If you pursue a Certificate of Strategy and Innovation at MIT’s Sloan School of Management, one of the first questions you will be asked is what is your definition of innovation.
My answer was “Creativity Engineering.” I liked the Venn diagram-like overlap of the conceptual with the practical, and I felt it was both succinct and easy to remember, but it does seem derivative of Disney’s “Imagineering.”
However, MIT’s definition of innovation (after polling within the MIT ecosystem) is as follows:
“The process by which we take ideas from inception to impact.”
Quoting MIT Professor Fiona Murray: “We think of it as a process so that we don’t become fixated or obsessed with specific technologies or gadgets or business processes.” (italics mine)
Despite the use of the word “impact” (a word which is condemned by grammar stylists, but not as bad as the word “impactful” which Garner’s Modern American Usage describes as “barbarous jargon”), the focus on process does feel right.
So which one is better? I do feel mine is easier to remember, and I like its focus on engineering as a craft—something which can be taught—not just some vague, intuitive ability. However, MIT’s focus on innovation as a process, especially for a large organization, is very useful, so I think it wins hands down.
Anyway, for those interested in more about the definition of innovation, I strongly suggest reviewing Deep-Diving MIT Sloan’s Innovation Approach and watching their videos.