, which is not explicitly stated. Should there be a discussion on the emotional dimension along with the cognitive and behavioural dimensions? Finally, it may be assumed but not stated that there needs to be an interest and motivation in learning, but it is not explicitly mentioned.

In summary, teaching and learning are intertwined and part of a reciprocal relationship that enhances learning outcomes but can also inform our teaching practices. As with many of our discussions, elements are multifaceted, context-dependent, and influenced by teaching practices and individual differences. Understanding this complexity enriches our approach to education.

 References

Haselgrove, M. (2016). ‘What is learning?’ Learning: A Very Short Introduction, Very Short Introductions.Oxford Academic,  https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780199688364.003.0001

Cherry, K. (2022). How do people learn? Verywell Mind. Retrieved from https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-learning-2795332

Kolb, A.Y., & Kolb, D.A. (2005). Learning Styles and Learning Spaces: Enhancing Experiential Learning in Higher Education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193-212. https://doi-org.conestoga.idm.oclc.org/10.5465/AMLE.2005.17268566

Quartermain, M. (2022). Foundational Building Blocks. Teaching Theory to Practical Learners EDEV0370. [Infographic]. Conestoga College.