Innovation or
I want to speculate on a topic that prompted me to start this story with registration on Habré.
At the best in the past 24 hours, the sandbox gave Habra a post “What overcomes the power of innovation?”. The author of the article asked the reader: change the environment or fight bad genes? The answer is obvious: look at the situation differently.
But, given the status of read - only user, some actions are not yet available to me on this resource.
So, the topic will be useful by the time of the publication of my first appeal to the audience.
At the best in the past 24 hours, the sandbox gave Habra a post “What overcomes the power of innovation?” . The author of the article asked the reader: change the environment or fight bad genes? The answer is obvious: look at the situation differently. And at this very moment the question takes the form of a discussion, and most importantly, it is worth understanding the participants in the conversation - what will be the innovation for the moment being discussed? What is innovation for beautification? Is it new knowledge or new materials? New professionals and engineers, or new performers? New coordinate system in the field of improvement or self-governing system?
If we consider the solution of the task: a) the janitor can initiate landscaping work at different levels, can send requests to change the landscape design of his territory; b) the janitor has the materials (eco-polymer) to create and strengthen the paths and the construction of fences, if he believes that the paths are not allowed through this lawn - will there be one of these solutions or both solutions in the amount of innovation in this area?
What of the possible will become the springboard to the new attitude of life in terms of improvement? Will the resulting improvements in quality of life a couple of levels higher? Will this breakthrough clear out a piece of muddy glass that covers the view of the future?
Looking up from textbooks, we define two fundamental dashes for the topic under discussion:
- innovation is possible under the conditions that the innovator or group of innovators has the courage, professional talent, ability to dream of the future, the team of talented like-minded people
- it is quite possible to consider the degree of conductivity of innovation from the existing state of affairs to the future as a qualitative indicator of innovation.
')
If we continue to think about the paths in the same way as it has been done for a certain amount of time, then all decisions that are possible within the framework of the existing one will be based on material resources. Energy costs threaten the energy itself, and so will be in any particular case of reflection inside the settled. So, is it worth thinking about improvements in spontaneous paths, or is it necessary to think about the situation itself? Do you need to remain inside the problem if you are already experienced enough to go beyond the problem and change it thoroughly? What do we do when we are looking for a shortcut? What do we use at the same time?
Yet the main question of the article , which uses for its own purposes an example of a situation that requires innovative solutions in the field of improvement, is the reasoning on the topic “how with the least losses (as energy efficient as possible, although the vulgar in current usage) slip along the wave of resisting innovation?”.
These arguments can be answered only by sufficiently studying the core of the phenomenon of innovation, its overwhelming significance. Innovation is possible in invention as well as in making changes. Innovation can be applied and hypothetical. Innovative solutions are possible on a private and public scale. There are many examples of the all-innovation in the existing - and this means that the DNA of a true innovative solution already contains a certain self-learning sequence for successfully overcoming the oncoming waves of ignorance.
So is it worth paying attention to resistance when trying to do something really interesting? Yes, but for the most part, as an episode of communication with society. What in the process of implementing innovations should pay more attention? Following the initial, not changed by process of the purpose.
At the best in the past 24 hours, the sandbox gave Habra a post “What overcomes the power of innovation?”. The author of the article asked the reader: change the environment or fight bad genes? The answer is obvious: look at the situation differently.
But, given the status of read - only user, some actions are not yet available to me on this resource.
So, the topic will be useful by the time of the publication of my first appeal to the audience.
At the best in the past 24 hours, the sandbox gave Habra a post “What overcomes the power of innovation?” . The author of the article asked the reader: change the environment or fight bad genes? The answer is obvious: look at the situation differently. And at this very moment the question takes the form of a discussion, and most importantly, it is worth understanding the participants in the conversation - what will be the innovation for the moment being discussed? What is innovation for beautification? Is it new knowledge or new materials? New professionals and engineers, or new performers? New coordinate system in the field of improvement or self-governing system?
If we consider the solution of the task: a) the janitor can initiate landscaping work at different levels, can send requests to change the landscape design of his territory; b) the janitor has the materials (eco-polymer) to create and strengthen the paths and the construction of fences, if he believes that the paths are not allowed through this lawn - will there be one of these solutions or both solutions in the amount of innovation in this area?
What of the possible will become the springboard to the new attitude of life in terms of improvement? Will the resulting improvements in quality of life a couple of levels higher? Will this breakthrough clear out a piece of muddy glass that covers the view of the future?
Looking up from textbooks, we define two fundamental dashes for the topic under discussion:
- innovation is possible under the conditions that the innovator or group of innovators has the courage, professional talent, ability to dream of the future, the team of talented like-minded people
- it is quite possible to consider the degree of conductivity of innovation from the existing state of affairs to the future as a qualitative indicator of innovation.
')
If we continue to think about the paths in the same way as it has been done for a certain amount of time, then all decisions that are possible within the framework of the existing one will be based on material resources. Energy costs threaten the energy itself, and so will be in any particular case of reflection inside the settled. So, is it worth thinking about improvements in spontaneous paths, or is it necessary to think about the situation itself? Do you need to remain inside the problem if you are already experienced enough to go beyond the problem and change it thoroughly? What do we do when we are looking for a shortcut? What do we use at the same time?
Yet the main question of the article , which uses for its own purposes an example of a situation that requires innovative solutions in the field of improvement, is the reasoning on the topic “how with the least losses (as energy efficient as possible, although the vulgar in current usage) slip along the wave of resisting innovation?”.
These arguments can be answered only by sufficiently studying the core of the phenomenon of innovation, its overwhelming significance. Innovation is possible in invention as well as in making changes. Innovation can be applied and hypothetical. Innovative solutions are possible on a private and public scale. There are many examples of the all-innovation in the existing - and this means that the DNA of a true innovative solution already contains a certain self-learning sequence for successfully overcoming the oncoming waves of ignorance.
So is it worth paying attention to resistance when trying to do something really interesting? Yes, but for the most part, as an episode of communication with society. What in the process of implementing innovations should pay more attention? Following the initial, not changed by process of the purpose.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/143238/
All Articles