“Innovation in medicine, science or psychology, how are they different or similar to tech biz entrepreneurs” innovationas Peter Drucker has defined ?
Discussion: Your point is a good one, thank you ! There are major differences. I will briefly point to the key difference between tech biz innovation, and science (that inlcudes medicine and psychology in broader perspectives of science).
It is helpful to use millitary language here, “strategic” & “tachtical”. Tech biz must have a ‘tactical’ focus, for example, technology commericalization to come up with prducts & services via innovation.
Science, is “strategic’. I have looked at select “Nobel in Medicine” carefully, vital to ‘tactical’ of tech biz. For example, Marshall Nirenberg’s shared Nobel in Medicine, ushered in today’s biotech industry in the early 70’s creatiing “tactical’ opportuities for bio innovators in tech biz.
But Nirenberg & others labored ‘strategically’ at govie labs & university labs, 20 years or more to create the breakthrough of a new industry in the ealy 70’s. I know this story well as similar story in electronics, ‘integrated circuits’, for example. A bit different, as the industry anchors are somewhat different.
Last comment is that we are all a ‘prisoner’ of ‘nature vs nurture’ in our lives. But clearly, borth “Strategic’ & Tactical’ elements of innovation are vital to the knowledge economy that is rapidly gaining on America as other leading nations of the world on a family, community, and tech hub basis as human nature dictates (both sides of ‘nature vs nurture”).
What can be done to improve our ability to innovate ? Answer: Hope a broder discussion & collaborations would be possible if ‘yea” !
I am ready to help and participate if you are !