Do you ever take the time to think?
Just a thought...
You may or may not have heard of the Nash equilibrium, but it has wide reaching implications for innovation.
This week we’re exploring what it is, why it’s important and what it means for innovation…
WHAT IS THE NASH EQUILIBRIUM?
If you’ve never heard of the Nash equilibrium, there are ample definitions to get you started.
For Investopedia, the Nash equilibrium is best defined as ‘a concept of game theory where the optimal outcome of a game is one where no player has an incentive to deviate from his chosen strategy after considering an opponent's choice.’
It continues ‘an individual can recei… continue reading
Creativity is the holy grail for many industries, and one of the most sought after skills in employees at all levels.
We all know the value of being creative, and that it is something we should be doing. Yet finding the time to actually put creativity into practice in your daily routine can be difficult.
Here are our top three ways to find time to be creative.
SEEK OUT UNFAMILIARITY
This sound piece of advice was recently suggested by the Harvard Business Review (HBR) as a way to make time for creativity.
Your working week doesn’t have to be boring, repetitive or restrictive. You don’t have to work 9-5 to get the job done, and you certainly don’t need to work that way when it doesn’t suit your natural rhythms of concentration and productivity.
Here at think we’re always telling people to work in a way which suits them best, but recently the working week has been in the international spotlight as commentators have turned their attention to the pros and cons of new ways of working.
SWEDEN LEADING THE WAY
The Kodak story is a sad one, not only for photography aficionados and those prone to nostalgia but also for innovators.
The tale of their gradual demise and failure to innovate is a well told one, but recently Harvard Business Review (HBR) has rekindled interest in the story by claiming that Kodak’s downfall wasn’t about technology, and that in fact their failure wasn’t quite as straightforward as the traditional narrative goes.
The notion of whether innovation can be classified as “good” or “bad’ is an interesting one, and has led us to question whether usefulness, added value and increased competition should be the ultimate aim of innovation. Is an innovation “bad” if it fails to solve a problem or confront a challenge? And when does too much of a good innovation become bad?
THERE HAS TO BE SOME ADDED VALUE
Without stating the obvious, innovation has to have some added value in order to be classified as a “good” innovation. It doesn’t necessarily follow that the outcome of the innovation is ethically good, or that t… continue reading